CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

BOOK

P i1C;ES

1-298

t

el

b,.JK 2

PAGES

K3:

PAGES

748

BOOK 1 OF 3 BOOKS

TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 1979

[6450-01-M]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Etorgy Conservation and Solar

Applications

(10 CFR Pore 430]

ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR

CONSUMER PROOUCtS

Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and

Notice of Public Meetings Regarding Energy

Efficiency Standards far Nine Types of Cansuost Products

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking and Notice of Public

Meetings.

SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and

Conservation. Act. as amended by the

National Energy Conservation Policy

Act, requires that the Department of

Energy prescribe energy efficiency

standards for nine types of consumer

products no later than December 1980.

The purpose of this advance notice of

proposed rulemaking and notice of

public meetings is to facilitate the

gathering or information prior to proposing the standards. Therefore, this

notice is designed to familiarize the

public with the standards program as

presently envisioned. and to tnv to the

public's review and comments.

DATES: Written comments in response to this notice to be flied by 4:30

p.m. March 5. '1979. Requests to speak

at the public meetings to be received

by 4:30 p.m., local time. January 19.

1979. Speakers to be notified by 4:30

p.m... local time, January 24. 1979.

Meetings to be held on the following

dates and times:

January 26. 1979. 9:00 a.m., Washington,. D.C.

January 26. 1979, 9:00 a.m., Boston,

Massachusetts.

January 31. 1979, 9:00 a.m., Chicago.

Minois.
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

-50

February 2, 1979, 9:O0 a.m.. Atlanta,

GeorgiaFebruary 6, 1979, 9-00 a.m.. Dallas,

Texas.

February 8, 1979, 9:00 a-m- San

Francisco. California.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the document to.,

U.S. Department of Energy. Con.

stoner Products Efficiency Branch.

Room 2248. CSA-RM-78-110. 20

Massachusetts Avenue. N.W., Washington, D.C. 20461 ( 202) 376-4814-

Requests to speak at the Washing.

ton. D.C.. meeting: U.S. Department

of Energy , ATIN: Margaret Sibley,

CSA-RM-78-110, Federal Building,

Room 5324. Washington, D.C. 20461

(202) 633-8608. -

Requests to speak at the Boston,

Massachusetts meeting: U.S. Depart•

ment of Energy, ATTN: Roberta

Walsh, Analex Bldg. Room 700. 150

Causeway Street. Boston. Massachusetts. 02114 (617) 22:1-0504 (FTS)

223-0504.

Requests to speak at the Chicago; Illinois meeting: U.S. Department of

Energy, ATTN: Ken Johnson. 175

West Jackson Boulevard, Room A333, Chicago, Illinois 60604 (312)

353-,0650 (Fl'S) 353-0650.

Requests to speak at the Atlanta,

Georgia meeting: U.S. Department

of Energy, ATTN: Roy Pettit, 1655

Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta.

Georgia 30309 ( 404) 881-2838 (FTS)

257-2838.

Requests to speak at the Dallas,

Texas meeting: U.S. Department of

Energy, ATTN: Grace Morrison.

P.O. Box 35228. 2626 West Mockinbird Lane Dallas, Texas 75235 (214)

749-7621 (F:'S) 749-7621.

Requests to speak at the San Francisco, California meeting: U.S. Department of Energy, ATTIC Dennis

Wong, 111 Pine Street, Third Floor.

San Francisco. Ca if ornia 94.111 (415)

556-7216 (415) 556-7216.

Meeting locations: 2000 M Street.

N.W., Washington. D.C.; JFK Federal Building, CGoverrunent Center.

Boston. Massachusettrs: Klutz nski

Federal Building. 220 South Dear.

born Street. Chicago. Illinois: the Atlanta Civic Center, 395 Piedmont

Avenue. N.E_, Atlanta. C-eorgia: Earl

Cabell Federal Building. 1100 Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas, Ryatt

Regency Union Square. 345 Stockton

Street, San Francisco.: Califor ia.

FOR FURTHER 1''4 FORMATION

CONTACT:

James A. Smith. U.S Department of

Energy, Office of Cansercation and

Solar A.ppllcaUona, Division of

Buildings and Community Systems.

Consvsaer Products Efficiency

Branch, Room 20 huOPOSED RULES

setts Avenue, N.W.. Washington,

D.C. 20545 (202) 376-4614.

Mary-Lynn Wrabel (Media Contact

Only), U.S. Department of Energy,

Office of Conservation and Solar Applications. Division of Buildings and

Community Systems. Technology &

Information Transfer Branch, Mail

Stop 2221-C. 20 Massachusetts

Avenue. N.W., Washington, D.C.

20545(202)376-4669.

'William J. Dennison, U.S. Depart.

ment of Energy, Office of General

Counsel, 12th and Pennsylvania

Avenue, N.W., Room 7148, Washing.

ton, D.C. 20461 ( 202) 633-8788.

CONSUMER INFORMATION TELEPHONE NUMBERS: (202) 376-5924;

(800) 424-5168.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

L Introduction

A. Planned Regulatory Action

B. Purpose and Scope of This Notice -

IL Legislativ e Framework

A. Background

B. Erterty Efficiency Standards

C. Implementation Process

D. Planned Phase-in of Standards

III. Product Types, Likely Product Classes

and Tentative Determinations ConcernIng the Maximum Technologically Feasible Energy Efficiency Levels

A. Definitions

b. Tentative Determinations of the Maximum Technologically Feasible Energy

Efficiency Level

C. Criteria for Selection of Classes

D. Method of Specifying Minimum

Energy

E. Project Class Rationale

IV. Development of Proposed Energy Efficiency Standards

' A. Approach

8. Components

C. Questions

D. Statement of Confidentiality

V. Enforcement

VI. Consumer Participation

VTi. Environmental Impact Analysis

VIII. Comments on Issues

IX. Comment Procedur-es

X. Oral Presentation: Conduct of Meetings

I. IFTRODIICTION

A. PLLT.V= REG'CLATORT ACTION

Section 325 of the Energy Policy and

Conservation Act (Act) (Pub. L. 94_

163). as amended by section 422 of the

National Energy Conservation Policy

Act (h---CPA) (Pub. L. 95-6191, requires that the Department of Energy

(DOE) prescribe energy efficiency

standards for the types of consumer

products listed in section 322(a) of the

Act. These consumer products are

sometimes referred to as "covered

products." Standardsfor nine of these

product types are required by section

325. as amended. to be published in

the ?mental. REGtsTER no later than,

Umber 1980. The nine types of ccmsumer products include refrigerators

and refrigerator-freezers, freezers.

clothes dryers, water heaters, room air

conditioners, home heating equipment

(not including furnaces), kitchen

ranges and ovens, central air conditioners, and furnaces. Standards for

dishwashers, televisions. clothes r'hers, humidifiers, and dehumidifie.

required to be published in the T.-DERAL REGISTER no later than November

1981.

The Act defines energy efficiency

standards as performance standards.

which means that they will establish

the minimum energy efficiency level

required to be achieved by each unit

of a covered product type or class, but

will not prescribe the methods. ' designs. processes, or materials to be

used to achieve any particular efficiency level. The standards will apply only

to new products manufactured after

the effective date of the standards.

S. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS NOTICE

Section 325(1), as amended, requires

DOE, as the first step In establishing

standards, to publish this advance

notice of proposed rulemaking which

is required to specify the type or class

of covered products to which a standard is likely to apply, and to invite

comments from interested persons relevant to establishing the energy efficiency standards. The primary purpose of this notice is to facilitate the

gathering of information prior to proposing standards. The notice provides

an opportunity for public comr^mnt

and participation in the early Ala. ..g

stages of the standards development

process. DOE expects that the comments received as a result of tht

notice will provide a major portion o:

the informatiotal base from which the

standards Will be proposed.

Accordingly, this notice is designec

to present an extensive discussion o

DOE's current views concerning the

standards program and the process fa:

implementation. Ensuing sections des

with the legislative background. th,

standards implementation process. t1

phase -in period for standards. the de

velopment of proposed standards,

Misting of the product types and classe

to which standards are likely to app:

DOE's present views regarding the CT'

tens for classes and the maxlmur.

technologically feasible efficiency fc

each class of products, and a reques

for comments on various standard:-r,

fated issues.

Interested persons are invited to prc

vide views, written presentations c

data, and arguments relevant to ants,,

Lisping energy efficiency standards. I

addition. interested persons are e.

coulaged to provide alternative pr(

grarnmatic approaches within tiframework of the legislation.

VOL 44, Aid, I-TUESDAY, JAMJAIY 2, 1979
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

LL. L==.Arm oRx

A. EACSGROU14D

The energy conservation program

f improving the efficiency of cons dr products. Title III. Part B of

the Act. is designed to encourage man.

ufacturers to,produee, and consumers

to purchase. significantly more efficient consumer products. The Act sets

forth two interrelated strategies for

accomplishing this objective: to require manufacturers to Produce more

efficient products and to enhance consumer acceptance of more efficient

products.

