Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Conventional Cooking Products, 50810-50822 [2023-16475]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
50810
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 88, No. 147
Wednesday, August 2, 2023
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[EERE–2014–BT–STD–0005]
RIN 1904–AD15
Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Consumer
Conventional Cooking Products
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notification of data availability
and request for comment.
AGENCY:
On February 1, 2023, the U.S.
Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’)
published a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (‘‘SNOPR’’), in
which DOE proposed new and amended
energy conservation standards for
consumer conventional cooking
products. In this notification of data
availability (‘‘NODA’’), DOE is updating
its analysis for consumer conventional
cooking products based on stakeholder
data and information it received in
response to that SNOPR. DOE requests
comments, data, and information
regarding the updated analysis.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data,
and information regarding this NODA
on or before September 1, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov, under docket
number EERE–2014–BT–STD–0005.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments. Alternatively, interested
persons may submit comments,
identified by docket number EERE–
2014–BT–STD–0005, by any of the
following methods:
Email: ConventionalCookingProducts
2014STD0005@ee.doe.gov. Include the
docket number EERE–2014–BT–STD–
0005 in the subject line of the message.
Postal Mail: Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW,
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
Washington, DC, 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible,
please submit all items on a compact
disc (‘‘CD’’), in which case it is not
necessary to include printed copies.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance
and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC, 20585–0121.
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 telefacsimiles (‘‘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
www.regulations.gov. All documents in
the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. However,
not all documents listed in the index
may be publicly available, such as
information that is exempt from public
disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at
www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE–
2014–BT–STD–0005. 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
www.regulations.gov.
Dr.
Carl Shapiro, 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–
5649. Email: ApplianceStandards
Questions@ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Pete Cochran, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC, 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–9496. Email:
Peter.Cochran@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–
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1445 or by email: ApplianceStandards
Questions@ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Discussion
A. Efficiency Levels
1. Electric Cooking Tops
2. Gas Cooking Tops
3. Conventional Ovens
B. Manufacturer Production Costs
1. Electric Cooking Tops
2. Gas Cooking Tops
3. Conventional Ovens
C. Market Distribution
1. Electric Cooking Tops
2. Gas Cooking Tops
3. Conventional Ovens
D. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
Analysis
E. National Impact Analysis
III. Public Participation
I. Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’),1 authorizes
DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of
a number of consumer products and
certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C.
6291–6317) Title III, Part B 2 of EPCA
established the Energy Conservation
Program for Consumer Products Other
Than Automobiles. These products
include consumer conventional cooking
products, the subject of this rulemaking.
(42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(10))
The currently applicable energy
conservation standards for consumer
conventional cooking products consist
of a prescriptive prohibition on constant
burning pilots for all gas cooking
products (i.e., gas cooking products both
with or without an electrical supply
cord) manufactured on and after April 9,
2012. These standards are set forth at
title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) § 430.32(j)(1) and
(2).
Consumer conventional cooking
products comprise conventional
cooking tops and conventional ovens, as
defined as 10 CFR 430.2.
Representations of energy use or energy
efficiency of conventional cooking tops
made on or after February 20, 2023,
must be based on results generated
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the Energy Act
of 2020. Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020), which
reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A–1 of EPCA.
2 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A.
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
using the test procedure for
conventional cooking products at 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix I1
(‘‘appendix I1’’). There are currently no
DOE test procedures for conventional
ovens.
On February 1, 2023, DOE published
a supplemental notice of proposed
rulemaking (‘‘February 2023 SNOPR’’)
proposing to establish new and
amended standards for consumer
conventional cooking products,
consisting of maximum integrated
annual energy consumption (‘‘IAEC’’)
levels, in kilowatt-hours per year
(‘‘kWh/year’’) for electric cooking tops
and thousand British thermal units per
year (‘‘kBtu/year’’) for gas cooking tops.
88 FR 6818. Compliance with the new
and amended standards would be
required 3 years after the publication
date of final rule, should DOE finalize
the proposed standards. Id. The
technical support document (‘‘TSD’’)
that presented the methodology and
results of the February 2023 SNOPR
analysis is available at:
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE2014-BT-STD-0005-0090.
On February 28, 2023, DOE published
a notification of data availability
(‘‘February 2023 NODA’’) providing
additional information to clarify the
February 2023 SNOPR analysis for gas
cooking tops. 88 FR 12603. DOE
provided further data on the gas cooking
top test sample used for the February
2023 SNOPR analysis and estimated
that currently available gas cooking tops
representing nearly half of the market
would already meet the standards that
were proposed in the February 2023
SNOPR, and therefore would not be
impacted by the proposed standard, if
finalized. 88 FR 12603, 12605.
In response to the February 2023
SNOPR, DOE received additional data
and information regarding consumer
conventional cooking products.
Specifically, DOE received additional
gas and electric cooking top test data
from the Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers (‘‘AHAM’’)
and Pacific Gas and Electric (‘‘PG&E’’).3
Stakeholders also provided substantive
information regarding gas cooking top
features that are desired by consumers.
In addition, AHAM provided shipment
estimates of gas and electric cooking
tops by product type and/or
configuration. (AHAM, No. 2285 at pp.
6, 27)
Upon consideration of further
information received from interested
3 The AHAM comment containing its data set is
available at www.regulations.gov/comment/EERE2014-BT-STD-0005-2285. The PG&E data was
provided confidentially to DOE’s contractor.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
parties in response to the February 2023
SNOPR, this NODA presents updated
efficiency levels, manufacturer
production costs, no-new-standardscase market shares, life-cycle costs
(‘‘LCC’’), payback periods (‘‘PBP’’), and
national impact analysis (‘‘NIA’’) results
for all consumer conventional cooking
products. DOE is requesting comments,
data, and information regarding the
updated analysis.
DOE notes that it is continuing to
consider all of the stakeholder
comments received in response to the
February 2023 SNOPR and the February
2023 NODA in further development of
the rulemaking.
50811
DOE is publishing the full expanded
test sample for electric smooth cooking
tops (including the stakeholderprovided data and one additional DOE
unit) in an attachment to this NODA,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking.4
DOE requests comment on the
efficiency levels for electric smooth
element cooking tops.
2. Gas Cooking Tops
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
proposed new and amended energy
conservation standards for consumer
conventional cooking products. Per its
authority in 42 U.S.C. 6295(h)(2), DOE
proposed to remove the existing
II. Discussion
prescriptive standard for gas cooking
In the following sections, DOE details tops prohibiting a constant burning pilot
light. 88 FR 6818, 6819. Instead, for gas
its updated analysis for consumer
cooking tops, DOE proposed a
conventional cooking products. As
discussed in the February 2023 SNOPR, performance standard of a maximum
allowable IAEC of 1,204 kBtu/year. 88
DOE has not identified any higher
FR 6818, 6819–6820. These proposed
efficiency levels for electric open (coil)
element cooking tops and as such, is not standards for conventional cooking tops,
if adopted, would apply to all gas
including them in this NODA.
cooking tops manufactured in, or
A. Efficiency Levels
imported into, the United States starting
on the date 3 years after the publication
1. Electric Cooking Tops
of any final rule for this rulemaking. 88
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
FR 6818, 6819.
established efficiency levels for electric
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
smooth element cooking tops based on
considered efficiency levels (‘‘ELs’’)
combining an active-mode annual
associated with an optimized burner
energy consumption (‘‘AEC’’) value and and grate design, but only insofar as the
a combined low-power mode annual
efficiency level was achievable with
energy consumption (‘‘ETLP’’) value
continuous cast-iron grates and at least
associated with specific design options, one high input rate (‘‘HIR’’) burner
noting that different combinations of
(which DOE defined in the February
AEC and ETLP could be used to meet the 2023 SNOPR as burners with input rates
IAEC of a given efficiency level. 88 FR
greater than or equal to 14,000 British
6818, 6845–6846. DOE received
thermal units per hour (‘‘Btu/h’’)). 88 FR
additional electric smooth element
6818, 6845. DOE’s testing showed that
cooking top test data from AHAM and
energy use was correlated to burner
PG&E in response to the February 2023
design and cooking top configuration
SNOPR. These additional data are
(e.g., grate weight, flame angle, distance
consistent with DOE’s tentative
from burner ports to the cooking
determination in the February 2023
surface) and could be reduced by
SNOPR regarding efficiency levels for
optimizing the design of the burner and
these products. Therefore, in this
grate system. Id. DOE reviewed the test
NODA, DOE maintains the efficiency
data for the gas cooking tops in its test
levels for electric smooth element
sample and identified two efficiency
cooking tops that were proposed in the
levels associated with improving the
February 2023 SNOPR. Table II.1 shows burner and grate design that
the efficiency levels for electric smooth
corresponded to different design
element cooking tops.
criteria. Id.
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
TABLE II.1—ELECTRIC SMOOTH ELE- established efficiency levels for gas
MENT COOKING TOP EFFICIENCY cooking tops based on combining an
AEC value and an ETLP value associated
LEVELS
with specific design options, noting that
IAEC
different combinations of AEC and ETLP
Level
(kWh/year)
could be used to meet the IAEC of a
given efficiency level. 88 FR 6818,
Baseline ..................................
250
1 ..............................................
207 6845–6846.
2 ..............................................
3 ..............................................
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
189
179
4 www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BTSTD-0005/document.
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
50812
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE set
the baseline gas cooking top IAEC equal
to the sum of the maximum AEC and
the maximum ETLP observed in its test
sample for gas cooking tops. 88 FR 6818,
6844.
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
defined EL 1 based on an AEC
achievable by a gas cooking top with
four or more HIR burners and
continuous cast-iron grates and the
same ETLP as used for the baseline
efficiency level. 88 FR 6818, 6845–6846.
The AEC selected for EL 1 was the
highest measured among the units in its
test sample with four or more HIR
burners and continuous cast-iron grates,
as shown in Table 5.5.2 in chapter 5 of
the TSD for the February 2023 SNOPR.5
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
defined EL 2 based on the highest
measured AEC measured among the
units in its test sample with at least one
HIR burner and continuous cast-iron
grates and the same ETLP as used for the
baseline efficiency level. 88 FR 6818,
6845–6846. In the February 2023
SNOPR, DOE stated that HIR burners
provide unique consumer utility and
allow consumers to perform high heat
cooking activities such as searing and
stir-frying. Id. at 88 FR 6845. DOE also
stated that it is aware that some
consumers derive utility from
continuous cast-iron grates, such as the
ability to use heavy pans, or to shift
cookware between burners without
needing to lift them. Id. DOE notes that
EL 2 was defined based on the highest
measured efficiency unit that met the
screening analysis criteria (i.e., gas
cooking tops that include at least one
HIR burner and continuous cast-iron
grates), rather than the highest measured
efficiency unit of all tested units, so that
all ELs would be achievable with
continuous cast-iron grates and at least
one HIR burner.
