1 |EnergyEfficiencyandRenewableEnergyeere.energy.govEnergyConservationStandards:NoticeofProposedRulemakingforResidentialDishwashersFebruary5,2015BryanBerringerDepartmentofEnergyBuildingTechnologiesProgramEERE‐2014‐BT‐STD‐0021ResDishwashers2014STD0021@ee.doe.gov2Welcome•Introductions(aroundtheroom)•RoleoftheFacilitator•GroundRules–Speakoneatatime.–Sayyournamefortherecord– therewillbeacompletetranscriptofthismeeting.–Beconcise– sharethe‘air‐time’.–Keepthefocushere– cellphonesonsilent;limitsidebarconversations.–Webinarparticipantsturnphoneonmute;‘raiseyourhand’toberecognizedtospeak.•HousekeepingItems•AgendaReview•OpeningRemarks3ListeningViatheWebcast•TheDepartmentisbroadcastingthismeetingliveovertheInternet.•DOEisprovidingthewebcasttoaccommodatestakeholdersthatareunabletoattendthepublicmeetinginperson.•Thewebbroadcastallowsstakeholderstolisteninandviewtheslides.•Allstakeholdersareencouragedtosubmitwrittencommentsafterthepublicmeeting.4Agenda9:00– 9:30amWelcome,Introduction9:30– 10:00amOverview,Scope,ProposedStandard10:00– 10:15amMarketandTechnologyAssessmentandScreening10:15– 10:45amEngineeringAnalysis10:45– 11:00amBreak11:00– 11:15amEnergyUseandMarkupsAnalysis11:15– 12:00pmLife‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysis12:00– 1:00pmLunch1:00– 2:00pmShipmentsandNationalImpactAnalysis2:00– 3:00pmMIAandNOPRAnalyses3:00– 4:00pmProposedStandardandClosingRemarks5PurposeofthePublicMeeting•Presenttheproceduralandanalyticalapproachestoevaluatepotentialenergyconservationstandardsforresidentialdishwashers.•Invitecommentontheenergyconservationstandardsnoticeofproposedrulemaking(NOPR)andtechnicalsupportdocument(TSD),includingDOE’sproposedstandardlevels.•Inviteparticipantstoprovidesummarycommentsorstatementsandraiseadditionalissuesfordiscussion.6IssuesforDiscussion•Issue“boxes”correspondtothelistofissuesforwhichtheDepartmentseekscomments.•ThelistofissuesisintheNOPR,availableat:http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE‐2014‐BT‐STD‐0021‐0007•ThedeadlineforsubmittingcommentsisFebruary17,2015,11:59PM(EST).IssueBox:DOEwelcomescomments,data,andinformationconcerningthestandardsitisconsideringforresidentialdishwashers.IssuesthatcorrespondtothoseraisedinDOE’spublishedmaterialwillbepresented.Whetherinvitedbyanissueboxornot,commentsarewelcomeonanypartofDOE’sanalysis.7OpeningRemarksMeetingparticipantsareinvitedtoprovideopeningremarksorstatementsatthistime.8PublicMeetingTopics1Overview, Scope, and Proposed Standard2Market & Technology and Screening3Engineering4Energy Use and Markups Analysis5Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analysis6Shipments and National Impact Analysis7MIA, NOPR Analyses, and Closing Remarks9RegulatoryHistory•EnergyPolicyandConservationActof1975(EPCA),P.L.94‐163–AmendedbyNationalEnergyConservationPolicyActof1978,P.L.95‐619,toestablishthe“EnergyConservationProgramforCertainIndustrialEquipment.”–AuthorizesDOEtoestablishconservationstandardsforcoveredproductsorequipmentthatwouldlikelyresultinsignificantnationalenergysavings.–Specifiesalistofcoveredresidentialandcommercialproductsandcontainsprovisionstoclassifyadditionalproductsascoveredproducts.•Dishwasherregulations:–TheNationalApplianceEnergyConservationActof1987,Pub.L.100‐12,amendedEPCAandrequiredanunheateddryingoptionfordishwashers.–Energyconservationstandardsfinalrules•1991(56FR22250),effectiveMay14,1994.•2009(74FR12058),effectiveJanuary1,2010.•CurrentStandards– 2012(77FR31918),effectiveMay30,2013.10ScopeofCoverage•10CFR430.2defines“dishwasher”as:–“acabinet‐likeappliancewhichwiththeaidofwateranddetergent,washes,rinses,anddries(whenadryingprocessisincluded)dishware,glassware,eatingutensils,andmostcookingutensilsbychemical,mechanicaland/orelectricalmeansanddischargestotheplumbingdrainagesystem.”•ProductClasses–Compact(capacitylessthaneightplacesettingsplussixservingpiecesasspecifiedinANSI/AHAMDW‐1)–Standard(capacityequaltoorgreaterthaneightplacesettingsplussixservingpieces)•DOEproposestomaintaintheexistingdefinitionandproductclassesforresidentialdishwashers.11EPCAFactorsEPCAdirectsDOEtoconsidersevenfactorswhensettingenergyconservationstandards.(42U.S.C.6313(a)(6)(B))EPCAFactors CorrespondingDOEAnalyses1.EconomicimpactonconsumersandmanufacturersLife‐CycleCostAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysis2.LifetimeoperatingcostsavingscomparedtoincreasedcostfortheequipmentLife‐CycleCostAnalysis3.TotalprojectedenergysavingsNationalImpactAnalysis4.ImpactonutilityorperformanceEngineeringAnalysisScreeningAnalysis5.ImpactofanylesseningofcompetitionManufacturerImpactAnalysis6.NeedfornationalenergyconservationNationalImpactAnalysis7.OtherfactorstheSecretaryconsidersrelevantEmissionsanalysisEmissionsmonetizationanalysisUtility,employment,andregulatoryimpactanalyses12NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis13ProposedStandardsTSLStandard CompactEfficiencyLevelAEU (kWh/year)WaterConsumption(gal/cycle)EfficiencyLevelAEU(kWh/year)WaterConsumption(gal/cycle)1 1 295 4.25 Baseline 222 3.502 3 234 3.10 1 203 3.103 4 180 2.22 2 141 