[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 115 (Thursday, June 13, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50205-50218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-12893]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 115 / Thursday, June 13, 2024 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 50205]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[EERE-2017-BT-STD-0003]
RIN 1904-AF56
Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for
Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective and compliance
dates; technical correction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') published a direct
final rule to establish new energy conservation standards for
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers in the Federal
Register on January 17, 2024. DOE has determined that the comments
received in response to the direct final rule do not provide a
reasonable basis for withdrawing the direct final rule. Therefore, DOE
provides this document confirming the effective and compliance dates of
those standards. This document also corrects an error in the amended
regulatory text as it appeared in the direct final rule published on
January 17, 2024.
DATES: The technical correction in this document is effective June 13,
2024.
The effective date of May 16, 2024, for the direct final rule
published January 17, 2024 (89 FR 3026) is confirmed. Compliance with
the standards established in the direct final rule will be required on
either January 31, 2029, or January 31, 2030, depending on product
class.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this rulemaking, which includes Federal
Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts,
comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for
review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed
in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in
the index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt
from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0003. The docket web page contains instructions on how
to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.
For further information on how to submit a comment or review other
public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or by email:
[email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Lucas Adin, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 287-5904. Email: [email protected].
Mr. Matthew Schneider, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4798. Email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, Public Law 94-163, as
amended (``EPCA''),\1\ authorizes DOE to issue a direct final rule
establishing an energy conservation standard for a product on receipt
of a statement submitted jointly by interested persons that are fairly
representative of relevant points of view (including representatives of
manufacturers of covered products, States, and efficiency advocates),
as determined by the Secretary, that contains recommendations with
respect to an energy or water conservation standard that are in
accordance with the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or 42 U.S.C.
6313(a)(6)(B), as applicable. (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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), which reflect the last statutory amendments that impact
Parts A and A-1 of EPCA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The direct final rule must be published simultaneously with a
notice of proposed rulemaking (``NOPR'') that proposes an energy or
water conservation standard that is identical to the standard
established in the direct final rule, and DOE must provide a public
comment period of at least 110 days on this proposal. (42 U.S.C.
6295(p)(4)(A)-(B)) Not later than 120 days after issuance of the direct
final rule, DOE shall withdraw the direct final rule if (1) DOE
receives one or more adverse public comments relating to the direct
final rule or any alternative joint recommendation; and (2) based on
the rulemaking record relating to the direct final rule, DOE determines
that such adverse public comments or alternative joint recommendation
may provide a reasonable basis for withdrawing the direct final rule.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)(C)) If DOE makes such a determination, DOE must
proceed with the NOPR published simultaneously with the direct final
rule and publish in the Federal Register the reasons why the direct
final rule was withdrawn. (Id.)
After review of comments received, DOE has determined that it did
receive adverse comments on the direct final rule. However, based on
the rulemaking record, the comments did not provide a reasonable basis
for withdrawing the direct final rule under the provisions in 42 U.S.C.
6295(p)(4)(C). As such, DOE did not withdraw this direct final rule and
allowed it to become effective. Although not required under EPCA, where
DOE does not withdraw a direct final rule, DOE publishes a summary of
the comments received during the 110-day comment period and its
responses to those comments. This document contains such a summary, as
well as DOE's responses to the comments.
II. Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers Direct Final
Rule
A. Background
In a final rule published on September 15, 2011 (``September 2011
Final Rule''), DOE prescribed the current energy conservation standards
for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers manufactured on
and after September 15, 2014. 76 FR 57516. These standards are set
forth in DOE's regulations at 10 CFR 430.32(a).
[[Page 50206]]
On November 15, 2019, DOE published a request for information
(``RFI'') to collect data and information to help DOE determine whether
any new or amended standards for consumer refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, and freezers would result in a significant amount of
additional energy savings and whether those standards would be
technologically feasible and economically justified. 84 FR 62470
(``November 2019 RFI'').
DOE then published a notice of public meeting and availability of
the preliminary technical support document (``TSD'') on October 15,
2021 (``October 2021 Preliminary Analysis''). 86 FR 57378. DOE held a
public meeting on December 1, 2021, to discuss and receive comments on
the preliminary TSD. The preliminary TSD that presented the methodology
and results of the preliminary analysis is available at:
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0003-0021.
On February 27, 2023, DOE published a NOPR and announced a public
webinar to respond to initial comments (``February 2023 NOPR''). 88 FR
12452. In the February 2023 NOPR, DOE updated its analysis and proposed
standards based on comments received following the publication of the
October 2021 Preliminary Analysis. DOE held a public webinar on April
11, 2023, to discuss and receive comments on the February 2023 NOPR and
February 2023 NOPR TSD. The February 2023 NOPR TSD is available at:
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0003-0045.
On September 25, 2023, DOE received a joint statement (i.e., the
Joint Agreement) recommending standards for refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers that was submitted by groups
representing manufacturers, energy and environmental advocates,
consumer groups, and a utility.\2\ In addition to the recommended
standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the
Joint Agreement also included separate recommendations for several
other covered products.\3\ The Joint Agreement recommended amended
standard levels for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers
as presented in Table II.1 as follows. Details of the Joint Agreement
recommendations for other products are provided in the Joint Agreement
posted in the docket.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The signatories to the Joint Agreement include Association
of Home Appliance Manufacturers, American Council for an Energy-
Efficient Economy, Alliance for Water Efficiency, Appliance
Standards Awareness Project, Consumer Federation of America,
Consumer Reports, Earthjustice, National Consumer Law Center,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance, and Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Members of AHAM's
Major Appliance Division that manufacture the affected products
include: Alliance Laundry Systems, LLC; Asko Appliances AB; Beko US
Inc.; Brown Stove Works, Inc.; BSH; Danby Products, Ltd.; Electrolux
Home Products, Inc.; Elicamex S.A. de C.V.; Faber; Fotile America;
GEA, a Haier Company; L'Atelier Paris Haute Design LLG; LG
Electronics USA ; Liebherr USA, Co.; Midea America Corp.; Miele,
Inc.; Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration Systems (PAPRSA)
Corporation of America; Perlick Corporation; Samsung; Sharp
Electronics Corporation; Smeg S.p.A; Sub-Zero Group, Inc.; The
Middle by Corporation; U-Line Corporation; Viking Range, LLC; and
Whirlpool.
\3\ The Joint Agreement contained recommendations for 6 covered
products: refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers;
clothes washers; clothes dryers; dishwashers; cooking products; and
miscellaneous refrigeration products.
\4\ The term sheet is available in the docket at:
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0003-0103.
Table II.1--Recommended Amended Energy Conservation Standards for
Residential Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level (based
Product class on AV (ft\3\)) Compliance date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Refrigerator-freezers and 6.79AV + 191.3. January 31, 2030.
refrigerators other than all-
refrigerators with manual
defrost.
1A. All-refrigerators--manual 5.77AV + 164.6. January 31, 2030.
defrost.
2. Refrigerator-freezers-- (6.79AV + January 31, 2030.
partial automatic defrost. 191.3) * K2.
3. Refrigerator-freezers-- 6.86AV + 198.6 January 31, 2030.
automatic defrost with top- + 28I.
mounted freezer.
3A. All-refrigerators-- (6.01AV + January 31, 2030.
automatic defrost. 171.4) * K3A.
4. Refrigerator-freezers-- 7.28AV + 254.9. January 31, 2030.
automatic defrost with side-
mounted freezer.
5. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.61AV +272.6) January 31, 2030.
automatic defrost with * K5 + 28I.
bottom-mounted freezer.
5A. Refrigerator-freezer-- (7.76AV + January 31, 2029.
automatic defrost with 351.9) * K5A.
bottom-mounted freezer with
through-the-door ice service.
6. Refrigerator-freezers-- 7.14AV + 280.0. January 31, 2030.
automatic defrost with top-
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
7. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.31AV + January 31, 2030.
automatic defrost with side- 322.5) * K7.
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
8. Upright freezers with 5.57AV + 193.7. January 31, 2029.
manual defrost.
9. Upright freezers with 7.33AV + 194.1 January 31, 2030.
automatic defrost. + 28I.
10. Chest freezers and all 7.29AV + 107.8. January 31, 2029.
other freezers except
compact freezers.
10A. Chest freezers with 10.24AV + 148.1 January 31, 2029.
automatic defrost.
11. Compact refrigerator- 7.68AV + 214.5. January 31, 2029.
freezers and refrigerators
other than all-refrigerators
with manual defrost.
11A. Compact all- 6.66AV + 186.2. January 31, 2029.
refrigerators--manual
defrost.
