[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79991-79998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26693]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 79991]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket No. EERE-2012-BT-DET-0033]
RIN 1904-AC83
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products and Certain
Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Final Determination of Compressors
as Covered Equipment
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is classifying certain
varieties of compressors as covered equipment under Part A-1 of Title
III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended.
Accordingly, this document establishes the definition of equipment that
are considered compressors.
DATES: This rule is effective December 15, 2016.
ADDRESSES: This rulemaking can be identified by docket number EERE-
2012-BT-DET-0033 and/or Regulatory Information Numbers (RIN) 1904-AC83.
Docket: 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, some documents listed in the index may not 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: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2012-BT-DET-0033. The
www.regulations.gov Web page contains simple 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) 586-6636 or by
email: [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Raba, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
586-8654. Email: [email protected].
Mary Greene, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1817. Email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Current Rulemaking Process
III. Covered Equipment
A. Compressors in Covered Products
B. Pressure Ratio
C. Equipment Configuration
D. Electrical Connection Method
E. Non-Electric Compressors
F. Variety of Equipment Covered
G. Federal Preemption
H. Conclusion
IV. Evaluation of Compressors as a Covered Equipment
A. Energy Consumption in Operation
B. Distribution in Commerce
C. Prior Inclusion as a Covered Product
D. Coverage Necessary To Carry Out Purposes of Part A-1 of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act of 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act of 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Congressional Notification
M. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Statutory Authority
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended (``EPCA'' or, in context, ``the Act''), sets forth a variety of
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C. 6291, et
seq.) Part C of Title III, which for editorial reasons was re-
designated as Part A-1 upon incorporation into the U.S. Code (42 U.S.C.
6311-6317), establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment.'' The purpose of Part A-1 is to improve the
efficiency of electric motors and pumps and certain other industrial
equipment in order to conserve the energy resources of the Nation. (42
U.S.C 6312(a))
EPCA provides that DOE may include a type of industrial equipment,
including compressors, as covered equipment if it determines that to do
so is necessary to carry out the purposes of Part A-1. (42 U.S.C.
6311(2)(B)(i) and 6312(b)). Industrial equipment, including
compressors, must be of a type that consumes, or is designed to
consume, energy in operation; is distributed in commerce for industrial
or commercial use; and is not a covered product as defined in 42 U.S.C.
6291(a)(2) of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6311 (2)(A)). DOE has determined that
compressors, the definition of which DOE is adding to subpart T of 10
CFR 431 and discusses in this rule, meet the statutory requirements
under 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(i) and 6312(b) and is classifying them as
covered equipment.
Separately, DOE is conducting rulemakings to consider test
procedures, and energy conservation standards for compressors. Pursuant
to EPCA, any new or amended energy conservation standard for
compressors must be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in
energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically
justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) and 6316(a)). Furthermore, the new
or amended standard must result in a significant conservation of
energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B) and 6316(a)). DOE will determine if
compressors satisfy these provisions during the course of the energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
[[Page 79992]]
II. Current Rulemaking Process
On December 31, 2012 (77 FR 76972), DOE issued a Proposed
Determination of Coverage (2012 NOPD) that proposed to determine that
compressors qualify as covered equipment under part A-1 of Title III of
EPCA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6311 et seq). DOE proposed that coverage
was necessary for the purposes of Part A-1 because (1) DOE may only
prescribe energy conservation standards for covered equipment; and (2)
energy conservation standards for compressors would improve the
efficiency of such equipment more than would be likely to occur in the
absence of standards. The 2012 NOPD tentatively determined adoption of
energy conservation standards for compressors likely would satisfy the
provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(i). On February 7, 2013 (78 FR
8998), DOE published a notice reopening the comment period on the 2012
NOPD.
On February 5, 2014 (79 FR 6839), DOE published a notice of public
meeting and provided a framework document that addressed potential
standards and test procedures rulemakings for compressors. DOE held a
public meeting to discuss the framework document on April 1, 2014. At
this meeting, DOE discussed and received comments on the framework
document, which covered the analytical framework, models, and tools
that DOE used to evaluate potential standards; and all other issues
raised relevant to the development of energy conservation standards for
the different categories of compressors. On March 18, 2014 (79 FR
15061), DOE extended the comment period.
