CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT

................................................................................. 1-1

1.2 OVERVIEW OF STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISHWASHERS, DEHUMIDIFIERS, AND COOKING PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL

CLOTHES WASHERS

................................................................................................... 1-1

1.3 PROCESS FOR SETTING ENERGY CONERVATION STANDARDS

...................... 1-3

1.4 STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT

............................................................................ 1-9

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.3.1 Analyses Under the Process Rule

........................................................................ 1-5

Table 1.3.2 Proposed Energy Conservation Sta ndards for Cooking Products and

Commercial Clothes Washers for the NOPR

....................................................... 1-7

Table 1.3.3 Proposed Energy Conservation St andards for Comme rcial Clothes

Washers for the SNOPR

...................................................................................... 1-9

1-iCHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE DOCUMENT

This technical support document (TSD) is a st and-alone report that provides the technical analyses and results in support of the informa tion presented in the final rule establishing amended energy conservation standards for co mmercial clothes washer s (CCWs). The TSD for DOE’s notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) also covered conventi onal cooking products ( i.e.

, cooktops and ovens), microwave oven energy fa ctor (EF), and microwa ve oven standby power consumption (which along with CCWs are referred to as “the considered products”.) Energy

conservation standards for c onventional cooking products a nd microwave oven EF were addressed in a final rule, pub lished April 8, 2009 (74 FR 16040; the “April 2009 Final Rule”), accompanied by a final rule TSD. The impact of more efficient equipment on microwave oven standby power will be addressed in a subsequent TSD.

1.2 OVERVIEW OF STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DISHWASHERS,

DEHUMIDIFIERS, AND COOKING PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL

CLOTHES WASHERS

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) established an energy conservation program for major household appliances. The National Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978 (NECPA) amended EPCA to add Part C of Title III (42

U.S.C. 6311–6317), which established an energy conservation program for certain industrial equipment. Additional amendments to EPCA have given the Department of Energy (DOE) the authority to regulate the energy efficiency of several products, including residential dishwashers, dehumidifiers, and cooking pr oducts and CCWs—the products that are the focus of this

document. The amendments to EPCA in the Na tional Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA) established prescriptive energy conservation standards for dishwashers and cooking products, as well as requirements for determining whether these standards should be amended. (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) The amendments to EPCA in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005), P.L. 109-58, included provisions that expanded DOE’s energy conservation program to include certain residential pr oducts and commercial equipment, including

dehumidifiers and CCWs.

NAECA established prescriptive standards fo r gas cooking products, requiring gas ranges and ovens with an electrical supply cord not to be equipped with consta nt burning pilots, and directed DOE to conduct two cycles of rulemakings to determine if more stringent standards are justified. a (42 U.S.C. 6295(h)(1)–(2)) DOE initially analyzed standards for cooking products as

a DOE is required to conduct two cycles of rulemakings for both gas and electric cooking products.

1-1part of an eight-product sta ndards rulemaking. It issued a NOPR on March 4, 1994, proposing performance standards for gas and electric resi dential cooking products, including microwave ovens. 59 FR 10464. In accordance with the July 15, 1996, Procedures for Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Products (the “Process Rule”), 61 FR 36974 (July 15, 1996), DOE refined its standards analys is of cooking products. With regard to gas cooking products, DOE focused on the economic justification for elimina ting standing pilots. Partially due to the difficulty of conclusively demonstrating that elimination of standing pilots was economically justified, DOE issued a fina l rule on September 8, 1998, that covered only electric cooking products, including microwave ovens. 63 FR 48038. That final rule found that no standards were justified for electric cooking products. DOE never comp leted that standards rulemaking for gas cooking products.

NAECA also established prescriptive standard s for dishwashers, requiring that they be equipped with an option to dry without heat, a nd further required that DOE conduct two cycles of rulemakings to determine if more stringent standards are justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(g)(1), (4), (5)) On May 14, 1991, DOE issued a final rule establishing the first set of performance standards for dishwashers; the new standards be came effective on May 14, 1994. 56 FR 22250. DOE initiated a second standards rulemaking for di shwashers by issuing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANOPR) on November 14, 1994. 59 FR 56423. As a result of the prioritysetting process outlined in the Process Rule, DOE suspended the standards rulemaking for dishwashers. The Energy Independence and S ecurity Act of 2007 (EISA 2007; Pub. L. No. 110

- 140) amended EPCA to establis h revised energy conservati on standards for residential dishwashers. (42 U.S.C. 6295(g)(9)) These EI SA 2007 amendments set energy efficiency standards for these products, effective January 1, 2010; therefore, DOE did not adopt standards for residential dishwashers in the April 2009 Final Rule, nor is addressi ng standards for these products in this final rule. Instead, DOE has codifi ed these statutory standards in a separate final rule, published March 23, 2009 (the “M arch 2009 Final Rule). 74 FR 12058.

Dehumidifiers are products first covered by EPACT 2005, which established standards for these products with an effective date of October 1, 2007. (Section 135(c)(4)) EPACT 2005 also required that DOE issue a final rule by October 1, 2009, to determine whether these

standards should be amended. If amended sta ndards were justified, EPACT 2005 required them to become effective by October 1, 2012. In the ev ent that DOE failed to publish a final rule by October 1, 2009, EPACT 2005 specified a new set of amended standards with an effective date of October 1, 2012. EISA 2007 amended EPCA to establish revised energy conservation standards for dehumidifiers, effective Oc tober 1, 2012. (42 U.S.C. 6295(cc)) As with dishwashers, DOE did not adopt standards for de humidifiers in the Apr il 2009 Final Rule, nor is addressing standards for these products in this final rule. Instead, DOE has codified these statutory standards in the March 2009 Final Rule. 74 FR 12058.

Like dehumidifiers, CCWs are equipmen t first covered by EPACT 2005. EPACT 2005

established standards for CCWs with an eff ective date of January 1, 2007. (Section 136(e)) EPACT 2005 also requires that DOE issue a final rule by January 1, 2010, to determine whether

these standards should be amended.

1-21.3 PROCESS FOR SETTING ENERGY CONERVATION STANDARDS

Under EPCA, when DOE evaluates new or am ended standards, it must consider, to the greatest extent practicable, the following seve n factors (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)):

1) the economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and on the consumers of the products subject to such a standard;

2) the savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered product in the type (or class) compared to any increases in the price of, or in the initial charges for, or maintenance expenses of, th e covered products which are likely to result from the imposition of the standard;

3) the total projected amount of energy, or as applicable, water, savings likely to result directly from the imposition of the standard;

4) any lessening of the utility or the performance of the covered products likely to result from the imposition of the standard;

5) the impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the imposition of the standard;

6) the need for national energy and water conservation; and

7) other factors the Secret ary considers relevant.

Other statutory requirements are set forth in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)–(2)(A), (2)(B)(ii)–(iii), (3)–(4) and 42 U.S.C. 6316(a).

DOE considers the participation of interested parties to be a very important part of the process for setting energy conservation standards. DOE actively encouraged the participation and interaction of all interested parties during the comment period in each stage of the rulemaking. Beginning with the framework document and durin g subsequent comment periods, interactions among interested parties provided a balanced discussion of the in formation that is required for the standards rulemaking.

In conducting energy conservation standard s rulemakings, DOE involves interested parties through formal public notifications ( i.e., Federal Register notices). For this rulemaking, DOE employed the procedures set forth in the Pro cess Rule to the extent they were appropriate for developing energy conservation standards for the considered products. The Process Rule greatly enhances opportunities for public input and improved analytic approaches, and encourages adoption of consensus-based standa rds. The Process Rule provides policies and guidelines for early public review and consultation with interested parties with regard to identifying and screening design options, selecting a proposed standard, and establishing the

1-3final standard. The factors for screening design options include: (1) technological feasibility; (2) practicability to manufacture, in stall, and service; (3) adve rse impacts on product utility or product availability; and (4) advers e impacts on health or safety (Process Rule at section 4(a)(4)).

61 FR 36982.

The Process Rule requires DOE to evaluate uncertainty and variability through the use of scenario or probability analysis, and provides for review by experts and interested parties of the analyses used, including: (1) qualitative and qu antitative analytical methods; (2) economic, engineering, and life-cycle cost (LCC) analyses; and (3) impacts on manufacturers and consumers, national energy savings, the econom y, and the environment. Although the Process Rule specifically applies only to the development of energy conservation standards for consumer products, DOE has decided to apply its procedures to the development of energy conservation

standards for commercial and indus trial equipment as well. See ap pendix A to subpart C of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regula tions Part 430 (10 CFR Part 430).

Before DOE determines whether or not to adopt a proposed energy conservation standard, it must first solicit comments on the proposed standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) Any new or amended standard must be designed to achieve significant ad ditional conservation of energy and be technologically feasible and eco nomically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) To determine whether economic justification exists, DOE must review comments on the proposal

and determine that the benefits of the proposed standard exceed its burdens to the greatest extent practicable, weighing the seven factors listed above. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i))

After the publication of the framework doc ument, the standards rulemaking process involves three additional formal, major public notices, which DOE publishes in the Federal Register. The first of the rulemaking notices is an ANOPR b , which is designed to publicly vet the models and tools used in the rulemaking, and to facilitate public par ticipation before the proposed rule stage. The second notice is a NO PR, which presents a discussion of comments received in response to the ANOPR; analysis of the impacts of standards on consumers, manufacturers, and the nation; DOE’s weighting of these impacts; and the proposed standards. The third notice is the final rule, which presen ts a discussion of comments received in response to the NOPR; the revised analysis of the imp acts of standards; DOE’s weighting of these impacts; the standards DOE is adopting; and the effective dates of the standards.

In April, 2006, DOE published a Rulemaking Framework for Commercial Clothes Washers and Residential Dishwashers, Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products , describing the procedural and analytical approaches DOE anticipated using to evaluate the establishment of

b In energy conservation standards rulemakings in the past, and for this rulemaking, DOE issued an ANOPR following publication of the framework document. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 eliminated the requirement that DOE issue ANOPRs as part of the standards rulemaking process; see EISA 2007, at sec. 307. DOE is now using an alternative process known as the preliminary activities and analyses. The preliminary activities and analyses will provide the same information and ability for public comment as the ANOPR, but without publication of analyses in the Federal Register

.

1-4energy conservation standards for these products. This document is available at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards /

. DOE held a public meeting on April 27, 2006, to discuss procedural and analytical approaches to the rulemaking, and to inform

and facilitate interested parties’ involvement in the rule making process. The analytical framework presented at the public meeting described different analyses, such as the engineering analysis and the LCC and payback period (PBP) analysis, the methods proposed for conducting them, and the relationships among the various an alyses. Table 1.3.1 lists the analyses undertaken and reported in each of the formal public rulemaking documents.

Table 1.3.1 Analyses Under the Process Rule

ANOPR NOPR Final Rule

Market and technology assessment Revised ANOPR analyses Revised analyses

Screening analysis Life-cycle cost sub-group analysis

Engineering analysis Manufacturer impact analysis

Energy and water use determination Utility impact analysis

Markups for equipment price

determination Environmental assessment

Life-cycle cost and payback period analysis Employment impact analysis

Shipments analysis Regulatory impact analysis

National impact analysis

Preliminary manufacturer impact analysis

During the April, 2006, public meeting, inte rested parties commented about the following issues related to the rulemaking: (1) the existing DOE test procedure for microwave ovens; (2) baseline unit definitions for the considered pr oducts; (3) number of product classes for the considered products; (4) consid eration of limiting standby power as a design option for all considered products; (5) technology options for impr oving efficiency for all considered products; (6) type of approach to employ for the engineerin g analysis; (6) efficiency levels to consider for all of the considered products; (7) implications of clothes container volume on CCW efficiency; (8) proposed approaches for specifying typical annual energy and water consumption for all considered products; (9) potential da ta sources for characterizing variability in annual energy and water consumption; (10) typical distribution channels and markups for the considered products; (11) data sources for retail prices; (12) type of approach to employ for the LCC and PBP analyses; (13) variability of forecasted energy and water prices; (14) repair, maintenance, and installation cost relationship to product efficiency; (15) product lifetimes; (16) development of consumer discount rates; (17) purchase price impacts on product shipments; (18) forecasted saturation rates of CCWs; (19) consumer subgroups; (20) water and wastewater utility impacts; and (21) wastewater discharge impacts. Interested parties’ comments submitted during the

1-5Framework Document comment period elaborated on the issues raised at the public meeting. DOE worked with its contractors to address these issues in the analyses.

After the April, 2006, public meeting, as part of the information gathering and sharing process, DOE organized and held interviews w ith manufacturers of the considered products. DOE selected companies that represented produc tion of all types of equipment, ranging from small to large manufacturers, and included both Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) member companies and non-AHAM member companies. DOE had four objectives for these interviews: (1) Solicit feedback on the draf t engineering analysis (including methodology, production costs, manufacturing processes, and findings); (2) solicit feedback on topics related to the preliminary manufacturer impact analysis (MIA ); (3) provide an opportunity, early in the rulemaking process, to express specific concerns to DOE; and (4) foster cooperation between the manufacturers and DOE. There were six general topics related to the preliminary manufacturer impact analysis discussed during each of the interviews: (1) general key issues; (2) shipment projections; (3) capital conversion costs; (4) equi pment mix and profitability; (5) market shares and industry consolidation; and (6) cumulativ e regulatory burden. DOE incorporated the information gathered at the interviews into its engineering analysis (see chapter 5 of the ANOPR TSD) and the preliminary manufacturer impact an alysis (see chapter 13 of the ANOPR TSD). Following the publication of the ANOPR and th e ANOPR public meeting, DOE held additional meetings with manufacturers as part of the c onsultative process for the MIA conducted during the NOPR phase of the rulemaking.

DOE developed spreadsheets for the LCC, PBP, and national impact analyses for each of the considered products in an effort to meet the objectives of the Process Rule. For each product, DOE developed an LCC spreadsheet that calculates the LCC and PBP at various energy efficiency levels. DOE also developed a national impact analysis (NIA) spreadsheet that calculates the national energy savings (NES) and national net present values (NPVs) at various energy efficiency levels. This spreadsheet includes a model that forecasts the impacts of energy efficiency standards at various levels on produc t shipments. All of these spreadsheets are available on the DOE website ( http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards ), within the specific pages for each of the considered products.

On November 15, 2007, DOE published an ANOPR to consider establishing new or revised energy conservation standards for the covered products, and to announce a public meeting to receive comments on a vari ety of issues. 72 FR 64432. This document is available at http:// www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards /

. DOE held a public meeting on December 13, 2007, to provide interested par ties the opportunity to comment on topics including: (1) the proposed product classes; (2) the analytical framework, models, and tools ( e.g. , LCC and NES spreadsheets) that DOE used to perform analyses of the impacts of energy conservation standards; (3) the results of the preliminary analyses; and (4) the candidate energy

conservation standard levels.

After the publication of the ANOPR and the presentation of the ANOPR to interested parties at the public meeting, DOE conducted interviews with manufacturers of the covered products as part of the MIA for the NOPR. There were thirteen general topics discussed during

1-6each of the interviews: (1) general key issues; (2) company overview and organizational characteristics; (3) company fi nancial parameters; (4) production cost breakdown; (5) shipment projections and market shares; (6) equipment mixes; (7) conversion costs; (8) markups and profitability; (9) cumulative regulatory bu rden; (10) exports, foreign competition, and outsourcing; (11) direct employment impact asse ssment; (12) market c onsolidation; and (13) baseline products and different design options.

Subsequent to the ANOPR, DOE revised its preliminary analyses to address public

comments it had received on its ANOPR. In a ddition, DOE conducted all of the analyses identified in Table 1.3.1 that are required for the NOPR phase of the rulemaking.

On October 17, 2008, DOE published a NOPR pr oposing energy conservation standards for the covered products, and to announce a public meeting to receive comments on a variety of issues. 73 FR 62034. In conjunction with the NOPR, DOE also published on its website the complete TSD for the proposed rule, which in corporated the analyses DOE conducted and technical documentation of each analysis, as well as the LCC and NIA spreadsheets. These

documents are available at http:// www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards /

. For the reasons discussed above in section 1.2, DOE did not consider energy conservation standards for dishwashers and dehumidifiers, and instead codified in a separate final rule the standards set by EISA 2007 for these products. 74 FR 12058 (March 23, 2009). The energy conservation standards proposed in the NOPR for the rema ining covered products were as follows:

Table 1.3.2 Proposed Energy Conservation Sta ndards for Cooking Products and

Commercial Clothes Washers for the NOPR

Product Class Proposed Energy Conservation

Standards
Conventional Cooking Products
Gas cooktops/conventional burners No constant burning pilot lights
Electric cooktops/low or high wattage open (coil) elements No standard
Electric cooktops/smooth elements No standard

Gas ovens/standard oven No constant burning pilot lights

Gas ovens/self-clean oven No change to existing standard

Electric ovens No standard

Microwave ovens Maximum standby power = 1.0 watt

Commercial clothes washers

Top-loading commercial clothes wash ers 1.76 Modified Energy Factor / 8.3

Water Factor
Front-loading commercial clothes wash ers 2.00 Modified Energy Factor / 5.5

Water Factor

The NOPR also included additional backgr ound information on the history of this rulemaking and on DOE’s use in this rulemaking of the procedures, inte rpretations, and policies

set forth in the Process Rule. 73 FR 62034, 62038–41 (Oct. 17, 2008). DOE held a public

1-7meeting on November 13, 2008, to hear oral commen ts on and solicit informa tion relevant to the proposed rule.

Based on information provided by interest ed parties at the public meeting and in subsequent written comments, DOE determined that additional analyses would be required to further evaluate energy conservation standard s for CCWs and microwave ovens as to standby power. The EISA 2007 amendments to EPCA requi red DOE to amend the ranges and ovens and microwave oven test procedure to incorporate st andby and off mode energy consumption no later than March 31, 2011. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(B)(vi )) For CCWs, EPCA requires that DOE issue a final rule by January 1, 2010, to determine whet her the existing energy conservation standards should be amended. (42 U.S.C. 6313(e)(2)(A)) B ecause additional analyses were required to resolve issues concerning microwave oven standby power and CCW energy conservation standards and EPCA did not require DOE to take action on these products by March 2009 (as was required under a Consent Decree c for the cooking efficiency for residential electric and gas kitchen ranges and ovens and microwave ovens), DOE continued the rulemaking for these products at the time of the April 2009 Final Rule.

In the April 2009 Final Rule, DOE issued a fi nal rule for energy conservation standards pertaining to cooking efficiency for residential electric and ga s kitchen ranges and ovens and microwave ovens, adopting prescriptive standards for gas cooking products, requiring gas ranges and ovens not to be equipped with constant burning pilots. No en ergy conservation standards for the cooking efficiency for residential electric kitchen ranges and ove ns and microwave ovens were found to be justified, and, therefore, the April 2009 Fina l Rule maintained the “no standard” standard for these produc ts. The effective date for these new standards will be April 8,

2012.

Subsequent to the NOPR, DOE revised its analyses for CCWs to address public

comments it had received on the NOPR. On November 9, 2009, DOE published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNOPR) proposin g revised energy conservation standards for CCWs, and to announce a public meeting to rece ive comments on a variety of issues. 74 FR 57738. In conjunction with the SNOPR, DOE also published on its website the complete TSD for the proposed rule, which incorporated the analyses DOE conducted and technical documentation of each analysis, as well as the LCC and NIA spreadsheets. These documents are available at http:// www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards /

. The energy conservation standards proposed in the SNOPR for CCWs were as follows:

c “Consent Decree” refers to the consolidated Consent Decree in New York v. Bodman , No. 05 Civ. 7807 (S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 7, 2005) and Natural Resources Defense Council v. Bodman , No. 05 Civ. 7808 (S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 7, 2005)

1-8Table 1.3.3 Proposed Energy Conservation Standard s for Commercial Clothes Washers

for the SNOPR
Top-loading commercial clothes wash ers 1.60 Modified Energy Factor / 8.5

Water Factor
Front-loading commercial clothes wash ers 2.00 Modified Energy Factor / 5.5

Water Factor

The SNOPR also included additional back ground information on the history of this rulemaking and on DOE’s use in this rulemaking of the procedures, inte rpretations, and policies

set forth in the Process Rule. 74 FR 57738, 57742–43 (Nov. 9, 2009). DOE held a public meeting on November 16, 2009, to hear oral commen ts on and solicit informa tion relevant to the proposed rule.

Based on information provided by interest ed parties at the public meeting and in subsequent written comments, DOE determined that the amended standards for CCWs proposed in the SNOPR are technologically feasible and economically justified, and is adopting these standards in a final rule published in the Federal Register on January 1, 2010. The effective date for the amended standards is January 1, 2013.

This TSD presents information on the final rule analyses performed in adopting energy

conservation standards for CCWs. A separate final rule for mic rowave ovens pertaining to standby power is planned to be issued as s oon as the revised analyses for that product are complete.

1.4 STRUCTURE OF THE DOCUMENT

This final rule TSD outlines the analytical approaches used in this rulemaking. The TSD consists of seventeen chapters and appendices.

Chapter 1 Introduction: provides an overv iew of the applianc e standards program and how it applies to this rulemaking, and outlines the structure of the

document.

Chapter 2 Analytical Framework: describes the rulemaking process.

Chapter 3 Market and Technology Assessm ent: characterizes the market for all considered products in this rulema king and the technologies available for increasing product efficiency.

Chapter 4 Screening Analysis: determines which CCW design options are viable for consideration in the engineering analysis.

1-9Chapter 5 Engineering Analysis: discusse s the methods used for developing the relationship between increased CCW manufacturer cost and increased efficiency.

Chapter 6 Energy and Water Use Determin ation: discusses the process used for generating energy- and water-use estimates for CCWs as a function of

standard levels.

Chapter 7 Markups for Equipment Price Determination: disc usses the methods used for establishing markups for converting manufacturer costs to customer retail prices.

Chapter 8 Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis: discusses the effects of

standards on individual customers and users of the equipment and compares the LCC and PBP of equipment with and without higher energy conservation standards.

Chapter 9 Trial Standard Le vels: discusses the trial st andard levels and methods used to derive the energy-efficien cy equations corresponding to the energy conservation standards.

Chapter 10 Shipments Analysis: discusses the methods used for forecasting shipments with and without higher e fficiency standards, including how equipment purchase decisions are economically influenced and how

DOE models this relationshi p with econometric equations.

Chapter 11 National Impact Analysis: disc usses the methods used for forecasting national energy consumption and national economic impacts based on estimates of future equipment efficiency, new construction and building starts, and annual equipmen t sales in the absence and presence of higher efficiency standards.

Chapter 12 Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Anal ysis: discusses the effects of standards on different subgroups of consumers and compares the LCC and PBP of equipment with and without higher efficiency standards for these

consumers.

Chapter 13 Manufacturer Impact Analys is: discusses the financial impact of amended energy conservation standards on manufacturers.

Chapter 14 Utility Impact Analysis: discusses the effects of standards on electric and gas utilities.

Chapter 15 Employment Impact Analysis : discusses the effects of standards on national employment.

1-10Chapter 16 Environmental Assessment: disc usses the effects of amended energy

conservation standards on three pollutants—sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), nitrogen oxides (NO

x ), and mercury (Hg)—as well as carbon emissions.

Chapter 17 Regulatory Impact Analysis: discusses the present regulatory actions as well as the impact of non-regulatory alternatives to setting new energy

conservation standards.

Appendix 5A AHAM Data Sub mittal: presents the data provided by AHAM to DOE

for CCWs.

Appendix 8A User Instructions for LCC a nd PBP Spreadsheets: briefly describes the LCC and PBP spreadsheets for CCWs and provides brief user instructions on how to operate the spreadsheets.

Appendix 8B Uncertainty and Variability: discusses how DOE uses uncertainty and variability to characterize the inputs to the LCC and PBP analysis.

Appendix 8C Lifetime Distributions: discusses how equipment lifetimes are characterized with Weibull probability distributions.

Appendix 10A Relative Price Elasticity of Demand for Appliances: describes the analysis that DOE conducted to determine the consumer sensitivity to appliance purchase price changes as well as operating cost changes and

household income.

Appendix 11A User Instructions for Shipment s and NIA Spreadsheets: briefly describes the shipments and national impact analysis (NIA) spreadsheets for CCWs and provides brief user inst ructions on how to operate the spreadsheets.

Appendix 11B National Equipment and Opera ting Costs: provides the components to the NPV for CCWs, namely, the present value of the equipment costs and the present value of the operating costs.

Appendix 11C Market Segment Sensitivity Analysis: describes the analysis DOE conducted to characterize the sensitivity of the NIA and MIA analyses to the estimated market share distribution of CCW shipments.

Appendix 13A The Low-Volume Manufacturer : discusses the method for estimating the revenue and equipment mix impact on a low-production-volume CCW

manufacturer.

1-11Appendix 13B Government Regulatory Impact Model (GRIM): discusses the method to estimate the change in value of an industry or manufacturers(s) following a regulation or a series of regulations.

Appendix 13C Federal Producti on Tax Credit: discusses th e calculation of industrywide Federal production tax credits and shows the industry impacts including the benefit of the tax credits.

Appendix 14A Interpolation of Utility and Environmental Results from NEMS-BT Output: describes the methodology for using output from NEMS-BT to estimate the utility impact and environmental impact results for equipment standards.

Appendix 17A Regulatory Impact Analysis Supporting Material: pr ovides more detailed information on the data used to conduct the Regulatory Impact Analysis.

1-12