Federal Register! Vol. 69, No. 158 / Tuesday, August 17, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 50997

Therefore, for the reasons given in the

interim rule and in this document, we

are adopting the interim rule as a final

rule without change.

This action also affirms the

information contained in the interim

rule concerning Executive Order 12866

and the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

Executive Orders 12372 and 12988, and

the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Further, for this action, the Office of

Management and Budget has waived its

review under Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301

Agricultural commodities, Plant

diseases and pests, Quarantine,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Transportation.

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE

NOTICES

• Accordingly, we are adopting as a final

rule, without change, the interim rule

that amended 7 CFR part 301 and that

was puhlished at 68 FR 43286—43287 on

July 22, 2003.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7701—7772: 7 CFR 2.22,

2.80, and 371.3.

Section 301.75—15 also issued under Sec.

204, Title 11, Pub. L. 106—113, 113 Stat.

1501A—293; sections 301.75—15 and 301.75—

16 also issued under Sec. 203, Title II, Pub.

L. 106—224, 114 Stat. 400 (7 U.S.C. 1421

note).

Done in Washington, DC, this 11th day of

August 2004.

W. Ron Dellaven,

Administrator, Animal and Plont Health

Inspection Service.

[FR Doc. 04—18784 Filed 8—16—04; 6:45 am]

BILLING CODB 3410—34—P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket Number EE—RM—98—440J

RIN 1904—A846

Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products; Central Air

Conditioners and Heat Pumps Energy

Conservation Standards

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, Department of

Energy.

ACTION: Final rule; technical

amendment.

apply to residential central air

conditioners and central air

conditioning heat pumps beginning on

January 23, 2006. More specifically, this

technical amendment replaces standard

levels currently in the Code of Federal

Regulations, which were established by

a final rule puhlished by DOE on May

23, 2002, with standard levels that were

set forth in a final rule published by

DOE on January 22, 2001. As explained

in the Supplementary Information

section of this notice, the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the Second Circuit has

ruled that DOE’s withdrawal of the rule

published on January 22, 2001, was

unlawful, and, therefore, that certain

standards promulgated in the May 23,

2002, final rule are invalid. DOE has

decided not to seek further review of

that ruling. Consequently, DOE is now

revising its regulations consistent with

the court’s ruling.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 21, 2001.

ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to

read background documents or

comments received, go to littpil!

www.eere.energy.gov/buildings/

applian ce_standards/residential!

ac_central.litml and/or visit the U.S.

Department of Energy, Forrestal

Building, Room 1J—018 (Resource Room

of the Building Technologies Program),

1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC, (202) 586—9127,

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at

the above telephone number for

additional information regarding

visiting the Resource Room. Please note:

The Department’s Freedom of

Information Reading Room (formerly

Room 1E—190 at the Forrestal Building)

is no longer housing rulemaking

materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Raymond, Project Manager,

Energy Conservation Standards for

Central Air Conditioners and Heat

Pumps, Docket No. EERM—440, EE—2J/

Forrestal Building, U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of Building Technologies,

EE—2J, 1000 Independence Avenue,

SW., Washington, DC 20585—0121, (202)

586—9611. E-mail:

michael.raymand@ee. dae.gav.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The National Appliance Energy

Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA)

(Pub. L. 100—12) established energy

efficiency standards for various

consumer products, including

residential central air conditioners, and

directed DOE to undertake periodic

rulemakings to decide whether to

amend those standards. NAECA also

amended the Energy Policy and

Conservation Act (EPCA) to provide, in

section 325(o)(1), that when DOE

reviews efficiency standards, it “may

not prescribe any amended standard

which increases the maximum

allowable energy use * * * or decreases

the minimum required energy

efficiency” of a covered product (42

U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)).

