June 29, 1999

FISCAL YEAR 2000 PRIORITIES FOR THE

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS

The enclosed data sheets reflect the priorities proposed for the Fiscal Year 2000 by the Department

of Energy, Office of Codes and Standards. The Office requests comments on the data sheets and the

proposed priorities and schedules. These proposed priorities are based on the presumption that the

Lighting and Appliance Standards Program will be funded at its requested level for the fiscal year

2000. The Department will base its final priorities on consideration of comments received and funds

available. If, based on the comments received, DOE considers changing the priorities from the

proposed, DOE will consult with interested parties before establishing final priorities.

The priority levels will assist DOE in determining the allocation of available resources during the

coming year. DOE plans to devote considerable resources to each high-priority rulemaking, for

activities including the preparation of technical feasibility and economic impact analyses, the

conduct of public meetings, and the issuance of various rulemaking notices, as appropriate.

For the medium-priority products, DOE plans to complete the initial analyses and circulate them for

comment. DOE does not plan to devote significant resources for low-priority products. Work on

these product categories likely will be limited to the monitoring of other efficiency programs.

Written comments should be submitted by July 30, 1999, to the U.S. Department of Energy,

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121, Attn: Michael Raymond, EE-43.

The final priorities will be reflected in the Regulatory Agenda. After publication of the Regulatory

Agenda, DOE will provide copies to interested parties. If you have any questions, please contact

Michael Raymond at (202) 586-9611, fax: (202) 586-4617, e-mail: michael.raymond@ee.doe.gov.

Sincerely,

Edward O. Pollock, Jr., Director

Office of Codes and Standards

Office of Building Technology, Stat

and Community Programs

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Enclosure

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

June 29, 1999 

FISCAL YEAR 2000 PRIORITIES FOR THE I 

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS 

The enclosed data sheets reflect the priorities proposed for the Fiscal Year 2000 by the Department 

of Energy, Office of Codes and Standards. The Office requests comments on the data sheets and the 

proposed priorities and schedules. These proposed priorities are based on the presumption that the 

Lighting and Appliance Standards Program will be funded at its requested level for the fiscal year 

2000. The Department will base its final priorities on consideration of comments received and funds 

available. If, based on the comments received, DOE considers changing the priorities from the 

proposed, DOE will consult with interested parties before establishing fmal priorities. 

The priority levels will assist DOE in determining the allocation of available resources during the 

coming year. DOE plans to devote considerable resources to each high-priority rulemaking, for 

activities including the preparation of technical feasibility and economic impact analyses, the 

conduct of public meetings, and the issuance of various rulemaking notices, as appropriate. 

For the medium-priority products, DOE plans to complete the initial analyses and circulate them for 

comment. DOE does not plan to devote significant resources for low-priority products. Work on 

these product categories likely will be limited to the monitoring of other efficiency programs. 

Written comments should be submitted by July 30, 1999, to the U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121, Attn: Michael Raymond, EE-43. 

The final priorities will be reflected in the Regulatory Agenda. After publication of the Regulatory 

Agenda, DOE will provide copies to interested parties. If you have any questions, please contact 

Michael Raymond at (202) 586-9611, fax: (202) 586-4617, e-mail: michaeLraymond@ee.doe.gov. 

Enclosure 

Sincerely, 

~iJl!e;AF Edward O. Pollock, Jr., Director 

Office of Codes and Standards 

Office of Building Technology, Stat 

and Community Programs 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
2000 Priority Setting

for

Standards and Test Procedure

Rulemakings

Draft

June 29, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

2000 Priority Setting 

for 

Standards and Test Procedure 

Rulemakings 

Draft 

June 29, 1999 
FISCAL 2000 PRIORITY SETTING FOR THE

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS

The enclosed data sheets reflect the priorities proposed for the Fiscal Year 2000 by the

Department of Energy, Office of Codes and Standards. The Office requests comments on the

data sheets and the proposed priorities and schedules. These proposed priorities are based on the

presumption that the Lighting and Appliance Standards Program will be funded at its requested

level for the fiscal year 2000. Final priorities will be based on the Department's consideration of

comments received and funds available. Once rulemakings are completed low priority actions

will be added to the high/medium priority lists.

Written comments should be submitted by July 30, 1999, to the U.S. Department of Energy,

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121, Attn: Michael Raymond, EE-43.

If you have any questions, please contact Michael Raymond at (202) 586-9611.

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

FISCAL 2000 PRIORITY SETTING FOR THE 

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS 

The enclosed data sheets reflect the priorities proposed for the Fiscal Year 2000 by the 

Department of Energy, Office of Codes and Standards. The Office requests comments on the 

data sheets and the proposed priorities and schedules. These proposed priorities are based on the 

presumption that the Lighting and Appliance Standards Program will be funded at its requested 

level for the fiscal year 2000. Final priorities will be based on the Department's consideration of 

comments received and funds available. Once rulemakings are completed low priority actions 

will be added to the high/medium priority lists. 

Written comments should be submitted by July 30, 1999, to the U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121, Attn: Michael Raymond, EE-43. 

If you have any questions, please contact Michael Raymond at (202) 586-9611. 
Table of Contents

Product Rulemaking Priority Page Product Rulemaking Priority Page

Clothes Dryers Standards Low 1 High Intensity Discharge Determination Medium 24

Lamps

Test Low 2 Test Procedure Low 25

Procedure

Clothes Washers Standards High 3 Lamps Standards Low 26

Test Low 4 Test Low 27

Procedure* Procedure*

Commercial A/C & H. P. Standards High 5 Mobile Home Furnaces Standards Low 28

Test High 6 Test Low 29

Procedure Procedure*

Comm. Furnaces & Boilers Standards High 7 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings Standards Low 30

Test High 8 Test Low 31

Procedure Procedure*

Commercial Water Heaters Standards High 9 Pool Heaters (Gas) Standards Low 32

Test High 10 Test Low 33

Procedure Procedure*

Cooking Products - Electric Standards Low 11 Refrigerators Standards* Low 34

Cooking Products - Gas Standards High' 12 Test Low 35

Procedure*

Test Low 13 Res. Central A/C and H. P. Standards High 36

Procedure*

Direct Heating Equipment, Standards Low 14 Test Procedure High 37

Gas

Test Low 15 Res. Furnaces and Boilers Standards Low 38

Procedure*

Dishwashers Standards Low 16 Test Low 39

Procedure*

Test High 17 Residential Water Heaters Standards High 40

Procedure

Distribution Transformers Standards High 18 Test Low 41

Procedure*

Test High' 19 Room Air Conditioners Standards* Low 42

Procedure

Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP Standards Low 20 Test Procedure Low 43

Test Low 21 Small Electric Motors Determination Medium 44

Procedure*

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts Standards High 22 Test Procedure Low 45

Test Low 23

Procedure

' Drops to Low Priority upon completion * Final Rules for these products have been recently published.

