Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products and Certain Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Final Determination of Compressors as Covered Equipment, 79991-79998 [2016-26693]
Download as PDF
79991
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 81, No. 220
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket No. EERE–2012–BT–DET–0033]
RIN 1904–AC83
Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products and Certain
Commercial and Industrial Equipment:
Final Determination of Compressors as
Covered Equipment
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) is classifying certain
varieties of compressors as covered
equipment under Part A–1 of Title III of
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act
(EPCA), as amended. Accordingly, this
document establishes the definition of
equipment that are considered
compressors.
SUMMARY:
This rule is effective December
15, 2016.
ADDRESSES: This rulemaking can be
identified by docket number EERE–
2012–BT–DET–0033 and/or Regulatory
Information Numbers (RIN) 1904–AC83.
Docket: The docket, which includes
Federal Register notices, public meeting
attendee lists and transcripts,
comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for
review at www.regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the www.regulations.gov index.
However, some documents listed in the
index may not be publicly available,
such as those containing information
that is exempt from public disclosure.
A link to the docket Web page can be
found at: https://www.regulations.gov/
docket?D=EERE-2012-BT-DET-0033.
The www.regulations.gov Web page
contains simple instructions on how to
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 11, 2016
Jkt 241001
access all documents, including public
comments, in the docket.
For further information on how to
review the docket, contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program staff at (202) 586–6636 or by
email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Raba, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Building
Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–8654. Email:
Jim.Raba@ee.doe.gov.
Mary Greene, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–1817. Email:
Mary.Greene@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Current Rulemaking Process
III. Covered Equipment
A. Compressors in Covered Products
B. Pressure Ratio
C. Equipment Configuration
D. Electrical Connection Method
E. Non-Electric Compressors
F. Variety of Equipment Covered
G. Federal Preemption
H. Conclusion
IV. Evaluation of Compressors as a Covered
Equipment
A. Energy Consumption in Operation
B. Distribution in Commerce
C. Prior Inclusion as a Covered Product
D. Coverage Necessary To Carry Out
Purposes of Part A–1 of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act
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. Congressional Notification
M. Review Under the Information Quality
Bulletin for Peer Review
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Statutory Authority
Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act of 1975, as amended
(‘‘EPCA’’ or, in context, ‘‘the Act’’), sets
forth a variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C.
6291, et seq.) Part C of Title III, which
for editorial reasons was re-designated
as Part A–1 upon incorporation into the
U.S. Code (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317),
establishes the ‘‘Energy Conservation
Program for Certain Industrial
Equipment.’’ The purpose of Part A–1 is
to improve the efficiency of electric
motors and pumps and certain other
industrial equipment in order to
conserve the energy resources of the
Nation. (42 U.S.C 6312(a))
EPCA provides that DOE may include
a type of industrial equipment,
including compressors, as covered
equipment if it determines that to do so
is necessary to carry out the purposes of
Part A–1. (42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(i) and
6312(b)). Industrial equipment,
including compressors, must be of a
type that consumes, or is designed to
consume, energy in operation; is
distributed in commerce for industrial
or commercial use; and is not a covered
product as defined in 42 U.S.C.
6291(a)(2) of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6311
(2)(A)). DOE has determined that
compressors, the definition of which
DOE is adding to subpart T of 10 CFR
431 and discusses in this rule, meet the
statutory requirements under 42 U.S.C.
6311(2)(B)(i) and 6312(b) and is
classifying them as covered equipment.
Separately, DOE is conducting
rulemakings to consider test procedures,
and energy conservation standards for
compressors. Pursuant to EPCA, any
new or amended energy conservation
standard for compressors must be
designed to achieve the maximum
improvement in energy efficiency that is
technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(A) and 6316(a)).
Furthermore, the new or amended
standard must result in a significant
conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(3)(B) and 6316(a)). DOE will
determine if compressors satisfy these
provisions during the course of the
energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
79992
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
II. Current Rulemaking Process
On December 31, 2012 (77 FR 76972),
DOE issued a Proposed Determination
of Coverage (2012 NOPD) that proposed
to determine that compressors qualify as
covered equipment under part A–1 of
Title III of EPCA, as amended (42 U.S.C.
6311 et seq). DOE proposed that
coverage was necessary for the purposes
of Part A–1 because (1) DOE may only
prescribe energy conservation standards
for covered equipment; and (2) energy
conservation standards for compressors
would improve the efficiency of such
equipment more than would be likely to
occur in the absence of standards. The
2012 NOPD tentatively determined
adoption of energy conservation
standards for compressors likely would
satisfy the provisions of 42 U.S.C.
6311(2)(B)(i). On February 7, 2013 (78
FR 8998), DOE published a notice
reopening the comment period on the
2012 NOPD.
On February 5, 2014 (79 FR 6839),
DOE published a notice of public
meeting and provided a framework
document that addressed potential
standards and test procedures
rulemakings for compressors. DOE held
a public meeting to discuss the
framework document on April 1, 2014.
At this meeting, DOE discussed and
received comments on the framework
document, which covered the analytical
framework, models, and tools that DOE
used to evaluate potential standards;
and all other issues raised relevant to
the development of energy conservation
standards for the different categories of
compressors. On March 18, 2014 (79 FR
15061), DOE extended the comment
period.
On May 5, 2016 (81 FR 27219), DOE
issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NOPR) to propose a definition for the
term ‘‘compressor’’ and to propose test
procedures for certain compressors
(hereafter, the ‘‘test procedure NOPR’’).
On May 19, 2016 (81 FR 31680), DOE
issued a NOPR to propose energy
conservation standards for certain
varieties of compressors (hereafter, the
‘‘energy conservation standards
NOPR’’). On June 20, 2016, DOE held a
public meeting to discuss the test
procedure and energy conservation
standards NOPRs and to accept
comments from interested parties.
In this final rule, DOE responds to the
seven comments received from
interested parties in response to the
2012 NOPD. DOE notes that certain
comments received in response to the
2012 NOPD discussed topics such as:
Technology options to improve the
efficiency of compressors, scope of
potential energy conservations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 11, 2016
Jkt 241001
standards, and test methods for
compressors, among other comments.
These comments relate to the ongoing
test procedure and/or energy
conservation standards rulemakings and
are, or will, be addressed in those
rulemakings, as applicable. In this
document, DOE also responds to certain
comments that were submitted in
response to the test procedure NOPR
and pertain to the definition of
‘‘compressor.’’
In this document, DOE addresses
comments submitted by the following:
The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI); American
Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy (ACEEE); Appliance
Standards Awareness Project (ASAP);
Alliance to Save Energy (ASE); Atlas
Copco AB (Atlas Copco); the
Compressed Air & Gas Institute (CAGI);
Compressed Air Systems; the Edison
Electric Institute (EEI); Ingersoll Rand;
Kaeser Compressors; the National Rural
Electric Cooperative Association
(NRECA); the Northwest Energy
Efficiency Alliance (NEEA); the
Northeast Energy Efficiency
Partnerships (NEEP); the National
Resources Defense Council (NRDC); the
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
(PG&E), San Diego Gas and Electric
(SDG&E), Southern California Edison
(SCE), and Southern California Gas
Company (SCGC), collectively referred
to as the California Investor Owned
Utilities (CA IOUs); Scales Industrial
Technologies; Sullair; Saylor-Beall
Manufacturing Company and SullivanPalatek, collectively referred to as
Sullivan-Palatek.
DOE will identify comments received
in response to the test procedure NOPR
by the number of the docket maintained
at www.regulations.gov (Docket No.
EERE–2014–BT–TP–0054), the
commenter, the number of document as
listed in that docket, and the page
number of that document where the
comment appears (for example: EERE–
2014–BT–TP–0054, CAGI, No. 0010 at
p. 3CAGI, No. 10 at p. 4). DOE will
identify comments received in response
to the energy conservation standards
NOPR by the commenter, the number of
document as listed in the docket
maintained at www.regulations.gov
(Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–STD–
0040), and the page number of that
document where the comment appears.
DOE will cite comments in this rule’s
docket (EERE–2012–BT–DET–0033)
solely using the commenter name,
commenter number, and page number,
without a docket reference.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
III. Covered Equipment
‘‘Compressor’’ is not an existing
defined term under EPCA. In the 2012
NOPD, DOE tentatively determined to
add compressors as a type of covered
equipment and proposed a definition for
‘‘compressor.’’ 77 FR 76972, 76973 (Dec
31, 2012). Specifically, DOE proposed to
define compressor as an electricpowered device that takes in air or gas
at atmospheric pressure and delivers the
air or gas at a higher pressure. DOE also
clarified that compressors typically have
a specific ratio, the ratio of delivery
pressure to supply pressure, greater than
1.20 and compressors are classified as
positive-displacement, dynamic, or
hybrid. 77 FR 76972, 76973–76974 (Dec
31, 2012). Finally, DOE noted that
compressors may have pistons, rollers,
rotors, impeller wheels, spiral disks,
cylinders, lubricant, motors and
transmissions, controls, treatment
equipment, filters, and/or a lubricant/air
separators. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31,
2012). In the 2016 test procedure NOPR,
after considering comments in response
to the February 5, 2014 framework
document (79 FR 6839), DOE proposed
revisions to its initial proposed ‘‘of a
compressor’’. Specifically, DOE
proposed that a compressor means a
machine or apparatus that converts
different types of energy into the
potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of
gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure and
has a pressure ratio greater than 1.3. 81
FR 27220, 27224 (May 5, 2016)
Several parties commented in
response to the definition of
‘‘compressor’’ considered in the 2012
NOPD and proposed in the 2016 test
procedure NOPR (and its associated
public meeting). These comments are
discussed by topic, in the sections that
follow.