2.0014RationaleforAdoptingtheProposedStandardTSL Benefits Burdens2•1.0quadofenergysavedfrom2019–2048•Netbenefitsof$0.23billioninNPVat7%discountrateand$2.14billionat3%discountrate•Emissionreductions:‐61.9 MMt CO2valuedatupto$6.1billion‐126.7 kt ofNOXvaluedatupto$0.17 billion•Forbothproductclasses,theaverageLCCsavingsarepositive•NetdecreaseinINPVbyasmuchas34.7%($203.7million)fortheresidentialdishwasherindustry15PublicMeetingTopics1Overview, Scope, and Proposed Standard2Market & Technology and Screening3Engineering4Energy Use and Markups Analysis5Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analysis6Shipments and National Impact Analysis7MIA, NOPR Analyses, and Closing Remarks16NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis17MarketandTechnologyAssessmentPurpose•Defineproductclasses•Characterizetheresidential dishwasherindustry•Identifyexistingregulatoryandvoluntaryefficiencyprograms•Gatherhistoricalshipmentsandotherrelevantmarketdata•IdentifytechnologyoptionsforimprovingefficiencySeechapter3oftheTSDforfurtherdiscussionofthemarketandtechnologyassessment.18MarketandTechnologyAssessmentProductClasses•Theproposedstandardswouldapplytotheexistingproductclassesforresidentialdishwashers.–Compact(capacitylessthaneightplacesettingsplussixservingpiecesasspecifiedinANSI/AHAMDW‐1)–Standard(capacityequaltoorgreaterthaneightplacesettingsplussixservingpieces)19MarketandTechnologyAssessmentTechnologyAssessment•Purpose–Todevelopapreliminarylistoftechnologyoptionsthatcouldimprovetheefficiencyofdishwashers.–Toexaminethelistingreaterdetail,includingremovinginappropriatetechnologies,insubsequentanalyses.•Method–DOEidentifiedtechnologyoptionsfrom:•Technicalsupportdocumentsfrompreviousrulemakings•Literaturereviewandmanufacturerspecificationsheets•Productteardowns•ThefulllistoftechnologiesthatDOEidentifiedcanbefoundinChapter3oftheTSD.20NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis21ScreeningAnalysis•Purpose–Todeterminewhichtechnologyoptionswillbeconsideredindownstreamanalyses.•Technologyoptionsare“screenedout”ifthey:–Arenottechnologicallyfeasible–Arenotpracticabletomanufacture,install,andservice–Haveadverseimpactsonequipmentutilityoravailabilitytoconsumers–Haveadverseimpactsonhealthorsafety•Screened‐OutTechnologies:–Reducedinletwatertemperature–Supercriticalcarbondioxidewashing–Ultrasonicwashing•Theremainingtechnologyoptionswereconsideredintheengineeringanalysis.22PublicMeetingTopics1Overview, Scope, and Proposed Standard2Market & Technology and Screening3Engineering4Energy Use and Markups Analysis5Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analysis6Shipments and National Impact Analysis7MIA, NOPR Analyses, and Closing Remarks23NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis24EngineeringAnalysisPurpose•Evaluatedesignoptionsthatimproveefficiency•Characterizemanufacturerproductioncost(MPC)versusefficiencyforhigher‐efficiencydishwashers.DownstreamAnalysis• Life‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysis• NationalImpactAnalysis• ManufacturerImpactAnalysisManufacturerProductionCost–EfficiencyRelationship

Manufacturer Production CostEfficiencyLevel25EngineeringAnalysisDevelop Baseline andHigher ELsSelectRepresentativeUnitsIdentifyDesignOptionsatELsCalculateCostsGenerateCost‐EfficiencyCurvesDetermineappropriatebaselineandhigherefficiencylevelsforbothproductclasses.Selectrepresentativeunitsfortestingandreverseengineering.Identifydesignoptionsusedtoincreaseproductefficienciesanddeterminemixofdesignoptionsneededtoreachhigherefficiencylevels.Conductcostmodelinganalysisbasedonteardownsofrepresentativeproductsandtheobserveddesignoptionsattheefficiencylevelsidentified.Generatecost‐efficiencycurves,whichaccountforfullMPCs.26EngineeringAnalysisBaselineEfficiencyLevels•DOEselectedbaselineefficiencylevelsconsistentwiththeMay2013standards.•DOEisawareofdishwashersavailableonthemarketatthebaselinelevelsforbothproductclasses.ProductClassEfficiencyLevelkWh/year gal/cycleStandard307 5.0Compact2223.527EngineeringAnalysisStandardDishwasherEfficiencyLevels•DOEanalyzedthefollowingimprovedefficiencylevelsbeyondthebaselineforstandarddishwashers:LevelEfficiencyLevelReferenceSourceEfficiencyLevelkWh/year gal/cycleBaselineDOEStandard 307 5.00EL1ENERGYSTAR(current) 295 4.25EL2Available forPurchase 280 3.50EL3Available forPurchase 234 3.10EL4MaximumAvailablea180 2.22a) Source:DOE‐certifieddishwashersasofMay22,201428EngineeringAnalysisStandardDishwasherEfficiencyLevels•DOEidentifiedEL3(thestandardsproposedinthisNOPR)bysurveyingunitsavailableonthemarket.•DOEobservedthatfewunitsareavailablebetweenthisefficiencyandthemaximumavailable.29EngineeringAnalysisCompactDishwasherEfficiencyLevels•DOEanalyzedthefollowingimprovedefficiencylevelsbeyondthebaselineforcompactdishwashers:•DOEisnotawareofcompactmodelsavailableonthemarketatEL1;however,whiledevelopingitsproposal,ENERGYSTARdiscussedefficiencyimprovementsandnecessarydesignchangeswithmanufacturers.LevelEfficiencyLevelReferenceSourceEfficiencyLevelkWh/year gal/cycleBaselineDOEStandard 222 3.5EL1ProposedENERGYSTAR203 3.1EL2MaximumAvailablea141 2.0a) Source:DOE‐certifieddishwashersasofMay22,201430Issue1:DOErequestscommentontheefficiencylevelsselectedforitsanalysis.Specifically,DOErequestsfeedbackonwhethercleaningperformanceoranyotherconsumerutilityisaffectedatanyoftheanalyzedefficiencylevels.RequestforComment31EngineeringAnalysisTesting•DOEconductedtestinginsupportofboththisNOPRanddevelopingtheENERGYSTARCleaningPerformanceTestMethod.