Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Proposed Determination of Miscellaneous Residential Refrigeration Products as Covered Products, 65223-65231 [2013-25943]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65223-65231]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-25943]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2013 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 65223]]



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EERE-2011-BT-DET-0072]
RIN 1904-AC51


Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Proposed 
Determination of Miscellaneous Residential Refrigeration Products as 
Covered Products

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

ACTION: Supplemental proposed determination.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has preliminarily 
determined that wine chillers and other residential refrigeration 
products that incorporate a compressor but do not meet the current 
regulatory definitions for electric refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, 
and freezer, qualify for coverage under the Energy Policy and 
Conservation Act (EPCA) as amended. This proposal also covers 
residential ice makers. Today's notice supplements an earlier proposed 
determination in which DOE tentatively concluded that residential 
refrigeration products that do not incorporate a compressor should be 
covered by energy conservation standards. As part of its review of 
residential refrigeration products generally, DOE is soliciting public 
comment on the feasibility of covering compressor-based miscellaneous 
residential refrigeration products based on the same criteria that had 
been evaluated earlier for non-compressor based residential 
refrigeration products.

DATES: DOE will accept written comments, data, and information on this 
notice, but no later than December 2, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The docket is available for review at regulations.gov, 
including Federal Register notices, framework documents, public meeting 
attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting 
documents/materials. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
regulations.gov index. Not all documents listed in the index may be 
publicly available, such as information that is exempt from public 
disclosure. The docket Web page can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2011-BT-DET-0072.
    For further information on how to submit or review public comments 
or view hard copies of the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 
586-2945 or email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

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.

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
    1. Vapor Compression Wine Chillers
    2. Thermoelectric Refrigeration Products
    3. Absorption Refrigeration Products
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 (i.e. ``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. Although EPCA did 
not define any of these products, it specified that the extent of DOE's 
coverage would apply to those refrigerator, refrigerator-freezers, and 
freezers 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)) EPCA did not preclude or otherwise foreclose the 
possibility that other consumer refrigeration products, such as those 
residential refrigeration products addressed in today's notice, could 
also be covered if they satisfy certain prerequisites.
    Those prerequisites, when met, permit the Secretary of Energy to 
classify additional types of consumer products as covered products. 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)).
    With respect to the terms ``electric refrigerator'' and ``electric 
refrigerator-freezer,'' DOE had defined these items in terms of their 
ability to safely store fresh food. In so doing, the agency has amended 
the definitions of ``electric refrigerator'' and ``electric 
refrigerator-freezer'' in 10 CFR 430.2 to separate them from other 
miscellaneous residential refrigeration products such as wine chillers. 
DOE established this

[[Page 65224]]

separation using temperature as the means of distinguishing between 
these groups of products, with 39 [deg]F being the dividing line 
between these groups. This temperature denotes the recommended maximum 
temperature for the safe storage of food. It also distinguishes these 
products from ``all-refrigerators,'' which are a small and special 
subset of refrigerators.\2\ Under the current regulatory approach, 
those products that can achieve this temperature and that otherwise 
meet the EPCA criteria for coverage as refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, or freezers (i.e., designed to be used with doors and include 
a compressor and condenser as an integral part of the cabinet assembly) 
would be treated and regulated as electric refrigerators and electric 
refrigerator-freezers, while those that cannot meet the temperature 
requirements would fall outside of the scope of these definitions. See, 
e.g. 66 FR 57845 (Nov. 19, 2001) and 75 FR 78810 (Dec. 16, 2010). As a 
result, DOE generally views products such as wine chillers as a type of 
product not addressed by the original EPCA coverage of refrigerators 
and refrigerator-freezers. Today's proposed coverage determination 
addresses those miscellaneous residential refrigeration products that 
fall outside of this already-established regulatory scope.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ All-refrigerators, under DOE's definition, do not have a 
compartment for the freezing and long-term storage of food at 
temperatures below 32 [deg]F but may contain a compartment of 0.50 
cubic feet capacity or less for the freezing and storage of ice. 
These products use a standardized compartment temperature of 38 
[deg]F in the current Appendix A1 test procedure, and 39 [deg]F in 
the Appendix A test procedure that will be required beginning 
September 15, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When attempting to cover additional product types, DOE must first 
determine whether the criteria described above in 42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1) 
are met. Once those criteria have been satisfied, the Secretary may 
begin to 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 (kWh) (or its British thermal unit (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 
miscellaneous residential refrigeration products are covered products, 
DOE will consider test procedures for these products and will determine 
if these products satisfy the required criteria of 42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1) 
prior to setting any energy conservation standards for them.

