[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 179 (Thursday, September 15, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63634-63661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21854]



[[Page 63633]]

Vol. 81

Thursday,

No. 179

September 15, 2016

Part III





 Federal Trade Commission





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





16 CFR Part 305





Energy Labeling Rule; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 179 / Thursday, September 15, 2016 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 63634]]


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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 305

RIN 3084-AB15


Energy Labeling Rule

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission issues final amendments to improve access to 
energy labels online and improve labels for refrigerators, ceiling 
fans, central air conditioners, and water heaters. The Commission is 
issuing these amendments to assist consumers in their purchasing 
decisions and ensure labels are consistent with Department of Energy 
requirements.

DATES: The amendments to 16 CFR 305.3(x), 305.13, and Sample Label 17 
of Appendix L are effective on September 17, 2018. All other amendments 
published in this document are effective on June 12, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Relevant portions of the proceeding, including this 
document, are available at http://www.ftc.gov.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    The Commission issued the Energy Labeling Rule (``Rule'') in 
1979,\1\ pursuant to 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. 
It also contains labeling requirements for refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, freezers, dishwashers, water heaters, clothes washers, room 
air conditioners, furnaces, central air conditioners, heat pumps, 
plumbing products, lighting products, ceiling fans, and televisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 44 FR 66466 (Nov. 19, 1979).
    \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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rule requires manufacturers to attach yellow EnergyGuide labels 
to many of the covered products and prohibits retailers from removing 
these labels or rendering them illegible. In addition, it directs 
sellers, including retailers, to post label information on Web sites 
and in paper catalogs from which consumers can order products. 
EnergyGuide labels for most covered products contain three key 
disclosures: Estimated annual energy cost; a product's energy 
consumption or energy efficiency rating as determined from DOE test 
procedures; and a comparability range displaying the highest and lowest 
energy costs or efficiency ratings for all similar models. For cost 
calculations, the Rule specifies national average costs for applicable 
energy sources (e.g., electricity, natural gas, oil) as calculated by 
DOE. Under the Rule, the Commission periodically updates comparability 
range and annual energy cost information based on manufacturer data 
submitted pursuant to the Rule's reporting requirements.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 16 CFR 305.10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Final Amendments to the Energy Labeling Rule

    In a November 2, 2015 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``2015 NPRM'' 
or ``NPRM''), the Commission sought comment on several proposed changes 
to the Energy Labeling Rule.\4\ The Commission received 17 comments in 
response.\5\ Pursuant to the NPRM and these comments, this final rule 
contains amendments for an online label database (label image 
reporting), revised ceiling fan labels, new refrigerator comparability 
range information, dual-mode refrigerator labeling, revised central air 
conditioner labels, and revised water heater labels.\6\ In a separate 
notice, the Commission will seek comments on issues that involve recent 
DOE regulatory actions or new issues raised by commenters in this 
proceeding, including portable air conditioner labeling, plumbing 
disclosures changes, large ceiling fan labels, and electric 
instantaneous water heater labeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 80 FR 67351 (Nov. 2, 2015).
    \5\ The comments received in response to the 2015 NPRM are here: 
https://www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments/initiative-601. The 
comments included: A. O. Smith Corporation (#00008); American 
Lighting Association (ALA) (#00013); Association of Home Appliance 
Manufacturers (AHAM) (#00016); Air Conditioning, Heating and 
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) (#00015); Amazon (#00017); Bradford 
White Corporation (BWC) (#00010); CSA Group (#00007); California 
Investor Owned Utilities (California IOUs) (#00019); Earthjustice 
(``Joint Commenters'') (#00018); GE Appliances (GEA) (#00012); 
Goodman Global, Inc. (#00020); International Association of Plumbing 
and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) (#00022); Lochinvar, LLC (#00009); 
NSF International (#00005); Plumbing Manufacturers International 
(PMI) (#00006); Rheem Manufacturing Company (#00014); Tyler Prough 
(#00003); and Whirlpool Corporation (#00011).
    \6\ The Commission also sought comment on a few of these issues 
during its review of the Energy Labeling Rule. See 77 FR 15298 (Mar. 
15, 2012); and 79 FR 34642 (June 18, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Online Label Database

    Background: In the NPRM, the Commission sought comments on the 
development of a centralized label database to provide retailers and 
consumers with convenient access to energy labels.\7\ To create such a 
comprehensive database, the Commission specifically proposed requiring 
manufacturers to submit links to their EnergyGuide and Lighting Facts 
labels through their routine report to the DOE's Compliance 
Certification Management System (CCMS) pursuant to section 305.8.\8\ 
The NPRM explained that this proposal would give online retailers 
access to digital labels for advertising or label replacement, 
obviating the need to obtain labels from individual manufacturers. The 
Commission explained that access to a single comprehensive database 
containing all the covered labels would benefit both consumers and 
retailers. Retailers could use the data for advertising and replacing 
missing labels for their display models, and consumers could use it to 
easily research comparative efficiency.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Commission also sought comments on this issue in a June 
18, 2014 Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) (79 FR 
34642). As explained in an earlier final rule, this requirement 
would not apply to private labelers, but manufacturers would be 
allowed to arrange with third parties, including private labelers, 
to display the labels and to submit the required links to CCMS. See 
78 FR 2200, 2205 (Jan. 10, 2013).
    \8\ See 10 CFR 429.12. The proposed requirement stems from 
EPCA's mandate that manufacturers ``provide'' a label, the 
Commission's general authority to require manufacturers to submit 
information, and the Commission's authority to specify the manner in 
which labels are displayed. 42 U.S.C. 6296(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 
6294(c)(3).
    \9\ In January 2013, the Commission amended section 305.6 of the 
Rule to require manufacturers to make copies of their EnergyGuide 
and Lighting Facts labels available on a publicly accessible Web 
site. See 78 FR 2200, 2205 (Jan. 10, 2013). In doing so, the 
Commission aimed to improve the availability of online labels for 
retailers that sell covered products online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NPRM, the Commission predicted this proposal was unlikely to 
create undue burdens on manufacturers. The current Rule already 
requires manufacturers to post product labels on their own sites.\10\ 
It also requires manufacturers of most covered products to submit 
annual reports, although such reporting requirements are largely 
harmonized with DOE's. The proposed FTC requirements would allow 
manufacturers to submit their label links through DOE's CCMS. Under the 
proposal, manufacturers would submit the label links prior to 
distributing their

[[Page 63635]]

products in commerce, consistent with current labeling requirements. 
The Commission also explained that it planned to give industry members 
ample time to make any necessary changes to their Web sites to 
facilitate compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 16 CFR 305.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: The commenters split in their support of the proposed 
reporting requirements. Appliance and ceiling fan manufacturers 
objected, asserting it would create burdens, questioning its utility, 
and raising several legal concerns. Conversely, energy efficiency and 
consumer groups, retail sellers, and heating and cooling equipment 
manufacturers generally supported the proposal, while providing a few 
suggestions discussed below.
    Critics argued that the proposal's costs outweigh its benefits. 
AHAM, representing appliance manufacturers, asserted that the label 
link submissions would increase manufacturer burdens while providing 
little benefit to consumers and retailers. Similarly, ALA, which 
represents ceiling fan manufacturers, added that the proposal would 
complicate existing requirements and pose significant added burdens. 
ALA also questioned the need for the change, arguing that ceiling fan 
customers are already comfortable with using existing Web sites to 
comparison shop. AHAM, as well as GEA, further explained the 
requirement would create difficult coordination issues between various 
manufacture-related teams (e.g., engineering, design, Web site, etc.) 
and would delay product deployment.\11\ According to AHAM and 
Whirlpool, even short delays could cause manufacturers to miss 
deadlines and significantly disrupt business, jeopardizing a 
manufacturer's market position and causing financial loss. In addition, 
AHAM argued that the proposal could lead to the premature disclosure of 
competitive information, such as capacity and energy efficiency, 
several weeks before such information is normally available to 
competitors.\12\ Finally, these commenters indicated that frequent Web 
site changes would pose additional compliance burdens, particularly if 
manufacturers had to change their certification reports every time they 
change labels on their Web site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Whirlpool explained that the proposal would require it to 
reverse its current process, whereby it holds off on creating Web 
pages for individual models and uploading labels to its Web site 
until after it receives DOE certification. According to Whirlpool, 
any delay in this process would slow certification and disrupt 
business. Whirlpool also explained that the proposal would require 
significant coordination with private labelers, particularly when 
manufacturers certify models for private labelers.
    \12\ AHAM also indicated that, under current requirements, DOE 
requires manufacturers to report discontinued models for a slightly 
longer period of time than does the FTC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to these concerns about the proposal's burdens, AHAM 
raised two legal objections. First, it questioned whether EPCA grants 
the Commission authority to determine the content of DOE's reports. 
AHAM noted that the Commission streamlined the data reporting 
requirements in 2013 by permitting manufacturers to file their FTC-
required annual reports on DOE's CCMS. However, in AHAM's view, that 
rulemaking differed from the present proposal because it ``did not 
merge the DOE and FTC reporting requirements themselves.'' According to 
AHAM, DOE is the agency with authority to require reporting on CCMS 
and, thus, DOE must effect changes to those reporting requirements 
through its own rulemaking. Second, AHAM argued the proposal would 
force manufacturers to violate DOE rules requiring manufacturers to 
certify that their covered products comply with applicable energy 
conservation standards. AHAM explained that, before distributing any 
basic model in commerce, manufacturers must submit a certification 
report to DOE.\13\ In determining whether a model has been 
``distributed in commerce,'' DOE considers several factors, including 
whether the units have appeared in public marketing material (e.g., on 
Web sites or in catalogs), whether such marketing material includes 
energy efficiency information, and whether the manufacturer has shown 
the unit at a trade show.\14\ Therefore, to avoid distributing a 
product in commerce prior to certification, manufacturers typically do 
not publicly release energy labels until a basic model has been 
certified to DOE. AHAM warned that the FTC proposal could force 
manufacturers to violate DOE requirements by forcing them to upload 
their energy labels prior to DOE certification.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 10 CFR 429.12(a).
    \14\ See, e.g., 76 FR 12422, 12426-27 (Mar. 7, 2011). EPCA 
defines ``distribute in commerce'' as ``to sell in commerce, to 
import, to introduce or deliver for introduction into commerce, or 
to hold for sale or distribution after introduction into commerce.'' 
42 U.S.C. 6291(16).
    \15\ Whirlpool added that the proposal could lead to similar 
problems with ENERGY STAR program requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In contrast, many commenters supported the proposal. The Joint 
Commenters argued that the benefits of a centralized label database 
greatly exceed the burden imposed on manufacturers. Amazon, an online 
retailer that sells covered products, explained that the ``database 
would allow consumers to easily research the comparative efficiency of 
covered products'' and will help increase Rule compliance and decrease 
mislabeling. According to Amazon, the proposal would not impose undue 
burdens on manufacturers because the Rule already directs them to have 
the labels available on a Web site.
    However, these commenters qualified their support with several 
recommendations. First, Amazon urged the Commission to require 
manufacturers to submit labels ``as a stand-alone image in a 
standardized format.'' It also recommended that the Rule require a UPC 
(universal product code) and label date information. Second, the Joint 
Commenters urged the Commission to extend the Rule to cover products 
not presently subject to reporting requirements, such as specialty 
consumer lamps and LED general service lamps. They asserted this 
extension would help consumers compare products through DOE's database. 
The Joint Commenters further suggested that, even if the FTC does not 
require label reporting for those products, it should provide 
manufacturers the option to submit such information. Finally, the Joint 
Commenters argued that DOE enforcement guidance can easily address any 
potential enforcement problems. In addition, to avoid any conflicts 
with DOE's requirements, they suggested that FTC allow manufacturers to 
delay activation of the Web site address submitted to CCMS for a 
certain time period after submittal (e.g., seven days after 
certification) so that manufacturers would not need to post labels 
prior to DOE certification.
    Other industry commenters offered qualified support for the 
proposal. For instance, though backing the proposal generally, AHRI and 
Goodman recommended the Rule allow manufacturers to submit links to a 
PDF download of the labels, in addition to a URL. AHRI already 
maintains an online database as part of its own directory, which 
generates label PDFs for public users but not a URL link. According to 
AHRI, given this current arrangement, a mandatory URL link requirement 
would be costly and burdensome. Therefore, AHRI recommended the 
amendments allow manufacturers to submit a link to a PDF download to 
CCMS. AHRI explained that this would provide the same information as a 
URL, without

