Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Proposed Determination To Treat Non-Compressor Residential Refrigeration Products as Covered Products, 69147-69154 [2011-28928]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
posted without change, including any
personal information, to https://
www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to background
documents or comments received, go to
the FSIS Docket Room at the address
listed above between 8:30 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Rosalyn Murphy-Jenkins, Director,
Labeling and Program Delivery Division,
Office of Policy and Program
Development, FSIS, USDA, (301) 504–
0879.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July
27, 2011, FSIS published the proposed
rule ‘‘Common or Usual Name for Raw
Meat and Poultry Products Containing
Added Solutions’’ (76 FR 44855) to
amend its regulations to establish a
common or usual name for raw meat
and poultry products that do not meet
standard of identity regulations and to
which solutions have been added. The
Agency proposed that the common or
usual name for such products include
an accurate description of the raw meat
or poultry component, the percentage of
added solution incorporated into the
raw meat or poultry product, and the
individual ingredients or multiingredient components in the solution
listed in the descending order of
predominance by weight. FSIS also
proposed that the print for all words in
the common or usual name appear in a
single font size, color, and style of print
and that the name appear on a singlecolor contrasting background. In
addition, the Agency proposed to
remove the standard of identity
regulation for ‘‘ready-to-cook poultry
products to which solutions are added.’’
The comment period for the proposed
rule ended on September 26, 2011.
The Agency received a request for a
60 day extension of the comment
period. The letter explained that
additional time to comment was
necessary because the proposed
amendments are important to many
meat and poultry companies. FSIS
agrees that the proposed amendments
are important, and, to provide more
time for constructive comment, the
Agency is reopening the comment
period for the proposed rule. The
comment period will close on January 9,
2012.
The letter also requested the
information, data, and evidence that
FSIS considered in developing the
proposed rule. In addition, the request
asked the Agency for examples of
specific labels in the marketplace about
which it has concerns.
The Agency responded that the
information, data, and evidence on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
which it based the proposed
amendments can be found in the
Truthful Labeling Coalition’s (TLC)
petition and attachments referenced in
the proposed rule (76 FR 44857). The
TLC petition and its attachments are
available in the FSIS Docket Room and
on its Web site (https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/Regulations_&_
Policies/Proposed_Rules/index.asp).
In response to the request for specific
labels in the marketplace that FSIS has
concerns about, examples of such labels
are included in the Sorensen Associates
Consumer Research Study (https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Petition_
Truthful_Labeling_Coalition_
Attachments.pdf) and ‘‘Attachment B’’
of the TLC petition (https://www.fsis.
usda.gov/PDF/Petition_Truthful_
Labeling_Coalition.pdf). To provide
further examples, the Agency posted
additional representative samples of
marketplace labels (https://
www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/2010-0012_
Examples.pdf).
The Agency’s response to the request
for information, data, and evidence that
FSIS considered in developing the
proposed rule is posted on its Web site
at (https://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations
_&_policies/Proposed_Rules/index.asp).
Additional Public Notification
FSIS will announce this notice online
through the FSIS Web page located at
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_
policies/Federal_Register_Publications_
&_Related_Documents/index.asp.
FSIS will also make copies of this
Federal Register publication available
through the FSIS Constituent Update,
which is used to provide information
regarding FSIS policies, procedures,
regulations, Federal Register notices,
FSIS public meetings, and other types of
information that could affect or would
be of interest to constituents and
stakeholders. The Update is
communicated via Listserv, a free
electronic mail subscription service for
industry, trade groups, consumer
interest groups, health professionals,
and other individuals who have asked
to be included. The Update is also
available on the FSIS Web page.
Through the Listserv and Web page,
FSIS is able to provide information to a
much broader and more diverse
audience. In addition, FSIS offers an
electronic mail subscription service
which provides automatic and
customized access to selected food
safety news and information. This
service is available at https://www.fsis.
usda.gov/News_&_Events/Email_
Subscription/. Options range from
recalls to export information to
regulations, directives and notices.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69147
Customers can add or delete
subscriptions themselves, and have the
option to password protect their
accounts.
USDA Nondiscrimination Statement
The U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) prohibits discrimination in all
its programs and activities on the basis
of race, color, national origin, gender,
religion, age, disability, political beliefs,
sexual orientation, and marital or family
status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to
all programs.)
Persons with disabilities who require
alternative means for communication of
program information (Braille, large
print, audiotape, etc.) should contact
USDA’s Target Center at (202) 720–2600
(voice and TTY).
To file a written complaint of
discrimination, write USDA, Office of
the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights,
1400 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20250–941 or call (202)
720–5964 (voice and TTY).
Done at Washington, DC, on November 1,
2011.
Alfred V. Almanza,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011–28796 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–DET–0072]
RIN 1904–AC66
Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products: Proposed
Determination To Treat NonCompressor Residential Refrigeration
Products as Covered Products
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Proposed determination.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) has preliminarily
determined that residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor qualify as covered products
under Part B of Title III of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as
amended. DOE reached this preliminary
conclusion because classifying products
of such type as covered products is
necessary or appropriate to carry out the
purposes of EPCA, and the average U.S.
household energy use for such products,
(e.g., thermoelectric wine chillers) is
likely to exceed the 100 kilowatt-hour
(kWh) per year threshold required for
coverage.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
69148
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
DOE will accept written
comments, data, and information on this
notice, but no later than December 8,
2011.
DATES:
Interested persons may
submit comments, identified by docket
number EERE–2011–BT–DET–0072, by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.
Include EERE–2011–BT–DET–0072 and/
or RIN 1904–AC66 in the subject line of
the message.
• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J,
Proposed Determination for Residential
Refrigeration Products that do not
Incorporate a Compressor, EERE–2011–
BT–DET–0072 and/or RIN 1904–AC66,
1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121. Phone:
(202) 586–2945. Please submit one
signed paper original.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda
Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, 6th
Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza, SW.,
Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202)
586–2945. Please submit one signed
paper original.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or RIN for this
rulemaking.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to the U.S.
Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950
L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC
20024, (202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. Please call Ms.
Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 for
additional information regarding
visiting the Resource Room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Lucas Adin, U.S. Department of Energy,
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–1317. Email:
Lucas.Adin@ee.doe.gov.
In the Office of General Counsel,
contact Mr. Michael Kido, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of the
General Counsel, GC–71, 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email:
Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov; or Ms.
Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–6111. Email:
Jennifer.Tiedeman@hq.doe.gov.
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Current Rulemaking Process
III. Scope of Coverage
IV. Evaluation of the Annual Energy Use of
Thermoelectric and Absorption
Refrigeration Products
A. Coverage Necessary or Appropriate To
Carry Out Purposes of EPCA
B. Average Household Energy Use
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act of 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act of 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under the Information Quality
Bulletin for Peer Review
VI. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comments
I. Statutory Authority
Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.), sets forth
various provisions designed to improve
energy efficiency. Part B of Title III of
EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) established
the ‘‘Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products Other Than
Automobiles,’’ which covers consumer
products and certain commercial
products (hereafter referred to as
‘‘covered products’’).1
EPCA specifies a list of covered
consumer products that includes
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and
freezers (referred to collectively as
‘‘residential refrigeration products’’) that
can be operated by alternating current
(AC) electricity, are not designed to be
used without doors, and include a
compressor and condenser as an integral
part of the cabinet assembly. (42 U.S.C.
6292(a)(1)) This proposed coverage
determination addresses those
residential refrigeration products that do
not meet these specific criteria.
In addition to specifying a list of
covered residential and commercial
products, EPCA permits the Secretary of
Energy to classify additional types of
1 Upon codification in the U.S. Code, Part B was
re-designated Part A for editorial reasons.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
consumer products as covered products
when certain prerequisites have been
met. For a given product to be classified
as a covered product, the Secretary must
determine that (1) Covering that product
is either necessary or appropriate to
carry out the purposes of EPCA and (2)
the average annual per-household
energy use by products of such type is
likely to exceed 100 kWh per year. (42
U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)).
After first determining whether the
above criteria are met, the Secretary may
prescribe energy conservation standards
for a covered product. See 42 U.S.C.
6295(o) and (p). In order to set standards
for a given product that has been added
as a newly covered product pursuant to
42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1), the Secretary must
determine that four additional criteria
are met. First, the average per household
energy use within the United States by
the products of such type (or class)
exceeded 150 kilowatt-hours (or its BTU
equivalent) for any 12-month period
ending before such determination.
Second, the aggregate household energy
use within the United States by
products of such type (or class)
exceeded 4,200,000,000 kilowatt-hours
(or its BTU equivalent) for any such 12month period. Third, a substantial
improvement in the energy efficiency of
products of such type (or class) is
technologically feasible. And fourth, the
application of a labeling rule under 42
U.S.C. 6294 to such type (or class) is not
likely 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)).
In addition to the above, if DOE issues
a final determination that noncompressor residential refrigeration
products are covered products, DOE
will consider test procedures for these
products and will determine if they
satisfy the provisions of 42 U.S.C.
6295(l)(1) during the course of any
energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
II. Current Rulemaking Process
DOE has not previously conducted an
energy conservation standard
rulemaking for non-compressor
equipped residential refrigeration
products. If, after public comment, DOE
issues a final determination of coverage
for this product, DOE will consider both
test procedures and energy conservation
standards for these products.
Additionally, assuming that DOE
determines that the criteria for
extending coverage to non-compressor
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
residential refrigeration products are
met and that accompanying energy
conservation standards are warranted,
DOE will, consistent with EPCA,
propose a test procedure for these
products. In developing an appropriate
procedure, DOE will take steps to help
ensure that the procedure is not unduly
burdensome to conduct for measuring
the energy efficiency, energy use or
estimated annual operating cost of these
products during a representative average
use cycle or period of use. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(3)) In carrying out this process,
DOE initially prepares a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NOPR) and
allows interested parties to present oral
and written data, views, and arguments
with respect to such procedures. DOE
also considers relevant information,
including technological developments
relating to energy use or energy
efficiency of the covered products.
With respect to energy conservation
standards, DOE typically prepares an
Energy Conservation Standards
Rulemaking Framework Document (the
framework document). The framework
document explains the issues, analyses,
and process that it is considering for the
development of energy conservation
standards for the product(s) to be
addressed by the standard. After DOE
receives comments on the framework
document, DOE typically prepares an
Energy Conservation Standards
Rulemaking preliminary analysis, and
an accompanying technical support
document (TSD) that provides the
details of DOE’s analysis. The
preliminary analysis typically provides
initial draft analyses of potential
impacts of energy conservation
standards on consumers, manufacturers,
and the nation. Neither of these steps is
legally required and DOE may,
depending on the circumstances of a
particular case, combine these steps
when preparing a new standards
rulemaking.
DOE also typically publishes a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) as part
of the energy conservation standards
rulemaking. The NOPR provides DOE’s
proposal for potential energy
conservation standards and a summary
of the results of DOE’s supporting
technical analysis. The details of DOE’s
energy conservation standards analysis
are provided in an accompanying TSD.
DOE’s analysis describes both the
burdens and benefits of potential
standards, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
6295(o). Because non-compressor
residential refrigeration products would
be newly covered under 42 U.S.C.
6292(b)(1), DOE would also consider, as
noted above, whether these products
satisfy certain specified criteria before
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
prescribing standards for them. See 42
U.S.C. 6295(l)(1). After the publication
of the NOPR, DOE affords interested
persons an opportunity during a period
of not less than 60 days to provide oral
and written comment. After receiving
and considering the comments on the
NOPR, and not less than 90 days after
the publication of the NOPR, DOE
would issue the final rule prescribing
any new energy conservation standards
for residential refrigeration products
that do not incorporate a compressor.
III. Scope of Coverage
DOE proposes in this determination to
extend coverage to refrigeration
products that are not currently covered
under existing authority for residential
refrigeration products (42 U.S.C.
6292(a)(1)) because they use alternative
refrigeration technologies that do not
include a compressor and condenser
unit as an integral part of the cabinet
assembly. Hence, DOE is proposing to
extend coverage to those residential
refrigeration products that operate using
AC electricity but use either
thermoelectric-based or absorptionbased systems. In addition, while some
non-compressor refrigeration products
operate using energy sources other than
AC electricity, it is DOE’s understanding
that most, if not all, of these products
would likely fall outside the scope of
coverage as consumer products under
EPCA because they are primarily used
in mobile applications such as
recreational vehicles. See 42 U.S.C.
6292(a) (excluding from coverage ‘‘those
consumer products designed solely for
use in recreational vehicles and other
mobile equipment’’).
DOE seeks feedback from interested
parties on this scope of coverage.
IV. Evaluation of the Annual Energy
Use of Thermoelectric and Absorption
Refrigeration Products
The following sections describe DOE’s
evaluation of whether residential
refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor fulfill the
EPCA criteria for being added as
covered products. As stated previously,
DOE may classify a consumer product
as a covered product if (1) Classifying
products of such type as covered
products is necessary and appropriate to
carry 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 (or
its Btu equivalent) per year. 42 U.S.C.
6292(b)(1).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69149
A. Coverage Necessary or Appropriate
To Carry Out Purposes of EPCA
To satisfy the purposes of EPCA, the
coverage of non-compressor residential
refrigeration products is both necessary
and appropriate to carry out the
purposes of EPCA. These products
consume energy generated from limited
energy supplies and their regulation
would be likely to result in the
improvement of their energy efficiency.
Accordingly, establishing standards for
these products fall squarely within the
overall statutory goals set out in EPCA
to: (1) Conserve energy supplies through
energy conservation programs; and (2)
provide for improved energy efficiency
of major appliances and certain other
consumer products. (42 U.S.C. 6201)
In a related matter, DOE recently set
energy conservation standards and
accompanying test procedures for
residential refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers (collectively,
refrigeration products). See 76 FR 57516
(Sept. 15, 2011) (amending energy
conservation standards for residential
refrigeration products) and 75 FR 78810
(Dec. 16, 2010) (amending current test
procedures and issuing an interim final
rule to create revised test procedures for
products manufactured starting in
2014). During DOE’s efforts to amend
the standards for these products,
interested parties urged DOE to include
wine chillers as part of this effort. See
75 FR 59470, 59486 (Sept. 27, 2010)
(residential refrigeration products
NOPR, noting industry’s urging that
DOE consider wine storage products
within the scope of the standards
rulemaking). Wine chillers are devices
used to store bottles of wine at
temperatures that are higher than those
used to store fresh food. Wine chillers,
which typically use either a
conventional compressor-condenser or a
thermoelectric-based system, have a
temperature range of between 45 °F and
55 °F, compared to 39 °F for the safe
storage of fresh food used in
refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers.
Given the different purposes served by
these products and their accompanying
performance characteristic differences,
DOE decided to generally address these
wine chiller products in a separate
rulemaking. 76 FR at 57534.
Consistent with this approach, DOE is
currently considering initiating an
energy conservation standard
rulemaking addressing wine chillers. As
a prerequisite to the setting of standards
for these products, DOE is interested in
ensuring that both compressor-based
and non-compressor-based products
would be covered as part of this
approach in order to prevent a mass
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
69150
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
shift in the market from compressorbased to alternative refrigeration
technologies such as thermoelectricand absorption-based systems that
currently fall outside of EPCA’s scope of
coverage for refrigeration products. As
explained below, DOE has reason to
believe that products that use these
alternative technologies are less efficient
than products using conventional
compressor-based refrigeration systems.
As a result, a shift by manufacturers to
use these alternative technologies could
have an adverse impact on overall
energy efficiency. To address this
potential problem, and to provide a
more comprehensive approach to the
treatment of wine chillers generally,
DOE seeks to establish coverage over
products that employ these alternative
technologies pursuant to the Agency’s
authority under 42 U.S.C. 6292(b).
Available information collected by
DOE suggests that products using
thermoelectric technology will be much
less efficient than their compressorequipped counterparts.2 DOE is also
aware that residential refrigeration
products using thermoelectric
technology have become commercially
available—particularly, wine chillers.
Similarly, a limited number of products
using absorption technology, which is
also less energy efficient than
compressor-based refrigeration
technology, are also commercially
available. Hence, DOE believes that
coverage and energy standards for these
products are necessary in order to
ensure that the existing standards for
compressor-based refrigeration products
and potential future standards for
compressor-based wine chillers are not
undermined by a switch to less-efficient
technologies.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Average Household Energy Use
DOE estimated the average household
energy use for two of the primary types
of residential refrigeration products that
do not incorporate a compressor—
thermoelectric wine chillers and
absorption refrigeration products.
Thermoelectric wine chillers
incorporate cooling modules that utilize
the Peltier effect.3 DOE obtained limited
data to estimate their average household
energy use and deduced the magnitude
of thermoelectric wine chiller energy
2 See, for example, the residential refrigeration
product energy conservation standard rulemaking
TSD, Chapter 4, Screening Analysis, https://
www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/
appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/
refrig_nopr_tsd_2010-09-23.pdf.
3 The Peltier effect refers to the creation of a
temperature differential across a device comprised
of two dissimilar electrical conductors by passing
an electric current through the junction between
them.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
use from a combination of (1)
Thermoelectric wine chiller market
data, (2) energy use data for vapor
compression (i.e., conventional
compressor/condenser-based) wine
chillers, and (3) thermoelectric module
efficiency.
To estimate the size of the
thermoelectric wine chiller market, DOE
purchased data on wine chiller sales in
the U.S. from 2007 to 2010 from the
NPD Group, Inc. (NPD), a marketing
research firm.4 NPD reports that these
data represent 30- to 45-percent of the
total wine chiller market, yielding a
total estimate of between 580,000 to
880,000 unit sales in the U.S. for the
year 2009. Unfortunately, the NPD data
do not differentiate between vapor
compression and thermoelectric
products. Therefore, DOE researched
manufacturer product offerings to
approximate the thermoelectric share of
the wine chiller market.
Specifically, DOE researched two of
the three largest wine chiller brands
based on sales figures in the NPD
database, Haier 5 and Vinotemp,6 and
determined that 69-percent and 82percent, respectively, of their wine
chiller product offerings for capacities
of fewer than 30 bottles are
thermoelectric. Because the NPD data
also indicate that 80 percent of the wine
chiller market is comprised of products
with capacities of fewer than 30 bottles,
DOE surmised that thermoelectric wine
chillers represent a large fraction of the
wine chiller market, specifically within
the portion of the market comprised of
products with capacities of fewer than
30 bottles.
To estimate vapor compression wine
chiller energy use, DOE relied on the
annual energy use of vapor compression
wine chiller products permitted under
California’s maximum energy use
standards 7 as well as the NPD sales data
cited above. The California Energy
Commission (CEC) currently specifies a
maximum allowable energy use for wine
chillers as a function of internal volume.
From the purchased NPD sales data,
which cover the years 2007 to 2010,
DOE deduced an internal volume for
each model listed in the database. Using
this information, DOE developed a
4 NPD Group, Inc., available at https://
www.npd.com/
corpServlet?nextpage=corp_welcome.html.
5 Haier America Trading. (https://
www.haieramerica.com/wine-beer-beverage).
6 Vinotemp International. (https://
www.vinotemp.com/Browse.aspx/387/WineCoolers?gclid=CPSvs57hlaoCFQo0QgodCEEOxQ).
7 California Energy Commission, 2010 Appliance
Efficiency Regulations, December 2010. CEC–400–
2010–012. https://www.energy.ca.gov/
2010publications/CEC-400-2010-012/CEC-4002010-012.PDF.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
range of vapor compression annual
energy use values for the range of
internal volumes of models in the NPD
database, assuming that the energy use
of these products is the maximum
allowed by the CEC standard. This
derived annual energy use ranges from
305 to 392 kWh for wine chillers with
capacities of fewer than 30 bottles.
Additionally, during the recent
standards rulemaking for residential
refrigeration products, DOE tested a
thermoelectric refrigerator. The results
from those tests showed that this
particular product’s efficiency was an
order of magnitude lower than that of a
conventional comparable vapor
compression product.8 These results
suggest that the energy use of
thermoelectric refrigeration products
could be much higher than that of vapor
compression products.
However, because these observations
are based on limited testing of a single
thermoelectric product purchased in
2008, DOE recently performed metering
of four thermoelectric wine chillers with
capacities of six, 12, 15, and 28 bottles
during the period from May 27, 2011 to
June 28, 2011. While the metering was
conducted in a non-controlled ambient
environment with room temperatures
varying between 64 °F and 85 °F, DOE
believed that the additional
measurements would improve DOE’s
understanding of typical thermoelectric
wine chiller energy use, since a greater
number of data points would be likely
to improve the confidence of the
measured values, because the initial
product was not a wine chiller, and
because thermoelectric refrigeration
technology may have evolved in the
past three years. The measured energy
use for the four units over the
approximately one-month time period
varied between 18 to 50 kWh, with the
high value associated with the 28 bottle
capacity wine chiller. Assuming wine
chillers are powered year-round, i.e.,
consumers do not unplug the units for
extended periods of time, the monthly
consumption translates into annual
energy use values of 218 to 598 kWh,
which closely match the values derived
for vapor compression units from the
NPD and CEC data.
The limited metered data clearly
indicate that thermoelectric wine chiller
annual energy use exceeds the 100 kWh
per year threshold set by EPCA for
establishing coverage. DOE notes that
the range of thermoelectric wine chiller
energy use based on the metering is
8 U.S. Department of Energy. Final Rule Technical
Support Document. 2011. p. 4–12. Available at
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/
appliance_standards/pdfs/refrig_finalrule_tsd.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
approximately the same as the derived
range for vapor compression wine
chillers. Although the implication is
that thermoelectric units may have a
level of energy consumption comparable
to their vapor compression counterparts,
DOE emphasizes that the test data are
not conclusive and a prescribed test
procedure to comprehensively measure
their energy use is currently
unavailable. As an example of the
limitations of the recorded data, the
metered tests likely indicate the low end
of possible energy use because they did
not capture the energy impacts from
door openings, nor did they include
steps to verify that compartment
temperatures were maintained at 55 °F
per CEC test procedure requirements.
Had these steps been included as part of
the measurements, the measured energy
consumption of the thermoelectric
products examined by DOE would have
likely been significantly higher.
Consequently, DOE believes that the
limited metering data should not be the
sole basis for estimating energy use for
products of this type.
In contrast with thermoelectric
refrigeration products, absorption
refrigeration products use a fluid-based
refrigeration cycle that relies upon heat
addition, which is typically provided by
electric resistance heaters or fuels such
as natural gas and propane. Such
systems ‘‘compress’’ 9 the refrigerant,
which is typically ammonia, using a
sorbent fluid, which is typically water.10
The refrigerant is absorbed by the fluid,
creating a liquid solution containing the
refrigerant. This solution is transferred
from the ‘‘low-pressure’’ to the ‘‘highpressure’’ sides of the system as a
liquid, and the refrigerant is
subsequently boiled out of the solution
by heating it. Most absorption systems
used for small refrigeration products
employ an inert gas on the low-pressure
side of the system, usually hydrogen or
helium for ammonia-water systems,
which allows the partial pressure of the
refrigerant gas to remain low while
boosting the total gas pressure. This
significantly reduces the total pressure
difference between the ‘‘high pressure’’
and ‘‘low pressure’’ sides. The system
eliminates the expansion valve and
replaces the pumping action of a
mechanical compressor with the
9 ‘‘Compress’’ in this context has a different
meaning that in conventional compressor-based
refrigeration products because, for the absorption
systems in most of these products, the refrigerant
is moved from a region of low partial pressure to
a region of high partial pressure rather than actually
being compressed.
10 A sorbent fluid is one that absorbs gas of
another substance (in this case the refrigerant) in an
exothermic process similar to condensation.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
thermal siphon driven by the heat input,
similar to the arrangement used in
coffee makers to lift the boiling water to
the top of the coffee maker. By
generating By moving the refrigerant
from the evaporator back to the
condenser using the sorbent, an
absorption system generates
refrigeration using heat input.
Electric-powered absorption units are
commonly used by the hotel industry
since they are much quieter than
products with a compressor. These
products would be part of the coverage
determination proposed in this notice.
Natural gas- or propane-fired absorption
units are used primarily in mobile
applications, remote areas, and mobile
residences that do not have reliable
access to electricity—these products
would not be part of the coverage
determination as proposed. Electricpowered absorption products tend to
have a fairly significant level of energy
use. As an example, the energy use of
the Dometic CS 52 DV, a representative
absorption refrigeration wine chiller
product, is reported by the manufacturer
to use 1.25 kWh per day in a 68 °F
ambient environment,11 which
translates into an annual energy use of
456 kWh, assuming these products are
powered year-round. Very small (< 1.5
cubic foot) absorption-cooled
refrigerators provided by hotels for their
guests use approximately 310 kWh/yr as
reported by the manufacturer, or up to
530 kWh/yr in limited field testing.12 13
DOE seeks comment on the market
share and penetration of all absorption
refrigeration products. DOE also seeks
comment on whether coverage should
also be considered for fuel-fired units.
Based upon these evaluations of the
two primary types of residential
refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor (i.e.
thermoelectric-based wine chillers and
absorption-based refrigeration
products), DOE has been able to develop
estimates of their annual energy use that
indicate that these products consume
significantly more than 100 kWh
annually. Therefore, DOE has
11 Dometic Corporation. (https://
www.dometic.com/enus/Americas/USA/HotelEquipment/Wine-Cellars/products/
?productdataid=68705).
12 The Bartender AMB–302 1.1 cu. ft. refrigerator
is reported to consume 840 Wh per day, or 307
kWh/yr (https://www.atlanticminifridge.com/
Brochures/AMF_Minibar_Brochure.pdf).
13 DOE also undertook field monitoring of
absorption-cooled hotel ‘‘mini’’ refrigerators (the
Dometic RH 341 LD with 1.4 cu. ft. capacity, and
the Bartender AMB–302 with 1.1 cu. ft. capacity)
in two hotels in the San Francisco Bay Area in
March-April 2010. A total of 48 refrigerators were
metered over a period of approximately two weeks,
resulting in annualized energy use measurements
from 307 to 528 kWh/yr.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69151
tentatively determined that the average
annual per household energy use for
residential refrigeration products that do
not incorporate a compressor is likely to
exceed the 100 kWh threshold set by
EPCA.
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
has determined that coverage
determination rulemakings do not
constitute ‘‘significant regulatory
actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993).
Accordingly, this proposed action was
not subject to review under the
Executive Order by the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) in the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB).
B. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis for any rule that, by
law, must be proposed for public
comment, unless the agency certifies
that the proposed rule, if promulgated,
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis
examines the impact of the rule on
small entities and considers alternative
ways of reducing negative effects. Also,
as required by E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in
Agency Rulemaking’’ 67 FR 53461
(August 16, 2002), DOE published
procedures and policies on February 19,
2003 to ensure that the potential impact
of its rules on small entities are properly
considered during the DOE rulemaking
process. 68 FR 7990 (February 19, 2003).
DOE makes its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General
Counsel’s Web site at https://
www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE reviewed today’s proposed
determination under the provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the
policies and procedures published on
February 19, 2003. If adopted, today’s
proposed determination would set no
standards; they would only positively
determine that future standards may be
warranted and should be explored in an
energy conservation standards and test
procedure rulemaking. Economic
impacts on small entities would be
considered in the context of such
rulemakings. On the basis of the
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
69152
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
foregoing, DOE certifies that the
proposed determination, if adopted,
would have no significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Accordingly, DOE has not
prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis
for this proposed determination. DOE
will transmit this certification and
supporting statement of factual basis to
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for
review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed determination that
residential refrigeration products that do
not incorporate a compressor meet the
criteria for covered products for which
the Secretary may prescribe energy
conservation standards pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) will impose no
new information or record-keeping
requirements. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
clearance is not required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this notice, DOE proposes to
positively determine that future
standards may be warranted and that
environmental impacts should be
explored in an energy conservation
standards rulemaking. DOE has
determined that review under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), Public Law 91–190,
codified at 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. is not
required at this time. NEPA review can
only be initiated ‘‘as soon as
environmental impacts can be
meaningfully evaluated’’ (10 CFR
1021.213(b)). This proposed
determination would only determine
that future standards may be warranted,
but would not itself propose to set any
specific standard. DOE has, therefore,
determined that there are no
environmental impacts to be evaluated
at this time. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order (E.O.) 13132,
‘‘Federalism’’ 64 FR 43255 (August 10,
1999), imposes certain requirements on
agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt
State law or that have Federalism
implications. The Executive Order
requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority
supporting any action that would limit
the policymaking discretion of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
States and to assess carefully the
necessity for such actions. The
Executive Order also requires agencies
to have an accountable process to
ensure meaningful and timely input by
State and local officials in developing
regulatory policies that have Federalism
implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE
published a statement of policy
describing the intergovernmental
consultation process that it will follow
in developing such regulations. 65 FR
13735 (March 14, 2000). DOE has
examined today’s proposed
determination and concludes that it
would not preempt State law or have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the Federal
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. DOE notes,
however, that if the agency determines
that the products at issue in today’s
notice are covered and energy
conservation standards are subsequently
promulgated for these products, any
existing State standards would be
preempted by EPCA. EPCA governs and
prescribes Federal preemption of State
regulations as to energy conservation for
the product that is the subject of today’s
proposed determination. States can
petition DOE for exemption from such
preemption to the extent permitted, and
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6297) No further action is
required by E.O. 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O.
12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ 61 FR
4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on
Federal agencies the duty to: (1)
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity;
(2) write regulations to minimize
litigation; (3) provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct rather
than a general standard; and (4) promote
simplification and burden reduction.
Section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically
requires that Executive agencies make
every reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation specifies the following: (1)
The preemptive effect, if any; (2) any
effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting
simplification and burden reduction; (4)
the retroactive effect, if any; (5)
definitions of key terms; and (6) other
important issues affecting clarity and
general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988
requires Executive agencies to review
regulations in light of applicable
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to
determine whether these standards are
met, or whether it is unreasonable to
meet one or more of them. DOE
completed the required review and
determined that, to the extent permitted
by law, this proposed determination
meets the relevant standards of E.O.
12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L.
104–4, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
requires each Federal agency to assess
the effects of Federal regulatory actions
on State, local, and tribal governments
and the private sector. For regulatory
actions likely to result in a rule that may
cause expenditures by State, local, and
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector of $100 million or
more in any one year (adjusted annually
for inflation), section 202 of UMRA
requires a Federal agency to publish a
written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other
effects on the national economy. (2
U.S.C. 1532(a) and (b)) UMRA requires
a Federal agency to develop an effective
process to permit timely input by
elected officers of State, local, and tribal
governments on a proposed ‘‘significant
intergovernmental mandate.’’ UMRA
also requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input
to small governments that may be
potentially affected before establishing
any requirement that might significantly
or uniquely affect them. On March 18,
1997, DOE published a statement of
policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under
UMRA. 62 FR 12820 (March 18, 1997).
(This policy also is available at https://
www.gc.doe.gov). DOE reviewed today’s
proposed determination pursuant to
these existing authorities and its policy
statement and determined that the
proposed determination contains
neither an intergovernmental mandate
nor a mandate that may result in the
expenditure of $100 million or more in
any year, so the UMRA requirements do
not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires
Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule
that may affect family well-being. This
proposed determination would not have
any impact on the autonomy or integrity
of the family as an institution.
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it
is not necessary to prepare a Family
Policymaking Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630,
‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 15, 1988),
DOE determined that this proposed
determination would not result in any
takings that might require compensation
under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
J. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 2001
The Treasury and General
Government Appropriation Act of 2001
(44 U.S.C. 3516, note) requires agencies
to review most disseminations of
information they make to the public
under guidelines established by each
agency pursuant to general guidelines
issued by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). The OMB’s guidelines
were published at 67 FR 8452 (February
22, 2002), and DOE’s guidelines were
published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7,
2002). DOE has reviewed today’s
proposed determination under the OMB
and DOE guidelines and has concluded
that it is consistent with applicable
policies in those guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,’’ 66
FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires
Federal agencies to prepare and submit
to OMB a Statement of Energy Effects
for any proposed significant energy
action. A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is
defined as any action by an agency that
promulgates a final rule or is expected
to lead to promulgation of a final rule,
and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory
action under E.O. 12866, or any
successor order; and (2) is likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy; or
(3) is designated by the Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) as a significant energy
action. For any proposed significant
energy action, the agency must give a
detailed statement of any adverse effects
on energy supply, distribution, or use if
the proposal is implemented, and of
reasonable alternatives to the proposed
action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
DOE has concluded that today’s
regulatory action proposing to
determine that residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor meet the criteria for covered
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
products for which the Secretary may
prescribe energy conservation standards
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p)
would not have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. This action is also not a
significant regulatory action for
purposes of E.O. 12866, and the OIRA
Administrator has not designated this
proposed determination as a significant
energy action. Therefore, this proposed
determination is not a significant energy
action. Accordingly, DOE has not
prepared a Statement of Energy Effects
for this proposed determination.
L. Review Under the Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in
consultation with the Office of Science
and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued
its Final Information Quality Bulletin
for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR
2664 (January 14, 2005). The Bulletin
establishes that certain scientific
information shall be peer reviewed by
qualified specialists before it is
disseminated by the Federal
government, including influential
scientific information related to agency
regulatory actions. The purpose of the
Bulletin is to enhance the quality and
credibility of the Government’s
scientific information. DOE has
determined that the analyses conducted
for this rulemaking do not constitute
‘‘influential scientific information,’’
which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific
information the agency reasonably can
determine will have or does have a clear
and substantial impact on important
public policies or private sector
decisions.’’ 70 FR 2667 (January 14,
2005). The analyses were subject to predissemination review prior to issuance
of this rulemaking.
DOE will determine the appropriate
level of review that would be applicable
to any future rulemaking to establish
energy conservation standards for settop boxes and network equipment.
VI. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and
information regarding this notice of
proposed determination no later than
the date provided at the beginning of
this notice. After the close of the
comment period, DOE will review the
comments received and determine
whether residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor are covered products under
EPCA.
Comments, data, and information
submitted to DOE’s email address for
this proposed determination should be
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69153
provided in WordPerfect, Microsoft
Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format.
Submissions should avoid the use of
special characters or any form of
encryption, and wherever possible
comments should include the electronic
signature of the author. No
telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.
According 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 two copies: One copy of
the document should have all 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.
Factors of interest to DOE when
evaluating requests to treat submitted
information as confidential include (1)
A description of the items; (2) whether
and why such items are customarily
treated as confidential within the
industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known or available from
public sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made
available to others without obligations
concerning its confidentiality; (5) an
explanation of the competitive injury to
the submitting persons which would
result from public disclosure; (6) a date
after which such information might no
longer be considered confidential; and
(7) why disclosure of the information
would be contrary to the public interest.
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks
Comments
DOE welcomes comments on all
aspects of this proposed determination.
DOE is particularly interested in
receiving comments from interested
parties on the following issues related to
the proposed determination for
residential refrigeration products that do
not incorporate a compressor:
(1) Is the proposed scope of coverage
for residential refrigeration products
that do not incorporate a compressor
sufficient or are there aspects to this
proposed scope that require
modification?
(2) Should the scope of coverage be
extended to also include products that
are not powered or activated solely by
AC power input, for instance products
that are fired with natural gas or
propane? What are the annual
shipments of such products?
(3) DOE notes that since the statutory
definition of a refrigerator excludes
certain products—namely, those devices
that are designed to be used without
doors—DOE is interested in whether its
scope of coverage should also include
products that are designed to be used
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
69154
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Proposed Rules
without doors. DOE is also interested in
information regarding the existence and
examples of these types of products.
Assuming that these types of products
exist, what are their annual shipments?
(4) DOE is interested in whether
classifying residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor as covered products is
necessary or appropriate to carry out the
purposes of EPCA.
(5) DOE seeks stock and shipment
data for residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor, segregated by different
product types.
(6) DOE seeks information regarding
energy test procedures suited for
residential refrigeration products that do
not incorporate a compressor.
(7) DOE seeks information regarding
energy use of these products.
(8) DOE seeks information concerning
the extent to which similar coverage
may be appropriate for commercial or
industrial products that utilize similar
refrigeration technologies.
(9) DOE seeks calculations and
accompanying values for household and
national energy consumption.
(10) DOE seeks information as to the
availability or lack of availability of
technologies for improving energy
efficiency of residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor.
The Department is interested in
receiving views concerning other
relevant issues that participants believe
would affect DOE’s ability to establish
test procedures and energy conservation
standards for residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor. The Department invites all
interested parties to submit in writing
by December 8, 2011, comments and
information on matters addressed in this
notice and on other matters relevant to
consideration of a determination for
residential refrigeration products that do
not incorporate a compressor.
After the expiration of the period for
submitting written statements, the
Department will consider all comments
and additional information that is
obtained from interested parties or
through further analyses, and it will
prepare a final determination. If DOE
determines that residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a
compressor qualify as covered products,
DOE will consider initiating
rulemakings to develop test procedures
and energy conservation standards for
residential refrigeration products that do
not incorporate a compressor. Members
of the public will be given an
opportunity to submit written and oral
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Nov 07, 2011
Jkt 226001
comments on any proposed test
procedure and standards.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 1,
2011.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011–28928 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
13 CFR Parts 121, 124, 125, 126, and
127
RIN 3245–AG23
Small Business Size and Status
Integrity
U.S. Small Business
Administration (SBA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
SBA is reopening the
comment period for the proposed rule
published in the Federal Register on
October 7, 2011. In that rule SBA
proposed to amend its regulations to
implement provisions of the Small
Business Jobs Act of 2010 (Jobs Act)
pertaining to small business size and
status integrity. SBA proposed to amend
its program regulations to implement
statutory provisions establishing that
there is a presumption of loss equal to
the value of the contract or other
instrument when a concern willfully
seeks and receives an award by
misrepresentation. SBA proposed to
amend its program regulations to
implement statutory provisions that
provide that the submission of an offer
or application for an award intended for
small business concerns will be deemed
a size or status certification or
representation in certain circumstances.
SBA proposed to amend its program
regulations to implement statutory
provisions that provide that an
authorized official must sign in
connection with a size or status
certification or representation for a
contract or other instrument. SBA
proposed to amend its regulations to
implement statutory provisions that
provide that concerns that fail to update
their size or status in the Online
Representations and Certifications
Application (ORCA) database (or any
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
successor thereto) at least annually shall
no longer be identified in the database
as small or some other socioeconomic
status, until the representation is
updated. SBA proposed to amend its
regulations to clarify when size is
determined for purposes of entry into
the 8(a) Business Development and
HUBZone programs. The proposed rule
provided a 30-day comment period
closing on November 7, 2011.
SBA is reopening the comment period
for an additional 30 days in response to
the significant level of interest generated
by the proposed rule among small
businesses. Given the scope of the
proposed rule and the nature of the
issues raised by the comments received
to date, SBA believes that affected
businesses need more time to review the
proposal and prepare their comments.
The comment period for the
proposed rule published on October 7,
2011 (76 FR 62313) is extended through
December 8, 2011.
DATES:
You may submit comments,
identified by RIN: 3245–AG23, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail, for paper, disk, or CD/ROM
submissions: Dean Koppel, U.S. Small
Business Administration, Office of
Government Contracting, 409 Third
Street SW., 8th Floor, Washington, DC
20416.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Dean
Koppel, U.S. Small Business
Administration, Office of Government
Contracting, 409 Third Street SW., 8th
Floor Washington, DC 20416.
SBA will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov. If you wish
to submit confidential business
information (CBI) as defined in the User
Notice at https://www.Regulations.gov,
please submit the information to Dean
Koppel, U.S. Small Business
Administration, Office of Government
Contracting, 409 Third Street SW., 8th
Floor, Washington, DC 20416, or send
an email to Dean.Koppel@sba.gov.
Highlight the information that you
consider to be CBI and explain why you
believe SBA should hold this
information as confidential. SBA will
review the information and make the
final determination on whether it will
publish the information or not.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dean Koppel, Office of Government
Contracting, 409 Third Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20416; (202) 205–9751;
Dean.Koppel@sba.gov.
E:\FR\FM\08NOP1.SGM
08NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 8, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69147-69154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28928]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[Docket No. EERE-2011-BT-DET-0072]
RIN 1904-AC66
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Proposed
Determination To Treat Non-Compressor Residential Refrigeration
Products as Covered Products
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Proposed determination.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has preliminarily
determined that residential refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor qualify as covered products under Part B of
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended.
DOE reached this preliminary conclusion because classifying products of
such type as covered products is necessary or appropriate to carry out
the purposes of EPCA, and the average U.S. household energy use for
such products, (e.g., thermoelectric wine chillers) is likely to exceed
the 100 kilowatt-hour (kWh) per year threshold required for coverage.
[[Page 69148]]
DATES: DOE will accept written comments, data, and information on this
notice, but no later than December 8, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket
number EERE-2011-BT-DET-0072, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. Include EERE-2011-BT-
DET-0072 and/or RIN 1904-AC66 in the subject line of the message.
Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, Proposed Determination
for Residential Refrigeration Products that do not Incorporate a
Compressor, EERE-2011-BT-DET-0072 and/or RIN 1904-AC66, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Phone: (202) 586-
2945. Please submit one signed paper original.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202) 586-2945. Please submit
one signed paper original.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or RIN for this rulemaking.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to the U.S. Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950
L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please
call Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 for additional information
regarding visiting the Resource Room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Lucas Adin, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington,
DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1317. Email: Lucas.Adin@ee.doe.gov.
In the Office of General Counsel, contact Mr. Michael Kido, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-71, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
586-8145. Email: Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov; or Ms. Jennifer Tiedeman,
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-71, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
287-6111. Email: Jennifer.Tiedeman@hq.doe.gov.
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Current Rulemaking Process
III. Scope of Coverage
IV. Evaluation of the Annual Energy Use of Thermoelectric and
Absorption Refrigeration Products
A. Coverage Necessary or Appropriate To Carry Out Purposes of
EPCA
B. Average Household Energy Use
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act of 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act of 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
VI. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comments
I. Statutory Authority
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as
amended (42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.), sets forth various provisions
designed to improve energy efficiency. Part B of Title III of EPCA (42
U.S.C. 6291-6309) established the ``Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles,'' which covers consumer
products and certain commercial products (hereafter referred to as
``covered products'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Upon codification in the U.S. Code, Part B was re-designated
Part A for editorial reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA specifies a list of covered consumer products that includes
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers (referred to
collectively as ``residential refrigeration products'') that can be
operated by alternating current (AC) electricity, are not designed to
be used without doors, and include a compressor and condenser as an
integral part of the cabinet assembly. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(1)) This
proposed coverage determination addresses those residential
refrigeration products that do not meet these specific criteria.
In addition to specifying a list of covered residential and
commercial products, EPCA permits the Secretary of Energy to classify
additional types of consumer products as covered products when certain
prerequisites have been met. For a given product to be classified as a
covered product, the Secretary must determine that (1) Covering that
product is either necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of
EPCA and (2) the average annual per-household energy use by products of
such type is likely to exceed 100 kWh per year. (42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)).
After first determining whether the above criteria are met, the
Secretary may prescribe energy conservation standards for a covered
product. See 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p). In order to set standards for a
given product that has been added as a newly covered product pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1), the Secretary must determine that four
additional criteria are met. First, the average per household energy
use within the United States by the products of such type (or class)
exceeded 150 kilowatt-hours (or its BTU equivalent) for any 12-month
period ending before such determination. Second, the aggregate
household energy use within the United States by products of such type
(or class) exceeded 4,200,000,000 kilowatt-hours (or its BTU
equivalent) for any such 12-month period. Third, a substantial
improvement in the energy efficiency of products of such type (or
class) is technologically feasible. And fourth, the application of a
labeling rule under 42 U.S.C. 6294 to such type (or class) is not
likely 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)).
In addition to the above, if DOE issues a final determination that
non-compressor residential refrigeration products are covered products,
DOE will consider test procedures for these products and will determine
if they satisfy the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1) during the
course of any energy conservation standards rulemaking.
II. Current Rulemaking Process
DOE has not previously conducted an energy conservation standard
rulemaking for non-compressor equipped residential refrigeration
products. If, after public comment, DOE issues a final determination of
coverage for this product, DOE will consider both test procedures and
energy conservation standards for these products.
Additionally, assuming that DOE determines that the criteria for
extending coverage to non-compressor
[[Page 69149]]
residential refrigeration products are met and that accompanying energy
conservation standards are warranted, DOE will, consistent with EPCA,
propose a test procedure for these products. In developing an
appropriate procedure, DOE will take steps to help ensure that the
procedure is not unduly burdensome to conduct for measuring the energy
efficiency, energy use or estimated annual operating cost of these
products during a representative average use cycle or period of use.
(42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In carrying out this process, DOE initially
prepares a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) and allows interested
parties to present oral and written data, views, and arguments with
respect to such procedures. DOE also considers relevant information,
including technological developments relating to energy use or energy
efficiency of the covered products.
With respect to energy conservation standards, DOE typically
prepares an Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Framework Document
(the framework document). The framework document explains the issues,
analyses, and process that it is considering for the development of
energy conservation standards for the product(s) to be addressed by the
standard. After DOE receives comments on the framework document, DOE
typically prepares an Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking
preliminary analysis, and an accompanying technical support document
(TSD) that provides the details of DOE's analysis. The preliminary
analysis typically provides initial draft analyses of potential impacts
of energy conservation standards on consumers, manufacturers, and the
nation. Neither of these steps is legally required and DOE may,
depending on the circumstances of a particular case, combine these
steps when preparing a new standards rulemaking.
DOE also typically publishes a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR)
as part of the energy conservation standards rulemaking. The NOPR
provides DOE's proposal for potential energy conservation standards and
a summary of the results of DOE's supporting technical analysis. The
details of DOE's energy conservation standards analysis are provided in
an accompanying TSD. DOE's analysis describes both the burdens and
benefits of potential standards, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o). Because
non-compressor residential refrigeration products would be newly
covered under 42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1), DOE would also consider, as noted
above, whether these products satisfy certain specified criteria before
prescribing standards for them. See 42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1). After the
publication of the NOPR, DOE affords interested persons an opportunity
during a period of not less than 60 days to provide oral and written
comment. After receiving and considering the comments on the NOPR, and
not less than 90 days after the publication of the NOPR, DOE would
issue the final rule prescribing any new energy conservation standards
for residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a
compressor.
III. Scope of Coverage
DOE proposes in this determination to extend coverage to
refrigeration products that are not currently covered under existing
authority for residential refrigeration products (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(1))
because they use alternative refrigeration technologies that do not
include a compressor and condenser unit as an integral part of the
cabinet assembly. Hence, DOE is proposing to extend coverage to those
residential refrigeration products that operate using AC electricity
but use either thermoelectric-based or absorption-based systems. In
addition, while some non-compressor refrigeration products operate
using energy sources other than AC electricity, it is DOE's
understanding that most, if not all, of these products would likely
fall outside the scope of coverage as consumer products under EPCA
because they are primarily used in mobile applications such as
recreational vehicles. See 42 U.S.C. 6292(a) (excluding from coverage
``those consumer products designed solely for use in recreational
vehicles and other mobile equipment'').
DOE seeks feedback from interested parties on this scope of
coverage.
IV. Evaluation of the Annual Energy Use of Thermoelectric and
Absorption Refrigeration Products
The following sections describe DOE's evaluation of whether
residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a compressor
fulfill the EPCA criteria for being added as covered products. As
stated previously, DOE may classify a consumer product as a covered
product if (1) Classifying products of such type as covered products is
necessary and appropriate to carry 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 (or its Btu equivalent) per year.
42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1).
A. Coverage Necessary or Appropriate To Carry Out Purposes of EPCA
To satisfy the purposes of EPCA, the coverage of non-compressor
residential refrigeration products is both necessary and appropriate to
carry out the purposes of EPCA. These products consume energy generated
from limited energy supplies and their regulation would be likely to
result in the improvement of their energy efficiency. Accordingly,
establishing standards for these products fall squarely within the
overall statutory goals set out in EPCA to: (1) Conserve energy
supplies through energy conservation programs; and (2) provide for
improved energy efficiency of major appliances and certain other
consumer products. (42 U.S.C. 6201)
In a related matter, DOE recently set energy conservation standards
and accompanying test procedures for residential refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers (collectively, refrigeration
products). See 76 FR 57516 (Sept. 15, 2011) (amending energy
conservation standards for residential refrigeration products) and 75
FR 78810 (Dec. 16, 2010) (amending current test procedures and issuing
an interim final rule to create revised test procedures for products
manufactured starting in 2014). During DOE's efforts to amend the
standards for these products, interested parties urged DOE to include
wine chillers as part of this effort. See 75 FR 59470, 59486 (Sept. 27,
2010) (residential refrigeration products NOPR, noting industry's
urging that DOE consider wine storage products within the scope of the
standards rulemaking). Wine chillers are devices used to store bottles
of wine at temperatures that are higher than those used to store fresh
food. Wine chillers, which typically use either a conventional
compressor-condenser or a thermoelectric-based system, have a
temperature range of between 45 [deg]F and 55 [deg]F, compared to 39
[deg]F for the safe storage of fresh food used in refrigerators and
refrigerator-freezers. Given the different purposes served by these
products and their accompanying performance characteristic differences,
DOE decided to generally address these wine chiller products in a
separate rulemaking. 76 FR at 57534.
Consistent with this approach, DOE is currently considering
initiating an energy conservation standard rulemaking addressing wine
chillers. As a prerequisite to the setting of standards for these
products, DOE is interested in ensuring that both compressor-based and
non-compressor-based products would be covered as part of this approach
in order to prevent a mass
[[Page 69150]]
shift in the market from compressor-based to alternative refrigeration
technologies such as thermoelectric- and absorption-based systems that
currently fall outside of EPCA's scope of coverage for refrigeration
products. As explained below, DOE has reason to believe that products
that use these alternative technologies are less efficient than
products using conventional compressor-based refrigeration systems. As
a result, a shift by manufacturers to use these alternative
technologies could have an adverse impact on overall energy efficiency.
To address this potential problem, and to provide a more comprehensive
approach to the treatment of wine chillers generally, DOE seeks to
establish coverage over products that employ these alternative
technologies pursuant to the Agency's authority under 42 U.S.C.
6292(b).
Available information collected by DOE suggests that products using
thermoelectric technology will be much less efficient than their
compressor-equipped counterparts.\2\ DOE is also aware that residential
refrigeration products using thermoelectric technology have become
commercially available--particularly, wine chillers. Similarly, a
limited number of products using absorption technology, which is also
less energy efficient than compressor-based refrigeration technology,
are also commercially available. Hence, DOE believes that coverage and
energy standards for these products are necessary in order to ensure
that the existing standards for compressor-based refrigeration products
and potential future standards for compressor-based wine chillers are
not undermined by a switch to less-efficient technologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See, for example, the residential refrigeration product
energy conservation standard rulemaking TSD, Chapter 4, Screening
Analysis, https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/refrig_nopr_tsd_2010-09-23.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Average Household Energy Use
DOE estimated the average household energy use for two of the
primary types of residential refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor--thermoelectric wine chillers and absorption
refrigeration products.
Thermoelectric wine chillers incorporate cooling modules that
utilize the Peltier effect.\3\ DOE obtained limited data to estimate
their average household energy use and deduced the magnitude of
thermoelectric wine chiller energy use from a combination of (1)
Thermoelectric wine chiller market data, (2) energy use data for vapor
compression (i.e., conventional compressor/condenser-based) wine
chillers, and (3) thermoelectric module efficiency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Peltier effect refers to the creation of a temperature
differential across a device comprised of two dissimilar electrical
conductors by passing an electric current through the junction
between them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To estimate the size of the thermoelectric wine chiller market, DOE
purchased data on wine chiller sales in the U.S. from 2007 to 2010 from
the NPD Group, Inc. (NPD), a marketing research firm.\4\ NPD reports
that these data represent 30- to 45-percent of the total wine chiller
market, yielding a total estimate of between 580,000 to 880,000 unit
sales in the U.S. for the year 2009. Unfortunately, the NPD data do not
differentiate between vapor compression and thermoelectric products.
Therefore, DOE researched manufacturer product offerings to approximate
the thermoelectric share of the wine chiller market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ NPD Group, Inc., available at https://www.npd.com/corpServlet?nextpage=corp_welcome.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, DOE researched two of the three largest wine chiller
brands based on sales figures in the NPD database, Haier \5\ and
Vinotemp,\6\ and determined that 69-percent and 82-percent,
respectively, of their wine chiller product offerings for capacities of
fewer than 30 bottles are thermoelectric. Because the NPD data also
indicate that 80 percent of the wine chiller market is comprised of
products with capacities of fewer than 30 bottles, DOE surmised that
thermoelectric wine chillers represent a large fraction of the wine
chiller market, specifically within the portion of the market comprised
of products with capacities of fewer than 30 bottles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Haier America Trading. (https://www.haieramerica.com/wine-beer-beverage).
\6\ Vinotemp International. (https://www.vinotemp.com/Browse.aspx/387/Wine-Coolers?gclid=CPSvs57hlaoCFQo0QgodCEEOxQ).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To estimate vapor compression wine chiller energy use, DOE relied
on the annual energy use of vapor compression wine chiller products
permitted under California's maximum energy use standards \7\ as well
as the NPD sales data cited above. The California Energy Commission
(CEC) currently specifies a maximum allowable energy use for wine
chillers as a function of internal volume. From the purchased NPD sales
data, which cover the years 2007 to 2010, DOE deduced an internal
volume for each model listed in the database. Using this information,
DOE developed a range of vapor compression annual energy use values for
the range of internal volumes of models in the NPD database, assuming
that the energy use of these products is the maximum allowed by the CEC
standard. This derived annual energy use ranges from 305 to 392 kWh for
wine chillers with capacities of fewer than 30 bottles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ California Energy Commission, 2010 Appliance Efficiency
Regulations, December 2010. CEC-400-2010-012. https://www.energy.ca.gov/2010publications/CEC-400-2010-012/CEC-400-2010-012.PDF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, during the recent standards rulemaking for
residential refrigeration products, DOE tested a thermoelectric
refrigerator. The results from those tests showed that this particular
product's efficiency was an order of magnitude lower than that of a
conventional comparable vapor compression product.\8\ These results
suggest that the energy use of thermoelectric refrigeration products
could be much higher than that of vapor compression products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ U.S. Department of Energy. Final Rule Technical Support
Document. 2011. p. 4-12. Available at https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/refrig_finalrule_tsd.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, because these observations are based on limited testing of
a single thermoelectric product purchased in 2008, DOE recently
performed metering of four thermoelectric wine chillers with capacities
of six, 12, 15, and 28 bottles during the period from May 27, 2011 to
June 28, 2011. While the metering was conducted in a non-controlled
ambient environment with room temperatures varying between
64[emsp14][deg]F and 85[emsp14][deg]F, DOE believed that the additional
measurements would improve DOE's understanding of typical
thermoelectric wine chiller energy use, since a greater number of data
points would be likely to improve the confidence of the measured
values, because the initial product was not a wine chiller, and because
thermoelectric refrigeration technology may have evolved in the past
three years. The measured energy use for the four units over the
approximately one-month time period varied between 18 to 50 kWh, with
the high value associated with the 28 bottle capacity wine chiller.
Assuming wine chillers are powered year-round, i.e., consumers do not
unplug the units for extended periods of time, the monthly consumption
translates into annual energy use values of 218 to 598 kWh, which
closely match the values derived for vapor compression units from the
NPD and CEC data.
The limited metered data clearly indicate that thermoelectric wine
chiller annual energy use exceeds the 100 kWh per year threshold set by
EPCA for establishing coverage. DOE notes that the range of
thermoelectric wine chiller energy use based on the metering is
[[Page 69151]]
approximately the same as the derived range for vapor compression wine
chillers. Although the implication is that thermoelectric units may
have a level of energy consumption comparable to their vapor
compression counterparts, DOE emphasizes that the test data are not
conclusive and a prescribed test procedure to comprehensively measure
their energy use is currently unavailable. As an example of the
limitations of the recorded data, the metered tests likely indicate the
low end of possible energy use because they did not capture the energy
impacts from door openings, nor did they include steps to verify that
compartment temperatures were maintained at 55[emsp14][deg]F per CEC
test procedure requirements. Had these steps been included as part of
the measurements, the measured energy consumption of the thermoelectric
products examined by DOE would have likely been significantly higher.
Consequently, DOE believes that the limited metering data should not be
the sole basis for estimating energy use for products of this type.
In contrast with thermoelectric refrigeration products, absorption
refrigeration products use a fluid-based refrigeration cycle that
relies upon heat addition, which is typically provided by electric
resistance heaters or fuels such as natural gas and propane. Such
systems ``compress'' \9\ the refrigerant, which is typically ammonia,
using a sorbent fluid, which is typically water.\10\ The refrigerant is
absorbed by the fluid, creating a liquid solution containing the
refrigerant. This solution is transferred from the ``low-pressure'' to
the ``high-pressure'' sides of the system as a liquid, and the
refrigerant is subsequently boiled out of the solution by heating it.
Most absorption systems used for small refrigeration products employ an
inert gas on the low-pressure side of the system, usually hydrogen or
helium for ammonia-water systems, which allows the partial pressure of
the refrigerant gas to remain low while boosting the total gas
pressure. This significantly reduces the total pressure difference
between the ``high pressure'' and ``low pressure'' sides. The system
eliminates the expansion valve and replaces the pumping action of a
mechanical compressor with the thermal siphon driven by the heat input,
similar to the arrangement used in coffee makers to lift the boiling
water to the top of the coffee maker. By generating By moving the
refrigerant from the evaporator back to the condenser using the
sorbent, an absorption system generates refrigeration using heat input.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ ``Compress'' in this context has a different meaning that in
conventional compressor-based refrigeration products because, for
the absorption systems in most of these products, the refrigerant is
moved from a region of low partial pressure to a region of high
partial pressure rather than actually being compressed.
\10\ A sorbent fluid is one that absorbs gas of another
substance (in this case the refrigerant) in an exothermic process
similar to condensation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric-powered absorption units are commonly used by the hotel
industry since they are much quieter than products with a compressor.
These products would be part of the coverage determination proposed in
this notice. Natural gas- or propane-fired absorption units are used
primarily in mobile applications, remote areas, and mobile residences
that do not have reliable access to electricity--these products would
not be part of the coverage determination as proposed. Electric-powered
absorption products tend to have a fairly significant level of energy
use. As an example, the energy use of the Dometic CS 52 DV, a
representative absorption refrigeration wine chiller product, is
reported by the manufacturer to use 1.25 kWh per day in a 68 [deg]F
ambient environment,\11\ which translates into an annual energy use of
456 kWh, assuming these products are powered year-round. Very small (<
1.5 cubic foot) absorption-cooled refrigerators provided by hotels for
their guests use approximately 310 kWh/yr as reported by the
manufacturer, or up to 530 kWh/yr in limited field
testing.12 13 DOE seeks comment on the market share and
penetration of all absorption refrigeration products. DOE also seeks
comment on whether coverage should also be considered for fuel-fired
units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Dometic Corporation. (https://www.dometic.com/enus/Americas/USA/Hotel-Equipment/Wine-Cellars/products/?productdataid=68705).
\12\ The Bartender AMB-302 1.1 cu. ft. refrigerator is reported
to consume 840 Wh per day, or 307 kWh/yr (https://www.atlanticminifridge.com/Brochures/AMF_Minibar_Brochure.pdf).
\13\ DOE also undertook field monitoring of absorption-cooled
hotel ``mini'' refrigerators (the Dometic RH 341 LD with 1.4 cu. ft.
capacity, and the Bartender AMB-302 with 1.1 cu. ft. capacity) in
two hotels in the San Francisco Bay Area in March-April 2010. A
total of 48 refrigerators were metered over a period of
approximately two weeks, resulting in annualized energy use
measurements from 307 to 528 kWh/yr.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon these evaluations of the two primary types of
residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a compressor
(i.e. thermoelectric-based wine chillers and absorption-based
refrigeration products), DOE has been able to develop estimates of
their annual energy use that indicate that these products consume
significantly more than 100 kWh annually. Therefore, DOE has
tentatively determined that the average annual per household energy use
for residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a
compressor is likely to exceed the 100 kWh threshold set by EPCA.
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that coverage
determination rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). Accordingly, this
proposed action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB).
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996)
requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for
any rule that, by law, must be proposed for public comment, unless the
agency certifies that the proposed rule, if promulgated, will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis examines the impact of the
rule on small entities and considers alternative ways of reducing
negative effects. Also, as required by E.O. 13272, ``Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking'' 67 FR 53461
(August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on February
19, 2003 to ensure that the potential impact of its rules on small
entities are properly considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68
FR 7990 (February 19, 2003). DOE makes its procedures and policies
available on the Office of the General Counsel's Web site at https://www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE reviewed today's proposed determination under the provisions of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the policies and procedures
published on February 19, 2003. If adopted, today's proposed
determination would set no standards; they would only positively
determine that future standards may be warranted and should be explored
in an energy conservation standards and test procedure rulemaking.
Economic impacts on small entities would be considered in the context
of such rulemakings. On the basis of the
[[Page 69152]]
foregoing, DOE certifies that the proposed determination, if adopted,
would have no significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a regulatory
flexibility analysis for this proposed determination. DOE will transmit
this certification and supporting statement of factual basis to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for
review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed determination that residential refrigeration products
that do not incorporate a compressor meet the criteria for covered
products for which the Secretary may prescribe energy conservation
standards pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) will impose no new
information or record-keeping requirements. Accordingly, the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) clearance is not required under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
In this notice, DOE proposes to positively determine that future
standards may be warranted and that environmental impacts should be
explored in an energy conservation standards rulemaking. DOE has
determined that review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), Public Law 91-190, codified at 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. is
not required at this time. NEPA review can only be initiated ``as soon
as environmental impacts can be meaningfully evaluated'' (10 CFR
1021.213(b)). This proposed determination would only determine that
future standards may be warranted, but would not itself propose to set
any specific standard. DOE has, therefore, determined that there are no
environmental impacts to be evaluated at this time. Accordingly,
neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact
statement is required.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, ``Federalism'' 64 FR 43255 (August
10, 1999), imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and
implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that
have Federalism implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to
examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any
action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and
to assess carefully the necessity for such actions. The Executive Order
also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in developing
regulatory policies that have Federalism implications. On March 14,
2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the
intergovernmental consultation process that it will follow in
developing such regulations. 65 FR 13735 (March 14, 2000). DOE has
examined today's proposed determination and concludes that it would not
preempt State law or have substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. DOE notes, however, that if the agency determines that
the products at issue in today's notice are covered and energy
conservation standards are subsequently promulgated for these products,
any existing State standards would be preempted by EPCA. EPCA governs
and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy
conservation for the product that is the subject of today's proposed
determination. States can petition DOE for exemption from such
preemption to the extent permitted, and based on criteria, set forth in
EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297) No further action is required by E.O. 13132.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on Federal
agencies the duty to: (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2)
write regulations to minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard; and (4)
promote simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of E.O. 12988
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation specifies the following: (1) The
preemptive effect, if any; (2) any effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for affected conduct while
promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) the retroactive
effect, if any; (5) definitions of key terms; and (6) other important
issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines
issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires
Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether these
standards are met, or whether it is unreasonable to meet one or more of
them. DOE completed the required review and determined that, to the
extent permitted by law, this proposed determination meets the relevant
standards of E.O. 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub.
L. 104-4, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires each Federal
agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and tribal governments and the private sector. For regulatory
actions likely to result in a rule that may cause expenditures by
State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector of $100 million or more in any one year (adjusted
annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency
to publish a written statement that estimates the resulting costs,
benefits, and other effects on the national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a)
and (b)) UMRA requires a Federal agency to develop an effective process
to permit timely input by elected officers of State, local, and tribal
governments on a proposed ``significant intergovernmental mandate.''
UMRA also requires an agency plan for giving notice and opportunity for
timely input to small governments that may be potentially affected
before establishing any requirement that might significantly or
uniquely affect them. On March 18, 1997, DOE published a statement of
policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62
FR 12820 (March 18, 1997). (This policy also is available at https://www.gc.doe.gov). DOE reviewed today's proposed determination pursuant
to these existing authorities and its policy statement and determined
that the proposed determination contains neither an intergovernmental
mandate nor a mandate that may result in the expenditure of $100
million or more in any year, so the UMRA requirements do not apply.
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act
of 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a
Family Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family
well-being. This proposed determination would not have any impact on
the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution.
[[Page 69153]]
Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a
Family Policymaking Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 15,
1988), DOE determined that this proposed determination would not result
in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act
of 2001
The Treasury and General Government Appropriation Act of 2001 (44
U.S.C. 3516, note) requires agencies to review most disseminations of
information they make to the public under guidelines established by
each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). The OMB's guidelines were published at 67
FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67
FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed today's proposed
determination under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has concluded that
it is consistent with applicable policies in those guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB a
Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy action.
A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency
that promulgates a final rule or is expected to lead to promulgation of
a final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under
E.O. 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) as a significant energy
action. For any proposed significant energy action, the agency must
give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply,
distribution, or use if the proposal is implemented, and of reasonable
alternatives to the proposed action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
DOE has concluded that today's regulatory action proposing to
determine that residential refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor meet the criteria for covered products for
which the Secretary may prescribe energy conservation standards
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) would not have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. This
action is also not a significant regulatory action for purposes of E.O.
12866, and the OIRA Administrator has not designated this proposed
determination as a significant energy action. Therefore, this proposed
determination is not a significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has
not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects for this proposed
determination.
L. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in consultation with the Office of
Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued its Final Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR 2664 (January
14, 2005). The Bulletin establishes that certain scientific information
shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is
disseminated by the Federal government, including influential
scientific information related to agency regulatory actions. The
purpose of the Bulletin is to enhance the quality and credibility of
the Government's scientific information. DOE has determined that the
analyses conducted for this rulemaking do not constitute ``influential
scientific information,'' which the Bulletin defines as ``scientific
information the agency reasonably can determine will have or does have
a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or private
sector decisions.'' 70 FR 2667 (January 14, 2005). The analyses were
subject to pre-dissemination review prior to issuance of this
rulemaking.
DOE will determine the appropriate level of review that would be
applicable to any future rulemaking to establish energy conservation
standards for set-top boxes and network equipment.
VI. Public Participation
A. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
notice of proposed determination no later than the date provided at the
beginning of this notice. After the close of the comment period, DOE
will review the comments received and determine whether residential
refrigeration products that do not incorporate a compressor are covered
products under EPCA.
Comments, data, and information submitted to DOE's email address
for this proposed determination should be provided in WordPerfect,
Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format. Submissions should
avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption, and
wherever possible comments should include the electronic signature of
the author. No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.
According 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 two copies: One copy of the document should
have all 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.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include (1) A description of the
items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known or available from public sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligations concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting persons which would result from
public disclosure; (6) a date after which such information might no
longer be considered confidential; and (7) why disclosure of the
information would be contrary to the public interest.
B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comments
DOE welcomes comments on all aspects of this proposed
determination. DOE is particularly interested in receiving comments
from interested parties on the following issues related to the proposed
determination for residential refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor:
(1) Is the proposed scope of coverage for residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a compressor sufficient or are there
aspects to this proposed scope that require modification?
(2) Should the scope of coverage be extended to also include
products that are not powered or activated solely by AC power input,
for instance products that are fired with natural gas or propane? What
are the annual shipments of such products?
(3) DOE notes that since the statutory definition of a refrigerator
excludes certain products--namely, those devices that are designed to
be used without doors--DOE is interested in whether its scope of
coverage should also include products that are designed to be used
[[Page 69154]]
without doors. DOE is also interested in information regarding the
existence and examples of these types of products. Assuming that these
types of products exist, what are their annual shipments?
(4) DOE is interested in whether classifying residential
refrigeration products that do not incorporate a compressor as covered
products is necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of EPCA.
(5) DOE seeks stock and shipment data for residential refrigeration
products that do not incorporate a compressor, segregated by different
product types.
(6) DOE seeks information regarding energy test procedures suited
for residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a
compressor.
(7) DOE seeks information regarding energy use of these products.
(8) DOE seeks information concerning the extent to which similar
coverage may be appropriate for commercial or industrial products that
utilize similar refrigeration technologies.
(9) DOE seeks calculations and accompanying values for household
and national energy consumption.
(10) DOE seeks information as to the availability or lack of
availability of technologies for improving energy efficiency of
residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a
compressor.
The Department is interested in receiving views concerning other
relevant issues that participants believe would affect DOE's ability to
establish test procedures and energy conservation standards for
residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a
compressor. The Department invites all interested parties to submit in
writing by December 8, 2011, comments and information on matters
addressed in this notice and on other matters relevant to consideration
of a determination for residential refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor.
After the expiration of the period for submitting written
statements, the Department will consider all comments and additional
information that is obtained from interested parties or through further
analyses, and it will prepare a final determination. If DOE determines
that residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a
compressor qualify as covered products, DOE will consider initiating
rulemakings to develop test procedures and energy conservation
standards for residential refrigeration products that do not
incorporate a compressor. Members of the public will be given an
opportunity to submit written and oral comments on any proposed test
procedure and standards.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 1, 2011.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-28928 Filed 11-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P