Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 127 / Wednesday, July 7, 2021 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

requirements need not be adopted or aligned with by DOE.
c ASHRAE Lookback Rulemakings. EPCA
also requires that DOE periodically consider amending energy conservation standards and test procedures for ASHRAE equipment.
1 EPCA requirements for ASHRAE
equipment outside of the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 process include:
i Energy Conservation Standards. Every 6
years, DOE shall conduct an evaluation of each class of covered equipment. DOE shall publish either a notice of determination that standards do not need to be amended because they would not result in significant additional conservation of energy and/or would not be technologically feasible and/or economically justified or a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed standards based on the criteria and procedures in 42 U.S.C. 6313a6B and supported by clear and convincing evidence.
A If DOE issues a notice of proposed rulemaking, it shall publish a final rule no more than 2 years later.
B If DOE determines that a standard does not need to be amended, not later than 3
years after such a determination, DOE must publish either a notice of determination that standards do not need to be amended because they would not result in significant additional conservation of energy and/or would not be technologically feasible and/or economically justified or a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed standards based on the criteria and procedures in in 42 U.S.C. 6313a6B and supported by clear and convincing evidence.
ii Test Procedures. At least once every 7
years, DOE shall conduct an evaluation, and if DOE determines, supported by clear and convincing evidence, that amended test procedures would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements in 42 U.S.C.
6314a23, it shall prescribe test procedures for the applicable equipment.
DOE notes that EPCA requires test procedures that are consistent with industry test procedures. As noted in paragraph b2 of this section, this affords DOE some flexibility in making modifications to the DOE test procedure that are consistent with the industry test procedure. Otherwise, DOE shall publish a notice of determination not to amend a test procedure.
2 DOEs 6-year-lookback and 7-yearlookback review requirements, as detailed in this section, are regulatory obligations specific to DOE and not satisfied by any ASHRAE action. Specifically, ASHRAE
reviewing and reaffirming but not amending a standard or test procedure does not eliminate DOEs separate requirement to review each class of covered equipment.
10. Direct Final Rules In accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295p4, on receipt of a joint proposal that is submitted by interested persons that are fairly representative of relevant points of view, DOE may issue a direct final rule DFR
establishing energy conservation standards for a covered product or equipment if DOE
determines the recommended standard is in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295o or 42

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:33 Jul 06, 2021

Jkt 253001

U.S.C. 6313a6B as applicable. To be fairly representative of relevant points of view the group submitting a joint statement must, where appropriate, include larger concerns and small businesses in the regulated industry/manufacturer community, energy advocates, energy utilities, consumers, and States. However, it will be necessary to evaluate the meaning of fairly representative on a case-by-case basis, subject to the circumstances of a particular rulemaking, to determine whether fewer or additional parties must be part of a joint statement in order to be fairly representative of relevant points of view.
11. Principles for Distinguishing Between Effective and Compliance Dates a Dates, generally. The effective and compliance dates for either DOE test procedures or DOE energy conservation standards are typically not identical, and these terms should not be used interchangeably.
b Effective date. The effective date is the date a rule is legally operative after being published in the Federal Register.
c Compliance date. 1 For test procedures, the compliance date is the specific date when manufacturers are required to use the new or amended test procedure requirements to make representations concerning the energy efficiency or use of a product, including certification that the covered product/
equipment meets an applicable energy conservation standard.
2 For energy conservation standards, the compliance date is the specific date upon which manufacturers are required to meet the new or amended standards for applicable covered products/equipment that are distributed in interstate commerce.
12. Principles for the Conduct of the Engineering Analysis a The purpose of the engineering analysis is to develop the relationship between efficiency and cost of the subject product/
equipment. Another important role of the engineering analysis is to identify the maximum technologically feasible level. The maximum technologically feasible level is one that can be reached through efficiency improvements and/or design options, both commercially feasible and in working prototypes. The Department will consider two elements in the engineering analysis:
The selection of efficiency levels to analyze, as discussed in paragraph b of this section;
and the determination of product cost at each efficiency level, as discussed in paragraph c of this section. From the efficiency/cost relationship developed in the engineering analysis, measures such as payback, lifecycle cost, and energy savings can be developed. The Department will identify issues that will be examined in the engineering analysis and the types of specialized expertise that may be required.
DOE will select appropriate contractors, subcontractors, and expert consultants, as necessary, to perform the engineering analysis. DOE will minimize uncertainties by using measures such as test data or component or material supplier information
PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

35687

where available. Also, the Department will consider data, information, and analyses received from interested parties for use in the analysis wherever feasible.
b The Department will typically use one of two approaches to develop energy efficiency levels for the engineering analysis:
Relying on observed efficiency levels in the market i.e., the efficiency-level approach; or determining the incremental efficiency improvements associated with incorporating specific design options to a baseline model i.e., the design-option approach. The Department will consider the availability of data and analytical tools, the resource needs, and public comments when determining the best approach or combination of approaches for an engineering analysis.
1 Using the efficiency-level approach, the efficiency levels established for the analysis will be determined based on the market distribution of existing products. This approach typically entails compiling a comprehensive list of products available on the market, such as from DOEs product certification database and conducting DOE
energy performance tests to validate the certified ratings.
2 Using the design option approach, the efficiency levels established for the analysis will be determined through detailed engineering calculations and/or computer simulations of the efficiency improvements from implementing specific design options that have been identified in the technology assessment and screening analysis. The design option approach will typically be used when a comprehensive database of certified models is unavailable. In certain rulemakings, the efficiency-level approach based on actual products on the market will be extended using the design option approach to interpolate to define gap fill levels to bridge large gaps between other identified efficiency levels and/or to extrapolate to the max-tech level the level that DOE determines is the maximum achievable efficiency level, particularly in cases where the max-tech level exceeds the maximum efficiency level currently available on the market. The Department will identify, modify, or develop any engineering models necessary to predict the efficiency impact of any one or combination of design options on the product/equipment as measured by the applicable DOE test procedure.
3 The cost-efficiency curve and a detailed description of any engineering models will be available to stakeholders during the preNOPR stage of the rulemaking.
c The Department will typically conduct the cost analysis using one or a combination of approaches depending on a suite of factors, including the availability and reliability of public information, characteristics of the subject product/
equipment, and the availability and timeliness of purchasing the product/
equipment on the market. The cost approaches are summarized as follows:
1 Physical teardowns: Under this approach, the Department will physically dismantle a commercially-available product/
equipment model, component-bycomponent, to develop a detailed bill of materials for the model. The core function of
E:FRFM07JYP1.SGM

07JYP1