80 FR 55038 - Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 177 (September 14, 2015)
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 177 (September 14, 2015)
| Page Range | 55038-55045 | |
| FR Document | 2015-23021 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 2015)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 55038-55045] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-23021] ======================================================================== Proposed Rules Federal Register ________________________________________________________________________ This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. ======================================================================== Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules [[Page 55038]] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 430 [Docket Number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0031] RIN 1904-AD20 Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of data availability. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has completed a provisional analysis of the potential economic impacts and energy savings that could result from promulgating amended energy conservation standards for residential non-weatherized gas furnaces (NWGFs) that include two product classes defined by input capacity and has published the data on its Web page. DOE encourages stakeholders to provide any additional data or information that may improve the analysis. DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NODA no later than October 14, 2015. See section IV for details. ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the NODA for Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces, and provide docket number EERE-2014-BT-STD-0031 and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 1904-AD20. Comments may be submitted using any of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number and/or RIN in the subject line of the message. Submit electronic comments in Word Perfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or ASCII file format, and avoid the use of special characters or any form on encryption. 3. Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (CD), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. 4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see section IV of this document (Submission of Comments). Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register documents, 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. A link for access to the docket Web page can be found at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=62. The www.regulations.gov Web page contains instructions on how to access all documents in the docket. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. John Cymbalsky, 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) 287-1692. Email: [email protected]. Ms. Johanna Hariharan, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9507 or (202) 287-6307. Email: [email protected]. For further information on how to review other public comments and the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or by email: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background II. Summary of the Analyses Performed by DOE A. Introduction B. Engineering Analysis C. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analyses 1. Furnace Size Assignment 2. Energy Prices 3. Other Updates D. National Impact Analysis III. Results of the Analysis A. Economic Impacts on Consumers B. National Impacts IV. Submission of Comments I. Background On March 10, 2015, DOE published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) and public meeting to amend energy conservation standards for residential non-weatherized gas furnaces (NWGF) and mobile home gas furnaces (MHGF). 80 FR 13119. The proposed standards, which are expressed as minimum annual fuel utilization efficiencies (AFUE), are shown in Table I.1. These proposed standards, if adopted, would apply to all products listed in Table I.1 and manufactured in, or imported into, the United States on or after the date 5 years after the publication of the final rule for this rulemaking. Table I.1--Proposed AFUE Energy Conservation Standards for Non- Weatherized Gas Furnaces and Mobile Home Gas Furnaces (TSL 3) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Product class AFUE % ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Non-Weatherized Gas-Fired Furnaces...................... 92 Mobile Home Gas-Fired Furnaces.......................... 92 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A number of stakeholders objected to a national standard at 92 percent AFUE, which would effectively only be able to be met by using condensing technology. The objections raised by stakeholders covered a wide range of issues, but the negative impacts of the proposed [[Page 55039]] standards on some furnace consumers were highlighted by many stakeholders. A letter dated June 8, 2015, signed by 121 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, expressed concern that a nationwide energy efficiency standard that effectively precludes a consumer from choosing to install a non-condensing furnace would result in many homeowners either abandoning the use of natural gas to heat their homes or paying substantially more for the installation of a furnace that meets the new standard. It stated that many families will be faced with the difficult choice of having to replace their non-condensing furnace with either a condensing furnace with higher installation costs or electric heat and accompanying higher monthly energy bills. (United States House of Representatives, No. 67 at p. 1) Comments from the Pennsylvania Chambers of Commerce, Business, and Industry, Meeks, Payne, Jr., Bishop, Jr., and Carrier make similar statements. (Pennsylvania Chambers of Commerce, Business, and Industry, No. 82 at p. 1; Meeks, No. 140 at p. 1; Payne, Jr., No. 75 at p. 1; Bishop, Jr., No. 76 at p. 1) The American Gas Association (AGA), Goodman, and American Energy Alliance (AEA et al.) stated that even assuming DOE's analysis is correct, many consumers could incur costs under the proposed standard. They stated that, according to DOE's analysis, 20 percent of households nationwide would face higher life-cycle costs under the proposed standard, and in the replacement market, one-quarter of all households replacing their natural gas furnaces would see a life-cycle cost increase. (AGA, No. 118 at p. 27; AEA et al., No. 69 at p. 1; Goodman, No. 135 at p. 2) AGA, Goodman, and Southern Gas Association (SGA) added that consumers in the South and low-income families would be disproportionately impacted. (AGA, No. 118 at p. 27; Goodman, No. 135 at p. 2; SGA, No. 145 at p. 1) The Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), Carrier, Rheem, and Ingersoll Rand expressed concern that the proposed standards will result in 10-20 percent of homes switching from gas furnaces to electric heat pumps because venting of a condensing gas furnace is difficult to impossible. (AHRI, No. 159 at p. 3; Carrier, No. 116 at p. 2; Rheem, No. 142 at p. 3; Ingersoll Rand, No. 156 at p. 2) AGA expressed a similar concern, and asserted that the resulting adverse energy and environmental impacts of this fuel switching are very substantial. (AGA, No. 118 at p. 28) Several stakeholders, who expressed general support for the proposed standards and suggested more stringent standards could be justified, provided a recommendation for reducing negative impacts on some furnace consumers while maintaining the overall economic and environmental benefits of the standards. The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) recommended that DOE establish a separate product class for small furnaces (tentatively those with an input capacity of 50,000 Btu/hour or less) and leave the standard level for these units at 80-percent AFUE, while adopting a higher standard level of 95-percent AFUE for larger furnaces. (ACEEE, No. 113 at p. 1) The Alliance to Save Energy made a similar recommendation, but referred to an input capacity of no more than 50,000 to 65,000 Btu/hour for smaller furnaces. (Alliance to Save Energy, No. 115 at p. 1) The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) urged DOE to adopt an 80- percent AFUE standard level for furnaces below a specified maximum capacity threshold, and set the capacity threshold low enough that the national energy, economic, and environmental benefits are largely preserved while allowing consumers in small and moderately-sized, well insulated and weatherized homes in moderate and warm climates to have a non-condensing option. (NRDC, No. 134 at p. 2) AGLR stated that DOE should establish a separate product class for small furnaces with an input capacity of less than 45,000 Btu/hour, citing section 305(f) of EPCA as authority for DOE to establish separate product classes