On May 5, 2016 (81 FR 27219), DOE issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR) to propose a definition for the term ``compressor''
and to propose test procedures for certain compressors (hereafter, the
``test procedure NOPR''). On May 19, 2016 (81 FR 31680), DOE issued a
NOPR to propose energy conservation standards for certain varieties of
compressors (hereafter, the ``energy conservation standards NOPR''). On
June 20, 2016, DOE held a public meeting to discuss the test procedure
and energy conservation standards NOPRs and to accept comments from
interested parties.
In this final rule, DOE responds to the seven comments received
from interested parties in response to the 2012 NOPD. DOE notes that
certain comments received in response to the 2012 NOPD discussed topics
such as: Technology options to improve the efficiency of compressors,
scope of potential energy conservations standards, and test methods for
compressors, among other comments. These comments relate to the ongoing
test procedure and/or energy conservation standards rulemakings and
are, or will, be addressed in those rulemakings, as applicable. In this
document, DOE also responds to certain comments that were submitted in
response to the test procedure NOPR and pertain to the definition of
``compressor.''
In this document, DOE addresses comments submitted by the
following: The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
(AHRI); American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE);
Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP); Alliance to Save Energy
(ASE); Atlas Copco AB (Atlas Copco); the Compressed Air & Gas Institute
(CAGI); Compressed Air Systems; the Edison Electric Institute (EEI);
Ingersoll Rand; Kaeser Compressors; the National Rural Electric
Cooperative Association (NRECA); the Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance (NEEA); the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP);
the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC); the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), Southern
California Edison (SCE), and Southern California Gas Company (SCGC),
collectively referred to as the California Investor Owned Utilities (CA
IOUs); Scales Industrial Technologies; Sullair; Saylor-Beall
Manufacturing Company and Sullivan-Palatek, collectively referred to as
Sullivan-Palatek.
DOE will identify comments received in response to the test
procedure NOPR by the number of the docket maintained at
www.regulations.gov (Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054), the commenter,
the number of document as listed in that docket, and the page number of
that document where the comment appears (for example: EERE-2014-BT-TP-
0054, CAGI, No. 0010 at p. 3CAGI, No. 10 at p. 4). DOE will identify
comments received in response to the energy conservation standards NOPR
by the commenter, the number of document as listed in the docket
maintained at www.regulations.gov (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040),
and the page number of that document where the comment appears. DOE
will cite comments in this rule's docket (EERE-2012-BT-DET-0033) solely
using the commenter name, commenter number, and page number, without a
docket reference.
III. Covered Equipment
``Compressor'' is not an existing defined term under EPCA. In the
2012 NOPD, DOE tentatively determined to add compressors as a type of
covered equipment and proposed a definition for ``compressor.'' 77 FR
76972, 76973 (Dec 31, 2012). Specifically, DOE proposed to define
compressor as an electric-powered device that takes in air or gas at
atmospheric pressure and delivers the air or gas at a higher pressure.
DOE also clarified that compressors typically have a specific ratio,
the ratio of delivery pressure to supply pressure, greater than 1.20
and compressors are classified as positive-displacement, dynamic, or
hybrid. 77 FR 76972, 76973-76974 (Dec 31, 2012). Finally, DOE noted
that compressors may have pistons, rollers, rotors, impeller wheels,
spiral disks, cylinders, lubricant, motors and transmissions, controls,
treatment equipment, filters, and/or a lubricant/air separators. 77 FR
76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012). In the 2016 test procedure NOPR, after
considering comments in response to the February 5, 2014 framework
document (79 FR 6839), DOE proposed revisions to its initial proposed
``of a compressor''. Specifically, DOE proposed that a compressor means
a machine or apparatus that converts different types of energy into the
potential energy of gas pressure for displacement and compression of
gaseous media to any higher pressure values above atmospheric pressure
and has a pressure ratio greater than 1.3. 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May 5,
2016)
Several parties commented in response to the definition of
``compressor'' considered in the 2012 NOPD and proposed in the 2016
test procedure NOPR (and its associated public meeting). These comments
are discussed by topic, in the sections that follow.
A. Compressors in Covered Products
In response to the 2012 NOPD, AHRI stated that DOE's proposed
definition of ``compressor'' may unintentionally include some products
as covered equipment. Specifically AHRI was concerned that heating,
ventilating, air conditioning, and refrigeration (HVACR) equipment may
meet the proposed definition, and suggested that DOE include a
statement to exclude them. (AHRI, No. 0002 at pp. 1-2) AHRI stated that
the energy consumption of HVACR compressors is already accounted for in
the efficiency ratings for regulated HVACR equipment, which means that
covering those compressors under separate regulations would lead to
unwarranted double regulation on
[[Page 79993]]
HVACR products. (AHRI, No. 0002 at p. 2).
