Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Direct Heating Equipment, 6095-6107 [2019-03270]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
result from public disclosure; (6) when
such information might lose its
confidential character due to the
passage of time, and (7) why disclosure
of the information would be contrary to
the public interest.
It is DOE’s policy that all comments
may be included in the public docket,
without change and as received,
including any personal information
provided in the comments (except
information deemed to be exempt from
public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to
be a very important part of the process
for developing test procedures and
energy conservation standards. DOE
actively encourages the participation
and interaction of the public during the
comment period in each stage of this
process. Interactions with and between
members of the public provide a
balanced discussion of the issues and
assist DOE in the process. Anyone who
wishes to be added to the DOE mailing
list to receive future notices and
information about this process should
contact Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287–
1445 or via email at
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Signed in Washington, DC, on February 13,
2019.
Steven Chalk,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2019–03269 Filed 2–25–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[EERE–2019–BT–STD–0002]
Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Direct
Heating Equipment
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (‘‘DOE’’) is initiating an effort to
determine whether to amend the current
energy conservation standards for direct
heating equipment. Under the Energy
Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as
amended (‘‘EPCA’’), DOE must
periodically review these standards and
publish either a notice of proposed
rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) to propose new
standards for direct heating equipment
or a notice of determination that the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
existing standards do not need to be
amended. This request for information
(‘‘RFI’’) solicits information from the
public to help DOE determine whether
amended standards for direct heating
equipment would result in significant
energy savings and whether such
standards would be technologically
feasible and economically justified. DOE
welcomes written comments from the
public on any subject within the scope
of this document (including topics not
raised in this RFI).
DATES: Written comments and
information are requested and will be
accepted on or before April 12, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Alternatively, interested persons may
submit comments, identified by docket
number EERE–2019–BT–STD–0002, by
any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: DHE2019STD0002@
ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number
EERE–2019–BT–STD–0002 in the
subject line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B,
Energy Conservation Standards RFI for
Direct Heating Equipment, Docket No.
EERE–2019–BT–STD–0002, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC, 20585–0121. If possible, please
submit all items on a compact disc
(‘‘CD’’), in which case it is not necessary
to include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance
and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza
SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC, 20024.
Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible,
please submit all items on a CD, in
which case it is not necessary to include
printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be
accepted. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional
information on this process, see section
III of this document.
Docket: The docket for this activity,
which includes Federal Register
notices, comments, and other
supporting documents/materials, is
available for review at https://
www.regulations.gov. All documents in
the docket are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. However,
some documents listed in the index,
such as those containing information
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6095
that is exempt from public disclosure,
may not be publicly available.
The docket web page can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2019-BT-STD0002. The docket web page contains
instructions on how to access all
documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section III of this
document for information on how to
submit comments through https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Stephanie Johnson, 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) 287–
1943. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–5827. Email:
Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to
submit a comment or review other
public comments and the docket,
contact the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287–
1445 or by email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
B. Rulemaking Process
II. Request for Information and Comments
A. Products Covered by This Process
1. Unvented Heaters
2. Vented Heaters
B. Market and Technology Assessment
1. Product Classes
2. Technology Assessment
C. Screening Analysis
D. Engineering Analysis
1. Baseline Efficiency Levels
2. Maximum Available and Maximum
Technologically Feasible Levels
3. Manufacturer Production Costs and
Manufacturing Selling Price
E. Mark-Up Analysis
1. Distribution Channels
2. Mark-Ups
F. Energy Use Analysis
1. Sample Development
2. Energy Use Calculations
G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
Analysis
1. Total Installed Cost
2. Operating Costs
H. Shipments Analysis
I. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
J. Other Energy Conservation Standards
Topics
1. Market Failures
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6096
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
2. Market-Based Approaches to Energy
Conservation Standards
III. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act of 1975, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’ or
‘‘the Act’’),1 Public Law 94–163 (42
U.S.C. 6291–6317, as codified), among
other things, authorizes DOE to regulate
the energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and industrial
equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291–6317, as
codified) Title III, Part B 2 of EPCA
established the Energy Conservation
Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a
variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. These
products include direct heating
equipment (DHE), the subject of this
document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(9)) EPCA
prescribed energy conservation
standards for these products and
directed DOE to conduct two cycles of
rulemakings to determine whether to
amend these standards. (42 U.S.C.
6295(e)(3) and (4))
Under EPCA, DOE’s energy
conservation program consists
essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2)
labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and
enforcement procedures. Relevant
provisions of the Act specifically
include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling
provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), energy
conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295),
and the authority to require information
and reports from manufacturers (42
U.S.C. 6296).
Federal energy efficiency
requirements for covered products
established under EPCA generally
supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing,
labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297)
DOE may, however, grant waivers of
Federal preemption in limited instances
for particular State laws or regulations,
in accordance with the procedures and
other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6297(d))
DOE completed the first of the
required rulemaking cycles in 2010 by
publishing a final rule on April 16, 2010
(‘‘April 2010 final rule’’) that adopted
amended performance standards for
certain DHE (i.e., vented home heating
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through America’s Water
Infrastructure Act of 2018, Public Law 115–270
(Oct. 23, 2018).
2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
equipment) manufactured on or after
April 16, 2013. 75 FR 20112. In the
April 2010 final rule, DOE did not issue
standards for unvented home heating
equipment, a subset of DHE, finding that
such standards would produce
insignificant energy savings. Id at
20130. Additionally, DOE completed a
second rulemaking cycle for DHE by
issuing a final determination to not
amend standards for vented home
heating equipment and to not to adopt
standards for unvented home heating
equipment on October 17, 2016
(‘‘October 2016 final determination’’).
81 FR 71325. The current energy
conservation standards for DHE are
located in title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) part 430, section
32(i)(2). The currently applicable DOE
test procedures for unvented and vented
DHE appear at 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B, appendix G and appendix O,
respectively.
In the October 2016 final
determination, DOE concluded that
energy conservation standards should
not be amended for DHE. DOE
determined that the DHE market
characteristics at the time were largely
similar to those during the analysis for
the April 2010 final rule, and that the
technologies available for improving
DHE energy efficiency had not advanced
significantly since the publication of the
April 2010 final rule. In addition, DOE
determined that the conclusions
reached in the April 2010 final rule
regarding the benefits and burdens of
more stringent standards for DHE were
still relevant to the DHE market.
Therefore, DOE concluded that
amended energy conservation standards
would not be economically justified. 81
FR 71325, 71325 (Oct. 17, 2016).
EPCA also requires that, not later than
6 years after the issuance of any final
rule establishing or amending a
standard, DOE evaluate the energy
conservation standards for each type of
covered product, including those at
issue here, and publish either a notice
of determination that standards do not
need to be amended, or a NOPR
including new proposed energy
conservation standards (proceeding to a
final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C.
6295(m)(1)) EPCA further provides that,
not later than 3 years after the issuance
of a final determination not to amend
standards, DOE must publish either a
notice of determination that standards
for the product do not need to be
amended, or a NOPR including new
proposed energy conservation standards
(proceeding to a final rule, as
appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B))
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DOE must make the analysis on which
the determination is based publicly
available and provide an opportunity for
written comment. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(2))
In making a determination, DOE must
evaluate whether more-stringent
standards would: (1) Yield a significant
savings in energy use and (2) be both
technologically feasible and
economically justified. (42 U.S.C.
6295(m)(1)(A)) DOE is publishing this
RFI to collect data and information to
inform its decision consistent with its
obligations under EPCA.
B. Rulemaking Process
DOE must follow specific statutory
criteria for prescribing new or amended
standards for covered products. EPCA
requires that any new or amended
energy conservation standard be
designed to achieve the maximum
improvement in energy or water
efficiency that is technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) To determine
whether a standard is economically
justified, EPCA requires that DOE
determine whether the benefits of the
standard exceed its burdens by, to the
greatest extent practicable, considering
the following seven factors:
(1) The economic impact of the
standard on the manufacturers and
consumers of the affected products;
(2) The savings in operating costs
throughout the estimated average life of
the product compared to any increases
in the initial cost, or maintenance
expenses;
(3) The total projected amount of
energy and water (if applicable) savings
likely to result directly from the
standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the
performance of the products likely to
result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of
competition, as determined in writing
by the Attorney General, that is likely to
result from the standard;
(6) The need for national energy and
water conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of
Energy (Secretary) considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)–(VII))
DOE fulfills these and other
applicable requirements by conducting
a series of analyses throughout the
rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows the
individual analyses that are performed
to satisfy each of the requirements
within EPCA.
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
6097
TABLE I.1—EPCA REQUIREMENTS AND CORRESPONDING DOE ANALYSIS
EPCA requirement
Corresponding DOE analysis
Technological Feasibility ..........................................................................
Economic Justification:
1. Economic impact on manufacturers and consumers ...................
2. Lifetime operating cost savings compared to increased cost for
the product.
3. Total projected energy savings .....................................................
4. Impact on utility or performance ...................................................
5. Impact of any lessening of competition ........................................
6. Need for national energy and water conservation ........................
7. Other factors the Secretary considers relevant ............................
As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE
is publishing this document seeking
input and data from interested parties to
aid in the development of the technical
analyses on which DOE will ultimately
rely to determine whether (and if so,
how) to amend the standards for direct
heating equipment.
II. Request for Information and
Comments
In the following sections, DOE has
identified a variety of issues on which
it seeks input to aid in the development
of the technical and economic analyses
regarding whether amended standards
for DHE may be warranted.
Additionally, DOE welcomes comments
on other issues relevant to this request
for information that may not specifically
be identified in this document. In
particular, DOE notes that under
Executive Order 13771, ‘‘Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs,’’ Executive Branch agencies such
as DOE are directed to manage the costs
associated with the imposition of
expenditures required to comply with
Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339
(Feb. 3, 2017). Pursuant to that
Executive Order, DOE encourages the
public to provide input on measures
DOE could take to lower the cost of its
energy conservation standards
rulemakings, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements, and compliance
and certification requirements
applicable to DHE while remaining
consistent with the requirements of
EPCA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
• Market and Technology Assessment.
• Screening Analysis.
• Engineering Analysis.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Manufacturer Impact Analysis.
Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.
Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis.
Shipments Analysis.
Mark-ups for Product Price Determination.
Energy and Water Use Determination.
Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.
Shipments Analysis.
National Impact Analysis.
Screening Analysis.
Engineering Analysis.
Manufacturer Impact Analysis.
Shipments Analysis.
National Impact Analysis.
Employment Impact Analysis.
Utility Impact Analysis.
Emissions Analysis.
Monetization of Emission Reductions Benefits.
Regulatory Impact Analysis.
A. Products Covered by This Process
The definitions for DHE were most
recently amended in a test procedure
final rule. 80 FR 792 (Jan. 6, 2015). This
RFI covers those products that meet the
definitions of ‘‘direct heating
equipment’’ and ‘‘home heating
equipment,’’ 3 as codified at 10 CFR
430.2 and defined as follows:
(1) ‘‘Direct heating equipment’’ means
vented home heating equipment and
unvented home heating equipment.
(2) ‘‘Home heating equipment, not
including furnaces’’ means vented home
heating equipment and unvented home
heating equipment.
1. Unvented Heaters
Unvented heaters are those products
that meet the definitions for ‘‘unvented
home heating equipment,’’ as codified at
10 CFR 430.2. DOE defines unvented
heaters and the various sub-types of
unvented heaters as follows:
(1) ‘‘Unvented home heating
equipment’’ means a class of home
heating equipment, not including
furnaces, used for the purpose of
furnishing heat to a space proximate to
such heater directly from the heater and
without duct connections and includes
electric heaters and unvented gas and
oil heaters.
3 DOE notes that DHE is defined at 10 CFR 430.2
as ‘‘vented home heating equipment’’ and
‘‘unvented home heating equipment’’; however, the
existing energy conservation standards apply only
to product classes of vented home heating
equipment. There are no existing energy
conservation standards for unvented home heating
equipment.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(2) ‘‘Electric heater’’ means an electric
appliance in which heat is generated
from electrical energy and dissipated by
convection and radiation and includes
baseboard electric heaters, ceiling
electric heaters, floor electric heaters,
portable electric heaters, and wall
electric heaters.
(3) ‘‘Primary heater’’ means a heating
device that is the principal source of
heat for a structure and includes
baseboard electric heaters, ceiling
electric heaters, and wall electric
heaters.
(4) ‘‘Supplementary heater’’ means a
heating device that provides heat to a
space in addition to that which is
supplied by a primary heater.
Supplementary heaters include portable
electric heaters.
(5) ‘‘Baseboard electric heater’’ means
an electric heater which is intended to
be recessed in or surface mounted on
walls at floor level, which is
characterized by long, low physical
dimensions, and which transfers heat by
natural convection and/or radiation.
(6) ‘‘Ceiling electric heater’’ means an
electric heater which is intended to be
recessed in, surface mounted on, or
hung from a ceiling, and which transfers
heat by radiation and/or convection
(either natural or forced).
(7) ‘‘Floor electric heater’’ means an
electric heater which is intended to be
recessed in a floor, and which transfers
by radiation and/or convection (either
natural or forced).
(8) ‘‘Portable electric heater’’ means
an electric heater which is intended to
stand unsupported, and can be moved
from place to place within a structure.
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6098
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
It is connected to electric supply by
means of a cord and plug, and transfers
heat by radiation and/or convention
(either natural or forced).
(9) ‘‘Wall electric heater’’ means an
electric heater (excluding baseboard
electric heaters) which is intended to be
recessed in or surface mounted on
walls, which transfers heat by radiation
and/or convection (either natural or
forced) and which includes forced
convectors, natural convectors, radiant
heaters, high wall or valance heaters.
(10) ‘‘Unvented gas heater’’ means an
unvented, self-contained, free-standing,
non-recessed gas-burning appliance
which furnishes warm air by gravity or
fan circulation.
(11) ‘‘Unvented oil heater’’ means an
unvented, self-contained, free-standing,
non-recessed oil-burning appliance
which furnishes warm air by gravity or
fan circulation.
Issue A.1 DOE requests comment on
the definitions currently applicable to
unvented heaters and whether any of
the definitions should be revised, and if
so, how. Please provide a rationale for
any suggested change. DOE notes that
floor electric heaters are not currently
listed among the other types of heaters
included in the definition of a ‘‘primary
heater.’’ DOE understands that floor
electric heaters have similar heat output
as the types of heaters listed in the
definition of ‘‘primary heater’’ and may
provide the primary source of heat in
small dwellings. DOE requests comment
on whether floor electric heaters should
be specifically defined and also
included in the definition of ‘‘primary
heater.’’
2. Vented Heaters
Vented heaters are those products that
meet the definitions for ‘‘vented home
heating equipment,’’ as codified at 10
CFR 430.2. DOE defines vented heaters
and the various sub-types of vented
heaters as follows:
(1) ‘‘Vented home heating equipment’’
or ‘‘vented heater’’ means a class of
home heating equipment, not including
furnaces, designed to furnish warmed
air to the living space of a residence,
directly from the device, without duct
connections (except that boots not to
exceed 10 inches beyond the casing may
be permitted) and includes: vented wall
furnace, vented floor furnace, and
vented room heater.
