Jump to main content.

Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Amendment to the Definition of ``Electric Refrigerator''

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 [Federal Register: November 19, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 223)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 57845-57848]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19no01-6]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EE-RM-93-801]
RIN 1904-AB03

 
Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Amendment to 
the Definition of ``Electric Refrigerator''

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE or Department) is amending the 
definition of Electric refrigerator in its energy conservation program 
regulations to include a maximum temperature of the fresh food storage 
compartment, and to exclude certain appliances whose physical 
configuration makes them unsuitable for general storage of perishable 
foods.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 19, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Forrestal 
Building, Mail Station EE-43, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, 
DC 20585-0121, phone (202) 586-9611 or by e-mail at 
michael.raymond@ee.doe.gov.
    Francine Pinto, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General 
Counsel, Forrestal Building, Mail Station GC-72, 1000 Independence 
Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585, phone (202) 586-7432.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 57846]]

I. Background and Introduction

    DOE received requests from several manufacturers of wine coolers, 
including Danby Products, Ltd. and the Witt Company, seeking exemptions 
from the refrigerator energy efficiency standards for wine coolers. 
These products are configured with special storage racks for wine 
bottles and in general do not attain as low a storage temperature as a 
standard refrigerator. These characteristics make them unsuitable for 
general long-term storage of perishable foods. Wine coolers also have 
glass front doors which makes them less energy efficient than standard 
refrigerators.
    On July 13, 1999, DOE published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NOPR) to amend the definition of the term ``electric refrigerator.'' 
64 FR 37706. The Department proposed to amend the definition of 
electric refrigerator at 10 CFR 430.2 to exclude wine coolers from 
coverage by the energy efficiency regulations. Sales of these products 
are small and excluding them from coverage would not have any 
significant impacts.
    DOE proposed to exclude wine coolers by including an upper 
temperature limit in the definition of electric refrigerator. The 
refrigerator definition contains the phrase ``designed for the 
refrigerated storage of food at temperatures above 32 deg. F.'' 
Clearly, not all temperatures above 32 deg. F would be suitable for the 
refrigerated storage of food. What is lacking in the definition is a 
temperature range suitable for food storage for a reasonable length of 
time. The ``American National Standard--Household Refrigerators/
Household Freezers,'' ANSI/AHAM HRF-1-1988, Section 7.6.5.1, 
``Recommended Level of Performance'' states: ``It is recommended that 
in the fresh food compartment of household refrigerators, an average 
temperature within the range of 34 deg. F and 41 deg. F be attainable 
between the coldest and warmest settings of the controls. * * *'' Also, 
from the same paragraph, ``Refrigerator-freezer design and development 
engineers believe 41 deg. F to be a very practical but not absolute 
upper limit.''
    Accordingly, the Department proposed to change the definition of a 
refrigerator to include the 41 deg. F upper limit, and to exclude 
refrigerators containing special storage racks only. By the proposed 
definition, appliances which, at the coldest setting of the controls, 
could not attain a fresh food compartment temperature below 41 deg. F, 
and contained only special-purpose storage racks, would not be 
considered a refrigerator and, therefore, not a covered product. The 
definition proposed by the Department was:
    ``Electric refrigerator means a cabinet designed for the 
refrigerated storage of food at temperatures above 32 deg. F and below 
41 deg. F, configured for general refrigerated food storage, and having 
a source of refrigeration requiring single phase, alternating current 
electric energy input only. An electric refrigerator may include a 
compartment for the freezing and storage of food at temperatures below 
32 deg. F, but does not provide a separate low temperature compartment 
designed for the freezing and storage of food at temperatures below 
8 deg. F.''

II. Discussion

    In response to the July 13, 1999, NOPR, the Department received two 
comments. The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) 
supported the proposed rule, but recommended that the upper temperature 
limit be lowered from 41 deg. F to 38 deg. F. AHAM stated ``this 
revision is necessary to accommodate the temperatures needed for 
champagne and other sparkling wines and to avoid unnecessary government 
imposed limits on technological and commercial development. 38 deg. F 
also is the rating point for an ``all-refrigerator'' and, therefore, 
using that limit sets the appropriate divider.'' The Sub-Zero Freezer 
Company also recommended lowering the upper temperature limit from 
41 deg. F to 38 deg. F.
    As AHAM and Sub-Zero stated, 38 deg. F is the rating point for the 
all-refrigerator in the DOE test procedure. It is also the rating point 
for variable defrost control refrigerators. The purpose of the revised 
definition of an electric refrigerator is to exclude wine coolers, not 
all-refrigerators or variable defrost control refrigerators. For this 
reason, the Department does not want to set the upper limit temperature 
at 38 deg. F. In order to accommodate concerns about temperatures for 
the storage of champagne and sparkling wines, we have decided to lower 
the defined upper temperature limit from 41 deg. F to 39 deg. F. The 
Department today revises the definition of an electric refrigerator (10 
CFR Part 430.2 Definitions), as follows: Electric refrigerator means a 
cabinet designed for the refrigerated storage of food at temperatures 
above 32 deg. F and below 39 deg. F, configured for general 
refrigerated food storage, and having a source of refrigeration 
requiring single phase, alternating current electric energy input only. 
An electric refrigerator may include a compartment for the freezing and 
storage of food at temperatures below 32 deg. F, but does not provide a 
separate low temperature compartment designed for the freezing and 
storage of food at temperatures below 8 deg. F.