12. Compact refrigerator- (5.32AV + January 31, 2029.
freezers--partial automatic 302.2) * K12.
defrost.
13. Compact refrigerator- 10.62AV + 305.3 January 31, 2029.
freezers--automatic defrost + 28I.
with top-mounted freezer.
13A. Compact all- (8.25AV + January 31, 2029.
refrigerators--automatic 233.4) * K13A.
defrost.
14. Compact refrigerator- 6.14AV + 411.2 January 31, 2029.
freezers--automatic defrost + 28I.
with side-mounted freezer.
15. Compact refrigerator- 10.62AV + 305.3 January 31, 2029.
freezers--automatic defrost + 28I.
with bottom-mounted freezer.
16. Compact upright freezers 7.35AV + 191.8. January 31, 2029.
with manual defrost.
17. Compact upright freezers 9.15AV + 316.7. January 31, 2029.
with automatic defrost.
18. Compact chest freezers... 7.86AV + 107.8. January 31, 2029.
3-BI. Built-in refrigerator- 8.24AV + 238.4 January 31, 2029.
freezer--automatic defrost + 28I.
with top-mounted freezer.
3A-BI. Built-in All- (7.22AV + ........................
refrigerators--automatic 205.7) * K3ABI.
defrost.
4-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- 8.79AV + 307.4 January 31, 2029.
freezers--automatic defrost + 28I.
with side-mounted freezer.
5-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.65AV + January 31, 2029.
freezers--automatic defrost 309.9) * K5BI
with bottom-mounted freezer. + 28I.
[[Page 50207]]
5A-BI. Built-in refrigerator- (8.21AV + January 31, 2029.
freezer--automatic defrost 370.7) * K5ABI.
with bottom-mounted freezer
with through-the-door ice
service.
7-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.82AV + January 31, 2029.
freezers--automatic defrost 384.1) * K7BI.
with side-mounted freezer.
9-BI. Built-In Upright 9.37AV + 247.9 January 31, 2029.
freezers with automatic + 28I.
defrost.
9A-BI. NEW PRODUCT CLASS: 9.86AV + 288.9. January 31, 2029.
Upright built-in freezer w/
auto defrost and through-
door-ice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft\3\, as determined in
appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.
av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters.
I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product
without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3A) are as
defined in Table I.2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Products without a Products without a transparent door
Door coefficient Products with a transparent door or door-in-door with added external
transparent door with a door-in-door doors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K2............................... N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K3A.............................. 1.10 N/A N/A
K3ABI............................ 1.10 N/A N/A
K13A............................. 1.10 N/A N/A
K4............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K4BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5A.............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-3).
K5ABI............................ 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-3).
K7............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K7BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K9............................... N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K9BI............................. N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K12.............................. N/A N/A 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Nd is the number of external doors.
After carefully considering the recommended energy conservation
standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers in the
Joint Agreement, DOE determined that these recommendations were in
accordance with the statutory requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4) for
the issuance of a direct final rule and published a direct final rule
on January 17, 2024 (``January 2024 Direct Final Rule''). 89 FR 3026.
DOE evaluated whether the Joint Agreement satisfies 42 U.S.C. 6295(o),
as applicable, and found that the recommended standard levels would
result in significant energy savings and are technologically feasible
and economically justified. 89 FR 3026, 3100-3106. Accordingly, DOE
adopted the consensus-recommended efficiency levels for refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers as the new and amended standard
levels in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule. 89 FR 3026, 3107-3108.
These standards, which are expressed as kWh/yr, apply to product
classes listed in Table II.2 and Table II.3 and manufactured in, or
imported into, the United States starting on January 31, 2029 or
January 31, 2030, depending on product class. The January 2024 Direct
Final Rule provides a detailed discussion of DOE's analysis of the
benefits and burdens of the new and amended standards pursuant to the
criteria set forth in EPCA. 89 FR 3026, 3100-3106.
Table II.2--Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers With Corresponding Door Coefficient
Table
[Compliance starting January 31, 2029]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equations for maximum energy use (kWh/
yr)
Product class (``PC'') ---------------------------------------
Based on AV
(ft\3\) Based on av (L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-BI. Built-in refrigerator- 8.24AV + 238.4 + 0.291av + 238.4 +
freezer--automatic defrost with 28I. 28I.
top-mounted freezer.
3A-BI. Built-in All- (7.22AV + 205.7) * (0.255av + 205.7)
refrigerators--automatic K3ABI. * K3ABI.
defrost.
4-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.79AV + 307.4) * (0.310av + 307.4)
freezers--automatic defrost K4BI + 28I. * K4BI + 28I.
with side-mounted freezer.
5-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.65AV + 309.9) * (0.305av + 309.9)
freezers--automatic defrost K5BI + 28I. * K5BI + 28I.
with bottom-mounted freezer.
5A. Refrigerator-freezer-- (7.76AV + 351.9) * (0.274av + 351.9)
automatic defrost with bottom- K5A. * K5A.
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
5A-BI. Built-in refrigerator- (8.21AV + 370.7) * (0.290av + 370.7)
freezer--automatic defrost with K5ABI. * K5ABI.
bottom-mounted freezer with
through-the-door ice service.
[[Page 50208]]
7-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.82AV + 384.1) * (0.311av + 384.1)
freezers--automatic defrost K7BI. * K7BI.
with side-mounted freezer with
through-the-door ice service..
8. Upright freezers with manual 5.57AV + 193.7.... 0.197av + 193.7.
defrost.
9-BI. Built-In Upright freezers (9.37AV + 247.9) * (0.331av + 247.9)
with automatic defrost. K9BI + 28I. * K9BI + 28I.
9A-BI. Built-In Upright freezers 9.86AV + 288.9.... 0.348av + 288.9.
with automatic defrost with
through-the-door ice service.
10. Chest freezers and all other 7.29AV + 107.8.... 0.257av + 107.8.
freezers except compact
freezers.
10A. Chest freezers with 10.24AV + 148.1... 0.362av + 148.1.
automatic defrost.
11. Compact refrigerator- 7.68AV + 214.5.... 0.271av + 214.5.
freezers and refrigerators
other than all-refrigerators
with manual defrost.
11A. Compact all-refrigerators-- 6.66AV + 186.2.... 0.235av + 186.2.
manual defrost.
12. Compact refrigerator- (5.32AV + 302.2) * (0.188av + 302.2)
freezers--partial automatic K12. * K12.
defrost.
13. Compact refrigerator- 10.62AV + 305.3 + 0.375av + 305.3 +
freezers--automatic defrost 28I. 28I.
with top-mounted freezer.
13A. Compact all-refrigerators-- (8.25AV + 233.4) * (0.291av + 233.4)
automatic defrost. K13A. * K13A.
14. Compact refrigerator- 6.14AV + 411.2 + 0.217av + 411.2 +
freezers--automatic defrost 28I. 28I.
with side-mounted freezer.
15. Compact refrigerator- 10.62AV + 305.3 + 0.375av + 305.3 +
freezers--automatic defrost 28I. 28I.
with bottom-mounted freezer.
16. Compact upright freezers 7.35AV + 191.8.... 0.260av + 191.8.
with manual defrost.
17. Compact upright freezers 9.15AV + 316.7.... 0.323av + 316.7.
with automatic defrost.
18. Compact chest freezers...... 7.86AV + 107.8.... 0.278av + 107.8.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft\3\, as determined in
appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.
av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters.
I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product
without an automatic icemaker.
Door Coefficients (e.g., K3ABI) are as defined in the following table
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Products without a Products without a transparent door
Door coefficient Products with a transparent door or door-in-door with added external
transparent door with a door-in-door doors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K3ABI............................ 1.10 1.0 1.0
K4BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5A.............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-3).
K5ABI............................ 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-3).
K7BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K9BI............................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K12.............................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K13A............................. 1.10 1.0 1.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ Nd is the number of external doors.
\2\ The maximum Nd values are 2 for K12, 3 for K9BI, and 5 for all other K values.
Table II.3 Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers With Corresponding Door Coefficient
Table
[Compliance starting January 31, 2030]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equations for maximum energy use (kWh/
yr)
Product class ---------------------------------------
Based on AV
(ft\3\) Based on av (L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Refrigerator-freezers and 6.79AV + 191.3.... 0.240av + 191.3.
refrigerators other than all-
refrigerators with manual
defrost.
1A. All-refrigerators--manual 5.77AV + 164.6.... 0.204av + 164.6.
defrost.
2. Refrigerator-freezers-- (6.79AV + 191.3) * (0.240av + 191.3)
partial automatic defrost. K2. * K2.
3. Refrigerator-freezers-- 6.86AV + 198.6 + 0.242av + 198.6 +
automatic defrost with top- 28I. 28I.
mounted freezer.