EEI commented that certain electric motors sized under 500
horsepower (which are used on certain compressors), are already subject
to DOE energy conservation standards, and DOE should take this into
consideration in any future energy conservation standards, in order to
avoid duplicative regulation of these motors. (EEI, No. 0009 at p. 4)
This final rule establishes a definition for ``compressors'' and
classifies them as covered equipment under EPCA; it does not establish
scope for any potential energy conservation standards. As such, AHRI's
comment that compressors in HVACR systems and EEI comments regarding
motors should be excluded from regulation will be addressed in the
ongoing energy conservation standards rulemaking.
B. Pressure Ratio
In response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR, Atlas Copco commented
that DOE should harmonize with international precedent to aid
manufacturers in exporting their products, and reduce the minimum
pressure ratio from 1.3 to 1.1, as is stated in European Union (EU) Lot
31 draft standard.\1\ (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Atlas Copco, No. 0009 at
p. 11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The EU Lot 31 draft standard is available at: http://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0031&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Atlas Copco, DOE reiterates that it proposed a
lower-bound pressure ratio of 1.3 to align the coverage determination
of compressors with the coverage determination being considered in the
fans and blowers rulemaking, with the intent that DOE regulations do
not leave any gaps in coverage. 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May 5, 2016). DOE
further reiterates that an Appliance Standards Rulemaking Advisory
Committee (ASRAC) Working Group was established to negotiate proposed
energy conservation standards for fans and blowers and this group
discussed and came to general agreement on a maximum fan energy limit
of 25 kJ/kg, which translates approximately to a 1.3 pressure ratio, as
the appropriate cutoff to distinguish between fans and compressors.
(EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006; EERE-2014-BT-
TP-0054, Public Meeting, No. 84 at p. 11) and 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May
5, 2016). If, through the fans and blowers rulemaking, DOE establishes
coverage for equipment that incorporates a maximum1.3 pressure ratio
limit, DOE would have the authority to establish test procedures and
energy conservation standards for equipment with pressure ratios
between 1.1 and 1.3, under the coverage of fans and blowers, rather
than compressors. (see: Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006).
Alternatively, incorporating a minimum 1.1 pressure ratio into the
definition of ``compressor'' would result in an overlap in coverage
with fans and blowers, and create confusion in the market.
Additionally, incorporating a definition for ``compressor'' as
covered equipment by itself has no material impact on manufacturers.
Rather, a decision by DOE to establish test procedures and/or energy
conservation standards for certain compressors could materially impact
manufacturers and trade. As such, DOE's decision to establish coverage
for compressors based on a minimum pressure ratio of 1.3 has no impact
on manufacturing or exporting, as claimed by Atlas Copco.
In response to the 2012 NOPD, CAGI commented that the 1.2
compression ratio proposed by DOE is too low. CAGI suggested a
compression ratio of 2.5 instead. CAGI noted that what are referred to
as ``low-pressure blowers'' can reach pressure ratios below 2.5, but
are not generally viewed as compressors. CAGI also stated that a
compression ratio of 1.2 may result in the inclusion of blowers for
hand drying and vending machine compressors. (CAGI, No. 0003 at pp. 6-
7) Both Ingersoll Rand and Kaeser Compressors supported CAGI's
recommendation to use a pressure ratio of 2.5 instead of 1.2. (Kaeser
Compressors, No. 0007 at p. 1; Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at pp. 1-2).
However, DOE notes that, in response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR,
CAGI and Ingersoll Rand updated their opinions and provided support for
the definition of ``compressor,'' with a 1.3 minimum pressure ratio, as
proposed by DOE in the test procedure NOPR. (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054,
CAGI, No. 0010 at p. 3; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Ingersoll Rand, No. 0011
at p. 1; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Sullair, No. 0006 at p. 1) Kaeser
Compressors provided no updated comments related minimum pressure
ratio, in response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR.
