Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Notices 40529 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

As part of its continuing effort to 

reduce paperwork and respondent 

burden, the Department provides the 

general public and Federal agencies 

with an opportunity to comment on 

proposed and continuing collections of 

information, in accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) 

(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps 

ensure that: The public understands the 

Department’s collection instructions, 

respondents can provide the requested 

data in the desired format, reporting 

burden (time and financial resources) is 

minimized, collection instruments are 

clearly understood, and the Department 

can properly assess the impact of 

collection requirements on respondents. 

The final priorities and definitions 

contain information collection 

requirements that are approved by OMB 

under OMB control numbers 1894– 

0006. The Department will request OMB 

approval under 1894–0006 for the Earlyphase grants program (84.411C) around 

the same time this document publishes. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Accessible Format: On request to the 

contact person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format. The Department 

will provide the requestor with an 

accessible format that may include Rich 

Text Format (RTF) or text format, a 

thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc or 

other accessible format. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. You may access the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 

www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 

view this document, as well as all other 

documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Portable Document Format 

(PDF). To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Ian Rosenblum, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Programs Delegated the Authority to Perform 

the Functions and Duties of the Assistant 

Secretary, Office for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2021–16097 Filed 7–27–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[EERE–2021–BT–DET–0010] 

Analysis Regarding Energy Efficiency 

Improvements in the 2021 International 

Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of determination. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) has reviewed the 2021 

International Energy Conservation Code 

(IECC) and determined the updated 

edition would improve energy 

efficiency in buildings subject to the 

code. DOE analysis indicates that 

buildings meeting the 2021 IECC, as 

compared with buildings meeting the 

2018 IECC, would result in national site 

energy savings of 9.38 percent, source 

energy savings of 8.79 percent, and 

energy cost savings of approximately 

8.66 percent of residential building 

energy consumption. Upon publication 

of this affirmative determination, each 

State must certify that it has reviewed 

the energy efficiency provisions of its 

residential building code and made a 

determination whether it is appropriate 

to revise the code to meet or exceed the 

updated edition of the IECC. 

Additionally, this notice provides 

guidance on State code review processes 

and associated certifications. 

DATES: Certification statements provided 

by States shall be submitted by July 28, 

2023. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the supporting 

analysis, as well as links to the Federal 

docket and public comments received, 

are available at: https://

www.energycodes.gov/development/ 

determinations. 

Certification Statements must be 

addressed to the Building Technologies 

Office—Building Energy Codes Program 

Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW, EE–5B, Washington, DC 

20585. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jeremiah Williams; U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW, EE–5B, Washington, DC 

20585; (202) 441–1288; 

Jeremiah.Williams@ee.doe.gov. 

For legal issues, please contact 

Matthew Ring; U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, GC–33, 

Washington, DC 20585; (202) 586–2555; 

Matthew.Ring@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

II. Public Participation 

III. Determination Statement 

IV. State Certification 

I. Background 

Title III of the Energy Conservation 

and Production Act (ECPA), as 

amended, establishes requirements for 

building energy conservation standards, 

which are administered by the DOE 

Building Energy Codes Program. (42 

U.S.C. 6831 et seq.) Section 304(a), as 

amended, of ECPA provides that 

whenever the 1992 Council of American 

Building Officials (CABO) Model Energy 

Code, or any successor to that code, is 

revised, the Secretary of Energy 

(Secretary) must make a determination, 

no later than 12 months after such 

revision, whether the revised code 

would improve energy efficiency in 

residential buildings, and must publish 

notice of such determination in the 

Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 

6833(a)(5)(A)) If the Secretary 

determines that the revision of the 

CABO Model Energy Code, or any 

successor thereof, improves the level of 

energy efficiency in residential 

buildings then, not later than two years 

after the date of the publication of such 

affirmative determination, each State is 

required to certify that it has reviewed 

its residential building code regarding 

energy efficiency, and made a 

determination as to whether it is 

appropriate to revise its code to meet or 

exceed the provisions of the successor 

code. (42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(5)(B)). 

The International Energy 

Conservation Code (IECC) is the 

contemporary successor to the CABO 

Model Energy Code specified in ECPA. 

The IECC is revised every three years 

through an established code 

development and consensus process 

administered by the International Code 

Council (ICC). As part of the ICC 

process, any interested party may 

submit proposals, as well as written 

comments or suggested changes to any 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
40530 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Notices 

1See https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/ 

external/technical_reports/PNNL-31437.pdf for the 

2021 interim code impact report. Financial benefits 

are calculated by applying historical and future fuel 

prices to site energy savings and by discounting 

future savings to 2020 dollars. Historical and future 

real fuel prices are obtained through EIA’s AEO 

2015 report (EIA 2015). 

2Available at https://www.energycodes.gov/ 

regulations/determinations/previous. 

3Available at https://www.energycodes.gov/ 

development/residential/iecc_analysis. 

4Available at https://www.energycodes.gov/ 

adoption/states. 

proposal, and make arguments before a 

committee of experts assembled by the 

ICC, with the collection of accepted 

proposals forming the revised edition of 

the IECC. More information on the ICC 

code development process is available 

at https://www.iccsafe.org/codes-techsupport/codes/code-developmentprocess/code-development-2/. 

