Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers, 66152-66230 [2023-19999]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
66152
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE–2017–BT–TP–0008]
RIN 1904–AD83
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedure for Commercial
Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers,
and Freezers
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (‘‘DOE’’) amends the test
procedures for commercial refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers
(‘‘CRE’’) to reference the latest versions
of the applicable industry standards.
DOE also establishes definitions and test
procedures for new equipment
categories, adopts test procedures
consistent with recently published
waivers and interim waivers, establishes
product-specific enforcement
provisions, allows for volume
determinations based on computeraided designs, specifies a sampling plan
for volume and total display area, and
adopts additional clarifying
amendments.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is
October 26, 2023. The amendments will
be mandatory for equipment testing
starting September 20, 2024.
The incorporation by reference of
certain material listed in the rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal
Register on October 26, 2023.
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-2017-BT-TP-0008. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
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. Peter Cochran, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC, 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–9496. Email:
Peter.Cochran@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE
incorporates by reference the following
industry standards into 10 CFR part 431:
AHRI Standard 1200–2023 (I–P), 2023
Standard for Performance Rating of
Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets,
copyright 2023 (‘‘AHRI 1200–2023’’).
ANSI/AHRI Standard 1320–2011 (I–
P), 2011 Standard for Performance
Rating of Commercial Refrigerated
Display Merchandisers and Storage
Cabinets for Use With Secondary
Refrigerants, copyright 2011 (‘‘ANSI/
AHRI 1320–2011’’).
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72–2022:
• Method of Testing Open and Closed
Commercial Refrigerators and
Freezers, approved June 30, 2022; and
• Errata Sheet, November 11, 2022
(‘‘ANSI/ASHRAE 72–2022’’).
ASTM F2143–16, Standard Test
Method for Performance of Refrigerated
Buffet and Preparation Tables,
approved May 1, 2016 (‘‘ASTM F2143–
16’’).
Copies of AHRI 1200–2023 and AHRI
1320–2011 can be obtained by going to
www.ahrinet.org/standards/searchstandards.
Copies of ASHRAE 72–2022 can be
obtained by going to
www.techstreet.com/standards/ashrae72-2022?product_id=1710927 and the
November 11, 2022 Errata can be
obtained by going to www.ashrae.org/
technical-resources/standards-andguidelines/standards-errata.
Copies of ASTM F2143–16 can be
purchased at www.astm.org/f214316.html.
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 and Definitions
1. Ice-Cream Freezers
2. High-Temperature CRE
3. Convertible Equipment
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
B. Updates to Industry Standards
1. AHRI 1200
2. ASHRAE 72
3. Secondary Coolants
C. Test Conditions for Specific CRE
Categories
1. Salad Bars, Buffet Tables, and
Refrigerated Preparation Tables
2. Pull-Down Temperature Applications
3. Blast Chillers and Blast Freezers
4. Chef Bases and Griddle Stands
5. Mobile Refrigerated Cabinets
6. Additional Covered Equipment
D. Harmonization of Efficiency Standards
and Testing With NSF 7–2019 Food
Safety
E. Dedicated Remote Condensing Units
F. Test Procedure Clarifications and
Modifications
1. Defrost Cycles
2. Total Display Area
G. Alternative Refrigerants
H. Certification of Compartment Volume
I. Test Procedure Waivers
J. Enforcement Provisions
K. Lowest Application Product
Temperature
L. Removal of Obsolete Provisions
M. Sampling Plan
N. Test Procedure Costs and
Harmonization
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
O. Effective and Compliance Dates
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866,
13563 and 14094
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal
Energy Administration Act of 1974
M. Congressional Notification
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by
Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Commercial refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers (collectively,
commercial refrigeration equipment, or
‘‘CRE’’) 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)(E))
DOE’s energy conservation standards
and test procedures for CRE are
currently prescribed at subpart C of part
431 of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (‘‘CFR’’). The following
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
sections discuss DOE’s authority to
establish test procedures for CRE and
relevant background information
regarding DOE’s consideration of test
procedures for this equipment.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
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 2 of EPCA, added
by Public Law 95–619, Title IV, section
441(a), established the Energy
Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a
variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. This
equipment includes CRE, the subject of
this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311 (1)(E))
The energy conservation program
under EPCA consists essentially of four
parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal
energy conservation standards, and (4)
certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of
EPCA specifically include definitions
(42 U.S.C. 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
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
with the procedures and other
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, and
requires that test procedures not be
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
With respect to CRE, EPCA requires
DOE to use the test procedures
determined by the Secretary to be
generally accepted industry standards,
or industry standards developed or
recognized by the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers (‘‘ASHRAE’’) or
American National Standards Institute
(‘‘ANSI’’). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(i))
With regard to self-contained CRE to
which statutory standards are
applicable, the required initial test
procedure is the ASHRAE 117 test
procedure in effect on January 1, 2005.
(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(ii))
Additionally, EPCA requires that if
ASHRAE 117 is amended, the Secretary
shall, by rule, amend the test procedure
for the product as necessary to ensure
that the test procedure is consistent
with the amended ASHRAE 117 test
procedure, unless the Secretary makes a
determination, by rule, and supported
by clear and convincing evidence, that
to do so would not meet the statutory
requirements regarding
representativeness and burden. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(E)) Finally, EPCA
states that if a test procedure other than
the ASHRAE 117 test procedure is
approved by ANSI, DOE must review
the relative strengths and weaknesses of
the new test procedure relative to the
ASHRAE 117 test procedure and adopt
one new test procedure for use in the
standards program. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(6)(F)(i)) 3
EPCA also requires that, at least once
every 7 years, DOE evaluate test
procedures for each type of covered
equipment, including CRE, to determine
whether amended test procedures
would more accurately or fully comply
with the requirements for the test
3 In 2005, ASHRAE combined Standard 72–1998,
‘‘Method of Testing Open Refrigerators,’’ and
Standard 117–2002 and published the test method
as ASHRAE Standard 72–2005, ‘‘Method of Testing
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,’’ which was
approved by ANSI on July 29, 2005.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66153
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
in the Federal Register 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(a)(1)(A))
B. Background
DOE’s current test procedure for CRE
appears at 10 CFR part 431, subpart C,
appendix B (‘‘Amended Uniform Test
Method for the Measurement of Energy
Consumption of Commercial
Refrigerators, Freezers, and RefrigeratorFreezers’’ or ‘‘appendix B’’).
DOE last amended the test procedure
for CRE in a final rule published on
April 24, 2014 (‘‘April 2014 Final
Rule’’). 79 FR 22277. Specifically, DOE
clarified certain terms, procedures, and
compliance dates to improve
repeatability and provide additional
detail compared to the prior version of
the test procedure. DOE noted that the
amendments in the April 2014 Final
Rule would not affect the energy use of
CRE as measured under the prior
version of the test procedure. 79 FR
22277, 22280–22281.
The test procedure incorporates by
reference the following industry
standards: (1) AHRI Standard 1200 (I–
P)-2010, ‘‘Performance Rating of
Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets’’
(‘‘AHRI 1200–2010’’); (2) ASHRAE
Standard 72–2005, ‘‘Method of Testing
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,’’
which was approved by ANSI on July
29, 2005 (‘‘ASHRAE 72–2005’’); and (3)
ANSI/Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers (‘‘AHAM’’) Standard
HRF–1–2008, ‘‘Energy and Internal
Volume of Refrigerating Appliances’’
(‘‘AHAM HRF–1–2008’’) for
determining refrigerated volumes for
CRE.
On June 11, 2021, DOE published in
the Federal Register an early assessment
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66154
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
request for information (‘‘June 2021
RFI’’) seeking comments on the existing
DOE test procedure for CRE. 86 FR
31182. In the June 2021 RFI, DOE
requested comments, information, and
data regarding a number of issues,
including (1) scope and definitions, (2)
updates to industry standards, (3) test
conditions for specific CRE categories,
(4) harmonization with food safety
standards, (5) remote condensing units,
(6) test procedure clarifications, (7)
alternative refrigerants, (8) compartment
volume certification, and (9) test
procedure waivers.
On June 30, 2022, DOE published in
the Federal Register a notice of
proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) that
proposed to update and establish test
procedures for CRE (‘‘June 2022
NOPR’’). 87 FR 39164. In the June 2022
NOPR, DOE proposed to and requested
feedback on the following:
(1) Establish new definitions for hightemperature refrigerator, mediumtemperature refrigerator, lowtemperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the
definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most
current versions of industry standards
AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI
1320;
(3) Establish definitions and a new
appendix C including test procedures
for buffet tables and preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and a new
appendix D including test procedures
for blast chillers and blast freezers;
(5) Amend the definition for chef base
or griddle stand;
(6) Specify refrigerant conditions for
CRE that use R–744;
(7) Allow for certification of
compartment volumes based on
computer-aided design (‘‘CAD’’) models;
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts
and customer order storage cabinets
currently specified in waivers and
interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific
enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the lowest
application product temperature
(‘‘LAPT’’) provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test
procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for
volume and total display area (‘‘TDA’’).
87 FR 39164.
DOE received comments in response
to the June 2022 NOPR from the
interested parties listed in Table I.1.
TABLE I.1—LIST OF COMMENTERS WITH WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE JUNE 2022 NOPR
Reference in this final rule
AHT Cooling Systems GmbH ...................................................
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute ..............
Appliance Standards Awareness Project, American ................
Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, and Natural Resources Defense Council.
Continental Refrigerator ............................................................
Hillphoenix, Inc .........................................................................
Hoshizaki America, Inc .............................................................
Hussmann Corporation .............................................................
National Automatic Merchandising Association ........................
North American Association of Food Equipment Manufacturers.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance .......................................
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric,
and Southern California Edison; collectively, the California
Investor-Owned Utilities.
True Manufacturing Company, Inc ...........................................
Zero Zone, Inc ..........................................................................
AHT .........................................
AHRI .......................................
Joint Commenters ...................
40
38
31
Manufacturer.
Trade Association.
Efficiency Organizations.
Continental ..............................
Hillphoenix ..............................
Hoshizaki ................................
Hussmann ...............................
NAMA ......................................
NAFEM ...................................
29
35
30
32
33
34
Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
Trade Association.
Trade Association.
NEEA ......................................
CA IOUs ..................................
39
36
Efficiency Organization.
Energy Utilities.
True .........................................
Zero Zone ...............................
28
37
Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
A parenthetical reference at the end of
a comment quotation or paraphrase
provides the location of the item in the
public record.4 To the extent that
interested parties have provided written
comments that are substantively
consistent with any oral comments
provided during the August 1, 2022,
public meeting, DOE cites the written
comments throughout this final rule.
Any oral comments provided during the
public meeting that are not
substantively addressed by written
comments are summarized and cited
separately throughout this final rule.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Comment No.
in the docket
Commenter(s)
4 The parenthetical reference provides a reference
for information located in the docket of DOE’s
rulemaking to develop test procedures for CRE.
(Docket No. EERE–2017–BT–TP–0008, 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 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
II. Synopsis of the Final Rule
In this final rule, DOE amends and
establishes test procedures for CRE as
follows:
(1) Establish new definitions for hightemperature refrigerator, mediumtemperature refrigerator, lowtemperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the
definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most
current versions of industry standards
AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI
1320;
(3) Establish definitions and a new
appendix C including test procedures
for buffet tables and preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and a new
appendix D including test procedures
for blast chillers and blast freezers;
(5) Amend the definition and certain
test conditions for chef bases or griddle
stands;
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Commenter type
(6) Specify refrigerant conditions for
CRE that use R–744;
(7) Allow for certification of
compartment volumes based on
computer-aided design (‘‘CAD’’) models;
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts
and customer order storage cabinets
currently specified in waivers and
interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific
enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the lowest
application product temperature
(‘‘LAPT’’) provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test
procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for
volume and total display area (‘‘TDA’’).
The adopted amendments are
summarized and compared to the test
procedure provision prior to the
amendment in Table II.1, along with the
reason for the adopted change.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
66155
TABLE II.1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN THE AMENDED TEST PROCEDURE
DOE Test Procedure Prior to
Amendment
Amended Test Procedure
Defines commercial refrigerator
without
delineating
between
units that operate at medium
and high temperatures.
Defines ice-cream freezer as a
type of commercial freezer.
Defines high-temperature refrigerator and medium-temperature
refrigerator to account for new
high-temperature rating point.
Defines low-temperature freezer
to delineate between ice-cream
freezers and other commercial
freezers.
Ice-cream definition refers more
broadly to ‘‘ice cream and other
frozen desserts’’.
References AHRI 1200–2023 for
rating requirements.
References ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata for test requirements.
References AHRI 1200–2023 for
volume requirements.
Specifies 38 °F rating point for
medium-temperature
refrigerators and 55 °F rating point
for
high-temperature
refrigerators.
References AHRI 1320–2011 for
CRE used with secondary coolants.
Defines buffet table and preparation table and establishes test
procedures based on ASTM
F2143–16.
Defines blast chiller and blast
freezer and establishes test
procedures based on expected
industry test method.
Clarifies chef base or griddle
stand definition by specifying a
maximum height of 32 in. for
this equipment.
Chef bases or griddle stands
have a dry-bulb temperature of
86.0 °F; wet-bulb temperature of
73.7 °F; and radiant heat temperature of greater than or
equal to 81.0 °F.
References ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata for test instructions
for units with no automatic defrost and adopts optional twopart test for CRE with defrost
cycles longer than 24 hours.
Corrects errors in current test procedure by reference to AHRI
1200–2023.
Ice-cream freezer definition refers
only to ‘‘ice cream’’.
References AHRI 1200–2010 for
rating requirements.
References ASHRAE 72–2005 for
test requirements.
References AHAM HRF–1–2008
for volume measurement.
Includes a single 38 °F rating point
for commercial refrigerators.
Does not specify a method for
testing CRE with secondary
coolants.
Does not specify definitions or test
procedures for buffet tables and
preparation tables.
Does not specify definitions or test
procedures for blast chillers and
blast freezers.
Chef base or griddle stand definition does not refer to a maximum height.
Chef bases or griddle stands have
a dry-bulb temperature of
75.2 °F; wet-bulb temperature of
64.4 °F; and radiant heat temperature of greater than or equal
to 70.0 °F.
Does not provide procedures for
CRE with no automatic defrost
or with long duration defrost cycles.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Includes conflicting instructions regarding TDA calculation.
Provides refrigerant conditions that
are applicable only to common
refrigerants.
Specifies refrigerant conditions to
allow for testing with carbon dioxide refrigerant.
Requires
determining
volume
based on testing.
Specifies a single door opening
sequence.
Allows the use of CAD models to
certify volume.
Defines customer order storage
cabinet equipment category and
specifies an alternate door
opening sequence for this
equipment.
Includes product-enforcement provisions for determining volume
and TDA.
Does not specify product-enforcement provisions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Changes from the June 2022
NOPR proposed test procedure
summary of changes
Attribution
None .............................................
Improves representativeness.
None .............................................
Improves representativeness.
Expanded to ‘‘ice cream and
other frozen desserts’’.
Improves representativeness.
Updated
recent
Updated
recent
to harmonize with most
version of AHRI 1200.
to harmonize with most
version of ASHRAE 72.
Harmonizes with most recent industry standard.
Harmonizes with most recent industry standard.
Updated to harmonize with most
recent version of AHRI 1200.
None .............................................
Harmonizes with most recent industry standard.
Improves representativeness; harmonizes with industry standard.
None .............................................
Improves representativeness; harmonizes with industry standard.
None .............................................
Improves representativeness; harmonizes with industry standard.
None .............................................
Improves representativeness; harmonizes with industry standard.
None .............................................
Improves representativeness.
Updated test conditions ................
Improves representativeness.
Updated to harmonize with most
recent version of ASHRAE 72.
Addresses existing waiver; harmonizes with industry standard.
Updated to harmonize with most
recent version of AHRI 1200.
Improves representativeness, repeatability, and reproducibility;
harmonizes with industry standard.
Improves representativeness; harmonizes with existing waiver.
Includes tolerances and updates
conditions to ensure appropriate operation within tolerances.
None .............................................
Reduces test burden.
None .............................................
Improves representativeness; harmonizes with existing waiver.
None .............................................
Improves clarity.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66156
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE II.1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN THE AMENDED TEST PROCEDURE—Continued
DOE Test Procedure Prior to
Amendment
Amended Test Procedure
Specifies LAPT instructions for
temperatures above target test
temperature.
Clarifies use of LAPT provisions
for
operating
temperatures
below the target test temperature.
Removes obsolete appendix A;
adds new appendix C for testing buffet tables and preparation tables, and adds new appendix D for testing blast
chillers and blast freezers.
Specifies that volume and TDA be
determined based on the mean
of the test sample.
Includes obsolete appendix A and
current appendix B test procedures.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Does not specify a sampling plan
for volume and TDA.
DOE has determined that the
amendments described in section III of
this document and adopted in this
document will not alter the measured
efficiency of CRE currently subject to
energy conservation standards, or
require retesting or recertification solely
as a result of DOE’s adoption of the
amendments to the test procedures.
Additionally, DOE has determined that
the amendments will not increase the
cost of testing for CRE currently tested
to the existing test procedure. For chef
bases or griddle stands, buffet tables and
preparation tables, and blast chillers
and blast freezers, testing according to
the amended or established test
procedure will not be required until the
compliance date of any energy
conservation standards for that
equipment. However, any
representations of energy use for chef
bases or griddle stands, buffet tables and
preparation tables and blast chillers and
blast freezers must be made in
accordance with the amended test
procedure starting 360 days after this
final rule publishes in the Federal
Register. While DOE does not expect
that manufacturers will incur additional
cost as a result of the established test
procedure, DOE provides a discussion
of testing costs in section III.O.1 of this
document. Discussion of DOE’s actions
are addressed in detail in section III of
this document.
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 360 days after the
publication of this final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
Changes from the June 2022
NOPR proposed test procedure
summary of changes
None .............................................
Improves clarity.
None .............................................
Improves readability.
None .............................................
Improves representativeness, repeatability, and reproducibility.
III. Discussion
A. Scope and Definitions
‘‘Commercial refrigerator, freezer, and
refrigerator-freezer’’ means refrigeration
equipment that is not a consumer
product (as defined in 10 CFR 430.2); is
not designed and marketed exclusively
for medical, scientific, or research
purposes; operates at a chilled, frozen,
combination chilled and frozen, or
variable temperature; displays or stores
merchandise and other perishable
materials horizontally, semi-vertically,
or vertically; has transparent or solid
doors, sliding or hinged doors, a
combination of hinged, sliding,
transparent, or solid doors, or no doors;
is designed for pull-down temperature
applications or holding temperature
applications; and is connected to a selfcontained condensing unit or to a
remote condensing unit. 10 CFR 431.62.
For the purpose of determining
applicability of certain test procedure
provisions, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to amend certain existing
definitions and to establish certain new
definitions, as discussed in the
following paragraphs. 87 FR 39164,
39168–39171. DOE discusses additional
equipment definitions and test
procedures for specific equipment
categories in section III.C of this
document.
1. Ice-Cream Freezers
DOE defines certain categories of CRE,
including ‘‘ice-cream freezer.’’ DOE
defines an ‘‘ice-cream freezer’’ as a
commercial freezer that is designed to
operate at or below ¥5 °F ±2 °F (¥21 °C
±1.1 °C) and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends for the
storing, displaying, or dispensing of ice
cream. 10 CFR 431.62.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE did not
identify any technical features that
would allow for distinguishing ice-
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Attribution
Sfmt 4700
cream freezers from other commercial
freezers capable of operating at low
temperatures and therefore did not
propose in the June 2022 NOPR to
include any additional equipment
characteristics in the ice-cream freezer
definition. 87 FR 39164, 39168.
a. Frozen Desserts
DOE noted in the June 2022 NOPR
that the equipment term and definition
reference ‘‘ice cream,’’ but ‘‘ice cream’’
is not defined. 87 FR 39164, 39168. DOE
acknowledged that other frozen
products may be similarly stored and
displayed. Id. For example, food
products such as gelato, frozen yogurt,
and sorbet are typically displayed,
stored, and dispensed in the same
manner as ice cream. Id. The CRE used
for these products is likely similar, if
not identical, to equipment used to
store, display, or dispense ice cream. Id.
To clarify the equipment
classification and to avoid potential
misunderstanding that the term ‘‘icecream freezer’’ is limited to equipment
associated with ice cream and not other
similar products, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to amend this term’s
definition to refer to equipment
designed, marketed, or intended for the
storing, displaying, or dispensing of
‘‘frozen desserts,’’ rather than ice cream
specifically. 87 FR 39164, 39169. DOE
stated in the NOPR that it does not
expect this proposal to affect testing or
certifications for existing CRE, because
equipment designed for frozen desserts
other than ice cream that otherwise
meets the ice-cream freezer definition
are likely already tested and certified as
ice-cream freezers. Id.
As proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
ice-cream freezer means:
(1) Prior to the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a
commercial freezer that is designed to
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
operate at or below ¥5.0 °F (±2.0 °F) and
that the manufacturer designs, markets,
or intends for the storing, displaying, or
dispensing of frozen desserts; or
(2) Upon the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a
commercial freezer that is designed for
an operating temperature at or below
¥15.0 °F (±2.0 °F) and that the
manufacturer designs, markets, or
intends for the storing, displaying, or
dispensing of frozen desserts. Id.
In response to the June 2022 NOPR,
Hussmann stated its support of the
amended definition for ‘‘frozen
desserts’’ rather than ice cream
specifically. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2)
Hussmann also asked DOE to include in
this definition the temperature range
needed to operate ice-cream freezers,
stating it does not oppose the definition
change, but cautioning that some
models intended for ‘‘frozen desserts’’
may not be able to achieve the DOE icecream ratings. Id.
The CA IOUs stated their support to
amend the definition for ‘‘ice-cream
freezer’’ to include all ‘‘frozen desserts’’
and to test frozen dessert freezers at
either 0 °F or ¥15 °F. (CA IOUs, No. 36,
p. 10)
AHRI disagreed with DOE’s proposal
to amend the ice-cream freezer
definition to refer to equipment
intended for ‘‘frozen desserts,’’ because
while some commercial refrigeration
equipment models are sold and
marketed as ‘‘ice-cream freezers,’’ AHRI
was not aware of any product
specifically marketed for ‘‘frozen
desserts.’’ (AHRI, No. 38, p. 2). AHRI
noted that the term ‘‘frozen desserts’’
was not defined, and that DOE indicated
its intention to clarify ‘‘ice cream’’ could
include gelato, frozen yogurt, sorbet,
and other ice-cream-like products. Id.
AHRI commented that they disagree
with DOE’s statement that these
products are typically displayed, stored,
and dispensed in the same manner as
ice cream; in fact, these additional
products have an array of temperature
requirements depending on their
characteristics (fat content, etc.) and the
application holding, dispensing, etc.).
Id. AHRI also noted that the term
‘‘frozen desserts’’ is problematic because
it might encompass products with
requirements different than ice-creamlike, such as frozen pastries, cakes,
fruits, chocolates, and other
confectionary items served frozen at the
end of a meal, while excluding ‘‘frozen
treats’’ or ‘‘frozen snacks.’’ Id.
Continental commented that it
disagreed with DOE’s proposal to
amend the ice-cream freezer definition
to refer to equipment intended for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
‘‘frozen desserts;’’ while some
commercial refrigeration equipment
models are sold and marketed as ‘‘icecream freezers,’’ Continental knew of
none marketed for ‘‘frozen desserts,’’ a
term DOE has not defined. (Continental,
No. 29, p. 1–2) Continental disagreed
with DOE’s statement that gelato, frozen
yogurt, sorbet, and other ice-cream-like
products were typically displayed,
stored, and dispensed in the same
manner as ice cream, as described in the
NOPR, since these products have an
array of temperature requirements
depending on their characteristics (fat
content, etc.) and the application
(holding, dispensing, etc.). Id.
Continental also found the term ‘‘frozen
desserts’’ problematic because it might
include frozen pastries, cakes, fruits,
chocolates, and other confectionary
items served frozen at the end of a meal,
but with temperature requirements
different than ice-cream-like products.
Id. Continental commented that icecream freezers have features, such as
manual defrost systems and cold-wall
evaporators, that differentiate them from
standard freezers to minimize
temperature excursions during normal
defrost periods. Id.
Hillphoenix disagreed with the
proposal to amend the ice-cream freezer
definition to refer to frozen desserts, as
this change will not clarify the intended
equipment to which this category is
applied and will continue to drive
uncertainty in the industry.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 1) Hillphoenix
recommended removing the product
type reference from the category name
and referencing a general name based on
manufacturers’ intent and internal air
temperature (‘‘IAT’’). Id. Hillphoenix
commented that the operating
temperature combined with
manufacture intent would be the main
characteristic that distinguishes
different types of freezers, and noted
that the proposed high-temperature, the
existing medium-temperature, and lowtemperature categories do not reference
a specific product type. Id. Hillphoenix
stated the term ‘‘ice-cream freezer’’
could be named ‘‘sub-zero freezer.’’ Id.
In response to Hussmann’s comment,
DOE states that the definition of ‘‘icecream freezer,’’ as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR, includes the operating
temperature range required to meet the
definition of an ice-cream freezer. 87 FR
39164, 39168. Any model that is unable
to operate at the required integrated
average temperature shall use the lowest
application product temperature to
certify.
In response to AHRI’s, Continental’s,
and Hillphoenix’s comments, DOE
provided examples in the June 2022
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66157
NOPR of ice-cream-like products that
are typically displayed, stored, and
dispensed in the same manner as ice
cream (gelato, frozen yogurt, and
sorbet). 87 FR 39164, 39168–39169. As
stated in the June 2022 NOPR, the CRE
used for these food products is likely
similar, if not identical, to equipment
used to store, display, or dispense ice
cream. Id. In addition, DOE has
determined that ‘‘frozen treats’’ or
‘‘frozen snacks’’ are understood to be
synonymous with ‘‘frozen desserts.’’ To
provide greater clarity, DOE is
amending the definition to specify ‘‘of
ice cream or other frozen desserts’’. DOE
also notes that the definition of ‘‘icecream freezer,’’ as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR, includes the operating
temperature range required to meet the
definition, and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends for the
storing, displaying, or dispensing of
frozen desserts. 87 FR 39164, 39168–
39170. If a commercial freezer does not
meet the requirements of an ice-cream
freezer, then it would be a lowtemperature freezer, according to the
definition as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR. Id.
In response to Continental’s comment
regarding certain features of ice-cream
freezers, DOE stated in the June 2022
NOPR that, while ice-cream freezers
may implement manual defrosts or cold
wall evaporators, DOE is aware of these
equipment designs in other commercial
freezers, such that they do not uniquely
distinguish ice-cream freezers. 87 FR
39164, 39169.
b. Operating Temperature Range
Appendix B requires testing all icecream freezers to an IAT of ¥15 °F.
However, the term ‘‘ice-cream freezer’’
includes a variety of equipment with a
range of typical operating temperatures
during normal use. For example, certain
ice-cream freezers are designed to
operate considerably below ¥5 °F
(sometimes referred to as ‘‘hardening
cabinets’’ and specifically designed for
ice-cream storage), while other icecream freezers are designed to operate
closer to 0 °F during typical use (e.g.,
‘‘dipping cabinets’’ and other equipment
used to hold ice cream intended for
immediate consumption). Ice-cream
freezers intended for higher-temperature
operation are often not capable of
achieving an IAT of ¥15 °F. In such an
instance, appendix B requires testing
the units to the LAPT.
AHRI 1200–2023 maintains the
existing rating points for commercial
freezers (i.e., ¥15.0 °F ±2.0 °F for icecream applications and 0.0 °F ±2.0 °F for
low-temperature applications) in section
4.1.1, ‘‘Integrated Average
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66158
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Temperature.’’ Consistent with AHRI
1200–2023, DOE is not amending the
commercial freezer target IATs for
testing.
Of the 346 ice-cream freezer models
certified to DOE,5 21 are rated based on
LAPTs higher than ¥15 °F, including 12
models with a rating temperature of
¥5 °F. Many of these models have a
horizontal or service over counter
configuration and are intended to hold
ice cream for immediate consumption.
DOE recognizes that testing and rating
certain commercial freezers to 0 °F may
be more appropriate than testing and
rating to ¥15 °F. DOE already requires
a 0 °F rating temperature for commercial
freezers. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that ice-cream
freezers that meet the current ice-cream
freezer definition but cannot operate as
low as an IAT of ¥15 °F ±2 °F can be
tested at an IAT of 0 °F ±2 °F. 87 FR
39164, 39170.
To better distinguish between icecream freezers and other commercial
freezers (i.e., ice-cream freezers not
capable of reaching an IAT of ¥15 °F
±2.0 °F), DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to amend the ice-cream freezer
definition to specify that the designed
operating temperature is required to be
at or below ¥15.0 °F (±2.0 °F), upon the
compliance date(s) of any amended
energy conservation standard(s) for icecream freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39170.
DOE also proposed to clarify which
commercial freezers are required to test
at an IAT of 0 °F according to appendix
B by defining the term ‘‘lowtemperature freezer’’ to mean a
commercial freezer that is not an icecream freezer. Id. In the June 2022
NOPR, DOE requested comment on the
proposed amended definition for ‘‘icecream freezer’’ and the proposed
definition for ‘‘low-temperature
freezer.’’ Id.
Zero Zone and AHRI commented that
modifying the definition of ‘‘ice-cream
freezer’’ through two separate requests
is confusing and asked that in future
correspondence, DOE provide the
composite final draft of a definition.
(Zero Zone, No. 37, p. 2; AHRI, No. 38,
p. 2) Zero Zone and AHRI also
commented that the rules for different
product categories are based on
temperature, but both groups could find
no mention of temperature in this
context and assumed it was the IAT. Id.
Zero Zone and AHRI asked that DOE
clarify and state that the temperatures
listed are the integrated average product
5 Based on review of DOE’s Compliance
Certification Database, available at
www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (last
accessed February 23, 2023).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
temperature. Id. In addition, Zero Zone
and AHRI commented that mixing
product types and product temperatures
in a definition was challenging and
confusing. Id. Zero Zone and AHRI
stated that manufacturers make generic
commercial freezers that customers
employ in a variety of uses. Id. Finally,
Zero Zone and AHRI stated that in the
2007 proposed rule (RE: 10 CFR part
431.62 and FR/Vol 72 No. 143/
Thursday, July 26, 2007 page 41173) 6
(‘‘July 2007 ANOPR’’), DOE clarified the
application and definition of ‘‘generic
commercial freezer’’ and requested that
DOE codify its comments from 2007
into the formal definition, because it
currently exists only in a proposed rule
and should be clarified in a final rule to
ease manufacturer concerns. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting,
ICF commented that rather than saying
‘‘operate at or below ¥5 plus-or-minus
2 Fahrenheit,’’ there should be a
threshold and no tolerance because ‘‘at
or below’’ contradicts ‘‘plus-or-minus
2,’’ and the same is the case with the
refrigerators. (Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 41, p. 21).
AHRI, Continental, and Hussmann
commented that they agree with DOE’s
intention to amend the definition of
‘‘ice-cream freezer’’ to products with
operating temperatures at or below
¥15 °F, but recommended refining the
definition to specify ‘‘ice-cream
hardening freezer’’ or ‘‘ice-cream
holding freezer’’ to clarify the proper
application and equipment marketing.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 3; Continental, No. 29,
p. 2; Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2) AHRI,
Continental, and Hussmann also
commented they were unaware of any
ice cream that was dispensed or served
at or below ¥15 °F. Id.
Continental agreed with DOE that a
separate definition for ‘‘low-temperature
freezer’’ as a commercial freezer that
will maintain ¥15 °F but is not an icecream freezer was appropriate.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 2) Continental
further commented that equipment in
this category should be tested and rated
at ¥15 °F to reflect the intended
application. Id. Continental stated
commercial freezers that cannot operate
as low as ¥15 °F, and are not marketed
for ice-cream applications, can be tested
and rated at 0 °F, and should be
classified under the current definition of
‘‘commercial freezer.’’ Id. In addition,
Continental commented that although
the test procedures for ‘‘ice-cream
hardening/holding’’ and ‘‘non-icecream’’ freezers at ¥15 °F may be
similar, DOE’s energy standards
6 See www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2007-0726/pdf/07-3640.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
expressed in 10 CFR part 431 have
significant differences in how allowable
energy consumption levels are
calculated for self-contained ice-cream
freezers versus other self-contained
commercial freezers, therefore changes
in this test procedure rulemaking will
have substantial impact. Id.
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposal
to amend the ice-cream freezer
operating temperature to be ≤ ¥15 °F
and to include this in the definition, but
recommended that DOE specify if the
rating temperature of ¥15 °F IAT will
change, as currently the ice-cream
freezer category has an operating
temperature of ≤ ¥5 °F and a rating
temperature of ¥15 °F ±2 °F IAT.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 1)
Hillphoenix disagreed with the
proposal to modify the definition of
‘‘low-temperature freezer’’ to refer to a
non-ice-cream freezer, as this change
will not clarify the intended equipment
in this category since ice cream can be
displayed in freezers not intended to
operate at ≤ ¥15 °F, which will
continue to drive uncertainty in the
industry. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 1)
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
amend the operating temperature of the
low-temperature category from > ¥5 °F
and <32 °F to > ¥15 °F and <32 °F if
such changes are applied to the icecream category. Id. Hillphoenix also
proposed that each category of CRE
reference the IAT only and not the
operating temperature to drive
consistency between categories. Id.
NEEA supported DOE’s proposed
modifications to the definition of ‘‘icecream freezers’’ to include operating
characteristics instead of how the
equipment was marketed for use
because technical characteristics
provide clearer differentiation of
equipment than marketing materials.
(NEEA, No. 39, p. 2). NEEA restated its
previous concern that some ice-cream
freezers that meet the existing
marketing-based definition cannot
operate at an IAT of ¥15 °F ±2 °F, which
represents DOE’s proposed defining
characteristic and DOE has proposed a
new term, ‘‘low-temperature freezer’’ for
those ice-cream freezers, with their
testing point at 0 °F. Id. NEEA
recommended that DOE review the
products that meet this new definition
of ‘‘low-temperature freezer’’ but not the
new definition for ‘‘ice-cream freezer’’
to ensure that the equipment is similar
enough to be grouped together and that
the test conditions are representative for
all products. Id.
The Joint Commenters stated support
for DOE’s proposed changes that remove
ambiguity in the definition of ‘‘icecream freezers’’ and ensure all ice-cream
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
and low-temperature freezers are tested
at a uniform temperature, ¥15 °F and
0 °F, respectively. (Joint Commenters,
No. 31, p. 1)
The CA IOUs commented that, in a
survey of products available on the
market, they determined ice-cream
dipping cabinets listed in DOE’s
Compliance Certification Management
System (‘‘CCMS’’) that were tested at
¥5 °F and ¥10 °F can achieve 0 °F. (CA
IOUs, No. 36, p. 10)
True commented that the equipment
category of ‘‘low-temperature freezer’’ is
not included in NSF/ANSI 7–2021.
(True, No. 28, p. 4) True also
commented that when a freezer is
designed to hold ¥15.0 °F (±2.0 °F), the
energy consumption will be much
higher due to the use of larger
displacement compressors, as well as
the use of more anti-condensation and
defrost heaters, such as heated glass. Id.
In response to Zero Zone’s and
AHRI’s comments, DOE notes that the
definition of ‘‘ice-cream freezer,’’ as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, refers
to ‘‘operating temperature,’’ defined in
10 CFR 431.62 as follows:
Operating temperature means the
range of integrated average temperatures
at which a self-contained commercial
refrigeration unit or remote-condensing
commercial refrigeration unit with a
thermostat is capable of operating or, in
the case of a remote-condensing
commercial refrigeration unit without a
thermostat, the range of integrated
average temperatures at which the unit
is marketed, designed, or intended to
operate.
However, DOE understands the
definition of ‘‘ice-cream freezer,’’ as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, states
‘‘operating temperature’’ in the second
part of the definition and ‘‘to operate’’
in the first part of the definition. 87 FR
39164, 39168–39170. Therefore, DOE is
amending the definition of ‘‘ice-cream
freezer’’ to include ‘‘operating
temperature’’ in both parts of the
definition.
Zero Zone and AHRI also referenced
the July 2007 ANOPR discussion of the
‘‘ice-cream freezer’’ definition. DOE
expects that Zero Zone and AHRI are
referring to the discussion which states
that unless equipment is designed,
marketed, or intended specifically for
the storage, display or dispensing of ice
cream, it would not be considered an
‘‘ice-cream freezer.’’ 72 FR 41161,
41173. Multi-purpose commercial
freezers, manufactured for storage and
display, for example, of frozen foods as
well as ice cream would not meet this
definition. Id. DOE also expects that the
update to ‘‘ice-cream applications’’ in
section 4.1.1.2 of AHRI 1200–2023 is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
consistent with Zero Zone’s and AHRI’s
comments. Consistent with the
discussion of the July 2007 ANOPR,
DOE is amending the definition of ‘‘icecream freezer’’ to include the term
‘‘specifically’’.
In response to ICF’s comment, DOE is
amending the definition of ‘‘ice-cream
freezer’’ to remove the temperature
tolerances and adjusting the
temperature in the second part of the
definition to specify the upper bound of
the ice-cream freezer IAT test condition
tolerance, consistent with DOE’s
intention of the definition proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR.
In response to AHRI’s, Continental’s,
and Hussmann’s comments, the
definition of ‘‘ice-cream freezer,’’ as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, states
that the manufacturer designs, markets,
or intends for the storing, displaying, or
dispensing of frozen desserts which
encompasses terms or equipment such
as ‘‘ice-cream hardening’’ or ‘‘ice-cream
holding.’’ 87 FR 39164, 39168–39169.
DOE notes that if a commercial freezer
does not meet the requirements of an
ice-cream freezer, then the commercial
freezer would be a low-temperature
freezer, according to the definition as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
39164, 39170. Commercial freezers that
are not ice-cream freezers (i.e., lowtemperature freezers) are currently
tested at 0 °F (±2 °F). As discussed in the
June 2022 NOPR, the definition of ‘‘icecream freezer’’ will not require a more
restrictive operating temperature range
until the compliance date(s) of any
amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers. 87 FR
39164, 39170.
In response to Hillphoenix’s
comment, as stated in the June 2022
NOPR, DOE is not amending the
commercial freezer target IATs for
testing, which is consistent with AHRI
1200–2023. 87 FR 39164, 39170. As
stated in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
recognizes that the reference to ‘‘icecream’’ in the definition of ‘‘ice-cream
freezer’’ does not itself distinguish this
equipment from other commercial
freezers, and that the additional
descriptors specified in the definition
(i.e., designed to operate at or below
¥5 °F) together classify a unit as an icecream freezer. 87 FR 39164, 39169.
Therefore, a commercial freezer that is
not designed for an operating
temperature at or below ¥5.0 °F, or
¥13.0 °F upon the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, and
that the manufacturer designs, markets,
or intends specifically for the storing,
displaying, or dispensing of ice cream or
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66159
other frozen desserts would meet the
definition of a low-temperature freezer.
In response to NEEA’s comment, DOE
states the CRE that currently meet the
definition of ‘‘ice-cream freezer’’ but
that would only meet the definition of
‘‘low-temperature freezer’’ upon the
compliance date(s) of any amended
energy conservation standard(s) for icecream freezers, are likely similar, if not
identical, to certain equipment that
currently meet the definition of ‘‘lowtemperature freezer.’’
In response to True’s comment, DOE
recognizes that the definitions and
categories do not necessarily match
those included in the NSF 7 standard,
but DOE is establishing definitions for
the purposes of the DOE test procedure.
To the extent that different equipment
categories require different components
due to different operating temperatures,
DOE would consider the corresponding
energy use impacts as part of the energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
Therefore, as described, DOE is
amending the definition of ‘‘ice-cream
freezer’’ as follows:
Ice-cream freezer means:
(1) Prior to the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a
commercial freezer that is capable of an
operating temperature at or below
¥5.0 °F and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends specifically
for the storing, displaying, or dispensing
of ice cream or other frozen desserts; or
(2) Upon the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a
commercial freezer that is capable of an
operating temperature at or below
¥13.0 °F and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends specifically
for the storing, displaying, or dispensing
of ice cream or other frozen desserts.
DOE is establishing the definition of
‘‘low-temperature freezer’’ as proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR in this final rule:
Low-temperature freezer means a
commercial freezer that is not an icecream freezer.
2. High-Temperature CRE
DOE defines ‘‘commercial
refrigerator’’ as a unit of commercial
refrigeration equipment in which all
refrigerated compartments in the unit
are capable of operating at or above
32 °F (±2 °F). 10 CFR 431.62.
Section 2.1 of appendix B requires
testing commercial refrigerators to an
IAT of 38 °F ±2 °F. DOE is aware of
equipment that meets the definition of
a commercial refrigerator but is capable
of operating only at temperatures above
the 38 °F ±2 °F IAT required for testing.
Examples of these types of equipment
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66160
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
include CRE designed for storing or
displaying chocolate and/or wine, with
typical recommended storage
temperatures around 55 °F. Consistent
with the current test procedure,
manufacturers certify such equipment
using the LAPT setting. LAPT can vary
by model, so this approach, which does
not rely on a uniform operating
temperature, can result in measured
energy consumptions that are not
necessarily comparable between
models. Currently, 145 models of singlecompartment commercial refrigerators
are certified to DOE with an LAPT
above 40.0 °F.7 Categorizing these
commercial refrigerators in a separate
high-temperature refrigerator category
would allow DOE to consider test
procedures for this equipment that may
better represent actual use.
To allow for differentiating typical
commercial refrigerators from
commercial refrigerators that operate
only at higher temperatures, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
define ‘‘high-temperature refrigerator’’
as a commercial refrigerator that is not
capable of operating with an integrated
average temperature as low as 38.0 °F
(±2.0 °F). 87 FR 39164, 39171.
DOE stated in the June 2022 NOPR
that it recognized certain commercial
refrigerators may be capable of operating
with an IAT of 38.0 °F (±2.0 °F) but are
intended for use at higher storage
temperatures. Id. However, DOE
proposed to define ‘‘high-temperature
refrigerator’’ based on operating
capability rather than intended use to
ensure consistent application of DOE’s
definitions and to ensure that CRE
currently tested and rated with an IAT
of 38.0 °F (±2.0 °F) would continue to be
categorized, tested, and rated at that
operating condition. Id.
To clarify the classification of
commercial refrigerators overall, DOE
also proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
define the term ‘‘medium-temperature
refrigerator’’ to refer to commercial
refrigerators capable of operating with
an IAT of 38.0 °F (±2.0 °F) or lower. Id.
DOE also proposed to require testing
high-temperature refrigerators according
to AHRI 1200–2023, which requires an
IAT of 55 °F ±2.0 °F. Id. Under the June
2022 NOPR approach, a commercial
refrigerator would be tested and rated as
either a medium-temperature
refrigerator (if capable of operating with
an IAT of 38.0 °F (±2.0 °F)) or as a hightemperature refrigerator (if not capable
7 Based on review of DOE’s Compliance
Certification Database, available at
www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (last
accessed February 23, 2023).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
of operating with an IAT as low as
38.0 °F (±2.0 °F)). Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
recognized that certain commercial
refrigerators may be capable of operating
at IATs of both 38 °F (±2.0 °F) and 55 °F
(±2.0 °F). Id. In the April 2014 Final
Rule, DOE stated that CRE capable of
operating at IATs that span multiple
equipment categories must be certified
and comply with DOE’s regulations for
each applicable equipment category. 79
FR 22277, 22291. The definition of
‘‘high-temperature refrigerator,’’ as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, would
exclude CRE capable of operating at
medium temperatures (i.e., an IAT of
38 °F), and therefore would exclude
models capable of operating at both
IATs. 87 FR 39164, 39171. Thus, as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, a unit
of CRE capable of operating at both IATs
of 38 °F and 55 °F would only meet the
definition of a medium-temperature
refrigerator. Id.
As an alternative to the definition
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
stated that it could instead define ‘‘hightemperature refrigerator’’ based only on
the capability of a commercial
refrigerator to operate at an IAT of 55 °F
(±2.0 °F). 87 FR 39164, 39171. Under
this alternate approach, a unit of CRE
capable of operating at IATs of both
38 °F and 55 °F would meet the
definitions of both a mediumtemperature refrigerator and a hightemperature refrigerator. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
definitions for ‘‘high-temperature
refrigerator’’ and ‘‘medium-temperature
refrigerator,’’ including whether the
terms should be mutually exclusive or
constructed such that equipment could
be considered to meet both definitions.
87 FR 39164, 39171.
The Joint Commenters supported
DOE’s proposed changes regarding the
establishment of a definition and
uniform test procedure for hightemperature refrigerators. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 1) The Joint
Commenters expressed support for
DOE’s proposed definition and test
procedure for high-temperature CRE,
particularly basing the distinction
between medium and high temperature
on operating ability rather than
intended use, as this will ensure
consistent application of DOE’s
definitions and test procedures. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 2)
NEEA commented that it supports the
new definitions DOE proposed for hightemperature CRE, stating that these
equipment types have unique
applications compared to other CRE,
and these definitions allowed
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
consideration (potential standards),
categorization (equipment classes), and
testing of this equipment separate from
other CRE. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2). NEEA
also stated its support for DOE’s
proposal to establish test procedures for
new and/or newly defined categories of
CRE, and restated its recommendation
from the 2021 CRE Test Procedure RFI
that DOE establish test methods for new
CRE product types, including hightemperature CRE. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
Hussmann commented that it favors
the proposed mutually exclusive
definitions of ‘‘high-temperature
refrigerator’’ and ‘‘medium-temperature
refrigerator.’’ (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2).
Hussmann commented in favor of rating
only at medium temperature if the CRE
are capable of operating at both high
and medium temperatures. (Hussmann,
No. 32, p. 3) In the August 2022 public
meeting, Hussmann commented that
there are specialty applications that run
in between the low-temperature and
medium-temperature rating points.
(Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p.
18) Hussmann added that a unit may
run between 8 °F and 10 °F as the
current LAPT for that product. Id.
Hussmann noted that these products
won’t run at 0 °F, and they don’t run at
32 °F, and that is something for DOE to
consider. Id.
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposed
definitions of ‘‘high-temperature
refrigerator’’ including the IAT of 55 °F
±2 °F, and ‘‘medium-temperature
refrigerator’’ including the IAT of 38 °F
±2 °F. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 1).
Hillphoenix commented that the
proposed separate designation for
‘‘medium-temperature refrigerator’’ is
not needed and could introduce
confusion, and it recommended DOE
amend the definitions of ‘‘commercial
freezer’’ and ‘‘commercial refrigerator’’
in which high- and mediumtemperature refrigerators are already
addressed. Id. Hillphoenix suggested, as
an alternative, that ‘‘commercial
freezer’’ and ‘‘commercial refrigerator’’
could be replaced by the terms
‘‘medium-temperature refrigerator’’ and
‘‘low-temperature freezer.’’ Id.
Hillphoenix also agreed with DOE that
a single CRE unit capable of operating
in both high- and medium-temperature
categories should only be required to
meet the 38 °F ±2 °F IAT. Id.
AHRI commented that DOE should
consider using existing product
designations and existing labelling as
found in ANSI/NSF 7–2019 for ‘‘hightemperature refrigerators.’’ (AHRI, No.
38, p. 3). AHRI stated that to meet
applicable sanitation requirements, selfcontained storage refrigerators must be
capable of maintaining an air
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
temperature of 40 °F in 100 °F ambient
temperature (AHRI stated a presumption
that such products should be able to
maintain IAT of 38 °F for the DOE
energy test). Id. AHRI commented that
two equipment types represent
refrigerators that meet applicable
sanitation requirements for hightemperature applications: (1) beverage
coolers are exempt from temperature
test requirements if they bear a
permanently attached label reading,
‘‘This equipment is intended for the
storage and display of non-potentially
hazardous bottled or canned products
only’’; and (2) self-contained display
refrigerators are exempt from
temperature performance testing if they
bear a label reading, ‘‘This display
refrigerator is not for the display of
potentially hazardous foods.’’ Id. AHRI
commented that there is no need for the
proposed separate designation for
‘‘medium-temperature refrigerator’’
since such products would already be
covered under the current definition of
‘‘refrigerator’’ if they do not fall under
the proposed sub-classification of ‘‘hightemperature refrigerator.’’ Id. AHRI
stated that this approach would be
consistent with the proposed new
definition of ‘‘low-temperature freezer’’
because a category for ‘‘mediumtemperature freezer’’ has not been
suggested. Id.
Continental commented that the term
‘‘commercial refrigerator’’ should be
retained to encompass all CRE capable
of operating at or above 32 °F and that
the proposed additional definition of
‘‘medium-temperature refrigerator’’ for
CRE at or below 38 °F down to 32 °F is
unnecessary and may introduce
confusion. (Continental, No. 29, p. 2)
Continental also commented that the
ANSI/NSF 7–2019 sanitation standard
for commercial refrigerators and freezers
requires that self-contained storage
refrigerators must be tested and proven
to maintain an air temperature of 40 °F
in 100 °F ambient, and capable of
maintaining product simulator IAT of
38 °F in 75 °F ambient, as prescribed by
ASHRAE 72–2022. Id. Continental
stated no objection to DOE’s proposed
definition of the term ‘‘high-temperature
refrigerator’’ as a commercial
refrigerator that is not capable of
operating with an IAT as low as 38 °F
in 75 °F ambient, but it added that DOE
should reference existing labelling
prescribed in ANSI/NSF 7–2019 to
identify ‘‘high-temperature
refrigerators’’ that meet required
sanitation requirements but are not
required to meet temperature testing
requirements. Id. Continental stated its
awareness that equipment identified
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
with the current NSF labels of beverage
cooler and self-contained display
refrigerator would be the only
commercial refrigerators meeting
applicable sanitation standards without
being required to maintain specified
temperatures that align with product
simulator IAT of 38 °F. Id.
True commented that any unit unable
to store food products at a temperature
of 38.0 °F (±2.0 °F) is not a commercial
refrigerator and as a result, the term
‘‘high-temperature refrigerator’’ could be
construed as misleading. (True, No. 28,
p. 4) True noted that the proposed terms
‘‘high-temperature refrigerator’’ and
‘‘medium-temperature refrigerator’’ are
seen in the new AHRI–1200 standard,
which is not yet public. Id. True
commented that commercial
refrigerators must comply with NSF–7,
and for a storage refrigerator, test per
NSF–7 such that they cannot exceed
40 °F at any point. (True, Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 41, p. 15). True
commented that the NSF–7 temperature
ranges should be considered for the
applicable equipment, noting that hightemperature refrigerators are not
covered under any health and safety
standards. Id. True further commented
that for chocolate, wine, and flower
storage applications, refrigerated units
unable to meet the 38.0 °F (±2.0 °F)
requirement should be labeled as
‘‘commercial display refrigerators for
non-hazardous (food) applications,’’ and
added that True units are all capable of
operating from 32.0 °F to 55 °F, with
control settings changed for highertemperature applications. (True, No. 28,
p. 4).
In response to Hussmann’s comment,
AHRI 1200–2023 maintains the existing
rating points for Medium Temperature
Applications and Low Temperature
Applications (i.e., 38 °F ±2.0 °F for
medium-temperature applications and
0.0 °F ±2.0 °F for low-temperature
applications) in section 4.1.1,
‘‘Integrated Average Temperature.’’
Consistent with AHRI 1200–2023, DOE
is not amending the mediumtemperature refrigerator or lowtemperature freezer target IATs for
testing. To the extent that a model may
not be able to maintain the target IATs
for testing, the LAPT provisions would
continue to apply, as discussed in
section III.K of this document.
In response to Hillphoenix’s, AHRI’s,
Continental’s, and True’s comments, the
definitions for ‘‘medium-temperature
refrigerator’’ and ‘‘low-temperature
freezer,’’ as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR, indicate they are subsets of the
definitions for ‘‘commercial
refrigerator’’ and ‘‘commercial freezer,’’
respectively. DOE is establishing the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66161
separate definitions to ensure clarity of
when certain provisions apply
specifically to either mediumtemperature refrigerators or lowtemperature freezers rather than the
broader categories of commercial
refrigerators or commercial freezers.
Consistent with the comments
discussed in section III.A.1.b regarding
‘‘operating temperature’’ and
temperature tolerances, DOE is
amending the definitions of ‘‘hightemperature refrigerator’’ and ‘‘mediumtemperature refrigerator’’ to specifically
include the definition for ‘‘operating
temperature’’ and to replace the
temperature tolerances with the upper
bound of the medium-temperature
refrigerator IAT test condition tolerance
which is consistent with DOE’s
intentions of these definitions in the
June 2022 NOPR.
Therefore, as described, DOE is
amending the definitions of ‘‘hightemperature refrigerator’’ and ‘‘mediumtemperature refrigerator’’ as follows:
High-temperature refrigerator means a
commercial refrigerator that is not
capable of an operating temperature at
or below 40.0 °F.
Medium-temperature refrigerator
means a commercial refrigerator that is
capable of an operating temperature at
or below 40.0 °F.
DOE discusses test requirements for
this equipment in section III.B.1.b of
this document.
3. Convertible Equipment
In the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE
noted that some basic models of CRE
may have operating characteristics that
include an operating temperature range
that spans multiple equipment classes,
and subsequently required that selfcontained equipment or remote
condensing equipment with thermostats
capable of operating at IATs that span
multiple equipment categories be
certified and comply with DOE’s
regulations for each applicable
equipment category. 79 FR 22277,
22291. Similarly, DOE adopted
requirements for remote condensing
equipment without thermostats that
specify that if a given basic model of
CRE is marketed, designed, or intended
to operate at IATs spanning multiple
equipment categories, the CRE basic
model must be certified and comply
with the relevant energy conservation
standards for all applicable equipment
categories. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to specify in 10 CFR 429.42
the requirements from the April 2014
Final Rule that require basic models of
CRE that operate in multiple equipment
classes to certify and comply with the
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66162
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
energy conservation standards for each
applicable equipment class. 87 FR
39164, 39171. This proposal is
consistent with the notice of petition for
a test procedure waiver that DOE
published on May 26, 2017, for AHT
Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT
Cooling Systems USA Inc. (‘‘AHT’’) in
which DOE declined to grant AHT an
interim waiver that would allow for
testing only in the ice-cream freezer
equipment class for AHT’s specified
multi-mode CRE basic models. 82 FR
24330.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal to
specify the requirements from the April
2014 Final Rule regarding basic models
of CRE that operate in multiple
equipment classes. 87 FR 39164, 39171.
AHRI recommended that because the
phrase ‘‘capable of operating at’’ was
included for marketing purposes and
not technical capability, DOE should
consider removing that phrase as
unnecessary in the following 2014 Final
Rule language: ‘‘CRE with thermostats
capable of operating at integrated
average temperatures (‘‘IATs’’) that span
multiple equipment categories must be
certified and comply with DOE’s
regulations for each applicable
equipment category.’’ (AHRI, No. 38, p.
4) AHRI used the same reasoning to
further recommend that DOE remove
the word ‘‘or’’ from the following
language: ‘‘. . . remote condensing
equipment without a thermostat that is
marketed, designed, or intended to
operate at IATs spanning multiple
equipment categories must be certified
and comply with the relevant energy
conservation standards for all applicable
equipment categories.’’ 8 Id.
Hussmann recommended removing
the phrase ‘‘capable of operating at’’
from the following 2014 Final Rule
sentence: ‘‘CRE with thermostats
capable of operating at integrated
average temperatures (‘‘IATs’’) that span
multiple equipment categories must be
certified and comply with DOE’s
regulations for each applicable
equipment category.’’ (Hussmann, No.
32, p. 2).
AHT commented that it is overly
burdensome to test and certify very
efficient closed equipment in all three
temperature classes when it is capable
of operating in all three classes, and that
only the most energy-consuming
temperature class should be used for
testing and certifying, as in Europe.
(AHT, No. 40, p. 1)
True commented that when designing
a unit for multiple temperature ratings,
the systems will not be as energy
8 79
FR 22277, 22291.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
efficient at the higher operating
temperature rating, compared to a
system designed specifically for the
higher temperature rating. (True, No. 28,
p. 2) True stated that, in one example,
a unit passes ENERGY STAR® 5.0
requirements as a storage freezer (0 °F
±2 °F) but, when tested as a storage
refrigerator (38 °F ±2 °F), will consume
about twice the energy of a unit
specifically designed to operate only as
a storage refrigerator, due mostly to the
excess capacity of the compressor and
refrigeration system required to operate
the unit at the lower temperature
application. Id.
Hillphoenix disagreed with the
proposal to specify the requirements
stated in the 2014 Final Rule and
recommended that basic models of CRE
that operate in multiple equipment
classes should only be required to meet
the coldest application for a CRE
product, which would be less
burdensome on manufacturers.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2)
In response to AHRI’s and
Hussmann’s comments, DOE notes the
phrase ‘‘capable of operating at’’ does
refer to technical capability and is
consistent with phrasing in current DOE
definitions (e.g., commercial refrigerator
and commercial freezer). Therefore,
DOE is maintaining this phrase in this
document.
In response to AHRI’s comment, DOE
notes that the word ‘‘or’’ is necessary for
the construction of the sentence that
contains the requirements for remote
condensing equipment without a
thermostat and is therefore maintaining
the word ‘‘or’’ in this document.
In response to AHT’s, True’s, and
Hillphoenix’s comments, DOE notes
that the definitions discussed in
sections III.A.1 and III.A.2 would only
require CRE including an operating
temperature range that spans multiple
equipment classes to certify in a
maximum of two equipment classes
(i.e., ice-cream freezer and mediumtemperature refrigerator, ice-cream
freezer and high-temperature
refrigerator, low-temperature freezer and
medium-temperature refrigerator, or
low-temperature freezer and hightemperature refrigerator). Testing to the
coldest applicable temperature would
be expected to result in the highest
energy consumption, but does not
necessarily ensure that a model would
meet the energy conservation standards
for multiple applicable equipment
classes at different operating
temperatures.
As proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE is specifying in 10 CFR 429.42 the
requirements from the April 2014 Final
Rule that basic models of CRE that
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
operate in multiple equipment classes
must be certified and comply with the
energy conservation standards for each
applicable equipment class.
B. Updates to Industry Standards
DOE’s test procedure for CRE
currently adopts through reference
certain provisions of AHRI 1200–2010,
ASHRAE 72–2005, and AHAM HRF–1–
2008. 10 CFR 431.63. With regard to the
provisions relevant to the DOE test
procedure, AHRI 1200–2010 references
certain provisions of ASHRAE 72–2005
and AHAM HRF–1–2008.
Since establishing the DOE test
procedure in appendix B, AHRI,
ASHRAE, and AHAM have published
updated versions of the referenced test
standards. On October 1, 2013, ANSI
approved an updated version of AHRI
1200, ANSI/AHRI Standard 1200 (I–P),
‘‘2013 Standard for Performance Rating
of Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets’’
(‘‘AHRI 1200–2013’’). On April 12,
2023, AHRI issued an updated version
of AHRI 1200 (‘‘AHRI 1200–2023’’). On
August 1, 2018, ANSI approved an
updated version of ASHRAE 72, ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 72–2018, ‘‘Method of
Testing Open and Closed Commercial
Refrigerators and Freezers’’ (‘‘ASHRAE
72–2018’’). On June 30, 2022, ANSI
approved an updated version of
ASHRAE 72, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard
72–2022, ‘‘Method of Testing Open and
Closed Commercial Refrigerators and
Freezers’’ (‘‘ASHRAE 72–2022’’). On
November 11, 2022, Errata Sheet for
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72–2022,
‘‘Method of Testing Open and Closed
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers’’
was published (‘‘ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata’’). AHAM more recently approved
and published an updated version of its
industry test standard, AHAM HRF–1–
2019, ‘‘Energy and Internal Volume of
Refrigerating Appliances’’ (‘‘AHAM
HRF–1–2019’’). DOE initially
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
the changes within AHRI 1200–2013,
ASHRAE 72–2018, and AHAM HRF–1–
2019 are editorial, improve clarity,
better harmonize with the DOE test
procedure, or not relevant to CRE (e.g.,
relevant to products such as consumer
refrigerators). 87 FR 39164, 39171.
Based on DOE’s assessment, the changes
in the latest versions of the industry test
standards, AHRI 1200–2023 and
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata, will not
impact the measured energy
consumption, volume, or TDA of CRE,
as applicable.
DOE discusses AHRI 1200–2023 and
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata in
sections III.B.1 and III.B.2 of this
document.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
In response to the June 2022 NOPR,
AHRI, Zero Zone, and NAFEM
recommended that DOE use the
referenced standards as intended.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 1; Zero Zone, No. 37,
p. 1; NAFEM, No. 34, p. 1) AHRI
cautioned DOE that combining test
standards was unnecessary and
inadvisable, and recommended that
DOE regulate the issues in the test
procedure under a singular standard. Id.
AHRI stated concern that the data set
used here did not provide clarity as to
whether the testing is indicative of
energy efficiency. Id. AHRI
recommended that DOE wait to update
certain regulations until clearer test
standards had been determined through
consensus by manufacturers and third
parties. Id. AHRI also noted that
ENERGY STAR was not ready to employ
certain referenced standards, raising
concerns that DOE was prematurely
adopting these requirements. Id.
Zero Zone recommended that DOE
wait for the updated standard whenever
possible and that under current rules,
DOE has been able to call out a standard
that was nearly revised (ASHRAE 72
and AHRI 1200). (Zero Zone, No. 37, p.
1). Zero Zone commented that possibly
DOE could follow this process for other
standards as well, and that when this
was not possible, Zero Zone asked DOE
to request that standards development
groups immediately focus on areas of
DOE concern to allow for industry input
and consensus building and allow DOE
to have improve information in the
standard. Id.
NAMA recommended that DOE use
the referenced standards as intended
and cautioned DOE that combining test
standards was unnecessary and
inadvisable and recommended that DOE
regulate the issues in the test procedure
under a singular standard. (NAFEM, No.
34, p. 2) NAMA stated concern that the
test procedures mentioned in many of
these items did not clarify which
standard was to be used for which
measurement. Id. NAMA commented
that referencing multiple standards
could be a problem when one standard
was updated before the other, and, in
general, NAMA recommended that
referencing one standard would be
preferred unless DOE specified which
sections in the standards were being
required. Id. NAMA commented that
many sections in the ASTM, ASHRAE,
and AHRI standards were written to
measure the performance of the product,
not just the energy measurement and
DOE therefore needed to identify the
standards sections carefully so as to not
move DOE into writing performance test
methods. Id. NAMA commented it
would be willing to support such
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
activities in joint discussions on the
sections to ensure that the measurement
of energy for NAMA-covered products
was accurate. Id.
Hussmann commented that
combining test standards was not a
typical practice and recommended that
DOE regulate the issues in the CRE TP
NOPR under a single, universally
accepted established standard.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 1). Hussmann
expressed concern that the data
acquired during a hybrid standard
approach would not yield representative
results of intended product use by
already established means throughout
the industry. Id. Hussmann
recommended that DOE work with the
appropriate standards committees to
update regulations until the standards
have been established, determined to
yield consistent results, and are
representative of typical manufactured
products. Id.
True commented that it uses NSF/
ANSI 7–2021 as the performance
standard for commercial food service
equipment, in addition to UL 471
(‘‘Standard for Commercial Refrigerators
and Freezers,’’ soon to be replaced by
UL CSA 60335–2–89, by October 2024),
and ASHRAE 72–2005 for energy
consumption reporting to DOE, Natural
Resources Canada (‘‘NRCAN’’), CEC,
and ENERGY STAR. (True, No. 28, p. 1)
True listed four current NSF 7
performance tests that must be complied
with to certify that its equipment meets
the NSF 7 food safety requirements for
temperature testing (performance),
construction, and materials used. Id.
True commented that AHRI–1200 is not
considered to be the standard used for
all commercial refrigeration, and that
AHRI standards and guidelines do not
address food safety temperatures or food
sanitation concerns and requirements,
making AHRI standards and guidelines
inappropriate for commercial food
service refrigeration equipment. Id.
DOE has evaluated existing industry
standards, and where applicable, is
incorporating by reference the industry
standard into the relevant appendix.
DOE considers incorporating by
reference an industry standard as a
standalone reference whenever possible.
DOE has identified certain areas in
which provisions of industry standards
require additional specifications or are
inconsistent with the existing regulatory
test method. To clarify the applicability
of provisions from standards that are
incorporated by reference, DOE
occasionally may need to supplement
an industry standard with additional
clarifications. For CRE, instead of
duplicating requirements necessary to
improve clarify of the test procedure
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66163
into the regulatory text, DOE is referring
to provisions in other industry
standards that provide the necessary
clarifications. This leads to DOE
referencing specific provisions from
multiple different industry standards.
DOE specifically refers to individual
sections of industry standards as
appropriate to ensure only relevant
provisions are incorporated in the
regulatory test method such that the test
method is not unduly burdensome to
conduct and is reasonably designed to
produce test results that reflect energy
use during a representative average use
cycle.
DOE recognizes the value of industry
standards setting processes and
regularly participates in committees that
develop and review industry standards.
DOE has statutory timelines for test
procedure rulemakings that require DOE
to determine whether amendments to
test procedures are necessary to carry
out the requirements of EPCA at least
once every 7 years. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(1)) DOE has evaluated industry
standards applicable to CRE that are
both available now and under
development as it conducts the
rulemaking activity to consider whether
the CRE test method requires
amendment. DOE will continue to
participate in industry committees and
will consider future industry standards
in future test procedure rulemakings.
DOE and EPA coordinate their
product and equipment efficiency
programs to harmonize test
requirements when possible and
appropriate. While EPA did not adopt
test methods for additional categories of
CRE during its last revision of the
ENERGY STAR specification, DOE has
evaluated test procedures for these
categories and determined that the
procedures adopted in this rule produce
test results which reflect energy use
during a representative average use
cycle, and are not unduly burdensome
to conduct. To the extent that EPA
revises its specification to include these
new categories of CRE into the ENERGY
STAR program, DOE will coordinate
with EPA to harmonize requirements
when appropriate.
In response to True’s comment, DOE
has evaluated existing industry test
procedures for the use as the basis of the
DOE test procedure for energy
consumption. DOE recognizes that the
industry test procedures serve different
purposes, including for food safety. DOE
discusses the individual industry test
procedures considered and incorporated
by reference in the following subsections, section III.C, and section III.D
of this document.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66164
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
1. AHRI 1200
The revisions included in AHRI
1200–2023 are largely to provide
editorial, clarifying, or harmonizing
updates that will not impact the
measured energy consumption, volume,
or TDA of CRE as compared to the
current test procedure. Specifically,
AHRI 1200–2023 includes the following
updates: definitions intended to
harmonize with ASHRAE 72–2022 and
DOE’s existing regulations; updated
definitions for consistency with the use
of the rating standard; removal of test
requirements that were duplicative with
ASHRAE 72–2022; clarified
measurement requirements and the use
of calculations; inclusion of direct
refrigerated volume measurement
instructions (rather than referencing the
AHAM test standard); and detailed total
display area requirements and
examples.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to incorporate by reference AHRI 1200–
202X for use in the DOE test procedure
because DOE tentatively determined
that the updates compared to AHRI
1200–2013 would improve the clarity of
the test standard, ensure consistent
testing, and as a result would improve
reproducibility of the test procedure. 87
FR 39164, 39172. AHRI 1200–202X
includes procedures for measuring
refrigerated volume rather than referring
to the AHAM standard (although the
procedures are consistent between these
standards). Id. Therefore, DOE proposed
in the NOPR to remove the
incorporation by reference of AHAM
HRF–1–2008 and instead refer to AHRI
1200–202X directly for refrigerated
volume measurement. Id. Based on
DOE’s review of AHRI 1200–2023, the
updates included in the standard are
primarily editorial and are not expected
to change test results as compared to the
existing test procedure, except for the
specific updates as discussed in the
following paragraphs. Therefore, DOE
has determined in this document that
any existing test data for CRE currently
available on the market is expected to be
consistent with the amended test
procedure.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1200–
202X and whether the use of the
updated test method would impact CRE
ratings based on the current DOE test
procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39173.
AHRI commented that it supports
DOE’s proposal to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1200–202X, noting that
select AHRI members consistently test
and rate remote condensing CRE using
high-glide refrigerants. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
4) AHRI commented that refrigerants
407, 448A, and 449A are considered
‘‘high glide’’ under the new definition
in AHRI 1200–202X and that the
updated test method is the most
accurate way to determine the rated
energy consumption, resulting in
similar rated numbers to previous nonhigh-glide refrigerants like R–404A. Id.
AHRI further noted that the current
AHRI 1200–202X standard does not
include testing requirements for CO2
(i.e., R–744), so this refrigerant would
require DOE waivers for future use. Id.
Continental supported DOE’s
proposal to incorporate by reference the
most recent versions of applicable
industry standards, including AHRI
1200–202X. (Continental, No. 29, p. 3)
Continental added that use of the latest
standards should not be required until
the compliance date of any new energy
conservation standards established,
based on the proposed rating standards,
to allow time for stakeholders to
thoroughly evaluate any impact on
energy consumption. Id.
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed
with the proposal to incorporate AHRI
1200–202X by reference, as no
significant impacts to CRE ratings could
be foreseen. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2)
Hussmann commented that it favors
the proposal to incorporate by reference
AHRI 1200–202X. (Hussmann, No. 32,
p. 2)
True commented that it opposes
removing the AHAM HRF–1–2008
standard and referencing AHRI 1200–
202X in future DOE test procedures, as
revisions to AHRI 1200 are in draft form
and have not been publicly reviewed.
(True, No. 28, p. 5). True recommended
that the NSF/ANSI–2021 standard be
added to this list because AHRI 1200
only references self-contained
commercial refrigeration sporadically
and does not specifically address the
issues of self-contained refrigeration. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting, True
commented that AHRI–1200 does not
apply to all commercial refrigeration but
does apply to display refrigeration.
(Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p.
16) True added that it believes DOE is
bringing in two different standards used
in two different applications,
additionally stating that AHRI–1200
does not address any food health/safety
issues. Id. Hussmann agreed with True’s
comment, and added that it thinks DOE
needs to make a distinction and
understand that AHRI–1200 is typically
a rating point and does not necessarily
align with NSF 7. (Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 41, p. 17)
AHRI 1200–2023 had two public
review periods prior to publication.
DOE has reviewed the updates to AHRI
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1200–2023 and determined that the
updates will not impact the measured
volume of CRE as compared to the
existing DOE test procedure (which
currently references HRF–1–2008 9).
DOE acknowledges that NSF 7 is a
performance standard applicable to
multiple CRE categories; however this
standard addresses food safety and
sanitation performance. DOE test
procedures must produce test results
which reflect energy use during a
representative average use cycle, and
not be unduly burdensome to conduct
as required by EPCA. DOE has evaluated
NSF 7, other available industry test
standards, and industry standards under
development when considering test
procedures for these equipment
categories as discussed in this
document. DOE also notes that the
current 10 and amended 11 test
procedures allow for optional testing at
NSF test conditions for commercial
refrigeration equipment that are also
tested in accordance with NSF test
procedures (Type I and Type II) (i.e.,
integrated average temperatures and
ambient conditions used for NSF testing
may be used in place of the DOEprescribed integrated average
temperatures and ambient conditions
provided they result in a more stringent
test).
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed alternate refrigerant
conditions to be used for testing remote
CRE with CO2 refrigerant. 87 FR 39164,
39210. See section III.G of this
document for a discussion of remote
CRE with CO2 refrigerant (i.e., R–744).
Based on the June 2022 NOPR and
comments received in response, DOE is
finalizing its proposal to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1200–2023.
In addition to the clarifying revisions
that would not substantively change
testing as compared to the current
approach using the DOE test procedure
and AHRI 1200–2010, AHRI 1200–2023
also includes two substantive additions:
addressing the use of high glide
refrigerants and providing an additional
temperature rating point for ‘‘hightemperature’’ applications. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
adopt these provisions in its test
procedure, as discussed in the following
sections. 87 FR 39164, 39172.
Additionally, DOE identified updates in
AHRI 1200–2023 as compared to AHRI
1200–202X discussed in the following
9 Section 3.1 of Appendix B to Subpart C of 10
CFR part 431.
10 Section 2.3 of Appendix B to Subpart C of 10
CFR part 431.
11 Section 2.3 of Appendix B to Subpart C of 10
CFR part 431.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
sections regarding chef bases, certain
definitions, and night curtains.
a. High Glide Refrigerants
For remote condensing CRE, AHRI
1200 provides calculations to estimate
the compressor energy consumption
necessary to provide the cooling to the
refrigerator or freezer. These
calculations are based on the dew point
of the refrigerant during testing, which
is intended to be representative of the
evaporator temperature. See Table 1 and
section 5.2.1 of AHRI 1200–2013 and
Table 1 and section 5.1.2 of AHRI 1200–
2023.
For certain refrigerants, the saturated
vapor temperature (i.e., the dew point)
can be different from the saturated
liquid temperature at a given pressure,
in which case the refrigerant is
considered to have ‘‘glide.’’ AHRI 1200–
2023 includes a definition for ‘‘high
glide refrigerant’’ as a zeotropic
refrigerant blend whose temperature
glide is greater than 2 °F. ASHRAE
defines ‘‘glide’’ as the absolute value of
the difference between the starting and
ending temperatures of a phase-change
process by a refrigerant within a
component of a refrigerating system,
exclusive of any subcooling or
superheating. This term usually
describes condensation or evaporation
of a zeotrope.12
For high glide refrigerants, the
refrigerant dew point is not necessarily
representative of the overall evaporator
temperature. AHRI 1200–2023 specifies
that for high glide refrigerants, the
temperature used to calculate
compressor energy consumption is
based on an adjusted mid-point
evaporator temperature rather than an
adjusted dew point temperature.
Because the evaporator provides
cooling to the CRE over the entire heat
exchanger surface, using the evaporator
mid-point temperature would ensure
that the temperature used to calculate
compressor energy consumption is more
representative of the overall evaporator
temperature. DOE determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that the AHRI 1200–
202X approach of using the evaporator
mid-point temperature rather than
refrigerant dew point is more
representative of actual remote
condensing CRE use for which the
equipment uses high glide refrigerants
and would improve consistency of
remote testing using different
refrigerants. 87 FR 39164, 29172.
Additionally, this approach would
improve consistency when testing a
given remote condensing CRE model
12 See ASHRAE’s glossary of defined terms at
xp20.ashrae.org/terminology/.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
with either high glide or low glide
refrigerants by ensuring that the
evaporator mid-point temperature for a
high glide refrigerant is similar to the
refrigerant dew point for a low glide
refrigerant.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to adopt through reference the high
glide refrigerant provisions of AHRI
1200–202X. 87 FR 39164, 29173.
Because the existing DOE test
procedure, by reference to AHRI 1200–
2013, only references adjusted dew
point for calculating compressor energy
consumption, this proposed amendment
would yield different results for remote
condensing CRE models tested with a
high glide refrigerant. However, DOE
expects that current remote condensing
CRE models are typically tested and
rated using low glide refrigerants (most
commonly R–404A); therefore, DOE
tentatively determined in the NOPR that
this proposed test procedure
amendment is not expected to result in
changes to rated energy consumption for
any currently available remote CRE
models. 87 FR 39164, 29173.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1200–
202X, including the new provisions
regarding high glide refrigerants. Id.
DOE also requests information on
whether any remote condensing CRE are
currently tested and rated using high
glide refrigerants and whether the
proposed test procedure would impact
the rated energy consumption for such
models. Id.
Hussmann commented that it favors
the proposal to incorporate by reference
AHRI 1200–202X, including the new
provisions regarding high glide
refrigerants. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 3)
Hillphoenix stated its agreement with
the proposal to incorporate AHRI 1200–
202X by reference, including the
provisions for high glide refrigerants
such as 407, 448A, and 449A, as no
significant impacts to CRE ratings could
be foreseen if incorporated.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2)
True commented that the proposed
use of AHRI 1200–202X referencing
high-glide refrigerants indicated a bias
toward remote refrigeration
manufacturers. (True, No. 28, p. 5) True
commented that there are small
numbers of self-contained refrigerators
using high-glide (synthetic) refrigerants,
and that in fact the self-contained
industry is a high adopter of
hydrocarbon refrigerants. Id.
In this rule, DOE is incorporating by
reference AHRI 1200–2023. AHRI 1200
includes a definition for ‘‘high glide
refrigerants’’ and specifies that for high
glide refrigerants, the temperature used
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66165
to calculate compressor energy
consumption is based on an adjusted
mid-point evaporator temperature rather
than an adjusted dew point temperature.
DOE notes that this provision addresses
the fact that AHRI 1200–2013 results in
high-glide refrigerants having an energy
penalty relative to no-glide refrigerants.
The update to AHRI 1200–2023
provides a more representative test
method of remote condensing CRE and
improves consistency when testing a
given remote condensing CRE model.
AHRI 1200–2023 includes parallel
provisions for remote and self-contained
refrigerators to ensure there is no bias
towards remote-condensing units. Selfcontained CRE are tested based on the
refrigerant and refrigeration system
contained within the unit and no
refrigerant measurements are necessary.
Therefore, the test procedure directly
accounts for the energy impacts of
refrigerants used in self-contained CRE.
b. High-Temperature Applications
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed a definition for ‘‘hightemperature refrigerators’’. 87 FR 39164,
39173. As discussed in section III.A.2 of
this final rule, DOE is establishing an
amended definition of ‘‘hightemperature refrigerator’’ from the June
2022 NOPR.
Section 4.1.1.1 of AHRI 1200–2023
specifies that CRE intended for hightemperature applications shall have an
integrated average temperature of 55 °F
±2.0 °F. DOE requires testing hightemperature consumer refrigeration
products (i.e., ‘‘coolers’’) at a
standardized cabinet temperature of
55 °F. 10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
appendix A.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to require testing hightemperature refrigerators according to
AHRI 1200–202X, which requires an
integrated average temperature of 55 °F
±2.0 °F. 87 FR 39164, 39173–39174.
High-temperature refrigerators are
used in many distinct applications, each
with specific intended storage
conditions. However, DOE determined
in the June 2022 NOPR that the IAT
specified in AHRI 1200–202X is the
most representative of high-temperature
refrigerator operating conditions,
because the high-temperature
refrigerators that DOE identified have
operating temperature ranges which
include 55 °F, and allows for consistent
measurements of energy use for
equipment in this category. 87 FR
39164, 39174.
In referencing AHRI 1200–2023, the
DOE test procedure would also require
that high-temperature refrigerators be
tested according to the same procedure
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66166
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
as other CRE, except for the IAT. DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022
NOPR that the door opening and
loading procedures in ASHRAE 72–
2018R are appropriate for hightemperature refrigerators. Following the
proposed test approach would also
ensure consistent test methods across
CRE categories, albeit at different IATs.
87 FR 39164, 39174.
Because the proposed test procedure
for high-temperature refrigerators would
amend the current test approach for
certain commercial refrigerators (i.e.,
those currently rated using the LAPT),
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that the high-temperature refrigerator
provisions in AHRI 1200–202X would
not be required for use until the
compliance date of any energy
conservation standards established for
high-temperature refrigerators based on
the proposed test procedure. Id. Under
this approach, CRE that would be
defined as high-temperature
refrigerators would continue to be tested
and rated at the LAPT and subject to the
current DOE energy conservation
standards for CRE. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal to
adopt a rating point of 55 °F ±2.0 °F for
high-temperature refrigerators by
adopting through reference certain
provisions of AHRI 1200–202X. 87 FR
39164, 39172.
AHRI commented that the 55 °F
(±2 °F) rating point aligns with AHRI
standard 1200–202X and supported
adopting the proposed rating point for
high-temperature refrigerators. (AHRI,
No. 38, p. 4)
Hussmann commented in favor of the
proposal to adopt a rating point of 55 °F
±2.0 °F for high-temperature
refrigerators. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 3)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed
with the proposal to adopt the rating
point temperature of 55 °F ±2 °F for the
proposed new category of hightemperature refrigerators through
reference of AHRI 1200–202X.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2) Hillphoenix
requested confirmation that the LAPT
provisions will remain to cover rare
occurrences driven by customer
expectations, which could suggest a
design that is outside the requirements
of each category. Id.
Continental commented it had no
objection to DOE’s proposed 55 °F ±2 °F
rating temperature for ‘‘hightemperature’’ refrigerators that cannot
maintain 38 °F. (Continental, No. 29, p.
3) Continental added that DOE should
consider referencing existing NSF
labeling requirements for equipment
that is intended for ‘‘non-potentially
hazardous bottled or canned products
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
only’’ and ‘‘not for the display of
potentially hazardous foods,’’ as this
would identify equipment that meets
required sanitation requirements in the
proposed ‘‘high-temperature’’ range. Id.
In addition, Continental agreed with
DOE that the high-temperature
refrigerator provisions in AHRI 1200–
202X should not be required until the
compliance date of any energy
conservation standards established for
these product types, based on the
proposed test procedure. Id.
For the reasons discussed in the June
2022 NOPR, DOE is adopting the hightemperature refrigerator test provisions
in AHRI 1200–2023. Because these
provisions would impact the measured
energy use for certain CRE currently
subject to the test procedure and energy
conservation standard, DOE is
specifying that the high-temperature
refrigerator testing would not be
required for use until the compliance
date of any energy conservation
standards established for hightemperature refrigerators based on the
amended test procedure.
As discussed in section III.K of this
document, DOE is retaining the LAPT
definition with modifications.
As discussed in section III.A.2 of this
document, DOE is establishing a
definition for high-temperature
refrigerator that is based on the
operating temperature of the equipment.
Identifying equipment that meets NSF 7
sanitation requirements is not within
the scope of the DOE CRE test
procedure. Therefore, DOE has not
included reference to equipment
labeling in the definition or test
requirements for high-temperature
refrigerators.
c. Chef Bases
Section 2 of AHRI 1200–202X and
AHRI 1200–2023 covers the scope of the
standard. AHRI 1200–202X listed
certain exclusions from scope (i.e.,
refrigerated vending machines, ice
makers, soft serve extruders, and
secondary coolant applications). AHRI
1200–2023 added certain additional
exclusions that were not excluded in
previous versions of the standard,
including AHRI 1200–202X (i.e., chef
bases, buffet tables, preparation tables,
walk-in coolers, and blast chillers and
freezers). DOE notes that none of these
excluded categories are defined in AHRI
1200–2023.
DOE has not observed any changes
from AHRI 1200–202X to AHRI 1200–
2023 that would affect the ability to test
chef bases and griddle stands in
accordance with the standard. Current
representations of chef bases and
griddle stands are required to be based
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
on the current DOE test procedure at
Appendix B, which references AHRI
Standard 1200–2010 and ASHRAE 72–
2005, neither of which excludes chef
bases or griddle stands. ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata similarly does not
exclude chef bases or griddle stands
(section 2 ‘‘Scope’’ states that this
standard does not apply to walk-in
coolers, or refrigerators and freezers
where the refrigerated air is in
communication with walk-in coolers).
In the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE
determined that, for chef bases and
griddle stands, the refrigeration system
and design of this equipment is not
significantly different from other types
of commercial refrigeration equipment,
and DOE believes that the existing DOE
test procedure is sufficiently
representative of field use, and
application of the existing energy
conservation standard appropriate for
this equipment. 79 FR 22277, 22282.
Therefore, DOE is maintaining the
reference to AHRI 1200 for chef bases
and griddle stands and updating the
reference to AHRI 1200–2023 consistent
with other CRE that are in scope of
appendix B. See section III.C.4 for
further discussion of chef bases and
griddle stands.
d. Definitions
AHRI 1200–2023 updated several of
its definitions as compared to AHRI
1200–202X (e.g., High Temperature
Applications was updated from
‘‘Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets
intended for High Temperature
Applications, shall have an Integrated
Average Temperature of 55 °F ±2.0 °F’’
to ‘‘An application where the Integrated
Average Temperature is at, or above,
45 °F’’). As proposed in the June 2022
NOPR, 10 CFR 431.62 would include
some similar terms as the definitions in
AHRI 1200–202X. Based on the updated
definitions in AHRI 1200–2023 as
compared to AHRI 1200–202X and to
avoid potential confusion regarding
multiple definitions of similar terms,
DOE is clarifying in 10 CFR 431.62 that
where definitions in AHRI 1200–2023
conflict with those in DOE’s regulations,
the DOE definitions take precedence.
e. Night Curtains
AHRI 1200–202X contained a
definition of ‘‘night curtain’’ (a device
which is temporarily deployed to
decrease air exchange and heat transfer
between the refrigerated case and the
surrounding environment) and certain
test requirements for ‘‘night curtains’’.13
13 For display cases sold with Night Curtains
installed, the Night Curtain shall be employed for
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Night curtains are currently required
in section 1.3.10 of appendix B of the
DOE test procedure.14 Therefore, DOE is
maintaining the requirements for night
curtains that were contained in AHRI
1200–202X as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
2. ASHRAE 72
As stated in the June 2022 NOPR, the
2014 and 2018 revisions to ASHRAE 72
provide editorial, clarifying, or
harmonizing revisions that would not
impact the measured energy
consumption, volume, or TDA of CRE as
compared to the existing DOE test
procedure. 86 FR 31182, 31184.
The revisions in ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata, as compared to the most
recent 2018 version, include substantial
reorganization largely to improve clarity
of the test standard. Specifically, the
foreword to ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata states that the revision
reorganizes the standard to make it
easier to read and use; includes updates
in the loading of test simulators and
filler material; revises the sequence of
operations during the test; provides
instructions for certain measurements;
and adds provisions for roll-in racks.
The following paragraphs describe these
revisions in more detail.
The reorganization of the test
standard in ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata is not expected to substantively
change any test requirements as
compared to the current test procedure.
DOE acknowledges that the intent of the
reorganization is to more closely align
the test standard with the order of
operations a test facility would follow
when conducting testing.
The updates to the loading of test
simulators (small packages with
temperature-measuring devices) and
filler material (material loaded between
test simulators for additional product
mass, intended to approximate food
product loading) in ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata revise certain requirements
included in ASHRAE 72–2005. These
updates change certain instructions
regarding loading, but DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
these updates are either clarifying in
nature or more closely align ASHRAE
72 with the capability of test facilities to
conduct testing. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
Specifically, ASHRAE 72–2022 with
6 hours; beginning 3 hours after the start of the test
period. Upon the completion of the 6-hour period,
the Night Curtain shall be raised until the
completion of the 24-hour test period.
14 For display cases sold with night curtains
installed, the night curtain shall be employed for 6
hours; beginning 3 hours after the start of the first
defrost period. Upon the completion of the 6-hour
period, the night curtain shall be raised until the
completion of the 24-hour test period.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
Errata would improve the clarity of the
simulator loading location instructions,
more clearly define net usable volume
(i.e., interior volume intended for
refrigerated storage or display within
the outermost manufacturer-specified
load limit boundaries) to determine the
loaded volume, and adjust the fill
volume from 70 to 90 percent of the net
usable volume to 60 to 80 percent. See
section 5.4.8 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata.
DOE tentatively acknowledged in the
NOPR that, in principle, the update to
the fill volume requirement would be a
substantive change to the current DOE
test procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
However, DOE has determined that
ASHRAE implemented this revision
because test facilities currently may
have difficulty loading to more than 80
percent of the net usable volume. Based
on this difficulty, DOE expects that most
tests are currently conducted with loads
between 70 to 80 percent of the net
usable volume. Additionally, the
revision to allow loading as low as 60
percent of net usable volume would
allow additional flexibility for test
facilities when loading equipment for
testing, and any impact on measured
energy use is expected to be minimal.
DOE also expects that if testing with a
lower load percentage has any impact
on measured energy use, it is likely to
increase measured energy use, as CRE
with doors would have more internal
compartment volume occupied by air
rather than the test load, allowing for
more internal air to exchange with
warm ambient air during the test
procedure’s door opening period.
Therefore, DOE tentatively determined
in the NOPR that this proposed
amendment to the test procedure would
not allow any CRE that does not
currently comply with DOE’s energy
conservation standards to become
compliant. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
Section 7.1 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata specifies the sequence of
operations for conducting a test. The
overall sequence requires conducting
two tests, Test A and Test B, to verify
stability of the unit under test. Both Test
A and Test B would be conducted in the
same way—starting with a defrost and
with door or drawer openings, night
curtains, and lighting occupancy
sensors and controls, as applicable—as
specified in section 7.3 of ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata. The test is determined
to be stable if the average temperature
of simulators during Test B is within
0.4 °F of the average measured
temperature during Test A. See section
7.5 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata. As
compared to the current DOE test
procedure and ASHRAE 72–2005,
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66167
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata specifies
how to determine that a test is stable.
ASHRAE 72–2005 currently requires
steady-state conditions for the test
(section 7.1.1) and a stabilization period
during which the CRE operates with no
adjustment to controls for at least 12
hours (section 7.4). Section 3 of
ASHRAE 72–2005 defines ‘‘steadystate’’ as the condition in which the
average temperature of all test
simulators changes less than 0.4 °F from
one 24-hour period or refrigeration cycle
to the next. ASHRAE 72–2005 does not
specify whether the 24-hour periods
used to determine steady-state
conditions include door openings,
which are required to be performed
during the 24-hour performance test.
Additionally, the temperatures
maintained over a 24-hour period with
door openings may differ from a 24-hour
period with no door openings. If steadystate is determined without door
openings, then door openings during a
test may increase simulator
temperatures outside of the desired
range, requiring a change to the
temperature setting and restarting the
steady-state determination prior to
another test period.
The testing approach in ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata specifies that Test A
and Test B are conducted in the same
way, and therefore the temperatures
used to determine stability would also
be at the target temperatures for the test.
DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR
that this approach provides clarity to
the existing test procedure while
limiting burden by reducing the need
for retests (i.e., by maintaining target
temperatures during the stability
determination). 87 FR 39164, 39175.
Because the sequence of operations in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata is
generally consistent with ASHRAE 72–
2005 but with added specificity, DOE
does not expect that the updated
sequence of operations would impact
current CRE ratings based on the current
DOE test procedure.
Moreover, ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata explicitly specifies test
conditions and data collection
requirements in a new appendix A:
‘‘Measurement Locations, Tolerances,
Accuracies, and Other Characteristics.’’
This appendix includes a table that
presents the measurements required
during testing, the measurement
location (if applicable), the period of
time the measurement is taken (e.g.,
once per minute throughout Test A and
Test B, once before Test B, and once
after Test B), the required measurement
accuracy, and the required value (i.e.,
the test condition, if applicable). The
measurement instructions and
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66168
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
requirements in appendix A to ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata are generally
consistent with those required by the
current DOE test procedure, by
reference to ASHRAE 72–2005, but with
added specificity to clarify the
applicable requirements. Because the
measurement instructions in ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata are generally
consistent with ASHRAE 72–2005 but
with added specificity, DOE does not
expect that the updated requirements in
appendix A would impact current CRE
ratings based on the current DOE test
procedure.
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata also
adds provisions for testing CRE used
with roll-in racks. Sections 5.4.1 and
5.4.5 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
provide loading instructions for CRE
used with roll-in racks. These sections
are generally consistent with the
existing test requirements for CRE, but
provide additional clarification specific
to roll-in racks to describe the
determination of net usable volume and
loading of test simulators. ASHRAE 72–
2005 includes roll-in racks within the
scope of the test standard (section 9.1)
but does not provide additional test
instructions for these models. Because
the instructions for testing CRE used
with roll-in racks in ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata are generally consistent with
ASHRAE 72–2005 but with added
specificity, DOE does not expect that the
updated requirements in appendix A
would impact current CRE ratings based
on the current DOE test procedure.
As discussed, the test procedure in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata is
generally consistent with the existing
DOE test procedure, which references
ASHRAE 72–2005. The updates
included in ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata are generally editorial, clarifying,
or harmonizing revisions. Additionally,
the substantive revisions in ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata provide further
specificity to the existing test procedure
requirements and would improve
repeatability, reproducibility, and
representativeness of the test procedure
while limiting test burden. For these
reasons, in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to incorporate by reference
ASHRAE 72–2018R into the DOE test
procedure and tentatively determined
that any test data for CRE currently
available on the market are expected to
be consistent with the proposed test
procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its proposal to
incorporate by reference ASHRAE 72–
2018R, including whether the updates
included in the industry test standard
would impact the measured energy
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
consumption of any CRE currently
available. Id.
AHRI commented that it supports
DOE’s proposal to incorporate by
reference ASHRAE 72–2022 because the
updates included in the industry test
standard should not significantly impact
the measured energy consumption of
any CRE currently available. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 4)
AHT supported incorporating by
reference ASHRAE 72–2018R. (AHT,
No. 38, p. 1).
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposal
to incorporate by reference the newer
version of ASHRAE 72, but
recommended version 202X, which is
currently in public review.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2) Hillphoenix
commented that this approach would
align with the incorporation of other
standards referenced that are not yet
released and would maintain
consistency within the industry. Id.
Continental supported DOE’s
proposal to incorporate the most recent
edition of the ASHRAE 72 test
procedure, pointing out that ASHRAE
72–2022, the most recent standard,
prescribes separate 24-hour A and B test
periods to provide more consistent
verification of stability than the
previous version of the procedure.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 3) Continental
commented that it is still evaluating
impacts of this change on the energy
consumption of equipment, particularly
for freezers, and stated that provisions
of ASHRAE 72–2022 should not be
required until the compliance date of
any new energy conservation standards
are established, based on the proposed
test procedure, to allow time for vetting
any impact on energy consumption. Id.
Continental also commented that the
use of separate 24-hour test periods,
including additional door opening
requirements, is desirable for the
reasons noted above, but the revised
method will increase the test burden for
some equipment types and substantially
increase costs for laboratory and staff
time, reducing the capacity to perform
other testing to meet regulations. Id.
Continental commented that these
factors and their related costs will
impact a small business like itself. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that it would
like to state for the record that there is
an ASHRAE 72–2018 standard and an
ASHRAE 72–2022 standard, and that it
agrees to proposing the incorporation of
ASHRAE 72–2018. (Hoshizaki, No. 30,
p. 1) Hoshizaki noted that the ASHRAE
72–2022 standard was just finalized in
July of 2022 and, as of the filing date of
this rulemaking, was not approved and
published for all parties to see. Id.
Hoshizaki noted that while most
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
changes to the standard were editorial,
the change from stabilization to new test
cycle may leave many manufacturers
without the opportunity to review and
comment. Id. Hoshizaki commented that
enough time would be needed for
manufacturers to fully digest these new
changes to determine for themselves
whether these changes affect their
designs. Id.
Based on the June 2022 NOPR and
comments received in response, DOE is
incorporating by reference ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata. Based on comments
received in response to the June 2022
NOPR and DOE’s review of ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata, DOE does not
expect any impact on ratings as a result
of the updates to the standard. DOE
notes that ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
is available for purchase, as discussed in
this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section.
In response to Continental’s comment
regarding test burden for some types of
CRE, ASHRAE 72–2005, currently
incorporated by reference, requires
stabilization periods generally
consistent with ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata. The updates clarify procedures
in the stabilization period and limit the
need for iterative testing. DOE expects
no significant change in test burden
associated with testing to ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata as compared to
ASHRAE 72–2005.
a. Drawers
Section 1.3.16 of appendix B of the
DOE test procedure specifies that
drawers are to be treated as identical to
doors when conducting the DOE test
procedure, and that drawers should be
configured with the drawer pans that
allow for the maximum packing of test
simulators and filler packages without
the filler packages and test simulators
exceeding 90 percent of the refrigerated
volume. Packing of test simulators and
filler packages must be in accordance
with the requirements for commercial
refrigerators without shelves, as
specified in section 6.2.3 of ASHRAE
72–2005.
CRE with drawers are typically
configured to hold standardized food
pans for food storage. Pans loaded into
the drawers are not typically filled with
food above their top edges to prevent
spilling or interfering with other
drawers. Additionally, these CRE may
require the space above the pans to be
unloaded to allow for air circulation
within the cabinet.
The current DOE test procedure
instructions do not specify any test
simulator or filler package load limits
for pans, other than not exceeding 90
percent of the refrigerated volume. For
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
other CRE tests, ASHRAE 72–2005 and
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata specify
test simulator and filler package loading
based on net usable volume rather than
refrigerated volume. See section 6.2.5 of
ASHRAE 72–2005 and section 5.4.1 of
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata. Loading
based on the net usable volume
accounts for load limits within the CRE
and would prevent overloading CRE to
the extent of impacting airflow
circulation within the cabinet.
To ensure consistent testing for CRE
with drawers, and to allow for testing
that is most representative of typical
use, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to specify in appendix B that CRE
with drawers be tested according to the
existing requirements with the
additional instruction that, for the
purposes of loading pans in drawers, the
net usable volume is the storage volume
of the pans up to their top edge. 87 FR
39164, 39175.
The drawer loading instructions in
appendix B reference section 6.2.3 of
ASHRAE 72–2005, which specifies
instructions for loading compartments
without shelves. Specifically, section
6.2.3 requires situating test simulators at
the left and right ends (i.e., sides), the
front and back, and the top and bottom
locations of the compartment. To make
explicit the application of this
instruction to standardized food pans,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to require that test simulators be placed
at the corner locations of each pan. 87
FR 39164, 39175. For any pans not wide
or deep enough to allow for test
simulators at each corner (i.e., less than
7.5 inches (‘‘in.’’) wide or deep, based
on the 3.75-in. test simulator width),
DOE proposed that test simulators be
centered along the width or depth
accordingly. 87 FR 39164, 39175–39176.
Similarly, for any pans not tall enough
to allow for test simulators at the
specified top and bottom locations (i.e.,
pans less than 4 in. tall, based on the 2in. test simulator height), DOE proposed
that a test simulator only be loaded at
the specified top location within the
standardized food pan. 87 FR 39174,
39176.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
additional instructions regarding
loading drawers. Id. DOE additionally
requested information on whether the
proposed approach is consistent with
any future industry standard revisions
to address this issue. Id. DOE also
requested comment on whether other
instructions for CRE with drawers
should be revised (e.g., fully open
definition for drawers) or if additional
instructions are needed. Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
AHRI commented that the additional
loading drawer instructions proposed by
DOE are incomplete and provide a
suboptimal approach. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
4) AHRI pointed out that ASHRAE
Standard 72–2022 may be available as
early as May 2024 as an update to
ASHRAE Standard 72–2018, with
revisions including the addition of a
specific test procedure for drawers as
well as more complete instructions. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE pause the
process of providing additional
instructions regarding loading drawers
and await ASHRAE 72–2022. Id.
Continental commented that DOE
should delay adoption of additional
instructions for testing drawers since
the ASHRAE 72 standards committee is
in the process of updating the current
Standard 72–2022, and is working to
resolve a number of significant
challenges with loading and testing
drawers to ensure a reliable and
repeatable process that is not overly
burdensome. (Continental, No. 29, p. 4)
Continental stated that DOE should
continue to work with ASHRAE to
complete incorporation of an industryaccepted standard procedure. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that, currently,
the ASHRAE 72 Standards Committee is
working on specifying test setup and
procedure for drawer units and that any
changes should be made in this
committee. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2)
Hoshizaki noted that making
suggestions in the DOE NOPR phase is
not the proper process by which to
change standards, and that using a
published standard for some parts and
requesting revisions in CFR could only
confuse both manufacturers and thirdparty testing agencies. Id.
Hillphoenix stated its disagreement
with the proposal to include additional
instructions regarding drawers and
recommended referencing the new
version of ASHRAE 72–202X, which
will maintain alignment in the industry
without creating new or duplicate
requirements that would otherwise be
added to the final rule. (Hillphoenix,
No. 35, p. 3)
DOE recognizes that a future update
to the ASHRAE 72 standard may
include additional instructions for CRE
with drawers, but a revision to ASHRAE
72 including such instruction is not yet
available.
Consistent with AHRI’s comment that
the additional loading drawer
instructions proposed by DOE are
incomplete and provide a suboptimal
approach, DOE reviewed the approach
specified in the June 2022 NOPR. As
stated in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed additional instructions to
ensure testing that is most
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66169
representative of typical use. 87 FR
39164, 39175. DOE re-ordered the
instructions in this final rule to better
clarify the proposed approach and better
specify some requirements. Specifically,
DOE has added a definition for fully
open (for drawers) which means opened
not less than 80 percent of their full
travel which is consistent with the fully
open (for sliding doors) definition in
ASHRAE 72 with Errata which means
opened at least 80 percent of its full
normal travel. Currently, ASHRAE 72
with Errata includes a definition for
fully open (for drawers) that requires
drawers to be opened not less than 66
percent of their full travel. This
definition allows a wider range of
openings than for sliding doors despite
the fact that, similar to sliding doors,
drawers require users to almost fully
open the drawer to expose the full
contents to the user. DOE has
determined that a definition of fully
open (for drawers) that is consistent
with the definition for fully open (for
sliding doors) would result in more
representative results by reducing the
range of allowable percent open.
Additionally, DOE has revised the food
service pan requirement from
Gastronorm to stainless steel to ensure
a repeatable and reproducible test with
the same pan material while allowing
test flexibility for different pan sizes as
specified in manufacturer instructions.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that the net usable volume of drawers is
the storage volume of the pans up to the
top edge of the pan. 87 FR 39164, 39175.
DOE has determined that ‘‘up to the top
edge of the pan’’ is better specified by
providing a more detailed description of
this instruction that is harmonized with
the net usable volume determination for
buffet tables or preparation tables
established in this final rule.
Specifically, DOE is specifying that the
net usable volume of pans is determined
by filling pans with water to within 0.5
in. of the top edge of the pan.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
additional test simulator loading
instructions to clarify the application of
ASHRAE 72 loading to pans. 87 FR
39164, 39175. DOE has revised the test
simulator locations proposed for
drawers to be less burdensome and to
align more closely with the simulator
loading requirements in ASHRAE 72
with Errata. Specifically, DOE has
determined that loading test simulators
into every individual pan (i.e., at each
corner of every pan), as proposed, is not
appropriate and would be overly
burdensome as compared to the
simulator loading requirements for
shelves in ASHRAE 72 with Errata. For
example, under the proposed approach,
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66170
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
a large drawer loaded with small pans
would require many more simulators (in
every pan) than a similarly-sized CRE
with a shelf in place of a drawer (at the
shelf corners and at specified intervals).
To ensure consistent application of the
ASHRAE 72 with Errata instructions,
DOE is specifying that drawers be
loaded with simulators in locations
similar to those required for shelves
(i.e., at the drawer ends and at specified
length intervals, at the front and back of
the drawers, and on the bottom of the
pan(s)) which is representative of the
integrated average temperature of the
drawer(s) while reducing the test
burden of requiring additional test
simulators and to account for pans
which may not accommodate two test
simulators stacked in the vertical
direction. Additionally, DOE is
specifying that test simulators shall be
secured during testing to ensure the
specified locations are maintained
throughout drawer openings. DOE has
determined that this revised method is
representative, repeatable, and
reproducible for testing of CRE with
drawers and maintains consistency with
the loading instructions in ASHRAE 72
with Errata.
b. Liquid Refrigerant Pressure Accuracy
On April 14, 2023, ASHRAE
published the first public review draft of
Addendum a to ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata.15 The purpose of Addendum a is
to correct the required liquid refrigerant
pressure measurement accuracy in
Table A–1 in Normative Appendix A.
The required accuracy for liquid
refrigerant pressure in ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata is ±7.0 kPa (±1.0 psi).
However, this is an error because in
previous versions of ASHRAE 72 (e.g.,
the version currently incorporated by
reference at 10 CFR 431.63, ASHRAE
72–2005), the required accuracy for
liquid refrigerant pressure was ±35 kPa
(±5.1 psi). Addendum a corrects the
required accuracy for liquid refrigerant
pressure to be ±35 kPa (±5.1 psi),
consistent with previous versions of
ASHRAE 72. Therefore, DOE is
clarifying in this final rule that the
required accuracy for liquid refrigerant
pressure is ±35 kPa (±5.1 psi).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
3. Secondary Coolants
Certain CRE are installed for use with
a secondary coolant. In this
configuration, a remotely cooled fluid
(e.g., a propylene glycol solution) is
supplied to the cabinet and absorbs heat
15 See www.ashrae.org/File%20Library/
Technical%20Resources/
Standards%20and%20Guidelines/
Standards%20Actions/SAApr142023.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
from the cabinet without the secondary
coolant undergoing a phase change.
AHRI publishes a rating standard
applicable to CRE that use a secondary
coolant or refrigerant, AHRI Standard
1320 (I–P), ‘‘2011 Standard for
Performance Rating of Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets for Use With
Secondary Refrigerants’’ (‘‘AHRI 1320–
2011’’), approved by ANSI on April 17,
2012. AHRI 1320–2011 is applicable to
CRE that are equipped and designed to
work with electrically driven, mediumtemperature, single-phase secondary
coolant systems, but excludes
equipment used for low-temperature
applications, secondary coolants
involving a phase change (e.g., ice
slurries or carbon dioxide), and selfcontained CRE. AHRI 1320–2011
includes similar rating temperature
conditions as those in AHRI 1200–2013
and references ASHRAE 72–2005 and
AHAM HRF–1–2008 for the
measurement of energy consumption
and calculation of refrigerated volume,
respectively. The only substantive
differences between AHRI 1200–2013
and AHRI 1320–2011 are the inclusion
of secondary refrigerant circulation
pump energy consumption in the
calculation of total daily energy
consumption and revised coefficients of
performance to determine compressor
energy consumption.
While CRE cooled by secondary
coolants are less common than selfcontained or remote CRE, DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate
by reference AHRI 1320–2011 to
reference only the specific sections
within the standard that apply to CRE
tested with secondary coolants (i.e.,
those referring to pump energy and
coolant flow) and to otherwise reference
the applicable requirements in AHRI
1200–202X. 87 FR 39164, 39176. DOE
acknowledges that AHRI 1320–2011
may be updated consistent with the
updates in AHRI 1200–2023.
Because CRE cooled by secondary
coolants are not currently subject to
DOE’s test procedure, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR that the test
procedure referencing AHRI 1320–2011
would not be required for use until the
compliance date of any amended energy
conservation standards for CRE that
consider such testing. 87 FR 39164,
39176. DOE is aware that directexpansion remote CRE may also be
capable of being installed with a
secondary coolant. Id. Under the June
2022 NOPR proposal, such equipment
would continue to be tested and rated
using the approach currently required
for remote condensing CRE. Id. The test
procedure for secondary coolants
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR would
be applicable to equipment only capable
of being installed with secondary
coolants, should any such models
become available. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1320–
2011 for CRE used with secondary
coolants, including the proposal to only
reference the industry standard for
provisions specific to secondary
coolants and to otherwise reference
AHRI 1200–202X, as proposed for other
CRE. 87 FR 39164, 39176.
The CA IOUs commented that they
support the addition of a test procedure
for secondary coolant systems in
reference to ANSI/AHRI Standard 1320
and recommended distinguishing
between secondary coolant systems and
cascade systems and including both
system types in the scope of DOE’s test
procedures. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 11)
The CA IOUs also encouraged DOE to
develop a test procedure to address CO2based (i.e., R–744) secondary coolant
systems and cascade systems. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE avoid
incorporating by reference AHRI 1320–
2011 for CRE used with secondary
coolants because AHRI will likely
update AHRI 1320–2011 during 2023,
and an updated standard could create
confusion for compliance purposes.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 5) AHRI noted that
AHRI 1320–2011 is not a widely used or
needed standard and that waiting for the
update would benefit the test procedure.
Id.
Zero Zone stated agreement that AHRI
1320 was the appropriate standard for
secondary coolants, as stated in
previous comments. (Zero Zone, No. 37,
p. 3) Zero Zone stated it had not used
the standard, expressed concern it
would not produce reliable results, and
agreed with AHRI’s position that the
standard was out of date and not used
by manufacturers. Id. Zero Zone
commented that generally speaking, a
commercial refrigerator has the same
amount of heat infiltration regardless of
the refrigerant used to cool the
equipment, plus the number of cases
sold that use a secondary coolant is
extremely low, and adding a
requirement to test and certify this
equipment would create an enormous
test burden. Id.
Hussmann recommended against
DOE’s proposal to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1320–2011 for CRE used
with secondary coolants, as AHRI is
likely to update AHRI 1320–2011 during
2023. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 3)
Hussmann commented that an updated
standard could create confusion for
compliance purposes, adding that AHRI
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
1320–2011 is not a widely used or
needed standard, and that waiting for a
more updated standard to incorporate in
the test procedure would be beneficial.
Id.
Hillphoenix disagreed with the
proposal to incorporate AHRI 1320–
2011 and recommended that DOE allow
the standard to be reviewed by the
industry and aligned with current
technology before being referenced.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 3)
DOE recognizes that AHRI 1320–2011
is not a widely used standard and that
AHRI may work on an update to the
standard, but DOE also recognizes that
AHRI 1320 parallels AHRI 1200.
Therefore, DOE is adopting the
provisions for CRE used with secondary
coolants as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR, which is consistent with the
updates in AHRI 1200–2023, so that
CRE using secondary coolants can be
tested and rated. DOE will evaluate any
future updates to AHRI 1320–2011 as
they become public. Consistent with the
June 2022 NOPR, the test procedure for
CRE using secondary coolants would
not be required for use until the
compliance date of any amended energy
conservation standards for CRE that
consider such testing.
As stated in the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE is aware that direct-expansion
remote CRE may also be capable of
being installed with a secondary
coolant. Such equipment will continue
to be tested and rated using the
approach currently required for remote
condensing CRE. The test procedure for
CRE with secondary coolants will be
applicable to equipment only capable of
being installed with secondary coolants,
should any such models become
available.
C. Test Conditions for Specific CRE
Categories
DOE has identified specific categories
of CRE that are not currently subject to
the DOE test procedure or in which the
current test procedure may not produce
results that are representative of their
use. Additionally, the EPA’s ENERGY
STAR program considered three of these
equipment categories for scope
expansion and test method development
during the Version 5.0 Specification
development process: refrigerated
preparation and buffet tables; chef bases
or griddle stands; and blast chillers and
freezers.16 DOE has considered
information gathered through the
ENERGY STAR process when
16 Information and materials for ENERGY STAR’s
Specification Version 5.0 process are available at
www.energystar.gov/products/spec/commercial_
refrigerators_and_freezers_specification_version_5_
0_pd (last accessed March 11, 2023).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
developing the proposals included in
this final rule. DOE discusses each of
these categories in the following
sections.
In response to the June 2022 NOPR,
NEEA encouraged DOE to align test
methods for this equipment with EPA
ENERGY STAR 5.0 where applicable to
reduce manufacturer burden and
establish consistently used ratings.
(NEEA, No. 39, p. 2). NEEA commented
that DOE had reviewed the test
procedures it recommended for these
four products and considered any
anticipated updates to industry TP or
active product committees, such as
ASHRAE 220. Id. NEEA stated support
for DOE’s proposed test procedures for
this equipment, noting that establishing
Federal test procedures was key to
providing consistent ratings to
consumers and enabling data collection
that would inform establishing
standards for this newly defined
equipment. Id. NEEA recommended that
DOE establish energy conservation
standards for newly defined CRE
equipment classes, including test
procedures for refrigerated preparation
and buffet tables; chef bases or griddle
stands; blast chillers and blast freezers;
and high-temperature CRE. Id.
