Federal Register, Volume 78 Issue 6 (Wednesday, January 9, 2013)

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 9, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1779-1792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00113]

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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 305

[3084-AB15]

Disclosures Regarding Energy Consumption and Water Use of Certain
Home Appliances and Other Products Required Under the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act (``Appliance Labeling Rule'')

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'').

ACTION: Proposed Rule and Proposed Conditional Exemption.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission proposes to amend the Appliance Labeling Rule
(``Rule'') by updating ranges of comparability and unit energy cost
figures for many EnergyGuide labels. The Commission also seeks comment
on a proposed exemption request by the Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers (AHAM) to help consumers compare the labels on
refrigerators and clothes washers after the implementation of upcoming
changes to the Department of Energy test procedures for those products.

DATES: Comments must be received by March 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper by
following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write ``Energy Label Ranges,
Matter No. R611004'' on your comment, and file your comment online at
https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/energylabelranges by following
the instructions on the Web-based form. If you prefer to file your
comment on paper, mail or deliver your comment to the following
address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113
(Annex U), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hampton Newsome, (202) 326-2889,
Attorney, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection,
Federal Trade Commission, Room M-8102B, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Commission issued the Appliance Labeling Rule (``Rule'') in
1979,\1\ in response to a directive in the Energy Policy and
Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA).\2\ The Rule requires energy labeling
for major home appliances and other consumer products, to help
consumers compare competing models. When first published, the Rule
applied to eight categories: refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers,
freezers, dishwashers, water heaters, clothes washers, room air
conditioners, and furnaces. The Commission subsequently expanded the
Rule's coverage to include central air conditioners, heat pumps,
plumbing products, lighting products, ceiling fans, and televisions.
The Commission is currently conducting a regulatory review of the
Rule.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ 44 FR 66466 (Nov. 19, 1979) (Rule's initial promulgation).
\2\ 42 U.S.C. 6294. EPCA also requires the Department of Energy
(``DOE'') to develop test procedures that measure how much energy
appliances use, and to determine the representative average cost a
consumer pays for different types of energy.
\3\ 77 FR 15298 (Mar. 15, 2012) (regulatory review). The
Commission currently has two other open proceedings related to other
proposed amendments for the Rule. See 77 FR 33337 (June 6, 2012)
(proposed changes to furnace and central air conditioner labels); 76
FR 45715 (Aug. 1, 2011) (proposed expanded light bulb coverage).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Rule requires manufacturers to attach yellow EnergyGuide labels
on many of these products, and prohibits retailers from removing the
labels or rendering them illegible. In addition, the Rule directs
sellers, including retailers, to post label information on Web sites
and in paper catalogs from which consumers can order products.
EnergyGuide labels for covered appliances must contain three key
disclosures: estimated annual energy cost (for most products); a
product's energy consumption or energy efficiency rating as determined
from Department of Energy (DOE) test procedures; and a comparability
range displaying the highest and lowest energy costs or efficiency
ratings for all similar models. For energy cost calculations, the Rule
specifies national average costs for applicable energy sources (e.g.,
electricity, natural gas, oil) as calculated by DOE. The Rule sets a
five-year schedule for updating range of comparability and annual
energy cost information.\4\ The Commission updates the range
information based on manufacturer data submitted pursuant to the Rule's
reporting requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ 16 CFR 305.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Proposed Amendments

As discussed below, the Commission proposes to update the
comparability ranges (Appendices A-J to Part 305) and national average
energy cost figures (Appendix K to Part 305) for many EnergyGuide
labels consistent with its five-year schedule. This Notice also
contains several minor, proposed revisions and updates to the label's
content, some of which were suggested by commenters as part of the
Commission's ongoing regulatory review. To avoid requiring multiple
label revisions within a short time period, the Commission proposes to
require these label content changes concurrently with the range
updates. Finally, the Commission proposes to grant a request from the
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) seeking an exemption
related to labeling requirements for refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, and freezers (hereinafter referred to as ``refrigerators''),
and clothes washers to

[[Page 1780]]

address recent DOE test procedure changes.

A. Comparability Range and Energy Cost Revisions

In accordance with the Rule's five-year schedule for label updates,
the Commission publishes proposed revisions to the comparability range
and energy cost information for many products bearing EnergyGuide
labels.\5\ The comparability ranges (i.e., scales) show the highest and
lowest energy costs or energy efficiency ratings of models similar to
the labeled product. The Commission derives these ranges from annual
data submitted by manufacturers.\6\ In addition, the Commission is
updating the average energy cost figures (e.g., 12 cents per kWh)
manufacturers must use to calculate a model's estimated energy cost for
the label based on national average cost figures published by DOE.\7\
To effect these changes, the Commission proposes amendments to the
applicable tables in the Rule's appendices. Manufacturers must begin
using this new information within 90 days after publication of a final
notice in this proceeding. To aid manufacturers in transitioning to the
new ranges, FTC staff will provide sample label template files on its
Web site.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ 16 CFR 305.10.
\6\ In addition to revising existing comparability ranges, the
Commission proposes to include a new range for instantaneous
electric water heaters (Appendix D6).
\7\ 77 FR 29940 (Apr. 26, 2012) (DOE notice for ``Representative
Average Unit Costs of Energy'').
\8\ The Commission will also update the prototype and sample
labels in the Rule's appendices to reflect the new range and cost
information as well as the minor label content changes proposed in
this Notice when it publishes a final rule regarding the ranges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