In response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR, Scales Industrial
Technologies commented that the term ``compressor'' was historically
used for equipment with pressure values above 18-25 psig, corresponding
to pressure ratios of 2.2-2.7, and that equipment with pressure values
below this range were referred to as ``blowers.'' (EERE-2014-BT-TP-
0054, Scales Industrial Technologies, No. 0013, at p. 3)
In response to Kaeser Compressors and Scales Industrial
Technologies, DOE acknowledges that lower pressure compressors are
often termed ``blowers'' in industry. However, significant industry
precedent exists that classifies blowers (and other lower pressure
ratio machines) as sub-varieties of compressors. Specifically, in the
test procedure NOPR, DOE noted that the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) Technical Report 12942:2012, ``Compressors--
Classification--Complementary information to ISO 5390,'' (ISO/TR
12942:2012) defines ``compressor'' as a machine or apparatus converting
different types of energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure with pressure-increase ratios
exceeding 1.1. 81 FR 27219, 27223 (May 5, 2016). Additionally, the
European Union (EU) Lot 31 draft standard,\2\ as previously discussed
by Atlas Copco, also defines ``compressor'' using a minimum pressure
ratio of 1.1.\3\ Technically, any machine with a pressure ratio of
greater than 1.0 could meet the first clause of the proposed definition
for ``compressor''. In other words, it can convert different types of
energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for displacement and
compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure values above
atmospheric pressure. Given the precedent established by ISO/TR
12942:2012 and the EU Lot 31 draft standard, DOE believes that 1.1 is
the minimum pressure ratio used in the industry to describe
compressors. Consequently, a machine that converts different types of
energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for displacement and
compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure values above
atmospheric pressure and has a pressure ratio of 1.3 would technically
be considered a compressor by the compressor industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The EU Lot 31 draft standard is available at: http://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0031&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf.
\3\ As discussed in the previous paragraph, DOE is adopting a
minimum pressure ratio of 1.3, rather than 1.1, in order to align
with the fans and blowers rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, DOE notes that the CA IOUs, CAGI, Sullivan-Palatek,
Ingersoll Rand, and Sullair all support the definition of
``compressor'' with a 1.3 minimum pressure ratio, as proposed in the
test procedure NOPR. (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, CA IOUs, No. 0012 at p. 3;
EERE-
[[Page 79994]]
2014-BT-TP-0054, CAGI, No. 0010 at p. 3; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054,
Sullivan-Palatek, No. 0007 at p. 1; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Ingersoll
Rand, No. 0011 at p. 1; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Sullair, No. 0006 at p.
1). For these reasons, DOE reaffirms its conclusion that a minimum
pressure ratio of 1.3 is appropriate for use in the definition of
``compressor.''
C. Equipment Configuration
In response to the 2012 NOPD, Ingersoll Rand made two
recommendations regarding which components should be included in the
definition of ``compressor.'' First, Ingersoll Rand suggested that
``compressor'' should be defined to include ``onboard'' controls that
are integrated into the compressor package and solely for the operation
of the compressor package to which they are mounted. (Ingersoll Rand,
No. 0004 at p. 2).
Second, Ingersoll Rand suggested that ``compressor'' should be
defined to include filters and treatment equipment that are integral
and necessary to operate the compressor, such as oil coolers,
aftercoolers, and filters, and deliver a certain quality of compressed
air. (Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at p. 2).
In response, this final rule establishes a definition for
``compressors'' and classifies them as covered equipment under EPCA; it
does not establish scope for any potential energy conservation
standards. To that end, DOE notes that the definition of ``compressor''
adopted in this final rule (see section III.H), is broad and does not
exclude the components recommended by Ingersoll Rand. However, DOE
notes that it may limit the applicability of any test procedures and
energy conservations standards it chooses to pursue in the future to
address the (components/controls) identified by Ingersoll Rand.
D. Electrical Connection Method
In response to the 2012 NOPD, CAGI commented that the definition of
``compressor'' should not apply to compressors that are connected
through a wall outlet using a plug connection. CAGI explained that
these compressors generally have intermittent usage patterns, are
small, and are not designed for continuous duty and, therefore, do not
represent significant energy use. (CAGI, No. 0003 at p. 7)
DOE recognizes the benefits of focusing on compressors likely to
account for significant energy use for the purposes of setting
regulatory requirements. However, DOE notes that compressors can be
modified to add or remove electrical plugs, without great cost or
difficulty, by a party aiming to circumvent standards. Additionally,
for certain compressor sizes (i.e., smaller horsepower), the presence
of a plug has no bearing on end user utility, as plugs can be added or
removed at a nominal cost to the end user. Therefore, many compressors
with and without plugs may serve the same markets and applications and
should be treated similarly.
