[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 58 (Friday, March 25, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17025-17032]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-06313]
========================================================================
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. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2022 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 17025]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE-2017-BT-STD-0022]
RIN 1904-AE47
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
Automatic Commercial Ice Makers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notification of availability of preliminary technical support
document and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') announces the
availability of the preliminary analysis it has conducted for purposes
of evaluating the need for amended energy conservation standards for
automatic commercial ice makers, which is set forth in the Department's
preliminary technical support document (``TSD'') for this rulemaking.
DOE will hold a public meeting via webinar to discuss and receive
comment on its preliminary analysis. The meeting will cover the
analytical framework, models, and tools used to evaluate potential
standards for this equipment, the results of preliminary analyses
performed by DOE, the potential energy conservation standard levels
derived from these analyses (if DOE determines that proposed amendments
are necessary), and other relevant issues. In addition, DOE encourages
written comments on these subjects.
DATES: Comments: Written comments and information will be accepted on
or before May 24, 2022.
Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on Monday, April 25, 2022, from
1:00 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.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov under docket
number EERE-2017-BT-STD-0022. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments. Alternatively, comments may be submitted by email to:
[email protected]. Include docket number EERE-2017-BT-STD-0022
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 the Federal eRulemaking
Portal, email, 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 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.
To inform interested parties and to facilitate this rulemaking
process, DOE has prepared an agenda, a preliminary TSD, and briefing
materials, which are available on the DOE website at:
www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0014.
Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials,
is available for review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the
docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all
documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as those
containing information that is exempt from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2017-BT-STD-0022. 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. Email:
[email protected].
Ms. Sarah Butler, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-1777. 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
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
[[Page 17026]]
certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317) Title III, Part C
\2\ of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619, Title IV, section 441(a) (42
U.S.C. 6311-6317, as codified), established the Energy Conservation
Program for Certain Industrial Equipment. This equipment includes
automatic commercial ice makers, the subject of this document. (42
U.S.C. 6311(1)(F))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act,
Public Law 117-58 (Nov. 15, 2021).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part C was redesignated Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA prescribed the initial energy and water conservation standards
for automatic commercial ice makers. (42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(1)) EPCA also
authorizes DOE to establish new standards for automatic commercial ice
makers not covered by the statutory standards. (42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(2))
Not later than January 1, 2015, with respect to the standards
established under 42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(1), and, with respect to the
standards established under 42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(2), not later than 5
years after the date on which the standards take effect, EPCA required
DOE to issue a final rule to determine whether amending the applicable
standards is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6313(d)(3)(A)) Not later than 5 years after the effective date
of any amended standards under 42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(3)(A) or the
publication of a final rule determining that amending the standards is
not technologically feasible or economically justified, DOE must issue
a final rule to determine whether amending the standards established
under 42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(1) or the amended standards, as applicable, is
technologically feasible or economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6313(d)(3)(B)) A final rule issued under 42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(2) or (3)
must establish standards at the maximum level that is technically
feasible and economically justified, as provided in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)
and (p). (42 U.S.C. 6313(d)(4))
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.
6316(a); 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. 6316(a); 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. 6316(a); 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. 6316(a); 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 equipment, including automatic commercial
ice makers. 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 equipment specified
by EPCA) that is technologically feasible and economically justified.
(42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 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. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3))
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.\4\ 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 or equipment with
relatively constant demand. In evaluating the significance of energy
savings, DOE considers differences in primary energy and full-fuel
cycle (``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. Accordingly, DOE
evaluates the significance of energy savings on a case-by-case basis,
taking into account the significance of cumulative FFC national energy
savings, the cumulative FFC emissions reductions, and the need to
confront the global climate crisis, among other factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Procedures, Interpretations, and Policies for Consideration
in New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures
for Consumer Products and Commercial/Industrial Equipment, 86 FR
70892, 70901 (Dec. 13, 2021).
\4\ See Executive Order 14008, 86 FR 7619 (Feb. 1, 2021)
(``Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has initially determined the energy savings estimated 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. 6316(a); 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
[[Page 17027]]
individual analyses that are performed 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 and Water 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 and Water 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.\5\
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. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ On March 16, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (No.
