82_FR_24319 82 FR 24218 - Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

82 FR 24218 - Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 101 (May 26, 2017)

Page Range24218-24221
FR Document2017-10868

On January 18, 2017, the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') published in the Federal Register a direct final rule to establish new energy conservation standards for dedicated purpose pool pumps. DOE has determined that the comments received in response to that direct final rule do not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawing it. Therefore, DOE is providing notice confirming the adoption of the energy conservation standards established in that direct final rule and announces the effective date of those standards.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 101 (Friday, May 26, 2017)
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 101 (Friday, May 26, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24218-24221]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10868]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008]
RIN 1904-AD52


Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for 
Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps

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

ACTION: Confirmation of effective date and compliance date for direct 
final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On January 18, 2017, the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') 
published in the Federal Register a direct final rule to establish new 
energy conservation standards for dedicated purpose pool pumps. DOE has 
determined that the comments received in response to that direct final 
rule do not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawing it. Therefore, 
DOE is providing notice confirming the adoption of the energy 
conservation standards established in that direct final rule and 
announces the effective date of those standards.

DATES: The direct final rule for dedicated-purpose pool pumps published 
on January 18, 2017 (82 FR 5650) became effective on May 18, 2017. 
Compliance with the dedicated-purpose pool pumps standards in the 
direct final rule will be required on July 19, 2021.

[[Page 24219]]


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 https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008. The docket Web page contains simple 
instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, 
in the docket.
    For further information on how to review the docket, contact the 
Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 586-6636 or by 
email: [email protected].

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) 586-9507. Email [email protected].
    Ms. Johanna Jochum, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-6307. Email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Authority

    As amended by the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Public 
Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015), the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
(``EPCA'' or, in context, ``the Act''), Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 
6291-6309, as codified), 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 of Energy (``Secretary''). That statement 
must contain 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. 6316, as applicable. A notice of proposed 
rulemaking (``NOPR'') that proposes an identical energy efficiency 
standard must be published simultaneously with the direct final rule 
and a public comment period of at least 110 days provided. 42 U.S.C. 
6295(p)(4). Not later than 120 days after issuance of the direct final 
rule, if DOE receives one or more adverse comments or an alternative 
joint recommendation is received relating to the direct final rule, the 
Secretary must determine whether the comments or alternative 
recommendation may provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal under 42 
U.S.C. 6295(o) or other applicable law.
    When making a determination whether to withdraw a direct final 
rule, DOE considers the substance, rather than the quantity, of 
comments. To this end, DOE weighs the substance of any adverse 
comment(s) received against the anticipated benefits of the consensus 
recommendations and the likelihood that further consideration of the 
comment(s) would change the results of the rulemaking. DOE notes that 
to the extent an adverse comment had been previously raised and 
addressed in the rulemaking proceeding, such a submission will not 
typically provide a basis for withdrawal of a direct final rule. If the 
Secretary makes such a determination, DOE must withdraw the direct 
final rule and proceed with the simultaneously published NOPR. DOE must 
publish in the Federal Register the reasons why the direct final rule 
was withdrawn.
    DOE determined that it did not receive any adverse comments 
providing a basis for withdrawal as described above for the direct 
final rule that is the subject of this document--dedicated purpose pool 
pumps (``DPPPs''). As such, DOE did not withdraw this direct final rule 
and allowed it to become effective. Although not required under EPCA, 
DOE customarily publishes a summary of the comments received during the 
110-day comment period and its responses to those comments.\1\ This 
document contains such a summary, as well as DOE's responses, for 
DPPPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See, e.g., Notice of effective date and compliance dates for 
direct final rule, 76 FR 67037 (Oct. 31, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps Direct Final Rule

A. Background

    Prior to May 18, 2017, no Federal energy conservation standards 
existed for DPPPs. DOE excluded this category of pumps from its recent 
consensus-based energy conservation standard final rule for general 
pumps. 81 FR 4368 (January 26, 2016).
    On July 29, 2016, DOE received a statement submitted by ASRAC that 
a consensus had been reached by a negotiated rulemaking working group 
for DPPPs (the ``the DPPP Working Group'' or, in context, the ``Working 
Group''). The DPPP Working Group consisted of 13 members, including one 
member from ASRAC and one DOE representative, with the balance 
comprising representatives of manufacturers of the DPPPs, efficiency 
advocates, and a State representative. The DPPP Working Group submitted 
to ASRAC a Term Sheet, that, in the view of the Working Group, would 
satisfy the EPCA requirements at 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), and ASRAC voted 
unanimously to adopt these consensus recommendations. (DPPP Term Sheet, 
Docket No. EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008, No. 82)
    After careful consideration of the DPPP Term Sheet related to 
amended energy conservation standards for DPPPs, the Secretary has 
determined that the recommendations contained therein are compliant 
with 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), and were submitted by interested persons who 
are fairly representative of relevant points of view on this matter, as 
required by 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4)(A)(i) for the issuance of a direct 
final rule.
    DOE found that the standard levels recommended in the DPPP Term 
Sheet would result in significant energy savings and are 
technologically feasible and economically justified. Thus, energy 
conservation standards, definitions, and prescriptive requirements 
established in the DPPP direct final rule and articulated below in this 
notice directly reflect the June 2016 DPPP Working Group 
recommendations.
    Tables II-1 and I-2 document the new standards for DPPPs 
established as a result of the direct final rule and the June 2016 DPPP 
Working Group recommendations. Standards for equipment classes in Table 
II-1 are performance-based, expressed in terms of weighted energy 
factor (``WEF''); standards in Table II-2 are prescriptive. These 
standards apply to all equipment listed in Tables II-1 and II-2 and 
manufactured in or imported into the United States starting on July 19, 
2021.

