Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers, 68788-68833 [2024-19072]

Download as PDF khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 68788 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules number, DG–1420 (ADAMS Accession No. ML24158A060) and the DG, entitled, ‘‘Criteria for the Protection of Class 1E Power Systems and Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ is temporarily identified by its task number, DG–1354 (ADAMS Accession No. ML24158A041). DG–1420 describes an approach that is acceptable to the NRC staff to meet regulatory requirements for the design, operation, and testing of electric power systems in nuclear power plants. DG– 1420 endorses, with exceptions and clarifications, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standard (Std.) 308 2020, ‘‘IEEE Standard Criteria for Class 1E Power Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.’’ In addition, DG–1420 includes the guidance provisions of RG 1.41, Revision 0, ‘‘Preoperational Testing of Redundant On-Site Electric Power Systems to Verify Proper Load Group Assignments,’’ which describes methods acceptable to the NRC for independence among redundant, onsite power sources and their load groups as part of the initial preoperational testing program and after major modifications or repairs. The staff plans to withdraw RG 1.41 if DG–1420 is finalized as RG 1.32, Revision 4. DG–1354 describes an approach that is acceptable to the staff of the NRC for use in complying with NRC regulations that address the protection of Class 1E power systems and equipment at nuclear power plants. DG–1354 endorses, with exceptions, additions and clarifications, IEEE Std. 741–2022, ‘‘IEEE Standard for Criteria for the Protection of Class 1E Power Systems and Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.’’ The staff is also issuing for public comment the draft regulatory analyses (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML24158A062 and ML24158A042). The staff developed these regulatory analyses to assess the value of issuing or revising the RGs as well as alternative courses of action. As noted in the Federal Register on December 9, 2022 (87 FR 75671), this document is being published in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of the Federal Register to comply with publication requirements under chapter I of title 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). III. Backfitting, Forward Fitting, and Issue Finality If finalized, DG–1420 and DG–1354, would not constitute backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 50.109, ‘‘Backfitting,’’ and as described in NRC Management Directive (MD) 8.4, ‘‘Management of VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 Backfitting, Forward Fitting, Issue Finality, and Information Requests’’; affect issue finality of any approval issued under 10 CFR part 52, ‘‘Licenses, Certificates, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants’’; or constitute forward fitting as defined in MD 8.4, because, as explained in these DGs, licensees would not be required to comply with the positions set forth in these DGs. IV. Submitting Suggestions for Improvement of Regulatory Guides A member of the public may, at any time, submit suggestions to the NRC for improvement of existing RGs or for the development of new RGs. Suggestions can be submitted on the NRC’s public website at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/reg-guides/ contactus.html. Suggestions will be considered in future updates and enhancements to the ‘‘Regulatory Guide’’ series. Dated: August 21, 2024. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Meraj Rahimi, Chief, Regulatory Guide and Programs Management Branch, Division of Engineering, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. [FR Doc. 2024–19187 Filed 8–27–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 431 [EERE–2017–BT–STD–0007] RIN 1904–AD82 Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notification of data availability and request for comment. AGENCY: On October 10, 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’), in which DOE proposed new and amended energy conservation standards for commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigeratorfreezers. In this notification of data availability (‘‘NODA’’), DOE is providing updated analytical results that reflect updates to the analysis that DOE is considering based on feedback received in response to the October 10, 2023, NOPR. DOE requests comments, data, and information regarding the updated analyses. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NODA no later than September 27, 2024. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov under docket number EERE–2017–BT–STD–0007. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE– 2017–BT–STD–0007, by any of the following methods: (1) Email: CRE2017STD0007@ ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number EERE–2017–BT–STD–0007 in the subject line of the message. (2) 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. (3) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. No telefacsimiles (‘‘faxes’’) will be accepted. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this process, see section IV 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/EERE2017-BT-STD-0007. The docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section IV of this document for information on how to submit comments through www.regulations.gov. DATES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586– 9870. Email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ ee.doe.gov. Ms. Kristin Koernig, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–4798. Email: Kristin.Koernig@hq.doe.gov. For further information on how to submit a comment or review other public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287– 1445 or by email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ ee.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Discussion A. Engineering Analysis 1. Representative Units 2. Baseline Energy Use Estimates 3. Baseline Design Components 4. Higher Efficiency Level Design Options a. Evaporator Fan Control b. Microchannel Condensers c. Variable-Speed Compressors 5. Compressor Energy Use Adjustment 6. Revised Cost Analysis 7. Equipment With Features That Affect Energy Use B. Energy Use Analysis 1. Energy Prices 2. Repair and Maintenance Costs 3. Residual Value for Refurbished CRE 4. Energy Efficiency Distribution in the NoNew-Standards Case C. Shipments Analysis D. National Impact Analysis 1. Sensitivity Analysis for Equipment With Unique Energy Use Characteristics E. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 1. Manufacturer Production Costs 2. Shipments Projections 3. Product and Capital Conversion Costs 4. Refrigerant Transition Investments 5. Manufacturer Markup Scenarios F. Emissions Analysis, and Monetizing Emissions Impacts III. Analytical Results A. Compliance Period 1. Remote-Condensing Units 2. Self-Contained Condensing Units (NonLarge) 3. Self-Contained Condensing Units (Large) 4. Consumer Subgroup Analysis 5. Rebuttable Presumption Payback B. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers 1. Industry Cashflow Analysis Results 2. Direct Impacts on Employment C. National Impact Analysis 1. National Energy Savings 2. Net Present Value of Consumer Costs and Benefits D. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy IV. Public Participation V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 I. Introduction EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of consumer equipment and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291– 6317, as codified) Title III, Part C of EPCA,1 added by Public Law 95–619, Title IV, section 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317) This equipment includes commercial refrigerators, freezers, or refrigerator-freezers (‘‘CRE’’), the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(E)) DOE defines a ‘‘commercial refrigerator, freezer, or refrigeratorfreezer,’’ consistent with EPCA’s definition at 42 U.S.C. 6311(9) and codified at title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) 431.62, as refrigeration equipment that is not a consumer product (as defined in 10 CFR 430.2); is not designed and marketed exclusively for medical, scientific, or research purposes; operates at a chilled, frozen, combination chilled and frozen, or variable temperature; displays or stores merchandise and other perishable materials horizontally, semi-vertically, or vertically; has transparent or solid doors, sliding or hinged doors, a combination of hinged, sliding, transparent, or solid doors, or no doors; is designed for pull-down temperature applications or holding temperature applications; and is connected to a selfcontained condensing unit or to a remote condensing unit. On March 28, 2014, DOE published a final rule in the Federal Register that prescribed the current energy conservation standards for CRE manufactured on and after March 27, 2017 (‘‘March 2014 Final Rule’’). 79 FR 17725. DOE initiated a rulemaking to consider amending energy conservation standards for CRE by publishing a request for information in the Federal Register on July 16, 2021. 86 FR 37708. DOE subsequently published a notification of the availability of a preliminary technical support document for CRE in the Federal Register on June 28, 2022 (‘‘June 2022 Preliminary Analysis’’). 87 FR 38296. In the June 2022 Preliminary Analysis, DOE sought comment on the analytical framework, models, and tools that DOE used to evaluate potential standards for CRE, the results of preliminary analyses performed, and the potential energy conservation standard levels derived from these analyses, which DOE 1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, part C was redesignated part A–1. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 68789 presented in the accompanying Preliminary Technical Support Document (‘‘TSD’’) (‘‘June 2022 Preliminary TSD’’).2 Id. DOE held a public meeting related to the June 2022 Preliminary Analysis on August 8, 2022. On October 10, 2023, DOE published in the Federal Register a NOPR to establish and amend energy conservation standards for CRE (‘‘October 2023 NOPR’’). 88 FR 70196. DOE also sought comment on the analytical framework, models, and tools that DOE used to evaluate the proposed standards for CRE, the results of the NOPR analyses performed, and the proposed new and amended energy conservation standard levels derived from these analyses, which DOE presented in the accompanying NOPR TSD (‘‘October 2023 NOPR TSD’’).3 Id. DOE held a public meeting related to the October 2023 NOPR on November 7, 2023 (hereafter, the ‘‘November 2023 Public Meeting’’). DOE is currently considering comments and feedback received in response to the October 2023 NOPR and November 2023 Public Meeting. DOE has also conducted revised analysis with regard to some of the topics on which it received feedback, as discussed throughout this document. Based on this feedback and DOE’s additional analysis, DOE is considering updates to certain inputs to the analysis and certain analytical approaches as presented in the October 2023 NOPR. DOE is publishing this NODA to show how such updates would affect the analytical results in comparison to the results presented in the October 2023 NOPR. This document provides a high-level summary of the analytical updates that DOE is considering. DOE is also publishing a separate support document (‘‘NODA support document’’) and its engineering spreadsheet (‘‘NODA engineering spreadsheet’’), available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking, that provide greater details and a full set of analytical results that include updates as compared to the analysis conducted for the October 2023 NOPR. DOE is requesting comments, data, and information regarding the updated analysis. DOE also welcomes feedback and public input on the methodological and analytical approaches used in this updated analysis. 2 The June 2022 Preliminary TSD is available in the docket for this rulemaking at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTSTD-0007-0013. 3 The October 2023 NOPR TSD is available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTSTD-0007-0051. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 68790 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules DOE notes that, in this document, DOE is not summarizing or responding to any specific comments received in response to the October 2023 NOPR and November 2023 Public Meeting. DOE is continuing to consider all of the stakeholder comments received in response to the October 2023 NOPR and November 2023 Public Meeting in further development of the rulemaking. Based on consideration of all of the public comments received, including any additional comments received in response to this NODA, DOE may adopt energy efficiency levels that are either higher or lower than the standards proposed in the October 2023 NOPR. II. Discussion A. Engineering Analysis The purpose of the engineering analysis is to establish the relationship between the efficiency and cost of the equipment. For each equipment class, DOE estimates the baseline cost (i.e., the cost of minimally compliant equipment), as well as the incremental cost for equipment at efficiency levels above the baseline. The output of the engineering analysis is a set of costefficiency ‘‘curves’’ that are used in downstream analyses (i.e., the life-cycle cost (‘‘LCC’’) and payback period (‘‘PBP’’) analyses, the manufacturer impact analysis (‘‘MIA’’), and the national impact analysis (‘‘NIA’’)). khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 1. Representative Units In performing the engineering analysis for CRE, DOE selected representative units for each primary equipment class to serve as analysis points in the development of costefficiency curves. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE presented results for a single representative unit at a specific capacity for each CRE equipment class. 88 FR 70196, 70225. In this NODA, DOE made one change to its approach for selecting representative units for the engineering analysis from the October 2023 NOPR. DOE analyzed additional representative capacities for certain VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 equipment classes in consideration of recent updates to future refrigerant requirements and safety standards in this NODA. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE stated that it expects that the use of R–290 generally will improve efficiency as compared with the refrigerants currently in use (e.g., R– 404A) because R–290 has a higher refrigeration-cycle efficiency than the current refrigerants. 88 FR 70196, 70227. Therefore, R–290 impacts the baseline energy use, compared to a baseline using current refrigerants, on which each efficiency level is built for the standards analysis. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE’s engineering analysis assumed that manufacturers would convert all self-contained CRE models to propane (designated as R–290) in accordance with the applicable refrigerant global warming potential (‘‘GWP’’) limits and compliance dates previously proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’).4 88 FR 70196, 70227. The October 2023 NOPR analysis also assumed that all self-contained CRE would have a refrigerant charge (i.e., the amount of refrigerant in the CRE refrigeration system) no greater than the maximum allowable R–290 charge size specified by Underwriters Laboratories (‘‘UL’’) 60335–2–89 (corresponding to 304g for units with closed cases and 494 g for units with open cases). Id. Since publishing the October 2023 NOPR, DOE has performed additional analysis as described below—as well as received additional feedback from CRE manufacturers—indicating that larger CRE units, which contain more refrigerant than smaller units, would require more R–290 refrigerant than the 4 EPA published its Technology Transitions Restrictions on the Use of Certain HFCs NOPR on December, 15, 2022 (‘‘December 2022 EPA NOPR’’). 88 FR 70196. Since the October 2023 NOPR, EPA published a Technology Transitions Restrictions on the Use of Certain HFCs Final Rule on October, 24, 2023 (the ‘‘October 2023 EPA Final Rule’’). 88 FR 73098. For CRE, the refrigerant GWP limits published in the October 2023 EPA Final Rule are consistent with the proposal in the December 2022 EPA NOPR. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 maximum allowable charge size specified by UL 60335–2–89. For such equipment, manufacturers will likely instead need to implement other lowGWP refrigerant options to comply with the GWP limits in the October 2023 EPA Final Rule. DOE has identified R–454C and R–455A as alternatives that are mildly flammable (designated ‘‘A2L’’) refrigerants currently available and could be used for units with cooling capacities greater than would be achievable using an allowable R–290 charge size. In recognition of this, DOE analyzed two different representative capacities for the following 7 equipment classes: VOP.SC.M, SVO.SC.M, HZO.SC.L, SOC.SC.M,5 VCT.SC.M, VCT.SC.L, and VCS.SC.L.6 For each of these 7 classes, DOE would assume the use of an A2L refrigerant for the large capacity and R– 290 for the non-large capacity. DOE requests comment on this analytical approach of assuming use of an A2L refrigerant for the large capacity equipment classes. Table II.1 presents the 7 equipment classes for which DOE analyzed two representative capacities. This NODA presents analytical results of this approach under consideration for each of these 7 equipment classes. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 5 DOE notes that, for the SOC.SC.M equipment class, DOE is considering a smaller representative capacity, as compared to the representative capacity proposed in the October 2023 NOPR, that would assume the use of R–290. For the large representative capacity in the SOC.SC.M equipment class (i.e., the same representative capacity as the October 2023 NOPR), DOE is considering an A2L refrigerant, consistent with the approach in this NODA. 6 The equipment classes are designated by equipment family, condensing unit configuration, and operating temperature. Equipment Families: VOP—Vertical Open; SVO—Semi-Vertical Open; HZO—Horizontal Open; VCT—Vertical Closed Transparent; HCT—Horizontal Closed Transparent; VCS—Vertical Closed Solid; HCS—Horizontal Closed Solid; SOC—Service Over Counter; CB— Chef Base; PD—Pull Down. Condensing Unit Configurations: RC—Remote Condensing; SC—Self Contained. Operating Temperatures: H—High Temperature; M—Medium Temperature; L—Low Temperature; I—Ice Cream Temperature. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68791 Table 11.1 Approach Under Consideration for Equipment Classes with Two Representative Capacities Condensing Unit Configuration Equipment Family Operating Temperature {°F) Equipment Class Designation Volume ("V") [ft3] or TDA [ft2] Representative Capacity lft3] or [ft2] Ran2e Self-Contained (SC) Vertical Open (VOP) 2: 32 Semi vertical Open (SVO) 2: 32 Horizontal Open (HZO) <32 Service Over Counter (SOC) 2: 32 Vertical Closed Transparent (VCT) VOP.SC.M SVO.SC.M HZO.SC.L SOC.SC.M 2: 32 VCT.SC.M <32 VCT.SC.L TOA :S 17 TOA> 17 TOA:S 15 TOA> 15 TOA :S 35 TOA> 35 TOA:S 40 TOA> 40 V :S 100 14.93* 29.86 12.8* 25.6 12* 50 20 51* 49* V> 100 150 V :S70 49* khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS BILLING CODE 6450–01–C In support of this NODA, DOE investigated currently available compressor performance data of compressors using R–404A, R–454C, and R–455A to compare performance for compressors applicable to CRE in the larger volume or TDA range of each equipment class presented in table II.1. This investigation indicates that compressors using R–454C and R–455A have performance similar to compressors with refrigerants already in use (e.g., R–404A) in larger equipment, which is consistent with the findings from other investigations conducted by a compressor manufacturer.7 Accordingly, for the large representative units considered for these 7 equipment classes, DOE is presenting in this NODA an updated analysis that reflects the use of A2L compressors, based on performance data of R–404A compressors as a proxy to calculate the 7 See p. 15 of https://e360hub.copeland.com/ presentations/preparing-for-emerging-refrigerantsand-carb-compliance. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 efficiency of this equipment. Using this approach, the baseline energy use for the large representative capacities in these 7 classes is set equal to the current standard. Based on feedback to the October 2023 NOPR and in support of this NODA, DOE did not find compressor cost data to indicate that the price of an A2L compressor would be different than the price of an R–290 compressor at the same cooling capacity. As a result, DOE assumes the same cost for an A2L compressor as an R–290 compressor of the same compressor capacity in this NODA. DOE requests comment on any information or cost data that may indicate that the price of an A2L compressor would be different than the price of an R–290 compressor at the same cooling capacity. 2. Baseline Energy Use Estimates As discussed previously, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE assumed that manufacturers would convert selfcontained CRE models to R–290. The PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 use of R–290 is generally expected to provide higher efficiency performance at the baseline level (compared to current refrigerants), such that the baseline efficiency levels defined in the October 2023 NOPR for each class generally reflected a lower energy use than the currently applicable DOE standards for CRE. 88 FR 70196, 70227– 70228. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE’s analysis considered that these efficiency improvements, equipment costs, and manufacturer investments required to comply with the December 2022 EPA NOPR would be in effect prior to the time of compliance for the October 2023 NOPR proposed amended DOE CRE standards for all CRE equipment classes and sizes. 88 FR 70196, 70228. Therefore, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE noted that the October 2023 NOPR analysis did not consider benefits and costs resulting from the December 2022 EPA NOPR. 88 FR 70196, 70208. DOE clarifies that DOE has not double counted any energy savings from the October 2023 EPA E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.409</GPH> V>70 73.5 Vertical 49* V :S 100 <32 Closed VCS.SC.L V> 100 150 Solid (VCS) * These representative volumes or TOAs were analyzed in the October 2023 NOPR. 68792 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Final Rule in this NODA nor in the October 2023 NOPR. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE initially determined the energy use associated with the defined baseline efficiency levels for each equipment class by maximizing the single-speed compressor efficiency achievable for each respective equipment class based on the CRE compressors available at the time of the analysis from two commonly-used compressor manufacturers. Id. at 88 FR 70228. In this NODA, DOE updated its analysis of R–290 compressor performance to reflect the average compressor efficiency from the database of CRE compressors it has collected, instead of the maximum compressor efficiency as considered in the October 2023 NOPR. After the publication of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE was able to incorporate into this NODA compressor performance data from an additional compressor manufacturer that was not available to DOE for the October 2023 NOPR. Based on this updated approach, on average, the medium-temperature compressor energy savings presented in this NODA are less than the compressor energy savings in the October 2023 NOPR and the low-temperature compressor energy savings presented in this NODA are greater than the compressor energy savings in the October 2023 NOPR. Table II.2 presents the updated baseline energy use associated with each equipment class, expressed as a reduction in energy compared to the currently applicable standard, for both the R–290 and A2L (if applicable) representative units for each class. As discussed in the previous section, for the large representative capacities (which assume the use of A2L refrigerants), the baseline energy use is set equal to the current standard. Table 11.2 Baseline Energy Use Expressed as Reduction in Energy Use Below Current Applicable Standard Equipment Class Baseline energy use reduction below DOE Standard - R-290 (%) 1.3 VOP.SC.M Baseline energy use reduction below DOE Standard -A2L (%) 9.7 14.7 2.6 15.1 5.5 19.9 6.1 0.0 0.0 12.6 0.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 6.9 SVO.SC.M HZO.SC.M HZO.SC.L VCT.SC.M VCT.SC.L VCS.SC.M VCS.SC.L HCT.SC.M HCT.SC.L HCS.SC.M HCS.SC.L SOC.SC.M VCT.SC.I HCT.SC.I VCS.SC.I 0.0 0.0 NA* 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA* 0.0 NA* NA* NA* NA* 0.0 NA* NA* NA* *NA indicates that this class did not contain a second, large representative capacity in this NODA. Based on feedback in response to the October 2023 NOPR and November 2023 Public Meeting and additional test and teardown data conducted since the October 2023 NOPR, DOE is updating certain design specifications and components assumed to be used in models at the baseline efficiency level in this NODA. These updates include the insulation R-Value (changing from 8 per inch to 6.5 per inch, which is more representative of current baseline equipment); insulation thickness (changing to be consistent with the thickness analyzed in the March 2014 Final Rule, which remain applicable to VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 current equipment); 8 baseline fan motor assumptions (considering electronically commutated motors (‘‘ECM’’) for evaporator and condenser fan motors for most classes); and use of electronic controls (to assume the use of electronic controls at the baseline for all equipment classes). Additional details regarding all design specification and component updates are provided in section 2 of the NODA support document. These changes result in adjustments to equipment cost at the baseline level, 8 See table 5A.2.2 Baseline Specifications in the 2014 Final Rule TSD at www.regulations.gov/ document/EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0102. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 as well as to the magnitude of efficiency improvement provided by higher efficiency design options whose performance depends on the heat load. 4. Higher Efficiency Level Design Options In consideration of feedback received in response to the October 2023 NOPR, DOE has removed evaporator fan control and microchannel condensers from consideration as design options and revised the variable speed compressor coefficients, as described in the following sections. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.410</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 3. Baseline Design Components Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules a. Evaporator Fan Control As stated in section 3.3.7.3 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD, evaporator fan motor controls can be programmed such that the evaporator fan motor runs at a 100 percent duty cycle to circulate cold air at all times and to prevent frost build up on the evaporator coil. As a design option, evaporator fan control refers to operating the evaporator fan at an evaporator fan duty cycle less than 100 percent. This design option operates the evaporator fan at an evaporator fan duty cycle that matches the compressor duty cycle, plus some additional operating time to accomplish defrosts and stir cycles. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE analyzed the evaporator fan control design option for self-contained, closed CRE. 88 FR 70196, 70222. Feedback received in response to the October 2023 NOPR suggests that the use of evaporator fan controls could reduce air distribution and temperature uniformity in the refrigerated compartment, potentially leading to higher temperatures that would exceed established tolerances for food safety (e.g., as established by National Sanitation Foundation (‘‘NSF’’) 7). DOE notes that NSF 7 requirements do not preclude CRE from using evaporator fan controls and that some self-contained, closed CRE may be able to use evaporator fan controls and still comply with NSF 7 requirements. However, recognizing current uncertainty as to whether such food safety requirements could be maintained in certain applications of self-contained, closed CRE with the use of evaporator fan controls, DOE has tentatively screened out evaporator fan control as a design option for CRE. As a result, this NODA presents an updated engineering analysis that does not include evaporator fan control as a design option. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS b. Microchannel Condensers In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE considered microchannel condensers as a design option for self-contained CRE, having observed the use of microchannel condensers in other commercial refrigeration equipment such as automatic commercial ice makers (‘‘ACIMs’’), including ACIMs that use R–290. Id. DOE is not, however, aware of microchannel condensers in use for CRE and has not observed microchannel condensers in any of the equipment in the teardown analysis. Even though DOE tentatively determined in the October 2023 NOPR that microchannel condensers would be technically feasible for use in CRE, VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 feedback from commenters in response to the October 2023 NOPR suggests that there is current uncertainty as to the practicability to manufacturer, install, or service this technology on the scale necessary to serve the CRE market at the time of the effective date of any new or amended standards. Recognizing this uncertainty, DOE has tentatively screened out microchannel condensers as a design option. As a result, this NODA presents an updated engineering analysis that does not include microchannel condensers as a design option. c. Variable-Speed Compressors In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE incorporated the performance data for variable-speed R–290 compressors currently available on the market into DOE’s engineering spreadsheet. Id. at 88 FR 70219. Since publication of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE has observed that some compressor manufacturers have updated their variable-speed compressor coefficients. To take into account these updates, and to maintain a methodology consistent with that used for single-speed compressors, DOE made updates to its engineering analysis to assume the average efficiency of the current market for variable-speed compressors, selecting the lowerefficiency compressor if only two compressor brands are available at a specific cooling capacity, in this NODA. DOE also adjusted the calculation for the difference in evaporator and condenser temperatures when switching from single-speed to variable-speed compressors to instead use a static temperature difference of +3 °F for the evaporator and ¥5 °F for the condenser. Implementing these updates results in an energy use reduction from implementing variable-speed R–290 compressors ranging from approximately 2.5 to 19.2 percent, depending on the representative capacity of each equipment class. DOE notes that variable-speed compressors operate more efficiently at lower speeds than single-speed compressors do at full-speed. Therefore, variable-speed compressors have greater energy savings potential as further explained in section 3.3.4.3 of the October 2023 NOPR. Comparatively, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE estimated approximately 0.5 to 25 percent energy consumption reduction when implementing variablespeed R–290 compressors.9 Id. 9 See section 5.5.3.1 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 68793 5. Compressor Energy Use Adjustment Since publication of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE has reviewed the AirConditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (‘‘AHRI’’) January 2017 white paper, Tolerances and Uncertainties in Performance Data of Refrigerant Compressors, which is referenced by the AHRI 540 compressor performance rating standard (‘‘AHRI 540’’).10 Based on this review, DOE applied a 5 percent increase in energy use for all compressors to account for the performance prediction uncertainty as a result of curve-fitted compressor performance maps in this NODA. See the NODA engineering spreadsheet for further details. 6. Revised Cost Analysis As DOE typically does during the course of a rulemaking, DOE considered updates to core case costs and certain design option costs to reflect current material prices and production factors that are relevant to the CRE industry. As part of this update, DOE has reviewed current Krypton gas prices and has observed that the cost differential between triple-pane doors with Argon gas and triple pane doors with Krypton gas has increased significantly 11 compared to the cost differential used in the October 2023 NOPR analysis. See chapter 5 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD. This NODA presents updated costs for triple-pane doors with Krypton gas. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE assumed an industry average manufacturer markup of 1.40 for all equipment classes. 88 FR 70196, 70247. Based on stakeholder comments in response to the October 2023 NOPR and market share weights, DOE updated the industry average manufacturer markup to 1.38 for all equipment classes and uses this updated value as the basis for the results presented in this NODA. 7. Equipment With Features That Affect Energy Use In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed less stringent energy conservation standards for equipment of certain classes that have unique features such as forced-air evaporators or certain special door configurations (e.g., roll-in, roll-through, and pass-through). Id. at 88 FR 70230. The approach in the October 2023 NOPR involved use of featurespecific multipliers greater than 1.0 that would be applied to the proposed 10 For the AHRI white paper see www.ahrinet.org/ system/files/2023-06/compressors-white-paper.pdf. 11 The cost differential between Argon gas fill and Krypton gas fill for triple-pane doors is approximately seven times greater at the time of this NODA as compared to the October 2023 NOPR. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 68794 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS energy conservation standard for an eligible class to provide less-stringent standards for a feature of that eligible class. Id. at 88 FR 70231. More details can be found in tables IV.7 and IV.8 of the October 2023 NOPR. As an alternative to the featurespecific multiplier approach, DOE is also tentatively considering a simplified multiplier approach to the eligible equipment classes discussed in the October 2023 NOPR, evaluating the use of a single multiplier for all evaluated equipment classes and feature groupings, including pass-through, sliding door, sliding-door pass-through, roll-in, roll-through, forced-air evaporator, and drawers. To select a single multiplier representative of the range of features analyzed, DOE used a shipment-weighted average of the eligible equipment class average multiplier values for each feature. DOE applied this multiplier to the energy use at each efficiency level for each eligible class, which implies that the difference in energy use of each feature compared to CRE without such feature is proportional to the equipment’s energy use prior to the addition of each feature. The result of this single multiplier analysis yields a multiplier of 1.07. DOE notes that EPCA, as codified, contains what is known as an ‘‘antibacksliding’’ provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing any amended standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered product. (42 U.S.C. 6316(e)(1); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Therefore, any multipliers that may be applied to eligible CRE equipment classes in any future DOE actions for this proposed rulemaking may be VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 limited or adjusted due to the antibacksliding provision. In this NODA, application of the multiplier to the energy use of each efficiency level of a given class is adjusted accordingly, if needed, to avoid backsliding against the current standard. Based on consideration of all of the public comments received, including any additional comments received in response to this NODA, DOE may adopt the multiplier approach proposed in the October 2023 NOPR, a revised approach with higher or lower multipliers than proposed in the October 2023 NOPR, an approach with additional or fewer multipliers, or a simpler approach in which a single multiplier would be used for any eligible feature for application to specific eligible classes as presented in this NODA. B. Energy Use Analysis The purpose of the energy use analysis is to determine the annual energy consumption of CRE at different efficiencies in representative U.S. commercial buildings and to assess the energy savings potential of increased CRE efficiency. The energy use analysis estimates the range of energy use of CRE in the field (i.e., as they are actually used by consumers). The energy use analysis provides the basis for other analyses DOE performs, particularly assessments of the energy savings and the savings in consumer operating costs that could result from adoption of amended or new standards. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE calculated the energy consumption of the equipment as part of the engineering analysis. Id. at 88 70196, 70237. In this NODA, DOE adjusted the annual energy consumption to account for the field operation of occupancy sensors. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Specifically, DOE was informed that some purchasers may choose to deactivate CRE occupancy sensors, thereby forgoing energy savings associated with this design option. Accordingly, DOE updated its energy use analysis for CRE at efficiency levels with occupancy sensors so that the benefit of an occupancy sensor is applied to only 75 percent of purchasers of this feature. The remaining 25 percent would incur the increased equipment cost but not the associated energy savings.12 The analysis presented in this NODA reflects this change under consideration. DOE requests comments, data, and information on the fraction of CRE that may not have the occupancy sensors activated. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis For this NODA, DOE conducted an LCC and PBP analysis using the same general methodology described in the October 2023 NOPR. See Id. at 88 FR 70237–70238. Table II.3 summarizes the approach and data DOE used to derive inputs to the LCC and PBP calculations. The following sections discuss updates to the source of method for deriving those inputs—as compared to the October 2023 NOPR—that DOE considered and implemented in this NODA analysis for review and comment. Inputs that utilized the same approach or data source as the October 2023 NOPR are not discussed in this NODA. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 12 DOE selected 25 percent as a reasonable estimation of the fraction of CRE purchasers that may choose to deactivate their occupancy sensors despite purchasing this feature. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68795 Table 11.3 Summary of Inputs and Methods for the LCC and PBP Analysis* Inputs Equipment Cost Installation Cost Annual Energy Use Energy Prices Enernv Price Trends Repair and Maintenance Costs Equipment Lifetime Discount Rates Source/Method Derived by multiplying MPCs by manufacturer and retailer markups and sales tax, as appropriate. Apply price learning between present (2023) and compliance year (2028) for LED lighting (I.I% average yearly decline) and variable-speed compressor electronics (6.3% average yearly decline), using historical data to derive a price scaling index to project equipment costs for those components. Assumed not to change with efficiency level for a given equipment class; therefore, not considered in the LCC and PBP analyses. Obtained from energy use analysis. Based on the CRE test procedure for each equipment class at each considered efficiencv level. Electricity: Edison Electric Institute Typical Bills and Average Rates reports. Variability: Regional energy prices across nine census divisions. Based on AE02023 13 price projections. Material costs derived from the engineering analysis and labor costs derived from RS Means 2023. Considered replacement of LED lighting, evaporators, condensers, compressors, and night curtains; assumed LED lighting repair frequency decreases due to the presence of occupancy sensor when in use by purchaser (see section 11.B).** Average: 10 years for large buildings and 20 years for small buildings. DOE defmed small buildings as those less than or equal to 5,000 ft 2, while large buildings are defmed as those greater than 5,000 ft 2 Approach involves identifying all possible debt or asset classes that might be used to purchase the considered equipment or might be affected indirectly. Primary data source was the Federal Reserve Board's Survey of Consumer Finances. 2028 Compliance Year * References for the data sources mentioned in this table are provided in the sections following this table. Energy price BILLING CODE 6450–01–C khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 1. Energy Prices Because marginal electricity price more accurately captures the incremental savings associated with a change in energy use from higher efficiency, it provides a better representation of incremental change in consumer costs than average electricity prices. Therefore, DOE applied average electricity prices for the energy use of the equipment purchased in the nonew-standards case, and marginal electricity prices for the incremental change in energy use associated with the other efficiency levels considered in the October 2023 NOPR. Id. at 88 FR 70239. To derive electricity prices for this NODA analysis, DOE followed the same methodology as in the October 2023 NOPR. However, in this NODA, DOE updated the price data for current 13 For further information, see the ‘‘Assumptions to AEO2023’’ report that sets forther the major assumptions used to generate the projections in the AEO2023. Available at www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/ assumptions/ (last accessed April 15, 2024). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 electricity prices (from 2022 to 2023). In particular, DOE developed electricity prices in 2023 for each census division using data from Edison Electric Institute (‘‘EEI’’) ‘‘Typical Bills and Average Rates’’ reports. To estimate energy prices in future years, DOE followed the same approach as in the October 2023 NOPR, i.e., DOE multiplied the 2023 electricity prices by the projection of annual average price changes for each of the nine census divisions from the reference case in AEO2023, which has an end year of 2050.14 2. Repair and Maintenance Costs Repair costs are associated with repairing or replacing components that have failed in an appliance or equipment; maintenance costs are associated with maintaining the operation of the equipment. Typically, small incremental increases in equipment efficiency entail no, or only minor, changes in repair and 14 EIA. Annual Energy Outlook 2023. Available at www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/ (last accessed April 15, 2024). PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 maintenance costs compared to baseline efficiency equipment. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE calculated repair costs by considering the typical failure rate of refrigeration system components (compressor, lighting, and evaporator and condenser fan motors), component manufacturer production costs (‘‘MPCs’’) and associated markups, and the labor cost of repairs, which is assumed to be performed by private vendors. Id. at 88 FR 70239. DOE considered the following specific CRE components and associated failure probabilities during typical CRE lifetime in its repair cost approach: compressor (25 percent), evaporator fan motor (50 percent), condenser fan motor (25 percent), and LED lighting (100 percent), with the presence of occupancy sensors decreasing LED lighting repair frequency by half. Id. In this NODA, DOE also considered repair and replacement costs associated with night curtains and has incorporated such costs into this NODA analysis. Specifically, DOE was informed that night curtains are likely to E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.411</GPH> trends, equipment lifetimes, and discount rates are not used for the PBP calculation. ** Forthe 25% of purchasers assumed to not utilize the occupancy sensors, the LED lighting repair frequency remains the same as for CRE without occupancy sensors. 68796 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS be replaced before the end of the lifetime of CRE. DOE contacted retailers and manufacturers of night curtains of similar cost to the ones contained in the engineering analysis; these manufacturers and sellers stated that the lifetime varies according to user care. One manufacturer reported a recent replacement from a unit that lasted 10 years. In light of these reports, DOE selected 5 years as a reasonable estimate for the average lifetime of all night curtains. As a result, depending on the lifetime associated with each CRE, night curtains may be replaced once or several times during the CRE lifetime. Furthermore, DOE assumed a half-hour night curtain replacement labor duration at the same labor rates (according to RSMeans 2023) as other CRE components assumed to be replaced during the CRE lifetime (e.g., compressors) in the LCC analysis. DOE assigned these labor rates according to each purchaser’s Census division to account for national labor cost variability. 3. Residual Value for Refurbished CRE To model the phenomenon of CRE sold for refurbishment, DOE utilized a residual value for such equipment in the LCC in the October 2023 NOPR. The residual value represents the remaining dollar value of surviving CRE at the average age of refurbishment. In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE estimated that refurbishments would occur at 5 years for small-size food-service buildings (e.g., restaurants) and 10 years for smallsize food-sales and other commercial buildings. To account for the value of CRE with remaining life to the consumer, the LCC model applies this residual value as a ‘‘credit’’ at the end of the CRE lifetime and discounts it back to the start of the analysis period. This credit was applied to a fraction of self-contained CRE, totaling about 10 percent of all CRE in the LCC sample. Id. at 88 FR 70240. Since the publication of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE made adjustments to its refurbishment assumptions based on the premise that if the refurbishment market offers a favorable economic opportunity, it could be utilized by all businesses, not just businesses in smallsize buildings. Accordingly, for this NODA, DOE still applies a credit to about 10 percent of all CRE in the sample; however the credit may apply to any self-contained equipment, VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 regardless of building size.15 DOE has no reason to expect that businesses occupying larger size buildings would have a different refurbishment schedule than those occupying small-size buildings, and as such DOE retained the same assumptions as in the October 2023 NOPR regarding the average CRE lifetimes at the time of refurbishment, occurring after 5 years for food-service buildings (e.g., restaurants) and after 10 years for food-sales, and other building types (e.g., grocery stores). See id. 4. Energy Efficiency Distribution in the No-New-Standards Case To accurately estimate the share of consumers that would be affected by a potential energy conservation standard at a particular efficiency level, DOE’s LCC analysis considers the projected distribution (market shares) of equipment efficiencies under the nonew-standards case (i.e., the case without amended or new energy conservation standards) in the compliance year. This approach reflects the fact that some consumers may purchase equipment with efficiencies greater than the baseline levels in the absence of new or amended standards. To estimate the energy efficiency distribution of CRE for 2028 in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE used test data, feedback from manufacturer interviews, surveys, and the ‘‘Single Compartment Commercial Refrigeration Equipment’’ data from DOE’s CCD, accessed in March 2024.16 Id. In this NODA, DOE presents the following updates to its LCC analysis, which are incorporated into this NODA analysis: (1) using CCD data retrieved on April 15, 2024 in place of CCD data used in the October 2023 NOPR that was retrieved on February 21, 2023, (2) deriving distributions for the new selfcontained (large) capacities from CCD, and (3) grouping some self-contained (non-large) categories that had few observations in the CCD. To create a robust sample for the energy efficiency distribution used in the LCC analysis, DOE separated the analyzed CRE equipment classes into 27 15 Due to the installation complexity of remote condensing CRE, DOE assumed that such equipment are not likely to be refurbished. 16 U.S. Department of Energy. Compliance Certification Database (‘‘CCD’’) for Refrigeration Equipment—Commercial, Single Compartment. Available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certificationdata/ (last accessed April 15, 2024). PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 separate groups for this NODA analysis. DOE notes that the analysis for the October 2023 NOPR was based on 21 separate groups; DOE is considering adding new groups to account for equipment classes with two representative capacities (discussed in section II.A.1 of this document), and some self-contained equipment classes were grouped together if there were few model counts in the CCD. For the equipment classes that DOE relied on CCD model count data to formulate the efficiency distributions, this approach was used to allow equipment classes with a limited sample to share the efficiency distribution of a group of similar classes with a larger sample in the CCD. DOE compared energy use data from the CCD with energy use equations from the engineering analysis to derive model counts at each efficiency level. For the 7 self-contained equipment classes with large representative capacities, model counts for each representative unit were taken from subsets of the CCD, filtered by the appropriate volume or TDA. Equipment classes whose efficiency distributions were derived from aggregated data from manufacturer interviews, surveys, and test data were assigned their own groups (these 9 classes are the same ones from the October 2023 NOPR.) The estimated market shares for the no-new-standards case for CRE and the corresponding groupings are shown in table II.4. In advance of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE conducted manufacturer interviews and collected shipments data for several equipment classes. The equipment classes for which DOE collected shipments data account for 75 percent of total shipments and are marked with an asterisk in table II.4.17 For the remainder of the equipment classes for which DOE was not able to collect representative shipments data from manufacturers due to low sample sizes, DOE utilized the CCD database to estimate the no-new-standards-case efficiency distribution; this is the same approach used in the October 2023 NOPR. See Id. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 17 For some of these classes, such as chef bases or griddle stands and high-temperature refrigerators, DOE also developed the efficiency distributions based on DOE’s test data, data submitted by manufacturers, ENERGY STAR certified data, and data from DOE’s CCD. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 68797 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 11.4 No-New-Standards Case Efficienc Distributions in 2028 Equipment Class HZO.RC.L HZO.RC.M SOC.RC.M SVO.RC.M VCT.RC.L VCT.RC.M VOP.RC.L VOP.RC.M ELO 100% 100% 12% 58% 15% 9% 36% 36% 15 15 13 11 3 3 Market Share by Efficiency Level** EL2 EL3 EL4 EL5 EL 1 Remote-Condensing Units EL6 EL7 ,, 12% 61% 35% 11% 11% 9% 5% 53% 53% 31% 15% 23% 0% 40% 60% 24% 35% 26% 3% 21% 26% 3% 21% 43% 6% 35% 7% 48% 45% 7% 48% 45% 41% 2% 1% 51% 5% 3% 8% 0% 25% 50% 25% 8% 7% 53% 32% 52% 0% 44% 45% 26% 30% 27% 14% 14% 2% 10% 37% 40% 50% 0% 0% 43% 16% 1% 1% 90% 0% 2% 4% Self-Contained HZO.SC.L 27 6% 94% SOC.SC.M 26 42% 2% 78% 4% 1% 2% SVO.SC.M 25 8% 7% 53% 33% VCS.SC.L 24 5% 75% 0% 0% VCT.SC.L 23 VCT.SC.M 22 0% 0% 98% 0% 0% 76% 1% 1% 4% 2% 16% VOP.SC.M 21 * The distributions for these equipment classes were derived from aggregated data from the Trade Associations Survey, test data, and manufacturer interview data. ** As seen in the table, certain equipment classes have large percentages of shipments at both baseline and at max tech; these distributions are due to variability in equipment design across the market. 20 19 18 18 17 17 17 16 16 14 12 8 10 10 9 4 7 6 5 2 BILLING CODE 6450–01–C The LCC Monte Carlo simulations draw from the efficiency distributions and randomly assign an efficiency to the CRE purchased by each sample consumer in the no-new-standards case. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 The resulting percent shares within the sample match the market shares in the efficiency distributions. PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 C. Shipments Analysis DOE uses projections of annual equipment shipments to calculate the national impacts of potential amended or new energy conservation standards E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.412</GPH> CB.SC.L* CB.SC.M* HCS.SC.L HCS.SC.M HCT.SC.I HCT.SC.L HCT.SC.M HZO.SC.L HZO.SC.M SOC.SC.M SVO.SC.M VCS.SC.H* VCS.SC.I VCS.SC.L* VCS.SC.M* VCT.SC.H* VCT.SC.I VCT.SC.L* VCT.SC.M* VOP.SC.M* khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Group 68798 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules on energy use, net present value (‘‘NPV’’), and future manufacturer cashflows.18 The shipments model takes an accounting approach, tracking market shares of each equipment class and the vintage of units in the stock. Stock accounting uses equipment shipments as inputs to estimate the age distribution of in-service equipment stocks for all years. The age distribution of in-service equipment stocks is a key input to calculations of both the NES and NPV because operating costs for any year depend on the age distribution of the stock. For the shipments analysis conducted for this NODA, DOE followed the same approach as the October 2023 NOPR, with the exception of CRE that may be subject to refurbishment, as discussed in the following paragraph. To account for a potential increase in refurbished CRE as a result of increased prices from CRE standards, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE assumed a price elasticity effect for a fraction of CRE shipments, which was limited to small-sized buildings. Id. at 88 FR 70242. In this NODA, DOE modified its price elasticity approach based on the premise that if the refurbishment market offers a favorable economic opportunity, it could be utilized by all businesses. Accordingly, for this NODA, the price elasticity effect 19 applies to all self- khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 18 DOE uses data on manufacturer shipments as a proxy for national sales, as aggregate data on sales are lacking. In general, one would expect a close correspondence between shipments and sales. 19 DOE applied an elasticity constant of ¥0.5 to shipments for self-contained CRE and scaled this constant down to ¥0.15 over a period of 20 years from the current year of calculations, holding it constant at that rate for the remainder of the analysis period. This is the same constant and VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 contained units, regardless of the building size where those units are installed. DOE assumed that remote condensing CRE are generally not refurbished as they are less likely to be removed from service when being part of a separate condensing system. DOE notes that the price elasticity effect, and a resulting reduction in CRE shipments, is dependent on the price difference between the price consumers pay in the no-new-standards case and the standards case. DOE also acknowledges that, while a CRE refurbishment market may well exist and its magnitude may have recently increased due to supply chain and equipment price increases, this phenomenon applies to the CRE market overall, and is not a result of energy efficiency standards on CRE. With regard to self-contained units, DOE estimates that their market share is approximately 87 percent of the overall new (i.e., not refurbished) CRE market. D. National Impact Analysis The NIA assesses the national energy savings (‘‘NES’’) and the 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.20 (‘‘Consumer’’ in this context refers to consumers of the equipment being regulated.) DOE calculates the NES and NPV for the potential standard levels considered based on projections of annual equipment shipments, along with the annual energy consumption and total installed cost data from the energy use and LCC analyses. For the scaling methodology used in the October 2023 NOPR. 20 The NIA accounts for impacts in the United States and U.S. territories. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 October 2023 NOPR, DOE projected the energy savings, operating cost savings, equipment costs, and NPV of consumer benefits over the lifetime of CRE sold from 2028 through 2057. Id. at 88 FR 70243. DOE evaluates the impacts of new or amended standards by comparing a case without such standards with standardscase projections. The no-new-standards case characterizes energy use and consumer costs for each equipment class in the absence of new or amended energy conservation standards. For this projection, DOE considers historical trends in efficiency and various forces that are likely to affect the mix of efficiencies over time. DOE compares the no-new-standards case with projections characterizing the market for each equipment class if DOE adopted new or amended standards at specific energy efficiency levels for that class. For the standards cases, DOE considers how a given standard would likely affect the market shares of equipment with efficiencies greater than the standard. Table II.5 summarizes the inputs and methods DOE used for the NIA for this NODA. DOE made updates to some of the key inputs to the NIA analysis compared to the NIA analysis performed in the October 2023 NOPR. In particular, the NIA for this NODA includes slightly updated shipments (see section II.D of this document), slightly updated efficiency distribution (see section II.C of this document), updated annual energy consumption per unit (see section II.A of this document) and updated total installed costs per unit (see section II.A.6 of this document). E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68799 Table 11.5 Summary of Inputs and Methods for the National Impact Analysis Inputs Shipments Compliance Date of Standard Efficiency Trends Annual Energy Consumption per Unit Total Installed Cost per Unit Annual Energy Cost per Unit Repair and Maintenance Cost per Unit Energy Price Trends Method Annual shipments from shipments model. 2028 NIA (No efficiency trends were applied) Annual weighted-average values are a function of energy use at each EL. Annual weighted-average values are a function of cost at each EL. Incorporates projection of future equipment prices. Annual weighted-average values as a function of the annual energy consumption per unit and energy prices. Annual, weighted-average values from the LCC model. Prices from LCC analysis and AEO2023 projections (to 2050) and extrapolation after 2050. Energy Site-to-Primary and FFC Conversion Discount Rate Present Year 1. Sensitivity Analysis for Equipment With Unique Energy Use Characteristics As discussed in section II.A.7 of this document, to account for CRE with certain features (e.g., pass-through, sliding door, sliding-door pass-through, roll-in, roll-through, forced-air evaporator, and drawers), DOE applied Time-series conversion factors based on AEO202 3. 3 percent and 7 percent 2024 a single multiplier of 1.07 to the energy use of CRE with such features. To evaluate the impact of CRE with these unique energy use characteristics in the NIA, DOE conducted a sensitivity analysis in this NODA and estimated the NES and NPV for all CRE, applying a 1.07 energy use multiplier to CRE with these features. Given a lack of market data regarding CRE with these unique energy use characteristics, DOE relied on CCD model counts to estimate their market share. Table II.6 presents the estimated market share of CRE with unique energy use characteristics compared to their corresponding equipment class. 0.5% VCT.SC.M (Non-Large) 4.6% VCT.SC.L (Non-Large) 0.4% VCS.SC.M 6.4% VCS.SC.L (Non-Large) 3.9% HCS.SC.L 8.5% To model this sensitivity, DOE assumed that the efficiency distribution of the equipment with unique features is the same as that of the overall equipment class. DOE assumed an increased energy consumption for the affected equipment by a factor of 7 percent. DOE modelled another sensitivity with the assumption that 5 percent of equipment in the specified equipment classes will have unique features instead of the market shares shown in table II.6. The results of these sensitivity analyses are shown in the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 accompanying NODA support document. E. Manufacturer Impact Analysis DOE uses the Government Regulatory Impact Model (‘‘GRIM’’) to quantify the changes in cash flow due to new or amended standards that result in a higher or lower industry value. The GRIM uses a standard, annual, discounted cash-flow analysis that incorporates manufacturer costs, manufacturer markups, shipments, and industry financial information as inputs. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 The GRIM models changes in costs, distribution of shipments, investments, and manufacturer margins that could result from a new or amended energy conservation standard. The GRIM spreadsheet uses the inputs to arrive at a series of annual cash flows, beginning in 2024 (the base year of the analysis) and continuing 30 years after the analyzed 2028 compliance year. For this NODA analysis, DOE calculated industry net present value (‘‘INPV’’) by summing the stream of annual discounted cash flows during the E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.414</GPH> VCT.RC.M EP28AU24.413</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Table 11.6 Market Shares of Equipment with Unique Features Corresponding Equipment Market Share Class 68800 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules analysis period. Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, DOE used a real discount rate of 10.0 percent for the CRE industry. Id. at 88 FR 70246. Key inputs to the GRIM (i.e., MPCs, shipments projections, conversion costs, refrigerant transition expenses, and manufacturer markup scenarios) are discussed in the following sections. 1. Manufacturer Production Costs The changes in the MPCs of covered equipment can affect the revenues, gross margins, and cash flow of the industry. See section II.A of this document for details on the NODA updated engineering analysis. 2. Shipments Projections The GRIM estimates manufacturer revenues based on total unit shipment projections and the distribution of those shipments by efficiency level. Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, the GRIM uses the NIA’s annual shipment projections derived from the shipments analysis. Id. at 88 FR 70196, 70242–70243. See section II.D of this document for details on the NODA updated shipments analysis. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 3. Product and Capital Conversion Costs DOE made certain refinements to the product conversion cost analysis in the October 2023 NOPR, which are incorporated into the analysis conducted for this NODA. 88 FR 70196, 70246–70247. Specifically, for this NODA analysis, DOE incorporated the most recent Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (‘‘BLS’’) wage data 21 into its product conversion cost estimates and refreshed its equipment database to include up-to-date model listings from its CCD 22 and California Energy Commission’s Modernized Appliance Efficiency Database System for covered CRE.23 Furthermore, to account for the potential increase in testing and certification costs associated with new safety standards (i.e., UL 60335–2–89), which go into effect September 29, 2024, DOE doubled product conversion costs associated with UL testing and certification. For this NODA, DOE updated its capital conversion cost estimates from the 21 U.S. Department of Labor, ‘‘Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics,’’ (May 2023). Available at: www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ stru.htm#17–0000 (last accessed May 22, 2024). 22 U.S. Department of Energy’s Compliance Certification Database is available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/ #q=Product_Group_s%3A* (last accessed Jan. 31, 2024). 23 California Energy Commission’s Modernized Appliance Efficiency Database System is available at cacertappliances.energy.ca.gov/Pages/Search/ AdvancedSearch.aspx (last accessed Jan. 31, 2024). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 October 2023 NOPR to 2023$ and manufacturer counts based on its refreshed model database but otherwise maintained its capital conversion cost methodology from the October 2023 NOPR. Id. 4. Refrigerant Transition Investments As discussed in section II.A.1 of this document, the October 2023 EPA Final Rule restricts the use of hydrofluorocarbons (‘‘HFCs’’) in specific sectors or subsectors, including use in certain CRE analyzed in this NODA. Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, DOE accounted for the costs associated with redesigning CRE to make use of low-GWP refrigerants and retrofitting production facilities to accommodate flammable refrigerants in the GRIM in the no-new-standards case and standards cases. DOE considered the October 2023 EPA Final Rule and the expenses associated with the refrigerant transition in the analytical baseline of this analysis since manufacturers would need to comply with the October 2023 EPA Final Rule regardless of whether or not DOE amended or established standards for CRE. Id. at 88 FR 70247. Although refrigerant transition costs associated with the October 2023 EPA Final Rule are not attributed to this rulemaking, DOE accounted for these refrigerant transition costs in the no-new-standards case and standards cases to better reflect industry finances and cash flow over the analysis period. In this NODA, DOE made refinements to its research and development (‘‘R&D’’) refrigerant transition estimate to account for increased testing costs associated with third-party laboratories, as well as adjustments to the timeline of when manufacturers would need to make investments related to the refrigerant transition to align with the revised compliance dates for CRE in the October 2023 EPA Final Rule. See Id. at 88 FR 70284. Accordingly, for this NODA, DOE assumed that the transition to low-GWP refrigerants would require industry to invest approximately $14.6 million in R&D and $19.0 million in capital expenditures from 2024 (the NODA reference year) to 2026. Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, DOE notes that its refrigerant transition estimates of $14.6 million in R&D and $19.0 million capital expenditures reflect an estimate of future investments industry would incur to comply with Federal or State refrigerant regulations. DOE acknowledges that manufacturers have already invested a significant amount of time and capital into transitioning CRE to low-GWP refrigerants. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 5. Manufacturer Markup Scenarios This NODA analysis used the same manufacturer markup scenarios as the October 2023 NOPR. See Id. at 88 FR 70247–70248. F. Emissions Analysis, and Monetizing Emissions Impacts For this NODA pertaining to CRE, DOE conducted the emissions analyses using the same methodology and data sources as in the October 2023 NOPR. See Id. at 88 FR 70251–70257. However, DOE updated its social cost of greenhouse gases (‘‘GHG) (‘‘SC–GHG’’) estimates, discussed as follows. To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, the October 2023 NOPR used the interim SC–GHG estimates presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases (‘‘IWG’’). As a member of the IWG involved in the development of the February 2021 SC–GHG TSD, DOE agreed that the interim SC–GHG estimates represented the most appropriate estimate of the SC–GHG until revised estimates were developed reflecting the latest, peer-reviewed science. See Id. at 88 FR 70253–70255 for discussion of the development and details of the IWG SC–GHG estimates. The IWG has continued working on updating the interim estimates but has not published final estimates. Accordingly, in the regulatory analysis of its December 2023 Final Rule, ‘‘Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review,’’ EPA estimated climate benefits using a new, updated set of SC–GHG estimates (‘‘2023 SC– GHG estimates’’). EPA documented the methodology underlying the new estimates in the regulatory impact analysis (‘‘RIA’’) for the December 2023 Final Rule and in greater detail in a technical report entitled Report on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent Scientific Advances that was presented as Supplementary Material to the RIA.24 The 2023 SC–GHG estimates ‘‘incorporate recent research addressing recommendations of the Natural 24 https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/ 2023-12/eo12866_oil-and-gas-nsps-eg-climatereview-2060-av16-final-rule-20231130.pdf; https:// www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/epa_ scghg_2023_report_final.pdf (last accessed July 3, 2024). E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (‘‘National Academies’’), responses to public comments on an earlier sensitivity analysis using draft SC–GHG estimates included in the EPA’s December 2022 proposal in the oil and natural gas sector standards of performance rulemaking, and comments from a 2023 external peer review of the accompanying technical report.’’ 25 On December 22, 2023, the IWG issued a memorandum directing that ‘‘agencies should use their professional judgment to determine which estimates of the SC–GHG reflect the best available evidence, are most appropriate for particular analytical contexts, and best facilitate sound decision-making’’ consistent with OMB Circular No. A–4 and applicable law.26 DOE has been extensively involved in the IWG process and related work on the SC–GHGs for over a decade. This involvement includes DOE’s role as the federal technical monitor for the seminal 2017 report on the SC–GHG issued by the National Academies, which provided extensive recommendations on how to strengthen and update the SC–GHG estimates.27 DOE has also participated in the IWG’s work since 2021. DOE technical experts involved in this work reviewed the 2023 SC–GHG methodology and report in light of the National Academies’ recommendations and DOE’s understanding of the state of the science. Based on this review, DOE has preliminarily determined that the updated 2023 SC–GHG estimates, including the approach to discounting, represent a significant improvement in estimating the SC–GHG through incorporating the most recent advancements in the scientific literature and by addressing recommendations on prior methodologies. In particular, the 2023 SC–GHG estimates implement the key recommendations of the National Academies, and the 2023 SC–GHG estimates incorporate the extensive scientific findings and methodological advances that have occurred since the last IWG updates in 2013, 2015, and 2016. The 2023 SC–GHG estimates have also been peer-reviewed. As indicated 25 https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/ 2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_final.pdf (last accessed July 3, 2024). 26 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2023/12/IWG-Memo-12.22.23.pdf (last accessed July 3, 2024). 27 Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide √ The National Academies Press. (available at: https:// nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/24651/valuingclimate-damages-updating-estimation-of-the-socialcost-of) (last accessed July 3, 2024). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 by their statements, the peer reviewers strongly supported the new methodology, calling it ‘‘a huge advance,’’ ‘‘a real step change’’ and ‘‘an important improvement’’ in estimating the SC–GHG, and noting that it addressed the National Academies’ and others’ recommendations and ‘‘generally represents well the emerging consensus in the literature.’’ The most significant improvements in the 2023 SC–GHG estimates carry out recommendations made by the National Academies. In its report, the National Academies’ principal recommendation was to develop and use ‘‘a new framework that would strengthen the scientific basis, provide greater transparency, and improve characterization of the uncertainties of the estimates.’’ 28 The IWG’s estimates since 2010 have relied on averaging the values produced by three integrated assessment models, each of which generates a set of SC–GHG emissions estimates based on the inputs and assumptions built into that particular model.29 The National Academies recommended an entirely new approach that would ‘‘unbundle’’ this process and instead use a framework in which each step of the SC–GHG calculation is developed as one of four separate but integrated ‘‘modules’’: the socioeconomic module, the climate module, the damages module, and the discounting module. The report provided detailed recommendations on developing and using these modules, including how to address discounting, socioeconomic projections, climate modeling, and uncertainty. DOE preliminarily concludes that the 2023 SC–GHG estimates are consistent with the National Academies’ 2017 recommendations and represent major scientific advancements over the IWG’s approach. In addition, DOE supports the incorporation of more recent scientific findings and data throughout the development of each of the 2023 SC– GHG modules and the underlying components of those modules. Thus, in accordance with the IWG memo, and having reviewed the 2023 SC–GHG methodologies and updates, DOE has preliminarily determined that the updated 2023 SC–GHG estimates reflect the best available scientific and analytical evidence and methodologies, 28 Report Recommends New Framework for Estimating the Social Cost of Carbon √ National Academies (available at: https:// www.nationalacademies.org/news/2017/01/reportrecommends-new-framework-for-estimating-thesocial-cost-of-carbon) (last accessed July 3, 2024). 29 See https://www.epa.gov/system/files/ documents/2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_ final.pdf at p. 6, (last accessed July 3, 2024). PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 68801 are accordingly the most appropriate for DOE analyses, and best facilitate sound decision-making by substantially improving the transparency of the estimates and representations of uncertainty inherent in such estimates. DOE welcomes comment on this preliminary determination.30 In a final rulemaking, DOE will determine what role, if any, these estimates will play in any final decision adopting new and amended energy conservation standards for CRE. For this NODA, DOE used these updated 2023 SC–GHG values to monetize the climate benefits of the emissions reductions associated at each efficiency level (‘‘EL’’) for CRE. These results are shown in the accompanying NODA support document in table 6.7 through table 6.15. Using these the 2023 SC–GHG estimates provides a betterinformed range of potential climate benefits associated with the proposed new and amended standards. The EPA technical report presents SC–GHG values for emissions years through 2080; therefore, DOE did not monetize the climate benefits of GHG emissions reductions occurring after 2080. DOE expects additional climate impacts to accrue from GHG emissions changes post 2080, but due to a lack of readily available SC–GHG estimates for emissions years beyond 2080 and the relatively small emission effects expected from those years, DOE has not monetized these additional impacts in this analysis. The overall climate benefits are generally greater when using the higher, updated 2023 SC–GHG estimates, compared to the climate benefits using the older IWG SC–GHG estimates, which were used in the October 2023 NOPR. To facilitate a comparison, DOE also performed a sensitivity analysis using the IWG’s 2021 interim SC–GHG estimates. The results are shown in the accompanying NODA support document.31 In setting energy efficiency standards for CRE in any subsequent final rule, DOE will, as in the NOPR, consider whether the standards result in positive net benefits under either SC–GHG calculation methodology, as well as in the absence 30 See EPA’s SC–GHG website for all of the technical files related to the updated estimates, including the final SC–GHG report (provided as Supplementary Material to the Dec 2023 Oil and Gas rule final RIA); all replication instructions and computer code for the estimates; all files related to the public comment and peer review process; and a workbook to assist analysts in applying the estimates: https://www.epa.gov/environmentaleconomics/scghg. 31 See tables 6.16 through 6.17 in the NODA support document. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 68802 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules of the estimated, monetized climate benefits. For this NODA, DOE monetized NOX and SO2 using the same methodology and data sources as described in chapter 14 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD. III. Analytical Results khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS A. Compliance Period EPCA requires that amended standards would apply to CRE on or after a date that is 3 years after the final rule is published in the Federal Register or, if the Secretary determines that 3 years is inadequate, not later than 5 years after the final rule is published in the Federal Register. (See 42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(6)(C)) Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, DOE assumed new and amended standards would apply to CRE manufactured 3 years after the date on which any new and amended standards are published. Currently, DOE anticipates publication of a final rule in the second half of 2024. Therefore, for purposes of its analysis, DOE used 2028 as the first full year of compliance with any new or amended standards for CRE. Extending the compliance lead-in period from 3 years to a date between 3 to 5 years after a final rule is published in the Federal Register would delay the compliance year analyzed in this NODA from 2028 to 2029 or 2030. With regard to the LCC analysis and the NIA, a longer compliance period after publication of a final rule is not expected to result in significant changes to the results of the LCC and the NIA. Although a number of inputs to the LCC analysis and NIA are timedependent (e.g., electricity prices, shipments drivers such as floorspace projections, and costs of certain design options that experience price learning, such as light-emitting diode (‘‘LED’’) lighting, and electronic components of variable speed compressors), these inputs would not result in significant changes to the results of the LCC and NIA for a 5-year compliance date (2030) compared to a 3-year compliance date (2028). For the LCC, the relative changes in inputs that are time-dependent are small over a two-year delay. Commercial electricity prices averaged on a national level are forecast by AEO 2023 to decrease by 1 percent from 2028 to 2030, but expected to exceed 2028 prices again in 2033 and beyond. Equipment costs for higher efficiency levels using LED lighting and variablespeed compressors are expected to decrease up to 0.8 percent from 2028 to 2030 due to the cost reduction associated with price learning.32 These variations in LCC inputs have only minor effects on the relative comparison of efficiency levels and, as a consequence, would lead only to a slight increase in life-cycle cost savings associated with higher efficiency equipment. Therefore, there are no negative impacts for consumers by a 2year delay of the compliance year. Furthermore, the efficiency distribution of purchasers does not change over time in the no-new-standards scenario, meaning that a delay of 2 years would not change the percentage of purchasers impacted by a new standard. Regarding the NIA results, timedependent inputs (e.g., equipment costs and electricity prices) will cause small variations to the undiscounted NPV. For example, a 2030 compliance date will result in a slight increase in NPV for CRE with design options that experience price learning because their future prices are expected to decrease over time. A delayed compliance date will result in a minor increase in energy savings primarily due to an overall increasing shipments trend in future years. Regarding MIA results, extending the compliance lead-in would allow manufacturers more flexibility to spread out investments over a longer period. Considered in isolation, extending the compliance lead-in could lessen reductions in annual free cash flow over the conversion period in the standards case because the same investments could be spread out over 4 or 5 years instead of 3 years. Because INPV is the sum of discounted annual cash flows over the analysis period, standards case INPV would be similarly impacted by a longer compliance period. Holding other factors constant, the projected change in INPV at more stringent levels would look less negative (or more positive) with a 4 or 5 year compliance period compared to a 3-year compliance period. B. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period In this NODA, DOE analyzed the economic impacts on CRE consumers by looking at the effects that potential new and amended standards at each EL would have on the LCC and PBP. DOE also examined the impacts of potential standards on selected consumer subgroups. These analyses are discussed in the following sections. In general, higher-efficiency equipment affect consumers in two ways: (1) purchase price increases and (2) annual operating costs decrease. Inputs used for calculating the LCC and PBP include total installed costs (i.e., equipment price plus installation costs), and operating costs (i.e., annual energy use, energy prices, energy price trends, repair costs, and maintenance costs). The LCC calculation also uses equipment lifetime and a discount rate. Chapter 8 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD provides detailed information on the LCC and PBP analyses. Table III.1 through table III.66 show the LCC and PBP results based on the updated analysis for the ELs considered for each equipment class in this NODA. In the first of each pair of tables, the simple payback is measured relative to the baseline equipment. In the second table, impacts are measured relative to the efficiency distribution in the nonew-standards case in the compliance year (see section II.C.4 of this document). Because some consumers purchase equipment with higher efficiency in the no-new-standards case, the average savings are less than the difference between the average LCC of the baseline equipment and the average LCC at each EL. The savings refer only to consumers who are affected by a standard at a given EL. Those who already purchase equipment 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. 1. Remote-Condensing Units BILLING CODE 6501–01–P 32 For more details on the price learning methodology, see chapter 8 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68803 Table 111.1 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for SOC.RC.M Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 13,136.48 972.68 10,088.94 23,225.42 -- 13.0 1 13,183.92 971.66 10,079.51 23,263.43 46.4 13.0 2 13,378.48 905.46 9,062.59 22,441.08 3.6 13.0 3 13,456.06 904.97 9,058.05 22,514.10 4.7 13.0 4 14,383.60 903.80 9,047.31 23,430.91 18.1 13.0 Table 111.2 Average LCC Savings for SOC.RC.M Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 1 2 3 4 (37.96) 814.70 741.68 (183.08) 12% 16% 16% 37% Table 111.3 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for SVO.RC.M Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 6,753.52 1,277.44 12,473.84 19,227.36 -- 13.1 1 6,943.70 1,197.05 12,190.98 19,134.68 2.4 13.1 2 7,164.79 1,158.82 11,576.13 18,740.92 3.5 13.1 Table 111.4 Average LCC Savings for SVO.RC.M Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 1 2 95.63 471.11 26% 15% EP28AU24.417</GPH> EP28AU24.416</GPH> VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.415</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS EP28AU24.418</GPH> Efficiency Level 68804 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.5 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCT.RC.L Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 8,873.09 1,449.41 14,490.26 23,363.36 -- 14.0 1 9,094.49 1,425.49 14,100.03 23,194.52 9.3 14.0 2 9,368.27 1,419.62 14,042.79 23,411.07 16.6 14.0 3 12,642.21 1,383.08 13,686.67 26,328.88 56.8 14.0 Table 111.6 Average LCC Savings for VCT.RC.L Efficiency Level % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ 173.32 (183.10) (3,081.12) I 2 3 4% 70% 86% Table 111.7 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCT.RC.M Average Costs Efficiency Level 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 8,669.99 491.77 5,259.61 13,929.60 -- 14.0 1 2 8,837.37 485.70 5,200.50 14,037.88 27.6 14.0 9,058.71 459.41 4,788.21 13,846.92 12.0 14.0 9,332.42 458.04 4,774.88 14,107.29 19.6 14.0 12,605.47 454.80 4,743.40 17,348.87 106.5 14.0 3 4 Table 111.8 Average LCC Savings for VCT.RC.M 2023$ (108.54) 169.39 (109.12) (3,334.00) % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 9% 11% 32% 56% VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.419</GPH> EP28AU24.420</GPH> EP28AU24.421</GPH> 1 2 3 4 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Average LCC Savings EP28AU24.422</GPH> Efficiency Level Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68805 Table 111.9 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VOP .RC.L Average Costs 2023$ Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC years Average Lifetime years Baseline 9,533.47 4,529.90 42,618.48 52,151.95 -- 13.0 1 9,723.64 4,317.78 41,119.32 50,842.96 0.9 13.0 2 9,944.73 4,269.76 40,358.76 50,303.49 1.6 13.0 Efficiency Level Simple PBP Table 111.10 Average LCC Savings for VOP.RC.L Efficiency Level % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ 1,296.79 1,525.93 1 2 0% 3% Table 111.11 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VOP.RC.M Average Costs 2023$ Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC years Average Lifetime years Baseline 8,693.14 1,645.12 16,031.53 24,724.67 -- 13.0 I 2 8,883.34 1,537.89 15,498.95 24,382.29 1.8 13.0 9,104.46 1,489.97 14,738.80 23,843.26 2.7 13.0 Efficiency Level Simple PBP Table 111.12 Average LCC Savings for VOP.RC.M Efficiency Level % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ 335.51 795.52 4% 7% khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS VerDate Sep<11>2014 2023$ Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC years Average Lifetime years Baseline 2,611.44 275.14 2,632.47 5,176.13 -- 13.4 1 2,617.77 269.67 2,582.50 5,132.34 1.2 13.4 2 2,632.90 262.86 2,522.21 5,086.78 1.8 13.4 3 2,776.39 234.00 2,279.53 4,983.86 4.0 13.4 Efficiency Level 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Simple Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 PBP E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.425</GPH> Average Costs EP28AU24.424</GPH> Table 111.13 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for CB.SC.L EP28AU24.423</GPH> 2. Self-Contained Condensing Units (Non-Large) EP28AU24.426</GPH> EP28AU24.427</GPH> 1 2 68806 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.14 Average LCC Savings for CB.SC.L Efficiency Level % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ I 2 3 44.25 75.26 159.16 0% 0% 9% Table 111.15 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for CB.SC.M Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 1,941.35 106.86 1,040.26 2,931.53 -- 13.3 1 2 1,947.68 103.43 1,009.80 2,907.24 1.9 13.3 1,962.81 99.15 973.79 2,885.97 2.8 13.3 3 2,106.29 83.06 853.70 2,905.66 6.9 13.3 Table 111.16 Average LCC Savings for CB.SC.M Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 1 2 3 24.56 46.28 3.63 0% 1% 27% Table 111.17 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HCS.SC.L Average Costs Installed Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 1,562.04 64.87 626.51 2,146.29 -- 13.4 I 1,575.69 60.55 589.36 2,122.44 3.2 13.4 Table 111.18 Average LCC Savings for HCS.SC.L Average LCC Savings 2023$ 4% EP28AU24.429</GPH> 24.04 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.428</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS I % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost EP28AU24.430</GPH> Efficiency Level EP28AU24.432</GPH> Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years First Year's Operating Cost EP28AU24.431</GPH> 2023$ Efficiency Level Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68807 Table 111.19 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HCS.SC.M Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 1,572.71 46.16 463.79 1,993.39 -- 13.3 1 1,583.05 43.50 441.56 1,981.22 3.9 13.3 2 1,596.69 40.18 414.07 1,966.99 4.0 13.3 Table 111.20 Average LCC Savings for HCS.SC.M Efficiency Level % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ 1 2 12.34 18.85 3% 9% Table 111.21 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HCT.SC.I Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 1,371.76 130.49 1,305.56 2,644.01 -- 13.5 I 2 3 4 5 6 1,444.95 120.09 1,207.15 2,617.01 7.0 13.5 1,457.24 118.22 1,189.45 2,611.30 7.0 13.5 1,600.51 105.10 1,095.51 2,657.15 9.0 13.5 1,689.08 104.02 1,072.50 2,720.56 12.0 13.5 1,709.18 103.49 1,067.42 2,735.09 12.5 13.5 1,949.61 102.23 1,055.55 2,957.82 20.5 13.5 Table 111.22 Average LCC Savings for HCT.SC.I 26.52 29.09 (29.44) (92.38) (I 04.53) (313.86) 10% 11% 35% 41% 44% 59% EP28AU24.434</GPH> 1 2 3 4 5 6 EP28AU24.436</GPH> 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost EP28AU24.435</GPH> Average LCC Savings VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.433</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Efficiency Level 68808 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.23 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HCT.SC.L Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 1,283.18 81.18 821.28 2,071.89 -- 13.4 1 1,356.35 74.97 762.85 2,084.76 11.8 13.4 2 1,368.64 73.93 752.98 2,086.87 11.8 13.4 3 4 1,457.20 72.86 730.06 2,150.26 20.9 13.4 1,477.30 72.51 726.77 2,166.56 22.4 13.4 5 1,620.57 70.97 743.66 2,323.08 33.1 13.4 6 1,860.99 70.18 736.19 2,549.92 52.5 13.4 Table 111.24 Averae:e LCC Savine:s for HCT.SC.L Efficiency Level I 2 3 4 % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ (12.47) (13.06) (70.98) (86.50) (240.45) (434.44) 5 6 18% 21% 49% 50% 52% 61% Table 111.25 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HCT.SC.M Average Costs 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 1,240.77 37.81 406.12 1,612.25 -- 13.3 1 1,313.94 35.90 388.21 1,665.47 38.3 13.3 2 1,326.23 35.50 384.53 1,673.73 37.1 13.3 3 4 1,414.77 34.44 361.71 1,736.98 51.6 13.3 1,434.87 34.31 360.48 1,755.29 55.4 13.3 5 1,675.24 34.00 357.62 1,986.08 114.1 13.3 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM EP28AU24.438</GPH> EP28AU24.439</GPH> Installed Cost VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 28AUP1 EP28AU24.437</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Efficiency Level Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68809 Table 111.26 Average LCC Savings for HCT.SC.M % of Consumers that Average LCC Savings Efficiency Level I 2 3 4 5 2023$ Experience Net Cost (53.45) (55.80) (95.77) (112.86) (341.01) 43% 48% 83% 84% 86% Table 111.27 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HZO.SC.L (Non-Large) Efficiency Level Average Costs 2023$ Simple Average PDP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 2,710.51 1,254.57 11,345.57 13,996.53 -- 12.6 1 2 2,724.11 1,246.72 11,278.62 13,942.88 1.7 12.6 3,206.59 1,047.39 9,578.24 12,714.36 2.4 12.6 Table 111.28 Average LCC Savings for HZO.SC.L (Non-Large) Efficiency Level 1 2 % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ 0% 0% 53.87 1,232.01 Table 111.29 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HZO.SC.M Average Costs LCC Baseline 2,098.34 521.41 4,712.40 6,764.14 -- 12.5 I 2 2,111.94 515.32 4,661.49 6,726.53 2.2 12.5 2,255.04 462.10 4,217.25 6,422.20 2.6 12.5 Table 111.30 Average LCC Savings for HZO.SC.M Average LCC Savings 2023$ 1 2 0% 1% EP28AU24.441</GPH> 39.14 307.76 % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.440</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Efficiency Level EP28AU24.443</GPH> Installed Cost Lifetime Operating Cost EP28AU24.444</GPH> Simple Average PDP Lifetime years years First Year's Operating Cost EP28AU24.442</GPH> 2023$ Efficiency Level 68810 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.31 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for SOC.SC.M (Non-Large) Average Costs Efficiency Level 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 7,372.64 439.42 4,375.09 11,590.67 -- 12.5 1 7,396.63 385.87 3,907.48 11,146.53 0.5 12.5 2 7,413.60 380.83 3,866.94 11,122.61 0.7 12.5 3 7,420.61 374.56 3,812.54 11,075.06 0.7 12.5 4 7,563.67 353.84 3,657.23 11,059.75 2.2 12.5 5 7,579.48 353.21 3,651.60 ll,069.60 2.4 12.5 6 7,774.02 335.05 3,343.32 10,951.70 3.9 12.5 7 8,109.01 334.37 3,337.22 ll,273.44 7.0 12.5 Table 111.32 Average LCC Savings for SOC.SC.M (Non-Large) Average LCC Savings Efficiency Level 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 440.56 447.33 480.41 447.88 437.99 499.66 178.05 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0% 0% 0% 3% 4% 5% 23% Table 111.33 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for SVO.SC.M (Non-Large) Average Costs Efficiency Level 2023$ Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 3,808.09 1,028.58 9,468.39 13,194.32 -- 12.5 1 3,871.48 953.93 8,977.61 12,765.55 0.9 12.5 940.55 8,861.44 12,661.74 0.9 12.5 923.89 8,720.71 12,550.53 1.0 12.5 841.83 8,017.73 12,455.61 3.9 12.5 830.12 7,829.91 12,380.28 4.3 12.5 2 3 4 3,884.11 3,914.28 4,535.76 4,650.73 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.445</GPH> EP28AU24.446</GPH> EP28AU24.447</GPH> 5 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68811 Table 111.34 Average LCC Savings for SVO.SC.M (Non-Large) Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost I 2 3 4 5 428.87 492.37 574.54 599.45 662.18 0% 0% 0% 10% 9% Table 111.35 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCS.SC.H Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 3,754.59 83.08 851.62 4,511.51 -- 13.5 1 3,760.94 80.66 830.48 4,496.55 2.6 13.5 2 3,776.07 77.65 806.12 4,486.94 4.0 13.5 3 3,919.54 66.46 731.18 4,551.85 9.9 13.5 Table 111.36 Average LCC Savings for VCS.SC.H Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost I 2 3 0.00 9.75 (61.77) 0% 6% 60% Table 111.37 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCS.SC.I Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 4,319.62 684.98 6,517.91 10,719.43 -- 13.4 1 4,325.95 679.51 6,468.24 10,675.91 1.2 13.4 2 4,341.08 672.70 6,408.29 10,630.68 1.8 13.4 3 4,628.05 587.55 5,668.30 10,169.81 3.2 13.4 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Table 111.38 Average LCC Savings for VCS.SC.I VerDate Sep<11>2014 Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost I 2 3 45.01 70.64 478.44 0% 0% 4% 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.451</GPH> First Year's Operating Cost EP28AU24.450</GPH> Installed Cost EP28AU24.452</GPH> Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years EP28AU24.449</GPH> Efficiency Level EP28AU24.448</GPH> Average Costs 2023$ 68812 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.39 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCS.SC.L (Non-Large) Average Costs Efficiency Level 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 3,878.36 479.45 4,553.43 8,325.28 -- 13.3 1 3,884.69 473.98 4,503.82 8,281.84 1.2 13.3 2 3,899.82 467.17 4,443.99 8,236.72 1.8 13.3 3 4,043.29 404.60 3,887.25 7,819.51 2.2 13.3 Table 111.40 Average LCC Savings for VCS.SC.L (Non-Large) Efficiency Level % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings 2023$ I 2 3 0% 0% 0% 43.22 87.86 465.30 Table 111.41 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCS.SC.M Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 3,762.88 128.78 1,283.16 4,946.67 -- 13.5 1 3,778.00 123.75 1,239.71 4,917.96 3.0 13.5 2 3,921.46 112.56 1,164.70 4,982.61 9.8 13.5 . . . T a bl e III 42 Avera J'e LCCS avmgs i or VCSSCM Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ 28.98 (46.13) 3% 53% EP28AU24.455</GPH> EP28AU24.454</GPH> VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.453</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS EP28AU24.456</GPH> 1 2 % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68813 Table 111.43 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCT.SC.H Average Costs 2023$ Efficiency Level Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 4,154.00 123.17 1,307.44 5,355.09 -- 13.4 I 4,160.32 120.76 1,286.43 5,340.25 2.6 13.4 2 4,175.43 117.76 1,262.20 5,330.73 4.0 13.4 3 4,318.69 103.36 1,156.36 5,364.50 8.3 13.4 4 4,385.66 101.92 1,142.82 5,416.21 10.9 13.4 5 4,500.77 99.05 1,087.00 5,472.56 14.4 13.4 6 4,610.28 98.59 1,082.63 5,574.89 18.6 13.4 7 5,919.80 97.50 1,072.33 6,840.60 68.8 13.4 Table 111.44 Average LCC Savings for VCT.SC.H Efficiency Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 14.60 19.21 (20.61) (72.33) (117.70) (205.24) (1,471.06) 1% 7% 37% 42% 55% 69% 73% Table 111.45 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCT.SC.I Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 6,920.79 814.90 7,869.55 14,620.80 -- 13.4 1 7,035.90 812.66 7,813.69 14,677.23 51.4 13.4 2 7,145.39 807.49 7,765.22 14,735.57 30.3 13.4 3 8,454.73 775.31 7,463.64 15,711.25 38.7 13.4 Table 111.46 Average LCC Savings for VCT.SC.I khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost (57.03) (68.81) (991.06) 2% 11% 48% 1 2 3 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.459</GPH> First Year's Operating Cost EP28AU24.458</GPH> Installed Cost EP28AU24.460</GPH> Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years EP28AU24.457</GPH> Efficiency Level Average Costs 2023$ 68814 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.47 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCT.SC.L (Non-Large) Average Costs 2023$ LCC Simple PBP years Average Lifetime years 6,528.63 12,473.35 -- 13.4 671.89 6,468.70 12,428.11 2.2 13.4 6,418.11 592.68 5,785.08 12,023.03 3.5 13.4 3 6,533.25 589.83 5,729.60 12,079.45 4.7 13.4 4 6,642.77 587.05 5,703.46 12,159.76 5.7 13.4 5 7,952.52 569.77 5,540.80 13,270.08 16.9 13.4 Efficiency Level Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost Baseline 6,116.42 678.68 1 6,131.53 2 Table 111.48 Average LCC Savings for VCT.SC.L (Non-Large) Average LCC Savings Efficiency Level 2023$ I 2 3 % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 45.12 427.63 370.84 290.56 (819.86) 4 5 0% 8% 12% 22% 83% Table 111.49 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCT.SC.M (Non-Large) Average Costs 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 4,166.13 205.26 2,065.13 6,131.40 -- 13.3 1 2 3 4,181.23 200.27 2,022.44 6,103.45 3.0 13.3 4,324.49 181.27 1,876.08 6,096.92 6.6 13.3 4,391.45 178.86 1,853.55 6,139.74 8.5 13.3 4 4,506.57 176.02 1,798.13 6,196.67 11.6 13.3 5 4,616.07 175.24 1,790.87 6,296.28 15.0 13.3 6 5,925.51 173.41 1,773.72 7,557.16 55.2 13.3 EP28AU24.462</GPH> EP28AU24.463</GPH> Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.461</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Efficiency Level Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68815 Table 111.50 Averae:e LCC Savine:s for VCT.SC.M (Non-Lare:e) % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost Average LCC Savings Efficiency Level 2023$ 27.96 28.63 (14.45) (70.92) (170.30) (1,426.42) 1 2 3 4 5 6 3% 27% 39% 45% 52% 61% Table 111.51 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VOP.SC.M (Non-Large) Average Costs Efficiency Level 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 6,064.25 1,274.48 11,835.07 17,768.25 -- 12.6 1 6,127.64 1,180.61 11,168.70 17,163.89 0.7 12.6 2 6,146.60 1,160.61 10,994.06 17,007.81 0.7 12.6 3 6,191.84 1,135.70 10,782.64 16,840.64 0.9 12.6 4 6,477.98 989.72 9,529.29 15,867.22 1.5 12.6 5 6,619.47 975.16 9,290.79 15,767.15 1.9 12.6 Table 111.52 Average LCC Savings for VOP.SC.M (Non-Large) Average LCC Savings Efficiency Level 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 602.98 758.60 913.23 1,854.34 1,932.42 I 2 3 4 5 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3. Self-Contained Condensing Units (Large) VerDate Sep<11>2014 Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 4,445.44 4,418.96 39,798.25 44,147.29 -- 12.5 I 4,499.86 4,387.51 39,531.08 43,933.35 1.7 12.5 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.466</GPH> 2023$ EP28AU24.465</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Efficiency Level EP28AU24.464</GPH> Average Costs EP28AU24.467</GPH> Table 111.53 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for HZO.SC.L (Large) 68816 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.54 Average LCC Savings for HZO.SC.L (Large) Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost I 214.07 0% Table 111.55 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for SOC.SC.M (Large) Efficiency Level Average Costs 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 13,730.99 1,190.20 11,590.72 25,023.04 -- 12.6 1 13,816.61 1,035.61 10,244.87 23,760.94 0.6 12.6 2 13,848.31 1,022.45 10,134.97 23,682.05 0.7 12.6 3 13,865.22 1,006.07 9,991.91 23,555.53 0.7 12.6 4 13,972.60 999.42 9,957.20 23,625.86 1.3 12.6 5 14,020.03 997.30 9,938.01 23,653.08 1.5 12.6 6 14,214.59 953.81 9,261.49 23,166.88 2.1 12.6 7 15,219.69 951.50 9,240.71 24,129.30 6.2 12.6 Table 111.56 Average LCC Savings for SOC.SC.M (Large) Efficiency Level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 1,254.83 1,287.15 1,382.73 1,185.29 1,158.17 1,511.88 551.11 0% 0% 0% 5% 5% 3% 19% Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 5,580.76 2,081.36 19,173.54 24,628.22 -- 12.5 1 5,707.55 1,922.78 18,054.79 23,633.39 0.8 12.5 1,895.97 17,821.62 23,424.93 0.8 12.5 1,862.58 17,539.30 23,201.57 1.0 12.5 1,825.87 17,233.66 22,996.32 1.2 12.5 1,800.97 16,853.81 22,728.85 1.5 12.5 3 4 5 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 5,732.83 5,793.16 5,895.88 6,010.85 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.470</GPH> First Year's Operating Cost EP28AU24.469</GPH> Installed Cost 2 VerDate Sep<11>2014 Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years EP28AU24.468</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Efficiency Level Average Costs 2023$ EP28AU24.471</GPH> Table 111.57 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for SVO.SC.M (Large) Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68817 Table 111.58 Average LCC Savings for SVO.SC.M (Large) Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost I 2 3 4 5 992.95 1,151.00 1,354.69 1,531.38 1,776.97 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% Ta ble III.59 LCC and PBP ResuIts b,y Effi1c1ency • Levelfior VCSSCL(L . . ar:J,e) Efficiency Level Average Costs 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 6,455.59 1,445.05 13,681.47 19,970.75 0.0 13.4 1 2 3 6,468.26 1,429.85 13,542.14 19,843.76 0.8 13.4 6,498.52 1,416.21 13,422.19 19,753.29 1.5 13.4 6,642.00 1,343.01 12,765.26 19,236.15 1.8 13.4 . . . Ta bl e III 60 Avera;?:e LCCS avme:s i or VCS SC L (L are:e Efficiency Level Average LCC Savings 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 1 2 3 129.20 163.19 553.84 0% 0% 0% . . . First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 7,096.31 1,018.36 9,707.28 16,613.23 -- 13.3 1 7,126.52 997.48 9,519.95 16,455.29 1.5 13.3 2 7,269.76 950.85 9,114.04 16,188.78 2.6 13.3 3 7,384.86 946.51 9,037.93 16,224.68 4.0 13.3 4 7,549.10 941.65 8,992.37 16,338.95 5.9 13.3 5 9,513.04 911.37 8,708.89 17,966.66 22.6 13.3 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.472</GPH> EP28AU24.473</GPH> Average Lifetime years EP28AU24.474</GPH> Installed Cost Simple PBP years Efficiency Level khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Average Costs 2023$ EP28AU24.475</GPH> Ta ble III 61 LCC an d PBP Resu Its b1y Effi1c1ency • L eveIior VCT SC L (L ar?e) 68818 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.62 Average LCC Savings for VCT.SC.L (Large) Average LCC Savings Efficiency Level 2023$ % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 156.55 274.84 238.83 123.87 (1,506.56) I 2 3 4 5 0% 3% 9% 34% 81% Table 111.63 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VCT.SC.M (Large) Average Costs 2023$ LCC Simple PBP years Average Lifetime years 6,720.94 13,894.31 -- 13.4 660.74 6,679.80 13,882.55 5.8 13.4 7,549.30 643.91 6,551.92 13,894.00 7.9 13.4 3 7,716.71 636.51 6,482.16 13,987.04 11.6 13.4 4 7,831.82 610.38 6,113.29 13,730.12 8.2 13.4 5 8,105.58 608.00 6,090.79 13,973.87 12.6 13.4 6 11,379.14 602.36 6,037.70 17,104.45 63.0 13.4 Efficiency Level Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost Baseline 7,375.84 665.95 1 7,406.05 2 Table 111.64 Average LCC Savings for VCT.SC.M (Large) Efficiency Level 2023$ 2 3 4 5 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.476</GPH> EP28AU24.477</GPH> EP28AU24.478</GPH> 6 % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 0% <1% 96% 25% 66% 98% 10.73 (17.35) (93.04) 164.79 (78.93) (3,209.30) 1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Average LCC Savings Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68819 Table 111.65 LCC and PBP Results by Efficiency Level for VOP.SC.M (Large) Average Costs Efficiency Level 2023$ Simple Average PBP Lifetime years years Installed Cost First Year's Operating Cost Lifetime Operating Cost LCC Baseline 6,360.07 2,402.14 22,212.09 28,436.22 -- 12.6 1 2 3 4 5 6,455.13 2,214.28 20,765.30 27,082.45 0.5 12.6 6,480.38 2,187.30 20,529.72 26,871.57 0.6 12.6 6,540.71 2,153.69 20,243.99 26,644.89 0.7 12.6 6,633.90 2,080.29 19,606.35 26,098.43 0.9 12.6 6,775.35 2,051.08 19,156.90 25,787.40 1.2 12.6 Table 111.66 Average LCC Savings for VOP.SC.M (Large) Average LCC Savings Efficiency Level 2023$ 1,359.47 1,557.08 1,765.96 2,233.06 2,489.70 I 2 3 4 5 BILLING CODE 6450–01–C 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% mostly higher than those in the full consumer sample. For this NODA, DOE also applied small business-specific energy prices, which are generally higher than those in the full consumer sample. Table III.67 compares the average LCC savings and PBP at each efficiency level for the consumer subgroups with similar metrics for the entire consumer sample for CRE. In most cases, the average LCC savings and PBP for small businesses at the considered efficiency levels are not substantially different from the average for all consumers. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.479</GPH> EP28AU24.480</GPH> 4. Consumer Subgroup Analysis In the consumer subgroup analysis in this NODA, DOE estimated the impact of the considered ELs on small businesses. As in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE applies small businessspecific discount rates, which are khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS % of Consumers that Experience Net Cost 68820 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table III.67 Comparison of LCC Savings and PBP for Small Businesses and All Businesses Equipment Class 2013$ EL Small Business SOC.RC.M SVO.RC.M VCT.RC.L VCT.RC.M VOP.RC.L VOP.RC.M CB.SC.L 1 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 3 l 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 1 Remote-Condensine: Units -37.36 -37.96 37.5 46.4 796.91 814.70 2.9 3.6 724.19 741.68 3.8 4.7 -199.67 -183.08 14.6 18.l 217.33 95.63 1.9 2.4 555.42 471.11 2.8 3.5 156.59 173.32 7.5 9.3 -184.12 -183.10 13.5 16.6 -3068.27 -3,081.12 46.2 56.8 -106.12 -108.54 22.4 27.6 157.07 169.39 12.0 9.8 -119.57 -109.12 16.0 19.6 -3341.57 -3,334.00 106.5 86.5 1511.61 1296.79 0.7 0.9 1674.17 1,525.93 1.3 1.6 479.03 335.51 1.4 1.8 888.14 795.52 2.1 2.7 Self-Contained Condensing Units (Non-Large) 46.60 44.25 1.2 0.9 1.4 Small Business Ref. Case 12% 16% 16% 31% 3% 12% 4% 69% 86% 9% 11% 30% 56% 0% 3% 0% 3% 12% 16% 16% 37% 26% 15% 4% 70% 86% 9% 11% 32% 56% 0% 3% 4% 7% 0% 0% 3 75.26 159.16 3.3 1.8 4.0 0% 3% 0% 9% 1 26.36 24.56 1.5 1.9 0% 0% 2 50.58 46.28 2.3 2.8 0% 1% 3.63 5.6 6.9 19% 27% 3.2 0% 4% 3 HCS.SC.L I 26.25 24.04 2.6 HCS.SC.M I 14.00 12.34 3.2 3.9 1% 3% 2 21.66 18.85 3.3 4.0 4% 9% 1 30.98 26.52 5.7 7.0 2% 10% 2 33.87 -17.03 29.09 -29.44 5.7 7.0 2% 11% 7.3 9.0 32% 35% 3 4 -81.89 -92.38 9.8 12.0 44% 41% -104.53 -313.86 10.2 12.5 47% 44% 6 -94.15 -304.97 16.7 20.5 60% 59% 1 -9.90 -12.47 9.6 11.8 20% 18% 2 -10.35 -13.06 3 4 5 6 11.8 20.9 21% -70.98 9.6 17.0 22% -71.10 -86.51 -235.48 -430.51 -86.50 -240.45 -434.44 18.2 26.8 42.6 22.4 33.1 52.5 50% 51% 52% 61% 49% 50% 52% 61% I -52.75 -53.45 31.2 38.3 43% 43% 2 -55.03 -55.80 30.2 37.1 48% 48% Jkt 262001 PO 00000 5 HCT.SC.L khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Ref. Case 17.49 IICT.SC.I HCT.SC.M VerDate Sep<11>2014 Small Business % 80.14 178.26 2 CB.SC.M Ref. Case Net Cost 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.481</GPH> Simple Payback Period years Average LCC Savings Equipment Class (Non- 2023$ years % Small Business Ref. Case Small Business Ref. Case Small Business Ref. Case -97.02 -95.77 42.0 51.6 83% 83% 4 -114.10 -112.86 45.l 55.4 84% 84% 5 -342.85 -341.01 92.9 114.l 86% 86% l 59.30 53.87 1.4 1.7 0% 0% 1373.26 1232.01 1.9 2.4 0% 0% 2 HZO.SC.M 1 43.12 39.14 1.8 2.2 0% 0% 2 348.24 307.76 2.1 2.6 0% 1% l 476.46 440.56 0.4 0.5 0% 0% 2 485.68 447.33 0.6 0.7 0% 0% SOC.SC.M 3 521.83 480.41 0.6 0.7 0% 0% (Non- 4 502.44 447.88 1.8 2.2 2% 3% Large) 5 492.92 437.99 1.9 2.4 2% 4% 6 537.95 499.66 3.1 3.9 4% 5% 7 215.94 178.05 5.7 7.0 18% 23% l 506.31 428.87 0.7 0.9 0% 0% 2 571.64 492.37 0.7 0.9 0% 0% 0% 0% (Non- 3 661.16 574.54 0.8 1.0 Large) 4 731.25 599.45 3.2 3.9 3% 10% 5 786.21 662.18 3.4 4.3 3% 9% VCS.SC.H VCS.SC.I l 2 3 1 0.00 0.00 2.1 2.6 0% 0% 11.45 9.75 3.2 4.0 4% 6% -52.49 -61.77 8.1 9.9 64% 60% 47.61 45.01 0.9 1.2 0% 0% 2 75.47 70.64 1.4 1.8 0% 0% 3 524.32 478.44 2.6 3.2 0% 4% VCS.SC.L l 46.03 43.22 0.9 1.2 0% 0% (Non- 2 94.45 87.86 1.4 1.8 0% 0% 0% Large) 3 501.22 465.30 1.8 2.2 0% VCS.SC.M l 2 31.37 28.98 2.5 3.0 0% 3% -36.25 -46.13 8.0 9.8 52% 53% VCT.SC.11 I 15.94 14.60 2.1 2.6 0% 1% 2 21.91 19.21 3.2 4.0 3% 7% 3 -8.16 -20.61 6.8 8.3 30% 37% 4 -72.33 -117.70 -205.24 -1471.06 -57.03 8.9 11.7 15.1 56.0 41.8 10.9 14.4 18.6 68.8 51.4 44% 59% 42% 55% l -59.47 -110.28 -198.89 -1468.12 -61.66 72% 73% 2% 69"/o 73% 2% 2 -67.57 -68.81 24.7 30.3 11% 11% 3 -979.89 -991.06 31.5 38.7 48% 48% 1 48.76 45.12 1.8 2.2 0% 0% 5 6 7 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Net Cost Large) SVO.SC.M VCT.SC.I VerDate Sep<11>2014 Simple Payback Period EL 3 HZO.SC.L Average LCC Savings 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 68821 EP28AU24.482</GPH> Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68822 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Equipment Class VCT.SC.L (NonLarge) Net Cost 2023$ years % Small Business Ref. Case Small Business Ref. Case Small Business Ref. Case 2 471.13 427.63 2.9 3.5 1% 8% 3 410.83 331.37 370.84 290.56 3.8 4.7 4.7 3% 12% 5.7 8% 22% -775.98 -819.86 88% 83% 27.96 13.7 2.5 16.9 30.89 43.48 28.63 5.4 3.0 6.6 0% 15% 3% 27% 1.00 -59.12 -14.45 -70.92 6.9 9.5 8.5 11.6 32% 46% 39% 45% -158.48 -1417.85 -170.30 -1426.42 12.2 44.9 15.0 55.2 56% 61% 52% 61% 689.96 602.98 0.6 0.7 0% 0% 3 858.78 1029.15 758.60 913.23 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.9 0% 0% 0% 0% 4 2064.56 1854.34 1.2 1.5 0% 0% 5 2133.24 1932.42 1.5 1.9 0% 0% 1.7 0% 0% 4 2 3 4 5 6 VOP.SC.M (NonLarge) Simple Payback Period EL 5 1 VCT.SC.M (NonLarge) Average LCC Savings 1 2 HZO.SC.L (Large) SOC.SC.M (Large) SVO.SC.M (Large) VCS.SC.L (Large) VCT.SC.L (Large) I 235.22 214.07 1.4 1 1,356.76 1,254.83 0.5 0.6 0% 0% 2 1,394.68 1,287.15 0.6 0.7 0% 0% 3 1,498.53 1,297.49 1,382.73 1,185.01 0.6 0.7 0% 0% 4 1.3 5% 5% 5 1,271.51 1,157.89 1 1.2 1.5 5% 5% 6 1,768.87 1,715.83 1.7 2.1 1% 0% 7 806.78 755.06 5.1 6.2 12% 14% 1 1,142.27 992.95 0.7 0.8 0% 0% 2 1,310.89 1,535.24 1,151.00 1,354.68 0.7 0.8 0% 0% 0.8 0% 1,531.32 I 1 1.2 0% 1,734.40 0% 0% 5 I 2 2,063.24 135.93 173.27 1,886.47 129.2 163.19 1.2 0.7 1.2 3 591.52 553.84 1.5 1.5 0.8 1.5 1.8 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1 169.87 156.55 1.2 1.5 0% 0% 2 301.64 283.57 274.5 263.8 2.1 ,, ,, 0% 4% .) .) . 2.6 4 1% 6% 170.27 -1,452.97 148.78 -1,482.17 4.8 18.4 5.9 22.6 11% 28% 13.9 10.73 4.7 5.8 82% 0% 81% 0% -2.22 -17.35 7.9 11.6 0% 97% 0% 96% 8.2 24% 23% 3 4 3 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 4 5 1 VCT.SC.M (Large) VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 2 3 -90.63 -93.04 6.4 9.5 4 228.53 246.85 6.7 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.483</GPH> Self-Contained Condensing Units (Large) Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Simple Payback Period years Equipment Class VOP.SC.M (Large) 2023$ EL Ref. Case Small Business Ref. Case Small Business Ref. Case 5 -15.12 3.13 10.3 12.6 44% 52% 6 -3,153.64 -3,127.24 51.4 63 98% 98% I 1,502.70 1,359.47 0.4 0.5 0% 0% 2 1,714.79 1,557.08 0.5 0.6 0% 0% 3 1,942.66 1,765.96 0.6 0.7 0% 0% 4 2,444.87 2,232.78 0.7 0.9 0% 0% 5 2,800.22 2,623.51 1 1.2 0% 0% EPCA establishes a rebuttable presumption that an energy conservation standard is economically justified if the increased purchase cost for equipment that meets the standard is less than three times the value of the khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS % Small Business 5. Rebuttable Presumption Payback VerDate Sep<11>2014 Net Cost 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 first-year energy savings resulting from the standard. (42 U.S.C. 6316(e)(1); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) In calculating a rebuttable presumption payback period for each of the considered Els in this NODA, DOE used discrete values and, as required by EPCA, based the energy use calculation on the DOE test PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 procedure for CRE. In contrast, the PBPs presented in section III.B of this document were calculated using distributions that reflect the range of energy use in the field. Table III. presents the rebuttablepresumption payback periods for the considered ELs for CRE. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.484</GPH> Average LCC Savings 68823 68824 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.68 Rebuttable-Presumption Payback Periods Rebuttable Presumption PBP (years) Equipment Class ELI EL2 EL3 EL4 ELS EL6 EL7 EL7 Remote-Condensing Units SOC.RC.M 39.7 3.3 4.3 SVO.RC.M 2.2 3.2 VCT.RC.L 8.4 15 51.4 VCT.RC.M 24.7 10.8 17.7 VOP.RC.L 0.8 1.5 VOP.RC.M 1.6 2.4 16.7 96 Self-Contained Condensing Units (Non-Large) ELl EL2 EL3 EL4 ELS EL6 CB.SC.L 1.1 1.6 3.6 CB.SC.M 1.6 2.4 6.3 HCS.SC.L 2.9 HCS.SC.M 3.7 3.8 HCT.SC.I 6.3 6.3 8.1 10.8 11.3 18.4 HCT.SC.L 10.2 10.2 18.2 19.5 29.2 46.8 HCT.SC.M 36.8 35.8 48.6 48.7 99.2 1.6 2.2 2 2.4 SOC.SC.M (NonLar_ge) 0.4 0.6 0.7 2.1 2.2 SVO.SC.M (NonLarge) 0.8 0.8 0.9 3.6 3.9 VCS.SC.H 2.3 3.6 9 VCS.SC.I 1 1.5 2.8 VCS.SC.L (NonLarge) 1.1 1.6 2 VCS.SC.M 2.7 8.9 VCT.SC.H 2.3 3.6 7.5 9.9 13 VCT.SC.I 34.8 24.9 34.3 VCT.SC.L (NonLarge) 2 3.2 4.2 5.2 15.2 VCT.SC.M (NonLarge) 2.7 5.9 7.6 10.4 13.5 VOP.SC.M (NonLarge) 0.6 0.7 0.8 1.3 1.7 HZO.SC.L (NonLarge) 3.5 6.5 16.6 61.6 49.6 Self-Contained Condensing Units (Large) ELI VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 EL2 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 EL3 Sfmt 4725 EL4 ELS E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM EL6 28AUP1 EL7 EP28AU24.486</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS HZO.SC.M Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules HZO.SC.L (Large) 1.6 SOC.SC.M (Large) 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.2 1.4 SVO.SC.M (Large) 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.4 VCS.SC.L (Large) 0.8 1.3 1.6 VCT.SC.L (Large) 1.3 2.3 3.6 5.3 20.4 VCT.SC.M (Large) 5.4 7.1 10.4 7.4 11.3 VOP.SC.M (Large) 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.8 I.I khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS B. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers Table III.69 shows the efficiency level grouping analyzed in the GRIM in this NODA. The MIA does not present results by equipment class and efficiency level because redesign and investments for one equipment class may impact multiple equipment classes because different equipment classes can share the same architecture, tooling, and production lines. Therefore, the MIA presents results based on a VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 representative combination of efficiency levels for remote-condensing units, selfcontained condensing units (non-large), and self-contained condensing units (large). The accompanying NODA support document shows the analyzed design options and energy use equations for each considered efficiency level. 1. Industry Cashflow Analysis Results Table III.70 through table III.72 present the GRIM results for the updated CRE analysis discussed in this PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 5.8 56.8 NODA for the CRE remote-condensing units, the CRE self-contained condensing units (non-large), and the CRE self-contained condensing units (large). The methodology and assumptions used in the MIA did not change from the October 2023 NOPR except for the analytical changes described in prior sections of this document. Details of the MIA inputs and methodology are available in chapter 12 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD. E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.487</GPH> BILLING CODE 6450–01–C 1.9 68825 68826 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.69 Efficiency Level Groupines for Manufacturer Impact Analysis HZO.RC.L HZO.RC.M SOC.RC.M SVO.RC.M RemoteCondensing Unit VCT.RC.L VCT.RC.M VOP.RC.L VOP.RC.M CB.SC.L CB.SC.M HCS.SC.L HCS.SC.M HCT.SC.I HCT.SC.L HCT.SC.M HZO.SC.L (Non-Large) HZO.SC.M SOC.SC.M (Non-Large) SVO.SC.M (Non-Large) VCS.SC.H Self-Contained Condensing Unit (NonLarge) VCS.SC.I VCS.SC.L (NonLarge) VCS.SC.M VCT.SC.H khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Self-Contained Condensing Unit (Large) VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 VCT.SC.I VCT.SC.L (Non-Large) VCT.SC.M (Non-Large) VOP.SC.M (Non-Large) HZO.SC.L (Large) SOC.SC.M (Large) SVO.SC.M (Large) VCS.SC.L (Large) VCT.SC.L (Large) VCT.SC.M (Large) VOP.SC.M (Large) PO 00000 Frm 00040 1 EL0 EL0 EL0 EL 1 EL0 EL0 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL0 EL0 Efficiency Level Group 4 2 3 EL0 EL0 EL 0 5 EL0 EL 0 EL 0 EL0 EL0 EL0 EL 1 EL0 EL 1 EL3 EL2 EL4 EL2 EL0 EL0 EL0 EL0 EL 1 EL2 EL3 EL4 EL 1 EL 1 EL2 EL2 EL 1 EL3 EL 1 EL 3 EL2 EL 3 EL2 EL3 EL3 EL 1 EL 3 EL 1 EL 3 EL 1 EL3 EL 1 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL6 EL2 EL0 EL2 EL 0 EL6 EL6 ELS EL0 EL0 ELS EL 1 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL 1 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL 1 EL7 ELS EL7 EL7 EL 1 EL4 EL4 ELS ELS EL2 EL2 EL2 EL2 EL3 EL 1 EL3 EL3 EL3 EL3 EL 1 EL2 EL 3 EL 3 EL3 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL2 EL 1 EL2 EL 1 EL2 EL2 EL7 EL0 EL0 EL0 EL0 EL3 EL 1 EL3 EL2 EL4 ELS EL 1 EL4 EL2 EL2 EL6 EL 1 EL4 EL4 ELS ELS EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 EL 1 ELS EL7 EL7 EL 1 EL4 EL4 ELS ELS EL I EL3 EL 3 EL 3 EL3 EL 1 ELS EL2 EL4 ELS EL 1 EL3 EL I EL4 EL6 EL I EL4 EL4 ELS ELS Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.488</GPH> Equipment Group 68827 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table III. 70 Manufacturer Impact Analysis Results - Remote-Condensine: Units Unit No-NewStandards Case 1 2 3 4 5 754.8 to 756.5 754.8 to 756.5 754.8 to 756.5 739.3 to 746.5 716.0 to 823.9 (1.9) to (0.3) (1.9) to (0.3) (1.9) to (0.3) (17.5) to (10.2) (40.7) to 67.2 (0.3) to (0.0) (0.3) to (0.0) (0.3) to (0.0) (2.3) to (1.3) (5.4) to 8.9 66.3 65.4 65.4 65.4 57.1 52.5 % - (1.4) (1.4) (1.4) (13.9) (20.9) 2023$ - 2.9 2.9 2.9 26.2 39.7 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 1.2 - 2.9 2.9 2.9 27.1 40.9 2023$ INPV 756.7 Million 2023$ Million - Change in INPV % Free Cashtlow (2027) Change in Free Cashflow (2027) Product Conversion Costs Capital Conversion Costs Total Conversion Costs Efficiency Level Group - 2023$ Million Million 2023$ Million 2023$ Million *Parentheses denote negative(-) values. Table III. 71 Manufacturer Impact Analysis Results -Self-Contained Condensing Units (Non-Lar2e) Unit No-NewStandards Case 2023$ INPV 2,265.9 Million 2023$ Efficiency Level Group 2 1 4 3 5 2,240.9 to 2,156.6 to 2,180.9 to 2,177.1 to 2,059.8 to 2,243.2 2,195.7 2,208.7 2,210.7 2,253.6 Million - (24.9) to (22.7) (109.3) to (70.2) (84.9) to (57.2) (88.8) to (55.2) (206.1) to (12.2) % - (1.1) to (1.0) (4.8) to (3.1) (3.7) to (2.5) (3.9) to (2.4) (9.l)to (0.5) 198.2 185.1 145.8 157.5 156.5 123.4 - (6.6) (26.4) (20.5) (21.1) (37.8) - 39.1 125.5 95.7 97.7 183.8 - 0.0 22.9 19.1 19.9 29.4 39.1 148.4 114.8 117.6 213.2 Change in INPV Free Cashflow (2027) Change in Free Cashtlow (2027) Product Conversion Costs Capital Conversion Costs Total Conversion Costs 2023$ Million % 2023$ Million 2023$ Million 2023$ EP28AU24.490</GPH> VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.489</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Million *Parentheses denote negative(-) values. 68828 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table III. 72 Manufacturer Impact Analysis Results -Self-Contained Condensing Units (Lare:e) Unit No-NewStandards Case 1 2 3 4 5 239.4 to 239.8 221.4 to 235.8 227.6 to 229.2 222.6 to 229.8 202.8 to 259.3 (0.5) to (0.1) (18.5) to (4.1) (12.3) to (10.7) (17.2) to (10.1) (37.1) to 19.5 (0.2) to (0.0) (7.7) to (1.7) (5.1) to (4.4) (7.2) to (4.2) (15.4) to 8.1 21.0 20.8 13.6 14.6 12.9 11.8 % - (1.0) (35.2) (30.7) (38.8) (43.6) 2023$ - 0.6 14.7 13.3 16.2 19.2 - 0.0 5.5 4.4 6.1 6.1 - 0.6 20.2 17.7 22.3 25.3 2023$ INPV Efficiency Level Group 239.9 Million 2023$ Million - Change in INPV % Free Cashflow (2027) Change in Free Cashflow (2027) Product Conversion Costs Capital Conversion Costs Total Conversion Costs - 2023$ Million Million 2023$ Million 2023$ Million *Parentheses denote negative (-) values. BILLING CODE 6450–01–C 2. Direct Impacts on Employment For the direct employment analysis, DOE revised the methodology used to estimate the lower bound impacts to domestic production employment in the October 2023 NOPR, which was incorporated into the analysis conducted for this NODA. DOE maintained the same estimate of U.S. labor percentage of 77 percent from the October 2023 NOPR for this NODA. See at Id. 88 FR 70196, 70282–70283. Using the GRIM, DOE estimated that in the absence of new and amended energy conservation standards, there would be 1,966 domestic production and non-production workers for CRE remote-condensing units in 2028, 9,613 domestic production and nonproduction workers for CRE selfcontained condensing units (non-large) in 2028, and 928 production and nonproduction workers for CRE selfcontained condensing units (large) in 2028. Table III.73 through table III.75 show the range of impacts of energy conservation standards on U.S. manufacturing employment in the CRE industry for remote-condensing units, self-contained condensing units (nonlarge), and self-contained condensing units (large). Table III. 73 Direct Employment Impacts for Domestic CRE Manufacturers in 2028 -Remote-Condensine: Units No-NewStandards Case Efficiencv Level Grouo 1 2 3 4 1,079 to 2,113 EP28AU24.492</GPH> (887) to 147 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.491</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Direct Employment in 2028 (Production 1,429 to 1,966 1,966 1,966 1,966 Workers+ Non1,967 Production Workers) Potential Changes in (537) to 1 Direct Employment in 2028* *Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding. Parentheses indicate negative numbers. 5 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68829 Table 111.74 Direct Employment Impacts for Domestic CRE Manufacturers in 2028 Self-Contained Condensin2 Units (Non-Lar2e) No-NewStandards Case Efficiencv Level Group 1 3 2 4 Direct Employment in 2028 (Production 9,606 to 9,523 to 5,585 to 5,582 to 9,613 Workers+ Non9,613 9,513 9,509 9,613 Production Workers) Potential Changes in (4,028) to (4,031) to (7) to 0 (90) to 0 Direct Employment in (100) (104) 2028* *Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding. Parentheses indicate negative numbers. 5 4,615 to 9,271 (4,998) to (342) Table III. 75 Direct Employment Impacts for Domestic CRE Manufacturers in 2028 - Self-Contained Condensin2 Units (Lar2e) No-NewStandards Case Efficiency Level Group 1 2 4 3 Direct Employment in 2028 (Production 926 to 317 to 671 to 316 to 928 911 922 921 Workers+ Non928 Production Workers) Potential Changes in (611) to (257) to (612) to (2) to 0 Direct Employment (17) (6) (7) in 2028* *Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding. Parentheses indicate negative numbers. The lower bound estimate conservatively assumes that some domestic manufacturing either is eliminated or moves abroad at more stringent efficiency levels. For levels that require capital investment and higher per-unit labor content, DOE assumed that some manufacturing could move abroad as relocating production to lower-labor cost countries could become increasingly attractive. The employment impacts discussed in this section are independent of the employment impacts from the broader U.S. economy. (615) to (86) 1. National Energy Savings To estimate the energy savings attributable to potential new and amended standards for CRE, DOE compared their energy consumption under the no-new-standards case to their anticipated energy consumption at each EL in this NODA. The savings are measured over the entire lifetime of equipment purchased in the 30-year period that begins in the year of anticipated compliance with new and amended standards 2028–2057. Table III.76 presents DOE’s projections of the national energy savings for each EL for CRE. The savings were calculated using the approach described in section II.E of this document. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P EP28AU24.494</GPH> C. National Impact Analysis This section presents DOE’s estimates of the NES and the NPV of consumer benefits that would result from each of the ELs considered as potential amended standards. 313 to 842 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.493</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS The upper bound estimate corresponds to a potential change in the number of domestic production workers that would result from new and amended energy conservation standards if manufacturers continue to produce the same scope of covered equipment within the United States after the analyzed compliance date. Most of the design options analyzed in the engineering analysis require manufacturers to purchase moreefficient components from suppliers. These components do not require significant additional labor to assemble or significant production line updates. For this NODA, DOE modeled an incremental increase in labor content associated with implementing improved door designs (i.e., moving to doublepane, triple-pane, or vacuum-insulated glass door designs). 5 68830 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.76 Cumulative National Energy Savings for CRE; 30 Years of Shipments 2028-2057 Full Fuel C cle Ener Savin s 1 CB.SC.L CB.SC.M HCS.SC.L HCS.SC.M HCT.SC.I HCT.SC.L HCT.SC.M HZO.SC.L HZO.SC.M SOC.SC.M SVO.SC.M VCS.SC.H VCS.SC.I VCS.SC.L VCS.SC.M VCT.SC.H VCT.SC.I VCT.SC.L VCT.SC.M VOP.SC.M HZO.SC.L SOC.SC.M SVO.SC.M VCS.SC.L VCT.SC.L VCT.SC.M VOP.SC.M 2 0.000 3 Efficienc Level 4 5 6 7 Self-Contained Condensin 0.000 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.000 0.018 0.048 0.000 0.000 0.008 0.031 0.016 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.005 0.012 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.217 0.000 0.000 0.227 0.194 0.019 0.004 0.234 0.214 0.023 0.000 0.001 0.032 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.039 0.038 0.045 0.000 0.007 0.030 0.032 0.000 0.012 0.045 0.052 Remote Con SOC.RC.M 0.004 0.000 SVO.RC.M 0.037 0.058 VCT.RC.L 0.018 0.008 VCT.RC.M 0.001 0.034 VOP.RC.L 0.001 0.001 VOP.RC.M 0.068 0.107 * A value of0.000 indicates savings ofless than 0.0005 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 2. Net Present Value of Consumer Costs and Benefits DOE estimated the cumulative NPV of the total costs and savings for 33 U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Circular A–4: Regulatory Analysis. September 17, VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 consumers that would result from the ELs considered for CRE. In accordance with OMB’s guidelines on regulatory analysis,33 DOE calculated NPV using both a 7-percent and a 3-percent real discount rate. Table III.77 and table 2003. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/ PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 III.78 show the consumer NPV results at 3 percent and 7 percent discount rates with impacts counted over the lifetime of equipment purchased during the period 2028–2057. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/circulars/A4/a4.pdf (last accessed June 6, 2024). E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.495</GPH> BILLING CODE 6450–01–C Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules 68831 Table 111.77 Cumulative Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits for CRE; 30 Years of Shi ments 2028-2057 at 3 Percent Discount Rate 1 2 3 Efficienc Level 4 5 6 7 Self-Contained Condensin 0.2 0.6 CB.SC.L CB.SC.M HCS.SC.L HCS.SC.M HCT.SC.I HCT.SC.L HCT.SC.M HZO.SC.L HZO.SC.M SOC.SC.M SVO.SC.M VCS.SC.H VCS.SC.I VCS.SC.L VCS.SC.M VCT.SC.H VCT.SC.I VCT.SC.L VCT.SC.M VOP.SC.M 0.1 2.7 4.9 1.5 2.4 0.3) (4.7 0.0 0.0 23.3 32.6 0.4 76.0 152.0 0.4 0.1 30.5 97.5 56.3 HZO.SC.L SOC.SC.M SVO.SC.M VCS.SC.L VCT.SC.L VCT.SC.M VOP.SC.M 0.0 3.5 115 0.7 3.5 0.0 161.2 2.9 0.3) 5.5) 6.6 2.1 24.7 41.5 0.3 1.3 156.3 61.3 0.7 0.7 777.5 370.5 71.1 49.7 718.5 210.2 87.4 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.496</GPH> khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 141 169 1.6 27.6 108.1 112.1 (62.0) 0.1 186.9 215.1 Remote Con SOC.RC.M 0.17) 27.3 165 SVO.RC.M 20.4 (124) VCT.RC.L 39.9 VCT.RC.M 11.0) 145.2 VOP.RC.L 2.36 3.87 VOP.RC.M 115 401 * A value of 0.0 indicates savings of less than 0.05 ** Numbers in brackets indicate negative values 68832 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules Table 111.78 Cumulative Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits for CRE; 30 Years of Shi ments 2028-2057 at 7 Percent Discount Rate 1 2 0.0 I. I 1.9 0.6 0.6 0.6) 2.8) 0.0 0.0 10.3 14.2 0.1 0.2 29.7 268.1 3.9 38.1 73.5 11.7 38.3 (41.0) 94.4 CB.SC.L CB.SC.M HCS.SC.L HCS.SC.M HCT.SC.I HCT.SC.L HCT.SC.M HZO.SC.L HZO.SC.M SOC.SC.M SVO.SC.M VCS.SC.H VCS.SC.I VCS.SC.L VCS.SC.M VCT.SC.H VCT.SC.I VCT.SC.L VCT.SC.M VOP.SC.M 0.2 33.0 60.8 0.1 0.1 12.7 38.9 24.7 0.9 10.9 18.1 0.1 0.6 66.5 80.8 0.3 0.5 310.0 104.3 31.2 HZO.SC.L SOC.SC.M SVO.SC.M VCS.SC.L VCT.SC.L VCT.SC.M VOP.SC.M 0.0 1.6 50.4 0.3 1.5 0.0 71.2 61.6 0.7 44.3 0.0 82.4 6 7 SOC.RC.M (0.1 11.6 10.6 SVO.RC.M 4.8 63.5 14.1 (82.7 VCT.RC.L VCT.RC.M (6.9 49.4 VOP.RC.L 1.0 1.7 VOP.RC.M 45.6 164.5 * A value of 0.0 indicates savings of less than 0.05 ** Numbers in brackets indicate negative values khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS D. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy Enhanced energy efficiency, where economically justified, improves the Nation’s energy security, strengthens the economy, and reduces the environmental impacts (costs) of energy production. Reduced electricity demand due to energy conservation standards is also likely to reduce the cost of maintaining the reliability of the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 electricity system, particularly during peak-load periods. Energy conservation resulting from potential energy conservation standards for CRE is expected to yield environmental benefits in the form of reduced emissions of certain air pollutants and greenhouse gases. DOE also estimated monetary benefits likely to result from the reduced emissions that DOE estimated for each of the considered ELs for CRE. Chapter 6 of the accompanying NODA support PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 document provides DOE’s estimate of cumulative emissions reductions and associated monetized benefits expected to result at each EL. IV. Public Participation DOE requests comment on the updated analysis for CRE presented in the NODA. As noted in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE may adopt energy efficiency levels that are either higher or lower than the proposed standards in E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1 EP28AU24.497</GPH> BILLING CODE 6450–01–C khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 28, 2024 / Proposed Rules the October 2023 NOPR. Id. at 88 FR 70196, 70203. DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NODA 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. Otherwise, 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:52 Aug 27, 2024 Jkt 262001 provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment. Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/courier, or postal mail 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. If you submit via postal mail or hand delivery/ courier, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 68833 information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure). V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notification of data availability and request for comment. Signing Authority This document of the Department of Energy was signed on August 17, 2024, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal Deputy 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 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 August 21, 2024. Treena V. Garrett, Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy. [FR Doc. 2024–19072 Filed 8–27–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 27 [Docket No. FAA–2024–0875; Notice No. 27– 24–01–SC] Special Conditions: Skyryse, Robinson Helicopter Company Model R66 Helicopter; Interaction of Systems and Structures Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions. AGENCY: This action proposes special conditions for the Robinson Helicopter Company (Robinson) Model R66 helicopter. This helicopter, as modified by Skyryse, will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for normal category helicopters. This design feature is a novel control input and fly-by-wire (FBW) system. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\28AUP1.SGM 28AUP1