In addition, on January 20, 2021, the 

President issued Executive Order 13990, 

‘‘Protecting Public Health and the 

Environment and Restoring Science to 

Tackle the Climate Crisis.’’ 86 FR 7037 

(Jan. 25, 2021). The Executive Order 

directed DOE to consider publishing for 

notice and comment a proposed rule 

suspending, revising, or rescinding the 

final technical determination regarding 

the 2018 IECC by May 2021. Id. at 86 FR 

7038. In response, DOE has reviewed 

the current 2021 IECC so that DOE’s 

determination under Section 304(b) of 

ECPA reflects the most recent version of 

IECC, and to facilitate State and local 

adoption of the 2021 IECC, which will 

improve energy efficiency in the 

nation’s residential buildings. 

To meet the statutory requirement, 

and to satisfy the directive issued under 

Executive Order 13990, DOE issued a 

preliminary determination and 

published supporting analysis to 

quantify the expected energy savings 

associated with the 2021 IECC relative 

to the previous 2018 IECC version. 

Notice of this preliminary analysis was 

published in the Federal Register on 

May 16, 2021 (86 FR 26710), and is 

available at: https://

www.regulations.gov/document/EERE2021-BT-DET-0010-0001. 

II. Public Participation 

In a May 16, 2021 Federal Register 

notice, DOE requested public comments 

on its preliminary analysis of the 2021 

IECC. (86 FR 26710) DOE received four 

public comments, all of which DOE 

considered in arriving at its final 

determination. DOE has now issued the 

final analysis of the expected energy 

savings associated with the 2021 IECC 

as compared to the 2018 IECC. A 

summary of public comments received, 

and DOE responses, is included in 

Appendix A of this Notice. The final 

analysis is available at: https://

www.energycodes.gov/development/ 

determinations. 

III. Determination Statement 

Residential buildings meeting the 

2021 IECC (compared to the previous 

2018 edition) are expected to incur the 

following savings on a weighted 

national average basis: 

• 9.38 percent site energy savings 

• 8.79 percent source energy savings 

• 8.66 percent energy cost savings 

DOE has rendered the conclusion that 

the 2021 IECC will improve energy 

efficiency in residential buildings, and, 

therefore, receives an affirmative 

determination under Section 304(a) of 

ECPA. States can experience significant 

benefits by updating their codes to 

reflect current construction standards, a 

total estimated $74.61 billion in energy 

cost savings and 424.20 MMT of 

avoided CO2 emissions in residential 

buildings (cumulative 2010 through 

2040), or $3.24 billion in annual energy 

cost savings and 18.50 MMT in annual 

avoided CO2 emissions (annually by 

2030). These benefits, including 

emissions reductions, are estimated in a 

revised 2021 interim report addressing 

building code impacts.1 Though not 

quantified in the interim report, there 

may also be costs to regulated entities as 

a result of updated residential building 

codes. 

IV. State Certification 

Upon publication of this affirmative 

determination, each State is required to 

review the provisions of its residential 

building code regarding energy 

efficiency, and determine whether it is 

appropriate for such State to revise its 

building code to meet or exceed the 

energy efficiency provisions of the 2021 

IECC. (42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(5)(B)) This 

action must be made not later than two 

years from the date of publication of a 

Notice of Determination, unless an 

extension is provided. 

State Review and Update 

The State determination must be: (1) 

Made after public notice and hearing; 

(2) in writing; (3) based upon findings 

and upon the evidence presented at the 

hearing; and (4) made available to the 

public. (42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(2)) States 

have discretion with regard to the 

hearing procedures they use, subject to 

providing an adequate opportunity for 

members of the public to be heard and 

to present relevant information. The 

Department recommends publication of 

any notice of public hearing through 

appropriate and prominent media 

outlets, such as in a newspaper of 

general circulation. States should also 

be aware that this determination does 

not apply to IECC chapters specific to 

nonresidential buildings, as defined in 

the IECC. Therefore, States must certify 

their evaluations of their State building 

codes for residential buildings with 

respect to all provisions of the IECC, 

except for those chapters not affecting 

residential buildings. DOE 

determinations regarding earlier 

editions of the IECC are available on the 

DOE Building Energy Codes Program 

website.2 Further national and State 

analysis is also available.3

State Certification Statements 

State certifications are to be sent to 

the address provided in the ADDRESSES

section, or may be submitted to 

BuildingEnergyCodes@ee.doe.gov, and 

must be submitted in accordance with 

the deadline identified in the DATES

section. If a State makes a determination 

that it is not appropriate to revise the 

energy efficiency provisions of its 

residential building code, the State must 

submit to the Secretary, in writing, the 

reasons for this determination, which 

shall be made available to the public. 