Finally, DOE prefers to use attributes more native to a compressor
(e.g., pressure ratios) to delineate, where needed, which compressors
may fall within the coverage determination. As a result, DOE is
declining CAGI's recommendation to remove from the coverage
determination those compressors that are connected through a wall
outlet using a plug connection.
E. Non-Electric Compressors
In response to the 2012 NOPD, EEI commented that DOE should use a
definition that applies to non-electric in addition to electric
compressors, arguing that limiting the definition to electric
compressors would be inconsistent with DOE's other recent actions for
similar products, and equipment such as pumps and fans, and would be
inconsistent with the intent of EPCA. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 2) NRECA
also commented that any compressor definition should be fuel-neutral.
(NRECA, No. 0008, at p. 2) EEI also noted that DOE provided no
rationale supporting the exclusion of non-electric compressors, and
that there are significant numbers of fossil fuel-driven compressors
operating in the United States. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 5)
Further, in response to the 2012 NOPD, EEI stated that excluding
non-electric compressors carries the potential to distort markets--
presumably by incentivizing end users to substitute unregulated
compressors. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 7) NRECA also commented that an
electric-only compressor definition could encourage fuel-switching to
non-electric compressors and not result in economic or energy savings.
(NRECA, No. 0008, at p. 2)
In response to EEI's and NRECA's argument not to limit the
definition of ``compressor'' to electric compressors, DOE notes that it
is adopting a fuel-neutral definition of ``compressor.''
F. Variety of Equipment Covered
In response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR, Compressed Air Systems
commented that the term ``compressor'' may unintentionally include
other equipment, such as refrigerators, air conditioners, bellows, hand
air pumps, or turbochargers, and suggested a more narrow definition of
the term that would encompass just the products intended for
regulation. (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Compressed Air Systems, No. 0008 at
p. 1).
In response, DOE notes that the definition of ``compressor,'' as
proposed in the test procedure NOPR, does not specifically include or
exclude compressors installed as components of other covered products
or equipment such as refrigerators and air conditioners. Nonetheless,
it may apply to subcomponents of such equipment. Further, if equipment
commonly referred to as bellows, hand air pumps, or turbochargers meets
the definition of ``compressor,'' as proposed in the test procedure
NOPR and adopted in this document, such equipment would fall within the
coverage determination for compressors. However, DOE will determine
appropriate scope(s) of applicability for future test procedure and
energy conservation standards rulemakings based on the particular
circumstances of the market.
G. Federal Preemption
In response to DOE's May 19, 2016 energy conversation standards
NOPR (81 FR 31680), the CA IOUs, ASAP, ACEEE, NEEA, NRDC, NEEP, and ASE
commented that if there are no energy conservation standards for
reciprocating compressors, then reciprocating compressors should not be
covered equipment in order to allow states to pursue standards. (EERE-
2013-BT-STD-0040, CA IOUs, No. 0059 at pp. 2-3; EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040,
CA IOUs, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0044 at p. 153; EERE-2013-BT-
STD-0040, ASAP, ACEEE, NEEA, NRDC, NEEP, ASE, No. 0060 at pp. 2-3)
In this final rule, DOE is establishing a broad definition for
``compressors;'' it is not establishing a definition for specific
categories of compressors. DOE will define specific categories of
compressors and the scope of applicability of test procedures and
energy conservation standards in their respective rules. In turn, DOE
is classifying compressors as covered equipment under EPCA because the
agency concludes that commercial and industrial compressors qualify as
covered equipment under part A-1 of Title III of EPCA, as amended. (42
U.S.C. 6311 et seq.). Once DOE has classified equipment as covered, any
State regulation concerning the energy use or energy efficiency of the
covered product is preempted by Federal coverage. (42 U.S.C. 6297(b),
6316(a)).
[[Page 79995]]
H. Conclusion
Ultimately, for the reasons discussed in this section and
established in the test procedure NOPR, DOE is adopting the definition
of ``compressor,'' as proposed in the test procedure NOPR, with one
minor modification in nomenclature. Specifically, DOE is replacing the
term ``pressure ratio'' with ``pressure ratio at full-load operating
pressure.''.
DOE will develop specific methods to determine pressure ratio at
full-load operating pressure as a part of a separate test procedure
rulemaking process.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. DOE--Energy Information Administration (2015), Annual
Energy Outlook 2015, DOE/EIA-0383 (Available at: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/aeo15/pdf/0383(2015).pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Evaluation of Compressors as a Covered Equipment
The following sections describe DOE's evaluation of whether
compressors fulfill the criteria for being added as covered equipment
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6311(2) and 42 U.S.C. 6312. Compressors are
listed as a type of industrial equipment at 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(i).
The following discussion addresses DOE's consideration of the three
requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(A) and 42 U.S.C. 6312.
A. Energy Consumption in Operation
In the 2012 NOPD, DOE cited data from the 2002 United States
Industrial Electric Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment,
which estimated total annual industrial compressor energy use (from
Manufacturing SIC codes 20-39) at 91,050 million kWh per year.\5\ DOE
noted that, because industrial activity in 2012 is greater than it was
in 2002, it was likely that annual compressor energy use was higher
than this figure. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Manufacturing
and Construction Division, Series MA333P(10)-1, Stationary Air
Compressors, Reciprocating, Single and Double Acting (333912110T),
2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to DOE's NOPD conclusions, EEI commented that data
referenced in the proposed determination of coverage was neither
accurate nor current. EEI noted that although DOE asserted industrial
activity in 2012 exceeded that of 2002, the amount of industrial
electricity consumed and number of industrial customers in 2011 were
lower than in 2003 and 2004, respectively. (EEI, No. 0009 at pp. 2-3).
In its energy conservation standards NOPR, DOE revised the sources
used to characterize the compressor market, DOE revised both initial
shipments, (discussed in section IV.B) and industrial and commercial
growth indicators. DOE projected future growth using Energy Information
Administration's (EIA's) Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Macroeconomic
projections for the Value of Manufacturing Shipments, and Commercial
Floor Space for industrial and commercial sectors, respectively.\4\
Based on the energy savings results discussed in section IV.D, DOE
reaffirms its conclusion that compressors consume a significant amount
of energy in the industrial and commercial sectors.
B. Distribution in Commerce
In the 2012 NOPD, DOE tentatively concluded that compressors are
distributed in commerce for both the industrial and commercial sectors.
Specifically, DOE estimated that 1.3 million motors are shipped
annually to drive compressors in the U.S. commercial and industrial
sectors, based on the 2011 International Energy Agency (IEA) Survey.
DOE also assumed that only a small fraction of these motors are used as
a motor only replacement in compressor systems (based on additional
2004 U.S. Census data); consequently, DOE estimated that nearly 1.3
million compressors were distributed in commerce annually for
industrial or commercial use. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
In response to DOE's NOPD conclusions, Ingersoll Rand commented
that the estimate of annual compressor shipments provided by DOE is
grossly inflated. (Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at p. 2) CAGI commented
that DOE's estimates most likely incorporate compressors going into
consumer applications, and if only commercial and industrial
applications were counted, the number would be significantly lower.
(CAGI, No. 0003 at p. 7) EEI recommended that DOE elaborate on how it
derived the 1.3 million compressor shipment estimate, if DOE is to use
it in in any future energy conservation standards analyses. (EEI, No.
0009 at p. 3)
In response to comments from Ingersoll Rand, CAGI, and EEI, DOE
sought, and received, shipments data for rotary screw compressors from
a number of manufacturer stakeholders and subject matter experts, which
DOE published in its energy conservation standards NOPR. However, DOE
was able to find only limited shipments data for reciprocating
compressors, so DOE continued to use the data from the U.S. Census
Bureau.\5\ DOE estimated in its energy conservation standards NOPR
shipments analysis that 31 thousand rotary screw and 538 thousand
reciprocating compressors were shipped to commercial and industrial
sectors in 2013. (EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0037) Based on these revised
shipments estimates, DOE reaffirms its conclusion that compressors are
distributed in commerce to commercial and industrial sectors.
C. Prior Inclusion as a Covered Product
Compressors are not currently included as covered products under
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 430.
