[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 11990-11996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04495]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2020-BT-STD-0013]
RIN 1904-AE50


Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Battery Chargers, Webinar and Availability of the Preliminary Technical 
Support Document

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

ACTION: Notification of a webinar and availability of preliminary 
technical support document.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') will hold a webinar to 
discuss and receive comments on the preliminary analysis it has 
conducted for purposes of evaluating energy conservation standards for 
battery chargers. The meeting will cover the analytical framework, 
models, and tools that DOE is using to evaluate potential standards for 
this product; the results of preliminary analyses performed by DOE for 
this product; the potential energy conservation standard levels derived 
from these analyses that DOE could consider for this product should it 
determine that proposed amendments are necessary; and any other issues 
relevant to the evaluation of energy conservation standards for battery 
chargers. In addition, DOE encourages written comments on these 
subjects. To inform interested parties and to facilitate this process, 
DOE has prepared an agenda, a preliminary technical support document 
(``TSD''), and briefing materials, which are available on the DOE 
website at: www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards.aspx?productid=26&action=viewlive.

DATES: 
    Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on Thursday, April 21, 2022, from 
1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section IV, ``Public Participation,'' for 
webinar registration information, participant instructions and 
information about the capabilities available to webinar participants.
    Comments: Written comments and information will be accepted on or 
before, May 2, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons 
may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2020-BT-STD-0013, 
by any of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Email: to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8be9eaffffeef9f2e8e3eaf9eceef9f8b9bbb9bbd8dfcfbbbbbab8cbeeeea5efe4eea5ece4fd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1f7d7e6b6b7a6d667c777e6d787a6d6c2d2f2d2f4c4b5b2f2f2e2c5f7a7a317b707a31787069">[email protected]</span></a>. Include docket 
number EERE-2020-BT-STD-0013 in the subject line of the message.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed 
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this 
process, see section IV of this document.
    Although DOE has routinely accepted public comment submissions 
through a variety of mechanisms, including postal mail and hand 
delivery/courier, the Department has found it necessary to make 
temporary modifications to the comment submission process in light of 
the ongoing coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. DOE is currently 
suspending receipt of public comments via postal mail and hand 
delivery/courier. If a commenter finds that this change poses an undue 
hardship, please contact Appliance Standards Program staff at (202) 
586-1445 to discuss the need for alternative arrangements. Once the 
COVID-19 pandemic health emergency is resolved, DOE anticipates 
resuming all of its regular options for public comment submission, 
including postal mail and hand delivery/courier.
    Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal 
Register notices, comments, public meeting transcripts, and other 
supporting documents/materials, is available for review at 
www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the index, 
such as those containing information that is exempt from public 
disclosure, may not be publicly available.
    The docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0013. The docket web page contains instructions on how 
to access all documents, including public comments in the docket. See 
section IV for information on how to submit comments through 
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies, EE-2J, 1000 
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b2f3c2c2dedbd3dcd1d7e1c6d3dcd6d3c0d6c1e3c7d7c1c6dbdddcc1f2d7d79cd6ddd79cd5ddc4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="723302021e1b131c11172106131c161300160123071701061b1d1c013217175c161d175c151d04">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. 
Telephone: (202) 586-8145. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1c51757f747d797032577578735c746d32787379327b736a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="90ddf9f3f8f1f5fcbedbf9f4ffd0f8e1bef4fff5bef7ffe6">[email protected]</span></a>.
    For further information on how to submit a comment, review other 
public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment 
Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#74350404181d151a17112700151a101506100725011107001d1b1a073411115a101b115a131b02"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="84c5f4f4e8ede5eae7e1d7f0e5eae0e5f6e0f7d5f1e1f7f0edebeaf7c4e1e1aae0ebe1aae3ebf2">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
    A. Authority
    B. Rulemaking Process
    C. Deviation From Appendix A
II. Background
    A. Current Standards
    B. Current Process
III. Summary of the Analyses Performed by DOE
    A. Market and Technology Assessment
    B. Screening Analysis
    C. Engineering Analysis
    D. Markups Analysis
    E. Energy Use Analysis
    F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analyses
    G. National Impact Analysis
IV. Public Participation
    A. Participation in the Webinar
    B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution
    C. Conduct of the Webinar
    D. Submission of Comments
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Introduction