[[Page 63636]]

significant additional costs and maintenance.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ AHRI also requested that section 305.6, which requires 
manufacturers to maintain labels on a publicly accessible Web site 
``for six months after production of that model ceases,'' be revised 
to clarify that manufacturers may maintain labels online more than 
six months after production for a particular model ceases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some commenters suggested that the Commission allow manufacturers 
to provide a link to a general Web site containing their labels, 
instead of submitting links to individual labels. Lochinvar, a water 
heater manufacturer, argued this would give manufacturers flexibility 
in generating and maintaining the online EnergyGuide labels. Although 
Whirlpool opposed the proposal, it suggested the FTC give manufacturers 
more flexibility should it finalize the proposed reporting 
requirements. Specifically, it suggested the Rule allow manufacturers 
to submit a link to the manufacturer's online public database housing 
all EnergyGuide labels, searchable by model number. According to 
Whirlpool, consumers and retailers could then access the label by 
copying the model number from the CCMS into the manufacturer's site. 
This approach would also provide consumers and retailers access to 
additional information, such as installation instructions, use and care 
guides, and product dimensions. Whirlpool also recommended that FTC 
grandfather existing models currently in the CCMS to avoid the many 
hours necessary for manufacturers to retrieve EnergyGuide labels for 
thousands of models already in commerce.
    Discussion: The final amendments require manufacturers to provide 
links to their online labels as part of the Rule's reporting 
requirements. Consistent with the other reporting provisions, the final 
amendment allows manufacturers to submit the links to DOE's CCMS as 
part of their normal FTC reporting. The new requirement will become 
effective in one year. After that date, manufacturers must begin 
submitting the required label links as part of all new model and annual 
reports required under section 305.8.
    The final Rule contains several changes and clarifications to 
address commenters' concerns. First, the amendments allow manufacturers 
to submit their links when they certify their models to DOE or at the 
next subsequent annual report date. This eliminates concerns about 
posting labels prior to DOE certification and will ensure that labels 
are available online within a reasonable time period.\17\ Second, the 
final Rule provides manufacturers three options for submitting label 
information: (1) Through direct URL links to the labels themselves; (2) 
through links to a PDF download; or (3) through a link to a Web site 
from which users can obtain labels by searching through model number. 
If manufacturers use the third approach, the link must take the user 
directly to the search function on the manufacturer's Web site. These 
three options strike a balance between ensuring the labels are 
available from a central location and giving manufacturers flexibility 
in managing their own Web sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ For models no longer in production, manufacturers may 
maintain labels online for longer than the six-month period 
identified in the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Contrary to one suggestion, the final Rule does not grandfather 
existing labels. Because some models remain in production for many 
years, the requested exemption would permanently exclude long-lived 
models from the database. However, to ensure manufacturers have ample 
time to comply, the final Rule will not become effective for one year 
after publication. Accordingly, manufacturers must begin submitting 
label links for existing models at the first applicable annual 
reporting date (see section 305.8) following this one-year period.
    The final amendments do not include lighting products in the 
reporting requirements. Current law prohibits DOE from spending funds 
for the enforcement of DOE efficiency standards related to several 
types of light bulbs, including many currently subject to FTC labeling 
requirements.\18\ Therefore, to avoid potential DOE issues related to 
this prohibition, the Commission has not included lighting products in 
the new reporting requirement. It may revisit this issue at a later 
date should circumstances warrant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. 114-113 
(Div. D, Title III, Sec. 312).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the commenters questioned DOE and FTC authority to collect 
information on DOE's Web site without a separate DOE rulemaking. The 
Commission has identified no legal impediment to such an arrangement. 
As previously noted, the FTC is issuing the label image reporting 
requirements pursuant to its authority under EPCA. The final Rule does 
not impose separate DOE requirements and, therefore, DOE need not issue 
its own rule. In addition, these new FTC requirements are consistent 
with existing FTC reporting provisions, which apply both to products 
also covered by DOE's reporting requirements, as well as products DOE 
does not cover (i.e., televisions and ceiling fans). In issuing its own 
reporting requirements under section 305.8, the FTC has allowed 
manufacturers to submit data through DOE's existing online database to 
avoid duplication and complication.\19\ The final language clarifies 
that the amendments do not ``merge'' the two agencies' reporting 
requirements. Specifically, the final Rule language appears in section 
305.8 (``Submission of Data'') rather than section 305.6 (``Duty to 
provide labels on Web sites''), and states that manufacturers may 
submit the information to DOE via CCMS in lieu of submitting it to the 
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Prior to 2013, FTC collected energy data on covered 
products separate from DOE through paper and email submissions to 
the Commission itself. This arrangement required manufacturers to 
submit nearly duplicative reports to DOE and FTC. However, in 2013 
(78 FR 2200), the Commission streamlined and harmonized the 
reporting requirements by giving manufacturers the option to report 
FTC-required data through DOE's CCMS, in lieu of the traditional 
practice of submitting directly to FTC. The present amendments 
follow the same approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Improved Ceiling Fan Labels

    Background: In the 2015 NPRM, the Commission proposed revising the 
ceiling fan label to include estimated annual energy cost information 
as the label's primary disclosure and to otherwise ensure the label is 
consistent with other EnergyGuide labels. The current label, which 
appears on product boxes and bears the title ``Energy Information,'' 
discloses airflow (cubic feet per minute), energy use (watts), and 
energy efficiency (cubic feet per minute per watt) at high speed. 
However, as the Commission previously stated, consumer research 
suggests energy cost information is the most useful metric because it 
``provides a clear, understandable tool to allow consumers to compare 
the energy performance of different models.'' \20\ The label proposed 
in the 2015 NPRM follows the EnergyGuide label format, consistent with 
other products displayed in showrooms, such as refrigerators and 
clothes washers.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 72 FR 49948, 49951, 49953 (Aug. 29, 2007) (appliance 
labels) (``The FTC's consumer research clearly indicates that cost 
information is likely to assist consumers in making purchasing 
decisions. While each of the designs considered has strengths and 
weaknesses, on balance, the Commission believed that the adoption of 
a design that presents cost as the primary disclosure would best 
serve consumers.''); see also 75 FR 41696 (July 19, 2010) (light 
bulb labels); 76 FR 1038 (Jan. 6, 2011) (television labels).
    \21\ 80 FR 67351.

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

[[Page 63637]]

    In seeking comments on the label change, the Commission noted that 
DOE is in the process of changing test procedures and developing new 
efficiency standards for ceiling fans.\22\ As part of the test 
procedure proceeding, DOE is revising various factors essential to the 
label, including the representative hours of operation, a 
representative or average testing speed, and a revised product scope 
covered by the test procedure.\23\ In the 2015 NPRM, the Commission 
announced it would wait for DOE to complete its test procedure changes 
before finalizing the label. To ensure consistency with the DOE testing 
requirements, the Commission proposed to adopt final DOE use and 
operating assumptions for the amended label, including the hours of 
operation, the representative or average speed, and the revised product 
coverage.\24\ The Commission indicated it would allow a two-year 
compliance period for the new label, once DOE issues its final 
Rule.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See 79 FR 62522 (Oct. 17, 2014) (proposed test procedure); 
79 FR 58290 (Sept. 29, 2014) (proposed standards).
    \23\ DOE issued a supplemental notice for the test procedure on 
June 3, 2015 (80 FR 31487).
    \24\ See, e.g., 79 FR 62521.
    \25\ In its test procedure Notice (79 FR at 62524 (Oct. 17, 
2014)), DOE proposed a special testing approach for ``multi-mount'' 
fan models under the Rule's coverage. Such models can be installed 
in two configurations: extended from the ceiling or flush with the 
ceiling (i.e., a ``hugger'' configuration). DOE proposed to require 
testing for these models at two separate configurations. Should DOE 
adopt such an approach, the Commission, in its 2015 Notice, proposed 
that the EnergyGuide label for these models would reflect the lowest 
efficiency (cubic feet per watt) configuration, with the option of 
providing a second label depicting the performance at the other 
configuration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Commenters generally supported the proposal. For example, 
the Joint Commenters noted that the two-year compliance period was 
consistent with the compliance period afforded to manufacturers for the 
original ceiling fan label issued in 2007 and that ceiling fan 
packaging already allocates space to FTC labels. However, some 
commenters raised logistical and implementation issues with the 
proposal. First, industry commenters urged the Commission to coordinate 
the timing of new labels with DOE efforts to revise the test procedure 
and set efficiency standards. ALA emphasized that manufacturers will 
need time to review the new requirements, develop and test products, 
and prepare new packaging with the revised labels. It agreed that a 
two-year compliance period is reasonable but encouraged the Commission 
to consider delaying enforcement action for an additional 18 months to 
allow for the resolution of unforeseen problems. Second, ALA raised 
concerns with the label's color because some manufacturers do not use 
color in printing their packages. It warned that a mandatory yellow 
background would significantly increase costs in some cases. To address 
this concern, ALA recommended the Rule allow a white background when a 
product package does not contain color. Also, given the small sizes of 
some fan packaging, it urged the Commission to ensure that the new 
label is no larger than the existing label.
    Discussion: The Commission has revised the ceiling fan label 
consistent with its proposal. The final label's content includes new 
information to reflect the content of DOE's new test procedure 
published July 25, 2016.\26\ Such updates include DOE's new definition 
of ``ceiling fan,'' energy information based on the new DOE-mandated 
average fan speed, as well as the DOE-established hours of operation 
per day (6.4). The new label also contains comparability information 
based on DOE data for the products covered by the test procedure.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See 81 FR 48620.
    \27\ Specifically, consistent with the current label, the label 
amendments maintain two basic size categories for labeling purposes. 
The amendments adjust these two bins to reflect new size categories 
established by DOE: (1) Fans less than 19 inches in diameter; and 
(2) fans from 19 or more inches and less than 84 inches in diameter. 
The Rule does not create separate comparability categories for niche 
product types recognized by DOE such as ``highly-decorative,'' belt-
driven, and hugger fans, as such separate bins do not appear 
necessary to aid consumers in comparing products. The final 
amendments also contain conforming changes to the reporting 
requirements in section 305.8, removing the term ``at high speed'' 
to ensure consistency with the new DOE test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to some commenter concerns, the final Rule does not 
mandate a yellow background. Specifically, it indicates that the label 
must be printed on a yellow or other neutral contrasting background. 
This approach, also used for the Lighting Facts label, avoids imposing 
increased compliance costs.
    Additionally, the final Rule requires manufacturers to begin 
labeling their packaging with the new label within two years of the 
final Rule's publication. Manufacturers may begin using the new label 
earlier, as soon as they complete testing under the new DOE test 
procedure.
    Finally, the final label does not apply to large-diameter fans 
(i.e., fans with diameters of 84 inches or greater) and high-speed 
small diameter fans, new fan categories added by DOE's test proceeding. 
The DOE test procedure mandates unique operating assumptions (hours per 
day) for these particular models. As a result, labels for these two 
groups of fans may not offer accurate comparisons to more conventional 
fans. The Commission will seek comment on the need for, and content of, 
fan labels for those two product categories in a separate notice.

C. Consolidated Refrigerator Ranges

    Background: Based on comments suggesting that a substantial number 
of consumers consider several different configurations when shopping, 
the 2015 NPRM proposed requiring disclosure of two cost ranges on the 
refrigerator label: One range for the existing applicable refrigerator 
configuration (e.g., side-by-side door configuration) and the other 
range covering all refrigerators. The Commission previously explained 
that providing cost information for all refrigerators consolidated into 
a single range would facilitate comparison shopping and alert consumers 
to the relative energy efficiency of various refrigerator types.\28\ 
Consistent with the current Rule, both range groups under the 2015 
proposal would include separate ranges organized by capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 79 FR at 34651.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current Rule organizes refrigerator comparability ranges by 
configuration (e.g., models with top-mounted freezers), designating 
eight separate categories for refrigerators and three for freezers.\29\ 
Five of those categories (or styles) apply to automatic-defrost 
refrigerator-freezers, which populate the bulk of showroom floors: 
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.\30\ The comparability 
ranges, which disclose the energy costs of the most and least efficient 
model in each category, allow consumers to easily compare the energy 
use of similarly configured units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 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.
    \30\ See 16 CFR part 305, Appendices A and B. The Rule also has 
other range categories for less common models, including those with 
manual and partial defrost, and refrigerator-only models. In 
addition, the freezer categories include upright models with 
automatic defrost, upright models with manual defrost, and chest 
freezers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the 2015 NPRM, the Commission explained that information 
submitted in earlier comments suggested that a substantial number of 
consumers consider models with different features when shopping.\31\ 
However, as explained in previous comments, not all shoppers do so. The 
proposal addressed both contingencies by allowing

[[Page 63638]]

