This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

2886 

Vol. 89, No. 11 

Wednesday, January 17, 2024 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[EERE–2017–BT–STD–0003] 

RIN 1904–AF56 

Energy Conservation Program: Energy 

Conservation Standards for 

Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, 

and Freezers 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act, as amended 

(‘‘EPCA’’), prescribes energy 

conservation standards for various 

consumer products and certain 

commercial and industrial equipment, 

including refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers. In this notice of 

proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’), DOE 

proposes new energy conservation 

standards for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers identical to those 

set forth in a direct final rule published 

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 

Register. If DOE receives adverse 

comment and determines that such 

comment may provide a reasonable 

basis for withdrawal of the direct final 

rule, DOE will publish a notice of 

withdrawal and will proceed with this 

proposed rule. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information regarding this NOPR no 

later than May 6, 2024. Comments 

regarding the likely competitive impact 

of the proposed standard should be sent 

to the Department of Justice contact 

listed in the ADDRESSES section on or 

before February 16, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: See section IV, ‘‘Public 

Participation,’’ for details. If DOE 

withdraws the direct final rule 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register, DOE will hold a 

public meeting to allow for additional 

comment on this proposed rule. DOE 

will publish notice of any meeting in 

the Federal Register. 

Interested persons are encouraged to 

submit comments using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov under docket 

number EERE–2017–BT–STD–0003. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. Alternatively, interested 

persons may submit comments, 

identified by docket number EERE– 

2017–BT–STD–0003, by any of the 

following methods: 

Email: 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number 

EERE–2017–BT–STD–0003 in the 

subject line of the message. 

Postal Mail: Appliance and 

Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, 

please submit all items on a compact 

disc (‘‘CD’’), in which case it is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance 

and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza 

SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, 

please submit all items on a CD, in 

which case it is not necessary to include 

printed copies. 

No telefacsimiles (‘‘faxes’’) will be 

accepted. For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on this process, see section 

IV of this document. 

Docket: The docket for this activity, 

which includes Federal Register 

notices, comments, and other 

supporting documents/materials, is 

available for review at 

www.regulations.gov. All documents in 

the docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. However, 

not all documents listed in the index 

may be publicly available, such as 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure. 

The docket web page can be found at 

www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE2017-BT-STD-0003. The docket web 

page contains instructions on how to 

access all documents, including public 

comments, in the docket. See section IV 

of this document for information on 

how to submit comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

EPCA requires the Attorney General 

to provide DOE a written determination 

of whether the proposed standard is 

likely to lessen competition. The U.S. 

Department of Justice Antitrust Division 

invites input from market participants 

and other interested persons with views 

on the likely competitive impact of the 

proposed standard. Interested persons 

may contact the Antitrust Division at 

energy.standards@usdoj.gov on or 

before the date specified in the DATES

section. Please indicate in the ‘‘Subject’’ 

line of your email the title and Docket 

Number of this proposed rulemaking. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mr. Lucas Adin, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 287– 

5904 Email: 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Matthew Schneider, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of the 

General Counsel, GC–33, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (240) 597– 

6265. Email: matthew.schneider@

hq.doe.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment, review other public 

comments and the docket, or participate 

in the public meeting, contact the 

Appliance and Equipment Standards 

Program staff at (202) 287–1445 or by 

Email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Synopsis of the Proposed Rule 

II. Introduction 

A. Authority 

B. Background 

1. Current Standards 

2. Current Test Procedure 

3. History of Standards Rulemaking for 

Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and 

Freezers, and Freezers 

4. The Joint Agreement 

III. Proposed Standards 

A. Benefits and Burdens of TSLs 

Considered for Refrigerator, RefrigeratorFreezer, and Freezer Standards 

B. Annualized Benefits and Costs of the 

Proposed Standards 

IV. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

B. Public Meeting 

V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

1. Description of Reasons Why Action Is 

Being Considered 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2887 

1All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through the Energy Act 

of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020), which 

reflect the last statutory amendments that impact 

Parts A and A–1 of EPCA. 

2For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A. 

3This document is available in the docket at: 

www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTSTD-0003-0103. 

4This document is available in the docket at: 

www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTSTD-0003-0104. 

5This document is available in the docket at: 

www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTSTD-0003-0105. 

2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, Rule 

3. Description and Estimated Number of 

Small Entities Regulated 

4. Description and Estimate of Compliance 

Requirements Including Differences in 

Cost, if Any, for Different Groups of 

Small Entities 

5. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict With 

Other Rules and Regulations 

6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule 

B. Materials Incorporated by Reference 

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Synopsis of the Proposed Rule 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act, Public Law 94–163, as amended 

(‘‘EPCA’’),1 authorizes DOE to regulate 

the energy efficiency of a number of 

consumer products and certain 

industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291– 

6317) Title III, Part B of EPCA 2

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles. (42 U.S.C. 6291– 

6309) These products include 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers, the subject of this proposed 

rulemaking. 

Pursuant to EPCA, any new or 

amended energy conservation standard 

must, among other things, be designed 

to achieve the maximum improvement 

in energy efficiency that DOE 

determines is technologically feasible 

and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new or 

amended standard must result in 

significant conservation of energy. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) 

In light of the above and under the 

authority provided by 42 U.S.C. 

6295(p)(4), DOE is proposing this rule 

establishing and amending the energy 

conservation standards for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers and is 

concurrently issuing a direct final rule 

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 

Register. DOE will proceed with this 

notice of proposed rulemaking only if it 

determines it must withdraw the direct 

final rule pursuant to the criteria 

provided in 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4). The 

amended standard levels in the 

proposed rule and the direct final rule 

were proposed in a letter submitted to 

DOE jointly by groups representing 

manufacturers, energy and 

environmental advocates, consumer 

groups, and a utility. This letter, titled 

‘‘Energy Efficiency Agreement of 2023’’ 

(hereafter, the ‘‘Joint Agreement’’ 3), 

recommends specific energy 

conservation standards for residential 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers that, in the commenters’ view, 

would satisfy the EPCA requirements in 

42 U.S.C. 6295(o). DOE subsequently 

received letters of support from States 

including New York, California, and 

Massachusetts 4 and utilities including 

San Diego Gas and Electric and 

Southern California Edison 5 advocating 

for the adoption of the recommended 

standards. As discussed in more detail 

in the accompanying direct final rule 

and in accordance with the provisions 

at 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4), DOE has 

determined that the recommendations 

contained in the Joint Agreement 

comply with the requirements of 42 

U.S.C. 6295(o). 

In accordance with these and other 

statutory provisions discussed in this 

document, DOE proposes new and 

amended energy conservation standards 

for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, 

and freezers. The standards for 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers are expressed in terms of 

integrated annual energy use (‘‘AEU’’), 

measured in kilowatt-hours per year 

(‘‘kWh/year’’), as measured according to 

DOE’s current test procedure codified at 

title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) part 430, subpart B, 

appendices A (‘‘appendix A’’) and B 

(‘‘appendix B’’). 

Table I.1 and Table I.2 present the 

proposed standards for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. The 

proposed standards the same as those 

recommended by the Joint Agreement. 

These standards apply to all products 

listed in Table I.1 and manufactured in, 

or imported into the United States 

starting on January 31, 2029, and all 

products listed in Table I.2 and 

manufactured in, or imported into, the 

United States starting on January 31, 

2030, as recommended in the Joint 

Agreement. 

TABLE I.1—ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATOR-FREEZERS, AND

FREEZERS WITH CORRESPONDING DOOR COEFFICIENT TABLE

[Compliance starting January 31, 2029] 

Product class 

(‘‘PC’’) 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

3–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer 8.24AV + 238.4 + 28I .............. 0.291av + 238.4 + 28I. 

3A–BI. Built-in All-refrigerators—automatic defrost ............................................. (7.22AV + 205.7)*K3ABI ......... (0.255av + 205.7)*K3ABI. 

4–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer.

(8.79AV + 307.4)*K4BI + 28I .. (0.310av + 307.4)*K4BI + 28I. 

5–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer.

(8.65AV + 309.9)*K5BI + 28I .. (0.305av + 309.9)*K5BI + 28I. 

5A. Refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

(7.76AV + 351.9)*K5A ............. (0.274av + 351.9)*K5A. 

5A–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer with through-the-door ice service.

(8.21AV + 370.7)*K5ABI ......... (0.290av + 370.7)*K5ABI. 

7–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer.

(8.82AV + 384.1)*K7BI ............ (0.311av + 384.1)*K7BI. 

8. Upright freezers with manual defrost .............................................................. 5.57AV + 193.7 ....................... 0.197av + 193.7. 

9–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost ......................................... (9.37AV + 247.9)*K9BI + 28I .. (0.331av + 247.9)*K9BI + 28I. 

9A–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost with through-the-door 

ice service.

9.86AV + 288.9 ....................... 0.348av + 288.9. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2888 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE I.1—ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATOR-FREEZERS, AND

FREEZERS WITH CORRESPONDING DOOR COEFFICIENT TABLE—Continued 

[Compliance starting January 31, 2029] 

Product class 

(‘‘PC’’) 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

10. Chest freezers and all other freezers except compact freezers ................... 7.29AV + 107.8 ....................... 0.257av + 107.8. 

10A. Chest freezers with automatic defrost ........................................................ 10.24AV + 148.1 ..................... 0.362av + 148.1. 

11. Compact refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators 

with manual defrost.

7.68AV + 214.5 ....................... 0.271av + 214.5. 

11A. Compact all-refrigerators—manual defrost ................................................. 6.66AV + 186.2 ....................... 0.235av + 186.2. 

12. Compact refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ............................. (5.32AV + 302.2)*K12 ............. (0.188av + 302.2)*K12. 

13. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer 10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I ............ 0.375av + 305.3 + 28I. 

13A. Compact all-refrigerators—automatic defrost ............................................. (8.25AV + 233.4)*K13A ........... (0.291av + 233.4)*K13A. 

14. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer.6.14AV + 411.2 + 28I .............. 0.217av + 411.2 + 28I. 

15. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer.

10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I ............ 0.375av + 305.3 + 28I. 

16. Compact upright freezers with manual defrost ............................................. 7.35AV + 191.8 ....................... 0.260av + 191.8. 

17. Compact upright freezers with automatic defrost ......................................... 9.15AV + 316.7 ....................... 0.323av + 316.7. 

18. Compact chest freezers ................................................................................ 7.86AV + 107.8 ....................... 0.278av + 107.8. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 

av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3ABI) are as defined in the following table. 

Door coefficient 

Products 

with a 

transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or door-in-door with added external 

doors 

K3ABI ............................................... 1.10 1.0 1.0. 

K4BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5A .................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3). 

K5ABI ............................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3). 

K7BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K9BI ................................................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K12 ................................................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K13A ................................................ 1.10 1.0 1.0. 

Notes: 

1 Nd is the number of external doors. 2The maximum Nd values are 2 for K12, 3 for K9BI, and 5 for all other K values. 

TABLE I.2—ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATOR-FREEZERS, AND

FREEZERS WITH CORRESPONDING DOOR COEFFICIENT TABLE

[Compliance starting January 31, 2030] 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

1. Refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators with manual defrost.6.79AV + 191.3 ....................... 0.240av + 191.3. 

1A. All-refrigerators—manual defrost .................................................................. 5.77AV + 164.6 ....................... 0.204av + 164.6. 

2. Refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ............................................. (6.79AV + 191.3)*K2 ............... (0.240av + 191.3)*K2. 

3. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer ............... 6.86AV + 198.6 + 28I .............. 0.242av + 198.6 + 28I. 

3A. All-refrigerators—automatic defrost .............................................................. (6.01AV + 171.4)*K3A ............. (0.212av + 171.4)*K3A. 

4. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer ............. (7.28AV + 254.9)*K4 + 28I ...... (0.257av + 254.9)*K4 + 28I. 

5. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer ......... (7.61AV + 272.6)*K5 + 28I ...... (0.269av + 272.6)*K5 + 28I. 

6. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

7.14AV + 280.0 ....................... 0.252av + 280.0. 

7. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

(7.31AV + 322.5)*K7 ............... (0.258av + 322.5)*K7. 

9. Upright freezers with automatic defrost .......................................................... (7.33AV + 194.1)*K9 + 28I ...... (0.259av + 194.1)*K9 + 28I. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 

Av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2889 

I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3A) are as defined in the following table. 

Door coefficient 

Products 

with a 

transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or door-in-door with added external 

doors 

K2 ..................................................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K4 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K3A .................................................. 1.10 1.0 1.0. 

K5 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K7 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K9 ..................................................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

Notes: 

1 Nd is the number of external doors. 2The maximum Nd values are 2 for K2, and 5 for all other K values. 

II. Introduction 

The following section briefly 

discusses the statutory authority 

underlying this proposed rule, as well 

as some of the relevant historical 

background related to the establishment 

of standards for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. 

A. Authority 

EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the 

energy efficiency of a number of 

consumer products and certain 

industrial equipment. Title III, Part B of 

EPCA established the Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles. 

These products include refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the 

subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 

6292(a)(1)) EPCA prescribed energy 

conservation standards for these 

products (42 U.S.C. 6295(b)(1)), and 

directs DOE to conduct future 

rulemakings to determine whether to 

amend these standards. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(b)(3)) EPCA further provides that, 

not later than 6 years after the issuance 

of any final rule establishing or 

amending a standard, DOE must publish 

either a notice of determination that 

standards for the product do not need to 

be amended, or a NOPR including new 

proposed energy conservation standards 

(proceeding to a final rule, as 

appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) 

The energy conservation program 

under EPCA consists essentially of four 

parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the 

establishment of Federal energy 

conservation standards, and (4) 

certification and enforcement 

procedures. Relevant provisions of 

EPCA specifically include definitions 

(42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 

U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 

U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation 

standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the 

authority to require information and 

reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 

6296). 

Federal energy efficiency 

requirements for covered products 

established under EPCA generally 

supersede State laws and regulations 

concerning energy conservation testing, 

labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 

6297(a)–(c)) DOE may, however, grant 

waivers of Federal preemption for 

particular State laws or regulations, in 

accordance with the procedures and 

other provisions set forth under EPCA. 

(see 42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) 

Subject to certain criteria and 

conditions, DOE is required to develop 

test procedures to measure the energy 

efficiency, energy use, or estimated 

annual operating cost of each covered 

product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A) and 

(r)) Manufacturers of covered products 

must use the prescribed DOE test 

procedure as the basis for certifying to 

DOE that their products comply with 

the applicable energy conservation 

standards adopted under EPCA and 

when making representations to the 

public regarding the energy use or 

efficiency of those products. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(c) and 6295(s)) Similarly, DOE 

must use these test procedures to 

determine whether the products comply 

with standards adopted pursuant to 

EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) The DOE test 

procedures for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers appear at title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(‘‘CFR’’) part 430, subpart B, appendices 

A (‘‘appendix A’’) and B (‘‘appendix 

B’’). 