As discussed in the following
sections, DOE is establishing test
procedures for new equipment
categories as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR. DOE has considered the latest
ENERGY STAR requirements in
evaluating the requirements for these
equipment categories. DOE may
evaluate energy conservation standards
for these new equipment categories as
part of a separate energy conservation
standards rulemaking.
1. Salad Bars, Buffet Tables, and
Refrigerated Preparation Tables
Salad bars, buffet tables, and other
refrigerated holding and serving
equipment, including refrigerated
preparation tables,17 are CRE that store
and display perishable items
temporarily during food preparation or
service. These units typically have
design attributes such as easily
accessible or open bins that allow
convenient and unimpeded access to
the refrigerated products, which make
them unique from CRE designed for
storage or retailing. In the April 2014
Final Rule, DOE did not establish test
procedures for this equipment but
17 While the April 2014 Final Rule did not
specifically refer to refrigerated preparation tables,
DOE is including them in this category because they
have similar features to salad bars and buffet tables.
Each of these equipment categories includes an
open-top area for holding refrigerated pans and is
used during food preparation and service.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66171
maintained that it meets the definition
of CRE and is covered equipment that
could be subject to future test
procedures and energy conservation
standards. 79 FR 22277, 22281. In the
June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed
definitions and test procedures
applicable to salad bars, buffet tables,
and refrigerated preparation tables.
a. Definitions
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE noted
that ASTM International F2143–16,
‘‘Standard Test Method for Performance
of Refrigerated Buffet and Preparation
Tables’’ (‘‘ASTM F2143–16’’) provides
the following definitions for refrigerated
buffet and preparation tables:
• Refrigerated buffet and preparation
table—equipment designed with a
refrigerated open top or open condiment
rail.
• Refrigerated buffet table or unit—
equipment designed with mechanical
refrigeration that is intended to receive
refrigerated food and maintain food
product temperatures and is intended
for customer service such as a salad bar.
A unit may or may not be equipped
with a lower refrigerated compartment.
• Refrigerated food preparation
unit—equipment designed with a
refrigerated open top or open condiment
rail such as refrigerated sandwich units,
pizza preparation tables, and similar
equipment. The unit may or may not be
equipped with a lower refrigerated
compartment.
86 FR 31182, 31185–31186.
DOE discussed in the June 2022
NOPR that certain terms used within
these definitions are undefined (e.g.,
condiment rails, food product
temperatures) and that it was not aware
of any other industry standard
definitions for these equipment
categories. Id.
DOE also noted in the June 2022
NOPR that the California Code of
Regulations (‘‘CCR’’) 18 defines ‘‘buffet
table’’ and ‘‘preparation table’’ as
follows:
• ‘‘Buffet table’’ means a commercial
refrigerator, such as a salad bar, that is
designed with mechanical refrigeration
and that is intended to receive
refrigerated food, to maintain food
product temperatures, and for customer
service; and
• ‘‘Preparation table’’ means a
commercial refrigerator with a
countertop refrigerated compartment
with or without cabinets below, and
18 California’s regulations for buffet tables and
preparation tables refer to the 2001 version of
ASTM F2143. For this final rule, DOE has reviewed
ASTM F2143–16, as it is the most current version
of the standard.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66172
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
with self-contained refrigeration
equipment. 20 CCR § 1602.
87 FR 39164, 39177.
Furthermore, the EPA’s ENERGY
STAR program’s Final Draft Version 5.0
Eligibility Criteria for commercial
refrigerators and freezers includes a
definition for ‘‘preparation or buffet
table’’ as a commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer with a
food condiment rail designed to hold
open perishable food and may or may
not be equipped with a lower
compartment that may or may not be
refrigerated.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE stated
that the configuration of salad bars,
buffet tables, and refrigerated
preparation tables may raise questions
as to whether a unit is commercial
hybrid refrigeration equipment. 87 FR
39164, 39177. DOE defines ‘‘commercial
hybrid refrigeration equipment’’ as a
unit of CRE (1) that consists of two or
more thermally separated refrigerated
compartments that are in two or more
different equipment families, and (2)
that is sold as a single unit. 10 CFR
431.62.
DOE discussed in the June 2022
NOPR that additional detail may be
necessary to distinguish between a unit
that is a salad bar, buffet table, or
refrigerated preparation table and a unit
that is commercial hybrid equipment
that includes a salad bar, buffet table, or
refrigerated preparation table. 87 FR
39164, 39177. Refrigerated salad bars,
buffet tables, and preparation tables
typically have removable pans or bins
that directly contact the chilled air in
the refrigerated compartment of the
unit. With that configuration, the
entirety of the chilled compartment and
surface pans would potentially be
considered a refrigerated salad bar,
buffet table, or preparation table. In
contrast, if a unit includes solid
partitions between the chilled
compartment and the pans or bins on
top of the unit, such a configuration
would potentially be considered
thermal separation and the unit would
be considered a commercial hybrid
consisting of a refrigerated salad bar,
buffet table, or preparation table with a
refrigerator and/or freezer.
To delineate this equipment from
other types of CRE, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to define the term
‘‘buffet table or preparation table.’’ 87
FR 39164, 39179. DOE proposed a
definition for this term that combines
elements of the existing industry and
ENERGY STAR definitions, includes
language for consistency with DOE’s
existing CRE definitions, and includes
further specificity regarding the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
characteristics of this equipment. Id.
Specifically, DOE proposed to define
this term as follows:
‘‘Buffet table or preparation table’’
means a commercial refrigerator with an
open-top refrigerated area, that may or
may not include a lid, for displaying or
storing merchandise and other
perishable materials in pans or other
removable containers for customer selfservice or food production and
assembly. 87 FR 39164, 39179. The unit
may or may not be equipped with a
refrigerated storage compartment
underneath the pans or other removable
containers that is not thermally
separated from the open-top refrigerated
area. Id.
DOE did not propose in the NOPR to
define the term ‘‘salad bar,’’ as this
equipment would be captured within
the proposed definition of ‘‘buffet table
or preparation table.’’ 87 FR 39164,
39179. DOE tentatively determined that
additional equipment definitions are not
necessary for the purposes of testing
buffet tables and preparation tables. Id.
Additionally, DOE did not propose in
the NOPR any reference to storage
temperature or duration in the proposed
definition for ‘‘buffet table or
preparation table.’’ 87 FR 39164, 39179–
39180. DOE recognized that these are
important aspects of the equipment
operation but has tentatively
determined that they are not necessary
for the purpose of defining the
equipment to establish test procedures.
Id. By specifying that such units are
commercial refrigerators, buffet tables
and preparation tables would be units
capable of operating at or above 32 °F
(±2 °F).
As discussed, CRE may include single
refrigeration systems to provide cooling
to multiple compartments or areas
within a unit. Additionally, CRE may
include multiple distinct refrigeration
systems or evaporator coils to
individually cool separate
compartments or refrigerated areas.
DOE’s proposed definition in the June
2022 NOPR would include units both
with and without a refrigerated storage
compartment underneath the pans or
other removable containers. The
proposed definition in the June 2022
NOPR, however, specifies that units
including a refrigerated storage
compartment underneath the pans or
other removable containers may not be
thermally separated from the open-top
refrigerated area.
DOE noted in the June 2022 NOPR
that while industry may use the term
‘‘hybrid’’ to refer to different
combinations of equipment capabilities
and configurations, the term
‘‘commercial hybrid’’ is specifically
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
defined by DOE in 10 CFR 431.62. 87 FR
39164, 39180. Currently, CRE with
refrigerated storage compartments
thermally separated from the open-top
refrigerated area of the buffet table or
preparation table are ‘‘commercial
hybrid’’ CRE and must be tested in
accordance with the applicable test
procedures and comply with the
applicable standards. Such equipment
would continue to be tested as currently
required to determine compliance with
the existing energy conservation
standards applicable to the non-buffet
table or preparation table element. As
noted, DOE has not established energy
conservation standards for CRE covered
under the proposed definition of ‘‘buffet
table or preparation table.’’ DOE
discussed in the April 2014 Final Rule
that because only the refrigerated
storage compartment is subject to
current energy conservation standards,
the unit would be tested with the buffet
table or preparation table portion
disabled and not included in the
determination of energy consumption.
79 FR 22277, 22289. If the same
refrigeration system serves both the
refrigerated compartment and the opentop refrigerated area and refrigeration of
the open-top area cannot be disabled,
manufacturers may apply for a test
procedure waiver for such equipment if
the measured energy use would not be
representative of the portion of the unit
that is not a buffet table or preparation
table of the CRE basic model. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
definition for ‘‘buffet table or
preparation table.’’ 87 FR 39164, 39180.
DOE also requested information on
whether any additional definitions are
necessary for the purposes of testing this
equipment, or whether any additional
equipment characteristics are necessary
to differentiate this equipment from
other categories of CRE. Id.
Hoshizaki supported this proposed
definition and stated that it is like the
definition given in ASTM F2143–16.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2)
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposed
definitions for buffet table and
preparation table as documented in the
NOPR. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 3)
NEEA supported the new definitions
DOE proposed for buffet tables and
preparation tables, stating that these
equipment types have unique
applications compared to other CRE,
and these definitions allow
consideration (potential standards),
categorization (equipment classes), and
testing of this equipment separate from
other CRE. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
Continental commented it continues
to support the use of NSF 7–2019
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(defined within NSF/ANSI 170–2019,
‘‘Glossary of Food Equipment
Terminology’’) definitions for
‘‘Refrigerated Buffet Units’’ and
‘‘Refrigerated Food Preparation Units.’’
(Continental, No. 29, p. 4)
True commented that the terms used
to define the categories of ‘‘buffet table’’
and ‘‘preparation table’’ correspond to
(match) those as defined by NSF/ANSI
170 (referenced in NSF/ANSI 7–2021).
(True, No. 28, p. 2) True commented
that the definition for a buffet table can
be found at NSF/ANSI 170 3.22, which
defines a buffet unit as ‘‘Equipment that
is designed to receive and maintain food
product(s) at proper temperatures and is
intended for customer service,’’ and that
the definition for a preparation table can
be found at NSF/ANSI 170 3.173, which
defines a refrigerated food preparation
unit as ‘‘Equipment designed with a
refrigerated open top or open condiment
rail such as refrigerated sandwich units,
pizza preparation tables, and similar
equipment. The unit may or may not be
equipped with a lower refrigerated
compartment.’’ Id.
AHRI commented that it found the
proposed definition for ‘‘buffet table or
preparation table’’ to be broad enough
for testing this equipment and defining
necessary equipment characteristics; as
a result, additional definitions may be
unnecessary. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 5) AHRI
recommended that DOE should specify
that this definition applies to selfcontained units and add to the
definition whether the equipment does
or does not share a coil. Id.
Hussmann commented that while it
did not oppose the proposed
definitions, it requested that DOE
include that the definition pertained to
self-contained units only, and that DOE
include language about sharing the coil
with other compartments. (Hussmann,
No. 32, p. 4) Hussmann also commented
that the definition included ‘‘may or
may not be equipped with a refrigerated
storage compartment underneath the
pans’’ but did not mention any other
equipment category, and that the buffet/
prep section may share a coil with a
different equipment category other than
storage and mention should be in the
definition because it already considers
the lower storage. Id. Hussmann
requested clarification about, and a
definition of, ‘‘non-thermally separated
compartments,’’ as the proposal stated
‘‘closed.’’ (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 5)
Hussmann commented that currently,
open display cases (‘‘SVO’’) share the
same coil/discharge air with the buffet/
prep section. Id. Hussman questioned
whether DOE considered this condition
as not thermally separated. Id.
Hussmann added that if so, a ‘‘no-load’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
in the SVO section of the case would
result in higher infiltration of warm air.
Id. Hussmann also commented by
asking if night curtains would be
allowed to be installed on the case or if
the unloaded compartment could be
protected or, alternatively, if the SVO
section of the case could be loaded. Id.
The CA IOUs commented that DOE’s
proposed definition for ‘‘buffet table or
preparation table’’ raises the issue that
if an energy conservation standard is
established in the future for this
equipment, refrigerated rails will have
to meet the same energy conservation
standard as prep tables with a
refrigerated bottom component if that
bottom component is not ‘‘thermally
separated’’ from the open-top
refrigerated area. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p.
1) The CA IOUs also commented that
DOE should consider defining
‘‘refrigerated rail’’ separately from
‘‘buffet table or preparation table’’ and
that the definition of ‘‘buffet table or
preparation table’’ include both
sandwich and pizza prep tables; and
that ‘‘commercial hybrid’’ CRE consists
of compartments refrigerated by
separate evaporators with fully
independent temperature control
between the different compartments.
(CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 3)
The CA IOUs amended the proposed
NOPR definitions with strikeout
deletions and underline additions. Id.
The CA IOUs agreed with the current
definition of a ‘‘refrigerated rail.’’ Id.
The CA IOUs amended the proposed
NOPR definition of ‘‘buffet table or
preparation table’’ to ‘‘a commercial
refrigerator with an open-top
refrigerated area, that may or may not
include a lid, for displaying or storing
merchandise and other perishable
materials in pans or other removable
containers for customer self-service or
food production and assembly. The unit
may or may not be equipped with a
refrigerated storage compartment
underneath the pans or other removable
containers, that is not thermally
separated from the open-top refrigerated
area that is conditioned by the same
refrigeration circuit as the open-top
refrigerated area.’’ Id. The CA IOUs
slightly altered the definition of
‘‘commercial hybrid’’ refrigeration
equipment to ‘‘a unit of CRE (1) that
consists of two or more thermally
separated refrigerated compartments
with independent control of
temperature amongst the refrigerated
compartments and that are in two or
more different equipment families, and
(2) that is sold as a single unit.’’ Id.
The CA IOUs commented that prep
tables (either sandwich tables or pizza
prep tables) are similar in having an
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66173
open-top refrigerated area with a
refrigerated storage compartment
underneath. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 2) The
CA IOUs stated that in the absence of a
definition for ‘‘thermal separation,’’
pizza prep tables could be misclassified
as ‘‘commercial hybrid’’ CRE with the
open-top refrigerated area evaluated as a
‘‘buffet table or preparation table’’ and
the refrigerated compartment tested as
Vertical Closed Solid (VCS.SC.M), while
sandwich prep tables would be tested as
‘‘buffet table or preparation table.’’ Id.
The CA IOUs commented that rating
sandwich prep tables differently from
pizza prep tables would create market
confusion. Id.
Consistent with the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE is not limiting the definition of
buffet tables or preparation tables to
self-contained configurations but is
specifying that the test procedure is
only applicable to self-contained
configurations 19 because DOE has not
evaluated test provisions for remote
equipment.
The existing hybrid definition is
based on thermally separated
compartments, not independent coils or
separate temperature control. DOE is
maintaining the existing approach for
hybrids, which will avoid reclassifying
all existing hybrid CRE.
DOE acknowledges that energy
consumption likely varies depending on
equipment configuration. For the
purposes of testing, DOE has
determined there is not a need to
separately define equipment categories
within buffet tables or preparation
tables and is not establishing separate
definitions. DOE has determined that
test instructions regarding refrigerated
pan areas and compartments are
sufficient for testing the referenced
configurations. DOE would consider
energy impacts of different
configurations as part of energy
conservation standards rule evaluating
this equipment category, and would
consider appropriate definitions for
those configurations at that time.
Therefore, DOE is maintaining
definitions as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR, which combine aspects of
existing industry definitions, ENERGY
STAR definitions, and other DOE
definitions for CRE.
b. Test Methods
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
considered potential test methods for
buffet tables and preparation tables. 87
FR 39164, 39180. DOE reviewed both
ASTM F2143–16 and NSF 7–2019 in
considering test methods for buffet
19 See section 1.1 of appendix C of the June 2022
NOPR.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66174
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
tables and preparation tables. As
described in section 1 of ASTM F2143–
16 (‘‘Scope’’), that test method covers
evaluation of the energy consumption of
refrigerated buffet and preparation
tables and allows food service operators
to use this evaluation to select a
refrigerated buffet and preparation table
and understand its energy performance.
The foreword to NSF 7–2019 specifies
that the purpose of the industry testing
standard is to establish minimum food
protection and sanitation requirements
for the materials, design, construction,
and performance of commercial
refrigerators and freezers.
The general test approach in ASTM
F2143–16 is to load the unit with
distilled water in pans and no load in
any refrigerated compartment, operate
the unit to confirm stability, then
conduct testing for 24 hours, with an 8hour ‘‘active period’’ with lid and door
openings followed by a 16-hour
‘‘standby period’’ with no door
openings. DOE understands that this
test is intended to represent unit
operation and energy consumption over
a 24-hour day.
The NSF 7–2019 test approach
requires loading the unit pans with
refrigerated food-simulating test media
(a specified mixture of water, salt, and
hydroxypropyl methylcellulose) and no
load in any refrigerated compartment
and operating the unit for 4 hours to
determine whether temperatures at all
measured locations are within the
acceptable range. DOE acknowledges
that this test is intended to evaluate the
ability of a unit to maintain the
temperature of refrigerated pans (and
any compartments) during a 4-hour
period.
While these two industry test
methods contain certain similarities
(e.g., loading pans but not
compartments, ambient temperature
conditions), DOE initially determined in
the June 2022 NOPR that ASTM F2143–
16 provides the more appropriate basis
for an energy consumption test
representative of typical use. 87 FR
39164, 39181. As discussed in the
following subsections, DOE initially
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
24 hours of maintaining stable
temperatures, as required in the ASTM
F2143–16 method, is representative of
average use for this equipment. Id. DOE
also tentatively determined in the June
2022 NOPR that the stabilization and
operating periods specified in ASTM
F2143–16 would ensure that units
maintain temperatures on a consistent
basis during testing and would allow for
comparative energy use measurements
across units. Id. NSF 7–2019 provides a
basis for determining whether a unit is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
capable of maintaining certain
temperatures over a shorter period, but
without additional instructions to
ensure energy consumption testing on a
consistent basis (i.e., the temperatures
maintained over the shorter test period
may not necessarily be stable).
For these reasons, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR to reference ASTM
F2134–16 as the basis for testing buffet
tables and preparation tables. 87 FR
39164, 39181. Consistent with the scope
of ASTM F2134–16, DOE proposed test
procedures only for self-contained
buffet tables and preparation tables. Id.
While DOE proposed to base the test
procedure for buffet tables and
preparation tables on ASTM F2134–16,
DOE also proposed certain additional
and different requirements for test
conditions, setup, and conduct to
ensure the representativeness of the test
procedure, as discussed in the following
sections. Id.
To avoid confusion regarding testing
of other CRE, DOE also proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to establish the test
procedure for buffet tables and
preparation tables as a new appendix C
to subpart C of 10 CFR part 431. 87 FR
39164, 39181. DOE also proposed to
refer to the proposed appendix C as the
test procedure for buffet tables and
preparation tables in 10 CFR 431.64. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its proposal to
adopt through reference certain
provisions of ASTM F2143–16 as the
basis for testing buffet tables and
preparation tables. 87 FR 39164, 39181.
DOE also sought comment on the
proposal to specify test procedures only
for self-contained buffet tables and
preparation tables, consistent with
ASTM F2143–16. Id.
The Joint Commenters supported
DOE’s proposed changes regarding the
proposed test methods for additional
equipment categories including buffet
and preparation tables. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 1)
NEEA stated its support for DOE’s
proposal to establish test procedures for
new and/or newly defined categories of
CRE, and restated its recommendation
from the 2021 CRE TP RFI that DOE
establish test methods for new CRE
product types, including refrigerated
preparation and buffet tables. (NEEA,
No. 39, p. 2)
The Joint Commenters expressed
support for establishing test procedures
for buffet and preparation tables, citing
a statistic from the California Energy
Commission (‘‘CEC’’) Modernized
Appliance Efficiency Database System
(‘‘MAEDbS’’) that listed over 100 buffet/
preparation tables with a broad range of
energy usage, and a 2014 report that
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
discussed testing on 11 preparation
tables, revealing a wide range of
measured energy consumption. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 2) The Joint
Commenters stated that findings in the
2014 report suggested the potential for
meaningful energy savings for these
products and establishing test
procedures for buffet and preparation
tables would ensure that the energy
consumption of this equipment would
be measured in a consistent manner. Id.
Continental commented that it
supports the NOPR proposal to add new
test procedures for product categories
such as refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables. (Continental, No. 29,
p. 1) Continental noted, however, that
attempting to develop test procedures
that combine aspects of different
existing industry standards and
introducing significant modifications is
not sufficient or appropriate for this
type of rulemaking. Id. Continental
recommended that DOE work with
ASHRAE, AHRI, ASTM, and other
stakeholders to develop suitable test
procedures for any additional product
categories so that new or modified
industry standards are comprehensive,
reliable, and repeatable for many
equipment types, with minimal
additional testing burden. Id.
Continental expressed significant
concerns with ASTM F2143–16, stating
that DOE recognized many of the same
issues in the NOPR and, as a result, DOE
should delay adoption of a test
procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables, and work in depth
with industry associations and other
stakeholders to develop an appropriate
standard procedure. (Continental, No.
29, p. 4) Continental commented that
attempting to combine existing test
standards was likely to result in
excessive testing burden, inconsistent
results, and confusion for stakeholders.
Id. Continental added that ENERGY
STAR had expressed a desire to include
buffet tables and preparation tables in
its most recent standards revision, but
recognized that an appropriate standard
test method has not been used by
industry and declined to include this
equipment. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE use
ASTM F2143–16 only as intended and
not impose additional provisions and
restrictions in testing buffet tables and
preparation tables. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 6)
AHRI commented that test standards
should not be combined and
recommended regulating this issue
under a single standard. Id. AHRI
commented with concern that the data
set used in testing failed to indicate
energy efficiency, and that DOE should
wait to update this regulation until
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
clearer test standards have been
determined through consensus by
manufacturers and third parties. Id.
AHRI noted that ENERGY STAR was
not employing ASTM F2143–16,
indicating that DOE’s adoption was
premature. Id. AHRI commented that it
had numerous concerns with ASTM
F2143–16 and advised that this standard
may not be ready for use in a DOE test
procedure. Id. AHRI added that if DOE
were to use this standard in a test
procedure, it should only apply to selfcontained equipment. Id. AHRI
commented that it could not determine
the impacts of employing the standard
because it is not widely used. Id.
Hoshizaki commented in agreement
with the proposal to use test procedures
from ASTM F–2143–2016, but in
disagreement with the proposal to have
additional requirements from other
standards. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2)
Hoshizaki commented that if DOE wants
to use a standard only in part, it should
request to have a single standard
updated with proposed changes and
wait for the standard process to
complete before publishing a test
procedure. Id. Hoshizaki stated that this
would give manufacturers a chance to
see the final standard and prepare for
testing prior to the implementation of
new regulations. Id.
Hillphoenix stated its disagreement
with the proposal to adopt ASTM
F2143–16 as the basis for testing buffet
and preparation tables, as it is not
widely utilized by all manufacturers.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 3) Hillphoenix
recommended that DOE approach the
industry and request updated testing
standards that better reflect actual
product intent, stating this approach
would (1) cause less confusion than
referencing portions of multiple
standards, (2) drive consistency within
the industry, and (3) be less burdensome
on manufacturers. Id. Hillphoenix
agreed that ASTM F2143–16 only
pertained to self-contained models, and
if adopted against industry
recommendations, the proposed test
procedure should reflect self-contained
models only, as in ASTM F2143–16. Id.
Hussmann cautioned DOE that ASTM
F2143–16 was not a commonly used
standard in the industry and contained
many holes and gaps common to DOE
test procedures. (Hussmann, No. 32, p.
4) Hussmann added that combining test
standards would cause confusion and
disruption to the industry as the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
different standards were revised and
therefore recommended adopting buffet/
prep cases under a single standard that
would be widely accepted across the
industry. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting,
True commented that ASTM–F2143–16
is only required by the State of
California for reporting energy, and that
it is surprised NSF–7 is not being used
as a standard for consideration, since
that is a de facto national standard in
place for the United States and Canada.
(Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p.
38) True commented that ASTM F2143–
16 is not an industry standard used by
the food service industry or by local
health inspectors. (True, No. 28, p. 2)
True stated that NSF 7 is the food
service industry standard for the
performance rating, food safety, and
evaluation of refrigerated food
preparation units (tables); that local
United States and Canada food safety
and sanitation inspectors (health
inspectors) require the NSF 7
compliance logo; and that certificates of
occupancy are issued based on NSF 7
Standard compliance. Id.
True also commented that the
proposed ASTM F2143–16 standard is
not a suitable standard that should be
used to evaluate these products. (True,
No. 28, p. 6) True stated that
consideration should be given to the fact
ASTM F2143–16 does not address food
safe temperatures (water as the test
media is not representative of food), and
adding this test setup would increase
testing and lab burdens to all
manufacturers. Id. True pointed to NSF/
ANSI 7–2021 as the reference standard
recommended for this type of
equipment and noted that ASTM
F2143–16 is in review and has not been
presented publicly. Id.
As discussed in section III.C.1.a, DOE
is establishing test procedures only for
self-contained buffet tables or
preparation tables.
DOE agrees with commenters that
ASTM F2143–16 cannot be referenced
as a standalone test method and,
accordingly, DOE proposed deviations
and additional specifications in the June
2022 NOPR. DOE recognizes that not all
manufacturers currently use ASTM
F2143–16, but DOE has determined the
approach based on ASTM F2143–16
with additional requirements is
representative and not unduly
burdensome to conduct. If a new or
updated industry standard that
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66175
measures the energy consumption of
buffet tables or preparation tables
becomes available, DOE will consider it
in a future test procedure rulemaking.
DOE has evaluated ASTM F2143–16
and identified the need for additional
provisions or alternate requirements. To
the extent that additional provisions are
consistent with requirements in other
industry methods, DOE has
incorporated by reference those other
methods. This approach makes it easier
to determine where requirements are
harmonized across industry standards.
In response to combining multiple
standards, DOE is not applying each
standard in whole to this equipment,
but rather is adopting the appropriate
provisions to result in a representative
DOE test procedure. The regulatory text
is located in appendix C established in
this final rule is the DOE test procedure
for this equipment, and the
requirements in appendix C clearly
outline when to use requirements from
each standard.
As discussed in section III.C.1.a, NSF
7 is intended to ensure refrigerating
performance and food safety, not energy
use. ASTM F2143–16 was developed to
evaluate energy performance, and with
the additional requirements established
in this final rule, DOE has determined
that referencing ASTM F2143–16 is
appropriate and meets the EPCA
requirements.
DOE’s determination to establish test
procedures consistent with EPCA
requirements is not impacted by
ENERGY STAR’s specification review
process. To the extent that ENERGY
STAR considers this equipment in
future updates, the ENERGY STAR
program typically adopts DOE test
procedures and DOE will coordinate
with ENERGY STAR to harmonize
requirements.
As discussed, DOE is establishing a
test procedure for buffet tables and
preparation tables based on ASTM
F2143–16 with additional requirements.
The following sub-sections describe
additional details of the test procedure.
Test Conditions
ASTM F2143–16 specifies different
rating conditions for test room dry-bulb
temperature and moisture content than
the current DOE test procedure. NSF 7–
2019 also specifies test conditions
similar to those in ASTM F2143–16.
Table III.1 summarizes these
differences.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66176
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III.1—TEST ROOM DRY-BULB TEMPERATURE AND MOISTURE CONTENT STANDARDS COMPARISON
Equipment type
Test standard
Test room dry
bulb temperature
Wet bulb temperature
(relative humidity)
Moisture
content
(lb/lb dry air)
Currently Covered CRE .................
ASHRAE 72 (2005 and 2022 with
Errata).
ASTM F2143–16 ...........................
NSF 7–2019 ..................................
75.2 °F ±1.8 °F ...
64.4 °F ±1.8 °F (49%–62%) ...........
0.009–0.011.
86 °F ±2 °F .........
86 °F ±2 °F .........
66.2 °F ±1.8 °F (30%–40%) ...........
Max 72 °F (based on max 50%) ....
0.008–0.010.
Max 0.013.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Buffet and Preparation Tables .......
Buffet and Preparation Tables .......
As previously described, the apparent
purpose of the NSF 7–2019 test is to
determine the capability of a unit to
maintain refrigerated temperature in the
conditions specified by the industry
testing standard. The ASTM F2143–16
ambient conditions match those in NSF
7–2019. However, DOE initially
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
these conditions are not necessarily the
most representative of typical use. 87 FR
39164, 39182. As discussed in the June
2022 NOPR, buffet tables and
preparation tables are typically installed
in locations similar to other CRE (e.g.,
food service areas, supermarkets,
commercial kitchens) and would be
subject to the same ambient conditions
during typical use. Id. DOE
acknowledged in the June 2022 NOPR
that the ambient conditions at the point
of installation may vary. Id. However,
DOE determined that the conditions in
ASHRAE 72 (in both the currently
referenced 2005 version and the 2022
with Errata version) are appropriately
representative of the average use of CRE.
79 FR 22277, 22283. For consistency
with other CRE testing, DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR that the ambient
conditions specified in ASHRAE 72–
2018R also apply for testing buffet tables
and preparation tables. 87 FR 39164,
39182.
For measuring these ambient
conditions, ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Eratta and ASTM F2143–16 specify the
same measurement locations; however,
the locations may require further
specificity depending on the
configuration of the refrigerated buffet
table or preparation table under test. For
example, the specified measurement
location based on the highest point of
the unit under test as provided in ASTM
F2143–16 could be based on the height
of the refrigerated table surface and pan
openings or on the height of any lid or
cover over the pans, if included.
Additionally, the specified
measurement location at the center of
the unit as provided in ASTM F2143–
16 could be based on the geometric
center of the unit determined from the
height of the open pan surfaces or on
the geometric center of any door
openings (for those units with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
refrigerated compartments below the
pan area).
As described, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to incorporate by
reference ASTM F2143–16 rather than
NSF 7–2019 as the basis for testing
buffet tables and preparation tables. 87
FR 39164, 39182. The ASTM F2143–16
ambient measurement locations are
generally consistent with those in the
current DOE test procedure and the
provisions in ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata, but ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata includes additional specificity
regarding ambient measurement
locations. To ensure appropriate
measurement locations, DOE proposed
in the NOPR to reference ASHRAE 72–
2018R rather than ASTM F2143–16 for
ambient condition measurement
locations. 87 FR 39164, 39183. To
provide additional specifications for
thermocouple placement to
accommodate different buffet table and
preparation table configurations, DOE
proposed to add an instruction that the
‘‘highest point’’ of the buffet table or
preparation table is determined as the
highest point of the open-top
refrigerated area of the buffet table or
preparation table, without including the
height of any lids or covers. Id. DOE
also proposed to specify that the
geometric center of the buffet table or
preparation table is: for buffet tables or
preparation tables without refrigerated
compartments, the geometric center of
the top surface of the open-top
refrigerated area; and for buffet tables or
preparation tables with refrigerated
compartments, the geometric center of
the door opening area for the
refrigerated compartment. Id. DOE
proposed this specification because the
geometric center of the unit is used to
measure ambient temperature gradient.
Id. For units with refrigerated
compartments, this instruction
referencing the center of the door
opening area would ensure that the air
entering the compartment during door
openings is within the allowable
temperature range.
Regarding electrical supply
requirements and measurements,
appendix A to ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata provides greater specificity for
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
testing as compared to ASTM F2143–16.
To improve test repeatability and
reproducibility, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to reference the
electric supply and measurement
requirements specified in appendix A to
ASHRAE 72–2018R for testing buffet
tables and preparation tables. 87 FR
39164, 39183.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE similarly
proposed to adopt through reference
certain provisions in ASHRAE 72–
2018R rather than ASTM F2143–16 for
instrumentation requirements for
consistency with other CRE testing and
with the proposed test conditions (e.g.,
wet-bulb temperature as specified in
ASHRAE 72–2018R rather than relative
humidity as specified in ASTM F2143–
16). Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal for
testing buffet tables and preparation
tables with test conditions (i.e., test
chamber conditions, measurement
location, and electric supply conditions)
consistent with ASHRAE 72–2018R,
with additional detail specific to buffet
tables and preparation tables. Id.
AHRI commented that it supports
DOE’s inclusion of the ASHRAE 72–
2022 ambient testing conditions with
the qualification that DOE not combine
test standards, which would be
unnecessary and inadvisable. AHRI
recommended regulation through a
singular standard using a test procedure
developed through industry consensus
and one that had been referred to an
appropriate standards committee.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 6)
AHRI noted that ASHRAE 72–2022
does not address areas with two
different cooling spaces. (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 6)
Continental stated a belief that 86 °F
ambient better reflected the application
temperature for food preparation tables
used in commercial kitchens, which are
often in proximity of cooking equipment
and that 75 °F conditions reflect an
applicable ambient temperature for
buffet tables used in restaurant front-ofhouse and supermarket applications.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 5) Continental
reiterated that DOE should not attempt
to merge different aspects of existing
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
test methods into a new amalgamated
test procedure within a rulemaking, and
that DOE should delay adoption of a test
procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables, instead working with
stakeholders to develop an appropriate
standard procedure. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposal to use ASHRAE 72 to establish
the conditions in which buffet and
preparations tables should be tested, as
this standard already applies to existing
CRE. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 4)
Hillphoenix recommended referencing
ASHRAE 72–202x, which would align
with the incorporation of other
standards that are referenced but not yet
released. Id. Hillphoenix recommended
against specifying alternate definitions
for portions not covered by an existing
industry standard and advised DOE to
allow the industry to develop
procedures through consensus. Id.
Hussmann supported the use of
ASHRAE 72 for ambient conditions,
which more accurately resemble
conditions in normal use, and which
would reduce test burden for testing a
new equipment category, as industry
test chambers and conditions were not
set for testing to different standards.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 4) Hussmann
recommended that DOE avoid
combining sections from different
standards to create a test procedure,
because doing so would provide results
not yet tested and proven by the
industry. Id. Hussmann added that
combining test standards would cause
confusion and disruption to the
industry as the different standards went
through revisions and stated support for
creating a universal standard for buffet/
prep tables. Id.
Hoshizaki agreed with the proposal to
use test procedures from ASTM F–
2143–2016, but disagreed with the
proposal to have additional
requirements from other standards.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2) Hoshizaki
commented that if DOE wants to use a
standard only in part, DOE should
request to have a single standard
updated with proposed changes and
wait for the standard process to
complete before publishing a test
procedure, which would give
manufacturers a chance to see the final
standard and prepare for testing prior to
the implementation of new regulations.
Id.
True recommended the use of NSF
ANSI 7–2021, with the following test
conditions: (1) ambient temperature of
86 ±2 °F (30 ±1 °C); (2) no vertical
temperature gradient exceeding 1.5 °F/ft
(2.5 °C/m); (3) maximum relative
humidity of 50 percent; and (4)
maximum air current velocity of 50 ft/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
min (0.25 m/s) across the surfaces of the
test pans. (True, No. 28, p. 6)
DOE recognizes that CRE across all
categories, including buffet tables or
preparation tables, can be used in a
range of installations, (e.g., in
commercial kitchens or in front-ofhouse installations). Other CRE
currently installed in these locations are
tested per the ASHRAE 72 conditions.
DOE understands that ASTM F2143–
16 is currently under revision and may
harmonize test conditions with
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata. Buffet
tables or preparation tables have the
same energy use metric, kWh/day, as
other CRE equipment. Test conditions
consistent with ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata will allow for better comparisons
between hybrid buffet tables or
preparation tables and other buffet
tables or preparation tables.
As stated earlier in this section, the
purpose of NSF 7 is to determine
refrigerating performance for food safety
requirements. While the elevated
ambient temperature may be
appropriate to ensure food safety, DOE
has determined that the existing test
condition based on ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata provides the most
appropriate test condition for the
purpose of energy testing.
For these reasons and consistent with
the discussion in section III.C.1.b of the
June 2022 NOPR, DOE has determined
that the ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
test conditions are representative for
buffet tables or preparation tables. DOE
is establishing these conditions in
appendix C by referencing ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata.
Test Setup
Section 9.1 of ASTM F2143–16
specifies installation of the buffet table
or preparation table for testing
according to the manufacturer’s
instructions, with 6 in. of rear clearance,
at least 12 in. of clearance to any side
wall or partition, and at least 3 feet of
clearance from the front of the unit.
Section 5.2 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata specifies that the test unit be
installed next to a wall or vertical
partition in the direction of (a) the
exhaust, (b) the intake, or (c) both the
exhaust and the intake at the minimum
clearance, ±0.5 in., as specified in the
installation instructions; if the
installation instructions do not provide
a minimum clearance, the vertical
partition or wall shall be located 4 ±0.5
in. from the sides or rear of the cabinet
and extend at least 12 in. beyond each
side of the cabinet from the floor to at
least 12 in. above the top of the cabinet.
DOE determined in the June 2022
NOPR that the installation instructions
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66177
in ASHRAE 72–2018R are more
representative of actual use, as they
require testing according to the
minimum manufacturer-specified
clearance in the direction of air exhaust
or intake rather than a constant 6 in. 87
FR 39164, 39183. DOE expects that CRE
are typically installed with minimum
installation clearances due to the spaceconstrained locations in which they
operate (e.g., commercial kitchens or
food service areas). DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to reference the
installation requirements in section 5.2
of ASHRAE 72–2018R for buffet table
and preparation table testing to
represent typical use and to ensure
consistency with appendix B test
requirements. 87 FR 39164, 39183.
Sections 5.1 and 5.3 of ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata also provide additional
instructions regarding test unit
installation and setup that are not
addressed in ASTM F2143–16.
Specifically, section 5.1 provides
instructions regarding test unit
installation within the test facility and
section 5.3 specifies test requirements
for components and accessories. While
these provisions were established for
conventional CRE, DOE initially
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
they are also applicable to buffet table
and preparation table installation and
use due to both categories having
similar installation locations and similar
accessories available for use. 87 FR
39164, 39183. DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to also reference these
sections in ASHRAE 72–2018R for
buffet table and preparation table testing
to ensure consistent testing that is
representative of actual use. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal for
testing buffet tables and preparation
tables with test setup instructions
consistent with ASHRAE 72–2018R
rather than ASTM F2143–16. Id.
Hillphoenix commented that it agrees
with the proposal to use ASHRAE 72 for
testing setup requirements for buffet and
preparations tables as this standard
already applies to existing CRE and
allows testing that is more
representative of the end use
installations. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 4)
Hillphoenix recommended referencing
ASHRAE 72–202X, which would align
with the incorporation of other
standards that are being referenced but
that are not yet released. Id.
Hussmann stated its support for the
ASTM F2143–16 test set-up instructions
as they more closely resembled typical
use. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 4) Hussmann
also cautioned DOE against combining
sections from different standards to
create a test procedure, commenting that
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66178
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
combining different standards would
provide unsupported results not yet
tested and proven by the industry. Id.
Hussmann added that combining test
standards would cause confusion and
disruption to the industry as the
different standards were revised. Id.
AHRI stated support for test setup
conditions consistent with ASTM
F2143–16, but with the qualification
that test standards not be combined,
which would be unnecessary and
inadvisable. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 6) AHRI
recommended that DOE should regulate
this issue under a singular standard and
advised that small business retailers
especially could be negatively impacted
by the proposed leapfrogging of
standards, especially for buffet tables,
where full analysis of testing had not
been completed. Id. AHRI commented
that ASTM F2143–16 was under review
and might be updated within the next
one to two years, making it prudent for
DOE to wait to further regulate. Id.
Hoshizaki repeated their previous
comment, commenting in agreement
with the proposal to use test procedures
from ASTM F–2143–2016, but in
disagreement with the proposal to have
additional requirements from other
standards. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2)
They commented that if DOE wants to
use a standard only in part, they should
request to have a single standard
updated with proposed changes and
wait for the standard process to
complete before publishing a test
procedure. Id. Hoshizaki stated that this
will give manufacturers a chance to see
the final standard and prepare for
testing prior to the implementation of
new regulations. Id.
Continental commented that the
ASHRAE 72 committee has discussed
requirements for testing buffet and
preparation tables, concluded that
ASHRAE 72 is not appropriate for these
product types, and determined that a
new standard procedure would be
needed, but that combining existing test
standards is unnecessary, inadvisable,
and likely to result in excessive testing
burden and confusion for stakeholders.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 5) Continental
commented that DOE should not
attempt to merge different aspects of
ASHRAE and ASTM standards into a
test procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables and instead should
work with stakeholders to develop and
thoroughly assess a single
comprehensive standard procedure. Id.
As discussed in the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE recognizes that the ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata provisions apply to
conventional CRE, but has determined
that the installation instructions
specified in ASHRAE 72–2022 with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
Errata provide for more representative
installation instructions when testing
buffet tables and preparation tables as
compared to those specified in ASTM
F2143–16. Specifically, DOE maintains
that this equipment is typically installed
in space-constrained locations, and
therefore the manufacturer specified
minimum clearances are most
representative of actual use.
Additionally, ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata provides additional instructions
regarding test unit installation within
the test facility and for components and
accessories. These provisions are
necessary to ensure consistent testing.
Regarding combining references to
multiple industry test standards within
the test procedure in appendix C, as
discussed in sections III.B and III.C.1.b
of this document, DOE references
specific sections of the applicable
industry standards for testing in
appendix C rather than incorporating
the industry standards in full. This
approach makes it easier to determine
where requirements are harmonized
across industry standards.
For these reasons, DOE is maintaining
references to ASTM F2143–16 as
appropriate for test conduct, but DOE is
additionally specifying instructions
based on ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
for certain installation provisions, as
appropriate, in appendix C.
Test Load
ASTM F2143–16 specifies that
temperature measurements for
preparation tables or buffet tables be
taken from standardized pans filled
with distilled water. ASTM F2143–16
also specifies measuring the
temperature in any chilled
compartments for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables using three
thermocouples in an empty, unloaded
compartment. DOE’s current test
procedure for CRE requires that
integrated average temperature
measurements be taken from test
simulators consisting of a plastic
container filled with a sponge saturated
with a 2-percent mixture of propylene
glycol and distilled water. See ASHRAE
72–2005, section 6.2.1. Additionally, the
DOE test procedure requires 70 to 90
percent of the compartment net usable
volume to be loaded with filler material
and test simulators for testing (60 to 80
percent as proposed in this final rule by
referencing section 5.4.8 of ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata). See ASHRAE 72–
2005, section 6.2.5. Buffet tables and
preparation tables may not typically be
loaded to 70 percent of their net usable
volume due to their use for service
rather than long-term storage, but testing
with the refrigerated compartment
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
entirely empty also may not be
representative of average use.
DOE initially determined in the June
2022 NOPR that the distilled water pan
loading as specified in ASTM F2143–16
provides a representative test load for
the open-top refrigerated areas of buffet
tables and preparation tables, while
limiting test burden, and is consistent
with the filler material specified in both
ASHRAE 72–2005 and ASHRAE 72–
2018R (i.e., filler material that consists
of water, a 50/50 mixture (±2 percent) of
distilled water and propylene glycol, or
wood blocks with an overall density not
less than 480 kg/m3 (30 lb/ft3). 87 FR
39164, 39184. Typical food loads are
composed mostly of water, such that
water is a representative test medium.
Additionally, distilled water does not
require any additional preparation by
the test laboratory, limiting test burden
and ensuring a consistent test medium
across different test facilities.
DOE acknowledges that using water
would not accommodate testing at
conditions at and below 32 °F. However,
ASTM F2143–16 specifies pan
temperature to be within 33 °F and 41 °F
for a valid test. As discussed later in this
section, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that the integrated average pan
temperature be 38 °F ±2 °F for buffet
table and preparation table testing. 87
FR 39164, 39184. At these temperatures,
the distilled water would be liquid and
would not result in the testing issues
associated with freezing. Additionally,
DOE observed during investigative
testing that individual pans filled with
distilled water did not reach
temperatures lower than 33 °F when
tested with an integrated average pan
temperature of 38 °F ±2 °F.
In addition to proposing the water test
load, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that pans for testing be loaded to
within 0.5 in. of the top of the pan. 87
FR 39164, 39184. For pans that are not
configured in a horizontal orientation,
DOE proposed that only the lowest side
of the pan be loaded to within 0.5 in.
of the top of the pan. Id. ASTM F2143–
16 specifies a pan loading procedure
based on the weight of water needed to
load pans to 0.5 in. of the top of the pan.
DOE expects that a loading method
based on marking pans or measuring
distance from the water to the top of the
pan would limit test burden as
compared to the weight-based method
in ASTM F2143–16 and that both the
loads and loading methods would be
substantively the same.
ASTM F2143–16 specifies the pans
for holding water to be standard 4-in.
deep 1⁄6-size metal steam table pans
with a weight of 0.70 ±0.07 lb. ASTM
F2143–16 allows for manufacturer-
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
specified pans if the unit is designed
specifically for such pans. DOE notes
that manufacturers typically specify pan
dimensions or provide pans for their
units, but some manufacturers do not
provide a pan depth or may specify a
range of possible pan depths. DOE also
notes that pan materials can vary and
are not always specified by the
manufacturer.
Based on a review of buffet tables and
preparation tables available on the
market, manufacturers typically allow
for a range of pan configurations in the
open-top refrigerated area. These
configurations can nearly always
accommodate the 1⁄6-size steam table
pans referenced in ASTM F2143–16. To
ensure consistent testing for units that
offer multiple pan configurations, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
reference the pan instructions in ASTM
F2143–16. 87 FR 39164, 39184. If a
buffet table or preparation table cannot
be loaded with the specified standard
pans, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to test with pans that are
consistent with the manufacturer
installation instructions and with
dimensions as close to the standard
pans as is available, consistent with the
ASTM F2143–16 loading instructions.
Id.
Under the current test procedure, a
thermal separation would be required
between the buffet table or preparation
table and a refrigerated compartment for
that compartment to be subject to the
testing requirements, which include test
simulators and loading requirements.
Buffet tables and preparation tables may
include refrigerated compartments that
are not thermally separated from the
open-top refrigerated area, and in the
NOPR, DOE considered whether
different loads (or no load) would be
appropriate for testing such
compartments. 87 FR 39164, 39185.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that any refrigerated compartment of a
buffet table or preparation table (i.e., any
refrigerated compartment that is not
thermally separated from the open-top
refrigerated area) be tested with no load.
Id. DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to reference the ASTM F2143–16
requirements, which specify placing
three thermocouples in specific
locations within the empty refrigerated
compartment. Id. DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
this approach would limit test burden
by not requiring additional test
simulator preparation or loading of filler
materials. Id. Additionally, DOE expects
that the refrigerated compartments of
buffet tables and preparation tables are
typically used for short-term storage of
items used during food service and food
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
preparation (i.e., with additional pans of
prepared food or ingredients for food
preparation) rather than long-term
storage, and that, therefore, an unloaded
cabinet would be more representative of
typical usage. This is also consistent
with the DOE test procedures for
consumer refrigeration products, which
measure internal compartment
temperatures with no load. See 10 CFR
part 430, subpart B, appendix A and
appendix B.
ASTM F2143–16 does not specify
whether the internal compartment
thermocouples are weighted or
unweighted. For consistency with the
NSF 7–2019 approach, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR that the
thermocouples be weighted—i.e., in
thermal contact with the center of a 1.6oz (45-g) cylindrical brass slug with a
diameter and height of 0.75 in. 87 FR
39164, 39185. The brass slugs shall be
placed at least 0.5 in from any heatconducting surface. Id. While ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata requires internal
compartment temperatures to be
measured using test simulators, ambient
temperature measurements are similarly
made by thermocouples in contact with
cylindrical brass slugs with the same
specifications.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed test
loads and temperature measurement
locations for buffet tables and
preparation tables—i.e., distilled water
in pans for the open-top refrigerated
area and no load in any refrigerated
compartment—consistent with the
approach in ASTM F2143–16. 87 FR
39164, 39185.
Hoshizaki commented that it agrees
with the proposal to use test procedures
from ASTM F2143–2016. (Hoshizaki,
No. 30, p. 3) Hoshizaki noted that if
DOE were to seek changes in the future,
those changes should go through the
ASTM standards committee. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposal to load pans with distilled
water, assuming there is no requirement
to move the pans (i.e., physically
relocating, opening of drawer with pans,
etc.), which would cause spillage and
splashing. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 4)
Hillphoenix also agreed with the
temperature measurement location in
the center of the pan and recommended
a sponge or similar material be used to
stabilize the measuring device and
maintain consistent placement of the
sensor. Id. Hillphoenix recommended
that DOE approach industry and request
updated testing standards that better
reflect actual product intent, which
would drive consistency within the
industry and be less burdensome on
manufacturers. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66179
AHRI commented that it urged DOE to
defer requirements for this issue in the
test procedure until the ASTM F2143–
16 standard has been updated in an
estimated 1 to 2 years. (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 7) AHRI stated a number of concerns,
including the fact that proposed changes
under consideration for test mediums or
loading would be subjected to a test
revision process. Id. AHRI pointed out
its concerns with the proposed use of
distilled water as a medium because it
may have limitations in certain
applications, even though it is much
less burdensome than alternative
mediums, such as glycol, used for
testing. Id. AHRI noted that
manufacturers are concerned that test
results using distilled water sent to
third-party testing labs may be
inconsistent and difficult to replicate,
and manufacturers need further testing
to determine if distilled water is the
decisively preferred testing medium, or
if a lack of testing repeatability makes
distilled water a less-preferred testing
medium. Id. AHRI also repeated its
concern that ENERGY STAR is not yet
ready to employ ASTM F2143–16 and
that DOE’s adoption may be premature.
Id.
Hussmann commented that distilled
water was less of a burden for testing;
however, water may have test
limitations due to freezing/slush that
could affect test measurements.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 5) Hussmann
recommended that DOE refer this issue
to a standards committee to determine
how water affected the temperature
measurements and to determine the
appropriate test medium. Id.
Continental commented that it had
not performed extensive equipment
testing using ASTM F2143–16 to
provide comprehensive feedback on any
proposed test conditions, and stated
support for use of a no-load test for
buffet tables or preparation tables that
do not have a refrigerated storage
compartment that is thermally separated
from the open-top pan area.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 6) Continental
advised that empty pans could be used
in the top opening to minimize
additional burden, but potential
inconsistencies in methods and results
would need to be evaluated. Id.
Continental commented that filling pans
in the top with distilled water for testing
was significantly less burdensome than
alternative product simulator
compounds, but that this approach is
problematic because distilled water can
be subject to partial freezing under
certain application conditions, resulting
in inconsistent test results. Id.
Continental added that a mixture of
propylene glycol and distilled water
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66180
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
would eliminate potential freezing
concerns, but also add cost and
potentially result in inconsistencies. Id.
Continental alluded to another type of
testing, a special test media, such as a
solution of water, sodium chloride, and
methocel as prescribed for ANSI/NSF 7–
2019 sanitation testing, which would be
extremely burdensome for separate
energy testing due to relatively
expensive ingredients, significant
preparation time, and limited shelf life
before the solution must be discarded.
Id. Continental urged DOE to postpone
adoption of a test procedure for
refrigerated buffet and preparation
tables and address these issues with
relevant standards committees, such as
ASTM, ASHRAE, and AHRI, as well as
stakeholders. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting,
True commented that the problem with
using distilled water in a cabinet,
especially a food preparation table, is
the threat of dual freeze; in other words,
the distilled water dropping below
32 °F. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 4,
p. 56) True stated that when using
water, measurements of the actual
temperature of the product cannot be
taken because as the water changes
state, it will not move from 32 °F. Id.
True added that the design of food
preparation tables and buffet tables
results in cold air coming out, or a cold
rail either making direct contact or
blowing directly on pans. Id. True stated
that because of this, pans will freeze
even though the average may be 38 °F.
Id. Therefore, True stated that using
water only as a test media is
irresponsible because it is not producing
adequate temperatures. Id. True
suggested instead filling a pan with 50/
50 water and glycol. Id.
In response to the Hillphoenix
comment, DOE is not requiring pans to
be moved during testing (as discussed in
a later sub-section of III.C.1.b in this
document), therefore limiting any
spillage or splashing concerns. DOE has
not identified an issue with maintaining
thermocouple placement in the center of
the pan during its internal testing of
buffet tables and preparation tables, and
therefore is not requiring the use of a
sponge or similar material to stabilize
the thermocouple during testing.
In response to AHRI’s comment, DOE
has determined that distilled water is a
repeatable and reproducible test
medium that limits test burden.
Distilled water provides a consistent,
representative basis for testing, limits
burden by avoiding the need for test
facilities to create solutions or mixtures
(e.g., propylene glycol and water
solutions, methocel, or sawdust
mixtures), and is cost effective. In
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
response to Continental’s suggestion
that empty pans could be used for
testing, DOE has determined that a
thermal load in the pans is most
representative of actual use and is
necessary to allow for temperature
measurements of the pan load.
DOE recognizes that water in pans of
buffet tables or preparation tables could
freeze under certain conditions but that
the target pan temperatures are above
water’s freezing point. Based on DOE’s
investigative testing, DOE does not
expect freezing of water in the pans
during the test. If a buffet table or
preparation table has a specific design
characteristic that results in water
freezing in a pan during the DOE test
and that prohibits the conduct of the
test, manufacturers can petition for a
waiver under the provisions in 10 CFR
431.401.
DOE has determined that distilled
water represents a consistent test load
that represents the thermal load in pans
during buffet table or preparation table
operation. Therefore, DOE is adopting
distilled water as the test medium for
pans in buffet tables and preparation
tables, and is requiring that any
refrigerated compartments in buffet
tables and preparation tables be tested
with no load using weighted
thermocouples, consistent with the June
2022 NOPR approach.
Test Conduct—Defrosts
ASTM F2143–16 does not provide
specific instructions for addressing
defrost cycles when testing buffet tables
and preparation tables, other than
indicating in the test report whether a
defrost cycle occurred. Section 7.3 of
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata directs
that the test period begins with a defrost
cycle. This section also requires that for
refrigerators with manual defrost or offcycle defrost, the test is started at the
beginning of a refrigeration system off
cycle (if the off-cycle defrost is not
identifiable); or, if the refrigeration
system never cycles off, the test is
started at any point during refrigeration
system operation.
Defrost cycles can increase the energy
consumption of refrigeration equipment
as compared to stable operation;
however, DOE has observed that most
buffet tables and preparation tables
often incorporate off-cycle defrosts,
which melt frost accumulation by
running the evaporator fan during a
compressor off cycle. This method of
defrost does not actively introduce heat
to melt the accumulated frost and may
occur during the compressor’s normal
cycling operation. With this defrost
approach, there may not be an
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
identifiable defrost occurrence in the
measured test data.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
determined that to the extent buffet
tables or preparation tables incorporate
automatic electric or hot gas defrosts
(i.e., heating the evaporator to melt frost
accumulation), or any automatic
extended off-cycle defrost (i.e., off-cycle
defrost with a duration longer than a
compressor off cycle), the energy
consumption of these defrosts should be
captured in the test period to measure
energy use representative of typical use.
87 FR 39164, 39186. DOE observed
during investigative testing that
automatic extended off-cycle defrost is
used in both buffet tables and
preparation tables. To incorporate this
energy use and ensure consistent testing
of buffet tables and preparation tables,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to require that test periods for buffet
tables and preparation tables account for
any defrosts consistent with the
requirements in ASHRAE 72–2018R. 87
FR 39164, 39186. This would require
capturing a defrost at the start of the test
period or starting the test period at the
beginning of a refrigeration off cycle if
there is no identifiable defrost (or at any
point during refrigeration system
operation if the refrigeration system
never cycles off).
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposal to
account for defrosts when testing buffet
tables and preparation tables, consistent
with the approach in ASHRAE 72–
2018R. 87 FR 39164, 39186.
AHRI commented that it supports
DOE’s proposal to account for defrosts
for buffet tables and preparation tables
in a test period greater than 4 hours,
although AHRI cautioned DOE against
combining test standards as it is
unnecessary and inadvisable and
restated the call for DOE to regulate this
issue under a singular standard. (AHRI,
No. 38, p. 7)
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposal to use ASHRAE 72 for defrost
requirements pertaining to buffet and
preparations tables as this standard
already applies to existing CRE.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 4) Hillphoenix
recommended referencing ASHRAE 72–
202x, which would align with the
incorporation of other standards that are
being referenced but that are not yet
released. Id. Hillphoenix recommended
this only be applied to units consisting
of open tops with pans that incorporate
other refrigerated zones. Hillphoenix
commented that in reference to the test
period duration, a defrost cycle may not
be required due to a shortened active
refrigeration time. Id.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Continental commented it had not
sufficiently tested equipment using the
proposed methods to provide an
adequate response regarding defrost
periods. (Continental, No. 29, p. 6)
Continental commented that DOE’s
recognition of this issue is another
indication as to why development of a
new test procedure should not be
attempted within a rulemaking, and
why DOE should delay publication of a
test procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables, instead working with
stakeholders to develop an appropriate
standard procedure. Id.
Hussmann cautioned DOE on using a
hybrid approach to creating a test
procedure, but stated support for
accounting for defrosts in a test period
greater than 4 hours. (Hussmann, No.
32, p. 5)
Hoshizaki commented that it does not
agree with proposing the use of one
standard but then incorporating parts of
other standards without going through
the standard review process. (Hoshizaki,
No. 30, p. 3) Hoshizaki noted that if
DOE feels that starting the test with
defrost is the best way to capture energy
values, then DOE should make requests
to amend ASTM F–2143 for those
changes. Id.
In response to the comments
regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments
discussed in sections III.B and III.C.1.b
of this document.
Because defrost occurrences can
impact energy use, DOE is requiring that
the test period begin at the start of a
defrost occurrence, or at the beginning
of a refrigeration off-cycle if there is no
identifiable defrost (or at any point
during refrigeration system operation if
the refrigeration system never cycles
off). This approach is consistent with
the test period requirements for other
CRE and would ensure repeatable and
reproducible testing of buffet tables and
preparation tables that is representative
of actual use.
Test Conduct—Moving Pans
Section 10.5.6 of ASTM F2143–16
specifies that if it is possible to control
cooling to the display area
independently of the refrigerated
cabinet, the cooling to the display area
is turned off and all pans are to be
moved from the display area to the
refrigerated cabinet underneath after the
active period. The ability to control
cooling in both the display area and the
refrigerated cabinet independently of
each other suggests that this language
applies to units with thermally
separated compartments and pan areas.
DOE currently provides test
procedures for any refrigerated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
compartments that are combined with
buffet tables and preparation tables and
that are thermally separate from the
open-top refrigerated area. In the June
2022 NOPR, DOE did not propose to
amend the test requirements for such
thermally separated refrigerated
compartments. 87 FR 39164, 39186.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to reference ASTM F2143–16
rather than NSF 7–2019 as the basis for
buffet table and preparation table
testing. Id. Section 10.5.6 of ASTM
F2143–16 specifies moving pans from
the display area to the refrigerated
cabinet underneath after the active
period if it is possible to control cooling
to the display area independently of the
refrigerated cabinet. As stated, the
separate cooling control suggests
thermal separation between the opentop area and the refrigerated cabinet.
Because DOE did not propose changes
to the current test requirements for any
thermally separated refrigerated
cabinets, DOE proposed that all buffet
tables and preparation tables be tested
with the pans in the display area for the
entire test, including the ‘‘standby
period’’ specified in section 10.5.6 of
ASTM F2143–16. 87 FR 39164, 39186.
DOE determined in the June 2022
NOPR that this proposed approach
would limit test burden and variability
by avoiding moving pans during the test
period, which could introduce varying
heat loads depending on how the
movement is conducted. Id.
Additionally, DOE expects that the
proposed test procedure is
representative of typical buffet table and
preparation table use. As previously
discussed, DOE expects that buffet
tables and preparation tables are used
for short-term storage during food
service and food preparation. Therefore,
it is unlikely that these units would be
used for storage in the refrigerated
compartment without any pans loaded
in the open-top pan area.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its proposal to
require loading pans in the open-top
refrigerated area and not moving them
to a refrigerated compartment, if
applicable, during testing. 87 FR 39164,
39186–39187.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposal to have open-top pans remain
in place once they are loaded and
testing begins, which would be
consistent with the ASHRAE 72
approach that applies to existing CRE.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 5) Hillphoenix
recommended referencing ASHRAE 72–
202x, which would align with the
incorporation of other standards that are
being referenced but that are not yet
released. Id. Hillphoenix recommended
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66181
DOE approach industry and request
updated testing standards that better
reflect actual product intent, an
approach intended to drive consistency
within the industry while proving less
burdensome on manufacturers. Id.
Hoshizaki commented agreeing that
keeping the pans in and closing the lid
would be simpler for the test.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 3) Hoshizaki
commented that manufacturers that
have a separated rail and compartment
temperature zones would have to
change their test process. Id. Hoshizaki
noted that if DOE wants to change this
for all manufacturers regardless of
design constraints of units, then this
process should be updated in the ASTM
F2143 standards committee. Id.
Continental commented that
equipment with the ability to
independently turn off the refrigeration
system for the pan display area should
be classified separately from other
refrigerated buffet and prep tables.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 6)
Continental added that if the
manufacturer’s instructions require
relocating pans to the storage area at
night, moving the pans would more
accurately reflect the actual energy
consumption of the equipment usage,
although Continental had not tested
equipment in this manner to thoroughly
judge the suitability of moving pans.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 6) Continental
found making physical changes to
equipment setup, such as relocating
pans during a test, to be problematic
because it could lead to significant
differences in results by, for example,
skewing measurements by the order in
which pans were removed or arranged
in the storage compartment, or how long
doors or drawers were opened for the
relocation of pans, etc. Id. Continental
commented that this issue is another
reason DOE must delay adoption of a
test procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables, and instead work
with the standards committees and
stakeholders to develop a
comprehensive industry standard. Id.
AHRI recommended that any changes
to the ASTM F2143–16 standard should
be addressed by the appropriate
standards committee. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
7) AHRI advised DOE that
manufacturers have not tested
equipment to the specifications
proposed, and therefore AHRI does not
have the knowledge to advise DOE
regarding the appropriateness of this
change. Id. AHRI commented that it
supported DOE’s proposal and
recommended that DOE should not
support moving pans during the test
procedure, as this might affect test
outcomes. Id. AHRI repeated that DOE
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66182
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
should not combine test standards and
recommended that DOE regulate this
issue under a singular standard.
Hussmann again cautioned DOE
against combining sections from
different standards to create a test
procedure and that doing so would
result in unsupported results not yet
tested and proven by industry.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 5) Hussmann
commented that the method mentioned
provides for testing variability and
additional burden of testing on the
manufacturer and was not
recommended. Id. Hussmann instead
recommended that the matter be taken
before the proper standards committee
for validation and vetting before being
adopted. Id.
In response to the comments
regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments
discussed in sections III.B and III.C.1.b
of this document.
DOE agrees with the comments
indicating that moving pans in the
middle of a test period would increase
test burden and potentially increase
variability. Therefore, DOE is requiring
that pans stay in place for the duration
of the test period, consistent with the
approach proposed in the June 2022
NOPR.
DOE recognizes that typical buffet
table and preparation table use may
include movement of food pans from
the top pan area or maintaining pans in
that location depending on end use.
However, the function of this equipment
is to provide cooling to food loads in the
top pan areas. DOE has determined that
maintaining pans in the top open
storage area allows for representative
measures of energy consumption while
limiting test burden.
Test Conduct—Operating Periods and
Door/Lid Openings
As described, buffet tables and
preparation tables temporarily store and
display perishable items during food
preparation or service. Because buffet
tables and preparation tables are used
only during food preparation or service,
these equipment types may not be used
for the same 24-hour duration used to
characterize performance for other
categories of CRE. Sections 10.5.5 and
10.5.6 of ASTM F2143–16 specify a 24hour test, with an active period of 8
hours and a standby period of 16 hours.
The active period specified in section
10.5.5 contains instructions for a cover,
if equipped (open for 2 hours, then
closed for 4 hours, then open for 2
hours), and a door opening sequence for
any refrigerated compartments (every 30
minutes, each cabinet door or drawer, or
both, shall be fully opened sequentially,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
one at a time, for 6 consecutive seconds;
for units with pass-thru doors, only the
doors on one side of the unit are
opened).
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that buffet tables and
preparation tables are typically used for
food service and food preparation rather
than longer-term food storage. 87 FR
39164, 39187. In the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE proposed to test this equipment
with pans loaded into the open-top
display areas for the duration of the test,
which DOE has tentatively determined
represents typical use during food
service and food preparation. Id.
DOE recognizes that the duration of
use per day varies based on the
application and installation location for
this equipment. In the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE identified that buffet tables and
preparation tables can be used for up to
24 hours per day. DOE initially
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
a 24-hour test period as specified in
ASTM F2143–16 incorporates the likely
aspects of buffet table and preparation
table operation—i.e., an active dooropening period and a period of stable
operation. 87 FR 39164, 39187. While
the actual durations of use may vary
based on end-use application, the
measured energy use in kWh/day is
representative of the energy use of a unit
operated in 24 hours and allows for
consistent energy use comparisons
among models. Id. DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to require a 24-hour
test period for buffet tables and
preparation tables as specified in ASTM
F2143–16. Id. The proposed 24-hour test
period is consistent with the industry
test procedure, the test procedure for
other CRE; the 24-hour test period also
limits test burden and variability by
allowing for stable operation over a
longer period and incorporates the door
openings while allowing the stable
operation expected during typical usage.
Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed 24hour test period, which is consistent
with the approach in ASTM F2143–16.
Id.
Hoshizaki commented that it
continues to agree with DOE’s proposal
to incorporate ASTM F2143–2016, but
with revisions. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 3)
Hoshizaki stated that any revisions DOE
feels necessary to make should be
proposed to the ASTM F2143–2016
standards committee. Id.
Continental commented it had not
thoroughly tested equipment using
ASTM F2143–16 to judge the
applicability of the 24-hour test period,
but generally believed a 24-hour test to
be appropriate. (Continental, No. 29, p.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
6) Continental stated DOE should
address any concerns raised regarding
this test method with the appropriate
standards committee and delay
adoption of a test procedure for
refrigerated buffet and preparation
tables. Id.
Hillphoenix stated partial agreement
with the ASTM 24-hour test period and
recommended it only apply to buffet
and prep units that share a thermostat
with another refrigerated portion (i.e., a
refrigerated storage box), as these units
could be used to maintain product
temperatures while the pan section is
not in use. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 5)
Hillphoenix commented that buffet and
preparation units that incorporate only
an open top with pans typically operate
between 8–12 hours, after which,
product was removed and relocated to
other storage units. Id. Hillphoenix
commented that because of this typical
use, the test period should be shortened.
Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE use this
procedure within its intended 8- to 12hour window, rather than the proposed
24-hour test period, because the
equipment in question is generally used
during store hours only and a 24-hour
test period would not be representative
of actual use. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 7) AHRI
commented that the hours of uncovered
time create a strain on the case and
product while not reflecting typical use,
and that the procedure is burdensome
for those conducting the testing. Id.
AHRI asked DOE for clarification
regarding this issue as a 24-hour test
period has been part of the test
procedure and has already been
confirmed by manufacturers. Id.
Hussmann commented that a 24-hour
use period was not typical use for these
types of CRE, which should therefore be
tested in an 8- to 12-hour period that
more closely resembled typical use.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 5) Hussmann
added that the hours of uncovered time
created a strain on the case and on the
product and were not reflective of
typical use, and that this procedure was
also burdensome for those conducting
the testing. Id. Hussmann recommended
this issue be taken before a standards
committee to be tested and accepted by
the industry instead of combining
sections from different standards. Id.
The CA IOUs commented that the
current proposed test procedure for
buffet tables or preparation tables is not
representative of average use for this
category because pizza and sandwich
prep tables almost always have lids, as
this equipment is designed for 24-hour
operation while many refrigerated rail
models are turned off at night and
precooled in the morning. (CA IOUs,
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
No. 36, p. 3) As a result, the CA IOUs
recommended that refrigerated rails
with a user-accessible on/off switch be
tested for a period of 8 hours excluding
the precool time (from ambient to below
40 °F), since the 8-hour period would
represent two meal periods typical of
most food-service establishments
serving breakfast and lunch or lunch
and dinner. Id. The CA IOUs further
recommended including precool energy
without pans in place in the daily
energy use, in addition to the energy
used during the 8-hour test, to maintain
pans in the refrigerated rail at the target
temperature, because refrigerated rails
tested for 8 hours typically do not go
into defrost mode, as the condensate is
wiped down at the end of the day after
pan removal and placement into another
refrigerator. Id. Finally, the CA IOUs
recommended testing refrigerated rails
that do not have on/off switches or
controllers for a period of 24 hours as
currently defined in the ASTM F2143
Standard Test Method for Performance
of Refrigerated Buffet and Preparation
Tables. Id.
True commented that buffet tables
and food preparation tables are not
effective for around-the-clock food
storage, and that the suggested test
period (i.e., 8 hours active and 16
inactive) does not represent how these
units are meant to be used and operated;
both model types are designed to be
used during meal rush times (breakfast,
lunch, dinner) to store perishable, open
food during 1-to-3-hour intervals and
not during a constant 8-hour period.
(True, No. 28, p. 6) True stated that
measuring the energy consumption
during the NSF/ANSI 7–2021 7.5.2 test
method for refrigerated buffet units and
refrigerated food preparation would be
the most representative measurement of
energy consumption, and if a 24-hour
number is required, simply multiplying
the energy consumption during the 4hour test by 6 would suffice. Id.
DOE notes that ASTM F2143–16
currently includes a 24-hour test period
for all units—with an 8-hour active
period, and 16-hour standby period.
DOE recognizes that duration of usage
per day varies depending on application
and installation location. However, as
noted by commenters, this equipment
can be used for 24 hours. A 24-hour test
allows for a representative measurement
of energy use and allows for a consistent
comparison of energy use. Therefore,
DOE is adopting a 24-hour test period
for buffet tables and preparation tables,
consistent with the approach in ASTM
F2143–16. As discussed in the following
paragraphs, the 24-hour period includes
active and standby periods, consistent
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
with ASTM F2143–16, to reflect usage
during service and storage periods.
As discussed, ASTM F2143–16
includes an 8-hour ‘‘active period’’ that
includes instructions for any open-top
display area covers (2 hours open, 4
hours closed, and 2 hours open) and any
refrigerated compartment doors and/or
drawers (fully opened sequentially for 6
seconds every 30 minutes). DOE
recognizes that the actual use of buffet
tables and preparation tables can vary
depending on application. The cover
and door opening requirements in
ASTM F2143–16 were developed by an
industry committee with the intent of
evaluating energy performance. While
the door openings specified in ASTM
F2143–16 are less frequent than those
required in ASHRAE 72–2018R, DOE
expects that any refrigerated
compartments in buffet tables or
preparation tables are accessed less
frequently than in other CRE because
maintaining the refrigerated temperature
of food items held in the open-top pan
area is the primary function of buffet
tables or preparation tables during
operation. Additionally, the 8-hour
‘‘active period’’ during which door
openings occur is consistent with the 8hour period of door openings required
in ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata. Based
on the foregoing, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
the cover and door opening provisions
of ASTM F2143–16 are appropriately
representative. 87 FR 39164, 39188.
Accordingly, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to incorporate the
‘‘active period’’ requirements for cover
and door and/or drawer openings as
specified in section 10.5.5 of ASTM
F2143–16. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
door and cover opening procedures,
which are consistent with the approach
specified in ASTM F2143–16. DOE
requested data and information on
representative usage of buffet tables and
preparation tables, including door and
cover openings. Id.
Hoshizaki commented in agreement
with DOE that the cover and door
opening provisions of ASTM F2143–16
are appropriately representative for
energy testing. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 4)
Hoshizaki commented that ASTM
F2143–2016 should be either accepted
in its entirety or changes suggested
should be made at the ASTM F2143–
2016 standards committee level and
await approval before accepting said
standard as a test procedure. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposal to use the door and cover
opening procedures as referenced in
ASTM F2143–16, as they are more
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66183
representative of end use than the door
opening procedure referenced in
ASHRAE 72. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 5)
Hillphoenix commented that the doors
on this type of equipment are normally
operated by store personnel and are not
customer facing, which excludes the
intent of the opening procedures
specified in ASHRAE 72. Id.
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
approach industry and request updated
testing standards that better reflect
actual product intent, an approach that
would drive consistency within the
industry and be less burdensome on
manufacturers. Id.
AHRI commented that the issue of
proposed door and cover opening
procedures consistent with ASTM
F2143–16 depend on DOE’s ultimate
decision regarding use of ASHRAE 72–
2018R. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8) AHRI stated
that ambient conditions must be
selected in order to select the door type
in use for equipment and recommended
that changes to this standard be
addressed by the appropriate standards
committee for review and approval, and
that a test procedure should be
developed prior to regulating this
equipment. Id.
Continental commented that it had
not performed sufficient testing to
ASTM F2143–16 to form a conclusive
position on the suitability of utilizing
the proposed door and cover opening
procedures, but stated concerns with the
practicality, burden, and repeatability of
the simultaneous door and cover
opening method specified in the ASTM
test method. (Continental, No. 29, p. 7)
Continental stated that results may be
significantly skewed by ambient test
conditions and the process used, and
DOE should delay adoption of a test
procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables and address feedback
regarding ASTM F2143–16 with the
appropriate standards committee. Id.
Hussmann commented that due to the
uncertainty of DOE selecting sections
from both standards, it would be
difficult to choose what method would
work for a majority of manufacturers.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 6) Hussmann
commented that options determined
from this test procedure may include:
ASHRAE 72 conditions with ASHRAE
72 door openings; ASHRAE 72
conditions with the ASTM door opening
procedure; ASTM conditions with the
ASTM door opening procedure; or
ASTM conditions with ASHRAE door
openings. Id. Hussmann requested that
DOE select test conditions in order to
determine the suitable door opening
procedure and cautioned against
combining test standards for this reason.
Id. Hussmann added that overall
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66184
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
measurements and results would have
varying effects based on openings,
ambient conditions, and test mediums
used, and recommended that any
changes be brought to the appropriate
standards committee for review and
approval prior to adoption. Id.
DOE agrees that the usage of buffet
tables or preparation tables likely varies
between high usage and low usage
periods over a 24-hour period. The
existing ASTM F2143–16 test procedure
is representative of field use because it
accounts for high and low usage periods
with the active and standby periods.
Therefore, DOE is adopting the active
mode provisions of the ASTM test
procedure for pan covers and door
openings of any refrigerated
compartments. This includes 4 hours
total of uncovered pan area (2 hours
open, 4 hours closed, 2 hours open for
the 8-hour active period) and 8 hours of
door openings (occurring every 30
minutes).
DOE is not adopting door openings
based on ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
as the doors are likely opened less
frequently for this equipment,
consistent with the ASTM F2143–16
requirements.
DOE recognizes that the impact of
uncovered pan operation and door
openings will vary depending on
ambient conditions. As discussed, DOE
has determined that the ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata ambient conditions are
appropriate for testing this equipment.
DOE expects that any ‘‘strain’’ on
uncovered operation would be mitigated
by the lower ambient temperature of
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata as
compared to the ambient temperature
specified in ASTM F2143–16, as well as
the use of pan covers when applicable
during a portion of the active period and
the duration of the standby period.
In response to the comments
regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments
discussed in sections III.B and III.C.1.b
of this document.
Test Conduct—Stabilization
Sections 10.3 and 10.4 of ASTM
F2143–16 require that the unit be
operated with empty pans and open
covers for at least 24 hours, that the unit
operate with empty pans for at least 2
hours, that water be pre-cooled before
being loaded into the pans, and, once
the water has been loaded into the pans,
that the thermostat be calibrated until
the pan temperatures are never outside
of 33 °F to 41 °F for any 15-minute
period over a 4-hour measurement
period. In contrast, the current CRE test
procedure, by reference to ASHRAE 72–
2005, generally provides that the unit be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
loaded with test simulators and filler
packages prior to pre-cooling, operated
to establish steady-state conditions over
consecutive 24-hour periods or
refrigeration cycles, and, once steadystate conditions have been achieved,
continue to operate for at least 12 hours
without any adjustment to the controls.
As discussed, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR generally to reference
ASTM F2143–16 rather than NSF 7–
2019 for buffet table and preparation
table testing. 87 FR 39164, 39188.
However, the stabilization and
thermostat calibration requirements in
sections 10.3 and 10.4 of ASTM F2143–
16 may require an iterative process of
thermostat adjustment and recalibration
to achieve stability and then to ensure
that appropriate conditions are
maintained during the test period.
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata specifies
provisions for other CRE that require
stability to be confirmed over two test
periods with identical operation in
order to avoid the need for an iterative
process. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to reference sections 7.1
through 7.5 (excluding sections 7.2.1,
7.2.2, 7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and 7.3.4, as
those sections would not be applicable
to self-contained buffet tables or
preparation tables because those
sections are intended for CRE with
remote condensing units, CRE without
doors, CRE with different door opening
sequences, and CRE with lighting
occupancy sensors and controls) of
ASHRAE 72–2018R for determining
stabilization and specifying the testing
sequence for testing buffet tables and
preparation tables. 87 FR 39164, 39188.
The preparation period under section
7.2 of ASHRAE 72–2018R would
include loading the pans with water and
adjusting the necessary controls to
maintain the specified temperatures. Id.
For the purposes of determining
stability as specified in section 7.5 of
ASHRAE 72–2018R, the average
temperatures of measured pans would
be used to compare Test A and Test B
rather than the temperatures of test
simulators. Id. DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
this approach would ensure stability
over the test period and limit test
burden by avoiding an iterative
approach to determine stability and test
conditions. Id. This approach would
also maintain consistency with the
procedures used for testing other CRE.
Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
stabilization approach for buffet table
and preparation table testing, which
would reference the approach specified
in ASHRAE 72–2018R. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
AHRI commented that it supports
DOE’s proposed stabilization approach
while again recommending that DOE
regulate this issue under a single
standard, cautioning DOE against
combining test standards as unnecessary
and inadvisable. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8)
AHRI further noted that buffet tables
have not yet been addressed by
ASHRAE Standard 72–2022. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 8)
Hussmann stated its support for
adopting the stabilization method for
self-contained CRE identified in section
7.4 in ASHRAE 72–2018R, but
cautioned that this method does not yet
address buffet/prep CRE and as a result,
the proposed stabilization approach
should be taken to the appropriate
standards committee prior to adoption.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 6)
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposal to use the ASHRAE 72
approach for stabilization of buffet table
and preparation table testing as
ASHRAE 72 followed methods used for
other CRE equipment. (Hillphoenix, No.
35, p. 5) Hillphoenix commented that
ASTM F2143–16 allowed many factors
that could be burdensome when trying
to stabilize temperatures. Id.
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
approach industry and request updated
testing standards that better reflect
actual product intent, an approach that
would drive consistency within the
industry and be less burdensome on
manufacturers. Id.
Hoshizaki commented requesting that
if DOE is proposing to reference ASTM
F2143–2016 for buffet table and
preparation table testing but use the
stabilization and thermostat calibration
requirements as specified in section 7.5
of ASHRAE 72–2022, then those
changes should be proposed to the
ASTM F2143–2016 standards
committee. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 4)
Hoshizaki noted than when DOE is
content with a proper test procedure,
then DOE can propose use of the test
procedure at that time. Id.
Continental stated a belief that the
stabilization period prescribed in
ASHRAE 72–2022 may have
applicability for buffet or preparation
tables, but had not tested this
equipment in the proposed manner to
inform a comprehensive opinion.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 7) Continental
maintained that combining aspects of
different test standards was inadvisable
and that DOE should delay adoption of
a test procedure for refrigerated buffet
and preparation tables, and work with
the appropriate standards committees
and other stakeholders to develop an
appropriate standard method that
addresses this issue. Id.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
In response to the comments
regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments
discussed in sections III.B and III.C.1.b
of this document.
DOE maintains its determination from
the June 2022 NOPR that the ASTM
F2143–16 approach is burdensome and
requires an iterative approach to
determine stability, whereas the
approach in ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata allows for consistent testing
while limiting test burden. Therefore,
DOE is adopting the relevant sections of
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata to require
that stability be confirmed over two
identical test periods.
DOE will continue to monitor
industry committee work to update
relevant standards and will consider
any updated industry standards
available during future test procedure
rulemakings.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Test Conduct—Target Temperatures
ASTM F2143–16 instructs that if a
buffet table or preparation table is
equipped with a refrigerated
compartment, the compartment air
temperature is to be between 33 °F and
41 °F. Likewise, the water temperature
in each of the pans placed in the display
area also is to be between 33 °F and
41 °F. The DOE test procedure for other
CRE requires IATs of 38 °F ±2.0 °F for
medium temperature applications.
Through research, DOE found that
buffet and preparation tables use a
variety of refrigeration methods for
cooling the pans in the display area and
the refrigerated compartment. In some
configurations, units might not be able
to maintain all pans and the refrigerated
compartment within the specified
temperature range. For example, units
with a single refrigeration system and
thermostat control for temperatures in
either the refrigerated compartment or
in the pan area would control for
temperature in either the pan area or
refrigerated compartment, and both may
not be within the target range. As a
result, certain equipment may maintain
only the refrigerated compartment or the
pan area, but not both, within a
specified temperature range during
operation.
As discussed, ASTM F2143–16 and
NSF 7–2019 both specify a pan and
compartment temperature range of 33 °F
to 41 °F for testing. The current DOE test
procedure for CRE requires testing to an
IAT within 2 °F of the specified target
temperature. DOE expects that this
smaller allowable temperature range
would limit test variability as compared
to the 8 °F allowable range specified in
ASTM F2143–16 and NSF 7–2019.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
The ASTM F2143–16 and NSF 7–
2019 temperature ranges apply to all
measured pan and compartment
temperatures, whereas DOE’s current
temperature specifications apply to the
IAT—i.e., the average of all test
simulator temperature measurements
over the test period. DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
the temperature specification based on
an average temperature rather than
individual temperature measurements
would limit test burden by limiting the
need for retests in the case of individual
temperature measurements being
outside of the required range. 87 FR
39164, 39189. Additionally, DOE
determined that the average temperature
approach would allow for testing buffet
tables and preparation tables with
configurations not capable of
maintaining all temperature
measurements within the required
range. Id. For example, if the
refrigerated compartment provides
cooling to the open-top pan area, the
refrigerated compartment temperature
measurements may be colder than the
pan temperatures and not necessarily
within a specified range. Id.
Additionally, certain temperature
measurement locations may be warmer
or colder than others depending on
proximity to the evaporator or
refrigerated areas, resulting in ‘‘hot’’ or
‘‘cold’’ spots. Id. Testing to a specified
average temperature would consider the
overall average measured temperature
and would allow for testing such
configurations. Id.
Based on these initial determinations,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to require testing buffet tables and
preparation tables to a specified average
temperature rather than an allowable
range. Id. DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR that the average temperature
be calculated over the test period
separately for the pan temperature
measurements (i.e., the average of
temperatures measured throughout the
test period at each pan measurement
location specified in ASTM F2143–16)
and the temperature measurements in
any refrigerated compartment (i.e., the
average of temperatures measured
throughout the test period at each of the
three compartment measurement
locations specified in ASTM F2143–16).
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that the average temperature of all
refrigerated pans be 38 °F ±2 °F. Id. This
temperature is consistent with the
current DOE test procedure for mediumtemperature CRE and is within the
allowable range specified in ASTM
F2143–16 and NSF 7–2019. In the June
2022 NOPR, DOE similarly proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66185
that the average temperature of any
refrigerated compartment also be 38 °F
±2 °F. 87 FR 39164, 39189. If the buffet
table or preparation table configuration
does not allow independent control of
the refrigerated compartment and both
the pan average temperature and
refrigerated compartment average
temperature cannot be maintained
within 38 °F ±2 °F over the test period,
DOE proposed that the refrigerated
compartment be tested to the average
temperature necessary to maintain the
pan average temperature within the
specified range. Id. Similar to the
existing LAPT provision in section 2.2
of appendix B, DOE also proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR that if a unit is not
capable of maintaining average pan
temperatures within the specified range,
the unit would be tested at the LAPT.
Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
approach for testing buffet tables and
preparation tables based on separate pan
and compartment average temperatures.
Id. DOE also requested feedback on the
proposed target temperature of 38 °F
±2 °F for each average temperature. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposed 38 °F ±2 °F IAT for averaging
the temperature for each refrigerated
compartment when there are no
separate refrigeration controls.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 6) Hillphoenix
also agreed with the approach to only
apply the 38 °F ±2 °F IAT requirement to
open-top pans if the other refrigerated
compartments must be operated colder
in order to achieve these pan
temperatures. Id. Hillphoenix disagreed
with utilizing the LAPT for the open
tops with pans in order to maintain
38 °F as required in other compartments,
but stated that the open top with pans
should be given priority to achieve 38 °F
with other compartments allowed to run
colder. Id.
Continental repeated its response to
DOE’s early assessment review,
supporting use of target temperature
ranges and moving box car average
temperatures for pans in the open
display area, along with maximum and
minimum thermocouple temperature
measurements in the refrigerated storage
compartment, as prescribed in NSF 7 for
this equipment. (Continental, No. 29, p.
7) Continental commented that it had
not energy tested relevant equipment in
the proposed manner to thoroughly
evaluate suitability of this approach and
reiterated that DOE should postpone
publication of a test procedure for
refrigerated buffet and preparation
tables, and work with the appropriate
standards committees and other
stakeholders to develop and evaluate an
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66186
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
appropriate single standard method that
addresses this and other issues. Id.
Hussmann commented that due to the
nature of the small refrigerated pans on
this type of CRE, removing pan lids and/
or entering defrost could have warming
effects on the pans and DOE should
therefore use an average IAT of below
41 °F for the target temperature.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 6) Hussmann also
cautioned DOE against combining
sections from different standards to
create a test procedure, stating that the
proposed changes should be taken to the
appropriate standards committee prior
to adoption. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE’s target
temperature should remain below 41 °F
and restated its belief that combining
test standards was unnecessary and that
a single standard should be used to
regulate the issue. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8)
Hoshizaki commented that if DOE is
proposing to reference ASTM F2143–
2016 for buffet table and preparation
table testing but use a modified target
temperature range, then those proposed
changes should made to the ASTM
F2143–2016 standards committee and
await approval before finalizing a test
procedure in DOE standards.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 4) Hoshizaki
noted that manufacturers would need to
be given the opportunity to test with
those new constraints and make viable
comments after seeing the differences.
Id.
True recommended recording the
energy consumption during the 4-hour
NSF/ANSI 7–2021 test method (7.5.2)
for refrigerated buffet units and
refrigerated food preparation units
because for buffet tables or preparation
tables, the average of the pan
temperatures is not a food-safe
measurement. (True, No. 28, p. 3) True
added that this test procedure is the
industry standard and that all original
equipment manufacturers (‘‘OEMs’’)
should be able to supply energy
consumption data for all equipment
already manufactured and certified to
NSF Standard 7. True asked DOE if such
information had been requested from
manufacturers. Id.
The 38 °F ±2 °F average pan
temperature is generally consistent with
the recommended approach for IAT
below 41 °F and would allow for
consistent comparisons across models
by including a target temperature rather
than a wide allowable range of IATs. For
example, the energy use of a unit
maintaining a pan IAT of 34 °F would be
expected to be higher than a unit with
an IAT of 41 °F. Additionally, testing
significantly below the 38 °F ±2 °F range
may introduce concerns of the distilled
water freezing during testing.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
DOE is maintaining pan and
compartment target temperatures
consistent with June 2022 NOPR and
test procedure for other medium
temperature CRE. To clarify, achieving
the target pan temperature always takes
priority over achieving the compartment
temperature. LAPT is only allowed if a
model cannot achieve the required pan
temperature target range.
The boxcar pan temperature averaging
approach in NSF 7 is for a test method
serving a different purpose—ensuring
food safety. For the DOE test procedure,
the average pan temperature over the
entire test duration is needed to ensure
energy consumption corresponds to the
maintained pan temperatures. DOE
recognizes that an average pan
temperature does not necessarily
represent food safe temperatures (i.e.,
each pan temperature may not be at
38 °F), but the DOE test procedure is
intended to provide a representative
basis for measuring energy consumption
while not being unduly burdensome to
conduct rather than ensuring food safety
or sanitation. DOE has determined that
the pan temperature averaging approach
as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
satisfies the EPCA requirements.
Test Conduct—Capacity Metrics
ASTM F2143–16 specifies the
reporting of ‘‘production capacity,’’
which is defined as the total volume of
the pans when each pan is filled within
0.5 in. of the rim. Energy consumption
of refrigerated buffet and preparation
tables likely varies with pan volume as
well as the volume of any closed
refrigerated compartments. Therefore,
both values are of interest when
considering metrics that define energy
performance. Pan surface area could be
another possible metric for evaluating
energy performance, similar to TDA for
horizontal open equipment classes.
Reliance on pan surface area may
eliminate the variability with different
test pan dimensions.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that pan storage
volume, pan display area, and
refrigerated volume may all contribute
to the capacity and energy consumption
of a buffet table or preparation table;
therefore, DOE proposed that the test
procedure include measures of these
three metrics. 87 FR 39164, 39190. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
define and measure ‘‘pan volume’’
consistent with the production capacity
specified in ASTM F2143–16. Id. DOE
proposed to refer to pan volume rather
than production capacity to avoid
confusion with the other relevant
capacity metrics. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed that the refrigerated volume of
buffet table and preparation table
refrigerated compartments be tested in
accordance with AHRI 1200–202X,
consistent with the method proposed for
use with other CRE. Id. To avoid double
counting of refrigerated pan volumes,
DOE proposed that the refrigerated
compartment volume would not include
any volume occupied by the pans
loaded in the open-top display area for
testing. Id.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that pan display area be defined and
measured as the surface area of the test
pan when filled to within 0.5 in. of the
rim. Id. This surface area measurement
would ensure that the pan display area
would be consistent with the pan
storage volume (i.e., both measurements
would be based on the pans as filled for
testing). Id. Additionally, the
measurement based on the surface area
of the water as loaded for testing would
ensure that the surface area
measurement accounts for the actual
food storage area and excludes any areas
not providing refrigerated storage for
food service or food preparation. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
capacity metrics of pan storage volume,
compartment volume, and pan display
area. Id. DOE requested feedback on the
proposed methods for measuring each
and the extent to which these metrics
are relevant capacity metrics for buffet
tables and preparation tables. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with
DOE’s intent to only measure volumes
and TDAs for the referenced products.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 6) Hillphoenix
commented that the method as
presented in the NOPR was not clearly
written and needed to be better defined.
Id. Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
approach industry and request updated
testing standards that better reflect
actual product intent, an approach that
would drive consistency within the
industry and be less burdensome on
manufacturers. Id.
AHRI recommended that the
proposed changes to capacity metrics of
pan storage volume, compartment
volume, and pan display area need to be
updated in tandem with the standard for
consistency and alignment with the
referenced standard. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
8)
Hussmann commented that the issue
of proposed capacity metrics of pan
storage volume, compartment volume,
and pan display area should be taken to
the appropriate standards committee
due to the importance of consistency
within standards. (Hussmann, No. 32, p.
6)
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Continental commented that DOE’s
proposed use of surface area of the
water as loaded for testing would
present a confusing and potentially
inconsistent method of rating
equipment because it deviates from
other industry standards. (Continental,
No. 29, p. 7) Continental added that
DOE should delay adoption of a test
procedure for these products and work
with the appropriate standards
committees and other stakeholders to
develop a suitable standard method that
sufficiently addresses concerns with
capacity measurements, which have
significant impact on potential new
energy standards in the future. Id.
The CA IOUs recommended for the
prep table test procedure using 1⁄8-pan
capacity as a size (and energy
normalization) metric for prep tables
instead of pan display area because prep
table energy consumption depends
mostly on the top pan capacity instead
of bottom compartment volume. (CA
IOUs, No. 36, p. 4) The CA IOUs
pointed out that using total volume in
the top pans and bottom compartment
as a normalization metric will favor
units with fewer top pans and larger
bottom compartments compared to units
with more top pan capacity. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that pan
display area is not currently used as a
metric in ASTM F2143–2016.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 4) Hoshizaki
commented that if DOE wants to add an
additional metric for measurement, this
should be proposed to the ASTM F2143
standards committee, and that such
proposals should give manufacturers
and third-party testing agencies the
opportunity to do analysis and feedback
in the standards committee process. Id.
Hoshizaki stated that only after all
revisions are finalized should the
standard be officially proposed as a test
procedure for product. Id.
DOE maintains that pan display area,
pan volume, and refrigerated
compartment volume can all impact
energy use and provide information
regarding usable capacity to end users.
Because ASTM F2143–16 includes
‘‘production capacity,’’ which
represents a measure of pan storage
volume, DOE is adopting additional
capacity metrics. These metrics reflect
the capacity of buffet tables and
preparation tables to store refrigerated
items and display or allow access to
refrigerated items.
Regarding the CA IOUs
recommendation, the measured pan area
rather than a number of standard pans
would ensure a consistent basis for
measuring unit capacity regardless of
pan configuration for a given unit.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
Regarding confusion and need for test
standard updates, the measurements of
compartment volume and pan volume
are consistent with the existing industry
methods (AHRI 1200–2023 and ASTM
F2143–16, respectively). Pan area is the
surface area of the water in the pans
which represents the refrigerated area in
contact with the ambient test
conditions, which ensures a
representative and comparable
measurement of the usable capacity that
contributes to energy consumption.
Commenters did not provide specific
information regarding what aspects of
the June 2022 NOPR approach were
unclear. DOE has reviewed the test
instructions as proposed and
determined they provide sufficient
clarity regarding measuring each of the
capacity metrics. Therefore, DOE is
adopting the capacity metrics as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
2. Pull-Down Temperature Applications
As defined, CRE is equipment that is
designed for holding temperature
applications 20 or pull-down
temperature applications. 10 CFR
431.62 (see also 42 U.S.C.
6311(9)(A)(vi)). ‘‘Pull-down temperature
application’’ is a commercial refrigerator
with doors that, when fully loaded with
12-ounce beverage cans at 90 °F, can
cool those beverages to an average stable
temperature of 38 °F in 12 hours or less.
10 CFR 431.62 (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(D)).
CRE within this definition are typically
known as beverage merchandisers or
beverage coolers because of their use in
displaying individually packaged
beverages for sale, and their ability to
pull down temperatures of such
beverages. Pull-down temperature
applications with transparent doors and
a self-contained condensing unit are the
only pull-down temperature
applications currently subject to DOE’s
energy conservation standards specified
at 10 CFR 431.66(e).
DOE’s current CRE test procedure
does not include specific provisions
related to the performance criteria in the
pull-down temperature application
definition. For example, the test
procedure does not provide instructions
for the starting conditions of the
equipment (e.g., whether the equipment
begins the test in a pre-cooled state or
at ambient temperature conditions),
loading of the cans (e.g., whether the
equipment must be loaded to full within
a certain amount of time), or a method
to measure the temperature of the cans
20 ‘‘Holding temperature application’’ means a
use of commercial refrigeration equipment other
than a pull-down temperature application, except a
blast chiller or freezer. 10 CFR 431.62 (see also 42
U.S.C. 6311(9)(B)).
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66187
to confirm cooling to 38 °F. The current
CRE test procedure specifies that
commercial refrigerators designed for
pull-down applications be tested at
steady state (see 10 CFR 431.64(b) and
appendix B section 2.1), consistent with
testing other covered CRE categories.
While DOE defines ‘‘pull-down
temperature application’’ and has
established energy conservation
standards for self-contained commercial
refrigerators with transparent doors for
pull-down temperature applications, no
models are currently certified to DOE in
this equipment class.(21) DOE has not
established energy conservation
standards for other categories of CRE for
pull-down temperature applications.
DOE recognizes that manufacturers
may represent their models as for use in
pull-down temperature applications
rather than holding temperature
applications. To ensure appropriate
application of DOE’s definitions, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR a
method to determine whether a model
meets the definition of ‘‘pull-down
temperature application.’’ 87 FR 39164,
39191. Specifically, DOE proposed to
include product-specific enforcement
provisions for CRE, and proposed to
include a section to specify how DOE
would confirm whether a commercial
refrigerator meets the definition of
‘‘pull-down temperature application.’’
Id.
As stated, the pull-down temperature
application definition requires that a
model be capable of cooling a full load
of 12-ounce beverage cans from 90 °F to
an average stable temperature of 38 °F in
12 hours or less. To confirm this
capability, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to specify in 10 CFR
429.134 that a classification as pulldown temperature application is valid
based on meeting the pull-down
temperature application definition by:
(1) Measuring the temperatures of 12ounce beverage cans loaded into the
commercial refrigerator at locations
consistent with those specified in
ASHRAE 72–2018R (i.e., those
temperature measurement locations
required for test simulators during DOE
testing of other commercial
refrigerators);
(2) Operating the commercial
refrigerator under the required
commercial refrigerator test conditions
(e.g., 75.2 °F ±1.8 °F dry-bulb
temperature) and at the control setting
necessary to achieve a stable integrated
average temperature of 38 °F prior to
loading;
(3) Fully loading the commercial
refrigerator with 12-ounce beverage cans
maintained at 90 °F ±2 °F;
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66188
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(4) Determining the duration of pull
down (which must be 12 hours or less)
starting from closing the commercial
refrigerator door after completing the
12-ounce beverage can loading until the
integrated average temperature reaches
38 °F ±2 °F; and
(5) Determining an average stable
temperature of 38 °F by operating the
commercial refrigerator for an
additional 12 hours after initially
reaching 38 °F ±2 °F with no changes to
control settings, and determining an
integrated average temperature of 38 °F
±2 °F at the end of the 12-hour stability
period. 87 FR 39164, 39191.
The proposed product-specific
enforcement provisions are consistent
with the existing definition of ‘‘pulldown temperature application,’’ but
would provide additional clarity
regarding how DOE would determine
whether a commercial refrigerator could
be classified as such. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
product-specific enforcement provisions
regarding how DOE would determine
whether a model meets the pull-down
temperature application definition. 87
FR 39164, 39191. DOE also requested
data and comment on whether the
proposed product-specific enforcement
provisions sufficiently differentiate
pull-down temperature applications
from holding temperature applications.
Id.
AHRI commented that detailed
information regarding pull down of
‘‘full load’’ wasn’t available. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 9) As a result, AHRI believed this
proposal is in conflict with NSF
requirements. Id. AHRI cited DOE’s
slide deck used in an August 1, 2022,
webinar for the CRE test procedure,
noting two concerns with pull-down
temperature and enforcement actions.
Id.
AHRI commented by citing issue 24 (a
question on the request for comment for
pull-down temperature applications) to
ask whether DOE is referring only to the
category of pull-down CRE, or if DOE is
adding pull down to all categories for
enforcement. AHRI also asked if this
would allow for the randomized
placement of bottles during a legitimate
test procedure. Id. AHRI referred to
issue 56 related to certified volume
versus volume measurement to ask if
this will allow manufacturers to use
their discretion. Id.
The Joint Commenters stated their
support for the proposed test procedure
to verify pull-down temperature
performance. (Joint Commenters, No.
31, p. 3) The Joint Commenters noted
they had expressed previous support for
eliminating the pull-down temperature
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
CRE class. As discussed in their
comments to the preliminary TSD for
CRE standards, the Joint Commenters
now supported the proposed NOPR
amendment maintaining the pull-down
class as it would clarify how DOE
would determine whether a model is
appropriately certified as a pull-down
unit. Id.
NAMA expressed concern about the
pull-down temperature provision
because of the lack of specificity and
asked if the provision related only to
those products for which DOE had pulldown requirements or whether the
provision referred to all CRE equipment
that stored and cooled beverage cans/
bottles. (NAMA, No. 33, p. 2) NAMA
noted that large beverage companies had
requirements for pull down, based on
customer preference and sanitary
conditions for food items that must
reach 38 °F in 16 hours, not 12 hours.
Id. NAMA commented that the DOE
proposal would set up a conflicting set
of requirements as more and more bottle
coolers were used to store food in
addition to beverages, making 12 hours
a much shorter pull-down time. Id.
NAMA suggested that DOE harmonize
at 16 hours since the customers of its
manufacturers already had
specifications on pull down, adding that
manufacturers already must test to
determine pull down in 16 hours, and
additional testing to show an arbitrary
pull down at 12 hours was unnecessary
and unduly burdensome. Id.
NAMA additionally requested that
DOE develop specific test procedures
for placing cans/bottles into the cooler,
stating it was possible to obtain different
results with a cooler packed with every
conceivable space used and shelves
removed versus cans/bottles packed as
in a retail store; different results could
also be obtained with cans versus
bottles. (NAMA, No. 33, p. 2) NAMA
recommended that DOE use a glycol
liquid, as with the beverage vending
machine (BVM) test procedure. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting,
True commented that the subject of 12ounce cans will lead to some serious
discussions on loading them. (Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 53) True
stated these cans are very convenient to
load two or three high per shelf, and if
they are not single-loaded on a shelf,
there could be a situation in which the
middle cans are getting far less surface
area and are more difficult to cool
down. Id. True commented that some
specification is needed on how to load
these cans so this situation doesn’t
happen, stating that if someone put one
shelf in the bottom and stacked it to the
ceiling with cans, they would never
pass this test. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
The CA IOUs urged DOE to amend the
definition for ‘‘pull-down temperature
application’’ to specify ‘‘a blast chiller
or freezer’’ and exclude beverage
merchandisers, which in practice are
used in holding-temperature
applications. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 6)
The CA IOUs commented that in the
CRE industry, pull-down refrigeration
specifically means equipment capable of
rapidly lowering food temperature in a
food-safe manner and that only blast
chillers/freezers are considered to have
pull-down applications by industry
while beverage merchandizers are rated
as Vertical Closed Transparent Medium
Temperature (‘‘VCT.M’’) CRE and
designed for holding-temperature
applications. Id. The CA IOUs pointed
out that there will be no need to
establish a ‘‘pull-down’’ refrigeration
test method for VCT.M equipment if
DOE updates the definition for ‘‘pulldown temperature application’’ in
accordance with industry practice. Id.
The CA IOUs added that if DOE retains
the current definition for ‘‘pull-down
temperature applications,’’ DOE should
share data on what percentage of
operating hours are spent in ‘‘pull
down’’ versus ‘‘holding mode’’
operation compared to other CRE
considered ‘‘holding temperature
applications’’ and recommends that the
daily energy usage for these ‘‘pull-down
temperature applications’’ be weighted
by the percentage of time spent in each
mode. Id.
To clarify, the provisions proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR related to pulldown temperature applications are
specific to the procedures DOE would
follow for verifying claims of pull-down
temperature applications as defined in
EPCA and by DOE. DOE currently only
specifies standards for pull-down
temperature application equipment with
self-contained condensing units and
transparent doors. Manufacturers may
claim their equipment is for pull-down
temperature applications rather than
holding temperature applications. The
intent of the provisions proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR for pull-down
temperature applications is to ensure
appropriate application of DOE’s
definitions. Such testing would not be
necessary to verify claims of equipment
for holding temperature applications.
Blast chiller and blast freezer testing is
addressed separately in section III.C.3 of
this document.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed loading instructions
consistent with ASHRAE 72–2018R.
Additional instructions are not
necessary because these provisions
outline the process DOE will use to
determine appropriate equipment
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
category (i.e., manufacturers are not
required to conduct testing in
accordance with these provisions, but
may choose to do so to ensure
appropriate application of DOE’s
definitions).
In response to AHRI’s comment
regarding placement of bottles during a
test procedure and certified volume
versus volume measurement, this pulldown verification procedure would be
separate from the DOE test procedure in
appendix B and only represents the
process DOE would follow to verify
claims of pull-down temperature
applications.
Based on the definition of pull-down
temperature applications specified in
EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(D)) and
replicated in 10 CFR 431.62, loading is
for 12 ounce beverage cans only. The
EPCA definition specifies 12 hours or
less of pull-down time, so DOE is
maintaining that requirement in the
verification approach rather than
harmonizing with any 16-hour periods
used by manufacturers.
DOE is not requiring propylene glycol
to be used in the cans—such a solution
is not necessary because the operating
temperatures will not result in potential
freezing for other can solutions, like
water. DOE notes that DOE’s test
procedure for BVMs 21 does not require
propylene glycol solution either.
DOE recognizes that these provisions
do not follow NSF or standard industry
terminology; however, DOE is
maintaining the June 2022 NOPR
verification provisions for pull-down
temperature applications based on the
EPCA definition. The other provisions
regarding blast chillers and blast
freezers established in this final rule
clarify DOE consideration of equipment
in that category.
3. Blast Chillers and Blast Freezers
As stated, CRE is equipment that, in
part, is designed for holding
temperature applications. (42 U.S.C.
6311(9)(A)(vi)) EPCA defines ‘‘holding
temperature application’’ as use of
commercial refrigeration equipment
other than a pull-down temperature
application, except a blast chiller or
freezer. (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(B)) Per the
definition, ‘‘holding temperature
application’’ includes blast chillers and
blast freezers, even if such equipment
meets the criteria of ‘‘pull-down
temperature application.’’
In general, blast chillers and blast
freezers are CRE with solid doors
intended for the rapid temperature pull
down of hot-food products.
21 See
appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR part
431.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
Blast chiller and blast freezer
operation is typically characterized by
three cycles. The first cycle pulls the air
temperature within the unit down until
it reaches a target air temperature set by
the manufacturer (e.g., 0 °F for blast
chillers and ¥28 °F for blast freezers).
This target air temperature within the
unit is maintained until the food
reaches a certain temperature, set by the
manufacturer, as measured by the unit’s
temperature probe. Once the food
reaches a certain temperature, the
second cycle begins by allowing the air
temperature within the unit to drift up
until it reaches the same temperature as
the target food temperature (e.g., 38 °F
for blast chillers and 0 °F for blast
freezers). Once the food reaches the
target food temperature, the last cycle
begins by proceeding to a holding
pattern during which the blast chiller or
blast freezer behaves similarly to a
typical CRE—i.e., cycling the
refrigeration system to maintain a target
temperature.
Within the general sequence of
operations, many blast chillers and blast
freezers provide users with options to
alter the specific pull-down profile
based on the food load. For example, a
‘‘soft chill’’ mode may provide a slower
temperature pull down intended for
more delicate food, as compared to a
‘‘hard chill’’ mode that cools food as
quickly as possible.
ASHRAE has established a standard
project committee (‘‘SPC’’) to consider
the development of an industry test
standard for this equipment: SPC 220P,
Method of Testing for Rating Small
Commercial Blast Chillers, ChillerFreezers, and Freezers (‘‘ASHRAE
220’’).22 DOE is participating in this
process and is aware of a draft test
standard underway that contains certain
definitions, requirements, and
procedure. DOE will consider the final
version of the SPC 220P standard if
available during future test procedure
rulemakings.
a. Definitions
DOE does not define blast chiller or
blast freezer. The California Code of
Regulations provides the following
definition for a blast chiller:
• Blast chiller—a refrigerator
designed to cool food products from
140 °F to 40 °F within four hours. (CCR,
Title 20, section 1602)
The SPC for ASHRAE 220 has
provided the following tentative
definitions for blast chiller and blast
freezer, and a related term:
22 See www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/
standards-and-guidelines/project-committeeinterim-meetings.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66189
• Blast chiller—a rapid pull-down
cooler designed to cool food to a safe
refrigerated temperature (typically
between 32 °F and 41 °F), but not freeze
it.
• Blast chiller-freezer: a rapid pulldown cooler designed to function as
both a blast chiller and blast freezer
depending on user inputs.
• Blast freezer—a rapid pull-down
cooler designed to freeze food.
• Rapid pull-down cooler—
commercial refrigeration equipment
intended for the rapid intermediate
chilling or freezing of hot food products
within a specified time period and
holding the food at a safe temperature
when not engaged in the chilling or
freezing process.
NSF 7–2019 provides the following
performance specification for rapid
pull-down refrigerators and freezers:
• Rapid pull-down refrigerators and
freezers—capable of reducing the
internal temperature of their contents
from 135 °F to 40 °F within a period of
4 hours or in the time specified by the
manufacturer, whichever is less.
Based on the comments from
interested parties and DOE’s review of
existing State definitions, tentative and
established industry definitions, and
equipment available on the market, DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022
NOPR that the characteristic of blast
chillers and blast freezers that
differentiate this equipment from other
categories of CRE are the oversized
refrigeration systems that allow for the
rapid temperature pull-down of hot food
products within a specified time period.
87 FR 39164, 39192. Blast chillers and
blast freezers specifically differ from
other types of CRE intended for pulldown temperature applications because
of the intended product (hot food
product for blast chillers and blast
freezers versus 12-ounce beverage cans
for pull-down temperature
applications), initial product
temperature (minimum 135 °F for blast
chillers and blast freezers versus 90 °F
for pull-down temperature
applications), and intended product
storage duration (minimal storage
duration for blast chillers and blast
freezers versus long-term storage
duration for pull-down temperature
applications).
As discussed, blast chillers and blast
freezers provide rapid cooling to ensure
hot food is quickly pulled down to safe
refrigerated storage temperatures. In the
June 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively
identified the capability to pull down
hot food from 135 °F to 40 °F within 4
hours as the primary operating
characteristic of blast chillers and blast
freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39192. This is
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66190
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
consistent with the performance
specification for rapid pull-down
refrigerators and freezers specified in
NSF 7–2019, the California definition,
and tentative definitions provided by
the SPC for ASHRAE 220. Although
DOE did not propose to test blast
chillers and blast freezers according to
NSF 7–2019, as discussed in the
following section, DOE expects that any
blast chiller or blast freezer meeting the
NSF 7–2019 performance specification
would be capable of pulling down hot
food from 135 °F to 40 °F within 4 hours
when tested as proposed in the NOPR.
87 FR 39164, 39192. As discussed in
section III.C.1.b, DOE is proposing a
lower ambient temperature condition
than the ambient temperature condition
specified in NSF 7–2019.
To delineate blast chillers and blast
freezers from other categories of CRE,
including from CRE designed for pulldown temperature applications, DOE
proposed in the NOPR to define the
terms ‘‘blast chiller’’ and ‘‘blast freezer.’’
87 FR 39164, 39192. DOE proposed
definitions for these terms that combine
parts of existing definitions, add
language for consistency with DOE’s
existing CRE definitions, and include
further specificity regarding the
characteristics of this equipment. Id.
Specifically, DOE proposed to add the
following definitions to 10 CFR 431.62:
‘‘Blast chiller’’ means commercial
refrigeration equipment, other than a
blast freezer, that is capable of the rapid
temperature pull-down of hot food
products from 135 °F to 40 °F within a
period of 4 hours, when measured
according to the DOE test procedure. Id.
‘‘Blast freezer’’ means commercial
refrigeration equipment that is capable
of the rapid temperature pull down of
hot food products from 135 °F to 40 °F
within a period of 4 hours and capable
of achieving a final product temperature
of less than 32 °F when measured
according to the DOE test procedure. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed definitions of
‘‘blast chiller’’ and ‘‘blast freezer.’’ 87
FR 39164, 39192.
NEEA commented that it supports the
new definitions DOE proposed for
‘‘blast chiller’’ and ‘‘blast freezer,’’
stating that these equipment types have
unique applications compared to other
CRE, and these definitions allowed
consideration (potential standards),
categorization (equipment classes), and
testing of this equipment separate from
other CRE. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
AHRI commented to recommend that
DOE align its definitions of ‘‘blast
chiller’’ and ‘‘blast freezer’’ with the
SPC language for ASHRAE 220
(‘‘Method of Testing for Rating Small
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
Commercial Blast Chillers, Chiller
Freezers, and Freezers’’) for the
proposed definitions of ‘‘blast chiller’’
and ‘‘blast freezer’’ (see bulleted
language). (AHRI, No. 38, p. 9)
• ‘‘Blast chiller—a rapid pull-down
cooler designed to cool food to a safe
refrigerated temperature (typically
between 32 °F and 41 °F), but not freeze
it.