The first strategy, as contained In

section 325 of the Act prior to amendment by NECPA in November 1978.

originally called for the promulgation

of voluntary efficiency improvement

targets representing aggregate industry levels of efficiency improvement to

be achieved by 1980. As an incentive

for the industry to reach these targets,

a reporting and monitoring system was

to be established by DOE in order to

track industry progress. In the event

that achievement of a target for a particular product appeared unlikely,

DOE would have been required to i-litiate an administrative proceeding to

prescribe a mandatory minimum efficiency standard for the `product in

question.

In the National Energy Plan proposed by the President in April 1977,

0.

PROPOSED RULES

the voluntary target program was to

be replaced with a mandatory minimum efficiency standards program because of the voluntary nature of the

targets and the long delays in estab-

. fishing standards if the target levels

were -not achieved. Section 422 of

NECPA amends section 325 of the Act

to provide for a program similar to the

mandatory standards program requested by the President in the National Energy Plan.

The second strategy, contained in

section 324 of the Act, as amended, involves development of a labeling program to require that manufacturers

label .each covered product with

energy. consumption information to

assist consumers in making purchasing

decisions. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has the responsibility for

developing labeling rules and administering the labeling program.

In conjunction with issuance of the

labeling rules.. section 337 of the Act

requires requires DOE to develop a

consumer education program to enhance consumer awareness of the

labels and create a better understanding of the information provided on the

labels. This is intended to encourage

comparison shopping and to enhance

consumer demand for the more efficient products. As a consequence. It is

anticipated that manufacturers will be

influenced to expedite efficiency tinprovements for their various product

lines to meet market demand.

ai

In order to support these dual strategies, section 323 of the Act mandates

that DOE develop test procedures for

the determination of estimated annual

operating costs and at least one other

measure of energy consumption for

each covered product which will assist

consumers in making purchasing decisions. Testing by manufacturers in accordance with these test procedures

will serve as a basis for: (1) the energy

cost and consumption information

that will be required to be included on

product labels under the FTC labeling

program and (2) representations by

manufacturers regarding the energy

consumption of their products. Also.

measurements of efficiency which are

derived from the test procedures will

be used as the basis for energy efficiency standards. Manufacturers will

be required to establish that their

products are in conformance with the

standards by testing in accordance

with test procedures. Further, the

compliance of individual units with

the standards will be determined by

using these procedures. DOE has prescribed final test procedures for the

covered products listed in Table I.

DOE has made a tentative determination to include heat pumps as a class

of central air conditioners and plans to

propose test procedures for heat

pumps on March 9. 1979. In accordance with section 325(1), as amended.

within 30 days after these test procedures are final'an advance notice of

proposed rulemaking for heat pump

standards will be issued.

Tnatz I.-Federal Register Citation for Test Procedures

Covered product type proposed.

1. Refrigerators. refrigerator-freee. (42 FR 21576, Apr. 27. 1977)

en.

under the definitions but which when

tested reflect inaccurate efficiencies.

DOE intends to propose in the near

future procedural guidelines relating

to the modification of test procedures.

Preeoers 442 FR 21516. Apr. 27 , 1977)._,. (42 FR 46140 , Sept 14. 1977)

3. Dishwashers ( 42 FR 15423. Mar, 22, 1977 ) ._,-.-,.,_.- (42 FR 39964. Aug. 8. 19771

4. Clothes dryers.........._..._..._,-.,,.m.._. 1142 FR 215 :6. Apr. 27, 1917).. (42 FR45140. Sept. 14. 1977)

5. Water he$ters...........w.._.. (42 FR 21576. Apr. 27. 1977).__ _... ^,,..,. .... (42 FR 54110. Oct. 4. 1977)

6. Room air corditioners .._._-..._._.„-. ( 41 FR 31231 . July 27, 1918) ......._......_....„.,._ ............._-. 1142 .11121996- Zunt 1. 1971,

7. Home heating equipment. (42 FR 23860. May 1L 19:7) (unveoted ) 1142 FR 43930. Aug. 31, 1917 ) (43 FR 10108. May 10. 1978)

(vented).

'0. Telev4sion sets ..._...-.....-.... (42 FR 21576. Apr. 2-..:9^,7)..._....___....._ (42 FR 46140. Sept. 14. )977)

9. ltitchen ranges and eve.-vs._..._..».._ ( 42 FR 30621. June 16. 1977) 11 42 FR 633'6, De,_ 30, 7971)..._..,.. (43 FR 10(08 May 10. 1978)

t0. Clothes a^uhe;s...._ ................._...__- (42 7 .0, 25329. May 1?. iS")...._.._,..._._ _.__._ (42 'R 499901. Sept. 28.:9-7)

It. Humidifiers ono 0enum;7::ers...__ (42 FR 2:941. June 1. :5"1)...._._._...._...__742 FR 55599. Oct. 18. 79771

12. Centro) air cord)tioners (42 FR 20401. June 14. 1977; ........... ..........._._._....._....._...«.._............................. (42 FR 3151 :Nov. 25.:3-7)

13. Furnaces.. ._ :42 FR 40826. Aug. i1. 79771 -_... (43 FR 20108- May 10, 1378)

Test procedure design must be f"iexible enough to allow for technological

variation among different product

lines within a product type. yet standardized enough to assure that differ.

ent manufacturers' product lines will

be subject to the same measurement

criteria in order to Provide comparable

measures of energy efficiency. DOE is

aware that new products or designs

will be developed which (1) do not fail

under the product test procedure definitions (10 CF R. 430.2) or (2) do fall

S. 1LSYE$GY =77CIENCT STANDARDS

The Act, as amended, i requires that

standards be prescribed for the types

of consumer products listed in section

322(a). However. section 325 (8) requires that priority be given to the

(42 FR 46140, Sept. it 1977)

nine product types listed earlier in this

notice. The remaining product types.

(dishwashers. television sets. ililr

ers. dehumidifiers, and clothes washers) Will be the subject of a separate

advance notice which is required b:;

section 325 to be published no later

'Subsequent references to the "Act" and

se^-dons of the Act refer to the Energy

Policy and Conservation Act as amended by

NECPA

FEDEL A£434SIEI, VOL 44, NO. 1-TUESD AY, JANUARY 2. 1979
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

62

than November 1979. The Act also per.

mits DOE to prescribe standards for

other products which meet certaiocriteria stated in section 325(aX2). A list

of such products which DOE considers

may be subject to standards is required to be published no later than

November 1980, but may be revised

thereafter.

The standards Prescribed. including

any intermediate standards, are required by section 325(c) to be designed

so as to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency which

is technologically feasible and economically justified. Under that subsection, however, no standard can be preYor a particular type or class of

covered product if (1) there is no DOE

test procedure for the type or class: or

(2) DOE determines, by rule, that establishment of a standard for the particular type or class would not result

tu significant conservation of energy

or Is' not technologically feasible or

coonomically justified.

Section 325(d) provides that before

DOE determines whether a standard

is economically justified, it must first

solicit comments on a proposed standard. After receiving comments on the

proposal. DOE must then determine

that the benefits of the standard

exceed its burdens based, to the greatest extent practicable, on a weighing

of the following seven factors

(1) The economic impact of the

standard on the manufacturers and on

the consumers of the products subject

to such standard.

(2) The savings in operating casts

throughout the estimated average life

of the covered products in the type (orclass), compared to any increase in the

price of, or in the initial charges for,

or maintenance expenses of. the covered products which are likely to

:result from the imposition of the

standard,

(3) The total pnjr-ted amount of

enerr7 swr.Oga Wrety to resuit directly

f: the Lm.- :oc of the standard,

(4) Any )..mg of the lity or

the performance of the covered prod6'scts likely to re'A1lt Lr= the i ' -

Wn of the etandard.

(5) The impact of any lea enins of

competition determined in writing by

the Attorney General that is likely to

result from the Imposition of the

standard.

(6) The need of the Nation to conserve energy, and

(7) Any other factors which DOE

considers relevant.

Section 325(f) provides that mini.

mum energy efficiency "levels do not

have to be identical for all produc.ss

within a type or class. Products that

consume different kinds of energy (oil.

natural gas, electnclty, etc.) or that

have a capacity or other performancerelated feature different from other

PROPOSED RULES

products within the same type or class

can be required to have higher or

lower energy efficiency levels. For example, different minimum energy efficiency levels could be prescribed for

gas and electric water heaters or for

manual and automatic defrost ref rig.

erator-freezers.

Section 325(e) provides that manufacturers having annual gross revenues of less than $8,000,000 (within

the meaning of that subsection) may

apply to DOE for exemption for up to

24 months from any standards requirement. This authority may not be

exercised unless DOE, after obtaining

the written views of the Attorney

General, determines that failure to

allow the exemption would , likely

result in a lessening of competition.