Agencies

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 28, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68788-68833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-19072]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[EERE-2017-BT-STD-0007]
RIN 1904-AD82


Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers

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

ACTION: Notification of data availability and request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: On October 10, 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') 
published a notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR''), in which DOE 
proposed new and amended energy conservation standards for commercial 
refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers. In this 
notification of data availability (``NODA''), DOE is providing updated 
analytical results that reflect updates to the analysis that DOE is 
considering based on feedback received in response to the October 10, 
2023, NOPR. DOE requests comments, data, and information regarding the 
updated analyses.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
NODA no later than September 27, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov under docket 
number EERE-2017-BT-STD-0007. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, 
identified by docket number EERE-2017-BT-STD-0007, by any of the 
following methods:
    (1) Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number 
EERE-2017-BT-STD-0007 in the subject line of the message.
    (2) 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.
    (3) Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards 
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 
L'Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case 
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see section IV 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-2017-BT-STD-0007. The docket web page contains instructions on how 
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See 
section IV of this document for information on how to submit comments 
through www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B, 
1000

[[Page 68789]]

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 
586-9870. Email: [email protected].
    Ms. Kristin Koernig, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4798. 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. Introduction
II. Discussion
    A. Engineering Analysis
    1. Representative Units
    2. Baseline Energy Use Estimates
    3. Baseline Design Components
    4. Higher Efficiency Level Design Options
    a. Evaporator Fan Control
    b. Microchannel Condensers
    c. Variable-Speed Compressors
    5. Compressor Energy Use Adjustment
    6. Revised Cost Analysis
    7. Equipment With Features That Affect Energy Use
    B. Energy Use Analysis
    1. Energy Prices
    2. Repair and Maintenance Costs
    3. Residual Value for Refurbished CRE
    4. Energy Efficiency Distribution in the No-New-Standards Case
    C. Shipments Analysis
    D. National Impact Analysis
    1. Sensitivity Analysis for Equipment With Unique Energy Use 
Characteristics
    E. Manufacturer Impact Analysis
    1. Manufacturer Production Costs
    2. Shipments Projections
    3. Product and Capital Conversion Costs
    4. Refrigerant Transition Investments
    5. Manufacturer Markup Scenarios
    F. Emissions Analysis, and Monetizing Emissions Impacts
III. Analytical Results
    A. Compliance Period
    1. Remote-Condensing Units
    2. Self-Contained Condensing Units (Non-Large)
    3. Self-Contained Condensing Units (Large)
    4. Consumer Subgroup Analysis
    5. Rebuttable Presumption Payback
    B. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers
    1. Industry Cashflow Analysis Results
    2. Direct Impacts on Employment
    C. National Impact Analysis
    1. National Energy Savings
    2. Net Present Value of Consumer Costs and Benefits
    D. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy
IV. Public Participation
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Introduction

    EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number 
of consumer equipment and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 
6291-6317, as codified) Title III, Part C of EPCA,\1\ added by Public 
Law 95-619, Title IV, section 441(a), established the Energy 
Conservation Program for Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth 
a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (42 
U.S.C. 6311-6317) This equipment includes commercial refrigerators, 
freezers, or refrigerator-freezers (``CRE''), the subject of this 
document. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(E))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
part C was redesignated part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE defines a ``commercial refrigerator, freezer, or refrigerator-
freezer,'' consistent with EPCA's definition at 42 U.S.C. 6311(9) and 
codified at title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (``CFR'') 431.62, as 
refrigeration equipment that is not a consumer product (as defined in 
10 CFR 430.2); is not designed and marketed exclusively for medical, 
scientific, or research purposes; operates at a chilled, frozen, 
combination chilled and frozen, or variable temperature; displays or 
stores merchandise and other perishable materials horizontally, semi-
vertically, or vertically; has transparent or solid doors, sliding or 
hinged doors, a combination of hinged, sliding, transparent, or solid 
doors, or no doors; is designed for pull-down temperature applications 
or holding temperature applications; and is connected to a self-
contained condensing unit or to a remote condensing unit.
    On March 28, 2014, DOE published a final rule in the Federal 
Register that prescribed the current energy conservation standards for 
CRE manufactured on and after March 27, 2017 (``March 2014 Final 
Rule''). 79 FR 17725. DOE initiated a rulemaking to consider amending 
energy conservation standards for CRE by publishing a request for 
information in the Federal Register on July 16, 2021. 86 FR 37708. DOE 
subsequently published a notification of the availability of a 
preliminary technical support document for CRE in the Federal Register 
on June 28, 2022 (``June 2022 Preliminary Analysis''). 87 FR 38296. In 
the June 2022 Preliminary Analysis, DOE sought comment on the 
analytical framework, models, and tools that DOE used to evaluate 
potential standards for CRE, the results of preliminary analyses 
performed, and the potential energy conservation standard levels 
derived from these analyses, which DOE presented in the accompanying 
Preliminary Technical Support Document (``TSD'') (``June 2022 
Preliminary TSD'').\2\ Id. DOE held a public meeting related to the 
June 2022 Preliminary Analysis on August 8, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The June 2022 Preliminary TSD is available in the docket for 
this rulemaking at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0007-0013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 10, 2023, DOE published in the Federal Register a NOPR 
to establish and amend energy conservation standards for CRE (``October 
2023 NOPR''). 88 FR 70196. DOE also sought comment on the analytical 
framework, models, and tools that DOE used to evaluate the proposed 
standards for CRE, the results of the NOPR analyses performed, and the 
proposed new and amended energy conservation standard levels derived 
from these analyses, which DOE presented in the accompanying NOPR TSD 
(``October 2023 NOPR TSD'').\3\ Id. DOE held a public meeting related 
to the October 2023 NOPR on November 7, 2023 (hereafter, the ``November 
2023 Public Meeting'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The October 2023 NOPR TSD is available in the docket for 
this proposed rulemaking at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0007-0051.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE is currently considering comments and feedback received in 
response to the October 2023 NOPR and November 2023 Public Meeting. DOE 
has also conducted revised analysis with regard to some of the topics 
on which it received feedback, as discussed throughout this document. 
Based on this feedback and DOE's additional analysis, DOE is 
considering updates to certain inputs to the analysis and certain 
analytical approaches as presented in the October 2023 NOPR. DOE is 
publishing this NODA to show how such updates would affect the 
analytical results in comparison to the results presented in the 
October 2023 NOPR.
    This document provides a high-level summary of the analytical 
updates that DOE is considering. DOE is also publishing a separate 
support document (``NODA support document'') and its engineering 
spreadsheet (``NODA engineering spreadsheet''), available in the docket 
for this proposed rulemaking, that provide greater details and a full 
set of analytical results that include updates as compared to the 
analysis conducted for the October 2023 NOPR. DOE is requesting 
comments, data, and information regarding the updated analysis. DOE 
also welcomes feedback and public input on the methodological and 
analytical approaches used in this updated analysis.

[[Page 68790]]

    DOE notes that, in this document, DOE is not summarizing or 
responding to any specific comments received in response to the October 
2023 NOPR and November 2023 Public Meeting. DOE is continuing to 
consider all of the stakeholder comments received in response to the 
October 2023 NOPR and November 2023 Public Meeting in further 
development of the rulemaking. Based on consideration of all of the 
public comments received, including any additional comments received in 
response to this NODA, DOE may adopt energy efficiency levels that are 
either higher or lower than the standards proposed in the October 2023 
NOPR.

II. Discussion

A. Engineering Analysis

    The purpose of the engineering analysis is to establish the 
relationship between the efficiency and cost of the equipment. For each 
equipment class, DOE estimates the baseline cost (i.e., the cost of 
minimally compliant equipment), as well as the incremental cost for 
equipment at efficiency levels above the baseline. The output of the 
engineering analysis is a set of cost-efficiency ``curves'' that are 
used in downstream analyses (i.e., the life-cycle cost (``LCC'') and 
payback period (``PBP'') analyses, the manufacturer impact analysis 
(``MIA''), and the national impact analysis (``NIA'')).
1. Representative Units
    In performing the engineering analysis for CRE, DOE selected 
representative units for each primary equipment class to serve as 
analysis points in the development of cost-efficiency curves. In the 
October 2023 NOPR, DOE presented results for a single representative 
unit at a specific capacity for each CRE equipment class. 88 FR 70196, 
70225. In this NODA, DOE made one change to its approach for selecting 
representative units for the engineering analysis from the October 2023 
NOPR.
    DOE analyzed additional representative capacities for certain 
equipment classes in consideration of recent updates to future 
refrigerant requirements and safety standards in this NODA. In the 
October 2023 NOPR, DOE stated that it expects that the use of R-290 
generally will improve efficiency as compared with the refrigerants 
currently in use (e.g., R-404A) because R-290 has a higher 
refrigeration-cycle efficiency than the current refrigerants. 88 FR 
70196, 70227. Therefore, R-290 impacts the baseline energy use, 
compared to a baseline using current refrigerants, on which each 
efficiency level is built for the standards analysis. In the October 
2023 NOPR, DOE's engineering analysis assumed that manufacturers would 
convert all self-contained CRE models to propane (designated as R-290) 
in accordance with the applicable refrigerant global warming potential 
(``GWP'') limits and compliance dates previously proposed by the 
Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'').\4\ 88 FR 70196, 70227. The 
October 2023 NOPR analysis also assumed that all self-contained CRE 
would have a refrigerant charge (i.e., the amount of refrigerant in the 
CRE refrigeration system) no greater than the maximum allowable R-290 
charge size specified by Underwriters Laboratories (``UL'') 60335-2-89 
(corresponding to 304g for units with closed cases and 494 g for units 
with open cases). Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA published its Technology Transitions Restrictions on the 
Use of Certain HFCs NOPR on December, 15, 2022 (``December 2022 EPA 
NOPR''). 88 FR 70196. Since the October 2023 NOPR, EPA published a 
Technology Transitions Restrictions on the Use of Certain HFCs Final 
Rule on October, 24, 2023 (the ``October 2023 EPA Final Rule''). 88 
FR 73098. For CRE, the refrigerant GWP limits published in the 
October 2023 EPA Final Rule are consistent with the proposal in the 
December 2022 EPA NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since publishing the October 2023 NOPR, DOE has performed 
additional analysis as described below--as well as received additional 
feedback from CRE manufacturers--indicating that larger CRE units, 
which contain more refrigerant than smaller units, would require more 
R-290 refrigerant than the maximum allowable charge size specified by 
UL 60335-2-89. For such equipment, manufacturers will likely instead 
need to implement other low-GWP refrigerant options to comply with the 
GWP limits in the October 2023 EPA Final Rule. DOE has identified R-
454C and R-455A as alternatives that are mildly flammable (designated 
``A2L'') refrigerants currently available and could be used for units 
with cooling capacities greater than would be achievable using an 
allowable R-290 charge size.
    In recognition of this, DOE analyzed two different representative 
capacities for the following 7 equipment classes: VOP.SC.M, SVO.SC.M, 
HZO.SC.L, SOC.SC.M,\5\ VCT.SC.M, VCT.SC.L, and VCS.SC.L.\6\ For each of 
these 7 classes, DOE would assume the use of an A2L refrigerant for the 
large capacity and R-290 for the non-large capacity. DOE requests 
comment on this analytical approach of assuming use of an A2L 
refrigerant for the large capacity equipment classes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ DOE notes that, for the SOC.SC.M equipment class, DOE is 
considering a smaller representative capacity, as compared to the 
representative capacity proposed in the October 2023 NOPR, that 
would assume the use of R-290. For the large representative capacity 
in the SOC.SC.M equipment class (i.e., the same representative 
capacity as the October 2023 NOPR), DOE is considering an A2L 
refrigerant, consistent with the approach in this NODA.
    \6\ The equipment classes are designated by equipment family, 
condensing unit configuration, and operating temperature. Equipment 
Families: VOP--Vertical Open; SVO--Semi-Vertical Open; HZO--
Horizontal Open; VCT--Vertical Closed Transparent; HCT--Horizontal 
Closed Transparent; VCS--Vertical Closed Solid; HCS--Horizontal 
Closed Solid; SOC--Service Over Counter; CB--Chef Base; PD--Pull 
Down. Condensing Unit Configurations: RC--Remote Condensing; SC--
Self Contained. Operating Temperatures: H--High Temperature; M--
Medium Temperature; L--Low Temperature; I--Ice Cream Temperature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table II.1 presents the 7 equipment classes for which DOE analyzed 
two representative capacities. This NODA presents analytical results of 
this approach under consideration for each of these 7 equipment 
classes.
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

[[Page 68791]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.409

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
    In support of this NODA, DOE investigated currently available 
compressor performance data of compressors using R-404A, R-454C, and R-
455A to compare performance for compressors applicable to CRE in the 
larger volume or TDA range of each equipment class presented in table 
II.1. This investigation indicates that compressors using R-454C and R-
455A have performance similar to compressors with refrigerants already 
in use (e.g., R-404A) in larger equipment, which is consistent with the 
findings from other investigations conducted by a compressor 
manufacturer.\7\ Accordingly, for the large representative units 
considered for these 7 equipment classes, DOE is presenting in this 
NODA an updated analysis that reflects the use of A2L compressors, 
based on performance data of R-404A compressors as a proxy to calculate 
the efficiency of this equipment. Using this approach, the baseline 
energy use for the large representative capacities in these 7 classes 
is set equal to the current standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See p. 15 of https://e360hub.copeland.com/presentations/preparing-for-emerging-refrigerants-and-carb-compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on feedback to the October 2023 NOPR and in support of this 
NODA, DOE did not find compressor cost data to indicate that the price 
of an A2L compressor would be different than the price of an R-290 
compressor at the same cooling capacity. As a result, DOE assumes the 
same cost for an A2L compressor as an R-290 compressor of the same 
compressor capacity in this NODA. DOE requests comment on any 
information or cost data that may indicate that the price of an A2L 
compressor would be different than the price of an R-290 compressor at 
the same cooling capacity.
2. Baseline Energy Use Estimates
    As discussed previously, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE assumed that 
manufacturers would convert self-contained CRE models to R-290. The use 
of R-290 is generally expected to provide higher efficiency performance 
at the baseline level (compared to current refrigerants), such that the 
baseline efficiency levels defined in the October 2023 NOPR for each 
class generally reflected a lower energy use than the currently 
applicable DOE standards for CRE. 88 FR 70196, 70227-70228. In the 
October 2023 NOPR, DOE's analysis considered that these efficiency 
improvements, equipment costs, and manufacturer investments required to 
comply with the December 2022 EPA NOPR would be in effect prior to the 
time of compliance for the October 2023 NOPR proposed amended DOE CRE 
standards for all CRE equipment classes and sizes. 88 FR 70196, 70228. 
Therefore, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE noted that the October 2023 
NOPR analysis did not consider benefits and costs resulting from the 
December 2022 EPA NOPR. 88 FR 70196, 70208. DOE clarifies that DOE has 
not double counted any energy savings from the October 2023 EPA

[[Page 68792]]

Final Rule in this NODA nor in the October 2023 NOPR.
    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE initially determined the energy use 
associated with the defined baseline efficiency levels for each 
equipment class by maximizing the single-speed compressor efficiency 
achievable for each respective equipment class based on the CRE 
compressors available at the time of the analysis from two commonly-
used compressor manufacturers. Id. at 88 FR 70228.
    In this NODA, DOE updated its analysis of R-290 compressor 
performance to reflect the average compressor efficiency from the 
database of CRE compressors it has collected, instead of the maximum 
compressor efficiency as considered in the October 2023 NOPR. After the 
publication of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE was able to incorporate into 
this NODA compressor performance data from an additional compressor 
manufacturer that was not available to DOE for the October 2023 NOPR. 
Based on this updated approach, on average, the medium-temperature 
compressor energy savings presented in this NODA are less than the 
compressor energy savings in the October 2023 NOPR and the low-
temperature compressor energy savings presented in this NODA are 
greater than the compressor energy savings in the October 2023 NOPR. 
Table II.2 presents the updated baseline energy use associated with 
each equipment class, expressed as a reduction in energy compared to 
the currently applicable standard, for both the R-290 and A2L (if 
applicable) representative units for each class. As discussed in the 
previous section, for the large representative capacities (which assume 
the use of A2L refrigerants), the baseline energy use is set equal to 
the current standard.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.410

3. Baseline Design Components
    Based on feedback in response to the October 2023 NOPR and November 
2023 Public Meeting and additional test and teardown data conducted 
since the October 2023 NOPR, DOE is updating certain design 
specifications and components assumed to be used in models at the 
baseline efficiency level in this NODA. These updates include the 
insulation R-Value (changing from 8 per inch to 6.5 per inch, which is 
more representative of current baseline equipment); insulation 
thickness (changing to be consistent with the thickness analyzed in the 
March 2014 Final Rule, which remain applicable to current equipment); 
\8\ baseline fan motor assumptions (considering electronically 
commutated motors (``ECM'') for evaporator and condenser fan motors for 
most classes); and use of electronic controls (to assume the use of 
electronic controls at the baseline for all equipment classes). 
Additional details regarding all design specification and component 
updates are provided in section 2 of the NODA support document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See table 5A.2.2 Baseline Specifications in the 2014 Final 
Rule TSD at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2010-BT-STD-0003-0102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These changes result in adjustments to equipment cost at the 
baseline level, as well as to the magnitude of efficiency improvement 
provided by higher efficiency design options whose performance depends 
on the heat load.
4. Higher Efficiency Level Design Options
    In consideration of feedback received in response to the October 
2023 NOPR, DOE has removed evaporator fan control and microchannel 
condensers from consideration as design options and revised the 
variable speed compressor coefficients, as described in the following 
sections.