[[Page 24220]]



          Table II.1--Performance-Based Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Equipment class
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  Minimum allowable WEF
  Dedicated-purpose pool pump    Hydraulic horsepower  applicability                             ** score
            variety                               *                       Motor phase
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard-Size Self-Priming Pool  0.711 hp <= hhp < 2.5 hp...........  Single............  WEF =-2.30 * ln (hhp)
 Filter Pumps.                                                                             + 6.59.
Small-Size Self-Priming Pool     hhp < 0.711 hp.....................  Single............  WEF = 5.55 for hhp <=
 Filter Pumps.                                                                             0.13 hp,-1.30 * ln
                                                                                           (hhp) + 2.90 for hhp
                                                                                           > 0.13 hp.
Non-Self-Priming Pool Filter     hhp < 2.5 hp.......................  Any...............  WEF = 4.60 for hhp <=
 Pumps.                                                                                    0.13 hp,-0.85 * ln
                                                                                           (hhp) + 2.87 for hhp
                                                                                           > 0.13 hp.
Pressure Cleaner Booster Pumps.  Any................................  Any...............  WEF = 0.42.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* All instances of hhp refer to rated hydraulic horsepower determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure
  at 10 CFR 431.464 and applicable sampling plans.
*** WEF is measured by kgal/kWh.


             Table II.2--Prescriptive Energy Conservation Standards for Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Equipment class
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Dedicated-purpose pool pump                                                              Prescriptive standard
            variety              Hydraulic horsepower  applicability      Motor phase
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integral Sand Filter Pool Pump.  Any................................  Any...............  Must be distributed in
                                                                                           commerce with a pool
                                                                                           pump timer that is
                                                                                           either integral to
                                                                                           the pump or a
                                                                                           separate component
                                                                                           that is shipped with
                                                                                           the pump.
Integral Cartridge Filter Pool   Any................................  Any...............  Must be distributed in
 Pump.                                                                                     commerce with a pool
                                                                                           pump timer that is
                                                                                           either integral to
                                                                                           the pump or a
                                                                                           separate component
                                                                                           that is shipped with
                                                                                           the pump.
All Dedicated-Purpose Pool       Any................................  Any...............  The pump must be
 Pumps Distributed in Commerce                                                             shipped with freeze
 with Freeze Protection                                                                    protection disabled
 Controls.                                                                                 or with the following
                                                                                           default, user-
                                                                                           adjustable settings:
                                                                                           The default
                                                                                           dry-bulb air
                                                                                           temperature setting
                                                                                           is no greater than 40
                                                                                           [deg]F;
                                                                                           The default
                                                                                           run time setting
                                                                                           shall be no greater
                                                                                           than 1 hour (before
                                                                                           the temperature is
                                                                                           rechecked); and
                                                                                           The default
                                                                                           motor speed shall not
                                                                                           be more than \1/2\ of
                                                                                           the maximum available
                                                                                           speed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Comments on the DPPP Direct Final Rule

    Of the 11 substantive comments received in response to the direct 
final rule, 9 were from parties that expressed support for the direct 
final rule and its outcome. (All comments are available for public 
viewing at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2014-BT-STD-0048.) 
Among these commenters, five manufacturers and one trade group all 
commented positively on finalizing the rule based on manufacturing 
certainty. In addition, they highlighted the significant economic 
benefits to consumers and ratepayers that the direct final rule would 
provide.
    Other parties submitted comments that either expressed tentative 
support or no support for the DPPP direct final rule. The following 
sections discuss these specific comments and DOE's determination that 
the comments do not provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal of the 
direct final rule.
1. Replacement Motors
    Four parties commented that they hesitated to support or stated 
they did not support the direct final rule, despite their participation 
in the DPPP Working Group and unanimous consensus to the DPPP Term 
Sheet, because the direct final rule did not address replacement 
motors. Two parties further encouraged DOE to initiate a working group 
to address specifically replacement pool motors.
    In response, DOE notes that its direct final rule and Working Group 
only supported the development of energy conservation standards for 
DPPPs. DPPP replacement motors are not the subject of in this direct 
final rule. DOE appreciates that stakeholders have expressed support 
for adoption of the direct final rule as currently drafted, and notes 
that affected stakeholders have four-and-a-half years to take steps 
toward compliance with the DPPP standards, including forming a 
replacement pool pump motors working group. Thus, DOE plans to hold a 
public meeting in the near future with the interested parties to gather 
data and information that could lead to the consideration of energy 
conservation standards for replacement pool pump motors.
2. Cost/Benefit Analysis
    DOE received one substantive comment that alleged that the costs 
(regulatory and consumer) published in the DPPP direct final rule were 
too high. In particular, the commenter noted that the installation cost 
of a typical self-priming pool pump would increase by 77 percent, and 
that other pump categories will see price increases of anywhere between 
$9 and $66.
    In response, DOE notes that all of these issues were discussed in 
detail during the Working Group negotiations. DOE's analysis accounted 
for the lower energy costs that the consumers would receive, which 
would add up to a lifetime cost saving of over $2,000 and an eight-
month payback period. DOE also received a comment from a manufacturer 
that stated that 50 percent

[[Page 24221]]

of the self-priming pool pumps on the market are already compliant, 
which suggests that the direct final rule's standards are 
technologically feasible and economically justified.
    DOE notes that EPCA does not require it to choose the standard 
level with the least consumer cost, or the least cost to manufacturers, 
but only to assess those, among other, costs and benefits (using the 7 
factors articulated at 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)) and determine whether the 
burdens outweigh the benefits. In this case, the recommended TSL met 
that standard, and DOE's analysis and conclusions would not change 
based on the comments received. Thus, DOE does not consider these 
comments to provide a basis to justify a withdrawal of this direct 
final rule under EPCA.
3. Independent Control as Interested Parties
    DOE received a comment from an independent control manufacturer who 
commented that the views of independent control manufacturers were not 
represented in the Working Group, and thus the Working Group Term Sheet 
did not represent a consensus agreement. The Working Group meetings 
were conducted transparently, and the commenter's concerns were raised 
by multiple Working Group members, discussed at length, and resolved.