II. Current Rulemaking Process

    On November 8, 2011, DOE published a proposed coverage 
determination for non-compression equipped residential refrigeration 
products in anticipation of a rulemaking to address these products and 
related residential refrigeration products. 76 FR 69147. On February 
23, 2012, DOE began a scoping process to set potential energy 
conservation standards and test procedures for wine chillers, non-
compressor equipped residential refrigeration products, and residential 
icemakers, by publishing a notice of public meeting, and providing a 
framework document that addressed potential standards and test 
procedure rulemakings. 77 FR 7547. Since that time, DOE has determined 
that coverage for these products should treat vapor compression wine 
chillers, non-vapor compression refrigeration products, hybrid 
refrigeration products, and residential ice makers as a combined 
product type distinct from the types of refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, and freezers currently covered by EPCA. DOE reached this 
determination after evaluating the various information it had been able 
to collect and the comments submitted by interested parties in response 
to the earlier notices. If, after further public comment submitted in 
response to today's notice, DOE determines that coverage of these 
products is warranted, DOE will consider setting both test procedures 
and energy conservation standards for these products, which would 
proceed in the same manner described in the proposed determination 
published on November 8, 2011. See 76 FR at 69149.

III. Scope of Coverage

    DOE is proposing to adopt a determination that would extend 
coverage to all residential refrigeration products that are not 
currently addressed by those provisions regulating the energy 
efficiency of residential refrigeration products (42 U.S.C. 
6292(a)(1)). DOE is considering this course of action to examine the 
feasibility of ensuring that these products achieve a minimum level of 
efficiency, while meeting the prescribed statutory prerequisites. As a 
result, those products that (1) are not capable of reaching the 
requisite temperature for safe food storage (i.e. 39 [deg]F), (2) do 
not include a condenser and compressor as an integral part of the 
product's cabinet assembly, or (3) are designed solely for the 
production and storage of ice, would, if adopted by DOE, be treated as 
covered products.
    DOE seeks feedback from interested parties on this proposed scope 
of coverage.

IV. Evaluation of the Annual Energy Use of Thermoelectric and 
Absorption Refrigeration Products

    The following sections describe DOE's tentative evaluation of 
whether miscellaneous residential refrigeration products 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

    In DOE's tentative view, the coverage of miscellaneous 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)
    As discussed in the November 2011 proposed determination, DOE is 
currently considering initiating an

[[Page 65225]]

energy conservation standard rulemaking addressing wine chillers. As a 
prerequisite to the setting of standards for these products, DOE seeks 
to establish that wine chillers are a distinct type of covered product 
under EPCA. DOE is also 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 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. Thus, 
DOE proposed in the previous notice to extend coverage to non-
compressor based refrigeration products. To ensure that DOE is able to 
consider energy conservation standards for the other products that 
currently fall outside the regulatory coverage established by EPCA, the 
proposal in this notice addresses all other products that are not 
presently covered in addition to those products already addressed by 
the November 2011 notice, including wine chiller products that 
incorporate a compressor, and residential ice makers.
    DOE also notes that, with respect to the potential for labeling 
requirements to serve as an adequate inducement for manufacturers to 
produce--and consumers to purchase--energy efficient residential 
refrigeration products, DOE does not currently have sufficient 
information to determine whether such an approach would be likely to 
satisfy this condition. See 42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1)(D). While DOE plans to 
investigate this issue with respect to any proposed rule that it may 
issue, the agency seeks information on this matter to help it ascertain 
the effectiveness of such an approach with respect to the residential 
refrigeration products addressed by today's notice.

