Quiero saber acerca de...

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 127 / Wednesday, July 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules should proceed with such rulemaking, including whether any new or amended rule would be: 1 Cost-effective; 2
economically justified; 3
technologically feasible, or 4 would result in a significant savings of energy.
Based upon available information, if DOE determines that a new or amended standard would not satisfy the applicable statutory criteria, it will publish a notice of proposed determination to that effect in the Federal Register for notice and comment. Otherwise, section 6a2 of the Process Rule provides that DOE
would undertake the preliminary stages of a rulemaking to issue or amend the energy conservation standard, proceeding with either a framework document/preliminary analysis or an advance notice of proposed rulemaking ANOPR. The Process Rule further provides that RFIs and notices of data availability NODA could be issued, as appropriate, in addition to these preliminary-stage documents. Finally, in section 6a3 of the Process Rule, DOE clarifies that initiation of a standards rulemaking does not guarantee that standards will be issued, because it could later be discovered that the applicable statutory criteria ultimately could not be satisfied. 85 FR
8626, 87048705.
Upon further consideration, DOE is proposing to modify these provisions to allow for a more expedited rulemaking process in appropriate cases, particularly in light of the significant number of legal deadlines confronting the Appliance Standards Program and the anticipated benefits to the Nation of the associated energy conservation standards. Because interested parties are free to raise the matter of the likelihood of satisfying or not satisfying the applicable statutory criteria needed for adoption of a new or amended energy conservation standard at any stage of the rulemaking, DOE has tentatively concluded that a separate rulemaking document limited to only that topic i.e., the early assessment RFI may unnecessarily delay the overall process without appreciable benefit if used in all cases. Consequently, DOE proposes to remove the requirement for a separate early assessment RFI for energy conservation standards. Instead, DOE
would welcome the same type of information in the context of an RFI, preliminary analysis, ANOPR, or some other pre-NOPR document, while at the same time asking other relevant questions and gathering information in the event that the Department decides to proceed with an energy conservation standards rulemaking. DOE requests
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:33 Jul 06, 2021

Jkt 253001

comments, information, and data on whether its proposed approach is appropriate or on any other suggested alternatives.
Second, in section 6e1 of the Process Rule, the February 2020 Final Rule clarified that if DOE determines it appropriate to move forward with an energy conservation standards rulemaking after conducting an early assessment, then the Department will publish in the Federal Register either a framework document with a subsequent preliminary analysis or an ANOPR. That same subsection provides that if DOE
finds, based upon the early assessment, that one or more of the required statutory criteria for setting an energy conservation standard cannot be met, then the Department will publish a proposed determination to that effect in the Federal Register for notice and comment which may lead to a final determination, as appropriate. Section 6e2 of the Process Rule provides that the length of the public comment period for pre-NOPR rulemaking documents will vary depending upon the circumstances of the particular rulemaking, but will not be less than 75
calendar days, and it further provides that DOE will determine whether a public hearing is appropriate for such documents. 85 FR 8626, 8705.
After further consideration, DOE
proposes to modify and clarify these provisions as follows. As noted previously, DOE is proposing to eliminate the requirement for an energy conservation standard early assessment RFI, while maintaining the opportunity for early public input through other rulemaking documents as to whether new or amended energy conservation standards are warranted under the applicable statutory criteria. The Department has tentatively concluded that one round of pre-NOPR input may be sufficient in some cases. For instance, DOE is required to revisit final determinations that energy conservation standards do not need to be amended within three years. 42 U.S.C.
6295m3B In such cases, DOE may only need to issue an RFI or NODA to update its rulemaking analysis in preparation for proposing amended standards or a determination that standards do not need to be amended.
Another example for which a single round of pre-NOPR input may be sufficient would be if a product has been subject to multiple rounds of rulemaking, relies on mature technologies, and for which the market is well understood. As such, DOE
proposes to publish one or more documents in the Federal Register during the pre-NOPR stage of a
PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

35673

rulemaking to gather information on key issues. Such documents could take several forms depending upon the specific proceeding, including a framework document, RFI, NODA, preliminary analysis, or ANOPR.
Additionally, DOE proposes to remove the 75-day comment period requirement for pre-NOPR energy conservation standards documents, as it is not compelled by EPCA or other applicable law. Instead, for these preNOPR documents for which there is no statutorily required comment period, DOE would provide an appropriate comment period,9 determined on a caseby-case basis, which is commensurate with the nature and complexity of the energy conservation standard at issue, and will consider requests from the public for extension of the comment period to allow additional opportunities for public input. Particularly given the many legal deadlines the Department faces for various appliance rulemakings, DOE reasons that these proposed changes would promote efficiency by eliminating redundant requests for the same information and otherwise streamlining the rulemaking process. It is DOEs belief that these changes would improve the efficiency of the Appliance Standards Program without sacrificing the quality of DOEs analyses or the opportunity for public input. Thus, for the reasons stated, DOE proposes to revise section 6e of the Process Rule to reflect these changes. DOE requests comments, information, and data on whether its proposed approach is appropriate or on any other suggested alternatives. DOE also seeks comment on whether these changes would affect the quality of DOEs analyses or opportunities for public comment.
In section 6g2 of the Process Rule, the February 2020 Final Rule stated that there would be a public comment period of at least 75 days for an energy conservation standards NOPR, with at least one public hearing or workshop.
85 FR 8626, 8706.
After further consideration, DOE
proposes to modify the provision at section 6g2 as follows. DOE proposes to remove the 75-day comment period 9 See, for example, Executive Order 128666a1: Each agency shall consistent with its own rules, regulations, or procedures provide the public with meaningful participation in the regulatory process. In particular, before issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking, each agency should, where appropriate, seek the involvement of those who are intended to benefit from and those expected to be burdened by any regulation including, specifically, State, local, and tribal officials. In addition, each agency should afford the public a meaningful opportunity to comment on any proposed regulation, which in most cases should include a comment period of not less than 60 days.

E:FRFM07JYP1.SGM

07JYP1