1998 Priority Setting

for

Standards and Test Procedure

Rulemakings

Draft

June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

1998 Priority Setting 

for 

, Standards and Test Procedure 

Rulemakings 

Draft 

June 27, 1997 
FISCAL 1998 PRIORITY SETTING FOR THE

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS

The following data sheets are the proposed priorities for the fiscal year 1998, by the Department

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

proposed priorities, and the proposed schedules. These proposed priorities are based on the

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

level for the fiscal year 1998. Final priorities will be based on the Department's consideration of

comments received and funds available.

Written comments should be submitted by August 4, 1997, to the U.S. Department of Energy,

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121, Attn: Sandy Beall, EE-43. If you

have any questions, please contact Anthony Balducci at (202) 586-8459.

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

FISCAL 1998 PRIORITY SETTING FOR THE 

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS 

The following data sheets are the proposed priorities for the fiscal year 1998, by the Department 

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

proposed priorities, and the proposed schedules. These proposed priorities are based on the 

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

level for the fiscal year 1998. Final priorities will be based on the Department's consideration of 

comments received and funds available. 

Written comments should be submitted by August 4, 1997, to the U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121, Attn: Sandy Beall, EE-43. If you 

have any questions, please contact Anthony Balducci at (202) 586-8459. 
Table of Contents

Product Rulemaking Priority Page Product Rulemaking Priority Page

Clothes Dryers Standards Low 1 High Intensity Discharge Lamps Determination Low 23

Test Procedure Low 2 Test Procedure Low 24

Clothes Washers Standards High 3 Lamps Standards Low 25

Test Procedure High' 4 Test Procedure Low 26

Commercial A/C & H. P. Standards Low 5 Mobile Home Furnaces Standards Low 27

Test Procedure High 6 Test Procedure Low 28

Comm. Furnaces & Boilers Standards Low 7 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings Standards Low 29

Test Procedure High 8 Test Procedure High' 30

Commercial Water Heating Standards Low 9 Pool Heaters (Gas) Standards Low 31

Test Procedure High 10 Test Procedure Low 32

Cooking Products Standards High' 11 Refrigerators Standards Low 33

Test Procedure High' 12 Test Procedure Low 34

Direct Heating Equipment, Gas Standards Low 13 Res. Central A/C and H. P. Standards Medium 35

Test Procedure Low 14 Test Procedure High 36

Dishwashers Standards Low 15 Res. Furnaces and Boilers Standards Low 37

Test Procedure Medium 16 Test Procedure Low 38

Distribution Transformers Determination High 17 Residential Water Heaters Standards High 39

Test Procedure 2

18 Test Procedure High' 40

Electric Motors, 1- 200 HP Standards Low 19 Room Air Conditioners Standards High' 41

Test Procedure High' 20 Test Procedure Low 42

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts Standards High 2`1 Small Electric Motors Determination Low 43

I Test Procedure Low 22 Test Procedure Low 44

Drops to Low Priority upon completion

s Moves to High Priority if positive determination

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Table of Contents 

Product Rulemaking Priority Page Product Rulemaking Priority Page 

Clothes Dryers Standards Low 1 High Intensity Discharge Lamps Determination Low 23 

Test Procedure Low 2 Test Procedure Low 24 

Clothes Washers Standards High 3 Lamps Standards Low 25 

Test Procedure Highl 4 Test Procedure Low 26 

Commercial AlC & H. P. Standards Low 5 Mobile Home Furnaces Standards Low 27 

Test Procedure High 6 Test Procedure Low 28 

Comm. Furnaces & Boilers Standards Low 7 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings Standards Low 29 

Test Procedure High 8 Test Procedure Highl 30 

Commercial Water Heating Standards Low 9 Pool Heaters (Gas) Standards Low 31 

Test Procedure High 10 Test Procedure Low 32 

, 

Cooking Products Standards Highl 11 Refrigerators Standards Low 33 

Test Procedure High I 12 Test Procedure Low 34 

Direct Heating Equipment, Gas Standards Low 13 Res. Central AlC and H. P. Standards Medium 35 

Test Procedure Low 14 Test Procedure High 36 

Dishwashers Standards Low 15 Res. Furnaces and Boilers Standards Low 37 

Test Procedure Medium 16 Test Procedure Low 38 

Distribution Transformers Determination High 17 Residential Water Heaters Standards High 39 

Test Procedure _2 18 Test Procedure Highl 40 

Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP Standards Low 19 Room Air Conditioners Standards Highl 41 

Test Procedure High I 20 Test Procedure Low 42 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts Standards High 2'1 Small Electric Motors Determination Low 43 

Test Procedure Low 22 Test Procedure Low 44 

1 Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

2 Moves to High Priority if positive determination 
Summary of Priorities

Standards and Determinations (D)

High Priority Products Page No. Low Priority Products (con't) Page No.

Clothes Washers 3 Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 7

Cooking Products' 11 Commercial Water Heating 9

Distribution Transformers (D) 17 Direct Heating Equipment, Gas 13

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 21 Dishwashers 15

Residential Water Heaters 39 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP 19

Room Air Conditioners' 41 High Intensity Discharge Lamps (D) 23

Lamps 25

Medium Priority Products Page No. Mobile Home Furnaces 27

Residential Central A/C and Heat Pump 35 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings 29

Pool Heaters, Gas 31

Low Priority Products Page No. Refrigerators 33

Clothes Dryers 1 Residential Furnaces and Boilers 37

Commercial A/C and Heat Pumps 5 Small Electric Motors (D) 43

Test Procedures

High Priority Products Page No. Low Priority Products Page No.

Clothes Washers' 4 Clothes Dryers 2

Commercial A/C and Heat Pumps 6 Direct Heating Equipment, Gas 14

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 8 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 22

Commercial Water Heating 10 High Intensity Discharge Lamps 24

Cooking Products' 12 Lamps 26

Electric Motors, 1-200 HP' 20 >?> Mobile Home Furnaces 28

Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings' 30 Pool Heaters, Gas 32

Residential Central A/C and Heat Pump 36 Refrigerators 34

Residential Water Heaters' 40 Residential Furnaces and Boilers 38

Room Air Conditioners 42

Medium Priority Products Page No. Small Electric Motors 44

Dishwashers 16 Distribution Transformers2 18

' Drops to Low Priority upon Completion 2 Moves-to High Priority if positive determination

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Summary of Priorities 

Standards and Determinations (D) 

High Priority Products Page No. Low Priority Products (con't) Page No. 