III. Department of Justice Analysis of Competitive Impacts

    EPCA directs DOE to consider any lessening of competition that is 
likely to result from new or amended standards. 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)) For the direct final rule 
discussed in this document, DOE published a NOPR containing energy 
conservation standards identical to those set forth the direct final 
rule and transmitted a copy of the direct final rule and the 
accompanying technical support document (``TSD'') to the Attorney 
General, requesting that the U.S. Department of Justice (``DOJ'') 
provide its determination on this issue. DOE has published DOJ's 
comments at the end of this document.
    DOJ reviewed the new standards in the direct final rule and the 
direct final rule TSD discussed in this document. As a result of its 
analysis, DOJ concluded that the new standards issued in the direct 
final rule are unlikely to have a significant adverse impact on 
competition. DOJ further noted that the standards established in the 
direct final rule were the same as recommended standards submitted in 
the consensus recommendations signed by industry participants who 
believed they could meet the standards (as well as other interested 
parties).

IV. Social Cost of Carbon

    DOE notes that the direct final rule discussed in this document 
preceded Executive Order 13783's requirement to revise future analyses 
involving carbon monetization. See 82 FR 16093 (March 31, 2017). The 
direct final rule included an analysis that examined the impacts 
associated with the social cost of carbon. These values, which were 
ancillary to the primary analyses that DOE conducted to determine 
whether the standards adopted in the rule were justified under the 
statutory criteria prescribed under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), did not change 
the results of DOE's analyses. Accordingly, while the inclusion of 
these values helped in providing additional detail regarding the 
impacts from the rule, those details played no role in determining the 
outcome of DOE's decision under EPCA.

V. National Environmental Policy Act

    Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(``NEPA''), DOE has determined that this direct final rule fits within 
the category of actions included in Categorical Exclusion (``CX'') B5.1 
and otherwise meets the requirements for application of a CX. See 10 
CFR part 1021, App. B, B5.1(b); 1021.410(b) and Appendix B, B(1)-(5). 
This rule fits within the category of actions because they are 
rulemakings establishing energy conservation standards for consumer 
products or industrial equipment, and for which none of the exceptions 
identified in CX B5.1(b) apply. Therefore, DOE has made a CX 
determination for this rulemaking, and DOE does not need to prepare an 
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement for it. 
DOE's CX determination applying to this direct final rule is available 
at http://energy.gov/nepa/categorical-exclusion-cx-determinations-cx.

VI. Conclusion

    In summary, based on the discussion above, DOE has determined that 
the comments received in response to the direct final rule establishing 
new energy conservation standards for DPPPs do not provide a reasonable 
basis for its withdrawal. As a result, the energy conservation 
standards set forth in that direct final rule became effective on May 
18, 2017. Compliance with the standards articulated in that direct 
final rule is required on July 19, 2021.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 22, 2017.
Daniel R. Simmons,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

Appendix

[The following letter will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations]

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division

ANDREW C. FINCH
Acting Assistant Attorney General
Main Justice Building
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.
Washington, DC 20530-0001
(202) 514-2401/(202) 616-2645 (Fax)

April 21, 2017

Daniel Cohen
Assistant General Counsel
U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, DC 20585

    Dear Assistant General Counsel Cohen:
    I am responding to your February 21, 2017, letter seeking the 
views of the Attorney General about the potential impact on 
competition of proposed energy conservation standards for dedicated-
purpose pool pumps (EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008). 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) 
and 43 U.S.C. 6316(a), which requires the Attorney General to make a 
determination of the impact of any lessening of competition that is 
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).
    In conducting its analysis, the Antitrust Division examines 
whether a proposed standard may lessen competition, for example, by 
substantially limiting consumer choice or increasing industry 
concentration. A lessening of competition could result in higher 
prices to manufacturers and consumers.
    We have reviewed the proposed standards contained in the Direct 
Final Rule (82 FR 5650, Jan. 18, 2017). We have also reviewed 
supplementary infounation submitted to the Attorney General by the 
Department of Energy and spoken with industry representatives. Based 
on this review, our conclusion is that the proposed energy 
conservation standards for dedicated-purpose pool pumps are unlikely 
to have a significant adverse impact on competition.

