[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