•DOEobservedthatcleaningperformancetypicallydecreasesatlowerenergyandwaterconsumptions,with0.4kWh/cycleofmachineelectricenergyconsumptionand3gal/cyclewaterconsumptionappearingtobekeylevels.–Thisoccurredfortheheavyandmediumsoilloads.Forthelightsoilload,cleaningperformancedidnotappeartoberelatedtoenergyandwaterconsumption;however,theamountofsoilusedinalightsoilloadisverylow.32EngineeringAnalysisTesting•Basedontheseresults,DOEexpectsEL3tomaintainadequatecleaningperformance.33EngineeringAnalysisReverseEngineering•DOEtoredowneachunittestedinsupportofthisNOPR.•TeardowninformationwasalsopulledfromtheanalysisconductedinsupportoftheMay2012standardsforunitsthatareeitherstillavailableonthemarketorarerepresentativeofcurrentlyavailablemodels.•Fromtheseteardowns,DOEobservedthetypicaldesignoptionsincorporatedintobaselineandhigher‐efficiencymodels.•Chapter5oftheTSDprovidesmoredetailedinformationontheteardownsanddesignoptionsateachefficiencylevel.34EngineeringAnalysisManufacturingCostModelRawMaterialsFinishedMaterialsPurchasedPartsPhysicalTeardownSelectionofUnitsFabricationProcessesBillofMaterialsAssemblyProcessesManufacturingCost•Physicalteardownanalysisconductedwithrepresentativeproducts.•Billsofmaterialweregeneratedduringtheproductteardownsandwereenteredintothecostmodel.•Costmodelgeneratedmanufacturing,material,labor,andoverheadcosts.35EngineeringAnalysisStructure/Classification of Manufacturing CostsFullManufacturerSellingPrice(MSP)Non‐ProductionCost**SellingGeneral&Admin.R&DInterestFullManufacturingProductionCost(MPC)*DirectLaborDirectMaterialOverheadFullManufacturingProductionCost(MPC)*DirectLaborDirectMaterialOverheadIndirectlaborIndirectmaterialMaintenanceDepreciationTaxesInsurancerelatedtoassetsMarketresearchAdvertisingPOSpromotionSalespersoncompensation&travelLogistics‐Warehousing‐Delivery‐RecordkeepingCostsofservice&staffunitsGeneralcorporatecosts–comp.,etc.CostsassociatedwitheffortstofindneworimprovedequipmentorproductionprocessesCostsofborrowingfunds*TaxReform Actof1986essentiallyrequirescompaniestomeasurecostofgoodssoldasthefullproductioncostofthegoodssold.**Inacompany’sincomestatement,manyofthesecostsarereportedasalumpsum,underSG&Aexpenses.36EngineeringAnalysisCost‐EfficiencyRelationship•Basedontheseanalyses,DOEgeneratedcost‐efficiencyresultsforeachproductclass.ProductClassLevelEfficiencyLevelIncr.MPCkWh/year gal/cycleStandardBaseline 307 5.0$‐EL1 295 4.25$9.52EL2 280 3.5$36.53EL3 234 3.1$74.72EL4 180 2.22 $74.72CompactBaseline222 3.5 $‐EL1203 3.1 $8.01EL2141 2.0 $21.5037Issue2:DOErequestscommentontheestimatedMPCsforeachoftheanalyzedefficiencylevels.DOEseeksinputonwhatdesignoptionsmanufacturersarelikelytoincorporateintoresidentialdishwashersateachoftheanalyzedefficiencylevels,andtheirassociatedcosts.RequestforComment38PublicMeetingTopics1Overview, Scope, and Proposed Standard2Market & Technology and Screening3Engineering4Energy Use and Markups Analysis5Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analysis6Shipments and National Impact Analysis7MIA, NOPR Analyses, and Closing Remarks39NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis40MarkupsAnalysisOverview41MarkupsAnalysis•Purpose–Determineconsumerpricesbasedonmanufacturer’ssellingpriceforbaselineandhigherefficiencyequipment.–Characterizeproductdistributionchannels.•Method–Analyzecompanydirectcosts,expenses,andprofits.Manufacturers:estimatedintheEngineeringAnalysis.–U.S.CensusAnnualRetailTradeSurvey–SalesTaxes:TheSalesTaxClearinghouseManufacturersRetailersConsumers42MarkupsAnalysis:MarkupTypes•BaselineMarkups–RelatetheMSPofbaselineproducttotheconsumerpurchaseprice.–Indicateaconsumerpricethatcoverstheretailer’sexpensesplusprofit.•IncrementalMarkups–RelatetheincreaseinMSPofmoreefficientproductstotheincreaseinconsumerpurchaseprice.–CoveronlyexpensesthatvarywithMSP,inthiscase,expensesthatincreaseduetoanefficiencystandard.43MarkupsAnalysis:OverallMarkups•AppliedbaselinemarkupstotheMSPofthebaselinelevel,andtheincrementalmarkupstotheincrementaldifferenceinMSPateachlevelabovethebaseline.StandardandCompactProductClassesMarkupBaseline IncrementalManufacturer1.24Retailer1.36 1.11SalesTax1.071Overall1.81 1.4744NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis45EnergyandWaterUseAnalysisOverview46EnergyandWaterUseAnalysis•Purpose–Determineannualenergyandwateruseattheconsideredefficiencylevels.–UseannualenergyandwateruseneededtodeterminecostinputstoLife‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysis.•Method–Useresearchstudiesandengineeringanalysisdatatodevelopper‐cycleenergyusebyefficiencylevel.