consumers to compare the labeled product to similar models as well as 
to all other refrigerators. The proposal also maintained the three 
freezer categories: Upright manual defrost models (Appendix B1), 
upright automatic defrost models (Appendix B2), and chest freezers 
(Appendix B3) because there is no evidence that consumers typically 
shop for models across these categories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 80 FR at 67354-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Commission proposed updated ranges based on new 
model data from the DOE database, including a new range reflecting 
consolidated range data for all refrigerators. Before issuing final 
refrigerator ranges, the Commission indicated that it would consider 
updating the numbers based on the most recent data. It also proposed to 
amend the range tables to cover bottom-mounted freezers with through-
the-door ice, a popular product subcategory currently not covered by 
the various tables. To accomplish this, the proposed amendments 
redesignate Appendix A7, which currently covers an obsolete category 
(top-mounted freezer with through-the-door ice models). In addition, 
the proposal modifies the size categories in each table to ensure 
consistency in all the ranges across all sizes.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ The Commission also proposed to eliminate an obsolete 
reference to adjusted volume for refrigerators and freezers in the 
Rule's capacity section (section 305.7(a)(b)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: The commenters sharply split on the proposed refrigerator 
label. The Joint Commenters and the California IOUs supported the 
proposal, while AHAM, representing appliance manufacturers, opposed it. 
The supporters argued the Commission's proposal represents a reasonable 
compromise between the various available options. They explained that, 
while some shoppers are committed to models with particular features, 
others are more flexible and willing to trade off those features for 
reduced utility bills. The Joint Commenters also asserted the two 
comparison ranges on the proposed label were unlikely to confuse 
consumers. They noted that the EnergyGuide labels for heat pumps 
already feature two comparability ranges and have done so for nearly 30 
years and that the label ``clearly indicates what each range bar 
depicts.'' The California IOUs argued the proposed label would continue 
to help customers understand a unit's energy cost relative to similarly 
configured products, particularly since many customers continue to shop 
for configurations matching their current model. These commenters 
further indicated that the second range displaying the unit's energy 
cost relative to a broader array of models serves to educate consumers 
about their potential buying choices, and contributes to a more 
informed decision-making process.
    While they supported the overall proposal, the Joint Commenters 
urged the FTC to break the ``All Models'' range into three separate 
categories: Automatic defrost refrigerator-freezers, manual or partial 
automatic defrost refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers, and 
refrigerators with automatic defrost but no freezer. They noted that 
consumers do not frequently shop for refrigerator-only models (i.e., 
refrigerators with no freezer). In their view, some consumers may be 
disappointed to discover some of the high efficiency models reflected 
on the range have no freezer. According to the commenters, such a 
result could undermine consumer trust in EnergyGuide's comparison 
ranges for other products.
    In contrast, AHAM opposed a consolidated range for the refrigerator 
label. Specifically, AHAM questioned the data supporting such a change. 
In particular, it argued that a study of EarthJustice members submitted 
in earlier comments surveyed biased respondents who may better 
understand energy consumption than the average consumer. In addition, 
AHAM stated that FTC has not demonstrated that consumers will 
understand the proposed label or that the consolidated range will 
assist their purchasing decisions. However, should FTC decide to move 
forward with changes, AHAM expressed a preference for the hybrid 
approach in the 2015 NPRM that includes two groups of ranges organized 
by both model subcategory and the consolidated range. AHAM stated this 
approach would preserve the opportunity for consumers to compare 
products of similar configuration and features. AHAM also suggested 
that FTC change the term ``All Models'' to indicate that the range 
depicts ``all models of similar capacity'' to avoid misleading 
consumers. It also asked the FTC to consider altering the current label 
to reduce the black ink required. According to AHAM, the ink required 
for this label increases drying times and printer jams. Finally, AHAM 
and Whirlpool urged the Commission to give manufacturers between six 
months and a year to implement the refrigerator changes to complete the 
many necessary activities for this change, including designing and 
contracting for the new labels, updating Web sites and certification 
reports, and coordinating between OEMs and private labelers.
    Discussion: The Commission has amended the refrigerator labels as 
proposed and updated the comparability ranges. The revised label will 
likely help consumers shop among models by providing two types of 
comparative information, allowing consumers to compare the labeled 
product to similar models as well as to all other refrigerators. This 
hybrid approach reflects the likelihood that, while not all shoppers 
consider different configurations, a significant number do. The final 
Rule gives manufacturers nine months to implement the revised label. In 
response to commenter concerns over the black ink required for the 
label, the FTC staff will update the online label template for 
refrigerators and clothes washers to modify the black background to 
reduce the amount of ink consumed in printing the labels.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/energyguide-labels-templates-manufacturers. In addition, 
manufacturers that do not use the FTC-provided templates may alter 
the black ink mix for their printers to reduce potential 
malfunctions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The new label should aid consumers in their shopping decisions. 
Information provided by commenters strongly suggests that a substantial 
number of consumers consider models with different features when 
shopping. The Commission agrees with AHAM that the email survey 
submitted by the Joint Commenters does not offer compelling evidence 
because it involved a self-selected population of respondents. However, 
other information in the record suggests that a significant number of 
consumers consider different model configurations when shopping. For 
example, according to earlier comments, 40% of the visitors to Consumer 
Reports' online refrigerator ratings in 2012 reviewed multiple 
refrigerator-freezer configurations.\34\ In addition, AHAM offered data 
indicating that only 46% of side-by-side refrigerator-freezer owners 
and 85% of top mount refrigerator-freezer owners replaced their units 
with the same

[[Page 63639]]

configuration.\35\ These numbers strongly suggest that a substantial 
proportion of consumers, though not all, consider different 
configurations. Other indicia of consumer shopping habits corroborate 
this conclusion. Specifically, online refrigerator buying guides 
routinely advise consumers about considering different configurations. 
The content of such sites confirm that consumer preferences for 
configuration are not pre-determined.\36\ The new label will help both 
consumers who consider different configurations, and those who do not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 79 FR at 34651. The Joint Commenters also reasoned that 
those who examined only one configuration probably considered models 
with, and without, through-the-door ice dispensers, and may have 
looked at an additional configuration on a subsequent visit. In 
addition, the Joint Commenters pointed to AHAM information 
demonstrating that more than half of side-by-side refrigerator-
freezer owners buy replacement units with a different configuration. 
The commenters contended that this was probably a conservative 
estimate because it does not include owners who bought similarly 
configured replacement units with different features.
    \35\ AHAM comments (July 16, 2012) (#560957-00023).
    \36\ See, e.g., CNET (http://www.cnet.com/topics/refrigerators/buying-guide), Consumer Reports (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2011/july/appliances/refrigerators/types/index.htm), Consumersearch (http://www.consumersearch.com/refrigerators/how-to-buy-a-refrigerator); and Good Housekeeping 
(http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/appliances/refrigerator-reviews/a18621/refrigerator-buyers-guide/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission agrees with the Joint Commenters that the label 
change is unlikely to confuse consumers. The modification represents a 
relatively small addition to an existing element of the label's 
content; the primary focus of the label continues to be the cost of 
energy measured in dollars. In addition, the new label clearly 
identifies the two comparability ranges, as noted by the Joint 
Commenters, and provides additional information about those ranges in 
explanatory text. Accordingly, the Commission expects the two ranges 
will help improve consumer understanding of the trade-offs involved 
choosing a refrigerator. Although the Commission recognizes AHAM's 
concern about consumer understanding of the label, commenters did not 
provide evidence of confusion or of a more effective means of 
presenting this information. Nevertheless, to minimize potential 
concerns, the staff plans to prepare educational material about the 
label change.
    The final Rule does not exclude certain refrigerators (i.e., 
refrigerator-freezer models without automatic defrost and refrigerator-
only models covered by Appendices A1 through A3) from the ``All 
Models'' range, as suggested by some commenters. The new range tables, 
which have been updated in the final rule based on more recent DOE 
data, do not reveal large differences between these models and the more 
common automatic defrost models covered by Appendices A4 through 
A7.\37\ In addition, excluding these models from the comparability 
categories would require additional explanatory text and clutter the 
label with only a marginal benefit. Similarly, the revised label does 
not disclose on the range itself that the range applies to similarly 
sized models. Consistent with past versions of the label, such language 
appears on the lower part of the label.\38\ Including additional 
information about ``similarly-sized models'' would add text and crowd 
the label potentially affecting usability.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ The DOE data indicate that models from Appendices A1, A2, 
and A3 are available in seven of the eleven size categories. There 
are few models from Appendix A1 through A3 at the higher capacity 
categories. In addition, for those seven size categories that do 
contain models from A1, A2, and A3, the estimated annual energy cost 
difference between the highest efficiency models in A1-A3 and those 
in A4-A8 is about $7 on average.
    \38\ In the past, the range has simply stated ``Cost Range of 
Similar Models.''
    \39\ Finally, GEA requested that the FTC update the capacity 
disclosure on the sample refrigerator label so that it conveys 
capacity to the nearest tenth, consistent with the Rule at section 
305.7. GEA also request a clarification that the product attributes 
(e.g., bottom-mount freezer) included on labels match those 
described in the Rule at Appendix L. According to GEA, some 
manufacturers place additional product descriptors on their labels 
not identified in the Rule. The amendments address these two issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Dual Mode Refrigerator-Freezers

    The final Rule contains an amendment related to dual mode 
refrigerator-freezers. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed adding a 
new provision addressing covered refrigerator models that can operate 
either as a refrigerator or a freezer under the DOE rules, depending on 
user settings. In 2014, DOE announced that these convertible models 
must be tested and certified to meet efficiency standards applicable to 
both refrigerators and freezers.\40\ AHAM sought clarification on 
labeling these products, suggesting that, consistent with 
manufacturers' labeling practices, convertible products be labeled with 
the most energy intensive configuration. In the 2015 NPRM, the 
Commission agreed with this approach because it ensured that labels for 
these products do not underestimate a product's energy cost. Therefore, 
the proposed Rule stated that these products should be labeled with the 
most energy intensive configuration.\41\ In response to the 2015 NPRM, 
AHAM supported the Commission's proposal, and no other commenters 
addressed the issue. Accordingly, the final Rule includes the proposed 
amendments for the dual mode refrigerator-freezers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 79 FR 22320 (Apr. 21, 2014). The amendments also contain a 
minor correction to the metric conversions for label sizes in 
section 305.11(a).
    \41\ 80 FR at 67356.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Heating and Cooling Equipment Label Requirements

    Background: In the 2015 NPRM, the Commission proposed several 
amendments to the heating and cooling equipment label requirements, 
including label changes related to upcoming DOE enforcement 
requirements for regional standards, labels for rooftop furnace-air 
conditioner systems, manufacturer name disclosures, multiple model 
number disclosures, and a clarification to retailer disclosure 
requirements. The Commission discusses each of these issues below.
    Revised Central Air Conditioner Labels Regarding Regional 
Standards: The Commission proposed several changes to the central air 
conditioner label in response to changes in DOE enforcement 
requirements regarding regional standards. The current EnergyGuide 
labels for these products provide industry members and consumers with 
information about regional efficiency standards issued by DOE in 
2011.\42\ These DOE requirements impose regional efficiency standards 
for split-system air conditioners and single-package air conditioners. 
For all other covered heating and cooling equipment (e.g., furnaces and 
boilers), the updated standards remain nationally uniform. Since 
publication of the regional standards related-labels in 2013, the 
Commission has issued several notices updating ranges and labels to 
reflect a court-approved settlement that vacated DOE's regional 
standards for furnaces.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ 78 FR 8362 (Feb. 6, 2013).
    \43\ See 79 FR 46985 (Aug. 12, 2014); 79 FR 52549 (Sept. 4, 
2014); 79 FR 77868 (Dec. 29, 2014). On April 24, 2014, the Court of 
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit approved a settlement in the DOE 
litigation, which vacates and remands DOE's regional standards for 
non-weatherized natural gas and mobile home furnaces and sets a two-
year timetable for DOE to propose new standards. American Public Gas 
Ass'n v. DOE, No. 11-1485 (D.C. Cir. filed Dec. 23, 2011) 
(DE.#1433580, May 1, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the fall of 2014, DOE conducted a negotiated rulemaking to 
establish enforcement rules for current regional standards applicable 
to central air conditioners.\44\ The current standards set a minimum 
14.0 Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio (SEER) for the southern and 
southwestern regions, a 13.0 SEER for all other areas, and separate 
Energy Efficiency Rating (EER) levels for the southwest region. For a 
particular condenser model, efficiency ratings vary (e.g., 13.0 to 14.2 
SEER) depending on the condenser-coil combination installed in the 
consumer's home. Because such variability complicates efforts to 
enforce the

[[Page 63640]]

regional standards, the consensus recommendation from the negotiated 
rulemaking advised DOE to determine regional compliance based on the 
condenser's lowest certified rating alone, not on the system rating 
(i.e., the specific condenser-coil combination) installed in a 
consumer's home.\45\ For instance, if a condenser's efficiency rating 
ranges from 13.0 to 14.2 SEER (depending on the coil ultimately matched 
with it), the rating will be 13.0 SEER for regional standards 
compliance, regardless of the coil with which it is ultimately 
installed. This recommended approach to DOE's enforcement would require 
revising the EnergyGuide label for central air conditioners because the 
current label advises installers to ensure the rating for the system 
they install in a consumer's home meets the DOE regional standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See, e.g., 79 FR 45731 (Aug. 6, 2014).
    \45\ See ``2014-10-24 Presentation Hand Out: Regional Standards 
Enforcement Working Group, Enforcement Plan,'' Oct. 24, 2014, Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office, Department of Energy, http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2011-BT-CE-0077-0070.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To conform the FTC label to this proposed DOE enforcement 
framework, the Commission proposed new labels for split-system central 
air conditioners that simply identify the states in which the labeled 
model may be installed.\46\ Specifically, the FTC proposed three types 
of labels for split systems. First, labels for models that may be 
installed anywhere (i.e., those that meet all applicable SEER and EER 
thresholds) would contain the statement: ``Notice: Federal law allows 
this unit to be installed in all U.S. states and territories.'' Second, 
labels for models that do not meet the 14.0 SEER threshold for southern 
states and southwestern states would contain a map identifying the 
states in which the unit may be legally installed. For instance, a 
model with a minimum rated efficiency of 13.8 SEER would contain a map 
indicating that that model can be legally installed only in northern 
states along with a statement that ``Federal law prohibits installation 
of this unit in other states.'' Finally, labels for a model with a 
minimum 14.0 SEER rating that does not meet EER minimum ratings for the 
southwest region would contain a map indicating that it can be legally 
installed only in northern and southern states (excluding southwestern 
states), as well as a statement that installation elsewhere is 
prohibited. These new label disclosures would simplify compliance by 
eliminating the need for installers to compare specific system ratings 
against the DOE standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Such an approach is consistent with the current regional 
standards labels for single package units. See, e.g., 78 FR at 8384 
(sample label).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, consistent with the approach recommended by the DOE 
working group, the proposed label disclosed only the efficiency rating 
for lowest rated coil-condenser combination (e.g., 14.4 SEER) in lieu 
of the current label's approach, which depicts a ``mini-range'' of the 
high and low values associated with the labeled model's various 
certified condenser-coil combinations (e.g., 13.9-15.0 SEER). The range 
of ratings on the current label alerts installers and consumers that a 
model's compliance with regional standards could vary depending on the 
installed coil-condenser combination. However, given the enforcement 
approach developed during DOE's negotiated rulemaking, such information 
is no longer necessary. A single, minimum efficiency rating will 
provide a simpler, more direct way to communicate the model's 
performance. If a system, as actually installed, has a higher 
efficiency rating than the minimum rating displayed on the label, that 
installer may communicate that fact to consumers.
    Rooftop Systems: The Commission also proposed amending section 
305.12 to allow a single label for packaged rooftop systems, a 
relatively new product consisting of a combination gas furnace and air 
conditioner (or heat pump). The proposed label would reflect the 
ratings for furnace and air conditioner (or heat pump) combinations as 
long as the unit meets all applicable air conditioner regional 
standards. For models that do not meet these standards, manufacturers 
would have to use two labels because a single label would not have 
space to accommodate all necessary disclosures (e.g., the annual fuel 
utilization efficiency (AFUE), SEER, and regional standards map).
    Manufacturer Name: In the NPRM, the Commission sought comments on 
the label's disclosure of the manufacturer (or private labeler) name. 
In 2013, the FTC amended the heating and cooling equipment labels to 
require the manufacturer or private labeler's name. This change 
occurred as part of the larger effort to create new labels consistent 
with new DOE regional efficiency standards.\47\ However, the Rule's 
current requirements for labels on refrigerators, clothes washers, and 
other appliances (section 305.11) continue to give manufacturers or 
private labelers the option to put their names on labels. To ensure the 
heating and cooling labels are consistent with other EnergyGuide 
labels, the Commission proposed to restore the option of including the 
manufacturer or private labeler name on the label. The Commission 
stated that making the manufacturer's name optional should not 
negatively impact consumers. For instance, consumers do not need a 
manufacturer or private labeler name to use the DOE database, including 
the cost calculator, because the model number is adequate for that 
purpose. In addition, because the labels are generally affixed to the 
products themselves or appear on Web sites describing the product, 
consumers are likely to already know the identity of the equipment's 
manufacturer or private labeler.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ See 78 FR 8362 (Feb. 6, 2013). Though the proposed Rule 
language in 2012 contained this change (77 FR 33337 (June 6, 2012)), 
the Notice did not discuss this issue. In issuing the original 
labeling rule in the 1970's, the Commission noted that the 
manufacturer and private labeler name was optional on EnergyGuide 
labels to ``minimize the printing burden on manufacturers who 
produce covered products for private labelers. . . .'' 44 FR 66466, 
66470, 66479 (November 19, 1979).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Model Numbers: The Commission also proposed clarifying in sections 
305.12(f)(3) and (g)(3) that manufacturers or private labelers may 
print multiple model numbers on a single label as long as the models 
share the same efficiency ratings and capacities. In the original 1979 
rulemaking notice, the Commission explained that manufacturers and 
private labelers could do so; however, associated language did not 
appear in the Rule itself.\48\ By ensuring that all model numbers 
listed in a single label share the same capacity, as well as efficiency 
rating, the proposed clarification would ensure all model numbers 
listed on a single label generate the same cost calculations when 
entered into the DOE online database.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See 44 FR at 66470 (``a manufacturer or private labeler may 
include multiple model numbers on the label if the models have the 
same capacity and consume the same amount of energy'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Updating Retailer Disclosure Requirements (Sec.  305.14): The 
Commission also announced that it would revise the effective date for 
section 305.14's disclosure requirements relating to efficiency 
information that furnace and air conditioner installers must provide to 
customers.\49\ In 2013, the Commission tied the effective date

