YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Department Energy

Washington, DC 20585

July 25, 2000

FISCAL YEAR 2001 PRIORITIES FOR THE

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS

The enclosed data sheets provide information relating to the Department of Energy (Departmen_t), Office of

Building Research and Standards (Office) proposed rulemaking priorities for FY 2001. The Office requests

comments on the information contained in the data sheets, the proposed priorities, and the proposed schedules.

The proposed priorities are based on the presumption that the fighting and A ppliance Standards Program will

be funded at its requested level for the fiscal year 2001. The Department will' base its final priorities on

consideration of comments received and funds available . If. based on the comments received , the Department

considers changing the priorities from these proposed, it will consult with interested parties before establishing

final priorities.

The priority levels will assist the Department in determining the allocation of available resources during the

coming year. The Department plans to devote considerable resources to each high -priority rulemaking, for

activities including the preparation of technical feasibility and economic impact analyses, the conduct of public

meetings, and the issuance of various rulemaking notices , as appropriate.

For the medium-priority products. the Department intends to conduct preliminary screening and analyses. The

Department does not intend to devote significant resources to low-priority products . Work on low-priority

product categories will be limited to certification and compliance enforcement.

On May 15, 2000 , the Department published in the Federal Register a summary of the energy and economic

impacts of the standards for commercial heating , air-conditioning and water heating equipment found in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999, and requested comments on which ASHRAE standards to adopt. The

Department is considering these comments, and requests, as part of the priority setting process, comments on

whether to adopt the ASHRAE Standard 90 . 1-1999 efficiency levels. The ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999 levels

are estimated to save 2 .2 quads and more stringent standards are estimated to save as much as an additional 0.8

quarts energy. The full rulemaking process requires several years for a final rule , and several additional years

before the effective dates, so the cumulative energy savings would be diminished by the delay.

In particular, the Department is interested in receiving comments , data, and information respecting energy

savings for split system and single package commercial air conditioners and heat pumps 65,000 Btu/h to

135,000 Btu/h. Our preliminary screening analysis indicates that 1 .3 quads of energy would be saved from

2001-2030 by adopting now the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999 efficiency levels . While our

preliminary analysis shows no additional savings for this class, we received comment on the May 15 Federal

Re ig ster notice that higher efficiencies , at lower cost than we estimated , can be achieved. We seek additional

information on possible energy savings of more stringent standards and the energy savings that would be lost by

the delay in the effective date of any standard set by the Department through a rulemaking.

Written comments should be submitted by letter or by e-mail not later than August 17, 2000 . The mailing

address is: U.S . Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121, Attn:

Michael Raymond, EE-41. The e-mail address is: michael.raymond@ee.doe.gov.

The final priorities will be reflected in the Regulatory Agenda . After publication of the Regulatory Agenda,

the Department will provide copies to interested parties. If you have anquestions, please contact Michael

Raymond by telephone at (202) 586-9611 , by telefacsimile at: (202) 586-4617, or by e-mail at the

aforementioned address.

Sincerely,

>j. ,^GI ^

award O. Pollock, Jr., Director

Office of Building Research and Standards

Office of Building Technology, State

and Community Programs

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Enclosure

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTIN<S COMMENT 01 

Department of Energy 

Washington, DC 20585 

FISCAL YEAR 2001 PRIORITIES FOR THE 

APPLIANCE STAl'I'DARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS 

July 25, 2000 

The enclosed data sheets provide information relating to the Department of Energy (Department), Office of 

Building Research and Standards (Office) proposed iulemaking priorities for FY2001. The Office requests 

comments on the information contained in the data sheets, the proposed priorities, and the proposed schedules. 

The proposed priorities are based on the presumption that the Ligliting and Appliance Stanaaras Program will 

be fUnded at its requested level for the fiscal year 2001. The Department win base its final priorities on 

consideration of comments received and funds available. If, based on the comments received, the Department 

considers changing the priorities from these proposed, it will consult with interested parties before establishing 

final priorities. 

The priority levels will assist the Department in determining the allocation of available resources during the comm~ year. The Department plans to devote considerable resources to each high-priority rulemaking, for 

activitIes including; the preparation of technical feasibility and economic impact analyses, the conduct of public 

meetings, and the Issuance of various rulemaking notices, as appropriate. 

For the medium-priority products, the Department intends to conduct prelimin~ screening and analyses. The 

Department does not intend to devote sigtlificant resources to low-priority products. Work on low-priority 

product categories will be limited to certIfication and compliance enforcement. 

On May 15,2000, the Department published in the Federal Re~ister a summary of the energy and economic 

impacts ofthe standards for commercial heating, air-conditiorung and water heating equipment found in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999, and requested comments on whicn ASHRAE standards to adopt. The 

Department is considering these comments, and requests, as part of the priority setting process, comments on 

whether to adopt the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999 efficiency levels. The ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999 levels 

are estimated to save 2.2 quads and more stringent standards are estimated to save as much as an additional 0.8 

quaas energy~ The full rulemaking process requires several years for a final rule, and several additional years 

Defore the effective dates, so the cumulative energy savings would be diminished by the delay. 

In particular, the Department is interested in receiving comments, data, and information respecting energy 

savings for split system and single package commercIal air conditioners and heat pumps 65,000 BtuIh to 

135,000 Btulh. Our preliminary screening analysis indicates that 1.3 quads of energy would be saved from 

2001-2030 by adoptmg now the revised ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999 efficiency levels. While our 

preliminary analysIs shows no additional savings for this class, we received comment on the May 15 Federal 

Register notice that higher efficiencies, at lower cost than we estimated, can be achieved. We seek additional 

information on possible energy savings of more stringent standards and the energy savings that would be lost by 

the delay in the effective date of any standard set by the Department through a rulemaking. 

Written comments should be submitted by letter or bye-mail not later than August 17, 2000. The mailing 

address is: U.S. Department of Energ).', 1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121, Attn: 

Michael Raymond, EE-41. The e-maIl address is: michael.raymond@ee.doe.gov. 

The final priorities will be reflected in the Regulatory Agenda. After publication of the Regulatory A~enda, 

the Department will provide copies to interested parties. If you have any questions, please contact MIchael 

Raymond by telephone at (202) 586-9611, by telefacsimile at: (202) 586-4617, or bye-mail at the 

aforementioned address. 

Enclosure 

Sincerely, .., A", dAh YLt. 7 ~( ,=c;;tt.. ~w~d O. Pollock, Jr., Director 

Office of Building Research and Standards 

Office of Building Technology, State 

and Community Programs 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

2001 Priority Setting

for

Standards and Test Procedure

Rulemakings

Draft

July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

2001 Priority Setting 

for 

Standards and Test Procedure 

Rulemakings 

Draft 

July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

FISCAL 2001 PRIORITY SETTING FOR THE

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS

The enclosed data sheets reflect the priorities proposed for Fiscal Year 2001 by the Department

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

the proposed priorities and 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 2001. Final priorities will be based on the Department's consideration of comments

received and funds available. Once rulemakings are completed low priority actions will be added

to the high/medium priority lists.

Written comments should be submitted by July 31, 2000, to the U. S. Department of Energy,

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121 , Attn: Michael Raymond, EE-41,

or by e-mail at Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. If you have any questions, please contact

Michael Raymond at (202) 586-9611.

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

FISCAL 2001 PRIORITY SETTING FOR THE 

APPLIANCE STANDARDS RULEMAKING PROCESS 

The enclosed data sheets reflect the priorities proposed for Fiscal Year 2001 by the Department 

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

the proposed priorities and 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 2001. Final priorities will be based on the Department's consideration of comments 

received and funds available. Once rulemakings are completed low priority actions will be added 

to the high/medium priority lists. 

Written comments should be submitted by July 31,2000, to the U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, D.C. 20585-0121, Attn: Michael Raymond, EE-41 , 

or bye-mail at Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. If you have any questions, please contact 

Michael Raymond at (202) 586-9611. 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Table of Contents

Product Rulemaking Priority Page Product Rulemaking Priority Page

Central A/C & HP 65-240

kBtu

Standards High 1 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts* Standards Low 27

Central A/C & HP, 39, < 65

kBtu

Standards Medium 2 Test Procedures Low 28

Clothes Dryers Standards Low 3 High Intensity Discharge

Lamps

Determination Low 29

Test Procedure Low 4 Test Procedure Low 30

Clothes Washers Standards' High 5 Lamps Standards Low 31

Test Procedure* Low 6 Test Procedure* Low 32

Commercial A/C & Heat

Pumps

Standards' High 7 Mobile Home Furnaces Standards Low 33

Test Procedure' High 8 Test Procedure* Low 34

Commercial Furnaces &

Boilers

Standards' High 9 Packaged Terminal A/C &

Heat Pumps Standards High 35

Gas-Fired Boilers Standards Medium 10 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings Standards Low 36

Commercial Boilers Test Procedure' High 11 Test Procedure* Low 37

Commercial Furnaces Test Procedure' High 12 Pool Heaters (Gas) Standards Low 38

Commercial Water Heaters Standards' High 13 Test Procedure* Low 39

Test Procedure' High 14 Refrigerators Standards* Low 40

Commercial Water Source HP Test Procedure Medium 15 Test Procedure Low 41

Cooking Products - Electric Standards* Low 16 Res. Central A/C and H. P. Standards' High 42

Cooking Products - Gas Standards' High 17 Test Procedure' High 43

Cooking Products Test Procedure* Low 18 Res. Central A/C & HP -

Ductless Split Test Procedure Medium 44

Direct Heating Equipment,

Gas

Standards Low 19 Res. Furnaces and Boilers Standards Medium 45

Test Procedure* Low 20 Test Procedure* Low 46

Dishwashers Standards Low 21 Residential Water Heaters Standards' High 47

Test Procedure' High 22 Test Procedure* Low 48

Distribution Transformers Standards High 23 Room Air Conditioners Standards* Low 49

Test Procedure Low 24 Test Procedure Low 50

Electric Motors, 1-200 HP Standards Low 25 Small Electric Motors Determination High 51

Test Procedure* Low 26 Test Procedure Low 52

I Drops to Low Priority upon completion * Final Rules for these products have been recently published.

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Table of Contents 

Product Rulemaking Priority Page Product Rulemaking Priority Page 

Central AlC & HP 65-240 Standards High 1 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts* Standards Low 27 

kBto 

Central AlC & HP, 3cp, < 65 Standards Medium 2 Test Procedures Low 28 

kBto 

Clothes Dryers Standards Low 3 High Intensity Discharge Determination Low 29 

Lamps 

Test Procedure Low 4 Test Procedure Low 30 

Clothes Washers Standards! High 5 Lamps Standards Low 31 

Test Procedure* Low 6 Test Procedure* Low 32 

Commercial AlC & Heat Standards! High 7 Mobile Horne Furnaces Standards Low 33 

Pumps 

Test Procedure! High 8 Test Procedure* Low 34 

Commercial Furnaces & Standards! High 9 Packaged Terminal AlC & Standards High 35 

Boilers Heat Pumps 

Gas-Fired Boilers Standards Medium 10 Plumbing FixtureslFittings Standards Low 36 

Commercial Boilers Test Procedure! High 11 Test Procedure· Low 37 

Commercial Furnaces Test Procedure! High 12 Pool Heaters (Gas) Standards Low 38 

Commercial Water Heaters Standards! High 13 Test Procedure· Low 39 

Test Procedure! High 14 Refrigerators Standards* Low 40 

Commercial Water Source HP Test Procedure Medium 15 Test Procedure Low 41 

Cooking Products - Electric Standards· Low 16 Res. Central AlC and H. P. Standards! High 42 

Cooking Products - Gas Standards! High 17 Test Procedure! High 43 

Cooking Products Test Procedure* Low 18 Res. Central AlC & HP - Test Procedure Medium 44 Ductless Split 

Direct Heating Equipment, Standards Low 19 Res. Furnaces and Boilers Standards Medium 45 

Gas 

Test Procedure* Low 20 Test Procedure* Low 46 

Dishwashers Standards Low 21 Residential Water Heaters Standards! High 47 

Test Procedure! High 22 Test Procedure· Low 48 

Distribution Transformers Standards High 23 Room Air Conditioners Standards* Low 49 

Test Procedure Low 24 Test Procedure Low 50 

Electric Motors, 1-200 HP Standards Low 25 Small Electric Motors Determination High 51 

Test Procedure* Low 26 Test Procedure Low 52 

I Drops to Low Priority upon completion * Final Rules for these products have been recently published. 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Summary of Priorities

Standards and Determinations (D)

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products Page

Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps,

65-240 kBtu

I Clothes Dryers 3

Clothes Washers' 5 Cooking Products - Electric* 16

Commercial A/C and Heat Pumps' 7 Direct Heating Equipment, Gas 19

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers' 9 Dishwashers 21

Commercial Water Heaters' 13 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP 25

Cooking Products - Gas' 17 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts* 27

Distribution Transformers 23 High Intensity Discharge Lamps (D) 29

Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and

Heat Pumps

35 Lamps 31

Residential Central AC/HP' 42 Mobile Home Furnaces 33

Residential Water Heaters ' 47 Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings 36

Small Electric Motors (D) 51 Pool Heaters, Gas 38

Refrigerators* 40

Medium Priority Products Page Room Air Conditioners* 49

Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps,

3 phase, <65 kBtu

2

Gas Fired Boilers 10

Residential Furnaces and Boilers 45

Test Procedures

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products (con't) Page

Commercial A/C and Heat Pumps' 8 Distribution Transformers 24

Commercial Boilers' 11 Electric Motors, 1-200 HP* 26

Commercial Furnaces' 12 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 28

Commercial Water Heaters' 14 High Intensity Discharge Lamps 30

Dishwashers' 22 Lamps* 32

Residential Central A/C and Heat Pump 43 Mobile Home Furnaces* 34

Medium Priority Products Page Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings* 37

Commercial Water Source Heat Pumps 15 Pool Heaters, Gas* 39

Compact Refrigerators 41 Refrigerators 41

Ductless Split Central AC/HP 44 Residential Furnaces and Boilers* 46

Low Priority Products Page Residential Water Heaters* 48

Clothes Dryers 4 Room Air Conditioners 50

Clothes Washers* 6 Small Electric Motors 52

Cooking Products* 18

Direct Heating Equipment, Gas* 20

' Drops to Low Priority upon Completion * Final Rules for these products have been recently published.

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Summary of Priorities 

Standards and Determinations (D) 

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products 

Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 1 Clothes Dryers 

65~240 kBtu 

Clothes Washers] 5 Cooking Products - Electric* 

Commercial AlC and Heat PumpS1 7 Direct Heating Equipment. Gas 

Commercial Furnaces & Boilers! 9 Dishwashers 

Commercial Water Heaters! 13 Electric Motors, 1 ~200 HP 

Cooking Products ~ Gas! 17 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts* 

Distribution Transformers 23 High Intensity Discharge Lamps (D) 

Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and 35 Lamps 

Heat Pumps 

Residential Central ACIHP! 42 Mobile Home Furnaces 

Residential Water Heaters ! 47 Plumbing FixtureslFittings 

Small Electric Motors (0) 51 Pool Heaters, Gas 

Refrigerators* 

Medium Priority Products Page Room Air Conditioners* 

Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 2 

3 phase, <65 kBtu 

Gas Fired Boilers 10 

Residential Furnaces and Boilers 45 

Test Procedures 

High Priority Products Page Low Priority Products (con't) 

Commercial AlC and Heat Pumps] 8 Distribution Transformers 

Commercial Boilers! 11 Electric Motors, 1~200 HP* 

Commercial Furnaces] 12 Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 

Commercial Water Heaters 1 14 High futensity Discharge Lamps 

Dishwashers] 22 Lamps* 

Residential Central AlC and Heat Pump] 43 Mobile Home Furnaces* 

Medium Priority Products Page Plumbing FixtureslFittings* 

Commercial Water Source Heat Pumps 15 Pool Heaters, Gas* 

Compact Refrigerators 41 Refrigerators 

Ductless Split Central ACIHP 44 Residential Furnaces and Boilers* 

Low Priority Products Page Residential Water Heaters* 

Clothes Dryers 4 Room Air Conditioners 

Clothes Washers* 6 Small Electric Motors 

Cooking Products* 18 

Direct Heating Equipment. Gas* 20 

Page 

3 

16 

19 

21 

25 

27 

29 

31 

33 

36 

38 

40 

49 

Page 

24 

26 

28 

30 

32 

34 

37 

39 

41 

46 

48 

50 

52 

1 . . Drops to Low Prionty upon CompletIon * Final Rules for these products have been recently publIshed . 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 65-240 kBtu

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings 0.50 - 4.711 (in addition to savings due to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999)

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 2005-

2030

Potential Economic 0.4 (estimated NPV, billions of $1998)

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Carbon emissions reduction - est. 7 million tons.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. See page 8.

Other Regulatory Actions Possible State and re tonal environmental regulation (e.g. air quality).

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99, which would save an estimated

2.2 quads from 2001-2030. DOE will consider higher standards for additional

energy savings.

FY 2000 Priority N/A

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

DOE plans to initiate rulemaking in FY 2001.

Energy savings are significant.

1 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HVAC Standards, see 65 FR 30929.

1

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 65-240 kBtu 

Priority: High 

Factors for Priority Setting Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings 0.50 - 4.711 (in addition to savings due to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999) 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 2005-

2030 

Potential Economic 0.4 (estimated NPV, billions of$1998) 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Carbon emissions reduction - est. 7 million tons. 

Enerln' Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. See page 8. 

Other Regulatorv Actions Possible State and regional environmental regulation (e.g. air aualitvt 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99, which would save an estimated 

2.2 quads from 200 1-2030. DOE will consider higher standards for additional 

energy savings. 

FY 2000 Priority N/A 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate rulemaking in FY 2001. 

Rationale for Priority Level Energy savings are significant. 

1 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HV AC Standards, see 65 FR 30929. 

1 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 3 phase, <65 kBtu

Priority: Medium

Potential Energy Savings 1.29-4.092

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic 1.7 (estimated NPV, billions of $1998)

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Carbon emissions reduction - est. 25 million tons.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. See page 8.

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

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99. Efficiencies of these products

were left unchanged. Single-phase products are regulated by NAECA, and it is

desirable to have the same standards for single and three phase versions. A DOE

rulemaking is in progress for single phase products,

FY 2000 Priority N/A

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate rulemaking when rulemaking for residential (single phase)

products is completed.

Rationale for Priority Level Energy savings are significant.

2 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HVAC Standards, see 65 FR 30929.

2

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps, 3 phase, <65 kBtu 

Priority: Medium 

Factors fhr PriQrity Setting Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings 1.29-4.olf 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic 1.7 (estimated NPV, billions of$1998) 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Carbon emissions reduction - est. 25 million tons. 

EneraY Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. See page 8. 

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

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99. Efficiencies of these products 

were left unchanged. Single-phase products are regulated by NAECA, and it is 

desirable to have the same standards for single and three phase versions. A DOE 

rulemaking is in progress for single phase products. 

FY 2000 Priority N/A 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate rulemaking when rulemak:ing for residential (single phase) 

products is completed. 

Rationale for Priority Level Energy savings are significant 

2 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HV AC Standards, see 65 FR 30929. 

2 

~ 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Clothes Dryers - (Gas/Electric)

Priority: Low

Factors for Priori fy Sett in

Potential Energy Savings

Assessment

The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not available

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes Reduced annual cycles needs to be considered, definitions and creation of new

to Test Procedures product class for condensing dryers.

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes washers.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

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

Interested Parties dryer standards should be given low priority.

Evidence of Market-Driven At least three U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficiency clothes washers,

or Voluntary Efficiency which are likely to have improved moisture extraction.

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 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

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

are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on white goods

manufacturers.

3

Draft -July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Clothes Dryers - (GaslElectric) 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Setting Assessment 

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

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not available 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not available 

EnergySecuritv Benefits 

Status of Required Changes Reduced annual cycles needs to be considered, definitions and creation of new 

to Test Procedures product'class for condensing dryers. 

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes washers. 

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

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

Interested Parties dryer standards should be given low priority. 

Evidence of Market-Driven At least three U.S. manufacturers are marketing high efficiency clothes washers, 

or Voluntary Efficiency which are likely to have improved moisture extraction. 

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 2000 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would 

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

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

are low. Other DOE standards will impose cumulative burden on white goods 

manufacturers. 

3 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Clothes Dryers - (Gas/Electric)

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Assessment

Test Procedure needs to be changed for standard

Priority of Standard Low

International or Other

Coordinatin Activities

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

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. There 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.

4

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Clothes Dryers - (GaslElectric) 

Priority: Low 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

spe:cializ(:<i dIyer tests and has asked DOE to consider 

revisions to the test 

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

one waiver in effect. There are numerous changes that are required prior to a 

standards for clothes 

Considered to be a low priority by stakeholders. 

4 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Clothes Washers

Priority: High - drops to Low priority upon completion

Factors %r Priority Setting ,

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2004-2030

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 Market-Driven

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 2000 Priority

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Assessment

Total range considered: [0.28 - 7.70]3 Specific examples below:

Efficiency Improvement over the Base Case (MEF)

5% (0.860) 10%(0.908)_ 15% (0.961) 20% (1.021) 25% (1.089)

0.28-0.28 0.93-0.94 1.74-1.76 2.13-2.15 4.06- 4.08

35% (1.257) 40% (1.362) 45% (1.485) 50% (1.634)

5.94-6.09 5.98-6. 13 6.98 -7.28 7.36-7.70

The Net Present Value (NPV) is $ 14.3 billion cumulative from 2004 to 2030 in

1997 dollars.

For period 2004- 2030, 95 million metric tons of carbon and 254 thousand metric

tons of NO,,.

Final Rule issued August 27, 1997. However, during this standards rulemaking, it

was discovered that the test cloth used for determining the remaining moisture

content (RMC) gave inconsistent results. Changes to the test procedure will be

incorporated into this standards rulemaking.

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 ANOPR -Published 11/19/98

NOPR - 7/00

Final Rule - 12/00

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

savings are large.

3

Based on preliminary National Energy Savings (NES) data used for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR).

5

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Clothes Washers 

Priority: High - drops to Low priority upon completion 

Factor) f(lr Priority Settinj:( Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings ToW range considered: [0.28 - 7.70]3 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) Efficiency Improvement over the Base Case (MEF) 

2004-2030 

5%(0.860) 10%(0.908) 15%(0.961) 20%(1.02]) 25% (1.089) 

0.28 - 0.28 0.93 -0.94 1.74-1.76 2.13 - 2.15 4.06-4.08 

35%(1.257) 40%(1.362) 45%(1.485) 50%(1.634) 

5.94 -6.09 5.98 - 6.13 6.98 -7.28 7.36 -7.70 

Potential Economic The Net Present Value (NPV) is $14.3 billion cumulative from 2004 to 2030 in 

BenefitslBurdens ]997 dollars. 

Potential Environmental or For period 2004- 2030, 95 million metric tons of carbon and 254 thousand metric 

Enerl!V Security Benefits tonsofNOx' 

Status of Required Changes Final Rule issued August 27,1997. However, during this standards rulemaking, it 

to Test Procedures was discovered that the test cloth used for determining the remaining moisture 

content (RMC) gave inconsistent results. Changes to the test procedure will be 

incorporated into this standards rulemaking. 

Other Regulatory Actions DOE regulation of clothes dfyers. DOE regulation of white goods for full line 

manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Consortium for Energy Efficiency program with utilities. Energy Star program. 

or Voluntary Efficiency Federal Energy Management Program for procurement initiative. At least three U.S. 

Improvements manufacturers are marketing high efficient clothes washers. 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule ANOPR - Published Ill] 9/98 

NOPR-7/00 

Final Rule - 12/00 

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

savings are large. 

3 Based on preliminary National Energy Savings (NES) data used for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR). 

5 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Product: Clothes Washers

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Test Procedure needs to be changed for standard, and is being changed as of

the standards rulemaking.

Priority of Standard High

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Revise as part of standards rulemaking.

Statutory Deadline

Issues Final Rule issued August 27, 1997. (See clothes washer standards write-up.)

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Publish as part of standards rulemaking. NOPR - 7/00. Final Rule 12/00.

Rationale for Priority Level Test procedure needs to be revised to implement the standards rulemaking. I

Test Procedure

6

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Clothes Washers 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

Publish as part of standards rulemaking. NOPR - 7/00. Final Rule 12/00. 

Test procedure needs to be revised to implement the standards rulemaking. 

6 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps (All products for which DOE proposes to accept ASHRAE 90.1-1999

levels)

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking. (Not a full rulemaking - DOE is adopting the standards of

ASHRAE 90.1-1999)

Potential Energy Savings 2.9° (ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999)

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

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

Energy Security Benefits energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative emission benefits

that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are minimal.

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rules to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000.

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out of HCFC refrigerants.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99.

FY 2000 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Notice of Availability 5/00. Final Rule 11/00.

Standards set by EPACT and are being amended to adopt revised ASHRAE 90.1

4 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HVAC Standards, see 65 FR 30929.

7

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps (All products for which DOE proposes to accept ASHRAE 90.1-1999 

levels) 

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking. (Not a full rulemaking - DOE is adopting the standards of 

ASHRAE 90.1-1999) 

k~ Fadors for Priority Setting ",c ' " '1, "- ';x~sessment ~, :,~ ~ ~ v~ ~ '" ~"" ,,~y " 

Potential Energy Savings 2.94 (ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999) 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

Energy Security Benefits energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative emission benefits 

that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are minimal. 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rules to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out ofHCFC refrigerants. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues RevisedASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99. 

FY 2000 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Notice of Availability 5/00. Final Rule 11100. 

Rationale for Priority Level Standards set by EP ACT and are being amended to adopt revised ASHRAE 90.1 

4 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HV AC Standards, see 65 FR 30929. 

7 

, 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps (All products for which DOE proposes to accept ASHRAE 90.1-1999

levels)

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking

Factors for Priority Setting„ ,„r ... ;.; .tssessrnent

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

W

Standards set by EPACT and are being amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

High

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 6/00

Final Rule 12/00

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR.

8

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps (All products for which DOE proposes to accept ASHRAE 90.1-1999 

levels) 

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking 

Standards set by EP ACT and are being amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR-6/00 

Final Rule 12100 

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR. 

8 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking. (Not a full rulemaking - DOE is adopting the standards of

ASHRAE 90.1-1999)

11

tm

Potential Energy Savings 0.55 (ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999)

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by August 2000 (furnaces) and December

2000 (boilers).

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

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99.

FY 2000 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Notice of Availability 5/00. Final Rule 11/00.

Standards set by EPACT and are being amended to adopt revised ASHRAE 90.1

5 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HVAC Standards, see 65 FR 30929.

9

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Commercial Furnaces and Boilers 

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking. (Not a full rulemaking - DOE is adopting the standards of 

ASHRAE 90.1-1999) 

~ 'Factors for Priority Settin~M"*" " ~ ,} "" " .'\ssessment " " 2 ~ ~ "'~ 

Potential Energy Savings 0.55 (ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999) 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savingS are minimal. 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by August 2000 (furnaces) and December 

2000 (boilers). 

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

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99. 

FY 2000 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Notice of Availability 5/00. Final Rule 11100. 

Rationale for Priority Level Standards set by EP ACT and are being amended to adopt revised ASHRAE 90.1 

5 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HV AC Standards, see 65 FR 30929. 

9 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers

Priority: Medium

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action;

0.12 - 0.60 6(in addition to savings due to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999)

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic 0.2 (estimated NPV, billions of $1998)

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Carbon emissions reduction - est. 4 million tons.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000.

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

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99, which would save an estimated

0.06 quads from 2001-2030. DOE will consider higher standards for additional

energy savings.

FY 2000 Priority N/A

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate work in support of rulemaking

I

Rationale for Priority Level Energy savings are significant.

6 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HVAC Standards, see 65 FR 30929.

10

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Commercial Gas-Fired Boilers 

Priority: Medium 

Factors for Priority Setting Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings 0.12 - 0.60 6(in addition to savings due to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999) 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic 0.2 (estimated NPV, billions of$] 998) 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Carbon emissions reduction - est. 4 million tons. 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. 

Other Resmlatory Actions Possible State and re~ional environmental re~lation (e.~. air Quality). 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven NoneknoWD. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99, which would save an estimated 

0.06 quads from 2001-2030. DOE will consider higher standards for additional 

energy savings. 

FY 2000 Priority N/A 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate work in support ofruiemaking 

Rationale for Priority Level Energy savings are significant. 

6 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HV AC Standards, see 65 FR 30929. 

10 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Boilers

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking

Factors for ^ Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Asse%sr nent

Standards set by EPACT are being amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

Priority of Standard High

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 6/00

'Final Rule 12/00

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR.

11

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Boilers 

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion ofrulemaking 

Standards set by EP ACT are being amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

Proposed Scbedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Scbedule NOPR-6/00 

'Final Rule 12/00 

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR. 

11 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Furnaces

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Standards set by EPACT are being amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 12/99

Final Rule - 8/00

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR.

12

Draft -July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Furnaces 

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking 

Standards set by EPACT are being amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR-12/99 

Final Rule - 8/00 

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR. 

12 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Commercial Water Heaters

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking. (Not a full rulemaking - DOE is adopting the standards of

ASHRAE 90.1-1999)

Potential Energy Savings 0.07 7(ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999)

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000.

Other Regulatory Actions

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99.

FY 2000 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Notice of Availability 5/00. Final Rule 11/00.

Standards set by EPACT and are being amended to adopt revised ASHRAE 90.1

7 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HVAC Standards, see 65 FR 30929.

13

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Commercial Water Heaters 

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking. (Not a full rulemaking - DOE is adopting the standards of 

ASHRAE 90.1-1999) 

Factors for Priority Setting Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings 0.07 1(ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999) 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. 

Other Regulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99. 

FY 2000 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Notice of Availability 5/00. Final Rule 11100. 

Rationale for Priority Level Standards set by EPACT and are being amended to adopt revised ASHRAE 90.1 

7 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HV AC Standards, see 65 FR 30929. 

13 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Water Heaters

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking

Factors for Priority Settin

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating_Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Assessment

Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

High

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 6/00

Final Rule - 12/00

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR.

14

Draft -July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Water Heaters 

Priority: High - drops to Low upon completion of rulemaking 

Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR-6100 

Final Rule - 12/00 

Rationale for Priority Level DOE needs to publish Final Rule to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR 

14 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Commercial Water Source Heat Pumps

Priority: Medium

Relationship to Changes in Standards set by EPACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1

Standard

Priority of Standard High

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by ARI has adopted the international test procedure ISO Standard 132561-1 effective

Interested Parties January 2000 in lieu of ARI Standards 320, 325 and 330.

Statutory Deadline

Issues The former ARI test procedures give different efficiency results than the ISO test

procedures. NIST is testing water source heat pumps using both procedures to

quantify the differences.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level This is the first ISO test procedure adopted by ARI.

15

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Commercial Water Source Heat Pumps 

Priority: Medium 

Intlern:ativlnal or Other 

Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards set by EP ACT and will be amended upon revision of ASHRAE 90.1 

has adopted the international test nrn,cedluTe ISO Standard 132561-1 effective 

2000 in lieu of ARl 330. 

The former ARl test procedures give different efficiency results than the ISO test 

procedures. NIST is testing water source heat pumps using both procedures to 

the differences. 

This is the first ISO test procedure adopted by ARl. 

15 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

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

Priority: Low

Factors for Priority 'Setting

Potential Energy Savings

N.ssessnien

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 DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Final Rule published September 8, 1998

Recent Final Rule.

16

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

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

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Setting Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

2000-2030 

Potential Economic 

Benefits!Burdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Cbanges 

to Test Procedures 

Otber Ret!ulatory Actions DOE regulation of white ~oods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority Low 

Proposed Scbedule and Rationale 

Proposed Scbedule Final Rule publisbed September 8, 1998 

Rationale for Priority Level Recent Final Rule. 

16 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Cooking Products - Gas Ovens, Cook Tops

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion

FA^tors for, Priority Se tinPotential Energy Savings Total ranges considered:"

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) Ovens Cook Tops

2000-2030 0.1- 2.1 0 - 0.5

Potential Economic [(9.3) - 0.1] [(4.0) - 0.02]

BenefitsBurdens NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Potential Environmental or NOx [11 - 239] NOx [ 0 - 65 ]

Energy Security Benefits CO2 [6 - 133] CO2 [ 0 - 361

Emission reductions in (kt) for NOx, and (Mt) for C02.

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued October 3, 1997.

to Test Procedures

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

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Pilotless designs may require installation of an electrical outlet. Loss of consumer

utility if loss of electrical power. If a loss of electricity, cannot use oven.

FY 2000 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - TBD

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

8

Based on Draft report, April 1996 and Supplemental Analysis, November 1997.

17

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Cooking Products - Gas Ovens, Cook Tops 

Priority: High - Drops to Low Priority upon completion 

f'actor~ for Priorit)' Seiting Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings Total ranges considered:8 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) Ovens Cook Tops 

2000-2030 [0.1- 2.11 rO - 0.51 

Potential Economic [(9.3) - O. I] [(4.0) - 0.02] 

BenefitslBurdens NPV, billions of 1990$ @ 7% 

Potential Environmental or NOx [1 I - 239] NOx [0-65] 

Energy Security Benefits CO2 [6 - 133] CO2 [0 - 36 ] 

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

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued October 3, 1997. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Re2ulatorv Actions DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Pilotless designs may require installation of an electrical outlet Loss of consumer 

utility if loss of electrical power. If a loss of electriCity, cannot use oven. 

FY 2000 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule - TBD 

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

moderate. Limited DOE resources needed to complete rulemaking. This 

rulemaking will remain high priority until the fmal rule is published. Once the 

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

8 Based on Draft report, April 1996 and Supplemental Analysis, November 1997. 

17 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

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

Priority: Low

Facto r.s for Priority Sett n.

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

A

Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard.

Priority of Standard High

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Final Rule issued - October 3, 1997

18

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTtNG COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

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

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Setting Assessment 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard High 

International or Other 

Coordinatinl! Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued - October 3, 1997 

Rationale for Priority Level 

18 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas)

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0 - 0.1]9 Specific examples below:"'

from Regulatory Action; Previous

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

Piezo ignit. & Previous & Condens. & 2030

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)

Potential Economic [(1.4) - 0.1] NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens 0 0.1 (0.6) (1.4)

Potential Environmental or SO2 0 (7) (140) (320)

Energy Security Benefits NOx 0 (6) (132) (301)

co, 0 (3) (72) (165)

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

Status of Required Changes Final rule published 5/12/97.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Fuel switching. Rural communities use for backup heating during power outages.

Utility concern with electronic ignition.

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Interested parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are low.

9

10

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

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

19

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas) 

Prio 

Fm:tors for Priority Setting .;\ssessment 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0 - 0.1]9 Specific examples below:1o 

from Regulatory Action; Previous, Cumulative (Quads) 1998- Piezo ignit. & Previous & Condens. & 2030 

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) 

Potential Economic [(1.4) - 0.1] NPV, Billions ofl990$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens 0 0.1 (0.6) (1.4) 

Potential Environmental or S02 0 (7) (140) (320) 

Energy Security Benefits NOx 0 (6) (132) (301) 

CO2 0 (3) (72) (165) 

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

Status of Required Changes Final rule published 5/12/97. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Rel!ulatory Actions None known that will impact product. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Fuel switching. Rural communities use for backup heating during power outages. 

Utility concern with electronic ignition. 

FY 2000 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would 

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Rationale for Priority Level Interested parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are low. 

9 

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

10 

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

19 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas)

Priority: Low

Factors for Priority Setting ... , Assessment

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

Rationale for Priority Level

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Final Rule issued 5/12/97

20

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Proced ure 

Product: Direct Heating Equipment (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Settinj? Assessment 

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

Standard 

Priority of Standard Low 

International or Other 

Coordinatin2 Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

StatutOry Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued 5/12/97 

Rationale for Priority Level 

20 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Dishwashers

Priority: Low

'actors tor Priority , ett Ing P, ssessinen

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

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes Test procedure is being revised to properly reflect energy consumption for new

to Test Procedures technologies (e.g. adaptive controls) and reduced annual cycles.

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

Recommendations by Some manufacturers believe that updating the dishwasher standard should be

Interested Parties given a low priority.

Evidence of Market Driven Energy Savers program. Federal Energy Management Program for procurement

or Voluntary Efficiency initiative. At least two U.S. manufacturers are marketing adaptive control

Improvements dishwashers.

Issues 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).

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

Rationale for Priority Level Estimated potential energy savings are small.

21

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Dishwashers 

Priority: Low 

F·actors for Priority Setting 

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 Reeulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

Assessment 

The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

savings for this product. 

Not available. 

Not available. 

Test procedure is being revised to properly reflect energy consumption for new 

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

DOE regulation of white ~oods 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 filters) or the availability of affordable models (contract 

housing). 

Low 

DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would 

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Estimated potential energy savings are small. 

21 

Draft - July 17. 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Dishwashers

Priority: High

Factors for,prloritv

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Test Procedure needed to be changed for standard.

Priority of Standard Low

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Efforts underway to harmonize international test procedures should include

dishwashers.

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Manufacturers support a test procedure revision for more accurate testing of new

adaptive control models. Industry working on revising its test procedure

suggestions to encompass the variety of sensor techniques now in the market.

Statutory Deadline

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

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule NOPR - published 9/99

Reopening Notice - 7/00

Final Rule - 11/00

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

22

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Dishwashers 

Priority: High 

Factors f(u- Priority Setting 

Relationship to Cbanges in 

Standard 

Priority of Standard 

International or Other 

Coordinatinl[ Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

Asses~mC'n( 

Test Procedure needed to be cbanged for standard. 

Low 

Efforts underway to harmonize international test procedures should include 

dishwashers. 

Manufacturers support a test procedure revision for more accurate testing of new 

adaptive control models. Industry working on revising its test procedure 

suggestions to encompass the variety of sensor techniq~es now in the market. 

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

NOPR - published 9/99 

Reopening Notice - 7/00 

Final Rule - 11100 

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

22 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Distribution Transformers

Priority: High

Factors for llriorityz""eiiini;

Potential Energy Savings

Ass essftlenU:

[.39-10.7]"

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes Need to publish a test procedure before rule.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None known.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven EPA Energy Star program for liquid immersion transformers. NEMA's TP-1 and

or Voluntary Efficiency the National Business Awareness Campaign to promote energy efficient electrical

Improvements products.

Issues Most efficient designs include proprietary technology.

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

savings questioned by NEMA.

FY 2000 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2001.

Rationale for Priority Level Potential for significant energy savings.

11

Based on DOE determination notice , October 22, 1997.

23

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Distribution Transformers 

Priority: High 

Factors for Priority Setting 

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 Ttl$t Procedures 

Other R~ulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

Assessment 

(.39-10.7] II 

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 publish a test procedure before rule. 

None known. 

EPA Energy Star program for liquid immersion transformers. NEMA's TP-l 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-l. Energy 

savings questioned by NEMA. 

High 

DOE plans to begin actively pursuing standards rulemaking in 2001. 

Potential for significant energy savings. 

11 

Based on DOE detennination notice. October 22. 1997. 

23 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Distribution Transformers

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Test Procedure needs to be established for standard.

Priority of Standard High

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

NEMA recommends using NEMA TP-2 test standard.

Statutory Deadline

Issues Sampling Plan; Definitions of Covered Products

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule NOPR -published 11/12/98

Reopening Notice 6/99

Final Rule - 8/00

Rationale for Priority Level Test procedure should be completed during FY 2000.

24

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Distribution Transformers 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

NEMA recommends using NEMA TP-2 test standard. 

NOPR - published 11112/98 

Reopening Notice 6/99 

Final Rule - 8/00 

Test procedure should be completed during FY 2000. 

24 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Electric Motors, 1 - 200 HP

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Estimate 31.3 billion KW/yr could be saved through enforcement of EPCA

from Regulatory Action; efficiency standards for electric motors - enough electricity to meet the lighting

Cumulative (Quads) needs of all U.S. households for 4 months..

Potential Economic Not Available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not Available.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes Final rule for test procedures published 10/5/99.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product.

Recommendations by Enforcement

Interested Parties

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

or Voluntary Efficiency Motor Challenge. Motor Master+

Improvements

Issues DOE regulates system efficiencies (e.g. HVAC) where motors are components of

such systems.

FY 2000 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 Level Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings

are unknown at this time. Determination required by EPCA

25

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Electric Motors, I - 200 HP 

Priority: Low 

Fltctor~ I(u' Priority Settin~ 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

EnergySecurity Benefits 

Status of Required Changes 

to Test Procedures 

Other R(l2ulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

Assessment 

Estimate 31.3 billion KW /yr could be saved through enforcement of EPCA 

efficiency standards for electric motors - enough electricity to meet the lighting 

needs of all U.S. households for 4 months .. 

Not Available. 

Not Available. 

Final rule for test procedures published 10/5/99. 

None known that will impact product. 

Enforcement 

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

Motor Challenge. Motor Master+ 

DOE regulates system efficiencies (e.g. HV AC) where motors are components of 

such systems. 

Low 

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

would be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring ofvoluntaIy 

programs. 

Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product Potential energy savings 

are unknown at this time. Determination required by EPCA 

25 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Electric Motors, I - 200 HP

Priority: Low

Factors fin-Pr or i it^ eS ttfn""''^

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Assessment,

Test Procedure needed to be revised to support the standard

Priority of Standard Low

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Natural Resources Canada: Energy Efficiency Regulations for Electric Motors

International Electrotechnical Commission/International Standards Organisation

(IEC/ISO)

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Manufacturers and energy efficiency advocates support test procedure rulemaking.

Statuto Deadline

Issues Expect DOE test procedure to be revised for compatibility with global (IEC/ISO)

test procedure.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule Proposed Rule Issued - 11/27/97

Final Rule - 10/5/99

Rationale for Priority Level Final Rule recently published.

26

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Electric Motors, I - 200 HP 

Priority: Low 

Factor!> for Prioritj' Setting 

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 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

Assessment 

Test Procedure needed to be revised to support the standard 

Low 

Natural Resources Canada: Energy Efficiency Regulations for Electric Motors 

International Electrotechnical CommissionlInternational Standards Organisation 

(IEC/ISO) 

Manufacturers and energy efficiency advocates support test procedure rulemaking, 

Expect DOE test procedure to be revised for compatibility with global (IECIISO) 

test procedure. 

Proposed Rule Issued - 11127/97 

Final Rule - 10/5/99 

Final Rule recently published. 

26 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: 1.2 - 2.3

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

Potential Economic 1 .4 - 2.6 NPV, billions of 1997$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes None required.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions Some ballast manufacturers also make electric motors.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

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

or Voluntary Efficiency Relighting Initiative (FEMP), The Energy Cost Savings Council, and some utility

Improvements DSM programs.

Issues Standards, for electronic ballasts, may adversely affect U.S. manufacturers.

Impact on U.S. employment levels.

FY 2000 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 3/00

Final Rule - 8/00

Rationale for Priority Level Final Rule in FY2000.

27

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Settin~ 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cuinulative (Quads) 

2000-2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Enerlff 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 2000 Priority 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

Assessment 

Total range considered: 1.2 - 2.3 

1.4 - 2.6 NPV, billions ofl997$ @ 7% 

None required. 

Some ballast manufacturers also make electric motors. 

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

Relighting Initiative (FEMP), The Energy Cost Savings Council, and some utility 

DSM programs. 

Standards, for electronic ballasts, may adversely affect U.S. manufacturers. 

Impact on U.S. employment levels. 

High 

NOPR-3/00 

Final Rule - 8/00 

Final Rule in FY2000. 

27 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Efficiency levels for new standards are already in the market and are covered by

existing standards and test procedures.

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 Level

28

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts 

Priority: Low 

Factors 1'01' Priority Setting 

Relationship to Changes in 

Standard 

Priority of Standard 

International or Other 

Coordinatin2 Activities 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Statutory Deadline 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

Assessment 

Efficiency levels for new standards are already in the market and are covered by 

existing standards and test procedures, 

Low 

28 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards Determination

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamps

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings

MEMO=

[0.11-0.22]12

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic Not Available.

Benefits/Burdens

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes IES and ANSI procedures are in place.

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

Other Regulatory Actions EPA mercury disposal requirements may apply.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Mercury vapor lamps being replaced by metal halide and high pressure sodium

or Voluntary Efficiency lamps.

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 2000 Priority Medium

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

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

Potential energy savings are low.

12

Based on DOE rough estimate, May 1996.

29

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards Determination 

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamps 

Priority: Low 

Factors fm' Priority SettillA Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings [0.11-0.22] 12 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic Not Available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

emission benefits that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savin!1$ are minimal. 

Status of Required Cbanges lES and ANSI procedures are in place. 

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

Other Rel!ulatorv Actions EPA mercury disposal requirements may apply. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Mercury vapor lamps being replaced by metal halide and high pressure sodium 

or Voluntary Efficiency lamps. 

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 2000 Priority Medium 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Scbedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are low. 

12 Based on DOE rough estimate, May 1996. 

29 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp

Priority: Low

Factors for PrioritySetting' Assessment

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

Rationale for Priority Level

Test Procedure needs to be developed for standard,

Low

No work expected during FY2001.

30

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: High Intensity Discharge (HID) Lamp 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Test Procedure 

Proposed Schedule No work expected during FY2001. 

Rationale for Priority Level 

30 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Not Available.

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not Available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not Available.

Energy Security Benefits

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

to Test Procedures 5/29/97

Other Regulatory Actions 'Existing EPA mercury disposal requirements apply, but EPA issued a final rule

July 6, 1999, including lamps as Universal Hazardous Waste.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

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

or Voluntary Efficiency programs, FEMP.

Improvements

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

difficult.

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

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

31

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Settina Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings Not Available. 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic Not Available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not Available. 

Ener2Y Security Benefits 

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

to Test Procedures 5/29/97 

Other Regulatory Actions ·Existing EPA mercury disposal requirements apply, but EPA issued a final rule 

July 6,1999, including lamps as Universal Hazardous Waste. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

or Voluntary Efficiency programs, FEMP. 

Improvements 

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

difficult. 

FY 2000 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pUrsue rulemaking in the next year. Work would 

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

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

31 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent

Priority: Low

^:Fattor% for Priority Settin

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Assessment

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

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 Level

Final Rule issued 5/29/97

32

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Lamps, Fluorescent and Incandescent 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Test Procedure 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule issued 5/29/97 

Rationale for Priority Level 

32 

Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces

Priority: Low

Standards

Potential Energy Savings

from Regulatory Action ;

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030 Imprv. fan

Impt.v. 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

Total range considered: [ 0 .1 - 0.6 ]13 Specific examples below:

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

Benefits/Burdens 0.1 0.1 (0.2)

Potential Environmental or SO2 16 17 4

Energy Security Benefits NOx 15 16 4

CO2 9 9 2

Emission reductions in (kt) for SO2 and NOx, and (Mt) for C02-

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5/12/97.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Fuel switching. Limited space for installation.

FY 2000 Priority Low

Pro used Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

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

technologies, such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers.

13

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

33

Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces 

Prio 

Factors for Pri{}rity SeWn!! Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; Imprv. fan 

Cumulative (Quads) 1998- Imprv. fan motor & burner 2030 

motor box damper Condensing (91.7 

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

Imprv. fan motor, 

ht. exchgr., 

Imprv. fan Imprv. fan con dens. & full 

motor motor modulation 

Oil iC82.1% AFUE) (82.1% AFUE) i(93.7% AFUE) 

0.1 0.1 0.5 

Total range considered: [ 0.1 - 0.6 ]13 Specific examples below: 

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

BenefitslBurdens 0.1 0.1 (0.2) 

Potential Environmental or SOz 16 17 4 

Energy Security Benefits NOx 15 16 4 

CO2 9 9 2 

Emission reductions in (let) for S02 and NOx, and (Mt) for COz. 

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Fuel switching. Limited space for installation. 

FY 2000 Priority Low 

P ro os edShedl c u ean dRa' tiona e 

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaldng in the next year. Work would 

be limited to basic technology investigai:ion and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

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

technologies, such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers. 

13 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

33 

Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces

Priority: Low

actors for Priority Settings

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

Rationale for Priority Level

:1sseS ,menf,,.j

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

34 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Mobile Home Furnaces 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Setting 

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 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Proced ore 

, , A-ssessment 

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard 

Low 

Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

34 Draft - July 17, 2000 
-YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps

Priority: High

Potential Energy Savings 0.55-0.78 14(in addition to savings due to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999)

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030

Potential Economic 0.6 (estimated NPV, billions of $1998).

Benefits/Burdens

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

Energy Security Benefits energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative emission benefits

that are likely to be possible. Expected oil savings are minimal.

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rules to incorporate the test procedures referred to in

to Test Procedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000.

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out of HCFC refrigerants.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99, which would save an estimated

0.11 quads from 2001-2030. DOE will consider higher standards for additional

energy savings.

FY 2000 Priority N/A

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

DOE plans to initiate rulemaking in FY2001.

Energy savings are significant.

14 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HVAC Standards, see 65 FR 30929.

35 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

·YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Packaged Tenninal Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

F~ct()rs for ~rj(JLity ~~tting Ah A%Sh& ~ 'SA "s~%% h ,," X, "~% 'S% ,%% %'%",7'm J},~t;;~!il}t£lJ~h "'~ U &~%,*"* 0"AM~Y%WsY Ax AS X4f7f~fq!l@ 

Potential Energy Savings 0.55 - 0.7814 (in addition to savings due to ASHRAE Standard 90.1-1999) 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995-

2030 

Potential Economic 0.6 (estimated NPV, billions of$1998). 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

Energy Security Benefits energy savings indicated above are indicative of the comparative emission benefits 

that are likely to be ~ossible. Expected oil savings are minimal. 

Status of Required Changes DOE plans to publish Final Rules to incorporate the test procedures referred to in 

to Test Proeedures ASHRAE Standard 90.1 into the CFR by December 2000. 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out ofHCFC refrigerants. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven None known. 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Revised ASHRAE 90.1 standards approved 6/99, which would save an estimated 

0.11 quads from 2001-2030. DOE will consider higher standards for additional 

energy savings. 

FY 2000 Priority N/A 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate rulemaking in FY2001. 

Rationale for Priority Level Energy savings are significant. 

14 Based on Screening Analysis Report for Commercial HV AC Standards, see 65 FR 30929. 

35 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings

Priority: Low

_ -

-l-I.-Potential Energy Savings The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available.

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

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

carefully considered.

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

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

Al 12.18.1 and ASME/ANSI Al 12.19.6.

36 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Plumbing FixtureslFittings 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Settin~ " 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Ener2Y Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

ImJl.rovements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

Assessment , ~ " '" w-! X ,,~d'"'~ 00v40Sd;6,jift"B'A 

The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

savings for this product. 

Not available. 

Not available. 

None. 

None known. 

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

carefully considered. 

Low 

DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would 

be limited to basic technolOgy investigation and monitoring of voluntary 

programs. 

Dependent upon revision by ASME and approval by ANSI to ASME/ANSI 

AI12.1S.1 and ASME/ANSI Al 12.19.6. 

36 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings

Priority: Low

'actors tour Priority ettine

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

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

Final Rule - March 18, 1998

37 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Plumbing Fixtures/Fittings 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

Final Rule· March 18, 1998 

37 Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas)

Priority: Low

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: (0.2 - 0.911$ Specific examples below:

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) IID, (78% ET) Non-condensing limit, (82.2% ET) Condensing, (90.8% ET)

2000-2030 0.2 0.4 0.7

Potential Economic [ (1.4) - 0.21 NPV, Billions of 1990$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens 0.2 0.2 (0.6)

Potential Environmental or SO2 0 0 0

Energy Security Benefits NOx 42 42 42

CO2 11 18 35

Emission reductions in (kt) for S02 and NOx, and (Mt) for C9_2.

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5/12/97_

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions None known that will impact product.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring of voluntary

programs.

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

are low.

15 Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995.

38 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Pri{)rity Setting 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

2000-2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefrtslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Energy Security Benefits 

Status of Required Cbanges 

to Test Procedures 

Other Re«ulatory Aetions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Scbedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

Assessmtmt 

Total range considered: [0.2 - 0.9115 Specific examples below: 

lID, (78% Er) Non-condensing limit, (82.2% Er) Condensing, (90.8% Er) 

0.2 0.4 0.7 

[(~.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 S02 and NOll, and (Mt) for CO2. 

Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

None known that will impact product. 

None known. 

Low 

DOE does not plan to actively pursue rulemaking in the next year. Work would 

be limited to basic technology investigation and monitoring ofvoluntaty 

programs. 

Interested Parties believe this is a low priority product. Potential energy savings 

are low. 

15 

Based on DOE preliminary analysis, June 1995. 

~ " 

38 Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas)

Priority: Low

Factors for Priorit} Scttm

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

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

Final rule issued 5/12/97.

39 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Pool Heaters (Gas) 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Scbedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Scbedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

Final rule issued 5/12/97. 

39 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Refrigerators, Refrigerator/Freezers, & Freezers

Priority: Low

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

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030

Potential Economic Not available

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes No changes required for standards.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out of insulation HCFCs in 2003.

DOE regulation of white goods for full line manufacturers.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

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

or Voluntary Efficiency Authority mass procurement. Energy Savers program. Significant quantities of

Improvements new high efficiency models are being marketed.

Issues Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997.

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997

Rule issued, will be effective July 1, 2001

40 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Refrigerators, RefrigeratorlFreezers, & Freezers 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Setting Asse~sment ~ 

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

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product. 

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030 

Potential Economic Not available 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Not available 

Enerl!V Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes No changes required for standards. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out of insulation HCFCs in 2003. 

DOE regulation of white ~ods for full line manufacturers. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

or .voluntary Efficiency Authority mass procurement. Energy Savers program. Significant quantities of 

Improvements new high efficiency models are bein~ marketed. 

Issues Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997. 

FY 2000 Priority Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule Final Rule Issued - April 28, 1997 

Rationale for Priority Level Rule issued, will be effective July 1,2001 

~~ 

40 Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Refrigerators, Refrigerator/Freezers, & Freezers

Priority: Medium for compact refrigerators and refrigerator/freezers, Low for all others.

Victors t^r f rioritt ,Settin ^.s^tstiment

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

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Low

Tests at NIST have revealed deficiencies in the compact refrigerator test

procedure. These will be researched and corrected , probably by revising the test

procedure for compact refrigerators.

Proposed Schedule NIST is testing compact refrigerators, and overseeing round robin testing of

compact refrigerators at independent test labs. Several deficiencies have been

identified, work is continuing. A proposed modification of the compact

refrigerator test procedure will be drafted in 2001.

Rationale for Priority Level Compact refrigerator manufacturers have obtained inconsistent results when

testing each other's products. Deficiencies in test procedure have been identified.

41 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Refrigerators, RefrigeratorlFreezers, & Freezers 

Priority: Medium for compact refrigerators and refrigerator/freezers, Low for all others. 

Recommendation by 

Interested Parties 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Tests at NIST have revealed deficiencies in the compact refrigerator test 

procedure. These will be researched and corrected, probably by revising the test 

nrn,,,,..tiIJlTf> for 

NIST is testing compact refrigerators, and overseeing round robin testing of 

compact refrigerators at independent test labs. Several deficiencies have been 

identified, work is continuing. A proposed modification of the compact 

refrigerator test procedure will be drafted in 2001. 

Compact refrigerator manufacturers have obtained inconsistent results when 

testing each other's products. Deficiencies in test procedure have been identified. 

41 Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High - drops to Low priority upon completion

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [2.2 -10.4] 1fi Specific examples below:

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1995- 11 SEER 12 SEER 13 SEER 18S EER

2030 2.2 3.8 5.4 10.4

Potential Economic [(22) - 0] NPV, Billions of 1998$ @ 7%

Benefits/Burdens 0 1 (5) (22)

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes Changes are not required for standards.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out of HCFC-22 refrigerant - 2010

DOE regulation of furnaces.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

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

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Small manufacturers. Niche Products. Regional variation.

FY 2000 Priority High

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule SANOPR - 11/99

NOPR - 8/00

Final Rule - 12/00

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are large.

16 Based on DOE analysis for NOPR, see www.eren.doe.gov/buildings/Codesstmdards/index.htm.

42 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High - drops to Low priority upon completion 

Fnctors for Priority Setting , "$ ,~~ Assess(!l~n! '" "'"'''' :P '0~*, =oiEf;=X 1MJ:?if%<7'\fw1h;MS,,*,_1%riiifffi 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [2.2 -10.4]16 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1995- 11 SEER 12 SEER 13 SEER 18 SEER 

2030 2.2 3.8 5.4 10.4 

Potential Economic [(22) - 0] NPV, Billions of 1998$ @ 7% 

BenefitslBurdens o (1) (5) (22) 

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes Changes are not required for standards. 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out ofHCFC-22 refrigerant - 2010 

DOE regulation offumaces. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

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

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Small manufacturers. Niche Products. Regional variation. 

FY 2000 Priority High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule SANOPR - 11199 

NOPR-8/00 

Final Rule - 12/00 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are large. 

16 

Based on DOE analysis for NOPR, see www.eren.doe.govlbuildings/codes_standards/index.htm. 

42 Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps

Priority: High

ii', Selliiil~.,, .» ._^ #tises lent

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priority of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Test Procedure does not need to be changed for standard.

Would like to see it published.

Many changes to accommodate new technology.

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 8/00

Final Rule - 2/01

Rationale for Priority Level Work is complete for technical content of proposed test procedure.

43 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps 

Priority: High 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule NOPR-8/00 

Final Rule - 2/01 

Rationale for Priority Level Work is complete for technical content of proposed test procedure. 

43 Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps - Ductless Split Systems

Priority: Medium

Relationship to Changes in Test Procedure does not need to be changed for standard.

Standard

Priority of Standard Hi

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by Ductless split system manufacturers would prefer to use calorimeter test.

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues Calorimeter test (which is used for room air conditioners) is more suitable and

accurate for testing ductless split central air conditioners, but this test is not

currently in the DOE central air conditioning test procedure.

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

DOE plans to initiate work in support of rulemaking

Change would make test procedure more accurate for this product.

44 Draft -July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Central Air Conditioners & Heat Pumps - Ductless Split Systems 

Priority: Medium 

Issues 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Ductless split system manufacturers would prefer to use calorimeter test. 

Calorimeter test (which is used for room air conditioners) is more suitable and 

accurate for testing ductless split central air conditioners, but this test is not 

""T1,p.nTlv in the DOE central air test 

DOE plans to initiate work in support ofrulemaking 

Change would make test procedure more accurate for this product. 

44 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers

Priority: Medium

Standards

Yactor.^ for Priority Settjo,-

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0.6 - 10.2] 7 Specific examples below:

from Regulatory Action; Insul., lID, imprv.

Cumulative (Quads)

fan motor, & two Previous & Gas 2000-2030

Gas stage oper. condensing absorption

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

IID & pulse Gas

Gas IID condensing absorption

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

0.6 3.7 10.2

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

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

Energy Security Benefits 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.

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5/12/97

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions Possible State and regional environmental regulation. DOE regulation of central

air conditioning products. Consumer Product Safety Commission - possible

regulation.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Star program. Wisconsin state condensing fumace/boiler program.

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

Improvements

Issues

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

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

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are significant. Higher standards levels requiring

technologies such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers.

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

45 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers 

Priority: Medium 

Factors for Priority Settill~ Assessment 

Potential Energy Savings Total range considered: [0.6 - 10.2]17 Specific examples below: 

from Regulatory Action; Insul., lID, imprv. 

Cumulative (Quads) fun motor, & two Previous & Gas 2000-2030 

Gas stage oper. condensing absorption 

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

lID & pulse Gas 

Gas lID condensing absorption 

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

0.6 3.7 10.2 

Potential Economic Not available. 

BenefitslBurdens 

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

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

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

silmificant than other products. 

Status of Required Changes Final rule issued 5112/97 

to Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions Possible State and regional environmental regulation. DOE regulation of central 

air conditioning products. Consumer Product Safety Commission - possible 

regulation. 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven Energy Star program. Wisconsin state condensing furnacefboiler program. 

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

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority Low 

PedS ro os ceuean h dId Rat' lona e 

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate work in support of rule making. 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are significant. Higher standards levels requiring 

technologies such as condensing furnaces would impact utility to consumers. 

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

45 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers

Priority: Low

factors for Priority Sett

Relationship to Changes in

Standard

Priori of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

#ssessm

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

Final rule issued 5/12/97

46 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Residential Furnaces & Boilers 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Test Procedure 

Proposed Schedule Final rule issued 5/12/97 

Rationale for Priority Level 

46 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric

Priority: High - drops to Low priority upon completion

Potential Energy Savings from I Total ranges considered:

Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads)

2003-2030

Heat raps Heat Traps,

& Insul. 2.5" Insul. & Ht. Traps, 3"

Tank Insul. Tank Insul. &

Electric Bottom Bottom Plastic Tank

3 " Insu .,

2" Insul., 2.5" Insul., Sidearm w/

Heat Traps, Heat Traps, 80% Flue

Gas Flue Baffle Flue Baffle Baffle & IID

Quads at

source 3.4 4.8 13.1

NPV,

1998$ 2.3 3.3 -17.4

S02 kt 4 -6 54

NOx kt 141 229 599

C02 Mt 48 83 219

Potential Environmental or Energy See table, above

Security Benefits Emission reductions in (Kt) for SO2 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO2. Based on 1999 analysis,

and includes oil, gas and electric.

Status of Required Changes to Changes not required for standards. Final rule for test procedure was published in 1998.

Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out of HCFCs for insulation (2003). Consumer Product Safety Commission

initiative for prevention of ignition of flammable vapors by gas water heaters.

Evidence of Market-Driven or Demand-side management programs for high efficiency water heaters.

Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Electronic ignition has impact on customer utility. Fuel switching. Replacement blowing

agent for insulation. Installation in small spaces.

Proposed Schedule NOPR - 4/00

Final Rule - 12/00

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are large.

18 Based on DOE analysis May 1999. Energy savings reduced due to phase out of HCFC- 141b insulation blowing agent in 2003.

47 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Standards 

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric 

Priority: High - drops to Low priority upon completion 

r'II':lor~ for Priorilj Selling :\s~cssm<!ll! 

Potential Energy Savings from Total ranges considered: 

Regulatory Action; 3.4- 13.1 18 

Cumulative (Quads) Heat Traps Heat Traps, 

2003-2030 & Insul. 2.5" Insul. & Ht. Traps, 3" 

Tank Insul. Tank Insul. & 

Electric Bottom Bottom Plastic Tank 

3" Insul., 

2" Insul., 2.5" Insul., Sidearm wI 

Heat Traps, Heat Traps, 80% Flue 

Gas Flue Baffle Flue Baffle Baffle & lID 

Quads at 

source 3.4 4.8 13.1 

NPV, 

1998$ 2.3 3.3 -17.4 

S02(kt) 4 -6 54 

NOx_(kt) 141 229 599 

C02 (Mt) 48 83 219 

Specific examples below: 

Potential Economic See NPV in table, above. 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or Energy See table, above 

Security Benefits Emission reductions in (Kt) for S02 and NOx, and (Mt) for CO2, Based on 1999 analysis, 

and includes oil. gas and electric. 

Status of Required Changes to Changes not required for standards. Final rule for test procedure was published in 1998. 

Test Procedures 

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out ofHCFCs for insulation (2003). Consumer Product Safety Commission 

initiative for prevention of ignition of flammable vapors by gas water heaters. 

Recommendations by Interested 

Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven or Demand-side management programs for high efficiency water heaters. 

Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues Electronic ignition has impact on customer utility. Fuel switching. Replacement blowing 

agent for insulation. Installation in small spaces. 

FY 1999 Priority High 

Proposed Scbedule and Rationale 

Proposed Scbedule NOPR-4/00 

Final Rule - 12100 

Rationale for Priority Level Potential energy savings are large. 

18 Based on DOE analysis May 1999. Energy savings reduced due to phase out ofHCFC-14Ib insulation blowing agent in 2003. 

47 Draft - July 17.2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric

Priority: Low

Relationship to Changes in I No change needed

Standard

Priori of Standard

International or Other

Coordinating Activities

Recommendation by

Interested Parties

Statutory Deadline

Issues

Proposed Schedule and Rationale:

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

High

Test procedure published in May 1998.

48 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Test Procedure 

Product: Residential Water Heaters - Gas, Oil & Electric 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level Test procedure published in May 1998. 

48 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Standards

Product: Room Air Conditioners

Priority: Low

111 111 MEW I Man

Potential Energy Savings

RMM I

The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy

from Regulatory Action; savings for this product.

Cumulative (Quads)

2000-2030

Potential Economic Not available

Benefits/Burdens

Potential Environmental or Not available

Energy Security Benefits

Status of Required Changes Not required for standards.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions EPA phase out of HCFC-22 refrigerant.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

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

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues Final Rule Issued - September 24, 1997

FY 2000 Priority Low

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule

Rationale for Priority Level

Final Rule Issued - September 24, 1997

49 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Room Air Conditioners 

Priority: Low 

Factors for Priority Setting 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 

2000-2030 

Potential Economic 

BenefitslBurdens 

Potential Environmental or 

Ener2Y Security Benefits 

Status of Required Changes 

to Test Procedures 

Other Reeulatorv Actions 

Recommendations by 

Interested Parties 

Evidence of Market-Driven 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Improvements 

Issues 

FY 2000 Priority 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards 

'" " , ~ 

~ Asse~~ mel!t ~ c 'c~ ='=="' _;':""'= Wi" _-x >/Wffi,,/§ 

The Department has not conducted any recent analysis regarding potential energy 

savings for this product. 

Not available 

Not available 

Not required for standards. 

EPA phase out ofHCFC-22 refrigerant. 

DSM programs. Labeling program vel)' effective. 

Final Rule Issued - September 24, 1997 

Low 

Final Rule Issued - September 24, 1997 

49 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Room Air Conditioners

Priority: Low

^)rs for Priority Settin

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

Rationale for Priority Level

Test Procedure not needed to be changed for standard

Low

50 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Room Air Conditioners 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

50 Draft - July 17,2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Product: Small Electric Motors

Priority: High

Standards Determination

Potential Energy Savings [0.8-4.5]19

from Regulatory Action;

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030

Potential Economic Not available.

Benefits/Burdens

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

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

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

Status of Required Changes IEEE 114 test procedure for single-phase induction motors is under review.

to Test Procedures

Other Regulatory Actions Small motors used in NAECA "covered roducts" (e.g. white oods are exempt.

Recommendations by

Interested Parties

Evidence of Market-Driven None known.

or Voluntary Efficiency

Improvements

Issues None.

FY 2000 Priority Medium

Proposed Schedule and Rationale

Proposed Schedule DOE plans to initiate determination in FY2001.

Potential energy savings are significant. Determination required by EPCA.

19 Based on draft DOE report May 1996.

51 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Small Electric Motors 

Priority: High 

Potential Energy Savings 

from Regulatory Action; 

Cumulative (Quads) 1998-

2030 

Potential Environmental or 

Energy Security Benefits 

Evidence of Market-Driven 

or Voluntary Efficiency 

Issues 

FY2000 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Standards Determination 

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 to be oil are minimal. 

IEEE 114 test procedure for single-phase induction motors is under review. 

None known. 

None. 

Medium 

DOE plans to initiate determination in FY2001. 

Potential energy savings are significant. Determination required by EPCA. 

19 Based on draft DOE report, May 1996. 

51 Draft - July 17, 2000 
YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01

Test Procedure

Product: Small Electric Motors

Priority: Low

actor ter Priuratt ttana;

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

Rationale for Priority Level

Low

Dependent on Determination.

ISSCssmep UNIUM W

52 Draft - July 17, 2000

EE-PS-96-001 COMMENT 52

YEAR 2001 PRIORITY SETTING COMMENT 01 

Product: Small Electric Motors 

Priority: Low 

Proposed Schedule and Rationale: 

Proposed Schedule 

Rationale for Priority Level 

Test Procedure 

Dependent on Detennination. 

52 Draft - July 17,2000