• Blast freezer—a rapid pull-down
cooler designed to freeze food.
• Rapid pull-down cooler—
commercial refrigeration equipment
intended for the rapid intermediate
chilling or freezing of hot food products
within a specified time period and
holding the food at a safe temperature
when not engaged in the chilling or
freezing process.’’ Id.
AHRI commented that alignment with
ASTM, ASHRAE, or other established
standards would also be acceptable. Id.
AHRI further urged DOE to go through
the standard review process and not
attempt to address this through either an
amendment to the DOE test procedure
or development of a new standard. Id.
DOE considered available industry
definitions when developing the
proposals in the June 2022 NOPR,
including the definitions in the draft
version of ASHRAE 220. ASHRAE 220
has not published a public review draft
and is still in draft form and DOE is not
aware of any updates to the definitions
considered in developing the proposal
in the June 2022 NOPR. Therefore, DOE
is adopting the definitions proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR. DOE will consider
any published standard when available
during any future test procedure
rulemakings.
b. Test Methods
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
reviewed the ASHRAE 220 test method
in development to determine the
suitability of the test method for a DOE
test procedure. The draft ASHRAE 220
test method determines the pull-down
energy consumption per pound of food
product, hot food product temperature
pull-down performance, and other
performance factors for self-contained
commercial blast chillers and blast
freezers that have a refrigerated volume
of up to 500 ft3. DOE acknowledges that
the ASHRAE 220 test method has
certain deviations from DOE’s current
CRE test procedures and ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata.
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that test procedures
that account for the pull-down
operation of blast chillers and blast
freezers are appropriate. 87 FR 39164,
39193. The primary function of blast
chillers and blast freezers is the rapid
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
cooling of hot food product and
minimal storage duration rather than
long-term storage duration. DOE has
considered the draft ASHRAE 220
standard as the basis for many of the test
procedure proposals.
DOE has also reviewed the ISO
22042:2021 test standard. Many of the
provisions in the ISO 22042:2021
method are similar to those included in
the draft ASHRAE 220 (e.g., ambient
temperature, starting food load
temperature, final blast freezer
temperature). DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
the provisions in draft ASHRAE 220
provide a more representative basis for
testing (e.g., blast chiller target
temperature of 38 °F rather than 50 °F)
and would limit test variability as
compared to ISO 22042:2021 (e.g., using
a well-defined food simulator test load
rather than actual food and defining
door openings for pan loading). 87 FR
39164, 39193. DOE also participated in
ENERGY STAR’s specification review
process to establish version 5.0
Eligibility Criteria for commercial
refrigerators and freezers. ENERGY
STAR considered including blast
chillers and blast freezers as part of the
version 5.0 Eligibility Criteria,23 but did
not include them in the specification
due to the lack of a standardized test
procedure.
Consistent with the tentative scope of
ASHRAE 220, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR test procedures for selfcontained commercial blast chillers and
blast freezers that have a refrigerated
volume of up to 500 ft3. 87 FR 39164,
39193. DOE proposed to incorporate
certain provisions from draft ASHRAE
220 and certain deviations, as discussed
in the following sections. Id. DOE
acknowledged that, to the extent
feasible, ASHRAE 220 will likely
harmonize with requirements included
in ASHRAE 72–2018R. Id. For this
reason, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to refer ASHRAE 72–2018R for
certain test requirements rather than
using the approach in the ongoing draft
ASHRAE 220. Id. The intent of these
proposals was to harmonize with the
eventual ASHRAE 220 final test
standard approach.
To avoid confusion regarding testing
of other CRE, DOE also proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to establish the test
procedure for blast chillers and blast
freezers as a new appendix D to subpart
C of 10 CFR part 431. 87 FR 39164,
23 See the Version 5.0 Specification and Test
Method Discussion Guide, December 2020, at
www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/
document/ENERGY%20STAR%20Commercial%20
Refrigerators%20and%20Freezers%20V5.0%20
Discussion%20Guide_0.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
39193. DOE also proposed to refer to the
proposed appendix D as the test
procedure for blast chillers and blast
freezers in 10 CFR 431.64. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to establish
test procedures for self-contained
commercial blast chillers and blast
freezers that have a refrigerated volume
of up to 500 ft3.
The Joint Commenters stated their
support for establishing test procedures
for blast chillers and freezers, noting
that DOE had tentatively identified the
capability to pull down hot food from
135 °F to 40 °F within 4 hours as the
primary operating characteristic of blast
chillers and blast freezers. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 3)
NEEA stated its support for DOE’s
proposal to establish test procedures for
new and newly defined categories of
CRE, and restated its recommendation
from the 2021 CRE TP RFI that DOE
establish test methods for new CRE
product types, including blast chillers
and blast freezers. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
Continental commented that it
supports the NOPR proposal to add new
test procedures for product categories
such as blast chillers and blast freezers.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 1) Continental
noted, however, that attempting to
develop test procedures that combine
aspects of different existing industry
standards and introduce significant
modifications is not sufficient or
appropriate for this type of rulemaking.
Id. Continental recommended that DOE
work with ASHRAE, AHRI, ASTM, and
other stakeholders to develop suitable
test procedures for any additional
product categories so that new or
modified industry standards are
comprehensive, reliable, and repeatable
for many equipment types, with
minimal additional testing burden. Id.
The Joint Commenters stated that
DOE proposed to add test procedures
only for self-contained commercial blast
chillers and freezers with a refrigerated
volume of up to 500 ft3, and that while
the Joint Commenters understood that
most of the blast chillers/freezers market
consists of self-contained equipment,
remote condensing blast chillers/
freezers are available on the market;
thus, the Joint Commenters encouraged
DOE to consider establishing test
procedures for remote condensing blast
chillers/freezers as part of a future
rulemaking. (Joint Commenters, No. 31,
p. 3)
The CA IOUs also stated their support
for DOE’s decision to limit scope to selfcontained blast chillers/freezers, which
represents the vast majority of the
market. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 6). In the
August 2022 public meeting, the CA
IOUs commented that ASHRAE 220 was
developed for blast chillers up to 500
ft3, but that self-contained blast chillers
would be significantly smaller than that
and most likely would have the volume
to accommodate a single rolling rack.
(Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p.
48)
Consistent with draft version of
ASHRAE 220 and the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE is establishing a test procedure for
self-contained blast chillers and blast
freezers only. In response to
Continental’s comment, DOE has
harmonized the June 2022 NOPR and
the test procedure established in this
final rule with the expected industry
test method to the extent possible. DOE
will consider harmonizing with any
available industry test method,
including regarding expanded scope, in
future test procedure rulemakings.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to incorporate
certain provisions from the draft
ASHRAE 220 and certain deviations for
the blast chillers and blast freezers test
procedures. 87 FR 39164, 39193.
The Joint Commenters commented
that they support DOE’s proposed
changes regarding the proposed test
methods for additional equipment
categories, including blast chillers and
freezers. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p.
1)
The Joint Commenters added that
they support the proposed test methods
that are consistent with ASHRAE 220
and include pre-cooling the blast
chiller’s or blast freezer’s cabinet to a
pre-set or controlled operating
66191
temperature, loading of hot food pans
into the blast chiller or blast freezer, and
pull down of the hot food pans to the
target temperature. (Joint Commenters,
No. 31, p. 3) The Joint Commenters
stated that this method captured energy
usage during pull-down operation, as a
representative method for estimating the
energy usage of blast chillers/freezers.
Id.
True commented that DOE should not
reinvent the wheel by referencing NSF
or ASHRAE for blast chiller and freezer
cabinets for professional use. (True, No.
28, p. 7) True commented that the
reference standard for blast chillers and
blast freezers should be ISO 22042:2021
since these products were developed in
Europe and are being evaluated for the
EU EcoDirective energy labeling
program. Id.
As discussed in the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE has reviewed ISO 22042:2021.
Many provisions are similar to those
included in the draft version of
ASHRAE 220 (e.g., ambient
temperature, starting food load
temperature, final blast freezer
temperature). However, DOE has
determined that other provisions
included in the draft ASHRAE 220 and
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR are
more representative of blast chiller and
blast freezer operation (e.g., blast chiller
target temperature of 38 °F rather than
50 °F) and would limit test variability as
compared to ISO 22042:2021 (e.g., using
a well-defined food simulator test load
rather than actual food and defining
door openings for pan loading).
Therefore, DOE is establishing the test
procedure for blast chillers and blast
freezers based on the draft of ASHRAE
220, and as included in appendix D to
subpart C of 10 CFR part 431.
Instruments
DOE reviewed the latest version of the
draft ASHRAE 220 standard and
compared it to ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata, as shown in Table III.2, to
determine appropriate instrument
requirements for blast chiller and blast
freezer testing.
TABLE III.2—INSTRUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS COMPARISON BETWEEN ASHRAE 220 AND ASHRAE 72–2022 WITH
ERRATA
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Calibration .......................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
ASHRAE 220
ASHRAE 72–2022 with errata
Instruments shall be calibrated traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology (‘‘NIST’’)
standards annually..
Measurements from the instruments shall be traceable to primary or secondary standards calibrated
by NIST (or other rating standards). Instruments
shall be recalibrated on regular intervals that do
not exceed the intervals prescribed by the instrument manufacturer, and with an interval no longer
than 1 year.
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66192
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE III.2—INSTRUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS COMPARISON BETWEEN ASHRAE 220 AND ASHRAE 72–2022 WITH
ERRATA—Continued
Temperature ....................................
Time ................................................
Energy .............................................
Electrical supply potential and supply frequency.
ASHRAE 220
ASHRAE 72–2022 with errata
Accuracy of temperature measurements shall be
within ±1.4 °F. Accuracy of temperature-difference
measurements shall be within ±0.2 °F. Temperature measurements not specified shall be made
per ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 41.1.2.
Time measurements shall be made with an accuracy of ±0.5% of the time period being measured.
Electrical energy measurements shall be made with
instruments accurate to ±2% of the quantity
measured..
Required Accuracy: ±1.4 °F. Temperature measurement methods and instruments shall be applied
and used in accordance with ASHRAE Standard
41.1–2020.
None specified ...........................................................
Generally, ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata has the same instrumentation
requirements as draft ASHRAE 220.
DOE acknowledges that ASHRAE 220
intends to harmonize with ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata to the extent possible
to maintain consistent test requirements
across similar equipment types. Because
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata provides
greater detail on the instrumentation
requirements, and DOE expects that the
final ASHRAE 220 standard will likely
adopt the ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
requirements, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to reference section 4 and
the relevant portions of appendix A of
ASHRAE 72–2018R for blast chiller and
blast freezer instrumentation
requirements. ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata provides additional requirements
for instruments that are not necessary
for testing blast chillers and blast
freezers (e.g., air velocity, radiant heat,
dry-bulb temperature gradient, and test
chamber illuminance). DOE proposed in
Required Accuracy: ±0.5% of time period measured.
Required Accuracy: must be measured with an integrating watt-hour meter with accuracy ±2.0% of
the quantity measured and graduated to 0.01
kWh.
Required Accuracy: ±2.0% of the quantity measured.
the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate
requirements only for instruments
necessary to test blast chillers and blast
freezers (i.e., those listed in Table III.2).
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to reference
section 4 and the relevant portions of
appendix A of ASHRAE 72–2018R for
instrumentation requirements for the
blast chiller and blast freezer test
procedures. 87 FR 39164, 39194.
AHRI commented cautioning DOE
against referencing the ASHRAE 220
standard with this test procedure, as it
would create inconsistencies to
reference ASHRAE 220 and ASHRAE
72–2022 simultaneously. (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 9)
DOE is maintaining the approach
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, based
on the draft version of ASHRAE 220. As
ASHRAE 220 is not yet available, DOE
is not incorporating that standard by
reference. DOE is adopting the test
procedure for blast chillers and blast
freezers in appendix D and
incorporating by reference the relevant
sections of ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata. DOE recognizes that certain
additional requirements are pulled from
other standards, but including multiple
incorporations by reference as
appropriate ensures consistent testing
and clarifies where test requirements are
harmonized across test procedures.
Test Conditions
Blast chillers and blast freezers are
typically intended for use only in
commercial kitchens, as compared to
other categories of CRE, which are
typically used in either commercial
kitchens or in customer-facing
environments.
ASHRAE 220 specifies different test
conditions for testing blast chillers and
blast freezers compared to the current
DOE CRE test procedures, as illustrated
in Table III.3.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
TABLE III.3—AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY TEST CONDITIONS COMPARISON
ASHRAE 220
DOE’s current CRE test procedure
Dry Bulb ..................
Measured at point TA; ...........................................................
Average: 86.0 °F ±1.8°F ........................................................
Individual: 86.0 °F ±3.6°F .......................................................
Humidity ..................
No test condition specified ....................................................
Measured at point TA for open
CRE and TB for closed CRE;
Average: 75.2 °F ±1.8°F
Individual: 75.2 °F ±3.6°F.
Wet Bulb measured at point TA for open CRE and TB for
closed CRE;
Average: 64.4 °F ±1.8 °F
Individual: 64.4 °F ±3.6 °F
The dry bulb is required to be
measured in ASHRAE 220 at the same
point (TA) as specified in section 6.1 of
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata. ASHRAE
220 does not specify the type of
thermocouple to be used when taking
dry-bulb measurements. ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata specifies that the
thermocouples used to measure drybulb temperatures shall be in thermal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
contact with the center of 1.6 oz.
cylindrical brass slug with a diameter
and height of 0.75 in. The brass slugs
shall be placed at least 0.50 in. from any
heat-conducting surface.
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that the test conditions
specified in ASHRAE 220 are more
representative of actual blast chiller and
blast freezer operation as compared to
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the existing CRE test procedure
conditions. 87 FR 39164, 39194. As
stated, blast chillers are typically only
used in commercial kitchens, whereas
other conventional CRE are used in a
range of environments.
DOE recognizes that harmonizing test
conditions across different CRE
categories may provide users with
measures of energy use that can be
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
compared on a consistent basis.
However, given the particular
application of blast chillers and blast
freezers in rapidly lowering the
temperature of hot food products, it is
not expected that other CRE would
serve as a substitute for blast chillers
and blast freezers (and vice versa).
Moreover, as indicated by a 2012
ASHRAE report,24 the test conditions in
the draft ASHRAE 220 are more
representative for blast chillers and blast
freezers than the test conditions
applicable to CRE generally.
Because blast chillers and blast
freezers experience different ambient
conditions than other types of CRE, and
because the proposed test procedures
for blast chillers and blast freezers
would use a different energy use and
capacity metric, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to require the
representative dry-bulb temperatures
specified in the tentative ASHRAE 220
draft. 87 FR 39164, 39194. DOE also
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
incorporate section 6.1 and Figure 6 of
ASHRAE 72–2018R to specify the point
TA where the dry-bulb temperatures are
to be measured and to specify the drybulb thermocouple setup. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to require the
dry-bulb temperatures specified in the
tentative ASHRAE 220 draft and
incorporate section 6.1 and Figure 6 of
ASHRAE 72–2018R to specify the point
TA where the dry-bulb temperatures are
to be measured and the type of
thermocouple to use when measuring
dry bulb in the blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that it would be
appropriate to measure dry-bulb
temperatures in blast chiller and blast
freezer test procedures using ASHRAE
Standard 220 where necessary. (AHRI,
No. 38, p. 10)
The CA IOUs stated their support for
DOE’s proposal to test blast chillers/
freezers at an ambient temperature of
86 °F where other CRE categories are
tested at 75 °F because blast chillers and
freezers are typically only used in
commercial kitchens, and as such, 86 °F
is more representative than 75 °F for
blast chiller/freezer operation. (CA
IOUs, No. 36, p. 6)
DOE is maintaining the ambient test
conditions of 86 °F based on the draft
version of ASHRAE 220 and as
supported in comments. DOE recognizes
that this ambient condition is different
from the condition used for testing other
CRE categories, and that DOE has
24 ASHRAE RP–1469, ‘‘Thermal Comfort in
Commercial Kitchens,’’ Final Report, January 6,
2012, page 24.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
intended to harmonize conditions when
possible to ensure consistent testing
across CRE categories. However, the
metrics for blast chiller and blast freezer
testing are sufficiently different from
other CRE testing (i.e., kWh/day) that
comparisons of energy use cannot be
made across these CRE categories, so
there is little benefit in harmonizing the
ambient test conditions for blast chillers
and blast freezers.
ASHRAE 220 specifies the same
requirements for the power supply,
voltage, and frequency as ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata. Specifically, ASHRAE
220 specifies that the rated voltage be
maintained at an average of ±2.0 percent
over the duration of the test and
individual recorded voltages be within
±4.0 percent of the rated voltage.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the rated
frequency be maintained within ±1.0
percent. Because ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata specifies the same
requirements for voltage and frequency,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to incorporate the portions of appendix
A in ASHRAE 72–2018R, which specify
the requirements for voltage and
frequency.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to incorporate
the portions of appendix A in ASHRAE
72–2018R that specify the requirements
for voltage and frequency in the blast
chillers and blast freezers test
procedures. 87 FR 39164, 39194.
AHRI recommended that the matter of
adopting portions of ASHRAE 72–2018R
concerning voltage and frequency
requirements in blast chiller and blast
freezer test procedures should be taken
to the ASHRAE 220 committee for
review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
10)
As stated in the June 2022 NOPR, the
proposed conditions were consistent
with those considered for the draft of
ASHRAE 220. Therefore, DOE is
maintaining the reference to ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata, consistent with the
June 2022 NOPR.
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
specifies additional test conditions that
ASHRAE 220 does not specify. These
include requirements for air currents,
radiant heat, dry-bulb temperature
gradient, and test chamber illuminance.
DOE expects that these requirements in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata are
primarily intended to limit variability of
testing for CRE without doors or with
transparent doors. DOE is only aware of
blast chillers and blast freezers with
solid doors, and therefore tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
the additional test conditions in
ASHRAE 72–2018R are not necessary
for blast chiller and blast freezer testing,
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66193
consistent with the draft of ASHRAE
220. 87 FR 39164, 39194, 39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on whether any additional test
conditions are appropriate for blast
chiller and blast freezer testing,
including those specified in sections 6.2
and 6.3 and appendix A in ASHRAE
72–2018R. 87 FR 39164, 39195.
DOE received no additional
comments on this topic in response to
the June 2022 NOPR, and therefore is
establishing the test conditions as
proposed.
Test Setup
The ASHRAE 220 draft specifies
certain test unit setup instructions for
components and accessories, electrical
loads, condensate pan heaters and
pumps, and crankcase heaters that are
based on sections 5.3, 5.3.1, 5.3.5, and
5.3.15 in ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata.
DOE notes that sections 5.3 and 5.3.5 of
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata contain
minor differences from the draft
ASHRAE 220. Section 5.3 of ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata refers to installing
all necessary components and
accessories prior to loading the storage
and display areas with test simulators
and filler material, whereas ASHRAE
220 does not use test simulators and
filler material. Section 5.3.5 of ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata refers to a selfcontained refrigerator instead of a blast
chiller or blast freezer and does not
specify that the condensate pan shall be
emptied before testing (this instruction
is provided in section 7.2.3 of ASRHAE
72–2022 with Errata) and that if a
condensate heater is used during the
test, it shall be recorded.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the
manufacturer’s recommendation on
clearances shall be followed on all sides
with a minimum of 3 feet on the door(s)
opening sides. The current DOE CRE
test procedures do not specify any
clearance requirements. Section 5.2 and
appendix A of ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata specify that there must be greater
than or equal to 59.1 in. ±1.0 in. of
clearance from the front of the unit
under test and a vertical partition or
wall shall be located at the minimum
clearance, ±0.5 in., as specified in the
installation instructions. Section 5.2
also provides that if the installation
instructions do not provide a minimum
clearance, the vertical partition or wall
shall be located 4.0 ±0.5 in. from the
sides or rear of the cabinet and extend
at least 12.0 ±0.5 in. beyond each side
of the cabinet from the floor to not less
than 12.0 ±0.5 in. above the top of the
cabinet.
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that because ASHRAE
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66194
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
72–2018R provides similar, equal, or
greater detail on the installation and
settings, clearance, and components and
accessories requirements as compared to
the draft of ASHRAE 220, the ASHRAE
72–2018R instructions are appropriate
for DOE testing. 87 FR 39164, 39195.
DOE also acknowledges that, to the
extent feasible, ASHRAE 220 intends to
harmonize with ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata requirements, and therefore will
likely adopt similar instructions in the
final version of the standard. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
incorporate sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3
(including sub-sections 5.3.1 to 5.3.17),
and the relevant portions of appendix A
of ASHRAE 72–2018R for testing blast
chillers and blast freezers with the
following deviations:
• The term ‘‘refrigerator’’ shall
instead refer to ‘‘blast chiller’’ or ‘‘blast
freezer,’’ as applicable. 87 FR 39164,
39195.
• For section 5.3 of ASHRAE 72–
2018R, replace ‘‘all necessary
components and accessories shall be
installed prior to loading the storage and
display areas with test simulators and
filler material’’ with ‘‘all necessary
components and accessories shall be
installed prior to precooling the unit
under test.’’ Id.
• Section 5.3.5 would be included
with the additional requirement that the
condensate pan be emptied before
precooling the unit under test. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to incorporate
sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 (including
subsections 5.3.1 to 5.3.17), and the
relevant portions of appendix A of
ASHRAE 72–2018R, with the proposed
deviations, for the blast chillers and
blast freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that it
recommended the matter of adopting
portions of ASHRAE 72–2018R
concerning blast chiller and blast freezer
test procedures should be taken to the
ASHRAE 220 committee for review and
approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 10)
As stated, DOE expects that ASHRAE
220 will harmonize with the ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata requirements for
test setup when appropriate, and is
adopting the ASHRE 72–2022 with
Errata requirements, with deviations, as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
Appendix A of ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata specifies electrical
measurements at the equipment
terminals. ASHRAE 220 specifies the
following electrical measurement
locations: at the plug-in location for
units with a standard wall plug, or at
the terminal box for units that are hard
wired to the building electrical system.
Because the electrical measurement
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
location in appendix A of ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata is similar to ASHRAE
220, DOE expects that the ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata approach is the likely
final approach to be used in the
eventual final ASHRAE 220 standard.
For that reason, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to incorporate the
relevant portions of appendix A of
ASHRAE 72–2018R for the electrical
measurement locations. 87 FR 39164,
39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to incorporate
the relevant portions of appendix A of
ASHRAE 72–2018R for the electrical
measurement locations for the blast
chillers and blast freezers test
procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that it
recommended the matter of adopting
portions of ASHRAE 72–2018R
concerning electrical measurement
locations in blast chiller and blast
freezer test procedures should be taken
to the ASHRAE 220 committee for
review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
10)
As stated, DOE expects that ASHRAE
220 will harmonize with the ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata requirements for
electrical measurement locations, and is
therefore adopting the ASHRE 72–2022
with Errata requirements, as proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR.
Capacity and Loading
ASHRAE 220 provides instructions
for measuring the gross refrigerated
volume of blast chillers and blast
freezers. The gross refrigerated volume
is calculated by multiplying the internal
length, width, and height of the cabinet
excluding panels and space occupied by
the evaporator or evaporator fan.
Appendix C of AHRI 1200–2023
specifies instructions for determining
the refrigerated volume of display
merchandisers and storage cabinets.
DOE reviewed the instructions in AHRI
1200–2023 for determining refrigerated
volume and determined that the
instructions can be applied to blast
chillers and blast freezers because of the
similar construction of these CRE. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
refer to AHRI 1200–202X for measuring
the refrigerated volume of blast chillers
and blast freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to reference
AHRI 1200–202X for measuring the
refrigerated volume of blast chillers and
blast freezers. Id.
AHRI stated its support for the
proposal to reference AHRI 1200–202X
for measuring the refrigerated volume of
blast chillers and freezers. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 10)
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
DOE is maintaining the measurement
of volume per AHRI 1200–2023
consistent with the June 2022 NOPR.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the
standard product vessel shall be a 12 in.
by 20 in. by 2.5 in. 22 gauge or heavier
and 300 series stainless steel pan.
ASHRAE 220 states that if the test unit
is not capable of holding the standard
product pan, the manufacturer’s
recommended pan size is used,
conforming as closely as possible to the
standard product load. Based on a
review of blast chillers and blast
freezers available on the market, DOE
observed that all units are intended for
use with food pans, and nearly all units
available can accommodate the
specified standard pan sizes. DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022
NOPR that the pans as specified in
ASHRAE 220 are representative of
typical use and DOE proposed to
incorporate the standard product pan
specifications included in the draft of
ASHRAE 220. 87 FR 39164, 39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to incorporate
the standard product pan specifications
in ASHRAE 220 for the blast chillers
and blast freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI stated its support for the
proposal to incorporate the standard
product pan specification in ASHRAE
220 for the blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures. (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 11)
DOE is maintaining the standard
product pan specifications as proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the
manufacturer’s recommended maximum
12 in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. pan capacity
should be used for testing. DOE has
reviewed the ASHRAE 220
specifications and equipment available
on the market. Based on DOE’s review,
it was determined in the NOPR that
additional specifications may be needed
to determine how many standard
product pans are used in the test unit.
87 FR 39164, 39195. The number of
standard product pans that would be
used for testing is dependent on the
specified product capacity of the test
unit based on food weight. The
ASHRAE 220 committee tentatively
determined that having a uniform food
simulator thickness across all standard
product pans is important for repeatable
and comparable results, manufacturer
design parameters, and consistency with
European blast chiller and blast freezer
testing requirements.25 The ASHRAE
220 committee tentatively concluded
that a uniform food simulator thickness
of 2 in. in the standard product pan (i.e.,
25 See
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
ISO 22042:2021.
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
filled to within 0.5 in. of the top of the
pan) is appropriate. Based on this
conclusion, the number of pans required
for testing blast chillers and blast
freezers would be determined by the
number of standard product pans filled
with the standard food simulator load to
2 in. deep that can fit in the blast chiller
or blast freezer without exceeding the
manufacturer’s recommended capacity.
Because this approach could potentially
require the tested capacity to be smaller
than the manufacturer’s stated capacity,
if the stated capacity is not evenly
divisible by the number of pans, the
ASHRAE 220 committee considered
allowing for one additional pan that has
a thickness less than 2 in., which would
make up the difference to meet the
manufacturer’s rated capacity, but that
this additional pan would not require
temperature measurement. Based on the
ASHRAE 220 committee approach, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that
the number of pans required for testing
blast chillers and blast freezers be
determined by the number of standard
product pans filled to 2 in. deep with
food simulator product that can be
loaded into the blast chiller or blast
freezer without exceeding the
manufacturer’s stated food load capacity
by weight, plus one additional standard
product pan, if needed, to meet the
manufacturer’s stated food load
capacity.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed method to
determine the number of pans required
for testing blast chillers and blast
freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39196.
AHRI recommended that the matter of
using ASHRAE 72–2018R to determine
the number of pans required for testing
blast chillers and blast freezers should
be taken to the ASHRAE 220 committee
for review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 11)
DOE notes that ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata is not used to determine the
number of pans required for testing blast
chillers and blast freezers. DOE is
adopting the approach proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR, which is consistent
with the expected ASHRAE 220
approach.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the tested
product capacity is determined based on
loading the test unit with the maximum
number of pans with food product up to
the manufacturer’s recommended
maximum food product weight capacity.
The food product weight does not
include the weight of the pans.
The ASHRAE 220 committee
determined that blast chiller and blast
freezer capacity based on food product
weight is relevant in addition to
refrigerated volume because the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
throughput of food product by weight is
the primary function provided to users,
as compared to long-term refrigerated
storage volume for typical CRE. Blast
chillers and blast freezers with the same
volume may have different pull-down
capacities by weight depending on the
design of the cooling system.
DOE expects that manufacturers
specify capacity by food weight based
on the maximum food load that can be
loaded into the blast chiller or blast
freezer while meeting the performance
requirement of NSF 7–2019. DOE
reviewed the ASHRAE 220
specifications and equipment available
on the market and tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
additional specifications may be needed
to determine the product capacity used
during the test. DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that when determining
the product capacity, all manufacturer
literature that is included with the unit
would be reviewed, and the largest
product capacity stated in the literature
would be used. 87 FR 39164, 39196. If
the unit is able to operate as both a blast
chiller and a blast freezer in different
operating modes and the literature
specifies different product capacities for
blast chilling and blast freezing, the
largest capacity stated for the respective
operating mode during the test would be
used.
If no product capacity is stated in the
manufacturer literature, DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR that the product
capacity be represented by the
maximum number of standard pans that
can fit in the test unit with each pan
filled 2 in. deep with product,
consistent with the ASHRAE 220
approach, with capacity determined as
the sum of the food weights within the
individual pans loaded for testing. 87
FR 39164, 39196. As discussed further
in a subsequent section, DOE proposed
use of a food simulator. Id. The tested
capacity would not include the weight
of the pans, temperature sensors, or
wires. If, upon testing, a blast chiller or
blast freezer with no stated product
capacity is not capable of pulling down
temperatures from 135 °F to 40 °F within
a period of 4 hours with the load
specified in the proposed test
procedure, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR that one pan be removed
until the unit achieves the specified
pull-down operation. 87 FR 39164,
39196.
To ensure repeatability of testing,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that the tested capacity (determined as
the sum of the food weights for
individual pans loaded for testing) be
within ±5 percent or ±2 lb of the rated
capacity, whichever is less. 87 FR
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66195
39164, 39196. DOE acknowledged that
the actual weight of food simulator may
be slightly different in each pan because
each pan may not be loaded with food
simulator to the exact same specified
thickness. Specifying a tolerance on the
overall tested capacity would ensure
that the total food load by weight is
consistent from test to test.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to determine
the tested product capacity for the blast
chillers and blast freezers test
procedures. 87 FR 39164, 39196.
AHRI recommended that any
proposed changes be brought to the
ASHRAE 220 committee for review and
approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
As stated, a final version of ASHRAE
220 has not been published. DOE has
harmonized with the expected ASHRAE
220 requirements to the extent feasible.
Therefore, DOE has adopted the
provisions as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR regarding determining blast
chiller and blast freezer capacity.
ASHRAE 220 specifies where to place
the standard product pans in the blast
chiller or blast freezer if a full load of
pans is not needed to meet the
manufacturer’s stated capacity.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that if there are
fewer pans than there are rack spaces in
the unit, the pans shall be placed evenly
in the unit with top and bottom shelves
occupied. If not all shelves are occupied
by pans, the pan locations shall be
recorded. The ASHRAE 220 committee
has also discussed specifying that pans
would be loaded without pans nesting
on each other and without touching the
top and the bottom of the cabinet.
DOE reviewed the ASHRAE 220
specifications and equipment available
on the market. Based on DOE’s review,
DOE tentatively determined that
additional specifications may be needed
to determine where to place the
standard product pans. DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR that once the
number of standard product pans
needed for the test has been determined,
the pans should be spaced evenly
throughout each vertical column of rack
positions in the test unit without the
pans touching any other pans and
without the pans touching the top and
the bottom of the cabinet. 87 FR 39164,
39196. For test units that have an
additional pan with a product thickness
of less than 2 in., DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to require placing the
additional pan as close to the middle
rack position as possible while
maintaining an even distribution of all
pans. Id. DOE also proposed in the June
2022 NOPR that if not all rack positions
are occupied by pans, the pan locations
shall be recorded. Id.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66196
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed method for
distributing the pans within the test
unit’s cabinet for testing blast chillers
and blast freezers. Id.
AHRI commented advising DOE to
reference ASTM 26 testing standards as
a method for distributing pans within
the test unit’s cabinet. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
11)
DOE expects that the requirements in
the ASTM standard will be harmonized
with those in the ASHRAE 220
standard. DOE understands that the
ASTM standard is intended to assess
blast chiller and blast freezer operating
performance whereas the ASHRAE 220
standard is intended to measure energy
consumption. Therefore, DOE has
determined that ASHRAE 220 is the
appropriate basis for the DOE test
procedure.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that if multiple
pans are used per level (i.e., pans can be
loaded side-by-side at the same level),
only one pan needs to be measured with
product temperature sensors per level.
ASHRAE 220 provides a figure
illustrating an example for test units
with multiple pans per level, indicating
which pans would include
thermocouples. In the figure, each level
includes two side-by-side pans, and the
thermocouple location is staggered such
that it alternates between the left and
right pan at each level, and such that
each vertical column does not have two
measured pans in sequential levels.
DOE reviewed the draft ASHRAE 220
pan loading approach and tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
it provides a representative measure of
food load temperature within the blast
chiller or blast freezer while limiting
test burden. 87 FR 39164, 39197. DOE
acknowledged that food temperatures
within the cabinet may vary depending
on proximity to the evaporator or
airflow pathway through the cabinet but
expects that measuring one pan per
level and staggering the measured pans
would ensure a representative food
temperature average would be measured
during testing. Id. DOE also determined
that this approach would limit test
burden by avoiding the need for every
pan to include a thermocouple, thereby
avoiding the setup of the thermocouple
within the pan and the routing of
additional thermocouple wires from
inside the cabinet. Id.
Based on the review of ASHRAE 220,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to incorporate the ASHRAE 220
approach with additional instructions.
Id. DOE proposed that if multiple
standard product pans are used per
level, only one pan per level be
measured with a temperature sensor. Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
DOE proposed to specify that the pan
measured should alternate vertical
columns so that each vertical column
does not have two measured pans in
sequential levels and that if a test unit
uses an additional pan that has a
thickness less than 2 in., this additional
pan would not be measured for product
temperature. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed method to
determine which standard product pans
would include temperature
measurement sensors for the blast
chillers and blast freezers test
procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that the ASHRAE
220 committee is in the process of
adding a requirement to determine
which standard product pans would
include temperature measurement
sensors for blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures; consequently,
AHRI added, for DOE to create a similar
requirement would be redundant and
unnecessary. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
As stated, ASHRAE 220 has not had
a public review period and is still in
draft form. DOE developed the proposal
in the June 2022 NOPR to be consistent
with the ASHRAE 220 approach, with
additional specificity where needed.
Therefore, DOE is adopting the
provisions as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR regarding pan temperature
measurements.
ASHRAE 220 specifies measuring the
product temperature in the geometric
center of any measured pans and
provides an example figure illustrating
the temperature sensor location in a
measured pan and, in particular,
showing the unweighted thermocouple
as being placed 5⁄8 in. above the bottom
of the pan. ASHRAE 220 provides that
temperature sensor leads must allow for
the transfer of pans from the heating
compartment to the test unit cabinet.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to incorporate this approach
with additional instruction to specify
explicitly details that are shown
visually in the example figure in
ASHRAE 220. 87 FR 39164, 39197. DOE
proposed that product temperature shall
be measured in the geometric center of
the product pan, 5⁄8 in. above the bottom
of the pan, that the temperature sensor
shall be unweighted, and that the
temperature sensor leads shall be
secured to the bottom of the pan while
also allowing for the transfer of the pan
from the heating source into the test
unit’s cabinet. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed method of
measuring the product temperature in
the measured pans for the blast chillers
and blast freezers test procedures. Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
AHRI commented recommending that
any proposed changes to measurement
of the product temperature in the
measured pans for the blast chillers and
blast freezers test procedures be taken to
the ASHRAE 220 committee for review
and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
As stated, DOE developed the
proposal in the June 2022 NOPR to be
consistent with the ASHRAE 220
approach, with additional specificity
where needed. A public review draft of
ASHRAE 220 has not yet been
published; therefore, DOE is adopting
the provisions as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR regarding temperature
measurements within individual pans.
ASHRAE 220 specifies instructions to
prepare the product medium mixture to
be placed in the standard product pans
as follows:
(a) Determine the manufacturer’s
recommended maximum food product
weight capacity.
(b) Prepare a 20-percent-by-volume
propylene glycol (1,2-Propanediol)
mixture in water.
(c) In each pan, pour the propylene
glycol mixture over #20 mesh southern
yellow pine sawdust to create a 22percent-to-78-percent-by-mass slurry.
Mixture must be pre-portioned for each
individual pan to avoid large batch
component separation.
(d) Mix until the sawdust becomes
completely saturated and leave
uncovered in the pan. The weight of the
mixture shall correspond with the
determined weight. Record the weight
of each pan, weight of the mixture, and
number of pans to be loaded. Weight of
the thermocouples shall be omitted.
Note: Acceptable Sawdust Specification
Example: American Wood Fibers brand, #20
Mesh Pine Sawdust (50 lb bags), Item #
30020205018.
(e) Verify that the pan thermocouple
is fully submerged in the mixture,
reposition the thermocouple in the
geometric center of the mixture if it is
not.
The ASHRAE 220 committee
developed the food simulator
specifications based on the food load
specified in NSF 7–2019 for rapid pulldown refrigerators and freezers. Because
this test load is already in use for this
equipment, and because its heat transfer
characteristics are similar to actual food
loads, DOE tentatively determined in
the June 2022 NOPR that the food
simulator load specified in the ASHRAE
220 draft is representative for testing
blast chillers and blast freezers. 87 FR
39164, 39197.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to incorporate the ASHRAE
220 approach with additional
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
specifications to ensure repeatability. Id.
As stated, each pan would be loaded to
2 in. of food load thickness (i.e., depth)
within the pan and an additional pan
would be loaded as needed to meet the
manufacturer’s stated capacity. Id. DOE
proposed that each pan shall be
weighed prior to heating, before and
after the food product simulator is
added. Id. A cumulative total of the
product weight shall be calculated and
the pans shall continue to be loaded
with the product mixture until the
cumulative total reaches the
manufacturer’s stated capacity (the total
product weight shall be within ±5
percent or ±2 lbs of the manufacturer’s
stated capacity, whichever is less). Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed method for
preparing the product medium mixture
to be placed in the standard product
pans for the blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI commented recommending that
any proposed changes to the method for
preparing the product medium mixture
to be placed in the standard product
pans for the blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures be taken to the
ASHRAE 220 committee for review and
approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
As stated, DOE developed the
proposal in the June 2022 NOPR to be
consistent with the ASHRAE 220
approach, with additional specificity
where needed. A public review draft of
ASHRAE 220 has not yet been
published; therefore, DOE is adopting
the provisions as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR regarding test medium
preparation.
Test Conduct
The overall test approach in the
ASHRAE 220 draft includes pre-cooling
the blast chiller’s or blast freezer’s
cabinet to a pre-set or controlled
operating temperature, loading of hot
food pans into the blast chiller or blast
freezer, and pull down of the hot food
pans to the target temperature. The
ASHRAE 220 committee also
considered including an operating
period in which the blast chiller or blast
freezer would maintain the food load at
the target temperature (i.e., a ‘‘holding
period’’). However the ASHRAE 220
committee determined that the primary
function of the blast chiller or blast
freezer is to pull down hot food
temperatures and that the prioritization
of throughput through the blast chiller
or blast freezer would result in less
operation in holding periods. DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022
NOPR that the ASHRAE 220 approach
is appropriate for blast chiller and blast
freezer testing and proposed in the June
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
2022 NOPR to only include pre-cooling
and pull-down operation within the
test. 87 FR 39164, 39197.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposal to include
pre-cooling and pull-down operation in
the blast chiller and blast freezer test
procedure and to not include any
holding periods during testing. Id.
The CA IOUs recommended that the
blast chiller and blast freezer test
procedure include equipment pre-cool
energy as well as a triplicate testing to
ensure repeatability. (CA IOUs, No. 36,
p. 5) The CA IOUs noted that different
blast chiller and blast freezer models
may pre-cool to different cabinet and
evaporator temperatures prior to the
start of the test, affecting blast cooling
energy consumption. Id. The CA IOUs
stated support for DOE’s proposal to
record pre-cool energy along with pulldown energy and requested that DOE
require reporting of the recorded precool energy. Id. The CA IOUs also stated
support for DOE’s proposal to exclude
‘‘holding energy’’ needed to maintain
the food load at a target temperature
after completion of the blast chilling
cycle. Id. The CA IOUs further
recommended normalizing energy usage
by initial measured weight of the
product to be cooled down (excluding
pan weight) instead of by blast chiller
and blast freezer volume or the
manufacturer’s rating and suggested
reporting blast chiller and blast freezer
energy by either kWh/cycle/lb or kWh/
day/lb. Id.
See the following Calculations subsection for discussion regarding
triplicate testing. DOE is not adopting
reporting requirements as part of this
final rule, but is requiring that both precool and blast chilling or blast freezing
cycle energy be recorded during testing.
DOE is not requiring any measurement
of holding energy. As recommended by
the CA IOUs and proposed in the June
2022 NOPR, DOE is adopting a
calculation of energy consumption
normalized by the total weight of
product loaded into the blast chiller or
blast freezer for testing.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that all
measurements shall be continuously
recorded during the test in intervals no
greater than 10 seconds. The current
DOE CRE test procedures require that
measurement intervals do not exceed 3
minutes and ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata requires certain measurements at
1-minute intervals. Because the blast
chiller and blast freezer test procedure
is not conducted at stable cabinet
temperature conditions, as is the case
for other CRE testing, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
a shorter measurement interval is
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66197
appropriate to accurately identify unit
performance (e.g., determining when all
pans reach the target temperatures). 87
FR 39164, 39198. Therefore, in the June
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to
incorporate the ASHRAE 220 approach
requiring data acquisition at 10-second
intervals. Id.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that data
would be recorded once a steady-state
condition is established. ASHRAE 220
specifies that the test unit stabilize at
ambient temperatures for at least 24
hours before pre-cooling and that the
prepared product be heated for a
minimum of 8 hours in the standard
product pans at the required
temperature prior to loading into the
blast chiller or blast freezer. Consistent
with these requirements, DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR that the test unit
stabilize at ambient temperatures for at
least 24 hours, and then data acquisition
would be recorded prior to the pre-cool
period. 87 FR 39164, 39198. For the
prepared product in the standard
product pans, DOE proposed that data
acquisition begin prior to the minimum
8-hour heating period. Id.
ASHRAE 220 specifies a procedure
for pre-cooling the test unit from
ambient conditions prior to pull-down
operation. The test unit is to remain in
the required ambient conditions for at
least 24 hours before pre-cooling. The
test unit’s pre-cooling cycle is used, if
available. For test units with more than
one pre-cool cycle, the cycle used is
recorded. For units without a precooling cycle, an empty blast cycle
should be run in its entirety. During the
pre-cool cycle, the test unit’s sensing
probe will remain in its default or
holstered position. Pre-cool is deemed
complete when the test unit’s pre-cool
notification reports. If the test unit does
not have a pre-cool cycle or pre-cool
completion notification, the pre-cool is
deemed complete when the compressor
first cycles off. The pre-cool data to be
recorded is the selected cycle name, precool duration, temperature, and energy
consumed.
Because the main function of a blast
chiller or blast freezer is to pull down
the product temperature of hot food,
DOE tentatively determined in the June
2022 NOPR that measuring performance
during the pre-cool period is not
necessary, other than to determine when
pre-cooling is complete. 87 FR 39164,
39198. However, because pull-down
testing is initiated after the completion
of pre-cooling, operation during precooling may impact pull-down
performance. Based on DOE’s review of
ASHRAE 220, additional specifications
regarding pre-cooling may be needed.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66198
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that the pre-cool cycle may be initiated
on blast chillers and blast freezers once
the test unit has been maintained at
ambient temperatures without operating
for at least 24 hours. 87 FR 39164,
39198. Rather than selecting and
recording any pre-cooling cycle, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that
the fastest pre-cooling cycle be selected.
DOE proposed to specify that the precool cycle is complete when the test
unit notifies the user that the pre-cool
is complete, consistent with ASHRAE
220, but that if the test unit does not
notify the user that the pre-cool cycle is
complete, the pre-cool will be deemed
complete when the test unit reaches
40 °F or 2 °F based on the test unit’s
sensing probe for blast chillers and blast
freezers, respectively. DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
this approach would ensure a consistent
starting point for pull-down testing from
unit to unit rather than the first
compressor off cycle. 87 FR 39164,
39198.
For test units without any defined
pre-cooling cycles, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that the fastest blast
chilling or blast freezing cycle shall be
run with an empty cabinet until the test
unit reaches 40 °F ±2 °F based on the test
unit’s sensing probe. Consistent with
ASHRAE 220, during the pre-cool cycle,
the test unit’s sensing probe will remain
in its default or holstered position. The
pre-cool test data to be recorded are the
ambient conditions, pre-cool cycle
selected, pre-cool duration, and final
pre-cool cabinet temperature based on
the test unit’s sensing probe.
As stated, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR that test procedures for blast
chillers and blast freezers are to measure
the energy consumed by the product
temperature pull-down operation. 87 FR
39164, 39198. Additionally, blast
chillers and blast freezers may run
multiple pull-down cycles
consecutively without the need for
individual pre-cooling cycles. However,
DOE acknowledges that the energy
consumed during the pre-cool period
may be relevant to the overall energy
consumption of blast chillers and blast
freezers and requests comment on
whether pre-cooling energy use should
be measured and considered in the
overall energy consumption metric for
blast chillers and blast freezers.
ASHRAE 220 specifies instructions
for loading the prepared standard
product pans into the test unit.
Measured standard product pans are
maintained at an average temperature of
160.0 °F ±1.8 °F and an individual pan
temperature tolerance of 160 °F ±10 °F
for a minimum of 8 hours prior to being
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
loaded into the test unit. Non-measured
pans are also required to be heated for
a minimum of 8 hours. The test unit
door is opened for loading at 4.0 ±1.0
minutes after the test unit completes its
pre-cool cycle. ASHRAE 220 specifies
that the door remain open to load all of
the standard product pans for the
entirety of the loading procedure.
ASHRAE 220 further specifies that the
door is open for 20 seconds per roll-in
rack and 15 seconds per pan for roll-in
and standard test units, respectively.
The test unit’s sensing probe is inserted
into the geometric center of a standard
product pan in the center level of the
cabinet. If the center level has capacity
for multiple pans, the probed pan
should be furthest away from the
evaporator. The probe must not touch
the bottom of the pan or be exposed to
the air. The location of the pan with the
probe is recorded. The factory probe is
placed so that it does not interfere with
the test thermocouple measurement.
The door remains closed for the
remainder of the test.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to adopt ASHRAE 220’s approach with
additional specifications and certain
deviations to ensure consistent testing.
87 FR 39164, 39198. DOE proposed that
while maintaining the temperature of
the measured standard product pans
prior to loading into the blast chiller or
blast freezer, the non-measured standard
product pans shall be placed in
alternating positions with the measured
standard product pans in the heating
device for a minimum of 8 hours prior
to being loaded into the test unit to
ensure consistent product temperatures.
Id. The test unit door would be opened
for loading at the specified time in
ASHRAE 220, but DOE proposed to
specify more precise values (i.e., 4.0
±1.0 minutes). Id. DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that the total dooropen period for loading pans would
have a tolerance of ±5 seconds to
account for different test lab operation.
Id. DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that the door would be fully
open, based on the definition of ‘‘fully
open’’ in ASHRAE 72–2018R, for the
duration specified in ASHRAE 220, to
ensure test repeatability. 87 FR 39164,
39199. DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that the test unit’s sensing probe
would be inserted into the geometric
center of the standard product pan
approximately 1-in. deep in the product
mixture at the median pan level in the
test unit, which adds greater specificity
for test repeatability. Id. If the standard
product pan at the median level is the
additional pan with less than 2 in. of
product thickness, DOE proposed in the
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
June 2022 NOPR to specify that the
closest pan or pan level that is farthest
away from the evaporator fan would be
used to insert the test unit’s sensing
probe, consistent with the ASHRAE 220
approach. Id. DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to add that the product
temperature sensor wiring not affect
energy performance, consistent with
section 5.4.9 of ASHRAE 72–2018R. Id.
ASHRAE 220 specifies instructions to
operate the blast chilling or blast
freezing cycle. A blast chilling or blast
freezing cycle is selected for blast
chilling and blast freezing tests,
respectively. ASHRAE 220 specifies that
the cycle selected should provide the
most rapid product cool down designed
for the densest food product as stated in
manufacturer literature. ASHRAE 220
provides that a manufacturer may
provide additional clarification on cycle
selection. ASHRAE 220 specifies that
the selected cycle name and settings are
recorded.
ASHRAE 220 further specifies the
following: Temperature and energy
measurement starts once the first pan is
loaded in the unit; the selected cycle
continues until all individual measured
pan temperatures are below the final
temperatures of 40 °F and 2 °F for blast
chilling and blast freezing tests,
respectively; if the selected cycle
program terminates prior to all product
temperatures reaching below the test’s
prescribed final temperature, the
standard product pans remain in the
unit until it does so; if the temperature
does not reach below the test’s
prescribed temperature after two
additional hours, unit temperature
settings are adjusted to achieve the
desired final temperature; temperature
and energy measurements end once the
door is opened to remove the standard
product pans; and energy consumption,
temperature, and time is reported
starting with the first pan loaded in the
unit and ending with the final pan
reaching the prescribed final
temperature.
Based on DOE’s review of ASHRAE
220, DOE determined in the June 2022
NOPR that additional specifications and
certain deviations may be needed to
improve test repeatability and
reproducibility. 87 FR 39164, 39199.
Consistent with the integrated average
temperature requirements from the
current DOE CRE test procedures, DOE
proposed that a blast chilling cycle with
a target temperature of 38 °F and a blast
freezing cycle with a target temperature
of 0 °F be selected for blast chilling and
blast freezing tests, respectively. Id.
Consistent with ASHRAE 220, the cycle
selected would be the cycle with the
most rapid product temperature pull
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
down that is designed for the densest
food product, as stated in the test unit’s
manufacturer literature. Ambient
conditions and time measurements
would be recorded from the pre-cool
cycle. Product temperature
measurements from the measured
standard product pans would be
recorded from the 8-hour period of
heating prior to being loaded into the
test unit to ensure that pull-down
performance data is recorded. Voltage,
frequency, and energy consumed would
start to be recorded as soon as the test
unit door is opened to load the standard
product pans so that blast chiller and
blast freezer tests are started at a
consistent point across all tests. Once
the test unit door is closed, the blast
chilling or blast freezing cycle would be
selected and initiated as soon as is
practicable. The blast chilling or blast
freezing cycle selected would be
recorded. The blast chilling or blast
freezing test period would continue
from the door opening until all
individual measured pan temperatures
are at or below 40.0 °F or 2.0 °F for blast
chiller and blast freezer tests,
respectively, regardless of whether the
selected cycle program has terminated.
If all individual measured pan
temperatures do not reach 40.0 °F or
2.0 °F for blast chiller and blast freezer
tests, respectively, 2 hours after the
selected cycle program has terminated,
the test would be repeated and the target
temperature would be lowered by 1.0 °F
until all individual measured pan
temperatures are at or below 40.0 °F or
2.0 °F for blast chiller and blast freezer
tests, respectively, at the conclusion of
the test. The duration of the blast chiller
or blast freezer test would be recorded.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed method to
conduct the blast chilling or blast
freezing test, including data recording
rates, data collection periods, precooling cycles, product loading, and
selecting and running the test cycle. 87
FR 39164, 39198–39199.
AHRI commented that the method to
conduct testing for blast chillers and
blast freezers is reflected in ASTM 26
testing standards and advised DOE to
reference this standard. Specifically,
AHRI recommended referencing ASTM
26 for data recording rates, data
collection periods, pre-cooling cycles,
pan loading, and test conduct. (AHRI,
No. 38, p. 12)
The CA IOUs suggested that in the
case where the blast chiller/freezer
cannot pull down the initial load to the
specified temperature, the unit should
be retested with one less pan instead of
the NOPR’s proposal to retest with the
temperature lowered by 1 °F, because
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
requiring a retest with a lower
temperature setpoint may not be feasible
for some equipment and will likely
result in excessive test burden. (CA
IOUs, No. 36, p. 5)
As discussed in the previous subsection, DOE expects that the
requirements in the ASTM 26 standard
will be harmonized with those in the
ASHRAE 220 standard. Because the
ASHRAE 220 standard is intended for
measuring blast chiller and blast freezer
energy use, DOE has determined that
ASHRAE 220 is the appropriate basis for
the DOE test procedure and is
maintaining the test conduct provisions
as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
DOE recognizes that the approach of
lowering the set point temperature if the
final temperatures are not met may
require multiple test runs, but DOE
expects that end users will operate the
blast chiller fully loaded and would
adjust temperature to meet their needs.
DOE maintains the proposed approach
in the June 2022 NOPR of decreasing the
temperature setting if all individual pan
temperatures do not reach the specified
temperatures. DOE is not adopting the
provision of removing test pans until
the unit can achieve temperatures
except for units that have no specified
product capacity (in weight). The
definition of blast chiller is based on the
unit pulling down product temperature
within the specified time. If a unit is not
capable of that operation at the specified
loading, it would not meet the
definition of blast chiller or blast
freezer.
Calculations
ASHRAE 220 specifies calculations
used to report the energy consumed
during the test. The measured energy
consumption is divided by the test
product capacity in pounds, averaged
for three repeated tests. DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate
the ASHRAE 220 approach (and to
specify that the measured energy
consumption is reported in kilowatthours) except that only one test would
be needed in order to limit test burden.
87 FR 39164, 39199. ASHRAE test
standards do not generally provide
requirements for multiple tests, as
sampling plans are typically established
by the rating programs that reference the
ASHRAE test standard. However, DOE
already provides sampling plans for the
determination of CRE represented
energy or efficiency values at 10 CFR
429.42(a). Accordingly, DOE determined
that the three tests considered for the
ASHRAE 220 standard are not necessary
for representations, and DOE is not
planning to incorporate ASHRAE’s
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66199
method of averaging over three tests. 87
FR 39164, 39199.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed method for
calculating the reported energy use
metric for blast chillers and blast
freezers. Id.
The CA IOUs commented that they
were concerned with the proposal in the
NOPR to use ASHRAE 220 with a single
test for blast chillers/freezers instead of
the three repeated tests specified by
ASHRAE 220, stating that the need for
accuracy outweighs DOE’s goal of
limiting test burden. (CA IOUs, No. 36,
p. 5) The CA IOUs commented that the
blast chiller/freezer test method is
complex and there is room for user or
test product consistency error. Id. The
CA IOUs requested that DOE share
further data illustrating the reduction in
accuracy of energy consumption and
product weight calculation of using a
single test compared with triplicate
tests. Id.
DOE recognizes the need for accurate
and repeatable results. However, DOE’s
test procedures themselves typically do
not include repeat runs; DOE addresses
the need for a data sample in making
representations of energy use or energy
efficiency by establishing sampling
plans in 10 CFR part 429. DOE is
adopting the requirement as proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR that the test only
be conducted once. For any
representations, manufacturers would
be required to apply the sampling
provisions in 10 CFR 429.42, which
require multiple test units.
For these reasons, DOE is maintaining
the approach as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR, which includes a single
calculation of measured energy use
divided by test product capacity in
pounds.
4. Chef Bases and Griddle Stands
DOE defines ‘‘chef base or griddle
stand’’ as CRE that is designed and
marketed for the express purpose of
having a griddle or other cooking
appliance placed on top of it that is
capable of reaching temperatures hot
enough to cook food. 10 CFR 431.62.
As discussed in the April 2014 Final
Rule, the explicit categorization of
griddle stands covers equipment that
experiences temperatures exceeding
200 °F. 79 FR 22277, 22282. As
explained, this was to distinguish
between equipment that experiences
cooking temperatures and equipment
that experiences temperatures at which
food is kept warm. Id. However, DOE
notes that the current definition for chef
bases and griddle stands does not
specify a quantitative temperature and
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66200
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
instead states ‘‘hot enough to cook
food.’’
DOE stated in the April 2014 Final
Rule that chef bases and griddle stands
are able to be tested according to the
DOE test procedure, but that their
refrigeration systems require larger
compressors to provide more cooling
capacity per storage volume than
equipment with compressors that are
appropriately sized for conventional
CRE and more typical room temperature
conditions. 79 FR 22277, 22281–22282.
However, the definition does not
include specifications for the
refrigeration systems to differentiate this
equipment from typical CRE.
ENERGY STAR has published a Final
Draft Version 5.0 Eligibility Criteria for
the ENERGY STAR program for
commercial refrigerators and freezers.26
This final draft specification includes a
definition for ‘‘chef base or griddle
stand’’ consistent with DOE’s current
definition and would require testing
according to the existing DOE test
procedure in place for CRE.
DOE has considered whether
additional detail regarding the
characteristics of chef bases or griddle
stands would better differentiate it from
other CRE. As discussed, chef bases or
griddle stands are designed for use with
cooking equipment placed on top of the
unit. Typical chef bases or griddle
stands may include oversized
refrigeration systems and additional
cabinet insulation to ensure the unit can
maintain cold storage temperatures with
the additional heat load from the
cooking equipment. However, these
characteristics may not be readily
identifiable in a given chef base or
griddle stand. For example,
manufacturers may not offer CRE in a
different CRE equipment class with
similar designs to any chef base or
griddle stand, in which case there
would not be a point of comparison
available to determine whether the chef
base or griddle stand includes more
insulation or an oversized refrigeration
system.
While ENERGY STAR’s Final Draft
Version 5.0 Eligibility Criteria includes
a definition of ‘‘chef base or griddle
stand’’ consistent with DOE’s definition,
it also includes definitions for similar
equipment types (i.e., worktop and
undercounter 27 CRE). Both of these
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
26 For
information on the Version 5.0
specification development, see www.energystar.gov/
sites/default/files/asset/document/
ENERGY%20STAR%20Version%205.0%20
Commercial%20Refrigerators
%20and%20Freezers%20Final%20Draft%
20Specification_0.pdf.
27 Undercounter: A vertical closed commercial
refrigerator or freezer that has no surface intended
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
definitions include a minimum height
requirement of 32 in. Chef bases or
griddle stands have similar construction
to worktop and undercounter
equipment but are typically shorter to
allow for installing cooking equipment
above the refrigerated cabinet at a
normal working height. Consistent with
the ENERGY STAR definitions for
worktop and undercounter, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
amend the definition for chef base or
griddle stand to specify that the
equipment has a maximum height of 32
in., including any legs or casters. 87 FR
39164, 39201.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
amendment to the definition for a chef
base or griddle stand, which specifies a
maximum height of 32 in. for this
equipment. DOE requested information
on any other identifiable equipment
characteristics that may differentiate
chef bases and griddle stands from other
similar CRE. Id.
Hoshizaki commented agreeing with
the proposal to add a maximum height
of 32 in. for chef bases or griddle stands.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 5)
AHRI commenting stating that it has
no objection to the proposed height
characteristic and recommended that
DOE examine ENERGY STAR Version
5.0 for griddle stands. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
12) AHRI commented that in light of
ENERGY STAR’s target where ∼20
percent of the market is listed with
ENERGY STAR, DOE should examine
having a higher kWh allowance than
ENERGY STAR, taking into
consideration mandatory versus
optional compliance. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the
proposed definition for chef bases and
griddle stands, but found it unclear why
the 32-in. limit would be added.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 6) Hillphoenix
recommended clearly defining these
products to not include CRE or hybrid
CRE in which a food warmer or such
can be placed on a section of the CRE
unit. Id.
Continental commented a belief that
DOE’s current definition of ‘‘chef bases
or griddle stands’’ was sufficient, and
the proposed additional specification of
equipment having a maximum height of
32 in., including any legs or casters, is
unnecessary and could cause confusion
for food preparation. The equipment is intended for
installation under a separate counter or workspace.
This equipment may have doors or drawers and
shall have a minimum height of 32 in., including
legs or casters. Worktop: A vertical closed
commercial refrigerator or freezer that has a surface
intended for food preparation that is incapable of
supporting cooking equipment. This equipment
may have doors or drawers and shall have a
minimum height of 32 in., including legs or casters.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
as some specialized, low-profile,
undercounter models of CRE are
available with an overall height less
than 32 in., but they are not designed or
intended to be used with cooking
equipment on the top. (Continental, No.
29, p. 8) Continental disagreed with
DOE’s statement that chef bases or
griddle stands have similar construction
to worktop and undercounter
equipment, but are typically shorter to
allow for installing cooking equipment
above the refrigerated cabinet at a
normal working height. Id. Continental
pointed out that commenters noted, and
DOE acknowledged, that chef bases or
griddle stands include oversized
refrigeration systems and additional
cabinet insulation to ensure the unit can
maintain cold storage temperatures with
the additional heat load from the
cooking equipment. Id. Continental
added that this type of equipment is
also provided with heavy-duty cabinet
construction to support excessive
weight loads, and may have specialized
insulation to protect against damage
from exposure to very high
temperatures. Id. Continental concluded
by stating that characteristics such as
larger evaporator coils, fans, and
upsized compressors may not be readily
identifiable in a given chef base or
griddle stand, yet still represent distinct
features that impact energy
consumption and separate these
products from other types of CRE. Id.
True commented that chef bases and
griddle stands are intended to be used
in conjunction with cooking equipment
installed on top (of the counter) of the
refrigerated unit, with temperatures
easily exceeding 500 °F, and the
refrigeration systems are usually larger
than a standard storage refrigeration
system due to the very high ambient
temperature and conditions they are
subjected to. (True, No. 28, p. 3) True
commented that the 32-in. height may
be excessive as the top of the griddle (or
other cooking equipment) should be at
about a 36-in. height, making a 28-in.
height or less recommended as more
appropriate. Id. True added that the
ADA requires a working height of 34-in.
or less, that the smallest griddles are
more than 6 in. high, and that most
grills are more than 15 in. high. Id.
The definition proposed in the June
2022 NOPR is largely consistent with
the existing definition, with the
additional height requirement. DOE has
determined this height limit is
appropriate as it harmonizes with
ENERGY STAR definitions and because
any units taller than 32″ would not have
cooking equipment at appropriate
working height.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66201
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
The current definition of chef bases or
griddle stands specifically refers to
cooking equipment capable of reaching
temperatures hot enough to cook food.
Therefore, no exclusions of other types
of equipment that can be placed on top
of the equipment are necessary.
DOE recognizes that chef bases may
be shorter to allow for taller cooking
equipment, as indicated in True’s
comment, but DOE set the height limit
at a level that would be inclusive of all
chef bases or griddle stands, not an
average or typical height.
DOE recognizes that there are other
CRE that are not chef bases or griddle
stands with heights under 32’’ (e.g.,
undercounter models). These CRE
would not be included in the definition
despite their height because the
definition would maintain that the
equipment is designed to have cooking
equipment placed on top of the unit.
DOE agrees with the characteristics
identified for chef bases (i.e., oversized
refrigeration, insulation, cabinets
capable of supporting weight) but has
not determined identifiable aspects of
these characteristics for inclusion in the
definition. To the extent that these
characteristics impact energy
consumption, DOE will consider these
impacts when evaluating potential
energy conservation standards for this
equipment.
For these reasons and those discussed
in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE is
maintaining the definition of chef bases
and griddle stands as proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR.
Regarding testing for chef bases or
griddle stands, DOE determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that the existing DOE
test procedure provides an appropriate
basis for measuring the energy
consumption of this equipment. 87 FR
39164, 39201. DOE recognized that chef
bases or griddle stands can be installed
and used in ambient environments that
are different from other CRE, but DOE
proposed to test this equipment in the
same conditions because DOE
tentatively determined that the
additional heat loads of cooking
equipment do not affect measured
energy use. Id.
Additionally, DOE conducted testing
similar to the PG&E and SCE testing 28
to investigate whether cooking
equipment operation would impact chef
base or griddle stand energy use during
typical operation, as illustrated in Table
III.4. DOE tested chef base or griddle
stand refrigerators and freezers to the
current DOE CRE test procedure with
and without an active griddle installed
on top of the test unit. During the tests
with an active griddle installed, the
griddle was turned on 3 hours after the
start of the defrost period and
maintained a target griddle surface
temperature of 185 °F for 8 hours,
concurrent with the door opening
period. After the 8-hour period of
griddle operation, the griddle was
turned off for the remainder of the test.
TABLE III.4—CHEF BASE OR GRIDDLE STAND ENERGY CONSUMPTION COMPARISON WITH AND WITHOUT AN ACTIVE
GRIDDLE
Refrigerated
volume
(ft3)
Test unit
Refrigerator #1 .................................................................................................
Refrigerator #2 .................................................................................................
Refrigerator #3 .................................................................................................
Freezer #1 .......................................................................................................
Freezer #2 .......................................................................................................
Energy
consumption
with griddle
installed
(kWh/day)
5.21
9.17
9.72
6.56
11.31
0.97
1.04
1.59
7.28
8.58
Energy
consumption
without
griddle
installed
(kWh/day)
Energy
consumption
difference
(percent)
0.96
1.03
1.58
7.29
8.70
¥0.5
¥0.5
¥0.1
+0.2
+1.4
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
* DOE tested an additional freezer that is not shown in the table due to inconsistent issues with the evaporator icing during testing.
Consistent with the findings in the
PG&E and SCE report, DOE observed
that chef bases or griddle stands
consumed similar amounts of energy
with and without cooking equipment
operating above the unit. DOE has been
unable to determine why Freezer #2
consumed slightly more energy without
a griddle installed. For these reasons,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to maintain the existing CRE test
procedure for testing chef bases or
griddle stands (with the additional
proposals as discussed in this NOPR).
87 FR 39164, 39202.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its proposal to
test chef bases and griddle stands
according to the test procedure used for
other CRE. Id.
The CA IOUs recommended
standardizing chef base internal volume
measurements by defining standardized
pans as full-size, 4-in.-deep hotel pans
(12 by 20 by 4 in.) since this is a
standard pan size that all units can
accommodate. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 7)
The CA IOUs added that for chef bases
able to hold 6-in.-deep pans, the volume
calculation should account for the extra
2 in. of depth. Id. The CA IOUs pointed
out that some 36-in.-wide chef bases
only accommodate one pan per drawer,
but have extra room to accommodate a
4- or 6-in.-deep, 1⁄6-size pan measuring
6 by 6 in.; for such bases that cannot fit
12-by-20-in. hotel pans, the CA IOUs
recommended adding 1⁄6-size pans to its
volume and suggested that any
refrigerated volume that cannot
accommodate a 1⁄6 pan should not be
counted as usable volume. Id.
The Joint Commenters supported
DOE’s proposed changes regarding the
28 See www.caetrm.com/media/referencedocuments/ET15SCE1010_Chef_Bases_Report_
final2.pdf.
29 See ‘‘Chef Bases for Foodservice Applications,’’
p. 9. www.caetrm.com/media/referencedocuments/
ET15SCE1010_Chef_Bases_Report_final2.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
test methods for additional equipment
categories, including chef bases and
griddle stands. (Joint Commenters, No.
31, p. 1)
The Joint Commenters stated their
support for establishing test procedures
for chef bases and griddle stands, citing
a 2016 report that found significant
variation in energy performance of chef
bases,29 suggesting there is opportunity
for efficiency improvements. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 3). The Joint
Commenters expressed a belief that it
was reasonable to test chef bases or
griddle stands according to the same test
procedure as other CRE, which would
allow end users to compare energy
consumption with other currently
covered equipment. Id.
NEEA stated its support for DOE’s
proposal to establish test procedures for
new and/or newly defined categories of
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66202
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
CRE, and restated its recommendation
from the 2021 CRE TP RFI that DOE
establish test methods for new CRE
product types, including chef bases or
griddle stands. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed
with using the test conditions and test
setup as required for CRE equipment,
but disagreed with utilizing the
standard door opening procedure as
documented in ASHRAE 72, as the door
openings of this equipment would be
better represented by a reduced opening
procedure. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7)
Hillphoenix commented that the doors
on this type of equipment are normally
operated by store personnel and are not
customer facing, which excludes the
intent of the opening procedures in
ASHRAE 72. Id.
Continental commented that it
supports DOE’s proposal in the NOPR to
add new test procedures for product
categories such as griddle stands and
chef bases. (Continental, No. 29, p. 1)
Continental agreed with DOE’s desire to
develop test procedures for additional
product types, including chef bases and
griddle stands, but added that new test
methods should only be introduced
after suitable industry-accepted
standards have been adequately vetted
with stakeholder feedback and approved
for publication. (Continental, No. 29, p.
8) Continental commented that DOE
should clarify that any test procedure
proposed for chef bases or griddle
stands would only apply to selfcontained equipment. Id. Continental
stated disagreement with DOE’s
recommendation to test chef bases and
griddle stands in the same manner as
other CRE—using ASHRAE Standard
72—because, as DOE recognizes, this
equipment is designed to operate with
higher heat loads than other types of
CRE and that as stated in the NOPR, an
ASHRAE research project found that
average temperatures in commercial
kitchen preparation areas are typically
72 °F to 79 °F, while cooking areas are
typically 79 °F to 93 °F. Id. Continental
commented that testing at an ambient
temperature of 75 °F would not
represent how chef bases and griddle
stands are used in real-world conditions
and that higher ambient conditions
should be used to even come close to
simulating representative conditions for
chef bases and griddle stands located in
the midst of commercial kitchen
cooking areas, with high-temperature
cooking equipment on the top, as well
as adjacent to them in most situations.
Id. Continental commented that energy
consumption at the elevated ambient
temperature conditions would need to
be evaluated thoroughly as part of any
future rulemaking regarding potential
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
energy standards for this equipment. Id.
Continental pointed out that DOE
provided a summary of some limited
energy testing performed on five chef
base models as justification that energy
consumption does not vary significantly
when tested with a griddle placed on
the top and operated for a limited time,
and yet little information about this
testing was offered and the procedure
and results had not been widely vetted
by stakeholders. Id. Continental
requested that DOE share details and
data from this testing, while
maintaining any needed confidentiality,
for thorough assessment and feedback.
Id. Continental cited an analysis by
Southern California Edison
(ET15SCE1010) from August 2016,
which evaluated chef bases for energy
consumption of six different units using
ASHRAE Standard 72–2014 test
conditions. Id. Continental pointed out
that an additional heat load was not
included because when an electric
griddle was placed on top of a chef base,
there was reportedly insignificant
variation in energy test results. Id.
Continental believed this conclusion
was based on insufficient data and lack
of a thorough understanding of the
application, as refrigerated chef bases
are subject to extreme heat loads from
high-temperature cooking equipment
adjacent to and on top of the unit, and
a variety of heavy-duty gas and electric
cooking equipment is typically used in
this application. Id. Continental
commented that as a result,
standardizing to one piece of equipment
could lead to varied results in the field,
and the Southern California Edison
study also found an extremely wide
variation in energy consumption of the
six units tested. Id. Continental urged a
thorough review and evaluation of prior
studies used by DOE to evaluate the
appropriateness of the proposed test
method to ensure reliability and
confidence, and it repeated its statement
that DOE should continue to work with
ASHRAE and allow time for completion
of an industry-accepted procedure
before incorporating a test procedure for
chef bases and griddle stands. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE provide
more information on the size of chef
bases and griddle stands that are tested,
as well as more information about the
size and heat load for griddles, noting
there is no current test standard specific
to chef bases. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 12)
AHRI commented that if DOE
incorporates standard ASHRAE 72,
AHRI would like to work with the
committee to craft an energy test for
chef bases. Id. AHRI stated concerns
with DOE’s proposal to test chef bases
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
and griddle stands, and with how DOE
proposed testing be conducted in the
NOPR. Id. AHRI stated that chef bases
and griddle stands are primarily drawer
units designed for higher ambient
conditions, which renders the
temperature standard for CRE
inapplicable and is the reason chef
bases are currently exempt. Id.
Hoshizaki stated that it would need
additional information to comment on
this proposal. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 5)
In particular, Hoshizaki stated that it
would need to know the size of the
equipment used in DOE’s testing
method (i.e., the condensing unit size
for the refrigerators and freezers; the
griddle size). Id. Also, Hoshizaki stated
that it would be helpful to know
whether the griddle was at a stable
temperature or actively recreating a
cooking environment during the testing
period. Id. Hoshizaki recommended that
this matter be proposed to the ASHRAE
72 standards committee for input
regarding changes needed to test chef
bases along with specifying the test
criteria with heat loads. Id.
Regarding capacity measurements,
DOE is maintaining the proposal in the
June 2022 NOPR to measure the
refrigerated volume according to AHRI
1200–2023. Most chef bases or griddle
stands use drawers for storing pans. The
definition does not require drawers or
pans, so other configurations are
possible. This is also true of other CRE
categories (e.g., undercounter units may
be configured with drawers for storing
pans). To allow for consistent
comparisons across such equipment,
DOE is maintaining the same volume
metric as the relevant capacity metric
for chef bases or griddle stands.
Regarding the test data presented in
the June 2022 NOPR, during the tests
with an active griddle installed, the
griddle was turned on three hours after
the start of the defrost period and
maintained a target griddle surface
temperature of 185 °F for 8 hours,
concurrent with the door opening
period, and after the 8-hour period of
griddle operation, the griddle was
turned off for the remainder of the test.
87 FR 39164, 39201. The griddles for
testing were appropriately sized to meet
the dimensions of the various chef bases
or griddle stands, which ranged in
volume from 5.2 to 11.3 cubic feet.
DOE expects the specific installation
conditions and door openings to vary
among CRE depending on actual end
use. DOE has determined that ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata door openings are
representative of CRE intended to be
used in commercial kitchens. However,
DOE agrees that chef bases or griddle
stands would be used in cooking areas
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
with ambient temperatures higher than
those specified in ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata. DOE stated in the April
2014 Final Rule that chef bases and
griddle stands are able to be tested
according to the DOE test procedure, but
that their refrigeration systems require
larger compressors to provide more
cooling capacity per storage volume
than conventional CRE used in more
typical room temperature conditions. 79
FR 22277, 22281–22282. In the June
2022 NOPR, DOE recognized that chef
bases or griddle stands can be installed
and used in ambient environments that
are different from other CRE, but DOE
proposed to test this equipment in the
same conditions because DOE
tentatively determined that the
additional heat loads of cooking
equipment do not affect measured
energy use. 87 FR 39164, 39201. Based
on DOE’s testing in support of this
rulemaking, as presented in Table III.4,
DOE has determined that chef bases or
griddle stands consume similar amounts
of energy with and without cooking
equipment operating above the unit and
is therefore not adopting any test
provisions to directly account for
operation of cooking equipment.
However, based on the comments
received in response to the June 2022
NOPR as well as previous comments
received in response to the June 2021
RFI, as summarized in the following
paragraphs, DOE recognizes that the
cooking areas of commercial kitchens
would typically have higher ambient
temperatures than those specified in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata, and is
adopting amended test conditions for
chef bases or griddle stands.
Ambient Conditions
DOE initially requested comment in
the June 2021 RFI on whether
modifications to the current CRE test
procedure would be appropriate for
testing chef bases and griddle stands to
better represent real-world use
conditions. 86 FR 31182, 31189. DOE
received limited feedback regarding
ambient conditions in response to the
June 2021 RFI. The CA IOUs and Joint
Commenters commented that DOE
should establish higher ambient
temperature and relative humidity
conditions for evaluating the
performance of chef bases. (CA IOUs,
No. 10, p. 2–3; Joint Commenters, No. 8,
p. 2) The CA IOUs recommended
adopting conditions from ASTM F2143–
16 or the emerging ASHRAE Standard
220, which have an ambient
temperature of 86 °F ±2 °F and relative
humidity of 35 percent ±5 percent. (CA
IOUs, No. 10, p. 2–3) The CA IOUs
commented that these elevated kitchen
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
temperatures are supported by a 2012
ASHRAE research project benchmarking
the thermal conditions in 100
commercial kitchens in the United
States, which found that the average
temperature in preparation areas ranged
from 72 °F to 79 °F, while the average
temperature in cooking areas ranged
from 79 °F to 93 °F. (Id.) AHRI did not
provide detailed information on
ambient temperature, but noted that the
current test procedure does not account
for the high ambient conditions for chef
bases or griddle stands. (AHRI, No. 3, p.
10)
Although not specific to ambient
conditions, DOE received comments in
response to the June 2021 RFI from ITW,
True, Hoshizaki, NEEA, and the CA
IOUs stating that the test procedure
should not change to limit burden.
(ITW, No. 2, p. 8; True, No. 4, p. 15–16;
Hoshizaki, No. 13, p. 3; NEEA, No. 5, p.
2; CA IOUs, No. 10, p. 1–2)
As discussed earlier in this section,
DOE tentatively determined in the June
2022 NOPR that the existing test
procedure provides an appropriate basis
for measuring the energy consumption
of chef bases or griddle stands. 87 FR
39164, 39201.
In response to the June 2022 NOPR,
Continental referred to the same
ASHRAE research project as the CA
IOUs referenced in response to the June
2021 RFI, noting that average
temperatures in commercial kitchen
preparation areas are typically 72 °F to
79 °F, while cooking areas are typically
79 °F to 93 °F. (Continental, No. 29, p. 8)
Continental commented that testing at
an ambient temperature of 75 °F would
not represent how chef bases and
griddle stands are used in real-world
conditions and that higher ambient
conditions should be used. (Id.) In
response to the June 2022 NOPR, AHRI
stated that chef bases and griddle stands
are primarily drawer units designed for
higher ambient conditions, which
renders the temperature standard for
CRE inapplicable. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 12)
Both AHRI and Hoshizaki
recommended that the industry test
standard committee should evaluate
appropriate testing for chef bases or
griddle stands. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 12;
Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 5)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed
with using the test conditions and test
setup as required for CRE equipment.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7) The Joint
Commenters and NEEA supported
DOE’s approach from the June 2022
NOPR, but did not specifically refer to
ambient conditions. (Joint Commenters,
No. 31, p. 3) (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
After evaluating these comments
received regarding chef base or griddle
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66203
stand ambient test conditions, DOE
acknowledges that multiple interested
parties representing a range of
viewpoints (i.e., efficiency advocates,
utilities, and industry) have supported
the use of higher ambient temperatures
for testing chef bases or griddle stands.
DOE also recognizes that chef bases or
griddle stands are uniquely used only in
the cooking areas of commercial
kitchens, as compared to other
conventional CRE that may be installed
in a range of locations. Based on the
referenced ASHRAE study, DOE has
determined that 86 °F is the ambient
condition most representative of chef
base or griddle stand operation, as that
is the mid-point of the 79 °F to 93 °F
range identified for cooking areas. This
ambient condition is also consistent
with the 86.0 °F ambient condition
established in this final rule for blast
chillers and blast freezers, equipment
that is also used in the cooking areas of
commercial kitchens. Consistent with
this higher ambient dry-bulb
temperature, DOE is also amending test
conditions for wet-bulb temperature to
require testing at 73.7 °F (i.e.,
maintaining the same ambient relative
humidity at the higher ambient dry-bulb
temperature), and radiant heat
temperature to require testing at greater
than or equal to 81.0 °F. For both drybulb and wet-bulb temperature, DOE is
maintaining the tolerances for ambient
temperature measurements: tolerance
for the average over the test period of
±1.8 °F, and a tolerance for the
individual measurements of ±3.6 °F.
For the reasons discussed in this
section, the June 2022 NOPR, and the
April 2014 Final Rule, DOE is
maintaining that chef bases or griddle
stands do not require separate test
provisions, except that the dry-bulb
temperature, wet-bulb temperature, and
radiant heat temperature will require
higher temperatures during the test.
Therefore, the test procedure in
appendix B, as established in this final
rule, is the test procedure applicable to
chef bases or griddle stands.
5. Mobile Refrigerated Cabinets
DOE does not currently define or
specify test procedure provisions
specific to other categories of
refrigerated holding and serving
equipment, such as certain mobile
refrigerated cabinets. Specifically,
mobile refrigerated cabinets chill the
refrigerated compartment before being
unplugged from power and taken to a
remote location to hold food products
while maintaining cooling. Such
equipment meets the definition of CRE
as defined at 10 CFR 431.62; however,
unlike typical CRE, mobile refrigerated
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66204
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
cabinets are not continuously connected
to a power supply. As discussed in the
April 2014 Final Rule, DOE determined
that such other categories of refrigerated
holding and serving equipment meet the
definition of CRE and could be subject
to future test procedures and energy
conservation standards. 79 FR 22277,
22281. To better distinguish mobile
refrigerated cabinets from other defined
categories of CRE, DOE considered
developing a definition for this
equipment in the June 2022 NOPR. 87
FR 39164, 39202.
Based on a review of mobile
refrigerated cabinets available on the
market, the operation and use of this
equipment is subject to varied end-use
applications, which may be specific to
individual models. DOE did not identify
data or information that would inform
development of representative test
conditions for such equipment. As such,
DOE did not propose to establish test
procedures for mobile refrigerated
cabinets in the June 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
39164, 39202.
To better distinguish mobile
refrigerated cabinets from other defined
categories of CRE, DOE proposed in the
NOPR to add the following definition to
10 CFR 431.62 for mobile refrigerated
cabinets:
A ‘‘mobile refrigerated cabinet’’
means commercial refrigeration
equipment that is designed and
marketed to operate only without a
continuous power supply. Id.
CRE that allow the user to choose
whether to operate with or without a
continuous power supply do not meet
the definition of a mobile refrigerated
cabinet.
Although DOE did not propose in the
June 2022 NOPR to establish test
procedure provisions specific to mobile
refrigerated cabinets, CRE that do not
meet the definition of mobile
refrigerated cabinets are subject to
DOE’s test procedure at appendix B and
energy conservation standards under the
applicable CRE equipment class. 87 FR
39164, 39202.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
definition for ‘‘mobile refrigerated
cabinet.’’ DOE also requested comment
on the proposal not to establish test
procedures for mobile refrigerated
cabinets. 87 FR 39164, 39202–39203.
Hillphoenix agreed with DOE’s
proposed definition of ‘‘mobile
refrigerated cabinet’’ and also agreed
with not establishing test procedures
since the unit’s operation and use were
subject to varied end-use applications
and did not represent a significant
portion of the CRE market. (Hillphoenix,
No. 35, p. 7) Hillphoenix assumed no
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
energy conservation category would be
developed since no test procedure is
being developed. Id.
True commented that the proposed
definition for ‘‘mobile refrigerated
cabinet’’ needs to be more specific, as
mobile refrigeration normally refers to
DC voltage (12V DC) for applications in
vehicles. (True, No. 28, p. 5) True
requested the following information
from DOE: Since some units require a
power converter (12V DC to 120V AC)
does ‘‘mobile refrigerated cabinet’’ refer
to both AC and DC power supplies? Id.
AHRI stated its assumption that if no
test procedure is developed for mobile
refrigerated cabinets, no energy
conservation standard will be developed
either. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 13)
The CA IOUs urged that the product
definition for ‘‘mobile refrigerated
cabinets’’ proposed in the NOPR be
based on technical specifications rather
than on end use, and recommended
refining the proposed definition to
explicitly exclude vertical selfcontained CRE. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 9)
The CA IOUs commented that the
following options should be added to
distinguish mobile refrigerated cabinets
from other types of CRE: solid doors,
minimum insulation thickness (1-in.
diameter minimum, presence of handles
designed to move the equipment, a
bumper guard around the bottom
perimeter, heavy-duty wheels or casters
(5 percent diameter minimum), a power
switch and analog or digital external
temperature display, a door latch, and
the presence of a cord wrap. Id. The CA
IOUs recommended adding ‘‘for
temporary storage and transport of
prepared food products and not for
retail sale of merchandise’’ to the
definition if DOE decides to retain
language based on end use. Id. The CA
IOUs stated that because this category
represents limited sales volume and
consumer utility is dependent on
minimizing thermal losses, the test
method should be excluded. Id.
DOE agrees that definitions should be
based on technical specifications and
characteristics where possible, however,
for mobile refrigerated cabinets, DOE
cannot identify a single characteristic
for this equipment at issue other than its
use without the ability to use a
continuous power supply. DOE notes
that none of characteristics identified by
the CA IOUs are specific to mobile
refrigerated cabinets. DOE has
determined that the operation of the
equipment without a continuous power
supply is sufficiently different than
other CRE intended for holding
temperature applications or pull-down
temperature applications, which are
used with continuous power supplies,
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that equipment meeting the mobile
refrigerated cabinet definition will be
identifiable.
In response to True’s comments, the
term mobile in this context does not
mean for use in vehicles; rather it is
intended to address equipment that is
used without a continuous connection
to a power supply (i.e., can be moved
away from the power supply location).
The definition as proposed reflects this
and so DOE is maintaining it as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
In response to comments regarding
test procedures and applicability of
energy conservation standards,
equipment without a test procedure
would not be subject to energy
conservation standards as DOE would
have no basis on which to evaluate
potential standards. As DOE is not
establishing a test procedure for this
equipment category, other CRE energy
conservation standards would not
apply. DOE may consider test
procedures and corresponding energy
conservation standards for mobile
refrigerated cabinets as part of future
rulemakings.
6. Additional Covered Equipment
DOE provided examples of potential
CRE that may require additional test
procedure provisions in the June 2021
RFI. 86 FR 31182, 31190. DOE
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
additional test procedure provisions to
account for what is likely unique
equipment operation or usage are not
needed at this time. 87 FR 39164, 39203.
The existing DOE test procedure is
reasonably designed to produce test
results which reflect energy efficiency
and energy use of the CRE subject to the
test procedure during a representative
average use cycle, and is not unduly
burdensome to conduct. Because the
test procedure provides a representative
average use cycle, DOE is unable to
account for every combination of
operating conditions and usage without
the resulting test procedures being
unduly burdensome. If the test
procedure cannot be conducted for
certain equipment, or if the test
procedure results in measures of energy
consumption so unrepresentative of the
equipment’s true energy consumption
characteristics as to provide materially
inaccurate comparative data,
manufacturers may petition DOE for a
test procedure waiver under the
provisions of 10 CFR 431.401.
DOE did not receive any comments
and is therefore maintaining the June
2022 NOPR approach and not adopting
additional provisions for other
categories of CRE.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
D. Harmonization of Efficiency
Standards and Testing With NSF 7–
2019 Food Safety
NSF 7–2019 establishes minimum
food protection and sanitation
specifications for the materials, design,
manufacture, and performance of
commercial refrigerators and freezers
and their related components. Section
2.3 of appendix B in the CRE test
procedure states that for CRE that is also
tested in accordance with NSF test
procedures (Type I and Type II),30
integrated average temperatures and
ambient conditions used for NSF testing
may be used in place of the DOEprescribed integrated average
temperatures and ambient conditions
provided they result in a more stringent
test. To that end, the ambient
temperature may be higher, but not
lower than the DOE test condition, and
the IAT may be lower, but not higher,
than that measured at the DOE ambient
test condition. Id. The test conditions
and possible different thermostat
settings under NSF 7–2019 may result
in measured energy use that is more
representative of average use in
applications for which users prioritize
food safety over energy efficiency.
Permitting the use of NSF 7–2019 test
conditions may also reduce testing
burden for manufacturers.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE did not
propose any additional amendments to
the test procedures to further reference
or harmonize with NSF 7–2019 testing.
87 FR 39164, 39203.
DOE did not receive any additional
comments on this topic in response to
the June 2022 NOPR. Therefore, DOE is
not adopting any additional
amendments regarding harmonizing
with NSF 7 testing. The existing test
procedure instructions in section 2.3 of
appendix B allow for the use of NSF 7–
2019 test data to be used for DOE testing
subject to certain requirements. DOE
recognizes that NSF 7–2019 testing is
not applicable or appropriate for all
equipment types. For those equipment
types, the DOE test procedure provides
the required test instructions—
including additional IAT rating
temperatures—and reference to NSF 7–
2019 is not needed. DOE maintains that
the amended DOE test procedure, by
reference to AHRI 1200–2023 and
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata for
conventional CRE, provides a measure
of energy use of CRE during a
representative average use cycle and is
not unduly burdensome to conduct. The
optional NSF 7–2019 test provides a
30 Type I equipment is designed to operate in
75 °F ambient conditions and Type II equipment is
designed to operate in 80 °F ambient conditions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
means to further reduce test burden in
certain instances, but it is not required
for DOE testing.
E. Dedicated Remote Condensing Units
DOE is aware of remote condensing
CRE models for which specific
dedicated condensing units are
intended for use with specific
refrigerated cases. For some of these
models, the remote condensing units are
intended to be installed on or near the
refrigerated case within the same
conditioned space. For other models,
the remote condensing units are
intended to be installed outdoors, but
the refrigerated case is intended to be
used specifically with the designated
remote condensing unit.
For this equipment, the combined
refrigerated case and condensing unit
refrigeration system would effectively
operate as if it were CRE with a selfcontained condensing unit. Under the
current DOE test procedure, remote CRE
energy consumption is determined from
the energy use of components in the
refrigerated case plus a calculated
compressor energy consumption based
on the enthalpy change of refrigerant
supplied to the case at specified
conditions. The compressor energy use
calculation is based on typical
reciprocating compressor energy
efficiency ratios (‘‘EERs’’) at a range of
operating conditions. See Table 1 in
AHRI 1200–2010. For CRE used with
dedicated condensing units, the actual
compressor used during normal
operation is known (i.e., the compressor
in the dedicated condensing unit).
Accordingly, testing the whole system
using the same approach as required for
a self-contained CRE unit may produce
energy use results that are more
representative of how this equipment
actually operates in the field.
Additionally, testing such a system as a
complete system rather than using the
test procedures for remote condensing
units may be less burdensome, because
it would not require the use of a test
facility capable of maintaining the
required liquid and suction line
refrigerant conditions as currently
required for testing remote CRE (i.e., the
refrigerant conditions consistent with
ASHRAE 72–2005 requirements and at
the conditions necessary to maintain the
appropriate case temperature for
testing).
DOE understands that remote CRE are
most commonly installed with rack
condensing systems, and that
installations with dedicated condensing
units represent a very small portion of
the remote CRE market. Additionally,
DOE has not identified a method to
determine whether a remote CRE unit
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66205
would be installed with a dedicated
condensing unit rather than a rack
condensing system. DOE is not aware of
any remote CRE that are capable of
installations only with a dedicated
remote condensing unit (i.e., DOE
expects that all remote CRE may be
installed with rack condensing systems).
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that an amended test
procedure to account for remote CRE
installed with dedicated remote
condensing units is not appropriate. 87
FR 39164, 39205.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on its tentative
determination not to propose amended
test procedures for dedicated remote
condensing units. Id.
AHRI stated its support for DOE’s
tentative determination to not propose
amended test procedures for dedicated
remote condensing units and thanked
DOE for this determination. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 13)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed
with not proposing a test procedure for
dedicated remote condensing units, as
the customization of each unit would
create an unreasonable burden on
manufacturers while not resulting in
reasonable energy savings. (Hillphoenix,
No. 35, p. 7)
DOE is maintaining the June 2022
NOPR approach and not adopting test
provisions for dedicated remote
condensing units at this time.
F. Test Procedure Clarifications and
Modifications
1. Defrost Cycles
The test period requirements in
ASHRAE 72–2005, incorporated by
reference in the current CRE test
procedure, and in ASHRAE 72–2018
require a 24-hour test period, which
begins with a defrost after steady-state
conditions are achieved.31 Use of a fixed
24-hour test period can provide for a
degree of variability in the measured
energy consumption, depending on
when additional defrost cycles occur
after the initial defrost cycle (e.g., the
test period may capture only a portion
of a defrost cycle at the end of the test
period rather than a complete number of
defrost cycles). Typically, if multiple
complete defrost cycles occur within the
24-hour period, the impact of capturing
partial defrost cycles would be small.
Similarly, if the defrost cycle duration is
slightly greater than 24 hours, the
impact of capturing a partial defrost
31 ASHRAE 72–2005 and ASHRAE 72–2018
define ‘‘steady state’’ as the condition in which the
average temperature of all test simulators changes
less than 0.4 °F from one 24-hour period or
refrigeration cycle to the next.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66206
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
cycle would be small. However, the
impact may be more substantial if the
defrost cycle duration is very long (i.e.,
multiple days between defrost) or if the
defrost cycle is slightly less than 24
hours (i.e., the test period would capture
two defrost occurrences but only one
period of ‘‘normal’’ operation between
defrosts). DOE also notes that ASHRAE
72–2005 does not have any specific
provisions for CRE with variable defrost
control schemes (i.e., defrosts that may
be triggered based on conditions or
other parameters rather than only a
timer) and does not account for CRE
with no automatic defrost (i.e., manual
defrost).
DOE has addressed similar issues in
the test procedures for consumer
refrigeration products. The test
procedures for those products apply a
two-part test period (one period for
steady-state operation and one period to
capture events related to the defrost
cycle) to account for defrost energy
consumption for products with long
defrost cycle durations or with variable
defrost control. The energy use
calculations then weigh the
performance from each test period based
on the known compressor runtime
between defrosts or on a calculated
average time between defrosts in field
operation that is based on the control
parameters for variable defrosts. See
appendices A and B to subpart B of 10
CFR part 430.
Additionally, DOE has addressed
testing of certain CRE models that do
not have automatic defrost in a waiver
granted to AHT published on October
30, 2018. 83 FR 54581 (‘‘October 2018
Waiver’’). For the basic models subject
to the waiver, the test period begins
after steady-state conditions occur
(instead of beginning with a defrost
cycle) and the door-opening period
begins 3 hours after the start of the test
(instead of 3 hours after a defrost cycle).
83 FR 54581, 54583. DOE also granted
AHT an interim waiver for testing
certain models with defrost cycles
longer than 24 hours. 82 FR 24330 (May
26, 2017; ‘‘May 2017 Interim
Waiver’’).32 The interim waiver required
that AHT test the specified models
using a two-part test method similar to
the method for consumer refrigerators,
with the first part capturing normal
compressor operation between defrosts,
including an 8-hour period of door
openings, and the second part capturing
all operation associated with a defrost,
including any pre-cooling or
32 On June 2, 2021, AHT sent a letter to DOE
requesting that this interim waiver be withdrawn.
See www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTWAV-0027-0015.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
temperature recovery following the
defrost. 82 FR 24330, 24332–24333.
For testing CRE with no automatic
defrost, ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
incorporates instructions for starting the
test period and door openings that are
consistent with those provided in the
October 2018 Waiver (i.e., the
instructions do not require a defrost
occurrence). Therefore, DOE
incorporating by reference ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata addresses this test
issue.
For testing CRE with variable defrost,
DOE tentatively determined in the June
2022 NOPR that the existing 24-hour
test period represents typical operation
during a day, including a period of door
openings and a period of closed-door
operation, and did not propose any
additional test requirements. 87 FR
39164, 39206. Units with variable
defrost controls may initiate more
frequent defrosts in response to door
openings, which is captured by the
current test procedure.
The 24-hour test period specified in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata provides
a representative basis for measuring
energy consumption of most CRE,
capturing the defrost occurrences and
door opening periods expected for a 24hour period. Most CRE include multiple
defrosts during a 24-hour test period,
and any incomplete defrost cycle
captured in the test period does not
significantly impact measured energy
consumption. DOE is not proposing to
amend the 24-hour test to require that
the test procedure capture complete
defrost cycles in situations where the
defrost interval is less than 24 hours.
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that for CRE with
defrost cycles longer than 24 hours, the
24-hour test period would overestimate
the actual average defrost energy
contribution during a day. 87 FR 39164,
39206. Therefore, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to allow the use of a
two-part test for CRE with defrost cycles
longer than 24 hours. Id. DOE proposed
the two-part test approach, consistent
with the approach in the May 2017
Interim Waiver, for such equipment—
rather than extending the existing test
period in 24-hour increments—in order
to limit test burden. Id. For the basic
models addressed in the May 2017
Interim Waiver, testing in 24-hour
increments would require three 24-hour
periods (e.g., the duration between
defrosts is 3.5 days, and introducing a
fourth 24-hour period would result in
the test period capturing two defrosts).
Additionally, the 24-hour increment
approach would continue to
overestimate energy consumption
associated with defrosts, albeit to a
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
lesser extent, for defrost intervals that
are not exact multiples of 24 hours (as
is the case with the basic models
covered by the May 2017 Interim
Waiver). The two-part test approach
eliminates the need for multiple door
opening periods and may allow for
much shorter overall test durations
while accounting for defrost
occurrences based on actual defrost
interval durations.
Also consistent with the May 2017
Interim Waiver, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that the two-part test
would be optional because it would
increase test duration compared to the
existing approach (by requiring both a
24-hour test plus a defrost test), and
manufacturers may determine that the
existing test procedure may be more
appropriate their models, even if the
models incorporate defrost intervals
longer than 24 hours. 87 FR 39164,
39206. Specifically, DOE proposed to
allow for testing equipment with defrost
intervals greater than 24 hours using a
two-part test in which the first part is a
24-hour period of stable operation,
including door openings as specified in
ASHRAE 72–2018R, but without any
defrost operation. Id. Stability for the
first part of the test would be
determined according to section 7.5 in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata, by
comparing temperatures determined
during Test A and Test B. A defrost may
occur during the test alignment period,
as defined in section 7.4 of ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata, between Test A
and Test B. The second part of the test
would capture a defrost cycle, including
any pre-cooling and temperature
recovery associated with a defrost.
Rather than referencing the consumer
refrigeration product test procedures (as
done in the May 2017 Interim Waiver
approach), DOE proposed to require that
the start and end of the test period be
determined as, respectively, the last
time before and first time after a defrost
occurrence, when the measured average
simulator temperature (i.e., the
instantaneous average of all test
simulator temperature measurements) is
within 0.5 °F of the IAT as measured
during the first part of the test. 87 FR
39164, 39206, 39207. This would ensure
that the defrost part of the test captures
any pre-cooling operation and
temperature recovery following a defrost
while limiting the overall duration of
the second part of the test.
The May 2017 Interim Waiver
includes certain parameters specific to
the models covered by the waiver,
namely the duration between defrosts.
DOE granted the interim waiver based
on the minimum defrost interval
possible for the equipment (i.e., 3.5
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
66207
days). To generalize the May 2017
Interim Waiver approach for other CRE
models, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that the two-part calculation be
applied based on the minimum duration
between defrosts permitted by the unit’s
controls as shown in the following
equation. 87 FR 39164, 39207.
Where DEC is the daily energy
consumption in kWh/day; ET1 is the
energy consumed during the first part of
the test, in kWh/day; ET2 is the energy
consumed during the second part of the
test, in kWh; tNDI is the normalized
length of defrosting time per day, in
minutes; tDI is the length of time of the
defrosting test period, in minutes; tDC is
the minimum time between defrost
occurrences, in days; and 1,440 is a
conversion factor, in minutes per day.
DOE recognizes that the two-part test
approach could result in slightly less
door-opening energy contribution as the
first part of the test, with no defrost and
8 hours of door openings, would be
combined with the defrost portion of the
test by a calculation. To investigate this
impact, DOE conducted testing on
equipment with defrost intervals longer
than 24 hours and compared results of
the existing test procedure (24-hour test
period, starting with a defrost), the May
2017 Interim Waiver approach (two-part
test, as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR), and a full-duration approach
(multiple 24-hour periods, each with
door opening periods, through a
complete defrost cycle) as illustrated in
Table III.5.
Total display
area
(ft2)
HCT.SC.I
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Unit #1 .............................................................................................................
Unit #2 .............................................................................................................
DOE’s testing showed that the twopart waiver test approach provides an
accurate representation of energy
consumption when measured over a full
defrost cycle (and is therefore
representative of average use).
Additionally, the testing showed that
the existing test procedure approach can
overestimate measured energy use for
CRE with defrost cycles longer than 24
hours.
Based on DOE’s investigative testing,
DOE tentatively determined in the June
2022 NOPR that the May 2017 Interim
Waiver approach, and the approach
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, is
representative of a full defrost cycle
duration approach for equipment with
defrost intervals greater than 24 hours.
87 FR 39164, 39207.
With regard to CRE models with
multiple evaporators (and, therefore,
potentially multiple defrosts) connected
to a single- or multi-stage condensing
unit, ASHRAE 72–2005 does not specify
which evaporator should be used to
determine the defrost cycle that initiates
the test. Additionally, if the defrost
cycles for multiple evaporators do not
activate at the same time during the test,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
12.72
14.84
ASHRAE 72–2005 does not specify
which defrost cycle should be used to
determine the start of the 24-hour test
period. ASHRAE 72–2005 also does not
explicitly address the treatment of
defrost cycles for multi-compartment
CRE models (i.e., hybrid CRE) with
different evaporator temperatures and
defrost sequences.
As discussed earlier in this section,
CRE with automatic defrost typically
include multiple defrost occurrences
per day. DOE expects that any multievaporator CRE with multiple unique
defrost cycle durations would similarly
defrost multiple times per day, and
therefore no change to the existing test
procedure is necessary. However, to
ensure that the 24-hour test period
captures a representative number of
defrosts for each evaporator’s defrost,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to specify that for CRE with multiple
unique defrost intervals for multiple
evaporators, the test period as specified
in ASHRAE 72–2018R would start with
a defrost occurrence for the evaporator
defrost having the longest interval
between defrosts. 87 FR 39164, 39208.
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Current DOE
CRE test
procedure
(kWh/day)
7.12
6.12
May 2017
interim waiver
approach
(kWh/day)
Full defrost
cycle duration
approach
(kWh/day)
6.66
5.61
6.66
5.62
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
approach to account for long-duration
defrost cycles using an optional twopart test procedure consistent with the
existing waiver approach granted for
such models. Id. DOE also requested
comment on whether any additional
provisions are necessary to account for
different defrost operation or controls,
and on DOE’s proposed approach in
which the test period would start with
the defrost occurrence having the
longest interval between defrosts. Id.
AHRI stated its support for DOE’s
proposed approach to account for longduration defrost cycles using an
optional two-part test procedure, and
further recommended that DOE bring
this approach to the ASHRAE 72
committee for review. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
13)
The Joint Commenters commented
that they support DOE’s proposals
regarding testing equipment with long
defrost cycles. (Joint Commenters, No.
31, p. 1)
AHT stated its support for the
proposed approach to account for longduration defrost cycles using the
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
ER26SE23.005</GPH>
TABLE III.5—MAY 2017 INTERIM WAIVER APPROACH INVESTIGATIVE TESTING
66208
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
optional two-part test procedure
consistent with the existing waiver.
(AHT, No. 38, p. 1)
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposed
long defrost duration approach for
determining energy on CRE equipment
that incorporate a defrost interval longer
than 24 hours. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p.
7) Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
approach ASHRAE and request this
approach be evaluated for inclusion in
ASHRAE 72. Id.
The Joint Commenters supported
DOE’s proposal for testing equipment
with defrost cycles greater than 24
hours. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 4)
The Joint Commenters stated that as
DOE discussed in the NOPR, use of a
fixed 24-hour test period might provide
a degree of variability in measured
energy consumption based on
additional defrost cycles, which DOE
proposed to address through an optional
two-part test procedure, based on an
existing test waiver, wherein the first
part captured energy usage during a 24hour operating period and the second
part captured a single defrost cycle. Id.
The Joint Commenters stated that this
approach mirrored that used to address
a similar issue for consumer
refrigeration equipment, and they
supported this approach because it
provides a more representative estimate
of energy usage for CRE with defrost
periods lasting longer than 24 hours. Id.
As discussed, the current industry test
procedures do not include provisions to
specifically account for defrost cycles
longer than 24 hours. DOE has
determined such test provisions are
appropriate to ensure representative
testing of such equipment. To the extent
that future industry standards
incorporate updated provisions to
address defrosts, DOE would consider
those standards as part of a future test
procedure rulemaking.
For these reasons and consistent with
the comments received, DOE is adopting
the approach for accounting for defrosts
as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
2. Total Display Area
Section 3.2 of appendix B provides
instructions regarding the measurement
of TDA, specifying that TDA is the sum
of the projected area(s) of visible
product, expressed in square feet (‘‘ft2’’)
(i.e., portions through which product
can be viewed from an angle normal, or
perpendicular, to the transparent area).
For certain CRE configurations,
merchandise is not necessarily located
at an angle directly normal, or
perpendicular, to the transparent area
despite this area being intended for
customer viewing. For example, for
service over counter ice-cream freezers,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
the ice-cream containers may be placed
within the chest portion of the
refrigerated case, with a glass display
panel on the front and glass rear doors
located above the merchandise storage
area. If the glass display areas are nearly
vertical, the ice-cream containers may
be positioned low enough in the case
that they are not at a viewing angle
perpendicular to the glass. However,
during typical use, customers would
stand close enough to the display glass
that the ice-cream would be visible from
other angles not perpendicular to the
glass.
AHRI 1200–2023 maintains the
existing definition and approach for
TDA, which is based on the visibility of
merchandise at a location normal to the
display surface, but includes additional
diagrams to clarify the determination of
TDA. See appendix D to AHRI 1200–
2023. Figure 10 in AHRI 1200–2023
appendix D shows a service over
counter unit similar to the example
described earlier in this section. The
food load is included only in the lowest
portion of the refrigerated cabinet, and
as a result, only portions of the
transparent areas are considered for the
TDA (i.e., the portions through which
the food load is visible at an angle
normal to the transparent area).
Consistent with the updated version
of AHRI 1200–202X, DOE did not
propose revisions to the current TDA in
the June 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 39164,
39208. As discussed, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1200–202X, which
includes the new appendix D to provide
clarification on how to apply the current
TDA approach to different CRE
configurations. 87 FR 39164, 39208.
DOE is aware that the current DOE
test procedure includes conflicting
instructions regarding the calculation of
TDA for CRE with transparent and nontransparent areas over the length of the
case. The instructions in section 3.1 of
appendix B specify determining the
length of the display area as the interior
length of the CRE model, provided no
more than 5 in. of that length consists
of non-transparent material; or, for those
cases with greater than 5 in. of nontransparent area, the length shall be
determined as the projected linear
dimension(s) of visible product plus 5
in. Figures A3.4 and A3.5 of appendix
B show a similar approach, but instead
reference 10 percent of the total length
as the threshold of non-transparent area
rather than 5 in. The captions for these
figures reference 5 in., consistent with
section 3.1. The April 2014 Final Rule
established these TDA provisions in
appendix B. 79 FR 22277, 22300–22301.
In the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE stated
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that the 10-percent approach rather than
the 5-in. approach would allow for more
consistent application of the TDA
requirements across CRE models. Id.
In addition, DOE incorrectly applied
the 10-percent threshold approach as
shown in Figures A3.4 and A3.5 of
appendix B. As discussed, DOE
intended to provide a consistent TDA
approach for cases with transparent and
non-transparent areas. The equation for
length shown in Figure A3.5 shows that
length equals the total transparent
dimension, multiplied by 1.10. As a
result, the non-transparent area would
represent 10 percent of the transparent
dimension, not 10 percent of the total
length. The correct application would
have length equal to the transparent
dimension divided by 0.9—resulting in
a non-transparent area representing 10
percent of the total length.
Section D.1.1.1 of AHRI 1200–202X
appendix D includes correct equations
regarding TDA and case length as
intended in the April 2014 Final Rule.
Specifically, AHRI 1200–202X applies
the 10-percent threshold approach for
non-transparent area and correctly
calculates the length of the CRE for
cases with non-transparent areas greater
than 10 percent of the length of the case.
As discussed, DOE proposed in the
NOPR to incorporate by reference AHRI
1200–202X, which would correct the
errors regarding TDA calculations
currently included in appendix B.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the June 2022 NOPR
regarding the TDA instructions, and is
adopting the provisions as proposed by
referencing AHRI 1200–2023.
G. Alternative Refrigerants
DOE’s current test procedure for
remote condensing CRE requires the
estimation of compressor EER from
Table 1 of AHRI 1200–2010. The EER
ratings in the table are based on
performance of reciprocating
compressors and were developed based
on refrigerants that historically have
been commonly used for CRE (i.e., R–
404A).
Certain remote CRE installations can
use R–744; however, the existing remote
CRE test procedure does not address the
unique operation for these systems. For
example, the current DOE test
procedure requires an inlet refrigerant
liquid temperature of 80 °F with a
saturated liquid pressure corresponding
to a condensing temperature of 89.6 °F
to 120.2 °F. See ASHRAE 72–2005,
sections 4.3.2 and 4.3.3. R–744 has a
critical point of 87.8 °F and 1,070
pounds per square inch (‘‘psi’’), above
which it is a supercritical fluid.
Accordingly, R–744 cannot be a liquid
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
at the specified condensing temperature
conditions (i.e., it would either be a gas
or supercritical fluid, depending on
pressure). Additionally, R–744 systems
typically include multiple stages of
compression and cooling, resulting in
liquid supplied to the refrigerant cases
at conditions not necessarily defined by
the typical condensing unit conditions.
DOE has recently granted a waiver for
specific models of CRE to address R–744
operating conditions for testing walk-in
cooler and walk-in freezer unit coolers.
86 FR 14887 (March 19, 2021; ‘‘March
2021 Waiver’’). For testing of the
specified basic models, the March 2021
Waiver requires liquid inlet saturation
temperature and liquid inlet subcooling
of 38 °F and 5 °F, respectively. 86 FR
14887, 14889. The March 2021 Waiver
also maintains the existing compressor
energy consumption determination
based on an approach consistent with
the CRE remote calculations using AHRI
1200–2010 (the walk-in requirements
instead refer to the walk-ins rating
standard, AHRI 1250–2009, which
includes the same EER table as AHRI
1200–2010). Id.
For all remote CRE, the DOE test
procedure requires measuring energy
consumption of the refrigerated case
and the heat gain of the refrigerant
providing cooling to the remote case.
AHRI 1200–2010 specifies a calculation
of compressor energy consumption
based on the heat gain measured for the
test refrigerant. DOE is aware that
manufacturers may specify the use of
multiple refrigerants for a single remote
CRE cabinet and that the current test
procedure allows for consistent testing
of such equipment regardless of
refrigerant used for testing.
Manufacturers are already testing and
rating systems that can use R–744, likely
by testing with non- R–744 refrigerants
under the existing test conditions,
according to the existing approach,
which references AHRI 1200–2010. DOE
expects that any ratings for current R–
744 systems are based on testing with
another refrigerant capable of
maintaining the conditions specified in
ASHRAE 72–2005.
Based on a review of CRE that are
capable of using R–744, DOE observed
that many of these models also may be
installed for use with other refrigerants
that can be tested under the existing
approach. However, any remote CRE
that are intended for use only with R–
744 would not be able to be tested
according to the current DOE test
procedure due to the specified liquid
conditions specified in ASHRAE 72–
2005. To allow for testing remote CRE
with R–744, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to adopt alternate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
refrigerant conditions consistent with
those granted in the March 2021 Waiver
for walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer
unit coolers with CO2 refrigerant. 87 FR
39164, 39209. DOE proposed that for
remote CRE tested with direct
expansion CO2, the liquid inlet
saturation temperature be 38 °F with
liquid inlet subcooling of 5 °F. 87 FR
39164, 39209, 39210.
DOE research into the performance of
different configurations of R–744
booster systems indicates that enhanced
R–744 cycles can match conventional
refrigerants in average efficiency. Even
though the EER values included in
AHRI 1200–202X for remote
compressors were initially established
for conventional refrigerants, DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022
NOPR that they are also appropriate for
determining compressor energy
consumption of CO2 remote systems. 87
FR 39164, 39210. DOE recognizes that
the actual compressor energy
consumption of a specific remote
system will vary based on a number of
parameters (e.g., ambient conditions,
refrigerant conditions necessary for the
remote cases), but tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
the values included in AHRI 1200–202X
are appropriate for determining the
energy consumption of an average use
cycle for all remote CRE as tested under
the proposed test procedure. Id.