–UseDOE‐EIA’sResidentialEnergyConsumptionSurvey(RECS)2009todevelopfrequencyrangesforannualenergyandwateruseofsampledU.S.households.–UseADLittleSurveytodevelopaverageannualenergyuse.47EnergyandWaterUseAnalysisELEnergyUse(kWh/yr)WaterUse(gal/cyc)StandbyPower(W)Total*(kWh/cyc)WaterHeating**(kWh/cyc)Machine+Drying(kWh/cyc)Baseline307 5.000.01.43 0.820.601295 4.250.51.35 0.700.652280 3.500.51.28 0.580.713234 3.100.51.07 0.510.564180 2.220.50.82 0.370.45ELEnergyUse(kWh/yr)WaterUse(gal/cyc)StandbyPower(W)Total*(kWh/cyc)WaterHeating**(kWh/cyc)Machine+Drying(kWh/cyc)Baseline222 3.502.30.94 0.580.361203 3.101.70.88 0.510.372141 2.000.50.64 0.330.31StandardDishwashers:Per‐Cycle EnergyandWaterUsebyEfficiencyLevelCompactDishwashers:Per‐Cycle EnergyandWaterUsebyEfficiencyLevel*Annualstandbyenergyuseisbasedonanassumeddishwashercycleofonehourand215cyclesperyear.Standbyhours=8,766hoursminus215*1hour=8,551hours.*Basedontheuseofanelectricwaterheaterat98%efficiency.48EnergyandWaterUseAnalysisStandardDishwashers:Annual EnergyandWaterUsebyEfficiencyLevelCompactDishwashers:Annual EnergyandWaterUsebyEfficiencyLevel*Water‐heatingenergyuseisbasedonwaterheaterefficienciesof98%forelectric,80%forgas,and78%foroil.ELAnnual EnergyUseAnnualWaterUse(gal/yr)Total(kWh/yr)WaterHeating*Machine+Drying+(kWh/yr)StandbyPower(kWh/yr)Electric(kWh/yr)Gas(MMBtu/yr)Oil(MMBtu/yr)Baseline307 177 0.74 0.76 130 0.0 1,0751295 150 0.63 0.64 140 4.3 9142280 124 0.52 0.53 152 4.3 7533234 110 0.46 0.47 120 4.3 6674180 79 0.33 0.34 97 4.3 477ELAnnual EnergyUseAnnualWaterUse(gal/yr)Total(kWh/yr)WaterHeating*Machine+Drying+(kWh/yr)StandbyPower(kWh/yr)Electric(kWh/yr)Gas(MMBtu/yr)Oil(MMBtu/yr)Baseline222124 0.52 0.53 78 19.77531203110 0.46 0.47 79 14.5667214171 0.30 0.30 66 4.343049PublicMeetingTopics1Overview, Scope, and Proposed Standard2Market & Technology and Screening3Engineering4Energy Use and Markups Analysis5Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analysis6Shipments and National Impact Analysis7MIA, NOPR Analyses, and Closing Remarks50NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis51Life‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysisOverview52Life‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysis•Purpose–Provideaneconomicevaluationfromtheconsumer’sperspective.–Life‐CycleCost(LCC)=thetotalconsumercostoverthelifeoftheequipment.–PaybackPeriod(PBP)=thetimerequiredtorecovertheincreasedpurchasepriceofmoreenergy‐efficientequipmentthroughreducedoperatingcosts.•Method–Useenergyandwateruseasinputintooperatingcosts.–Determinetotalinstalledcostsforeachefficiencylevel(EL).–Determinefirst‐yearandproductlifetimeoperatingcosts.–CalculatePBPbydividingaverageincreaseininstalledcostbyaveragedecreaseinfirst‐yearoperatingcost.–CalculateLCCbyaddinginstalledcostsandlifetimeoperatingcosts.–CalculateLCCsavingsbysubtractingLCCofeachELfromLCCoftheELthatconsumerwouldpurchaseintheabsenceofanewstandard.53LCCandPBPAnalysis:ConsumerSample•ModelconsumerhouseholdsontheRECS2009sampledevelopedintheenergyandwateruseanalysis.•UserangefrequenciesinRECStoshowvariabilityinconsumerenergyandwateruseandresultingcosts.•Characterizewithprobabilitydistributionsofotherinputs(e.g.discountratesandlifetimes).–MonteCarlosamplingwasusedtocreateaconsumerlistwithvariablevaluesfortheseinputs.54LCCandPBPAnalysis:TotalInstalledCostInputs•TotalInstalledCost=sumofequipmentpriceandinstallationcost.•Productprice=providedbyEngineeringAnalysisandMarkupsAnalysis.–Producerpriceindices(PPI)usedtoprojectresidentialdishwasherpricesin2019.–DOEusedproducerpriceindices(PPI)fromtheBureauofLaborStatistics(BLS)for“othermiscellaneoushouseholdappliances,”availablefrom1988‐2013.•Installationcosts=laborandmaterialsnecessaryproductinstallation–CostsbasedonRSMeansResidentialCostData2013.–DOEassumedthatinstallationcostswouldnotchangebasedonefficiencylevel.55LCCandPBPAnalysis:OperatingCostInputs•AnnualenergyandwaterconsumptionprovidedbyEnergyandWaterUseAnalysis.•EnergyInformationAdministration(EIA)Form861Datausedtodevelopelectricitypricesfor27geographicareas.•EIANaturalGasNavigatorusedtodevelopnaturalgaspricesfor27geographicareas.•EIAStateEnergyConsumption,PriceandExpendituresEstimates(SEDS)usedtodevelopLPGandoilpricesfor27geographicareas.•Raftelis WaterandWasteWaterRateSurveyusedtodevelopwaterpricesfor4CensusRegions.•DOEusedAnnualEnergyOutlook(AEO)2014forprojectionsoffutureenergypricesforeachcensusdivision.•DOEusedConsumerPriceIndex(CPI)trendofnationalwaterpriceindex(1970– 2012)todevelopfuturewaterprices.56LCCandPBPAnalysis:OperatingCostInputs•Maintenancecostsrepresentthelaborandmaterialsnecessarytomaintaintheequipment•Repaircostsareassociatedwithrepairingorreplacingcomponentsthathavefailed.–Typically,smallincrementalchangesinproductefficiencyincurlittleornochangesinrepairandmaintenancecostsoverbaselineproducts.Therefore,DOEdidnotincludemaintenanceandrepaircostsdifferencesbasedonefficiencylevel.57RequestforCommentIssue3:DOErequestscommentsonthedeterminationofmaintenance,andrepaircostsformoreefficientresidentialdishwashers.Ifnotappropriate,DOErequestsinformationanddatathatcanbeusedtodevelopappropriaterepairandmaintenancecostsforproductsmoreefficientthanbaselineproducts.58LCCandPBPAnalysis:ProductLifetime•BaseproductlifetimeonaWeibullprobabilitydistributionofhistoricalshipmentsdataandsaturationsforRECSandAmericanHousingSurvey.–Averagelifetimeforbothproductclasses:15.4years0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50YearRetirementFunctionforDishwashers(mean=15.4years)59LCCandPBPAnalysis:DiscountRates•UsediscountratestoconvertstreamsofannualoperatingexpensestopresentvalueintheLCCanalysis.–Derivedfromvarioustypesofdebtandequity–FederalReserveBoard’sSurveyofConsumerFinancesisasourceofmuchoftheequityanddebtdata.IncomeGroup DiscountRate(%)1 4.852 5.123 4.754 4.045 3.806 3.57OverallAverage 4.4960LCCandPBPAnalysis:EnergyEfficiencyintheBaseCase•Analyzestandardlevelsrelativetoabaselineefficiencylevel.•Definebasecaseefficiencydistributionsfromthepercentageofproductsbeingpurchasedatvariousefficiencylevels.•Usehistoricalshipmentsweightedbasecaseefficiencytrend(2002–2009)toestimatebasecaseefficiencyintheyearofcompliance(2019).250270290310330350370390410430 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 2023 2026 2029 2032 2035 2038 2041 2044 2047 2050

Base

‐ case AEU (kWh/year)YearBaseCaseAnnualEnergyUseForecastHistoricalDataForecast2019Forecast61LCCandPBPAnalysis:EnergyEfficiencyintheBaseCaseEfficiencyLevelAnnualEnergyUse(kWh/yr)WaterUse(gal/cycle)MarketShareBaseline307 5.00 12.1%1295 4.25 43.9%2280 3.50 40.3%3234 3.10 3.2%4180 2.22 0.4%EfficiencyLevelAnnualEnergyUse(kWh/yr)WaterUse(gal/cycle)MarketShareBaseline222 3.50 48.1%1203 3.10 14.8%2141 2.00 37.0%StandardDishwashers:BaseCaseEfficiencyDistributionin2019CompactDishwashers:BaseCaseEfficiencyDistributionin201962RequestforCommentIssue4:DOErequestscomments,informationanddataonthebasecaseefficiencydistributionsofresidentialdishwashers.Giventhathistoricalmarketshareefficiencydatafrom2002–2009wereusedtodevelopestimatedbasecaseefficiencydistributionsinthecomplianceyear(2019),DOEseeksmorerecenthistoricalmarketshareefficiencydatathatwouldbeusefulfordevelopingthebasecaseefficiencydistributionsfortheanalysisperiod.63LCCandPBPAnalysis:ResultsELAnnualEnergyUse(kWh/yr)WaterUse(gal/cyc)Life‐CycleCost2013$AverageLife‐CycleCostSavings($)SimplePayback(years)ExpectedLife(years)TotalInstalledCost($)AverageLifetimeOperatingCost($)AverageLife‐cycleCost($)Baseline307 5.00 483 518 1,000‐‐ ‐‐15.41295 4.25 495 492 987 2 6.1 15.42280 3.50 531 462 993‐2 10.8 15.43234 3.10 582 387 970 21 9.0 15.44180 2.22 582 296 879 112 5.3 15.4ELAnnualEnergyUse(kWh/yr)WaterUse(gal/cyc)Life‐CycleCost2013$AverageLife‐CycleCostSavings($)SimplePayback(years)ExpectedLife(years)TotalInstalledCost($)AverageLifetimeOperatingCost($)AverageLife‐cycleCost($)Baseline222 3.50 456 302 758‐‐ ‐‐15.41203 3.10 467 274 741 8 4.5 15.42141 2.00 485 188 673 51 2.9 15.4StandardDishwashers:LCCandPBPResultsCompactDishwashers:LCCandPBPResults64Issue5:DOEinvitescommentsandrecommendationsfrominterestedpartiesonanyotheraspectsrelatedtotheLife‐CycleCostandPaybackPeriodAnalysis.RequestforComment65PublicMeetingTopics1Overview, Scope, and Proposed Standard2Market & Technology and Screening3Engineering4Energy Use and Markups Analysis5Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analysis6Shipments and National Impact Analysis7MIA, NOPR Analyses, and Closing Remarks66NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis67ShipmentsAnalysis•Purpose–Quantifychangesovertimeofproductshipmentsduetopossiblenewenergyefficiencystandards.–Estimatethedisaggregationofshipmentsintoproductclasses,andchangeinshipmentsbyproductclassovertime.•Method–Usehistoricalshipments,andRECSdataforstockestimations.–Accountforreplacementsandnewinstallations.68HistoricalShipments&MarketSharebyProductClassApplianceLifetimeTotalShipmentsReplacementShipmentsShipmentsbyProductClassNewInstallationShipmentsAnalysis:ModelingApproach69ShipmentsAnalysis:ModelInputsInputs DataSource/DescriptionHistoricalShipmentsTotaldishwashershipments data:‐ApplianceMagazine(1972– 1988),‐AHAMFactbook(1989– 1994),‐AHAM(2000– 2010),and‐ApplianceDesign(2011– 2012).ShipmentsbyProductClassMarket sharebyproductclass:NPDdata(2001– 2011).‐StandardDishwashers:99.2%‐CompactDishwashers:0.8%ReplacementDishwasherlifetime retirementfunctiondevelopedfromLife‐CycleCostAnalysis‐Averagelifetime=15.4yearsNewInstallation NewinstallationestimatedusingAEO2014newhousingstarts.ProductPrice andOperatingCostsLCCprovidesproduct pricesfor2019.Productpricetrendisappliedtoproductpricefortheperiod2019–2048.FutureoperatingcostsestimatedusingAEO2014energypricetrendsandCPInationalwaterpriceindextrend.70ShipmentsAnalysis:BaseCasevsStandardsCase•BaseCaseShipmentsProjection–Capturebase‐caseshipmentsprojectionwhennewstandardsarenotadopted.–Projectshipmentstoaccountforreplacementsandnewinstallation.–Developbase‐caseprojectionsforproductclasses.•StandardsCaseShipmentsProjection–Projectshipmentsforthebasecaseusinghistoricalshipments.–Developstandardscaseprojectionsaccountingforpurchasepriceincreasesandoperatingcostsavings.71ShipmentsAnalysis:StandardsImpactsonShipmentsTSLAnnualShipments(Unit: million)2012 2015 2020 2030 2040 2048BaseCase5.7 7.3 7.5 8.2 9.0 9.615.7 7.3 7.5 8.2 9.0 9.625.7 7.3 7.3 8.2 9.0 9.635.7 7.3 7.4 8.2 9.0 9.7• Shipments under each TSL are approximately the same as the base caseshipments72Issue6:DOErequestscommentsandinformationrelatingtotheinputstotheshipmentsmodel,particularlyupdatedshipmentsandmarketshareofstandardandcompactdishwashers.DOEalsowelcomesstakeholderinputsandestimatesontheeffectofamendedstandardsonfutureresidentialdishwashershipments.RequestforComment73NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis74NationalImpactAnalysis•Purpose–Determinetheprojectednationalenergyandwatersavingsandconsumernationalnetpresentvalue.•Method–Developannualseriesofnationalenergy,waterandeconomicimpacts.–Usetheshipmentsmodeltoestimatethetotalstockofresidentialdishwashersinserviceeachyear.–Aggregatethecostsandenergyandwateruseperunitinanygivenyear.–ReportestimatesforeconomicimpactaschangeinconsumerNationalNetPresentValue(NPV)(inconstantyeardollars).–Accountforthetime‐valueofmoneythroughdefineddiscountrates.75ShipmentsModelNationalEnergy/WaterSavingsNationalEconomicImpactsLCCAnalysisResults andOther InputsNationalEnergy and WaterSavings (Quads,trillion gallon)NationalNet Present Value(NPV)(2013 US $, billion)•Nationalenergyandwatersavingscalculatedforperiodfrom2019‐2048(30years)•NPVcalculatedforproductsshippedovertheperiodfrom2019– 2048(30yearsofshipments).NationalImpactAnalysis:ProcessNationalEconomicImpacts76Inputs DescriptionTotalInstalledCostAnnualweighted‐average perunitvaluesasafunctionofefficiencyleveltakenfromtheLCCanalysis.AnnualEnergyandWaterUseAnnualweighted‐averageperunitvaluesasafunctionofefficiencyleveltakenfromLCCanalysis.Base‐CaseEfficienciesShipments‐weightedefficienciesdeterminedfortheeffectiveyear.Basedonbase‐caseefficiency distributionfromLCCanalysis.Standards‐CaseProjectedEfficienciesRoll‐upscenarioassumedfordeterminingshipment‐weightedefficiencyforeachstandards case.EnergyPricesAveragepricesandforecastedenergypricesfromEIAAEO2014 forecasts(to2040)andextrapolationto2048.WaterPriceLinearextrapolationofinflation‐adjustedhistoricalnationalwaterpriceindex(to 2048).FullFuelCycle Multipliertoconvertsiteenergytofull‐fuelcycleenergy.DiscountRate 7 percentand3percentrealfromOMB’sRegulatoryAnalysisGuidelineA‐4.PresentYear Futureexpensesarediscountedtotheyear2014.NationalImpactAnalysis:Inputs77NationalImpactAnalysis:TrialStandardLevelsTSLStandardCompactEfficiencyLevelAnnualEnergyUse(kWh/year)WaterUse(gal/cycle)EfficiencyLevelAnnualEnergyUse(kWh/year)WaterUse(gal/cycle)11 295 4.25 Baseline 222 3.5023 234 3.10 1 203 3.1034 180 2.22 2 141 2.0078NationalImpactAnalysis:EnergyandWaterSavingResultsTSLPrimaryEnergySavings(quads)Full‐Fuel‐CycleEnergySavings(quads)NationalWaterSavings(trilliongallons)10.00 0.01 0.0321.00 1.06 0.2432.39 2.53 0.9979NationalImpactAnalysis:ConsumerNPVResultsTSL7% DiscountRate(billion2013$)3% DiscountRate(billion2013$)10.05 0.1520.23 2.1435.56 15.7080Issue7:DOEanalyzedtheeffectsofpotentialstandardsonproductspurchasedovera30‐yearperiod,anditundertookasensitivityanalysisusing9yearsratherthan30yearsofproductshipments.Thechoiceofa30‐yearperiodofshipmentsisconsistentwiththeDOEanalysisforotherproductsandcommercialequipment.Thechoiceofa9‐yearperiodisaproxyforthetimelineinEPCAforthereviewofcertainenergyconservationstandardsandpotentialrevisionof,andcompliancewith,suchamendedstandards.DOEisseekinginputonwaystorefinetheanalyticaltimeline.RequestforComment81PublicMeetingTopics1Overview, Scope, and Proposed Standard2Market & Technology and Screening3Engineering4Energy Use and Markups Analysis5Life-Cycle Cost & Payback Period Analysis6Shipments and National Impact Analysis7MIA, NOPR Analyses, and Closing Remarks82NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis83Purpose:•Assesstheimpactsofpotentialenergyconservationstandardsonmanufacturers;•Identifyandestimateimpactsonmanufacturersubgroupsthatmaybemoreseverelyaffectedthantheindustryasawhole;and•Examinethedirectemployment,productcompetition,manufacturingcapacity,andcumulativeregulatoryimpactsontheindustry.Methodology:•Analyzeindustrycashflowandindustrynetpresentvalue(INPV)throughuseoftheGovernmentRegulatoryImpactModel(GRIM);and•InterviewmanufacturerstorefineinputstotheGRIM,developsubgroupanalyses,andaddressqualitativeissues.MIA:Overview84•Phase1–DOEcreatesanindustryprofiletocharacterizethemarketandidentifyimportantissuesthatrequirefurtherinvestigation.•Phase2–DOEpreparesanindustrycashflowmodelandaninterviewquestionnairetoguidesubsequentdiscussionswithmanufacturers.•Phase3–DOEinterviewsmanufacturersandassessestheimpactsofstandardsbothquantitatively(usingtheGRIM)andqualitatively(impactsonemployment,competition,manufacturingcapacity,andregulatoryburden).MIA:MethodologyIndustryprofileDeveloppreliminaryGRIMDevelopinterviewguideInterviews& industrysubgroupanalysesAssessemployment,competition,capacity, ®ulatoryburdensPhase 2Phase 3Phase 185Forthisrulemaking,DOEreliedoninformationgatheredfrommanufacturerinterviewsconductedinsupportoftheMay2012directfinalrule(DFR).Atthattime,keyissueswere:•ImpactonDishwasherPerformance–Washperformance,dryingperformance,cycletime,andnoiselevels–Possibleneedformultiplewashes•Testprocedures–Multitudeofadditionaltestproceduresinthefield–Lackofperformancemetrics–Singleversusmultiplecycles•IncreasedCompetition–Removaloffeaturesfromhigherefficiencyunitsasameanstocutcoststomaintainalow‐costminimally‐compliantproductORthedisappearanceofentry‐levelmodelsasmanufacturersareforcedtoaddotherfeaturesandcostinlinewithcurrenthigherefficiencyproducts.Thelatterwouldincreasecompetitionwithinthehigher‐endmarketsegment.•CumulativeRegulatoryBurden–Dishwashersareonlyoneofasuiteofproductsofferedbymanufacturers.–R&D,capitalexpenditures,andretrainingtomeetstandardsforeachproductMIA:KeyIssues86•DuringinterviewsrelatingtotheMay2012DFR,DOEreceivedfeedbackfrommanufacturerssupportingthecalculated1.24baselinemarkup•DOEmodeledtwoMarkupScenariosforDWs–PreservationofGrossMarginPercentage(i.e.FlatMarkup)–PreservationofOperatingProfit•PreservationofGrossMarginPercentageMarkupScenario=LeastSevereforManufacturers–Intheflatmarkupscenariomanufacturersfullypassthroughadditionalcoststotheirconsumersandmaintaintheirgrossmarginpercentageinthestandardscase.•PreservationofOperatingProfitMarkupScenario=MostSevereforManufacturers–Inthepreservationofoperatingprofitmarkupscenariomanufacturersmaintainthesametotaloperatingprofitinabsolutedollarsinthestandardscaseasinthebasecase,despiteahigherlevelofinvestment.MIA:ScenariosAnalyzed87•DOEmodeledtwoConversionCost(CC)ScenariosforDWs–CCsBasedonMay2012DFR–CCsBasedon2014EngineeringCostModel•ConversionCostsBasedonMay2012DFR–DOEscaledtheproductandcapitalCCestimatesdevelopedfortheMay2012DFRtoreflectthenewefficiencylevelsforeachproductclass.•ConversionCostsBasedon2014EngineeringCostModel–DOEdevelopedaseparatecapitalCCscenariousingtheengineeringcostmodel.Forthisestimate,DOEidentifiedthedesignpathwaysconsideredintheengineeringanalysis,estimatedthecostofthechangesinproductionequipmenttoimplementeachdesignoption,andaggregatedthesecoststoreflecttheindustry‐wideinvestmentusingmarketinformationaboutthenumberofplatformandproductfamiliescurrentlyonthemarketfromeachmanufacturer.MIA:ScenariosAnalyzed88MIA:INPVResults•PreservationofGrossMarginPercentageMarkup– ProductandCapitalCCsScaledfromMay2012DFR(LeastSevereImpactforManufacturers)•PreservationofOperatingProfitMarkup– ProductandCapitalCCsScaledfromMay2012DFR (MostSevereImpactforManufacturers)Units BaseCaseTrialStandardLevel123INPV (2013$millions)586.6 507.3 483.0 426.0ChangeinINPV(2013$millions)‐ ‐79.2‐103.6‐160.5(%)‐ ‐13.5%‐17.7%‐27.4%ProductConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐38.3 61.7 80.2CapitalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐79.2 172 236.7TotalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐117.5 233.7 316.9Units BaseCaseTrialStandardLevel123INPV (2013$millions)586.6 506.1 404.2 346.8ChangeinINPV(2013$millions)‐ ‐80.5‐182.3‐239.8(%)‐ ‐13.7%‐31.1%‐40.9%ProductConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐38.3 61.7 80.2CapitalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐79.2 172 236.7TotalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐117.5 233.7 316.989MIA:INPVResults•PreservationofGrossMarginPercentageMarkup– CapitalCCsBasedon2014EngineeringCostModel(LeastSevereImpactforManufacturers)•PreservationofOperatingProfitMarkup– CapitalCCsBasedon2014EngineeringCostModel (MostSevereImpactforManufacturers)Units BaseCaseTrialStandardLevel123INPV (2013$millions)586.6 543.1 465.2 445.5ChangeinINPV(2013$millions)‐ ‐43.5‐121.4‐141.1(%)‐ ‐7.4%‐20.7%‐24.0%ProductConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐38.3 61.7 80.2CapitalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐35.4 219.7 236.1TotalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐73.7 281.4 316.3Units BaseCaseTrialStandardLevel123INPV (2013$millions)586.6 541.8 382.9 362.6ChangeinINPV(2013$millions)‐ ‐44.7‐203.7‐224(%)‐ ‐7.6%‐34.7%‐38.2%ProductConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐38.3 61.7 80.2CapitalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐35.4 219.7 236.1TotalConversionCosts (2013$millions)‐73.7 281.4 316.390RequestforCommentDetails of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSDIssue9:AspartoftheMIA,DOEestimatestheproductandcapitalconversioncoststhatallmanufacturersmustmaketocomplywithpotentialstandards.DOErequestscommentontheproductindustryconversioncostsandcapitalindustryconversioncostsnecessaryforDWmanufacturerstocomplywiththeproposedstandards.91RequestforCommentDetails of the Manufacturer Impact Analysis can be found in chapter 12 of theTSDIssue10:DOEquantitativelyassessedtheimpactsofstandardsondirectemployment.DOEseekscommentonthepotentialdomesticemploymentimpactstoDWmanufacturersattheproposedefficacylevels.Issue11:DOEseekscommentonthecompliancecostsofanyotherregulationsDWmanufacturersmustmake,especiallyifthoseregulationstakeplacethreeyearsbeforeoraftertheestimatedcompliancedateoftheseproposedstandards(2019).92NOPR Rulemaking StageMarket &TechnologyScreeningAnalysisEngineeringAnalysisMarkupsAnalysisEnergy &Water UseAnalysisManufacturerImpactAnalysisNOPRFinalRuleConsumerSubgroupAnalysisEmissionsAnalysisUtilityImpactAnalysisEmploymentImpactAnalysisRegulatoryImpactAnalysisEmissionsMonetizationAnalysisNationalImpactAnalysisShipmentsAnalysisLife-CycleCost andPaybackPeriod Analysis93ConsumerSubgroupAnalysis•Purpose–Evaluatetheeconomicimpactsofstandardsonconsumersubgroupswhomaybedisproportionatelyimpactedcomparedwiththegeneraluserpopulation.•Method–Identifysenior‐onlyandlow‐incomehouseholds.•Results–LCCandPBPresultswerenotappreciablydifferentthanforthegeneralpopulation.94•Purpose–Estimatetheemissionsreductionsresultingfromamendedenergyconservationstandards.–Includesestimatingconsidersfull‐fuel‐cycleemissions;bothpowerplantemissionsand“upstream”emissions.–Includesfugitivemethaneemissions.•Method–ProvidefromNationalImpactAnalysisanannualtime‐seriesofenergysavingsovertheanalysisperiod.–UseEnergyInformationAdministration’sNationalEnergyModelingSystem(NEMS)torepresenttheimpactsofamendedstandards.EmissionsAnalysis95EmissionsAnalysis:ResultsTSL1 TSL 2 TSL 3CO2(millionmetrictons)0.30 61.86 147.22NOx(thousandtons)3.44 126.66 312.64SO2(thousandtons)‐0.42 42.93 99.36Hg(tons)‐0.001 0.13 0.30N2O(thousandtons)‐0.005 0.74 1.74CH4(thousandtons)7.05 345.12 846.1996EmissionMonetizationAnalysis•UsethemostcurrentSocialCostofCarbon(SCC)valuesdevelopedbyinteragencyprocess.–SCCisintendedtobeamonetarymeasureoftheincrementaldamageresultingfromgreenhousegas(GHG)emissions,including,butnotlimitedto,agriculturalproductivityloss,humanhealtheffects,propertydamagefromrisingsealevels,andchangesintheecosystem.•Usethemostrecent(2013)U.S.governmentinteragencyestimatesoftheSCCforemissionsin2015,permetrictonavoided(in2013$):–$12.0(averagevaluefromdistributionwitha5%discountrate)–$40.5(averagevaluefromdistributionwitha3%discountrate)–$62.4(averagevaluefromdistributionwitha2.5%discountrate)–$119(95th‐percentilevaluefromdistributionwitha3%discountrate)•ReporttheSCCinconstantdollarsasincreasedovertime.•MonetizetheNOxemissionsreductionsresultingfromamendedstandards.–Estimatesofmonetaryvaluerangefrom$476to$4,893pershortton.–DOEcalculatedmonetarybenefitsusingamediumvalueof$2,684pershortton.97EmissionMonetizationAnalysis:ResultsTSL1 TSL2 TSL3CO22.3to31.3 427.4 to6,114.5 963.8to14,056NOx3%discountrate4.9 173.3 400.3NOx7%discountrate2.4 79.2 175.4FullFuelCycleEmissionsReductionBenefits(million2013$)98RequestforCommentIssue12:DOErequestscommentontheapplicationofthenewSCCvaluesusedtodeterminethesocialbenefitsofCO2emissionsreductionsovertherulemakinganalysisperiod.Inparticular,theagencysolicitscommentonitsderivationofSCCvaluesafter2050,wheretheagencyappliedtheaverageannualgrowthrateoftheSCCestimatesin2040–2050associatedwitheachofthefoursetsofvalues.99UtilityImpactAnalysis•Purpose–Estimatethechangesinelectricinstalledcapacityandgenerationthatresultfromamendedenergyconservationstandards.•Method–ProvidefromNationalImpactAnalysisanannualtime‐seriesofenergysavingsovertheanalysisperiod.–UseEnergyInformationAdministration’sNationalEnergyModelingSystem(NEMS)torepresenttheimpactsofamendedstandards.•Output–Reductionsintotalelectricitygeneration.–Reductionsinprimaryfuel(e.g.coal,naturalgas)consumption.–Changestothemixofelectricitygenerationbyfueltype.–Changestototalinstalledcapacity.100EmploymentImpactAnalysis•Purpose–Estimatethenationalnetimpactonjobsasaconsequenceofamendedenergyconservationstandards,includingindirectemploymentimpacts.•Method–UsetheImSET (ImpactofSectorEnergyTechnologies)modelfortheevaluationofindirectemploymentimpacts;directemploymentimpactstothecommercialairconditioningindustryaredevelopedintheManufacturerImpactAnalysis.–InputintoImSET thechangesinnationalequipmentandenergyexpendituresfromtheNationalImpactAnalysis.•Results–Netlabormarketimpactsarenegligibleovertimeduetothesmallmagnitudeoftheshort‐termeffects.101RegulatoryImpactAnalysis•Purpose–Investigatethenationalimpactsofnon‐regulatoryalternativestomandatoryamendedenergyconservationstandards.•Method–ModifytheNIAspreadsheettoanalyzethefollowingnon‐regulatoryalternativesandtheirimpactonpurchasepriceandenergyandwateruse.–Output–NationalEnergySavingsandNetPresentValueforthenon‐regulatoryalternatives.•Nonewregulatoryaction•Manufacturertaxcredits•Consumerrebates•Voluntaryefficiencytargets•Consumertaxcredits•Bulkgovernmentprocurement102HowtoSubmitWrittenCommentsInallcorrespondence,pleaserefertothisrulemakingby:– StandardsforResidentialDishwashers– DocketNumberEERE‐2014‐BT‐STD‐0021– RegulationIdentificationNumber(RIN)1904‐AD24Email:ResDishwashers2014STD0021@ee.doe.govPostal:CourierMs.BrendaEdwardsMs.BrendaEdwardsU.S.DepartmentofEnergyU.S.DepartmentofEnergyBuildingTechnologiesProgram,BuildingTechnologiesProgram,Suite600MailstopEE‐5B950L’EnfantPlaza,SW1000IndependenceAvenue,SWWashington,DC20024Washington,DC20585‐0121Tel:202586‐2945CommentperiodclosesFebruary17,2015,11:59PMEST