(42 U.S.C. 6833(a)(4)) 

The DOE Building Energy Codes 

Program tracks and reports State code 

adoption and certifications.4 Once a 

State has adopted an updated 

residential code, DOE typically provides 

software, training, and support for the 

new code, as long as the new code is 

based on the national model code (i.e., 

the 2021 IECC). DOE has issued 

previous guidance on how it intends to 

respond to technical assistance requests 

related to implementation resources, 

such as building energy code 

compliance software. (79 FR 15112) 

DOE is directed to provide incentive 

funding to States to implement the 

requirements of Section 304, and to 

improve and implement State 

residential and commercial building 

energy efficiency codes, including 

increasing and verifying compliance 

with such codes. (See 42 U.S.C. 6833(e)) 

Some States develop their own codes 

that are only loosely related to the 

national model codes, and DOE does not 

typically provide technical support for 

those codes. DOE does not prescribe 

how each State adopts and enforces its 

energy codes. 

Requests for Extensions 

Section 304(c) of ECPA requires that 

the Secretary permit an extension of the 

deadline for complying with the 

certification requirements described 

previously, if a State can demonstrate 

that it has made a good faith effort to 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Notices 40531 

5REScheck is a software tool developed and 

maintained by DOE for the purpose of verifying 

compliance in residential buildings. See https://

www.energycodes.gov/rescheck. 

comply with such requirements, and 

that it has made significant progress 

toward meeting its certification 

obligations. (42 U.S.C. 6833(c)) Such 

demonstrations could include one or 

both of the following: (1) A substantive 

plan for response to the requirements 

stated in Section 304; or (2) a statement 

that the State has appropriated or 

requested funds (within State funding 

procedures) to implement a plan that 

would respond to the requirements of 

Section 304 of ECPA. This list is not 

exhaustive. Requests are to be sent to 

the address provided in the ADDRESSES

section, or may be submitted to 

BuildingEnergyCodes@ee.doe.gov. 

Appendix A 

DOE accepted public comments on the 

Notice of Preliminary Determination for the 

2021 IECC until June 16, 2021, and received 

submissions from a total of 4 commenters. 

Responsive public comments and associated 

DOE answers are described as follows. DOE 

received comments on its preliminary 

determination and supporting analysis of the 

2021 IECC from the following stakeholders: 

• North American Insulation Manufacturers 

Association (NAIMA) 

• Responsible Energy Code Alliance (RECA) 

• Edison Electric Institute (EEI) 

• Air-Conditioning, Heating and 

Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) 

The comments are summarized as follows 

and are available at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2021- 

BT-DET-0010-0001/comment. DOE 

responded to all comments received. Several 

issues raised by commenters are distinct from 

the energy efficiency analysis DOE has 

undertaken pursuant to its statutory 

obligations. These include the social cost of 

carbon, life-cycle cost, and cost effectiveness; 

among these issues, social cost of carbon 

garnered the most attention from commenters 

and is therefore emphasized in the responses 

below. 

North American Insulation Manufacturers 

Association (NAIMA) 

Comment: NAIMA requested that DOE use 

the updated climate zone designations in the 

2021 IECC and not 2018 IECC. DOE’s 

preliminary analysis appears to leave out 

impact of the 2021 IECC climate zone 

designations in numerous counties across the 

United States. This shortfall could lead to an 

overestimation of the energy savings 

associated with the 2021 IECC. 

DOE Response: DOE acknowledges that the 

residential provisions of the 2021 IECC 

incorporate several administrative changes 

introduced by the 2013 edition of ASHRAE 

Standard 169, Climatic Data for Building 

Design Standards (ASHRAE 2013a). 

ASHRAE 169–2013 redefined climate zones 

and moisture regimes based on recent 

weather data. As a result, a number of U.S. 

counties were reassigned to different zones/ 

regimes, and a new, extremely hot Climate 

Zone 0 was added. (The addition of Climate 

Zone 0 has no impact on DOE’s analysis, 

since it does not occur in the U.S.) 

Approximately 400 U.S. counties out of more 

than 3,000 were reassigned, most to warmer 

climate zones. However, the reassignment of 

localities is considered an administrative 

action, based on long-established definitions 

of heating degree days and cooling degree 

days, and is handled consistently with how 

similar climate zone updates have been 

handled by previous DOE model energy code 

determinations. DOE also notes that the 

reassignment of climate zones is expected to 

occur in the future, based on updated 

weather and climate data, and associated 

updates to ASHRAE Standard 169. 

Comment: NAIMA requested that DOE 

produce the equivalent cost-effectiveness 

document for the 2021 IECC as rapidly as 

possible after the publication of the final 

2021 IECC determination. Additionally, 

NAIMA requested that DOE perform this 

analysis with a variety of down payment 

amounts to show cost-effectiveness with 

typical range of loans—a 0% down loan, a 

10% down loan, and a 20% down loan. 

DOE Response: In making its 

determination, DOE’s directive under ECPA 

is to assess whether updated editions of the 

2021 IECC would improve energy efficiency 

in residential buildings. Concepts such as 

life-cycle cost and cost effectiveness 

represent economic analysis and are 

therefore unique from energy efficiency 

analysis. However, DOE recognizes the value 

of such analysis in informing State and local 

decisions surrounding code review and 

update processes, as well as design decisions 

associated with specific buildings and 

systems. Distinct from its determination 

directive under ECPA, DOE provides a 

variety of additional analysis, including costeffectiveness analysis. The established DOE 

methodology is currently designed around a 

single typical home mortgage scenario, and 

not multiple down payment scenarios, as 

requested by NAIMA. However, DOE will 

consider expanding its analysis in the future 

to further study a range of financing 

scenarios, including those experienced by 

low and moderate income (LMI) households. 