A. Compressors in Covered Products
In response to the 2012 NOPD, AHRI
stated that DOE’s proposed definition of
‘‘compressor’’ may unintentionally
include some products as covered
equipment. Specifically AHRI was
concerned that heating, ventilating, air
conditioning, and refrigeration (HVACR)
equipment may meet the proposed
definition, and suggested that DOE
include a statement to exclude them.
(AHRI, No. 0002 at pp. 1–2) AHRI stated
that the energy consumption of HVACR
compressors is already accounted for in
the efficiency ratings for regulated
HVACR equipment, which means that
covering those compressors under
separate regulations would lead to
unwarranted double regulation on
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
HVACR products. (AHRI, No. 0002 at
p. 2).
EEI commented that certain electric
motors sized under 500 horsepower
(which are used on certain
compressors), are already subject to
DOE energy conservation standards, and
DOE should take this into consideration
in any future energy conservation
standards, in order to avoid duplicative
regulation of these motors. (EEI, No.
0009 at p. 4)
This final rule establishes a definition
for ‘‘compressors’’ and classifies them as
covered equipment under EPCA; it does
not establish scope for any potential
energy conservation standards. As such,
AHRI’s comment that compressors in
HVACR systems and EEI comments
regarding motors should be excluded
from regulation will be addressed in the
ongoing energy conservation standards
rulemaking.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
B. Pressure Ratio
In response to the 2016 test procedure
NOPR, Atlas Copco commented that
DOE should harmonize with
international precedent to aid
manufacturers in exporting their
products, and reduce the minimum
pressure ratio from 1.3 to 1.1, as is
stated in European Union (EU) Lot 31
draft standard.1 (EERE–2014–BT–TP–
0054, Atlas Copco, No. 0009 at p. 11).
In response to Atlas Copco, DOE
reiterates that it proposed a lowerbound pressure ratio of 1.3 to align the
coverage determination of compressors
with the coverage determination being
considered in the fans and blowers
rulemaking, with the intent that DOE
regulations do not leave any gaps in
coverage. 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May 5,
2016). DOE further reiterates that an
Appliance Standards Rulemaking
Advisory Committee (ASRAC) Working
Group was established to negotiate
proposed energy conservation standards
for fans and blowers and this group
discussed and came to general
agreement on a maximum fan energy
limit of 25 kJ/kg, which translates
approximately to a 1.3 pressure ratio, as
the appropriate cutoff to distinguish
between fans and compressors. (EERE–
2014–BT–TP–0054, Docket No. EERE–
2013–BT–STD–0006; EERE–2014–BT–
TP–0054, Public Meeting, No. 84 at p.
11) and 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May 5,
2016). If, through the fans and blowers
rulemaking, DOE establishes coverage
for equipment that incorporates a
maximum1.3 pressure ratio limit, DOE
1 The EU Lot 31 draft standard is available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer
?documentId=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0031&
disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 11, 2016
Jkt 241001
would have the authority to establish
test procedures and energy conservation
standards for equipment with pressure
ratios between 1.1 and 1.3, under the
coverage of fans and blowers, rather
than compressors. (see: Docket No.
EERE–2013–BT–STD–0006).
Alternatively, incorporating a minimum
1.1 pressure ratio into the definition of
‘‘compressor’’ would result in an
overlap in coverage with fans and
blowers, and create confusion in the
market.
Additionally, incorporating a
definition for ‘‘compressor’’ as covered
equipment by itself has no material
impact on manufacturers. Rather, a
decision by DOE to establish test
procedures and/or energy conservation
standards for certain compressors could
materially impact manufacturers and
trade. As such, DOE’s decision to
establish coverage for compressors
based on a minimum pressure ratio of
1.3 has no impact on manufacturing or
exporting, as claimed by Atlas Copco.
In response to the 2012 NOPD, CAGI
commented that the 1.2 compression
ratio proposed by DOE is too low. CAGI
suggested a compression ratio of 2.5
instead. CAGI noted that what are
referred to as ‘‘low-pressure blowers’’
can reach pressure ratios below 2.5, but
are not generally viewed as
compressors. CAGI also stated that a
compression ratio of 1.2 may result in
the inclusion of blowers for hand drying
and vending machine compressors.
(CAGI, No. 0003 at pp. 6–7) Both
Ingersoll Rand and Kaeser Compressors
supported CAGI’s recommendation to
use a pressure ratio of 2.5 instead of 1.2.
(Kaeser Compressors, No. 0007 at p. 1;
Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at pp. 1–2).
However, DOE notes that, in response to
the 2016 test procedure NOPR, CAGI
and Ingersoll Rand updated their
opinions and provided support for the
definition of ‘‘compressor,’’ with a 1.3
minimum pressure ratio, as proposed by
DOE in the test procedure NOPR.
(EERE–2014–BT–TP–0054, CAGI, No.
0010 at p. 3; EERE–2014–BT–TP–0054,
Ingersoll Rand, No. 0011 at p. 1; EERE–
2014–BT–TP–0054, Sullair, No. 0006 at
p. 1) Kaeser Compressors provided no
updated comments related minimum
pressure ratio, in response to the 2016
test procedure NOPR.
In response to the 2016 test procedure
NOPR, Scales Industrial Technologies
commented that the term ‘‘compressor’’
was historically used for equipment
with pressure values above 18–25 psig,
corresponding to pressure ratios of 2.2–
2.7, and that equipment with pressure
values below this range were referred to
as ‘‘blowers.’’ (EERE–2014–BT–TP–
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
79993
0054, Scales Industrial Technologies,
No. 0013, at p. 3)
In response to Kaeser Compressors
and Scales Industrial Technologies,
DOE acknowledges that lower pressure
compressors are often termed ‘‘blowers’’
in industry. However, significant
industry precedent exists that classifies
blowers (and other lower pressure ratio
machines) as sub-varieties of
compressors. Specifically, in the test
procedure NOPR, DOE noted that the
International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) Technical Report
12942:2012, ‘‘Compressors—
Classification—Complementary
information to ISO 5390,’’ (ISO/TR
12942:2012) defines ‘‘compressor’’ as a
machine or apparatus converting
different types of energy into the
potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of
gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure with
pressure-increase ratios exceeding 1.1.
81 FR 27219, 27223 (May 5, 2016).
Additionally, the European Union (EU)
Lot 31 draft standard,2 as previously
discussed by Atlas Copco, also defines
‘‘compressor’’ using a minimum
pressure ratio of 1.1.3 Technically, any
machine with a pressure ratio of greater
than 1.0 could meet the first clause of
the proposed definition for
‘‘compressor’’. In other words, it can
convert different types of energy into
the potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of
gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure.
Given the precedent established by ISO/
TR 12942:2012 and the EU Lot 31 draft
standard, DOE believes that 1.1 is the
minimum pressure ratio used in the
industry to describe compressors.
Consequently, a machine that converts
different types of energy into the
potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of
gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure and
has a pressure ratio of 1.3 would
technically be considered a compressor
by the compressor industry.
Finally, DOE notes that the CA IOUs,
CAGI, Sullivan-Palatek, Ingersoll Rand,
and Sullair all support the definition of
‘‘compressor’’ with a 1.3 minimum
pressure ratio, as proposed in the test
procedure NOPR. (EERE–2014–BT–TP–
0054, CA IOUs, No. 0012 at p. 3; EERE–
2 The EU Lot 31 draft standard is available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer
?documentId=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0031&
disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf.
3 As discussed in the previous paragraph, DOE is
adopting a minimum pressure ratio of 1.3, rather
than 1.1, in order to align with the fans and blowers
rule.
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
79994
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
2014–BT–TP–0054, CAGI, No. 0010 at
p. 3; EERE–2014–BT–TP–0054,
Sullivan-Palatek, No. 0007 at p. 1;
EERE–2014–BT–TP–0054, Ingersoll
Rand, No. 0011 at p. 1; EERE–2014–BT–
TP–0054, Sullair, No. 0006 at p. 1). For
these reasons, DOE reaffirms its
conclusion that a minimum pressure
ratio of 1.3 is appropriate for use in the
definition of ‘‘compressor.’’
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
C. Equipment Configuration
In response to the 2012 NOPD,
Ingersoll Rand made two
recommendations regarding which
components should be included in the
definition of ‘‘compressor.’’ First,
Ingersoll Rand suggested that
‘‘compressor’’ should be defined to
include ‘‘onboard’’ controls that are
integrated into the compressor package
and solely for the operation of the
compressor package to which they are
mounted. (Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at p.
