(Doeln!t No.**~E-R~1]**

### E~**eonSe~~** 

## ProQr.m2 for
Consumer Products

AGENCY: Office ofILe:gy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Department of " Energy {DOE}.'
AC'J!ON!.PubIicaUon 

### of a finding of DO

. significantimpac:1 for**en~ental** .

assessment OOEJEA-08Ul.

.
SUWM4R'r. 

## on Ma:n::b 4. 1994;tbe' .'

. Department**p~blished** 8 Notice of

### F~ 

### R.egister I Vol ,59, .No. 65 

### I.Tuesday, April S. 1994 

### I Proposed. 

### Rules



### :- "

..**~** la**.Wasm~DC,.~** 1'. 191M.**y~** M. Sf_art:. Jr..'

. OWifofS Effldency4."lti 

### 15869[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 1994)] [Unknown Section] [Page 0] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] [FR Doc No: 94-8122]

[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 5, 1994]

=======================================================================

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EE-RM-90-201]

Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Publication of a finding of no significant impact for environmental assessment DOE/EA-0819.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On March 4, 1994, the Department published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Energy Efficiency Standards for eight appliance types (59 FR 10464). As part of the analysis supporting that Notice, the Department prepared an Environmental Assessment (DOE/EA-0819), which was printed within Volume I of the Technical Support Document that was prepared for that rulemaking proposal. Today's action makes publically available the Finding of No Significant Impact that had been prepared for that Environmental Assessment. It is printed in its entirety.

Issued in Washington, DC, March 17, 1994. Frank M. Stewart, Jr., Chief of Staff, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

Finding of No Significant Impact--Energy Conservation Program for
Consumer Products

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended by the National Energy Conservation Policy Act, the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987, and the National Appliance Energy Conservation Amendments of 1988, prescribes energy conservation standards for certain major household appliances, and requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to administer an energy conservation programfor these products. Based on an Environmental Assessment (EA), DOE/EA

### Page 1 of 3 Federal Register, Volume 59 Issue 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 1994)

9/21/2009 htt p ://www. gp o. g ov/fds y s/ p k g/F R -1994-04-05/html/94-8122.htm0819, DOE has determined that the proposal of any of the candidate amended energy efficiency standards for the eight appliances would not be a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Therefore, an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required, and the Department is issuing this finding of no significant impact (FONSI). Public Availability: Copies of the EA are available from the Hearings and Dockets Branch, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, EE-43, room 6B-025, U.S. Department of Energy, Docket Number EE-RM-90-201, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, 20585, (202) 586-9320. For further program information, contact: Dr. Barry P. Berlin, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EE-43), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-9127. For further information regarding the DOE NEPA process, contact: Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Oversight (EH-25), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-4600 or (800) 472-2756. Description of the Proposed Action: The proposed action is the establishment of revised energy conservation standards for room air conditioners, water heaters, direct heating equipment, mobile home furnaces, kitchen ranges and ovens, pool heaters and fluorescent lamp ballasts, and to consider standards for televisions. Environmental Impacts: The EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a range of new candidate energy conservation standards for eight types of household appliances. The results are presented for each potential standard level for each of the eight appliance types. Each potential standard level is an alternative action, and the environmental impacts of each alternative are compared to what would be expected to happen if no new standards for each product were finalized, i.e., the ``no action'' alternative.
The main environmental concern is emissions from fossil-fueled electricity generation. Most of the design options for the eight appliances would result in decreased electricity use and, therefore, a reduction of power plant emissions. The proposed efficiency standards would generally decrease air pollution by decreasing future energy demand. The greatest decreases in air pollution would be for sulfur oxides, listed in equivalent weight of sulfur dioxide, or SO2. Reductions of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide would also occur and are listed by weight of NOx and CO2, respectively. Design options for many of the appliances (i.e., gas and oil water heaters, gas pool heaters, direct heating equipment, mobile home furnaces, and gas ranges and ovens) would also reduce in-home fuel consumption, resulting in lower in-home emissions from fuel-burning appliances. Although the quantity of raw materials used per appliance would remain relatively constant, in most scenarios increased initial prices from standards are expected to reduce slightly the number of appliances sold, which would result in small decreases in the total amount of raw materials used. The main effect of this decreased appliance production would be the SO2 decreases from avoided fuel burning at power plants. The environmental contribution from reduced steel production is not included in the estimates for net SO2 decreases resulting from design changes in these products. Although the effects on particulate emissions related to a standard-induced decrease in electricity generation would be minor compared to effects on SO2, NO2, and CO2, any reduction would possibly be beneficial to the quality of surface water. Since the total amount of particulates emitted would decrease, it is very likely 

### Page 2 of 3 Federal Register, Volume 59 Issue 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 1994)

9/21/2009 htt p ://www. gp o. g ov/fds y s/ p k g/F R -1994-04-05/html/94-8122.htmthat fewer particulates would reach the surface water. Reductions in particulate emissions accompanied by drecases in SO2 and NO2 would have other beneficial effects on the environment. The resultant improvement to air quality and the decreased potential for acid rain formation could help improve the quality of wetlands and fish and wildlife as well as aid in the preservation of historical and archaeological sites. Reduced in-home fuel consumption of gas or oil would decrease the impact of combustion on indoor air quality. Indoor air problems are usually due to a combination of factors, including a tight house envelope, insufficient ventilation for cooking appliances, presence of sources such as cigarette smokers or formaldehyde-containing products, and radon diffusion from soil. In comparison to the above factors, and because fuel-burning appliances are normally vented to the outside, the projected changes in home fuel-burning appliance use is expected to have little effect on indoor air quality. Determination: Based upon the EA, DOE has determined that the proposal of any of the candidate amended energy-efficiency standards for room air conditioners, water heaters, direct heating equipment, mobile home furnaces, kitchen ranges and ovens, pool heaters, fluorescent lamp ballasts, and television sets would not consitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, within the meaning of NEPA. Therefore, an EIS for the proposed action is not required.

Issued in Washington, DC, this 4th day of December 1992. Paul L. Ziemer, Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health. [FR Doc. 94-8122 Filed 4-4-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P 

### Page 3 of 3 Federal Register, Volume 59 Issue 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 1994)

9/21/2009 htt p ://www. gp o. g ov/fds y s/ p k g/F R -1994-04-05/html/94-8122.htm