On January 22, 2001, DOE published

a rule in the Federal Register amending

the efficiency standard for central air

conditioners established by NAECA by

increasing the standard from 10 to 13

SEER (“seasonal energy efficiency

ratio”), a 30% increase in energy

efficiency. 66 FR 7170. The rule stated

it would become effective on February

21, 2001, but manufacturers’ products

would not have to meet the 13 SEER

standard until January 23, 2006. On

January 24, 2001, the President’s Chief

of Staff issued a memorandum asking

Executive Branch agencies to review

ongoing rulemaking proceedings and to

postpone the effective dates of any new

regulations already published in the

Federal Register but not yet effective,

pending completion of such review.

DOE accordingly issued a rule delaying

the effective date af the central air

conditioner rule published on January

22, 2001, in order to conduct that

review. 66 FR 8745. DOE also received

a petition from the Air-Conditioning

and Refrigeration Institute (ART), an

association of air conditioner

manufacturers, asking DOE to

reconsider the 13 SEER standard. On

May 23, 2002, DOE withdrew the 13

SEER rule and promulgated a new rule

establishing a 12 SEER efficiency

standard, a 20% increase in energy

efficiency. 67 FR 36368.

The Natural Resources Defense

Council (NRDC) and various public

interest groups, joined by several state

Attorneys General, filed suit in federal

district court, and alternatively in the

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second

Circuit, challenging DOE’s withdrawal

of the 13 SEER rule and promulgation

of the 12 SEER standard. Among other

things, they alleged that section

325(o)(1) of EPCA precluded DOE from

adopting the 12 SEER rule.

On January 13, 2004, the U.S. Court

of Appeals for the Second Circuit

decided that once DOE published the 13

SEER rule for central air conditioners in

the Federal Register, DOE was

precluded from subsequently adopting a

lower standard for those products. Thus,

DOE’s actions of withdrawing the 13

SEER standard and promulgating the 12

SEER standard violated section

325(o)(1). Natural Resources Defense

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

(DOE) is revising the Code of Federal

Regulations to incorporate certain

energy conservation standards that will
50998 Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 158/Tuesday, August 17, 2004/Rules and Regulations

CounciL eta]. v. Abraham, 355 F.3d 179

(2nd Cir. 2004). The court’s written

opinion disclaimed any intent to affect

a challenge to the 13 SEER standard that

AM and certain manufacturers had filed

in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

Fourth Circuit. Nonetheless, AM and

the manufacturers who joined it in the

Fourth Circuit lawsuit subsequently

withdrew their challenge to the 13 SEER

rule, citing the need for regulatory

certainty.

On April 2, 2004, DOE publicly

announced that, in the interest of giving

all affected persons regulatory certainty,

DOE would not appeal or seek further

review of the ruling of the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the Second Circuit. As a

result, the 13 SEER standard will apply

to covered conventional central air

conditioners and central air

conditioning heat pumps manufactured

on or after January 23, 2006. Today’s

technical amendment places those

standards in the Code of Federal

Regulations.

II. Summary ofToday’s Action

DOE is revising the energy

conservation standards for split system

and single package central air

conditioners and central air

conditioning heat pumps in 10 CFR

430.32(c)(2). The standards currently set

forth in the Code of Federal Regulations

are 12 SEER for split system and single

package air conditioners, and 12 SEER,

7.4 HSPF (“heating system performance

factor”) for split system and single

package heat pumps. DOE is replacing

these standards with the following

standards established in the January 22,

2001 final rule: 13 SEER for split system

and single package air conditioners, and

13 SEER, 7.7 HSPF for split system and

single package heat pumps.

The January 22, 2001, final rule also

established a separate product class of

“space constrained products,” but it did

not establish amended standard levels

for those products. DOE explained in

the preamble to the January 22, 2001,

final rule that it was concemed that air

conditioners and heat pumps intended

to serve applications with severe space

constraints would have difficulty in

meeting the 13 SEER standard. 66 FR

7196. Therefore, DOE established a

separate product class for space

constrained products and reserved

setting standard levels for that class

pending completion of later rulemaking

proceedings. Subsequently, in the

rulemaking culminating in the May 23,

2002, final rule, DOE determined that 12

SEER was the appropriate standard level

for all space constrained products

except those with through-the-wall

condensers, and the final rule

established lower standards for throughthe-wall products. 67 FR 36402—03,

36406. The standards established for

space constrained products in the May

23, 2002, final rule are unaffected by the

January 13, 2004, ruling of the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

because the January 22, 2001, final rule

set no standards for these products and,

thus, section 325(o)(1) of EPCA does not

affect the validity of the standards for

these products that were published on

May 23, 2002.

The May 23, 2002, final rule set forth

a compliance date of January 23, 2006,

for all of the efficiency standards

promulgated in that rule, including the

standards for space-constrained

products. This is the same compliance

date set forth in the January 22, 2001,

final rule for the standards promulgated

in that rule. The May 23, 2002, rule’s

preamble discussed why DOE was

adopting the January 23, 2006,

compliance date. 67 FR 36394. DOE

recognized that by adopting that date,

the time between publication of the May

23, 2002 rule and the compliance date

would be less than the five-year interval

provided in the statute (42 U.S.C.

6295(d)(3)(A)). DOE explained that

when it cannot meet a statutory

deadline to promulgate a rule (as was

the case with the products covered by

the January 22, 2001, and May 23, 2002,

final rules), it generally will adjust the

date such rule becomes enforceable to

allow for the same amount of lead time

as provided in the statute, but that in

special circumstances DOE will not

follow that practice. DOE stated it

would set the effective date for the

standards adopted in the May 23, 2002,

final rule at less than five years from the

date of publication because all of the

participants in the rulemaking,

including representatives of the

manufacturers who would have to

comply with the standards and who had

expressed a view about the matter, had

agreed that five years of lead time was

not needed for central air conditioner

manufacturers to come into compliance

with the standards adopted in the May

23, 2002, final rule. DOE stated,

however, that if, as a result of

unforeseen circumstances, a particular

manufacturer could show hardship,

inequity, or unfair distribution of

burdens, the effective date would be

subject to case-by-case exception

pursuant to the authority of the DOE

Office of Hearings and Appeals under

section 504 of the Department of Energy

Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7194), as

implemented at subpart B of 10 CFR

part 1003.

DOE is today adding to § 430.2 the

definition of “space constrained

product” that was contained in the

January 22, 2001, final rule and adding

the following standard levels set in the

May 23, 2002, final rule: 12 SEER for

space constrained air conditioners, and

12 SEER, 7.4 HSPF for space

constrained heat pumps. The standards

for through-the-wall air conditioners

and heat pumps, which fall within the

definition of “space constrained

product,” were set in the May 23, 2002,

final rule, and are: 10.9 SEER, 7.1 HSPF

for split systems and 10.6 SEER, 7.0

HSPF for single package systems. The

definition of “through-the-wall air

conditioner and heat pump” in § 430.2

provides that this product class exists

only for products manufactured prior to

January 23, 2010. After that date, the

standards for space constrained

products will apply to these throughthe-wall air conditioners and heat

pumps.

The January 22, 2001, final rule did

not establish a separate product class for

covered central air conditioners that are

small duct, high velocity systems, and

the rule did not establish separate

standards for them; nor are these

products “space constrained products”

(see discussion at 66 FR 7197).

Therefore, small duct, high velocity

systems are covered by the 13 SEER

standard. However, in the May 23, 2002,

notice of final rulemaking, DOE

explained that information obtained in

the rulemaking proceeding indicated

that the special characteristics of small

duct, high velocity systems made it

unlikely such systems could even meet

the 12 SEERI7.4 HSPF standard

established for conventional products.

67 FR 36396. As a result, DOE included

the NAECA-prescribed values for small

duct, high velocity systems in the Code

of Federal Regulations pending a later

rulemaking to establish appropriate

standards for that product class.

