[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 114 (Tuesday, June 14, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35925-35938]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-12786]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2022-BT-STD-0017]
RIN 1904-AF41


Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Miscellaneous Gas Products

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

ACTION: Request for information.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'' or ``the Department'') 
is initiating an effort to evaluate the potential for energy 
conservation standards for consumer miscellaneous gas products. DOE 
published a proposed coverage determination for these products in the 
Federal Register on February 7, 2022. This request for information 
(``RFI'') solicits information from the public to help DOE determine 
whether potential standards for miscellaneous gas products would result 
in significant energy savings and whether such standards would be 
technologically feasible and economically justified, information which 
will prove useful in the event DOE moves forward with a final coverage 
determination. As part of this RFI and to aid in the Department's 
evaluation, DOE seeks comment on the market for these products and 
technologies to improve their energy efficiency or reduce their energy 
consumption. DOE also welcomes written comments from the public on any 
subject within the scope of this document (including topics not 
specifically raised), as well as the submission of data and other 
relevant information.

DATES: Written comments and information are requested and will be 
accepted on or before July 14, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov, under docket 
number EERE-2022-BT-STD-0017. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, 
identified by docket number EERE-2022-BT-STD-0017 and/or RIN 1904-AF41, 
by any of the following methods:
    (1) Email: [email protected]. Include docket number 
EERE-2022-BT-STD-0017 and/or RIN 1904-AF41 in the subject line of the 
message.
    (2) Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc 
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    (3) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards 
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case 
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see section III of this document.
    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 not 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/docket/EERE-2022-BT-STD-0017. The docket web page contains instructions on how 
to

[[Page 35926]]

access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See 
section III for information on how to submit comments through 
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Ms. Julia Hegarty, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: 
(240) 597-6737. Email: [email protected].
    Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. 
Telephone: (202) 586-5827. Email: [email protected].
    For further information on how to submit a comment, or 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 and Background
    B. Rulemaking Process
    C. Deviation From Appendix A
II. Request for Information and Comments
    A. Products Addressed by This Process
    B. Test Procedure
    C. Market and Technology Assessment
    1. Product Classes
    2. Technology Assessment
    D. Screening Analysis
    E. Engineering Analysis
    1. Efficiency Analysis
    2. Cost Analysis
    F. Markup Analysis
    G. Energy Use Analysis
    H. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
    1. Installation Costs
    2. Energy Prices
    3. Repair and Maintenance Costs
    4. Product Lifetime
    5. No-New-Standards Case Efficiency Distribution
    I. Shipments Analysis
    J. National Impact Analysis
    K. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
III. Submission of Comments

I. Introduction

A. Authority and Background

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\ 
Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified) authorizes DOE to 
regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and 
certain industrial equipment. Title III, Part B \2\ of EPCA established 
the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than 
Automobiles. (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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), which reflects the last statutory amendments that impact 
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of 
four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation 
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant 
provisions of EPCA specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), 
test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), 
energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to 
require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
    In addition to specifying a list of covered residential products 
and commercial/industrial equipment, EPCA, as amended, contains 
provisions that enable the Secretary of Energy to classify additional 
types of consumer products as covered products. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20)) 
Specifically, for a given product to be classified as a covered 
product, the Secretary must determine that:

    (1) Classifying the product as a covered product is necessary or 
appropriate for carrying out the purposes of EPCA; and
    (2) The average annual per-household energy use by products of 
such type is likely to exceed 100 kilowatt-hours (``kWh'') (or its 
British thermal unit (``Btu'') equivalent) per year.

(42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)(A) and (B))

    The Secretary may prescribe an energy conservation standard 
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20) and (b)(1), provided that such 
standard meets the requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p), and the 
Secretary must also determine that:

    (1) The average per-household energy use within the United 
States of the type (or class) of products has exceeded 150 kWh (or 
its Btu equivalent) per household for any prior 12-month period;
    (2) The aggregate 12-month household energy use of the type (or 
class) of products has exceeded 4.2 terawatt-hours \3\ (or its Btu 
equivalent);
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ A terawatt is a unit of power equal to one trillion watts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (3) Substantial improvement in energy efficiency of products in 
such type (or class) is technologically feasible; and
    (4) Application of a labeling rule under 42 U.S.C. 6294 is 
unlikely to be sufficient to induce manufacturers to produce, and 
consumers and other persons to purchase, covered products of such 
type (or class) that achieve the maximum energy efficiency that is 
technologically feasible and economically justified.

(42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1)(A)-(D))

    On February 7, 2022, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice 
of proposed determination (``NOPD'') of miscellaneous gas products 
(``MGPs'') as a covered consumer product (``February 2022 NOPD''). 87 
FR 6786. As proposed in the February 2022 NOPD, ``miscellaneous gas 
products'' are comprised of decorative hearths and outdoor heaters, the 
definitions for which are discussed in section II.A of this document. 
In the February 2022 NOPD, DOE presented its preliminary findings 
relating to the energy use of MGPs to determine whether they could be 
classified as a type of covered product under the requirements of 42 
U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)(A) and (B). 87 FR 6786, 6790-9792 (Feb. 7, 2022). DOE 
also stated that it would determine if MGPs satisfy the provisions of 
42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1), if DOE proceeds with a rulemaking to establish 
energy conservation standards for said products. Id. at 87 FR 6788.
    DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or 
amended energy conservation standards for covered products. Any new or 
amended standard for a covered product must be designed to achieve the 
maximum improvement in energy efficiency that the Secretary of Energy 
determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) and (3)(B)) Furthermore, DOE may not adopt any 
standard that would not result in the significant conservation of 
energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3))
    Moreover, DOE may not prescribe a standard: (1) for certain 
products if no test procedure has been established for the product, or 
(2) if DOE determines by rule that the standard is not technologically 
feasible or economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A)-(B)) In 
deciding whether a proposed standard is economically justified, DOE 
must determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed its burdens. 
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) DOE must make this determination after 
receiving views and comments on the proposed standard, and 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)

[[Page 35927]]

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 considers relevant.

(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))

    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 that warrant separate product classes and energy 
conservation standards with a level of energy efficiency or energy use 
either higher or lower than that which would apply for such group of 
covered products which have the same function or intended use. DOE must 
specify a different standard level for a type or class of products 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 capacity or another 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))
    Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products 
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations 
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 
U.S.C. 6297(a)-(c)) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal 
preemption in limited circumstances for particular State laws or 
regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other provisions of 
EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d))
    There are not currently any energy conservation standards for MGPs, 
but as discussed, DOE has proposed to determine that MGPs are a covered 
product. 87 FR 6786 (Feb. 7, 2022). The February 2022 NOPD addresses 
MGPs, which are consumer products comprising: (1) Those hearth products 
that are not direct heating equipment (``DHE'') (i.e., those hearth 
products that are indoor or outdoor decorative hearth products), and 
(2) outdoor heaters. Id. at 87 FR 6788. Previous rulemaking history 
related to these products is discussed in section II of the February 
2022 NOPD. Id. at 87 FR 6787-6788. Were DOE to ultimately determine 
that MGPs are a covered product, DOE would then consider whether to 
establish energy conservation standards for MGPs subject to the 
criteria in EPCA.
    DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information to 
inform its decision consistent with its obligations under EPCA.

B. Rulemaking Process

    As discussed previously, DOE must follow specific statutory 
criteria for prescribing new or amended energy conservation standards 
for covered products. EPCA requires that any new or amended energy 
conservation standard prescribed by the Secretary of Energy 
(``Secretary'') shall be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in 
energy efficiency (or for certain products specified by EPCA, water 
efficiency) 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)(B))
    Particularly in light of the climate crisis, 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.\4\ For example, the United States has 
now rejoined the Paris Agreement on February 19, 2021. As part of that 
agreement, the United States has committed to reducing greenhouse gas 
(``GHG'') emissions in order to limit the rise in mean global 
temperature.\5\ 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. Accordingly, DOE evaluates the

[[Page 35928]]

significance of energy savings on a case-by-case basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 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).
    \5\ See Executive Order 14008, ``Tackling the Climate Crisis at 
Home and Abroad,'' 86 FR 7619 (Feb. 1, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To determine whether a proposed new or amended energy conservation 
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 affected products subject to the standard;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated 
average life of the covered product in the type (or class) compared 
to any increases 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 directly 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 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 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 Water   Shipments Analysis.
     Conservation.                          National Impact
                                            Analysis.
    7. Other Factors the Secretary          Employment Impact
     Considers Relevant.                    Analysis.
                                            Utility Impact
                                            Analysis.
                                            Emissions Analysis.
                                            Monetization of
                                            Emission Reductions
                                            Benefits.\6\
                                            Regulatory Impact
                                            Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE is publishing this document 
seeking input and data from interested parties to aid in the 
development of the technical analyses on which DOE would ultimately 
rely to determine whether (and if so, how) to adopt energy conservation 
standards for consumer MGPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 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. Among other 
things, the preliminary injunction enjoined the defendants in that 
case from ``adopting, employing, treating as binding, or relying 
upon'' 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 where 
appropriate and permissible under law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Deviation From Appendix A

    In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, 
appendix A (``appendix A''), ``Procedures, Interpretations, and 
Policies for Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation 
Standards and Test Procedures for Consumer Products and Certain 
Commercial/Industrial Equipment,'' DOE notes that it is deviating from 
that appendix's provision that DOE will publish its final coverage 
determination prior to the initiation of any energy conservation 
standards rulemaking. 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, section 
5(c). DOE finds it appropriate to deviate from this step because DOE 
believes that providing an opportunity for comment on potential energy 
conservation standards prior to a final coverage determination for MGPs 
allows stakeholders an earlier opportunity to provide comment, 
information, and data that may help inform DOE's priority setting. DOE 
also notes that in the notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') 
published in the Federal Register on July 7, 2021, DOE proposed to 
amend appendix A, in relevant part, by eliminating the requirement that 
coverage determination rulemakings must be finalized prior to 
initiation of a test procedure or energy conservation standard 
rulemaking. 86 FR 35668, 35672. DOE explained that the coverage 
determination, test procedure, and energy conservation standard 
rulemakings are interdependent and that a coverage determination 
defines the product/equipment scope for which DOE can establish test 
procedure and energy conservation standards. It also signals that 
inclusion of the consumer

[[Page 35929]]

product is necessary to carry out the purpose of EPCA (i.e., to 
conserve energy and/or water). In order to make this determination, DOE 
needs to consider whether energy conservation standards can be 
established for the consumer product. If DOE cannot prescribe energy 
conservation standards that result in significant energy savings (42 
U.S.C. 6295(o)), then making a coverage determination is not necessary 
as it will not result in the conservation of energy. Thus, it is 
important that DOE be able to gather information and provide 
stakeholders an opportunity to comment and provide information and data 
pertinent to test procedure and energy conservation standard 
rulemakings, during the course of DOE conducting its coverage 
determination rulemaking. Id.
    DOE further notes that it is deviating from that appendix's 
provision requiring a 75-day comment period for all pre-NOPR rulemaking 
documents for standards. 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, 
section 6(d)(2). DOE finds it appropriate to deviate from this 
provision and to instead provide a 30-day comment period for this RFI. 
DOE believes that 30 days is sufficient time to respond to this initial 
rulemaking document, as DOE already requested information on the MGP 
market in the February 2022 NOPD. See 87 FR 6786, 6794-6795 (Feb. 7, 
2022). Market information developed and reviewed for the February 2022 
NOPD would provide the basis for responses to the requests in this RFI. 
A 30-day comment period will also allow DOE to review comments received 
in response to this document before finalizing its coverage 
determination, thereby assisting the Department by helping inform its 
decisions regarding prioritizing any potential rulemakings for MGPs in 
light of its other on-going rulemakings and statutory requirements.

II. Request for Information and Comments

    In the following sections, DOE has identified a variety of issues 
on which it seeks input to aid in the development of the technical and 
economic analyses regarding whether establishing energy conservation 
standards for MGPs may be warranted.

A. Products Addressed by This Process

    This RFI addresses those products that meet the definition of MGPs 
as proposed in the February 2022 NOPD. 87 FR 6786, 6788 (Feb. 7, 2022). 
More specifically, MGPs are consumer products comprising: (1) hearth 
products that are not DHE (i.e., hearth products that are indoor or 
outdoor decorative hearth products) and (2) outdoor heaters. Id. 
Further, the proposed definitions of ``decorative hearth product'' and 
``outdoor heater'' are as follows:

    Decorative hearth product means a gas-fired appliance that:
    (1) Simulates a solid-fueled fireplace or presents a flame 
pattern;
    (2) Includes products designed for indoor use, outdoor use, or 
either indoor or outdoor use;
    (3) Is not designed to be operated with a thermostat;
    (4) For products designed for indoor use, is not designed to 
provide space heating to the space in which it is installed; and
    (5) For products designed for outdoor use, is not designed to 
provide heat proximate to the unit.
    Outdoor heater means a gas-fired appliance designed for use in 
outdoor spaces only, and which is designed to provide heat proximate 
to the unit.

87 FR 6786, 6790 (Feb. 7, 2022).
    DOE requests comment on whether the proposed definitions for 
``miscellaneous gas products,'' ``decorative hearth product,'' and/or 
``outdoor heater'' require any revisions, and if so, how those 
definitions should be revised.
    DOE requests comment on whether additional product definitions are 
necessary to close any potential gaps in coverage between product 
types. DOE also seeks input on whether such products currently exist in 
the market or whether they are being planned for introduction.
    In addition, DOE notes that this RFI does not address electric or 
oil-fired products, which were also not included in the February 2022 
NOPD. DOE has tentatively determined that there is little opportunity 
for additional energy savings for these products, as they do not use 
standing pilot ignition systems.

B. Test Procedure

    EPCA defines ``energy conservation standard'' as a performance 
standard which prescribes a minimum level of energy efficiency or a 
maximum quantity of energy use; or for certain enumerated covered 
products, including products for which the Secretary has made a 
determination to classify them as covered products, a design 
requirement. (42 U.S.C. 6291(6)) EPCA requires that test procedures 
used to evaluate compliance with a performance standard be reasonably 
designed to produce test results which measure energy efficiency, 
energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product 
during a representative average use cycle or period of use, as 
determined by the Secretary, and not be unduly burdensome to conduct. 
(42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ EPCA states, in relevant part, that an amended or new 
standard may not be adopted if a test procedure has not been 
established for the relevant product type or class. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(3)(A)) However, in certain cases, EPCA also authorizes 
energy conservation standards that by nature would not require a 
test procedure (i.e., design requirements). (42 U.S.C. 6291(6)(B)) 
Additionally, EPCA requires use of the test procedures and criteria 
prescribed in 42 U.S.C. 6293, except for design standards. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(s)) EPCA also states that a test procedure need not be 
prescribed if one cannot be designed to reasonably measure energy 
efficiency, energy use, water use, or annual operating cost, and not 
be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(d)(1)) EPCA 
requires that a determination be published in the Federal Register 
providing justification in such case. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As proposed to be defined, decorative hearth products simulate a 
solid-fuel fireplace and/or present an aesthetic flame pattern, and are 
not designed to heat the space in which they are used. Given the 
aesthetic nature of decorative hearth products and the subjective 
nature of the aesthetic value, DOE has tentatively determined that 
establishing a performance based-test procedure that meets the 
statutory criteria would not be possible. Instead, a design requirement 
may be better-suited to improve efficiency without impacting or 
altering the aesthetic appeal of these products.
    Similarly, as proposed to be defined, outdoor heaters are gas-fired 
appliances designed for use in outdoor spaces only, and which are 
designed to provide heat proximate to the units. The aesthetic nature 
of many outdoor heaters is an important part of the value they provide, 
with some designs featuring a prominent flame (although others have 
little or no visible flame). Although the use of certain technology 
options may reduce the energy consumption of outdoor heaters under a 
performance-based standard, DOE is not currently aware of any design 
options that would offer significant energy savings other than removal 
of a standing pilot ignition system (if present). Therefore, for 
simplicity, DOE is tentatively considering all outdoor heaters to be in 
a single product class. Further, DOE expects that a design requirement 
may be better-suited than a performance requirement to improve 
efficiency without impacting or altering the aesthetic appeal of 
outdoor heaters.
    Therefore, DOE is considering whether a prescriptive design 
requirement would be appropriate for MGPs. Specifically, as discussed 
in this section and later sections, DOE is seeking information 
regarding a possible design standard regarding the use of a 
continuously-burning pilot light in these products. Because the 
potential energy conservation standard being

[[Page 35930]]

investigated at this time is a design requirement and not a performance 
standard (i.e., minimum efficiency or maximum energy consumption), DOE 
is not currently planning to develop or evaluate a potential test 
procedure.
    DOE requests comment on whether a test procedure and performance 
metric that meets the EPCA criteria would be feasible for decorative 
hearth products and/or outdoor heaters. If so, DOE requests comment on 
the potential performance metric(s) and testing method(s) that would be 
appropriate.

C. Market and Technology Assessment

    The market and technology assessment that DOE routinely conducts 
when analyzing the impacts of a potential new or amended energy 
conservation standard provides information about the MGP industry that 
would be used in DOE's analysis throughout the rulemaking process. DOE 
uses qualitative and quantitative assessments to characterize the 
structure of the industry and market, based upon publicly-available 
information. The subjects addressed in this market and technology 
assessment include: (1) a determination of the scope of the rulemaking 
and product classes; (2) manufacturers and industry structure; (3) 
industry market shares and trends; (4) existing regulatory and non-
regulatory initiatives intended to improve energy efficiency or reduce 
energy consumption; (5) shipments information; and (6) technologies or 
design options that could improve the energy efficiency of MGPs. DOE 
also reviews product literature, industry publications, and company 
websites. Additionally, DOE considers conducting interviews with 
manufacturers to improve its assessment of the market and available 
technologies for MGPs.
1. Product Classes
    When evaluating and establishing energy conservation standards, DOE 
may divide covered products into product classes by the type of energy 
used, or by capacity or other performance-related features that justify 
a different standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1)) In making a determination 
whether a performance-related feature justifies a different standard, 
DOE must consider such factors as the utility of the feature to the 
consumer and other factors DOE deems appropriate. (Id.)
    For MGPs, there are no energy conservation standards. As noted in 
section I.A of this document, DOE published a proposed determination to 
establish MGPs as a covered consumer product in the Federal Register on 
February 7, 2022. 87 FR 6786. If DOE issues a final determination of 
coverage for MGPs, as discussed in section II.A of this document, the 
proposed scope of coverage for MGPs would include decorative hearth 
products and outdoor heaters. A wide range of decorative hearth 
products are available on the market, including, for example, gas log 
sets, gas fire pits, gas stoves, and gas fireplace inserts. Decorative 
hearth products may be used indoors or outdoors. Outdoor heaters are 
gas-fired products that heat the area proximate to the heater and that 
are designed to be used outdoors. Id. at 87 FR 6788. Were DOE to 
propose energy conservation standards for MGPs, DOE would consider 
whether any type of such products has a capacity or other performance-
related feature that justifies a different standard.
    DOE requests feedback on whether certain decorative hearth products 
and/or outdoor heaters have a capacity or other performance-related 
feature providing unique consumer utility that impacts energy use of 
the product. If so, DOE requests information and data detailing the 
customer utility of such a feature and the corresponding impacts on 
energy use that would justify separate product classes (i.e., 
explanation for why the presence of these performance-related features 
would increase energy consumption).
2. Technology Assessment
    In analyzing the feasibility of potential new or amended energy 
conservation standards, DOE uses information about existing and past 
technology options and working prototype designs to help identify 
technologies that manufacturers could use to meet and/or exceed a given 
set of energy conservation standards under consideration. In 
consultation with interested parties, DOE intends to develop a list of 
technologies to consider in its analysis. That analysis may include a 
number of the technology options DOE previously considered as part of 
an energy conservation standards NOPR for certain products proposed to 
be defined as ``hearth products'' published in the Federal Register on 
February 9, 2015 (``the February 2015 NOPR''), as well as technologies 
identified by stakeholders in response to that NOPR.\8\ 80 FR 7082. The 
products evaluated in the February 2015 NOPR included certain products 
that would be covered under the currently proposed definition of MGPs. 
Id. Certain of those prior technology options that DOE identified in 
the February 2015 NOPR (see 80 FR 7082, 7095 (Feb. 9, 2015)) and that 
may be applicable to MGPs appear in Table II.1 of this document. In 
addition to the technology options previously identified by DOE, 
stakeholders identified ``on demand'' pilot ignition systems as a 
potential alternative to traditional standing pilot ignitions.\9\ The 
February 2015 NOPR covered hearth heaters in addition to decorative 
hearths and outdoor hearths, and, therefore, some of the technology 
options considered in that analysis may not be appropriate for MGPs. 
Additionally, as discussed in section 0 of this document, DOE is 
currently considering whether a prescriptive design requirement would 
be appropriate for MGPs, and, therefore, some technologies considered 
in the February 2015 NOPR analysis were not included in Table II.1 of 
this document because they related to the product's active mode power 
consumption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The February 2015 NOPR was issued subsequent to publication 
in the Federal Register of a proposed determination of coverage for 
``hearth products.'' 78 FR 79638 (Dec. 31, 2013; ``December 2013 
NOPD''). In the December 2013 NOPD, DOE proposed to define ``hearth 
product'' as a gas-fired appliance that simulates a solid-fueled 
fireplace or presents a flame pattern (for aesthetics or other 
purpose) and that may provide space heating directly to the space in 
which it is installed. Id. at 78 FR 79640. On March 31, 2017, DOE 
withdrew the December 2013 NOPD and the February 2015 NOPR in the 
bi-annual publication of the DOE Regulatory Agenda. 82 FR 40270, 
40274 (August 24, 2017).
    \9\ An ``on demand'' ignition system includes a pilot light that 
burns continuously as long as the main burner is operated at least 
once within a pre-programmed period of time (e.g., 7 days) and a 
control system that shuts off the pilot light if the main burner is 
not operated within the preset time period.

                Table II.1--Potential Technology Options
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Optimized air-to-fuel ratio.
Optimized burner port design.
Improved simulated log design.
Improved pan burner media/bead type.
Reflective walls and/or other components inside combustion zone.
Electronic ignition.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE seeks information on the technologies listed in Table II.1 of 
this document regarding their applicability to the current market and 
how these technologies might potentially impact the energy efficiency 
and/or energy use of decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters. 
DOE also seeks information on how these technologies may have changed 
since they were considered in the February 2015 NOPR analysis. 
Specifically, DOE seeks information on the range of efficiencies or 
performance characteristics that are currently available for each 
technology option.

[[Page 35931]]

    DOE also seeks comment on any other technology options that it 
should consider for inclusion in its analysis, such as ``on demand'' 
pilot ignition systems, and whether these technologies might impact 
product features or consumer utility of decorative hearth products and 
outdoor heaters.

D. Screening Analysis

    The purpose of the screening analysis is to further evaluate the 
technologies with the potential to improve equipment efficiency to 
determine which technologies should be eliminated from further 
consideration and which ones should proceed to the engineering analysis 
for further consideration in the energy conservation standards 
rulemaking.
    DOE determines whether to eliminate certain technology options from 
further consideration based on the following five screening criteria:

    (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 significant adverse impact 
on the utility of the product to 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(b)(3) and 7(b).

    Technology options identified in the technology assessment are 
evaluated against these criteria using DOE analyses and inputs from 
interested parties (e.g., manufacturers, trade organizations, and 
energy efficiency advocates). Technologies that pass through the 
screening analysis are referred to as ``design options'' in the 
engineering analysis. Technology options that fail to meet one or more 
of the five criteria are eliminated from further consideration.
    DOE requests feedback on what impact, if any, the five screening 
criteria described in this section would have when applied to each of 
the technology options listed in Table II.1 of this document pertaining 
to decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters. Similarly, DOE seeks 
information regarding the effect these same criteria would have when 
applied to any other technology options not already identified in this 
document with respect to their potential use in decorative hearth 
products and/or outdoor heaters.

E. Engineering Analysis

    The purpose of the engineering analysis is to establish the 
relationship between the efficiency (or energy use) and cost of 
consumer MGPs. There are two elements to consider in the engineering 
analysis: (1) the selection of efficiency levels to analyze (i.e., the 
``efficiency analysis'') and (2) 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 baseline cost 
(i.e., the manufacturer production cost (``MPC''), as well as the 
incremental cost for the product at efficiency levels above the 
baseline. The output of the engineering analysis is a set of cost-
efficiency ``curves'' that are used in downstream analyses (i.e., the 
life-cycle cost (``LCC'') and payback period (``PBP'') analyses and the 
national impact analysis (``NIA'')). The following sections provide 
further detail on DOE's engineering analysis and seek public input on 
specific issues pertinent to consumer miscellaneous gas products, the 
subject of this rulemaking.
    In the analysis accompanying the February 2015 NOPR, which included 
consideration of decorative hearth products, DOE focused its 
engineering analysis on the impacts of a prescriptive design 
requirement that would remove the standing pilot ignition system and 
replace it with a system that does not use a continuously-burning 
pilot. 80 FR 7082, 7097 (Feb. 9, 2015).
    In the February 2015 NOPR analysis for hearth products, which 
included decorative hearths and outdoor hearths, as well as hearth 
heaters (which DOE is considering in a separate rulemaking proceeding 
as a category of DHE products), DOE used the design option approach 
(described further in section II.E.1 of this document) by selecting 
hearth models that represented a range of hearth configurations (e.g., 
vented fireplaces, vented fireplace inserts, unvented fireplace 
inserts, vented gas log sets, and unvented gas log sets). In light of 
the analytical focus on a prescriptive design requirement related to 
standby mode energy consumption, representative models were chosen that 
would allow a direct comparison between standing pilot and electronic 
ignition systems. DOE then used the cost assessment approach by 
gathering additional information using reverse-engineering 
methodologies, product information from manufacturer catalogs and 
manuals, and discussions with manufacturers and other experts on hearth 
products. Id. at 80 FR 7096. DOE assumed that, should standing pilot 
ignitions be disallowed, manufacturers would convert standing pilot 
models to electronic ignition models rather than match-lit models in 
order to provide the same level of safety, comfort, and functionality. 
Id. DOE expects that a similar approach to the engineering analysis 
would be appropriate for MGPs.
    DOE seeks comment on its anticipated general approach to the 
engineering analysis and whether the approach used in the analysis for 
the February 2015 NOPR would be appropriate for an analysis of all 
MGPs.
1. Efficiency Analysis
    DOE typically uses one of two approaches to develop energy 
efficiency levels for the engineering analysis: (1) relying on observed 
efficiency levels in the market (i.e., the efficiency-level approach), 
or (2) determining the incremental efficiency improvements associated 
with incorporating specific design options to a baseline model (i.e., 
the design-option approach). Using the efficiency-level approach, the 
efficiency levels established for the analysis are determined based on 
the market distribution of existing products (in other words, based on 
the range of efficiencies and efficiency level ``clusters'' that 
already exist on the market). Using the design-option approach, the 
efficiency levels established for the analysis are determined through 
detailed engineering calculations and/or computer simulations of the 
efficiency improvements from implementing specific design options that 
have been identified in the technology assessment. DOE may also rely on 
a combination of these two approaches. For example, the efficiency-
level approach (based on actual products on the market) may be extended 
using the design-option

[[Page 35932]]

approach to interpolate to define ``gap fill'' levels (to bridge large 
gaps between other identified efficiency levels) and/or to extrapolate 
to the max-tech level (particularly in cases where the max-tech level 
exceeds the maximum efficiency level currently available on the 
market).
    As stated previously, in the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, 
DOE only considered prescriptive requirements. In that analysis, DOE 
identified electronic ignition as a design option that would be 
applicable to hearth products in standby mode. 80 FR 7082, 7097-7098 
(Feb. 9, 2015). The prior analysis only considered as an energy 
conservation standard a design requirement that would disallow the use 
of constant-burning pilot lights. DOE expects that a similar approach 
considering a design requirement may be appropriate for MGPs in the 
current rulemaking.
    DOE requests feedback on whether any case exists of a product with 
a constant-burning pilot for which the ignition system cannot be 
replaced with an alternative ignition system that does not utilize a 
constant-burning pilot, and if so, what the specific situations are in 
which this would occur. DOE also seeks information as to whether other 
design options could be a viable approach to reducing the energy 
consumption of decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters, as well 
as where there are limitations on the use of certain design options. 
DOE requests feedback on any other existing technologies that would be 
technologically feasible, economically justified, and would result in 
significant energy consumption savings for miscellaneous gas products.
    For each product class, DOE selects a baseline model as a reference 
point against which any changes resulting from potential new or amended 
energy conservation standards can be measured. The baseline model in 
each product class represents the characteristics of common or typical 
products in that class (e.g., capacity, physical size). Typically, a 
baseline model is one that just meets the current minimum energy 
conservation standards, or if no standards are in place (as is the case 
for miscellaneous gas products), the baseline is generally the most 
common or least-efficient units on the market that provides basic 
consumer utility. In the February 2015 NOPR, DOE tentatively determined 
that the standing pilot ignition system represents the baseline design 
in terms of energy consumption for hearth products, to the extent such 
products were evaluated. 80 FR 7082, 7098 (Feb. 9, 2015).
    DOE requests feedback on the appropriate baseline efficiency levels 
and/or designs for decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters.
    As part of DOE's analysis, the maximum available efficiency level 
is the highest-efficiency unit currently available on the market. DOE 
defines a ``max-tech'' efficiency level to represent the theoretical 
maximum possible efficiency if all available design options are 
incorporated in a model. In applying these design options, DOE would 
only include those that are compatible with each other and that when 
combined would represent the theoretical maximum possible efficiency. 
In many cases, the max-tech efficiency level differs from the maximum 
available efficiency level, because the max-tech design options are not 
economically feasible to implement.
    Although MGPs do not currently have energy conservation standards, 
and test data for both decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters 
are limited, DOE expects that having electronic ignition (including 
intermittent pilot ignition systems) would necessarily result in a 
lower energy consumption than if electronic ignition is not present. In 
the February 2015 NOPR, electronic ignition was identified as providing 
the maximum reduction in energy use possible. 80 FR 7082, 7098 (Feb. 9, 
2015). DOE used this as the max-tech design option, as it was unaware 
of any other design options on the market that would substantially 
reduce the energy consumption of hearth products during standby 
operation. Id.
    DOE seeks input on the max-tech efficiency level and/or design for 
decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters. Additionally, for any 
max-tech efficiency level and/or design identified by stakeholders, DOE 
also seeks input on whether such a max-tech efficiency level would be 
appropriate and technologically feasible for potential consideration as 
possible energy conservation standards for decorative hearth products 
and outdoor heaters, and if not, why not.
2. Cost Analysis
    The cost analysis portion of the engineering analysis is conducted 
using one or a combination of cost approaches. The selection of cost 
approach depends on a suite of factors, including availability and 
reliability of public information, characteristics of the regulated 
product, and the availability and timeliness of purchasing the product 
on the market. The cost approaches are summarized as follows:
     Physical teardowns: Under this approach, DOE physically 
dismantles a commercially-available product, component-by-component, to 
develop a detailed bill of materials (``BOM'') for the product.
     Catalog teardowns: In lieu of physically deconstructing a 
product, DOE identifies each component using parts diagrams (available 
from manufacturer websites or appliance repair websites, for example) 
to develop the BOM for the product.
     Price surveys: If neither a physical nor catalog teardown 
is feasible (e.g., tightly integrated products such as fluorescent 
lamps, which are infeasible to disassemble and for which parts diagrams 
are unavailable) or cost-prohibitive and otherwise impractical (e.g., 
large commercial boilers), DOE conducts price surveys using publicly-
available pricing data published on major online retailer websites and/
or by soliciting prices from distributors and other commercial 
channels.
    In the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, DOE performed physical 
teardowns to generate a BOM for each product torn down. 80 FR 7082, 
7098 (Feb. 9, 2015). DOE selected products for the physical teardown 
analysis that represented the most common configurations of products 
being analyzed, including some products that are now being evaluated as 
MGPs. In the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, DOE conducted 14 
physical teardowns to create a detailed BOM for each product type or 
style. Id.
    The resulting BOM provided the basis for the manufacturer 
production cost (``MPC'') estimates. DOE converted the materials and 
components in the BOM to dollar values based on the price of materials, 
average labor rates associated with manufacturing and assembly and the 
cost of overhead and depreciation. DOE then applied a cost multiplier 
(the manufacturer markup) to convert the MPC to manufacturer selling 
price (``MSP''). The manufacturer markup accounts for non-production 
costs (i.e., selling, general, and administrative expenses, research 
and development, and interest), along with profit. The resulting MSP is 
the price at which the manufacturer distributes a unit into commerce. 
The MPC and MSP were calculated for products utilizing standing pilot 
ignition systems and products utilizing intermittent pilot ignition 
systems. 80 FR 7082, 7098 (Feb. 9, 2015).
    As described at the beginning of this section, the main outputs of 
the engineering analysis are cost-efficiency relationships that 
describe the estimated increases in MPC associated with

[[Page 35933]]

higher-efficiency products for the analyzed product classes. For the 
February 2015 NOPR, DOE developed the cost-efficiency relationships by 
estimating the efficiency improvements and costs associated with 
incorporating an intermittent pilot ignition (i.e., an electronic 
ignition) into the assumed baseline model for each hearth type. Id.
    DOE requests feedback on whether, and if so how, manufacturers 
would incorporate the technology options listed in Table II.1 of this 
document to increase energy efficiency and/or reduce energy use in 
decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters beyond baseline. This 
includes information on the order in which manufacturers would 
incorporate the different technologies to incrementally improve the 
efficiencies of products. DOE also requests feedback on whether the 
increased energy efficiency would lead to other design changes that 
would not occur otherwise. Furthermore, DOE is interested in 
information regarding any potential impact of design options on a 
manufacturer's ability to incorporate additional functions or 
attributes in response to consumer demand.
    DOE also seeks input on the increase in MPC associated with 
incorporating each particular design option. Specifically, DOE is 
interested in whether and how the costs estimated for design options 
presented in the February 2015 NOPR have changed since the time of that 
analysis. DOE also requests information on the investments necessary to 
incorporate specific design options, including, but not limited to, 
costs related to new or modified tooling (if any), materials, 
engineering and development efforts to implement each design option, 
and manufacturing/production impacts.
    DOE requests comment on whether certain design options may not be 
applicable to (or incompatible with) specific product types.

F. Markup Analysis

    DOE derives consumer prices based on manufacturer markups, retailer 
markups, distributor markups, contractor markups (where appropriate), 
and sales taxes. In deriving these markups, DOE determines the major 
distribution channels for product sales, the markup associated with 
each party in each distribution channel, and the existence and 
magnitude of differences between markups for baseline products 
(``baseline markups'') and higher-efficiency products (``incremental 
markups''). The identified distribution channels (i.e., how the 
products are distributed from the manufacturer to the consumer) and 
estimated relative sales volumes through each channel are used in 
generating end-user price inputs for the LCC analysis and NIA. The 
markups are multipliers that are applied at each stage in the 
distribution channel for consumer MGPs.
    In its prior analysis, DOE analyzed decorative hearths and outdoor 
hearth products (which included outdoor fireplaces, outdoor fireplace 
inserts, outdoor fire pits, outdoor gas lamps, and patio heaters). (See 
Chapter 3 of the 2015 NOPR TSD \10\ for a detailed description of the 
products analyzed in that notice.) The same distribution channels were 
used for all products in the previous analysis. DOE utilized several 
sources including: (1) the Heating, Air-Conditioning & Refrigeration 
Distributors International (``HARDI'') 2013 Profit Report \11\ to 
develop wholesaler mark-ups; (2) the Air Conditioning Contractors of 
America's (``ACAA'') 2005 financial analysis for the heating, 
ventilation, air-conditioning, and refrigeration (``HVACR'') 
contracting industry \12\ to develop mechanical contractor markups, and 
(3) U.S. Census Bureau 2007 Economic Census data \13\ for the 
residential and commercial building construction industry to develop 
general contractor markups. 80 FR 7082, 7100 (Feb. 9, 2015). DOE 
characterized two distribution channels to describe how hearth products 
pass from the manufacturer to consumers: (1) replacement market and (2) 
new construction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Available at: www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0036-0002.
    \11\ Heating, Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors 
International 2013 Profit Report (Available at: www.hardinet.org) 
(Last accessed March 31, 2022).
    \12\ Air Conditioning Contractors of America (ACCA), Financial 
Analysis for the HVACR Contracting Industry: 2005 (Last accessed 
April 10, 2013).
    \13\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 Economic Census Data (Available 
at: www.census.gov/econ/) (Last accessed March 31, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The replacement market channel was characterized as:

Manufacturer >< Wholesaler 
>< Mechanical Contractor 
>< Consumer

    The new construction distribution channel was characterized as:

Manufacturer >< Wholesaler 
>< Mechanical Contractor 
>< General Contractor 
>< Consumer

Id. It is DOE's understanding that these distribution channels remain 
in place at the current time in essentially the same form.
    For wholesalers and contractors, DOE developed baseline and 
incremental markups. The baseline markup relates the change in the MSP 
of baseline models to the change in the consumer purchase price. The 
incremental markup relates the change in the MSP of higher-efficiency 
models to the change in consumer purchase price. In addition to the 
markups, DOE derived State and local taxes from data provided by the 
Sales Tax Clearinghouse.\14\ DOE derived shipment-weighted-average tax 
values for each region considered in the analysis. Id. DOE plans to use 
the most updated versions of these data sources to develop mark-ups for 
consumer MGPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Sales Tax Clearinghouse, Inc. State Sales Tax Rates Along 
with Combined Average City and County Rates, 2013 (Available at: 
https://thestc.com/STrates.stm) (Last accessed March 31, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE did not account for the retail outlets distribution channel in 
which the manufacturer sells the equipment to a retailer, who in turn 
sells it to a mechanical contractor, who in turn sells it to the 
consumer. DOE did not have sufficient data to estimate a separate 
markup for this distribution channel. Accordingly, DOE assumed that the 
retailer markup was similar to the wholesaler markup.
    DOE is also aware that there may be two additional distribution 
channels for hearth products: (1) an online distribution channel where 
manufacturers sell the products to online retailers who in turn sell 
them directly to consumers; and (2) a rebranding distribution channel 
where wholesalers or retailers negotiate good pricing from the hearth 
product manufacturer based on high volumes and have the product 
customized to carry their name, and then send it through their normal 
distribution channel to the contractors. The former one mainly applies 
to the do-it-yourself (``DIY'') installation, which was estimated at 
the time of the 2015 analysis to account for a very small fraction of 
the total hearth products shipments. For the latter one, DOE assumes 
that it would have the same overall markups as the conventional 
distribution channels. Although manufacturers may have a lower margin 
in such cases, wholesalers and retailers would redistribute the profit 
throughout the distribution channel to set the final retail price so as 
to be comparable with products sold through conventional distribution 
channels. For the reasons mentioned above, DOE did not consider any of 
these additional distribution channels in the February 2015 NOPR 
analysis.
    DOE requests information on the distribution channels outlined 
previously, and their relevance to decorative hearths and outdoor 
heaters.

[[Page 35934]]

DOE requests information on the existence of any distribution channels 
other than those listed above for decorative hearths and outdoor 
heaters. Further, DOE seeks input on the percentage of decorative 
hearth products and outdoor heaters being distributed through the 
different distribution channels, as well as whether the share of 
products through each channel varies based on capacity or other 
features.
    DOE seeks updated data, if available, and recommendations regarding 
data sources to establish the markups for the parties involved with the 
distribution of consumer MGPs.

G. Energy Use Analysis

    As part of the rulemaking process, DOE conducts an energy use 
analysis to identify how products are used by consumers to determine 
the annual energy consumption of these products at issue, and to assess 
the energy savings potential of energy efficiency improvements. In this 
case, the energy use analysis is expected to represent typical energy 
consumption of various ignition systems in the field. DOE previously 
developed a sample of residential homes that use a hearth product based 
on the 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (``RECS'').\15\ 80 FR 
7082, 7100 (Feb. 9. 2015). DOE developed ranges of operating hours from 
hearth product field studies.16 17 Id. DOE represented 
different modes of consumer behavior (i.e., only using the pilot light 
when starting the hearth product, leaving the standing pilot light on 
for the entirety of the heating season, or leaving the standing pilot 
light on year-round) with a continuous distribution of standing pilot 
operating hours. Id. The pilot light operating hours for standing pilot 
lights coupled with the pilot light input capacity from the engineering 
analysis allowed DOE to calculate the annual pilot light energy use. 
Id. (``On demand'' pilot ignition systems were not separately 
considered in the February 2015 NOPR analysis, and DOE did not develop 
separate estimates for the typical operating hours of ``on demand'' 
pilot ignition systems.) DOE also calculated the electricity use of an 
intermittent pilot using the representative burner input and the 
average duty cycle length to calculate a number of cycles, and a 
conservative estimates of 30 seconds on-time per ignition. Id. DOE 
assumed a 50 watt (``W'') representative input to derive electricity 
consumption. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information 
Administration, Residential Energy Consumption Survey: 2009 RECS 
Survey Data (2013) (Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2009/) (Last accessed March 31, 2022).
    \16\ Hayden, A.C.S. Fireplace Pilots Take Gas Use Sky High. Home 
Energy Magazine (Jan. 1997). (Available at: www.homeenergy.org/show/article/nav/hvac/page/28/id/1264) (Last accessed Feb. 9, 2015).
    \17\ Menkedick, John, Pam Hartford, Shawna Collins, Shawn 
Shumaker, and Darlene Wells, Hearth Products Meter Study (1995-
1997), Rep. no. GRI-97/0298, Gas Research Institute (1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also considered the space heating impact of the pilot light in 
its analysis. The elimination of a pilot light would mean that the 
home's main heating system would have to operate somewhat more and the 
air conditioning system somewhat less in cases where the pilot is on 
year-round. DOE based this analysis on a report from the Canadian 
Centre for Housing Technology.\18\ DOE used this study to estimate the 
ratio of energy consumed by the standing pilot light to the heat 
delivered to the conditioned space for each vented hearth product 
group. For unvented hearth products, DOE assumed that the majority of 
the heat from the pilot is input into the space. For outdoor units, 
none of the energy consumed by the pilot is considered useful heat. 80 
FR 7082, 7101 (Feb. 9, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Armstrong M.M., Swinton, M.C. and Szadkowski, F., 
Assessment of the Impact of a Natural Gas Fireplace on Heating 
Energy Consumption and Room Temperatures at the Canadian Centre for 
Housing Technology (March 31, 2010) Canada Mortgage and Housing 
Corporation (Available at: https://chic.cmhc-schl.gc.ca/uhtbin/cgisirsi.exe/?ps=Ey6u7UxnJz/CHIC/17510006/60/502/X) (Last accessed 
Feb. 9, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2017, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory conducted a 
survey (``2017 Hearth Survey'') of 2,100 homes with hearth 
products.\19\ The 2017 Hearth Survey defined hearths as a gas-fired or 
electrical appliance that displays a flame or a flame pattern. Hearth 
product types are fireplaces, or fireplace inserts, gas log sets that 
are typically inserted into an existing empty hearth, freestanding 
stoves, or outdoor units.\20\ The survey provided hearth product 
characteristics, usage data, and repair and maintenance costs. The 
hearth product characteristics include the hearth product type, fuel 
type, ignition system type, features, venting, and installation 
details. The usage information includes seasonal usage of the main 
burner and standing pilot (if present), daily usage, and the primary 
utility (whether decorative or for heating). DOE plans to use this 
survey for the operating hours of decorative hearth products. The 
survey does not provide product characteristics or usage data for 
outdoor heaters.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ David Siap, Henry Willem, Sarah K. Price, Hung-Chia Yang, 
and Alex Lekov, Survey of Hearth Products in U.S. Homes (2017) LBNL-
2001030 (Available at: https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/lbnl-2001030.pdf) (Last accessed June 6, 2022.).
    \20\ Id.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the previous analysis, DOE used an input capacity of 35,000 
British thermal units per hour (``Btu/h'') to represent decorative 
fireplace main burners and 1,000 Btu/h to represent standing pilot 
light input capacity, and calculated annual national intermittent 
ignition electricity use of a decorative fireplace to be 29 kilowatt-
hours per year (``kWh/yr''). (See chapter 7 of the February 2015 NOPR 
TSD).\22\ DOE did not have separate estimates for other decorative 
hearth products, such as gas log sets, gas fire pits, gas stoves, or 
gas fireplace inserts. (Id.) Further, DOE used an input capacity of 
50,000 Btu/h to represent the main burners of outdoor products and 
1,000 Btu/h to represent the standing pilots, and calculated annual 
national intermittent ignition electricity use of an outdoor product to 
be 29 kWh/yr. (Id.) The outdoor product category in the 2015 NOPR 
included decorative products and heaters; DOE did not develop separate 
estimates for outdoor decorative hearths and outdoor heaters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support Document: 
Energy Conservation Programs for Consumer Products, Energy 
Conservation Standards for Hearth Products. Chapter 7: Energy Use 
Analysis (Jan. 30, 2015) (Available at: www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0036-0002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE requests comment on the national average input capacities, 
standing pilot input capacities, and annual intermittent ignition 
electricity use estimated in the February 2015 NOPR for decorative 
fireplace main burners and outdoor products (the outdoor product class 
included decorative hearths and heaters) Specifically, DOE requests 
comment on the applicability of these values to currently available 
decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters.
    DOE requests comment on the typical operating hours of ``on 
demand'' pilot ignition systems, and whether the energy consumption of 
such ignition systems when lit is comparable to that of continuously-
burning pilot lights. Specifically, DOE requests data and information 
about the frequency with which these systems ``time-out'' (i.e., 
automatically extinguish the pilot light), the typical length of time 
before ``time-out,'' and how often these pilot lights need to be relit. 
DOE also requests comment on the market share of ``on demand'' pilot 
ignition systems for decorative hearth products.
    DOE requests comment on the approach of using the 2017 Hearth 
Survey to develop the decorative hearth

[[Page 35935]]

product characteristics and usage data to measure the energy use of 
standing pilot lights of decorative hearths.
    DOE requests data on the breakdown of ignition types (standing 
pilot, on demand pilot, intermittent, and match lit) and usage data for 
outdoor heaters. DOE also seeks comment on whether the ignition types 
and usage of outdoor heaters vary significantly from outdoor decorative 
hearths.

H. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

    DOE conducts the LCC and PBP analysis to evaluate the economic 
effects of potential energy conservation standards for MGPs on 
individual consumers, which usually involves a reduction in operating 
cost and an increase in purchase cost. For any given efficiency level, 
DOE measures the PBP and the change in LCC relative to an estimated 
baseline level. The LCC is the total consumer expense of an appliance 
or product over the life of that product, consisting of the total 
installed cost and operating costs (expenses for energy use, 
maintenance, and repair). Inputs to the calculation of total installed 
cost include the purchase cost of the product--which includes MSPs, 
distribution channel markups, and sales taxes--and installation costs. 
Inputs to the calculation of operating expenses include annual energy 
consumption, energy prices and price projections, repair and 
maintenance costs, equipment lifetimes, discount rates, and the year 
that compliance with new and amended standards is required.
1. Installation Costs
    Installation costs represent the labor and materials required to 
install an MGP. However, in the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, 
DOE assumed that because a pilot light is a component of a hearth 
product, the installation cost for most installations was $0. 80 FR 
7082, 7102 (Feb. 9, 2015). In a fraction of installations, the 
intermittent pilot could necessitate an electrical connection (although 
many are battery powered). For these cases, DOE used RS Means 2013 
Residential Cost Data \23\ to determine the material and labor costs 
associated with a new electrical connection and electrical grounding. 
Id. DOE plans to take this same approach, but with the most recent 
version of RS Means, which is currently 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ RS Means Company Inc., RS Means Residential Cost Data 
(2013) (Available at: rsmeans.reedconstructiondata.com/) (Last 
accessed Feb. 9, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE requests comment on its approach to installation costs and the 
use of RS Means 2021 for labor and material costs.
2. Energy Prices
    In the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, DOE used data from the 
Energy Information Administration (``EIA'') on average prices in 
various States and regions 24 25 26 to assign an energy 
price to each house in the sample based on its location. 80 FR 7082, 
7102 (Feb. 9, 2015). Average electricity prices and natural gas prices 
from the EIA data were adjusted using seasonal marginal price factors 
to derive monthly marginal electricity and natural gas prices. Id. 
Future prices were estimated using the reference case projection of the 
Annual Energy Outlook (``AEO'') 2014.\27\ Id. DOE plans to use a 
similar approach and with updated data from the EIA and AEO 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ U.S. Department of Energy--Energy Information 
Administration, Form EIA-826 Database Monthly Electric Utility Sales 
and Revenue Data (2013) (Available at: www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia826.html).
    \25\ U.S. Department of Energy--Energy Information 
Administration, Natural Gas Navigator (2013) (Available at: 
tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_nus_m.htm).
    \26\ U.S. Department of Energy--Energy Information 
Administration, 2012 State Energy Consumption, Price, and 
Expenditure Estimates (SEDS) (2013) (Available at: www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/states/_seds.html).
    \27\ Annual Energy Outlook--Energy Information Administration 
(2014) (Available at: www.eia.gov/outlooks/archive/aeo14/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE requests comment on its approach to develop electricity and 
natural gas prices for consumer MGPs.
3. Repair and Maintenance Costs
    Repair costs are associated with repairing or replacing components 
in the MGPs that have failed, whereas maintenance costs are routine 
annual costs associated with the continued proper operation of 
equipment. The 2017 Hearth Survey asked respondents about the average 
cost and frequency of hearth repairs and maintenance over the lifetime 
of the product. Repair categories included in the survey were ignition 
failure, controls failure, combustion damage, and other. Maintenance 
categories included in the survey were chimney cleaning, firebox 
cleaning, exterior cleaning, and other.\28\ DOE intends to use this 
data along with data from RS Means about ignition system repairs to 
estimate the repair and maintenance costs of MGPs. In the analysis for 
the February 2015 NOPR, DOE assumed that the cost of repairing an 
intermittent pilot was 44 percent higher than for units with standing 
pilots. 80 FR 7082, 7103 (Feb. 9, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ David Siap, Henry Willem, Sarah K. Price, Hung-Chia Yang, 
and Alex Lekov, Survey of Hearth Products in U.S. Homes (2017) LBNL-
2001030 (Available at: eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/lbnl-2001030.pdf) pp. 44-46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE intends to use the same repair and maintenance categories, with 
the exception of chimney maintenance, for outdoor heaters.
    DOE requests comment on the repair and maintenance categories 
included in the 2017 Hearth Survey and whether they apply to decorative 
hearths and outdoor heaters.
    DOE requests comment on the assumption that the cost of repairing 
an intermittent pilot is 44 percent higher than the cost of a standing 
pilot repair.
    DOE requests information and data on the frequency of repair and 
repair costs for decorative hearth heaters and outdoor heaters for the 
technology options listed in Table II.1 of this document. While DOE is 
interested in information regarding each of the listed technology 
options, the Department is also interested in whether consumers simply 
replace the products when they fail as opposed to repairing them.
4. Product Lifetime
    Product lifetime is the age at which a product is retired from 
service. In the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, DOE developed a 
hearth product survival function, which provides a range of minimum to 
maximum lifetime, as well as an average lifetime. Furthermore, DOE 
assumed that the lifetime of the ignition device is the same as the 
lifetime of the hearth product. 80 FR 7082, 7103 (Feb. 9, 2015). The 
average lifetime was estimated to be 16 years. Id.
    DOE requests comment on whether the average lifetime of 16 years 
for decorative hearth products that was used in the analysis for the 
February 2015 NOPR is still a valid estimate, and whether such estimate 
is appropriate for all MGPs.
5. No-New-Standards Case Efficiency Distribution
    To estimate the share of consumers affected by a potential energy 
conservation standard, DOE's LCC and PBP analysis considers the 
projected distribution (i.e., market shares) of product efficiencies 
that consumers would be expected to purchase in the first compliance 
year in the base case (i.e., the case without new or amended energy 
conservation standards). DOE intends to develop the no-new-standards 
case efficiency distribution using data from the 2017 Hearth Survey 
indicate that 71 percent of decorative hearths use a standing pilot, 18 
percent use intermittent ignition, and 12 percent

[[Page 35936]]

are match lit.\29\ The 2017 Hearth Survey did not include data 
specifically for outdoor heaters, but instead for all outdoor products 
(including decorative products and heaters). The data for outdoor 
products indicate that 48 percent use a standing pilot, that 15 percent 
use intermittent ignition, and that 37 percent are match lit.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ David Siap, Henry Willem, Sarah K. Price, Hung-Chia Yang, 
and Alex Lekov, Survey of Hearth Products in U.S. Homes (2017) LBNL-
2001030 (Available at: eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/lbnl-2001030.pdf) p. 48.
    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE requests comment on the distribution of ignition types from the 
2017 Hearth Survey, and whether such estimates remain valid.
    DOE requests data on the breakdown of ignition systems for outdoor 
heaters, particularly the percentage of outdoor heaters that use 
standing pilots, intermittent ignition, and match lit.

I. Shipments Analysis

    DOE typically develops shipments forecasts of a covered product as 
an input to calculate the national impacts of potential new or amended 
energy conservation standards on energy consumption, net present value 
(``NPV'') of consumer benefits and costs, and future manufacturer cash 
flows. DOE shipments projections are based on available historical data 
broken out by product group. Current sales estimates allow for a more 
accurate model that captures recent trends in the market.
    In the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, DOE relied on 
historical shipments data from the Hearth, Patio, and Barbeque 
Association (``HPBA'') and manufacturer interviews for hearth products, 
as shown in Table II.2 of this document. The HBPA shipments values 
included decorative hearth products and hearth heaters. Outdoor heater 
shipment estimates were based on manufacturer interviews.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See chapter 9 of the technical support document that 
accompanied the February 2015 NOPR. (Available at: 
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0036-0002). (Last 
accessed June 6, 2022).

                                  Table II.2--Annual Shipments for Hearth Products From the February 2015 NOPR Analysis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 2005        2006        2007        2008        2009        2010        2011        2012        2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shipments (millions)........................       1.69        1.30        1.13       0.785       0.462       0.487       0.423       0.436       0.586
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE requests annual sales data (i.e., number of shipments) for 
decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters. If disaggregated 
fractions of annual sales are not available based on these 
classifications, DOE requests more aggregated fractions of annual 
sales. If available, DOE requests the annual shipments information for 
the years 2014 to 2021.

J. National Impact Analysis

    The purpose of the NIA is to estimate the aggregate economic 
impacts of potential energy conservation standards at the national 
level. The NIA assesses the potential NES and the national NPV of total 
consumer costs and savings that would be expected to result from new or 
amended standards at specific efficiency levels over 30 years of 
shipments. An important component of the NIA is the trend in energy 
efficiency in the no-new-standards case over the 30-year analysis 
period. In the analysis for the February 2015 NOPR, DOE assumed a 
constant efficiency trend over the 30-year period. 80 FR 7082, 7104 
(Feb. 9, 2015).
    DOE requests data on the expected future growth trends of 
decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters by ignition type 
(standing pilot, intermittent ignition, and match lit).

K. Manufacturer Impact Analysis

    The purpose of the manufacturer impact analysis (``MIA'') is to 
identify and quantify the estimated financial impacts of any new or 
amended energy conservation standards on manufacturers of consumer 
MGPs, and to evaluate the potential impacts of such standards on direct 
employment and manufacturing capacity. The MIA includes both 
quantitative and qualitative aspects. The quantitative part of the MIA 
primarily relies on the Government Regulatory Impact Model (``GRIM''), 
an industry cash-flow model adapted for each product in this analysis, 
with the key output being industry net present value (``INPV''). The 
qualitative part of the MIA addresses the potential impacts of energy 
conservation standards on manufacturing capacity and industry 
competition, as well as factors such as product characteristics, 
impacts on particular subgroups of firms, and important market and 
product trends.
    As part of the MIA, DOE intends to analyze impacts of potential 
energy conservation standards on subgroups of manufacturers of covered 
products, including domestic small business manufacturers. DOE uses the 
Small Business Administration's (``SBA'') small business size standards 
to determine whether manufacturers qualify as small businesses, which 
are listed by the applicable North American Industry Classification 
System (``NAICS'') code.\32\ Manufacturing of outdoor heaters is 
classified under NAICS 333414, ``Heating Equipment (except Warm Air 
Furnaces) Manufacturing,'' and the SBA sets a threshold of 500 
employees or less for a domestic entity to be considered a small 
business in this category. For decorative hearth products, DOE will 
rely on NAICS 337124, ``Metal Household Furniture Manufacturing,'' and 
the SBA sets a threshold of 750 employees or less for a domestic entity 
to be considered a small business in this category. These employee 
thresholds include all employees in a business's parent company and any 
other subsidiaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Table of Size Standards--U.S. Small Business Administration 
(Available at: www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards) 
(Last accessed March 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One aspect of assessing manufacturer burden involves examining the 
cumulative impact of multiple DOE standards and the product-specific 
regulatory actions of other Federal agencies that affect the 
manufacturers of a covered product or equipment. While any one 
regulation may not impose a significant burden on manufacturers, the 
combined effects of several existing or impending regulations may have 
serious consequences for some manufacturers, groups of manufacturers, 
or an entire industry. Assessing the impact of a single regulation may 
overlook this cumulative regulatory burden. In addition to energy 
conservation standards, other regulations can significantly affect 
manufacturers' financial operations. Multiple regulations affecting the 
same manufacturer can strain profits and lead companies to abandon 
product lines or markets with lower expected future returns than 
competing products. For these reasons, DOE conducts an analysis of 
cumulative regulatory burden as part of its rulemakings pertaining to 
appliance efficiency.

[[Page 35937]]

    To the extent feasible, DOE seeks the names and contact information 
of any domestic or foreign-based manufacturers that distribute 
decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters in the United States.
    DOE identified small businesses as a subgroup of manufacturers that 
could be disproportionally impacted by potential energy conservation 
standards for consumer MGPs. DOE requests the names and contact 
information of small business manufacturers, as defined by the SBA's 
size thresholds, that manufacture decorative hearth products and 
outdoor heaters in the United States. In addition, DOE requests comment 
on any other manufacturer subgroups that could be disproportionally 
impacted by potential energy conservation standards for consumer MGPs. 
DOE requests feedback on any potential approaches that could be 
considered to address impacts on such manufacturers, including small 
businesses.
    DOE requests information regarding the cumulative regulatory burden 
impacts on manufacturers of decorative hearth products and outdoor 
heaters associated with: (1) other DOE energy conservation standards 
applying to different products or equipment that these manufacturers 
may also make and (2) product-specific regulatory actions of other 
Federal agencies. DOE also requests comment on its methodology for 
computing cumulative regulatory burden and whether there are any 
flexibilities it can consider that would reduce this burden while 
remaining consistent with the requirements of EPCA.

III. Submission of Comments

    DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by the date 
specified in the DATES section of this document, comments and 
information on matters addressed in this document and on other matters 
relevant to DOE's consideration of energy conservations standards for 
MGPs. After the close of the comment period, DOE will review the public 
comments received and may begin collecting data and conducting the 
analyses discussed in this document.
    Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The 
www.regulations.gov web page requires you to provide your name and 
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE 
Building Technologies Office 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 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, hand delivery/courier, or postal 
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal mail 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. If you submit via postal mail 
or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if 
feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. 
No telefacsimiles (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, written in English, and 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 as to 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).
    DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of 
the process for developing energy conservation standards. DOE actively 
encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the 
comment period in each stage of this process. Interactions with and 
between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of the 
issues and assist DOE in the process. Anyone who wishes to be added to 
the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and information about 
this process should contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program 
staff at (202) 287-1445 or via email at 
[email protected].

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on June 9, 
2022, by Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal

[[Page 35938]]

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 June 9, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2022-12786 Filed 6-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P