Je veux savoir à propos de…

53888

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules
2 The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered products in the type or class compared to any increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses for the covered products that are likely to result from the standard;
3 The total projected amount of energy or as applicable, water savings likely to result directly from the standard;

4 Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the products likely to result from the standard;
5 The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the standard;
6 The need for national energy and water conservation; and 7 Other factors the Secretary of Energy Secretary considers relevant.

42 U.S.C. 6295o2BiIVII
DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows the individual analyses that are performed to satisfy each of the requirements within EPCA.

TABLE I.1EPCA REQUIREMENTS AND CORRESPONDING DOE ANALYSIS
EPCA requirement
Corresponding DOE analysis
Significant Energy Savings
Technological Feasibility
Economic Justification:
1. Economic impact on manufacturers and consumers

2. Lifetime operating cost savings compared to increased cost for the product
3. Total projected energy savings
4. Impact on utility or performance
5. Impact of any lessening of competition
6. Need for national energy and water conservation

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

7. Other factors the Secretary considers relevant

Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable presumption that a standard is economically justified if the Secretary finds that the additional cost to the consumer of purchasing a product complying with an energy conservation standard level will be less than three times the value of the energy savings during the first year that the consumer will receive as a result of the standard, as calculated under the applicable test procedure. 42 U.S.C. 6295o2Biii EPCA also 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. 6295o1 Also, the Secretary may not prescribe an amended or new standard if interested persons have established by a preponderance of the evidence that the standard is likely to result in the unavailability in the United States in any covered product type or class of performance characteristics including reliability,
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:01 Sep 28, 2021

Jkt 253001

Shipments Analysis.
National Impact Analysis.
Energy and Water Use Analysis.
Market and Technology Assessment.
Screening Analysis.
Engineering Analysis.

Manufacturer Impact Analysis.
Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.
Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis.
Shipments Analysis.
Markups for Product Price Analysis.
Energy and Water Use Analysis.
Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis.
Shipments Analysis.
National Impact Analysis.
Screening Analysis.
Engineering Analysis.
Manufacturer Impact Analysis.
Shipments Analysis.
National Impact Analysis.
Employment Impact Analysis.
Utility Impact Analysis.
Emissions Analysis.
Monetization of Emission Reductions Benefits.
Regulatory Impact Analysis.

features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as those generally available in the United States.
42 U.S.C. 6295o4
Additionally, EPCA specifies requirements when promulgating an energy conservation standard for a covered product that has two or more subcategories. DOE must specify a different standard level for a type or class of product that has the same function or intended use, if DOE
determines that products within such group: A Consume a different kind of energy from that consumed by other covered products within such type or class; or B have a capacity or other performance-related feature which other products within such type or class do not have and such feature justifies a higher or lower standard. 42 U.S.C.
6295q1 In determining whether a performance-related feature justifies a different standard for a group of products, DOE must consider such factors as the utility to the consumer of the feature and other factors DOE deems appropriate. Id. Any rule prescribing
PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

such a standard must include an explanation of the basis on which such higher or lower level was established.
42 U.S.C. 6295q2
Finally, pursuant to the amendments contained in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 EISA 2007, Public Law 110140, any final rule for new or amended energy conservation standards promulgated after July 1, 2010, is required to address standby mode and off mode energy use. 42
U.S.C. 6295gg3 Specifically, when DOE adopts a standard for a covered product after that date, it must, if justified by the criteria for adoption of standards under EPCA 42 U.S.C.
6295o, incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into a single standard, or, if that is not feasible, adopt a separate standard for such energy use for that product. 42 U.S.C.
6295gg3AB DOEs current test procedures for RCWs address standby mode and off mode energy use. In this rulemaking, DOE intends to continue to incorporate such energy use into any
E:FRFM29SEP1.SGM

29SEP1