Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 237 / Tuesday, December 14, 2021 / Rules and Regulations In the December 2020 Final Rule, DOE made a policy decision to place significant weight on reducing manufacturers burdens, providing greater certainty and transparency to manufacturers, and reducing delays in manufacturers ability to bring innovative product options to consumers. 85 FR 79816. To justify these changes to DOEs interim waiver process, DOE noted that it intended to shift the burden of any delays in the review process onto the Department and allow for innovative products to be
made available more quickly to consumers. 85 FR 79802, 79803 and 79811.
In the August 2021 NOPR, DOE stated that in reconsideration of the December 2020 Final Rule, DOE is weighing these policy considerations differently. DOE
tentatively determined that the changes under the December 2020 Final Rule may not allow DOE sufficient time to review an alternate test procedure, leading to increased risks to consumers of purchasing noncompliant products, decreased energy savings, and an unfair
70947

playing field for competing manufacturers in the market. Given EPCAs goal of energy conservation and DOEs statutory obligations under EPCA, in this final rule DOE places greater weight on ensuring compliant test procedures, decreasing risks to consumers and manufacturers, and ensuring that DOE meets its statutory obligations. 86 FR 46793, 46795.
In response to the August 2021 NOPR, DOE received comments from the interested parties listed in Table II.1.

TABLE II.1WRITTEN COMMENTS RECEIVED IN RESPONSE TO AUGUST 2021 NOPR
Commenters
Reference in this final rule
Appliance Standards Awareness Project, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Consumer Federation of America, National Consumer Law Center on behalf of its low-income clients, and Natural Resources Defense Council.
Sierra Club and Earthjustice
Attorneys General of New York, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, the Commonwealths of Massachusetts And Pennsylvania, the District Of Columbia and the City Of New York.
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
California Investor-Owned Utilities Pacific Gas and Electric, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison.
Madison Indoor Air Quality
North American Association of Food Equipment Manufacturers
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute, Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, and National Electrical Manufacturers Association.
Carrier Corporation
Bradford White Corporation
Lennox International Inc

Joint Advocates

Efficiency Organizations.

Sierra Club and Earthjustice
Joint Attorneys General

Efficiency Organizations.
State and Local Governments.

DEEP
CA IOUs

State.
Utility.

MIAQ
NAFEM
AHRI
Joint Commenters

Manufacturer.
Trade Association.
Trade Association.
Trade Associations.

Carrier
BWC
Lennox

Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.
Manufacturer.

As noted previously, DOE is required to develop test procedures to measure the energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of each covered product and covered equipment during a representative average use cycle or period of use. 42 U.S.C. 6293;
42 U.S.C. 6314 Manufacturers of covered products and covered equipment must use the prescribed DOE
test procedure to certify that their products and equipment meet the applicable energy conservation
standards adopted under EPCA, and also when making any other representations to the public regarding the energy use or efficiency of those products. 42 U.S.C. 6293c, 6295s, 42
U.S.C. 6314d and 42 U.S.C. 6316a In accordance with EPCA, manufacturers are prohibited from distributing a covered product without first demonstrating compliance with applicable standards through the use of DOE test procedures. 42 U.S.C.
6302a5, 42 U.S.C. 6295s DOE has determined that, upon weighing the aforementioned policy considerations differently, certain provisions implemented by the December 2020 Final Rule are not appropriate or necessary. DOE
acknowledges that its interim waiver process often involves a lengthy period
following submission of interim waiver and waiver applications and imposes burdens on manufacturers who are unable to certify their products or equipment absent an interim waiver or waiver from DOE. The December 2020
Final Rule, however, mandates a process that, by prioritizing the speeding up of the petition process, may result in alternate test procedures that are inconsistent with EPCAs purpose and requirements and have adverse environmental impacts. Further, to encourage waivers and prevent the Departments administrative waiver process from delaying or deterring the introduction of novel, innovative products into the marketplace, the Department has a long-stated Enforcement Policy StatementPending Test Procedure Waiver Applications
manufacturers 180 days from issuance of a new or amended test procedure to begin using that test procedure for representation of energy efficiency.
84 FR 18414, 18416; See 42 U.S.C. 6293c2. In the December 2020 Final Rule, DOE stated that it was maintaining the 180-day grace period as proposed. 85 FR 79802, 79813. As such, under 10
CFR 430.27i and 431.401i as finalized in the December 2020 Final Rule, were a Decision and
Order issued with an alternate test procedure that differed from that required under the interim waiver, beginning 180 days following publication of the Decision and Order any representations made by the petitioner must fairly disclose the results of testing in accordance with the alternate test procedure specified by the final Order and the applicable requirements of 10 CFR part 429.

7 The parenthetical reference provides a reference for information located in the docket of DOEs rulemaking to amend the test procedure interim waiver process. Docket NO. EERE2019BTNOA
0011, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov.
The references are arranged as follows: Commenter name, comment docket ID number, page of that document.

A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.7
Other comments pertaining to specific proposals are discussed in section III.
III. Discussion
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1

Commenter type
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:20 Dec 13, 2021

Jkt 256001

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

E:FRFM14DER1.SGM

14DER1