[[Page 63641]]

for the new provision to the compliance date for DOE regional furnace 
standards. However, because those DOE standards were subsequently 
vacated,\50\ the Commission must set a new effective date. Accordingly, 
the Commission proposed to update that provision to clarify that the 
2013 amendment now applies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ In 2013, as part of the regional standards label rulemaking 
(78 FR 8362), the Commission updated disclosure requirements in 
section 305.14 for manufacturers and retailers, including 
installers. The 2013 changes required sellers to ensure that 
consumers have pre-purchase access to the EnergyGuide labels for 
heating and cooling equipment. Previously, the Rule required sellers 
to disclose a list of information contained on the labels. The 
updated Rule simplified the disclosure by requiring retailers to 
provide access to the labels themselves.
    \50\ See 77 FR at 77868. American Public Gas Ass'n v. DOE, No. 
11-1485 (D.C. Cir. filed Dec. 23, 2011) (DE.#1433580, May 1, 2013); 
(DE.# 1489805, Apr. 24, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Regional Standards Information: The commenters generally 
supported the proposed revisions to the central air conditioner labels. 
AHRI explained that the state-specific information on the bottom of the 
proposed label is needed to clarify where a specific model may be sold. 
The Joint Commenters and the California IOUs emphasized that the label 
provides an important regional standards compliance tool. They also 
explained that the proposed changes accurately reflect the consensus 
recommendations of the DOE working group (Appliance Standards and 
Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee (ASRAC)) convened to negotiate 
compliance and enforcement implementation for those standards.\51\ 
However, in addition to generally supporting the proposed label, the 
commenters raised several specific issues related to the proposal, 
including concerns about the SEER ratings for models, comparability 
ranges for the label, and the timing of the revised label. We discuss 
these comments below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ In addition, the California IOUs urged the FTC to continue 
to include the EER rating, along with SEER, on the label for central 
air conditioners because, in their view, EER is a more beneficial 
annual energy use metric for consumers, especially as utilities move 
towards peak day pricing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the commenters generally supported the proposal, they 
disagreed on how the label should present a model's specific SEER 
rating. Industry members opposed the proposal to eliminate the model-
specific SEER and EER ranges (``mini-ranges'') for split-system air 
conditioners. For example, Goodman explained that this current 
information, which the Commission only recently added to the label, is 
essential to fully inform consumers about the range of available 
efficiencies. In Goodman and AHRI's view, the proposed single rating 
approach, which depicts the lowest efficiency rating of all certified 
coil-condenser combinations for the unit, would mislead some consumers 
who purchase systems with much higher ratings. AHRI further contended 
that the model-specific range information is helpful because it clearly 
displays comparable efficiencies and its removal would unnecessarily 
burden manufacturers.
    The California IOUs noted that the ASRAC working group, which 
included industry representation, advised DOE to determine the 
``regional compliance based on the condenser's lowest certified rating 
alone, not on the system rating as installed in the home.'' Thus, 
according to the California IOUs, the working group consensus was to 
disclose ``only the efficiency rating for the lowest rated coil-
condenser combination'' and eliminate the current model-specific 
range.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ The Joint Commenters recommended that outdoor units be 
marked with a ``ruggedized label'' on or near the nameplate, 
indicating in what regions of the country, if any, installation of 
the unit is prohibited. The Joint Commenters argued this approach, 
agreed upon by the DOE working group, would aid in detecting non-
compliant units. Because not all manufacturers certify their 
products through AHRI, the Joint Commenters asserted that a separate 
FTC requirement would ensure a level playing field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some commenters also suggested changing the label's comparability 
range for similar models on the market. AHRI, for example, requested 
that, for split system units covered by the range table in Appendix H, 
the low end of the range should be 13 SEER on labels for models allowed 
in northern states only, and 14 SEER for the two other label types 
described in the proposal. The current table has a low SEER of 13 for 
all units. By removing the 13 SEER from the range's lower end for 
products sold in southern states, the recommended change would 
eliminate confusion regarding the regional standards.
    Finally, the commenters addressed the timing of the labeling 
changes for central air conditioners. Goodman urged the Commission to 
give manufacturers the maximum lead time possible to make the proposed 
changes. In its view, a longer lead time will allow industry to make 
the necessary changes while simultaneously conducting product redesigns 
to meet many new federal energy conservation standards. Specifically, 
Goodman asked for six months and the issuance of a pre-publication 
final rule to allow manufacturers to make the necessary changes.
    Roof-Top Systems, Manufacturer Names on Labels, Model Numbers, and 
Retailer Disclosures: The commenters also addressed the Commission's 
proposals related to manufacturer names on the labels, model numbers, 
combined roof-top systems, and retailer disclosures.
    First, the commenters disagreed on the proposal to give 
manufacturers flexibility in whether to place their name on the label. 
Industry members supported this proposal. The Joint Commenters, 
however, argued the Rule should require the label to bear the 
manufacturer name. In their view, the name aids consumers in their 
purchases because many do not see the heating and cooling equipment 
(and thus the unit's nameplate) until it is installed in their home. In 
addition, they argued that, though many retailers, installers, and 
assemblers deal exclusively with a single manufacturer or private 
labeler, that is not always the case.
    Second, the commenters, such as AHRI, generally supported the 
proposal to allow central air conditioner manufacturers to print 
multiple model numbers on a single label as long as the models share 
the same efficiency ratings and capacities. However, the Joint 
Commenters urged the FTC to consider establishing a maximum limit, 
either on the number of different model numbers or the amount of space 
consumed by such numbers, to ensure the label's legibility.
    Third, commenters (e.g., Goodman and AHRI) supported the proposal 
to allow a single label on rooftop units to reflect energy usage for 
furnace and ACs or HPs for single-packaged air conditioners less than 
65,000 Btu/h with gas heat. No commenters opposed the proposal.
    Finally, no commenters opposed the proposal to clarify the retailer 
disclosure provisions in Sec.  305.14.
    Discussion: Regional Standards Label for Central Air Conditioners. 
The Commission issues the final labels as proposed, including the three 
proposed label categories related to regional standards, but without 
the ``mini-range'' for split-system units.\53\ In addition, as 
suggested by AHRI, the final central air conditioner label has a 
different SEER range for products that qualify for different regions. 
Specifically, for products that can be sold only in northern states, 
the low end of the range is 13 SEER. For other products, the low end is 
14 SEER. This change will minimize confusion by eliminating comparative 
information related to models that may not be available for sale in 
certain regions due to the DOE standards. The Rule requires 
manufacturers to begin using the revised label nine months after the 
Commission publishes the amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ DOE issued final enforcement rules for regional standards 
on July 14, 2016 (81 FR 45387).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the proposal and contrary to AHRI's recommendation, 
the final label includes the lowest SEER rating associated with the 
labeled model

[[Page 63642]]

but not the model-specific range of ratings. As noted by some 
commenters, this simplified disclosure is consistent with the ASRAC 
discussions and recommendations. In addition, in initially issuing 
labels related to regional standards several years ago, the Commission 
included the installed range for individual systems to help installers 
and consumers determine whether an installed system met applicable 
regional standards. The Commission predicated the disclosure on the 
assumption that the regional standards would apply to the system's 
installed efficiency rating. However, that assumption no longer applies 
because DOE plans to enforce the regional standards based on the lowest 
rated efficiency rating, rather than the rating of the systems as 
installed. Accordingly, the ``mini-range'' on the current label is no 
longer necessary. The single number will make it easier for installers 
to determine regional compliance.\54\ Also, with the single number, 
there is no risk that the label will mislead consumers into believing 
their installed system's efficiency is higher than it actually is. 
Finally, installers will have a clear incentive to inform consumers 
about higher efficiency combinations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ The 2015 NPRM did not discuss conforming changes to the 
heat pump labels. Since these products are not subject to DOE's 
regional standards, the final amendments do not change those labels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Roof-Top Systems, Manufacturer Names on Labels, Model Numbers, and 
Updates to Retailer Disclosures: Finally, the final amendments contain 
provisions related to combined roof-top systems, manufacturer names on 
the labels, model numbers, and retailer disclosures.
    First, the final amendments allow a single label to reflect energy 
usage for ``rooftop systems'' (i.e., furnace and ACs or HPs for single-
packaged air conditioners less than 65,000 Btu/h with gas heat) to 
reduce the burden and clutter associated with using two separate labels 
for these products.
    Second, the amendments allow manufacturers to include their name on 
the label at their discretion, which is, as discussed above, consistent 
with labels for most other covered products. For the reasons detailed 
in the proposed Rule, these products are routinely sold through 
contractors in consumers' homes. Therefore, the absence of the 
manufacturer's name on the label should not confuse consumers.
    Third, the final Rule allows multiple model numbers to appear on 
labels for models that share the same capacity and efficiency ratings. 
To reduce the likelihood that labels will become crowded with model 
numbers, the final Rule advises that numbers must be clear and 
prominent. The Rule has allowed multiple model numbers on appliance 
labels for decades with no apparent problem.\55\ Should the inclusion 
of multiple model numbers on labels become an issue, the Commission 
will consider more prescriptive requirements in the future.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See 44 FR 66466 (Nov. 19, 1979).
    \56\ Contrary to commenter suggestions, the final Rule does not 
include a requirement for an all-weather disclosure on the 
nameplate. Without additional information and comment, the 
Commission lacks sufficient information to do so. It may consider 
such requirements at a later date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission has updated the retailer disclosure 
provisions in Sec.  305.14 to clarify that the 2013 amendments now 
apply.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ 78 FR 8362.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Water Heater Labels