[[Page 68793]]

a. Evaporator Fan Control
    As stated in section 3.3.7.3 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD, 
evaporator fan motor controls can be programmed such that the 
evaporator fan motor runs at a 100 percent duty cycle to circulate cold 
air at all times and to prevent frost build up on the evaporator coil. 
As a design option, evaporator fan control refers to operating the 
evaporator fan at an evaporator fan duty cycle less than 100 percent. 
This design option operates the evaporator fan at an evaporator fan 
duty cycle that matches the compressor duty cycle, plus some additional 
operating time to accomplish defrosts and stir cycles.
    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE analyzed the evaporator fan control 
design option for self-contained, closed CRE. 88 FR 70196, 70222. 
Feedback received in response to the October 2023 NOPR suggests that 
the use of evaporator fan controls could reduce air distribution and 
temperature uniformity in the refrigerated compartment, potentially 
leading to higher temperatures that would exceed established tolerances 
for food safety (e.g., as established by National Sanitation Foundation 
(``NSF'') 7). DOE notes that NSF 7 requirements do not preclude CRE 
from using evaporator fan controls and that some self-contained, closed 
CRE may be able to use evaporator fan controls and still comply with 
NSF 7 requirements. However, recognizing current uncertainty as to 
whether such food safety requirements could be maintained in certain 
applications of self-contained, closed CRE with the use of evaporator 
fan controls, DOE has tentatively screened out evaporator fan control 
as a design option for CRE. As a result, this NODA presents an updated 
engineering analysis that does not include evaporator fan control as a 
design option.
b. Microchannel Condensers
    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE considered microchannel condensers as 
a design option for self-contained CRE, having observed the use of 
microchannel condensers in other commercial refrigeration equipment 
such as automatic commercial ice makers (``ACIMs''), including ACIMs 
that use R-290. Id. DOE is not, however, aware of microchannel 
condensers in use for CRE and has not observed microchannel condensers 
in any of the equipment in the teardown analysis. Even though DOE 
tentatively determined in the October 2023 NOPR that microchannel 
condensers would be technically feasible for use in CRE, feedback from 
commenters in response to the October 2023 NOPR suggests that there is 
current uncertainty as to the practicability to manufacturer, install, 
or service this technology on the scale necessary to serve the CRE 
market at the time of the effective date of any new or amended 
standards. Recognizing this uncertainty, DOE has tentatively screened 
out microchannel condensers as a design option. As a result, this NODA 
presents an updated engineering analysis that does not include 
microchannel condensers as a design option.
c. Variable-Speed Compressors
    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE incorporated the performance data for 
variable-speed R-290 compressors currently available on the market into 
DOE's engineering spreadsheet. Id. at 88 FR 70219. Since publication of 
the October 2023 NOPR, DOE has observed that some compressor 
manufacturers have updated their variable-speed compressor 
coefficients. To take into account these updates, and to maintain a 
methodology consistent with that used for single-speed compressors, DOE 
made updates to its engineering analysis to assume the average 
efficiency of the current market for variable-speed compressors, 
selecting the lower-efficiency compressor if only two compressor brands 
are available at a specific cooling capacity, in this NODA. DOE also 
adjusted the calculation for the difference in evaporator and condenser 
temperatures when switching from single-speed to variable-speed 
compressors to instead use a static temperature difference of +3 [deg]F 
for the evaporator and -5 [deg]F for the condenser. Implementing these 
updates results in an energy use reduction from implementing variable-
speed R-290 compressors ranging from approximately 2.5 to 19.2 percent, 
depending on the representative capacity of each equipment class. DOE 
notes that variable-speed compressors operate more efficiently at lower 
speeds than single-speed compressors do at full-speed. Therefore, 
variable-speed compressors have greater energy savings potential as 
further explained in section 3.3.4.3 of the October 2023 NOPR. 
Comparatively, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE estimated approximately 
0.5 to 25 percent energy consumption reduction when implementing 
variable-speed R-290 compressors.\9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See section 5.5.3.1 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Compressor Energy Use Adjustment
    Since publication of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE has reviewed the 
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (``AHRI'') 
January 2017 white paper, Tolerances and Uncertainties in Performance 
Data of Refrigerant Compressors, which is referenced by the AHRI 540 
compressor performance rating standard (``AHRI 540'').\10\ Based on 
this review, DOE applied a 5 percent increase in energy use for all 
compressors to account for the performance prediction uncertainty as a 
result of curve-fitted compressor performance maps in this NODA. See 
the NODA engineering spreadsheet for further details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For the AHRI white paper see www.ahrinet.org/system/files/2023-06/compressors-white-paper.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Revised Cost Analysis
    As DOE typically does during the course of a rulemaking, DOE 
considered updates to core case costs and certain design option costs 
to reflect current material prices and production factors that are 
relevant to the CRE industry.
    As part of this update, DOE has reviewed current Krypton gas prices 
and has observed that the cost differential between triple-pane doors 
with Argon gas and triple pane doors with Krypton gas has increased 
significantly \11\ compared to the cost differential used in the 
October 2023 NOPR analysis. See chapter 5 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD. 
This NODA presents updated costs for triple-pane doors with Krypton 
gas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The cost differential between Argon gas fill and Krypton 
gas fill for triple-pane doors is approximately seven times greater 
at the time of this NODA as compared to the October 2023 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE assumed an industry average 
manufacturer markup of 1.40 for all equipment classes. 88 FR 70196, 
70247. Based on stakeholder comments in response to the October 2023 
NOPR and market share weights, DOE updated the industry average 
manufacturer markup to 1.38 for all equipment classes and uses this 
updated value as the basis for the results presented in this NODA.
7. Equipment With Features That Affect Energy Use
    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed less stringent energy 
conservation standards for equipment of certain classes that have 
unique features such as forced-air evaporators or certain special door 
configurations (e.g., roll-in, roll-through, and pass-through). Id. at 
88 FR 70230. The approach in the October 2023 NOPR involved use of 
feature-specific multipliers greater than 1.0 that would be applied to 
the proposed

[[Page 68794]]

energy conservation standard for an eligible class to provide less-
stringent standards for a feature of that eligible class. Id. at 88 FR 
70231. More details can be found in tables IV.7 and IV.8 of the October 
2023 NOPR.
    As an alternative to the feature-specific multiplier approach, DOE 
is also tentatively considering a simplified multiplier approach to the 
eligible equipment classes discussed in the October 2023 NOPR, 
evaluating the use of a single multiplier for all evaluated equipment 
classes and feature groupings, including pass-through, sliding door, 
sliding-door pass-through, roll-in, roll-through, forced-air 
evaporator, and drawers. To select a single multiplier representative 
of the range of features analyzed, DOE used a shipment-weighted average 
of the eligible equipment class average multiplier values for each 
feature. DOE applied this multiplier to the energy use at each 
efficiency level for each eligible class, which implies that the 
difference in energy use of each feature compared to CRE without such 
feature is proportional to the equipment's energy use prior to the 
addition of each feature. The result of this single multiplier analysis 
yields a multiplier of 1.07.
    DOE notes that EPCA, as codified, contains what is known as an 
``anti-backsliding'' provision, which prevents the Secretary from 
prescribing any amended standard that either increases the maximum 
allowable energy use or decreases the minimum required energy 
efficiency of a covered product. (42 U.S.C. 6316(e)(1); 42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(1)) Therefore, any multipliers that may be applied to eligible 
CRE equipment classes in any future DOE actions for this proposed 
rulemaking may be limited or adjusted due to the anti-backsliding 
provision. In this NODA, application of the multiplier to the energy 
use of each efficiency level of a given class is adjusted accordingly, 
if needed, to avoid backsliding against the current standard.
    Based on consideration of all of the public comments received, 
including any additional comments received in response to this NODA, 
DOE may adopt the multiplier approach proposed in the October 2023 
NOPR, a revised approach with higher or lower multipliers than proposed 
in the October 2023 NOPR, an approach with additional or fewer 
multipliers, or a simpler approach in which a single multiplier would 
be used for any eligible feature for application to specific eligible 
classes as presented in this NODA.

B. Energy Use Analysis

    The purpose of the energy use analysis is to determine the annual 
energy consumption of CRE at different efficiencies in representative 
U.S. commercial buildings and to assess the energy savings potential of 
increased CRE efficiency. The energy use analysis estimates the range 
of energy use of CRE in the field (i.e., as they are actually used by 
consumers). The energy use analysis provides the basis for other 
analyses DOE performs, particularly assessments of the energy savings 
and the savings in consumer operating costs that could result from 
adoption of amended or new standards.
    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE calculated the energy consumption of 
the equipment as part of the engineering analysis. Id. at 88 70196, 
70237. In this NODA, DOE adjusted the annual energy consumption to 
account for the field operation of occupancy sensors. Specifically, DOE 
was informed that some purchasers may choose to deactivate CRE 
occupancy sensors, thereby forgoing energy savings associated with this 
design option. Accordingly, DOE updated its energy use analysis for CRE 
at efficiency levels with occupancy sensors so that the benefit of an 
occupancy sensor is applied to only 75 percent of purchasers of this 
feature. The remaining 25 percent would incur the increased equipment 
cost but not the associated energy savings.\12\ The analysis presented 
in this NODA reflects this change under consideration. DOE requests 
comments, data, and information on the fraction of CRE that may not 
have the occupancy sensors activated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ DOE selected 25 percent as a reasonable estimation of the 
fraction of CRE purchasers that may choose to deactivate their 
occupancy sensors despite purchasing this feature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
    For this NODA, DOE conducted an LCC and PBP analysis using the same 
general methodology described in the October 2023 NOPR. See Id. at 88 
FR 70237-70238. Table II.3 summarizes the approach and data DOE used to 
derive inputs to the LCC and PBP calculations. The following sections 
discuss updates to the source of method for deriving those inputs--as 
compared to the October 2023 NOPR--that DOE considered and implemented 
in this NODA analysis for review and comment. Inputs that utilized the 
same approach or data source as the October 2023 NOPR are not discussed 
in this NODA.
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

[[Page 68795]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.411

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
1. Energy Prices
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For further information, see the ``Assumptions to AEO2023'' 
report that sets forther the major assumptions used to generate the 
projections in the AEO2023. Available at www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/assumptions/ (last accessed April 15, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because marginal electricity price more accurately captures the 
incremental savings associated with a change in energy use from higher 
efficiency, it provides a better representation of incremental change 
in consumer costs than average electricity prices. Therefore, DOE 
applied average electricity prices for the energy use of the equipment 
purchased in the no-new-standards case, and marginal electricity prices 
for the incremental change in energy use associated with the other 
efficiency levels considered in the October 2023 NOPR. Id. at 88 FR 
70239.
    To derive electricity prices for this NODA analysis, DOE followed 
the same methodology as in the October 2023 NOPR. However, in this 
NODA, DOE updated the price data for current electricity prices (from 
2022 to 2023). In particular, DOE developed electricity prices in 2023 
for each census division using data from Edison Electric Institute 
(``EEI'') ``Typical Bills and Average Rates'' reports.
    To estimate energy prices in future years, DOE followed the same 
approach as in the October 2023 NOPR, i.e., DOE multiplied the 2023 
electricity prices by the projection of annual average price changes 
for each of the nine census divisions from the reference case in 
AEO2023, which has an end year of 2050.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ EIA. Annual Energy Outlook 2023. Available at www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/ (last accessed April 15, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Repair and Maintenance Costs
    Repair costs are associated with repairing or replacing components 
that have failed in an appliance or equipment; maintenance costs are 
associated with maintaining the operation of the equipment. Typically, 
small incremental increases in equipment efficiency entail no, or only 
minor, changes in repair and maintenance costs compared to baseline 
efficiency equipment.
    In the October 2023 NOPR, DOE calculated repair costs by 
considering the typical failure rate of refrigeration system components 
(compressor, lighting, and evaporator and condenser fan motors), 
component manufacturer production costs (``MPCs'') and associated 
markups, and the labor cost of repairs, which is assumed to be 
performed by private vendors. Id. at 88 FR 70239. DOE considered the 
following specific CRE components and associated failure probabilities 
during typical CRE lifetime in its repair cost approach: compressor (25 
percent), evaporator fan motor (50 percent), condenser fan motor (25 
percent), and LED lighting (100 percent), with the presence of 
occupancy sensors decreasing LED lighting repair frequency by half. Id.
    In this NODA, DOE also considered repair and replacement costs 
associated with night curtains and has incorporated such costs into 
this NODA analysis. Specifically, DOE was informed that night curtains 
are likely to

[[Page 68796]]

be replaced before the end of the lifetime of CRE. DOE contacted 
retailers and manufacturers of night curtains of similar cost to the 
ones contained in the engineering analysis; these manufacturers and 
sellers stated that the lifetime varies according to user care. One 
manufacturer reported a recent replacement from a unit that lasted 10 
years. In light of these reports, DOE selected 5 years as a reasonable 
estimate for the average lifetime of all night curtains. As a result, 
depending on the lifetime associated with each CRE, night curtains may 
be replaced once or several times during the CRE lifetime. Furthermore, 
DOE assumed a half-hour night curtain replacement labor duration at the 
same labor rates (according to RSMeans 2023) as other CRE components 
assumed to be replaced during the CRE lifetime (e.g., compressors) in 
the LCC analysis. DOE assigned these labor rates according to each 
purchaser's Census division to account for national labor cost 
variability.
3. Residual Value for Refurbished CRE
    To model the phenomenon of CRE sold for refurbishment, DOE utilized 
a residual value for such equipment in the LCC in the October 2023 
NOPR. The residual value represents the remaining dollar value of 
surviving CRE at the average age of refurbishment. In the October 2023 
NOPR, DOE estimated that refurbishments would occur at 5 years for 
small-size food-service buildings (e.g., restaurants) and 10 years for 
small-size food-sales and other commercial buildings. To account for 
the value of CRE with remaining life to the consumer, the LCC model 
applies this residual value as a ``credit'' at the end of the CRE 
lifetime and discounts it back to the start of the analysis period. 
This credit was applied to a fraction of self-contained CRE, totaling 
about 10 percent of all CRE in the LCC sample. Id. at 88 FR 70240.
    Since the publication of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE made 
adjustments to its refurbishment assumptions based on the premise that 
if the refurbishment market offers a favorable economic opportunity, it 
could be utilized by all businesses, not just businesses in small-size 
buildings. Accordingly, for this NODA, DOE still applies a credit to 
about 10 percent of all CRE in the sample; however the credit may apply 
to any self-contained equipment, regardless of building size.\15\ DOE 
has no reason to expect that businesses occupying larger size buildings 
would have a different refurbishment schedule than those occupying 
small-size buildings, and as such DOE retained the same assumptions as 
in the October 2023 NOPR regarding the average CRE lifetimes at the 
time of refurbishment, occurring after 5 years for food-service 
buildings (e.g., restaurants) and after 10 years for food-sales, and 
other building types (e.g., grocery stores). See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Due to the installation complexity of remote condensing 
CRE, DOE assumed that such equipment are not likely to be 
refurbished.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Energy Efficiency Distribution in the No-New-Standards Case
    To accurately estimate the share of consumers that would be 
affected by a potential energy conservation standard at a particular 
efficiency level, DOE's LCC analysis considers the projected 
distribution (market shares) of equipment efficiencies under the no-
new-standards case (i.e., the case without amended or new energy 
conservation standards) in the compliance year. This approach reflects 
the fact that some consumers may purchase equipment with efficiencies 
greater than the baseline levels in the absence of new or amended 
standards.
    To estimate the energy efficiency distribution of CRE for 2028 in 
the October 2023 NOPR, DOE used test data, feedback from manufacturer 
interviews, surveys, and the ``Single Compartment Commercial 
Refrigeration Equipment'' data from DOE's CCD, accessed in March 
2024.\16\ Id. In this NODA, DOE presents the following updates to its 
LCC analysis, which are incorporated into this NODA analysis: (1) using 
CCD data retrieved on April 15, 2024 in place of CCD data used in the 
October 2023 NOPR that was retrieved on February 21, 2023, (2) deriving 
distributions for the new self-contained (large) capacities from CCD, 
and (3) grouping some self-contained (non-large) categories that had 
few observations in the CCD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ U.S. Department of Energy. Compliance Certification 
Database (``CCD'') for Refrigeration Equipment--Commercial, Single 
Compartment. Available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/ (last accessed April 15, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To create a robust sample for the energy efficiency distribution 
used in the LCC analysis, DOE separated the analyzed CRE equipment 
classes into 27 separate groups for this NODA analysis. DOE notes that 
the analysis for the October 2023 NOPR was based on 21 separate groups; 
DOE is considering adding new groups to account for equipment classes 
with two representative capacities (discussed in section II.A.1 of this 
document), and some self-contained equipment classes were grouped 
together if there were few model counts in the CCD. For the equipment 
classes that DOE relied on CCD model count data to formulate the 
efficiency distributions, this approach was used to allow equipment 
classes with a limited sample to share the efficiency distribution of a 
group of similar classes with a larger sample in the CCD. DOE compared 
energy use data from the CCD with energy use equations from the 
engineering analysis to derive model counts at each efficiency level. 
For the 7 self-contained equipment classes with large representative 
capacities, model counts for each representative unit were taken from 
subsets of the CCD, filtered by the appropriate volume or TDA. 
Equipment classes whose efficiency distributions were derived from 
aggregated data from manufacturer interviews, surveys, and test data 
were assigned their own groups (these 9 classes are the same ones from 
the October 2023 NOPR.) The estimated market shares for the no-new-
standards case for CRE and the corresponding groupings are shown in 
table II.4.
    In advance of the October 2023 NOPR, DOE conducted manufacturer 
interviews and collected shipments data for several equipment classes. 
The equipment classes for which DOE collected shipments data account 
for 75 percent of total shipments and are marked with an asterisk in 
table II.4.\17\ For the remainder of the equipment classes for which 
DOE was not able to collect representative shipments data from 
manufacturers due to low sample sizes, DOE utilized the CCD database to 
estimate the no-new-standards-case efficiency distribution; this is the 
same approach used in the October 2023 NOPR. See Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ For some of these classes, such as chef bases or griddle 
stands and high-temperature refrigerators, DOE also developed the 
efficiency distributions based on DOE's test data, data submitted by 
manufacturers, ENERGY STAR certified data, and data from DOE's CCD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

[[Page 68797]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.412

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
    The LCC Monte Carlo simulations draw from the efficiency 
distributions and randomly assign an efficiency to the CRE purchased by 
each sample consumer in the no-new-standards case. The resulting 
percent shares within the sample match the market shares in the 
efficiency distributions.

C. Shipments Analysis

    DOE uses projections of annual equipment shipments to calculate the 
national impacts of potential amended or new energy conservation 
standards

[[Page 68798]]

on energy use, net present value (``NPV''), and future manufacturer 
cashflows.\18\ The shipments model takes an accounting approach, 
tracking market shares of each equipment class and the vintage of units 
in the stock. Stock accounting uses equipment shipments as inputs to 
estimate the age distribution of in-service equipment stocks for all 
years. The age distribution of in-service equipment stocks is a key 
input to calculations of both the NES and NPV because operating costs 
for any year depend on the age distribution of the stock.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ DOE uses data on manufacturer shipments as a proxy for 
national sales, as aggregate data on sales are lacking. In general, 
one would expect a close correspondence between shipments and sales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the shipments analysis conducted for this NODA, DOE followed 
the same approach as the October 2023 NOPR, with the exception of CRE 
that may be subject to refurbishment, as discussed in the following 
paragraph.
    To account for a potential increase in refurbished CRE as a result 
of increased prices from CRE standards, in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE 
assumed a price elasticity effect for a fraction of CRE shipments, 
which was limited to small-sized buildings. Id. at 88 FR 70242. In this 
NODA, DOE modified its price elasticity approach based on the premise 
that if the refurbishment market offers a favorable economic 
opportunity, it could be utilized by all businesses. Accordingly, for 
this NODA, the price elasticity effect \19\ applies to all self-
contained units, regardless of the building size where those units are 
installed. DOE assumed that remote condensing CRE are generally not 
refurbished as they are less likely to be removed from service when 
being part of a separate condensing system. DOE notes that the price 
elasticity effect, and a resulting reduction in CRE shipments, is 
dependent on the price difference between the price consumers pay in 
the no-new-standards case and the standards case. DOE also acknowledges 
that, while a CRE refurbishment market may well exist and its magnitude 
may have recently increased due to supply chain and equipment price 
increases, this phenomenon applies to the CRE market overall, and is 
not a result of energy efficiency standards on CRE. With regard to 
self-contained units, DOE estimates that their market share is 
approximately 87 percent of the overall new (i.e., not refurbished) CRE 
market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ DOE applied an elasticity constant of -0.5 to shipments for 
self-contained CRE and scaled this constant down to -0.15 over a 
period of 20 years from the current year of calculations, holding it 
constant at that rate for the remainder of the analysis period. This 
is the same constant and scaling methodology used in the October 
2023 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. National Impact Analysis

    The NIA assesses the national energy savings (``NES'') and the 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.\20\ (``Consumer'' in this context refers to 
consumers of the equipment being regulated.) DOE calculates the NES and 
NPV for the potential standard levels considered based on projections 
of annual equipment shipments, along with the annual energy consumption 
and total installed cost data from the energy use and LCC analyses. For 
the October 2023 NOPR, DOE projected the energy savings, operating cost 
savings, equipment costs, and NPV of consumer benefits over the 
lifetime of CRE sold from 2028 through 2057. Id. at 88 FR 70243.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The NIA accounts for impacts in the United States and U.S. 
territories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE evaluates the impacts of new or amended standards by comparing 
a case without such standards with standards-case projections. The no-
new-standards case characterizes energy use and consumer costs for each 
equipment class in the absence of new or amended energy conservation 
standards. For this projection, DOE considers historical trends in 
efficiency and various forces that are likely to affect the mix of 
efficiencies over time. DOE compares the no-new-standards case with 
projections characterizing the market for each equipment class if DOE 
adopted new or amended standards at specific energy efficiency levels 
for that class. For the standards cases, DOE considers how a given 
standard would likely affect the market shares of equipment with 
efficiencies greater than the standard.
    Table II.5 summarizes the inputs and methods DOE used for the NIA 
for this NODA. DOE made updates to some of the key inputs to the NIA 
analysis compared to the NIA analysis performed in the October 2023 
NOPR. In particular, the NIA for this NODA includes slightly updated 
shipments (see section II.D of this document), slightly updated 
efficiency distribution (see section II.C of this document), updated 
annual energy consumption per unit (see section II.A of this document) 
and updated total installed costs per unit (see section II.A.6 of this 
document).

[[Page 68799]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.413

1. Sensitivity Analysis for Equipment With Unique Energy Use 
Characteristics
    As discussed in section II.A.7 of this document, to account for CRE 
with certain features (e.g., pass-through, sliding door, sliding-door 
pass-through, roll-in, roll-through, forced-air evaporator, and 
drawers), DOE applied a single multiplier of 1.07 to the energy use of 
CRE with such features.
    To evaluate the impact of CRE with these unique energy use 
characteristics in the NIA, DOE conducted a sensitivity analysis in 
this NODA and estimated the NES and NPV for all CRE, applying a 1.07 
energy use multiplier to CRE with these features. Given a lack of 
market data regarding CRE with these unique energy use characteristics, 
DOE relied on CCD model counts to estimate their market share. Table 
II.6 presents the estimated market share of CRE with unique energy use 
characteristics compared to their corresponding equipment class.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.414

    To model this sensitivity, DOE assumed that the efficiency 
distribution of the equipment with unique features is the same as that 
of the overall equipment class. DOE assumed an increased energy 
consumption for the affected equipment by a factor of 7 percent. DOE 
modelled another sensitivity with the assumption that 5 percent of 
equipment in the specified equipment classes will have unique features 
instead of the market shares shown in table II.6. The results of these 
sensitivity analyses are shown in the accompanying NODA support 
document.

E. Manufacturer Impact Analysis

    DOE uses the Government Regulatory Impact Model (``GRIM'') to 
quantify the changes in cash flow due to new or amended standards that 
result in a higher or lower industry value. The GRIM uses a standard, 
annual, discounted cash-flow analysis that incorporates manufacturer 
costs, manufacturer markups, shipments, and industry financial 
information as inputs. The GRIM models changes in costs, distribution 
of shipments, investments, and manufacturer margins that could result 
from a new or amended energy conservation standard. The GRIM 
spreadsheet uses the inputs to arrive at a series of annual cash flows, 
beginning in 2024 (the base year of the analysis) and continuing 30 
years after the analyzed 2028 compliance year. For this NODA analysis, 
DOE calculated industry net present value (``INPV'') by summing the 
stream of annual discounted cash flows during the

[[Page 68800]]

analysis period. Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, DOE used a real 
discount rate of 10.0 percent for the CRE industry. Id. at 88 FR 70246. 
Key inputs to the GRIM (i.e., MPCs, shipments projections, conversion 
costs, refrigerant transition expenses, and manufacturer markup 
scenarios) are discussed in the following sections.
1. Manufacturer Production Costs
    The changes in the MPCs of covered equipment can affect the 
revenues, gross margins, and cash flow of the industry. See section 
II.A of this document for details on the NODA updated engineering 
analysis.
2. Shipments Projections
    The GRIM estimates manufacturer revenues based on total unit 
shipment projections and the distribution of those shipments by 
efficiency level. Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, the GRIM uses 
the NIA's annual shipment projections derived from the shipments 
analysis. Id. at 88 FR 70196, 70242-70243. See section II.D of this 
document for details on the NODA updated shipments analysis.
3. Product and Capital Conversion Costs
    DOE made certain refinements to the product conversion cost 
analysis in the October 2023 NOPR, which are incorporated into the 
analysis conducted for this NODA. 88 FR 70196, 70246-70247. 
Specifically, for this NODA analysis, DOE incorporated the most recent 
Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics (``BLS'') wage data 
\21\ into its product conversion cost estimates and refreshed its 
equipment database to include up-to-date model listings from its CCD 
\22\ and California Energy Commission's Modernized Appliance Efficiency 
Database System for covered CRE.\23\ Furthermore, to account for the 
potential increase in testing and certification costs associated with 
new safety standards (i.e., UL 60335-2-89), which go into effect 
September 29, 2024, DOE doubled product conversion costs associated 
with UL testing and certification. For this NODA, DOE updated its 
capital conversion cost estimates from the October 2023 NOPR to 2023$ 
and manufacturer counts based on its refreshed model database but 
otherwise maintained its capital conversion cost methodology from the 
October 2023 NOPR. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ U.S. Department of Labor, ``Occupational Employment and 
Wage Statistics,'' (May 2023). Available at: www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_stru.htm#17-0000 (last accessed May 22, 2024).
    \22\ U.S. Department of Energy's Compliance Certification 
Database is available at www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/#q=Product_Group_s%3A* (last accessed Jan. 31, 2024).
    \23\ California Energy Commission's Modernized Appliance 
Efficiency Database System is available at 
cacertappliances.energy.ca.gov/Pages/Search/AdvancedSearch.aspx 
(last accessed Jan. 31, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Refrigerant Transition Investments
    As discussed in section II.A.1 of this document, the October 2023 
EPA Final Rule restricts the use of hydrofluorocarbons (``HFCs'') in 
specific sectors or subsectors, including use in certain CRE analyzed 
in this NODA. Consistent with the October 2023 NOPR, DOE accounted for 
the costs associated with redesigning CRE to make use of low-GWP 
refrigerants and retrofitting production facilities to accommodate 
flammable refrigerants in the GRIM in the no-new-standards case and 
standards cases. DOE considered the October 2023 EPA Final Rule and the 
expenses associated with the refrigerant transition in the analytical 
baseline of this analysis since manufacturers would need to comply with 
the October 2023 EPA Final Rule regardless of whether or not DOE 
amended or established standards for CRE. Id. at 88 FR 70247. Although 
refrigerant transition costs associated with the October 2023 EPA Final 
Rule are not attributed to this rulemaking, DOE accounted for these 
refrigerant transition costs in the no-new-standards case and standards 
cases to better reflect industry finances and cash flow over the 
analysis period.
    In this NODA, DOE made refinements to its research and development 
(``R&D'') refrigerant transition estimate to account for increased 
testing costs associated with third-party laboratories, as well as 
adjustments to the timeline of when manufacturers would need to make 
investments related to the refrigerant transition to align with the 
revised compliance dates for CRE in the October 2023 EPA Final Rule. 
See Id. at 88 FR 70284. Accordingly, for this NODA, DOE assumed that 
the transition to low-GWP refrigerants would require industry to invest 
approximately $14.6 million in R&D and $19.0 million in capital 
expenditures from 2024 (the NODA reference year) to 2026. Consistent 
with the October 2023 NOPR, DOE notes that its refrigerant transition 
estimates of $14.6 million in R&D and $19.0 million capital 
expenditures reflect an estimate of future investments industry would 
incur to comply with Federal or State refrigerant regulations. DOE 
acknowledges that manufacturers have already invested a significant 
amount of time and capital into transitioning CRE to low-GWP 
refrigerants.
5. Manufacturer Markup Scenarios
    This NODA analysis used the same manufacturer markup scenarios as 
the October 2023 NOPR. See Id. at 88 FR 70247-70248.

F. Emissions Analysis, and Monetizing Emissions Impacts

    For this NODA pertaining to CRE, DOE conducted the emissions 
analyses using the same methodology and data sources as in the October 
2023 NOPR. See Id. at 88 FR 70251-70257. However, DOE updated its 
social cost of greenhouse gases (``GHG) (``SC-GHG'') estimates, 
discussed as follows.
    To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, the October 
2023 NOPR used the interim SC-GHG estimates presented in the Technical 
Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide 
Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990 published in February 
2021 by the Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse 
Gases (``IWG''). As a member of the IWG involved in the development of 
the February 2021 SC-GHG TSD, DOE agreed that the interim SC-GHG 
estimates represented the most appropriate estimate of the SC-GHG until 
revised estimates were developed reflecting the latest, peer-reviewed 
science. See Id. at 88 FR 70253-70255 for discussion of the development 
and details of the IWG SC-GHG estimates. The IWG has continued working 
on updating the interim estimates but has not published final 
estimates.
    Accordingly, in the regulatory analysis of its December 2023 Final 
Rule, ``Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified 
Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural 
Gas Sector Climate Review,'' EPA estimated climate benefits using a 
new, updated set of SC-GHG estimates (``2023 SC-GHG estimates''). EPA 
documented the methodology underlying the new estimates in the 
regulatory impact analysis (``RIA'') for the December 2023 Final Rule 
and in greater detail in a technical report entitled Report on the 
Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases: Estimates Incorporating Recent 
Scientific Advances that was presented as Supplementary Material to the 
RIA.\24\ The 2023 SC-GHG estimates ``incorporate recent research 
addressing recommendations of the Natural

[[Page 68801]]

Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (``National 
Academies''), responses to public comments on an earlier sensitivity 
analysis using draft SC-GHG estimates included in the EPA's December 
2022 proposal in the oil and natural gas sector standards of 
performance rulemaking, and comments from a 2023 external peer review 
of the accompanying technical report.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/eo12866_oil-and-gas-nsps-eg-climate-review-2060-av16-final-rule-20231130.pdf; https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_final.pdf (last accessed July 3, 2024).
    \25\ https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_final.pdf (last accessed July 3, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 22, 2023, the IWG issued a memorandum directing that 
``agencies should use their professional judgment to determine which 
estimates of the SC-GHG reflect the best available evidence, are most 
appropriate for particular analytical contexts, and best facilitate 
sound decision-making'' consistent with OMB Circular No. A-4 and 
applicable law.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/IWG-Memo-12.22.23.pdf (last accessed July 3, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE has been extensively involved in the IWG process and related 
work on the SC-GHGs for over a decade. This involvement includes DOE's 
role as the federal technical monitor for the seminal 2017 report on 
the SC-GHG issued by the National Academies, which provided extensive 
recommendations on how to strengthen and update the SC-GHG 
estimates.\27\ DOE has also participated in the IWG's work since 2021. 
DOE technical experts involved in this work reviewed the 2023 SC-GHG 
methodology and report in light of the National Academies' 
recommendations and DOE's understanding of the state of the science.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social 
Cost of Carbon Dioxide  The National Academies Press. 
(available at: https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/24651/valuing-climate-damages-updating-estimation-of-the-social-cost-of) 
(last accessed July 3, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on this review, DOE has preliminarily determined that the 
updated 2023 SC-GHG estimates, including the approach to discounting, 
represent a significant improvement in estimating the SC-GHG through 
incorporating the most recent advancements in the scientific literature 
and by addressing recommendations on prior methodologies. In 
particular, the 2023 SC-GHG estimates implement the key recommendations 
of the National Academies, and the 2023 SC-GHG estimates incorporate 
the extensive scientific findings and methodological advances that have 
occurred since the last IWG updates in 2013, 2015, and 2016.
    The 2023 SC-GHG estimates have also been peer-reviewed. As 
indicated by their statements, the peer reviewers strongly supported 
the new methodology, calling it ``a huge advance,'' ``a real step 
change'' and ``an important improvement'' in estimating the SC-GHG, and 
noting that it addressed the National Academies' and others' 
recommendations and ``generally represents well the emerging consensus 
in the literature.''
    The most significant improvements in the 2023 SC-GHG estimates 
carry out recommendations made by the National Academies. In its 
report, the National Academies' principal recommendation was to develop 
and use ``a new framework that would strengthen the scientific basis, 
provide greater transparency, and improve characterization of the 
uncertainties of the estimates.'' \28\ The IWG's estimates since 2010 
have relied on averaging the values produced by three integrated 
assessment models, each of which generates a set of SC-GHG emissions 
estimates based on the inputs and assumptions built into that 
particular model.\29\ The National Academies recommended an entirely 
new approach that would ``unbundle'' this process and instead use a 
framework in which each step of the SC-GHG calculation is developed as 
one of four separate but integrated ``modules'': the socioeconomic 
module, the climate module, the damages module, and the discounting 
module. The report provided detailed recommendations on developing and 
using these modules, including how to address discounting, 
socioeconomic projections, climate modeling, and uncertainty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Report Recommends New Framework for Estimating the Social 
Cost of Carbon  National Academies (available at: https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2017/01/report-recommends-new-framework-for-estimating-the-social-cost-of-carbon) (last accessed 
July 3, 2024).
    \29\ See https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_final.pdf at p. 6, (last accessed July 3, 
2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE preliminarily concludes that the 2023 SC-GHG estimates are 
consistent with the National Academies' 2017 recommendations and 
represent major scientific advancements over the IWG's approach. In 
addition, DOE supports the incorporation of more recent scientific 
findings and data throughout the development of each of the 2023 SC-GHG 
modules and the underlying components of those modules.
    Thus, in accordance with the IWG memo, and having reviewed the 2023 
SC-GHG methodologies and updates, DOE has preliminarily determined that 
the updated 2023 SC-GHG estimates reflect the best available scientific 
and analytical evidence and methodologies, are accordingly the most 
appropriate for DOE analyses, and best facilitate sound decision-making 
by substantially improving the transparency of the estimates and 
representations of uncertainty inherent in such estimates. DOE welcomes 
comment on this preliminary determination.\30\ In a final rulemaking, 
DOE will determine what role, if any, these estimates will play in any 
final decision adopting new and amended energy conservation standards 
for CRE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See EPA's SC-GHG website for all of the technical files 
related to the updated estimates, including the final SC-GHG report 
(provided as Supplementary Material to the Dec 2023 Oil and Gas rule 
final RIA); all replication instructions and computer code for the 
estimates; all files related to the public comment and peer review 
process; and a workbook to assist analysts in applying the 
estimates: https://www.epa.gov/environmental-economics/scghg.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this NODA, DOE used these updated 2023 SC-GHG values to 
monetize the climate benefits of the emissions reductions associated at 
each efficiency level (``EL'') for CRE. These results are shown in the 
accompanying NODA support document in table 6.7 through table 6.15. 
Using these the 2023 SC-GHG estimates provides a better-informed range 
of potential climate benefits associated with the proposed new and 
amended standards. The EPA technical report presents SC-GHG values for 
emissions years through 2080; therefore, DOE did not monetize the 
climate benefits of GHG emissions reductions occurring after 2080. DOE 
expects additional climate impacts to accrue from GHG emissions changes 
post 2080, but due to a lack of readily available SC-GHG estimates for 
emissions years beyond 2080 and the relatively small emission effects 
expected from those years, DOE has not monetized these additional 
impacts in this analysis. The overall climate benefits are generally 
greater when using the higher, updated 2023 SC-GHG estimates, compared 
to the climate benefits using the older IWG SC-GHG estimates, which 
were used in the October 2023 NOPR. To facilitate a comparison, DOE 
also performed a sensitivity analysis using the IWG's 2021 interim SC-
GHG estimates. The results are shown in the accompanying NODA support 
document.\31\ In setting energy efficiency standards for CRE in any 
subsequent final rule, DOE will, as in the NOPR, consider whether the 
standards result in positive net benefits under either SC-GHG 
calculation methodology, as well as in the absence

[[Page 68802]]

of the estimated, monetized climate benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See tables 6.16 through 6.17 in the NODA support document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this NODA, DOE monetized NOX and SO2 
using the same methodology and data sources as described in chapter 14 
of the October 2023 NOPR TSD.

III. Analytical Results

A. Compliance Period

    EPCA requires that amended standards would apply to CRE on or after 
a date that is 3 years after the final rule is published in the Federal 
Register or, if the Secretary determines that 3 years is inadequate, 
not later than 5 years after the final rule is published in the Federal 
Register. (See 42 U.S.C. 6313(c)(6)(C)) Consistent with the October 
2023 NOPR, DOE assumed new and amended standards would apply to CRE 
manufactured 3 years after the date on which any new and amended 
standards are published. Currently, DOE anticipates publication of a 
final rule in the second half of 2024. Therefore, for purposes of its 
analysis, DOE used 2028 as the first full year of compliance with any 
new or amended standards for CRE.
    Extending the compliance lead-in period from 3 years to a date 
between 3 to 5 years after a final rule is published in the Federal 
Register would delay the compliance year analyzed in this NODA from 
2028 to 2029 or 2030. With regard to the LCC analysis and the NIA, a 
longer compliance period after publication of a final rule is not 
expected to result in significant changes to the results of the LCC and 
the NIA.
    Although a number of inputs to the LCC analysis and NIA are time-
dependent (e.g., electricity prices, shipments drivers such as 
floorspace projections, and costs of certain design options that 
experience price learning, such as light-emitting diode (``LED'') 
lighting, and electronic components of variable speed compressors), 
these inputs would not result in significant changes to the results of 
the LCC and NIA for a 5-year compliance date (2030) compared to a 3-
year compliance date (2028).
    For the LCC, the relative changes in inputs that are time-dependent 
are small over a two-year delay. Commercial electricity prices averaged 
on a national level are forecast by AEO 2023 to decrease by 1 percent 
from 2028 to 2030, but expected to exceed 2028 prices again in 2033 and 
beyond. Equipment costs for higher efficiency levels using LED lighting 
and variable-speed compressors are expected to decrease up to 0.8 
percent from 2028 to 2030 due to the cost reduction associated with 
price learning.\32\ These variations in LCC inputs have only minor 
effects on the relative comparison of efficiency levels and, as a 
consequence, would lead only to a slight increase in life-cycle cost 
savings associated with higher efficiency equipment. Therefore, there 
are no negative impacts for consumers by a 2-year delay of the 
compliance year. Furthermore, the efficiency distribution of purchasers 
does not change over time in the no-new-standards scenario, meaning 
that a delay of 2 years would not change the percentage of purchasers 
impacted by a new standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ For more details on the price learning methodology, see 
chapter 8 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding the NIA results, time-dependent inputs (e.g., equipment 
costs and electricity prices) will cause small variations to the 
undiscounted NPV. For example, a 2030 compliance date will result in a 
slight increase in NPV for CRE with design options that experience 
price learning because their future prices are expected to decrease 
over time. A delayed compliance date will result in a minor increase in 
energy savings primarily due to an overall increasing shipments trend 
in future years. Regarding MIA results, extending the compliance lead-
in would allow manufacturers more flexibility to spread out investments 
over a longer period. Considered in isolation, extending the compliance 
lead-in could lessen reductions in annual free cash flow over the 
conversion period in the standards case because the same investments 
could be spread out over 4 or 5 years instead of 3 years. Because INPV 
is the sum of discounted annual cash flows over the analysis period, 
standards case INPV would be similarly impacted by a longer compliance 
period. Holding other factors constant, the projected change in INPV at 
more stringent levels would look less negative (or more positive) with 
a 4 or 5 year compliance period compared to a 3-year compliance period.

B. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period

    In this NODA, DOE analyzed the economic impacts on CRE consumers by 
looking at the effects that potential new and amended standards at each 
EL would have on the LCC and PBP. DOE also examined the impacts of 
potential standards on selected consumer subgroups. These analyses are 
discussed in the following sections.
    In general, higher-efficiency equipment affect consumers in two 
ways: (1) purchase price increases and (2) annual operating costs 
decrease. Inputs used for calculating the LCC and PBP include total 
installed costs (i.e., equipment price plus installation costs), and 
operating costs (i.e., annual energy use, energy prices, energy price 
trends, repair costs, and maintenance costs). The LCC calculation also 
uses equipment lifetime and a discount rate. Chapter 8 of the October 
2023 NOPR TSD provides detailed information on the LCC and PBP 
analyses.
    Table III.1 through table III.66 show the LCC and PBP results based 
on the updated analysis for the ELs considered for each equipment class 
in this NODA. In the first of each pair of tables, the simple payback 
is measured relative to the baseline equipment. In the second table, 
impacts are measured relative to the efficiency distribution in the no-
new-standards case in the compliance year (see section II.C.4 of this 
document). Because some consumers purchase equipment with higher 
efficiency in the no-new-standards case, the average savings are less 
than the difference between the average LCC of the baseline equipment 
and the average LCC at each EL. The savings refer only to consumers who 
are affected by a standard at a given EL. Those who already purchase 
equipment 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.
1. Remote-Condensing Units
BILLING CODE 6501-01-P

[[Page 68803]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.415

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.416

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.417

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.418


[[Page 68804]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.419

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.420

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.421

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.422


[[Page 68805]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.423

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.424

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.425

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.426

2. Self-Contained Condensing Units (Non-Large)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.427


[[Page 68806]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.428

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.429

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.430

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.431

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.432


[[Page 68807]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.433

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.434

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.435

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.436


[[Page 68808]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.437

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.438

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.439


[[Page 68809]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.440

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.441

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.442

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.443

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.444


[[Page 68810]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.445

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.446

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.447


[[Page 68811]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.448

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.449

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.450

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.451

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.452


[[Page 68812]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.453

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.454

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.455

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.456


[[Page 68813]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.457

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.458

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.459

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.460


[[Page 68814]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.461

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.462

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.463


[[Page 68815]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.464

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.465

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.466

3. Self-Contained Condensing Units (Large)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.467


[[Page 68816]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.468

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.469

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.470

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.471


[[Page 68817]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.472

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.473

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.474

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.475


[[Page 68818]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.476

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.477

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.478


[[Page 68819]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.479

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.480

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
4. Consumer Subgroup Analysis
    In the consumer subgroup analysis in this NODA, DOE estimated the 
impact of the considered ELs on small businesses. As in the October 
2023 NOPR, DOE applies small business-specific discount rates, which 
are mostly higher than those in the full consumer sample. For this 
NODA, DOE also applied small business-specific energy prices, which are 
generally higher than those in the full consumer sample. Table III.67 
compares the average LCC savings and PBP at each efficiency level for 
the consumer subgroups with similar metrics for the entire consumer 
sample for CRE. In most cases, the average LCC savings and PBP for 
small businesses at the considered efficiency levels are not 
substantially different from the average for all consumers.
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

[[Page 68820]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.481


[[Page 68821]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.482


[[Page 68822]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.483


[[Page 68823]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.484

5. Rebuttable Presumption Payback
    EPCA establishes a rebuttable presumption that an energy 
conservation standard is economically justified if the increased 
purchase cost for equipment that meets the standard is less than three 
times the value of the first-year energy savings resulting from the 
standard. (42 U.S.C. 6316(e)(1); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) In 
calculating a rebuttable presumption payback period for each of the 
considered Els in this NODA, DOE used discrete values and, as required 
by EPCA, based the energy use calculation on the DOE test procedure for 
CRE. In contrast, the PBPs presented in section III.B of this document 
were calculated using distributions that reflect the range of energy 
use in the field.
    Table III. presents the rebuttable-presumption payback periods for 
the considered ELs for CRE.

[[Page 68824]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.486


[[Page 68825]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.487

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C

B. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers

    Table III.69 shows the efficiency level grouping analyzed in the 
GRIM in this NODA. The MIA does not present results by equipment class 
and efficiency level because redesign and investments for one equipment 
class may impact multiple equipment classes because different equipment 
classes can share the same architecture, tooling, and production lines. 
Therefore, the MIA presents results based on a representative 
combination of efficiency levels for remote-condensing units, self-
contained condensing units (non-large), and self-contained condensing 
units (large). The accompanying NODA support document shows the 
analyzed design options and energy use equations for each considered 
efficiency level.
1. Industry Cashflow Analysis Results
    Table III.70 through table III.72 present the GRIM results for the 
updated CRE analysis discussed in this NODA for the CRE remote-
condensing units, the CRE self-contained condensing units (non-large), 
and the CRE self-contained condensing units (large). The methodology 
and assumptions used in the MIA did not change from the October 2023 
NOPR except for the analytical changes described in prior sections of 
this document. Details of the MIA inputs and methodology are available 
in chapter 12 of the October 2023 NOPR TSD.

[[Page 68826]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.488


[[Page 68827]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.489

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.490


[[Page 68828]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.491

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
2. Direct Impacts on Employment
    For the direct employment analysis, DOE revised the methodology 
used to estimate the lower bound impacts to domestic production 
employment in the October 2023 NOPR, which was incorporated into the 
analysis conducted for this NODA. DOE maintained the same estimate of 
U.S. labor percentage of 77 percent from the October 2023 NOPR for this 
NODA. See at Id. 88 FR 70196, 70282-70283.
    Using the GRIM, DOE estimated that in the absence of new and 
amended energy conservation standards, there would be 1,966 domestic 
production and non-production workers for CRE remote-condensing units 
in 2028, 9,613 domestic production and non-production workers for CRE 
self-contained condensing units (non-large) in 2028, and 928 production 
and non-production workers for CRE self-contained condensing units 
(large) in 2028. Table III.73 through table III.75 show the range of 
impacts of energy conservation standards on U.S. manufacturing 
employment in the CRE industry for remote-condensing units, self-
contained condensing units (non-large), and self-contained condensing 
units (large).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.492


[[Page 68829]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.493

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.494

    The upper bound estimate corresponds to a potential change in the 
number of domestic production workers that would result from new and 
amended energy conservation standards if manufacturers continue to 
produce the same scope of covered equipment within the United States 
after the analyzed compliance date. Most of the design options analyzed 
in the engineering analysis require manufacturers to purchase more-
efficient components from suppliers. These components do not require 
significant additional labor to assemble or significant production line 
updates. For this NODA, DOE modeled an incremental increase in labor 
content associated with implementing improved door designs (i.e., 
moving to double-pane, triple-pane, or vacuum-insulated glass door 
designs).
    The lower bound estimate conservatively assumes that some domestic 
manufacturing either is eliminated or moves abroad at more stringent 
efficiency levels. For levels that require capital investment and 
higher per-unit labor content, DOE assumed that some manufacturing 
could move abroad as relocating production to lower-labor cost 
countries could become increasingly attractive.
    The employment impacts discussed in this section are independent of 
the employment impacts from the broader U.S. economy.

C. National Impact Analysis

    This section presents DOE's estimates of the NES and the NPV of 
consumer benefits that would result from each of the ELs considered as 
potential amended standards.
1. National Energy Savings
    To estimate the energy savings attributable to potential new and 
amended standards for CRE, DOE compared their energy consumption under 
the no-new-standards case to their anticipated energy consumption at 
each EL in this NODA. The savings are measured over the entire lifetime 
of equipment purchased in the 30-year period that begins in the year of 
anticipated compliance with new and amended standards 2028-2057. Table 
III.76 presents DOE's projections of the national energy savings for 
each EL for CRE. The savings were calculated using the approach 
described in section II.E of this document.
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

[[Page 68830]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.495

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C
2. Net Present Value of Consumer Costs and Benefits
    DOE estimated the cumulative NPV of the total costs and savings for 
consumers that would result from the ELs considered for CRE. In 
accordance with OMB's guidelines on regulatory analysis,\33\ DOE 
calculated NPV using both a 7-percent and a 3-percent real discount 
rate. Table III.77 and table III.78 show the consumer NPV results at 3 
percent and 7 percent discount rates with impacts counted over the 
lifetime of equipment purchased during the period 2028-2057.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ U.S. Office of Management and Budget. Circular A-4: 
Regulatory Analysis. September 17, 2003. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/circulars/A4/a-4.pdf 
(last accessed June 6, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

[[Page 68831]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.496


[[Page 68832]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU24.497

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C

D. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy

    Enhanced energy efficiency, where economically justified, improves 
the Nation's energy security, strengthens the economy, and reduces the 
environmental impacts (costs) of energy production. Reduced electricity 
demand due to energy conservation standards is also likely to reduce 
the cost of maintaining the reliability of the electricity system, 
particularly during peak-load periods.
    Energy conservation resulting from potential energy conservation 
standards for CRE is expected to yield environmental benefits in the 
form of reduced emissions of certain air pollutants and greenhouse 
gases. DOE also estimated monetary benefits likely to result from the 
reduced emissions that DOE estimated for each of the considered ELs for 
CRE. Chapter 6 of the accompanying NODA support document provides DOE's 
estimate of cumulative emissions reductions and associated monetized 
benefits expected to result at each EL.

IV. Public Participation

    DOE requests comment on the updated analysis for CRE presented in 
the NODA. As noted in the October 2023 NOPR, DOE may adopt energy 
efficiency levels that are either higher or lower than the proposed 
standards in

[[Page 68833]]

the October 2023 NOPR. Id. at 88 FR 70196, 70203.
    DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NODA 
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. Otherwise, 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, hand delivery/courier, or postal 
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal mail 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. If you submit via postal mail 
or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if 
feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. 
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).

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this 
notification of data availability and request for comment.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on August 17, 
2024, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal Deputy 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 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 August 21, 2024.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2024-19072 Filed 8-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.