3A. All-refrigerators--automatic (6.01AV + 171.4) * (0.212av + 171.4)
defrost. K3A. * K3A.
4. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.28AV + 254.9) * (0.257av + 254.9)
automatic defrost with side- K4 + 28I. * K4 + 28I.
mounted freezer.
5. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.61AV + 272.6) * (0.269av + 272.6)
automatic defrost with bottom- K5 + 28I. * K5 + 28I.
mounted freezer.
6. Refrigerator-freezers-- 7.14AV + 280.0.... 0.252av + 280.0.
automatic defrost with top-
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
[[Page 50209]]
7. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.31AV + 322.5) * (0.258av + 322.5)
automatic defrost with side- K7. * K7.
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
9. Upright freezers with (7.33AV + 194.1) * (0.259av + 194.1)
automatic defrost. K9 + 28I. * K9 + 28I.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft\3\, as determined in
appendices A and B of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.
av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters.
I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product
without an automatic icemaker.
Door Coefficients (e.g., K3A) are as defined in the following table.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Products without a Products without a transparent door
Door coefficient Products with a transparent door or door-in-door with added external
transparent door with a door-in-door doors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K2............................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K4............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K3A.............................. 1.10 1.0 1.0
K5............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K7............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K9............................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ Nd is the number of external doors.
\2\ The maximum Nd values are 2 for K2, and 5 for all other K values.
As required by EPCA, DOE also simultaneously published a NOPR
proposing the identical standard levels contained in the January 2024
Direct Final Rule. 89 FR 2886. DOE considered whether any adverse
comment received during the 110-day comment period following the
publication of the January 2024 Direct Final Rule provided a reasonable
basis for withdrawal of the direct final rule under the provisions in
42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)(C).
III. Comments on the Direct Final Rule
As discussed in section I of this document, not later than 120 days
after publication of a direct final rule, DOE shall withdraw the direct
final rule if (1) DOE receives one or more adverse public comments
relating to the direct final rule or any alternative joint
recommendation; and (2) based on the rulemaking record relating to the
direct final rule, DOE determines that such adverse public comments or
alternative joint recommendation may provide a reasonable basis for
withdrawing the direct final rule. (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)(C)(i))
DOE received comments in response to the January 2024 Direct Final
Rule from the interested parties listed in Table III.1.
Table III.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the January 2024 Direct Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment No. in
Commenter(s) Abbreviation the docket Commenter type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous......................... Anonymous....................... 117-120 Individual.
Association of Home Appliance Joint Commenters................ 121 Manufacturers, Energy and
Manufacturers (AHAM), Appliance Environmental Advocates,
Standards Awareness Project Consumer Groups, and a
(ASAP), et al. Utility.
Montana Office of the Attorney AG of Montana................... 122 State Attorney General.
General.
State of Tennessee Office of the State AGs....................... 123 State Attorney General.
Attorney General.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\5\
The following sections discuss the substantive comments DOE received on
the January 2024 Direct Final Rule as well as DOE's determination that
the comments do not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal of the
direct final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for
information located in the docket of DOE's rulemaking to develop
energy conservation standards for air cleaners. (Docket No. EERE-
2017-BT-STD-0003, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The
references are arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket
ID number, page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. General Comments
In comments submitted in response to the January 2024 Direct Final
Rule, the Joint Commenters, consisting of the parties who submitted the
Joint Agreement, supported the standard levels specified in the January
2024 Direct Final Rule as the standards align with those levels
recommended in the Joint Agreement. (Joint Commenters,
[[Page 50210]]
No. 121 at p. 2) The Joint Commenters also agreed with DOE's findings
that the standards in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule meet EPCA's
requirements of being the maximum levels that are technologically
feasible and economically justified, taking into account the criteria
set forth in 42 U.S.C. 6295(o). (Id. at pp. 2-3) The Joint Commenters
stated that the Joint Agreement was submitted by a group of
stakeholders with fairly representative points of view. (Id. at p. 4)
DOE also received comments from numerous individual commenters who
expressed support for the standards proposed in the DFR. (Anonymous,
No. 117 at p. 1; Anonymous, No. 118 at p. 1; Anonymous, No. 119 at p.
1; Anonymous, No. 120 at p. 1)
The State AGs and the AG of Montana submitted comments opposing the
January 2024 Direct Final Rule. (AG of Montana, No. 122, pp. 1-5; State
AGs, No. 123 at pp. 2-10) However, as discussed in more detail below,
DOE has determined that these comments do not provide a reasonable
basis to withdraw the January 2024 Direct Final Rule.
B. Responses to Previous Stakeholder Comments
The State AGs stated their belief that comments from AHAM and
General Electric in response to the February 2023 NOPR had gone
unanswered in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, specifically those
concerning DOE's supply chain analysis, component availability, and
economic impacts on consumers, particularly low-income households,
which leaves consumers to bear the brunt of regulatory pressure on
manufacturers. (State AGs, No. 123 at pp. 2-3)
In response to the comment from the State AGs that DOE did not
respond in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule to the comments submitted
by signatories to the Joint Agreement and other stakeholders in
response to the February 2023 NOPR, DOE notes that the commenter
misunderstands DOE's direct final rule authority under EPCA. As
discussed in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, DOE was conducting a
rulemaking to consider amending the standards for refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers when the Joint Agreement was
submitted. Id. at 89 FR 3037. After receiving the Joint Agreement, DOE
initiated a separate rulemaking action and subsequently issued the
January 2024 Direct Final Rule after determining that the
recommendations contained in the Joint Agreement were compliant with 42
U.S.C. 6295(o). Id. at 89 FR 3027. The January 2024 Direct Final Rule
is a separate rulemaking, conducted under a different statutory
authority, from DOE's prior rulemaking in the February 2023 NOPR and
DOE has no obligation to consider comments submitted in response to
that prior rulemaking in a different rulemaking.
Even though DOE was not required to consider comments from the
February 2023 NOPR, DOE did in fact consider comments, data and
information obtained through the February 2023 NOPR. This included the
issues that the State AGs asserted DOE ignored in the January 2024
Direct Final Rule. In the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, DOE
specifically addressed concerns related to supply chains and component
availability for vacuum-insulated panels (``VIPs'') and variable-speed
compressors (``VSCs'') by conducting a supply chain analysis. 89 FR
3026, 3049-3051. Based on information provided by relevant
manufacturers of VSCs, DOE believes that significant increases in VSCs
in the U.S. market aligned with the standard levels adopted in the
January 2024 Direct Final Rule are well within the production capacity
of the compressor industry. And based on the information gathered from
relevant VIP manufacturers, DOE expects that VIP production lines can
be quickly scaled up to meet demand of future amended standards within
1 to 2 years depending on the specific VIP design), well within lead
time between publication of amended standards and the compliance date
for those standards. DOE also notes that the longer 5 and 6-year lead
time between publication of the January 2024 Direct Final Rule and the
compliance date provides more time to build production capacity than
the 3-year lead time proposed in the February 2023 NOPR.
Additionally, in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, DOE considered
the impact on low-income households by performing a life-cycle-cost
subgroup analysis for low-income households. Id. at 89 FR 3064-3065.
Notably, consistent with Joint Agreement, in the January 2024 Direct
Final Rule DOE adopted a lower standard level for product class 7
(side-by-side refrigerators, used by 19 percent of low-income
households) than the level proposed in the February 2023 NOPR. DOE
estimated that the lower standard level would result in 0.6% of low-
income households experiencing a net cost due to the standard, compared
with 23% at the proposed level in the February 2023 NOPR. The adopted
standard level for product class 7 in the January 2024 Direct Final
Rule also reduced the estimated incremental increase in purchase price
to $24.39, compared with $100.28 at the proposed standard level in the
February 2023 NOPR.
C. Stakeholder Representation
Under 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4), interested persons that are fairly
representative of relevant points of view (including representatives of
manufacturers of covered products, States, and efficiency advocates),
as determined by DOE, may submit a joint recommendation to the
Department for new or amended energy conservation standards. The State
AGs commented that the parties to the Joint Agreement are not ``fairly
representative of relevant points of view'' as required when
considering a direct final rule. (State AGs, No. 123 at pp. 4-5) The
State AGs stated that many of the groups represented by AHAM, who
signed the Joint Agreement, submitted comments prior to the submission
of the Joint Agreement and those comments were not addressed in the
Joint Agreement or the January 2024 Direct Final Rule. (Id. at p. 3).
The State AGs further stated their belief that AHAM and manufacturers
who previously opposed the February 2023 NOPR but now joined in the
consensus agreement did so due to agency ``arm-twisting.'' (Id. at 5).