B. Average Household Energy Use

    DOE estimated that the average household energy use for vapor 
compression wine chillers, the primary types of residential 
refrigeration products that do not incorporate a compressor 
(thermoelectric and absorption wine chillers and refrigerators), 
residential ice makers, and hybrid refrigeration products (consisting 
of both a wine chiller and a refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer or 
freezer). DOE found no evidence that non-vapor compression freezers are 
used in U.S. households, so energy use estimates for these products are 
not provided.
1. Vapor Compression Wine Chillers
    DOE conducted testing on eight vapor compression wine chillers with 
rated capacities of 17, 48, 50, 57, 132, and 147 bottles. These 
products were tested using the test procedures prescribed by the 
California Energy Commission (CEC) (2012 Appliance Efficiency 
Regulations, CEC-400-2012-019-CMF, Table A-1, p. 70). The measured 
energy consumption of these products ranged from 161 kWh to 480 kWh.
    DOE compared the energy consumption of two vapor compression wine 
chillers measured in the field with the maximum allowable energy use 
for products of their size, as required under the California Energy 
Commission (CEC) standard for automatic defrost wine chillers, and 
found that the field energy use was lower by approximately one-half. 
DOE also conducted closed-door testing of eight vapor compression wine 
chillers in typical room-temperature conditions of 72 [deg]F and found 
that the energy use for this condition was also on average about half 
(46 percent) the energy use measured in 90 [deg]F ambient conditions. 
This observation suggests that if the usage factor for vapor 
compression wine chillers (the factor applied to the actual energy use 
measured in a 90 [deg]F closed-door test to obtain a result 
representative of typical room conditions) did not consider the impact 
of door openings, it should be 0.46 rather than the 0.85 factor used in 
the CEC test procedure. If consideration is given for some limited 
number of door openings, a usage factor equal to 0.55 may be 
appropriate--this factor is consistent with an assumption that the 
energy use associated with door openings is equal to roughly one-fifth 
of the closed-door energy use.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Dividing 0.55 by 0.46 and subtracting 1.0 from the quotient 
results in a value roughly equal to one-fifth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on limited field data and laboratory testing at different 
ambient temperature conditions, DOE believes the energy use estimates 
based on the current CEC test procedure for these products are high. As 
discussed above, use of the 0.55 usage factor appears to be more 
appropriate than the 0.85 usage factor prescribed by the current CEC 
test. Hence, in order to estimate field energy use for wine chillers, 
DOE adjusted the reported energy use of wine chillers (which is based 
on the CEC test procedure) by dividing the reported energy use by 0.85 
and multiplying by 0.55.
    DOE acquired data on the distribution of vapor compression wine 
chiller internal volumes (or capacities) found in U.S. households from 
a study that used online surveys.\4\ However, DOE did not have energy 
use rating information for these products and instead assumed that 
these products all consume the maximum allowable energy as allowed by 
the CEC energy standard. Using the average capacity of vapor 
compression wine chillers from these data (3.6 cubic feet), and the CEC 
energy standard (adjusted for the differences between field and test 
procedure energy use as described above) to represent average energy 
use, DOE estimated that the average annual energy consumption of vapor 
compression wine chillers is 268 kWh.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Greenblatt, J. B., et al. (2013). ``U.S. Residential 
Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products: Results from Amazon Mechanical 
Turk Surveys,'' Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Report number 
6194E, April.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The online surveys in the study also provided information on the 
saturation of vapor compression wine chillers found in U.S. households. 
Using these data, DOE found a market saturation rate of 1.60% for vapor 
compression wine chillers, yielding a national stock estimate of 
1,860,000. Together with the above information on the average annual 
energy consumption of vapor compression wine chillers, DOE estimates 
the national energy consumption of vapor compression wine chillers to 
be 0.50 terawatt-hours (TWh) per year.
    Finally, the online surveys provided data on the distribution of 
ages of wine chillers (both vapor compression and thermoelectric). From 
these data, DOE derived an estimate of the lifetime of wine chillers of 
approximately 4.5 years. Together with the above estimate of the 
national stock of vapor compression wine chillers, DOE estimates annual 
sales of vapor compression wine chillers at 410,000 units.
2. Thermoelectric Wine Chillers
    This section provides an update to the estimates of energy use by 
residential thermoelectric refrigeration products that DOE provided in 
the notice of proposed determination published on November 2011. See 76 
FR at 69150. Since that notice's publication, DOE conducted laboratory 
testing of three thermoelectric wine chillers (DOE TE WC Data, No. 6). 
These products had rated capacities of 6, 12, and 28 bottles. They were 
tested using the CEC test procedure (2012 Appliance Efficiency 
Regulations, CEC-400-2012-019-CMF, Table A-1, p. 70). The testing 
yielded measured energy usage for these products ranging from 413 kWh 
to 550 kWh. However, two of these three products were not able to 
maintain the