(2) ‘‘Vented floor furnace’’ means a
self-contained vented heater suspended
from the floor of the space being heated,
taking air for combustion from outside
this space. The vented floor furnace
supplies heated air circulated by gravity
or by a fan directly into the space to be
heated through openings in the casing.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
(3) ‘‘Vented room heater’’ means a
self-contained, free standing, nonrecessed, vented heater for furnishing
warmed air to the space in which it is
installed. The vented room heater
supplies heated air circulated by gravity
or by a fan directly into the space to be
heated through openings in the casing.
(4) ‘‘Vented wall furnace’’ means a
self-contained vented heater complete
with grilles or the equivalent, designed
for incorporation in, or permanent
attachment to, a wall of a residence and
furnishing heated air circulated by
gravity or by a fan directly into the
space to be heated through openings in
the casing.
(5) ‘‘Unvented home heating
equipment’’ means a class of home
heating equipment, not including
furnaces, used for the purpose of
furnishing heat to a space proximate to
such heater directly from the heater and
without duct connections and includes
electric heaters and unvented gas and
oil heaters.
Issue A.2 DOE requests comment on
whether the definitions applicable to
DHE require any revisions, and if so,
how those definitions should be revised.
Please provide a rationale for any
suggested change. DOE also requests
feedback on whether the sub-category
definitions currently in place are
appropriate or whether further
modifications are needed. If these subcategory definitions need modifying,
DOE seeks specific input on how to
define these terms.
Issue A.3 DOE requests comment on
whether additional product definitions
are necessary to close any potential gaps
in coverage between product types. DOE
also seeks input on whether such
products currently exist in the market or
whether they are being planned for
introduction.
B. Market and Technology Assessment
The market and technology
assessment that DOE routinely conducts
when analyzing the impacts of a
potential new or amended energy
conservation standard provides
information about the DHE industry that
will be used in DOE’s analysis
throughout the rulemaking process.
DOE uses qualitative and quantitative
information to characterize the structure
of the industry and market. DOE
identifies manufacturers, estimates
market shares and trends, addresses
regulatory and non-regulatory initiatives
intended to improve energy efficiency
or reduce energy consumption, and
explores the potential for efficiency
improvements in the design and
manufacturing of the subject products.
DOE also reviews product literature,
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
industry publications, and company
websites, as well as information from
trade journals, government agencies,
and trade organizations. Additionally,
DOE routinely conducts interviews with
manufacturers to improve its assessment
of the market and available technologies
for DHE.
1. Product Classes
When evaluating and establishing
energy conservation standards, DOE
may divide covered products into
product classes by the type of energy
used, or by capacity or other
performance-related features that justify
a different standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q))
In making a determination whether
capacity or another performance-related
feature justifies a different standard,
DOE must consider such factors as the
utility of the feature to the consumer
and other factors DOE deems
appropriate. Id.
For DHE, the current energy
conservation standards specified in 10
CFR 430.32(i)(2) are based on 11
product classes divided by equipment
type (i.e., wall, floor, or room), heat
circulation type (i.e., fan or gravity), and
input capacity. Table II.1 lists the
current product classes for DHE.
TABLE II.1—CURRENT DIRECT HEATING EQUIPMENT PRODUCT CLASSES
DHE
type
Heat
circulation
type
Wall ..
Fan ............
Gravity .......
Floor
All ..............
Room
All ..............
Input rate, Btu/h
≤42,000.
>42,000.
≤27,000.
>27,000 and ≤46,000.
>46,000.
≤37,000.
>37,000.
≤20,000.
>20,000 and ≤27,000.
>27,000 and ≤46,000.
>46,000.
Issue B.1 DOE requests feedback on
the current DHE product classes and
whether changes to these individual
product classes and their descriptions
should be made or whether certain
classes should be merged or separated.
DOE further requests feedback on
whether combining certain classes
could impact product utility by
eliminating any performance-related
features or impact the stringency of the
current energy conservation standard for
these products. DOE also requests
comment on separating any of the
existing product classes and whether it
would impact product utility by
eliminating any performance-related
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
features or reduce any compliance
burdens.
Issue B.2 DOE seeks information
regarding any other new product classes
it should consider for inclusion in its
analysis. Specifically, DOE requests
information on the performance-related
features (e.g., input capacity, equipment
type, heater type, etc.) that provide
unique consumer utility and data
detailing the corresponding impacts on
energy use that would justify separate
product classes (i.e., explanation for
why the presence of these performancerelated features would increase energy
consumption).
TABLE II.2—PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED
TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR DIRECT
HEATING EQUIPMENT FROM THE
APRIL 2010 FINAL RULE AND OCTOBER 2016 FINAL DETERMINATION 4—
Continued
Technology options
Two-stage and modulating operation
Improved fan or blower motor efficiency
Increased insulation
Condensing
Condensing Pulse Combustion
Air circulation fan
Sealed combustion
Issue B.3 DOE seeks information on
the technologies listed in Table II.2
In analyzing the feasibility of
regarding their applicability to the
potential new or amended energy
current market and how these
conservation standards, DOE uses
technologies may impact the efficiency
information about existing and past
of DHE as measured according to the
technology options and prototype
DOE test procedure. DOE also seeks
designs to help identify technologies
information on how these technologies
that manufacturers could use to meet
may have changed since they were
and/or exceed a given set of energy
considered in the October 2016 Final
conservation standards under
Determination analysis. Specifically,
consideration. In consultation with
DOE seeks information on the range of
interested parties, DOE intends to
efficiencies or performance
develop a list of technologies to
characteristics that are currently
consider in its analysis. That analysis
available for each technology option.
will likely include a number of the
Issue B.4 DOE seeks comment on
technology options DOE previously
other technology options that it should
considered during its most recent
consider for inclusion in its analysis.
rulemaking for DHE. A complete list of
DOE is particularly interested in
those prior options appears in Table II.2. information for any potential new
DOE has conducted a preliminary
technology options regarding their
review and did not identify any new
market adoption, costs, and any
options.
concerns with incorporating them into
products (e.g., impacts on consumer
TABLE II.2—PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED utility, potential safety concerns,
TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FOR DIRECT manufacturing/production/
HEATING EQUIPMENT FROM THE implementation issues).
2. Technology Assessment
APRIL 2010 FINAL RULE AND OCTOBER 2016 FINAL DETERMINATION 4
Technology options
Increased heat exchanger surface area
Multiple flues
Multiple turns in flue
Direct vent (concentric)
Increased heat transfer coefficient
Electronic ignition
Thermal vent damper
Electrical vent damper
Power burner
Induced draft
4 See chapter 3, section 3.3.2.2 in the April 2010
final rule technical support document (TSD)
published during the rulemaking process,
document #149 on https://regulations.gov in docket
ID EERE–2006–STD–0129.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
C. Screening Analysis
The purpose of the screening analysis
is to evaluate the technologies that
improve equipment efficiency to
determine which technologies will be
eliminated from further consideration
and which will be passed to the
engineering analysis for further
consideration.
DOE determines whether to eliminate
certain technology options from further
consideration based on the following
criteria:
(1) Technological feasibility.
Technologies that are not incorporated
in commercial products or in working
prototypes will not be considered
further.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6099
(2) Practicability to manufacture,
install, and service. If it is determined
that mass production of a technology in
commercial products and reliable
installation and servicing of the
technology could not be achieved on the
scale necessary to serve the relevant
market at the time of the compliance
date of the standard, then that
technology will not be considered
further.
(3) Impacts on equipment utility or
equipment availability. If a technology
is determined to have significant
adverse impact on the utility of the
equipment for significant subgroups of
consumers, or result in the
unavailability of any covered equipment
type with performance characteristics
(including reliability), features, sizes,
capacities, and volumes that are
substantially the same as equipment
generally available in the United States
at the time, it will not be considered
further.
(4) Adverse impacts on health or
safety. If it is determined that a
technology will have significant adverse
impacts on health or safety, it will not
be considered further.
10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A,
sections 4(a)(4) and 5(b).
Technology options identified in the
technology assessment are evaluated
against these criteria using DOE
analyses and inputs from interested
parties (e.g., manufacturers, trade
organizations, and energy efficiency
advocates). Technologies that pass
through the screening analysis are
referred to as ‘‘design options’’ in the
engineering analysis. Technology
options that fail to meet one or more of
the four criteria are eliminated from
consideration.
Additionally, DOE notes that the four
screening criteria do not directly
address the proprietary status of
technology options. DOE only considers
potential efficiency levels achieved
through the use of proprietary designs
in the engineering analysis if they are
not part of a unique pathway to achieve
the efficiency level (i.e., if there are
other non-proprietary technologies
capable of achieving the same efficiency
level).
Table II.3 summarizes the technology
options that DOE screened out in the
April 2010 final rule, and the applicable
screening criteria.
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6100
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE II.3—PREVIOUSLY SCREENED OUT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FROM THE APRIL 2010 FINAL RULE 5
EPCA Criteria
(X = basis for screening out)
Screened technology option
Increased heat transfer coefficient ..........................................
Power burner ...........................................................................
Condensing Pulse Combustion ...............................................
Improved fan or blower motor efficiency .................................
Issue C.1 DOE requests feedback on
what impact, if any, the screening
criteria described in this section would
have on each of the technology options
listed in Table II.2 with respect to DHE.
Similarly, DOE seeks information
regarding how these same criteria would
affect any other technology options not
already identified in this document with
respect to their potential use in DHE.
Issue C.2 With respect to the
screened out technology options listed
in Table II.3, DOE seeks information on
whether these options should, based on
current and projected assessments
regarding each of them, remain screened
out under the screening criteria
described in this section. With respect
to each of these technology options,
what steps, if any, could be (or have
already been) taken to facilitate the
introduction of each option as a means
to improve the energy performance of
DHE?
D. Engineering Analysis
The engineering analysis estimates
the cost-efficiency relationship of
products at different levels of increased
energy efficiency (‘‘efficiency levels’’).
This relationship serves as the basis for
the cost-benefit calculations for
consumers, manufacturers, and the
Nation. In determining the costefficiency relationship, DOE estimates
the change in manufacturer production
cost (‘‘MPC’’) associated with increasing
the efficiency of products above the
baseline, up to the maximum
technologically feasible (‘‘max-tech’’)
efficiency level for each product class.
DOE historically has used the
following three methodologies to
generate incremental manufacturing
costs and establish efficiency levels
(‘‘ELs’’) for analysis: (1) The designoption approach, which provides the
incremental costs of adding to a baseline
model design options that will improve
its efficiency; (2) the efficiency-level
approach, which provides the relative
5 See chapter 4, section 4.2.2 in the April 2010
final rule TSD published during the rulemaking
process, document #149 on https://regulations.gov
in docket ID EERE–2006–STD–0129.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
Technological
feasibility
Practicability to
manufacture,
install, and service
..............................
..............................
X
..............................
X
X
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Adverse impacts
on health and
safety
X
costs of achieving increases in energy
efficiency levels, without regard to the
particular design options used to
achieve such increases; and (3) the costassessment (or reverse engineering)
approach, which provides ‘‘bottom-up’’
manufacturing cost assessments for
achieving various levels of increased
efficiency, based on detailed cost data
for parts and material, labor, shipping/
packaging, and investment for models
that operate at particular efficiency
levels.
In the analysis for the April 2010 final
rule, DOE analyzed four product classes
that were representative of the 11 total
classes. Specifically, for each type of
DHE (i.e., wall fan, wall gravity, floor,
room), DOE selected one
‘‘representative’’ input range for
analysis and applied that analysis across
all other input rate ranges for the given
type of DHE. DOE developed a costefficiency relationship for each of these
analyzed representative product classes
that were used as the input for the
downstream analyses conducted in
support of that rulemaking. See chapter
5 of the April 2010 final rule TSD for
the cost-efficiency curves developed in
that rulemaking.
Issue D.1 DOE requests comment on
whether it is necessary to individually
analyze all 11 product classes, or
whether the approach of analyzing a
representative sub-set of product classes
is appropriate for any potential future
DHE energy conservation standards
rulemaking. For example, analysis on
the gas wall fan less than or equal to
42,000 Btu/h product classes may not be
necessary if the analysis on the
corresponding gas wall fan greater than
42,000 Btu/h product classes is
applicable to both product classes.
Additionally, DOE welcomes comment
on potential approaches to apply the
analyzed representative product class
results to the other product classes,
including the approach used for the
April 2010 final rule. If it is necessary
to individually analyze each of the 11
product classes (or more than the 11
classes), please provide information on
why aggregating certain products is not
PO 00000
Adverse impact on
product utility
appropriate. If this approach is not
appropriate, what alternative
approaches should DOE consider using
and why? 6
1. Baseline Efficiency Levels
For each product class that is
analyzed, DOE selects a baseline model
as a reference point against which any
changes resulting from new or amended
energy conservation standards can be
measured. The baseline model in each
product class represents the
characteristics of common or typical
products in that class. Typically, a
baseline model is one that just meets the
current minimum energy conservation
standards and provides basic consumer
utility.
DOE uses baseline models for
comparison in several phases of the
analyses, including the engineering
analysis, life-cycle cost (‘‘LCC’’)
analysis, payback period (‘‘PBP’’)
analysis, and national impact analysis
(‘‘NIA’’). In the engineering analysis, to
determine the changes in price to the
consumer that result from amended
standards, DOE compares the price of a
baseline model to the price of a model
at each higher efficiency level.
If it determines that a rulemaking is
necessary, consistent with this
analytical approach, DOE tentatively
plans to consider the current minimum
energy conservations standards (which
went into effect April 16, 2013) to
establish the baseline efficiency levels
for each product class. The current
standards for each product class are
based on DHE type (wall, floor, or
room), heat circulation type (fan or
gravity), and input capacity. The current
standards for DHE are found at 10 CFR
430.32(i)(2).
Issue D.2 DOE requests feedback on
whether using the current established
energy conservation standards for DHE
are appropriate baseline efficiency
levels for DOE to apply to each product
class in evaluating whether to amend
6 See chapter 5, section 5.3 in the April 2010 final
rule TSD published during the rulemaking process,
document #149 on https://regulations.gov in docket
ID EERE–2006–STD–0129.
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6101
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
the current energy conservation
standards for these products. DOE
requests data and suggestions to
evaluate the baseline efficiency levels in
order to better evaluate the potential for
amending energy conservation
standards for these products.
Issue D.3 DOE requests feedback on
the appropriate baseline efficiency
levels for any newly analyzed product
classes that are not currently in place or
for any contemplated combined or
separated product classes, as discussed
in section II.B.1 of this document. For
product classes that would be newly
analyzed (if any), DOE requests energy
use data to develop a baseline
relationship between energy use and
input capacity.
2. Maximum Available and Maximum
Technologically Feasible Levels
As part of DOE’s analysis when
considering potential amended
standards, DOE determines the
maximum available efficiency level and
the maximum technologically feasible
(‘‘max-tech’’) efficiency level for each
product class analyzed. The maximum
available efficiency level is the highestefficiency model currently available on
the market for that class. The max-tech
efficiency level represents the
theoretical maximum possible efficiency
if all available design options are
incorporated in a model. In some cases,
models at the max-tech efficiency level
are not commercially available because,
although the level is technically
achievable, manufacturers have
determined that it is not economically
feasible (either for the manufacturer to
produce or for consumers to purchase).
However, DOE seeks to determine the
max-tech level for purposes of its
analyses. The current maximum
available efficiencies for the 11 existing
product classes are included in Table
II.4, along with the maximum available
efficiencies from the April 2010 final
rule and the October 2016 final
determination.
TABLE II.4—MAXIMUM AVAILABLE EFFICIENCY LEVELS—CURRENT AND PREVIOUS RULEMAKINGS
AFUE
DHE type
Heat circulation type
Input rate, Btu/h
April 2010 *
Wall ........................................
