DOE Representa

Pumps Working Group O

Working Group Responsibilities and Interactions with 
2

Agenda• Welcome• Ethics Discussion (DOE General Counsel)

• WG Member Introductions

• Introduction of Facilitator

• Description of Negotiated Rulemakings• Establishment of Ground Rules for Negotiations

• Discussion of Objective and Scope for Negotiations

• Discussion of Issues Surrounding Commercial and Ind

Pumps (time permitting)

• Confirm Meeting Schedule

• Establish Needs for Next Meeting
3

Background

• DOE formed the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal A

Committee (ASRAC) in 2012 to further improve the DOE procesestablishing efficiency standards

• ASRAC is an advisory committee charted by DOE

• ASRAC is solely advisory in nature, with focus on appliance stan

rulemaking issues and solutions

• Committee tasks originate from discussion between DOE and A

members, defining clear goals, timeframe for task completion, a

date for presenting the Committee’s formal recommendations t
4

DOE and ASRAC• As needed, ASRAC will vote to form working groups to investiga

task in detail and gather additional input from stakeholders

– In such cases where ASRAC votes to form a working group, DOE w

Federal Register notice soliciting nominations for members

– Working group efforts are presented to ASRAC and ASRAC deliber

forms recommendations to DOE (working groups never present

recommendations directly to DOE)

• DOE may withdraw a task from ASRAC at any time

• In the event a consensus recommendation is not reached for a 

task within a given timeframe, ASRAC will let DOE know that no

recommendations will be made and it is determined to withdra

give the working group more time

– Without a consensus recommendation from the working group a

affirmation from ASRAC, DOE will proceed with its “normal” rulem

activities
5

ASRAC’s Process Flow

ASRAC

ASR

Wo

“Tas

WG Presents

Update/ Consensus

to ASRAC

Update/ Consensus

ASRAC

Deliberation

Task Discussion

Recommendation

WG Update/

Consensus WG Deliberations

As Decided Decided ‐ Additional Additional

Work from WG As Decided –

Dissolve WG

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

8a

8b
6

Formation of Pumps WG

• EPCA directs DOE to adopt energy conservation standards for

commercial/industrial pumps for which standards would be tech

feasible and economically justified

• The are currently no Federal energy conservation standards for p

• On June 13, 2011 DOE published a Request for Information (RFI) 

information on various issues related to commercial/industrial p

• DOE published a Framework document on February 1, 2013 des

prospective scope for a commercial/industrial pumps rulemakin

• DOE subsequently determined that a negotiated process may be 

effective for this rulemaking

• The ASRAC approved the formation of a WG and a notice of inte

published July 23, 2013 to announce the group and solicit memb

• Members and first meetings announced November 12, 2013
7

Negotiation Process

• As provided in the notice of intent, the following are the basic un

issues and concerns:

– DOE’s need for full compliance with statutory mandates. Congress has mand

establish minimum energy efficiency standards that are technologically feasi

economically justified.

– Balancing the goals and priorities of State regulatory programs and DOE's pr

energy efficiency standards.

– Manufacturers desire that standards not diminish or constrain innovation fo

products.

– Environmental advocates seek to ensure that standards achieve the maximu

savings that are technologically feasible and economically justifiable

• All participants will need to provide DOE with data and an analyt

framework to support deliberations

• DOE will also perform analysis to support the negotiations

• Good faith negotiation required

• Specifics of WG end goals and deadlines will be established in gro
8

EPCA Criteria for Standards Rulemakings

• General criteria are described in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)

• DOE may not prescribe an amended standard that increases the 

allowable energy use of a covered product

• Any new or amended standard must be designed to achieve the m

savings that DOE determines are technologically feasible and eco

justifiable

• In determining whether a standard is economically justified, DOE 

determine whether the benefits would exceed the burdens, cons

– The economic impact of the standard on manufacturers and consumers of th

subject to the standard

– The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the p

compared to any increase in the price or maintenance expenses of the produ

– The total projected energy savings that would result from the standard

– Any lessening of the utility or performance of the covered products likely to 

the imposition of the standard

– The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in writing from th

General, that is likely to result from the imposition of the standard

– The need for national energy conservation

– Other factors DOE considers relevant
9

DOE Rulemaking Process

Rulemaking Process Steps

Framework

Document

Preliminary

Analysis

Notice of

Proposed

Rulemaking

(NOPR)

Final

Rule

• DOE published a Federal Register notice on February 1, 2013 anno

availability of the framework document

• Preliminary analysis examines the issues in the framework docum

provides the underlying analytical basis for proposed standard lev

• If the WG reaches agreement on proposed standards, these would 

to the ASRAC and, if accepted, published in a NOPR

• After receiving public comments on the NOPR, DOE may publish a 
10

Rulemaking Analysis

Market &Technology

ScreeningAnalysis

EngineeringAnalysis

Energy UseCharacterization

ShipmentsAnalysis

Markups forEquipment PriceDetermination

Life‐Cycle

Cost and

Payback

Period Analysis

Framework

Document

Preliminary

Analysis NOPR Final Rule