[[Page 65226]]

55 [deg]F compartment temperature target for wine chillers in the 
required 90 [deg]F test room temperature. When tested in a 72 [deg]F 
room temperature and applying a 1.2 usage factor \5\ to account for 
door openings, the measured energy use of the products ranged from 142 
kWh to 664 kWh. For these tests, all three products were able to 
maintain the 55 [deg]F compartment temperature target; however, the 28-
bottle product just barely maintained this temperature in its coldest 
setting. The metered data and laboratory test results together indicate 
that thermoelectric wine chiller annual energy use exceeds the 100 kWh 
per year threshold set by EPCA as a prerequisite for establishing 
coverage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Similar to the analysis for vapor compression wine chillers 
discussed in section III.IV.B.IV.B.1, this usage factor assumes that 
the energy use associated with door openings is one-fifth of the 
closed-door energy use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE also acquired energy consumption data from six thermoelectric 
wine chillers measured under field conditions (two in residential homes 
and four in an office with an average ambient temperature of 
approximately 70 [deg]F), and gathered energy use data for 35 
thermoelectric wine chillers from manufacturer and/or retailer Web 
sites. (TE CC, No. 9) Taken together, these products had rated 
capacities from 0.6 to 4.9 cubic feet, with average annual energy use 
ranging from 183 to 803 kWh.
    Including the previously discussed laboratory test data for three 
units, the thermoelectric wine chiller data represented 44 individual 
measurements, shown in Table 1. DOE developed a linear regression using 
all data weighted equally:

UEC = 82.67*C + 222.6

Where
UEC = unit energy consumption in kWh/yr
C = wine chiller capacity in cubic feet (analysis of wine chiller 
data from manufacturer Web sites indicates a relationship between 
number of wine bottles and capacity of 8.22 wine bottles per cubic 
foot. This factor was used to convert rated capacities in bottles 
into rated capacities in cubic feet.)

