Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 247 / Wednesday, December 29, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 42 U.S.C. 631118 emphasis added Energy efficiency is the ratio of the useful output of services from a consumer product or an article of industrial equipment to the energy use of such a product or article. 42 U.S.C.
62915; 42 U.S.C. 63113 Energy use means, in relevant part, the quantity of energy directly consumed by a consumer product or article of industrial equipment at the point of use. 42 U.S.C. 62914; 42 U.S.C.
63114 EPCA further provides that DOE may establish more than one energy conservation standard for products that serve more than one major function by setting one energy conservation standard for each major function. 42 U.S.C. 6295o5; 42
U.S.C. 6316a Reading these provisions in the context of EPCA as a whole, the statute requires the Department to establish energy conservation standards that regulate the energy use associated with the useful output or energy consumption at the point of use of an appliance in operation of its major function. Where an appliance possesses more than one major function, Congress authorized and directed DOE to consider regulation of energy efficiency or consumption of an appliance for each major function. Where Congress tasked DOE to address other matters beyond the appliances major functions, it expressly directed DOE to set standards that pursue those other objectives, such as when it directed the agency to establish standards for standby mode and off mode operation of covered products see 42 U.S.C. 6295gg.
Given EPCAs focus on an appliances major functions, it is reasonable to assume that the consumer would be cognizant of such function and recognize such feature as providing additional benefit in the appliances performance of such major function. It follows that an aspect of the appliance whose elimination would not be noticed by the consumer when interacting with the appliance would not be the type of product characteristic that Congress would expect DOE to preserve at the expense of energy savings. Given that DOE is directed to consider the application of EPCAs features provision in appropriate cases when prescribing new or amended energy conservation standards, DOE finds the better reading of the features provision i.e., those features that cannot be eliminated by the establishment of a new or amended energy conservation standard to be those features that provide a consumer unique utility during the operation of the appliance in performance of its
VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:59 Dec 28, 2021

Jkt 256001

major functions. Stated another way, the features provision and the related utility of such features pertain to those aspects of the appliance with which the consumer interacts during the operation of the product i.e., when the product is providing its useful output and the utility derived from those features during normal operation.
Using this logic, in the context of residential furnaces, commercial water heaters, and similarly-situated products or equipment, incorporation of noncondensing technology and associated venting is not a performance-related feature for the purpose of the EPCA
prohibitions at 42 U.S.C. 6295o4 and 42 U.S.C. 6313a6BiiiIIaa.
As discussed in the subsequent paragraphs, DOE acknowledges that a condensing appliance generally cannot operate as intended by the manufacturer if installed with a non-condensing venting system without modifications.
Also, issues of complex and costly installations that require modifications to the existing venting system to be properly installed, as well as potential alternatives, are economic matters appropriately addressed as part of the determination of whether new or amended standards are economically justified, as required by EPCA.
DOE finds that non-condensing technology and the associated venting does not provide unique utility to consumers distinct from an appliances function of providing heated air or water, as applicable. Regardless of changes to the living space that may be required at the time of installation, the consumer utility of a condensing residential furnace or commercial water heater is the same as that of a noncondensing residential furnace or commercial water heater once installed and operating. While interacting with a residential furnace or commercial water heater during operation of the appliance, a consumer discerns no unique utility resulting from the specific heat exchanger technology noncondensing or condensing or the associated venting, as the heated air or water provided by the appliance is indistinguishable to the consumer regardless of those attributes. Because the consumer realizes the same perceived benefit i.e., heated air or water regardless of the technology used by the appliance, there is no unique utility to preserve as would justify sacrificing potential additional gains in energy savings through new or amended energy conservation standards in future product-specific rulemakings.
DOE disagrees with Bradford White that the Departments reading, as adopted in this final interpretive rule, is
PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

73955

inconsistent with the inclusion of reliability in the features provision.
Whether a consumer can depend on a product to provide its useful output when needed goes directly to an aspect of the appliance that is accessible to the layperson consumer and is based upon user operation and interaction with that appliance. Preserving reliability ensures, for example, that when a consumer calls upon a residential furnace or commercial water heater, the consumer is provided heated air or water, as the case may be. Conversely, there is no noticeable difference to the consumer in access or output based upon the type of technology or venting used by the appliance. In addition, DOE
disagrees with Bradford Whites assertion that condensing technology requires an increase in the overall size of a water heater, and instead, the agency agrees with the Institute for Policy Integrity that installation of a condensing appliance would not result in a loss of useful space for most consumers. To confirm this understanding, DOE conducted a review of several condensing and noncondensing models having similar characteristics i.e., input rating and storage volume from multiple manufacturers and found that the overall dimensions for condensing models were not significantly larger than for non-condensing models.10
Further, changes to product dimensions resulting from increasing efficiency is more appropriately considered as part of the energy conservation standards rulemaking process, so that DOE can evaluate the appropriate cost impacts on a case-by-case basis.
APGA et al. further commented that establishing energy conservation standards at a condensing level would make all atmospherically-vented furnaces and water heaters no longer commercially viable. APGA et al., No.
140 at p. 7 GEUAG asserted that the adoption of proposed standards under the interpretation set forth in the August 2021 NOPIR would effectively eliminate the use of non-condensing gas furnaces, which is not permitted under 42 U.S.C.
6295o4. GEUAG, No. 132 at pp. 3
4 In response to APGA et al. and GEUAG, DOE notes that, in establishing the features provision, EPCA
anticipates that new or amended energy 10 DOE notes that it surveyed the dimensions of representative commercial water heaters 100
gallon, 200,000 British thermal units Btu/hour and found the height and diameter dimensions comparable. The cubic volume of condensing models ranged from 20 percent less to 2 percent more than the cubic volume of comparable noncondensing models.

E:FRFM29DER1.SGM

29DER1