commentDOE To Ban Multi-Spray Showerheads
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has issued a draft interpretive ruling on the definition of “showerhead” as used in the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA). Sidestepping public comment procedures, DOE has defined “showerhead” in a way that makes multi-spray systems illegal. The new ruling states that all of the fixtures used in a multi-spray system must, combined, use no more than 2.5 gallons of water per minute.
Based on what you have seen and read about this project, how would you grade it? Use the stars below to indicate your assessment, five stars being the highest rating.
EPCA, first passed in 1975 and updated several times since then, limits water use by showerheads to 2.5 gallons per minute (gpm; 9.5 lpm) at 80 psi. The law does not, however, specify what a “showerhead” includes, so manufacturers have been able to sell shower systems with multiple heads, each of which conforms to the 2.5 gpm limit. These multi-spray systems can include body sprayers and other fixtures, and sometimes use upwards of 20 gpm (76 lpm). Marketed as a high-end product, with high prices to match, these systems are not installed frequently.
DOE’s ruling came as a surprise to plumbing manufacturers and conservationists alike, since it lacked the public comment process required for substantive rule changes. But DOE considers the ruling an interpretation of an existing law, and thus “exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act,” in its wording.
A letter to DOE from a coalition of industry groups noted: ”A change of this magnitude should not be exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act as DOE has asserted.” It also argues that the ruling would affect hand-held showers and other fixtures “used in hospitals, nursing homes, schools, and other therapeutic and medical facilities.” Marsha Mazz, the Technical Assistance Coordinator for the U.S. Access Board, disagrees with the assertion that the ruling could adversely affect the showerheads used by the elderly and disabled. “We don’t see it as a disability issue at all,” she said.
Conservation-minded observers worry that the lack of a public comment period will allow manufacturers to find loopholes in the language of the ruling, leading to increased water use. “This is a substantive change and working out all the definitions and conditions to make sure the language is watertight will take a lot of effort from a lot of folks,” said water expert John Koeller, P.E.
Copyright 2010 by BuildingGreen, LLC
|
|