A. Authority

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\ 
authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of a number of 
consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291-
6317) Title III, Part B \2\ of EPCA established the Energy Conservation

[[Page 11991]]

Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. These products 
include battery chargers, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 
6291(32); 42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(1)(E)(II); 42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through the Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116-260 (Dec. 
27, 2020).
    \2\ For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, 
Part B was redesignated Part A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPCA further provides that, not later than 6 years after the 
issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE 
must publish either a notification of determination that standards for 
the product do not need to be amended, or a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (``NOPR'') including new proposed energy conservation 
standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 
6295(m)(1)) Not later than three years after issuance of a final 
determination not to amend standards, DOE must publish either a notice 
of determination that standards for the product do not need to be 
amended, or a NOPR including new proposed energy conservation standards 
(proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B))
    Under EPCA, any new or amended energy conservation standard must be 
designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that 
DOE determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. 
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new or amended standard must 
result in a significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(3)(B))
    DOE is publishing this Preliminary Analysis to collect data and 
information to inform its decision consistent with its obligations 
under EPCA.

B. Rulemaking Process

    DOE must follow specific statutory criteria for prescribing new or 
amended standards for covered products, including battery chargers. As 
noted, EPCA requires that any new or amended energy conservation 
standard prescribed by the Secretary of Energy (``Secretary'') be 
designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency (or 
water efficiency for certain products specified by EPCA) that is 
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(2)(A)) The Secretary may not prescribe an amended or new 
standard that will not result in significant conservation of energy, or 
is not technologically feasible or economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(3))
    To adopt any new or amended standards for a covered product, DOE 
must determine that such action would result in significant energy 
savings. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) The significance of energy savings 
offered by a new or amended energy conservation standard cannot be 
determined without knowledge of the specific circumstances surrounding 
a given rulemaking.\3\ For example, the United States rejoined the 
Paris Agreement on February 19, 2021. As part of that agreement, the 
United States has committed to reducing greenhouse gas (``GHG'') 
emissions in order to limit the rise in mean global temperature. As 
such, energy savings that reduce GHG emission have taken on greater 
importance. Additionally, some covered products and equipment have most 
of their energy consumption occur during periods of peak energy demand. 
The impacts of these products on the energy infrastructure can be more 
pronounced than products with relatively constant demand. In evaluating 
the significance of energy savings, DOE considers differences in 
primary energy and full-fuel-cycle (``FFC'') effects for different 
covered products and equipment when determining whether energy savings 
are significant. Primary energy and FFC effects include the energy 
consumed in electricity production (depending on load shape), in 
distribution and transmission, and in extracting, processing, and 
transporting primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas, petroleum fuels), 
and thus present a more complete picture of the impacts of energy 
conservation standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 86 FR 70892, 70901 (Dec. 13, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, DOE evaluates the significance of energy savings on a 
case-by-case basis. DOE estimates a combined total of 0.96 quads of FFC 
energy savings at the max-tech efficiency levels for battery chargers. 
This represents a 24 percent energy savings relative to the no-new-
standards case energy consumption for battery chargers. DOE has 
initially determined the energy savings for the candidate standard 
levels considered in this preliminary analysis are ``significant'' 
within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B).
    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 seven factors:
    (1) The economic impact of the standard on the manufacturers and 
consumers of the products subject to the standard;
    (2) The savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average 
life of the covered products in the type (or class) compared to any 
increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses for the 
covered products that are likely to result from the standard;
    (3) The total projected amount of energy (or as applicable, water) 
savings likely to result directly from the standard;
    (4) Any lessening of the utility or the performance of the products 
likely to result from the standard;
    (5) The impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in 
writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the 
standard;
    (6) The need for national energy and water conservation; and
    (7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) considers 
relevant.
    (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)-(VII))
    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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Significant Energy Savings................  <bullet> Shipments Analysis.
                                            <bullet> National Impact
                                             Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Energy Analysis.
Technological Feasibility.................  <bullet> Market and
                                             Technology Assessment.
                                            <bullet> Screening Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Engineering
                                             Analysis.
Economic Justification:
    1. Economic impact on manufacturers     <bullet> Manufacturer Impact
     and consumers.                          Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Life-Cycle Cost and
                                             Payback Period Analysis.

[[Page 11992]]

 
                                            <bullet> Life-Cycle Cost
                                             Subgroup Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Shipments Analysis.
    2. Lifetime operating cost savings      <bullet> Markups for Product
     compared to increased cost for the      Price Analysis.
     product.                               <bullet> Energy Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Life-Cycle Cost and
                                             Payback Period Analysis.
    3. Total projected energy savings.....  <bullet> Shipments Analysis.
                                            <bullet> National Impact
                                             Analysis.
    4. Impact on utility or performance...  <bullet> Screening Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Engineering
                                             Analysis.
    5. Impact of any lessening of           <bullet> Manufacturer Impact
     competition.                            Analysis.
    6. Need for national energy and water   <bullet> Shipments Analysis.
     conservation.
                                            <bullet> National Impact
                                             Analysis.
    7. Other factors the Secretary          <bullet> Employment Impact
     considers relevant.                     Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Utility Impact
                                             Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Emissions Analysis.
                                            <bullet> Monetization of
                                             Emission Reductions \4\
                                             Benefits.
                                            <bullet> Regulatory Impact
                                             Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable presumption that a standard 
is economically justified if the Secretary finds that the additional 
cost to the consumer of purchasing a product complying with an energy 
conservation standard level will be less than three times the value of 
the energy savings during the first year that the consumer will receive 
as a result of the standard, as calculated under the applicable test 
procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Currently, in compliance with the preliminary injunction 
issued on February 11, 2022, in Louisiana v. Biden, No. 21-cv-1074-
JDC-KK (W.D. La.), DOE is not monetizing the costs of greenhouse gas 
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPCA also contains what is known as an ``anti-backsliding'' 
provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing any amended 
standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or 
decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered product. 
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Also, the Secretary may not prescribe an amended 
or new standard if interested persons have established by a 
preponderance of the evidence that the standard is likely to result in 
the unavailability in the United States in any covered product type (or 
class) of performance characteristics (including reliability), 
features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the 
same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(4))
    Additionally, EPCA specifies requirements when promulgating an 
energy conservation standard for a covered product that has two or more 
subcategories. DOE must specify a different standard level for a type 
or class of product that has the same function or intended use, if DOE 
determines that products within such group: (A) Consume a different 
kind of energy from that consumed by other covered products within such 
type (or class); or (B) have a capacity or other performance-related 
feature which other products within such type (or class) do not have 
and such feature justifies a higher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C. 
6295(q)(1)) In determining whether a performance-related feature 
justifies a different standard for a group of products, DOE must 
consider such factors as the utility to the consumer of the feature and 
other factors DOE deems appropriate. Id. Any rule prescribing such a 
standard must include an explanation of the basis on which such higher 
or lower level was established. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2))
    Finally, pursuant to the amendments contained in the Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (``EISA 2007''), Public Law 110-
140 (December 19, 2007), any final rule for new or amended energy 
conservation standards promulgated after July 1, 2010, is required to 
address standby mode and off mode energy use. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) 
Specifically, when DOE adopts a standard for a covered product after 
that date, it must, if justified by the criteria for adoption of 
standards under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)), incorporate standby mode and 
off mode energy use into a single standard, or, if that is not 
feasible, adopt a separate standard for such energy use for that 
product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)(A)-(B)) DOE's current test procedures 
for battery chargers address standby mode and off mode energy use. In 
this Preliminary Analysis, DOE intends to incorporate such energy use 
into any amended energy conservation standards it adopts in the final 
rule.
    Before proposing a standard, DOE typically seeks public input on 
the analytical framework, models, and tools that DOE intends to use to 
evaluate standards for the product at issue and the results of 
preliminary analyses DOE performed for the product.
    DOE is examining whether to amend the current standards pursuant to 
its obligations under EPCA. This notification announces the 
availability of the preliminary TSD, which details the preliminary 
analyses and summarizes the preliminary results of DOE's analyses. In 
addition, DOE is announcing a public meeting to solicit feedback from 
interested parties on its analytical framework, models, and preliminary 
results.