At this time, the Commission does not propose to alter range and
cost information for EnergyGuide labels on four product categories
(refrigerators, clothes washers, furnaces and central air conditioners,
and televisions) given upcoming DOE regulatory changes applicable to
those products.\9\ Instead, the Commission proposes waiting to
synchronize the changes with the impending DOE regulations. By doing
so, the Commission would avoid several label changes in a short time
period, a practice that could confuse consumers and burden
manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ For refrigerators and clothes washers, as discussed in
Section II.B. below, the Commission proposes to update range and
cost information after the upcoming implementation of revised DOE
standards and test procedures, which will significantly change
energy use data for those products. See infra note 19. Similarly,
for furnace and central air conditioner labels, the Commission
recently announced plans to issue range data to coincide with new
DOE efficiency standards scheduled to become effective next year. 77
FR 33337 (June 6, 2012) (proposed FTC rule). Finally, for
televisions, the Commission will issue revisions to the television
ranges in 16 CFR 305.17 after DOE adopts a recently proposed test
procedure. 77 FR 2830 (Jan. 19, 2012) (proposed DOE test procedure).
The Commission will also establish an annual reporting schedule for
television manufacturers at that time. EPCA requires annual
reporting based on DOE test procedures. Because no DOE television
test procedure currently exists, the Rule currently contains no
reporting requirements. 42 U.S.C. 6296(b)(4) (FTC annual reporting
requirements tied to DOE test procedure); 16 CFR 305.8 (FTC
reporting requirements). In addition, these amendments do not affect
recently revised labeling requirements for lighting products. 75 FR
41696 (July 19, 2010). The Rule has separate provisions in Sec.
305.15 for energy cost disclosures on lighting products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Proposed Revisions and Updates to Label Content

In addition to the proposed range and cost updates, the proposed
amendments contain five minor label changes to simplify and improve the
disclosures. The Commission also seeks comment on the possible
elimination of range information on television labels. Finally, the
Commission seeks comment on the potential increase in the frequency of
changes to range and cost information on all EnergyGuide labels.
First, consistent with recently implemented FTC labeling
requirements for light bulb and television labels,\10\ the proposed
rule rounds to the nearest cent the national average electricity (12
cents per kWh) and natural gas ($1.06 per therm) cost figures (in
Appendix K) used to calculate the label's estimated annual operating
(energy) cost. In the past, the Rule has expressed these figures as a
fraction of a cent (e.g., 11.85 cents per kWh). A cost figure rounded
to cents should be more familiar to consumers and should not have any
negative impact on the label's utility because any differences in cost
from such rounding will be very small and apply to all models.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ 75 FR 41696 (July 19, 2010) (light bulbs); 76 FR 1038 (Jan.
6, 2011) (televisions).
\11\ DOE's 2012 national average energy cost data lists
electricity at 11.84 cents/kWh. 77 FR 24940 (Apr. 26, 2012) (DOE
fuel cost update). Accordingly, the FTC's proposed amendments
require manufacturers to use 12 cents/kWh in calculating energy cost
for affected labels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second, also consistent with the recent television and light bulb
labeling requirements, the proposed amendments further simplify the
label's cost disclosure by eliminating reference to the cost rate's
year in Sec. 305.11(f). Currently, the label identifies the year of
the underlying energy cost rate (e.g., ``based on a 2007 national
average electricity cost of 10 cents per kWh''). This date remains on
the label for five years. For example, labels for a product introduced
in 2011 state that the cost figure derives from a 2007 national
average. However, because energy rates can increase and decrease from
year to year, the benefit of disclosing this detail on the label does
not appear significant. More importantly, this disclosure could cause
confusion. For instance, the ``2007'' reference in the example above
may incorrectly suggest to some consumers that the product itself was
produced in 2007. To avoid these problems, the Commission proposes to
eliminate the reference to the year. The label would simply read
``based on a national average electricity cost of * * *.''
Third, based on comments in the ongoing regulatory review for the
Rule, the Commission proposes to include a new disclosure on room air
conditioners (Sec. 305.11(f)) explaining that the cost estimate is
based on an assumed 750 hours of operation a year.\12\ Similar
estimates already appear on other labels (e.g., four loads per week for
dishwashers and five hours per day for televisions). This change should
help consumers gauge the product's estimated energy cost in the context
of their own use. Fourth, the amendments replace the term ``operating
cost'' with ``energy cost'' on EnergyGuide labels for appliances (Sec.
305.11(f)). The term ``energy'' ties the disclosure directly to the
label's purpose (i.e., disclosing the product's energy use) and is
consistent with new labels for televisions and light bulbs. Finally,
the amendments make a conforming change to the Web site address on the
label, from www.ftc.gov/appliances to www.ftc.gov/energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ Joint Comments from Energy-Efficiency and Consumer
Organizations (May 16, 2012) (560957-00015) available at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/00015-83010.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In addition to these minor changes, the Commission seeks comment on
whether to retain range information on television labels.\13\ In
comments related to the regulatory review of the overall Rule, the
Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) argued that the comparability
ranges on the EnergyGuide labels become obsolete soon after they are
issued because the television market changes so frequently.\14\ As a
result, the estimated energy costs for many models fall

[[Page 1781]]

outside the range depicted on the label, limiting the label's utility.
CEA also noted that, in lieu of the ranges on labels, consumers can
rely on other sources, including consumer and trade publications and
product reviews, to obtain comparative energy information for
televisions. In response, the Commission seeks comment on whether to
eliminate range information from future updates of the television
label. Comments should address whether range information is useful,
whether the model's energy cost information provides an adequate
comparative tool for consumers shopping in stores and online, and
whether there are sufficient alternatives to provide comparability
information to consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ 16 CFR 305.17(f).
\14\ CEA comments (May 16, 2012) (560957-00012)
available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/560957-00012-83006.pdf. EPCA grants the Commission discretion to include
(or exclude) range information for television labels. 42 U.S.C.
6296(c)(9). However, once DOE issues a final test procedure,
manufacturers will have to submit energy data whether or not the
label displays a range. 42. U.S.C. 6296(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Commission seeks comment on whether to update range
and cost information more frequently than every five years.\15\ In
comments on the regulatory review, several energy-efficiency
organizations suggested that the FTC follow a three-year schedule to
update national average energy cost figures and the comparison ranges
for most products. They also recommended a two-year schedule for
products with rapidly changing efficiencies and quicker sell-through
periods, such as televisions.\16\ The commenters argued that the
current schedule fails to keep pace with efficiency improvements of new
models. Similarly, in their view, the five-year schedule does not
update the label's average cost figures frequently enough. In support
of these observations, the commenters noted recent dishwasher market
changes brought on by new DOE standards as well as an approximately 10%
increase in national average electricity costs over the last few years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ 16 CFR 305.10(a).
\16\ Joint Comments from Energy-Efficiency and Consumer
Organizations (May 16, 2012) (560957-00015) available at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/00015-83010.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In establishing the five-year schedule, the Commission recognized
the potential benefits of more frequent changes to cost and range
information.\17\ However, the Commission concluded that the need for
consistent label information is paramount and, on balance, deserves
greater weight than the need for more frequent updates. In doing so,
the Commission focused on the need to minimize frequent label changes,
noting that inconsistent cost and range information for competing
models in showrooms and catalogs can lead to consumer confusion and a
lack of confidence in the label. In the Commission's view, the five-
year schedule strikes a reasonable balance between maintaining
consistent disclosures and providing frequent updates. Accordingly, the
Commission is not proposing to change the current schedule. However,
the Commission seeks further comment on whether it should adopt the
commenters' suggestions to implement a three-year schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\17\ 72 FR 49948, 49959 (Aug. 29, 2007) (rulemaking on
effectiveness of the EnergyGuide label).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Proposed Conditional Exemption for Refrigerators and Clothes Washers

In response to a request from the Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers (AHAM),\18\ the Commission proposes a conditional
exemption and rule amendments for refrigerators and clothes washers.
New DOE testing procedures for these products, issued in conjunction
with new efficiency standards, change the methods for calculating a
model's energy use and, as a result, will trigger substantial changes
to the energy information disclosed on EnergyGuide labels.\19\ To aid
consumers in their comparison shopping during this transition, the
Commission proposes a distinct label for models tested under the new
DOE procedure to be used both during this transition and afterward. In
addition, the Commission proposes to allow manufacturers to begin
labeling new models using the new DOE test procedures several months
before the DOE compliance dates to ease the burden associated with
transition to the new test procedures.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\18\ AHAM comments (July 17, 2012) (560957-00023) at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/00023-83190.pdf and
(Sept. 11, 2012) (560957-00025) at http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/560957-00025-84112.pdf.
\19\ 76 FR 57516 (Sept. 15, 2011) (refrigerator standards); 77
FR 3559 (Jan. 25, 2012) (refrigerator test procedure); 77 FR 32308
(May 31, 2012) (clothes washer standards); 77 FR 13888 (Mar. 7,
2012) (clothes washer test procedure). DOE rules require compliance
with the new test procedures for all refrigerators by September 15,
2014 and for all clothes washers by March 7, 2015.
\20\ The Commission issued similar modifications in 2003 for
clothes washer labels in response to changes in the DOE test
procedure. 68 FR 23584 (May 5, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AHAM submitted its request in anticipation of upcoming DOE energy
conservation standards and test procedures for refrigerators (effective
on September 15, 2014) and clothes washers (effective on March 7,
2015). The new, more stringent conservation standards will render a
substantial portion of existing refrigerator and clothes washer models
obsolete. In addition, the updated test procedures will yield
substantially different results than the current ones. According to
AHAM, the new refrigerator test procedure will increase the measured
energy use of refrigerators by approximately 14%, though the increase
will vary between product classes, manufacturers, and even individual
models.\21\ In addition, the new clothes washer test procedure bases
annual energy use estimates on 295 cycles per year (approximately six
per week), instead of the current 392 cycles (approximately eight per
week), thus reducing stated energy costs on the EnergyGuide labels by
about 25%.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\21\ AHAM comments (May 16, 2012) (560957-0013) at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/00013-83038.pdf.
\22\ See 77 FR 13888, 13933 (Mar. 7, 2012) (DOE clothes washer
test procedure). The new DOE test procedure also includes the cost
of energy consumed in non-active wash modes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AHAM notes that after manufacturers start to test their products
using the new procedures, showrooms and Web sites will contain some
models tested under the old procedure and others tested under the new
one. In AHAM's view, the resulting mix of EnergyGuide labels could
severely hamper consumers in making fair product comparisons.
To help facilitate the transition to the new efficiency standards
and to aid shoppers who compare products during this period, AHAM
proposed two measures. First, it seeks permission to use the new DOE
tests for labeling models introduced prior to DOE's compliance dates.
Second, it recommends different, transitional EnergyGuide labels for
these models, to help consumers distinguish products tested under the
new procedure from those tested under the old one. Specifically, AHAM
proposes that new labels contain blue (cyan) text and include the
statement: ``Blue EnergyGuide Compares Only to Other Models with Blue
EnergyGuides (due to new U.S. Government requirements).'' \23\ AHAM's
members want to begin using the new test procedures and transitional
labels for models introduced after January 1, 2014 for refrigerators,
and June 1, 2014 for clothes washers. AHAM also requested that the
Commission continue to require this modified label for products tested
under the new procedure until DOE makes another substantial change to
the test procedure in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\23\ AHAM comments (Sept. 11, 2012) (560957-00025) at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/560957-00025-84112.pdf. In those comments, AHAM also recommended that the
Commission omit a comparability range scale from the label until
data from the new test procedures becomes available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AHAM contends that these proposals will reduce burdens associated
with upcoming regulatory changes, avoid

[[Page 1782]]