    Background: In the 2015 NPRM, the Commission sought comment on 
modifications to water heater labels in response to a new DOE test 
procedure (79 FR 40542 (July 11, 2014)).\58\ Among other things, the 
new DOE test creates four categories or ``bins,'' which group models by 
their ``first hour rating,'' DOE's standard measure of hot water output 
for these products. The first hour rating, which appears on current 
EnergyGuide labels, displays the number of gallons of hot water the 
heater can supply in the first hour. The four new DOE first hour rating 
bins are: Very small (first hour rating less than 18 gallons), low 
(first hour rating between 18 and 51 gallons), medium (first hour 
rating between 51 and 75 gallons), and high (first hour rating greater 
than 75 gallons). In contrast, the Rule currently groups water heater 
ranges by the first hour rating in roughly five-gallon increments 
(e.g., 25-29, 30-34, 35-39 gallons, etc.). The new test procedure also 
establishes a new energy efficiency metric (uniform energy factor or 
``UEF'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ DOE also published a proposed rule in April 2015 related to 
a ``conversion factor'' for use under the new test procedure (80 FR 
20116 (April 14, 2015)). In that Notice, DOE proposed to continue to 
allow manufacturers to determine costs under existing testing 
requirements and thus create ``a transition period for FTC to pursue 
a rulemaking to determine whether changes are needed to the water 
heater EnergyGuide label due to changes in the water heater test 
procedure.'' 80 FR at 20138.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In anticipation of these changes, the Commission proposed 
amendments to the water heater label ranges to provide both: (1) Tank 
capacity information and (2) first hour rating information consistent 
with the four new DOE categories. Because water heaters are commonly 
marketed by tank size (i.e., storage volume) and not first hour rating, 
the Notice asked commenters whether the Rule should group the ranges by 
tank size, and then further by first hour rating, placing the four DOE 
water usage bins within such tank size categories. In addition, the 
Commission proposed to use the term ``hourly hot water output'' instead 
of the more technical term ``first hour rating.'' The proposal also 
contains text explaining the term ``hourly hot water output.'' Under 
the proposal, the label would continue to display annual energy cost as 
the primary disclosure, with energy use appearing in the label's 
secondary information. The Commission did not propose to add an energy 
efficiency rating (i.e., energy factor) to the label.
    Additionally, the Commission announced plans to update the 
comparability range for water heaters to reflect the new test procedure 
results and significant efficiency increases driven by the new DOE 
standards.\59\ As a result of the new DOE standards, most, if not all, 
electric water heaters will include heat pump technology. The 
Commission, therefore, proposed revising the existing water heater 
categories to eliminate the separate category for heat pump water 
heaters, and combining such models into a general category for all 
electric water heaters. The Commissioned expected this change would 
simplify the tables and help consumers compare all electric water 
heaters.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ Given the absence of model energy data from the new test 
procedure, the proposed amendatory language did not include proposed 
tables for revised cost ranges.
    \60\ The Commission also proposed to update the definition of 
``water heater'' so that it is consistent with clarifying changes to 
that term recently proposed by DOE. 79 FR 40541 (July 11, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: In general, the commenters agreed that the FTC should 
amend the water heater label based on significant changes to the DOE 
test procedure. Despite their general support for changing the label, 
industry members, as discussed in detail below, raised several concerns 
with the proposed label, including the ``first hour rating'' 
terminology, annual energy use and energy efficiency disclosures, tank 
size disclosures, the comparability categories, energy factor 
information, and timing of revised labels. In urging FTC to consider 
these various issues, industry members asked that the FTC reconsider 
the sample labels AHRI submitted with its previous comments. In their 
view, these labels provide clear, concise consumer information while 
not adversely affecting competition among water heater manufacturers. 
Specifically, AHRI asserted that its

[[Page 63643]]

suggested labels clearly identify the new DOE size bins and inform 
consumers that the labels' comparative information applies only to 
water heaters within the same bin.\61\ Finally, in addition to concerns 
regarding the proposed label designs, the commenters raised issues 
about labels for electric instantaneous models and grid-enabled water 
heaters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ AHRI noted two minor errors on the proposed label related 
to the names of the DOE first hour rating categories and the 
description of the term ``hourly hot water output.'' The Commission 
addresses both of these issues in the final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    First hour rating. Several industry commenters (e.g., A.O. Smith, 
AHRI, and BWC) objected to the proposed label's use of the term 
``hourly hot water output'' instead of ``first hour rating.'' In their 
opinion, this undefined term incorrectly implies that a model will 
deliver the indicated hot water volume on an hour-to-hour basis. The 
commenters explained that the first hour rating only measures the first 
hour's water delivery and does not necessarily apply to subsequent 
operating hours.\62\ Instead of creating a new term, most industry 
commenters recommended the Commission retain the ``first hour rating'' 
because it is a commonly accepted term employed for decades in DOE 
standards, on FTC labels, and in building codes and sizing guides.\63\ 
Some commenters offered specific alternatives. For instance, GEA 
suggested the term ``Hot Water Output'' rather than ``Hourly Hot Water 
Output'' along with a clarification that the term refers to ``How much 
hot water you get in 1st hour.'' Rheem suggested terms such as ``usage 
category'' or ``hot water usage capability.'' Finally, Rheem and AHRI 
recommended the usage category scale include not only the first hour 
rating category (e.g., very small, low), but also the actual rating 
number (e.g., 70 gallons) to provide more detailed information to help 
consumers pick a model that meets their hot water demands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ A.O. Smith also argued that the ``Hourly Hot Water Output'' 
term may conflict with applicable DOE test procedures. See 42 U.S.C. 
6293(b).
    \63\ Rheem noted that in DOE regulations ``first hour rating'' 
is defined as ``an estimate of the maximum volume of hot water that 
a storage-type water heater can supply within an hour that begins 
with the water heater fully heated (i.e., with all thermostats 
satisfied). It is a function of both the storage volume and the 
recovery rate.'' 10 CFR 430, Subpart B, Appendix E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Annual Energy Use in Therms and Energy Factor: The commenters 
offered different views on including annual energy use and energy 
factor ratings on the label. Several industry commenters (e.g., AHRI, 
A.O. Smith, Rheem and BWC) recommended excluding the estimated annual 
energy use in therms from the label because, in their view, most 
consumers do not find that information useful.\64\ AHRI explained that 
annual energy cost and therms are proportional and that users who need 
such information can easily calculate ``annual therms'' from the annual 
energy cost. These commenters suggested that other disclosures would be 
more useful, though they did not provide examples. GEA disagreed, 
arguing that the label should retain the estimated annual energy use 
disclosure because it provides energy use information to consumers 
without forcing them to convert those figures from the cost disclosure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ AHRI and Rheem agreed that the ``Estimated Yearly Energy 
Cost'' range chart on the label be larger and more prominent than 
the first hour rating category segmented bar figure, as depicted in 
the proposed FTC EnergyGuide label.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The California IOUs, which did not address the annual energy use 
issue, suggested that the label display the model's efficiency rating 
(i.e., energy factor), in addition to its energy consumption, because 
it is the best indicator of a water heater's efficiency. They explained 
that energy factor helps consumers determine whether a model qualifies 
for utility rebates and serves as the applicable metric for gauging 
compliance with DOE standards and state building codes.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ In addition, for water heaters that exceed the minimum 
federally required energy factor, the California IOUs recommended 
FTC include the following language: ``This water heater's energy 
factor is [insert percentage] percent better than the federal 
minimum standard. Contact your local utility to find out if this 
product qualifies for a rebate.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tank Size: The commenters also took issue with including 
information about tank size on the proposed label. First, several 
commenters (e.g., AHRI and A.O. Smith) objected to the term ``tank 
size'' and urged the Commission to use the standard industry term, 
``storage vessel capacity,'' which nationally-recognized safety 
standards already require on the product's rating plate.\66\ Rheem 
agreed that the term ``tank size'' should not appear on the label but, 
should the Commission decide to include it, suggested alternative terms 
such as ``rated storage volume'' or ``rated storage capacity'' to 
better reflect the terms used by DOE and the water heater industry.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ See ANSI Z21.10.1-2014/CSA 4.1-2014, ``Gas water heaters, 
volume I, storage water heaters with input ratings of 75,000 Btu per 
hour or less.'' AHRI and A.O. Smith stressed that, if the Commission 
decides to require such information on the label, the term and 
number displayed should match the water heater's rating plate to 
ensure consistency between the labels on the water heater.
    \67\ Rheem explained that the ``actual storage water heater tank 
size is comprised of dimensional measurements as well as tank 
volume, so a volume measurement in gallons should not be the only 
measurement describing `Tank Size.'''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comparability Categories and Tank Size: Similarly, industry 
commenters (including A.O. Smith, AHRI, and BWC) argued the label 
should not divide comparability categories by storage vessel capacity. 
Rheem explained that first hour rating, which is a function of both 
volume and output, better describes the amount of hot water consumers 
can expect. In addition, Rheem noted that the four DOE first hour 
rating categories (i.e., very small, low, medium, or high) provide 
appropriate comparative information regardless of storage tank 
capacity. Accordingly, industry commenters asserted that the proposed 
division of categories by storage capacity is unnecessary, overly 
complicated, and confusing to consumers. Instead, they recommended that 
the comparability ranges reflect first hour rating categories only.
    Combining range information for electric water heaters and heat 
pump water heaters: The commenters (including A.O. Smith, BWC, Rheem, 
AHRI, and the Joint Commenters) supported the proposal to combine the 
comparability range information for electric and heat pump water 
heaters. Rheem explained that this will allow consumers to gauge 
operating cost differences between the two technologies and weigh them 
against initial purchase prices. The Joint Commenters noted that this 
proposal reflects the reality that these products compete with each 
other for the same applications.\68\ Finally, AHRI urged the Commission 
to clarify that the Rule's combination of existing categories for 
electric water heaters and heat pumps applies only to storage water 
heaters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ AHRI noted that electric resistance models will cluster at 
the high end of the energy cost range while most heat pump water 
heaters will appear at the lower end, with few, if any models, in 
between.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Need For a Transitional Label: The commenters offered different 
views about the need for additional label information about the DOE 
test procedure change. GEA argued that the FTC should highlight the 
transition to aid consumers in their comparison shopping. It suggested 
using a modified label similar to the transitional labels employed for 
refrigerators and clothes washers during the recent DOE test procedure 
change for those products. AHRI and A.O. Smith disagreed, explaining 
that the proposed AHRI label provides adequate information regarding 
the transition by defining the new first hour categories (``bins'') and 
clearly explaining how consumers should use that information. A.O. 
Smith cautioned that transitional advisory

[[Page 63644]]

language would be overly confusing and soon become unnecessary. 
Instead, AHRI and A.O. Smith recommended the Commission separately 
educate consumers on the transition between test procedures, using 
sources such as the FTC Web site.
    Gallons per hour for instantaneous water heaters: The current 
instantaneous water heater label provides capacity in gallons per 
minute (gpm). The California IOUs recommended the instantaneous water 
heater label include the model's hourly hot water output, as well as 
the same ranges for hourly hot water output as the storage water 
heaters (very low, small, medium, and high) for consistency. The 
California IOUs argued that such a change would allow consumers to 
better compare the two technologies.
    Timing: AHRI asserted that the information necessary to develop 
amended water heater labels is not yet available. In particular, AHRI 
explained that there is no industry data from the new test procedure to 
generate new comparability ranges. In addition, AHRI urged the 
Commission to coordinate, to the fullest extent possible, the timing of 
new labeling requirements with DOE's implementation of its revised test 
procedure. Specifically, industry members (Rheem and AHRI) urged FTC to 
coordinate with DOE to ensure the new label requirements coincide with 
the new DOE ratings. AHRI noted that industry members are not yet using 
the new UEF metrics from the revised test procedure to determine 
compliance with the minimum efficiency standards because DOE has not 
issued a conversion factor. The commenters suggested the Commission use 
the new data to determine new comparability ranges once it becomes 
available. AHRI indicated that the UEF implementation date has yet to 
be determined and will be decided with DOE's publication of the final 
UEF conversion factor rule.
    Grid-Enabled Residential Electric Water Heaters: Commenters also 
requested that the Commission consider labeling for thermal storage 
grid-enabled residential electric water heaters. Utilities can operate 
these models remotely to manage overall electricity load. Rheem 
explained that these models, which have storage volumes greater than 75 
gallons, have several unique aspects such as an activation lock and key 
and communications modules. In addition, Rheem explained that these 
models are not limited to residential use, and electronic utility 
companies use these models as thermal storage batteries. Given these 
unusual characteristics, Rheem argued that the EnergyGuide labels will 
not adequately compare these models to conventional models. 
Accordingly, it urged the Commission to exempt grid enabled water 
heaters from EnergyGuide labeling requirements. AHRI disagreed. It 
explained that DOE regulations already require a specific disclosure 
addressing the appropriate use of these water heaters (see 10 CFR 
430.2), which could appear on the FTC EnergyGuide label, or as a 
separate label.
    Electric instantaneous water heaters: AHRI also recommended the 
Commission propose labels for residential electric instantaneous water 
heaters, which have been excluded from the DOE test procedure in the 
past. The revised DOE water heater efficiency test procedure now 
includes a method to measure these models' energy use.
    Discussion: In the final amendments, the Commission has revised the 
water heater label to include new information consistent with the 
revised DOE test procedure. Manufacturers will have nine months to 
begin using the label and must base the information on the new DOE test 
procedure. Consistent with the proposed label, the new label depicts 
storage water heater capacity using DOE's new output categories (or 
bins). The final Rule also includes new ranges for these bins derived 
from DOE data developed as part of its regulatory proceeding. As 
proposed and supported in the comments, the final Rule combines the 
electric water heaters and heat pump water heaters for comparison 
purposes.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ Heat pump water heaters now fall under the comparability 
range information for electric water heaters in Appendix D2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the comments, the Commission has made several 
revisions to the proposed label. First, the final label uses the 
conventional term ``first hour rating'' instead of ``hourly hot water 
output.'' We agree with commenters that the latter term may suggest 
that the rating applies on an hour-to-hour basis, when, in reality, it 
only measures output in the first hour. To address this issue, the 
final label states that ``first hour rating'' describes ``How much hot 
water you get in the first hour.'' Consistent with AHRI's suggestions, 
the model's first hour rating in gallons appears on the scale next to 
the model's first hour rating bin (i.e., very small, low, medium, and 
high) to allow for better product comparisons. Second, the label does 
not sort comparability ranges by tank size (i.e., storage capacity) as 
proposed, but instead limits those ranges to the four DOE water output 
bins (very small, low, medium, and high). As explained by the 
commenters, ``first hour rating'' best describes the hot water amount 
consumers can expect the product to deliver. Therefore, including tank 
size in the comparability ranges is unnecessary and potentially 
confusing. However, the final label includes a storage capacity 
disclosure near the top of the label. In response to commenters' 
concerns about terminology, the final label uses the term ``tank size 
(storage capacity),'' to ensure consistency with commonly used wording. 
Finally, the label continues to include annual energy use to provide 
consumers with this additional comparative information.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ The revised label does not include an energy factor 
disclosure, as suggested by some commenters. As the Commission 
explained in a 2015 Notice, it is unclear whether consumers are 
familiar with the term. In addition, such information is available 
from DOE's Compliance Certification Management System (CCMS). 80 FR 
67285, 67293 (Nov. 2, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The final label, however, does not include several items proposed 
by commenters. First, it does not include text regarding the new DOE 
test procedure. The Commission agrees with other commenters that the 
final label appropriately conveys information related to the test 
procedure transition. Specifically, the label clearly defines the new 
categories (``bins'') and explains how consumers should use that 
information, making additional explanatory text unnecessary. Second, 
the label does not contain a statement explaining how the labeled model 
compares to the applicable DOE standard. Such information would clutter 
the label and be potentially confusing. Finally, the labels for 
instantaneous water heaters continue to convey capacity in gallons per 
minute. As commenters suggest, a ``gallons per hour'' rating on an 
instantaneous model may confuse or mislead consumers. Such a disclosure 
is not equivalent to the ``first hour rating'' for storage models. 
``Gallons per hour'' represents a continuous flow rate that the model 
will continuously deliver, whereas ``first hour rating'' reflects hot 
water volume delivered in the first hour.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ The FTC staff will provide a sample label template for 
instantaneous water heaters on the FTC Web site for use by 
manufacturers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Commission will consider seeking comment on special 
labeling for grid-enabled residential electric water heaters in the 
future. In the meantime, since grid-enabled water heaters meet existing 
definitions for water heaters, and the Rule contains applicable 
comparison ranges, manufacturers should label these models as they do 
any other storage water heater. The Commission will also formally 
propose

[[Page 63645]]

labels for instantaneous electric-water heaters in a later notice. 
These products cannot be labeled under the current Rule because they do 
not fall into an existing labeling category, and no range of 
comparability exists.

III. 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 May 31, 
2017 (OMB Control No. 3084-0069). The amendments make changes in the 
Rule's labeling requirements that will increase the PRA burden as 
detailed below.\72\ Accordingly, the Commission is seeking OMB 
clearance specific to the Rule amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ As indicated in the NPRM (80 FR 67363, n. 54), several 
proposed labeling changes, including changes to dual mode 
refrigerators, heating and cooling equipment, consolidated 
comparability ranges for refrigerators, ceiling fan labels, and 
water heaters should impose no additional burden beyond existing 
estimates because such changes either impose no or de minimis 
additional burdens, or manufacturers should be able to incorporate 
the proposed changes into their normally scheduled package or label 
revisions without incurring additional burdens beyond those already 
accounted for. The PRA analysis for this rulemaking focuses strictly 
on the information collection requirements created by and/or 
otherwise affected by the amendments. Unaffected information 
collection provisions have previously been accounted for in past FTC 
analyses under the Rule and are covered by the current PRA clearance 
from OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reporting Requirements (label images): The amendments require 
manufacturers to furnish (as part of their normal FTC reporting) links 
to images of their EnergyGuide labels. Given approximately 15,000 total 
models at an estimated 1 minute per model, this requirement will entail 
a burden of 250 hours. Assuming further that these reporting 
requirements will be implemented by data entry workers at an hourly 
wage rate of $15.79 per hour,\73\ the associated labor cost for 
reporting would be approximately $3,948 per year. Any non-labor costs 
associated with the reporting amendments are likely to be minimal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ This is an increase from the labor cost estimate in the 
NPRM, attributable to an intervening annual release from the Bureau 
of Labor Statistics. Within it, the mean hourly wage for ``Data 
entry and information processing workers'' rose from the previously 
shown amount of $15.48 to $15.79. See http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.t01.htm ``Occupational Employment and Wages--May 
2015,'' Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, 
released March 30, 2016, Table 1 (``National employment and wage 
data from the Occupational Employment Statistics survey by 
occupation, May 2015'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, requires 
that the Commission provide an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA) with a Proposed Rule, and a Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (FRFA) with the final Rule, unless the Commission certifies 
that the Rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ 5 U.S.C. 603-605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission does not anticipate that the final amendments will 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The Commission recognizes that many affected entities may 
qualify as small businesses under the relevant thresholds. The 
Commission does not expect, however, that the economic impact of 
implementing the amendments will be significant. The Commission plans 
to provide businesses with ample time to implement the requirements. In 
addition, the Commission does not expect that the requirements 
specified in the final amendments will have a significant impact on 
affected entities.
    Although the Commission certified under the RFA that the amendments 
would not, if promulgated, have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, the Commission has determined, nonetheless, 
that it is appropriate to publish an FRFA in order to explain the 
impact of the amendments on small entities as follows:

A. Description of the Reasons That Action by the Agency Is Being Taken

    The Commission initiated this rulemaking to reduce the Rule's 
reporting burdens, increase the availability of energy labels to 
consumers while minimizing burdens on industry, and generally improve 
existing requirements.

B. Issues Raised by Comments in Response to the IRFA

    The Commission did not receive any comments specifically related to 
the impact of the final amendments on small businesses. Comments that 
involve impacts on all entities are discussed above.

C. Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Amendments Will 
Apply

    Under the Small Business Size Standards issued by the Small 
Business Administration, the standards for various affected entities 
are as follows: refrigerator manufacturers--up to 1,000 employees; 
other appliance manufacturers--up to 500 employees. Based on general 
knowledge of the this market, the FTC staff estimates that fewer than 
50 entities subject to the Rule's requirements qualify as small 
businesses.

D. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements

    The Commission recognizes that the changes will involve some 
burdens on affected entities. However, the amendments should not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Manufacturers will have to make changes to their reporting process. 
However, the Commission has provided them with ample time to 
incorporate the changes into their normal Web site updates. In 
addition, as detailed in the Paperwork Reduction Act analysis, the 
changes will not be significant. There should be no capital costs 
associated with the amendments. As estimated above, the Rule imposes 
new requirements on fewer than 50 small businesses (appliance and 
electronics manufacturers. The changes are likely to be made by data 
entry specialists.

E. Description of Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact, 
If Any, on Small Entities, Including Alternatives

    The Commission sought comment and information on the need, if any, 
for alternative compliance methods that would reduce the economic 
impact of the Rule on such small entities. In particular, the 
Commission sought comments on whether it should delay the Rule's 
effective date to provide additional time for small business compliance 
and whether to reduce the amount of information catalog sellers must 
provide. However, to minimize the impacts on manufacturers, the 
Commission has set the effective date for most of the new requirements 
at one year after publication of this document in the Federal Register 
and has also modified its proposal to reduce the burden associated with 
that reporting by providing manufacturers with different options for 
reporting their label images (e.g., links to pdf files, Web sites, 
etc.).

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 305

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

[[Page 63646]]

Final Rule

    For the reasons discussed above, the Commission amends part 305 of 
title 16, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 305--ENERGY AND WATER USE LABELING FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS UNDER 
THE ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT (``ENERGY 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.  305.3, revise paragraph (x) to read as follows:


Sec.  305.3  Description of covered products.

* * * * *
    (x) Ceiling fan means a nonportable device that is suspended from a 
ceiling for circulating air via the rotation of fan blades, excluding 
large-diameter and high-speed small diameter fans as defined in 
appendix U of subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. The requirements of this 
part are otherwise limited to those ceiling fans for which the 
Department of Energy has adopted and published test procedures for 
measuring energy usage.
* * * * *

0
3. Amend Sec.  305.7 by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (d) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  305.7  Determinations of capacity.

* * * * *
    (a) Refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. The capacity shall be 
the total refrigerated volume (VT) in cubic feet, rounded to the 
nearest one-tenth of a cubic foot, as determined according to appendix 
A to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B.
    (b) Freezers. The capacity shall be the total refrigerated volume 
(VT) in cubic feet, rounded to the nearest one-tenth of a cubic foot, 
as determined according to appendix B to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B.
* * * * *
    (d) Water heaters. The capacity shall be the rated storage volume 
and first hour rating (for storage-type models), and gallons per minute 
(for instantaneous-type models), as determined according to appendix E 
to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B.
* * * * *

0
4. In Sec.  305.8:
0
 a. Remove the term ``at high speed'' wherever it appears; and
0
 b. Add paragraph (a)(5) to read as follows:


Sec.  305.8   Submission of data.

    (a) * * *
    (5) After September 15, 2017, manufacturers must begin submitting a 
Web site address for the online EnergyGuide labels covered by Sec.  
305.6(a) in new model and annual reports required by this section. 
Manufacturers may accomplish this by either submitting a specific link 
to a URL for each label, a link to a PDF download for each label, or a 
link to a Web site that takes users directly to a searchable database 
of the covered labels from which the label image or download may be 
accessed using the model number as certified to DOE pursuant to 10 CFR 
part 429 and the model number advertised in product literature. Such 
label information must be submitted either at the time the model is 
certified to DOE pursuant to 10 CFR part 429 or at some time on or 
before the annual report date immediately following such certification. 
In lieu of submitting the required information to the Commission, 
manufacturers may submit such information to the Department of Energy 
via the CCMS at https://regulations.doe.gov/ccms as provided by 10 CFR 
429.12. The requirements in this paragraph do not apply to Lighting 
Facts labels.
* * * * *

0
5. Amend Sec.  305.11 by revising paragraphs (a) and (f) to read as 
follows:


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

    (a) Layout. All energy labels for refrigerators, refrigerator-
freezers, freezers, dishwashers, clothes washers, water heaters, pool 
heaters, and room air conditioners shall use one size, similar colors, 
and typefaces with consistent positioning of headline, copy, and charts 
to maintain uniformity for immediate consumer recognition and 
readability. Trim size dimensions for all labels shall be as follows: 
width must be between 5\1/4\ inches and 5\1/2\ inches (13.34 cm. and 
13.97 cm.); length must be between 7\3/8\ inches (18.73 cm.) and 7\5/8\ 
(19.37 cm.). Copy is to be set between 27 picas and 29 picas and copy 
page should be centered (right to left and top to bottom). Depth is 
variable but should follow closely the prototype labels appearing at 
the end of this part illustrating the basis layout. All positioning, 
spacing, type sizes, and line widths should be similar to and 
consistent with the prototype and sample labels in appendix L to this 
part.
* * * * *
    (f) Label content. (1) Headlines and texts, as illustrated in the 
prototype and sample labels in appendix L to this part, are standard 
for all labels.
    (2) Name of manufacturer or private labeler shall, in the case of a 
corporation, be deemed to be satisfied only by the actual corporate 
name, which may be preceded or followed by the name of the particular 
division of the corporation. In the case of an individual, partnership, 
or association, the name under which the business is conducted shall be 
used. Inclusion of the name of the manufacturer or private labeler is 
optional at the discretion of the manufacturer or private labeler.
    (3) Model number(s) will be the designation given by the 
manufacturer or private labeler.
    (4) Capacity or size is that determined in accordance with Sec.  
305.7. For refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers, the 
capacity provided on the label shall be the model's total refrigerated 
volume (VT) as determined in accordance with Sec.  305.7 and the model 
description must be consistent with the categories described in 
Appendices A and B to this part. Capacity for storage water heaters 
shall be presented in both rated storage volume (``tank size (storage 
capacity)'') and first hour rating as indicated on the sample label in 
appendix L to this part.
    (5) Unless otherwise indicated in this paragraph, 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. 
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 to this 
part. Labels for dual-mode refrigerator-freezers that can operate as 
either a refrigerator or a freezer must reflect the estimated energy 
cost of the model's most energy intensive configuration.
    (6) Unless otherwise indicated in this paragraph, ranges of 
comparability for estimated annual operating costs or thermal 
efficiencies, as applicable, are found in the appropriate appendices 
accompanying this part.
    (7) Placement of the labeled product on the scale shall be 
proportionate to the lowest and highest estimated annual operating 
costs or thermal efficiencies, as applicable.
    (8) Labels for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezers, 
dishwashers, clothes washers, and water heaters must contain the 
model's estimated annual energy consumption as determined in accordance 
with

[[Page 63647]]

Sec.  305.5 and as indicated on the sample labels in appendix L. Labels 
for room air conditioners, and pool heaters must contain the model's 
energy efficiency rating or thermal efficiency, as applicable, as 
determined in accordance with Sec.  305.5 and as indicated on the 
sample labels in appendix L to this part.
    (9) Labels must contain a statement as illustrated in the prototype 
labels in appendix L and specified as follows by product type:
    (i) Labels for refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers must contain 
a statement as illustrated in the prototype labels in appendix L and 
specified as follows (fill in the blanks with the appropriate year and 
energy cost figures):
    Your cost will depend on your utility rates and use.
    Both cost ranges based on models of similar size capacity.
    [Insert statement required by Sec.  305.11(f)(9)(iii)].
    Estimated energy cost is based on a national average electricity 
cost of __cents per kWh.
    ftc.gov/energy.
    (ii) For refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers and 
clothes washers the label shall contain the text and graphics 
illustrated in sample labels 1 and 2 of appendix L, including the 
statement:
    Compare ONLY to other labels with yellow numbers.
    Labels with yellow numbers are based on the same test procedures.
    (iii) For refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers, the following 
sentence shall be included as part of the statement required by 
paragraph (f)(9)(i) of this section:
    (A) For models covered under appendix A1, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have automatic defrost and no freezer.
    (B) For models covered under appendix A2, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have manual defrost.
    (C) For models covered under appendix A3, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have partial automatic defrost.
    (D) For models covered under appendix A4, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have automatic defrost, top-mounted 
freezer, and no through-the-door ice.
    (E) For models covered under appendix A5, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have automatic defrost, side-mounted 
freezer, and no through-the-door ice.
    (F) For models covered under appendix A6, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have automatic defrost, bottom-mounted 
freezer, and no through-the-door ice.
    (G) For models covered under appendix A7, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have automatic defrost, bottom-mounted 
freezer and through-the-door ice.
    (H) For models covered under appendix A8, the sentence shall read:
    Models with similar features have automatic defrost, side-mounted 
freezer, and through-the-door ice.
    (iv) Labels for freezers must contain a statement as illustrated in 
the prototype labels in appendix L and specified as follows (fill in 
the blanks with the appropriate year and energy cost figures):
    Your cost will depend on your utility rates and use.
    [Insert statement required by Sec.  305.11(f)(10)(v).]
    Estimated energy cost is based on a national average electricity 
cost of __cents per kWh.
    ftc.gov/energy.
    (v) For freezers, the following sentence shall be included as part 
of the statement required by paragraph (f)(9)(iv) of this section:
    (A) For models covered under appendix B1, the sentence shall read:
    Cost range based only on upright freezer models of similar capacity 
with manual defrost.
    (B) For models covered under appendix B2, the sentence shall read:
    Cost range based only on upright freezer models of similar capacity 
with automatic defrost.
    (C) For models covered under appendix B3, the sentence shall read:
    Cost range based only on chest and other freezer models of similar 
capacity.
    (vi) 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.
    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 annual energy cost is based on a national average 
electricity cost of __cents per kWh and a seasonal use of 8 hours use 
per day over a 3 month period.
    For more information, visit www.ftc.gov/energy.
    (vii) 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 fueled by [natural gas, oil, 
propane, or electricity] with a [very small, low, medium, or large] 
first hour rating ([fewer than 18 gallons, 18-50.9 gallons, 51-74.9 
gallons, or greater than 75 gallons]).
    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].
    Estimated yearly energy use: __[kWh or therms].
    ftc.gov/energy.
    (viii) For instantaneous water heaters (Appendix D4), 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 models fueled by natural gas with a [very 
small, low, medium, or large] gallons per minute rating ([0 to 1.6, 1.7 
to 2.7, 2.8 to 4.0, or greater than 4.0]).
    Estimated energy cost is based on a national average [natural gas, 
or propane] cost of [__cents per kWh or $__per therm or gallon].
    Estimated yearly energy use: __[kWh or therms].
    ftc.gov/energy.
    (ix) For dishwashers covered by appendices C1 and C2, 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, and a 
national average electricity cost of __cents per kWh and natural gas 
cost of $__per therm.
    ftc.gov/energy.
    (x) For clothes washers covered by appendices 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 six wash loads a week and a 
national

[[Page 63648]]

average electricity cost of __cents per kWh and natural gas cost of 
$__per therm.
    ftc.gov/energy.
    (xi) 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
6. Amend Sec.  305.12 by revising paragraphs (f)(2) and (3), adding 
paragraph (f)(14), and revising paragraph (g) to read as follows:


Sec.  305.12   Labeling for central air conditioners, heat pumps, and 
furnaces.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) Name of manufacturer or private labeler shall, in the case of a 
corporation, be deemed to be satisfied only by the actual corporate 
name, which may be preceded or followed by the name of the particular 
division of the corporation. In the case of an individual, partnership, 
or association, the name under which the business is conducted shall be 
used. Inclusion of the name of the manufacturer or private labeler is 
optional at the discretion of the manufacturer or private labeler.
    (3) The model's basic model number. The label may include multiple 
model numbers on a single label for models as long as the models share 
the same efficiency ratings and capacities and the presentation of such 
information is clear and prominent.
* * * * *
    (14) Manufacturers of models that qualify as both furnaces and 
central air conditioners or heat pumps under DOE requirements may 
combine the disclosures required by this section on one label for 
models that meet all applicable DOE regional efficiency standards.
    (g) Content of central air conditioner labels: Content of labels 
for central air conditioners and heat pumps. (1) Headlines and texts, 
as illustrated in the prototype and sample labels in appendix L to this 
part.
    (2) Name of manufacturer or private labeler shall, in the case of a 
corporation, be deemed to be satisfied only by the actual corporate 
name, which may be preceded or followed by the name of the particular 
division of the corporation. In the case of an individual, partnership, 
or association, the name under which the business is conducted shall be 
used. Inclusion of the name of the manufacturer or private labeler is 
optional at the discretion of the manufacturer or private labeler.
    (3) The model's basic model number. The label may include multiple 
model numbers on a single label for models as long as the models share 
the same efficiency ratings and capacities and the presentation of such 
information is clear and prominent.
    (4) The model's capacity. Inclusion of capacity is optional at the 
discretion of the manufacturer or private labeler for all models except 
split-system labels, which may not disclose capacity.
    (5) The seasonal energy efficiency ratio (SEER) for the cooling 
function of central air conditioners as determined in accordance with 
Sec.  305.5. For the heating function, the heating seasonal performance 
factor (HSPF) shall be calculated for heating Region IV for the 
standardized design heating requirement nearest the capacity measured 
in the High Temperature Test in accordance with Sec.  305.5. In 
addition, as illustrated in the sample labels in appendix L to this 
part, the ratings for any split-system air conditioner condenser 
evaporator coil combinations shall be the minimum rating of all 
condenser-evaporator coil combinations certified to the Department of 
Energy pursuant to 10 CFR part 430. The ratings for any split-system 
heat pump condenser-evaporator coil combinations shall include the low 
and high ratings of all condenser-evaporator coil combinations 
certified to the Department of Energy pursuant to 10 CFR part 430.
    (6)(i) Each cooling-only central air conditioner label shall 
contain a range of comparability consisting of the lowest and highest 
SEER for all cooling-only central air conditioners consistent with 
sample label 7A in appendix L to this part.
    (ii) Each heat pump label, except as noted in paragraph (g)(6)(iii) 
of this section, shall contain two ranges of comparability. The first 
range shall consist of the lowest and highest seasonal energy 
efficiency ratios for the cooling side of all heat pumps consistent 
with sample label 8 in appendix L to this part. The second range shall 
consist of the lowest and highest heating seasonal performance factors 
for the heating side of all heat pumps consistent with sample label 8 
in appendix L to this part.
    (iii) Each heating-only heat pump label shall contain a range of 
comparability consisting of the lowest and highest heating seasonal 
performance factors for all heating-only heat pumps following the 
format of sample label 8 in appendix L to this part.
    (7) Placement of the labeled product on the scale shall be 
proportionate to the lowest and highest efficiency ratings forming the 
scale.
    (8) The following statement shall appear on the label in bold print 
as indicated in the sample labels in appendix L to this part.
    For energy cost info, visit productinfo.energy.gov.
    (9) All labels on split-system condenser units must contain one of 
the following three statements:
    (i) For labels disclosing only the seasonal energy efficiency ratio 
for cooling, the statement should read:
    * Your air conditioner's efficiency rating may be better depending 
on the coil your contractor installs.
    (ii) For labels disclosing both the seasonal energy efficiency 
ratio for cooling and the heating seasonal performance factor for 
heating, the statement should read:
    This system's efficiency ratings depend on the coil your contractor 
installs with this unit. The heating efficiency rating varies slightly 
in different geographic regions. Ask your contractor for details.
    (iii) For labels disclosing only the heating seasonal performance 
factor for heating, the statement should read:
    This system's efficiency rating depends on the coil your contractor 
installs with this unit. The efficiency rating varies slightly in 
different geographic regions. Ask your contractor for details.
    (10) The following statement shall appear at the top of the label 
as illustrated in the sample labels in appendix L of this part:
    Federal law prohibits removal of this label before consumer 
purchase.
    (11) For any single-package air conditioner with a minimum Energy 
Efficiency Ratio (EER) of at least 11.0, any split system central air 
conditioner with a rated cooling capacity of at least 45,000 Btu/h and 
minimum efficiency ratings of at least 14 SEER and 11.7 EER, and any 
split-system central air conditioners with a rated cooling capacity 
less than 45,000 Btu/h and minimum efficiency ratings of at least 14 
SEER and 12.2 EER, the label must contain the following regional 
standards information:
    (i) A statement that reads:
    Notice Federal law allows this unit to be installed in all U.S. 
states and territories.
    (ii) For split systems, a statement that reads:
    Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): The installed system's minimum EER 
is __.
    (iii) For single-package air conditioners, a statement that reads:
    Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): This model's EER is [__].

[[Page 63649]]

    (12) For any split system central air conditioner with a rated 
cooling capacity of at least 45,000 Btu/h and minimum efficiency 
ratings of at least 14 SEER but lower than 11.7 EER, and any split-
system central air conditioners with a rated cooling capacity less than 
45,000 Btu/h and minimum efficiency ratings of at least 14 SEER but 
lower than 12.2 EER, the label must contain the following regional 
standards information.
    (i) A statement that reads:
    Notice Federal law allows this unit to be installed only in: AK, 
AL, AR, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IA, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, ME, 
MD, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE., NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, 
SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY and U.S. territories. 
Federal law prohibits installation of this unit in other states.
    (ii) A map and accompanying text as illustrated in the sample label 
7A in appendix L.
    (iii) A statement that reads:
    Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): The installed system's minimum EER 
is __.
    (13) For any split system central air conditioner with a minimum 
rated efficiency rating less than 14 SEER, the label must contain the 
following regional standards information:
    (i) A statement that reads:
    Notice Federal law allows this unit to be installed only in: AK, 
CO, CT, ID, IL, IA, IN, KS, MA, ME, MI, MN, MO, MT, ND, NE., NH, NJ, 
NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, SD, UT, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY, and U.S. Territories. 
Federal law prohibits installation of this unit in other states.
    (ii) A map and accompanying text as illustrated in the sample label 
8 in appendix L.
    (iii) A statement that reads:
    Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): The installed system's minimum EER 
is __.
    (14) For any single-package air conditioner with a minimum EER 
below 11.0, the label must contain the following regional standards 
information consistent with sample label 7A in appendix L to this part:
    (i) A statement that reads:
    Notice Federal law allows this unit to be installed only in: AK, 
AL, AR, CO, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IA, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, ME, 
MD, MI, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, ND, NE., NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, 
SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY and U.S. territories. 
Federal law prohibits installation of this unit in other states.
    (ii) A map and accompanying text as illustrated in the sample label 
7A in appendix L.
    (15) No marks or information other than that specified in this part 
shall appear on or directly adjoining this label except that:
    (i) A part or publication number identification may be included on 
this label, as desired by the manufacturer. If a manufacturer elects to 
use a part or publication number, it must appear in the lower right-
hand corner of the label and be set in 6-point type or smaller.
    (ii) The energy use disclosure labels required by the governments 
of Canada or Mexico may appear directly adjoining this label, as 
desired by the manufacturer.
    (iii) The manufacturer may include the ENERGY STAR logo on the 
label for certified products in a location consistent with the sample 
labels in appendix L to this part. The logo must be no larger than 1 
inch by 3 inches in size. Only manufacturers that have signed a 
Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of Energy or the 
Environmental Protection Agency may add the ENERGY STAR logo to labels 
on qualifying covered products; such manufacturers may add the ENERGY 
STAR logo to labels only on those covered products that are 
contemplated by the Memorandum of Understanding.

0
7. Revise Sec.  305.13(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  305.13  Labeling for ceiling fans.

    (a) Ceiling fans--(1) Content. Any covered product that is a 
ceiling fan, except for models 84 inches or greater in diameter and 
high-speed small diameter fans as defined in 10 CFR part 430, shall be 
labeled clearly and conspicuously on the package's principal display 
panel with the following information on the label consistent with the 
sample label in appendix L to this part:
    (i) Headlines, including the title ``EnergyGuide,'' and text as 
illustrated in the sample label in appendix L to this part;
    (ii) The product's estimated yearly energy cost based on 6.4 hours 
use per day and 12 cents per kWh;
    (iii) The product's airflow expressed in cubic feet per minute and 
determined pursuant to Sec.  305.5;
    (iv) The product's energy use expressed in watts and determined 
pursuant to Sec.  305.5 as indicated in the sample label in appendix L 
of this part;
    (v) The statement ``Based on 12 cents per kWh and 6.4 hours use per 
day'';
    (vi) The statement ``Your cost depends on rates and use'';
    (vii) The statement ``All estimates based on typical use, excluding 
lights'';
    (viii) The statement ``The higher the airflow, the more air the fan 
will move'';
    (ix) The statement ``Airflow Efficiency: __Cubic Feet Per Minute 
Per Watt'';
    (x) The address ftc.gov/energy;
    (xi) For fans less than 19 inches in diameter, the label shall 
display a cost range of $10 to $50 along with the statement underneath 
the range ``Cost Range of Similar Models (18'' or smaller)'';
    (xii) For fans from 19 or more inches and less than 84 inches in 
diameter, the label shall display a cost range of $3 to $34 along with 
the statement underneath the range ``Cost Range of Similar Models 
(19''-83)''.
    (xiii) Placement of the labeled product on the scale proportionate 
to the lowest and highest estimated annual energy costs as illustrated 
in the Sample Labels in appendix L. When the estimated annual energy 
cost of a given model falls outside the limits of the current range for 
that product, the manufacturer shall place the product at the end of 
the range closest to the model's energy cost.
    (xiv) The ENERGY STAR logo as illustrated on the ceiling fan label 
illustration in Appendix L for qualified products, if desired by the 
manufacturer. Only manufacturers that have signed a Memorandum of 
Understanding with the Department of Energy or the Environmental 
Protection Agency may add the ENERGY STAR logo to labels on qualifying 
covered products; such manufacturers may add the ENERGY STAR logo to 
labels only on those products that are covered by the Memorandum of 
Understanding;
    (2) Label size, color, and text font. The label shall be four 
inches wide and three inches high. The label colors shall be black text 
on a process yellow or other neutral contrasting background. The text 
font shall be Arial or another equivalent font. The label's text size, 
format, content, and the order of the required disclosures shall be 
consistent with the ceiling fan label illustration of appendix L of 
this part.
    (3) Placement. The ceiling fan label shall be printed on or affixed 
to the principal display panel of the product's packaging.
    (4) Additional information. No marks or information other than that 
specified in this part shall appear on this label, except a model name, 
number, or similar identifying information.
    (5) Labeling for ``multi-mount'' fans. For ``multi-mount'' fan 
models that can be installed either extended from the ceiling or flush 
with the ceiling, the label content must reflect the lowest efficiency 
(cubic feet per watt) configuration. Manufacturers may

[[Page 63650]]

provide a second label depicting the efficiency at the other 
configuration.
* * * * *

0
8. Revise Sec.  305.14 to read as follows:


Sec.  305.14   Energy information disclosures for heating and cooling 
equipment.

    The following provisions apply to any covered central air 
conditioner, heat pump, or furnace.
    (a) Manufacturer duty to provide labels. For any covered central 
air conditioner, heat pump, or furnace model that a manufacturer 
distributes in commerce, the manufacturer must make a copy of the 
EnergyGuide label available on a publicly accessible Web site in a 
manner that allows catalog sellers and consumers to hyperlink to the 
label or download it for their use. The labels must remain on the Web 
site for six months after the manufacturer ceases the model's 
production.
    (b) Distribution. (1) Manufacturers and private labelers must 
provide to distributors and retailers, including assemblers, 
EnergyGuide labels for covered central air conditioners, heat pumps, 
and furnaces (including boilers) they sell to them. The label may be 
provided in paper or electronic form (including Internet-based access). 
Distributors must give this information to retailers, including 
assemblers, they supply.
    (2) Retailers, including assemblers, who sell covered central air 
conditioners, heat pumps, and furnaces (including boilers) to consumers 
must show the labels for the products they offer to customers and let 
them read the labels before the customers agree to purchase the 
product. For example, the retailer may display labeled units in their 
store or direct consumers to the labels in a binder or computer at a 
counter or service desk.
    (3) Retailers, including installers and assemblers, who negotiate 
or make sales at a place other than their regular places of business, 
including sales over the telephone or through electronic 
communications, must show the labels for the products they offer to 
customers and let them read the labels before the customers agree to 
purchase the product. If the labels are on a Web site, retailers, 
including assemblers, who negotiate or make sales at a place other than 
their regular places of business, may choose to provide customers with 
instructions to access such labels in lieu of showing them a paper 
version of the information. Retailers who choose to use the Internet 
for the required label disclosures must provide customers the 
opportunity to read such information prior to sale of the product.
    (c) Oil furnace labels. If an installer installs an oil furnace 
with an input capacity different from that set by the manufacturer and 
the manufacturer identifies alternative capacities on the label, the 
installer must permanently mark the appropriate box on the EnergyGuide 
label displaying the installed input capacity and the associated AFUE 
as illustrated in Sample Labels in appendix L to this part.

0
9. Revise Appendixes A1 through A8 to Part 305 to read as follows:

Appendix A1 to Part 305--Refrigerators With Automatic Defrost

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated  operating costs (dollars/year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             $18             $39
10.5 to 12.4............................              30              34
12.5 to 14.4............................              34              36
14.5 to 16.4............................             (*)             (*)
16.5 to 18.4............................              34              40
18.5 to 20.4............................              40              41
20.5 to 22.4............................              37              48
22.5 to 24.4............................              45              50
24.5 to 26.4............................             (*)             (*)
26.5 to 28.4............................             (*)             (*)
28.5 and over...........................             (*)             (*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.

Appendix A2 to Part 305--Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers With 
Manual Defrost

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             $24             $41
10.5 to 12.4............................             (*)             (*)
12.5 to 14.4............................              30              30
14.5 to 16.4............................             (*)             (*)
16.5 to 18.4............................             (*)             (*)
18.5 to 20.4............................             (*)             (*)
20.5 to 22.4............................             (*)             (*)
22.5 to 24.4............................             (*)             (*)
24.5 to 26.4............................             (*)             (*)

[[Page 63651]]

 
26.5 to 28.4............................             (*)             (*)
28.5 and over...........................             (*)             (*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.

Appendix A3 to Part 305--Refrigerator-Freezers With Partial Automatic 
Defrost

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             $25             $44
10.5 to 12.4............................             (*)             (*)
12.5 to 14.4............................             (*)             (*)
14.5 to 16.4............................             (*)             (*)
16.5 to 18.4............................             (*)             (*)
18.5 to 20.4............................             (*)             (*)
20.5 to 22.4............................             (*)             (*)
22.5 to 24.4............................             (*)             (*)
24.5 to 26.4............................             (*)             (*)
26.5 to 28.4............................             (*)             (*)
28.5 and over...........................             (*)             (*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.

Appendix A4 to Part 305--Refrigerator-Freezers With Automatic Defrost 
With Top-Mounted Freezer Without Through-the-Door Ice Service

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             $36             $53
10.5 to 12.4............................              37              51
12.5 to 14.4............................              40              55
14.5 to 16.4............................              40              57
16.5 to 18.4............................              43              59
18.5 to 20.4............................              45              62
20.5 to 22.4............................              46              63
22.5 to 24.4............................              56              66
24.5 to 26.4............................             (*)             (*)
26.5 to 28.4............................             (*)             (*)
28.5 and over...........................             (*)             (*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.

Appendix A5 to Part 305--Refrigerator-Freezers With Automatic Defrost 
With Side-Mounted Freezer Without Through-the-Door Ice Service

[[Page 63652]]



                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             $25             $70
10.5 to 12.4............................             (*)             (*)
12.5 to 14.4............................             (*)             (*)
14.5 to 16.4............................              37              37
16.5 to 18.4............................             (*)             (*)
18.5 to 20.4............................             (*)             (*)
20.5 to 22.4............................              63              86
22.5 to 24.4............................              67              90
24.5 to 26.4............................              69              93
26.5 to 28.4............................              85              96
28.5 and over...........................              86             101
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.

Appendix A6 to Part 305--Refrigerator-Freezers With Automatic Defrost 
With Bottom-Mounted Freezer Without Through-the-Door Ice Service

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             $19             $62
10.5 to 12.4............................              38              63
12.5 to 14.4............................              49              65
14.5 to 16.4............................              52              72
16.5 to 18.4............................              54              73
18.5 to 20.4............................              54              75
20.5 to 22.4............................              58              79
22.5 to 24.4............................              71              83
24.5 to 26.4............................              64              81
26.5 to 28.4............................              77              84
28.5 and over...........................              78              86
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendix A7 to Part 305--Refrigerator-Freezers With Automatic Defrost 
With Bottom-Mounted Freezer With Through-the-Door Ice Service

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             (*)             (*)
10.5 to 12.4............................             (*)             (*)
12.5 to 14.4............................             (*)             (*)
14.5 to 16.4............................             (*)             (*)
16.5 to 18.4............................             (*)             (*)
18.5 to 20.4............................             $77             $83
20.5 to 22.4............................              79              87
22.5 to 24.4............................              80              91
24.5 to 26.4............................              76              93
26.5 to 28.4............................              74              95
28.5 and over...........................              78             103
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.


[[Page 63653]]

Appendix A8 to Part 305--Refrigerator-Freezers With Automatic Defrost 
With Side-Mounted Freezer With Through-the-Door Ice Service

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             (*)             (*)
10.5 to 12.4............................             (*)             (*)
12.5 to 14.4............................             (*)             (*)
14.5 to 16.4............................             (*)             (*)
16.5 to 18.4............................             (*)             (*)
18.5 to 20.4............................             $78             $78
20.5 to 22.4............................              72              94
22.5 to 24.4............................              81              98
24.5 to 26.4............................              73              99
26.5 to 28.4............................              89             104
28.5 and over...........................              82             107
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.


0
10. Add Appendix A9 to Part 305 to read as follows:

Appendix A9 to Part 305--All Refrigerators and Refrigerator-Freezers

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 10.5..........................             $18             $70
10.5 to 12.4............................              30              63
12.5 to 14.4............................              30              65
14.5 to 16.4............................              37              72
16.5 to 18.4............................              34              73
18.5 to 20.4............................              40              83
20.5 to 22.4............................              37              94
22.5 to 24.4............................              45              98
24.5 to 26.4............................              64              99
26.5 to 28.4............................              74             104
28.5 and over...........................              78             107
------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
11. Revise Appendixes B1 through B3 to Part 305 to read as follows:

Appendix B1 to Part 305--Upright Freezers With Manual Defrost

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
                                            operating costs  (dollars/
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated               year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 5.5...........................             $26             $36
5.5 to 7.4..............................              37              38
7.5 to 9.4..............................              30              30
9.5 to 11.4.............................              31              31
11.5 to 13.4............................              38              38
13.5 to 15.4............................              40              40
15.5 to 17.4............................              43              43
17.5 to 19.4............................             (*)             (*)
19.5 to 21.4............................              48              48
21.5 to 23.4............................             (*)             (*)
23.5 to 25.4............................             (*)             (*)
25.5 to 27.4............................             (*)             (*)
27.5 to 29.4............................             (*)             (*)

[[Page 63654]]

 
29.5 and over...........................             (*)             (*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.

Appendix B2 To Part 305--Upright Freezers With Automatic Defrost

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated  operating costs (dollars/year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 5.5...........................             $32             $32
5.5 to 7.4..............................             (*)             (*)
7.5 to 9.4..............................              53              59
9.5 to 11.4.............................              59              59
11.5 to 13.4............................              57              67
13.5 to 15.4............................              47              73
15.5 to 17.4............................              52              74
17.5 to 19.4............................              54              71
19.5 to 21.4............................              57              76
21.5 to 23.4............................              81              87
23.5 to 25.4............................             (*)             (*)
25.5 to 27.4............................             (*)             (*)
27.5 to 29.4............................             (*)             (*)
29.5 and over...........................             (*)             (*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.

Appendix B3 To Part 305--Chest Freezers And All Other Freezers

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Range of estimated annual
 Manufacturer's rated total refrigerated  operating costs (dollars/year)
          volume in cubic feet           -------------------------------
                                                Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 5.5...........................             $16             $27
5.5 to 7.4..............................              24              30
7.5 to 9.4..............................              23              31
9.5 to 11.4.............................              25              30
11.5 to 13.4............................             (*)             (*)
13.5 to 15.4............................              35              36
15.5 to 17.4............................              33              37
17.5 to 19.4............................              40              40
19.5 to 21.4............................             (*)             (*)
 21.5 to 23.4...........................              46              46
23.5 to 25.4............................             (*)             (*)
25.5 to 27.4............................             (*)             (*)
27.5 to 29.4............................             (*)             (*)
29.5 and over...........................             (*)             (*)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(*) No data.


0
12. Appendices D1 through D4 to Part 305 are revised to read as 
follows:

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

[[Page 63655]]



                                                Range Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Capacity (first hour rating in gallons)           Range of estimated annual energy costs (dollars/year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Natural gas ($/year)              Propane ($/year)
                First hour rating                ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Low            High             Low            High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Very Small''--less than 18....................               *               *               *               *
``Low''--18 to 50.9.............................            $154            $155               *               *
``Medium''--51 to 74.9..........................             177             206             437             560
``High''--over 75...............................             225             297             506             732
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data.

Appendix D2 to Part 305--Water Heaters Electric

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Capacity (first hour rating in gallons)     Range of estimated annual
-----------------------------------------   energy costs (dollars/year)
                                         -------------------------------
            First hour rating                   Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Very Small''--less than 18............               *               *
``Low''--18 to 50.9.....................             $93            $295
``Medium''--51 to 74.9..................             120             423
High''--over 75.........................             191             252
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data.

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

                            Range Information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Capacity (first hour rating in gallons)     Range of estimated annual
-----------------------------------------   energy costs (dollars/year)
                                         -------------------------------
            First hour rating                   Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Very Small''--less than 18............               *               *
``Low''--18 to 50.9.....................               *               *
``Medium''--51 to 74.9..................               *               *
High''--over 75.........................            $649            $730
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data.

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

                                                Range Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Very Small''--less than 1.6...................               *               *               *               *
``Low''--1.7 to 2.7.............................               *               *               *               *
``Medium''--2.8 to 3.9..........................            $130            $151            $321            $372
``High''--over 4.0..............................             195             230             485             567
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No data.


[[Page 63656]]


0
13. Appendix D5 is removed.

0
14. Revise Appendix H to Part 305 to read as follows:

Appendix H to Part 305--Cooling Performance for Central Air 
Conditioners

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Range of SEER's
  Manufacturer's rated cooling capacity  -------------------------------
               (btu's/hr)                       Low            High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Single Package Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central Air Conditioners (Cooling Only):              14              20
 All capacities.........................
Heat Pumps (Cooling Function): All                    14            18.1
 capacities.............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Split System Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central Air Conditioner models allowed                13              26
 only in northern states (listed in
 305.12(g)(13)) (Cooling Only): All
 capacities.............................
Central Air Conditioner models allowed
 in all states (Cooling Only):
    All capacities......................              14              26
    Heat Pumps (Cooling Function): All                14            30.5
     capacities.........................
Small-duct, high-velocity Systems.......              12            12.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Space-Constrained Products
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central Air Conditioners (Cooling Only):              12              14
 All capacities.........................
Heat Pumps (Cooling Function): All                    12              14
 capacities.............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
15. Amend Appendix L to Part 305 by revising Prototype Label 1, 
revising Sample Label 1, removing Sample Label 1A, and revising Sample 
Labels 5, 7 and 17 to read as follows:

Appendix L to Part 305--Sample Labels

* * * * *
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P

[[Page 63657]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15SE16.001

* * * * *

[[Page 63658]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15SE16.002

* * * * *

[[Page 63659]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15SE16.003

* * * * *

[[Page 63660]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15SE16.004

* * * * *

[[Page 63661]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15SE16.005

* * * * *

    By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-21854 Filed 9-14-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6750-01-C