Table II.2 shows the efficiency levels
for gas cooking tops evaluated in the
February 2023 SNOPR. Id. at 88 FR
6846.
PG&E that has prompted DOE to review
the engineering analysis for gas cooking
tops as presented in the February 2023
SNOPR. The additional gas cooking top
test data provided to DOE includes a
unit with a more energy consumptive
AEC value and a different unit with a
more energy consumptive maximum
ETLP value than the most energy
consumptive values in DOE’s gas
cooking top test sample. As discussed,
in the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
established efficiency levels for gas
cooking tops based on combining the
AEC value associated with specific
cooking top characteristics and the
maximum ETLP value in DOE’s test
sample, to avoid any potential loss of
utility from setting a standard based on
a unit without clock functionality.
DOE is publishing the full expanded
test sample for gas cooking tops
(including the stakeholder-provided
data) in an attachment to this NODA,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking.6
As discussed, in the February 2023
SNOPR, DOE used the maximum ETLP
value in its test sample to define the ELs
for gas cooking tops. In this NODA, DOE
is updating the ETLP estimate at each EL
for gas cooking tops to be equal to the
average of the non-zero ETLP values
measured in the expanded test sample.
ETLP ranged from 6–57 kBtu/year, with
one additional outlier at 101 kBtu/year.
Upon closer examination of the data,
DOE has tentatively determined that the
ETLP value used in the SNOPR was
unrepresentative for use in defining the
ELs. Instead, DOE has tentatively
determined that a more representative
ETLP value to use in determining each
efficiency level would be the average of
the non-zero ETLP values in the test
sample. Through a close examination of
the control functionality associated with
various standby levels, DOE has
tentatively determined that using the
non-zero average ETLP value would not
preclude gas standalone cooking tops or
gas ranges with electronic controls and/
or displays from achieving any potential
TABLE II.2—FEBRUARY 2023 SNOPR standard level.
GAS COOKING TOP EFFICIENCY LEVIn response to the February 2023
SNOPR and February 2023 NODA,
ELS
stakeholders provided substantive
IAEC
information regarding gas cooking top
Level
(kBtu/year)
features that are desired by consumers.
Baseline ..................................
1,775 A review of these stakeholder comments
1 ..............................................
1,440 has led DOE to better understand what
2 ..............................................
1,204 features some consumers value,
including: the presence of multiple HIR
burners; continuous cast-iron grates; the
As discussed in section I of this
ability to choose between nominal unit
document, DOE received additional gas
widths; burner type (open versus sealed
cooking top test data from AHAM and
5 Available at www.regulations.gov/document/
EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-0090.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
6 www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BTSTD-0005/document.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
burners); at least one low input rate
burner (i.e., rated below 5,000 Btu/h);
the ability to have multiple dual-stacked
and/or multi-ring HIR burners; and at
least one extra-high input rate burner
(i.e., rated above 18,000 Btu/h).
In this NODA, therefore, DOE is
updating its definition of the max-tech
efficiency level to be based on the most
efficient AEC value in its expanded test
sample achievable with continuous castiron grates and multiple HIR burners,
rather than the single HIR burner utility
defined in the February 2023 SNOPR.
DOE’s data show that among the gas
cooking tops in the expanded test
sample, units with two to six HIR
burners can also achieve this EL and
that the updated EL 2 can be achieved
by a gas cooking top with all HIR
burners.
As discussed, in the February 2023
SNOPR, DOE defined EL 1 based on the
optimized burner/grate design option
yielding the most energy efficient AEC
achievable with at least four HIR
burners and continuous cast-iron grates.
In this NODA, DOE is updating its
definition of EL 1 to represent the most
energy efficient AEC among units with
multiple (up to six) HIR burners and
continuous cast-iron grates that would
not preclude any combination of the
other features mentioned by
manufacturers (including different
nominal unit widths, at least one low
input rate burner, all HIR burners,
multiple dual-stacked and/or multi-ring
HIR burners, and at least one extra-high
input rate burner), as demonstrated by
products from multiple manufacturers
in DOE’s expanded test sample.
As discussed, in the February 2023
SNOPR, DOE tentatively determined the
baseline cooking top AEC as the
maximum value observed in its test
sample. In this NODA, DOE is updating
the baseline efficiency level for gas
cooking tops by applying the same
methodology as was used in the
engineering analysis for the February
2023 SNOPR to the expanded test
sample. Using the expanded test
sample, DOE is setting a higher baseline
IAEC value, corresponding to a lower
efficiency.
Table II.3 shows the efficiency levels
for gas cooking tops that DOE evaluated
for this NODA.
TABLE II.3—UPDATED GAS COOKING
TOP EFFICIENCY LEVELS
Level
Baseline ..................................
1 ..............................................
2 ..............................................
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
IAEC
(kBtu/year)
1,900
1,633
1,343
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
DOE’s analysis shows that the
TABLE II.6—ELECTRIC SMOOTH ELEMENT COOKING TOPS INCREMENTAL incremental MPC developed in the
MANUFACTURER
PRODUCTION February 2023 SNOPR, $12.41,
representing the optimized burner and
COSTS
DOE requests comment on the
efficiency levels for gas cooking tops.
3. Conventional Ovens
As discussed in the February 2023
SNOPR, there are no current test
procedures for conventional ovens. 88
FR 6818, 6846. Therefore, DOE
considered only efficiency levels
corresponding to prescriptive design
requirements as defined by the design
options developed as part of the
screening analysis: forced convection,
the use of a switch-mode power supply
(‘‘SMPS’’), and an oven separator. Id.
DOE ordered the design options by
incremental manufacturer production
cost (‘‘MPC’’). Id. In this NODA, DOE
maintains the efficiency levels for
conventional ovens that were proposed
in the February 2023 SNOPR. Table II.4
and Table II.5 define the efficiency
levels for conventional electric and gas
ovens, respectively.
TABLE II.4—CONVENTIONAL ELECTRIC
OVEN EFFICIENCY LEVELS
Level
Baseline ...
1 ...............
2 ...............
3 ...............
Design option
Baseline
Baseline + SMPS
1 + Forced Convection
2 + Oven Separator
TABLE II.5—CONVENTIONAL GAS OVEN
EFFICIENCY LEVELS
Level
Baseline ...
1 ...............
2 ...............
Design Option
Baseline
Baseline + SMPS
1 + Forced Convection
DOE requests comment on the
efficiency levels for conventional ovens.
B. Manufacturer Production Costs
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1. Electric Cooking Tops
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
developed cost-efficiency results for
electric smooth element cooking tops
based on manufacturing cost modeling
of units in its sample featuring the
design options. 88 FR 6818, 6850. In
this NODA, DOE maintains the
incremental MPCs for electric smooth
element cooking tops that were
proposed in the February 2023 SNOPR,
as shown in Table II.6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
50813
grate design option (e.g., grate weight,
flame angle, distance from burner ports
IAEC
to the cooking surface), accurately
Level
(kWh/year)
represents the cost to redesign a unit at
EL 1 to meet EL 2.
1 ....................
207
$2.17
To develop the incremental MPC
2 ....................
189
11.05
3 ....................
179
263.19 between the updated baseline and EL 1,
DOE analyzed the test data in its
DOE is requesting comment, data, and expanded test sample which shows that
information on the incremental
cooking tops at the baseline efficiency
manufacturer production costs for
level typically include one or two
electric smooth element cooking tops.
burners with ‘‘non-optimized’’
turndown capability (i.e., the lowest
2. Gas Cooking Tops
available simmer setting is more energy
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
consumptive than necessary to hold the
developed the incremental MPCs
test load in a constant simmer close to
associated with each efficiency levels
90 degrees Celsius, resulting in
shown in Table II.7. 88 FR 6818, 6850–
significantly higher energy consumption
6851. DOE developed incremental MPCs than for a burner with a simmer setting
based on manufacturing cost modeling
that holds the test load close to that
of units in its sample featuring the
temperature). In this NODA, DOE
design options. Id.
estimates that the cost of implementing
As discussed, in the February 2023
a burner with optimized turndown
SNOPR, DOE evaluated two versions of
capability in place of a burner with nonthe optimized burner and grate design
optimized turndown capability to meet
option, representative of a minimum of
typical efficiencies available in the
either four or one HIR burners. Id.
market is smaller than the cost of an
DOE’s testing showed that decreased
entirely redesigned burner and grate
energy use could be correlated to burner system (associated with the incremental
design and cooking top configuration
MPC between EL 1 and EL 2). DOE
(e.g., grate weight, flame angle, distance estimates that the percentage of burners
from burner ports to the cooking
with non-optimized turndown
surface). Id. Because this design option
capability (defined empirically from the
effectively corresponds to a whole
expanded test sample as burners with a
burner and grate system redesign,
specific energy use of more than 1.45
regardless of the efficiency level
Btu per gram of water in the test load,
achieved by the redesign, DOE stated
as measured by appendix I1) in the
that the incremental costs for EL 1 and
baseline units in its expanded test
for EL 2 for gas cooking tops include the sample ranged from 16 percent (one out
cost for redesigning the combination of
of six burners) to 40 percent (two out of
each burner and grate configuration. Id.
five burners). In order to conservatively
Therefore, DOE stated that it was not
assess the incremental MPC between
able to determine different incremental
baseline and EL 1, DOE defined it as 40
costs for EL 1 and EL 2 for gas cooking
percent of the $12.41 incremental MPC
tops. Id.
between EL 1 and EL 2, or $4.96.
In sum, for this NODA, DOE
TABLE II.7—FEBRUARY 2023 SNOPR
developed
the incremental MPCs
GAS COOKING TOPS INCREMENTAL
MANUFACTURER
PRODUCTION relative to the baseline associated with
the updated efficiency levels shown in
COSTS
Table II.8.
Incremental
MPC
(2021$)
Level
IAEC
(kBtu/year)
1 ....................
2 ....................
1,440
1,204
Incremental
MPC
(2021$)
$12.41
12.41
In this NODA, DOE is updating the
MPCs for gas cooking tops based on its
understanding of the different types of
burner and grate redesign likely to be
needed to achieve each of the revised
ELs, using the same underlying data as
was used in the February 2023 SNOPR.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
TABLE II.8—UPDATED GAS COOKING
TOPS INCREMENTAL MANUFACTURER
PRODUCTION COSTS
Level
1 ....................
2 ....................
IAEC
(kBtu/year)
1,633
1,343
Incremental
MPC
(2021$)
$4.96
17.37
DOE is requesting comment, data, and
information on the incremental
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
50814
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
manufacturer production costs for gas
cooking tops.
TABLE II.11—FEBRUARY 2023
SNOPR NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE
MARKET SHARE FOR ELECTRIC
SMOOTH ELEMENT COOKING TOPS
BY EFFICIENCY LEVEL IN 2027
3. Conventional Ovens
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
developed cost-efficiency results for
each conventional oven product class
based on manufacturing cost modeling
of units in its sample featuring the
design options. 88 FR 6818, 6851. In
this NODA, DOE maintains the
incremental MPCs for conventional
ovens that were presented in the
February 2023 SNOPR, as shown in
Table II.9 and Table II.10 for electric
and gas ovens respectively.
EL
0
1
2
3
IAEC
(kWh/year)
....................
....................
....................
....................
Market
share
(%)
250
207
189
179
EL
20
50
25
5
In its comment on the February 2023
SNOPR, AHAM provided shipment
estimates of electric cooking tops by
TABLE II.9—ELECTRIC OVEN INCRE- product type (i.e., open (coil) element
versus electric smooth resistance versus
MENTAL MANUFACTURER PRODUCinduction).7 The AHAM shipment data
TION COSTS
specified that of electric smooth element
cooking top shipments, 93.8 percent use
Incremental
resistance heating elements, and 6.2
Level
Design option
MPC
percent use induction heating elements.
(2021$)
AHAM also provided shipment
1 ...... Baseline + SMPS ......
$2.03 estimates of electric cooking tops by
2 ...... 1 + Forced Convec34.11 configuration (i.e., standalone cooking
tion.
top versus conventional range). The
3 ...... 2 + Oven Separator ...
67.77 AHAM shipment data specified that
93.4 percent of electric cooking tops are
TABLE II.10—GAS OVEN INCREMENTAL sold as components of conventional
MANUFACTURER PRODUCTION COSTS ranges.
Combining these percentages, DOE
estimates the current market
Incremental
distributions for electric smooth
Level
Design option
MPC
(2021$)
element cooking tops by product
categories as shown in Table II.12.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
TABLE II.13—UPDATED NO-NEWSTANDARDS CASE MARKET SHARE
FOR ELECTRIC SMOOTH ELEMENT
COOKING TOPS BY EFFICIENCY
LEVEL IN 2027
0
1
2
3
IAEC
(kWh/year)
....................
....................
....................
....................
250
207
189
179
Market share
(%)
23
62
15
0.02
DOE requests comment on the nonew-standards case market share for
electric smooth element cooking tops.
2. Gas Cooking Tops
In the February 2023 SNOPR analysis,
DOE’s estimate of the current market
share of gas cooking tops that meet each
efficiency level under consideration
reflected the exclusion of higherefficiency products that DOE had
screened out (i.e., excluded products
that do not have at least one HIR burner
and continuous cast-iron grates). (See
Table 8.2.43 in chapter 8 of the TSD for
the February 2023 SNOPR). In the
February 2023 NODA, DOE clarified
that it has tentatively determined that
gas cooking tops with steel grates, noncontinuous grates, and/or burners with
input rates less than 14,000 Btu/h
would also be able to meet the
efficiency levels described in the
February 2023 SNOPR and therefore
1 ...... Baseline + SMPS ......
$2.17
would not be impacted by the proposed
2 ...... 1 + Forced Convec24.96
TABLE II.12—ELECTRIC SMOOTH ELE- standard, if finalized. 88 FR 12603,
tion.
MENT COOKING TOP DISTRIBUTIONS 12604. Based on its testing results and
model counts of the burner/grate
BY PRODUCT CATEGORY
configurations of gas cooking top
DOE is requesting comment, data, and
models currently available on the
information on the incremental
Radiant
Induction
websites of major U.S. retailers, DOE
(93.8%)
(6.2%)
manufacturer production costs for
estimated in the February 2023 NODA
conventional ovens.
Standalone cookthat the products that were screened out
ing top (6.6%) ...
6.2
0.4 of the engineering analysis for the
C. Market Distribution
Component of a
February 2023 SNOPR represent over 40
1. Electric Cooking Tops
conventional
percent of the market. 88 FR 12603,
range (93.4%) ...
87.6
5.8
12605. Together with the models
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
included in the engineering analysis,
estimated the efficiency distribution for
To calculate the no-new-standards
DOE estimated that nearly half of the
each cooking top product class from the case market shares, DOE first
total gas cooking top market currently
sample of cooking tops used to develop
determined the efficiency level and
achieves the proposed EL 2 and
the engineering analysis. 88 FR 6818,
category of each unit in its expanded
therefore would not be impacted by the
6856. Given the lack of data on historic
test sample, then applied the
proposed standard, if finalized. Id. DOE
efficiency trends, DOE assumed that the appropriate weighting factors to adjust
estimated that the remaining portion of
estimated current distributions would
the efficiency level distribution of the
the total market was distributed equally
apply in 2027. Id. The estimated market test sample to a market share
between the baseline and EL 1. Id.
shares for the no-new-standards case for distribution representing the full
In its comment on the February 2023
electric smooth element cooking tops in market.
SNOPR, AHAM provided shipment
2027 used in the February 2023 SNOPR
Table II.13 shows the results for the
estimates of gas cooking tops by
are shown in Table II.11. 88 FR 6818,
NODA estimate of the no-new-standards configuration (i.e., standalone cooking
6857.
case efficiency distribution in 2027 for
top versus conventional range).8
electric smooth element cooking tops.
According to AHAM’s shipment data,
7 Available at www.regulations.gov/document/
EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-2285.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8 Available at www.regulations.gov/document/
EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-2285.
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
50815
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
86.7 percent of gas cooking tops are sold
as components of conventional ranges.
For this NODA, DOE confirmed the
estimate of the products that were
screened out of the February 2023
SNOPR engineering analysis based on a
thorough, model-by-model evaluation of
these specific features on online retailer
websites. DOE notes that these models
represent ‘‘entry-level’’ products that
feature steel grates, non-continuous
grates, and/or burners with input rates
less than 14,000 Btu/h. DOE notes that
these are typically the lowest-cost
products available in the market, and
are typically purchased by pricesensitive consumers.
Combining these percentages, DOE
estimates the current market
distributions for gas cooking tops by
product categories as shown in Table
II.14.
TABLE II.14—GAS COOKING TOP MARKET DISTRIBUTIONS BY PRODUCT
CATEGORY
Nonentrylevel
(60%)
Entrylevel
(40%)
Standalone
cooking top
(13.3%) ......
Component of
a conventional range
(86.7%) ......
5.3
IAEC
(kBtu/year)
EL
8.0
34.7
TABLE II.15—UPDATED NO-NEWSTANDARDS CASE MARKET SHARE
FOR GAS COOKING TOP SHIPMENTS
BY EFFICIENCY LEVEL IN 2027
52.0
0 ....................
1 ....................
2 ....................
Market share
(%)
1,900
1,633
1,343
10
49
41
DOE requests comment on the nonew-standards case market share for gas
cooking tops.
3. Conventional Ovens
To calculate the no-new-standards
case market shares, DOE first
determined the efficiency level and
category of each unit in its expanded
test sample, then applied the
appropriate weighting factors to adjust
the efficiency level distribution of the
test sample to a market share
distribution representing the full
market.
Table II.15 shows the results for the
NODA estimate of the no-new-standards
case efficiency distribution in 2027 for
gas cooking tops shipments.
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE
relied on model counts of the current
market distribution for ovens. 88 FR
6818, 6856. Given the lack of data on
historic efficiency trends, DOE assumed
that the estimated current distributions
would apply in 2027. Id. The estimated
market shares for the no-new-standards
case for gas and electric ovens in 2027
are shown in Table II.16 and Table II.17,
respectively. 88 FR 6818, 6857. DOE
maintains the February 2023 SNOPR
market share estimates for this NODA.
TABLE II.16—NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE MARKET SHARE FOR GAS OVENS BY EFFICIENCY LEVEL IN 2027
Gas standard
ovens,
freestanding
(%)
EL
0 .......................................................................................................................
1 .......................................................................................................................
2 .......................................................................................................................
Gas standard
ovens, built-in/
slide-in
(%)
Gas self-clean
ovens,
freestanding
(%)
Gas self-clean
ovens, built-in/
slide-in
(%)
4
58
38
4
3
93
4
19
77
4
34
62
TABLE II.17—NO-NEW-STANDARDS CASE MARKET SHARE FOR ELECTRIC OVENS BY EFFICIENCY LEVEL IN 2027
Electric
standard
ovens, freestanding
(%)
EL
0
1
2
3
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
DOE requests comment on the nonew-standards case market share for
conventional ovens.
D. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
Analysis
DOE conducted LCC and PBP
analyses to evaluate the economic
impacts on individual consumers of
potential energy conservation standards
for the gas cooking top efficiency levels
presented in this NODA. For this NODA
analysis, DOE used the same inputs and
assumptions as in the February 2023
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
Electric
standard
ovens, built-in/
slide-in
(%)
5
57
38
0
SNOPR LCC analysis, including using
the 2015 Residential Energy
Consumption Survey (‘‘2015 RECS’’) 9 as
the basis for the consumer sample and
Energy Information Administration’s
(‘‘EIA’s’’) Annual Energy Outlook 2022
(‘‘AEO 2022’’) 10 for energy price
projections. Details of the analysis
inputs and methodology are available in
chapter 8 of the TSD for the February
9 Available at www.eia.gov/consumption/
residential/data/2015/.
10 Available at www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/
index.php.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5
65
30
0
Electric selfclean ovens,
freestanding
(%)
Electric selfclean ovens,
built-in/slide-in
(%)
5
18
77
0
5
7
86
2
2023 SNOPR analysis.11 Subsequent
rulemaking analyses will be updated
with the most recent data releases (e.g.,
2020 RECS, AEO 2023).
The results of this NODA analysis are
presented in Table II.18 through Table
II.37. In the first of each pair of tables,
the simple payback is measured relative
to the baseline product. In the second
table, impacts are measured relative to
the efficiency distribution in the nonew-standards case in the compliance
11 Available at www.regulations.gov/document/
EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-0090.
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
50816
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
year (see section II.C of this document).
Because some consumers purchase
products with higher efficiency in the
no-new-standards case, the average
savings are less than the difference
between the average LCC of the baseline
product and the average LCC at each EL.
The savings refer only to consumers
who are affected by a standard at a given
EL.12 Those who already purchase a
product with efficiency at or above a
given EL are not affected. Consumers for
whom the LCC increases at a given EL
experience a net cost.
TABLE II.18—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR ELECTRIC SMOOTH ELEMENT COOKING TOPS
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
3 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$20
14
13
12
$405
332
319
311
$552
555
568
1,204
LCC
$957
887
887
1,515
Average
lifetime
years
........................
0.6
2.5
87.7
16.8
16.8
16.8
16.8
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
TABLE II.19—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR ELECTRIC SMOOTH ELEMENT
COOKING TOPS
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
thatexperience
net cost
$68.87
19.07
(611.59)
0
40
100
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.20—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR GAS COOKING TOPS
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$16
14
12
$342
322
299
$376
384
402
LCC
$719
705
701
Average
lifetime
years
........................
4.3
7.2
14.5
14.5
14.5
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
TABLE II.21—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR GAS COOKING TOPS
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC savings *
2021$
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent
of consumers that
experience
net cost
14.78
6.86
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
12 LCC savings presented in the February 2023
SNOPR were mislabeled as only including
impacted consumers; however, they also included
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
unimpacted consumers. The values in this NODA
have been updated to reflect only impacted
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
consumers to be consistent with current DOE
rulemakings.
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
4
35
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
50817
TABLE II.22—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR ELECTRIC STANDARD OVENS, FREESTANDING
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
3 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$23
21
20
17
$480
457
447
403
$652
655
704
755
LCC
$1,133
1,113
1,151
1,159
........................
1.7
19.8
17.2
Average
lifetime
years
16.8
16.8
16.8
16.8
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
TABLE II.23—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR ELECTRIC STANDARD OVENS,
FREESTANDING
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
$19.82
(36.62)
(30.65)
0
60
80
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.24—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR ELECTRIC STANDARD OVENS, BUILT-IN/SLIDE-IN
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
3 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$23
22
21
18
$492
470
459
416
$682
685
734
785
LCC
$1,175
1,155
1,194
1,202
........................
1.8
20.2
17.3
Average
lifetime
years
16.8
16.8
16.8
16.8
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
TABLE II.25—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR ELECTRIC STANDARD OVENS,
BUILT-IN/SLIDE-IN
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
$19.86
(36.66)
(33.53)
0
67
81
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.26—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR ELECTRIC SELF-CLEAN OVENS, FREESTANDING
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
3 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$28
26
25
22
$550
527
517
473
$699
702
751
802
LCC
$1,250
1,229
1,268
1,276
........................
1.7
19.8
17.2
Average
lifetime
years
16.8
16.8
16.8
16.8
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
50818
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
TABLE II.27—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR ELECTRIC SELF-CLEAN OVENS,
FREESTANDING
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
$20.55
(33.71)
(15.70)
0
22
75
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.28—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR ELECTRIC SELF-CLEAN OVENS, BUILT-IN/SLIDE-IN
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
3 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$29
27
26
23
$561
539
528
485
$729
732
781
832
LCC
$1,291
1,271
1,310
1,318
Average
lifetime
years
........................
1.8
20.2
17.3
16.8
16.8
16.8
16.8
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
TABLE II.29—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR ELECTRIC SELF-CLEAN OVENS,
BUILT-IN/SLIDE-IN
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
3 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
$20.23
(30.20)
(11.88)
0
11
72
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.30—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR GAS STANDARD OVENS, FREESTANDING
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$42
41
40
$682
662
651
$677
681
715
LCC
$1,359
1,343
1,366
Average
lifetime
years
........................
1.9
14.3
14.5
14.5
14.5
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
TABLE II.31—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR GAS STANDARD OVENS,
FREESTANDING
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
$15.05
(20.68)
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
1
34
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
50819
TABLE II.32—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR GAS STANDARD OVENS, BUILT-IN/SLIDE-IN
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$43
41
40
$690
671
660
$707
710
744
LCC
$1,397
1,381
1,404
........................
2.0
14.5
Average
lifetime
years
14.5
14.5
14.5
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
TABLE II.33—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR GAS STANDARD OVENS, BUILTIN/SLIDE-IN
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
$15.73
(21.74)
1
56
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.34—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR GAS SELF-CLEAN OVENS, FREESTANDING
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$44
42
41
$702
682
671
$847
850
884
LCC
$1,548
1,532
1,555
........................
1.9
14.3
Average
lifetime
years
14.5
14.5
14.5
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
TABLE II.35—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR GAS SELF-CLEAN OVENS,
FREESTANDING
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
$15.22
(14.43)
1
6
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.36—AVERAGE LCC AND PBP RESULTS FOR GAS SELF-CLEAN OVENS, BUILT-IN/SLIDE-IN
Average costs
2021$
Simple
payback
years
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Efficiency level
Installed cost
Baseline ...................................................
1 ...............................................................
2 ...............................................................
First year’s
operating cost
Lifetime
operating cost
$45
43
42
$710
691
680
$876
879
913
LCC
$1,586
1,571
1,593
........................
2.0
14.5
Average
lifetime
years
14.5
14.5
14.5
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured relative to the baseline product.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
50820
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
TABLE II.37—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE FOR GAS SELF-CLEAN OVENS,
BUILT-IN/SLIDE-IN
Life-cycle cost savings
Efficiency level
Average LCC
savings * **
2021$
1 ...............................................................................................................................................
2 ...............................................................................................................................................
Percent of consumers
that experience
net cost
$15.53
(19.69)
1
20
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
The LCC spreadsheet used to
calculate the results of this NODA are
available on the DOE website for this
rulemaking.13
DOE requests comment on the LCC
results for conventional cooking
products.
E. National Impact Analysis
The NIA assesses the national energy
savings (‘‘NES’’) and the net present
value (‘‘NPV’’) from a national
perspective of total consumer costs and
savings that would be expected to result
from new or amended standards at
specific efficiency levels. In this section,
DOE presents the NIA results analyzing
the impacts of the updated analysis
discussed in this NODA. As in the LCC
analysis, DOE maintained the same
methodologies and assumptions
presented in the February 2023 SNOPR
analysis, including using estimates from
2015 RECS and AEO 2022 projections.
Details of the NIA analysis are available
in chapter 10 of the TSD for the
February 2023 SNOPR. Subsequent
rulemaking analyses will be updated
with most recent data releases (e.g.,
2020 RECS, AEO 2023).
Table II.38 shows full-fuel cycle NES
results of a potential standard at each
efficiency level. Full-fuel cycle national
energy savings are presented in
quadrillion British thermal units, or
quads. Table II.39 and Table II.40 show
NPV results at each considered
efficiency level, discounted at 3 and 7
percent, respectively.
TABLE II.38—CUMULATIVE FULL-FUEL CYCLE NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS; 30 YEARS OF SHIPMENTS
[2027–2056]
Electric
smooth
cooking tops
Efficiency level
Gas
cooking tops
Electric
ovens
Gas
ovens
quads
1 .......................................................................................................................
2 .......................................................................................................................
3 .......................................................................................................................
0.14
0.23
0.25
0.02
0.16
........................
0.02
0.08
0.90
0.01
0.03
TABLE II.39—CUMULATIVE NET PRESENT VALUE OF CONSUMER BENEFITS AT A 3 PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE; 30 YEARS
OF SHIPMENTS
[2027–2056]
Electric
smooth
cooking tops
Efficiency level
Gas
cooking tops
Electric
ovens
Gas ovens
billion 2021$
1 .......................................................................................................................
2* ......................................................................................................................
3* ......................................................................................................................
0.89
1.01
(28.61)
0.05
(0.02)
........................
0.13
(1.05)
(1.06)
0.04
(0.25)
* Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
TABLE II.40—CUMULATIVE NET PRESENT VALUE OF CONSUMER BENEFITS AT A 7 PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE; 30 YEARS
OF SHIPMENTS
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
[2027–2056]
Electric
smooth
cooking tops
Efficiency level
Gas
cooking tops
Electric
ovens
Gas ovens
billion 2021$
1 .......................................................................................................................
0.36
0.01
13 www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BTSTD-0005/document.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
0.05
0.02
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
50821
TABLE II.40—CUMULATIVE NET PRESENT VALUE OF CONSUMER BENEFITS AT A 7 PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE; 30 YEARS
OF SHIPMENTS—Continued
[2027–2056]
Electric
smooth
cooking tops
Efficiency level
2* ......................................................................................................................
3* ......................................................................................................................
0.35
(15.17)
Gas
cooking tops
(0.09)
........................
Electric
ovens
(0.63)
(1.34)
Gas ovens
(0.15)
* Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
The NIA spreadsheet used to calculate
the results of this NODA are available
on the DOE website for this
rulemaking.14
DOE requests comment on the NIA
results for conventional cooking
products.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
III. Public Participation
DOE requests comment on the
updated efficiency levels, incremental
MPCs, no-new-standards case market
shares, LCC, PBP, and NIA results for
consumer conventional cooking
products presented in this NODA. As
noted in the February 2023 SNOPR,
DOE may adopt energy efficiency levels
that are either higher or lower than the
proposed standards, or some
combination of level(s) that incorporate
the proposed standards in part.
DOE will accept comments, data, and
information regarding this document,
but no later than the date provided in
the DATES section at the beginning of
this document. Interested parties may
submit comments, data, and other
information using any of the methods
described in the ADDRESSES section at
the beginning of this document.
Submitting comments via
www.regulations.gov. The
www.regulations.gov web page will
require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact
information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies 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 itself or in any
documents attached to your comment.
14 www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BTSTD-0005/document.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
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 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
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 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 www.regulations.gov
provides after you have successfully
uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email.
Comments and documents submitted
via email also will be posted to
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 in 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. No
telefacsimiles (‘‘faxes’’) will be
accepted.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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, that are written in English, and
that are 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 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. DOE
will make its own determination about
the confidential status of the
information and treat it according to its
determination.
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).
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on July 27, 2023, by
Francisco Alejandro Moreno, Acting
Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, pursuant to
delegated authority from the Secretary
of Energy. That document with the
original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
50822
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters
the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on July 28,
2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2023–16475 Filed 8–1–23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 230724–0173]
RIN 0648–BM33
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;
2024 Atlantic Shark Commercial
Fishing Year
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
This proposed rule would
adjust quotas and retention limits and
establish the opening date for the 2024
fishing year for the Atlantic shark
commercial fisheries. Within this
proposed rule, NMFS also considers
options for the 2024 and future fishing
years to automatically open the
commercial fishing year on January 1 of
each year under the base quotas and
default retention limits, and to increase
the default commercial retention limit
for the large coastal shark (LCS)
fisheries. Quotas would be adjusted as
required or allowable based on any
underharvests from the previous fishing
years. The proposed measures could
affect fishing opportunities for
commercial shark fishermen in the
northwestern Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of
Mexico, and Caribbean Sea.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by September 1, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2023–0081, by electronic
submission. Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking
Portal. Go to https://
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:34 Aug 01, 2023
Jkt 259001
www.regulations.gov and enter NOAA–
NMFS–2023–0081 in the search box.
Click on the ‘‘Comment’’ icon, complete
the required fields, and enter or attach
your comments.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/
A’’ in the required fields if you wish to
remain anonymous).
Copies of this proposed rule and
supporting documents are available
from the Atlantic Highly Migratory
Species (HMS) Management Division
website at https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/topic/atlantichighly-migratory-species or by
contacting Ann Williamson
(ann.williamson@noaa.gov) by phone at
301–427–8503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann
Williamson (ann.williamson@noaa.gov),
Guy DuBeck (guy.dubeck@noaa.gov), or
Karyl Brewster-Geisz (karyl.brewstergeisz@noaa.gov) at 301–427–8503.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Atlantic shark fisheries are managed
under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens
Act; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and the
Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (16
U.S.C. 971 et seq.). The 2006
Consolidated Atlantic HMS Fishery
Management Plan (2006 Consolidated
HMS FMP) and its amendments are
implemented by regulations at 50 CFR
part 635. The shark commercial
retention limits, quotas, and closure
requirements can be found in
§§ 635.24(a), 635.27(b), and 635.28(b),
respectively.
For the Atlantic shark commercial
fisheries, the 2006 Consolidated HMS
FMP and its amendments established
default commercial shark retention
limits, commercial quotas for species
and management groups, and
adjustment procedures for
underharvests and overharvests.
Regulations also include provisions
allowing flexible opening dates for the
fishing year (§ 635.27(b)(3)) and
inseason adjustments to shark trip limits
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(§ 635.24(a)(8)), which provide
management flexibility in furtherance of
equitable fishing opportunities, to the
extent practicable, for commercial shark
fishermen in all regions and areas. In
addition, § 635.28(b)(4) lists species and
management groups with quotas that are
linked. If quotas are linked, meaning
when the specified quota threshold for
one management group or species is
reached and that management group or
species is closed, the linked
management group or species closes at
the same time (§ 635.28(b)(3)). Lastly,
pursuant to § 635.27(b)(2), any annual or
inseason adjustments to the base annual
commercial overall, regional, or subregional quotas will be published in the
Federal Register.
Proposed Opening Date and Retention
Limit Measures
NMFS is proposing to open the 2024
fishing year on January 1, permitting the
maximum allowable retention limit for
LCS fisheries, and is proposing options,
described below, to change the opening
date and default retention limit
measures for LCS fisheries for future
fishing years. These options are based
on catch rates and landings information
for 2021, 2022, and to date in 2023. In
2022 and 2023, NMFS opened the
fishing years on January 1, with the
maximum retention limit of 55 LCS
other than sandbar sharks per vessel per
trip for Shark Directed permit holders.
The 2021 fishing year opened on
January 1, with the default retention
limit of 45 LCS other than sandbar
sharks per vessel per trip; however, the
retention limit was increased in all
regions to 55 LCS other than sandbar
sharks per vessel per trip by the end of
March (86 FR 16075, March 26, 2021; 86
FR 47395, August 25, 2021). Despite
having the maximum retention limits
allowed under the regulations, the
quotas for the various LCS management
groups were not fully harvested in 2021
or 2022. Under current catch rates, it is
unlikely the current quotas will be fully
harvested in 2023. Given the current
number of active and inactive permit
holders, NMFS does not expect catch
rates to increase in the near future. As
such, NMFS is proposing opening the
Atlantic shark commercial fishing year
on January 1 under the highest possible
allowable retention limit for LCS
fisheries for 2024 and considering
establishing those as the default opening
date and retention limit for future
fishing years.
Option 1, status quo, maintains the
current management measures that
require NMFS to adjust quotas and
retention limits and establish the
opening date for the upcoming fishing
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 147 (Wednesday, August 2, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50810-50822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16475]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 147 / Wednesday, August 2, 2023 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 50810]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005]
RIN 1904-AD15
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
Consumer Conventional Cooking Products
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notification of data availability and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On February 1, 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'')
published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (``SNOPR''), in
which DOE proposed new and amended energy conservation standards for
consumer conventional cooking products. In this notification of data
availability (``NODA''), DOE is updating its analysis for consumer
conventional cooking products based on stakeholder data and information
it received in response to that SNOPR. DOE requests comments, data, and
information regarding the updated analysis.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
NODA on or before September 1, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov, under docket
number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005. Follow the instructions for submitting
comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments,
identified by docket number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005, by any of the
following methods:
Email: [email protected]. Include
the docket number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005 in the subject line of the
message.
Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program,
U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-
5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-0121. 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 telefacsimiles (``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 www.regulations.gov. All documents in the
docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all
documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as
information that is exempt from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005. 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 www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Carl Shapiro, 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) 287-5649. Email:
[email protected].
Mr. Pete Cochran, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9496. Email: [email protected].
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:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Discussion
A. Efficiency Levels
1. Electric Cooking Tops
2. Gas Cooking Tops
3. Conventional Ovens
B. Manufacturer Production Costs
1. Electric Cooking Tops
2. Gas Cooking Tops
3. Conventional Ovens
C. Market Distribution
1. Electric Cooking Tops
2. Gas Cooking Tops
3. Conventional Ovens
D. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
E. National Impact Analysis
III. Public Participation
I. Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\
authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6317) Title III, Part B \2\ of EPCA established the Energy Conservation
Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. These products
include consumer conventional cooking products, the subject of this
rulemaking. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(10))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020. Public Law 116-260 (Dec.
27, 2020), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
\2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code,
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The currently applicable energy conservation standards for consumer
conventional cooking products consist of a prescriptive prohibition on
constant burning pilots for all gas cooking products (i.e., gas cooking
products both with or without an electrical supply cord) manufactured
on and after April 9, 2012. These standards are set forth at title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (``CFR'') Sec. 430.32(j)(1) and
(2).
Consumer conventional cooking products comprise conventional
cooking tops and conventional ovens, as defined as 10 CFR 430.2.
Representations of energy use or energy efficiency of conventional
cooking tops made on or after February 20, 2023, must be based on
results generated
[[Page 50811]]
using the test procedure for conventional cooking products at 10 CFR
part 430, subpart B, appendix I1 (``appendix I1''). There are currently
no DOE test procedures for conventional ovens.
On February 1, 2023, DOE published a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (``February 2023 SNOPR'') proposing to establish
new and amended standards for consumer conventional cooking products,
consisting of maximum integrated annual energy consumption (``IAEC'')
levels, in kilowatt-hours per year (``kWh/year'') for electric cooking
tops and thousand British thermal units per year (``kBtu/year'') for
gas cooking tops. 88 FR 6818. Compliance with the new and amended
standards would be required 3 years after the publication date of final
rule, should DOE finalize the proposed standards. Id. The technical
support document (``TSD'') that presented the methodology and results
of the February 2023 SNOPR analysis is available at:
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-0090.
On February 28, 2023, DOE published a notification of data
availability (``February 2023 NODA'') providing additional information
to clarify the February 2023 SNOPR analysis for gas cooking tops. 88 FR
12603. DOE provided further data on the gas cooking top test sample
used for the February 2023 SNOPR analysis and estimated that currently
available gas cooking tops representing nearly half of the market would
already meet the standards that were proposed in the February 2023
SNOPR, and therefore would not be impacted by the proposed standard, if
finalized. 88 FR 12603, 12605.
In response to the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE received additional
data and information regarding consumer conventional cooking products.
Specifically, DOE received additional gas and electric cooking top test
data from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (``AHAM'')
and Pacific Gas and Electric (``PG&E'').\3\ Stakeholders also provided
substantive information regarding gas cooking top features that are
desired by consumers. In addition, AHAM provided shipment estimates of
gas and electric cooking tops by product type and/or configuration.
(AHAM, No. 2285 at pp. 6, 27)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The AHAM comment containing its data set is available at
www.regulations.gov/comment/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-2285. The PG&E
data was provided confidentially to DOE's contractor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upon consideration of further information received from interested
parties in response to the February 2023 SNOPR, this NODA presents
updated efficiency levels, manufacturer production costs, no-new-
standards-case market shares, life-cycle costs (``LCC''), payback
periods (``PBP''), and national impact analysis (``NIA'') results for
all consumer conventional cooking products. DOE is requesting comments,
data, and information regarding the updated analysis.
DOE notes that it is continuing to consider all of the stakeholder
comments received in response to the February 2023 SNOPR and the
February 2023 NODA in further development of the rulemaking.
II. Discussion
In the following sections, DOE details its updated analysis for
consumer conventional cooking products. As discussed in the February
2023 SNOPR, DOE has not identified any higher efficiency levels for
electric open (coil) element cooking tops and as such, is not including
them in this NODA.
A. Efficiency Levels
1. Electric Cooking Tops
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE established efficiency levels for
electric smooth element cooking tops based on combining an active-mode
annual energy consumption (``AEC'') value and a combined low-power mode
annual energy consumption (``ETLP'') value associated with
specific design options, noting that different combinations of AEC and
ETLP could be used to meet the IAEC of a given efficiency
level. 88 FR 6818, 6845-6846. DOE received additional electric smooth
element cooking top test data from AHAM and PG&E in response to the
February 2023 SNOPR. These additional data are consistent with DOE's
tentative determination in the February 2023 SNOPR regarding efficiency
levels for these products. Therefore, in this NODA, DOE maintains the
efficiency levels for electric smooth element cooking tops that were
proposed in the February 2023 SNOPR. Table II.1 shows the efficiency
levels for electric smooth element cooking tops.
Table II.1--Electric Smooth Element Cooking Top Efficiency Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kWh/
Level year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline.................................................. 250
1......................................................... 207
2......................................................... 189
3......................................................... 179
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE is publishing the full expanded test sample for electric smooth
cooking tops (including the stakeholder-provided data and one
additional DOE unit) in an attachment to this NODA, available in the
docket for this rulemaking.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005/document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the efficiency levels for electric smooth
element cooking tops.
2. Gas Cooking Tops
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE proposed new and amended energy
conservation standards for consumer conventional cooking products. Per
its authority in 42 U.S.C. 6295(h)(2), DOE proposed to remove the
existing prescriptive standard for gas cooking tops prohibiting a
constant burning pilot light. 88 FR 6818, 6819. Instead, for gas
cooking tops, DOE proposed a performance standard of a maximum
allowable IAEC of 1,204 kBtu/year. 88 FR 6818, 6819-6820. These
proposed standards for conventional cooking tops, if adopted, would
apply to all gas cooking tops manufactured in, or imported into, the
United States starting on the date 3 years after the publication of any
final rule for this rulemaking. 88 FR 6818, 6819.
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE considered efficiency levels
(``ELs'') associated with an optimized burner and grate design, but
only insofar as the efficiency level was achievable with continuous
cast-iron grates and at least one high input rate (``HIR'') burner
(which DOE defined in the February 2023 SNOPR as burners with input
rates greater than or equal to 14,000 British thermal units per hour
(``Btu/h'')). 88 FR 6818, 6845. DOE's testing showed that energy use
was correlated to burner design and cooking top configuration (e.g.,
grate weight, flame angle, distance from burner ports to the cooking
surface) and could be reduced by optimizing the design of the burner
and grate system. Id. DOE reviewed the test data for the gas cooking
tops in its test sample and identified two efficiency levels associated
with improving the burner and grate design that corresponded to
different design criteria. Id.
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE established efficiency levels for
gas cooking tops based on combining an AEC value and an ETLP
value associated with specific design options, noting that different
combinations of AEC and ETLP could be used to meet the IAEC
of a given efficiency level. 88 FR 6818, 6845-6846.
[[Page 50812]]
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE set the baseline gas cooking top
IAEC equal to the sum of the maximum AEC and the maximum
ETLP observed in its test sample for gas cooking tops. 88 FR
6818, 6844.
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE defined EL 1 based on an AEC
achievable by a gas cooking top with four or more HIR burners and
continuous cast-iron grates and the same ETLP as used for
the baseline efficiency level. 88 FR 6818, 6845-6846. The AEC selected
for EL 1 was the highest measured among the units in its test sample
with four or more HIR burners and continuous cast-iron grates, as shown
in Table 5.5.2 in chapter 5 of the TSD for the February 2023 SNOPR.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-0090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE defined EL 2 based on the highest
measured AEC measured among the units in its test sample with at least
one HIR burner and continuous cast-iron grates and the same
ETLP as used for the baseline efficiency level. 88 FR 6818,
6845-6846. In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE stated that HIR burners
provide unique consumer utility and allow consumers to perform high
heat cooking activities such as searing and stir-frying. Id. at 88 FR
6845. DOE also stated that it is aware that some consumers derive
utility from continuous cast-iron grates, such as the ability to use
heavy pans, or to shift cookware between burners without needing to
lift them. Id. DOE notes that EL 2 was defined based on the highest
measured efficiency unit that met the screening analysis criteria
(i.e., gas cooking tops that include at least one HIR burner and
continuous cast-iron grates), rather than the highest measured
efficiency unit of all tested units, so that all ELs would be
achievable with continuous cast-iron grates and at least one HIR
burner.
Table II.2 shows the efficiency levels for gas cooking tops
evaluated in the February 2023 SNOPR. Id. at 88 FR 6846.
Table II.2--February 2023 SNOPR Gas Cooking Top Efficiency Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kBtu/
Level year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline.................................................. 1,775
1......................................................... 1,440
2......................................................... 1,204
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in section I of this document, DOE received additional
gas cooking top test data from AHAM and PG&E that has prompted DOE to
review the engineering analysis for gas cooking tops as presented in
the February 2023 SNOPR. The additional gas cooking top test data
provided to DOE includes a unit with a more energy consumptive AEC
value and a different unit with a more energy consumptive maximum
ETLP value than the most energy consumptive values in DOE's
gas cooking top test sample. As discussed, in the February 2023 SNOPR,
DOE established efficiency levels for gas cooking tops based on
combining the AEC value associated with specific cooking top
characteristics and the maximum ETLP value in DOE's test
sample, to avoid any potential loss of utility from setting a standard
based on a unit without clock functionality.
DOE is publishing the full expanded test sample for gas cooking
tops (including the stakeholder-provided data) in an attachment to this
NODA, available in the docket for this rulemaking.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005/document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed, in the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE used the maximum
ETLP value in its test sample to define the ELs for gas
cooking tops. In this NODA, DOE is updating the ETLP
estimate at each EL for gas cooking tops to be equal to the average of
the non-zero ETLP values measured in the expanded test
sample. ETLP ranged from 6-57 kBtu/year, with one additional
outlier at 101 kBtu/year. Upon closer examination of the data, DOE has
tentatively determined that the ETLP value used in the SNOPR
was unrepresentative for use in defining the ELs. Instead, DOE has
tentatively determined that a more representative ETLP value
to use in determining each efficiency level would be the average of the
non-zero ETLP values in the test sample. Through a close
examination of the control functionality associated with various
standby levels, DOE has tentatively determined that using the non-zero
average ETLP value would not preclude gas standalone cooking
tops or gas ranges with electronic controls and/or displays from
achieving any potential standard level.
In response to the February 2023 SNOPR and February 2023 NODA,
stakeholders provided substantive information regarding gas cooking top
features that are desired by consumers. A review of these stakeholder
comments has led DOE to better understand what features some consumers
value, including: the presence of multiple HIR burners; continuous
cast-iron grates; the ability to choose between nominal unit widths;
burner type (open versus sealed burners); at least one low input rate
burner (i.e., rated below 5,000 Btu/h); the ability to have multiple
dual-stacked and/or multi-ring HIR burners; and at least one extra-high
input rate burner (i.e., rated above 18,000 Btu/h).
In this NODA, therefore, DOE is updating its definition of the max-
tech efficiency level to be based on the most efficient AEC value in
its expanded test sample achievable with continuous cast-iron grates
and multiple HIR burners, rather than the single HIR burner utility
defined in the February 2023 SNOPR. DOE's data show that among the gas
cooking tops in the expanded test sample, units with two to six HIR
burners can also achieve this EL and that the updated EL 2 can be
achieved by a gas cooking top with all HIR burners.
As discussed, in the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE defined EL 1 based on
the optimized burner/grate design option yielding the most energy
efficient AEC achievable with at least four HIR burners and continuous
cast-iron grates. In this NODA, DOE is updating its definition of EL 1
to represent the most energy efficient AEC among units with multiple
(up to six) HIR burners and continuous cast-iron grates that would not
preclude any combination of the other features mentioned by
manufacturers (including different nominal unit widths, at least one
low input rate burner, all HIR burners, multiple dual-stacked and/or
multi-ring HIR burners, and at least one extra-high input rate burner),
as demonstrated by products from multiple manufacturers in DOE's
expanded test sample.
As discussed, in the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE tentatively
determined the baseline cooking top AEC as the maximum value observed
in its test sample. In this NODA, DOE is updating the baseline
efficiency level for gas cooking tops by applying the same methodology
as was used in the engineering analysis for the February 2023 SNOPR to
the expanded test sample. Using the expanded test sample, DOE is
setting a higher baseline IAEC value, corresponding to a lower
efficiency.
Table II.3 shows the efficiency levels for gas cooking tops that
DOE evaluated for this NODA.
Table II.3--Updated Gas Cooking Top Efficiency Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kBtu/
Level year)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline.................................................. 1,900
1......................................................... 1,633
2......................................................... 1,343
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50813]]
DOE requests comment on the efficiency levels for gas cooking tops.
3. Conventional Ovens
As discussed in the February 2023 SNOPR, there are no current test
procedures for conventional ovens. 88 FR 6818, 6846. Therefore, DOE
considered only efficiency levels corresponding to prescriptive design
requirements as defined by the design options developed as part of the
screening analysis: forced convection, the use of a switch-mode power
supply (``SMPS''), and an oven separator. Id. DOE ordered the design
options by incremental manufacturer production cost (``MPC''). Id. In
this NODA, DOE maintains the efficiency levels for conventional ovens
that were proposed in the February 2023 SNOPR. Table II.4 and Table
II.5 define the efficiency levels for conventional electric and gas
ovens, respectively.
Table II.4--Conventional Electric Oven Efficiency Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Design option
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline.......................... Baseline
1................................. Baseline + SMPS
2................................. 1 + Forced Convection
3................................. 2 + Oven Separator
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II.5--Conventional Gas Oven Efficiency Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level Design Option
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline.......................... Baseline
1................................. Baseline + SMPS
2................................. 1 + Forced Convection
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the efficiency levels for conventional
ovens.
B. Manufacturer Production Costs
1. Electric Cooking Tops
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE developed cost-efficiency results
for electric smooth element cooking tops based on manufacturing cost
modeling of units in its sample featuring the design options. 88 FR
6818, 6850. In this NODA, DOE maintains the incremental MPCs for
electric smooth element cooking tops that were proposed in the February
2023 SNOPR, as shown in Table II.6.
Table II.6--Electric Smooth Element Cooking Tops Incremental
Manufacturer Production Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kWh/ Incremental
Level year) MPC (2021$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................................... 207 $2.17
2........................................... 189 11.05
3........................................... 179 263.19
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE is requesting comment, data, and information on the incremental
manufacturer production costs for electric smooth element cooking tops.
2. Gas Cooking Tops
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE developed the incremental MPCs
associated with each efficiency levels shown in Table II.7. 88 FR 6818,
6850-6851. DOE developed incremental MPCs based on manufacturing cost
modeling of units in its sample featuring the design options. Id.
As discussed, in the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE evaluated two
versions of the optimized burner and grate design option,
representative of a minimum of either four or one HIR burners. Id.
DOE's testing showed that decreased energy use could be correlated to
burner design and cooking top configuration (e.g., grate weight, flame
angle, distance from burner ports to the cooking surface). Id. Because
this design option effectively corresponds to a whole burner and grate
system redesign, regardless of the efficiency level achieved by the
redesign, DOE stated that the incremental costs for EL 1 and for EL 2
for gas cooking tops include the cost for redesigning the combination
of each burner and grate configuration. Id. Therefore, DOE stated that
it was not able to determine different incremental costs for EL 1 and
EL 2 for gas cooking tops. Id.
Table II.7--February 2023 SNOPR Gas Cooking Tops Incremental
Manufacturer Production Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kBtu/ Incremental
Level year) MPC (2021$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................................... 1,440 $12.41
2........................................... 1,204 12.41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this NODA, DOE is updating the MPCs for gas cooking tops based
on its understanding of the different types of burner and grate
redesign likely to be needed to achieve each of the revised ELs, using
the same underlying data as was used in the February 2023 SNOPR.
DOE's analysis shows that the incremental MPC developed in the
February 2023 SNOPR, $12.41, representing the optimized burner and
grate design option (e.g., grate weight, flame angle, distance from
burner ports to the cooking surface), accurately represents the cost to
redesign a unit at EL 1 to meet EL 2.
To develop the incremental MPC between the updated baseline and EL
1, DOE analyzed the test data in its expanded test sample which shows
that cooking tops at the baseline efficiency level typically include
one or two burners with ``non-optimized'' turndown capability (i.e.,
the lowest available simmer setting is more energy consumptive than
necessary to hold the test load in a constant simmer close to 90
degrees Celsius, resulting in significantly higher energy consumption
than for a burner with a simmer setting that holds the test load close
to that temperature). In this NODA, DOE estimates that the cost of
implementing a burner with optimized turndown capability in place of a
burner with non-optimized turndown capability to meet typical
efficiencies available in the market is smaller than the cost of an
entirely redesigned burner and grate system (associated with the
incremental MPC between EL 1 and EL 2). DOE estimates that the
percentage of burners with non-optimized turndown capability (defined
empirically from the expanded test sample as burners with a specific
energy use of more than 1.45 Btu per gram of water in the test load, as
measured by appendix I1) in the baseline units in its expanded test
sample ranged from 16 percent (one out of six burners) to 40 percent
(two out of five burners). In order to conservatively assess the
incremental MPC between baseline and EL 1, DOE defined it as 40 percent
of the $12.41 incremental MPC between EL 1 and EL 2, or $4.96.
In sum, for this NODA, DOE developed the incremental MPCs relative
to the baseline associated with the updated efficiency levels shown in
Table II.8.
Table II.8--Updated Gas Cooking Tops Incremental Manufacturer Production
Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kBtu/ Incremental
Level year) MPC (2021$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................................... 1,633 $4.96
2........................................... 1,343 17.37
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE is requesting comment, data, and information on the incremental
[[Page 50814]]
manufacturer production costs for gas cooking tops.
3. Conventional Ovens
For the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE developed cost-efficiency results
for each conventional oven product class based on manufacturing cost
modeling of units in its sample featuring the design options. 88 FR
6818, 6851. In this NODA, DOE maintains the incremental MPCs for
conventional ovens that were presented in the February 2023 SNOPR, as
shown in Table II.9 and Table II.10 for electric and gas ovens
respectively.
Table II.9--Electric Oven Incremental Manufacturer Production Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incremental
Level Design option MPC (2021$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................... Baseline + SMPS................. $2.03
2....................... 1 + Forced Convection........... 34.11
3....................... 2 + Oven Separator.............. 67.77
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II.10--Gas Oven Incremental Manufacturer Production Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incremental
Level Design option MPC (2021$)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................... Baseline + SMPS................. $2.17
2....................... 1 + Forced Convection........... 24.96
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE is requesting comment, data, and information on the incremental
manufacturer production costs for conventional ovens.
C. Market Distribution
1. Electric Cooking Tops
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE estimated the efficiency
distribution for each cooking top product class from the sample of
cooking tops used to develop the engineering analysis. 88 FR 6818,
6856. Given the lack of data on historic efficiency trends, DOE assumed
that the estimated current distributions would apply in 2027. Id. The
estimated market shares for the no-new-standards case for electric
smooth element cooking tops in 2027 used in the February 2023 SNOPR are
shown in Table II.11. 88 FR 6818, 6857.
Table II.11--February 2023 SNOPR No-New-Standards Case Market Share for
Electric Smooth Element Cooking Tops by Efficiency Level in 2027
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kWh/ Market share
EL year) (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0........................................... 250 20
1........................................... 207 50
2........................................... 189 25
3........................................... 179 5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its comment on the February 2023 SNOPR, AHAM provided shipment
estimates of electric cooking tops by product type (i.e., open (coil)
element versus electric smooth resistance versus induction).\7\ The
AHAM shipment data specified that of electric smooth element cooking
top shipments, 93.8 percent use resistance heating elements, and 6.2
percent use induction heating elements. AHAM also provided shipment
estimates of electric cooking tops by configuration (i.e., standalone
cooking top versus conventional range). The AHAM shipment data
specified that 93.4 percent of electric cooking tops are sold as
components of conventional ranges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-2285.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Combining these percentages, DOE estimates the current market
distributions for electric smooth element cooking tops by product
categories as shown in Table II.12.
Table II.12--Electric Smooth Element Cooking Top Distributions by
Product Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radiant Induction
(93.8%) (6.2%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standalone cooking top (6.6%)................... 6.2 0.4
Component of a conventional range (93.4%)....... 87.6 5.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To calculate the no-new-standards case market shares, DOE first
determined the efficiency level and category of each unit in its
expanded test sample, then applied the appropriate weighting factors to
adjust the efficiency level distribution of the test sample to a market
share distribution representing the full market.
Table II.13 shows the results for the NODA estimate of the no-new-
standards case efficiency distribution in 2027 for electric smooth
element cooking tops.
Table II.13--Updated No-New-Standards Case Market Share for Electric
Smooth Element Cooking Tops by Efficiency Level in 2027
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kWh/ Market share
EL year) (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0........................................... 250 23
1........................................... 207 62
2........................................... 189 15
3........................................... 179 0.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the no-new-standards case market share for
electric smooth element cooking tops.
2. Gas Cooking Tops
In the February 2023 SNOPR analysis, DOE's estimate of the current
market share of gas cooking tops that meet each efficiency level under
consideration reflected the exclusion of higher-efficiency products
that DOE had screened out (i.e., excluded products that do not have at
least one HIR burner and continuous cast-iron grates). (See Table
8.2.43 in chapter 8 of the TSD for the February 2023 SNOPR). In the
February 2023 NODA, DOE clarified that it has tentatively determined
that gas cooking tops with steel grates, non-continuous grates, and/or
burners with input rates less than 14,000 Btu/h would also be able to
meet the efficiency levels described in the February 2023 SNOPR and
therefore would not be impacted by the proposed standard, if finalized.
88 FR 12603, 12604. Based on its testing results and model counts of
the burner/grate configurations of gas cooking top models currently
available on the websites of major U.S. retailers, DOE estimated in the
February 2023 NODA that the products that were screened out of the
engineering analysis for the February 2023 SNOPR represent over 40
percent of the market. 88 FR 12603, 12605. Together with the models
included in the engineering analysis, DOE estimated that nearly half of
the total gas cooking top market currently achieves the proposed EL 2
and therefore would not be impacted by the proposed standard, if
finalized. Id. DOE estimated that the remaining portion of the total
market was distributed equally between the baseline and EL 1. Id.
In its comment on the February 2023 SNOPR, AHAM provided shipment
estimates of gas cooking tops by configuration (i.e., standalone
cooking top versus conventional range).\8\ According to AHAM's shipment
data,
[[Page 50815]]
86.7 percent of gas cooking tops are sold as components of conventional
ranges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-2285.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For this NODA, DOE confirmed the estimate of the products that were
screened out of the February 2023 SNOPR engineering analysis based on a
thorough, model-by-model evaluation of these specific features on
online retailer websites. DOE notes that these models represent
``entry-level'' products that feature steel grates, non-continuous
grates, and/or burners with input rates less than 14,000 Btu/h. DOE
notes that these are typically the lowest-cost products available in
the market, and are typically purchased by price-sensitive consumers.
Combining these percentages, DOE estimates the current market
distributions for gas cooking tops by product categories as shown in
Table II.14.
Table II.14--Gas Cooking Top Market Distributions by Product Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entry- level Non- entry-
(40%) level (60%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standalone cooking top (13.3%).............. 5.3 8.0
Component of a conventional range (86.7%)... 34.7 52.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To calculate the no-new-standards case market shares, DOE first
determined the efficiency level and category of each unit in its
expanded test sample, then applied the appropriate weighting factors to
adjust the efficiency level distribution of the test sample to a market
share distribution representing the full market.
Table II.15 shows the results for the NODA estimate of the no-new-
standards case efficiency distribution in 2027 for gas cooking tops
shipments.
Table II.15--Updated No-New-Standards Case Market Share for Gas Cooking
Top Shipments by Efficiency Level in 2027
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IAEC (kBtu/ Market share
EL year) (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0........................................... 1,900 10
1........................................... 1,633 49
2........................................... 1,343 41
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the no-new-standards case market share for
gas cooking tops.
3. Conventional Ovens
In the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE relied on model counts of the
current market distribution for ovens. 88 FR 6818, 6856. Given the lack
of data on historic efficiency trends, DOE assumed that the estimated
current distributions would apply in 2027. Id. The estimated market
shares for the no-new-standards case for gas and electric ovens in 2027
are shown in Table II.16 and Table II.17, respectively. 88 FR 6818,
6857. DOE maintains the February 2023 SNOPR market share estimates for
this NODA.
Table II.16--No-New-Standards Case Market Share for Gas Ovens by Efficiency Level in 2027
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gas standard Gas standard Gas self-clean Gas self-clean
ovens, ovens, built- ovens, ovens, built-
EL freestanding in/slide-in freestanding in/slide-in
(%) (%) (%) (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0............................................... 4 4 4 4
1............................................... 34 58 3 19
2............................................... 62 38 93 77
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II.17--No-New-Standards Case Market Share for Electric Ovens by Efficiency Level in 2027
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Electric
standard standard Electric self- Electric self-
EL ovens, ovens, built- clean ovens, clean ovens,
freestanding in/slide-in freestanding built-in/slide-
(%) (%) (%) in (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0............................................... 5 5 5 5
1............................................... 57 65 18 7
2............................................... 38 30 77 86
3............................................... 0 0 0 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the no-new-standards case market share for
conventional ovens.
D. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
DOE conducted LCC and PBP analyses to evaluate the economic impacts
on individual consumers of potential energy conservation standards for
the gas cooking top efficiency levels presented in this NODA. For this
NODA analysis, DOE used the same inputs and assumptions as in the
February 2023 SNOPR LCC analysis, including using the 2015 Residential
Energy Consumption Survey (``2015 RECS'') \9\ as the basis for the
consumer sample and Energy Information Administration's (``EIA's'')
Annual Energy Outlook 2022 (``AEO 2022'') \10\ for energy price
projections. Details of the analysis inputs and methodology are
available in chapter 8 of the TSD for the February 2023 SNOPR
analysis.\11\ Subsequent rulemaking analyses will be updated with the
most recent data releases (e.g., 2020 RECS, AEO 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Available at www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2015/.
\10\ Available at www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/index.php.
\11\ Available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005-0090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The results of this NODA analysis are presented in Table II.18
through Table II.37. In the first of each pair of tables, the simple
payback is measured relative to the baseline product. In the second
table, impacts are measured relative to the efficiency distribution in
the no-new-standards case in the compliance
[[Page 50816]]
year (see section II.C of this document). Because some consumers
purchase products with higher efficiency in the no-new-standards case,
the average savings are less than the difference between the average
LCC of the baseline product and the average LCC at each EL. The savings
refer only to consumers who are affected by a standard at a given
EL.\12\ Those who already purchase a product with efficiency at or
above a given EL are not affected. Consumers for whom the LCC increases
at a given EL experience a net cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ LCC savings presented in the February 2023 SNOPR were
mislabeled as only including impacted consumers; however, they also
included unimpacted consumers. The values in this NODA have been
updated to reflect only impacted consumers to be consistent with
current DOE rulemakings.
Table II.18--Average LCC and PBP Results for Electric Smooth Element Cooking Tops
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $552 $20 $405 $957 .............. 16.8
1....................................................... 555 14 332 887 0.6 16.8
2....................................................... 568 13 319 887 2.5 16.8
3....................................................... 1,204 12 311 1,515 87.7 16.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.19--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case
for Electric Smooth Element Cooking Tops
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
----------------------------------------
Efficiency level Average LCC
savings * ** Percent of consumers
2021$ thatexperience net cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.............................. $68.87 0
2.............................. 19.07 40
3.............................. (611.59) 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.20--Average LCC and PBP Results for Gas Cooking Tops
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple payback Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $376 $16 $342 $719 .............. 14.5
1....................................................... 384 14 322 705 4.3 14.5
2....................................................... 402 12 299 701 7.2 14.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.21--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Gas Cooking Tops
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. 14.78 4
2............................................................. 6.86 35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
[[Page 50817]]
Table II.22--Average LCC and PBP Results for Electric Standard Ovens, Freestanding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $652 $23 $480 $1,133 .............. 16.8
1....................................................... 655 21 457 1,113 1.7 16.8
2....................................................... 704 20 447 1,151 19.8 16.8
3....................................................... 755 17 403 1,159 17.2 16.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.23--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Electric Standard Ovens, Freestanding
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $19.82 0
2............................................................. (36.62) 60
3............................................................. (30.65) 80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.24--Average LCC and PBP Results for Electric Standard Ovens, Built-In/Slide-In
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $682 $23 $492 $1,175 .............. 16.8
1....................................................... 685 22 470 1,155 1.8 16.8
2....................................................... 734 21 459 1,194 20.2 16.8
3....................................................... 785 18 416 1,202 17.3 16.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.25--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Electric Standard Ovens, Built-In/
Slide-In
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $19.86 0
2............................................................. (36.66) 67
3............................................................. (33.53) 81
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.26--Average LCC and PBP Results for Electric Self-Clean Ovens, Freestanding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $699 $28 $550 $1,250 .............. 16.8
1....................................................... 702 26 527 1,229 1.7 16.8
2....................................................... 751 25 517 1,268 19.8 16.8
3....................................................... 802 22 473 1,276 17.2 16.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
[[Page 50818]]
Table II.27--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Electric Self-Clean Ovens,
Freestanding
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $20.55 0
2............................................................. (33.71) 22
3............................................................. (15.70) 75
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.28--Average LCC and PBP Results for Electric Self-Clean Ovens, Built-In/Slide-In
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $729 $29 $561 $1,291 .............. 16.8
1....................................................... 732 27 539 1,271 1.8 16.8
2....................................................... 781 26 528 1,310 20.2 16.8
3....................................................... 832 23 485 1,318 17.3 16.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.29--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Electric Self-Clean Ovens, Built-In/
Slide-In
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $20.23 0
2............................................................. (30.20) 11
3............................................................. (11.88) 72
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.30--Average LCC and PBP Results for Gas Standard Ovens, Freestanding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $677 $42 $682 $1,359 .............. 14.5
1....................................................... 681 41 662 1,343 1.9 14.5
2....................................................... 715 40 651 1,366 14.3 14.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.31--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Gas Standard Ovens, Freestanding
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $15.05 1
2............................................................. (20.68) 34
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
[[Page 50819]]
Table II.32--Average LCC and PBP Results for Gas Standard Ovens, Built-In/Slide-In
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $707 $43 $690 $1,397 .............. 14.5
1....................................................... 710 41 671 1,381 2.0 14.5
2....................................................... 744 40 660 1,404 14.5 14.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.33--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Gas Standard Ovens, Built-In/Slide-In
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $15.73 1
2............................................................. (21.74) 56
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.34--Average LCC and PBP Results for Gas Self-Clean Ovens, Freestanding
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $847 $44 $702 $1,548 .............. 14.5
1....................................................... 850 42 682 1,532 1.9 14.5
2....................................................... 884 41 671 1,555 14.3 14.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
Table II.35--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Gas Self-Clean Ovens, Freestanding
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $15.22 1
2............................................................. (14.43) 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.36--Average LCC and PBP Results for Gas Self-Clean Ovens, Built-In/Slide-In
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average costs 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------- Simple Average
Efficiency level First year's Lifetime payback years lifetime years
Installed cost operating cost operating cost LCC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline................................................ $876 $45 $710 $1,586 .............. 14.5
1....................................................... 879 43 691 1,571 2.0 14.5
2....................................................... 913 42 680 1,593 14.5 14.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The results for each efficiency level are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is measured
relative to the baseline product.
[[Page 50820]]
Table II.37--Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New Standards Case for Gas Self-Clean Ovens, Built-In/Slide-
In
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life-cycle cost savings
-------------------------------------------------
Efficiency level Percent of consumers
Average LCC savings * that experience net
** 2021$ cost
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................................. $15.53 1
2............................................................. (19.69) 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.
** Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
The LCC spreadsheet used to calculate the results of this NODA are
available on the DOE website for this rulemaking.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005/document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the LCC results for conventional cooking
products.
E. National Impact Analysis
The NIA assesses the national energy savings (``NES'') and the net
present value (``NPV'') from a national perspective of total consumer
costs and savings that would be expected to result from new or amended
standards at specific efficiency levels. In this section, DOE presents
the NIA results analyzing the impacts of the updated analysis discussed
in this NODA. As in the LCC analysis, DOE maintained the same
methodologies and assumptions presented in the February 2023 SNOPR
analysis, including using estimates from 2015 RECS and AEO 2022
projections. Details of the NIA analysis are available in chapter 10 of
the TSD for the February 2023 SNOPR. Subsequent rulemaking analyses
will be updated with most recent data releases (e.g., 2020 RECS, AEO
2023).
Table II.38 shows full-fuel cycle NES results of a potential
standard at each efficiency level. Full-fuel cycle national energy
savings are presented in quadrillion British thermal units, or quads.
Table II.39 and Table II.40 show NPV results at each considered
efficiency level, discounted at 3 and 7 percent, respectively.
Table II.38--Cumulative Full-Fuel Cycle National Energy Savings; 30 Years of Shipments
[2027-2056]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric
Efficiency level smooth cooking Gas cooking Electric ovens Gas ovens
tops tops
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quads
---------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................... 0.14 0.02 0.02 0.01
2............................................... 0.23 0.16 0.08 0.03
3............................................... 0.25 .............. 0.90
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II.39--Cumulative Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits at a 3 Percent Discount Rate; 30 Years of
Shipments
[2027-2056]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric
Efficiency level smooth cooking Gas cooking Electric ovens Gas ovens
tops tops
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
billion 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................... 0.89 0.05 0.13 0.04
2\*\............................................ 1.01 (0.02) (1.05) (0.25)
3\*\............................................ (28.61) .............. (1.06)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
Table II.40--Cumulative Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits at a 7 Percent Discount Rate; 30 Years of
Shipments
[2027-2056]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric
Efficiency level smooth cooking Gas cooking Electric ovens Gas ovens
tops tops
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
billion 2021$
---------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................... 0.36 0.01 0.05 0.02
[[Page 50821]]
2\*\............................................ 0.35 (0.09) (0.63) (0.15)
3\*\............................................ (15.17) .............. (1.34)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Negative values denoted in parenthesis.
The NIA spreadsheet used to calculate the results of this NODA are
available on the DOE website for this rulemaking.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005/document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE requests comment on the NIA results for conventional cooking
products.
III. Public Participation
DOE requests comment on the updated efficiency levels, incremental
MPCs, no-new-standards case market shares, LCC, PBP, and NIA results
for consumer conventional cooking products presented in this NODA. As
noted in the February 2023 SNOPR, DOE may adopt energy efficiency
levels that are either higher or lower than the proposed standards, or
some combination of level(s) that incorporate the proposed standards in
part.
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
document, but no later than the date provided in the DATES section at
the beginning of this document. Interested parties may submit comments,
data, and other information using any of the methods described in the
ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document.
Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The
www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies 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 itself 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 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 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 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 www.regulations.gov
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted via
email also will be posted to 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 in 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. No telefacsimiles (``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, that are written in English, and that are 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 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. DOE will make
its own determination about the confidential status of the information
and treat it according to its determination.
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).
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on July 27,
2023, by Francisco Alejandro Moreno, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority
from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature
and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in
compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal
[[Page 50822]]
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on July 28, 2023.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2023-16475 Filed 8-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