consumer confusion, and encourage early introduction of high-efficiency
models. The Commission generally agrees. The proposal should reduce
burdens by allowing refrigerator and clothes washer manufacturers to
roll out new high-efficiency models well before the DOE compliance date
and thus avoid the logistical complications associated with designing,
producing, and testing many models at the same time.\24\ In addition,
using transitional labels will avoid the display of a misleading mix of
test results on EnergyGuide labels. Lastly, early compliance will
provide an incentive for manufacturers to introduce models that meet
the more stringent energy standards sooner, thus providing consumers
with more high-efficiency choices.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\24\ To facilitate the early introduction of these higher-
efficiency models, DOE has announced that manufacturers may certify
these models with DOE using the new test procedures, thus relieving
them from having to test new models under both the old and new test
procedures during the transition period. On June 29, 2012, DOE
issued guidance permitting early compliance with new or amended test
procedures and standards. See http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/tp_faq_2012-06-29.pdf. Thus, in DOE's
view, manufacturers may begin using the new test procedures before
the dates specified for compliance.
\25\ AHAM also requested guidance on whether manufacturers must
change model numbers for products during the DOE transition period.
Unless the manufacturer modifies the model in a way that affects its
energy performance, the Commission does not recommend changing model
numbers during the transition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, the Commission proposes to exempt manufacturers from
certain EnergyGuide testing and labeling requirements for new
refrigerator and clothes washer models introduced before DOE's
compliance dates. Specifically, the Commission proposes to grant a
conditional exemption from the Rule's requirement that, for purposes of
the EnergyGuide label, manufacturers use the estimated annual energy
consumption derived from the test procedures presently required by
DOE.\26\ By granting the requested exemption, the Commission would
allow manufacturers to begin using the results of DOE's new procedures
and provide those results on EnergyGuide labels several months before
the DOE compliance date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\26\ 16 CFR 305.5(a) and 305.11(a) (FTC testing and labeling);
see also 10 CFR Part 430 (DOE test procedures).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission proposes to grant this exception, but only to the
extent required to allow manufacturers \27\ to use the new test
procedures on refrigerator (including refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, and freezers) and clothes washer models manufactured after
January 1, 2014 (for refrigerators) and June 1, 2014 (for clothes
washers). If a manufacturer continues to use the current test results
for a particular model until the new procedures take effect, September
15, 2014 (for refrigerators) and March 7, 2015 (for clothes washers),
it must continue to use the current label for that model up until those
dates. Manufacturers would remain obligated to comply with all other
Rule requirements. The Commission proposes to grant this exemption on
the following additional conditions:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\27\ Consistent with the Rule's requirements, the proposed
exemption applies to both manufacturers and private labelers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) For models manufacturers choose to test and label under the
exemption, manufacturers must follow the new DOE test procedures in 10
CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix A (refrigerators) and Appendix J2
(clothes washers) to determine the energy use figures printed on
EnergyGuide labels; \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\28\ Manufacturers also may use the new test procedures for
labeling existing products during this period, but must follow all
conditions of this exemption in doing so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2) For all such models, manufacturers must use EnergyGuide labels,
as illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 of this Notice, with the energy cost
and electricity use figures in yellow text framed by block boxes and
containing the statement ``Compare to other labels with yellow numbers.
Appliances that have labels with black numbers were tested differently
to estimate cost and electricity used.'' \29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\29\ The Commission does not propose a cyan (blue) label as
suggested by AHAM because cyan text on yellow background would be
difficult to read, especially for smaller text. In addition, the
cyan ink could cause confusion with regard to ENERGY STAR
certification given that cyan is the color commonly used for ENERGY
STAR logos. By retaining the yellow and black format, the proposed
label will not change the printing cost associated with the labels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(3) For all such models, manufacturers must print the estimated
energy cost on the label above the center of the comparability range,
and the following statement must appear directly below the range:
``Cost Range Not Available,'' as illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 of this
Notice; \30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\30\ The Commission will publish range information for the new
labels once energy data becomes available for refrigerators and
clothes washers tested under the new procedure, most likely in 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(4) For all such models, the label must state that the estimated
energy cost is based on a national average electricity cost of 12 cents
per kWh; and
(5) For all such clothes washer models, the label must state that
the estimated energy cost is based on six wash loads per week and, as
discussed below, must provide capacity in cubic feet.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\31\ The new DOE test procedure changes the estimated weekly
clothes washer cycles from 8 to 6. 77 FR 13888 (DOE clothes washer
test procedure).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second, to ensure consistency in labeling following the exemption
period, the Commission proposes to amend the Rule at Sec. Sec.
305.5(a) and 305.11 to require these new labels, as described in the
five conditions above, after the test procedure transition. Thus, the
new labels would apply to all refrigerators and clothes washers
distributed on, or after, the DOE new test procedure compliance dates
(September 15, 2014 for refrigerators and March 7, 2015 for clothes
washers). This change should reduce consumer confusion in viewing
labels that look alike but contain differently-calculated
information.\32\ The Commission proposes to maintain this new label
until DOE further amends the test procedures in the future beyond 2015.
At that time, the Commission will consider changes to the label. In
addition, once the Commission receives product data reflecting new and
existing models tested under the new DOE procedures, it would issue new
comparability ranges for those products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\32\ To avoid confusion associated with the multiple rule
amendments and effective dates covered by this Notice, the
Commission has not included formal proposed rule language for the
transitional labels. However, this Notice contains a full
description of the proposal, including sample labels. In addition,
the minor label changes proposed in section II.B. (i.e., fuel rates
to the nearest cent and the use of ``energy cost'' instead of
``operating cost'') would not be required for refrigerator and
clothes washer labels until the new DOE test procedure compliance
dates. (September 15, 2014 for refrigerators and March 7, 2015 for
clothes washers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission seeks comment on the proposed exemption and
associated amendments. In particular, the Commission requests input on
whether the different results from the new and old DOE test procedures
are significant enough to warrant the proposed label modifications. In
addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether the proposed label
changes are appropriate and will help consumers in their purchasing
decisions. In particular, commenters should address whether the
proposed labels will effectively communicate to consumers that they
should not compare the old and new labels. In addition, commenters
should identify any alternative disclosures or label design

[[Page 1783]]

features that would be more effective than the proposed labels.
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09JA13.002

[[Page 1784]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09JA13.003

BILLING CODE 6750-01-C

D. Additional Refrigerator and Clothes Washer Issues

In addition to the exemption request for a transitional label, the
Commission has considered the following three issues related to
refrigerators and clothes washers raised in response to the regulatory
review notice: Changes to refrigerator range categories; disclosures
for refrigerator models with optional icemakers; and capacity
information for clothes washers.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\33\ The Commission plans to consider other outstanding issues
from the regulatory review at a later date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Refrigerator Comparability Range Categories: The current rule
organizes refrigerator comparability ranges by product configuration
(e.g., models with top-mounted freezers) in Appendices A1-A8. The
current requirements designate eight separate range categories for
refrigerator models and three for

[[Page 1785]]

freezer models.\34\ These ranges disclose the energy costs associated
with the most and least efficient models in a particular category.
Specifically, for automatic-defrost refrigerator freezers, which
typically populate the bulk of showroom floors, the Rule contains five
categories (or styles): Side-by-side door models with and without
through-the-door ice service; top-mounted freezer models with and
without through-the-door ice service; and bottom-mounted freezer
models. The Rule also has ranges for less common models including those
with manual and partial defrost models, and refrigerator-only
models.\35\ These categories allow consumers to compare the energy use
of similarly configured refrigerators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\34\ The Rule further divides each model category into several
size classes (e.g., 19.5 to 21.4 cubic feet), each with its own
comparability range.
\35\ See 16 CFR part 305, Appendices A and B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Several energy-efficiency and consumer groups urged the Commission
to consolidate the comparability ranges into a single range covering
all configurations.\36\ They reasoned one range would allow consumers
to compare a product's energy performance against all other models.
AHAM opposed this approach, arguing that consolidation of the ranges
for different configurations would cast fully-featured products that
use more energy in an unfavorable light. AHAM also pointed to data
suggesting that consumers usually replace their existing refrigerators
with similarly configured models. AHAM acknowledged, however, that it
had no detailed information directly addressing whether consumers shop
with a specific configuration in mind. It concluded that, without clear
data on consumer shopping habits, the Commission should refrain from
changing the current ranges.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\36\ Joint Comments from Energy-Efficiency and Consumer
Organizations (May 16, 2012) (560957-00015) available at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/00015-83010.pdf.
\37\ AHAM comments (Sept. 11, 2012) (560957-00025)
available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/560957-00025-84112.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission does not propose any changes at this time. Without
further opportunity for comment on a proposal and more information
about consumer buying habits, the Commission is reluctant to alter
existing requirements.\38\ Once DOE's new standards become effective,
the Commission will examine new range data from models on the market
and consider whether to propose changes to the range categories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\38\ The consolidation of ranges also could cause conflicts and
confusion with regard to the ENERGY STAR system, which sets
efficiency levels based on different refrigerator configurations.
For example, ENERGY STAR-qualified side-by-side door models are
highly efficient compared to other side-by-side models but not
necessarily compared to all other refrigerator-freezers. Therefore,
if the comparison range on the EnergyGuide label included all
configurations, some ENERGY STAR designated models will be higher on
the cost range than some non-ENERGY STAR models. Before making any
changes, the Commission needs to explore the overall costs and
benefits of such a change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Refrigerator Models with Optional Icemakers: Currently,
refrigerator labels do not reflect icemaker energy consumption because
the current DOE test procedure does not measure a model's icemaker
operation. However, because the new DOE procedures will account for
icemakers, the new labels will now include icemaker energy consumption
for those products.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\39\ 16 CFR 305.5 (FTC testing rules); 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart
B, Appendix A (DOE refrigerator tests).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In light of this change, AHAM has raised concerns about labeling
for so-called ``kitable'' refrigerator models (i.e., models that can be
fitted with an icemaker before or after purchase).\40\ The new DOE
rules divide these products into categories (i.e., units with pre-
installed icemakers and units without). Thus, each category will have
its own EnergyGuide labels reflecting different levels of energy use.
In comments to the Commission, AHAM has suggested that all ``kitable''
refrigerator labels disclose the energy use of the model shipped
without the optional icemaker to avoid overstating energy costs for
models that may never have an icemaker. In addition, AHAM suggests
additional label language to inform retailers and consumers that the
addition of an icemaker will increase the model's energy costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\40\ AHAM comments (May 16, 2012, and October 31, 2012) at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/00013-83038.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission agrees that this proposal merits consideration.
However, DOE plans to examine its designation of these models and thus
may provide guidance that addresses AHAM's concerns.\41\ Accordingly,
the Commission does not plan to impose any additional testing-related
disclosures for these products until DOE has completed its
deliberations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\41\ 77 FR at 3569 (DOE notice on refrigerator testing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clothes Washer Capacity: In initiating the Rule's regulatory
review, the Commission proposed to require specific capacity
information in cubic feet on EnergyGuide labels for clothes
washers.\42\ The Commission seeks additional comments on this issue.
Current EnergyGuide labels indicate whether the model is ``standard''
or ``compact,'' but do not specify volume (e.g., 3.5 cubic feet). In
the current market, most models fall into the broad ``standard'' size
class (i.e., models with tub capacities greater than 1.6 cubic feet),
but actual capacity among models varies significantly. Thus, the
general capacity disclosure provides little assistance to consumers in
distinguishing washer size. A specific capacity disclosure on the label
should help consumers make important product comparisons. It would also
complement recent DOE and industry efforts to ensure uniformity in
capacity disclosures, which would provide consumers with usable
information whether they are looking at EnergyGuide labels,
manufacturer advertising, or DOE certification data.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\42\ 77 FR at 15302 (proposing to amend 16 CFR 305.7(g) to
include clothes washer capacity on the label).
\43\ See 75 FR 57556, 57575 (Sept. 21, 2010) (DOE clothes washer
notice) and http://www.aham.org/ht/a/GetDocumentAction/i/51727.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AHAM objected to the Commission's proposal, arguing that it will
greatly increase the number of labels manufacturers have to produce.
According to AHAM, many washer models with different capacities have
the same energy cost. Manufacturers currently print one label for such
appliances. AHAM contended that the Commission's proposal would prevent
this cost-savings. AHAM also argued consumers can access capacity
information through other sources. In addition, it observed that
industry members have already taken steps to ensure consistency in
washer capacity claims. Thus, in AHAM's view, the Commission's proposal
addresses a problem that no longer exists. In contrast, PG&E supported
the specific capacity disclosure proposed in the regulatory review
notice, suggesting it might ``prompt consumers to think more critically
about the utility of different sized washers, and also [their]
associated energy and water requirements.'' \44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\44\ Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) comments (May 15,
2012) (00009) at http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/00009-82974.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission continues to believe that detailed capacity
information will help consumers in their purchasing decisions. The
presence of capacity information allows consumers easily to consider
the size and energy cost of models as they compare products in
showrooms and Web sites, without repeatedly crosschecking washer
capacity disclosed elsewhere in specifications and other marketing
material. In addition, this approach is consistent with the EnergyGuide
labels

[[Page 1786]]

for most other covered products, which, among other things, allow
consumers to gauge a model's energy cost against its size. Moreover,
data for clothes washers certified to DOE suggests that the proposed
change would require new labels for a small fraction of models.\45\
Accordingly, it seems unlikely that the proposal would impose a
substantial burden on manufacturers. The Commission seeks further
comment on its proposal to require clothes washer capacity disclosures
on the label.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\45\ See DOE clothes washer data at https://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Request for Comment

The Commission invites interested persons to submit written
comments on any issue of fact, law, or policy that may bear upon the
FTC's proposed labeling requirements. Please provide explanations for
your answers and supporting evidence where appropriate. In addition,
the Commission notes that it has accepted several late comments in its
ongoing regulatory review proceeding.\46\ To ensure that parties have
an opportunity to address issues raised in those submissions, the
Commission invites comments on any open issue in the regulatory review
proceeding in addition to those issues raised in the present notice.
Interested persons should follow the instructions below for filing any
such comments on the regulatory review. After examining the comments,
the Commission will determine whether to issue final amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\46\ 44 FR 66466 (Nov. 19, 1979) (regulatory review notice). The
late comments are available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/energylabelamend/index.shtm and include: AHAM (July 17, 2012, Sept.
12, 2012, and Oct. 31, 2012), Earthjustice (Dec. 3, 2012),
Fanimation (July 17, 2012), Miele Inc. (Sept. 20, 2012), and
Progress Lighting (June 25, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

All comments should be filed as prescribed below, and must be
received by March 1, 2013. Interested parties are invited to submit
written comments electronically or in paper form. Comments should refer
to ``Energy Label Ranges, Matter No. R611004'' to facilitate the
organization of comments. Please note that your comment, including your
name and your state, will be placed on the public record of this
proceeding, including on the publicly accessible FTC Web site, at
http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm.
Because comments will be made public, they should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as any individual's Social
Security Number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state
identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number;
financial account number; or credit or debit card number. Comments also
should not include any sensitive health information, such as medical
records or other individually identifiable health information. In
addition, comments should not include trade secret or any commercial or
financial information which is obtained from any person and which is
privileged or confidential as provided in Section 6(f) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act (FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f)), and FTC Rule
4.10(a)(2) (16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)). Comments containing matter for which
confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must
be clearly labeled Confidential, and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c).
Because paper mail addressed to the FTC is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening, please consider submitting your comments
in electronic form. Comments filed in electronic form should be
submitted using the following weblink: https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/energylabelranges (and following the
instructions on the web-based form). To ensure that the Commission
considers an electronic comment, you must file it on the web-based form
at the weblink https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/energylabelranges. If this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov/#!home, you may also file an electronic comment
through that Web site. The Commission will consider all comments that
regulations.gov forwards to it. You may also visit the FTC Web site at
http://www.ftc.gov to read the Notice and the news release describing
it.
A comment filed in paper form should include the Energy Label
Ranges, Matter No. R611004 reference both in the text and on the
envelope, and should be mailed or delivered to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex
U), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the
Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to
heightened security precautions.
The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit
the collection of public comments to consider and use in this
proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and
responsive public comments that it receives, whether filed in paper or
electronic form. Comments received will be available to the public on
the FTC Web site, to the extent practicable, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of discretion, the FTC makes every
effort to remove home contact information for individuals from the
public comments it receives before placing those comments on the FTC
Web site. More information, including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.
Because written comments appear adequate to present the views of
all interested parties, the Commission has not scheduled an oral
hearing regarding these proposed amendments. Interested parties may
request an opportunity to present views orally. If such a request is
made, the Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register
stating the time and place for such oral presentation(s) and describing
the procedures that will be followed. Interested parties who wish to
present oral views must submit a hearing request, on or before February
1, 2013, in the form of a written comment that describes the issues on
which the party wishes to speak. If there is no oral hearing, the
Commission will base its decision on the written rulemaking record.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Act

The current Rule contains recordkeeping, disclosure, testing, and
reporting requirements that constitute information collection
requirements as defined by 5 CFR 1320.3(c), the definitional provision
within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations that
implement the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). OMB has approved the
Rule's existing information collection requirements through Jan. 31,
2014 (OMB Control No. 3084 0069). The proposed amendments do not change
the substance or frequency of the recordkeeping, disclosure, or
reporting requirements and, therefore, do not require further OMB
clearance.

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act relating to a
Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis (5 U.S.C. 603-604) are not
applicable to this proceeding because the amendments do not impose any
new obligations on entities regulated by the Appliance Labeling Rule.
As explained in detail elsewhere in this document, the proposed
exemption and amendments do not significantly change the substance or
frequency of the recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting requirements.
Thus, the amendments will not have a ``significant economic

[[Page 1787]]

impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 605. The
Commission has concluded, therefore, that a regulatory flexibility
analysis is not necessary, and certifies, under Section 605 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), that the amendments
announced today will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

Proposed Rule Language

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 305

Advertising, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Commission proposes to
amend 16 CFR part 305 as follows:

PART 305--RULE CONCERNING DISCLOSURES REGARDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
AND WATER USE OF CERTAIN HOME APPLIANCES AND OTHER PRODUCTS
REQUIRED UNDER THE ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT (``APPLIANCE
LABELING RULE'')

0
1. The authority citation for part 305 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6294.

0
2. In Sec. 305.7, revise paragraph (g) to read as follows:

Sec. 305.7 Determinations of capacity.

* * * * *
(g) Clothes washers. The capacity shall be the tub capacity as
determined according to Department of Energy test procedures in 10 CFR
part 430, subpart B, expressed in the terms of volume in cubic feet and
the designations of ``standard'' or ``compact'' as determined pursuant
to those regulations.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 305.10, revise paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:

Sec. 305.10 Ranges of comparability on the required labels.

(a) Range of estimated annual energy costs or energy efficiency
ratings. The range of estimated annual operating costs or energy
efficiency ratings for each covered product (except televisions,
fluorescent lamp ballasts, lamps, showerheads, faucets, water closets
and urinals) shall be taken from the appropriate appendix to this part
in effect at the time the labels are affixed to the product. The
Commission shall publish revised ranges in the Federal Register in
2017. When the ranges are revised, all information disseminated after
90 days following the publication of the revision shall conform to the
revised ranges. Products that have been labeled prior to the effective
date of a modification under this section need not be relabeled.
(b) Representative average unit energy cost. The Representative
Average Unit Energy Cost to be used on labels as required by Sec.
305.11 and disclosures as required by Sec. 305.20 are listed in
appendix K to this part, except the electricity and gas cost to be used
on labels for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers
distributed before September 15, 2014 and labels for clothes washers
distributed before March 7, 2015 shall be 10.65 cents per kWh and 1.218
dollars per therm. The Commission shall publish revised Representative
Average Unit Energy Cost figures in the Federal Register in 2017. When
the cost figures are revised, all information disseminated after 90
days following the publication of the revision shall conform to the new
cost figure.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 305.11, revise paragraphs (f)(5) and (9) and redesignate
paragraphs (f)(11) and (12) as paragraphs (f)(10) and (11),
respectively.
The revisions read as follows:

Sec. 305.11 Labeling for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers,
freezers, dishwashers, clothes washers, water heaters, room air
conditioners, and pool heaters.

* * * * *
(f) * * *
(5) Estimated annual operating costs for refrigerators,
refrigerator-freezers, freezers, clothes washers, dishwashers, room air
conditioners, and water heaters are as determined in accordance with
Sec. Sec. 305.5 and 305.10 of this part. Thermal efficiencies for pool
heaters are as determined in accordance with Sec. 305.5. Labels for
clothes washers and dishwashers must disclose estimated annual
operating cost for both electricity and natural gas as illustrated in
the sample labels in appendix L.
* * * * *
(9) Labels must contain a statement explaining information on the
label as illustrated in the prototype labels in appendix L and
specified as follows by product type:
(i) For refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the
statement will read as follows (fill in the blanks with the appropriate
year and energy cost figures):
Your costs will depend on your utility rates and use.
[Insert statement required by Sec. 305.11(f)(9)(ii)].
Estimated energy cost is based on a national average electricity
cost of ---- cents per kWh.
For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/energy.
(ii) For refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the
following sentence shall be included as part of the statement required
by Sec. 305.11(f)(9)(i):
(A) For models covered under appendix A1, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with automatic
defrost.
(B) For models covered under appendix A2, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with manual
defrost.
(C) For models covered under appendix A3, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with partial
automatic defrost.
(D) For models covered under appendix A4, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with automatic
defrost, top-mounted freezer, and without through-the-door ice.
(E) For models covered under appendix A5, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with automatic
defrost, side-mounted freezer, and without through-the-door ice.
(F) For models covered under appendix A6, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with automatic
defrost, bottom-mounted freezer, and without through-the-door ice.
(G) For models covered under appendix A7, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with automatic
defrost, top-mounted freezer, and through-the-door ice.
(H) For models covered under appendix A8, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity with automatic
defrost, side-mounted freezer, and through-the-door ice.
(I) For models covered under appendix B1, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on upright freezer models of similar capacity
with manual defrost.
(J) For models covered under appendix B2, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on upright freezer models of similar capacity
with automatic defrost.
(K) For models covered under appendix B3, the sentence shall read:
Cost range based only on chest and other freezer models of similar
capacity.
(iii) For room air conditioners covered under appendix E, the
statement will read as follows (fill in the blanks with the appropriate
model type, year, energy type, and energy cost figure):
Your costs will depend on your utility rates and use.

[[Page 1788]]

Cost range based only on models [of similar capacity without
reverse cycle and with louvered sides; of similar capacity without
reverse cycle and without louvered sides; with reverse cycle and with
louvered sides; or with reverse cycle and without louvered sides].
Estimated energy cost is based on a national average electricity
cost of ---- cents per kWh and 750 hours of operation per year.
For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/energy.
(iv) For water heaters covered by Appendices D1, D2, and D3, the
statement will read as follows (fill in the blanks with the appropriate
fuel type, year, and energy cost figures):
Your costs will depend on your utility rates and use.
Cost range based only on models of similar capacity fueled by
[natural gas, oil, propane, or electricity]. Estimated energy cost is
based on a national average [electricity, natural gas, propane, or oil]
cost of [------ cents per kWh or $---- per therm or gallon].
For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/energy.
(v) For instantaneous water heaters (appendix D4 and D6) and heat
pump water heaters (appendix D5), the statement will read as follows
(fill in the blanks with the appropriate model type, the operating
cost, the year, and the energy cost figures):
Your costs will depend on your utility rates and use.
Cost range based only on [instantaneous gas water heater or heat
pump water heater] models of similar capacity. Estimated energy cost is
based on a national average [electricity, natural gas, or propane] cost
of [---- cents per kWh or $---- per therm or gallon].
For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/energy.
(vi) For clothes washers and dishwashers covered by appendices C1,
C2, F1, and F2, the statement will read as follows (fill in the blanks
with the appropriate appliance type, the energy cost, the number of
loads per week, the year, and the energy cost figures):
Your costs will depend on your utility rates and use.
Cost range based only on [compact/standard] capacity models.
Estimated energy cost is based on [4 washloads a week for
dishwashers, or 6 washloads a week for clothes washers] and a national
average electricity cost of ---- cents per kWh and natural gas cost of
$---- per therm.
For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/energy.
(vii) For pool heaters covered under appendices J1 and J2, the
statement will read as follows:
Efficiency range based only on models fueled by [natural gas or
oil].
For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/energy.
* * * * *
0
5. Appendix C1 to Part 305 is revised to read as follows:

Appendix C1 to Part 305--Compact Dishwashers

Range Information

``Compact'' includes countertop dishwasher models with a
capacity of fewer than eight (8) place settings. Place settings
shall be in accordance with appendix C to 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B. Load patterns shall conform to the operating normal for the model
being tested.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of estimated annual
energy costs (dollars/year)
Capacity -------------------------------
Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compact................................. $18 $27
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
6. Appendix C2 to Part 305 is revised to read as follows:

Appendix C2 to Part 305--Standard Dishwashers

Range Information

``Standard'' includes dishwasher models with a capacity of eight
(8) or more place settings. Place settings shall be in accordance
with appendix C to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B. Load patterns shall
conform to the operating normal for the model being tested.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of estimated annual
energy costs (dollars/year)
Capacity -------------------------------
Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard................................ $21 $41
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
7. Appendices D1 through D5 to Part 305 are revised and Appendix D6 is
added to read as follows:

Appendix D1 to Part 305--Water Heaters--Gas

Range Information

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capacity Range of estimated annual energy costs (dollars/year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural gas ($/year) Propane ($/year)
First hour rating ---------------------------------------------------------------
Low High Low High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 21.................................... * * * *
21 to 24........................................ * * * *
25 to 29........................................ * * * *
30 to 34........................................ * * * *
35 to 40........................................ * * * *
41 to 47........................................ * * * *

[[Page 1789]]

48 to 55........................................ $248 $269 $655 $712
56 to 64........................................ $257 $269 $678 $712
65 to 74........................................ $237 $273 $627 $724
75 to 86........................................ $237 $288 $627 $724
87 to 99........................................ $248 $288 $645 $763
100 to 114...................................... $241 $300 $637 $763
115 to 131...................................... $241 $331 $637 $791
Over 131........................................ $269 $331 $712 $876
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data submitted.

Appendix D2 to Part 305--Water Heaters--Electric

Range Information

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capacity Range of estimated annual
----------------------------------------- energy costs (dollars/year)
-------------------------------
First hour rating Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 21............................ $567 $567
21 to 24................................ * *
25 to 29................................ $567 $567
30 to 34................................ $567 $573
35 to 40................................ $561 $573
41 to 47................................ $555 $599
48 to 55................................ $555 $599
56 to 64................................ $555 $585
65 to 74................................ $555 $599
75 to 86................................ $555 $613
87 to 99................................ $567 $620
100 to 114.............................. $579 $651
115 to 131.............................. $613 $635
Over 131................................ * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data submitted.

Appendix D3 to Part 305--Water Heaters--Oil

Range Information

Appendix D4 to Part 305--Water Heaters--Instantaneous--Gas

Range Information

[[Page 1790]]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capacity Range of estimated annual energy costs (dollars/year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural gas ($/year) Propane ($/year)
Capacity (maximum flow rate); gallons per minute ---------------------------------------------------------------
(gpm) Low High Low High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under 1.00...................................... $248 $248 $655 $655
1.00 to 2.00.................................... $248 $248 $627 $627
2.01 to 3.00.................................... $171 $231 $499 $609
Over 3.00....................................... $167 $204 $435 $532
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data submitted.

Appendix D5 to Part 305--Water Heaters--Heat Pump

Range Information

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capacity Range of estimated annual
----------------------------------------- energy costs (dollars/year)
-------------------------------
First hour rating Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 21............................ * *
21 to 24................................ * *
25 to 29................................ * *
30 to 34................................ * *
35 to 40................................ * *
41 to 47................................ * *
48 to 55................................ * *
56 to 64................................ * *
65 to 74................................ * *
75 to 86................................ * *
87 to 99................................ * *
100 to 114.............................. * *
115 to 131.............................. * *
Over 131................................ * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data submitted.

Appendix D6 to Part 305--Water Heaters--Instantaneous--Electric

Range Information

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Capacity Range of estimated annual
----------------------------------------- energy costs (dollars/year)
Capacity (maximum flow rate); gallons -------------------------------
per minute (gpm) Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under 1.00.............................. $532 $532
1.00 to 2.00............................ $532 $532
2.01 to 3.00............................ * *
Over 3.00............................... * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data submitted.

0
8. Appendix E to Part 305 is revised to read as follows:

Appendix E to Part 305--Room Air Conditioners

Range Information

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of estimated annual
Manufacturer's rated cooling capacity in energy costs (dollars/year)
Btu's/yr -------------------------------
Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Without Reverse Cycle and with Louvered
Sides:
Less than 6,000 Btu................. $42 $48
6,000 to 7,999 Btu.................. $50 $72
8,000 to 13,999 Btu................. $66 $115
14,000 to 19,999 Btu................ $117 $195

[[Page 1791]]

20,000 and more Btu................. $169 $382
Without Reverse Cycle and without
Louvered Sides:
Less than 6,000 Btu................. * *
6,000 to 7,999 Btu.................. $56 $72
8,000 to 13,999 Btu................. $73 $138
14,000 to 19,999 Btu................ $140 $166
20,000 and more Btu................. * *
With Reverse Cycle and with Louvered $71 $225
Sides..............................
With Reverse Cycle, without Louvered $89 $126
Sides..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data submitted.

0
9. Appendices J1 and J2 to part 305 are revised to read as follows:

Appendix J1 to Part 305--Pool Heaters--Gas

Range Information

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of thermal efficiencies (percent)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer's rated heating capacities Natural gas Propane
---------------------------------------------------------------
Low High Low High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All capacities.................................. 78.2 95.0 78.2 95.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix J2 to Part 305--Pool Heaters--Oil

Range Information

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of thermal efficiencies
(percent)
Manufacturer's rated heating capacities -------------------------------
Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All capacities.......................... * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data submitted.

0
10. Appendix K to part 305 is revised to read as follows:

Appendix K to Part 305--Representative Average Unit Energy Costs

This Table contains the representative unit energy costs that
must be utilized to calculate estimated annual energy cost
disclosures required under Sec. Sec. 305.11 and 305.20. This Table
is based on information published by the U.S. Department of Energy
in 2012. Unless otherwise indicated by the Commission, this table
will be revised in 2017.

Unit Costs of Energy for Use on EnergyGuide Labels Required by Sec. 305.11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As required by DOE test Dollars per
Type of energy In commonly used terms procedure million Btu 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electricity......................... 12.00[cent]/kWh 2,3 $.1200/kWh $34.70
Natural Gas......................... $1.06/therm 4 $0.00001035/Btu $10.35
$10.59/MCF 5,6
No. 2 heating oil................... $4.04/gallon 7 $0.00002912/Btu $29.12
Propane............................. $2.56/gallon 8 $0.00002803/Btu $28.03
Kerosene............................ $4.35/gallon 9 $0.00003222/Btu $32.22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Btu stands for British thermal unit.
2 kWh stands for kiloWatt hour.
3 1 kWh = 3,412 Btu.
4 1 therm = 100,000 Btu. Natural gas prices include taxes.
5 MCF stands for 1,000 cubic feet.
6 For the purposes of this table, 1 cubic foot of natural gas has an energy equivalence of 1,023 Btu.

[[Page 1792]]

7 For the purposes of this table, 1 gallon of No. 2 heating oil has an energy equivalence of 138,690 Btu.
8 For the purposes of this table, 1 gallon of liquid propane has an energy equivalence of 91,333 Btu.
9 For the purposes of this table, 1 gallon of kerosene has an energy equivalence of 135,000 Btu.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-00113 Filed 1-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P