Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations current standard, in addition to the one product that also had a cycle time of 30
minutes high temperature setting and met the standard when tested under Appendix D2. The CA IOUs also conducted independent testing, using Appendix D1, that showed there were multiple clothes dryers on the market offering a 30 minute or less cycle time high temperature setting that also met the current energy conservation standard. No. 0036, pp. 34 These commenters concluded that based on this data, short cycle time was not a feature justifying a different a standard and the proposed product classes were not warranted for clothes washers and clothes dryers. No. 0036, p. 5
DOE testing presented in the NOPR
was conducted according to the Appendix D2 methodology because, unlike Appendix D1, it produces a cycle time that is representative of an average use cycle even though cycle time is not currently recorded in either test procedure. The methodology in Appendix D1 will not allow for the measurement of a cycle time that is representative of average use, because the cycle is interrupted before completion. While cycle time measured using Appendix D1 would be shorter than the cycle time measured under Appendix D2, DOE maintains that this is not an accurate representation of how consumers would use these products.
As DOE explained in the December 2020 final rule, even if clothes washers and clothes dryers with short normal cycle times for were available, the product class provision, 42 U.S.C.
6295q, would still be appropriately applied in this rulemaking. While there are some products on the market that may complete a cycle within the time thresholds, DOE is establishing these short cycle product classes to facilitate the development of products design to complete a normal cycle within the threshold times and be subject to testing by the manufacturer. DOE notes that the impact of this rulemaking is to establish product classes based on short normal wash or dry cycles, therefore incentivizing manufacturers to develop such products that can meet consumer needs. 85 FR 81359, 81367.
The CA IOUs reliance on the Oak Ridge study, and the CA IOUs own data, are also out of place in the context of this rulemaking because these data were generated using the test method set forth in Appendix D1. As DOE explained in the NOPR, Appendix D1 does not provide data that can be used to determine a cycle time as experienced by the consumer. This is because Appendix D1 requires manually stopping operation at a specified
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:33 Jan 17, 2021

Jkt 253001

moisture content, normalizing, and applying a field use factor, therefore, the length of time that a clothes dryer is operated during an Appendix D1 test does not necessarily correspond to the length of time that a consumer would operate the clothes dryers in contrast to the calculated energy use, which is representative of the energy use experienced by the consumer. 85 FR
49297, 49303. This means that while testing under Appendix D1 may identify products on the market that could dry clothes in 30 minutes, it is not an accurate representation of how consumers would use these products because the cycle is manually stopped at the target remaining moisture content.
DOE established these short cycle product classes so that consumers would have access to products that accomplish normal washing or drying within the specified cycle time, not just in control room settings.
The CA IOUs also present their review of 111 products in the Consumer Reports database that showed no clear relationship between normal cycle time and consumer satisfaction and requested DOE provide evidence of consumer demand. No. 0036, p. 7
Comments submitted by the Competitive Enterprise Institute CEI
and the 60 Plus Association demonstrated that consumers want and desire these faster products. CEI shared feedback it received from consumers that expressed a need for faster appliances and identified growing consumer dissatisfaction with the current length of cycles. 85 FR 81359, 81366 referencing No. 0031, pp. 23.
The 60 Plus Association submitted comments, arguing on behalf of its senior citizen members, that the rulemaking offers a significant benefit to individuals looking to make the most of their time. This commenter noted that the time saved by utilizing future, short normal cycle products would make a noticeable difference in the lives of its underrepresented members. 85 FR
81363, referencing No. 0043, p. 1.
The CA IOUs also worried that some manufacturers may easily modify their current products to meet the requirements of the new product classes at the expense of the consumer. No.
0036, p. 5 While DOE acknowledges these concerns, DOE has no information to support the contention, and does not anticipate that manufacturers would reengineer products already on the market in response to this rulemaking.
Further, it remains the consumers choice ultimately to decide which product on the market that they will choose to purchase. The creation of the new product classes does not set a
PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

4885

mandate that consumers must purchase products from these product classes.
DOE thanks the CA IOUs for their comments and directs them to the responses provided in the December 2020 final rule for the shared issues they raised. After considering the unique comments provided by the CA IOUs, DOE affirms the conclusions reached in the December 2020 final rule.
Signing Authority This document of the Department of Energy was signed on January 11, 2021, by Daniel R. Simmons, 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 January 12, 2021.
Treena V. Garrett, Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
FR Doc. 202100842 Filed 11521; 8:45 am BILLING CODE 645001P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
EERE2019BTSTD0008
RIN 1904AD29

Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Small Electric Motors Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Final determination.
AGENCY:

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended EPCA, prescribes energy conservation standards for various consumer products and certain commercial and industrial equipment, including small electric motors SEMs. EPCA also requires the U.S.
Department of Energy DOE to periodically determine whether morestringent standards would be technologically feasible and
SUMMARY:

E:FRFM19JAR1.SGM

19JAR1