The State AGs pointed to the other signatories of the Joint
Agreement, including advocacy groups such as the Alliance for Water
Efficiency, Earthjustice, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, Natural
Resources Defense Council, and National Consumer Law Center, as either
lacking the relevant expertise on consumer refrigeration products,
lacking expertise or failing to consider initial consumer or
manufacturer costs, or failing to conduct their own analysis. (Id. at
p. 4) Additionally, the State AGs noted that many of these groups
failed to address concerns raised during the regulatory process in
their sponsorship of the Joint Agreement. (Id. at p. 5)
The State AGs commented that other groups, although not a part of
the Joint Agreement, provided comments on the February 2023 NOPR with
regards to the proposed standards' impact on the consumers. (Id. at pp.
5-6) The State AGs stated that groups such as the National Apartment
Association and National Multifamily Housing Council expressed concerns
about the February 2023 NOPR's impact on consumer welfare in the form
of increased costs and economic burdens to low-income consumers. (Id.
at p. 6) Additionally, the State AGs stated that many states besides
those party to the Joint Agreement (i.e., Massachusetts, New York, and
California) expressed concern about consumer welfare. (Id.) The State
[[Page 50211]]
AGs contended that a joint statement comprising of fairly
representative points of view requires the concurrence of States across
the ideological spectrum for DOE to proceed with a direct final rule.
(Id.)
The AG of Montana agreed with the comment from the State AGs and
commented that the signatories of the Joint Agreement were a skewed
collection of ideological extremists. (AG of Montana, No. 122 at p. 1)
In response to the comments regarding whether the Joint Agreement
was submitted by persons fairly representative of relevant points of
view, DOE reiterates that 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4) reads, in relevant part,
``[o]n receipt of a statement that is submitted jointly by interested
persons that are fairly representative of relevant points of view
(including representatives of manufacturers of covered products,
States, and efficiency advocates), as determined by the Secretary . .
.'' (42 U.S.C. 6295(p))
As stated in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, DOE determined
that this requirement was met. 89 FR 3026, 3038. The Joint Agreement
included a trade association, AHAM, which represents 20 manufacturers
of the subject covered products--refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers,
and freezers. Id. The Joint Agreement also included environmental and
energy-efficiency advocacy organizations, consumer advocacy
organizations, and a gas and electric utility company. Id.
Additionally, DOE received a letter in support of the Joint Agreement
from the States of New York, California, and Massachusetts (see comment
No. 104). Id. DOE also received a letter in support of the Joint
Agreement from the gas and electric utility, San Diego Gas and
Electric, and the electric utility, Southern California Edison (see
comment No. 107). Id. Each of the listed categories of persons
described in 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4) supported the Joint Agreement.
DOE has ample authority to accept a joint statement in these
circumstances. EPCA does not require that the Joint Agreement be
representative of every point of view. Nor does it require that a
statement be submitted by all interested persons. Rather, it requires a
statement from a sufficient number and diversity of ``interested
persons'' such that the statement is ``fairly representative of
relevant points of view.'' The Joint Agreement presented here is such a
statement, as the Secretary determined.
Contrary to the commenters' suggestion, EPCA does not include any
requirement that ``relevant points of view'' must include politically
opposite points of view. Rather, EPCA ensures a diversity of opinions
and interests by requiring that joint agreements be submitted by
relevant points of view, including representatives of manufacturers,
States, and efficiency advocates. (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)(A))
Moreover, regardless of whether amended energy conservation
standards are recommended as part of a joint agreement or proposed by
DOE, the standards have to satisfy the same criteria in 42 U.S.C.
6295(o). Thus, once DOE has determined that a joint agreement was
submitted by interested persons that are fairly representative of
relevant points of view, DOE then determines whether the joint
agreement satisfies the relevant statutory criteria. As a result, in
evaluating whether comments provide a reasonable basis for withdrawing
a direct final rule, it is the substance of the comments, not the
number of stakeholders that submit statements in favor of, or opposed
to, the joint agreement, that determines whether a rule should be
withdrawn.
Similarly, EPCA does not require that DOE reject a joint statement
merely because non-signatories have differing opinions and interests
than the signatories. Nor does EPCA require that every manufacturer,
industry association, or state who submitted comments on the separate
February 2023 NOPR be party to the Joint Agreement. (State AGs, No. 123
at pp. 6). Finally, there is nothing in this provision of EPCA to
support the interpretation from the State AGs and the AG of Montana
that interested persons who did not raise concerns about a separate
rulemaking or who opposed a separate rulemaking should be excluded from
submitting a joint statement.
DOE also finds meritless the contention that the Joint Agreement
parties are not competent to present a statement for purposes of
section 6295(p). Contrary to the characterizations by the State AGs and
Montana AG, the parties to the Joint Agreement have an established
historical record of participation in DOE rulemakings and have
submitted detailed comments in the past that demonstrate a thorough
understanding of technical, legal, and economic aspects of appliance
standards rulemakings, including factors affecting specific groups such
as low-income households.
In a follow-up letter from the parties to the Joint Agreement, each
organization provided a brief description of its background. American
Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy is a nonprofit research
organization and its independent analysis advances investments,
programs, and behaviors that use energy more effectively and help build
an equitable clean energy future. Alliance for Water Efficiency is a
nonprofit dedicated to efficiency and sustainable use of water that
provides a forum for collaboration around policy, information sharing,
research, education, and stakeholder engagement. Appliance Standards
Awareness Project organizes and leads a broad-based coalition effort
that works to advance new appliance, equipment, and lighting standards
that cut emissions that contribute to climate change and other
environmental and public health harms, save water, and reduce economic
and environmental burdens for low- and moderate-income households. AHAM
represents more than 150 member companies that manufacture 90% of the
major, portable and floor care appliances shipped for sale in the U.S.
The Consumer Federation of America is an association of more than 250
non-profit consumer and cooperative groups that advances the consumer
interest through research, advocacy, and education. Consumer Reports is
a mission-driven, independent, nonprofit member organization that
empowers and informs consumers, incentivize corporations to act
responsibly, and helps policymakers prioritize the rights and interests
of consumers in order to shape a truly consumer-driven marketplace.
Earthjustice is a nonprofit public interest environmental law
organization advocating to advance clean energy and combat climate
change. National Consumer Law Center supports consumer justice and
economic security for low-income and other disadvantaged people in the
U.S. through its expertise in policy analysis and advocacy,
publications, litigation, expert witness services, and training.
National Resources Defense Council is an international nonprofit
environmental organization with expertise from lawyers, scientists, and
other environmental specialists. The Northwest Energy Efficiency
Alliance is a collaboration of 140 utilities and efficiency
organizations working together to advance energy efficiency in the
Northwest on behalf of more than 13 million consumers. PG&E represents
one of the largest combined gas and electric utilities in the Western
U.S., serving over 16 million customers across northern and central
California.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ This document is available in the docket at:
www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0003-0105.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50212]]
Finally, DOE notes that it had no role in requesting that the
parties to the Joint Agreement submit the Joint Agreement or in
negotiating the terms of the Joint Agreement. As noted in the Joint
Agreement itself, the parties accepted the Agreement based on the
totality of the agreement. DOE's participation was limited to
evaluating the joint submission under the criteria set forth in 42
U.S.C. 6295(p).
Therefore, DOE reaffirms its determination that the Joint Agreement
was submitted by interested persons that are fairly representative of
relevant points of view.
D. Formal Rulemaking
The State AGs commented that, given the previous comments submitted
in response to February 2023 NOPR, DOE should use its direct final rule
authority with caution and must return to a formal rulemaking in order
to ensure the representation of diverse viewpoints and address all
concerns raised during the rulemaking process. (State AGs, No. 123 at
pp. 7-10)
In response, DOE notes that there is nothing in EPCA that limits
DOE's direct final rule authority other than that the statement
containing recommended standards must be submitted jointly by
interested persons that are fairly representative of relevant points of
view and that DOE must evaluate whether the recommended standards are
in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295(o). (See 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)) In the
January 2024 Direct Final Rule, DOE determined that Joint Agreement was
submitted jointly by interested persons that are fairly representative
of relevant points of view and the adopted energy conservation
standards as recommended in the Joint Agreement would result in
significant energy savings and are technologically feasible and
economically justified as required under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and provided
supporting analysis. 89 FR 3026, 3038, 3078-3109.
Additionally, DOE notes it followed the procedures in 42 U.S.C.