In addition to R–744, in this final
rule, DOE has determined that the EER
table in AHRI 1200–2023 is appropriate
for other alternative refrigerants. DOE
similarly researched compressor EERs at
a range of operating conditions for
refrigerants other than R–404A,
including R–407A, R–407F, and R–
507A, and found the existing EERs to be
representative based on expected
operating conditions. Additionally,
AHRI 1200–2023 further improves the
consistency of the EER approach by
including additional instructions
regarding the use of high-glide
refrigerants. DOE did not propose
additional amendments to address
alternative refrigerants other than CO2
in the June 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 39164,
39210.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
alternate refrigerant conditions to be
used for testing remote CRE with CO2
refrigerant. Id. DOE requested comment
on whether any other aspects of the
current test procedure require
amendment to allow for testing with
CO2 or any other alternative refrigerants.
Id.
AHRI commented that regarding
testing with CO2 (i.e., R–744) or any
other alternate refrigerants, it is not
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66209
aware of any alternative refrigerants, nor
is it aware of any aspects of the current
test procedure that would require
amendments to the test procedure.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 13) AHRI stated that
manufacturers are still working to
determine which refrigerants they will
use to comply with the AIM Act, and
advised DOE to consider that there may
be additional refrigerants and properties
to those refrigerants that are currently
unknown and will need to be taken
under consideration. Id. AHRI
tentatively agreed with the proposed
alternate condition for testing CRE with
CO2 refrigerant as specified by DOE, that
‘‘the liquid inlet saturation temperature
be 38 °F with liquid inlet subcooling of
5 °F.’’ Id. AHRI stipulated that it would
be necessary to add tolerances to both
liquid temperature and subcooling
values and recommended DOE wait for
the ASHRAE 72 committee to address
typical conditions for CO2 remote CRE
in its ASHRAE 72 update. Id.
The Joint Commenters commented
that they support DOE’s proposals
regarding the use of a CO2 refrigerant
(i.e., R–744). (Joint Commenters, No. 31,
p. 1) The Joint Commenters also stated
their support for DOE’s proposed
specifications regarding CO2 refrigerant
in remote condensing CRE. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 4) The Joint
Commenters noted that DOE’s current
test procedure did not account for the
unique operating conditions of CO2charged systems and that DOE proposed
in the NOPR to adopt alternate
refrigerant conditions consistent with
those granted in a March 2021 waiver
for walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer
unit coolers using CO2 refrigerant.33 Id.
The Joint Commenters expressed
support for this change, stating it would
result in more representative energy
usage for CRE utilizing CO2 refrigerant.
Id.
Hillphoenix tentatively agreed with
the proposed alternate condition for
testing CRE with CO2 refrigerant (i.e., R–
744) as specified by DOE: ‘‘the liquid
inlet saturation temperature be 38 °F
with liquid inlet subcooling of 5 °F’’;
however, Hillphoenix stated that it
would be necessary to add tolerances to
both liquid temperature and subcooling
values. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7)
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
should wait for an update to ASHRAE
72 because the committee is addressing
typical conditions for CO2 remote CRE
testing. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting,
Arneg commented that if regarding the
proposal for the liquid inlet saturation
temperature to be 38 °F and a 5 °F sub33 87
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
FR 39209, 39210.
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66210
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
cooling, or bottom-line 33 °F liquid,
there would be an operational problem
at the medium-temperature CO2 (i.e., R–
744) application. (Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 41, p. 48) Arneg stated
that it is not sure what that 38 °F and
5 °F are representing. Id. Arneg
commented that at this rate, for 33 °F
liquid inlet temperature, there is an
issue with medium-temperature
application. Id. When prompted as to
whether there was any temperature it
considers more appropriate or
representative, Arneg stated that 36 °F to
38 °F seems to be a reasonable
temperature range. Id.
Zero Zone commented that the
proposed temperatures for testing CO2
(i.e., R–744) are appropriate but
recommended that DOE utilize
tolerances similar to those stated for
liquid refrigerant temperature in the
current draft of ASHRAE 72. (Zero
Zone, No. 37, p. 9) Zero Zone
commented that CO2 systems have a
certain degree of operational instability
and recommended that there should be
a tolerance for the average and a
tolerance for individual measurement.
Id. Zero Zone recommended these
tolerances should be applied to the
refrigerant temperature and the
saturated refrigerant temperature of CO2.
Id. Zero Zone further urged that this
issue should be addressed by the
ASHRAE 72 working group. Id.
DOE agrees with commenters that
revisions to certain liquid refrigerant
test conditions and tolerances are
appropriate for the liquid refrigerant test
conditions. DOE recognizes that remote
CRE using R–744 are currently available
and that a future version of ASHRAE 72
may include liquid refrigerant test
conditions for CRE connected to a direct
expansion remote condensing unit with
R–744, however an updated version of
ASHRAE 72 with such conditions is not
yet available.
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
specifies liquid refrigerant temperature,
liquid refrigerant pressure, and liquid
refrigerant subcooling for liquid
refrigerant test conditions for directexpansion remote units. In the June
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed a liquid
inlet saturation temperature of 38 °F
with a liquid inlet subcooling of 5 °F for
R–744, which together would require a
liquid refrigerant temperature of 33 °F,
which is consistent with Arneg’s
comment in the August 2022 public
meeting.
As stated, Arneg also suggested a
different liquid refrigerant temperature
of between 36 °F to 38 °F (mid-point
temperature is 37 °F).
Commenters agreed with the liquid
inlet saturation temperature (specified
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
as the liquid refrigerant pressure or the
saturated liquid pressure corresponding
to a condensing temperature in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata) of 38 °F
and, consistent with feedback from
commenters, DOE is maintaining that
test condition in this final rule.
However, as suggested by comments
received in response to the June 2022
NOPR, DOE considered tolerances for
the liquid refrigerant temperature,
saturation temperature, and subcooling
requirements.
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
specifies the liquid refrigerant
temperature to be 80.0 °F with a
tolerance for the average over the test
period of ±5.0 °F and a tolerance for the
individual measurements of ±10.0 °F.
Also, ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
specifies the saturated liquid pressure
corresponding to a condensing
temperature in the range of 89.6 °F to
120.2 °F (e.g., roughly a ±15 °F range) for
the average over test period. These
liquid conditions and tolerances are
based on operation in a singlecompressor-stage system rejecting heat
to outdoor ambient conditions. Because
the liquid entering display cases in CO2
booster systems is at an intermediate
temperature and pressure (i.e., at a level
between the high-side outdoor heat
rejection conditions and the low-side
display case evaporating conditions), it
is not expected that the potential range
of its temperature or pressure could be
as large. In order to maintain test
condition flexibility while addressing
these differences for CO2, DOE is
selecting reduced allowable ranges for
the saturated temperature and
temperature conditions, specifically
±6 °F for the average saturation
temperature, and ±3 °F for the average
liquid temperature. Therefore, for
commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers connected to a
direct expansion remote condensing
unit with R–744, DOE is requiring in
this final rule that, instead of the
saturated liquid pressure corresponding
to a condensing temperature range
specified in appendix A to ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata, the saturated liquid
pressure corresponding to a condensing
temperature range shall be 38.0 °F
±6.0 °F or 32.0 °F to 44.0 °F for the
average over test period.
DOE notes that, during operation,
liquid temperature must remain below
saturation temperature to prevent
formation of bubbles in the liquid line,
which can cause flow instability
through the refrigerant expansion
device. Hence, DOE is reducing the
specified liquid temperature from the
33 °F level adopted in the Hussmann
waiver to 30 °F. This would not
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
completely eliminate crossover of these
temperature with the selected
tolerances, but would limit the potential
for such crossover (i.e., maximum liquid
temperature would be 33 °F, while
minimum saturation temperature would
be 32 °F).
To ensure that no such crossover
could occur, DOE is requiring that
subcooling (the difference between
saturation temperature and liquid
temperature) be at least 2 °F. While
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata specifies
subcooling >0 °R, the specified accuracy
for the temperature measurement is
±1.4 °F. Therefore, to ensure subcooling
occurs, DOE has determined to use the
test condition tolerance for liquid
refrigerant subcooling of >2 °R for
average over test period, which with the
given accuracy requirement would
ensure at least 0.6 °F subcooling.
DOE recognizes that fluctuations
could occur during testing, e.g., the
refrigerant liquid temperature could
fluctuate. As mentioned above, DOE is
requiring that the average refrigerant
temperature vary no more than 3 °F from
the specified 30 °F target. To limit
fluctuations, DOE is additionally
requiring that the maximum range of
individual liquid temperature
measurements be ±5 °F. This is
consistent with the operating tolerance
ranges for refrigerant liquid saturation
temperature and subcooling allowed for
testing of WICF unit coolers 34 in AHRI
1250–2020 (i.e., the latest version of the
test standard specified in the March
2021 Hussmann waiver). Therefore, for
commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers connected to a
direct expansion remote condensing
unit with R–744, DOE is requiring in
this final rule that, instead of the liquid
refrigerant test conditions specified in
appendix A to ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata, the liquid refrigerant temperature
shall be 30.0 °F with a tolerance for the
average over test period of ±3.0 °F and
a tolerance for the individual
measurements of ±5.0 °F.
DOE has determined that these liquid
refrigerant test conditions for CRE
connected to a direct expansion remote
condensing unit with R–744 are
representative, repeatable, and
reproducible.
In summary, for commercial
refrigerators, freezers, and refrigeratorfreezers connected to a direct expansion
remote condensing unit with R–744,
DOE is requiring in this final rule that,
instead of the liquid refrigerant
34 Unit coolers are the walk-in component most
comparable to remote refrigerated cabinets, in that
they operate with high-pressure subcooled liquid
entering the component and low-pressure
superheated vapor leaving it.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
measurements for direct-expansion
remote units specified in appendix A to
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata, the
liquid refrigerant measurements for
direct-expansion remote units shall be:
liquid refrigerant temperature shall be
30.0 °F with a tolerance for the average
over test period of ±3.0 °F and a
tolerance for the individual
measurements of ±5.0 °F; liquid
refrigerant pressure shall be the
saturated liquid pressure corresponding
to a condensing temperature in the
range of 32.0 °F to 44.0 °F for the average
over test period; and liquid refrigerant
subcooling shall be greater than 2.0 °R
for the average over test period.
If manufacturers adopt additional
refrigerant types that cannot be tested
according to the test procedure as
established in this final rule,
manufacturers may petition for a waiver
to ensure that equipment using such
refrigerants can be tested and certified
to DOE.
H. Certification of Compartment
Volume
DOE’s current test procedure
incorporates by reference AHAM HRF–
1–2008 to measure compartment
volume. DOE acknowledges that
manufacturers often use CAD in
designing their equipment. However,
the current test procedure and
certification provisions for CRE do not
provide for using CAD drawings to
determine compartment volume. Using
CAD drawings as the basis for
determining compartment volumes may
be particularly helpful when the
geometric designs of the CRE make
physical measurements in accordance
with AHAM HRF–1–2008 difficult.
Currently, DOE’s certification
requirements in 10 CFR part 429
include provisions for certifying volume
for basic models of consumer
refrigeration products, commercial gasfired and oil-fired instantaneous water
heaters, and hot water supply boilers
using CAD drawings. 10 CFR 429.72(c),
(d), and (e).
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that calculating
volume according to CAD drawings
would reduce manufacturer test burden
and may allow for more accurate
measurements of volume for
complicated cabinet designs. 87 FR
39164, 39210. DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to adopt provisions in 10
CFR part 429 to allow for certifying
volume for basic models of CRE using
CAD drawings. To ensure that volumes
determined based on CAD drawings are
consistent with testing actual
production models, DOE also proposed
certain enforcement provisions as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
discussed in section III.J of this final
rule.
DOE did not receive any comments in
response to the proposal for using CAD
drawings for volume measurements, and
is adopting those provisions as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
I. Test Procedure Waivers
A person may seek a waiver from the
test procedure requirements for a
particular basic model of a type of
covered equipment when the basic
model for which the petition for waiver
is submitted contains one or more
design characteristics that (1) prevent
testing according to the prescribed test
procedure or (2) cause the prescribed
test procedures to evaluate the basic
model in a manner so unrepresentative
of its true energy consumption
characteristics as to provide materially
inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR
431.401(a)(1).
In addition to the test procedure
waivers discussed, DOE granted test
procedure waivers to address certain
CRE designed for specialized
applications. Specifically, on September
12, 2018, DOE published a test
procedure waiver for ITW for testing
specified basic models of grocery and
general merchandise system equipment
(i.e., refrigerated storage allowing for
order storage and customer pickup). 83
FR 46148 (‘‘September 2018 Waiver’’).
The specified basic models have
characteristics that include floating
suction temperatures for individual
compartments, different typical dooropening cycles, and a high-temperature
‘‘ambient’’ compartment. 83 FR 46148,
46149. DOE similarly granted
Hussmann an interim waiver for testing
CRE intended for short-term storage and
designed for loading and retrieving
product a limited number of times per
day. 86 FR 40548 (July 28, 2021; ‘‘July
2021 Interim Waiver’’).
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to adopt test procedure provisions to
address the equipment characteristics at
issue in the September 2018 Waiver and
the July 2021 Interim Waiver. 87 FR
39164, 39211. For both waiver cases, the
subject basic models are intended for
short-term storage of refrigerated
merchandise and limited door opening
cycles per day (e.g., holding customer
orders and maintaining refrigerated
temperatures until customer pickup).
DOE acknowledges that this equipment
includes individual-secured
compartments that are accessible only to
the customer for order retrieval (e.g., by
providing the customer with a unique
unlocking function to access the
compartment). DOE also conducted a
review of the market of this type of
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66211
equipment and found similar
characteristics and features in currently
available models (e.g., contactless
pickup of customer orders using digital
locks). Therefore, DOE proposed in the
NOPR to name this equipment
‘‘customer order storage cabinets’’ to
differentiate it from other CRE. DOE is
proposing to define ‘‘customer order
storage cabinets’’ as CRE that store
customer orders and include individual,
secured compartments with doors that
are accessible to customers for order
retrieval. 87 FR 39164, 39211.
Consistent with the waiver and
interim waiver, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that customer order
storage cabinets be tested according to
the conventional CRE test procedure,
except that the door openings be
conducted by opening each door to the
fully open position for 8 seconds, once
every 2 hours, for 6 door-opening
cycles. Id. DOE tentatively determined
in the June 2022 NOPR that this
proposed approach, consistent with the
September 2018 Waiver and the July
2021 Interim Waiver, was representative
of typical use of this equipment. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
term ‘‘customer order storage cabinet’’
and its definition to describe the
equipment currently addressed in the
September 2018 Waiver and the July
2021 Interim Waiver. Id. DOE requested
comment on the proposal to test such
equipment with reduced door openings,
consistent with the waiver and interim
waiver approach. Id.
AHRI supported the proposed
definition of ‘‘customer order storage
cabinet,’’ and recommended that DOE
consult with the ASHRAE 72 committee
on this approach. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 14)
Hillphoenix agreed with the term
‘‘customer order storage cabinet’’ and
definitions as proposed in the NOPR.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 8) Hillphoenix
recommended that DOE provide
research for the opening characteristics
used to determine the door-opening
procedure. Id. Hillphoenix
recommended that DOE approach
industry and request updated testing
standards that better reflect actual
product intent, which would drive
consistency within the industry and be
less burdensome on manufacturers. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting,
True stated that regardless of whether
the equipment is limited-opening or
limited-application, it still has to
comply with the food safety temperature
requirements of NSF 7. (Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 41, p. 24) True
commented that providing the option
for a different procedure on this
application would be giving somebody
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66212
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
a pass for something that should not be
considered. Id. True commented that
the proposed term ‘‘customer order
storage cabinet’’ and definition should
not exist, as equipment intended to be
used for order retrieval applications is
designed to operate around the clock
and not only at certain times, nor is it
unplugged at night. (True, No. 28, p. 5)
True commented that such units would
therefore logically fall under the same
category as a storage refrigerator or a
storage freezer and should meet the
same energy and temperature
performance requirements (i.e., ¥15 °F,
0 °F, and 38 °F) since these units are
used to store perishable food items and
therefore need to follow NSF/ANSI 7–
2021. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting,
the CA IOUs commented that they
wanted DOE to be aware that there are
also heated and non-cooled storage
cabinets, and there are products on the
market that can do all three for the same
compartments. (Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 41, p. 24) As a result, the
CA IOUs recommended that DOE add
the word ‘‘refrigerated’’ to clarify things.
Id.
DOE has reviewed operating
characteristics for this equipment
through the waivers received. DOE has
based the reduced number of door
openings on the customer usage data
presented in those petitions for waiver
and has determined that the number of
openings is representative of an average
use cycle for this equipment based on
the available data. DOE notes that the
available data indicate that the door
openings for this equipment are
significantly less frequent than for other
types of CRE.
In response to True’s comments, the
purpose of DOE’s test procedure
measures the energy consumption of
equipment during a representative
average use cycle as compared to the
purpose of NSF 7, which is ensuring
food safety. DOE has identified unique
equipment characteristics for this
equipment and is establishing the
definition of customer order storage
cabinet as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR. DOE recognizes that the reduced
number of door openings would result
in lower energy use for this equipment
as compared to the test procedure with
door openings as specified in ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata.
Because DOE has determined that this
equipment can be defined by unique
characteristics (i.e., storing customer
orders and including individual,
secured compartments with doors that
are accessible to customers for order
retrieval) and it has significantly
different operating characteristics as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
compared to other CRE (i.e., 6 dooropening cycles in 24 hours as compared
to 48 door-opening cycles for other
CRE), DOE is adopting the definition
and test method for this equipment as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
Regarding heated or non-cooled
storage cabinets, such storage cabinets
without cooling functionality would not
meet the definition of CRE. The
definition of customer order storage
cabinet specifies that this equipment is
a commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer; therefore, DOE has
determined that specifying customer
order storage cabinets are refrigerated is
not necessary.
In addition to door-opening cycles,
the September 2018 Waiver specifies
testing provisions for other
characteristics of the specified basic
models, including floating suction
temperatures for individual
compartments and the presence of a
high-temperature ‘‘ambient’’
compartment. 83 FR 46148, 46149–
46152.
To address the floating suction
temperature aspect of the basic models
subject to the September 2018 Waiver,
DOE requires the use of an alternate test
approach for testing and rating the
equipment in a manner similar to the
remote CRE test procedure. 83 FR
46148, 46151. Specifically, DOE
requires that this equipment be tested
using an inverse refrigeration load test
(i.e., a reverse heat leak method). Id.
This test allows for determining the
thermal load of the cabinet at the
specified storage temperatures without
requiring refrigerant to be supplied to
the unit (as refrigerant is supplied from
an integral condensing unit). The
September 2018 Waiver specifies
calculating energy consumption
associated with the thermal load based
on assumed EERs, consistent with those
specified in AHRI 1200–2010. 83 FR
46148, 46151–46152. The calculations
also account for component energy
consumption and heat loads. Id. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
adopt this alternate test procedure for
any customer order storage cabinets that
supply refrigerant to multiple
individual-secured compartments and
that allow the suction pressure from the
evaporator in each individual-secured
compartment to float based on the
temperature required to store the
customer order in that individualsecured compartment. 87 FR 39164,
39211.
For the high-temperature ‘‘ambient’’
compartments in the basic models
specified in the September 2018 Waiver,
DOE requires that testing be based on a
75 °F storage temperature for these
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
compartments and that the ambient
compartment be treated as a mediumtemperature compartment at 75 °F. 83
FR 46148, 46150. The September 2018
Waiver also requires that all volume and
energy consumption calculations be
included within the mediumtemperature category and summed with
other medium-temperature
compartment calculations. Id. The
September 2018 Waiver further requires
that compartments that are convertible
between ambient and refrigerator
temperature ranges be tested at the
refrigerator temperature (38 °F) and that
compartments that are convertible
between refrigerator and freezer (0 °F)
temperature ranges be tested at both
temperatures. Id. DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to adopt the existing
waiver instructions for customer order
storage cabinets that have at least one
individual-secured compartment that is
not capable of maintaining an IAT
below the ambient dry-bulb temperature
(i.e., the individual-secured
compartment(s) may include
refrigeration systems to ensure proper
storage temperatures but are only
intended to operate at an IAT of 75 °F
±2 °F and not at a LAPT or the specified
refrigerator or freezer temperatures). 87
FR 39164, 39211. Additionally, with the
proposed introduction of hightemperature refrigerators, as discussed
in sections III.A.1 and III.B.1.b of this
final rule, DOE proposed that such
compartments would be treated as hightemperature refrigerators rather than
refrigerators upon the compliance date
of any new energy conservation
standards for high-temperature
refrigerators. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the additional
proposed test procedure amendments
that would allow for reverse heat leak
testing of customer order storage
cabinets with floating suction pressures
for multiple different temperature
compartments. Id.
AHRI requested more information
from DOE regarding the additional
proposed test procedure amendments
that would allow for reverse heat leak
testing of customer order storage
cabinets with floating suction pressures
for multiple temperature compartments.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 14)
Hillphoenix stated tentative
disagreement with the additional
proposed test procedure amendments
and recommended clarification of the
proposed process. (Hillphoenix, No. 35,
p. 8) Hillphoenix commented that DOE
should not adopt the amendments until
industry reviews, tests, and approvals
are given by industry standards
committees. Id.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
As discussed in the petition leading to
the September 2018 Waiver, the
condensing unit control functionality is
similar to that found on a parallel rack
in a supermarket, with refrigeration
capacity managed with a floating or
moving saturated suction temperature.
See 82 FR 33081, 33092. DOE received
no comments in response to the notice
announcing the petition for waiver and
interim waiver approach, and granted
the September 2018 Waiver. DOE has
determined that this equipment has a
different usage profile as compared to
other CRE, and is establishing the
alternate test procedure as proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR, and consistent
with the approach granted in the
September 2018 Waiver.
J. Enforcement Provisions
Subpart C of 10 CFR part 429
establishes enforcement provisions
applicable to covered products and
covered equipment, including CRE.
Product-specific enforcement provisions
are established in 10 CFR 429.134.
Various provisions in 10 CFR 429.134
specify which ratings or measurements
DOE will use to determine compliance
with applicable energy or water
conservation standards. Generally, DOE
provides that the certified metric is used
for enforcement purposes (e.g.,
calculation of the applicable energy
conservation standard) if the average
value measured during assessment and
enforcement testing is within a specified
percent of the rated value. Otherwise,
the average measured value would be
used.
Section 429.134 currently does not
contain product-specific enforcement
provisions for CRE. However, DOE does
currently provide product-specific
enforcement provisions for refrigerated
bottled or canned beverage vending
machines, specifying that the certified
refrigerated volume will be considered
valid only if the measurement(s) (either
the measured refrigerated volume for a
single-unit sample or the average of the
measured refrigerated volumes for a
multiple-unit sample) is within 5
percent of the certified refrigerated
volume. 10 CFR 429.134(j)(1). The test
procedure for measuring volume of
beverage vending machines is consistent
with the procedure required for CRE,
and vending machines typically have
volumes similar to those for CRE.
Because of the same test methods and
similar equipment sizes, in the June
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed consistent
product-specific enforcement provisions
for CRE. 87 FR 39164, 39211.
Specifically, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to add a new productspecific enforcement provision section
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
stating that the certified volume for CRE
will be considered valid only if the
measurement(s) (either the measured
volume for a single-unit sample or the
average of the measured volumes for a
multiple-unit sample) is within 5
percent of the certified volume;
otherwise, the measured volume would
be used as the basis for determining the
applicable energy conservation
standard. Id.
DOE has also established productspecific enforcement provisions for
transparent areas of beverage vending
machines. 10 CFR 429.134(j)(2).
However, display area is only used to
determine equipment class for beverage
vending machines and TDA is not a
metric used to determine applicable
energy conservation standards. For
consistency with the volume approach,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that the certified TDA for CRE will be
considered valid only if the
measurement(s) (either the measured
TDA for a single-unit sample or the
average of the measured TDAs for a
multiple-unit sample) is within 5
percent of the certified TDA. 87 FR
39164, 39212. If the certified TDA is
found not to be valid, the measured
TDA would be used to determine the
applicable energy conservation
standard.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the proposed
product-specific enforcement provisions
for CRE. 87 FR 39164, 39212.
AHRI commented expressing concern
that the proposed product-specific
enforcement provisions for CRE are not
open-ended, but it offered tentative
support for the proposed provisions and
requested that DOE provide more
information through a public meeting to
clarify intent. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 14)
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
clarify how enforcement would be
applied if the sampling plan were to be
adopted and how implementing such
provisions would benefit end users and/
or manufacturers. (Hillphoenix, No. 35,
p. 8)
NAMA commented that it understood
the desire to develop common language
on certified volume measurements;
however, a beverage vending machine
and a bottle cooler are not necessarily
the same product since in a BVM,
bottles or cans have specific placement
and the volume could be constructed
based on the uniform measurement of
the refrigerated space available for the
beverage containers, while a bottle
cooler’s refrigerated space depends on
how a customer decides on placement.
(NAMA, No. 33, p. 3) NAMA urged DOE
to study this issue more closely and to
use examples of how DOE intended to
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66213
measure the volume in this case and
why it believed certified volume should
be stated in the same way as BVM
because manufacturers might file Test
Procedure Waivers for individual cases.
Id.
The relevant capacity metrics for CRE
will continue to be tested in accordance
with the DOE test procedure for CRE,
not BVMs. DOE referred to BVMs only
as an example of another equipment
type with product-specific enforcement
provisions and a similar capacity metric
(i.e., volume).
Product-specific enforcement
provisions are included to clarify how
DOE would determine compliance in
the case of any enforcement actions. For
equipment such as CRE, the applicable
energy conservation standard is
calculated based on the capacity metric.
Product-specific enforcement provisions
provide manufacturers certainty that
DOE will determine compliance based
on the same capacity metrics as the
manufacturer, so long as the capacity
metrics are rated correctly (i.e., these
provisions provide certainty regarding
the maximum daily energy consumption
for a given CRE basic model, if volume
or TDA are rated correctly). DOE has
these provisions for many similar
products and equipment. If the tested
volume or TDA from DOE enforcement
testing is near the certified value, DOE
will use the certified value as the basis
for calculating the appliable standard
for compliance determinations. For the
reasons discussed, DOE is adopting the
product-specific enforcement provisions
as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
The product-specific enforcement
provisions are intended to provide
clarity on the energy conservation
standard applicable to a specific basic
model of CRE. Determinations of
compliance based on tested energy
consumption will continue to be based
on the enforcement provisions in 10
CFR 429.110.
K. Lowest Application Product
Temperature
Section 2.2 of appendix B specifies
that if a unit is not able to be operated
at the specified IAT, the unit is tested
at the LAPT, defined in 10 CFR 431.62
as the lowest IAT at which a given basic
model is capable of consistently
operating (i.e., maintaining so as to
comply with the steady-state
stabilization requirements specified in
ASHRAE 72–2005 for the purposes of
testing under the DOE test procedure).
Section 2.2 of appendix B specifies that
for units equipped with a thermostat,
LAPT is the lowest thermostat setting;
for remote condensing equipment
without a thermostat or other means of
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66214
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
controlling temperature at the case, the
LAPT is the temperature achieved with
the dew point temperature (as defined
in AHRI Standard 1200–2010) set to 5
degrees colder than that required to
maintain the manufacturer’s lowest
specified application temperature.
DOE’s Compliance Certification
Database 35 lists all CRE models certified
to DOE, including the LAPT used for
rating each model, if applicable. Of the
28,478 single-compartment individual
models included in the Compliance
Certification Database at the time of the
June 2022 NOPR analysis, 460
individual models are rated at LAPTs.
Of these individual models, 77 are rated
at LAPTs below the required test IAT.
For example, multiple refrigerator
models are rated at an IAT of 34 °F
(instead of 38 °F ±2 °F), and multiple
freezer models are rated at an IAT of
¥7 °F (instead of 0 °F ±2 °F).
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to maintain the current LAPT provisions
and add an additional provision for
testing CRE that are only capable of
maintaining temperatures below the
specified IAT range (or for buffet tables
or preparation tables, the average pan
temperature of all measurements taken
during the test). 87 FR 39164, 39212.
For these units, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to test at the highest
thermostat setting, which would allow
testing the CRE under the setting closest
to the required IAT (or for buffet tables
or preparation tables, the average pan
temperature of all measurements taken
during the test). Id. Also in the NOPR,
DOE proposed to amend the definition
of LAPT in 10 CFR 431.62 to the
following:
‘‘Lowest application product
temperature’’ means the integrated
average temperature (or for buffet tables
or preparation tables, the average pan
temperature of all measurements taken
during the test) at which a given basic
model is capable of consistently
operating that is closest to the integrated
average temperature (or for buffet tables
or preparation tables, the average pan
temperature of all measurements taken
during the test) specified for testing
under the DOE test procedure. 87 FR
39164, 39212.
For testing, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to specify that if a unit is
not able to operate at the integrated
average temperature specified for testing
(or average pan temperature, as
applicable), test the unit at the LAPT, as
defined in 10 CFR 431.62. Id. DOE
proposed that for units equipped with a
35 U.S. Department of Energy Compliance
Certification Database, available at
www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
thermostat, LAPT is the lowest
thermostat setting (for units that are
only able to operate at temperatures
above the specified integrated average
temperature or average pan temperature)
or the highest thermostat setting (for
units that are only able to operate at
temperatures below the specified
integrated average temperature or
average pan temperature). Id. DOE
proposed that for remote condensing
equipment without a thermostat or other
means of controlling temperature at the
case, the LAPT is the temperature
achieved with the dew point
temperature, or mid-point evaporator
temperature for high-glide refrigerants
(as defined in AHRI Standard 1200–
202X), set to 5 degrees colder than that
required to maintain the manufacturer’s
specified application temperature
closest to the specified integrated
average temperature or average pan
temperature. Id.
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that this proposal
would not affect current CRE ratings or
testing costs, because the models
currently available on the market that
would be tested under the newly
proposed provision are already testing
and rating in accordance with the
proposed approach. Id.
In response to the June 2022 NOPR,
The CA IOUs commented that they
support the proposal to shift to testing
CRE product classes at consistent
temperatures versus testing at the LAPT
within each category, such as: lowtemperature freezer (to be tested at 0 °F
±2 °F); medium-temperature refrigerator
(to be tested at 38 °F ±2 °F); and hightemperature refrigerator (operates above
38 °F ±2 °F, to be tested at 55 °F). (CA
IOUs, No. 36, p. 10) The CA IOUs added
that testing at consistent product
temperatures would improve
comparability of energy consumption
between products within each category.
Id.
The updated provisions for ice cream
freezers, low temp freezers, medium
temp refrigerators, and high-temp
refrigerators will limit the need to apply
LAPT testing in the future. Equipment
will be categorized and rated based on
operating temperatures, consistent with
the CA IOUs recommendations. To the
extent that equipment in these
categories cannot maintain the specified
IAT, the equipment would either be
classified in a different category or
would be tested under the LAPT
provisions.
Even with the updated operating
temperature categories, basic models
may still only be capable of maintaining
temperatures below the specified IAT
range for testing. DOE is adopting the
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
LAPT rating provisions as proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR to allow for testing
and rating such basic models.
L. Removal of Obsolete Provisions
The DOE test procedure in appendix
B is required for testing CRE
manufactured on or after March 28,
2017, and appendix A applies to CRE
manufactured prior to that date. As
such, appendix A is now obsolete for
new units being manufactured.
Therefore, DOE proposed in the NOPR
to remove appendix A. 87 FR 39164,
39212. DOE did not propose to
redesignate appendix B as appendix A
to avoid confusion regarding the
appropriate version of the test
procedure required for use. Id.
Additionally, the title to appendix B
is currently ‘‘Amended Uniform Test
Method for the Measurement of Energy
Consumption of Commercial
Refrigerators, Freezers, and RefrigeratorFreezers.’’ To avoid confusion with the
other test procedure amendments
proposed in this final rule, DOE
proposed in the NOPR to amend the
title to appendix B to remove the word
‘‘amended.’’ 87 FR 39164, 39212.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE also
proposed to remove outdated standards
incorporated by reference in 10 CFR
431.63 that would no longer be
referenced under the proposed test
procedure. Id. Specifically, DOE
proposed to remove reference to ANSI/
AHAM HRF–1–2004, AHAM HRF–1–
2008, and ASHRAE 72–2005. Id. DOE
would maintain the listing of standards
referenced in 10 CFR 431.66 (‘‘Energy
conservation standards and their
effective dates’’) and would consider
removing those referenced standards
when proposing any amendments to
that section of the CFR as part of any
future amended energy conservation
standards. Id.
DOE received no comments in
response to the amendments proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR and is adopting
the changes as proposed.
M. Sampling Plan
DOE’s current certification
requirements mandate reporting of the
chilled or frozen compartment volume
in cubic feet, the adjusted volume in
cubic feet, or the TDA (as appropriate
for the equipment class). 10 CFR
429.42(b)(2)(iii). However, the sampling
plan requirements in 10 CFR 429.42(a)
do not specify how to determine the
represented value of volume or TDA for
each basic model based on the test
results from the sample of individual
models tested. Similar to the
requirements for other covered products
and commercial equipment, DOE
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that
any represented value of volume or TDA
for the basic model be determined as the
mean of the measured volumes or TDAs
for the units in the test sample, based on
the same tests used to determine the
reported energy consumption. 87 FR
39164, 39213. Although not currently
specified in 10 CFR 429.42, DOE
expects manufacturers are currently
certifying CRE performance based on
the tested volume and TDA. Id.
Therefore, the amendment proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR would clarify the
certification requirements but not
impose any additional burden on
manufacturers. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought
comment on the proposed sampling
plan for CRE volume and TDA. Id.
AHRI commented that the proposed
sampling plan for CRE volume and TDA
required modification and that DOE
should certify the volume and TDA,
stating that these are important values
and critical to determining the
allowable energy consumption of a
product. AHRI recommended that DOE
work with AHRI to modify standard
AHRI 1200–202X and develop
appropriate tolerances and also raise
this issue with the appropriate
standards committee for review and
approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 14)
NAMA commented that it agreed with
AHRI and advised DOE that the
proposed sampling plan for CRE volume
and TDA needed modification. (NAMA,
No. 33, p. 4) NAMA commented that the
current plan included no tolerances,
and if DOE intended to measure and
enforce standards for CRE volume and
TDA, DOE must provide tolerances. Id.
NAMA stated that DOE should also
bring this issue to the appropriate
standards committee for review and
approval. Id.
Hussmann commented that the
proposed sampling plan for CRE volume
and TDA needed modification because
it included no tolerances. (Hussmann,
No. 32, p. 6) Hussmann commented that
if DOE intended to measure and enforce
standards for CRE volume and TDA,
DOE must provide tolerances, and that
DOE should take this issue to the
appropriate standards committee for
review and approval. Id.
Zero Zone stated agreement that DOE
should certify the volume and TDA, as
these are important values and critical
to determining the allowable energy
consumption of a product. (Zero Zone,
No. 37, p. 10) Zero Zone commented
that DOE’s proposal of a 5-percent
tolerance is too large, and that if the
TDA measurements are different,
equipment that passes when tested by a
manufacturer could fail when tested by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
DOE. Id. Zero Zone recommended that
DOE work with AHRI to modify
standard 1200 to develop appropriate
tolerances. Id.
Hillphoenix commented that if DOE
intended to measure and enforce
standards for CRE volume and TDA,
then the process should be evaluated by
the appropriate standards committee for
approval. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 8)
DOE’s certification requirements in 10
CFR 429.42(b)(2) currently require
manufacturers to certify volume or TDA
for basic models. The sampling plan
requirements established in this final
rule, and consistent with those
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, clarify
that the certified volume or TDA must
be based on the mean of the measured
values for the tested units of the basic
model, based on the same tests used to
determine the reported energy
consumption.
In response to the comments
regarding tolerance associated with the
sampling plan to determine compliance
and enforce standards, DOE interprets
the comments as referring to DOE
applying a tolerance around certified
volumes or TDAs to determine the
applicable maximum daily energy
consumption standard level for a basic
model. Such tolerances are applied in
product-specific enforcement provisions
as specified in 10 CFR 429.134. DOE is
adopting product-specific enforcement
provisions for CRE, as discussed in
section III.J of this document.
N. Test Procedure Costs and
Harmonization
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
proposed to amend the existing test
procedure for CRE to:
(1) Establish new definitions for hightemperature refrigerator, mediumtemperature refrigerator, lowtemperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the
definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most
current versions of industry standards
AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI
1320–2011;
(3) Establish definitions and test
procedures for buffet tables and
preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and test
procedures for blast chillers and blast
freezers;
(5) Amend the definition for chef base
or griddle stand;
(6) Specify alternate conditions for
alternative refrigerants;
(7) Allow for certification of
compartment volumes based on CAD
drawings;
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66215
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts
and customer order storage cabinets
currently specified in waivers and
interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific
enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the LAPT
provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test
procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for
volume and TDA.
87 FR 39164, 39213–39214.
DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that the proposed
amendments to the test procedure for
CRE currently subject to testing would
not impact testing costs, and
manufacturers would be able to rely on
data generated under the current test
procedure should any of these
additional proposed amendments be
finalized. Id.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to establish test procedures for
additional categories of CRE not
currently subject to the DOE test
procedure: buffet tables or preparation
tables, and blast chillers and blast
freezers. Id. If a manufacturer chooses to
make representations of the energy
consumption of this equipment,
beginning 360 days after a final rule,
were DOE to finalize the proposal,
manufacturers would be required to test
according to the proposed test
procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) DOE
discusses the costs associated with
testing this equipment, if a
manufacturer chooses to make
representations of the energy
consumption, in the following
paragraphs.
In the November 2010 NOPR, DOE
estimated CRE testing costs to be
approximately $5,000 per unit. 75 FR
71596, 71607. Based on testing at thirdparty test facilities, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
$5,000 is still a representative CRE test
cost based on the existing DOE test
procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39214. DOE
has also tentatively determined that
$5,000 is a representative per-test cost
for the new test procedures proposed for
the additional CRE categories (i.e.,
buffet tables or preparation tables, blast
chillers, and blast freezers).
For chef bases or griddle stands, DOE
is amending the ambient test conditions
in this final rule based on comments
received in response to the June 2022
NOPR. Because DOE did not receive any
information in response to the June
2022 NOPR indicating testing costs
would change based on a different
ambient test condition, DOE determined
that the amended ambient test
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66216
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
conditions would not impact the $5,000
representative per-test cost for the
amended CRE test procedure.
Chef bases or griddle stands are
currently eligible for ENERGY STAR
certification under Product
Specification for Commercial
Refrigerators and Freezers Version 5.0
which references 10 CFR part 431,
subpart C, Appendix B as the required
test method.36 DOE observed that to the
extent that chef bases or griddle stand
manufacturers make representations
regarding the energy consumption of
their models, they do so in accordance
with ENERGY STAR and the existing
DOE test procedure. EPCA prescribes
that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all
representations of energy efficiency and
energy use of CRE, including those
made on marketing materials and
product labels, must be made in
accordance with that amended test
procedure, beginning 360 days after
publication of such a test procedure
final rule in the Federal Register. (42
U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) Therefore, the
manufacturers currently making
representations of the energy
consumption of chef bases or griddle
stands will be required to retest
according to the test procedure
beginning 360 days after this final rule,
and may incur some retesting costs
associated with their chef bases or
griddle stand models if they choose to
continue making such representations.
For any manufacturers not currently
making representations of the energy
use of chef bases or griddle stands,
testing according to the amended test
procedure will not be required for use
(other than if making voluntary
representations of energy consumption)
until determining compliance with any
energy conservation standards for chef
bases or griddle stands, should DOE
adopt such standards.
For buffet tables and preparation
tables, the overall test duration would
be similar to the test duration for CRE
currently subject to the test procedure.
The test would be a 24-hour test, and in
the June 2022 NOPR DOE proposed
stabilization requirements consistent
with CRE currently subject to the test
procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39214. The
proposed test setup would not require
the use of test simulators or test filler
materials loaded in any refrigerated
compartments, but would require
loading pans with distilled water and
identifying the appropriate control
setting to maintain the specified average
36 See www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/
ENERGY%20STAR%20Version%205.0%20%
28Rev.%20November%20-%202022%29%
20Commercial%20Refrigerators%20and
%20Freezers%20Specification.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
temperatures. DOE expects the overall
test burden associated with loading and
determining appropriate control settings
to be similar for testing buffet tables and
preparation tables, as proposed, and
other CRE currently subject to the test
procedure. While DOE has not
quantified the differences in test
burden, DOE determined that the test
burden and duration for buffet and
preparation tables is similar to CRE
currently subject to the test procedure,
and therefore the $5,000 per-test cost is
appropriate.
For blast chillers and blast freezers,
the overall duration of a test as
proposed would be shorter than the 24hour test period and stabilization period
required for CRE currently subject to the
test procedure. As proposed in the June
2022 NOPR, blast chiller and blast
freezer testing would require the
preparation of food simulator material,
heating that material to the specified
temperature, loading the heated test
pans, and then conducting the test
procedure as specified (DOE estimates
approximately an 8-hour test duration
per test). While DOE has not quantified
the differences in test burden, DOE
expects the increased test burden and
decreased test burden to be comparable.
Therefore, DOE tentatively determined
in the June 2022 NOPR that $5,000 is a
representative per-unit test cost for blast
chillers and blast freezers, based on the
test procedure proposed. 87 FR 39164,
39214.
Under the proposed test procedures,
were a manufacturer to choose to make
representations of the energy
consumption of buffet tables or
preparation tables, blast chillers, or blast
freezers beginning 360 days after a final
rule, and were DOE to finalize the
proposal, manufacturers would be
required to base such representations on
the DOE test procedure. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d))
Based on a review of blast chillers and
blast freezers available on the market,
DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR
that manufacturers make no claims
regarding the energy consumption of
their models. 87 FR 39164, 39214.
After establishing any test procedure
for blast chillers and blast freezers, DOE
expects that the manufacturers currently
electing to make no claims regarding
energy consumption would continue to
do so. Therefore, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
the proposed test procedure for blast
chillers and blast freezers would not
impact testing costs should the
proposed test procedure be finalized. 87
FR 39164, 39214.
Buffet tables and preparation tables
are currently subject to test procedures
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
under the California Code of
Regulations. DOE observed that to the
extent that buffet table and preparation
table manufacturers make
representations regarding the energy
consumption of their models, they do so
in accordance with the California Code
of Regulations. EPCA prescribes that, if
DOE amends a test procedure, all
representations of energy efficiency and
energy use, including those made on
marketing materials and product labels,
must be made in accordance with that
amended test procedure, beginning 360
days after publication of such a test
procedure final rule in the Federal
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1))
Therefore, the manufacturers currently
making representations of the energy
consumption of buffet tables and
preparation tables will be required to
retest according to the test procedure
beginning 360 days after this final rule,
and may incur some retesting costs
associated with their buffet table and
preparation table models.
For any manufacturers not currently
making representations of the energy
use of buffet tables or preparation tables,
blast chillers, or blast freezers, testing
according to the test procedure will not
be required (other than if making
voluntary representations of energy
consumption) until the compliance date
of any energy conservation standards for
that equipment, should DOE adopt such
standards.
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. 10 CFR 431.4; section
8(c) of appendix A 10 CFR part 430
subpart C. In cases where the industry
standard does not meet EPCA statutory
criteria for test procedures DOE will
make modifications through the
rulemaking process to these standards
as the DOE test procedure.
The test procedures for CRE at 10 CFR
431.63 incorporate by reference AHRI
1200–2010 for definitions, test rating
conditions, and calculations; ASHRAE
72–2005 for test conditions, equipment,
measurements, and test conduct; and
AHAM HRF–1–2008 for the volume
measurement method.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE
requested comment on the benefits and
burdens of the proposed updates and
additions to industry standards
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
referenced in the test procedure for CRE.
87 FR 39164, 39215. DOE discusses
comments received in response to the
June 2022 NOPR regarding adopting
provisions of industry standards in the
relevant discussion sections of this final
rule. DOE further describes industry
standards incorporated by reference in
section IV.N of this document.
AHRI 1200–2010 has been updated to
AHRI 1200–2023 to provide additional
direction regarding application of the
standard and to provide volume
measurement instructions (eliminating
the need to reference AHAM HRF–1–
2008). ASHRAE 72–2005 has similarly
been updated in ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata to reorganize the standard,
provide updated setup instructions,
revise the test sequence, and provide
additional instructions for some test
measurements. DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
these updates (at the time, in earlier or
draft versions of the standards) provide
additional detail for testing but would
otherwise not impact energy
consumption measurements compared
to the current approach. In the June
2022 NOPR, DOE also proposed to
incorporate by reference an existing
industry standard for testing buffet
tables and preparation tables: ASTM
F2143–16. This standard provides
instructions regarding setup and test
conduct. DOE is also aware of the CRE
industry standard NSF/ANSI 7–2021,37
which establishes minimum food
protection and sanitation requirements
for the materials, design, manufacture,
construction, and performance of CRE
and CRE components.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
O. Effective and Compliance Dates
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
that amended test procedure, beginning
360 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 360-day
period if the manufacturer may
experience undue hardship in meeting
the deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(2)) To
37 In response to the June 2022 NOPR, interested
parties commented in reference to NSF 7–2019.
NSF 7–2021 was published after the June 2022
NOPR comment period ended. DOE did not observe
any changes from the 2019 to 2021 version that
would impact the comments received or DOE’s
proposal to reference industry standards other than
NSF 7–2019 or NSF 7–2021.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
66217
receive such an extension, petitions
must be filed with DOE no later than 60
days before the end of the 360-day
period and must detail how the
manufacturer will experience undue
hardship. (Id.) To the extent the
modified test procedure adopted in this
final rule is required only for the
evaluation and issuance of updated
efficiency standards, compliance with
the amended test procedure does not
require use of such modified test
procedure provisions until the
compliance date of updated standards.
Upon the compliance date of test
procedure provisions in this final rule
any waivers that had been previously
issued and are in effect that pertain to
issues addressed by such provisions are
terminated. 10 CFR 431.401(h)(3).
Recipients of any such waivers are
required to test the products subject to
the waiver according to the amended
test procedure as of the compliance date
of the amended test procedure. The
amendments proposed in this document
pertain to issues addressed by waivers
and interim waivers granted to AHT
(Case Nos. CR–006, 2017–007, 2020–
023, 2020–025, 2022–001, and 2022–
002), ITW (Case No. CR–007), and
Hussmann (Case No. 2020–003). See
sections III.F.1 and III.I of this final rule
for a discussion of the proposals to
address the issues in the existing
waivers and interim waivers.
performance objectives, rather than
specifying the behavior or manner of
compliance that regulated entities must
adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct
regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the
desired behavior, such as user fees or
marketable permits, or providing
information upon which choices can be
made by the public. DOE emphasizes as
well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to
use the best available techniques to
quantify anticipated present and future
benefits and costs as accurately as
possible. In its guidance, the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(‘‘OIRA’’) in the Office of Management
and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) has emphasized
that such techniques may include
identifying changing future compliance
costs that might result from
technological innovation or anticipated
behavioral changes. For the reasons
stated in the preamble, this 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.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
B. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
A. Review Under Executive Orders
12866, 13563 and 14094
Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ as
supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O.
13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review, 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21,
2011) and amended by E.O. 14094,
‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review,’’ 88
FR 21879 (April 11, 2023), requires
agencies, to the extent permitted by law,
to (1) propose or adopt a regulation only
upon a reasoned determination that its
benefits justify its costs (recognizing
that some benefits and costs are difficult
to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to
impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among
other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative
regulations; (3) select, in choosing
among alternative regulatory
approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and
equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify
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 the rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66218
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
number of small entities. The factual
basis for this certification is as follows.
DOE uses the Small Business
Administration (‘‘SBA’’) small business
size standards to determine whether
manufacturers qualify as ‘‘small
businesses,’’ which are listed by the
North American Industry Classification
System (‘‘NAICS’’). The SBA considers
a business entity to be small business if,
together with its affiliates, it employs
less than a threshold number of workers
specified in 13 CFR part 121. CRE
manufacturers, who produce the
equipment covered by this final rule, are
classified under NAICS code 333415,
‘‘Air-conditioning and Warm Air
Heating Equipment and Commercial
and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment
Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets a
threshold of 1,250 employees or fewer
for an entity to be considered a small
business for this category. This
employee threshold includes all
employees in a business’s parent
company and any other subsidiaries.
DOE has recently conducted a focused
inquiry into small business
manufacturers of the CRE covered by
this rulemaking. As with the initial
regulatory flexibility analysis, DOE
accessed its Compliance Certification
Database (‘‘CCD’’),38 California Energy
Commission’s Modernized Appliance
Efficiency Database System
(‘‘MAEDbS’’),39 and other public
sources, including manufacturer
websites, to create a list of companies
that produce, manufacture, import, or
private label the CRE covered by this
rulemaking. DOE refreshed its
equipment database in support of the
FRFA. DOE then consulted other
publicly available data, such as
manufacturer specifications and product
literature, import/export logs (e.g., bills
of lading from Panjiva 40), and basic
model numbers, to identify original
equipment manufacturers (‘‘OEMs’’) of
the equipment covered by this
rulemaking. DOE further relied on
public sources and subscription-based
market research tools (e.g., Dun &
Bradstreet reports 41) to determine
company location, headcount, and
38 U.S. Department of Energy’s Compliance
Certification Database is available at
www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (Last
accessed February 24, 2023).
39 California Energy Commission’s Modernized
Appliance Efficiency Database System is available
at cacertappliances.energy.ca.gov/Pages/Search/
AdvancedSearch.aspx (Last accessed February 24,
2023)
40 Panjiva Supply Chain Intelligence is available
at: panjiva.com/import-export/United-States (Last
accessed March 28, 2023).
41 The Dun & Bradstreet Hoovers subscription
login is available online at app.dnbhoovers.com/
(Last accessed March 28, 2023).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
annual revenue. DOE screened out
companies that do not offer equipment
covered by this rulemaking, do not meet
the SBA’s definition of a ‘‘small
business,’’ or are foreign-owned and
operated.
DOE initially identified 83 OEMs
selling CRE into the U.S. market. Of the
83 OEMs identified, DOE estimates that
25 qualify as small OEMs and are not
foreign-owned and operated.
In this final rule, DOE amends and
establishes test procedures for CRE as
follows:
(1) Establish new definitions for hightemperature refrigerator, mediumtemperature refrigerator, lowtemperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the
definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most
current versions of industry standards
AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI
1320;
(3) Establish definitions and a new
appendix C including test procedures
for buffet tables and preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and a new
appendix D including test procedures
for blast chillers and blast freezers;
(5) Amend the definition and certain
test conditions for chef bases or griddle
stands;
(6) Specify refrigerant conditions for
CRE that use R–744;
(7) Allow for certification of
compartment volumes based on
computer-aided design models;
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts
and customer order storage cabinets
currently specified in waivers and
interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific
enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the lowest
application product temperature
provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test
procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for
volume and total display area.
DOE maintains that the amendments
detailed in the final rule would not
impact testing costs, which would
remain at approximately $5,000 perunit. Furthermore, DOE does not expect
manufacturers would need to re-test or
re-certify equipment as manufacturers
would be able to rely on data generated
under the current test procedure for the
amendments detailed in this final rule.
For the test procedures established by
this final rule for additional categories
of CRE not currently subject to the DOE
test procedure (i.e., buffet tables or
preparation tables, and blast chillers
and blast freezers), testing would not be
required (other than making voluntary
representations of energy consumption)
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
until the compliance date of any energy
conservation standards for equipment in
these categories. If a manufacturer
chooses to make representations of the
energy consumption of this equipment,
beginning 360 days after a final rule,
manufacturers would be required to test
according to the adopted test procedure.
(42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) DOE has determined
that $5,000 is a representative per-test
cost for the new test procedures for the
additional CRE categories.
For the amended test procedure
established by this final rule for chef
bases or griddle stands, testing similarly
would not be required until the
compliance date of any energy
conservation standards for equipment in
these categories. However, any
representations of energy use for chef
bases or griddle stands must be made in
accordance with the amended test
procedure starting 360 days after this
notice publishes in the Federal Register.
Manufacturers currently choosing to
make representations of the energy
consumption of this equipment
according to the existing test procedure
may continue to do so until 360 days
after publication of this final rule. To
the extent that a manufacturer chooses
to test according to the amended test
procedure, DOE has determined that
$5,000 is a representative per-test cost,
consistent with the other CRE
categories.
Based on a review of commercially
available blast chillers and blast
freezers, DOE has determined that
manufacturers make no claims regarding
the energy consumption of their models.
To the extent that buffet table and
preparation table manufacturers make
claims regarding the energy
consumption of their models, DOE
observed that they do so in accordance
with the California Code of Regulations.
The manufacturers currently making
representations of the energy
consumption of buffet tables and
preparation tables would be required to
test according to the adopted test
procedure beginning 360 days after the
final rule.
DOE reviewed California Energy
Commission’s MAEDbS and identified
two small domestic OEMs currently
making representations of the energy
consumption of buffet table or
preparation table models. According to
MAEDbS, one small OEM makes claims
regarding the energy consumption of 26
buffet table or preparation table models
and the other small OEM makes claims
regarding the energy consumption of 15
buffet table or preparation table models.
Based on Dun & Bradstreet reports,42
42 Id.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
both small OEMs have an estimated
annual revenue of over $100 million. As
previously discussed, DOE estimates a
per-unit test cost of $5,000. Therefore,
DOE estimates that the potential costs
associated with re-testing would be
minimal, accounting for approximately
0.1 percent of annual revenue for both
small businesses.
AHRI commented that they disagree
with DOE’s conclusion that ‘‘the
amendments detailed in the NOPR
would not have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities.’’
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 14) AHRI expressed
concern about the impact of the
proposed amendments on small entities,
including both manufacturers and end
users, because the proposed
amendments could drive a continued
use of older, less efficient, and leaky
equipment. Id. AHRI commented further
that Natural Resources Canada
(‘‘NRCAN’’) would likely harmonize
with this requirement, resulting in
additional cost associated with thirdparty testing for NRCAN and also for
ENERGY STAR, which would create an
undue burden, especially on small
businesses. Id.
NAMA stated its agreement with
AHRI and advised DOE that this
conclusion was inaccurate, and that
NAMA had profound concerns about
the impact of the proposed amendments
on small entities, including both
manufacturers and end users. (NAMA,
No. 33, p. 4) NAMA commented that its
concerns centered around the
possibility of the proposed amendments
driving a continued use of older, less
efficient, and refrigerant-leaky
equipment, as well as a continuation of
the trend of greater sale of refurbished
products that do not meet current DOE
standards. Id. NAMA also advised DOE
that NRCAN would likely harmonize
with this requirement, creating
additional costs associated with the
testing for NRCAN, especially for new
classifications—and costs associated
with third-party testing (required for
both NRCAN and ENERGY STAR)
would create an undue burden,
especially on small businesses. Id.
Continental commented that as
previously stated in its comments, some
proposed changes to test procedures,
including use of ASHRAE 72–2022,
would increase test burden on
manufacturers and testing agencies, and
prove particularly burdensome to small
manufacturers like itself. (Continental,
No. 29, p. 9)
Hoshizaki commented that they
disagree with DOE, and stated that
adding new test standards to previously
unregulated products will require
testing at least two of each model to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
fully realize the impact of new test
standards. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 5)
Hoshizaki commented that DOE
requires listing of the product with the
CCD, and accurate testing will be
needed to qualify such listings. Id. They
noted that since NRCAN is likely to
harmonize with DOE requirements,
third-party certification is required for
NRCAN listing. Id. They commented
that costs associated with this thirdparty testing is an undue burden on
small business manufacturers. Id.
Regarding the small business impacts,
as previously discussed, DOE does not
expect small manufacturers would need
to re-test or re-certify CRE models as a
direct result of the amendments detailed
in this final rule. For the two small
manufacturers that may incur some retesting costs associated with making
voluntary representations of energy
consumption, DOE’s analysis indicates
that re-testing costs would have de
minimis cost impacts on the small
manufacturers, which would account
for approximately 0.1 percent of annual
revenue for each of the small
businesses. Regarding the estimated test
procedure costs, see section III.N.1 of
this final rule for additional discussion
of the per-unit testing costs.
DOE does not anticipate that the
adopted test procedure amendments
would result in increased testing costs
for the vast majority of manufacturers,
including small manufacturers. DOE
estimates that two small businesses may
incur some re-testing costs associated
with their buffet table and preparation
table models. However, DOE’s research
indicates these costs would account for
approximately 0.1 percent of annual
revenue for both small OEMs identified.
Therefore, DOE concludes that the cost
effects accruing from the final rule
would not have a ‘‘significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities,’’ and that the preparation of a
FRFA is not warranted. DOE will submit
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 CRE 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
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66219
covered consumer products and
commercial equipment, including CRE.
(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 CRE in
this final rule. Further, certification data
will be required for buffet tables and
preparation tables, blast chillers, and
blast freezers; however, DOE is not
proposing certification or reporting
requirements for these categories of CRE
in this final rule. Instead, DOE may
consider proposals to amend the
certification requirements and reporting
for these categories 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
CRE. 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:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66220
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order
12988 requires Executive agencies to
review regulations in light of applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to
determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of
them. DOE has completed the required
review and determined that, to the
extent permitted by law, this final rule
meets the relevant standards of
Executive Order 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘UMRA’’) requires
each Federal agency to assess the effects
of Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec.
201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a
regulatory action resulting in a rule that
may cause the expenditure by State,
local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section
202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency
to publish a written statement that
estimates the resulting costs, benefits,
and other effects on the national
economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The
UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit
timely input by elected officers of State,
local, and Tribal governments on a
proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental
mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan
for giving notice and opportunity for
timely input to potentially affected
small governments before establishing
any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE
published a statement of policy on its
process for intergovernmental
consultation under UMRA. 62 FR
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
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
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 CRE adopted in this final
rule incorporate testing methods
contained in certain sections of the
following commercial standards: AHRI
1200–2023, AHRI 1320–2011, ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata, and ASTM F2143–
16. 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.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
N. Description of Materials Incorporated
by Reference
In this final rule, DOE incorporates by
reference the following test standards:
AHRI 1200–2023 is an industryaccepted test procedure that provides
rating instructions, calculations, and
methods for CRE. The test procedure
discussed in this final rule references
AHRI 1200–2023 for specific rating
instructions, calculations, and rating
methods for CRE. AHRI 1200–2023 is
available at www.ahrinet.org/standards/
search-standards.
AHRI 1320–2011 is an industry
accepted test procedure that provides
rating instructs, calculations, and
methods for CRE used with secondary
coolants. The test procedure discussed
in this final rule references AHRI 1320–
2011 regarding specific provisions
regarding secondary coolants, but
otherwise references AHRI 1200–2023
as discussed. AHRI 1320–2011 is
available at www.ahrinet.org/standards.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72–2022 is
an industry-accepted test procedure that
provides setup, instrumentation,
measurement, and test conduct
instructions for testing CRE. The test
procedure discussed in this final rule
references ASHRAE 72–2022 as the
basis for test setup and test conduct
requirements.
Errata sheet for ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 72–2022, Method of Testing
Open and Closed Commercial
Refrigerators and Freezers, November
11, 2022. This errata sheet corrects the
note preceding Normative Appendix A
of ASHRAE 72–2022.
ASHRAE 72–2022 is available at
www.techstreet.com/standards/ashrae72-2022?product_id=1710927 and the
November 11, 2022 Errata is available at
www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/
standards-and-guidelines/standardserrata.
ASTM F2143–16 is an industryaccepted test procedure that provides
setup, instrumentation, conditions,
measurement, and test conduct
instructions for testing buffet tables and
preparation tables. The test procedure
discussed in this final rule references
ASTM F2143–16 as the basis for test
setup and test conduct for buffet tables
and preparation tables. Copies of ASTM
F2143–16 can be purchased at
www.astm.org/f2143–16.html.
ASTM E1084–86 (Reapproved 2009),
which appears in the regulatory text,
has already been incorporated by
reference for that text; no change is
being made to this standard.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66221
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,
Incorporation by reference,
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 September 8,
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.
Signed in Washington, DC, on September
12, 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
431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 429—CERTIFICATION,
COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT
FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
1. The authority citation for part 429
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
2. Section 429.42 is amended by
adding paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) to read
as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
66222
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
§ 429.42 Commercial refrigerators,
freezers, and refrigerator-freezers.
(a) * * *
(3) Represented value calculations.
The volume and total display area
(TDA) of a basic model, as applicable,
is the mean of the measured volumes
and the mean of the measured TDAs, as
applicable, for the tested units of the
basic model, based on the same tests
used to determine energy consumption.
(4) Convertible equipment. Each basic
model of commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer that is
capable of operating at integrated
average temperatures that spans the
operating temperature range of multiple
equipment classes, either by adjusting a
thermostat for a basic model or by the
marketed, designed, or intended
operation for a basic model with a
remote condensing unit but without a
thermostat, must determine the
represented values, which includes the
certified ratings, either by testing, in
conjunction with the applicable
sampling provisions, or by applying an
AEDM to comply with the requirements
necessary to certify to each equipment
class that the basic model is capable of
operating within.
(i) Customer order storage cabinets.
For customer order storage cabinets that
have individual-secured compartments
that are convertible between the ≥32 °F
and <32 °F operating temperatures, the
customer order storage cabinets must
determine the represented values,
which includes the certified ratings,
either by testing, in conjunction with
the applicable sampling provisions, or
by applying an AEDM, with all
convertible compartments operating
either as medium temperature
refrigerators or all convertible
compartments as low-temperature
freezers, or at the lowest application
product temperature for each equipment
class as specified in § 431.64 of this
chapter, to comply with the
requirements necessary to certify to
each equipment class that the basic
model is capable of operating within.
(ii) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 429.72 by adding
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 429.72 Alternative methods for
determining non-energy ratings.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Commercial refrigerators, freezers,
and refrigerator-freezers. The volume of
a basic model of a commercial
refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, or
freezer may be determined by
performing a calculation of the volume
based upon computer-aided design
(CAD) models of the basic model in lieu
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
of physical measurements of a
production unit of the basic model. If
volume is determined by performing a
calculation of volume based on CAD
drawings, any value of volume of the
basic model reported to DOE in a
certification of compliance in
accordance with § 429.42(b)(2)(iii) must
be calculated using the CAD-derived
volume(s) and the applicable provisions
in the test procedures in 10 CFR part
431.64 for measuring volume.
■ 4. Amend § 429.134 by adding
reserved paragraphs (dd) and (ee) and
paragraph (ff) to read as follows:
§ 429.134 Product-specific enforcement
provisions.
*
*
*
*
*
(dd)–(ee) [Reserved]
(ff) Commercial refrigerators, freezers,
and refrigerator-freezers—(1)
Verification of volume. The volume will
be measured pursuant to the test
requirements of 10 CFR part 431 for
each unit tested. The results of the
measurement(s) will be averaged and
compared to the value of the certified
volume of the basic model. The certified
volume will be considered valid only if
the average measured volume is within
five percent of the certified volume.
(i) If the certified volume is found to
be valid, the certified volume will be
used as the basis for determining the
maximum daily energy consumption
allowed for the basic model.
(ii) If the certified volume is found to
be invalid, the average measured
volume of the units in the sample will
be used as the basis for determining the
maximum daily energy consumption
allowed for the basic model.
(2) Verification of total display area.
The total display area will be measured
pursuant to the test requirements of 10
CFR part 431 for each unit tested. The
results of the measurement(s) will be
averaged and compared to the value of
the certified total display area of the
basic model. The certified total display
area will be considered valid only if the
average measured total display area is
within five percent of the certified total
display area.
(i) If the certified total display area is
found to be valid, the certified total
display area will be used as the basis for
determining the maximum daily energy
consumption allowed for the basic
model.
(ii) If the certified total display area is
found to be invalid, the average
measured total display area of the units
in the sample will be used as the basis
for determining the maximum daily
energy consumption allowed for the
basic model.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(3) Determination of pull-down
temperature application. A
classification of a basic model as pulldown temperature application will be
considered valid only if a model meets
the definition of ‘‘pull-down
temperature application’’ specified in
§ 431.62 of this chapter as follows.
(i) 12-ounce beverage can
temperatures will be measured for 12ounce beverage cans loaded at the
locations within the commercial
refrigerator that are as close as possible
to the locations that would be measured
by test simulators according to the test
procedure for commercial refrigerators
specified in § 431.64 of this chapter.
(ii) The commercial refrigerator will
be operated at ambient conditions
consistent with those specified for
commercial refrigerators in § 431.64 of
this chapter and at the control setting
necessary to achieve a stable integrated
average temperature of 38 °F, prior to
loading.
(iii) 12-ounce beverage cans to be
fully loaded into the commercial
refrigerator (with and without
temperature measurements) will be
maintained at 90 °F ±2 °F based on the
average measured 12-ounce beverage
can temperatures prior to loading into
the commercial refrigerator.
(iv) The duration of pull-down (which
must be 12 hours or less) will be
determined starting from closing the
commercial refrigerator door after
completing the 12-ounce beverage can
loading until the integrated average
temperature reaches 38 °F ±2 °F.
(v) An average stable temperature of
38 °F will be determined by operating
the commercial refrigerator for an
additional 12 hours after initially
reaching 38 °F ±2 °F with no changes to
control settings, and determining an
integrated average temperature of 38 °F
±2 °F at the end of the 12 hour stability
period.
PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY
PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
5. The authority citation for part 431
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
6. Section 431.62 is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 431.62 Definitions concerning
commercial refrigerators, freezers and
refrigerator-freezers.
Air-curtain angle means:
(1) For equipment without doors and
without a discharge air grille or
discharge air honeycomb, the angle
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
between a vertical line extended down
from the highest point on the
manufacturer’s recommended load limit
line and the load limit line itself, when
the equipment is viewed in crosssection; and
(2) For all other equipment without
doors, the angle formed between a
vertical line and the straight line drawn
by connecting the point at the inside
edge of the discharge air opening with
the point at the inside edge of the return
air opening, when the equipment is
viewed in cross-section.
Basic model means all commercial
refrigeration equipment manufactured
by one manufacturer within a single
equipment class, having the same
primary energy source, and that have
essentially identical electrical, physical,
and functional characteristics that affect
energy consumption.
Blast chiller means commercial
refrigeration equipment, other than a
blast freezer, that is capable of the rapid
temperature pull-down of hot food
products from 135 °F to 40 °F within a
period of four hours, when measured
according to the test procedure at
appendix D to subpart C of part 431.
Blast freezer means commercial
refrigeration equipment that is capable
of the rapid temperature pull-down of
hot food products from 135 °F to 40 °F
within a period of four hours and
capable of achieving a final product
temperature of less than 32 °F, when
measured according to the test
procedure at appendix D to subpart C of
this part.
Buffet table or preparation table
means a commercial refrigerator with an
open-top refrigerated area, that may or
may not include a lid, for displaying or
storing merchandise and other
perishable materials in pans or other
removable containers for customer selfservice or food production and
assembly. The unit may or may not be
equipped with a refrigerated storage
compartment underneath the pans or
other removable containers that is not
thermally separated from the open-top
refrigerated area.
Chef base or griddle stand means
commercial refrigeration equipment that
has a maximum height of 32 in.,
including any legs or casters, and that
is designed and marketed for the
express purpose of having a griddle or
other cooking appliance placed on top
of it that is capable of reaching
temperatures hot enough to cook food.
Closed solid means equipment with
doors, and in which more than 75
percent of the outer surface area of all
doors on a unit are not transparent.
Closed transparent means equipment
with doors, and in which 25 percent or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
more of the outer surface area of all
doors on the unit are transparent.
Commercial freezer means a unit of
commercial refrigeration equipment in
which all refrigerated compartments in
the unit are capable of operating below
32 °F (±2 °F).
Commercial hybrid means a unit of
commercial refrigeration equipment:
(1) That consists of two or more
thermally separated refrigerated
compartments that are in two or more
different equipment families, and
(2) That is sold as a single unit.
Commercial refrigerator means a unit
of commercial refrigeration equipment
in which all refrigerated compartments
in the unit are capable of operating at or
above 32 °F (±2 °F).
Commercial refrigerator-freezer means
a unit of commercial refrigeration
equipment consisting of two or more
refrigerated compartments where at
least one refrigerated compartment is
capable of operating at or above 32 °F
(±2 °F) and at least one refrigerated
compartment is capable of operating
below 32 °F (±2 °F).
Commercial refrigerator, freezer, and
refrigerator-freezer means refrigeration
equipment that—
(1) Is not a consumer product (as
defined in § 430.2 of this chapter);
(2) Is not designed and marketed
exclusively for medical, scientific, or
research purposes;
(3) Operates at a chilled, frozen,
combination chilled and frozen, or
variable temperature;
(4) Displays or stores merchandise
and other perishable materials
horizontally, semi-vertically, or
vertically;
(5) Has transparent or solid doors,
sliding or hinged doors, a combination
of hinged, sliding, transparent, or solid
doors, or no doors;
(6) Is designed for pull-down
temperature applications or holding
temperature applications; and
(7) Is connected to a self-contained
condensing unit or to a remote
condensing unit.
Customer order storage cabinet means
a commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer that stores customer
orders and includes individual, secured
compartments with doors that are
accessible to customers for order
retrieval.
Door means a movable panel that
separates the interior volume of a unit
of commercial refrigeration equipment
from the ambient environment and is
designed to facilitate access to the
refrigerated space for the purpose of
loading and unloading product. This
includes hinged doors, sliding doors,
and drawers. This does not include
night curtains.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66223
Door angle means:
(1) For equipment with flat doors, the
angle between a vertical line and the
line formed by the plane of the door,
when the equipment is viewed in crosssection; and
(2) For equipment with curved doors,
the angle formed between a vertical line
and the straight line drawn by
connecting the top and bottom points
where the display area glass joins the
cabinet, when the equipment is viewed
in cross-section.
Fully open (for drawers) means
opened not less than 80% of their full
travel.
High-temperature refrigerator means a
commercial refrigerator that is not
capable of an operating temperature at
or below 40.0 °F.
Holding temperature application
means a use of commercial refrigeration
equipment other than a pull-down
temperature application, except a blast
chiller or freezer.
Horizontal Closed means equipment
with hinged or sliding doors and a door
angle greater than or equal to 45°.
Horizontal Open means equipment
without doors and an air-curtain angle
greater than or equal to 80° from the
vertical.
Ice-cream freezer means:
(1) Prior to the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) issued after January 1, 2023
for ice-cream freezers (see § 431.66), a
commercial freezer that is capable of an
operating temperature at or below
¥5.0 °F and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends specifically
for the storing, displaying, or dispensing
of ice cream or other frozen desserts; or
(2) Upon the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) issued after January 1, 2023
for ice-cream freezers (see § 431.66), a
commercial freezer that is capable of an
operating temperature at or below
¥13.0 °F and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends specifically
for the storing, displaying, or dispensing
of ice cream or other frozen desserts.
Integrated average temperature means
the average temperature of all test
package measurements taken during the
test.
Lighting occupancy sensor means a
device which uses passive infrared,
ultrasonic, or other motion-sensing
technology to automatically turn off or
dim lights within the equipment when
no motion is detected in the sensor’s
coverage area for a certain preset period
of time.
Lowest application product
temperature means the integrated
average temperature (or for buffet tables
or preparation tables, the average pan
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66224
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
temperature of all measurements taken
during the test) at which a given basic
model is capable of consistently
operating that is closest to the integrated
average temperature (or for buffet tables
or preparation tables, the average pan
temperature of all measurements taken
during the test) specified for testing
under the DOE test procedure (see
§ 431.64).
Low-temperature freezer means a
commercial freezer that is not an icecream freezer.
Medium-temperature refrigerator
means a commercial refrigerator that is
capable of an operating temperature at
or below 40.0 °F.
Mobile refrigerated cabinet means
commercial refrigeration equipment that
is designed and marketed to operate
only without a continuous power
supply.
Night curtain means a device which is
temporarily deployed to decrease air
exchange and heat transfer between the
refrigerated case and the surrounding
environment.
Operating temperature means the
range of integrated average temperatures
at which a self-contained commercial
refrigeration unit or remote-condensing
commercial refrigeration unit with a
thermostat is capable of operating or, in
the case of a remote-condensing
commercial refrigeration unit without a
thermostat, the range of integrated
average temperatures at which the unit
is marketed, designed, or intended to
operate.
Pull-down temperature application
means a commercial refrigerator with
doors that, when fully loaded with 12ounce beverage cans at 90 degrees F, can
cool those beverages to an average stable
temperature of 38 degrees F in 12 hours
or less.
Rating temperature means the
integrated average temperature a unit
must maintain during testing (i.e., either
as listed in the table at § 431.66(d)(1) or
the lowest application product
temperature).
Remote condensing unit means a
factory-made assembly of refrigerating
components designed to compress and
liquefy a specific refrigerant that is
remotely located from the refrigerated
equipment and consists of one or more
refrigerant compressors, refrigerant
condensers, condenser fans and motors,
and factory supplied accessories.
Scheduled lighting control means a
device which automatically shuts off or
dims the lighting in a display case at
scheduled times throughout the day.
Self-contained condensing unit means
a factory-made assembly of refrigerating
components designed to compress and
liquefy a specific refrigerant that is an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
integral part of the refrigerated
equipment and consists of one or more
refrigerant compressors, refrigerant
condensers, condenser fans and motors,
and factory-supplied accessories.
Semivertical Open means equipment
without doors and an air-curtain angle
greater than or equal to 10° and less
than 80° from the vertical.
Service over counter means
equipment that has sliding or hinged
doors in the back intended for use by
sales personnel, with glass or other
transparent material in the front for
displaying merchandise, and that has a
height not greater than 66 in. and is
intended to serve as a counter for
transactions between sales personnel
and customers.
Test package means a packaged
material that is used as a standard
product temperature-measuring device.
Transparent means greater than or
equal to 45 percent light transmittance,
as determined in accordance with
ASTM E1084–86 (Reapproved 2009)
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.63)
at normal incidence and in the intended
direction of viewing.
Vertical Closed means equipment
with hinged or sliding doors and a door
angle less than 45°.
Vertical Open means equipment
without doors and an air-curtain angle
greater than or equal to 0° and less than
10° from the vertical.
Wedge case means a commercial
refrigerator, freezer, or refrigeratorfreezer that forms the transition between
two regularly shaped display cases.
■ 7. Amend § 431.63 by revising
paragraphs (a), (c), (d), and (e) to read
as follows:
§ 431.63 Materials incorporated by
reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by
reference into this subpart with the
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, the DOE must publish a
document in the Federal Register and
the material must be available to the
public. All approved incorporation by
reference (IBR) material 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, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, EE–5B,
Washington, DC 20024, (202)-586–9127,
Buildings@ee.doe.gov, www.energy.gov/
eere/buildings/building-technologiesoffice. For information on the
availability of this material at NARA,
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
visit www.archives.gov/federal-register/
cfr/ibr-locations.html or email:
fr.inspection@nara.gov. The material
may be obtained from the sources in the
following paragraphs of this section:
*
*
*
*
*
(c) AHRI. Air-Conditioning, Heating,
and Refrigeration Institute, 2111 Wilson
Blvd., Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201;
(703) 524–8800; ahri@ahrinet.org;
www.ahrinet.org/.
(1) ARI Standard 1200–2006,
Performance Rating of Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets, 2006; IBR approved
for § 431.66.
(2) AHRI Standard 1200 (I–P)–2010
(‘‘AHRI Standard 1200 (I–P)–2010’’),
2010 Standard for Performance Rating
of Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets,
2010; IBR approved for § 431.66.
(3) AHRI Standard 1200–2023 (I–P)
(‘‘AHRI 1200–2023’’), 2023 Standard for
Performance Rating of Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets, copyright 2023; IBR
approved for appendices B, C, and D to
this subpart.
(4) AHRI Standard 1320–2011 (I–P),
(‘‘AHRI 1320–2011’’) 2011 Standard for
Performance Rating of Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets for Use With
Secondary Refrigerants, copyright 2011;
IBR approved for appendix B to this
subpart.
(d) ASHRAE. The American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers, Inc., 1971
Tullie Circle NE, Atlanta, GA 30329;
(404) 636–8400; ashrae@ashrae.org;
www.ashrae.org/.
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72–2022
(ASHRAE 72–2022), Method of Testing
Open and Closed Commercial
Refrigerators and Freezers, approved
June 30, 2022; IBR approved for
appendices B, C, and D to this subpart.
(2) Errata sheet for ANSI/ASHRAE
Standard 72–2022 (ASHRAE 72–2022
Errata), Method of Testing Open and
Closed Commercial Refrigerators and
Freezers, November 11, 2022; IBR
approved for appendices B, C, and D to
this subpart.
(e) ASTM. ASTM International, 100
Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428; (877) 909–
2786; www.astm.org/.
(1) ASTM E1084–86 (Reapproved
2009), Standard Test Method for Solar
Transmittance (Terrestrial) of Sheet
Materials Using Sunlight, approved
April 1, 2009; IBR approved for
§ 431.62.
(2) ASTM F2143–16, Standard Test
Method for Performance of Refrigerated
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
Buffet and Preparation Tables,
approved May 1, 2016; IBR approved for
appendix C to this subpart.
■ 8. Section 431.64 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 431.64 Uniform test method for the
measurement of energy consumption of
commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers.
(a) Scope. This section provides the
test procedures for measuring, pursuant
to EPCA, the energy consumption or
energy efficiency for a given equipment
category of commercial refrigerators,
freezers, and refrigerator-freezers.
(b) Testing and calculations. (1)
Determine the daily energy
consumption and volume or total
display area of each covered commercial
refrigerator, freezer, or refrigeratorfreezer by conducting the appropriate
test procedure set forth below in
appendix B, to this subpart. The daily
energy consumption of commercial
refrigeration equipment shall be
calculated using raw measured values
and the final test results shall be
reported in increments of 0.01 kWh/day.
(2) Determine the daily energy
consumption and pan storage volume,
pan display area, and refrigerated
volume of each buffet table or
preparation table by conducting the
appropriate test procedure set forth
below in appendix C to this subpart.
The daily energy consumption shall be
calculated using raw measured values
and the final test results shall be
recorded in increments of 0.01 kWh/
day.
(3) Determine the energy consumption
per weight of product and product
capacity of each blast chiller and blast
freezer by conducting the appropriate
test procedure set forth below in
appendix D to this subpart. The energy
consumption per weight of product
shall be calculated using raw measured
values and the final test results shall be
recorded in increments of 0.01 kWh/lb.
Appendix A [Removed and Reserved]
9. Appendix A to subpart C of part
431 is removed and reserved.
■ 10. Appendix B to subpart C of part
431 is revised to read as follows:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
■
Appendix B to Subpart C of Part 431—
Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of
Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers,
and Refrigerator-Freezers
Note: On or after September 20, 2024, any
representations, including for certification of
compliance, made with respect to the energy
use or efficiency of commercial refrigeration
equipment, except for buffet tables or
preparation tables, blast chillers, blast
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
freezers, or mobile refrigerated cabinets, must
be made in accordance with the results of
testing pursuant to this appendix. Prior to
September 20, 2024, any representations with
respect to energy use or efficiency of
commercial refrigeration equipment, except
for buffet tables or preparation tables, blast
chillers, blast freezers, or mobile refrigerated
cabinets, must be made either in accordance
with the results of testing pursuant to this
appendix or with the results of testing
pursuant to this appendix as it appeared in
appendix B to subpart C of part 431 in the
10 CFR parts 200–499 edition revised as of
January 1, 2023. Buffet tables or preparation
tables are subject to the test method
requirements in appendix C to subpart C of
part 431. Blast chillers and blast freezers are
subject to the test method requirements in
appendix D to subpart C of part 431.
The test procedure for equipment cooled
only by secondary coolants in section 1.1.3
of this appendix is not required for use until
the compliance date(s) of any amended
energy conservation standard(s) (see
§ 431.66) for such commercial refrigeration
equipment.
High-temperature refrigerators must be
tested as medium-temperature refrigerators
according to section 2.1.3 of this appendix
based on the lowest application product
temperature until the compliance date(s) of
any amended energy conservation
standard(s) (see § 431.66) established for
high-temperature refrigerators. On and after
the compliance date(s) of such energy
conservation standard(s) (see § 431.66), hightemperature refrigerators must be tested as
high-temperature refrigerators according to
section 2.1.4 of this appendix.
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference in § 431.63
the entire standard for AHRI 1200–2023;
AHRI 1320–2011; ASHRAE 72–2022 and
ASHRAE 72–2022 Errata (the latter two
collectively referenced as ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata). However, only enumerated
provisions of AHRI 1200–2023 and AHRI
1320–2011 are applicable to this appendix as
follows:
0.1. AHRI 1200–2023
(a) Section 3, ‘‘Definitions,’’ as referenced
in section 1.1 of this appendix.
(b) Section 3.2.8, ‘‘Dew Point,’’ as
referenced in section 2.2. of this appendix.
(c) Section 3.2.20, ‘‘Total Display Area
(TDA),’’ as referenced in section 3.2 of this
appendix.
(d) Section 4, ‘‘Test Requirements,’’ as
referenced in section 1.1 of this appendix.
(e) Section 4.1.1.1, ‘‘High Temperature
Applications,’’ as referenced in section 2.1.4
of this appendix.
(f) Section 4.1.1.2, ‘‘Ice Cream
Applications,’’ as referenced in section 2.1.1
of this appendix.
(g) Section 4.1.1.3, ‘‘Low Temperature
Applications,’’ as referenced in section 2.1.2
of this appendix.
(h) Section 4.1.1.4, ‘‘Medium Temperature
Applications,’’ as referenced in section 2.1.3
of this appendix.
(i) Section 5.1, ‘‘Rating Requirements for
Remote Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets’’ as
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
66225
referenced in sections 1.1.2, 1.1.3, and 1.5.3.3
of this appendix.
(j) Section 5.2, ‘‘Rating Requirements for
Self-Contained Commercial Refrigerated
Display Merchandisers and Storage
Cabinets,’’ as referenced in section 1.1.1 of
this appendix.
(k) Section 9, ‘‘Symbols and Subscripts,’’ as
referenced in section 1.1 and 2.2 of this
appendix.
(l) Appendix C, ‘‘Commercial Refrigerated
Display Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet
Refrigerated Volume Calculation—
Normative’’ as referenced in section 3.1 of
this appendix.
(m) Appendix D, ‘‘Commercial Refrigerated
Display Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet
Total Display Area (TDA) Calculation—
Normative,’’ as referenced in section 3.2 of
this appendix.
0.2. AHRI 1320–2011
(a) Sections 5.2.7 and 5.2.8 as referenced in
section 1.1.3 of this appendix.
(b) [Reserved].
1. Test Procedure
1.1. Determination of Daily Energy
Consumption. Determine the daily energy
consumption of each covered commercial
refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-freezer by
conducting the test procedure set forth in
AHRI 1200–2023, section 3, ‘‘Definitions,’’
section 4, ‘‘Test Requirements,’’ and section
9, ‘‘Symbols and Subscripts.’’
1.1.1. For each commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer with a selfcontained condensing unit, also use AHRI
1200–2023, section 5.2, ‘‘Rating
Requirements for Self-Contained Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets.’’
1.1.2. For each commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer with a remote
condensing unit, also use AHRI 1200–2023,
section 5.1, ‘‘Rating Requirements for Remote
Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets.’’
1.1.3. For each commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer used with a
secondary coolant, test according to section
1.1.2 of this appendix, except in place of the
equations for CDEC and CEC in sections 5.1.2
and 5.1.2.1 of AHRI 1200–2023, respectively,
apply the following equations:
CDEC = CEC + [FEC + LEC + AEC + DEC +
PEC]* + CPEC
CEC = [(Qrt + QCP) · (t ¥ tdt)]/(EER · 1000)
Where CPEC and QCP are as specified in
sections 5.2.7 and 5.2.8 of AHRI 1320–2011
and EER is determined based on a
temperature that is 6.0 °F lower than the
secondary coolant cabinet inlet temperature.
1.2. Methodology for Determining
Applicability of Transparent Door Equipment
Families. To determine if a door for a given
model of commercial refrigeration equipment
is transparent:
(a) Calculate the outer door surface area
including frames and mullions;
(b) calculate the transparent surface area
within the outer door surface area excluding
frames and mullions;
(c) calculate the ratio of (2) to (1) for each
of the outer doors; and
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
(d) the ratio for the transparent surface area
of all outer doors must be greater than 0.25
to qualify as a transparent equipment family.
1.3. Drawers. Drawers shall be treated as
identical to doors when conducting the DOE
test procedure. Commercial refrigeration
equipment with drawers intended for use
with pans shall be configured with stainless
steel food service pans, installed in a
configuration per the manufacturer’s
instructions utilizing the maximum pan sizes
specified. If the manufacturer does not
specify the pan sizes, the maximum pan
depth and pan volume allowed shall be used.
For commercial refrigeration equipment with
drawers intended for use with pans, the net
usable volume includes only the interior
volume of the pan(s) in the drawer. The net
usable volume shall be measured by the
amount of water needed to fill all the pan(s)
to within 0.5 inches of the top rim, or
determined by calculating the total volume of
all pan(s) using the pan manufacturers’
published pan volume. For commercial
refrigeration equipment with drawers not
intended for pans, the net usable volume
shall be equal to the total volume of the
drawer to the top edge of the drawer. Test
simulators shall be placed in commercial
refrigeration equipment with drawers as
follows: For each drawer, there shall be two
test simulators placed at each of the
following locations: at the left end, at the
right end, and at consistent 24 inch to 48
inch intervals across the width of the drawer
(for drawers wider than 48 inches). For
drawers with overall internal width of 48
inches or less, only the left and right ends
shall have test simulators. If test simulators
are to be placed at a pan edge or divider, the
test simulator shall be placed at the nearest
adjacent location. For each drawer, one test
simulator shall be placed on the bottom of
the pan or drawer at each of the front and
rear test simulator locations of the drawer.
Test simulators shall be placed in contact
with the drawer or pan end or ends unless
load limiting stops are provided as part of the
case. Test simulators shall be secured such
that the test simulators do not move during
the test. The net usable volume where test
simulators are not required shall be filled
with filler material so that between 60
percent and 80 percent of the net usable
volume is occupied by test simulators and
uniformly occupied by filler material.
1.4. Long-time Automatic Defrost. For
commercial refrigeration equipment not
capable of operating with defrost intervals of
24 hours or less, testing may be conducted
using a two-part test method.
1.4.1. First Part of Test. The first part of the
test shall be a 24-hour test starting in steadystate conditions and including eight hours of
door opening (according to ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata). The energy consumed in
this test, ET1, shall be recorded.
1.4.2. Second Part of Test. The second part
of the test shall be a defrost cycle, including
any operation associated with a defrost. The
start and end of the test period be determined
as the last time before and first time after a
defrost occurrence when the measured
average simulator temperature (i.e., the
instantaneous average of all test simulator
temperature measurements) is within 0.5 °F
of the IAT as measured during the first part
of the test. The energy consumed in this test,
ET2, and duration, tDI, shall be recorded.
1.4.3. Daily Energy Consumption. Based on
the measured energy consumption in these
two tests, the daily energy consumption
(DEC) in kWh shall be calculated as:
Where:
DEC = daily energy consumption, in kWh;
ET 1 = energy consumed during the first part
of the test, in kWh;
ET 2 = energy consumed during the second
part of the test, in kWh;
tNDI = normalized length of defrosting time
per day, in minutes;
tDI = length of time of defrosting test period,
in minutes;
tDC = minimum time between defrost
occurrences, in days; and
1440 = conversion factor, minutes per day.
1.5. Customer Order Storage Cabinets.
Customer order storage cabinets shall
conduct door openings according to ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata, except that each door
shall be opened to the fully open position for
8 seconds, once every 2 hours, for 6 dooropening cycles.
1.5.1. Ambient Compartments. For
customer order storage cabinets that have at
least one individual-secured compartment
that is not capable of maintaining an
integrated average temperature below the
ambient dry-bulb temperature, the
individual-secured compartment(s) at
ambient dry-bulb temperature shall be
categorized as a high-temperature refrigerator
compartment for the purpose of testing and
rating. All volume, total display area, and
energy consumption calculations shall be
included within the high-temperature
refrigerator category and summed with other
high-temperature refrigerator category
compartment(s) calculations.
1.5.2. Convertible Compartments. For
customer order storage cabinets that have
individual-secured compartments that are
convertible between the ambient dry-bulb
temperature and the ≥32 °F operating
temperature, the convertible compartment
shall be tested as a medium-temperature
refrigerator compartment or at the lowest
application product temperature as specified
in section 2.2 of this appendix.
1.5.3. Inverse Refrigeration Load Test. For
customer order storage cabinets that supply
refrigerant to multiple individual-secured
compartments and that allow the suction
pressure from the evaporator in each
individual-secured compartment to float
based on the temperature required to store
the customer order in that individual-secured
compartment, test according to section 1.1.2
of this appendix, except that energy (heat)
loss shall be allowed at a rate and DT
equivalent to the energy gains of a standard
refrigerated cabinet as specified in sections
1.5.3.1–1.5.3.3 of this appendix.
1.5.3.1. Anti-sweat door heaters. Antisweat door heaters shall be de-energized for
the inverse refrigeration load test specified in
section 1.5.3. of this appendix.
1.5.3.2. Integrated Average Temperature.
For medium-temperature refrigerator
compartments, the integrated average
temperature shall be 112.4 °F ±2.0 °F. For
low-temperature freezer compartments, the
integrated average temperature shall be
150.4 °F ±2.0 °F. For ambient compartments,
the integrated average temperature shall be
75.4 °F ±2.0 °F.
1.5.3.3. Daily Energy Consumption.
Determine the calculated daily energy
consumption (‘‘CDEC’’) and the EER based on
AHRI 1200–2023, section 5.1, ‘‘Rating
Requirements for Remote Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and
Storage Cabinets,’’ except that the
compressor energy consumption (‘‘CEC’’)
shall be calculated by applying the following
equations:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
ER26SE23.007</GPH>
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66226
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
2. Test Conditions
2.1. Integrated Average Temperatures.
Conduct the testing required in section 1 of
this appendix, and determine the daily
energy consumption at the applicable
integrated average temperature as follows:
2.1.1. Ice-Cream Freezers. Test ice-cream
freezers and ice-cream freezer compartments
to the integrated average temperature
specified in section 4.1.1.2, ‘‘Ice Cream
Applications,’’ of AHRI 1200–2023.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
2.1.2. Low-Temperature Freezers. Test lowtemperature freezers and low-temperature
freezer compartments to the integrated
average temperature specified in section
4.1.1.3, ‘‘Low Temperature Applications,’’ of
AHRI 1200–2023.
2.1.3. Medium-Temperature Refrigerators.
Test medium-temperature refrigerators and
medium-temperature refrigerator
compartments to the integrated average
temperature specified in section 4.1.1.4,
‘‘Medium Temperature Applications,’’ of
AHRI 1200–2023.
2.1.4. High-Temperature Refrigerators. Test
high-temperature refrigerators and hightemperature refrigerator compartments to the
integrated average temperature specified in
section 4.1.1.1, ‘‘High Temperature
Applications,’’ of AHRI 1200–2023.
2.2. Lowest Application Product
Temperature. If a unit of commercial
refrigeration equipment is not able to be
operated at the integrated average
temperature specified in section 2.1 of this
appendix, test the unit at the lowest
application product temperature (LAPT), as
defined in § 431.62. For units equipped with
a thermostat, LAPT is the measured
temperature at the lowest thermostat setting
of the unit (for units that are only able to
operate at temperatures above the specified
test temperature) or the highest thermostat
setting of the unit (for units that are only able
to operate at temperatures below the
specified test temperature). For remote
condensing equipment without a thermostat
or other means of controlling temperature at
the case, the lowest application product
temperature is measured at the temperature
achieved with the dew point temperature (as
defined in section 3.2.8, ‘‘Dew Point,’’ of
AHRI 1200–2023) or mid-point evaporator
temperature (as defined in section 9,
‘‘Symbols and Subscripts,’’ of AHRI 1200–
2023) set to 5 degrees colder than that
required to maintain the manufacturer’s
specified application temperature that is
closest to the specified integrated average
temperature.
2.3. Testing at NSF Test Conditions. For
commercial refrigeration equipment that is
also tested in accordance with NSF test
procedures (Type I and Type II), integrated
average temperatures and ambient conditions
used for NSF testing may be used in place
of the DOE-prescribed integrated average
temperatures and ambient conditions
provided they result in a more stringent test.
That is, the measured daily energy
consumption of the same unit, when tested
at the rating temperatures and/or ambient
conditions specified in the DOE test
procedure, must be lower than or equal to the
measured daily energy consumption of the
unit when tested with the rating
temperatures or ambient conditions used for
NSF testing. The integrated average
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
temperature measured during the test may be
lower than the range specified by the DOE
applicable temperature specification
provided in section 2.1 of this appendix, but
may not exceed the upper value of the
specified range. Ambient temperatures and/
or humidity values may be higher than those
specified in the DOE test procedure.
2.4. Liquid Refrigerant Pressure Required
Accuracy. The liquid refrigerant pressure
required accuracy is ±35 kPa (±5.1 psi).
2.5 Commercial Refrigerator, Freezer, and
Refrigerator-Freezer connected to a Direct
Expansion Remote Condensing Unit with R–
744. For commercial refrigerators, freezers,
and refrigerator-freezers connected to a direct
expansion remote condensing unit with R–
744, instead of the liquid refrigerant
measurements for direct-expansion remote
units specified in appendix A to ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata, the liquid refrigerant
measurements for direct-expansion remote
units shall be: liquid refrigerant temperature
shall be 30.0 °F with a tolerance for the
average over test period of ±3.0 °F and a
tolerance for the individual measurements of
±5.0 °F; liquid refrigerant pressure shall be
the saturated liquid pressure corresponding
to a condensing temperature in the range of
32.0 °F to 44.0 °F for the average over test
period; and liquid refrigerant subcooling
shall be greater than 2.0 °R for the average
over test period.
2.6 Chef Base or Griddle Stand Test
Conditions. For chef bases or griddle stands,
instead of the dry-bulb temperature, wet-bulb
temperature, and radiant heat temperature
specified in appendix A to ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata: dry-bulb temperature shall be
86.0 °F with a tolerance for the average over
test period of ±1.8 °F and a tolerance for the
individual measurements of ±3.6 °F; wet-bulb
temperature shall be 73.7 °F with a tolerance
for the average over test period of ±1.8 °F and
a tolerance for the individual measurements
of ±3.6 °F; and radiant heat temperature shall
be greater than or equal to 81.0 °F.
3. Volume and Total Display Area
3.1. Determination of Volume. Determine
the volume of a commercial refrigerator,
freezer, and refrigerator-freezer using the
method set forth in AHRI 1200–2023,
appendix C, ‘‘Commercial Refrigerated
Display Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet
Refrigerated Volume Calculation—
Normative.’’
3.2. Determination of Total Display Area.
Determine the total display area of a
commercial refrigerator, freezer, and
refrigerator-freezer using the method set forth
in AHRI 1200–2023, section 3.2.20, ‘‘Total
Display Area (TDA),’’ and appendix D,
‘‘Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet Total
Display Area (TDA) Calculation—
Normative.’’
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
ER26SE23.006</GPH>
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
ML = Nd × (Ae + Am)
Ae = [(Ha ¥ Hc) ¥ (Ht ¥ Ha)] × ma
Am = Cp,liner × Wliner × DTliner
Where:
CEC = compressor energy consumption, kWh
per day;
Q = inverse refrigeration load (does not
include waste heat from auxiliary
components and moisture infiltration),
in BTU per h;
t = test duration, in h;
ML = moisture load impacts, BTU per day;
FEC = evaporator fan motor(s) energy
consumption, Wh per day;
AEC = anti-condensate heater(s) energy
consumption, Wh per day;
DEC = defrost heater(s) energy consumption,
Wh per day;
3.412 = conversion factor, BTU per Wh;
EER = energy efficiency ratio, BTU per Wh;
1000 = conversion factor, W per kW;
Win = energy input measured over the test
period for all energized components
(heaters, controls, and fans) located in
the refrigerated compartments, in Wh;
Nd = number of door openings during test,
unitless;
Ae = enthalpy adjustment, BTU per day;
Am = moisture/frost accumulation, BTU per
day;
Ha = ambient air enthalpy, BTU per pound;
Hc = compartment air enthalpy based on air
conditions during cold operation (e.g.,
0 °F dry bulb/¥20 °F dew point for
freezer compartment, 38 °F dry bulb/
20 °F dew point for refrigerator
compartment, 75 °F dry bulb/20 °F dew
point for ambient compartment), BTU
per pound;
Ht = compartment air enthalpy during heat
leak test based on dew point being equal
to ambient air dew point, BTU per
pound;
ma = mass of compartment air exchanged
(30% of total compartment volume)
based density of air during cold
operation, pounds;
Cp,liner = specific heat of liner material, BTU
per °F per pound;
Wliner = weight of all liner parts, pounds; and
DTliner = maximum temperature rise of all
liner parts (e.g., 4.5 °F, 2.5 °F, and 1 °F for
freezer, refrigerator, and ambient
compartments, respectively), °F.
66227
66228
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
11. Appendix C to subpart C of part
431 is added to read as follows:
■
Appendix C to Subpart C of Part 431—
Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of
Buffet Tables or Preparation Tables
Note: On or after September 20, 2024, any
representations, including for certification of
compliance, made with respect to the energy
use or efficiency of buffet tables or
preparation tables must be made in
accordance with the results of testing
pursuant to this appendix.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference in § 431.63
the entire standard for AHRI 1200–2023,
ASHRAE 72–2022, ASHRAE 72–2022 Errata
(the latter two collectively referenced as
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata), and ASTM
F2143–16. However, only enumerated
provisions of those documents are applicable
to this appendix as follows:
0.1. AHRI 1200–2023
(a) Section 3.2.17, ‘‘Refrigerated Volume
(Vr),’’ as referenced in section 2.2 of this
appendix.
(b) Normative Appendix C, ‘‘Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandiser and
Storage Cabinet Refrigerated Volume
Calculation,’’ as referenced in section 2.2 of
this appendix.
0.2 ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
(a) Section 5.1, ‘‘Installation and Settings,’’
as referenced in section 1.3 of this appendix.
(b) Section 5.2, ‘‘Wall or Vertical Partition
Placement,’’ as referenced in section 1.3 of
this appendix.
(c) Section 5.3, ‘‘Components and
Accessories,’’ as referenced in section 1.3 of
this appendix.
(d) Section 6.1, ‘‘Ambient Temperature and
Humidity,’’ as referenced in section 1.2 of
this appendix.
(e) Section 7.1, ‘‘Sequence of Operations,’’
as referenced in section 1.5 of this appendix.
(f) Section 7.2, ‘‘Preparation Period’’
(excluding sections 7.2.1 and 7.2.2), as
referenced in section 1.5 of this appendix.
(g) Section 7.3, ‘‘Test Periods A and B’’
(excluding sections 7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and
7.3.4), as referenced in sections 1.5 and 1.5.1
of this appendix.
(h) Section 7.4, ‘‘Test Alignment Period,’’
as referenced in section 1.5 of this appendix.
(i) Section 7.5, ‘‘Determining Stability,’’ as
referenced in sections 1.5 and 1.5.2 of this
appendix.
(j) Normative Appendix A, ‘‘Measurement
Locations, Tolerances, Accuracies, and Other
Characteristics,’’ (only the measured
quantities specified in section 1.2 of this
appendix) as referenced in sections 1.2 and
1.5.3 of this appendix.
0.3 ASTM F2143–16
(a) Section 3, ‘‘Terminology,’’ as referenced
in section 1.1 of this appendix.
(b) Section 6.1, ‘‘Analytical Balance Scale,’’
as referenced in section 1.1 of this appendix.
(c) Section 6.2, ‘‘Pans,’’ as referenced in
section 1.1 of this appendix.
(d) Section 7, ‘‘Reagents and Materials,’’ as
referenced in section 1.1 of this appendix.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
(e) Section 9, ‘‘Preparation of Apparatus’’
(section 9.6 only), as referenced in sections
1.1 and 1.4.2 of this appendix.
(f) Section 10.1, ‘‘General’’ (section 10.1.1
only), as referenced in sections 1.1 and 1.5.3
of this appendix.
(g) Section 10.2, ‘‘Pan Thermocouple
Placement,’’ as referenced in section 1.1 of
this appendix.
(h) Section 10.5, ‘‘Test’’ (sections 10.5.5
and 10.5.6 only), as referenced in sections 1.1
and 1.5.1 of this appendix.
(i) Section 11.4, ‘‘Energy Consumption’’
(section 11.4.1 only), as referenced in section
1.1 of this appendix.
(j) Section 11.5, ‘‘Production Capacity,’’ as
referenced in sections 1.1 and 2.1 of this
appendix.
1. Test Procedure
1.1. Determination of Daily Energy
Consumption. Determine the daily energy
consumption of each buffet table or
preparation table with a self-contained
condensing unit by conducting the test
procedure set forth in ASTM F2143–16
section 3, ‘‘Terminology,’’ section 6.1,
‘‘Analytical Balance Scale,’’ section 6.2,
‘‘Pans,’’ section 7, ‘‘Reagents and Materials,’’
section 9.6, ‘‘Preparation of Apparatus’’,
section 10.1, ‘‘General’’ (section 10.1.1 only),
section 10.2, ‘‘Pan Thermocouple
Placement,’’ section 10.5, ‘‘Test’’ (sections
10.5.5 and 10.5.6 only), section 11.4, ‘‘Energy
Consumption’’ (section 11.4.1 only), and
section 11.5, ‘‘Production Capacity,’’ with
additional instructions as described in the
following sections.
1.2. Test Conditions. Ambient conditions
and instrumentation for testing shall be as
specified in the ‘‘Chamber conditions’’ and
‘‘Electricity supply and consumption of unit
under test and components metered
separately’’ portions of appendix A to
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata and measured
according to section 6.1 of ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata and the specifications in
appendix A of ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata.
The ‘‘highest point’’ of the buffet table or
preparation table shall be determined as the
highest point of the open-top refrigerated
area of the buffet table or preparation table,
without including the height of any lids or
covers. The geometric center of the buffet
table or preparation table is: for buffet tables
or preparation tables without refrigerated
compartments, the geometric center of the
top surface of the open-top refrigerated area;
and for buffet tables or preparation tables
with refrigerated compartments, the
geometric center of the door opening area for
the refrigerated compartment.
1.3. Test Setup. Install the buffet table or
preparation table according to sections 5.1,
5.2, and 5.3 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata.
1.4. Test Load.
1.4.1. Pan Loading. Fill pans with distilled
water to within 0.5 in. of the top edge of the
pan. For pans that are not configured in a
horizontal orientation, only the lowest side of
the pan is filled to within 0.5 in. of the top
edge of the pan with distilled water.
1.4.2. Refrigerated Compartments. Measure
the temperature of any refrigerated
compartment(s) as specified in section 9.6 of
ASTM F2143–16. The thermocouples for
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
measuring compartment air temperature shall
be in thermal contact with the center of a 1.6oz (45-g) cylindrical brass slug with a
diameter and height of 0.75 in. The brass
slugs shall be placed at least 0.5 in from any
heat-conducting surface.
1.5. Stabilization and Test Period. Prepare
the unit for testing and conduct two test
periods to determine stability according to
sections 7.1 through 7.5 of ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata, excluding sections 7.2.1, 7.2.2,
7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and 7.3.4. The preparation
period under section 7.2 of ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata includes loading the test
unit pans with distilled water and adjusting
the controls to maintain the desired
performance.
1.5.1. Test Periods A and B. Conduct two
test periods, A and B, as specified in section
7.3 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
(excluding sections 7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and
7.3.4). The 24-hour test periods shall begin
with an 8-hour active period as specified in
section 10.5.5 of ASTM F2143–16. Following
the active period, the remaining 16 hours of
the test period shall be a standby period with
the pans remaining in place, any pan covers
in the closed position, and with no
additional door openings.
1.5.2. Stability. Average pan temperatures
shall be used to determine stability, as
specified in section 7.5 of ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata, rather than average test simulator
temperatures.
1.5.3. Data Recording. For each test period,
record data as specified in section 10.1.1 of
ASTM F2143–16, except record wet-bulb
temperature rather than relative humidity.
Rather than voltage, current, and power as
specified in section 10.1.1 of ASTM F2143–
16, record the electrical supply potential and
frequency and energy consumption as
specified in appendix A of ASHRAE 72–2022
with Errata.
1.6. Target Temperatures.
1.6.1. Average Pan Temperature. The
average of all pan temperature measurements
during the test period shall be 38 °F ±2 °F. If
the unit under test is not able to be operated
at this average temperature range, test the
unit at the lowest application product
temperature (LAPT), as defined in § 431.62.
For units equipped with a thermostat, LAPT
is measured at the lowest thermostat setting
of the unit (for units that are only able to
operate at temperatures above the specified
test temperature) or the highest thermostat
setting of the unit (for units that are only able
to operate at temperatures below the
specified test temperature).
1.6.2. Average Compartment Temperature.
The average of all compartment temperature
measurements during the test period shall be
38 °F ±2 °F. If the unit under test is not
capable of maintaining both average pan
temperature and average compartment
temperature within the specified range, the
average compartment temperature shall be
the average temperature necessary to
maintain average pan temperature within the
specified range. If the unit is tested at the
LAPT for the average pan temperature, as
described in section 1.6.1 of this appendix,
the average compartment temperature is the
average of all compartment temperature
measurements at that control setting.
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
2. Capacity Metrics
2.1. Pan Volume. Determine pan volume
according to section 11.5 of ASTM F2143–16.
2.2. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the
volume of any refrigerated compartments
according to section 3.2.17 and appendix C
of AHRI 1200–2023. The refrigerated volume
excludes the volume occupied by pans
loaded in the open-top display area for
testing.
2.3. Pan Display Area. Determine the pan
display area based on the total surface area
of water in the test pans when filled to
within 0.5 in. of the top edge of the pan, or
for test pans that are not configured in a
horizontal orientation, when the lowest side
of the pan is filled to within 0.5 in. of the
top edge of the pan with water.
12. Appendix D to subpart C of part
431 is added to read as follows:
■
Appendix D to Subpart C of Part 431—
Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of
Blast Chillers or Blast Freezers
Note: On or after September 20, 2024, any
representations, including for certification of
compliance, made with respect to the energy
use or efficiency of blast chillers or blast
freezers must be made in accordance with the
results of testing pursuant to this appendix.
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference in § 431.63
the entire standard for AHRI 1200–2023,
ASHRAE 72–2022, and ASHRAE 72–2022
Errata (the latter two collectively referenced
as ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata). However,
only enumerated provisions of those
documents are applicable to this appendix as
follows:
0.1 AHRI 1200–2023
(a) Appendix C, ‘‘Commercial Refrigerated
Display Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet
Refrigerated Volume Calculation—
Normative,’’ as referenced in section 1.1.1. of
this appendix.
(b) Reserved.
0.2 ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata
(a) Section 4, ‘‘Instruments,’’ as referenced
in section 1.2 of this appendix.
(b) Section 5, ‘‘Preparation of Unit Under
Test’’ (except section 5.4, ‘‘Loading of Test
Simulators and Filler Material’’), as
referenced in section 1.2 of this appendix.
(c) Section 6.1, ‘‘Ambient Temperature and
Humidity,’’ as referenced in sections 1.2 and
1.4 of this appendix.
(d) Figure 6, ‘‘Location of Ambient
Temperature Indicators,’’ as referenced in
sections 1.2 and 1.4 of this appendix.
(e) Normative Appendix A, ‘‘Measurement
Locations, Tolerances, Accuracies, and Other
Characteristics,’’ (only the measured
quantities specified in section 1.2.1 of this
appendix) as referenced in sections 1.2 and
1.4 of this appendix.
1. Test Procedures
1.1. Scope. This section provides the test
procedures for measuring the energy
consumption in kilowatt-hours per pound
(kWh/lb) for self-contained commercial blast
chillers and blast freezers that have a
refrigerated volume of up to 500 ft3.
1.1.1. Determination of Refrigerated
Volume. Determine the refrigerated volume
of a self-contained commercial blast chiller
or blast freezer using the method set forth in
AHRI 1200–2023, appendix C, ‘‘Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandiser and
Storage Cabinet Refrigerated Volume
Calculation—Normative.’’
1.2. Determination of Energy Consumption.
Determine the energy consumption of each
covered blast chiller or blast freezer by
conducting the test procedure set forth in
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata section 4,
‘‘Instruments,’’ section 5, ‘‘Preparation of
Unit Under Test’’ (except section 5.4,
‘‘Loading of Test Simulators and Filler
Material’’), section 6.1, ‘‘Ambient
Temperature and Humidity,’’ Figure 6,
66229
‘‘Location of Ambient Temperature
Indicators,’’ and normative appendix A,
‘‘Measurement Locations, Tolerances,
Accuracies, and Other Characteristics’’ (only
the measured quantities specified in section
1.2.1 of this appendix), as well as the
requirements of this appendix.
1.2.1. Measured Quantities in Normative
Appendix A of ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata. The following measured quantities
shall be in accordance with the specifications
of normative appendix A of ASHRAE 72–
2022 with Errata: dry bulb temperature
(except for deviations specified in sections
1.3 and 1.4 of this appendix), electrical
supply frequency, electrical supply potential,
energy consumed (except for deviations
specified in section 1.3 of this appendix),
extent of non-perforated surface beyond
edges of unit under test, front clearance, rear
or side clearance, and time measurements.
1.2.2. Additional Specifications for
ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata. The term
‘‘refrigerator’’ used in ASHRAE 72–2022 with
Errata shall instead refer to ‘‘blast chiller’’ or
‘‘blast freezer,’’ as applicable. In section 5.3
of ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata, the phrase
‘‘all necessary components and accessories
shall be installed prior to loading the storage
and display areas with test simulators and
filler material’’ shall be replaced with ‘‘all
necessary components and accessories shall
be installed prior to precooling the unit
under test.’’ Section 5.3.5 shall also require
that, prior to precooling the unit under test,
the condensate pan shall be dry.
1.3. Data Recording Measurement Intervals.
Measurements shall be continuously
recorded during the test in intervals no
greater than 10 seconds.
1.4. Test Conditions. The required test
conditions shall have dry bulb temperature
values according to Table D.1 when
measured at point A in figure 6 of ASHRAE
72–2022 with Errata and according to section
6.1 of ASHRAE 72–2022 with Errata.
TABLE D.1—TEST CONDITION VALUES AND TOLERANCES
Test condition
Value
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
Dry Bulb ..................................................................
1.5. Product Pan. The product pan shall be
a 12 in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in., 22 gauge or
heavier, and 300 series stainless steel pan. If
the blast chiller or blast freezer is not capable
of holding the 12 in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in.
product pan dimensions, the manufacturer’s
recommended pan size shall be used,
conforming as closely as possible to the 12
in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. pan dimensions.
1.6. Product Temperature Measurement.
The product temperature shall be measured
in the geometric center of the measured
product pans using an unweighted
thermocouple placed 5⁄8 of an in. above the
bottom of the measured product pan. The
thermocouple leads shall be secured to the
bottom of the measured product pan while
also allowing for the transfer of the measured
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
Tolerance
86.0 °F
Average over test period: ±1.8 °F.