Sincerely,

Andrew C. Finch

[FR Doc. 2017-10868 Filed 5-25-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P



                                                24218                Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 101 / Friday, May 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations

                                                with an analysis of the nature and                      products or industrial equipment, and                 to the Assistant Attorney General for the
                                                extent of the impact. (42 U.S.C.                        for which none of the exceptions                      Antitrust Division in 28 CFR § 0.40(g).
                                                6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) and (B)(ii)) For the                identified in CX B5.1(b) apply.                         In conducting its analysis, the Antitrust
                                                                                                                                                              Division examines whether a proposed
                                                direct final rule discussed in this                     Therefore, DOE has made a CX                          standard may lessen competition, for
                                                document, DOE published a NOPR                          determination for this rulemaking, and                example, by substantially limiting consumer
                                                containing energy conservation                          DOE does not need to prepare an                       choice or increasing industry concentration.
                                                standards identical to those set forth the              Environmental Assessment or                           A lessening of competition could result in
                                                direct final rule and transmitted a copy                Environmental Impact Statement for it.                higher prices to manufacturers and
                                                of the direct final rule and the                        DOE’s CX determination applying to                    consumers.
                                                accompanying technical support                          this direct final rule is available at                  We have reviewed the proposed standards
                                                document (‘‘TSD’’) to the Attorney                                                                            contained in the Notice of Proposed
                                                                                                        http://energy.gov/nepa/categorical-
                                                                                                                                                              Rulemaking and the Direct Final Rule (81
                                                General, requesting that the U.S.                       exclusion-cx-determinations-cx.                       Fed. Reg. 74950 and 75194, Oct. 28, 2016),
                                                Department of Justice (‘‘DOJ’’) provide                                                                       and the related Technical Support Document.
                                                its determination on this issue. DOE has                VI. Conclusion
                                                                                                                                                              We have also reviewed the transcript of the
                                                published DOJ’s comments at the end of                     In summary, based on the discussion                public meeting held on the proposed
                                                this document.                                          above, DOE has determined that the                    standards on January 9, 2015, and public
                                                   DOJ reviewed the new standards in                    comments received in response to the                  comments filed with the Department of
                                                the direct final rule and the direct final              direct final rule for new energy                      Energy, and conducted interviews with
                                                rule TSD discussed in this document.                    conservation standards for MREFs do                   industry representatives.
                                                As a result of its analysis, DOJ                        not provide a reasonable basis for                      Based on the information currently
                                                concluded that the new standards                                                                              available, we do not believe that the
                                                                                                        withdrawal of the direct final rule. As
                                                                                                                                                              proposed energy conservation standards for
                                                issued in the direct final rule are                     a result, the energy conservation                     MREFs are likely to have a significant
                                                unlikely to have a significant adverse                  standards set forth in that direct final              adverse impact on competition.
                                                impact on competition. DOJ further                      rule became effective on February 27,                 Very truly yours,
                                                noted that the standards established in                 2017. Compliance with the standards                   Renata B. Hesse.
                                                the direct final rule were the same as                  articulated in that direct final rule is
                                                recommended standards submitted in                                                                            [FR Doc. 2017–10867 Filed 5–25–17; 8:45 am]
                                                                                                        required on October 28, 2019.
                                                the consensus recommendations signed                      Issued in Washington, DC, on May 22,
                                                                                                                                                              BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
                                                by industry participants who believed                   2017.
                                                they could meet the standards (as well                  Daniel R. Simmons,
                                                as other interested parties).                                                                                 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
                                                                                                        Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency
                                                IV. Social Cost of Carbon                               and Renewable Energy.                                 10 CFR Part 431
                                                  DOE notes that the direct final rule                  Appendix                                              [EERE–2015–BT–STD–0008]
                                                discussed in this document preceded
                                                                                                        [The following letter from the Department of          RIN 1904–AD52
                                                Executive Order 16093’s requirement to                  Justice will not appear in the Code of Federal
                                                revise future analyses involving carbon                 Regulations.]                                         Energy Conservation Program: Energy
                                                monetization. See 82 FR 16093 (March                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE                            Conservation Standards for Dedicated-
                                                31, 2017). The direct final rule included               Antitrust Division                                    Purpose Pool Pumps
                                                an analysis that examined the impacts                   Renata B. Hesse
                                                associated with the social cost of                      Acting Assistant Attorney General                     AGENCY:  Office of Energy Efficiency and
                                                carbon. These values, which were                        RFK Main Justice Building                             Renewable Energy, Department of
                                                ancillary to the primary analyses that                  950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.                         Energy.
                                                DOE conducted to determine whether                      Washington, D.C. 20530–0001                           ACTION: Confirmation of effective date
                                                the standards adopted in the rule were                  (202)514–2401/(202)616–2645 (Fax)                     and compliance date for direct final
                                                justified under the statutory criteria                  December 27, 2016                                     rule.
                                                prescribed under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), did                 Daniel Cohen
                                                not change the results of DOE’s                         Assistant General Counsel for Legislation,            SUMMARY:   On January 18, 2017, the U.S.
                                                analyses. Accordingly, while the                          Regulation and Energy Efficiency                    Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’)
                                                                                                        Department of Energy                                  published in the Federal Register a
                                                inclusion of these values helped in                     Washington, DC 20585
                                                providing additional detail regarding                                                                         direct final rule to establish new energy
                                                                                                        Re: Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–STD–0043                  conservation standards for dedicated
                                                the impacts from the rule, those details
                                                                                                          Dear Assistant General Counsel Cohen:               purpose pool pumps. DOE has
                                                played no role in determining the
                                                                                                          I am responding to your letter of October           determined that the comments received
                                                outcome of DOE’s decision under EPCA.                   28, 2016 seeking the views of the Attorney            in response to that direct final rule do
                                                V. National Environmental Policy Act                    General about the potential impact on                 not provide a reasonable basis for
                                                                                                        competition of proposed energy conservation
                                                   Pursuant to the National                             standards for miscellaneous refrigeration
                                                                                                                                                              withdrawing it. Therefore, DOE is
                                                Environmental Policy Act of 1969                        products (MREFs).                                     providing notice confirming the
                                                (‘‘NEPA’’), DOE has determined that this                  Your request was submitted under Section            adoption of the energy conservation
                                                direct final rule fits within the category              325(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) of the Energy Policy and           standards established in that direct final
                                                of actions included in Categorical                      Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA), 42               rule and announces the effective date of
                                                Exclusion (‘‘CX’’) B5.1 and otherwise                   U.S.C. § 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V), which requires          those standards.
                                                                                                        the Attorney General to make a
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES




                                                meets the requirements for application                                                                        DATES: The direct final rule for
                                                                                                        determination of the impact of any lessening
                                                of a CX. See 10 CFR part 1021, App. B,                                                                        dedicated-purpose pool pumps
                                                                                                        of competition that is likely to result from the
                                                B5.1(b); 1021.410(b) and Appendix B,                    imposition of proposed energy conservation            published on January 18, 2017 (82 FR
                                                B(1)–(5). This rule fits within the                     standards. The Attorney General’s                     5650) became effective on May 18, 2017.
                                                category of actions because it is a                     responsibility for responding to requests from        Compliance with the dedicated-purpose
                                                rulemaking establishing energy                          other departments about the effect of a               pool pumps standards in the direct final
                                                conservation standards for consumer                     program on competition has been delegated             rule will be required on July 19, 2021.


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:49 May 25, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00008   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM   26MYR1


                                                                     Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 101 / Friday, May 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations                                         24219

                                                ADDRESSES:   The docket for this                        provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or 42                 of pumps from its recent consensus-
                                                rulemaking, which includes Federal                      U.S.C. 6316, as applicable. A notice of               based energy conservation standard
                                                Register notices, public meeting                        proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) that                   final rule for general pumps. 81 FR 4368
                                                attendee lists and transcripts,                         proposes an identical energy efficiency               (January 26, 2016).
                                                comments, and other supporting                          standard must be published                               On July 29, 2016, DOE received a
                                                documents/materials, is available for                   simultaneously with the direct final rule             statement submitted by ASRAC that a
                                                review at www.regulations.gov. All                      and a public comment period of at least               consensus had been reached by a
                                                documents in the docket are listed in                   110 days provided. 42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(4).
                                                                                                                                                              negotiated rulemaking working group
                                                the www.regulations.gov index.                          Not later than 120 days after issuance of
                                                                                                                                                              for DPPPs (the ‘‘the DPPP Working
                                                However, not all documents listed in                    the direct final rule, if DOE receives one
                                                                                                                                                              Group’’ or, in context, the ‘‘Working
                                                the index may be publicly available,                    or more adverse comments or an
                                                                                                                                                              Group’’). The DPPP Working Group
                                                such as information that is exempt from                 alternative joint recommendation is
                                                                                                                                                              consisted of 13 members, including one
                                                public disclosure.                                      received relating to the direct final rule,
                                                   The docket Web page can be found at                  the Secretary must determine whether                  member from ASRAC and one DOE
                                                https://www.regulations.gov/                            the comments or alternative                           representative, with the balance
                                                docket?D=EERE-2015-BT-STD-0008.                         recommendation may provide a                          comprising representatives of
                                                The docket Web page contains simple                     reasonable basis for withdrawal under                 manufacturers of the DPPPs, efficiency
                                                instructions on how to access all                       42 U.S.C. 6295(o) or other applicable                 advocates, and a State representative.
                                                documents, including public comments,                   law.                                                  The DPPP Working Group submitted to
                                                in the docket.                                             When making a determination                        ASRAC a Term Sheet, that, in the view
                                                   For further information on how to                    whether to withdraw a direct final rule,              of the Working Group, would satisfy the
                                                review the docket, contact the                          DOE considers the substance, rather                   EPCA requirements at 42 U.S.C. 6295(o),
                                                Appliance and Equipment Standards                       than the quantity, of comments. To this               and ASRAC voted unanimously to
                                                Program staff at (202) 586–6636 or by                   end, DOE weighs the substance of any                  adopt these consensus
                                                email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@                     adverse comment(s) received against the               recommendations. (DPPP Term Sheet,
                                                ee.doe.gov.                                             anticipated benefits of the consensus                 Docket No. EERE–2015–BT–STD–0008,
                                                FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                        recommendations and the likelihood                    No. 82)
                                                   Mr. John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department                  that further consideration of the                        After careful consideration of the
                                                of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency                  comment(s) would change the results of                DPPP Term Sheet related to amended
                                                and Renewable Energy, Building                          the rulemaking. DOE notes that to the                 energy conservation standards for
                                                Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000                        extent an adverse comment had been                    DPPPs, the Secretary has determined
                                                Independence Avenue SW.,                                previously raised and addressed in the                that the recommendations contained
                                                Washington, DC 20585–0121.                              rulemaking proceeding, such a                         therein are compliant with 42 U.S.C.
                                                Telephone: (202) 586–9507. Email                        submission will not typically provide a               6295(o), and were submitted by
                                                ApplianceStandardsQuestions@                            basis for withdrawal of a direct final                interested persons who are fairly
                                                ee.doe.gov.                                             rule. If the Secretary makes such a                   representative of relevant points of view
                                                   Ms. Johanna Jochum, U.S. Department                  determination, DOE must withdraw the                  on this matter, as required by 42 U.S.C.
                                                of Energy, Office of the General Counsel,               direct final rule and proceed with the                6295(p)(4)(A)(i) for the issuance of a
                                                GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue                         simultaneously published NOPR. DOE                    direct final rule.
                                                SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.                         must publish in the Federal Register the
                                                Telephone: (202) 287–6307. Email:                       reasons why the direct final rule was                    DOE found that the standard levels
                                                Johanna.Jochum@hq.doe.gov.                              withdrawn.                                            recommended in the DPPP Term Sheet
                                                                                                           DOE determined that it did not                     would result in significant energy
                                                SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                                                                                        receive any adverse comments                          savings and are technologically feasible
                                                I. Authority                                            providing a basis for withdrawal as                   and economically justified. Thus,
                                                   As amended by the Energy Efficiency                  described above for the direct final rule             energy conservation standards,
                                                Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law                     that is the subject of this document—                 definitions, and prescriptive
                                                114–11 (April 30, 2015), the Energy                     dedicated purpose pool pumps                          requirements established in the DPPP
                                                Policy and Conservation Act (‘‘EPCA’’                   (‘‘DPPPs’’). As such, DOE did not                     direct final rule and articulated below in
                                                or, in context, ‘‘the Act’’), Public Law                withdraw this direct final rule and                   this notice directly reflect the June 2016
                                                94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309, as                         allowed it to become effective. Although              DPPP Working Group
                                                codified), authorizes DOE to issue a                    not required under EPCA, DOE                          recommendations.
                                                direct final rule establishing an energy                customarily publishes a summary of the                   Tables II–1 and I–2 document the new
                                                conservation standard for a product on                  comments received during the 110-day                  standards for DPPPs established as a
                                                receipt of a statement submitted jointly                comment period and its responses to                   result of the direct final rule and the
                                                by interested persons that are fairly                   those comments.1 This document                        June 2016 DPPP Working Group
                                                representative of relevant points of view               contains such a summary, as well as                   recommendations. Standards for
                                                (including representatives of                           DOE’s responses, for DPPPs.                           equipment classes in Table II–1 are
                                                manufacturers of covered products,                      II. Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps                      performance-based, expressed in terms
                                                States, and efficiency advocates) as                    Direct Final Rule                                     of weighted energy factor (‘‘WEF’’);
                                                determined by the Secretary of Energy                                                                         standards in Table II–2 are prescriptive.
                                                (‘‘Secretary’’). That statement must                    A. Background                                         These standards apply to all equipment
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES




                                                contain recommendations with respect                      Prior to May 18, 2017, no Federal                   listed in Tables II–1 and II–2 and
                                                to an energy or water conservation                      energy conservation standards existed                 manufactured in or imported into the
                                                standard that are in accordance with the                for DPPPs. DOE excluded this category                 United States starting on July 19, 2021.


                                                  1 See, e.g., Notice of effective date and

                                                compliance dates for direct final rule, 76 FR 67037
                                                (Oct. 31, 2011).

                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:49 May 25, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00009   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM   26MYR1


                                                24220                 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 101 / Friday, May 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations

                                                     TABLE II.1—PERFORMANCE-BASED ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR DEDICATED-PURPOSE POOL PUMPS
                                                                                              Equipment class
                                                                                                                                                                                      Minimum allowable WEF ** score
                                                                                                                 Hydraulic horsepower
                                                      Dedicated-purpose pool pump variety                                                                 Motor phase
                                                                                                                     applicability *

                                                Standard-Size Self-Priming Pool Filter Pumps ...             0.711 hp ≤ hhp < 2.5 hp ....                Single ...........    WEF =¥2.30 * ln (hhp) + 6.59.
                                                Small-Size Self-Priming Pool Filter Pumps ........           hhp < 0.711 hp ...................          Single ...........    WEF = 5.55 for hhp ≤ 0.13 hp,¥1.30 * ln (hhp)
                                                                                                                                                                                + 2.90 for hhp > 0.13 hp.
                                                Non-Self-Priming Pool Filter Pumps ...................       hhp < 2.5 hp .......................        Any ...............   WEF = 4.60 for hhp ≤ 0.13 hp,¥0.85 * ln (hhp)
                                                                                                                                                                                + 2.87 for hhp > 0.13 hp.
                                                Pressure Cleaner Booster Pumps ......................        Any .....................................   Any ...............   WEF = 0.42.
                                                  * All instances of hhp refer to rated hydraulic horsepower determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure at 10 CFR 431.464 and appli-
                                                cable sampling plans.
                                                  *** WEF is measured by kgal/kWh.

                                                           TABLE II.2—PRESCRIPTIVE ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR DEDICATED-PURPOSE POOL PUMPS
                                                                                              Equipment class
                                                                                                                                                                                            Prescriptive standard
                                                                                                                 Hydraulic horsepower
                                                      Dedicated-purpose pool pump variety                                                                 Motor phase
                                                                                                                     applicability

                                                Integral Sand Filter Pool Pump ..........................    Any .....................................   Any ...............   Must be distributed in commerce with a pool
                                                                                                                                                                                 pump timer that is either integral to the pump
                                                                                                                                                                                 or a separate component that is shipped with
                                                                                                                                                                                 the pump.
                                                Integral Cartridge Filter Pool Pump ....................     Any .....................................   Any ...............   Must be distributed in commerce with a pool
                                                                                                                                                                                 pump timer that is either integral to the pump
                                                                                                                                                                                 or a separate component that is shipped with
                                                                                                                                                                                 the pump.
                                                All Dedicated-Purpose Pool Pumps Distributed Any .....................................                   Any ...............   The pump must be shipped with freeze protec-
                                                   in Commerce with Freeze Protection Controls.                                                                                  tion disabled or with the following default,
                                                                                                                                                                                 user-adjustable settings:
                                                                                                                                                                               • The default dry-bulb air temperature setting is
                                                                                                                                                                                 no greater than 40 °F;
                                                                                                                                                                               • The default run time setting shall be no great-
                                                                                                                                                                                 er than 1 hour (before the temperature is re-
                                                                                                                                                                                 checked); and
                                                                                                                                                                               • The default motor speed shall not be more
                                                                                                                                                                                 than 1⁄2 of the maximum available speed.