    Table 1--Energy Consumption Data for Thermoelectric Wine Chillers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Annual
                                                  Volume       energy
                    Source                       (Cu. Ft.)   consumption
                                                                (kWh)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer Web site.........................        0.56           310
                                                      0.56           183
                                                      0.64           365
                                                      0.73           183
                                                      0.81           183
                                                      0.81           201
                                                      0.81           201
                                                      0.88           292
                                                      0.88           292
                                                      0.97           183
                                                      0.99           183
                                                      1.17           292
                                                      1.17           219
                                                      1.17           292
                                                      1.20           548
                                                      1.24           365
                                                      1.41           548
                                                      1.46           365
                                                      1.46           219
                                                      1.62           365
                                                      1.62           237
                                                      1.69           365
                                                      1.69           365
                                                      1.69           365
                                                      1.77           365
                                                      1.87           475
                                                      2.05           365
                                                      2.30           548
                                                      2.30           402
                                                      2.30           438
                                                      2.40           548
                                                      2.47           438
                                                      2.75           475
                                                      4.94           803
                                                      4.94           657
Laboratory test...............................        0.64           142
                                                      1.08           439
                                                      2.26           664
Field measurement.............................        0.73           427
                                                      0.97           266
                                                      1.46           216
                                                      1.82           248
                                                      3.41           608
                                                      6.81           482
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The online surveys in the study described in section IV.B.1 
provided information on the distribution of thermoelectric wine chiller 
capacities. Using the average capacity of thermoelectric wine chillers 
from these data (1.51 cubic feet), and the above linear regression of 
unit energy consumption versus capacity, DOE estimated the average 
annual energy consumption of thermoelectric wine chillers to be 348 
kWh. Note that this represents 30 percent greater energy use than the 
vapor compression wine chiller average, whereas the average product 
volume is 58 percent less than the average for vapor compression wine 
chillers.
    The online surveys also provided saturation data for thermoelectric 
wine chillers found in U.S. households. Using these data, DOE found a 
saturation rate of 9.0% for thermoelectric wine chillers, yielding a 
national stock estimate of 10,500,000. Together with the above 
information on the average annual energy consumption of thermoelectric 
wine chillers, DOE estimates national energy consumption of 
thermoelectric wine chillers to be 3.64 TWh per year.
    Using the estimate of the lifetime of wine chillers described above 
(4.5 years) along with the above estimate of the national stock of 
thermoelectric wine chillers, DOE estimates annual sales of these 
products at 2,300,000 units.
3. Thermoelectric Refrigerators
    Very little energy consumption information was available for non-
vapor compression refrigerators. DOE tested two thermoelectric 
refrigerators at ambient temperatures of both 72 [deg]F and 90 [deg]F. 
Neither product was able to maintain a 39 [deg]F compartment 
temperature in the 90 [deg]F condition, and only one of the two was 
able to maintain this compartment temperature in the 72 [deg]F 
condition. Estimating the expected energy use of such products, if used 
in the field, is complicated by the inability of the products to 
maintain the compartment temperature. However, DOE estimated that the 
average annual energy consumption in field use would be 566 kWh.
    The online surveys conducted as part of the study described in the 
previous sections provided saturation data for thermoelectric 
refrigerators found in U.S. households. Using these data, DOE found a 
market saturation rate of 2.5% for thermoelectric refrigerators, 
yielding a national stock estimate of 2,900,000. Together with the 
above information on the average annual energy consumption of 
thermoelectric refrigerators, DOE estimates national annual energy 
consumption of thermoelectric wine chillers to be 1.64 TWh.
    However, the estimated saturation rate of thermoelectric 
refrigerators is uncertain, ranging from 1.1% to 3.8%. This uncertainty 
results in national stock estimates that range between 1,200,000 and 
4,400,000, and national annual energy consumption estimates that range 
from 0.68 to 2.49 TWh.
    DOE was unable to obtain data providing an estimate of the lifetime 
of thermoelectric refrigerators. Therefore, using the estimate of the 
lifetime of wine chillers described above (4.5 years) as a proxy, along 
with the central estimate of the national stock of thermoelectric 
refrigerators, DOE estimates annual sales of these products at 600,000 
units.

