[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 14 (Friday, January 21, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3229-3236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-00848]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 3229]]



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2020-BT-STD-0039]
RIN 1904-AF00


Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products, Webinar and Availability of the 
Preliminary Technical Support Document

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notification of a webinar and availability of preliminary 
technical support document.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'' or ``the Department'') 
will hold a webinar to discuss and receive comments on the preliminary 
analysis it has conducted for purposes of evaluating energy 
conservation standards for miscellaneous refrigeration products 
(``MREFs''). The meeting will cover the analytical framework, models, 
and tools that DOE is using to evaluate potential standards for these 
products; the results of preliminary analyses performed by DOE; the 
potential energy conservation standard levels derived from these 
analyses that DOE could consider for this product should it determine 
that proposed amendments are necessary; and any other issues relevant 
to the evaluation of energy conservation standards for MREFs. In 
addition, DOE encourages written comments on these subjects. To inform 
interested parties and to facilitate this process, DOE has prepared an 
agenda, a preliminary technical support document (``TSD''), and 
briefing materials, which are available on the DOE website at: 
www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=39&action=viewlive.

DATES: 
    Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on Thursday, February 17, 2022, 
from 12:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section IV, ``Public Participation,'' 
for webinar registration information, participant instructions and 
information about the capabilities available to webinar participants.
    Comments: Written comments and information will be accepted on or 
before, March 22, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons 
may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2020-BT-STD-0039, 
by any of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Email: To [email protected]. Include docket number EERE-
2020-BT-STD-0039 in the subject line of the message.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see section IV of this document.
    Although DOE has routinely accepted public comment submissions 
through a variety of mechanisms, including postal mail and hand 
delivery/courier, the Department has found it necessary to make 
temporary modifications to the comment submission process in light of 
the ongoing corona virus 2019 (``COVID-19'') pandemic. DOE is currently 
suspending receipt of public comments via postal mail and hand 
delivery/courier. If a commenter finds that this change poses an undue 
hardship, please contact Appliance Standards Program staff at (202) 
586-1445 to discuss the need for alternative arrangements. Once the 
COVID-19 pandemic health emergency is resolved, DOE anticipates 
resuming all of its regular options for public comment submission, 
including postal mail and hand delivery/courier.
    Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal 
Register notices, comments, public meeting transcripts, 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, 
such as those containing information that is exempt from public 
disclosure, may not be publicly available.
    The docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0039. The docket web page contains instructions on how 
to access all documents, including public comments in the docket. See 
section IV for information on how to submit comments through 
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Dr. Stephanie Johnson, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies, EE-2J, 1000 
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 
287-1943. Email: [email protected].
    Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. 
Telephone: (202) 586-8145. Email: [email protected].
    For further information on how to submit a comment, review other 
public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment 
Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
    A. Authority
    B. Rulemaking Process
    C. Deviation from Appendix A
II. Background
    A. Current Standards
    B. Current Process
III. Summary of the Analyses Performed by DOE
    A. Market and Technology Assessment
    B. Screening Analysis
    C. Engineering Analysis
    D. Markups Analysis
    E. Energy Use Analysis
    F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analyses
    G. National Impact Analysis
IV. Public Participation
    A. Participation in the Webinar
    B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution
    C. Conduct of the Webinar
    D. Submission of Comments
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

[[Page 3230]]

I. Introduction

A. Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, 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 B \2\ of EPCA established the Energy Conservation 
Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles, which, in 
addition to identifying particular consumer products and commercial 
equipment as covered under the statute, permits the Secretary of Energy 
to classify additional types of consumer products as covered products. 
(42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20)) DOE added MREFs as covered products through a 
final determination of coverage published in the Federal Register on 
July 18, 2016 (the ``July 2016 Final Coverage Determination''). 81 FR 
46768. MREFs are consumer refrigeration products other than 
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, or freezers, which include 
coolers and combination cooler refrigeration products. 10 CFR 430.2. 
MREFs include refrigeration products such as coolers (e.g., wine 
chillers and other specialty products) and combination cooler 
refrigeration products (e.g., wine chillers and other specialty 
compartments combined with a refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-
freezer).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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).
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPCA further provides that, not later than 6 years after the 
issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE 
must publish either a notification of determination that standards for 
the product do not need to be amended, or a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (``NOPR'') including new proposed energy conservation 
standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 
6295(m)(1)) Not later than three years after issuance of a final 
determination not to amend standards, DOE must publish either a notice 
of determination that standards for the product do not need to be 
amended, or a NOPR including new proposed energy conservation standards 
(proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B))
    Under EPCA, any new or amended energy conservation standard must be 
designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that 
DOE determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. 
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new or amended standard must 
result in a significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(3)(B))
    DOE is publishing this Preliminary Analysis to collect data and 
information to inform its decision consistent with its obligations 
under EPCA.

B. Rulemaking Process

    DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or 
amended standards for covered products, including MREFs. As noted, EPCA 
requires that any new or amended energy conservation standard 
prescribed by the Secretary of Energy (``Secretary'') be designed to 
achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency (or water 
efficiency for certain products specified by EPCA) that is 
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, DOE may not adopt any standard that would 
not result in the significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(3)) The Secretary may not prescribe an amended or new standard 
that will not result in significant conservation of energy, or is not 
technologically feasible or economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(3))
    To adopt any new or amended standards for a covered product, DOE 
must determine that such action would result in significant energy 
savings. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) Although the term ``significant'' is 
not defined in the EPCA, the U.S. Court of Appeals, for the District of 
Columbia Circuit in Natural Resources Defense Council v. Herrington, 
768 F.2d 1355, 1373 (D.C. Cir. 1985), opined that Congress intended 
``significant'' energy savings in the context of EPCA to be savings 
that were not ``genuinely trivial.''
    The significance of energy savings offered by a new or amended 
energy conservation standard cannot be determined without knowledge of 
the specific circumstances surrounding a given rulemaking.\3\ For 
example, the United States rejoined the Paris Agreement on February 19, 
2021. As part of that agreement, the United States has committed to 
reducing GHG emissions in order to limit the rise in mean global 
temperature. As such, energy savings that reduce GHG emissions have 
taken on greater importance. Additionally, some covered products and 
equipment have most of their energy consumption occur during periods of 
peak energy demand. The impacts of these products on the energy 
infrastructure can be more pronounced than products with relatively 
constant demand. In evaluating the significance of energy savings, DOE 
considers differences in primary energy and FFC effects for different 
covered products and equipment when determining whether energy savings 
are significant. Primary energy and FFC effects include the energy 
consumed in electricity production (depending on load shape), in 
distribution and transmission, and in extracting, processing, and 
transporting primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas, petroleum fuels), 
and thus present a more complete picture of the impacts of energy 
conservation standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 86 FR 70892, 70901 (Dec. 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, DOE evaluates the significance of energy savings on a 
case-by-case basis. DOE estimates a combined total of 0.45 quads of FFC 
energy savings at the max-tech efficiency levels for MREFs. This 
represents 44.4 percent energy savings relative to the no-new-standards 
case energy consumption for MREFs. DOE has initially determined the 
energy savings for the candidate standard levels considered in this 
preliminary analysis are ``significant'' within the meaning of 42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B).
    To determine whether a standard is economically justified, EPCA 
requires that DOE determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed 
its burdens by considering, to the greatest extent practicable, the 
following seven factors:

    (1) The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and 
consumers of the products subject to the standard;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated 
average life of the covered products in the type (or class) compared 
to any increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance 
expenses for the covered products that are likely to result from the 
standard;
    (3) The total projected amount of energy (or as applicable, 
water) savings likely to result directly from the standard;
    (4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the 
products likely to result from the standard;
    (5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in 
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the 
standard;
    (6) The need for national energy and water conservation; and
    (7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) considers 
relevant. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))

    DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting 
a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows 
the individual analyses that are performed

[[Page 3231]]

to satisfy each of the requirements within EPCA.

       Table I.1--EPCA Requirements and Corresponding DOE Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            EPCA requirement                Corresponding DOE analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Significant Energy Savings.............   Shipments Analysis.
                                          National Impact
                                          Analysis.
                                          Energy Use Analysis.
Technological Feasibility..............   Market and Technology
                                          Assessment.
                                          Screening Analysis.
                                          Engineering Analysis.
Economic Justification:
    1. Economic impact on manufacturers   Manufacturer Impact
     and consumers.                       Analysis.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost and
                                          Payback Period Analysis.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost
                                          Subgroup Analysis.
                                          Shipments Analysis.
    2. Lifetime operating cost savings    Markups for Product
     compared to increased cost for the   Price Analysis.
     product.                             Energy Use Analysis.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost and
                                          Payback Period Analysis.
    3. Total projected energy savings..   Shipments Analysis.
                                          National Impact
                                          Analysis.
    4. Impact on utility or performance   Screening Analysis.
                                          Engineering Analysis.
    5. Impact of any lessening of         Manufacturer Impact
     competition.                         Analysis
    6. Need for national energy and       Shipments Analysis.
     water conservation.
                                          National Impact
                                          Analysis.
    7. Other factors the Secretary        Employment Impact
     considers relevant.                  Analysis.
                                          Utility Impact
                                          Analysis.
                                          Emissions Analysis.
                                          Monetization of
                                          Emission Reductions Benefits.
                                          Regulatory Impact
                                          Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable presumption that a standard 
is economically justified if the Secretary finds that the additional 
cost to the consumer of purchasing a product complying with an energy 
conservation standard level will be less than three times the value of 
the energy savings during the first year that the consumer will receive 
as a result of the standard, as calculated under the applicable test 
procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii))
    EPCA also contains what is known as an ``anti-backsliding'' 
provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing any amended 
standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or 
decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered product. 
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Also, the Secretary may not prescribe an amended 
or new standard if interested persons have established by a 
preponderance of the evidence that the standard is likely to result in 
the unavailability in the United States in any covered product type (or 
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability), 
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the 
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(4))
    Additionally, EPCA specifies requirements when promulgating an 
energy conservation standard for a covered product that has two or more 
subcategories. DOE must specify a different standard level for a type 
or class of product that has the same function or intended use, if DOE 
determines that products within such group: (A) Consume a different 
kind of energy from that consumed by other covered products within such 
type (or class); or (B) have a capacity or other performance-related 
feature which other products within such type (or class) do not have 
and such feature justifies a higher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(q)(1)) In determining whether a performance-related feature 
justifies a different standard for a group of products, DOE must 
consider such factors as the utility to the consumer of the feature and 
other factors DOE deems appropriate. Id. Any rule prescribing such a 
standard must include an explanation of the basis on which such higher 
or lower level was established. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2))
    Finally, pursuant to the amendments contained in the Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 110-140, 
any final rule for new or amended energy conservation standards 
promulgated after July 1, 2010, is required to address standby mode and 
off mode energy use. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) Specifically, when DOE 
adopts a standard for a covered product after that date, it must, if 
justified by the criteria for adoption of standards under EPCA (42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)), incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into 
a single standard, or, if that is not feasible, adopt a separate 
standard for such energy use for that product. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(gg)(3)(A)-(B)) DOE's current test procedure for MREFs measures the 
energy use of these products during extended time periods that include 
periods when the compressor and other key components are cycled off. 
All of the energy these products use during the ``off cycles'' is 
already included in the measurements. By measuring the energy use 
during ``off cycles,'' the current test procedure already addresses 
EPCA's requirement to include standby mode and off mode energy 
consumption in the overall energy descriptor for MREFs. See 86 FR 56790 
(October 12, 2021) (final rule amending the test procedures for 
consumer refrigeration products). As a result, DOE's current energy 
conservation standards and any amended energy conservation standards 
account for such energy use.
    Before proposing a standard, DOE typically seeks public input on 
the analytical framework, models, and tools that DOE intends to use to 
evaluate standards for the product at issue and the results of the 
preliminary analyses DOE performed for the product.
    DOE is examining whether to amend the current standards pursuant to 
its

[[Page 3232]]

obligations under EPCA. This document announces the availability of the 
preliminary technical support document (``TSD''), which details the 
preliminary analyses and summarizes the preliminary results of DOE's 
analyses. In addition, DOE is announcing a public meeting to solicit 
feedback from interested parties on its analytical framework, models, 
and preliminary results.

C. Deviation From Appendix A

    In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, 
appendix A (``appendix A''), DOE notes that it is deviating from the 
provision in appendix A regarding the pre-NOPR stages for an energy 
conservation standards rulemaking. (See 86 FR 70892 (Dec. 13, 2021) 
(effective January 12, 2022)) Section 6(a)(2) of appendix A states that 
if the Department determines it is appropriate to proceed with a 
rulemaking (after initiating the rulemaking process through an early 
assessment), the preliminary stages of a rulemaking to issue or amend 
an energy conservation standard that DOE will undertake will be a 
framework document and preliminary analysis, or an advance notice of 
proposed rulemaking (``ANOPR''). DOE is opting to deviate from this 
step by publishing a preliminary analysis without a framework document. 
A framework document is intended to introduce and summarize the various 
analyses DOE conducts during the rulemaking process and requests 
initial feedback from interested parties. As discussed further in the 
following section, prior to this notification of the preliminary 
analysis, DOE issued an early assessment request for information 
(``RFI'') in which DOE identified and sought comment on the analyses 
conducted in support of the most recent energy conservation standards 
rulemaking (81 FR 75194; Oct. 28, 2016 (the ``October 2016 Direct Final 
Rule'')). 85 FR 78964, 78965-78966 (Dec. 8, 2020) (the ``December 2020 
Early Assessment Review RFI''). DOE provided a 75-day comment period 
for the early assessment RFI. 85 FR 78964. As DOE is intending to rely 
on substantively the same analytical methods as in the most recent 
rulemaking, publication of a framework document would be largely 
redundant with the published early assessment RFI. As such, DOE is not 
publishing a framework document.
    Section 6(d)(2) of appendix A specifies that the length of the 
public comment period for pre-NOPR rulemaking documents will vary 
depending upon the circumstances of the particular rulemaking, but will 
not be less than 75 calendar days. For this preliminary analysis, DOE 
has opted to instead provide a 60-day comment period. As stated, DOE 
requested comment in the December 2020 Early Assessment Review RFI on 
the analysis conducted in support of the October 2016 Direct Final Rule 
and provided stakeholders a 75-day comment period. For this preliminary 
analysis, DOE has relied on many of the same analytical assumptions and 
approaches as used in the previous rulemaking and has determined that a 
60-day comment period in conjunction with the prior 75-day comment 
period provides sufficient time for interested parties to review the 
preliminary analysis and develop comments.

II. Background

A. Current Standards

    As noted, DOE added MREFs as covered products through its July 2016 
Final Coverage Determination. 81 FR 46768. In that determination, DOE 
noted that MREFs, on average, consume more than 150 kilowatt hours per 
year (``kWh/yr'') and that the aggregate annual national energy use of 
these products exceeds 4.2 terawatt hours (``TWh''). 81 FR 46768, 
46775. In addition to establishing coverage, the July 2016 Final 
Coverage Determination established definitions for ``miscellaneous 
refrigeration products,'' ``coolers,'' and ``combination cooler 
refrigeration products'' in 10 CFR 430.2. 81 FR 46768, 46791-46792.
    In the October 2016 Direct Final Rule, DOE adopted energy 
conservation standards for MREFs consistent with the recommendations 
from a negotiated rulemaking working group established under the 
Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee. 81 FR 
75194. Concurrent with the October 2016 Direct Final Rule, DOE 
published a NOPR in which it proposed and requested comments on the 
standards set forth in the direct final rule. 81 FR 74950. On May 26, 
2017, DOE published a notice in the Federal Register in which it 
determined that the comments received in response to the October 2016 
Direct Final Rule did not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawing 
the rule and, therefore, confirmed the adoption of the energy 
conservation standards established in that direct final rule. 82 FR 
24214.
    These current standards for MREFs are set forth in DOE's 
regulations at 10 CFR 430.32(aa)(1)-(2) and are repeated solely for 
reference in Table II.1 to aid the reader.

       Table II.1--Federal Energy Conservation Standards for MREFs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Equations for maximum
                  Product class                     energy use (kWh/yr)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Built-in compact coolers.....................  7.88AV + 155.8.
2. Built-in coolers.............................  7.88AV + 155.8.
3. Freestanding compact coolers.................  7.88AV + 155.8.
4. Freestanding coolers.........................  7.88AV + 155.8.
C-3A. Cooler with all-refrigerator--automatic     4.57AV + 130.4.
 defrost.
C-3A-BI. Built-in cooler with all-refrigerator--  5.19AV + 147.8.
 automatic defrost.
C-9. Cooler with upright freezer with automatic   5.58AV + 147.7.
 defrost without an automatic icemaker.
C-9-BI. Built-in cooler with upright freezer      6.38AV + 168.8.
 with automatic defrost without an automatic
 icemaker.
C-9I. Cooler with upright freezer with automatic  5.58AV + 231.7.
 defrost with an automatic icemaker.
C-9I-BI. Built-in cooler with upright freezer     6.38AV + 252.8.
 with automatic defrost with an automatic
 icemaker.
C-13A. Compact cooler with all-refrigerator--     5.93AV + 193.7.
 automatic defrost.
C-13A-BI. Built-in compact cooler with all-       6.52AV + 213.1.
 refrigerator--automatic defrost.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft\3\, as determined in
               appendix A to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 3233]]

B. Current Process

    In the December 2020 Early Assessment Review RFI, DOE published a 
notice that it was initiating an early assessment review to determine 
whether any new or amended standards would satisfy the relevant 
requirements of EPCA for a new or amended energy conservation standard 
for MREFs and a request for information. 85 FR 78964.
    Comments received to date as part of the current process have 
helped DOE identify and resolve issues related to the preliminary 
analyses. Chapter 2 of the preliminary TSD summarizes and addresses the 
comments received.

III. Summary of the Analyses Performed by DOE

    For the products covered in this preliminary analysis, DOE 
conducted in-depth technical analyses in the following areas: (1) 
Engineering; (2) markups to determine product price; (3) energy use; 
(4) life cycle cost (``LCC'') and payback period (``PBP''); and (5) 
national impacts. The preliminary TSD that presents the methodology and 
results of each of these analyses is available at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0039.
    DOE also conducted, and has included in the preliminary TSD, 
several other analyses that support the major analyses or are 
preliminary analyses that will be expanded if DOE determines that a 
NOPR is warranted to propose amended energy conservation standards. 
These analyses include: (1) The market and technology assessment; (2) 
the screening analysis, which contributes to the engineering analysis; 
and (3) the shipments analysis, which contributes to the LCC and PBP 
analysis and the national impact analysis (``NIA''). In addition to 
these analyses, DOE has begun preliminary work on the manufacturer 
impact analysis and has identified the methods to be used for the 
consumer subgroup analysis, the emissions analysis, the employment 
impact analysis, the regulatory impact analysis, and the utility impact 
analysis. DOE will expand on these analyses in a NOPR, should one be 
issued.

A. Market and Technology Assessment

    DOE develops information in the market and technology assessment 
that provides an overall picture of the market for the products 
concerned, including general characteristics of the products, the 
industry structure, manufacturers, market characteristics, and 
technologies used in the products. This activity includes both 
quantitative and qualitative assessments, based primarily on publicly 
available information. The subjects addressed in the market and 
technology assessment include: (1) A determination of the scope of the 
rulemaking and product classes, (2) manufacturers and industry 
structure, (3) existing efficiency programs, (4) shipments information, 
(5) market and industry trends, and (6) technologies or design options 
that could improve the energy efficiency of the product.
    See chapter 3 of the preliminary TSD for further discussion of the 
market and technology assessment.

B. Screening Analysis

    DOE uses the following five screening criteria to determine which 
technology options are suitable for further consideration in an energy 
conservation standards rulemaking:
    (1) Technological feasibility. Technologies that are not 
incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes will not 
be considered further.
    (2) Practicability to manufacture, install, and service. If it is 
determined that mass production and reliable installation and servicing 
of a technology in commercial products could not be achieved on the 
scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time of the 
projected compliance date of the standard, then that technology will 
not be considered further.
    (3) Impacts on product utility or product availability. If it is 
determined that a technology would have a significant adverse impact on 
the utility of the product for significant subgroups of consumers or 
would result in the unavailability of any covered product type with 
performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, 
capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as products 
generally available in the United States at the time, it will not be 
considered further.
    (4) Adverse impacts on health or safety. If it is determined that a 
technology would have significant adverse impacts on health or safety, 
it will not be considered further.
    (5) Unique-pathway proprietary technologies. If a design option 
utilizes proprietary technology that represents a unique pathway to 
achieving a given efficiency level, that technology will not be 
considered further due to the potential for monopolistic concerns.
    10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, sections 6(c)(3) and 7(b).
    If DOE determines that a technology, or a combination of 
technologies, fails to meet one or more of the listed five criteria, it 
will be excluded from further consideration in the engineering 
analysis.
    See chapter 4 of the preliminary TSD for further discussion of the 
screening analysis.

C. Engineering Analysis

    The purpose of the engineering analysis is to establish the 
relationship between the efficiency and cost of MREFs. There are two 
elements to consider in the engineering analysis; the selection of 
efficiency levels to analyze (i.e., the ``efficiency analysis'') and 
the determination of product cost at each efficiency level (i.e., the 
``cost analysis''). In determining the performance of higher-efficiency 
products, DOE considers technologies and design option combinations not 
eliminated by the screening analysis. For each product class, DOE 
estimates the manufacturer production cost (``MPC'') for the baseline 
as well as higher efficiency levels. The output of the engineering 
analysis is a set of cost-efficiency ``curves'' that are used in 
downstream analyses (i.e., the LCC and PBP analyses and the NIA).
    DOE converts the MPC to the manufacturer selling price (``MSP'') by 
applying a manufacturer markup. The MSP is the price the manufacturer 
charges its first customer, when selling into the product distribution 
channels. The manufacturer markup accounts for manufacturer non-
production costs and profit margin. DOE developed the manufacturer 
markup by examining publicly available financial information for 
manufacturers of the covered product.
    See Chapter 5 of the preliminary TSD for additional detail on the 
engineering analysis.

D. Markups Analysis

    The markups analysis develops appropriate markups (e.g., retailer 
markups, distributor markups, contractor markups) in the distribution 
chain and sales taxes to convert MSP estimates derived in the 
engineering analysis to consumer prices, which are then used in the LCC 
and PBP analysis. At each step in the distribution channel, companies 
mark up the price of the product to cover business costs and profit 
margin.
    DOE develops baseline and incremental markups for each actor in the 
distribution chain (after the product leaves the manufacturer). 
Baseline markups are applied to the price of products with baseline 
efficiency, while incremental markups are applied to the difference in 
price between baseline and higher-efficiency models (the incremental 
cost increase). The

[[Page 3234]]

incremental markup is typically less than the baseline markup and is 
designed to maintain similar per-unit operating profit before and after 
new or amended standards.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Because the projected price of standards-compliant products 
is typically higher than the price of baseline products, using the 
same markup for the incremental cost and the baseline cost would 
result in higher per-unit operating profit. While such an outcome is 
possible, DOE maintains that in markets that are reasonably 
competitive it is unlikely that standards would lead to a 
sustainable increase in profitability in the long run.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chapter 6 of the preliminary TSD provides details on DOE's 
development of markups for MREFs. Chapter 12 of the preliminary TSD 
provides additional detail on the manufacturer markup.

E. Energy Use Analysis

    The purpose of the energy use analysis is to determine the annual 
energy consumption of MREFs at different efficiencies in representative 
U.S. single-family homes, and multi-family residences, and to assess 
the energy savings potential of increased MREF efficiency. The energy 
use analysis estimates the range of energy use of MREFs in the field 
(i.e., as they are actually used by consumers). The energy use analysis 
provides the basis for other analyses DOE performed, particularly 
assessments of the energy savings and the savings in consumer operating 
costs that could result from adoption of amended or new standards.
    Chapter 7 of the preliminary TSD addresses the energy use analysis.

F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analyses

    The effect of new or amended energy conservation standards on 
individual consumers usually involves a reduction in operating cost and 
an increase in purchase cost. DOE used the following two metrics to 
measure consumer impacts:
     The LCC is the total consumer expense of an appliance or 
product over the life of that product, consisting of total installed 
cost (manufacturer selling price, distribution chain markups, sales 
tax, and installation costs) plus operating costs (expenses for energy 
use, maintenance, and repair). To compute the operating costs, DOE 
discounts future operating costs to the time of purchase and sums them 
over the lifetime of the product.
     The PBP is the estimated amount of time (in years) it 
takes consumers to recover the increased purchase cost (including 
installation) of a more-efficient product through lower operating 
costs. DOE calculates the PBP by dividing the change in purchase cost 
at higher efficiency levels by the change in annual operating cost for 
the year that amended or new standards are assumed to take effect.
    Chapter 8 of the preliminary TSD addresses the LCC and PBP 
analyses.

G. National Impact Analysis

    The NIA estimates the national energy savings (``NES'') and the net 
present value (``NPV'') of total consumer costs and savings expected to 
result from amended standards at specific efficiency levels (referred 
to as candidate standard levels).\5\ DOE calculates the NES and NPV for 
the potential standard levels considered based on projections of annual 
product shipments, along with the annual energy consumption and total 
installed cost data from the energy use and LCC analyses. For the 
present analysis, DOE projected the energy savings, operating cost 
savings, product costs, and NPV of consumer benefits over the lifetime 
of MREFs sold from 2029 through 2058.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The NIA accounts for impacts in the 50 states and U.S. 
territories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE evaluates the impacts of new or amended standards by comparing 
a case without such standards with standards-case projections (``no-
new-standards case''). The no-new-standards case characterizes energy 
use and consumer costs for each product class in the absence of new or 
amended energy conservation standards. For this projection, DOE 
considers historical trends in efficiency and various forces that are 
likely to affect the mix of efficiencies over time. DOE compares the 
no-new-standards case with projections characterizing the market for 
each product class if DOE adopted new or amended standards at specific 
energy efficiency levels for that class. For each efficiency level, DOE 
considers how a given standard would likely affect the market shares of 
those products with efficiencies greater than the standard.
    DOE uses a spreadsheet model to calculate the energy savings and 
the national consumer costs and savings from each efficiency level. 
Interested parties can review DOE's analyses by changing various input 
quantities within the spreadsheet. The NIA spreadsheet model uses 
typical values (as opposed to probability distributions) as inputs. 
Critical inputs to this analysis include shipments projections, 
estimated product lifetimes, product installed costs and operating 
costs, product annual energy consumption, the base case efficiency 
projection, and discount rates.
    DOE estimates a combined total of 0.16 quads of site energy savings 
at the max-tech efficiency levels for MREFs. This represents 44.4 
percent energy savings relative to the no-new-standards case energy 
consumption for MREFs.
    Chapter 10 of the preliminary TSD addresses the NIA.

IV. Public Participation

    DOE invites public participation in this process through 
participation in the webinar and submission of written comments and 
information. After the webinar and the closing of the comment period, 
DOE will consider all timely-submitted comments and additional 
information obtained from interested parties, as well as information 
obtained through further analyses. Following such consideration, the 
Department will publish either a determination that the standards for 
MREFs need not be amended or a NOPR proposing to amend those standards. 
The NOPR, should one be issued, would include proposed energy 
conservation standards for the products covered by that rulemaking, and 
members of the public would be given an opportunity to submit written 
and oral comments on the proposed standards.

A. Participation in the Webinar

    The time and date for the webinar meeting are listed in the DATES 
section at the beginning of this document. Webinar registration 
information, participant instructions, and information about the 
capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on 
DOE's website: www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/public-meetings-and-comment-deadlines. Participants are responsible for ensuring their 
systems are compatible with the webinar software.

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution

    Any person who has an interest in the topics addressed in this 
document, or who is representative of a group or class of persons that 
has an interest in these issues, may request an opportunity to make an 
oral presentation at the webinar. Such persons may submit such request 
to [email protected]. Persons who wish to speak 
should include with their request a computer file in Microsoft Word, 
PDF, or text (ASCII) file format that briefly describes the nature of 
their interest in this rulemaking and the topics they wish to discuss. 
Such persons should also provide a daytime telephone number where they 
can be reached.

[[Page 3235]]

C. Conduct of the Webinar

    DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the webinar and may 
also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The webinar will 
not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, but DOE will 
conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6306). A 
court reporter will be present to record the proceedings and prepare a 
transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of 
presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of 
the webinar. There shall not be discussion of proprietary information, 
costs or prices, market share, or other commercial matters regulated by 
U.S. anti-trust laws. After the webinar and until the end of the 
comment period, interested parties may submit further comments on the 
proceedings and any aspect of the rulemaking.
    The webinar will be conducted in an informal, conference style. DOE 
will present summaries of comments received before the webinar, allow 
time for prepared general statements by participants, and encourage all 
interested parties to share their views on issues affecting this 
rulemaking. Each participant will be allowed to make a general 
statement (within time limits determined by DOE), before the discussion 
of specific topics. DOE will permit, as time permits, other 
participants to comment briefly on any general statements.
    At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit 
participants to clarify their statements briefly. Participants should 
be prepared to answer questions by DOE and by other participants 
concerning these issues. DOE representatives may also ask questions of 
participants concerning other matters relevant to this rulemaking. The 
official conducting the webinar will accept additional comments or 
questions from those attending, as time permits. The presiding official 
will announce any further procedural rules or modification of the above 
procedures that may be needed for the proper conduct of the webinar.
    A transcript of the webinar will be included in the docket, which 
can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the beginning of 
this document. In addition, any person may buy a copy of the transcript 
from the transcribing reporter.

D. Submission of Comments

    DOE invites all interested parties, regardless of whether they 
participate in the public meeting, to submit in writing by March 22, 
2022, comments and information on matters addressed in this 
notification and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of 
amended energy conservations standards for MREFs. Interested parties 
may submit comments, data, and other information using any of the 
methods described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this 
document.
    Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The 
www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and 
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE 
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be 
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization 
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your 
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, 
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
    However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you 
include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your 
comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable 
should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to 
your comment. If this instruction is followed, persons viewing comments 
will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence 
containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.
    Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which 
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and 
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as 
Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through 
www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through 
the website will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. 
For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business 
Information section.
    DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before 
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being 
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed 
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several 
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov 
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
    Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted via 
email also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want 
your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not 
include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, 
provide your contact information in a cover letter. Include your first 
and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing 
address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it 
does not include any comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. No faxes will be accepted.
    Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE 
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 
Excel, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not 
secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any defects 
or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form 
of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic 
signature of the author.
    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the 
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters 
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled 
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting 
time.
    Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 
person submitting information that he or she believes to be 
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via 
email two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked 
``confidential'' including all the information believed to be 
confidential, and one copy of the document marked ``non-confidential'' 
with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make 
its own determination about the confidential status of the information 
and treat it according to its determination.
    It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public 
docket, without change and as received, including any personal 
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be 
exempt from public disclosure).

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this 
notification of a webinar and availability of preliminary technical 
support document.

[[Page 3236]]

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on January 12, 
2022, by Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy 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 January 12, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2022-00848 Filed 1-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P