6295(p)(4) to publish a direct final rule in the Federal Register
simultaneously with a NOPR proposing identical standards and allow 110
days for public comment. See 89 FR 3026; 89 FR 2886. This comment
period provided an ample opportunity for the public to express their
views on the recommended standards. Finally, DOE has met all the
requirements under its direct rule authority and, therefore, formal
rulemaking procedures are not necessary.\7\ Therefore, DOE has
determined that the comment provided by the State AGs does not provide
a reasonable basis for withdrawal of the January 2024 Direct Final
Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ DOE utilizes informal or legislative rulemaking when it
promulgates rules under EPCA (i.e., notice and comment rulemaking
under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Consumer Preference
The AG of Montana stated that DOE acknowledges consumer preference
but disregards it in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule. (AG of
Montana, No. 122, p. 2)
With respect to the comment from the AG of Montana, DOE did not
disregard consumer preference but rather noted in the January 2024
Direct Final Rule that the economics literature provides a wide-ranging
discussion of how consumers trade off upfront costs and energy savings
in the absence of government intervention. 89 FR 3026, 3101. Much of
this literature attempts to explain why consumers appear to undervalue
energy efficiency improvements, as the AG of Montana alleged in his
comment. There is evidence that consumers undervalue future energy
savings as a result of (1) a lack of information; (2) a lack of
sufficient salience of the long-term or aggregate benefits; (3) a lack
of sufficient savings to warrant delaying or altering purchases; (4)
excessive focus on the short term, in the form of inconsistent
weighting of future energy cost savings relative to available returns
on other investments; (5) computational or other difficulties
associated with the evaluation of relevant tradeoffs; and (6) a
divergence in incentives (for example, between renters and owners, or
builders and purchasers). Id. Having less than perfect foresight and a
high degree of uncertainty about the future, consumers may trade off
these types of investments at a higher than expected rate between
current consumption and uncertain future energy cost savings. Id.
Potential changes in the benefits and costs associated with a
standard due to changes in consumer purchase decisions were included in
the analysis for the January 2024 Direct Final Rule in two ways. Id.
First, if consumers forgo the purchase of a product in the standards
case, as estimated based on price elasticity based on empirical data on
appliances, this decreases sales for product manufacturers, and the
impact on manufacturers attributed to lost revenue is included in the
manufacturer impact analysis. Id. Second, DOE accounts for energy
savings attributable only to products actually used by consumers in the
standards case; if a standard decreases the number of products
purchased by consumers, this decreases the potential energy savings
from an energy conservation standard. Id.
Therefore, the January 2024 Direct Final Rule did take into account
consumer purchase decisions in its analysis, and DOE has determined
that the comment provided by the AG of Montana does not provide a
reasonable basis for withdrawal of the January 2024 Direct Final Rule.
F. Monetization of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The AG of Montana stated his belief that greenhouse gas emissions
and climate change impacts should not be part of EPCA rulemakings, but
given their inclusion, DOE must consider them throughout the entire
lifecycle of the product, including manufacturing and potential
reductions in lifespan due to increased complexity. (AG of Montana, No.
122 at p. 3) The AG of Montana commented that the January 2024 Direct
Final Rule failed to adequately address these full lifecycle impacts.
(Id.)
In response and as stated in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule,
DOE notes that it would have reached the same conclusion that the
adopted standard levels were economically justified without considering
the social cost of greenhouse gases. 89 FR 3026, 3072.
Nevertheless, DOE notes also that the comment from the AG of
Montana points to a statement made to the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on
Energy to indicate that 40 to 60 percent of the carbon footprint for
many consumer products can be attributed to the supply chain.\8\ This
statement cites a McKinsey report, which clarifies that this 40 to 60
percent refers to the fraction of a manufacturing company's energy and
carbon footprint that can reside upstream in its supply chain.\9\
However, it does not include the energy and emissions associated with
the usage phase of the appliance lifecycle, which represents more than
90 percent of the total for refrigerators.10 11 In the
January
[[Page 50213]]
2024 Direct Final Rule, DOE accounted for the environmental and public
health benefits associated with the more efficient use of energy,
including those connected to global climate change, as they are
important to take into account when considering the need for national
energy conservation. (See 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(IV)) Id. This
analysis focused on the estimated reduced emissions expected to result
during lifetime of refrigerators, refrigerator freezers, and freezers
shipped during the projection period. Id. at 89 FR 3071.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://www.energy.senate.gov/services/files/3D26FA56-F102-9E9F-BEA4-52BB0085B19A.
\9\ C. Brickman and D. Ungerman, ``Climate Change and Supply
Chain Management,'' McKinsey Quarterly, July 2008.
\10\ Kim, Hyung Chul, Keoleian, Gregory A. and Horie, Yuhta A.,
(2006), Optimal household refrigerator replacement policy for life
cycle energy, greenhouse gas emissions, and cost, Energy Policy, 34,
issue 15, p. 2310-2323.
\11\ Gonzalez A., Chase A., Energy Solutions. Horowitz N. ACEEE
Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings. 2012. What We Know
and Don't Know about Embodied Energy and Greenhouse Gases for
Electronics, Appliances, and Light Bulbs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result, DOE has determined that the comment provided by the AG
of Montana does not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal of the
January 2024 Direct Final Rule.
G. Efficiency and Reliability
The AG of Montana commented that DOE has dismissed comments
regarding the increase in appliance complexity and its impact on
reliability when considering the implementation of higher efficiency
standards in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule. (AG of Montana, No.
122 at p. 4) The AG of Montana noted that increased energy efficiency
in appliances during the use phase often leads to increased complexity,
decreased robustness of components, and reduced engineering margins, as
outlined in reliability engineering principles. (Id.) As a result of
this increased complexity, AG of Montana stated that the mean time
between failures and mean time to failure decreases, while the also
reducing the economic viability of repair. (Id. at p. 5)
Review of refrigerator reliability information and the most
reliable brands provides no indication that higher efficiency products
are less reliable. The most common refrigerator reliability issues are
cited as icemakers and dispensers,12 13 which are not
associated with design options identified for efficiency improvement in
DOE's analysis. While refrigeration system issues have been identified
as requiring service calls, e.g. lack of cooling, poor control of
cooling, etc., no available information has correlated prevalence of
these service issues with efficiency-improving design options such as
variable-speed compressors. While one company's linear compressor has
been cited as a reliability issue, this company made design changes to
improve reliability and reduce service calls.\14\ Hence,
notwithstanding conjecture that more-efficient products may experience
a decrease in reliability, The AG of Montana has not provided, nor has
DOE found, any evidence that more-efficient refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers are less reliable. Therefore, DOE
has determined that the comment provided by the AG of Montana does not
provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal of the January 2024 Direct
Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ https://atlantaappliancesrepair.net/most-reliable-refrigerators-brands/.
\13\ https://www.consumerreports.org/appliances/refrigerators/most-and-least-reliable-refrigerator-brands-a8271265835/.
\14\ https://prudentreviews.com/reliable-refrigerator-brands/#Results-From-Yale-Appliance-Annual-Refrigerator-Reliability-Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. EPCA Requirements
The State AGs commented that DOE should reevaluate the benefits and
burdens of its rules under the factors listed in 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I), (II), and (IV) (State AGs, No. 123 at pp. 7-8)
In response, in the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, DOE evaluated
the benefits and burden of the standard level it ultimately adopted. 89
FR 3078-3109 DOE estimated that the adopted standards would save an
estimated 5.61 quads of energy, an amount DOE considers significant.
DOE estimated that the cumulative net present value (``NPV'') of
consumer benefit of the adopted standard would be $9.04 billion using a
discount rate of 7 percent, and $26.98 billion using a discount rate of
3 percent.
DOE estimated that the cumulative emissions reductions at the
adopted standard are 101 Mt of carbon dioxide (``CO2''),
31.6 thousand tons of sulfur dioxide (``SO2''), 186 thousand
tons of nitrogen oxides (``NOX''), 0.22 tons of mercury
(``Hg''), 846.5 thousand tons of methane (``CH4''), and 0.99
thousand tons of nitrous oxide (``N2O''). DOE estimated the
monetary value of the climate benefits from reduced greenhouse gases
(``GHG'') emissions (associated with the average social cost of GHG
(``SC-GHG'') at a 3-percent discount rate) from the adopted standard is
$5.02 billion. DOE estimated the monetary value of the health benefits
from reduced SO2 and NOX emissions from the
adopted standard is $3.45 billion using a 7-percent discount rate and
$9.80 billion using a 3-percent discount rate.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for consumer benefits and costs,
health benefits from reduced SO2 and NOX
emissions, and the 3-percent discount rate case for climate benefits
from reduced GHG emissions, DOE estimated the total NPV from the
adopted standard is $17.51 billion. Using a 3-percent discount rate for
all benefits and costs, DOE estimated the total NPV from the adopted
standard is $441.80 billion. DOE noted that the estimated total NPV is
provided for additional information, however DOE primarily relies upon
the NPV of consumer benefits when determining whether a standard level
is economically justified.
For the largest product classes, which are 3 (top-mount
refrigerator-freezers), 5 (bottom-mount refrigerator-freezers), 5A
(bottom-mount refrigerator-freezers with through-the-door-ice service),
and 7 (side-by-side refrigerator-freezers with through the door ice
service), DOE estimated that the adopted standards would result in a
life-cycle cost savings of $50.91, $55.23, $133.27, and $142.56 and a
payback period of 4.8 years, 5.6 years, 4.1 years and 1.6 years,
respectively. For these product classes, DOE estimated the fraction of
customers experiencing a net LCC cost would be 28.3 percent, 33.6
percent, 19.8 percent and 0.5 percent with increases in first cost of
$47.67, $62.72, $81.32, and $24.39, respectively. Overall, DOE
estimated that 24.4 percent of refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers,
and freezers consumers would experience a net cost and the average LCC
savings are positive for all product classes.
As a result of the adopted standard, DOE estimated that 9 percent
of low-income households with a top-mount or single-door refrigerator-
freezer (represented by PC 3 and used by 72 percent of low-income
households) and 0.6 percent of low-income households with a side-by-
side refrigerator-freezer (represented by PC 7 and used by 19 percent
of low-income households) would experience a net cost. Additionally,
DOE noted that the incremental increase in purchase price is $24.39 for
low-income PC 7 homeowners at the adopted standard level, substantially
lower than the incremental increase in purchase price of $121.58 at
higher considered standard levels.
As a result of the adopted standard, DOE estimated that the
projected change in industry net present value (``INPV'') ranges from a
decrease of $504.4 million to a decrease of $383.5 million, which
correspond to decreases of 10.3 percent and 7.8 percent, respectively.
DOE estimated that industry must invest $830.3 million comply with
standards set at the Recommended TSL. DOE estimated that approximately
14 percent of refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, and freezer annual
shipments meet the Recommended TSL efficiencies.
Compared to higher considered standard levels, DOE noted that more
[[Page 50214]]
manufacturers offer standard-size refrigerator freezer products that
meet the required efficiencies since PC 7 has a lower required
efficiency level at the adopted standard level. For PC 7, which
accounts for 11 percent of shipments, three OEMs offer products that
meet the efficiency level required by the adopted standard level.
Furthermore, DOE does not expect manufacturers would need to
incorporate VIPs into PC 7 designs to meet the efficiencies required at
the adopted standard level. For PC 5 and PC 5A, DOE noted that it
understands the two product classes often share the same production
lines, with shared cabinet architecture and tooling. DOE expects
manufacturers would likely need to incorporate some VIPs into PC 5A
designs, but not to the extent required at higher considered standard
levels. Thus, for the 10 OEMs that manufacture both PC 5 and PC 5A, DOE
expects that manufacturers could implement similar cabinet upgrades
(i.e., partial VIP) for PC 5 and PC 5A designs to achieve the
efficiencies required by the adopted standard.
DOE's analysis of the benefits and burden of the adopted standard
level utilized the January 31, 2029 (or January 31, 2030, for some
product classes) compliance dates specified in the Joint Agreement as
they were an integral part of the multi-product joint recommendation.
These compliance dates provide manufacturers the flexibility to spread
capital requirements, engineering resources, and other conversion
activities over a longer period of time depending on the individual
needs of each manufacturer. Furthermore, these delayed compliance dates
provide additional lead time and certainty for suppliers of components
that improve efficiency. The adopted standard mitigates risks raised by
AHAM and multiple manufacturers in response to the February 2023 NOPR
regarding the ability for VSC and VIP component suppliers to increase
supply of these key components in the 3-year lead time required by
EPCA.
After considering the analysis and weighing the benefits and
burdens, the Secretary concluded that the adopted standard for
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers was economically
justified. At this standard level, DOE estimated that the average LCC
savings were positive for all product classes for which an amended
standard was considered. An estimated 24.4 percent of all refrigerator,
refrigerator-freezer, and freezer consumers would experience a net
cost. An estimated 9 percent of low-income households with a top-mount
or single-door refrigerator-freezer (represented by PC 3 and used by 72
percent of low-income households) and 0.6 percent of low-income
households with a side-by-side refrigerator-freezer (represented by PC
7 and used by 19 percent of low-income households), would experience a
net cost, which is a significantly lower percentage than under higher
considered standard levels. DOE noted that for low-income PC 7
consumers, as well as across all PC 7 consumers, the adopted standard
level represents the largest average LCC savings of any considered
standard level. The full-fuel cycle (``FFC'') national energy savings
are significant and the NPV of consumer benefits is positive at the
adopted standard level using both a 3-percent and 7-percent discount
rate. Notably, DOE found that the benefits to consumers would vastly
outweigh the cost to manufacturers. At the adopted standard level, DOE
estimated the NPV of consumer benefits, even measured at the more
conservative discount rate of 7 percent is over 17 times higher than
the maximum estimated manufacturers' loss in INPV. DOE found the
adopted standard levels were economically justified even without
weighing the estimated monetary value of emissions reductions. When
those emissions reductions were included--representing $5.02 billion in
climate benefits (associated with the average SC-GHG at a 3-percent
discount rate), and $9.80 billion (using a 3-percent discount rate) or
$3.45 billion (using a 7-percent discount rate) in health benefits--the
rationale became stronger still.
In summary, DOE determined that the adopted energy conservation
standards as recommended in the Joint Agreement would result in
significant energy savings and are technologically feasible and
economically justified as required under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and provided
supporting analysis. 89 FR 3026, 3078-3109. DOE notes that the State
AGs did not provide any specific comments on the benefits and burdens
of the adopted standards beyond emissions, and as noted previously, DOE
would have reached the same conclusion that the adopted standard levels
were economically justified without considering the social cost of
greenhouse gases. DOE has determined that the comment provided by the
State AGs does not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal of the
January 2024 Direct Final Rule.
I. Product Class Definitions
In response to the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, Joint Commenters
pointed out that the description of product class 7-BI as listed in
Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(2) of the January 2024 Direct Final Rule (pg.
3315) and the subsequent updates to the regulatory text in 10 CFR
430.32 include a typographical error. (Joint Commenters, No. 121 at p.
4) This original description of product class 7-BI from the DFR as well
as the corrected version as amended in this confirmation document are
shown in Table III.2.
Table III.2--Product Class Description Correction
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description as Correct description
Product class stated in the DFR (correction in bold)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-BI.................... Built-In Built-In Refrigerator-
Refrigerator- freezers--automatic
freezers--automatic defrost with side-
defrost with side- mounted freezer with
mounted freezer. through-the-door ice
service.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE acknowledges that the description as currently found in the
January 2024 Direct Final Rule inadvertently left off part of the
definition for product class 7-BI. In correcting the description of
product class 7-BI in this confirmation document, DOE is aligning the
product class description with the intent of the January 2024 Direct
Final Rule as well as the description found in previous rulemakings.
Specifically, DOE notes that Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1) of the January
2024 Direct Final Rule (pg. 3314), which lists the standards adopted in
2014, lists the correct description for product class 7-BI. Because
this amendment is a clarifying correction and makes no substantive
changes to the January 2024 Direct Final Rule, the changes addressed in
this document are technical in nature.
DOE has concluded that the determinations made pursuant to the
various procedural requirements applicable to the January 2024 Direct
Final Rule remain unchanged for this final rule technical correction.
These determinations are set forth in the
[[Page 50215]]
January 2024 Direct Final Rule. 89 FR 3026.
Pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), DOE finds that there is good cause to not issue a
separate notice to solicit public comment on the changes contained in
this document. Issuing a separate notice to solicit public comment
would be impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public
interest. Neither the errors nor the corrections in this document
affect the substance of the January 2024 Direct Final Rule or any of
the conclusions reached in support of the direct final rule. Providing
prior notice and an opportunity for public comment on correcting
objective, typographical errors that do not change the substance of the
test procedure serves no useful purpose.
Further, this rule correcting a regulatory text error makes non-
substantive changes to the test procedure. As such, this rule is not
subject to the 30-day delay in effective date requirement of 5 U.S.C.
553(d) otherwise applicable to rules that make substantive changes.
J. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition
EPCA directs DOE to consider any lessening of competition that is
likely to result from new or amended standards. (42 U.S.C.