22-30087) granted the federal government's emergency motion for stay
pending appeal of the February 11, 2022, preliminary injunction
issued in Louisiana v. Biden, No. 21-cv-1074-JDC-KK (W.D. La.). As a
result of the Fifth Circuit's order, the preliminary injunction is
no longer in effect, pending resolution of the federal government's
appeal of that injunction or a further court order. The preliminary
injunction enjoined the federal government from relying on the
interim estimates of the social cost of greenhouse gases--which were
issued by the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of
Greenhouse Gases on February 26, 2021--to monetize the benefits of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In the absence of further
intervening court orders, DOE will revert to its approach prior to
the injunction and present monetized benefits in accordance with
applicable Executive Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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. 6316(a); 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. 6316(a); 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.
6316(a); 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. 6316(a);
42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2))
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 equipment at issue and the results of
preliminary analyses DOE performed for the equipment.
DOE is examining whether to amend the current standards pursuant to
its obligations under EPCA. This notification announces the
availability of the preliminary 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. Section 6(a)(2) of
[[Page 17028]]
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 (80 FR 4646; Jan. 28, 2015 (the ``January 2015 Final
Rule'')). 85 FR 60923, 60295 (Sept. 29, 2020) (the ``September 2020
RFI''). DOE provided a 75-day comment period for the early assessment
RFI. 85 FR 60923. 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 September 2020 RFI on the analysis conducted
in support of the January 2015 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
In the January 2015 Final Rule, DOE prescribed the current energy
conservation standards for automatic commercial ice makers manufactured
on and after January 28, 2018. 80 FR 4646. These standards are set
forth in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 431.134(c) and (d) and are
repeated in Table II.1 and Table II.2.
Table II.1--Federal Energy Conservation Standards for Batch Automatic Commercial Ice Makers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum condenser
Equipment type Condenser cooling Harvest rate (lb Maximum energy use water use ** (gal/
ice/24 h) (kWh/100 lbs ice) 100 lbs ice)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. <300.............. 6.88-0.0055H *.... 200-0.022H.
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. >=300 and <850.... 5.80-0.00191H..... 200-0.022H.
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. >=850 and <1,500.. 4.42-0.00028H..... 200-0.022H.
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. >=1,500 and <2,500 4................. 200-0.022H.
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. >=2,500 and <4,000 4................. 145.
Ice-Making Head................. Air............... <300.............. 10-0.01233H....... NA.
Ice-Making Head................. Air............... >=300 and <800.... 7.05-0.0025H...... NA.
Ice-Making Head................. Air............... >=800 and <1,500.. 5.55-0.00063H..... NA.
Ice-Making Head................. Air............... >=1,500 and <4,000 4.61.............. NA.
Remote Condensing (but Not Air............... <988.............. 7.97-0.00342H..... NA.
Remote Compressor).
Remote Condensing (but Not Air............... >=988 and <4,000.. 4.59.............. NA.
Remote Compressor).
Remote Condensing and Remote Air............... <930.............. 7.97-0.00342H..... NA.
Compressor.
Remote Condensing and Remote Air............... >=930 and <4,000.. 4.79.............. NA.
Compressor.
Self-Contained.................. Water............. <200.............. 9.5-0.019H........ 191-0.0315H.
Self-Contained.................. Water............. >=200 and <2,500.. 5.7............... 191-0.0315H.
Self-Contained.................. Water............. >=2,500 and <4,000 5.7............... 112.
Self-Contained.................. Air............... <110.............. 14.79-0.0469H..... NA.
Self-Contained.................. Air............... >=110 and <200.... 12.42-0.02533H.... NA.
Self-Contained.................. Air............... >=200 and <4,000.. 7.35.............. NA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* H = harvest rate in pounds per 24 hours, indicating the water or energy use for a given harvest rate. Source:
42 U.S.C. 6313(d).
** Water use is for the condenser only and does not include potable water used to make ice.
Table II.2--Federal Energy Conservation Standards for Continuous Automatic Commercial Ice Makers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum condenser
Equipment type Condenser cooling Harvest rate (lb Maximum energy use water use ** (gal/
ice/24 h) (kWh/100 lbs ice) 100 lbs ice)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. <801.............. 6.48-0.00267H..... 180-0.0198H.
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. >=801 and <2,500.. 4.34.............. 180-0.0198H.
Ice-Making Head................. Water............. >=2,500 and <4,000 4.34.............. 130.5.
Ice-Making Head................. Air............... <310.............. 9.19-0.00629H..... NA.
[[Page 17029]]
Ice-Making Head................. Air............... >=310 and <820.... 8.23-0.0032H...... NA.