Fan ........................................
Gravity ..................................
Floor ......................................
All ..........................................
Room .....................................
All ..........................................
≤42,000
>42,000
≤27,000
>27,000
>46,000
≤37,000
>37,000
≤20,000
>20,000
>27,000
>46,000
.................................
.................................
.................................
and ≤46,000 ...........
.................................
.................................
.................................
.................................
and ≤27,000 ...........
and ≤46,000 ...........
.................................
83
† 80
80
† 69
69
57
† 58
59
63
† 81
70
October
2016 **
Current ***
92
80
80
69
70
57
58
71
66
68
70
93
80
72
69
70
57
58
71
66
68
70
* Gas Appliance Manufacturers Associated Directory for Direct Heating Equipment downloaded March 2, 2009.
** Combination of Air-Conditioning, Heating, & Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) and DOE’s Compliance Certification Management System (CCMS)
databases downloaded on July 16, 2015.
*** Combination of AHRI and CCMS databases download on September 10, 2018.
† Representative product classes analyzed in the April 2010 final rule.
In the April 2010 final rule, DOE
determined max-tech efficiency levels
using the technology options available
at that time. For gas wall fan DHE with
an input rate over 42,000 Btu/h, DOE
identified a max-tech efficiency level
design with induced draft combustion,
resulting in an AFUE of 80 percent. For
gas wall gravity DHE with an input rate
over 27,000 Btu/h and up to 46,000 Btu/
h, DOE identified 70 percent AFUE as
a theoretical max-tech level, which was
achievable with an improved heat
exchanger design and electronic
ignition. For gas floor DHE with an
input rate over 37,000 Btu/h, DOE
identified the max-tech efficiency level
as 58 percent AFUE, which DOE stated
could be reached using an improved
heat exchanger design. For gas room
DHE with an input rate over 27,000 Btu/
h and up to 46,000 Btu/h, DOE
identified a theoretical max-tech
efficiency level of 83 percent AFUE,
which manufacturers could achieve
using an electronic ignition and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
improved heat exchanger. 75 FR 20112,
20145–20146 (April 16, 2010).
In the October 2016 final
determination, DOE noted that
condensing gas wall fan DHE models
with input rates at or below 42,000 Btu/
h had become available, and DOE
considered this the max-tech level for
gas wall fan DHE. Based on information
obtained during manufacturer
interviews and a manufacturer
production cost found through a
teardown analysis performed for the
proposed determination (81 FR 21276,
21280 (April 11, 2016)), DOE
determined that condensing technology
was not economically justified for gas
wall fan DHE at that time. 81 FR 71325,
71328 (Oct. 17, 2016). During
manufacturer interviews conducted
leading up to the proposed
determination, manufacturers indicated
that condensing models are significantly
more expensive to produce than noncondensing models, which DOE
confirmed through its teardown
analysis, which showed a 23 percent
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
manufacturing cost increase for
condensing units. Manufacturers also
indicated that shipments were so low as
to be negligible, and DOE noted that
only one manufacturer produced a
condensing gas wall fan DHE at that
time. DOE stated in the final
determination that manufacturers would
need to make substantial investments in
order to produce these units on a scale
large enough to support a Federal
minimum standard and that severe
manufacturer impacts would be
expected if an energy conservation
standard were adopted at a level met
through use of condensing technology.
Therefore, DOE concluded the
condensing technology option would
not be economically justified at that
time when analyzed for the Nation as a
whole. Id. In DOE’s preliminary
research for this RFI, it found that 2 out
of the 4 manufacturers of gas wall fan
DHE currently make products
incorporating condensing technology.
Issue D.4 DOE seeks input on
whether the maximum available
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6102
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
efficiency levels are appropriate and
technologically feasible for
consideration as possible energy
conservation standards for the products
at issue, and if not, why not. DOE also
seeks input on whether other maximum
efficiency levels are possible with
technologies, or combinations of
technologies, not currently incorporated
in available designs.
Issue D.5 DOE seeks feedback on
what design options would be
incorporated at a max-tech efficiency
level, and the efficiencies associated
with those levels. As part of this
request, DOE also seeks information as
to whether there are limitations on the
use of certain combinations of design
options.
3. Manufacturer Production Costs and
Manufacturing Selling Price
As described at the beginning of this
section, the main outputs of the
engineering analysis are cost-efficiency
relationships that describe the estimated
increases in manufacturer production
cost (MPC) associated with higherefficiency products for the analyzed
product classes. For the April 2010 final
rule, DOE developed the cost-efficiency
relationships by estimating the
efficiency improvements and costs
associated with incorporating specific
design options into the assumed
baseline model for each analyzed
product class. 75 FR 20112, 20147–
20149 (April 16, 2010).
Issue D.6 DOE requests feedback on
how manufacturers would incorporate
the technology options listed in Table
II.2 to increase energy efficiency in DHE
beyond the baseline. This includes
information on the order in which
manufacturers would incorporate the
different technologies to incrementally
improve the efficiencies of products.
DOE also requests feedback on whether
the increased energy efficiency would
lead to other design changes that would
not occur otherwise. DOE is also
interested in information regarding any
potential impact of design options on a
manufacturer’s ability to incorporate
additional functions or attributes in
response to consumer demand.
Issue D.7 DOE also seeks input on
the change in MPC associated with
incorporating each particular design
option. Specifically, DOE is interested
in whether and how the costs estimated
for design options in the April 2010
final rule have changed since the time
of that analysis. DOE also requests
information on the investments
necessary to incorporate specific design
options, including, but not limited to,
costs related to new or modified tooling
(if any), materials, engineering, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
development efforts to implement each
design option, and manufacturing/
production impacts.
Issue D.8 DOE requests comment on
whether certain design options may not
be applicable to (or incompatible with)
specific product classes.
To account for manufacturers’ nonproduction costs and profit margin, DOE
applies a non-production cost multiplier
(the manufacturer mark-up) to the MPC.
The resulting manufacturer selling price
(‘‘MSP’’) is the price at which the
manufacturer distributes a unit into
commerce. For the April 2010 final rule,
DOE used a manufacturer mark-up of
1.35 for all DHE. See chapter 5 of the
April 2010 final rule TSD.
Issue D.9 DOE requests feedback on
whether a manufacturer mark-up of 1.35
is appropriate for all DHE.
go through distributors to contractors,
and then to consumers as follows:
Manufacturer → Wholesaler →
Mechanical Contractor → Consumer
In new home applications, most sales
go through distributors to contractors
hired by the builder as follows:
Manufacturer → Wholesaler →
Mechanical Contractor → General
Contractor → Consumer
Issue E.1 DOE requests information
on the existence of any distribution
channels that are used to distribute the
products at issue into the market. DOE
also requests data on the fraction of DHE
sales in the residential sector that go
through any identified channels.
2. Mark-Ups
In generating end-user price inputs for
the LCC analysis and NIA, DOE must
identify distribution channels (i.e., how
the products are distributed from the
manufacturer to the consumer) and
estimate relative sales volumes through
each channel. Two different markets
exist for DHE: (1) Replacements and
new owners,7 and (2) new construction.
DOE intends to use similar distribution
channels in its analysis as found in the
April 2010 final rule. DHE is mainly a
replacement product.8 For replacement
and new owner applications, most sales
To develop mark-ups for the parties
involved in the distribution of the
equipment, DOE plans to primarily
utilize: (1) The Heating, Air
Conditioning & Refrigeration
Distributors International (‘‘HARDI’’)
2013 Profit Report 9 (for wholesalers)
and 3. U.S. Census Bureau 2012
Economic Census data 10 on the
residential building construction
industry (for general contractors and
mechanical contractors). DOE also plans
to use the 2005 Air Conditioning
Contractors of America’s (‘‘ACCA’’)
Financial Analysis on the Heating,
Ventilation, Air-Conditioning, and
Refrigeration (‘‘HVACR’’) contracting
industry 11 to disaggregate the
mechanical contractor mark-ups into
replacement and new construction
markets. DOE will also consider updates
to any of these materials that may
publish during DOE’s evaluation.
In addition to the mark-ups, DOE will
derive State and local taxes from data
provided by the Sales Tax
Clearinghouse.12 These data represent
weighted-average taxes that include
county and city rates. DOE will derive
shipment-weighted-average tax values
for each region considered in the
analysis.
Issue E.2 DOE requests recent data
and recommendations regarding data
sources to establish the mark-ups for the
7 New owners are defined as existing buildings
that acquire a DHE for the first time during the
analysis period. An example of new owner for DHE
would be someone with an addition to an existing
house where it would not be feasible to extend the
house’s primary heating system to the new space.
8 The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) stated that less than
5 percent of DHE sales are for new construction
projects. AHRI, Comment #7 for RFI for Energy
Conservation Standards for Energy Conservation
Standards for Direct Heating Equipment and Pool
Heaters (April 27, 2015) (Available at: https://
www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2015-BTSTD-0003-0007) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
9 Heating, Air Conditioning & Refrigeration
Distributors International (HARDI), 2013 HARDI
Profit Report (Available at: https://hardinet.org/)
(Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
10 U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 Economic Census
Data (Available at: https://www.census.gov/econ/)
(Last accessed Sept. 12, 2018).
11 Air Conditioning Contractors of America
(ACCA), Financial Analysis for the HVACR
Contracting Industry (2005) (Available at: https://
www.acca.org/store/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
12 Sales Tax Clearinghouse Inc., State Sales Tax
Rates Along with Combined Average City and
County Rates. 2018 (Available at; https://thestc.com/
STrates.stm) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
E. Mark-Up Analysis
The mark-ups analysis develops
appropriate mark-ups (e.g., for
wholesalers, mechanical contractors,
general contractors) in the distribution
chain (i.e., how the products are
distributed from the manufacturer to the
consumer) and sales taxes to convert the
manufacturer sales prices (‘‘MSP’’)
derived in the engineering analysis to
consumer prices, which are then used in
the LCC and PBP analyses and other
analyses. At each step in the
distribution channel, companies mark
up the price of the equipment to cover
business costs and profit margin.
1. Distribution Channels
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
parties involved with the distribution of
DHE.
F. Energy Use Analysis
DOE conducts an energy use analysis
to identify how products are used by
consumers, and thereby determine the
energy savings potential of energy
efficiency improvements. DOE uses the
annual energy consumption and energysavings potential in the LCC and PBP
analysis to establish the operating costs
savings at various product efficiency
levels. DOE will estimate the annual
energy consumption of direct heating
equipment at specified energy efficiency
levels across a range of applications,
household types, and climate zones.
The annual energy consumption
includes use of natural gas, liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG (i.e., propane)), and
electricity.
1. Sample Development
DOE intends to base the energy use
analysis on key characteristics from the
Energy Information Administration’s
(‘‘EIA’’) 2015 Residential Energy
Consumption Survey (‘‘RECS’’) 13 for the
subset of residential buildings that use
DHEs. DOE also plans to include in its
analysis DHE used in the commercial
sector using EIA’s 2012 Commercial
Building Energy Consumption Survey
(‘‘CBECS’’).14
RECS and CBECS data include
information on the DHE type, physical
characteristics of buildings, fuels used,
energy consumption and expenditures,
and other relevant characteristics.15
Based on RECS 2015 and CBECS 2012
data, DOE will develop a representative
population of buildings for DHE. In
addition, DOE intends to review other
data sets (e.g., data from the 2016
Residential Building Stock Assessment
for the Northwest,16 2014 Commercial
Building Stock Assessment for the
13 Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2015
Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS)
(Available at: https://www.eia.gov/consumption/
residential/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
14 Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2012
Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey
(CBECS) (Available at: https://www.eia.gov/
consumption/commercial/) (Last accessed Oct. 2,
2018).
15 From RECS 2015, DOE intends to use
households listed as using primary gas heating
equipment from ‘‘built-in room heater burning gas,
oil, or kerosene’’ (138 home sample is estimated to
represent 2.8 million homes in 2015) and ‘‘built-in
floor/wall pipeless furnace’’ (41 home sample is
estimated to represent 0.8 million homes in 2015)
and as secondary gas heating equipment from
‘‘some other equipment’’ (221 home sample is
estimated to represent 4.2 million homes in 2015).
16 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA),
Residential Building Stock Assessment (2016)
(Available at: https://dev.neea.org/data/residentialbuilding-stock-assessment) (Last accessed Oct. 2,
2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
Northwest,17 2015 Residential
Statewide Baseline Study of New York
State,18 2006 California Commercial
End-Use Survey,19 and 2009 Residential
Appliance Saturation Study 20) to
compare these to the RECS 2015 and
CBECS 2012 data for the corresponding
region.
Issue F.1 DOE requests comment on
the overall method to determine the
building sample for direct heating
equipment and whether other factors
should be considered in developing the
building sample. In addition, DOE
requests information on the installation
applications of DHE, including, but not
limited to the fraction of DHEs that are
installed in residential and commercial
applications, as well as how many DHE
are typically installed per building.
2. Energy Use Calculations
To determine the site energy
consumption by the DHEs installed in
the building, DOE intends to use a
methodology based on the energy use
equations from the DOE test procedure
for DHEs (10 CFR part 430, subpart B,
appendix O, section 4.6). For each
household or building in the sample,
DOE plans to use RECS 2015 and
CBECS 2012 reported heating energy
consumption to estimate the heating
load of the housing unit or building.21
The estimation of heating loads requires
data on the existing DHE characteristics
(such as DHE type, fuel type, equipment
size, and efficiency of the DHE). DOE
intends to assign DHE characteristics of
existing systems based on the
distributions of DHE provided in
historical versions of the AHRI model
certification directory 22 and any other
available historical data. The estimation
of heating loads also requires
calculating the electricity consumption
17 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA),
Commercial Building Stock Assessment (2014)
(Available at: https://dev.neea.org/data/
commercial-building-stock-assessments) (Last
accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
18 New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority (NYSERDA), Residential
Statewide Baseline Study of New York State (July
2015) (Available at: https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/
About/Publications/Building-Stock-and-PotentialStudies/Residential-Statewide-Baseline-Study-ofNew-York-State) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
19 California Energy Commission (CEC), 2006
California Commercial End-Use Survey (2006)
(Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/ceus/2006_
enduse.html) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
20 California Energy Commission (CEC), 2009
Residential Appliance Saturation Study (RASS)
(2009) (Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/
appliances/rass/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
21 The heating load represents the amount of
heating required to keep a housing unit comfortable
throughout an average year.
22 AHRI, Directory of Certified Product
Performance for Direct Heating Equipment
(Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/) (Last
accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6103
of the blower (when applicable),
because heat from the blower
contributes to heating the housing unit.
A large fraction of DHE are used as
secondary heating equipment; therefore,
DOE intends to adjust the house heating
load for households that use the direct
heating equipment as secondary heating
equipment by using the reported
fraction of heating energy consumption
attributable to secondary heating
products in RECS 2015. To complete the
analysis, DOE plans to calculate the
energy consumption of more energy
efficient DHE alternatives replacing the
existing DHE.
Issue F.2 DOE requests comment on
the overall method to determine energy
use of direct heating equipment and if
other factors should be considered in
developing the energy use methodology.
G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
Analysis
DOE plans to conduct LCC and PBP
analyses to evaluate the economic
impacts on residential and commercial
consumers of potential standards for
DHEs. The effect of new or amended
standards on residential and
commercial consumers usually involves
a reduction in operating cost and an
increase in purchase cost.