[[Page 65227]]

4. Absorption Refrigeration Products
    This section provides an update to the estimates of energy use by 
residential thermoelectric refrigeration products that DOE provided in 
the November 2011 notice of proposed determination. See 76 FR at 69151.
    The online survey data that DOE acquired from the study discussed 
in the previous sections provided no evidence indicating absorption-
based wine chillers or other refrigeration products are used in homes. 
However, this technology is commonly used by the hotel industry. DOE 
estimated that the total stock of absorption refrigeration products in 
hotels, based on data from Dometic Corporation (a provider of 
specially-designed refrigerators for, among other things, the storage 
of wine), is approximately 400,000 units. (Dometic Group Company 
Presentation 2011-03-15, No. 7 at pp. 40, 42)
    Information provided on manufacturer Web sites regarding absorption 
product energy use cited values between 207 and 730 kWh per year, but 
did not clarify which test procedures were used to determine these 
values and did not indicate the operating temperature ranges of the 
advertised products. (Dometic Screenshots, No. 8) However, DOE measured 
the energy use of a 1.4 cubic foot absorption refrigerator using 
closed-door tests in both 72 [deg]F and 90 [deg]F ambient temperature 
conditions. The unit was not able to maintain a 39 [deg]F compartment 
temperature in the 90 [deg]F condition. For the 72 [deg]F condition, 
the unit was able to maintain a compartment temperature below 39 
[deg]F. Not including any usage factor adjustment, the measured energy 
use was 461 kWh. Applying a usage adjustment factor for door openings 
of 1.2, the projected field energy use of such a product would be 553 
kWh. As discussed previously, this usage adjustment factor may be 
appropriate for wine chillers, but it is unclear whether it adequately 
accounts for door openings in refrigerators.
    Together with the above energy use estimate, and assuming that the 
Dometic estimate represents the national stock of these units, DOE 
estimated national annual energy use of absorption refrigeration 
products to be 0.22 TWh.
    DOE was unable to obtain data providing an estimate of the lifetime 
of absorption refrigeration products. Using the estimate of the 
lifetime of wine chillers described above (4.5 years) as a proxy, along 
with the above estimate of the national stock of absorption 
refrigeration products, DOE estimates annual sales of these products at 
90,000 units.
5. Hybrid Refrigeration Products
    For the purposes of this discussion, the term ``hybrid'' refers to 
any product that includes compartments designed for storage at warmer 
temperatures than fresh food compartments and that otherwise serves the 
functions of a refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, or freezer. DOE 
conducted an online manufacturer model search for hybrid refrigeration 
products, and found a total of potentially up to 23 unique models, 
including 21 hybrid refrigerator-wine chillers (one manual defrost unit 
and 20 automatic defrost units) and two hybrid freezer-wine chillers. 
From these data, DOE determined that the average capacity of hybrid 
refrigerator-wine chillers was 7.4 cubic feet, and the average annual 
energy consumption of hybrid refrigerator-wine chillers was 415 kWh--
these averages are based on the information provided for two units by 
manufacturer Web sites (Hybrid U-Line, No. 11 and Hybrid Vinotemp, No. 
12, p. 2) and a third from the petition for waiver from the DOE test 
procedure of Sanyo E&E Corporation for a hybrid wine chiller/beverage 
center (77 FR 19654 (April 2, 2012)). For the two hybrid freezer-wine 
chiller models, the average unit capacity was 12.6 cubic feet, and the 
upper limit to the annual energy consumption was 413 kWh based on 
information provided for one unit by a manufacturer Web site.\6\ 
(Hybrid Liebherr, No. 10, p. 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The manufacturer (Liebherr) did not provide an annual energy 
use estimate for the freezer-cooled cabinet model (WF 1061: 4.5 cu. 
ft. cooled cabinet, 4.5 cu ft. freezer). However, information on a 
unit of comparable volume (BF 1061: 5.5 cu. ft. fresh food and 4.5 
cu. ft. freezer) was available with an annual energy use estimate of 
413 kWh/yr. This value was used as an upper limit to the energy 
consumption of the freezer-cooled cabinet model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The online surveys from the study discussed in the previous 
sections provided market saturation data for hybrid refrigeration 
products found in U.S. households. Using these data, DOE found a 
saturation rate of 3.1% for hybrid refrigerator-wine chillers and 0.8% 
for hybrid freezer-wine chillers, yielding national stock estimates of 
3,600,000 hybrid refrigerator-wine chillers and 900,000 hybrid freezer-
wine chillers.
    Together with the above information on the average annual energy 
consumption of hybrid refrigeration products, DOE estimates the 
national annual energy consumption of hybrid refrigerator-wine chillers 
to be 1.49 TWh, and of hybrid freezer-wine chillers to be 0.37 TWh.
    DOE was unable to obtain data providing an estimate of the lifetime 
of hybrid refrigeration products. Using the estimated lifetimes of 
refrigerators (17 years) and freezers (22 years) from the 2011 Final 
Rule for Residential Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers 
(76 FR 57516-57612) as proxies, along with the above estimate of the 
national stocks of hybrid refrigeration products, DOE estimates annual 
sales to be 200,000 hybrid refrigerator-wine chillers and 40,000 hybrid 
freezer-wine chillers.
6. Residential Ice Makers
    DOE measured the energy use of a portable and a non-portable ice 
maker in typical room temperature conditions. The energy use of the 
portable ice maker was 139 kWh. This includes applying a 50% usage 
factor to account for the expectation that the unit would not be 
plugged in for the entire year. The energy use of the non-portable ice 
maker was 842 kWh. Both of these measurements incorporate energy use 
associated both with ice production and ice storage. In addition, the 
energy use associated with ice production is based on an estimated 
production amount of 4 pounds of ice per day. (For the portable ice 
maker, this estimate applies only during times when the unit is plugged 
in.)
    DOE also acquired data on the numbers and types of residential ice 
makers found in U.S. households from the online surveys conducted as 
part of the study discussed in the previous sections. The data indicate 
that 69% of residential ice makers are portable units, with the 
remainder being non-portable built-in or freestanding units. Because 
data were unavailable on the fraction of the year when such portable 
units are plugged in and making ice, DOE estimated that the average 
annual usage factor was 50%. Using the data described above, DOE 
estimated that the average annual energy use of residential ice makers 
was 357 kWh.
    The online surveys in the study provided information on the 
saturation of residential ice makers found in U.S. households. Using 
these data, DOE found a saturation rate of 4.6% for residential ice 
makers, yielding a national stock estimate of 5,500,000. Together with 
the above information on the average annual energy consumption of 
residential ice makers, DOE estimates the national energy consumption 
of residential ice makers to be 2.0 TWh per year.
    However, both the estimated numbers and annual energy use of 
residential ice makers is uncertain. The estimated saturation rate 
ranges from 1.7% to

[[Page 65228]]

7.5%, resulting in a national stock estimate between 2,000,000 and 
8,700,000. The uncertainty in annual energy use was estimated to be 
30%. Taken together, the range in estimated national annual 
energy consumption varies between 0.5 and 4.0 TWh.
    Finally, the online surveys discussed in previous sections provided 
data on the age distribution of residential ice makers. From these 
data, DOE derived an estimate of the lifetime of residential ice makers 
of approximately 1.7 years. The online surveys discussed in previous 
sections provided information on the age distribution of wine chillers. 
From these data, DOE derived an estimate of the lifetime of wine 
chillers of approximately 4.5 years, which is comparable to the 
estimated lifetime of compact refrigerators of 5.6 years used in the 
2011 Final Rule for Residential Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, 
and Freezers (76 FR 57516-57612). DOE believes that the derived 
lifetime of residential ice makers may be unrealistically low when 
compared to the estimated lifetimes of wine chillers and compact 
refrigerators, so it has adopted a range in its estimate of annual 
sales of these products by using the lifetime assumptions of both 
residential ice makers and wine chillers. Therefore, using the central 
value for the national stock of residential icemakers of 5,500,000 
units and the aforementioned high and low values of product lifetime 
(1.7 years and 4.5 years, respectively), DOE estimates that annual 
sales of these products may range from 1,200,000 to 3,200,000 units.
7. Conclusions
    Based upon its evaluations of vapor compression wine chillers, the 
three primary types of residential refrigeration products that do not 
incorporate a compressor (i.e. thermoelectric-based wine chillers, 
thermoelectric-based refrigerators and absorption-based refrigeration 
products), the hybrid refrigeration products described in this notice, 
and residential ice makers, DOE has been able to develop estimates of 
their annual energy use that indicate that these products on average 
consume significantly more than 100 kWh annually. Therefore, DOE has 
tentatively determined that the average annual per household energy use 
for miscellaneous residential refrigeration products is likely to 
exceed the 100 kWh threshold set by EPCA. Moreover, DOE has determined 
that the aggregate annual national energy use of these products is 9.9 
TWh, which exceeds the 4.2 TWh minimum threshold set by EPCA in order 
to establish energy conservation standards for a product that the 
Secretary chooses to add for regulatory coverage.

V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

    DOE has reviewed its proposed determination of wine chillers and 
residential non-compressor refrigeration products under the following 
Executive Orders and acts.

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has determined that coverage 
determinations 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://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
    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 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 miscellaneous residential 
refrigeration products 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, 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

[[Page 65229]]

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://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.) 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. 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 the 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 miscellaneous residential refrigeration products meet 
the criteria for covered products for

[[Page 65230]]

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 notice.
    DOE will determine the appropriate level of review that would be 
applicable to any future rulemaking to establish energy conservation 
standards for miscellaneous residential refrigeration products.

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 miscellaneous 
residential refrigeration products 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 miscellaneous residential refrigeration products:
    (1) Is the proposed scope of coverage for miscellaneous residential 
refrigeration products sufficient or are there aspects to this proposed 
scope that require modification?
    (2) DOE seeks information on the types of vapor compression and 
non-compressor residential refrigeration products currently being 
marketed that would be addressed by the coverage proposed in this 
notice, particularly whether such products are distributed to any 
significant extent for uses other than as wine or beverage chillers.
    (3) DOE seeks stock and shipment data for residential wine chillers 
cooled by vapor compression and for residential refrigeration products 
that do not incorporate a compressor, segregated by different product 
types, including any details regarding trends in shipments for each 
respective type of product.
    (4) DOE seeks information regarding energy test procedures suited 
for residential wine chillers cooled by vapor compression and for 
residential refrigeration products that do not incorporate a 
compressor.
    (5) DOE seeks information regarding the energy use of all of the 
different products that would be affected by today's proposed coverage 
determination.
    (6) DOE seeks calculations and accompanying values for household 
and national energy consumption of the products that would be affected 
by today's notice of proposed coverage determination.
    (7) DOE seeks information as to what technologies, if any, would be 
available to improve the energy efficiency of residential vapor 
compression wine chillers, residential refrigeration products that do 
not incorporate a compressor, and residential ice makers. To the extent 
that no technologies are readily available to improve the efficiency of 
these products, DOE seeks information on the factors that may be 
limiting the development of those technologies.
    (8) DOE seeks information regarding the factors that would cause a 
manufacturer to select a cooling technology other than vapor 
compression for a residential refrigeration product, including design 
and production costs, energy use, product performance, consumer 
acceptance, and any other relevant factors.
    (9) DOE seeks information, including supporting data, regarding 
whether labeling-related efforts applied to the residential 
refrigeration products addressed in today's notice would be sufficient 
to induce manufacturers to produce and consumers and other persons to 
purchase, residential refrigeration products that achieve the minimum 
energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically 
justified.
    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 
miscellaneous residential refrigeration products. The Department 
invites all interested parties to submit in writing by December 2, 
2013, comments and information on matters addressed in this notice and 
on other matters relevant to consideration of a determination for 
miscellaneous residential refrigeration products.

[[Page 65231]]

    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 miscellaneous residential refrigeration products qualify as 
covered products, DOE will consider initiating rulemakings to develop 
test procedures and energy conservation standards for miscellaneous 
residential refrigeration products. 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 September 30, 2013.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2013-25943 Filed 10-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P