Individual measurements: ±3.6 °F.
product pan from the heating source into the
blast chiller’s or blast freezer’s cabinet.
1.7. Product Preparation. The product shall
be made for each product pan and shall be
loaded to 2 in. of product thickness (i.e.,
depth) within the product pan unless an
additional product pan with a product
thickness of less than 2 in. is needed to meet
the product capacity determined in section
2.1 of this appendix. A 20-percent-by-volume
propylene glycol (1,2-Propanediol) mixture
in water shall be prepared. In each product
pan, pour the propylene glycol mixture over
#20 mesh southern yellow pine sawdust to
create a 22 percent to 78 percent by mass
slurry. An example of an acceptable sawdust
specification is the American Wood Fibers
brand, #20 Mesh Pine Sawdust. Mix until the
sawdust becomes completely saturated and
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
leave uncovered in the product pan. Verify
that the product pan thermocouple is fully
submerged in the product mixture and
reposition the product pan thermocouple to
the requirements of section 1.6. of this
appendix if the product pan thermocouple is
incorrectly positioned after mixing. Each
product pan shall be weighed before and
after the food product simulator is added and
prior to heating the product. The weight of
the product shall not include the weight of
the pans, thermocouples, or wires. A
cumulative total of the product weight shall
be calculated and the product pans shall
continue to be loaded with the product
mixture until the cumulative total reaches,
but not exceeds, the product capacity
determined in section 2.1 of this appendix
with a tolerance of ±5 percent or ±2 pounds,
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES2
66230
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 / Rules and Regulations
whichever is less. The cumulative total
weight of product, the weight of product in
each individual pan, and the number of pans
shall be recorded.
1.8. Product Pan Heating. Measured
product pans shall be maintained at an
average temperature of 160.0 °F ±1.8 °F and
individual pan temperatures shall be
maintained at 160 °F ±10 °F for a minimum
of 8 hours prior to being loaded into the blast
chiller or blast freezer. Non-measured
product pans shall also be heated for a
minimum of 8 hours prior to being loaded
into the blast chiller or blast freezer and the
non-measured product pans shall be placed
in alternating positions with the measured
product pans in the heating device. Data
acquisition for the temperature of the
measured product pans and time
measurements shall begin to be recorded
prior to the minimum of 8 hours heating
period.
1.9. Product Pan Distribution. The product
pans shall be spaced evenly throughout each
vertical column of rack positions in the blast
chiller or blast freezer without the product
pans touching any other product pans and
without the product pans touching the top
and the bottom of the blast chiller or blast
freezer cabinet. For blast chillers or blast
freezers that have an additional product pan
with a product thickness of less than 2 in.,
the additional product pan shall be placed as
close to the middle rack position as possible
while maintaining an even distribution of all
product pans. If not all rack positions are
occupied by product pans, the product pan
locations shall be recorded.
1.10. Measured Product Pans. If multiple
product pans are required per level of the
blast chiller or blast freezer (i.e., product
pans can be loaded side-by-side at the same
level), only the product temperature of one
product pan per level shall be measured and
the product pans measured should alternate
vertical columns of the blast chiller or blast
freezer cabinet so that each vertical column
does not have two measured product pans on
sequential levels. If a blast chiller or blast
freezer requires an additional product pan
with a thickness less than 2 in., the
additional product pan shall not be measured
for product temperature.
1.11. Stabilization. The blast chiller or
blast freezer shall stabilize at the test
conditions specified in section 1.4 of this
appendix for at least 24 hours without
operating.
1.12. Pre-cool Cycle. Data acquisition for
the test condition temperatures specified in
section 1.4 of this appendix and time
measurements shall begin to be recorded
prior to the pre-cool cycle. The pre-cool cycle
shall be initiated on a blast chiller or blast
freezer once the stabilization specified in
section 1.11 of this appendix is complete.
The fastest pre-cool cycle shall be selected.
The pre-cool cycle shall be complete when
the blast chiller or blast freezer notifies the
user that the pre-cool is complete. If the blast
chiller or blast freezer does not notify the
user that the pre-cool cycle is complete, the
pre-cool cycle shall be deemed complete
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Sep 25, 2023
Jkt 259001
when the blast chiller or blast freezer reaches
40 °F or 2 °F based on the blast chiller’s or
blast freezer’s sensing probe for blast chillers
and blast freezers, respectively. For blast
chillers or blast freezers without any defined
pre-cool cycles, the fastest blast chilling or
blast freezing cycle shall be run with an
empty cabinet until the blast chiller or blast
freezer reaches 40 °F or 2 °F based on the
blast chiller’s or blast freezer’s sensing probe.
During the pre-cool cycle, the blast chiller’s
or blast freezer’s sensing probe shall remain
in its default or holstered position. The precool test data to be recorded are the test
condition temperatures specified in section
1.4 of this appendix, pre-cool cycle selected,
pre-cool duration, and final pre-cool cabinet
temperature based on the blast chiller’s or
blast freezer’s sensing probe.
1.13. Loading. The blast chiller or blast
freezer door shall be fully open to an angle
of not less than 75 °F for loading at 4.0 ±1.0
minutes after the blast chiller or blast freezer
completes the pre-cool cycle as specified in
section 1.12 of this appendix. The door shall
remain open to load all of the product pans
for the entirety of the loading procedure. The
door shall remain open for 20 seconds per
roll-in rack and 15 seconds per product pan
for roll-in and standard blast chillers or blast
freezers, respectively. The total door open
period shall have a tolerance of ±5 seconds.
The blast chiller’s or blast freezer’s sensing
probe shall be inserted into the geometric
center of a product pan approximately 1 in.
deep in the product mixture at the median
pan level in the blast chiller or blast freezer.
If the product pan at the median level is the
additional product pan with less than 2 in.
of product thickness, the closest product pan
or product pan level that is farthest away
from the evaporator fan shall be used to
insert the blast chiller’s or blast freezer’s
sensing probe. If the median pan level has
capacity for multiple product pans, the
probed product pan shall be the furthest
away from the evaporator. The sensing probe
shall not touch the bottom of the product pan
or be exposed to the air. The location of the
product pan with the sensing probe shall be
recorded. The sensing probe shall be placed
so that there is no interference with the
product pan thermocouple. The product pan
thermocouple wiring shall not affect the
energy performance of the blast chiller or
blast freezer. The door shall remain closed
for the remainder of the test.
1.14. Blast Chilling or Blast Freezing Cycle.
Determine the blast chilling or blast freezing
cycle that will conduct the most rapid
product temperature pulldown that is
designed for the densest food product, as
stated in the blast chiller’s or blast freezer’s
manufacturer literature. A blast chilling cycle
shall have a target temperature of 38.0 °F and
a blast freezing cycle shall have a target
temperature of 0.0 °F. The test condition
temperatures specified in section 1.4 of this
appendix and the time measurements shall
continue to be recorded from the pre-cool
cycle. Measured product pan temperatures
shall continue to be recorded from the
minimum of 8-hour period of heating prior
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
to the loading of the product pans into the
blast chiller or blast freezer. Electrical supply
frequency, electrical supply potential, and
energy consumed shall start to be recorded as
soon as the blast chiller or blast freezer door
is opened to load the product pans. Once the
blast chiller or blast freezer door is closed,
the blast chilling cycle or blast freezing cycle
shall be selected and initiated as soon as is
practicable. The blast chilling cycle or blast
freezing cycle selected shall be recorded. The
blast chilling or blast freezing test period
shall continue from the door opening until
all individual measured pan temperatures are
at or below 40.0 °F or 2.0 °F for blast chiller
and blast freezer tests, respectively,
regardless of whether the selected cycle
program has terminated. If all individual
measured pan temperatures do not reach
40.0 °F or 2.0 °F for blast chiller and blast
freezer tests, respectively, two hours after the
selected cycle program has terminated, the
test shall be repeated with the target
temperature lowered by 1.0 °F until all
individual measured pan temperatures are at
or below 40.0 °F or 2.0 °F for blast chiller and
blast freezer tests, respectively, at the
conclusion of the test. The duration of the
blast chiller or blast freezer test shall be
recorded.
1.15. Calculations. The measured energy
consumption determined in section 1.14 of
this appendix shall be reported in kilowatthours and shall be divided by the cumulative
total weight of product determined in section
1.7 of this appendix in pounds.
2. Capacity Metric
2.1. Product Capacity. Determine the
product capacity by reviewing all
manufacturer literature that is included with
the blast chiller or blast freezer. The largest
product capacity by weight that is stated in
the manufacturer literature shall be the
product capacity. If the blast chiller or blast
freezer is able to operate as both a blast
chiller and a blast freezer when set to
different operating modes by the user and the
manufacturer literature specifies different
product capacities for blast chilling and blast
freezing, the largest capacity by weight stated
for the respective operating mode shall be the
product capacity. If no product capacity is
stated in the manufacturer literature, the
product capacity shall be the product
capacity that fills the maximum number of 12
in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. pans that can be
loaded into the blast chiller or blast freezer
according to section 1.7 of this appendix. If
the blast chiller or blast freezer with no
product capacity stated in the manufacturer
literature is not capable of meeting the
definition of a blast chiller or blast freezer
according to § 431.62 upon testing according
to section 1 of this appendix, one 12 in. by
20 in. by 2.5 in. pan shall be removed from
the blast chiller or blast freezer until the
definition of a blast chiller or blast freezer is
met according to § 431.62 when testing
according to section 1 of this appendix.
[FR Doc. 2023–19999 Filed 9–25–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
E:\FR\FM\26SER2.SGM
26SER2
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 26, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66152-66230]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19999]
[[Page 66151]]
Vol. 88
Tuesday,
No. 185
September 26, 2023
Part II
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial
Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 26, 2023 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 66152]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE-2017-BT-TP-0008]
RIN 1904-AD83
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Commercial
Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') amends the test
procedures for commercial refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and
freezers (``CRE'') to reference the latest versions of the applicable
industry standards. DOE also establishes definitions and test
procedures for new equipment categories, adopts test procedures
consistent with recently published waivers and interim waivers,
establishes product-specific enforcement provisions, allows for volume
determinations based on computer-aided designs, specifies a sampling
plan for volume and total display area, and adopts additional
clarifying amendments.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is October 26, 2023. The
amendments will be mandatory for equipment testing starting September
20, 2024.
The incorporation by reference of certain material listed in the
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register on October 26,
2023.
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-2017-BT-TP-0008. 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. Peter Cochran, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9496. Email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE incorporates by reference the following
industry standards into 10 CFR part 431:
AHRI Standard 1200-2023 (I-P), 2023 Standard for Performance Rating
of Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets,
copyright 2023 (``AHRI 1200-2023'').
ANSI/AHRI Standard 1320-2011 (I-P), 2011 Standard for Performance
Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage
Cabinets for Use With Secondary Refrigerants, copyright 2011 (``ANSI/
AHRI 1320-2011'').
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2022:
Method of Testing Open and Closed Commercial Refrigerators and
Freezers, approved June 30, 2022; and
Errata Sheet, November 11, 2022
(``ANSI/ASHRAE 72-2022'').
ASTM F2143-16, Standard Test Method for Performance of Refrigerated
Buffet and Preparation Tables, approved May 1, 2016 (``ASTM F2143-
16'').
Copies of AHRI 1200-2023 and AHRI 1320-2011 can be obtained by
going to www.ahrinet.org/standards/search-standards.
Copies of ASHRAE 72-2022 can be obtained by going to
www.techstreet.com/standards/ashrae-72-2022?product_id=1710927 and the
November 11, 2022 Errata can be obtained by going to www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/standards-and-guidelines/standards-errata.
Copies of ASTM F2143-16 can be purchased at www.astm.org/f2143-16.html.
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 and Definitions
1. Ice-Cream Freezers
2. High-Temperature CRE
3. Convertible Equipment
B. Updates to Industry Standards
1. AHRI 1200
2. ASHRAE 72
3. Secondary Coolants
C. Test Conditions for Specific CRE Categories
1. Salad Bars, Buffet Tables, and Refrigerated Preparation
Tables
2. Pull-Down Temperature Applications
3. Blast Chillers and Blast Freezers
4. Chef Bases and Griddle Stands
5. Mobile Refrigerated Cabinets
6. Additional Covered Equipment
D. Harmonization of Efficiency Standards and Testing With NSF 7-
2019 Food Safety
E. Dedicated Remote Condensing Units
F. Test Procedure Clarifications and Modifications
1. Defrost Cycles
2. Total Display Area
G. Alternative Refrigerants
H. Certification of Compartment Volume
I. Test Procedure Waivers
J. Enforcement Provisions
K. Lowest Application Product Temperature
L. Removal of Obsolete Provisions
M. Sampling Plan
N. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
2. Harmonization With Industry Standards
O. Effective and Compliance Dates
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563 and 14094
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration
Act of 1974
M. Congressional Notification
N. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
Commercial refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers
(collectively, commercial refrigeration equipment, or ``CRE'') 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)(E)) DOE's energy conservation standards and test procedures
for CRE are currently prescribed at subpart C of part 431 of title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (``CFR''). The following
[[Page 66153]]
sections discuss DOE's authority to establish test procedures for CRE
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 \2\ of EPCA, added by Public Law
95-619, Title IV, section 441(a), established the Energy Conservation
Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. This equipment
includes CRE, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311 (1)(E))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 specifically 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 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, and requires that test procedures not
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
With respect to CRE, EPCA requires DOE to use the test procedures
determined by the Secretary to be generally accepted industry
standards, or industry standards developed or recognized by the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers (``ASHRAE'') or American National Standards Institute
(``ANSI''). (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(i)) With regard to self-contained
CRE to which statutory standards are applicable, the required initial
test procedure is the ASHRAE 117 test procedure in effect on January 1,
2005. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(A)(ii)) Additionally, EPCA requires that if
ASHRAE 117 is amended, the Secretary shall, by rule, amend the test
procedure for the product as necessary to ensure that the test
procedure is consistent with the amended ASHRAE 117 test procedure,
unless the Secretary makes a determination, by rule, and supported by
clear and convincing evidence, that to do so would not meet the
statutory requirements regarding representativeness and burden. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(6)(E)) Finally, EPCA states that if a test procedure
other than the ASHRAE 117 test procedure is approved by ANSI, DOE must
review the relative strengths and weaknesses of the new test procedure
relative to the ASHRAE 117 test procedure and adopt one new test
procedure for use in the standards program. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(6)(F)(i)) \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In 2005, ASHRAE combined Standard 72-1998, ``Method of
Testing Open Refrigerators,'' and Standard 117-2002 and published
the test method as ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, ``Method of Testing
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,'' which was approved by ANSI
on July 29, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate
test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including CRE, 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 in the Federal Register 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(a)(1)(A))
B. Background
DOE's current test procedure for CRE appears at 10 CFR part 431,
subpart C, appendix B (``Amended Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Commercial Refrigerators,
Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers'' or ``appendix B'').
DOE last amended the test procedure for CRE in a final rule
published on April 24, 2014 (``April 2014 Final Rule''). 79 FR 22277.
Specifically, DOE clarified certain terms, procedures, and compliance
dates to improve repeatability and provide additional detail compared
to the prior version of the test procedure. DOE noted that the
amendments in the April 2014 Final Rule would not affect the energy use
of CRE as measured under the prior version of the test procedure. 79 FR
22277, 22280-22281.
The test procedure incorporates by reference the following industry
standards: (1) AHRI Standard 1200 (I-P)-2010, ``Performance Rating of
Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets''
(``AHRI 1200-2010''); (2) ASHRAE Standard 72-2005, ``Method of Testing
Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,'' which was approved by ANSI on
July 29, 2005 (``ASHRAE 72-2005''); and (3) ANSI/Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers (``AHAM'') Standard HRF-1-2008, ``Energy and
Internal Volume of Refrigerating Appliances'' (``AHAM HRF-1-2008'') for
determining refrigerated volumes for CRE.
On June 11, 2021, DOE published in the Federal Register an early
assessment
[[Page 66154]]
request for information (``June 2021 RFI'') seeking comments on the
existing DOE test procedure for CRE. 86 FR 31182. In the June 2021 RFI,
DOE requested comments, information, and data regarding a number of
issues, including (1) scope and definitions, (2) updates to industry
standards, (3) test conditions for specific CRE categories, (4)
harmonization with food safety standards, (5) remote condensing units,
(6) test procedure clarifications, (7) alternative refrigerants, (8)
compartment volume certification, and (9) test procedure waivers.
On June 30, 2022, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice of
proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') that proposed to update and establish
test procedures for CRE (``June 2022 NOPR''). 87 FR 39164. In the June
2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to and requested feedback on the following:
(1) Establish new definitions for high-temperature refrigerator,
medium-temperature refrigerator, low-temperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most current versions of industry
standards AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI 1320;
(3) Establish definitions and a new appendix C including test
procedures for buffet tables and preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and a new appendix D including test
procedures for blast chillers and blast freezers;
(5) Amend the definition for chef base or griddle stand;
(6) Specify refrigerant conditions for CRE that use R-744;
(7) Allow for certification of compartment volumes based on
computer-aided design (``CAD'') models;
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts and customer order storage
cabinets currently specified in waivers and interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the lowest application product temperature
(``LAPT'') provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for volume and total display area
(``TDA'').
87 FR 39164.
DOE received comments in response to the June 2022 NOPR from the
interested parties listed in Table I.1.
Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the June 2022 NOPR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in this final Comment No. in
Commenter(s) rule the docket Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AHT Cooling Systems GmbH................ AHT....................... 40 Manufacturer.
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and AHRI...................... 38 Trade Association.
Refrigeration Institute.
Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Joint Commenters.......... 31 Efficiency Organizations.
American.
Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy,
and Natural Resources Defense Council.
Continental Refrigerator................ Continental............... 29 Manufacturer.
Hillphoenix, Inc........................ Hillphoenix............... 35 Manufacturer.
Hoshizaki America, Inc.................. Hoshizaki................. 30 Manufacturer.
Hussmann Corporation.................... Hussmann.................. 32 Manufacturer.
National Automatic Merchandising NAMA...................... 33 Trade Association.
Association.
North American Association of Food NAFEM..................... 34 Trade Association.
Equipment Manufacturers.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.... NEEA...................... 39 Efficiency Organization.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San CA IOUs................... 36 Energy Utilities.
Diego Gas & Electric, and Southern
California Edison; collectively, the
California Investor-Owned Utilities.
True Manufacturing Company, Inc......... True...................... 28 Manufacturer.
Zero Zone, Inc.......................... Zero Zone................. 37 Manufacturer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\4\
To the extent that interested parties have provided written comments
that are substantively consistent with any oral comments provided
during the August 1, 2022, public meeting, DOE cites the written
comments throughout this final rule. Any oral comments provided during
the public meeting that are not substantively addressed by written
comments are summarized and cited separately throughout this final
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
test procedures for CRE. (Docket No. EERE-2017-BT-TP-0008, 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 and establishes test procedures for
CRE as follows:
(1) Establish new definitions for high-temperature refrigerator,
medium-temperature refrigerator, low-temperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most current versions of industry
standards AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI 1320;
(3) Establish definitions and a new appendix C including test
procedures for buffet tables and preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and a new appendix D including test
procedures for blast chillers and blast freezers;
(5) Amend the definition and certain test conditions for chef bases
or griddle stands;
(6) Specify refrigerant conditions for CRE that use R-744;
(7) Allow for certification of compartment volumes based on
computer-aided design (``CAD'') models;
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts and customer order storage
cabinets currently specified in waivers and interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the lowest application product temperature
(``LAPT'') provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for volume and total display area
(``TDA'').
The adopted amendments are summarized and compared to the test
procedure provision prior to the amendment in Table II.1, along with
the reason for the adopted change.
[[Page 66155]]
Table II.1--Summary of Changes in the Amended Test Procedure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes from the June
2022 NOPR proposed test
DOE Test Procedure Prior to Amendment Amended Test Procedure procedure summary of Attribution
changes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defines commercial refrigerator Defines high- None................... Improves
without delineating between units temperature representativeness.
that operate at medium and high refrigerator and
temperatures. medium-temperature
refrigerator to
account for new high-
temperature rating
point.
Defines ice-cream freezer as a type Defines low-temperature None................... Improves
of commercial freezer. freezer to delineate representativeness.
between ice-cream
freezers and other
commercial freezers.
Ice-cream freezer definition refers Ice-cream definition Expanded to ``ice cream Improves
only to ``ice cream''. refers more broadly to and other frozen representativeness.
``ice cream and other desserts''.
frozen desserts''.
References AHRI 1200-2010 for rating References AHRI 1200- Updated to harmonize Harmonizes with most
requirements. 2023 for rating with most recent recent industry
requirements. version of AHRI 1200. standard.
References ASHRAE 72-2005 for test References ASHRAE 72- Updated to harmonize Harmonizes with most
requirements. 2022 with Errata for with most recent recent industry
test requirements. version of ASHRAE 72. standard.
References AHAM HRF-1-2008 for volume References AHRI 1200- Updated to harmonize Harmonizes with most
measurement. 2023 for volume with most recent recent industry
requirements. version of AHRI 1200. standard.
Includes a single 38 [deg]F rating Specifies 38 [deg]F None................... Improves
point for commercial refrigerators. rating point for representativeness;
medium-temperature harmonizes with
refrigerators and 55 industry standard.
[deg]F rating point
for high-temperature
refrigerators.
Does not specify a method for testing References AHRI 1320- None................... Improves
CRE with secondary coolants. 2011 for CRE used with representativeness;
secondary coolants. harmonizes with
industry standard.
Does not specify definitions or test Defines buffet table None................... Improves
procedures for buffet tables and and preparation table representativeness;
preparation tables. and establishes test harmonizes with
procedures based on industry standard.
ASTM F2143-16.
Does not specify definitions or test Defines blast chiller None................... Improves
procedures for blast chillers and and blast freezer and representativeness;
blast freezers. establishes test harmonizes with
procedures based on industry standard.
expected industry test
method.
Chef base or griddle stand definition Clarifies chef base or None................... Improves
does not refer to a maximum height. griddle stand representativeness.
definition by
specifying a maximum
height of 32 in. for
this equipment.
Chef bases or griddle stands have a Chef bases or griddle Updated test conditions Improves
dry-bulb temperature of 75.2 [deg]F; stands have a dry-bulb representativeness.
wet-bulb temperature of 64.4 [deg]F; temperature of 86.0
and radiant heat temperature of [deg]F; wet-bulb
greater than or equal to 70.0 [deg]F. temperature of 73.7
[deg]F; and radiant
heat temperature of
greater than or equal
to 81.0 [deg]F.
Does not provide procedures for CRE References ASHRAE 72- Updated to harmonize Addresses existing
with no automatic defrost or with 2022 with Errata for with most recent waiver; harmonizes
long duration defrost cycles. test instructions for version of ASHRAE 72. with industry
units with no standard.
automatic defrost and
adopts optional two-
part test for CRE with
defrost cycles longer
than 24 hours.
Includes conflicting instructions Corrects errors in Updated to harmonize Improves
regarding TDA calculation. current test procedure with most recent representativeness,
by reference to AHRI version of AHRI 1200. repeatability, and
1200-2023. reproducibility;
harmonizes with
industry standard.
Provides refrigerant conditions that Specifies refrigerant Includes tolerances and Improves
are applicable only to common conditions to allow updates conditions to representativeness;
refrigerants. for testing with ensure appropriate harmonizes with
carbon dioxide operation within existing waiver.
refrigerant. tolerances.
Requires determining volume based on Allows the use of CAD None................... Reduces test burden.
testing. models to certify
volume.
Specifies a single door opening Defines customer order None................... Improves
sequence. storage cabinet representativeness;
equipment category and harmonizes with
specifies an alternate existing waiver.
door opening sequence
for this equipment.
Does not specify product-enforcement Includes product- None................... Improves clarity.
provisions. enforcement provisions
for determining volume
and TDA.
[[Page 66156]]
Specifies LAPT instructions for Clarifies use of LAPT None................... Improves clarity.
temperatures above target test provisions for
temperature. operating temperatures
below the target test
temperature.
Includes obsolete appendix A and Removes obsolete None................... Improves readability.
current appendix B test procedures. appendix A; adds new
appendix C for testing
buffet tables and
preparation tables,
and adds new appendix
D for testing blast
chillers and blast
freezers.
Does not specify a sampling plan for Specifies that volume None................... Improves
volume and TDA. and TDA be determined representativeness,
based on the mean of repeatability, and
the test sample. reproducibility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has determined that the amendments described in section III of
this document and adopted in this document will not alter the measured
efficiency of CRE currently subject to energy conservation standards,
or require retesting or recertification solely as a result of DOE's
adoption of the amendments to the test procedures. Additionally, DOE
has determined that the amendments will not increase the cost of
testing for CRE currently tested to the existing test procedure. For
chef bases or griddle stands, buffet tables and preparation tables, and
blast chillers and blast freezers, testing according to the amended or
established test procedure will not be required until the compliance
date of any energy conservation standards for that equipment. However,
any representations of energy use for chef bases or griddle stands,
buffet tables and preparation tables and blast chillers and blast
freezers must be made in accordance with the amended test procedure
starting 360 days after this final rule publishes in the Federal
Register. While DOE does not expect that manufacturers will incur
additional cost as a result of the established test procedure, DOE
provides a discussion of testing costs in section III.O.1 of this
document. Discussion of DOE's actions are addressed in detail in
section III of this document.
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 360 days after the publication of this final rule.
III. Discussion
A. Scope and Definitions
``Commercial refrigerator, freezer, and refrigerator-freezer''
means refrigeration equipment that is not a consumer product (as
defined in 10 CFR 430.2); is not designed and marketed exclusively for
medical, scientific, or research purposes; operates at a chilled,
frozen, combination chilled and frozen, or variable temperature;
displays or stores merchandise and other perishable materials
horizontally, semi-vertically, or vertically; has transparent or solid
doors, sliding or hinged doors, a combination of hinged, sliding,
transparent, or solid doors, or no doors; is designed for pull-down
temperature applications or holding temperature applications; and is
connected to a self-contained condensing unit or to a remote condensing
unit. 10 CFR 431.62.
For the purpose of determining applicability of certain test
procedure provisions, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to amend
certain existing definitions and to establish certain new definitions,
as discussed in the following paragraphs. 87 FR 39164, 39168-39171. DOE
discusses additional equipment definitions and test procedures for
specific equipment categories in section III.C of this document.
1. Ice-Cream Freezers
DOE defines certain categories of CRE, including ``ice-cream
freezer.'' DOE defines an ``ice-cream freezer'' as a commercial freezer
that is designed to operate at or below -5 [deg]F 2 [deg]F
(-21 [deg]C 1.1 [deg]C) and that the manufacturer designs,
markets, or intends for the storing, displaying, or dispensing of ice
cream. 10 CFR 431.62.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE did not identify any technical features
that would allow for distinguishing ice-cream freezers from other
commercial freezers capable of operating at low temperatures and
therefore did not propose in the June 2022 NOPR to include any
additional equipment characteristics in the ice-cream freezer
definition. 87 FR 39164, 39168.
a. Frozen Desserts
DOE noted in the June 2022 NOPR that the equipment term and
definition reference ``ice cream,'' but ``ice cream'' is not defined.
87 FR 39164, 39168. DOE acknowledged that other frozen products may be
similarly stored and displayed. Id. For example, food products such as
gelato, frozen yogurt, and sorbet are typically displayed, stored, and
dispensed in the same manner as ice cream. Id. The CRE used for these
products is likely similar, if not identical, to equipment used to
store, display, or dispense ice cream. Id.
To clarify the equipment classification and to avoid potential
misunderstanding that the term ``ice-cream freezer'' is limited to
equipment associated with ice cream and not other similar products, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to amend this term's definition to refer
to equipment designed, marketed, or intended for the storing,
displaying, or dispensing of ``frozen desserts,'' rather than ice cream
specifically. 87 FR 39164, 39169. DOE stated in the NOPR that it does
not expect this proposal to affect testing or certifications for
existing CRE, because equipment designed for frozen desserts other than
ice cream that otherwise meets the ice-cream freezer definition are
likely already tested and certified as ice-cream freezers. Id.
As proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, ice-cream freezer means:
(1) Prior to the compliance date(s) of any amended energy
conservation standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a commercial freezer
that is designed to
[[Page 66157]]
operate at or below -5.0 [deg]F (2.0 [deg]F) and that the
manufacturer designs, markets, or intends for the storing, displaying,
or dispensing of frozen desserts; or
(2) Upon the compliance date(s) of any amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a commercial freezer that is
designed for an operating temperature at or below -15.0 [deg]F (2.0 [deg]F) and that the manufacturer designs, markets, or
intends for the storing, displaying, or dispensing of frozen desserts.
Id.
In response to the June 2022 NOPR, Hussmann stated its support of
the amended definition for ``frozen desserts'' rather than ice cream
specifically. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2) Hussmann also asked DOE to
include in this definition the temperature range needed to operate ice-
cream freezers, stating it does not oppose the definition change, but
cautioning that some models intended for ``frozen desserts'' may not be
able to achieve the DOE ice-cream ratings. Id.
The CA IOUs stated their support to amend the definition for ``ice-
cream freezer'' to include all ``frozen desserts'' and to test frozen
dessert freezers at either 0 [deg]F or -15 [deg]F. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p.
10)
AHRI disagreed with DOE's proposal to amend the ice-cream freezer
definition to refer to equipment intended for ``frozen desserts,''
because while some commercial refrigeration equipment models are sold
and marketed as ``ice-cream freezers,'' AHRI was not aware of any
product specifically marketed for ``frozen desserts.'' (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 2). AHRI noted that the term ``frozen desserts'' was not defined,
and that DOE indicated its intention to clarify ``ice cream'' could
include gelato, frozen yogurt, sorbet, and other ice-cream-like
products. Id. AHRI commented that they disagree with DOE's statement
that these products are typically displayed, stored, and dispensed in
the same manner as ice cream; in fact, these additional products have
an array of temperature requirements depending on their characteristics
(fat content, etc.) and the application holding, dispensing, etc.). Id.
AHRI also noted that the term ``frozen desserts'' is problematic
because it might encompass products with requirements different than
ice-cream-like, such as frozen pastries, cakes, fruits, chocolates, and
other confectionary items served frozen at the end of a meal, while
excluding ``frozen treats'' or ``frozen snacks.'' Id.
Continental commented that it disagreed with DOE's proposal to
amend the ice-cream freezer definition to refer to equipment intended
for ``frozen desserts;'' while some commercial refrigeration equipment
models are sold and marketed as ``ice-cream freezers,'' Continental
knew of none marketed for ``frozen desserts,'' a term DOE has not
defined. (Continental, No. 29, p. 1-2) Continental disagreed with DOE's
statement that gelato, frozen yogurt, sorbet, and other ice-cream-like
products were typically displayed, stored, and dispensed in the same
manner as ice cream, as described in the NOPR, since these products
have an array of temperature requirements depending on their
characteristics (fat content, etc.) and the application (holding,
dispensing, etc.). Id. Continental also found the term ``frozen
desserts'' problematic because it might include frozen pastries, cakes,
fruits, chocolates, and other confectionary items served frozen at the
end of a meal, but with temperature requirements different than ice-
cream-like products. Id. Continental commented that ice-cream freezers
have features, such as manual defrost systems and cold-wall
evaporators, that differentiate them from standard freezers to minimize
temperature excursions during normal defrost periods. Id.
Hillphoenix disagreed with the proposal to amend the ice-cream
freezer definition to refer to frozen desserts, as this change will not
clarify the intended equipment to which this category is applied and
will continue to drive uncertainty in the industry. (Hillphoenix, No.
35, p. 1) Hillphoenix recommended removing the product type reference
from the category name and referencing a general name based on
manufacturers' intent and internal air temperature (``IAT''). Id.
Hillphoenix commented that the operating temperature combined with
manufacture intent would be the main characteristic that distinguishes
different types of freezers, and noted that the proposed high-
temperature, the existing medium-temperature, and low-temperature
categories do not reference a specific product type. Id. Hillphoenix
stated the term ``ice-cream freezer'' could be named ``sub-zero
freezer.'' Id.
In response to Hussmann's comment, DOE states that the definition
of ``ice-cream freezer,'' as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, includes
the operating temperature range required to meet the definition of an
ice-cream freezer. 87 FR 39164, 39168. Any model that is unable to
operate at the required integrated average temperature shall use the
lowest application product temperature to certify.
In response to AHRI's, Continental's, and Hillphoenix's comments,
DOE provided examples in the June 2022 NOPR of ice-cream-like products
that are typically displayed, stored, and dispensed in the same manner
as ice cream (gelato, frozen yogurt, and sorbet). 87 FR 39164, 39168-
39169. As stated in the June 2022 NOPR, the CRE used for these food
products is likely similar, if not identical, to equipment used to
store, display, or dispense ice cream. Id. In addition, DOE has
determined that ``frozen treats'' or ``frozen snacks'' are understood
to be synonymous with ``frozen desserts.'' To provide greater clarity,
DOE is amending the definition to specify ``of ice cream or other
frozen desserts''. DOE also notes that the definition of ``ice-cream
freezer,'' as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, includes the operating
temperature range required to meet the definition, and that the
manufacturer designs, markets, or intends for the storing, displaying,
or dispensing of frozen desserts. 87 FR 39164, 39168-39170. If a
commercial freezer does not meet the requirements of an ice-cream
freezer, then it would be a low-temperature freezer, according to the
definition as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR. Id.
In response to Continental's comment regarding certain features of
ice-cream freezers, DOE stated in the June 2022 NOPR that, while ice-
cream freezers may implement manual defrosts or cold wall evaporators,
DOE is aware of these equipment designs in other commercial freezers,
such that they do not uniquely distinguish ice-cream freezers. 87 FR
39164, 39169.
b. Operating Temperature Range
Appendix B requires testing all ice-cream freezers to an IAT of -15
[deg]F. However, the term ``ice-cream freezer'' includes a variety of
equipment with a range of typical operating temperatures during normal
use. For example, certain ice-cream freezers are designed to operate
considerably below -5 [deg]F (sometimes referred to as ``hardening
cabinets'' and specifically designed for ice-cream storage), while
other ice-cream freezers are designed to operate closer to 0 [deg]F
during typical use (e.g., ``dipping cabinets'' and other equipment used
to hold ice cream intended for immediate consumption). Ice-cream
freezers intended for higher-temperature operation are often not
capable of achieving an IAT of -15 [deg]F. In such an instance,
appendix B requires testing the units to the LAPT.
AHRI 1200-2023 maintains the existing rating points for commercial
freezers (i.e., -15.0 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F for ice-cream
applications and 0.0 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F for low-temperature
applications) in section 4.1.1, ``Integrated Average
[[Page 66158]]
Temperature.'' Consistent with AHRI 1200-2023, DOE is not amending the
commercial freezer target IATs for testing.
Of the 346 ice-cream freezer models certified to DOE,\5\ 21 are
rated based on LAPTs higher than -15 [deg]F, including 12 models with a
rating temperature of -5 [deg]F. Many of these models have a horizontal
or service over counter configuration and are intended to hold ice
cream for immediate consumption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Based on review of DOE's Compliance Certification Database,
available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (last
accessed February 23, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE recognizes that testing and rating certain commercial freezers
to 0 [deg]F may be more appropriate than testing and rating to -15
[deg]F. DOE already requires a 0 [deg]F rating temperature for
commercial freezers. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined
that ice-cream freezers that meet the current ice-cream freezer
definition but cannot operate as low as an IAT of -15 [deg]F 2 [deg]F can be tested at an IAT of 0 [deg]F 2
[deg]F. 87 FR 39164, 39170.
To better distinguish between ice-cream freezers and other
commercial freezers (i.e., ice-cream freezers not capable of reaching
an IAT of -15 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F), DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to amend the ice-cream freezer definition to specify that the
designed operating temperature is required to be at or below -15.0
[deg]F (2.0 [deg]F), upon the compliance date(s) of any
amended energy conservation standard(s) for ice-cream freezers. 87 FR
39164, 39170. DOE also proposed to clarify which commercial freezers
are required to test at an IAT of 0 [deg]F according to appendix B by
defining the term ``low-temperature freezer'' to mean a commercial
freezer that is not an ice-cream freezer. Id. In the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE requested comment on the proposed amended definition for ``ice-
cream freezer'' and the proposed definition for ``low-temperature
freezer.'' Id.
Zero Zone and AHRI commented that modifying the definition of
``ice-cream freezer'' through two separate requests is confusing and
asked that in future correspondence, DOE provide the composite final
draft of a definition. (Zero Zone, No. 37, p. 2; AHRI, No. 38, p. 2)
Zero Zone and AHRI also commented that the rules for different product
categories are based on temperature, but both groups could find no
mention of temperature in this context and assumed it was the IAT. Id.
Zero Zone and AHRI asked that DOE clarify and state that the
temperatures listed are the integrated average product temperature. Id.
In addition, Zero Zone and AHRI commented that mixing product types and
product temperatures in a definition was challenging and confusing. Id.
Zero Zone and AHRI stated that manufacturers make generic commercial
freezers that customers employ in a variety of uses. Id. Finally, Zero
Zone and AHRI stated that in the 2007 proposed rule (RE: 10 CFR part
431.62 and FR/Vol 72 No. 143/Thursday, July 26, 2007 page 41173) \6\
(``July 2007 ANOPR''), DOE clarified the application and definition of
``generic commercial freezer'' and requested that DOE codify its
comments from 2007 into the formal definition, because it currently
exists only in a proposed rule and should be clarified in a final rule
to ease manufacturer concerns. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2007-07-26/pdf/07-3640.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the August 2022 public meeting, ICF commented that rather than
saying ``operate at or below -5 plus-or-minus 2 Fahrenheit,'' there
should be a threshold and no tolerance because ``at or below''
contradicts ``plus-or-minus 2,'' and the same is the case with the
refrigerators. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 21).
AHRI, Continental, and Hussmann commented that they agree with
DOE's intention to amend the definition of ``ice-cream freezer'' to
products with operating temperatures at or below -15 [deg]F, but
recommended refining the definition to specify ``ice-cream hardening
freezer'' or ``ice-cream holding freezer'' to clarify the proper
application and equipment marketing. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 3; Continental,
No. 29, p. 2; Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2) AHRI, Continental, and Hussmann
also commented they were unaware of any ice cream that was dispensed or
served at or below -15 [deg]F. Id.
Continental agreed with DOE that a separate definition for ``low-
temperature freezer'' as a commercial freezer that will maintain -15
[deg]F but is not an ice-cream freezer was appropriate. (Continental,
No. 29, p. 2) Continental further commented that equipment in this
category should be tested and rated at -15 [deg]F to reflect the
intended application. Id. Continental stated commercial freezers that
cannot operate as low as -15 [deg]F, and are not marketed for ice-cream
applications, can be tested and rated at 0 [deg]F, and should be
classified under the current definition of ``commercial freezer.'' Id.
In addition, Continental commented that although the test procedures
for ``ice-cream hardening/holding'' and ``non-ice-cream'' freezers at -
15 [deg]F may be similar, DOE's energy standards expressed in 10 CFR
part 431 have significant differences in how allowable energy
consumption levels are calculated for self-contained ice-cream freezers
versus other self-contained commercial freezers, therefore changes in
this test procedure rulemaking will have substantial impact. Id.
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposal to amend the ice-cream freezer
operating temperature to be <= -15 [deg]F and to include this in the
definition, but recommended that DOE specify if the rating temperature
of -15 [deg]F IAT will change, as currently the ice-cream freezer
category has an operating temperature of <= -5 [deg]F and a rating
temperature of -15 [deg]F 2 [deg]F IAT. (Hillphoenix, No.
35, p. 1)
Hillphoenix disagreed with the proposal to modify the definition of
``low-temperature freezer'' to refer to a non-ice-cream freezer, as
this change will not clarify the intended equipment in this category
since ice cream can be displayed in freezers not intended to operate at
<= -15 [deg]F, which will continue to drive uncertainty in the
industry. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 1) Hillphoenix recommended that DOE
amend the operating temperature of the low-temperature category from >
-5 [deg]F and <32 [deg]F to > -15 [deg]F and <32 [deg]F if such changes
are applied to the ice-cream category. Id. Hillphoenix also proposed
that each category of CRE reference the IAT only and not the operating
temperature to drive consistency between categories. Id.
NEEA supported DOE's proposed modifications to the definition of
``ice-cream freezers'' to include operating characteristics instead of
how the equipment was marketed for use because technical
characteristics provide clearer differentiation of equipment than
marketing materials. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2). NEEA restated its previous
concern that some ice-cream freezers that meet the existing marketing-
based definition cannot operate at an IAT of -15 [deg]F 2
[deg]F, which represents DOE's proposed defining characteristic and DOE
has proposed a new term, ``low-temperature freezer'' for those ice-
cream freezers, with their testing point at 0 [deg]F. Id. NEEA
recommended that DOE review the products that meet this new definition
of ``low-temperature freezer'' but not the new definition for ``ice-
cream freezer'' to ensure that the equipment is similar enough to be
grouped together and that the test conditions are representative for
all products. Id.
The Joint Commenters stated support for DOE's proposed changes that
remove ambiguity in the definition of ``ice-cream freezers'' and ensure
all ice-cream
[[Page 66159]]
and low-temperature freezers are tested at a uniform temperature, -15
[deg]F and 0 [deg]F, respectively. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 1)
The CA IOUs commented that, in a survey of products available on
the market, they determined ice-cream dipping cabinets listed in DOE's
Compliance Certification Management System (``CCMS'') that were tested
at -5 [deg]F and -10 [deg]F can achieve 0 [deg]F. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p.
10)
True commented that the equipment category of ``low-temperature
freezer'' is not included in NSF/ANSI 7-2021. (True, No. 28, p. 4) True
also commented that when a freezer is designed to hold -15.0 [deg]F
(2.0 [deg]F), the energy consumption will be much higher
due to the use of larger displacement compressors, as well as the use
of more anti-condensation and defrost heaters, such as heated glass.
Id.
In response to Zero Zone's and AHRI's comments, DOE notes that the
definition of ``ice-cream freezer,'' as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
refers to ``operating temperature,'' defined in 10 CFR 431.62 as
follows:
Operating temperature means the range of integrated average
temperatures at which a self-contained commercial refrigeration unit or
remote-condensing commercial refrigeration unit with a thermostat is
capable of operating or, in the case of a remote-condensing commercial
refrigeration unit without a thermostat, the range of integrated
average temperatures at which the unit is marketed, designed, or
intended to operate.
However, DOE understands the definition of ``ice-cream freezer,''
as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, states ``operating temperature'' in
the second part of the definition and ``to operate'' in the first part
of the definition. 87 FR 39164, 39168-39170. Therefore, DOE is amending
the definition of ``ice-cream freezer'' to include ``operating
temperature'' in both parts of the definition.
Zero Zone and AHRI also referenced the July 2007 ANOPR discussion
of the ``ice-cream freezer'' definition. DOE expects that Zero Zone and
AHRI are referring to the discussion which states that unless equipment
is designed, marketed, or intended specifically for the storage,
display or dispensing of ice cream, it would not be considered an
``ice-cream freezer.'' 72 FR 41161, 41173. Multi-purpose commercial
freezers, manufactured for storage and display, for example, of frozen
foods as well as ice cream would not meet this definition. Id. DOE also
expects that the update to ``ice-cream applications'' in section
4.1.1.2 of AHRI 1200-2023 is consistent with Zero Zone's and AHRI's
comments. Consistent with the discussion of the July 2007 ANOPR, DOE is
amending the definition of ``ice-cream freezer'' to include the term
``specifically''.
In response to ICF's comment, DOE is amending the definition of
``ice-cream freezer'' to remove the temperature tolerances and
adjusting the temperature in the second part of the definition to
specify the upper bound of the ice-cream freezer IAT test condition
tolerance, consistent with DOE's intention of the definition proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR.
In response to AHRI's, Continental's, and Hussmann's comments, the
definition of ``ice-cream freezer,'' as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
states that the manufacturer designs, markets, or intends for the
storing, displaying, or dispensing of frozen desserts which encompasses
terms or equipment such as ``ice-cream hardening'' or ``ice-cream
holding.'' 87 FR 39164, 39168-39169. DOE notes that if a commercial
freezer does not meet the requirements of an ice-cream freezer, then
the commercial freezer would be a low-temperature freezer, according to
the definition as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 39164, 39170.
Commercial freezers that are not ice-cream freezers (i.e., low-
temperature freezers) are currently tested at 0 [deg]F (2
[deg]F). As discussed in the June 2022 NOPR, the definition of ``ice-
cream freezer'' will not require a more restrictive operating
temperature range until the compliance date(s) of any amended energy
conservation standard(s) for ice-cream freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39170.
In response to Hillphoenix's comment, as stated in the June 2022
NOPR, DOE is not amending the commercial freezer target IATs for
testing, which is consistent with AHRI 1200-2023. 87 FR 39164, 39170.
As stated in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE recognizes that the reference to
``ice-cream'' in the definition of ``ice-cream freezer'' does not
itself distinguish this equipment from other commercial freezers, and
that the additional descriptors specified in the definition (i.e.,
designed to operate at or below -5 [deg]F) together classify a unit as
an ice-cream freezer. 87 FR 39164, 39169. Therefore, a commercial
freezer that is not designed for an operating temperature at or below -
5.0 [deg]F, or -13.0 [deg]F upon the compliance date(s) of any amended
energy conservation standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, and that the
manufacturer designs, markets, or intends specifically for the storing,
displaying, or dispensing of ice cream or other frozen desserts would
meet the definition of a low-temperature freezer.
In response to NEEA's comment, DOE states the CRE that currently
meet the definition of ``ice-cream freezer'' but that would only meet
the definition of ``low-temperature freezer'' upon the compliance
date(s) of any amended energy conservation standard(s) for ice-cream
freezers, are likely similar, if not identical, to certain equipment
that currently meet the definition of ``low-temperature freezer.''
In response to True's comment, DOE recognizes that the definitions
and categories do not necessarily match those included in the NSF 7
standard, but DOE is establishing definitions for the purposes of the
DOE test procedure. To the extent that different equipment categories
require different components due to different operating temperatures,
DOE would consider the corresponding energy use impacts as part of the
energy conservation standards rulemaking.
Therefore, as described, DOE is amending the definition of ``ice-
cream freezer'' as follows:
Ice-cream freezer means:
(1) Prior to the compliance date(s) of any amended energy
conservation standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a commercial freezer
that is capable of an operating temperature at or below -5.0 [deg]F and
that the manufacturer designs, markets, or intends specifically for the
storing, displaying, or dispensing of ice cream or other frozen
desserts; or
(2) Upon the compliance date(s) of any amended energy conservation
standard(s) for ice-cream freezers, a commercial freezer that is
capable of an operating temperature at or below -13.0 [deg]F and that
the manufacturer designs, markets, or intends specifically for the
storing, displaying, or dispensing of ice cream or other frozen
desserts.
DOE is establishing the definition of ``low-temperature freezer''
as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR in this final rule:
Low-temperature freezer means a commercial freezer that is not an
ice-cream freezer.
2. High-Temperature CRE
DOE defines ``commercial refrigerator'' as a unit of commercial
refrigeration equipment in which all refrigerated compartments in the
unit are capable of operating at or above 32 [deg]F (2
[deg]F). 10 CFR 431.62.
Section 2.1 of appendix B requires testing commercial refrigerators
to an IAT of 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. DOE is aware of equipment
that meets the definition of a commercial refrigerator but is capable
of operating only at temperatures above the 38 [deg]F 2
[deg]F IAT required for testing. Examples of these types of equipment
[[Page 66160]]
include CRE designed for storing or displaying chocolate and/or wine,
with typical recommended storage temperatures around 55 [deg]F.
Consistent with the current test procedure, manufacturers certify such
equipment using the LAPT setting. LAPT can vary by model, so this
approach, which does not rely on a uniform operating temperature, can
result in measured energy consumptions that are not necessarily
comparable between models. Currently, 145 models of single-compartment
commercial refrigerators are certified to DOE with an LAPT above 40.0
[deg]F.\7\ Categorizing these commercial refrigerators in a separate
high-temperature refrigerator category would allow DOE to consider test
procedures for this equipment that may better represent actual use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Based on review of DOE's Compliance Certification Database,
available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (last
accessed February 23, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To allow for differentiating typical commercial refrigerators from
commercial refrigerators that operate only at higher temperatures, DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to define ``high-temperature
refrigerator'' as a commercial refrigerator that is not capable of
operating with an integrated average temperature as low as 38.0 [deg]F
(2.0 [deg]F). 87 FR 39164, 39171.
DOE stated in the June 2022 NOPR that it recognized certain
commercial refrigerators may be capable of operating with an IAT of
38.0 [deg]F (2.0 [deg]F) but are intended for use at higher
storage temperatures. Id. However, DOE proposed to define ``high-
temperature refrigerator'' based on operating capability rather than
intended use to ensure consistent application of DOE's definitions and
to ensure that CRE currently tested and rated with an IAT of 38.0
[deg]F (2.0 [deg]F) would continue to be categorized,
tested, and rated at that operating condition. Id.
To clarify the classification of commercial refrigerators overall,
DOE also proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to define the term ``medium-
temperature refrigerator'' to refer to commercial refrigerators capable
of operating with an IAT of 38.0 [deg]F (2.0 [deg]F) or
lower. Id.
DOE also proposed to require testing high-temperature refrigerators
according to AHRI 1200-2023, which requires an IAT of 55 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F. Id. Under the June 2022 NOPR approach, a commercial
refrigerator would be tested and rated as either a medium-temperature
refrigerator (if capable of operating with an IAT of 38.0 [deg]F
(2.0 [deg]F)) or as a high-temperature refrigerator (if not
capable of operating with an IAT as low as 38.0 [deg]F (2.0
[deg]F)). Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE recognized that certain commercial
refrigerators may be capable of operating at IATs of both 38 [deg]F
(2.0 [deg]F) and 55 [deg]F (2.0 [deg]F). Id. In
the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE stated that CRE capable of operating at
IATs that span multiple equipment categories must be certified and
comply with DOE's regulations for each applicable equipment category.
79 FR 22277, 22291. The definition of ``high-temperature
refrigerator,'' as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, would exclude CRE
capable of operating at medium temperatures (i.e., an IAT of 38
[deg]F), and therefore would exclude models capable of operating at
both IATs. 87 FR 39164, 39171. Thus, as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
a unit of CRE capable of operating at both IATs of 38 [deg]F and 55
[deg]F would only meet the definition of a medium-temperature
refrigerator. Id.
As an alternative to the definition proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE stated that it could instead define ``high-temperature
refrigerator'' based only on the capability of a commercial
refrigerator to operate at an IAT of 55 [deg]F (2.0
[deg]F). 87 FR 39164, 39171. Under this alternate approach, a unit of
CRE capable of operating at IATs of both 38 [deg]F and 55 [deg]F would
meet the definitions of both a medium-temperature refrigerator and a
high-temperature refrigerator. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
definitions for ``high-temperature refrigerator'' and ``medium-
temperature refrigerator,'' including whether the terms should be
mutually exclusive or constructed such that equipment could be
considered to meet both definitions. 87 FR 39164, 39171.
The Joint Commenters supported DOE's proposed changes regarding the
establishment of a definition and uniform test procedure for high-
temperature refrigerators. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 1) The Joint
Commenters expressed support for DOE's proposed definition and test
procedure for high-temperature CRE, particularly basing the distinction
between medium and high temperature on operating ability rather than
intended use, as this will ensure consistent application of DOE's
definitions and test procedures. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 2)
NEEA commented that it supports the new definitions DOE proposed
for high-temperature CRE, stating that these equipment types have
unique applications compared to other CRE, and these definitions
allowed consideration (potential standards), categorization (equipment
classes), and testing of this equipment separate from other CRE. (NEEA,
No. 39, p. 2). NEEA also stated its support for DOE's proposal to
establish test procedures for new and/or newly defined categories of
CRE, and restated its recommendation from the 2021 CRE Test Procedure
RFI that DOE establish test methods for new CRE product types,
including high-temperature CRE. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
Hussmann commented that it favors the proposed mutually exclusive
definitions of ``high-temperature refrigerator'' and ``medium-
temperature refrigerator.'' (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2). Hussmann
commented in favor of rating only at medium temperature if the CRE are
capable of operating at both high and medium temperatures. (Hussmann,
No. 32, p. 3) In the August 2022 public meeting, Hussmann commented
that there are specialty applications that run in between the low-
temperature and medium-temperature rating points. (Public Meeting
Transcript, No. 41, p. 18) Hussmann added that a unit may run between 8
[deg]F and 10 [deg]F as the current LAPT for that product. Id. Hussmann
noted that these products won't run at 0 [deg]F, and they don't run at
32 [deg]F, and that is something for DOE to consider. Id.
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposed definitions of ``high-
temperature refrigerator'' including the IAT of 55 [deg]F 2
[deg]F, and ``medium-temperature refrigerator'' including the IAT of 38
[deg]F 2 [deg]F. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 1). Hillphoenix
commented that the proposed separate designation for ``medium-
temperature refrigerator'' is not needed and could introduce confusion,
and it recommended DOE amend the definitions of ``commercial freezer''
and ``commercial refrigerator'' in which high- and medium-temperature
refrigerators are already addressed. Id. Hillphoenix suggested, as an
alternative, that ``commercial freezer'' and ``commercial
refrigerator'' could be replaced by the terms ``medium-temperature
refrigerator'' and ``low-temperature freezer.'' Id. Hillphoenix also
agreed with DOE that a single CRE unit capable of operating in both
high- and medium-temperature categories should only be required to meet
the 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F IAT. Id.
AHRI commented that DOE should consider using existing product
designations and existing labelling as found in ANSI/NSF 7-2019 for
``high-temperature refrigerators.'' (AHRI, No. 38, p. 3). AHRI stated
that to meet applicable sanitation requirements, self-contained storage
refrigerators must be capable of maintaining an air
[[Page 66161]]
temperature of 40 [deg]F in 100 [deg]F ambient temperature (AHRI stated
a presumption that such products should be able to maintain IAT of 38
[deg]F for the DOE energy test). Id. AHRI commented that two equipment
types represent refrigerators that meet applicable sanitation
requirements for high-temperature applications: (1) beverage coolers
are exempt from temperature test requirements if they bear a
permanently attached label reading, ``This equipment is intended for
the storage and display of non-potentially hazardous bottled or canned
products only''; and (2) self-contained display refrigerators are
exempt from temperature performance testing if they bear a label
reading, ``This display refrigerator is not for the display of
potentially hazardous foods.'' Id. AHRI commented that there is no need
for the proposed separate designation for ``medium-temperature
refrigerator'' since such products would already be covered under the
current definition of ``refrigerator'' if they do not fall under the
proposed sub-classification of ``high-temperature refrigerator.'' Id.
AHRI stated that this approach would be consistent with the proposed
new definition of ``low-temperature freezer'' because a category for
``medium-temperature freezer'' has not been suggested. Id.
Continental commented that the term ``commercial refrigerator''
should be retained to encompass all CRE capable of operating at or
above 32 [deg]F and that the proposed additional definition of
``medium-temperature refrigerator'' for CRE at or below 38 [deg]F down
to 32 [deg]F is unnecessary and may introduce confusion. (Continental,
No. 29, p. 2) Continental also commented that the ANSI/NSF 7-2019
sanitation standard for commercial refrigerators and freezers requires
that self-contained storage refrigerators must be tested and proven to
maintain an air temperature of 40 [deg]F in 100 [deg]F ambient, and
capable of maintaining product simulator IAT of 38 [deg]F in 75 [deg]F
ambient, as prescribed by ASHRAE 72-2022. Id. Continental stated no
objection to DOE's proposed definition of the term ``high-temperature
refrigerator'' as a commercial refrigerator that is not capable of
operating with an IAT as low as 38 [deg]F in 75 [deg]F ambient, but it
added that DOE should reference existing labelling prescribed in ANSI/
NSF 7-2019 to identify ``high-temperature refrigerators'' that meet
required sanitation requirements but are not required to meet
temperature testing requirements. Id. Continental stated its awareness
that equipment identified with the current NSF labels of beverage
cooler and self-contained display refrigerator would be the only
commercial refrigerators meeting applicable sanitation standards
without being required to maintain specified temperatures that align
with product simulator IAT of 38 [deg]F. Id.
True commented that any unit unable to store food products at a
temperature of 38.0 [deg]F (2.0 [deg]F) is not a commercial
refrigerator and as a result, the term ``high-temperature
refrigerator'' could be construed as misleading. (True, No. 28, p. 4)
True noted that the proposed terms ``high-temperature refrigerator''
and ``medium-temperature refrigerator'' are seen in the new AHRI-1200
standard, which is not yet public. Id. True commented that commercial
refrigerators must comply with NSF-7, and for a storage refrigerator,
test per NSF-7 such that they cannot exceed 40 [deg]F at any point.
(True, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 15). True commented that
the NSF-7 temperature ranges should be considered for the applicable
equipment, noting that high-temperature refrigerators are not covered
under any health and safety standards. Id. True further commented that
for chocolate, wine, and flower storage applications, refrigerated
units unable to meet the 38.0 [deg]F (2.0 [deg]F)
requirement should be labeled as ``commercial display refrigerators for
non-hazardous (food) applications,'' and added that True units are all
capable of operating from 32.0 [deg]F to 55 [deg]F, with control
settings changed for higher-temperature applications. (True, No. 28, p.
4).
In response to Hussmann's comment, AHRI 1200-2023 maintains the
existing rating points for Medium Temperature Applications and Low
Temperature Applications (i.e., 38 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F for
medium-temperature applications and 0.0 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F
for low-temperature applications) in section 4.1.1, ``Integrated
Average Temperature.'' Consistent with AHRI 1200-2023, DOE is not
amending the medium-temperature refrigerator or low-temperature freezer
target IATs for testing. To the extent that a model may not be able to
maintain the target IATs for testing, the LAPT provisions would
continue to apply, as discussed in section III.K of this document.
In response to Hillphoenix's, AHRI's, Continental's, and True's
comments, the definitions for ``medium-temperature refrigerator'' and
``low-temperature freezer,'' as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
indicate they are subsets of the definitions for ``commercial
refrigerator'' and ``commercial freezer,'' respectively. DOE is
establishing the separate definitions to ensure clarity of when certain
provisions apply specifically to either medium-temperature
refrigerators or low-temperature freezers rather than the broader
categories of commercial refrigerators or commercial freezers.
Consistent with the comments discussed in section III.A.1.b
regarding ``operating temperature'' and temperature tolerances, DOE is
amending the definitions of ``high-temperature refrigerator'' and
``medium-temperature refrigerator'' to specifically include the
definition for ``operating temperature'' and to replace the temperature
tolerances with the upper bound of the medium-temperature refrigerator
IAT test condition tolerance which is consistent with DOE's intentions
of these definitions in the June 2022 NOPR.
Therefore, as described, DOE is amending the definitions of ``high-
temperature refrigerator'' and ``medium-temperature refrigerator'' as
follows:
High-temperature refrigerator means a commercial refrigerator that
is not capable of an operating temperature at or below 40.0 [deg]F.
Medium-temperature refrigerator means a commercial refrigerator
that is capable of an operating temperature at or below 40.0 [deg]F.
DOE discusses test requirements for this equipment in section
III.B.1.b of this document.
3. Convertible Equipment
In the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE noted that some basic models of
CRE may have operating characteristics that include an operating
temperature range that spans multiple equipment classes, and
subsequently required that self-contained equipment or remote
condensing equipment with thermostats capable of operating at IATs that
span multiple equipment categories be certified and comply with DOE's
regulations for each applicable equipment category. 79 FR 22277, 22291.
Similarly, DOE adopted requirements for remote condensing equipment
without thermostats that specify that if a given basic model of CRE is
marketed, designed, or intended to operate at IATs spanning multiple
equipment categories, the CRE basic model must be certified and comply
with the relevant energy conservation standards for all applicable
equipment categories. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to specify in 10 CFR 429.42 the
requirements from the April 2014 Final Rule that require basic models
of CRE that operate in multiple equipment classes to certify and comply
with the
[[Page 66162]]
energy conservation standards for each applicable equipment class. 87
FR 39164, 39171. This proposal is consistent with the notice of
petition for a test procedure waiver that DOE published on May 26,
2017, for AHT Cooling Systems GmbH and AHT Cooling Systems USA Inc.
(``AHT'') in which DOE declined to grant AHT an interim waiver that
would allow for testing only in the ice-cream freezer equipment class
for AHT's specified multi-mode CRE basic models. 82 FR 24330.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal to
specify the requirements from the April 2014 Final Rule regarding basic
models of CRE that operate in multiple equipment classes. 87 FR 39164,
39171.
AHRI recommended that because the phrase ``capable of operating
at'' was included for marketing purposes and not technical capability,
DOE should consider removing that phrase as unnecessary in the
following 2014 Final Rule language: ``CRE with thermostats capable of
operating at integrated average temperatures (``IATs'') that span
multiple equipment categories must be certified and comply with DOE's
regulations for each applicable equipment category.'' (AHRI, No. 38, p.
4) AHRI used the same reasoning to further recommend that DOE remove
the word ``or'' from the following language: ``. . . remote condensing
equipment without a thermostat that is marketed, designed, or intended
to operate at IATs spanning multiple equipment categories must be
certified and comply with the relevant energy conservation standards
for all applicable equipment categories.'' \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 79 FR 22277, 22291.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hussmann recommended removing the phrase ``capable of operating
at'' from the following 2014 Final Rule sentence: ``CRE with
thermostats capable of operating at integrated average temperatures
(``IATs'') that span multiple equipment categories must be certified
and comply with DOE's regulations for each applicable equipment
category.'' (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2).
AHT commented that it is overly burdensome to test and certify very
efficient closed equipment in all three temperature classes when it is
capable of operating in all three classes, and that only the most
energy-consuming temperature class should be used for testing and
certifying, as in Europe. (AHT, No. 40, p. 1)
True commented that when designing a unit for multiple temperature
ratings, the systems will not be as energy efficient at the higher
operating temperature rating, compared to a system designed
specifically for the higher temperature rating. (True, No. 28, p. 2)
True stated that, in one example, a unit passes ENERGY STAR[supreg] 5.0
requirements as a storage freezer (0 [deg]F 2 [deg]F) but,
when tested as a storage refrigerator (38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F),
will consume about twice the energy of a unit specifically designed to
operate only as a storage refrigerator, due mostly to the excess
capacity of the compressor and refrigeration system required to operate
the unit at the lower temperature application. Id.
Hillphoenix disagreed with the proposal to specify the requirements
stated in the 2014 Final Rule and recommended that basic models of CRE
that operate in multiple equipment classes should only be required to
meet the coldest application for a CRE product, which would be less
burdensome on manufacturers. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2)
In response to AHRI's and Hussmann's comments, DOE notes the phrase
``capable of operating at'' does refer to technical capability and is
consistent with phrasing in current DOE definitions (e.g., commercial
refrigerator and commercial freezer). Therefore, DOE is maintaining
this phrase in this document.
In response to AHRI's comment, DOE notes that the word ``or'' is
necessary for the construction of the sentence that contains the
requirements for remote condensing equipment without a thermostat and
is therefore maintaining the word ``or'' in this document.
In response to AHT's, True's, and Hillphoenix's comments, DOE notes
that the definitions discussed in sections III.A.1 and III.A.2 would
only require CRE including an operating temperature range that spans
multiple equipment classes to certify in a maximum of two equipment
classes (i.e., ice-cream freezer and medium-temperature refrigerator,
ice-cream freezer and high-temperature refrigerator, low-temperature
freezer and medium-temperature refrigerator, or low-temperature freezer
and high-temperature refrigerator). Testing to the coldest applicable
temperature would be expected to result in the highest energy
consumption, but does not necessarily ensure that a model would meet
the energy conservation standards for multiple applicable equipment
classes at different operating temperatures.
As proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE is specifying in 10 CFR
429.42 the requirements from the April 2014 Final Rule that basic
models of CRE that operate in multiple equipment classes must be
certified and comply with the energy conservation standards for each
applicable equipment class.
B. Updates to Industry Standards
DOE's test procedure for CRE currently adopts through reference
certain provisions of AHRI 1200-2010, ASHRAE 72-2005, and AHAM HRF-1-
2008. 10 CFR 431.63. With regard to the provisions relevant to the DOE
test procedure, AHRI 1200-2010 references certain provisions of ASHRAE
72-2005 and AHAM HRF-1-2008.
Since establishing the DOE test procedure in appendix B, AHRI,
ASHRAE, and AHAM have published updated versions of the referenced test
standards. On October 1, 2013, ANSI approved an updated version of AHRI
1200, ANSI/AHRI Standard 1200 (I-P), ``2013 Standard for Performance
Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage
Cabinets'' (``AHRI 1200-2013''). On April 12, 2023, AHRI issued an
updated version of AHRI 1200 (``AHRI 1200-2023''). On August 1, 2018,
ANSI approved an updated version of ASHRAE 72, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-
2018, ``Method of Testing Open and Closed Commercial Refrigerators and
Freezers'' (``ASHRAE 72-2018''). On June 30, 2022, ANSI approved an
updated version of ASHRAE 72, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2022, ``Method of
Testing Open and Closed Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers''
(``ASHRAE 72-2022''). On November 11, 2022, Errata Sheet for ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard 72-2022, ``Method of Testing Open and Closed Commercial
Refrigerators and Freezers'' was published (``ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata''). AHAM more recently approved and published an updated version
of its industry test standard, AHAM HRF-1-2019, ``Energy and Internal
Volume of Refrigerating Appliances'' (``AHAM HRF-1-2019''). DOE
initially determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the changes within AHRI
1200-2013, ASHRAE 72-2018, and AHAM HRF-1-2019 are editorial, improve
clarity, better harmonize with the DOE test procedure, or not relevant
to CRE (e.g., relevant to products such as consumer refrigerators). 87
FR 39164, 39171. Based on DOE's assessment, the changes in the latest
versions of the industry test standards, AHRI 1200-2023 and ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata, will not impact the measured energy consumption,
volume, or TDA of CRE, as applicable.
DOE discusses AHRI 1200-2023 and ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata in
sections III.B.1 and III.B.2 of this document.
[[Page 66163]]
In response to the June 2022 NOPR, AHRI, Zero Zone, and NAFEM
recommended that DOE use the referenced standards as intended. (AHRI,
No. 38, p. 1; Zero Zone, No. 37, p. 1; NAFEM, No. 34, p. 1) AHRI
cautioned DOE that combining test standards was unnecessary and
inadvisable, and recommended that DOE regulate the issues in the test
procedure under a singular standard. Id. AHRI stated concern that the
data set used here did not provide clarity as to whether the testing is
indicative of energy efficiency. Id. AHRI recommended that DOE wait to
update certain regulations until clearer test standards had been
determined through consensus by manufacturers and third parties. Id.
AHRI also noted that ENERGY STAR was not ready to employ certain
referenced standards, raising concerns that DOE was prematurely
adopting these requirements. Id.
Zero Zone recommended that DOE wait for the updated standard
whenever possible and that under current rules, DOE has been able to
call out a standard that was nearly revised (ASHRAE 72 and AHRI 1200).
(Zero Zone, No. 37, p. 1). Zero Zone commented that possibly DOE could
follow this process for other standards as well, and that when this was
not possible, Zero Zone asked DOE to request that standards development
groups immediately focus on areas of DOE concern to allow for industry
input and consensus building and allow DOE to have improve information
in the standard. Id.
NAMA recommended that DOE use the referenced standards as intended
and cautioned DOE that combining test standards was unnecessary and
inadvisable and recommended that DOE regulate the issues in the test
procedure under a singular standard. (NAFEM, No. 34, p. 2) NAMA stated
concern that the test procedures mentioned in many of these items did
not clarify which standard was to be used for which measurement. Id.
NAMA commented that referencing multiple standards could be a problem
when one standard was updated before the other, and, in general, NAMA
recommended that referencing one standard would be preferred unless DOE
specified which sections in the standards were being required. Id. NAMA
commented that many sections in the ASTM, ASHRAE, and AHRI standards
were written to measure the performance of the product, not just the
energy measurement and DOE therefore needed to identify the standards
sections carefully so as to not move DOE into writing performance test
methods. Id. NAMA commented it would be willing to support such
activities in joint discussions on the sections to ensure that the
measurement of energy for NAMA-covered products was accurate. Id.
Hussmann commented that combining test standards was not a typical
practice and recommended that DOE regulate the issues in the CRE TP
NOPR under a single, universally accepted established standard.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 1). Hussmann expressed concern that the data
acquired during a hybrid standard approach would not yield
representative results of intended product use by already established
means throughout the industry. Id. Hussmann recommended that DOE work
with the appropriate standards committees to update regulations until
the standards have been established, determined to yield consistent
results, and are representative of typical manufactured products. Id.
True commented that it uses NSF/ANSI 7-2021 as the performance
standard for commercial food service equipment, in addition to UL 471
(``Standard for Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers,'' soon to be
replaced by UL CSA 60335-2-89, by October 2024), and ASHRAE 72-2005 for
energy consumption reporting to DOE, Natural Resources Canada
(``NRCAN''), CEC, and ENERGY STAR. (True, No. 28, p. 1) True listed
four current NSF 7 performance tests that must be complied with to
certify that its equipment meets the NSF 7 food safety requirements for
temperature testing (performance), construction, and materials used.
Id. True commented that AHRI-1200 is not considered to be the standard
used for all commercial refrigeration, and that AHRI standards and
guidelines do not address food safety temperatures or food sanitation
concerns and requirements, making AHRI standards and guidelines
inappropriate for commercial food service refrigeration equipment. Id.
DOE has evaluated existing industry standards, and where
applicable, is incorporating by reference the industry standard into
the relevant appendix. DOE considers incorporating by reference an
industry standard as a standalone reference whenever possible. DOE has
identified certain areas in which provisions of industry standards
require additional specifications or are inconsistent with the existing
regulatory test method. To clarify the applicability of provisions from
standards that are incorporated by reference, DOE occasionally may need
to supplement an industry standard with additional clarifications. For
CRE, instead of duplicating requirements necessary to improve clarify
of the test procedure into the regulatory text, DOE is referring to
provisions in other industry standards that provide the necessary
clarifications. This leads to DOE referencing specific provisions from
multiple different industry standards. DOE specifically refers to
individual sections of industry standards as appropriate to ensure only
relevant provisions are incorporated in the regulatory test method such
that the test method is not unduly burdensome to conduct and is
reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy use
during a representative average use cycle.
DOE recognizes the value of industry standards setting processes
and regularly participates in committees that develop and review
industry standards. DOE has statutory timelines for test procedure
rulemakings that require DOE to determine whether amendments to test
procedures are necessary to carry out the requirements of EPCA at least
once every 7 years. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)) DOE has evaluated industry
standards applicable to CRE that are both available now and under
development as it conducts the rulemaking activity to consider whether
the CRE test method requires amendment. DOE will continue to
participate in industry committees and will consider future industry
standards in future test procedure rulemakings.
DOE and EPA coordinate their product and equipment efficiency
programs to harmonize test requirements when possible and appropriate.
While EPA did not adopt test methods for additional categories of CRE
during its last revision of the ENERGY STAR specification, DOE has
evaluated test procedures for these categories and determined that the
procedures adopted in this rule produce test results which reflect
energy use during a representative average use cycle, and are not
unduly burdensome to conduct. To the extent that EPA revises its
specification to include these new categories of CRE into the ENERGY
STAR program, DOE will coordinate with EPA to harmonize requirements
when appropriate.
In response to True's comment, DOE has evaluated existing industry
test procedures for the use as the basis of the DOE test procedure for
energy consumption. DOE recognizes that the industry test procedures
serve different purposes, including for food safety. DOE discusses the
individual industry test procedures considered and incorporated by
reference in the following sub-sections, section III.C, and section
III.D of this document.
[[Page 66164]]
1. AHRI 1200
The revisions included in AHRI 1200-2023 are largely to provide
editorial, clarifying, or harmonizing updates that will not impact the
measured energy consumption, volume, or TDA of CRE as compared to the
current test procedure. Specifically, AHRI 1200-2023 includes the
following updates: definitions intended to harmonize with ASHRAE 72-
2022 and DOE's existing regulations; updated definitions for
consistency with the use of the rating standard; removal of test
requirements that were duplicative with ASHRAE 72-2022; clarified
measurement requirements and the use of calculations; inclusion of
direct refrigerated volume measurement instructions (rather than
referencing the AHAM test standard); and detailed total display area
requirements and examples.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate by reference AHRI
1200-202X for use in the DOE test procedure because DOE tentatively
determined that the updates compared to AHRI 1200-2013 would improve
the clarity of the test standard, ensure consistent testing, and as a
result would improve reproducibility of the test procedure. 87 FR
39164, 39172. AHRI 1200-202X includes procedures for measuring
refrigerated volume rather than referring to the AHAM standard
(although the procedures are consistent between these standards). Id.
Therefore, DOE proposed in the NOPR to remove the incorporation by
reference of AHAM HRF-1-2008 and instead refer to AHRI 1200-202X
directly for refrigerated volume measurement. Id. Based on DOE's review
of AHRI 1200-2023, the updates included in the standard are primarily
editorial and are not expected to change test results as compared to
the existing test procedure, except for the specific updates as
discussed in the following paragraphs. Therefore, DOE has determined in
this document that any existing test data for CRE currently available
on the market is expected to be consistent with the amended test
procedure.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1200-202X and whether the use of the
updated test method would impact CRE ratings based on the current DOE
test procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39173.
AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposal to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1200-202X, noting that select AHRI members consistently
test and rate remote condensing CRE using high-glide refrigerants.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 4) AHRI commented that refrigerants 407, 448A, and
449A are considered ``high glide'' under the new definition in AHRI
1200-202X and that the updated test method is the most accurate way to
determine the rated energy consumption, resulting in similar rated
numbers to previous non-high-glide refrigerants like R-404A. Id. AHRI
further noted that the current AHRI 1200-202X standard does not include
testing requirements for CO2 (i.e., R-744), so this
refrigerant would require DOE waivers for future use. Id.
Continental supported DOE's proposal to incorporate by reference
the most recent versions of applicable industry standards, including
AHRI 1200-202X. (Continental, No. 29, p. 3) Continental added that use
of the latest standards should not be required until the compliance
date of any new energy conservation standards established, based on the
proposed rating standards, to allow time for stakeholders to thoroughly
evaluate any impact on energy consumption. Id.
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed with the proposal to
incorporate AHRI 1200-202X by reference, as no significant impacts to
CRE ratings could be foreseen. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2)
Hussmann commented that it favors the proposal to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1200-202X. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 2)
True commented that it opposes removing the AHAM HRF-1-2008
standard and referencing AHRI 1200-202X in future DOE test procedures,
as revisions to AHRI 1200 are in draft form and have not been publicly
reviewed. (True, No. 28, p. 5). True recommended that the NSF/ANSI-2021
standard be added to this list because AHRI 1200 only references self-
contained commercial refrigeration sporadically and does not
specifically address the issues of self-contained refrigeration. Id. In
the August 2022 public meeting, True commented that AHRI-1200 does not
apply to all commercial refrigeration but does apply to display
refrigeration. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 16) True added
that it believes DOE is bringing in two different standards used in two
different applications, additionally stating that AHRI-1200 does not
address any food health/safety issues. Id. Hussmann agreed with True's
comment, and added that it thinks DOE needs to make a distinction and
understand that AHRI-1200 is typically a rating point and does not
necessarily align with NSF 7. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p.
17)
AHRI 1200-2023 had two public review periods prior to publication.
DOE has reviewed the updates to AHRI 1200-2023 and determined that the
updates will not impact the measured volume of CRE as compared to the
existing DOE test procedure (which currently references HRF-1-2008
\9\).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Section 3.1 of Appendix B to Subpart C of 10 CFR part 431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE acknowledges that NSF 7 is a performance standard applicable to
multiple CRE categories; however this standard addresses food safety
and sanitation performance. DOE test procedures must produce test
results which reflect energy use during a representative average use
cycle, and not be unduly burdensome to conduct as required by EPCA. DOE
has evaluated NSF 7, other available industry test standards, and
industry standards under development when considering test procedures
for these equipment categories as discussed in this document. DOE also
notes that the current \10\ and amended \11\ test procedures allow for
optional testing at NSF test conditions for commercial refrigeration
equipment that are also tested in accordance with NSF test procedures
(Type I and Type II) (i.e., integrated average temperatures and ambient
conditions used for NSF testing may be used in place of the DOE-
prescribed integrated average temperatures and ambient conditions
provided they result in a more stringent test).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Section 2.3 of Appendix B to Subpart C of 10 CFR part 431.
\11\ Section 2.3 of Appendix B to Subpart C of 10 CFR part 431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed alternate refrigerant
conditions to be used for testing remote CRE with CO2
refrigerant. 87 FR 39164, 39210. See section III.G of this document for
a discussion of remote CRE with CO2 refrigerant (i.e., R-
744).
Based on the June 2022 NOPR and comments received in response, DOE
is finalizing its proposal to incorporate by reference AHRI 1200-2023.
In addition to the clarifying revisions that would not
substantively change testing as compared to the current approach using
the DOE test procedure and AHRI 1200-2010, AHRI 1200-2023 also includes
two substantive additions: addressing the use of high glide
refrigerants and providing an additional temperature rating point for
``high-temperature'' applications. DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to adopt these provisions in its test procedure, as discussed in the
following sections. 87 FR 39164, 39172. Additionally, DOE identified
updates in AHRI 1200-2023 as compared to AHRI 1200-202X discussed in
the following
[[Page 66165]]
sections regarding chef bases, certain definitions, and night curtains.
a. High Glide Refrigerants
For remote condensing CRE, AHRI 1200 provides calculations to
estimate the compressor energy consumption necessary to provide the
cooling to the refrigerator or freezer. These calculations are based on
the dew point of the refrigerant during testing, which is intended to
be representative of the evaporator temperature. See Table 1 and
section 5.2.1 of AHRI 1200-2013 and Table 1 and section 5.1.2 of AHRI
1200-2023.
For certain refrigerants, the saturated vapor temperature (i.e.,
the dew point) can be different from the saturated liquid temperature
at a given pressure, in which case the refrigerant is considered to
have ``glide.'' AHRI 1200-2023 includes a definition for ``high glide
refrigerant'' as a zeotropic refrigerant blend whose temperature glide
is greater than 2 [deg]F. ASHRAE defines ``glide'' as the absolute
value of the difference between the starting and ending temperatures of
a phase-change process by a refrigerant within a component of a
refrigerating system, exclusive of any subcooling or superheating. This
term usually describes condensation or evaporation of a zeotrope.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See ASHRAE's glossary of defined terms at xp20.ashrae.org/terminology/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For high glide refrigerants, the refrigerant dew point is not
necessarily representative of the overall evaporator temperature. AHRI
1200-2023 specifies that for high glide refrigerants, the temperature
used to calculate compressor energy consumption is based on an adjusted
mid-point evaporator temperature rather than an adjusted dew point
temperature.
Because the evaporator provides cooling to the CRE over the entire
heat exchanger surface, using the evaporator mid-point temperature
would ensure that the temperature used to calculate compressor energy
consumption is more representative of the overall evaporator
temperature. DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the AHRI 1200-
202X approach of using the evaporator mid-point temperature rather than
refrigerant dew point is more representative of actual remote
condensing CRE use for which the equipment uses high glide refrigerants
and would improve consistency of remote testing using different
refrigerants. 87 FR 39164, 29172. Additionally, this approach would
improve consistency when testing a given remote condensing CRE model
with either high glide or low glide refrigerants by ensuring that the
evaporator mid-point temperature for a high glide refrigerant is
similar to the refrigerant dew point for a low glide refrigerant.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to adopt through reference the
high glide refrigerant provisions of AHRI 1200-202X. 87 FR 39164,
29173. Because the existing DOE test procedure, by reference to AHRI
1200-2013, only references adjusted dew point for calculating
compressor energy consumption, this proposed amendment would yield
different results for remote condensing CRE models tested with a high
glide refrigerant. However, DOE expects that current remote condensing
CRE models are typically tested and rated using low glide refrigerants
(most commonly R-404A); therefore, DOE tentatively determined in the
NOPR that this proposed test procedure amendment is not expected to
result in changes to rated energy consumption for any currently
available remote CRE models. 87 FR 39164, 29173.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1200-202X, including the new provisions
regarding high glide refrigerants. Id. DOE also requests information on
whether any remote condensing CRE are currently tested and rated using
high glide refrigerants and whether the proposed test procedure would
impact the rated energy consumption for such models. Id.
Hussmann commented that it favors the proposal to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1200-202X, including the new provisions regarding high
glide refrigerants. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 3)
Hillphoenix stated its agreement with the proposal to incorporate
AHRI 1200-202X by reference, including the provisions for high glide
refrigerants such as 407, 448A, and 449A, as no significant impacts to
CRE ratings could be foreseen if incorporated. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p.
2)
True commented that the proposed use of AHRI 1200-202X referencing
high-glide refrigerants indicated a bias toward remote refrigeration
manufacturers. (True, No. 28, p. 5) True commented that there are small
numbers of self-contained refrigerators using high-glide (synthetic)
refrigerants, and that in fact the self-contained industry is a high
adopter of hydrocarbon refrigerants. Id.
In this rule, DOE is incorporating by reference AHRI 1200-2023.
AHRI 1200 includes a definition for ``high glide refrigerants'' and
specifies that for high glide refrigerants, the temperature used to
calculate compressor energy consumption is based on an adjusted mid-
point evaporator temperature rather than an adjusted dew point
temperature. DOE notes that this provision addresses the fact that AHRI
1200-2013 results in high-glide refrigerants having an energy penalty
relative to no-glide refrigerants. The update to AHRI 1200-2023
provides a more representative test method of remote condensing CRE and
improves consistency when testing a given remote condensing CRE model.
AHRI 1200-2023 includes parallel provisions for remote and self-
contained refrigerators to ensure there is no bias towards remote-
condensing units. Self-contained CRE are tested based on the
refrigerant and refrigeration system contained within the unit and no
refrigerant measurements are necessary. Therefore, the test procedure
directly accounts for the energy impacts of refrigerants used in self-
contained CRE.
b. High-Temperature Applications
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed a definition for ``high-
temperature refrigerators''. 87 FR 39164, 39173. As discussed in
section III.A.2 of this final rule, DOE is establishing an amended
definition of ``high-temperature refrigerator'' from the June 2022
NOPR.
Section 4.1.1.1 of AHRI 1200-2023 specifies that CRE intended for
high-temperature applications shall have an integrated average
temperature of 55 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F. DOE requires testing
high-temperature consumer refrigeration products (i.e., ``coolers'') at
a standardized cabinet temperature of 55 [deg]F. 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix A.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to require testing high-
temperature refrigerators according to AHRI 1200-202X, which requires
an integrated average temperature of 55 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F.
87 FR 39164, 39173-39174.
High-temperature refrigerators are used in many distinct
applications, each with specific intended storage conditions. However,
DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the IAT specified in AHRI
1200-202X is the most representative of high-temperature refrigerator
operating conditions, because the high-temperature refrigerators that
DOE identified have operating temperature ranges which include 55
[deg]F, and allows for consistent measurements of energy use for
equipment in this category. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
In referencing AHRI 1200-2023, the DOE test procedure would also
require that high-temperature refrigerators be tested according to the
same procedure
[[Page 66166]]
as other CRE, except for the IAT. DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that the door opening and loading procedures in ASHRAE
72-2018R are appropriate for high-temperature refrigerators. Following
the proposed test approach would also ensure consistent test methods
across CRE categories, albeit at different IATs. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
Because the proposed test procedure for high-temperature
refrigerators would amend the current test approach for certain
commercial refrigerators (i.e., those currently rated using the LAPT),
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the high-temperature
refrigerator provisions in AHRI 1200-202X would not be required for use
until the compliance date of any energy conservation standards
established for high-temperature refrigerators based on the proposed
test procedure. Id. Under this approach, CRE that would be defined as
high-temperature refrigerators would continue to be tested and rated at
the LAPT and subject to the current DOE energy conservation standards
for CRE. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal to
adopt a rating point of 55 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F for high-
temperature refrigerators by adopting through reference certain
provisions of AHRI 1200-202X. 87 FR 39164, 39172.
AHRI commented that the 55 [deg]F (2 [deg]F) rating
point aligns with AHRI standard 1200-202X and supported adopting the
proposed rating point for high-temperature refrigerators. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 4)
Hussmann commented in favor of the proposal to adopt a rating point
of 55 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F for high-temperature refrigerators.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 3)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed with the proposal to adopt the
rating point temperature of 55 [deg]F 2 [deg]F for the
proposed new category of high-temperature refrigerators through
reference of AHRI 1200-202X. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2) Hillphoenix
requested confirmation that the LAPT provisions will remain to cover
rare occurrences driven by customer expectations, which could suggest a
design that is outside the requirements of each category. Id.
Continental commented it had no objection to DOE's proposed 55
[deg]F 2 [deg]F rating temperature for ``high-temperature''
refrigerators that cannot maintain 38 [deg]F. (Continental, No. 29, p.
3) Continental added that DOE should consider referencing existing NSF
labeling requirements for equipment that is intended for ``non-
potentially hazardous bottled or canned products only'' and ``not for
the display of potentially hazardous foods,'' as this would identify
equipment that meets required sanitation requirements in the proposed
``high-temperature'' range. Id. In addition, Continental agreed with
DOE that the high-temperature refrigerator provisions in AHRI 1200-202X
should not be required until the compliance date of any energy
conservation standards established for these product types, based on
the proposed test procedure. Id.
For the reasons discussed in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE is adopting
the high-temperature refrigerator test provisions in AHRI 1200-2023.
Because these provisions would impact the measured energy use for
certain CRE currently subject to the test procedure and energy
conservation standard, DOE is specifying that the high-temperature
refrigerator testing would not be required for use until the compliance
date of any energy conservation standards established for high-
temperature refrigerators based on the amended test procedure.
As discussed in section III.K of this document, DOE is retaining
the LAPT definition with modifications.
As discussed in section III.A.2 of this document, DOE is
establishing a definition for high-temperature refrigerator that is
based on the operating temperature of the equipment. Identifying
equipment that meets NSF 7 sanitation requirements is not within the
scope of the DOE CRE test procedure. Therefore, DOE has not included
reference to equipment labeling in the definition or test requirements
for high-temperature refrigerators.
c. Chef Bases
Section 2 of AHRI 1200-202X and AHRI 1200-2023 covers the scope of
the standard. AHRI 1200-202X listed certain exclusions from scope
(i.e., refrigerated vending machines, ice makers, soft serve extruders,
and secondary coolant applications). AHRI 1200-2023 added certain
additional exclusions that were not excluded in previous versions of
the standard, including AHRI 1200-202X (i.e., chef bases, buffet
tables, preparation tables, walk-in coolers, and blast chillers and
freezers). DOE notes that none of these excluded categories are defined
in AHRI 1200-2023.
DOE has not observed any changes from AHRI 1200-202X to AHRI 1200-
2023 that would affect the ability to test chef bases and griddle
stands in accordance with the standard. Current representations of chef
bases and griddle stands are required to be based on the current DOE
test procedure at Appendix B, which references AHRI Standard 1200-2010
and ASHRAE 72-2005, neither of which excludes chef bases or griddle
stands. ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata similarly does not exclude chef
bases or griddle stands (section 2 ``Scope'' states that this standard
does not apply to walk-in coolers, or refrigerators and freezers where
the refrigerated air is in communication with walk-in coolers).
In the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE determined that, for chef bases
and griddle stands, the refrigeration system and design of this
equipment is not significantly different from other types of commercial
refrigeration equipment, and DOE believes that the existing DOE test
procedure is sufficiently representative of field use, and application
of the existing energy conservation standard appropriate for this
equipment. 79 FR 22277, 22282. Therefore, DOE is maintaining the
reference to AHRI 1200 for chef bases and griddle stands and updating
the reference to AHRI 1200-2023 consistent with other CRE that are in
scope of appendix B. See section III.C.4 for further discussion of chef
bases and griddle stands.
d. Definitions
AHRI 1200-2023 updated several of its definitions as compared to
AHRI 1200-202X (e.g., High Temperature Applications was updated from
``Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets
intended for High Temperature Applications, shall have an Integrated
Average Temperature of 55 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F'' to ``An
application where the Integrated Average Temperature is at, or above,
45 [deg]F''). As proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, 10 CFR 431.62 would
include some similar terms as the definitions in AHRI 1200-202X. Based
on the updated definitions in AHRI 1200-2023 as compared to AHRI 1200-
202X and to avoid potential confusion regarding multiple definitions of
similar terms, DOE is clarifying in 10 CFR 431.62 that where
definitions in AHRI 1200-2023 conflict with those in DOE's regulations,
the DOE definitions take precedence.
e. Night Curtains
AHRI 1200-202X contained a definition of ``night curtain'' (a
device which is temporarily deployed to decrease air exchange and heat
transfer between the refrigerated case and the surrounding environment)
and certain test requirements for ``night curtains''.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ For display cases sold with Night Curtains installed, the
Night Curtain shall be employed for 6 hours; beginning 3 hours after
the start of the test period. Upon the completion of the 6-hour
period, the Night Curtain shall be raised until the completion of
the 24-hour test period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66167]]
Night curtains are currently required in section 1.3.10 of appendix
B of the DOE test procedure.\14\ Therefore, DOE is maintaining the
requirements for night curtains that were contained in AHRI 1200-202X
as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For display cases sold with night curtains installed, the
night curtain shall be employed for 6 hours; beginning 3 hours after
the start of the first defrost period. Upon the completion of the 6-
hour period, the night curtain shall be raised until the completion
of the 24-hour test period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. ASHRAE 72
As stated in the June 2022 NOPR, the 2014 and 2018 revisions to
ASHRAE 72 provide editorial, clarifying, or harmonizing revisions that
would not impact the measured energy consumption, volume, or TDA of CRE
as compared to the existing DOE test procedure. 86 FR 31182, 31184.
The revisions in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, as compared to the
most recent 2018 version, include substantial reorganization largely to
improve clarity of the test standard. Specifically, the foreword to
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata states that the revision reorganizes the
standard to make it easier to read and use; includes updates in the
loading of test simulators and filler material; revises the sequence of
operations during the test; provides instructions for certain
measurements; and adds provisions for roll-in racks. The following
paragraphs describe these revisions in more detail.
The reorganization of the test standard in ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata is not expected to substantively change any test requirements as
compared to the current test procedure. DOE acknowledges that the
intent of the reorganization is to more closely align the test standard
with the order of operations a test facility would follow when
conducting testing.
The updates to the loading of test simulators (small packages with
temperature-measuring devices) and filler material (material loaded
between test simulators for additional product mass, intended to
approximate food product loading) in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata revise
certain requirements included in ASHRAE 72-2005. These updates change
certain instructions regarding loading, but DOE tentatively determined
in the June 2022 NOPR that these updates are either clarifying in
nature or more closely align ASHRAE 72 with the capability of test
facilities to conduct testing. 87 FR 39164, 39174. Specifically, ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata would improve the clarity of the simulator loading
location instructions, more clearly define net usable volume (i.e.,
interior volume intended for refrigerated storage or display within the
outermost manufacturer-specified load limit boundaries) to determine
the loaded volume, and adjust the fill volume from 70 to 90 percent of
the net usable volume to 60 to 80 percent. See section 5.4.8 of ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata.
DOE tentatively acknowledged in the NOPR that, in principle, the
update to the fill volume requirement would be a substantive change to
the current DOE test procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39174. However, DOE has
determined that ASHRAE implemented this revision because test
facilities currently may have difficulty loading to more than 80
percent of the net usable volume. Based on this difficulty, DOE expects
that most tests are currently conducted with loads between 70 to 80
percent of the net usable volume. Additionally, the revision to allow
loading as low as 60 percent of net usable volume would allow
additional flexibility for test facilities when loading equipment for
testing, and any impact on measured energy use is expected to be
minimal. DOE also expects that if testing with a lower load percentage
has any impact on measured energy use, it is likely to increase
measured energy use, as CRE with doors would have more internal
compartment volume occupied by air rather than the test load, allowing
for more internal air to exchange with warm ambient air during the test
procedure's door opening period. Therefore, DOE tentatively determined
in the NOPR that this proposed amendment to the test procedure would
not allow any CRE that does not currently comply with DOE's energy
conservation standards to become compliant. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
Section 7.1 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies the sequence of
operations for conducting a test. The overall sequence requires
conducting two tests, Test A and Test B, to verify stability of the
unit under test. Both Test A and Test B would be conducted in the same
way--starting with a defrost and with door or drawer openings, night
curtains, and lighting occupancy sensors and controls, as applicable--
as specified in section 7.3 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. The test is
determined to be stable if the average temperature of simulators during
Test B is within 0.4 [deg]F of the average measured temperature during
Test A. See section 7.5 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. As compared to
the current DOE test procedure and ASHRAE 72-2005, ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata specifies how to determine that a test is stable. ASHRAE 72-2005
currently requires steady-state conditions for the test (section 7.1.1)
and a stabilization period during which the CRE operates with no
adjustment to controls for at least 12 hours (section 7.4). Section 3
of ASHRAE 72-2005 defines ``steady-state'' as the condition in which
the average temperature of all test simulators changes less than 0.4
[deg]F from one 24-hour period or refrigeration cycle to the next.
ASHRAE 72-2005 does not specify whether the 24-hour periods used to
determine steady-state conditions include door openings, which are
required to be performed during the 24-hour performance test.
Additionally, the temperatures maintained over a 24-hour period with
door openings may differ from a 24-hour period with no door openings.
If steady-state is determined without door openings, then door openings
during a test may increase simulator temperatures outside of the
desired range, requiring a change to the temperature setting and
restarting the steady-state determination prior to another test period.
The testing approach in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies that
Test A and Test B are conducted in the same way, and therefore the
temperatures used to determine stability would also be at the target
temperatures for the test. DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
this approach provides clarity to the existing test procedure while
limiting burden by reducing the need for retests (i.e., by maintaining
target temperatures during the stability determination). 87 FR 39164,
39175. Because the sequence of operations in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
is generally consistent with ASHRAE 72-2005 but with added specificity,
DOE does not expect that the updated sequence of operations would
impact current CRE ratings based on the current DOE test procedure.
Moreover, ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata explicitly specifies test
conditions and data collection requirements in a new appendix A:
``Measurement Locations, Tolerances, Accuracies, and Other
Characteristics.'' This appendix includes a table that presents the
measurements required during testing, the measurement location (if
applicable), the period of time the measurement is taken (e.g., once
per minute throughout Test A and Test B, once before Test B, and once
after Test B), the required measurement accuracy, and the required
value (i.e., the test condition, if applicable). The measurement
instructions and
[[Page 66168]]
requirements in appendix A to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata are generally
consistent with those required by the current DOE test procedure, by
reference to ASHRAE 72-2005, but with added specificity to clarify the
applicable requirements. Because the measurement instructions in ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata are generally consistent with ASHRAE 72-2005 but
with added specificity, DOE does not expect that the updated
requirements in appendix A would impact current CRE ratings based on
the current DOE test procedure.
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata also adds provisions for testing CRE
used with roll-in racks. Sections 5.4.1 and 5.4.5 of ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata provide loading instructions for CRE used with roll-in
racks. These sections are generally consistent with the existing test
requirements for CRE, but provide additional clarification specific to
roll-in racks to describe the determination of net usable volume and
loading of test simulators. ASHRAE 72-2005 includes roll-in racks
within the scope of the test standard (section 9.1) but does not
provide additional test instructions for these models. Because the
instructions for testing CRE used with roll-in racks in ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata are generally consistent with ASHRAE 72-2005 but with added
specificity, DOE does not expect that the updated requirements in
appendix A would impact current CRE ratings based on the current DOE
test procedure.
As discussed, the test procedure in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata is
generally consistent with the existing DOE test procedure, which
references ASHRAE 72-2005. The updates included in ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata are generally editorial, clarifying, or harmonizing revisions.
Additionally, the substantive revisions in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
provide further specificity to the existing test procedure requirements
and would improve repeatability, reproducibility, and
representativeness of the test procedure while limiting test burden.
For these reasons, in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate
by reference ASHRAE 72-2018R into the DOE test procedure and
tentatively determined that any test data for CRE currently available
on the market are expected to be consistent with the proposed test
procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39174.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to
incorporate by reference ASHRAE 72-2018R, including whether the updates
included in the industry test standard would impact the measured energy
consumption of any CRE currently available. Id.
AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposal to incorporate by
reference ASHRAE 72-2022 because the updates included in the industry
test standard should not significantly impact the measured energy
consumption of any CRE currently available. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 4)
AHT supported incorporating by reference ASHRAE 72-2018R. (AHT, No.
38, p. 1).
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposal to incorporate by reference
the newer version of ASHRAE 72, but recommended version 202X, which is
currently in public review. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 2) Hillphoenix
commented that this approach would align with the incorporation of
other standards referenced that are not yet released and would maintain
consistency within the industry. Id.
Continental supported DOE's proposal to incorporate the most recent
edition of the ASHRAE 72 test procedure, pointing out that ASHRAE 72-
2022, the most recent standard, prescribes separate 24-hour A and B
test periods to provide more consistent verification of stability than
the previous version of the procedure. (Continental, No. 29, p. 3)
Continental commented that it is still evaluating impacts of this
change on the energy consumption of equipment, particularly for
freezers, and stated that provisions of ASHRAE 72-2022 should not be
required until the compliance date of any new energy conservation
standards are established, based on the proposed test procedure, to
allow time for vetting any impact on energy consumption. Id.
Continental also commented that the use of separate 24-hour test
periods, including additional door opening requirements, is desirable
for the reasons noted above, but the revised method will increase the
test burden for some equipment types and substantially increase costs
for laboratory and staff time, reducing the capacity to perform other
testing to meet regulations. Id. Continental commented that these
factors and their related costs will impact a small business like
itself. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that it would like to state for the record that
there is an ASHRAE 72-2018 standard and an ASHRAE 72-2022 standard, and
that it agrees to proposing the incorporation of ASHRAE 72-2018.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 1) Hoshizaki noted that the ASHRAE 72-2022
standard was just finalized in July of 2022 and, as of the filing date
of this rulemaking, was not approved and published for all parties to
see. Id. Hoshizaki noted that while most changes to the standard were
editorial, the change from stabilization to new test cycle may leave
many manufacturers without the opportunity to review and comment. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that enough time would be needed for manufacturers
to fully digest these new changes to determine for themselves whether
these changes affect their designs. Id.
Based on the June 2022 NOPR and comments received in response, DOE
is incorporating by reference ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. Based on
comments received in response to the June 2022 NOPR and DOE's review of
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, DOE does not expect any impact on ratings
as a result of the updates to the standard. DOE notes that ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata is available for purchase, as discussed in this
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
In response to Continental's comment regarding test burden for some
types of CRE, ASHRAE 72-2005, currently incorporated by reference,
requires stabilization periods generally consistent with ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata. The updates clarify procedures in the stabilization period
and limit the need for iterative testing. DOE expects no significant
change in test burden associated with testing to ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata as compared to ASHRAE 72-2005.
a. Drawers
Section 1.3.16 of appendix B of the DOE test procedure specifies
that drawers are to be treated as identical to doors when conducting
the DOE test procedure, and that drawers should be configured with the
drawer pans that allow for the maximum packing of test simulators and
filler packages without the filler packages and test simulators
exceeding 90 percent of the refrigerated volume. Packing of test
simulators and filler packages must be in accordance with the
requirements for commercial refrigerators without shelves, as specified
in section 6.2.3 of ASHRAE 72-2005.
CRE with drawers are typically configured to hold standardized food
pans for food storage. Pans loaded into the drawers are not typically
filled with food above their top edges to prevent spilling or
interfering with other drawers. Additionally, these CRE may require the
space above the pans to be unloaded to allow for air circulation within
the cabinet.
The current DOE test procedure instructions do not specify any test
simulator or filler package load limits for pans, other than not
exceeding 90 percent of the refrigerated volume. For
[[Page 66169]]
other CRE tests, ASHRAE 72-2005 and ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specify
test simulator and filler package loading based on net usable volume
rather than refrigerated volume. See section 6.2.5 of ASHRAE 72-2005
and section 5.4.1 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. Loading based on the
net usable volume accounts for load limits within the CRE and would
prevent overloading CRE to the extent of impacting airflow circulation
within the cabinet.
To ensure consistent testing for CRE with drawers, and to allow for
testing that is most representative of typical use, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to specify in appendix B that CRE with drawers be tested
according to the existing requirements with the additional instruction
that, for the purposes of loading pans in drawers, the net usable
volume is the storage volume of the pans up to their top edge. 87 FR
39164, 39175.
The drawer loading instructions in appendix B reference section
6.2.3 of ASHRAE 72-2005, which specifies instructions for loading
compartments without shelves. Specifically, section 6.2.3 requires
situating test simulators at the left and right ends (i.e., sides), the
front and back, and the top and bottom locations of the compartment. To
make explicit the application of this instruction to standardized food
pans, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to require that test
simulators be placed at the corner locations of each pan. 87 FR 39164,
39175. For any pans not wide or deep enough to allow for test
simulators at each corner (i.e., less than 7.5 inches (``in.'') wide or
deep, based on the 3.75-in. test simulator width), DOE proposed that
test simulators be centered along the width or depth accordingly. 87 FR
39164, 39175-39176. Similarly, for any pans not tall enough to allow
for test simulators at the specified top and bottom locations (i.e.,
pans less than 4 in. tall, based on the 2-in. test simulator height),
DOE proposed that a test simulator only be loaded at the specified top
location within the standardized food pan. 87 FR 39174, 39176.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
additional instructions regarding loading drawers. Id. DOE additionally
requested information on whether the proposed approach is consistent
with any future industry standard revisions to address this issue. Id.
DOE also requested comment on whether other instructions for CRE with
drawers should be revised (e.g., fully open definition for drawers) or
if additional instructions are needed. Id.
AHRI commented that the additional loading drawer instructions
proposed by DOE are incomplete and provide a suboptimal approach.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 4) AHRI pointed out that ASHRAE Standard 72-2022 may
be available as early as May 2024 as an update to ASHRAE Standard 72-
2018, with revisions including the addition of a specific test
procedure for drawers as well as more complete instructions. Id. AHRI
recommended that DOE pause the process of providing additional
instructions regarding loading drawers and await ASHRAE 72-2022. Id.
Continental commented that DOE should delay adoption of additional
instructions for testing drawers since the ASHRAE 72 standards
committee is in the process of updating the current Standard 72-2022,
and is working to resolve a number of significant challenges with
loading and testing drawers to ensure a reliable and repeatable process
that is not overly burdensome. (Continental, No. 29, p. 4) Continental
stated that DOE should continue to work with ASHRAE to complete
incorporation of an industry-accepted standard procedure. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that, currently, the ASHRAE 72 Standards
Committee is working on specifying test setup and procedure for drawer
units and that any changes should be made in this committee.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2) Hoshizaki noted that making suggestions in
the DOE NOPR phase is not the proper process by which to change
standards, and that using a published standard for some parts and
requesting revisions in CFR could only confuse both manufacturers and
third-party testing agencies. Id.
Hillphoenix stated its disagreement with the proposal to include
additional instructions regarding drawers and recommended referencing
the new version of ASHRAE 72-202X, which will maintain alignment in the
industry without creating new or duplicate requirements that would
otherwise be added to the final rule. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 3)
DOE recognizes that a future update to the ASHRAE 72 standard may
include additional instructions for CRE with drawers, but a revision to
ASHRAE 72 including such instruction is not yet available.
Consistent with AHRI's comment that the additional loading drawer
instructions proposed by DOE are incomplete and provide a suboptimal
approach, DOE reviewed the approach specified in the June 2022 NOPR. As
stated in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed additional instructions to
ensure testing that is most representative of typical use. 87 FR 39164,
39175. DOE re-ordered the instructions in this final rule to better
clarify the proposed approach and better specify some requirements.
Specifically, DOE has added a definition for fully open (for drawers)
which means opened not less than 80 percent of their full travel which
is consistent with the fully open (for sliding doors) definition in
ASHRAE 72 with Errata which means opened at least 80 percent of its
full normal travel. Currently, ASHRAE 72 with Errata includes a
definition for fully open (for drawers) that requires drawers to be
opened not less than 66 percent of their full travel. This definition
allows a wider range of openings than for sliding doors despite the
fact that, similar to sliding doors, drawers require users to almost
fully open the drawer to expose the full contents to the user. DOE has
determined that a definition of fully open (for drawers) that is
consistent with the definition for fully open (for sliding doors) would
result in more representative results by reducing the range of
allowable percent open. Additionally, DOE has revised the food service
pan requirement from Gastronorm to stainless steel to ensure a
repeatable and reproducible test with the same pan material while
allowing test flexibility for different pan sizes as specified in
manufacturer instructions.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the net usable volume of
drawers is the storage volume of the pans up to the top edge of the
pan. 87 FR 39164, 39175. DOE has determined that ``up to the top edge
of the pan'' is better specified by providing a more detailed
description of this instruction that is harmonized with the net usable
volume determination for buffet tables or preparation tables
established in this final rule. Specifically, DOE is specifying that
the net usable volume of pans is determined by filling pans with water
to within 0.5 in. of the top edge of the pan.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR additional test simulator
loading instructions to clarify the application of ASHRAE 72 loading to
pans. 87 FR 39164, 39175. DOE has revised the test simulator locations
proposed for drawers to be less burdensome and to align more closely
with the simulator loading requirements in ASHRAE 72 with Errata.
Specifically, DOE has determined that loading test simulators into
every individual pan (i.e., at each corner of every pan), as proposed,
is not appropriate and would be overly burdensome as compared to the
simulator loading requirements for shelves in ASHRAE 72 with Errata.
For example, under the proposed approach,
[[Page 66170]]
a large drawer loaded with small pans would require many more
simulators (in every pan) than a similarly-sized CRE with a shelf in
place of a drawer (at the shelf corners and at specified intervals). To
ensure consistent application of the ASHRAE 72 with Errata
instructions, DOE is specifying that drawers be loaded with simulators
in locations similar to those required for shelves (i.e., at the drawer
ends and at specified length intervals, at the front and back of the
drawers, and on the bottom of the pan(s)) which is representative of
the integrated average temperature of the drawer(s) while reducing the
test burden of requiring additional test simulators and to account for
pans which may not accommodate two test simulators stacked in the
vertical direction. Additionally, DOE is specifying that test
simulators shall be secured during testing to ensure the specified
locations are maintained throughout drawer openings. DOE has determined
that this revised method is representative, repeatable, and
reproducible for testing of CRE with drawers and maintains consistency
with the loading instructions in ASHRAE 72 with Errata.
b. Liquid Refrigerant Pressure Accuracy
On April 14, 2023, ASHRAE published the first public review draft
of Addendum a to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata.\15\ The purpose of
Addendum a is to correct the required liquid refrigerant pressure
measurement accuracy in Table A-1 in Normative Appendix A. The required
accuracy for liquid refrigerant pressure in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
is 7.0 kPa (1.0 psi). However, this is an error
because in previous versions of ASHRAE 72 (e.g., the version currently
incorporated by reference at 10 CFR 431.63, ASHRAE 72-2005), the
required accuracy for liquid refrigerant pressure was 35
kPa (5.1 psi). Addendum a corrects the required accuracy
for liquid refrigerant pressure to be 35 kPa (5.1 psi), consistent with previous versions of ASHRAE 72.
Therefore, DOE is clarifying in this final rule that the required
accuracy for liquid refrigerant pressure is 35 kPa (5.1 psi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See www.ashrae.org/File%20Library/Technical%20Resources/Standards%20and%20Guidelines/Standards%20Actions/SAApr142023.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Secondary Coolants
Certain CRE are installed for use with a secondary coolant. In this
configuration, a remotely cooled fluid (e.g., a propylene glycol
solution) is supplied to the cabinet and absorbs heat from the cabinet
without the secondary coolant undergoing a phase change.
AHRI publishes a rating standard applicable to CRE that use a
secondary coolant or refrigerant, AHRI Standard 1320 (I-P), ``2011
Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets for Use With Secondary
Refrigerants'' (``AHRI 1320-2011''), approved by ANSI on April 17,
2012. AHRI 1320-2011 is applicable to CRE that are equipped and
designed to work with electrically driven, medium-temperature, single-
phase secondary coolant systems, but excludes equipment used for low-
temperature applications, secondary coolants involving a phase change
(e.g., ice slurries or carbon dioxide), and self-contained CRE. AHRI
1320-2011 includes similar rating temperature conditions as those in
AHRI 1200-2013 and references ASHRAE 72-2005 and AHAM HRF-1-2008 for
the measurement of energy consumption and calculation of refrigerated
volume, respectively. The only substantive differences between AHRI
1200-2013 and AHRI 1320-2011 are the inclusion of secondary refrigerant
circulation pump energy consumption in the calculation of total daily
energy consumption and revised coefficients of performance to determine
compressor energy consumption.
While CRE cooled by secondary coolants are less common than self-
contained or remote CRE, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1320-2011 to reference only the specific
sections within the standard that apply to CRE tested with secondary
coolants (i.e., those referring to pump energy and coolant flow) and to
otherwise reference the applicable requirements in AHRI 1200-202X. 87
FR 39164, 39176. DOE acknowledges that AHRI 1320-2011 may be updated
consistent with the updates in AHRI 1200-2023.
Because CRE cooled by secondary coolants are not currently subject
to DOE's test procedure, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the
test procedure referencing AHRI 1320-2011 would not be required for use
until the compliance date of any amended energy conservation standards
for CRE that consider such testing. 87 FR 39164, 39176. DOE is aware
that direct-expansion remote CRE may also be capable of being installed
with a secondary coolant. Id. Under the June 2022 NOPR proposal, such
equipment would continue to be tested and rated using the approach
currently required for remote condensing CRE. Id. The test procedure
for secondary coolants proposed in the June 2022 NOPR would be
applicable to equipment only capable of being installed with secondary
coolants, should any such models become available. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1320-2011 for CRE used with secondary
coolants, including the proposal to only reference the industry
standard for provisions specific to secondary coolants and to otherwise
reference AHRI 1200-202X, as proposed for other CRE. 87 FR 39164,
39176.
The CA IOUs commented that they support the addition of a test
procedure for secondary coolant systems in reference to ANSI/AHRI
Standard 1320 and recommended distinguishing between secondary coolant
systems and cascade systems and including both system types in the
scope of DOE's test procedures. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 11) The CA IOUs
also encouraged DOE to develop a test procedure to address
CO2-based (i.e., R-744) secondary coolant systems and
cascade systems. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE avoid incorporating by reference AHRI
1320-2011 for CRE used with secondary coolants because AHRI will likely
update AHRI 1320-2011 during 2023, and an updated standard could create
confusion for compliance purposes. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 5) AHRI noted that
AHRI 1320-2011 is not a widely used or needed standard and that waiting
for the update would benefit the test procedure. Id.
Zero Zone stated agreement that AHRI 1320 was the appropriate
standard for secondary coolants, as stated in previous comments. (Zero
Zone, No. 37, p. 3) Zero Zone stated it had not used the standard,
expressed concern it would not produce reliable results, and agreed
with AHRI's position that the standard was out of date and not used by
manufacturers. Id. Zero Zone commented that generally speaking, a
commercial refrigerator has the same amount of heat infiltration
regardless of the refrigerant used to cool the equipment, plus the
number of cases sold that use a secondary coolant is extremely low, and
adding a requirement to test and certify this equipment would create an
enormous test burden. Id.
Hussmann recommended against DOE's proposal to incorporate by
reference AHRI 1320-2011 for CRE used with secondary coolants, as AHRI
is likely to update AHRI 1320-2011 during 2023. (Hussmann, No. 32, p.
3) Hussmann commented that an updated standard could create confusion
for compliance purposes, adding that AHRI
[[Page 66171]]
1320-2011 is not a widely used or needed standard, and that waiting for
a more updated standard to incorporate in the test procedure would be
beneficial. Id.
Hillphoenix disagreed with the proposal to incorporate AHRI 1320-
2011 and recommended that DOE allow the standard to be reviewed by the
industry and aligned with current technology before being referenced.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 3)
DOE recognizes that AHRI 1320-2011 is not a widely used standard
and that AHRI may work on an update to the standard, but DOE also
recognizes that AHRI 1320 parallels AHRI 1200. Therefore, DOE is
adopting the provisions for CRE used with secondary coolants as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, which is consistent with the updates in
AHRI 1200-2023, so that CRE using secondary coolants can be tested and
rated. DOE will evaluate any future updates to AHRI 1320-2011 as they
become public. Consistent with the June 2022 NOPR, the test procedure
for CRE using secondary coolants would not be required for use until
the compliance date of any amended energy conservation standards for
CRE that consider such testing.
As stated in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE is aware that direct-expansion
remote CRE may also be capable of being installed with a secondary
coolant. Such equipment will continue to be tested and rated using the
approach currently required for remote condensing CRE. The test
procedure for CRE with secondary coolants will be applicable to
equipment only capable of being installed with secondary coolants,
should any such models become available.
C. Test Conditions for Specific CRE Categories
DOE has identified specific categories of CRE that are not
currently subject to the DOE test procedure or in which the current
test procedure may not produce results that are representative of their
use. Additionally, the EPA's ENERGY STAR program considered three of
these equipment categories for scope expansion and test method
development during the Version 5.0 Specification development process:
refrigerated preparation and buffet tables; chef bases or griddle
stands; and blast chillers and freezers.\16\ DOE has considered
information gathered through the ENERGY STAR process when developing
the proposals included in this final rule. DOE discusses each of these
categories in the following sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Information and materials for ENERGY STAR's Specification
Version 5.0 process are available at www.energystar.gov/products/spec/commercial_refrigerators_and_freezers_specification_version_5_0_pd
(last accessed March 11, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the June 2022 NOPR, NEEA encouraged DOE to align
test methods for this equipment with EPA ENERGY STAR 5.0 where
applicable to reduce manufacturer burden and establish consistently
used ratings. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2). NEEA commented that DOE had
reviewed the test procedures it recommended for these four products and
considered any anticipated updates to industry TP or active product
committees, such as ASHRAE 220. Id. NEEA stated support for DOE's
proposed test procedures for this equipment, noting that establishing
Federal test procedures was key to providing consistent ratings to
consumers and enabling data collection that would inform establishing
standards for this newly defined equipment. Id. NEEA recommended that
DOE establish energy conservation standards for newly defined CRE
equipment classes, including test procedures for refrigerated
preparation and buffet tables; chef bases or griddle stands; blast
chillers and blast freezers; and high-temperature CRE. Id.
As discussed in the following sections, DOE is establishing test
procedures for new equipment categories as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR. DOE has considered the latest ENERGY STAR requirements in
evaluating the requirements for these equipment categories. DOE may
evaluate energy conservation standards for these new equipment
categories as part of a separate energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
1. Salad Bars, Buffet Tables, and Refrigerated Preparation Tables
Salad bars, buffet tables, and other refrigerated holding and
serving equipment, including refrigerated preparation tables,\17\ are
CRE that store and display perishable items temporarily during food
preparation or service. These units typically have design attributes
such as easily accessible or open bins that allow convenient and
unimpeded access to the refrigerated products, which make them unique
from CRE designed for storage or retailing. In the April 2014 Final
Rule, DOE did not establish test procedures for this equipment but
maintained that it meets the definition of CRE and is covered equipment
that could be subject to future test procedures and energy conservation
standards. 79 FR 22277, 22281. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed
definitions and test procedures applicable to salad bars, buffet
tables, and refrigerated preparation tables.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ While the April 2014 Final Rule did not specifically refer
to refrigerated preparation tables, DOE is including them in this
category because they have similar features to salad bars and buffet
tables. Each of these equipment categories includes an open-top area
for holding refrigerated pans and is used during food preparation
and service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Definitions
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE noted that ASTM International F2143-16,
``Standard Test Method for Performance of Refrigerated Buffet and
Preparation Tables'' (``ASTM F2143-16'') provides the following
definitions for refrigerated buffet and preparation tables:
Refrigerated buffet and preparation table--equipment
designed with a refrigerated open top or open condiment rail.
Refrigerated buffet table or unit--equipment designed with
mechanical refrigeration that is intended to receive refrigerated food
and maintain food product temperatures and is intended for customer
service such as a salad bar. A unit may or may not be equipped with a
lower refrigerated compartment.
Refrigerated food preparation unit--equipment designed
with a refrigerated open top or open condiment rail such as
refrigerated sandwich units, pizza preparation tables, and similar
equipment. The unit may or may not be equipped with a lower
refrigerated compartment.
86 FR 31182, 31185-31186.
DOE discussed in the June 2022 NOPR that certain terms used within
these definitions are undefined (e.g., condiment rails, food product
temperatures) and that it was not aware of any other industry standard
definitions for these equipment categories. Id.
DOE also noted in the June 2022 NOPR that the California Code of
Regulations (``CCR'') \18\ defines ``buffet table'' and ``preparation
table'' as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ California's regulations for buffet tables and preparation
tables refer to the 2001 version of ASTM F2143. For this final rule,
DOE has reviewed ASTM F2143-16, as it is the most current version of
the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Buffet table'' means a commercial refrigerator, such as
a salad bar, that is designed with mechanical refrigeration and that is
intended to receive refrigerated food, to maintain food product
temperatures, and for customer service; and
``Preparation table'' means a commercial refrigerator with
a countertop refrigerated compartment with or without cabinets below,
and
[[Page 66172]]
with self-contained refrigeration equipment. 20 CCR Sec. 1602.
87 FR 39164, 39177.
Furthermore, the EPA's ENERGY STAR program's Final Draft Version
5.0 Eligibility Criteria for commercial refrigerators and freezers
includes a definition for ``preparation or buffet table'' as a
commercial refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-freezer with a food
condiment rail designed to hold open perishable food and may or may not
be equipped with a lower compartment that may or may not be
refrigerated.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE stated that the configuration of salad
bars, buffet tables, and refrigerated preparation tables may raise
questions as to whether a unit is commercial hybrid refrigeration
equipment. 87 FR 39164, 39177. DOE defines ``commercial hybrid
refrigeration equipment'' as a unit of CRE (1) that consists of two or
more thermally separated refrigerated compartments that are in two or
more different equipment families, and (2) that is sold as a single
unit. 10 CFR 431.62.
DOE discussed in the June 2022 NOPR that additional detail may be
necessary to distinguish between a unit that is a salad bar, buffet
table, or refrigerated preparation table and a unit that is commercial
hybrid equipment that includes a salad bar, buffet table, or
refrigerated preparation table. 87 FR 39164, 39177. Refrigerated salad
bars, buffet tables, and preparation tables typically have removable
pans or bins that directly contact the chilled air in the refrigerated
compartment of the unit. With that configuration, the entirety of the
chilled compartment and surface pans would potentially be considered a
refrigerated salad bar, buffet table, or preparation table. In
contrast, if a unit includes solid partitions between the chilled
compartment and the pans or bins on top of the unit, such a
configuration would potentially be considered thermal separation and
the unit would be considered a commercial hybrid consisting of a
refrigerated salad bar, buffet table, or preparation table with a
refrigerator and/or freezer.
To delineate this equipment from other types of CRE, DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR to define the term ``buffet table or preparation
table.'' 87 FR 39164, 39179. DOE proposed a definition for this term
that combines elements of the existing industry and ENERGY STAR
definitions, includes language for consistency with DOE's existing CRE
definitions, and includes further specificity regarding the
characteristics of this equipment. Id. Specifically, DOE proposed to
define this term as follows:
``Buffet table or preparation table'' means a commercial
refrigerator with an open-top refrigerated area, that may or may not
include a lid, for displaying or storing merchandise and other
perishable materials in pans or other removable containers for customer
self-service or food production and assembly. 87 FR 39164, 39179. The
unit may or may not be equipped with a refrigerated storage compartment
underneath the pans or other removable containers that is not thermally
separated from the open-top refrigerated area. Id.
DOE did not propose in the NOPR to define the term ``salad bar,''
as this equipment would be captured within the proposed definition of
``buffet table or preparation table.'' 87 FR 39164, 39179. DOE
tentatively determined that additional equipment definitions are not
necessary for the purposes of testing buffet tables and preparation
tables. Id.
Additionally, DOE did not propose in the NOPR any reference to
storage temperature or duration in the proposed definition for ``buffet
table or preparation table.'' 87 FR 39164, 39179-39180. DOE recognized
that these are important aspects of the equipment operation but has
tentatively determined that they are not necessary for the purpose of
defining the equipment to establish test procedures. Id. By specifying
that such units are commercial refrigerators, buffet tables and
preparation tables would be units capable of operating at or above 32
[deg]F (2 [deg]F).
As discussed, CRE may include single refrigeration systems to
provide cooling to multiple compartments or areas within a unit.
Additionally, CRE may include multiple distinct refrigeration systems
or evaporator coils to individually cool separate compartments or
refrigerated areas. DOE's proposed definition in the June 2022 NOPR
would include units both with and without a refrigerated storage
compartment underneath the pans or other removable containers. The
proposed definition in the June 2022 NOPR, however, specifies that
units including a refrigerated storage compartment underneath the pans
or other removable containers may not be thermally separated from the
open-top refrigerated area.
DOE noted in the June 2022 NOPR that while industry may use the
term ``hybrid'' to refer to different combinations of equipment
capabilities and configurations, the term ``commercial hybrid'' is
specifically defined by DOE in 10 CFR 431.62. 87 FR 39164, 39180.
Currently, CRE with refrigerated storage compartments thermally
separated from the open-top refrigerated area of the buffet table or
preparation table are ``commercial hybrid'' CRE and must be tested in
accordance with the applicable test procedures and comply with the
applicable standards. Such equipment would continue to be tested as
currently required to determine compliance with the existing energy
conservation standards applicable to the non-buffet table or
preparation table element. As noted, DOE has not established energy
conservation standards for CRE covered under the proposed definition of
``buffet table or preparation table.'' DOE discussed in the April 2014
Final Rule that because only the refrigerated storage compartment is
subject to current energy conservation standards, the unit would be
tested with the buffet table or preparation table portion disabled and
not included in the determination of energy consumption. 79 FR 22277,
22289. If the same refrigeration system serves both the refrigerated
compartment and the open-top refrigerated area and refrigeration of the
open-top area cannot be disabled, manufacturers may apply for a test
procedure waiver for such equipment if the measured energy use would
not be representative of the portion of the unit that is not a buffet
table or preparation table of the CRE basic model. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
definition for ``buffet table or preparation table.'' 87 FR 39164,
39180. DOE also requested information on whether any additional
definitions are necessary for the purposes of testing this equipment,
or whether any additional equipment characteristics are necessary to
differentiate this equipment from other categories of CRE. Id.
Hoshizaki supported this proposed definition and stated that it is
like the definition given in ASTM F2143-16. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2)
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposed definitions for buffet table
and preparation table as documented in the NOPR. (Hillphoenix, No. 35,
p. 3)
NEEA supported the new definitions DOE proposed for buffet tables
and preparation tables, stating that these equipment types have unique
applications compared to other CRE, and these definitions allow
consideration (potential standards), categorization (equipment
classes), and testing of this equipment separate from other CRE. (NEEA,
No. 39, p. 2)
Continental commented it continues to support the use of NSF 7-2019
[[Page 66173]]
(defined within NSF/ANSI 170-2019, ``Glossary of Food Equipment
Terminology'') definitions for ``Refrigerated Buffet Units'' and
``Refrigerated Food Preparation Units.'' (Continental, No. 29, p. 4)
True commented that the terms used to define the categories of
``buffet table'' and ``preparation table'' correspond to (match) those
as defined by NSF/ANSI 170 (referenced in NSF/ANSI 7-2021). (True, No.
28, p. 2) True commented that the definition for a buffet table can be
found at NSF/ANSI 170 3.22, which defines a buffet unit as ``Equipment
that is designed to receive and maintain food product(s) at proper
temperatures and is intended for customer service,'' and that the
definition for a preparation table can be found at NSF/ANSI 170 3.173,
which defines a refrigerated food preparation unit as ``Equipment
designed with a refrigerated open top or open condiment rail such as
refrigerated sandwich units, pizza preparation tables, and similar
equipment. The unit may or may not be equipped with a lower
refrigerated compartment.'' Id.
AHRI commented that it found the proposed definition for ``buffet
table or preparation table'' to be broad enough for testing this
equipment and defining necessary equipment characteristics; as a
result, additional definitions may be unnecessary. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 5)
AHRI recommended that DOE should specify that this definition applies
to self-contained units and add to the definition whether the equipment
does or does not share a coil. Id.
Hussmann commented that while it did not oppose the proposed
definitions, it requested that DOE include that the definition
pertained to self-contained units only, and that DOE include language
about sharing the coil with other compartments. (Hussmann, No. 32, p.
4) Hussmann also commented that the definition included ``may or may
not be equipped with a refrigerated storage compartment underneath the
pans'' but did not mention any other equipment category, and that the
buffet/prep section may share a coil with a different equipment
category other than storage and mention should be in the definition
because it already considers the lower storage. Id. Hussmann requested
clarification about, and a definition of, ``non-thermally separated
compartments,'' as the proposal stated ``closed.'' (Hussmann, No. 32,
p. 5) Hussmann commented that currently, open display cases (``SVO'')
share the same coil/discharge air with the buffet/prep section. Id.
Hussman questioned whether DOE considered this condition as not
thermally separated. Id. Hussmann added that if so, a ``no-load'' in
the SVO section of the case would result in higher infiltration of warm
air. Id. Hussmann also commented by asking if night curtains would be
allowed to be installed on the case or if the unloaded compartment
could be protected or, alternatively, if the SVO section of the case
could be loaded. Id.
The CA IOUs commented that DOE's proposed definition for ``buffet
table or preparation table'' raises the issue that if an energy
conservation standard is established in the future for this equipment,
refrigerated rails will have to meet the same energy conservation
standard as prep tables with a refrigerated bottom component if that
bottom component is not ``thermally separated'' from the open-top
refrigerated area. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 1) The CA IOUs also commented
that DOE should consider defining ``refrigerated rail'' separately from
``buffet table or preparation table'' and that the definition of
``buffet table or preparation table'' include both sandwich and pizza
prep tables; and that ``commercial hybrid'' CRE consists of
compartments refrigerated by separate evaporators with fully
independent temperature control between the different compartments. (CA
IOUs, No. 36, p. 3)
The CA IOUs amended the proposed NOPR definitions with strikeout
deletions and underline additions. Id. The CA IOUs agreed with the
current definition of a ``refrigerated rail.'' Id. The CA IOUs amended
the proposed NOPR definition of ``buffet table or preparation table''
to ``a commercial refrigerator with an open-top refrigerated area, that
may or may not include a lid, for displaying or storing merchandise and
other perishable materials in pans or other removable containers for
customer self-service or food production and assembly. The unit may or
may not be equipped with a refrigerated storage compartment underneath
the pans or other removable containers, that is not thermally separated
from the open-top refrigerated area that is conditioned by the same
refrigeration circuit as the open-top refrigerated area.'' Id. The CA
IOUs slightly altered the definition of ``commercial hybrid''
refrigeration equipment to ``a unit of CRE (1) that consists of two or
more thermally separated refrigerated compartments with independent
control of temperature amongst the refrigerated compartments and that
are in two or more different equipment families, and (2) that is sold
as a single unit.'' Id.
The CA IOUs commented that prep tables (either sandwich tables or
pizza prep tables) are similar in having an open-top refrigerated area
with a refrigerated storage compartment underneath. (CA IOUs, No. 36,
p. 2) The CA IOUs stated that in the absence of a definition for
``thermal separation,'' pizza prep tables could be misclassified as
``commercial hybrid'' CRE with the open-top refrigerated area evaluated
as a ``buffet table or preparation table'' and the refrigerated
compartment tested as Vertical Closed Solid (VCS.SC.M), while sandwich
prep tables would be tested as ``buffet table or preparation table.''
Id. The CA IOUs commented that rating sandwich prep tables differently
from pizza prep tables would create market confusion. Id.
Consistent with the June 2022 NOPR, DOE is not limiting the
definition of buffet tables or preparation tables to self-contained
configurations but is specifying that the test procedure is only
applicable to self-contained configurations \19\ because DOE has not
evaluated test provisions for remote equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See section 1.1 of appendix C of the June 2022 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The existing hybrid definition is based on thermally separated
compartments, not independent coils or separate temperature control.
DOE is maintaining the existing approach for hybrids, which will avoid
reclassifying all existing hybrid CRE.
DOE acknowledges that energy consumption likely varies depending on
equipment configuration. For the purposes of testing, DOE has
determined there is not a need to separately define equipment
categories within buffet tables or preparation tables and is not
establishing separate definitions. DOE has determined that test
instructions regarding refrigerated pan areas and compartments are
sufficient for testing the referenced configurations. DOE would
consider energy impacts of different configurations as part of energy
conservation standards rule evaluating this equipment category, and
would consider appropriate definitions for those configurations at that
time. Therefore, DOE is maintaining definitions as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR, which combine aspects of existing industry definitions,
ENERGY STAR definitions, and other DOE definitions for CRE.
b. Test Methods
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE considered potential test methods for
buffet tables and preparation tables. 87 FR 39164, 39180. DOE reviewed
both ASTM F2143-16 and NSF 7-2019 in considering test methods for
buffet
[[Page 66174]]
tables and preparation tables. As described in section 1 of ASTM F2143-
16 (``Scope''), that test method covers evaluation of the energy
consumption of refrigerated buffet and preparation tables and allows
food service operators to use this evaluation to select a refrigerated
buffet and preparation table and understand its energy performance. The
foreword to NSF 7-2019 specifies that the purpose of the industry
testing standard is to establish minimum food protection and sanitation
requirements for the materials, design, construction, and performance
of commercial refrigerators and freezers.
The general test approach in ASTM F2143-16 is to load the unit with
distilled water in pans and no load in any refrigerated compartment,
operate the unit to confirm stability, then conduct testing for 24
hours, with an 8-hour ``active period'' with lid and door openings
followed by a 16-hour ``standby period'' with no door openings. DOE
understands that this test is intended to represent unit operation and
energy consumption over a 24-hour day.
The NSF 7-2019 test approach requires loading the unit pans with
refrigerated food-simulating test media (a specified mixture of water,
salt, and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose) and no load in any
refrigerated compartment and operating the unit for 4 hours to
determine whether temperatures at all measured locations are within the
acceptable range. DOE acknowledges that this test is intended to
evaluate the ability of a unit to maintain the temperature of
refrigerated pans (and any compartments) during a 4-hour period.
While these two industry test methods contain certain similarities
(e.g., loading pans but not compartments, ambient temperature
conditions), DOE initially determined in the June 2022 NOPR that ASTM
F2143-16 provides the more appropriate basis for an energy consumption
test representative of typical use. 87 FR 39164, 39181. As discussed in
the following subsections, DOE initially determined in the June 2022
NOPR that 24 hours of maintaining stable temperatures, as required in
the ASTM F2143-16 method, is representative of average use for this
equipment. Id. DOE also tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR
that the stabilization and operating periods specified in ASTM F2143-16
would ensure that units maintain temperatures on a consistent basis
during testing and would allow for comparative energy use measurements
across units. Id. NSF 7-2019 provides a basis for determining whether a
unit is capable of maintaining certain temperatures over a shorter
period, but without additional instructions to ensure energy
consumption testing on a consistent basis (i.e., the temperatures
maintained over the shorter test period may not necessarily be stable).
For these reasons, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to reference
ASTM F2134-16 as the basis for testing buffet tables and preparation
tables. 87 FR 39164, 39181. Consistent with the scope of ASTM F2134-16,
DOE proposed test procedures only for self-contained buffet tables and
preparation tables. Id. While DOE proposed to base the test procedure
for buffet tables and preparation tables on ASTM F2134-16, DOE also
proposed certain additional and different requirements for test
conditions, setup, and conduct to ensure the representativeness of the
test procedure, as discussed in the following sections. Id.
To avoid confusion regarding testing of other CRE, DOE also
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to establish the test procedure for
buffet tables and preparation tables as a new appendix C to subpart C
of 10 CFR part 431. 87 FR 39164, 39181. DOE also proposed to refer to
the proposed appendix C as the test procedure for buffet tables and
preparation tables in 10 CFR 431.64. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to
adopt through reference certain provisions of ASTM F2143-16 as the
basis for testing buffet tables and preparation tables. 87 FR 39164,
39181. DOE also sought comment on the proposal to specify test
procedures only for self-contained buffet tables and preparation
tables, consistent with ASTM F2143-16. Id.
The Joint Commenters supported DOE's proposed changes regarding the
proposed test methods for additional equipment categories including
buffet and preparation tables. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 1)
NEEA stated its support for DOE's proposal to establish test
procedures for new and/or newly defined categories of CRE, and restated
its recommendation from the 2021 CRE TP RFI that DOE establish test
methods for new CRE product types, including refrigerated preparation
and buffet tables. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
The Joint Commenters expressed support for establishing test
procedures for buffet and preparation tables, citing a statistic from
the California Energy Commission (``CEC'') Modernized Appliance
Efficiency Database System (``MAEDbS'') that listed over 100 buffet/
preparation tables with a broad range of energy usage, and a 2014
report that discussed testing on 11 preparation tables, revealing a
wide range of measured energy consumption. (Joint Commenters, No. 31,
p. 2) The Joint Commenters stated that findings in the 2014 report
suggested the potential for meaningful energy savings for these
products and establishing test procedures for buffet and preparation
tables would ensure that the energy consumption of this equipment would
be measured in a consistent manner. Id.
Continental commented that it supports the NOPR proposal to add new
test procedures for product categories such as refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables. (Continental, No. 29, p. 1) Continental noted,
however, that attempting to develop test procedures that combine
aspects of different existing industry standards and introducing
significant modifications is not sufficient or appropriate for this
type of rulemaking. Id. Continental recommended that DOE work with
ASHRAE, AHRI, ASTM, and other stakeholders to develop suitable test
procedures for any additional product categories so that new or
modified industry standards are comprehensive, reliable, and repeatable
for many equipment types, with minimal additional testing burden. Id.
Continental expressed significant concerns with ASTM F2143-16, stating
that DOE recognized many of the same issues in the NOPR and, as a
result, DOE should delay adoption of a test procedure for refrigerated
buffet and preparation tables, and work in depth with industry
associations and other stakeholders to develop an appropriate standard
procedure. (Continental, No. 29, p. 4) Continental commented that
attempting to combine existing test standards was likely to result in
excessive testing burden, inconsistent results, and confusion for
stakeholders. Id. Continental added that ENERGY STAR had expressed a
desire to include buffet tables and preparation tables in its most
recent standards revision, but recognized that an appropriate standard
test method has not been used by industry and declined to include this
equipment. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE use ASTM F2143-16 only as intended and
not impose additional provisions and restrictions in testing buffet
tables and preparation tables. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 6) AHRI commented that
test standards should not be combined and recommended regulating this
issue under a single standard. Id. AHRI commented with concern that the
data set used in testing failed to indicate energy efficiency, and that
DOE should wait to update this regulation until
[[Page 66175]]
clearer test standards have been determined through consensus by
manufacturers and third parties. Id. AHRI noted that ENERGY STAR was
not employing ASTM F2143-16, indicating that DOE's adoption was
premature. Id. AHRI commented that it had numerous concerns with ASTM
F2143-16 and advised that this standard may not be ready for use in a
DOE test procedure. Id. AHRI added that if DOE were to use this
standard in a test procedure, it should only apply to self-contained
equipment. Id. AHRI commented that it could not determine the impacts
of employing the standard because it is not widely used. Id.
Hoshizaki commented in agreement with the proposal to use test
procedures from ASTM F-2143-2016, but in disagreement with the proposal
to have additional requirements from other standards. (Hoshizaki, No.
30, p. 2) Hoshizaki commented that if DOE wants to use a standard only
in part, it should request to have a single standard updated with
proposed changes and wait for the standard process to complete before
publishing a test procedure. Id. Hoshizaki stated that this would give
manufacturers a chance to see the final standard and prepare for
testing prior to the implementation of new regulations. Id.
Hillphoenix stated its disagreement with the proposal to adopt ASTM
F2143-16 as the basis for testing buffet and preparation tables, as it
is not widely utilized by all manufacturers. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p.
3) Hillphoenix recommended that DOE approach the industry and request
updated testing standards that better reflect actual product intent,
stating this approach would (1) cause less confusion than referencing
portions of multiple standards, (2) drive consistency within the
industry, and (3) be less burdensome on manufacturers. Id. Hillphoenix
agreed that ASTM F2143-16 only pertained to self-contained models, and
if adopted against industry recommendations, the proposed test
procedure should reflect self-contained models only, as in ASTM F2143-
16. Id.
Hussmann cautioned DOE that ASTM F2143-16 was not a commonly used
standard in the industry and contained many holes and gaps common to
DOE test procedures. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 4) Hussmann added that
combining test standards would cause confusion and disruption to the
industry as the different standards were revised and therefore
recommended adopting buffet/prep cases under a single standard that
would be widely accepted across the industry. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting, True commented that ASTM-F2143-
16 is only required by the State of California for reporting energy,
and that it is surprised NSF-7 is not being used as a standard for
consideration, since that is a de facto national standard in place for
the United States and Canada. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p.
38) True commented that ASTM F2143-16 is not an industry standard used
by the food service industry or by local health inspectors. (True, No.
28, p. 2) True stated that NSF 7 is the food service industry standard
for the performance rating, food safety, and evaluation of refrigerated
food preparation units (tables); that local United States and Canada
food safety and sanitation inspectors (health inspectors) require the
NSF 7 compliance logo; and that certificates of occupancy are issued
based on NSF 7 Standard compliance. Id.
True also commented that the proposed ASTM F2143-16 standard is not
a suitable standard that should be used to evaluate these products.
(True, No. 28, p. 6) True stated that consideration should be given to
the fact ASTM F2143-16 does not address food safe temperatures (water
as the test media is not representative of food), and adding this test
setup would increase testing and lab burdens to all manufacturers. Id.
True pointed to NSF/ANSI 7-2021 as the reference standard recommended
for this type of equipment and noted that ASTM F2143-16 is in review
and has not been presented publicly. Id.
As discussed in section III.C.1.a, DOE is establishing test
procedures only for self-contained buffet tables or preparation tables.
DOE agrees with commenters that ASTM F2143-16 cannot be referenced
as a standalone test method and, accordingly, DOE proposed deviations
and additional specifications in the June 2022 NOPR. DOE recognizes
that not all manufacturers currently use ASTM F2143-16, but DOE has
determined the approach based on ASTM F2143-16 with additional
requirements is representative and not unduly burdensome to conduct. If
a new or updated industry standard that measures the energy consumption
of buffet tables or preparation tables becomes available, DOE will
consider it in a future test procedure rulemaking.
DOE has evaluated ASTM F2143-16 and identified the need for
additional provisions or alternate requirements. To the extent that
additional provisions are consistent with requirements in other
industry methods, DOE has incorporated by reference those other
methods. This approach makes it easier to determine where requirements
are harmonized across industry standards. In response to combining
multiple standards, DOE is not applying each standard in whole to this
equipment, but rather is adopting the appropriate provisions to result
in a representative DOE test procedure. The regulatory text is located
in appendix C established in this final rule is the DOE test procedure
for this equipment, and the requirements in appendix C clearly outline
when to use requirements from each standard.
As discussed in section III.C.1.a, NSF 7 is intended to ensure
refrigerating performance and food safety, not energy use. ASTM F2143-
16 was developed to evaluate energy performance, and with the
additional requirements established in this final rule, DOE has
determined that referencing ASTM F2143-16 is appropriate and meets the
EPCA requirements.
DOE's determination to establish test procedures consistent with
EPCA requirements is not impacted by ENERGY STAR's specification review
process. To the extent that ENERGY STAR considers this equipment in
future updates, the ENERGY STAR program typically adopts DOE test
procedures and DOE will coordinate with ENERGY STAR to harmonize
requirements.
As discussed, DOE is establishing a test procedure for buffet
tables and preparation tables based on ASTM F2143-16 with additional
requirements. The following sub-sections describe additional details of
the test procedure.
Test Conditions
ASTM F2143-16 specifies different rating conditions for test room
dry-bulb temperature and moisture content than the current DOE test
procedure. NSF 7-2019 also specifies test conditions similar to those
in ASTM F2143-16. Table III.1 summarizes these differences.
[[Page 66176]]
Table III.1--Test Room Dry-Bulb Temperature and Moisture Content Standards Comparison
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wet bulb
Test room dry bulb temperature Moisture content
Equipment type Test standard temperature (relative (lb/lb dry air)
humidity)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently Covered CRE........... ASHRAE 72 (2005 75.2 [deg]F 1.8 [deg]F. minus>1.8 [deg]F
Errata). (49%-62%).
Buffet and Preparation Tables... ASTM F2143-16..... 86 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. minus>1.8 [deg]F
(30%-40%).
Buffet and Preparation Tables... NSF 7-2019........ 86 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. (based on max
50%).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As previously described, the apparent purpose of the NSF 7-2019
test is to determine the capability of a unit to maintain refrigerated
temperature in the conditions specified by the industry testing
standard. The ASTM F2143-16 ambient conditions match those in NSF 7-
2019. However, DOE initially determined in the June 2022 NOPR that
these conditions are not necessarily the most representative of typical
use. 87 FR 39164, 39182. As discussed in the June 2022 NOPR, buffet
tables and preparation tables are typically installed in locations
similar to other CRE (e.g., food service areas, supermarkets,
commercial kitchens) and would be subject to the same ambient
conditions during typical use. Id. DOE acknowledged in the June 2022
NOPR that the ambient conditions at the point of installation may vary.
Id. However, DOE determined that the conditions in ASHRAE 72 (in both
the currently referenced 2005 version and the 2022 with Errata version)
are appropriately representative of the average use of CRE. 79 FR
22277, 22283. For consistency with other CRE testing, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR that the ambient conditions specified in ASHRAE 72-
2018R also apply for testing buffet tables and preparation tables. 87
FR 39164, 39182.
For measuring these ambient conditions, ASHRAE 72-2022 with Eratta
and ASTM F2143-16 specify the same measurement locations; however, the
locations may require further specificity depending on the
configuration of the refrigerated buffet table or preparation table
under test. For example, the specified measurement location based on
the highest point of the unit under test as provided in ASTM F2143-16
could be based on the height of the refrigerated table surface and pan
openings or on the height of any lid or cover over the pans, if
included. Additionally, the specified measurement location at the
center of the unit as provided in ASTM F2143-16 could be based on the
geometric center of the unit determined from the height of the open pan
surfaces or on the geometric center of any door openings (for those
units with refrigerated compartments below the pan area).
As described, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate by
reference ASTM F2143-16 rather than NSF 7-2019 as the basis for testing
buffet tables and preparation tables. 87 FR 39164, 39182. The ASTM
F2143-16 ambient measurement locations are generally consistent with
those in the current DOE test procedure and the provisions in ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata, but ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata includes additional
specificity regarding ambient measurement locations. To ensure
appropriate measurement locations, DOE proposed in the NOPR to
reference ASHRAE 72-2018R rather than ASTM F2143-16 for ambient
condition measurement locations. 87 FR 39164, 39183. To provide
additional specifications for thermocouple placement to accommodate
different buffet table and preparation table configurations, DOE
proposed to add an instruction that the ``highest point'' of the buffet
table or preparation table is determined as the highest point of the
open-top refrigerated area of the buffet table or preparation table,
without including the height of any lids or covers. Id. DOE also
proposed to specify that the geometric center of the buffet table or
preparation table is: for buffet tables or preparation tables without
refrigerated compartments, the geometric center of the top surface of
the open-top refrigerated area; and for buffet tables or preparation
tables with refrigerated compartments, the geometric center of the door
opening area for the refrigerated compartment. Id. DOE proposed this
specification because the geometric center of the unit is used to
measure ambient temperature gradient. Id. For units with refrigerated
compartments, this instruction referencing the center of the door
opening area would ensure that the air entering the compartment during
door openings is within the allowable temperature range.
Regarding electrical supply requirements and measurements, appendix
A to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata provides greater specificity for
testing as compared to ASTM F2143-16. To improve test repeatability and
reproducibility, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to reference the
electric supply and measurement requirements specified in appendix A to
ASHRAE 72-2018R for testing buffet tables and preparation tables. 87 FR
39164, 39183.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE similarly proposed to adopt through
reference certain provisions in ASHRAE 72-2018R rather than ASTM F2143-
16 for instrumentation requirements for consistency with other CRE
testing and with the proposed test conditions (e.g., wet-bulb
temperature as specified in ASHRAE 72-2018R rather than relative
humidity as specified in ASTM F2143-16). Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal for
testing buffet tables and preparation tables with test conditions
(i.e., test chamber conditions, measurement location, and electric
supply conditions) consistent with ASHRAE 72-2018R, with additional
detail specific to buffet tables and preparation tables. Id.
AHRI commented that it supports DOE's inclusion of the ASHRAE 72-
2022 ambient testing conditions with the qualification that DOE not
combine test standards, which would be unnecessary and inadvisable.
AHRI recommended regulation through a singular standard using a test
procedure developed through industry consensus and one that had been
referred to an appropriate standards committee. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 6)
AHRI noted that ASHRAE 72-2022 does not address areas with two
different cooling spaces. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 6)
Continental stated a belief that 86 [deg]F ambient better reflected
the application temperature for food preparation tables used in
commercial kitchens, which are often in proximity of cooking equipment
and that 75 [deg]F conditions reflect an applicable ambient temperature
for buffet tables used in restaurant front-of-house and supermarket
applications. (Continental, No. 29, p. 5) Continental reiterated that
DOE should not attempt to merge different aspects of existing
[[Page 66177]]
test methods into a new amalgamated test procedure within a rulemaking,
and that DOE should delay adoption of a test procedure for refrigerated
buffet and preparation tables, instead working with stakeholders to
develop an appropriate standard procedure. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposal to use ASHRAE 72 to
establish the conditions in which buffet and preparations tables should
be tested, as this standard already applies to existing CRE.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 4) Hillphoenix recommended referencing ASHRAE
72-202x, which would align with the incorporation of other standards
that are referenced but not yet released. Id. Hillphoenix recommended
against specifying alternate definitions for portions not covered by an
existing industry standard and advised DOE to allow the industry to
develop procedures through consensus. Id.
Hussmann supported the use of ASHRAE 72 for ambient conditions,
which more accurately resemble conditions in normal use, and which
would reduce test burden for testing a new equipment category, as
industry test chambers and conditions were not set for testing to
different standards. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 4) Hussmann recommended that
DOE avoid combining sections from different standards to create a test
procedure, because doing so would provide results not yet tested and
proven by the industry. Id. Hussmann added that combining test
standards would cause confusion and disruption to the industry as the
different standards went through revisions and stated support for
creating a universal standard for buffet/prep tables. Id.
Hoshizaki agreed with the proposal to use test procedures from ASTM
F-2143-2016, but disagreed with the proposal to have additional
requirements from other standards. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2) Hoshizaki
commented that if DOE wants to use a standard only in part, DOE should
request to have a single standard updated with proposed changes and
wait for the standard process to complete before publishing a test
procedure, which would give manufacturers a chance to see the final
standard and prepare for testing prior to the implementation of new
regulations. Id.
True recommended the use of NSF ANSI 7-2021, with the following
test conditions: (1) ambient temperature of 86 2 [deg]F (30
1 [deg]C); (2) no vertical temperature gradient exceeding
1.5 [deg]F/ft (2.5 [deg]C/m); (3) maximum relative humidity of 50
percent; and (4) maximum air current velocity of 50 ft/min (0.25 m/s)
across the surfaces of the test pans. (True, No. 28, p. 6)
DOE recognizes that CRE across all categories, including buffet
tables or preparation tables, can be used in a range of installations,
(e.g., in commercial kitchens or in front-of-house installations).
Other CRE currently installed in these locations are tested per the
ASHRAE 72 conditions.
DOE understands that ASTM F2143-16 is currently under revision and
may harmonize test conditions with ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. Buffet
tables or preparation tables have the same energy use metric, kWh/day,
as other CRE equipment. Test conditions consistent with ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata will allow for better comparisons between hybrid buffet
tables or preparation tables and other buffet tables or preparation
tables.
As stated earlier in this section, the purpose of NSF 7 is to
determine refrigerating performance for food safety requirements. While
the elevated ambient temperature may be appropriate to ensure food
safety, DOE has determined that the existing test condition based on
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata provides the most appropriate test condition
for the purpose of energy testing.
For these reasons and consistent with the discussion in section
III.C.1.b of the June 2022 NOPR, DOE has determined that the ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata test conditions are representative for buffet tables
or preparation tables. DOE is establishing these conditions in appendix
C by referencing ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata.
Test Setup
Section 9.1 of ASTM F2143-16 specifies installation of the buffet
table or preparation table for testing according to the manufacturer's
instructions, with 6 in. of rear clearance, at least 12 in. of
clearance to any side wall or partition, and at least 3 feet of
clearance from the front of the unit. Section 5.2 of ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata specifies that the test unit be installed next to a wall or
vertical partition in the direction of (a) the exhaust, (b) the intake,
or (c) both the exhaust and the intake at the minimum clearance, 0.5 in., as specified in the installation instructions; if the
installation instructions do not provide a minimum clearance, the
vertical partition or wall shall be located 4 0.5 in. from
the sides or rear of the cabinet and extend at least 12 in. beyond each
side of the cabinet from the floor to at least 12 in. above the top of
the cabinet.
DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the installation
instructions in ASHRAE 72-2018R are more representative of actual use,
as they require testing according to the minimum manufacturer-specified
clearance in the direction of air exhaust or intake rather than a
constant 6 in. 87 FR 39164, 39183. DOE expects that CRE are typically
installed with minimum installation clearances due to the space-
constrained locations in which they operate (e.g., commercial kitchens
or food service areas). DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to reference
the installation requirements in section 5.2 of ASHRAE 72-2018R for
buffet table and preparation table testing to represent typical use and
to ensure consistency with appendix B test requirements. 87 FR 39164,
39183.
Sections 5.1 and 5.3 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata also provide
additional instructions regarding test unit installation and setup that
are not addressed in ASTM F2143-16. Specifically, section 5.1 provides
instructions regarding test unit installation within the test facility
and section 5.3 specifies test requirements for components and
accessories. While these provisions were established for conventional
CRE, DOE initially determined in the June 2022 NOPR that they are also
applicable to buffet table and preparation table installation and use
due to both categories having similar installation locations and
similar accessories available for use. 87 FR 39164, 39183. DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR to also reference these sections in ASHRAE 72-
2018R for buffet table and preparation table testing to ensure
consistent testing that is representative of actual use. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal for
testing buffet tables and preparation tables with test setup
instructions consistent with ASHRAE 72-2018R rather than ASTM F2143-16.
Id.
Hillphoenix commented that it agrees with the proposal to use
ASHRAE 72 for testing setup requirements for buffet and preparations
tables as this standard already applies to existing CRE and allows
testing that is more representative of the end use installations.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 4) Hillphoenix recommended referencing ASHRAE
72-202X, which would align with the incorporation of other standards
that are being referenced but that are not yet released. Id.
Hussmann stated its support for the ASTM F2143-16 test set-up
instructions as they more closely resembled typical use. (Hussmann, No.
32, p. 4) Hussmann also cautioned DOE against combining sections from
different standards to create a test procedure, commenting that
[[Page 66178]]
combining different standards would provide unsupported results not yet
tested and proven by the industry. Id. Hussmann added that combining
test standards would cause confusion and disruption to the industry as
the different standards were revised. Id.
AHRI stated support for test setup conditions consistent with ASTM
F2143-16, but with the qualification that test standards not be
combined, which would be unnecessary and inadvisable. (AHRI, No. 38, p.
6) AHRI recommended that DOE should regulate this issue under a
singular standard and advised that small business retailers especially
could be negatively impacted by the proposed leapfrogging of standards,
especially for buffet tables, where full analysis of testing had not
been completed. Id. AHRI commented that ASTM F2143-16 was under review
and might be updated within the next one to two years, making it
prudent for DOE to wait to further regulate. Id.
Hoshizaki repeated their previous comment, commenting in agreement
with the proposal to use test procedures from ASTM F-2143-2016, but in
disagreement with the proposal to have additional requirements from
other standards. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 2) They commented that if DOE
wants to use a standard only in part, they should request to have a
single standard updated with proposed changes and wait for the standard
process to complete before publishing a test procedure. Id. Hoshizaki
stated that this will give manufacturers a chance to see the final
standard and prepare for testing prior to the implementation of new
regulations. Id.
Continental commented that the ASHRAE 72 committee has discussed
requirements for testing buffet and preparation tables, concluded that
ASHRAE 72 is not appropriate for these product types, and determined
that a new standard procedure would be needed, but that combining
existing test standards is unnecessary, inadvisable, and likely to
result in excessive testing burden and confusion for stakeholders.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 5) Continental commented that DOE should not
attempt to merge different aspects of ASHRAE and ASTM standards into a
test procedure for refrigerated buffet and preparation tables and
instead should work with stakeholders to develop and thoroughly assess
a single comprehensive standard procedure. Id.
As discussed in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE recognizes that the ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata provisions apply to conventional CRE, but has
determined that the installation instructions specified in ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata provide for more representative installation
instructions when testing buffet tables and preparation tables as
compared to those specified in ASTM F2143-16. Specifically, DOE
maintains that this equipment is typically installed in space-
constrained locations, and therefore the manufacturer specified minimum
clearances are most representative of actual use. Additionally, ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata provides additional instructions regarding test
unit installation within the test facility and for components and
accessories. These provisions are necessary to ensure consistent
testing.
Regarding combining references to multiple industry test standards
within the test procedure in appendix C, as discussed in sections III.B
and III.C.1.b of this document, DOE references specific sections of the
applicable industry standards for testing in appendix C rather than
incorporating the industry standards in full. This approach makes it
easier to determine where requirements are harmonized across industry
standards.
For these reasons, DOE is maintaining references to ASTM F2143-16
as appropriate for test conduct, but DOE is additionally specifying
instructions based on ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata for certain
installation provisions, as appropriate, in appendix C.
Test Load
ASTM F2143-16 specifies that temperature measurements for
preparation tables or buffet tables be taken from standardized pans
filled with distilled water. ASTM F2143-16 also specifies measuring the
temperature in any chilled compartments for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables using three thermocouples in an empty, unloaded
compartment. DOE's current test procedure for CRE requires that
integrated average temperature measurements be taken from test
simulators consisting of a plastic container filled with a sponge
saturated with a 2-percent mixture of propylene glycol and distilled
water. See ASHRAE 72-2005, section 6.2.1. Additionally, the DOE test
procedure requires 70 to 90 percent of the compartment net usable
volume to be loaded with filler material and test simulators for
testing (60 to 80 percent as proposed in this final rule by referencing
section 5.4.8 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata). See ASHRAE 72-2005,
section 6.2.5. Buffet tables and preparation tables may not typically
be loaded to 70 percent of their net usable volume due to their use for
service rather than long-term storage, but testing with the
refrigerated compartment entirely empty also may not be representative
of average use.
DOE initially determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the distilled
water pan loading as specified in ASTM F2143-16 provides a
representative test load for the open-top refrigerated areas of buffet
tables and preparation tables, while limiting test burden, and is
consistent with the filler material specified in both ASHRAE 72-2005
and ASHRAE 72-2018R (i.e., filler material that consists of water, a
50/50 mixture (2 percent) of distilled water and propylene
glycol, or wood blocks with an overall density not less than 480 kg/
m\3\ (30 lb/ft\3\). 87 FR 39164, 39184. Typical food loads are composed
mostly of water, such that water is a representative test medium.
Additionally, distilled water does not require any additional
preparation by the test laboratory, limiting test burden and ensuring a
consistent test medium across different test facilities.
DOE acknowledges that using water would not accommodate testing at
conditions at and below 32 [deg]F. However, ASTM F2143-16 specifies pan
temperature to be within 33 [deg]F and 41 [deg]F for a valid test. As
discussed later in this section, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
that the integrated average pan temperature be 38 [deg]F 2
[deg]F for buffet table and preparation table testing. 87 FR 39164,
39184. At these temperatures, the distilled water would be liquid and
would not result in the testing issues associated with freezing.
Additionally, DOE observed during investigative testing that individual
pans filled with distilled water did not reach temperatures lower than
33 [deg]F when tested with an integrated average pan temperature of 38
[deg]F 2 [deg]F.
In addition to proposing the water test load, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that pans for testing be loaded to within 0.5 in. of the
top of the pan. 87 FR 39164, 39184. For pans that are not configured in
a horizontal orientation, DOE proposed that only the lowest side of the
pan be loaded to within 0.5 in. of the top of the pan. Id. ASTM F2143-
16 specifies a pan loading procedure based on the weight of water
needed to load pans to 0.5 in. of the top of the pan. DOE expects that
a loading method based on marking pans or measuring distance from the
water to the top of the pan would limit test burden as compared to the
weight-based method in ASTM F2143-16 and that both the loads and
loading methods would be substantively the same.
ASTM F2143-16 specifies the pans for holding water to be standard
4-in. deep \1/6\-size metal steam table pans with a weight of 0.70
0.07 lb. ASTM F2143-16 allows for manufacturer-
[[Page 66179]]
specified pans if the unit is designed specifically for such pans. DOE
notes that manufacturers typically specify pan dimensions or provide
pans for their units, but some manufacturers do not provide a pan depth
or may specify a range of possible pan depths. DOE also notes that pan
materials can vary and are not always specified by the manufacturer.
Based on a review of buffet tables and preparation tables available
on the market, manufacturers typically allow for a range of pan
configurations in the open-top refrigerated area. These configurations
can nearly always accommodate the \1/6\-size steam table pans
referenced in ASTM F2143-16. To ensure consistent testing for units
that offer multiple pan configurations, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to reference the pan instructions in ASTM F2143-16. 87 FR 39164,
39184. If a buffet table or preparation table cannot be loaded with the
specified standard pans, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to test
with pans that are consistent with the manufacturer installation
instructions and with dimensions as close to the standard pans as is
available, consistent with the ASTM F2143-16 loading instructions. Id.
Under the current test procedure, a thermal separation would be
required between the buffet table or preparation table and a
refrigerated compartment for that compartment to be subject to the
testing requirements, which include test simulators and loading
requirements. Buffet tables and preparation tables may include
refrigerated compartments that are not thermally separated from the
open-top refrigerated area, and in the NOPR, DOE considered whether
different loads (or no load) would be appropriate for testing such
compartments. 87 FR 39164, 39185.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that any refrigerated
compartment of a buffet table or preparation table (i.e., any
refrigerated compartment that is not thermally separated from the open-
top refrigerated area) be tested with no load. Id. DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to reference the ASTM F2143-16 requirements, which
specify placing three thermocouples in specific locations within the
empty refrigerated compartment. Id. DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that this approach would limit test burden by not
requiring additional test simulator preparation or loading of filler
materials. Id. Additionally, DOE expects that the refrigerated
compartments of buffet tables and preparation tables are typically used
for short-term storage of items used during food service and food
preparation (i.e., with additional pans of prepared food or ingredients
for food preparation) rather than long-term storage, and that,
therefore, an unloaded cabinet would be more representative of typical
usage. This is also consistent with the DOE test procedures for
consumer refrigeration products, which measure internal compartment
temperatures with no load. See 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A
and appendix B.
ASTM F2143-16 does not specify whether the internal compartment
thermocouples are weighted or unweighted. For consistency with the NSF
7-2019 approach, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the
thermocouples be weighted--i.e., in thermal contact with the center of
a 1.6-oz (45-g) cylindrical brass slug with a diameter and height of
0.75 in. 87 FR 39164, 39185. The brass slugs shall be placed at least
0.5 in from any heat-conducting surface. Id. While ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata requires internal compartment temperatures to be measured using
test simulators, ambient temperature measurements are similarly made by
thermocouples in contact with cylindrical brass slugs with the same
specifications.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed test
loads and temperature measurement locations for buffet tables and
preparation tables--i.e., distilled water in pans for the open-top
refrigerated area and no load in any refrigerated compartment--
consistent with the approach in ASTM F2143-16. 87 FR 39164, 39185.
Hoshizaki commented that it agrees with the proposal to use test
procedures from ASTM F2143-2016. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 3) Hoshizaki
noted that if DOE were to seek changes in the future, those changes
should go through the ASTM standards committee. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposal to load pans with
distilled water, assuming there is no requirement to move the pans
(i.e., physically relocating, opening of drawer with pans, etc.), which
would cause spillage and splashing. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 4)
Hillphoenix also agreed with the temperature measurement location in
the center of the pan and recommended a sponge or similar material be
used to stabilize the measuring device and maintain consistent
placement of the sensor. Id. Hillphoenix recommended that DOE approach
industry and request updated testing standards that better reflect
actual product intent, which would drive consistency within the
industry and be less burdensome on manufacturers. Id.
AHRI commented that it urged DOE to defer requirements for this
issue in the test procedure until the ASTM F2143-16 standard has been
updated in an estimated 1 to 2 years. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 7) AHRI stated
a number of concerns, including the fact that proposed changes under
consideration for test mediums or loading would be subjected to a test
revision process. Id. AHRI pointed out its concerns with the proposed
use of distilled water as a medium because it may have limitations in
certain applications, even though it is much less burdensome than
alternative mediums, such as glycol, used for testing. Id. AHRI noted
that manufacturers are concerned that test results using distilled
water sent to third-party testing labs may be inconsistent and
difficult to replicate, and manufacturers need further testing to
determine if distilled water is the decisively preferred testing
medium, or if a lack of testing repeatability makes distilled water a
less-preferred testing medium. Id. AHRI also repeated its concern that
ENERGY STAR is not yet ready to employ ASTM F2143-16 and that DOE's
adoption may be premature. Id.
Hussmann commented that distilled water was less of a burden for
testing; however, water may have test limitations due to freezing/slush
that could affect test measurements. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 5) Hussmann
recommended that DOE refer this issue to a standards committee to
determine how water affected the temperature measurements and to
determine the appropriate test medium. Id.
Continental commented that it had not performed extensive equipment
testing using ASTM F2143-16 to provide comprehensive feedback on any
proposed test conditions, and stated support for use of a no-load test
for buffet tables or preparation tables that do not have a refrigerated
storage compartment that is thermally separated from the open-top pan
area. (Continental, No. 29, p. 6) Continental advised that empty pans
could be used in the top opening to minimize additional burden, but
potential inconsistencies in methods and results would need to be
evaluated. Id. Continental commented that filling pans in the top with
distilled water for testing was significantly less burdensome than
alternative product simulator compounds, but that this approach is
problematic because distilled water can be subject to partial freezing
under certain application conditions, resulting in inconsistent test
results. Id. Continental added that a mixture of propylene glycol and
distilled water
[[Page 66180]]
would eliminate potential freezing concerns, but also add cost and
potentially result in inconsistencies. Id. Continental alluded to
another type of testing, a special test media, such as a solution of
water, sodium chloride, and methocel as prescribed for ANSI/NSF 7-2019
sanitation testing, which would be extremely burdensome for separate
energy testing due to relatively expensive ingredients, significant
preparation time, and limited shelf life before the solution must be
discarded. Id. Continental urged DOE to postpone adoption of a test
procedure for refrigerated buffet and preparation tables and address
these issues with relevant standards committees, such as ASTM, ASHRAE,
and AHRI, as well as stakeholders. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting, True commented that the problem
with using distilled water in a cabinet, especially a food preparation
table, is the threat of dual freeze; in other words, the distilled
water dropping below 32 [deg]F. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 4, p.
56) True stated that when using water, measurements of the actual
temperature of the product cannot be taken because as the water changes
state, it will not move from 32 [deg]F. Id. True added that the design
of food preparation tables and buffet tables results in cold air coming
out, or a cold rail either making direct contact or blowing directly on
pans. Id. True stated that because of this, pans will freeze even
though the average may be 38 [deg]F. Id. Therefore, True stated that
using water only as a test media is irresponsible because it is not
producing adequate temperatures. Id. True suggested instead filling a
pan with 50/50 water and glycol. Id.
In response to the Hillphoenix comment, DOE is not requiring pans
to be moved during testing (as discussed in a later sub-section of
III.C.1.b in this document), therefore limiting any spillage or
splashing concerns. DOE has not identified an issue with maintaining
thermocouple placement in the center of the pan during its internal
testing of buffet tables and preparation tables, and therefore is not
requiring the use of a sponge or similar material to stabilize the
thermocouple during testing.
In response to AHRI's comment, DOE has determined that distilled
water is a repeatable and reproducible test medium that limits test
burden. Distilled water provides a consistent, representative basis for
testing, limits burden by avoiding the need for test facilities to
create solutions or mixtures (e.g., propylene glycol and water
solutions, methocel, or sawdust mixtures), and is cost effective. In
response to Continental's suggestion that empty pans could be used for
testing, DOE has determined that a thermal load in the pans is most
representative of actual use and is necessary to allow for temperature
measurements of the pan load.
DOE recognizes that water in pans of buffet tables or preparation
tables could freeze under certain conditions but that the target pan
temperatures are above water's freezing point. Based on DOE's
investigative testing, DOE does not expect freezing of water in the
pans during the test. If a buffet table or preparation table has a
specific design characteristic that results in water freezing in a pan
during the DOE test and that prohibits the conduct of the test,
manufacturers can petition for a waiver under the provisions in 10 CFR
431.401.
DOE has determined that distilled water represents a consistent
test load that represents the thermal load in pans during buffet table
or preparation table operation. Therefore, DOE is adopting distilled
water as the test medium for pans in buffet tables and preparation
tables, and is requiring that any refrigerated compartments in buffet
tables and preparation tables be tested with no load using weighted
thermocouples, consistent with the June 2022 NOPR approach.
Test Conduct--Defrosts
ASTM F2143-16 does not provide specific instructions for addressing
defrost cycles when testing buffet tables and preparation tables, other
than indicating in the test report whether a defrost cycle occurred.
Section 7.3 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata directs that the test period
begins with a defrost cycle. This section also requires that for
refrigerators with manual defrost or off-cycle defrost, the test is
started at the beginning of a refrigeration system off cycle (if the
off-cycle defrost is not identifiable); or, if the refrigeration system
never cycles off, the test is started at any point during refrigeration
system operation.
Defrost cycles can increase the energy consumption of refrigeration
equipment as compared to stable operation; however, DOE has observed
that most buffet tables and preparation tables often incorporate off-
cycle defrosts, which melt frost accumulation by running the evaporator
fan during a compressor off cycle. This method of defrost does not
actively introduce heat to melt the accumulated frost and may occur
during the compressor's normal cycling operation. With this defrost
approach, there may not be an identifiable defrost occurrence in the
measured test data.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE determined that to the extent buffet
tables or preparation tables incorporate automatic electric or hot gas
defrosts (i.e., heating the evaporator to melt frost accumulation), or
any automatic extended off-cycle defrost (i.e., off-cycle defrost with
a duration longer than a compressor off cycle), the energy consumption
of these defrosts should be captured in the test period to measure
energy use representative of typical use. 87 FR 39164, 39186. DOE
observed during investigative testing that automatic extended off-cycle
defrost is used in both buffet tables and preparation tables. To
incorporate this energy use and ensure consistent testing of buffet
tables and preparation tables, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
require that test periods for buffet tables and preparation tables
account for any defrosts consistent with the requirements in ASHRAE 72-
2018R. 87 FR 39164, 39186. This would require capturing a defrost at
the start of the test period or starting the test period at the
beginning of a refrigeration off cycle if there is no identifiable
defrost (or at any point during refrigeration system operation if the
refrigeration system never cycles off).
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposal to
account for defrosts when testing buffet tables and preparation tables,
consistent with the approach in ASHRAE 72-2018R. 87 FR 39164, 39186.
AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposal to account for
defrosts for buffet tables and preparation tables in a test period
greater than 4 hours, although AHRI cautioned DOE against combining
test standards as it is unnecessary and inadvisable and restated the
call for DOE to regulate this issue under a singular standard. (AHRI,
No. 38, p. 7)
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposal to use ASHRAE 72 for
defrost requirements pertaining to buffet and preparations tables as
this standard already applies to existing CRE. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p.
4) Hillphoenix recommended referencing ASHRAE 72-202x, which would
align with the incorporation of other standards that are being
referenced but that are not yet released. Id. Hillphoenix recommended
this only be applied to units consisting of open tops with pans that
incorporate other refrigerated zones. Hillphoenix commented that in
reference to the test period duration, a defrost cycle may not be
required due to a shortened active refrigeration time. Id.
[[Page 66181]]
Continental commented it had not sufficiently tested equipment
using the proposed methods to provide an adequate response regarding
defrost periods. (Continental, No. 29, p. 6) Continental commented that
DOE's recognition of this issue is another indication as to why
development of a new test procedure should not be attempted within a
rulemaking, and why DOE should delay publication of a test procedure
for refrigerated buffet and preparation tables, instead working with
stakeholders to develop an appropriate standard procedure. Id.
Hussmann cautioned DOE on using a hybrid approach to creating a
test procedure, but stated support for accounting for defrosts in a
test period greater than 4 hours. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 5)
Hoshizaki commented that it does not agree with proposing the use
of one standard but then incorporating parts of other standards without
going through the standard review process. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 3)
Hoshizaki noted that if DOE feels that starting the test with defrost
is the best way to capture energy values, then DOE should make requests
to amend ASTM F-2143 for those changes. Id.
In response to the comments regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments discussed in sections III.B and
III.C.1.b of this document.
Because defrost occurrences can impact energy use, DOE is requiring
that the test period begin at the start of a defrost occurrence, or at
the beginning of a refrigeration off-cycle if there is no identifiable
defrost (or at any point during refrigeration system operation if the
refrigeration system never cycles off). This approach is consistent
with the test period requirements for other CRE and would ensure
repeatable and reproducible testing of buffet tables and preparation
tables that is representative of actual use.
Test Conduct--Moving Pans
Section 10.5.6 of ASTM F2143-16 specifies that if it is possible to
control cooling to the display area independently of the refrigerated
cabinet, the cooling to the display area is turned off and all pans are
to be moved from the display area to the refrigerated cabinet
underneath after the active period. The ability to control cooling in
both the display area and the refrigerated cabinet independently of
each other suggests that this language applies to units with thermally
separated compartments and pan areas.
DOE currently provides test procedures for any refrigerated
compartments that are combined with buffet tables and preparation
tables and that are thermally separate from the open-top refrigerated
area. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE did not propose to amend the test
requirements for such thermally separated refrigerated compartments. 87
FR 39164, 39186.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference ASTM F2143-16
rather than NSF 7-2019 as the basis for buffet table and preparation
table testing. Id. Section 10.5.6 of ASTM F2143-16 specifies moving
pans from the display area to the refrigerated cabinet underneath after
the active period if it is possible to control cooling to the display
area independently of the refrigerated cabinet. As stated, the separate
cooling control suggests thermal separation between the open-top area
and the refrigerated cabinet. Because DOE did not propose changes to
the current test requirements for any thermally separated refrigerated
cabinets, DOE proposed that all buffet tables and preparation tables be
tested with the pans in the display area for the entire test, including
the ``standby period'' specified in section 10.5.6 of ASTM F2143-16. 87
FR 39164, 39186.
DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR that this proposed approach
would limit test burden and variability by avoiding moving pans during
the test period, which could introduce varying heat loads depending on
how the movement is conducted. Id. Additionally, DOE expects that the
proposed test procedure is representative of typical buffet table and
preparation table use. As previously discussed, DOE expects that buffet
tables and preparation tables are used for short-term storage during
food service and food preparation. Therefore, it is unlikely that these
units would be used for storage in the refrigerated compartment without
any pans loaded in the open-top pan area.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to
require loading pans in the open-top refrigerated area and not moving
them to a refrigerated compartment, if applicable, during testing. 87
FR 39164, 39186-39187.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposal to have open-top
pans remain in place once they are loaded and testing begins, which
would be consistent with the ASHRAE 72 approach that applies to
existing CRE. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 5) Hillphoenix recommended
referencing ASHRAE 72-202x, which would align with the incorporation of
other standards that are being referenced but that are not yet
released. Id. Hillphoenix recommended DOE approach industry and request
updated testing standards that better reflect actual product intent, an
approach intended to drive consistency within the industry while
proving less burdensome on manufacturers. Id.
Hoshizaki commented agreeing that keeping the pans in and closing
the lid would be simpler for the test. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 3)
Hoshizaki commented that manufacturers that have a separated rail and
compartment temperature zones would have to change their test process.
Id. Hoshizaki noted that if DOE wants to change this for all
manufacturers regardless of design constraints of units, then this
process should be updated in the ASTM F2143 standards committee. Id.
Continental commented that equipment with the ability to
independently turn off the refrigeration system for the pan display
area should be classified separately from other refrigerated buffet and
prep tables. (Continental, No. 29, p. 6)
Continental added that if the manufacturer's instructions require
relocating pans to the storage area at night, moving the pans would
more accurately reflect the actual energy consumption of the equipment
usage, although Continental had not tested equipment in this manner to
thoroughly judge the suitability of moving pans. (Continental, No. 29,
p. 6) Continental found making physical changes to equipment setup,
such as relocating pans during a test, to be problematic because it
could lead to significant differences in results by, for example,
skewing measurements by the order in which pans were removed or
arranged in the storage compartment, or how long doors or drawers were
opened for the relocation of pans, etc. Id. Continental commented that
this issue is another reason DOE must delay adoption of a test
procedure for refrigerated buffet and preparation tables, and instead
work with the standards committees and stakeholders to develop a
comprehensive industry standard. Id.
AHRI recommended that any changes to the ASTM F2143-16 standard
should be addressed by the appropriate standards committee. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 7) AHRI advised DOE that manufacturers have not tested equipment
to the specifications proposed, and therefore AHRI does not have the
knowledge to advise DOE regarding the appropriateness of this change.
Id. AHRI commented that it supported DOE's proposal and recommended
that DOE should not support moving pans during the test procedure, as
this might affect test outcomes. Id. AHRI repeated that DOE
[[Page 66182]]
should not combine test standards and recommended that DOE regulate
this issue under a singular standard.
Hussmann again cautioned DOE against combining sections from
different standards to create a test procedure and that doing so would
result in unsupported results not yet tested and proven by industry.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 5) Hussmann commented that the method mentioned
provides for testing variability and additional burden of testing on
the manufacturer and was not recommended. Id. Hussmann instead
recommended that the matter be taken before the proper standards
committee for validation and vetting before being adopted. Id.
In response to the comments regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments discussed in sections III.B and
III.C.1.b of this document.
DOE agrees with the comments indicating that moving pans in the
middle of a test period would increase test burden and potentially
increase variability. Therefore, DOE is requiring that pans stay in
place for the duration of the test period, consistent with the approach
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
DOE recognizes that typical buffet table and preparation table use
may include movement of food pans from the top pan area or maintaining
pans in that location depending on end use. However, the function of
this equipment is to provide cooling to food loads in the top pan
areas. DOE has determined that maintaining pans in the top open storage
area allows for representative measures of energy consumption while
limiting test burden.
Test Conduct--Operating Periods and Door/Lid Openings
As described, buffet tables and preparation tables temporarily
store and display perishable items during food preparation or service.
Because buffet tables and preparation tables are used only during food
preparation or service, these equipment types may not be used for the
same 24-hour duration used to characterize performance for other
categories of CRE. Sections 10.5.5 and 10.5.6 of ASTM F2143-16 specify
a 24-hour test, with an active period of 8 hours and a standby period
of 16 hours. The active period specified in section 10.5.5 contains
instructions for a cover, if equipped (open for 2 hours, then closed
for 4 hours, then open for 2 hours), and a door opening sequence for
any refrigerated compartments (every 30 minutes, each cabinet door or
drawer, or both, shall be fully opened sequentially, one at a time, for
6 consecutive seconds; for units with pass-thru doors, only the doors
on one side of the unit are opened).
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that buffet tables
and preparation tables are typically used for food service and food
preparation rather than longer-term food storage. 87 FR 39164, 39187.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to test this equipment with pans
loaded into the open-top display areas for the duration of the test,
which DOE has tentatively determined represents typical use during food
service and food preparation. Id.
DOE recognizes that the duration of use per day varies based on the
application and installation location for this equipment. In the June
2022 NOPR, DOE identified that buffet tables and preparation tables can
be used for up to 24 hours per day. DOE initially determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that a 24-hour test period as specified in ASTM F2143-16
incorporates the likely aspects of buffet table and preparation table
operation--i.e., an active door-opening period and a period of stable
operation. 87 FR 39164, 39187. While the actual durations of use may
vary based on end-use application, the measured energy use in kWh/day
is representative of the energy use of a unit operated in 24 hours and
allows for consistent energy use comparisons among models. Id. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to require a 24-hour test period for
buffet tables and preparation tables as specified in ASTM F2143-16. Id.
The proposed 24-hour test period is consistent with the industry test
procedure, the test procedure for other CRE; the 24-hour test period
also limits test burden and variability by allowing for stable
operation over a longer period and incorporates the door openings while
allowing the stable operation expected during typical usage. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed 24-
hour test period, which is consistent with the approach in ASTM F2143-
16. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that it continues to agree with DOE's proposal
to incorporate ASTM F2143-2016, but with revisions. (Hoshizaki, No. 30,
p. 3) Hoshizaki stated that any revisions DOE feels necessary to make
should be proposed to the ASTM F2143-2016 standards committee. Id.
Continental commented it had not thoroughly tested equipment using
ASTM F2143-16 to judge the applicability of the 24-hour test period,
but generally believed a 24-hour test to be appropriate. (Continental,
No. 29, p. 6) Continental stated DOE should address any concerns raised
regarding this test method with the appropriate standards committee and
delay adoption of a test procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables. Id.
Hillphoenix stated partial agreement with the ASTM 24-hour test
period and recommended it only apply to buffet and prep units that
share a thermostat with another refrigerated portion (i.e., a
refrigerated storage box), as these units could be used to maintain
product temperatures while the pan section is not in use. (Hillphoenix,
No. 35, p. 5) Hillphoenix commented that buffet and preparation units
that incorporate only an open top with pans typically operate between
8-12 hours, after which, product was removed and relocated to other
storage units. Id. Hillphoenix commented that because of this typical
use, the test period should be shortened. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE use this procedure within its intended 8-
to 12-hour window, rather than the proposed 24-hour test period,
because the equipment in question is generally used during store hours
only and a 24-hour test period would not be representative of actual
use. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 7) AHRI commented that the hours of uncovered
time create a strain on the case and product while not reflecting
typical use, and that the procedure is burdensome for those conducting
the testing. Id. AHRI asked DOE for clarification regarding this issue
as a 24-hour test period has been part of the test procedure and has
already been confirmed by manufacturers. Id.
Hussmann commented that a 24-hour use period was not typical use
for these types of CRE, which should therefore be tested in an 8- to
12-hour period that more closely resembled typical use. (Hussmann, No.
32, p. 5) Hussmann added that the hours of uncovered time created a
strain on the case and on the product and were not reflective of
typical use, and that this procedure was also burdensome for those
conducting the testing. Id. Hussmann recommended this issue be taken
before a standards committee to be tested and accepted by the industry
instead of combining sections from different standards. Id.
The CA IOUs commented that the current proposed test procedure for
buffet tables or preparation tables is not representative of average
use for this category because pizza and sandwich prep tables almost
always have lids, as this equipment is designed for 24-hour operation
while many refrigerated rail models are turned off at night and
precooled in the morning. (CA IOUs,
[[Page 66183]]
No. 36, p. 3) As a result, the CA IOUs recommended that refrigerated
rails with a user-accessible on/off switch be tested for a period of 8
hours excluding the precool time (from ambient to below 40 [deg]F),
since the 8-hour period would represent two meal periods typical of
most food-service establishments serving breakfast and lunch or lunch
and dinner. Id. The CA IOUs further recommended including precool
energy without pans in place in the daily energy use, in addition to
the energy used during the 8-hour test, to maintain pans in the
refrigerated rail at the target temperature, because refrigerated rails
tested for 8 hours typically do not go into defrost mode, as the
condensate is wiped down at the end of the day after pan removal and
placement into another refrigerator. Id. Finally, the CA IOUs
recommended testing refrigerated rails that do not have on/off switches
or controllers for a period of 24 hours as currently defined in the
ASTM F2143 Standard Test Method for Performance of Refrigerated Buffet
and Preparation Tables. Id.
True commented that buffet tables and food preparation tables are
not effective for around-the-clock food storage, and that the suggested
test period (i.e., 8 hours active and 16 inactive) does not represent
how these units are meant to be used and operated; both model types are
designed to be used during meal rush times (breakfast, lunch, dinner)
to store perishable, open food during 1-to-3-hour intervals and not
during a constant 8-hour period. (True, No. 28, p. 6) True stated that
measuring the energy consumption during the NSF/ANSI 7-2021 7.5.2 test
method for refrigerated buffet units and refrigerated food preparation
would be the most representative measurement of energy consumption, and
if a 24-hour number is required, simply multiplying the energy
consumption during the 4-hour test by 6 would suffice. Id.
DOE notes that ASTM F2143-16 currently includes a 24-hour test
period for all units--with an 8-hour active period, and 16-hour standby
period. DOE recognizes that duration of usage per day varies depending
on application and installation location. However, as noted by
commenters, this equipment can be used for 24 hours. A 24-hour test
allows for a representative measurement of energy use and allows for a
consistent comparison of energy use. Therefore, DOE is adopting a 24-
hour test period for buffet tables and preparation tables, consistent
with the approach in ASTM F2143-16. As discussed in the following
paragraphs, the 24-hour period includes active and standby periods,
consistent with ASTM F2143-16, to reflect usage during service and
storage periods.
As discussed, ASTM F2143-16 includes an 8-hour ``active period''
that includes instructions for any open-top display area covers (2
hours open, 4 hours closed, and 2 hours open) and any refrigerated
compartment doors and/or drawers (fully opened sequentially for 6
seconds every 30 minutes). DOE recognizes that the actual use of buffet
tables and preparation tables can vary depending on application. The
cover and door opening requirements in ASTM F2143-16 were developed by
an industry committee with the intent of evaluating energy performance.
While the door openings specified in ASTM F2143-16 are less frequent
than those required in ASHRAE 72-2018R, DOE expects that any
refrigerated compartments in buffet tables or preparation tables are
accessed less frequently than in other CRE because maintaining the
refrigerated temperature of food items held in the open-top pan area is
the primary function of buffet tables or preparation tables during
operation. Additionally, the 8-hour ``active period'' during which door
openings occur is consistent with the 8-hour period of door openings
required in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. Based on the foregoing, DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the cover and door
opening provisions of ASTM F2143-16 are appropriately representative.
87 FR 39164, 39188.
Accordingly, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate the
``active period'' requirements for cover and door and/or drawer
openings as specified in section 10.5.5 of ASTM F2143-16. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed door
and cover opening procedures, which are consistent with the approach
specified in ASTM F2143-16. DOE requested data and information on
representative usage of buffet tables and preparation tables, including
door and cover openings. Id.
Hoshizaki commented in agreement with DOE that the cover and door
opening provisions of ASTM F2143-16 are appropriately representative
for energy testing. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 4) Hoshizaki commented that
ASTM F2143-2016 should be either accepted in its entirety or changes
suggested should be made at the ASTM F2143-2016 standards committee
level and await approval before accepting said standard as a test
procedure. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposal to use the door and
cover opening procedures as referenced in ASTM F2143-16, as they are
more representative of end use than the door opening procedure
referenced in ASHRAE 72. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 5) Hillphoenix
commented that the doors on this type of equipment are normally
operated by store personnel and are not customer facing, which excludes
the intent of the opening procedures specified in ASHRAE 72. Id.
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE approach industry and request updated
testing standards that better reflect actual product intent, an
approach that would drive consistency within the industry and be less
burdensome on manufacturers. Id.
AHRI commented that the issue of proposed door and cover opening
procedures consistent with ASTM F2143-16 depend on DOE's ultimate
decision regarding use of ASHRAE 72-2018R. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8) AHRI
stated that ambient conditions must be selected in order to select the
door type in use for equipment and recommended that changes to this
standard be addressed by the appropriate standards committee for review
and approval, and that a test procedure should be developed prior to
regulating this equipment. Id.
Continental commented that it had not performed sufficient testing
to ASTM F2143-16 to form a conclusive position on the suitability of
utilizing the proposed door and cover opening procedures, but stated
concerns with the practicality, burden, and repeatability of the
simultaneous door and cover opening method specified in the ASTM test
method. (Continental, No. 29, p. 7) Continental stated that results may
be significantly skewed by ambient test conditions and the process
used, and DOE should delay adoption of a test procedure for
refrigerated buffet and preparation tables and address feedback
regarding ASTM F2143-16 with the appropriate standards committee. Id.
Hussmann commented that due to the uncertainty of DOE selecting
sections from both standards, it would be difficult to choose what
method would work for a majority of manufacturers. (Hussmann, No. 32,
p. 6) Hussmann commented that options determined from this test
procedure may include: ASHRAE 72 conditions with ASHRAE 72 door
openings; ASHRAE 72 conditions with the ASTM door opening procedure;
ASTM conditions with the ASTM door opening procedure; or ASTM
conditions with ASHRAE door openings. Id. Hussmann requested that DOE
select test conditions in order to determine the suitable door opening
procedure and cautioned against combining test standards for this
reason. Id. Hussmann added that overall
[[Page 66184]]
measurements and results would have varying effects based on openings,
ambient conditions, and test mediums used, and recommended that any
changes be brought to the appropriate standards committee for review
and approval prior to adoption. Id.
DOE agrees that the usage of buffet tables or preparation tables
likely varies between high usage and low usage periods over a 24-hour
period. The existing ASTM F2143-16 test procedure is representative of
field use because it accounts for high and low usage periods with the
active and standby periods. Therefore, DOE is adopting the active mode
provisions of the ASTM test procedure for pan covers and door openings
of any refrigerated compartments. This includes 4 hours total of
uncovered pan area (2 hours open, 4 hours closed, 2 hours open for the
8-hour active period) and 8 hours of door openings (occurring every 30
minutes).
DOE is not adopting door openings based on ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata as the doors are likely opened less frequently for this
equipment, consistent with the ASTM F2143-16 requirements.
DOE recognizes that the impact of uncovered pan operation and door
openings will vary depending on ambient conditions. As discussed, DOE
has determined that the ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata ambient conditions
are appropriate for testing this equipment. DOE expects that any
``strain'' on uncovered operation would be mitigated by the lower
ambient temperature of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata as compared to the
ambient temperature specified in ASTM F2143-16, as well as the use of
pan covers when applicable during a portion of the active period and
the duration of the standby period.
In response to the comments regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments discussed in sections III.B and
III.C.1.b of this document.
Test Conduct--Stabilization
Sections 10.3 and 10.4 of ASTM F2143-16 require that the unit be
operated with empty pans and open covers for at least 24 hours, that
the unit operate with empty pans for at least 2 hours, that water be
pre-cooled before being loaded into the pans, and, once the water has
been loaded into the pans, that the thermostat be calibrated until the
pan temperatures are never outside of 33 [deg]F to 41 [deg]F for any
15-minute period over a 4-hour measurement period. In contrast, the
current CRE test procedure, by reference to ASHRAE 72-2005, generally
provides that the unit be loaded with test simulators and filler
packages prior to pre-cooling, operated to establish steady-state
conditions over consecutive 24-hour periods or refrigeration cycles,
and, once steady-state conditions have been achieved, continue to
operate for at least 12 hours without any adjustment to the controls.
As discussed, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR generally to
reference ASTM F2143-16 rather than NSF 7-2019 for buffet table and
preparation table testing. 87 FR 39164, 39188. However, the
stabilization and thermostat calibration requirements in sections 10.3
and 10.4 of ASTM F2143-16 may require an iterative process of
thermostat adjustment and recalibration to achieve stability and then
to ensure that appropriate conditions are maintained during the test
period. ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies provisions for other CRE
that require stability to be confirmed over two test periods with
identical operation in order to avoid the need for an iterative
process. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to reference sections 7.1
through 7.5 (excluding sections 7.2.1, 7.2.2, 7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and
7.3.4, as those sections would not be applicable to self-contained
buffet tables or preparation tables because those sections are intended
for CRE with remote condensing units, CRE without doors, CRE with
different door opening sequences, and CRE with lighting occupancy
sensors and controls) of ASHRAE 72-2018R for determining stabilization
and specifying the testing sequence for testing buffet tables and
preparation tables. 87 FR 39164, 39188. The preparation period under
section 7.2 of ASHRAE 72-2018R would include loading the pans with
water and adjusting the necessary controls to maintain the specified
temperatures. Id. For the purposes of determining stability as
specified in section 7.5 of ASHRAE 72-2018R, the average temperatures
of measured pans would be used to compare Test A and Test B rather than
the temperatures of test simulators. Id. DOE tentatively determined in
the June 2022 NOPR that this approach would ensure stability over the
test period and limit test burden by avoiding an iterative approach to
determine stability and test conditions. Id. This approach would also
maintain consistency with the procedures used for testing other CRE.
Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
stabilization approach for buffet table and preparation table testing,
which would reference the approach specified in ASHRAE 72-2018R. Id.
AHRI commented that it supports DOE's proposed stabilization
approach while again recommending that DOE regulate this issue under a
single standard, cautioning DOE against combining test standards as
unnecessary and inadvisable. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8)
AHRI further noted that buffet tables have not yet been addressed
by ASHRAE Standard 72-2022. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8)
Hussmann stated its support for adopting the stabilization method
for self-contained CRE identified in section 7.4 in ASHRAE 72-2018R,
but cautioned that this method does not yet address buffet/prep CRE and
as a result, the proposed stabilization approach should be taken to the
appropriate standards committee prior to adoption. (Hussmann, No. 32,
p. 6)
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposal to use the ASHRAE 72
approach for stabilization of buffet table and preparation table
testing as ASHRAE 72 followed methods used for other CRE equipment.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 5) Hillphoenix commented that ASTM F2143-16
allowed many factors that could be burdensome when trying to stabilize
temperatures. Id. Hillphoenix recommended that DOE approach industry
and request updated testing standards that better reflect actual
product intent, an approach that would drive consistency within the
industry and be less burdensome on manufacturers. Id.
Hoshizaki commented requesting that if DOE is proposing to
reference ASTM F2143-2016 for buffet table and preparation table
testing but use the stabilization and thermostat calibration
requirements as specified in section 7.5 of ASHRAE 72-2022, then those
changes should be proposed to the ASTM F2143-2016 standards committee.
(Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 4) Hoshizaki noted than when DOE is content with
a proper test procedure, then DOE can propose use of the test procedure
at that time. Id.
Continental stated a belief that the stabilization period
prescribed in ASHRAE 72-2022 may have applicability for buffet or
preparation tables, but had not tested this equipment in the proposed
manner to inform a comprehensive opinion. (Continental, No. 29, p. 7)
Continental maintained that combining aspects of different test
standards was inadvisable and that DOE should delay adoption of a test
procedure for refrigerated buffet and preparation tables, and work with
the appropriate standards committees and other stakeholders to develop
an appropriate standard method that addresses this issue. Id.
[[Page 66185]]
In response to the comments regarding DOE referencing multiple test
standards, refer to the same comments discussed in sections III.B and
III.C.1.b of this document.
DOE maintains its determination from the June 2022 NOPR that the
ASTM F2143-16 approach is burdensome and requires an iterative approach
to determine stability, whereas the approach in ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata allows for consistent testing while limiting test burden.
Therefore, DOE is adopting the relevant sections of ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata to require that stability be confirmed over two identical test
periods.
DOE will continue to monitor industry committee work to update
relevant standards and will consider any updated industry standards
available during future test procedure rulemakings.
Test Conduct--Target Temperatures
ASTM F2143-16 instructs that if a buffet table or preparation table
is equipped with a refrigerated compartment, the compartment air
temperature is to be between 33 [deg]F and 41 [deg]F. Likewise, the
water temperature in each of the pans placed in the display area also
is to be between 33 [deg]F and 41 [deg]F. The DOE test procedure for
other CRE requires IATs of 38 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F for medium
temperature applications.
Through research, DOE found that buffet and preparation tables use
a variety of refrigeration methods for cooling the pans in the display
area and the refrigerated compartment. In some configurations, units
might not be able to maintain all pans and the refrigerated compartment
within the specified temperature range. For example, units with a
single refrigeration system and thermostat control for temperatures in
either the refrigerated compartment or in the pan area would control
for temperature in either the pan area or refrigerated compartment, and
both may not be within the target range. As a result, certain equipment
may maintain only the refrigerated compartment or the pan area, but not
both, within a specified temperature range during operation.
As discussed, ASTM F2143-16 and NSF 7-2019 both specify a pan and
compartment temperature range of 33 [deg]F to 41 [deg]F for testing.
The current DOE test procedure for CRE requires testing to an IAT
within 2 [deg]F of the specified target temperature. DOE expects that
this smaller allowable temperature range would limit test variability
as compared to the 8 [deg]F allowable range specified in ASTM F2143-16
and NSF 7-2019.
The ASTM F2143-16 and NSF 7-2019 temperature ranges apply to all
measured pan and compartment temperatures, whereas DOE's current
temperature specifications apply to the IAT--i.e., the average of all
test simulator temperature measurements over the test period. DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the temperature
specification based on an average temperature rather than individual
temperature measurements would limit test burden by limiting the need
for retests in the case of individual temperature measurements being
outside of the required range. 87 FR 39164, 39189. Additionally, DOE
determined that the average temperature approach would allow for
testing buffet tables and preparation tables with configurations not
capable of maintaining all temperature measurements within the required
range. Id. For example, if the refrigerated compartment provides
cooling to the open-top pan area, the refrigerated compartment
temperature measurements may be colder than the pan temperatures and
not necessarily within a specified range. Id. Additionally, certain
temperature measurement locations may be warmer or colder than others
depending on proximity to the evaporator or refrigerated areas,
resulting in ``hot'' or ``cold'' spots. Id. Testing to a specified
average temperature would consider the overall average measured
temperature and would allow for testing such configurations. Id.
Based on these initial determinations, DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to require testing buffet tables and preparation tables to a
specified average temperature rather than an allowable range. Id. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the average temperature be
calculated over the test period separately for the pan temperature
measurements (i.e., the average of temperatures measured throughout the
test period at each pan measurement location specified in ASTM F2143-
16) and the temperature measurements in any refrigerated compartment
(i.e., the average of temperatures measured throughout the test period
at each of the three compartment measurement locations specified in
ASTM F2143-16). DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the average
temperature of all refrigerated pans be 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F.
Id. This temperature is consistent with the current DOE test procedure
for medium-temperature CRE and is within the allowable range specified
in ASTM F2143-16 and NSF 7-2019. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE similarly
proposed that the average temperature of any refrigerated compartment
also be 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. 87 FR 39164, 39189. If the
buffet table or preparation table configuration does not allow
independent control of the refrigerated compartment and both the pan
average temperature and refrigerated compartment average temperature
cannot be maintained within 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F over the
test period, DOE proposed that the refrigerated compartment be tested
to the average temperature necessary to maintain the pan average
temperature within the specified range. Id. Similar to the existing
LAPT provision in section 2.2 of appendix B, DOE also proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that if a unit is not capable of maintaining average pan
temperatures within the specified range, the unit would be tested at
the LAPT. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
approach for testing buffet tables and preparation tables based on
separate pan and compartment average temperatures. Id. DOE also
requested feedback on the proposed target temperature of 38 [deg]F
2 [deg]F for each average temperature. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposed 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F IAT for averaging the temperature for each refrigerated
compartment when there are no separate refrigeration controls.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 6) Hillphoenix also agreed with the approach
to only apply the 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F IAT requirement to
open-top pans if the other refrigerated compartments must be operated
colder in order to achieve these pan temperatures. Id. Hillphoenix
disagreed with utilizing the LAPT for the open tops with pans in order
to maintain 38 [deg]F as required in other compartments, but stated
that the open top with pans should be given priority to achieve 38
[deg]F with other compartments allowed to run colder. Id.
Continental repeated its response to DOE's early assessment review,
supporting use of target temperature ranges and moving box car average
temperatures for pans in the open display area, along with maximum and
minimum thermocouple temperature measurements in the refrigerated
storage compartment, as prescribed in NSF 7 for this equipment.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 7) Continental commented that it had not
energy tested relevant equipment in the proposed manner to thoroughly
evaluate suitability of this approach and reiterated that DOE should
postpone publication of a test procedure for refrigerated buffet and
preparation tables, and work with the appropriate standards committees
and other stakeholders to develop and evaluate an
[[Page 66186]]
appropriate single standard method that addresses this and other
issues. Id.
Hussmann commented that due to the nature of the small refrigerated
pans on this type of CRE, removing pan lids and/or entering defrost
could have warming effects on the pans and DOE should therefore use an
average IAT of below 41 [deg]F for the target temperature. (Hussmann,
No. 32, p. 6) Hussmann also cautioned DOE against combining sections
from different standards to create a test procedure, stating that the
proposed changes should be taken to the appropriate standards committee
prior to adoption. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE's target temperature should remain below
41 [deg]F and restated its belief that combining test standards was
unnecessary and that a single standard should be used to regulate the
issue. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8)
Hoshizaki commented that if DOE is proposing to reference ASTM
F2143-2016 for buffet table and preparation table testing but use a
modified target temperature range, then those proposed changes should
made to the ASTM F2143-2016 standards committee and await approval
before finalizing a test procedure in DOE standards. (Hoshizaki, No.
30, p. 4) Hoshizaki noted that manufacturers would need to be given the
opportunity to test with those new constraints and make viable comments
after seeing the differences. Id.
True recommended recording the energy consumption during the 4-hour
NSF/ANSI 7-2021 test method (7.5.2) for refrigerated buffet units and
refrigerated food preparation units because for buffet tables or
preparation tables, the average of the pan temperatures is not a food-
safe measurement. (True, No. 28, p. 3) True added that this test
procedure is the industry standard and that all original equipment
manufacturers (``OEMs'') should be able to supply energy consumption
data for all equipment already manufactured and certified to NSF
Standard 7. True asked DOE if such information had been requested from
manufacturers. Id.
The 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F average pan temperature is
generally consistent with the recommended approach for IAT below 41
[deg]F and would allow for consistent comparisons across models by
including a target temperature rather than a wide allowable range of
IATs. For example, the energy use of a unit maintaining a pan IAT of 34
[deg]F would be expected to be higher than a unit with an IAT of 41
[deg]F. Additionally, testing significantly below the 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F range may introduce concerns of the distilled water
freezing during testing.
DOE is maintaining pan and compartment target temperatures
consistent with June 2022 NOPR and test procedure for other medium
temperature CRE. To clarify, achieving the target pan temperature
always takes priority over achieving the compartment temperature. LAPT
is only allowed if a model cannot achieve the required pan temperature
target range.
The boxcar pan temperature averaging approach in NSF 7 is for a
test method serving a different purpose--ensuring food safety. For the
DOE test procedure, the average pan temperature over the entire test
duration is needed to ensure energy consumption corresponds to the
maintained pan temperatures. DOE recognizes that an average pan
temperature does not necessarily represent food safe temperatures
(i.e., each pan temperature may not be at 38 [deg]F), but the DOE test
procedure is intended to provide a representative basis for measuring
energy consumption while not being unduly burdensome to conduct rather
than ensuring food safety or sanitation. DOE has determined that the
pan temperature averaging approach as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
satisfies the EPCA requirements.
Test Conduct--Capacity Metrics
ASTM F2143-16 specifies the reporting of ``production capacity,''
which is defined as the total volume of the pans when each pan is
filled within 0.5 in. of the rim. Energy consumption of refrigerated
buffet and preparation tables likely varies with pan volume as well as
the volume of any closed refrigerated compartments. Therefore, both
values are of interest when considering metrics that define energy
performance. Pan surface area could be another possible metric for
evaluating energy performance, similar to TDA for horizontal open
equipment classes. Reliance on pan surface area may eliminate the
variability with different test pan dimensions.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined that pan storage
volume, pan display area, and refrigerated volume may all contribute to
the capacity and energy consumption of a buffet table or preparation
table; therefore, DOE proposed that the test procedure include measures
of these three metrics. 87 FR 39164, 39190. DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to define and measure ``pan volume'' consistent with the
production capacity specified in ASTM F2143-16. Id. DOE proposed to
refer to pan volume rather than production capacity to avoid confusion
with the other relevant capacity metrics. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed that the refrigerated volume of
buffet table and preparation table refrigerated compartments be tested
in accordance with AHRI 1200-202X, consistent with the method proposed
for use with other CRE. Id. To avoid double counting of refrigerated
pan volumes, DOE proposed that the refrigerated compartment volume
would not include any volume occupied by the pans loaded in the open-
top display area for testing. Id.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that pan display area be defined
and measured as the surface area of the test pan when filled to within
0.5 in. of the rim. Id. This surface area measurement would ensure that
the pan display area would be consistent with the pan storage volume
(i.e., both measurements would be based on the pans as filled for
testing). Id. Additionally, the measurement based on the surface area
of the water as loaded for testing would ensure that the surface area
measurement accounts for the actual food storage area and excludes any
areas not providing refrigerated storage for food service or food
preparation. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
capacity metrics of pan storage volume, compartment volume, and pan
display area. Id. DOE requested feedback on the proposed methods for
measuring each and the extent to which these metrics are relevant
capacity metrics for buffet tables and preparation tables. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with DOE's intent to only measure
volumes and TDAs for the referenced products. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p.
6) Hillphoenix commented that the method as presented in the NOPR was
not clearly written and needed to be better defined. Id. Hillphoenix
recommended that DOE approach industry and request updated testing
standards that better reflect actual product intent, an approach that
would drive consistency within the industry and be less burdensome on
manufacturers. Id.
AHRI recommended that the proposed changes to capacity metrics of
pan storage volume, compartment volume, and pan display area need to be
updated in tandem with the standard for consistency and alignment with
the referenced standard. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 8)
Hussmann commented that the issue of proposed capacity metrics of
pan storage volume, compartment volume, and pan display area should be
taken to the appropriate standards committee due to the importance of
consistency within standards. (Hussmann, No. 32, p. 6)
[[Page 66187]]
Continental commented that DOE's proposed use of surface area of
the water as loaded for testing would present a confusing and
potentially inconsistent method of rating equipment because it deviates
from other industry standards. (Continental, No. 29, p. 7) Continental
added that DOE should delay adoption of a test procedure for these
products and work with the appropriate standards committees and other
stakeholders to develop a suitable standard method that sufficiently
addresses concerns with capacity measurements, which have significant
impact on potential new energy standards in the future. Id.
The CA IOUs recommended for the prep table test procedure using \1/
8\-pan capacity as a size (and energy normalization) metric for prep
tables instead of pan display area because prep table energy
consumption depends mostly on the top pan capacity instead of bottom
compartment volume. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 4) The CA IOUs pointed out
that using total volume in the top pans and bottom compartment as a
normalization metric will favor units with fewer top pans and larger
bottom compartments compared to units with more top pan capacity. Id.
Hoshizaki commented that pan display area is not currently used as
a metric in ASTM F2143-2016. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 4) Hoshizaki
commented that if DOE wants to add an additional metric for
measurement, this should be proposed to the ASTM F2143 standards
committee, and that such proposals should give manufacturers and third-
party testing agencies the opportunity to do analysis and feedback in
the standards committee process. Id. Hoshizaki stated that only after
all revisions are finalized should the standard be officially proposed
as a test procedure for product. Id.
DOE maintains that pan display area, pan volume, and refrigerated
compartment volume can all impact energy use and provide information
regarding usable capacity to end users. Because ASTM F2143-16 includes
``production capacity,'' which represents a measure of pan storage
volume, DOE is adopting additional capacity metrics. These metrics
reflect the capacity of buffet tables and preparation tables to store
refrigerated items and display or allow access to refrigerated items.
Regarding the CA IOUs recommendation, the measured pan area rather
than a number of standard pans would ensure a consistent basis for
measuring unit capacity regardless of pan configuration for a given
unit.
Regarding confusion and need for test standard updates, the
measurements of compartment volume and pan volume are consistent with
the existing industry methods (AHRI 1200-2023 and ASTM F2143-16,
respectively). Pan area is the surface area of the water in the pans
which represents the refrigerated area in contact with the ambient test
conditions, which ensures a representative and comparable measurement
of the usable capacity that contributes to energy consumption.
Commenters did not provide specific information regarding what aspects
of the June 2022 NOPR approach were unclear. DOE has reviewed the test
instructions as proposed and determined they provide sufficient clarity
regarding measuring each of the capacity metrics. Therefore, DOE is
adopting the capacity metrics as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
2. Pull-Down Temperature Applications
As defined, CRE is equipment that is designed for holding
temperature applications \20\ or pull-down temperature applications. 10
CFR 431.62 (see also 42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(A)(vi)). ``Pull-down temperature
application'' is a commercial refrigerator with doors that, when fully
loaded with 12-ounce beverage cans at 90 [deg]F, can cool those
beverages to an average stable temperature of 38 [deg]F in 12 hours or
less. 10 CFR 431.62 (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(D)). CRE within this definition
are typically known as beverage merchandisers or beverage coolers
because of their use in displaying individually packaged beverages for
sale, and their ability to pull down temperatures of such beverages.
Pull-down temperature applications with transparent doors and a self-
contained condensing unit are the only pull-down temperature
applications currently subject to DOE's energy conservation standards
specified at 10 CFR 431.66(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ ``Holding temperature application'' means a use of
commercial refrigeration equipment other than a pull-down
temperature application, except a blast chiller or freezer. 10 CFR
431.62 (see also 42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(B)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's current CRE test procedure does not include specific
provisions related to the performance criteria in the pull-down
temperature application definition. For example, the test procedure
does not provide instructions for the starting conditions of the
equipment (e.g., whether the equipment begins the test in a pre-cooled
state or at ambient temperature conditions), loading of the cans (e.g.,
whether the equipment must be loaded to full within a certain amount of
time), or a method to measure the temperature of the cans to confirm
cooling to 38 [deg]F. The current CRE test procedure specifies that
commercial refrigerators designed for pull-down applications be tested
at steady state (see 10 CFR 431.64(b) and appendix B section 2.1),
consistent with testing other covered CRE categories.
While DOE defines ``pull-down temperature application'' and has
established energy conservation standards for self-contained commercial
refrigerators with transparent doors for pull-down temperature
applications, no models are currently certified to DOE in this
equipment class.\(21)\ DOE has not established energy conservation
standards for other categories of CRE for pull-down temperature
applications.
DOE recognizes that manufacturers may represent their models as for
use in pull-down temperature applications rather than holding
temperature applications. To ensure appropriate application of DOE's
definitions, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR a method to determine
whether a model meets the definition of ``pull-down temperature
application.'' 87 FR 39164, 39191. Specifically, DOE proposed to
include product-specific enforcement provisions for CRE, and proposed
to include a section to specify how DOE would confirm whether a
commercial refrigerator meets the definition of ``pull-down temperature
application.'' Id.
As stated, the pull-down temperature application definition
requires that a model be capable of cooling a full load of 12-ounce
beverage cans from 90 [deg]F to an average stable temperature of 38
[deg]F in 12 hours or less. To confirm this capability, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR to specify in 10 CFR 429.134 that a classification
as pull-down temperature application is valid based on meeting the
pull-down temperature application definition by:
(1) Measuring the temperatures of 12-ounce beverage cans loaded
into the commercial refrigerator at locations consistent with those
specified in ASHRAE 72-2018R (i.e., those temperature measurement
locations required for test simulators during DOE testing of other
commercial refrigerators);
(2) Operating the commercial refrigerator under the required
commercial refrigerator test conditions (e.g., 75.2 [deg]F 1.8 [deg]F dry-bulb temperature) and at the control setting
necessary to achieve a stable integrated average temperature of 38
[deg]F prior to loading;
(3) Fully loading the commercial refrigerator with 12-ounce
beverage cans maintained at 90 [deg]F 2 [deg]F;
[[Page 66188]]
(4) Determining the duration of pull down (which must be 12 hours
or less) starting from closing the commercial refrigerator door after
completing the 12-ounce beverage can loading until the integrated
average temperature reaches 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F; and
(5) Determining an average stable temperature of 38 [deg]F by
operating the commercial refrigerator for an additional 12 hours after
initially reaching 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F with no changes to
control settings, and determining an integrated average temperature of
38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F at the end of the 12-hour stability
period. 87 FR 39164, 39191.
The proposed product-specific enforcement provisions are consistent
with the existing definition of ``pull-down temperature application,''
but would provide additional clarity regarding how DOE would determine
whether a commercial refrigerator could be classified as such. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
product-specific enforcement provisions regarding how DOE would
determine whether a model meets the pull-down temperature application
definition. 87 FR 39164, 39191. DOE also requested data and comment on
whether the proposed product-specific enforcement provisions
sufficiently differentiate pull-down temperature applications from
holding temperature applications. Id.
AHRI commented that detailed information regarding pull down of
``full load'' wasn't available. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 9) As a result, AHRI
believed this proposal is in conflict with NSF requirements. Id. AHRI
cited DOE's slide deck used in an August 1, 2022, webinar for the CRE
test procedure, noting two concerns with pull-down temperature and
enforcement actions. Id.
AHRI commented by citing issue 24 (a question on the request for
comment for pull-down temperature applications) to ask whether DOE is
referring only to the category of pull-down CRE, or if DOE is adding
pull down to all categories for enforcement. AHRI also asked if this
would allow for the randomized placement of bottles during a legitimate
test procedure. Id. AHRI referred to issue 56 related to certified
volume versus volume measurement to ask if this will allow
manufacturers to use their discretion. Id.
The Joint Commenters stated their support for the proposed test
procedure to verify pull-down temperature performance. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 3) The Joint Commenters noted they had expressed
previous support for eliminating the pull-down temperature CRE class.
As discussed in their comments to the preliminary TSD for CRE
standards, the Joint Commenters now supported the proposed NOPR
amendment maintaining the pull-down class as it would clarify how DOE
would determine whether a model is appropriately certified as a pull-
down unit. Id.
NAMA expressed concern about the pull-down temperature provision
because of the lack of specificity and asked if the provision related
only to those products for which DOE had pull-down requirements or
whether the provision referred to all CRE equipment that stored and
cooled beverage cans/bottles. (NAMA, No. 33, p. 2) NAMA noted that
large beverage companies had requirements for pull down, based on
customer preference and sanitary conditions for food items that must
reach 38 [deg]F in 16 hours, not 12 hours. Id. NAMA commented that the
DOE proposal would set up a conflicting set of requirements as more and
more bottle coolers were used to store food in addition to beverages,
making 12 hours a much shorter pull-down time. Id. NAMA suggested that
DOE harmonize at 16 hours since the customers of its manufacturers
already had specifications on pull down, adding that manufacturers
already must test to determine pull down in 16 hours, and additional
testing to show an arbitrary pull down at 12 hours was unnecessary and
unduly burdensome. Id.
NAMA additionally requested that DOE develop specific test
procedures for placing cans/bottles into the cooler, stating it was
possible to obtain different results with a cooler packed with every
conceivable space used and shelves removed versus cans/bottles packed
as in a retail store; different results could also be obtained with
cans versus bottles. (NAMA, No. 33, p. 2) NAMA recommended that DOE use
a glycol liquid, as with the beverage vending machine (BVM) test
procedure. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting, True commented that the subject
of 12-ounce cans will lead to some serious discussions on loading them.
(Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 53) True stated these cans are
very convenient to load two or three high per shelf, and if they are
not single-loaded on a shelf, there could be a situation in which the
middle cans are getting far less surface area and are more difficult to
cool down. Id. True commented that some specification is needed on how
to load these cans so this situation doesn't happen, stating that if
someone put one shelf in the bottom and stacked it to the ceiling with
cans, they would never pass this test. Id.
The CA IOUs urged DOE to amend the definition for ``pull-down
temperature application'' to specify ``a blast chiller or freezer'' and
exclude beverage merchandisers, which in practice are used in holding-
temperature applications. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 6) The CA IOUs commented
that in the CRE industry, pull-down refrigeration specifically means
equipment capable of rapidly lowering food temperature in a food-safe
manner and that only blast chillers/freezers are considered to have
pull-down applications by industry while beverage merchandizers are
rated as Vertical Closed Transparent Medium Temperature (``VCT.M'') CRE
and designed for holding-temperature applications. Id. The CA IOUs
pointed out that there will be no need to establish a ``pull-down''
refrigeration test method for VCT.M equipment if DOE updates the
definition for ``pull-down temperature application'' in accordance with
industry practice. Id. The CA IOUs added that if DOE retains the
current definition for ``pull-down temperature applications,'' DOE
should share data on what percentage of operating hours are spent in
``pull down'' versus ``holding mode'' operation compared to other CRE
considered ``holding temperature applications'' and recommends that the
daily energy usage for these ``pull-down temperature applications'' be
weighted by the percentage of time spent in each mode. Id.
To clarify, the provisions proposed in the June 2022 NOPR related
to pull-down temperature applications are specific to the procedures
DOE would follow for verifying claims of pull-down temperature
applications as defined in EPCA and by DOE. DOE currently only
specifies standards for pull-down temperature application equipment
with self-contained condensing units and transparent doors.
Manufacturers may claim their equipment is for pull-down temperature
applications rather than holding temperature applications. The intent
of the provisions proposed in the June 2022 NOPR for pull-down
temperature applications is to ensure appropriate application of DOE's
definitions. Such testing would not be necessary to verify claims of
equipment for holding temperature applications. Blast chiller and blast
freezer testing is addressed separately in section III.C.3 of this
document.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed loading instructions consistent
with ASHRAE 72-2018R. Additional instructions are not necessary because
these provisions outline the process DOE will use to determine
appropriate equipment
[[Page 66189]]
category (i.e., manufacturers are not required to conduct testing in
accordance with these provisions, but may choose to do so to ensure
appropriate application of DOE's definitions).
In response to AHRI's comment regarding placement of bottles during
a test procedure and certified volume versus volume measurement, this
pull-down verification procedure would be separate from the DOE test
procedure in appendix B and only represents the process DOE would
follow to verify claims of pull-down temperature applications.
Based on the definition of pull-down temperature applications
specified in EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(D)) and replicated in 10 CFR
431.62, loading is for 12 ounce beverage cans only. The EPCA definition
specifies 12 hours or less of pull-down time, so DOE is maintaining
that requirement in the verification approach rather than harmonizing
with any 16-hour periods used by manufacturers.
DOE is not requiring propylene glycol to be used in the cans--such
a solution is not necessary because the operating temperatures will not
result in potential freezing for other can solutions, like water. DOE
notes that DOE's test procedure for BVMs \21\ does not require
propylene glycol solution either.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See appendix B to subpart Q of 10 CFR part 431.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE recognizes that these provisions do not follow NSF or standard
industry terminology; however, DOE is maintaining the June 2022 NOPR
verification provisions for pull-down temperature applications based on
the EPCA definition. The other provisions regarding blast chillers and
blast freezers established in this final rule clarify DOE consideration
of equipment in that category.
3. Blast Chillers and Blast Freezers
As stated, CRE is equipment that, in part, is designed for holding
temperature applications. (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(A)(vi)) EPCA defines
``holding temperature application'' as use of commercial refrigeration
equipment other than a pull-down temperature application, except a
blast chiller or freezer. (42 U.S.C. 6311(9)(B)) Per the definition,
``holding temperature application'' includes blast chillers and blast
freezers, even if such equipment meets the criteria of ``pull-down
temperature application.''
In general, blast chillers and blast freezers are CRE with solid
doors intended for the rapid temperature pull down of hot-food
products.
Blast chiller and blast freezer operation is typically
characterized by three cycles. The first cycle pulls the air
temperature within the unit down until it reaches a target air
temperature set by the manufacturer (e.g., 0 [deg]F for blast chillers
and -28 [deg]F for blast freezers). This target air temperature within
the unit is maintained until the food reaches a certain temperature,
set by the manufacturer, as measured by the unit's temperature probe.
Once the food reaches a certain temperature, the second cycle begins by
allowing the air temperature within the unit to drift up until it
reaches the same temperature as the target food temperature (e.g., 38
[deg]F for blast chillers and 0 [deg]F for blast freezers). Once the
food reaches the target food temperature, the last cycle begins by
proceeding to a holding pattern during which the blast chiller or blast
freezer behaves similarly to a typical CRE--i.e., cycling the
refrigeration system to maintain a target temperature.
Within the general sequence of operations, many blast chillers and
blast freezers provide users with options to alter the specific pull-
down profile based on the food load. For example, a ``soft chill'' mode
may provide a slower temperature pull down intended for more delicate
food, as compared to a ``hard chill'' mode that cools food as quickly
as possible.
ASHRAE has established a standard project committee (``SPC'') to
consider the development of an industry test standard for this
equipment: SPC 220P, Method of Testing for Rating Small Commercial
Blast Chillers, Chiller-Freezers, and Freezers (``ASHRAE 220'').\22\
DOE is participating in this process and is aware of a draft test
standard underway that contains certain definitions, requirements, and
procedure. DOE will consider the final version of the SPC 220P standard
if available during future test procedure rulemakings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/standards-and-guidelines/project-committee-interim-meetings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Definitions
DOE does not define blast chiller or blast freezer. The California
Code of Regulations provides the following definition for a blast
chiller:
Blast chiller--a refrigerator designed to cool food
products from 140 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F within four hours. (CCR, Title
20, section 1602)
The SPC for ASHRAE 220 has provided the following tentative
definitions for blast chiller and blast freezer, and a related term:
Blast chiller--a rapid pull-down cooler designed to cool
food to a safe refrigerated temperature (typically between 32 [deg]F
and 41 [deg]F), but not freeze it.
Blast chiller-freezer: a rapid pull-down cooler designed
to function as both a blast chiller and blast freezer depending on user
inputs.
Blast freezer--a rapid pull-down cooler designed to freeze
food.
Rapid pull-down cooler--commercial refrigeration equipment
intended for the rapid intermediate chilling or freezing of hot food
products within a specified time period and holding the food at a safe
temperature when not engaged in the chilling or freezing process.
NSF 7-2019 provides the following performance specification for
rapid pull-down refrigerators and freezers:
Rapid pull-down refrigerators and freezers--capable of
reducing the internal temperature of their contents from 135 [deg]F to
40 [deg]F within a period of 4 hours or in the time specified by the
manufacturer, whichever is less.
Based on the comments from interested parties and DOE's review of
existing State definitions, tentative and established industry
definitions, and equipment available on the market, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the characteristic of blast
chillers and blast freezers that differentiate this equipment from
other categories of CRE are the oversized refrigeration systems that
allow for the rapid temperature pull-down of hot food products within a
specified time period. 87 FR 39164, 39192. Blast chillers and blast
freezers specifically differ from other types of CRE intended for pull-
down temperature applications because of the intended product (hot food
product for blast chillers and blast freezers versus 12-ounce beverage
cans for pull-down temperature applications), initial product
temperature (minimum 135 [deg]F for blast chillers and blast freezers
versus 90 [deg]F for pull-down temperature applications), and intended
product storage duration (minimal storage duration for blast chillers
and blast freezers versus long-term storage duration for pull-down
temperature applications).
As discussed, blast chillers and blast freezers provide rapid
cooling to ensure hot food is quickly pulled down to safe refrigerated
storage temperatures. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE tentatively identified
the capability to pull down hot food from 135 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F
within 4 hours as the primary operating characteristic of blast
chillers and blast freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39192. This is
[[Page 66190]]
consistent with the performance specification for rapid pull-down
refrigerators and freezers specified in NSF 7-2019, the California
definition, and tentative definitions provided by the SPC for ASHRAE
220. Although DOE did not propose to test blast chillers and blast
freezers according to NSF 7-2019, as discussed in the following
section, DOE expects that any blast chiller or blast freezer meeting
the NSF 7-2019 performance specification would be capable of pulling
down hot food from 135 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F within 4 hours when tested
as proposed in the NOPR. 87 FR 39164, 39192. As discussed in section
III.C.1.b, DOE is proposing a lower ambient temperature condition than
the ambient temperature condition specified in NSF 7-2019.
To delineate blast chillers and blast freezers from other
categories of CRE, including from CRE designed for pull-down
temperature applications, DOE proposed in the NOPR to define the terms
``blast chiller'' and ``blast freezer.'' 87 FR 39164, 39192. DOE
proposed definitions for these terms that combine parts of existing
definitions, add language for consistency with DOE's existing CRE
definitions, and include further specificity regarding the
characteristics of this equipment. Id. Specifically, DOE proposed to
add the following definitions to 10 CFR 431.62: ``Blast chiller'' means
commercial refrigeration equipment, other than a blast freezer, that is
capable of the rapid temperature pull-down of hot food products from
135 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F within a period of 4 hours, when measured
according to the DOE test procedure. Id. ``Blast freezer'' means
commercial refrigeration equipment that is capable of the rapid
temperature pull down of hot food products from 135 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F
within a period of 4 hours and capable of achieving a final product
temperature of less than 32 [deg]F when measured according to the DOE
test procedure. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed
definitions of ``blast chiller'' and ``blast freezer.'' 87 FR 39164,
39192.
NEEA commented that it supports the new definitions DOE proposed
for ``blast chiller'' and ``blast freezer,'' stating that these
equipment types have unique applications compared to other CRE, and
these definitions allowed consideration (potential standards),
categorization (equipment classes), and testing of this equipment
separate from other CRE. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
AHRI commented to recommend that DOE align its definitions of
``blast chiller'' and ``blast freezer'' with the SPC language for
ASHRAE 220 (``Method of Testing for Rating Small Commercial Blast
Chillers, Chiller Freezers, and Freezers'') for the proposed
definitions of ``blast chiller'' and ``blast freezer'' (see bulleted
language). (AHRI, No. 38, p. 9)
``Blast chiller--a rapid pull-down cooler designed to cool
food to a safe refrigerated temperature (typically between 32 [deg]F
and 41 [deg]F), but not freeze it.
Blast freezer--a rapid pull-down cooler designed to freeze
food.
Rapid pull-down cooler--commercial refrigeration equipment
intended for the rapid intermediate chilling or freezing of hot food
products within a specified time period and holding the food at a safe
temperature when not engaged in the chilling or freezing process.'' Id.
AHRI commented that alignment with ASTM, ASHRAE, or other
established standards would also be acceptable. Id. AHRI further urged
DOE to go through the standard review process and not attempt to
address this through either an amendment to the DOE test procedure or
development of a new standard. Id.
DOE considered available industry definitions when developing the
proposals in the June 2022 NOPR, including the definitions in the draft
version of ASHRAE 220. ASHRAE 220 has not published a public review
draft and is still in draft form and DOE is not aware of any updates to
the definitions considered in developing the proposal in the June 2022
NOPR. Therefore, DOE is adopting the definitions proposed in the June
2022 NOPR. DOE will consider any published standard when available
during any future test procedure rulemakings.
b. Test Methods
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE reviewed the ASHRAE 220 test method in
development to determine the suitability of the test method for a DOE
test procedure. The draft ASHRAE 220 test method determines the pull-
down energy consumption per pound of food product, hot food product
temperature pull-down performance, and other performance factors for
self-contained commercial blast chillers and blast freezers that have a
refrigerated volume of up to 500 ft\3\. DOE acknowledges that the
ASHRAE 220 test method has certain deviations from DOE's current CRE
test procedures and ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata.
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that test
procedures that account for the pull-down operation of blast chillers
and blast freezers are appropriate. 87 FR 39164, 39193. The primary
function of blast chillers and blast freezers is the rapid cooling of
hot food product and minimal storage duration rather than long-term
storage duration. DOE has considered the draft ASHRAE 220 standard as
the basis for many of the test procedure proposals.
DOE has also reviewed the ISO 22042:2021 test standard. Many of the
provisions in the ISO 22042:2021 method are similar to those included
in the draft ASHRAE 220 (e.g., ambient temperature, starting food load
temperature, final blast freezer temperature). DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the provisions in draft ASHRAE
220 provide a more representative basis for testing (e.g., blast
chiller target temperature of 38 [deg]F rather than 50 [deg]F) and
would limit test variability as compared to ISO 22042:2021 (e.g., using
a well-defined food simulator test load rather than actual food and
defining door openings for pan loading). 87 FR 39164, 39193. DOE also
participated in ENERGY STAR's specification review process to establish
version 5.0 Eligibility Criteria for commercial refrigerators and
freezers. ENERGY STAR considered including blast chillers and blast
freezers as part of the version 5.0 Eligibility Criteria,\23\ but did
not include them in the specification due to the lack of a standardized
test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See the Version 5.0 Specification and Test Method
Discussion Guide, December 2020, at www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/ENERGY%20STAR%20Commercial%20Refrigerators%20and%20Freezers%20V5.0%20Discussion%20Guide_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with the tentative scope of ASHRAE 220, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR test procedures for self-contained commercial blast
chillers and blast freezers that have a refrigerated volume of up to
500 ft\3\. 87 FR 39164, 39193. DOE proposed to incorporate certain
provisions from draft ASHRAE 220 and certain deviations, as discussed
in the following sections. Id. DOE acknowledged that, to the extent
feasible, ASHRAE 220 will likely harmonize with requirements included
in ASHRAE 72-2018R. Id. For this reason, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to refer ASHRAE 72-2018R for certain test requirements rather than
using the approach in the ongoing draft ASHRAE 220. Id. The intent of
these proposals was to harmonize with the eventual ASHRAE 220 final
test standard approach.
To avoid confusion regarding testing of other CRE, DOE also
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to establish the test procedure for
blast chillers and blast freezers as a new appendix D to subpart C of
10 CFR part 431. 87 FR 39164,
[[Page 66191]]
39193. DOE also proposed to refer to the proposed appendix D as the
test procedure for blast chillers and blast freezers in 10 CFR 431.64.
Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
establish test procedures for self-contained commercial blast chillers
and blast freezers that have a refrigerated volume of up to 500 ft\3\.
The Joint Commenters stated their support for establishing test
procedures for blast chillers and freezers, noting that DOE had
tentatively identified the capability to pull down hot food from 135
[deg]F to 40 [deg]F within 4 hours as the primary operating
characteristic of blast chillers and blast freezers. (Joint Commenters,
No. 31, p. 3)
NEEA stated its support for DOE's proposal to establish test
procedures for new and newly defined categories of CRE, and restated
its recommendation from the 2021 CRE TP RFI that DOE establish test
methods for new CRE product types, including blast chillers and blast
freezers. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
Continental commented that it supports the NOPR proposal to add new
test procedures for product categories such as blast chillers and blast
freezers. (Continental, No. 29, p. 1) Continental noted, however, that
attempting to develop test procedures that combine aspects of different
existing industry standards and introduce significant modifications is
not sufficient or appropriate for this type of rulemaking. Id.
Continental recommended that DOE work with ASHRAE, AHRI, ASTM, and
other stakeholders to develop suitable test procedures for any
additional product categories so that new or modified industry
standards are comprehensive, reliable, and repeatable for many
equipment types, with minimal additional testing burden. Id.
The Joint Commenters stated that DOE proposed to add test
procedures only for self-contained commercial blast chillers and
freezers with a refrigerated volume of up to 500 ft\3\, and that while
the Joint Commenters understood that most of the blast chillers/
freezers market consists of self-contained equipment, remote condensing
blast chillers/freezers are available on the market; thus, the Joint
Commenters encouraged DOE to consider establishing test procedures for
remote condensing blast chillers/freezers as part of a future
rulemaking. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 3)
The CA IOUs also stated their support for DOE's decision to limit
scope to self-contained blast chillers/freezers, which represents the
vast majority of the market. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 6). In the August
2022 public meeting, the CA IOUs commented that ASHRAE 220 was
developed for blast chillers up to 500 ft\3\, but that self-contained
blast chillers would be significantly smaller than that and most likely
would have the volume to accommodate a single rolling rack. (Public
Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 48)
Consistent with draft version of ASHRAE 220 and the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE is establishing a test procedure for self-contained blast chillers
and blast freezers only. In response to Continental's comment, DOE has
harmonized the June 2022 NOPR and the test procedure established in
this final rule with the expected industry test method to the extent
possible. DOE will consider harmonizing with any available industry
test method, including regarding expanded scope, in future test
procedure rulemakings.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
incorporate certain provisions from the draft ASHRAE 220 and certain
deviations for the blast chillers and blast freezers test procedures.
87 FR 39164, 39193.
The Joint Commenters commented that they support DOE's proposed
changes regarding the proposed test methods for additional equipment
categories, including blast chillers and freezers. (Joint Commenters,
No. 31, p. 1)
The Joint Commenters added that they support the proposed test
methods that are consistent with ASHRAE 220 and include pre-cooling the
blast chiller's or blast freezer's cabinet to a pre-set or controlled
operating temperature, loading of hot food pans into the blast chiller
or blast freezer, and pull down of the hot food pans to the target
temperature. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 3) The Joint Commenters
stated that this method captured energy usage during pull-down
operation, as a representative method for estimating the energy usage
of blast chillers/freezers. Id.
True commented that DOE should not reinvent the wheel by
referencing NSF or ASHRAE for blast chiller and freezer cabinets for
professional use. (True, No. 28, p. 7) True commented that the
reference standard for blast chillers and blast freezers should be ISO
22042:2021 since these products were developed in Europe and are being
evaluated for the EU EcoDirective energy labeling program. Id.
As discussed in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE has reviewed ISO
22042:2021. Many provisions are similar to those included in the draft
version of ASHRAE 220 (e.g., ambient temperature, starting food load
temperature, final blast freezer temperature). However, DOE has
determined that other provisions included in the draft ASHRAE 220 and
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR are more representative of blast chiller
and blast freezer operation (e.g., blast chiller target temperature of
38 [deg]F rather than 50 [deg]F) and would limit test variability as
compared to ISO 22042:2021 (e.g., using a well-defined food simulator
test load rather than actual food and defining door openings for pan
loading). Therefore, DOE is establishing the test procedure for blast
chillers and blast freezers based on the draft of ASHRAE 220, and as
included in appendix D to subpart C of 10 CFR part 431.
Instruments
DOE reviewed the latest version of the draft ASHRAE 220 standard
and compared it to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, as shown in Table III.2,
to determine appropriate instrument requirements for blast chiller and
blast freezer testing.
Table III.2--Instrumentation Requirements Comparison Between ASHRAE 220
and ASHRAE 72-2022 With Errata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHRAE 72-2022
ASHRAE 220 with errata
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calibration..................... Instruments shall Measurements from
be calibrated the instruments
traceable to shall be
National traceable to
Institute of primary or
Standards and secondary
Technology standards
(``NIST'') calibrated by
standards NIST (or other
annually.. rating
standards).
Instruments shall
be recalibrated
on regular
intervals that do
not exceed the
intervals
prescribed by the
instrument
manufacturer, and
with an interval
no longer than 1
year.
[[Page 66192]]
Temperature..................... Accuracy of Required Accuracy:
temperature 1.4
measurements [deg]F.
shall be within Temperature
1.4 measurement
[deg]F. Accuracy methods and
of temperature- instruments shall
difference be applied and
measurements used in
shall be within accordance with
0.2 ASHRAE Standard
[deg]F. 41.1-2020.
Temperature
measurements not
specified shall
be made per ANSI/
ASHRAE Standard
41.1.2.
Time............................ Time measurements Required Accuracy:
shall be made 0.5%
with an accuracy of time period
of 0.5% of the
time period being
measured.
Energy.......................... Electrical energy Required Accuracy:
measurements must be measured
shall be made with an
with instruments integrating watt-
accurate to 2% of the accuracy 2.0% of the
measured.. quantity measured
and graduated to
0.01 kWh.
Electrical supply potential and None specified.... Required Accuracy:
supply frequency. 2.0%
of the quantity
measured.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally, ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata has the same instrumentation
requirements as draft ASHRAE 220. DOE acknowledges that ASHRAE 220
intends to harmonize with ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata to the extent
possible to maintain consistent test requirements across similar
equipment types. Because ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata provides greater
detail on the instrumentation requirements, and DOE expects that the
final ASHRAE 220 standard will likely adopt the ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata requirements, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to reference
section 4 and the relevant portions of appendix A of ASHRAE 72-2018R
for blast chiller and blast freezer instrumentation requirements.
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata provides additional requirements for
instruments that are not necessary for testing blast chillers and blast
freezers (e.g., air velocity, radiant heat, dry-bulb temperature
gradient, and test chamber illuminance). DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to incorporate requirements only for instruments necessary to test
blast chillers and blast freezers (i.e., those listed in Table III.2).
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
reference section 4 and the relevant portions of appendix A of ASHRAE
72-2018R for instrumentation requirements for the blast chiller and
blast freezer test procedures. 87 FR 39164, 39194.
AHRI commented cautioning DOE against referencing the ASHRAE 220
standard with this test procedure, as it would create inconsistencies
to reference ASHRAE 220 and ASHRAE 72-2022 simultaneously. (AHRI, No.
38, p. 9)
DOE is maintaining the approach proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
based on the draft version of ASHRAE 220. As ASHRAE 220 is not yet
available, DOE is not incorporating that standard by reference. DOE is
adopting the test procedure for blast chillers and blast freezers in
appendix D and incorporating by reference the relevant sections of
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. DOE recognizes that certain additional
requirements are pulled from other standards, but including multiple
incorporations by reference as appropriate ensures consistent testing
and clarifies where test requirements are harmonized across test
procedures.
Test Conditions
Blast chillers and blast freezers are typically intended for use
only in commercial kitchens, as compared to other categories of CRE,
which are typically used in either commercial kitchens or in customer-
facing environments.
ASHRAE 220 specifies different test conditions for testing blast
chillers and blast freezers compared to the current DOE CRE test
procedures, as illustrated in Table III.3.
Table III.3--Ambient Temperature and Humidity Test Conditions Comparison
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's current CRE
ASHRAE 220 test procedure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dry Bulb........................ Measured at point Measured at point
TA;. TA for open
Average: 86.0 CRE and TB for
[deg]F 1.8[deg]F. Average: 75.2
Individual: 86.0 [deg]F 1.8[deg]F
minus>3.6[deg]F. Individual: 75.2
[deg]F 3.6[deg]F.
Humidity........................ No test condition Wet Bulb measured
specified. at point TA for
open CRE and TB
for closed CRE;
Average: 64.4
[deg]F 1.8 [deg]F
Individual: 64.4
[deg]F 3.6 [deg]F
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The dry bulb is required to be measured in ASHRAE 220 at the same
point (TA) as specified in section 6.1 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata.
ASHRAE 220 does not specify the type of thermocouple to be used when
taking dry-bulb measurements. ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies that
the thermocouples used to measure dry-bulb temperatures shall be in
thermal contact with the center of 1.6 oz. cylindrical brass slug with
a diameter and height of 0.75 in. The brass slugs shall be placed at
least 0.50 in. from any heat-conducting surface.
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the test
conditions specified in ASHRAE 220 are more representative of actual
blast chiller and blast freezer operation as compared to the existing
CRE test procedure conditions. 87 FR 39164, 39194. As stated, blast
chillers are typically only used in commercial kitchens, whereas other
conventional CRE are used in a range of environments.
DOE recognizes that harmonizing test conditions across different
CRE categories may provide users with measures of energy use that can
be
[[Page 66193]]
compared on a consistent basis. However, given the particular
application of blast chillers and blast freezers in rapidly lowering
the temperature of hot food products, it is not expected that other CRE
would serve as a substitute for blast chillers and blast freezers (and
vice versa). Moreover, as indicated by a 2012 ASHRAE report,\24\ the
test conditions in the draft ASHRAE 220 are more representative for
blast chillers and blast freezers than the test conditions applicable
to CRE generally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ ASHRAE RP-1469, ``Thermal Comfort in Commercial Kitchens,''
Final Report, January 6, 2012, page 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because blast chillers and blast freezers experience different
ambient conditions than other types of CRE, and because the proposed
test procedures for blast chillers and blast freezers would use a
different energy use and capacity metric, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to require the representative dry-bulb temperatures specified in
the tentative ASHRAE 220 draft. 87 FR 39164, 39194. DOE also proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate section 6.1 and Figure 6 of ASHRAE
72-2018R to specify the point TA where the dry-bulb
temperatures are to be measured and to specify the dry-bulb
thermocouple setup. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
require the dry-bulb temperatures specified in the tentative ASHRAE 220
draft and incorporate section 6.1 and Figure 6 of ASHRAE 72-2018R to
specify the point TA where the dry-bulb temperatures are to
be measured and the type of thermocouple to use when measuring dry bulb
in the blast chillers and blast freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that it would be appropriate to measure dry-bulb
temperatures in blast chiller and blast freezer test procedures using
ASHRAE Standard 220 where necessary. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 10)
The CA IOUs stated their support for DOE's proposal to test blast
chillers/freezers at an ambient temperature of 86 [deg]F where other
CRE categories are tested at 75 [deg]F because blast chillers and
freezers are typically only used in commercial kitchens, and as such,
86 [deg]F is more representative than 75 [deg]F for blast chiller/
freezer operation. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 6)
DOE is maintaining the ambient test conditions of 86 [deg]F based
on the draft version of ASHRAE 220 and as supported in comments. DOE
recognizes that this ambient condition is different from the condition
used for testing other CRE categories, and that DOE has intended to
harmonize conditions when possible to ensure consistent testing across
CRE categories. However, the metrics for blast chiller and blast
freezer testing are sufficiently different from other CRE testing
(i.e., kWh/day) that comparisons of energy use cannot be made across
these CRE categories, so there is little benefit in harmonizing the
ambient test conditions for blast chillers and blast freezers.
ASHRAE 220 specifies the same requirements for the power supply,
voltage, and frequency as ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. Specifically,
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the rated voltage be maintained at an average
of 2.0 percent over the duration of the test and individual
recorded voltages be within 4.0 percent of the rated
voltage. ASHRAE 220 specifies that the rated frequency be maintained
within 1.0 percent. Because ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
specifies the same requirements for voltage and frequency, DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate the portions of appendix A in
ASHRAE 72-2018R, which specify the requirements for voltage and
frequency.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
incorporate the portions of appendix A in ASHRAE 72-2018R that specify
the requirements for voltage and frequency in the blast chillers and
blast freezers test procedures. 87 FR 39164, 39194.
AHRI recommended that the matter of adopting portions of ASHRAE 72-
2018R concerning voltage and frequency requirements in blast chiller
and blast freezer test procedures should be taken to the ASHRAE 220
committee for review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 10)
As stated in the June 2022 NOPR, the proposed conditions were
consistent with those considered for the draft of ASHRAE 220.
Therefore, DOE is maintaining the reference to ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata, consistent with the June 2022 NOPR.
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies additional test conditions
that ASHRAE 220 does not specify. These include requirements for air
currents, radiant heat, dry-bulb temperature gradient, and test chamber
illuminance. DOE expects that these requirements in ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata are primarily intended to limit variability of testing for CRE
without doors or with transparent doors. DOE is only aware of blast
chillers and blast freezers with solid doors, and therefore tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the additional test conditions in
ASHRAE 72-2018R are not necessary for blast chiller and blast freezer
testing, consistent with the draft of ASHRAE 220. 87 FR 39164, 39194,
39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on whether any additional
test conditions are appropriate for blast chiller and blast freezer
testing, including those specified in sections 6.2 and 6.3 and appendix
A in ASHRAE 72-2018R. 87 FR 39164, 39195.
DOE received no additional comments on this topic in response to
the June 2022 NOPR, and therefore is establishing the test conditions
as proposed.
Test Setup
The ASHRAE 220 draft specifies certain test unit setup instructions
for components and accessories, electrical loads, condensate pan
heaters and pumps, and crankcase heaters that are based on sections
5.3, 5.3.1, 5.3.5, and 5.3.15 in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata. DOE notes
that sections 5.3 and 5.3.5 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata contain minor
differences from the draft ASHRAE 220. Section 5.3 of ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata refers to installing all necessary components and
accessories prior to loading the storage and display areas with test
simulators and filler material, whereas ASHRAE 220 does not use test
simulators and filler material. Section 5.3.5 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata refers to a self-contained refrigerator instead of a blast
chiller or blast freezer and does not specify that the condensate pan
shall be emptied before testing (this instruction is provided in
section 7.2.3 of ASRHAE 72-2022 with Errata) and that if a condensate
heater is used during the test, it shall be recorded.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the manufacturer's recommendation on
clearances shall be followed on all sides with a minimum of 3 feet on
the door(s) opening sides. The current DOE CRE test procedures do not
specify any clearance requirements. Section 5.2 and appendix A of
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specify that there must be greater than or
equal to 59.1 in. 1.0 in. of clearance from the front of
the unit under test and a vertical partition or wall shall be located
at the minimum clearance, 0.5 in., as specified in the
installation instructions. Section 5.2 also provides that if the
installation instructions do not provide a minimum clearance, the
vertical partition or wall shall be located 4.0 0.5 in.
from the sides or rear of the cabinet and extend at least 12.0 0.5 in. beyond each side of the cabinet from the floor to not
less than 12.0 0.5 in. above the top of the cabinet.
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that because
ASHRAE
[[Page 66194]]
72-2018R provides similar, equal, or greater detail on the installation
and settings, clearance, and components and accessories requirements as
compared to the draft of ASHRAE 220, the ASHRAE 72-2018R instructions
are appropriate for DOE testing. 87 FR 39164, 39195. DOE also
acknowledges that, to the extent feasible, ASHRAE 220 intends to
harmonize with ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata requirements, and therefore
will likely adopt similar instructions in the final version of the
standard. DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate sections
5.1, 5.2, 5.3 (including sub-sections 5.3.1 to 5.3.17), and the
relevant portions of appendix A of ASHRAE 72-2018R for testing blast
chillers and blast freezers with the following deviations:
The term ``refrigerator'' shall instead refer to ``blast
chiller'' or ``blast freezer,'' as applicable. 87 FR 39164, 39195.
For section 5.3 of ASHRAE 72-2018R, replace ``all
necessary components and accessories shall be installed prior to
loading the storage and display areas with test simulators and filler
material'' with ``all necessary components and accessories shall be
installed prior to precooling the unit under test.'' Id.
Section 5.3.5 would be included with the additional
requirement that the condensate pan be emptied before precooling the
unit under test. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
incorporate sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 (including subsections 5.3.1 to
5.3.17), and the relevant portions of appendix A of ASHRAE 72-2018R,
with the proposed deviations, for the blast chillers and blast freezers
test procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that it recommended the matter of adopting portions
of ASHRAE 72-2018R concerning blast chiller and blast freezer test
procedures should be taken to the ASHRAE 220 committee for review and
approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 10)
As stated, DOE expects that ASHRAE 220 will harmonize with the
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata requirements for test setup when
appropriate, and is adopting the ASHRE 72-2022 with Errata
requirements, with deviations, as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
Appendix A of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies electrical
measurements at the equipment terminals. ASHRAE 220 specifies the
following electrical measurement locations: at the plug-in location for
units with a standard wall plug, or at the terminal box for units that
are hard wired to the building electrical system. Because the
electrical measurement location in appendix A of ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata is similar to ASHRAE 220, DOE expects that the ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata approach is the likely final approach to be used in the
eventual final ASHRAE 220 standard. For that reason, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate the relevant portions of appendix A
of ASHRAE 72-2018R for the electrical measurement locations. 87 FR
39164, 39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
incorporate the relevant portions of appendix A of ASHRAE 72-2018R for
the electrical measurement locations for the blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that it recommended the matter of adopting portions
of ASHRAE 72-2018R concerning electrical measurement locations in blast
chiller and blast freezer test procedures should be taken to the ASHRAE
220 committee for review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 10)
As stated, DOE expects that ASHRAE 220 will harmonize with the
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata requirements for electrical measurement
locations, and is therefore adopting the ASHRE 72-2022 with Errata
requirements, as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
Capacity and Loading
ASHRAE 220 provides instructions for measuring the gross
refrigerated volume of blast chillers and blast freezers. The gross
refrigerated volume is calculated by multiplying the internal length,
width, and height of the cabinet excluding panels and space occupied by
the evaporator or evaporator fan. Appendix C of AHRI 1200-2023
specifies instructions for determining the refrigerated volume of
display merchandisers and storage cabinets. DOE reviewed the
instructions in AHRI 1200-2023 for determining refrigerated volume and
determined that the instructions can be applied to blast chillers and
blast freezers because of the similar construction of these CRE. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to refer to AHRI 1200-202X for measuring
the refrigerated volume of blast chillers and blast freezers. 87 FR
39164, 39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
reference AHRI 1200-202X for measuring the refrigerated volume of blast
chillers and blast freezers. Id.
AHRI stated its support for the proposal to reference AHRI 1200-
202X for measuring the refrigerated volume of blast chillers and
freezers. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 10)
DOE is maintaining the measurement of volume per AHRI 1200-2023
consistent with the June 2022 NOPR.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the standard product vessel shall be a 12
in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. 22 gauge or heavier and 300 series stainless
steel pan. ASHRAE 220 states that if the test unit is not capable of
holding the standard product pan, the manufacturer's recommended pan
size is used, conforming as closely as possible to the standard product
load. Based on a review of blast chillers and blast freezers available
on the market, DOE observed that all units are intended for use with
food pans, and nearly all units available can accommodate the specified
standard pan sizes. DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR
that the pans as specified in ASHRAE 220 are representative of typical
use and DOE proposed to incorporate the standard product pan
specifications included in the draft of ASHRAE 220. 87 FR 39164, 39195.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
incorporate the standard product pan specifications in ASHRAE 220 for
the blast chillers and blast freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI stated its support for the proposal to incorporate the
standard product pan specification in ASHRAE 220 for the blast chillers
and blast freezers test procedures. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
DOE is maintaining the standard product pan specifications as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the manufacturer's recommended maximum 12
in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. pan capacity should be used for testing. DOE
has reviewed the ASHRAE 220 specifications and equipment available on
the market. Based on DOE's review, it was determined in the NOPR that
additional specifications may be needed to determine how many standard
product pans are used in the test unit. 87 FR 39164, 39195. The number
of standard product pans that would be used for testing is dependent on
the specified product capacity of the test unit based on food weight.
The ASHRAE 220 committee tentatively determined that having a uniform
food simulator thickness across all standard product pans is important
for repeatable and comparable results, manufacturer design parameters,
and consistency with European blast chiller and blast freezer testing
requirements.\25\ The ASHRAE 220 committee tentatively concluded that a
uniform food simulator thickness of 2 in. in the standard product pan
(i.e.,
[[Page 66195]]
filled to within 0.5 in. of the top of the pan) is appropriate. Based
on this conclusion, the number of pans required for testing blast
chillers and blast freezers would be determined by the number of
standard product pans filled with the standard food simulator load to 2
in. deep that can fit in the blast chiller or blast freezer without
exceeding the manufacturer's recommended capacity. Because this
approach could potentially require the tested capacity to be smaller
than the manufacturer's stated capacity, if the stated capacity is not
evenly divisible by the number of pans, the ASHRAE 220 committee
considered allowing for one additional pan that has a thickness less
than 2 in., which would make up the difference to meet the
manufacturer's rated capacity, but that this additional pan would not
require temperature measurement. Based on the ASHRAE 220 committee
approach, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the number of pans
required for testing blast chillers and blast freezers be determined by
the number of standard product pans filled to 2 in. deep with food
simulator product that can be loaded into the blast chiller or blast
freezer without exceeding the manufacturer's stated food load capacity
by weight, plus one additional standard product pan, if needed, to meet
the manufacturer's stated food load capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See ISO 22042:2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed method to
determine the number of pans required for testing blast chillers and
blast freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39196.
AHRI recommended that the matter of using ASHRAE 72-2018R to
determine the number of pans required for testing blast chillers and
blast freezers should be taken to the ASHRAE 220 committee for review
and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
DOE notes that ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata is not used to determine
the number of pans required for testing blast chillers and blast
freezers. DOE is adopting the approach proposed in the June 2022 NOPR,
which is consistent with the expected ASHRAE 220 approach.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the tested product capacity is determined
based on loading the test unit with the maximum number of pans with
food product up to the manufacturer's recommended maximum food product
weight capacity. The food product weight does not include the weight of
the pans.
The ASHRAE 220 committee determined that blast chiller and blast
freezer capacity based on food product weight is relevant in addition
to refrigerated volume because the throughput of food product by weight
is the primary function provided to users, as compared to long-term
refrigerated storage volume for typical CRE. Blast chillers and blast
freezers with the same volume may have different pull-down capacities
by weight depending on the design of the cooling system.
DOE expects that manufacturers specify capacity by food weight
based on the maximum food load that can be loaded into the blast
chiller or blast freezer while meeting the performance requirement of
NSF 7-2019. DOE reviewed the ASHRAE 220 specifications and equipment
available on the market and tentatively determined in the June 2022
NOPR that additional specifications may be needed to determine the
product capacity used during the test. DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that when determining the product capacity, all manufacturer
literature that is included with the unit would be reviewed, and the
largest product capacity stated in the literature would be used. 87 FR
39164, 39196. If the unit is able to operate as both a blast chiller
and a blast freezer in different operating modes and the literature
specifies different product capacities for blast chilling and blast
freezing, the largest capacity stated for the respective operating mode
during the test would be used.
If no product capacity is stated in the manufacturer literature,
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the product capacity be
represented by the maximum number of standard pans that can fit in the
test unit with each pan filled 2 in. deep with product, consistent with
the ASHRAE 220 approach, with capacity determined as the sum of the
food weights within the individual pans loaded for testing. 87 FR
39164, 39196. As discussed further in a subsequent section, DOE
proposed use of a food simulator. Id. The tested capacity would not
include the weight of the pans, temperature sensors, or wires. If, upon
testing, a blast chiller or blast freezer with no stated product
capacity is not capable of pulling down temperatures from 135 [deg]F to
40 [deg]F within a period of 4 hours with the load specified in the
proposed test procedure, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that one
pan be removed until the unit achieves the specified pull-down
operation. 87 FR 39164, 39196.
To ensure repeatability of testing, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that the tested capacity (determined as the sum of the food
weights for individual pans loaded for testing) be within 5
percent or 2 lb of the rated capacity, whichever is less.
87 FR 39164, 39196. DOE acknowledged that the actual weight of food
simulator may be slightly different in each pan because each pan may
not be loaded with food simulator to the exact same specified
thickness. Specifying a tolerance on the overall tested capacity would
ensure that the total food load by weight is consistent from test to
test.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
determine the tested product capacity for the blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures. 87 FR 39164, 39196.
AHRI recommended that any proposed changes be brought to the ASHRAE
220 committee for review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
As stated, a final version of ASHRAE 220 has not been published.
DOE has harmonized with the expected ASHRAE 220 requirements to the
extent feasible. Therefore, DOE has adopted the provisions as proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR regarding determining blast chiller and blast
freezer capacity.
ASHRAE 220 specifies where to place the standard product pans in
the blast chiller or blast freezer if a full load of pans is not needed
to meet the manufacturer's stated capacity. ASHRAE 220 specifies that
if there are fewer pans than there are rack spaces in the unit, the
pans shall be placed evenly in the unit with top and bottom shelves
occupied. If not all shelves are occupied by pans, the pan locations
shall be recorded. The ASHRAE 220 committee has also discussed
specifying that pans would be loaded without pans nesting on each other
and without touching the top and the bottom of the cabinet.
DOE reviewed the ASHRAE 220 specifications and equipment available
on the market. Based on DOE's review, DOE tentatively determined that
additional specifications may be needed to determine where to place the
standard product pans. DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that once the
number of standard product pans needed for the test has been
determined, the pans should be spaced evenly throughout each vertical
column of rack positions in the test unit without the pans touching any
other pans and without the pans touching the top and the bottom of the
cabinet. 87 FR 39164, 39196. For test units that have an additional pan
with a product thickness of less than 2 in., DOE proposed in the June
2022 NOPR to require placing the additional pan as close to the middle
rack position as possible while maintaining an even distribution of all
pans. Id. DOE also proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that if not all rack
positions are occupied by pans, the pan locations shall be recorded.
Id.
[[Page 66196]]
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed method
for distributing the pans within the test unit's cabinet for testing
blast chillers and blast freezers. Id.
AHRI commented advising DOE to reference ASTM 26 testing standards
as a method for distributing pans within the test unit's cabinet.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
DOE expects that the requirements in the ASTM standard will be
harmonized with those in the ASHRAE 220 standard. DOE understands that
the ASTM standard is intended to assess blast chiller and blast freezer
operating performance whereas the ASHRAE 220 standard is intended to
measure energy consumption. Therefore, DOE has determined that ASHRAE
220 is the appropriate basis for the DOE test procedure.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that if multiple pans are used per level
(i.e., pans can be loaded side-by-side at the same level), only one pan
needs to be measured with product temperature sensors per level. ASHRAE
220 provides a figure illustrating an example for test units with
multiple pans per level, indicating which pans would include
thermocouples. In the figure, each level includes two side-by-side
pans, and the thermocouple location is staggered such that it
alternates between the left and right pan at each level, and such that
each vertical column does not have two measured pans in sequential
levels.
DOE reviewed the draft ASHRAE 220 pan loading approach and
tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that it provides a
representative measure of food load temperature within the blast
chiller or blast freezer while limiting test burden. 87 FR 39164,
39197. DOE acknowledged that food temperatures within the cabinet may
vary depending on proximity to the evaporator or airflow pathway
through the cabinet but expects that measuring one pan per level and
staggering the measured pans would ensure a representative food
temperature average would be measured during testing. Id. DOE also
determined that this approach would limit test burden by avoiding the
need for every pan to include a thermocouple, thereby avoiding the
setup of the thermocouple within the pan and the routing of additional
thermocouple wires from inside the cabinet. Id.
Based on the review of ASHRAE 220, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to incorporate the ASHRAE 220 approach with additional
instructions. Id. DOE proposed that if multiple standard product pans
are used per level, only one pan per level be measured with a
temperature sensor. Id. DOE proposed to specify that the pan measured
should alternate vertical columns so that each vertical column does not
have two measured pans in sequential levels and that if a test unit
uses an additional pan that has a thickness less than 2 in., this
additional pan would not be measured for product temperature. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed method to
determine which standard product pans would include temperature
measurement sensors for the blast chillers and blast freezers test
procedures. Id.
AHRI commented that the ASHRAE 220 committee is in the process of
adding a requirement to determine which standard product pans would
include temperature measurement sensors for blast chillers and blast
freezers test procedures; consequently, AHRI added, for DOE to create a
similar requirement would be redundant and unnecessary. (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 11)
As stated, ASHRAE 220 has not had a public review period and is
still in draft form. DOE developed the proposal in the June 2022 NOPR
to be consistent with the ASHRAE 220 approach, with additional
specificity where needed. Therefore, DOE is adopting the provisions as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR regarding pan temperature measurements.
ASHRAE 220 specifies measuring the product temperature in the
geometric center of any measured pans and provides an example figure
illustrating the temperature sensor location in a measured pan and, in
particular, showing the unweighted thermocouple as being placed \5/8\
in. above the bottom of the pan. ASHRAE 220 provides that temperature
sensor leads must allow for the transfer of pans from the heating
compartment to the test unit cabinet.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate this approach
with additional instruction to specify explicitly details that are
shown visually in the example figure in ASHRAE 220. 87 FR 39164, 39197.
DOE proposed that product temperature shall be measured in the
geometric center of the product pan, \5/8\ in. above the bottom of the
pan, that the temperature sensor shall be unweighted, and that the
temperature sensor leads shall be secured to the bottom of the pan
while also allowing for the transfer of the pan from the heating source
into the test unit's cabinet. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed method of
measuring the product temperature in the measured pans for the blast
chillers and blast freezers test procedures. Id.
AHRI commented recommending that any proposed changes to
measurement of the product temperature in the measured pans for the
blast chillers and blast freezers test procedures be taken to the
ASHRAE 220 committee for review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 11)
As stated, DOE developed the proposal in the June 2022 NOPR to be
consistent with the ASHRAE 220 approach, with additional specificity
where needed. A public review draft of ASHRAE 220 has not yet been
published; therefore, DOE is adopting the provisions as proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR regarding temperature measurements within individual
pans.
ASHRAE 220 specifies instructions to prepare the product medium
mixture to be placed in the standard product pans as follows:
(a) Determine the manufacturer's recommended maximum food product
weight capacity.
(b) Prepare a 20-percent-by-volume propylene glycol (1,2-
Propanediol) mixture in water.
(c) In each pan, pour the propylene glycol mixture over #20 mesh
southern yellow pine sawdust to create a 22-percent-to-78-percent-by-
mass slurry. Mixture must be pre-portioned for each individual pan to
avoid large batch component separation.
(d) Mix until the sawdust becomes completely saturated and leave
uncovered in the pan. The weight of the mixture shall correspond with
the determined weight. Record the weight of each pan, weight of the
mixture, and number of pans to be loaded. Weight of the thermocouples
shall be omitted.
Note: Acceptable Sawdust Specification Example: American Wood
Fibers brand, #20 Mesh Pine Sawdust (50 lb bags), Item #
30020205018.
(e) Verify that the pan thermocouple is fully submerged in the
mixture, reposition the thermocouple in the geometric center of the
mixture if it is not.
The ASHRAE 220 committee developed the food simulator
specifications based on the food load specified in NSF 7-2019 for rapid
pull-down refrigerators and freezers. Because this test load is already
in use for this equipment, and because its heat transfer
characteristics are similar to actual food loads, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the food simulator load specified
in the ASHRAE 220 draft is representative for testing blast chillers
and blast freezers. 87 FR 39164, 39197.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate the ASHRAE 220
approach with additional
[[Page 66197]]
specifications to ensure repeatability. Id. As stated, each pan would
be loaded to 2 in. of food load thickness (i.e., depth) within the pan
and an additional pan would be loaded as needed to meet the
manufacturer's stated capacity. Id. DOE proposed that each pan shall be
weighed prior to heating, before and after the food product simulator
is added. Id. A cumulative total of the product weight shall be
calculated and the pans shall continue to be loaded with the product
mixture until the cumulative total reaches the manufacturer's stated
capacity (the total product weight shall be within 5
percent or 2 lbs of the manufacturer's stated capacity,
whichever is less). Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed method
for preparing the product medium mixture to be placed in the standard
product pans for the blast chillers and blast freezers test procedures.
Id.
AHRI commented recommending that any proposed changes to the method
for preparing the product medium mixture to be placed in the standard
product pans for the blast chillers and blast freezers test procedures
be taken to the ASHRAE 220 committee for review and approval. (AHRI,
No. 38, p. 11)
As stated, DOE developed the proposal in the June 2022 NOPR to be
consistent with the ASHRAE 220 approach, with additional specificity
where needed. A public review draft of ASHRAE 220 has not yet been
published; therefore, DOE is adopting the provisions as proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR regarding test medium preparation.
Test Conduct
The overall test approach in the ASHRAE 220 draft includes pre-
cooling the blast chiller's or blast freezer's cabinet to a pre-set or
controlled operating temperature, loading of hot food pans into the
blast chiller or blast freezer, and pull down of the hot food pans to
the target temperature. The ASHRAE 220 committee also considered
including an operating period in which the blast chiller or blast
freezer would maintain the food load at the target temperature (i.e., a
``holding period''). However the ASHRAE 220 committee determined that
the primary function of the blast chiller or blast freezer is to pull
down hot food temperatures and that the prioritization of throughput
through the blast chiller or blast freezer would result in less
operation in holding periods. DOE tentatively determined in the June
2022 NOPR that the ASHRAE 220 approach is appropriate for blast chiller
and blast freezer testing and proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to only
include pre-cooling and pull-down operation within the test. 87 FR
39164, 39197.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposal to
include pre-cooling and pull-down operation in the blast chiller and
blast freezer test procedure and to not include any holding periods
during testing. Id.
The CA IOUs recommended that the blast chiller and blast freezer
test procedure include equipment pre-cool energy as well as a
triplicate testing to ensure repeatability. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 5) The
CA IOUs noted that different blast chiller and blast freezer models may
pre-cool to different cabinet and evaporator temperatures prior to the
start of the test, affecting blast cooling energy consumption. Id. The
CA IOUs stated support for DOE's proposal to record pre-cool energy
along with pull-down energy and requested that DOE require reporting of
the recorded pre-cool energy. Id. The CA IOUs also stated support for
DOE's proposal to exclude ``holding energy'' needed to maintain the
food load at a target temperature after completion of the blast
chilling cycle. Id. The CA IOUs further recommended normalizing energy
usage by initial measured weight of the product to be cooled down
(excluding pan weight) instead of by blast chiller and blast freezer
volume or the manufacturer's rating and suggested reporting blast
chiller and blast freezer energy by either kWh/cycle/lb or kWh/day/lb.
Id.
See the following Calculations sub-section for discussion regarding
triplicate testing. DOE is not adopting reporting requirements as part
of this final rule, but is requiring that both pre-cool and blast
chilling or blast freezing cycle energy be recorded during testing. DOE
is not requiring any measurement of holding energy. As recommended by
the CA IOUs and proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE is adopting a
calculation of energy consumption normalized by the total weight of
product loaded into the blast chiller or blast freezer for testing.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that all measurements shall be continuously
recorded during the test in intervals no greater than 10 seconds. The
current DOE CRE test procedures require that measurement intervals do
not exceed 3 minutes and ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata requires certain
measurements at 1-minute intervals. Because the blast chiller and blast
freezer test procedure is not conducted at stable cabinet temperature
conditions, as is the case for other CRE testing, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that a shorter measurement interval is
appropriate to accurately identify unit performance (e.g., determining
when all pans reach the target temperatures). 87 FR 39164, 39198.
Therefore, in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate the
ASHRAE 220 approach requiring data acquisition at 10-second intervals.
Id.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that data would be recorded once a steady-
state condition is established. ASHRAE 220 specifies that the test unit
stabilize at ambient temperatures for at least 24 hours before pre-
cooling and that the prepared product be heated for a minimum of 8
hours in the standard product pans at the required temperature prior to
loading into the blast chiller or blast freezer. Consistent with these
requirements, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the test unit
stabilize at ambient temperatures for at least 24 hours, and then data
acquisition would be recorded prior to the pre-cool period. 87 FR
39164, 39198. For the prepared product in the standard product pans,
DOE proposed that data acquisition begin prior to the minimum 8-hour
heating period. Id.
ASHRAE 220 specifies a procedure for pre-cooling the test unit from
ambient conditions prior to pull-down operation. The test unit is to
remain in the required ambient conditions for at least 24 hours before
pre-cooling. The test unit's pre-cooling cycle is used, if available.
For test units with more than one pre-cool cycle, the cycle used is
recorded. For units without a pre-cooling cycle, an empty blast cycle
should be run in its entirety. During the pre-cool cycle, the test
unit's sensing probe will remain in its default or holstered position.
Pre-cool is deemed complete when the test unit's pre-cool notification
reports. If the test unit does not have a pre-cool cycle or pre-cool
completion notification, the pre-cool is deemed complete when the
compressor first cycles off. The pre-cool data to be recorded is the
selected cycle name, pre-cool duration, temperature, and energy
consumed.
Because the main function of a blast chiller or blast freezer is to
pull down the product temperature of hot food, DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that measuring performance during the
pre-cool period is not necessary, other than to determine when pre-
cooling is complete. 87 FR 39164, 39198. However, because pull-down
testing is initiated after the completion of pre-cooling, operation
during pre-cooling may impact pull-down performance. Based on DOE's
review of ASHRAE 220, additional specifications regarding pre-cooling
may be needed.
[[Page 66198]]
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the pre-cool cycle may be
initiated on blast chillers and blast freezers once the test unit has
been maintained at ambient temperatures without operating for at least
24 hours. 87 FR 39164, 39198. Rather than selecting and recording any
pre-cooling cycle, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the fastest
pre-cooling cycle be selected. DOE proposed to specify that the pre-
cool cycle is complete when the test unit notifies the user that the
pre-cool is complete, consistent with ASHRAE 220, but that if the test
unit does not notify the user that the pre-cool cycle is complete, the
pre-cool will be deemed complete when the test unit reaches 40 [deg]F
or 2 [deg]F based on the test unit's sensing probe for blast chillers
and blast freezers, respectively. DOE tentatively determined in the
June 2022 NOPR that this approach would ensure a consistent starting
point for pull-down testing from unit to unit rather than the first
compressor off cycle. 87 FR 39164, 39198.
For test units without any defined pre-cooling cycles, DOE proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR that the fastest blast chilling or blast freezing
cycle shall be run with an empty cabinet until the test unit reaches 40
[deg]F 2 [deg]F based on the test unit's sensing probe.
Consistent with ASHRAE 220, during the pre-cool cycle, the test unit's
sensing probe will remain in its default or holstered position. The
pre-cool test data to be recorded are the ambient conditions, pre-cool
cycle selected, pre-cool duration, and final pre-cool cabinet
temperature based on the test unit's sensing probe.
As stated, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that test procedures
for blast chillers and blast freezers are to measure the energy
consumed by the product temperature pull-down operation. 87 FR 39164,
39198. Additionally, blast chillers and blast freezers may run multiple
pull-down cycles consecutively without the need for individual pre-
cooling cycles. However, DOE acknowledges that the energy consumed
during the pre-cool period may be relevant to the overall energy
consumption of blast chillers and blast freezers and requests comment
on whether pre-cooling energy use should be measured and considered in
the overall energy consumption metric for blast chillers and blast
freezers.
ASHRAE 220 specifies instructions for loading the prepared standard
product pans into the test unit. Measured standard product pans are
maintained at an average temperature of 160.0 [deg]F 1.8
[deg]F and an individual pan temperature tolerance of 160 [deg]F 10 [deg]F for a minimum of 8 hours prior to being loaded into the
test unit. Non-measured pans are also required to be heated for a
minimum of 8 hours. The test unit door is opened for loading at 4.0
1.0 minutes after the test unit completes its pre-cool
cycle. ASHRAE 220 specifies that the door remain open to load all of
the standard product pans for the entirety of the loading procedure.
ASHRAE 220 further specifies that the door is open for 20 seconds per
roll-in rack and 15 seconds per pan for roll-in and standard test
units, respectively. The test unit's sensing probe is inserted into the
geometric center of a standard product pan in the center level of the
cabinet. If the center level has capacity for multiple pans, the probed
pan should be furthest away from the evaporator. The probe must not
touch the bottom of the pan or be exposed to the air. The location of
the pan with the probe is recorded. The factory probe is placed so that
it does not interfere with the test thermocouple measurement. The door
remains closed for the remainder of the test.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to adopt ASHRAE 220's approach
with additional specifications and certain deviations to ensure
consistent testing. 87 FR 39164, 39198. DOE proposed that while
maintaining the temperature of the measured standard product pans prior
to loading into the blast chiller or blast freezer, the non-measured
standard product pans shall be placed in alternating positions with the
measured standard product pans in the heating device for a minimum of 8
hours prior to being loaded into the test unit to ensure consistent
product temperatures. Id. The test unit door would be opened for
loading at the specified time in ASHRAE 220, but DOE proposed to
specify more precise values (i.e., 4.0 1.0 minutes). Id.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the total door-open period for
loading pans would have a tolerance of 5 seconds to account
for different test lab operation. Id. DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that the door would be fully open, based on the definition of
``fully open'' in ASHRAE 72-2018R, for the duration specified in ASHRAE
220, to ensure test repeatability. 87 FR 39164, 39199. DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR that the test unit's sensing probe would be inserted
into the geometric center of the standard product pan approximately 1-
in. deep in the product mixture at the median pan level in the test
unit, which adds greater specificity for test repeatability. Id. If the
standard product pan at the median level is the additional pan with
less than 2 in. of product thickness, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to specify that the closest pan or pan level that is farthest away
from the evaporator fan would be used to insert the test unit's sensing
probe, consistent with the ASHRAE 220 approach. Id. DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR to add that the product temperature sensor wiring not
affect energy performance, consistent with section 5.4.9 of ASHRAE 72-
2018R. Id.
ASHRAE 220 specifies instructions to operate the blast chilling or
blast freezing cycle. A blast chilling or blast freezing cycle is
selected for blast chilling and blast freezing tests, respectively.
ASHRAE 220 specifies that the cycle selected should provide the most
rapid product cool down designed for the densest food product as stated
in manufacturer literature. ASHRAE 220 provides that a manufacturer may
provide additional clarification on cycle selection. ASHRAE 220
specifies that the selected cycle name and settings are recorded.
ASHRAE 220 further specifies the following: Temperature and energy
measurement starts once the first pan is loaded in the unit; the
selected cycle continues until all individual measured pan temperatures
are below the final temperatures of 40 [deg]F and 2 [deg]F for blast
chilling and blast freezing tests, respectively; if the selected cycle
program terminates prior to all product temperatures reaching below the
test's prescribed final temperature, the standard product pans remain
in the unit until it does so; if the temperature does not reach below
the test's prescribed temperature after two additional hours, unit
temperature settings are adjusted to achieve the desired final
temperature; temperature and energy measurements end once the door is
opened to remove the standard product pans; and energy consumption,
temperature, and time is reported starting with the first pan loaded in
the unit and ending with the final pan reaching the prescribed final
temperature.
Based on DOE's review of ASHRAE 220, DOE determined in the June
2022 NOPR that additional specifications and certain deviations may be
needed to improve test repeatability and reproducibility. 87 FR 39164,
39199. Consistent with the integrated average temperature requirements
from the current DOE CRE test procedures, DOE proposed that a blast
chilling cycle with a target temperature of 38 [deg]F and a blast
freezing cycle with a target temperature of 0 [deg]F be selected for
blast chilling and blast freezing tests, respectively. Id. Consistent
with ASHRAE 220, the cycle selected would be the cycle with the most
rapid product temperature pull
[[Page 66199]]
down that is designed for the densest food product, as stated in the
test unit's manufacturer literature. Ambient conditions and time
measurements would be recorded from the pre-cool cycle. Product
temperature measurements from the measured standard product pans would
be recorded from the 8-hour period of heating prior to being loaded
into the test unit to ensure that pull-down performance data is
recorded. Voltage, frequency, and energy consumed would start to be
recorded as soon as the test unit door is opened to load the standard
product pans so that blast chiller and blast freezer tests are started
at a consistent point across all tests. Once the test unit door is
closed, the blast chilling or blast freezing cycle would be selected
and initiated as soon as is practicable. The blast chilling or blast
freezing cycle selected would be recorded. The blast chilling or blast
freezing test period would continue from the door opening until all
individual measured pan temperatures are at or below 40.0 [deg]F or 2.0
[deg]F for blast chiller and blast freezer tests, respectively,
regardless of whether the selected cycle program has terminated. If all
individual measured pan temperatures do not reach 40.0 [deg]F or 2.0
[deg]F for blast chiller and blast freezer tests, respectively, 2 hours
after the selected cycle program has terminated, the test would be
repeated and the target temperature would be lowered by 1.0 [deg]F
until all individual measured pan temperatures are at or below 40.0
[deg]F or 2.0 [deg]F for blast chiller and blast freezer tests,
respectively, at the conclusion of the test. The duration of the blast
chiller or blast freezer test would be recorded.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed method to
conduct the blast chilling or blast freezing test, including data
recording rates, data collection periods, pre-cooling cycles, product
loading, and selecting and running the test cycle. 87 FR 39164, 39198-
39199.
AHRI commented that the method to conduct testing for blast
chillers and blast freezers is reflected in ASTM 26 testing standards
and advised DOE to reference this standard. Specifically, AHRI
recommended referencing ASTM 26 for data recording rates, data
collection periods, pre-cooling cycles, pan loading, and test conduct.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 12)
The CA IOUs suggested that in the case where the blast chiller/
freezer cannot pull down the initial load to the specified temperature,
the unit should be retested with one less pan instead of the NOPR's
proposal to retest with the temperature lowered by 1 [deg]F, because
requiring a retest with a lower temperature setpoint may not be
feasible for some equipment and will likely result in excessive test
burden. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 5)
As discussed in the previous sub-section, DOE expects that the
requirements in the ASTM 26 standard will be harmonized with those in
the ASHRAE 220 standard. Because the ASHRAE 220 standard is intended
for measuring blast chiller and blast freezer energy use, DOE has
determined that ASHRAE 220 is the appropriate basis for the DOE test
procedure and is maintaining the test conduct provisions as proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR.
DOE recognizes that the approach of lowering the set point
temperature if the final temperatures are not met may require multiple
test runs, but DOE expects that end users will operate the blast
chiller fully loaded and would adjust temperature to meet their needs.
DOE maintains the proposed approach in the June 2022 NOPR of decreasing
the temperature setting if all individual pan temperatures do not reach
the specified temperatures. DOE is not adopting the provision of
removing test pans until the unit can achieve temperatures except for
units that have no specified product capacity (in weight). The
definition of blast chiller is based on the unit pulling down product
temperature within the specified time. If a unit is not capable of that
operation at the specified loading, it would not meet the definition of
blast chiller or blast freezer.
Calculations
ASHRAE 220 specifies calculations used to report the energy
consumed during the test. The measured energy consumption is divided by
the test product capacity in pounds, averaged for three repeated tests.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to incorporate the ASHRAE 220
approach (and to specify that the measured energy consumption is
reported in kilowatt-hours) except that only one test would be needed
in order to limit test burden. 87 FR 39164, 39199. ASHRAE test
standards do not generally provide requirements for multiple tests, as
sampling plans are typically established by the rating programs that
reference the ASHRAE test standard. However, DOE already provides
sampling plans for the determination of CRE represented energy or
efficiency values at 10 CFR 429.42(a). Accordingly, DOE determined that
the three tests considered for the ASHRAE 220 standard are not
necessary for representations, and DOE is not planning to incorporate
ASHRAE's method of averaging over three tests. 87 FR 39164, 39199.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed method
for calculating the reported energy use metric for blast chillers and
blast freezers. Id.
The CA IOUs commented that they were concerned with the proposal in
the NOPR to use ASHRAE 220 with a single test for blast chillers/
freezers instead of the three repeated tests specified by ASHRAE 220,
stating that the need for accuracy outweighs DOE's goal of limiting
test burden. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 5) The CA IOUs commented that the
blast chiller/freezer test method is complex and there is room for user
or test product consistency error. Id. The CA IOUs requested that DOE
share further data illustrating the reduction in accuracy of energy
consumption and product weight calculation of using a single test
compared with triplicate tests. Id.
DOE recognizes the need for accurate and repeatable results.
However, DOE's test procedures themselves typically do not include
repeat runs; DOE addresses the need for a data sample in making
representations of energy use or energy efficiency by establishing
sampling plans in 10 CFR part 429. DOE is adopting the requirement as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the test only be conducted once.
For any representations, manufacturers would be required to apply the
sampling provisions in 10 CFR 429.42, which require multiple test
units.
For these reasons, DOE is maintaining the approach as proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR, which includes a single calculation of measured
energy use divided by test product capacity in pounds.
4. Chef Bases and Griddle Stands
DOE defines ``chef base or griddle stand'' as CRE that is designed
and marketed for the express purpose of having a griddle or other
cooking appliance placed on top of it that is capable of reaching
temperatures hot enough to cook food. 10 CFR 431.62.
As discussed in the April 2014 Final Rule, the explicit
categorization of griddle stands covers equipment that experiences
temperatures exceeding 200 [deg]F. 79 FR 22277, 22282. As explained,
this was to distinguish between equipment that experiences cooking
temperatures and equipment that experiences temperatures at which food
is kept warm. Id. However, DOE notes that the current definition for
chef bases and griddle stands does not specify a quantitative
temperature and
[[Page 66200]]
instead states ``hot enough to cook food.''
DOE stated in the April 2014 Final Rule that chef bases and griddle
stands are able to be tested according to the DOE test procedure, but
that their refrigeration systems require larger compressors to provide
more cooling capacity per storage volume than equipment with
compressors that are appropriately sized for conventional CRE and more
typical room temperature conditions. 79 FR 22277, 22281-22282. However,
the definition does not include specifications for the refrigeration
systems to differentiate this equipment from typical CRE.
ENERGY STAR has published a Final Draft Version 5.0 Eligibility
Criteria for the ENERGY STAR program for commercial refrigerators and
freezers.\26\ This final draft specification includes a definition for
``chef base or griddle stand'' consistent with DOE's current definition
and would require testing according to the existing DOE test procedure
in place for CRE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ For information on the Version 5.0 specification
development, see www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/asset/document/ENERGY%20STAR%20Version%205.0%20Commercial%20Refrigerators%20and%20Freezers%20Final%20Draft%20Specification_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has considered whether additional detail regarding the
characteristics of chef bases or griddle stands would better
differentiate it from other CRE. As discussed, chef bases or griddle
stands are designed for use with cooking equipment placed on top of the
unit. Typical chef bases or griddle stands may include oversized
refrigeration systems and additional cabinet insulation to ensure the
unit can maintain cold storage temperatures with the additional heat
load from the cooking equipment. However, these characteristics may not
be readily identifiable in a given chef base or griddle stand. For
example, manufacturers may not offer CRE in a different CRE equipment
class with similar designs to any chef base or griddle stand, in which
case there would not be a point of comparison available to determine
whether the chef base or griddle stand includes more insulation or an
oversized refrigeration system.
While ENERGY STAR's Final Draft Version 5.0 Eligibility Criteria
includes a definition of ``chef base or griddle stand'' consistent with
DOE's definition, it also includes definitions for similar equipment
types (i.e., worktop and undercounter \27\ CRE). Both of these
definitions include a minimum height requirement of 32 in. Chef bases
or griddle stands have similar construction to worktop and undercounter
equipment but are typically shorter to allow for installing cooking
equipment above the refrigerated cabinet at a normal working height.
Consistent with the ENERGY STAR definitions for worktop and
undercounter, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to amend the
definition for chef base or griddle stand to specify that the equipment
has a maximum height of 32 in., including any legs or casters. 87 FR
39164, 39201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Undercounter: A vertical closed commercial refrigerator or
freezer that has no surface intended for food preparation. The
equipment is intended for installation under a separate counter or
workspace. This equipment may have doors or drawers and shall have a
minimum height of 32 in., including legs or casters. Worktop: A
vertical closed commercial refrigerator or freezer that has a
surface intended for food preparation that is incapable of
supporting cooking equipment. This equipment may have doors or
drawers and shall have a minimum height of 32 in., including legs or
casters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
amendment to the definition for a chef base or griddle stand, which
specifies a maximum height of 32 in. for this equipment. DOE requested
information on any other identifiable equipment characteristics that
may differentiate chef bases and griddle stands from other similar CRE.
Id.
Hoshizaki commented agreeing with the proposal to add a maximum
height of 32 in. for chef bases or griddle stands. (Hoshizaki, No. 30,
p. 5)
AHRI commenting stating that it has no objection to the proposed
height characteristic and recommended that DOE examine ENERGY STAR
Version 5.0 for griddle stands. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 12) AHRI commented
that in light of ENERGY STAR's target where ~20 percent of the market
is listed with ENERGY STAR, DOE should examine having a higher kWh
allowance than ENERGY STAR, taking into consideration mandatory versus
optional compliance. Id.
Hillphoenix stated agreement with the proposed definition for chef
bases and griddle stands, but found it unclear why the 32-in. limit
would be added. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 6) Hillphoenix recommended
clearly defining these products to not include CRE or hybrid CRE in
which a food warmer or such can be placed on a section of the CRE unit.
Id.
Continental commented a belief that DOE's current definition of
``chef bases or griddle stands'' was sufficient, and the proposed
additional specification of equipment having a maximum height of 32
in., including any legs or casters, is unnecessary and could cause
confusion as some specialized, low-profile, undercounter models of CRE
are available with an overall height less than 32 in., but they are not
designed or intended to be used with cooking equipment on the top.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 8) Continental disagreed with DOE's statement
that chef bases or griddle stands have similar construction to worktop
and undercounter equipment, but are typically shorter to allow for
installing cooking equipment above the refrigerated cabinet at a normal
working height. Id. Continental pointed out that commenters noted, and
DOE acknowledged, that chef bases or griddle stands include oversized
refrigeration systems and additional cabinet insulation to ensure the
unit can maintain cold storage temperatures with the additional heat
load from the cooking equipment. Id. Continental added that this type
of equipment is also provided with heavy-duty cabinet construction to
support excessive weight loads, and may have specialized insulation to
protect against damage from exposure to very high temperatures. Id.
Continental concluded by stating that characteristics such as larger
evaporator coils, fans, and upsized compressors may not be readily
identifiable in a given chef base or griddle stand, yet still represent
distinct features that impact energy consumption and separate these
products from other types of CRE. Id.
True commented that chef bases and griddle stands are intended to
be used in conjunction with cooking equipment installed on top (of the
counter) of the refrigerated unit, with temperatures easily exceeding
500 [deg]F, and the refrigeration systems are usually larger than a
standard storage refrigeration system due to the very high ambient
temperature and conditions they are subjected to. (True, No. 28, p. 3)
True commented that the 32-in. height may be excessive as the top of
the griddle (or other cooking equipment) should be at about a 36-in.
height, making a 28-in. height or less recommended as more appropriate.
Id. True added that the ADA requires a working height of 34-in. or
less, that the smallest griddles are more than 6 in. high, and that
most grills are more than 15 in. high. Id.
The definition proposed in the June 2022 NOPR is largely consistent
with the existing definition, with the additional height requirement.
DOE has determined this height limit is appropriate as it harmonizes
with ENERGY STAR definitions and because any units taller than
32 would not have cooking equipment at appropriate working
height.
[[Page 66201]]
The current definition of chef bases or griddle stands specifically
refers to cooking equipment capable of reaching temperatures hot enough
to cook food. Therefore, no exclusions of other types of equipment that
can be placed on top of the equipment are necessary.
DOE recognizes that chef bases may be shorter to allow for taller
cooking equipment, as indicated in True's comment, but DOE set the
height limit at a level that would be inclusive of all chef bases or
griddle stands, not an average or typical height.
DOE recognizes that there are other CRE that are not chef bases or
griddle stands with heights under 32'' (e.g., undercounter models).
These CRE would not be included in the definition despite their height
because the definition would maintain that the equipment is designed to
have cooking equipment placed on top of the unit.
DOE agrees with the characteristics identified for chef bases
(i.e., oversized refrigeration, insulation, cabinets capable of
supporting weight) but has not determined identifiable aspects of these
characteristics for inclusion in the definition. To the extent that
these characteristics impact energy consumption, DOE will consider
these impacts when evaluating potential energy conservation standards
for this equipment.
For these reasons and those discussed in the June 2022 NOPR, DOE is
maintaining the definition of chef bases and griddle stands as proposed
in the June 2022 NOPR.
Regarding testing for chef bases or griddle stands, DOE determined
in the June 2022 NOPR that the existing DOE test procedure provides an
appropriate basis for measuring the energy consumption of this
equipment. 87 FR 39164, 39201. DOE recognized that chef bases or
griddle stands can be installed and used in ambient environments that
are different from other CRE, but DOE proposed to test this equipment
in the same conditions because DOE tentatively determined that the
additional heat loads of cooking equipment do not affect measured
energy use. Id.
Additionally, DOE conducted testing similar to the PG&E and SCE
testing \28\ to investigate whether cooking equipment operation would
impact chef base or griddle stand energy use during typical operation,
as illustrated in Table III.4. DOE tested chef base or griddle stand
refrigerators and freezers to the current DOE CRE test procedure with
and without an active griddle installed on top of the test unit. During
the tests with an active griddle installed, the griddle was turned on 3
hours after the start of the defrost period and maintained a target
griddle surface temperature of 185 [deg]F for 8 hours, concurrent with
the door opening period. After the 8-hour period of griddle operation,
the griddle was turned off for the remainder of the test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See www.caetrm.com/media/reference-documents/ET15SCE1010_Chef_Bases_Report_final2.pdf.
Table III.4--Chef Base or Griddle Stand Energy Consumption Comparison With and Without an Active Griddle
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy
Energy consumption Energy
Refrigerated consumption without consumption
Test unit volume with griddle griddle difference
(ft\3\) installed (kWh/ installed (kWh/ (percent)
day) day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Refrigerator #1................................. 5.21 0.97 0.96 -0.5
Refrigerator #2................................. 9.17 1.04 1.03 -0.5
Refrigerator #3................................. 9.72 1.59 1.58 -0.1
Freezer #1...................................... 6.56 7.28 7.29 +0.2
Freezer #2...................................... 11.31 8.58 8.70 +1.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* DOE tested an additional freezer that is not shown in the table due to inconsistent issues with the evaporator
icing during testing.
Consistent with the findings in the PG&E and SCE report, DOE
observed that chef bases or griddle stands consumed similar amounts of
energy with and without cooking equipment operating above the unit. DOE
has been unable to determine why Freezer #2 consumed slightly more
energy without a griddle installed. For these reasons, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR to maintain the existing CRE test procedure for
testing chef bases or griddle stands (with the additional proposals as
discussed in this NOPR). 87 FR 39164, 39202.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to
test chef bases and griddle stands according to the test procedure used
for other CRE. Id.
The CA IOUs recommended standardizing chef base internal volume
measurements by defining standardized pans as full-size, 4-in.-deep
hotel pans (12 by 20 by 4 in.) since this is a standard pan size that
all units can accommodate. (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 7) The CA IOUs added
that for chef bases able to hold 6-in.-deep pans, the volume
calculation should account for the extra 2 in. of depth. Id. The CA
IOUs pointed out that some 36-in.-wide chef bases only accommodate one
pan per drawer, but have extra room to accommodate a 4- or 6-in.-deep,
\1/6\-size pan measuring 6 by 6 in.; for such bases that cannot fit 12-
by-20-in. hotel pans, the CA IOUs recommended adding \1/6\-size pans to
its volume and suggested that any refrigerated volume that cannot
accommodate a \1/6\ pan should not be counted as usable volume. Id.
The Joint Commenters supported DOE's proposed changes regarding the
test methods for additional equipment categories, including chef bases
and griddle stands. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 1)
The Joint Commenters stated their support for establishing test
procedures for chef bases and griddle stands, citing a 2016 report that
found significant variation in energy performance of chef bases,\29\
suggesting there is opportunity for efficiency improvements. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 3). The Joint Commenters expressed a belief that
it was reasonable to test chef bases or griddle stands according to the
same test procedure as other CRE, which would allow end users to
compare energy consumption with other currently covered equipment. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See ``Chef Bases for Foodservice Applications,'' p. 9.
www.caetrm.com/media/referencedocuments/ET15SCE1010_Chef_Bases_Report_final2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEEA stated its support for DOE's proposal to establish test
procedures for new and/or newly defined categories of
[[Page 66202]]
CRE, and restated its recommendation from the 2021 CRE TP RFI that DOE
establish test methods for new CRE product types, including chef bases
or griddle stands. (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed with using the test conditions
and test setup as required for CRE equipment, but disagreed with
utilizing the standard door opening procedure as documented in ASHRAE
72, as the door openings of this equipment would be better represented
by a reduced opening procedure. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7) Hillphoenix
commented that the doors on this type of equipment are normally
operated by store personnel and are not customer facing, which excludes
the intent of the opening procedures in ASHRAE 72. Id.
Continental commented that it supports DOE's proposal in the NOPR
to add new test procedures for product categories such as griddle
stands and chef bases. (Continental, No. 29, p. 1) Continental agreed
with DOE's desire to develop test procedures for additional product
types, including chef bases and griddle stands, but added that new test
methods should only be introduced after suitable industry-accepted
standards have been adequately vetted with stakeholder feedback and
approved for publication. (Continental, No. 29, p. 8) Continental
commented that DOE should clarify that any test procedure proposed for
chef bases or griddle stands would only apply to self-contained
equipment. Id. Continental stated disagreement with DOE's
recommendation to test chef bases and griddle stands in the same manner
as other CRE--using ASHRAE Standard 72--because, as DOE recognizes,
this equipment is designed to operate with higher heat loads than other
types of CRE and that as stated in the NOPR, an ASHRAE research project
found that average temperatures in commercial kitchen preparation areas
are typically 72 [deg]F to 79 [deg]F, while cooking areas are typically
79 [deg]F to 93 [deg]F. Id. Continental commented that testing at an
ambient temperature of 75 [deg]F would not represent how chef bases and
griddle stands are used in real-world conditions and that higher
ambient conditions should be used to even come close to simulating
representative conditions for chef bases and griddle stands located in
the midst of commercial kitchen cooking areas, with high-temperature
cooking equipment on the top, as well as adjacent to them in most
situations. Id. Continental commented that energy consumption at the
elevated ambient temperature conditions would need to be evaluated
thoroughly as part of any future rulemaking regarding potential energy
standards for this equipment. Id. Continental pointed out that DOE
provided a summary of some limited energy testing performed on five
chef base models as justification that energy consumption does not vary
significantly when tested with a griddle placed on the top and operated
for a limited time, and yet little information about this testing was
offered and the procedure and results had not been widely vetted by
stakeholders. Id. Continental requested that DOE share details and data
from this testing, while maintaining any needed confidentiality, for
thorough assessment and feedback. Id. Continental cited an analysis by
Southern California Edison (ET15SCE1010) from August 2016, which
evaluated chef bases for energy consumption of six different units
using ASHRAE Standard 72-2014 test conditions. Id. Continental pointed
out that an additional heat load was not included because when an
electric griddle was placed on top of a chef base, there was reportedly
insignificant variation in energy test results. Id. Continental
believed this conclusion was based on insufficient data and lack of a
thorough understanding of the application, as refrigerated chef bases
are subject to extreme heat loads from high-temperature cooking
equipment adjacent to and on top of the unit, and a variety of heavy-
duty gas and electric cooking equipment is typically used in this
application. Id. Continental commented that as a result, standardizing
to one piece of equipment could lead to varied results in the field,
and the Southern California Edison study also found an extremely wide
variation in energy consumption of the six units tested. Id.
Continental urged a thorough review and evaluation of prior studies
used by DOE to evaluate the appropriateness of the proposed test method
to ensure reliability and confidence, and it repeated its statement
that DOE should continue to work with ASHRAE and allow time for
completion of an industry-accepted procedure before incorporating a
test procedure for chef bases and griddle stands. Id.
AHRI recommended that DOE provide more information on the size of
chef bases and griddle stands that are tested, as well as more
information about the size and heat load for griddles, noting there is
no current test standard specific to chef bases. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 12)
AHRI commented that if DOE incorporates standard ASHRAE 72, AHRI would
like to work with the committee to craft an energy test for chef bases.
Id. AHRI stated concerns with DOE's proposal to test chef bases and
griddle stands, and with how DOE proposed testing be conducted in the
NOPR. Id. AHRI stated that chef bases and griddle stands are primarily
drawer units designed for higher ambient conditions, which renders the
temperature standard for CRE inapplicable and is the reason chef bases
are currently exempt. Id.
Hoshizaki stated that it would need additional information to
comment on this proposal. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 5) In particular,
Hoshizaki stated that it would need to know the size of the equipment
used in DOE's testing method (i.e., the condensing unit size for the
refrigerators and freezers; the griddle size). Id. Also, Hoshizaki
stated that it would be helpful to know whether the griddle was at a
stable temperature or actively recreating a cooking environment during
the testing period. Id. Hoshizaki recommended that this matter be
proposed to the ASHRAE 72 standards committee for input regarding
changes needed to test chef bases along with specifying the test
criteria with heat loads. Id.
Regarding capacity measurements, DOE is maintaining the proposal in
the June 2022 NOPR to measure the refrigerated volume according to AHRI
1200-2023. Most chef bases or griddle stands use drawers for storing
pans. The definition does not require drawers or pans, so other
configurations are possible. This is also true of other CRE categories
(e.g., undercounter units may be configured with drawers for storing
pans). To allow for consistent comparisons across such equipment, DOE
is maintaining the same volume metric as the relevant capacity metric
for chef bases or griddle stands.
Regarding the test data presented in the June 2022 NOPR, during the
tests with an active griddle installed, the griddle was turned on three
hours after the start of the defrost period and maintained a target
griddle surface temperature of 185 [deg]F for 8 hours, concurrent with
the door opening period, and after the 8-hour period of griddle
operation, the griddle was turned off for the remainder of the test. 87
FR 39164, 39201. The griddles for testing were appropriately sized to
meet the dimensions of the various chef bases or griddle stands, which
ranged in volume from 5.2 to 11.3 cubic feet.
DOE expects the specific installation conditions and door openings
to vary among CRE depending on actual end use. DOE has determined that
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata door openings are representative of CRE
intended to be used in commercial kitchens. However, DOE agrees that
chef bases or griddle stands would be used in cooking areas
[[Page 66203]]
with ambient temperatures higher than those specified in ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata. DOE stated in the April 2014 Final Rule that chef bases
and griddle stands are able to be tested according to the DOE test
procedure, but that their refrigeration systems require larger
compressors to provide more cooling capacity per storage volume than
conventional CRE used in more typical room temperature conditions. 79
FR 22277, 22281-22282. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE recognized that chef
bases or griddle stands can be installed and used in ambient
environments that are different from other CRE, but DOE proposed to
test this equipment in the same conditions because DOE tentatively
determined that the additional heat loads of cooking equipment do not
affect measured energy use. 87 FR 39164, 39201. Based on DOE's testing
in support of this rulemaking, as presented in Table III.4, DOE has
determined that chef bases or griddle stands consume similar amounts of
energy with and without cooking equipment operating above the unit and
is therefore not adopting any test provisions to directly account for
operation of cooking equipment. However, based on the comments received
in response to the June 2022 NOPR as well as previous comments received
in response to the June 2021 RFI, as summarized in the following
paragraphs, DOE recognizes that the cooking areas of commercial
kitchens would typically have higher ambient temperatures than those
specified in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, and is adopting amended test
conditions for chef bases or griddle stands.
Ambient Conditions
DOE initially requested comment in the June 2021 RFI on whether
modifications to the current CRE test procedure would be appropriate
for testing chef bases and griddle stands to better represent real-
world use conditions. 86 FR 31182, 31189. DOE received limited feedback
regarding ambient conditions in response to the June 2021 RFI. The CA
IOUs and Joint Commenters commented that DOE should establish higher
ambient temperature and relative humidity conditions for evaluating the
performance of chef bases. (CA IOUs, No. 10, p. 2-3; Joint Commenters,
No. 8, p. 2) The CA IOUs recommended adopting conditions from ASTM
F2143-16 or the emerging ASHRAE Standard 220, which have an ambient
temperature of 86 [deg]F 2 [deg]F and relative humidity of
35 percent 5 percent. (CA IOUs, No. 10, p. 2-3) The CA IOUs
commented that these elevated kitchen temperatures are supported by a
2012 ASHRAE research project benchmarking the thermal conditions in 100
commercial kitchens in the United States, which found that the average
temperature in preparation areas ranged from 72 [deg]F to 79 [deg]F,
while the average temperature in cooking areas ranged from 79 [deg]F to
93 [deg]F. (Id.) AHRI did not provide detailed information on ambient
temperature, but noted that the current test procedure does not account
for the high ambient conditions for chef bases or griddle stands.
(AHRI, No. 3, p. 10)
Although not specific to ambient conditions, DOE received comments
in response to the June 2021 RFI from ITW, True, Hoshizaki, NEEA, and
the CA IOUs stating that the test procedure should not change to limit
burden. (ITW, No. 2, p. 8; True, No. 4, p. 15-16; Hoshizaki, No. 13, p.
3; NEEA, No. 5, p. 2; CA IOUs, No. 10, p. 1-2)
As discussed earlier in this section, DOE tentatively determined in
the June 2022 NOPR that the existing test procedure provides an
appropriate basis for measuring the energy consumption of chef bases or
griddle stands. 87 FR 39164, 39201.
In response to the June 2022 NOPR, Continental referred to the same
ASHRAE research project as the CA IOUs referenced in response to the
June 2021 RFI, noting that average temperatures in commercial kitchen
preparation areas are typically 72 [deg]F to 79 [deg]F, while cooking
areas are typically 79 [deg]F to 93 [deg]F. (Continental, No. 29, p. 8)
Continental commented that testing at an ambient temperature of 75
[deg]F would not represent how chef bases and griddle stands are used
in real-world conditions and that higher ambient conditions should be
used. (Id.) In response to the June 2022 NOPR, AHRI stated that chef
bases and griddle stands are primarily drawer units designed for higher
ambient conditions, which renders the temperature standard for CRE
inapplicable. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 12) Both AHRI and Hoshizaki recommended
that the industry test standard committee should evaluate appropriate
testing for chef bases or griddle stands. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 12;
Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 5)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed with using the test conditions
and test setup as required for CRE equipment. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p.
7) The Joint Commenters and NEEA supported DOE's approach from the June
2022 NOPR, but did not specifically refer to ambient conditions. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 3) (NEEA, No. 39, p. 2)
After evaluating these comments received regarding chef base or
griddle stand ambient test conditions, DOE acknowledges that multiple
interested parties representing a range of viewpoints (i.e., efficiency
advocates, utilities, and industry) have supported the use of higher
ambient temperatures for testing chef bases or griddle stands. DOE also
recognizes that chef bases or griddle stands are uniquely used only in
the cooking areas of commercial kitchens, as compared to other
conventional CRE that may be installed in a range of locations. Based
on the referenced ASHRAE study, DOE has determined that 86 [deg]F is
the ambient condition most representative of chef base or griddle stand
operation, as that is the mid-point of the 79 [deg]F to 93 [deg]F range
identified for cooking areas. This ambient condition is also consistent
with the 86.0 [deg]F ambient condition established in this final rule
for blast chillers and blast freezers, equipment that is also used in
the cooking areas of commercial kitchens. Consistent with this higher
ambient dry-bulb temperature, DOE is also amending test conditions for
wet-bulb temperature to require testing at 73.7 [deg]F (i.e.,
maintaining the same ambient relative humidity at the higher ambient
dry-bulb temperature), and radiant heat temperature to require testing
at greater than or equal to 81.0 [deg]F. For both dry-bulb and wet-bulb
temperature, DOE is maintaining the tolerances for ambient temperature
measurements: tolerance for the average over the test period of 1.8 [deg]F, and a tolerance for the individual measurements of
3.6 [deg]F.
For the reasons discussed in this section, the June 2022 NOPR, and
the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE is maintaining that chef bases or
griddle stands do not require separate test provisions, except that the
dry-bulb temperature, wet-bulb temperature, and radiant heat
temperature will require higher temperatures during the test.
Therefore, the test procedure in appendix B, as established in this
final rule, is the test procedure applicable to chef bases or griddle
stands.
5. Mobile Refrigerated Cabinets
DOE does not currently define or specify test procedure provisions
specific to other categories of refrigerated holding and serving
equipment, such as certain mobile refrigerated cabinets. Specifically,
mobile refrigerated cabinets chill the refrigerated compartment before
being unplugged from power and taken to a remote location to hold food
products while maintaining cooling. Such equipment meets the definition
of CRE as defined at 10 CFR 431.62; however, unlike typical CRE, mobile
refrigerated
[[Page 66204]]
cabinets are not continuously connected to a power supply. As discussed
in the April 2014 Final Rule, DOE determined that such other categories
of refrigerated holding and serving equipment meet the definition of
CRE and could be subject to future test procedures and energy
conservation standards. 79 FR 22277, 22281. To better distinguish
mobile refrigerated cabinets from other defined categories of CRE, DOE
considered developing a definition for this equipment in the June 2022
NOPR. 87 FR 39164, 39202.
Based on a review of mobile refrigerated cabinets available on the
market, the operation and use of this equipment is subject to varied
end-use applications, which may be specific to individual models. DOE
did not identify data or information that would inform development of
representative test conditions for such equipment. As such, DOE did not
propose to establish test procedures for mobile refrigerated cabinets
in the June 2022 NOPR. 87 FR 39164, 39202.
To better distinguish mobile refrigerated cabinets from other
defined categories of CRE, DOE proposed in the NOPR to add the
following definition to 10 CFR 431.62 for mobile refrigerated cabinets:
A ``mobile refrigerated cabinet'' means commercial refrigeration
equipment that is designed and marketed to operate only without a
continuous power supply. Id.
CRE that allow the user to choose whether to operate with or
without a continuous power supply do not meet the definition of a
mobile refrigerated cabinet.
Although DOE did not propose in the June 2022 NOPR to establish
test procedure provisions specific to mobile refrigerated cabinets, CRE
that do not meet the definition of mobile refrigerated cabinets are
subject to DOE's test procedure at appendix B and energy conservation
standards under the applicable CRE equipment class. 87 FR 39164, 39202.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
definition for ``mobile refrigerated cabinet.'' DOE also requested
comment on the proposal not to establish test procedures for mobile
refrigerated cabinets. 87 FR 39164, 39202-39203.
Hillphoenix agreed with DOE's proposed definition of ``mobile
refrigerated cabinet'' and also agreed with not establishing test
procedures since the unit's operation and use were subject to varied
end-use applications and did not represent a significant portion of the
CRE market. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7) Hillphoenix assumed no energy
conservation category would be developed since no test procedure is
being developed. Id.
True commented that the proposed definition for ``mobile
refrigerated cabinet'' needs to be more specific, as mobile
refrigeration normally refers to DC voltage (12V DC) for applications
in vehicles. (True, No. 28, p. 5) True requested the following
information from DOE: Since some units require a power converter (12V
DC to 120V AC) does ``mobile refrigerated cabinet'' refer to both AC
and DC power supplies? Id.
AHRI stated its assumption that if no test procedure is developed
for mobile refrigerated cabinets, no energy conservation standard will
be developed either. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 13)
The CA IOUs urged that the product definition for ``mobile
refrigerated cabinets'' proposed in the NOPR be based on technical
specifications rather than on end use, and recommended refining the
proposed definition to explicitly exclude vertical self-contained CRE.
(CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 9) The CA IOUs commented that the following
options should be added to distinguish mobile refrigerated cabinets
from other types of CRE: solid doors, minimum insulation thickness (1-
in. diameter minimum, presence of handles designed to move the
equipment, a bumper guard around the bottom perimeter, heavy-duty
wheels or casters (5 percent diameter minimum), a power switch and
analog or digital external temperature display, a door latch, and the
presence of a cord wrap. Id. The CA IOUs recommended adding ``for
temporary storage and transport of prepared food products and not for
retail sale of merchandise'' to the definition if DOE decides to retain
language based on end use. Id. The CA IOUs stated that because this
category represents limited sales volume and consumer utility is
dependent on minimizing thermal losses, the test method should be
excluded. Id.
DOE agrees that definitions should be based on technical
specifications and characteristics where possible, however, for mobile
refrigerated cabinets, DOE cannot identify a single characteristic for
this equipment at issue other than its use without the ability to use a
continuous power supply. DOE notes that none of characteristics
identified by the CA IOUs are specific to mobile refrigerated cabinets.
DOE has determined that the operation of the equipment without a
continuous power supply is sufficiently different than other CRE
intended for holding temperature applications or pull-down temperature
applications, which are used with continuous power supplies, that
equipment meeting the mobile refrigerated cabinet definition will be
identifiable.
In response to True's comments, the term mobile in this context
does not mean for use in vehicles; rather it is intended to address
equipment that is used without a continuous connection to a power
supply (i.e., can be moved away from the power supply location). The
definition as proposed reflects this and so DOE is maintaining it as
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
In response to comments regarding test procedures and applicability
of energy conservation standards, equipment without a test procedure
would not be subject to energy conservation standards as DOE would have
no basis on which to evaluate potential standards. As DOE is not
establishing a test procedure for this equipment category, other CRE
energy conservation standards would not apply. DOE may consider test
procedures and corresponding energy conservation standards for mobile
refrigerated cabinets as part of future rulemakings.
6. Additional Covered Equipment
DOE provided examples of potential CRE that may require additional
test procedure provisions in the June 2021 RFI. 86 FR 31182, 31190. DOE
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that additional test procedure
provisions to account for what is likely unique equipment operation or
usage are not needed at this time. 87 FR 39164, 39203. The existing DOE
test procedure is reasonably designed to produce test results which
reflect energy efficiency and energy use of the CRE subject to the test
procedure during a representative average use cycle, and is not unduly
burdensome to conduct. Because the test procedure provides a
representative average use cycle, DOE is unable to account for every
combination of operating conditions and usage without the resulting
test procedures being unduly burdensome. If the test procedure cannot
be conducted for certain equipment, or if the test procedure results in
measures of energy consumption so unrepresentative of the equipment's
true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially
inaccurate comparative data, manufacturers may petition DOE for a test
procedure waiver under the provisions of 10 CFR 431.401.
DOE did not receive any comments and is therefore maintaining the
June 2022 NOPR approach and not adopting additional provisions for
other categories of CRE.
[[Page 66205]]
D. Harmonization of Efficiency Standards and Testing With NSF 7-2019
Food Safety
NSF 7-2019 establishes minimum food protection and sanitation
specifications for the materials, design, manufacture, and performance
of commercial refrigerators and freezers and their related components.
Section 2.3 of appendix B in the CRE test procedure states that for CRE
that is also tested in accordance with NSF test procedures (Type I and
Type II),\30\ integrated average temperatures and ambient conditions
used for NSF testing may be used in place of the DOE-prescribed
integrated average temperatures and ambient conditions provided they
result in a more stringent test. To that end, the ambient temperature
may be higher, but not lower than the DOE test condition, and the IAT
may be lower, but not higher, than that measured at the DOE ambient
test condition. Id. The test conditions and possible different
thermostat settings under NSF 7-2019 may result in measured energy use
that is more representative of average use in applications for which
users prioritize food safety over energy efficiency. Permitting the use
of NSF 7-2019 test conditions may also reduce testing burden for
manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Type I equipment is designed to operate in 75 [deg]F
ambient conditions and Type II equipment is designed to operate in
80 [deg]F ambient conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE did not propose any additional
amendments to the test procedures to further reference or harmonize
with NSF 7-2019 testing. 87 FR 39164, 39203.
DOE did not receive any additional comments on this topic in
response to the June 2022 NOPR. Therefore, DOE is not adopting any
additional amendments regarding harmonizing with NSF 7 testing. The
existing test procedure instructions in section 2.3 of appendix B allow
for the use of NSF 7-2019 test data to be used for DOE testing subject
to certain requirements. DOE recognizes that NSF 7-2019 testing is not
applicable or appropriate for all equipment types. For those equipment
types, the DOE test procedure provides the required test instructions--
including additional IAT rating temperatures--and reference to NSF 7-
2019 is not needed. DOE maintains that the amended DOE test procedure,
by reference to AHRI 1200-2023 and ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata for
conventional CRE, provides a measure of energy use of CRE during a
representative average use cycle and is not unduly burdensome to
conduct. The optional NSF 7-2019 test provides a means to further
reduce test burden in certain instances, but it is not required for DOE
testing.
E. Dedicated Remote Condensing Units
DOE is aware of remote condensing CRE models for which specific
dedicated condensing units are intended for use with specific
refrigerated cases. For some of these models, the remote condensing
units are intended to be installed on or near the refrigerated case
within the same conditioned space. For other models, the remote
condensing units are intended to be installed outdoors, but the
refrigerated case is intended to be used specifically with the
designated remote condensing unit.
For this equipment, the combined refrigerated case and condensing
unit refrigeration system would effectively operate as if it were CRE
with a self-contained condensing unit. Under the current DOE test
procedure, remote CRE energy consumption is determined from the energy
use of components in the refrigerated case plus a calculated compressor
energy consumption based on the enthalpy change of refrigerant supplied
to the case at specified conditions. The compressor energy use
calculation is based on typical reciprocating compressor energy
efficiency ratios (``EERs'') at a range of operating conditions. See
Table 1 in AHRI 1200-2010. For CRE used with dedicated condensing
units, the actual compressor used during normal operation is known
(i.e., the compressor in the dedicated condensing unit). Accordingly,
testing the whole system using the same approach as required for a
self-contained CRE unit may produce energy use results that are more
representative of how this equipment actually operates in the field.
Additionally, testing such a system as a complete system rather than
using the test procedures for remote condensing units may be less
burdensome, because it would not require the use of a test facility
capable of maintaining the required liquid and suction line refrigerant
conditions as currently required for testing remote CRE (i.e., the
refrigerant conditions consistent with ASHRAE 72-2005 requirements and
at the conditions necessary to maintain the appropriate case
temperature for testing).
DOE understands that remote CRE are most commonly installed with
rack condensing systems, and that installations with dedicated
condensing units represent a very small portion of the remote CRE
market. Additionally, DOE has not identified a method to determine
whether a remote CRE unit would be installed with a dedicated
condensing unit rather than a rack condensing system. DOE is not aware
of any remote CRE that are capable of installations only with a
dedicated remote condensing unit (i.e., DOE expects that all remote CRE
may be installed with rack condensing systems).
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that an amended
test procedure to account for remote CRE installed with dedicated
remote condensing units is not appropriate. 87 FR 39164, 39205.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its tentative
determination not to propose amended test procedures for dedicated
remote condensing units. Id.
AHRI stated its support for DOE's tentative determination to not
propose amended test procedures for dedicated remote condensing units
and thanked DOE for this determination. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 13)
Hillphoenix commented that it agreed with not proposing a test
procedure for dedicated remote condensing units, as the customization
of each unit would create an unreasonable burden on manufacturers while
not resulting in reasonable energy savings. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7)
DOE is maintaining the June 2022 NOPR approach and not adopting
test provisions for dedicated remote condensing units at this time.
F. Test Procedure Clarifications and Modifications
1. Defrost Cycles
The test period requirements in ASHRAE 72-2005, incorporated by
reference in the current CRE test procedure, and in ASHRAE 72-2018
require a 24-hour test period, which begins with a defrost after
steady-state conditions are achieved.\31\ Use of a fixed 24-hour test
period can provide for a degree of variability in the measured energy
consumption, depending on when additional defrost cycles occur after
the initial defrost cycle (e.g., the test period may capture only a
portion of a defrost cycle at the end of the test period rather than a
complete number of defrost cycles). Typically, if multiple complete
defrost cycles occur within the 24-hour period, the impact of capturing
partial defrost cycles would be small. Similarly, if the defrost cycle
duration is slightly greater than 24 hours, the impact of capturing a
partial defrost
[[Page 66206]]
cycle would be small. However, the impact may be more substantial if
the defrost cycle duration is very long (i.e., multiple days between
defrost) or if the defrost cycle is slightly less than 24 hours (i.e.,
the test period would capture two defrost occurrences but only one
period of ``normal'' operation between defrosts). DOE also notes that
ASHRAE 72-2005 does not have any specific provisions for CRE with
variable defrost control schemes (i.e., defrosts that may be triggered
based on conditions or other parameters rather than only a timer) and
does not account for CRE with no automatic defrost (i.e., manual
defrost).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ ASHRAE 72-2005 and ASHRAE 72-2018 define ``steady state''
as the condition in which the average temperature of all test
simulators changes less than 0.4 [deg]F from one 24-hour period or
refrigeration cycle to the next.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has addressed similar issues in the test procedures for
consumer refrigeration products. The test procedures for those products
apply a two-part test period (one period for steady-state operation and
one period to capture events related to the defrost cycle) to account
for defrost energy consumption for products with long defrost cycle
durations or with variable defrost control. The energy use calculations
then weigh the performance from each test period based on the known
compressor runtime between defrosts or on a calculated average time
between defrosts in field operation that is based on the control
parameters for variable defrosts. See appendices A and B to subpart B
of 10 CFR part 430.
Additionally, DOE has addressed testing of certain CRE models that
do not have automatic defrost in a waiver granted to AHT published on
October 30, 2018. 83 FR 54581 (``October 2018 Waiver''). For the basic
models subject to the waiver, the test period begins after steady-state
conditions occur (instead of beginning with a defrost cycle) and the
door-opening period begins 3 hours after the start of the test (instead
of 3 hours after a defrost cycle). 83 FR 54581, 54583. DOE also granted
AHT an interim waiver for testing certain models with defrost cycles
longer than 24 hours. 82 FR 24330 (May 26, 2017; ``May 2017 Interim
Waiver'').\32\ The interim waiver required that AHT test the specified
models using a two-part test method similar to the method for consumer
refrigerators, with the first part capturing normal compressor
operation between defrosts, including an 8-hour period of door
openings, and the second part capturing all operation associated with a
defrost, including any pre-cooling or temperature recovery following
the defrost. 82 FR 24330, 24332-24333.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ On June 2, 2021, AHT sent a letter to DOE requesting that
this interim waiver be withdrawn. See www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-WAV-0027-0015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For testing CRE with no automatic defrost, ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata incorporates instructions for starting the test period and door
openings that are consistent with those provided in the October 2018
Waiver (i.e., the instructions do not require a defrost occurrence).
Therefore, DOE incorporating by reference ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
addresses this test issue.
For testing CRE with variable defrost, DOE tentatively determined
in the June 2022 NOPR that the existing 24-hour test period represents
typical operation during a day, including a period of door openings and
a period of closed-door operation, and did not propose any additional
test requirements. 87 FR 39164, 39206. Units with variable defrost
controls may initiate more frequent defrosts in response to door
openings, which is captured by the current test procedure.
The 24-hour test period specified in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
provides a representative basis for measuring energy consumption of
most CRE, capturing the defrost occurrences and door opening periods
expected for a 24-hour period. Most CRE include multiple defrosts
during a 24-hour test period, and any incomplete defrost cycle captured
in the test period does not significantly impact measured energy
consumption. DOE is not proposing to amend the 24-hour test to require
that the test procedure capture complete defrost cycles in situations
where the defrost interval is less than 24 hours.
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that for CRE with
defrost cycles longer than 24 hours, the 24-hour test period would
overestimate the actual average defrost energy contribution during a
day. 87 FR 39164, 39206. Therefore, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to allow the use of a two-part test for CRE with defrost cycles longer
than 24 hours. Id. DOE proposed the two-part test approach, consistent
with the approach in the May 2017 Interim Waiver, for such equipment--
rather than extending the existing test period in 24-hour increments--
in order to limit test burden. Id. For the basic models addressed in
the May 2017 Interim Waiver, testing in 24-hour increments would
require three 24-hour periods (e.g., the duration between defrosts is
3.5 days, and introducing a fourth 24-hour period would result in the
test period capturing two defrosts). Additionally, the 24-hour
increment approach would continue to overestimate energy consumption
associated with defrosts, albeit to a lesser extent, for defrost
intervals that are not exact multiples of 24 hours (as is the case with
the basic models covered by the May 2017 Interim Waiver). The two-part
test approach eliminates the need for multiple door opening periods and
may allow for much shorter overall test durations while accounting for
defrost occurrences based on actual defrost interval durations.
Also consistent with the May 2017 Interim Waiver, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR that the two-part test would be optional because it
would increase test duration compared to the existing approach (by
requiring both a 24-hour test plus a defrost test), and manufacturers
may determine that the existing test procedure may be more appropriate
their models, even if the models incorporate defrost intervals longer
than 24 hours. 87 FR 39164, 39206. Specifically, DOE proposed to allow
for testing equipment with defrost intervals greater than 24 hours
using a two-part test in which the first part is a 24-hour period of
stable operation, including door openings as specified in ASHRAE 72-
2018R, but without any defrost operation. Id. Stability for the first
part of the test would be determined according to section 7.5 in ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata, by comparing temperatures determined during Test A
and Test B. A defrost may occur during the test alignment period, as
defined in section 7.4 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, between Test A
and Test B. The second part of the test would capture a defrost cycle,
including any pre-cooling and temperature recovery associated with a
defrost. Rather than referencing the consumer refrigeration product
test procedures (as done in the May 2017 Interim Waiver approach), DOE
proposed to require that the start and end of the test period be
determined as, respectively, the last time before and first time after
a defrost occurrence, when the measured average simulator temperature
(i.e., the instantaneous average of all test simulator temperature
measurements) is within 0.5 [deg]F of the IAT as measured during the
first part of the test. 87 FR 39164, 39206, 39207. This would ensure
that the defrost part of the test captures any pre-cooling operation
and temperature recovery following a defrost while limiting the overall
duration of the second part of the test.
The May 2017 Interim Waiver includes certain parameters specific to
the models covered by the waiver, namely the duration between defrosts.
DOE granted the interim waiver based on the minimum defrost interval
possible for the equipment (i.e., 3.5
[[Page 66207]]
days). To generalize the May 2017 Interim Waiver approach for other CRE
models, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that the two-part
calculation be applied based on the minimum duration between defrosts
permitted by the unit's controls as shown in the following equation. 87
FR 39164, 39207.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26SE23.005
Where DEC is the daily energy consumption in kWh/day; ET1 is the
energy consumed during the first part of the test, in kWh/day; ET2 is
the energy consumed during the second part of the test, in kWh;
tNDI is the normalized length of defrosting time per day, in
minutes; tDI is the length of time of the defrosting test
period, in minutes; tDC is the minimum time between defrost
occurrences, in days; and 1,440 is a conversion factor, in minutes per
day. DOE recognizes that the two-part test approach could result in
slightly less door-opening energy contribution as the first part of the
test, with no defrost and 8 hours of door openings, would be combined
with the defrost portion of the test by a calculation. To investigate
this impact, DOE conducted testing on equipment with defrost intervals
longer than 24 hours and compared results of the existing test
procedure (24-hour test period, starting with a defrost), the May 2017
Interim Waiver approach (two-part test, as proposed in the June 2022
NOPR), and a full-duration approach (multiple 24-hour periods, each
with door opening periods, through a complete defrost cycle) as
illustrated in Table III.5.
Table III.5--May 2017 Interim Waiver Approach Investigative Testing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current DOE May 2017 Full defrost
Total display CRE test interim waiver cycle duration
HCT.SC.I area (ft\2\) procedure (kWh/ approach (kWh/ approach (kWh/
day) day) day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit #1......................................... 12.72 7.12 6.66 6.66
Unit #2......................................... 14.84 6.12 5.61 5.62
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's testing showed that the two-part waiver test approach
provides an accurate representation of energy consumption when measured
over a full defrost cycle (and is therefore representative of average
use). Additionally, the testing showed that the existing test procedure
approach can overestimate measured energy use for CRE with defrost
cycles longer than 24 hours.
Based on DOE's investigative testing, DOE tentatively determined in
the June 2022 NOPR that the May 2017 Interim Waiver approach, and the
approach proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, is representative of a full
defrost cycle duration approach for equipment with defrost intervals
greater than 24 hours. 87 FR 39164, 39207.
With regard to CRE models with multiple evaporators (and,
therefore, potentially multiple defrosts) connected to a single- or
multi-stage condensing unit, ASHRAE 72-2005 does not specify which
evaporator should be used to determine the defrost cycle that initiates
the test. Additionally, if the defrost cycles for multiple evaporators
do not activate at the same time during the test, ASHRAE 72-2005 does
not specify which defrost cycle should be used to determine the start
of the 24-hour test period. ASHRAE 72-2005 also does not explicitly
address the treatment of defrost cycles for multi-compartment CRE
models (i.e., hybrid CRE) with different evaporator temperatures and
defrost sequences.
As discussed earlier in this section, CRE with automatic defrost
typically include multiple defrost occurrences per day. DOE expects
that any multi-evaporator CRE with multiple unique defrost cycle
durations would similarly defrost multiple times per day, and therefore
no change to the existing test procedure is necessary. However, to
ensure that the 24-hour test period captures a representative number of
defrosts for each evaporator's defrost, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to specify that for CRE with multiple unique defrost intervals for
multiple evaporators, the test period as specified in ASHRAE 72-2018R
would start with a defrost occurrence for the evaporator defrost having
the longest interval between defrosts. 87 FR 39164, 39208.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
approach to account for long-duration defrost cycles using an optional
two-part test procedure consistent with the existing waiver approach
granted for such models. Id. DOE also requested comment on whether any
additional provisions are necessary to account for different defrost
operation or controls, and on DOE's proposed approach in which the test
period would start with the defrost occurrence having the longest
interval between defrosts. Id.
AHRI stated its support for DOE's proposed approach to account for
long-duration defrost cycles using an optional two-part test procedure,
and further recommended that DOE bring this approach to the ASHRAE 72
committee for review. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 13)
The Joint Commenters commented that they support DOE's proposals
regarding testing equipment with long defrost cycles. (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 1)
AHT stated its support for the proposed approach to account for
long-duration defrost cycles using the
[[Page 66208]]
optional two-part test procedure consistent with the existing waiver.
(AHT, No. 38, p. 1)
Hillphoenix agreed with the proposed long defrost duration approach
for determining energy on CRE equipment that incorporate a defrost
interval longer than 24 hours. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7) Hillphoenix
recommended that DOE approach ASHRAE and request this approach be
evaluated for inclusion in ASHRAE 72. Id.
The Joint Commenters supported DOE's proposal for testing equipment
with defrost cycles greater than 24 hours. (Joint Commenters, No. 31,
p. 4) The Joint Commenters stated that as DOE discussed in the NOPR,
use of a fixed 24-hour test period might provide a degree of
variability in measured energy consumption based on additional defrost
cycles, which DOE proposed to address through an optional two-part test
procedure, based on an existing test waiver, wherein the first part
captured energy usage during a 24-hour operating period and the second
part captured a single defrost cycle. Id. The Joint Commenters stated
that this approach mirrored that used to address a similar issue for
consumer refrigeration equipment, and they supported this approach
because it provides a more representative estimate of energy usage for
CRE with defrost periods lasting longer than 24 hours. Id.
As discussed, the current industry test procedures do not include
provisions to specifically account for defrost cycles longer than 24
hours. DOE has determined such test provisions are appropriate to
ensure representative testing of such equipment. To the extent that
future industry standards incorporate updated provisions to address
defrosts, DOE would consider those standards as part of a future test
procedure rulemaking.
For these reasons and consistent with the comments received, DOE is
adopting the approach for accounting for defrosts as proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR.
2. Total Display Area
Section 3.2 of appendix B provides instructions regarding the
measurement of TDA, specifying that TDA is the sum of the projected
area(s) of visible product, expressed in square feet (``ft\2\'') (i.e.,
portions through which product can be viewed from an angle normal, or
perpendicular, to the transparent area).
For certain CRE configurations, merchandise is not necessarily
located at an angle directly normal, or perpendicular, to the
transparent area despite this area being intended for customer viewing.
For example, for service over counter ice-cream freezers, the ice-cream
containers may be placed within the chest portion of the refrigerated
case, with a glass display panel on the front and glass rear doors
located above the merchandise storage area. If the glass display areas
are nearly vertical, the ice-cream containers may be positioned low
enough in the case that they are not at a viewing angle perpendicular
to the glass. However, during typical use, customers would stand close
enough to the display glass that the ice-cream would be visible from
other angles not perpendicular to the glass.
AHRI 1200-2023 maintains the existing definition and approach for
TDA, which is based on the visibility of merchandise at a location
normal to the display surface, but includes additional diagrams to
clarify the determination of TDA. See appendix D to AHRI 1200-2023.
Figure 10 in AHRI 1200-2023 appendix D shows a service over counter
unit similar to the example described earlier in this section. The food
load is included only in the lowest portion of the refrigerated
cabinet, and as a result, only portions of the transparent areas are
considered for the TDA (i.e., the portions through which the food load
is visible at an angle normal to the transparent area).
Consistent with the updated version of AHRI 1200-202X, DOE did not
propose revisions to the current TDA in the June 2022 NOPR. 87 FR
39164, 39208. As discussed, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
incorporate by reference AHRI 1200-202X, which includes the new
appendix D to provide clarification on how to apply the current TDA
approach to different CRE configurations. 87 FR 39164, 39208.
DOE is aware that the current DOE test procedure includes
conflicting instructions regarding the calculation of TDA for CRE with
transparent and non-transparent areas over the length of the case. The
instructions in section 3.1 of appendix B specify determining the
length of the display area as the interior length of the CRE model,
provided no more than 5 in. of that length consists of non-transparent
material; or, for those cases with greater than 5 in. of non-
transparent area, the length shall be determined as the projected
linear dimension(s) of visible product plus 5 in. Figures A3.4 and A3.5
of appendix B show a similar approach, but instead reference 10 percent
of the total length as the threshold of non-transparent area rather
than 5 in. The captions for these figures reference 5 in., consistent
with section 3.1. The April 2014 Final Rule established these TDA
provisions in appendix B. 79 FR 22277, 22300-22301. In the April 2014
Final Rule, DOE stated that the 10-percent approach rather than the 5-
in. approach would allow for more consistent application of the TDA
requirements across CRE models. Id.
In addition, DOE incorrectly applied the 10-percent threshold
approach as shown in Figures A3.4 and A3.5 of appendix B. As discussed,
DOE intended to provide a consistent TDA approach for cases with
transparent and non-transparent areas. The equation for length shown in
Figure A3.5 shows that length equals the total transparent dimension,
multiplied by 1.10. As a result, the non-transparent area would
represent 10 percent of the transparent dimension, not 10 percent of
the total length. The correct application would have length equal to
the transparent dimension divided by 0.9--resulting in a non-
transparent area representing 10 percent of the total length.
Section D.1.1.1 of AHRI 1200-202X appendix D includes correct
equations regarding TDA and case length as intended in the April 2014
Final Rule. Specifically, AHRI 1200-202X applies the 10-percent
threshold approach for non-transparent area and correctly calculates
the length of the CRE for cases with non-transparent areas greater than
10 percent of the length of the case. As discussed, DOE proposed in the
NOPR to incorporate by reference AHRI 1200-202X, which would correct
the errors regarding TDA calculations currently included in appendix B.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the June 2022 NOPR
regarding the TDA instructions, and is adopting the provisions as
proposed by referencing AHRI 1200-2023.
G. Alternative Refrigerants
DOE's current test procedure for remote condensing CRE requires the
estimation of compressor EER from Table 1 of AHRI 1200-2010. The EER
ratings in the table are based on performance of reciprocating
compressors and were developed based on refrigerants that historically
have been commonly used for CRE (i.e., R-404A).
Certain remote CRE installations can use R-744; however, the
existing remote CRE test procedure does not address the unique
operation for these systems. For example, the current DOE test
procedure requires an inlet refrigerant liquid temperature of 80 [deg]F
with a saturated liquid pressure corresponding to a condensing
temperature of 89.6 [deg]F to 120.2 [deg]F. See ASHRAE 72-2005,
sections 4.3.2 and 4.3.3. R-744 has a critical point of 87.8 [deg]F and
1,070 pounds per square inch (``psi''), above which it is a
supercritical fluid. Accordingly, R-744 cannot be a liquid
[[Page 66209]]
at the specified condensing temperature conditions (i.e., it would
either be a gas or supercritical fluid, depending on pressure).
Additionally, R-744 systems typically include multiple stages of
compression and cooling, resulting in liquid supplied to the
refrigerant cases at conditions not necessarily defined by the typical
condensing unit conditions. DOE has recently granted a waiver for
specific models of CRE to address R-744 operating conditions for
testing walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer unit coolers. 86 FR 14887
(March 19, 2021; ``March 2021 Waiver''). For testing of the specified
basic models, the March 2021 Waiver requires liquid inlet saturation
temperature and liquid inlet subcooling of 38 [deg]F and 5 [deg]F,
respectively. 86 FR 14887, 14889. The March 2021 Waiver also maintains
the existing compressor energy consumption determination based on an
approach consistent with the CRE remote calculations using AHRI 1200-
2010 (the walk-in requirements instead refer to the walk-ins rating
standard, AHRI 1250-2009, which includes the same EER table as AHRI
1200-2010). Id.
For all remote CRE, the DOE test procedure requires measuring
energy consumption of the refrigerated case and the heat gain of the
refrigerant providing cooling to the remote case. AHRI 1200-2010
specifies a calculation of compressor energy consumption based on the
heat gain measured for the test refrigerant. DOE is aware that
manufacturers may specify the use of multiple refrigerants for a single
remote CRE cabinet and that the current test procedure allows for
consistent testing of such equipment regardless of refrigerant used for
testing. Manufacturers are already testing and rating systems that can
use R-744, likely by testing with non- R-744 refrigerants under the
existing test conditions, according to the existing approach, which
references AHRI 1200-2010. DOE expects that any ratings for current R-
744 systems are based on testing with another refrigerant capable of
maintaining the conditions specified in ASHRAE 72-2005.
Based on a review of CRE that are capable of using R-744, DOE
observed that many of these models also may be installed for use with
other refrigerants that can be tested under the existing approach.
However, any remote CRE that are intended for use only with R-744 would
not be able to be tested according to the current DOE test procedure
due to the specified liquid conditions specified in ASHRAE 72-2005. To
allow for testing remote CRE with R-744, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR to adopt alternate refrigerant conditions consistent with those
granted in the March 2021 Waiver for walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer
unit coolers with CO2 refrigerant. 87 FR 39164, 39209. DOE
proposed that for remote CRE tested with direct expansion
CO2, the liquid inlet saturation temperature be 38 [deg]F
with liquid inlet subcooling of 5 [deg]F. 87 FR 39164, 39209, 39210.
DOE research into the performance of different configurations of R-
744 booster systems indicates that enhanced R-744 cycles can match
conventional refrigerants in average efficiency. Even though the EER
values included in AHRI 1200-202X for remote compressors were initially
established for conventional refrigerants, DOE tentatively determined
in the June 2022 NOPR that they are also appropriate for determining
compressor energy consumption of CO2 remote systems. 87 FR
39164, 39210. DOE recognizes that the actual compressor energy
consumption of a specific remote system will vary based on a number of
parameters (e.g., ambient conditions, refrigerant conditions necessary
for the remote cases), but tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR
that the values included in AHRI 1200-202X are appropriate for
determining the energy consumption of an average use cycle for all
remote CRE as tested under the proposed test procedure. Id.
In addition to R-744, in this final rule, DOE has determined that
the EER table in AHRI 1200-2023 is appropriate for other alternative
refrigerants. DOE similarly researched compressor EERs at a range of
operating conditions for refrigerants other than R-404A, including R-
407A, R-407F, and R-507A, and found the existing EERs to be
representative based on expected operating conditions. Additionally,
AHRI 1200-2023 further improves the consistency of the EER approach by
including additional instructions regarding the use of high-glide
refrigerants. DOE did not propose additional amendments to address
alternative refrigerants other than CO2 in the June 2022
NOPR. 87 FR 39164, 39210.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
alternate refrigerant conditions to be used for testing remote CRE with
CO2 refrigerant. Id. DOE requested comment on whether any
other aspects of the current test procedure require amendment to allow
for testing with CO2 or any other alternative refrigerants.
Id.
AHRI commented that regarding testing with CO2 (i.e., R-
744) or any other alternate refrigerants, it is not aware of any
alternative refrigerants, nor is it aware of any aspects of the current
test procedure that would require amendments to the test procedure.
(AHRI, No. 38, p. 13) AHRI stated that manufacturers are still working
to determine which refrigerants they will use to comply with the AIM
Act, and advised DOE to consider that there may be additional
refrigerants and properties to those refrigerants that are currently
unknown and will need to be taken under consideration. Id. AHRI
tentatively agreed with the proposed alternate condition for testing
CRE with CO2 refrigerant as specified by DOE, that ``the
liquid inlet saturation temperature be 38 [deg]F with liquid inlet
subcooling of 5 [deg]F.'' Id. AHRI stipulated that it would be
necessary to add tolerances to both liquid temperature and subcooling
values and recommended DOE wait for the ASHRAE 72 committee to address
typical conditions for CO2 remote CRE in its ASHRAE 72
update. Id.
The Joint Commenters commented that they support DOE's proposals
regarding the use of a CO2 refrigerant (i.e., R-744). (Joint
Commenters, No. 31, p. 1) The Joint Commenters also stated their
support for DOE's proposed specifications regarding CO2
refrigerant in remote condensing CRE. (Joint Commenters, No. 31, p. 4)
The Joint Commenters noted that DOE's current test procedure did not
account for the unique operating conditions of CO2-charged
systems and that DOE proposed in the NOPR to adopt alternate
refrigerant conditions consistent with those granted in a March 2021
waiver for walk-in cooler and walk-in freezer unit coolers using
CO2 refrigerant.\33\ Id. The Joint Commenters expressed
support for this change, stating it would result in more representative
energy usage for CRE utilizing CO2 refrigerant. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ 87 FR 39209, 39210.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hillphoenix tentatively agreed with the proposed alternate
condition for testing CRE with CO2 refrigerant (i.e., R-744)
as specified by DOE: ``the liquid inlet saturation temperature be 38
[deg]F with liquid inlet subcooling of 5 [deg]F''; however, Hillphoenix
stated that it would be necessary to add tolerances to both liquid
temperature and subcooling values. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 7)
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE should wait for an update to ASHRAE 72
because the committee is addressing typical conditions for
CO2 remote CRE testing. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting, Arneg commented that if
regarding the proposal for the liquid inlet saturation temperature to
be 38 [deg]F and a 5 [deg]F sub-
[[Page 66210]]
cooling, or bottom-line 33 [deg]F liquid, there would be an operational
problem at the medium-temperature CO2 (i.e., R-744)
application. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 48) Arneg stated
that it is not sure what that 38 [deg]F and 5 [deg]F are representing.
Id. Arneg commented that at this rate, for 33 [deg]F liquid inlet
temperature, there is an issue with medium-temperature application. Id.
When prompted as to whether there was any temperature it considers more
appropriate or representative, Arneg stated that 36 [deg]F to 38 [deg]F
seems to be a reasonable temperature range. Id.
Zero Zone commented that the proposed temperatures for testing
CO2 (i.e., R-744) are appropriate but recommended that DOE
utilize tolerances similar to those stated for liquid refrigerant
temperature in the current draft of ASHRAE 72. (Zero Zone, No. 37, p.
9) Zero Zone commented that CO2 systems have a certain
degree of operational instability and recommended that there should be
a tolerance for the average and a tolerance for individual measurement.
Id. Zero Zone recommended these tolerances should be applied to the
refrigerant temperature and the saturated refrigerant temperature of
CO2. Id. Zero Zone further urged that this issue should be
addressed by the ASHRAE 72 working group. Id.