C. Deviation From Appendix A

    In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, 
appendix A (``appendix A''), DOE notes that it is deviating from the 
provision in appendix A regarding the pre-NOPR stages for an energy 
conservation standards rulemaking. Section 6(a)(2) of appendix A states 
that if the Department determines it is appropriate to proceed with a 
rulemaking, the preliminary stages of a rulemaking to issue or amend an 
energy conservation standard that DOE will undertake will be a 
framework document and preliminary analysis, or an advance notice of 
proposed rulemaking (``ANOPR''). DOE is opting to deviate from this 
step by publishing a preliminary analysis without a framework document. 
A framework document is intended to introduce and summarize generally 
the various analyses DOE conducts during the rulemaking process and 
requests initial feedback from interested parties. As discussed further 
in the following section, prior to this notification of the preliminary 
analysis, DOE issued a request for information on September 16, 2020 
(``September 2020 RFI'') in

[[Page 11993]]

which DOE discussed the previous battery charger energy conservation 
standards final rule published on June 13, 2016 (81 FR 38266, ``June 
2016 Final Rule''). 85 FR 57787. In that RFI, DOE requested comment on 
whether there were changes to the technologies considered as part of 
the June 2016 Final Rule that would affect potential amended standards 
and on any aspect of its economic justification analysis. 85 FR 57787, 
57791-57798. While DOE received comments on the assumptions employed in 
the analysis conducted in support of the June 2016 Final Rule (AHAM, 
No. 7 at p.3 and pp.5-6),\5\ DOE did not receive comments or data 
suggesting DOE rely on a different analytical framework from that 
conducted for the June 2016 Final Rule. As DOE intends to rely on 
substantively the same analytical methods as in the most recent 
rulemaking, publication of a framework document would not introduce an 
analytical framework different from that on which comment was requested 
in the September 2020 RFI and on which comment was received. As such, 
DOE is not publishing a framework document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to amend 
standards for battery chargers. (Docket No. EERE-2020-BT-TP-0013, 
which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references are 
arranged as follows: (Commenter name, comment docket ID number, page 
of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Further, section 6(d)(2) of appendix A specifies that the length of 
the public comment period for pre-NOPR rulemaking documents will vary 
depending upon the circumstances of the particular rulemaking, but will 
not be less than 75 calendar days. For this preliminary analysis, DOE 
has opted to instead provide a 60-day comment period.
    As stated, DOE requested comment in the September 2020 RFI on the 
analysis conducted in support of the June 2016 Final Rule and provided 
stakeholders a 75-day comment period. DOE, however, did not receive 
comments suggesting a need to substantively change the analytical 
approach previously taken. Given that the analysis will largely remain 
the same, and in light of the 75-day comment period DOE has already 
provided with its September 2020 RFI, DOE has determined that a 60-day 
comment period is sufficient to enable interested parties to review the 
tentative methodologies and accompanying analysis to develop meaningful 
comments in response to the battery charger preliminary analysis.

II. Background

A. Current Standards

    In its June 2016 Final Rule, DOE prescribed the current energy 
conservation standards for battery chargers manufactured on and after 
June 13, 2018. 81 FR 38266. These standards are set forth in DOE's 
regulations at 10 CFR 430.32(z) and are repeated in Table II.1. The 
currently applicable DOE test procedure for battery chargers appears at 
10 CFR part 430 subpart B, appendix Y (``Appendix Y'').

 Table II.1--Federal Energy Conservation Standards for Battery Chargers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Maximum UEC  (kWh/yr)  (as a
           Product class              function of rated  battery energy
                                                (``Ebatt''))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................................  3.04.
2.................................  0.1440 * Ebatt + 2.95.
3.................................  For Ebatt <10 Wh, 1.42 kWh/y, Ebatt
                                     >=10 Wh, 0.0255 * Ebatt + 1.16.
4.................................  0.11 * Ebatt + 3.18.
5.................................  0.0257 * Ebatt + .815.
6.................................  0.0778 * Ebatt + 2.4.
7.................................  0.0502 * Ebatt + 4.53.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Current Process

    On September 16, 2020, DOE initiated an early assessment RFI review 
to determine whether any new or amended standards would satisfy the 
relevant requirements of EPCA for a new or amended energy conservation 
standard for battery chargers. 85 FR 57787 (``September 2020 Early 
Assessment Review RFI''). Through that RFI, DOE sought data and 
information that could enable the agency to determine whether DOE 
should propose a ``no new standard'' determination because a more 
stringent standard: (1) Would not result in a significant savings of 
energy; (2) is not technologically feasible; (3) is not economically 
justified; or (4) any combination of foregoing. Id.
    Comments received to date as part of the current process have 
helped DOE identify and resolve issues related to the preliminary 
analyses. Chapter 2 of the preliminary TSD summarizes and addresses the 
comments received.

III. Summary of the Analyses Performed by DOE

    For the battery chargers covered in this preliminary analysis, DOE 
conducted in-depth technical analyses in the following areas: (1) 
Engineering; (2) markups to determine product price; (3) energy use; 
(4) life cycle cost (``LCC'') and payback period (``PBP''); and (5) 
national impacts. The preliminary TSD that presents the methodology and 
results of each of these analyses is available at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0013.
    DOE also conducted, and has included in the preliminary TSD, 
several other analyses that support the major analyses or are 
preliminary analyses that will be expanded if DOE determines that a 
NOPR is warranted to propose amended energy conservation standards. 
These analyses include: (1) The market and technology assessment; (2) 
the screening analysis, which contributes to the engineering analysis; 
and (3) the shipments analysis, which contributes to the LCC and PBP 
analysis and the national impact analysis (``NIA''). In addition to 
these analyses, DOE has begun preliminary work on the manufacturer 
impact analysis and has identified the methods to be used for the 
consumer subgroup analysis, the emissions analysis, the employment 
impact analysis, the regulatory impact analysis, and the utility impact 
analysis. DOE will expand on these analyses in the NOPR should one be 
issued.

A. Market and Technology Assessment

    DOE develops information in the market and technology assessment 
that provides an overall picture of the market for the products 
concerned, including general characteristics of the products, the 
industry structure, manufacturers, market characteristics, and 
technologies used in the products. This activity includes both 
quantitative and qualitative assessments, based primarily on publicly 
available information. The subjects addressed in the market and 
technology assessment include: (1) A determination of the scope of the 
rulemaking and product classes, (2) manufacturers and industry 
structure, (3) existing efficiency programs, (4) shipments information, 
(5) market and industry trends, and (6) technologies or design options 
that could improve the energy efficiency of the product.
    See chapter 3 of the preliminary TSD for further discussion of the 
market and technology assessment.

B. Screening Analysis

    DOE uses the following five screening criteria to determine which 
technology options are suitable for further consideration in an energy 
conservation standards rulemaking:
    (1) Technological feasibility. Technologies that are not 
incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes will not 
be considered further.

[[Page 11994]]

    (2) Practicability to manufacture, install, and service. If it is 
determined that mass production and reliable installation and servicing 
of a technology in commercial products could not be achieved on the 
scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time of the 
projected compliance date of the standard, then that technology will 
not be considered further.
    (3) Impacts on product utility or product availability. If it is 
determined that a technology would have a significant adverse impact on 
the utility of the product for significant subgroups of consumers or 
would result in the unavailability of any covered product type with 
performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, 
capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as products 
generally available in the United States at the time, it will not be 
considered further.
    (4) Adverse impacts on health or safety. If it is determined that a 
technology would have significant adverse impacts on health or safety, 
it will not be considered further.
    (5) Unique-pathway proprietary technologies. If a design option 
utilizes proprietary technology that represents a unique pathway to 
achieving a given efficiency level, that technology will not be 
considered further due to the potential for monopolistic concerns.
    10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, sections 6(b)(3) and 7(b).
    If DOE determines that a technology, or a combination of 
technologies, fails to meet one or more of the listed five criteria, it 
will be excluded from further consideration in the engineering 
analysis.
    See chapter 4 of the preliminary TSD for further discussion of the 
screening analysis.

C. Engineering Analysis

    The purpose of the engineering analysis is to establish the 
relationship between the efficiency and cost of battery chargers. There 
are two elements to consider in the engineering analysis; the selection 
of efficiency levels to analyze (i.e., the ``efficiency analysis'') and 
the determination of product cost at each efficiency level (i.e., the 
``cost analysis''). In determining the performance of higher-efficiency 
products, DOE considers technologies and design option combinations not 
eliminated by the screening analysis. For each product class, DOE 
estimates the manufacturer production cost (``MPC'') for the baseline 
as well as higher efficiency levels. The output of the engineering 
analysis is a set of cost-efficiency ``curves'' that are used in 
downstream analyses (i.e., the LCC and PBP analyses and the NIA).
    DOE converts the MPC to the manufacturer selling price (``MSP'') by 
applying a manufacturer markup. The MSP is the price the manufacturer 
charges its first customer, when selling into the product distribution 
channels. The manufacturer markup accounts for manufacturer non-
production costs and profit margin. DOE developed the manufacturer 
markup by examining publicly available financial information for 
manufacturers of the covered product.
    See chapter 5 of the preliminary TSD for additional detail on the 
engineering analysis.

D. Markups Analysis

    The markups analysis develops appropriate markups (e.g., retailer 
markups, distributor markups, contractor markups) in the distribution 
chain and sales taxes to convert MSP estimates derived in the 
engineering analysis to consumer prices, which are then used in the LCC 
and PBP analysis. At each step in the distribution channel, companies 
mark up the price of the product to cover business costs and profit 
margin.
    DOE developed baseline and incremental markups for each actor in 
the distribution chain. Baseline markups are applied to the price of 
products with baseline efficiency, while incremental markups are 
applied to the difference in price between baseline and higher-
efficiency models (the incremental cost increase). The incremental 
markup is typically less than the baseline markup and is designed to 
maintain similar per-unit operating profit before and after new or 
amended standards.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Because the projected price of standards-compliant products 
is typically higher than the price of baseline products, using the 
same markup for the incremental cost and the baseline cost would 
result in higher per-unit operating profit. While such an outcome is 
possible, DOE maintains that in markets that are reasonably 
competitive it is unlikely that standards would lead to a 
sustainable increase in profitability in the long run.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chapter 6 of the preliminary TSD provides details on DOE's 
development of markups for battery chargers.

E. Energy Use Analysis

    The purpose of the energy use analysis is to determine the annual 
energy consumption of battery chargers at different efficiencies in 
representative U.S. households and businesses, and to assess the energy 
savings potential of increased battery charger efficiency. The energy 
use analysis estimates the range of energy use of battery chargers in 
the field (i.e., as they are actually used by consumers). The energy 
use analysis provides the basis for other analyses DOE performed, 
particularly assessments of the energy savings and the savings in 
consumer operating costs that could result from adopting amended or new 
standards.
    Chapter 7 of the preliminary TSD addresses the energy use analysis.

F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analyses

    The effect of new or amended energy conservation standards on 
individual consumers usually involves a reduction in operating cost and 
an increase in purchase cost. DOE used the following two metrics to 
measure consumer impacts:
    <bullet> The LCC is the total consumer expense of an appliance or 
product over the life of that product, consisting of total installed 
cost (manufacturer selling price, distribution chain markups, sales 
tax, and installation costs) plus operating costs (expenses for energy 
use, maintenance, and repair). To compute the operating costs, DOE 
discounts future operating costs to the time of purchase and sums them 
over the lifetime of the product.
    <bullet> The PBP is the estimated amount of time (in years) it 
takes consumers to recover the increased purchase cost (including 
installation) of a more-efficient product through lower operating 
costs. DOE calculates the PBP by dividing the change in purchase cost 
at higher efficiency levels by the change in annual operating cost for 
the year that amended or new standards are assumed to take effect.
    Chapter 8 of the preliminary TSD addresses the LCC and PBP 
analyses.

G. National Impact Analysis

    The NIA estimates the national energy savings (``NES'') and the net 
present value (``NPV'') of total consumer costs and savings expected to 
result from amended standards at specific efficiency levels (referred 
to as candidate standard levels).\7\ DOE calculates the NES and NPV for 
the potential standard levels considered based on projections of annual 
product shipments, along with the annual energy consumption and total 
installed cost data from the energy use and LCC analyses. For the 
present analysis, DOE projected the energy savings, operating cost 
savings, product costs, and NPV of consumer benefits over the lifetime 
of battery chargers sold from 2027 through 2056.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The NIA accounts for impacts in the 50 states and U.S. 
territories.

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

[[Page 11995]]

    DOE evaluates the impacts of new or amended standards by comparing 
a case without such standards with standards-case projections (``no-
new-standards case''). The no-new-standards case characterizes energy 
use and consumer costs for each product class in the absence of new or 
amended energy conservation standards. For this projection, DOE 
considers historical trends in efficiency and various forces that are 
likely to affect the mix of efficiencies over time. DOE compares the 
no-new-standards case with projections characterizing the market for 
each product class if DOE adopted new or amended standards at specific 
energy efficiency levels for that class. For each efficiency level, DOE 
considers how a given standard would likely affect the market shares of 
product with efficiencies greater than the standard.
    DOE uses a spreadsheet model to calculate the energy savings and 
the national consumer costs and savings from each efficiency level. 
Interested parties can review DOE's analyses by changing various input 
quantities within the spreadsheet. The NIA spreadsheet model uses 
typical values (as opposed to probability distributions) as inputs. 
Critical inputs to this analysis include shipments projections, 
estimated product lifetimes, product installed costs and operating 
costs, product annual energy consumption, the base case efficiency 
projection, and discount rates.
    DOE estimates a combined total of 0.96 quads of FFC energy savings 
at the max-tech efficiency levels for battery chargers. Combined FFC 
energy savings at Efficiency Level 1 for all product/equipment classes 
are estimated to be 0.28 quads.
    Chapter 10 of the preliminary TSD addresses the NIA.

IV. Public Participation

    DOE invites public participation in this process through 
participation in the webinar and submission of written comments and 
information. After the webinar and the closing of the comment period, 
DOE will consider all timely-submitted comments and additional 
information obtained from interested parties, as well as information 
obtained through further analyses. Following such consideration, the 
Department will publish either a determination that the standards for 
battery chargers need not be amended or a NOPR proposing to amend those 
standards. The NOPR, should one be issued, would include proposed 
energy conservation standards for the products covered by that 
rulemaking, and members of the public would be given an opportunity to 
submit written and oral comments on the proposed standards.

A. Participation in the Webinar

    The time and date for the webinar meeting are listed in the DATES 
section at the beginning of this document. Webinar registration 
information, participant instructions, and information about the 
capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on 
DOE's website: www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/public-meetings-and-comment-deadlines. Participants are responsible for ensuring their 
systems are compatible with the webinar software.

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for 
Distribution

    Any person who has an interest in the topics addressed in this 
document, or who is representative of a group or class of persons that 
has an interest in these issues, may request an opportunity to make an 
oral presentation at the webinar. Such persons may submit such request 
to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#175667677b7e7679747244637679737665736446627264637e7879645772723973787239707861"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ce8fbebea2a7afa0adab9dbaafa0aaafbcaabd9fbbabbdbaa7a1a0bd8eababe0aaa1abe0a9a1b8">[email protected]</span></a>. Persons who wish to speak 
should include with their request a computer file in Microsoft Word, 
PDF, or text (ASCII) file format that briefly describes the nature of 
their interest in this rulemaking and the topics they wish to discuss. 
Such persons should also provide a daytime telephone number where they 
can be reached.
    Persons requesting to speak should briefly describe the nature of 
their interest in this document and provide a telephone number for 
contact. DOE requests persons selected to make an oral presentation to 
submit an advance copy of their statements at least two weeks before 
the webinar. At its discretion, DOE may permit persons who cannot 
supply an advance copy of their statement to participate, if those 
persons have made advance alternative arrangements with the Building 
Technologies Office. As necessary, requests to give an oral 
presentation should ask for such alternative arrangements.

C. Conduct of the Webinar

    DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the webinar and may 
also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The meeting will 
not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, but DOE will 
conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6306). A 
court reporter will be present to record the proceedings and prepare a 
transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of 
presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of 
the webinar. There shall not be discussion of proprietary information, 
costs or prices, market share, or other commercial matters regulated by 
U.S. anti-trust laws. After the webinar and until the end of the 
comment period, interested parties may submit further comments on the 
proceedings and any aspect of the Preliminary Analysis.
    The webinar will be conducted in an informal, conference style. DOE 
will present a general overview of the topics addressed in this 
Preliminary Analysis, allow time for prepared general statements by 
participants, and encourage all interested parties to share their views 
on issues affecting this Preliminary Analysis. Each participant will be 
allowed to make a general statement (within time limits determined by 
DOE), before the discussion of specific topics. DOE will permit, as 
time allows, other participants to comment briefly on any general 
statements.
    At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit 
participants to clarify their statements briefly. Participants should 
be prepared to answer questions by DOE and by other participants 
concerning these issues. DOE representatives may also ask questions of 
participants concerning other matters relevant to this Preliminary 
Analysis. The official conducting the webinar will accept additional 
comments or questions from those attending, as time permits. The 
presiding official will announce any further procedural rules or 
modification of the above procedures that may be needed for the proper 
conduct of the webinar.
    A transcript of the webinar will be included in the docket, which 
can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the beginning of 
this document. In addition, any person may buy a copy of the transcript 
from the transcribing reporter.

D. Submission of Comments

    DOE invites all interested parties, regardless of whether they 
participate in the public meeting, to submit in writing by May 2, 2022, 
comments and information on matters addressed in this notification and 
on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended energy 
conservations standards for battery chargers. Interested parties may 
submit comments, data, and other information using any of the methods 
described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document.
    Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The

[[Page 11996]]

www.regulations.gov web page will require you to provide your name and 
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE 
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be 
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization 
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your 
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, 
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
    However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you 
include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your 
comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable 
should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to 
your comment. If this instruction is followed, persons viewing comments 
will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence 
containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments.
    Do not submit to www.regulations.gov. information for which 
disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and 
commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as 
Confidential Business Information (``CBI'')). Comments submitted 
through www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received 
through the website will waive any CBI claims for the information 
submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential 
Business Information section.
    DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before 
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being 
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed 
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several 
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov 
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
    Submitting comments via email. Comments and documents submitted via 
email also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want 
your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not 
include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, 
provide your contact information in a cover letter. Include your first 
and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing 
address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it 
does not include any comments.
    Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, 
documents, and other information to DOE. No faxes will be accepted.
    Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE 
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 
Excel, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not 
secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any defects 
or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form 
of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic 
signature of the author.
    Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the 
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters 
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled 
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting 
time.
    Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 
person submitting information that he or she believes to be 
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via 
email two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked 
``confidential'' including all the information believed to be 
confidential, and one copy of the document marked ``non-confidential'' 
with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make 
its own determination about the confidential status of the information 
and treat it according to its determination.
    It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public 
docket, without change and as received, including any personal 
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be 
exempt from public disclosure).

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this 
notification of a webinar and availability of preliminary technical 
support document.
Signing Authority
    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on February 
25, 2022, by Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to 
delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with 
the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For 
administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of 
the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 
Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the 
document in electronic format for publication, as an official document 
of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way 
alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the 
Federal Register.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on February 28, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2022-04495 Filed 3-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>