D. Coverage Necessary To Carry Out Purposes of Part A-1 of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act
The purpose of part A-1 of EPCA is to improve the energy efficiency
of electric motors, pumps and certain other industrial equipment to
conserve the energy resources of the Nation. (42 U.S.C. 6312 (a)). In
the 2012 NOPD, DOE proposed that coverage of compressors was necessary
to carry out the purposes of part A-1 of EPCA because coverage will
promote the conservation of energy resources. DOE concluded that
efficiency standards that may result from coverage would help to
capture some portion of the potential for improving the efficiency of
compressors. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
In response to DOE's conclusion that efficiency standards that may
result from coverage of compressors would help to capture some portion
of the potential for improving the efficiency of compressors, CAGI
commented that compressor designs are mature and compressor
manufacturers have already incorporated the most efficient motor
designs and technologies available in the market. CAGI believes that
including compressors as covered equipment would inhibit investment in
research and development because of the hurdles involved in approving
new designs for the market. (CAGI, No. 0003 at p. 8) CAGI also argued
that, due to variation in field applications that lead to changes in
overall efficiency, regulation of compressor packages is an ineffective
way to capture significant energy savings. CAGI suggested that,
therefore, DOE exclude commercial and industrial compressors under Part
A-1 of Title III of EPCA. (CAGI, No. 0003 at pp. 4-5)
Kaeser Compressors commented that since manufacturers already
publish test data at various load levels and that data is verified by a
third-party and since annual energy costs are dependent on the dynamics
of an individual system, Kaeser does not believe that including
[[Page 79996]]
compressors alone as covered equipment would be beneficial to carrying
out the purposes of Part A-1 of EPCA. (Kaeser Compressors, No. 0007 at
pp. 3)
DOE published consumer saving for lubricated rotary screw,
lubricant-free rotary screw, and reciprocating compressors in its
energy conservation standard NOPR TSD.\6\ These equipment account for
over 90 percent of compressors in the commercial and industrial sectors
and are used in a wide variety of applications. While DOE did not
propose an increase in efficiency above the baseline for lubricant-free
rotary screw, or, new standards for reciprocating compressors, DOE's
analysis found that there was energy, and consumer savings for these
equipment at most efficiency levels. Further, DOE published national
energy saving estimates for lubricated rotary screw compressors in its
energy conservation standard NOPR. DOE estimated, at the proposed
level, significant national energy savings of 0.18 quads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy Office (2015), NOPR Technical Support Document (TSD): Energy
Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and
Industrial Equipment: Air Compressors (Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2013-BT=STD-0040-0037).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These estimated saving presented in the energy conservation
standard TSD and NOPR are an indication that coverage will result in
conservation of energy resources. While DOE proposed new energy
conservation standards for a sub-set of compressor designs currently
available in commerce, broadening of the energy conservations standards
beyond lubricated rotary screw compressors will likely increase the
amount of energy savings.
Based on the preceding discussion, DOE reaffirms its conclusion
that incorporating compressors as covered equipment is necessary to
carry out the purposes of Part A-1 of EPCA, and that efficiency
standards that may result from coverage would improve the efficiency of
compressors and help to capture some portion of the potential for
energy savings from this improved efficiency. Based on the information
in sections IV.A, IV.B, and IV.C of this rule, DOE determines that
commercial and industrial compressors qualify as covered equipment
under part A-1 of Title III of EPCA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6311 et
seq.).
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
DOE has reviewed this final rule, which determines coverage for
compressors, under the following executive orders and acts.
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that
coverage determination rulemakings do not constitute ``significant
regulatory actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
Accordingly, this final action was not subject to review under the
Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) in the OMB.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996)
requires preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule
that, by law, must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency
certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. A regulatory
flexibility analysis examines the impact of the rule on small entities
and considers alternative ways of reducing negative effects. Also, as
required by E.O. 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in
Agency Rulemaking'' 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published
procedures and policies on February 19, 2003 to ensure that the
potential impact of its rules on small entities are properly considered
during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990 (Feb. 19, 2003). DOE
makes its procedures and policies available on the Office of the
General Counsel's Web site at www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE reviewed this final rule under the provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the policies and procedures published on February
19, 2003. This final rule sets no test procedures or standards; it only
positively determines that compressors meet the criteria for
classification as covered equipment and that future standards may be
warranted to regulate their energy use. Economic impacts on small
entities would be considered in the context of such rulemakings. On the
basis of the foregoing, DOE certifies that the determination has no
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis for
this final rule. DOE will transmit this 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
This final rule, which concludes that compressors meet the criteria
for a covered product for which the Secretary may prescribe an energy
conservation standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p), imposes no
new information or record-keeping requirements. Accordingly, the OMB
clearance is not required under the Paperwork Reduction Act. (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.)