DOE agrees with commenters that revisions to certain liquid
refrigerant test conditions and tolerances are appropriate for the
liquid refrigerant test conditions. DOE recognizes that remote CRE
using R-744 are currently available and that a future version of ASHRAE
72 may include liquid refrigerant test conditions for CRE connected to
a direct expansion remote condensing unit with R-744, however an
updated version of ASHRAE 72 with such conditions is not yet available.
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies liquid refrigerant
temperature, liquid refrigerant pressure, and liquid refrigerant
subcooling for liquid refrigerant test conditions for direct-expansion
remote units. In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed a liquid inlet
saturation temperature of 38 [deg]F with a liquid inlet subcooling of 5
[deg]F for R-744, which together would require a liquid refrigerant
temperature of 33 [deg]F, which is consistent with Arneg's comment in
the August 2022 public meeting.
As stated, Arneg also suggested a different liquid refrigerant
temperature of between 36 [deg]F to 38 [deg]F (mid-point temperature is
37 [deg]F).
Commenters agreed with the liquid inlet saturation temperature
(specified as the liquid refrigerant pressure or the saturated liquid
pressure corresponding to a condensing temperature in ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata) of 38 [deg]F and, consistent with feedback from
commenters, DOE is maintaining that test condition in this final rule.
However, as suggested by comments received in response to the June 2022
NOPR, DOE considered tolerances for the liquid refrigerant temperature,
saturation temperature, and subcooling requirements.
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata specifies the liquid refrigerant
temperature to be 80.0 [deg]F with a tolerance for the average over the
test period of 5.0 [deg]F and a tolerance for the
individual measurements of 10.0 [deg]F. Also, ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata specifies the saturated liquid pressure corresponding
to a condensing temperature in the range of 89.6 [deg]F to 120.2 [deg]F
(e.g., roughly a 15 [deg]F range) for the average over test
period. These liquid conditions and tolerances are based on operation
in a single-compressor-stage system rejecting heat to outdoor ambient
conditions. Because the liquid entering display cases in CO2
booster systems is at an intermediate temperature and pressure (i.e.,
at a level between the high-side outdoor heat rejection conditions and
the low-side display case evaporating conditions), it is not expected
that the potential range of its temperature or pressure could be as
large. In order to maintain test condition flexibility while addressing
these differences for CO2, DOE is selecting reduced
allowable ranges for the saturated temperature and temperature
conditions, specifically 6 [deg]F for the average
saturation temperature, and 3 [deg]F for the average liquid
temperature. Therefore, for commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers connected to a direct expansion remote condensing
unit with R-744, DOE is requiring in this final rule that, instead of
the saturated liquid pressure corresponding to a condensing temperature
range specified in appendix A to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, the
saturated liquid pressure corresponding to a condensing temperature
range shall be 38.0 [deg]F 6.0 [deg]F or 32.0 [deg]F to
44.0 [deg]F for the average over test period.
DOE notes that, during operation, liquid temperature must remain
below saturation temperature to prevent formation of bubbles in the
liquid line, which can cause flow instability through the refrigerant
expansion device. Hence, DOE is reducing the specified liquid
temperature from the 33 [deg]F level adopted in the Hussmann waiver to
30 [deg]F. This would not completely eliminate crossover of these
temperature with the selected tolerances, but would limit the potential
for such crossover (i.e., maximum liquid temperature would be 33
[deg]F, while minimum saturation temperature would be 32 [deg]F).
To ensure that no such crossover could occur, DOE is requiring that
subcooling (the difference between saturation temperature and liquid
temperature) be at least 2 [deg]F. While ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
specifies subcooling >0 [deg]R, the specified accuracy for the
temperature measurement is 1.4 [deg]F. Therefore, to ensure
subcooling occurs, DOE has determined to use the test condition
tolerance for liquid refrigerant subcooling of >2 [deg]R for average
over test period, which with the given accuracy requirement would
ensure at least 0.6 [deg]F subcooling.
DOE recognizes that fluctuations could occur during testing, e.g.,
the refrigerant liquid temperature could fluctuate. As mentioned above,
DOE is requiring that the average refrigerant temperature vary no more
than 3 [deg]F from the specified 30 [deg]F target. To limit
fluctuations, DOE is additionally requiring that the maximum range of
individual liquid temperature measurements be 5 [deg]F.
This is consistent with the operating tolerance ranges for refrigerant
liquid saturation temperature and subcooling allowed for testing of
WICF unit coolers \34\ in AHRI 1250-2020 (i.e., the latest version of
the test standard specified in the March 2021 Hussmann waiver).
Therefore, for commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers connected to a direct expansion remote condensing unit with R-
744, DOE is requiring in this final rule that, instead of the liquid
refrigerant test conditions specified in appendix A to ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata, the liquid refrigerant temperature shall be 30.0 [deg]F
with a tolerance for the average over test period of 3.0
[deg]F and a tolerance for the individual measurements of 5.0 [deg]F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Unit coolers are the walk-in component most comparable to
remote refrigerated cabinets, in that they operate with high-
pressure subcooled liquid entering the component and low-pressure
superheated vapor leaving it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has determined that these liquid refrigerant test conditions
for CRE connected to a direct expansion remote condensing unit with R-
744 are representative, repeatable, and reproducible.
In summary, for commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers connected to a direct expansion remote condensing
unit with R-744, DOE is requiring in this final rule that, instead of
the liquid refrigerant
[[Page 66211]]
measurements for direct-expansion remote units specified in appendix A
to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, the liquid refrigerant measurements for
direct-expansion remote units shall be: liquid refrigerant temperature
shall be 30.0 [deg]F with a tolerance for the average over test period
of 3.0 [deg]F and a tolerance for the individual
measurements of 5.0 [deg]F; liquid refrigerant pressure
shall be the saturated liquid pressure corresponding to a condensing
temperature in the range of 32.0 [deg]F to 44.0 [deg]F for the average
over test period; and liquid refrigerant subcooling shall be greater
than 2.0 [deg]R for the average over test period.
If manufacturers adopt additional refrigerant types that cannot be
tested according to the test procedure as established in this final
rule, manufacturers may petition for a waiver to ensure that equipment
using such refrigerants can be tested and certified to DOE.
H. Certification of Compartment Volume
DOE's current test procedure incorporates by reference AHAM HRF-1-
2008 to measure compartment volume. DOE acknowledges that manufacturers
often use CAD in designing their equipment. However, the current test
procedure and certification provisions for CRE do not provide for using
CAD drawings to determine compartment volume. Using CAD drawings as the
basis for determining compartment volumes may be particularly helpful
when the geometric designs of the CRE make physical measurements in
accordance with AHAM HRF-1-2008 difficult. Currently, DOE's
certification requirements in 10 CFR part 429 include provisions for
certifying volume for basic models of consumer refrigeration products,
commercial gas-fired and oil-fired instantaneous water heaters, and hot
water supply boilers using CAD drawings. 10 CFR 429.72(c), (d), and
(e).
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that calculating
volume according to CAD drawings would reduce manufacturer test burden
and may allow for more accurate measurements of volume for complicated
cabinet designs. 87 FR 39164, 39210. DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR
to adopt provisions in 10 CFR part 429 to allow for certifying volume
for basic models of CRE using CAD drawings. To ensure that volumes
determined based on CAD drawings are consistent with testing actual
production models, DOE also proposed certain enforcement provisions as
discussed in section III.J of this final rule.
DOE did not receive any comments in response to the proposal for
using CAD drawings for volume measurements, and is adopting those
provisions as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
I. Test Procedure Waivers
A person may seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for
a particular basic model of a type of covered equipment when the basic
model for which the petition for waiver is submitted contains one or
more design characteristics that (1) prevent testing according to the
prescribed test procedure or (2) cause the prescribed test procedures
to evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true
energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate
comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1).
In addition to the test procedure waivers discussed, DOE granted
test procedure waivers to address certain CRE designed for specialized
applications. Specifically, on September 12, 2018, DOE published a test
procedure waiver for ITW for testing specified basic models of grocery
and general merchandise system equipment (i.e., refrigerated storage
allowing for order storage and customer pickup). 83 FR 46148
(``September 2018 Waiver''). The specified basic models have
characteristics that include floating suction temperatures for
individual compartments, different typical door-opening cycles, and a
high-temperature ``ambient'' compartment. 83 FR 46148, 46149. DOE
similarly granted Hussmann an interim waiver for testing CRE intended
for short-term storage and designed for loading and retrieving product
a limited number of times per day. 86 FR 40548 (July 28, 2021; ``July
2021 Interim Waiver'').
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to adopt test procedure
provisions to address the equipment characteristics at issue in the
September 2018 Waiver and the July 2021 Interim Waiver. 87 FR 39164,
39211. For both waiver cases, the subject basic models are intended for
short-term storage of refrigerated merchandise and limited door opening
cycles per day (e.g., holding customer orders and maintaining
refrigerated temperatures until customer pickup). DOE acknowledges that
this equipment includes individual-secured compartments that are
accessible only to the customer for order retrieval (e.g., by providing
the customer with a unique unlocking function to access the
compartment). DOE also conducted a review of the market of this type of
equipment and found similar characteristics and features in currently
available models (e.g., contactless pickup of customer orders using
digital locks). Therefore, DOE proposed in the NOPR to name this
equipment ``customer order storage cabinets'' to differentiate it from
other CRE. DOE is proposing to define ``customer order storage
cabinets'' as CRE that store customer orders and include individual,
secured compartments with doors that are accessible to customers for
order retrieval. 87 FR 39164, 39211.
Consistent with the waiver and interim waiver, DOE proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR that customer order storage cabinets be tested according
to the conventional CRE test procedure, except that the door openings
be conducted by opening each door to the fully open position for 8
seconds, once every 2 hours, for 6 door-opening cycles. Id. DOE
tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that this proposed
approach, consistent with the September 2018 Waiver and the July 2021
Interim Waiver, was representative of typical use of this equipment.
Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed term
``customer order storage cabinet'' and its definition to describe the
equipment currently addressed in the September 2018 Waiver and the July
2021 Interim Waiver. Id. DOE requested comment on the proposal to test
such equipment with reduced door openings, consistent with the waiver
and interim waiver approach. Id.
AHRI supported the proposed definition of ``customer order storage
cabinet,'' and recommended that DOE consult with the ASHRAE 72
committee on this approach. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 14)
Hillphoenix agreed with the term ``customer order storage cabinet''
and definitions as proposed in the NOPR. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 8)
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE provide research for the opening
characteristics used to determine the door-opening procedure. Id.
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE approach industry and request updated
testing standards that better reflect actual product intent, which
would drive consistency within the industry and be less burdensome on
manufacturers. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting, True stated that regardless of
whether the equipment is limited-opening or limited-application, it
still has to comply with the food safety temperature requirements of
NSF 7. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p. 24) True commented that
providing the option for a different procedure on this application
would be giving somebody
[[Page 66212]]
a pass for something that should not be considered. Id. True commented
that the proposed term ``customer order storage cabinet'' and
definition should not exist, as equipment intended to be used for order
retrieval applications is designed to operate around the clock and not
only at certain times, nor is it unplugged at night. (True, No. 28, p.
5) True commented that such units would therefore logically fall under
the same category as a storage refrigerator or a storage freezer and
should meet the same energy and temperature performance requirements
(i.e., -15 [deg]F, 0 [deg]F, and 38 [deg]F) since these units are used
to store perishable food items and therefore need to follow NSF/ANSI 7-
2021. Id.
In the August 2022 public meeting, the CA IOUs commented that they
wanted DOE to be aware that there are also heated and non-cooled
storage cabinets, and there are products on the market that can do all
three for the same compartments. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 41, p.
24) As a result, the CA IOUs recommended that DOE add the word
``refrigerated'' to clarify things. Id.
DOE has reviewed operating characteristics for this equipment
through the waivers received. DOE has based the reduced number of door
openings on the customer usage data presented in those petitions for
waiver and has determined that the number of openings is representative
of an average use cycle for this equipment based on the available data.
DOE notes that the available data indicate that the door openings for
this equipment are significantly less frequent than for other types of
CRE.
In response to True's comments, the purpose of DOE's test procedure
measures the energy consumption of equipment during a representative
average use cycle as compared to the purpose of NSF 7, which is
ensuring food safety. DOE has identified unique equipment
characteristics for this equipment and is establishing the definition
of customer order storage cabinet as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
DOE recognizes that the reduced number of door openings would result in
lower energy use for this equipment as compared to the test procedure
with door openings as specified in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata.
Because DOE has determined that this equipment can be defined by
unique characteristics (i.e., storing customer orders and including
individual, secured compartments with doors that are accessible to
customers for order retrieval) and it has significantly different
operating characteristics as compared to other CRE (i.e., 6 door-
opening cycles in 24 hours as compared to 48 door-opening cycles for
other CRE), DOE is adopting the definition and test method for this
equipment as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
Regarding heated or non-cooled storage cabinets, such storage
cabinets without cooling functionality would not meet the definition of
CRE. The definition of customer order storage cabinet specifies that
this equipment is a commercial refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-
freezer; therefore, DOE has determined that specifying customer order
storage cabinets are refrigerated is not necessary.
In addition to door-opening cycles, the September 2018 Waiver
specifies testing provisions for other characteristics of the specified
basic models, including floating suction temperatures for individual
compartments and the presence of a high-temperature ``ambient''
compartment. 83 FR 46148, 46149-46152.
To address the floating suction temperature aspect of the basic
models subject to the September 2018 Waiver, DOE requires the use of an
alternate test approach for testing and rating the equipment in a
manner similar to the remote CRE test procedure. 83 FR 46148, 46151.
Specifically, DOE requires that this equipment be tested using an
inverse refrigeration load test (i.e., a reverse heat leak method). Id.
This test allows for determining the thermal load of the cabinet at the
specified storage temperatures without requiring refrigerant to be
supplied to the unit (as refrigerant is supplied from an integral
condensing unit). The September 2018 Waiver specifies calculating
energy consumption associated with the thermal load based on assumed
EERs, consistent with those specified in AHRI 1200-2010. 83 FR 46148,
46151-46152. The calculations also account for component energy
consumption and heat loads. Id. DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to
adopt this alternate test procedure for any customer order storage
cabinets that supply refrigerant to multiple individual-secured
compartments and that allow the suction pressure from the evaporator in
each individual-secured compartment to float based on the temperature
required to store the customer order in that individual-secured
compartment. 87 FR 39164, 39211.
For the high-temperature ``ambient'' compartments in the basic
models specified in the September 2018 Waiver, DOE requires that
testing be based on a 75 [deg]F storage temperature for these
compartments and that the ambient compartment be treated as a medium-
temperature compartment at 75 [deg]F. 83 FR 46148, 46150. The September
2018 Waiver also requires that all volume and energy consumption
calculations be included within the medium-temperature category and
summed with other medium-temperature compartment calculations. Id. The
September 2018 Waiver further requires that compartments that are
convertible between ambient and refrigerator temperature ranges be
tested at the refrigerator temperature (38 [deg]F) and that
compartments that are convertible between refrigerator and freezer (0
[deg]F) temperature ranges be tested at both temperatures. Id. DOE
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to adopt the existing waiver
instructions for customer order storage cabinets that have at least one
individual-secured compartment that is not capable of maintaining an
IAT below the ambient dry-bulb temperature (i.e., the individual-
secured compartment(s) may include refrigeration systems to ensure
proper storage temperatures but are only intended to operate at an IAT
of 75 [deg]F 2 [deg]F and not at a LAPT or the specified
refrigerator or freezer temperatures). 87 FR 39164, 39211.
Additionally, with the proposed introduction of high-temperature
refrigerators, as discussed in sections III.A.1 and III.B.1.b of this
final rule, DOE proposed that such compartments would be treated as
high-temperature refrigerators rather than refrigerators upon the
compliance date of any new energy conservation standards for high-
temperature refrigerators. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the additional
proposed test procedure amendments that would allow for reverse heat
leak testing of customer order storage cabinets with floating suction
pressures for multiple different temperature compartments. Id.
AHRI requested more information from DOE regarding the additional
proposed test procedure amendments that would allow for reverse heat
leak testing of customer order storage cabinets with floating suction
pressures for multiple temperature compartments. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 14)
Hillphoenix stated tentative disagreement with the additional
proposed test procedure amendments and recommended clarification of the
proposed process. (Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 8) Hillphoenix commented
that DOE should not adopt the amendments until industry reviews, tests,
and approvals are given by industry standards committees. Id.
[[Page 66213]]
As discussed in the petition leading to the September 2018 Waiver,
the condensing unit control functionality is similar to that found on a
parallel rack in a supermarket, with refrigeration capacity managed
with a floating or moving saturated suction temperature. See 82 FR
33081, 33092. DOE received no comments in response to the notice
announcing the petition for waiver and interim waiver approach, and
granted the September 2018 Waiver. DOE has determined that this
equipment has a different usage profile as compared to other CRE, and
is establishing the alternate test procedure as proposed in the June
2022 NOPR, and consistent with the approach granted in the September
2018 Waiver.
J. Enforcement Provisions
Subpart C of 10 CFR part 429 establishes enforcement provisions
applicable to covered products and covered equipment, including CRE.
Product-specific enforcement provisions are established in 10 CFR
429.134. Various provisions in 10 CFR 429.134 specify which ratings or
measurements DOE will use to determine compliance with applicable
energy or water conservation standards. Generally, DOE provides that
the certified metric is used for enforcement purposes (e.g.,
calculation of the applicable energy conservation standard) if the
average value measured during assessment and enforcement testing is
within a specified percent of the rated value. Otherwise, the average
measured value would be used.
Section 429.134 currently does not contain product-specific
enforcement provisions for CRE. However, DOE does currently provide
product-specific enforcement provisions for refrigerated bottled or
canned beverage vending machines, specifying that the certified
refrigerated volume will be considered valid only if the measurement(s)
(either the measured refrigerated volume for a single-unit sample or
the average of the measured refrigerated volumes for a multiple-unit
sample) is within 5 percent of the certified refrigerated volume. 10
CFR 429.134(j)(1). The test procedure for measuring volume of beverage
vending machines is consistent with the procedure required for CRE, and
vending machines typically have volumes similar to those for CRE.
Because of the same test methods and similar equipment sizes, in the
June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed consistent product-specific enforcement
provisions for CRE. 87 FR 39164, 39211. Specifically, DOE proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR to add a new product-specific enforcement provision
section stating that the certified volume for CRE will be considered
valid only if the measurement(s) (either the measured volume for a
single-unit sample or the average of the measured volumes for a
multiple-unit sample) is within 5 percent of the certified volume;
otherwise, the measured volume would be used as the basis for
determining the applicable energy conservation standard. Id.
DOE has also established product-specific enforcement provisions
for transparent areas of beverage vending machines. 10 CFR
429.134(j)(2). However, display area is only used to determine
equipment class for beverage vending machines and TDA is not a metric
used to determine applicable energy conservation standards. For
consistency with the volume approach, DOE proposed in the June 2022
NOPR that the certified TDA for CRE will be considered valid only if
the measurement(s) (either the measured TDA for a single-unit sample or
the average of the measured TDAs for a multiple-unit sample) is within
5 percent of the certified TDA. 87 FR 39164, 39212. If the certified
TDA is found not to be valid, the measured TDA would be used to
determine the applicable energy conservation standard.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the proposed
product-specific enforcement provisions for CRE. 87 FR 39164, 39212.
AHRI commented expressing concern that the proposed product-
specific enforcement provisions for CRE are not open-ended, but it
offered tentative support for the proposed provisions and requested
that DOE provide more information through a public meeting to clarify
intent. (AHRI, No. 38, p. 14)
Hillphoenix recommended that DOE clarify how enforcement would be
applied if the sampling plan were to be adopted and how implementing
such provisions would benefit end users and/or manufacturers.
(Hillphoenix, No. 35, p. 8)
NAMA commented that it understood the desire to develop common
language on certified volume measurements; however, a beverage vending
machine and a bottle cooler are not necessarily the same product since
in a BVM, bottles or cans have specific placement and the volume could
be constructed based on the uniform measurement of the refrigerated
space available for the beverage containers, while a bottle cooler's
refrigerated space depends on how a customer decides on placement.
(NAMA, No. 33, p. 3) NAMA urged DOE to study this issue more closely
and to use examples of how DOE intended to measure the volume in this
case and why it believed certified volume should be stated in the same
way as BVM because manufacturers might file Test Procedure Waivers for
individual cases. Id.
The relevant capacity metrics for CRE will continue to be tested in
accordance with the DOE test procedure for CRE, not BVMs. DOE referred
to BVMs only as an example of another equipment type with product-
specific enforcement provisions and a similar capacity metric (i.e.,
volume).
Product-specific enforcement provisions are included to clarify how
DOE would determine compliance in the case of any enforcement actions.
For equipment such as CRE, the applicable energy conservation standard
is calculated based on the capacity metric. Product-specific
enforcement provisions provide manufacturers certainty that DOE will
determine compliance based on the same capacity metrics as the
manufacturer, so long as the capacity metrics are rated correctly
(i.e., these provisions provide certainty regarding the maximum daily
energy consumption for a given CRE basic model, if volume or TDA are
rated correctly). DOE has these provisions for many similar products
and equipment. If the tested volume or TDA from DOE enforcement testing
is near the certified value, DOE will use the certified value as the
basis for calculating the appliable standard for compliance
determinations. For the reasons discussed, DOE is adopting the product-
specific enforcement provisions as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR.
The product-specific enforcement provisions are intended to provide
clarity on the energy conservation standard applicable to a specific
basic model of CRE. Determinations of compliance based on tested energy
consumption will continue to be based on the enforcement provisions in
10 CFR 429.110.
K. Lowest Application Product Temperature
Section 2.2 of appendix B specifies that if a unit is not able to
be operated at the specified IAT, the unit is tested at the LAPT,
defined in 10 CFR 431.62 as the lowest IAT at which a given basic model
is capable of consistently operating (i.e., maintaining so as to comply
with the steady-state stabilization requirements specified in ASHRAE
72-2005 for the purposes of testing under the DOE test procedure).
Section 2.2 of appendix B specifies that for units equipped with a
thermostat, LAPT is the lowest thermostat setting; for remote
condensing equipment without a thermostat or other means of
[[Page 66214]]
controlling temperature at the case, the LAPT is the temperature
achieved with the dew point temperature (as defined in AHRI Standard
1200-2010) set to 5 degrees colder than that required to maintain the
manufacturer's lowest specified application temperature.
DOE's Compliance Certification Database \35\ lists all CRE models
certified to DOE, including the LAPT used for rating each model, if
applicable. Of the 28,478 single-compartment individual models included
in the Compliance Certification Database at the time of the June 2022
NOPR analysis, 460 individual models are rated at LAPTs. Of these
individual models, 77 are rated at LAPTs below the required test IAT.
For example, multiple refrigerator models are rated at an IAT of 34
[deg]F (instead of 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F), and multiple
freezer models are rated at an IAT of -7 [deg]F (instead of 0 [deg]F
2 [deg]F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ U.S. Department of Energy Compliance Certification
Database, available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to maintain the current LAPT
provisions and add an additional provision for testing CRE that are
only capable of maintaining temperatures below the specified IAT range
(or for buffet tables or preparation tables, the average pan
temperature of all measurements taken during the test). 87 FR 39164,
39212. For these units, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to test at
the highest thermostat setting, which would allow testing the CRE under
the setting closest to the required IAT (or for buffet tables or
preparation tables, the average pan temperature of all measurements
taken during the test). Id. Also in the NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the
definition of LAPT in 10 CFR 431.62 to the following:
``Lowest application product temperature'' means the integrated
average temperature (or for buffet tables or preparation tables, the
average pan temperature of all measurements taken during the test) at
which a given basic model is capable of consistently operating that is
closest to the integrated average temperature (or for buffet tables or
preparation tables, the average pan temperature of all measurements
taken during the test) specified for testing under the DOE test
procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39212.
For testing, DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to specify that if
a unit is not able to operate at the integrated average temperature
specified for testing (or average pan temperature, as applicable), test
the unit at the LAPT, as defined in 10 CFR 431.62. Id. DOE proposed
that for units equipped with a thermostat, LAPT is the lowest
thermostat setting (for units that are only able to operate at
temperatures above the specified integrated average temperature or
average pan temperature) or the highest thermostat setting (for units
that are only able to operate at temperatures below the specified
integrated average temperature or average pan temperature). Id. DOE
proposed that for remote condensing equipment without a thermostat or
other means of controlling temperature at the case, the LAPT is the
temperature achieved with the dew point temperature, or mid-point
evaporator temperature for high-glide refrigerants (as defined in AHRI
Standard 1200-202X), set to 5 degrees colder than that required to
maintain the manufacturer's specified application temperature closest
to the specified integrated average temperature or average pan
temperature. Id.
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that this proposal
would not affect current CRE ratings or testing costs, because the
models currently available on the market that would be tested under the
newly proposed provision are already testing and rating in accordance
with the proposed approach. Id.
In response to the June 2022 NOPR, The CA IOUs commented that they
support the proposal to shift to testing CRE product classes at
consistent temperatures versus testing at the LAPT within each
category, such as: low-temperature freezer (to be tested at 0 [deg]F
2 [deg]F); medium-temperature refrigerator (to be tested at
38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F); and high-temperature refrigerator
(operates above 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F, to be tested at 55
[deg]F). (CA IOUs, No. 36, p. 10) The CA IOUs added that testing at
consistent product temperatures would improve comparability of energy
consumption between products within each category. Id.
The updated provisions for ice cream freezers, low temp freezers,
medium temp refrigerators, and high-temp refrigerators will limit the
need to apply LAPT testing in the future. Equipment will be categorized
and rated based on operating temperatures, consistent with the CA IOUs
recommendations. To the extent that equipment in these categories
cannot maintain the specified IAT, the equipment would either be
classified in a different category or would be tested under the LAPT
provisions.
Even with the updated operating temperature categories, basic
models may still only be capable of maintaining temperatures below the
specified IAT range for testing. DOE is adopting the LAPT rating
provisions as proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to allow for testing and
rating such basic models.
L. Removal of Obsolete Provisions
The DOE test procedure in appendix B is required for testing CRE
manufactured on or after March 28, 2017, and appendix A applies to CRE
manufactured prior to that date. As such, appendix A is now obsolete
for new units being manufactured. Therefore, DOE proposed in the NOPR
to remove appendix A. 87 FR 39164, 39212. DOE did not propose to
redesignate appendix B as appendix A to avoid confusion regarding the
appropriate version of the test procedure required for use. Id.
Additionally, the title to appendix B is currently ``Amended
Uniform Test Method for the Measurement of Energy Consumption of
Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers.'' To
avoid confusion with the other test procedure amendments proposed in
this final rule, DOE proposed in the NOPR to amend the title to
appendix B to remove the word ``amended.'' 87 FR 39164, 39212.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE also proposed to remove outdated
standards incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 431.63 that would no
longer be referenced under the proposed test procedure. Id.
Specifically, DOE proposed to remove reference to ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-2004,
AHAM HRF-1-2008, and ASHRAE 72-2005. Id. DOE would maintain the listing
of standards referenced in 10 CFR 431.66 (``Energy conservation
standards and their effective dates'') and would consider removing
those referenced standards when proposing any amendments to that
section of the CFR as part of any future amended energy conservation
standards. Id.
DOE received no comments in response to the amendments proposed in
the June 2022 NOPR and is adopting the changes as proposed.
M. Sampling Plan
DOE's current certification requirements mandate reporting of the
chilled or frozen compartment volume in cubic feet, the adjusted volume
in cubic feet, or the TDA (as appropriate for the equipment class). 10
CFR 429.42(b)(2)(iii). However, the sampling plan requirements in 10
CFR 429.42(a) do not specify how to determine the represented value of
volume or TDA for each basic model based on the test results from the
sample of individual models tested. Similar to the requirements for
other covered products and commercial equipment, DOE
[[Page 66215]]
proposed in the June 2022 NOPR that any represented value of volume or
TDA for the basic model be determined as the mean of the measured
volumes or TDAs for the units in the test sample, based on the same
tests used to determine the reported energy consumption. 87 FR 39164,
39213. Although not currently specified in 10 CFR 429.42, DOE expects
manufacturers are currently certifying CRE performance based on the
tested volume and TDA. Id. Therefore, the amendment proposed in the
June 2022 NOPR would clarify the certification requirements but not
impose any additional burden on manufacturers. Id.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE sought comment on the proposed sampling
plan for CRE volume and TDA. Id.
AHRI commented that the proposed sampling plan for CRE volume and
TDA required modification and that DOE should certify the volume and
TDA, stating that these are important values and critical to
determining the allowable energy consumption of a product. AHRI
recommended that DOE work with AHRI to modify standard AHRI 1200-202X
and develop appropriate tolerances and also raise this issue with the
appropriate standards committee for review and approval. (AHRI, No. 38,
p. 14)
NAMA commented that it agreed with AHRI and advised DOE that the
proposed sampling plan for CRE volume and TDA needed modification.
(NAMA, No. 33, p. 4) NAMA commented that the current plan included no
tolerances, and if DOE intended to measure and enforce standards for
CRE volume and TDA, DOE must provide tolerances. Id. NAMA stated that
DOE should also bring this issue to the appropriate standards committee
for review and approval. Id.
Hussmann commented that the proposed sampling plan for CRE volume
and TDA needed modification because it included no tolerances.
(Hussmann, No. 32, p. 6) Hussmann commented that if DOE intended to
measure and enforce standards for CRE volume and TDA, DOE must provide
tolerances, and that DOE should take this issue to the appropriate
standards committee for review and approval. Id.
Zero Zone stated agreement that DOE should certify the volume and
TDA, as these are important values and critical to determining the
allowable energy consumption of a product. (Zero Zone, No. 37, p. 10)
Zero Zone commented that DOE's proposal of a 5-percent tolerance is too
large, and that if the TDA measurements are different, equipment that
passes when tested by a manufacturer could fail when tested by DOE. Id.
Zero Zone recommended that DOE work with AHRI to modify standard 1200
to develop appropriate tolerances. Id.
Hillphoenix commented that if DOE intended to measure and enforce
standards for CRE volume and TDA, then the process should be evaluated
by the appropriate standards committee for approval. (Hillphoenix, No.
35, p. 8)
DOE's certification requirements in 10 CFR 429.42(b)(2) currently
require manufacturers to certify volume or TDA for basic models. The
sampling plan requirements established in this final rule, and
consistent with those proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, clarify that the
certified volume or TDA must be based on the mean of the measured
values for the tested units of the basic model, based on the same tests
used to determine the reported energy consumption.
In response to the comments regarding tolerance associated with the
sampling plan to determine compliance and enforce standards, DOE
interprets the comments as referring to DOE applying a tolerance around
certified volumes or TDAs to determine the applicable maximum daily
energy consumption standard level for a basic model. Such tolerances
are applied in product-specific enforcement provisions as specified in
10 CFR 429.134. DOE is adopting product-specific enforcement provisions
for CRE, as discussed in section III.J of this document.
N. Test Procedure Costs and Harmonization
1. Test Procedure Costs and Impact
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the existing test
procedure for CRE to:
(1) Establish new definitions for high-temperature refrigerator,
medium-temperature refrigerator, low-temperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most current versions of industry
standards AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI 1320-2011;
(3) Establish definitions and test procedures for buffet tables and
preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and test procedures for blast chillers
and blast freezers;
(5) Amend the definition for chef base or griddle stand;
(6) Specify alternate conditions for alternative refrigerants;
(7) Allow for certification of compartment volumes based on CAD
drawings;
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts and customer order storage
cabinets currently specified in waivers and interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the LAPT provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for volume and TDA.
87 FR 39164, 39213-39214.
DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the proposed
amendments to the test procedure for CRE currently subject to testing
would not impact testing costs, and manufacturers would be able to rely
on data generated under the current test procedure should any of these
additional proposed amendments be finalized. Id.
DOE proposed in the June 2022 NOPR to establish test procedures for
additional categories of CRE not currently subject to the DOE test
procedure: buffet tables or preparation tables, and blast chillers and
blast freezers. Id. If a manufacturer chooses to make representations
of the energy consumption of this equipment, beginning 360 days after a
final rule, were DOE to finalize the proposal, manufacturers would be
required to test according to the proposed test procedure. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)) DOE discusses the costs associated with testing this
equipment, if a manufacturer chooses to make representations of the
energy consumption, in the following paragraphs.
In the November 2010 NOPR, DOE estimated CRE testing costs to be
approximately $5,000 per unit. 75 FR 71596, 71607. Based on testing at
third-party test facilities, DOE tentatively determined in the June
2022 NOPR that $5,000 is still a representative CRE test cost based on
the existing DOE test procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39214. DOE has also
tentatively determined that $5,000 is a representative per-test cost
for the new test procedures proposed for the additional CRE categories
(i.e., buffet tables or preparation tables, blast chillers, and blast
freezers).
For chef bases or griddle stands, DOE is amending the ambient test
conditions in this final rule based on comments received in response to
the June 2022 NOPR. Because DOE did not receive any information in
response to the June 2022 NOPR indicating testing costs would change
based on a different ambient test condition, DOE determined that the
amended ambient test
[[Page 66216]]
conditions would not impact the $5,000 representative per-test cost for
the amended CRE test procedure.
Chef bases or griddle stands are currently eligible for ENERGY STAR
certification under Product Specification for Commercial Refrigerators
and Freezers Version 5.0 which references 10 CFR part 431, subpart C,
Appendix B as the required test method.\36\ DOE observed that to the
extent that chef bases or griddle stand manufacturers make
representations regarding the energy consumption of their models, they
do so in accordance with ENERGY STAR and the existing DOE test
procedure. EPCA prescribes that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all
representations of energy efficiency and energy use of CRE, including
those made on marketing materials and product labels, must be made in
accordance with that amended test procedure, beginning 360 days after
publication of such a test procedure final rule in the Federal
Register. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(1)) Therefore, the manufacturers currently
making representations of the energy consumption of chef bases or
griddle stands will be required to retest according to the test
procedure beginning 360 days after this final rule, and may incur some
retesting costs associated with their chef bases or griddle stand
models if they choose to continue making such representations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See www.energystar.gov/sites/default/files/ENERGY%20STAR%20Version%205.0%20%28Rev.%20November%20-%202022%29%20Commercial%20Refrigerators%20and%20Freezers%20Specification.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For any manufacturers not currently making representations of the
energy use of chef bases or griddle stands, testing according to the
amended test procedure will not be required for use (other than if
making voluntary representations of energy consumption) until
determining compliance with any energy conservation standards for chef
bases or griddle stands, should DOE adopt such standards.
For buffet tables and preparation tables, the overall test duration
would be similar to the test duration for CRE currently subject to the
test procedure. The test would be a 24-hour test, and in the June 2022
NOPR DOE proposed stabilization requirements consistent with CRE
currently subject to the test procedure. 87 FR 39164, 39214. The
proposed test setup would not require the use of test simulators or
test filler materials loaded in any refrigerated compartments, but
would require loading pans with distilled water and identifying the
appropriate control setting to maintain the specified average
temperatures. DOE expects the overall test burden associated with
loading and determining appropriate control settings to be similar for
testing buffet tables and preparation tables, as proposed, and other
CRE currently subject to the test procedure. While DOE has not
quantified the differences in test burden, DOE determined that the test
burden and duration for buffet and preparation tables is similar to CRE
currently subject to the test procedure, and therefore the $5,000 per-
test cost is appropriate.
For blast chillers and blast freezers, the overall duration of a
test as proposed would be shorter than the 24-hour test period and
stabilization period required for CRE currently subject to the test
procedure. As proposed in the June 2022 NOPR, blast chiller and blast
freezer testing would require the preparation of food simulator
material, heating that material to the specified temperature, loading
the heated test pans, and then conducting the test procedure as
specified (DOE estimates approximately an 8-hour test duration per
test). While DOE has not quantified the differences in test burden, DOE
expects the increased test burden and decreased test burden to be
comparable. Therefore, DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR
that $5,000 is a representative per-unit test cost for blast chillers
and blast freezers, based on the test procedure proposed. 87 FR 39164,
39214.
Under the proposed test procedures, were a manufacturer to choose
to make representations of the energy consumption of buffet tables or
preparation tables, blast chillers, or blast freezers beginning 360
days after a final rule, and were DOE to finalize the proposal,
manufacturers would be required to base such representations on the DOE
test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d))
Based on a review of blast chillers and blast freezers available on
the market, DOE determined in the June 2022 NOPR that manufacturers
make no claims regarding the energy consumption of their models. 87 FR
39164, 39214.
After establishing any test procedure for blast chillers and blast
freezers, DOE expects that the manufacturers currently electing to make
no claims regarding energy consumption would continue to do so.
Therefore, DOE tentatively determined in the June 2022 NOPR that the
proposed test procedure for blast chillers and blast freezers would not
impact testing costs should the proposed test procedure be finalized.
87 FR 39164, 39214.
Buffet tables and preparation tables are currently subject to test
procedures under the California Code of Regulations. DOE observed that
to the extent that buffet table and preparation table manufacturers
make representations regarding the energy consumption of their models,
they do so in accordance with the California Code of Regulations. EPCA
prescribes that, if DOE amends a test procedure, all representations of
energy efficiency and energy use, including those made on marketing
materials and product labels, must be made in accordance with that
amended test procedure, beginning 360 days after publication of such a
test procedure final rule in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)(1)) Therefore, the manufacturers currently making
representations of the energy consumption of buffet tables and
preparation tables will be required to retest according to the test
procedure beginning 360 days after this final rule, and may incur some
retesting costs associated with their buffet table and preparation
table models.
For any manufacturers not currently making representations of the
energy use of buffet tables or preparation tables, blast chillers, or
blast freezers, testing according to the test procedure will not be
required (other than if making voluntary representations of energy
consumption) until the compliance date of any energy conservation
standards for that equipment, should DOE adopt such standards.
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. 10 CFR 431.4; section 8(c) of appendix A 10 CFR part
430 subpart C. In cases where the industry standard does not meet EPCA
statutory criteria for test procedures DOE will make modifications
through the rulemaking process to these standards as the DOE test
procedure.
The test procedures for CRE at 10 CFR 431.63 incorporate by
reference AHRI 1200-2010 for definitions, test rating conditions, and
calculations; ASHRAE 72-2005 for test conditions, equipment,
measurements, and test conduct; and AHAM HRF-1-2008 for the volume
measurement method.
In the June 2022 NOPR, DOE requested comment on the benefits and
burdens of the proposed updates and additions to industry standards
[[Page 66217]]
referenced in the test procedure for CRE. 87 FR 39164, 39215. DOE
discusses comments received in response to the June 2022 NOPR regarding
adopting provisions of industry standards in the relevant discussion
sections of this final rule. DOE further describes industry standards
incorporated by reference in section IV.N of this document.
AHRI 1200-2010 has been updated to AHRI 1200-2023 to provide
additional direction regarding application of the standard and to
provide volume measurement instructions (eliminating the need to
reference AHAM HRF-1-2008). ASHRAE 72-2005 has similarly been updated
in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata to reorganize the standard, provide
updated setup instructions, revise the test sequence, and provide
additional instructions for some test measurements. DOE tentatively
determined in the June 2022 NOPR that these updates (at the time, in
earlier or draft versions of the standards) provide additional detail
for testing but would otherwise not impact energy consumption
measurements compared to the current approach. In the June 2022 NOPR,
DOE also proposed to incorporate by reference an existing industry
standard for testing buffet tables and preparation tables: ASTM F2143-
16. This standard provides instructions regarding setup and test
conduct. DOE is also aware of the CRE industry standard NSF/ANSI 7-
2021,\37\ which establishes minimum food protection and sanitation
requirements for the materials, design, manufacture, construction, and
performance of CRE and CRE components.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ In response to the June 2022 NOPR, interested parties
commented in reference to NSF 7-2019. NSF 7-2021 was published after
the June 2022 NOPR comment period ended. DOE did not observe any
changes from the 2019 to 2021 version that would impact the comments
received or DOE's proposal to reference industry standards other
than NSF 7-2019 or NSF 7-2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
O. Effective and Compliance Dates
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 that amended test procedure,
beginning 360 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 360-
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 360-day period and must detail how the manufacturer will
experience undue hardship. (Id.) To the extent the modified test
procedure adopted in this final rule is required only for the
evaluation and issuance of updated efficiency standards, compliance
with the amended test procedure does not require use of such modified
test procedure provisions until the compliance date of updated
standards.
Upon the compliance date of test procedure provisions in this final
rule any waivers that had been previously issued and are in effect that
pertain to issues addressed by such provisions are terminated. 10 CFR
431.401(h)(3). Recipients of any such waivers are required to test the
products subject to the waiver according to the amended test procedure
as of the compliance date of the amended test procedure. The amendments
proposed in this document pertain to issues addressed by waivers and
interim waivers granted to AHT (Case Nos. CR-006, 2017-007, 2020-023,
2020-025, 2022-001, and 2022-002), ITW (Case No. CR-007), and Hussmann
(Case No. 2020-003). See sections III.F.1 and III.I of this final rule
for a discussion of the proposals to address the issues in the existing
waivers and interim waivers.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866, 13563 and 14094
Executive Order (``E.O.'') 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review,'' as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review, 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011) and
amended by E.O. 14094, ``Modernizing Regulatory Review,'' 88 FR 21879
(April 11, 2023), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to
(1) propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination
that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and
costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the
least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent
practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in
choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance
that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess
available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user
fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices
can be made by the public. DOE emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563
requires agencies to use the best available techniques to quantify
anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as
possible. In its guidance, the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (``OIRA'') in the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') has
emphasized that such techniques may include identifying changing future
compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or
anticipated behavioral changes. For the reasons stated in the preamble,
this 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 the
rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial
[[Page 66218]]
number of small entities. The factual basis for this certification is
as follows.
DOE uses the Small Business Administration (``SBA'') small business
size standards to determine whether manufacturers qualify as ``small
businesses,'' which are listed by the North American Industry
Classification System (``NAICS''). The SBA considers a business entity
to be small business if, together with its affiliates, it employs less
than a threshold number of workers specified in 13 CFR part 121. CRE
manufacturers, who produce the equipment covered by this final rule,
are classified under NAICS code 333415, ``Air-conditioning and Warm Air
Heating Equipment and Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment
Manufacturing.'' The SBA sets a threshold of 1,250 employees or fewer
for an entity to be considered a small business for this category. This
employee threshold includes all employees in a business's parent
company and any other subsidiaries.
DOE has recently conducted a focused inquiry into small business
manufacturers of the CRE covered by this rulemaking. As with the
initial regulatory flexibility analysis, DOE accessed its Compliance
Certification Database (``CCD''),\38\ California Energy Commission's
Modernized Appliance Efficiency Database System (``MAEDbS''),\39\ and
other public sources, including manufacturer websites, to create a list
of companies that produce, manufacture, import, or private label the
CRE covered by this rulemaking. DOE refreshed its equipment database in
support of the FRFA. DOE then consulted other publicly available data,
such as manufacturer specifications and product literature, import/
export logs (e.g., bills of lading from Panjiva \40\), and basic model
numbers, to identify original equipment manufacturers (``OEMs'') of the
equipment covered by this rulemaking. DOE further relied on public
sources and subscription-based market research tools (e.g., Dun &
Bradstreet reports \41\) to determine company location, headcount, and
annual revenue. DOE screened out companies that do not offer equipment
covered by this rulemaking, do not meet the SBA's definition of a
``small business,'' or are foreign-owned and operated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ U.S. Department of Energy's Compliance Certification
Database is available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data
(Last accessed February 24, 2023).
\39\ California Energy Commission's Modernized Appliance
Efficiency Database System is available at
cacertappliances.energy.ca.gov/Pages/Search/AdvancedSearch.aspx
(Last accessed February 24, 2023)
\40\ Panjiva Supply Chain Intelligence is available at:
panjiva.com/import-export/United-States (Last accessed March 28,
2023).
\41\ The Dun & Bradstreet Hoovers subscription login is
available online at app.dnbhoovers.com/ (Last accessed March 28,
2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE initially identified 83 OEMs selling CRE into the U.S. market.
Of the 83 OEMs identified, DOE estimates that 25 qualify as small OEMs
and are not foreign-owned and operated.
In this final rule, DOE amends and establishes test procedures for
CRE as follows:
(1) Establish new definitions for high-temperature refrigerator,
medium-temperature refrigerator, low-temperature freezer, and mobile
refrigerated cabinet, and amend the definition for ice-cream freezer;
(2) Incorporate by reference the most current versions of industry
standards AHRI 1200, ASHRAE 72, and AHRI 1320;
(3) Establish definitions and a new appendix C including test
procedures for buffet tables and preparation tables;
(4) Establish definitions and a new appendix D including test
procedures for blast chillers and blast freezers;
(5) Amend the definition and certain test conditions for chef bases
or griddle stands;
(6) Specify refrigerant conditions for CRE that use R-744;
(7) Allow for certification of compartment volumes based on
computer-aided design models;
(8) Incorporate provisions for defrosts and customer order storage
cabinets currently specified in waivers and interim waivers;
(9) Adopt product-specific enforcement provisions;
(10) Clarify use of the lowest application product temperature
provisions;
(11) Remove the obsolete test procedure in appendix A; and
(12) Specify a sampling plan for volume and total display area.
DOE maintains that the amendments detailed in the final rule would
not impact testing costs, which would remain at approximately $5,000
per-unit. Furthermore, DOE does not expect manufacturers would need to
re-test or re-certify equipment as manufacturers would be able to rely
on data generated under the current test procedure for the amendments
detailed in this final rule.
For the test procedures established by this final rule for
additional categories of CRE not currently subject to the DOE test
procedure (i.e., buffet tables or preparation tables, and blast
chillers and blast freezers), testing would not be required (other than
making voluntary representations of energy consumption) until the
compliance date of any energy conservation standards for equipment in
these categories. If a manufacturer chooses to make representations of
the energy consumption of this equipment, beginning 360 days after a
final rule, manufacturers would be required to test according to the
adopted test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) DOE has determined that
$5,000 is a representative per-test cost for the new test procedures
for the additional CRE categories.
For the amended test procedure established by this final rule for
chef bases or griddle stands, testing similarly would not be required
until the compliance date of any energy conservation standards for
equipment in these categories. However, any representations of energy
use for chef bases or griddle stands must be made in accordance with
the amended test procedure starting 360 days after this notice
publishes in the Federal Register. Manufacturers currently choosing to
make representations of the energy consumption of this equipment
according to the existing test procedure may continue to do so until
360 days after publication of this final rule. To the extent that a
manufacturer chooses to test according to the amended test procedure,
DOE has determined that $5,000 is a representative per-test cost,
consistent with the other CRE categories.
Based on a review of commercially available blast chillers and
blast freezers, DOE has determined that manufacturers make no claims
regarding the energy consumption of their models. To the extent that
buffet table and preparation table manufacturers make claims regarding
the energy consumption of their models, DOE observed that they do so in
accordance with the California Code of Regulations. The manufacturers
currently making representations of the energy consumption of buffet
tables and preparation tables would be required to test according to
the adopted test procedure beginning 360 days after the final rule.
DOE reviewed California Energy Commission's MAEDbS and identified
two small domestic OEMs currently making representations of the energy
consumption of buffet table or preparation table models. According to
MAEDbS, one small OEM makes claims regarding the energy consumption of
26 buffet table or preparation table models and the other small OEM
makes claims regarding the energy consumption of 15 buffet table or
preparation table models. Based on Dun & Bradstreet reports,\42\
[[Page 66219]]
both small OEMs have an estimated annual revenue of over $100 million.
As previously discussed, DOE estimates a per-unit test cost of $5,000.
Therefore, DOE estimates that the potential costs associated with re-
testing would be minimal, accounting for approximately 0.1 percent of
annual revenue for both small businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AHRI commented that they disagree with DOE's conclusion that ``the
amendments detailed in the NOPR would not have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities.'' (AHRI, No. 38, p. 14) AHRI
expressed concern about the impact of the proposed amendments on small
entities, including both manufacturers and end users, because the
proposed amendments could drive a continued use of older, less
efficient, and leaky equipment. Id. AHRI commented further that Natural
Resources Canada (``NRCAN'') would likely harmonize with this
requirement, resulting in additional cost associated with third-party
testing for NRCAN and also for ENERGY STAR, which would create an undue
burden, especially on small businesses. Id.
NAMA stated its agreement with AHRI and advised DOE that this
conclusion was inaccurate, and that NAMA had profound concerns about
the impact of the proposed amendments on small entities, including both
manufacturers and end users. (NAMA, No. 33, p. 4) NAMA commented that
its concerns centered around the possibility of the proposed amendments
driving a continued use of older, less efficient, and refrigerant-leaky
equipment, as well as a continuation of the trend of greater sale of
refurbished products that do not meet current DOE standards. Id. NAMA
also advised DOE that NRCAN would likely harmonize with this
requirement, creating additional costs associated with the testing for
NRCAN, especially for new classifications--and costs associated with
third-party testing (required for both NRCAN and ENERGY STAR) would
create an undue burden, especially on small businesses. Id.
Continental commented that as previously stated in its comments,
some proposed changes to test procedures, including use of ASHRAE 72-
2022, would increase test burden on manufacturers and testing agencies,
and prove particularly burdensome to small manufacturers like itself.
(Continental, No. 29, p. 9)
Hoshizaki commented that they disagree with DOE, and stated that
adding new test standards to previously unregulated products will
require testing at least two of each model to fully realize the impact
of new test standards. (Hoshizaki, No. 30, p. 5) Hoshizaki commented
that DOE requires listing of the product with the CCD, and accurate
testing will be needed to qualify such listings. Id. They noted that
since NRCAN is likely to harmonize with DOE requirements, third-party
certification is required for NRCAN listing. Id. They commented that
costs associated with this third-party testing is an undue burden on
small business manufacturers. Id.
Regarding the small business impacts, as previously discussed, DOE
does not expect small manufacturers would need to re-test or re-certify
CRE models as a direct result of the amendments detailed in this final
rule. For the two small manufacturers that may incur some re-testing
costs associated with making voluntary representations of energy
consumption, DOE's analysis indicates that re-testing costs would have
de minimis cost impacts on the small manufacturers, which would account
for approximately 0.1 percent of annual revenue for each of the small
businesses. Regarding the estimated test procedure costs, see section
III.N.1 of this final rule for additional discussion of the per-unit
testing costs.
DOE does not anticipate that the adopted test procedure amendments
would result in increased testing costs for the vast majority of
manufacturers, including small manufacturers. DOE estimates that two
small businesses may incur some re-testing costs associated with their
buffet table and preparation table models. However, DOE's research
indicates these costs would account for approximately 0.1 percent of
annual revenue for both small OEMs identified. Therefore, DOE concludes
that the cost effects accruing from the final rule would not have a
``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities,'' and that the preparation of a FRFA is not warranted. DOE
will submit 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 CRE 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 CRE. (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
CRE in this final rule. Further, certification data will be required
for buffet tables and preparation tables, blast chillers, and blast
freezers; however, DOE is not proposing certification or reporting
requirements for these categories of CRE in this final rule. Instead,
DOE may consider proposals to amend the certification requirements and
reporting for these categories 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 CRE. 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.
[[Page 66220]]
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 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
[[Page 66221]]
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 CRE adopted in this
final rule incorporate testing methods contained in certain sections of
the following commercial standards: AHRI 1200-2023, AHRI 1320-2011,
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, and ASTM F2143-16. 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
test standards: AHRI 1200-2023 is an industry-accepted test procedure
that provides rating instructions, calculations, and methods for CRE.
The test procedure discussed in this final rule references AHRI 1200-
2023 for specific rating instructions, calculations, and rating methods
for CRE. AHRI 1200-2023 is available at www.ahrinet.org/standards/search-standards.
AHRI 1320-2011 is an industry accepted test procedure that provides
rating instructs, calculations, and methods for CRE used with secondary
coolants. The test procedure discussed in this final rule references
AHRI 1320-2011 regarding specific provisions regarding secondary
coolants, but otherwise references AHRI 1200-2023 as discussed. AHRI
1320-2011 is available at www.ahrinet.org/standards.
ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2022 is an industry-accepted test procedure
that provides setup, instrumentation, measurement, and test conduct
instructions for testing CRE. The test procedure discussed in this
final rule references ASHRAE 72-2022 as the basis for test setup and
test conduct requirements.
Errata sheet for ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2022, Method of Testing
Open and Closed Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers, November 11,
2022. This errata sheet corrects the note preceding Normative Appendix
A of ASHRAE 72-2022.
ASHRAE 72-2022 is available at www.techstreet.com/standards/ashrae-72-2022?product_id=1710927 and the November 11, 2022 Errata is
available at www.ashrae.org/technical-resources/standards-and-guidelines/standards-errata.
ASTM F2143-16 is an industry-accepted test procedure that provides
setup, instrumentation, conditions, measurement, and test conduct
instructions for testing buffet tables and preparation tables. The test
procedure discussed in this final rule references ASTM F2143-16 as the
basis for test setup and test conduct for buffet tables and preparation
tables. Copies of ASTM F2143-16 can be purchased at www.astm.org/f2143-16.html.
ASTM E1084-86 (Reapproved 2009), which appears in the regulatory
text, has already been incorporated by reference for that text; no
change is being made to this standard.
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,
Incorporation by reference, 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 September
8, 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.
Signed in Washington, DC, on September 12, 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
431 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth
below:
PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Section 429.42 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) to
read as follows:
[[Page 66222]]
Sec. 429.42 Commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers.
(a) * * *
(3) Represented value calculations. The volume and total display
area (TDA) of a basic model, as applicable, is the mean of the measured
volumes and the mean of the measured TDAs, as applicable, for the
tested units of the basic model, based on the same tests used to
determine energy consumption.
(4) Convertible equipment. Each basic model of commercial
refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-freezer that is capable of
operating at integrated average temperatures that spans the operating
temperature range of multiple equipment classes, either by adjusting a
thermostat for a basic model or by the marketed, designed, or intended
operation for a basic model with a remote condensing unit but without a
thermostat, must determine the represented values, which includes the
certified ratings, either by testing, in conjunction with the
applicable sampling provisions, or by applying an AEDM to comply with
the requirements necessary to certify to each equipment class that the
basic model is capable of operating within.
(i) Customer order storage cabinets. For customer order storage
cabinets that have individual-secured compartments that are convertible
between the >=32 [deg]F and <32 [deg]F operating temperatures, the
customer order storage cabinets must determine the represented values,
which includes the certified ratings, either by testing, in conjunction
with the applicable sampling provisions, or by applying an AEDM, with
all convertible compartments operating either as medium temperature
refrigerators or all convertible compartments as low-temperature
freezers, or at the lowest application product temperature for each
equipment class as specified in Sec. 431.64 of this chapter, to comply
with the requirements necessary to certify to each equipment class that
the basic model is capable of operating within.
(ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 429.72 by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 429.72 Alternative methods for determining non-energy ratings.
* * * * *
(f) Commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers.
The volume of a basic model of a commercial refrigerator, refrigerator-
freezer, or freezer may be determined by performing a calculation of
the volume based upon computer-aided design (CAD) models of the basic
model in lieu of physical measurements of a production unit of the
basic model. If volume is determined by performing a calculation of
volume based on CAD drawings, any value of volume of the basic model
reported to DOE in a certification of compliance in accordance with
Sec. 429.42(b)(2)(iii) must be calculated using the CAD-derived
volume(s) and the applicable provisions in the test procedures in 10
CFR part 431.64 for measuring volume.
0
4. Amend Sec. 429.134 by adding reserved paragraphs (dd) and (ee) and
paragraph (ff) to read as follows:
Sec. 429.134 Product-specific enforcement provisions.
* * * * *
(dd)-(ee) [Reserved]
(ff) Commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers--(1) Verification of volume. The volume will be measured
pursuant to the test requirements of 10 CFR part 431 for each unit
tested. The results of the measurement(s) will be averaged and compared
to the value of the certified volume of the basic model. The certified
volume will be considered valid only if the average measured volume is
within five percent of the certified volume.
(i) If the certified volume is found to be valid, the certified
volume will be used as the basis for determining the maximum daily
energy consumption allowed for the basic model.
(ii) If the certified volume is found to be invalid, the average
measured volume of the units in the sample will be used as the basis
for determining the maximum daily energy consumption allowed for the
basic model.
(2) Verification of total display area. The total display area will
be measured pursuant to the test requirements of 10 CFR part 431 for
each unit tested. The results of the measurement(s) will be averaged
and compared to the value of the certified total display area of the
basic model. The certified total display area will be considered valid
only if the average measured total display area is within five percent
of the certified total display area.
(i) If the certified total display area is found to be valid, the
certified total display area will be used as the basis for determining
the maximum daily energy consumption allowed for the basic model.
(ii) If the certified total display area is found to be invalid,
the average measured total display area of the units in the sample will
be used as the basis for determining the maximum daily energy
consumption allowed for the basic model.
(3) Determination of pull-down temperature application. A
classification of a basic model as pull-down temperature application
will be considered valid only if a model meets the definition of
``pull-down temperature application'' specified in Sec. 431.62 of this
chapter as follows.
(i) 12-ounce beverage can temperatures will be measured for 12-
ounce beverage cans loaded at the locations within the commercial
refrigerator that are as close as possible to the locations that would
be measured by test simulators according to the test procedure for
commercial refrigerators specified in Sec. 431.64 of this chapter.
(ii) The commercial refrigerator will be operated at ambient
conditions consistent with those specified for commercial refrigerators
in Sec. 431.64 of this chapter and at the control setting necessary to
achieve a stable integrated average temperature of 38 [deg]F, prior to
loading.
(iii) 12-ounce beverage cans to be fully loaded into the commercial
refrigerator (with and without temperature measurements) will be
maintained at 90 [deg]F 2 [deg]F based on the average
measured 12-ounce beverage can temperatures prior to loading into the
commercial refrigerator.
(iv) The duration of pull-down (which must be 12 hours or less)
will be determined starting from closing the commercial refrigerator
door after completing the 12-ounce beverage can loading until the
integrated average temperature reaches 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F.
(v) An average stable temperature of 38 [deg]F will be determined
by operating the commercial refrigerator for an additional 12 hours
after initially reaching 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F with no changes
to control settings, and determining an integrated average temperature
of 38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F at the end of the 12 hour stability
period.
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
5. 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
6. Section 431.62 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 431.62 Definitions concerning commercial refrigerators, freezers
and refrigerator-freezers.
Air-curtain angle means:
(1) For equipment without doors and without a discharge air grille
or discharge air honeycomb, the angle
[[Page 66223]]
between a vertical line extended down from the highest point on the
manufacturer's recommended load limit line and the load limit line
itself, when the equipment is viewed in cross-section; and
(2) For all other equipment without doors, the angle formed between
a vertical line and the straight line drawn by connecting the point at
the inside edge of the discharge air opening with the point at the
inside edge of the return air opening, when the equipment is viewed in
cross-section.
Basic model means all commercial refrigeration equipment
manufactured by one manufacturer within a single equipment class,
having the same primary energy source, and that have essentially
identical electrical, physical, and functional characteristics that
affect energy consumption.
Blast chiller means commercial refrigeration equipment, other than
a blast freezer, that is capable of the rapid temperature pull-down of
hot food products from 135 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F within a period of four
hours, when measured according to the test procedure at appendix D to
subpart C of part 431.
Blast freezer means commercial refrigeration equipment that is
capable of the rapid temperature pull-down of hot food products from
135 [deg]F to 40 [deg]F within a period of four hours and capable of
achieving a final product temperature of less than 32 [deg]F, when
measured according to the test procedure at appendix D to subpart C of
this part.
Buffet table or preparation table means a commercial refrigerator
with an open-top refrigerated area, that may or may not include a lid,
for displaying or storing merchandise and other perishable materials in
pans or other removable containers for customer self-service or food
production and assembly. The unit may or may not be equipped with a
refrigerated storage compartment underneath the pans or other removable
containers that is not thermally separated from the open-top
refrigerated area.
Chef base or griddle stand means commercial refrigeration equipment
that has a maximum height of 32 in., including any legs or casters, and
that is designed and marketed for the express purpose of having a
griddle or other cooking appliance placed on top of it that is capable
of reaching temperatures hot enough to cook food.
Closed solid means equipment with doors, and in which more than 75
percent of the outer surface area of all doors on a unit are not
transparent.
Closed transparent means equipment with doors, and in which 25
percent or more of the outer surface area of all doors on the unit are
transparent.
Commercial freezer means a unit of commercial refrigeration
equipment in which all refrigerated compartments in the unit are
capable of operating below 32 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
Commercial hybrid means a unit of commercial refrigeration
equipment:
(1) That consists of two or more thermally separated refrigerated
compartments that are in two or more different equipment families, and
(2) That is sold as a single unit.
Commercial refrigerator means a unit of commercial refrigeration
equipment in which all refrigerated compartments in the unit are
capable of operating at or above 32 [deg]F (2 [deg]F).
Commercial refrigerator-freezer means a unit of commercial
refrigeration equipment consisting of two or more refrigerated
compartments where at least one refrigerated compartment is capable of
operating at or above 32 [deg]F (2 [deg]F) and at least one
refrigerated compartment is capable of operating below 32 [deg]F
(2 [deg]F).
Commercial refrigerator, freezer, and refrigerator-freezer means
refrigeration equipment that--
(1) Is not a consumer product (as defined in Sec. 430.2 of this
chapter);
(2) Is not designed and marketed exclusively for medical,
scientific, or research purposes;
(3) Operates at a chilled, frozen, combination chilled and frozen,
or variable temperature;
(4) Displays or stores merchandise and other perishable materials
horizontally, semi-vertically, or vertically;
(5) Has transparent or solid doors, sliding or hinged doors, a
combination of hinged, sliding, transparent, or solid doors, or no
doors;
(6) Is designed for pull-down temperature applications or holding
temperature applications; and
(7) Is connected to a self-contained condensing unit or to a remote
condensing unit.
Customer order storage cabinet means a commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer that stores customer orders and
includes individual, secured compartments with doors that are
accessible to customers for order retrieval.
Door means a movable panel that separates the interior volume of a
unit of commercial refrigeration equipment from the ambient environment
and is designed to facilitate access to the refrigerated space for the
purpose of loading and unloading product. This includes hinged doors,
sliding doors, and drawers. This does not include night curtains.
Door angle means:
(1) For equipment with flat doors, the angle between a vertical
line and the line formed by the plane of the door, when the equipment
is viewed in cross-section; and
(2) For equipment with curved doors, the angle formed between a
vertical line and the straight line drawn by connecting the top and
bottom points where the display area glass joins the cabinet, when the
equipment is viewed in cross-section.
Fully open (for drawers) means opened not less than 80% of their
full travel.
High-temperature refrigerator means a commercial refrigerator that
is not capable of an operating temperature at or below 40.0 [deg]F.
Holding temperature application means a use of commercial
refrigeration equipment other than a pull-down temperature application,
except a blast chiller or freezer.
Horizontal Closed means equipment with hinged or sliding doors and
a door angle greater than or equal to 45[deg].
Horizontal Open means equipment without doors and an air-curtain
angle greater than or equal to 80[deg] from the vertical.
Ice-cream freezer means:
(1) Prior to the compliance date(s) of any amended energy
conservation standard(s) issued after January 1, 2023 for ice-cream
freezers (see Sec. 431.66), a commercial freezer that is capable of an
operating temperature at or below -5.0 [deg]F and that the manufacturer
designs, markets, or intends specifically for the storing, displaying,
or dispensing of ice cream or other frozen desserts; or
(2) Upon the compliance date(s) of any amended energy conservation
standard(s) issued after January 1, 2023 for ice-cream freezers (see
Sec. 431.66), a commercial freezer that is capable of an operating
temperature at or below -13.0 [deg]F and that the manufacturer designs,
markets, or intends specifically for the storing, displaying, or
dispensing of ice cream or other frozen desserts.
Integrated average temperature means the average temperature of all
test package measurements taken during the test.
Lighting occupancy sensor means a device which uses passive
infrared, ultrasonic, or other motion-sensing technology to
automatically turn off or dim lights within the equipment when no
motion is detected in the sensor's coverage area for a certain preset
period of time.
Lowest application product temperature means the integrated average
temperature (or for buffet tables or preparation tables, the average
pan
[[Page 66224]]
temperature of all measurements taken during the test) at which a given
basic model is capable of consistently operating that is closest to the
integrated average temperature (or for buffet tables or preparation
tables, the average pan temperature of all measurements taken during
the test) specified for testing under the DOE test procedure (see Sec.
431.64).
Low-temperature freezer means a commercial freezer that is not an
ice-cream freezer.
Medium-temperature refrigerator means a commercial refrigerator
that is capable of an operating temperature at or below 40.0 [deg]F.
Mobile refrigerated cabinet means commercial refrigeration
equipment that is designed and marketed to operate only without a
continuous power supply.
Night curtain means a device which is temporarily deployed to
decrease air exchange and heat transfer between the refrigerated case
and the surrounding environment.
Operating temperature means the range of integrated average
temperatures at which a self-contained commercial refrigeration unit or
remote-condensing commercial refrigeration unit with a thermostat is
capable of operating or, in the case of a remote-condensing commercial
refrigeration unit without a thermostat, the range of integrated
average temperatures at which the unit is marketed, designed, or
intended to operate.
Pull-down temperature application means a commercial refrigerator
with doors that, when fully loaded with 12-ounce beverage cans at 90
degrees F, can cool those beverages to an average stable temperature of
38 degrees F in 12 hours or less.
Rating temperature means the integrated average temperature a unit
must maintain during testing (i.e., either as listed in the table at
Sec. 431.66(d)(1) or the lowest application product temperature).
Remote condensing unit means a factory-made assembly of
refrigerating components designed to compress and liquefy a specific
refrigerant that is remotely located from the refrigerated equipment
and consists of one or more refrigerant compressors, refrigerant
condensers, condenser fans and motors, and factory supplied
accessories.
Scheduled lighting control means a device which automatically shuts
off or dims the lighting in a display case at scheduled times
throughout the day.
Self-contained condensing unit means a factory-made assembly of
refrigerating components designed to compress and liquefy a specific
refrigerant that is an integral part of the refrigerated equipment and
consists of one or more refrigerant compressors, refrigerant
condensers, condenser fans and motors, and factory-supplied
accessories.
Semivertical Open means equipment without doors and an air-curtain
angle greater than or equal to 10[deg] and less than 80[deg] from the
vertical.
Service over counter means equipment that has sliding or hinged
doors in the back intended for use by sales personnel, with glass or
other transparent material in the front for displaying merchandise, and
that has a height not greater than 66 in. and is intended to serve as a
counter for transactions between sales personnel and customers.
Test package means a packaged material that is used as a standard
product temperature-measuring device.
Transparent means greater than or equal to 45 percent light
transmittance, as determined in accordance with ASTM E1084-86
(Reapproved 2009) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.63) at
normal incidence and in the intended direction of viewing.
Vertical Closed means equipment with hinged or sliding doors and a
door angle less than 45[deg].
Vertical Open means equipment without doors and an air-curtain
angle greater than or equal to 0[deg] and less than 10[deg] from the
vertical.
Wedge case means a commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer that forms the transition between two regularly
shaped display cases.
0
7. Amend Sec. 431.63 by revising paragraphs (a), (c), (d), and (e) to
read as follows:
Sec. 431.63 Materials incorporated by reference.
(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this subpart
with the 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, the DOE must publish a document in
the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public.
All approved incorporation by reference (IBR) material 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, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, EE-5B, Washington, DC 20024,
(202)-586-9127, [email protected], 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 sources in the following paragraphs of this section:
* * * * *
(c) AHRI. Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute,
2111 Wilson Blvd., Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201; (703) 524-8800;
[email protected]; www.ahrinet.org/.
(1) ARI Standard 1200-2006, Performance Rating of Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets, 2006; IBR
approved for Sec. 431.66.
(2) AHRI Standard 1200 (I-P)-2010 (``AHRI Standard 1200 (I-P)-
2010''), 2010 Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets, 2010; IBR
approved for Sec. 431.66.
(3) AHRI Standard 1200-2023 (I-P) (``AHRI 1200-2023''), 2023
Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets, copyright 2023; IBR approved for
appendices B, C, and D to this subpart.
(4) AHRI Standard 1320-2011 (I-P), (``AHRI 1320-2011'') 2011
Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets for Use With Secondary Refrigerants,
copyright 2011; IBR approved for appendix B to this subpart.
(d) ASHRAE. The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 1971 Tullie Circle NE, Atlanta, GA
30329; (404) 636-8400; [email protected]; www.ashrae.org/.
(1) ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2022 (ASHRAE 72-2022), Method of
Testing Open and Closed Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers, approved
June 30, 2022; IBR approved for appendices B, C, and D to this subpart.
(2) Errata sheet for ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 72-2022 (ASHRAE 72-2022
Errata), Method of Testing Open and Closed Commercial Refrigerators and
Freezers, November 11, 2022; IBR approved for appendices B, C, and D to
this subpart.
(e) ASTM. ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700,
West Conshohocken, PA 19428; (877) 909-2786; www.astm.org/.
(1) ASTM E1084-86 (Reapproved 2009), Standard Test Method for Solar
Transmittance (Terrestrial) of Sheet Materials Using Sunlight, approved
April 1, 2009; IBR approved for Sec. 431.62.
(2) ASTM F2143-16, Standard Test Method for Performance of
Refrigerated
[[Page 66225]]
Buffet and Preparation Tables, approved May 1, 2016; IBR approved for
appendix C to this subpart.
0
8. Section 431.64 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 431.64 Uniform test method for the measurement of energy
consumption of commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-
freezers.
(a) Scope. This section provides the test procedures for measuring,
pursuant to EPCA, the energy consumption or energy efficiency for a
given equipment category of commercial refrigerators, freezers, and
refrigerator-freezers.
(b) Testing and calculations. (1) Determine the daily energy
consumption and volume or total display area of each covered commercial
refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-freezer by conducting the
appropriate test procedure set forth below in appendix B, to this
subpart. The daily energy consumption of commercial refrigeration
equipment shall be calculated using raw measured values and the final
test results shall be reported in increments of 0.01 kWh/day.
(2) Determine the daily energy consumption and pan storage volume,
pan display area, and refrigerated volume of each buffet table or
preparation table by conducting the appropriate test procedure set
forth below in appendix C to this subpart. The daily energy consumption
shall be calculated using raw measured values and the final test
results shall be recorded in increments of 0.01 kWh/day.
(3) Determine the energy consumption per weight of product and
product capacity of each blast chiller and blast freezer by conducting
the appropriate test procedure set forth below in appendix D to this
subpart. The energy consumption per weight of product shall be
calculated using raw measured values and the final test results shall
be recorded in increments of 0.01 kWh/lb.
Appendix A [Removed and Reserved]
0
9. Appendix A to subpart C of part 431 is removed and reserved.
0
10. Appendix B to subpart C of part 431 is revised to read as follows:
Appendix B to Subpart C of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Commercial Refrigerators,
Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers
Note: On or after September 20, 2024, any representations,
including for certification of compliance, made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of commercial refrigeration equipment,
except for buffet tables or preparation tables, blast chillers,
blast freezers, or mobile refrigerated cabinets, must be made in
accordance with the results of testing pursuant to this appendix.
Prior to September 20, 2024, any representations with respect to
energy use or efficiency of commercial refrigeration equipment,
except for buffet tables or preparation tables, blast chillers,
blast freezers, or mobile refrigerated cabinets, must be made either
in accordance with the results of testing pursuant to this appendix
or with the results of testing pursuant to this appendix as it
appeared in appendix B to subpart C of part 431 in the 10 CFR parts
200-499 edition revised as of January 1, 2023. Buffet tables or
preparation tables are subject to the test method requirements in
appendix C to subpart C of part 431. Blast chillers and blast
freezers are subject to the test method requirements in appendix D
to subpart C of part 431.
The test procedure for equipment cooled only by secondary
coolants in section 1.1.3 of this appendix is not required for use
until the compliance date(s) of any amended energy conservation
standard(s) (see Sec. 431.66) for such commercial refrigeration
equipment.
High-temperature refrigerators must be tested as medium-
temperature refrigerators according to section 2.1.3 of this
appendix based on the lowest application product temperature until
the compliance date(s) of any amended energy conservation
standard(s) (see Sec. 431.66) established for high-temperature
refrigerators. On and after the compliance date(s) of such energy
conservation standard(s) (see Sec. 431.66), high-temperature
refrigerators must be tested as high-temperature refrigerators
according to section 2.1.4 of this appendix.
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference in Sec. 431.63 the entire
standard for AHRI 1200-2023; AHRI 1320-2011; ASHRAE 72-2022 and
ASHRAE 72-2022 Errata (the latter two collectively referenced as
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata). However, only enumerated provisions of
AHRI 1200-2023 and AHRI 1320-2011 are applicable to this appendix as
follows:
0.1. AHRI 1200-2023
(a) Section 3, ``Definitions,'' as referenced in section 1.1 of
this appendix.
(b) Section 3.2.8, ``Dew Point,'' as referenced in section 2.2.
of this appendix.
(c) Section 3.2.20, ``Total Display Area (TDA),'' as referenced
in section 3.2 of this appendix.
(d) Section 4, ``Test Requirements,'' as referenced in section
1.1 of this appendix.
(e) Section 4.1.1.1, ``High Temperature Applications,'' as
referenced in section 2.1.4 of this appendix.
(f) Section 4.1.1.2, ``Ice Cream Applications,'' as referenced
in section 2.1.1 of this appendix.
(g) Section 4.1.1.3, ``Low Temperature Applications,'' as
referenced in section 2.1.2 of this appendix.
(h) Section 4.1.1.4, ``Medium Temperature Applications,'' as
referenced in section 2.1.3 of this appendix.
(i) Section 5.1, ``Rating Requirements for Remote Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets'' as
referenced in sections 1.1.2, 1.1.3, and 1.5.3.3 of this appendix.
(j) Section 5.2, ``Rating Requirements for Self-Contained
Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage
Cabinets,'' as referenced in section 1.1.1 of this appendix.
(k) Section 9, ``Symbols and Subscripts,'' as referenced in
section 1.1 and 2.2 of this appendix.
(l) Appendix C, ``Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandiser
and Storage Cabinet Refrigerated Volume Calculation--Normative'' as
referenced in section 3.1 of this appendix.
(m) Appendix D, ``Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandiser
and Storage Cabinet Total Display Area (TDA) Calculation--
Normative,'' as referenced in section 3.2 of this appendix.
0.2. AHRI 1320-2011
(a) Sections 5.2.7 and 5.2.8 as referenced in section 1.1.3 of
this appendix.
(b) [Reserved].
1. Test Procedure
1.1. Determination of Daily Energy Consumption. Determine the
daily energy consumption of each covered commercial refrigerator,
freezer, or refrigerator-freezer by conducting the test procedure
set forth in AHRI 1200-2023, section 3, ``Definitions,'' section 4,
``Test Requirements,'' and section 9, ``Symbols and Subscripts.''
1.1.1. For each commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer with a self-contained condensing unit, also use
AHRI 1200-2023, section 5.2, ``Rating Requirements for Self-
Contained Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage
Cabinets.''
1.1.2. For each commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer with a remote condensing unit, also use AHRI
1200-2023, section 5.1, ``Rating Requirements for Remote Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets.''
1.1.3. For each commercial refrigerator, freezer, or
refrigerator-freezer used with a secondary coolant, test according
to section 1.1.2 of this appendix, except in place of the equations
for CDEC and CEC in sections 5.1.2 and 5.1.2.1 of AHRI 1200-2023,
respectively, apply the following equations:
CDEC = CEC + [FEC + LEC + AEC + DEC + PEC]* + CPEC
CEC = [(Qrt + QCP) [middot] (t -
tdt)]/(EER [middot] 1000)
Where CPEC and QCP are as specified in sections 5.2.7
and 5.2.8 of AHRI 1320-2011 and EER is determined based on a
temperature that is 6.0 [deg]F lower than the secondary coolant
cabinet inlet temperature.
1.2. Methodology for Determining Applicability of Transparent
Door Equipment Families. To determine if a door for a given model of
commercial refrigeration equipment is transparent:
(a) Calculate the outer door surface area including frames and
mullions;
(b) calculate the transparent surface area within the outer door
surface area excluding frames and mullions;
(c) calculate the ratio of (2) to (1) for each of the outer
doors; and
[[Page 66226]]
(d) the ratio for the transparent surface area of all outer
doors must be greater than 0.25 to qualify as a transparent
equipment family.
1.3. Drawers. Drawers shall be treated as identical to doors
when conducting the DOE test procedure. Commercial refrigeration
equipment with drawers intended for use with pans shall be
configured with stainless steel food service pans, installed in a
configuration per the manufacturer's instructions utilizing the
maximum pan sizes specified. If the manufacturer does not specify
the pan sizes, the maximum pan depth and pan volume allowed shall be
used. For commercial refrigeration equipment with drawers intended
for use with pans, the net usable volume includes only the interior
volume of the pan(s) in the drawer. The net usable volume shall be
measured by the amount of water needed to fill all the pan(s) to
within 0.5 inches of the top rim, or determined by calculating the
total volume of all pan(s) using the pan manufacturers' published
pan volume. For commercial refrigeration equipment with drawers not
intended for pans, the net usable volume shall be equal to the total
volume of the drawer to the top edge of the drawer. Test simulators
shall be placed in commercial refrigeration equipment with drawers
as follows: For each drawer, there shall be two test simulators
placed at each of the following locations: at the left end, at the
right end, and at consistent 24 inch to 48 inch intervals across the
width of the drawer (for drawers wider than 48 inches). For drawers
with overall internal width of 48 inches or less, only the left and
right ends shall have test simulators. If test simulators are to be
placed at a pan edge or divider, the test simulator shall be placed
at the nearest adjacent location. For each drawer, one test
simulator shall be placed on the bottom of the pan or drawer at each
of the front and rear test simulator locations of the drawer. Test
simulators shall be placed in contact with the drawer or pan end or
ends unless load limiting stops are provided as part of the case.
Test simulators shall be secured such that the test simulators do
not move during the test. The net usable volume where test
simulators are not required shall be filled with filler material so
that between 60 percent and 80 percent of the net usable volume is
occupied by test simulators and uniformly occupied by filler
material.
1.4. Long-time Automatic Defrost. For commercial refrigeration
equipment not capable of operating with defrost intervals of 24
hours or less, testing may be conducted using a two-part test
method.
1.4.1. First Part of Test. The first part of the test shall be a
24-hour test starting in steady-state conditions and including eight
hours of door opening (according to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata). The
energy consumed in this test, ET1, shall be recorded.
1.4.2. Second Part of Test. The second part of the test shall be
a defrost cycle, including any operation associated with a defrost.
The start and end of the test period be determined as the last time
before and first time after a defrost occurrence when the measured
average simulator temperature (i.e., the instantaneous average of
all test simulator temperature measurements) is within 0.5 [deg]F of
the IAT as measured during the first part of the test. The energy
consumed in this test, ET2, and duration, tDI, shall be
recorded.
1.4.3. Daily Energy Consumption. Based on the measured energy
consumption in these two tests, the daily energy consumption (DEC)
in kWh shall be calculated as:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26SE23.007
Where:
DEC = daily energy consumption, in kWh;
ET 1 = energy consumed during the first part of the test, in kWh;
ET 2 = energy consumed during the second part of the test, in kWh;
tNDI = normalized length of defrosting time per day, in
minutes;
tDI = length of time of defrosting test period, in
minutes;
tDC = minimum time between defrost occurrences, in days;
and
1440 = conversion factor, minutes per day.
1.5. Customer Order Storage Cabinets. Customer order storage
cabinets shall conduct door openings according to ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata, except that each door shall be opened to the fully open
position for 8 seconds, once every 2 hours, for 6 door-opening
cycles.
1.5.1. Ambient Compartments. For customer order storage cabinets
that have at least one individual-secured compartment that is not
capable of maintaining an integrated average temperature below the
ambient dry-bulb temperature, the individual-secured compartment(s)
at ambient dry-bulb temperature shall be categorized as a high-
temperature refrigerator compartment for the purpose of testing and
rating. All volume, total display area, and energy consumption
calculations shall be included within the high-temperature
refrigerator category and summed with other high-temperature
refrigerator category compartment(s) calculations.
1.5.2. Convertible Compartments. For customer order storage
cabinets that have individual-secured compartments that are
convertible between the ambient dry-bulb temperature and the >=32
[deg]F operating temperature, the convertible compartment shall be
tested as a medium-temperature refrigerator compartment or at the
lowest application product temperature as specified in section 2.2
of this appendix.
1.5.3. Inverse Refrigeration Load Test. For customer order
storage cabinets that supply refrigerant to multiple individual-
secured compartments and that allow the suction pressure from the
evaporator in each individual-secured compartment to float based on
the temperature required to store the customer order in that
individual-secured compartment, test according to section 1.1.2 of
this appendix, except that energy (heat) loss shall be allowed at a
rate and [Delta]T equivalent to the energy gains of a standard
refrigerated cabinet as specified in sections 1.5.3.1-1.5.3.3 of
this appendix.
1.5.3.1. Anti-sweat door heaters. Anti-sweat door heaters shall
be de-energized for the inverse refrigeration load test specified in
section 1.5.3. of this appendix.
1.5.3.2. Integrated Average Temperature. For medium-temperature
refrigerator compartments, the integrated average temperature shall
be 112.4 [deg]F 2.0 [deg]F. For low-temperature freezer
compartments, the integrated average temperature shall be 150.4
[deg]F 2.0 [deg]F. For ambient compartments, the
integrated average temperature shall be 75.4 [deg]F 2.0
[deg]F.
1.5.3.3. Daily Energy Consumption. Determine the calculated
daily energy consumption (``CDEC'') and the EER based on AHRI 1200-
2023, section 5.1, ``Rating Requirements for Remote Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandisers and Storage Cabinets,'' except
that the compressor energy consumption (``CEC'') shall be calculated
by applying the following equations:
[[Page 66227]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26SE23.006
ML = Nd x (Ae + Am)
Ae = [(Ha - Hc) - (Ht - Ha)] x ma
Am = Cp,liner x Wliner x [Delta]Tliner
Where:
CEC = compressor energy consumption, kWh per day;
Q = inverse refrigeration load (does not include waste heat from
auxiliary components and moisture infiltration), in BTU per h;
t = test duration, in h;
ML = moisture load impacts, BTU per day;
FEC = evaporator fan motor(s) energy consumption, Wh per day;
AEC = anti-condensate heater(s) energy consumption, Wh per day;
DEC = defrost heater(s) energy consumption, Wh per day;
3.412 = conversion factor, BTU per Wh;
EER = energy efficiency ratio, BTU per Wh;
1000 = conversion factor, W per kW;
Win = energy input measured over the test period for all energized
components (heaters, controls, and fans) located in the refrigerated
compartments, in Wh;
Nd = number of door openings during test, unitless;
Ae = enthalpy adjustment, BTU per day;
Am = moisture/frost accumulation, BTU per day;
Ha = ambient air enthalpy, BTU per pound;
Hc = compartment air enthalpy based on air conditions during cold
operation (e.g., 0 [deg]F dry bulb/-20 [deg]F dew point for freezer
compartment, 38 [deg]F dry bulb/20 [deg]F dew point for refrigerator
compartment, 75 [deg]F dry bulb/20 [deg]F dew point for ambient
compartment), BTU per pound;
Ht = compartment air enthalpy during heat leak test based on dew
point being equal to ambient air dew point, BTU per pound;
ma = mass of compartment air exchanged (30% of total
compartment volume) based density of air during cold operation,
pounds;
Cp,liner = specific heat of liner material, BTU per [deg]F per
pound;
Wliner = weight of all liner parts, pounds; and
[Delta]Tliner = maximum temperature rise of all liner parts (e.g.,
4.5 [deg]F, 2.5 [deg]F, and 1 [deg]F for freezer, refrigerator, and
ambient compartments, respectively), [deg]F.
2. Test Conditions
2.1. Integrated Average Temperatures. Conduct the testing
required in section 1 of this appendix, and determine the daily
energy consumption at the applicable integrated average temperature
as follows:
2.1.1. Ice-Cream Freezers. Test ice-cream freezers and ice-cream
freezer compartments to the integrated average temperature specified
in section 4.1.1.2, ``Ice Cream Applications,'' of AHRI 1200-2023.
2.1.2. Low-Temperature Freezers. Test low-temperature freezers
and low-temperature freezer compartments to the integrated average
temperature specified in section 4.1.1.3, ``Low Temperature
Applications,'' of AHRI 1200-2023.
2.1.3. Medium-Temperature Refrigerators. Test medium-temperature
refrigerators and medium-temperature refrigerator compartments to
the integrated average temperature specified in section 4.1.1.4,
``Medium Temperature Applications,'' of AHRI 1200-2023.
2.1.4. High-Temperature Refrigerators. Test high-temperature
refrigerators and high-temperature refrigerator compartments to the
integrated average temperature specified in section 4.1.1.1, ``High
Temperature Applications,'' of AHRI 1200-2023.
2.2. Lowest Application Product Temperature. If a unit of
commercial refrigeration equipment is not able to be operated at the
integrated average temperature specified in section 2.1 of this
appendix, test the unit at the lowest application product
temperature (LAPT), as defined in Sec. 431.62. For units equipped
with a thermostat, LAPT is the measured temperature at the lowest
thermostat setting of the unit (for units that are only able to
operate at temperatures above the specified test temperature) or the
highest thermostat setting of the unit (for units that are only able
to operate at temperatures below the specified test temperature).
For remote condensing equipment without a thermostat or other means
of controlling temperature at the case, the lowest application
product temperature is measured at the temperature achieved with the
dew point temperature (as defined in section 3.2.8, ``Dew Point,''
of AHRI 1200-2023) or mid-point evaporator temperature (as defined
in section 9, ``Symbols and Subscripts,'' of AHRI 1200-2023) set to
5 degrees colder than that required to maintain the manufacturer's
specified application temperature that is closest to the specified
integrated average temperature.
2.3. Testing at NSF Test Conditions. For commercial
refrigeration equipment that is also tested in accordance with NSF
test procedures (Type I and Type II), integrated average
temperatures and ambient conditions used for NSF testing may be used
in place of the DOE-prescribed integrated average temperatures and
ambient conditions provided they result in a more stringent test.
That is, the measured daily energy consumption of the same unit,
when tested at the rating temperatures and/or ambient conditions
specified in the DOE test procedure, must be lower than or equal to
the measured daily energy consumption of the unit when tested with
the rating temperatures or ambient conditions used for NSF testing.
The integrated average temperature measured during the test may be
lower than the range specified by the DOE applicable temperature
specification provided in section 2.1 of this appendix, but may not
exceed the upper value of the specified range. Ambient temperatures
and/or humidity values may be higher than those specified in the DOE
test procedure.
2.4. Liquid Refrigerant Pressure Required Accuracy. The liquid
refrigerant pressure required accuracy is 35 kPa (5.1 psi).
2.5 Commercial Refrigerator, Freezer, and Refrigerator-Freezer
connected to a Direct Expansion Remote Condensing Unit with R-744.
For commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers
connected to a direct expansion remote condensing unit with R-744,
instead of the liquid refrigerant measurements for direct-expansion
remote units specified in appendix A to ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata,
the liquid refrigerant measurements for direct-expansion remote
units shall be: liquid refrigerant temperature shall be 30.0 [deg]F
with a tolerance for the average over test period of 3.0
[deg]F and a tolerance for the individual measurements of 5.0 [deg]F; liquid refrigerant pressure shall be the saturated
liquid pressure corresponding to a condensing temperature in the
range of 32.0 [deg]F to 44.0 [deg]F for the average over test
period; and liquid refrigerant subcooling shall be greater than 2.0
[deg]R for the average over test period.
2.6 Chef Base or Griddle Stand Test Conditions. For chef bases
or griddle stands, instead of the dry-bulb temperature, wet-bulb
temperature, and radiant heat temperature specified in appendix A to
ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata: dry-bulb temperature shall be 86.0
[deg]F with a tolerance for the average over test period of 1.8 [deg]F and a tolerance for the individual measurements of
3.6 [deg]F; wet-bulb temperature shall be 73.7 [deg]F
with a tolerance for the average over test period of 1.8
[deg]F and a tolerance for the individual measurements of 3.6 [deg]F; and radiant heat temperature shall be greater than
or equal to 81.0 [deg]F.
3. Volume and Total Display Area
3.1. Determination of Volume. Determine the volume of a
commercial refrigerator, freezer, and refrigerator-freezer using the
method set forth in AHRI 1200-2023, appendix C, ``Commercial
Refrigerated Display Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet Refrigerated
Volume Calculation--Normative.''
3.2. Determination of Total Display Area. Determine the total
display area of a commercial refrigerator, freezer, and
refrigerator-freezer using the method set forth in AHRI 1200-2023,
section 3.2.20, ``Total Display Area (TDA),'' and appendix D,
``Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet
Total Display Area (TDA) Calculation--Normative.''
[[Page 66228]]
0
11. Appendix C to subpart C of part 431 is added to read as follows:
Appendix C to Subpart C of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Buffet Tables or Preparation
Tables
Note: On or after September 20, 2024, any representations,
including for certification of compliance, made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of buffet tables or preparation tables must
be made in accordance with the results of testing pursuant to this
appendix.
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference in Sec. 431.63 the entire
standard for AHRI 1200-2023, ASHRAE 72-2022, ASHRAE 72-2022 Errata
(the latter two collectively referenced as ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata), and ASTM F2143-16. However, only enumerated provisions of
those documents are applicable to this appendix as follows:
0.1. AHRI 1200-2023
(a) Section 3.2.17, ``Refrigerated Volume (Vr),'' as referenced
in section 2.2 of this appendix.
(b) Normative Appendix C, ``Commercial Refrigerated Display
Merchandiser and Storage Cabinet Refrigerated Volume Calculation,''
as referenced in section 2.2 of this appendix.
0.2 ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
(a) Section 5.1, ``Installation and Settings,'' as referenced in
section 1.3 of this appendix.
(b) Section 5.2, ``Wall or Vertical Partition Placement,'' as
referenced in section 1.3 of this appendix.
(c) Section 5.3, ``Components and Accessories,'' as referenced
in section 1.3 of this appendix.
(d) Section 6.1, ``Ambient Temperature and Humidity,'' as
referenced in section 1.2 of this appendix.
(e) Section 7.1, ``Sequence of Operations,'' as referenced in
section 1.5 of this appendix.
(f) Section 7.2, ``Preparation Period'' (excluding sections
7.2.1 and 7.2.2), as referenced in section 1.5 of this appendix.
(g) Section 7.3, ``Test Periods A and B'' (excluding sections
7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and 7.3.4), as referenced in sections 1.5 and
1.5.1 of this appendix.
(h) Section 7.4, ``Test Alignment Period,'' as referenced in
section 1.5 of this appendix.
(i) Section 7.5, ``Determining Stability,'' as referenced in
sections 1.5 and 1.5.2 of this appendix.
(j) Normative Appendix A, ``Measurement Locations, Tolerances,
Accuracies, and Other Characteristics,'' (only the measured
quantities specified in section 1.2 of this appendix) as referenced
in sections 1.2 and 1.5.3 of this appendix.
0.3 ASTM F2143-16
(a) Section 3, ``Terminology,'' as referenced in section 1.1 of
this appendix.
(b) Section 6.1, ``Analytical Balance Scale,'' as referenced in
section 1.1 of this appendix.
(c) Section 6.2, ``Pans,'' as referenced in section 1.1 of this
appendix.
(d) Section 7, ``Reagents and Materials,'' as referenced in
section 1.1 of this appendix.
(e) Section 9, ``Preparation of Apparatus'' (section 9.6 only),
as referenced in sections 1.1 and 1.4.2 of this appendix.
(f) Section 10.1, ``General'' (section 10.1.1 only), as
referenced in sections 1.1 and 1.5.3 of this appendix.
(g) Section 10.2, ``Pan Thermocouple Placement,'' as referenced
in section 1.1 of this appendix.
(h) Section 10.5, ``Test'' (sections 10.5.5 and 10.5.6 only), as
referenced in sections 1.1 and 1.5.1 of this appendix.
(i) Section 11.4, ``Energy Consumption'' (section 11.4.1 only),
as referenced in section 1.1 of this appendix.
(j) Section 11.5, ``Production Capacity,'' as referenced in
sections 1.1 and 2.1 of this appendix.
1. Test Procedure
1.1. Determination of Daily Energy Consumption. Determine the
daily energy consumption of each buffet table or preparation table
with a self-contained condensing unit by conducting the test
procedure set forth in ASTM F2143-16 section 3, ``Terminology,''
section 6.1, ``Analytical Balance Scale,'' section 6.2, ``Pans,''
section 7, ``Reagents and Materials,'' section 9.6, ``Preparation of
Apparatus'', section 10.1, ``General'' (section 10.1.1 only),
section 10.2, ``Pan Thermocouple Placement,'' section 10.5, ``Test''
(sections 10.5.5 and 10.5.6 only), section 11.4, ``Energy
Consumption'' (section 11.4.1 only), and section 11.5, ``Production
Capacity,'' with additional instructions as described in the
following sections.
1.2. Test Conditions. Ambient conditions and instrumentation for
testing shall be as specified in the ``Chamber conditions'' and
``Electricity supply and consumption of unit under test and
components metered separately'' portions of appendix A to ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata and measured according to section 6.1 of ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata and the specifications in appendix A of ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata. The ``highest point'' of the buffet table or
preparation table shall be determined as the highest point of the
open-top refrigerated area of the buffet table or preparation table,
without including the height of any lids or covers. The geometric
center of the buffet table or preparation table is: for buffet
tables or preparation tables without refrigerated compartments, the
geometric center of the top surface of the open-top refrigerated
area; and for buffet tables or preparation tables with refrigerated
compartments, the geometric center of the door opening area for the
refrigerated compartment.
1.3. Test Setup. Install the buffet table or preparation table
according to sections 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata.
1.4. Test Load.
1.4.1. Pan Loading. Fill pans with distilled water to within 0.5
in. of the top edge of the pan. For pans that are not configured in
a horizontal orientation, only the lowest side of the pan is filled
to within 0.5 in. of the top edge of the pan with distilled water.
1.4.2. Refrigerated Compartments. Measure the temperature of any
refrigerated compartment(s) as specified in section 9.6 of ASTM
F2143-16. The thermocouples for measuring compartment air
temperature shall be in thermal contact with the center of a 1.6-oz
(45-g) cylindrical brass slug with a diameter and height of 0.75 in.
The brass slugs shall be placed at least 0.5 in from any heat-
conducting surface.
1.5. Stabilization and Test Period. Prepare the unit for testing
and conduct two test periods to determine stability according to
sections 7.1 through 7.5 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, excluding
sections 7.2.1, 7.2.2, 7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and 7.3.4. The
preparation period under section 7.2 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
includes loading the test unit pans with distilled water and
adjusting the controls to maintain the desired performance.
1.5.1. Test Periods A and B. Conduct two test periods, A and B,
as specified in section 7.3 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata (excluding
sections 7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3, and 7.3.4). The 24-hour test periods
shall begin with an 8-hour active period as specified in section
10.5.5 of ASTM F2143-16. Following the active period, the remaining
16 hours of the test period shall be a standby period with the pans
remaining in place, any pan covers in the closed position, and with
no additional door openings.
1.5.2. Stability. Average pan temperatures shall be used to
determine stability, as specified in section 7.5 of ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata, rather than average test simulator temperatures.
1.5.3. Data Recording. For each test period, record data as
specified in section 10.1.1 of ASTM F2143-16, except record wet-bulb
temperature rather than relative humidity. Rather than voltage,
current, and power as specified in section 10.1.1 of ASTM F2143-16,
record the electrical supply potential and frequency and energy
consumption as specified in appendix A of ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata.
1.6. Target Temperatures.
1.6.1. Average Pan Temperature. The average of all pan
temperature measurements during the test period shall be 38 [deg]F
2 [deg]F. If the unit under test is not able to be
operated at this average temperature range, test the unit at the
lowest application product temperature (LAPT), as defined in Sec.
431.62. For units equipped with a thermostat, LAPT is measured at
the lowest thermostat setting of the unit (for units that are only
able to operate at temperatures above the specified test
temperature) or the highest thermostat setting of the unit (for
units that are only able to operate at temperatures below the
specified test temperature).
1.6.2. Average Compartment Temperature. The average of all
compartment temperature measurements during the test period shall be
38 [deg]F 2 [deg]F. If the unit under test is not
capable of maintaining both average pan temperature and average
compartment temperature within the specified range, the average
compartment temperature shall be the average temperature necessary
to maintain average pan temperature within the specified range. If
the unit is tested at the LAPT for the average pan temperature, as
described in section 1.6.1 of this appendix, the average compartment
temperature is the average of all compartment temperature
measurements at that control setting.
[[Page 66229]]
2. Capacity Metrics
2.1. Pan Volume. Determine pan volume according to section 11.5
of ASTM F2143-16.
2.2. Refrigerated Volume. Determine the volume of any
refrigerated compartments according to section 3.2.17 and appendix C
of AHRI 1200-2023. The refrigerated volume excludes the volume
occupied by pans loaded in the open-top display area for testing.
2.3. Pan Display Area. Determine the pan display area based on
the total surface area of water in the test pans when filled to
within 0.5 in. of the top edge of the pan, or for test pans that are
not configured in a horizontal orientation, when the lowest side of
the pan is filled to within 0.5 in. of the top edge of the pan with
water.
0
12. Appendix D to subpart C of part 431 is added to read as follows:
Appendix D to Subpart C of Part 431--Uniform Test Method for the
Measurement of Energy Consumption of Blast Chillers or Blast Freezers
Note: On or after September 20, 2024, any representations,
including for certification of compliance, made with respect to the
energy use or efficiency of blast chillers or blast freezers must be
made in accordance with the results of testing pursuant to this
appendix.
0. Incorporation by Reference
DOE incorporated by reference in Sec. 431.63 the entire
standard for AHRI 1200-2023, ASHRAE 72-2022, and ASHRAE 72-2022
Errata (the latter two collectively referenced as ASHRAE 72-2022
with Errata). However, only enumerated provisions of those documents
are applicable to this appendix as follows:
0.1 AHRI 1200-2023
(a) Appendix C, ``Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandiser
and Storage Cabinet Refrigerated Volume Calculation--Normative,'' as
referenced in section 1.1.1. of this appendix.
(b) Reserved.
0.2 ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata
(a) Section 4, ``Instruments,'' as referenced in section 1.2 of
this appendix.
(b) Section 5, ``Preparation of Unit Under Test'' (except
section 5.4, ``Loading of Test Simulators and Filler Material''), as
referenced in section 1.2 of this appendix.
(c) Section 6.1, ``Ambient Temperature and Humidity,'' as
referenced in sections 1.2 and 1.4 of this appendix.
(d) Figure 6, ``Location of Ambient Temperature Indicators,'' as
referenced in sections 1.2 and 1.4 of this appendix.
(e) Normative Appendix A, ``Measurement Locations, Tolerances,
Accuracies, and Other Characteristics,'' (only the measured
quantities specified in section 1.2.1 of this appendix) as
referenced in sections 1.2 and 1.4 of this appendix.
1. Test Procedures
1.1. Scope. This section provides the test procedures for
measuring the energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per pound (kWh/
lb) for self-contained commercial blast chillers and blast freezers
that have a refrigerated volume of up to 500 ft\3\.
1.1.1. Determination of Refrigerated Volume. Determine the
refrigerated volume of a self-contained commercial blast chiller or
blast freezer using the method set forth in AHRI 1200-2023, appendix
C, ``Commercial Refrigerated Display Merchandiser and Storage
Cabinet Refrigerated Volume Calculation--Normative.''
1.2. Determination of Energy Consumption. Determine the energy
consumption of each covered blast chiller or blast freezer by
conducting the test procedure set forth in ASHRAE 72-2022 with
Errata section 4, ``Instruments,'' section 5, ``Preparation of Unit
Under Test'' (except section 5.4, ``Loading of Test Simulators and
Filler Material''), section 6.1, ``Ambient Temperature and
Humidity,'' Figure 6, ``Location of Ambient Temperature
Indicators,'' and normative appendix A, ``Measurement Locations,
Tolerances, Accuracies, and Other Characteristics'' (only the
measured quantities specified in section 1.2.1 of this appendix), as
well as the requirements of this appendix.
1.2.1. Measured Quantities in Normative Appendix A of ASHRAE 72-
2022 with Errata. The following measured quantities shall be in
accordance with the specifications of normative appendix A of ASHRAE
72-2022 with Errata: dry bulb temperature (except for deviations
specified in sections 1.3 and 1.4 of this appendix), electrical
supply frequency, electrical supply potential, energy consumed
(except for deviations specified in section 1.3 of this appendix),
extent of non-perforated surface beyond edges of unit under test,
front clearance, rear or side clearance, and time measurements.
1.2.2. Additional Specifications for ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata.
The term ``refrigerator'' used in ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata shall
instead refer to ``blast chiller'' or ``blast freezer,'' as
applicable. In section 5.3 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata, the phrase
``all necessary components and accessories shall be installed prior
to loading the storage and display areas with test simulators and
filler material'' shall be replaced with ``all necessary components
and accessories shall be installed prior to precooling the unit
under test.'' Section 5.3.5 shall also require that, prior to
precooling the unit under test, the condensate pan shall be dry.
1.3. Data Recording Measurement Intervals. Measurements shall be
continuously recorded during the test in intervals no greater than
10 seconds.
1.4. Test Conditions. The required test conditions shall have
dry bulb temperature values according to Table D.1 when measured at
point A in figure 6 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata and according to
section 6.1 of ASHRAE 72-2022 with Errata.
Table D.1--Test Condition Values and Tolerances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test condition Value Tolerance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dry Bulb.......................... 86.0 [deg]F Average over test
period: 1.8 [deg]F.
Individual
measurements: 3.6 [deg]F.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.5. Product Pan. The product pan shall be a 12 in. by 20 in. by
2.5 in., 22 gauge or heavier, and 300 series stainless steel pan. If
the blast chiller or blast freezer is not capable of holding the 12
in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. product pan dimensions, the manufacturer's
recommended pan size shall be used, conforming as closely as
possible to the 12 in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. pan dimensions.
1.6. Product Temperature Measurement. The product temperature
shall be measured in the geometric center of the measured product
pans using an unweighted thermocouple placed \5/8\ of an in. above
the bottom of the measured product pan. The thermocouple leads shall
be secured to the bottom of the measured product pan while also
allowing for the transfer of the measured product pan from the
heating source into the blast chiller's or blast freezer's cabinet.
1.7. Product Preparation. The product shall be made for each
product pan and shall be loaded to 2 in. of product thickness (i.e.,
depth) within the product pan unless an additional product pan with
a product thickness of less than 2 in. is needed to meet the product
capacity determined in section 2.1 of this appendix. A 20-percent-
by-volume propylene glycol (1,2-Propanediol) mixture in water shall
be prepared. In each product pan, pour the propylene glycol mixture
over #20 mesh southern yellow pine sawdust to create a 22 percent to
78 percent by mass slurry. An example of an acceptable sawdust
specification is the American Wood Fibers brand, #20 Mesh Pine
Sawdust. Mix until the sawdust becomes completely saturated and
leave uncovered in the product pan. Verify that the product pan
thermocouple is fully submerged in the product mixture and
reposition the product pan thermocouple to the requirements of
section 1.6. of this appendix if the product pan thermocouple is
incorrectly positioned after mixing. Each product pan shall be
weighed before and after the food product simulator is added and
prior to heating the product. The weight of the product shall not
include the weight of the pans, thermocouples, or wires. A
cumulative total of the product weight shall be calculated and the
product pans shall continue to be loaded with the product mixture
until the cumulative total reaches, but not exceeds, the product
capacity determined in section 2.1 of this appendix with a tolerance
of 5 percent or 2 pounds,
[[Page 66230]]
whichever is less. The cumulative total weight of product, the
weight of product in each individual pan, and the number of pans
shall be recorded.
1.8. Product Pan Heating. Measured product pans shall be
maintained at an average temperature of 160.0 [deg]F 1.8
[deg]F and individual pan temperatures shall be maintained at 160
[deg]F 10 [deg]F for a minimum of 8 hours prior to being
loaded into the blast chiller or blast freezer. Non-measured product
pans shall also be heated for a minimum of 8 hours prior to being
loaded into the blast chiller or blast freezer and the non-measured
product pans shall be placed in alternating positions with the
measured product pans in the heating device. Data acquisition for
the temperature of the measured product pans and time measurements
shall begin to be recorded prior to the minimum of 8 hours heating
period.
1.9. Product Pan Distribution. The product pans shall be spaced
evenly throughout each vertical column of rack positions in the
blast chiller or blast freezer without the product pans touching any
other product pans and without the product pans touching the top and
the bottom of the blast chiller or blast freezer cabinet. For blast
chillers or blast freezers that have an additional product pan with
a product thickness of less than 2 in., the additional product pan
shall be placed as close to the middle rack position as possible
while maintaining an even distribution of all product pans. If not
all rack positions are occupied by product pans, the product pan
locations shall be recorded.
1.10. Measured Product Pans. If multiple product pans are
required per level of the blast chiller or blast freezer (i.e.,
product pans can be loaded side-by-side at the same level), only the
product temperature of one product pan per level shall be measured
and the product pans measured should alternate vertical columns of
the blast chiller or blast freezer cabinet so that each vertical
column does not have two measured product pans on sequential levels.
If a blast chiller or blast freezer requires an additional product
pan with a thickness less than 2 in., the additional product pan
shall not be measured for product temperature.
1.11. Stabilization. The blast chiller or blast freezer shall
stabilize at the test conditions specified in section 1.4 of this
appendix for at least 24 hours without operating.
1.12. Pre-cool Cycle. Data acquisition for the test condition
temperatures specified in section 1.4 of this appendix and time
measurements shall begin to be recorded prior to the pre-cool cycle.
The pre-cool cycle shall be initiated on a blast chiller or blast
freezer once the stabilization specified in section 1.11 of this
appendix is complete. The fastest pre-cool cycle shall be selected.
The pre-cool cycle shall be complete when the blast chiller or blast
freezer notifies the user that the pre-cool is complete. If the
blast chiller or blast freezer does not notify the user that the
pre-cool cycle is complete, the pre-cool cycle shall be deemed
complete when the blast chiller or blast freezer reaches 40 [deg]F
or 2 [deg]F based on the blast chiller's or blast freezer's sensing
probe for blast chillers and blast freezers, respectively. For blast
chillers or blast freezers without any defined pre-cool cycles, the
fastest blast chilling or blast freezing cycle shall be run with an
empty cabinet until the blast chiller or blast freezer reaches 40
[deg]F or 2 [deg]F based on the blast chiller's or blast freezer's
sensing probe. During the pre-cool cycle, the blast chiller's or
blast freezer's sensing probe shall remain in its default or
holstered position. The pre-cool test data to be recorded are the
test condition temperatures specified in section 1.4 of this
appendix, pre-cool cycle selected, pre-cool duration, and final pre-
cool cabinet temperature based on the blast chiller's or blast
freezer's sensing probe.
1.13. Loading. The blast chiller or blast freezer door shall be
fully open to an angle of not less than 75 [deg]F for loading at 4.0
1.0 minutes after the blast chiller or blast freezer
completes the pre-cool cycle as specified in section 1.12 of this
appendix. The door shall remain open to load all of the product pans
for the entirety of the loading procedure. The door shall remain
open for 20 seconds per roll-in rack and 15 seconds per product pan
for roll-in and standard blast chillers or blast freezers,
respectively. The total door open period shall have a tolerance of
5 seconds. The blast chiller's or blast freezer's
sensing probe shall be inserted into the geometric center of a
product pan approximately 1 in. deep in the product mixture at the
median pan level in the blast chiller or blast freezer. If the
product pan at the median level is the additional product pan with
less than 2 in. of product thickness, the closest product pan or
product pan level that is farthest away from the evaporator fan
shall be used to insert the blast chiller's or blast freezer's
sensing probe. If the median pan level has capacity for multiple
product pans, the probed product pan shall be the furthest away from
the evaporator. The sensing probe shall not touch the bottom of the
product pan or be exposed to the air. The location of the product
pan with the sensing probe shall be recorded. The sensing probe
shall be placed so that there is no interference with the product
pan thermocouple. The product pan thermocouple wiring shall not
affect the energy performance of the blast chiller or blast freezer.
The door shall remain closed for the remainder of the test.
1.14. Blast Chilling or Blast Freezing Cycle. Determine the
blast chilling or blast freezing cycle that will conduct the most
rapid product temperature pulldown that is designed for the densest
food product, as stated in the blast chiller's or blast freezer's
manufacturer literature. A blast chilling cycle shall have a target
temperature of 38.0 [deg]F and a blast freezing cycle shall have a
target temperature of 0.0 [deg]F. The test condition temperatures
specified in section 1.4 of this appendix and the time measurements
shall continue to be recorded from the pre-cool cycle. Measured
product pan temperatures shall continue to be recorded from the
minimum of 8-hour period of heating prior to the loading of the
product pans into the blast chiller or blast freezer. Electrical
supply frequency, electrical supply potential, and energy consumed
shall start to be recorded as soon as the blast chiller or blast
freezer door is opened to load the product pans. Once the blast
chiller or blast freezer door is closed, the blast chilling cycle or
blast freezing cycle shall be selected and initiated as soon as is
practicable. The blast chilling cycle or blast freezing cycle
selected shall be recorded. The blast chilling or blast freezing
test period shall continue from the door opening until all
individual measured pan temperatures are at or below 40.0 [deg]F or
2.0 [deg]F for blast chiller and blast freezer tests, respectively,
regardless of whether the selected cycle program has terminated. If
all individual measured pan temperatures do not reach 40.0 [deg]F or
2.0 [deg]F for blast chiller and blast freezer tests, respectively,
two hours after the selected cycle program has terminated, the test
shall be repeated with the target temperature lowered by 1.0 [deg]F
until all individual measured pan temperatures are at or below 40.0
[deg]F or 2.0 [deg]F for blast chiller and blast freezer tests,
respectively, at the conclusion of the test. The duration of the
blast chiller or blast freezer test shall be recorded.
1.15. Calculations. The measured energy consumption determined
in section 1.14 of this appendix shall be reported in kilowatt-hours
and shall be divided by the cumulative total weight of product
determined in section 1.7 of this appendix in pounds.
2. Capacity Metric
2.1. Product Capacity. Determine the product capacity by
reviewing all manufacturer literature that is included with the
blast chiller or blast freezer. The largest product capacity by
weight that is stated in the manufacturer literature shall be the
product capacity. If the blast chiller or blast freezer is able to
operate as both a blast chiller and a blast freezer when set to
different operating modes by the user and the manufacturer
literature specifies different product capacities for blast chilling
and blast freezing, the largest capacity by weight stated for the
respective operating mode shall be the product capacity. If no
product capacity is stated in the manufacturer literature, the
product capacity shall be the product capacity that fills the
maximum number of 12 in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. pans that can be
loaded into the blast chiller or blast freezer according to section
1.7 of this appendix. If the blast chiller or blast freezer with no
product capacity stated in the manufacturer literature is not
capable of meeting the definition of a blast chiller or blast
freezer according to Sec. 431.62 upon testing according to section
1 of this appendix, one 12 in. by 20 in. by 2.5 in. pan shall be
removed from the blast chiller or blast freezer until the definition
of a blast chiller or blast freezer is met according to Sec. 431.62
when testing according to section 1 of this appendix.
[FR Doc. 2023-19999 Filed 9-25-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