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Table of Contents 

Product Rulemaking Priority Page Product Rulemaking Priority Page 

Clothes Dryers Standards Low 1 High Intensity Discharge Determination Medium 24 

Lamps 

Test Low 2 Test Procedure Low 25 

Procedure 

Clothes Washers Standards High 3 Lamps Standards Low 26 

Test Low 4 Test Low 27 

Procedure* Procedure* 

Commercial AlC & H. P. Standards High 5 Mobile Home Furnaces Standards Low 28 

Test High 6 Test Low 29 

Procedure Procedure* 

Comm. Furnaces & Boilers Standards High 7 Plumbing FixiureslFittings Standards Low 30 

Test High 8 Test Low 31 

Procedure Procedure* 

Commercial Water Heaters Standards High 9 Pool Heaters (Gas) Standards Low 32 

Test High 10 Test Low 33 

Procedure Procedure* 

Cooking Products - Electric Standards Low 11 Refrigerators Standards* Low 34 

Cooking Products - Gas Standards Highl 12 Test Low 35 

Procedure* 

Test Low 13 Res. Central AlC and H. P. Standards High 36 

Procedure* 

Direct Heating Equipment, Standards Low 14 Test Procedure High 37 

Gas 

Test Low 15 Res. Furnaces and Boilers Standards Low 38 

Procedure* 

Dishwashers Standards Low 16 Test Low 39 

Procedure* 

Test High 17 Residential Water Heaters Standards High 40 

Procedure 

Distribution Transformers Standards High 18 Test Low 41 

Procedure* 

Test Highl 19 Room Air Conditioners Standards* Low 42 

Procedure 

Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP Standards Low 20 Test Procedure Low 43 

Test Low 21 Small Electric Motors Determination Medium 44 

Procedure* 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts Standards High 22 Test Procedure Low 45 

Test Low 23 

Procedure 

I Drops to Low Priority upon completion * Final Rules for these products have been recently published. 
Summary of Priorities

Standards and Determinations (D)

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products Page

Clothes Washers 3 Clothes Dryers 1

Commercial A/C and Heat Pumps 5 Cooking Products - Electric 11

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 7 Direct Heating Equipment, Gas 14

Commercial Water Heaters 9 Dishwashers 16

Cooking Products - Gas' 12 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP 20

Distribution Transformers 18 Lamps 26

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 22 Mobile Home Furnaces 28

Residential Central A/C and Heat Pumps 36 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings 30

Residential Water Heaters 40 Pool Heaters, Gas 32

Refrigerators* 34

Medium Priority Products Page Residential Furnaces and Boilers 38

High Intensity Discharge Lamps (D) 24 Room Air Conditioners* 42

Small Electric Motors (D) 44

Test Procedures

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products (con't) Page

Commercial A/C and Heat Pumps 6 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP* 21

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 8 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 23

Commercial Water Heaters 10 High Intensity Discharge Lamps 25

Dishwashers 17 Lamps* 27

Distribution Transformers' 19 Mobile Home Furnaces* 29

Residential Central A/C and Heat Pump 37 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings* 31

Pool Heaters, Gas* 33

Low Priority Products Page Refrigerators 35

Clothes Dryers 2 Residential Furnaces and Boilers* 39

Clothes Washers* 4 Residential Water Heaters* 41

Cooking Products* 13 Room Air Conditioners 43

Direct Heating Equipment, Gas* 15 Small Electric Motors 45

' Drops to Low Priority upon Completion * Final Rules for these products have been recently published.

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Summary of Priorities 

Standards and Determinations (D) 

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products Page 

Clothes Washers 3 Clothes Dryers 1 

Commercial AlC and Heat Pumps 5 Cooking Products - Electric 11 

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 7 Direct Heating Equipment, Gas 14 

Commercial Water Heaters 9 Dishwashers 16 

Cooking Products - Gas 1 12 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP 20 

Distribution Transformers 18 Lamps 26 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 22 Mobile Home Furnaces 28 

Residential Central AlC and Heat Pumps 36 Plumbing FixturesfFittings 30 

Residential Water Heaters 40 Pool Heaters, Gas 32 

Refrigerators* 34 

Medium Priority Products Page Residential Furnaces and Boilers 38 

High Intensity Discharge Lamps CD) 24 Room Air Conditioners* 42 

Small Electric Motors (D) 44 

Test Procedures 

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products (con't) Page 

Commercial AlC and Heat Pumps 6 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP* 21 

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 8 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 23 

Commercial Water Heaters 10 High Intensity Discharge Lamps 25 

Dishwashers 17 Lamps* 27 

Distribution Transformersl 19 Mobile Home Furnaces* 29 

Residential Central AlC and Heat Pump 37 Plumbing FixturesfFittings* 31 

Pool Heaters, Gas* 33 

Low Priority Products Page Refrigerators 35 

Clothes Dryers 2 Residential Furnaces and Boilers* 39 

Clothes Washers* 4 Residential Water Heaters* 41 

Cooking Products* 13 Room Air Conditioners 43 

Direct Heating Equipment, Gas* 15 Small Electric Motors 45 

1 Drops to Low Pnonty upon CompletlOn * FIllal Rules for these products have been recently pubbshed. 
Standards

Product: Clothes Dryers - (Gas/Electric)

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action ; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not available

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes Reduced annual cycles needs to be considered, definitions and creation of new

to Test Procedures product class for condensing dryers

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes washers.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Recommendations by There appears to be a general consensus among stakeholders that updating

Interested Parties clothes dryer standards should be given low priority.

Evidence of Market-Driven At least three U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes washers

or Voluntary Efficiency which are likely to have improved moisture extraction.

Improvements

Issues Significant dryer savings potential will be considered in clothes washer

rulemaking (greater moisture extraction). Mechanical extraction has been

estimated to be 20 times more cost effective than thermal extraction.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on white good

manufacturers.

1 Draft- June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Clothes Dryers - (GaslElectric) 

Priority: Low 

:·.::.:¥4~~:mJ{~i~~~~~.~~~fiiii·.::~::.:·~:::::::,::.:.:.::-:~.:::::.:·:.:.:::I:~::·:::::~.::.a:<?::.::}:i·;·:rL:~·;: ~::::r:?;:::lM~~m~g(,;:I~.~;:;~~:;;::;;~::;;;;:;·; .. ::~:::;;~;::;i;;:;;:·:;:~~:::~:::~~:;;.;;:::::;;:·:ii::;.:::::::.:::;:::;:.:1 

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not available 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not available 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes Reduced annual cycles needs to be considered, definitions and creation of new 

to Test Procedures product class for condensing dryers 

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes washers. 

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by There appears to be a general consensus among stakeholders that updating 

Interested Parties clothes dryer standards should be given low priority. 

Evidence of Market-Driven At least three U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes washers 

or Voluntary Efficiency which are likely to have improved moisture extraction. 

Improvements 

Issues Significant dryer savings potential \'lill be considered in clothes washer 

rulemaking (greater moisture extraction). Mechanical extraction has been 

estimated to be 20 times more cost effective than thermal extraction. 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on white good 

manufacturers. 

1 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Clothes Dryers - (Gas/Electric)

Priority: Low

NEEM

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Test Procedure needs to be changed for standard

Priority of Standard Low

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

CSA has conducted specialized dryer tests and has asked DOE to consider

revisions to the test procedure.

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues A new product class needs to be defined for condenser dryers. Currently there is

one waiver in effect. The are numerous changes that are required prior to a

standards rulemaking for clothes dryers.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Considered to be a low priority by stakeholders.

2 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Test Procedure 

Product: Clothes Dryers - (GaslElectric) 

Priority: Low 

:.:;j'~~~~m:'tit.v;m1#.t~it~:;$.@'fiiji}:~i:::·;::.::~:::!::::::}::::;.::·:}·:::!.::t:::\~.:~.:::::t:(: .. ::::}:·:::j::·:}:;~i~~1~~l~iji:i:~:i\il~.::~::;:;:;::\;·:;·:·::~:i·~:K';:~i·;:~:::.\~!::~:::;:.y;::·i~~:;;~!~::(:;;:~:::: 

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure needs to be changed for standard 

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other CSA has conducted specialized dryer tests and has asked DOE to consider 

Coordinatin~ Activities revisions to the test procedure. 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues A new product class needs to be defined for condenser dryers. Currently there is 

one waiver in effect. The are numerous changes that are required prior to a 

standards rulemaking for clothes dryers. 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori Considered to be a low b stakeholders. 

2 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Clothes Washers

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 0.29 - 8.36 ]' Specific examples below:

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) Efficiency Improvement over the Base Case

2002-2030

VerticalAxis

5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

0.29 - 0.32 0.97 - 1.06 1.81 - 1.98 2.20 - 2.42 4.14-4.591

.........................:.........................

HorizontalAxis

35% 40% 45% 50%

5.88-6.79 5.92-6.83 6.89 - 7.94 7.28 - 8.36

Potential Economic Potential benefits to consumers have not been quantified. High efficient clothes

Benefits/Burdens washers require a new platform design and significant investment.