                                                B. Comments on the DPPP Direct Final                        1. Replacement Motors                                               meeting in the near future with the
                                                Rule                                                                                                                            interested parties to gather data and
                                                                                                               Four parties commented that they                                 information that could lead to the
                                                  Of the 11 substantive comments                            hesitated to support or stated they did                             consideration of energy conservation
                                                received in response to the direct final                    not support the direct final rule, despite                          standards for replacement pool pump
                                                rule, 9 were from parties that expressed                    their participation in the DPPP Working                             motors.
                                                support for the direct final rule and its                   Group and unanimous consensus to the
                                                outcome. (All comments are available                        DPPP Term Sheet, because the direct                                 2. Cost/Benefit Analysis
                                                for public viewing at https://                              final rule did not address replacement                                 DOE received one substantive
                                                www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-                          motors. Two parties further encouraged                              comment that alleged that the costs
                                                2014-BT-STD-0048.) Among these                              DOE to initiate a working group to                                  (regulatory and consumer) published in
                                                                                                            address specifically replacement pool                               the DPPP direct final rule were too high.
                                                commenters, five manufacturers and
                                                                                                            motors.                                                             In particular, the commenter noted that
                                                one trade group all commented
                                                positively on finalizing the rule based                        In response, DOE notes that its direct                           the installation cost of a typical self-
                                                on manufacturing certainty. In addition,                    final rule and Working Group only                                   priming pool pump would increase by
                                                they highlighted the significant                            supported the development of energy                                 77 percent, and that other pump
                                                economic benefits to consumers and                          conservation standards for DPPPs. DPPP                              categories will see price increases of
                                                ratepayers that the direct final rule                       replacement motors are not the subject                              anywhere between $9 and $66.
                                                                                                            of in this direct final rule. DOE                                      In response, DOE notes that all of
                                                would provide.
                                                                                                            appreciates that stakeholders have                                  these issues were discussed in detail
                                                  Other parties submitted comments                          expressed support for adoption of the                               during the Working Group negotiations.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES




                                                that either expressed tentative support                     direct final rule as currently drafted,                             DOE’s analysis accounted for the lower
                                                or no support for the DPPP direct final                     and notes that affected stakeholders                                energy costs that the consumers would
                                                rule. The following sections discuss                        have four-and-a-half years to take steps                            receive, which would add up to a
                                                these specific comments and DOE’s                           toward compliance with the DPPP                                     lifetime cost saving of over $2,000 and
                                                determination that the comments do not                      standards, including forming a                                      an eight-month payback period. DOE
                                                provide a reasonable basis for                              replacement pool pump motors working                                also received a comment from a
                                                withdrawal of the direct final rule.                        group. Thus, DOE plans to hold a public                             manufacturer that stated that 50 percent


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014    17:49 May 25, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000      Frm 00010      Fmt 4700       Sfmt 4700     E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM       26MYR1


                                                                     Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 101 / Friday, May 26, 2017 / Rules and Regulations                                               24221

                                                of the self-priming pool pumps on the                   As a result of its analysis, DOJ                      provide a reasonable basis for its
                                                market are already compliant, which                     concluded that the new standards                      withdrawal. As a result, the energy
                                                suggests that the direct final rule’s                   issued in the direct final rule are                   conservation standards set forth in that
                                                standards are technologically feasible                  unlikely to have a significant adverse                direct final rule became effective on
                                                and economically justified.                             impact on competition. DOJ further                    May 18, 2017. Compliance with the
                                                   DOE notes that EPCA does not require                 noted that the standards established in               standards articulated in that direct final
                                                it to choose the standard level with the                the direct final rule were the same as                rule is required on July 19, 2021.
                                                least consumer cost, or the least cost to               recommended standards submitted in                      Issued in Washington, DC, on May 22,
                                                manufacturers, but only to assess those,                the consensus recommendations signed                  2017.
                                                among other, costs and benefits (using                  by industry participants who believed                 Daniel R. Simmons,
                                                the 7 factors articulated at 42 U.S.C.                  they could meet the standards (as well                Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency
                                                6295(o)) and determine whether the                      as other interested parties).                         and Renewable Energy.
                                                burdens outweigh the benefits. In this
                                                case, the recommended TSL met that                      IV. Social Cost of Carbon                             Appendix
                                                standard, and DOE’s analysis and                          DOE notes that the direct final rule                [The following letter will not appear in the
                                                conclusions would not change based on                   discussed in this document preceded                   Code of Federal Regulations]
                                                the comments received. Thus, DOE does                   Executive Order 13783’s requirement to                U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
                                                not consider these comments to provide                  revise future analyses involving carbon               Antitrust Division
                                                a basis to justify a withdrawal of this                 monetization. See 82 FR 16093 (March                  ANDREW C. FINCH
                                                direct final rule under EPCA.                           31, 2017). The direct final rule included             Acting Assistant Attorney General
                                                                                                        an analysis that examined the impacts                 Main Justice Building
                                                3. Independent Control as Interested                    associated with the social cost of                    950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.
                                                Parties                                                 carbon. These values, which were                      Washington, DC 20530–0001
                                                   DOE received a comment from an                       ancillary to the primary analyses that                (202) 514–2401/(202) 616–2645 (Fax)
                                                independent control manufacturer who                    DOE conducted to determine whether                    April 21, 2017
                                                commented that the views of                             the standards adopted in the rule were                Daniel Cohen
                                                independent control manufacturers                       justified under the statutory criteria                Assistant General Counsel
                                                were not represented in the Working                     prescribed under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), did               U.S. Department of Energy
                                                Group, and thus the Working Group                       not change the results of DOE’s                       Washington, DC 20585
                                                Term Sheet did not represent a                          analyses. Accordingly, while the                         Dear Assistant General Counsel Cohen:
                                                consensus agreement. The Working                                                                                 I am responding to your February 21, 2017,
                                                                                                        inclusion of these values helped in                   letter seeking the views of the Attorney
                                                Group meetings were conducted                           providing additional detail regarding                 General about the potential impact on
                                                transparently, and the commenter’s                      the impacts from the rule, those details              competition of proposed energy conservation
                                                concerns were raised by multiple                        played no role in determining the                     standards for dedicated-purpose pool pumps
                                                Working Group members, discussed at                     outcome of DOE’s decision under EPCA.                 (EERE–2015–BT–STD–0008). Your request
                                                length, and resolved.                                                                                         was submitted under Section
                                                                                                        V. National Environmental Policy Act                  325(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) of the Energy Policy and
                                                III. Department of Justice Analysis of                     Pursuant to the National                           Conservation Act, as amended (EPCA), 42
                                                Competitive Impacts                                     Environmental Policy Act of 1969                      U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) and 43 U.S.C.
                                                   EPCA directs DOE to consider any                                                                           6316(a), which requires the Attorney General
                                                                                                        (‘‘NEPA’’), DOE has determined that this              to make a determination of the impact of any
                                                lessening of competition that is likely to              direct final rule fits within the category            lessening of competition that is likely to
                                                result from new or amended standards.                   of actions included in Categorical                    result from the imposition of proposed
                                                It also directs the Attorney General of                 Exclusion (‘‘CX’’) B5.1 and otherwise                 energy conservation standards. The Attorney
                                                the United States (‘‘Attorney General’’)                meets the requirements for application                General’s responsibility for responding to
                                                to determine the impact, if any, of any                 of a CX. See 10 CFR part 1021, App. B,                requests from other departments about the
                                                lessening of competition likely to result               B5.1(b); 1021.410(b) and Appendix B,                  effect of a program on competition has been
                                                from a proposed standard and to                         B(1)–(5). This rule fits within the                   delegated to the Assistant Attorney General
                                                transmit such determination to the                                                                            for the Antitrust Division in 28 CFR 0.40(g).
                                                                                                        category of actions because they are                     In conducting its analysis, the Antitrust
                                                Secretary within 60 days of the                         rulemakings establishing energy                       Division examines whether a proposed
                                                publication of a proposed rule, together                conservation standards for consumer                   standard may lessen competition, for
                                                with an analysis of the nature and                      products or industrial equipment, and                 example, by substantially limiting consumer
                                                extent of the impact. (42 U.S.C.                        for which none of the exceptions                      choice or increasing industry concentration.
                                                6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) and (B)(ii)) For the                identified in CX B5.1(b) apply.                       A lessening of competition could result in
                                                direct final rule discussed in this                     Therefore, DOE has made a CX                          higher prices to manufacturers and
                                                document, DOE published a NOPR                                                                                consumers.
                                                                                                        determination for this rulemaking, and                   We have reviewed the proposed standards
                                                containing energy conservation                          DOE does not need to prepare an                       contained in the Direct Final Rule (82 FR
                                                standards identical to those set forth the              Environmental Assessment or                           5650, Jan. 18, 2017). We have also reviewed
                                                direct final rule and transmitted a copy                Environmental Impact Statement for it.                supplementary infounation submitted to the
                                                of the direct final rule and the                        DOE’s CX determination applying to                    Attorney General by the Department of
                                                accompanying technical support                          this direct final rule is available at                Energy and spoken with industry
                                                document (‘‘TSD’’) to the Attorney                      http://energy.gov/nepa/categorical-                   representatives. Based on this review, our
                                                General, requesting that the U.S.                       exclusion-cx-determinations-cx.                       conclusion is that the proposed energy
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES




                                                Department of Justice (‘‘DOJ’’) provide                                                                       conservation standards for dedicated-purpose
                                                its determination on this issue. DOE has                VI. Conclusion                                        pool pumps are unlikely to have a significant
                                                                                                                                                              adverse impact on competition.
                                                published DOJ’s comments at the end of                    In summary, based on the discussion
                                                                                                        above, DOE has determined that the                    Sincerely,
                                                this document.
                                                   DOJ reviewed the new standards in                    comments received in response to the                  Andrew C. Finch
                                                the direct final rule and the direct final              direct final rule establishing new energy             [FR Doc. 2017–10868 Filed 5–25–17; 8:45 am]
                                                rule TSD discussed in this document.                    conservation standards for DPPPs do not               BILLING CODE 6450–01–P




                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   17:49 May 25, 2017   Jkt 241001   PO 00000   Frm 00011   Fmt 4700   Sfmt 9990   E:\FR\FM\26MYR1.SGM   26MYR1



Document Created: 2017-05-26 02:24:10
Document Modified: 2017-05-26 02:24:10
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionRules and Regulations
ActionConfirmation of effective date and compliance date for direct final rule.
DatesThe direct final rule for dedicated-purpose pool pumps published on January 18, 2017 (82 FR 5650) became effective on May 18, 2017. Compliance with the dedicated-purpose pool pumps standards in the direct final rule will be required on July 19, 2021.
ContactMr. 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) 586-9507. Email [email protected]
FR Citation82 FR 24218 
RIN Number1904-AD52

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR