[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 77 (Friday, April 20, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 20191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-9975]



[[Page 20191]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EE-RM-98-440]
RIN 1904-AA77


Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products; Central Air 
Conditioners and Heat Pumps Energy Conservation Standards

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Final rule; postponement of effective date and reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the memorandum of January 20, 2001, from 
the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, entitled 
``Regulatory Review Plan,'' published in the Federal Register on 
January 24, 2001 (66 FR 7702), DOE temporarily delayed for 60 days (66 
FR 8745, February 2, 2001) the effective date of the final rule 
entitled ``Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products; Central 
Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps Energy Conservation Standards published 
in the Federal Register on January 22, 2001 (66 FR 7170). DOE today 
gives notice of further postponement of the effective date of the 
January 22, 2001, final rule pending the outcome of petitions by the 
Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) for reconsideration 
by DOE and for judicial review by the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Fourth Circuit.

DATES: The effective date of the rule amending 10 CFR Part 430 
published at 66 FR 7170, January 22, 2001, is further postponed from 
April 23, 2001, pending the outcome of petitions for administrative 
reconsideration and judicial review and further Federal Register 
notice. This action is effective immediately upon publication.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill Holtzman, Office of General 
Counsel, (202) 586-3410, [email protected]; Dr. Michael E. 
McCabe, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, (202) 586-
0371, [email protected]; or Eugene Margolis, Office of General 
Counsel, (202) 586-9526, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 325 of the Energy Policy 
and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6295), on January 22, 2001, DOE 
published a notice of final rulemaking, setting forth energy 
conservation standards for central air conditioners and central air 
conditioning heat pumps that are not yet effective and will not be 
enforceable against manufacturers until January 23, 2006 (66 FR 7170). 
The existing standards require a Seasonal Energy Efficiency Rating 
(SEER) of 10 for split systems with a corresponding Heating System 
Performance Rating (HSPF) of 6.8 and a SEER of 9.7 for single package 
systems with a corresponding HSPF of 6.6 (42 U.S.C. 6295(d)(1)). The 
January 22, 2001, final rule would require a SEER of 13 for all systems 
with a corresponding HSPF of 7.7.
    The EFFECTIVE DATE line of the January 22, 2001, notice of final 
rulemaking set forth February 21, 2001, as the effective date for the 
purpose of modifying Part 430 of Chapter II of title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations. On February 2, 2001, pursuant to President Bush's 
Regulatory Review Plan, DOE published a final rule postponing the 
effective date from February 21, 2001, to April 23, 2001 (66 FR 8745).
    Subsequently, ARI petitioned DOE for reconsideration of the January 
22, 2001, final rule, and a group of environmental advocacy 
organizations have responded with a statement in opposition to 
reconsideration. In its petition, ARI acknowledges that the rulemaking 
record will support a 20 percent increase of the minimum required 
energy efficiency levels in the existing standards to a SEER of 12 with 
a corresponding HSPF of 7.3. However, ARI contends that DOE unfairly 
and erroneously raised the standard levels by 30 percent above the 
existing standards to a SEER of 13 with a corresponding HSPF of 7.7. On 
March 19, 2001, ARI also petitioned the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Fourth Circuit for judicial review of the final rule.
    Under the informal rulemaking provisions of the Administrative 
Procedure Act (APA), an agency by rule may alter the ``effective date'' 
of a previously published final rule (5 U.S.C. 551(4), 551(5), 553). 
The judicial review provisions of the APA also provide for a change of 
``effective date'' as follows: ``When an agency finds that justice so 
requires, it may postpone the effective date of action taken by it, 
pending judicial review. . . .'' (5 U.S.C. 705). Once the effective 
date passes, the standards set out in the January 22, 2001 final rule 
would become part of the Code of Federal Regulations as an effective 
final rule, and manufacturers would have to begin the process of coming 
into compliance by January 23, 2006. That process involves both 
planning and capital expenditures.
    DOE is of the view that ARI has raised some substantial questions 
about the legal sustainability of the January 22, 2001, final rule. 
Consistent with Executive Order 12866 and consultations with the Office 
of Management and Budget, DOE intends within the next 60 days to issue 
a further notice of proposed rulemaking to revise the standard levels 
set out in the January 22, 2001, final rule and examine the extent to 
which current minimum required energy efficiency levels are to be 
increased in 2006. In that notice, DOE intends to propose a 12 SEER 
with a corresponding 7.4 HSPF. DOE will also invite public comment on 
its explanation of the statutory authority to make such a proposal upon 
reconsideration. During the pendency of ARI's petition for judicial 
review and the related petition for administrative reconsideration, 
justice requires that DOE postpone the effective date of the January 
22, 2001, final rule, in order to avoid imposing on manufacturers an 
obligation to undertake planning and capital expenditures to come into 
compliance by January 23, 2006, with a rule DOE is reconsidering.
    To the extent that 5 U.S.C. 553 applies to this action, it is 
exempt from notice and comment procedures based on the good cause 
exceptions in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and 553(d)(3). Seeking public comment 
and delaying the effect of today's action are impracticable, 
unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest for several reasons. 
Postponement of the imminent effective date of April 23, 2001, avoids 
confusion among manufacturers as to whether to begin the process of 
coming into compliance. It avoids expenditures by manufacturers in 
reliance on a rule with respect to which there is a significant 
likelihood of modification. It also facilitates reconsideration of a 
final rule that, if allowed to take effect, might well result in a 
court order remanding the rule under instructions for further action 
thereby producing delay in realizing the anticipated energy and cost 
savings.

    Issued in Washington, DC on April 18, 2001.
Eric J. Fygi,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-9975 Filed 4-18-01; 2:13 pm]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P