Responsible Energy Codes Alliance (RECA) 

Comment: RECA’s first comment 

recommended that the DOE take actions to 

encourage, and provide additional support 

for, States and cities to adopt and implement 

the 2021 IECC in the months and years 

ahead. 

DOE response: DOE is directed under 

ECPA to provide technical assistance 

supporting the implementation of building 

energy codes. Consistent with this directive, 

DOE intends to continue providing robust 

technical assistance supporting State and 

local implementation of buildings energy 

codes. DOE recognizes the importance of 

supporting the States and local governments 

who ultimately adopt and implement codes, 

as well as the wide range of industry 

stakeholders who rely upon energy codes and 

strive to achieve compliance in practice. 

Comment: RECA’s second comment stated 

that RECA agrees with and supports the 

methodology and conclusion in the 

preliminary analysis. 

DOE response: DOE appreciates the 

support. 

Comment: RECA’s third comment 

recommended that DOE should implement 

the 2021 IECC into REScheck. 

DOE response: DOE intends to support the 

implementation of the 2021 IECC into 

REScheck in the future. 

Comment: RECA’s fourth comment 

recommended that DOE remove pre-2015 

IECC versions from REScheck. 

DOE response: In maintaining its 

compliance resources, such as the REScheck 

software 5, DOE typically supports the three 

most recent editions of the model codes. (79 

FR 15112) Following the current 

determination, this is anticipated to include 

the 2021, 2018 and 2015 editions of the IECC. 

DOE intends to maintain consistency with 

this approach. 

Comment: RECA’s fifth comment 

recommended that DOE provide costeffectiveness analysis. 

DOE response: As outlined in previous 

responses, DOE notes that the current 

determination is focused on whether the 

2021 IECC would improve energy efficiency 

in residential buildings. However, DOE 

recognizes the value of additional forms of 

technical analysis supporting building energy 

codes, and intends to continue to provide 

both national and State-level costeffectiveness analysis of the 2021 IECC in the 

future. 

Comment: RECA’s sixth comment 

recommended that DOE provide State-level 

energy and cost analyses. 

DOE response: Consistent with the 

previous comment response, DOE intends to 

provide State-level energy and cost analyses 

in the future. 

Comment: RECA’s seventh comment 

recommended that DOE provide 

implementation support for the 2021 IECC. 

DOE response: Consistent with previous 

comment responses, DOE intends to continue 

providing robust support for States and local 

governments implementing building energy 

codes. DOE intends to provide additional 

resources supporting the 2021 IECC 

implementation in the future. 

Edison Electric Institute (EEI) 

Comment: EEI’s first comment stated that 

the EPA greenhouse gas equivalencies 

calculator overstates the emissions impact. 

DOE response: As outlined in previous 

responses, DOE notes that the current 

determination is focused solely on whether 

the revised Standard would improve energy 

efficiency in residential buildings, and CO2

savings were not considered as part of DOE’s 

ultimate determination of whether the 

revised Standard will improve energy 

efficiency. DOE is reporting estimated CO2

savings only because it recognizes the value 

of additional forms of technical analysis 

supporting State implementation of building 

energy codes, including emissions analyses. 

DOE relies on greenhouse gas emission 

coefficients established by the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) in estimating 

current year CO2 savings. EPA’s emission 

coefficients are designed to reflect marginal 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
40532 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Notices 

6The E.O. instructs the IWG to undertake a fuller 

update of the SC–GHG estimates by January 2022. 

7The social cost of greenhouse gases (SC–GHG) 

is the monetary value of the net harm to society 

associated with adding a small amount of that GHG 

to the atmosphere in a given year and, therefore, 

should reflect the societal value of reducing 

emissions of the gas in question by one metric ton. 

The marginal estimate of social costs will differ by 

the type of greenhouse gas (such as carbon dioxide, 

methane, and nitrous oxide) and by the year in 

which the emissions change occurs. The estimates 

of the social cost of carbon (SC–CO2), social cost of 

methane (SC–CH4), and social cost of nitrous oxide 

(SC–N2O) published in the February 2021 TSD 

allow agencies to understand the social benefits of 

reducing emissions of each of these greenhouse 

gases, or the social costs of increasing such 

emissions, in the policy making process. 

CO2 savings from electricity savings 

occurring on the building site, which DOE 

considers appropriate for estimating and 

communicating the carbon savings stemming 

from an improved energy code. This 

approach is consistent with how DOE has 

performed similar calculations in previous 

determinations. 

Comment: EEI’s second comment 

recommended that DOE’s determination 

should take into account the commitments 

utilities have made to reduce carbon 

emissions. 