based on product capacity. (AGLR, No. 112 at pp. 15-16) ACEEE also stated that creating two product classes based on furnace size would reduce the number of households that would experience net costs under the proposed standard (many of whom are in the south). ACEEE stated that many of the consumers who would experience net costs will have small furnaces and recommended that DOE specifically examine this issue and estimate the economics of separate standard levels as a function of furnace input capacity. ACEEE noted that a size threshold provides another option for some households with very high installation costs--if they weatherize their home and get the needed capacity below 50,000 Btu/h, they can avoid the extra installation cost of a condensing furnace. ACEEE added that a size threshold would not present the potential enforcement challenges associated with regional standards. (ACEEE, No. 113 at p. 3) Although DOE believes that the standards proposed in the March 2015 NOPR meet the statutory criteria for amended standards, given the concerns and suggestions described above, DOE undertook an analysis of the consumer economics and national impacts of establishing separate standard levels for large and small residential furnaces. In so doing, it examined the effect of alternative size thresholds for a small furnace. Because the issues raised by stakeholders primarily concern NWGFs, DOE only considered that product in its analysis and did not examine mobile home gas furnaces. The analysis is described in section II of this NODA; section III provides the results of the analysis. DOE notes that this NODA does not propose any energy conservation standards for residential furnaces. DOE may revise the analyses presented in today's NODA based on any new or updated information or data it obtains during the course of the rulemaking. DOE encourages stakeholders to provide any additional data or information that may improve the analysis. II. Summary of the Analyses Performed by DOE DOE conducted an analysis of the consumer impacts (life-cycle cost and payback period) and national impacts (national energy savings and net present value of national benefits) of potential standard levels for the considered NWGF product classes. The tools used in preparing these analyses and their respective results are available at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=62. Each individual spreadsheet includes an introduction that provides an overview of the contents of the spreadsheet. These spreadsheets present the various inputs and outputs to the analysis and, where necessary, instructions. Brief descriptions of the analyses and of the supporting spreadsheet tools are provided below. If DOE were to consider adopting energy conservation standards for residential furnaces that set separate levels based on input capacity, it would do so in a future supplemental NOPR (SNOPR). DOE would also publish a technical support document (TSD) containing a detailed written account of the analyses performed in support of the SNOPR, which will include updates to the analyses made available in this NODA. The analysis conducted for this NODA used the same analytical [[Page 55040]] framework as the March 2015 NOPR.\1\ Key aspects of the present analysis and DOE's updates to the NOPR analysis are described in the sections below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Please see the March 2015 NOPR and the accompanying TSD for details, which are available at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=62. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. Introduction The analysis conducted for this NODA estimated impacts for the potential standard level combinations shown in Table II.1. The key aspect of this analysis is that only large furnaces would need to use condensing technology to meet the standard. Thus, households installing a small furnace would not need to incur the costs associated with installing a condensing furnace. Table II.1--Potential Standard Level Combinations Analyzed for Large and Small Furnaces ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Furnance size Annual fuel utilization efficiency (%) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Large........................................... 90 92 95 98 Small........................................... 80 80 80 80 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This NODA analysis used the same sample of residential furnace consumers as the March 2015 NOPR. Each sample household was assigned a furnace size (in terms of input capacity) based on a number of features, as discussed in section II.C. The share of households that would install a small furnace depends on how ``small furnace'' is defined in terms of input capacity. For this analysis, DOE considered the following small furnace definitions: <=45 kBtu/hour, <=50 kBtu/ hour, <=55 kBtu/hour, <=60 kBtu/hour, and <=65 kBtu/hour. In each case, large furnaces would be defined as all sizes above the given thresholds. The share of households that would install a furnace meeting a small furnace standard rises as the size cutoff in the small furnace definition increases, as illustrated in Table II.2.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ The shares in Table II.2 reflect the likelihood that some consumers would down-size a new furnace to meet the ``small furnace'' definition. See section II.C for discussion. Table II.2--Share of Sample Households by Furnace Size [percent] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Small furnace definition Furnace size ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <=45 kBtu/hour <=50 kBtu/hour <=55 kBtu/hour <=60 kBtu/hour <=65 kBtu/hour ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Large........................... 92 86 85 68 62 Small........................... 8 14 15 32 38 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total....................... 100 100 100 100 100 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Engineering Analysis The engineering analysis establishes the relationship between the manufacturer production cost (MPC) and energy efficiency for residential furnaces. This relationship between MPC and energy efficiency serves as the basis for calculations performed in the other analysis tools to estimate the costs and benefits to individual consumers, manufacturers, and the nation. For each NWGF efficiency level that was analyzed, the MPC was estimated for four furnace capacities (60 kBtu/hour, 80 kBtu/hour, 100 kBtu/hour, and 120 kBtu/ hour). For the NODA analysis, DOE updated the MPCs from the NOPR to incorporate the most recent available data for material,\3\ component, labor, and overhead costs, and also updated the MPCs to 2014$. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ DOE uses 5-year averages for metal materials and current prices for all other materials. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analyses The life-cycle cost (LCC) and payback period (PBP) analyses determine the economic impact of potential standards on individual consumers who purchase a furnace in the expected compliance year (assumed to be 2021 for this analysis). The LCC is the total cost of purchasing, installing and operating a residential furnace over the course of its lifetime. DOE determines the LCC by considering: (1) The total installed cost to the consumer (which consists of manufacturer selling price, distribution channel markups, sales taxes, and installation costs); (2) the annual energy consumption (natural gas or LPG and electricity) of residential furnaces as they are used in the field; (3) the operating cost of residential furnaces (i.e., energy cost and maintenance and repair cost); (4) equipment lifetime; and (5) a discount rate that reflects the consumer cost of capital and puts the LCC in present-value terms. The PBP represents the number of years needed to recover the increase in purchase price of higher-efficiency residential furnaces through savings in the operating cost. For each considered standards case, DOE measures the change in LCC relative to a no-new-standards case, which reflects the market in the absence of amended energy conservation standards, including market trends for equipment that exceeds the current energy conservation standards. In the March 2015 NOPR and in today's NODA, DOE developed nationally-representative household samples for residential furnaces from the 2009 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS).\4\ DOE analyzed the net effect of potential amended residential furnace standards on consumers by calculating the LCC savings and PBP for each household by efficiency level. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information Administration, Residential Energy Consumption Survey: 2009 RECS Survey Data (2013), available at: http://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/2009/ (last accessed July 29, 2015). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DOE performed the LCC and PBP analyses using a spreadsheet model [[Page 55041]] combined with Crystal Ball \5\ to account for uncertainty and variability among the input variables. Each Monte Carlo simulation consists of 10,000 LCC and PBP calculations using input values that are either sampled from probability distributions and household samples or characterized with single point values. The analytical results include a distribution of 10,000 data points showing the range of LCC savings for a given efficiency level relative to the no-new-standards case efficiency distribution. In performing an iteration of the Monte Carlo simulation for a given consumer, product efficiency is chosen based on its probability. If the chosen product efficiency is greater than or equal to the efficiency of the standard level under consideration, the LCC and PBP calculation reveals that a consumer is not impacted by the standard level. By accounting for consumers who already purchase more- efficient products, DOE avoids overstating the potential benefits from increasing product efficiency. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ Crystal Ball is a commercial software program developed by Oracle and used to conduct stochastic analysis using Monte Carlo simulation. A Monte Carlo simulation uses random sampling over many iterations of the simulation to obtain a probability distribution of results. Certain key inputs to the analysis are defined as probability distributions rather than single-point values. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Furnace Size Assignment For the March 2015 NOPR, DOE assigned an input capacity for the existing furnace of each housing unit based on an algorithm that correlates the heating square footage and the outdoor design temperature for heating (i.e., the temperature that is exceeded by the 30-year minimum average temperature 1 percent of the time) with the distribution of input capacity of furnaces.\6\ DOE assumed that, for the new furnace installation, the input capacity would remain the same. DOE's analysis accounted for the typical over-sizing of furnace capacity (i.e., the furnace is larger than it needs to be to fulfill the building heating load). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ The distribution of input capacity is based on shipments data by input capacity bins for the year 2000 provided by AHRI (AHRI (formerly GAMA). Furnace and Boiler Shipments data provided to DOE for Furnace and Boiler ANOPR. January 23, 2002). AHRI data was further disaggregated into 5-kBtu/h bins using the reduced models dataset from the NOPR analysis. Appendix 7B of the NOPR TSD provides details about furnace sizing method. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there is a separate standard for small furnaces, DOE expects that some consumers who would otherwise install a typically-oversized furnace would choose to down-size in order to be able to purchase a non-condensing furnace. For the NODA analysis, DOE identified those sample households that might down-size at the considered small furnace definitions. DOE first determined if a household would install a non- condensing furnace with an input capacity greater than the small furnace size limit without amended standards. In the standards case, DOE assumed that a fraction of such consumers would down-size to the input capacity limit for small furnaces. 2. Energy Prices For this NODA, DOE updated current energy prices and also the projection of future energy prices. Current average and marginal monthly energy prices are based on the latest data (2013 energy prices) from EIA (Form 861 data \7\ to calculate commercial electricity prices, Natural Gas Navigator \8\ to calculate commercial natural gas prices, and State Energy Data System \9\ to calculate LPG prices). The update to 2013 energy prices had a very small impact on the LCC and PBP results.\10\ Future energy prices are based on the projection of average annual percent change in national-average residential natural gas and electricity prices in the Annual Energy Outlook 2015 (AEO 2015). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ Energy Information Administration (EIA), Survey form EIA- 861--Annual Electric Power Industry Report (Available at: http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861/index.html) (Last accessed July 15, 2015). \8\ Energy Information Administration (EIA), Natural Gas Navigator (Available at: http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_pri_sum_dcu_nus_m.htm) (Last accessed July 15, 2015). \9\ Energy Information Administration (EIA), State Energy Data System (SEDS) (Available at: http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/) (Last accessed July 15, 2015). \10\ For the NOPR, 2012 energy prices from the same sources were used. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Other Updates For this NODA, DOE updated the efficiency distribution in the no- new-standards case to reflect AHRI shipments data from 2010 to 2014.\11\ The update resulted in decreased fraction of consumers being impacted by an efficiency standard requiring efficiencies of 90-percent AFUE and above.\12\ DOE also made minor updates to the markups, product price trend, and the building shell efficiency and climate indexes used to adjust energy use. These are described in the LCC spreadsheet. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute. Personal communication. May 12, 2015. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-STD-0031-0052. \12\ For the NOPR, the AHRI shipments data was not available and DOE instead relied on shipments data from the ENERGY STAR program to derive its estimates. Based on the AHRI shipments data, DOE's estimate of the condensing furnace market share in 2021 increased from 47-percent in the NOPR to 53-percent in the NODA. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. National Impact Analysis The national impacts analysis (NIA) estimates the national energy savings (NES) and the net present value (NPV) of total consumer costs and savings expected to result from potential new standards. DOE calculated NES and NPV as the difference between a case without amended standards and each standards case. DOE calculated the annual energy consumption for each case using the appropriate per-unit annual energy use data multiplied by the projected residential furnaces shipments for each year. To estimate impacts of separate standards for small and large furnaces, DOE needed to disaggregate NWGF shipments by input capacity. To do so, DOE assumed that the shares of each size category in NWGF shipments are the same as the shares estimated for the household sample. The shares were assumed to remain constant over time. Cumulative energy savings are the sum of the annual NES determined for the lifetime of furnaces shipped during a 30-year period assumed to start in the expected compliance year. Energy savings include the full- fuel cycle energy savings (i.e., the energy needed to extract, process, and deliver primary fuel sources such as coal and natural gas, and the conversion and distribution losses of generating electricity from those fuel sources). To develop the national NPV of consumer benefits from potential energy conservation standards, DOE calculated projected annual operating costs (energy costs and repair and maintenance costs) and annual installation costs for the no-new-standards case and the standards cases. DOE calculated annual energy expenditures from annual energy consumption using forecasted energy prices in each year. DOE calculated annual product expenditures by multiplying the price per unit times the projected shipments in each year. The aggregate difference each year between operating cost savings and increased installation costs is the net savings or net costs. DOE multiplies the net savings in future years by a discount factor to determine their present value. DOE estimates the NPV of consumer benefits using both a 3-percent and a 7-percent real discount rate, in accordance with guidance provided by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to Federal agencies on the development of regulatory analysis.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ Office of Management and Budget, OMB Circular A-4, section E, Identifying and Measuring Benefits and Costs (2003), available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/m03-21.html. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 55042]] For the NODA analysis, DOE updated energy price trends and several other inputs with data from AEO 2015, as described in the NIA spreadsheet. III. Results of the Analysis A. Economic Impacts on Consumers As mentioned in section II.C, for each considered standards case, DOE measures the change in LCC relative to a no-new-standards case. For example, in the case of a separate standard of 90-percent AFUE for large furnaces and 80-percent AFUE for small furnaces, the analysis reflects the likelihood that some consumers would purchase a furnace at or above those efficiency levels without standards, and thus would not be affected by the standards. The average LCC savings in Table III.1 only include those consumers who would be affected at a given standard level. Table III.2 shows the percentage of consumers that would experience a net cost under each considered standards case, and Table III.3 shows the percentage of consumers in the South that would experience a net cost.\14\ For these consumers, the LCC would increase under the standard compared to the furnace they would purchase in no-new- standards case. As expected, the percentage of consumers that would experience a net cost declines as the definition of small furnace expands to include more furnaces. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ The analysis used the same definition of the South region as the March 2015 NOPR. Table III.1--Average LCC Savings for Alternative Furnace Standard Level Combinations [2014$] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minimum AFUE (%) Average LCC savings (2014$) * ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour) Large Small --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <=45 <=50 <=55 <=60 <=65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90 80 $383 $400 $400 $492 $484 92 80 463 478 479 553 525 95 80 439 447 449 479 437 98 80 365 372 374 388 347 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * The average LCC savings only include those consumers who would be affected at a given standard level. Table III.2--Share of All Consumers Experiencing a Net Cost for Alternative Furnace Standard Level Combinations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minimum AFUE (%) % of consumers experiencing a net cost ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour) Large Small --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <=45 <=50 <=55 <=60 <=65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90 80 19 15 13 11 7 92 80 17 13 12 10 6 95 80 21 17 15 12 9 98 80 35 34 33 26 23 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table III.3--Share of Consumers in the South Experiencing a Net Cost for Alternative Furnace Standard Level Combinations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minimum AFUE (%) % of consumers in the south experiencing a net cost ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour) Large Small --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <=45 <=50 <=55 <=60 <=65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90 80 27 20 19 13 7 92 80 25 18 17 11 7 95 80 28 22 21 14 10 98 80 35 31 30 20 14 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table III.4 compares the key consumer economic impacts of a single standard for all furnaces to a separate standard for large and small furnaces.\15\ Under a separate standard for large and small furnaces, the average LCC savings increase somewhat but the share of consumers with a net cost declines considerably. The impacts of a separate standard for large and small furnaces would vary depending on the small furnace definition. For example, if the definition was <=60 kBtu/hour instead of <=55 kBtu/hour, the difference between the single standard for all furnaces and separate standards for large and small furnaces would be greater than shown. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ The results for a single standard for all furnaces differ slightly from the results in the March 2015 NOPR because of the input revisions discussed in section II. DOE believes that showing a direct comparison with the NOPR results would not serve the purpose of the NODA analysis. [[Page 55043]] Table III.4--Comparison of Consumer Impacts of Single Standard vs. Separate Standard for Large and Small Furnaces * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single standard for all furnaces Separate standard for large and small furnaces -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Avg. LCC savings Share of consumers Avg. LCC savings Share of consumers AFUE (%) (2014$) with net cost (%) AFUE (%) large/small (2014$) with net cost (%) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90..................................... $347 20 90/80..................... $400 13 92..................................... 425 18 92/80..................... 479 12 95..................................... 420 22 95/80..................... 449 15 98..................................... 343 41 98/80..................... 374 33 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Using small furnace definition of <=55 kBtu/hour. Table III.5 and Table III.6 show a similar comparison for consumers in the south and low-income consumers, with similar results.\16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ The results in Table III.6 overstate the percentage of low- income households that would actually be negatively impacted by proposed higher-efficiency furnace standards. Close to 60 percent of low-income households in RECS 2009 are either renters or residents of public housing. In these cases, the furnace would be purchased by the property owner, and the cost of a higher-efficiency furnace might be passed on over time in the rent (or perhaps not all in the case of public housing). DOE's current analysis assumes that in cases where the property owner does not pay for energy, the cost of a higher-efficiency furnace is passed on immediately, which would tend to overstate any negative impact. Table III.5--Comparison of Impacts for Consumers in the South of Single Standard vs. Separate Standard for Large and Small Furnaces * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single standard for all furnaces Separate standard for large and small furnaces -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Avg. LCC savings Share of consumers Avg. LCC savings Share of consumers AFUE (%) (2014$) with net cost (%) AFUE (%) large/small (2014$) with net cost (%) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90..................................... $291 31 90/80..................... $335 19 92..................................... 357 28 92/80..................... 405 17 95..................................... 357 33 95/80..................... 379 21 98..................................... 319 44 98/80..................... 368 30 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Using small furnace definition of <=55 kBtu/hour. Table III.6--Comparison of Impacts for Low-Income Consumers of Single Standard vs. Separate Standard for Large and Small Furnaces * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single standard for all furnaces Separate standard for large and small furnaces -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Avg. LCC savings Share of consumers Avg. LCC savings Share of consumers AFUE (%) (2014$) with net cost (%) AFUE (%) large/small (2014$) with net cost (%) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90..................................... $210 22 90/80..................... $274 12 92..................................... 301 20 92/80..................... 379 11 95..................................... 363 24 95/80..................... 423 13 98..................................... 356 44 98/80..................... 447 31 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Using small furnace definition of <=55 kBtu/hour. In the NOPR analysis, DOE estimated that some consumers faced with significant costs to install a condensing furnace would instead choose to switch to electric heating with a heat pump or electric furnace. If there were a separate, lower standard level for small furnaces, fewer consumers would be faced with installing a condensing furnace, and there would be less switching. Table III.7 shows this outcome. Table III.7--Comparison of Fuel Switching Impacts of Single Standard vs. Separate Standard for Large and Small Furnaces * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single standard for all furnaces Separate standard for large and small furnaces -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Switch to electric Switch to electric AFUE (%) Switch to heat pump furnace (% of AFUE (%) large/small Switch to heat pump furnace (% of (% of consumers) consumers) (% of consumers) consumers) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90..................................... 6.7 3.0 90/80..................... 2.9 1.8 92..................................... 6.9 3.1 92/80..................... 3.0 1.9 95..................................... 8.3 3.5 95/80..................... 3.9 2.3 98..................................... 11.7 4.2 98/80..................... 6.5 2.8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Using small furnace definition of <=55 kBtu/hour. [[Page 55044]] B. National Impacts The estimated national energy savings (full-fuel-cycle) of the considered combinations of minimum AFUE for large and small furnaces are shown in Table III.8. Table III.9 and Table III.10 show the national NPV of benefits for alternative furnace standard level combinations at 7-percent and 3- percent discount rates, respectively. The national energy savings decrease as the small furnace definition expands. Table III.8--National Energy Savings for Alternative Furnace Standard Level Combinations [Quads] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minimum AFUE (%) Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Large Small <=45 <=50 <=55 <=60 <=65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 92 80 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.3 1.8 95 80 4.2 4.2 4.1 3.4 2.8 98 80 5.8 5.7 5.7 4.9 4.2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table III.9--National Net Present Value of Benefits for Alternative Furnace Standard Level Combinations at 7- Percent Discount Rate [Billion 2014$] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minimum AFUE (%) Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Large Small <=45 <=50 <=55 <=60 <=65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 92 80 3.1 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.4 95 80 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.2 3.6 98 80 3.8 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table III.10--National Net Present Value of Benefits for Alternative Furnace Standard Level Combinations at 3- Percent Discount Rate [Billion 2014$] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Minimum AFUE (%) Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Large Small <=45 <=50 <=55 <=60 <=65 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 92 80 14.7 14.8 14.8 11.8 9.1 95 80 20.2 20.1 20.0 16.9 13.9 98 80 23.9 24.0 23.9 21.3 18.4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table III.11 compares the national energy savings and NPV of a single standard for all furnaces vs. a separate standard for large and small furnaces. The national energy savings are higher in the case of a separate standard for large and small furnaces mainly because there is less switching from gas to electric heating.\17\ The NPV is higher in the case of a separate standard for large and small furnaces mainly because the LCC savings are higher. The impacts of a separate standard for large and small furnaces would vary depending on the small furnace definition. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ In terms of FFC energy, switching from gas to electricity increases energy use considerably because of the losses in thermal electricity generation. Table III.11--Comparison of National Impacts of Single Standard vs. Separate Standard for Large and Small Furnaces * -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Single standard for all furnaces Separate standard for large and small furnaces -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- National net present National net AFUE (%) National energy value, 7% (billion AFUE (%) large/small National energy present value, 7% savings (quads) 2014$) savings (quads) (billion 2014$) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 92..................................... 2.6 2.2 92/80..................... 2.9 3.5 95..................................... 3.9 3.3 95/80..................... 4.1 4.6 98..................................... 5.4 2.6 98/80..................... 5.7 4.4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Using small furnace definition of <=55 kBtu/hour. [[Page 55045]] IV. Submission of Comments DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this analysis before or after the public meeting, but no later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this document. Interested parties may submit comments, data, and other information using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document. Submitting comments via www.regulations.gov. The www.regulations.gov Web page will require you to provide your name and contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment. However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment itself or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. Otherwise, persons viewing comments will see only first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments. Do not submit to www.regulations.gov information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the Web site will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section below. DOE processes submissions made through www.regulations.gov before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment. Submitting comments via email, hand delivery/courier, or mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/courier, or mail also will be posted to www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information in a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible, in which case it is not necessary to submit printed copies. No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, that are written in English, and that are free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author. Confidential Business Information. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email, postal mail, or hand delivery/courier two well-marked copies: One copy of the document marked ``confidential'' including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked ``non-confidential'' with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination. Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the information has previously been made available to others without obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the competitive injury to the submitting person that would result from public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest. It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure). Issued in Washington, DC, on September 4, 2015. Kathleen B. Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. [FR Doc. 2015-23021 Filed 9-11-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
![55038
Proposed Rules Federal Register
Vol. 80, No. 177
Monday, September 14, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER of special characters or any form on For further information on how to
contains notices to the public of the proposed encryption. review other public comments and the
issuance of rules and regulations. The 3. Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at
purpose of these notices is to give interested U.S. Department of Energy, Building (202) 586–2945 or by email:
persons an opportunity to participate in the Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
rules. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Washington, DC 20585–0121. If
possible, please submit all items on a Table of Contents
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY compact disc (CD), in which case it is I. Background
not necessary to include printed copies. II. Summary of the Analyses Performed by
10 CFR Part 430 4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda DOE
Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, A. Introduction
[Docket Number EERE–2014–BT–STD– Building Technologies Office, 950 B. Engineering Analysis
0031] L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, C. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: Analyses
RIN 1904–AD20 1. Furnace Size Assignment
(202) 586–2945. If possible, please
2. Energy Prices
Energy Conservation Program for submit all items on a CD, in which case
3. Other Updates
Consumer Products: Energy it is not necessary to include printed D. National Impact Analysis
Conservation Standards for copies. III. Results of the Analysis
Residential Furnaces No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be A. Economic Impacts on Consumers
accepted. For detailed instructions on B. National Impacts
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and submitting comments and additional IV. Submission of Comments
Renewable Energy, Department of information on the rulemaking process,
Energy. I. Background
see section IV of this document
ACTION: Notice of data availability. (Submission of Comments). On March 10, 2015, DOE published in
Docket: The docket, which includes the Federal Register a notice of
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Federal Register documents, comments, proposed rulemaking (NOPR) and
Energy (DOE) has completed a and other supporting documents/ public meeting to amend energy
provisional analysis of the potential materials, is available for review at conservation standards for residential
economic impacts and energy savings www.regulations.gov. All documents in non-weatherized gas furnaces (NWGF)
that could result from promulgating the docket are listed in the and mobile home gas furnaces (MHGF).
amended energy conservation standards www.regulations.gov index. However, 80 FR 13119. The proposed standards,
for residential non-weatherized gas not all documents listed in the index which are expressed as minimum
furnaces (NWGFs) that include two may be publicly available, such as annual fuel utilization efficiencies
product classes defined by input information that is exempt from public (AFUE), are shown in Table I.1. These
capacity and has published the data on disclosure. proposed standards, if adopted, would
its Web page. DOE encourages A link for access to the docket Web apply to all products listed in Table I.1
stakeholders to provide any additional page can be found at: https:// and manufactured in, or imported into,
data or information that may improve www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ the United States on or after the date 5
the analysis. appliance_standards/ years after the publication of the final
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=62. The rule for this rulemaking.
and information regarding this NODA www.regulations.gov Web page contains
no later than October 14, 2015. See instructions on how to access all TABLE I.1—PROPOSED AFUE ENERGY
section IV for details. documents in the docket. CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. NON-WEATHERIZED GAS FURNACES
must identify the NODA for Energy John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of AND MOBILE HOME GAS FURNACES
Conservation Standards for Residential Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and (TSL 3)
Furnaces, and provide docket number Renewable Energy, Building
EERE–2014–BT–STD–0031 and/or Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 Product class AFUE %
regulatory information number (RIN) Independence Avenue SW.,
number 1904–AD20. Comments may be Washington, DC 20585–0121. Non-Weatherized Gas-Fired
submitted using any of the following Telephone: (202) 287–1692. Email: Furnaces ........................... 92
methods: residential_furnaces_and_boilers@ Mobile Home Gas-Fired Fur-
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: ee.doe.gov. naces ................................. 92
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
www.regulations.gov. Follow the Ms. Johanna Hariharan, U.S.
instructions for submitting comments. Department of Energy, Office of the A number of stakeholders objected to
2. Email: ResFurnaces2014STD0031@ General Counsel, GC–33, 1000 a national standard at 92 percent AFUE,
ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number Independence Avenue SW., which would effectively only be able to
and/or RIN in the subject line of the Washington, DC 20585–0121. be met by using condensing technology.
message. Submit electronic comments Telephone: (202) 586–9507 or (202) The objections raised by stakeholders
in Word Perfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, 287–6307. Email: Johanna.Hariharan@ covered a wide range of issues, but the
or ASCII file format, and avoid the use hq.doe.gov. negative impacts of the proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Sep 11, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55215/page/1.svg)
![55040 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
framework as the March 2015 NOPR.1 A. Introduction would need to use condensing
Key aspects of the present analysis and The analysis conducted for this technology to meet the standard. Thus,
DOE’s updates to the NOPR analysis are NODA estimated impacts for the households installing a small furnace
described in the sections below. potential standard level combinations would not need to incur the costs
shown in Table II.1. The key aspect of associated with installing a condensing
this analysis is that only large furnaces furnace.
TABLE II.1—POTENTIAL STANDARD LEVEL COMBINATIONS ANALYZED FOR LARGE AND SMALL FURNACES
Furnance size Annual fuel utilization efficiency (%)
Large ................................................................................................................ 90 92 95 98
Small ................................................................................................................ 80 80 80 80
This NODA analysis used the same that would install a small furnace hour. In each case, large furnaces would
sample of residential furnace consumers depends on how ‘‘small furnace’’ is be defined as all sizes above the given
as the March 2015 NOPR. Each sample defined in terms of input capacity. For thresholds. The share of households that
household was assigned a furnace size this analysis, DOE considered the would install a furnace meeting a small
(in terms of input capacity) based on a following small furnace definitions: ≤45 furnace standard rises as the size cutoff
number of features, as discussed in kBtu/hour, ≤50 kBtu/hour, ≤55 kBtu/ in the small furnace definition
section II.C. The share of households hour, ≤60 kBtu/hour, and ≤65 kBtu/ increases, as illustrated in Table II.2.2
TABLE II.2—SHARE OF SAMPLE HOUSEHOLDS BY FURNACE SIZE
[percent]
Small furnace definition
Furnace size
≤45 kBtu/hour ≤50 kBtu/hour ≤55 kBtu/hour ≤60 kBtu/hour ≤65 kBtu/hour
Large .................................................................................... 92 86 85 68 62
Small .................................................................................... 8 14 15 32 38
Total .............................................................................. 100 100 100 100 100
B. Engineering Analysis C. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period LCC in present-value terms. The PBP
Analyses represents the number of years needed
The engineering analysis establishes to recover the increase in purchase price
the relationship between the The life-cycle cost (LCC) and payback of higher-efficiency residential furnaces
manufacturer production cost (MPC) period (PBP) analyses determine the through savings in the operating cost.
and energy efficiency for residential economic impact of potential standards For each considered standards case,
furnaces. This relationship between on individual consumers who purchase DOE measures the change in LCC
MPC and energy efficiency serves as the a furnace in the expected compliance relative to a no-new-standards case,
basis for calculations performed in the year (assumed to be 2021 for this which reflects the market in the absence
other analysis tools to estimate the costs analysis). The LCC is the total cost of of amended energy conservation
and benefits to individual consumers, purchasing, installing and operating a standards, including market trends for
manufacturers, and the nation. For each residential furnace over the course of its equipment that exceeds the current
NWGF efficiency level that was lifetime. DOE determines the LCC by energy conservation standards.
analyzed, the MPC was estimated for considering: (1) The total installed cost In the March 2015 NOPR and in
four furnace capacities (60 kBtu/hour, to the consumer (which consists of today’s NODA, DOE developed
manufacturer selling price, distribution nationally-representative household
80 kBtu/hour, 100 kBtu/hour, and 120
channel markups, sales taxes, and samples for residential furnaces from
kBtu/hour). For the NODA analysis,
installation costs); (2) the annual energy the 2009 Residential Energy
DOE updated the MPCs from the NOPR
consumption (natural gas or LPG and Consumption Survey (RECS).4 DOE
to incorporate the most recent available electricity) of residential furnaces as analyzed the net effect of potential
data for material,3 component, labor, they are used in the field; (3) the amended residential furnace standards
and overhead costs, and also updated operating cost of residential furnaces on consumers by calculating the LCC
the MPCs to 2014$. (i.e., energy cost and maintenance and savings and PBP for each household by
repair cost); (4) equipment lifetime; and efficiency level.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(5) a discount rate that reflects the DOE performed the LCC and PBP
consumer cost of capital and puts the analyses using a spreadsheet model
1 Please see the March 2015 NOPR and the furnace to meet the ‘‘small furnace’’ definition. See 4 U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information
accompanying TSD for details, which are available section II.C for discussion. Administration, Residential Energy Consumption
at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 3 DOE uses 5-year averages for metal materials Survey: 2009 RECS Survey Data (2013), available at:
appliance_standards/rulemaking.aspx?ruleid=62. http://www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/data/
and current prices for all other materials.
2 The shares in Table II.2 reflect the likelihood
2009/ (last accessed July 29, 2015).
that some consumers would down-size a new
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Sep 11, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55215/page/3.svg)
![55042 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
For the NODA analysis, DOE updated percent AFUE for large furnaces and 80- cost under each considered standards
energy price trends and several other percent AFUE for small furnaces, the case, and Table III.3 shows the
inputs with data from AEO 2015, as analysis reflects the likelihood that percentage of consumers in the South
described in the NIA spreadsheet. some consumers would purchase a that would experience a net cost.14 For
furnace at or above those efficiency these consumers, the LCC would
III. Results of the Analysis levels without standards, and thus increase under the standard compared
A. Economic Impacts on Consumers would not be affected by the standards. to the furnace they would purchase in
The average LCC savings in Table III.1 no-new-standards case. As expected, the
As mentioned in section II.C, for each only include those consumers who percentage of consumers that would
considered standards case, DOE would be affected at a given standard
experience a net cost declines as the
measures the change in LCC relative to level.
a no-new-standards case. For example, Table III.2 shows the percentage of definition of small furnace expands to
in the case of a separate standard of 90- consumers that would experience a net include more furnaces.
TABLE III.1—AVERAGE LCC SAVINGS FOR ALTERNATIVE FURNACE STANDARD LEVEL COMBINATIONS
[2014$]
Minimum AFUE (%) Average LCC savings (2014$) *
Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour)
Large Small
≤45 ≤50 ≤55 ≤60 ≤65
90 80 $383 $400 $400 $492 $484
92 80 463 478 479 553 525
95 80 439 447 449 479 437
98 80 365 372 374 388 347
* The average LCC savings only include those consumers who would be affected at a given standard level.
TABLE III.2—SHARE OF ALL CONSUMERS EXPERIENCING A NET COST FOR ALTERNATIVE FURNACE STANDARD LEVEL
COMBINATIONS
Minimum AFUE (%) % of consumers experiencing a net cost
Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour)
Large Small
≤45 ≤50 ≤55 ≤60 ≤65
90 80 19 15 13 11 7
92 80 17 13 12 10 6
95 80 21 17 15 12 9
98 80 35 34 33 26 23
TABLE III.3—SHARE OF CONSUMERS IN THE SOUTH EXPERIENCING A NET COST FOR ALTERNATIVE FURNACE STANDARD
LEVEL COMBINATIONS
Minimum AFUE (%) % of consumers in the south experiencing a net cost
Small furnace definition (kBtu/hour)
Large Small
≤45 ≤50 ≤55 ≤60 ≤65
90 80 27 20 19 13 7
92 80 25 18 17 11 7
95 80 28 22 21 14 10
98 80 35 31 30 20 14
Table III.4 compares the key increase somewhat but the share of definition was ≤60 kBtu/hour instead of
consumer economic impacts of a single consumers with a net cost declines ≤55 kBtu/hour, the difference between
standard for all furnaces to a separate considerably. The impacts of a separate the single standard for all furnaces and
standard for large and small furnaces.15 standard for large and small furnaces separate standards for large and small
Under a separate standard for large and would vary depending on the small furnaces would be greater than shown.
small furnaces, the average LCC savings furnace definition. For example, if the
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
14 The analysis used the same definition of the 15 The results for a single standard for all furnaces section II. DOE believes that showing a direct
South region as the March 2015 NOPR. differ slightly from the results in the March 2015 comparison with the NOPR results would not serve
NOPR because of the input revisions discussed in the purpose of the NODA analysis.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Sep 11, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55215/page/5.svg)
![55044 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
B. National Impacts large and small furnaces are shown in 7-percent and 3-percent discount rates,
Table III.8. respectively. The national energy
The estimated national energy savings Table III.9 and Table III.10 show the savings decrease as the small furnace
(full-fuel-cycle) of the considered national NPV of benefits for alternative definition expands.
combinations of minimum AFUE for furnace standard level combinations at
TABLE III.8—NATIONAL ENERGY SAVINGS FOR ALTERNATIVE FURNACE STANDARD LEVEL COMBINATIONS
[Quads]
Minimum AFUE (%) Small furnace definition
(kBtu/hour)
Large Small ≤45 ≤50 ≤55 ≤60 ≤65
92 80 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.3 1.8
95 80 4.2 4.2 4.1 3.4 2.8
98 80 5.8 5.7 5.7 4.9 4.2
TABLE III.9—NATIONAL NET PRESENT VALUE OF BENEFITS FOR ALTERNATIVE FURNACE STANDARD LEVEL COMBINATIONS
AT 7-PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE
[Billion 2014$]
Minimum AFUE (%) Small furnace definition
(kBtu/hour)
Large Small ≤45 ≤50 ≤55 ≤60 ≤65
92 80 3.1 3.5 3.5 3.0 2.4
95 80 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.2 3.6
98 80 3.8 4.4 4.4 4.6 4.0
TABLE III.10—NATIONAL NET PRESENT VALUE OF BENEFITS FOR ALTERNATIVE FURNACE STANDARD LEVEL
COMBINATIONS AT 3-PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE
[Billion 2014$]
Minimum AFUE (%) Small furnace definition
(kBtu/hour)
Large Small ≤45 ≤50 ≤55 ≤60 ≤65
92 80 14.7 14.8 14.8 11.8 9.1
95 80 20.2 20.1 20.0 16.9 13.9
98 80 23.9 24.0 23.9 21.3 18.4
Table III.11 compares the national in the case of a separate standard for and small furnaces mainly because the
energy savings and NPV of a single large and small furnaces mainly because LCC savings are higher. The impacts of
standard for all furnaces vs. a separate there is less switching from gas to a separate standard for large and small
standard for large and small furnaces. electric heating.17 The NPV is higher in furnaces would vary depending on the
The national energy savings are higher the case of a separate standard for large small furnace definition.
TABLE III.11—COMPARISON OF NATIONAL IMPACTS OF SINGLE STANDARD VS. SEPARATE STANDARD FOR LARGE AND
SMALL FURNACES *
Single standard for all furnaces Separate standard for large and small furnaces
National energy National net present National energy National net present
AFUE (%)
AFUE (%) savings value, 7% savings value, 7%
large/small
(quads) (billion 2014$) (quads) (billion 2014$)
92 .................................. 2.6 2.2 92/80 ............................ 2.9 3.5
95 .................................. 3.9 3.3 95/80 ............................ 4.1 4.6
98 .................................. 5.4 2.6 98/80 ............................ 5.7 4.4
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
* Using small furnace definition of ≤55 kBtu/hour.
17 In terms of FFC energy, switching from gas to because of the losses in thermal electricity
electricity increases energy use considerably generation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Sep 11, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55215/page/7.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55045
IV. Submission of Comments provides after you have successfully the submitting person that would result
DOE will accept comments, data, and uploaded your comment. from public disclosure; (6) when such
Submitting comments via email, hand information might lose its confidential
information regarding this analysis
delivery/courier, or mail. Comments and character due to the passage of time; and
before or after the public meeting, but
documents submitted via email, hand (7) why disclosure of the information
no later than the date provided in the
delivery/courier, or mail also will be would be contrary to the public interest.
DATES section at the beginning of this
posted to www.regulations.gov. If you It is DOE’s policy that all comments
document. Interested parties may
do not want your personal contact may be included in the public docket,
submit comments, data, and other
information to be publicly viewable, do without change and as received,
information using any of the methods
not include it in your comment or any including any personal information
described in the ADDRESSES section at
accompanying documents. Instead, provided in the comments (except
the beginning of this document.
provide your contact information in a information deemed to be exempt from
Submitting comments via
cover letter. Include your first and last public disclosure).
www.regulations.gov. The
names, email address, telephone
www.regulations.gov Web page will Issued in Washington, DC, on September 4,
number, and optional mailing address. 2015.
require you to provide your name and
The cover letter will not be publicly
contact information. Your contact viewable as long as it does not include
Kathleen B. Hogan,
information will be viewable to DOE any comments Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Building Technologies staff only. Your Include contact information each time Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
contact information will not be publicly Energy.
you submit comments, data, documents,
viewable except for your first and last and other information to DOE. If you [FR Doc. 2015–23021 Filed 9–11–15; 8:45 am]
names, organization name (if any), and submit via mail or hand delivery/ BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
submitter representative name (if any). courier, please provide all items on a
If your comment is not processed CD, if feasible, in which case it is not
properly because of technical necessary to submit printed copies. No DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
difficulties, DOE will use this telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted.
information to contact you. If DOE Comments, data, and other Federal Aviation Administration
cannot read your comment due to information submitted to DOE
technical difficulties and cannot contact electronically should be provided in 14 CFR Part 39
you for clarification, DOE may not be PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
able to consider your comment. Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file [Docket No. FAA–2015–3628; Directorate
However, your contact information format. Provide documents that are not Identifier 2015–NM–025–AD]
will be publicly viewable if you include secured, that are written in English, and RIN 2120–AA64
it in the comment itself or in any that are free of any defects or viruses.
documents attached to your comment. Documents should not contain special Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing
Any information that you do not want characters or any form of encryption Company Airplanes
to be publicly viewable should not be and, if possible, they should carry the
included in your comment, nor in any electronic signature of the author. AGENCY: Federal Aviation
document attached to your comment. Confidential Business Information. Administration (FAA), DOT.
Otherwise, persons viewing comments Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
will see only first and last names, submitting information that he or she (NPRM).
organization names, correspondence believes to be confidential and exempt
containing comments, and any by law from public disclosure should SUMMARY: We propose to supersede
documents submitted with the submit via email, postal mail, or hand Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012–12–
comments. delivery/courier two well-marked 04, which applies to certain The Boeing
Do not submit to www.regulations.gov copies: One copy of the document Company Model 737–300, –400, and
information for which disclosure is marked ‘‘confidential’’ including all the –500 series airplanes. AD 2012–12–04
restricted by statute, such as trade information believed to be confidential, currently requires repetitive external
secrets and commercial or financial and one copy of the document marked detailed inspections and nondestructive
information (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information inspections to detect cracks in the
Confidential Business Information believed to be confidential deleted. fuselage skin along the chem-mill steps
(CBI)). Comments submitted through Submit these documents via email or on at stringers S–1 and S–2R, between
www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own station (STA) 400 and STA 460, and
as CBI. Comments received through the determination about the confidential repair if necessary. Since we issued AD
Web site will waive any CBI claims for status of the information and treat it 2012–12–04, we have determined that,
the information submitted. For according to its determination. for certain airplanes, the skin pockets
information on submitting CBI, see the Factors of interest to DOE when adjacent to the Air Traffic Control (ATC)
Confidential Business Information evaluating requests to treat submitted antenna are susceptible to widespread
section below. information as confidential include: (1) fatigue damage. This proposed AD
DOE processes submissions made A description of the items; (2) whether would require a preventive modification
through www.regulations.gov before and why such items are customarily of the fuselage skin at crown stringers
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
posting. Normally, comments will be treated as confidential within the S–1 and S–2R. This proposed AD would
posted within a few days of being industry; (3) whether the information is reduce inspection thresholds and
submitted. However, if large volumes of generally known by or available from repetitive intervals for certain airplanes.
comments are being processed other sources; (4) whether the We are proposing this AD to detect and
simultaneously, your comment may not information has previously been made correct fatigue cracking of the fuselage
be viewable for up to several weeks. available to others without obligation skin panels at the chem-mill steps,
Please keep the comment tracking concerning its confidentiality; (5) an which could result in sudden fracture
number that www.regulations.gov explanation of the competitive injury to and failure of the fuselage skin panels,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:52 Sep 11, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14SEP1.SGM 14SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55215/page/8.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-26 10:15:05
Document Modified: 2018-02-26 10:15:05
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notice of data availability. | |
| Dates | DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NODA no later than October 14, 2015. See section IV for details. | |
| Contact | Mr. John Cymbalsky, 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) 287-1692. Email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 55038 | |
| RIN Number | 1904-AD20 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR