Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Cooking Products (Kitchen Ranges and Ovens) Energy Conservation Standards

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket Numbers EE-RM-93-201 and EE-RM-S-97-700]

RIN 1904-AA84

Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Cooking

Products (Kitchen Ranges and Ovens) Energy Conservation Standards

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

ACTION: Notice of limited reopening of the record and opportunity for

public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy reopens the record of its rulemaking

to revise energy conservation standards for cooking products under the

Energy Policy and Conservation Act for the following classes: Gas

cooktops, gas ovens, and electric non-self-cleaning ovens. This notice

provides an opportunity for public comment regarding supplemental

analyses on the potential impact of alternative efficiency levels,

written comments on these analyses, new factual information, and the

principal policy options now under consideration.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 30, 1998.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the 1996 Draft Report on the Potential Impact of

Alternative Energy Efficiency Levels for Residential Cooking Products

(Draft Report), supplemental analysis, and other post comment period

correspondence is available for public inspection and copying at the

Freedom of Information Reading Room, U.S. Department of Energy,

Forrestal Building, Room 1E-190, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-7574, between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4

p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

Written comments are welcome. Please submit 10 copies (no faxes)

to: Kathi Epping, U. S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, ``Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products: Cooking Products, Docket No. EE-RM-S-97-700'', EE-

43, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathi Epping, U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, EE-43, 1000

Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-7425, or

Eugene Margolis, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General

Counsel, GC-72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585,

(202) 586-9507.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 325 of the Energy Policy

and Conservation Act (EPCA), 42 U.S.C. 6295, the Department of Energy

(DOE) proposed to revise the energy conservation standards applicable

to cooking products, as well as a variety of other consumer products.

59 FR 10464 (March 4, 1994). Cooking products include conventional

ranges, cooktops, and ovens and microwave ovens. Section 325(o)(2)

requires that any amended standard be designed to achieve the maximum

improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and

economically justified. 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2). DOE proposed performance

standards for all conventional ovens and cooktops and microwave ovens.

DOE held public hearings and received 59 comments on its proposed

revisions to the cooking products energy conservation standards. After

reviewing the comments, DOE concluded that a number of significant

issues had been raised that required additional analysis. DOE also

decided to separate the rulemaking on cooking products from the

rulemakings for the other consumer products covered by the notice of

proposed rulemaking.

The Department, in response to comments on the proposed rule,

prepared a Draft Report containing DOE's revised analysis examining

five alternative efficiency levels. The Draft Report indicated that

standards based on the described venting and insulating improvements to

non-self-cleaning conventional electric ovens and eliminating standing

pilot lights for non-self-cleaning conventional gas ovens and

conventional gas cooktops could be determined to be technologically

feasible and economically justified and to save significant energy. The

analysis did not support any new or more stringent

[[Page 9976]]

efficiency standard for any other cooking products.

On May 5, 1996, DOE distributed a copy of the Draft Report to

interested parties including all of the commenters on the proposed rule

on cooking products. (EE-RM-S-97-700, No. 1 and No. 2.) The Department

invited comment on the Draft Report by no later than July 1, 1996. A

copy of the cover letter and the Draft Report has been added to the

record on file for inspection in the DOE Freedom of Information Reading

Room.

In commenting on the 1994 proposed rule, AHAM argued that standards

are not warranted for any product, though AHAM proposed that, if a

standard is set, DOE should adopt a prescriptive design standard

prohibiting standing pilot lights on conventional gas ranges in lieu of

all performance standards proposed for cooking products. Significant

energy savings, consistency with current standards, minimal design

change, and no compliance program were cited as benefits. AHAM also

commented that eliminating standing pilot lights could

disproportionately affect low-income and rural consumers. (EE-RM-93-

201, No. 1.)

On April 23, 1996, the American Council for an Energy Efficient

Economy (ACEEE) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) sent a

letter to the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM)

stating their support for a prescriptive design standard banning pilot

lights from all conventional gas ranges. (EE-RM-S-97-700, No. 3.)

DOE received three comments on the Draft Report. NRDC recommended

banning all standing pilot lights. In addition to cost effective energy

savings, NRDC emphasized the health and safety benefits which would

result from banning pilot lights. (EE-RM-S-97-700, No. 4.)

Betty Crocker expressed concern over the impact of standards for

consumers. Betty Crocker expressed concern about the maintenance

required for electric coil cooktop reflective pans and commented that

an oven separator would have low consumer acceptance. (EE-RM-S-97-700,

No. 5.) The results of the Draft Report indicated that neither of these

design options were economically justified.

Whirlpool stated that none of the proposed design options are

economically justified, several of the design options lessen consumer

utility, and the energy use by ranges and ovens has declined

significantly over the past two years. In addition, Whirlpool stated

that the cost of compliance testing for any performance standard would

offset the potential energy savings. Whirlpool did not discuss

prescriptive design standards such as the elimination of pilot lights

for gas products. (EE-RM-S-97-700, No. 6.)

Based on the analysis in the Draft Report and the comments

received, the Department is inclined to believe the record is complete

with respect to microwave ovens, electric self-cleaning ovens, and

electric cooktops. The analysis in the Draft Report indicates that

establishing new or revised standards for these types of cooking

products is not economically justified. For example, the analysis for

microwave ovens indicated paybacks exceeding the 10-year product life,

increased life-cycle costs, and a negative net present value. Based on

the consideration of this analysis, the Department does not expect to

establish new or revised standards for these products in this

rulemaking.

In addition, the analysis in the Draft Report and the comments

received prompted further examination of gas cooktops, gas ovens, and

electric non-self-cleaning ovens. DOE prepared an analysis to

supplement the Draft Report that focuses exclusively on the possible

elimination of standing pilot lights for gas products and improving

non-self-cleaning conventional electric ovens by venting and insulating

them like self-cleaning electric ovens. The supplemental analysis uses

the latest available data from AHAM regarding the trends over time of

shares of sales of non-self-cleaning conventional ovens and gas

products with pilot lights. It also uses the latest utility price

forecasts from the Annual Energy Outlook of the Energy Information

Administration, AEO 97, and the Gas Research Institute, GRI 97. A copy

of the supplemental analysis has been added to the record on file for

inspection in the DOE Freedom of Information Reading Room, and DOE is

sending a copy to all commenters on the proposed rule for cooking

products. (EE-RM-S-97-700, No. 7.)

The Department's supplemental analysis indicates that extending the

statutory prescriptive design standard banning standing pilot lights to

cover all conventional gas ranges would be technically feasible and

economically justified and would result in significant energy savings.

The current statutory standard bans pilot lights for gas kitchen ranges

and ovens equipped with an electric cord. Some consumers would need to

add an electrical outlet to accommodate electrical service to a

conventional gas range. While it is unknown what percent of homes do

not have electrical outlets available, based on the limited data

available, the Department believes that this percentage would be small.

In those homes where an electrical outlet is available, the estimated

first-cost increase to consumers for conventional gas ranges is $37,

with life-cycle cost savings of $91-$104 and paybacks of 2.9-3.2 years.

In those homes where an outlet needs to be added, the additional $90

cost of installing a new outlet 1 almost negates the

savings. In homes where an electric outlet is not available, the total

cost increase of $127, for conventional gas ranges, would result in

life-cycle cost savings of $1-$14 with paybacks of 10-11 years.

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

\1\ The $90 estimate for adding an electrical outlet comes from

a GRI report submitted by AHAM as a comment. It was derived from an

informal survey of electricians to install an outlet accessible to a

gas water heater and is comprised of $50 parts and labor and $40 for

a service call.

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

The impacts are more substantial for separate conventional gas

cooktops and ovens. For separate conventional gas cooktops, the cost

increase is $116, resulting in a life-cycle cost increase of $41-48 and

paybacks of 17-19 years. For separate conventional gas ovens, the cost

increase of $113 results in a life-cycle cost increase of $68-$75 and

paybacks of 27-32 years. Thus, the Department believes extending the

ban to these separate products is not economically justified. Based on

AHAM shipment data, the Department estimates the percent of separate

conventional gas cooktops and separate conventional gas ovens with

standing pilot lights to be approximately 3 and 0 percent,

respectively, by the year 2000. Therefore, a standard extending the

prohibition of standing pilot lights to include separate gas cooktops

and ovens in addition to ranges results in very little incremental

energy savings. Permitting separate conventional gas cooktops and ovens

to use pilot lights could also accommodate special circumstances where

electrical service is not practically available. Based on AHAM's

comments regarding the elimination of pilot lights and the fact that no

testing program would be required to implement such a prescriptive

design standard, the Department believes that there would not be any

significant adverse impacts on manufacturers. Given the analysis and

public comments to date, the Department expects to extend the

prescriptive design standard prohibiting standing pilot lights to all

conventional gas ranges but not to include the extension to separate

conventional gas cooktops and ovens without an electrical cord.

The Department's supplemental analysis indicates that establishing

[[Page 9977]]

standards for electric non-self-cleaning ovens could be technically

feasible and could save significant energy. However, because ovens are

not tested currently and therefore performance data on specific ovens

does not exist, it is unknown whether all non-self-cleaning electric

ovens, if insulated and vented as their self-cleaning counterparts,

would meet a specific performance standard. Consequently, there is a

risk that in order to bring some electric non-self-cleaning ovens into

compliance with a performance standard, manufacturers would need to use

additional design options. The analysis found no other design options

for either gas or electric ovens to be cost effective. Thus, the

Department does not expect to establish performance standards for any

cooking products including non-self-cleaning electric ovens.

The Department is changing the name for this rulemaking from

``kitchen ranges and ovens'' to ``cooking products.'' This change is

made because the term ``kitchen ranges and ovens'' does not accurately

describe the products considered which include conventional ranges,

cooktops and ovens and microwave ovens. To be consistent with this

change, the Department expects to add a regulatory definition of

``cooking products'' that is the same as the existing definition of

``kitchen ranges and ovens.''

The Department solicits public comment on the supplemental analysis

and its implications for this rulemaking, specifically with regard to

the extension of the prohibition on standing pilot lights.

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 26, 1998.

Dan W. Reicher,

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

[FR Doc. 98-5084 Filed 2-26-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P