DOE response: As outlined in previous 

responses, DOE notes that the current 

determination is focused solely on whether 

the revised Standard would improve energy 

efficiency in residential buildings, and CO2

savings were not considered as part of DOE’s 

ultimate determination of whether the 

revised Standard will improve energy 

efficiency. DOE is reporting estimated CO2

savings only because it recognizes the value 

of additional forms of technical analysis 

supporting State implementation of building 

energy codes, including emissions analyses. 

DOE’s analysis is based on several metrics; 

energy cost, site energy, and source energy. 

In addition, DOE reports carbon emissions on 

a first-year basis. DOE recognizes the 

progress being made by utilities in 

decarbonizing the electric grid, and 

emphasizes that estimates provided in the 

supporting technical analysis are based on 

current emission levels and are subject to 

change in the future. 

Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration 

Institute (AHRI) 

Comment: AHRI, p. 2–5. AHRI commented 

that historically DOE did not estimate 

emission reductions or apply a value to 

emission reductions as part of the results and 

basis for the determination. They further 

stated that including emission reductions or 

their value, including the SC–CO2, as part of 

the basis for determination was outside 

DOE’s authority to consider (42 U.S.C. 

6833(a)(5)), because EPCA is an energy 

conservation statute and excludes 

environmental objectives (see 42 U.S.C. 6312 

which excludes environmental objectives), 

and that DOE does not have the statutory 

authority to consider greenhouse gas 

estimates in determination of residential 

building codes. AHRI opined that the SC– 

CO2 should only be included for rulemakings 

where DOE has clear statutory authority to do 

so and stated that it lacks such statutory 

authority as to building energy codes. 

DOE response: In making its 

determination, DOE’s directive under ECPA 

is to assess whether updated editions of the 

IECC would improve energy efficiency in 

residential buildings. 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A) 

DOE emphasizes that the estimates 

pertaining to CO2 are provided as 

supplemental information only and were not 

considered as part of DOE’s final 

determination, which is based on energy 

efficiency as required under 42 U.S.C. 

6833(5)(A). Climate benefits associated with 

the expected CO2 emissions reductions are 

monetized using estimates of the social cost 

of carbon presented in the Technical Support 

Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, 

and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under 

Executive Order 13990 (IWG 2021). DOE is 

reporting estimates related to CO2 only 

because information on the carbon emissions 

associated with buildings are valued by many 

stakeholders, including States and local 

governments who ultimately implement 

building codes, and who have expressed a 

need for this information. These estimates are 

not considered as part of DOE’s ultimate 

determination of whether the updated IECC 

will improve energy efficiency. 

Comment: AHRI, p. 2, 5. AHRI stated that 

DOE is ignoring clear congressional intent in 

including emissions in the narrowly scoped 

building energy code review defined in the 

statutory text (42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(1)). AHRI 

further stated that congress could have added 

global climate change into a variable to weigh 

in the determination, but did not do so and 

so DOE should not include this in the 

determination. 

DOE Response: See response to previous 

AHRI comment. 

Comment: AHRI, p. 2. AHRI requested that 

DOE remove carbon emissions from the 

determination for building energy codes, 

including the 2021 IECC. 

DOE Response: See response to previous 

AHRI comment. 

Comment: AHRI p. 2. Irrespective of the 

authority consideration, AHRI requested that 

DOE must act to remedy inaccurate 

assumptions and conclusions on the social 

cost of carbon benefits analysis. AHRI opined 

that the benefits claimed from full fuel cycle 

and global impact of emissions and SC–CO2

are speculative and tangential and that these 

are calculated over a time period (100 years) 

that greatly exceeds that used to measure 

economic costs. 

DOE Response: In making its 

determination, DOE’s directive under ECPA 

is to assess whether updated editions of the 

IECC would improve energy efficiency in 

residential buildings. 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A) 

DOE emphasizes that the estimates 

pertaining to CO2 are provided only as 

supplemental information and are not 

considered as part of the final determination, 

which is based on energy efficiency as 

required under 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A). 

In calculating related CO2 impacts, DOE 

used the estimates for the SC–CO2 from the 

most recent update of the Interagency 

Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse 

Gases, United States Government (IWG), from 

‘‘Technical Support Document: Social Cost of 

Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim 

Estimates under Executive Order 13990.’’ 

(February 2021 TSD). DOE has determined 

that the estimates from the February 2021 

TSD, as described more below, are based 

upon sound analysis and provide well 

founded estimates for DOE’s analysis of the 

impacts of CO2 related to the reductions of 

emissions from updating the IECC to the 

2021 edition. 

These SC–CO2 estimates are interim values 

developed under Executive Order (E.O.) 

13990 for use until an improved estimate of 

the impacts of climate change can be 

developed based on the best available science 

and economics. The SC–CO2 estimates used 

in this analysis were developed over many 

years, using a transparent process, peerreviewed methodologies, the best science 

available at the time of that process, and with 

input from the public. Specifically, an 

interagency working group (IWG) that 

included the EPA and other executive branch 

agencies and offices used three integrated 

assessment models (IAMs) to develop the 

SC–CO2 estimates and recommended four 

global values for use in regulatory analyses. 