DOE must follow specific statutory 

criteria for prescribing new or amended 

standards for covered products, 

including refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezer. Any new or 

amended standard for a covered product 

must be designed to achieve the 

maximum improvement in energy 

efficiency that the Secretary of Energy 

determines is technologically feasible 

and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(2)(A) Furthermore, DOE may 

not adopt any standard that would not 

result in the significant conservation of 

energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)) 

Moreover, DOE may not prescribe a 

standard: (1) for certain products, 

including refrigerators, refrigeratorsfreezers, and freezers, if no test 

procedure has been established for the 

product, or (2) if DOE determines by 

rule that the standard is not 

technologically feasible or economically 

justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A)–(B)) 

In deciding whether a proposed 

standard is economically justified, DOE 

must determine whether the benefits of 

the standard exceed its burdens. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) DOE must make 

this determination after receiving 

comments on the proposed standard, 

and by considering, to the greatest 

extent practicable, the following seven 

statutory factors: 

(1) The economic impact of the 

standard on manufacturers and 

consumers of the products subject to the 

standard; 

(2) The savings in operating costs 

throughout the estimated average life of 

the covered products in the type (or 

class) compared to any increase in the 

price, initial charges, or maintenance 

expenses for the covered products that 

are likely to result from the standard; 

(3) The total projected amount of 

energy (or as applicable, water) savings 

likely to result directly from the 

standard; 

(4) Any lessening of the utility or the 

performance of the covered products 

likely to result from the standard; 

(5) The impact of any lessening of 

competition, as determined in writing 

by the Attorney General, that is likely to 

result from the standard; 

(6) The need for national energy and 

water conservation; and 

(7) Other factors the Secretary of 

Energy (‘‘Secretary’’) considers relevant. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)–(VII)) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2890 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable 

presumption that a standard is 

economically justified if the Secretary 

finds that the additional cost to the 

consumer of purchasing a product 

complying with an energy conservation 

standard level will be less than three 

times the value of the energy savings 

during the first year that the consumer 

will receive as a result of the standard, 

as calculated under the applicable test 

procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) 

EPCA, as codified also contains what 

is known as an ‘‘anti-backsliding’’ 

provision, which prevents the Secretary 

from prescribing any amended standard 

that either increases the maximum 

allowable energy use or decreases the 

minimum required energy efficiency of 

a covered product. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(1)) Also, the Secretary may not 

prescribe an amended or new standard 

if interested persons have established by 

a preponderance of the evidence that 

the standard is likely to result in the 

unavailability in the United States in 

any covered product type (or class) of 

performance characteristics (including 

reliability), features, sizes, capacities, 

and volumes that are substantially the 

same as those generally available in the 

United States. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4)) 

EPCA specifies requirements when 

promulgating an energy conservation 

standard for a covered product that has 

two or more subcategories. DOE must 

specify a different standard level for a 

type or class of product that has the 

same function or intended use, if DOE 

determines that products within such 

group: (A) consume a different kind of 

energy from that consumed by other 

covered products within such type (or 

class); or (B) have a capacity or other 

performance-related feature which other 

products within such type (or class) do 

not have and such feature justifies a 

higher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(q)(1)) In determining whether a 

performance-related feature justifies a 

different standard for a group of 

products, DOE must consider such 

factors as the utility to the consumer of 

the feature and other factors DOE deems 

appropriate. Id. Any rule prescribing 

such a standard must include an 

explanation of the basis on which such 

higher or lower level was established. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2)) 

Additionally, pursuant to the 

amendments contained in the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(‘‘EISA 2007’’), Public Law 110–140, 

any final rule for new or amended 

energy conservation standards 

promulgated after July 1, 2010, is 

required to address standby mode and 

off mode energy use. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(3)) Specifically, when DOE 

adopts a standard for a covered product 

after that date, it must, if justified by the 

criteria for adoption of standards under 

EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)), incorporate 

standby mode and off mode energy use 

into a single standard, or, if that is not 

feasible, adopt a separate standard for 

such energy use for that product. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)(A)–(B)) DOE’s current 

test procedures for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers 

address standby mode and off mode 

energy use. 

Finally, EISA 2007 amended EPCA, in 

relevant part, to grant DOE authority to 

directly issue a final rule (i.e., a ‘‘direct 

final rule’’) establishing an energy 

conservation standard on receipt of a 

statement submitted jointly by 

interested persons that are fairly 

representative of relevant points of view 

(including representatives of 

manufacturers of covered products, 

States, and efficiency advocates), as 

determined by the Secretary, that 

contains recommendations with respect 

to an energy or water conservation 

standard (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)) Pursuant 

to 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4), the Secretary 

must also determine whether a jointlysubmitted recommendation for an 

energy or water conservation standard 

satisfies 42 U.S.C. 6295(o). 

A NOPR that proposes an identical 

energy efficiency standard must be 

published simultaneously with the 

direct final rule, and DOE must provide 

a public comment period of at least 110 

days on this proposal. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(p)(4)(A)–(B)) Based on the 

comments received during this period, 

the direct final rule will either become 

effective, or DOE will withdraw it not 

later than 120 days after its issuance if 

(1) one or more adverse comments is 

received, and (2) DOE determines that 

those comments, when viewed in light 

of the rulemaking record related to the 

direct final rule, may provide a 

reasonable basis for withdrawal of the 

direct final rule under 42 U.S.C. 

6295(o). (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)(C)) 

Receipt of an alternative joint 

recommendation may also trigger a DOE 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

same manner. Id. After withdrawing a 

direct final rule, DOE must proceed 

with the notice of proposed rulemaking 

published simultaneously with the 

direct final rule and publish in the 

Federal Register the reasons why the 

direct final rule was withdrawn. Id. 

DOE has previously explained its 

interpretation of its direct final rule 

authority. In a final rule amending the 

Department’s ‘‘Procedures, 

Interpretations and Policies for 

Consideration of New or Revised Energy 

Conservation Standards for Consumer 

Products’’ at 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

C, appendix A, DOE noted that it may 

issue standards recommended by 

interested persons that are fairly 

representative of relative points of view 

as a direct final rule when the 

recommended standards are in 

accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or 

6313(a)(6)(B), as applicable. 86 FR 

70892, 70912 (Dec. 13, 2021). But the 

direct final rule provision in EPCA, 

under which this proposed rule is 

issued, does not impose additional 

requirements applicable to other 

standards rulemakings, which is 

consistent with the unique 

circumstances of rules issued as 

consensus agreements under DOE’s 

direct final rule authority. Id. DOE’s 

discretion remains bounded by its 

statutory mandate to adopt a standard 

that results in the maximum 

improvement in energy efficiency that is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified—a requirement 

found in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o). Id. As such, 

DOE’s review and analysis of the Joint 

Agreement is limited to whether the 

recommended standards satisfy the 

criteria in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o). 

B. Background 

1. Current Standards 

In a final rule published on 

September 15, 2011, DOE prescribed the 

current energy conservation standards 

for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, 

and freezers. 76 FR 57516 (‘‘September 

2011 Final Rule’’). These standards are 

set forth in DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR 

430.32(a) and are shown in Table I.2. 

These standards are expressed in terms 

of kilo-watt hours per year (‘‘kWh/yr’’). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2891 

TABLE II.2—CURRENT FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATORFREEZERS, AND FREEZERS

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

1. Refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators with manual defrost.7.99AV + 225.0 ....................... 0.282av + 225.0. 

1A. All-refrigerators—manual defrost .................................................................. 6.79AV + 193.6 ....................... 0.240av + 193.6. 

2. Refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ............................................. 7.99AV + 225.0 ....................... 0.282av + 225.0. 

3. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer without 

an automatic icemaker.

8.07AV + 233.7 ....................... 0.285av + 233.7. 

3–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer 

without an automatic icemaker.

9.15AV + 264.9 ....................... 0.323av + 264.9. 

3I. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with an 

automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.

8.07AV + 317.7 ....................... 0.285av + 317.7. 

3I–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.9.15AV + 348.9 ....................... 0.323av + 348.9. 

3A. All-refrigerators—automatic defrost .............................................................. 7.07AV + 201.6 ....................... 0.250av + 201.6. 

3A–BI. Built-in All-refrigerators—automatic defrost ............................................. 8.02AV + 228.5 ....................... 0.283av + 228.5. 

4. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer without 

an automatic icemaker.

8.51AV + 297.8 ....................... 0.301av + 297.8. 

4–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer without an automatic icemaker.

10.22AV + 357.4 ..................... 0.361av + 357.4. 

4I. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with an 

automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.

8.51AV + 381.8 ....................... 0.301av + 381.8. 

4I–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.

10.22AV + 441.4 ..................... 0.361av + 441.4. 

5. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer without an automatic icemaker.8.85AV + 317.0 ....................... 0.312av + 317.0. 

5–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer without an automatic icemaker.

9.40AV + 336.9 ....................... 0.332av + 336.9. 

5I. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with 

an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.

8.85AV + 401.0 ....................... 0.312av + 401.0. 

5I–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.

9.40AV + 420.9 ....................... 0.332av + 420.9. 

5A. Refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

9.25AV + 475.4 ....................... 0.327av + 475.4. 

5A–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer with through-the-door ice service.

9.83AV + 499.9 ....................... 0.347av + 499.9. 

6. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

8.40AV + 385.4 ....................... 0.297av + 385.4. 

7. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

8.54AV + 432.8 ....................... 0.302av + 432.8. 

7–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer with through-the-door ice service.

10.25AV + 502.6 ..................... 0.362av + 502.6. 

8. Upright freezers with manual defrost .............................................................. 5.57AV + 193.7 ....................... 0.197av + 193.7. 

9. Upright freezers with automatic defrost without an automatic icemaker ........ 8.62AV + 228.3 ....................... 0.305av + 228.3. 

9I. Upright freezers with automatic defrost with an automatic icemaker ............ 8.62AV + 312.3 ....................... 0.305av + 312.3. 

9–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost without an automatic icemaker.9.86AV + 260.9 ....................... 0.348av + 260.9. 

9I–BI. Built-in upright freezers with automatic defrost with an automatic icemaker.9.86AV + 344.9 ....................... 0.348av + 344.9. 

10. Chest freezers and all other freezers except compact freezers ................... 7.29AV + 107.8 ....................... 0.257av + 107.8. 

10A. Chest freezers with automatic defrost ........................................................ 10.24AV + 148.1 ..................... 0.362av + 148.1. 

11. Compact refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators 

with manual defrost.

9.03AV + 252.3 ....................... 0.319av + 252.3. 

11A.Compact all-refrigerators—manual defrost .................................................. 7.84AV + 219.1 ....................... 0.277av + 219.1. 

12. Compact refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ............................. 5.91AV + 335.8 ....................... 0.209av + 335.8. 

13. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer 11.80AV + 339.2 ..................... 0.417av + 339.2. 

13I. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker.11.80AV + 423.2 ..................... 0.417av + 423.2. 

13A. Compact all-refrigerators—automatic defrost ............................................. 9.17AV + 259.3 ....................... 0.324av + 259.3. 

14. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer.6.82AV + 456.9 ....................... 0.241av + 456.9. 

14I. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer with an automatic icemaker.

6.82AV + 540.9 ....................... 0.241av + 540.9. 

15. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer.

11.80AV + 339.2 ..................... 0.417av + 339.2. 

15I. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer with an automatic icemaker.

11.80AV + 423.2 ..................... 0.417av + 423.2. 

16. Compact upright freezers with manual defrost ............................................. 8.65AV + 225.7 ....................... 0.306av + 225.7. 

17. Compact upright freezers with automatic defrost ......................................... 10.17AV + 351.9 ..................... 0.359av + 351.9. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2892 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

6The signatories to the Joint Agreement include 

AHAM, American Council for an Energy-Efficient 

Economy, Alliance for Water Efficiency, Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project, Consumer Federation 

of America, Consumer Reports, Earthjustice, 

National Consumer Law Center, Natural Resources 

Defense Council, Northwest Energy Efficiency 

Alliance, and Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 

Members of AHAM’s Major Appliance Division that 

manufacture the affected products include: Alliance 

Laundry Systems, LLC; Asko Appliances AB; Beko 

US Inc.; Brown Stove Works, Inc.; BSH; Danby 

Products, Ltd.; Electrolux Home Products, Inc.; 

Elicamex S.A. de C.V.; Faber; Fotile America; GEA, 

a Haier Company; L’Atelier Paris Haute Design LLG; 

LGEUSA; Liebherr USA, Co.; Midea America Corp.; 

Miele, Inc.; Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration 

Systems (PAPRSA) Corporation of America; Perlick 

Corporation; Samsung; Sharp Electronics 

Corporation; Smeg S.p.A; Sub-Zero Group, Inc.; The 

Middleby Corporation; U-Line Corporation; Viking 

Range, LLC; and Whirlpool. 

7The Joint Agreement is available in the docket 

at: www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTSTD-0003-0103. 

TABLE II.2—CURRENT FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATORFREEZERS, AND FREEZERS—Continued 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

18. Compact chest freezers ................................................................................ 9.25AV + 136.8 ....................... 0.327av + 136.8. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of this part. 

av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

2. Current Test Procedure 

On October 12, 2021, DOE published 

a test procedure final rule (‘‘October 

2021 TP Final Rule’’) establishing test 

procedures for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers, at 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendices A 

(‘‘appendix A’’) and B (‘‘appendix B’’). 

86 FR 56790. The test procedure 

adopted the latest version of the 

relevant industry standard published by 

the Association of Home Appliance 

Manufacturers (‘‘AHAM’’), updated in 

2019, AHAM Standard HRF–1, ‘‘Energy 

and Internal Volume of Refrigerating 

Appliances’’ (‘‘HRF–1–2019’’). 10 CFR 

430.3(i)(4). The standard levels 

proposed in this NOPR are based on the 

AEU metrics as measured according to 

appendix A and appendix B. 

3. History of Standards Rulemaking for 

Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and 

Freezers, and Freezers 

The National Appliance Energy 

Conservation Act of 1987 (‘‘NAECA’’), 

Public Law 100–12, amended EPCA to 

establish prescriptive standards for 

refrigeration products, with 

requirements that DOE conduct two 

cycles of rulemakings to determine 

whether to amend these standards (42 

U.S.C. 6295 (b)(1), (2), (3)(A)(i), and 

(3)(B)–(C)). DOE completed the first of 

these rulemaking cycles in 1989 and 

1990 by adopting amended performance 

standards for all refrigeration products 

manufactured on or after January 1, 

1993. 54 FR 47916 (November 17, 1989); 

55 FR 42845 (October 24, 1990). DOE 

Completed a second rulemaking cycle to 

amend the standards for refrigeration 

products by issuing a final rule in 1997, 

which adopted the current standards for 

these products. 62 FR 23102 (April 28, 

1997). 

In 2005, DOE granted a petition, 

submitted by a coalition of state 

governments, utility companies, 

consumer and low-income advocacy 

groups, and environmental and energy 

efficiency organizations, requesting a 

rulemaking to amend the standards for 

residential refrigerator-freezers. DOE 

then conducted limited analyses to 

examine the technological and 

economic feasibility of amended 

standards at the ENERGY STAR levels 

that were in effect for 2005 for the two 

most popular product classes of 

refrigerator-freezers. These analyses not 

only identified potential energy savings, 

benefits, and burdens from such 

standards, but also assessed other issues 

related to them. 

DOE initiated a rulemaking and also 

published a notice announcing the 

availability of the framework document 

and a public meeting to discuss the 

document in September 2008. It also 

requested public comment on the 

published document. 73 FR 54089 

(September 18, 2008). The framework 

document described the procedural and 

analytical approaches that DOE 

anticipated using to evaluate energy 

conservation standards for refrigeration 

products and identified various issues 

to resolve during the rulemaking. DOE 

published a final rule on September 15, 

2011, to satisfy the statutory 

requirement that DOE publish a final 

rule to determine whether to amend the 

standards for refrigeration products 

manufactured in 2014. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(b)(4)) The limited 2005 analyses 

served as background for the more 

extensive analysis conducted for final 

rule published on September 15, 2011. 

76 FR 57516. 

4. The Joint Agreement 

On September 25, 2023, DOE received 

the Joint Agreement for various 

consumer products, including 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers, submitted jointly by groups 

representing manufacturers, energy and 

environmental advocates, consumer 

groups, and a utility.6 The Joint 

Agreement recommends amended 

standard levels for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers as 

presented in Table II.3. (Joint 

Agreement, No. 103 at p. 4) Details of 

the Joint Agreement recommendations 

for other products are provided in the 

Joint Agreement posted in the docket.7

TABLE II.3—RECOMMENDED AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL REFRIGERATORS, 

REFRIGERATOR-FREEZERS, AND FREEZERS

Product class Efficiency level Level 

(based on AV (ft3)) Compliance date 

1. Refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than allrefrigerators with manual defrost.EL 3 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 6.79AV + 191.3 .................. January 31, 2030. 

1A. All-refrigerators—manual defrost. 5.77AV + 164.6.

2. Refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost. (6.79AV + 191.3)*K2.


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2893 

TABLE II.3—RECOMMENDED AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL REFRIGERATORS, 

REFRIGERATOR-FREEZERS, AND FREEZERS—Continued 

Product class Efficiency level Level 

(based on AV (ft3)) Compliance date 

3. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with topmounted freezer. 6.86AV + 198.6 +28I.

3A. All-refrigerators—automatic defrost. (6.01AV + 171.4)*K3A.

4. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with sidemounted freezer.EL 3 ............................................. 7.28AV + 254.9 .................. January 31, 2030. 

5. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottommounted freezer.EL 2 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... (7.61AV + 272.6)*K5 + 28I January 31, 2030. 

5A. Refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottommounted freezer with through-the-door ice service.EL 2 ............................................. (7.76AV + 351.9)*K5A ........ January 31, 2029. 

6. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with topmounted freezer with through-the-door ice service.EL 3 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 7.14AV + 280.0 .................. January 31, 2030. 

7. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with sidemounted freezer with through-the-door ice service.EL 3 ............................................. (7.31AV + 322.5)*K7 .......... January 31, 2030. 

8. Upright freezers with manual defrost ............................ No Change (DOE Proposed 

Level).

5.57AV + 193.7 .................. January 31, 2029. 

9. Upright freezers with automatic defrost ........................ EL 2 ............................................. 7.33AV + 194.1 + 28I ......... January 31, 2030. 

10. Chest freezers and all other freezers except compact 

freezers.

No Change (DOE Proposed 

Level).

7.29AV + 107.8 .................. January 31, 2029. 

10A. Chest freezers with automatic defrost ...................... No Change (DOE Proposed 

Level).

10.24AV + 148.1 ................ January 31, 2029. 

11. Compact refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other 

than all-refrigerators with manual defrost.

EL 2 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 7.68AV + 214.5 .................. January 31, 2029. 

11A. Compact all-refrigerators—manual defrost. 6.66AV + 186.2.

12. Compact refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost.10% Savings ............................... (5.32AV + 302.2)*K12 ........ January 31, 2029. 

13. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost 

with top-mounted freezer.

EL 1 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I ....... January 31, 2029. 

13A. Compact all-refrigerators—automatic defrost (8.25AV + 233.4)*K13A.

14. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost 

with side-mounted freezer. 

6.14AV + 411.2 + 28I.

15. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost 

with bottom-mounted freezer. 

10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I.

16. Compact upright freezers with manual defrost ........... EL 2 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 7.35AV + 191.8 .................. January 31, 2029. 

17. Compact upright freezers with automatic defrost ....... EL 1 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 9.15AV + 316.7 .................. January 31, 2029. 

18. Compact chest freezers .............................................. EL 2 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 7.86AV + 107.8 .................. January 31, 2029. 

3–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with 

top-mounted freezer.

EL 3 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 8.24AV + 238.4 + 28I ......... January 31, 2029. 

3A–BI. Built-in All-refrigerators—automatic defrost. (7.22AV + 205.7)*K3ABI.

4–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost 

with side-mounted freezer.

EL 4 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 8.79AV + 307.4 + 28I ......... January 31, 2029. 

5–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost 

with bottom-mounted freezer.

EL 1 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... (8.65AV + 309.9)*K5BI + 

28I.

January 31, 2029. 

5A–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost 

with bottom-mounted freezer with through-the-door ice 

service.

EL 3 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... (8.21AV + 370.7)*K5ABI .... January 31, 2029. 

7–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost 

with side-mounted freezer.

EL 4 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... (8.82AV + 384.1)*K7BI ....... January 31, 2029. 

9–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost ...... EL 1 (DOE Proposed Level) ....... 9.37AV + 247.9 + 28I ......... January 31, 2029. 

9A–BI. NEW PRODUCT CLASS: Upright built-in freezer 

w/auto defrost and through-door-ice.

N/A .............................................. 9.86AV + 288.9 .................. January 31, 2029. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 

Av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3A) are as defined below. 

Door coefficient 

Products with 

a transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or door-in-door with added external 

doors 

K2 ..................................................... N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K3A .................................................. 1.10 N/A N/A. 

K3ABI ............................................... 1.10 N/A N/A. 

K13A ................................................ 1.10 N/A N/A. 

K4 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K4BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5A .................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2894 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

8The TSD is available in the docket for this 

rulemaking at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0003-0046/ 

document. 

Door coefficient 

Products with 

a transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or door-in-door with added external 

doors 

K5ABI ............................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3). 

K7 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K7BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K9 ..................................................... N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K9BI ................................................. N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K12 ................................................... N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

Note: Nd is the number of external doors. 

DOE has evaluated the Joint 

Agreement and believes that it meets the 

EPCA requirements for issuance of a 

direct final rule. As a result, DOE 

published a direct final rule establishing 

energy conservation standards for 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register. If DOE receives 

adverse comments that may provide a 

reasonable basis for withdrawal and 

withdraws the direct final rule, DOE 

will consider those comments and any 

other comments received in determining 

how to proceed with this proposed rule. 

For further background information 

on these proposed standards and the 

supporting analyses, please see the 

direct final rule published elsewhere in 

this issue of the Federal Register. That 

document and the accompanying 

technical support document (‘‘TSD’’) 

contain an in-depth discussion of the 

analyses conducted in evaluating the 

Joint Agreement, the methodologies 

DOE used in conducting those analyses, 

and the analytical results. 

DOE also notes that it was conducting 

a rulemaking to consider amending the 

standards for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers when the Joint 

Agreement was submitted. As part of 

that process, DOE published a NOPR 

and announced a public webinar to 

respond to initial comments on 

February 27, 2023 (‘‘February 2023 

NOPR’’). 88 FR 12452. DOE also held a 

public webinar on April 11, 2023, to 

discuss and receive comments on the 

February 2023 NOPR and NOPR TSD. 

The NOPR TSD is available at: 

www.regulations.gov/document/EERE2017-BT-STD-0003-0045. 

III. Proposed Standards 

When considering new or amended 

energy conservation standards, the 

standards that DOE adopts for any type 

(or class) of covered product must be 

designed to achieve the maximum 

improvement in energy efficiency that 

the Secretary determines is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(2)(A)) In determining whether a 

standard is economically justified, the 

Secretary must determine whether the 

benefits of the standard exceed its 

burdens by, to the greatest extent 

practicable, considering the seven 

statutory factors discussed previously. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) The new or 

amended standard must also result in 

significant conservation of energy. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) 

DOE considered the impacts of 

amended standards for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers at each 

trial standard level (‘‘TSL’’), beginning 

with the maximum technologically 

feasible (‘‘max-tech’’) level, to determine 

whether that level was economically 

justified. Where the max-tech level was 

not justified, DOE then considered the 

next most efficient level and undertook 

the same evaluation until it reached the 

highest efficiency level that is both 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified and saves a 

significant amount of energy. DOE refers 

to this process as the ‘‘walk-down’’ 

analysis. 

To aid the reader as DOE discusses 

the benefits and/or burdens of each TSL, 

tables in this section present a summary 

of the results of DOE’s quantitative 

analysis for each TSL. In addition to the 

quantitative results presented in the 

tables, DOE also considers other 

burdens and benefits that affect 

economic justification. These include 

the impacts on identifiable subgroups of 

consumers who may be 

disproportionately affected by a national 

standard and impacts on employment. 

DOE also notes that the economics 

literature provides a wide-ranging 

discussion of how consumers trade off 

upfront costs and energy savings in the 

absence of government intervention. 

Much of this literature attempts to 

explain why consumers appear to 

undervalue energy efficiency 

improvements. There is evidence that 

consumers undervalue future energy 

savings as a result of (1) a lack of 

information; (2) a lack of sufficient 

salience of the long-term or aggregate 

benefits; (3) a lack of sufficient savings 

to warrant delaying or altering 

purchases; (4) excessive focus on the 

short term, in the form of inconsistent 

weighting of future energy cost savings 

relative to available returns on other 

investments; (5) computational or other 

difficulties associated with the 

evaluation of relevant tradeoffs; and (6) 

a divergence in incentives (for example, 

between renters and owners, or builders 

and purchasers). Having less than 

perfect foresight and a high degree of 

uncertainty about the future, consumers 

may trade off these types of investments 

at a higher than expected rate between 

current consumption and uncertain 

future energy cost savings. 

In DOE’s current regulatory analysis, 

potential changes in the benefits and 

costs of a regulation due to changes in 

consumer purchase decisions are 

included in two ways. First, if 

consumers forego the purchase of a 

product in the standards case, this 

decreases sales for product 

manufacturers, and the impact on 

manufacturers attributed to lost revenue 

is included in the manufacturer impact 

analysis (‘‘MIA’’). Second, DOE 

accounts for energy savings attributable 

only to products actually used by 

consumers in the standards case; if a 

standard decreases the number of 

products purchased by consumers, this 

decreases the potential energy savings 

from an energy conservation standard. 

DOE provides estimates of shipments 

and changes in the volume of product 

purchases in chapter 9 of the direct final 

rule TSD 8 available in the docket for 

this rulemaking. However, DOE’s 

current analysis does not explicitly 

control for heterogeneity in consumer 

preferences, preferences across 

subcategories of products or specific 

features, or consumer price sensitivity 

variation according to household 

income. 

While DOE is not prepared at present 

to provide a fuller quantifiable 

framework for estimating the benefits 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2895 

and costs of changes in consumer 

purchase decisions due to an energy 

conservation standard, DOE is 

committed to developing a framework 

that can support empirical quantitative 

tools for improved assessment of the 

consumer welfare impacts of appliance 

standards. DOE has posted a paper that 

discusses the issue of consumer welfare 

impacts of appliance energy 

conservation standards, and potential 

enhancements to the methodology by 

which these impacts are defined and 

estimated in the regulatory process. 

DOE welcomes comments on how to 

more fully assess the potential impact of 

energy conservation standards on 

consumer choice and how to quantify 

this impact in its regulatory analysis in 

future rulemakings. 

A. Benefits and Burdens of TSLs 

Considered for Refrigerator, 

Refrigerator-freezer, and Freezer 

Standards 

Table III.1 and Table III.2 summarize 

the quantitative impacts estimated for 

each TSL for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers. The national 

impacts are measured over the lifetime 

of refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers purchased in the 30-year period 

that begins in the anticipated year of 

compliance with amended standards 

(2027–2056 for all TSLs except TSL 4; 

for TSL 4, 2029–2058 for the product 

classes listed in Table III.3 and 2030– 

2059 for the product classes listed in 

Table IIII.4). The energy savings, 

emissions reductions, and value of 

emissions reductions refer to full-fuelcycle (‘‘FFC’’) results. The efficiency 

levels contained in each TSL are 

described in section V.A of the direct 

final rule published elsewhere in this 

issue of the Federal Register. 

TABLE III.1—SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR REFRIGERATOR, REFRIGERATOR-FREEZER, AND FREEZER TSLS: 

NATIONAL IMPACTS

Category TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 

Cumulative FFC National Energy Savings 

Quads ....................................................... 2.76 3.38 4.72 5.61 6.01 9.57 

Cumulative FFC Emissions Reduction 

CO2 (million metric tons) ......................... 50.79 62.34 86.98 100.76 110.76 176.19 

CH4 (thousand tons) ................................ 419.63 514.70 717.90 846.48 914.15 1455.24 

N2O (thousand tons) ................................ 0.50 0.62 0.87 0.99 1.10 1.75 

SO2 (thousand tons) ................................ 16.00 19.64 27.40 31.57 34.89 55.49 

NOX (thousand tons) ................................ 93.17 114.33 159.50 186.11 203.10 323.18 

Hg (tons) .................................................. 0.11 0.13 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.38 

Present Value of Benefits and Costs (3% discount rate, billion 2022$) 

Consumer Operating Cost Savings ......... 19.68 24.06 33.21 36.36 41.23 63.08 

Climate Benefits * ..................................... 2.67 3.29 4.60 5.02 5.87 9.29 

Health Benefits ** ..................................... 5.24 6.46 9.03 9.80 11.50 18.24 

Total Benefits † ................................. 27.60 33.81 46.85 51.18 58.60 90.61 

Consumer Incremental Product Costs ‡ .. 3.23 4.64 8.56 9.38 15.43 37.66 

Consumer Net Benefits ............................ 16.45 19.42 24.65 26.98 25.80 25.42 

Total Net Benefits ............................. 24.37 29.17 38.29 41.80 43.17 52.96 

Present Value of Benefits and Costs (7% discount rate, billion 2022$) 

Consumer Operating Cost Savings ......... 8.36 10.25 14.17 14.00 17.60 26.88 

Climate Benefits * ..................................... 2.67 3.29 4.60 5.02 5.87 9.29 

Health Benefits ** ..................................... 2.04 2.52 3.53 3.45 4.50 7.12 

Total Benefits † ................................. 13.07 16.06 22.31 22.47 27.97 43.29 

Consumer Incremental Product Costs ..... 1.92 2.75 5.00 4.96 8.96 21.65 

Consumer Net Benefits ............................ 6.44 7.50 9.17 9.04 8.64 5.23 

Total Net Benefits ............................. 11.15 13.32 17.31 17.51 19.01 21.64 

Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers shipped during the period 

2027–2056 for all TSLs except TSL 4; for TSL 4, 2029–2058 for the product classes listed in Table III.3 and 2030–2059 for the product classes 

listed in Table IIII.4. These results include consumer, climate, and health benefits that accrue after 2056 from the products shipped during the 

period 2027–2056 for all TSLs except TSL 4; for TSL 4, 2029–2058 for the product classes listed in Table III.3 and 2030–2059 for the product 

classes listed in Table IIII.4. 

* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the four different estimates of the social cost of carbon (SC–CO2), methane 

(SC–CH4), and nitrous oxide (SC–N2O) (model average at 2.5 percent, 3 percent, and 5 percent discount rates; 95th percentile at 3 percent discount rate). Together, these represent the global SC–GHG. For presentational purposes of this table, the climate benefits associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3 percent discount rate are shown; however, DOE emphasizes the importance and value of considering the benefits calculated using all four sets of SC–GHG estimates. To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, this analysis uses the interim estimates 

presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 

13990 published in February 2021 by the Interagency Working Group (‘‘IWG’’) on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases. See 

www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/TechnicalSupportDocument_SocialCostofCarbonMethaneNitrousOxide.pdf. 

** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOX and SO2. DOE is currently only monetizing (for NOX and SO2) PM2.5 precursor health benefits and (for NOX) ozone precursor health benefits, but will continue to assess the ability to monetize other effects such as 

health benefits from reductions in direct PM2.5 emissions. The health benefits are presented at real discount rates of 3 and 7 percent. For more 

details, see section IV.L of the direct final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2896 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

† Total and net benefits include consumer, climate, and health benefits. For presentation purposes, total and net benefits for both the 3-percent 

and 7-percent cases are presented using the average SC–GHG with 3-percent discount rate. 

TABLE III.2—SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR REFRIGERATOR, REFRIGERATOR-FREEZER, AND FREEZER TSLS: 

MANUFACTURER AND CONSUMER IMPACTS

Category TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 

Manufacturer Impacts 

Industry NPV (million 2022$) (No-newstandards case INPV = 4,905.8) ....... 4,841.5 to 4,891.4 4,798.5 to 4,870.1 4,387.6 to 4,514.7 4,401.3 to 4,522.3 3,839.9 to 4,061.6 3,080.1 to 3,604.0 

Industry NPV (% change) ..................... (1.3) to (0.3) (2.2) to (0.7) (10.6) to (8.0) (10.3) to (7.8) (21.7) to (17.2) (37.2) to (26.5) 

Consumer Average LCC Savings (2022$) 

PC 3 ...................................................... 30.50 40.14 40.14 50.91 43.46 0.03 

PC 5 ...................................................... 46.90 46.90 45.47 55.23 45.47 20.22 

PC 5BI ................................................... 86.19 86.19 86.19 91.13 86.19 (30.73) 

PC 5A .................................................... 127.59 127.59 124.76 133.27 122.18 122.18 

PC 7 ...................................................... 52.10 70.96 134.10 142.56 73.96 69.71 

PC 9 ...................................................... 62.02 62.02 62.02 56.17 62.02 26.33 

PC 10 .................................................... 5.94 N/A N/A N/A N/A (8.65) 

PC 11A (residential) .............................. 0.00 0.00 8.11 8.35 8.11 (4.66) 

PC 11A (commercial) ............................ 0.00 0.00 3.06 3.16 3.06 (29.11) 

PC 17 .................................................... 32.29 32.29 32.29 36.86 32.29 0.26 

PC 18 .................................................... 23.82 23.82 22.49 23.55 22.49 (5.34) 

Shipment-Weighted Average * .............. 47.08 55.22 63.46 70.88 55.93 27.51 

Consumer Simple PBP (years) 

PC 3 ...................................................... 1.4 4.2 4.2 4.8 5.3 9.3 

PC 5 ...................................................... 4.3 4.3 6.1 5.6 6.1 8.6 

PC 5BI ................................................... 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.1 2.4 8.2 

PC 5A .................................................... 1.9 1.9 4.4 4.1 6.0 6.0 

PC 7 ...................................................... 0.7 2.9 1.9 1.6 6.2 6.8 

PC 9 ...................................................... 4.1 4.1 4.1 6.6 4.1 10.7 

PC 10 .................................................... 11.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 13.4 

PC 11A (residential) .............................. 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.1 6.0 

PC 11A (commercial) ............................ 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.3 9.3 

PC 17 .................................................... 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.1 4.6 7.2 

PC 18 .................................................... 1.4 1.4 4.2 4.1 4.2 9.4 

Shipment-Weighted Average * .............. 3.0 3.6 4.3 4.5 5.4 8.7 

Percent of Consumers that Experience a Net Cost 

PC 3 ...................................................... 3.9 17.3 17.3 28.3 34.2 67.1 

PC 5 ...................................................... 18.2 18.2 39.4 33.6 39.4 60.3 

PC 5BI ................................................... 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 61.0 

PC 5A .................................................... 1.2 1.2 23.0 19.8 39.4 39.4 

PC 7 ...................................................... 0.0 9.6 1.2 0.5 42.6 48.3 

PC 9 ...................................................... 12.2 12.2 12.2 39.1 12.2 61.0 

PC 10 .................................................... 57.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 70.0 

PC 11A (residential) .............................. 0.0 0.0 8.4 8.0 8.4 61.7 

PC 11A (commercial) ............................ 0.0 0.0 16.1 15.7 16.1 92.7 

PC 17 .................................................... 5.6 5.6 5.6 4.5 5.6 61.5 

PC 18 .................................................... 0.8 0.8 18.9 17.6 18.9 68.5 

Shipment-Weighted Average * .............. 10.2 12.7 20.5 24.4 33.2 60.0 

Parentheses indicate negative (¥) values. The entry ‘‘N/A’’ means not applicable because there is no change in the standard at certain TSLs. 

* Weighted by shares of each product class in total projected shipments in 2027 for all TSLs except TSL 4; for TSL 4, 2029 for PCs 5BI, 5A, 10, 11A, 17, and 18, 

and 2030 for PCs 3, 5, 7, and 9. 

DOE first considered TSL 6, which 

represents the max-tech efficiency 

levels. At this level, DOE expects that 

all product classes would require 

vacuum-insulated panels (‘‘VIPs’’) and 

most would require variable-speed 

compressor (‘‘VSCs’’). For most product 

classes, this represents the use of VIPs 

for roughly half the cabinet surface 

(typically side walls and doors for an 

upright cabinet), the best-availableefficiency variable-speed compressor, 

forced-convection heat exchangers with 

multi-speed brush-less direct current 

(‘‘BLDC’’) fans, variable defrost, and 

increase in cabinet wall thickness for 

some classes (e.g., compact refrigerators 

and both standard-size and compact 

chest freezers). DOE estimates that less 

than 1 percent of annual shipments 

across all refrigerator, refrigeratorfreezer, and freezer product classes 

currently meet the max-tech efficiencies 

required. TSL 6 would save an 

estimated 9.57 quads of energy, an 

amount DOE considers significant. 

Under TSL 6, the net present value 

(‘‘NPV’’) of consumer benefit would be 

$5.23 billion using a discount rate of 7 

percent, and $25.42 billion using a 

discount rate of 3 percent. 

The cumulative emissions reductions 

at TSL 6 are 176 Mt of CO2, 55.5 

thousand tons of SO2, 323 thousand 

tons of NOX, 0.38 tons of Hg, 1,455 

thousand tons of CH4, and 1.75 

thousand tons of N2O. The estimated 

monetary value of the climate benefits 

from reduced GHG emissions 

(associated with the average SC–GHG at 

a 3-percent discount rate) at TSL 6 is 

$9.29 billion. The estimated monetary 

value of the health benefits from 

reduced SO2 and NOX emissions at TSL 

6 is $7.12 billion using a 7-percent 

discount rate and $18.24 billion using a 

3-percent discount rate. 

Using a 7-percent discount rate for 

consumer benefits and costs, health 

benefits from reduced SO2 and NOX

emissions, and the 3-percent discount 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2897 

9Current shipments calculations relied on 

shipments in the year 2023. 

rate case for climate benefits from 

reduced GHG emissions, the estimated 

total NPV at TSL 6 is $21.64 billion. 

Using a 3-percent discount rate for all 

benefits and costs, the estimated total 

NPV at TSL 6 is $52.96 billion. The 

estimated total NPV is provided for 

additional information, however DOE 

primarily relies upon the NPV of 

consumer benefits when determining 

whether a standard level is 

economically justified. 

At TSL 6, for the largest product 

classes, which are 3, 5, 5A, and 7 and 

together account for approximately 76 

percent of annual shipments, there is a 

life-cycle cost (‘‘LLC’’) savings of $0.03, 

$20.22, $122.18, and $69.71 and a 

payback period of 9.3 years, 8.6 years, 

6.0 years and 6.8 years, respectively. 

However, for these product classes, the 

fraction of customers experiencing a net 

LCC cost is 67.1 percent, 60.3 percent, 

39.4 percent and 48.3 percent with 

increases in first cost of $169.37, 

$151.75, $161.65, and $153.01, 

respectively. Overall, a majority of 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers consumers (60 percent) would 

experience a net cost and the average 

LCC savings would be negative for PC 

5BI, PC 10, PC 11A, and PC 18. 

Additionally, 35 percent of low-income 

households with a side-by-side 

refrigerator-freezer (represented by PC 7 

and used by 19 percent of low-income 

households) would experience a net 

cost. 

At TSL 6, the projected change in 

industry net present value (‘‘INPV’’) 

ranges from a decrease of $1.83 billion 

to a decrease of $1.30 billion, which 

corresponds to decreases of 37.2 percent 

and 26.5 percent, respectively. Industry 

conversion costs could reach $2.39 

billion as manufacturers work to 

redesign their portfolio of model 

offerings and re-tool entire factories to 

comply with amended standards at TSL 

6. 

DOE estimates that less than 1 percent 

of refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, and 

freezer current annual shipments meet 

the max-tech levels. At TSL 6, only a 

few manufacturers offer any standardsize products that meet the efficiencies 

required. For PC 3, which accounts for 

approximately 25 percent of annual 

shipments, no original equipment 

manufacturers (‘‘OEMs’’) currently offer 

products that meet the efficiency level 

required. For PC 5, which accounts for 

approximately 21 percent of annual 

shipments, DOE estimates that seven 

out of 22 OEMs currently offer products 

that meet the efficiency level required. 

For PC 7, which accounts for 

approximately 11 percent of annual 

shipments, only one out of 11 OEMs 

currently offers products that meet the 

efficiency level required. 

At max-tech, manufacturers would 

likely need to implement all the most 

efficient design options in the 

engineering analysis. In interviews, 

manufacturer indicated they would 

redesign all product platforms and 

dramatically update manufacturing 

facilities to meet max-tech for all 

approximately 17.0 million annual 

shipments of refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers.9

In particular, increased incorporation 

of VIPs could increase the expense of 

adapting manufacturing plants. As 

discussed in section IV.J.2.c of the direct 

final rule published elsewhere in this 

issue of the Federal Register, DOE 

expects manufacturers would likely 

adopt VIP technology to improve 

thermal insulation while minimizing 

loss to the interior volume for their 

products. Extensive incorporation of 

VIPs requires significant capital 

expenditures due to the need for more 

careful product handling and conveyor, 

increased warehousing requirements, 

investments in tooling necessary for the 

VIP installation process, and adding 

production line capacity to compensate 

for more time-intensive manufacturing 

associated with VIPs. Manufacturers 

with facilities that have limited space 

and few options to expand may consider 

greenfield projects. In interviews, 

several manufacturers expressed 

concerns about their ability to produce 

sufficient quantities of refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers at 

max-tech given the required scale of 

investment, redesign effort, and 3-year 

compliance timeline. 

The Secretary tentatively concludes 

that at TSL 6 for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the 

benefits of energy savings, positive NPV 

of consumer benefits, emission 

reductions, and the estimated monetary 

value of the emissions reductions would 

be outweighed by the economic burden 

on many consumers, and the impacts on 

manufacturers, including the large 

potential reduction in INPV and the lack 

of manufacturers currently offering 

products meeting the efficiency levels 

required at this TSL. At TSL 6, a 

majority of refrigerator, refrigeratorfreezer, and freezers consumers (60 

percent) would experience a net cost 

and the average LCC savings would be 

negative for PC 5BI, PC 10, PC 11A, and 

PC 18. Additionally, manufacturers 

would need to make significant upfront 

investments to update product lines and 

manufacturing facilities. Manufacturers 

expressed concern that they would not 

be able to complete product and 

production line updates within the 3- 

year conversion period. Consequently, 

the Secretary has tentatively concluded 

that TSL 6 is not economically justified. 

DOE then considered TSL 5 for 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers. For classes other than 

refrigerator-freezers with bottommounted freezers and through-the-door 

ice service (PC 5A), this TSL represents 

efficiency levels less than max-tech. 

TSL 5 represents similar design options 

as max-tech, but generally incorporates 

the use of high-efficiency compressors 

(single speed compressors or VSCs) 

rather than maximum efficiency VSCs, 

incorporates VIPs in fewer product 

classes, and incorporates less VIP 

surface area for the product classes 

requiring the use of VIPs as compared 

to TSL 6. TSL 5 would save an 

estimated 6.01 quads of energy, an 

amount DOE considers significant. 

Under TSL 5, the NPV of consumer 

benefit would be $8.64 billion using a 

discount rate of 7 percent, and $25.80 

billion using a discount rate of 3 

percent. 

The cumulative emissions reductions 

at TSL 5 are 111 Mt of CO2, 34.9 

thousand tons of SO2, 203 thousand 

tons of NOX, 0.24 tons of Hg, 914 

thousand tons of CH4, and 1.10 

thousand tons of N2O. The estimated 

monetary value of the climate benefits 

from reduced GHG emissions 

(associated with the average SC–GHG at 

a 3-percent discount rate) at TSL 5 is 

$5.87 billion. The estimated monetary 

value of the health benefits from 

reduced SO2 and NOX emissions at TSL 

5 is $4.50 billion using a 7-percent 

discount rate and $11.50 billion using a 

3-percent discount rate. 

Using a 7-percent discount rate for 

consumer benefits and costs, health 

benefits from reduced SO2 and NOX

emissions, and the 3-percent discount 

rate case for climate benefits from 

reduced GHG emissions, the estimated 

total NPV at TSL 5 is $19.01 billion. 

Using a 3-percent discount rate for all 

benefits and costs, the estimated total 

NPV at TSL 5 is $43.17 billion. The 

estimated total NPV is provided for 

additional information, however DOE 

primarily relies upon the NPV of 

consumer benefits when determining 

whether a standard level is 

economically justified. 

At TSL 5, for the largest product 

classes, which are 3, 5, 5A, and 7, there 

is a life-cycle cost savings of $43.46, 

$45.47, $122.18, and $73.96 and a 

payback period of 5.3 years, 6.1 years, 

6.0 years and 6.2 years, respectively. For 

these product classes, the fraction of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2898 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

10For all TSLs except the Recommended TSL, the 

efficiency levels required for non-representative 

product classes are the same as the efficiency levels 

required for the associated directly analyzed 

product classes. However, as noted in section V.A 

of this document, the Recommended TSL from the 

Joint Agreement includes standard levels for some 

non-representative product classes that differ from 

their associated representative product class. Thus, 

in addition to the representative PC 5A, PC 7, and 

PC 9, the efficiency levels required for nonrepresentative PC 9A–BI and PC 12 at the 

Recommended TSL also differ from the efficiency 

levels required at TSL 5. 

customers experiencing a net LCC cost 

is 34.2 percent, 39.4 percent, 39.4 

percent and 42.6 percent with increases 

in first cost of $52.69, $69.25, $161.65, 

and $121.58, respectively. Overall, 33 

percent of refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers consumers would 

experience a net cost and the average 

LCC savings are positive for all product 

classes. 

At TSL 5, an estimated 16 percent of 

all low-income households experience a 

net cost, including 11 percent of lowincome households with a top-mount or 

single-door refrigerator-freezer 

(represented by PC 3 and used by 72 

percent of low-income households) and 

32 percent of low-income households 

with a side-by-side refrigerator-freezer 

(represented by PC 7 and used by 19 

percent of low-income households). 

More than half of low-income PC 7 

consumers with a net cost experience a 

net cost of at least $40 and while lowincome PC 7 consumers experience an 

average LCC savings of $132.77 at TSL 

5, there are larger average LCC savings 

at TSL 4 ($161.87) and substantially 

fewer low-income PC 7 consumers 

would experience a net cost (0.6 

percent) at that TSL. Further, the 

incremental increase in purchase price 

at TSL 5 for PC 7 is $121.58, which may 

be difficult for low-income homeowners 

to afford. 

At TSL 5, the projected change in 

INPV ranges from a decrease of $1.07 

billion to a decrease of $844.2 million, 

which corresponds to decreases of 21.7 

percent and 17.2 percent, respectively. 

DOE estimates that industry must invest 

$1.40 billion to comply with standards 

set at TSL 5. 

DOE estimates that approximately 14 

percent of refrigerator, refrigeratorfreezer, and freezer annual shipments 

meet the TSL 5 efficiencies. For 

standard-size refrigerator-freezers, 

which account for approximately 70 

percent of total annual shipments, 

approximately 1 percent of shipments 

meet the efficiencies required at TSL 5. 

Compared to max-tech, more 

manufacturers offer standard-size 

refrigerator-freezer products that meet 

the required efficiencies, however, 

many manufacturers do not offer 

products that meet this level. Of the 22 

OEMs offering PC 3 products, three 

OEMs offer models that meet the 

efficiency level required. Of the 22 

OEMs offering PC 5 products, 14 OEMs 

offer models that meet the efficiency 

level required. Of the 11 OEMs offering 

PC 7 products, only one OEM offers 

models that meet the efficiency level 

required. 

The manufacturers that do not 

currently offer models that meet TSL 5 

efficiencies would need to develop new 

product platforms. Updates could 

include incorporating variable defrost, 

BLDC evaporator fan motors, and highefficiency VSCs. Additionally, some 

product classes could require the use of 

VIPs. DOE expects manufacturers would 

likely need to incorporate some VIPs 

into PC 5 and PC 7 designs, but not to 

the extent required at max-tech. 

However, DOE expects manufacturers 

would need to incorporate the max-tech 

design options for PC 5A, which 

includes the use of VIPs for roughly half 

the cabinet surface (side walls and 

doors) to meet TSL 5 efficiencies. As 

discussed in section IV.J.2.c of the direct 

final rule published elsewhere in this 

issue of the Federal Register, the 

inclusion of VIPs in product design 

necessitates large investments in tooling 

and significant changes to production 

plants. Furthermore, given that only 1 

percent of current standard-size 

refrigerator-freezer shipments meet TSL 

5 efficiency levels, the manufacturers 

that are currently able to meet TSL 5 

would need to scale up manufacturing 

capacity of compliant models. DOE 

anticipates conversion costs as high as 

$1.40 billion because the majority of 

product platforms in the industry would 

require redesign and investment. 

The Secretary tentatively concludes 

that at TSL 5 for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the 

benefits of energy savings, positive NPV 

of consumer benefits, emission 

reductions, and the estimated monetary 

value of the emissions reductions would 

be outweighed by the economic burden 

on consumers, particularly low-income 

consumers of side-by-side refrigeratorfreezers, and the impacts on 

manufacturers, including the large 

potential reduction in INPV and the lack 

of manufacturers currently offering 

standard-size refrigerator-freezer 

products meeting the efficiency levels 

required at this TSL. Specifically, only 

one OEM currently offers any PC 7 

models that meet the TSL 5 efficiencies. 

At TSL 5, 32 percent of low-income PC 

7 consumers would experience a net 

cost and the incremental increase in 

purchase price of $121.58 may be 

difficult for low-income homeowners to 

afford. Consequently, the Secretary has 

tentatively concluded that TSL 5 is not 

economically justified. 

DOE then considered the TSL 4 which 

corresponds to the TSL recommended 

in the Joint Agreement (the 

‘‘Recommended TSL’’). For 

representative product classes other 

than PC 5A, PC 7, and PC 9, this TSL 

represents the same efficiency levels as 

TSL 5.10 Thus, the Recommended TSL 

represents similar design options as TSL 

5, except for PC 5A, PC 7, and PC 9. For 

PC 7, DOE expects manufacturers would 

not require the use of VIPs to meet the 

required efficiency level. For PC 5A, 

DOE expects manufacturers would 

require less VIP surface area to meet the 

required efficiency level. For PC 9, DOE 

expects manufacturers to implement 

variable speed compressor systems to 

meet required standards. DOE estimates 

that approximately 14 percent of annual 

shipments across all refrigerator, 

refrigerator-freezer, and freezer product 

classes currently meet the efficiencies 

required. For the Recommended TSL, 

DOE’s analysis utilized the January 31, 

2029 (or January 31, 2030, for some 

product classes) compliance dates 

specified in the Joint Agreement. The 

Recommended TSL would save an 

estimated 5.61 quads of energy, an 

amount DOE considers significant. 

Under the Recommended TSL, the NPV 

of consumer benefit would be $9.04 

billion using a discount rate of 7 

percent, and $26.98 billion using a 

discount rate of 3 percent. 

The cumulative emissions reductions 

at the Recommended TSL are 101 Mt of 

CO2, 31.6 thousand tons of SO2, 186 

thousand tons of NOX, 0.22 tons of Hg, 

846.5 thousand tons of CH4, and 0.99 

thousand tons of N2O. The estimated 

monetary value of the climate benefits 

from reduced GHG emissions 

(associated with the average SC–GHG at 

a 3-percent discount rate) at the 

Recommended TSL is $5.02 billion. The 

estimated monetary value of the health 

benefits from reduced SO2 and NOX

emissions at the Recommended TSL is 

$3.45 billion using a 7-percent discount 

rate and $9.80 billion using a 3-percent 

discount rate. 

Using a 7-percent discount rate for 

consumer benefits and costs, health 

benefits from reduced SO2 and NOX

emissions, and the 3-percent discount 

rate case for climate benefits from 

reduced GHG emissions, the estimated 

total NPV at the Recommended TSL is 

$17.51 billion. Using a 3-percent 

discount rate for all benefits and costs, 

the estimated total NPV at the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2899 

Recommended TSL is $41.80 billion. 

The estimated total NPV is provided for 

additional information, however DOE 

primarily relies upon the NPV of 

consumer benefits when determining 

whether a standard level is 

economically justified. 

At the Recommended TSL, for the 

largest product classes, which are 3, 5, 

5A, and 7, there is a life-cycle cost 

savings of $50.91, $55.23, $133.27, and 

$142.56 and a payback period of 4.8 

years, 5.6 years, 4.1 years and 1.6 years, 

respectively. For these product classes, 

the fraction of customers experiencing a 

net LCC cost is 28.3 percent, 33.6 

percent, 19.8 percent and 0.5 percent 

with increases in first cost of $47.67, 

$62.72, $81.32, and $24.39, respectively. 

Overall, 24.4 percent of refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers 

consumers would experience a net cost 

and the average LCC savings are positive 

for all product classes. 

At the Recommended TSL, 9 percent 

of low-income households with a topmount or single-door refrigerator-freezer 

(represented by PC 3 and used by 72 

percent of low-income households) and 

0.6 percent of low-income households 

with a side-by-side refrigerator-freezer 

(represented by PC 7 and used by 19 

percent of low-income households) 

experience a net cost. Additionally, the 

incremental increase in purchase price 

is $24.39 for low-income PC 7 

homeowners at the Recommended TSL, 

substantially lower than the incremental 

increase in purchase price of $121.58 at 

TSL 5. 

At the Recommended TSL, the 

projected change in INPV ranges from a 

decrease of $504.4 million to a decrease 

of $383.5 million, which correspond to 

decreases of 10.3 percent and 7.8 

percent, respectively. DOE estimates 

that industry must invest $830.3 million 

comply with standards set at the 

Recommended TSL. DOE estimates that 

approximately 14 percent of refrigerator, 

refrigerator-freezer, and freezer annual 

shipments meet the Recommended TSL 

efficiencies. 

Compared to TSL 5, more 

manufacturers offer standard-size 

refrigerator freezer products that meet 

the required efficiencies since PC 7 has 

a lower required efficiency level at the 

Recommended TSL. For PC 7, which 

accounts for 11 percent of shipments, 

three OEMs offer products that meet the 

efficiency level required. Furthermore, 

DOE does not expect manufacturers 

would need to incorporate VIPs into PC 

7 designs to meet the efficiencies 

required at the Recommended TSL. For 

PC 5 and PC 5A, DOE understands the 

two product classes often share the 

same production lines, with shared 

cabinet architecture and tooling. DOE 

expects manufacturers would likely 

need to incorporate some VIPs into PC 

5A designs, but not to the extent 

required at TSL 5 and TSL 6. Thus, for 

the 10 OEMs that manufacture both PC 

5 and PC 5A, DOE expects 

manufacturers could implement similar 

cabinet upgrades (i.e., partial VIP) for PC 

5 and PC 5A designs to achieve the 

efficiencies required at this level. 

For all TSLs considered in this 

proposed rule—except for the 

Recommended TSL—DOE is bound by 

the 3-year lead time requirements in 

EPCA when determining compliance 

dates (i.e., compliance with amended 

standards required in 2027). For the 

Recommended TSL, DOE’s analysis 

utilized the January 31, 2029 (or January 

31, 2030, for some product classes) 

compliance dates specified in the Joint 

Agreement as they were an integral part 

of the multi-product joint 

recommendation. These compliance 

dates provide manufacturers the 

flexibility to spread capital 

requirements, engineering resources, 

and other conversion activities over a 

longer period of time depending on the 

individual needs of each manufacturer. 

Furthermore, these delayed compliance 

dates provide additional lead time and 

certainty for suppliers of components 

that improve efficiency. DOE believes 

the Recommended TSL mitigates risks 

raised by AHAM and multiple 

manufacturers in response to the 

February 2023 NOPR regarding the 

ability for VSC and VIP component 

suppliers to increase supply of these key 

components in the 3-year lead time 

required by EPCA. 

After considering the analysis and 

weighing the benefits and burdens, the 

Secretary has tentatively concluded that 

a standard set at the Recommended TSL 

for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, 

and freezers is economically justified. 

At this TSL, the average LCC savings are 

positive for all product classes for 

which an amended standard is 

considered. An estimated 24.4 percent 

of all refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, 

and freezer consumers experience a net 

cost. An estimated 9 percent of lowincome households with a top-mount or 

single-door refrigerator-freezer 

(represented by PC 3 and used by 72 

percent of low-income households) and 

0.6 percent of low-income households 

with a side-by-side refrigerator-freezer 

(represented by PC 7 and used by 19 

percent of low-income households), 

experience a net cost, which is a 

significantly lower percentage than 

under TSL 5. DOE notes that for lowincome PC 7 consumers, as well as 

across all PC 7 consumers, the 

Recommended TSL represents the 

largest average LCC savings of any TSL. 

The FFC national energy savings are 

significant and the NPV of consumer 

benefits is positive at the Recommended 

TSL using both a 3-percent and 7- 

percent discount rate. Notably, the 

benefits to consumers vastly outweigh 

the cost to manufacturers. At the 

Recommended TSL, the NPV of 

consumer benefits, even measured at the 

more conservative discount rate of 7 

percent is over 17 times higher than the 

maximum estimated manufacturers’ loss 

in INPV. The standard levels at the 

Recommended TSL are economically 

justified even without weighing the 

estimated monetary value of emissions 

reductions. When those emissions 

reductions are included—representing 

$5.02 billion in climate benefits 

(associated with the average SC–GHG at 

a 3-percent discount rate), and $9.80 

billion (using a 3-percent discount rate) 

or $3.45 billion (using a 7-percent 

discount rate) in health benefits—the 

rationale becomes stronger still. 

As stated, DOE conducts the walkdown analysis to determine the TSL that 

represents the maximum improvement 

in energy efficiency that is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified as required under 

EPCA. DOE notes 72 percent of lowincome households have a top-mount 

refrigerator-freezer (represented by PC 3) 

and that an estimated 9 percent of lowincome PC 3 households experience a 

net cost at the Recommended TSL, 

whereas an estimated 6 percent of lowincome households with a top-mount 

refrigerator-freezer experience a net cost 

at TSL 3. However, the average LCC 

savings for low-income PC 3 consumers 

are $22.05 higher at the Recommended 

TSL than at TSL 3. Further, compared 

to TSL 3, it is estimated that the 

Recommended TSL would result in 

additional FFC national energy savings 

of 0.9 quads. These additional savings 

and benefits at the Recommended TSL 

are significant. DOE considers the 

impacts to be, as a whole, economically 

justified at the Recommended TSL. 

Although DOE considered amended 

standard levels for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers by 

grouping the efficiency levels for each 

product class into TSLs, DOE evaluates 

all analyzed efficiency levels in its 

analysis. In general, the standard level 

represents the maximum energy savings 

that does not result in a large percentage 

of consumers experiencing a net LCC 

cost. For example, for PC 5, more than 

half of consumers experience a net cost 

at EL 3. In the case of PC 7, for which 

DOE found that a relatively higher 

percentage of low-income consumers 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2900 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

11The refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers (88 FR 12452); consumer conventional 

cooking products (88 FR 6818); residential clothes 

washers (88 FR 13520); consumer clothes dryers (87 

FR 51734); and dishwashers (88 FR 32514) utilized 

a 2027 compliance year for analysis at the proposed 

rule stage. Miscellaneous refrigeration products (88 

FR 12452) utilized a 2029 compliance year for the 

NOPR analysis. 

12AHAM has submitted written comments 

regarding cumulative regulatory burden for the 

other five rulemakings included in the multiproduct Joint Agreement. AHAM’s written 

comments on cumulative regulatory burden are 

available at: www.regulations.gov/comment/EERE2020-BT-STD-0039-0031 (pp. 12–15) for 

miscellaneous refrigeration products; 

www.regulations.gov/comment/EERE-2014-BT-STD0005-2285 (pp. 44–27) for consumer conventional 

cooking products; www.regulations.gov/comment/ 

EERE-2017-BT-STD-0014-0464 (pp. 40–44) for 

residential clothes washers; www.regulations.gov/ 

comment/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0058-0046 (pp. 12– 

13) for consumer clothes dryers; and 

www.regulations.gov/comment/EERE-2019-BT-STD0039-0051 (pp. 21–24) for dishwashers. 

may experience net costs at higher 

efficiency levels, at the standard level 

chosen, 0.6 percent of low-income 

households with side-by-side 

refrigerator-freezers will experience a 

potential burden. The ELs at the 

standard level result in positive LCC 

savings for all product classes, 

significantly reduce the number of 

consumers experiencing a net cost, and 

reduce the decrease in INPV and 

conversion costs to the point where 

DOE has tentatively concluded they are 

economically justified, as discussed for 

the Recommended TSL in the preceding 

paragraphs. 

Therefore, based on the previous 

considerations, DOE proposes to adopt 

the energy conservation standards for 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers at the Recommended TSL. 

The Recommended TSL for 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers proposed in this NOPR is part 

of a multi-product Joint Agreement 

covering six rulemakings (refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers; 

miscellaneous refrigeration products; 

conventional cooking products; 

residential clothes washers; consumer 

clothes dryers; and dishwashers). The 

signatories indicate that the Joint 

Agreement for the six rulemakings 

should be considered as a joint 

statement of recommended standards, to 

be adopted in its entirety. As discussed 

in section V.B.2.e of the direct final rule 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register, many refrigerator, 

refrigerator-freezer, and freezer OEMs 

also manufacture miscellaneous 

refrigeration products, conventional 

cooking products, residential clothes 

washers, consumer clothes dryers, and 

dishwashers. Rather than requiring 

compliance with five amended 

standards in a single year (2027),11 the 

negotiated multi-product Joint 

Agreement staggers the compliance 

dates for the five amended standards 

over a 4-year period (2027–2030). In 

response to the February 2023 NOPR, 

AHAM and individual manufacturers 

expressed concerns about the timing of 

ongoing home appliance rulemakings. 

Specifically, AHAM commented that 

the combination of the stringency of 

DOE’s proposals, the short lead-in time 

required under EPCA to comply with 

standards, and the overlapping 

timeframe of multiple standards 

affecting the same manufacturers 

represents significant cumulative 

regulatory burden for the home 

appliance industry. (AHAM, No. 69 at 

pp. 20–21) AHAM has submitted similar 

comments to other ongoing consumer 

product rulemakings.12 As AHAM is a 

key signatory of the Joint Agreement, 

DOE understands that the compliance 

dates recommended in the Joint 

Agreement would help reduce 

cumulative regulatory burden. These 

compliance dates help relieve concern 

on the part of some manufacturers about 

their ability to allocate sufficient 

resources to comply with multiple 

concurrent amended standards, about 

the need to align compliance dates for 

products that are typically designed or 

sold as matched pairs, and about the 

ability of their suppliers to ramp up 

production of key components. The 

Joint Agreement also provides 

additional years of regulatory certainty 

for manufacturers and their suppliers 

while still achieving the maximum 

improvement in energy efficiency that is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. 

The proposed energy conservation 

standards for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers, which are 

expressed in kWh/yr, are shown in 

Table III.3 and Table IIII.4. 

TABLE III.3—PROPOSED AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATORFREEZERS, AND FREEZERS

[Compliance starting January 31, 2029] 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

3–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer .... 8.24AV + 238.4 + 28I ........... 0.291av + 238.4 + 28I. 

3A–BI. Built-in All-refrigerators—automatic defrost ................................................ (7.22AV + 205.7)*K3ABI ...... (0.255av + 205.7)*K3ABI. 

4–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer (8.79AV + 307.4)*K4BI + 28I (0.310av + 307.4)*K4BI + 28I. 

5–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer.

(8.65AV + 309.9)*K5BI + 28I (0.305av + 309.9)*K5BI + 28I. 

5A. Refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

(7.76AV + 351.9)*K5A .......... (0.274av + 351.9)*K5A. 

5A–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer with through-the-door ice service.

(8.21AV + 370.7)*K5ABI ...... (0.290av + 370.7)*K5ABI. 

7–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer (8.82AV + 384.1)*K7BI ......... (0.311av + 384.1)*K7BI. 

8. Upright freezers with manual defrost .................................................................. 5.57AV + 193.7 .................... 0.197av + 193.7. 

9–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost ............................................ (9.37AV + 247.9)*K9BI + 28I (0.331av + 247.9)*K9BI + 28I. 

9A–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost with through-the-door ice 

service.

9.86AV + 288.9 .................... 0.348av + 288.9. 

10. Chest freezers and all other freezers except compact freezers ...................... 7.29AV + 107.8 .................... 0.257av + 107.8. 

10A. Chest freezers with automatic defrost ............................................................ 10.24AV + 148.1 .................. 0.362av + 148.1. 

11. Compact refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators 

with manual defrost.

7.68AV + 214.5 .................... 0.271av + 214.5. 

11A. Compact all-refrigerators—manual defrost .................................................... 6.66AV + 186.2 .................... 0.235av + 186.2. 

12. Compact refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ................................ (5.32AV + 302.2)*K12 .......... (0.188av + 302.2)*K12. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2901 

TABLE III.3—PROPOSED AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATORFREEZERS, AND FREEZERS—Continued 

[Compliance starting January 31, 2029] 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

13. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer .. 10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I ......... 0.375av + 305.3 + 28I. 

13A. Compact all-refrigerators—automatic defrost ................................................. (8.25AV + 233.4)*K13A ........ (0.291av + 233.4)*K13A. 

14. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer 6.14AV + 411.2 + 28I ........... 0.217av + 411.2 + 28I. 

15. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer.

10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I ......... 0.375av + 305.3 + 28I. 

16. Compact upright freezers with manual defrost ................................................. 7.35AV + 191.8 .................... 0.260av + 191.8. 

17. Compact upright freezers with automatic defrost ............................................. 9.15AV + 316.7 .................... 0.323av + 316.7. 

18. Compact chest freezers .................................................................................... 7.86AV + 107.8 .................... 0.278av + 107.8. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 

av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3ABI) are as defined in the following table. 

Door coefficient 

Products 

with a 

transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or 

door-in-door with added external doors 

K3ABI ............................................................................ 1.10 1.0 1.0. 

K4BI .............................................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5BI .............................................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5A ............................................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3). 

K5ABI ............................................................................ 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3). 

K7BI .............................................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K9BI .............................................................................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K12 ............................................................................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K13A ............................................................................. 1.10 1.0 1.0. 

Notes: 

1 Nd is the number of external doors. 2The maximum Nd values are 3 for K9BI, and 5 for all other K values. 

TABLE IIII.4—PROPOSED AMENDED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATORFREEZERS, AND FREEZERS

[Compliance starting January 31, 2030] 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

1. Refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators with manual 

defrost.

6.79AV + 191.3 .................... 0.240av + 191.3. 

1A. All-refrigerators—manual defrost ...................................................................... 5.77AV + 164.6 .................... 0.204av + 164.6. 

2. Refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ................................................. (6.79AV + 191.3)*K2 ............ (0.240av + 191.3)*K2. 

3. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer .................. 6.86AV + 198.6 + 28I ........... 0.242av + 198.6 + 28I. 

3A. All-refrigerators—automatic defrost .................................................................. (6.01AV + 171.4)*K3A .......... (0.212av + 171.4)*K3A. 

4. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer ................. (7.28AV + 254.9)*K4 + 28I ... (0.257av + 254.9)*K4 + 28I. 

5. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer ............ (7.61AV + 272.6)*K5 + 28I ... (0.269av + 272.6)*K5 + 28I. 

6. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

7.14AV + 280.0 .................... 0.252av + 280.0. 

7. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

(7.31AV + 322.5)*K7 ............ (0.258av + 322.5)*K7. 

9. Upright freezers with automatic defrost .............................................................. (7.33AV + 194.1)*K9 + 28I ... (0.259av + 194.1)*K9 + 28I. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 

av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3A) are as defined in the following table. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2902 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

Door coefficient 

Products 

with a 

transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or 

door-in-door with added external doors 

K2 ................................................................................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

K3A ............................................................................... 1.10 1.0 1.0. 

K4 ................................................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K5 ................................................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K7 ................................................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2). 

K9 ................................................................................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1). 

Notes: 

1 Nd is the number of external doors. 2The maximum Nd values are 2 for K2, and 5 for all other K values. 

B. Annualized Benefits and Costs of the 

Proposed Standards 

The benefits and costs of the proposed 

standards can also be expressed in terms 

of annualized values. The annualized 

net benefit is (1) the annualized national 

economic value (expressed in 2022$) of 

the benefits from operating products 

that meet the proposed standards 

(consisting primarily of operating cost 

savings from using less energy), minus 

increases in product purchase costs, and 

(2) the annualized monetary value of the 

climate and health benefits from 

emission reductions. 

Table III.5 shows the annualized 

values for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers under the 

Recommended TSL, expressed in 2022$. 

The results under the primary estimate 

are as follows. 

Using a 7-percent discount rate for 

consumer benefits and costs and health 

benefits from reduced NOX and SO2

emissions, and the 3-percent discount 

rate case for climate benefits from 

reduced GHG emissions, the estimated 

cost of the proposed standards is $590.5 

million per year in increased equipment 

costs, while the estimated annual 

monetized benefits are $1.7 billion in 

reduced equipment operating costs, 

$303.8 million in climate benefits, and 

$410.6 million in health benefits. In this 

case, the net benefit would amount to 

$1.8 billion per year. 

Using a 3-percent discount rate for all 

benefits and costs, the estimated cost of 

the proposed standards is $567.5 

million per year in increased equipment 

costs, while the estimated annual 

monetized benefits are $2.2 billion in 

reduced operating costs, $303.8 million 

in climate benefits, and $592.9 million 

in health benefits. In this case, the net 

benefit would amount to $2.5 billion per 

year. 

TABLE III.5—ANNUALIZED BENEFITS AND COSTS OF PROPOSED STANDARDS FOR REFRIGERATORS, REFRIGERATORFREEZERS, AND FREEZERS

Million 2022$/year 

Primary 

estimate 

Low-netbenefits 

estimate 

High-netbenefits 

estimate 

3% discount rate 

Consumer Operating Cost Savings ............................................................................................. 2,200.5 2,023.9 2,326.6 

Climate Benefits * ......................................................................................................................... 303.8 291.8 307.9 

Health Benefits ** ......................................................................................................................... 592.9 569.7 600.7 

Total Benefits † ..................................................................................................................... 3,097.2 2,885.4 3,235.2 

Consumer Incremental Product Costs ‡ ...................................................................................... 567.5 666.6 547.8 

Net Benefits .......................................................................................................................... 2,529.6 2,218.8 2,687.4 

Change in Producer Cashflow (INPV‡‡) .................................................................................... (49) to (37) (49) to (37) (49) to (37) 

7% discount rate 

Consumer Operating Cost Savings ............................................................................................. 1,667.0 1,541.9 1,758.5 

Climate Benefits * (3% discount rate) .......................................................................................... 303.8 291.8 307.9 

Health Benefits ** ......................................................................................................................... 410.6 395.8 415.7 

Total Benefits † ..................................................................................................................... 2,381.4 2,229.5 2,482.0 

Consumer Incremental Product Costs ........................................................................................ 590.5 677.9 569.6 

Net Benefits .......................................................................................................................... 1,790.9 1,551.6 1,912.5 

Change in Producer Cashflow (INPV‡‡) .................................................................................... (49) to (37) (49) to (37) (49) to (37) 

Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers shipped during the period 

2029–2058 for the product classes listed in Table III.3 and shipped in 2030–2059 for the product classes listed in Table IIII.4. These results include benefits which accrue after 2058/9 from the products shipped in 2029–2058 for the product classes listed in Table III.3 and shipped in 

2030–2059 for the product classes listed in Table IIII.4. The Primary, Low Net Benefits, and High Net Benefits Estimates utilize projections of energy prices from the AEO2023 Reference case, Low Economic Growth case, and High Economic Growth case, respectively. In addition, incremental equipment costs reflect a medium decline rate in the Primary Estimate, a low decline rate in the Low Net Benefits Estimate, and a high 

decline rate in the High Net Benefits Estimate. The methods used to derive projected price trends are explained in sections V.H.3 of the direct 

final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. Note that the Benefits and Costs may not sum to the Net Benefits due to 

rounding. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2903 

* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the SC–CO2, SC–CH4 and SC–N2O. For presentational purposes of this 

table, the climate benefits associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3 percent discount rate are shown, but DOE does not have a single central 

SC–GHG point estimate, and it emphasizes the importance and value of considering the benefits calculated using all four sets of SC–GHG estimates. To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, this analysis uses the interim estimates presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the 

IWG. 

** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOX and SO2. DOE is currently only monetizing (for SO2 and NOX) PM2.5

precursor health benefits and (for NOX) ozone precursor health benefits, but will continue to assess the ability to monetize other effects such as 

health benefits from reductions in direct PM2.5 emissions. See section IV.L of the direct final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 

Register for more details. 

† Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are presented using the average SC–GHG with 3-percent discount rate, but DOE 

does not have a single central SC–GHG point estimate. 

‡‡ Operating Cost Savings are calculated based on the life cycle costs analysis and national impact analysis as discussed in detail below. See 

sections IV.F and IV.H of the direct final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. DOE’s national impacts analysis includes all impacts (both costs and benefits) along the distribution chain beginning with the increased costs to the manufacturer to manufacture 

the product and ending with the increase in price experienced by the consumer. DOE also separately conducts a detailed analysis on the impacts on manufacturers (i.e., manufacturer impact analysis, or ‘‘MIA’’). See section IV.J of the direct final rule published elsewhere in this issue of 

the Federal Register. In the detailed MIA, DOE models manufacturers’ pricing decisions based on assumptions regarding investments, conversion costs, cashflow, and margins. The MIA produces a range of impacts, which is the rule’s expected impact on the INPV. The change in INPV 

is the present value of all changes in industry cash flow, including changes in production costs, capital expenditures, and manufacturer profit 

margins. The annualized change in INPV is calculated using the industry weighted average cost of capital value of 9.1 percent that is estimated 

in the manufacturer impact analysis (see chapter 12 of the direct final rule TSD for a complete description of the industry weighted average cost 

of capital). For refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the annualized change in INPV ranges from ¥$48.7 million to ¥$37.0 million. 

DOE accounts for that range of likely impacts in analyzing whether a trial standard level is economically justified. See section V.C of the direct 

final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. DOE is presenting the range of impacts to the INPV under two manufacturer 

markup scenarios: the Preservation of Gross Margin scenario, which is the manufacturer markup scenario used in the calculation of Consumer 

Operating Cost Savings in this table; and the Preservation of Operating Profit scenario, where DOE assumed manufacturers would not be able to 

increase per-unit operating profit in proportion to increases in manufacturer production costs. DOE includes the range of estimated annual 

change in INPV in the above table, drawing on the MIA explained further in section IV.J of the direct final rule published elsewhere in this issue 

of the Federal Register to provide additional context for assessing the estimated impacts of this proposal to society, including potential changes 

in production and consumption, which is consistent with OMB’s Circular A–4 and E.O. 12866. If DOE were to include the INPV into the 

annualized net benefit calculation for this proposed rule, the annualized net benefits would range from $2,480.9 million to $2,492.6 million at 3- 

percent discount rate and would range from $1,742.2 million to $1,753.9 million at 7-percent discount rate. 

IV. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this proposed 

rule until the date provided in the DATES

section at the beginning of this proposed 

rule. Interested parties may submit 

comments, data, and other information 

using any of the methods described in 

the ADDRESSES section at the beginning 

of this document. Comments relating to 

the direct final rule published elsewhere 

in this issue of the Federal Register, 

should be submitted as instructed 

therein. 

Submitting comments via 

www.regulations.gov. The 

www.regulations.gov web page will 

require you to provide your name and 

contact information. Your contact 

information will be viewable to DOE 

Building Technologies staff only. Your 

contact information will not be publicly 

viewable except for your first and last 

names, organization name (if any), and 

submitter representative name (if any). 

If your comment is not processed 

properly because of technical 

difficulties, DOE will use this 

information to contact you. If DOE 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, DOE may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

However, your contact information 

will be publicly viewable if you include 

it in the comment itself or in any 

documents attached to your comment. 

Any information that you do not want 

to be publicly viewable should not be 

included in your comment, nor in any 

document attached to your comment. 

Otherwise, persons viewing comments 

will see only first and last names, 

organization names, correspondence 

containing comments, and any 

documents submitted with the 

comments. 

Do not submit to www.regulations.gov 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute, such as trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information (hereinafter referred to as 

Confidential Business Information 

(‘‘CBI’’)). Comments submitted through 

www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed 

as CBI. Comments received through the 

website will waive any CBI claims for 

the information submitted. For 

information on submitting CBI, see the 

Confidential Business Information 

section. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through www.regulations.gov before 

posting. Normally, comments will be 

posted within a few days of being 

submitted. However, if large volumes of 

comments are being processed 

simultaneously, your comment may not 

be viewable for up to several weeks. 

Please keep the comment tracking 

number that www.regulations.gov 

provides after you have successfully 

uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email, hand 

delivery/courier, or postal mail. 

Comments and documents submitted 

via email, hand delivery/courier, or 

postal mail also will be posted to 

www.regulations.gov. If you do not want 

your personal contact information to be 

publicly viewable, do not include it in 

your comment or any accompanying 

documents. Instead, provide your 

contact information in a cover letter. 

Include your first and last names, email 

address, telephone number, and 

optional mailing address. The cover 

letter will not be publicly viewable as 

long as it does not include any 

comments. 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. If you 

submit via postal mail or hand delivery/ 

courier, please provide all items on a 

CD, if feasible, in which case it is not 

necessary to submit printed copies. No 

telefacsimiles (‘‘faxes’’) will be 

accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format. Provide documents that are not 

secured, that are written in English, and 

that are free of any defects or viruses. 

Documents should not contain special 

characters or any form of encryption 

and, if possible, they should carry the 

electronic signature of the author. 

Campaign form letters. Please submit 

campaign form letters by the originating 

organization in batches of between 50 to 

500 form letters per PDF or as one form 

letter with a list of supporters’ names 

compiled into one or more PDFs. This 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2904 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

13The signatories to the Joint Agreement include 

AHAM, American Council for an Energy-Efficient 

Economy, Alliance for Water Efficiency, Appliance 

Standards Awareness Project, Consumer Federation 

of America, Consumer Reports, Earthjustice, 

National Consumer Law Center, Natural Resources 

Defense Council, Northwest Energy Efficiency 

Alliance, and Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 

Members of AHAM’s Major Appliance Division that 

manufacture the affected products include: Alliance 

Laundry Systems, LLC; Asko Appliances AB; Beko 

US Inc.; Brown Stove Works, Inc.; BSH; Danby 

Products, Ltd.; Electrolux Home Products, Inc.; 

Elicamex S.A. de C.V.; Faber; Fotile America; GEA, 

a Haier Company; L’Atelier Paris Haute Design LLG; 

LGEUSA; Liebherr USA, Co.; Midea America Corp.; 

Miele, Inc.; Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration 

Systems (PAPRSA) Corporation of America; Perlick 

Corporation; Samsung; Sharp Electronics 

Corporation; Smeg S.p.A; Sub-Zero Group, Inc.; The 

Middleby Corporation; U-Line Corporation; Viking 

Range, LLC; and Whirlpool. 

14This document is available in the docket at: 

www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BTSTD-0003-0103. 

reduces comment processing and 

posting time. 

Confidential Business Information. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person 

submitting information that he or she 

believes to be confidential and exempt 

by law from public disclosure should 

submit via email two well-marked 

copies: one copy of the document 

marked ‘‘confidential’’ including all the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document marked 

‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information 

believed to be confidential deleted. DOE 

will make its own determination about 

the confidential status of the 

information and treat it according to its 

determination. 

It is DOE’s policy that all comments 

may be included in the public docket, 

without change and as received, 

including any personal information 

provided in the comments (except 

information deemed to be exempt from 

public disclosure). 

B. Public Meeting 

As stated previously, if DOE 

withdraws the direct final rule 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

6295(p)(4)(C), DOE will hold a public 

meeting to allow for additional 

comment on this proposed rule. DOE 

will publish notice of any meeting in 

the Federal Register. 

V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

The regulatory reviews conducted for 

this proposed rule are identical to those 

conducted for the direct final rule 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register. Please see the direct 

final rule for further details. 

A. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation 

of an initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) and a final regulatory 

flexibility analysis (‘‘FRFA’’) for any 

rule that by law must be proposed for 

public comment, unless the agency 

certifies that the rule, if promulgated, 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. As required by E.O. 13272, 

‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities 

in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 

(Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003, to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the 

rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE 

has made its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of the General 

Counsel’s website (www.energy.gov/gc/ 

office-general-counsel). DOE has 

prepared the following IRFA for the 

products that are the subject of this 

proposed rulemaking. 

For manufacturers of refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the 

Small Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’) 

has set a size threshold, which defines 

those entities classified as ‘‘small 

businesses’’ for the purposes of the 

statute. DOE used the SBA’s small 

business size standards to determine 

whether any small entities would be 

subject to the requirements of the rule. 

(See 13 CFR part 121.) The size 

standards are listed by North American 

Industry Classification System 

(‘‘NAICS’’) code and industry 

description and are available at 

www.sba.gov/document/support--tablesize-standards. Manufacturing of 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers is classified under NAICS 

335220, ‘‘Major Household Appliance 

Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets a 

threshold of 1,500 employees or fewer 

for an entity to be considered as a small 

business for this category. 

1. Description of Reasons Why Action Is 

Being Considered 

DOE is proposing amended energy 

conservation standards for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. EPCA 

prescribed energy conservation 

standards for these products (42 U.S.C. 

6295(b)(1)–(2)), and directed DOE to 

conduct three cycles of future 

rulemakings to whether to amend these 

standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(b)(3)(A)(i), 

(b)(3)(B), and (b)(4)). DOE has 

completed these rulemakings. EPCA 

further provides that, not later than 6 

years after the issuance of any final rule 

establishing or amending a standard, 

DOE must publish either a notice of 

determination that standards for the 

product do not need to be amended, or 

a NOPR including new proposed energy 

conservation standards (proceeding to a 

final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 

6295(m)(1)) 

Pursuant to EPCA, any new or 

amended energy conservation standard 

must be designed to achieve the 

maximum improvement in energy 

efficiency that DOE determines is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new or 

amended standard must result in 

significant conservation of energy. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) 

In light of the above and the 

requirements under 42 U.S.C. 

6295(p)(4)(A)–(B), DOE is issuing this 

NOPR proposing energy conservation 

standards for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, and freezers. These standard 

levels were submitted jointly to DOE on 

September 25, 2023, by groups 

representing manufacturers, energy and 

environmental advocates, consumer 

groups, and a utility.13 This letter, titled 

‘‘Energy Efficiency Agreement of 2023’’ 

(hereafter, the ‘‘Joint Agreement’’ 14), 

recommends specific energy 

conservation standards for refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers that, in 

the commenters’ view, would satisfy the 

EPCA requirements in 42 U.S.C. 

6295(o). 

2. Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, 

Rule 

EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the 

energy efficiency of a number of 

consumer products and certain 

industrial equipment. Title III, Part B of 

EPCA established the Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles. 

These products include refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the 

subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 

6292(a)(1)) EPCA prescribed energy 

conservation standards for these 

products (42 U.S.C. 6295(b)(1)–(2)), and 

directed. DOE to conduct three cycles of 

future rulemakings to whether to amend 

these standards. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(b)(3)(A)(i), (b)(3)(B), and (b)(4)). 

DOE has completed these rulemakings. 

EPCA further provides that, not later 

than 6 years after the issuance of any 

final rule establishing or amending a 

standard, DOE must publish either a 

notice of determination that standards 

for the product do not need to be 

amended, or a NOPR including new 

proposed energy conservation standards 

(proceeding to a final rule, as 

appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2905 

15U.S. Department of Energy’s Compliance 

Certification Database. (last accessed May 5, 2023.) 

www.regulations.doe.gov/certification-data/ 

#q=Product_Group_s%3A*. 

16California Energy Commission’s Modernized 

Appliance Efficiency Database System. (last 

accessed May 5, 2023.) 

cacertappliances.energy.ca.gov/Pages/Appliance

Search.aspx. 

17S&P Global. Panjiva Market Intelligence. (last 

accessed July 18, 2023.) panjiva.com/import-export/ 

United-States. 

18 D&B Hoover. Company Profiles. Various 

companies. (last accessed July 14, 2023.) 

app.dnbhoovers.com. 

3. Description and Estimated Number of

Small Entities Regulated

DOE reviewed this proposed rule 

under the provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act and the procedures and 

policies published on February 19, 

2003. 68 FR 7990. DOE conducted a 

market survey to identify potential 

small manufacturers of refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. DOE 

conducted a market survey to identify 

potential small manufacturers of 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers. DOE began its assessment by 

reviewing DOE’s Compliance 

Certification Database,15 California 

Energy Commission’s Modernized 

Appliance Efficiency Database 

System,16 individual company websites, 

and prior refrigerator, refrigeratorfreezer, and freezer rulemakings to 

identify manufacturers of the covered 

product. DOE then consulted publicly 

available data, such as manufacturer 

websites, manufacturer specifications 

and product literature, import/export 

logs (e.g., bills of lading from Panjiva 17), 

and basic model numbers, to identify 

OEMs of covered refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, and freezers. DOE 

further relied on public data and 

subscription-based market research 

tools (e.g., Dun & Bradstreet reports 18) 

to determine company, location, 

headcount, and annual revenue. DOE 

also asked industry representatives if 

they were aware of any small 

manufacturers during manufacturer 

interviews in support of the February 

2023 NOPR. 88 FR 12452. DOE screened 

out companies that do not offer 

products covered by this rulemaking, do 

not meet the SBA’s definition of a 

‘‘small business,’’ or are foreign-owned 

and operated. 

DOE identified 63 OEMs that sell 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, or 

freezers in the United States. Of the 63 

OEMs identified, DOE tentatively 

determined that one company qualifies 

as a small business and is not foreignowned and operated. 

In support of the February 2023 

NOPR, DOE reached out to the small 

business and invited them to participate 

in a voluntary interview. The small 

business did not consent to participate 

in a formal MIA interview. DOE also 

requested information about small 

businesses and potential impacts on 

small businesses while interviewing 

larger manufacturers. 

4. Description and Estimate of

Compliance Requirements Including

Differences in Cost, if Any, for Different

Groups of Small Entities

The one small business identified has 

45 refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, and 

freezer models certified in DOE’s 

Compliance Certification Database 

(‘‘CCD’’). Of those 45 models, 43 models 

are compact-size refrigerators, 

refrigerator-freezers, or freezers (34 PC 

13A models, three PC 15 models, and 

six PC 17 models). The remaining two 

models are standard-size built-in 

refrigerator-freezer models (PC 3A–BI). 

Of the 34 PC 13A models, 22 models 

meet the efficiency required (EL 1) at 

TSL. For PC 15, PC 17, and PC 3A–BI, 

this small manufacturer only offers 

models at the current DOE baseline 

efficiency and, therefore, does not offer 

any products that meet the proposed 

TSL efficiencies (i.e., 10-percent 

reduction in energy use from the current 

DOE baseline). To meet the required 

efficiencies, DOE expects this small 

manufacturer would likely need to 

implement variable defrost and higher 

efficiency compressors across their 

product platforms. For some PC 3A–BI, 

PC 13A, PC 15, and PC 17 models, 

variable-speed compressors may be 

necessary to meet the required 

efficiencies. Some capital conversion 

costs may be necessary for additional 

tooling and new stations to test more 

variable-speed compressors. Product 

conversion costs may be necessary for 

developing, qualifying, sourcing, and 

testing new components. DOE estimated 

conversion costs for this small 

manufacturer by using model counts to 

scale down the industry conversion 

costs. DOE estimates that the small 

manufacturer may incur $367,000 in 

capital conversion costs and $530,000 in 

product conversion costs related to 

redesigning their products to meet 

amended standards. Based on 

subscription-based market research 

reports, the small business has an 

annual revenue of approximately $85.3 

million. The total conversion costs of 

$897,000 are approximately 0.2 percent 

of company revenue over the 5-year 

conversion period. 

5. Duplication, Overlap, and Conflict

With Other Rules and Regulations

DOE is not aware of any rules or 

regulations that duplicate, overlap, or 

conflict with the proposed rule. 

6. Significant Alternatives to the Rule

The discussion in the previous

section analyzes impacts on small 

businesses that would result from DOE’s 

proposed rule, represented by TSL 4 

(i.e., the Recommended TSL). In 

reviewing alternatives to the proposed 

rule, DOE examined energy 

conservation standards set at lower 

efficiency levels. While TSLs 3, 2, and 

1 would reduce the impacts on small 

business manufacturers, it would come 

at the expense of a reduction in energy 

savings. TSL 1 achieves 51 percent 

lower energy savings compared to the 

energy savings at TSL 4. TSL 2 achieves 

40 percent lower energy savings 

compared to the energy savings at TSL 

4. TSL 3 achieves 16 percent lower

energy savings compared to the energy

savings at TSL 4.

Based on the presented discussion, 

establishing standards at TSL 4 balances 

the benefits of the energy savings at TSL 

4 with the potential burdens placed on 

refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and 

freezers manufacturers, including small 

business manufacturers. Accordingly, 

DOE does not propose one of the other 

TSLs considered in the analysis, or the 

other policy alternatives examined as 

part of the regulatory impact analysis 

and included in chapter 17 of the direct 

final rule TSD. 

Additional compliance flexibilities 

may be available through other means. 

EPCA provides that a manufacturer 

whose annual gross revenue from all of 

its operations does not exceed $8 

million may apply for an exemption 

from all or part of an energy 

conservation standard for a period not 

longer than 24 months after the effective 

date of a final rule establishing the 

standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(t)) 

Additionally, manufacturers subject to 

DOE’s energy efficiency standards may 

apply to DOE’s Office of Hearings and 

Appeals for exception relief under 

certain circumstances. Manufacturers 

should refer to 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

E, and 10 CFR part 1003 for additional 

details. 

B. Materials Incorporated by Reference

The following standards appear in the

amendatory text of this document and 

were previously approved for the 

locations in which they appear: AS/NZS 

4474.1:2007; HRF–1–2019. No changes 

are proposed to the IBR material. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2906 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

VI. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Household appliances, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Small 

businesses. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on December 28, 

2023, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

pursuant to delegated authority from the 

Secretary of Energy. That document 

with the original signature and date is 

maintained by DOE. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

the Department of Energy. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on December 

29, 2023. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, DOE proposes to amend part 

430 of chapter II, subchapter D, of title 

10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

as set forth below: 

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 2. Amend appendix A to subpart B of 

part 430 by: 

■ a. In section 1: 

■ i. In paragraph (b)(i), removing the 

text ‘‘5.3(e)’’ and adding in its place the 

text ‘‘5.5’’; and 

■ ii. Removing the undesignated 

paragraph immediately following 

paragraph (b)(ii); 

■ b. In section 3, adding, in alphabetical 

order, definitions for ‘‘Door-in-door’’ 

and ‘‘Transparent door’’; 

■ c. In section 5.3: 

■ i. Removing paragraphs (a) and (f); 

and 

■ ii. Redesignating paragraphs (b) 

through (e) as paragraphs (a) through 

(d); and 

■ d. Adding new sections 5.4 and 5.5. 

The additions read as follows: 

Appendix A to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Refrigerators, 

Refrigerator-Freezers, and 

Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products 

* * * * * 

3. * * * 

Door-in-door means a set of doors or an 

outer door and inner drawer for which— 

(a) Both doors (or both the door and the 

drawer) must be opened to provide access to 

the interior through a single opening; 

(b) Gaskets for both doors (or both the door 

and the drawer) are exposed to external 

ambient conditions on the outside around the 

full perimeter of the respective openings; and 

(c) The space between the two doors (or 

between the door and the drawer) achieves 

temperature levels consistent with the 

temperature requirements of the interior 

compartment to which the door-in-door 

provides access. 

* * * * * 

Transparent door means an external fresh 

food compartment door which meets the 

following criteria: 

(a) The area of the transparent portion of 

the door is at least 40 percent of the area of 

the door. 

(b) The area of the door is at least 50 

percent of the sum of the areas of all the 

external doors providing access to the fresh 

food compartments and cooler 

compartments. 

(c) For the purposes of this evaluation, the 

area of a door is determined as the product 

of the maximum height and maximum width 

dimensions of the door, not considering 

potential extension of flaps used to provide 

a seal to adjacent doors. 

* * * * * 

5. * * * 

5.4. Icemaker Energy Use 

(a) For refrigerators and refrigeratorfreezers: To demonstrate compliance with the 

energy conservation standards at § 430.32(a) 

applicable to products manufactured on or 

after September 15, 2014, but before the 

compliance date of any amended standards 

published after January 1, 2022, IET, 

expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle, equals 

0.23 for a product with one or more 

automatic icemakers and otherwise equals 0 

(zero). To demonstrate compliance with any 

amended standards published after January 

1, 2022, IET, expressed in kilowatt-hours per 

cycle, is as defined in section 5.9.2.1 of HRF– 

1–2019. 

(b) For miscellaneous refrigeration 

products: To demonstrate compliance with 

the energy conservation standards at 

§ 430.32(aa) applicable to products 

manufactured on or after October 28, 2019, 

IET, expressed in kilowatt-hours per cycle, 

equals 0.23 for a product with one or more 

automatic icemakers and otherwise equals 0 

(zero). 

5.5. Triangulation Method 

If the three-point interpolation method of 

section 5.2(b) of this appendix is used for 

setting temperature controls, the average percycle energy consumption shall be defined as 

follows: 

E = EX + IET 

Where: 

E is defined in section 5.9.1.1 of HRF–1– 

2019; 

IET is defined in section 5.4 of this appendix; 

and 

EX is defined and calculated as described in 

appendix M, section M4(a) of AS/NZS 

4474.1:2007. The target temperatures txA

and txB defined in section M4(a)(i) of AS/ 

NZS 4474.1:2007 shall be the 

standardized temperatures defined in 

section 5.6 of HRF–1–2019. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend appendix B to subpart B of 

part 430 by: 

■ a. In section 5.3: 

■ i. Removing paragraph (a); 

■ ii. Redesignating paragraphs (b) and 

(c) as paragraphs (a) and (b); and 

■ b. Adding section 5.4. 

The addition reads as follows: 

Appendix B to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Freezers 

* * * * * 

5. * * * 

5.4. Icemaker Energy Use 

For freezers: To demonstrate compliance 

with the energy conservation standards at 

§ 430.32(a) applicable to products 

manufactured on or after September 15, 2014, 

but before the compliance date of any 

amended standards published after January 

1, 2022, IET, expressed in kilowatt-hours per 

cycle, equals 0.23 for a product with one or 

more automatic icemakers and otherwise 

equals 0 (zero). To demonstrate compliance 

with any amended standards published after 

January 1, 2022, IET, expressed in kilowatthours per cycle, is as defined in section 

5.9.2.1 of HRF–1–2019. 

■ 4. Amend § 430.32 by: 

■ a. Redesignating table 3 to paragraph 

(b) and table 4 to paragraph (b)(2) as 

table 6 to paragraph (b)(1) and table 7 to 

paragraph (b)(2); and 

■ b. Revising paragraph (a). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 430.32 Energy and water conservation 

standards and their compliance dates. 

* * * * * 

(a) Refrigerators/refrigerator-freezers/ 

freezers. The standards in this 

paragraph (a) do not apply to 

refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers 

with total refrigerated volume exceeding 

39 cubic feet (1104 liters) or freezers 

with total refrigerated volume exceeding 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2907 

30 cubic feet (850 liters). The energy 

standards as determined by the 

equations of the following table(s) shall 

be rounded off to the nearest kWh per 

year. If the equation calculation is 

halfway between the nearest two kWh 

per year values, the standard shall be 

rounded up to the higher of these 

values. 

(1) The following standards apply to 

products manufactured on or before 

September 15, 2014, and before the 

2029/2030 compliance dates depending 

on product class (see paragraphs (a)(2) 

and (3) of this section). 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1) 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

based on AV 

(ft3) 

based on av 

(L) 

1. Refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers with manual defrost ....................................................... 7.99AV + 225.0 ......... 0.282av + 225.0. 

1A. All-refrigerators—manual defrost .............................................................................................. 6.79AV + 193.6 ......... 0.240av + 193.6. 

2. Refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ......................................................................... 7.99AV + 225.0 ......... 0.282av + 225.0. 

3. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer without an automatic icemaker.8.07AV + 233.7 ......... 0.285av + 233.7. 

3–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer without an automatic icemaker.9.15AV + 264.9 ......... 0.323av + 264.9. 

3I. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.8.07AV + 317.7 ......... 0.285av + 317.7. 

3I–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.9.15AV + 348.9 ......... 0.323av + 348.9. 

3A. All-refrigerators—automatic defrost .......................................................................................... 7.07AV + 201.6 ......... 0.250av + 201.6. 

3A–BI. Built-in All-refrigerators—automatic defrost ......................................................................... 8.02AV + 228.5 ......... 0.283av + 228.5. 

4. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer without an automatic icemaker.8.51AV + 297.8 ......... 0.301av + 297.8. 

4–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer without an 

automatic icemaker.

10.22AV + 357.4 ....... 0.361av + 357.4. 

4I. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.8.51AV + 381.8 ......... 0.301av + 381.8. 

4I–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.10.22AV + 441.4.2 .... 0.361av + 441.4. 

5. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer without an automatic 

icemaker.

8.85AV + 317.0 ......... 0.312av + 317.0. 

5–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer without an 

automatic icemaker.

9.40AV + 336.9 ......... 0.332av + 336.9. 

5I. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.8.85AV + 401.0 ......... 0.312av + 401.0. 

5I–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with an 

automatic icemaker without through-the-door ice service.

9.40AV + 420.9 ......... 0.332av + 420.9. 

5A. Refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with through-the-door 

ice service.

9.25AV + 475.4 ......... 0.327av + 475.4. 

5A–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

9.83AV + 499.9 ......... 0.347av + 499.9. 

6. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with through-the-door ice 

service.

8.40AV + 385.4 ......... 0.297av + 385.4. 

7. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with through-the-door ice 

service.

8.54AV + 432.8 ......... 0.302av + 431.1. 

7–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with throughthe-door ice service.10.25AV + 502.6 ....... 0.362av + 502.6. 

8. Upright freezers with manual defrost .......................................................................................... 5.57AV + 193.7 ......... 0.197av + 193.7. 

9. Upright freezers with automatic defrost without an automatic icemaker .................................... 8.62AV + 228.3 ......... 0.305av + 228.3. 

9I. Upright freezers with automatic defrost with an automatic icemaker ........................................ 8.62AV + 312.3 ......... 0.305av + 312.3. 

9–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost without an automatic icemaker .................. 9.86AV + 260.9 ......... 0.348av + 260.6. 

9I–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost with an automatic icemaker ...................... 9.86AV + 344.9 ......... 0.348av + 344.9. 

10. Chest freezers and all other freezers except compact freezers ............................................... 7.29AV + 107.8 ......... 0.257av + 107.8. 

10A. Chest freezers with automatic defrost .................................................................................... 10.24AV + 148.1 ....... 0.362av + 148.1. 

11. Compact refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers with manual defrost ....................................... 9.03AV + 252.3 ......... 0.319av + 252.3. 

11A.Compact refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers with manual defrost ...................................... 7.84AV + 219.1 ......... 0.277av + 219.1. 

12. Compact refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ......................................................... 5.91AV + 335.8 ......... 0.209av + 335.8. 

13. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer. .......................... 11.80AV + 339.2 ....... 0.417av + 339.2. 

13I. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker.11.80AV + 423.2 ....... 0.417av + 423.2. 

13A. Compact all-refrigerator—automatic defrost ........................................................................... 9.17AV + 259.3 ......... 0.324av + 259.3. 

14. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer ......................... 6.82AV + 456.9 ......... 0.241av + 456.9. 

14I. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with an automatic icemaker.6.82AV + 540.9 ......... 0.241av + 540.9. 

15. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer ..................... 11.80AV + 339.2 ....... 0.417av + 339.2. 

15I. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with an 

automatic icemaker.

11.80AV + 423.2 ....... 0.417av + 423.2. 

16. Compact upright freezers with manual defrost ......................................................................... 8.65AV + 225.7 ......... 0.306av + 225.7. 

17. Compact upright freezers with automatic defrost ..................................................................... 10.17AV + 351.9 ....... 0.359av + 351.9. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2908 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(1)—Continued 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

based on AV 

(ft3) 

based on av 

(L) 

18. Compact chest freezers ............................................................................................................ 9.25AV + 136.8 ......... 0.327av + 136.8. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of this part. 

av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

(2) The following standards apply to 

products manufactured on or after 

January 31, 2029. 

TABLE 2 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(2) 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

3–BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer 8.24AV + 238.4 + 28I .............. 0.291av + 238.4 + 28I. 

3A–BI. Built-in All-refrigerators—automatic defrost ............................................. (7.22AV + 205.7)*K3ABI ......... (0.255av + 205.7)*K3ABI. 

4–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer.

(8.79AV + 307.4)*K4BI + 28I .. (0.310av + 307.4)*K4BI + 28I. 

5–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer.

(8.65AV + 309.9)*K5BI + 28I .. (0.305av + 309.9)*K5BI + 28I. 

5A. Refrigerator-freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

(7.76AV + 351.9)*K5A ............. (0.274av + 351.9)*K5A. 

5A–BI. Built-in refrigerator–freezer—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer with through-the-door ice service.

(8.21AV + 370.7)*K5ABI ......... (0.290av + 370.7)*K5ABI. 

7–BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted 

freezer.

(8.82AV + 384.1)*K7BI ............ (0.311av + 384.1)*K7BI. 

8. Upright freezers with manual defrost .............................................................. 5.57AV + 193.7 ....................... 0.197av + 193.7. 

9–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost ......................................... (9.37AV + 247.9)*K9BI + 28I .. (0.331av + 247.9)*K9BI + 28I. 

9A–BI. Built-In Upright freezers with automatic defrost with through-the-door 

ice service.

9.86AV + 288.9 ....................... 0.348av + 288.9. 

10. Chest freezers and all other freezers except compact freezers ................... 7.29AV + 107.8 ....................... 0.257av + 107.8. 

10A. Chest freezers with automatic defrost ........................................................ 10.24AV + 148.1 ..................... 0.362av + 148.1. 

11. Compact refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators 

with manual defrost.

7.68AV + 214.5 ....................... 0.271av + 214.5. 

11A. Compact all-refrigerators—manual defrost ................................................. 6.66AV + 186.2 ....................... 0.235av + 186.2. 

12. Compact refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ............................. (5.32AV + 302.2)*K12 ............. (0.188av + 302.2)*K12. 

13. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer 10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I ............ 0.375av + 305.3 + 28I. 

13A. Compact all-refrigerators—automatic defrost ............................................. (8.25AV + 233.4)*K13A ........... (0.291av + 233.4)*K13A. 

14. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer.6.14AV + 411.2 + 28I .............. 0.217av + 411.2 + 28I. 

15. Compact refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted 

freezer.

10.62AV + 305.3 + 28I ............ 0.375av + 305.3 + 28I. 

16. Compact upright freezers with manual defrost ............................................. 7.35AV + 191.8 ....................... 0.260av + 191.8. 

17. Compact upright freezers with automatic defrost ......................................... 9.15AV + 316.7 ....................... 0.323av + 316.7. 

18. Compact chest freezers ................................................................................ 7.86AV + 107.8 ....................... 0.278av + 107.8. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 

av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3ABI) are as defined in the following table. 

TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(2) 

Door coefficient 

Products 

with a 

transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or door-in-door with added external 

doors 

K3ABI ............................................... 1.10 1.0 1.0 

K4BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2) 

K5BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2) 

K5A .................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3) 

K5ABI ............................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥3) 

K7BI ................................................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2) 

K9BI ................................................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 11 / Wednesday, January 17, 2024 / Proposed Rules 2909 

TABLE 3 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(2)—Continued 

Door coefficient 

Products 

with a 

transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or door-in-door with added external 

doors 

K12 ................................................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1) 

K13A ................................................ 1.10 1.0 1.0 

Notes: 

1 Nd is the number of external doors. 2The maximum Nd values are 2 for K12, 3 for K9BI, and 5 for all other K values. 

(3) The following standards apply to 

products manufactured on or after 

January 31, 2030. 

TABLE 4 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(3) 

Product class 

Equations for maximum energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

Based on AV 

(ft3) 

Based on av 

(L) 

1. Refrigerator-freezers and refrigerators other than all-refrigerators with manual defrost.6.79AV + 191.3 ....................... 0.240av + 191.3. 

1A. All-refrigerators—manual defrost .................................................................. 5.77AV + 164.6 ....................... 0.204av + 164.6. 

2. Refrigerator-freezers—partial automatic defrost ............................................. (6.79AV + 191.3)*K2 ............... (0.240av + 191.3)*K2. 

3. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer ............... 6.86AV + 198.6 + 28I .............. 0.242av + 198.6 + 28I. 

3A. All-refrigerators—automatic defrost .............................................................. (6.01AV + 171.4)*K3A ............. (0.212av + 171.4)*K3A. 

4. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer ............. (7.28AV + 254.9)*K4 + 28I ...... (0.257av + 254.9)*K4 + 28I. 

5. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with bottom-mounted freezer ......... (7.61AV + 272.6)*K5 + 28I ...... (0.269av + 272.6)*K5 + 28I. 

6. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with top-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

7.14AV + 280.0 ....................... 0.252av + 280.0. 

7. Refrigerator-freezers—automatic defrost with side-mounted freezer with 

through-the-door ice service.

(7.31AV + 322.5)*K7 ............... (0.258av + 322.5)*K7. 

9. Upright freezers with automatic defrost .......................................................... (7.33AV + 194.1)*K9 + 28I ...... (0.259av + 194.1)*K9 + 28I. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 

av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters. 

I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3A) are as defined in the following table. 

TABLE 5 TO PARAGRAPH (a)(3) 

Door coefficient 

Products 

with a 

transparent 

door 

Products 

without a 

transparent 

door with a 

door-in-door 

Products without a transparent door or door-in-door with added external 

doors 

K2 ..................................................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1) 

K3A .................................................. 1.10 1.0 1.0 

K4 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2) 

K5 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2) 

K7 ..................................................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥2) 

K9 ..................................................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd¥1) 

Notes: 

1 Nd is the number of external doors. 2The maximum Nd values are 2 for K2, and 5 for all other K values. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2023–28977 Filed 1–16–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1