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes Final Rule issued August 27, 1997.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes dryers. DOE regulation of white goods for full line

manufacturers.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Consortium for Energy Efficiency program with utilities. Energy Star program.

or Voluntary Efficiency Federal Energy Management Program for procurement initiative. At least three

Improvements U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes washers.

Issues

FY 1999 Priority 1-ligh

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule ANOPR - Published 11/19/98

NOPR - 12/99

Final Rule - 7/00

Rationale for Priority Level Generally considered to be a high priority by stakeholders. Potential energy

savings are large.

1 Based preliminary National Energy Savings (NES) data used for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR).

3 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Clothes Washers 

Priority: High 

Standards 

:;;jtitt~i:m·:;m~::gfl~i~(¥$.ijnmi}tiiT·::t:~::::·:?-;r~i·;:;:·;';:i:::'~~:::'~:~'::::;:::';'::~:':;?::·;·:;::~;:,::~::;~:,:~::;·;J~,~~~@l.~~f1:Itf'I~}?~;:r:?~::::;~;:·:;i.r~i??:::::·::·:;r;I;:;;::;;::::{;·:;::~~:I;:;;j 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 0.29 - 8.36 r Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; '" Cumulative (Quads) ~Efficiency hnpro\ement owr the Base Case 

2002-2030 

VerticalAxis 

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 

0.29 - 0.32 0.97 - 1.06 1.81 - 1.98 2.20 - 2.42 4.14 - 4.59 

HorizontalAxis 

35% 40% 45% 50% 

.5.88 - 6.79 5.92 - 6.83 6.89 -7.94 7.28 - 8.36 ...... - ................... -_ ....................... 

Potential Economic Potential benefits to consumers have not been quantified. High efficient clothes 

BenefitslBurdens washers require a new platform design and significant investment. 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are 

minimal. 

Status of Required Changes Final Rule issued August 27, 1997. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes dryers. DOE regulation of white goods for full line 

manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Consortium for Energy Efficiency program with utilities. Energy Star program. 

or Voluntary Efficiency Federal Energy Management Program for procurement initiative. At least three 

Improvements U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes washers. 

Issues 

FY 1999 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule ANOPR - Published 11119/98 

NOPR-12/99 

Final Rule - 7/00 

Rationale for Priority Level Generally considered to be a high priority by stakeholders. Potential energy 

savings are large. 

Based preliminary National Energy Savings (NES) data used for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR). 

3 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Clothes Washers

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Prior

Hi

Final Rule issued August 27, 1997.

Final Rule issued August 27, 1997.

i Level I

4 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Clothes Washers 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

Test Procedure 

Final Rule issued August 27, 1997. 

4 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings 7.3 2

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by February, 2000.

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of HCFC refrigerants.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards to be published 12/99.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to beg

Rationale for Priori Level

in actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2000.

Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

2

Based on PNNL rough estimate , May 1996.

5 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

: ·::,F.i~~~ifilf:::pft~rl1f.::$~~i~;:'(;::::'; '::::'i.:::"::'};'E:l';:-::~it;~:;;::;:::,;;:;:::,::t;;,\:~t\:'::;i:::';:~;,H~i~~~Mi~t\t:!·!:~:g;'·T~:::::i'::::If§{:ri;;:::;i;j'.!;i'::;;::::::;:!;;:~{:n::'.\::';~:;::;:: 

Potential Energy Savings 7.3 2 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available, 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible, Expected oil savings are 

minimal. 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90,1 into the CFR by February, 2000, 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of HCFC refrigerants. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90,1 standards to be published 12/99. 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2000. 

Rationale for Priori Standards set b EPACT and will be ameneded u on revision of ASHRAE 90, I 

2 Based on PNNL rough estimate, May 1996. 

5 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in I Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 8/99

Final Rule - 2/1/00

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR.

6 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

Standards set by EP ACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR- 8/99 

Final Rule - 2/1/00 

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR. 

6 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings 13

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by February, 2000.

Other Regulatory Actions Possible State and regional environmental regulation (e. g. air quality).

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards to be published 12/99.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2000.

Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

3

Based on PNNL rough estimate, May 1996.

7 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers 

Priority: High 

.!/·F:jf~t~h;t~~;·~~~~~~y';'$.riti~·.::!:;~~:}X:::;::;Ij;:::;jg;'f,:~i::;:Ij:';;~::ij;:::;:;:t;·;jE:r!:tt;;:::.t!t:~~~~~Jl.'f:;:~),·:;:::.f:t::i;~:::;.::::::;:::f:\ig.(X:::::::::::\:I:;X::X:::::::~:X:.~:~t:~::;: 

Potential Energy Savings 1 3 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are 

minimaL 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by February, 2000. 

Other Ree;ulatory Actions Possible State and regional environmental regulation (e.g. air Quality). 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards to be published 12/99. 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2000. 

Rationale for Priori Standards set b EP ACT and will be ameneded u on revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

3 Based on PNNL rough estimate, May 1996. 

7 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in ( Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

High

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 8/99

Final Rule - 2/1/00

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR.

8 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers 

Priority: High 

Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR- 8/99 

Final Rule - 2/1/00 

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR. 

8 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Commercial Water Heaters

Priority: High

I

Potential Energy Savings

No=

[0.21 - 1.2]"

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by February, 2000.

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards to be published 12/99.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2000.

Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

4

Based on PNNL preliminary findings report, April 1996.

9 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Commercial Water Heaters 

Priority: High 

Standards 

:.:: .. ;.i\'#ii;~iil~idj~~iii~~;~$.itif:~j~;:;::.i(\:·:fiS.;rr;:l:~rI:~::::::::tn~:::::;';;:::~;'r~:::/i';i~7K:;::;;;ii~;M¥Il(.r:·::mn::.:~·;r:w;::rt::::::iI~:r(::·r:·::.·:;::;r:':;;!:X;::t::t::t;:::;: 

Potential Energy Savings [0.21 - 1.2]4 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are 

minimal. 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by February, 2000. 

Other Regulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards to be published 12/99. 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2000. 

Rationale for Priori Standards set b 'EPACT and will be ameneded u on revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

4 Based on PNNL preliminary findings report, April 1996. 

9 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Water Heaters

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in I Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

High

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 8/99

Final Rule - 2/1/00

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR.

10 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Commercial Water Heaters 

Priority: High 

Test Procedure 

.:: ... ·:(J~~iimr:m~i;t:~f.~'·§ii~~:::::.::·~:}:::::r:r:::;.:;:i~:::;::~.:;:t':.?:.:::::i::i.::{::;i;::r:i::::::.\:;;i:::::.:};::::'i'i~~nl~ii~::;::ir::{::::/::r\::.:::ri}i:"!::'f:,::::::riI:://.:·:::):,::.:::t::} 

Relationship to Changes in Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

Standard 

Priority of Standard High 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR- 8/99 

Final Rule - 2/1/00 

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR. 

10 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Cooking Products - Electric Ovens, Cook Tops, Microwave Ovens

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Prior

Final Rule published September 8, 1998

i Level Recent Final Rule.

11 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Cooking Products - Electric Ovens, Cook Tops, Microwave Ovens 

Priority: Low 

... i!#itff:m":i~h;~ii#.{tW:.·$~i~~~;~:;;j;;:.;:\:<::~::;;::::jJjJ::.!:f!:lb:;.g::;:;;~·!;:::tj:l.f.;:!;·r:g:;i;;·iMii~iiiijJ.~i:;.;;:~:·:;:/:::!;::;;;;~;;:;r~~t::;:::;:·;::::;r!.i:;i:i;.;f;:;jii:;;:;;;:::;i~;i·;:SiiEt 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

2000-2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Enenn' Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes 

to Test Procedures 

Other Rel!Ulatory Actions DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven NoneknoWll. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule published September 8, 1998 

Rationale for Priori Recent Final Rule. 

11 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Cooking Products - Gas Ovens, Cook Tops

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

mmom,

Potential Energy Savings Total ranges considered:'

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) Ovens Cook Tops

2000-2030 [0.1 - 2.11 [ 0 - 0.5

Potential Economic [ (9.3) - 0.11 [ (4.0) - 0.02 ]

Benefits/Burdens NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Potential Environmental or NOx [ 11 - 239 ] NOx [ 0 - 65 ]

Energy Security Benefits CO2 [ 6 - 133 ] CO2 [0-36]

Emission reductions in (kt) for NOx, and (Mt) for CO,

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued October 3, 1997.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

]Improvements

Issues Pilotless designs may require installation of an electrical outlet. Loss of

consumer utility if loss of electrical power. If a loss of electricity, cannot use

oven.

FY 1999 Priority Hi

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 1/00

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties recommended high priority. Potential energy savings are low

to moderate. Limited DOE resources needed to complete rulemaking. This

rulemaking will remain high priority until the final rule is published. Once the

final rule is ublished it will become a low priority,

5

Based on Draft report, April 1996 and Supplemental Analysis, November 1997.

12 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Cooking Products - Gas Ovens, Cook Tops 

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

:;::}F~ii~~::ti~irRJ~ijiiii:S:f.iif:~~;:~;';::;,:~;,;::;':;:,::r:;:':::::::::X,;:;;,;:':;;::;~:;:::,;:t::;:::;:,:;:::::';::::'::X'~;:;:;:;:;l:;;/~~~iil#~~:;:;:::;;:::;I:::;::';::i;::';X:;,::::;:;:::::':;r;;:;:::;:;,:{:)::':;::':::::\:::::;:;!./::;;:I;::~ 

Potential Energy Savings Total ranges considered:5 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) Ovens Cook Tops 

2000-2030 [0.1-2,1] [0 - 0,5] 

Potential Economic [ (9.3) - 0,1 ] [(4,0) - 0,02] 

BenefitslBurdens NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

Potential Environmental or NOx [ 11 - 239 ] NOx[0-65] 

Energy Security Benefits CO2 [ 6 - 133 1 CO2 [0 - 36 1 

Emission reductions in (1-..1) for NOx, and (Mt) for CO2, 

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued October 3, 1997. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Re~ulatory Actions DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers, 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known, 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Pilotless designs may require installation of an electrical outlet Loss of 

consumer utility ifloss of electrical power. If a loss of electricity, cannot use 

oven, 

FY 1999 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 1100 

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties recommended high priority, Potential energy savings are low 

to moderate, Limited DOE resources needed to complete rulemaking, This 

rulemaking will remain high priority until the final rule is published, Once the 

final rule is published it will become a low priority, 

5 

Based on Draft report, April 1996 and Supplemental Analysis, November 1997, 

12 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Cooking Products - Ovens, Cook Tops, Microwave Ovens

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Hi

Final Rule issued - October 3, 1997

13 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Test Procedure 

Product: Cooking Products - Ovens, Cook Tops, Microwave Ovens 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued - October 3, 1997 

Rationale for Priori 

13 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas)

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings I Total range considered: [ 0 - 0.1

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 1999 Priority

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Previous,

Piezo ignit. & Previous & Condens. &

Piezo ignit. Derate 20% Induced Draft Modulat. Oper.

(64.8% AFUE) (66.9% AFUE) (78.0% AFUE) (87.0% AFUE)

0.1 0 (0.3) (1.0)

[ (1.4) - 0.1 ] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

0 0.1 (0.6) (1.4)

SO2 0 (7) (140) (320)

NOx 0 (6) (132) (301)

CO2 0 (3) (72) (165 )

Emission reductions in (kt) for SO2 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO2.

Final rule published 5/12/97.

None known that will impact product.

None known.

Fuel switching. Rural communities use for backup heating during power

outages. Utility concern with electronic ignition.

Low

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are low.

6

7

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

Examples shown for design options and AFUE are for gravity wall heaters (27 - 46 kBtu/hr).

14 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas) 

Low 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Energy Security Benefits 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Previous, 

Piezo ignit. & Previous & Condens. & 

Piezo ignit. Derate 20% Induced Draft Modulat. Opel. 

(64.8% AFUE) (66.9% AFUE) 1(78.0% AFUE) j(87.0% AFUE) 

0.1 0 (0.3) (1.0) 

[(1.4) - 0.1] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

0 0.1 

S02 0 (7) (320 ) 

NOx 0 (6) (301 ) 

CO2 0 (3) (165 ) 

Emission reductions in for 

Final rule published 5112/97. 

"WIt,",llUI),;. Rural communities use heating during power 

concern with electronic 

DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are low. 

6 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

7 Examples shown for design options and AFUE are for gravity wall heaters (27 - 46 kBtulhr). 

14 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas)

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Final Rule issued 5/12/97

15 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Test Procedure 

;::,lt~~~i!ii::mf:Ri1ih;~i~(~~i~t~lClj:,':',:):::,,:::,:r:',}i.'li':t':;',',:;:,';.',:,::,'::';.':;,'::i/,::;",::,'·:t;:';:':':¥~~~n~~J¥:;R:!:~;~;::':;::}):;::::';:::'~~::;:;:;:}:;';~{;)I'::::rL:::;~)f~) 

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard 

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued 5/12/97 

Rationale for Priority Level 

15 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Dishwashers

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes Test procedure is being revised to properly reflect energy consumption for new

to Test Procedures technologies (e.g. adaptive controls) and reduced annual cycles.

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Recommendations by Some manufacturers believe that updating the dishwasher standard should be

Interested Parties given a low priority,

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Savers program. Federal Energy Management Program for procurement

or Voluntary Efficiency initiative. At least two U.S. manufacturers are marketing adaptive control

Improvements dishwashers.

Issues Increased efficiency may impact product utility (e.g. may require pre-rinsing of

dishes or cleaning of filters) or the availability of affordable models (contract

housing).

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on white good

manufacturers.

16 Draft- June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Dishwashers 

Priority: Low 

Standards 

',:::j'~#tiii:ii:t.#.~:~~~~(~~~$~Ii@)·~i::,::,}:;t::-:::::':')K:::':;:;:~:;;:;:;:;,:;S~;:;:it;:,~::::,:::;:::::;~:;;t::::,::r:L;;;:;j~~~~~~~~~/:;i·,{~!:;,;;).:'i;:::::!frri~;;::::':,:;i;:r::,::;:,:,,:;~:,:;.+rt:::;:r:;r:;;,i 

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not available, 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible, Expected oil savings are 

minimal. 

Status of Required Changes Test procedure is being revised to properly reflect energy consumption for new 

to Test Procedures technologies (e,g, adaptive controls) and reduced annual cycles, 

Other Rel!Ulatorv Actions DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by Some manufacturers believe that updating the dishwasher standard should be 

Interested Parties given a low priority. 

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Savers program, Federal Energy Management Program for procurement 

or Voluntary Efficiency initiative. At least two U,S, manufacturers are marketing adaptive control 

Improvements dishwashers, 

Issues Increased efficiency may impact product utility (e,g, may require pre-rinsing of 

dishes or cleaning of filters) or the availability of affordable models (contract 

housing), 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years, Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs, 

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are low, Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on white good 

manufacturers, 

16 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Dishwashers

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard.

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Low

Manufacturers support a test procedure revision for more accurate testing of new

adaptive control models.

New technology in product, i.e. smart controls, fuzzy logic.

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 7/99

Final Rule - 3/00

Rationale for Priority Level New technolo in product, i.e. smart controls, logic.

17 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Dishwashers 

Priority: High 

Test Procedure 

: ;:Jl4~hij.~~~:.!id~i$.i@~r.mK:~~:~~;.~:·:.:tT·;1Tt:~:i::;:~::;E:::r:~: .. :i:.i.F:::r:/·:::.:.·.:::.:::·:~::·A~~~~~lf~J:/\:.:::~·.:.::::::.~:~;:.:::\::::;:i:~:.::i··;:::.:::;~'::;:::::.:::::::·~.\:::::.::::~:~~:~;::::::i 

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard. 

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatinl! Activities 

Recommendation by Manufacturers support a test procedure revision for more accurate testing of new 

Interested Parties adaptive control models. 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues New technology in product, i.e. smart controls, fuzzy logic. 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR-7/99 

Final Rule - 3/00 

Rationale for Priority Level New technology in product i.e. smart controls. fuzzy loaic. 

17 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Distribution Transformers

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings [.39-10.7]$

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes Need to develop a test procedure before rule.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None known.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven EPA Energy Star program for liquid immersion transformers. NEMA's TP-1 and

or Voluntary Efficiency the National Business Awareness Campaign to promote energy efficient

Improvements electrical products.

Issues Most efficient designs include proprietary technology.

NEMA recommends adoption of voluntary standards as specified in TP-1.

Energy savings questioned by NEMA.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2000.

Rationale for Priority Level Potential for significant energy savings. I

8

Based on DOE determination notice, October 22, 1997.

18 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Distribution Transformers 

Priority: High 

Standards 

L:;.f'4~ii~.,mli:iWi~j'i~~;~j,~fug;::::;::~;:;::i:.':.·::i·::::·:;·:;;:~:;:?:;;:.·;·;;';;'l/:.:;/:::·::.::;t:::'::;ii;;·:r:;·;:;;·j;.~miqi~jj~:;i:;i.i:;l)\·~:.~i~::ii:::~:i;:;;;;H .. :;:;~:::ii):·:rS;:::;i~:i:3;;:·Ir.; 

Potential Energy Savings [.39-10.7]8 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are 

minimal. 

Status of Required Changes Need to develop a test procedure before rule. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Rej!ulatory Actions None known. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven EPA Energy Star program for liquid immersion transformers. NEMA's TP-I and 

or Voluntary Efficiency the National Business Awareness Campaign to promote energy efficient 

Improvements electrical products. 

Issues Most efficient designs include propri<;tary technology. 

NEMA recommends adoption of voluntary standards as specified in TP-l. 

Energy savings questioned by NEMA. 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemakillg in 2000. 

Rationale for Priori 

8 Based on DOE determination notice, October 22, 1997. 

18 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Distribution Transformers

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in ( Test Procedure need to be established for standard.

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

NEMA recommends using NEMA TP-2 test standard.

Sampling Plan; Definitions of Covered Products

Proposed Schedule NOPR - published 11/12/98

Reopening Notice 6/99

Final Rule - 12/99

Rationale for Priority Level Determination was made that standards maybe technically feasible,

economically justified, and save significant energy.

19 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Distribution Transformers 

Priority: High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

NEMA recommends using NEMA TP-2 test standard. 

NOPR - published 11112/98 

Reopening Notice 6/99 

Final Rule - 12/99 

Determination was made that standards may be technically feasible, 

economically iustified and save significant energy. 

19 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

--035i 12

Not Available.

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not Available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not Available.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes NEMA MG-1987 was amended 12/7/93. DOE proposing to adopt 1993 version.

to Test Procedures Final rule for test procedures expected Spring 1999.

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven ASHRAE 90.1. "Consortium for Energy Efficiency" program with utilities.

or Voluntary Efficiency Motor Challenge. Motor Master+

Improvements

Issues Some system efficiencies are regulated by DOE (e. g. HVAC) where motors are

components of such systems.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are unknown at this time. Statutory deadline is 1999 (2000).

20 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP 

Priority: Low 

Standards 

::,:,:~:;l#i;~W:!':F~ii;M~tiff&§#.i~fmF:;':,I:::::;;;'::::};::::;:li,;~::'::;;:;\';::;~:i:::;:;:::::(;:/;:";:;Ki::;;':~~~~Mi~~;r::;::::~{;?i;{;;::{,:::::::'::~:;,;i::::::i':;,::;::;:;;:,~:::::::':',:ir,::::~::,:::::::\;~:: 

Potential Energy Savings Not Available, 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not Available, 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not Available, 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes NEMA MG-1987 was amended 12/7/93, DOE proposing to adopt 1993 version, 

to Test Procedures Final rule for test procedures expected Spring 1999, 

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven ASHRAE 90,1. "Consortium for Energy Efficiency" program 'with utilities. 

or Voluntary Efficiency Motor Challenge. Motor Master+ 

Improvements 

Issues Some system efficiencies are regulated by DOE (e,g. HVAC) where motors are 

components of such systems, 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs, 

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are unknown at this time. StatutOry deadline is 1999 (2000). 

20 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard

Low

Natural Resources Canada: Energy Efficiency Regulations for Electric Motors

Manufacturers and energy efficiency advocates support test procedure

rulemaking.

Proposed Schedule Proposed Rule Issued - 11!27197

Final Rule - Summer 1999

Rationale for Priority Level Final Rule recently published (as of FY2000).

21 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

1VlanUI.acDureJrS and energy efficiency advocates support test procedure 

Proposed Rule Issued - 11127/97 

Final Rule - Summer 1999 

Final Rule recently published (as ofFY2000). 

21 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings I Total range cons

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 1999 Priori

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Gthod~

Cathode Gatott /

Cutout Electronic

0.5-2.3 1.0-3.6

[ 0.2-4.9 ] NPV, billions of 1997$ @ 7%

0.2-3.0 1.0-4.9

None required.

Specific examples below.

Some ballast manufacturers also make electric motors.

EPA Green Lights and Energy Star buildings, ASHRAE 90.1, DOE's Federal

Relighting Initiative (FEMP), The Energy Cost Savings Council, and some utility

DSM programs.

Standards, for electronic ballasts, may adversely affect U.S. manufacturers.

Impact on U.S. employment levels.

High

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 10/99

Final Rule - 6/00

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are moderate.

9

Based on data posted to Web, April 1999.

22 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 

Priority: High 

Standards 

:· ... :F.##~~::(~~·l~tI~dt¥.:SAt~iruL.:::.;::· .:.:·::i:;:.:;;rri:xr·~::·;!".::·:::. :1::.\:::;~:::-::.:.:.i .. :.:::j:'::.::·.::':~~~~~~~~:;::·:.t·;::.;.:··:·.:.;:'.::··::"::D:::::::::;·;:;;i.':·:~D:::{;:·::.::::i:r,:r::·:ij:':l 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0.5 - 3.6 t Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) ~ 

2000-2030 ~ G.:dnlt/ 

G.:dnlt Bectronic 

0.5-2.3 1.0-3.6 

Potential Economic [ 0.2-4.9] NPV, billions of 1997$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens 0.2-3.0 1.0-4.9 

Potential Environmental or 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes None required. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions Some ballast manufacturers also make electric motors. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven EPA Green Lights and Energy Star buildings, ASHRAE 90.1, DOE's Federal 

or Voluntary Efficiency Relighting Initiative (FE.MP), The Energy Cost Savings Council, and some utility 

Improvements DSMjlrograms. 

Issues Standards, for electronic ballasts, may adversely affect U.S. manufacturers. 

Impact on U.S. employment levels. 

FY 1999 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule NOPR-IO/99 

Final Rule - 6/00 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are moderate. 

9 Based on data posted to Web, April 1999. 

22 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priori of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

a

Efficiency levels considered for new standards are already in the market and are

covered by existing standards and test procedures.

23 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

Test Procedure 

23 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards Determination

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp

Priority: Medium

Potential Energy Savings [0 .11-0.22]'"

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not Available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are minimal.

Status of Required Changes IES and ANSI procedures are in place.

to Test Procedures Issues with definitions, covered products and sampling.

Other Regulatory Actions EPA mercury disposal requirements may apply.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Mercury vapor lamps being replaced by metal halide and high pressure

or Voluntary Efficiency sodium lamps.

Improvements

Issues Concern about non-equitable impact of possible elimination of mercury

vapor lamps (e.g. significant regional and municipal variation exists).

High first cost impact (elimination of mercury vapor lamps will require

fixture replacement).

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

10

DOE plans to initiate work in support of rulemaking.

Potential energy savings are low to moderate . Determination required by EPACT.

Based on DOE rough estimate , May 1996.

24 Draft - February 15, 2007

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards Determination 

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp 

Priority: Medium 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitsfBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Energy Security Benefits 

Issues 

FY 1999 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Not Available. 

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are to be oil . are minimal. 

IES and ANSI procedures are in place. 

Issues with definition covered roducts and 

Mercury vapor lamps being replaced by metal halide and high pressure 

sodium lamps. 

Concern about non-equitable impact of possible elimination of mercury 

vapor lamps (e.g. significant regional and municipal variation exists). 

High first cost impact (elimination of mercury vapor lamps will require 

fixture replacement). 

Low 

DOE plans to initiate work in support of rulemaking. 

Potential energy savings are low to moderate. Determination required by EP ACT. 

10 

Based on DOE rough estimate, May 1996. 

24 Draft - February 15, 2007 
Test Procedure

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Prior

Test Procedure needs to be developed for standard.

Low

Dependant on determination.

ity Level I

25 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp 

Priority: Low 

Test Procedure 

;.:. fi'ff#1i.i%·mii.:p,iji~i:~f.£~if~i}i£:':K::;::?::;:::;:r::~:?;::::;·I·:·:;:::.;).:::'i\:i;~::\::2::·;~~;;::·:.:::it::::;::~~~W~~iinf:~::::::r::I:·:::;·:·n:;:::r:::::;:~~:::::;·::~;:·~::::::';j\::j;:;:::::;:::r:·:·::;·;::::·:·::;:;::: 

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure needs to be developed for standard. 

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Dependant on detennination. 

Rationale for Priori 

25 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Not Available.

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not Available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not Available.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes IES and ANSI procedures are in place, DOE test procedure Final Rule issued

to Test Procedures 5/29/97

Other Regulatory Actions Existing EPA mercury disposal requirements apply, but EPA is considering

responses to a NOPR regarding a "conditional" exclusion from the hazardous

waste designation or an inclusion of lamps into the Universal Waste Rule.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven EPA Green lights, Energy Star Buildings, ASHRAE 90.1, and some utility DSM

or Voluntary Efficiency programs, FEMP.

Improvements

Issues Because lamps are components of systems, establishment of standards is more

difficult.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are unknown at this time. Statutory deadline is 1997 (2002) for amending

current lamp standards and 1999 for adding additional general service

fluorescent and incandescent lamps.

26 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent 

Priority: Low 

i:;:~ :lt~ij~~~;mt:·~~iii~~.$&~~M;-::;~·:::::::;::·:·;.~::~X.;~:::~::};:;:;';':;C;';ii;;::!~;:':~ft~;:;\~:::;::;';::::;;i~~t.:;:::~:j~~i~ib.lrnK~~::r:r?:::!:::~;£:~::::::;::'.::.::::::::\::?::::::::-:::·l(I:::}:::::.:~·r::?:: 

Potential Energy Savings Not Available. 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not Available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not Available. 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes IES and ANSI procedures are in place, DOE test procedure Final Rule issued 

to Test Procedures 5/29/97 

Other Regulatory Actions Existing EPA mercury disposal requirements apply, but EPA is considering 

responses to a NOPR regarding a "conditional" exclusion from the hazardous 

waste designation or an inclusion oflamps into the Universal Waste Rule. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven EPA Green lights, Energy Star Buildings, ASHRAE 90.1, and some utility DSM 

or Voluntary Efficiency programs, FEMP. 

Improvements 

Issues Because lamps are components of systems, establishment of standards is more 

difficult. 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are unknown at this time. Statutory deadline is 1997 (2002) for amending 

current lamp standards and 1999 [or adding additional general service 

fluorescent and incandescent lamps. 

26 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Prior

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Final Rule issued 5/29/97

ity Level I

27 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent 

Priority: Low 

Test Procedure 

.:.: :lt~~¥,~.:t.~r:P:ti9~{~i .. ~AA~~~It::::::::·::.::::.;::;:::~::·.;·;::::::;·::·:;r:.;::~::r:r~:::::;:::~:;\::~;.:;;i.:;·::";~T:.;;::;)~~~~~l~il~~;i:::.:;:::.;::·:::'::·~.:i:;:;;~:;:;::}:i"::;~~;:·:;)·;:··:;::::i;.:;:·.:!.:};~-::.;~:E~:; 

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard 

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued 5/29/97 

Rationale for Priori 

27 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings I Total range considered: [ 0.1 - 0.6 ]11

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 1999 Priority

Pro osed Schedule and Rationale

Specific examples below:

Imprv. fan

Imprv. fan motor & burner

motor box damper Condensing (91.7

Gas (76.6% AFUE) (79.6 AFUE) AFUE)

Imprv. fan motor,

ht. exchgr.,

Imprv. fan Imprv. fan condens. & full

motor motor modulation

Oil (82.1% AFUE 82.1% AFUE 93.7% AFUE

0.1 0.1 0.5

[ (0.8) - 0.1 ] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

0.1 0.1 (0.2)

SOZ 16 17 4

NOx 15 16 4

CO2 9 9 2

Emission reductions in (kt) for SO2 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO,.

Final rule issued 5/12197.

None known that will impact product.

None known.

Fuel switching. Limited space for installation.

Low

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are low to moderate. Higher standards levels requiring

technologies, such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers.

11

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

28 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030 

Potential Economic 

Benefits/Burdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Energy Security Benefits 

Pro osed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

Imprv. fan 

motor 

Gas (76.6% AFUE) 

Oil 

Imprv. fan 

motor 

(82.1%AFUE 

0.1 

Imprv. fan 

motor & burner 

box damper Condensing (91.7 

(79.6 AFUE) AFUE) 

Imprv. fan motor, 

ht. exchgr., 

Imprv. fan condens. & full 

motor 

82.1%AFUE 

0.1 

modulation 

93.7%AFUE 

0.5 

[ (0.8) - 0.1] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

0.1 0.1 

S02 16 

NOx 15 

CO2 9 

Emission reductions in 

Final rule issued 5112/97. 

17 

16 

9 

4 

4 

2 

DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Potential energy savings are low to moderate. Higher standards levels requiring 

technologies such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers. 

11 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

28 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Low

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

Rationale for Priority Level I

29 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

Test Procedure 

Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

29 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues As flow rates and water consumption decline the effects on utility need to be

carefully considered.

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Dependent upon revision by ASME and approval by ANSI to ASME/ANSI

Al12.18.1 and ASME/ANSI A112.19.6.

30 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Plumbing FixtureslFittings 

Priority: Low 

Standards 

; ... t'~~~~Elf~f::t$.th:~r.i,:$~i~~mi::.~:::~;::'.':::::'.:';:;}/;:::;;:::Il(:/;::::;;~:):;:;:.:'::·::":';:.::::;::;:;:'.t;:::';;:.;:~~l&~~i~~l:}:::;';jJ;?::'i::;~:;(;};;:'::::':;·:;::·:;;;·::::.:t;:::r?;;:::::::::::;:;::?::.:;:::j 

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not available. 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes 

to Test Procedures 

Other Rel!ulatorv Actions None. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues As flow rates and water consumption decline the effects on utility need to be 

carefully considered. 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Rationale for Priority Level Dependent upon revision by ASME and approval by ANSI to ASME/ANSI 

A112.18.1 and ASrvIE/ANSIA1l2.19.6. 

30 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

Final Rule - March 18, 1998

31 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Plumbing FixturesIFittings 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

Test Procedure 

Final Rule - March 18, 1998 

31 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas)

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 0.2 - 0.9 ]12 Specific examples below:

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

11D, (78% ET) Non-cond. Limit, (82.2% ET)

0.2 0.4

Condensing, (90.8% ET)

0.7

Potential Economic [ (1.4) - 0.2 ] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens 0.2 0.2 (0.6)

Potential Environmental or SO2 0 0 0

Energy Security Benefits NOx 42 42 42

CO2 11 18 35

Emission reductions in (kt) for SO2 _ and NOx, and (Mt) for CO2.

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5112/97.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product,

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are low.

12 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

32 Draft- June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Standards 

.. :.ill:~tt~~)#~··gijh~·~t~:$.~:t~tmti;.:::;::::::;:::·;:.::;:.::\;:~:·::}:;:·.:Fi:r~;·::::):i·/::?:·:·::::'.·:Y·;~{·:}M¥.§~~~(·:!.::::i~·;\:·::.::·.::·::?r::;:·::.:::::::::.::r:::::·::::::;:'x.:.::·::.:;::·:·;:.::·;::::·::.:}; 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0.2 - 0.9 ]12 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) IID, (78% ET) Non-cond. Limit, (82.2% ET) Condensing, (90.8% ET) 

2000-2030 0.2 0.4 0.7 

Potential Economic [(1.4) - 0.2] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

BenefitsfBurdens 0.2 0.2 (0.6) 

Potential Environmental or S02 0 0 0 

Energy Security Benefits NOx 42 42 42 

CO2 11 18 35 

Emission reductions in (lct) for S02 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO2, 

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Work 

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Rationale for Priority Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are low. 

12 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

32 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas)

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard.

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

33 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

Test Procedure 

Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

33 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Refrigerators, Refrigerator/Freezers, & Freezers

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030

Potential Economic Not available

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes No changes required for standards.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of insulation HCFCs in 2003.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Super Efficient Refrigerator Program (Golden Carrot). New York Housing

or Voluntary Efficiency Authority mass procurement. Energy Savers program. Significant quantity of

Improvements new high efficiency models are being marketed.

Issues Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997 Amana has petitioned OHA for 10%

relaxation of 2001 standards - blowing agent concerns

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997

Rule issued, effective July 1 , 2001

34 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Refrigerators, RefrigeratorlFreezers, & Freezers 

Priority: Low 

:.·:·:~i~~~i(t~t;gq~~i.~ibr~~H~ijft{::;;~i;:f:;~!Tr::;r:n:::;·:·:::;::r:;;:':::::·;:;~:::;2{t\;;::.;::::;:;::;}~~$iliif.::./:;::;.;;'::::;;:i::;;.:::;:·::t;;::::;:);;:'~i:;:;:::;i:::;::)~;::::;~:;:::rr;t::;:;;;l;;; 

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not available 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes No changes required for standards. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of insulation HCFCs in 2003. 

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Super Efficient Refrigerator Program (Golden Carrot). New York Housing 

or Voluntary Efficiency Authority mass procurement. Energy Savers program. Significant quantity of 

Improvements new high efficiency models are being marketed. 

Issues Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997 Amana has petitioned OHA for 10% 

relaxation of2001 standards - blowing agent concerns 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997 

Rationale for Priori Rule issued effective Jul 1 2001 

34 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Refrigerators, Refrigerator/Freezers, & Freezers

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

Final rule for vented refrigerator - 8/97

35 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Test Procedure 

Product: Refrigerators, RefrigeratorlFreezers, & Freezers 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final rule for vented refrigerator - 8/97 

Rationale for Priori 

35 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 2.0 - 13.1 ]13 Specific examples below:

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995- 11 SEER 12 SEER 14 SEER 16 SEER 14

2030 2.0 4.0 8.2 13.1

Potential Economic [ (19.8) - 8.11 NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens not avail. not avail. 8.1 (19.8)

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes Changes are not required for standards.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of HCFC-22 refrigerant - 2010

DOE regulation of furnaces.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Star program recommending a 12 SEER.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Small manufacturers. Niche Products. Regional variation.

FY 1999 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule SANOPR - 10/99

NOPR - 7/00

Final Rule - 4/01

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are large.

13

14

Based on DOE analysis, January 5, 1995.

Represented SEER levels are approximate weighted average for various configurations of central a/c equipment. Potential

energy savings for 11 and 12 SEER models were extrapolated from REM analysis for 14 and 16 SEER levels.

36 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

.:::.: f~ii4.~.:.m.di~~i.~i~i.~~~#ilig;.:.ij.:.:;:.:;::::J.;.;.i;:::;::.:;;:::::.\.:;.:~1;:;;;.:::.;! .. ;1:::.;:.:;:t':;:j!;:.:;:{E:\::;iM.~~~~nli~~::::;;·;:;:{;:~:::.:.:\;;i;·:;;::;:.;;:;.;;.::.t::::.:.::.;:;;;:::;~~:;iI.::;::;::;)L::; 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [2.0 - 13.1 ]13 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995- 11 SEER 12 SEER 14 SEER 16 SEER 14 

2030 2.0 4.0 8.2 13.1 

Potential Economic [ (19.8) - 8.1 ] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens not avaiL not avaiL 8.1 (19.8) 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are 

minimaL 

Status of Required Changes Changes are not required for standards. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout ofHCFC-22 refrigerant - 2010 

DOE regulation of furnaces. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Star program recommending a 12 SEER. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Small manufacturers. Niche Products. Regional variation. 

FY 1999 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule SANOPR - 10/99 

NOPR-7!00 

Final Rule - 4!01 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are large. 

13 Based on DOE analysis, January 5, 1995. 

14 

Represented SEER levels are approximate weighted average for various configurations of central alc equipment. Potential 

energy savings for II and 12 SEER models were extrapolated from REM analysis for 14 and 16 SEER levels. 

36 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in ( Test Procedure does not need to be changed for standard.

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Would like to see it published.

Many changes to accommodate new technology.

Work is com lete for technical content of proposed test procedure.

37 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR- 8/99 

Final Rule - 6/00 

Rationale for Priority Level Work is complete for technical content of proposed test procedure. 

37 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 0.6 - 10.2 ] L5 Specific examples below:

from Regulatory Action; Insul., HD, imprv.

Cumulative (Quads)

fan motor & two Previous & Gas 2000-2030 ,

Gas stage oper. condensing absorption

Furnaces (81.8% AFUE) (92% AFUE) heat pump

IID & pulse Gas

Gas IID condensing absorption

Boilers (81.8% AFUE (90.4% AFUE) heat pump

0.6 3.7 10.2

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are more

significant than other products.

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5/12/97

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions Possible State and regional environmental regulation. DOE regulation of central

air conditioning products. Consumer Product Safety Commission - possible

regulation.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Star program. Wisconsin state condensing furnace/boiler program.

or Voluntary Efficiency ACEEE indicated that trend for higher efficiency products stopped in 1994.

Improvements

Issues

FY 1999 Priority Low

Pro osed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years. Any

work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are low to moderate. Higher standards levels requiring

technologies. such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers.

15 Based on DOE rough estimate for gas only, May 1996.

38 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers 

Priority: Low 

. :,:M#.~w.r~::fiti,;~:i~~i1!~;f'$.~~ifur::'}::,;'.::r;:';;::;;';::'i;;,:;\:;;:;lX:;;;;';;::';:;:::::;:;;:,:;:,:;::;,:;':,;.',:;::i:;:';ii!:J;:tj,~i~~mi~~~~:'::::;It:";':/i~~,\;:,:t:;,:,::::::.':::C:)::~';'::;i(~'I:~:::::~:;!';,~;;E: 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0,6 - 10.2 ]l5 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; Insul., lID, imprv. Cumulative (Quads) fan motor, & two Previous & Gas 2000-2030 

Gas stage oper. condensing absorption 

Furnaces (81.8% AFUE) (92% AFUE) heat pump 

lID & pulse Gas 

Gas lID condensing absorption 

Boilers (81.8% AFUE) (90.4% AFUE) heat pump 

0.6 3.7 10.2 

Potential Economic Not available. 

Benefits/Burdens 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are more 

significant than other products, 

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5/12/97 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions Possible State and regional environmental regulation. DOE regulation of central 

air conditioning products, Consumer Product Safety Commission - possible 

regulation, 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Star program. Wisconsin state condensing furnacelboiler program. 

or Voluntary Efficiency ACEEE indicated that trend for higher efficiency products stopped in 1994. 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

P ro ose d S h d I c e uean dR atlona . e 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next two years, Any 

work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs, 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are low to moderate. Higher standards levels requiring 

technologies. such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers. 

15 Based on DOE rough estimate for gas only, May 1996. 

38 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in ( Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

Final rule issued 5/12/97

39 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Test Procedure 

Proposed Schedule Final rule issued 5/12/97 

Rationale for Priori 

39 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings Total ranges considered:

from Regulatory Action; Gas & Oil: [ 0.07 - 7.95 ]16 Electric: [ 0.87 - 3.45 ] t6

Cumulative (Quads) Specific examples below:

2003-2030

Electric

3"Insul.,

Sidearm Ht. Traps,

2"Insul., w/ 80% Ht. Traps 2.5"Insul. Ht. Traps,

flue baffle Flue & Insul. & Insul. 3"Insul. &

Heat & Heat Baffle & Tank Tank Plastic

Gas Traps Traps IID Bottom ................. ....... . .......... Bottom Tank ..........................

1"Foam

Insul. & 2" Foam 3"

Heat Insul. & Insul.,82

Oil Traps Heat Traps % HX

0.07 0.76 7.95 0.87 2.17 3.45

Potential Economic [ 6.0 - (30.6) ] NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens 0.10 0.03 (7.33) 1.38 1.74 0.24

Potential Environmental or SO2

Energy Security Benefits NOx

CO2

Emission reductions in (Kt) for SO2 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO,. Based on 1999

analysis, and includes oil, gas and electric.

Status of Required Changes Changes not required for standards. Final rule for test procedure was published

to Test Procedures in 1998.

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of HCFCs for insulation (2003). Consumer Product Safety

Commission initiative for prevention of ignition of flammable vapors by gas

water heaters.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Demand-side management programs for high efficiency water heaters.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Electronic ignition has impact on customer utility. Fuel switching. Replacement

blowing agent for insulation. Installation in small spaces.

FY 1999 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 12/99

Rationale for Priority Level Final Rule - 07/00

16 Based on DOE analysis May 1999. Energy savings reduced due to phaseout of HCFC-141b insulation blowing agent in 2003.

40 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Standards 

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric 

Priority: High 

·::.::.~~~£'!~~H~i::gi.,~r:f:~:::.~mg:::;::::t:::;\)::L.:::;:::;:::}};:·;:&;r:::':~;J:::.::::.~t;:.i:.;;:;;:·:iIjL:t:~~~~wmi~::;:r:::i:rt:::f:::::;·:f·J::,·:::c::.~·::::.:·.:::·.~:·:·;:·t:J!.::;:E;::;;; 

Potential Energy Savings Total ranges considered: 

from Regulatory Action; Gas & Oil: [0.07 - 7.95]16 Electric: [0.87 - 3.45 r 6 

Cumulative (Quads) Specific examples below: 

2003-2030 

•.....•.. -....•• ". 

Electric 

3"lnsul., 

Sidearm Ht. Traps, 

2"lnsul., w/80% Ht Traps 2.5"lnsul. Ht Traps, 

flue baffle Flue & lnsul. & lnsul. 3"Insul. & 

Heat & Heat Baffle & Tank Tank Plastic 

Gas Traps Traps lID Bottom Bottom Tank ............ .... -.... -_ .. -.......... .......................... 

1 "Foam 

lnsul. & 2"Foam 3" 

Heat lnsul. & Insul.,82 

Oil Traps Heat Traps %HX 

0.07 0.76 7.95 0.87 2.17 3.45 .......... 

Potential Economic [6.0 - (30.6)] NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens 0.10 0.03 (7.33) 1.38 1.74 0.24 

Potential Environmental or S02 

Energy Security Benefits NOx 

CO2 

Emission reductions in (Kt) for S02 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO2, Based on 1999 

analysis, and includes oil, gas and electric. 

Status of Required Changes Changes not required for standards. Final rule for test procedure was published 

to Test Procedures in 1998. 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of HCFCs for insulation (2003). Consumer Product Safety 

Corrunission initiative for prevention of ignition of flarrunable vapors by gas 

water heaters. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Demand-side management programs for high efi1ciency water heaters. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Electronic ignition has impact on customer utility. Fuel switching. Replacement 

blowing agent for insulation. Installation in small spaces. 

FY 1999 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule NOPR-12/99 

Final Rule - 07/00 

Rationale for Priority Level 

16 Based on DOE analysis May 1999. Energy savings reduced due to phaseout of HCFC-141b insulation blowing agent in 2003. 

40 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I No changed needed

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Test Procedure published in May 1998.

41 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

41 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards

Product: Room Air Conditioners

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

2000 -2030

Potential Economic Not available

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes Not required for standards.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of IICFC-22 refrigerant.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven DSM programs. Labeling program very effective.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Final Rule Issued - September 24, 1997

FY 1999 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Final Rule Issued - September 24, 1997

42 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Room Air Conditioners 

Priority: Low 

Standards 

.:::;;:~M~~~ci;:j*f:·~j~i:~tY;$.ii~tj);S.:i::·:i:;\::·:)~:;iI::t!:r;:i{;t.~.~·::\:~::::i::;::i::·:}:·U):;):\·;:·:·:~M,4~~'~~f.·;:::.::::;;::·:::;;i:":::.:;\::::·:·;::\·:::·: ::-';;;:;·:;:·;·:)~;;}:·::}l;:;t:.f 

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 

2000 -2030 

Potential Economic Not available 

Benefits/Burdens 

Potential Environmental or Not available 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes Not required for standards. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of HCFC-22 refrigerant. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven DSM programs. Labeling program very effective. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Final Rule Issued - September 24, 1997 

FY 1999 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule Issued - September 24,1997 

Rationale for Priori 

42 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Room Air Conditioners

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

I

43 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Room Air Conditioners 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

Test Procedure 

43 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Standards Determination

Product: Small Electric Motors

Priority: Medium

Potential Energy Savings [0.8-4.5]"

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are

minimal.

Status of Required Changes IEEE test procedure for single-phase induction motors is under review.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions Small motors used in NAECA "covered products" (e. g. white goods) are exempt.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues None.

FY 1999 Priority Medium

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

17 Based on draft DOE report, May 1996.

44 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Small Electric Motors 

Priority: Medium 

Standards Determination 

: ::':;r~«~ii: ~'iJm~t:J&.i~ij~iruii::~~:::;:·;·:::~;:';:·:~~:~;:~:~;\::G::~::;i~i::;~;;;;{::;::.I:.:::P:;·;;:.m;~:t}·;;:~ii~~IDi~~f:~::In~:g;:::;~·;;~::~ii:::fi\:::·;;:g;:;:;;::::;::~::·.~ ;:::;r;;:·;~~:;iI:{;::~:i: 

Potential Energy Savings [0.8-4.5]17 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

Energy Security Benefits estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are 

minimaL 

Status of Required Changes IEEE test procedure for single-phase induction motors is under review. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions Small motors used in NAECA "covered products" (e.g. white goods) are exempt. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven NoneknoWll. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues None. 

FY 1999 Priority Medimn 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate work in support of rulemaking. 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are low to moderate. Determination required by 

EPACT. 

17 Based on draft DOE report, May 1996. 

44 Draft - June 22, 1999 
Test Procedure

Product: Small Electric Motors

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priori Level

Low

Dependent on Determination.

45 Draft - June 22, 1999

 EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 41

Product: Small Electric Motors 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priori 

Test Procedure 

Dependent on Determination. 

45 Draft - June 22, 1999