[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 9, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43367-43371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-17227]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 429
[EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028]
RIN 1904-AF49
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Central Air
Conditioners and Heat Pumps
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is finalizing a one-
year delay of certain product-specific enforcement provisions related
to the controls verification procedure established in a recently
published final rule amending the test procedures for central air
conditioners and heat pumps.
DATES: The effective date of this rule is September 9, 2025.
ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for review at www.regulations.gov.
All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. However, not all documents listed in the index may be publicly
available, such as those containing information that is exempt from
public disclosure.
A link to the docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2022-BT-TP-0028. The docket web page contains instructions
on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the
docket.
For further information on how to review the docket contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by
email: [email protected].
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:
(202) 255-0630. Email: [email protected].
Mr. Pete Cochran, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-4798. Email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
II. Discussion
A. Summary of Comments Received
1. Comments Supporting the Proposed One-Year Delay of CVP
Enforcement
2. Comments Opposing the Proposed One-Year Delay of CVP
Enforcement
3. Other Comments
B. Conclusion
III. Effective Date
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, as
amended (``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency
of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified) Title III, Part B of EPCA \2\
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. Central air conditioners (``CACs'') and
central air conditioning heat pumps (``HPs'') (collectively, ``CAC/
HPs'') are included in the list of ``covered products'' for which DOE
is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation standards and
test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6292 (a)(3)) DOE's currently applicable
test procedure for CAC/HPs is prescribed at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
appendix M1 (``appendix M1'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 reflect 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 7, 2025, DOE published a final rule amending the Federal
test procedures for CAC/HPs (``January 2025 Final Rule''). 90 FR 1224.
The January 2025 Final Rule amended the currently applicable test
procedure at appendix M1 and also established a new test procedure at
10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix M2 (``appendix M2''), the use of
which would be required beginning on the compliance date of any future
amended standards for CAC/HPs based on the new efficiency metrics
established in appendix M2. Id. at 90 FR 1284. Additionally, the
January 2025 Final Rule established enforcement provisions related to
the use of a controls verification procedure (``CVP''), to be conducted
per industry standards AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024 for the
purposes of CAC/HP assessment and enforcement testing. Id. at 90 FR
1224, 1255-1265.
On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued the ``Regulatory Freeze
Pending Review'' memorandum, which was published in the Federal
Register on January 25, 2025. 90 FR 8249. This Presidential action
ordered all executive departments and agencies to consider postponing
for 60 days the effective date of certain rules published in the
Federal Register for the purpose of reviewing any questions of fact,
law, and policy that the rules may raise. Additionally, executive
departments and agencies were to consider opening a comment period to
allow interested parties to provide comments about issues of fact, law,
and policy raised by the rules postponed under the memorandum.
Consistent with the ``Regulatory Freeze Pending Review''
Presidential memorandum of January 20, 2025, DOE delayed the effective
date of the January 2025 Final Rule to March 21, 2025 (``February 2025
delay of effective date''). 90 FR 9001, (February 5, 2025). DOE also
sought comment on any further delay of the effective date, including
the impacts of such delay, as well as comment on the legal, factual, or
policy issues raised by the rule. Id.
Following the February 2025 delay of effective date, DOE delayed
the effective date of the January 2025 Final Rule twice more, to allow
time for further review of comments received. The first of these
additional delays extended the effective date of the January 2025 Final
Rule to May 20, 2025. 90 FR 13052 (March 30, 2025). The second of these
additional delays extended the effective date of the January 2025 Final
Rule to July 7, 2025. 90 FR 21389 (May 20, 2025). Neither of these
additional delays nor the initial February 2025 delay of effective date
affected the compliance date of the January 2025 Final Rule, which
remains July 7, 2025.
In response to the February 2025 delay of effective date, comments
from interested parties advocating for a further delay in the effective
date of the January 2025 Final Rule were largely limited to the CVP
provisions established by the January 2025 Final Rule. Multiple
commenters provided justification for further delaying the CVP
enforcement provisions of the January 2025 Final Rule, with most
commenters suggesting a one-year delay. DOE published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') on May 29, 2025 (``May 2025 NOPR''), in
which
[[Page 43368]]
DOE tentatively determined that a further delay in implementation of
the CVP provisions is warranted and proposed to delay implementation of
the CVP provisions at 10 CFR 429.134(k)(4) until July 7, 2026 (i.e., a
one-year delay from the original compliance date). 90 FR 22671, 22674.
DOE received comments in response to the May 2025 NOPR from the
interested parties listed in Table I.1.
Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the May 2025 NOPR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in this final
Commenter(s) rule Comment No. in the docket Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air-Conditioning, Heating, & AHRI................... 72....................... Trade Association.
Refrigeration Institute.
Allstyle Coil Company............... Allstyle............... 78....................... Manufacturer.
Anonymous........................... Anonymous.............. 63....................... Individual.
Appliance Standards Awareness ASAP................... 80....................... Efficiency Advocacy
Project. Organization.
AUX Air USA......................... AUX Air................ 67....................... Manufacturer.
Bosch Home Comfort.................. Bosch.................. 77....................... Manufacturer.
China WTO/TBT * National P.R. China............. 64 and 68................ Foreign Government.
Notification & Enquiry Center.
Daikin Comfort Technologies North Daikin................. 81....................... Manufacturer.
America, Inc.
Daniel Simpson...................... Simpson................ 65....................... Individual.
Fujitsu General America, Inc........ Fujitsu................ 73....................... Manufacturer.
GE Appliances....................... GE Appliances.......... 70....................... Manufacturer.
Johnson Controls.................... JCI.................... 79....................... Manufacturer.
Lennox International................ Lennox................. 74....................... Manufacturer.
LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.......... LG..................... 66....................... Manufacturer.
Mitsubishi Electric US, Inc......... Mitsubishi............. 71....................... Manufacturer.
Mortex Products, Inc................ Mortex................. 76....................... Manufacturer.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance NEEA................... 83....................... Efficiency
Organization.
Rheem Manufacturing Company......... Rheem.................. 75....................... Manufacturer.
Trane Technologies.................. Trane.................. 82....................... Manufacturer.
Unico, Inc.......................... Unico.................. 69....................... Manufacturer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* WTO/TBT refers to World Trade Organization/Technical Barriers to Trade.
A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
test procedures for insert product. (Docket No. EERE-2022-BT-TP-
0028, which is maintained at: www.regulations.gov). The references
are arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID number
at page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following section discusses comments received in response to
the May 2025 NOPR.
II. Discussion
A. Summary of Comments Received
1. Comments Supporting the Proposed One-Year Delay of CVP Enforcement
AHRI supported the May 2025 NOPR proposal for a one-year delay of
CVP enforcement provisions. (AHRI, No.72 at p.1) AHRI commented that
the delay would allow time for further CVP testing and procedure
evaluation, which may be used to provide additional clarifications on
the CVP, referenced by DOE, in AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI 1600-2024.
(Id. at pp.1-2)
Similarly, comments received from Allstyle, AUX Air, Bosch, Daikin,
GE Appliances, JCI, LG, Mitsubishi, Mortex, Rheem, Trane, and Unico
supported the May 2025 NOPR proposal for a one-year delay of CVP
enforcement provisions. (Allstyle, No.78 at p.1; AUX Air, No.67 at p.1;
Bosch, No.77 at p.2; Daikin, No.81 at p.2; GE Appliances, No.70 at p.3;
JCI, No.79 at p.1; LG, No.66 at p.1; Mitsubishi, No.71 at p.1; Mortex,
No.76 at p.1; Rheem, No.75 at p.1; Trane, No.82 at p.2; Unico, No.69 at
p.1) Several of these commenters stated their reason for supporting the
proposal was that the delay would allow time for additional CVP testing
to inform possible refinements or clarifications of the CVP
methodology. (Allstyle, No.78 at p.1; Bosch, No.77 at p.2; Daikin,
No.81 at pp.2-4; GE Appliances, No.70 at p.1; JCI, No.79 at p.1;
Mortex, No.76 at p.1; Trane, No.82 at p.2; Unico, No.69 at p.2) Other
reasons stated for supporting the proposed delay included the
following: concerns over the repeatability and/or reproducibility of
the CVP (Bosch, No.77 at p.2; Daikin, No.81 at pp.2-3; GE Appliances,
No.70 at pp.1-2; JCI, No.79 at p.1; Mitsubishi, No.71 at pp.1-2; Trane,
No.82 at p.2); concerns that the capacity and energy efficiency ratio
tolerances selected by DOE at 10 CFR 429.134(k)(4) have not been
adequately validated (Bosch, No.77 at p.2; Daikin, No.81 at p.3; LG,
No.66 at p.1; Rheem, No.75 at p.1); concerns that market disruption may
be created by CVP enforcement without the proposed delay, with negative
consumer consequences (Bosch, No.77 at p.2; Daikin, No.81 at p.2; LG,
No.66 at p.1; Unico, No.69 at p.1); concerns that the CVP is time-
consuming and costly to perform (AUX Air, No.67 at p.1; Bosch, No.77 at
p.2; Daikin, No.81 at pp.3-4); and concerns that the CVP methodology
does not adequately address certain product types or product behaviors
(e.g., multi-split systems, defrost cycles, oil return cycles,
incidental protective subroutines) (AUX Air, No.67 at p.1; GE
Appliances, No.70 at pp.1-2; Mitsubishi, No.71 at pp.1-2).
Additionally, Bosch commented that, without the proposed delay, CVP
enforcement would unfairly penalize variable-speed systems that provide
superior performance and energy savings to consumers. (Bosch, No.77 at
p.2) Daikin stated that, without the proposed delay, CVP enforcement
would require the re-design of some existing products, with little
benefit to consumers. (Bosch, No.77 at p.2; Daikin, No.81 at pp.3-4)
Further, GE Appliances commented that the proposed delay would
allow the sell-through period for R-410A products to finish before CVP
enforcement takes effect. (GE Appliances, No.70 at p.2) JCI commented
that the proposed delay would allow time for laboratory upgrades needed
to perform the CVP on products. (JCI, No.79 at p.1)
[[Page 43369]]
Lastly, Daikin, Mitsubishi, and Unico requested that DOE prepare to
make revisions to its CVP references and/or CVP enforcement provisions
during the proposed delay. (Daikin, No.81 at p.4; Mitsubishi, No.71 at
p.2; Unico, No.69 at p.2) While Fujitsu did not directly comment on the
one-year delay of the CVP enforcement provisions as proposed in the May
2025 NOPR, it urged DOE to be flexible with CVP enforcement. (Fujitsu,
No.73 at p.1) Noting that industry and AHRI are still collecting and
evaluating CVP test data, Fujitsu commented that DOE should consider
further delaying CVP enforcement into 2027 or later if results of
testing indicate major revisions of the CVP are necessary. (Id.)
2. Comments Opposing the Proposed One-Year Delay of CVP Enforcement
ASAP, Lennox, and NEEA commented in opposition to the May 2025 NOPR
proposal for a one-year delay of CVP enforcement provisions. (ASAP,
No.80 at p.1; Lennox, No.74 at p.3; NEEA, No.83 at p.1) All three
commenters stated that the CVP was developed collaboratively with
industry (ASAP, No.80 at p.1, Lennox, No.74 at p.2; NEEA, No.83 at
pp.1-2) and that the CVP benefits consumers by ensuring variable-speed
systems operate with the efficiency and comfort claimed by
manufacturers. (ASAP, No.80 at p.1; Lennox, No.74 at pp.1-3; NEEA,
No.83 at p.1) Further, ASAP commented that the tolerances selected by
DOE at 10 CFR 429.134(k)(4) were supported with data presented in the
January 2025 Final Rule. (ASAP, No.80 at p.1)
Lennox commented that the CVP provides a more level playing field
for manufacturers because it provides a consistent and representative
approach to ensuring variable-speed systems operate as indicated by
manufacturers. (Lennox, No.74 at pp.1-2) Lennox also stated that the
proposed delay would benefit manufacturers that are primarily foreign-
owned and whose variable-speed products do not perform properly. (Id.
at p.2) By moving forward with the proposed delay, Lennox asserted that
DOE would improperly provide relief to these manufacturers and create
an unlevel playing field for other manufacturers, including itself,
that have taken steps to comply with the CVP. (Id.) Lennox pointed to
previous comments submitted by the Carrier Global Corporation
(``Carrier''), Trane, and itself in response to the February 2025 delay
of effective date as examples of manufacturers that have evaluated the
CVP and have concluded that the procedure appropriately represents the
operation of variable-speed equipment. (Id.) Lastly, Lennox commented
that, to the benefit of consumers, the CVP promotes innovation and
helps avoid poor product designs among manufacturers. (Id. at p.3)
In its comments, NEEA also noted that Carrier, Lennox, and Trane
had expressed confidence in the CVP finalized by the January 2025 Final
Rule in responses to the February 2025 delay of effective date. (NEEA,
No.83 at pp.1-2) NEEA stated that its recent lab testing \4\ supports
the urgency of implementing the CVP enforcement provisions because a
substantial fraction of systems tested would likely fail the procedure.
(Id. at p.2) NEEA commented that its findings from lab testing align
with field-performance data from the Bonneville Power Administration,
which showed one-third of 17 variable-speed units behaving as fixed-
speed systems. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See neea.org/resource/low-load-efficiency-heat-pump-performance/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, NEEA commented that the CVP was designed to minimize
testing burden because it does not require testing every model line
(i.e., only enough to ensure consistent variable-speed operation across
product lines) and utilizes generous tolerance bands for flexibility.
(Id.) NEEA stated that the CVP was designed to close a known loophole
in variable-speed representations to reflect real-world energy use,
while complying with DOE's statutory obligation to ensure test
procedures are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (Id.)
3. Other Comments
This section summarizes comments received regarding the January
2025 Final Rule as a whole (i.e., not specific to the May 2025 NOPR
proposal for a one-year delay of CVP enforcement provisions).
Two individual commenters recommended that the January 2025 Final
Rule not be delayed. (Simpson, No.65 at p.1; Anonymous, No.63 at p.1)
Simpson further expressed that a delay or rescission of the January
2025 Final Rule would disregard the sunk cost of developing the AHRI
standards that the final rule incorporates by reference. (Simpson,
No.65 at p.1)
AHRI recommended that DOE refrain from any further delays to the
effective date of the January 2025 Final Rule, for all sections besides
the CVP enforcement provisions, to implement improvements in the
representativeness of the test procedure benefiting consumers and other
key stakeholders. (AHRI, No.72 at p.2) Similarly, Rheem, Daikin, and
Trane commented that DOE should retain the July 7, 2025, effective date
for all other sections (i.e., all except the CVP enforcement
provisions) of the January 2025 Final Rule. (Rheem, No.75 at pp.1-2;
Daikin, No.81 at p.4; Trane, No.82 at p.2) Trane further commented that
maintaining the effective date of the January 2025 Final Rule would
promote regulatory predictability so that manufacturers could move
forward with equipment design and manufacturing. (Trane, No.82 at p.2)
Rheem asserted that maintaining the effective date for the January 2025
Final Rule would lessen confusion surrounding outdoor units with no
match (``OUWNM'') and guidance on the disposition of existing R-410A
refrigerant system inventory. (Rheem, No.75 at pp.1-2)
Unico, Mortex, and Allstyle requested that DOE consider excluding
independent coil manufacturers (``ICMs'') \5\ from the requirement to
comply with the CVP enforcement provisions. (Unico, No.69 at pp.1-2;
Mortex, No.76 at pp.1-2; Allstyle, No.78 at pp.1-2) To substantiate
their request, Unico, Mortex, and Allstyle commented that, in the case
of an ICM matchup with a coil-only indoor unit, there are no controls
in the coil-only indoor unit that would impact the variable-speed
outdoor unit's control system and, subsequently, CVP results. (Id.) In
the case of an ICM matchup with a blower-coil indoor unit, the
commenters stated that there would only be blower motor controls in the
blower-coil indoor unit, and that these blower motor controls would
have no direct interaction with the variable-speed outdoor unit's
control system. (Id.) Further, Unico, Mortex, and Allstyle stated that
nearly all ICM matchups with variable-speed outdoor units use non-
communicating controls. (Id.) The three commenters added that, with
non-communicating controls in an ICM matchup, the indoor unit is
unlikely to have a measurable effect on CVP results because, in such
cases, the indoor unit is only providing basic inputs (e.g., calls for
cooling/heating) to the outdoor unit rather than participating in a
closed-loop control logic. (Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ ICMs are manufacturers that manufacture indoor units (e.g.,
coil-only or blower-coil units) but do not manufacture single-
package units or outdoor units. ICMs match the indoor units they
manufacture to the outdoor units of other manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.R. China provided two separate comments to the May 2025 NOPR with
recommendations regarding compliance dates. In its first submitted
comment, P.R. China requested that DOE postpone the compliance date of
the entire January 2025 Final Rule to 180 days after its effective
date, for the purpose of allowing a transition period. (P.R.
[[Page 43370]]
China, No.64 at pp.6-9) P.R. China commented that, currently, there is
no transition period for complying with the January 2025 Final Rule
because its effective date and compliance date are now both July 7,
2025. (Id.) With no transition period, P.R. China asserted that
manufacturers cannot recertify their products in appropriate time since
certification bodies can only accept new certifications after a rule
takes effect. (Id.) P.R. China referenced previous final rules
published by DOE as precedent for having transition periods of
approximately 180 days. (Id.) P.R. China also cited Article 5.9 of the
World Trade Organization Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade
(``WTO TBT Agreement'') as reason for having a transition period.\6\
(Id.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Article 5.9 of the WTO TBT Agreement states that ``except in
those urgent circumstances referred to in paragraph 7, Members shall
allow a reasonable interval between the publication of requirements
concerning conformity assessment procedures and their entry into
force in order to allow time for producers in exporting Members, and
particularly in developing country Members, to adapt their products
or methods of production to the requirements of the importing
Member.'' See www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/tbt_e.htm#art5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its second submitted comment, P.R. China requested that DOE
delay the compliance date for the January 2025 Final Rule to July 1,
2027. (P.R. China, No.68 at p.3) P.R. China stated that the CVP
provisions would add time and cost burden because manufacturers want to
ensure compliance with increased testing. (P.R. China, No.68 at p. 3)
P.R China further stated that product redesign and upgrades to testing
labs would be necessary to ensure compliance, and that the proposed CVP
tolerances needed to be verified by industry. (Id.) P.R. China also
asserted that the EPA Technology Transition Rule may be reconsidered,
which could impact OUWNM provisions in the January 2025 Final Rule.
(Id.)
Lastly, P.R China offered the following concerns regarding the CVP
enforcement provisions and methodology: (1) that a contradiction in
regulations exists by only incorporating the AHRI 210/240-2024 and AHRI
1600-2024 CVP appendices in 10 CFR 429 and not in appendix M1; and (2)
that the 3 [deg]F temperature rise in the CVP's return air temperature
(``RAT'') equation (i.e., 83 [deg]F-80 [deg]F) is not large enough to
generate a full-load response that matches the cooling capacity of the
AFull regulatory test. (P.R. China, No.64 at pp.2-6) P.R.
China suggested that DOE clarify the contradiction in regulations and
modify the CVP methodology to allow for a larger temperature rise in
the RAT equation. (Id. at p.9)
B. Conclusion
After considering the comments received in response to the May 2025
NOPR, DOE has determined that a one-year delay of the CVP enforcement
provisions is appropriate. DOE acknowledges the concerns of AHRI, P.R.
China, and industry stakeholders that additional time is needed to
conduct further CVP testing, evaluate the CVP methodology, and provide
clarifications if necessary. While a few commenters opposed the
proposed delay, citing the benefits of CVP enforcement for consumers,
DOE finds that the additional time will better support an effective
implementation of the CVP.
Accordingly, DOE is finalizing the proposed one-year delay of the
CVP enforcement provisions at 10 CFR 429.134(k)(4), amending the date
of applicability to July 7, 2026. Furthermore, in light of this final
rule being published after the effective date of the test procedure and
enforcement provisions as amended by the January 2025 Final Rule, DOE
will exercise its enforcement discretion and will not apply the CVP
enforcement provisions set forth at 10 CFR 429.134(k)(4) to impacted
units manufactured between July 7, 2025, and the effective date of this
final rule.
In response to comments from P.R. China requesting a delay in the
compliance date of the entire test procedure adopted in the January
2025 Final Rule to allow for a transition period, DOE notes that EPCA
does not require manufacturers to immediately use test procedures upon
publication in the Federal Register. Manufacturers have 180 days before
representations of energy use or efficiency have to be based on the new
test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)) The January 2025 Final Rule was
published on January 7, 2025, which provided a 180-day period prior to
the July 7, 2025, compliance date. Manufacturers, distributors,
retailers, and private labelers may also petition DOE for a compliance
date extension of up to an additional 180 days. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3))
Thus, DOE is not delaying the compliance date of the January 2025 Final
Rule (with the exception of delaying applicability of the CVP
enforcement provisions). July 7, 2025, remains both the effective date
and compliance date of the January 2025 Final Rule. With regards to
P.R. China's request for a delay of the January 2025 Final Rule
compliance date to July 1, 2027, due to CVP concerns, DOE notes that
the one-year delay in CVP enforcement provides manufacturers, both
domestic and international, with additional time to prepare for
compliance and to ensure that the CVP is implemented in an effective
manner.
Regarding P.R. China's concern about a contradiction in regulation,
DOE clarifies that the CVP is not incorporated by reference in appendix
M1 because it is not a required element of the test procedure for
certification. Rather, the CVP is used for DOE assessment and
enforcement purposes. As such, its incorporation in 10 CFR 429.4 and
429.134, rather than appendix M1, is consistent with its intended use
and does not represent a contradiction in regulation.
With regards to the comments that ICM models should be excluded
from the requirement to comply with the CVP enforcement provisions, DOE
is not amending the CVP provisions at this time to provide any
exclusion for ICM models certified as variable capacity. As discussed
in the January 2025 Final Rule, the CVP test provisions represented
industry consensus regarding: (1) the verification of compliance of
systems with the variable capacity system definition, and (2)
verification of the consistency of fixed-speed settings of compressor
and indoor fans with native control operation as part of enforcement.
90 FR 1224, 1232. When the CVP provisions take effect, DOE may perform
the CVP for any model certified as a variable capacity compressor
system for the purposes of assessment or enforcement testing, including
ICM models certified as variable capacity.
III. Effective Date
The Administrative Procedure Act (``APA'') requires that agencies
publish a rule not less than 30 days before the rule will become
effective, unless an exception from this requirement applies. (5 U.S.C.
553(d)) Under the APA, agencies may bypass this 30-day delay if the
final rule ``relieves a restriction'' or if the agency finds ``good
cause.'' Here, both exceptions apply. First, this final rule delays the
implementation of the CVP enforcement provisions until July 7, 2026.
Under the January 2025 Final Rule, the implementation date of the CVP
enforcement provisions was July 7, 2025. Thus, this final rule relieves
a restriction as it is delaying the implementation date of the CVP
enforcement provisions for one year and delaying the application of
these provisions.
Second, as stated previously, DOE will not apply the CVP
enforcement
[[Page 43371]]
provisions to models manufactured between July 7, 2025, and the
effective date of this final rule. Moreover, DOE foresees little, if
any, harm done by bypassing the 30-day delay in effectiveness. Rather,
DOE finds that there is a good cause to forego the generally required
30-day delay because having the final rule effective upon publication
will avoid potential confusion regarding the applicability of the CVP
enforcement provisions.
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
DOE has concluded that the determinations made pursuant to the
various procedural requirements applicable to the January 2025 Final
Rule remain unchanged for this final rule. These determinations are set
forth in the January 2025 Final Rule and are adopted here. 90 FR 1224,
1268-1272.
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final
rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 429
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Small businesses.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on September
4, 2025, by Louis Hrkman, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority
from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature
and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in
compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on September 4, 2025.
Jennifer Hartzell,
Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends part 429 of
Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Amend Sec. 429.134 by revising the introductory text to paragraph
(k) to read as follows:
Sec. 429.134 Product-specific enforcement provisions.
* * * * *
(k) Central air conditioners and heat pumps. Before July 7, 2025,
the provisions in this section of this title as it appeared in the 10
CFR parts 200-499 edition revised as of January 1, 2023 are applicable.
On and after July 7, 2025, provisions in paragraphs (k)(1), (2) and (3)
of this section shall apply. On and after July 7, 2026, provisions in
paragraph (k)(4) of this section shall also apply.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-17227 Filed 9-8-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P