Other provisions provide for (1) a

review of test procedures within three

years of NECPA enactment, section

323(a)(7); (2) reevaluation of the

standards within five years of pre.

scription, section 325( h): (3) supersession of state energy efficiency regulations under conditions and procedures

specified in section 327; and (4) authority to use power otherwise availa.

ble to collect information relating to

the economic impact of compliance

with proposed standards requirements,

section 326(d).

Section 325(j) of the Act provides for

standards to include any requirements

on manufacturers which DOE deter.

mines are necessary to assure that

each covered product to which a

standard applies meets the required

minimum energy efficiency level. DOE

expects such provisions to include testing and submission of information to

DOE before a munufacturer introduces products into commerce.

Section 333 provides that any persons who knowingly violate any provi.

sion of section 332 (which lists prohibited acts) shall be subject to civil penalties.

Other enforcement-rested provi.

sions provide for. (1) DOE to prescribe

ruses rrequ::ng aamnuiaccurers to al ow

Dom to oaaerye and inspect results of

t-mnc t Iuctdd by the manufacturer or his agent.. section 334 bX5): (2)

the -=oufacturer to supply to DOE a

reasonable number of products for

testing pure ses. section 325(b); (3)

the ma ufacturer to submit information or reports necessary to insure

compliance. section 326(d); and (4) injunctive relief against any prohibited

act. including distribution of noncomplying products, section 334.

C. rAC?tJ29=iTAT101q PROCESS

Section 325(1) outlines the process

by which the standards are to be prescribed. '^ his process is substantially

different from that followed in the

target program in one Important respect. Section 325( 1)(3) requires DOE

to Identify, in the proposed rule, the

maximum technologically feasible

level of efficiency for each type (or

class) of product, and if any proposer'

standard is not designed to achie'

this level, to state the reasons for proposing a different level as the standard.

In anticipation of this requirement

and to facilitate the gathering of relevant information, DOE is providing a

detailed discussion. in this notice of

product classes, levels of efficiency

and analytical concepts, and further,

is holding a series of public meetings

following publication of this notice in

order to familiarize the public with

this standard setting program and to

achieve the highest possible degree of

public awareness, involvement and

comment.

Based upon comments received from

this notice and information otherwise

available, DOE will issue a notice proposing standards for the nine types of

products. The proposal is scheduled to

be issued in October 1979. That notice

will provide DOE's determination of

the maximum technologically feasible

level of efficiency for each type (or

class) of products, and if the standards

proposed are not the maximum technologically feasible level of efficiency,

the notice will state, as required by

section 325(f), the reasons why the

proposed standards are different. In

addition. that notice is expected to

propose a program for assuring compliance with the standards. A 60-d•

public comment period and a series

public hearings will follow.

After the public hearings. review

and analysis of the continents. survey

data, and other information will begin.

Final standards are required to be

issued no later than December 1980.

The final rule will contain the standards and is expected also to contain

compliance requirements. Under section 325(.), the standards may not

become effective earlier than 130 days

after publication of the fin®.i ride in

the -'1xaatAL Rs rsTER.

a. PEA"= PSASS-ti OP r. aTDsADa

C.ve^ion 325( c) allows for the phaatog-in of standards over a period of on

to fire years through the establishment of intermediate standards. Use

of the full five-year perioc for establishing final standards will provide

teanuf3cturers with the greatest possible pia.nning and development time.

and thus it would appear that they

would be better able to meet higher

final standards than might otherwise

be the case were a shorter penod

adopted.

DOE's tentative planning is to utilize the full phase-in period and to

prescihe standards which are to be

achieved by December 1985. To assure

that manufacturers make steady p*

MOULAL #LGt51E3, VOL 44. NO. i-TUESZ)AY, JA$UAZY 2. 14P4
CSA-RM-73-110 COMMENT 01

6WrW=W auLna

gees toward the 1985 standards, inter- In compliance with an energy efficien.

mediate standards are planned for

June 1981 and December 1983. in June

1981, six months after standards are

promulgated, the fist intermediate

ndards would become effective.

t .ese standards would take Into account the short lead time that manufacturers will have to make design

changes. Intermediate standards for

December 1983 would be higher be'

cause those standards would have

published for a period of three

If this alternative is followed,

DOE will Identify in the proposed

rrale , for each class. minimum

energy efficiency levels for each of the

years ( 1981, 1983, 1985).

one alternative to this p in

strategy would be to set a 1981 standard and only one additional standard,.

the final standard, which would

become effective sometime - before

1995. Since under this approach manufacturers would have less time to

achieve compliance with a final standard, this approach Lacks the flexibility

of the first one and could result in

lower standards.

Another option whkh DOE is exploring would be to have different

phase-in periods for the various prodtact types or classes. This alternative

might permit maximum efficiency

levels to be reached over shorter time

periods, but DOE does not have sufficient information about the efficiency

improvement possibilities for individual types and classes of products to con-

-Jer this approach at this time.

'-.iL PaoDOcr TYxEs. LIz m Paomrcr

CLASsts ARD Tm;'rATIVE DLrm fix -

TIONS CONMU NG ME MAXIXVX

T NOLOGICAZLY FEASSBLF E7arRGY

Eniclx xc! LsvEZs

. A. D£FLW1nONS

For purposes of this notice:

"Energy efficiency standard" means

a performance standard (as opposed to

a design ranaard) which prescribes

far each wit 12 a covered vroducs a

sninitnum energy efficiency level.

Energy efficiency standards include

test procedures prescribed in 10 CPR

Part 430, Subpart B, and any requirements on manufacturers which DOE

determines are necessary to assure

that each covered product to which a

standard applies meets the required

mit-!r„ um energy efficiency level specitled in the Stanaard..

Mi'nimum energy efficiency lever"

=mmns the -n=-et-nm value of the

measure of efficiency (i.e., energy

factor, energy efficiency ratio. seasonal energy efficiency ratio. annual fuel

utilization efficiency, defined and

measured accari g to DOE test procedures in 10 C17. Part e.30. Subpar,

B). which each unit of a covered product must meet or exceed in order to be

cy standard.

"Type" of covered products means

one of the categories of consumer

products designated in section 322(a)

of the Act. For example, freezers are a

type of covered product.

Class" of covered products means a

group of covered products, the functions or intended uses of which are

similar. A class of covered products is

subject to a single energy efficiency

standard. Such standard may prescribe either • the same minimum

energy efficiency level for all of the

basic models of the class, or different

minimum energy efficiency levels for

basic models which are distinguished

by capacity or other performance-related features that affect efficiency

and utility. For example, automatic

defrost freezers are a class of covered

products. - -

B. T--NTATIYs DET SMtNATiONS OF THE

TEL-eNOLOGICALLT 4EASZBLE

Mq=x cY LSTM

In the proposed rule, DOE Is required to identify the maximum technologically feasible energy efficiency

level for each mess of covered produc:s. In order to daciiitate the gathering of data, views and arguments. DOE

is offering for consideration a definition of the term "maximum technologically feasible energy efficiency

level" and presenting in Table II

DOE's tentative determination of such

levels based on 1978 data. The levels in

Table II may be modified in the proposed rule as a result of either modifying the definition, obtaining better information regarding the highest levels

of energy efficiency of basic models

commercially available, or identifying

efficiency improvements that occur in

commercially available products prior

to the time of the proposal.

For purposes of this advance notice,

the term "maximum technologically

feasible energy efficiency level"

means. for earn cans of covered prod-

;, the h.., ... newt of the ni,•a,sare

of energy efficiency (ire- energy

factor, energy efficiency ratio, seasonal energy efficiency zatio. annual fuel

ut .ii-=r±on efficiency. defined and

measured according to DOE test procedures) of any basic model that is

commercially available at the time of

proposal (which is manned for October, i9793. Based on this definition.

DO.E's tentative detp_rrninathsns of

r axi-, technologically Bible

energy a fficletzcy level for each produm class are listed in Table 11. As mentioned earlier, those levels are based

on products commercially available in

1973, For the product class-- -- for

which DOE has incomplete trformatics on the (eves of the meas::re of effv-ioncy of the basic models commercially available in 1973. DOE has esti53

mated the maximum technologically

feasible energy efficiency level based

on the best available information.

Classes for which levels have been estimated are noted in Table II by three

asterisks.

C. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF CLASSES

DOE has segregated the basic

models of product types into classes to

which different energy efficiency

standards are likely to apply. These

classes are tentative, and different

classes may be specified in the proposed rule if DOE receives data. views

and arguments which justify changes.

DOE used the following two criteria to

segregate the basic models of product

types into classes:

1. DOE is specifying classes whenever different basic models of the

product type consume different types

of energy (i.e., oil, gas, or electricity).

2. DOE is specifying classes in order

to insure that consumer products

having different capacities or other

useful performance-related features

which affect efficiency and utility

remain available to consumers.

These criteria are applied to each

product type in Section III E of this

notice. For each class within a product

type, Section III E includes a discussion of the justification for establishing minimum energy efficiency levels

different from those which apply to

other classes within the same product

type.,

M 1CLTHOD OF sPSCSrrING M114ndfW

BSYLRGY J TXCZENCY

For covered products other than refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezera, and window room air conditioners,

the same minimum energy efficiency

level is likely to apply to each basic

model . ithin a particular class.

For refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers. freezers, and window room air conditioners. rn^n'.mum energy efficiency

levels within any class are likely to

vary with capacity (i.e., net refrigerated .ol'..me Cr cooling capacity). Terefore, wi,thim a single class, basic models

di.fferng according to capacity are

likely to be subject to different

mum energy efficiency levels. This

method of establishing =,inimu

enemy efficiency levels is likely to be

used for refrigerators. r•efrigeratorfreezers. and freezers because their efficiency, as measured by toe energy

factor. tends to increase with volume.

The same method is i l-ely to oe used

for window room air conditioners because the .ninc-num energy efficiency

level is expected to vary greatly with

capa.C.ity.

The likely product classes, and the

tentative determinations of the ms.ximum technologically feat-ble energy

efficiency level for each class, are pre-

.nted in Table II. Section III E conVOL 44. MG. I-TUESDAT, W4U Y 1, 1979
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

54

Lain a discussion of the considerations

leading to the selection of the individual classes.

!. PRODUCT CLASS RATION=

1..Re. rigerators and Refrigertrtor freezerg

Three classes of electric refrigeratats and electric refrigerator-freezers

specified in this notice. These

classes. are distinguished by two performance-related features which

affect utility: freezer compartment

design temperature and the type of defrost system.

Refrigeration products which require manual defrosting are separated

into two classes. Basic models of the

first class have freezer compartments

designed to operate at 157. This

group is referred to as-"manual defrost refrigerators" in DOE test procedures. Basic models of the second class

have freezer compartments designed

to operate at 57. This group is referred to as "partial automatic defrost

refrigerator-freezers" in DOE test procedures and as "cycle defrost refrigerator-freezers" by certain members of

the refrigeration industry.

According to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, food can be stored for

much longer periods of time at 5'F

than at 15'F. Therefore, the lower

freezer compartment temperature provides additional utility to the consumer.

Despite the references to manual defrosting and partial-automatic defrosting in DOE test procedures. DOE believes that there are no significant differences between these products with

regard to the type of consumer actions

needed to accomplish defrosting. DOE

believes, therefore, that "partial automatic" defrosting, as compared to

manual defrosting, is riot, in itself, a

performanoe-related feature which affects ur?ity.

Because of the different freezer

compartment design temperatures, the

energy factors of units having freezer

eampartments designed to operate at

5'F should tend to be lower than. the

energy factors of units having freezer

compartments designed to operate at

1S'F. Minimum energy efficiency

levels appropriate for units having

freezer compartments designed to operate at 11'F may not be achievable by

units hav°.: g freezer compartments designed to operate at 5'F:: CE is contemplating segregating these units

into separate classes in order to insure

that units having freezer compartments designed to operate at 5'F

remain available to consumers.

Automatic defrost units do not require any consumer action to a.."" =-

plish defrosting, and thus provide a

utility to the consumer not provided

by manually defrosted units. Moreover, automatic defrost units should

PROPOSED RULES

tend to have lower energy factors because of the extra energy consumed by

the automatic defrosting cycle. Minimum energy efficiency levels appropriate for other classes of refrigerators

and refrigerator-freezers may not be

achievable by automatic defrost refrigerator-freezers. Since automatic defrost refrigerator-freezers offer a distinct performance-related feature

which affects utility and efficiency.

DOE is specifying a class of automatic

defrost refrigerator-freezers in order

to insure that such units remain available to consumers, DOE is not further

classifying automatic defrost refrigerator-freezers on the basis of freezer

compartment design temperature because DOE believes that the freezer

compartments of all automatic defrost

...refrigerator-freezers are designed to

operate at the same temperature.

2. Freezers

Three classes of freezer are specified

in this notice. These classes are distinguished by performance-related features which affect utility and efficiency. One such feature is the configuration of the unit, i.e., chest or upright.

Examples of the extra utility which

distinguishes upright freezers from

chest freezers. include greater accessibility to the freezer contents and more

efficient use of floor space. Information available to DOE indicates that

the energy factors of upright freezers

should tend to be lower than the

energy factors of chest freezers.

Therefore, minimum energy efficiency

levels appropriate for chest freezers

may not be achievable by upright

freezers. Since upright freezers offer

distinct performance-related features

which affect utility and efficiency.

DOE is specifying in this notice sepa.

rate classes in order to insure that upright freezers remain available to consume.

Another performance-related feature which affects utility and efficiency is .he type of defrost system. which

deterw-es the extent of con-:su.mer

action needed to accomplish defrrsting..automatic defrost units do not require any consumer action to accomplish defrosting, and thus provide the

consumer with utility not provided by

manual defrost units. Moreover, automatic defrost units. as compared to

manual defrost units, should tend to

have lower energy factors because of

tae extra energy consumed by the

automatic defrosting cycle. Minimum

energy efficiency levels appropriate

for maauai defrost freezers may not

be achievable by automatic defrost

freezers. Since automatic defrost

freezers offer a i'i tir,ct perfor ancereiated feature, DOE is specifying in,

this notice a class of automatic defrost

freezers in order to insure that such

units remain available to consumers,

Because DOE is not aware of any

automatic defrost chest freezers distributed in commerce, DOE is not

planning to segregate automatic defrost freezers according to confir---,ation.

3, Clothes Dryers

Three classes of clothes dryers are

specified in this notice. These classes

are distinguished either by the type 01

energy consumed by the basic models

of a class or by performance-relatec

features which affect utility and effi•

ciency.

Basic models of clothes dryers are

segregated into those which consum¢

gas energy and those which consume

electric energy. Failure to establisk

separate classes according to the typo

of energy consumed might result ii

the elimination of all basic model:

consuming certain types of energy

Such possibility is contrary to indices

tions of the intent of Congress, a

stated in the legislative history of th

NECPA amendments.

Basic models of clothes dryers ar

also distinguished by the amount c

room occupied by the unit, a perform

ance-related feature which affects uti

ity and efficiency. Compact clothe

dryers take up less room than stanc

and clothes dryers. Another relate

feature which affects utility is tY.

drum size, which determines the six

-of an economical load: compact ciotht

dryers will dry the small loads typicu

ly needed by small families at a low.

cost than standard clothes dryer

formation available to DOE inc.

that the energy factors of compa

clothes dryers should tend to be low

than the energy factors of standa

clothes dryers. Since compact cloth

dryers offer a distinct performance-i

;aced feature which affects utility a.

efficiency, DOE is specifying in tl

notice a separate class for camp:

electric clothes dryers in order

insure that such units remain av ai

bie to consumers. DOE is not specs

ing a class for compact 6-as cloti

dryers because DOE Is not aware

any such units distributed in cc

merce.

4. c., e- Heater

Three classes of water :eater

specified in this notice, based on

type of energy consumed: oil. gas.

electricity. Failure to establis se

rate riasses according to ttLe ty'cE

energy consumed =,^t result in

elimination of basic models cons nt

certain types of energy, x hitn is tit

sirabie for the reasons already sti

in the discussion concerning cioi

dryers.

5. Doom Air Conditioners

Four classes of room air canditio

are specified in this notice. Roo=

conditioners are distinguished by

FEDUAL L GIST . VOt, 6d, NO. 1--ti7ESOAY, JAN'JA$T 2. 1974
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

configuration of the unit, pick

terminal, through-the-wail (no outdoor louvers), reverse cycle. and

window room air conditioners, (Beuse through-the-wall room air condi-

.ners with outdoor side louvers and

_,ndow room air conditioners can

often be used Interchangeably,

through-the-wall units with outdoor

side louvers will be considered as part

of the class of window room air conditioners. )

These four classes are each distined by performance-related features which affect utility and efficiency. Packaged terminal air conditioners

have special mounting provisions essential to use in apartment complexes

or condominiums. Through-the-wall

units (no outdoor louvers) are typically designed to be flush mounted with

the outside wall of the building. Reverse cycle air conditioners have the

capability of providing heat to the

conditioned space. Window units are

designed to be mounted in various

window openings.

The energy efficiency levels which

are the maximum technologically feasible and economically Justified are

llkey to be distinct for each of the

classes. Minimum energy efficiency

levels appropriate for one class may

not be achievable by basic models of

other classes. Since the basic models

of each class offer distinct performance-related features, DOE is specifying in this notice four separate classes

in order to insure that basic models of

"-tch class remain available to consumcs.

6. Home Heating Equipment (not including furnaces)

Thirteen classes of home heating

equipment (not including furnaces)

are specified in this notice. These

classes are distinguished by the type

of energy consumed by the basic

models of each class and by performance-related features which affect utility and efficiency.

Basic modes of home heating equipment are se sg3ted according to

whether the? consume electricity, gas

or oil. Failure tc establish separate

classes according to the type of energy

consumed might result in the elimination of basic models consuming certain

types of energy. which is undesirable

for the reasons *Already stated in the

dlscuszian concerning clothes cryers.

Basic modes of gait fired home healing equipment are further dis..iiguuishhed by methods of hot air dst-ribution (n.e., forced-air or gravity). and

the configuration (i.e., wall furnace.

floor furnace. or room heater). Basic

models of oil-fired home heating

equipment are distinguished by methods of air distribution ci.e_- gravity or

forced-air) and configuration (Le., wall

furznace, floor furnace or room

PROPOSED RULES

heater). Information available to DOE

indicates that the minimum energy efficiency levels which are the maximum technologically feasible and economicaily Justified are likely to be distinct for each of the proposed classes

of oil-fired and gas-fired equipment.

Therefore. minimum energy efficiency

levels appropriate for one class may

not be achievable by basic models of

other classes. Since the basic models

of each class offer distinct performance-related features which affect utility and efficiency, DOE is specifying

twelve classes of oil-fired and gas-fired

horse heating equipment.

It is not necessary to differentiate

between basic models of electric home

heating equipment because all units

are 100 percent efficient at point of

use, according to the applicable DOE

test procedures.

7. Kitchen Flanges and Ovens

Seven classes of kitchen ranges and

ovens are specified in this notice.

These classes are distinguished by the

type of energy consumed by the, basic

models of each class, by the function

of the basic models of the class, or by

other performance-related features

which affect utility and efficiency of

the basic models of the class

Basic models of kitchen ranges and

ovens are segregated into classes according to whether basic models of the

class consume electric energy only, or

gas energy. Failure to establish separate classes according to the type of

energy consumed might result in the

elimination of all basic models consinning certain types of energy, which

is undesirable for the reasons already

stated in the discussion concerning

clothes dryers.

This product type has been further

segregated to account for the differing

functions of the three major cooking

components. Le.. microwave ovens,

conventional ovens (electric and gas)

and cooking tops (electric and gas).

DOE anticipates that. Instead of setting single sccdarcs for basic mode is

which consist of two or more major

cooking components, a separate st :nda-rd silt be set for each component.

Electric ovens and gas ovens have

been further segregated into classes of

self-cleaning ovens and non-self-eiear,-

ing ovens because of their differing

utility to consumers. Self-cleaning

Ovens, as compared to con-self-ciean1Eg Ovens, should tend to have lower

energy factors because of the ex--ra

energy consumed by the self-cleaning

cycle. Minimum energy efficiency

levels appropriate for non-self-cieaning ovens may not be achievable by

seif-cleaning ovens. Since self-cleaning

ovens offer a distinct performance-related feature which affects utility and

efficiency. DOE is specifying in this

notice a class of self-cleaning ovens in

55

order to insure that such units remain

available to consumers.

Information available to DOE indicates that the minimum energy efficiency levels which are the maximum

technologically feasible and economically Justified are likely to be distinct

for each of the specified classes of

kitchen ranges and ovens. Therefore,

minimum energy efficiency levels appropriate for one class may not be

achievable by basic models of other

classes. Since the basic models of each

class offer distinct performance-related features. DOE is specifying seven

classes of kitchen ranges and ovens in

order to insure that such models

remain available to consumers.

8. Central Air Conditioners

Two classes of central air conditioners are apecified in this notice. These

classes are distinguished by their

configuration, a performance-related

feature which affects utility and efficiency.

Central air conditioners are segregated according to whether the units

make up a single package or a split

system (separated indoor and outdoor

components connected by refrigeration and electrical lines). Certain

households cannot accommodate split

systems because suitable space is not

available for the outdoor unit. Technical information available to DOE indicates that the measures of efficiency

of single package systems should tend

to be lower than the measures of efficiency of split systems. Minimum

energy efficiency levels appropriate

for split systems may not be achievable by single package systems. Since

single package systems offer distinct

performance-related features which

affect utility and efficiency. DOE is

specifying a separate class for single

package systems.

9. Furnaces

Six classes of furnaces are specified

in this notice. These classes are d stinyuished either by the type of energy

co. su=ed by the basic models of each

class. or by performance-reiated featuxes conch affect utility.

Basic models of furnaces are segregated according to whether they consme electricity, gas. or oil. F'atiure to

establish separate classes accords: g to

the type of energy consumed night

result in the elimination of basic

models consuming certain. types of

energy, which is desirable for the reasons already stated in the discussion

concerning clothes dryers.

One performance-reiated feature

which affects utility is the Method of

heat distribution to the household.

Gas furnaces use air circulation systems based either on the effect of

gravity on low density heated air. or

on the action of a blower (i.e.. forced

air). Gravity-type systems offer the

MAKU l SiMt, YOt- 44, NO. }-tt ,WAY, Ed M "Y 2. 1179
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

56

utility of operating without an electrical connection. In addition, a further

class of furnaces, gas boilers, use hot

water or steam to distribute heat.

These various distribution systems

result in different characteristics of

heat transfer from the furnace flame

to the conditioned space, and different

bases through the flue. Information

available to DOE indicates that the

measure of efficiency of gravity gas

Electrle, manually defroated. 5' freezerEleetrie, automatic defrost

T IL-LiJfely Gasses and Tentative Determinations of Maximum Technologically Feasible Energy E/licieney Levels

Caircend product type

Reirigerators and refriterattor-frees. Electric. manually defrosted, 15' freezer...

ens.

Clotibes dryers.

Water heaters-- ......

air conditioners

Manual defrost, ehest._

Manual defrost. uprightAutomatic defrost.

Electric, standard.

Electric. compact

Gas

Electric

083

Packaged terminal

Reverse cycle ..,.„

provides distinct performance-rela

features, DOE is specifying separ

classes in order to insure that

groups remain available to consurrl

Identical arguments lead to the cn

ification of separate classes for

air oil furnaces and oil boilers.

of oil furnaces using gravity to cir

late hot air is not specified becal

DOE is not aware of any such ur,

distributed In commerce.

Preliminary maxunum technologically fees!-

energy efficiency level"

.......-.. 10.4 ft 1/kWh-day (EF)

- 10.1 ft '/kWh-day (EF)

- 6.6 ft'/kWh-dap t EF)

- 16.9 ft'/kWh-day (EF)

13.9 It '/kWh-day , EF)

- 9.1 ft 'fkWh-day , EF)

- 2.77lb/dWh (EF)

2.61 lb/dWh tEF)

__r.. 2.46 1bidWh (EP)

_ 0.89 (EP)"'

oil .. 0

.......,. 0.59 tEF) "'

.50 (EF)"

Window and through the wall (with outdoor side louvers)_._...._, .... 11.6 Stu. watt-hour (EER)

Through the Will (no outdoor side louvers)._...._..:^ .............._....... ^ 7.5 Btu /watt-hour (ZER)

Home heating equipment. not, lnclud- Electric, primary and supplementary

1n8 turnaces.

Liteben ranges and ovew

Central air conditioners

Pwnocea

Gas. gravity, vented room heater_-...._.__..._.-.

Ou. forced air, vented room heater..-.r .

Gas. gravity. vented wall furnace..._..__..._....._......-..`

Gas, forced air. vented wall furnace

Gas, gravity, vented floor furnace.

Gas, forced alr, vented floor furnace..

Oil, gravity. vented room heater ...

Oil. forced air. vented room heater....r._-...._.........

Oi . gravity. vented wall furnace -

Oil. famed tit. vented wall furnace....._.-...........^^....-..

Oft. gravity. vented floor furnace.........-.. _

Oil. forced air. vented floor furnace .`..

Microwaveoven ,-._..

Electric cooking top

Electric oven

Electric oven. self-cleaning...

Oar cooking too.._.._r

Gas Open

Gas oven. self-cleaning

..,. Split system-...__.. ._. .....Y.,._.,._..^

Single package ..^_..,.r-..,

oat gratay..

Gas. forced air.

0" boilers

Oti. boilers.

Olt forced

Electric

PROPOSED RULES

furnaces should tend to be lower than

the measures of -efficiency of forcedair gas furnaces. Further, the measure

of efficiency of forced-air furnaces

should tend to be lower than the

measure of efficiency fcr gas boilers.

Minimum energy efficiency levels for

one class of gas furnaces may not be

achievable by other classes of gas furnaces. Since each class of gas furnaces

- 8.7 Btu/watt.hour (EER)

...... 8.8 Btu/watt-hour (EER)

- 100% efficiency

58% (AFTJE)**'

74% (AFUE)'"

60% (AFUE)'

70%(AFT:E)"'

701. (AF(JE)'a°

(AERIE)'

(A IUM)'

(Arm),

(AFl7E)'

44%(EF)'"

79% (EF)

16% (EF)"

._^ 141. (EF)"

46% (EF)

^ _ 1 8%' EF)

10.3'SEER("'

8.9 tSE_ R "'"

70% (AFt'E)' '

..... 75e )A_RJE)

?9% (AFT E)

45 ,AYTE)

^...._._.__...^ 3-- AF VE I...

:v0% (AFAE)

'Inior-.,aron is not available to deterinne :.ie ma x== :ec(tnologtcatly feasible energy eff:c:eacy :rveL

Based or. is .a oota:ned by us:rg OCE test procedu;.-*s.

aaied on best available information.

EP-energy factor.

EER - energy efficiency ratio.

AFC£=annua fuel uui(at.on efficiency.

-eeazonai energy elru)ency ratio.

N. Dr'+T.AP3c_TS r op PROPOSED EaraRG'r

E^ CIM-OY STA,6M .anS

A. AYPAOACI3

Section 325(1) of the Act requires

DOE to determine the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is

technologically feasible for each type

(or class) of covered product in proposIng a standard. L' the proposed standard is not designed to achieve this

level of efficiency. DOE is required to

state in the proposed rule the reasons

therefor. If standards are proposed at

a level below that which is the maximum technologically feasible, the reasons for such a proposal are expected

to be primarily economic, Le. relat e

to the seven factors identified by Co:

gress which must be considered to t'7

extent practicable in deterrllnir:

whether a standard is economical.

Justified. In order to supplement anal

able data for identifying any reaso r

for not proposing a standard at th

€t.AL l;£G115Th*. VOL 44, NO. 1-TUMAY, JANUARY 2, l9
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

maximum technologically feasible

level. DOE has developed a series of

questions framed around components

of these seven factors. Any comments

regarding the components and any responses to the questions will also be

used as a framework for identifying

areas which require additional data in

determining final standards.2 The

components are listed in Part B and

the questions are listed in Part C of

this section.

1. s

The following is a listing of the

seven factors and the major components of each factor. DOE has identified these major components in order

to facilitate public comment. In addition to the components • identified

below, there may be other areas of

concern regarding the seven factors.

The public is invited to identify any

additional areas of concern and to

comment upon them.

The seven factors and their components are as follows:

1. The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and on the

consumers of the products subject to

such standard.

I.J. Impact on Manufacturers

a. Production

b. Employment

C. Capital Investment

d. Industry Structure

e. Change in Retail Price

1.2. Impact on Consumers

a. Choice of Products Available in

the Market

b. Change in Retail Price

c. Utility/Performance

d. Maintenance

e. Energy Savings

f. Differential Impact of the Standard on"Consumers

2. The savings in operating costs

throughout the estimated average life

of the covered products in the type (or

class), compared to any increase in the

price of. or in the initial charges for,

or maintenance expenses of. the covered products which are likely to

result from the imposition of the

standard.

a Estimated Average Product Life

b. Estimated Energy Savings

c- Changes Maintenance Expenses

d. Change in Retail Price

3- The total projected amount of

energy savings likely to. result directly

from the imposition of the stardarda- Number of Unit Produced Annu•

ally

b. Aggregate L.. ne_rgy Savings

4- Any lessening of the utility or the

performance of the covered products

'A description of the ar-alysii proposed to

be used in determining whether a >taridard

in economic .ily justified zilj be avalacle to

the public upon antten request. These

quests should be sent to James A. Smith, at

the address listed at the beginning of the

notice.

r%wr'ae&s auasa

likely to result from the imposition of

the standard.

a. Product Classes

5. The impact of any lessening of

competition determined in writing by

the Attorney General that is likely to

result from the imposition of the

standard.

a. Changes in Competitive Situation

for Each Manufacturer

6. The need of the Nation to conserve energy.

a. Estimated National Energy Savings

7. Any other factors which DOE considers relevant.

a, Impact of Standards on the Suppliers of Component Parts

b. Impact of Standards on the Distributors, Retailers and Institdtional

Sales Outlets

c. The Maximum Energy Efficiency

Level Achievable by Manufacturers

C. etr$sriONS

The questions dealing with the components of the seven factors are listed

below. Each question may invite responses based upon as many as three

different sets of assumptions:

Current data-Answers to the questions using calendar year 1978 actual

data. If actual data are not available

for the complete year 1978. estimated

data, based upon part-year data, may

be used.

Scenario 1-Answers using 1986 estimated data, based on plans and forecasts assuming no energy efficiency

standards program.' In the questions

listed below, the term "Scenario 1" Indicates the need for this type of

answer.

Scenario 2-Answers using 1986 estimated data, assuming that the maximum technologically feasible levels of

energy efficiency for each product

class as given in Table II of this notice

are to be met by 1986.2 In the questiors listed below. the term "Scenario

2" indicates the need for-this type of

arswer.

In responding to questions involving

Scenario I the a, suaptiotss underlying the plans and forecasts for 1986

should be identified. such as assumptions regarding the price of energy.

the rate of inflation, etc. To permit

useful comparison and analysis, answers Involving Scenario 2 should be

based on the same assumptions as

those involving Scenario 1, plus the assumption of having to meet the maximum technologically feasible levels of

energ; efficiency as defined in this

notice. Some of the questions have

been repeated, because certain types

of information are relevant in quantifying the impacts of more than one of

the seven factors.

':1 1986 estimates are not currently available, use latest actual or estimated data to

develop them.

5,7

The questions, listed according to

factors and components, are as follows:

1. The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and on the

consumers of the products subject to

such standard.

1.1. Impact on Manufacturers

a. Production

(1) What is the number of models

manufactured by each company, for

for each product class during calendar

year 1978?' What is this number projected to be under Scenario 1 and Scenario 2?

(2) What is the number of units produced, and the average per unit price

of the product at shipment from the

factory, of each model during calendar

year 1978?' What are these numbers

and prices projected to be under Scenario 1 and under Scenario 2?

(3) In accordance with DOE test procedures, identify the capacity or other

measure of useful output of services.

the average annual energy consumption, and the level of the measure of

energy efficiency for each model manufactured during calendar Year 1978.4

What is this same information projected to be under Scenario 1 and under

Scenario 2? .

(4) For those models to be producerd

in 1986, what would be the percentage

change in the cost of production (i.e.,

the sum of materials. labor, and over.

head) since 1978 under Scenario 1 and

under Scenario 2?

b. Employment

(1) What is the total employment

for each firm and what percentage of

this total are production workers foreach of the 9 product types covered by

this notice? • What would these figures

be under Scenario 1 and under Scenario 2?

c. Capital Investment

(1) By product class, what is the

dollar amount of capital investment by

each firm for 1978 ;actual data) and

1979 through 1986 (estimated data!.

on a year by year basis, assuming no

sttarida.-;s? What is the dollar amount

of capita.! investment for 1979 t Zi ougn

1986 'estimated data) assuming that

the maximum tec-rnoicv cai_ :ea:: ie

level of efficiency of each product

class Over. in this notice is required

to be met by 1986?

d. Industry Structure -

(1) What is share of market for each

firm ;•ithin each product class in calenr_ar year 1978? • What is this share

projected to be under Scenario 1 and

wider Scenario 2?

e. Change in Retail Price

1. What is the average retail price

for eaca model manufactured ny each

company for calendar year 1918? • Tf

the actual retail price is not available,

give the suggested or estimated retail

'See Table II of this notice for a listing of

Product cases by product type.

FEDEXM 03Srfl, VOL 44, NO. )--TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 1979
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

58

price and Identify it as such. What

vrould the price b e u n d e r Scenazw 1

and under Scenario 2?

1.2. Impact an Consumers

a. Choice of Products Available in

the Market

(1) What is the number of models

manufactured by each company, and

for each product class. during calendar

191'8? ° What is this number pro.

tected to be under Scenario 1 and

under Scenario 2?

b. Change in Retail Price

(1) What is the average retail price

for each model manufactured by each

company for calendar year 1978?' if

the actual retail Price is not available,

give the suggested or estimated retail

price and icentify it as sttt. What

auould this price be under Scenario 1

and under Scenario 2?

C. U41W/Performamice

(1) What would be the difference, if

any. in the utility/perfanzance of

each product c.La., bet'seen Scenario 1

and Scenario 2? °

C2) Describe product design fewim-es

that affect energy t pcioa of

each model manufactured diwi.ng calendar year 1978. Describe wbat these

features are projected to be tinder Scenario 1 and Scenario 2.

d. Maintenance Expenses

(1) W'h'at are the estimated annual

average maintenance expenses for

each product class manufactured

during calendar year 1978, over the

life of the product? 4 What are these

expenses projected to be under Sceaarlo 1 and under Scenario 2?

e. Energy Savings

(1) In accordance with DOE test pro.

cedures,'identify the capacity or other

measure of useful output of services.

the average annual energy consumption and the level of the energy effie ency measure for each model manufactured during calendar year 19.3.'

What is the Informant i projected to

be under Scena:a I and under Sce :arso 2?

I. Dtfferert;.al impact of the Standard on Ce u=t-

(1) What factors are imper'tant when

e c ideri.ng differential iLran.S on

2. The savings in operating costs

throughout the atec average life

it the cove e^c produc°.s in the type (or

alias) com ar c to any in--v,se in the

price of. or to the initial =arses for,

or cSi.i'sit^nance expenses of tide covered products. which are hi'k7 to

result from the ipasrtian of the

clardard.

a. Estmtated Average Pr um Life

(1)' What is the estimated avez-Age

Hie for each product a nufactamed during calendar rest 197?°

What is the average life p:n ed to

be under Scenario i and Scenario 2?

^'. Estimated Et>zrzy '

0SED 5

(1) In accordance with DOE test Procedures, identify the capacity or other

measure of useful output of rues,

the average annual energy consumption and the level of the energy efficiency measure f,or each mnrlel manufactured during calendar year 1978.°

What is this information projected to

be endenScm&m 1 and under Scerlarl0 2?

c. Changes in Maintenance Expenses

(1) What are the estimated annual

average maintenance expenses for

each product class manufactured

during calendar year 1978. over the

life of the product?4 What are these

expenses projected to be under Scenario 1 and under Scenario 2?

d. Change in Beiaii Price

(1) What is the average retail price

far each model manufactured by each

comaparly for calendar year 1978?1 If

the actual retail price is not available,

give the suggested or estimated retail

price and identify it as such. What

would this price be under Scenario 1

and under Scenario 22

3. The tarsi projected amount of

energy savings Liissly to result directly

from the imposition of the standard.

a. Number of Units Produced AnntrAlly

(1) What is the ntmmber of units of

each model Produced dnring calendar

year 19'78? ° What is this number proJected be wades Seenarto 1 and

under Scenario 2?

b. Aggregate Energy SaThrgs

( 1) In accordance with DOE test proeedur'ea, identify the capacity or a -her

measure of useful output of services,

the average annual energy consuzcption and the level of the energy effi.

ciency measure for each model manufactured dtati calendar Year 1978.•

What is this same information projected to be under Scenario I and tinder

Scenario V

(2) What is the estimated average

life for each product class manufacua: ed :....-':g calendar year 1778?'

W'-.at is the average life projected to

be under Scenario 1 and Scenario 2'.

4. Any lessening of the utility or the

pe-rforrtan of the covered products

tis:.ly to result from the imposition of

the standard.

®- Product Cases

(1) What would be the difference. if

any, is the utility/perfo.-ma.ece of

each Prom= class manufacured. ba

tween Marto 1 and Scenario 2? .

5. The =Dam of any seni>;g of

eompetaion dec inee in writing by

the Aticrney General that is likely to

resait for the Ur_ tiun of S.andard.

a. Change in Competitive Sia;ation

by Manufacturer

(1) What is each comrany's share of

the ntarxet for each product class. in

ca.iendar year 1978?1 What is the ;care

projected to be under Scenario 1 and

under Scenario 2?

(2) To what extent will the implementation of standards under Scenario 2 change the degree of competition

wi[1*00 each product class and w z

each of the 9 product types covere...._I^y

this notice, and with regard to the

overall competitiveness of each firm?

8. The need of the Nation to conserve energy.

a. Estimated National Energy Savings

(1) In accordance with DOT test procedures. identify the capacity or other

measure of useful output of services.

the average annual energy consumption and the level of the energy efficiency meson for each model manufactured during calendar year L978."

What is this same information projected to be under Scenario I and Scenario

2 as defined above?

(2) What additional information is

pertinent to conserving energy with

respect to the 9 products types covered

in this notice?

T. Any other factors which DOE considers relevant.

a. Impact of Standards on the Suppliers of Component Parts

(1) What is the projected impact in

1988 on the suppliers of component

parts to the manufacturers, assuming

Scenario 2?

b. Impact of Standards on the Distributors, Retailers and Institutional

Sales Outlets

(1) What is the projected impact in

1988 on the distributors. retailers d,

institutional sales outlets for t. 9

products types covered in this notice,

assuming Scenario 2?

c. The Maximum Energy Efficiency

Level Achievable by Manufacturers

(1) Assuming a standards program as

outlined in this notice. What should

the 19855 level of the measure of efficiency be for each product class expected to be covered by v 25e program?

(It is erected that this level R ouid

exceed uae level projected cr.,der cena.:c L cnrx Scenario 1. ass, - no

standards program.) If this 'e7ei for a

product class is different front the

maximum technologically feasible

level of energy e`ficiesscy Led in

Table II, what are he reasons for this

difference based on any answers to the

questions listed above or oath reference to the components of the factors

identified in Part B of this aection?

D. s L-_MAt 1rr Of ca. r2` rry

Persons responding to this notice

may consider parts of their comments

to be of a confidential nature. lzc_ ruse

the release of certain types of utiormation might be deemed to cause subS1.ar=ial competiti-e If an y

person believes that any Winformauon

a2L' *^ *' ! is covered by the exemption

of the Freedom of lnformaLion Act

i? 44.' NO. 1-dta saAY Y 2, PM'
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

OPOSED RULES:.

concerning trade secrets and commer-- The programs that will be evaluated any methods DOE should consider in.

- cial or financial information obtained - include the following: order to maximize consumer participa-

-» person and considered privi- .1.. U.S. Environmental Protection tion in the development of standards..

or confidential. (5 U.S.C. Agency; :. -- ' • -

am VII. ENWRO ' NKENTAL J. the person should so state a Noise Enforcement Progr IMPACT ^^'31S"

me of submission and request _. b. Automobile. Exhaust Emission

DOE treat this information as Certification Program.

confidential.,Factors of Interest to 2. National Highway Traffic Safety

DOE when evaluating requests to Administration ; Enforcement of Motor

treat information that has been sub- Vehicle Safety Standards.

milted as confidential- includes: (1) a 3. D.S. Department of Defense; Fleet

description of the Item; (2) an indiea- ' Ballistic Missiles Procurement Stand- . efficiency standards for the nine type

tion whether and-.why such , items of ards.- consumer products, discussed

information have been treated by the 4 : State of California; Enforcement herein, may be a major Federal action

submitting person as confidential -and of Appliance Energy Efficiency Stand- significantly- affecting the quality of

whether and why such items are cus-, arils.: - . the - human environment: Consequent.

ternary treated as confidential within ' "5--'Association of -Home Appliance ly, the Department-will prepare an En--

the industry;

(3) whether the informs Manufacturers Certification Program vironmental Assessment to -serve- as

tion is generally.: known, or publicly for Raom.Air-Conditioners.. the basis to determine whether an En-:-:

available from „other sources; (4) $. Air Conditioning and Refrigera- vironmental Impact - Statement (EIS)-, -

whether the information has previoustion - Institute; Certification of Unitary • is required, If an EIS is required, a

ly been. made available to others with- Conditioners. N o t i c e of Intent to prepare an EIS wiii

out obligation concerning Its confiden-.- -

- - 7. Underwriters Laboratory; Product be -published In the FIwatA . R€cxsTEat..

tiality; (5). an explanation of thek com Safety Certification.

submitting In providing any comments or alter VIII Co s on Iss s _ x - petitive injury_ Jo , the

person which would result from public native-.approaches,

commenters should moues and questions relating to" the

disclosure; and (6) an indication when focus on the enforcement authority development of standards are found

such information might become non- meted in the Act (discussed in sec- throughout this notice. The following -

confidential due. -

to the passage of tion H. B. of this notice ) and the pa list of issues, while highlighting sometime. DOE retains the-.right to make tential- impacts of implementing var- of the major. areas of interest to-DOE.

its own determination with regard to :

ions approaches available pursuant to is not intended to - be comprehensive

any claim of confidentiality. this autliorityy and should not-be construed as limit

DOE is also Interested in obtaining vY Corisvs R:Peaxicn'nxxose big the scope of comments relating to

views on what specific types of Infor- _ this notice.

oration warrant. consideration'

under Because of the direct impact of the I. DOE intends to phase in ' stand- *

exemption set 'forth in (5 U.S.C. standards on individual consumers, ards over a five year period as -de.

"'(4). Examples of specific types.- DOE wishes to achieve in the stand scribed in this notice , with the final

modelc meetings in six cities across the publi

3. Total employment by product country. Representatives of consumer groups

type model and individual consumers are urged to 4. Estimated cost increase by model attend these meetings and to make, proposed

to meet a all investment statements regarding the stand- s. Capita instmmeent t annually nnualy by ,

ards program. DOE is mailing copies product type.

of this notice to "all indi ual vid s and

V. ENPoaCl rx consumer organizations identified by.

An enforcement program is expected DOE as having an interest in stand- First, classes were divided by the type

development: Further, DOE will ' of energy ( electricity, gas, oil) the be included in the notice of pro- to acce t c ll t t l ll h t th

posed rulemaking specifying require- posed

ments on manufacturers for demonstrating compliance with a standard,

as well as stating `the actions which,

DOE will take to-assure such compliance:

DOE is undertaking an analysis ` of

enforcement - program alternatives

which will include. the evaluation. of'

ongoing Federal, State, and industry

programs. An important part of the .

evaluation will include contact with

manufacturers, trade associations, and

consumer groups to identify various

approaches to the enforcement program. The different approaches will be

analyzed according td the overall program costs and benefits, including cost

manufacture, consumers, and the

vernment.

arcs development process the, maxi- standards becoming effective in De- '

mum level of consumer participation

. possible. The first major action taken

reach this goal will be a series of

cember 1985. It is expected that intermediate standards may be prescribed

for 1981 and 1983 so that progress

toward meeting the 1985 efficiency

levels will be assured. DOE is interested In comments relating to this schedule and other alternative phase-in

schedules.• - -

2. DOE has, identified the product

types and classes to which standards

are likely to apply. Product classes

were selected'- based on two criteria.

p o ec e ep one ca s, a e product consumes; second, classes were

consumer Information numbers listed - established within energy types by

at the beginning of this notice, 'from r'taking into account utility and per.

individuals making requests to speak formance-related features. DOE would

at the public meetings or requesting like to receive comments pertaining to

information about this program. until the proposed classes. If additional

the -close of the comment Period . classes are recommended, the recom=

March 5. 1979. .. ' mendations should include- the ratio -

- Additional consumer input Is expect- nale for the establishment of such,

ed to. be received from, a consumer` classes based on the two class selection

. survey to be conducted under DOE's . criteria discussed above.

direction. The survey will be used to 3. For purposes' of this notice. DOE

determine, with respect to energy effi-. has defined "maximum technologicalciency, what products have-been pur- ly feasible energy efficiency level" in

chased and what products consumers section III B. DOE invites comments

expect to purchase. Data from this

survey will be used in DOE's demand

analysis studies in determining the

economic impacts of standards.

DOE requests interested persons to

submit suggestions and comments on

on this definition and on the prelimi.

nary efficiency levels listed in Table

II. .

4. -DOE's- approach to the develop.

ment of an energy efficiency standard -

enforcement - program has been -disFEDE L REGISTER, VOL 44, NO. 1-TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 1979

irmation might include: . '.

Number of . units -produced by

gel annually .. -

Factory shipment price of each

The issuance of regulations under

this program is subject to review pursuant to the provisions of the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42.

U.S.C. 4321, et seq.). DOE believes

that the setting of minimum energy
CSA-RM-78-110 COMMENT 01

PROPOSED- RULES ^

cussed in section V_ Suggestions relat- submit one copy only - of the informaing to. -a. DOE enforcement program tion. DOE reserves the right to deter

would be- most valuable in the early mine the confidential status of the instages of program development. In formation or data, as discussed above

providing any comments or ap- In section IV D, and to treat it accordproaches, manufacturers, trade associ- lug to that determination.

ations and the general public. should All comments received on-or before

focus on the enforcement authority March 5, .1979 will be considered by

granted. in the Act (discussed in sec- DOE in- developing the proposed

tion 11 B) -and the effectiveness and standards. The comment period will

potential impacts of implementing var- extend over a period of 60 days, rather

ious- approaches pursuant to this au- than the 45 day comment period specithority_ fled in section 325(i)(IXB ) of the Act

5- DOE -believes, on the basis-of in- because DOE's policy pursuant to-Ex-

- formation- currently available, that ecutive' Order 12044 requires at least a. -

retail prices vary widely - for products 60 day comment period. Further, DOD

of, similar efficiencies , manufactured believes- that the additional 15 days

by. different manufacturers. Further, will- result in. more meaningful - reretail- prices of identical Products man- sponse to this notice, and this eaten- -

ufactured . by. a single manufacturer . sign will not result In delay- of the legvary = widely. In quantifying the im- islated timetable for the- prescription

pacts-of. standards, what relationships, of standards. s ra: -=

are. Important in accounting for the.

numerous retail pricing stragtegies

found In the marketplaces? _ ,

..&.Costs.: to- operate consumer products. vary widely across the nation, due

-to. different . costs of " energy, climatic

variations,' and the different. ways in

which consumers use these products.

DOE ' is: interested in receiving comments - that address - methods that

could be used for assessing the impacts

for these variable costs when develop.

. ing minimum energy efficiency :levels

for a standard.

7. Congress identified seven factors

vh.iclt . must be considered to the

extent practicable in determining the

economic justification of a standard.

In. section IV, DOE has identified the

major 'components within each factor

and listed a series of questions framed

around these components to focus any

comments regarding the economic impacts of standards. DOE is interested

in comments on the following issues

relating to the seven factors:

(a) Whether or not the. components

and questions presented are sufficient-.

(b) The need to obtain answers to

the questions on a firm-by-firm basis.

(c) The best method for DOE to use

to collect data of this nature.

X. ORAL PRESENTATIok CONDOM OF

Any person who has- an interest in

this proceeding. - or who is a - repre-0

sentative of a group of persons. having

an interest, may request in writing an

opportunity to make an oral presents

tion at - any of the public meetings.

Such requests should be labeled both

on the document and on the envelope,

'Energy Efficiency Standards for Consumer Products Request to Speak at

Public Meeing," and should be sent to

the address for the appropriate meet,

ing indicated at the -beginning of this

notice, by the time there specified.

The person making the request

should briefly describe the interest

concerned and, if appropriate, state

why he or she is'a proper representa-

.tive of a group that has an interest,

and give a phone number where he or

she may be contacted.

DOE reserves the right to select the

persons to be heard at. these meetings,

to -schedule the respective presentations, and to establish the procedures

governing the conduct of the meetings. The length of each presentation

may be limited, due to the number of -

persons requesting to be heard. If time

} Coi 4TPltoc2D -t -permits, t e official- conducting- the-

. ra.-'etmg may, at his or her discretion, .

Interested persons are invited to par- accept additional comments or ques- -

ticipate-in the development of stand- tions from those attending the meet

ards by submitting.. to the address in- ing..

cheated at the beginning of this notice. A DOE official will be designated to

data, views or .arguments with respect preside at the meeting. These will not

to the subjects set forth in this notice:- be judicial or evidentiary-type hear- -

Comments should be identified on ings. Questions may be asked only by

the outside of the envelope, and on those conducting the meetings,. except

documents submitted to DOE, with during those periods when comments

the designation, "Energy Efficiency are requested from the floor. Any furStandards for Consumer Products." If ther procedural rules needed for the

possible, fifteen copies should be sub- proper conduct of the meetings will be

witted,-but this is not a requirement. announced by the presiding officer.

for submitting comments. Transcripts of the meetings will be:

Any person submitting information made, and the entire record of the

which be believes to be confidential meetings, including the transcript, will

should so identify the information and be retained by DOE and made avails- -

ble for inspection at the DOE Free-•.

dam of Information Office in the Forrestal Building, Independence Avenue

and. L .Enfant Plaza, S.W., Washing=

ton, D.G. 20585, between the hours of

&00 a.m. and 420 p.m., Monday

through Friday.

Issued in Washington,. D.C:, Decensber 26, 1978.. : -

OXI WALDEN,

Assistant Secretary, Con

seruatfon and Solar Appitcations.

IF'S. Doe. 78-35936 Filed 12-27-'1a 1&49 amt -

[7535-0l-M]

. - .. NATIONAL CREDIT UNION

°.. ADMINISTRATION

112 CFR Pm-r7011 "ti - •

ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS OF _.

-_. E CREDIT UNIONS ._ .:.

Purse, Solo, and PPk4" -of EHgila16-

- •. -- Obli^o4ions

AGENCY: National Credit Union Administration.

ACTION: Proposed Rule.:.

SUMMARY: The proposed rule would

permit a Federal credit union (1) to

purchase from, sell to, or pledge to'

any source any eligible obligations of--

Its members; (2) to purchase from a

liquidating - credit union any eligible

obligations of the liquidating credit

union's individual members. and (3)

when engaged in real estate lending

pursuant to Section 701_21 -6. to purchase from other credit unions real

estate loans granted in accordancewith that section if the purchase will

facilitate the purchaser's packaging of

a pool of such loans to be sold or

pledged on the secondary market, and

to sell or pledge to any source any real

estate loans purchased in packaging of

a pool of such loans. The rule is necessary to implement provisions of the

April 1.9, 1977 amendments to the Federal Credit Union Act (Public. Law 95-

22, 91 Stat. 49). It Is intended to provide. Federal credit unions greater

flexibility both in meeting member- demaxnds and in spreading the risk. of.

those demands. This should enhance a

credit union's 'ability to react quickly.

and efficiently to meet liquidity needs.

It is also intended to provide a Federal

credit union- making long term real

estate loans greater access to the secondary mortgage market.

DATE: Comments must be received on.

or before January 31, 1979. -

ADDRESS: Send comments to Robert

S. Monheit, Senior Attorney , Office of

General Counsel,. National Credit.

Union Administration, Room -4202,

2025 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C:

20456.

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 44, NO. I-TUESDAY, JANUARY 2, 1979