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this document, DOE positively determines that compressors meet
the criteria for classification as covered equipment and that future
standards may be warranted to regulate their energy use. Should DOE
pursue that option, the relevant environmental impacts would be
explored as part of that rulemaking. As a result, DOE has determined
that this action falls into a class of actions that are categorically
excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10
CFR part 1021. Specifically, this action establishes a class of
equipment (compressors) for which energy conservation standards would
be appropriate. However, this action does not establish energy
conservation standards, and, therefore, does not result in any
environmental impacts. Thus, this action is covered by Categorical
Exclusion A6 ``Procedural rulemakings'' under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart
D. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, ``Federalism'' 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10,
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 assess carefully 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 developing
regulatory policies that have Federalism implications. On March 14,
2000 (65 FR 13735), DOE published a statement of policy describing the
intergovernmental
[[Page 79997]]
consultation process that it will follow in developing such
regulations. DOE has examined this final rule and concludes that it
does not preempt State law or have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the Federal 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
product that is the subject of this final rule. States can petition DOE
for exemption from such preemption to the extent permitted, and based
on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297) No further action is
required by E.O. 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal agencies
the duty to: (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 E.O. 12988
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation specifies the following: (1) The
preemptive effect, if any; (2) any effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for affected conduct while
promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) the retroactive
effect, if any; (5) definitions of key terms; and (6) other important
issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines
issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires
Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether these
standards are met, or whether it is unreasonable to meet one or more of
them. DOE completed the required review and determined that, to the
extent permitted by law, this final rule meets the relevant standards
of E.O. 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub.
L. 104-4, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires each Federal
agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and tribal governments and the private sector. For regulatory
actions likely to result in a rule that may cause expenditures by
State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector of $100 million or more in any 1 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)
and (b)). UMRA 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.'' UMRA also requires an agency plan for giving notice and
opportunity for timely input to small governments that may be
potentially affected before establishing any requirement that might
significantly or uniquely affect them. On March 18, 1997 (62 FR 12820),
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. (This policy also is
available at www.gc.doe.gov). DOE reviewed this final rule pursuant to
these existing authorities and its policy statement 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 the UMRA requirements do not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act
of 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 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 does 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
Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (Mar. 15,
1988), DOE determined that this final rule does not result in any
takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act
of 2001
The Treasury and General Government Appropriation Act of 2001 (44
U.S.C. 3516, note) requires agencies to review most disseminations of
information they make to the public under guidelines established by
each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by the OMB. The OMB's
guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE's
guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has
reviewed this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those
guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 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 proposed significant energy action.
A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency
that promulgates a final rule or is expected to lead to promulgation of
a final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under
E.O. 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 the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) as a significant energy
action. For any proposed significant energy action, the agency must
give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply,
distribution, or use if the proposal is implemented, and of reasonable
alternatives to the proposed action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
DOE has concluded that this regulatory action establishing certain
definitions and determining that compressors meet the criteria for a
covered product for which the Secretary may prescribe an energy
conservation standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) does not
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. This action is also not a significant regulatory action for
purposes of E.O. 12866, and the OIRA Administrator has not designated
this final determination as a significant energy action under E.O.
12866 or any successor order. Therefore, this final rule is not a
significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the
promulgation of this rule prior to its effective date. The report will
state that it has been determined that the rule is a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
[[Page 79998]]
M. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in consultation with the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued its Final Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR 2664 (Jan. 14,
2005). The Bulletin establishes that certain scientific information
shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is
disseminated by the Federal government, including influential
scientific information related to agency regulatory actions. The
purpose of the Bulletin is to enhance the quality and credibility of
the Government's scientific information. DOE has determined that the
analyses conducted for the regulatory action discussed in this document
do not constitute ``influential scientific information,'' which the
Bulletin defines as ``scientific information the agency reasonably can
determine will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on
important public policies or private sector decisions.'' 70 FR 2667
(Jan. 14, 2005). The analyses were subject to pre-dissemination review
prior to issuance of this rulemaking.
DOE will determine the appropriate level of review that would apply
to any future rulemaking to establish energy conservation standards for
compressors.
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final
rule.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 28, 2016.
David J. Friedman,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. 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
2. Add subpart T to part 431 to read as follows:
Subpart T--Compressors
Sec.
431.341 Purpose and scope.
431.342 Definitions concerning compressors.
Subpart T--Compressors
Sec. 431.341 Purpose and scope.
This subpart contains and energy conservation requirements for
compressors, pursuant to Part A-1 of Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6311-6317.
Sec. 431.342 Definitions concerning compressors.
Compressor means a machine or apparatus that converts different
types of energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure and has a pressure ratio at full-load
operating pressure greater than 1.3.
[FR Doc. 2016-26693 Filed 11-14-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P