The SC–CO2 estimates were first released in 

February 2010 and updated in 2013 using 

new versions of each IAM. In 2015, as part 

of the response to public comments received 

to a 2013 solicitation for comments on the 

SC–CO2 estimates, the IWG announced a 

National Academies of Sciences, 

Engineering, and Medicine review of the SC– 

CO2 estimates to offer advice on how to 

approach future updates to ensure that the 

estimates continue to reflect the best 

available science and methodologies. In 

January 2017, the National Academies 

released their final report, Valuing Climate 

Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social 

Cost of Carbon Dioxide, and recommended 

specific criteria for future updates to the SC– 

CO2 estimates, a modeling framework to 

satisfy the specified criteria, and both nearterm updates and longer term research needs 

pertaining to various components of the 

estimation process (National Academies 

2017). On January 20, 2021, President Biden 

issued Executive Order 13990, which 

directed the IWG to ensure that the U.S. 

Government’s (USG) estimates of the social 

cost of carbon and other greenhouse gases 

reflect the best available science and the 

recommendations of the National Academies 

(2017). The IWG was tasked with first 

reviewing the estimates currently used by the 

USG and publishing interim estimates within 

30 days of E.O. 13990 that reflect the full 

impact of GHG emissions, including taking 

global damages into account.6 The interim 

SC–CO2 estimates published in February 

2021 are used here to estimate the climate 

benefits associated with this determination. 

DOE acknowledges that there are a number 

of challenges in attempting to assess the 

incremental economic impacts of CO2

emissions. The science and economic 

understanding of climate change and its 

impacts is improving over time; research 

focused on the assessment of climate 

damages and socioeconomic emissions 

projections is particularly important for 

reducing uncertainty in the calculation of the 

social cost of greenhouse gases (SC–GHG),7


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Notices 40533 

Collectively, these values are referenced as the 

‘‘social cost of greenhouse gases’’ (SC–GHG). 

8See Interagency Working Group on Social Cost 

of Greenhouse Gases, Technical Support Document: 

Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide. 

Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990, 

Washington, DC, February 2021. 

is quantifying and being transparent about 

where key uncertainties in the models 

remain. But contrary to AHRI’s suggestion 

that uncertainty should cause DOE to 

discount or abandon monetization of the 

social benefits of reducing CO2 emissions, as 

IWG has stated, due to a number of sources 

of uncertainty, there is a likelihood that the 

SC–CO2 is an underestimate of the true social 

cost of emissions.8 Despite the limits of both 

quantification and monetization, SC–CO2

estimates can be useful in estimating the 

social benefits of reducing CO2 emissions. As 

a result, DOE has used the IWG’s SC–CO2

estimates in monetizing the social benefits of 

reducing CO2 emissions. However, as 

discussed in previous comments, DOE’s SC– 

CO2 analysis using these estimates was not 

considered in DOE’s ultimate determination 

of whether the 2021 IECC Standard will 

improve energy efficiency. 

Comment: AHRI p. 2,3. As part of the 

rationale for not including SC–CO2, AHRI 

further commented that DOE has 

acknowledged the uncertainty of SC–CO2

estimates and stated that these are both 

provisional and revisable. Further, they 

noted that the interagency working group 

developing the SC–CO2 noted that the 

underlying models were imperfect and 

incomplete and notes that the 

intergovernmental panel on climate change 

(IPCC) which the IWG relied on also stated 

in 2013 that no best estimate for equilibrium 

climate sensitivity could then be given 

because of the lack of agreement on values 

across assessed lines of evidence and studies. 

DOE Response: In making its 

determination, DOE’s directive under ECPA 

is to assess whether updated editions of the 

IECC would improve energy efficiency in 

residential buildings. 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A) 

DOE emphasizes that the estimates 

pertaining to CO2 are provided only as 

supplemental information and are not 

considered as part of the final determination, 

which is based on energy efficiency as 

required under 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A). 

As noted above, DOE determined that the 

estimates from the February 2021 TSD are 

based upon sound analysis and provide well 

founded estimates for DOE’s analysis of the 

impacts of CO2 related to the reductions of 

emissions from updating the 90.1 Standard to 

the 2019 edition. As explained in the 

February 2021 TSD and while the IWG works 

to assess how best to incorporate the latest, 

peer reviewed science to develop an updated 

set of SC–GHG estimates, the IWG has 

determined that it is appropriate for agencies 

to revert to the same set of four values drawn 

from the SC–GHG distributions based on 

three discount rates as were used in 

regulatory analyses between 2010 and 2016 

and subject to public comment. For each 

discount rate, the IWG combined the 

distributions across models and 

socioeconomic emissions scenarios (applying 

equal weight to each) and then selected a set 

of four values for use in benefit-cost analyses: 

An average value resulting from the model 

runs for each of three discount rates (2.5%, 

3%, and 5%), plus a fourth value, selected 

as the 95th percentile of estimates based on 

a 3 percent discount rate. The fourth value 

was included to provide information on 

potentially higher-than-expected economic 

impacts from climate change, conditional on 

the 3% estimate of the discount rate. As 

explained in the February 2021 TSD, this 

update reflects the immediate need to have 

an operational SC–GHG for use in regulatory 

benefit-cost analyses and other applications 

that was developed using a transparent 

process, peer-reviewed methodologies, and 

the science available at the time of that 

process. Those estimates were subject to 

public comment in the context of dozens of 

proposed rulemakings as well as in a 

dedicated public comment period in 2013. 

However, as discussed in previous 

comments, DOE’s SC–CO2 analysis using 

these estimates was not considered in DOE’s 

ultimate determination of whether the 2021 

IECC Standard will improve energy 

efficiency. 

Comment: AHRI, p. 3,5. AHRI commented 

that EPCA’s focus is on benefits accruing 

with this nation, hence incorporation of SC– 

CO2 at the global level is beyond the scope 

and authority of DOE. See 42 U.S.C. 

6833(a)(1–5). They further noted that EPCA 

originally arose out of the 1970’s oil embargo 

and that nothing in the subsequent 

amendments suggests a different statutory 

focus other than improving the energy 

economic within the United States. AHRI 

notes that DOE analyzes expected national 

[domestic] energy savings, but does not scale 

back reported SC–CO2 calculations to reflect 

domestic impacts only. 

DOE Response: In making its 

determination, DOE’s directive under ECPA 

is to assess whether updated editions of the 

IECC would improve energy efficiency in 

residential buildings. 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A) 

DOE emphasizes that the estimates 

pertaining to CO2 are provided only as 

supplemental information and are not 

considered as part of the final determination, 

which is based on energy efficiency as 

required under 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A). 

As to the use of a SC–CO2 value that 

includes impacts outside the boundaries of 

the United States, the February 2021 TSD 

provides a complete discussion of the IWG’s 

initial review conducted under E.O. 13990. 

In particular, the IWG found that a global 

perspective is essential for SC–GHG 

estimates because climate impacts occurring 

outside U.S. borders can directly (and 

indirectly affect the welfare of U.S. citizens 

and residents. Thus, U.S. interests are 

affected by the climate impacts that occur 

outside U.S. borders. Examples of affected 

interests include: Direct effects on U.S. 

citizens and assets located abroad, 

international trade, and tourism, and 

spillover pathways such as economic and 

political destabilization and global migration. 

In addition, assessing the benefits of U.S. 

GHG mitigation activities requires 

consideration of how those actions may affect 

mitigation activities by other countries, as 

those international mitigation actions will 

provide a benefit to U.S. citizens and 

residents by mitigating climate impacts that 

affect U.S. citizens and residents. Therefore, 

in this analysis DOE centers attention on a 

global measure of SC–GHG. 

As noted above, DOE determined that the 

estimates from the February 2021 TSD are 

based upon sound analysis, and therefore, in 

analyzing the impacts of CO2 related to the 

reductions of emissions from updating the 

90.1 Standard to the 2019 edition, DOE has 

focused on a global measure of SC–CO2. As 

noted in the February 2021 TSD, the IWG 

will continue to review developments in the 

literature, including more robust 

methodologies for estimating SC–GHG values 

based on purely domestic damages, and 

explore ways to better inform the public of 

the full range of carbon impacts, both global 

and domestic. As a member of the IWG, DOE 

will likewise continue to follow 

developments in the literature pertaining to 

this issue. However, as discussed in previous 

comments, DOE’s SC–CO2 analysis using 

these estimates was not considered in DOE’s 

ultimate determination of whether the 2021 

IECC Standard will improve energy 

efficiency. 

Comment: AHRI, p.3,4. AHRI stated that 

DOE wrongly assumes that SC–CO2 values 

increase over time in real dollars and states 

that this is contrary to ‘‘historical experience 

and to economic development science’’ and 

that the more economic development that 

occurs, the more adaptation and mitigation 

efforts a population living in a growing 

economy can afford to undertake (AHRI cites 

the IWG indicating that developed countries 

can eliminate 90% of the economic impacts 

and developing countries could eventually 

eliminate 50% of the economic impacts of 

climate change). They comment that they see 

no indication that DOE considered this 

separately. 

DOE Response: In making its 

determination, DOE’s directive under ECPA 

is to assess whether updated editions of 

Standard 90.1 would improve energy 

efficiency in commercial buildings. 42 U.S.C. 

6833(b)(2)(A) DOE emphasizes that the 

estimates pertaining to CO2 are provided only 

as supplemental information and are not 

considered as part of the final determination, 

which is based on energy efficiency as 

required under 42 U.S.C. 6833(b)(2)(A). 

The model scenarios reported by the IWG 

demonstrate that the damage assessments 

and corresponding valuation (SC–CO2), 

adjusted for inflation, increase through time. 

As explained in the February 2021 TSD, 

‘‘[t]he SC-[CO2] estimates increase over time 

within the models—i.e., the societal harm 

from one metric ton emitted in 2030 is higher 

than the harm caused by one metric ton 

emitted in 2025—because future emissions 

produce larger incremental damages as 

physical and economic systems become more 

stressed in response to greater climatic 

change, and because GDP is growing over 

time and many damage categories are 

modeled as proportional to GDP. As noted 

above, DOE determined that the estimates 

from the February 2021 TSD are based upon 

sound analysis and provide well founded 

estimates for DOE’s analysis of the impacts 

of CO2 related to the reductions of emissions 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
40534 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 28, 2021 / Notices 

from updating the 90.1 Standard to the 2019 

edition in its building codes impact analysis. 

Accordingly, DOE incorporated the IWG’s 

consideration in its analysis. However, as 

discussed in previous comments, DOE’s SC– 

CO2 analysis using these estimates was not 

considered in DOE’s ultimate determination 

of whether the 2021 IECC Standard will 

improve energy efficiency. 

Comment: AHRI, p. 4. AHRI argued that it 

is arbitrary and capricious to use different 

timeframes and assumptions for costs and 

benefits and notes that DOE must clarify 

precisely why and how it believes it has 

statutory authority under 42 U.S.C. 6833(a) to 

consider SC–CO2 issues and cites why such 

action is legally arbitrary without sufficient 

documented reason for treating similar 

situations differently. AHRI notes that DOE, 

in clarifying why it believes it has such 

authority, can establish how it is acting 

consistently in terms of the analysis of 

benefits. 

DOE Response: See previous response to 

AHRI comment on the issue of authority. On 

the issue of costs and benefits, DOE 

reemphasizes that its determination analysis 

is not assessing the costs and benefits 

associated with the updated 2021 IECC, that 

the determination is solely based on energy 

efficiency, and that the reported carbon 

emissions are reported only as supplemental 

information for the benefit of interested 

parties and in support of the directives of 

Executive Order 12866. To clarify the issue 

of timeframe, the emission estimates are 

based on one year (i.e., the annual energy 

consumption estimated via the energy 

efficiency analysis). However, the step of 

projecting the associated CO2 impacts 

captures the longer-term impact of those 

single-year emissions, as they persist in the 

atmosphere (and drive the damage impacts 

over the time they persist), which is then 

discounted to present value for the year 

when the emissions occur. DOE does not find 

an economic inconsistency in this approach 

to reporting emission benefits. Such a 

calculation is similar to life-cycle analysis, 

for instance, which is performed in a similar 

fashion, where a single year event occurs 

(e.g., a purchase of more efficient 

equipment), but the energy savings are 

calculated over the time they exist (e.g., the 

life of the equipment), and discounted back 

to the present value to reflect an overall lifecycle cost. DOE’s reporting here of 

discounted damage impacts is consistent 

with that general approach. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on July 19, 2021, by 

Kelly Speakes-Backman, Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary and Acting 

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 July 22, 

2021. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2021–15969 Filed 7–27–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[Case Number 2021–001; EERE–2021–BT– 

WAV–0001] 

Energy Conservation Program: 

Notification of Petition for Waiver of 

Goodman Manufacturing Company, 

L.P. From the Department of Energy 

Central Air Conditioners and Heat 

Pumps Test Procedure and 

Notification of Grant of Interim Waiver 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notification of petition for 

waiver and grant of an interim waiver; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: This notification announces 

receipt of and publishes a petition for 

waiver and interim waiver from 

Goodman Manufacturing Company, L.P. 

(‘‘Goodman’’) which seeks a waiver 

from the U.S. Department of Energy 

(‘‘DOE’’) test procedure used for 

determining the efficiency of specified 

central air conditioner (‘‘CAC’’) and heat 

pump (‘‘HP’’) basic models. DOE also 

gives notification of an Interim Waiver 

Order that requires Goodman to test and 

rate specified CAC and HP basic models 

in accordance with the alternate test 

procedure set forth in the Interim 

Waiver Order. DOE solicits comments, 

data, and information concerning 

Goodman’s petition and its suggested 

alternate test procedure to inform DOE’s 

final decision on Goodman’s waiver 

request. 

DATES: The Interim Waiver Order is 

effective on July 28, 2021. Written 

comments and information are 

requested and will be accepted on or 

before August 27, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

encouraged to submit comments using 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Alternatively, interested persons may 

submit comments by email to the 

following address: 

Goodman2021WAV0001@ee.doe.gov. 

Include case number ‘‘2021–001’’ and 

Docket number ‘‘EERE–2021–BT–WAV– 

0001’’ in the subject line of the message. 

Submit electronic comments in 

WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or 

ASCII file format, and avoid the use of 

special characters or any form of 

encryption. 

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 disease 2019 

(‘‘COVID–19’’) pandemic. DOE is 

currently accepting only electronic 

submissions at this time. 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. 

No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be 

accepted. For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on this process, see the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: The docket, which includes 

Federal Register notices, comments, 

and other supporting documents/ 

materials, is available for review at 

https://www.regulations.gov. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the https://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 

https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D= 

EERE-2021-BT-WAV-0001. The docket 

web page contains instruction on how to 

access all documents, including public 

comments, in the docket. See the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

information on how to submit 

comments through https://

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Lucy deButts, 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. Email: 

AS_Waiver_Request@ee.doe.gov. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES