```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 29 (Wednesday, February 12, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8337-8350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-03086]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005]
RIN 1904-AD15

Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Residential Conventional Cooking Products

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Request for information (RFI) and notice of document 
availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is initiating an effort to 
determine whether to amend the current energy conservation standards 
for residential conventional cooking products. According to the Energy 
Policy and Conservation Act's 6-year review requirement, DOE must 
publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to propose new standards for 
conventional electric cooking products or amended standards for 
conventional gas cooking products or a notice of determination that the 
existing standards do not need to be amended by February 26, 2015. This 
RFI seeks to solicit information from the public to help DOE determine 
whether new or amended standards for residential conventional cooking 
products would result in a significant

[[Page 8338]]

amount of additional energy savings and whether those standards would 
be technologically feasible and economically justified.

DATES: Written comments and information are requested on or before 
March 14, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are encouraged to submit comments 
electronically. However, comments may be submitted by any of the 
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the instructions for submitting comments.
     Email to the following address: 
ConventionalCookingProducts2014STD0005@ee.doe.gov. Include docket 
number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005 and/or RIN 1904-AD15 in the subject line 
of the message. All comments should clearly identify the name, address, 
and, if appropriate, organization of the commenter.
     Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, Request for 
Information for Residential Conventional Cooking Products, Docket No. 
EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005 and/or RIN 1904-AD15, 1000 Independence Avenue 
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Please submit one signed paper 
original.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Sixth Floor, 950 L'Enfant 
Plaza SW., Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one signed paper 
original.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number and/or RIN for this rulemaking. No telefacsimiles 
(faxes) will be accepted.
    Docket: The docket is available for review at www.regulations.gov, 
including Federal Register notices, public meeting attendees' lists and 
transcripts, comments, and other supporting documents/materials. 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.
    A link to the docket Web page can be found at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-STD-0005. This Web 
page contains a link to the docket for this notice on the 
www.regulations.gov Web site. The www.regulations.gov Web page contains 
simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public 
comments, in the docket.
    For information on how to submit a comment, review other public 
comments and the docket, or participate in the public meeting, contact 
Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or by email: 
Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct requests for additional 
information may be sent to John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies 
Program, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1692. Email: kitchen_ranges_and_ovens@ee.doe.gov.
    Mr. Ari Altman, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 287-6307. Email: ari.altman@hq.doe.gov.
    For information on how to submit or review public comments, contact 
Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop 
EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. 
Telephone: (202) 586-2945. Email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
    A. Authority and Background
    B. Rulemaking Process
II. Request for Information and Comments
    A. Products Covered by This RFI
    B. Test Procedure
    C. Market Assessment
    D. Engineering Analysis
    E. Markups Analysis
    F. Energy Use Analysis
    G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis
    H. Shipments Analysis
    I. National Impact Analysis
    J. Submission of Comments

I. Introduction

A. Authority and Background

    Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 
(EPCA or the Act), Public Law 94-163, (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as 
codified) sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy 
efficiency and established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer 
Products Other Than Automobiles, a program covering major household 
appliances (collectively referred to as ``covered products''), 
including residential conventional cooking products. EPCA authorizes 
DOE to establish technologically feasible, economically justified 
energy conservation standards for covered products that would be likely 
to result in significant national energy savings. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))
    The National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA), 
Public Law 100-12, amended EPCA to establish prescriptive standards for 
gas cooking products, requiring gas ranges and ovens with an electrical 
supply cord that are manufactured on or after January 1, 1990, not to 
be equipped with a constant burning pilot light. NAECA also directed 
DOE to conduct two cycles of rulemakings to determine if more stringent 
or additional standards were justified for kitchen ranges and ovens. 
(42 U.S.C. 6295(h)(1)-(2))
    DOE undertook the first cycle of these rulemakings and published a 
final rule on September 8, 1998, which found that no standards were 
justified for conventional electric cooking products at that time. In 
addition, partially due to the difficulty of conclusively demonstrating 
that elimination of standing pilots for conventional gas cooking 
products without an electrical supply cord was economically justified, 
DOE did not include amended standards for conventional gas cooking 
products in the final rule. 63 FR 48038. For the second cycle of 
rulemakings, DOE published a final rule on April 8, 2009 (hereafter the 
April 2009 Final Rule), amending the energy conservation standards for 
conventional cooking products to prohibit constant burning pilots for 
all gas cooking products (i.e., gas cooking products both with or 
without an electrical supply cord) manufactured on or after April 9, 
2012. DOE decided to not adopt energy conservation standards pertaining 
to the cooking efficiency of conventional electric cooking products 
because it determined that such standards would not be technologically 
feasible and economically justified at that time. 74 FR 16040, 16041-
16044.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As part of the April 2009 Final Rule, DOE decided not to 
adopt energy conservation standards pertaining to the cooking 
efficiency of microwave ovens. DOE also published a final rule on 
June 17, 2013 adopting energy conservation standards for microwave 
oven standby mode and off mode. 78 FR 36316. DOE is not considering 
energy conservation standards for microwave ovens as part of this 
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPCA also requires that, not later than 6 years after the issuance 
of a final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE publish a NOPR 
proposing new standards or a notice of determination that the existing 
standards do not need to be amended. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) Based on 
this provision, DOE must publish by March 31, 2015 either a NOPR 
proposing new standards for conventional electric cooking products

[[Page 8339]]

or amended standards for conventional gas cooking products \2\ or a 
notice of determination that the existing standards do not need to be 
amended. Today's notice represents the initiation of the mandatory 
review process imposed by EPCA and seeks input from the public to 
assist DOE with its determination on whether new or amended standards 
pertaining to conventional cooking products are warranted. In making 
this determination, DOE must evaluate whether more new or amended 
standards would (1) yield a significant savings in energy use and (2) 
be both technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(3)(B))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As discussed in section 0.0, DOE is also tentatively 
planning to consider new energy conservation standards for 
commercial-style gas cooking products and residential-scale units 
with higher burner input rates, which were previously excluded from 
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Rulemaking Process

    DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or 
amended standards for covered products. EPCA requires that any new or 
amended energy conservation standard be designed to achieve the maximum 
improvement in energy or water efficiency that is technologically 
feasible and economically justified. To determine whether a standard is 
economically justified, EPCA requires that DOE determine whether the 
benefits of the standard exceed its burdens by considering, to the 
greatest extent practicable, the following:
    1. The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and 
consumers of the affected products;
    2. The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average 
life of the product compared to any increases in the initial cost, or 
maintenance expense;
    3. The total projected amount of energy and water (if applicable) 
savings likely to result directly from the imposition of the standard;
    4. Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the products 
likely to result from the imposition of the standard;
    5. The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in 
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the 
imposition of the standard;
    6. The need for national energy and water conservation; and
    7. Other factors the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) considers 
relevant. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i))
    DOE fulfills these and other applicable requirements by conducting 
a series of analyses throughout the rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows 
the individual analyses that are performed to satisfy each of the 
requirements within EPCA.

       Table I.1--EPCA Requirements and Corresponding DOE Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            EPCA requirement                Corresponding DOE analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technological Feasibility..............   Market and Technology
                                          Assessment.
                                          Screening Analysis.
                                          Engineering Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Economic Justification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Economic impact on manufacturers and   Manufacturer Impact
 consumers.                               Analysis.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost and
                                          Payback Period Analysis.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost
                                          Subgroup Analysis.
                                          Shipments Analysis.
2. Lifetime operating cost savings        Markups for Product
 compared to increased cost for the       Price Determination.
 product.
                                          Energy and Water Use
                                          Determination.
                                          Life-Cycle Cost and
                                          Payback Period Analysis.
3. Total projected energy savings......   Shipments Analysis.
                                          National Impact
                                          Analysis.
4. Impact on utility or performance....   Screening Analysis.
                                          Engineering Analysis.
5. Impact of any lessening of             Manufacturer Impact
 competition.                             Analysis.
6. Need for national energy and water     Shipments Analysis.
 conservation.
                                          National Impact
                                          Analysis.
7. Other factors the Secretary            Emissions Analysis.
 considers relevant.
                                          Utility Impact
                                          Analysis.
                                          Employment Impact
                                          Analysis.
                                          Monetization of
                                          Emission Reductions Benefits.
                                          Regulatory Impact
                                          Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE is specifically publishing 
this notice as the first step in the analysis process and is 
specifically requesting input and data from interested parties to aid 
in the development of the technical analyses.

II. Request for Information and Comments

    In the next section, DOE has identified a variety of questions that 
DOE would like to receive input on to aid in the development of the 
technical and economic analyses regarding whether new standards for 
conventional electric cooking products or amended standards for 
conventional gas cooking products \3\ may be warranted. In addition, 
DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the conduct of this 
RFI that may not specifically be identified in this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As discussed in section 0.0, DOE is also tentatively 
planning to consider new energy conservation standards for 
commercial-style gas cooking products and residential-scale units 
with higher burner input rates, which were previously excluded from 
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Products Covered by This RFI

    DOE defines ``cooking products'' as consumer products that are used 
as the major household cooking appliances.

[[Page 8340]]

They are designed to cook or heat different types of food by one or 
more of the following sources of heat: gas, electricity, or microwave 
energy. Each product may consist of a horizontal cooking top containing 
one or more surface units and/or one or more heating compartments. They 
must be one of the following classes: conventional ranges, conventional 
cooking tops, conventional ovens, microwave ovens, microwave/
conventional ranges and other cooking products. (10 CFR 430.2) As part 
of this RFI, DOE intends to address energy conservation standards for 
all conventional cooking products.
    As part of the most recent standards rulemaking for conventional 
cooking products, DOE decided to exclude commercial-style residential 
gas cooking products from consideration of energy conservation 
standards due to a lack of available data for determining efficiency 
characteristics of those products. DOE considered commercial-style gas 
cooking tops to be those products that incorporate cooking tops with 
higher input rate burners (i.e., greater than 14,000 British thermal 
units (Btu)/hour (h)) and heavy-duty grates that provide faster cooking 
and the ability to cook larger quantities of food in larger cooking 
vessels. DOE also stated that the burners are optimized for the larger-
scale cookware to maintain high cooking performance. Similarly, DOE 
considered commercial-style gas ovens to have higher input rates (i.e., 
greater than 22,500 Btu/h) and dimensions to accommodate larger cooking 
utensils or greater quantity of food items, as well as features to 
optimize cooking performance. 74 FR 16040, 16054 (Apr. 8, 2009); 72 FR 
64432, 64444, 64445 (Nov. 15, 2007). As discussed in section II.B, DOE 
also stated in the previous standards rulemaking that the current DOE 
cooking products test procedures may not adequately measure performance 
of commercial-style gas cooking tops and ovens. 72 FR 64432, 64444, 
64445 (Nov. 15, 2007).
    Based on DOE's review of residential gas cooking products available 
on the market, DOE noted that there are a significant number of models 
advertised as commercial-style (or in some cases ``professional-
style'') with the features described above.\4\ In particular, DOE noted 
that commercial-style gas cooking tops and ranges have multiple surface 
burners rated above 14,000 Btu/h and the ``heavy-duty'' grates are 
consistently made of cast iron. DOE also noted that the number of 
burners ranged from four to eight for commercial-style gas cooking tops 
and ranges versus four to five burners for residential-scale products. 
Additionally, these commercial-style gas cooking tops and ranges may be 
reconfigurable, for example with the option to replace burners with 
griddles or grills.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ DOE noted one manufacturer offers electric cooking products 
advertised as professional-style. However, the cooking elements have 
similar wattages and diameters to other residential cooking products 
not advertised as commercial-style. As a result, DOE is not 
considering a separate classification for conventional electric 
cooking tops or ovens. DOE considers commercial-style products to be 
commercial-style gas cooking products or the gas component of a 
dual-fuel-range.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE does note that a number of residential gas cooking products 
that manufacturers do not advertise as commercial-style have a single 
surface burner rated above 14,000 Btu/h, which may be labeled in 
product literature as specifically intended for rapid boiling. Products 
with only one high-Btu/h burner also have cast-iron grates, suggesting 
that ``heavy-duty grates'' are related to the input rate of the burner 
but are not a feature unique to products advertised as commercial-
style.
    DOE also observed differences in oven capacity during a review of 
residential cooking products. According to DOE's research, the oven 
capacity in typical residential ovens and ranges varies from 2.5 cubic 
feet to 5.0 cubic feet, while commercial-style gas ovens and ranges 
typically have oven capacities ranging from 3.0 cubic feet to 6.0 cubic 
feet. Of the reviewed commercial-style ranges, most had gas oven 
capacities between 5.0 and 6.0 cubic feet.
    As part of this RFI, DOE tentatively plans to consider energy 
conservation standards for all residential conventional cooking 
products, including commercial-style gas cooking products and 
residential-scale units with higher burner input rates. As discussed in 
the sections below, DOE may consider developing test procedures for 
these products and determine whether separate product classes are 
warranted.
    DOE notes that the test procedures for conventional ranges, cooking 
tops, and ovens found at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix I, do not 
address all possible types of combined cooking products (i.e., products 
that combine a conventional cooking product with other appliance 
functionality, which may or may not include another cooking product), 
such as microwave/conventional ovens or any other products that may 
combine a conventional cooking product with other appliance 
functionality that is not a conventional cooking product. Because test 
procedures are not available addressing products that combine a 
conventional cooking product with other appliance functionality that is 
not a conventional cooking product (e.g., microwave/conventional 
ovens), DOE is not considering energy conservation standards for such 
products at this time.
    Issue A.1 DOE requests comment on the consideration of energy 
conservation standards for all residential conventional cooking 
products, including gas cooking products with higher input rates. DOE 
requests comment on a potential definition of commercial-style gas 
cooking products, in particular with respect to burner input rates, 
cooking top grate materials, cavity volume, or any other 
characteristics that may be specific to commercial-style gas cooking 
products. DOE also requests comment on the tentative determination to 
not consider energy conservation standards for combined cooking 
products that may combine a conventional cooking product with other 
appliance functionality that is not a conventional cooking product.

B. Test Procedure

    DOE's test procedures for conventional ranges, cooking tops, and 
ovens are found at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix I. DOE first 
established the test procedures included in appendix I in a final rule 
published in the Federal Register on May 10, 1978. 43 FR 20108, 20120-
20128. DOE revised its test procedure for cooking products to more 
accurately measure their efficiency and energy use, and published the 
revisions as a final rule in 1997. 62 FR 51976 (Oct. 3, 1997). These 
test procedure amendments included: (1) A reduction in the annual 
useful cooking energy; \5\ (2) a reduction in the number of self-
cleaning oven cycles per year; and (3) incorporation of portions of the 
International Electrotechnical Commission's (IEC) Standard 705-1988, 
``Methods for measuring the performance of microwave ovens for 
household and similar purposes,'' and Amendment 2-1993 (IEC Standard 
705) for the testing of microwave ovens. Id. The test procedure for 
conventional cooking products establishes provisions for determining 
estimated annual energy use, cooking efficiency (defined as the ratio 
of cooking energy output to cooking energy input), and energy factor 
(EF) (defined as the ratio of annual useful cooking energy output to 
total annual energy input). 10 CFR 430.23(i); 10 CFR part 430, subpart 
B, appendix I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The annual useful cooking energy is the energy input to a 
cooking product that is transferred to the load being cooked and is 
used to relate the efficiency (energy factor) of the cooking product 
to the annual energy consumption.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 8341]]

    DOE published a final rule on October 31, 2012, amending the test 
procedures for conventional cooking products (hereafter referred to as 
the October 2012 TP Final Rule), to incorporate by reference provisions 
from IEC Standard 62301 ``Household electrical appliances--Measurement 
of standby power'' (Second Edition) for the measurement of energy use 
in standby mode and off mode, and methodology for the measurement of 
fan-only mode energy use in the energy efficiency metrics. 77 FR 65942.
    DOE also published a NOPR on January 30, 2013 (hereafter referred 
to as the January 2013 Induction TP NOPR), in which it proposed 
amendments to the cooking products test procedure to allow for testing 
the active mode energy consumption of induction cooking products; i.e., 
conventional cooking tops and ranges equipped with induction heating 
technology for one or more surface units on the cooking top. The 
proposed test procedure would replace the aluminum test blocks 
currently specified for conventional cooking top testing with hybrid 
test blocks comprising two separate stacked pieces: A stainless steel 
alloy 430 base, which is compatible with the induction technology, and 
an aluminum body. The proposed hybrid test blocks would have the same 
outer diameters and heat capacities as the existing aluminum test 
blocks and would be used for testing all cooking tops being considered 
in this standards rulemaking, including both conventional and induction 
cooking tops. 78 FR 6232. This test procedure rulemaking is still in 
progress.
    As discussed in section II., DOE tentatively plans to consider 
energy conservation standards for all residential conventional cooking 
products, including commercial-style gas cooking products and 
residential-scale gas cooking products with higher burner input rates. 
As part of the previous energy conservation standards rulemaking, DOE 
noted that the test procedure for gas cooking tops is currently based 
on measuring temperature rise in an aluminum block with a single 
diameter for all burner input rates. DOE stated that the diameter of 
the test block is sufficient to measure higher-output residential-scale 
burners. For commercial-style burners that may have larger diameter 
burner rings to accomplish complete combustion, however, DOE noted that 
this test block diameter may be too small to achieve proper heat 
transfer and may not be representative of the dimensions of suitable 
cookware. DOE further stated that it was not aware of any data to 
determine the measurement of energy efficiency or energy efficiency 
characteristics for those products. 72 FR 64432, 64444 (Nov. 15, 2007). 
DOE also noted that the test procedure may not adequately measure 
performance of commercial-style gas ovens. DOE stated that the single 
test block may not adequately measure the temperature distribution that 
is inherent with the larger cavity volumes and higher input rates 
typically found in these products. DOE stated that it was not aware of 
any data upon which to determine the measurement of energy efficiency 
or energy efficiency characteristics for commercial-style gas ovens, so 
it therefore decided to exclude commercial-style gas cooking products 
from consideration of energy conservation standards. 72 FR 64432, 64445 
(Nov. 15, 2007). Because DOE is tentatively planning to consider energy 
conservation standards for commercial-style gas cooking products and 
residential-scale units with higher burner input rates for this 
rulemaking, DOE may consider amending the cooking products test 
procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix I to include methods 
for measuring the energy use of commercial-style gas cooking products 
and residential-scale gas cooking products with higher burner input 
rates.
    DOE plans to consider the test procedure amendments adopted in the 
October 2012 TP Final Rule and the proposed amendments in the January 
2013 Induction TP NOPR as part of this rulemaking. DOE also plans to 
consider any additional test procedure amendments developed for 
commercial-style gas cooking products and residential-scale gas cooking 
products with higher burner input rates.
    Issue B.1 DOE requests comment on appropriate test methods for 
measuring the energy consumption of commercial-style gas cooking 
products and residential-scale gas cooking products with higher burner 
input rates. In particular, DOE requests comment and data on the size 
of test blocks that would be representative of typical consumer use for 
these products.

C. Market Assessment

    The market and technology assessment provides information about the 
residential conventional cooking products industry that will be used 
throughout the rulemaking process. For example, this information will 
be used to determine whether the existing product class structure 
requires modification based on the statutory criteria for setting such 
classes and to explore the potential for technological improvements in 
the design and manufacturing of such products. The Department uses 
qualitative and quantitative information to characterize the structure 
of the residential cooking products industry and market. DOE will 
identify and characterize the manufacturers of cooking products, 
estimate market shares and trends, address regulatory and non-
regulatory initiatives intended to improve energy efficiency or reduce 
energy consumption, and explore the potential for technological 
improvements in the design and manufacturing of cooking products. DOE 
will also review product literature, industry publications, and company 
Web sites. Additionally, DOE will consider conducting interviews with 
manufacturers to assess the overall market for residential conventional 
cooking products.
Product Classes
    The general criteria for separation into different classes include 
(1) type of energy used; (2) capacity; or (3) other performance-related 
features that justify the establishment of a separate energy 
conservation standard, considering the utility of the feature to the 
consumer and other factors deemed appropriate by the Secretary. (42 
U.S.C. 6295(q))
    During the previous energy conservation standards rulemaking for 
cooking products, DOE evaluated product classes for conventional 
cooking products based on energy source (i.e., gas or electric) and the 
type of cooking (i.e., cooking tops and ovens). These distinctions 
initially yielded four conventional cooking product classes: (1) Gas 
cooking tops; (2) electric cooking tops; (3) gas ovens; and (4) 
electric ovens. For electric cooking tops, DOE determined that the ease 
of cleaning smooth elements provides enhanced consumer utility over 
coil elements. Because smooth elements typically use more energy than 
coil elements, DOE defined two separate product classes for electric 
cooking tops. For both electric and gas ovens, DOE determined that the 
type of oven-cleaning system is a utility feature that affects 
performance. DOE found that standard ovens and ovens using a catalytic 
continuous-cleaning process use roughly the same amount of energy. On 
the other hand, self-cleaning ovens use a pyrolytic process that 
provides enhanced consumer utility with lower overall energy 
consumption as compared to either standard or catalytically lined 
ovens. DOE defined the following product classes in the technical 
support document (TSD) for

[[Page 8342]]

the April 2009 Final Rule (2009 TSD) \6\ for the previous cooking 
products standards rulemaking:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Technical support document from the previous residential 
cooking products standards rulemaking is available at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2006-STD-0127-0097.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Gas cooking tops--conventional burners;
     Electric cooking tops--low or high wattage open (coil) 
elements;
     Electric cooking tops--smooth elements;
     Electric ovens--standard oven with or without a catalytic 
line;
     Electric ovens--self-clean oven;
     Gas ovens--standard oven with or without a catalytic line; 
and
     Gas ovens--self-clean oven.
    For this rulemaking, DOE tentatively plans to maintain the product 
classes for conventional cooking products from the previous standards 
rulemaking, as presented above. As discussed below, DOE tentatively 
plans to consider induction heating as a technology option for electric 
smooth cooking tops rather than as a separate product class. DOE notes 
that induction heating provides the same basic function of cooking or 
heating food as heating by gas flame or electric resistance, and that 
the installation options available to consumers are also the same for 
both cooking products with induction and electric resistance heating. 
As discussed in section II.A, DOE is also planning to consider 
commercial-style gas cooking products and residential-scale gas cooking 
products with higher burner input rates as part of this rulemaking. As 
a result, DOE may consider whether separate product classes are 
warranted for these latter products.
    Issue C.1 DOE requests feedback on the proposed product classes and 
seeks information regarding other product classes it should consider 
for inclusion in its analysis. In particular, DOE requests comment on 
the determination to consider induction heating as a technology option 
rather than as a separate product class. In addition, DOE requests 
comment and data on whether commercial-style gas cooking products or 
residential-scale gas cooking products with higher burner input rates 
warrant product classes separate from residential-scale gas cooking 
products with lower burner input rates. If commenters believe that 
separate product classes are warranted, DOE requests comment as to how 
those classes should be configured, i.e., gas burner input rates, 
number of high input rate burners, cooking top grate materials, oven 
cavity volume, or some other criteria.
Technology Assessment
    DOE uses information about existing and past technology options and 
prototype designs to help identify technologies that manufacturers 
could use to meet and/or exceed energy conservation standards. In 
consultation with interested parties, DOE intends to develop a list of 
technologies to consider in its analysis. Initially, this list will 
include a subset of the technology options considered during the most 
recent residential cooking products standards rulemaking that are 
considered to be technologically feasible. Based on a preliminary 
review of the cooking products market and information published in 
recent trade publications, technical reports, and manufacturer 
literature, DOE has observed that the results of the technology 
screening analysis performed during the previous rulemaking remain 
largely relevant for this rulemaking.
    Based on the technologies identified in the previous standards 
rulemaking, DOE considered the technologies listed in Table II.1 for 
gas cooking tops. As part of the previous standards rulemaking, DOE 
considered electronic ignition as a technology option. However, because 
the previous standards rulemaking adopted standards to prohibit 
constant burning pilots for all gas cooking products manufactured on or 
after April 9, 2012 (74 FR 16040, 16041-44 (Apr. 8, 2009)), DOE 
considers electronic ignition part of the baseline design. As a result, 
DOE is not considering electronic ignition as a technology option for 
improving efficiency for this rulemaking. In addition, DOE's review of 
gas cooking tops suggests that all such products currently use 
electromechanical controls that do not consume power in a standby mode 
or off mode. As a result, DOE did not consider technology options for 
reducing standby mode or off mode energy consumption.

           Table II.1--Technology Options for Gas Cooking Tops
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Catalytic burners.
2. Insulation.
3. Radiant gas burners.
4. Reduced excess air at burner.
5. Reflective surfaces.
6. Sealed burners.
7. Thermostatically controlled burners.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For open (coil) element electric cooking tops, DOE considered the 
technologies listed in Table II.2. DOE noted in the 2009 TSD that 
reflective surfaces and insulation yield very low energy savings. As 
with gas cooking tops, DOE's review of open (coil) element electric 
cooking tops suggests that all such products use electromechanical 
controls. As a result, DOE did not consider technology options for 
reducing standby mode or off mode energy consumption for electric 
cooking tops with open coils.

 Table II.2--Technology Options for Open (Coil) Element Electric Cooking
                                  Tops
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Electronic controls.
2. Improved contact conductance.
3. Insulation.
4. Reflective surfaces.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For smooth element electric cooking tops, DOE considered the 
technologies listed in Table II.3. In the 2009 TSD, DOE noted that it 
did not evaluate induction elements because the existing DOE test 
procedure cannot measure the possible energy savings from this 
technology. As discussed in section II.B, DOE published the January 
2013 Induction TP NOPR to propose amendments to the cooking products 
test procedure to provide test methods for induction cooking products. 
As a result, DOE tentatively plans to consider induction elements as a 
technology option for smooth element electric cooking tops for this 
rulemaking.

 Table II.3--Technology Options for Smooth Element Electric Cooking Tops
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Electronic controls.
2. Halogen elements.
3. Induction elements.
4. Low-standby-loss electronic controls.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For gas and electric ovens, DOE considered the technologies listed 
in Table II.4 based on the previous standards rulemaking analysis. 
Because DOE's current energy conservation standards prohibit standing 
pilot lights for all gas cooking products, DOE did not consider 
pilotless ignition as a technology option. In the previous rulemaking, 
DOE considered electronic spark ignition as a technology option to 
replace electric glo-bar ignition for conventional gas standard ovens, 
but not for conventional gas self-clean ovens. For this RFI, DOE 
reviewed products available on the market, but did not observe any 
conventional gas self-clean ovens with electronic spark ignition. 
However, DOE is unaware of any design constraints that would prohibit 
the use of electronic spark ignition in conventional gas self-clean 
ovens. As a result, DOE is tentatively

[[Page 8343]]

planning to consider electronic spark ignition for all conventional gas 
ovens.

        Table II.4--Technology Options for Gas and Electric Ovens
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Bi-radiant oven (electric only).
2. Electronic Spark Ignition (gas only).
3. Forced convection.
4. Halogen lamp oven (electric only).
5. Improved and added insulation.
6. Improved door seals.
7. No oven-door window.
8. Oven separator.
9. Radiant burner (gas only).
10. Reduced conduction losses.
11. Reduced thermal mass.
12. Reduced vent rate.
13. Reflective surfaces.
14. Steam cooking.
15. Low-standby-loss electronic controls.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue C.2 DOE seeks information related to the efficiency improving 
technologies listed in Table II.4 or other unlisted technologies as to 
their applicability to the current market and how these technologies 
improve efficiency of residential conventional cooking products as 
measured according to the DOE test procedure. Additionally, DOE 
requests comment on the effects of the gas cooking products technology 
options on efficiency for commercial-style gas cooking products and gas 
cooking products with higher burner input rates.

D. Engineering Analysis

    The engineering analysis estimates the cost-efficiency relationship 
of products at different levels of increased energy efficiency. This 
relationship serves as the basis for the cost-benefit calculations for 
consumers, manufacturers, and the nation. In determining the cost-
efficiency relationship, DOE estimates the increase in manufacturer 
cost associated with increasing the efficiency of products above the 
baseline to the maximum technologically feasible (``max-tech'') 
efficiency level for each product class. The baseline model is used as 
a reference point for each product class in the engineering analysis 
and the life-cycle cost and payback-period analyses.
Baseline Models
    For each established product class, DOE selects a baseline model as 
a reference point against which any changes resulting from energy 
conservation standards can be measured. The baseline model in each 
product class represents the characteristics of common or typical 
products in that class. Typically, a baseline model is one that meets 
the current minimum energy conservation standards.
    In developing the baseline efficiency levels, DOE initially 
considered the current standards for conventional gas cooking products 
and the baseline efficiency levels for conventional electric cooking 
products from the previous standards rulemaking analysis. Since the 
last standards rulemaking, as discussed in section II.B, DOE amended 
the cooking products test procedures as part of the October 2012 TP 
Final Rule to include methods for measuring standby mode and off mode 
energy consumption and fan-only mode energy consumption for 
conventional cooking products. In addition, as part of the January 2013 
Induction TP NOPR, DOE is proposing to amend the active mode test 
procedures for conventional cooking tops. DOE has developed tentative 
baseline efficiency levels considering these proposed and amended test 
procedures based on the integrated annual energy use metric combining 
active mode, standby mode, and off mode energy use.
    For this RFI, DOE developed tentative baseline efficiency levels 
for gas and electric cooking tops considering energy use in different 
operating modes (i.e., active mode, standby mode, and off mode) using 
the following methodology. DOE first considered the baseline active 
mode efficiency levels from the previous standards rulemaking analysis 
in the 2009 TSD. For gas cooking tops, DOE notes that the previous 
standards rulemaking adopted standards to prohibit constant burning 
pilots for products manufactured on or after April 9, 2012. 74 FR 
16040, 16041-44 (Apr. 8, 2009). As a result, DOE considered the 
baseline efficiency level for gas cooking tops as the efficiency level 
corresponding to electronic ignition. Because DOE is proposing to amend 
the cooking products test procedure to replace the aluminum test blocks 
currently specified for conventional cooking top testing with hybrid 
test blocks (a stainless steel alloy 430 base and an aluminum body), 
DOE also considered the effects of these proposed test procedure 
amendments on the baseline active mode efficiency levels. Based on 
testing conducted for the January 2013 Induction TP NOPR,\7\ the 
measured cooking efficiency using the proposed test block was on 
average 8.5 percent lower than the cooking efficiency using the current 
test block. 78 FR 6232, 6236, 6239 (Jan. 30, 2013). Based on this data, 
DOE scaled the active mode cooking efficiency in this rulemaking for 
all three cooking top product classes to account for the proposed test 
procedure amendments in the January 2013 Induction TP NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As part of the induction cooking products test procedure 
rulemaking, DOE conducted testing with both the current and proposed 
test blocks for 3 different cooking tops with a total of 6 different 
surface heating elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in section II.B, the October 2012 TP Final Rule 
amended the cooking products test procedure to provide methods for 
measuring conventional cooking product standby mode and off mode energy 
use, and created an integrated annual energy consumption (IAEC) metric 
combining standby mode and off mode energy consumption with the active 
mode energy consumption. 77 FR 65942. As a result, DOE considered the 
baseline energy use associated with standby mode and off mode for this 
RFI. DOE reviewed the gas cooking tops and electric open (coil) element 
cooking tops available on the market, noting that all of these products 
used electromechanical controls. As a result, DOE did not consider any 
additional energy consumption in standby mode or off mode for these two 
product classes. DOE observed that a large number of electric smooth 
element cooking tops on the market were equipped with electronic 
controls. DOE reviewed the cooking top standby test data presented in 
the microwave oven test procedure supplemental NOPR (SNOPR) that 
published on May 16, 2012 (77 FR 28805, 28811),\8\ noting that the 
standby power for 4 models tested ranged from 0.6 watts (W) to 3.0 W, 
with an average of 1.9 W. DOE is considering the baseline standby power 
that was the highest standby power that DOE observed while providing 
full consumer utility, in this case 3.0 W, as part of the IAEC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In the May 2012 microwave oven test procedure SNOPR, DOE 
considered test procedure amendments for measuring the standby mode 
and off mode energy consumption of combined cooking products and, as 
a result, presented standby power data for microwave ovens, 
conventional cooking tops, and conventional ovens.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE is tentatively considering that it analyze the baseline IAEC 
levels for gas and electric cooking tops presented in Table II.5.

[[Page 8344]]

                        Table II.5--Conventional Cooking Tops Baseline Efficiency Levels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                2009 standards
                                                  rulemaking         Proposed test
              Product class               -------------------------    procedure            Proposed IAEC
                                               Cooking                  cooking
                                             efficiency       EF      efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gas Cooking Tops.........................           0.399    0.399           0.365  1445.0 kBtu
Electric Cooking Tops--Low or High                  0.737    0.737           0.674  256.7 kilowatt-hours (kWh).
 Wattage Open (Coil) Elements.
Electric Cooking Tops--Smooth Elements...           0.742    0.742           0.679  280.6 kWh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this RFI, DOE developed tentative baseline efficiency levels 
for gas and electric ovens considering energy use in different 
operating modes (i.e., active mode, standby/off mode, and fan-only 
mode) using the following methodology. DOE first considered the 
baseline active mode efficiency from the previous standards rulemaking 
analysis in the 2009 TSD. As discussed above, the previous standards 
rulemaking adopted standards to prohibit constant burning pilots for 
all gas standard (i.e., non-self-cleaning) ovens manufactured on or 
after April 9, 2012. As a result, DOE considered the baseline active 
mode efficiency level for gas standard ovens as the efficiency level 
corresponding to electronic ignition.
    As discussed in section II.B, DOE amended the cooking products test 
procedure to include provisions for measuring standby mode and off mode 
energy consumption for conventional ovens. As a result, DOE considered 
the baseline energy use associated with standby mode and off mode for 
this RFI. Based on DOE's review of products available on the market, 
DOE observed a large number of ovens in all product classes that were 
equipped with electronic controls. DOE also notes that the units 
equipped with only electromechanical controls likely consume little to 
no energy in standby mode or off mode. For standby mode, DOE reviewed 
the test data presented in the May 2012 microwave oven test procedure 
SNOPR, noting that the standby power for 11 conventional oven models 
tested ranged from 1.1 W to 10.7 W, with an average of 3.4 W. 77 FR 
28805, 28811 (May 16, 2012). DOE is tentatively considering the 
baseline standby power that was the highest standby power that DOE 
observed while providing full consumer utility, in this case 10.7 W.
    In addition, as discussed in section II.B, DOE amended the cooking 
products test procedure to include provisions for measuring fan-only 
mode energy consumption for conventional ovens. Based on DOE's testing 
for the October 2012 TP Final Rule, DOE observed that ovens are 
normally capable of operating in fan-only mode. As a result, DOE 
considered the additional annual energy consumption in fan-only mode to 
develop the baseline efficiency levels. For fan-only mode, DOE 
presented data in a separate SNOPR for the conventional cooking 
products test procedure published on May 25, 2012 showing that the fan 
power ranged from 16 W to 50 W and that the duration of fan-only mode 
ranged from 10 minutes to 3.5 hours. 77 FR 31444, 31448. Using the 
highest fan-only mode power and duration that DOE observed, DOE 
estimated for this rulemaking a baseline per-cycle fan-only mode energy 
consumption of 0.175 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per cycle. DOE accounted for 
the fan-only mode energy consumption in the IAEC for each product class 
based on the per-cycle energy consumption and the number of annual 
cooking cycles.
    DOE is tentatively considering that it analyze the baseline IAEC 
levels for conventional gas and electric ovens presented in Table II.6.

                            Table II.6--Conventional Ovens Baseline Efficiency Levels
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  2009 Standards rulemaking
                                          -----------------------------------------
              Product class                             Annual energy consumption           Proposed IAEC
                                               EF                  \9\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gas Oven--Standard Oven with or without a     0.0536  1656.7 kBtu.................  2076.5 kBtu.
 Catalytic Line.
Gas Oven--Self-Clean Oven................     0.0540  1644.4 kBtu.................  1965.0 kBtu.
Electric Oven--Standard Oven with or          0.1066  274.9 kWh...................  370.0 kWh.
 without a Catalytic Line.
Electric Oven--Self-Clean Oven...........     0.1099  266.6 kWh...................  360.0 kWh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue D.1 DOE requests comment on approaches that it should 
consider when determining the baseline efficiency levels for each 
product class, including information regarding the merits and/or 
limitations of such approaches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ DOE notes that the previous conventional cooking products 
test procedure in appendix I included the clock energy consumption. 
As a result, DOE subtracted the clock energy consumption before 
adding the standby and off mode energy consumption when considering 
integrated efficiency levels for this standards rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue D.2 DOE also requests additional test data to characterize 
the baseline efficiency levels for each product class. In particular, 
DOE requests additional standby mode and off mode data for each product 
class to characterize the baseline standby/off mode power levels. DOE 
also requests additional test data for conventional ovens regarding the 
energy use in fan-only mode. DOE requests additional test data for 
conventional cooking tops showing the difference in measured efficiency 
using the current test procedure and the test procedure proposed in the 
January 2013 Induction TP NOPR.
Higher Efficiency Levels
    DOE will analyze each product class to determine the relevant trial 
standard levels (TSLs) and to develop

[[Page 8345]]

incremental manufacturing cost data at each higher efficiency level. 
DOE tentatively plans to analyze the proposed efficiency levels based 
on the IAEC metric that accounts for the test procedure amendments 
adopted in the October 2012 TP Final Rule and the amendments proposed 
in the January 2013 Induction TP NOPR.
    For gas and electric cooking tops, DOE plans to use the efficiency 
levels presented in the 2009 TSD, adjusted to account for the proposed 
and amended test procedures. DOE plans to consider an additional 
efficiency level for electric smooth cooking tops associated with 
changing conventional linear power supplies to switch-mode power 
supplies. DOE also notes that the Commission of the European 
Communities published Commission Regulation 1275/2008 on December 17, 
2008 implementing Ecodesign requirements for standby and off mode 
electric power consumption for a specified list of energy using 
products, which includes the cooking products covered by this 
rulemaking. The Ecodesign regulation requires that any of these 
products manufactured after December 17, 2012, have a maximum standby 
power of 1 W. As a result, DOE considered an additional efficiency 
levels for electric smooth cooking tops associated with a 1-W standby 
power level. In addition, DOE considered an efficiency level for 
electric smooth cooking tops associated with induction technology. DOE 
based this efficiency level on the testing results presented in the 
January 2013 Induction TP NOPR that showed a 9.8 percent increase in 
cooking efficiency for induction cooking tops compared to conventional 
electric smooth cooking tops. 78 FR 6232, 6239 (Jan. 30, 2013). DOE 
ordered the efficiency levels based on the cost-effectiveness of the 
design options using data from the 2009 TSD and preliminary estimates 
for standby power design options. Table II.7 through Table II.9 present 
the proposed efficiency levels for gas and electric cooking tops. DOE 
may consider revisions to the order of efficiency levels as additional 
cost-efficiency data is made available.

                     Table II.7--Efficiency Levels Under Consideration for Gas Cooking Tops
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2009 standards
                                                            rulemaking          Proposed test
         Level             Efficiency level source  -------------------------     procedure       Proposed IAEC
                                                         Cooking                   cooking           (kBtu)
                                                       efficiency       EF       efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline...............  2009 TSD (Electronic                 0.399    0.399             0.365            1445.0
                          Ignition).
1......................  2009 TSD Max-Tech (Sealed            0.420    0.420             0.384            1372.7
                          Burners).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         Table II.8--Efficiency Levels Under Consideration for Open (Coil) Element Electric Cooking Tops
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2009 standards
                                                            rulemaking          Proposed test
         Level             Efficiency level source  -------------------------     procedure       Proposed IAEC
                                                         Cooking                   cooking           (kBtu)
                                                       efficiency       EF       efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline...............  2009 TSD (Baseline).......           0.737    0.737             0.674             256.7
1......................  2009 TSD (Improved Contact           0.769    0.769             0.704             246.0
                          Conductance).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Table II.9--Efficiency Levels Under Consideration for Smooth Element Electric Cooking Tops
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          2009 standards
                                                            rulemaking          Proposed test
         Level             Efficiency level source  -------------------------     procedure       Proposed IAEC
                                                         Cooking                   cooking           (kBtu)
                                                       efficiency       EF       efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline...............  2009 TSD (Baseline).......           0.742    0.742             0.679             280.6
1......................  Baseline + Switch-Mode               0.742    0.742             0.679             268.6
                          Power Supply (SMPS).
2......................  Baseline + 1 W Standby....           0.742    0.742             0.679             263.5
3......................  2009 TSD (Halogen Lamp               0.753    0.753             0.689             259.8
                          Element) + 1 W Standby.
4......................  Induction + SMPS..........  ..............  .......             0.746             245.9
5......................  Induction + 1 W Standby...  ..............  .......             0.746             240.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For gas and electric ovens, DOE again plans to use the efficiency 
levels presented in the 2009 TSD, adjusted to account for the proposed 
and amended test procedures. DOE plans to consider an additional 
efficiency level for all conventional oven product classes associated 
with changing the conventional linear power supplies to switch-mode 
power supplies. DOE also plans to consider an additional efficiency 
level for all conventional oven product classes based on the 1-W 
Ecodesign standby requirement discussed above. For gas self-clean 
ovens, DOE is also considering an additional efficiency level 
associated with changing the baseline electric glo-bar ignition to 
electronic spark ignition. DOE ordered the efficiency levels based on 
the cost-effectiveness of the design options using data from the 2009 
TSD and preliminary estimates for standby power design options. Table 
II.10 through Table II.13 present the proposed efficiency levels for 
gas and electric ovens.

[[Page 8346]]

  Table II.10--Efficiency Levels Under Consideration for Gas Ovens--Standard Ovens With or Without a Catalytic
                                                      Line
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    2009 standards rulemaking
                                                                  -----------------------------
             Level                   Efficiency level source                    Annual energy     Proposed IAEC
                                                                       EF        consumption         (kBtu)
                                                                                   (kBtu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline......................  2009 TSD (Electric Glo-bar            0.0536            1656.7            2076.5
                                 Ignition).
1.............................  2009 TSD (Electric Glo-bar            0.0536            1656.7            1932.0
                                 Ignition) + SMPS.
2.............................  2009 TSD (Improved Insulation) +      0.0566            1568.9            1844.2
                                 SMPS.
3.............................  2009 TSD (2 + Electronic Spark        0.0616            1442.4            1717.7
                                 Ignition) + SMPS.
4.............................  2009 TSD (3 + Improved Door           0.0622            1427.3            1702.6
                                 Seals) + SMPS.
5.............................  2009 TSD (4 + Reduced Vent Rate)      0.0625            1420.1            1695.4
                                 + SMPS.
6.............................  2009 TSD (5 + Reduced Conduction      0.0630            1410.6            1685.9
                                 Losses) + SMPS.
7.............................  2009 TSD (6 + Forced Convection)      0.0653            1360.7            1636.0
                                 + SMPS.
8.............................  2009 TSD (7) + 1W Standby........     0.0653            1360.7            1499.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Table II.11--Efficiency Levels Under Consideration for Gas Ovens--Self-Clean Ovens
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    2009 standards rulemaking
                                                                  -----------------------------
             Level                   Efficiency level source                    Annual energy     Proposed IAEC
                                                                       EF        consumption         (kBtu)
                                                                                   (kBtu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline......................  2009 TSD (Baseline)..............     0.0540            1644.4            1965.0
1.............................  2009 TSD (Baseline) + SMPS.......     0.0540            1644.4            1820.5
2.............................  2009 TSD (Forced Convection) +        0.0625            1420.8            1596.9
                                 SMPS.
3.............................  2009 TSD (2) + Electronic Spark       0.0680            1306.3            1482.3
                                 Ignition + SMPS.
4.............................  2009 TSD (3 + Improved Door           0.0685            1295.9            1472.0
                                 Seals) + SMPS.
5.............................  2009 TSD (4 + Reduced Conduction      0.0687            1291.8            1467.8
                                 Losses) + SMPS.
6.............................  2009 TSD (5) + 1 W Standby.......     0.0687            1291.8            1330.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table II.12--Efficiency Levels Under Consideration for Electric Ovens--Standards Ovens With or Without a
                                                 Catalytic Line
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    2009 standards rulemaking
                                                                  -----------------------------
             Level                   Efficiency level source                    Annual energy     Proposed IAEC
                                                                       EF        consumption          (kWh)
                                                                                    (kWh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline......................  2009 TSD (Baseline)..............     0.1066             274.9             370.0
1.............................  2009 TSD (Baseline) + SMPS.......     0.1066             274.9             327.7
2.............................  2009 TSD (Reduced Vent Rate) +        0.1113             263.3             316.1
                                 SMPS.
3.............................  2009 TSD (2 + Improved                0.1163             251.9             304.8
                                 Insulation) + SMPS.
4.............................  2009 TSD (3 + Improved Door           0.1181             248.1             300.9
                                 Seals) + SMPS.
5.............................  2009 TSD (4 + Reduced Conduction      0.1184             247.5             300.3
                                 Losses) + SMPS.
6.............................  2009 TSD (5 + Forced Convection)      0.1209             242.3             295.2
                                 + SMPS.
7.............................  2009 TSD (6) + 1 W Standby.......     0.1209             242.3             255.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Table II.13--Efficiency Levels Under Consideration for Electric Ovens--Self-Clean Ovens
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    2009 standards rulemaking
                                                                  -----------------------------
             Level                   Efficiency level source                    Annual energy     Proposed IAEC
                                                                       EF        consumption          (kWh)
                                                                                    (kWh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline......................  2009 TSD (Baseline)..............     0.1099             266.6             360.0
1.............................  2009 TSD (Baseline) + SMPS.......     0.1099             266.6             317.7
2.............................  2009 TSD (Reduced Conduction          0.1102             265.9             317.0
                                 Losses) + SMPS.
3.............................  2009 TSD (2 + Forced Convection)      0.1123             260.9             312.0
                                 + SMPS.
4.............................  2009 TSD (3) + 1 W Standby.......     0.1123             260.9             271.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue D.3 DOE seeks input concerning the efficiency levels it 
tentatively plans to use for each product class for collecting 
incremental cost data from manufacturers of residential cooking 
products. DOE also seeks input on appropriate maximum technologically 
feasible efficiency levels and the basis for why those levels should be 
selected.
    Issue D.4 DOE requests data on how the relative changes in 
efficiencies presented above for residential-scale gas cooking products 
would differ for commercial-style gas cooking products

[[Page 8347]]

and gas cooking products with higher burner input rates.
Approach for Determining the Cost-Efficiency Relationship
    In order to create the cost-efficiency relationship, DOE intends to 
use a design-option approach, using reverse engineering (physical 
teardowns and testing of existing products in the market) to identify 
the incremental cost and efficiency improvement associated with each 
design option or design option combination.
    DOE will analyze technologies and associated costs representative 
of baseline units as part of the reverse-engineering process. DOE 
intends to perform reverse engineering for each product class being 
analyzed. Whenever possible, DOE will attempt to reverse engineer test 
units that share similar platforms to better identify the efficiency 
benefits and costs of design options. As units are torn down, all 
design options used in them are noted and reviewed. Prior to tear down, 
DOE also plans to conduct limited testing to establish what control 
strategies are being used by manufacturers in conjunction with design 
options and platform design. Unit testing may include the measurement 
of disaggregated energy consumption to identify the relationship 
between particular components and control strategies taken by 
manufacturers to achieve higher efficiency levels. As part of the 
reverse-engineering process, DOE will attempt to generate a cost-
efficiency relationship for each design option identified. In support 
of this design-option approach, DOE will consider cost-efficiency data 
from the 2009 TSD. DOE also requests incremental cost data for each 
cooking product design option. DOE intends the data to represent the 
average industry-wide incremental production cost for each technology.
    To be useful in the manufacturer impact analysis, manufacturer cost 
information should reflect the variability in baseline models, design 
strategies, and cost structures that can exist among manufacturers. 
This information allows DOE to better understand the industry and its 
associated cost structure, and, thus, it helps predict the most likely 
impact that new energy efficiency regulations would have. For example, 
the reverse-engineering methodology allows DOE to estimate the ``green-
field'' costs of building new facilities, yet the majority of plants in 
any given industry are comprised of a mix of assets in different stages 
of depreciation. Interviews with manufacturers not only help DOE refine 
its capital expenditure estimates, but they also allow DOE to refine 
depreciation and other financial parameters.
    DOE will refine the cost-efficiency data it generates through the 
reverse-engineering activities with information obtained through 
follow-up manufacturer interviews and, as necessary, information 
contained in the market and technology assessment and further review of 
publicly available cost and performance information.
    Issue D.5 DOE requests feedback on using a design option approach 
supplemented with reverse engineering to determine the relationship 
between manufacturer cost and energy efficiency for residential cooking 
products.
    Issue D.6 DOE also requests incremental cost data for each cooking 
product design option. DOE intends the data to represent the average 
industry-wide incremental production cost for each technology. DOE also 
welcomes comment and data on how the incremental costs for residential-
scale gas cooking products compare to those for commercial-style gas 
cooking products and gas cooking products with higher burner input 
rates.
    EPCA also requires DOE to consider any lessening of the utility or 
the performance of a covered product likely to result from the 
imposition of a new standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(IV)) As part 
of its analysis of higher efficiency levels, DOE will consider whether 
new standards may impact the utility of residential cooking products.
    Issue D.7 DOE seeks comment on whether any new standards may impact 
the utility of cooking products. If such impacts exist, can the effects 
be quantified? If so, how?

E. Markups Analysis

    To carry out the life-cycle cost (LCC) and payback period (PBP) 
calculations, DOE needs to determine the cost to the residential 
consumer of baseline products that satisfies the currently applicable 
standards, and the cost of the more-efficient unit the consumer would 
purchase under potential amended standards. By applying a multiplier 
called a ``markup'' to the manufacturer's selling price, DOE is able to 
estimate the residential consumer's price.
    For the April 2009 Final Rule, DOE based the distribution channels 
on data from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM). 
The 2005 Fact Book (the latest available version from AHAM) shows that 
more than 93 percent of residential cooking products are sold through 
retail outlets. Because an overwhelming majority of products are sold 
through retail outlets, DOE assumed that all of the residential 
products are purchased by consumers from retail outlets. Thus, DOE 
analyzed a manufacturer-to-consumer distribution channel consisting of 
three parties: (1) The manufacturers producing the products; (2) the 
retailers purchasing the products from manufacturers and selling them 
to consumers; and (3) the consumers who purchase the products. DOE 
plans to use the same approach in the current rulemaking.
    As was done in the last rulemaking and consistent with the approach 
followed for other energy consuming products, DOE will determine an 
average manufacturer markup by examining the annual Securities and 
Exchange Commission (SEC) 10-K reports filed by publicly traded 
manufacturers of appliances whose product range includes cooking 
products. DOE will determine an average retailer markup by analyzing 
both economic census data from the U.S. Census Bureau and the annual 
SEC 10-K reports filed by publicly traded retailers.
    In addition to developing manufacturer and retailer markups, DOE 
will develop and include sales taxes to calculate appliance retail 
prices. DOE will use an Internet source, the Sales Tax Clearinghouse, 
to calculate applicable sales taxes.
    Issue E.1 DOE seeks input from stakeholders on whether the 
distribution channels described above are still relevant for kitchen 
ranges and ovens being considered in this rulemaking. DOE also welcomes 
comments concerning its proposed approach to developing estimates of 
markups reflecting future residential cooking products retail prices.

F. Energy Use Analysis

    The purpose of the energy analysis is to assess the energy-savings 
potential of different product efficiencies. DOE uses the annual energy 
consumption and energy-savings potential in the LCC and PBP analyses to 
establish the savings in consumer operating costs at various product 
efficiency levels. As part of the energy use analysis, certain 
assumptions may be required regarding product application, including 
how the product is operated and under what conditions.
    DOE's energy use analysis estimates the range of energy use of 
cooking products in the field, i.e., as they are actually used by 
consumers. Because energy use by residential cooking products varies 
greatly based on consumer usage patterns, the Department will establish 
a range of energy use. The Energy Information Administration (EIA)'s 
Residential

[[Page 8348]]

Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) is one source for estimating the range 
of energy use for cooking products. DOE will use data from RECS 2009 
for the current rulemaking.\10\ From RECS, DOE will develop household 
samples for each product class. Although RECS does not provide the 
annual energy consumption of the cooking product, it does provide the 
frequency of cooking use. Thus, DOE can utilize the range in frequency 
of use to define the variability of the annual energy consumption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ RECS 2009 is based on a sample of 12,083 households 
statistically selected to represent 113.6 million housing units in 
the United States. RECS 2009 data are available for 27 geographical 
areas (including 16 large States) (Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the April 2009 Final Rule, DOE utilized the 2004 California 
Residential Appliance Saturation Study (CA RASS) \11\ and a Florida 
Solar Energy Center (FSEC) study \12\ to establish representative 
annual energy use values for cooking products. The CA RASS and FSEC 
studies confirmed that annual cooking energy use has been consistently 
declining since the late 1970s. In the last rulemaking, DOE determined 
the average annual energy consumption for the various product classes 
as shown in Table II.14. DOE plans to update these values on the basis 
of most recent studies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ California Energy Commission. California Statewide 
Residential Appliance Saturation Study, June 2004. Prepared for the 
California Energy Commission by KEMA-XENERGY, Itron, and RoperASW. 
Contract No. 400-04-009.
    \12\ Parker, D. S. ``Research Highlights from a Large Scale 
Residential Monitoring Study in a Hot Climate.'' Proceeding of 
International Symposium on Highly Efficient Use of Energy and 
Reduction of its Environmental Impact, January 2002. Japan Society 
for the Promotion of Science Research for the Future Program, Osaka, 
Japan. JPS-RFTF97P01002: pp. 108-116. Also published as FSEC-PF369-
02, Florida Solar Energy Center, Cocoa, FL.

     Table II.14--Average Annual Energy Consumption by Product Class
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Annual energy
            Product class                 EF       consumption (kWh/yr)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Open (Coil) Element Cooking      0.737  128.2.
 Tops.
Electric Smooth Element Cooking Tops      0.742  128.2.
Gas Cooking Tops....................      0.399  0.72 (MMBtu/yr).
Electric Ovens--Standard Ovens with      0.1066  166.5.
 or without a Catalytic Line.
Electric Ovens--Self-Clean..........     0.1099  171.0.
Gas Ovens--Standard Ovens with or        0.0536  21.1* (and 0.84 MMBtu/
 without a Catalytic Line.                        yr).
Gas Ovens--Self-Clean...............     0.0625  55.1* (and 0.73 MMBtu/
                                                  yr).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents electrical energy use associated primarily with the
  ignition system.

    DOE requests comment or seeks input from stakeholders on the 
following issues pertaining to the energy use analysis:
    Issue F.1 Approaches for specifying the typical annual energy 
consumption;
    Issue F.2 Data sources that DOE can use to characterize the 
variability in annual energy consumption for cooking products.

G. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis

    The purpose of the LCC and PBP analysis is to analyze the effects 
of potential amended energy conservation standards on consumers of 
cooking products by determining how a potential amended standard 
affects their operating expenses (usually decreased) and their total 
installed costs (usually increased).
    DOE intends to analyze the potential for variability and 
uncertainty by performing the LCC and PBP calculations on a 
representative sample of households from RECS for the considered 
product classes using Monte Carlo simulation and probability 
distributions. The analysis results are a distribution of 10,000 data 
points showing the range of LCC savings and PBPs for a given efficiency 
level relative to the baseline level. DOE intends to conduct the 
analysis for all seven product classes of residential cooking 
products--Gas Cooking tops with conventional burners, Electric Cooking 
tops (Open coil and Smooth elements), Electric Ovens (Standard with or 
without a catalytic line and self-clean), and Gas Ovens (Standard with 
or without a catalytic line and self-clean).
    DOE expects to use single point values to characterize most 
components of the total installed cost, including the manufacturer 
markup and retailer markup. If, however, the manufacturer cost 
estimates developed in the engineering analysis are characterized using 
uncertainty or variability, DOE will use probability distributions to 
capture this uncertainty and variability.
    DOE measures savings of potential standards relative to a base case 
that reflects conditions without new or amended standards. DOE will use 
efficiency market shares to characterize the base-case product mix. By 
accounting for consumers who already purchase more efficient products, 
DOE avoids overstating the potential benefits from potential standards.
    Issue G.1 DOE seeks stakeholder input on its proposed approach of 
using probability distributions and Monte Carlo simulation to conduct 
the LCC and PBP analysis.
    Inputs to the LCC and PBP analysis are categorized as: (1) Inputs 
for establishing the purchase expense, otherwise known as the total 
installed cost, and (2) inputs for calculating the operating expense.
    The primary inputs for establishing the total installed cost are 
the baseline consumer price, standard-level consumer price increases, 
and installation costs. Baseline consumer prices and standard-level 
consumer price increases will be determined by applying markups to 
manufacturer price estimates. The installation cost is added to the 
consumer price to arrive at a total installed cost. With regard to 
installation costs, unless the increased efficiency levels considered 
for this rulemaking result in significantly larger, heavier or 
functionally different products, DOE expects that more efficient 
cooking products will incur no increased installation costs.
    Issue G.2 DOE seeks input on whether it is correct to assume that 
changes in installation costs will be negligible for more-efficient 
products.
    The primary inputs for calculating the operating costs are product 
energy consumption, product efficiency, electricity and gas prices and 
forecasts, maintenance and repair costs, product lifetime, and discount 
rates. Both product lifetime and discount rates are used to calculate 
the present value of future operating expenses.
    Electricity and gas prices are used to calculate the annual cost 
savings at different efficiency levels. DOE plans to derive average 
monthly natural gas, and electricity prices for the 27 geographic areas 
used in RECS 2009 by using the

[[Page 8349]]

latest data from EIA and monthly energy price factors. DOE will develop 
the 27 regional energy prices based on the household population in each 
region. DOE will assign an appropriate price to each household in the 
RECS sample, depending on its location. To calculate annual electricity 
prices for residential consumers in each of the geographic areas, DOE 
will use information provided by electric utilities as summarized in 
the most recent EIA Form 861 data. To calculate annual natural gas 
prices, DOE will use data from EIA's Natural Gas Navigator, which 
includes monthly natural gas prices by State for residential consumers.
    DOE will use projections of national average energy prices to 
residential consumers to estimate future energy prices. DOE will use 
the most recent available edition of EIA's Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 
as the default source of projections for future energy prices.
    Issue G.3 DOE seeks stakeholder input on the proposed approaches 
for estimating current and future energy prices.
    Maintenance costs are costs associated with maintaining the 
operation of the product. DOE will consider any expected changes to 
maintenance and repair costs for cooking products subject to new 
standards. Typically, small incremental changes in product efficiency 
incur little or no change in repair and maintenance costs over baseline 
products. Products having efficiencies that are significantly higher 
than the baseline are more likely to incur increased repair and 
maintenance costs, because such products are more likely to incorporate 
technologies that are not widely available. DOE will use input from 
manufacturers and other stakeholders to develop appropriate repair and 
maintenance cost estimates. DOE's current understanding is that changes 
in maintenance and repair costs will be negligible for more-efficient 
products.
    Issue G.4 DOE seeks stakeholder input on whether it is correct to 
assume that changes in maintenance and repair costs will be negligible 
for more-efficient products.
    The product lifetime is the age at which a product is retired from 
service. In the past, DOE used information from various literature 
sources, such as Appliance Magazine, and input from manufacturers and 
other stakeholders to determine a range for the lifetime of residential 
cooking products. In the last rulemaking, DOE estimated an average 
product lifetime of 19 years for conventional gas and electric cooking 
products. DOE characterized the cooking top, and oven lifetimes with 
Weibull distributions.
    For this rulemaking, DOE plans to use an approach that more 
accurately accounts for cooking product lifetimes in the field. It is 
based on an analysis of lifetime in the field using a combination of 
shipments data, the stock of appliances, and RECS data on the age of 
the appliances in the homes.\13\ The method will allow DOE to estimate 
a survival function, which also provides an average and a median 
appliance lifetime. DOE plans to use recent data from RECS 2009, 
American Housing Survey for 2009 and 2011, and updated historical 
shipment data to develop product lifetimes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Lutz, et al. ``Using National Survey Data to Estimate 
Lifetimes of Residential Appliances.'' October 2011. HVAC&R 
Research. (www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10789669.2011.558166#preview)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue G.5 DOE seeks stakeholder comments on the methodology 
proposed to determine product lifetimes for cooking products.
    DOE uses a discount rate to determine the present value of lifetime 
operating expenses. For residential consumers of cooking products, DOE 
plans to estimate discount rates as the ``finance cost'' to purchase 
residential products. The finance cost of raising funds to purchase 
products can be interpreted as (1) the financial cost of any debt 
incurred to purchase products (principally interest charges on debt), 
or (2) the opportunity cost of funds used to purchase products 
(principally interest earnings on household equity). Much of the data 
required for determining the cost of debt and equity comes from the 
Federal Reserve Board's triennial Survey of Consumer Finances.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Available at www.federalreserve.gov/econresdata/scf/scfindex.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE measures LCC and PBP impacts of potential standard levels 
relative to a base case that reflects the likely market in the absence 
of amended standards. DOE plans to develop market-share efficiency data 
(i.e., the distribution of product shipments by efficiency) for the 
product classes DOE is considering, for the year in which compliance 
with any amended or new standards would be required.
    Issue G.6 DOE requests data on current efficiency market shares (of 
shipments) by product class, and also similar historic data, and 
expected trends in cooking products efficiency.

H. Shipments Analysis

    DOE uses shipment projections by product class in its analysis of 
national impacts of potential standards as well as in the manufacturer 
impact analysis.
    For the April 2009 Final Rule, DOE developed a shipments model for 
cooking products driven by historical shipments data. The historical 
shipments data are used not only to build up a product stock but also 
to calibrate the shipments model.
    In the last rulemaking DOE utilized historical shipments 
information for cooking tops and ovens from three sources: (1) Data 
provided by AHAM for the period 2003-2005, (2) data from the AHAM 2000 
Fact Book for the period 1989-2002,\15\ and (3) data from Appliance 
Magazine.\16\ For this rulemaking, DOE requests data on shipments from 
manufacturers. Additionally, DOE will also consider using other public 
sources of data, such as data from the NPD Group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, AHAM 2000 Fact 
Book, 2000. Washington, DC.
    \16\ Available for purchase at: www.appliancemagazine.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Issue H.1 DOE seeks historical shipments data broken down by 
product class for cooking tops and ovens.
    DOE plans to determine annual shipments in the base case by 
accounting for: (1) Replacements due to failure; and (2) cooking 
products purchases due to new home construction. In the last 
rulemaking, DOE included a third market segment for early replacements 
in order to calibrate the model. DOE will examine the applicability of 
this market segment in the shipments model for the current rulemaking. 
DOE plans to use new housing starts from the latest available edition 
of EIA's AEO in conjunction with appliance saturations to determine 
shipments to new construction. To determine replacement shipments, DOE 
will use the same product lifetimes and retirement functions that it 
generates for the LCC and PBP analyses.
    Issue H.2 DOE requests comment on the approach it intends on using 
to develop the shipments model and shipments forecasts for this 
rulemaking.

I. National Impact Analysis

    The purpose of the national impact analysis (NIA) is to estimate 
aggregate impacts of potential efficiency standards at the national 
level. Impacts that DOE reports include the national energy savings 
(NES) from potential standards and the national NPV of the total 
consumer benefits. The NIA considers lifetime impacts of potential 
standards on products shipped in a 30-year period that begins with the 
expected compliance date for new or amended standards.

[[Page 8350]]

    To develop the NES, DOE calculates annual energy consumption for 
the base case and each standards case. DOE calculates the annual energy 
consumption in each year using per-unit average annual energy use data 
multiplied by projected shipments.
    To develop the national NPV of consumer benefits from potential 
standards, DOE calculates annual energy expenditures and annual product 
expenditures for the base case and the standards cases. DOE calculates 
total annual energy expenditures using data on annual energy 
consumption in each case, forecasted average annual energy prices, and 
shipment projections. The difference each year between energy bill 
savings and increased product expenditures is the net savings or net 
costs.
    A key component of DOE's estimates of NES and NPV is the product 
energy efficiency forecasted over time for the base case and for each 
of the standards cases. To project a base-case shipment-weighted 
efficiency (SWEF) trend for each product class, DOE will consider 
recent trends in efficiency and input from stakeholders. To estimate 
the impact that standards have in the year compliance becomes required, 
in the April 2009 Final Rule, DOE used a ``roll-up'' scenario which 
assumes that product efficiencies in the base case that do not meet the 
standard level under consideration would ``roll up'' to meet the new 
standard level and product shipments at efficiencies above the standard 
level under consideration are not affected. DOE intends to use the same 
method for conducting the NIA for this rulemaking.
    Issue I.1 DOE seeks historical SWEF data for cooking products by 
product class. DOE also seeks historical market share data showing the 
percentages of product shipments by efficiency level.

J. Submission of Comments

    DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by March 
14, 2014, comments and information on matters addressed in this notice 
and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of new or amended 
energy conservations standards for residential conventional cooking 
products. After the close of the comment period, DOE will begin 
collecting data, conducting the analyses, and reviewing the public 
comments, as needed. These actions will be taken to aid in the 
development of a NOPR for residential conventional cooking products if 
DOE decides to amend the standards for such products.
    DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of 
the process for developing test procedures and energy conservation 
standards. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of 
the public during the comment period in each stage of the rulemaking 
process. Interactions with and between members of the public provide a 
balanced discussion of the issues and assist DOE in the rulemaking 
process. Anyone who wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to 
receive future notices and information about this rulemaking should 
contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945, or via email at 
Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on February 6, 2014.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2014-03086 Filed 2-11-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```