2).
Second, Ingersoll Rand suggested that
‘‘compressor’’ should be defined to
include filters and treatment equipment
that are integral and necessary to
operate the compressor, such as oil
coolers, aftercoolers, and filters, and
deliver a certain quality of compressed
air. (Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at p. 2).
In response, this final rule establishes
a definition for ‘‘compressors’’ and
classifies them as covered equipment
under EPCA; it does not establish scope
for any potential energy conservation
standards. To that end, DOE notes that
the definition of ‘‘compressor’’ adopted
in this final rule (see section III.H), is
broad and does not exclude the
components recommended by Ingersoll
Rand. However, DOE notes that it may
limit the applicability of any test
procedures and energy conservations
standards it chooses to pursue in the
future to address the (components/
controls) identified by Ingersoll Rand.
D. Electrical Connection Method
In response to the 2012 NOPD, CAGI
commented that the definition of
‘‘compressor’’ should not apply to
compressors that are connected through
a wall outlet using a plug connection.
CAGI explained that these compressors
generally have intermittent usage
patterns, are small, and are not designed
for continuous duty and, therefore, do
not represent significant energy use.
(CAGI, No. 0003 at p. 7)
DOE recognizes the benefits of
focusing on compressors likely to
account for significant energy use for
the purposes of setting regulatory
requirements. However, DOE notes that
compressors can be modified to add or
remove electrical plugs, without great
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 11, 2016
Jkt 241001
cost or difficulty, by a party aiming to
circumvent standards. Additionally, for
certain compressor sizes (i.e., smaller
horsepower), the presence of a plug has
no bearing on end user utility, as plugs
can be added or removed at a nominal
cost to the end user. Therefore, many
compressors with and without plugs
may serve the same markets and
applications and should be treated
similarly.
Finally, DOE prefers to use attributes
more native to a compressor (e.g.,
pressure ratios) to delineate, where
needed, which compressors may fall
within the coverage determination. As a
result, DOE is declining CAGI’s
recommendation to remove from the
coverage determination those
compressors that are connected through
a wall outlet using a plug connection.
E. Non-Electric Compressors
In response to the 2012 NOPD, EEI
commented that DOE should use a
definition that applies to non-electric in
addition to electric compressors,
arguing that limiting the definition to
electric compressors would be
inconsistent with DOE’s other recent
actions for similar products, and
equipment such as pumps and fans, and
would be inconsistent with the intent of
EPCA. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 2) NRECA
also commented that any compressor
definition should be fuel-neutral.
(NRECA, No. 0008, at p. 2) EEI also
noted that DOE provided no rationale
supporting the exclusion of non-electric
compressors, and that there are
significant numbers of fossil fuel-driven
compressors operating in the United
States. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 5)
Further, in response to the 2012
NOPD, EEI stated that excluding nonelectric compressors carries the
potential to distort markets—
presumably by incentivizing end users
to substitute unregulated compressors.
(EEI, No. 0009, at p. 7) NRECA also
commented that an electric-only
compressor definition could encourage
fuel-switching to non-electric
compressors and not result in economic
or energy savings. (NRECA, No. 0008, at
p. 2)
In response to EEI’s and NRECA’s
argument not to limit the definition of
‘‘compressor’’ to electric compressors,
DOE notes that it is adopting a fuelneutral definition of ‘‘compressor.’’
F. Variety of Equipment Covered
In response to the 2016 test procedure
NOPR, Compressed Air Systems
commented that the term ‘‘compressor’’
may unintentionally include other
equipment, such as refrigerators, air
conditioners, bellows, hand air pumps,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
or turbochargers, and suggested a more
narrow definition of the term that would
encompass just the products intended
for regulation. (EERE–2014–BT–TP–
0054, Compressed Air Systems, No.
0008 at p. 1).
In response, DOE notes that the
definition of ‘‘compressor,’’ as proposed
in the test procedure NOPR, does not
specifically include or exclude
compressors installed as components of
other covered products or equipment
such as refrigerators and air
conditioners. Nonetheless, it may apply
to subcomponents of such equipment.
Further, if equipment commonly
referred to as bellows, hand air pumps,
or turbochargers meets the definition of
‘‘compressor,’’ as proposed in the test
procedure NOPR and adopted in this
document, such equipment would fall
within the coverage determination for
compressors. However, DOE will
determine appropriate scope(s) of
applicability for future test procedure
and energy conservation standards
rulemakings based on the particular
circumstances of the market.
G. Federal Preemption
In response to DOE’s May 19, 2016
energy conversation standards NOPR
(81 FR 31680), the CA IOUs, ASAP,
ACEEE, NEEA, NRDC, NEEP, and ASE
commented that if there are no energy
conservation standards for reciprocating
compressors, then reciprocating
compressors should not be covered
equipment in order to allow states to
pursue standards. (EERE–2013–BT–
STD–0040, CA IOUs, No. 0059 at pp. 2–
3; EERE–2013–BT–STD–0040, CA IOUs,
Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0044 at
p. 153; EERE–2013–BT–STD–0040,
ASAP, ACEEE, NEEA, NRDC, NEEP,
ASE, No. 0060 at pp. 2–3)
In this final rule, DOE is establishing
a broad definition for ‘‘compressors;’’ it
is not establishing a definition for
specific categories of compressors. DOE
will define specific categories of
compressors and the scope of
applicability of test procedures and
energy conservation standards in their
respective rules. In turn, DOE is
classifying compressors as covered
equipment under EPCA because the
agency concludes that commercial and
industrial compressors qualify as
covered equipment under part A–1 of
Title III of EPCA, as amended. (42
U.S.C. 6311 et seq.). Once DOE has
classified equipment as covered, any
State regulation concerning the energy
use or energy efficiency of the covered
product is preempted by Federal
coverage. (42 U.S.C. 6297(b), 6316(a)).
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
H. Conclusion
Ultimately, for the reasons discussed
in this section and established in the
test procedure NOPR, DOE is adopting
the definition of ‘‘compressor,’’ as
proposed in the test procedure NOPR,
with one minor modification in
nomenclature. Specifically, DOE is
replacing the term ‘‘pressure ratio’’ with
‘‘pressure ratio at full-load operating
pressure.’’.
DOE will develop specific methods to
determine pressure ratio at full-load
operating pressure as a part of a separate
test procedure rulemaking process.4
IV. Evaluation of Compressors as a
Covered Equipment
The following sections describe DOE’s
evaluation of whether compressors
fulfill the criteria for being added as
covered equipment pursuant to 42
U.S.C. 6311(2) and 42 U.S.C. 6312.
Compressors are listed as a type of
industrial equipment at 42 U.S.C.
6311(2)(B)(i). The following discussion
addresses DOE’s consideration of the
three requirements of 42 U.S.C.
6311(2)(A) and 42 U.S.C. 6312.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
A. Energy Consumption in Operation
In the 2012 NOPD, DOE cited data
from the 2002 United States Industrial
Electric Motor Systems Market
Opportunities Assessment, which
estimated total annual industrial
compressor energy use (from
Manufacturing SIC codes 20–39) at
91,050 million kWh per year.5 DOE
noted that, because industrial activity in
2012 is greater than it was in 2002, it
was likely that annual compressor
energy use was higher than this figure.
77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
In response to DOE’s NOPD
conclusions, EEI commented that data
referenced in the proposed
determination of coverage was neither
accurate nor current. EEI noted that
although DOE asserted industrial
activity in 2012 exceeded that of 2002,
the amount of industrial electricity
consumed and number of industrial
customers in 2011 were lower than in
2003 and 2004, respectively. (EEI, No.
0009 at pp. 2–3).
In its energy conservation standards
NOPR, DOE revised the sources used to
characterize the compressor market,
DOE revised both initial shipments,
4 U.S. DOE—Energy Information Administration
(2015), Annual Energy Outlook 2015, DOE/EIA–
0383 (Available at: https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/
archive/aeo15/pdf/0383(2015).pdf).
5 U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau,
Manufacturing and Construction Division, Series
MA333P(10)–1, Stationary Air Compressors,
Reciprocating, Single and Double Acting
(333912110T), 2011.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 11, 2016
Jkt 241001
(discussed in section IV.B) and
industrial and commercial growth
indicators. DOE projected future growth
using Energy Information
Administration’s (EIA’s) Annual Energy
Outlook (AEO) Macroeconomic
projections for the Value of
Manufacturing Shipments, and
Commercial Floor Space for industrial
and commercial sectors, respectively.4
Based on the energy savings results
discussed in section IV.D, DOE reaffirms
its conclusion that compressors
consume a significant amount of energy
in the industrial and commercial
sectors.
B. Distribution in Commerce
In the 2012 NOPD, DOE tentatively
concluded that compressors are
distributed in commerce for both the
industrial and commercial sectors.
Specifically, DOE estimated that 1.3
million motors are shipped annually to
drive compressors in the U.S.
commercial and industrial sectors,
based on the 2011 International Energy
Agency (IEA) Survey. DOE also assumed
that only a small fraction of these
motors are used as a motor only
replacement in compressor systems
(based on additional 2004 U.S. Census
data); consequently, DOE estimated that
nearly 1.3 million compressors were
distributed in commerce annually for
industrial or commercial use. 77 FR
76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
In response to DOE’s NOPD
conclusions, Ingersoll Rand commented
that the estimate of annual compressor
shipments provided by DOE is grossly
inflated. (Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at p.
2) CAGI commented that DOE’s
estimates most likely incorporate
compressors going into consumer
applications, and if only commercial
and industrial applications were
counted, the number would be
significantly lower. (CAGI, No. 0003 at
p. 7) EEI recommended that DOE
elaborate on how it derived the 1.3
million compressor shipment estimate,
if DOE is to use it in in any future
energy conservation standards analyses.
(EEI, No. 0009 at p. 3)
In response to comments from
Ingersoll Rand, CAGI, and EEI, DOE
sought, and received, shipments data for
rotary screw compressors from a
number of manufacturer stakeholders
and subject matter experts, which DOE
published in its energy conservation
standards NOPR. However, DOE was
able to find only limited shipments data
for reciprocating compressors, so DOE
continued to use the data from the U.S.
Census Bureau.5 DOE estimated in its
energy conservation standards NOPR
shipments analysis that 31 thousand
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
79995
rotary screw and 538 thousand
reciprocating compressors were shipped
to commercial and industrial sectors in
2013. (EERE–2013–BT–STD–0040–
0037) Based on these revised shipments
estimates, DOE reaffirms its conclusion
that compressors are distributed in
commerce to commercial and industrial
sectors.
C. Prior Inclusion as a Covered Product
Compressors are not currently
included as covered products under
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, part 430.
D. Coverage Necessary To Carry Out
Purposes of Part A–1 of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act
The purpose of part A–1 of EPCA is
to improve the energy efficiency of
electric motors, pumps and certain other
industrial equipment to conserve the
energy resources of the Nation. (42
U.S.C. 6312 (a)). In the 2012 NOPD,
DOE proposed that coverage of
compressors was necessary to carry out
the purposes of part A–1 of EPCA
because coverage will promote the
conservation of energy resources. DOE
concluded that efficiency standards that
may result from coverage would help to
capture some portion of the potential for
improving the efficiency of
compressors. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec
31, 2012).
In response to DOE’s conclusion that
efficiency standards that may result
from coverage of compressors would
help to capture some portion of the
potential for improving the efficiency of
compressors, CAGI commented that
compressor designs are mature and
compressor manufacturers have already
incorporated the most efficient motor
designs and technologies available in
the market. CAGI believes that
including compressors as covered
equipment would inhibit investment in
research and development because of
the hurdles involved in approving new
designs for the market. (CAGI, No. 0003
at p. 8) CAGI also argued that, due to
variation in field applications that lead
to changes in overall efficiency,
regulation of compressor packages is an
ineffective way to capture significant
energy savings. CAGI suggested that,
therefore, DOE exclude commercial and
industrial compressors under Part A–1
of Title III of EPCA. (CAGI, No. 0003 at
pp. 4–5)
Kaeser Compressors commented that
since manufacturers already publish test
data at various load levels and that data
is verified by a third-party and since
annual energy costs are dependent on
the dynamics of an individual system,
Kaeser does not believe that including
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
79996
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
compressors alone as covered
equipment would be beneficial to
carrying out the purposes of Part A–1 of
EPCA. (Kaeser Compressors, No. 0007 at
pp. 3)
DOE published consumer saving for
lubricated rotary screw, lubricant-free
rotary screw, and reciprocating
compressors in its energy conservation
standard NOPR TSD.6 These equipment
account for over 90 percent of
compressors in the commercial and
industrial sectors and are used in a wide
variety of applications. While DOE did
not propose an increase in efficiency
above the baseline for lubricant-free
rotary screw, or, new standards for
reciprocating compressors, DOE’s
analysis found that there was energy,
and consumer savings for these
equipment at most efficiency levels.
Further, DOE published national energy
saving estimates for lubricated rotary
screw compressors in its energy
conservation standard NOPR. DOE
estimated, at the proposed level,
significant national energy savings of
0.18 quads.
These estimated saving presented in
the energy conservation standard TSD
and NOPR are an indication that
coverage will result in conservation of
energy resources. While DOE proposed
new energy conservation standards for a
sub-set of compressor designs currently
available in commerce, broadening of
the energy conservations standards
beyond lubricated rotary screw
compressors will likely increase the
amount of energy savings.
Based on the preceding discussion,
DOE reaffirms its conclusion that
incorporating compressors as covered
equipment is necessary to carry out the
purposes of Part A–1 of EPCA, and that
efficiency standards that may result
from coverage would improve the
efficiency of compressors and help to
capture some portion of the potential for
energy savings from this improved
efficiency. Based on the information in
sections IV.A, IV.B, and IV.C of this
rule, DOE determines that commercial
and industrial compressors qualify as
covered equipment under part A–1 of
Title III of EPCA, as amended (42 U.S.C.
6311 et seq.).
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
DOE has reviewed this final rule,
which determines coverage for
6 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy Office (2015), NOPR
Technical Support Document (TSD): Energy
Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and
Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Air
Compressors (Available at: https://www.regulations.
gov/document?D=EERE-2013-BT=STD-0040-0037).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 11, 2016
Jkt 241001
compressors, under the following
executive orders and acts.
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) 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 final action was not
subject to review under the Executive
Order by the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the OMB.
This final rule, which concludes that
compressors meet the criteria for a
covered product for which the Secretary
may prescribe an energy conservation
standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)
and (p), imposes no new information or
record-keeping requirements.
Accordingly, the OMB clearance is not
required under the Paperwork
Reduction Act. (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
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 a regulatory flexibility
analysis for any rule that, by law, must
be proposed for public comment, unless
the agency certifies that the 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 (Aug. 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 (Feb. 19, 2003). DOE makes its
procedures and policies available on the
Office of the General Counsel’s Web site
at www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE reviewed this final rule under
the provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the policies and
procedures published on February 19,
2003. This final rule sets no test
procedures or standards; it only
positively determines that compressors
meet the criteria for classification as
covered equipment and that future
standards may be warranted to regulate
their energy use. Economic impacts on
small entities would be considered in
the context of such rulemakings. On the
basis of the foregoing, DOE certifies that
the determination has no significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Accordingly,
DOE has not prepared a regulatory
flexibility analysis for this final rule.
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).
In this document, DOE positively
determines that compressors meet the
criteria for classification as covered
equipment and that future standards
may be warranted to regulate their
energy use. Should DOE pursue that
option, the relevant environmental
impacts would be explored as part of
that rulemaking. As a result, DOE has
determined that this action falls into a
class of actions that are categorically
excluded from review under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE’s
implementing regulations at 10 CFR part
1021. Specifically, this action
establishes a class of equipment
(compressors) for which energy
conservation standards would be
appropriate. However, this action does
not establish energy conservation
standards, and, therefore, does not
result in any environmental impacts.
Thus, this action is covered by
Categorical Exclusion A6 ‘‘Procedural
rulemakings’’ under 10 CFR part 1021,
subpart D. Accordingly, neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
Executive Order (E.O.) 13132,
‘‘Federalism’’ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 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 (65 FR
13735), DOE published a statement of
policy describing the intergovernmental
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
consultation process that it will follow
in developing such regulations. DOE has
examined this final rule and concludes
that it does 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. EPCA governs and
prescribes Federal preemption of State
regulations as to energy conservation for
the product that is the subject of this
final rule. 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.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
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 (Feb. 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 final rule 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:08 Nov 14, 2016
Jkt 241001
Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
by the private sector of $100 million or
more in any 1 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 (62 FR 12820), DOE published a
statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under
UMRA. (This policy also is available at
www.gc.doe.gov). DOE reviewed this
final rule pursuant to these existing
authorities and its policy statement and
determined that the rule 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
final rule does 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 (Mar. 15, 1988),
DOE determined that this final rule does
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
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
79997
agency pursuant to general guidelines
issued by the OMB. The OMB’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed
this final rule 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 this
regulatory action establishing certain
definitions and determining that
compressors meet the criteria for a
covered product for which the Secretary
may prescribe an energy conservation
standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)
and (p) does 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 final determination as a
significant energy action under E.O.
12866 or any successor order. Therefore,
this final rule is not a significant energy
action. Accordingly, DOE has not
prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will
report to Congress on the promulgation
of this rule prior to its effective date.
The report will state that it has been
determined that the rule is a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
79998
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
M. Review Under the Information
Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
Subpart T—Compressors
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 (Jan. 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 the regulatory action discussed in
this document 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 (Jan. 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 apply to any
future rulemaking to establish energy
conservation standards for compressors.
This subpart contains and energy
conservation requirements for
compressors, pursuant to Part A–1 of
Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 6311–6317.
VI. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 28,
2016.
David J. Friedman,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations as set forth below:
PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY
PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
EQUIPMENT
1. The authority citation for part 431
continues to read as follows:
■
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
2. Add subpart T to part 431 to read
as follows:
Subpart T—Compressors
Sec.
431.341 Purpose and scope.
431.342 Definitions concerning
compressors.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:28 Nov 11, 2016
Jkt 241001
Purpose and scope.
§ 431.342 Definitions concerning
compressors.
Compressor means a machine or
apparatus that converts different types
of energy into the potential energy of gas
pressure for displacement and
compression of gaseous media to any
higher pressure values above
atmospheric pressure and has a pressure
ratio at full-load operating pressure
greater than 1.3.
[FR Doc. 2016–26693 Filed 11–14–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 73
[Docket No. FAA–2015–3680; Airspace
Docket No. 13–ASW–15]
RIN 2120–AA66
Establishment of and Modification to
Restricted Areas; Fort Sill, OK
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this final rule.
■
§ 431.341
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code.
Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator.
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the
agency’s authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of the airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it restructures
the restricted airspace at Fort Sill, OK,
enhancing safety and accommodating
essential military training.
History
This action establishes 2 new
restricted areas (R–5601G and R–5601H)
to the special use airspace (SUA)
complex located at Fort Sill, OK, to
provide additional maneuvering
airspace for current and planned
hazardous training activities.
Specifically, the restricted areas provide
participating fighter and bomber aircraft
with non-eye safe laser firing and
maneuvering airspace when training at
the Falcon Bombing Range contained in
R–5601C, the West Range Target Area
contained in R–5601B, or the East Range
Target Area contained in R–5601A.
Additionally, the using agency
information for all Fort Sill restricted
areas is updated for standardization and
to reflect the current organization. This
action also updates a number of
geographic coordinates for R–5601A–E,
G, and H as a result of more accurate
digital charting capabilities, updates the
arc radius distance in R–5601B and R–
5601H from statute miles to nautical
miles (NM), and corrects the controlling
agency information for R–5601H. This
SUMMARY:
action ensures realistic U.S. Army
training on current tactics for employing
hazardous targeting laser systems and
weapons capabilities at longer ranges
from the target area.
DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, March
2, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Colby Abbott, Airspace Policy Group,
Office of Airspace Services, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202)
267–8783.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On October 19, 2015, the FAA
published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
(80 FR 63153), Docket No. FAA–2015–
3680, to establish two restricted areas
and amend using agency information for
six other restricted areas designated to
support hazardous training activities
conducted within the Fort Sill, OK,
special use airspace (SUA) complex.
Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by
submitting written comments on the
proposal. One comment from the
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
(AOPA) was received.
Discussion of Comments
In their response to the NPRM, AOPA
raised several substantive issues. AOPA
contended the proposed airspace design
would have a negative impact on
general aviation aircraft and offered the
following recommendations to mitigate
the negative effects: consider other types
of SUA before establishing additional
restricted areas; change the ceiling of R–
5601G so it aligns with the Minimum
Enroute Altitude (MEA) of V–436; if
E:\FR\FM\15NOR1.SGM
15NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 15, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 79991-79998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-26693]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 220 / Tuesday, November 15, 2016 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 79991]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket No. EERE-2012-BT-DET-0033]
RIN 1904-AC83
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products and Certain
Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Final Determination of Compressors
as Covered Equipment
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is classifying certain
varieties of compressors as covered equipment under Part A-1 of Title
III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended.
Accordingly, this document establishes the definition of equipment that
are considered compressors.
DATES: This rule is effective December 15, 2016.
ADDRESSES: This rulemaking can be identified by docket number EERE-
2012-BT-DET-0033 and/or Regulatory Information Numbers (RIN) 1904-AC83.
Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for review at www.regulations.gov.
All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. However, some documents listed in the index may not be publicly
available, such as those containing information that is exempt from
public disclosure.
A link to the docket Web page can be found at: https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2012-BT-DET-0033. The
www.regulations.gov Web page contains simple instructions on how to
access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.
For further information on how to review the docket, contact the
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 586-6636 or by
email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Raba, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
586-8654. Email: Jim.Raba@ee.doe.gov.
Mary Greene, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1817. Email: Mary.Greene@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Statutory Authority
II. Current Rulemaking Process
III. Covered Equipment
A. Compressors in Covered Products
B. Pressure Ratio
C. Equipment Configuration
D. Electrical Connection Method
E. Non-Electric Compressors
F. Variety of Equipment Covered
G. Federal Preemption
H. Conclusion
IV. Evaluation of Compressors as a Covered Equipment
A. Energy Consumption in Operation
B. Distribution in Commerce
C. Prior Inclusion as a Covered Product
D. Coverage Necessary To Carry Out Purposes of Part A-1 of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act
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. Congressional Notification
M. Review Under the Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Statutory Authority
Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended (``EPCA'' or, in context, ``the Act''), sets forth a variety of
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C. 6291, et
seq.) Part C of Title III, which for editorial reasons was re-
designated as Part A-1 upon incorporation into the U.S. Code (42 U.S.C.
6311-6317), establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment.'' The purpose of Part A-1 is to improve the
efficiency of electric motors and pumps and certain other industrial
equipment in order to conserve the energy resources of the Nation. (42
U.S.C 6312(a))
EPCA provides that DOE may include a type of industrial equipment,
including compressors, as covered equipment if it determines that to do
so is necessary to carry out the purposes of Part A-1. (42 U.S.C.
6311(2)(B)(i) and 6312(b)). Industrial equipment, including
compressors, must be of a type that consumes, or is designed to
consume, energy in operation; is distributed in commerce for industrial
or commercial use; and is not a covered product as defined in 42 U.S.C.
6291(a)(2) of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6311 (2)(A)). DOE has determined that
compressors, the definition of which DOE is adding to subpart T of 10
CFR 431 and discusses in this rule, meet the statutory requirements
under 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(i) and 6312(b) and is classifying them as
covered equipment.
Separately, DOE is conducting rulemakings to consider test
procedures, and energy conservation standards for compressors. Pursuant
to EPCA, any new or amended energy conservation standard for
compressors must be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in
energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically
justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) and 6316(a)). Furthermore, the new
or amended standard must result in a significant conservation of
energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B) and 6316(a)). DOE will determine if
compressors satisfy these provisions during the course of the energy
conservation standards rulemaking.
[[Page 79992]]
II. Current Rulemaking Process
On December 31, 2012 (77 FR 76972), DOE issued a Proposed
Determination of Coverage (2012 NOPD) that proposed to determine that
compressors qualify as covered equipment under part A-1 of Title III of
EPCA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6311 et seq). DOE proposed that coverage
was necessary for the purposes of Part A-1 because (1) DOE may only
prescribe energy conservation standards for covered equipment; and (2)
energy conservation standards for compressors would improve the
efficiency of such equipment more than would be likely to occur in the
absence of standards. The 2012 NOPD tentatively determined adoption of
energy conservation standards for compressors likely would satisfy the
provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(i). On February 7, 2013 (78 FR
8998), DOE published a notice reopening the comment period on the 2012
NOPD.
On February 5, 2014 (79 FR 6839), DOE published a notice of public
meeting and provided a framework document that addressed potential
standards and test procedures rulemakings for compressors. DOE held a
public meeting to discuss the framework document on April 1, 2014. At
this meeting, DOE discussed and received comments on the framework
document, which covered the analytical framework, models, and tools
that DOE used to evaluate potential standards; and all other issues
raised relevant to the development of energy conservation standards for
the different categories of compressors. On March 18, 2014 (79 FR
15061), DOE extended the comment period.
On May 5, 2016 (81 FR 27219), DOE issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR) to propose a definition for the term ``compressor''
and to propose test procedures for certain compressors (hereafter, the
``test procedure NOPR''). On May 19, 2016 (81 FR 31680), DOE issued a
NOPR to propose energy conservation standards for certain varieties of
compressors (hereafter, the ``energy conservation standards NOPR''). On
June 20, 2016, DOE held a public meeting to discuss the test procedure
and energy conservation standards NOPRs and to accept comments from
interested parties.
In this final rule, DOE responds to the seven comments received
from interested parties in response to the 2012 NOPD. DOE notes that
certain comments received in response to the 2012 NOPD discussed topics
such as: Technology options to improve the efficiency of compressors,
scope of potential energy conservations standards, and test methods for
compressors, among other comments. These comments relate to the ongoing
test procedure and/or energy conservation standards rulemakings and
are, or will, be addressed in those rulemakings, as applicable. In this
document, DOE also responds to certain comments that were submitted in
response to the test procedure NOPR and pertain to the definition of
``compressor.''
In this document, DOE addresses comments submitted by the
following: The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
(AHRI); American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE);
Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP); Alliance to Save Energy
(ASE); Atlas Copco AB (Atlas Copco); the Compressed Air & Gas Institute
(CAGI); Compressed Air Systems; the Edison Electric Institute (EEI);
Ingersoll Rand; Kaeser Compressors; the National Rural Electric
Cooperative Association (NRECA); the Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance (NEEA); the Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP);
the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC); the Pacific Gas and
Electric Company (PG&E), San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), Southern
California Edison (SCE), and Southern California Gas Company (SCGC),
collectively referred to as the California Investor Owned Utilities (CA
IOUs); Scales Industrial Technologies; Sullair; Saylor-Beall
Manufacturing Company and Sullivan-Palatek, collectively referred to as
Sullivan-Palatek.
DOE will identify comments received in response to the test
procedure NOPR by the number of the docket maintained at
www.regulations.gov (Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054), the commenter,
the number of document as listed in that docket, and the page number of
that document where the comment appears (for example: EERE-2014-BT-TP-
0054, CAGI, No. 0010 at p. 3CAGI, No. 10 at p. 4). DOE will identify
comments received in response to the energy conservation standards NOPR
by the commenter, the number of document as listed in the docket
maintained at www.regulations.gov (Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040),
and the page number of that document where the comment appears. DOE
will cite comments in this rule's docket (EERE-2012-BT-DET-0033) solely
using the commenter name, commenter number, and page number, without a
docket reference.
III. Covered Equipment
``Compressor'' is not an existing defined term under EPCA. In the
2012 NOPD, DOE tentatively determined to add compressors as a type of
covered equipment and proposed a definition for ``compressor.'' 77 FR
76972, 76973 (Dec 31, 2012). Specifically, DOE proposed to define
compressor as an electric-powered device that takes in air or gas at
atmospheric pressure and delivers the air or gas at a higher pressure.
DOE also clarified that compressors typically have a specific ratio,
the ratio of delivery pressure to supply pressure, greater than 1.20
and compressors are classified as positive-displacement, dynamic, or
hybrid. 77 FR 76972, 76973-76974 (Dec 31, 2012). Finally, DOE noted
that compressors may have pistons, rollers, rotors, impeller wheels,
spiral disks, cylinders, lubricant, motors and transmissions, controls,
treatment equipment, filters, and/or a lubricant/air separators. 77 FR
76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012). In the 2016 test procedure NOPR, after
considering comments in response to the February 5, 2014 framework
document (79 FR 6839), DOE proposed revisions to its initial proposed
``of a compressor''. Specifically, DOE proposed that a compressor means
a machine or apparatus that converts different types of energy into the
potential energy of gas pressure for displacement and compression of
gaseous media to any higher pressure values above atmospheric pressure
and has a pressure ratio greater than 1.3. 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May 5,
2016)
Several parties commented in response to the definition of
``compressor'' considered in the 2012 NOPD and proposed in the 2016
test procedure NOPR (and its associated public meeting). These comments
are discussed by topic, in the sections that follow.
A. Compressors in Covered Products
In response to the 2012 NOPD, AHRI stated that DOE's proposed
definition of ``compressor'' may unintentionally include some products
as covered equipment. Specifically AHRI was concerned that heating,
ventilating, air conditioning, and refrigeration (HVACR) equipment may
meet the proposed definition, and suggested that DOE include a
statement to exclude them. (AHRI, No. 0002 at pp. 1-2) AHRI stated that
the energy consumption of HVACR compressors is already accounted for in
the efficiency ratings for regulated HVACR equipment, which means that
covering those compressors under separate regulations would lead to
unwarranted double regulation on
[[Page 79993]]
HVACR products. (AHRI, No. 0002 at p. 2).
EEI commented that certain electric motors sized under 500
horsepower (which are used on certain compressors), are already subject
to DOE energy conservation standards, and DOE should take this into
consideration in any future energy conservation standards, in order to
avoid duplicative regulation of these motors. (EEI, No. 0009 at p. 4)
This final rule establishes a definition for ``compressors'' and
classifies them as covered equipment under EPCA; it does not establish
scope for any potential energy conservation standards. As such, AHRI's
comment that compressors in HVACR systems and EEI comments regarding
motors should be excluded from regulation will be addressed in the
ongoing energy conservation standards rulemaking.
B. Pressure Ratio
In response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR, Atlas Copco commented
that DOE should harmonize with international precedent to aid
manufacturers in exporting their products, and reduce the minimum
pressure ratio from 1.3 to 1.1, as is stated in European Union (EU) Lot
31 draft standard.\1\ (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Atlas Copco, No. 0009 at
p. 11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The EU Lot 31 draft standard is available at: https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0031&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to Atlas Copco, DOE reiterates that it proposed a
lower-bound pressure ratio of 1.3 to align the coverage determination
of compressors with the coverage determination being considered in the
fans and blowers rulemaking, with the intent that DOE regulations do
not leave any gaps in coverage. 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May 5, 2016). DOE
further reiterates that an Appliance Standards Rulemaking Advisory
Committee (ASRAC) Working Group was established to negotiate proposed
energy conservation standards for fans and blowers and this group
discussed and came to general agreement on a maximum fan energy limit
of 25 kJ/kg, which translates approximately to a 1.3 pressure ratio, as
the appropriate cutoff to distinguish between fans and compressors.
(EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006; EERE-2014-BT-
TP-0054, Public Meeting, No. 84 at p. 11) and 81 FR 27220, 27224 (May
5, 2016). If, through the fans and blowers rulemaking, DOE establishes
coverage for equipment that incorporates a maximum1.3 pressure ratio
limit, DOE would have the authority to establish test procedures and
energy conservation standards for equipment with pressure ratios
between 1.1 and 1.3, under the coverage of fans and blowers, rather
than compressors. (see: Docket No. EERE-2013-BT-STD-0006).
Alternatively, incorporating a minimum 1.1 pressure ratio into the
definition of ``compressor'' would result in an overlap in coverage
with fans and blowers, and create confusion in the market.
Additionally, incorporating a definition for ``compressor'' as
covered equipment by itself has no material impact on manufacturers.
Rather, a decision by DOE to establish test procedures and/or energy
conservation standards for certain compressors could materially impact
manufacturers and trade. As such, DOE's decision to establish coverage
for compressors based on a minimum pressure ratio of 1.3 has no impact
on manufacturing or exporting, as claimed by Atlas Copco.
In response to the 2012 NOPD, CAGI commented that the 1.2
compression ratio proposed by DOE is too low. CAGI suggested a
compression ratio of 2.5 instead. CAGI noted that what are referred to
as ``low-pressure blowers'' can reach pressure ratios below 2.5, but
are not generally viewed as compressors. CAGI also stated that a
compression ratio of 1.2 may result in the inclusion of blowers for
hand drying and vending machine compressors. (CAGI, No. 0003 at pp. 6-
7) Both Ingersoll Rand and Kaeser Compressors supported CAGI's
recommendation to use a pressure ratio of 2.5 instead of 1.2. (Kaeser
Compressors, No. 0007 at p. 1; Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at pp. 1-2).
However, DOE notes that, in response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR,
CAGI and Ingersoll Rand updated their opinions and provided support for
the definition of ``compressor,'' with a 1.3 minimum pressure ratio, as
proposed by DOE in the test procedure NOPR. (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054,
CAGI, No. 0010 at p. 3; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Ingersoll Rand, No. 0011
at p. 1; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Sullair, No. 0006 at p. 1) Kaeser
Compressors provided no updated comments related minimum pressure
ratio, in response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR.
In response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR, Scales Industrial
Technologies commented that the term ``compressor'' was historically
used for equipment with pressure values above 18-25 psig, corresponding
to pressure ratios of 2.2-2.7, and that equipment with pressure values
below this range were referred to as ``blowers.'' (EERE-2014-BT-TP-
0054, Scales Industrial Technologies, No. 0013, at p. 3)
In response to Kaeser Compressors and Scales Industrial
Technologies, DOE acknowledges that lower pressure compressors are
often termed ``blowers'' in industry. However, significant industry
precedent exists that classifies blowers (and other lower pressure
ratio machines) as sub-varieties of compressors. Specifically, in the
test procedure NOPR, DOE noted that the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) Technical Report 12942:2012, ``Compressors--
Classification--Complementary information to ISO 5390,'' (ISO/TR
12942:2012) defines ``compressor'' as a machine or apparatus converting
different types of energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure with pressure-increase ratios
exceeding 1.1. 81 FR 27219, 27223 (May 5, 2016). Additionally, the
European Union (EU) Lot 31 draft standard,\2\ as previously discussed
by Atlas Copco, also defines ``compressor'' using a minimum pressure
ratio of 1.1.\3\ Technically, any machine with a pressure ratio of
greater than 1.0 could meet the first clause of the proposed definition
for ``compressor''. In other words, it can convert different types of
energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for displacement and
compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure values above
atmospheric pressure. Given the precedent established by ISO/TR
12942:2012 and the EU Lot 31 draft standard, DOE believes that 1.1 is
the minimum pressure ratio used in the industry to describe
compressors. Consequently, a machine that converts different types of
energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for displacement and
compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure values above
atmospheric pressure and has a pressure ratio of 1.3 would technically
be considered a compressor by the compressor industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The EU Lot 31 draft standard is available at: https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0031&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf.
\3\ As discussed in the previous paragraph, DOE is adopting a
minimum pressure ratio of 1.3, rather than 1.1, in order to align
with the fans and blowers rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, DOE notes that the CA IOUs, CAGI, Sullivan-Palatek,
Ingersoll Rand, and Sullair all support the definition of
``compressor'' with a 1.3 minimum pressure ratio, as proposed in the
test procedure NOPR. (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, CA IOUs, No. 0012 at p. 3;
EERE-
[[Page 79994]]
2014-BT-TP-0054, CAGI, No. 0010 at p. 3; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054,
Sullivan-Palatek, No. 0007 at p. 1; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Ingersoll
Rand, No. 0011 at p. 1; EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Sullair, No. 0006 at p.
1). For these reasons, DOE reaffirms its conclusion that a minimum
pressure ratio of 1.3 is appropriate for use in the definition of
``compressor.''
C. Equipment Configuration
In response to the 2012 NOPD, Ingersoll Rand made two
recommendations regarding which components should be included in the
definition of ``compressor.'' First, Ingersoll Rand suggested that
``compressor'' should be defined to include ``onboard'' controls that
are integrated into the compressor package and solely for the operation
of the compressor package to which they are mounted. (Ingersoll Rand,
No. 0004 at p. 2).
Second, Ingersoll Rand suggested that ``compressor'' should be
defined to include filters and treatment equipment that are integral
and necessary to operate the compressor, such as oil coolers,
aftercoolers, and filters, and deliver a certain quality of compressed
air. (Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at p. 2).
In response, this final rule establishes a definition for
``compressors'' and classifies them as covered equipment under EPCA; it
does not establish scope for any potential energy conservation
standards. To that end, DOE notes that the definition of ``compressor''
adopted in this final rule (see section III.H), is broad and does not
exclude the components recommended by Ingersoll Rand. However, DOE
notes that it may limit the applicability of any test procedures and
energy conservations standards it chooses to pursue in the future to
address the (components/controls) identified by Ingersoll Rand.
D. Electrical Connection Method
In response to the 2012 NOPD, CAGI commented that the definition of
``compressor'' should not apply to compressors that are connected
through a wall outlet using a plug connection. CAGI explained that
these compressors generally have intermittent usage patterns, are
small, and are not designed for continuous duty and, therefore, do not
represent significant energy use. (CAGI, No. 0003 at p. 7)
DOE recognizes the benefits of focusing on compressors likely to
account for significant energy use for the purposes of setting
regulatory requirements. However, DOE notes that compressors can be
modified to add or remove electrical plugs, without great cost or
difficulty, by a party aiming to circumvent standards. Additionally,
for certain compressor sizes (i.e., smaller horsepower), the presence
of a plug has no bearing on end user utility, as plugs can be added or
removed at a nominal cost to the end user. Therefore, many compressors
with and without plugs may serve the same markets and applications and
should be treated similarly.
Finally, DOE prefers to use attributes more native to a compressor
(e.g., pressure ratios) to delineate, where needed, which compressors
may fall within the coverage determination. As a result, DOE is
declining CAGI's recommendation to remove from the coverage
determination those compressors that are connected through a wall
outlet using a plug connection.
E. Non-Electric Compressors
In response to the 2012 NOPD, EEI commented that DOE should use a
definition that applies to non-electric in addition to electric
compressors, arguing that limiting the definition to electric
compressors would be inconsistent with DOE's other recent actions for
similar products, and equipment such as pumps and fans, and would be
inconsistent with the intent of EPCA. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 2) NRECA
also commented that any compressor definition should be fuel-neutral.
(NRECA, No. 0008, at p. 2) EEI also noted that DOE provided no
rationale supporting the exclusion of non-electric compressors, and
that there are significant numbers of fossil fuel-driven compressors
operating in the United States. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 5)
Further, in response to the 2012 NOPD, EEI stated that excluding
non-electric compressors carries the potential to distort markets--
presumably by incentivizing end users to substitute unregulated
compressors. (EEI, No. 0009, at p. 7) NRECA also commented that an
electric-only compressor definition could encourage fuel-switching to
non-electric compressors and not result in economic or energy savings.
(NRECA, No. 0008, at p. 2)
In response to EEI's and NRECA's argument not to limit the
definition of ``compressor'' to electric compressors, DOE notes that it
is adopting a fuel-neutral definition of ``compressor.''
F. Variety of Equipment Covered
In response to the 2016 test procedure NOPR, Compressed Air Systems
commented that the term ``compressor'' may unintentionally include
other equipment, such as refrigerators, air conditioners, bellows, hand
air pumps, or turbochargers, and suggested a more narrow definition of
the term that would encompass just the products intended for
regulation. (EERE-2014-BT-TP-0054, Compressed Air Systems, No. 0008 at
p. 1).
In response, DOE notes that the definition of ``compressor,'' as
proposed in the test procedure NOPR, does not specifically include or
exclude compressors installed as components of other covered products
or equipment such as refrigerators and air conditioners. Nonetheless,
it may apply to subcomponents of such equipment. Further, if equipment
commonly referred to as bellows, hand air pumps, or turbochargers meets
the definition of ``compressor,'' as proposed in the test procedure
NOPR and adopted in this document, such equipment would fall within the
coverage determination for compressors. However, DOE will determine
appropriate scope(s) of applicability for future test procedure and
energy conservation standards rulemakings based on the particular
circumstances of the market.
G. Federal Preemption
In response to DOE's May 19, 2016 energy conversation standards
NOPR (81 FR 31680), the CA IOUs, ASAP, ACEEE, NEEA, NRDC, NEEP, and ASE
commented that if there are no energy conservation standards for
reciprocating compressors, then reciprocating compressors should not be
covered equipment in order to allow states to pursue standards. (EERE-
2013-BT-STD-0040, CA IOUs, No. 0059 at pp. 2-3; EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040,
CA IOUs, Public Meeting Transcript, No. 0044 at p. 153; EERE-2013-BT-
STD-0040, ASAP, ACEEE, NEEA, NRDC, NEEP, ASE, No. 0060 at pp. 2-3)
In this final rule, DOE is establishing a broad definition for
``compressors;'' it is not establishing a definition for specific
categories of compressors. DOE will define specific categories of
compressors and the scope of applicability of test procedures and
energy conservation standards in their respective rules. In turn, DOE
is classifying compressors as covered equipment under EPCA because the
agency concludes that commercial and industrial compressors qualify as
covered equipment under part A-1 of Title III of EPCA, as amended. (42
U.S.C. 6311 et seq.). Once DOE has classified equipment as covered, any
State regulation concerning the energy use or energy efficiency of the
covered product is preempted by Federal coverage. (42 U.S.C. 6297(b),
6316(a)).
[[Page 79995]]
H. Conclusion
Ultimately, for the reasons discussed in this section and
established in the test procedure NOPR, DOE is adopting the definition
of ``compressor,'' as proposed in the test procedure NOPR, with one
minor modification in nomenclature. Specifically, DOE is replacing the
term ``pressure ratio'' with ``pressure ratio at full-load operating
pressure.''.
DOE will develop specific methods to determine pressure ratio at
full-load operating pressure as a part of a separate test procedure
rulemaking process.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ U.S. DOE--Energy Information Administration (2015), Annual
Energy Outlook 2015, DOE/EIA-0383 (Available at: https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/aeo15/pdf/0383(2015).pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Evaluation of Compressors as a Covered Equipment
The following sections describe DOE's evaluation of whether
compressors fulfill the criteria for being added as covered equipment
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6311(2) and 42 U.S.C. 6312. Compressors are
listed as a type of industrial equipment at 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(i).
The following discussion addresses DOE's consideration of the three
requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(A) and 42 U.S.C. 6312.
A. Energy Consumption in Operation
In the 2012 NOPD, DOE cited data from the 2002 United States
Industrial Electric Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment,
which estimated total annual industrial compressor energy use (from
Manufacturing SIC codes 20-39) at 91,050 million kWh per year.\5\ DOE
noted that, because industrial activity in 2012 is greater than it was
in 2002, it was likely that annual compressor energy use was higher
than this figure. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Manufacturing
and Construction Division, Series MA333P(10)-1, Stationary Air
Compressors, Reciprocating, Single and Double Acting (333912110T),
2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to DOE's NOPD conclusions, EEI commented that data
referenced in the proposed determination of coverage was neither
accurate nor current. EEI noted that although DOE asserted industrial
activity in 2012 exceeded that of 2002, the amount of industrial
electricity consumed and number of industrial customers in 2011 were
lower than in 2003 and 2004, respectively. (EEI, No. 0009 at pp. 2-3).
In its energy conservation standards NOPR, DOE revised the sources
used to characterize the compressor market, DOE revised both initial
shipments, (discussed in section IV.B) and industrial and commercial
growth indicators. DOE projected future growth using Energy Information
Administration's (EIA's) Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) Macroeconomic
projections for the Value of Manufacturing Shipments, and Commercial
Floor Space for industrial and commercial sectors, respectively.\4\
Based on the energy savings results discussed in section IV.D, DOE
reaffirms its conclusion that compressors consume a significant amount
of energy in the industrial and commercial sectors.
B. Distribution in Commerce
In the 2012 NOPD, DOE tentatively concluded that compressors are
distributed in commerce for both the industrial and commercial sectors.
Specifically, DOE estimated that 1.3 million motors are shipped
annually to drive compressors in the U.S. commercial and industrial
sectors, based on the 2011 International Energy Agency (IEA) Survey.
DOE also assumed that only a small fraction of these motors are used as
a motor only replacement in compressor systems (based on additional
2004 U.S. Census data); consequently, DOE estimated that nearly 1.3
million compressors were distributed in commerce annually for
industrial or commercial use. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
In response to DOE's NOPD conclusions, Ingersoll Rand commented
that the estimate of annual compressor shipments provided by DOE is
grossly inflated. (Ingersoll Rand, No. 0004 at p. 2) CAGI commented
that DOE's estimates most likely incorporate compressors going into
consumer applications, and if only commercial and industrial
applications were counted, the number would be significantly lower.
(CAGI, No. 0003 at p. 7) EEI recommended that DOE elaborate on how it
derived the 1.3 million compressor shipment estimate, if DOE is to use
it in in any future energy conservation standards analyses. (EEI, No.
0009 at p. 3)
In response to comments from Ingersoll Rand, CAGI, and EEI, DOE
sought, and received, shipments data for rotary screw compressors from
a number of manufacturer stakeholders and subject matter experts, which
DOE published in its energy conservation standards NOPR. However, DOE
was able to find only limited shipments data for reciprocating
compressors, so DOE continued to use the data from the U.S. Census
Bureau.\5\ DOE estimated in its energy conservation standards NOPR
shipments analysis that 31 thousand rotary screw and 538 thousand
reciprocating compressors were shipped to commercial and industrial
sectors in 2013. (EERE-2013-BT-STD-0040-0037) Based on these revised
shipments estimates, DOE reaffirms its conclusion that compressors are
distributed in commerce to commercial and industrial sectors.
C. Prior Inclusion as a Covered Product
Compressors are not currently included as covered products under
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 430.
D. Coverage Necessary To Carry Out Purposes of Part A-1 of the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act
The purpose of part A-1 of EPCA is to improve the energy efficiency
of electric motors, pumps and certain other industrial equipment to
conserve the energy resources of the Nation. (42 U.S.C. 6312 (a)). In
the 2012 NOPD, DOE proposed that coverage of compressors was necessary
to carry out the purposes of part A-1 of EPCA because coverage will
promote the conservation of energy resources. DOE concluded that
efficiency standards that may result from coverage would help to
capture some portion of the potential for improving the efficiency of
compressors. 77 FR 76972, 76974 (Dec 31, 2012).
In response to DOE's conclusion that efficiency standards that may
result from coverage of compressors would help to capture some portion
of the potential for improving the efficiency of compressors, CAGI
commented that compressor designs are mature and compressor
manufacturers have already incorporated the most efficient motor
designs and technologies available in the market. CAGI believes that
including compressors as covered equipment would inhibit investment in
research and development because of the hurdles involved in approving
new designs for the market. (CAGI, No. 0003 at p. 8) CAGI also argued
that, due to variation in field applications that lead to changes in
overall efficiency, regulation of compressor packages is an ineffective
way to capture significant energy savings. CAGI suggested that,
therefore, DOE exclude commercial and industrial compressors under Part
A-1 of Title III of EPCA. (CAGI, No. 0003 at pp. 4-5)
Kaeser Compressors commented that since manufacturers already
publish test data at various load levels and that data is verified by a
third-party and since annual energy costs are dependent on the dynamics
of an individual system, Kaeser does not believe that including
[[Page 79996]]
compressors alone as covered equipment would be beneficial to carrying
out the purposes of Part A-1 of EPCA. (Kaeser Compressors, No. 0007 at
pp. 3)
DOE published consumer saving for lubricated rotary screw,
lubricant-free rotary screw, and reciprocating compressors in its
energy conservation standard NOPR TSD.\6\ These equipment account for
over 90 percent of compressors in the commercial and industrial sectors
and are used in a wide variety of applications. While DOE did not
propose an increase in efficiency above the baseline for lubricant-free
rotary screw, or, new standards for reciprocating compressors, DOE's
analysis found that there was energy, and consumer savings for these
equipment at most efficiency levels. Further, DOE published national
energy saving estimates for lubricated rotary screw compressors in its
energy conservation standard NOPR. DOE estimated, at the proposed
level, significant national energy savings of 0.18 quads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy Office (2015), NOPR Technical Support Document (TSD): Energy
Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and
Industrial Equipment: Air Compressors (Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2013-BT=STD-0040-0037).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These estimated saving presented in the energy conservation
standard TSD and NOPR are an indication that coverage will result in
conservation of energy resources. While DOE proposed new energy
conservation standards for a sub-set of compressor designs currently
available in commerce, broadening of the energy conservations standards
beyond lubricated rotary screw compressors will likely increase the
amount of energy savings.
Based on the preceding discussion, DOE reaffirms its conclusion
that incorporating compressors as covered equipment is necessary to
carry out the purposes of Part A-1 of EPCA, and that efficiency
standards that may result from coverage would improve the efficiency of
compressors and help to capture some portion of the potential for
energy savings from this improved efficiency. Based on the information
in sections IV.A, IV.B, and IV.C of this rule, DOE determines that
commercial and industrial compressors qualify as covered equipment
under part A-1 of Title III of EPCA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6311 et
seq.).
V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
DOE has reviewed this final rule, which determines coverage for
compressors, under the following executive orders and acts.
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 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 final action was not subject to review under the
Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) in the 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 a regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule
that, by law, must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency
certifies that the 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 (Aug. 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 (Feb. 19, 2003). DOE
makes its procedures and policies available on the Office of the
General Counsel's Web site at www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE reviewed this final rule under the provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the policies and procedures published on February
19, 2003. This final rule sets no test procedures or standards; it only
positively determines that compressors meet the criteria for
classification as covered equipment and that future standards may be
warranted to regulate their energy use. Economic impacts on small
entities would be considered in the context of such rulemakings. On the
basis of the foregoing, DOE certifies that the determination has no
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis for
this final rule. 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 final rule, which concludes that compressors meet the criteria
for a covered product for which the Secretary may prescribe an energy
conservation standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p), imposes no
new information or record-keeping requirements. Accordingly, the 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 document, DOE positively determines that compressors meet
the criteria for classification as covered equipment and that future
standards may be warranted to regulate their energy use. Should DOE
pursue that option, the relevant environmental impacts would be
explored as part of that rulemaking. As a result, DOE has determined
that this action falls into a class of actions that are categorically
excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10
CFR part 1021. Specifically, this action establishes a class of
equipment (compressors) for which energy conservation standards would
be appropriate. However, this action does not establish energy
conservation standards, and, therefore, does not result in any
environmental impacts. Thus, this action is covered by Categorical
Exclusion A6 ``Procedural rulemakings'' under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart
D. 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 (Aug. 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 (65 FR 13735), DOE published a statement of policy describing the
intergovernmental
[[Page 79997]]
consultation process that it will follow in developing such
regulations. DOE has examined this final rule and concludes that it
does 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. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
product that is the subject of this final rule. 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 (Feb. 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 final rule 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 1 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 (62 FR 12820),
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. (This policy also is
available at www.gc.doe.gov). DOE reviewed this final rule pursuant to
these existing authorities and its policy statement and determined that
the rule 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 final rule does 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 (Mar. 15,
1988), DOE determined that this final rule does 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 OMB. The OMB's
guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE's
guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has
reviewed this final rule 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 this regulatory action establishing certain
definitions and determining that compressors meet the criteria for a
covered product for which the Secretary may prescribe an energy
conservation standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) does 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 final determination as a significant energy action under E.O.
12866 or any successor order. Therefore, this final rule is not a
significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
L. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will report to Congress on the
promulgation of this rule prior to its effective date. The report will
state that it has been determined that the rule is a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
[[Page 79998]]
M. 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 (Jan. 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 the regulatory action discussed in this document
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
(Jan. 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 apply
to any future rulemaking to establish energy conservation standards for
compressors.
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final
rule.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 28, 2016.
David J. Friedman,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE amends part 431 of
chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.
0
2. Add subpart T to part 431 to read as follows:
Subpart T--Compressors
Sec.
431.341 Purpose and scope.
431.342 Definitions concerning compressors.
Subpart T--Compressors
Sec. 431.341 Purpose and scope.
This subpart contains and energy conservation requirements for
compressors, pursuant to Part A-1 of Title III of the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6311-6317.
Sec. 431.342 Definitions concerning compressors.
Compressor means a machine or apparatus that converts different
types of energy into the potential energy of gas pressure for
displacement and compression of gaseous media to any higher pressure
values above atmospheric pressure and has a pressure ratio at full-load
operating pressure greater than 1.3.
[FR Doc. 2016-26693 Filed 11-14-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P