629(p)(4)(A)(i) and (C)(i)(II); 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V)) It also
directs the Attorney General of the United States (``Attorney
General'') to determine the impact, if any, of any lessening of
competition likely to result from a proposed standard and to transmit
such determination to the Secretary within 60 days of the publication
of a proposed rule, together with an analysis of the nature and extent
of the impact. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) and (B)(ii)) To assist
the Attorney General in making this determination, DOE provided the
Department of Justice (``DOJ'') with copies of the January 2024 Direct
Final Rule, the corresponding NOPR, and the January 2024 Direct Final
Rule TSD for review. DOE has published DOJ's comments at the end of
this document.
In its letter responding to DOE, DOJ concluded that, based on its
review, the proposed energy conservation standards for refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, and freezers are unlikely to have a significant
adverse impact on competition.
IV. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(``NEPA''), DOE had analyzed the direct final rule in accordance with
NEPA and DOE's NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE
has determined that this rule qualifies for categorical exclusion under
10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, appendix B5.1 because it is a rulemaking
that establishes energy conservation standards for consumer products or
industrial equipment, none of the exceptions identified in B5.1(b)
apply, no extraordinary circumstances exist that require further
environmental analysis, and it meets the requirements for application
of a categorical exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410. Therefore, DOE has
determined that promulgation of this direct final rule is not a major
Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment within the meaning of NEPA and does not require an
environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
V. Conclusion
In summary, based on the previous discussion, DOE has determined
that the comments received in response to the direct final rule for new
energy conservation standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers,
and freezers do not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal of the
direct final rule. As a result, the energy conservation standards set
forth in the direct final rule became effective on May 16, 2024.
Compliance with these standards is required on and after January 31,
2029, or January 31, 2030, depending on product class.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on June 7,
2024, by Jeffrey Marootian, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority
from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature
and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in
compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on June 7, 2024.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE amends part 430 of
chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, by making the following technical correction:
PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS
0
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.
0
2. Amend Sec. 430.32 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 430.32 Energy and water conservation standards and their
compliance dates.
* * * * *
(a) Refrigerators/refrigerator-freezers/freezers. These standards
do not apply to refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers with total
refrigerated volume exceeding 39 cubic feet (1104 liters) or freezers
with total refrigerated volume exceeding 30 cubic feet (850 liters).
The energy standards as determined by the equations of the following
table(s) shall be rounded off to the nearest kWh per year. If the
equation calculation is halfway between the nearest two kWh per year
values, the standard shall be rounded up to the higher of these values.
(1) The following standards apply to products manufactured on or
before September 15, 2014, and before the 2029/2030 compliance dates
depending on product class (see paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this
section).
[[Page 50216]]
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equations for maximum energy use (kWh/yr)
Product class -------------------------------------------------------------------------
based on AV (ft\3\) based on av (L)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Refrigerators and refrigerator- 7.99AV + 225.0..................... 0.282av + 225.0.
freezers with manual defrost.
1A. All-refrigerators--manual defrost. 6.79AV + 193.6..................... 0.240av + 193.6.
2. Refrigerator-freezers--partial 7.99AV + 225.0..................... 0.282av + 225.0.
automatic defrost.
3. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.07AV + 233.7..................... 0.285av + 233.7.
defrost with top-mounted freezer
without an automatic icemaker.
3-BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer-- 9.15AV + 264.9..................... 0.323av + 264.9.
automatic defrost with top-mounted
freezer without an automatic icemaker.
3I. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.07AV + 317.7..................... 0.285av + 317.7.
defrost with top-mounted freezer with
an automatic icemaker without through-
the-door ice service.
3I-BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezers-- 9.15AV + 348.9..................... 0.323av + 348.9.
automatic defrost with top-mounted
freezer with an automatic icemaker
without through-the-door ice service.
3A. All-refrigerators--automatic 7.07AV + 201.6..................... 0.250av + 201.6.
defrost.
3A-BI. Built-in All-refrigerators-- 8.02AV + 228.5..................... 0.283av + 228.5.
automatic defrost.
4. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.51AV + 297.8..................... 0.301av + 297.8.
defrost with side-mounted freezer
without an automatic icemaker.
4-BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers-- 10.22AV + 357.4.................... 0.361av + 357.4.
automatic defrost with side-mounted
freezer without an automatic icemaker.
4I. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.51AV + 381.8..................... 0.301av + 381.8.
defrost with side-mounted freezer
with an automatic icemaker without
through-the-door ice service.
4I-BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers-- 10.22AV + 441.4.2.................. 0.361av + 441.4.
automatic defrost with side-mounted
freezer with an automatic icemaker
without through-the-door ice service.
5. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.85AV + 317.0..................... 0.312av + 317.0.
defrost with bottom-mounted freezer
without an automatic icemaker.
5-BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers-- 9.40AV + 336.9..................... 0.332av + 336.9.
automatic defrost with bottom-mounted
freezer without an automatic icemaker.
5I. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.85AV + 401.0..................... 0.312av + 401.0.
defrost with bottom-mounted freezer
with an automatic icemaker without
through-the-door ice service.
5I-BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers-- 9.40AV + 420.9..................... 0.332av + 420.9.
automatic defrost with bottom-mounted
freezer with an automatic icemaker
without through-the-door ice service.
5A. Refrigerator-freezer--automatic 9.25AV + 475.4..................... 0.327av + 475.4.
defrost with bottom-mounted freezer
with through-the-door ice service.
5A-BI. Built-in refrigerator-freezer-- 9.83AV + 499.9..................... 0.347av + 499.9.
automatic defrost with bottom-mounted
freezer with through-the-door ice
service.
6. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.40AV + 385.4..................... 0.297av + 385.4.
defrost with top-mounted freezer with
through-the-door ice service.
7. Refrigerator-freezers--automatic 8.54AV + 432.8..................... 0.302av + 431.1.
defrost with side-mounted freezer
with through-the-door ice service.
7-BI. Built-In Refrigerator-freezers-- 10.25AV + 502.6.................... 0.362av + 502.6.
automatic defrost with side-mounted
freezer with through-the-door ice
service.
8. Upright freezers with manual 5.57AV + 193.7..................... 0.197av + 193.7.
defrost.
9. Upright freezers with automatic 8.62AV + 228.3..................... 0.305av + 228.3.
defrost without an automatic icemaker.
9I. Upright freezers with automatic 8.62AV + 312.3..................... 0.305av + 312.3.
defrost with an automatic icemaker.
9-BI. Built-In Upright freezers with 9.86AV + 260.9..................... 0.348av + 260.6.
automatic defrost without an
automatic icemaker.
9I-BI. Built-In Upright freezers with 9.86AV + 344.9..................... 0.348av + 344.9.
automatic defrost with an automatic
icemaker.
10. Chest freezers and all other 7.29AV + 107.8..................... 0.257av + 107.8.
freezers except compact freezers.
10A. Chest freezers with automatic 10.24AV + 148.1.................... 0.362av + 148.1.
defrost.
11. Compact refrigerators and 9.03AV + 252.3..................... 0.319av + 252.3.
refrigerator-freezers with manual
defrost.
11A.Compact refrigerators and 7.84AV + 219.1..................... 0.277av + 219.1.
refrigerator-freezers with manual
defrost.
12. Compact refrigerator-freezers-- 5.91AV + 335.8..................... 0.209av + 335.8.
partial automatic defrost.
13. Compact refrigerator-freezers-- 11.80AV + 339.2.................... 0.417av + 339.2.
automatic defrost with top-mounted
freezer.
13I. Compact refrigerator-freezers-- 11.80AV + 423.2.................... 0.417av + 423.2.
automatic defrost with top-mounted
freezer with an automatic icemaker.
13A. Compact all-refrigerator-- 9.17AV + 259.3..................... 0.324av + 259.3.
automatic defrost.
14. Compact refrigerator-freezers-- 6.82AV + 456.9..................... 0.241av + 456.9.
automatic defrost with side-mounted
freezer.
14I. Compact refrigerator-freezers-- 6.82AV + 540.9..................... 0.241av + 540.9.
automatic defrost with side-mounted
freezer with an automatic icemaker.
15. Compact refrigerator-freezers-- 11.80AV + 339.2.................... 0.417av + 339.2.
automatic defrost with bottom-mounted
freezer.
15I. Compact refrigerator-freezers-- 11.80AV + 423.2.................... 0.417av + 423.2.
automatic defrost with bottom-mounted
freezer with an automatic icemaker.
16. Compact upright freezers with 8.65AV + 225.7..................... 0.306av + 225.7.
manual defrost.
17. Compact upright freezers with 10.17AV + 351.9.................... 0.359av + 351.9.
automatic defrost.