Clothes Washers 3 Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 7 

Cooking Products! 11 Commercial Water Heating 9 

Distribution Transformers CD) 17 Direct Heating Equipment, Gas 13 

Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 21 Dishwashers 15 

Residential Water Heaters 39 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP 19 

Room Air Conditioners! 41 High Intensity Discharge Lamps (D) 23 

Lamps 25 

Medium Priority Products Page No. Mobile Home Furnaces 27 

Residential Central AlC and Heat Pump 35 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings 29 

Pool Heaters, Gas 31 

Low Priority Products Page No. Refrigerators 33 

Clothes Dryers 1 Residential Furnaces and Boilers 37 

Commercial AlC and Heat 5 Small Electric Motors (D) 43 

Test Procedures 

High Priority Products Page No. Page No • 

. Clothes Washers! 4 2 

Commercial AlC and Heat P.umps 6 14 

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers 8 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 22 

Commercial Water Heating 10 High Intensity Discharge Lamps 24 

Cooking Products! 12 26 

Electric Motors, 1-200 Hp! 20 28 

Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings! 30 Pool Heaters, Gas 32 

Residential Central AlC and Heat Pump 36 34 

Residential Water Heaters! 40 Residential Furnaces and Boilers 38 

Room Air Conditioners 42 

Medium Priority Products Small Electric Motors 44 

Dishwashers Distribution Transformers2 18 

! Drops to Low Priority upon Completion 2 Moves·to High Priority if positive determination 
Standards

Product: Clothes Dryers - (Gas/Electric)

Priority: Low

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

from Regulatory Action; I energy savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Not available

Not available

Reduced annual cycles needs to be considered, definitions and creation of

new product class for condensing dryers

DOE regulation of clothes washers.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

There appears to be a general consensus among stakeholders that updating

clothes dryer standards should be given low priority.

At least three U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes

washers which are likely to have improved moisture extraction.

Significant dryer savings potential will be considered in clothes washer

rulemaking (greater moisture extraction). Mechanical extraction has been

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

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

Level savings are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on

white good manufacturers.

Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Clothes Dryers - (GaslElectric) 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potenti~ 

from Regulatory Action; energy savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not available 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental Not available 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required Reduced annual cycles needs to be considered. definitions and creation of 

Changes to Test new product class for condensing dryers 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes washers. 

DOE regulation of white goods for fulIline manufacturers. 

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

Interested Parties clothes dryer standards should be given low priority. 

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

Driven or Voluntary washers which are likely to have improved moisture extraction. 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues Significant dryer savings potential will be considered in clothes washer 

rulemaking (greater moisture extraction). Mechanical extraction has been 

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

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

Level savings are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on 

white good manufacturers. 

1 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Clothes Dryers - (Gas/Electric)

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure needs to be changed for standard

Low

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

revisions to the test procedure.

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

there is one waiver in effect. The are numerous changes that are required

prior to a standards rulemaking for clothes dryers.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

Considered to be a low priority by stakeholders.

2 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Clothes Dryers - (GaslElectric) 

Priority: Low 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

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

Coordinating Activities revisions to the test procedure. 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

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

there is one waiver in effect. The are numerous changes that are required 

prior to a standards rulemaking for clothes dryers. 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Considered to be a low priority by stakeholders. 

Level 

2 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Clothes Washers

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2002-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Total range considered: [ 0.6 - 11.5 ]' Specific examples below:

Iirv. Max tech.

fill ctrl. & vert. axis Horz. axis Horz. axis

In^rv. 50% & 40% Horz. recirc. & recirc. &

fill ctrl RMC RMC axis 50% RMC 40% RMC

0.6 2.7 5.0 6.4 9.8 11.5

Potential benefits to consumers have not been quantified. High efficient

clothes washers require a new platform design and significant investment.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

Test procedures need to be changed for standard. Final rule for test

procedures expected 7/97.

DOE regulation of clothes dryers. DOE regulation of white goods for full

line manufacturers.

Consortium for Energy Efficiency program with utilities. Energy Star

program. Federal Energy Management Program for procurement initiative.

At least three U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes

washers.

High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule ANOPR - 1/97 NOPR - 01/99

Final Rule - 12/99

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

Level savings are large.

Based on rough estimates, complete analysis will be performed for the rulemaking.

3 Draft - June 27, , 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Clothes Washers 

Priority: High 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

2002-2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market· 

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues 

FY 1997 Priority 

Standards 

Total range considered: [ 0.6 - I1.S ]' Specific examples below: 

ln1Jrv. Max tech. 

fill ctrl. & vert. axis HorZ. axis Horz. axis 

ln1Jrv. SO% &40% Horz. recirc. & recirc. & 

fill ctrl RMC. RMC axis SO%RMC 40%RMC 

0.6 2.7 S.O 6.4 9.8 11.S 

Potential benefits to consumers have not been quantified. High efficient 

clothes washers require a new platfonn design and significant investment. 

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

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

minimal. 

Test procedures need to be changed for standard. Final rule for test 

procedures expected 7/97. 

DOE regulation of clothes dryers. DOE regulation of white goods for full 

line manufacturers. 

Consortium for Energy Efficiency program with utilities. Energy Star 

program. Federal Energy Management Program for procurement initiative. 

At least three U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes 

washers. 

High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule ANOPR-1I97 NOPR - 01/99 

Final Rule - 12/99 

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

Level savings are large. 

. Based on rough estimates, complete analysis will be performed for the rulemaking. 

3 Draft - June 21, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Clothes Washers

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation- by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

High

The Department will work with CSA to help Canada implement a test

procedure consistent with DOE's revised clothes washer test procedure.

Final Rule issued FY97

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: -

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 7/97

Rationale for Priority

Level

This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is

published. Once the final rule is published, it will become a low priority.

4 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Clothes Washers 

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard High 

International or Other The Department will work with CSA to help Canada implement a test 

Coordinatin~ Activities procedure consistent with DOE's revised clothes washer test procedure. 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues Final Rule issued FY97 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: ' 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 7/97 

Rationale for Priority This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is 

Level Dublished. Once the final rule is published it will become a low priority. 

4 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1995-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

7.3 2

Not available.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal

Regulation.

EPA phaseout of HCFC refrigerants.

None known.

Dependent upon revision ASHRAE 90.1 standards.

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

Rationale for Priority Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE

Level 90.1

2

Based on PNNL rough estimate, May 1996.

Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings 7.3 2 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

1995-2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

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

minimal. 

Status of Required DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal 

Changes to Test Regulation. 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of HCFC refrigerants. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market- None known. 

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues Dependent upon revision ASHRAE 90.1 standards. 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs . 

Rationale for Priority . Standards set by EP ACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE 

Level 90.1 

2 Based on PNNL rough estimate, May 1996. 

5 Draft - J nne 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

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

90.1

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal

Regulation.

6 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

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

Standard 90.1 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatinl?; Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal 

Level Regulation. 

6 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1995-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

1

Not available.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal

Regulation.

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

None known.

Dependent upon revision ASHRAE 90.1 standards.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs. .

Rationale for Priority Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE

Level 90.1

3

Based on PNNL rough estimate, May 1996.

7 Draft- June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings 1 3 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

1995-2030 0 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

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

minimal. 

Status of Required DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal 

Changes to Test ,- Regulation. 

Procedures 

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

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market- None known. 

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues Dependent upon revision ASHRAE 90.1 standards. 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be liinited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

Rationale for Priority Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE 

Level 90.1 

3 Based on PNNL rough estimate, May 1996. 

7 Draft- June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

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

90.1

IOW

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal

Regulation.

8 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers 

Priority: High 

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

Standard 90.1 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatin~ Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal 

Level Regulation. 

8 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Commercial Water Heating

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings [0.21 - 1.2]

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1995-2030

1. Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Not available.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal

Regulation.

None known.

Dependent upon revision ASHRAE 90.1 standards.

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

Rationale for Priority Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE

Level 90.1

4

Based on PNNL preliminary findings report, April 1996.

9 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Commercial Water Heating 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings [0.21 - 1.2]4 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

1995-2030 

1. Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

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

minimal. 

Status of Required DOE needs to incorporate ARl and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal 

Changes to Test Regulation. 

Procedures 

Other Re~latorv Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market- None known. 

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues Dependent upon revision ASHRAE 90.1 standards. 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

• 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

Rationale for Priority Standards set by EPACT and will be ameneded upon revision of ASHRAE 

Level 90.1 

4 Based on PNNL preliminary fmdings report, April 1996. 

9 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Water Heating

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

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

90.1

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal

Re ulation.

10 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Commercial Water Heating 

Priority: High 

Test Procedure 

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

Standard 90.1 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority DOE needs to incorporate ARI and ASHRAE standard into Code of Federal 

Level Regulation. 

10 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

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

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Total ranges considered:'

Ovens Cook Tops Microwave Ovens

[0.1-2.1] [0-0.5] [0-0.3]

[ (9.3) - 0.11 [ (4.0) - 0.11 [ 0 - (4.7) ] NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Microwave design option is highly speculative.

SO2 [9-247] SO2 [0-67] SO2 [0-53]

NOx [ 11 - 239 ] NOx [ 0 - 65 ] NOx [0-481

CO2 [ 6-133] CO2 [0-36] CO2 [0-25]

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

Reduction of annual energy consumption and incorporation of IEC 705 test

procedure. Final rule for test procedures expected 7/97.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

None known.

Use of ranges is declining in the U.S.. Pilotless designs may require

additional wiring for installation.

High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule , Final Rule - 9/97

Rationale for Priority 2. Interested Parties recommended high priority. Potential energy savings

Level are low to moderate. Limited DOE resources needed to complete

rulemaking. This rulemaking will remain high priority until the final

rule is published. Once the final rule is published, it will become a low

priority.

5

Based on DOE report, April 1996.

11 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

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

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

Potential Energy Savings Total ranges considered:5 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) Ovens Cook Tops Microwave Ovens 

2000-2030 [0.1 - 2.1 ] [0 - 0.5 ] [ 0 - 0.3 ] 

Potential Economic [ (9.3) - 0.1 ] [ (4.0) - 0.1 ] [0 - (4.7) ] NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens Microwave design option is highly speculative. 

Potential Environmental S02 [9 - 247] S02 [0 - 67] S02 [0 - 53] 

or Energy Security NOx [ 11 - 239 ] NOx [0 - 65] NOx [0- 48] 

Benefits CO2 [ 6 - 133] CO2 [0 - 36] CO2 [0 - 25] . 

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

Status of Required Reduction of annual energy consumption and incorporation of IEC 705 test 

Changes to Test procedure. Final rule for test procedures expected 7/97. 

Procedures 

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

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market- None known. 

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues Use of ranges is declining in the U.S .. Pilotless designs may require 

additional wiring for installation. 

FY 1997 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule . Final Rule - 9/97 

Rationale for Priority 2. Interested Parties recommended high priority. Potential energy savings 

Level are low to moderate. Limited DOE resources needed to complete 

rulemaking. This rulemaking will remain high priority until the final 

rule is published. Once the final rule is published, it will become a low 

priority. 

5 Based on DOE report, April 1996. 

11 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

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

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard.

Hig

'Incorporate the International Electrotechnical Commission standard 705 and

amendment 2 for microwave oven testing.

Changes made to lower annual energy consumption were incorporated in the

revised test procedure to correspond to the standard.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 7/97

Rationale for Priority

Level

This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is

ublished. Once the final rule is published, it will become a low riorit .

12 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

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

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

International or Other 

Activities 

Issues 

~ Incorporate the International Electrotechnical Commission stand~d 705 and 

amendment 2 for microwave oven 

Changes made to lower annual energy consumption were incorporated in the 

revised test 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 7/97 

Rationale for Priority This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is 

Level published. Once the final rule is published it will become a low priority. 

12 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas)

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

'Cumulative (Quads)

1998-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Total range considered: [ 0 - 0.1 ]6 Specific examples below:'

Previous,

Piezo ignit. & Previous & Condens. &

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

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

0.1 0 (0.3) (1.0)

[ (1.4) - 0.11 NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

0 0.1 (0.6) (1.4)

SO2 0 (7) (140) (320)

NOx 0 (6) (132) (301)

CO2 0 (3) (72) (165)

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

Final rule published 5/12/97.

None known that will impact product.

None known.

Venting safety issue. Fuel switching. Rural communities use for backup

heating during power outages. Utility concern with electronic ignition.

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

Level savings are low.

6

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

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

13 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas) 

Low 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

. Cumulative (Quads) 

1998-2030 

Potential Economic 

Potential Environmental 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary 

1m rovements 

Issues 

Total range considered: [ 0 - 0.1 ]6 Specific examples below: 7 

Previous, 

Piezo ignit. & Previous & Condens. & 

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

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

0.1 0 (0.3) (1.0) 

[ (1.4) - 0.1 ] 

o 

NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

0.1 

o 

o 

o 

None known. 

(7) 

(6) 

(3) 

(140) 

(132) 

(72) 

(320 ) 

(301 ) 

(165 ) 

Venting safety issue. Fuel switching. Rural communities use for backup 

concern with electronic 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

Level savings are low. 

6 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

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

13 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas)

Priority: Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

Final Rule issued 5/12/97

14 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatin~ Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued 5/12/97 

Rationale for Priority 

Level . 

14 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Dishwashers

Priority: Low

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

from Regulatory Action ; I energy savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Not available.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

Test procedures may require revision to properly reflect energy consumption

for new technologies (e.g. adaptive controls) and reduced annual cycles

needs to be considered.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Some manufacturers believe that updating the dishwasher standard should

be given allow priority.

Energy Savers program. Federal Energy Management Program for

procurement initiative. At least two U.S. manufacturers are marketing

adaptive control dishwashers.

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

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

(contract housing).

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

Level savings are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on

white good manufacturers.

15 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Dishwashers 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Re~ulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues 

FY 1997 Priority 

Standards 

The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential 

energy savings for this product. 

Not available. 

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however, 

estimat~ energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative 

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

rilinimal. 

Test procedures may require revision to properly reflect energy consumption 

for new technologies (e.g. adaptive controls) and reduced annual cycles 

needs to be considered. 

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

Some manufacturers believe that updating the dishwasher standard should 

be given a low priority. 

Energy Savers program. Federal Energy Management Program for 

procurement initiative. At least two U.S. manufacturers are marketing 

adaptive control dishwashers. 

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

of dishes or cleaning of fllters) or the availability of affordable models 

(contract housing). 

Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

Level savings are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on 

white good manufacturers. 

15 Draft - June 27, 1997 . 
Test Procedure

Product: Dishwashers

Priority: Medium

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard

Low

ology in product, i.e. smart controls, fuzzy logic.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule TBD

Rationale for Priority

Level

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

16 Draft m June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Dishwashers 

Priority: Medium 

Relationship to Changes in 

Standard 

Priority of Standard 

International or Other 

Coordinatin2 Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Test Procedure 

Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard 

Low 

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

proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule TBD 

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

Level 

16 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards Determination

Product: Distribution Transformers

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1995-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

[4.2-13.7]8

Not available.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

Need to develop a test procedure before rule.

None known.

EPA Energy Star program for liquid immersion transformers. NEMA's TP1 and the National Business Awareness Campaign to promote energy

efficient electrical products.

Most efficient designs include proprietary technology.

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

Energy savings questioned by NEMA.

High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Notice of Determination - 7/97

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are large, although industry believes it may be

Level overstated. Determination required by EPACT. If positive determination is

made, product will become a high priori!j standards.

8

Based on ORNL determination analysis, April 1996.

17 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards Determination 

Product: Distribution Transfonners 

Priority: High 

Potential Energy Savings [4.2-13.7]8 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

1995-2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

Benefits emissiqn benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are 

minimal. 

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

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions None known. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market- EPA Energy Star program for liquid immersion transformers. NEMA's 1PDrive~ or Voluntary 1 and the National Business Awareness Campaign to promote energy 

Efficiency Improvements efficient electrical products. 

Issues Most efficient designs include proprietary technology. 

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

Energy savings questioned by NEMA. 

FY 1997 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Notice of Determination - 7/97 

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are large, although industry believes it may be 

Level overstated. Determination required by EPACT. If positive determination is 

made, product will become a high priority for standards. 

8 Based on ORNL determination analysis, April 1996. 

17 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Distribution Transformers

Priority : Low - Moves to High Priority if positive determination

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure need to be changed for standard.

High

Dependant on determination

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Dependant on determination

Rationale for Priority

Level

The test procedure will become a high priority if a positive determination is

made.

18 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Distribution Transfonners 

Priority: Low - Moves to High Priority if positive determination 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Dependant on determination 

Rationale for Priority The test procedure will beCome a high priority if a positive determination is 

Level made. 

18 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDr * iven or Voluntary

Efciency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Not Available.

Not Available.

Not Available.

NEMA MG-1987 was amended 12/7/93. DOE proposing to adopt 1993

version. Final rule for test procedures expected Fall 1997.

None known that will impact product.

ASHRAE 90.1. "Consortium for Energy Efficiency" program with utilities.

Motor Challenge. Motor Master+

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

are components of such systems.

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

Level savings are unknown at this time. Statutory deadline is 1999 2000 .

19 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Electric Motors, I - 200 HP 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings Not Available. 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not Available. 

BenefitsIBurdens 

Potential Environmental Not Available. 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required NEMA MG-1987 was amended 12nt93. DOE proposing to adopt 1993 

Changes to Test version. Final rule for test procedures expected Fall 1997. 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions' None known that will impact product. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

Dr,iven or Voluntary Motor Challenge. Motor Master+ 

Efficiency Improvements 

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

are components of such systems. 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

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

19 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Electric Motors, 1 200 HP

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard

Low

Proposed'Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Proposed Rule Issued - 11/27/97

Final Rule - Fall 1997

Rationale for Priority Considered to be a high priority by stakeholders. This test procedure will

Level remain a high priority until the final rule is published. Once the final rule is

ublished it will become a low riorit .

20 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP 

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatin~ Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed· Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Proposed Rule Issued - 11/27/97 

Final Rule - Fall 1997 

. Rationale for Priority Considered to be a high priority by stakeholders. This test procedure will 

Level remain a high priority until the final rule is published. Once the final rule is 

Dublished it will become a lowpriority. 

20 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

Total range considered: [ 0.4 - 5.3 ]9 Specific examples below:

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Cathode Cutout Electronic Electronic

Cathode / Electronic Rapid Start / Rapid Start /

Cutout Rapid Start Instant Start Instant Start

0.4-2.7 1.4-5.1 1.5-5.3 1.7-5.5

[ 0.3 - 5.81 NPV, billions of 1994$ @ 7%

0.3-1.6 2.2-5.6 2.5-5.7 2.5-5.8

Testing of electronic ballast may require revision to test procedure.

None.

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

Federal Relighting Initiative (FEMP), NEMA's Energy Efficient

Procurement Collaborative, and some utility DSM programs.

Standards, for electronic ballasts, could adversely affect remaining U.S.

manufacturers more than those overseas. NEMA believes that DOE should

remove itself from promulgating standards for products that are components

of larger systems.

High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Impact Workshop -

NOPR -

Final Rule -

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are moderate. Engineering analysis completed with

Level strong endorsement from industry.

Based on DOE workshop, March 1997.

21 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 

Priority: High 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [OA - 5.3 ]9 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) Cathode Cutou Electronic Electronic 

2000-2030 Cathode I Electronic Rapid S tartl Rapid Start I 

Cutout Rapid Start Instant Start Instant Start 

0.4-2.7 1.4-5.1 1.5-5.3 1.7-5.5 

Potential Economic [0.3 - 5.8] NPV, billions of 1994$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens 0.3 - 1.6 2.2- 5.6 2.5 - 5.7 2.5 - 5.8 

Potential Environmental 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required Testing of electronic ballast may require revision to test procedure. 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Re~ulatory Actions None. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

Driven or Voluntary Federal Relighting Initiative (FEMP), NEMA's Energy Efficient 

Efficiency Improvements Procurement Collaborative, and some utility DSM programs. 

Issues Standards, for electronic ballasts, could adversely affect remaining U.S. 

manufacturers more than those overseas. NEMA believes that DOE should 

remove itself from promulgating standards for products that are components 

of larger systems. 

FY 1997 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Impact Workshop -

NOPRFinal RuleRationale for Priority Potential energy savings are moderate. Engineering analysis completed with 

Level strong endorsement from industrY. 

9 Based on DOE workshop, March 1997. 

21 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

22 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 

Priority: Low 

Test Procedure 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard High 

International or Other 

Coordinatin~ Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

22 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards Determination

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1995-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

[0.11-0.22]10

Not Available.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

IES and ANSI procedures are in place.

Issues with definitions, covered products and sampling.

EPA mercury disposal requirements may apply.

Mercury vapor lamps being replaced by metal halide and high pressure

sodium lamps.

Concern about non-equitable impact of possible elimination of mercury

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

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

fixture replacement).

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Determination -

Rationale for Priority

Level

Determination required by EPACT.

10 Based on DOE rough estimate, May 1996.

23 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards Determination 

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings [0.11-0.22]10 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

1995·2030 

Potential Economic Not Available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

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

minimal. 

Status of Required IES and ANSI procedures are in place. 

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

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA mercury disposal requirements may apply. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

Driven or Voluntary sodium lamps. 

Efficiency Improvements 

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

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

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

fixture replacement). 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Determination -

Rationale for Priority Determination required by EPACT. 

Level 

10 Based on DOE rough estimate, May 1996. 

23 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I Test Procedure need to be changed for standard

Standard

Priority of Standard I Low

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

Dependant on determination

24 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp 

Priority: Low 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Dependant on determination 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

24 

'-

Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Not Available.

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens.

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Not Available.

Not Available.

IES and ANSI procedures are in place, DOE test procedure Final Rule

issued 5/29/97

Existing EPA mercury disposal requirements apply, but EPA is considering

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

hazardous waste designation or an inclusion of lamps into the Universal

Waste Rule.

EPA Green lights, Energy Star Buildings, ASHRAE 90.1, and some utility

DSM programs, FEMP.

Because lamps are components of systems, establishment of standards is

more difficult.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

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

amending current lamp standards and 1999 for, adding additional general

service fluorescent and incandescent lamps.

25 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards, 

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings Not Available. 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not Available. 

BenefitslBurdens . 

Potential Environmental Not Available. 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

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

Changes to Test issued 5/29/97 

Procedures 

Other Regu.atory Actions Existing EPA mercury disposal requirements apply, but EPA is considering 

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

hazardous waste designation or an inclusion of lamps into the Universal 

Waste Rule. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

Driven or Voluntary DSM programs, FEMP. 

Efficiency Improvements 

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

more difficult. 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

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

amending current lamp standards and 1999 for· adding additional general 

service fluorescent and incandescent lamDs. 

25 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

Final Rule issued 5/29/97

26 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent 

Priority: Low 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued 5/29/97 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

26 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1998-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Total range considered: [ 0.1 - 0.6 ] " Specific examples below:

Imprv. fan

Imprv. fan motor & burner

motor box damper Condensing (91.7

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

Imprv. fan motor,

ht. exchgr.,

Imprv. fan Imprv. fan condens. & full

motor motor modulation

Oil 82.1% AFUE 82.1% AFUE 93.7% AFUE

0.1 0.1 0.5

( (0.8) - 0.11 NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

0.1 0.1 (0.2)

so, 16 17 4

NOx 15 16 4

CO2 9 9 2

Emission reductions in (kt) for SO 2 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO,

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

None known that will impact product.

None known.

Venting safety issue. Fuel switching. Limited space for installation.

Low

oe Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are low to moderate. Manufacturers recommend

Level packaging mobile home furnaces with residential furnaces. Higher standards

levels requiring technologies, such as condensing furnaces would impact

utility to consumers. Other standard levels may cause safety concerns due to

venting issues.

11

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

27 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

1998-2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitsfBurdens 

Potential Environmental 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Total range considered: [ 0.1 - 0.6 ]11 

Imprv.fan 

motor 

Gas 76.6% ARJE 

Oil 

Imprv. fan 

motor 

82.1%ARJE 

0.1 

motor 

82.1%ARJE 

0.1 

Specific examples below: 

Imprv. fan motor, 

ht. exchgr., 

condens. & full 

modulation 

93.7%ARJE 

0.5 

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

0.1 0.1 

S02 16 

NOx 15 

CO2 9 

Emission reductions in 

Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

None known. 

17 

16 

9 

4 

4 

2 

ProDosed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are low to moderate .. Manufacturers recommend 

Level packaging mobile home furnaces with residential furnaces. Higher standards 

levels requiring technologies, such as condensing furnaces would impact 

utility to consumers. Other standard levels may cause safety concerns due to 

venting issues. 

11 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

27 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

28 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces 

Priority: Low 

Test Procedure 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatine: Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

28 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings

Priority: Low

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

from Regulatory Action ; energy savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Not available.

Not available.

None.

None known.

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

carefully considered.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

Level A112.18.1 and ASME/ANSI A112.19.6.

29 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Plumbing FixtureslFittings 

Priority: Low 

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

from Regulatory Action; energy savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental Not available. 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions None. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market- None known. 

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

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

carefully considered. 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

, Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

Level Al12.18.1 and ASME/ANSI Al12.19.6. 

29 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties.

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Proposed Rule issued -

Final Rule - Fall 1997

Rationale for Priority This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is

Level ublished. Once the final rule is ublished it will become a low riorit .

30 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Plumbing FixturesIFittings 

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

Relationship to Changes in 

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties. 

Statutory Deadline 

IsSues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Proposed Rule issued -

Final Rule - Fall 1997 

Rationale for Priority This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is 

Level llublished. Once the final rule is published it will become a low priority. 

30 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas)

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

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

IID, (78% E,.) Non-cond. Limit, (82.2% E.) Condensing, (90.8%E,)

0.2 0.4 0.7

Potential Economic [ (1.4) - 0.2 1 NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens 0.2 0.2

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

(0.6)

SO2 0 0 0

NOx 42 42 42

CO2 11 18 35

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

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

None known that will impact product.

None known.

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

Level savings are low.

12

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

31 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

2000-2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental 

or Energy Security 

Benefits 

Status of Required 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Re~ulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues 

FY 1997 Priority 

Standards 

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

TID, (78% Er) Non-cond. Limit, (82.2% Er) Condensing, (90.8% Er) 

0.2 0.4 0.7 

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

0.2 0.2 (0.6) 

S02 0 0 0 

NOx 42 42 42 

CO2 11 18 35 

Emission reductions in (kt) for SOo and NOx, and (Mt) for COo. 

Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

. None known that will impact product. 

None known. 

Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

Work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

Level savin!!s are low. 

12 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

31 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas)

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

I Level

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

32 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Relationship to Changes in 

Standard 

Priority of Standard 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Test Procedure 

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard. 

Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

32 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Refrigerators, Refrigerator/Freezers, & Freezers

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1998-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

Total range considered: [ 5.0 - 12.6113 Specific examples below:

2003 Alternative Joint Comments Highest Level

Refrigerators 5.0 7.0 10.6

Freezers included above 0.5 2.0

[ TBD - 9.1 1 NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7%.

Refrigerators not available 7.7 7.8

Freezers not available 0.5 1.3

Significant investment by manufacturers and questionable pass-through

costs to consumers.

SO2 not available 1017 1720

NOx not available 1065 1635

CO2 not available 540 914

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

No changes required for standards.

EPA phaseout of insulation HCFCs in 2003.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Super Efficient Refrigerator Program (Golden Carrot). New York Housing

Authority mass procurement. Energy Savers program. Significant quantity

of new high efficiency models are being marketed.

Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997

High.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 4/28/97

Rationale for Priority

Level

Rule issued.

13

Based on July 1995, TSD and April 1996 additional scenarios.

33 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Refrigerators, RefrigeratorlFreezers, & Freezers 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 5.0 - 12.6 ]13 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 2003 Al~math:~ Joint Cornmentf! Higb~t l&veI. 

1998-2030 Refrigerators 5.0 7.0 10.6 

Freezers included above 0.5 2.0 

Potential Economic [TBD -9.1 ] NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7%. 

BenefitslBurdens Refrigerators not available 7.7 7.8 

Freezers not available 0.5 1.3 

Significant investment by manufacturers and questionable pass-through 

costs to consumers. 

Potential Environmental S02 not available 1017 1720 

or Energy Security NOx not available 1065 1635 

Benefits CO2 not available 540 914 

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

Status of Required No changes required for standards. 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout of insulation HCFCs in 2003. 

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

Driven or Voluntary Authority mass procurement. Energy Savers program. Significant quantity 

Efficiency Improvements of new high efficiency models are being marketed. 

Issues Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997 

FY 1997 Priority High. 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 4/28/97 

Rationale for Priority Rule issued. 

Level 

13 Based on July 1995. TSD and April 1996 additional scenarios. 

33 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Refrigerators, Refrigerator/Freezers, & Freezers

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard, except for vented

refrigerator.

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

Final rule for vented refrigerator - 8/97

34 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Refrigerators, RefrigeratorlFreezers, & Freezers 

Priority: Low 

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

Standard refrigerator. 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final rule for vented refrigerator - 8/97 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

34 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: Medium

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Total range considered: [ 2.0 - 13.1 1 14 Specific examples below:

Cumulative (Quads) 111SEER 12 SEER 14 SEES LEER '5

1995-2030 2.0 4.0 8.2 13.1

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

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

not avail. not avail. 8.1 (19.8)

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

Changes required for standards.

EPA phaseout of HCFC-22 refrigerant.

DOE regulation of furnaces.

Energy Star program recommending a 12 SEER.

ARI rejected the engineering analysis methodology.

Regional variation.

Medium

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

conducting a screening workshop for a standards rulemaking

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are large, but EPA regulation of HCFCs warrants

Level caution on rulemaking, although in FY 97 preliminary work can be

performed.

14

15

Based on DOE analysis, January 5, 1995.

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

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

35 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: Medium 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 2.0 - 13.1 ] 14 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 11 ~EER 12 SEER HSEER 16 SEER 15 

1995-2030 2.0 4.0 8.2 13.1 

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

BenefitslBurdens not avail. not avail. 8.1 (19.8) 

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

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

Benefits emission benefits that are likely to be possibl~. Expected·oil savings are 

minimal. 

Status of Required Changes required for standards. 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

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

DOE regulation of furnaces. 

Recommendations by . 

Interested Parties 

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

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues ARI rejected the engineering analysis methodology. 

Regional variation. 

FY 1997 Priority Medium 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

conducting a screening workshop for a standards rulemaking 

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are large, but EPA regulation of HCFCs warrants 

Level 

14 

15 

caution on rulemaking, although in FY 97 preliminary work can be 

performed. 

Based on DOE analysis, January 5, 1995. 

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

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

35 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Residential Central. Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure needs to be changed for standard

Many changes to accommodate new technology.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Workshop - 8/97

NOPR - 10/97

Rationale for Priority Work is almost complete for draft of new test procedure.

Level

36 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Medium 

International or Other 

Coordinating Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues Many changes to accommodate new technology. 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Workshop - 8/97 

NOPR-: 10/97 

Rationale for Priority Work is almost complete for draft of new test procedure. 

Level 

36 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

Total range considered: [ 0.6 - 10.2

Gas

Furnaces

Insul., IID, imprv.

fan motor, & two

stage oper.

(81.8% AFUE)

Gas

Boilers

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

III)

(81.8% AFUE)

0.6

Not available.

16 Specific examples below:

Previous &

condensing

(92% AFUE)

III) & pulse

condensing

(90.4% AFUE)

3.7

Gas

absorption

heat pump

Gas

absorption

heat pump

10.2

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

more significant than other products.

Final rule issued 5/12/97

Possible State and regional environmental regulation (e.g. air quality). DOE

regulation of central air conditioning products. Consumer Product Safety

Commission - possible regulation

Energy Star program. Wisconsin state condensing furnace/boiler program.

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

Venting safety issue. Regional analysis. Industry opposes Gas absorption

heat pump as a design option, suggest new product class

Low

Pr oe Schedule1 n Rationale

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

work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of

voluntary programs.

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

Level requiring technologies, such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to

consumers. High standard levels may cause safety concerns due to venting

issues.

16

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

37 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0.6 - 10.2 ]16 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; Insul., TID, imprv. Cumulative (Quads) fan motor, & two Previous & Gas 

2000-2030 Gas stageoper. condensing absorption 

Furnaces (81.8% AFUE) 1(92%AFUE) heat pump 

lID & pulse Gas 

Gas TID condensing absorption 

Boilers (81.8% AFUE) 1(90.4% AFUE) heat pump 

0.6 3.7 10.2 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslB urdens 

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

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

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

more significant than other products. 

Status of Required Final rule issued 5/12/97 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

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

regulation of central air conditioning products. Consumer Product Safety 

Cortunission - possible regulation 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

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

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues Venting safety issue. Regional analysis. Industry opposes Gas absorption 

heat pump as a design option, suggest new product class 

FY 1997 Priority Low 

ProDosed Schedule and Rationale 

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

work would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of 

voluntary programs. 

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

Level requiring technologies, such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to 

consumers. High standard levels may cause safety concerns due to venting 

issues. 

16 Based on OOE rough estimate for gas only, May 1996. 

37 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

Final rule issued 5/12/97

38 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers 

Priority: Low 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatin~ Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final rule issued 5/12/97 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

38 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1996-2030 (Electric)

1999-2030 (Gas/Oil)

Total ranges considered:

Gas & Oil: [0.4-16.5]5

Specific examples below:

R16 R25 Insul.,

Insul. & flue baffle

Heat & III) w/ CondenGas Traps flue damp. sing

1" Foam

Insul. & 2" Foam

Heat Insul. &

Previous

& Mult.

Oil Tra s I Heat Traps I Flue

1.7

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test,

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priori

5.9 16.5

Electric: [ 0.1 - 41.1 ] 17

Electric

Rd. Ht. imprv.

Leak, Ht. resist. &

Traps & Add-on

Insul. Heat Pump

(imprv.

resist.)

0.6 1 28.2

[ 0.7 - 26.0 1 NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7%

1.7 (1.6) (12.1) 0.8 39.6

imprv.

resist. &

Integral

Heat Pump

41.1

38.0

SO2 (14) (327) (2406) 132 4897 7093

NOx (12) (596) (2261) 107 4450 6365

CO2 (6) (634) (1238) 54 2372 3332

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

based on 1993 analysis, and includes oil, gas and electric.

Changes required for standards. Final rule for test procedures expected

Summer 1997.

EPA phaseout of HCFCs for insulation (2003). Possible State and regional

environmental regulation (e.g. air quality). Consumer Product Safety

Commission requirement for vapor ignition issue.

Fuel switching. Venting safety issues. Lack of infrastructure for HP water

heater. Diverse range of hot water usage among households.

High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 06/98

Final Rule - 12/98

Rationale for Priority

Level

17 Based on DOE analysis June 29, 1995, for gas/oil water heaters and 1993 TSD for Eight Product NOPR for electric water

heaters. Low energy savings for improved resistance electric water heaters result from an aggressive market induced efficiency

assumption.

39 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric 

Priority: High 

Potential Energy Savings Total ranges considered: 

from Regulatory Action; Gas & Oil: [0.4 - 16.5 ]5 Electric: [0.1 - 41.1 ]17 

Cumulative (Quads) Specific examples below: 

1996-2030 (Electric) . Electric 1999-2030 (Gas/Oil) !R16 R25 Insul., Rd. Ht. imprv. imprv. 

Insul. & flue baffle Leak, Ht. resist. & resist. & 

Heat &IIDw/ Conden- Traps & Add-on Integral 

Gas Traps flue damp. sing Insul. Heat Pump Heat Pump 

I"Poam 

(imprv. 

resist.) 

Insul. & 2"Poam Previous 

Heat Insul. & & Mult. 

Oil Traps Heat Traps Flue 

1.7 5.9 16.5 0.6 28.2 41.1 

Potential Economic [ 0.7 - 26.0 ] NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens 1.7 (1.6) (12.1) 0.8 39.6 38.0 

Potential Environmental S02 (14) (327) (2406) 132 4897 7093 

or Energy Security NOx (12) (596) (2261) 107 4450 6365 

Benefits CO2 (6) (634) (1238) 54 2372 3332 

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

based on 1993 analysis, and includes oil, gas and electric. 

Status of Required Changes required for standards. Final rule for test procedures expected 

Changes to Test. Summer 1997. 

Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phaseout ofHCFCs for insulation (2003). P9ssible State and regional 

environmental regulation (e.g. air qUality). Consumer Product Safety 

Commission requirement for vapor ignition issue. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues Fuel switching. Venting safety issues. Lack of infrastructure for HP water 

heater. Diverse range of hot water usage among households. 

FY 1997 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule NOPR- 06/98 

Final Rule - 12/98 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

17 Based on DOE analysis June 29, 1995, for gas/oil water heaters and 1993 TSD for Eight Product NOPR for electric water 

heaters. Low energy savings for improved resistance electric water heaters result from an aggressive market induced efficiency 

assumption. 

39 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure needs to be changed for standard

Hig

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - Summer 1997

Rationale for Priority

Level

This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is

ublished. Once the final rule is ublished it will become a low riorit .

40 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric 

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

Relationship to Changes in 

Standard 

International or Other 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - Summer 1997 

Rationale for Priority This test procedure will remain a high priority until the final rule is 

Level published. Once the final rule is published it will become a low priority. 

40 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards

Product: Room Air Conditioners

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 0.4 - 1.0

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) Level

2000 -2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priori

Specific examples below:

4 5 New Lv119

1.0 0.7 0.5

(0.3) (10.9) 0.5

Certain standard levels could require costly chassis changes and eliminate

niche products.

1

0.4 0.5

3

0.7

[ (10.9) - 0.61 NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

0.4 0.5 0.6

SO2 59 86 ill 149 33 79

NOx 55 80 104 141 51 , 74

CO2 30 44 57 79 51 41

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

Not required for standards.

EPA phaseout of HCFC-22 refrigerant.

DSM programs. Labeling program very effective.

High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 10/97

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

Level moderate and based on,incremental technology. Limited DOE resources

needed to complete rulemakng. This rulemaking will remain high priority

until the final rule is published. Once the final rule is published, it will

become a low priority.

18 Based on DOE report, April 1996.

19 The EER's corresponding to the "New Lvl" are the same as those published in the Federal Register Notice - FR Jan 29, 1997

"Limited Reopening of the record and opportunity for public comment"

41 Draft June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards 

Product: Room Air Conditioners 

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [ 0.4 - 1.0 j18 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) Level 1 2 3 ~ 5 N~Lv119 

2000 -2030 0.4 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.5 

Potential Economic [ (10.9) - 0.6] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens 0.4 0.5 0.6 (0.3) (10.9) 0.5 

Certain standard levels could require costly chassis changes and eliminate 

niche products. 

Potential Environmental S02 59 86 111 149 33 79 

or Energy Security NOx 55 80 104 141 51 74 

Benefits CO2 30 44 57 79 51 41 

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

Status of Required Not required for standards. 

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

Other Regulatorv Actions EPA phaseout ofHCFC-22 refrigerant. 

Recommendations hy 

Interested Parties 

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

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiencv Improvements 

Issues 

FY 1997 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - 10/97 

Rationale for Priority Interested PartieS recommended high priority. Potential energy ,savings are 

Level moderate and based on.incremental technology. Limited DOE resources 

needed to complete rulemaking. This rulemaking will remain high priority 

until the final rule is published. Once the final rule is published, it will 

become a low priority. 

18 Based on DOE report, April 1996. 

19 The EER's corresponding to the "New LvI" are the same as those published in the Federal Register Notice - FR Jan 29, 1997 

"Limited Reopening of the record and opportunity for public comment" 

41 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Room Air Conditioners

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Hig

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority

Level

42 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Room Air Conditioners 

Priority: Low 

Test Procedure 

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard 

International or Other 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

42 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Standards Determination

Product: Small Electric Motors

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

1998-2030

Potential Economic

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental

or Energy Security

Benefits

Status of Required

Changes to Test

Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of MarketDriven or Voluntary

Efficiency Improvements

Issues

FY 1997 Priority

[0.8-4.5120

Not available.

Specific estimates of emission reductions have not been developed however,

estimated energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative

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

minimal.

IEEE test procedure for single-phase induction motors is under review.

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

exempt.

None known.

None.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

conducting a screening workshop for a standards rulemaking.

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are moderate. Determination required by EPACT.

Level

20 Based on draft DOE report, May 1996.

43 Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Standards Determination 

Product: Small Electric Motors 

Priority: Low 

Potential Energy Savings [O.8-4.5fo 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

1998-2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitsIB urdens 

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

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

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

minimal. 

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

Changes to Test 

Procedures 

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

exempt. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market- NoneknoWll. 

Driven or Voluntary 

Efficiency Improvements 

Issues None. 

FY 1997 Prior!ty Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

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

conducting a screening workshop for a standards rulemaking. 

Rationale for Priority Potential energy savings are moderate. Determination required by EPACT. 

Level 

20 Based on draft DOE report, May 1996. 

43 Draft - June 27, 1997 
Test Procedure

Product: Small Electric Motors

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Dependant on Determination

Rationale for Priority

i Level

Draft - June 27, 1997

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 25

Product: Small Electric Motors 

Priority: Low 

Relationship to Changes in 

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatin2 Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Test Procedure 

Proposed Schedule Dependant on Detennination 

Rationale for Priority 

Level 

44 Draft - June 27, 1997