Because the Second Circuit’s ruling

prevents DOE from adopting a standard

lower than 13 SEER for small duct, high

velocity systems, despite DOE’s later

conclusion that it is unlikely such

systems can meet even the lower 12

SEER standard, DOE has advised the

two manufacturers of these systems of

the procedure available to affected

persons under section 504 of the

Department of Energy Organization Act

(42 U.S.C. 7194), which allows them to

request relief from hardship or inequity

caused by a regulation issued under

EPCA.

Lastly, DOE is revising § 430.2 to

remove several definitions that were

included to implement DOE’s

interpretation of section 325(o)(1) of

EPCA contained in the preamble of the

May 23, 2002, final rule. Because its
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 158/Tuesday, August 17, 2004/Rules and Regulations 50999

interpretation has been rejected by the

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second

Circuit, DOE is removing the definitions

of “effective date,” “maximum

allowable energy use,” “maximum

allowable water use,” and “minimum

required energy efficiency.”

ifi. Procedural Requirements

A. Public Comment

Section 553 of the Administrative

Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) generally

requires agencies to provide notice and

an opportunity for public comment on

substantive rules. The requirement does

not apply, however, if the agency

determines that notice and opportunity

for public comment is “impracticable,

unnecessary, or contrary to the public

interest.” DOE finds that good cause

exists for dispensing with notice and

opportunity for public comment in

issuing today’s rule because those

procedures are unnecessary where, as

here, the agency has no discretion in

fashioning its rule. Today’s final rule

simply conforms the Code of Federal

Regulations to the order of the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit,

and DOE has no discretion to deviate

from the court’s ruling. For this reason,

DOE has characterized today’s rule as a

“technical amendment” in the Action

line at the beginning of this notice of

final rulemaking.

B. Review Under Executive Order 12866

The Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs of the Office of

Management and Budget (0MB) has

determined that today’s regulatory

action is a “significant regulatory

action” under Executive Order 12866,

“Regulatory Planning and Review,” 58

FR 51735 (October 4, 1993).

Accordingly, DOE submitted today’s

notice to 0MB for clearance under the

Executive Order. 0MB has completed

its review.

C. Review Under the Regulotory

Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

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

of an initial regulatory flexibility

analysis for any rule that by law must

be proposed for public comment, unless

the agency certifies that the rule, if

promulgated, will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. As required by

Executive Order 13272, “Proper

Consideration of Small Entities in

Agency Rulemaking,” 67 FR 53461

(August 16, 2002), DOE published

procedures and policies on February 19,

2003, to ensure that the potential

impacts of its rules on small entities are

properly considered during the

rulemaking process (68 FR 7990). DOE

has made its procedures and policies

available on the Office of General

Counsel’s Web site: http://

www.gc.doe.gov. DOE today is simply

revising the Code of Federal Regulations

to comply with the order of the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Because the energy conservation

standards in this rule were established

in prior final rules that have taken

effect, today’s rule does not establish

any new requirements for any entity. On

this basis, DOE certifies that this final

rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

D. Review Under the Poperwork

Reduction Act

This rulemaking will impose no new

information or recordkeeping

requirements. Accordingly, 0MB

clearance is not required under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

E. Review Under the Notionol

Environmentol Policy Act

DOE has determined that this rule

falls into a class of actions that are

categorically excluded from review

under the National Environmental

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et

seq.) and the Department’s

implementing regulations at 10 CFR part

1021. This rule is a technical

amendment that reinstates, pursuant to

court order, amended energy

conservation standards for central air

conditioners and heat pumps that were

published in the Federal Register on

January 22, 2001. DOE has therefore

determined that this rule is covered by

the Categorical Exclusion in paragraph

A6 to subpart D, 10 CFR part 1021,

which applies to rulemakings that are

strictly procedural. Accordingly, neither

an environmental assessment nor an

environmental impact statement is

required.

F. Review Under Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132, “Federalism,”

64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999), imposes

certain requirements on agencies

formulating and implementing policies

or regulations that preempt State law or

that have federalism implications. The

Executive Order requires agencies to

examine the constitutional and statutory

authority supporting any action that

would limit the policymaking discretion

of the States and carefully assess the

necessity for such actions. The

Executive Order also requires agencies

to have an accountable process to

ensure meaningful and timely input by

State and local officials in the

development of regulatory policies that

have federalism implications. On March

14, 2000, DOE published a statement of

policy describing the intergovernmental

consultation process it will follow in the

development of such regulations (65 FR

13735). DOE has examined today’s final

rule and has determined that it does not

have a substantial direct effect on the

States, on the relationship between the

national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. State regulations

that may have existed on the products

that are the subject of today’s final rule

were preempted by the Federal

standards established in NAECA. States

can petition DOE for exemption from

such preemption to the extent, and

based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. No

further action is required by Executive

Order 13132.

C. Review Under Executive Order 12988

With respect to the review of existing

regulations and the promulgation of

new regulations, section 3(a) of

Executive Order 12988, “Civil Justice

Reform” (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996),

imposes on Federal agencies the general

duty to adhere to the following

requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting

errors and ambiguity; (2) write

regulations to minimize litigation; and

(3) provide a clear legal standard for

affected conduct rather than a general

standard and promote simplification

and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of

Executive Order 12988 specifically

requires that Executive agencies make

every reasonable effort to ensure that the

regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the

preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly

specifies any effect on existing Federal

law or regulation; (3) provides a clear

legal standard for affected conduct

while promoting simplification and

burden reduction; (4) specifies the

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately

defines key terms; and (6) addresses

other important issues affecting clarity

and general draftsmanship under any

guidelines issued by the Attorney

General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order

12988 requires Executive agencies to

review regulations in light of applicable

standards in section 3(a) and section

3(b) to determine whether they are met

or it is unreasonable to meet one or

more of them. DOE has completed the

required review and determined that, to

the extent permitted by law, this final

rule meets the relevant standards of

Executive Order 12988.
51000 Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 158/Tuesday, August 17, 2004/Rules and Regulations

H. Review Under the Unfunded

Mondotes Reform Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104—4)

requires each Federal agency to assess

the effects of Federal regulatory actions

on State, local, and tribal governments

and the private sector. With respect to

a proposed regulatory action that may

result in the expenditure by State, local

and tribal governments, in the aggregate,

or by the private sector of $100 million

or more (adjusted annually for

inflation), section 202 of the Act

requires a Federal agency to publish

estimates of the resulting costs, benefits,

and other effects on the national

economy (2 U.S.C. 1532(a),(b)). The Act

also requires a Federal agency to

develop an effective process to permit

timely input by elected officers of State,

local, and tribal governments on a

proposed “significant intergovernmental

mandate,” and requires an agency plan

for giving notice and opportunity for

timely input to potentially affected

small governments before establishing

any requirements that might

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE

published a statement of policy on its

process for intergovernmental

consultation under the Act (62 FR

12820) (also available at http://

www.gc.doe.gov). The rule published

today does not contain any Federal

mandate; it only incorporates into the

Code of Federal Regulations standards

set forth in rules promulgated in 2001

and 2002.

L Review Under the Treasury and

General Government Appropriations

Act, 1999

Section 654 of the Treasury and

General Government Appropriations

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105—277) requires

Federal agencies to issue a Family

Policymaking Assessment for any rule

that may affect family well-being. This

rule would not have any impact an the

autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has

concluded that it is not necessary to

prepare a Family Policymaking

Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

DOE has determined pursuant to

Executive Order 12630, “Governmental

Actions and Interference with

Constitutionally Protected Property

Rights,” 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988),

that this regulation would not result in

any takings which might require

compensation under the Fifth

Amendment to the United States

Constitution.

K, Review Under the Treasury and

General Government Appropriations

Act, 2001

The Treasury and General

Government Appropriations Act, 2001

(44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for

agencies to review most disseminations

of information to the public under

guidelines established by each agency

pursuant to general guidelines issued by

0MB. OMB’s guidelines were published

at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and

DOE’s guidelines were published at 67

FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has

reviewed today’s final rule under the

0MB and DOE guidelines and has

concluded that it is consistent with

applicable policies in those guidelines.

L. Review Under Executive Order 13211

Executive Order 13211, “Actions

Concerning Regulations That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use,” 66 FR 28355 (May

22, 2001) requires Federal agencies to

prepare and submit to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs

(OIRA), Office of Management and

Budget, a Statement of Energy Effects for

any proposed significant energy action.

A “significant energy action” is defined

as any action by an agency that

promulgated or is expected to lead to

promulgation of a final rule, and that:

(1) Is a significant regulatory action

under Executive Order 12866, or any

successor order; and (2) is likely to have

a significant adverse effect on the

supply, distribution, or use of energy, or

(3) is designated by the Administrator of

OIRA as a significant energy action. For

any proposed significant energy action,

the agency must give a detailed

statement of any adverse effects on

energy supply, distribution, or use

should the proposal be implemented,

and of reasonable alternatives to the

action and their expected benefits on

energy supply, distribution, and use.

Today’s regulatory action would not

have a significant adverse effect on the

supply, distribution, or use of energy

and, therefore, is not a significant

energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not

prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.

M. Congressional Notification

As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will

report to Congress on the promulgation

of today’s rule prior to its effective date.

The report will state that it has been

determined that the rule is not a “major

rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

N. Approval of the Office of the

Secretary

The Secretary of Energy has approved

publication of today’s rule.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430

Administrative practice and

procedure, Energy conservation,

Household appliances.

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 4,

2004.

David K. Garman,

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency ond

Renewable Energy.

• For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, Part 430 of Chapter II of Title

10, Code of Federal Regulations, is

amended as set forth below:

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER

PRODUCTS

I 1. The authority citation for part 430

continues to read as follows:

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

2461 note.

• 2. Section 430.2 is amended by:

• a. Removing the definitions for

“effective date,” “maximum allowable

energy use,” “maximum allowable water

use,” and “minimum required energy

efficiency”; and

• b. Adding a definition of “space

constrained product” in alphabetical

order to read as follows:

§ 430.2 Definitions. * * * * *

Space constrained product means a

central air conditioner or heat pump:

(1) That has rated cooling capacities

no greater than 30,000 BTU/hr;

(2) That has an outdoor or indoor unit

having at least two overall exterior

dimensions or an overall displacement

that:

(i) Is substantially smaller than those

of other units that are:

(A) Currently usually installed in sitebuilt single family homes; and

(B) Of a similar cooling, and, if a heat

pump, heating capacity; and

(ii) If increased, would certainly result

in a considerable increase in the usual

cost of installation or would certainly

result in a significant loss in the utility

of the product to the consumer; and

(3) Of a product type that was

available for purchase in the United

States as of December 1, 2000. * * * * *

• 3. Section 430.32 ofsubpart C is

amended by revising paragraph (c)(2) to

read as follows:

§ 430.32 Energy and water conservation

standards and effective dates. * * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) Central air conditioners and

central air conditioning heat pumps

manufactured on or after January 23,
Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 158/Tuesday, August 17, 2004/Rules and Regulations 51001

2006, shall have Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio and Heating Seasonal

Performance Factor no less than:

Seasonal Heating

energy seasonal

Product class efficiency performance

ratio factor

(SEER) (HSPF)

(i) Split system air conditioners 13

(ii) Split system heat pumps 13 7.7

(iii) Single package air conditioners 13

(iv) Single package heat pumps 13 7.7

(v)(A) Through-the-wall air conditioners and heat pumps-split system 1 10.9 7.1

(v)(B) Through-the-wall air conditioners and heat pumps-single package 1 10.6 7.0

(vi) Small duct, high velocity systems 13 7.7

(vii)(A) Space constrained products-air conditioners 12

(vii)(B) Space constrained products-heat pumps 12 7.4

1 As defined in § 430.2, this product class applies to products manufactured prior to January 23, 2010.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 04—18533 Filed 8—16—04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01—P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

12 CFR Part 201

[Regulation A]

Extensions of Credit by Federal

Reserve Banks

AGENCY: Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Board of Governors of the

Federal Reserve System (Board) has

adopted final amendments to its

Regulation A to reflect the Board’s

approval of an increase in the primary

credit rate at each Federal Reserve Bank.

The secondary credit rate at each

Reserve Bank automatically increased

by formula as a result of the Board’s

primary credit rate action.

DATES: The amendments to part 201

(Regulation A) are effective August 17,

2004. The rate changes for primary and

secondary credit were effective on the

dates specified in 12 CFR 201.51, as

amended.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

JenniferJ. Johnson, Secretary of the

Board (202/452—3259); for users of

Telecommunication Devices for the Deaf

(TDD) only, contact 202/263—4869.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Federal Reserve Banks make primary

and secondary credit available to

depository institutions as a backup

source of funding on a short-term basis,

usually overnight. The primary and

secondary credit rates are the interest

rates that the twelve Federal Reserve

Banks charge for extensions of credit

under these programs. In accordance

with the Federal Reserve Act, the

primary and secondary credit rates are

established by the boards of directors of

the Federal Reserve Banks, subject to

the review and determination of the

Board.

The Board approved requests by the

Reserve Banks to increase by 25 basis

points the primary credit rate in effect

at each of the twelve Federal Reserve

Banks, thereby increasing from 2.25

percent to 2.50 percent the rate that

each Reserve Bank charges for

extensions of primary credit. As a result

of the Board’s action on the primary

credit rate, the rate that each Reserve

Bank charges for extensions of

secondary credit automatically

increased from 2.75 percent to 3.00

percent under the secondary credit rate

formula. The final amendments to

Regulation A reflect these rate changes.

The 25-basis-point increase in the

primary credit rate was associated with

a similar increase in the target for the

federal funds rate (from 1.25 percent to

1.50 percent) approved by the Federal

Open Market Committee (Committee)

and announced at the same time. A

press release announcing these actions

indicated that:

The Conmdttee believes that, even after

this action, the stance of monetary policy

remains accommodative and, coupled with

robust underlying growth in productivity, is

providing ongoing support to economic

activity. In recent months, output growth has

moderated and the pace of improvement in

labor market conditions has slowed. This

softness likely owes importantly to the

substantial rise in energy prices. The

economy nevertheless appears poised to resume a stronger pace of expansion going

forward. Inflation has been somewhat

elevated this year, though a portion of the

rise in prices seems to reflect transitory

factors.

The Committee perceives the upside and

downside risks to the attaimnent of both

sustainable growth and price stability for the

next few quarters are roughly equal. With

underlying inflation still expected to be

relatively low, the Committee believes that

policy accommodation can be removed at a

pace that is likely to be measured.

Nonetheless, the Committee will respond to

changes in economic prospects as needed to

fulfill its obligation to maintain price

stability.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Board certifies

that the new primary and secondary

credit rates will not have a significantly

adverse economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

because the final rule does not impose

any additional requirements on entities

affected by the regulation.

Administrative Procedure Act

The Board did not follow the

provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b) relating to

notice and public participation in

connection with the adoption of these

amendments because the Board for good

cause determined that delaying

implementation of the new primary and

secondary credit rates in order to allow

notice and public comment would be

unnecessary and contrary to the public

interest in fostering price stability and

sustainable economic growth. For these

same reasons, the Board also has not

provided 30 days prior notice of the

effective date of the rule under section

553(d).

12 CFR Chapter II

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 201

Banks, Banking, Federal Reserve

System, Reporting and recordkeeping.

Authority and Issuance

• For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Board is amending 12 CFR

Chapter II to read as follows: