Je veux savoir à propos de…

4906

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations TABLE V8LCC SAVINGS RELATIVE TO THE NO-NEW STANDARDS CASE EFFICIENCY DISTRIBUTION FOR
REPRESENTATIVE UNIT 4: POLYPHASE, 4-POLE, 0.5 hp Life-cycle cost savings Efficiency level
Percent of customers that experience
Average savings

Net cost percent
2019$

1
2
3

91.7
99.6
100.0

40.5
77.9
721.4

The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

C. Final Determination For this final determination, DOE
analyzed whether amended standards for SEMs would be technological feasible and cost effective. 42 U.S.C.
6316a; 42 U.S.C. 6295m1A and 42
U.S.C. 6295n2 EPCA mandates that DOE consider whether amended energy conservation standards for SEMs would be technologically feasible. 42 U.S.C.
6316a; 42 U.S.C. 6295m1A and 42
U.S.C. 6295n2B DOE has determined that there are technology options that would improve the efficiency of SEMs. These technology options are being used in commercially available SEMs and therefore are technologically feasible. See section IV.B for further information. Hence, DOE has determined that amended energy conservation standards for SEMs are technologically feasible.
EPCA requires DOE to consider whether energy conservation standards for SEMs would be cost effective through an evaluation of the savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered product/equipment compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial charges for, or maintenance expenses of, the covered products/equipment which are/is likely to result from the imposition of an amended standard. 42
U.S.C. 63136a; 42 U.S.C.
6295m1A, 42 U.S.C. 6295n2C, and 42 U.S.C. 6295o2BiII As presented in the prior section, the average customer purchasing a representative SEM would experience an increase in LCC at each evaluated standards case as compared to the no new standards case. The simple PBP for the average of a representative SEM
customer at each EL is projected to be generally longer than the mean lifetime of the equipment. Based on the above considerations, DOE has determined that more stringent amended energy conservation standards for SEMs cannot satisfy the relevant statutory requirements because such standards
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:33 Jan 17, 2021

Jkt 253001

would not be cost effective as required under EPCA. See 42 U.S.C. 6295n2;
42 U.S.C. 6295o2BII; 42 U.S.C.
6316a Having determined that amended energy conservation standards for SEMs would not be cost-effective, DOE did not separately evaluate the significance of the amount of energy conservation under the considered amended standards because it has determined that the potential standards would not be cost-effective and by extension, would not be economically justified as required under EPCA. 42 U.S.C.
6316a; 42 U.S.C. 6295m1A; 42
U.S.C. 6295n2; 42 U.S.C.
6295o2B
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866
This final determination has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order E.O.
12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. 58 FR 51735 Oct. 4, 1993. As a result, the Office of Management and Budget OMB did not review this final determination.
B. Review Under Executive Orders 13771 and 13777
On January 30, 2017, the President issued E.O. 13771, Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs. E.O. 13771 stated the policy of the executive branch is to be prudent and financially responsible in the expenditure of funds, from both public and private sources. E.O. 13771 stated it is essential to manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations.
Additionally, on February 24, 2017, the President issued E.O. 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda. See 82 FR 12285 March 1, 2017. E.O. 13777 required the head of each agency to designate an agency
PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

official as its Regulatory Reform Officer RRO. Each RRO oversees the implementation of regulatory reform initiatives and policies to ensure that agencies effectively carry out regulatory reforms, consistent with applicable law.
Further, E.O. 13777 requires the establishment of a regulatory task force at each agency. The regulatory task force is required to make recommendations to the agency head regarding the repeal, replacement, or modification of existing regulations, consistent with applicable law. At a minimum, each regulatory reform task force must attempt to identify regulations that:
1 Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation;
2 Are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective;
3 Impose costs that exceed benefits;
4 Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with regulatory reform initiatives and policies;
5 Are inconsistent with the requirements of the Information Quality Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to that Act, particularly those regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently transparent to meet the standard for reproducibility; or 6 Derive from or implement Executive Orders or other Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or substantially modified.
DOE concludes that this final determination is consistent with the directives set forth in these executive orders. As discussed in this document, DOE is not amending the current energy conservation standards for SEMs and will not have any cost impact on manufacturers of SEMs. Therefore, this determination is an E.O. 13771 Other Action.
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act 5
U.S.C. 601 et seq. requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility
E:FRFM19JAR1.SGM

19JAR1