Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

66410

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 23, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1

After DOE has determined that particular technology options are technologically feasible, it further evaluates each technology option in light of the following additional screening criteria: 1 Practicability to manufacture, install, and service; 2
adverse impacts on product utility or availability; 3 adverse impacts on health or safety, and 4 unique-pathway proprietary technologies. Sections 6a3iiiBE and 7b25 of the Process Rule. The technology options identified for this final determination are essentially those technologies identified and considered for the October 2016 final determination. See sections III.B.3.b. and III.B.3.c. of this document for additional discussion.
EPCA requires that in proposing to adopt an amended or new energy conservation standard, or proposing no amendment or no new standard for a type or class of covered product, DOE
must determine the maximum improvement in energy efficiency or maximum reduction in energy use that is technologically feasible for each type or class of covered product. 42 U.S.C.
6295p1 Accordingly, DOE
determined the max-tech improvements in energy efficiency for vented heaters, using the design parameters for the most efficient products available on the market or in working prototypes. See section III.B.3.d. of this document for further discussion.
b. Energy Savings To adopt any new or amended standards for a covered product, DOE
must determine that such action would result in significant energy savings. 42
U.S.C. 6295o3B Although the term significant is not defined in the EPCA, the U.S. Court of Appeals, for the District of Columbia Circuit in Natural Resources Defense Council v.
Herrington, 768 F.2d 1355, 1373 D.C.
Cir. 1985, opined that Congress intended significant energy savings in the context of EPCA to be savings that were not genuinely trivial.
The significance of energy savings offered by a new or amended energy conservation standard cannot be determined without knowledge of the specific circumstances surrounding a given rulemaking. For example, the United States has now rejoined the Paris Agreement and will exert leadership in confronting the climate crisis.11
Additionally, some covered products and equipment have most of their energy consumption occur during 11 See Executive Order 14008, 86 FR 7619 Feb.
1, 2021 Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:32 Nov 22, 2021

Jkt 256001

periods of peak energy demand. The impacts of these products on the energy infrastructure can be more pronounced than products with relatively constant demand. In evaluating the significance of energy savings, DOE considers differences in primary energy and FFC
effects for different covered products and equipment when determining whether energy savings are significant.
Primary energy and FFC effects include the energy consumed in electricity production depending on load shape, in distribution and transmission, and in extracting, processing, and transporting primary fuels i.e., coal, natural gas, petroleum fuels, and thus present a more complete picture of the impacts of energy conservation standards.
Accordingly, DOE evaluates the significance of energy savings on a caseby-case basis.
c. Cost-Effectiveness Under EPCAs 6-year-lookback review provision for existing energy conservation standards at 42 U.S.C.
6295m1, cost-effectiveness of potential amended standards is a relevant consideration both where DOE
proposes to adopt such standards, as well as where it does not. In considering cost-effectiveness when making a determination of whether existing energy conservation standards do not need to be amended, DOE considers the savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered product compared to any increase in the price of, or in the initial charges for, or maintenance expenses of, the covered product that are likely to result from a standard. 42 U.S.C.
6295m1Areferencing 42 U.S.C.
6295n2 Additionally, any new or amended energy conservation standard prescribed by the Secretary for any type or class of covered product shall be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency which the Secretary determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. 42 U.S.C.
6295o2A Cost-effectiveness is one of the factors that DOE must ultimately consider under 42 U.S.C. 6295o2B
to support a finding of economic justification, if it is determined that amended standards are appropriate under the applicable statutory criteria.
42 U.S.C. 6295o2BiII
In determining cost effectiveness of potential amended standards for DHE, DOE considered the life-cycle cost LCC and payback period PBP
analyses that estimate the costs and benefits to users from the standards. The LCC is the sum of the initial price of equipment including its installation
PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

and the operating expense including energy, maintenance, and repair expenditures discounted over the lifetime of the equipment. The LCC
analysis requires a variety of inputs, such as equipment prices, equipment energy consumption, energy prices, maintenance and repair costs, equipment lifetime, and discount rates appropriate for consumers. To account for uncertainty and variability in specific inputs e.g., equipment lifetime and discount rate, DOE uses a distribution of values, with probabilities attached to each value.
The PBP is the estimated amount of time in years it takes consumers to recover the increased purchase cost including installation of more-efficient equipment through lower operating costs. DOE calculates the PBP by dividing the change in total installation cost due to a more-stringent standard by the change in annual operating cost for the year that standards are assumed to take effect.
To further inform DOEs consideration of the cost-effectiveness of potential amended standards, DOE may also consider the NPV of total costs and benefits estimated as part of the national impact analysis NIA. The inputs for determining the NPV of the total costs and benefits experienced by consumers are: 1 Total annual installed cost, 2
total annual operating costs energy costs and repair and maintenance costs, and 3 a discount factor to calculate the present value of costs and savings.
For the determination in this document, DOE considered the LCC and PBP analyses from the April 2010 final rule, as well as the evaluation in the October 2016 final determination, and information gathered on the current market and technologies.
d. Further Considerations As stated previously, pursuant to EPCA, if DOE does not issue a notification of determination that energy conservation standards for DHE do not need to be amended, DOE must issue a NOPR that includes new proposed standards. 42 U.S.C. 6295m1B The new proposed standards in any such NOPR must be based on the criteria established under 42 U.S.C. 6295o. 42
U.S.C. 6295m1B The criteria in 42
U.S.C. 6295o require that standards be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency, which the Secretary determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. 42 U.S.C.
6295o2A In deciding whether a proposed standard is economically justified, DOE must determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed its
E:FRFM23NOR1.SGM

23NOR1