III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act

    The Department has reviewed this rule under the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., the 
regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality, 40 CFR parts 1500-
1508, the Department's regulations for compliance with NEPA, 10 CFR 
part 1021, and the Secretarial Policy on the National Environmental 
Policy Act (June 1994). DOE has concluded that this rule is covered 
under the Categorical Exclusion in paragraph A5 to subpart D, 10 CFR 
part 1021, which applies to rulemakings that interpret or amend an 
existing regulation without changing the environmental effect of the 
regulation. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an 
environmental impact statement is required.

B. Review Under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review''

    This regulatory action has been determined not to be a 
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, 
``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). 
Accordingly, this action was not subject to review under the Executive 
Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Office 
of Management and Budget.

C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601, requires an 
assessment of the impact of regulations on small businesses. Small 
businesses are those firms within an industry that are privately owned 
and less dominant in the market and that meet the size standards for 
small concerns promulgated by the Small Business Administration. A 
regulatory flexibility analysis examines the impact of the rule on 
small entities and considers alternative ways of reducing negative 
impacts. The regulatory flexibility analysis requirement does not apply 
if the head of an agency certifies that the rule will not, if 
promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities. 5 U.S.C. 605. Today's final rule redefines the term 
``electric refrigerator'' to exclude wine coolers. This change to the 
definition was requested by small

[[Page 57847]]

manufacturers of wine coolers for their benefit, and no negative impact 
on any small manufacturer is foreseen. Accordingly, DOE certifies that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    No new information or record keeping requirements are imposed by 
this rulemaking. Accordingly, no Office of Management and Budget 
clearance is required under the Paperwork Reduction Act. 44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.

E. Review Under Executive Order 12988, ``Civil Justice Reform''

    With respect to the review of existing regulations and the 
promulgation of new regulations, Section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, 
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on 
Executive agencies the general duty to adhere to the following 
requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write 
regulations to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal 
standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard and 
promote simplification and burden reduction. With regard to the review 
required by section 3(a), section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable 
effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the 
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing 
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction; 
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines 
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity 
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney 
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive 
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in 
section 3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it 
is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE reviewed today's final 
rule under the standards of section 3 of the Executive Order and 
determined that, to the extent permitted by law, the final regulations 
meet the relevant standards.

F. ``Takings'' Assessment Review

    DOE has determined pursuant to Executive Order 12630, 
``Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights,'' 52 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this regulation 
would not result in any takings that might require compensation under 
the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

G. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132 ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999), 
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing 
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism 
implications. Agencies are required to examine the constitutional and 
statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the 
policymaking discretion of the States and carefully assess the 
necessity for such actions. Agencies also must have an accountable 
process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local 
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications. DOE published its intergovernmental 
consultation policy on March 14, 2000. (65 FR 13735). Today's final 
rule only changes the definition of an electric refrigerator and it 
would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.

H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. 
104-4 (``Unfunded Mandates Act'') requires that the Department prepare 
an assessment of costs and benefits before promulgating a rule that 
includes a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by state, 
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private 
sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. The written assessment 
must include: (i) Identification of the Federal law under which the 
rule is promulgated; (ii) a qualitative and quantitative assessment of 
anticipated costs and benefits of the Federal mandate and an analysis 
of the extent to which such costs to state, local, and tribal 
governments may be paid with Federal financial assistance; (iii) if 
feasible, estimates of the future compliance costs and of any 
disproportionate budgetary effects the mandate has on particular 
regions, communities, non-Federal units of government, or sectors of 
the economy; (iv) if feasible, estimates of the effect on the national 
economy; and (v) a description of the Department's prior consultation 
with elected representatives of state, local, and tribal governments 
and a summary and evaluation of the comments and concerns presented. 
The Department has determined that today's final rule does not include 
a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or 
more to state, local or to tribal governments in the aggregate or to 
the private sector. Therefore, the requirements of Sections 203 and 204 
of the Unfunded Mandates Act do not apply to this action.

I. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act 
of 1999

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. No. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a 
Family Policymaking Assessment for any proposed rule or policy that may 
affect family well-being. Today's final rule would not have any impact 
on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. 
Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a 
Family Policymaking Assessment.

J. Review Under Executive Order 13211

    Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001) requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to 
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of 
Management and Budget, a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed 
significant energy action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined 
as any action by an agency that promulgates or is expected to lead to 
the promulgation of a final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant 
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; 
and (2) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy; or (3) is designated by the 
Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any proposed 
significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of 
any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the 
proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action 
and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
    Today's final rule will not have a significant adverse effect on 
the supply, distribution, or the use of energy, and, therefore, is not 
a significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a 
Statement of Energy Effects.

K. Congressional Notification

    As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will submit to Congress a report 
regarding the issuance of today's final rule prior

[[Page 57848]]

to the effective date set forth at the outset of this notice. The 
report will state that it has been determined that the rule is not a 
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 801(2).

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430

    Administrative practice and procedure, Energy conservation, 
Household appliances.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on November 14, 2001.
Douglas L. Faulkner,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 
Energy.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, Part 430 of Chapter II 
of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as set forth 
below.

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

    1. The authority citation for Part 430 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

    2. Section 430.2 is amended by revising the definition for Electric 
refrigerator to read as follows:


Sec. 430.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Electric refrigerator means a cabinet designed for the refrigerated 
storage of food at temperatures above 32 deg. F and below 39 deg. F, 
configured for general refrigerated food storage, and having a source 
of refrigeration requiring single phase, alternating current electric 
energy input only. An electric refrigerator may include a compartment 
for the freezing and storage of food at temperatures below 32 deg. F, 
but does not provide a separate low temperature compartment designed 
for the freezing and storage of food at temperatures below 8 deg. F.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 01-28822 Filed 11-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.