DOE intends to analyze the potential
for variability by performing the LCC
and PBP calculations on a
representative sample of residential and
commercial consumers. DOE plans to
utilize the sample of buildings
developed for the energy use analysis.
DOE plans to model uncertainty in
many of the inputs to the LCC and PBP
analysis using Monte Carlo simulation
and probability distributions. As a
result, the LCC and PBP results will be
presented as distributions of impacts
compared to the no-new-standards case
(i.e., the case without amended
standards).
Inputs to the LCC and PBP analysis
are categorized as: (1) Inputs for
establishing the purchase expense,
otherwise known as the total installed
cost, and (2) inputs for calculating the
operating costs. Each type of input is
discussed in the paragraphs that follow.
1. Total Installed Cost
The primary inputs for establishing
the total installed cost are the baseline
customer price, incremental customer
price increases resulting from a
potential standard, and installation
costs. Baseline prices and standard-level
price increases will be determined by
applying mark-ups to manufacturer
selling price estimates and sales tax.
The installation cost is added to the
customer price to arrive at a total
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6104
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
installed cost. DOE intends to develop
installation costs using the most recent
RS Means data available.23 DOE also
intends to use regional labor costs to
more accurately estimate installation
costs by applying the appropriate
regional labor cost from RS Means to
each sampled DHE installation.
In conducting its analyses, DOE
intends to utilize an installation cost
methodology that is customized for each
DHE product class. For DHEs in new
owner installations or new construction,
DOE plans to include costs such as
adding gas piping, putting the DHE in
place, and additional set-up. For
replacement cases, in addition to the
costs considered for new installations,
DOE also plans to include the
installation cost associated with
disconnecting and removing the old
DHE, as well as removal/disposal and
permit fees, if applicable. In addition,
DOE intends to assess whether
installation costs vary with equipment
efficiency, including design options that
require a new electrical outlet (many
existing DHE installations currently do
not have electrical power input) or
condensing DHE units that require new
PVC venting and condensate
withdrawal.
Issue G.1 DOE seeks input on any
available installation cost data for DHEs.
DOE also seeks input on the approach
it intends to use to develop DHE
installation costs, specifically, its
intention to use the most recent RS
Means Mechanical Cost Data.
2. Operating Costs
The primary inputs for calculating the
operating costs of DHEs are energy
consumption, equipment efficiency,
energy prices, maintenance and repair
costs, equipment lifetime, and discount
rates. Both equipment lifetime and
discount rates are used to calculate the
present value of future operating costs.
The product energy consumption is
the site energy use associated with
providing space heating to the room of
a building. DOE intends to utilize the
site energy use calculation methodology
described in section II.F of this
document to determine product energy
use. DOE also plans to assess the
potential applicability of the ‘‘rebound
effect’’ in the energy consumption for
DHE. A rebound effect occurs when a
product that is made more efficient is
used more intensively, so that the
expected energy savings from the
efficiency improvement may not fully
materialize. However, at this time, DOE
23 RS
Means, 2018 Mechanical Cost Data
(Available at: https://www.rsmeans.com/products/
books.aspx) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
is not aware of any information about a
rebound effect for DHE.
Issue G.2 DOE seeks comments and
data on any rebound effect that may be
associated with more-efficient DHE.
The repair cost is the expense to
repair or replace components of the
covered product that have failed. The
maintenance cost is the expense of
regular scheduled product maintenance
to ensure the continued operation of the
covered product over time. These costs
cover all labor and material costs
associated with the repair or
maintenance. DOE intends to develop
repair and maintenance costs using the
most recent RS Means data available 24
and manufacturer literature.
DOE intends to assess whether repair
or maintenance costs vary with
equipment efficiency and product class.
In addition, DOE plans to consider the
cases in which the equipment is covered
by warranty, service, and/or
maintenance agreements. More
specifically, DOE intends to account for
the maintenance cost associated with
the manufacturer-recommended annual
maintenance prior to the heating season.
DOE will determine the repair cost
using an approach that reflects the cost
and the service life of the components
that are likely to fail. DOE plans to
consider component repair costs that
might fail during the lifetime of the
product, including the pilot ignition,
electronic ignition, circulating blower,
and induced draft fan.
Issue G.3 DOE requests feedback and
data on whether maintenance costs
differ in comparison to the baseline
maintenance costs for any of the specific
technology options listed in Table II.2
and Table II.3. To the extent that these
costs differ, DOE seeks supporting data
and the reasons for those differences.
Issue G.4 DOE requests information
and data on the frequency of repair and
repair costs by product class for the
technology options listed in Table II.2
and Table II.3. DOE is also interested in
whether consumers simply replace the
products when they fail as opposed to
repairing them.
Issue G.5 DOE also seeks comment
on the extent to which repair or
maintenance costs are covered by
warranty, service, and/or maintenance
agreements.
Equipment lifetime is the age at
which a unit is retired from service.
DOE intends to conduct a literature
review of DHE lifetime data together
with any stakeholder lifetime data to
24 RS Means, 2018 Facilities Maintenance &
Repair Cost Data (Available at: https://
www.rsmeans.com/products/books.aspx) (Last
accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
develop a Weibull probability
distribution to characterize DHE
lifetime.25
Issue G.6 DOE requests product
lifetime data and information on
whether product lifetime varies based
on DHE product class, application, or
efficiency.
DOE measures LCC and PBP impacts
of potential standard levels relative to a
no-new-standards case that reflects the
likely market in the absence of amended
standards. DOE plans to develop
efficiency market shares (i.e., the
distribution of product shipments by
efficiency) for DHEs, for the anticipated
year in which compliance with any
potential amended standards would be
required. DOE is not aware of any
shipment data to estimate the market
shares of different DHE energy
efficiency levels in the no-newstandards case. DOE is particularly
interested in receiving such data. If no
market share data become available,
DOE intends to use data on the number
of DHE models at different energy
efficiency levels, as reported in DOE’s
compliance certification database,26
historical versions of the AHRI model
certification directory,27 and from
manufacturer literature.
Issue G.7 DOE requests information
on the DHE market, including but not
limited to, the current market share by
different efficiency level and by product
class, similar historical data, and
information on expected future trends
in the efficiency of DHEs.
H. Shipments Analysis
DOE develops shipments forecasts of
DHE to calculate the national impacts of
potential amended energy conservation
standards on energy consumption, net
present value (‘‘NPV’’), and future
manufacturer cash flows. DOE
shipments projections are based on
available historical data broken out by
product class, input capacity, and
efficiency. Current sales estimates allow
for a more accurate model that captures
recent trends in the market. From the
April 2010 final rule, DOE has DHE
historical shipment data from AHRI for
25 A Weibull probability distribution is a
continuous distribution function typically used in
reliability engineering and equipment failure
analysis. If the data are available, DOE also plans
to take into account differences in DHE lifetime
based on usage and application.
26 U.S. Department of Energy, Compliance
Certification Database: Unfired Hot Water Storage
Tanks—Commercial (Available at: https://
www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/
products.html) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
27 AHRI, Directory of Certified Product
Performance for Direct Heating Equipment
(Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/) (Last
accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6105
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
wall furnaces from 1990 to 1998 and
from 2000 to 2006, for floor furnaces
from 1990 to 2007, and for room heaters
from 1990 to 2005.28 29 DOE has limited
disaggregated shipments for fan and
gravity wall furnaces and by input
capacity.30
Issue H.1 DOE requests annual sales
data (i.e., number of shipments) for each
DHE product class from 2008–2018.
An example table of the types of data
requested for 2008–2018 shipments can
be found in Table II.5. Interested parties
are also encouraged to provide
additional shipment data as may be
relevant including data before 2008.
TABLE II.5—SUMMARY TABLE OF SHIPMENTS—RELATED DATA REQUESTS
Heat circulation
type
Equipment type
Annual shipments
(number sold)
Input rate, Btu/h
2008
Wall ....................
Fan ....................
Gravity ...............
Floor ...................
All ......................
Room .................
All ......................
I. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
The purpose of the manufacturer
impact analysis (‘‘MIA’’) is to estimate
the financial impact of new or amended
energy conservation standards on
manufacturers of DHE, and to evaluate
the potential impact of such standards
on direct employment and
manufacturing capacity. The MIA
includes both quantitative and
qualitative aspects. The quantitative
part of the MIA primarily relies on the
Government Regulatory Impact Model
(‘‘GRIM’’), an industry cash-flow model
adapted for each product in this
analysis, with the key output being the
industry net present value (‘‘INPV’’),
which is used to assess the financial
impacts of a potential standard. The
qualitative part of the MIA addresses the
potential impacts of energy conservation
standards on manufacturing capacity
and industry competition, as well as
factors such as product characteristics,
impacts on particular subgroups of
firms, and important market and
product trends.
As part of the MIA, DOE intends to
analyze impacts of potential amended
28 AHRI, AHRI Shipments Data, March 3, 2008.
(Note: 1990–2006 Wall furnaces data disaggregated
by vented wall furnaces and direct-vent wall
furnaces).
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
≤42,000.
>42,000.
≤27,000.
>27,000 and
≤46,000.
>46,000.
≤37,000.
>37,000.
≤20,000.
>20,000 and
≤27,000.
>27,000 and
≤46,000.
>46,000.
If disaggregated fractions of annual
sales are not available at the product
type level, DOE requests more
aggregated fractions of annual
shipments at the category level.
Issue H.2 If available, DOE requests
the same information in Table II.5 by
efficiency.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
2009
Jkt 247001
energy conservation standards on
subgroups of manufacturers of covered
products, including small business
manufacturers. DOE uses the Small
Business Administration’s (‘‘SBA’’)
small business size standards to
determine whether manufacturers
qualify as small businesses, which are
listed by the applicable North American
Industry Classification System
(‘‘NAICS’’) code.31 Manufacturing of
consumer DHE is classified under
NAICS 333414, ‘‘Heating Equipment
(except Warm Air Furnaces)
Manufacturing,’’ and the SBA sets a
threshold of 500 employees or less for
a domestic entity to be considered as a
small business. This employee
threshold includes all employees in a
business’s parent company and any
other subsidiaries.
One aspect of assessing manufacturer
burden involves examining the
cumulative impact of multiple DOE
standards and the product-specific
regulatory actions of other Federal
agencies that affect the manufacturers of
a covered product or equipment. While
any one regulation may not impose a
significant burden on manufacturers,
the combined effects of several existing
or impending regulations may have
serious consequences for some
manufacturers, groups of manufacturers,
or an entire industry. Assessing the
impact of a single regulation may
overlook this cumulative regulatory
burden. In addition to energy
conservation standards, other
regulations can significantly affect
manufacturers’ financial operations.
Multiple regulations affecting the same
manufacturer can strain profits and lead
companies to abandon product lines or
markets with lower expected future
returns than competing products. For
these reasons, DOE conducts an analysis
of cumulative regulatory burden as part
of its rulemakings pertaining to
appliance efficiency.
Issue I.1 To the extent feasible, DOE
seeks the names and contact
information of any domestic or foreignbased manufacturers that distribute DHE
in the United States.
Issue I.2 DOE identified small
businesses as a subgroup of
manufacturers that could be
disproportionally impacted by amended
energy conservation standards. DOE
requests the names and contact
information of small business
manufacturers, as defined by the SBA’s
size threshold, that distribute DHE
products in commerce in the United
States. In addition, DOE requests
comment on any other manufacturer
subgroups that could be
disproportionally impacted by amended
energy conservation standards for DHE.
DOE requests feedback on any potential
approaches that could be considered to
address impacts on manufacturers,
including small businesses.
29 AHRI, AHRI Floor Furnace Supplemental
Shipments Data, March 11, 2008.
30 AHRI, AHRI Wall Furnace Supplemental
Shipments Data, May 19, 2008. (Note: 2002–2006
shipments for wall gravity furnace over 27 to 46
kBtu/h and wall fan furnace above over 42 kBtu/
h only).
31 Available online at: https://www.sba.gov/sites/
default/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
6106
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Issue I.3 DOE requests information
regarding the cumulative regulatory
burden impacts on manufacturers of
DHE associated with: (1) Other DOE
standards applying to different products
that these manufacturers may also make
and (2) product-specific regulatory
actions of other Federal agencies. DOE
also requests comment on its
methodology for computing cumulative
regulatory burden and whether there are
any flexibilities it can consider that
would reduce this burden while
remaining consistent with the
requirements of EPCA.
J. Other Energy Conservation Standards
Topics
1. Market Failures
In the field of economics, a market
failure is a situation in which the
market outcome does not maximize
societal welfare. Such an outcome
would result in unrealized potential
welfare. DOE welcomes comment on
any aspect of market failures, especially
those in the context of amended energy
conservation standards for DHE.
2. Market-Based Approaches to Energy
Conservation Standards
As part of its regulatory reform efforts,
DOE published a request for information
discussing key issues and requesting
feedback on market-based approaches to
energy conservation standards. 82 FR
56181 (Nov. 28, 2017). DOE requests
comment on how market-based
approaches to energy conservation
standards might impact standards for
these products, and specifically seeks
comment on any considerations with
respect to DHE.
In addition to the issues identified
earlier in this document, DOE welcomes
comment on any other aspect of energy
conservation standards for DHE not
already addressed by the specific areas
identified in this document.
III. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to
submit in writing by April 12, 2019,
comments and information on matters
addressed in this notice and on other
matters relevant to DOE’s consideration
of amended energy conservations
standards for DHE. After the close of the
comment period, DOE will review the
public comments received and may
begin collecting data and conducting the
analyses discussed in this RFI.
Submitting comments via https://
www.regulations.gov. The https://
www.regulations.gov web page requires
you to provide your name and contact
information. Your contact information
will be viewable to DOE Building
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
Technologies Office staff only. Your
contact information will not be publicly
viewable except for your first and last
names, organization name (if any), and
submitter representative name (if any).
If your comment is not processed
properly because of technical
difficulties, DOE will use this
information to contact you. If DOE
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, DOE may not be
able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information
will be publicly viewable if you include
it in the comment or in any documents
attached to your comment. Any
information that you do not want to be
publicly viewable should not be
included in your comment, nor in any
document attached to your comment.
Persons viewing comments will see only
first and last names, organization
names, correspondence containing
comments, and any documents
submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to https://
www.regulations.gov information for
which disclosure is restricted by statute,
such as trade secrets and commercial or
financial information (hereinafter
referred to as Confidential Business
Information (‘‘CBI’’)). Comments
submitted through https://
www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed
as CBI. Comments received through the
website will waive any CBI claims for
the information submitted. For
information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information
section.
DOE processes submissions made
through https://www.regulations.gov
before posting. Normally, comments
will be posted within a few days of
being submitted. However, if large
volumes of comments are being
processed simultaneously, your
comment may not be viewable for up to
several weeks. Please keep the comment
tracking number that https://
www.regulations.gov provides after you
have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand
delivery, or postal mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand
delivery, or postal mail also will be
posted to https://www.regulations.gov. If
you do not want your personal contact
information to be publicly viewable, do
not include it in your comment or any
accompanying documents. Instead,
provide your contact information on a
cover letter. Include your first and last
names, email address, telephone
number, and optional mailing address.
The cover letter will not be publicly
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
viewable as long as it does not include
any comments.
Include contact information each time
you submit comments, data, documents,
and other information to DOE. If you
submit via postal mail or hand delivery,
please provide all items on a CD, if
feasible, in which case it is not
necessary to submit printed copies. No
telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted.
Comments, data, and other
information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in
PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file
format. Provide documents that are not
secured, written in English, and free of
any defects or viruses. Documents
should not contain special characters or
any form of encryption, and, if possible,
they should carry the electronic
signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit
campaign form letters by the originating
organization in batches of between 50 to
500 form letters per PDF or as one form
letter with a list of supporters’ names
compiled into one or more PDFs. This
reduces comment processing and
posting time.
Confidential Business Information.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person
submitting information that he or she
believes to be confidential and exempt
by law from public disclosure should
submit via email, postal mail, or hand
delivery two well-marked copies: one
copy of the document marked
‘‘confidential’’ including all the
information believed to be confidential,
and one copy of the document marked
‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information
believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email or on
a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own
determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it
according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when
evaluating requests to treat submitted
information as confidential include: (1)
A description of the items; (2) whether
and why such items are customarily
treated as confidential within the
industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from
other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made
available to others without obligation
concerning its confidentiality; (5) an
explanation of the competitive injury to
the submitting person which would
result from public disclosure; (6) when
such information might lose its
confidential character due to the
passage of time, and (7) why disclosure
of the information would be contrary to
the public interest.
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
26FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 26, 2019 / Proposed Rules
It is DOE’s policy that all comments
may be included in the public docket,
without change and as received,
including any personal information
provided in the comments (except
information deemed to be exempt from
public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to
be a very important part of the process
for developing energy conservation
standards. DOE actively encourages the
participation and interaction of the
public during the comment period in
each stage of the process. Interactions
with and between members of the
public provide a balanced discussion of
the issues and assist DOE in the process.
Anyone who wishes to be added to the
DOE mailing list to receive future
notices and information about this
process or would like to request a public
meeting should contact Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program staff at
(202) 287–1445 or via email at
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Signed in Washington, DC, on February 13,
2019.
Steven Chalk,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2019–03270 Filed 2–25–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
12 CFR Parts 3 and 32
[Docket ID OCC–2018–0030]
RIN 1557–AE44
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 217
[Docket R–1629]
RIN 7100–AF22
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORPORATION
12 CFR Part 324
RIN 3064–AE80
Notice, Extension of Comment Period;
Standardized Approach for Calculating
the Exposure Amount of Derivatives
Contracts
The Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System; the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, Treasury.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:09 Feb 25, 2019
Jkt 247001
ACTION:
Notice; extension of comment
period.
On December 17, 2018, the
Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System (Board), the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC),
and the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC) (collectively, the
agencies) published in the Federal
Register a proposal to amend the
agencies’ capital rule to implement the
Standardized Approach for Calculating
the Exposure Amount of Derivatives
Contracts. The agencies have
determined that an extension of the
comment period until March 18, 2019,
is appropriate.
DATES: Comments must be received by
March 18, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the methods identified in the
proposal.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
OCC: Guowei Zhang, Risk Expert,
Capital Policy, (202) 649–7106; Kevin
Korzeniewski, Counsel, (202) 649–5490;
or Ron Shimabukuro, Senior Counsel,
(202) 649–5490, or, for persons who are
deaf or hearing impaired, TTY, (202)
649–5597, Chief Counsel’s Office, Office
of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400
7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20219.
Board: Constance M. Horsley, Deputy
Associate Director, (202) 452–5239;
David Lynch, Deputy Associate
Director, (202) 452–2081; Elizabeth
MacDonald, Manager, (202) 475–6316;
Michael Pykhtin, Manager, (202) 912–
4312; Mark Handzlik, Senior
Supervisory Financial Analyst, (202)
475–6636; Sara Saab, Supervisory
Financial Analyst, (202) 872–4936; or
Noah Cuttler, Senior Financial Analyst,
(202) 912–4678; Division of Supervision
and Regulation; or Benjamin W.
McDonough, Assistant General Counsel,
(202) 452–2036; Gillian Burgess, Senior
Counsel, (202) 736–5564; Mark Buresh,
Counsel, (202) 452–5270; Andrew
Hartlage, Counsel, (202) 452–6483;
Legal Division, Board of Governors of
the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C
Streets NW, Washington, DC 20551. For
the hearing impaired only,
Telecommunication Device for the Deaf,
(202) 263–4869.
FDIC: Bobby R. Bean, Associate
Director, bbean@fdic.gov; Irina Leonova,
Senior Policy Analyst, ileonova@
fdic.gov; Peter Yen, Senior Policy
Analyst, pyen@fdic.gov, Capital Markets
Branch, Division of Risk Management
Supervision, (202) 898–6888; or Michael
Phillips, Counsel, mphillips@fdic.gov;
Catherine Wood, Counsel, cawood@
fdic.gov; Supervision Branch, Legal
Division, Federal Deposit Insurance
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
6107
Corporation, 550 17th Street NW,
Washington, DC 20429.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
December 17, 2018, the Board, FDIC,
and OCC published in the Federal
Register a proposal to amend the
agencies’ capital rule to implement the
Standardized Approach for Calculating
the Exposure Amount of Derivatives
Contracts.1 The notice of proposed
rulemaking stated that the comment
period would close on February 15,
2019. The agencies have received
requests to extend the comment period.
An extension of the comment period
will provide additional opportunity for
the public to consider the proposal and
prepare comments, including to address
the questions posed by the agencies.
Therefore, the agencies are extending
the end of the comment period for the
proposal from February 15, 2019, to
March 18, 2019.
Dated: February 19, 2019.
Joseph M. Otting,
Comptroller of the Currency.
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, acting through the
Secretary of the Board under delegated
authority, February 14, 2019.
Ann E. Misback,
Secretary of the Board.
Dated at Washington, DC, on February 15,
2019.
By order of the Board of Directors.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Valerie J. Best,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019–03249 Filed 2–25–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 100
[Docket Number USCG–2019–0051]
RIN 1625–AA08
Special Local Regulation; Choptank
River, Cambridge, MD
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard proposes to
establish special local regulations for
certain waters of the Choptank River.
This action is necessary to provide for
the safety of life on these navigable
waters located at Cambridge, MD,
during a swim event on the morning of
May 11, 2019. This proposed
SUMMARY:
1 83
E:\FR\FM\26FEP1.SGM
FR 64660 (December 17, 2018).
26FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 26, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6095-6107]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03270]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[EERE-2019-BT-STD-0002]
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
Direct Heating Equipment
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is initiating an
effort to determine whether to amend the current energy conservation
standards for direct heating equipment. Under the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act of 1975, as amended (``EPCA''), DOE must periodically
review these standards and publish either a notice of proposed
rulemaking (``NOPR'') to propose new standards for direct heating
equipment or a notice of determination that the existing standards do
not need to be amended. This request for information (``RFI'') solicits
information from the public to help DOE determine whether amended
standards for direct heating equipment would result in significant
energy savings and whether such standards would be technologically
feasible and economically justified. DOE welcomes written comments from
the public on any subject within the scope of this document (including
topics not raised in this RFI).
DATES: Written comments and information are requested and will be
accepted on or before April 12, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested
persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2019-BT-
STD-0002, by any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: DHE2019STD0002@ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number
EERE-2019-BT-STD-0002 in the subject line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B,
Energy Conservation Standards RFI for Direct Heating Equipment, Docket
No. EERE-2019-BT-STD-0002, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC,
20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC, 20024. Telephone: (202)
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this
process, see section III of this document.
Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials,
is available for review at https://www.regulations.gov. All documents in
the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. However,
some documents listed in the index, such as those containing
information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly
available.
The docket web page can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2019-BT-STD-0002. The docket web page contains
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section III of this document for information on how
to submit comments through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Stephanie Johnson, 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) 287-1943. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-5827. Email: Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to submit a comment or review other
public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
B. Rulemaking Process
II. Request for Information and Comments
A. Products Covered by This Process
1. Unvented Heaters
2. Vented Heaters
B. Market and Technology Assessment
1. Product Classes
2. Technology Assessment
C. Screening Analysis
D. Engineering Analysis
1. Baseline Efficiency Levels
2. Maximum Available and Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels
3. Manufacturer Production Costs and Manufacturing Selling Price
E. Mark-Up Analysis
1. Distribution Channels
2. Mark-Ups
F. Energy Use Analysis
1. Sample Development
2. Energy Use Calculations
G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
1. Total Installed Cost
2. Operating Costs
H. Shipments Analysis
I. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
J. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics
1. Market Failures
[[Page 6096]]
2. Market-Based Approaches to Energy Conservation Standards
III. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended
(``EPCA'' or ``the Act''),\1\ Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317,
as codified), among other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy
efficiency of a number of consumer products and industrial equipment.
(42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified) Title III, Part B \2\ of EPCA
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. These products include direct heating
equipment (DHE), the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(9))
EPCA prescribed energy conservation standards for these products and
directed DOE to conduct two cycles of rulemakings to determine whether
to amend these standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(3) and (4))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018,
Public Law 115-270 (Oct. 23, 2018).
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under EPCA, DOE's energy conservation program consists essentially
of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy
conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of the Act specifically include
definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293),
labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation standards (42
U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6297) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption in
limited instances for particular State laws or regulations, in
accordance with the procedures and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6297(d))
DOE completed the first of the required rulemaking cycles in 2010
by publishing a final rule on April 16, 2010 (``April 2010 final
rule'') that adopted amended performance standards for certain DHE
(i.e., vented home heating equipment) manufactured on or after April
16, 2013. 75 FR 20112. In the April 2010 final rule, DOE did not issue
standards for unvented home heating equipment, a subset of DHE, finding
that such standards would produce insignificant energy savings. Id at
20130. Additionally, DOE completed a second rulemaking cycle for DHE by
issuing a final determination to not amend standards for vented home
heating equipment and to not to adopt standards for unvented home
heating equipment on October 17, 2016 (``October 2016 final
determination''). 81 FR 71325. The current energy conservation
standards for DHE are located in title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (``CFR'') part 430, section 32(i)(2). The currently
applicable DOE test procedures for unvented and vented DHE appear at 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix G and appendix O, respectively.
In the October 2016 final determination, DOE concluded that energy
conservation standards should not be amended for DHE. DOE determined
that the DHE market characteristics at the time were largely similar to
those during the analysis for the April 2010 final rule, and that the
technologies available for improving DHE energy efficiency had not
advanced significantly since the publication of the April 2010 final
rule. In addition, DOE determined that the conclusions reached in the
April 2010 final rule regarding the benefits and burdens of more
stringent standards for DHE were still relevant to the DHE market.
Therefore, DOE concluded that amended energy conservation standards
would not be economically justified. 81 FR 71325, 71325 (Oct. 17,
2016).
EPCA also requires that, not later than 6 years after the issuance
of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE evaluate the
energy conservation standards for each type of covered product,
including those at issue here, and publish either a notice of
determination that standards do not need to be amended, or a NOPR
including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a
final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) EPCA further
provides that, not later than 3 years after the issuance of a final
determination not to amend standards, DOE must publish either a notice
of determination that standards for the product do not need to be
amended, or a NOPR including new proposed energy conservation standards
(proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B))
DOE must make the analysis on which the determination is based publicly
available and provide an opportunity for written comment. (42 U.S.C.
6295(m)(2)) In making a determination, DOE must evaluate whether more-
stringent standards would: (1) Yield a significant savings in energy
use and (2) be both technologically feasible and economically
justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)(A)) DOE is publishing this RFI to
collect data and information to inform its decision consistent with its
obligations under EPCA.
B. Rulemaking Process
DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or
amended standards for covered products. EPCA requires that any new or
amended energy conservation standard be designed to achieve the maximum
improvement in energy or water efficiency that is technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) To
determine whether a standard is economically justified, EPCA requires
that DOE determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed its
burdens by, to the greatest extent practicable, considering the
following seven factors:
(1) The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and
consumers of the affected products;
(2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average
life of the product compared to any increases in the initial cost, or
maintenance expenses;
(3) The total projected amount of energy and water (if applicable)
savings likely to result directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the products
likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the
standard;
(6) The need for national energy and water conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) considers
relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))
DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting
a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows
the individual analyses that are performed to satisfy each of the
requirements within EPCA.
[[Page 6097]]
Table I.1--EPCA Requirements and Corresponding DOE Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA requirement Corresponding DOE analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technological Feasibility.............. Market and Technology
Assessment.
Screening Analysis.
Engineering Analysis.
Economic Justification:
1. Economic impact on manufacturers Manufacturer Impact
and consumers. Analysis.
Life-Cycle Cost and
Payback Period Analysis.
Life-Cycle Cost
Subgroup Analysis.
Shipments Analysis.
2. Lifetime operating cost savings Mark-ups for Product
compared to increased cost for the Price Determination.
product. Energy and Water Use
Determination.
Life-Cycle Cost and
Payback Period Analysis.
3. Total projected energy savings.. Shipments Analysis.
National Impact
Analysis.
4. Impact on utility or performance Screening Analysis.
Engineering Analysis.
5. Impact of any lessening of Manufacturer Impact
competition. Analysis.
6. Need for national energy and Shipments Analysis.
water conservation. National Impact
Analysis.
7. Other factors the Secretary Employment Impact
considers relevant. Analysis.
Utility Impact
Analysis.
Emissions Analysis.
Monetization of
Emission Reductions Benefits.
Regulatory Impact
Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE is publishing this document
seeking input and data from interested parties to aid in the
development of the technical analyses on which DOE will ultimately rely
to determine whether (and if so, how) to amend the standards for direct
heating equipment.
II. Request for Information and Comments
In the following sections, DOE has identified a variety of issues
on which it seeks input to aid in the development of the technical and
economic analyses regarding whether amended standards for DHE may be
warranted. Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant
to this request for information that may not specifically be identified
in this document. In particular, DOE notes that under Executive Order
13771, ``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,''
Executive Branch agencies such as DOE are directed to manage the costs
associated with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with
Federal regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Pursuant to that
Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on measures
DOE could take to lower the cost of its energy conservation standards
rulemakings, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and compliance
and certification requirements applicable to DHE while remaining
consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
A. Products Covered by This Process
The definitions for DHE were most recently amended in a test
procedure final rule. 80 FR 792 (Jan. 6, 2015). This RFI covers those
products that meet the definitions of ``direct heating equipment'' and
``home heating equipment,'' \3\ as codified at 10 CFR 430.2 and defined
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ DOE notes that DHE is defined at 10 CFR 430.2 as ``vented
home heating equipment'' and ``unvented home heating equipment'';
however, the existing energy conservation standards apply only to
product classes of vented home heating equipment. There are no
existing energy conservation standards for unvented home heating
equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) ``Direct heating equipment'' means vented home heating
equipment and unvented home heating equipment.
(2) ``Home heating equipment, not including furnaces'' means vented
home heating equipment and unvented home heating equipment.
1. Unvented Heaters
Unvented heaters are those products that meet the definitions for
``unvented home heating equipment,'' as codified at 10 CFR 430.2. DOE
defines unvented heaters and the various sub-types of unvented heaters
as follows:
(1) ``Unvented home heating equipment'' means a class of home
heating equipment, not including furnaces, used for the purpose of
furnishing heat to a space proximate to such heater directly from the
heater and without duct connections and includes electric heaters and
unvented gas and oil heaters.
(2) ``Electric heater'' means an electric appliance in which heat
is generated from electrical energy and dissipated by convection and
radiation and includes baseboard electric heaters, ceiling electric
heaters, floor electric heaters, portable electric heaters, and wall
electric heaters.
(3) ``Primary heater'' means a heating device that is the principal
source of heat for a structure and includes baseboard electric heaters,
ceiling electric heaters, and wall electric heaters.
(4) ``Supplementary heater'' means a heating device that provides
heat to a space in addition to that which is supplied by a primary
heater. Supplementary heaters include portable electric heaters.
(5) ``Baseboard electric heater'' means an electric heater which is
intended to be recessed in or surface mounted on walls at floor level,
which is characterized by long, low physical dimensions, and which
transfers heat by natural convection and/or radiation.
(6) ``Ceiling electric heater'' means an electric heater which is
intended to be recessed in, surface mounted on, or hung from a ceiling,
and which transfers heat by radiation and/or convection (either natural
or forced).
(7) ``Floor electric heater'' means an electric heater which is
intended to be recessed in a floor, and which transfers by radiation
and/or convection (either natural or forced).
(8) ``Portable electric heater'' means an electric heater which is
intended to stand unsupported, and can be moved from place to place
within a structure.
[[Page 6098]]
It is connected to electric supply by means of a cord and plug, and
transfers heat by radiation and/or convention (either natural or
forced).
(9) ``Wall electric heater'' means an electric heater (excluding
baseboard electric heaters) which is intended to be recessed in or
surface mounted on walls, which transfers heat by radiation and/or
convection (either natural or forced) and which includes forced
convectors, natural convectors, radiant heaters, high wall or valance
heaters.
(10) ``Unvented gas heater'' means an unvented, self-contained,
free-standing, non-recessed gas-burning appliance which furnishes warm
air by gravity or fan circulation.
(11) ``Unvented oil heater'' means an unvented, self-contained,
free-standing, non-recessed oil-burning appliance which furnishes warm
air by gravity or fan circulation.
Issue A.1 DOE requests comment on the definitions currently
applicable to unvented heaters and whether any of the definitions
should be revised, and if so, how. Please provide a rationale for any
suggested change. DOE notes that floor electric heaters are not
currently listed among the other types of heaters included in the
definition of a ``primary heater.'' DOE understands that floor electric
heaters have similar heat output as the types of heaters listed in the
definition of ``primary heater'' and may provide the primary source of
heat in small dwellings. DOE requests comment on whether floor electric
heaters should be specifically defined and also included in the
definition of ``primary heater.''
2. Vented Heaters
Vented heaters are those products that meet the definitions for
``vented home heating equipment,'' as codified at 10 CFR 430.2. DOE
defines vented heaters and the various sub-types of vented heaters as
follows:
(1) ``Vented home heating equipment'' or ``vented heater'' means a
class of home heating equipment, not including furnaces, designed to
furnish warmed air to the living space of a residence, directly from
the device, without duct connections (except that boots not to exceed
10 inches beyond the casing may be permitted) and includes: vented wall
furnace, vented floor furnace, and vented room heater.
(2) ``Vented floor furnace'' means a self-contained vented heater
suspended from the floor of the space being heated, taking air for
combustion from outside this space. The vented floor furnace supplies
heated air circulated by gravity or by a fan directly into the space to
be heated through openings in the casing.
(3) ``Vented room heater'' means a self-contained, free standing,
non-recessed, vented heater for furnishing warmed air to the space in
which it is installed. The vented room heater supplies heated air
circulated by gravity or by a fan directly into the space to be heated
through openings in the casing.
(4) ``Vented wall furnace'' means a self-contained vented heater
complete with grilles or the equivalent, designed for incorporation in,
or permanent attachment to, a wall of a residence and furnishing heated
air circulated by gravity or by a fan directly into the space to be
heated through openings in the casing.
(5) ``Unvented home heating equipment'' means a class of home
heating equipment, not including furnaces, used for the purpose of
furnishing heat to a space proximate to such heater directly from the
heater and without duct connections and includes electric heaters and
unvented gas and oil heaters.
Issue A.2 DOE requests comment on whether the definitions
applicable to DHE require any revisions, and if so, how those
definitions should be revised. Please provide a rationale for any
suggested change. DOE also requests feedback on whether the sub-
category definitions currently in place are appropriate or whether
further modifications are needed. If these sub-category definitions
need modifying, DOE seeks specific input on how to define these terms.
Issue A.3 DOE requests comment on whether additional product
definitions are necessary to close any potential gaps in coverage
between product types. DOE also seeks input on whether such products
currently exist in the market or whether they are being planned for
introduction.
B. Market and Technology Assessment
The market and technology assessment that DOE routinely conducts
when analyzing the impacts of a potential new or amended energy
conservation standard provides information about the DHE industry that
will be used in DOE's analysis throughout the rulemaking process. DOE
uses qualitative and quantitative information to characterize the
structure of the industry and market. DOE identifies manufacturers,
estimates market shares and trends, addresses regulatory and non-
regulatory initiatives intended to improve energy efficiency or reduce
energy consumption, and explores the potential for efficiency
improvements in the design and manufacturing of the subject products.
DOE also reviews product literature, industry publications, and company
websites, as well as information from trade journals, government
agencies, and trade organizations. Additionally, DOE routinely conducts
interviews with manufacturers to improve its assessment of the market
and available technologies for DHE.
1. Product Classes
When evaluating and establishing energy conservation standards, DOE
may divide covered products into product classes by the type of energy
used, or by capacity or other performance-related features that justify
a different standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)) In making a determination
whether capacity or another performance-related feature justifies a
different standard, DOE must consider such factors as the utility of
the feature to the consumer and other factors DOE deems appropriate.
Id.
For DHE, the current energy conservation standards specified in 10
CFR 430.32(i)(2) are based on 11 product classes divided by equipment
type (i.e., wall, floor, or room), heat circulation type (i.e., fan or
gravity), and input capacity. Table II.1 lists the current product
classes for DHE.
Table II.1--Current Direct Heating Equipment Product Classes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHE type Heat circulation type Input rate, Btu/h
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wall............... Fan..................... <=42,000.
>42,000.
Gravity................. <=27,000.
>27,000 and <=46,000.
>46,000.
Floor.............. All..................... <=37,000.
>37,000.
Room............... All..................... <=20,000.
>20,000 and <=27,000.
>27,000 and <=46,000.
>46,000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue B.1 DOE requests feedback on the current DHE product classes
and whether changes to these individual product classes and their
descriptions should be made or whether certain classes should be merged
or separated. DOE further requests feedback on whether combining
certain classes could impact product utility by eliminating any
performance-related features or impact the stringency of the current
energy conservation standard for these products. DOE also requests
comment on separating any of the existing product classes and whether
it would impact product utility by eliminating any performance-related
[[Page 6099]]
features or reduce any compliance burdens.
Issue B.2 DOE seeks information regarding any other new product
classes it should consider for inclusion in its analysis. Specifically,
DOE requests information on the performance-related features (e.g.,
input capacity, equipment type, heater type, etc.) that provide unique
consumer utility and data detailing the corresponding impacts on energy
use that would justify separate product classes (i.e., explanation for
why the presence of these performance-related features would increase
energy consumption).
2. Technology Assessment
In analyzing the feasibility of potential new or amended energy
conservation standards, DOE uses information about existing and past
technology options and prototype designs to help identify technologies
that manufacturers could use to meet and/or exceed a given set of
energy conservation standards under consideration. In consultation with
interested parties, DOE intends to develop a list of technologies to
consider in its analysis. That analysis will likely include a number of
the technology options DOE previously considered during its most recent
rulemaking for DHE. A complete list of those prior options appears in
Table II.2. DOE has conducted a preliminary review and did not identify
any new options.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See chapter 3, section 3.3.2.2 in the April 2010 final rule
technical support document (TSD) published during the rulemaking
process, document #149 on https://regulations.gov in docket ID EERE-
2006-STD-0129.
Table II.2--Previously Considered Technology Options for Direct Heating
Equipment From the April 2010 Final Rule and October 2016 Final
Determination \4\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technology options
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increased heat exchanger surface area
Multiple flues
Multiple turns in flue
Direct vent (concentric)
Increased heat transfer coefficient
Electronic ignition
Thermal vent damper
Electrical vent damper
Power burner
Induced draft
Two-stage and modulating operation
Improved fan or blower motor efficiency
Increased insulation
Condensing
Condensing Pulse Combustion
Air circulation fan
Sealed combustion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue B.3 DOE seeks information on the technologies listed in Table
II.2 regarding their applicability to the current market and how these
technologies may impact the efficiency of DHE as measured according to
the DOE test procedure. DOE also seeks information on how these
technologies may have changed since they were considered in the October
2016 Final Determination analysis. Specifically, DOE seeks information
on the range of efficiencies or performance characteristics that are
currently available for each technology option.
Issue B.4 DOE seeks comment on other technology options that it
should consider for inclusion in its analysis. DOE is particularly
interested in information for any potential new technology options
regarding their market adoption, costs, and any concerns with
incorporating them into products (e.g., impacts on consumer utility,
potential safety concerns, manufacturing/production/implementation
issues).
C. Screening Analysis
The purpose of the screening analysis is to evaluate the
technologies that improve equipment efficiency to determine which
technologies will be eliminated from further consideration and which
will be passed to the engineering analysis for further consideration.
DOE determines whether to eliminate certain technology options from
further consideration based on the following criteria:
(1) Technological feasibility. Technologies that are not
incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes will not
be considered further.
(2) Practicability to manufacture, install, and service. If it is
determined that mass production of a technology in commercial products
and reliable installation and servicing of the technology could not be
achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the
time of the compliance date of the standard, then that technology will
not be considered further.
(3) Impacts on equipment utility or equipment availability. If a
technology is determined to have significant adverse impact on the
utility of the equipment for significant subgroups of consumers, or
result in the unavailability of any covered equipment type with
performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes,
capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as equipment
generally available in the United States at the time, it will not be
considered further.
(4) Adverse impacts on health or safety. If it is determined that a
technology will have significant adverse impacts on health or safety,
it will not be considered further.
10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, sections 4(a)(4) and 5(b).
Technology options identified in the technology assessment are
evaluated against these criteria using DOE analyses and inputs from
interested parties (e.g., manufacturers, trade organizations, and
energy efficiency advocates). Technologies that pass through the
screening analysis are referred to as ``design options'' in the
engineering analysis. Technology options that fail to meet one or more
of the four criteria are eliminated from consideration.
Additionally, DOE notes that the four screening criteria do not
directly address the proprietary status of technology options. DOE only
considers potential efficiency levels achieved through the use of
proprietary designs in the engineering analysis if they are not part of
a unique pathway to achieve the efficiency level (i.e., if there are
other non-proprietary technologies capable of achieving the same
efficiency level).
Table II.3 summarizes the technology options that DOE screened out
in the April 2010 final rule, and the applicable screening criteria.
[[Page 6100]]
Table II.3--Previously Screened Out Technology Options From the April 2010 Final Rule \5\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPCA Criteria (X = basis for screening out)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Practicability to
Screened technology option Technological manufacture, Adverse impact on Adverse impacts on
feasibility install, and product utility health and safety
service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increased heat transfer .................. X
coefficient....................
Power burner.................... .................. X
Condensing Pulse Combustion..... X
Improved fan or blower motor .................. X
efficiency.....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue C.1 DOE requests feedback on what impact, if any, the
screening criteria described in this section would have on each of the
technology options listed in Table II.2 with respect to DHE. Similarly,
DOE seeks information regarding how these same criteria would affect
any other technology options not already identified in this document
with respect to their potential use in DHE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See chapter 4, section 4.2.2 in the April 2010 final rule
TSD published during the rulemaking process, document #149 on
https://regulations.gov in docket ID EERE-2006-STD-0129.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue C.2 With respect to the screened out technology options
listed in Table II.3, DOE seeks information on whether these options
should, based on current and projected assessments regarding each of
them, remain screened out under the screening criteria described in
this section. With respect to each of these technology options, what
steps, if any, could be (or have already been) taken to facilitate the
introduction of each option as a means to improve the energy
performance of DHE?
D. Engineering Analysis
The engineering analysis estimates the cost-efficiency relationship
of products at different levels of increased energy efficiency
(``efficiency levels''). This relationship serves as the basis for the
cost-benefit calculations for consumers, manufacturers, and the Nation.
In determining the cost-efficiency relationship, DOE estimates the
change in manufacturer production cost (``MPC'') associated with
increasing the efficiency of products above the baseline, up to the
maximum technologically feasible (``max-tech'') efficiency level for
each product class.
DOE historically has used the following three methodologies to
generate incremental manufacturing costs and establish efficiency
levels (``ELs'') for analysis: (1) The design-option approach, which
provides the incremental costs of adding to a baseline model design
options that will improve its efficiency; (2) the efficiency-level
approach, which provides the relative costs of achieving increases in
energy efficiency levels, without regard to the particular design
options used to achieve such increases; and (3) the cost-assessment (or
reverse engineering) approach, which provides ``bottom-up''
manufacturing cost assessments for achieving various levels of
increased efficiency, based on detailed cost data for parts and
material, labor, shipping/packaging, and investment for models that
operate at particular efficiency levels.
In the analysis for the April 2010 final rule, DOE analyzed four
product classes that were representative of the 11 total classes.
Specifically, for each type of DHE (i.e., wall fan, wall gravity,
floor, room), DOE selected one ``representative'' input range for
analysis and applied that analysis across all other input rate ranges
for the given type of DHE. DOE developed a cost-efficiency relationship
for each of these analyzed representative product classes that were
used as the input for the downstream analyses conducted in support of
that rulemaking. See chapter 5 of the April 2010 final rule TSD for the
cost-efficiency curves developed in that rulemaking.
Issue D.1 DOE requests comment on whether it is necessary to
individually analyze all 11 product classes, or whether the approach of
analyzing a representative sub-set of product classes is appropriate
for any potential future DHE energy conservation standards rulemaking.
For example, analysis on the gas wall fan less than or equal to 42,000
Btu/h product classes may not be necessary if the analysis on the
corresponding gas wall fan greater than 42,000 Btu/h product classes is
applicable to both product classes. Additionally, DOE welcomes comment
on potential approaches to apply the analyzed representative product
class results to the other product classes, including the approach used
for the April 2010 final rule. If it is necessary to individually
analyze each of the 11 product classes (or more than the 11 classes),
please provide information on why aggregating certain products is not
appropriate. If this approach is not appropriate, what alternative
approaches should DOE consider using and why? \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See chapter 5, section 5.3 in the April 2010 final rule TSD
published during the rulemaking process, document #149 on https://regulations.gov in docket ID EERE-2006-STD-0129.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Baseline Efficiency Levels
For each product class that is analyzed, DOE selects a baseline
model as a reference point against which any changes resulting from new
or amended energy conservation standards can be measured. The baseline
model in each product class represents the characteristics of common or
typical products in that class. Typically, a baseline model is one that
just meets the current minimum energy conservation standards and
provides basic consumer utility.
DOE uses baseline models for comparison in several phases of the
analyses, including the engineering analysis, life-cycle cost (``LCC'')
analysis, payback period (``PBP'') analysis, and national impact
analysis (``NIA''). In the engineering analysis, to determine the
changes in price to the consumer that result from amended standards,
DOE compares the price of a baseline model to the price of a model at
each higher efficiency level.
If it determines that a rulemaking is necessary, consistent with
this analytical approach, DOE tentatively plans to consider the current
minimum energy conservations standards (which went into effect April
16, 2013) to establish the baseline efficiency levels for each product
class. The current standards for each product class are based on DHE
type (wall, floor, or room), heat circulation type (fan or gravity),
and input capacity. The current standards for DHE are found at 10 CFR
430.32(i)(2).
Issue D.2 DOE requests feedback on whether using the current
established energy conservation standards for DHE are appropriate
baseline efficiency levels for DOE to apply to each product class in
evaluating whether to amend
[[Page 6101]]
the current energy conservation standards for these products. DOE
requests data and suggestions to evaluate the baseline efficiency
levels in order to better evaluate the potential for amending energy
conservation standards for these products.
Issue D.3 DOE requests feedback on the appropriate baseline
efficiency levels for any newly analyzed product classes that are not
currently in place or for any contemplated combined or separated
product classes, as discussed in section II.B.1 of this document. For
product classes that would be newly analyzed (if any), DOE requests
energy use data to develop a baseline relationship between energy use
and input capacity.
2. Maximum Available and Maximum Technologically Feasible Levels
As part of DOE's analysis when considering potential amended
standards, DOE determines the maximum available efficiency level and
the maximum technologically feasible (``max-tech'') efficiency level
for each product class analyzed. The maximum available efficiency level
is the highest-efficiency model currently available on the market for
that class. The max-tech efficiency level represents the theoretical
maximum possible efficiency if all available design options are
incorporated in a model. In some cases, models at the max-tech
efficiency level are not commercially available because, although the
level is technically achievable, manufacturers have determined that it
is not economically feasible (either for the manufacturer to produce or
for consumers to purchase). However, DOE seeks to determine the max-
tech level for purposes of its analyses. The current maximum available
efficiencies for the 11 existing product classes are included in Table
II.4, along with the maximum available efficiencies from the April 2010
final rule and the October 2016 final determination.
Table II.4--Maximum Available Efficiency Levels--Current and Previous Rulemakings
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFUE
Heat circulation Input rate, Btu/-----------------------------------------------
DHE type type h October 2016
April 2010 * ** Current ***
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wall......................... Fan............. <=42,000....... 83 92 93
>42,000........ [dagger] 80 80 80
Gravity......... <=27,000....... 80 80 72
>27,000 and [dagger] 69 69 69
<=46,000.
>46,000........ 69 70 70
Floor........................ All............. <=37,000....... 57 57 57
>37,000........ [dagger] 58 58 58
Room......................... All............. <=20,000....... 59 71 71
>20,000 and 63 66 66
<=27,000.
>27,000 and [dagger] 81 68 68
<=46,000.
>46,000........ 70 70 70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Gas Appliance Manufacturers Associated Directory for Direct Heating Equipment downloaded March 2, 2009.
** Combination of Air-Conditioning, Heating, & Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) and DOE's Compliance Certification
Management System (CCMS) databases downloaded on July 16, 2015.
*** Combination of AHRI and CCMS databases download on September 10, 2018.
[dagger] Representative product classes analyzed in the April 2010 final rule.
In the April 2010 final rule, DOE determined max-tech efficiency
levels using the technology options available at that time. For gas
wall fan DHE with an input rate over 42,000 Btu/h, DOE identified a
max-tech efficiency level design with induced draft combustion,
resulting in an AFUE of 80 percent. For gas wall gravity DHE with an
input rate over 27,000 Btu/h and up to 46,000 Btu/h, DOE identified 70
percent AFUE as a theoretical max-tech level, which was achievable with
an improved heat exchanger design and electronic ignition. For gas
floor DHE with an input rate over 37,000 Btu/h, DOE identified the max-
tech efficiency level as 58 percent AFUE, which DOE stated could be
reached using an improved heat exchanger design. For gas room DHE with
an input rate over 27,000 Btu/h and up to 46,000 Btu/h, DOE identified
a theoretical max-tech efficiency level of 83 percent AFUE, which
manufacturers could achieve using an electronic ignition and improved
heat exchanger. 75 FR 20112, 20145-20146 (April 16, 2010).
In the October 2016 final determination, DOE noted that condensing
gas wall fan DHE models with input rates at or below 42,000 Btu/h had
become available, and DOE considered this the max-tech level for gas
wall fan DHE. Based on information obtained during manufacturer
interviews and a manufacturer production cost found through a teardown
analysis performed for the proposed determination (81 FR 21276, 21280
(April 11, 2016)), DOE determined that condensing technology was not
economically justified for gas wall fan DHE at that time. 81 FR 71325,
71328 (Oct. 17, 2016). During manufacturer interviews conducted leading
up to the proposed determination, manufacturers indicated that
condensing models are significantly more expensive to produce than non-
condensing models, which DOE confirmed through its teardown analysis,
which showed a 23 percent manufacturing cost increase for condensing
units. Manufacturers also indicated that shipments were so low as to be
negligible, and DOE noted that only one manufacturer produced a
condensing gas wall fan DHE at that time. DOE stated in the final
determination that manufacturers would need to make substantial
investments in order to produce these units on a scale large enough to
support a Federal minimum standard and that severe manufacturer impacts
would be expected if an energy conservation standard were adopted at a
level met through use of condensing technology. Therefore, DOE
concluded the condensing technology option would not be economically
justified at that time when analyzed for the Nation as a whole. Id. In
DOE's preliminary research for this RFI, it found that 2 out of the 4
manufacturers of gas wall fan DHE currently make products incorporating
condensing technology.
Issue D.4 DOE seeks input on whether the maximum available
[[Page 6102]]
efficiency levels are appropriate and technologically feasible for
consideration as possible energy conservation standards for the
products at issue, and if not, why not. DOE also seeks input on whether
other maximum efficiency levels are possible with technologies, or
combinations of technologies, not currently incorporated in available
designs.
Issue D.5 DOE seeks feedback on what design options would be
incorporated at a max-tech efficiency level, and the efficiencies
associated with those levels. As part of this request, DOE also seeks
information as to whether there are limitations on the use of certain
combinations of design options.
3. Manufacturer Production Costs and Manufacturing Selling Price
As described at the beginning of this section, the main outputs of
the engineering analysis are cost-efficiency relationships that
describe the estimated increases in manufacturer production cost (MPC)
associated with higher-efficiency products for the analyzed product
classes. For the April 2010 final rule, DOE developed the cost-
efficiency relationships by estimating the efficiency improvements and
costs associated with incorporating specific design options into the
assumed baseline model for each analyzed product class. 75 FR 20112,
20147-20149 (April 16, 2010).
Issue D.6 DOE requests feedback on how manufacturers would
incorporate the technology options listed in Table II.2 to increase
energy efficiency in DHE beyond the baseline. This includes information
on the order in which manufacturers would incorporate the different
technologies to incrementally improve the efficiencies of products. DOE
also requests feedback on whether the increased energy efficiency would
lead to other design changes that would not occur otherwise. DOE is
also interested in information regarding any potential impact of design
options on a manufacturer's ability to incorporate additional functions
or attributes in response to consumer demand.
Issue D.7 DOE also seeks input on the change in MPC associated with
incorporating each particular design option. Specifically, DOE is
interested in whether and how the costs estimated for design options in
the April 2010 final rule have changed since the time of that analysis.
DOE also requests information on the investments necessary to
incorporate specific design options, including, but not limited to,
costs related to new or modified tooling (if any), materials,
engineering, and development efforts to implement each design option,
and manufacturing/production impacts.
Issue D.8 DOE requests comment on whether certain design options
may not be applicable to (or incompatible with) specific product
classes.
To account for manufacturers' non-production costs and profit
margin, DOE applies a non-production cost multiplier (the manufacturer
mark-up) to the MPC. The resulting manufacturer selling price (``MSP'')
is the price at which the manufacturer distributes a unit into
commerce. For the April 2010 final rule, DOE used a manufacturer mark-
up of 1.35 for all DHE. See chapter 5 of the April 2010 final rule TSD.
Issue D.9 DOE requests feedback on whether a manufacturer mark-up
of 1.35 is appropriate for all DHE.
E. Mark-Up Analysis
The mark-ups analysis develops appropriate mark-ups (e.g., for
wholesalers, mechanical contractors, general contractors) in the
distribution chain (i.e., how the products are distributed from the
manufacturer to the consumer) and sales taxes to convert the
manufacturer sales prices (``MSP'') derived in the engineering analysis
to consumer prices, which are then used in the LCC and PBP analyses and
other analyses. At each step in the distribution channel, companies
mark up the price of the equipment to cover business costs and profit
margin.
1. Distribution Channels
In generating end-user price inputs for the LCC analysis and NIA,
DOE must identify distribution channels (i.e., how the products are
distributed from the manufacturer to the consumer) and estimate
relative sales volumes through each channel. Two different markets
exist for DHE: (1) Replacements and new owners,\7\ and (2) new
construction. DOE intends to use similar distribution channels in its
analysis as found in the April 2010 final rule. DHE is mainly a
replacement product.\8\ For replacement and new owner applications,
most sales go through distributors to contractors, and then to
consumers as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ New owners are defined as existing buildings that acquire a
DHE for the first time during the analysis period. An example of new
owner for DHE would be someone with an addition to an existing house
where it would not be feasible to extend the house's primary heating
system to the new space.
\8\ The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
(AHRI) stated that less than 5 percent of DHE sales are for new
construction projects. AHRI, Comment #7 for RFI for Energy
Conservation Standards for Energy Conservation Standards for Direct
Heating Equipment and Pool Heaters (April 27, 2015) (Available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2015-BT-STD-0003-0007)
(Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
Manufacturer [rarr] Wholesaler [rarr] Mechanical Contractor [rarr]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer
In new home applications, most sales go through distributors to
contractors hired by the builder as follows:
Manufacturer [rarr] Wholesaler [rarr] Mechanical Contractor [rarr]
General Contractor [rarr] Consumer
Issue E.1 DOE requests information on the existence of any
distribution channels that are used to distribute the products at issue
into the market. DOE also requests data on the fraction of DHE sales in
the residential sector that go through any identified channels.
2. Mark-Ups
To develop mark-ups for the parties involved in the distribution of
the equipment, DOE plans to primarily utilize: (1) The Heating, Air
Conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors International (``HARDI'')
2013 Profit Report \9\ (for wholesalers) and 3. U.S. Census Bureau 2012
Economic Census data \10\ on the residential building construction
industry (for general contractors and mechanical contractors). DOE also
plans to use the 2005 Air Conditioning Contractors of America's
(``ACCA'') Financial Analysis on the Heating, Ventilation, Air-
Conditioning, and Refrigeration (``HVACR'') contracting industry \11\
to disaggregate the mechanical contractor mark-ups into replacement and
new construction markets. DOE will also consider updates to any of
these materials that may publish during DOE's evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Heating, Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Distributors
International (HARDI), 2013 HARDI Profit Report (Available at:
https://hardinet.org/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
\10\ U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 Economic Census Data (Available
at: https://www.census.gov/econ/) (Last accessed Sept. 12, 2018).
\11\ Air Conditioning Contractors of America (ACCA), Financial
Analysis for the HVACR Contracting Industry (2005) (Available at:
https://www.acca.org/store/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the mark-ups, DOE will derive State and local taxes
from data provided by the Sales Tax Clearinghouse.\12\ These data
represent weighted-average taxes that include county and city rates.
DOE will derive shipment-weighted-average tax values for each region
considered in the analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Sales Tax Clearinghouse Inc., State Sales Tax Rates Along
with Combined Average City and County Rates. 2018 (Available at;
https://thestc.com/STrates.stm) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue E.2 DOE requests recent data and recommendations regarding
data sources to establish the mark-ups for the
[[Page 6103]]
parties involved with the distribution of DHE.
F. Energy Use Analysis
DOE conducts an energy use analysis to identify how products are
used by consumers, and thereby determine the energy savings potential
of energy efficiency improvements. DOE uses the annual energy
consumption and energy-savings potential in the LCC and PBP analysis to
establish the operating costs savings at various product efficiency
levels. DOE will estimate the annual energy consumption of direct
heating equipment at specified energy efficiency levels across a range
of applications, household types, and climate zones. The annual energy
consumption includes use of natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG
(i.e., propane)), and electricity.
1. Sample Development
DOE intends to base the energy use analysis on key characteristics
from the Energy Information Administration's (``EIA'') 2015 Residential
Energy Consumption Survey (``RECS'') \13\ for the subset of residential
buildings that use DHEs. DOE also plans to include in its analysis DHE
used in the commercial sector using EIA's 2012 Commercial Building
Energy Consumption Survey (``CBECS'').\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2015 Residential
Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) (Available at: https://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
\14\ Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2012 Commercial
Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) (Available at: https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECS and CBECS data include information on the DHE type, physical
characteristics of buildings, fuels used, energy consumption and
expenditures, and other relevant characteristics.\15\ Based on RECS
2015 and CBECS 2012 data, DOE will develop a representative population
of buildings for DHE. In addition, DOE intends to review other data
sets (e.g., data from the 2016 Residential Building Stock Assessment
for the Northwest,\16\ 2014 Commercial Building Stock Assessment for
the Northwest,\17\ 2015 Residential Statewide Baseline Study of New
York State,\18\ 2006 California Commercial End-Use Survey,\19\ and 2009
Residential Appliance Saturation Study \20\) to compare these to the
RECS 2015 and CBECS 2012 data for the corresponding region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ From RECS 2015, DOE intends to use households listed as
using primary gas heating equipment from ``built-in room heater
burning gas, oil, or kerosene'' (138 home sample is estimated to
represent 2.8 million homes in 2015) and ``built-in floor/wall
pipeless furnace'' (41 home sample is estimated to represent 0.8
million homes in 2015) and as secondary gas heating equipment from
``some other equipment'' (221 home sample is estimated to represent
4.2 million homes in 2015).
\16\ Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA), Residential
Building Stock Assessment (2016) (Available at: https://dev.neea.org/data/residential-building-stock-assessment) (Last
accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
\17\ Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA), Commercial
Building Stock Assessment (2014) (Available at: https://dev.neea.org/data/commercial-building-stock-assessments) (Last
accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
\18\ New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
(NYSERDA), Residential Statewide Baseline Study of New York State
(July 2015) (Available at: https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/About/Publications/Building-Stock-and-Potential-Studies/Residential-Statewide-Baseline-Study-of-New-York-State) (Last accessed Oct. 2,
2018).
\19\ California Energy Commission (CEC), 2006 California
Commercial End-Use Survey (2006) (Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/ceus/2006_enduse.html) (Last accessed Oct. 2,
2018).
\20\ California Energy Commission (CEC), 2009 Residential
Appliance Saturation Study (RASS) (2009) (Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/rass/) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue F.1 DOE requests comment on the overall method to determine
the building sample for direct heating equipment and whether other
factors should be considered in developing the building sample. In
addition, DOE requests information on the installation applications of
DHE, including, but not limited to the fraction of DHEs that are
installed in residential and commercial applications, as well as how
many DHE are typically installed per building.
2. Energy Use Calculations
To determine the site energy consumption by the DHEs installed in
the building, DOE intends to use a methodology based on the energy use
equations from the DOE test procedure for DHEs (10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix O, section 4.6). For each household or building in
the sample, DOE plans to use RECS 2015 and CBECS 2012 reported heating
energy consumption to estimate the heating load of the housing unit or
building.\21\ The estimation of heating loads requires data on the
existing DHE characteristics (such as DHE type, fuel type, equipment
size, and efficiency of the DHE). DOE intends to assign DHE
characteristics of existing systems based on the distributions of DHE
provided in historical versions of the AHRI model certification
directory \22\ and any other available historical data. The estimation
of heating loads also requires calculating the electricity consumption
of the blower (when applicable), because heat from the blower
contributes to heating the housing unit. A large fraction of DHE are
used as secondary heating equipment; therefore, DOE intends to adjust
the house heating load for households that use the direct heating
equipment as secondary heating equipment by using the reported fraction
of heating energy consumption attributable to secondary heating
products in RECS 2015. To complete the analysis, DOE plans to calculate
the energy consumption of more energy efficient DHE alternatives
replacing the existing DHE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The heating load represents the amount of heating required
to keep a housing unit comfortable throughout an average year.
\22\ AHRI, Directory of Certified Product Performance for Direct
Heating Equipment (Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/)
(Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue F.2 DOE requests comment on the overall method to determine
energy use of direct heating equipment and if other factors should be
considered in developing the energy use methodology.
G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
DOE plans to conduct LCC and PBP analyses to evaluate the economic
impacts on residential and commercial consumers of potential standards
for DHEs. The effect of new or amended standards on residential and
commercial consumers usually involves a reduction in operating cost and
an increase in purchase cost.
DOE intends to analyze the potential for variability by performing
the LCC and PBP calculations on a representative sample of residential
and commercial consumers. DOE plans to utilize the sample of buildings
developed for the energy use analysis. DOE plans to model uncertainty
in many of the inputs to the LCC and PBP analysis using Monte Carlo
simulation and probability distributions. As a result, the LCC and PBP
results will be presented as distributions of impacts compared to the
no-new-standards case (i.e., the case without amended standards).
Inputs to the LCC and PBP analysis are categorized as: (1) Inputs
for establishing the purchase expense, otherwise known as the total
installed cost, and (2) inputs for calculating the operating costs.
Each type of input is discussed in the paragraphs that follow.
1. Total Installed Cost
The primary inputs for establishing the total installed cost are
the baseline customer price, incremental customer price increases
resulting from a potential standard, and installation costs. Baseline
prices and standard-level price increases will be determined by
applying mark-ups to manufacturer selling price estimates and sales
tax.
The installation cost is added to the customer price to arrive at a
total
[[Page 6104]]
installed cost. DOE intends to develop installation costs using the
most recent RS Means data available.\23\ DOE also intends to use
regional labor costs to more accurately estimate installation costs by
applying the appropriate regional labor cost from RS Means to each
sampled DHE installation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ RS Means, 2018 Mechanical Cost Data (Available at: https://www.rsmeans.com/products/books.aspx) (Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In conducting its analyses, DOE intends to utilize an installation
cost methodology that is customized for each DHE product class. For
DHEs in new owner installations or new construction, DOE plans to
include costs such as adding gas piping, putting the DHE in place, and
additional set-up. For replacement cases, in addition to the costs
considered for new installations, DOE also plans to include the
installation cost associated with disconnecting and removing the old
DHE, as well as removal/disposal and permit fees, if applicable. In
addition, DOE intends to assess whether installation costs vary with
equipment efficiency, including design options that require a new
electrical outlet (many existing DHE installations currently do not
have electrical power input) or condensing DHE units that require new
PVC venting and condensate withdrawal.
Issue G.1 DOE seeks input on any available installation cost data
for DHEs. DOE also seeks input on the approach it intends to use to
develop DHE installation costs, specifically, its intention to use the
most recent RS Means Mechanical Cost Data.
2. Operating Costs
The primary inputs for calculating the operating costs of DHEs are
energy consumption, equipment efficiency, energy prices, maintenance
and repair costs, equipment lifetime, and discount rates. Both
equipment lifetime and discount rates are used to calculate the present
value of future operating costs.
The product energy consumption is the site energy use associated
with providing space heating to the room of a building. DOE intends to
utilize the site energy use calculation methodology described in
section II.F of this document to determine product energy use. DOE also
plans to assess the potential applicability of the ``rebound effect''
in the energy consumption for DHE. A rebound effect occurs when a
product that is made more efficient is used more intensively, so that
the expected energy savings from the efficiency improvement may not
fully materialize. However, at this time, DOE is not aware of any
information about a rebound effect for DHE.
Issue G.2 DOE seeks comments and data on any rebound effect that
may be associated with more-efficient DHE.
The repair cost is the expense to repair or replace components of
the covered product that have failed. The maintenance cost is the
expense of regular scheduled product maintenance to ensure the
continued operation of the covered product over time. These costs cover
all labor and material costs associated with the repair or maintenance.
DOE intends to develop repair and maintenance costs using the most
recent RS Means data available \24\ and manufacturer literature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ RS Means, 2018 Facilities Maintenance & Repair Cost Data
(Available at: https://www.rsmeans.com/products/books.aspx) (Last
accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE intends to assess whether repair or maintenance costs vary with
equipment efficiency and product class. In addition, DOE plans to
consider the cases in which the equipment is covered by warranty,
service, and/or maintenance agreements. More specifically, DOE intends
to account for the maintenance cost associated with the manufacturer-
recommended annual maintenance prior to the heating season.
DOE will determine the repair cost using an approach that reflects
the cost and the service life of the components that are likely to
fail. DOE plans to consider component repair costs that might fail
during the lifetime of the product, including the pilot ignition,
electronic ignition, circulating blower, and induced draft fan.
Issue G.3 DOE requests feedback and data on whether maintenance
costs differ in comparison to the baseline maintenance costs for any of
the specific technology options listed in Table II.2 and Table II.3. To
the extent that these costs differ, DOE seeks supporting data and the
reasons for those differences.
Issue G.4 DOE requests information and data on the frequency of
repair and repair costs by product class for the technology options
listed in Table II.2 and Table II.3. DOE is also interested in whether
consumers simply replace the products when they fail as opposed to
repairing them.
Issue G.5 DOE also seeks comment on the extent to which repair or
maintenance costs are covered by warranty, service, and/or maintenance
agreements.
Equipment lifetime is the age at which a unit is retired from
service. DOE intends to conduct a literature review of DHE lifetime
data together with any stakeholder lifetime data to develop a Weibull
probability distribution to characterize DHE lifetime.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ A Weibull probability distribution is a continuous
distribution function typically used in reliability engineering and
equipment failure analysis. If the data are available, DOE also
plans to take into account differences in DHE lifetime based on
usage and application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue G.6 DOE requests product lifetime data and information on
whether product lifetime varies based on DHE product class,
application, or efficiency.
DOE measures LCC and PBP impacts of potential standard levels
relative to a no-new-standards case that reflects the likely market in
the absence of amended standards. DOE plans to develop efficiency
market shares (i.e., the distribution of product shipments by
efficiency) for DHEs, for the anticipated year in which compliance with
any potential amended standards would be required. DOE is not aware of
any shipment data to estimate the market shares of different DHE energy
efficiency levels in the no-new-standards case. DOE is particularly
interested in receiving such data. If no market share data become
available, DOE intends to use data on the number of DHE models at
different energy efficiency levels, as reported in DOE's compliance
certification database,\26\ historical versions of the AHRI model
certification directory,\27\ and from manufacturer literature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ U.S. Department of Energy, Compliance Certification
Database: Unfired Hot Water Storage Tanks--Commercial (Available at:
https://www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/products.html)
(Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
\27\ AHRI, Directory of Certified Product Performance for Direct
Heating Equipment (Available at: https://www.ahridirectory.org/)
(Last accessed Oct. 2, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue G.7 DOE requests information on the DHE market, including but
not limited to, the current market share by different efficiency level
and by product class, similar historical data, and information on
expected future trends in the efficiency of DHEs.
H. Shipments Analysis
DOE develops shipments forecasts of DHE to calculate the national
impacts of potential amended energy conservation standards on energy
consumption, net present value (``NPV''), and future manufacturer cash
flows. DOE shipments projections are based on available historical data
broken out by product class, input capacity, and efficiency. Current
sales estimates allow for a more accurate model that captures recent
trends in the market. From the April 2010 final rule, DOE has DHE
historical shipment data from AHRI for
[[Page 6105]]
wall furnaces from 1990 to 1998 and from 2000 to 2006, for floor
furnaces from 1990 to 2007, and for room heaters from 1990 to 2005.\28
29\ DOE has limited disaggregated shipments for fan and gravity wall
furnaces and by input capacity.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ AHRI, AHRI Shipments Data, March 3, 2008. (Note: 1990-2006
Wall furnaces data disaggregated by vented wall furnaces and direct-
vent wall furnaces).
\29\ AHRI, AHRI Floor Furnace Supplemental Shipments Data, March
11, 2008.
\30\ AHRI, AHRI Wall Furnace Supplemental Shipments Data, May
19, 2008. (Note: 2002-2006 shipments for wall gravity furnace over
27 to 46 kBtu/h and wall fan furnace above over 42 kBtu/h only).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue H.1 DOE requests annual sales data (i.e., number of
shipments) for each DHE product class from 2008-2018.
An example table of the types of data requested for 2008-2018
shipments can be found in Table II.5. Interested parties are also
encouraged to provide additional shipment data as may be relevant
including data before 2008.
Table II.5--Summary Table of Shipments--Related Data Requests
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual shipments (number sold)
Equipment type Heat circulation type Input rate, Btu/h --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wall................................... Fan...................... <=42,000.................
>42,000..................
Gravity.................. <=27,000.................
>27,000 and <=46,000.....
>46,000..................
Floor.................................. All...................... <=37,000.................
>37,000..................
Room................................... All...................... <=20,000.................
>20,000 and <=27,000.....
>27,000 and <=46,000.....
>46,000..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If disaggregated fractions of annual sales are not available at the
product type level, DOE requests more aggregated fractions of annual
shipments at the category level.
Issue H.2 If available, DOE requests the same information in Table
II.5 by efficiency.
I. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
The purpose of the manufacturer impact analysis (``MIA'') is to
estimate the financial impact of new or amended energy conservation
standards on manufacturers of DHE, and to evaluate the potential impact
of such standards on direct employment and manufacturing capacity. The
MIA includes both quantitative and qualitative aspects. The
quantitative part of the MIA primarily relies on the Government
Regulatory Impact Model (``GRIM''), an industry cash-flow model adapted
for each product in this analysis, with the key output being the
industry net present value (``INPV''), which is used to assess the
financial impacts of a potential standard. The qualitative part of the
MIA addresses the potential impacts of energy conservation standards on
manufacturing capacity and industry competition, as well as factors
such as product characteristics, impacts on particular subgroups of
firms, and important market and product trends.
As part of the MIA, DOE intends to analyze impacts of potential
amended energy conservation standards on subgroups of manufacturers of
covered products, including small business manufacturers. DOE uses the
Small Business Administration's (``SBA'') small business size standards
to determine whether manufacturers qualify as small businesses, which
are listed by the applicable North American Industry Classification
System (``NAICS'') code.\31\ Manufacturing of consumer DHE is
classified under NAICS 333414, ``Heating Equipment (except Warm Air
Furnaces) Manufacturing,'' and the SBA sets a threshold of 500
employees or less for a domestic entity to be considered as a small
business. This employee threshold includes all employees in a
business's parent company and any other subsidiaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Available online at: https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One aspect of assessing manufacturer burden involves examining the
cumulative impact of multiple DOE standards and the product-specific
regulatory actions of other Federal agencies that affect the
manufacturers of a covered product or equipment. While any one
regulation may not impose a significant burden on manufacturers, the
combined effects of several existing or impending regulations may have
serious consequences for some manufacturers, groups of manufacturers,
or an entire industry. Assessing the impact of a single regulation may
overlook this cumulative regulatory burden. In addition to energy
conservation standards, other regulations can significantly affect
manufacturers' financial operations. Multiple regulations affecting the
same manufacturer can strain profits and lead companies to abandon
product lines or markets with lower expected future returns than
competing products. For these reasons, DOE conducts an analysis of
cumulative regulatory burden as part of its rulemakings pertaining to
appliance efficiency.
Issue I.1 To the extent feasible, DOE seeks the names and contact
information of any domestic or foreign-based manufacturers that
distribute DHE in the United States.
Issue I.2 DOE identified small businesses as a subgroup of
manufacturers that could be disproportionally impacted by amended
energy conservation standards. DOE requests the names and contact
information of small business manufacturers, as defined by the SBA's
size threshold, that distribute DHE products in commerce in the United
States. In addition, DOE requests comment on any other manufacturer
subgroups that could be disproportionally impacted by amended energy
conservation standards for DHE. DOE requests feedback on any potential
approaches that could be considered to address impacts on
manufacturers, including small businesses.
[[Page 6106]]
Issue I.3 DOE requests information regarding the cumulative
regulatory burden impacts on manufacturers of DHE associated with: (1)
Other DOE standards applying to different products that these
manufacturers may also make and (2) product-specific regulatory actions
of other Federal agencies. DOE also requests comment on its methodology
for computing cumulative regulatory burden and whether there are any
flexibilities it can consider that would reduce this burden while
remaining consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
J. Other Energy Conservation Standards Topics
1. Market Failures
In the field of economics, a market failure is a situation in which
the market outcome does not maximize societal welfare. Such an outcome
would result in unrealized potential welfare. DOE welcomes comment on
any aspect of market failures, especially those in the context of
amended energy conservation standards for DHE.
2. Market-Based Approaches to Energy Conservation Standards
As part of its regulatory reform efforts, DOE published a request
for information discussing key issues and requesting feedback on
market-based approaches to energy conservation standards. 82 FR 56181
(Nov. 28, 2017). DOE requests comment on how market-based approaches to
energy conservation standards might impact standards for these
products, and specifically seeks comment on any considerations with
respect to DHE.
In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document, DOE
welcomes comment on any other aspect of energy conservation standards
for DHE not already addressed by the specific areas identified in this
document.
III. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by April
12, 2019, comments and information on matters addressed in this notice
and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended energy
conservations standards for DHE. After the close of the comment period,
DOE will review the public comments received and may begin collecting
data and conducting the analyses discussed in this RFI.
Submitting comments via https://www.regulations.gov. The https://www.regulations.gov web page requires you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies Office staff only. Your contact information will
not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names,
organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any).
If your comment is not processed properly because of technical
difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your
comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names,
organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any
documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to https://www.regulations.gov information for which
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'')). Comments submitted
through https://www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments
received through the website will waive any CBI claims for the
information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through https://www.regulations.gov
before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of
being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being
processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to
several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that https://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or postal mail.
Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or postal
mail also will be posted to https://www.regulations.gov. If you do not
want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not
include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead,
provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first
and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing
address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it
does not include any comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via postal mail
or hand delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in
which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. No
telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, written in English, and free of any defects or
viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of
encryption, and, if possible, they should carry the electronic
signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery two well-marked copies: one copy
of the document marked ``confidential'' including all the information
believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked ``non-
confidential'' with the information believed to be confidential
deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE
will make its own determination about the confidential status of the
information and treat it according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the
items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time, and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
[[Page 6107]]
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of
the process for developing energy conservation standards. DOE actively
encourages the participation and interaction of the public during the
comment period in each stage of the process. Interactions with and
between members of the public provide a balanced discussion of the
issues and assist DOE in the process. Anyone who wishes to be added to
the DOE mailing list to receive future notices and information about
this process or would like to request a public meeting should contact
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or
via email at ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
Signed in Washington, DC, on February 13, 2019.
Steven Chalk,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2019-03270 Filed 2-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