Ice-Making Head................. Air............... >=820 and <4,000.. 5.61.............. NA.
Remote Condensing (but Not Air............... <800.............. 9.7-0.0058H....... NA.
Remote Compressor).
Remote Condensing (but Not Air............... >=800 and <4,000.. 5.06.............. NA.
Remote Compressor).
Remote Condensing and Remote Air............... <800.............. 9.9-0.0058H....... NA.
Compressor.
Remote Condensing and Remote Air............... >=800 and <4,000.. 5.26.............. NA.
Compressor.
Self-Contained.................. Water............. <900.............. 7.6-0.00302H...... 153-0.0252H.
Self-Contained.................. Water............. >=900 and <2,500.. 4.88.............. 153-0.0252H.
Self-Contained.................. Water............. >=2,500 and <4,000 4.88.............. 90.
Self-Contained.................. Air............... <200.............. 14.22-0.03H....... NA.
Self-Contained.................. Air............... >=200 and <700.... 9.47-0.00624H..... NA.
Self-Contained.................. Air............... >=700 and <4,000.. 5.1............... NA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Current Process
In the September 2020 RFI, DOE published a notification 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 automatic commercial
ice makers as well as a request for information. 85 FR 60923.
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 equipment 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/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2017-BT-STD-0022.
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 the 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 equipment
concerned, including general characteristics of the equipment, the
industry structure, manufacturers, market characteristics, and
technologies used in the equipment. 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 equipment 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 equipment.
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 equipment utility or equipment availability. If it
is determined that a technology would have a significant adverse impact
on the utility of the equipment for significant subgroups of consumers
or would result in the unavailability of any covered equipment type
with performance characteristics (including reliability), features,
sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as
equipment 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.
[[Page 17030]]
(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 431.4; 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, sections 6(b)(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 automatic commercial
ice makers. 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 equipment cost at
each efficiency level (i.e., the ``cost analysis''). In determining the
performance of higher-efficiency equipment, DOE considers technologies
and design option combinations not eliminated by the screening
analysis. For each equipment 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 equipment
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. See chapter 12 of the preliminary TSD for
additional detail on the manufacturer markup.
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 developed baseline and incremental markups for each actor in
the distribution chain. 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 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.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Because the projected price of standards-compliant equipment
is typically higher than the price of baseline equipment, 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 automatic commercial ice makers.
E. Energy Use Analysis
The purpose of the energy use analysis is to determine the annual
energy consumption of automatic commercial ice makers at different
efficiencies in representative commercial buildings, and to assess the
energy savings potential of increased ACIM efficiency. The energy use
analysis estimates the range of energy use of automatic commercial ice
makers 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 equipment over
the life of that equipment, consisting of total installed cost (MSP,
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 equipment.
The PBP is the estimated amount of time (in years) it
takes consumers to recover the increased purchase cost (including
installation) of more-efficient equipment 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''), national
water savings (``NWS''), 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).\7\ DOE calculates the NES, NWS, and NPV for the potential
standard levels considered based on projections of annual equipment
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,
equipment costs, and NPV of consumer benefits over the lifetime of
automatic commercial ice makers sold from 2027 through 2056.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 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 equipment 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 equipment 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 equipment with efficiencies greater than the standard.
DOE uses a spreadsheet model to calculate the energy savings and
the
[[Page 17031]]
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 equipment lifetimes, installed costs and operating costs,
annual energy consumption, the base case efficiency projection, and
discount rates.
DOE estimates a combined total of 0.324 quads of site energy
savings at the max-tech efficiency levels for automatic commercial ice
makers. Combined site energy savings at efficiency level 1 for all
equipment classes are estimated to be 0.030 quads.
Chapter 10 of the preliminary TSD addresses the NIA.
IV. Public Participation
DOE invites public engagement in this process through participation
in the webinar and submission of written comments, data, 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 energy
conservation standards for automatic commercial ice makers 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 this 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 requests to
speak via email to the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program at:
[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.
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 meeting 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 a general overview of the topics addressed in this
rulemaking, 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 allow, 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/public meeting 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 webinar, to submit in writing no
later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of
this document, comments and information on matters addressed in this
notification and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of
potential amended energy conservations standards for automatic
commercial ice makers. 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
[[Page 17032]]
(``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, WordPerfect, 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 availability of the preliminary technical support
document and request for comment.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on March 17,
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 March 22, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2022-06313 Filed 3-24-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P