18. Compact chest freezers............ 9.25AV + 136.8..................... 0.327av + 136.8.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft\3\, as determined in appendices A and B to subpart B of this part.
av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters.
[[Page 50217]]
(2) The following standards apply to products manufactured on or
after January 31, 2029.
Table 2 to Paragraph (a)(2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equations for maximum energy use (kWh/
yr)
Product class ---------------------------------------
Based on AV
(ft\3\) Based on av (L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-BI. Built-in refrigerator- 8.24AV + 238.4 + 0.291av + 238.4 +
freezer--automatic defrost with 28I. 28I.
top-mounted freezer.
3A-BI. Built-in All- (7.22AV + 205.7) * (0.255av + 205.7)
refrigerators--automatic K3ABI. * K3ABI.
defrost.
4-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.79AV + 307.4) * (0.310av + 307.4)
freezers--automatic defrost K4BI + 28I. * K4BI + 28I.
with side-mounted freezer.
5-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.65AV + 309.9) * (0.305av + 309.9)
freezers--automatic defrost K5BI + 28I. * K5BI + 28I.
with bottom-mounted freezer.
5A. Refrigerator-freezer-- (7.76AV + 351.9) * (0.274av + 351.9)
automatic defrost with bottom- K5A. * K5A.
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
5A-BI. Built-in refrigerator- (8.21AV + 370.7) * (0.290av + 370.7)
freezer--automatic defrost with K5ABI. * K5ABI.
bottom-mounted freezer with
through-the-door ice service.
7-BI. Built-In Refrigerator- (8.82AV + 384.1) * (0.311av + 384.1)
freezers--automatic defrost K7BI. * K7BI.
with side-mounted freezer with
through-the-door ice service.
8. Upright freezers with manual 5.57AV + 193.7.... 0.197av + 193.7.
defrost.
9-BI. Built-In Upright freezers (9.37AV + 247.9) * (0.331av + 247.9)
with automatic defrost. K9BI + 28I. * K9BI + 28I.
9A-BI. Built-In Upright freezers 9.86AV + 288.9.... 0.348av + 288.9.
with automatic defrost with
through-the-door ice service.
10. Chest freezers and all other 7.29AV + 107.8.... 0.257av + 107.8.
freezers except compact
freezers.
10A. Chest freezers with 10.24AV + 148.1... 0.362av + 148.1.
automatic defrost.
11. Compact refrigerator- 7.68AV + 214.5.... 0.271av + 214.5.
freezers and refrigerators
other than all-refrigerators
with manual defrost.
11A. Compact all-refrigerators-- 6.66AV + 186.2.... 0.235av + 186.2.
manual defrost.
12. Compact refrigerator- (5.32AV + 302.2) * (0.188av + 302.2)
freezers--partial automatic K12. * K12.
defrost.
13. Compact refrigerator- 10.62AV + 305.3 + 0.375av + 305.3 +
freezers--automatic defrost 28I. 28I.
with top-mounted freezer.
13A. Compact all-refrigerators-- (8.25AV + 233.4) * (0.291av + 233.4)
automatic defrost. K13A. * K13A.
14. Compact refrigerator- 6.14AV + 411.2 + 0.217av + 411.2 +
freezers--automatic defrost 28I. 28I.
with side-mounted freezer.
15. Compact refrigerator- 10.62AV + 305.3 + 0.375av + 305.3 +
freezers--automatic defrost 28I. 28I.
with bottom-mounted freezer.
16. Compact upright freezers 7.35AV + 191.8.... 0.260av + 191.8.
with manual defrost.
17. Compact upright freezers 9.15AV + 316.7.... 0.323av + 316.7.
with automatic defrost.
18. Compact chest freezers...... 7.86AV + 107.8.... 0.278av + 107.8.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft\3\, as determined in
appendices A and B to subpart B of this part.
av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters.
I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product
without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3ABI) are as
defined in the following table.
Table 3 to Paragraph (a)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Products without a Products without a transparent door
Door coefficient Products with a transparent door or door-in-door with added external
transparent door with a door-in-door doors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K3ABI............................ 1.10 1.0 1.0.
K4BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5A.............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-3).
K5ABI............................ 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-3).
K7BI............................. 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K9BI............................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K12.............................. 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K13A............................. 1.10 1.0 1.0.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ Nd is the number of external doors.
\2\ The maximum Nd values are 2 for K12, 3 for K9BI, and 5 for all other K values.
(3) The following standards apply to products manufactured on or
after January 31, 2030.
[[Page 50218]]
Table 4 to Paragraph (a)(3)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equations for maximum energy use (kWh/
yr)
Product class ---------------------------------------
Based on AV
(ft\3\) Based on av (L)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Refrigerator-freezers and 6.79AV + 191.3.... 0.240av + 191.3.
refrigerators other than all-
refrigerators with manual
defrost.
1A. All-refrigerators--manual 5.77AV + 164.6.... 0.204av + 164.6.
defrost.
2. Refrigerator-freezers-- (6.79AV + 191.3) * (0.240av + 191.3)
partial automatic defrost. K2. * K2.
3. Refrigerator-freezers-- 6.86AV + 198.6 + 0.242av + 198.6 +
automatic defrost with top- 28I. 28I.
mounted freezer.
3A. All-refrigerators--automatic (6.01AV + 171.4) * (0.212av + 171.4)
defrost. K3A. * K3A.
4. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.28AV + 254.9) * (0.257av + 254.9)
automatic defrost with side- K4 + 28I. * K4 + 28I.
mounted freezer.
5. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.61AV + 272.6) * (0.269av + 272.6)
automatic defrost with bottom- K5 + 28I. * K5 + 28I.
mounted freezer.
6. Refrigerator-freezers-- 7.14AV + 280.0.... 0.252av + 280.0.
automatic defrost with top-
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
7. Refrigerator-freezers-- (7.31AV + 322.5) * (0.258av + 322.5)
automatic defrost with side- K7. * K7.
mounted freezer with through-
the-door ice service.
9. Upright freezers with (7.33AV + 194.1) * (0.259av + 194.1)
automatic defrost. K9 + 28I. * K9 + 28I.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft\3\, as determined in
appendices A and B to subpart B of this part.
av = Total adjusted volume, expressed in Liters.
I = 1 for a product with an automatic icemaker and = 0 for a product
without an automatic icemaker. Door Coefficients (e.g., K3A) are as
defined in the following table.
Table 5 to Paragraph (a)(3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Products without a Products without a transparent door
Door coefficient Products with a transparent door or door-in-door with added external
transparent door with a door-in-door doors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K2............................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
K3A.............................. 1.10 1.0 1.0.
K4............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K5............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K7............................... 1.10 1.06 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-2).
K9............................... 1.0 1.0 1 + 0.02 * (Nd-1).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
\1\ Nd is the number of external doors.
\2\ The maximum Nd values are 2 for K2, and 5 for all other K values.
* * * * *
Note: The following appendix will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.
Appendix A
March 18, 2024
Ami Grace-Tardy
Assistant General Counsel for
Legislation, Regulation and Energy Efficiency
U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, DC 20585
[email protected]
Re: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers, DOE Docket No. EERE-2017-BT-
STD-0003
Dear Assistant General Counsel Grace-Tardy:
I am responding to your January 18, 2024 letter seeking the
views of the Attorney General about the potential impact on
competition of proposed energy conservation standards for
refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers.
Your request was submitted under Section 325(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) of
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA), 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V), which requires the Attorney General to make a
determination of the impact of any lessening of competition likely
to result from the imposition of proposed energy conservation
standards. The Attorney General's responsibility for responding to
requests from other departments about the effect of a program on
competition has been delegated to the Assistant Attorney General for
the Antitrust Division in 28 CFR 0.40(g). The Assistant Attorney
General for the Antitrust Division has authorized me, as the Policy
Director for the Antitrust Division, to provide the Antitrust
Division's views regarding the potential impact on competition of
proposed energy conservation standards on his behalf.
In conducting its analysis, the Antitrust Division examines
whether a proposed standard may lessen competition, for example, by
substantially limiting consumer choice, by placing certain
manufacturers at an unjustified competitive disadvantage, or by
inducing avoidable inefficiencies in production or distribution of
particular products. A lessening of competition could result in
higher prices to manufacturers and consumers.
We have reviewed the proposed standard contained in the Notice
of proposed rulemaking and the related Technical Support Document.
We have also reviewed public comments and information provided by
industry participants.
Based on this review, our conclusion is that the proposed energy
conservation standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and
freezers are unlikely to have a significant adverse impact on
competition.
Sincerely,
/s/
David G.B. Lawrence,
Policy Director.
[FR Doc. 2024-12893 Filed 6-12-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P