Search is not available for this dataset
filepath
string | file_id
string | text
string | word_count
int64 | character_count
int64 | root_directory
string | collection
string |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN20_KOR874A1.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN20_KOR874A1
|
G/TBT/N/KOR/874/Add.1
18 March 2020
(20-2146) Page: 1/1
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
The following communication, dated 18 March 2020, is being circulated at the request of the
delegation of the Republic of Korea .
_______________
Considering the requests from other Members as to extending comment period for the proposed
rule, which was notified on 15 January 2020, the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) is
extending the comment period from 15 March 2020 to 15 April 2020. Members may submit either
electronic or written comments by 15 April 2020.
__________
| 96
| 662
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_SPS_NCAN1279.pdf
|
s_G_SPS_NCAN1279
|
G/SPS/N/CAN/1279
5 de noviembre de 2019
(19-7471) Página: 1/3
Comité de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias Original: inglés/francés
NOTIFICACIÓN
1. Miembro que notifica : CANADÁ
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate:
2. Organismo responsable : Canadian Food Inspection Agency (Organismo Canadiense de
Inspección de Alimentos)
3. Productos abarcados (número de la(s) partida(s) arancelaria(s) según se
especifica en las listas nacionales depositadas en la OMC ; deberá indicarse
además, cuando proceda, el número de partida de la ICS): Todos los vegetales con
o sin raíces para plantación y las ramas frescas hospedantes de Anoplophora spp. con un
diámetro mínimo de 10 mm (0,4 pulgadas) en su parte más ancha, incluidos los vegetales
reducidos artificialmente (bonsái y penjing).
4. Regiones o países que podrían verse afectados, en la medida en que sea
procedente o factible:
[ ] Todos los interlocutores comerciales
[X] Regiones o países específicos : Unión Europea.
5. Título del documento notificado : Directiva D -11-01, Phytosanitary Requirements for
Plants for Planting and Fresh Branches to Prevent the Entry and Spread of Anoplophora
spp. (Prescripciones fitosanitarias aplicables a los vegetales para plantación y las ramas
frescas, con el fin de evitar la entrada y prop agación de Anoplophora spp.).
Idioma(s) : inglés y francés . Número de páginas : 3.
6. Descripción del contenido : El Canadá propone reconocer a determinados países
europeos como países libres del escarabajo de cuernos largos de los cítricos y el
escarabajo a siático de cuernos largos.
En respuesta a una solicitud de la Comisión Europea, el Organismo Canadiense de
Inspección de Alimentos (CFIA) propone reconocer a 22 Estados miembros de la Unión
Europea (UE) como países libres del escarabajo de cuernos largos de los cítricos y el
escarabajo asiático de cuernos largos . Conforme a la propuesta notificada, el CFIA solo
reconocería a los Estados miembros de la UE donde nunca se hayan detectado estos dos
parásitos o que, de haber erradicado una plaga tal , no lo hayan hecho en los últimos tres
años. Los siguientes Estados miembros de la UE permanecen en la lista de países en los
que sigue presente el escarabajo de cuernos largos de los cítricos o el escarabajo asiático
de cuernos largos : Alemania, Austria, Croa cia, Finlandia, Francia e Italia.
Se permite la importación de vegetales hospedantes de los géneros cuya importación en
el Canadá había sido aceptada con anterioridad y que tengan un diámetro mínimo de
10 mm (0,4 pulgadas) en su parte más ancha, siempre qu e procedan de Estados
miembros de la UE declarados libres del escarabajo de cuernos largos de los cítricos y el
escarabajo asiático de cuernos largos.
G/SPS/N/CAN/1279
- 2 -
El Sistema Automatizado de Referencias para la Importación (ARIS) del CFIA
(http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/imports/airs/eng/1300127512994/1300127627409
) es la fuente de mayor autoridad para consultar las prescripciones actualizadas en
materia de importación.
En el apéndice 1 de la directiva D -11-01, Prescripciones fitosanitarias aplicables a los
vegetales para plantación y las ramas frescas, con el fin de evitar la entrada y propagación
de Anoplophora spp., se puede consultar la lista de vegetales hospedantes de
Anoplophora spp.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser : [ ] inocuidad de los alimentos, [ ] sanidad animal, [X]
preservación de los vegetales, [ ] protección de la salud humana contra las
enfermedades o plagas animales o vegetales, [X] protección del territorio c ontra
otros daños causados por plagas.
8. ¿Existe una norma internacional pertinente ? De ser así, indíquese la norma:
[ ] de la Comisión del Codex Alimentarius (por ejemplo, título o número de
serie de la norma del Codex o texto conexo) :
[ ] de la Organización Mundial de Sanidad Animal (OIE) (por ejemplo,
número de capítulo del Código Sanitario para los Animales Terrestres o
del Código Sanitario para los Animales Acuáticos) :
[X] de la Convención Internacional de Protección Fitosanitaria (por e jemplo,
número de NIMF) : NIMF Nº 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 17 y 19
[ ] Ninguna
¿Se ajusta la reglamentación que se propone a la norma internacional
pertinente?
[X] S í [ ] No
En caso negativo, indíquese, cuando sea posible, en qué medida y por qué razón
se apar ta de la norma internacional:
9. Otros documentos pertinentes e idioma(s) en que están disponibles:
− D-11-01: Phytosanitary Requirements for Plants for Planting and Fresh Branches to
Prevent the Entry and Spread of Anoplophora spp. (inglés)
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/plant -pests -invasive -
species/directives/horticulture/d -11-01/eng/1322607792840/ 1322607978401
− D-11-01: Exigences phytosanitaires visant les végétaux destinés à la plantation et les
rameaux décoratifs frais afin de prévenir l'introduction et la dissémination des insectes
appartenant au genre Anoplophora spp. (francés)
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/vegetaux/phytoravageurs -especes -
envahissantes/directives/horticulture/d -11-01/fra/132260779 2840/1322607978401
10. Fecha propuesta de adopción (día/mes/año) : 2 de diciembre de 2019
Fecha propuesta de publicación (día/mes/año) : 2 de diciembre de 2019
11. Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : [ ] Seis meses a partir de la fecha de
publicación, y/o (día/mes/año) : 2 de diciembre de 2019
[X] Medida de facilitación del comercio G/SPS/N/CAN/1279
- 3 -
12. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : [ ] Sesenta días a partir de
la fecha de distribución de la notifica ción y/o (día/mes/año) :
1º de diciembre de 2019
Organismo o autoridad encargado de tramitar las observaciones : [ ] Organismo
nacional encargado de la notificación, [X] Servicio nacional de información .
Dirección, número de fax y dirección de correo electr ónico (en su caso) de otra
institución:
Las observaciones se pueden presentar directamente a:
cfia.wto -omc.acia@canada.ca
13. Texto(s) disponible(s) en : [ ] Organismo nacional encargado de la notificación,
[X] Servicio nacional de información . Dirección, número de fax y dirección de
correo electrónico (en su caso) de otra institución:
Canada's SPS and TBT Notification Authority and Enquiry Point (Organismo na cional
encargado de la notificación y servicio de información MSF -OTC del Canadá)
Technical Barriers and Regulations Division (División de Reglamentos y Obstáculos
Técnicos)
Global Affairs Canada (Ministerio de Asuntos Mundiales del Canadá)
111 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2
Teléfono : +(343) 203 4273
Fax: +(613) 943 0346
Correo electrónico : enquirypoint@international.gc.ca
| 1,013
| 6,755
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_IP_C_W678.pdf
|
r_IP_C_W678
|
IP/C/W/678
27 mai 2021
(21-4408) Page: 1/4
Conseil des aspects des droits de propriété
intellectuelle qui touchent au commerce Original: anglais
PROPRIÉTÉ INTELLECTUELLE ET INNOVATION:
RÉSUMÉ DU THÈME DE 2020 – "RENDRE LES MICRO, PETITES ET MOYENNES
ENTREPRISES (MPME) COMPÉTITIVES GRÂCE À LA PI ET À L'INNOVATION"
COMMUNICATION PRÉSENTÉE PAR L'AUSTRALIE, LE CANADA, LES ÉTATS -UNIS,
LE JAPON, LA SUISSE, LE TERRITOIRE DOUANIER DISTINCT DE TAIWAN,
PENGHU, KINMEN ET MATSU ET L'UNION EUROPÉENNE
1 INTRODUCTION
1. Le Conseil des ADPIC de l'OMC a examiné le thème "Rendre les MPME compétitives grâce à la
propriété intellectuelle (PI) et à l' innovation" tout au long de l'année 2020 et durant la première
partie de l'année 2021 . La présente communication met en lumière des exemples fournis dans le
cadre des discussions et réaffirme à quel point les MPME – qui jouent un rôle crucial dans l'économ ie
mondiale en tant que moteurs essentiels de l'innovation, de l'emploi, de la croissance et du
commerce – peuvent utiliser efficacement les droits de propriété intellectuelle (DPI) pour développer
leurs activités . Dans le cadre de ce thème, les délégation s ont échangé des données d'expérience
concernant la sensibilisation à la protection des marques et l'utilisation du système de marques pour
les MPME ; le développement de stratégies de gestion de la PI pour les MPME, y compris des
combinaisons de DPI, tels que les secrets commerciaux, les brevets et les dessins et modèles
industriels ; et la façon dont les MPME peuvent tirer profit de la PI pour innover, établir des
partenariats et commercialiser des technologies vertes.
2 RENDRE LES MPME COMPÉTITIVES GRÂCE AU X MARQUES
2. Les marques constituent la forme de DPI enregistrés la plus répandue, offrent des avantages tels
que la distinction des produits et la protection contre la concurrence déloyale, et sont un élément
essentiel de la stratégie de marque et du marketi ng. Bien que les demandes d'enregistrement de
marques aient tendance à augmenter dans le monde entier, il a été noté que de nombreuses MPME
n'avaient toujours pas pris de mesures pour demander la protection d'une marque parce qu'elles ne
connaissaient pas et ne comprenaient pas la protection des marques, parce qu'elles pensaient que
les procédures d'enregistrement étaient trop compliquées ou coûteuses, parce qu'elles manquaient
de ressources financières ou humaines pour mener à bien l'enregistrement d'une m arque, ou dans
certains cas parce qu'une entreprise ne comprenait pas qu'elle avait une marque, une réputation ou
une innovation à protéger.
3. Plusieurs Membres ont partagé des renseignements sur les initiatives nationales et les meilleures
pratiques que leu rs gouvernements et leurs bureaux de la PI ont utilisées pour sensibiliser les MPME
et leur fournir des outils pour protéger leurs marques et maximiser leur potentiel commercial sur le
marché mondial . Un certain nombre de bureaux nationaux de la PI ont cré é des "boîtes à outils" de
PI en ligne ou établi des points de contact pour les entrepreneurs et les MPME, qui offrent une
gamme de ressources telles que des fiches d'information, des guides de recherche et de déclaration
de marques, des vidéos, ou même un e assistance en personne, toutes personnalisées pour répondre
aux défis et aux besoins uniques des MPME . Plusieurs Membres ont également décrit les initiatives
prises par leur gouvernement en vue de fournir un soutien financier et des programmes de mentora t
aux MPME, qui peuvent avoir des ressources financières limitées pour les activités d'enregistrement
de la PI, ou les efforts visant à améliorer l'efficacité des systèmes nationaux de dépôt des marques
de façon à maintenir des coûts bas et accessibles. IP/C/W/678
- 2 -
3 RENDRE LES MPME COMPÉTITIVES GRÂCE À LA PROTECTION INCLUSIVE DE
DIFFÉRENTES FORMES DE DPI
4. Un portefeuille de PI de valeur peut inclure différentes formes de PI, telles que des brevets, des
dessins et modèles, des droits d'auteur, des marques de fabrique ou d e commerce et des secrets
commerciaux . Cependant, bien souvent les MPME ne savent pas ou ne comprennent pas comment
développer leurs activités en constituant et en réalisant un portefeuille de PI diversifié et de haute
qualité composé de différents types d e PI. Les gouvernements s'interrogent de plus en plus sur la
manière d'aider plus efficacement les MPME à développer leurs activités par la croissance stratégique
et la diversification de leurs actifs de PI . Plusieurs Membres ont attiré l'attention sur les programmes
et initiatives proposés par leurs bureaux nationaux de propriété intellectuelle pour aider les
inventeurs individuels et les MPME à protéger et à commercialiser leurs inventions, y compris par
des politiques de réduction des droits pour les dem andes d'enregistrement de PI des petites et micro
entités ; un programme transversal d'"examen collectif pour les portefeuilles de PI" pour l'octroi
rapide et coordonné de droits de PI ; et le développement d'outils d'audit et d'évaluation de la "PI
pour les entreprises" et d'autres services de diagnostic préalable de la PI pour aider les entreprises
à identifier, comprendre, évaluer et gérer leur propriété intellectuelle et les actifs connexes d'une
manière plus stratégique et dans le contexte de leur planif ication commerciale spécifique.
5. Les Membres ont aussi pris note de leurs efforts pour traiter les domaines émergents dans
lesquels les MPME ont besoin d'un soutien pour optimiser leur propriété intellectuelle, y compris
l'éducation des MPME concernant les stratégies de financement de la PI et les considérations
connexes relatives aux types de PI dans leur portefeuille . Plusieurs Membres ont mis en avant des
programmes offrant des services consultatifs gratuits ou subventionnés assurés par des
professionnels de la PI pour guider et conseiller les MPME individuelles dans des domaines importants
tels que la recherche de brevets, la rédaction et le dépôt de demandes, la gestion de la propriété
intellectuelle, les possibilités de commercialisation, y compris l'ai de à l'exportation, et la stratégie
de marque/le marketing . Il a également été noté que la capacité à faire respecter efficacement les
droits de propriété intellectuelle faisait partie intégrante de la valeur de ces droits, et plusieurs
Membres étudiaient les moyens d'aider les MPME, qui ne disposaient pas nécessairement des
ressources financières ou juridiques requises pour faire face aux atteintes de droits, en leur
proposant d'autres moyens de résoudre les litiges, par exemple des services d'arbitrage et de
médiation conçus pour les MPME . De même, les Membres ont aussi noté une tendance future possible
des polices d'assurance pour les frais juridiques qui peuvent être encourus pendant les procédures
judiciaires liées à la violation de la PI ; cela peut êtr e intéressant pour les MPME et d'autres personnes
ayant peu de ressources.
4 SOUTENIR LES MPME, LES PMA/LES PAYS À REVENU FAIBLE ET INTERMÉDIAIRE ET LA
TECHNOLOGIE VERTE
6. Les gouvernements intègrent de plus en plus l'innovation dans les technologies vertes da ns la
planification stratégique nationale, notamment en mettant en place des programmes et des outils
visant à encourager et à récompenser les inventions vertes et leur diffusion . Un certain nombre de
Membres ont pris note de plans d'action, de groupes de travail et de mécanismes de financement
qu'ils ont mis en place et qui visent à accélérer les investissements dans la R -D dans le secteur des
technologies vertes et à inciter les scientifiques, les inventeurs et les entrepreneurs à faire avancer
les travaux sur les technologies permettant de relever les défis climatiques et humanitaires
mondiaux.
7. Les MPME et les jeunes entreprises apportent des solutions importantes et novatrices aux défis
énergétiques et climatiques du monde réel, mais sont souv ent confrontées à des difficultés liées à
l'utilisation stratégique de la propriété intellectuelle au cours des premières phases de
développement des produits . Plusieurs Membres ont fait part des expériences positives de leurs
bureaux nationaux de propriét é intellectuelle qui ont fourni aux inventeurs des MPME du secteur des
technologies vertes une assistance personnalisée pour la recherche de brevets, et qui ont accordé
la priorité ou accéléré les procédures de demande de brevet pour des technologies verte s. Ils ont
également discuté de la plate-forme WIPO GREEN de l'Organisation mondiale de la propriété
intellectuelle (OMPI) et de son rôle dans la facilitation du développement et de la diffusion des
technologies vertes en favorisant la mise en relation des fournisseurs et des demandeurs de
technologies écologiquement durables . Les organismes gouvernementaux, les groupes industriels,
les entreprises et les universités ont la possibilité d'être partenaires de WIPO GREEN, et les MPME IP/C/W/678
- 3 -
qui y participent peuvent bénéficier de nouvelles opportunités de partenariat par le biais de licences,
de collaborations, de coentreprises et de ventes.
8. Durant l'activité parallèle organisée par les Amis de la propriété intellectuelle et de l'innovation
intitulée "Soutenir les MPM E, les PMA/les pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire et la technologie
verte", qui s'est tenu e virtuellement en marge de la réunion du Conseil des ADPIC de mars 2021,
les Membres et les participants ont écouté des experts représentant des jeunes entreprise s du
secteur des technologies vertes, le bureau de la propriété intellectuelle du Royaume -Uni, le C entre
réseau des technologies climatiques (CTCN), qui joue le rôle de courtier en connaissances pour les
technologies liées au climat, et deux experts de l'O rganisation mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle
(OMPI) qui soutiennent les MPME dans leurs efforts pour commercialiser leurs innovations en matière
de technologies vertes et pour développer leurs entreprises et utiliser la propriété intellectuelle à
leur avantage . En abordant les deux points de l'ordre du jour – "Améliorer l'utilisation du système
de la propriété intellectuelle par les MPME" et "PMA/pays à revenu faible et intermédiaire : études de
cas et récits", les intervenants ont mis l'accent sur le s messages clés suivants:
a. Bien que les innovateurs verts s'intéressent de plus en plus au système mondial de la
propriété intellectuelle pour soutenir leurs activités, le type de soutien fourni par les
institutions devrait être adapté aux MPME, car leurs besoins seront très différents de ceux
des grandes entreprises . Les jeunes entreprises du secteur de la technologie verte, comme
les autres jeunes entreprises, doivent être agiles et rapides, et le processus de demande
et de délivrance des brevets es t délibératif et formel . Les organismes d'appui à la propriété
intellectuelle devraient envisager et étudier la meilleure façon d'accueillir et de servir les
jeunes entreprises.
b. Les organisations internationales telles que l'OMPI, les bureaux nationaux de la propriété
intellectuelle et les autres organismes d'appui ont un rôle crucial à jouer dans la création
d'une passerelle entre les MPME vertes innovantes et leur capacité à utiliser efficacement
l'infrastructure de la propriété intellectuelle pour ajoute r de la valeur à leurs activités . De
même, comme l'a noté le Directeur du CTCN, les partenariats sont essentiels à la diffusion
des technologies vertes, mais les MPME ont besoin de soutien et d'assistance technique
pour s'engager dans le partage des connai ssances et le transfert de technologie, afin
d'améliorer leur capacité à utiliser et à tirer parti du cadre incitatif.
c. L'expert d'un bureau national de la propriété intellectuelle a souligné les efforts de son
bureau pour soutenir les entreprises du secteu r des technologies vertes par la mise en
place de services spécialisés et stratégiques de soutien à la propriété intellectuelle, tels
que la sensibilisation, l'évaluation des actifs commerciaux, l'atténuation des risques,
l'examen accéléré des brevets pour les inventions de technologies vertes admissibles et
même l'aide au règlement des litiges.
d. Plusieurs experts de jeunes entreprises ont également évoqué l'importance de la propriété
intellectuelle dans le domaine des technologies vertes pour attirer des in vestissements et
des soutiens financiers et établir ensuite des partenariats et des accords de licence
essentiels . Les experts ont également noté que, d'après leur expérience, le fait de disposer
d'un portefeuille de propriété intellectuelle augmente la va leur de leurs jeunes entreprises
pour les investisseurs, qui recherchent quelque chose de tangible qui donne aux
entreprises en question une distinction et un avantage par rapport à d'autres
investissements potentiels.
9. Les présentations et les discussions étaient importantes pour aider à définir comment la
protection de la PI pouvait contribuer aux efforts des MPME et d'autres entreprises dans le secteur
des technologies vertes pour développer et commercialiser leurs innovations, et aussi pour mettre
en lum ière les défis et les besoins réels en matière de PI rencontrés par les MPME, quelle que soit
leur localisation . À la fin de l'activité, il a été fourni un guide de ressources sur les domaines de la
sensibilisation à la PI pour les MPME/PME et les services permettant d'accroître l'accès aux
technologies vertes et l'utilisation de celles -ci. Il a été compilé en coopération avec l'OMPI, l'OMC et
le CTCN (annexé à la communication).
10. Le thème 2020/21, qui explore la manière dont les Membres peuvent contribuer à "Rendre les
MPME compétitives grâce à la PI et à l'innovation ", a fourni un contexte et un partage d'expérience s IP/C/W/678
- 4 -
utiles sur la variété des politiques et des activités actuellement employées par les gouvernements,
et des idées sur ce que les décideurs pour raient faire différemment pour mieux permettre aux MPME
d'optimiser leur utilisation du système de la PI et de l'innovation.
__________
| 2,190
| 14,215
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_LIC_N3KAZ6.pdf
|
s_G_LIC_N3KAZ6
|
G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
20 de enero de 2022
(22-0466) Página: 1/48
Comité de Licencias de Importación Original: inglés
RESPUESTAS AL CUESTIONARIO SOBRE LOS PROCEDIMIENTOS PARA
EL TRÁMITE DE LICENCIAS DE IMPORTACIÓN1
NOTIFICACIÓN EN VIRTUD DEL ARTÍCULO 7.3 DEL ACUERDO SOBRE
PROCEDIMIENTOS PARA EL TRÁMITE DE LICENCIAS
DE IMPORTACIÓN (2021)
KAZAJSTÁN
La siguiente comunicación, de fecha 17 de enero de 2022, se distribuye a petición de la delegación
de Kazajstán.
_______________
Kazajstán ya no aplica los procedimientos para el trámite de licencias de importación de
acero laminado en caliente y determinados tipos de tuberías de acero debido a su
expiración.
Las demás modificaciones y adiciones introducidas en el presente documento son
insignificantes y se han destacado en negr ita en el texto para facilitar la consulta de los
demás Miembros de la OMC.
Índice
1 SUSTANCIAS QUE AGOTAN LA CAPA DE OZONO ................................ ........................... 2
2 PRODUCTOS QUÍMICOS FITOSANITARIOS ................................ ................................ ... 6
3 DESECHOS PELIGROSOS ................................ ................................ .............................. 8
4 ESTUPEFACIENTES, SUSTANCIAS PSICOTRÓPICAS Y SUS PRECURSORES .................. 14
5 SUSTANCIAS TÓXICAS QUE NO SON PRECURSORES DE ESTUPEFACIENTES Y
SUSTANCIAS PSICOTRÓPICAS ................................ ................................ ....................... 16
6 PRODUCTOS ELECTRÓNICOS DE RADIOCOMUNICACIÓN Y (O) DISPOSITIVOS
DE ALTA FRECUENCIA DE USO CIVIL, INCLUIDOS LOS QUE ESTÉN INTEGRADOS
EN OTROS PRODUCTOS O LOS A COMPAÑEN ................................ ................................ ... 20
7 DISPOSITIVOS TÉCNICOS ESPECIALES DISEÑADOS PARA LA OBTENCIÓN
ENCUBIERTA DE INFORMACIÓN ................................ ................................ ..................... 23
8 MEDIOS DE ENCRIPTACIÓN (CRIPTOGRÁFICOS) ................................ ....................... 27
9 ÓRGANOS Y TEJIDOS HUMANOS, SANGRE Y SUS COMPONENTES, MUESTRAS
DE MATERIA BIOLÓGICA HUMANA ................................ ................................ ................. 32
10 ARMAS DE SERVICIO O DE USO CIVIL, SUS PARTES PRINCIPALES
(COMPONENTES) Y MUNICIONES ................................ ................................ ................... 35
11 DETERMINADOS TIPOS DE PRODUCTOS AGRÍCOLAS ................................ ............... 38
1 El cuestionario se encuentra en el anexo del documento G/LIC/3. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 2 -
12 PRODUCTOS MÉDICOS ................................ ................................ ............................. 43
13 ANIMALES SILVESTRES VIVOS Y PLANTAS SILVESTRES ................................ .......... 46
___________ ____
1 SUSTANCIAS QUE AGOTAN LA CAPA DE OZONO
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Kazajstán cumple con las obligaciones que le corresponden en relación con las sustancias que
agotan la capa de ozono en virtud del Protocolo de Montreal . Esta norma prohíbe la importación,
exportación y fabricación de sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono, excepto cuando las Partes en
el Protocolo hayan permitido una exención para usos esenciales o críticos . Para cumplir con las
obligaciones que le impone el Protocolo, Kazajstá n tiene un sistema de licencias.
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. Los requisitos del sistema de licencias son los siguientes:
- importación y exportación de sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono;
- equipos precargados que contienen sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono.
Para la obtención de todas las licencias, se imponen condiciones severas y requisitos estrictos en
materia de presentación de informes.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012 ) Designación detallada del producto
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorodicloroetano CHFCl2
del 2903 71 000 0 clorodifluorometano CHF2Cl
del 2903 79 300 0 clorofluorometano CH2FCl
del 2903 79 300 0 tetraclorofluoroetano C2HFCl4
del 2903 79 300 0 triclorodifluoroetano C2HF2Cl3
del 2903 72 000 0 diclorotrifluoroetano C2HF3Cl2
del 2903 72 000 0 diclorotrifluoroetano CHCl2CF3
del 2903 79 300 0 tetrafluorocloroetano C2HF4Cl
del 2903 79 300 0 tetrafluorocloroetano CHFClCF3
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorotricloroetano C2H2FCl3
del 2903 79 300 0 difluorodicloroetano C2H2F2Cl2
del 2903 79 300 0 trifluorocloroetano C2H2F3Cl
del 2903 73 000 0 1-fluoro -2,2-dicloroetano C2H3FCl2
del 2903 73 000 0 1,1,1-fluorodicloroetano CH3CFCl2
del 2903 74 000 0 1-cloro-2, 2-difluoroetano C2H3F2Cl
del 2903 74 000 0 1,1,1-difluorocloroetano CH3CF2Cl
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorocloroetano C2H4FCl
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorohexacloropropano C3HFCl6
del 2903 79 300 0 difluoropentacloropropano C3HF2Cl5
del 2903 79 300 0 trifluorotetracloropropano C3HF3Cl4
del 2903 79 300 0 tetrafluorotricloropropano C3HF4Cl3
del 2903 75 000 0 pentafluorodicloropropano C3HF5Cl2
del 2903 75 000 0 1-trifluoro, 2 -difluoro, 3 -dicloropropano CF3CF2CHCl2
del 2903 75 000 0 1,1-difluorocloro, 2 -difluoro, 3 -dicloropropano CF2ClCF2CHClF
del 2903 79 300 0 hexafluorocloropropano C3HF6Cl
del 2903 79 300 0 fluoropentacloropropano C3H2FCl5
del 2903 79 300 0 difluorotetracloropropano C3H2F2Cl4
del 2903 79 300 0 trifluorotricloropropano C3H2F3Cl3
del 2903 79 300 0 tetrafluorodicloropropano C3H2F4Cl2
del 2903 79 300 0 pentafluorocloropropano C3H2F5Cl
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorotetracloropropano C3H3FCl4
del 2903 79 300 0 difluorotricloropropano C3H3F2Cl3
del 2903 79 300 0 trifluorodicloropropano C3H3F3Cl2
del 2903 79 300 0 tetrafluorocloropropano C3H3F4Cl G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 3 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012 ) Designación detallada del producto
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorotricloropropano C3H4FCl3
del 2903 79 300 0 difluorodicloropropano C3H4F2Cl2
del 2903 79 300 0 trifluorocloropropano C3H4F3Cl
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorodicloropropano C3H5FCl2
del 2903 79 300 0 difluorocloropropano C3H5F2Cl
del 2903 79 300 0 fluorocloropropano C3H6FCl
del 2903 39 290 0 1,1,2,2 -tetrafluoroetano CHF2CHF2
2903 39 260 0 1,1,1,2 -tetrafluoroetano CH2FCF3
del 2903 39 290 0 1,1,2 -trifluoroetano CH2FCHF2
del 2903 39 270 0 1,1,1,3,3 - pentafluoropropano CHF2CH2CF3
del 2903 39 290 0 1,1,1,3,3 - pentafluorobutano CF3CH2CF2CH3
del 2903 39 270 0 1,1,1,2,3,3,3 - heptafluoropropano CF3CHFCF3
del 2903 39 2700 1,1,1,2,2,3 - hexafluoropropano CH2FCF2CF3
del 2903 39 270 0 1,1,1,2,3,3 - hexafluoropropano CHF2CHFCF3
del 2903 39 270 0 1,1,1,3,3,3 - hexafluoropropano CF3CH2CF3
del 2903 39 270 0 1,1,2,2,3 - pentafluoropropano CH2FCF2CHF2
del 2903 39 290 0 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5 - decafluoropentano CF3CHFCHFCF2CF3
2903 39 210 0 difluorometano CH2F2
del 2903 39 240 0 pentafluoroetano CHF2CF3
del 2903 39 240 0 1,1,1 - trifluoroetano CH3CF3
del 2903 39 290 0 fluorometano CH3F
del 2903 39 290 0 1,2- difluoroetano CH2FCH2F
2903 39 250 0 1,1- difluoroetano CH3CHF2
2903 39 230 0 trifluorometano CHF3
3. El régimen se aplica a las mercancías procedentes de todos los países que han suscrito el
Protocolo de Montreal.
4. El sistema de licencias se aplica en cumplimiento de las obligaciones jurídicas de Kazajstán en el
marco del Protocolo de Montreal . Además de los límites impuestos a la producción y el consumo de
sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono con miras a su eliminación gradual, el Protocolo de Montreal
exige el establecimiento de un sistema de licencias.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el régimen de licencias son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Acuerdo sobre el movimiento de sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono y de los
productos que las contienen, y el registro de sustancia s que agotan la capa de ozono
en el comercio mutuo de los Estados miembros de la Unión Económica Euroasiática,
de 29 de mayo de 2015;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.1) ;
- Reglamento relativo a la importación en el territorio aduanero de la Unión Económica
Euroasiática de las sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono y los productos que las
contengan y a su exportación desde dicho territorio ( anexo 20 de la Decisión Nº 30 de
la Junta de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática, de 21 de abril de 2015);
- Código Nº 400 -VI de la República de Kazajstá n de Medio Ambiente, de 2 de
enero de 2021;
- Ley Nº 176 de Adhesión de la República de Kazajstán al Protocolo de Montreal relativo
a las sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono, de 30 de octubre de 1997; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 4 -
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permis os, de conformidad con los tratados
internacionales y los permisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Ministro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazaj stán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020 ;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán relativa a
la aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de importaci ón y
exportación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, la documentación probatoria, los
formularios de solicitud de una licencia y (o) anexo a la licencia, el formulario de una
licencia y (o) anexos a la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
El régimen de licencia s es un requisito legal . Es delito importar, exportar o fabricar sin licencia las
sustancias que figuran en la lista . El régimen no se puede suprimir sin el acuerdo del poder
legislativo . La legislación no deja al arbitrio de la administración la designación de los productos .
Todas las sustancias para las que se exige licencia están especificadas en una lista incluida en la
legislación ; no hay más sustancias que requieran licencia.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) Las solicitudes se deben presentar con anterioridad a la llegada de las mercancías . El plazo
máximo de tramitación de las licencias es de ocho días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) Sí, las solicitudes de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo administrativo : el
Ministerio de Ecología, Geología y Recursos Naturales de la República de Kazajstán.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del co ntrato para el que se necesita la licencia ;
y v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente).
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 5 -
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar u na licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrón ico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia electrónica del contrato de comercio exterior;
- una copia del doc umento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- una copia de la licencia para efectuar el tipo de actividad objeto de la licencia o
información sobre la existencia de dicha licencia si esta actividad está relac ionada con
la venta de las mercancías con respecto a las cuales se ha establecido la licencia;
- una copia del contrato de suministro de servicios de intermediación (en caso de que el
solicitante sea un intermediario);
- certificado de conformidad o avis o del fabricante, por escrito, de que las sustancias que
agotan la capa de ozono y (o) los productos que las contengan producidos por él
cumplen los requisitos de los documentos con arreglo a los cuales se fabrican;
- una copia de un certificado válido de seguro del cargamento.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual .2
13. La expedición de licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan y no se pueden
prorrogar.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilizació n total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. Los titulares de licencias no pueden comerciar con sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono con
países que no sean Partes en el Protocolo de Montreal . También se p ueden imponer condiciones en
cuanto a los fines a los que se debe destinar la sustancia importada, si su consumo se ha aprobado
con una finalidad específica en el marco del Protocolo de Montreal.
2 El índice de evaluación mensual (IEM) se utiliza en Kazajstán para calcular las pensiones y otras
prestaciones sociales, así como para imponer sanciones y calcular impuestos y otras contribuciones, y se
aprueba anualmente mediante la Ley del Presupuesto Na cional. En 2021, el IEM es de 2.917 tenge. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 6 -
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
2 PRODU CTOS QUÍMICOS FITOSANITARIOS
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Es posible importar sin licencia muestras de productos fitosanitarios no registrados con el fin de
realizar pruebas y estudios a efectos de registro y de producción, así como un número limitado de
productos fitosanitarios no registrados destinados a la eliminación de focos de plagas cuarentenarias
de nueva detección, si la autoridad ejecutiva de Kazajstán encargada del registro estatal de
productos fitosanitarios establece que es pertinente ; se indi carán en este caso los nombres, la
cantidad, la forma de preparación, la frecuencia de aplicación, la concentración, el embalaje, el
nombre de la fábrica y el país de origen ( Lista común de mercancías sujetas a medidas no
arancelarias en el comercio con te rceros países, aprobada por la Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la
Comisión Económica Euroasiática, de 21 de abril de 2015, anexo 2.2).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. La importación de productos fitosanitarios no registrados está sujeta al rég imen de concesión de
licencias.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s) arancelaria(s)
afectada(s), basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 3808 (excepto 3808 94) Productos fitosanitarios (pesticidas), excepto cualquier cinta
adhesiva para proteger los árboles de los insectos
3. El régimen se aplica a las mercancías originarias y procedentes de todos los países.
4. El régimen de concesión de licencias se utiliza con el fin de administrar las restricciones a la
importación mantenidas para pr oteger la salud y la vida de las personas y de los animales o para
preservar los vegetales.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el régimen de licencias son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.2);
- Ley Nº 331 de la República de Kazajstán, de Protección Fitosanitaria, de 3 de julio
de 2002;
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 7 -
internacionales y los permisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Ministro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán relativa a
la aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de importación y
exportación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, la documentación probatoria, los
formularios de solicitud de una licencia y (o) anexo a la licencia, el formulario de una
licencia y (o) anexos a la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) Las solicitudes se deben presentar con anterioridad a la lleg ada de las mercancías . El plazo
máximo de tramitación de una licencia es de cinco días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) El importador debe presentar su solicitud a un organismo administrativo : el Comité Oficial de
Inspección del Complejo Agroindustrial del Min isterio de Agricultura de la República de
Kazajstán.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justif ican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del T ratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita la licencia ;
y v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente).
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de de negar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicit ud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- una copia digital del formulario de solicitud; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 8 -
- una copia del contrato;
- una copia del documento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- una copia de la licencia de producción (formulación), venta o uso de plaguicidas
(productos químicos tóxicos), para aplicación en aerosol o fu migación;
- una copia del contrato (acuerdo) que establece el procedimiento de devolución de
productos fitosanitarios defectuosos al exportador;
- una copia del pasaporte de seguridad de productos químicos.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Cond iciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias pr oporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
3 DESECHOS PELIGROSOS
Breve descripción del régimen
1. La República de Kazajstán cumple con las obligaciones que le incumben en virtud del Convenio
de Basilea sobr e el Control de los Movimientos Transfronterizos de los Desechos Peligrosos y su
Eliminación (Convenio de Basilea), adoptando la Lista común de mercancías sujetas a medidas no
arancelarias en los intercambios comerciales con terceros países (Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la
Comisión Económica Euroasiática relativa a medidas de reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de
abril de 2015, anexo 2.3).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. De conformidad con las obligaciones de Kazajstán en el marco del Conv enio de Basilea, el régimen
de licencias se aplica a los desechos peligrosos enumerados en las listas de tal Convenio.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
2618 00 000 0 Escorias granuladas (arena de escorias) procedentes de la siderurgia
2619 00 Escorias (excepto las granuladas), batiduras y demás desperdicios de la
siderurgia G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 9 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 2620 30 000 0 Batiduras que contengan óxido de cobre
2620 Escorias, cenizas y residuos (excepto los procedentes de la siderurgia) que
contengan metales, arsénico o compuestos metálicos, incluidos:
2620 11 000 0 cinc duro
del 2620 21 000 0
del 2620 29 000 0 virutas de plomo, granzas de plomo y lodos de plomo con un contenido de
plomo del 30% o superior
del 2620 40 000 0 escoria de aluminio
del 2620 99 950 9 escorias salinas, que contengan magnesio
del 2620 99 950 9 productos de metales ligeros, que contengan magnesio
del 2620 catalizadores usados, destinados solamente a la recuperación de los metales
o la fabricación de reactivos químicos
del 2620
del 3825 Desechos que estén constituidos o contaminados por una de las sustancias
siguientes:
carbonilos metálicos
del 2620 91 000 0
del 3825 compuestos de cromo hexavalente
del 2620 30 000 0 Polvos y residuos de sistemas de depuración de gases de fundiciones de
cobre
del 2620 30 000 0 Lodos obtenidos como desechos de los procesos de separación electrolítica y
purificación de cobre, excepto los lodos anódicos
del 2620 30 000 0
del 3825 Desechos que contengan cloruro de cobre o cianuro de cobre
del 2619 00 900 0 Escorias generadas en la producción siderúrgica, utilizadas como una materia
prima para la producción de esponja de titanio y de vanadio
del 7112 30 000 0 Cenizas procedentes de la incineración de circuitos impresos, que contengan
metal precioso o compuestos de metal precioso
del 7112 30 000 0 Cenizas resultantes de la incineración de películas, que contengan metal
precioso o compuestos de metal precioso
del 7112 99 000 0 Películas fotográficas usadas que contengan halogenuros de plata y (o) plata
metálica
del 7112 99 000 0 Desechos de papel fotográfico que contengan halogenuros de plata y (o)
plata metálica
del 2520 10 000 0
del 3825 Yeso de desecho generado en procesos de la industria química
del 3912 20 Desechos de nitrocelulosa
del 2907
del 2908 Desechos de fenoles y compuestos fenólicos incluidos los clorofenoles, en
forma líquida o de lodos
del 3825 41 000 0
del 3825 49 000 0 Desechos de destilación no acuosos, incluso halogenados, generados en las
operaciones de recuperación (regeneración) de disolventes orgánicos
del 3825 61 000 0 Desechos procedentes de la producción de hidrocarburos alifáticos
halog enados (tales como los clorometanos, el dicloroetano, el cloruro de alilo
y la epiclorhidrina), consistentes en una mezcla de hidrocarburos policlorados
al 80-90%
Desechos que contengan los compuestos siguientes o estén contaminados
por ellos:
del 2837
del 3825 cianuros inorgánicos, excepto los residuos que contengan metales preciosos
o compuestos de metales preciosos en forma sólida con vestigios de cianuros
inorgánicos
del 2926
del 2929
del 3825 cianuros orgánicos
Desechos de soluciones ácidas y alcalinas, que contengan como compuesto
principal una de las sustancias siguientes:
del 2806 10 000 0 ácido clorhídrico, de pH ≤ 2
del 2807 00 000 ácido sulfúrico, ácido sulfúrico fumante
del 2808 00 000 0 ácido nítrico, de pH ≤ 2
del 2811 11 000 0 ácido fluorhídrico
del 2811 19 100 0 ácido bromhídrico
del 2814 20 000 0 amoniaco en disolución acuosa
del 2815 12 000 0 hidróxido de sodio, de pH ≥ 11,5
del 2815 20 000 0 hidróxido de potasio, de pH ≥ 11,5
del 2620 30 000 0
del 2620 99 950 9 Escorias procedentes de la producción del cobre, (excepto las químicamente
estabilizadas, que contengan una cantidad importante de hierro (superior
al 20%) y estén tratadas conforme a las normas industriales) G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 10 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 2620 11 000 0
del 2620 19 000 0
del 2620 99 950 9 Escorias procedentes de la producción de cinc, (excepto las químicamente
estabilizadas, que contengan una cantidad importante de hierro (superior
al 20%) y estén tratadas conforme a las normas industriales)
del 2620
del 2621
del 38 25 Escorias y demás cenizas (incluso las cenizas de algas marinas), incluidas:
cenizas de caldera
residuos que contengan sales y residuos procedentes de dispositivos de
captación de humos de hornos de combustible convencional (sin yeso de
grado reactivo)
cenizas y polvos volantes procedentes de centrales de combustión (excepto
las cenizas y polvos volantes procedentes de centrales de tratamiento de
desechos mediante incineración o pirólisis)
arcilla roja neutralizada procedente de la producci ón de alúmina
cenizas procedentes de centrales eléctricas de carbón (incluidas las volantes)
del 3802 Carbón activado agotado (excepto el procedente del tratamiento de agua
potable, de procesos de la industria alimentaria y de producción de
vitaminas)
del 28
del 3824
del 3825 Desechos que contengan compuestos inorgánicos de flúor en forma de
líquidos o de lodos, excepto los lodos de fluoruro de calcio
del 4004 00 000 0 Desechos, recortes y recortes de caucho (excepto el caucho endurecido)
4012 20 000 1
4012 20 000 9 Llantas y neumáticos usados
2307 00 Vinaza de vino, tártaro
del 3504 00 Residuos de curtiduría en forma de aserrín, cenizas, lodo y polvo que
contengan compuestos de cromo hexavalente o biocidas
del 4115 10 000 0
del 4115 20 000 0 Recortes y otros desechos de cuero o cuero regenerado, no utilizables para la
fabricación de artículos de cuero, que contengan compuestos de cromo
hexavalente o biocidas
del 0511 99 100 0
del 4101 - del 4103
del 4301 Desechos de pi eles o peletería en bruto, que contengan compuestos de
cromo hexavalente o biocidas
del 5003 00 000 0
del 5103 20 000 0
del 5202 10 000 0
del 5505
del 5601 30 000 0 Desechos de pelusas procedentes de procesos de hilatura de lana
del 3206, del 3208
del 3212, del 3825 Desechos de pigmentos, tintes, pinturas y barnices que contengan metales
pesados y (o) disolventes orgánicos
del 2805 40
del 7204
del 7404 00
del 7503 00
del 7602 00 Desechos de metales y aleaciones (excepto los desechos y las aleaciones
presentes en productos acabados, tales como chapas, planchas, vigas,
barras, tuberías, etc.) que contengan alguna de las siguientes sustancias:
del 7802 00 000 0 antimonio
del 7902 00 000 0 cadmio
del 8002 00 000 0 selenio
del 8101 97 000 0 telurio
del 8102 97 000 0
del 8103 30 000 0
del 8104 20 000 0
del 8105 30 000 0
del 8106 00 100 0
del 8107 30 000 0
del 8108 30 000 0
del 8109 30 000 0
del 8110 20 000 0
del 8111 00 190 0
del 8112 13 000 0
del 8112 22 000 0
del 8112 52 000 0
del 8112 92 210 9
del 8113 00 400 0 talio
del 2620 29 000 0
del 2620 60 000 0
del 2620 91 000 0 Desechos (excepto la chatarra sólida) que estén constituidos o contaminados
por las sustancias siguientes:
antimonio y sus compuestos G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 11 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 2620 99 950 9 berilio y sus compuestos
cadmio y sus compuestos
plomo y sus compuestos
selenio y sus compuestos
telurio y sus compuestos
talio y sus compuestos
del 2620 19 000 0
del 2530 90 000 9 Residuos de la lixiviación de la metalurgia de cinc, en forma de polvos y
lodos (jarosita, hematites, etc.)
del 7802 00 000 0
del 8548 10 910 0 Acumuladores de plomo de desecho usados, no montados
del 8548 10 100 0
del 8548 10 210 0
del 8548 10 290 0 Acumuladores de desecho sin clasificar
del 85 Desechos de equipos eléctricos o electrotécnicos, incluidas las pilas
galvánicas, las pilas, los interruptores de mercurio, los vidrios de tuberías de
rayos catódicos y otros vidrios con revestimiento activo, o contaminados por
cadmio, mercurio, plomo o difenilos poli clorados, en concentraciones
superiores a 50 mg/kg
del 2710 Productos del petróleo usados, incluidos:
productos del petróleo en forma de emulsiones acuosas o mezclas con agua
productos del petróleo en forma de fangos de depósitos de almacenamiento
productos del petróleo inadecuados para su utilización ulterior como
productos primarios
2710 91 000 0 Productos del petróleo usados que contengan difenilos policlorados (PCB),
terfenilos policlorados (PCT) o difenilos polibromados (PBB)
del 2710 91 000 0 Desechos de sustancias y artículos que contengan o que estén contaminados
por: difenilos policlorados (PCB), terfenilos policlorados (PCT), naftalenos
policlorados (PCN) o difenilos polibromados (PBB), incluido todo análogo
polibromado de esos compuestos, en concentraciones iguales o superiores
a 50 mg/kg
3. El régimen se aplica a los desechos peligrosos originarios y procedentes de todos los países que
son Parte en el Convenio de Basilea.
4. El régimen de licencias garantiza el cumplimiento de los compromisos contraídos por Kazajstán
en su calidad de Estado Parte en el Convenio de Basilea . A tales efectos, los movimientos
transfronterizos de desechos peligrosos y otros desechos se deben reducir al mínimo, e n coherencia
con una gestión ecológicamente racional y eficaz de esos desechos, y se han de efectuar de tal
manera que no tengan efectos perjudiciales para la salud humana y el medio ambiente . El trámite
de licencias no está destinado a limitar la cantidad ni el valor de las importaciones.
La obtención de una licencia es un requisito obligatorio para la importación de cualquier desecho
peligroso enumerado en las listas del Convenio de Basilea . No es posible suprimir el régimen sin el
acuerdo del poder legis lativo.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el régimen de licencias son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.3) ;
- Ley Nº 389 de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la Adhesión de l a República de
Kazajstán al Convenio de Basilea sobre el control de los movimientos transfronterizos
de los desechos peligrosos y su eliminación, de 10 de febrero de 2003;
- Código Nº 400 -VI de la República de Kazajstán de Medio Ambiente, de 2 de
enero de 2021; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 12 -
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados
internacionales y los permisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de exportación e
importación de mercancías, la documentación probatoria, los formularios de solici tud
para obtener una licencia y (o) anexo de la licencia, el formulario de licencia y (o)
anexos de la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o e n las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) Las solicitudes se deben presentar con anterioridad a la llegada de las mercancías . El plazo
máximo para la tramitación de las licencias es de 15 días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) Sí, las solicitudes de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo administrativo : el
Ministerio de Ecología, Geología y Recursos Naturales de la República de Kazajstán.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documento s aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita la licencia ;
y v) el agotamiento del cont ingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente).
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importa dores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 13 -
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia electrónica del contrato de comercio exterior;
- una copia del documento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- una copia de la licencia de actividad para la utilización de desechos;
- una copia del contrato (acuerdo) sobre el transporte;
- una copia de las conclusiones del examen ecológico del Estado;
- una copia del contrato (acuerdo) entre el importador y la persona responsable de la
eliminación de los desechos, donde se establece su utilización segura desde el punto de
vista ecológico;
- la notificación del transporte transfronterizo de desechos peligrosos de conformidad co n
el Convenio de Basilea;
- información sobre posibilidades técnicas (tecnológicas) para la utilización de desechos
peligrosos;
- una copia del comprobante de un seguro, una fianza u otra garantía que cubre el
movimiento transfronterizo.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de las licencias no está supeditada al pago d e ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias en tre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las imp ortaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 14 -
4 ESTUPEFACIENTES, SUSTANCIAS PSICOTRÓPICAS Y SUS PRECURSORES
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Se expiden licencias para controlar la impor tación de determinados estupefacientes, sustancias
con efectos psicotrópicos y sus precursores ( Lista común de mercancías sujetas a medidas no
arancelarias en los intercambios comerciales con terceros países, aprobada mediante la Decisión
Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática relativa a medidas de reglamentación no
arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015, anexo 2.12).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. Este régimen garantiza que Kazajstán cumple con una parte de las obligaciones que le incumben
en virtud de lo dispuesto en la Convención Única de 1961 sobre Estupefacientes, el Convenio sobre
Sustancias Sicotrópicas de 1971, y los cuadros I y II de la Conve nción de las Naciones Unidas contra
el Tráfico Ilícito de Estupefacientes y Sustancias Sicotrópicas de 1988.
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de sustancias controladas procedentes de todos los
países.
4. El régimen de licencias de importación permite a l Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de
sustancias controladas que se importan . Permite impedir el suministro excesivo y el uso no previsto
de sustancias controladas, y afrontar el problema del uso indebido de drogas . El régimen está basado
en las disposic iones de los tratados internacionales y no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o el
volumen de las importaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguient es:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Acuerdo sobre el Procedimiento de Transferencia de Estupefacientes,
Sustancias Psicotrópicas y sus Precursores en el Territorio Aduanero de la
Unión Aduanera, de 24 de octubre de 2013 ;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a tercero s países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.12) ;
- Ley Nº 257 de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Adhesión de la República de Kazajstán
a la Convención Única de 1961 sobre Estupefacientes modificada de conformidad con el
Protocolo de 1972 de enmienda de la Convención Única de 1961 sobre Estupefacientes,
de 1 de julio de 1998;
- Ley Nº 249 de la Repúbl ica de Kazajstán sobre la Adhesión de la República de Kazajstán
al Convenio sobre Sustancias Sicotrópicas, de 29 de junio de 1998;
- Ley Nº 246 de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Adhesión de la República de Kazajstán
a la Convención de las Naciones Uni das contra el Tráfico Ilícito de Estupefacientes y
Sustancias Sicotrópicas, de 29 de junio de 1998;
- Ley Nº 279 -I de la República de Kazajstán sobre Estupefacientes, Sustancias
Psicotrópicas, Sus Sustitutos y Sus Precursores, así como sobre medidas para combatir
su circulación ilegal y uso indebido, de 10 de julio de 1998;
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 15 -
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Noti ficaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados
internaci onales y los permisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro d e servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de exportación e
importación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, los documentos probatorios, los
formularios de solicitud para obtener u na licencia y (o) anexo de la licencia, el formulario
de licencia y (o) anexos de la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
El régimen no se puede suprimir sin el acuerdo del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límit es cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) Las solicitudes se deben presentar con anterioridad a la llegada de las mercancías . El plazo
máximo de tramita ción de una licencia es de tres días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) Sí, las solicitudes de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo administrativo : el
Ministerio del Interior de la República de Kazajstán.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita l a licencia ;
y v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente).
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Solo las personas jurídicas tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibl es en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011137#z32 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 16 -
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de l a República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- Una copia electrónica del acuerdo ( contrato ) de comercio exterior, solicitudes
y (o) adiciones al mismo (para una licencia única) ; y a falta de dicho acuerdo
(contrato ) de comercio, una copia del documento que confirme la intención de
las Partes .
- Copias electrónicas del permiso emitido por la autoridad competente del
Estado importador para importar a su territorio expedici ones concreta s de
sustancias controla das, si así lo dispone la legislación del Estado pertinente o
la notificación oficial de este organismo de que no se requiere un permiso
específico.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de adu anas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de las licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas duran te todo el período para el que se concedan.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
5 SUSTANCIAS TÓXICAS QUE NO SON PRECURSORES DE ESTUPEFACIENTES Y
SUSTANCIAS PSICOTRÓPICAS
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Se expiden licencias para controlar la importación de sustancias tóxicas, excepto los precursores
de estu pefacientes y sustancias que pueden alterar la actividad psíquica.
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen de licencias permite controlar la venta de sustancias tóxicas de diversos orígenes a
fin de proteger la salud y la vida de las pers onas y los animales, y preservar los vegetales.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 1211 90 860 9 Acónito
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Aconitina
del 2922 19 700 0 Benactizina G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 17 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 2933 39 990 0 Aceclidina
del 2837 19 000 0 Cianuro de bario
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Brucina
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Hiosciamina (base)
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Canforato de hiosciamina
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Sulfato de hiosciamina
del 2905 59 Gliftor
del 2837 19 000 0 Cianuro de cadmio
del 2837 19 000 0 Prusiato de calcio
del 2924 19 000 0 Carbacol
del 2930 90 950 9 Mercaptofos
2905 11 000 0 Alcohol metílico (metanol)
2804 80 000 0 Arsénico
del 2811 29 100 0 Ácido arsénico
del 2811 29 900 0 Anhídrido arsénico
del 2842 90 800 0 Arseniato de sodio
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Nicotina
del 2931 90 800 9 Novarsenol
del 2852 90 000 7 Clormerodrina
2805 40 100 0
2805 40 900 0 Metilmercurio
del 2852 10 000 8 Diyoduro de mercurio
del 2852 10 000 8 Dicloruro de mercurio
del 2852 10 000 8 Oxicianuro de mercurio
del 2852 10 000 8 Salicilato de mercurio
del 2852 10 000 8 Cianuro de mercurio
del 2843 29 000 0 Cianuro de plata
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Hidrobromuro de escopolamina
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Nitrato de estricnina
del 2939 79 000 0
del 2939 80 000 0 Alcaloides de la belladona
del 8112 51 000 0 Talio, sin elaborar
del 2931 90 800 9 Tetracarbonilo de níquel
del 2931 10 000 0 Tetraetilo de plomo
del 2931 10 000 0 Tetrametilplomo
del 1211 90 860 9 Acónito de Zungaria (Aconitum soongoricum) fresco
del 2907 11 000 0 Fenol
del 2853 90 900 0 Fosfuro de cinc
del 2804 70 001 0 Fósforo amarillo
del 2843 29 000 0 Fluoruro de plata
del 2926 90 980 0 O-Cloro bencilideno malononitrilo 1
del 2837 19 000 0 Cianuro de cinc
del 2939 20 000 0 Cinconina
del 1302 19 900 0 Extracto de nuez vómica
del 2852 10 000 8 Fosfato de etilmercurio
del 2852 10 000 8 Cloruro de etilmercurio
del 3001 90 980 0 Veneno de serpiente
del 3001 90 980 0 Veneno de abeja, purificado
del 2837 11 000 0 Cianuros de sodi o
del 2837 19 000 0 Cianuros de potasio
del 2837 19 000 0 Cianuros de cobre
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de sustancias controladas procedentes de todos los
países. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 18 -
4. El uso de licencias de importación permite al Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de sustancias
controladas que se importan . El régimen no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o el volumen de
las importaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el régimen de licencias son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euro asiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.13) ;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de l a lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados
internacionales y los permisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en fun ciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020 ;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstá n sobre la
aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de exportación e
importación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, los documentos probatorios, los
formularios de solicitud para obtener una licencia y (o) anexo de la licencia, el formul ario
de licencia y (o) anexos de la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
El régimen no se puede suprimir sin el acuerdo del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) Las solicitudes se deben presentar con anterioridad a la llegada de las mercancías . El plazo
máximo de tramitación de las licencias es de cinco días h ábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) Sí, las solicitudes de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo administrativo : el
Ministerio de Industria y Desarrollo de las Infraestructuras de la República de Kazajstán.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita la licencia ; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 19 -
y v) el agotami ento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente).
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reuni r los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la d irección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
El importador debe presentar los siguientes documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia del contrato;
- un documento que confirme el pago del derecho de l icencia para poder realizar
determinadas actividades (para quienes la soliciten por primera vez);
- una copia del documento (información) de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o del registro
estatal;
- una copia de la licencia de actividad para la producc ión, elaboración, compra,
almacenamiento, venta, utilización y destrucción de sustancias tóxicas;
- una copia de la licencia para realizar la actividad objeto de la licencia;
- una copia de las conclusiones sanitarias y epidemiológicas sobre el almacenam iento de
sustancias tóxicas;
- el pasaporte de seguridad de los productos tóxicos;
- una copia del certificado de seguro.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de las licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan .
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 20 -
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
6 PRODUCTOS ELECTRÓNICOS DE RADIOCOMUNICACIÓN Y (O) DISPOSITIVOS DE ALTA
FRECUENCIA DE USO CIVIL, INCLUIDOS LOS QUE ESTÉN INTEGRADOS EN OTROS
PRODUCTOS O LOS ACOMPAÑEN
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Se expiden licencias para regular la import ación de productos electrónicos de radiocomunicación
y (o) equipos de alta frecuencia de uso civil, incluidos los que estén integrados en otras mercancías
o formen parte de ellas ( Lista común de mercancías sujetas a medidas no arancelarias en los
intercamb ios comerciales con terceros países, aprobada mediante la Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de
la Comisión Económica Euroasiática relativa a medidas de reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de
abril de 2015, anexo 2.16).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licenc ias
2. El régimen de licencias permite regular la venta de productos electrónicos de radiocomunicación
y (o) equipos de alta frecuencia de uso civil, incluidos los que estén integrados en otras mercancías
o formen parte de ellas.
Código(s) de la(s)
línea(s) a rancelaria(s)
afectada(s), basado(s)
en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 8419
del 8514
del 8540
del 8543
del 9018
del 9027 Dispositivos, equipos y aparatos de alta frecuencia utilizados con fines
industriales, científicos y medicinales, incluidos los generadores de alta frecuencia
del 8470
del 8471
del 8517
del 8518
del 8519
del 8521
del 8525
del 8526
del 8527
del 8528
del 8531
del 90 Productos electrónicos de radiocomunicación destinados a varios fines, utilizados
para la transmisión o recepción de voz, imagen, datos y (u) otros tipos de
información
del 8526
del 8527 Equipos y programas informáticos para radiovigilancia, aparatos de recepción,
utilizados para la detección de dispositivos radioelectrónicos emisores de
radiación electromagnética
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de productos electrónicos controlados procedentes de
todos los países.
4. El uso de licencias de importación permite al Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de productos
electrónicos controlados que se importan . El régimen no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o el
volumen de las importaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguient es: G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 21 -
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática so bre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.16);
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de P ermisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los trat ados
internacionales y los permisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán sobr e la
aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de exportación e
importación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, los documentos probatorios, los
formularios de solicitud para obtener una licencia y (o) anexo de la licencia, el formulario
de licencia y (o) anexos de la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
El régimen no se puede suprimir sin el acuerdo del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) No hay un plazo mínimo para las solicitudes de licencia . El plazo máximo para la tramitación
de las licencias es de ocho días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) Sí, las solicitudes de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo administrativo : el Comité
de Telecomunicaciones del Ministerio de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e Industria
Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán, quien debe contar con la a probación del
Comité de Seguridad Nacional de la República de Kazajstán para expedir las
licencias.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisito s establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligacio nes internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita la licencia ; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 22 -
y v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente).
El organis mo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán par a
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia del contrato de comercio exterior;
- una copia del documento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- los datos sobre los productos electrónicos de radiocomunicación y (o) equipos de alta
frecuencia de uso civil importados;
- una copia del certificado de conformidad de la mercancía;
- una copia de las conclusiones del examen técnico relativo a la designa ción de las
mercancías importadas que sean equipos de encriptación o dispositivos técnicos
especiales para la realización de actividades operativas y de investigación, expedida por
el Comité de Seguridad Nacional de la República de Kazajstán;
- una copia de la licencia de la actividad objeto de la licencia;
- las conclusiones (documento de permiso) para la importación de determinadas
mercancías incluidas en la Lista común de mercancías sujetas a prohibiciones
o restricciones a las importaciones o exportac iones impuestas por los Estados
miembros de la Unión Aduanera dentro de la Comunidad Económica
Euroasiática en sus intercambios comerciales con terceros países, y las
Disposiciones relativas a la aplicación de las restricciones (los datos, en su
caso);
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud con arreglo al anexo 4 de las normas para
los servicios públicos;
- una copia de las conclusiones sobre la referencia (no la referencia) de las
mercancías de los productos electrónicos de radiocomunicación y (o)
dispositivos de alta frecuencia para uso civil.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el í ndice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de las licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 23 -
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan y no se pueden
prorrogar.
15. No se im ponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no es tán sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
7 DISPOSITIVOS TÉCNICOS ES PECIALES DISEÑADOS PARA LA OBTENCIÓN ENCUBIERTA
DE INFORMACIÓN
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Se expiden licencias para regular la importación de dispositivos especialmente diseñados para la
obtención no autorizada de información ( Lista común de mercancías sujetas a medidas no
arancelarias en los intercambios comerciales con terceros países, aprobada mediante la Decisión
Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática relativa a medidas de reglamentación no
arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015, anexo 2.17).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen de licencias permite regular la venta de dispositivos especialmente diseñados para la
obtención no autorizada de información, incluidos los que estén integrados en otras mercancías o
formen parte de ellas.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
Dispositivos técnicos especiales diseñados para la obtención y el registro
encubiertos de información acústica:
del 8517 61 000
del 8517 62 000
del 8517 69 390 0
del 8517 69 900 0 sistemas de comunicación por cable diseñados para la obtención y (o) la
grabación encubiertas de información acústica
del 8517 70 900 1
del 8518 30 950 0
del 8518 40
del 8523 49 450 0
del 8525 50 000 0
del 8525 60 000
del 8527
del 8529 10 390 0 dispositivos radioelectrónicos diseñados para la obtención y (o) el registro
encubiertos de información acústica
del 8519 81 510 0
del 8519 81 550
del 8519 81 610
del 8519 81 650
del 8519 81 750
del 8519 81 850
del 8519 89 900
del 8523 51 dispositivos electrónicos diseñados para el registro encubierto de
información acústica
Dispositivos técnicos especiales para la observación y grabación
encubiertas de informació n visual:
del 9002 lentes estenopeicas G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 24 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 9006 51 000 0
del 9006 52 000 9
del 9006 53 100 0 cámaras que tengan por lo menos una de las siguientes características :
que simulen ser un artículo destinado a otro uso o tengan una lente
estenopeica
del 8525 80 aparatos de televisión y videocámaras que tengan por lo menos una de las
siguientes características : que simulen ser un artículo destinado a otro uso
o tengan una lente estenopeica
del 8517 61 000
del 8517 62 000 sistemas de comunicación por cable diseñados para la obtención y (o) la
grabación encubiertos de información visual
del 8517 69 390 0
del 8517 69 900 0
del 8523 49 450 0
del 8525 50 000 0
del 8525 60 000
del 8527
del 8529 10 390 0 dispositivos radioelectrónicos diseñados para la obtención y (o) el registro
encubiertos de información visual
del 8521
del 8523 51 dispositivos electrónicos diseñados para el registro encubierto de
información visual
Dispositivos técnicos especiales para la escucha encubierta de
conversaciones telefónicas:
del 8517 61 000
del 8517 62 000 sistemas de comunicación por cable diseñados para la escucha encubierta
de conversaciones telefónicas
del 8517 69 390 0
del 8517 69 900 0
del 8525 50 000 0
del 8525 60 000
del 8527
del 8529 10 390 0 dispositivos radioelectrónicos diseñados para la escucha encubierta de
conversaciones telefónicas
del 8519 81 510 0
del 8519 81 550
del 8519 81 610
del 8519 81 650
del 8519 81 750
del 8519 81 850
del 8523 51 dispositivos electrónicos diseñados para el registro encubierto de
conversaciones telefónicas
del 8471
del 8517 61 000
del 8517 62 000
del 8517 69 390 0
del 8517 69 900 0
del 8523 29 310 1
del 8523 29 310 2
del 8523 49 250 0
del 8523 49 910 1
del 8523 51 910 1
del 8523 59 910 1
del 8523 80 910 1
del 8527 Dispositivos técnicos especiales para la captura y grabación encubiertas de
información procedente de dispositivos técnicos
del 9022 19 000 0 Dispositivos técnicos especiales para la interceptación encubierta de
mensajes y envíos masivos de correo electrónico
del 9022 19 000 0 Dispositivos técnicos especiales para el examen encubierto de objetos y
documentos, incluidos los radioscopios, l os monitores de radiología y los
equipos de rayos X portátiles, de pequeño tamaño
Dispositivos técnicos especiales para penetrar de forma encubierta en
establecimientos, vehículos y otros objetos, e inspeccionarlos:
del 8301 70 000 0 medios utilizados para abrir cerraduras
del 9022 19 000 0 radioscopios, monitores de radiología y equipos de rayos X portátiles, de
pequeño tamaño
del 8526 10 000 9
del 8526 91 Dispositivos técnicos especiales para penetrar de forma encubierta en
establecimientos, vehículos y otras instalaciones, e inspeccionarlos G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 25 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 8471
del 8505 90 200
del 8517 61 000
del 8517 62 000
del 8517 69 390 0
del 8517 69 900 0
del 8523 29 310 1
del 8523 29 310 2 Dispositivos técnicos especiales para la obtención, modificación o
eliminación encubiertas de información desde los medios técnicos
utilizados para el almacenamiento, tratamiento y transmisión de dicha
información
del 8523 49 250 0
del 8523 49 910 1
del 8523 51 910 1
del 8523 59 910 1
del 8523 80 910 1
del 8527
del 9019 10 900 9 Dispositivos técnicos especiales para la identificación encubierta de
personas
del 9019 10 900 9 Dispositivos técnicos especiales para el registro encubierto de reacciones
psicofisiológicas de personas
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de productos electrónicos controlados procedentes de
todos los países.
4. El uso de licencias de importación permite al Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de productos
electrónicos controlados que se importan . El régimen n o tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o el
volumen de las importaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euro asiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.17) ;
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados
internacionales y los permisos emitidos por lo s organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de exportación e
importación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, los documentos probatorios, los
formularios de solicitud para obtener una licencia y (o) anexo de la licencia, el formulario
de licencia y (o) anexos de la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
El régimen no se puede suprimir sin el acuerdo del poder legislativo. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 26 -
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) No hay un plazo mínimo para las solicitudes de licencia . No se podrá formalizar la importación
de mercancías recibidas en las aduanas sin la debida licencia, y no se podrán expedir permisos
con carácter retroactivo . El plazo máximo de tramitación de las licencias es de 10 días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) Sí, las so licitudes de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo autorizado : el Ministerio
de Industria y Desarrollo de las Infraestructuras de la República de Kazajstán, quien debe
contar con la aprobación del Comité de Seguridad Nacional de la República de Ka zajstán para
expedir las licencias.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegació n de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resulta do de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita la licencia ;
v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente) ; y vi) en caso de que un organismo de coordinación deniegue la solicitud de l icencia y
de que los resultados del examen o la investigación técnica confirmen que la importación o
exportación del equipo técnico especial pueden causar daño a la seguridad nacional del Estado
miembro.
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto c on la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/ ?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia del contra to de comercio exterior;
- una copia del documento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- una copia de la licencia de actividad para el diseño, producción, reparación y venta de
dispositivos técnicos especia les para la realización de actividades operativas y de
investigación; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 27 -
- un documento que confirme el pago de la tasa estatal (derecho de licencia);
- una copia de las conclusiones del examen técnico relativo a la designación de las
mercancías importadas que son dispositivos técnicos especiales para la realización de
actividades operativas y de investigación, publicado por el Comité de Seguridad
Nacional de la República de Kazajstán.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de las licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no es tá sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente la s divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
8 MEDIOS DE ENCRIPTACIÓN (CRIPTOGRÁFICOS)
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Se expiden licencias para regular la importación de aparatos de criptografía ( Lista común de
mercancías sujetas a medidas no arancelarias en el comercio con terceros países, aprobada por la
Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de reglamentación
no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015, anexo 2. 19).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen de licencias permite regular la venta de aparatos de criptografía, incluidos los que
estén integrados en otras mercancías o formen parte de ellas.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afe ctada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 8443 31
del 8443 32 100 9
del 8443 32 300 0
del 8443 99 100 0 Impresoras, fotocopiadoras y aparatos de fax y sus módulos electrónicos
con funciones de encriptación (criptográficas)
del 8470 10 000 0 Dispositivos de bolsillo para registrar, reproducir y visualizar datos con
funciones de cálculo que incorporen funciones de encriptación
(criptográficas)
del 8471 30 000 0 Ordenadores portátiles con función de encriptac ión (criptográfica) G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 28 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afe ctada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 8471 30 000 0
del 8471 41 000 0
del 8471 49 000 0
del 8471 50 000 0
del 8471 90 000 0
del 8473 30 200 8 Ordenadores y sus partes, con función de encriptación (criptográfica)
del 8471 70 500 0
del 8471 70 980 0
del 8471 80 000 0 Dispositivos informáticos con función de encriptación (criptográfica)
del 8473 21 100 0
del 8473 21 900 0
del 8473 30 200 8
del 8473 30 800 0 Módulos electrónicos y partes de ordenadores portátiles, con función de
encriptación (criptográfica)
del 8517 11 000 0
del 8517 12 000 0
del 8517 18 000 0 Dispositivos de comunicación para abonados con función de encriptación
(criptográfica)
del 8517 61 000 1
del 8517 61 000 2
del 8517 61 000 8 Estaciones base con función de encriptación (criptográfica)
del 8517 62 000
del 8517 69 390 0
del 8517 69 900 0
del 8517 70 900 Equipos de telecomunicaciones y sus partes, con función de encriptación
(criptográfica)
del 8523 29 310 1
del 8523 29 310 2
del 8523 29 330
del 8523 29 390
del 8523 49 250 0
del 8523 49 310 0
del 8523 49 390 0
del 8523 49 450 0
del 8523 49 910 1
del 8523 49 930 0
del 8523 51 910 1
del 8523 51 930 0
del 8523 52
del 8523 59 910 1
del 8523 59 930 0
del 8523 80 910 1
del 8523 80 930 0 Programas informáticos con función de encriptación (criptográfica), con
independencia del soporte de información utilizado
del 3704 00
del 3705 00
del 3706
del 4821 10
del 4901 10 000 0
del 4901 99 000 0
del 4911 99 000 0
del 8523 21 000 0
del 8523 29 310 1
del 8523 29 310 2
del 8523 29 330
del 8523 29 390
del 8523 49 250 0
del 8523 49 310 0
del 8523 49 390 0
del 8523 49 450 0
del 8523 49 910 1
del 8523 49 930 0
del 8523 51 910 1
del 8523 51 930 0
del 8523 52
del 8523 59 910 1
del 8523 59 930 0
del 8523 80 910 1
del 8523 80 930 0 Documentos fundamentales G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 29 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afe ctada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 8525 50 000 0
del 8525 60 000
del 8529 90 200 1
del 8529 90 650
del 8529 90 970 0 Equipos de radiodifusión o televisión y sus partes, con función de
encriptación (criptográfica)
del 8526 91 200 0
del 8526 91 800 0
del 8526 92 000
del 8529 90 650
del 8529 90 970 0 Receptores de radionavegación, equipos de control remoto y sus partes, con
función de encriptación (criptográfica)
del 8517 62 000
del 8528 71 150 0
del 8529 90 650
del 8529 90 970 0 Equipos con acceso a Internet y receptores/aparatos de televisión con
función de comunicación y sus partes, con función de encriptación
(criptográfica)
del 8542 31 901 0
del 8542 31 909 0
del 8542 32 900 0 Circuitos electrónicos integrados, unidades de m emoria con función
criptográfica o que tienen dispositivos con función de encriptación
(criptográfica)
del 8543 70 900 0
del 8543 90 000 0 Otros aparatos y equipos electrónicos con funciones específicas que
contengan instrumentos para la encriptación (criptográficos)
del 3704 00
del 3705 00
del 3706
del 4821 10
del 4901 10 000 0
del 4901 99 000 0
del 4911 99 000 0
del 8523 29 310
del 8523 29 330
del 8523 29 390
del 8523 29 900 0
del 8523 49 450 0
del 8523 49 510 0
del 8523 49 590 0
del 8523 49 930 0
del 8523 49 990 0
del 8523 51 930 0
del 8523 51 990 0
del 8523 59 930 0
del 8523 59 990 0
del 8523 80 930 0
del 8523 80 990 0 Documentación normativa, técnica, de diseño y operativa de los
instrumentos de encriptación (criptográficos) especif icados en los puntos
mencionados supra (cualquiera sea el soporte)
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de productos electrónicos controlados procedentes de
todos los países.
4. El uso de licencias de importación permite al Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de productos
electrónicos controlados que se importan . El régimen no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o el
volumen de las importaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificad as en esta categoría
son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisi ón Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.19) ; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 30 -
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados
internacionales y los permisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán rela tiva a
la aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de importación y
exportación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, los documentos probatorios, los
formularios de solicitud de una licencia y (o) anexo a la licencia, el formulario de una
licencia y (o) anexos a la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
No es posible anular el régimen sin la aprobación del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en l as
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) No hay un plazo mínimo para las solicitudes de licencia . No se podrá formalizar la importación
de mercancías recibidas en las aduanas sin la debida licencia, y no pu eden expedirse permisos
con carácter retroactivo . El plazo máximo de tramitación de las licencias es de 10 días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) Sí, las solicitudes de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo autorizado : el Ministerio
de Industria y Desarrollo de las Infraestructuras de la República de Kazajstán, quien debe
contar con la aprobación del Comité de Seguridad Nacional para expedir las licencias.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licenci as y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el so licitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la lice ncia;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita la licencia ;
v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de reg istro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente) ; y vi) en caso de que un organismo de coordinación deniegue una licencia.
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al sol icitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 31 -
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la Re pública de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- la solicitud;
- una copia del contrato de comercio exterior;
- un comprobante de pago del derecho de licencia;
- un documento que confirme el pago de la tasa estatal (derecho de licencia);
- una copia del documento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- una copia de la licencia de actividad para la elaboración y venta (in cluidos otros tipos
de transferencias) de dispositivos criptográficos de protección de información;
- la notificación del solicitante sobre la falta de dispositivos criptográficos electrónicos de
radiocomunicación y (o) de alta frecuencia;
- una copia de las conclusiones del examen técnico relativo a la identidad de las
mercancías importadas como dispositivos técnicos especiales para la realización de
actividades operativas y de investigación, publicado por el Comité de Seguridad
Nacional de la República de Kazajstán;
- una copia de los documentos técnicos sobre los dispositivos criptográficos;
- muestras de un dispositivo de encriptación (previa solicitud del Comité de Seguridad
Nacional).
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la docu mentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de las licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de la s licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan aut omáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 32 -
9 ÓRGANOS Y TEJIDOS HUMANOS, SANGRE Y SUS COMPONENTES, MUESTRAS DE
MATERIA BIOLÓGICA HUMAN A
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Se expiden licencias para controlar la importación de órganos y tejidos humanos, sangre y sus
componentes ( Lista común de mercancías sujetas a medidas no arancelarias en el comercio con
terceros países, aprobada por la Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática
sobre medid as de reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015, anexo 2.21).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen de licencias permite controlar la venta de órganos y tejidos humanos, sangre y sus
componentes a fin de proteger la vida y l a salud de las personas.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 3001 90 200 0 Tejidos alogénicos (páncreas, tiroides, paratiroides, glándulas, hipófisis y
otros tejidos endocrinos)
del 3001 90 200 0 Células madre hematopoyéticas
del 3001 90 200 0 Facocisto
del 3001 90 200 0 Piel
del 3001 90 200 0 Corazón y pulmones
del 3001 90 200 0 Conjuntiva
del 3001 90 200 0 Médula ósea
del 3002 12 000 3
del 3002 12 000 4
del 3002 12 000 5
del 3002 13 000 0
del 3002 14 000 0
del 3002 90 100 0 Sangre humana y sus componentes
del 3001 90 200 0 Complejos de varias vísceras (hígado -riñón; hígado -riñón-glándulas
suprarrenales -parte del tubo digestivo ; riñón-páncreas)
del 3001 90 200 0 Hígado y sus partes
del 3001 90 200 0 Páncreas aislado o junto con otros órganos
del 3001 90 200 0 Riñones
del 3001 90 200 0 Córnea
del 3001 90 200 0 Corazón
del 3001 90 200 0 Esclerótica
del 3001 90 200 0 Fragmentos de intestino
del 3001 90 200 0 Huesos y fragmentos de huesos con capa cortical
del 3001 90 200 0 Tejido cartilaginoso
del 3001 90 200 0 Extremidades superiores y sus fragmentos
del 3001 90 200 0 Válvulas cardíacas
del 3001 90 200 0 Huesos del cráneo
del 3001 90 200 0 Pulmón
del 3001 90 200 0 Extremidades inferiores y sus fragmentos
del 3001 90 200 0 Vasos y partes del lecho vascular
del 3001 90 200 0 Tendones
del 3001 90 200 0 Duramadre
del 3001 90 200 0 Tráquea
del 3001 90 200 0 Gametos y embriones
del 3001 90 200 0 Tráquea
del 0511 99 853 9
del 0511 99 859 9
del 3002 12 000 5
del 3002 13 000 0
del 3002 14 000 0
del 3002 90 100 0 Muestras de materia biológica humana (muestras de células, tejidos, fluidos
biológicos, secreciones, productos de la actividad vital humana, secreciones
fisiológicas y patológicas, frotis, lavados, raspados)
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de sustancias controladas procedentes de todos los
países. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 33 -
4. El uso de licencias de importación permite al Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de sustancias
controladas que se importan . El régimen no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o el volumen de
las importaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de import ación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA ;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.21) ;
- Código Nº 360 -VI de la República de Kazajstán sobre la salud de la población
y el sistema de ate nción sanitaria, de 7 de septiembre de 2020;
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados
internacionales y los permisos emit idos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 3 1 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Economía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán relativa a
la aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de importación y
exportación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, la lista de documentos en los que se
confirma el cumplimiento de e sos requisitos, los formularios de solicitud de una licencia
y (o) anexo a la licencia, el formulario de una licencia y (o) anexos a la licencia, de 30 de
enero de 2015.
No es posible anular el régimen sin la aprobación del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) No hay un plazo mínimo para las solicitudes de licencia . El plazo máximo de tramitación de
las licencias para órganos humanos es de un día laborable, para tejidos humanos y sus
componentes, tres días hábiles, y para sangre y sus componentes, tres días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 34 -
d) Sí, las solicitude s de licencia son examinadas por un único organismo autorizado : el Comité
de Control de la Actividad Médica y Farmacéutica del Ministerio de Salud Pública y Desarrollo
Social de la República de Kazajstán.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesita la licencia ;
y v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente).
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que debe n reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Solo personas jurídicas.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licenci as "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguiente s documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia del contrato de comercio exterior;
- una copia electrónica del documento que confirme el pago del derecho de
licencia para realizar determinados tipos de actividades, salvo pago efectuad o
a través del portal de pagos del "gobierno electrónico";
- una copia del documento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- una copia de la licencia de actividad médica;
- permiso de las autoridades del tercer país encargado de decidir sobre la posibilidad de
importar/exportar órganos y tejidos humanos, sangre y sus componentes.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de las licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan y no se pueden
prorrogar.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 35 -
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas d estinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
10 ARMAS DE SERVICIO O DE USO CIVIL, SUS PARTES PRINCIPALES (COMPONENTES) Y
MUNICIONES
Breve descripción del régimen
1. Se expiden licencias para regular la importación de armas de servicio o de uso civil (Lista común
de mercancías sujetas a medidas no arancelarias en el comercio con terceros países, aprobada por
la Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015, anexo 2.22).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen permite regular la venta de armas de uso oficial o civil, incluidas sus partes principales
y sus municiones.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 9302 00 000 0 Pistolas y revólveres de gas, incluidos los que permiten disparar cartuchos
con balas de goma
del 9302 00 000 0 Pistolas y revólveres para tiro deportivo con cañón de ánima estriada
del 9302 00 000 0 Pistolas y revólveres de servicio con cañón de ánima estriada
del 9302 00 000 0 Armas de cañón que no sean armas de fuego (revólveres y pistolas, incluidos
los equipados con cartuchos de acción traumática)
del 9303 20 Armas de tiro deportivo con cañón de ánima lisa
del 9303 30 000 0 Rifles de tiro deportivo de cañón de ánima estriada
del 9303 20 100 0 Armas largas de caza de un solo cañón con ánima lisa
del 9303 20 950 0
del 9303 30 000 0 Armas de caza de dos cañones o combinadas
del 9303 20 950 0 Armas de caza con dos cañones de ánima lisa, incluidas las que tienen
cañones de varios calibres
del 9303 30 000 0
del 9303 20 950 0 Escopetas de caza de cañón de ánima estriada
del 9304 00 000 0 Armas de caza de aire comprimido, de avancarga, con una energía en la
boca del cañón no superior a 25 J
del 9304 00 000 0 Armas largas y rifles de aire comprimido, para tiro deportivo, con una
energía en la boca del cañón superior a 3 J
del 9304 00 000 0 Pistolas y revólveres de aire comprimido, para tiro deportivo, con una
energía en la boca del cañón superior a 3 J
del 9305 10 000 0 Partes principales (compuestas) de pistolas y revólveres de tiro deportivo
(cañón, cerrojo, tambor, armazón, cajón de mecanismos, gat illo y sus partes
y accesorios)
del 9305 10 000 0 Partes principales (compuestas) de pistolas y revólveres de servicio (cañón,
cerrojo, tambor, armazón, cajón de mecanismos, gatillo y sus partes y
accesorios)
del 9305 20 000 1 Cañones de ánima lisa de rifles y carabinas de caza y de tiro deportivo
del 9305 20 000 1 Cañones de ánima estriada de rifles y carabinas de caza y de tiro deportivo
del 9305 20 000 9 Otras partes principales (integrantes) de rifles de caza y tiro deportivo con
cañón de ánima li sa (cerrojo, tambor, armazón, cajón de mecanismos,
guardamano, mecanismos de gatillo y sus partes y accesorios) G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 36 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
del 9305 20.000 Partes principales (integrantes) de rifles de tiro deportivo y carabinas y rifles
de caza con cañón de ánima estriada (cañón, tambor, culata, cajón de
mecanismos, guardamano, mecanismos de gatillo y sus partes y accesorios)
del 9306 21 000 0 Cartuchos para armas de caza y de tiro deportivo con cañón de ánima lisa,
incluidos los de prueba de alta presión
del 9306 30 100 0 Cartuchos de pistolas y revólveres de tiro deportivo y de servicio que no
sean armas de fuego
del 9306 30 900 0 Cartuchos para armas de caza o de tiro deportivo, de cañón de ánima
estriada (excepto las pistolas y los revólveres), y de armas de gas para
autodefensa, incluidos los cartuchos de prueba de alta presión
del 9306 29 000 0 Cápsulas cilíndricas para armas de caza y tiro deportivo con cañón de ánima
lisa
del 9306 30 900 0 Cápsulas cilíndricas para armas de caza y de tiro deportivo, de cañón de
ánima estriada (excepto las pistolas y los revólveres)
del 9306 30 900 0 Cilindros encapsulados para armas de gas para autodefensa
del 9306 30 100 0 Cilindros encapsulados para pistolas y revólveres de servicio o de tiro
deportivo
del 3603 00 900 9 Cápsulas para cartuchos para armas de servicio y civiles
del 9307 00 000 0
del 8211 Armas blancas de caza (cuchillos y cuchillos de caza)
del 9307 00 000 0 Armas blancas deportivas
del 9307 00 000 0 Otras armas blancas (diseñadas para llevarse con uniformes de cosaco o
trajes nacionales de los pueblos de la Unión Económica Euroasiática, para
coleccionista)
Arcos y ballestas deportivos
del 9506 99 900 0 Arcos y ballestas deportivos
del 9304 00 000 0 Armas eléctricas (aparatos para provocar descargas eléctricas y
descargadores de chispas, con parámetros de salida compatibles con las
normas establecidas por la autoridad sanitaria autorizada del Estado
miembro de la Unión Económica Euroasiática)
del 9303 Arma s de calibre superior a los 6 mm que por su estructura estén diseñadas
exclusivamente para la emisión de señales luminosas, de humo y acústicas
del 93
del 9705 00 000 0
del 9706 00 000 0 Copias y réplicas de armas antiguas
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de productos controlados procedentes de todos los países.
4. El uso de licencias permite al Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de productos controlados que
se importan . El régimen no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o el volumen de las imp ortaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Acuerdo sobre el movimiento de armas de servicio o de uso civil entre los Estados
miembros de la Unión Económica Euroasiática, de 20 de mayo de 2016;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.22) ;
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 d e abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 37 -
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 602 del Ministro del Interior de la República de Kazajstán relativa a
la aprobación de normas para la venta de armas y munici ones de servicio y de
uso civil, de 1 de julio de 2019;
- Orden Nº 254 del Ministro del Interior de la República de Kazajstán relativa a
la aproba ción de normas para la prestación de servicios públicos en el ámbito
de la venta de armas y munici ones de servicio y de uso civil, sustancias
pirotécnicas de uso civil y productos en que se emplean, de 27 de marzo
de 2020;
- Orden Nº 67 del Ministro de Ec onomía Nacional de la República de Kazajstán relativa a
la aprobación de los requisitos de admisión para las actividades de importación y
exportación de mercancías sujetas a licencia, los documentos probatorios, los
formularios de solicitud de una licencia y (o) anexo a la licencia, el formulario de una
licencia y (o) anexos a la licencia, de 30 de enero de 2015.
No es posible anular el régimen sin la aprobación del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cua ntitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) No hay un plazo mínimo para las solicitudes de licencia . No se podrá formalizar la importación
de mercancías recibidas en las aduanas sin la debida licencia . El plazo máximo de tramitación
de las licencias es de 15 días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) El importador debe presentar su solicitud a un órgano administrativo : el Ministerio de Industria
y Desarr ollo de las Infraestructuras de la República de Kazajstán.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rigen la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber (conclusiones) : i) la presentación de información
incompleta o inexacta en los documentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la conclusión ;
ii) el incumplimiento de los requisitos establecidos en el apé ndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de
la UEEA ; y iii) la expiración o suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de
base a la expedición de la conclusión .
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicit ar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web :
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500011074#z7 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 38 -
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia del contrato de comercio exterior;
- una copia del certificado de registro del solicitante ante las autoridades
fiscales, certificada por el sello y la firma del solicitante;
- una copia del documento de registro ante la autoridad fiscal o una copia del documento
de registro estatal;
- una copi a de una licencia de compra de un arma y sus partes, expedida por el organismo
competente del Ministerio del Interior;
- una copia del certificado de conformidad;
- información sobre el modelo del arma y sus características;
- una copia del permiso (lic encia) expedido por un organismo del Ministerio del Interior
del país exportador;
- una copia de la licencia para efectuar el tipo de actividad objeto de la licencia;
- un documento que confirme el pago del derecho de licencia.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el índice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de licencias no está supeditad a al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan y no se pueden
prorrogar.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de los
productos que se van a importar.
11 DETERMINADOS TIPOS DE PRODUCTOS AGRÍCOLAS
Breve descripción del régimen
1. El régimen de licencias de importación se ap lica a determinados tipos de productos agrícolas de
conformidad con la Decisión Nº 102 del Colegio de la Unión Económica Euroasiática relativa G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 39 -
al establecimiento de contingentes arancelarios en 2021 para determinados tipos de
productos agrícolas importados en el territorio aduanero de la Unión Económica
Euroasiática, así como de los volúmenes de contingentes arancelarios para la importación
de estos productos en los territorios de los Estados miembros de la Unión Económica
Euroasiática, de 18 de agosto de 2020. (Lista común de mercancías sujetas a medidas no
arancelarias en el comercio con terceros países, aprobada por la Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la
Comisión Económica Euroasiática relativa a las medidas de reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de
abril de 2015, anexo 2.27).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen de licencias permite regular la importación de carne a tipos arancelarios nulos.
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s) arancelaria(s)
afectada(s), basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
0201 10 000 1
0201 20 200 1
0201 20 300 1
0201 20 500 1
0201 20 900 1
0201 30 000 4 Carne de animales de la especie bovina, fresca o
refrigerada
0202 10 000 1
0202 20 100 1
0202 20 300 1
0202 20 500 1
0202 20 900 1
0202 30 100 4
0202 30 500 4
0202 30 900 4 Carne de animales de la especie bovina, congelada
0203 11 100 1
0203 11 900 1
0203 12 110 1
0203 12 190 1
0203 12 900 1
0203 19 110 1
0203 19 130 1
0203 19 150 1
0203 19 550 1
0203 19 590 1
0203 19 900 1
0203 21 100 1
0203 21 900 1
0203 22 110 1
0203 22 190 1
0203 22 900 1
0203 29 110 1
0203 29 130 1
0203 29 150 1
0203 29 550 1
0203 29 550 2
0203 29 590 1
0203 29 900 1
0203 29 900 2 Carne de animales de la especie porcina, fresca, refrigerada
o congelada
Carne y despojos comestibles, de aves de la partida 01.05,
frescos, refrigerados o congelados
0207 14 200 1
0207 14 600 1 Medios o cuartos de pollos congelados y sin deshuesar, y
patas de pollo y sus trozos congelados y sin deshuesar
0207 13 100 1 Carne de pollo deshuesada casera, fresca o refrigerada
0207 14 100 1 Carne de pollo deshuesada casera, congelada
0207 27 100 1 Carne de pavo (gallipavo) deshuesada, congelada
0207 27 300 1
0207 27 400 1
0207 27 600 1
0207 27 700 1 Partes de canales de pavo (gallipavo) congeladas
0207 11 100 1, 0207 11 300 1, 0207 11 900 1
0207 12 100 1, 0207 12 900 1, 0207 13 200 1
0207 13 300 1, 0207 13 400 1, 0207 13 500 1
0207 13 600 1, 0207 13 700 1, 0207 13 910 1
0207 12 990 1, 0207 12 300 1, 0207 14 400 1 Carne y despojos comestibles, de aves de la partida 01.05,
frescos, refrigerados o congelados, no enumerados
anteriormente G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 40 -
Código(s) de la(s) línea(s) arancelaria(s)
afectada(s), basado(s) en el SA (2012) Designación detallada del producto
0207 14 500 1, 0207 14 700 1, 0207 14 910 1
0207 11 990 1, 0207 11 100 1, 0207 11 900 1
0207 25 100 1, 0207 25 900 1, 0207 26 200 1
0207 26 300 1, 0207 26 400 1, 0207 26 500 1
0207 26 600 1, 0207 26 700 1, 0207 26 800 1
0207 26 910 1, 0207 26 990 1, 0207 27 200 1
0207 27 500 1, 0207 27 800 1, 0207 27 910 1
0207 12 990 1, 0207 12 200 1, 0207 41 300 1
0207 12 800 1, 0207 12 300 1, 0207 42 800 1
0207 12 000 1, 0207 12 100 1, 0207 44 210 1
0207 44 310 1, 0207 44 410 1, 0207 44 510 1
0207 44 610 1, 0207 44 710 1, 0207 44 810 1
0207 44 910 1, 0207 44 990 1, 0207 45 100 1
0207 45 210 1, 0207 45 310 1, 0207 45 410 1
0207 45 510 1, 0207 45 610 1, 0207 45 710 1
0207 45 810 1, 0207 45 930 1, 0207 45 950 1
0207 12 990 1, 0207 12 100 1, 0207 51 900 1
0207 52 100 1, 0207 52 900 1, 0207 53 000 1
0207 54 100 1, 0207 54 210 1, 0207 54 310 1
0207 54 410 1, 0207 54 510 1, 0207 54 610 1
0207 54 710 1, 0207 54 810 1, 0207 54 910 1
0207 12 990 1, 0207 12 100 1, 0207 55 210 1
0207 55 310 1, 0207 55 410 1, 0207 55 510 1
0207 55 610 1, 0207 55 710 1, 0207 55 810 1
0207 55 930 1, 0207 55 950 1, 0207 55 990 1
0207 60 050 1, 0207 60 100 1, 0207 60 210 1
0207 60 310 1, 0207 60 410 1, 0207 60 510 1
0207 60 610 1, 0207 60 810 1, 0207 60 910 1
0207 60 990 1
0404 10 120 1
0404 10 160 1 Determinados tipos de lactosuero, aunque esté modificado,
en polvo, gránulos o demás especies sólidas, s in adición de
azúcar ni otro edulcorante
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de mercancías controladas procedentes de todos los
países.
4. El uso de licencias de importación permite al Gobierno supervisar las cantidades de mercancías
controladas que se importan.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 29 de mayo de 2014;
- Anexo 7 (Protocolo sobre medidas no arancelarias relativas a terceros países) del
Tratado de la UEEA;
- Decisión Nº 102 del Colegio de la Unión Económica Euroasiática relativa al
establecimiento de contingentes arancelarios en 2021 para determinados tipos
de productos agrícolas importados en el territorio aduanero de la Unión
Económica Euroasiática, así como de los volúmenes de contingentes
arancelarios para la importación de estos productos en los territorios de los
Estados miembros de l a Unión Económica Euroasiática, de 18 de agosto
de 2020 ;
- Ley Nº 544 -II de la República de Kazajstán sobre la Reglamentación de la Actividad
Comercial, de 12 de abril de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Resolución Nº 287 del Gobierno de la República de Kazajstán sobre la
aprobación de la lista de mercancías cuya importación (o) exportación se G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 41 -
realiza sobre la base de permisos, de conformidad con los tratados
internacionales y los p ermisos emitidos por los organismos estatales, de 24 de
abril de 2015 ;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios pú blicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 51 -HK del Ministro de Comercio e Integración de la República de Kazajstán
relativa a la aprobación de normas para la prestación de servicios gubernamentales en
el ámbito de las actividades comerciales, de 16 de m arzo de 2020.
No es posible suprimir el régimen sin obtener el acuerdo del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6.
I. La información pertinente sobre el reparto de los contingentes y sobre las formalidades para
la presentación de solicitudes de licencias puede obtenerse en las direcciones web
https://docs.eaeunion.org/Pages/DisplayDocument.aspx?s={e1f13d1d -5914-465c-835f-
2aa3762eddda}&w=9260b414 -defe-45cc-88a3-eb5c73238076&l={8a412e96 -924f-4b3c-
8321-0d5e767e5f91}&EntityID=27175 , http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V1500010181 y en
http://adilet.zan .kz/rus/docs/V2000020135#z73 , respectivamente.
II. El volumen del contingente se determina cada año . Las licencias se conceden anualmente . El
contingente de importación se fija con arreglo a la Decisión Nº 102 del Colegio de la Unión
Económica Euroasiátic a relativa al establecimiento de contingentes arancelarios
en 2021 para determinados tipos de productos agrícolas importados en el territorio
aduanero de la Unión Económica Euroasiática, así como de los volúmenes de
contingentes arancelarios para la import ación de estos productos en los territorios
de los Estados miembros de la Unión Económica Euroasiática, de 18 de agosto
de 2020 .
III. La lista de importadores que han obtenido licencias se publica en el sitio web oficial del
Ministerio de Comercio e Integ ración de la República de Kazajstán ( http://trade.gov.kz ).
IV. A partir de la fecha en que se anuncia la apertura de los contingentes, se concede un plazo
mínimo de 30 días para la presentación de solicitudes de licenc ias.
V. Las solicitudes de licencia se tramitan en un plazo de un día hábil.
VI. No procede.
VII. Las solicitudes de licencias son examinadas por un solo órgano administrativo : el Ministerio
de Comercio e Integración de la República de Kazajstán.
VIII. Las licencias se conceden, principalmente, teniendo en cuenta las importaciones realizadas en
períodos anteriores . Una parte del contingente se asigna a nuevos importadores . Las
solicitudes se examinan a medida que se reciben.
IX-X. No se exigen permisos de exportación expedidos por los países exportadores.
XI. No hay licencias que estén sujetas a la condición de que se exporten los productos y no se
vendan en el mercado interno.
7. No procede.
8. En la parte II del apéndice del anexo 7 "Normas que rig en la Expedición de Licencias y Permisos
de Exportación y (o) Importación de Mercancías" del Tratado de la UEEA se establecen los motivos G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 42 -
que justifican la denegación de licencias, a saber : i) la presentación de información incompleta o
inexacta en los doc umentos aportados por el solicitante para obtener la licencia ; ii) el incumplimiento
de los requisitos establecidos en el apéndice del anexo 7 del Tratado de la UEEA ; iii) la expiración o
suspensión de uno o varios de los documentos que han servido de base a la expedición de la licencia ;
iv) la posibilidad de que se produzca un incumplimiento de obligaciones internacionales de un Estado
miembro de la UEEA como resultado de la ejecución del contrato para el que se necesite la licencia ;
v) el agotamiento del contingente (en caso de registro de una licencia para mercancías sujetas a
contingente) ; y vi) en los casos establecidos por la Comisión.
El organismo autorizado debe justificar la decisión de denegar una licencia y comunicar por escrito
dicha decisión al solicitante.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Todas las personas, empresas e instituciones tienen derecho a solicitar una licencia.
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formulario s de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V2000020135#z73 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador
debe presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para
la expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del
portal web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kaz ajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- una copia digital del formulario de solicitud;
- una copia digital del contrato;
- una copia digital de la licencia para efectuar el tipo de actividad objeto de la licencia o
información sobre la existencia de dicha licencia si esta actividad está relacionada con
la venta de las mercancías con respecto a las cuales se ha establecido la licencia;
- información sobre los documentos de identidad, de registro ante la autoridad fiscal y de
registro estatal.
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud de licencia es 10 veces el ín dice de evaluación mensual.
13. La expedición de licencias no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Las licencias son válidas durante todo el período para el que se concedan y no se pueden
prorrogar.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización total o parcial de las licencias.
16. No está permitido transferir licencias entre importadores.
17. La expedición de licencias no está sujeta a condiciones.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están s ujetas a procedimientos administrativos previos distintos del
trámite de la licencia de importación. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 43 -
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas al pago de las
mercancías que se van a importar.
12 PRODUCTOS MÉDICOS
Breve desc ripción del régimen
1. Se expiden permisos para controlar la importación de determinados productos medicinales (lista
unificada de mercancías a las cuales se aplican las medidas no arancelarias en el comercio con
terceros países previstas en el régimen de la UEEA (Decisión Nº 30 de la Junta de la Comisión
Económica Euroasiática, de 21 de abril de 2015, modificada el 13 de diciembre de 2017, anexo 2.14).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen de permisos permite controlar la venta de determin ados productos médicos a efectos
de proteger la vida y la salud de las personas y los animales, y preservar los vegetales.
Designación detallada del producto Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012)
Compuestos químicos orgánicos utilizados como sustancias farmacéuticas del 2904
del 2905
del 2906
del 2907
del 2908
del 2909
del 2912
del 2913 00 000 0
del 2914
del 2915
del 2916
del 2917
del 2918
del 2919
del 2920
del 2921
del 2922
del 2923
del 2924
del 2925
del 2926
del 2927 00 000 0
del 2928 00
del 2929
del 2930
del 2931
del 2932
del 2933
del 2934
del 2935
del 2936
del 2937
del 2938
del 2939
del 2940 00 000 0
del 2941
del 2942 00 000 0
Glándulas y demás órganos para usos opoterápicos, desecados, incluso
pulverizados ; extractos de glándulas o de otros órganos o de sus secreciones
para usos opoterápicos ; heparina y sus sales ; las demás sustancias de
origen humano o animal preparadas para usos terapéuticos o profilácticos y
no expresadas n i comprendidas en otra parte del 3001
Sangre humana ; sangre animal preparada para usos terapéuticos,
profilácticos o de diagnóstico ; inmunosueros, demás fracciones de la sangre
y productos inmunológicos modificados, incluso obtenidos por proceso
biotecnológico ; vacunas, toxinas, cultivos de microorganismos (excepto las
levaduras) y productos similares, utilizados con fines medicinales del 3002
G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 44 -
Designación detallada del producto Código(s) de la(s) línea(s)
arancelaria(s) afectada(s),
basado(s) en el SA (2012)
Medicamentos (excepto los productos de las partidas 3002, 3005 o 3006)
constituidos por productos mezc lados entre sí, preparados para usos
terapéuticos o profilácticos, sin dosificar ni acondicionar para la venta al por
menor (distintos de los utilizados en veterinaria) del 3003
Medicamentos (excepto los productos de las partidas 3002, 3005 o 3006)
constituidos por productos mezclados o no entre sí preparados para usos
terapéuticos o profilácticos y acondicionados en su forma farmacéutica
(incluidos los medicamentos en forma de sistemas transdérmicos) o en
envases para su venta al por menor (distinto s de los utilizados con fines
veterinarios) del 3004
Medios de contraste para exploraciones radiológicas ; reactivos de
diagnóstico destinados a su administración a pacientes con fines médicos del 3006 30 000 0
Preparaciones químicas anticonceptivas a base de hormonas, otros
productos de la partida 2937 o espermicidas del 3006 60 000
Fármacos que contengan vitaminas y (o) sustancias minerales, utilizadas
con fines medicinales del 2106 90 920 0
del 2106 90 980 3
del 2106 90 980 9
Provitaminas y vitaminas, naturales o reproducidas por síntesis (incluidos los
concentrados naturales) y sus derivados utilizados principalmente como
vitaminas, mezclados o no entre sí o en disoluciones de cualquier clase,
utilizados con fines medicinales del 2936
Polímeros naturales (por ejemplo, ácido algínico) y polímeros naturales
modificados (por ejemplo : proteínas endurecidas, derivados químicos del
caucho natural) en formas primarias del 3913
3. El régimen se aplica a los importadores de mercancías controladas procedentes de todos los
países.
4. La aplicación del régimen de permisos permite que el Gobierno haga un seguimiento del volumen
de mercancías controladas que se importan . El régimen no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o
el cost o de las importaciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 19 de mayo de 2014;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.14);
- Código Nº 360 -VI de la República de Kazajstán sobre la salud de la población
y el sistema de atención sanitaria, de 7 de julio de 2020;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020 ;
- Orden Nº 668 del Ministro de Salud Pública y Desarrollo Social de la República de
Kazajstán sobre la aprobación de normas para la importación en el territorio de la
República de Kazajstán y la exportación desde dicho territorio de productos e
instrumental médicos y sobre el servicio gubernamental de expedición de aprobaciones
y (o) licencias (permisos) para la importación en el territorio de la República de
Kazajstán y la exportación desde dicho territorio de productos e instrumental médicos
registrados y n o registrados, de 17 de agosto de 2015;
- Orden Nº KR DSM -65/2020 del Ministro en funciones de Salud Pública de la
República de Kazajstán sobre ciertas cuestiones relativas a la prestación de G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 45 -
servicios públicos en el ámbito de la actividad farmacéutica, d e 15 de junio
de 2020 .
El régimen no puede derogarse sin el acuerdo del poder legislativo.
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) El plazo máximo para la expedición de una autorización (documento de autorización) es de
tres días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) El importador debe presentar su solicitud a un único organismo administrativo : el Ministerio
de Salud de la República de Kazajstán.
8. La expedición del permiso de importación puede denegarse si no se presenta la totalidad de los
documentos necesarios.
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Cualquier persona física o jurídica tiene derecho a solicitar una licencia (permiso).
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V2000021749 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador debe
presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para la
exped ición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del portal
web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://eg ov.kz/cms/en ), con la solicitud de licencia . La lista de documentos necesarios
para presentar la solicitud están disponibles en el siguiente enlace:
http://elicense.kz/Lice nsingContent/ServicesList?scode= por cientoD0 por cientoA0 por
cientoD0 por ciento9414&lang=en , con la selección de los criterios adecuados y los
subtipos de actividad.
- La importación de productos médicos no registrados se realiza sobre la base de un
permiso, para el cual es necesario presentar al organismo autorizado, a saber, el
Ministerio de Salud, los siguientes documentos:
- una copia electrónica de la solicitud;
- una copia del acuerdo (contrato).
- La importación de productos médicos registrados debe realizarse sobre la base de la
información sobre la inscripción de los productos médicos importados en el registro
único de la Unión Económica Euroasiática o el registro estatal de productos médicos de
la República de Kazajstán.
11. Al efectua r la importación, el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y un permiso (autorización) válido.
12. La expedición del permiso (autorización) es gratuita. G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 46 -
13. La expedición del permiso (autorización) no está supeditada al p ago de un depósito ni de un
adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Los permisos (autorizaciones) son válidos durante todo el período para el que se expidan.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización de los permisos (autorizaciones).
16. No está permitido t ransferir permisos (autorizaciones) entre importadores.
17. No hay ningún otro requisito para la expedición de los permisos (autorizaciones)
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a procedimientos administrativos previo s distintos de la
obtención de un permiso (autorización).
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas a los productos
importados.
13 ANIMALES SILVESTRES VIVOS Y PLANTAS SILVESTRES
Breve descripción del régimen
1. La lista de pro ductos a cuya importación o exportación se aplican prohibiciones y restricciones
con respecto al comercio con terceros países (Decisión Nº 30 de la Junta de la Comisión Económica
Euroasiática sobre medidas de reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015, modificada
por última vez el 13 de diciembre de 2017, anexo 2.7) regula el comercio internacional de especies,
la flora y fauna silvestres y las especies enumeradas en la Convención sobre el Comercio
Internacional de Especies Amenazadas de Fauna y Flora Silvestres (CITES).
Finalidades y alcance del trámite de licencias
2. El régimen de permisos permite controlar la importación de especies, la flora y fauna silvestres
y las especies enumeradas en la Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies
Amenazadas de Fauna y Flora Silvestres (CITES), de 3 de marzo de 1973. La lista completa de
especies puede consultarse en la direcc ión web:
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/trade/catr/nontariff/Pages/ediny_perechen_30.aspx .
3. La legislación se aplica a la importación de mer cancías procedentes de todos los países.
4. La aplicación del régimen de permisos permite que el Gobierno haga un seguimiento del volumen
de mercancías controladas que se importan . El régimen no tiene por finalidad limitar la cantidad o
el costo de las import aciones.
5. Los instrumentos legislativos que fundamentan el control de importación de las mercancías
especificadas en esta categoría son los siguientes:
- Tratado de la Unión Económica Euroasiática (UEEA), de 19 de mayo de 2014;
- Decisión Nº 30 del Colegio de la Comisión Económica Euroasiática sobre medidas de
reglamentación no arancelaria, de 21 de abril de 2015 (Sección 2.7) ;
- Ley Nº 593 de la República de Kazajstán de Protección, Reproducción y Utilización de la
Fauna, de 9 de julio de 2004;
- Ley Nº 202 -V de la República de Kazajstán, de Permisos y Notificaciones, de 16 de mayo
de 2014; G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 47 -
- Orden Nº 18 -03/143 del Ministro de Agricultura de la República de Kazajstán sobre
aprobación de las normas para la expedición por la autoridad admin istrativa de permisos
de importación en el territorio de la República de Kazajstán y exportación desde dicho
territorio de especies , flora y fauna silvestres y especies enumeradas en la Convención
sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas de F auna y Flora Silvestres,
de 27 de febrero de 2015;
- Orden Nº 138 del Ministro de Ecología, Geología y Recursos Naturales de la
República de Kazajstán sobre la aprobación de las normas para la expedición
por la autoridad administrativa de permisos de impo rtación en el territorio de
la República de Kazajstán, exportación y (o) reexportación desde dicho
territorio de especímenes de flora, sus partes y derivados, sujetos a la
Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas de Fauna
y Flora S ilvestres, de 10 de febrero de 2020;
- Orden Nº 39/NK del Minist ro en funciones de Desarrollo Digital, Innovación e
Industria Aeroespacial de la República de Kazajstán relativa a la aprobación
del registro de servicios públicos, de 31 de enero de 2020;
Procedimientos
6. No procede.
7. En los casos en que no se apliquen límites cuantitativos a la importación de un producto o en las
importaciones procedentes de un país determinado, el procedimiento es el siguiente:
a) El plazo máximo para la expedición de una a utorización (documento de autorización) es de
tres días hábiles.
b) No.
c) No.
d) El importador debe presentar su solicitud a un único organismo administrativo : el Ministerio
de Ecología, Geología y Recursos Naturales de la República de Kazajstán .
8. El examen de la solicitud puede denegarse por las razones siguientes:
- en los documentos presentados figuran datos falsos;
- el solicitante y (o) los materiales, objetos y datos no cumplen los requisitos normativos;
- el solicitante ya no está autorizado a llevar a cabo las actividades pertinentes o
determinado tipo de actividades que requieren la obtención de un permiso, debido a
órdenes judiciales que ya están en vigor;
- el solicitante está privado del derecho especial de realizar las actividades perti nentes o
determinado tipo de actividades que requieren la obtención de un permiso, debido a
órdenes judiciales que ya están en vigor;
Condiciones que deben reunir los importadores para solicitar una licencia
9. Cualquier persona física o jurídica tiene derech o a solicitar una licencia (permiso).
Documentos y otros requisitos necesarios para solicitar una licencia
10. Los formularios de solicitud están disponibles en la dirección web:
http://adilet.zan.kz/ru s/docs/V1500011935 . Junto con la solicitud de licencia, el importador debe
presentar al organismo autorizado, a través del portal web de la República de Kazajstán para la
expedición electrónica de licencias "E -license" ( http://elicense.kz/?lang=en ) o a través del portal G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/6
- 48 -
web de "gobierno electrónico" de la República de Kazajstán "e -gov"
(https://egov.kz/cms/en ), los siguientes documentos:
- la solicitud;
- una copia electrónica de la conclusión ;
- una copia electrónica del documento que confirme el pago de la tasa estatal al
presupuesto, salvo pago efectuado a través del portal del "gobierno
electrónico";
- cuando se importen muestras en el territorio de la Repúblic a de Kazajstán, una
copia electrónica de un permiso de exportación o un certificado de
reexportación en caso de que el modelo se incluya en los anexos 1, 2, y 3 de la
Convención sobre el Comercio Internacional de Especies Amenazadas de Fauna
y Flora Silves tres;
- el contrato o el acuerdo entre el exportador y el importador, que confirme la
intención sobre la comisión de esta exportación , excepto para personas que
realicen exportaciones por razones personales;
- una copia electrónica del permiso de caza (s olo para personas jurídicas y
empresarios individuales).
11. Al efectuar la importación , el importador debe presentar la documentación ordinaria para el
despacho de aduanas y una licencia válida.
12. La tasa de solicitud del permiso es dos veces el índice de evalu ación mensual.
13. La expedición de permisos no está supeditada al pago de ningún depósito ni adelanto.
Condiciones de las licencias
14. Los permisos son válidos durante todo el período para el que se expidan.
15. No se imponen sanciones por la no utilización de los permisos.
16. No está permitido transferir permisos (autorizaciones) entre importadores.
17. No hay ningún otro requisito para la expedición de los permisos.
Otros requisitos en materia de procedimiento
18. Las importaciones no están sujetas a proce dimientos administrativos previos distintos de la
obtención de un permiso.
19. Las autoridades bancarias proporcionan automáticamente las divisas destinadas a los productos
importados.
__________
| 22,577
| 141,390
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN19_KOR830.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN19_KOR830
|
G/TBT/N/KOR/830
9 May 2019
(19-3180) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
The following notification is being circulated in accordance with Article 10.6
1. Notifying Member: REPUBLIC OF KOREA
If applicable, name of local government involved (Article 3.2 and 7.2):
2. Agency responsible: Ministry of Food and Drug Safety
Name and address (including telephone and fax numbers , email and website
addresses, if available) of agency or authority designated to handle comments
regarding the notification shall be indicated if different from above:
Documents are available from the Ministry of Food and Drug safety(MFDS) website
(www.mf ds.go.kr). Also available from:
International Cooperation Office
Ministry of Food and Drug Safety
187 Osongsaengmyeong2 -ro, Osong -eup, Heungdeok -gu, Cheongju -si,
Chungcheongbuk -do, 28159
Republic of Korea
Tel: (+82) 43 719 -1564
Fax: (+82) 43 -719-1550
Email: wtokfda@korea.kr
3. Notified under Article 2.9.2 [ ], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ], other :
4. Products covered (HS or CCCN where applicable, otherwise national tariff
heading. ICS numbers may be provided in addition, where applicable): Medical
Devices
5. Title, number of pages and language(s) of the notified document: Establishment
of "Regulation on Integrated Management of Medical Device Information" (7 page(s), in
Korean)
6. Description of content: A list of required information and guidance for manufacturers
or importers on how to insert data into the database "Integrated Medical Device
Information System (IMDIS)"
7. Objective and rationale, including the nature of urgent problems where
applicable: Protection of Human health or Safety (Improving public health by reinforcing
safety management for invasive medical devices.)
8. Relevant documents:
• MFDS NOTIFICATION No. 2019 -163 (29 March 2018)
9. Proposed date of adoption: To be determined
Proposed date of entry into force: To be determined G/TBT/N/KOR/830
- 2 -
10. Final date for comments: 60 days from notification
11. Texts available from: National enquiry point [X] or address, telephone and fax
numbers and email and website addresses, if available , of other body:
Technical Barriers to Trade(TBT) Division
Korean Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS)
93, Isu -ro, Maengdong -myeon, Eumseong -gun, Chungcheongbuk -do, 27737 Republic of
Korea
Tel.: (+82) 43 870 5525 Fax: (+82) 43 870 5682
E-mail: tbt@kats.go.kr
website: http://www.knowtbt.kr
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2019/TBT/KOR/ 19_2747_00_x.pdf
| 369
| 2,672
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_SPS_NCOL253A5.pdf
|
s_G_SPS_NCOL253A5
|
G/SPS/N/COL/253/Add.5
14 de diciembre de 2020
(20-8982) Página: 1/2
Comité de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias Original: español
NOTIFICACIÓN
Addendum
La siguiente comunicación, recibida el 11 de diciembre de 2020, se distribuye a petición de la
delegación de Colombia .
_______________
Resolución N° 079193 de 2020
La medida modifica el numeral 1 y 2 del Anexo Lista de Plagas Reglamentadas de la Resolución
ICA 3593 de 2015, en cuanto a las disposiciones sobre " Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense raza 4
tropical".
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2020/SPS/COL/20_7607_00_s.pdf
Este addendum se refiere a:
[ ] la modificación de la fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones
[ ] la notificación de la adopción, publicación o entrada en vigor del reglamen to
[ ] la modificación del contenido y/o ámbito de aplicación de un proyecto de reglamento
previamente notificado
[ ] el retiro del reglamento propuesto
[ ] la modificación de la fecha propuesta de adopción, publicación o entrada en vigor
[X] otro aspecto: Modificación del numeral 1 y 2 del Anexo Lista de Plagas Reglamentadas
de la Resolución ICA 3593 de 2015 "Por medio del cual se crea el mecanismo para
establecer, mantener, actualizar y divulgar el listado de plagas reglamentarias de
Colombia ", notificada el 19 de noviembre de 2015 bajo signatura
G/SPS/N/COL/253/Add.1.
Plazo para la presentación de observaciones: (Si el addendum amplía el ámbito de
aplicación de la medida anteriormente notificada en cuanto a los productos abarcados y/o
los Miembros a los que puede afectar, deberá preverse un nuevo plazo para recibir
observaciones, normalmente de 60 días naturales como mínimo. En otros casos, como el
aplazamiento de la fecha límite anunciada inicialmente para la presentación de
observaciones, el plazo previsto en el addendum podrá variar.)
[ ] Sesenta días a partir de la fecha de distribución del addendum a la notificación y/o
(día/mes/año) : No se aplica.
Organismo o autoridad encargado de tramitar las observaciones: [X] Organismo nacional
encargado de la notificación, [ ] Servicio nacional de información. Dirección, número de fax
y dirección de correo electrónico ( en su caso ) de otra institución:
Minist erio de Comercio, Industria y Turismo
Dirección de Regulación
Calle 28 No. 13A - 15, tercer piso
Bogotá, D.C. Colombia G/SPS/N/COL/253/Add.5
- 2 -
Tel: +(571) 6067 676 Ext. 1340
Correo electrónico: puntocontacto@mincit.gov.co
Sitio Web: http://www.mincit.gov.co
Instituto Colombiano Agropecuario - ICA
Subgerencia de Regulación Sanitaria y Fitosanitaria
Dirección Técnica de Asuntos Internacionales
Avenida Calle 26 No. 85B -09
Bogotá - Colombia
Tel: +(571) 332 3700
+(571) 288 48 00 Ext. 1510 - 1515
Correos electrónicos: asuntos.internacionales@ica.gov.co
margarita. lubo@ica.gov.co
Sitio Web: http://www.ica.gov.co
Texto (s) disponible (s) en: [X] Organismo nacional encargado de la notificación,
[ ] Servicio nacional de información. Dirección, número de fax y dirección de c orreo
electrónico ( en su caso ) de otra institución:
Ministerio de Comercio, Industria y Turismo
Dirección de Regulación
Calle 28 No. 13A - 15, tercer piso
Bogotá, D.C. Colombia
Tel: +(571) 6067 676 Ext. 1340
Correo electrónico: puntocontacto@mincit.gov.co
Sitio Web: http://www.mincit.gov.co
__________
| 491
| 3,439
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN23_SAU1286.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN23_SAU1286
|
G/TBT/N/SAU/1286
13 de abril de 2023
(23-2654) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Se da traslado de la notificación siguiente de conformidad con el artículo 10.6.
1. Miembro que notifica : REINO DE LA ARABIA SAUDITA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate (artículos 3.2 y 7.2):
2. Organismo responsable:
Saudi Standards, Metrology and Quality Organization (SASO) (Organización de
Normalización, Metrología y Calidad de la Arabia Saudita)
Nombre y dirección (incluidos los números de teléfono y de fax, así como las
direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso) del organismo o
autoridad encargado de la tramitación de observaciones sobre la notificación,
en caso de que se trate de un organismo o autoridad diferente:
Saudi Standards, Metrology and Quality Organization (Organiza ción de Normalización,
Metrología y Calidad de la Arabia Saudita)
P. O. B OX: 3437 Riad 11471
Teléfono : +966(11)252 ; ext: (9060-9081-9072) ; fax: +966(11)4520193
Correo electrónico: enquirypoint@saso.gov.sa
3. Notificación hecha en virtud del artículo 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ],
3.2 [ ], 7.2 [ ], o en virtud de:
4. Productos abarcados (partida del SA o de la NCCA cuando corresponda ; en otro
caso partida del arancel nacional . Podrá indicarse además, cuando proceda, el
número de partida de la ICS) : 3920, 3923, 4415, 4416, 4503, 4602, 4805, 4810,
4817, 4819, 4820, 4823, 5901, 6305, 5909, 7010, 7013, 7020, 7310.
5. Título, número de páginas e idioma(s) del documento notificado : Technical
Regulation for Packaging (Reglamento Técnico para el Envasado) . Documento en árabe
(18 páginas).
6. Descripción del contenido : El cont enido del Reglamento notificado es el siguiente:
terminología y definiciones, ámbito de aplicación, objetivos, obligaciones de los
proveedores, etiquetado, procedimientos de evaluación de la conformidad,
responsabilidades de las autoridades encargadas de l a reglamentación, responsabilidades
de las autoridades encargadas de la vigilancia de los mercados, infracciones y sanciones,
disposiciones generales, disposiciones transitorias, publicación de apéndices (listas de
normas, códigos del SA, listas, sistema d e identificación de los materiales de envasado,
formularios de evaluación de la conformidad (declaración de conformidad del proveedor)).
7. Objetivo y razón de ser, incluida, cuando proceda, la naturaleza de los
problemas urgentes : protección de la salud o seguridad humanas ; protección del medio
ambiente. G/TBT/N/SAU/1286
- 2 -
8. Documentos pertinentes:
Lista de normas relacionadas del anexo (1 -a), página 11.
9. Fecha propuesta de adopción : por determinar
Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : seis meses después de la fecha de publicación
en el Diario Oficial
10. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : 60 días después de la fecha de
notificación
11. Textos disponibles en : Servicio nacional de información [ ], o dirección, números
de teléfono y de fax y dir ecciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso,
de otra institución:
P.O. Box 3437
Riad
Teléfono : +966(11)252 ; ext: (9065-9081-9072)
Fax: +966 (1) 4530035
Correo electrónico: ENQUIRYPOINT@saso.gov.sa
Sitio web: http://www.saso.gov.sa
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/TBT/SAU/23_8947_00_x.pdf
| 500
| 3,436
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_WT_DS_471-17A57.pdf
|
s_WT_DS_471-17A57
|
WT/DS471/17/Add.57
16 de octubre de 2023
(23-6934) Página: 1/1
Original: inglés
ESTADOS UNIDOS - DETERMINADOS MÉTODOS Y SU APLICACIÓN
A PROCEDIMIENTOS ANTIDUMPING QUE ATAÑEN A CHINA
INFORME DE SITUACIÓN RELATIVO A LA APLICACIÓN DE LAS RECOMENDACIONES
Y RESOLUCIONES DEL OSD PRESENTADO POR LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS
Addendum
La siguiente comunicación, de fecha 13 de octubre de 2023, dirigida por la delegación de los
Estados Unidos al Presidente del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias, se distribuye de conformidad
con el artículo 21.6 del ESD.
_______________
Los Esta dos Unidos presentan este informe de conformidad con el artículo 21.6 del Entendimiento
relativo a las normas y procedimientos por los que se rige la solución de diferencias ("ESD").
El 22 de mayo de 2017, el Órgano de Solución de Diferencias ("OSD ") adoptó sus recomendaciones
con respecto a la diferencia Estados Unidos - Determinados métodos y su aplicación a procedimientos
antidumping que atañen a China (WT/DS471) . En la siguiente reunión del OSD, celebrada el 19 de
junio de 2017, los Estados Unid os informaron al OSD de su propósito de aplicar las recomendaciones
de ese Órgano relativas a dicho asunto . China solicitó que el plazo prudencial para que los
Estados Unidos aplicaran las recomendaciones del OSD se determinara mediante arbitraje, de
conformidad con el artículo 21.3 c) del ESD . El Árbitro determinó que el plazo prudencial era
de 15 meses, y expiraría el 22 de agosto de 2018.
Los Estados Unidos siguen manteniendo consultas con las partes interesadas sobre las opciones para
abordar las recom endaciones del OSD.
__________
| 258
| 1,685
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_WT_GC_245.pdf
|
q_WT_GC_245
|
WT/GC/245
16 March 2022
(22-2317) Page: 1/2
General Council Original: English
COMMUNICATION FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
The following communication, dated 15 March 2022, is being circulated at the request of the
delegation of the Russian Federation.
_______________
The Russian Federation would like to draw the attention of WTO Members to dangers looming over
the multilateral trading system because of the recent aggressive and politically motivated trade
restrictive actions of certain Members.
Instead of encouraging gradual normalizing of international trade, wh ich is essential for post -
pandemic economic recovery, those Members have been progressively applying unilateral trade
measures aimed at undermining the economies of Russia and its neighbors. Recently, the scale of
reckless "economic war " launched by these Members has increased to the breaking point leading to
collateral damage across the globe.
Direct violations of the basic WTO rules by these Members have put severe pressure on global supply
chains, which are still fragile after the pandemic, and jeopardi zing the global food security. We are
witnessing the immediate consequences of trade and economic restrictions – spiking prices for basic
energy resources, minerals, and foodstuff. Unfortunately, as the IMF warned, the most vulnerable
households and busine sses across the globe will bear the main burden of such inflationary effects.
These ramifications could have been avoided if the mentioned countries had not breached the basic
WTO rules. In particular, the following measures are clearly inconsistent with the relevant provisions
of the GATT and GATS:
• implementation of import tariffs above MFN rates;
• import ban on Russian oil and oil refining products, as well as intentions to curb imports
of other energy resources, such as natural gas and coal;
• restrictions on export to Russia of various goods, including oil refining equipment and
technologies, foodstuff and industrial consumer goods;
• blocking of Russian financial institutions, including freezing substantial part of its currency
reserves, and tra nsportation services companies;
• prohibition of new investment in the Russian Federation, including in the energy sector in
the Russian Federation;
• extreme export controls or total prohibition of trade in other goods and technologies critical
for economic d evelopment.
We are deeply disturbed by the relevant developments in the WTO, which pave the way to a complete
dismantling of the rules -based multilateral trading system.
First, there are voices proposing to "expel " Russia from the WTO or to suspend its me mbership 's
rights against the rules of the WTO which do not provide for such actions.
WT/GC/245
- 2 -
Second, unilateral unjustified withdrawal of MFN treatment for Russian goods and services or even
public discussion about revocation of this treatment severely defies th e fundamental WTO principle
of non -discrimination. The actions of Canada and some other countries have already resulted in their
de facto abandonment of WTO legal system due to purely political concerns. Eventually, all Members
will be affected if we get i nto a vicious circle of introducing mutual retaliatory measures, thereby
making the application of WTO agreements largely sporadic and, therefore, deficient.
Third, attempts to isolate Russia from the negotiating and regular WTO activities would lead to
paralysis of the basic functions of the WTO, namely providing the forum for trade negotiations and
administering trade agreements. Such attempt to block the negotiation process for political reasons
looks more like an excuse to hide their inability or unwil lingness to seek compromises on substantive
issues on the negotiating table.
And, fourth, the recent statements by representatives of some Members demonstrate clear intention
to introduce the issue of territoriality into the framework of the WTO. This tre nd is quite disturbing.
Since its creation in 1947, the GATT/WTO system has been successfully avoiding any links of that
issue with trade, notwithstanding the existence of a number of territorial conflicts and disputes
across the globe, including among Mem bers. However, now some Members have radically changed
their stance, thus creating another systemic risk for the organization.
We should remember that the WTO, as the centerpiece of the multilateral trading system, was
created to raise standards of living and stimulate economic development. The WTO has proved to
be an organization that is primarily guided by economic considerations and solid legal standards.
Regrettably, an ever -increasing pressure for its politization has already brought numerous
ineffici encies and now threatens the existence and effectiveness of the organization and the
multilateral trading system.
The Russian Federation is convinced that the only way of dealing with the current crisis is to talk
economics, not politics, and prevent the violations of multilaterally agreed trade rules through
unilateral means. Otherwise, world markets and economies of many Members will continue to suffer.
__________
| 775
| 5,254
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/301870_2023_TBT_TZA_23_14376_00_e.pdf
|
301870_2023_TBT_TZA_23_14376_00_e
|
DEAS 910: 2023
ICS 65.080
© EAC 2023 Second Edition 2023
DRAFT EAST AFRICAN STANDARD
Fertilizers — Urea — Specification
EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY DEAS 910: 2023
ii © EAC 2023 – All rights reserved
Copyright notice
This EAC document is copyright -protected by EAC. While the reproduction of this document by
participants in the EAC standards development process is per mitted without prior permission from EAC,
neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form for
any other purpose without prior written permission from EAC.
Requests for permission to reproduce this document for the purpose of selling it should be addressed
as shown below or to EAC’s member body in the country of the requester:
© East African Community 2019 — All rights reserved
East African Community
P.O. Box 1096 ,
Arusha
Tanzania
Tel: + 255 27 2 162100
Fax: + 255 27 2162190
E-mail: eac@eachq.org
Web: www.eac -quality.net
Reproduction for sales purposes may be subject to royalty payments or a licensing agreement.
Violators may be prosecuted . DEAS 910: 2023
© EAC 2023 – All rights reserved iii
Foreword
Development of the East African Standards has been ne cessitated by the need for harmonizing requirements
governing quality of products and services in the East African Community. It is envisaged that through
harmonized standardization, trade barriers that are encountered when goods and services are exchanged
within the Community will be removed.
The Community has established an East African Standards Committee (EASC) mandated to develop and
issue East African Standards (EAS) . The Committee is composed of representatives of the National
Standards Bodies in Pa rtner States, together with the representatives from the public and private sector
organizations in the community .
East African Standards are developed through Technical Committees that are representative of key
stakeholders including government, academia , consumer groups, private sector and other interested parties.
Draft East African Standards are circulated to stakeholders through the National Standards Bodies in the
Partner States. The comments received are discussed and incorporated before finalizatio n of standards, in
accordance with the Principles and procedures for develop ment of East African Standards .
East African Standards are subject to review, to keep pace with technological advances. Users of the East
African Standards are therefore expected t o ensure that they always have the latest versions of the standards
they are implementing .
The committee responsible for this document is Technical Committee EASC /TC 020, Agriculture and
agrochemicals .
DRAFT EAST AFRICAN STANDARD DEAS 910: 2023
© EAC 2023 – All rights reserved 1
Fertilizers — Urea — Specification
1 Scope
This Draft East African Standard specifies the requirements, sampling and test metho ds for urea fertilizer. This
standard does not cover specifications for coated urea.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
AOAC 960.04, Biuret in f ertilizers — Spectrophotometric method
AOAC 965.08, Water (free) in fertilizers — Vacuum -desiccatio n
AOAC 2006.03, Arsenic, Cadmium, Cobalt, Chromium, Lead, Molybdenum, Nickel and Selenium in fertilizers
ISO 5315 , Fertilizers — Determination of Total Nitr ogen Content — Titrimetric method after distillation
ISO 8157 , Fertilizers , soil conditioners and beneficial substances — Vocabulary
ISO 8397 , Solid Fertilizers and soil conditioners — Test sieving
ISO 17318 , Fertilizers and soil conditioners — Determinat ion of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead and
mercury contents
ISO 18643, Fertilizers and soil conditioners — Determination of biuret content of urea -based fertilizers —
HPLC method
ISO 14820 -1, Fertilizers and liming materials - Sampling and sample preparat ion - Part 1: Sampling
ISO 148 20-2, Fertilizers and liming materials - Sampling and sample preparation - Part 2: Sample preparation
ISO 7409, Fertilizers -Marking - Presentation and declarations
3 Terms and definitions
For the purpose s of this document , the terms and definitions given in ISO 8157 apply .
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at http://www.iso.org/obp
2 © EAC 2023 – All rights reserved
4 Requirements
4.1 General requirements
4.1.1 Urea fertilizer shall be in the form of a free -flowing granules or prills, free from foreign matter and
impurities. The colour of the fertilizer shall be uniform.
4.1.2 When tested using ISO 8397, not less than 90 % by weight of the material shall be of particles in the
size range of 1 mm to 4 mm for prills and 2 mm to 4 mm for granules.
4.2 Specific requirements
Urea fertilizer shall comply with the specific requirements specified in Table 1 when tested i n accordance with
the test methods prescribed therein.
Table 1 — Specific requirements for urea fertilizer
S/N Characteristic Requirement Test method
i. Total nitrogen, % by mass, min. 46 ISO 5315
ii. Biuret, % by mass, max. 1.5 ISO 18643
AOAC 960.04
iii. Moisture, % by mass, max. 1.0 AOAC 965.08
5 Contaminants
Heavy metal contaminants in urea fertilizer shall conform to the limits given in Table 2 when tested in
accordance with the test methods prescribed therein.
Table 2 — Requirements for heavy metal cont aminants in urea fertilizer
S/N Heavy metal Requirement
mg/kg, max. Test method
i. Arsenic (As) 20
ISO 17318 ii. Cadmium (Cd) 7
iii. Mercury (Hg) 0.1
iv. Lead (Pb) 30
v. Chromium (Cr) 500
vi. Selenium (Se) 1.0 AOAC 2006.03
7 Packaging
Urea fertilizer shall be packaged in materials that are clean and non -defective that protect the product from
physical, chemical and moisture contamination and withstand multiple stages of handlin g (transportation and
storage ).
© EAC 2023 – All rights reserved 3
8 Labelling
Each package shall be legibly and indelibly labeled in accordance with ISO 7409 in English and/or any other
official language in the destination country with the following information :
a) name of the fertilizer; “Urea Fertilizer ”
b) brand name if any ;
c) name and address of the manufacturer /importer ;
d) nutrient content;
e) net content by mass in metric units ;
f) handling instructions – including the words “Use No hooks”;
g) production date
h) expiry date;
i) country of origin ;
j) batch number ; and
k) storage conditions .
9 Sampling
Sampling and sample preparation of urea fertilizers shall be carried out as prescribed in ISO 14820 -1 and ISO
14820-2 respectively .
. DEAS 910: 2023
© EAC 2023 – All rights reserved
| 1,105
| 7,316
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_SPS_NBRA1865A1.pdf
|
r_G_SPS_NBRA1865A1
|
G/SPS/N/BRA/1865/Add.1
17 mars 2021
(21-2223) Page: 1/2
Comité des mesures sanitaires et phytosanitaires Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
La communication ci -après, reçue le 1 6 mars 2021, est distribuée à la demande de la délégation du
Brésil .
_______________
Resolution - RE number 958, 4 March 2021 (Décision RE n° 958 du 4 mars 2021)
Le projet de Décision n° 976, du 1 5 décembre 2020, précédemment notifié au moyen du
document G/SPS/N/BRA/1865, a été adopté en tant que Décision RE n° 958 du 4 mars 2021.
Le texte complet, disponible en portugais uniquement, peut être téléchargé à l'adresse s uivante:
https://pesquisa.in.gov.br/imprensa/jsp/visualiza/index.jsp?data=08/03/2021&jornal=515&pagi
na=140 .
Le présent addendum c oncerne:
[ ] Une modification de la date limite pour la présentation des observations
[X] La notification de l'adoption, de la publication ou de l'entrée en vigueur d'une
réglementation
[ ] Une modification du contenu et/ou du champ d'application d'un p rojet de
réglementation déjà notifié
[ ] Le retrait d'une réglementation projetée
[ ] Une modification de la date proposée pour l'adoption, la publication ou l'entrée en
vigueur
[ ] Autres:
Délai prévu pour la présentation des observations : (Si l'addendum élargit le champ
d'application de la mesure déjà notifiée, qu'il s'agisse des produits visés ou des
Membres concernés, un nouveau délai pour la présentation des observations,
normalement de 60 jours civils au moins, devrait être prévu . Dans d'au tres
circonstances, comme le report de la date limite initialement annoncée pour la
présentation des observations, le délai pour la présentation des observations prévu
dans l'addendum peut être différent.)
[ ] Soixante jours à compter de la date de distri bution de l'addendum à la notification
et/ou (jj/mm/aa) : sans objet G/SPS/N/BRA/1865/Add.1
- 2 -
Organisme ou autorité désigné pour traiter les observations : [ ] autorité nationale
responsable des notifications, [X] point d'information national . Adresse, numéro de fax
et adresse élec tronique (s'il y a lieu) d'un autre organisme:
Assessoria de Assuntos Internacionais - AINTE
(Bureau des affaires internationales)
Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária - Anvisa
(Agence brésilienne de réglementation sanitaire)
Téléphone : +(55 61) 3462 5402/5404/5406
Courrier électronique : rel@anvisa.gov.br
Texte(s) disponible(s) auprès de : [ ] autorité nationale responsable des notifications,
[X] point d'information national . Adresse, numéro de fax et adresse électronique (s'il y
a lieu) d'un autr e organisme:
Assessoria de Assuntos Internacionais - AINTE
(Bureau des affaires internationales)
Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária - Anvisa
(Agence brésilienne de réglementation sanitaire)
Téléphone : +(55 61) 3462 5402/5404/5406
Courrier électronique : rel@anvisa.gov.br
__________
| 417
| 2,961
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN23_URY73.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN23_URY73
|
G/TBT/N/URY/73
28 février 2023
(23-1369) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: espagnol
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : URUGUAY
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable:
Asesoría de Política Comercial (Unité consultative de politique commerciale)
Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas (Ministère de l'économie et des finances)
Paraguay 1401 - 2º Piso
Téléphone : +598 1712 int. 4315 et 4319
Courrier électronique: apc.otc@mef.gub.uy
Montevideo
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'autorité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqu és si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organisme susmentionné:
Dirección Nacional de Industrias
Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Minería
Mercedes 1041 - 1º Piso
Téléphone : +598 2840 1234 int. 2166
Courrier électronique: comentariosimpoalimentosybebidas@miem.gub.uy
Montevideo
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [ ], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ],
7.2 [ ], autres:
4. Produits visés (le c as échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être indiqués, le cas
échéant) : Pour plus de précisions, voir l'Annexe 1 - Liste des aliments/boissons importés
nécessitant le certifica t de commercialisation
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : Proyecto de Decreto por el
cual se modifica el Decreto Nº 338/982 de 22 de setiembre de 1982, por el cual se aplican
los controles de evaluación de la conformidad de los al imentos y bebidas importadas,
previas a su liberación al mercado interno (Projet de décret portant modification du Décret
n° 338/982 du 2 2 septembre 1 982 qui met en œuvre les contrôles ayant pour objet
d'évaluer la conformité des produits alimentaires et des boissons importés avant leur
distribution sur le marché intérieur) ; 17 pages, en espagnol G/TBT/N/URY/73
- 2 -
6. Teneur : La procédure d'obtention du certificat de commercialisation prévue par le Décret
n° 338/982 du 2 2 septembre 1 982 est mise à jour, compte tenu de la dynamique du
commerce international actuel et de l'innocuité et de l'égalité des conditions de
commercialisation des produits alimentaires dans le pays . Les mécanismes d'application
des contrôles des produits alimentaires et des boissons importés visés par le Décret n°
338/982, ses modifications et dispositions connexes, sont mis à jour afin de créer un
système conforme à la facilitation des échanges qui garantisse la complémentarité et la
rapidité entre les différents acteurs publics et p rivés, compte tenu de la dynamique du
marché, des besoins des utilisateurs et des nouveaux mécanismes de maîtrise et de
gestion des risques . Enfin, le champ d'application objectif du Décret n° 338/982 du 2 2
septembre 1 982 est adapté en intégrant de nouveau x produits conformément aux critères
et objectifs initialement prévus par la norme susmentionnée.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Protection de la santé ou de la sécurité des personnes
8. Documents pertinents:
-
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : à déterminer
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : à déterminer
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 60 jours à compter de la date de
notification
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [ ] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
Le texteintégral du projet de décret notifié est annexé à la présente notification.
https://www .gub.uy/ministerio -industria -energia -
mineria/comunicacion/noticias/consulta -publica -proyecto -decreto -modificativo -del-
regimen -importacion
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/TBT/URY/23_1378_00_s.pdf
| 633
| 4,235
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_ADP_N374.pdf
|
s_G_ADP_N374
|
G/ADP/N/374
7 de septiembre de 2022
(22-6664) Página: 1/5
Comité de Prácticas Antidumping
PRESENTACIÓN DE LOS INFORMES PREVISTOS
EN EL ARTÍCULO 16.4 DEL ACUERDO
Agosto de 2022
NOTA DE LA SECRETARÍA
En agosto de 2022 se recibieron de la Argentina ; Armenia ; Australia ; el Canadá ; Corea,
República de; los Estados Unidos ; la Federación de Rusia ; la India; México ; el Pakistán ; Sudáfrica ;
la Unión Europea ; y Viet Nam los informes que se indican a continuación sobre medidas antidumping
preliminares y definitivas, presentados de conformidad con el artículo 16.4 del Acuerdo de la
Ronda Uruguay.1 Los representantes de los Gobiernos pueden consultar estos informes en la
Secretaría de la OMC, que también puede facilitarlos en versión electrónica.2
Producto País o territorio
aduanero
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: ARGENTINA
Hojas de sierra manuales rectas de acero rápido China
Aspiradoras, con motor eléctrico incorporado, de potencia inferior
o igual a 2.500 W y de capacidad del depósito o bolsa para el
polvo inferior o igual a 35 l, excepto aquellas capaces de funcionar
sin fuente externa de energ ía y las diseñadas para conectarse al
sistema eléctrico de vehículos automóviles
China
Evaporadores y condensadores de los tipos utilizados en aparatos
para acondicionamiento de aire, en vehículos automóviles
China
Radiadores para vehículos automóviles y tractores China
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: ARMENIA
Neumáticos (llantas neumáticas) para vehículos comerciales China
Melamina China
1 Todas las notificaciones deben enviarse al Registro Central de Notificaciones (crn@wto.org ), en
formato PDF o Word únicamente.
2 Se ruega a las delegaciones interesadas que se pongan en contacto con la Sra. Nélida Varela,
despacho 2174, teléfono: 022 739 5833. El presente documento ha sido elaborado bajo la responsabilidad de
la Secretaría y se entiende sin perjuicio de las posiciones de los
Miembros ni de sus derechos y obligaciones en el marco de la OMC. G/ADP/N/374
- 2 -
Producto País o territorio
aduanero
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: AUSTRALIA
Papel de formato A4 para copiadora Indonesia
Extrusiones de aluminio China
Perfiles huecos para la construcción China
Corea, República de
Malasia
Taipei Chino
Acero para tubos de precisión China
Corea, República de
Barras de refuerzo de acero Corea, República de
Acero cincado (galvanizado) India
Malasia
Viet Nam
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: CANADÁ
Colchones China
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: COREA, REPÚBLICA DE
Éter butílico de glicol Estados Unidos
Francia
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: ESTADOS UNIDOS
Caucho acrilonitrilo -butadieno Corea, República de
Francia
México
Lápices en estuche China
Isocianuratos clorados China
Tubos de acero al carbono soldados, de sección circular Emiratos Árabes Unidos
Tubos de acero sin alear soldados, de sección circular Corea, República de
Ácido cítrico y determinadas sales de citrato Bélgica
Colombia
Tailandia
Tubos para uso mecánico estirados en frío de acero al carbono
y de acero aleado
India
Italia
Productos de acero resistentes a la corrosión China
Corea, República de
Taipei Chino
Células fotovoltaicas de silicio cristalino, incluso ensambladas
en módulos China G/ADP/N/374
- 3 -
Producto País o territorio
aduanero
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: ESTADOS UNIDOS (Cont.)
Planchas de acero al carbono cortadas a medida Corea, República de
Emulsión de caucho estireno -butadieno Federación de Rusia
República Checa
Bridas de acero al carbono acabadas España
Camarones de aguas cálidas congelados India
Glicina India
Japón
Productos contrachapados de madera dura China
Tubos y tuberías soldados de acero de sección rectangular
y paredes gruesas
México
Jugo de limón Brasil
Sudáfrica
Suelos de madera multicapa China
Pasta Italia
Bolsas de compra de polietileno China
Películas, láminas y tiras de tereftalato de polietileno India
Taipei Chino
Productos para superficies de cuarzo India
Barriles de acero inoxidable reutilizables China
Nitrito sódico Federación de Rusia
Barras de acero para hormigón armado Türkiye
Clavos de acero Corea, República de
India
Malasia
Omán
Sri Lanka
Tailandia
Taipei Chino
Türkiye
Rodamientos de rodillos cónicos y sus partes, acabados o no China
Papel sin estucar ni recubrir Portugal
Soluciones de urea y nitrato de amonio Federación de Rusia
Trinidad y Tabago
Tuberías soldadas Corea, República de
Goma xantana China
G/ADP/N/374
- 4 -
Producto País o territorio
aduanero
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: FEDERACIÓN DE RUSIA
Neumáticos (llantas neumáticas) para vehículos comerciales China
Melamina China
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: INDIA
Acero electrogalvanizado Corea, República de
Japón
Singapur
Hilados de alta tenacidad de poliésteres China
Caucho estireno -butadieno Corea, República de
Tailandia
Unión Europea
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: MÉXICO
Aceite epoxidado de soya Argentina
Cable coaxial del tipo RG (radio guide o guía de radio),
con o sin mensajero
China
Lámina rolada en frío Viet Nam
Malla cincada (galvanizada) de alambre de acero en forma
hexagonal ("malla hexagonal")
China
Película rígida de polímero de cloruro de vinilo China
Pierna y muslo de pollo Estados Unidos
Productos de presfuerzo China
España
Portugal
Tubería de acero sin costura China
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: PAKISTÁN
Cartón estucado o cuché blanqueado/cartón para cajas plegables
con reverso blanco
China
Hilados de filamentos de poliéster China
Malasia
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: SUDÁFRICA
Partes congeladas de aves de la especie Gallus domesticus ,
con hueso Brasil
Dinamarca
España
Irlanda
Polonia
Espejos de vidrio sin enmarcar Indonesia G/ADP/N/374
- 5 -
Producto País o territorio
aduanero
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: UNIÓN EUROPEA
Productos de aluminio laminado plano China
Ruedas de aluminio para vehículos de motor Marruecos
Bicicletas eléctricas China
Rollos y chapas de acero inoxidable laminados en caliente Indonesia
Türkiye
Melamina China
Alambres de molibdeno China
Glutamato monosódico China
Indonesia
Neumáticos (llantas neumáticas) China
Tejidos de fibra de vidrio, hilados y/o cosidos China
Egipto
MIEMBRO INFORMANTE: VIET NAM
Electrodos recubiertos para soldadura de arco, de metal común,
y alambre de acero para soldadura China
Malasia
Tailandia
__________
| 907
| 6,681
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN20_EU734.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN20_EU734
|
G/TBT/N/EU/734
31 de agosto de 2020
(20-5908) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Se da traslado de la notificación siguiente de conformidad con el artículo 10.6.
1. Miembro que notifica : UNIÓN EUROPEA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate (artículos 3.2 y 7.2):
2. Organismo responsable : Comisión Europea
Nombre y dirección (incluidos los números de teléfono y de fax, así como las
direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso) del organismo o
autoridad encargado de la tramitación de observaciones sobre la notificac ión,
en caso de que se trate de un organismo o autoridad diferente:
European Commission (Comisión Europea)
EU-TBT Enquiry Point (Servicio de Información OTC de la UE)
Fax: +(32) 2 299 80 43
Correo electrónico: grow-eu-tbt@ec.europa.eu
Sitio web: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools -databases/tbt/en/
3. Notificación hecha en virtud del artículo 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ],
o en virtud de:
4. Productos abarcados (partida del SA o de la NCCA cuando corresponda ; en otro
caso partida del arancel nacional . Podrá indicarse además, cuando proced a, el
número de partida de la ICS) : productos alimenticios ; Productos alimenticios en
general ( ICS 67 .040).
5. Título, número de páginas e idioma(s) del documento notificado : Draft
Commission Delegated Regulation amending the Annex to Regulation (EU) No 6 09/2013
of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the lists of substances that may
be added to infant and follow -on formula, baby food and processed cereal -based food
(Proyecto de Reglamento Delegado de la Comisión por el que se modifica el anexo del
Reglamento (UE) N° 609/2013 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo en lo referente a
las sustancias que se pueden incorporar en los preparados para lactantes y los preparados
de continuación, los alimentos infantiles y los alimentos transformados a base de
cereales) . Documentos en inglés (4 y 2 páginas).
6. Descripción del contenido : El Proyecto de Reglamento Delegado de la Comisión se
refiere a la autorización de incorporar L -metilfolato de calcio, como fuente de folato, en
los preparados para lactantes y los preparados de continuación, los alimentos
transformados a base de cereales y los alimentos infantiles en el futuro, en conformidad
con el dictamen científico pertinente de la Autorid ad Europea de Seguridad Alimentaria
(EFSA). G/TBT/N/EU/734
- 2 -
7. Objetivo y razón de ser, incluida, cuando proceda, la naturaleza de los
problemas urgentes : El objetivo de la medida propuesta es autorizar la incorporación
de L-metilfolato de calcio, como fuente de folato, en los preparados para lactantes y los
preparados de continuación, los alimentos transformados a base de cereales y los
alimentos infantiles . El proyecto de medida es el resultado favorable de la evaluación de
seguridad realizada por la EFSA . A fin de auto rizar la incorporación de L -metilfolato de
calcio, como fuente de folato, en los preparados para lactantes y los preparados de
continuación, los alimentos transformados a base de cereales y los alimentos infantiles,
es necesario modificar el anexo del Regl amento (UE) N° 609/2013 relativo a los alimentos
destinados a los lactantes y niños de corta edad, los alimentos para usos médicos
especiales y los sustitutivos de la dieta completa para el control de peso . Protección de la
salud y la seguridad humanas.
8. Documentos pertinentes:
• Reglamento (UE) N° 609/2013 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo de 12 de
junio de 2013 relativo a los alimentos destinados a los lactantes y niños de
corta edad, los alimentos para usos médicos especiales y los sustitutivos de la
dieta completa para el control de peso https://eur -lex.europa.eu/legal -
content/ES/TXT/?qid=1598515068550&uri=CELEX:32013R0609
9. Fecha propuesta de adopción : cuarto trimestre de 2020
Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : La medida propuesta entrará en vigor 20 días
después de su publicación en el Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea (aproximadamente un
mes después de su adopción) . La medida propuesta será aplicable en conformidad con
las disposiciones del artículo 22 del Reglamento (UE) N° 609/2013.
10. Fecha lím ite para la presentación de observaciones : 60 días después de la fecha de
notificación
11. Textos disponibles en : Servicio nacional de información [ ], o dirección, números
de teléfono y de fax y direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso,
de otra institución:
European Commission (Comisión Europea)
EU-TBT Enquiry Point (Servicio de Información OTC de la UE)
Fax: + (32) 2 299 80 43
Correo electrónico: grow-eu-tbt@ec.europa.eu
El documento está disponible en el sitio web UE -OTC: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools -
databases/tbt/en/
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2020/TBT/EEC/20_5191_00_e.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2020/TBT/EEC/20_5191_01_e.pdf
| 764
| 5,045
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_INF_ECOM_R6.pdf
|
r_INF_ECOM_R6
| 0
| 0
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
|
WTO_1/290315_2022_TBT_UKR_22_8418_07_x.pdf
|
290315_2022_TBT_UKR_22_8418_07_x
|
Додаток 6
до Технічного регламенту
щодо вимог до екодизайну
для побутових
посудомийних машин
Таблиця відповідності
положень Регламенту Комісії (ЄС) 2019/2022 від 1 жовтня 2019 року
що встановлює вимоги екодизайну для побутових посудомийних
машин відповідно до Директиви 2009/125/ЄС Європейського
Парламенту та Ради та вносить зм іни до Регламент у Комісії (ЄС)
№1275/2008 і скасовує Регламент Комісії (ЄС) № 1016/201 0 положенням
Технічного регламенту щодо вимог до екоди зайну для побутових
посудомийних машин
Положення
Регламенту Комісії ЄС Положення
Технічного регламенту
Стаття 1 пункти 1 і 2
Стаття 2 пункт 3
Стаття 3 пункт 4
Стаття 4 пункт 5
Стаття 5 пункт 6
Стаття 6 пункт 7
Стаття 7 пункт 8
Стаття 8
Стаття 9
Стаття 10
Стаття 11
Стаття 12
Стаття 13 пункт 9
Додаток I додаток 1
Додаток II додаток 2
Додаток III додаток 3
Додаток IV додаток 4
Додаток V додаток 5
додаток 6
| 144
| 961
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_WT_MIN22_ST41.pdf
|
s_WT_MIN22_ST41
|
WT/MIN(22)/ST/41
12 de junio de 2022
(22-4479) Página: 1/2
Conferencia Ministerial
Duodécimo período de sesiones
Ginebra, 12 -15 de junio de 2022 Original: inglés
DECLARACIÓN DE LA EXCMA. SRA. SENADORA KEISAL PETERS
MINISTRA DE ESTADO, MINISTRA DE ASUNTOS EXTERIORES
Y COMERCIO EXTERIOR
SAN VICENTE Y LAS GRANADINAS EN NOMBRE DE LA OECO
Es un gran honor para mí formular esta declaración en nombre de los Gobiernos y los habitantes de
los países de la Organización de Estados del Caribe Oriental (OECO) que son Miembros de la OMC .
En primer lugar, permítanme decir que la OECO respalda las declaraciones de la República
Cooperativa de Guyana y Jam aica en nombre del Grupo de la CARICOM y el Grupo ACP,
respectivamente.
La OECO aprovecha esta oportunidad para renovar su compromiso con un sistema multilateral de
comercio más viable y sostenible, en el que la OMC ocupe un lugar central.
Como pequeños Es tados insulares en desarrollo (PEID) y economías pequeñas y vulnerables (EPV),
los países de la OECO estamos expuestos a una gran apertura económica, y a menudo tenemos una
fuerte dependencia de las importaciones, especialmente para cubrir nuestras necesid ades de
alimentos y energía.
Además, tenemos unas estructuras de producción reducidas, una gama de bienes y servicios para
la exportación limitada y una vulnerabilidad permanente a las conmociones externas, como la
pandemia mundial de COVID -19, las crisis alimentarias y energéticas y las dificultades relacionadas
con las cadenas de suministro . Esas conmociones tienden a afectarnos de forma más grave que a
las economías más grandes y más avanzadas y nuestro tiempo de recuperación suele ser mayor.
Por supuest o, no puedo dejar de mencionar la amenaza del cambio climático y los desastres
naturales, una realidad que vivimos a diario . Cuando esas amenazas se materializan, sus
repercusiones pueden detener —y de hecho detienen — toda la actividad económica, incluida nuestra
capacidad de comerciar.
Incluso ahora que nos enfrentamos a esos desafíos, hemos observado una reducción de las
preferencias comerciales, la financiación en condiciones favorables y la asistencia para el desarrollo .
Algunos aducen, de manera erróne a, que dada nuestra condición de países de ingreso mediano a
alto no deberíamos disponer del margen de actuación ni de la asistencia concreta necesarios para
defender nuestros intereses en materia de desarrollo . Esos argumentos no tienen en cuenta nuestras
vulnerabilidades intrínsecas.
En ese contexto, recordamos el espíritu y la letra del Acuerdo de Marrakech, que reconoce, entre
otras cosas, que nuestras relaciones comerciales y económicas deberían llevarse a cabo con el
objetivo de un desarrollo sostenib le, y que debemos garantizar que los países en desarrollo y menos
adelantados Miembros obtengan una parte del incremento del comercio internacional que
corresponda a las necesidades de su desarrollo económico.
Nuestras deliberaciones durante y después de l a CM12 deben volver al espíritu del Acuerdo de
Marrakech . Como cuestión prioritaria, debemos intentar fortalecer, y no socavar, el margen de
actuación que necesitamos como países en desarrollo para seguir adelante con nuestro desarrollo. WT/MIN(22)/ST/41
- 2 -
Antes de terminar, quisiera señalar que la OECO espera que se alcancen resultados significativos en
la CM12 en lo que respecta a una amplia serie de cuestiones.
Después de estar negociando durante más de veinte años, es fundamental que se logre un acuerdo
significativo sobr e las subvenciones a la pesca . Además de reducir drásticamente las subvenciones
a la pesca y las prácticas perjudiciales, ese acuerdo debe prever como elemento central, conforme
a nuestro mandato, un trato especial y diferenciado apropiado y efectivo para los países en desarrollo
y los países menos adelantados . A este respecto, el establecimiento de una exención para los
pequeños actores y una excepción para la pesca artesanal es esencial para que conservemos nuestro
margen de actuación con el fin de seguir desarrollando este sector.
La agricultura sigue siendo fundamental para nuestras economías y estamos muy decepcionados
por lo que parece ser un nivel de ambición bajo para lograr un conjunto de resultados en esta esfera .
No obstante, contribuiremos de man era significativa a cualquier programa de trabajo futuro en el
marco de los distintos pilares de la agricultura . La OECO también espera que otros Ministros se unan
a nosotros para acordar una decisión sobre la exención de las restricciones a la exportación para las
compras realizadas por el Programa Mundial de Alimentos (PMA).
Además, a la luz de los problemas de larga data de nuestra seguridad alimentaria, que son anteriores
a la pandemia y a las perturbaciones más recientes de los mercados mundiales de al imentos,
también esperamos con interés sumarnos a un consenso sobre una declaración relativa a la
seguridad alimentaria.
Ciertamente, acogemos con satisfacción el hecho de que uno de los primeros resultados para
la CM12, logrado desde el año pasado, sea un a decisión ministerial relativa al Programa de Trabajo
sobre las Pequeñas Economías, que contiene elementos destinados a contribuir a nuestra mayor
integración en la economía mundial.
Por otra parte, la OECO considera que es fundamental alcanzar resultados en esferas como la
exención de los derechos de propiedad intelectual sobre las vacunas contra la COVID -19 y la
respuesta de la OMC a la pandemia.
El último punto que plantearé tiene que ver con la reforma de la OMC . Debemos reforzar el
funcionam iento de la OMC, así como su función normativa y de negociación . En este sentido, la OECO
es partidaria de una iniciativa multilateral de reforma que sea abierta, inclusiva y transparente .
También solicitamos que se restablezca el sistema de solución de diferencias de doble instancia, y
pedimos al Miembro interesado que deje de bloquear los nombramientos de los Miembros del Órgano
de Apelación.
La OECO espera que la CM12 sea un éxito y desempeñará un papel constructivo con miras a que se
logren resultados significativos en todas las esferas de negociación.
__________
| 974
| 6,251
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_Jobs_RD-GC_13.pdf
|
q_Jobs_RD-GC_13
| 0
| 0
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
|
WTO_1/r_G_AG_NMRT1.pdf
|
r_G_AG_NMRT1
|
G/AG/N/MRT/1
6 avril 2023
(23-2446) Page: 1/1
Comité de l'agriculture Original: français
NOTIFICATION
La communication ci -après, datée du 29 mars 2023, est distribuée à la demande de la délégation
de Mauritanie . La notification concerne les engagements en matière de subventions à l'exportation
(tableau ES:1) pour l' Année Civile 1995.
_______________
La délégation de Mauritanie notifie qu'elle n'a accordé aucune subvention à l'exportation pour des
produits agricoles pendant l'année civile 199 5.1
__________
1 Sur la base de la déclaration orale de ce Membre lors de la réunion du Comité de l'Agriculture des
27 et 28 mars 2023, conformément au processus convenu lors de la réunion du Comité de l'Agriculture des
21 et 22 novembre (voir le paragraphe 2.17 du docume nt G/AG/R/104).
| 124
| 835
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN21_GBR39A3.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN21_GBR39A3
|
G/TBT/N/GBR/39/Add.3
20 October 2021
(21-7936) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
The following communication , dated 20 October 2021 , is being circulated at the request of the
delegation of the United Kingdom .
_______________
Title: Medical Devices Regulations 2002
Reason for Addendum:
[ ] Comment period changed - date:
[ ] Notified measure adopted - date:
[ ] Notified measure published - date:
[X] Notified measure enters into force - date: 1 November 2021
[X] Text of final measure available from1:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid -19-test-validation -approved -
products
[ ] Notified measure withdrawn or revoked - date:
Relevant symbol if measure re -notified:
[X] Content or scope of notified measure changed and text available from1:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid -19-test-validation -approved -
products
A protocol has been published to allow some Coronavirus In vitro diagnostic devices to
stay on the market after 31 October without approval under regulation 34A of the Medical
Devices Regulations 2002. The protocol will expire on 28 February 2022 and is published
here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/co vid-19-test-validation -approved -
products
New deadline for comments (if applicable):
[ ] Interpretive guidance issued and text available from1:
[ ] Other:
Description: We are publishing a protocol under regulation 39A of the Medical Devices Regulations
2002 which will allow certain Coronavirus test devices to remain on the market after 31 October
without approval under regulation 38A(5). These tests are the subject of a pending application for
validation approval and will have to be removed from the market within 10 working days if their
application is refused. Permitting the tests listed in the protocol to remain on the market without
approval is considered a necessar y and proportionate measure to address the serious public health
1 This information can be provided by including a website address, a pdf attachment, or other
information on where the text of the final /modified measure and/or interpretive guidance can be obtained. G/TBT/N/GBR/39/Add.3
- 2 -
risk that a shortage of tests could create over the winter. The protocol will expire on 28 February
2022.
__________
| 341
| 2,432
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_SPS_NCHL706.pdf
|
s_G_SPS_NCHL706
|
G/SPS/N/CHL/706
23 de noviembre de 2021
(21-8824) Página: 1/3
Comité de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias Original: español
NOTIFICACIÓN
1. Miembro que notifica: CHILE
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate:
2. Organismo responsable: Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero (SAG)
3. Productos abarcados (número de la(s) partida(s) arancelaria(s) según se
especifica en las listas nacionales depositadas en la OMC; deberá indicarse
además, cuando proceda, el número de partida de la ICS): Embriones de bovinos
4. Regiones o países que podrían verse afectados, en la medida en que sea
procedente o factible:
[X] Todos los interlocutores comerciales
[ ] Regiones o países específicos:
5. Título del documento notificado: Fija exigencias sanitarias para la internación de
embriones bovinos a Chile y deroga las Resoluciones que indica . Idioma(s): español .
Número de páginas: 3
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/SPS/CHL/21_7230_00_s.pdf
6. Descripción del contenido: Se fijan exigencias sanitarias para importar a Chile
embriones bovinos, destacándose:
Para su identificación
− Los embriones de bovinos que se importen al país deben contar con la información
indicada en el Resuelvo 1 del proyecto de Resolución .
Del país o zona de procedencia
− El país o zona de procedencia está declarado oficialmente libre de fiebre aftosa y
pleuron eumonía contagiosa bovina ante la Organización Mundial de Sanidad Animal
(OIE) y reconocida por Chile esta condición sanitaria .
− El país o zona cumple con las condiciones de la OIE, para ser considerado libre de las
siguientes enfermedades: dermatosis nodul ar contagiosa, enfermedad, hemorrágica
epizoótica, septicemia hemorrágica, fiebre del Valle del Rift, y esta condición sanitaria
ha sido evaluada favorablemente por Chile .
− El país o zona tiene una categoría de riesgo insignificante de EEB, situación recono cida
por la OIE y en concordancia con las directrices de la OIE en esta materia.
Del semen
- El semen usado para producción de embriones cumplen con los requisitos sanitarios
exigidos por Chile.
De la donante
- Ha nacido o ha permanecido ininterrumpidamente en el país, a lo menos, 6 meses
antes de la recolección de embriones con destino a Chile.
- Ha sido inspeccionada el día de la recolección encontrándose libre de evidencias de
enfermedades infectocontagiosas y no ha sido expuesta en el tiempo establecido en
este punto. G/SPS/N/CHL/706
- 2 -
− El predio de origen de la donante está oficialmente libre de brucelosis y tuberculosis.
− En el predio de origen, no se han presentado evidencias clínicas de enfermedades
infectocontagiosas, durante el tiempo determinado en este punto.
De los embriones
- Los embriones f ueron recolectados y procesados en las condiciones establecidas en
este proyecto de resolución.
- El grupo de recolección no ha operado durante el proceso en zonas infectadas con las
enfermedades que constan en la lista de enf ermedades de la OIE.
- El proceso de obtención, procesamiento, almacenaje y transporte, se realizó de
acuerdo a los procedimientos aprobados por la Sociedad Internacional de Tecnología
de Embriones (IETS) y recomendados por la OIE .
- Se colocaron en pajuelas, las que se marcaron e identificaron de acuerdo al punto 1.
del proyecto de resolución.
Almacenaje y transporte
- Los embriones se almacenaron y son manipulados bajo las condiciones mencionadas
en este punto del proyecto resolución .
Certificación sanitaria
- La importación al país deben venir amparados de un certificado sanitario oficial,
emitido por la Autoridad Sanitaria Oficial del país de origen, en el cual se debe
estipular el cumplimiento de las exigencias sanitarias establecidas en esta resolución.
Para m ayor detalle revisar el documento adjunto a esta notificación.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser: [ ] inocuidad de los alimentos, [X] sanidad animal,
[ ] preservación de los vegetales, [ ] protección de la salud humana contra las
enfermedades o plagas animales o vegetales, [ ] protección del territorio contra
otros daños causados por plagas.
8. ¿Existe una norma internacional pertinente? De ser así, indíquese la norma:
[ ] de la Comisión del Codex Alimentarius (por ejemplo, título o número de
serie d e la norma del Codex o texto conexo) :
[X] de la Organización Mundial de Sanidad Animal (OIE) (por ejemplo,
número de capítulo del Código Sanitario para los Animales Terrestres o del
Código Sanitario para los Animales Acuáticos) : Títulos 8 y 11 del Código
Sanitario para los Animales Terrestres de la Organización Mundial de Sanidad
Animal (OIE)
[ ] de la Convención Internacional de Protección Fitosanitaria (por ejemplo,
número de NIMF) :
[ ] Ninguna
¿Se ajusta la reglamentación que se propone a la norma inte rnacional
pertinente?
[X] Sí [ ] No
En caso negativo, indíquese, cuando sea posible, en qué medida y por qué razón
se aparta de la norma internacional:
9. Otros documentos pertinentes e idioma(s) en que están disponibles:
Resolución exenta Nº 1.720 de 1995
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/SPS/CHL/21_7230_01_s.pdf (disponible
en español)
10. Fecha propuesta de adopción (día/mes/año) : A su publicación en el Diario Oficial.
Fecha propuesta de publicación (día/mes/año) : Aproximadamente 80 días a partir
de la fecha de distribución de la notificación. G/SPS/N/CHL/706
- 3 -
11. Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor: [ ] Seis meses a partir de la fecha de
publicación, y/o (día/mes/año) : A su publicación en el Diario Oficial.
[ ] Medida de facilitación del comercio
12. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones: [X] Sesenta días a partir de
la fecha de distribución de la notificación y/o (día/mes/año) : 22 de enero de 2022
Organismo o autoridad encargado de tramitar las observaciones: [X] Organismo
nacional encargado de la notificación, [ ] Servicio nacional de informa ción.
Dirección, número de fax y dirección de correo electrónico ( en su caso ) de otra
institución:
Correo electrónico: sps.chile@sag.gob.cl
13. Texto (s) disponible (s) en: [X] Organismo nacional encargado de la notificación,
[ ] Servicio nacional de infor mación. Dirección, número de fax y dirección de
correo electrónico ( en su caso ) de otra institución:
Correo electrónico: sps.chile@sag.gob.cl
| 975
| 6,432
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN22_USA1850.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN22_USA1850
|
G/TBT/N/USA/1850
13 avril 2022
(22-3028) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : ÉTATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable:
Environmental Protection Agency - EPA (Agence pour la protection de l'environnement)
[1879]
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organism e
ou de l'autorité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organisme susmentionné:
Les observations sont à envoyer à : USA WTO TBT Enquiry Point (Point d' information OTC
pour l'OMC des États -Unis d'Amérique) . Courrier électronique: usatbtep@nist.gov
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ],
7.2 [ ], autres:
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être indiqués, le cas
échéant) : Amiante chrysotile ; Amiante [asbeste] (à l'excl. des ouvrages en cette
matière) (SH 2524) ; Garnitures de friction [p.ex. plaques, rouleaux, bandes, segments,
disques, rondelles, plaquettes], non montées, pour freins, pour embrayages ou pour tous
organes de frottement, à base d'amiante [asbeste], d'autres substances minérales ou de
cellulo se, même combinés avec des textiles ou d'autres matières (à l'excl. des garnitures
de freins montées) (SH 6813) ; Protection de l'environnement ( ICS 13 .020) ; Qualité de
l'air ( ICS 13 .040) ; Protection contre les matières dangereuses ( ICS 13 .300) ; Systèmes
automobiles ( ICS 43 .040) ; Produits de l 'industrie chimique ( ICS 71 .100)
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : Asbestos Part 1 : Chrysotile
Asbestos ; Regulation of Certain Conditions of Use Under Section 6(a) of the Toxic
Substances Cont rol Act (TSCA) (Amiante Partie 1 : Amiante chrysotile ; Réglementation de
certaines conditions d'utilisation au titre de la Section 6 a) de la Loi sur la réglementation
des substances toxiques (TSCA), 33 pages, en anglais
6. Teneur : Proposition de règle - L'Agence pour la protection de l'environnement (EPA)
propose une règle au titre de la Loi sur la réglementation des substances toxiques (TSCA)
afin de parer aux risques excessifs d'atteinte à la santé qu'elle a identifiés pour des
conditions d'utilisation de l'amiante chrysotile, à l'issue de l'évaluation des risques menée
au titre de la TSCA, partie 1 : amiante chrysotile . La TSCA exige que l'EPA remédie grâce
à une règle aux risques excessifs d'atteinte à la santé et à l'environnement et applique
des exigences dans la mesure nécessaire de sorte que l'amiante chrysotile ne présente
plus de risques excessifs . Par conséquent, afin de remédier aux risques excessifs identifiés
par l'évaluation des risques menée au titre de la TSCA, partie 1 : amiante chrysotile, l'EPA
propose d'interdire la fabrication (y compris l'importation), la transformation, la G/TBT/N/USA/1850
- 2 -
distribution dans le commerce et l'utilisation commerciale d'amiante chrysotile dans les
diaphragmes contenant de l'amiante chrysotile utilisés dans l'industrie du chlore -alcali,
dans les semelles de frein contenant de l'amiante chrysotile utilisés dans l'industrie
pétrolière, dans les garnitures de freins contenant de l'amiante chrysotile présentes sur
le marché des pièces de rechange automobiles , dans d'autres produits de friction pour
véhicules contenant de l'amiante chrysotile, et dans d'autres joints d'étanchéité contenant
de l'amiante chrysotile . L'EPA propose également d'interdire la fabrication (y compris
l'importation), la transformation e t la distribution dans le commerce de garnitures de
freins contenant de l'amiante chrysotile présentes sur le marché des pièces de rechange,
destinées aux consommateurs, et d'autres joints d'étanchéité contenant de l'amiante
chrysotile destinés aux consomm ateurs . L'EPA propose en outre des exigences en matière
d'élimination et de tenue d'archives de ces conditions d'utilisation.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Protection de la santé ou de la sécurité des personnes ; protection de
l'environnement
8. Documents pertinents:
87 Federal Register (FR) 21706, 1 2 avril 2 022; Titre 40 du Code des règlements
fédéraux (CFR) Partie 751:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2022-04-12/html/2022 -07601.htm
https://www.govin fo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2022-04-12/pdf/2022 -07601.pdf
La proposition de réglementation notifiée porte le numéro de dossier de consultation
(docket ) EPA -HQ-OPPT-2021-0057. Le dossier y relatif est disponible sur le site
Regulations.gov à l 'adresse https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA -HQ-OPPT-2021-
0057/document et permet d'accéder aux documents principaux et aux documents
justificatifs, ainsi qu'aux observations reçues . Les documents sont également disponibles
sur le site Regulations.gov en effectuant une recherche par numéro de dossier ( docket ).
Les Membres de l'OMC et leurs parties prenantes sont priés de présenter leurs
observations au point d'information OTC des États -Unis d'ici au 1 3 juin 2 022 à 16 heures ,
heure de l'Est . Les observations reçues par le point d'information OTC des États -Unis de
la part des Membres de l'OMC et de leurs parties prenantes seront transmises à
l'organisme de réglementation et seront aussi versées au dossier sur Regulations.gov si
elles sont reçues pendant le délai prévu pour la présentation des observations.
G/TBT/N/USA/1685 - Amiante (Partie 1 : chrysotile) ; Évaluation des risques finale au titre
de la Loi sur la réglementation des substances toxiques (TSCA) ; avis de disponibilité,
publiée le 4 janvier 2021 et accompagnée du numéro de dossier de consultation (docket)
EPA-HQ-OPPT-2019-0501. Le dossier y relatif est disponible sur le site Regulations.gov à
l'adresse https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA -HQ-OPPT-2019-0501 et permet
d'accéder aux documents principaux et aux documents justificatifs, ainsi qu'aux
observations reçues.
9. Date proj etée pour l'adoption : à déterminer
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : à déterminer
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 13 juin 2 022
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [ ] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2022/TBT/USA/22_2830_00_e.pdf
| 1,012
| 6,913
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_LIC_N2KHM3.pdf
|
s_G_LIC_N2KHM3
|
G/LIC/N/2/KHM/3
4 de octubre de 2022
(22-7461) Página: 1/3
Comité de Licencias de Importación Original: inglés
ACUERDO SOBRE PROCEDIMIENTOS PARA EL TRÁMITE DE
LICENCIAS DE IMPORTACIÓN
NOTIFICACIÓN EN VIRTUD DE LOS ARTÍCULOS 5.1
A 5.4 DEL ACUERDO1
REINO DE CAMBOYA
La siguiente notificación , recibida originalmente el 29 de abril de 2022, se distribuye a petición de
la delegación del Reino de Camboya.
Categoría Información sobre la notificación
1 Miembro que notifica Reino de Camboya
2 Título de la nueva
legislación/procedimiento Ley de Protección Ambiental y Gestión de los Recursos Naturales
3 Fecha de publicación 9 de enero de 1997
4 Fecha de entrada en vigor 9 de enero de 1997
5 Enlace al sitio web/
Publicación oficial de la
nueva reglamentación/
procedimiento https://www.cambodiantr.gov.kh/index.php?r=site/display&id=85
6 ¿Se ha adjuntado una
copia de la
reglamentación (PDF)
para la Secretaría? [X] Sí. ( Sírvanse adjuntar una copia de la reglamentación a la
notificación ).
[ ] No.
7 Tipo de notificación [X] a) Nueva reglamentación/procedimiento para el trámite de
licencias2; (sírvanse responder las preguntas 8 a 14)
[ ] b) Modificaciones en una reglamentación/procedimiento notificado
previamente en el documento: ______________; ( sírvanse responder
las preguntas 15 y 16 )
8 Lista de los productos
sujetos al procedimiento
para el trámite de
licencias Los códigos del SA y las descripciones detalladas de los productos
figuran a continuación :
- 8414 - Bombas de aire o de vacío, compresores de aire u otros
gases y ventiladores; campanas aspirantes para extracción o
reciclado, con ventilador incorporado, incluso con filtro .
- 8415 - Máquinas y aparatos para acondicionamiento de aire que
comprendan un ventilador con motor y los dispositivos adecuados
para modificar la temperatura y la humedad, aunque no regulen
separadamente el grado higrométrico .
- 8418 - Refrigeradores, congeladores y demás material, máquinas y
aparatos para producción de frío, aunque no sean eléctricos;
1 Se entiende que el Miembro que notifica también ha cumplido las obligaciones en materia de
notificación que le corresponden en virtud del artículo 1.4 a) y el artículo 8.2 b) con respecto a la
ley/reglamentación/procedimiento pertinente notificado rellenando este formulario de manera completa y
detallada.
2 Se entiende que la expresión "Nueva re glamentación/procedimiento para el trámite de licencias" se
refiere a cualquier ley, reglamentación o procedimiento introducido recientemente, y a los que están en vigor
pero se notifican por primera vez al Comité. G/LIC/N/2/KHM/3
- 2 -
Categoría Información sobre la notificación
bombas de calor, excepto las máquinas y aparatos para
acondicionamiento de aire de la partida 8415 .
- 2903 - Derivados halogenados de los hidrocarburos acíclicos .
- 3824 - Preparaciones aglutinantes para moldes o núcleos de
fundición; productos químicos y preparaciones de la industria
química o de las industrias conexas (incluidas las mezclas de
productos naturales), no exp resados ni comprendidos en otra parte .
- 2618 - Escorias granuladas (arena de escorias) de la siderurgia .
- 2619 - Escorias (excepto las granuladas), batiduras y demás
desperdicios de la siderurgia .
- 2620 - Escorias, cenizas y residuos (excepto los de la sideru rgia)
que contengan metal, arsénico, o sus compuestos.
- 7204 - Desperdicios y desechos (chatarra), de fundición, hierro o
acero; lingotes de chatarra de hierro o acero .
- 7404 - Desperdicios y desechos, de cobre .
- 7902 - Desperdicios y desechos , de zinc .
- 8471 - Máquinas automáticas para tratamiento de información y sus
unidades; lectores magnéticos u ópticos, máquinas para registro de
información sobre soportes en forma codificada y máquinas para
tratamiento de esta información, no expresadas ni comprendidas en
otras partidas (equipo de segunda mano).
9 Naturaleza del
procedimiento para el
trámite de licencias Automático: [X]
No automático: [ ]
10 Finalidad administrativa/
medida que se aplica a) Protección de la moral pública;
b) Protección de la salud y la vida de las personas y de los
animales y preservación de los vegetales; protección del
medio ambiente ;
c) Obtención de estadísticas comerciales o vigilancia del
mercado;
d) Protección de patentes, marcas de fábrica o de comercio y
derechos de autor, y prevención de prácticas que puedan
inducir a error;
e) Cumplimiento de las obligaciones contraídas en virtud de
la Carta de las Naciones Unidas y otros tratados
internacionales (CITES, Convenio de Basilea, Convenio de
Rotterdam, resoluciones del Consejo de Seguridad de las
Naciones Unidas, etc.)
Protocolo de Montreal relativo a las sustancias que agotan
la capa de ozono
f) Administración de contingentes (incluidos los
arancelarios);
g) Regulación de la importación de armas, municiones y
materiales fisionables, y protección de la seguridad
nacional;
h) Otros: ______________ ( sírvanse especificar )
11 Órgano u órganos
administrativos para la
presentación de las
solicitudes
Ministerio de Medio Ambiente
Morodok Techo Building (Lot 503),
Sangkat Tonle Basac, Khan Chamkarmorn, Phnom Penh
https://www.moe.gov.kh/
Teléfono: (+855) 12758687, (+855) 979088557
Correo electrónico: nou@online.com.kh
12 Servicio del que pueda
recabarse información
sobre las c ondiciones
requeridas para obtener
las licencias Ministerio de Medio Ambiente
Morodok Techo Building (Lot 503),
Sangkat Tonle Basac, Khan Chamkarmorn, Phnom Penh
https://www.moe.gov.kh/
Teléfono: (+855), (+855) 23 220 369
Correo electrónico: nou@online.com.kh
13 Duración prevista del
procedimiento para el
trámite de licencias En curso
G/LIC/N/2/KHM/3
- 3 -
Categoría Información sobre la notificación
14 Resumen de la
notificación en uno de los
idiomas oficiales de
la OMC Esta Ley tiene por objeto proteger y promover la calidad del medio
ambiente y la salud pública mediante la prevención, la reducción y el
control de la contaminación; evaluar los efectos medioambientales de
todos los proyectos propuestos antes de que el Gob ierno Real emita
una decisión; garantizar la conservación, el desarrollo, la gestión y el
uso racional y sostenible de los recursos naturales del Reino de
Camboya; alentar y permitir que el público participe en la protección
del medio ambiente y la gestión de los recursos naturales; y eliminar
las medidas que provoquen un daño en el medio ambiente.
15 Si se ha marcado la
casilla 7 b), sírvanse
indicar el tipo de
modificación o
modificaciones que se
ha(n) introducido) a) Expiración
b) Suspensión
c) Modificación de aspectos específicos en los
procedimientos existentes:
Productos comprendidos;
Finalidad administrativa;
Procedimiento automático o no automático;
Duración del procedimiento para el trámite de licencias;
Modificación de la naturaleza de la restricción
cuantitativa/del valor;
Condiciones que deben reunir los solicitantes;
Servicio del que pueda recabarse información sobre l as
condiciones requeridas para obtener las licencias;
Órgano u órganos administrativos para la presentación de
las solicitudes;
Requisitos de documentación (incluido el formulario de
solicitud);
Plazo para la presentación de solicitudes;
Órgano u órganos administrativos expedidores de las
licencias;
Plazo para la expedición de las licencias;
Derechos de licencia/cargas administrativas;
Depósito/pago anticipado y condiciones apl icables;
Reglamentación/procedimientos para la presentación de un
recurso;
Validez de las licencias;
Otras condiciones de las licencias (prórroga,
transferibilidad, sanciones por no utilización, etc.);
Prescripciones en materi a de divisas;
Otros: ______________ (sírvanse especificar).
16 Sírvanse explicar en
detalle las modificaciones
(en uno de los idiomas
oficiales de la OMC)
__________
| 1,156
| 8,087
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_WT_PRESS_856.pdf
|
r_WT_PRESS_856
|
PRESS/8 56
27 avril 2020
(20-3277) Page: 1/1
COMMUNIQUÉ
DE PRESSE
ASSISTANCE TECHNIQUE
Le Canada fait un don de 450 000 CAD pour aider les pays en
développement à participer au commerce des produits agricoles
Le gouvernement canadien verse une contribution de 450 000 CAD (un peu plus de 300 000 CHF)
en 2020 pour aider les pays en développement et les pays les moins avancés (PMA) à se
conformer aux normes internationales en matière de sécurité sanitaire des produits alimentaires,
de santé des animaux et de préservation des végétaux, dans le but d'accroître leur accès aux
marchés agricoles.
Ce don est destiné au Fonds pour l'application des normes et le développement du commerce
(STDF ), un partenariat mondial qui aide les pays en développement à accéder aux marchés en
améliorant leurs connaissances en matière sanitaire et phytosanitaire (SPS) et en promouvant la
sécurité sanitaire des produits alimentaires, la santé des animaux et la préservation des végétaux.
Il œuvre en f aveur d'une croissance économique durable, de la réduction de la pauvreté, de la
sécurité alimentaire et de la protection de l'environnement.
Le Directeur général de l'OMC, Roberto Azevêdo, a dit: "Cette nouvelle contribution du Canada
aidera les pays en d éveloppement à faire en sorte que leurs produits puissent franchir les
frontières tout en satisfaisant aux prescriptions sanitaires et phytosanitaires. Je remercie le
Canada pour sa générosité."
L'Ambassadeur du Canada auprès de l'OMC, Stephen de Boer, a a ffirmé: "Nous sommes heureux
de continuer à soutenir le STDF dans le cadre de l'engagement du Canada en faveur du système
commercial multilatéral. Par cette nouvelle contribution, nous espérons aider les pays en
développement à mettre en œuvre les normes s anitaires et phytosanitaires internationales de
manière à renforcer leur capacité d'obtenir ou de conserver un accès aux marchés mondiaux."
Le Groupe de travail du STDF est actuellement présidé par Julie Emond, Premier Secrétaire à la
Mission canadienne.
Au total, la Norvège a versé environ 13 millions de CHF aux fonds d'affectation spéciale de l'OMC
en près de 20 ans.
FIN
| 340
| 2,200
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_PLURI_GPALEGIS_AUS3.pdf
|
s_PLURI_GPALEGIS_AUS3
|
GPA/LEGIS/ AUS/3
18 de diciembre de 2020
(20-9206) Página: 1/2
Comité de Contratación Pública Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN DE LA LEGISLACIÓN INTERNA RELACIONADA
CON EL ACUERDO SOBRE CONTRATACIÓN PÚBLICA
NOTIFICACIÓN DE AUSTRALIA
La siguiente comunicación, de fecha 18 de diciembre de 2020, se distribuye a petición de la
delegación de Australia .
_______________
Parte que
presenta la
notificación AUSTRALIA
Fundamento
jurídico Párrafo 5 del Artículo XXII del ACP revisado
Decisión del Comité sobre las prescripciones de notificación
establecidas en l os artículos XIX y XXII.5 del ACP revisado (GPA/113,
anexo A del Apéndice 2, párrafo 1 )
Título del texto
jurídico
notificado Ley de Contratación Pública de 2020 (Australia Occidental )
Enlace al texto
jurídico https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/law_a147268.ht
ml
Situación de la
notificación Primera notificación (a saber, legislación nacional nueva )
Cambio , modificación o revisión del texto jurídico notificado
Sustitución o refundición del/de los texto(s) jurídico(s) notificado(s)
Referencias de
notificaciones
anteriores
Breve descripción del texto jurídico notificado
La Ley tiene por objeto modernizar los procedimientos para la contratación pública de bienes,
servicios y obras en Australia Occidental. Permite el establecimiento de políticas de contratación
uniformes a todos los niveles de gobierno, denominadas directivas en materia de contratación
pública, a las que deben ajustarse todos los organismos estatales . También mejora las
disposiciones de gobernanza y la integridad del sistema de contratación pública de Australia
Occidental al permitir al organismo central de co ntratación pública realizar auditorías e
investigaciones y ex aminar las reclamaciones de los proveedores, así como administrar el régimen
de exclusión del estado.
Idioma(s) del
texto jurídico
notificado Inglés
Fecha de
adopción 19 de junio de 2020
Entrada en vigor Parte 1: 19 de junio de 2020 (véase el artículo 2 a)); GPA/LEGIS/ AUS/3
- 2 -
Partes 2 a 6, parte 8, parte 9 (pero solamente el artículo 52) y parte 10
(pero solamente la sección 4): 22 de julio de 2020 (véase el artículo 2 b) y
https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/gazette/gazette.nsf/searchgazette/67F58A880
C5B7C76482585AB0008D9DE/$file/Gg124.pdf )
Parte 7, artículos 40 a 51, 53 y 54, y parte 10, secci ones 1 a 3 y 5 a 7:
pendiente de su anuncio oficial (véase el artículo 2 b))
Otra
información
Organismo o
autoridad
responsable Ministro de Finanzas/ Departamento de Finanzas de Australia Occidental
__________
| 369
| 2,671
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_PLURI_GPA_ACCBRA4.pdf
|
r_PLURI_GPA_ACCBRA4
| 0
| 0
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
|
WTO_1/q_G_RO_W223.pdf
|
q_G_RO_W223
|
G/RO/W/223
3 August 2023
(23-5292) Page: 1/15
Committee on Rules of Origin
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON RULES OF ORIGIN TO THE GENERAL COUNCIL
ON PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN FOR LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
DRAFT
This report is being submitted by the Committee on Rules of Origin (CRO) to the General Council
following the 2022 Decision on Preferential Rules of Origin and the Implementation of the Nairobi
Ministerial Decision , which states that "[t]he CRO should report its work to the General Council ahead
of the Thirteenth Ministerial Conference " (G/RO/95 ).
In addition, it also discharges the requirements of the 2013 (Bali) and 2015 (Nairobi) Ministerial
Decisions on preferent ial rules of origin for least developed countries (LDCs) (WT/L/917 and
WT/L/917/Add.1 , respectively) , which stipulate that the CRO " shall annually review the
developments in preferential rules of origin applicable to imports from LDCs " and report to the
General Council.
1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 2
2 TRANSPARENCY AND DATA AVAILABILITY (NOTIFICATIONS) ................................ .... 2
2.1 Preferential Rules of Origin ................................ ................................ ......................... 2
2.2 Preferential Tariffs and Preferential Import Statistics ................................ ....................... 3
3 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS REPORTED TO THE CRO ................................ ........................ 4
4 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI AND NAIROBI MINISTERIAL DECISIONS .................. 4
4.1 Requirements for the Assessment of Sufficient or Substantial Transformation ..................... 5
4.1.1 Ad valorem percentage Criterion ................................ ................................ ............... 5
4.1.2 Change of Tariff Classification Criterion ................................ ................................ ...... 5
4.1.3 Specific Working and Processing Criterion ................................ ................................ ... 5
4.2 Cumulatio n ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 5
5 DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS ................................ ................................ ................. 6
5.1 Proof of Origin ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 6
5.2 Trade Facilitation Measures for Small Consignments ................................ ....................... 6
5.3 Documentary Evidence of Direct Consignment ................................ ............................... 6
6 IMPACT OF PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN ON PREFERENCE UTILIZATION:
THE ANALYSIS OF PREFERENCE UTILIZATION RATES ................................ ...................... 7
6.1 Linking Preference Utilization Rates and Preferential Rules of Origin ................................ .. 7
6.2 Modalities for the Calculation of Utilization Rates ................................ ............................ 7
6.3 Preference Utilization by LDCs ................................ ................................ ..................... 8
6.4 Factors Not Related to Rules of Origin Which Affect the Utilization of Trade Preferences ....... 8
6.5 Factors Related to Rules of Origin ................................ ................................ ................ 9
7 WAY FORWARD ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 10 G/RO/W/223
- 2 -
8 REFERENCES TO DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE CRO (2013 -2023) ..................... 10
ANNEX 1 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 11
ANNEX 2 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 14
ANNEX 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 15
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1. This document reports on the work conducted by the CRO from 2017 to October 2023 pursuant
to the April 2022 "Decision on Preferential Rules of Origin and the Implementation of the Nairobi
Ministerial Decision" ( G/RO/95 ). This Decision was also acknowledged in the Outcome Document of
the Twelfth Ministerial Conference.1
1.2. This report describes progress in the different areas of work of the CRO related to preferential
rules of origin for LDCs . It highlights the main issues discussed and the state of play reached on the
main components of the work. When relevant, it indicates lessons learned and best practices on the
use of preferential rules of origin, including from the point of view of LDCs. Finally, it provides
guidance for the future work of the Committee to advance further in the identification of possible
best practices and lessons learned.
2 TRANSPARENCY AND DATA AVAILABILITY (NOTIFICATIONS)
2.1. The work of the CRO on preferential rules of origin requires access to two types of information:
(i) Preferential rules of origin applied to LDCs by preference -granting Members (rules of
origin and the related administrative requirements); and
(ii) preferential tariffs and preferential imports under preferential trade arrangements (or
other preferential trade agreements ).
2.1 Preferential Rules of Origin
2.2. The CRO has made substantial progress in terms of the availability of information regarding
preferential rules of origin applied to LDCs in the context of non -reciprocal trade preferences. As
required by paragraph 4.3 of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision2, Members adopted a template in 2017
for the notification of preferential rules of origin and origin requirements (G/RO/84 ). A new document
series was created for the circulation of these notifications (G/RO/LDC/N ). The template has been
instrumental in making detailed and standardized information about Members' current practices
available . In addition, it has allowed for the preparation of documents that describe, analyse , and
compare the current practices of preference -granting Members.
2.3. All preference -granting Members (except Armenia, Iceland, and Morocco) have notified the ir
preferential rules of origin applied to LDCs under their non -reciprocal trade arrangements .3
2.4. In addition , Members took note of two significant developments to access this information:
(i) All notifications submitted to the Secretariat are available on the WTO Preferential Trade
Arrangements database and in the WTO's three official languages
(http://ptadb.wto.org ); and
(ii) all rules of origin and origin requirements notified were made available through the
"Origin Facilitator" tool (https://findrulesoforigin.org ). The Facilitator is a free, publicly
available online tool which allows users to retrieve most-favoured -nation ( MFN) and
preferential tariff rates as well as requirements related to origin at the tariff -line level.
1 Document WT/MIN(22)/24 , paragraph 8.
2 Paragraph 4.3 reads: " […] Furthermore, the CRO shall develop a template for the notification of
preferential rules of origin, to enhance transparency and promote a better understanding of the rules of or igin
applicable to imports from LDCs ".
3 Document series G/RO/W/163 has been updated regularly to describe in detail these notifications. G/RO/W/223
- 3 -
The Facilitator is the result of a collaboration between the WTO Secretariat, the
International Trade Centre, and the World Customs Organization .
2.5. The Committee encourages all p reference -granting Members to ensure that their notifi cations
are complete and up to date, including any Internet links.
2.2 Preferential Tariffs and Preferential Import Statistics
2.6. MFN treatment, preferential tariff rates , and preferential import statistics are needed to
calculate the utilization rates of non -reciprocal LDC trade preferences. Tariff rates are needed to
identify the existence of a preference ( that is, the fact that the tariff is above zero on a n MFN basis).
Information about preferential import statistics is used to calculate the proportion of imports that
receive preferential treatment under at least one preferential arrangement.
2.7. Members made significant progress in improving the availability of data on preferential tariffs
and imports in compliance with the Transparency Mechanism for PTAs (WT/L/806 ). However,
significant gaps remain in this area that impact the ability of the Secretariat to conduct a
comprehensive analysis of current rates of preference utilization. As of [September] 2023:4
(i) Complete data5 is available for : [Australia; Canada; Chile (since 2014); China;
European Union ; Iceland ; India (since 2015); Japan (since 2015); Republic of Korea ;
Montenegro (since 2017) ; Switzerland (since 2012) ; Chinese Taipei ; Thailand (since
2015); Türkiye ; United Kingdom (since 2020); and United States. In addition, China
and India advised at the June 2023 Committee meeting that they had liaised with the
Secretariat regarding the provision of enhanced datasets to the WTO's Integrated
Database (IDB), which would facilitate more accurate analysis of the uptake in the
Generalized System of Preferences ( GSP preferences )]; and
(ii) no data, or only partial information , is available for : [Armenia; Kazakhstan; Kyrgyz
Republic; Morocco; New Zealand (tariffs only); Norway ; Russian Federation (tariffs
only); and Tajikistan. ]
2.8. In addition, one significant gap that has emerged concerns the availability of information on
imports entering under "other" preferential schemes , whether these be regional trade agreements,
other preferential arrangements , or special national regimes which offer tariff concessions.6 In fact,
before concluding that LDCs are not utilizing , or not fully utilizing , a preferential trade arrangement,
it is first necessary to verify whether or not benefi ts are being received under other preferences that
may be available. In the absence of such data, a full analysis of trade between LDCs and
preference -granting Members , including on the impact of rules of origin on the utilization of
preferences , is not po ssible. In this sense, Members currently are encouraged – but are not obliged –
to notify to the WTO their preferential imports and tariffs under such schemes.7
2.9. The Committee encourage s all Members to consider the details of their IDB notifications and
to improve them where possible . The Secretariat shall, upon request, provide technical assistance
in relation to the submission of the data required for the IDB.8
4 Document series G/RO/W/163 has been updated regularly to describe in detail these notifications [to
be updated in light of developments by 15 September].
5 Data is available for all Members since 2010 unless otherwise indicated.
6 Tariff concessions include any special programme which allow imports of certain go ods to be
temporarily or permanently exempt from the "normal" import duty. They may be implemented for social,
humanitarian , economic or industry assistance purposes . Typical concessionary regimes include imports into
free trade zones and d uty drawback for manufacturing exporters .
7 See paragraph 2 of the IDB Decision "Modalities and operation of the Integrated Database (IDB) "
(G/MA/367 ).
8 Members may contact the Secretariat through the following email address: idb@wto.org . See
document G/MA/367 , paragraph 12, 23 -254 on technical assistance . G/RO/W/223
- 4 -
3 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS REPORTED TO THE CRO
3.1. A number of developments relating to preferential rules of origin and related administrative
requirements have been reported to the Committee since 2017, including the following:
(i) Thailand initiated stakeholder consultations with a view to extending the duration of its
preferential trade arrangement for LDCs. The consultation would also aim at expanding
the coverage of eligible products and improving the rules of origin ( G/RO/77 ; G/RO/91 );
(ii) China introduce d a series of improvements , including new cumulation options ( bilateral
and regional cumulation ). The government also implemented simplified documentary
requirements for country -of-origin certification , allowing for the use of an importer's
declaration based on any advance origin ruling issued by the customs administration of
China. A de minimis value for low -value shipments (not more than CNY 6,000) was also
introduced for which no certification was required. Finally, a system of electronic
certification was rolled out to further simplify certification procedures ( G/RO/77 ;
G/RO/85 );
(iii) Australia reported that it had initiated a comprehensive review p rocess of its GSP,
including the applicable preferential rules of origin (paragraphs 4.1 to 4.7 of
G/RO/M/67 ; G/RO/85 );
(iv) Japan informed Members about the s implification of preferential rules of origin for
knitted apparel of HS Chapter 61 (G/RO/77 ; G/RO/81 ; G/RO/85 );
(v) the European Union (EU) updated the Committee on several occasions on the
introduction of its Registered Exporter System (REX System) for self -certification
(G/RO/79 ; G/RO/94 ). The REX System is also being utilized for imports to Norway
(G/RO/85 ), Switzerland and Türkiye (G/RO/87 );
(vi) Iceland reported that new legislation governing non-reciprocal preferences for LDCs was
being prepared and would be notified in due course (G/RO/89 );
(vii) the Russian Federation highlighted the key elements of its revised preferential rules of
origin for LDCs being implemented under the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU)'s
Common System of Tariff Preferences , which had entered into force in January 2019.
The new rules are based on a calculation of the value of non -originating materials
(G/RO/91 );
(viii) the United Kingdom updated Members on the continuation of its trade preferences for
LDCs during the transition period until 31 December 2020 and after its withdrawal from
the European Union ( G/RO/91 ). The UK also in formed Members about its Developing
Countries Trading Scheme (DCTS) and the revised rules of origin to be implemented
under it . The new rules simplified product -specific rule s, introduced cumulat ion with up
to 95 other eligible Members , and introduc ed the possibility of deduct ing freight and
insurance costs from the calculation of the value of non -originating - materials
(G/RO/97 );
(ix) Canada introduced changes to allow additional apparel products to qualify for duty -free
treatment when imported into Canada in 2017 ( G/RO/82 ); and
(x) Norway expanded cumulation possibilities in 2017 by introducing cumulation among
LDCs after an inte r-ministerial working group had examined the Norwegian GSP scheme
in light of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision. (G/RO/85 ).
4 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI AND NAIROBI MINISTERIAL DECISIONS
4.1. Different submissions of the LDC Group compared the existing practices of preference -granting
Members with the relevant paragraphs of the Nairobi Decision in order to highlight the aspec ts that,
in the view of the LDC Group , need ed to be reform ed (Annex 3 contains a full list of such
submissions) . However, v iews about the status of implementation of the Nairobi Decision often
diverged among the LDC Group and preference -granting Members . G/RO/W/223
- 5 -
4.1 Requirements for the Assessment of Sufficient or Substantial Transformation
4.1.1 Ad valorem percentage Criterion
4.2. Different submissions by the LDC Group have analysed preference -granting Members' practices
in light of the relevant paragraphs of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision , and have highlighted the
follow ing:
(i) The LDC Group reiterated the Group's preference , and the Nairobi Ministerial Decision's
recommendation , for a method of calculation based on the ex -works price or free on
board (f.o.b. ) value of non -originating materials. Non -originating materials should be
allowed up to 75% of the final value of goods;
(ii) all preference -granting Members (except Australia, New Zealand, and the United
States) whose rules were based on the ad valorem percentage criterion already use a
method of calculation based on the value of non -originating materials;
(iii) currently , only Canada and the United Kingdom meet the threshold of 75% of the value
of non -originating materials; and
(iv) currently , only the United Kingdom explicitly allows for the deduction of the costs of
freight and insurance from the value of non -originating materials. Other
preference -granting Members do not have such an allowance , or their rules were unclear
in this respect.
4.3. Some preference -granting Members objected to such proposals stating that their present rules
of origin already comply with the Nairobi Decision.
4.1.2 Change of Tariff Classification Criterion
4.4. Submissions by the LDC Group also analysed preference -granting Members' practices related
to the use of rules of origin based on the change of tariff classification (CTC) criterion. The LDC Group
focused on the rules used by the European Union, Japan , Norway , and Switzerland , and noted the
follow ing:
(i) The LDC Group reiterated the Group's preference for the parameters contained in the
Nairobi Ministerial Decision in this area, most notably, the elimination of exclusions and
restrictions associated with CTC rules and the elimination of rules which impose a
combination of two or more criteria for the same product;
(ii) according to the LDC Group, exclusions and restrictions continue to be widespread and
in most cases are not justifiable. Such rules are often also stricter than the rules of
origin which have been agreed to in the context of free trade agreements ; and
(iii) the LDC Group circulated a list of product -specific rules used by Japan which, in its view ,
should be reformed ( G/RO/W/209 ). Following this submission, bilateral consultation s
took place between the LDC Group and Japan in 2019 . No further progress has been
reported to the CRO and, according to the LDC Group, the points raised about the
complexity of rules of origin in Japan still needed to be addressed.
4.1.3 Specific Working and Processing Criterion
4.5. The LDC Group has noted in differen t submissions that this criterion could be usefully used for
textiles and clothing provided that it reflects a single transformation requirement ( for example,
"manufacture from fabric" for items of HS Chapter 62, as applied by the European Union and Japan) .
The same criterion could be used for HS Chapters 28 to 30 ( namely, " chemical reaction").
4.2 Cumulation
4.6. The LDC Group pointed out that cumulation possibilities can provide important flexibility.
However, cumulation possibilities should not be a substitute fo r simple and liberal rules of origin , G/RO/W/223
- 6 -
since cumulation is often associated with a series of administrative procedures and conditions. In
this sense, the general and product -specific rules of origin had to be considered together with
cumulation for a full a ppraisal of the leniency or stringency of the rules.
4.7. In this respect, the LDC Group noted difficulties related to the use of cumulation by Cambodia
under the European Union's GSP (G/RO/W/220 ). The submission raised important cross -cutting
issues concerning cumulation, the procedures attached to cumulation , and the graduation of LDC s
and neighbouring countries in the same regional group. The submission shared lessons learned and
best practices that preference -giving Members could adopt (i) to facilitate compliance with origin
requirements ; (ii) to mitigate any adverse effects arising from graduation by facilitating cum ulation
procedures ; and (iii) to maintain regional value chains, as implicitly recommended by paragraph 2
of the Nairobi Decision on cumulation.
4.8. The submission described the complex and lengthy procedures to request extended cumulation
in the European Unio n, noting that, since December 2022, when the application had been lodged,
there had not been a formal response from the EU. The submission also highlighted that Canada
had provided examples of best practices in addressing similar challenges , and explained that
ACP countries participating in an economic partnership agreement s (EPAs) with the EU could be
facing similar difficulties in deriving the benefits of cumulation. The EU explained that the matter
would be further discussed with Cambodia.
5 DOCUMENTARY R EQUIREMENTS
5.1 Proof of Origin
5.1. The Nairobi Ministerial Decision recognizes self -certification as a useful trade facilitating
practice . In that context, the LDC Group noted that the European Union , Norway, and Switzerland
had introduced self -certification under the Registered Exporter System (REX). The Canadian GSP
and the US AGOA also provide d for self -certification , while Japan allowed for self -certification of
origin in certain instances. The LDC Group requested the delegations of Chile; China; India; the
Republic of Korea; the Russian Federation; Chinese Taipei ; and Thailand to introduce
self-certification as an option for certain goods.
5.2 Trade Facilitation Measures for Small Consignment s
5.2. The issue of " minimizing documentation requirements f or small consignments" has not yet
been discussed in the Committee.
5.3 Documentary Evidence of Direct Consignment
5.3. The LDC Group noted in certain submissions that documentary evidence related to direct
consignment could constitute an obstacle for certain LDCs, especially landlocked and island LDCs.
In this respect, the LDC Group noted that most preference -granting Members require d documentary
evidence of non -manipulation in case of transit (either a through -bill of lading or a certificate of
non-manipulation). In this sense, the LDC Group noted that the "non -alteration" rule introduced by
the European Union could constitute a best practice in this area. Under th e EU's new regime, the
non-manipulation (non -alteration principle) clause shall be considered satisfied a priori unless
customs administrations have a doubt about the goods ( G/RO/W/191 ).
5.4. The LDC submission concluded that the non -alteration principle provision introduced by the
European Union, or similar arrangements, such as those adopted by Australia and New Zealand ,
constitut ed a best practice that other preference -giving Members should progressively adopt . G/RO/W/223
- 7 -
6 IMPACT OF PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN ON PREFERENCE UTILIZATION: THE
ANALYSIS OF PREFERENCE UTILIZATION RATES
6.1. Further to paragraph 4.3 of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision9, Members have :
(i) Agreed to modalities for the calculation of utilization rates; and
(ii) considered several notes describing patterns of utilization of trade preferences by LDCs.
6.1 Linking Preference Utilization Rates and Preferential Rules of Origin
6.2. Preference utilization rates are a useful marker to examine the impact of origin -related
requirements. In fact, customs will only grant preferential treatment to goods which are deemed to
"originate" in the beneficiary country. In practice, a good must simultaneously satisfy
three requirements:
(i) A good must be wholly obtained in the beneficiary country or comply with minimum
substantial transformation requirements (that is, satisfy general or product -specific
rules of origin);
(ii) a good must demonstrate compliance with such requirements by being accompanied by
the prescribed proof of origin ( namely, a certificate of origin delivered by a designated
competent authority or certifying body , or a self -declaration of origin); and
(iii) a good must in principle be directly consigned from the beneficiary country to the
preference -granting country to avoid any risks of further manipulation in third or transit
countries or, in case of transit, goods must satisfy the prescriptions in relation to
documentary evidence about non -manipulation (or non -alternation) in transit.
6.3. If a preference is fully utilized (that is, a utilization rate of 100%), it necessarily indicates that
these three requirements have been simultaneously met , and therefore that origin requirements did
not hinder the utilization of the preference.
6.4. To the contrary, low preference utilization rates could indicate that these requirements are too
demanding or too costly , and that in certain cases they cannot be met . Therefore, the calculation
and monitoring of preference utilization rates offer a useful means by which to examine the extent
to which rules of origin are facilitating market access for LDCs while allowing for the full use of the
preferences available to them.
6.2 Modalities for the Calculation of Utilization Rates
6.5. First, regarding the methodology for the calculation of utilization rates, the Secretariat had
proposed to use the following formula based on the discussion in G/RO/W/161 , namely the
modalities of calculation agreed by the CRO :
𝑝𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒=∑∑𝑃𝑇𝐴𝑗,𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑
𝑝 𝑗
∑∑𝑃𝑇𝐴𝑗,𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒
𝑝 𝑗
𝑝𝑢𝑟𝑖,𝑝𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒: PREFERENCE UTILIZATION RATE (per cent) based on import value by preference granting Member
where: i
j = preference granting Member
= preference receiving Member
p = product
PTAreported = imports reported to have taken place under the PTA preferential duty scheme
PTAeligible = imports under any eligible tariff line, i.e. preferential duty < MFN duty rate.
6.6. More recently, the notes of the Secretariat have reflected a change of focus from "utilization"
to "non -utilization" or "underutilization" instead. The methodology and data needs are identical, but,
in the view of the Secretariat, the results allow for a more comprehensive analysis of the factors
that define trade between LDCs and preference -granting Members. Underutilizat ion rates reflect the
9 Paragraph 4.3 reads: "[…] Members reaffirm their commitment to annually provide import data to the
Secretariat as referred to Annex 1 of the PTA Transparency Mechanism, on the basis of which the Secretariat
can calculate utilization rates, in accordance with modalities to be agreed upon by the CRO". G/RO/W/223
- 8 -
proportion of imports which pay MFN duties despite being eligible for at least one trade preference
programme as reflected in the following formula :10
𝑝𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒=∑∑𝑀𝐹𝑁𝑗,𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑓 𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒
𝑝 𝑗
∑∑𝑃𝑇𝐴𝑗,𝑝𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒
𝑝 𝑗
𝑝𝑢𝑢𝑟𝑖,𝑝𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒: PREFERENCE UNDERUTILIZATION RATE (per cent) based on import value by preference granting
Member
where: i
j = preference granting Member
= preference receiving Member
p = product
MFNpref eligible = imports under any preference eligible tariff line, i.e. , preferential duty < MFN
duty rate , but are imported under the Most-Favoured -Nation (MFN) tariff
PTAeligible = imports under any eligible tariff line, i.e. preferential duty < MFN duty rate.
6.3 Preference U tilization by LDCs
6.7. Different notes by the Secretariat and by the LDC Group and other delegations have reported
on preference utilization rates and assessed the relevant implications (see Annex 1 and 2). In
addition, the following events were organized which explored the factors that influence the utilization
of trade preferences, including rules of origin:
(i) A first Webinar organized by the Secretariat 2021 "What drives the utilization of trade
preferences";
(ii) a second , follow -up Webinar organized by the Secretariat in 2022 on "What drives the
utilization of trade preferences"; and
(iii) a webinar organized by the delegation of the United States during the 8th WTO Aid for
Trade Review on "How can exporting countries improve utilization of US Trade
Preference Programs?"
6.8. The examination of import statistics for the 2015-2019 period confirms that utilization of
preference s can be improved in all prefere ntial arrangements . It also confirms that utilization rates
vary significantly across different prefere nce-granting Members. Even in cases of overall high levels
of utilization, there might also be "pockets" of non -utilization in certain sectors , and some
preferential arrangements show a low or very low level of utilization.
6.9. In addition, preference utilization rates show significant annual variations, which confirms the
benefits of examining multiple years to identify structural patterns and trends . Strong variation s
could also be an indication that the utilization of preferen ces is influenced by trade values .
6.10. While the discussions in the CRO were useful to better understand the impact of rules of origin
on pr eference utilization, they also highlighted various limitations in the data that require the
Committee 's further conside ration. In many cases , the relevant preference -granting Member
identified discrepancies between the analys es and their own internal research , while in certain other
cases, temporary tariffs and other factors not available to the Secretariat were identified as limiting
the scope of the analysis.
6.4 Factors Not Related to Rules of Origin Which Affect the Utilization of Trade
Preferences
6.11. The Secretariat has indicated in its notes that additional factors, not related to rules of origin,
may help explain low rates of preference utilization, including:
(i) The existence of several competing preferential schemes or the availability of other tariff
concessions (for example, Australia grants trade preferences to Cambodia both under
the "Australian System of Tariff Prefe rences" (ASTP) and under the
ASEAN -Australia -New Zealand Free Trade Agreement (AANZFTA). As a result, low
preference utilization under one scheme does not necessarily indicate problems related
10 G/RO/W/161/Rev.1 [to be issued] . G/RO/W/223
- 9 -
to origin requirements in a specific scheme , and could rather simply reflect that trade
is being channelled through multiple schemes); and
(ii) economic operators may not be aware of the availability of preferences or may simply
choose not to claim any preferential benefits, including because they perceive these
benefits to be insignificant ( such as a tariff margin that is too small) or because they
perceive compliance costs to be too high ( for example, the time or documentation
needed to obtain a certificate of origin is too long , or the costs of c onsigning goods
directly are too high).
6.5 Factors Related to Rules of Origin
6.12. Different submissions of the LDC Group and notes prepared by the Secretariat have explored
the linkages between rules of origin and origin -related administrative requirements and t he
utilization of trade preferences. This link is complex and preference utilization rates do not always
allow for clear -cut conclusions. The following points could be noted in this regard :
(i) The under or non -utilization of preferences is common in many sectors , including
sectors for which simple rules of origin apply, such as agricultural goods or minerals
(that is, wholly obtained products). The LDC Group pointed to low utilization rates in
the case of the preferences of China's and India. Low utilizati on rates affected a wide
range of tariff lines, from raw materials, natural products, and agricultural products , to
garments and other industrial products. The analysis showed zero utilization, especially
for certain African LDC s. The delegation of China o bjected to these findings , explaining
that benefits under other preferences or duty relief schemes could explain the low
utilization of China's LDC preferences. China's response emphasized the need for the
notification of a correct and complete dataset. The LDC Group called on China and India
to provide the WTO Secretariat with an appropriate and complete set of data ;
(ii) the utilization of trade preferences also varies greatly from one LDC to another. Going
forward, a better understanding of these differences – and particularly the case of LDCs
who managed to improve their utilization rates , such as Afghanistan or Rwanda – could
yield useful insights about the mechanics behind better preference utilization ;
(iii) there might be a "learning by doing effect" in the case of at least one PTA-LDC (Chile).
It would be useful to better understand any strategies that were implemented to
increase awareness of, and compliance with , preferential origin requirements;
(iv) direct consignment obligations seem to have a significant impact on the ability of LDCs
to utilize their available trade preferences. L andlocked LDCs find it more difficult to
benefit from trade preferences. In fact, the analysis shows that there is a significant ly
lower utilization of preferences in the case of landlocked LDCs . In a detailed analysis of
utilization rates for Switzerland , the LDC Group identified large pockets of
underutilization. Bilateral consultation s between Switzerland and the LDC Group helpe d
to identify reasons linked to the direct consignment requirement. However, reforms to
facilitate LDC compliance with this requirement , and to contribute to a higher utilization
of the Swiss preferences , have not yet been reported to the CRO ;
(v) the modalities concerning proofs of origin also seem to have a significant impact on the
ability of LDCs to utilize trade preferences. Self-certification is associated, in general,
with better preference utilization. Nevertheless, these findings need to be interpreted
with caution given limitations in the methodology and data , as well as the difficulties in
isolating the impact on origin certification of other factors; and
(vi) better preference utilization also require s trade facilitation reforms in beneficiary LDCs,
in particular to promote trade preferences among economic operators , and facilitate and
simplify the administrative procedures for the application and delivery of certificates of
origin.
6.13. Going forward, some preference -granting Members have noted that it would be useful for
preference -granting Members and beneficiary LDCs to strengthen their cooperation for the G/RO/W/223
- 10 -
calculation of utilization rates , and to strive together to improve the accuracy of the relevant
research.
6.14. In relation to the utilization of trade preferences, Members also took note of the launch by
UNCTAD of the online platform " Database on Generalized System of Trade Preferences Utilization ".
This tool provides information on the utilization of the GSP schemes , as well as other trade
preferences granted to developing countries and LDCs by Canada, the European Union, Japan, and
the United States .
7 WAY FORWARD
7.1. [Members reaffirm their commitment and shared responsibility to achieving the objective of
implementing preferential rules of origin for LDCs that are simple and transparent and that contribute
to facilitating market access. Members agree to continue their work in the CRO, and in particular:
(i) Continue an examination of substantive aspects of the preferential rules of origin used
by preference -granting Members in light of the provisions of the Bali and Nairobi
Ministerial Decisions;
(ii) identify , as appropriate, lessons learned and best practices to design and administer
rules of origin;
(iii) preference -granting Members shall revi ew their legislation in light of the provisions of
the Nairobi Ministerial Decision and any agreed best practices and report on any
developments to the CRO. Members that are not in a position to align their legislation
with such provisions and best practic es shall submit the reasons for such
non-alignment;
(iv) the Committee shall continue to report on the progress made in implementing the
Ministerial Decisions and any recommendations to the General Council ; and
(v) in the context of the efforts made to i mprove the functioning of the CRO , it is
recommended that the CRO may be provided with funds from the technical assistance
budget of the WTO to carry out research on identifying specific difficulties encountered
by LDC s in meeting rules of origin and relat ed administrative requirements. ]
8 REFERENCES TO DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE CRO (2013 -2023)
Annex 1 contains a list of documents submitted by delegations . Annex 2 contains the list of
background notes prepared by the WTO Secretariat . Annex 3 contains the l ist of annual reports from
the CRO to the General Council on preferential rules of origin for LDCs since 2013.
_______________
G/RO/W/223
- 11 - ANNEX 1
DOCUMENTS CONCERNING PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN FOR LDCS
List of Documents Submitted by the LDC Group on Preferential Rules of Origin for LDCs (2013-2023)
Document Symbol Title Member Date of
Discussion
G/RO/W/148 Challenges Faced by LDCs in Complying with Preferential Rules of Origin under
Unilateral Preference Schemes LDC Group November 2015
G/RO/W/154 Elements for a Discussion on Preferential Rules of Origin for LDCs LDC Group April 2015
G/RO/W/159 Implementation of the Ministerial Decisions on Preferential Rules of Origin for Least
Developed Countries LDC Group April 2016
G/RO/W/169 Possible Agenda Items for a Dedicated Session of the CRO Meeting on Preferential
Rules of Origin for LDCs LDC Group October 2017
RD/RO/52 Developments Regarding Methods of Calculation of the Percentage Criterion
(Paragraph 1.1 of the Nairobi Decision) Tanzania and Lao PDR (on behalf of
the LDC Group) October 2017
RD/RO/53 Developments Regarding Methods using a Change of Tariff Classification Criterion to
Determine Substantial Tr ansformation (Paragraph 1.2 of the Nairobi Decision) Benin (on behalf of the LDC Group) October 2017
RD/RO/54 Developments Regarding Methods using a Specific Manufacturing or Processing
Operation Criterion to Determine Substantial Transformation ( Paragraph 1.3 of the
Nairobi Decision ) Myanmar (on behalf of the
LDC Group) October 2017
RD/RO/55 Developments Regarding Methods using a Combination of Requirements to
Determine Substantial Transformation ( Paragraphs 1.4 and 1.5 of the Nairobi
Decision) Tanzania (on behalf of the
LDC Group) October 2017
RD/RO/56 Developments Regarding Cumulation Provisions (Paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the
Nairobi Decision) Cambodia (on behalf of the
LDC Group) October 2017
RD/RO/57 Developments Regarding Documentary Requirements (Parag raph 3 of the Nairobi
Decision) Nepal (on behalf of the LDC Group) October 2017
RD/RO/58 Utilization Rates under Preferential Trade Arrangements for Least Developed
Countries Yemen (on behalf of th e LDC Group) October 2017
G/RO/W/223
- 12 - Document Symbol Title Member Date of
Discussion
G/RO/W/174 Implementation of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Preferential Rules of Origin for
LDCs LDC Group April 2018
RD/RO/73 Identifying Low Utilization of Trade Preferences Due to the Stringency of Rules of
Origin: New Evidence Tanzania (on behalf of the
LDC Group) October 2018
G/RO/W/184 and Rev.1
RD/RO/79 (presentation) Rules of Origin Based on a Change of the Tariff Classification Criterion LDC Group
Tanzania (on behalf of the
LDC Group) May 2019
G/RO/W/186 and
RD/RO/80 (presentation) Further Evidence from Utilization Rates LDC Group
Bangladesh (on behalf of the
LDC Group) May 2019
G/RO/W/191 and
RD/RO/82 (presentation) Direct Consignment Rules and Low Utilization of Trade Preferences Cambodia (on behalf of the
LDC Group) October 2019
G/RO/W/192 and
RD/RO/84 (presentation) Further Evidence from Utilization Rates: Utilization by LDCs of China's Preference LDC Group
Tanzania (on behalf of the
LDC Group) October 2019
RD/RO/87 Fifth Anniversary of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision: Review of Implementation,
Identification of Gaps and the Way Forward Yemen and Cambodia (on behalf of
the LDC Group) March 2020
G/RO/W/202 and
RD/RO/91 Submission of the LDC Group t o the Committee on Rules of Origin Ad Valorem
Criterion (Paragraph 1.1 of the Nairobi Decision) LDC Group
Tanzania and Afghanistan (on behalf
of the LDC Group) November 2020
G/RO/W/198 Submission of Chad on Behalf of the LDC Group on Preferential Rules of Origin for
Least Developed Countries LDC Group November 2020
G/RO/W/209 Further Submission on Rules of Origin Based on a Change of Tariff Classification:
The Case of Rules of Origin used by Japan LDC Group October 2021
G/RO/W/210 Taking Note of the Implementation of the Bali and Nairobi Ministerial Decisions at
MC12 LDC Group October 2021
G/RO/W/211 Examination of Existing Origin -Related Documentary Requirements (Paragraph 1.8
of the Bali Decision and Paragraph 3.1 of the Nairobi Decision) LDC Group April 2022
G/RO/W/216 Preliminary Examination of Proposed New Rules of Origin under the UK Developing
Countries Trading Scheme ( DCTS ) LDC Group October 2022
G/RO/W/220 The Impact of GSP Graduation on LDCs and Cumulation – The Case of Cambodia Cambodia June 2023
G/RO/W/223
- 13 - Document Symbol Title Member Date of
Discussion
G/RO/W/222 and
RD/RO/102 (presentation) Further Evidence from Utilization Rates Utilization by LDCs of China and India's
Preference LDC Group
Senegal (on behalf of the LDC Group) June 2023
RD/RO/103 Alternative Methods of Assessing Utilization of Preferential Rules of Origin of LDCs China June 2023
_______________
G/RO/W/223
- 14 - ANNEX 2
LIST OF BACKGROUND NOTES PREPARED BY THE SECRETARIAT ON PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN FOR LDCS (2013-2023)
Document Symbol Title Date
G/RO/W/161 [and Rev.1 to be
issued] Modalities for the Calculation of "Preference Utilization" 25 August 2016
G/RO/W/168/Rev.1 Utilization Rates under Preferential Trade Arrangements for Least Developed Countries under the LDC Duty
Scheme 4 October 2017
G/RO/W/178 Preferential Rules of Origin for Least -Developed Countries Rules of Origin Based on the Criterion of Change of
Tariff Classification 15 October 2018
RD/RO/W/179 Utilization Rates under Preferential Trade Arrangements for Least Developed Countries under the LDC Duty
Scheme 15 October 2018
G/RO/W/185 Utilization Rates under Preferential Trade Arrangements for Least Developed Countries Under the LDC Duty
Scheme 9 May 2019
G/RO/W/187/Rev.1 and
RD/RO/81 (presentation) Impact of Direct Consignment Requirements on Preference Utilization by LDCs 17 October 2019
G/RO/W/203 and
RD/RO/89 (presentation) Calculation of Utilization Rates under Preferential Duty Schemes for Least Developed Countries: The Case of
Minerals and Metals 13 November 2020
G/RO/W/204 and
RD/RO/94 (presentation) Utilization of Trade Preferences by Least Developed Countries: 2015 -2019 Patterns and Trends 7 May 2021
G/RO/W/212 and
RD/RO/99 (presentation) Certification of Origin and the Utilization of Trad e Preferences by Least Developed Countries 6 June 2023
_______________
G/RO/W/223
- 15 -
ANNEX 3
LIST OF REPORTS TO THE GENERAL COUNCIL ON PREFERENTIAL RULES OF ORIGIN FOR LDCS
Year Annual Reports to the General Council
Draft Adopted
2014 - G/RO/76
2015 G/RO/W/156 G/RO/77
2016 G/RO/W/164/Rev.2 G/RO/79
2017 G/RO/W/173 G/RO/85
2018 G/RO/W/180 G/RO/87
2019 G/RO/W/188/Rev.1 G/RO/89
2020 G/RO/W/201 G/RO/91
2021 G/RO/W/207 G/RO/94
2022 G/RO/W/213/Rev.1 G/RO/97
2023 [To be issued] [To be issued]
__________
| 6,420
| 44,287
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_SPS_NCHL707.pdf
|
s_G_SPS_NCHL707
|
G/SPS/N/CHL/707
25 de noviembre de 2021
(21-8913) Página: 1/2
Comité de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias Original: español
NOTIFICACIÓN
1. Miembro que notifica: CHILE
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate:
2. Organismo responsable: Ministerio de Salud (MINSAL)
3. Productos abarcados (número de la(s) partida(s) arancelaria(s) según se
especifica en las listas nacionales depositadas en la OMC; deberá indicarse
además, cuando proceda, el número de partida de la ICS): Metales pesados
(Arsénico, Mercurio, Cadmio, Plomo, Estaño) en los alimentos
4. Regiones o países que podrían verse afectados, en la medida en que sea
procedente o factible:
[X] Todos los interlocutores comerciales
[ ] Regiones o países específicos:
5. Título del documento notificado: Consulta pública de modificación del Decreto Supremo
n°977/96, Ministerio de Salud, Reglamento Sanitario de los alimentos, Artículo 160,
Título IV de los metales pesados . Idioma(s): español . Número de páginas: 7
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/SPS/CHL/21_7342_00_s.pdf
6. Descripción del contenido: La medida notificada corresponde a una armonización al
Título IV del Reglamento Sanitario de los Alimentos (RSA) DS. 977/96 de acuerdo con lo
establecido por el Codex Alimentarius en la "Norma General para los Contaminantes y
Piensos" (CXS 193 -1995), reem plazando en el artículo 160 del RSA, los listados que se
encuentran bajo los subtítulos de Arsénico, Mercurio, Cadmio y Estaño, por los respectivos
cuadros de nivel máximo (NM) para cada categoría de alimentos.
Para las matrices alimentarias que no están i ncorporadas en el Codex, se han establecido
como referentes internacionales, la regulación de metales pesados de la Unión Europea y
la regulación de Nueva Zeland ia y Australia ( Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code -
Schedule 19 - Maximum levels of con taminants and natural toxicants ).
Por otro lado, en base a la evidencia científica internacional y a las actuales regulaciones
de nuestros referentes se han excluido los metales -que además son considerados
oligoelementos esenciales en la nutrición - como : Cobre (Cu), Fierro (Fe), Zinc (Zn) y
Selenio (Se).
Para mayor detalle revisar el documento adjunto a esta notificación.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser: [X] inocuidad de los alimentos, [ ] sanidad animal,
[ ] preservación de los vegetales, [ ] protección de la salud humana contra las
enfermedades o plagas animales o vegetales, [ ] protección del territorio contra
otros daños causados por plagas. G/SPS/N/CHL/707
- 2 -
8. ¿Existe una norma internacional pertinente? De ser así, indíquese la norma:
[X] de la Comisión del Codex Alimentarius (por ejemplo, título o número de
serie de la norma del Codex o texto conexo) : Norma General para los
Contaminantes y Piensos" (CXS 193 -1995)
[ ] de la Organización Mundial de Sanidad Animal (OIE) (por ejemplo,
número d e capítulo del Código Sanitario para los Animales Terrestres o del
Código Sanitario para los Animales Acuáticos) :
[ ] de la Convención Internacional de Protección Fitosanitaria (por ejemplo,
número de NIMF) :
[ ] Ninguna
¿Se ajusta la reglamentación que s e propone a la norma internacional
pertinente?
[X] Sí [ ] No
En caso negativo, indíquese, cuando sea posible, en qué medida y por qué razón
se aparta de la norma internacional:
9. Otros documentos pertinentes e idioma(s) en que están disponibles:
Decreto Supremo N°977/96, Ministerio de Salud, Reglamento Sanitario de los alimentos
10. Fecha propuesta de adopción (día/mes/año) : A su publicación en el Diario Oficial.
Fecha propuesta de publicación (día/mes/año) : Aproximadamente 80 días a partir
de la fecha de distribución de la notificación.
11. Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor: [ ] Seis meses a partir de la fecha de
publicación, y/o (día/mes/año) : Seis meses después de su publicación en el Diario
Oficial.
[ ] Medida de facilitación del comercio
12. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones: [ ] Sesenta días a partir de la
fecha de distribución de la notificación y/o (día/mes/año) : 19 de enero de 2022
Organismo o autoridad encargado de tramitar las observaciones: [X] Organismo
nacional encargado de la notificación, [ ] Servicio nacional de información.
Dirección, número de fax y dirección de correo electrónico ( en su caso ) de otra
institución:
Correo electrónico: sps.chile@sag.gob.cl
13. Texto (s) disponible (s) en: [X] Organismo nacional encargado de la notificación,
[ ] Servicio nacional de información. Dirección, número de fax y dirección de
correo electrónico ( en su caso ) de otra institución:
Correo electrónico: sps.chile@sag.gob.cl
| 722
| 4,775
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN24_KEN1572.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN24_KEN1572
|
G/TBT/N/KEN/1572
26 janvier 2024
(24-0571) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : KENYA
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable:
Kenya Bureau of Standards (Bureau des normes du Kenya)
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'autorité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concern ant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organisme susmentionné:
Kenya Bureau of Standards (Bureau des normes du Kenya)
P.O. Box: 4974-00200, Nairobi (Kenya)
Téléphone : + (254) 020 605490, 605506/69482 58
Fax: + (254) 020 609660/609665
Courrier électronique: info@kebs.org ; Site Web: http://www.kebs.org
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ],
7.2 [ ], autres:
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être i ndiqués, le cas
échéant) : Produits alimentaires en général ( ICS 67 .040)
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : KS 2991(2023) . Almond
kernels - Specification (Amandes - Spécifications), 14 pages, en anglais.
6. Teneur : Le projet de no rme kényane notifié établit les exigences et les méthodes
d'échantillonnage et d'essai applicables aux amandes décortiquées brutes, grillées,
blanchies et frites issues d'amandiers ( Amygdalus communis L. ) et destinées à la
consommation humaine.
Cette norme ne s'applique pas aux amandes amères.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Information des consommateurs, étiquetage ; prévention des pratiques de
nature à induire en erreur et protection des consommateurs ; protection de la santé ou de
la sécurité des personnes ; exigences en matière de qualité ; réduction des obstacles au
commerce et facilitation des échanges .
8. Documents pertinents:
NORME CEE -ONU DPP -06 - AMANDES DÉCORTIQUÉES, publiée par les Nations Unies,
New York et Genève, 2003. G/TBT/N/KEN/1572
- 2 -
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : juin 2 024
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : à déterminer
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 26 mars 2 024
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [X] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
Kenya Bureau of Standards (Bureau des normes du Kenya)
Point d'information national OTC pour l'OMC
P.O. Box: 4974-00200, Nairobi (Kenya)
Téléphone : + (254) 020 605490, 605506/6948258
Fax: + (254) 020 609660/609665
Courrier électronique: info@kebs.org ; Site Web: http://www.kebs.org
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2024/TBT/KEN/24_00725_00_e.pdf
| 475
| 3,181
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_WT_DS_477-21A15.pdf
|
s_WT_DS_477-21A15
|
WT/DS477/21/Add.15
WT/DS478/22/Add .15
17 de julio de 2020
(20-4951) Página: 1/1
Original: inglés
INDONESIA - IMPORTAC IÓN DE PRODUCTOS HOR TÍCOLAS,
ANIMALES Y PRODUCTOS DEL REIN O ANIMAL
INFORME DE SITUACIÓN RELATIVO A LA APLIC ACIÓN DE LAS RECOMEN DACIONES
Y RESOLUCIONES DEL O SD PRESENTADO POR IN DONESIA
Addendum
La siguiente comunicación, de fecha 16 de julio de 2020, dirigida por la delegación de Indonesia al
Presidente del Órgano de Solución de Diferencias, se distribuye de conformidad con el artículo 21.6
del ESD.
_______________
Indonesia presenta este informe de confor midad con el artículo 21.6 del Entendimiento relativo a
las normas y procedimientos por los que se rige la solución de diferencias (ESD).
Indonesia desea reiterar su voluntad de aplicar las recomendaciones y resoluciones del OSD en estas
diferencias. Esta voluntad ha quedado demostrada mediante la introducción de los ajustes
necesarios en los reglamentos del Ministerio de Agricultura (MoA) y el Ministerio de Comercio (MoT)
pertinentes. Dichos ajustes también se han comunicado de forma periódica a este Órgan o. Indonesia
toma nota de las preocupaciones persistentes, especialmente sobre medidas específicas, planteadas
por los Estados Unidos y Nueva Zelandia en reuniones anteriores del OSD.
Por lo que se refiere a la medida 18, tal como se comunicó en reuniones anteriores, el Gobierno ha
remitido al Parlamento el proyecto de enmienda de las leyes pertinentes. Los debates entre el
Gobierno y el Parlamento han seguido en curso a pesar de las restricciones sociales de gran alcance
impuestas a causa de la pandemia de COVID -19.
Indonesia seguirá manteniendo conversaciones con los Estados Unidos y Nueva Zelandia sobre
cuestiones relacionadas con las recomendaciones y resoluciones del OSD.
__________
| 276
| 1,863
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN21_CHN1643.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN21_CHN1643
|
G/TBT/N/CHN/1643
20 de diciembre de 2021
(21-9502) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Se da traslado de la notificación siguiente de conformidad con el artículo 10.6.
1. Miembro que notifica : CHINA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate (artículos 3.2 y 7.2):
2. Organismo responsable : State Administration for Market Regulation (Standardization
Administration of the P.R.C.) (Administración Estatal para la Reglamentación del Mercado
(Administración de Normalización de la República Popular China))
Nombre y dirección (incluidos los números de tel éfono y de fax, así como las
direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso) del organismo o
autoridad encargado de la tramitación de observaciones sobre la notificación,
en caso de que se trate de un organismo o autoridad diferente:
3. Notificación hecha en virtud del artículo 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ],
o en virtud de:
4. Productos abarcados (partida del SA o de la NCCA cuando corresponda ; en otro
caso partida del arancel nacional . Podrá indicarse además, cuando proced a, el
número de partida de la ICS) : Válvulas y aceleradores para tuberías secas de los
sistemas de rociadores automáticos (SA : 848180) ; (ICS: 13.220.10).
5. Título, número de páginas e idioma(s) del documento notificado : National
Standard of the P.R.C., A utomatic Sprinkler System -Part 4 : Dry Pipe Valves and
Accelerator (Norma Nacional de la República Popular China . Sistemas de rociadores
automáticos . Parte 4 : Válvulas y aceleradores para tuberías secas) . Documento en chino
(20 páginas).
6. Descripción del contenido : En el documento notificado se especifican la clasificación y
código, la preparación de modelos, los requisitos, los métodos de prueba, las normas de
inspección, las instrucciones de uso y etiquetado, y los criterios de embalaje, transporte
y almacenamiento relativos a las válvulas y aceleradores de tuberías secas para sistemas
de rociadores automáticos .
El documento se aplica a las válvulas y aceleradores de tuberías secas.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser, incluida, cuando proceda, la naturaleza de los
problemas urgentes : prevención de prácticas que puedan inducir a error y protección
de los consumidores ; protección de la salud o seguridad humanas ; requisitos de calidad.
8. Documentos pertinentes:
9. Fecha propuesta de adopción : No se ha determinado.
Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : No se ha determinado.
10. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : 60 días después de la fecha de
notificación G/TBT/N/CHN/1643
- 2 -
11. Textos disponibles en : Servicio nacional de información [X], o dirección,
números de teléfono y de fax y direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web,
en su caso, de otra institución:
WTO/TBT National Notification and Enquiry Center of the People's Republic of China
(Servicio Nacional de Informaci ón y de Notificación OMC/OTC de la República Popular
China)
Teléfono : +86 10 57954633 / 57954627
Correo electrónico: tbt@customs.gov.cn
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/TBT/CHN/21_7915_00_x.pdf
| 486
| 3,208
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN24_PHL330.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN24_PHL330
|
G/TBT/N/PHL/330
16 avril 2024
(24-3171) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : PHILIPPINES
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable:
Bureau of Philippine Standards (Bureau des normes des Philippines)
Department of Trade and Industry (Ministère du commerce et de l'industrie)
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'autorité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organisme susmentionné:
M. Neil P. C atajay
Director (Directeur)
Bureau of Philippine Standards (Bureau des normes des Philippines)
Department of Trade and Industry (Ministère du commerce et de l'industrie)
Courrier électronique: BPS@dti.gov.ph ; BPS.SMD@dti.gov.ph
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ],
7.2 [ ], autres:
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être indiqués, le cas
échéant) : Tabac, produits du tabac et équipements connexes ( ICS 65 .160)
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : Supplemental Guidelines
for the Implementation of DAO 22 -06, Series of 2022 (Directives complémentaires pour
la mise en œuvre du DAO 22 -06, Série de 2022), 26 pages, en anglais.
6. Teneur : 1.1 Les produits de vapotage contenant ou non de la nicotine, visés par la
Règle 2 du DAO 22 - 06, Série de 2022, devront être révisés comme suit:
1.1.1 Systèmes de cigarettes électroniques;
1.1.2 Cigarettes électroniques et recharges de cigarettes électroniques;
1.1.3 Cigarettes électroniques;
1.1.4 Systèmes de produits à tabac chauffé;
1.1.5 Matériel pour produits à tabac chauffé;
1.1.6 Dispositifs pour produits à tabac chauffé ; et
1.1.7 Pochettes de nicotine à usage oral sans tabac.
1.2 La fabrication, l'importation, la distribution et la vente d'autres nouveaux produits du
tabac qui ne sont pas mentionnés ci -dessus ne ser a pas autorisée sur le marché des G/TBT/N/PHL/330
- 2 -
Philippines sans la promulgation d'une norme de référence et son inclusion dans le présent
règlement technique.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Protection de la san té ou de la sécurité des personnes
8. Documents pertinents:
• Department Administrative Order (DAO) 22 -06, Series of 2022
• Republic Act No. 11900, An Act Regulating the Importation, Manufacture, Sale,
Packaging, Distribution, Use, and Communication of Vaporized Nicotine and Non -
Nicotine Products, and Novel Tobacco Products
• Department Administrative Order (DAO) No. 22 -16, Series of 2022
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : à déterminer
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : La Circulaire -Mémorandum prendra effet
immédiatement après sa publication dans un journal de grande diffusion dont une copie
devra être envoyée à l'Office des registres administratifs nationaux de l'Université des
Philippines.
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 16 mai 2 024
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [ ] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
M. Neil P. C atajay
Director (Directeur)
Bureau of Philippine Standards (Bureau des normes des Philippines)
Department of Trade and Industry (Ministère du commerce et de l'industrie)
3F Trade and Industry Building
361 Sen . Gil Puyat Avenue
Makati City
Philippines
1200
Téléphone : (632) 77913127
Courrier électronique: bps@dti.gov.ph
Site Web : http://www.bps.dti.gov.ph
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2024/TBT/PHL/24_02646_00_e.pdf
| 618
| 4,176
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_AG_NCOL69.pdf
|
r_G_AG_NCOL69
|
G/AG/N/COL/69
17 octobre 2019
(19-6784) Page: 1/7
Comité de l'agriculture Original: espagnol
NOTIFICATION
La communication ci -après , datée du 2 octobre 2019, est distribuée à la demande de la délégation
de la Colombi e. La notification concerne les engagements en matière de soutien interne
(tableau DS:1 et tableaux explicatifs pertinents ) pour l'année civile 2016 .
_______________
G/AG/N/COL/69
- 2 -
Tableau DS: 1
SOUTIEN INTERNE : COLOMBIE
PÉRIODE CONSIDÉRÉE: ANNÉE CIVILE 2016
Mesure globale du soutien totale courante
Niveau d'engagement concernant la MGS totale Monnaie MGS totale courante
(d'après la section I de la Partie IV de la Liste ) (d'après la section I de la partie IV de la Liste ) (d'après les tableaux explicatifs ci -joints )
1 2 3
344 733 Milliers d'USD 0
G/AG/N/COL/69
- 3 -
Tableau explicatif DS: 1
SOUTIEN INTERNE : COLOMBIE
PÉRIODE CONSIDÉRÉE: ANNÉE CIVILE 2016
Mesures exemptées de l'engageme nt de réduction – "Catégorie verte "
Type de mesure Désignation et description de la mesure eu égard
aux critères énoncés à l'Annexe 2 Valeur monétaire Milliers
d'USD Source des
données Note
1 2 3 4
2. Services de caractère général
2. a) Recherche Aide au développement des activités de recherche et de transfert de technologie en vue
d'améliorer et d'accroître la productivité, la compétitivité et la modernisation des activités
agricoles. 72 332
Sous -total: 72 332
2. b) Lutte contre les parasites et les
maladies Renforcement des actions de prévention et de lutte contre les maladies des animaux et des
végétaux qui pourraient affecter la production agricole et renforcement du régime SPS
national. 40 809
Sous -total: 40 809
2. c) Services de formation Aide visant à stimuler et à renforcer la capacité de gestion des entités du secteur agricole
en vue de contribuer au développement de ce secteur en tenant compte des changements
économiques et sociaux du pays. 105 457
(1)
Sous -total: 105 457
2. d) Services de vulgarisation et de
consultation Aides destinées à faciliter le transfert d'informations et des résultats des recherches aux
producteurs et aux consommateurs par la mise en œuvre de systèmes d'information
nécessaires à la prise de décisions dans le secteur agricole. 6 194
Sous -total: 6 194
2. e) Services d'inspection Aide aux centres de diagnostic et aux laboratoires compétents en matière de santé pour
assurer le respect, au niveau national, de mesures de prévention, de contrôle et de
sécurité liées aux produits agricoles . 0
Sous -total:
2. f) Services de commercialisation et
de promotion Aide à la promotion et au renforcement des activités de professionnalisation du secteur
agricole visant à améliorer la compétitivité des régions et à fournir des services de
commercialisation des produits agricoles. 25 695
Sous -total: 25 695
2. g) Services d'infrastructure Aide à l'analyse, à la conception, à la construction, à la remise en état et à la
modernisation de l'infrastructure d'irrigation et de drainage au niveau national . 14 780
Sous -total: 14 780
Sous -total Services de caractère général 265 267
G/AG/N/COL/69
- 4 -
1 2 3 4
13. Programmes d'aide régionale Acquisition et adjudication de terres ; aide à la population rurale déplacée par suite de
flambées de violence ; garantie du droit à la propriété et à l'assainissement pour les
communautés autochtones, comme moyen de préserver leur culture et de respecter leur
identité ; légalisation de la propriété des ter res occupées par les colons petits producteurs,
de sorte qu'ils soient propriétaires de leurs propres moyens de production ; contribution à
la durabilité des zones rurales par le développement de méthodes efficaces qui permettent
la bonne utilisation du sol en fonction de ses caractéristiques. 21 251
Sous -total: 21 251
Total général Catégorie verte 286 518
(1) Équivaut au budget total alloué aux projets (y compris les composantes de soutien à des projets de production , d'assistance technique et de services de formation . On ne dispose pas de
renseignements désagrégés) .
G/AG/N/COL/69
- 5 -
Tableau explicatif DS:2
SOUTIEN INTERNE : COLOMBIE
PÉRIODE CONSIDÉRÉE: ANNÉE CIVILE 2016
Mesures exemptées de l'engagement de réduction – Traitement spécial et différencié – "Programmes de développement"
Type de mesure Désignation et description de la mesure eu égard
aux critères énoncés à l'article 6:2 Valeur monétaire Source des données Note
Milliers d'USD
1 2 3 4
a) Subventions à l'investissement généralement
disponibles pour l'agriculture Mesures d'incitation en faveur des producteurs qui présentent
des projets d'investissement visant à accroître la compétitivité
du secteur agricole et à faciliter les processus d'aju stement des
différents secteurs, ou du développement de nouveaux projets
de production visant à relancer les activités agricoles . 233 858 Ministère de l'agriculture et du
développement rural
Prêts à la production accordés aux petits producteurs pour leur
permettre de faire des investissements visant à accroître la
productivité de leurs activités agricoles . 50 824 FINAGRO
Sous -total: 284 682
c) Soutien destiné à encourager le remplacement
des cultures de plantes narcotiques illicites Aide aux communautés concernées par les cultures illicites au
moyen d'investissements dans des projets de production, la
technologie, la remise en état de l'environnement et le
développement rural . 42 609 Présidence de la République .
Unité du regroupement territorial
Sous -total: 42 609
Total général Programmes de développement 327 291
G/AG/N/COL/69
- 6 -
Tableau explicatif DS: 4
SOUTIEN INTERNE : COLOMBIE
PÉRIODE CONSIDÉRÉE: ANNÉE CIVILE 2016
Calcul de la mesure globale du soutien totale courante
Désignation des produits
initiaux (y compris MGS autre
que par produit) MGS par produit
(d'après les tableaux
explicatifs DS:5
à DS:7) Mesures du soutien
par produit
(d'après le tableau
explicatif DS:8) Total (2+3)
Valeur de
la production Soutien en % de la
valeur
de la production MGS totale courante
(globale) Note
Milliers d'USD Milliers d'USD Milliers d'USD Milliers d'USD Milliers d'USD
1 2 3 4
Coton 2 924 2 924 82 596 3,5% 0 (de minimis ) (1)
Riz 10 090 10 090 1 141 929 0,9% 0 (de minimis ) (1)
Total MGS autre que par produit (d'après le tableau explicatif DS:9)
TOTAL 0
(1) Source : DANE. Le calcul de la valeur de la production résulte d u changement de méthode . Année de base 2015 . Classification centrale des produits (CPC).
G/AG/N/COL/69
- 7 -
Tableau explicatif DS: 6
SOUTIEN INTERNE : COLOMBIE
PÉRIODE CONSIDÉRÉE: ANNÉE CIVILE 2016
Mesure s globale s du soutien par produit : Versements directs non exemptés
Désignation
des produits
initiaux Période considérée
Type(s) de
mesure(s) Prix
administré
appliqué Prix de
référence
extérieur
(en général
d'après les
documents de
la série AGST) Production
visée Versements
directs
totaux liés
aux prix
((4-5)*6) Autres
versements
directs non
exemptés Redevances/
prélèvements
connexes Versements
directs
totaux
(7+8 -9) Source des
données Note
USD
USD Milliers
d'USD Milliers
d'USD Milliers
d'USD Milliers
d'USD
Type Du Au
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Coton Année
civile 01/01/2016 31/12/2016 Soutien
direct aux
producteurs
2 924
2 924 Ministère de
l'agriculture
et du
développement
rural
Total coton 2 924
Riz Année
civile 01/01/2016 31/12/2016 Soutien
direct aux
producteurs 10 090 10 090
Total riz
10 090
__________
| 1,176
| 7,883
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_AG_NISR81R1.pdf
|
q_G_AG_NISR81R1
|
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
7 March 2024
(24-2109) Page: 1/13
Committee on Agriculture Original: English
NOTIFICATION
Revision
The following submission, dated 6 March 2024, is being circulated at the request of the delegation
of Israel . The revised notification concerns domestic support commitments ( Table DS:1 and the
relevant supporting tables) for the Calendar Year 2020.
_______________
This revision results from an in-depth analysis of the Israeli egg market , conducted in 2022 towards
a reform in egg production quotas to be implemented by 2032. Pursuant t o this analysis, Israel
wishes to clarify that there has never been an applied administered price set by the Israeli
government or any other regulatory authority, guaranteed to table egg producers. Moreover, the
pricing of eggs for the producers remains su bject to market forces and fluctuates in accordance with
supply and demand.
The "applied administered price" of "eggs" used for AMS calculations in the original Table DS:1
notification , based on an erroneous assumption , was the corresponding average domestic annual
price published ex post facto .
This revision has accordingly corrected the market price support calculations for "eggs". The modified
support values in the supporting table DS:5, as well as other affected tables , are highlighted in bold.
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 2 - Table DS:1
DOMESTIC SUPPORT: ISRAEL
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 2020
Current Total Aggregate Measurement of Support
Total AMS commitment level Currency Current Total AMS
(from Section I of Part IV of the Schedule) (from Section I of Part IV of the Schedule) (from attached Supporting Tables)
1 2 3
568,980 USD/thousand 457,499
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 3 - Supporting Table DS:1
DOMESTIC SUPPORT: ISRAEL
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 2020
Measures exempt from the reduction commitment - "Green Box"
Measure Type Name and description of measure with reference
to criteria in Annex 2 Monetary value
USD, thousand Data Sources Note
1 2 3 4
2.General Services
2 (a). Research Agriculture Research Center: Improvement of production potential,
diversification of agro -industry and post harvest processes:
General operation 62,664 BB-MOA
Agriculture Research Center: Improvement of production potential,
diversification of agro -industry and post harvest processes:
Infrastructure investments 60,028 BB-MOA
Agriculture Research Center: Improvement of production potential,
diversification of agro -industry and post harvest processes:
Research centres and facilities operations 0 BB-MOA
Agriculture Research Center: Improvement of production potential,
diversification of agro -industry and post harvest processes:
Research funds 0 BB-MOA
Chief Scientist Research Fund: Provide grants to agriculture
research: General operation for research 28,730 BB-MOA
Chief Scientist Research Fund: Provide grants to agriculture
research: 'Kemah' fund – Agriculture Chief Scientist Fund 481 BB-BARD (Kemah)
Chief Scientist Research Fund: Provide grant s to agriculture
research: Agriculture by the Torah (Bible) 0 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 151,903
2 (b). Pest and disease control Services provided for farmers: Plant protection services 8,792 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: Veterinary services 7,381 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: Pest prevention activities 0 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: Plant and animal protection 0 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: Bovine spongiform Encephalopathy
assistance 1 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 16,174
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 4 - Measure Type Name and description of measure with reference
to criteria in Annex 2 Monetary value
USD, thousand Data Sources Note
1 2 3 4
2 (c). Training services Services provided for farmers: Distribution of information, farmers
training and technical assistance. 463 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 463
2 (d). Extension and advisory services Services provided for farmers: Support to farmers' organizations 625 BB-MOA (1)
Subtotal: 625
2 (e). Inspection services Services provided for farmers: Inspection and training 0 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 0
2 (f). Marketing and promotion services Services provided for farmers: Marketing promotion 1,218 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 1,218
2 (g). Infrastructural services Services provided for farmers: Soil conservation and drainage
department 59,909 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: Investment in agriculture 20,083 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 79,992
2 (h). Other general services General Ministry of Agriculture Operations: Provision of overall
management of the Ministry of Agriculture including specialised
administrative service 147,630 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: National park protection Authority 0 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: Pasture authorities 10,746 BB-MOA
Services provided for farmers: Districts assistance 1,891 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 160,267
Subtotal General Services 410,642
3. Public stockholding for food security purposes Cereal Reserve To ensure a reserve for three months of Cereal for
emergency purposes 12,430 BB-MOA
Melah To ensure a reserve of foodstuff for emergency purposes 0 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 12,430
5. Direct payments to producers
6. Decoupled income support Israeli workers Support to encourage Israeli workers in agriculture 33 BB-MOA (2)
Subtotal: 33
8. Payments for relief from natural disasters Natural Disasters Insurance Fund Government allowance in the
Natural Disasters Insurance programme 23,133 BB-MOA
Advances for claims on Insurance Fund Advance payment to
farmers not covered by the insurance policy 36,089 BB-MOA
Natural Disasters Compensation Payment to farmers not covered
by the insurance policy 30 BB-MOA (3)
Water cuts payments Compensation for cut in water supply to
farmers 0 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 59,252
11. Structural adjustment assistance provided through
investment aids Small and medium farmers' loans Governmental guarantees for
SME loans 0 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 0
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 5 - Measure Type Name and description of measure with reference
to criteria in Annex 2 Monetary value
USD, thousand Data Sources Note
1 2 3 4
12. Environmental programmes Environment reform in the dairy farms Payments to milk producers
who produce in compliance with environmental requirements 69 BB-MOA
Jewish Shmita year Environmental programme as part of the
agricultural cycle mandated by the Torah 0 BB-MOA (4)
Subtotal: 69
13. Regional assistance programmes Rural Department Agreement Specific measure to Kibbutzim and
Moshavim. 0 BB-MOA
New Settlement Infrastructure Specific measure to New Kibbutzim
and Moshavim 2,552 BB-MOA
Subtotal: 2,552
Grand Total Green Box 484,978
Notes:
(1) G/AG/N/ISR/61.
(2) G/AG/N/ISR/54.
(3) G/AG/N/ISR/17.
(4) G/AG/N/ISR/54.
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 6 - Supporting Table DS:4
DOMESTIC SUPPORT: ISRAEL
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 2020
Calculation of the Current Total Aggregate Measurement of Support
Description of basic products
(including non -product specific AMS) Product specific
AMS (from
ST DS:5 to DS:7)
USD, thousand Product -specific
EMS (from
ST DS:8)
USD, thousand Total
(2 + 3)
USD, thousand Value of
production
USD, thousand Support as a
% of value
of
production Current Total AMS
USD, thousand Note
1 2 3 4
Milk 457,499 457,499 882,455 51.8% 457,499
Eggs 14,996 14,996 299,993 5.0% 0 (de minimis )
Meat of poultry 8,250 8,250 1,104,589 0.7% 0 (de minimis )
Cotton 0 0 19,404 0% 0 (de minimis )
Cereals 5,267 5,267 80,645 6.5% 0 (de minimis )
Vegetables 407 407 1,684,818 0.0% 0 (de minimis )
Fruits other than citrus 204 204 2,125,279 0.0% 0 (de minimis )
Citrus 0 0 424,095 0% 0 (de minimis )
Flowers 1,721 1,721 155,009 1.1% 0 (de minimis )
Meat of bovine 211 211 463,883 0.1% 0 (de minimis )
Non-product -specific AMS(from ST/DS:9) 32,280 8,971,834 0.36% 0 (de minimis )
TOTAL 457,499
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 7 - Supporting Table DS:5
DOMESTIC SUPPORT: ISRAEL
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 2020
Product -Specific Aggregate Measurements of Support: Market Price Support
Description of
basic products Reporting Year Measure
Types Applied
administer
ed price
USD External
reference
price
(generally
from AGST)
USD Eligible production Associated
fees / levies
USD,
thousand Total market
price support
((4-5)*6) -7
USD,
thousand Data
Sources Note
Type From To
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
eggs CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 Production
quotas and
guaranteed
min. price 0/Tonne 0.0/Tonne 2,177,657 thousand
Tonnes 0 Poultry
Board (1)
Total Eggs 0
tomatoes CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 absorption
of surplus 0/Tonne 257/Tonne 0 hundred Tonnes Plants
Board (2)
cucumbers CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 absorption
of surplus 0/Tonne 333/Tonne 0 thousand Tonnes Plants
Board (3)
onions CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 absorption
of surplus 0/Tonne 208/Tonne 0 thousand Tonnes Plants
Board (4)
potatoes CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 absorption
of surplus 0/Tonne 303/Tonne 0 thousand Tonnes Plants
Board (5)
Total Vegetables 0
meat of poultry CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 Production
quotas and
guaranteed
min. price 0/Tonne 1354/Tonne 0 thousand Tonnes Poultry
Board (6)
Total Meat of
poultry 0
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 8 - Description of
basic products Reporting Year Measure
Types Applied
administer
ed price
USD External
reference
price
(generally
from AGST)
USD Eligible production Associated
fees / levies
USD,
thousand Total market
price support
((4-5)*6) -7
USD,
thousand Data
Sources Note
Type From To
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
milk - tradable CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 Production
quotas and
guaranteed
min. price 453/Tonne 157/Tonne 847 thousand Tonnes 250,712 Dairy Board (7)
milk - non-tradable CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 Production
quotas and
guaranteed
min. price 453/Tonne 157/Tonne 697 thousand Tonnes 206,312 Dairy Board (8)
Total Milk 457,024
Notes:
(1) "Eligible production " is total annual production.
(2) The Plants Board no longer applies absorption of surplus practices.
(3) The Plants Board no longer applies absorption of surplus practices.
(4) The Plants Board no longer applies absorption of surplus practices.
(5) The Plants Board no longer applies absorption of surplus practices.
(6) The Poultry Board no longer sets production quotas for poult ry meat.
(7) "Eligible production" is the total annual production quota. According to FAO's Gateway to Dairy Production (http://www.fao.org/dairy -production -products/socio -
economics/markets -and-trade/), milk products can be classified into non -tradable flu id and tradable, manufactured products.
(8) "Eligible production" is the total annual production quota. According to FAO's Gateway to Dairy Production (http://www.fao.org/dairy -production -products/socio -
economics/markets -and-trade/), milk products can be c lassified into non -tradable fluid and tradable, manufactured products .
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 9 - Supporting Table DS:6
DOMESTIC SUPPORT: ISRAEL
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 2020
Product -Specific Aggregate Measurements of Support: Non -Exempt Direct Payments
Description
of basic
products Reporting Year Measure
Types Applied
administered
price
USD External
reference
price
(generally
from
AGST)
USD Eligible
production Total pric e
related direct
payments
((4-5)*6)
USD,
thousand Other non
exempt
direct
payments
USD,
thousand Associated
fees / levies
USD,
thousand Total direct
payment
(7+8 -9)
USD,
thousand Data
Sources Note
Type From To
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
milk CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 dairy farm
reform 475 475 BB-MOA
Total Milk 475
eggs CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 deficiency
payment 121 121 BB-MOA
eggs CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 Galilee
Law 14,875 14,875 BB-MOA
Total Eggs 14,996
meat of
poultry CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 0 0 BB-MOA
meat of
poultry CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 Galilee
Law 8,250 8,250 BB-MOA
Total Meat
of poultry 8,250
cotton CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 0 0 BB-MOA
Total
Cotton 0
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 10 - Description
of basic
products Reporting Year Measure
Types Applied
administered
price
USD External
reference
price
(generally
from
AGST)
USD Eligible
production Total pric e
related direct
payments
((4-5)*6)
USD,
thousand Other non
exempt
direct
payments
USD,
thousand Associated
fees / levies
USD,
thousand Total direct
payment
(7+8 -9)
USD,
thousand Data
Sources Note
Type From To
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
cereals CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 116 116 BB-MOA
cereals CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 income
insurance 5,151 5,151 BB-MOA
Total
Cereals 5,267
vegetables CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 grower
support 0 0 BB-MOA
vegetables CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 407 407 BB-MOA
Total
Vegetables 407
fruits other
than citrus CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 Marketing
Board 0 0 BB-MOA
fruits other
than citrus CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 grower
support 0 0 BB-MOA
fruits other
than citrus CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 204 204 BB-MOA
Total Fruits
other than
citrus 204
citrus CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 0 0 BB-MOA
Total
Citrus 0
flowers CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 902 902 BB-MOA
flowers CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 grower
support 819 819 BB-MOA
Total
Flowers 1,721
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 11 - Description
of basic
products Reporting Year Measure
Types Applied
administered
price
USD External
reference
price
(generally
from
AGST)
USD Eligible
production Total pric e
related direct
payments
((4-5)*6)
USD,
thousand Other non
exempt
direct
payments
USD,
thousand Associated
fees / levies
USD,
thousand Total direct
payment
(7+8 -9)
USD,
thousand Data
Sources Note
Type From To
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
meat of
bovine CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 investment
program 8 8 BB-MOA
meat of
bovine CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 herd aid 203 203 BB-MOA
Total Meat
of bovine 211
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 12 - Supporting Table DS:7
DOMESTIC SUPPORT: ISRAEL
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 2020
Product -Specific Aggregate Measurements of Support: Other Product -Specific Support and Total Product -Specific AMS
Description
of basic
products Reporting
Year Measure
Types Other
product -
specific
budgetary
outlays
USD,
thousand Other product
specific
support (with
calculation
details)
USD,
thousand Associated
fees /
levies Total other
product -
specific
support
(4+5 -6)
USD,
thousand Market price
support (from
ST DS:5)
USD,
thousand Non-exempt
direct
payments
(from
ST DS:6)
USD,
thousand Total AMS
(7+8+9)
USD,
thousand Data
Sources Note
Type From To
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Total Eggs 0 14,996 14,996
Total Meat
of poultry 8,250 8,250
Total Milk 457,024 475 457,499
Total
Cotton 0 0
Total
Cereals 5,267 5,267
Total
Vegetables 407 407
Total
Fruits
other than
citrus 204 204
Total
Citrus 0 0
Total
Flowers 1,721 1,721
Total Meat
of bovine 211 211
G/AG/N/ISR/81/Rev.1
- 13 - Supporting Table DS:9
DOMESTIC SUPPORT: ISRAEL
REPORTING PERIOD: CALENDAR YEAR 2020
Non-Product -Specific AMS
Measure Types Reporting Year Non-product -
specific
budgetary
outlays
USD, thousand Other non -product
specific support
(include
calculation
details)
USD, thousand Associated
fees / levies
USD, thousand Total non -
product -specific
support
(3+4 -5)
USD, thousand Data
Sources Note
Type From To
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Non-specific support CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 0 0 BB-MOA
Water support CY 01-01-20 31-12-20 32,280 32,280 BB-MOA
TOTAL 32,280
__________
| 2,252
| 16,864
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TFA_W47.pdf
|
q_G_TFA_W47
|
G/TFA/W/47
25 June 2021
(21-5163) Page: 1/1
Committee on Trade Facilitation Original: English
TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT FOUR YEAR REVIEW
ARTICLE 23.1.6 OF THE TFA
COMMUNICATION FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
The following communication, dated 23 June 2021 , is being circulated at the request of the
delegation of the Russian Federation .
_______________
1. The Russian Federation suggests adding the following text to paragraph 2.7 of Section 2 of
the First Review of the Operation and Implementation of the Trad e Facilitation Agreement Factual
Report contained in document G/TFA/W/41 :
"For the maintenance of the transparency notifications submitted by Members of the official places
where information under Article 1 of TFA is published, the Secretariat shall annually monitor the
operability of the related weblinks , namely, those related to the implementation of Article 1.4 of
TFA, and request t he relevant Members to u pdate the links that are identified as broken. "
__________
| 153
| 1,042
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SPS_GEN2052.pdf
|
q_G_SPS_GEN2052
|
G/SPS/GEN/2052
8 July 2022
(22-5287) Page: 1/2
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original: Spanish
EUROPEAN UNION RESTRICTIONS ON EXPORTS OF CHOCOLATE AND COCOA PRODUCTS
DUE TO THE APPLICATION OF COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) NO. 488/2014
OF 12 MAY 2014 AMENDING REGULATION (EC) NO. 1881/2006
AS REGARDS MAXIMUM LEVELS OF CADMIUM
IN FOODSTUFFS (PCE NO. 503)
COMMUNICATION FROM PERU
The following communication, received on 8 July 2022, is being circulated at the request of the
delegati on of Peru.
_______________
1. Peru would like to present to WTO Members its trade concern with respect to Commission
Regulation (EU) No. 488/2014 of 12 May 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No. 1881/2006 as regards
maximum levels of cadmium in foodstuffs. In specific terms, the European Regulation establishes
maximum levels for cadmium in chocolate and other cocoa products that, in practice, have a negative
impact on trade in cocoa beans and cocoa powder.
2. Peru considers that Commission Regulation (EU) No. 488/ 2014 violates Article 2 of the SPS
Agreement because sanitary measures should be applied only to the extent necessary to protect,
inter alia , human health and life; however, the European Union has not taken into account:
a. The opinion of the Joint FAO/WHO Ex pert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), at its
77th meeting in 2013, which did not consider cadmium in cocoa to pose a risk to public
health;
b. The statements made by FAO on behalf of the JECFA Secretariat at the 42nd Session of the
Codex Alimentarius Comm ission in July 2019, according to which dietary exposure to
cadmium from cocoa is insignificant compared to other sources of dietary exposure and does
not amount to a public health concern;
c. Document JECFA/91/SC of 5 March 2021, which indicates that the cadmium contribution of
cocoa products continues to be minor, even in countries where the consumption of such
products is high;
d. The endorsement of the JECFA position at the 15th meeting of the Codex Committee on
Contaminants in Foods (CCCF) in May 2022 to the effect that a reduction in maximum
cadmium levels in cocoa products would have no observable impact on health.
3. The European Union has established maximum cadmium levels in different types o f chocolate
based on a possible maximum tolerable intake (TWI) of 2 .5 µg/kg body weight per week1, while the
level used by the JECFA is 5 .8 µg/kg body weight per week. Thus, the level established by the
European Food Safety Authority is less than half (43 .1%) of that established by the JECFA, resulting
in lower maximum levels in its regional regulations. We therefore call on the European Union to
1 Recital 3 of Regulation No. 488/2014:
"(3) In the scientific opinion on cadmium in food, the CONTAM Panel concluded that the mean
dietary exposures to cadmium in European countries are close to or slightly exceeding the TWI of 2.5 μg/kg
body weight. Certain subgroups of the population may exceed the TWI by about 2 fold. The CONTAM Panel
further concluded that, although adverse effects on kidney function are unlikely to occur for an individual
exposed at this level, exposure to cadmium at the population level should be reduced." G/SPS/GEN/2052
- 2 -
share scientific evidence demonstrating that European Union citizens are 232% more sensitive to
cadmium than ci tizens elsewhere in the world.
4. Furthermore, Peru remains concerned that maximum cadmium levels in chocolate and cocoa
products are still being used as a negotiation tool against producers, who have seen their incomes
fall owing to maximum levels ranging fr om 0.3 to 1.0 ppm for cocoa beans, cocoa cakes, cocoa
husks, cocoa paste, etc.
5. Moreover, the European Regulation is being used for all cocoa powder, regardless of the risk that
it may pose. This situation is made worse by the inaccurate messages sent out b y the European
Union, which indicate that a maximum cadmium level of 0.6 ppm is applicable to all cocoa powder.2
6. In light of the above, Peru calls upon the European Union to rescind Commission Regulation (EU)
No. 488/2014 with respect to chocolate and oth er cocoa products, since it is inconsistent with the
WTO SPS Agreement and creates unnecessary barriers to trade. In addition, Peru encourages the
European Union to review its Regulation in line with the conclusions of the CCCF.
__________
2 European Union fact sheet:
https://ec.europa.eu/food/system/files/2019 -
03/cs_contaminants_catalogue_cadmium_chocolate_en.pdf .
| 728
| 4,592
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN21_EU788.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN21_EU788
|
G/TBT/N/EU/788
24 de marzo de 2021
(21-2416) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Se da traslado de la notificación siguiente de conformidad con el artículo 10.6.
1. Miembro que notifica : UNIÓN EUROPEA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate (artículos 3.2 y 7.2):
2. Organismo responsable : Comisión Europea
Nombre y dirección (incluidos los números de teléfono y de fax, así como las
direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso) del organismo o
autoridad encargado de la tramitación de observaciones sobre la notificac ión,
en caso de que se trate de un organismo o autoridad diferente:
European Commission (Comisión Europea)
EU-TBT Enquiry Point (Servicio de Información OTC de la UE)
Fax: +(32) 2 299 80 43,
Correo electrónico: grow-eu-tbt@ec.europa.eu
Sitio web: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools -databases/tbt/en/
3. Notificación hecha en virtud del artículo 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ],
o en virtud de:
4. Productos abarcados (partida del SA o de la NCCA cuando corresponda ; en otro
caso partida del arancel nacional . Podrá indicarse además, cuando proced a, el
número de partida de la ICS) : biocidas ; Productos de la industria química (ICS :
71.100).
5. Título, número de páginas e idioma(s) del documento notificado : Draft
Commission Implementing Decision on the non -approval of certain active substances in
biocidal products pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament
and of the Council (Proyecto de Decisión de Ejecución de la Comisión relativa a la no
aprobación de determinadas sustancias activas de los biocidas, de conformidad con el
Reglamento [UE] N° 528/2012 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo) . Documentos en
inglés (3 y 2 páginas).
6. Descripción del contenido : El Proyecto de Decisión de Ejecución de la Comisión no
aprueba determinadas sustancias activas de los biocidas de conformidad con el
Reglamento (UE) N° 528/2012 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo . Para una serie de
combinaciones de sustancias activas o tipos de productos incluidas en el programa de
revisión de las sustancias activas existentes enumeradas en el anexo II del Reglamento
(UE) Nº 1062/2014, todos los participantes han retirado, o se considera que han retirado,
su ayuda y, por tanto, las combinaciones de sustancias activas o tipos de productos no
deben aprobarse para su uso en biocidas.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser, incluida, cuando proceda, la naturaleza de los
problemas urgentes : El objetivo del Reglamento (UE) Nº 528/2012 relativo a los
biocidas es mejorar el funcionamiento del mercado interno de los biocidas en la UE,
garantizando al mismo tiempo un alto nivel de protección de la salud humana y animal y
del medio ambiente . Solo se podrán comercializar y utilizar en la UE las sustancias activas
y los biocidas evaluados y que han demostrado su inocuidad y eficacia . Esta legislación G/TBT/N/EU/788
- 2 -
se irá apl icando progresivamente . Se puede consultar más información en los sitios web
de la Comisión de la UE, y de la Agencia Europea de Sustancias y Mezclas Químicas :
http://ec.europa.eu/heal th/biocides/policy/index_en.htm ; protección de la salud o
seguridad humanas ; protección del medio ambiente ; armonización.
8. Documentos pertinentes : Reglamento (UE) Nº 528/2012 del Parlamento Europeo y del
Consejo, de 22 de mayo de 2012 , relativo a la com ercialización y el uso de los biocidas
(DO L 167, de 27 de junio de 2012 , página 1). Disponible en todos los idiomas oficiales
de la UE.
http://eur -lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32012R0528:EN:NOT
9. Fecha propuesta de adopción : junio de 2021
Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : 20 días después de la publicación en el Diario
Oficial de la UE (se aplicará 12 meses después de la adopción)
10. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : 60 días después de la fecha de
notificación
11. Textos disponibles en : Servicio nacional de información [ ], o dirección, números
de teléfono y de fax y direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso,
de otra institución:
European Commission (Comisión Europea)
EU-TBT Enquiry Point (Servicio de Información OTC de la UE)
Fax: + (32) 2 299 80 43,
Correo electrónico: grow-eu-tbt@ec.europa.eu
El documento está disponible en el sitio web UE -OTC: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools -
databases/tbt/en/
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/TBT/EEC/21_2139_00_e.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnat tachments/2021/TBT/EEC/21_2139_01_e.pdf
| 710
| 4,660
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN22_COL259.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN22_COL259
|
G/TBT/N/COL/259
27 juin 2022
(22-4943) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: espagnol
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : COLOMBIE
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable:
Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible (Ministère de l'environnement et du
développement durable)
Ministerio de Comercio, Industria y Turismo (Ministère du commerce, de l'industrie et du
tourisme)
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'autorité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organism e susmentionné:
Point de contact OTC/SPS
Servicio Nacional de Información de Colombia (Point d'information national de Colombie)
puntocontacto@mincit.gov.co
Dirección de Regulación (Regulation Department)
Calle 28 # 13 A 15 Piso 3
(+571) 6067676 int. 1566
Bogotá (Colombie)
www.mincit.gov.co
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [ ], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ],
7.2 [ ], autres [X] : Principe de la transparence
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être indiqués, le cas
échéant) : Conformément au Protocole de Montréal, la fabrication et l'importation
d'équipements et de produits contenant des substances réglementées énumérées dans
les annexes A, B, C, E et F du protocole et/ou nécessitant ces substances pour être
opérationnels ou fonctionner, sont interdites en Colombie.
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) d u texte notifié : Resolución 634 del 17 de
junio de 2022 "Por la cual en desarrollo del Protocolo de Montreal, se entiende prohibida
la fabricación e importación de equipos y productos que contengan y/o requieran para su
operación o funcionamiento las susta ncias controladas en los Anexos A, B, C, E y F del
Protocolo de Montreal y se adoptan otras disposiciones" (Décision n° 63 4 du 17 juin 2 022
"interdisant, conformément au Protocole de Montréal, la fabrication et l'importation
d'équipements et de produits co ntenant des substances réglementées énumérées dans
les annexes A, B, C, E et F du Protocole de Montréal et/ou nécessitant ces substances
pour être opérationnels ou fonctionner, et adoptant d'autres dispositions"), 20 pages, en
espagnol G/TBT/N/COL/259
- 2 -
6. Teneur : La décis ion notifiée établit des dispositions applicables à toutes les personnes
physiques et morales qui fabriquent et/ou importent certains équipements et produits,
lorsque ceux -ci contiennent, ont nécessité pour leur production et/ou nécessitent pour
être opéra tionnels ou pour fonctionner, les substances réglementées énumérées dans les
annexes A, B, C, E et F du protocole de Montréal.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Protection de l'environnement
8. Documents pertinents : -
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : À partir de la publication au Journal officiel ( Diario
Oficial )
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : Les mesures énoncées au chapitre III de la
décision entreront en vigueur dès la publication de l'acte administratif notifié au Journal
officiel.
Les autres mesures énoncées dans la décision entreront en vigueur trois (3) mois après
la publication de l'acte administratif notifié au Journal officiel.
Une fois le délai sus mentionné écoulé, les décisions n° 1652 de 2007, n° 0171 de 2013
et n° 2507 de 2018 seront abrogées.
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : Sans objet
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [X] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
Point de contact OTC/SPS
Servicio Nacional de Información de Colombia
puntocontacto@mincit.gov.co
Dirección de Regulación
Calle 28 # 13 A 15 Piso 3
(+571) 6067676 int. 1566.
Bogotá (Colombie)
www.mincit.gov.co
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2022/TBT/COL/22_4324_00_s.pdf
| 657
| 4,413
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SPS_NEU487.pdf
|
q_G_SPS_NEU487
|
G/SPS/N/EU/487
30 April 2021
(21-3721) Page: 1/2
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original: English
NOTIFICATION
1. Notifying Member: EUROPEAN UNION
If applicable, name of local government involved:
2. Agency responsible: European Commission, Health and Food Safety Directorate -
General
3. Products covered (provide tariff item number(s) as specified in national
schedules deposited with the WTO; ICS numbers should be provided in addition,
where applicable): Preparation of a kind used in animal nutrition (HS Code: 2309)
4. Regions or countries likely to be affected, to the extent relevant or practicable :
[X] All trading partners
[ ] Specific regions or countries:
5. Title of the notified document: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/658
concerning the authorisation of essential oil from Origanum vulgare L. subsp. hirtum
(Link) letsw. Var. Vulkan (DOS 00001) as a feed additive for all animal species (Text with
EEA relevance) . Language(s): English, French and Spanish . Number of pages: 4
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/SPS/EEC/21_3175_00_e.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/SPS/EEC/21_3175_00_f.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/SPS/EEC/21_3175_00_s.pdf
6. Description of content: Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 provides for the authorisation
of additives for use in animal nutrition and for the grounds and procedures for granting
such authorisation. Article 4(1) of that Regulation provides for the authorisation of
additives. In accordance with Article 4(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 in conjunc tion
with Article 7 thereof, an application was submitted for the authorisation of essential oil
from Origanum vulgare L. subsp. hirtum (Link) letsw. Var. Vulkan (DOS 00001) as a feed
additive for all animal species. The applicant requested the additive to be classified in the
additive category 'sensory additives'. That application was accompanied by the particulars
and documents required under Article 7(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003.
The European Food Safety Authority ( 'the Authority') concluded in it s opinions of
29 November 2017 and 4 July 2019 that, under the proposed conditions of use, the
essential oil from Origanum vulgare L. subsp. hirtum (Link) letsw. Var. Vulkan
(DOS 00001) does not have an adverse effect on animal health, consumer health or t he
environment. It also concluded that the additive is considered as a potential irritant to
skin and eye and a potential respiratory and skin sensitiser in susceptible individuals.
Therefore, the Commission considers that appropriate protective measures s hould be
taken to prevent adverse effects on human health, in particular as regards the users of
the additive. The Authority does not consider that there is a need for specific requirements
of post -market monitoring. It also verified the report on the meth ods of analysis of the
feed additives in feed submitted by the Reference Laboratory set up by Regulation
(EC) No 1831/2003. G/SPS/N/EU/487
- 2 -
7. Objective and rationale: [X] food safety, [ ] animal health, [ ] plant protection,
[ ] protect humans from animal/plant pest or disease, [ ] protect territory from
other damage from pests.
8. Is there a relevant international standard? If so, identify the standard:
[X] Codex Alimentarius Commission (e.g. title or serial number of Codex
standard or related text) : Code of practice on Good Animal Feeding
CAC/RCP 54-2004
[ ] World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) (e.g. Terrestrial or Aquatic
Animal Health Code, chapter number) :
[ ] International Plant Protection Convention (e.g. ISPM number) :
[ ] None
Does this proposed regulation conform to the relevant international standard?
[X] Yes [ ] No
If no, describe, whenever possible, how and why it deviates from the
international standard:
9. Other relevant documents and language(s) in which these are available:
10. Proposed date of adoption (dd/mm/yy) : 21 April 2021
Proposed date of publication (dd/mm/yy) : 22 April 2021
11. Proposed date of entry into force: [ ] Six months from date of publication ,
and/or (dd/mm/yy) : This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day
following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
[X] Trade facilitating measure
12. Final date for comments: [ ] Sixty days from the date of circulation of the
notification and/or (dd/mm/yy) : Not applicable
Agency or authority designated to handle comments: [X] National Notification
Authority, [X] National Enquiry Point. Address, fax number and e -mail address
(if available) of other body:
European Commission
DG Health and Food Safety, Unit D2 -Multilateral International Relations
Rue Froissart 101
B-1049 Brussels
Tel: +(32 2) 29 54263
Fax: +(32 2) 29 98090
E-mail: sps@ec.europa.eu
13. Text(s) available from: [X] National Notification Authority, [X] National Enquiry
Point. Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other body:
European Commission
DG Health and Food Safety, Unit D2 -Multilateral International Relations
Rue Froissart 101
B-1049 Brussels
Tel: +(32 2) 29 54263
Fax: +(32 2) 29 98090
E-mail: sps@ec.europa.eu
| 774
| 5,340
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN19_TZA336.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN19_TZA336
|
G/TBT/N/TZA/336
25 de noviembre de 2019
(19-8039) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Se da traslado de la notificación siguiente de conformidad con el artículo 10.6.
1. Miembro que notifica : TANZANÍA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate (artículos 3.2 y 7.2):
2. Organismo responsable:
Tanzanía Bureau of Standards (Oficina de Normas de Tanzanía)
Morogoro/Sam Nujoma Road, Ubungo
P.O Box 9524
Teléfono : +255 222450206
Correo electrónico: nep@tbs.go.tz
Sitio web: www.tbs.go.tz
Nombre y dirección (incluidos los números de teléfono y de fax, así como las
direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso) del organismo o
autoridad encargado de la tramitación de observaciones sobre la notificación,
en caso de que se trate de un organismo o autoridad diferente:
3. Notificación hecha en virtud del artículo 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ],
o en virtud de:
4. Productos abarcados (partida del SA o de la NCCA cuando corresponda ; en otro
caso partida del arancel nacional . Podrá indicarse además, cuando proceda, el
número de partida de la ICS) : Aceites y grasas comestibles . Semillas oleaginosas (ICS :
67.200).
5. Título, número de páginas e idioma(s) del documento notificado : Norma del
Comité de Normalización de la Dirección de Agricultura y Alimentación A FDC 4 (6551) P3,
Code of hygienic practice for desiccated coconut (Código de Prácticas de Higiene para
coco desecado) . Documento en ingles (7 páginas)
6. Descripción del contenido : El códig o de prácticas de higiene notificado es aplicable al
coco desdecado para consumo humano sin elaboración posterior.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser, incluida, cuando proceda, la naturaleza de los
problemas urgentes : información al consumidor y etiquetado ; protección de la salud o
seguridad humanas ; requisitos de calidad.
8. Documentos pertinentes:
(CAC/ RCP 4 -1971-modificado en 2011) Código de prácticas de higiene para el coco
desecado
9. Fecha propuesta de adopción : abril de 2020
Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : fecha de adopción como norma obligatoria por
el Ministerio de Industria, Comercio e Inversión G/TBT/N/TZA/336
- 2 -
10. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : 60 días después de la fecha de
notificación
11. Textos disponibles en : Servicio nacional de información [X], o dirección,
números de teléfono y de fax y direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web,
en su caso, de otra institución:
Tanzanía Bureau of Standards (Oficina de Normas de Tanzanía)
Morogoro/Sam Nuj oma Road, Ubungo
P.O Box 9524
Teléfono : +255 222450206
Correo electrónico: nep@tbs.go.tz
Sitio web: www.tbs.go.tz
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2019/TBT/TZA/19_6670_00_e.pdf
| 430
| 2,849
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN15_ECU310A1.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN15_ECU310A1
|
G/TBT/N/ECU/310/Add.1
9 septembre 2019
(19-5710) Page: 1/1
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: espagnol
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
La communication ci -après, datée du 9 septembre 2 019, est distribuée à la demande de la délégation
de l'Équateur .
_______________
Luminaires encastrés
La République de l'Équateur annonce que le projet de Règlement technique équatorien RTE INEN 143
relatif aux luminaires encastrés, qui a fait l'objet de la notification G/TBT/N/ECU/310 du
23 mars 2015, a été suspendu et déclaré inapplicable . Le projet de texte notifié est donc retiré.
Texte disponible auprès du Sous -secrétariat chargé de la réglementation de la qualité relevant du
Ministère de la production, du commerce extérieur, de l'investissement et de la pêche (autorité
nationale responsable des notifications):
Point de contact OTC : Andrés Ramón
Platafor ma Gubernamental de Gestión Financiera - Piso 8 Bloque amarillo Av . Amazonas entre
Unión Nacional de Periodistas y Alfonso Pereira
Quito (Équateur)
Téléphone : (+593 -2) 3948760, int. 2252/2254
Courrier électronique:
PuntocontactoOTCECU@produccion.gob.ec
PuntocontactoOTCECU@gmail.com
cyepez@produccion.gob.ec
aramon@produccion.gob.ec
www.normalizacion.gob.ec
https://members.wto.org/c rnattachments/2019/TBT/ECU/19_4925_00_s.pdf
__________
| 168
| 1,379
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/292057_2023_SPS_CAN_23_1215_00_e.pdf
|
292057_2023_SPS_CAN_23_1215_00_e
|
Notice of M odification to the List of
Permitted Food Enzymes to Enable the
Use of L actase from Bacillus subtilis
DH617 in Lactose -reducing Enzyme
Preparations and Certain Dairy F oods
Notice of Modification – Lists of Permitted Food
Additives
Reference Number: NOM/ADM-0193
February 6, 2023
Notice of Modification to the List of Permitted Food Enzymes to Enable the Use of Lactase from Bacillus subtilis DH617 in Lactose -
reducing Enzyme Preparations and Certain Dairy Foods | 2
Summary
Food additives are regulated in Canada under Marketing Authorizations (MAs) issued by the Minister of
Health and the Food and Drug Regulations (Regulations) . Approved food additives and their permitted
conditions of use are set out in the Lists of Permitted Food Additives that are incorporated by reference in
the MAs and published on the Canada.ca website. A petitioner can request that Health Canada authorize a
new additive , or a new source or a new condition of use for an already permitted food additive , by filing a
food additive submission with the Department's Food Directorate. Health Canada uses this premarket
autho rization process to determine whether the scientific data support the safety of food additives when
used under specified conditions in foods sold in Canada.
Health Canada’s Food Directorate received a food additive submission seeking a uthorization for the use of
lactase from Bacillus s ubtilis DH617 to reduce lactose in milk and dairy products. Examples of foods of
interest are cheese, condensed milk and sweet condensed milk, evaporated milk, flavoured milk s, frozen
dairy desserts, milk, milk shake, whe y, yogurt and sweetened yogurt . The requested maximum level of use is
“Good Manufacturing Practice ”.
According to the petitioner, lactase serves to catalyze the breakdown of the milk sugar lactose to its
respective monosaccharides, glucose and galactose, and that its use would allow for the production of
lactose -reduced and lactose -free dairy products. The petitioner also noted that the use of this enzyme could
also increase the sweetness of dairy products as well as improve the texture of c ertain milk -derived products
such as sweetened condensed milks and ice cream.
Most of the se examples of dairy products of interest are standardized foods. Lactase from other sources is
already permitted for use in flavoured milks , milk destined for use in ice cream mix and whey , which are all
standardized food s. Lactase from other sources is also permitted in lactose -reducing enzyme preparations .
Lactose -reducing enzyme preparations may, in turn, be used in unstandardized dairy products, including milk
shake, yogurt and sweetened yogurt, and unstandardized frozen dairy desserts . Lactose -reducing enzyme
preparations may also be used in dairy product s that deviate from standardized dairy products by virtue of
being lactose -reduced or lactose -free provided the common name reflects the deviation (e.g. “lactose -free
milk”) .1
Prior to this notice, B. subtilis DH617 was not a permitted source for any foo d enzyme in Canada.
The results of the Food Directorate’s evaluation of available scientific data support the safety of lactase from
B. subtilis DH617 for use as requested by the petitioner . Therefore, Health Canada has modified the List of
Permitted Food Enzymes to enable the use of lactase from this source by adding the text shown below to the
list. For the definition of “Good Manufacturing Practice” set out in Column 4 as a Maximum Level of Use, see
the Marketing Authorization for Food Additives That May Be Used as Food Enzymes .
1 See the Canadian Food Inspection Agency ’s website Labelling requirements for dairy products and the
Implementation and Enforcement section of this Not ice of Modification.
Notice of Modification to the List of Permitted Food Enzymes to Enable the Use of Lactase from Bacillus subtilis DH617 in Lactose -
reducing Enzyme Preparations and Certain Dairy Foods | 3
Modification to the List of Permitted Food Enzymes
The f ollowing text was added to the List of Permitted Food Enzymes (bold font not used in the list) :
Item
No. Column 1
Additive Column 2
Permitted Source Column 3
Permitted in or Upon Column 4
Maximum Level of Use
and Other Conditions
L.1 Lactase Bacillus s ubtilis
DH617 (1)
Lactose -reducing enzyme
preparations (1)
Good Manufacturing
Practice
(2)
(naming the flavour) Malted
milk; (naming the flavour) Milk;
(naming the flavour) Partly
skimmed milk; (naming the
flavour ) Partly skimmed milk
with added milk solids; (naming
the flavour) Skim milk; (naming
the flavour) Skimmed milk with
added milk solids (2)
Good Manufacturing
Practice
(3)
Milk destined for use in ice
cream mix (3)
Good Manufacturing
Practice
(4)
Whey (4)
Good Manufacturing
Practice
Rationale
Health Canada’s Food Directorat e completed a premarket safety assessment of lactase from B. subtilis DH617
for use as a food enzyme to reduce lactose in foods as requested by the petitioner . The D irectorate
considered allergenicity, chemistry, microbiology, molecular biology, nutrition, and toxicology in the
assessment. The results of the assessment supports the safety of lactase from B. subtilis DH617 for its
requested use . Therefore, the Departm ent has enabled the requested use of lactase from B. subtilis DH617
by adding to the List of Permitted Food Enzymes the new text shown in the above table.
Other Relevant Information
Food additives such as lactase are required to meet food -grade specifications set out in Part B of the
Regulations , where such specifications exist, or those set out in the most recent edition of the Food
Chemicals Codex or the Combined Compendium of Food Additive Specifications where there are no
specifications set out in Part B . The Food Chemicals Codex is a compendium of food grade specifications for
Notice of Modification to the List of Permitted Food Enzymes to Enable the Use of Lactase from Bacillus subtilis DH617 in Lactose -
reducing Enzyme Preparations and Certain Dairy Foods | 4
food ingredients, including food additives, published by the United States Pharmacopeial Convention.
Specifications in the Combined Compendium of Food Additive Specifications and its associated General
Specifications and Considerations for Enzyme Prepara tions are prepared by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert
Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) , both of which are published by the Food and Agriculture Orga nization
of the United Nations.
Implementation and Enforcement
Lactase from B. subtilis DH617 is being permitted for use in lactose -reducing enzyme preparations, as is
already permitted for lactase from other sources. Manufacturers interested in using a lactose -reducing
enzyme preparation to make a lactose -reduced or lactase -free version of a standardized dairy product that is
not specifically permitted to contain lactase as shown by the List of Permitted Food Enzymes should consult
the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s guidance on “Common names for lactose -free dairy products” at the
Agency’s website “ Labelling requirements for dairy products ”.
The above modification came into force February 6 , 2023, the day it was published in the List o f Permitted
Food Enzymes .
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is responsible for the enforcement of the Food and Drugs Act and its
associated regulations with respect to foods.
Contact Information
Health Canada's Food Directorate is committed to reviewing new scientific information on the safety in use of
any permitted food additive . Anyone wishing to submit an inquiry or new scien tific information on the use of
a permitted food additive may do so in writing, by regular mail or electronically. If you wish to contact the
Food Directorate electronically about lactase from B.subtilis DH617 , please use the words " lactase (NOM -
0193)" in the subject line of your e -mail.
Bureau of Chemical Safety, Food Directorate
251 Sir Frederick Banting Driveway
Tunney’s Pasture, PL: 2202C
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K9
E-mail: bcs-bipc@hc -sc.gc.ca
| 1,291
| 8,288
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/271705_2021_SPS_BRA_21_1779_00_x.pdf
|
271705_2021_SPS_BRA_21_1779_00_x
|
01/03/2021 SEI/MAP A - 14042666 - Minuta
https://sistemas.agricultura.gov .br/sei/controlador .php?acao=documento_imprimir_web&acao_origem=arvore_visualizar&id_documento=25648103&in … 1/2
MINISTÉRIO DA AGRICULTURA, PECUÁRIA E ABASTECIMENTO
SECRETARIA DE DEFESA AGROPECUÁRIA
DEPARTAMENTO DE SANIDADE VEGETAL E INSUMOS AGRICOLAS
COORDENACAO GERAL DE FISCALIZACAO E CERTIFICACAO FITOSSANITARIA INTERNACIONAL
DIVISAO DE QUARENTENA VEGETAL
MINUTA
MINUTA Nº
ESTABELE CE OS REQUISIT OS
FITOSSANIT ÁRIOS PARA A IMPOR TAÇÃO DE
SEMENTE S DE CAPSICUM ANNUUM DE
QUALQUER ORIGEM
O SECRETÁRIO DE DEFESA AGROPECUÁRIA, DO MINISTÉRIO DA AGRICUL TURA, PECUÁRIA E
ABASTECIMENT O, no uso das atribuições que lhe conferem os arts. 21 e 63 do Anexo I do Decreto n.º
10.523, de 20 de fevereiro de 2020, tendo em vista o disposto no Decreto nº 24.1 14, de 12 de abril de 1934, no
Decreto nº 1.355, de 30 de dezembro de 1994, no Decreto nº 5.759, de 17 de abril de 2006, na Instrução
Normativa nº 23, de 2 de agosto de 2004, na Instrução Normativa nº 25, de 7 de abril de 2020, e o que consta
dos Processos nº 21000.070880/2020-1 1, resolve:
Art. 1º Ficam estabelecidos os requisitos fitossanitários para a importação de sementes (Categoria 4, Classe 3) de
pimentão e pimenta ( Capsicum annuum ), de qualquer origem, exceto para países do MERCOSUL.
Art. 2º As sementes devem estar acondicionadas em embalagens de primeiro uso e livres de solo.
Art. 3º As sementes devem estar acompanhadas de Certificado Fitossanitário, emitido pela Or ganização
Nacional de Proteção Fitossanitária - ONPF do país de origem, com a seguinte Declaração Adicional:
I - "O envio encontra-se livre de Colletotrichum fioriniae, Colletotrichum incanum, Colletotrichum
javanense, Colletotrichum kahawae, Colletotrichum simmondsii, Globisporangium sylvaticum, Phomopsis
capsici, Pseudomonas syringae pv. aptata, Rhodococcus fascians, Burkholderia glumae, Tomato yellow leaf
curl Kanchanaburi virus, Tomato yellow leaf curl Mali virus, Tomato yellow leaf curl Sardinia virus, Tomato
yellow leaf curl Thailand virus, Tomato yellow leaf curl virus, Parietaria mottle virus, Tobacco ringspot
virus, Tomato ringspot virus, Pepper chat fruit viroid, Potato spindle tuber viroid, Tomato apical stunt
viroid, Bell pepper mottle virus, Tomato brown rugose fruit virus, Tobacco rattle virus e Tomato bushy stunt
virus de acordo com o resultado da análise oficial do laboratório Nº ( )".
Art. 4º De acordo com o status fitossanitário em seu território, o país de origem poderá, alternativamente, para
qualquer uma das pragas relacionadas no inciso I do art. 3º, declarar:
I - "A/s (praga/s) é/são praga/s quarentenária/s ausente/s para (país de origem)."; ou
II - "A/s (praga/s) não está/ão presente/s no (país de origem)."01/03/2021 SEI/MAP A - 14042666 - Minuta
https://sistemas.agricultura.gov .br/sei/controlador .php?acao=documento_imprimir_web&acao_origem=arvore_visualizar&id_documento=25648103&in … 2/2Art. 5º O país de origem deve comunicar previamente, para aprovação da ONPF do Brasil, as Declarações
Adicionais que serão utilizadas na emissão do Certificado Fitossanitário.
Parágrafo Único. Não está autorizada a importação sem comunicação prévia e aprovação pela ONPF do Brasil e
os envios que não atenderem a este critério serão rechaçados.
Art. 6º Os envios estão sujeitos à inspeção no ponto de ingresso (Inspeção Fitossanitária - IF), bem como à
coleta de amostras para análise fitossanitária em laboratórios oficiais ou credenciados pelo Ministério da
Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento - MAP A.
§ 1º Os custos do envio das amostras e da análise fitossanitária serão com ônus para o interessado.
§ 2º A critério da fiscalização o interessado poderá ficar como depositário do restante do envio até a conclusão
do processo pela fiscalização.
Art. 7º No caso de interceptação de praga quarentenária ou de praga que apresente potencial quarentenário para
o Brasil, o envio será destruído ou rechaçado e a ONPF do país de origem será notificada, podendo a ONPF do
Brasil suspender as importações de sementes de pimentão e pimenta até a revisão da Análise de Risco de Pragas.
Art. 8º O envio não será internalizado quando descumprir as exigências estabelecidas nesta Instrução Normativa.
Art. 9º Esta Instrução Normativa entra em vigor na data de xx de xxxx de 2021.
JOSÉ GUILHERME T OLLS TADIUS LE AL
Documento assinado eletronicamente por TIAGO RODRIGO LOHMANN, Auditor Fiscal Federal
Agropecuário, em 25/02/2021, às 10:42, conforme horário oficial de Brasília, com fundamento no art.
6º,§ 1º, do Decreto nº 8.539, de 8 de outubro de 2015.
A auten cidade deste documento pode ser conferida no site
h p://sistemas.agricultura.gov.br/sei/controlador_externo.php?
acao=documento_conferir&id_orgao_acesso_externo=0, informando o código verificador 14042666 e o
código CRC 5609773C.
Processo nº 21000.070880/2020-11 SEI nº 14042666
| 713
| 4,896
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_SPS_NUKR221.pdf
|
s_G_SPS_NUKR221
|
G/SPS/N/UKR/221
1 de mayo de 2024
(24-3505) Página: 1/3
Comité de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
1. Miembro que notifica : UCRANIA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate:
2. Organismo responsable : Ministry of Health of Ukraine (Ministerio de Salud de Ucrania)
3. Productos abarcados (número de la(s) partida(s) arancelaria(s) según se
especifica en las listas nacionales depositadas en la OMC ; deberá indicarse
además, cuando proceda, el número de partida de la ICS) : Vajilla y demás artículos
para el servicio de mesa o de cocina, de plástico (SA : 392410) .
4. Regiones o países que podrían verse afectados, en la medida en que sea
procedente o factible:
[X] Todos los interlocutores comerciales
[ ] Regiones o países específicos:
5. Título del documento notificado : Order of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine No. 460
"On Approval of Special Requirements and Detailed Rules for Placing Plastic Kitchenware
of Polyamide and of Melamine on the Market" of 18 March 2024 (Orden Nº 460 del
Ministerio de Salud de Ucrania sobre la Aprobación de los Requisitos Espe ciales y las
Normas Detalladas para la Comercialización de Artículos Plásticos de Poliamida y
Melamina para la Cocina, de 18 de marzo de 2024 ). Idioma(s) : ucraniano e inglés .
Número de páginas : 4.
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0481 -24#Text
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2024/SPS/UK R/24_02901_00_e.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2024/SPS/UKR/24_02901_01_e.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2024/SPS/UKR/24 _02901_00_x.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2024/SPS/UKR/24_02901_01_x.pdf
6. Descripción del contenido : La Orden notificada prevé la aprobación de requisitos
específicos y normas detalladas para la comercialización de artículos plásticos de
poliamida y melamina para la cocina.
La Orden estipu la que los materiales y objetos de plástico destinados a entrar en contacto
con alimentos, fabricados antes de la fecha de entrada en vigor de la Orden notificada
podrán comercializarse hasta su fecha de caducidad.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser : [X] inocuida d de los alimentos, [ ] sanidad animal, [ ]
preservación de los vegetales, [ ] protección de la salud humana contra las
enfermedades o plagas animales o vegetales, [ ] protección del territorio contra
otros daños causados por plagas.
8. ¿Existe una norma internacional pertinente ? De ser así, indíquese la norma:
[ ] de la Comisión del Codex Alimentarius (por ejemplo, título o número de
serie de la norma del Codex o texto conexo) : G/SPS/N/UKR/221
- 2 -
[ ] de la Organización Mundial de Sanidad Animal (OIE) (por ejemplo,
número de capítulo del Código Sanitario para los Animales Terrestres o
del Código Sanitario para los Animales Acuáticos) :
[ ] de la Convención Internacional de Protección Fitosanitaria (por ejemplo,
número de NIMF) :
[X] Ninguna
¿Se ajusta la reglamentación que se propone a la norma internacional
pertinente?
[ ] Sí [ ] No
En caso negativo, indíquese, cuando sea posible, en qué medida y por qué razón
se aparta de la norma internacional:
9. Otros documentos pertinentes e idioma(s) en que están disponibles:
• Laws of Ukraine "On Materials and Articles Intended to Come into Contact with Food"
(notificada en los documentos G/SPS/N/UKR/150 , G/SPS/N/UKR/150/Rev.1 ), "On
State Control over Compliance with Legislati on on Food, Feed, Animal By -Products,
Animal Health and Welfare" (notificada en el documento G/SPS/N/UKR/123 ), "On
Basic Principles and Requirements for Safety and Quality of Food Products" ;
• Order of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine No. 2104 "O n Approval of Special
Requirements for Plastic Materials and Articles Intended to Come into Contact with
Foodstuffs" of 11 December 2023 (notificada en los documentos G/SPS/N/UKR/212 ,
G/SPS/N/UKR/21 2/Add.1 );
• Order of the Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food of Ukraine No. 1743 "On Approval of
the Requirements for a Written Declaration of the Conformity of Materials and Articles
Intended to Come into Contact with Fo od and a List of Documents Confirming the
Information Specified in the Declaration" of 2 October 2023 (notificada en los
documentos G/SPS/N/UKR/209 , G/SPS/N/UKR/209/Add.1 ).
• Reglamento (UE) Nº 284/2011 de la Comisión, de 2 2 de marzo de 2011 , por el que se
establecen condiciones específicas y procedimientos detallados para la importación de
artículos plásticos de poliamida y melamina para la cocina originarios o procedentes
de la República Popular China y de la Región Admini strativa Especial de Hong Kong,
China (disponible en inglés).
10. Fecha propuesta de adopción (día/mes/año) : 18 de marzo de 2024. L a Orden
notificada se registró en el Ministerio de Justicia de Ucrania el 2 de abril de 2024 .
Fecha propuesta de publicación (día/mes/año) : 23 de abril de 2024
11. Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : [ ] Seis meses a partir de la fecha de
publicación, y/o (día/mes/año) : 19 de noviembre de 2025
La Orden entrará en vigor el 19 de noviembre de 2025 , el mismo día que la Ley de Ucrania
Nº 2718 -IX sobre Materiales y Objetos Destinados a Entrar en Contacto con A limentos,
de 3 de noviembre de 2022 (documento G/SPS/N/UKR/150/Rev.1/Add.1 ).
[ ] Medida de facilitación del comercio
12. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : [X] Sesenta días a partir de
la fecha de distribución de la notificación y/o (día/mes/año) : 30 de junio de 2024
Organismo o autoridad encargado de tramitar las observaciones : [X] Organismo
nacional encargado de la notificación, [X] Servicio nacional de informa ción.
Dirección, número de fax y dirección de correo electrónico (en su caso) de otra
institución:
Ministry of Economy of Ukraine (Ministerio de Economía de Ucrania)
Department for Trade Agreements and Export Development (Departamento de Acuerdos
Comerciales y Desarrollo de las Exportaciones)
12/2 Hrushevskoho Str.
Teléfono : +(38 044) 596 6839 G/SPS/N/UKR/221
- 3 -
Fax: +(38 044) 596 6839
Correo electrónico: ep@me.gov.ua
Sitio web: https://www.me.gov.ua
13. Texto(s) disponible(s) en : [X] Organismo nacional encargado de la notificación,
[X] Servicio nacional de información . Dirección, número de fax y dirección de
correo electrónico (en su caso) de otra institución:
Ministry of Economy of Ukraine (Ministerio de Economía de Ucrania)
Department for Trade Agreements and Export Development (Departamento de Acuerdos
Comerciales y Desarrollo d e las Exportaciones)
12/2 Hrushevskoho Str.
Teléfono : +(38 044) 596 6839
Fax: +(38 044) 596 6839
Correo electrónico: ep@me.gov.ua
Sitio web: https://www.me.gov.ua
| 1,024
| 6,769
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/302737_2024_SPS_TZA_24_00572_00_e.pdf
|
302737_2024_SPS_TZA_24_00572_00_e
|
AFRICAN
STANDARD DARS
1349:2023
First Edition 2023
Reference No. DARS 1349 :2023(E)
ICS 67.060
© ARSO 2023
Amaranth grains — Specification
DARS 1349 :2023 (E)
ii © ARSO 2023 — All rights reserved
Table of contents
1 Scope ................................ ................................ ......... Error! Bookmark not defined.
2 Normative references ................................ ................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
3 Definitions ................................ ................................ ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4 Quality requirements ................................ ................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.2 General requirements ................................ ................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3 Specific requirements ................................ ................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.1 Classification ................................ .............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.2 Grading ................................ ................................ ....... Error! Bookmar k not defined.
5 Contaminants ................................ ............................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.1 Metals ................................ ................................ ......... Error! Bookmark not defined.
5.2 Pesticide residues ................................ ...................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
6 Hygiene ................................ ................................ ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
7 Packaging ................................ ................................ ... Error! Bookmark not defined.
8 Labelling ................................ ................................ ..... Error! Bookmark not defined.
9 Sampling methods ................................ ...................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Annex A (normative) Methods of analysis for rice specifications Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Annex B (normative) Determination of waxy rice in parboiled rice Error! Bookmark no t
defined.
Bibliography ................................ ................................ ........... Error! Bookmark not defined.
DARS 1349 :2023 (E)
© ARSO 2023 — All rights reserved iii Foreword
The African Organization for Standardization (ARS) is an African intergovernmental organization
made up of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) and the Organization of
African Unity (AU). One of the fundamental mandates of ARSO is to develop and harmoniz e African
Standards (ARS) for the purpose of enhancing Africa’s internal trading capacity, increase Africa’s
product and service competitiveness globally and uplift the welfare of African communities. The work
of preparing African Standa rds is normally carried out through ARSO technical committees. Each
Member State interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been established has the
right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, Regional Economic
Communities (RECs), governmental and non -governmental organizations , in liaison with ARSO , also
take part in the work.
ARSO Standards are drafted in accordance with the rules given in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.
The main task of technical committee s is to prepare ARSO Standards. Draft ARSO Standards
adopted by the technical committees are circulated to the member bodies for voting. Publication as an
ARSO Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the member bodies casting a vote.
Attention is d rawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ARSO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
This African Standard was prepared by the ARSO Technical Committee on Cereals, Pulsses and
Derived Products (ARSO/TC 12).
© African Organisation for Standardisation 2023 — All rights reserved*
ARSO Central Secretariat
International House 3rd Floor
P. O. Box 57363 — 00200 City Square
NAIROBI, KENYA
Tel. +254 -20-2224561, +254 -20-311641, +254 -20-311608
Fax: +254 -20-218792
E-mail: arso@arso -oran.org
Web: www.arso -oran.org
* 2023 ARSO — All rights of exploitation reserved worldwide for African Member States’ NSBs.
DARS 1349 :2023 (E)
iv © ARSO 2023 — All rights reserved
Copyright notice
This ARSO document is copyright -protected by ARSO. While the reproduction of this document
by participants in the ARSO standards development process is permitted without prior
permission from ARSO, neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, sto red
or transmitted in any form for any other purpose without prior written permission from ARSO.
Requests for permission to reproduce this document for the purpose of selling it should be
addressed as shown below or to ARSO’s member body in the country of the requester:
© African Organisation for Standardisation 20 23 — All rights reserved
ARSO Central Secretariat
International House 3rd Floor
P.O. Box 57363 — 00200 City Square
NAIROBI, KENYA
Tel: +254 -20-2224561, +254 -20-311641, +254 -20-311608
Fax: +254 -20-218792
E-mail: arso@arso -oran.org
Web: www.arso -oran.org
Reproduction for sales purposes may be subject to royalty payments or a licensing agreement.
Violators may be p rosecuted.
DARS 1349 :2023 (E)
© ARSO 2023 — All rights reserved v
DARS 1349 :2023(E)
© ARSO 2023 — All rights reserved Amaranth grains – Specification
1 Scope
This African Standard specifies the requirements and methods of sampling and test of whole grains of
amaranth (Amaranthus . hypochondaricus and A. cruentus and any other variety duly approved as a
grain amaranth species) intended for human consumption.
2 Normative references
The following referenced documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of
their content constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition
cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any
amendments) applies.
ARS 56 , Labelling of pre -packaged foods — Requirements
ARS 53, General principles of food hygiene — Code of practice
ISO 24333 , Cereals and pulses — Sampling
ISO 712 - Determination of Moisture content in cereals and cereals product.
ISO 605 , Pulses — Determination of impurities, size, foreign odours, insects, and species and variety
— Test methods
ISO 16649 -1, Microbiology of food and animal feeding stuffs — Horizontal method for the
enumeration of β -glucuronidase -positive Escherichia coli — Part 1: Colony -count technique at 44 °C
using membranes and 5 -bromo -4-chloro -3-indolyl β -D-glucuronide
ISO 6888 -1, Microb iology of food and animal feeding stuffs — Horizontal method for the enumeration
of coagulase -positive staphylococci (Staphylococcus aureus and other species) — Part 1: Technique
using Baird -Parker agar medium
ISO 21527 -2, Horizontal method for the enume ration of yeasts and moulds — Part 2: Colony count
technique in products with water activity less than or equal to 0, 95
ISO 1871, Food and feed products — General guidelines for the determination of nitrogen by the
Kjeldahl method
CODEX STAN 193 Codex general standard for contaminants and toxins in food and feed
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this standard, the following terms and definitions shall apply.
3.1
amaranth whole grains
grains obtained from species of Amaranth (Amaranthus . hypochondaricus, and A. cruentus) and any
other variety duly approved as a grain amaranth species
3.2
extraneo us matter
organic and i norganic materials other than the amaranth grains
3.3
inorganic matter
extraneous matter such as stones, glass, pieces of soil and other mineral matter
3.4
organic matter
any animal or plant matter (seed coats, straws, weeds) other than the amaranthus grains, extraneous
matter, harmful/toxic seeds and other inedible grains
AFRICAN STANDARD DARS 1349 :2023(E)
2 © ARSO 2023 — All rights reserved 3.5
filth
impurities of animal origin, including dead insects
3.6
discolouration
alterations of natural colour due to heat or weather damage
3.7
food grade packaging material
packaging material, made of substances which are safe and suitable for their intended use and which
will not impart any toxic substance or undesirable odour or flavour to the product
4 Quality requirements
4.1 General quality requirements
Amaranth grain shall
a) be free from insect infestation
b) be free of off flavours and odours,
c) have a colour characteristic of the variety, and
d) not be discoloured
4.2 Specific quality requirements
Amaranth grain shall comply with the specific quality requirements specified in Table 1.
Table 1 — Specific quality requiremen ts for amaranth grain
Characteristic Level Method of test
Protein content , %, min. 12 ISO 1871
Moisture content, % by mass, max 12
ISO 605 Filth, %, max 0.1
extraneou s matter, %, max 0.2
5 Contaminants
5.1 Pesticide residues
Amaranth grain shall conform to those maximum residue limits for pesticides established by the
Codex Alimentarius Commission for this commodity.
5.2 Other contaminants
Amaranth grain shall conform to those maximum levels in accordance CODEX STAN 193 .
6 Hygiene
6.1 Amaranth grains shall be produced, prepared and handled in accordance with ARS 53.
6.2 When tested by appropriate standards for sampling and examination in Clause 2, the product
shall be free from microorganisms in amounts which may represent a hazard to health and shall not
exceed the limits stipulated in Table 2.
DARS 1349 :2023(E)
© ARSO 2023 — All rights reserved
Table 2 — Microbiological limits for Amaranth grain
S/No Type of micro-organism Limits Test method
i) Yeasts and moulds, cfu per g,
max. 104 ISO 21527 -2
ii) S. aureus, per 25 g Absent ISO 6888 -1
iii) E. coli, per g, max Absent ISO 16649 -1
7 Packaging
7.2 Amaranth grain shall be packaged in food grade packaging materials which will safeguard the
hygienic, nutritional, technological and organoleptic qualities of the products.
7.3 Each package shall contain amaranth grain of the same variety and of the same grade
designation .
8 Labelling
In addition to the requirements of ARS 56, the following labelling requirements shall apply and shall
be legibly and indelibly marked:
a) common name of the food to be declared on the label shall be 'Amaranth grain' and variety (if
applicable) ;
b) net contents by weight in metric (`System International') units;
c) name and physical address of the manufacturer / distributor;
d) country of origin;
e) lot identification;
f) statement “Food for Human Consumption” shall appear on the package;
g) storage conditions as “Store in a cool dry place away from contaminants ”;
h) instructions on disposal of used package;
i) crop year; and
j) packing date.
9 Method of sampling
Sampling shall be carried out in accordance with ISO 24333 .
| 1,590
| 11,498
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_VALQ_IND7.pdf
|
r_G_VALQ_IND7
|
G/VAL/Q/IND/ 7
22 mai 2023
(23-3468) Page: 1/1
Comité de l'évaluation en douane Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION AU TITRE DE L'ARTICLE 22 DE L'ACCORD SUR LA MISE
EN ŒUVRE DE L'ARTICLE VII DE L'ACCORD GÉNÉRAL SUR LES
TARIFS DOUANIERS ET LE COMMERCE DE 1994
QUESTIONS POSÉES PAR LES ÉTATS -UNIS À L'INDE
CONCERNANT LES DOCUMENT S G/VAL/Q/IND/ 2
ET G/VAL/Q/IND/5
INDE
La communication ci -après, datée du 18 mai 2023, est distribuée à la demande de la délégation d es
États-Unis.
_______________
Les États -Unis remercient l'Inde pour les réponses qu'elle a fournie dans le
document G/VAL/Q/IND/ 5 aux questions qu'ils ont posées dans le document C/VAL/Q/IND/4
concernant le document G/VAL/Q/IND/2. Les États -Unis demandent qu'il soit répondu aux questions
complémentaires ci -après concernant ces réponses:
Question n ° 7
Dans l a réponse de l'Inde à la question n° 7 figurant dans le document G/VAL/Q/IND/ 5 il est indiqué
que l'évaluation des marchandises importées est réalisée conformément à l'article 14 1) de la Loi
douanière de 1962 , lu conjointement avec le Règlement de 2007 sur l' évaluation en douane
(Détermination de la valeur des marchandises importées) . La règle 10 de ce Règlement dispose que
pour déterminer la valeur de la transaction, les coûts et services sont calculés sur une base réelle.
Toutefois, dans de rares cas, lorsqu e les frais de transport liés à la livraison des marchandises
importées jusqu'au lieu d'importation et le coût de l'assurance jusqu'au lieu d'importation ne peuvent
pas être déterminés, des valeurs théoriques sont utilisées pour accélérer le dédouanement.
Cette disposition ne doit être utilisée que dans les cas où l'importateur n'est pas en mesure de
déclarer les coûts de transport et d'assurance. Dans les autres cas, les calculs sont faits sur une
base réelle.
Les États -Unis demandent à l'Inde de préciser si les valeurs théoriques utilisées concernant le
transport e t l'assurance sont actualisées une fois que les coûts réels sont connus?
Question n° 10
Les États -Unis remercient l'Inde d'avoir fourni un lien pe rmettant d 'accéder à la
Circulaire n° 20/1997 -Douanes du 17 juin 1997.
L'article 2 d) de la Circulaire no 20/1997 -Douanes du 17 juin 1997 indique que les intérêts ne sont
pas ajoutés à la valeur de la marchandise étant donné que le prix déclaré est le pri x effectivement
payé ou à payer au cours d'opérations commerciales normales. Veuillez préciser comment les
douanes indiennes déterminent que le prix déclaré est le prix effectivement payé ou à payer au
cours d'opérations commerciales normales dans ce type de cas.
__________
| 424
| 2,701
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN19_KEN867.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN19_KEN867
|
G/TBT/N/KEN/867
15 April 2019
(19-2487) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
The following notification is being circulated in accordance with Article 10.6
1. Notifying Member: KENYA
If applicable, name of local government involved (Article 3.2 and 7.2):
2. Agency responsible: Kenya Bureau of Standards
Name and address (including telephone and fax numbers , email and website
addresses, if available) of agency or authority designated to handle comments
regarding the notification shall be indicated if different from above:
P.O. Box: 54974 -00200, Nairobi, Kenya
Telephone: + (254) 020 605490, 605506/6948258
Fax: + (254) 020 609660/609665
E-mail: info@kebs.org
Website: http://www.kebs.org
3. Notified under Article 2.9.2 [ ], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ], other :
4. Products covered (HS or CCCN where applicable, otherwise national tariff
heading. ICS numbers may be provided in addition, where applicable): Masonry
(ICS 91.080.30)
5. Title, number of pages and language(s) of the notified document: DKS 2802 -
11:2019 Masonry units — Metho ds of test Part 11: Determination of water absorption of
clay and calcium silicate masonry units by cold - water absorption (9 page(s), in English)
6. Description of content: This Kenyan Standard specifies a method of determining the
water absorption of c lay and calcium silicate masonry units by immersing them in cold
water.
7. Objective and rationale, including the nature of urgent problems where
applicable: Quality requirements
8. Relevant documents: BS EN 772 -21:2011 Methods of test for masonry units - Part 21:
Determination of water absorption of clay and calcium silicate masonry units by cold water
absorption.
9. Proposed date of adoption: September 2019
Proposed date of entry into force: Upon declaration as mandatory by the relevant
Cabinet Secreta ry
10. Final date for comments: 31 May 2019 G/TBT/N/KEN/867
- 2 -
11. Texts available from: National enquiry point [X] or address, telephone and fax
numbers and email and website addresses, if available , of other body:
Kenya Bureau of Standards
WTO/TBT National Enquiry Point
P.O. Box: 54974 -00200, Nairobi, Kenya
Telephone: + (254) 020 605490, 605506/6948258
Fax: + (254) 020 609660/609665
E-mail: info@kebs.org
Website: http://www.kebs.org
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2019/TBT/KEN/19_2187_00_e.pdf
| 352
| 2,498
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN20_KOR902.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN20_KOR902
|
G/TBT/N/KOR/902
9 July 2020
(20-4729) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
The following notification is being circulated in accordance with Article 10.6
1. Notifying Member: REPUBLIC OF KOREA
If applicable, name of local government involved (Article 3.2 and 7.2):
2. Agency responsible: Ministry of Food and Drug Safety
Name and address (including telephone and fax numbers , email and website
addresses, if available) of agency or authority designated to handle comments
regarding the notification shall be indicated if different from above:
International Cooperation Office
Ministry of Food and Drug Safety
187 Osongsaengmyeong2 -ro, Osong -eup, Heungdeok -gu, Cheongju -si, Chungcheongbuk -
do, 363 -700 - Republic of Korea
Tel: (+82) 43 719 -1564
Fax: (+85) 43 719 -1550
Email: intmfds@korea.kr
Website: www.mfds.go.kr
3. Notified under Article 2.9.2 [ ], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ], other :
4. Products covered (HS or CCCN where applicable, otherwise national tariff
heading. ICS numbers may be provided in addition, where applicable): Medical
Devices
5. Title, number of pages and language(s) of the notified document: Draft amendment
of the "Public Notice on Standard Specifications of Medical Devices" (17 page(s ), in
Korean)
6. Description of content: Safety requirements for medical devices in the form of LED
masks such as setting the measurement distances of light output in consideration of the
actual use environment and providing eye protection for products th at use wavelengths
below the blue light range, etc.
7. Objective and rationale, including the nature of urgent problems where
applicable: Promotion of the health and safety of patients and medical professionals;
Protection of human health or safety
8. Relevant documents:
• MFDS Public Notice No. 2020 -250 (24 Jun 2020)
9. Proposed date of adoption: To be determined
Proposed date of entry into force: To be determined
10. Final date for comments: 60 days from notification G/TBT/N/KOR/902
- 2 -
11. Texts available from: National enquiry point [X] or address, telephone and fax
numbers and email and website addresses, if available , of other body:
Technical Barriers to Trade(TBT) Division
Korean Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS)
93, Isu -ro, Maengdo ng-myeon, Eumseong -gun, Chungcheongbuk -do, Republic of Korea,
27737
Tel.: (+82) 43 870 5525
Fax: (+82) 43 870 5682
Email: tbt@korea.kr
Website: http://www.knowtbt.kr
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2020/TBT/KOR/20_4132_00_x.pdf
| 379
| 2,657
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_C_W772.pdf
|
q_G_C_W772
|
RESTRICTED
G/C/W/772
6 November 2019
(19-7566) Page: 1/22
Council for Trade in Goods
DRAFT REPORT (201 9) OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS
In accordance with the "Procedures for an Annual Overview of WTO Activities and for Reporting
under the WTO " (WT/L/105), the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG, or the Council) is to report each
year to the General Council on the activities in the Council as well as those in its subsidiary bodies.
The reports are to be "factual in nature, containing an indication o f actions and decisions taken, with
cross-references to reports of subordinate bodies and could follow the model of the GATT 1947
Council reports to the CONTRACTING PARTIES ".
Since its 201 8 Annual Report (G/L/12 82 and G/L/1282/Add.1 ) was issued, the CTG m et three times
in formal session, on the following dates: 11 and 12 April 2019 (G/C/M/1341); 8 and 9 July 2019
(G/C/M/135); and 14 and 15 November 2019 (G/C/M/1362).]
The subject matters raised and/or acted upon in the Council were as follows:
1 ELECTION OF CHAI RPERSON OF THE COUNC IL FOR TRADE IN GOOD S ....................... 4
2 APPOINTMENT OF O FFICERS FOR THE SUBS IDIARY BODIES OF THE COUNCIL .......... 4
3 MARKET ACCESS IS SUES ................................ ................................ ............................ 5
3.1 Collective Waiver Requests on the Introduction of the Harmonized System 2002, 2007,
2012, and 2017 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 5
4 WAIVERS UNDER AR TICLE IX OF THE WTO AGREEMENT ................................ ............ 5
4.1 Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 Changes into WTO Schedules
of Tariff Concessions ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 5
4.1.1 Collective request for a waiver extension (G/C/W/768) ................................ ................. 5
4.2 Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes into WTO Schedules
of Tariff Concessions ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 5
4.2.1 Collective request for a waiver extension (G/C/W/769) ................................ ................. 5
4.3 Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 Changes into WTO Schedules
of Tariff Concessions ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 5
4.3.1 Collective request for a waiver (G/C/W/770) ................................ ............................... 5
4.4 Introduction of Harmonized System 2017 Changes into WTO Schedules
of Tariff Concessions ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 6
4.4.1 Collective request for a waiver (G/C/W/771) ................................ ............................... 6
4.5 Jordan – Request for a Waiver Relating to the Transitional Period for the Elimination of the
Export Subsidy Programme for Jordan (G/C/W/705; G/C/W/705/Corr.1; G/C/W/705/Rev.1; and
G/C/W/705/Rev.2) ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 6
4.6 Chile, China, India, and Thailand – Request for the Extension of the Waiver for Preferential
Tariff Treatment for Least Developed Countries (G/C/W/7 64) ................................ .................. 6
1 A reconvened meeting took place on Wednesday, 4 June 2019, to deal with Agenda Item No. 3,
"Appointment of Officers to the Subsidiary Bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods" ( see
document G/C/M/134/Add.1). An informal meeting took place before this reconvened meeting.
2 To be issued. G/C/W/772
- 2 -
4.7 United States - Request for a Waiver – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA as
Amended) (G/C/W/765) ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 6
5 ENLARGEMENT OF T HE EUROPEAN UNION: P ROCEDURES UNDER ARTI CLE XXVIII:3
OF GATT 1994 ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 7
5.1 Enlargement of the European Union to Include Croatia: Negotiations under Article XXIV:6
of the GATT 1994 – Request from the Russian Federation ................................ ....................... 7
6 ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA AND OF THE KYRGYZ R EPUBLIC TO THE
EURASIAN ECONOMIC UN ION (EAEU): PROCEDUR ES UNDER ARTICL E XXVIII:3 OF
GATT 1994 ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 7
6.1 Accession of the Republic of Armenia and of the Kyrgyz Republic to the Eurasian Economic
Union (EAEU ): Procedures under Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 – Request from the European
Union ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 7
6.2 Accession of the Kyrgyz Republic to the Eurasian Economic Union: Procedures under
Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 (G/L/1137/Add.4) ................................ ................................ ... 7
6.3 Accession of the Republic of Armenia to the Eurasian Economic Union: Procedures under
Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 (G/L/1110/Add.5) ................................ ................................ ... 7
7 SWITZERLAND – LIECHTENSTEIN – NEGOTI ATIONS UNDER ARTICLE XXVIII:5 OF
GATT 1994 (G/L/1262/ ADD.1) ................................ ................................ ....................... 8
8 NOTIFICATION OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREE MENTS ................................ ................... 8
9 NOTIFI CATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 8
9.1 Status of Notifications under the Provisions of the Agreements in Annex 1A of the
WTO Agreement (G/L/223/Rev.26) ................................ ................................ ...................... 8
10 ADOPTION OF THE RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE
FACILITATION (G/TFA/ W/14) ................................ ................................ ....................... 9
11 MEASURES TO ALL OW GRADUATED LDCS, W ITH GNP BELOW US$1,0 00,
BENEFITS PURSUANT TO ANNEX VII(B) OF THE AGREEMENT ON SUBSID IES AND
COUNTERVAILING MEASU RES (WT/GC/W/742 AND G/C/W/752) ................................ . 9
12 EUROPEAN UNION – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON INDICA RICE FROM CAMBODIA –
REQUEST FROM CAMBODI A ................................ ................................ ............................. 9
13 EUROPEAN UNION – PROPOSED EU TARIFF RATE QUOTA COMMITME NTS:
SYSTEMIC CONCERNS ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 9
14 EUROPEAN UNION – REGULATION EC NO. 1272/2008 (CLP REGUL ATION) –
REQUEST FROM THE RUS SIAN FEDERATION ................................ ................................ . 10
15 JAMAICA – REGUL ATIONS NOS. 145 AND 146 BANNING SINGLE -USE PLASTIC
PRODUCTS – REQUEST F ROM THE DOMINICAN RE PUBLIC ................................ ............ 10
16 TRINIDAD AND TO BAGO – ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING THE BAN O N THE
MARKETING AND IMPORT ATION OF POLYSTYRENE PLASTICS – REQUEST FROM THE
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC ................................ ................................ ................................ . 10
17 EUROPEAN UNION – IMPLEMENTATION OF NON-TARIFF BARRIERS ON
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT S – REQUEST FROM ARG ENTINA, AUSTRALIA, B RAZIL,
CANADA, COLOMBIA, CO STA RICA, CÔTE D'IVO IRE, DOMINICAN REPUB LIC, ECUADOR,
GUATEMALA, HONDURAS, MALAYSIA, NICARAGUA , PANAMA, PARAGUAY, PERU, THE
UNITED STATES, AND U RUGUAY ................................ ................................ ................... 11
18 UNITED STATES - MEASURES RE GARDING MARKET ACCES S PROHIBITION FOR
ICT PRODUCTS – REQUE ST FROM CHINA ................................ ................................ ...... 11
19 UNITED STATES – EXPORT CONTROL MEAS URES FOR ICT PRODU CTS – REQUEST
FROM CHINA ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 11
20 EUROPEAN UNION – MEDICAL DEVICE REG ULATION AND IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC
MEDICAL DEVICES REGULATION – REQUEST FROM THE UNITED STA TES ...................... 11 G/C/W/772
- 3 -
21 TUNISIA – IMPOR T RESTRICTION MEASUR ES – REQUEST FROM TH E EUROPEAN
UNION ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 12
22 ANGOLA – IMPORT RESTRICTING PRACTIC ES ................................ ........................ 12
23 EUROPEAN UNION – REGULATION (EU) 2017/2321 AND REGULATI ON
(EU) 2018/825 – REQU EST FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ................................ ..... 12
24 EUROPEAN UNION – REGULATION ON UNMA NNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM S AND ON
THIRD -COUNTRY OPERAT ORS OF UNMANNED AIRC RAFT SYSTEMS – REQUE ST FROM
CHINA ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 12
25 INDONESIA'S IMP ORT AND EXPORT RESTR ICTING POLICIES AND PRACTICES –
REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN UNION, JAPAN, NORWAY,
AND THE UNITED STATE S................................ ................................ .............................. 12
26 INDIA – CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ICT PRODU CTS ................................ ....................... 13
27 EGYPT – MANUFAC TURER REGISTRATION S YSTEM – REQUEST FROM THE
EUROPEAN UNION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 13
28 CROATIA – REGUL ATION OF IMPORT AND SALE OF CERTAIN OIL PRODUCTS –
REQUEST FROM THE RUS SIAN FEDERATION ................................ ................................ . 14
29 RUSSIAN FEDERAT ION – TRADE RESTRICT ING PRACTICES – REQU EST FROM THE
EUROPEAN UNION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 14
30 KINGDOM OF SAUD I ARABIA, KINGDOM OF BAHRAIN, THE UNITED ARAB
EMIRATES AND OMAN – SELECTIVE TAX ON CERTAIN IMPORTED PRO DUCTS –
REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN UNION, SWITZER LAND, AND THE UNITED STATES ..... 15
31 CHINA – NEW EXP ORT CONTROL LA W IN DRAFT – REQUEST FROM JAPAN ............. 15
32 VIET NAM – DECR EE ON THE REGULATION ON CONDITIONS FOR A UTOMOBILES
MANUFACTURING, ASSEM BLING, IMPORTING, AND AUTOM OTIVE WARRANTY AND
MAINTENANCE SERVICES ................................ ................................ .............................. 15
33 MONGOLIA – QUAN TITATIVE RESTRICTION S AND PROHIBITIONS O N
IMPORTAT ION OF CERTAIN AGRIC ULTURAL PRODUCTS – REQUEST FROM
THE RUSSIAN FEDERATI ON................................ ................................ ........................... 16
34 INDIA – QUANTIT ATIVE RESTRICTION ON IMPORTS OF CERTAIN P ULSES –
REQUEST FROM AUSTRAL IA, CANADA, THE EURO PEAN UNION, THE RUSS IAN
FEDERATION, AND THE UNITED STATES ................................ ................................ ....... 16
35 CHINA – CUSTOMS DUT IES ON CERTAIN INTEG RATED CIRCUITS –
REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN UNION, JAPAN, AND CHINESE TAIPEI ........................ 17
36 CHINA – MEASURES RESTRICTING THE IMPORT OF SCRAP MATERIALS –
REQUEST FROM THE UNI TED STATES ................................ ................................ ............ 17
37 EUROPEAN UNION – AMENDMENTS TO THE DIRECT IVE 2009/28/EC,
RENEWABLE ENERGY DIR ECTIVE (RED) – REQUE ST FROM COLOMBIA AND MALAYSIA 17
38 UNITED STATES – PROHIBITIVE PROPOSAL ON COMMUNIC ATION EQUIPMENT
OR SERVICES RELEASED BY THE FCC – REQUES T FROM CHINA ................................ ..... 18
39 UNITED STATES – MEASURES ON AVIATIO N SECURITY EQUIPMENT – REQUEST
FROM CHINA ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 18
40 EUROPEAN UNION – QUALITY SCHEMES FO R AGRICULTURAL PRODU CTS AND
FOODSTUFFS – THE REG ISTRATION OF CERTAIN TERMS OF CHEESE
AS GEOGRAPHICAL INDI CATIONS – REQUEST FR OM ARGENTINA,
THE UNITED STATES, A ND URUGUAY ................................ ................................ ............ 18
41 EUROPEAN UNION – DRAFT IMPLEMENTING REGULAT IONS REGARDING
PROTECTED DESIGNATIO N OF ORIGIN AND GEOG RAPHICAL INDICATIONS ,
TRADITIONAL TERMS, L ABELLING AND PRESENT ATION OF CERTAIN WIN E SECTOR
PRODUCTS – REQUEST F ROM ARGENTINA AND TH E UNITED STATES ............................ 19
42 AUSTRALIA – DISCRIMINATORY MARKET A CCESS PROHIBITION ON
5G EQUIPMENT – REQUE ST FROM CHINA ................................ ................................ ...... 19 G/C/W/772
- 4 -
43 JAPAN – EXPORT CONTROL MEASURES ON MATERIALS ESSENTIAL FOR
SEMICONDUCTORS AND D ISPLAYS ................................ ................................ ............... 20
44 TRANSPARENCY AN D NOTIFICATION REQUI REMENTS
UNDER WTO AGREEMENTS ................................ ................................ ............................ 20
44.1 Communication from Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, the European Union, Japan,
New Zealand, the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, and the
United States
(JOB/GC/204/Rev.1 –JOB/CTG/14/Rev.1 – JOB/GC/204/Rev.2 –JOB/CTG/14/Rev.2) ................. 20
44.2 An Inclusive Approach to Transparency and Notificat ion Requirements in the WTO –
Communication from Cuba, India, Nigeria, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe
(JOB/GC/218, JOB/CTG/15, JOB/SERV/292, JOB/IP/33, JOB/DEV/58, JOB/AG/158) ................. 21
45 WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMER CE ................................ .................. 21
46 BETTER FUNCTION ING OF THE COUNCIL F OR TRADE IN GOODS AN D
SUBSIDIARY COMMITTEE S – STATEMENT BY HON G KONG, CHINA ............................... 22
47 CONSIDERATION O F ANNUAL REPORTS OF SUBSIDIARY BODIES OF
THE COUNCIL FOR TRAD E IN GOODS ................................ ................................ ............ 22
48 ADOPTION OF THE ANNUAL REPORT OF TH E COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS TO
THE GENERAL COUNCIL ................................ ................................ ................................ . 22
49 OTHER BUSINESS ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 22
49.1 Optimization of the CTG's Work in Line with t he Practice of the General Council .............. 22
1 ELECTION OF CHAIRPER SON OF THE COUNCIL F OR TRADE IN GOODS
1.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council elected by acclamation HE Mr José Luis Cancela Gómez
(Uruguay ) as its Chairperson for 201 9-2020.
2 APPOINTMENT OF OFFIC ERS FOR THE SUBSIDIA RY BODIES OF THE COU NCIL
2.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council agreed to suspend this agenda item in order for the
outgoing Chair to hold additional consultations on this issue; it also agreed to reconvene a meeting
to continue dealing with this agenda item once he, in his capacity as outgoing Chair , would be in a
position to present a slate of names.
2.2. On 4 June, the Council reverted to this agenda item and, following an informal meeting at
which the Chairperson had submitted to the Council the slate of names that had emerged as a result
of his predecessor 's consultations, agree d on the nominations of the following persons for election
as Chairpersons of its subsidiary bodies for 201 9:
Chairpersons of CTG Subsidiary Bodies
Market Access Mr Fernando Bruno ESCOBAR PACHECO
(Plurinational State of Bolivia )
Agriculture Mrs Christiane DALEIDEN DISTEFANO (Luxembourg)
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Mr Daniel ARBOLEDA (Colombia)
Technical Barriers to Trade Mr Sung hwa JANG (Republic of Korea)
TRIMs Ms Tiziana ZUGLIANO (Italy)
Anti-Dumping Practices Ms Lenka ŠUSTROVÁ (Czech Republic)
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Ms Michèle LEGAULT DOOLEY (Canada)
Safeguards Ms Katherine DELLAR (Australia) G/C/W/772
- 5 -
Chairpersons of CTG Subsidiary Bodies
Import Licensing Ms Carol TSANG (Hong Kong, China)
Rules of Origin Ms Uma Shankari MUNIANDY (Singapore)
Customs Valuation Mr Baroma Winega BAMANA (Togo)
State Trading Enterprises Dr Kristian HENK (Austria)
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade
in Information Technology Products (ITA Committee) Mr Kazunori FUKUDA (Japan)
Committee on Trade Facilitation (TFA Committee) HE Mr Mohammad Qurban HAQJO (Afghanistan)
2.3. At the same meeting, the Council agreed to proceed on the understanding that, as concerned
the Vice -Chairpersons, it would be for the subsidiary bodies to decide if they needed a
Vice-Chairperson in cases where the option existed under the respective Agreement and/or rules of
procedure, and for the respective Chairperson to hold the necessary consultations. In the absence
of provisions in the rules of procedure of Wo rking Parties to elect Chairpersons, the Council also
agreed to appoint the nominated Chairperson, Dr Kristian HENK (Austria ), for the Working Party on
State Trading Enterprises.
3 MARKET ACCESS ISSUES
3.1 Collective Waiver Requests on the Introduction of the Ha rmonized System 2002,
2007, 2012, and 2017
3.1. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council considered four collective waiver requests on the
introduction of Harmonized System 2002, 2007, 2012, and 2017 changes into WTO Schedules of
Concessions (see Section 4 below). ]
4 WAIVERS UNDER ARTICL E IX OF THE WTO AGRE EMENT
4.1 Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff
Concessions
4.1.1 Collective request for a waiver extension (G/C/W/ 768)
4.1. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council considered a col lective request for an extension
of the waiver in connection with the introduction of HS2002 changes to the Schedules of
Concessions. The Council approved the waiver request and recommended that the draft decision
contained in document G/C/W/ 768 be forward ed to the General Council for adoption. ]
4.2 Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff
Concessions
4.2.1 Collective request for a waiver extension (G/C/W/ 769)
4.2. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council considered a collective request for an extension
of the waiver in connection with the introduction of HS2007 changes to the Schedules of
Concessions. The Council approved the waiver request and recommended that the draft decision
contained in document G/C/W/ 769 be forwarded to the General Council for adoption. ]
4.3 Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff
Concessions
4.3.1 Collective request for a waiver (G/C/W/ 770)
4.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council considered a collective request for a waiver in
connection with the introduction of HS2012 changes to the Schedules of Concessions. The Council G/C/W/772
- 6 -
approved the waiver request and recommended that the draft decision contained in
document G/C/W/ 770 be forwarded to the General Council for adoption. ]
4.4 Introduction of Harmonized System 2017 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff
Concessions
4.4.1 Collective request for a waiver (G/C/W/ 771)
4.4. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council considered a collective request for a wai ver in
connection with the introduction of HS2017 changes to the Schedules of Concessions. The Council
approved the waiver request and recommended that the draft decision contained in
document G/C/W/7 71 be forwarded to the General Council for adoption. ]
4.5 Jordan – Request for a Waiver Relating to the Transitional Period for the Elimination
of the Export Subsidy Programme for Jordan (G/C/W/705; G/C/W/705/Corr.1;
G/C/W/705/Rev.1; and G/C/W/705/Rev.2)
4.5. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the stat ement made by Jordan confirming
that its export subsidy programme for exporting enterprises had been terminated on
21 December 2018 and replaced by a new income tax law, which was WTO -consistent. The Council
also took note of the statements made by Austral ia, New Zealand, and the United States,
appreciating the updates provided by Jordan on its transparency and reform efforts , and agreed
that, since Jordan 's export subsidy programme had been teriminated, this item would not appear on
the agenda of subsequen t Council meetings .
4.6 Chile, China , India, and Thailand – Request for the Extension of the Waiver for
Preferential Tariff Treatment for Least Developed Countries (G/C/W/764)
4.6. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council considered the request for the extension and draft decision
to extend the validity of the existing waiver in document WT/L/759 for the granting of preferential
tariff treatment to Least Developed Countries. The Council took note of the statem ents made by
Chile, China, India, and Thailand, and of the statement made by Turkey supporting the request and
indicating that Turkey should also be added to the list of co -sponsors. The Council also took note of
the statements made by Chad on behalf of th e LDC Group, Argentina, Burkina Faso, Canada, Japan,
the Republic of Korea, Mali, Nepal, and Uruguay, in support of the request, and of the statement
made by the European Union indicating that it also supported the request but needed to complete
its internal procedures before the draft waiver request for extension could be forwarded to the
General Council for adoption. The Council therefore agreed to send the draft decision to the General
Council for adoption once the European Union had informed the Council, through the Secretariat, of
the completion of its internal procedures.
4.7. In a communication dated 2 October 2019, the European Union informed the Secretariat that
it had completed its internal procedures. Therefore, the draft waiver decision was forwarded to the
General Council for adoption at its meeting on 15 October 2019.3
4.7 United States - Request for a Waiver – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act
(CBERA as Amended) (G/C/W/765 )
4.8. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council considered the request made by the United States to
extend the current waiver concerning the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA as
amended). The Council took note of the statement made by the United States and of the statements
made by Trinidad and Tobago on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Group, Barbados,
Haiti, Jamaica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago on behalf of its own
delegation. The Council also took note of the statement made by the European Union indicating that
it also supported the request but needed to complete its internal procedures before the draft waiver
request for extension could be forwarded to the General Council for adoption. The Co uncil therefore
agreed to send the draft decision to the General Council for adoption once the European Union had
informed the Council, through the Secretariat, of the completion of its internal procedures.
3 Document WT/L/1069. G/C/W/772
- 7 -
4.9. In a communication dated 2 October 2019, the Euro pean Union informed the Secretariat that
it had completed its internal procedures. Therefore, the draft waiver decision was forwarded to the
General Council for adoption at its meeting on 15 October 2019.4
5 ENLARGEMENT OF THE E UROPEAN UNION : PROCEDURES UNDER ART ICLE XXVIII:3
OF GATT 1994
5.1 Enlargement of the European Union to Include Croatia: Negotiations under
Article XXIV:6 of the GATT 1994 – Request from the Russian Federation
5.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the Russian
Federation on its concerns over the E uropean Union's refusal to engage with it in the renegotiation
process under GATT Article XXIV:6 following Croatia 's accession to the E U. It also took note of the
statement made by the European Unio n in response to Russia 's concern.
5.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council again took note of the statement made by the Russian
Federation reiterating its concerns regarding the E uropean Union's refusal to engage with it in the
renegotiation process under GA TT Article XXIV:6, following Croatia 's accession to the EU. It also
took note of the European Union 's statement in response to Russia 's concern.
5.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took note of the statement made by the
Russian Federation rei terating its concerns regarding the European Union's refusal to engage with it
in the renegotiation process under GATT Article XXIV:6, following Croatia's accession to the EU. It
also took note of the European Union's statement in response to Russia's conc ern.]
6 ACCESSION OF THE REP UBLIC OF ARMENIA AND OF THE KYRGYZ REPUB LIC TO THE
EURASIAN ECONOMIC UN ION (EAEU): PROCEDUR ES UNDER ARTICLE XXVIII:3 OF
GATT 1994
6.1 Accession of the Republic of Armenia and of the Kyrgyz Republic to the Eurasian
Economic Union ( EAEU ): Procedures under Article XXVIII :3 of GATT 1994 – Request from
the European Union
6.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the European Union
on the progress that had been achieved in the tariff negotiations for non -agricultural products
following Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic 's accession to the EAEU and expressing concerns over a
lack of progress in the area of agriculture. The Council also took note of the statements made by
China, the Russian Federation , Chinese Taipei, and Ukraine, and of the responses provided by
Armenia and the Kyrgyz Republic .
6.2 Accession of the Kyrgyz Republic to the Eurasian Economic Union: Procedures under
Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 (G/L/1137/Add.4)
6.2. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Coun cil took note of the information provided by the
Kyrgyz Republic relating to its renegotiations under Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 following its
accession to the EAEU and considered the extension of the deadline set out in
document G/L/1137/Add.4. The Cou ncil took note of the statements made by …, …, and …, and
approved the requested extension until 12 February 2021. ]
6.3 Accession of the Republic of Armenia to the Eurasian Economic Union: Procedures
under Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994 (G/L/1110/Add.5)
6.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the information provided by the
Republic of Armenia relating to its renegotiations under Article XXVIII:3 of GATT 1994, following its
accession to the EAEU, and considered the exten sion of the deadline set out in
document G/L/1110/Add.5. The Council t ook note of the statements made by …, …, and …, and
approved the requested extension until 2 January 2021.
4 Document WT/L/1070. G/C/W/772
- 8 -
7 SWITZERLAND – LIECHT ENSTEIN – NEGOTIATIO NS UNDER ARTICLE XXVIII:5 OF
GATT 1994 (G/L/1262/ADD.1)
7.1. At its meeting of 11 April, under agenda item "Other Business ", Switzerland informed the
Council that the date of 4 April 2019 was the date on which had expired the first extension of the
period during which substantially equivalent conces sions could be withdrawn by those Members
having submitted a claim of interest following the modification of the tariff concessions for "meat
not further prepared than seasoned " and that it had subsequently requested, in
document G/L/1262/Add.1, dated 1 April 2019, a further 12 -month extension of such period.
7.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by Switzerland informing
Members that negotiations and consultations pursuant to GATT Article XXVIII:5 were ongoing and
of its request for the extension of the deadline for WTO Members to withdraw equivalent co ncessions
under Article XXVIII:3 until 4 April 2020 contained in document G/L/1262/Add.1 . The Council took
note of the statement made by Switzerland and Liechtenstein and agree d to extend the deadline, as
indicated in document G/L/1262/Add.1, until 4 April 2020.
8 NOTIFICATION OF REGI ONAL TRADE AGREEMENT S
8.1. At its meetings of 11 April, 8 July [and 14 November ], the Council was informed of the
following notifications of regional trade agreements:
– Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partne rship (CPTPP)
(WT/REG395/N/1);
– Economic Partnership Agreement Between the European Union and Japan
(WT/REG396/N/1);
– Free Trade Agreement between Hong Kong, China and Georgia (WT/REG397/N/1);
– Free Trade Agreement between the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) and Israel
(WT/REG398/N/1);
– Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
(WT/REG399/N/1) ;
[– Free Trade Agreement Between Turkey and Jordan (WT/REG294/N /2) – Notification of
Termination ;
– Free Trade Agreement Between China and Chile (WT/REG230/N/1/ Add.1) – Notification
of Changes ;
– Free Trade Agreement Between Canada and Israel (WT/REG31/N/1/ Add.1) –
Notification of Changes .]
8.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council also took note of the updates provided by Nigeria on the
ECOWAS Customs Union and Common External Tariff (CET), which had entered into force on
1 January 2015, and that had been notified to the CRTA under Article XXIV of the GATT , indicating
that, mindful of the provisions in GATT Articles XXIV:6 and XXVIII, ECOWAS members had made
arrangements to start GATT Article XXVIII negotiations for the modification of WTO schedules of
those ECOWAS members in violation of their tariff bound commitments. Nigeria informed the Council
that Article XXVIII negotiations would be conducted by ECOWAS members as a group to align their
WTO schedules to the ECOWAS CET.
9 NOTIFICATIONS
9.1 Status of Notifications under the Provisions of the Agreements in Annex 1A of the
WTO Agreement (G/L/223/Rev.26)
9.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the latest revision of the status of
notifications contained in document G/L/223/Rev.26, and of the information provided by the Chair G/C/W/772
- 9 -
that, following informal consultations , Members had agreed that the Annual Report on Notification s
should only contain information relative to particular provisions of Section I of the TFA (the so -called
"transparency notifications ") as these were the notification requirements that applied to a ll Members,
including Article 1.4 (Publication and Availability of Information), Article 10.4.3 (Single Window),
Article 10.6.2 (Customs Brokers), and Article 12.2.2 (Customs Cooperation) .5 The Council also took
note of the statements made by Australia, China , the European Union , and Japan.
10 ADOPTION OF THE RULE S OF PROCEDURE OF TH E COMMITTEE ON TRADE
FACILITATION (G/TFA/ W/14)
10.1. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council considered document G/TFA/W/14 and took note
of the statements made by …, …, and ….]
11 MEASURES TO ALLOW GR ADUATED LDC S, WITH GNP BELOW US$ 1,000, BENEFITS
PURSUANT TO ANNEX VII(B) OF THE AGREEMEN T ON SUBSIDIES AND C OUNTERVAILING
MEASURES (WT/GC/W/74 2 AND G/C/W/752)
11.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement m ade by Chad on behalf of
the LDC Group, asking Members to consider the proposal to allow graduated LDC Members to benefit
from the exception provided under Article 27.2(a) of the SCM Agreement to devel oping countries
listed in Annex VII(b) , and informing Members that there were ongoing consultations on this issue
in order to reach consensus.6 The Council also took note of the statements made by Bangladesh,
Côte d 'Ivoire, India, Nepal, Senegal, and Turkey, in support of this request, and of the statements
made by Canada, the European Union, and the United States, requesting further clarification and
discussion of this issue , and of the closing statement made by Chad on behalf of the LDC Group .
11.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by Chad , on behalf of
the LDC Group, recalling the importance that the submission had for LDCs and for which the Group
sought a decision by the General Council. The Council also took note of the state ments made by
Bangladesh, Canada, the European Union, India, Nepal, Turkey, and the United States, and of the
closing statement made by Chad on behalf of the LDC Group.
11.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by Chad on
behalf of the LDC Group … . The Council also took note of the statements made by …, and … .]
12 EUROPEAN UNION – SAFEGUARD MEASURES ON I NDICA RICE FROM CAMB ODIA –
REQUEST FROM CAMBODI A
12.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of concerns raised by Cambodia over the
introduction of EU Regulation 2019/67 withdrawing the duty-free quota -free ( DFQF ) access to the
European Union 's market under the EBA scheme for Cambodia 's Indica rice through the imposition
of a safeguard duty. The Council also took note of the statements made by China, Indonesia, Lao
People 's Democratic Republic , Myanmar, the Philippines, and Thailand , and of the statement made
by the European Union in response to these concerns.
13 EUROPEAN UNI ON – PROPOSED EU TARIFF RATE QUOTA COMMITMENTS : SYSTEMIC
CONCERNS
13.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by Australia, Brazil,
Canada, China, Mexico, New Zealand, the Russian Federation, the United States, and Uruguay,
expressing their systemic, commercial , and technical concerns regarding the tariff rate quota
(TRQ) commitments of the European Union following the Brexit process.7 The Council also took note
of the statements made by Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, India, Indonesia,
Japan , the Republic of Korea, Paraguay, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, and Chinese Taipei . The Council also
took note of the statement made by the European Union in response to these concerns.
5 See document G/L/223/Rev.26, Section 15, Agree ment on Trade Facilitation (TFA) (explanatory
notes), paragraphs 15.1–15.5, and Annex 18.
6 This issue had already been raised by the Central African Republic, on behalf of the LDC Group, at the
Council's meetings of 3 July and 12 November 2018.
7 This concern had already been raised at the Council's meeting of 12 November 2018. G/C/W/772
- 10 -
13.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council again took note of the statements made by Australia,
Canada, China, New Zealand, and the United States, reiterating their concerns about the impact of
the modifications to the EU and UK 's WTO TRQs. The Council also took note of the statements made
by Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, India, Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, the Russian
Federa tion, Switzerland, Chines e Taipei, and Uruguay, and of the statement made by the European
Union in response to these concerns.
13.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by …. The
Council also took note of the statements made by …, and …, and of the statements made by the
European Union in response to these concerns.]
14 EUROPEAN UNION – REGULATION EC NO. 1272/2008 (CLP REGULATION) – REQUES T
FROM THE RUSSIAN FED ERATION
14.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took n ote of the statement made by the Russian
Federation expressing its concerns over the proposed update of the EU notification to the
TBT Committee in December 2018, contained in document G/TBT/N/EU/629 , to include titanium
dioxide as a category 2 carcinogen and cobalt as a category 1b carcinogen , and which could
potentially disrupt trade in a wide variety of products . The Council also took note of the statements
made by Australia, Canada, Mexico, the Philippines, and the United States, echoing these concerns ;
and of the statement made by the European Union in response to th ese concerns.
14.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by the Russian
Federation, supported by Canada, reiterating their concerns over the proposed update to the
European Union CLP, notified to the TBT Committee in December 2018, to include titanium dioxide
and cobalt, and the lack of transparency and scientific criteria for the classification of many chemicals
as carcinogens. The Council also took note of the statement made by the European Union in response
to these concerns.
14.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by …, …, and
…, reiterating their concerns over the proposed update to the European Union CLP to include titanium
dioxide and cobalt, and the lack of transparency and scientific criteria for the classification of many
chemicals as carcinogens. The Council also took note of the statement made by the European Union
in response to these concerns.]
15 JAMAICA – REGULATIONS NOS. 145 AND 146 BANNING SINGLE -USE PLASTIC
PRODUCTS – REQUEST F ROM THE DOMINICAN RE PUBLIC
15.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the Dominican
Republic expressing its concerns over Jamaica 's ban on single -use plastic notified to the
TBT Committee given its trade restrictive impact , the discretion given to national authorities to
regulate the domestic industry , and its compatibility with the TBT Agreement and GATT Articles III
and XX. The Council also took not e of the statements made by Guatemala and the United States,
echoing the Dominican Republic 's concerns ; and of the statement made by Jamaica in response to
these concerns.
16 TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO – ANNOUNCEMENT CONCE RNING THE BAN ON THE
MARKETING AND IMPORT ATION OF POLYSTYRENE PL ASTICS – REQUEST FRO M THE
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
16.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the Dominican
Republic, supported by Guatemala and Honduras, expressing concerns regarding Trinidad and
Tobago 's imp ort and marketing ban on polystyrene plastic , including glasses and food containers,
dishes, cups, and other utensils, and particularly as to whether or not the same treatment would be
provided to domestic and imported like products. The Council also took note of the statement made
by Trinidad and Tobago in response to these concerns. G/C/W/772
- 11 -
17 EUROPEAN UNION – IMPLEMENTATION OF NON -TARIFF BARRIERS ON
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT S – REQUEST FROM ARGENTINA, AUSTRALIA, BRAZIL, C ANADA,
COLOMBIA, COSTA RICA , CÔTE D'IVOIRE, DOMIN ICAN REPUBLIC, ECUADOR, GUATEMALA,
HONDURAS, MALAYSIA, NICARAGUA, PANAMA, PARAGUAY, PE RU, THE UNITED STATES,
AND URUGUAY
17.1. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by A rgentina, A ustralia,
Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d 'Ivoire, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the United States, and Uruguay, raising
their concerns regarding the European Union 's implemen tation of measures prohibiting the use of a
number of agro -chemical substances required for safe and sustainable agriculture production, which
disrupted trade in a number of products (e.g. cereals, nuts, bananas, cranberries, grapes, sweet
potatoes, mangoe s, among others), and which affect ed farmers , particularly in developing countries
and LDCs. Members' concerns included the diversion from evidence and science -based standards by
incorporating a hazard -based approach for the approval and renewal of plant p roduction
authorizations; the setting of import tolerances for active maximum residue levels (MRLs) below
internationally recognized standards (by Codex, FAO, and other relevant bodies); and the lack of
appropriate transitional periods for the implementati on of the new MRLs in order for producers to
identify and register alternative substances that would comply with the same level of protection in
the EU market. The Council also took note of the statements made by the Plurinational State of
Bolivia , Chile, China, El Salvador, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Mexico, New Zealand, the Philippines,
Sri Lanka, and Thailand, and of the statement made by the European Union in response to these
concerns.
17.2. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took note of the statements made by …,
…, …, …, …, …, and …. The Council also took note of the statement made by the European Union in
response to these concerns. ]
18 UNITED STATES - MEAS URES REGARDING MARKE T ACCESS PROHIBITION FOR
ICT PRODUCTS – REQUEST F ROM CHINA
18.1. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by China regarding the
US Executive Order on Securing the Information and Telecommunication Technology and Services
Supply Chain, of 15 May 2019, banning US companies from buying or usin g telecommunications
equipment provided by enterprises that were considered to pose a potential national security threat.
The Council also took note of the statement made by United States in response to these concerns.
18.2. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council … .]
19 UNITED STATES – EXPO RT CONTROL MEASURES FOR ICT PRODUCTS – REQUEST FROM
CHINA
19.1. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by China regarding the
Chinese companies that had been placed onto the United States export cont rol "Entity List " and its
consistency with Articles I and XI of GATT 1994. The Council also took note off the statement made
by the United States in response to these concerns.
19.2. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council … .]
20 EUROPEAN UNION – MEDICAL DEVIC E REGULATION AND IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC
MEDICAL DEVICES REGU LATION – REQUEST FRO M THE UNITED STATES
20.1. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by the United States,
supported by Canada and the Republic of Korea, expressing their co ncern over two new
EU regulations that restricted patients ' access to life saving and life improving medical technologies
and devices, and which affect ed the market access conditions of those products on the EU market .
Concerns also related to the insufficient number of testing facilities (Notified Bodies) to perform
certification. The Council also took note of the statement made by European Union in response to
these concerns.
20.2. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Counc il … .] G/C/W/772
- 12 -
21 TUNISIA – IMPORT RES TRICTION MEASURES – REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN
UNION
21.1. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by the European Union
and of the statement made by China, expressing their concern over Tunisia 's new import
authorization regime, which affected various products, including agricultural and agri -food products,
textiles, clothing, cosmetics, leather products, shoes, toys , and electrical goods , representing
roughly 4% of total EU exports to Tunisia . These meas ures, which also included quantitative
restrictions, could be a de facto non -automatic import licence, which had not been announced prior
to its entry into force, nor notified to the WTO. The Council also took note of the statement made
by Tunisia providin g its response to these concerns.
22 ANGOLA – IMPORT REST RICTING PRACTICES
22.1. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by the United States
concerning Angola 's Presidential Decree aimed at restricting imports of certain agricultural products
in order to increase domestic economic development , which it had adopted in January 2019.
Pursuant to this decree, Angola had introduced bans on the importation of pork, maize flour, and
diapers. The Council also took note of the statement s made b y Brazil, Canada, the European Union,
and the Russian Federation on this issue, and of the statement made by Angola providing its
response to these concerns.
22.2. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council … .]
23 EUROPEAN UNION – REGULATION (EU) 2017/2321 AND REGULA TION
(EU) 2018/825 – REQUEST F ROM THE RUSSIAN FEDE RATION
23.1. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by the Russian
Federation over the EU Regulations 2017/2321 and 2018/825. The Council also took note of the
statements made by …, and of the statement made by the European Union in response to these
concerns.]
24 EUROPEAN UNION – REGULATION ON UNMAN NED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS AND ON
THIRD -COUNTRY OPERATORS OF UNMANNE D AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS – REQUEST FROM
CHINA
24.1. [At its mee ting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by China
regarding the European Union's regulations on unmanned aircraft systems and on third -country
operators of unmanned aircraft systems. The Council also took note of the statements made by …,
and …, and of the statement made by the European Union in response to these concerns .]
25 INDONESIA 'S IMPORT AND EXPORT RESTRICTING POLICIES AND PRACTICES –
REQUEST FROM THE EUR OPEAN UNION, JAPAN, NORWAY, AND THE UNITED STAT ES
25.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by the European
Union, Japan, Norway, and the United States, and of the statements made by Brazil, China, Japan ,
New Zealand , the Russian Federation, and Chinese Taipei , reiterating their concerns over Indonesia 's
import and export restricting policies and practices which , in their view , were protectionist in nature ,
legally uncertai n, and unclear in implementation. Among the measures of particular concern were
the followi ng: the local content requirements in a number of sectors; complex and burdensome
import requirements for a number of products, including for cosmetics, which were subjected to very
high registration fees; burdensome and non -transparent SPS measures, QRs f or meat , seafood ,
steel, and tyres; export restrictions for certain raw materials ; and burdensome and discriminatory
CPAs and increased technical standards as well as the "Halal" Law and its implementing regulations
and procedures .8 The Council also took n ote of the statement made by Indonesia in response to
these concerns.
25.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by the European Union,
Japan, and the United States , reiterating their concerns over the protectionist nature of In donesia 's
8 This issue has been on the CTG's agenda since its meeting of 22 June 2012. G/C/W/772
- 13 -
trade policy , which include d the following : local content requirements for meat and dairy products,
horticultural products, and cosmetics (subject to high registration fees); QRs for meat, alcohol
products, steel and tyres; export restrictions for raw materials; burdensome SPS measures;
increased technical regulations and burdensome conformity assessment procedures (CAPs) on
human and veterinarian pharmaceutical products , and the Halal law , as well as the decrees on
maritime transpo rt and insurance . The Council also took note of the statements made by New
Zealand, the Russian Federation, Chinese Taipei, and Thailand ; and of the statement made by
Indonesia in response to these concerns.
25.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council too k note of the statements made by …, …, and
…, relating to their ongoing concerns over various aspects of Indonesia 's trade and investment
regime, including in relation to import licensing requirements, unique technical regulations,
pre-shipment inspection requirements, export restrictions, local content requirements, domestic
manufacturing requirements, sales restrictions on 4G mobile phones, and a general lack of
transparency, among others. The Council also took note of the statements made by …, …, and …;
and of the statement made by Indonesia in response to these concerns. ]
26 INDIA – CUSTOMS DUTI ES ON ICT PRODUCTS
26.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by Canada, China,
the European Union, Japan, Norway, Chinese Taipei, and the United States, re iterating their concerns
expressed in this Council and the Market Access and ITA Committees, re garding India's introduction
of import duties on a wide range of ICT products in excess of its WTO bound commitments and the
lack of transparency with regard to the scope of the products covered by these increases .9 The
European Union also informed the Council that , in April 2019, it had requested consultations with
India on this issue. The Council also took note of the statements made by Australia, the Republic of
Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, and Thailand; and of the statement made by India in
response to these concerns.
26.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by Canada, China,
Norway, Chine se Taipei, and the United States , regarding the imposition of customs duties on
additional ICT products covered by ITA -1 in the context of India 's budget proposal for 2018 -2019.
The Council also took note of the statements made by Australia, Japan, the Rep ublic of Korea, New
Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland , and Thailand on this issue and of the information provided by
Japan indicating that, on 10 May 2019, it had requested formal bilateral consultations with India
under the DSB . The Council also took note of the statement made by India in response to these
concerns.
26.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council … . ]
27 EGYPT – MANUFACTURER REGISTRATION SYSTEM – REQUEST FROM THE E UROPEAN
UNIO N
27.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by the European
Union, reiterating its concerns over Egypt 's procedure for compulsory registration of foreign
companies as the Ministerial Decree s No. 991/2015 and No. 43/2016 continued to create obstacles
to trade, and with regard to Egypt 's decision to extend the mandatory registration requirements to
new products via Decree No. 44/2019.10. The Council also took note of the statement s made by
Brazil, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, Switzerland, and Thailand; and of the
statement made by Egypt in response to these concerns.
27.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by the European Union ,
reiterating its concerns raised already at the CTG and the TBT Committee, regarding Egypt's Decree s
Nos. 991/2015, 43/2016, and 44/2019 , which had introduced procedures relating to the compulsory
registration of foreign companies and pre -shipment inspections , and Egypt 's decision to extend the
mandatory registration requirements to new produ ct categories . The Council also took note of the
9 This issue had already been raised at the Council's meeting of 6 April 2017.
10 This issue had already raised by the European Union and the United States at the Council's meeting of
6 April 2017. G/C/W/772
- 14 -
statement s made by Brazil and the Russian Federation; and of the statement made by Egypt in
response to these concerns.
27.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by the Euro pean
Union on Egypt 's manufacturer registration system. The Council also took note of the statements
made by …, …, and … .]
28 CROATIA – REGULATION OF IMPORT AND SALE OF CERTAIN OIL PRODU CTS –
REQUEST FROM THE RUS SIAN FEDERATION
28.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the
Russian Federation reiterating its concerns in relation to Croatia 's discriminatory policies against
certain imported oil products from the Russian Federation, as well as its requirements for minimum
volume of containers and some requirements for wholesale trade in certain oil products applicable
to all imports except those from EU member States or members of the European Economic Area and
Turkey. The Council also took note of the statement made by the European Union in response to this
concern.
28.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by the Russian
Federation reiterating its concerns over Croatia 's regulation on import and sale of certain oil products
that had established a minimum volume of containers and some requirements for wholesale trade
in certain oil products, applicable to all imports except those from EU member States or members
of the European Economic Area and Turkey. 11 The Council also took note of the statement made by
the European Union in response to this concern.
29 RUSSIAN FEDERATION – TRADE RESTRICTING P RACTICES – REQUEST FROM THE
EUROPEAN UNION
29.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by the European
Union and the United States on the GOST standard on cement certification; the "good manufacturing
practice (GMP) " certificates for pharmaceutical products; the ban on exports of skins and hides; the
updated list of goods that could be subject to export bans, including fishery produc ts from Estonia
and Latvia; and the wine taxation regime.12 The Council also took note of the statement s made by
Sri Lanka, Ukraine , and the United States ; and of the statement made by the Russian Federation in
response to these concerns.
29.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by the European Union,
supported by Ukraine and the United States, reiterating their concerns over the Russian Federation 's
certification requirements, in particular with regard to the good manufacturing practices (GMP) for
pharmaceutical products; cement certification; the SPS ban on fishery products from Estonia; the
wine taxation regime; "temporary " export bans on raw hides and skins and export o f birch logs; and
restrictions on importing/foreign compan ies to Russian State -Owned Enterprise s' purchases .
29.3. At the same meeting, the Council also took note of the statement of Ukraine expressing
concerns over a new Regulation adopted by the Russian Federation prohibiting the importation of a
number of agricultural and industrial goods such as paper, cardboard, clothing, wire, pipe products,
machinery, of Ukrainian origin, or if such goo ds had transited through the territory of Ukraine. The
Council also took note of the statement made by the United States; and of the statement made by
the Russian Federation in response to these concerns.
29.4. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took no te of the statement made by … with
regard to the above -mentioned concerns. The Council also took note of the statement made by …;
and of the statement made by the Russian Federation in response to these concerns. ]
11 This issue had already been raised by the Russian Federation at the Council's meeting s
of 17 November 2016, 6 April 2017, and 3 July 2018.
12 This issue h ad already been raised by the European Union at the Council's meeting s of 15 April 2016,
6 April, 30 June, and 10 November 2017, and 23 March, 3 July, and 12 November 2018. G/C/W/772
- 15 -
30 KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARA BIA, KINGDOM OF BAHR AIN, THE UNITED ARAB E MIRATES
AND OMAN – SELECTIVE TAX ON C ERTAIN IMPORTED PROD UCTS – REQUEST FROM THE
EUROPEAN UNION, SWIT ZERLAND, AND THE UNI TED STATES
30.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by the European
Union, Switzerl and, and the United States concerning the GCC Council of Ministers ' "Treaty on Excise
Tax", adopted in December 2016, relating to a 100% ad valorem excise duty on energy drinks and
a 50% ad valorem duty on other carbonated drinks.13 The Council also took no te of the statement
made by Japan; and of the Kingdom of Bahrain, on its own behalf and on behalf of the Kingdom of
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, in response to these concerns .
30.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by the European Union,
Switzerland, and the United States, reiterating their concern s over the discriminatory impact of the
GCC selective tax providing for a 100% ad valorem excise duty on energy drinks, and a 50% ad
valorem duty on other carbonated drinks , and of Oman 's implementation, as of 15 June 2019, of a
selective tax on certain products without publishing the implementing legislation. Note was also
taken of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 's selective tax re forms , which had been expanded to cover
e-cigarette and e -cigarette products, and fizzy drinks, as well as of the expected replacement of the
ad valorem tax by a volume -based tax. The Council also took note of the statement made by the
Kingdom of Bahrain, on its own behalf and on behalf of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia , the United
Arab Emirates, and Oman, in response to these concerns.
30.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statements made by … … … ,
and supported by … , reiterating their concerns over the GCC Council of Ministers ' "Treaty on Excise
Tax", adopted in December 2016. The Council also took note of the statement s made by …, …, and
…, in response to these concerns. ]
31 CHINA – NEW EXPORT C ONTROL LAW IN DRAFT – REQUEST FROM JAPAN
31.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by Japan reiterating
its concern s on the Chinese draft export control law intended to conso lidate various existing export
control provisions in a single draft.14 The Council also took note of the statements made by the
European Union and the Republic of Korea ; and of the statement made by China in response to these
concerns.
31.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by Japan reiterating
its concerns over the Chinese draft export control law that was intended to consolidate various
existing export control provisions into a single law , including overly stringent export r egulations , and
their compatibility with GATT Article XI on quantitative restrictions. The Council also took note of the
statement s made by the European Union and the Republic of Korea; and of the statement made by
China in response to these concerns.
31.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by Japan
reiterating its concerns over the Chinese export control law, including regarding the scope of
products subject to restrictions, the disclosure of technical information at export, and the responsive
measures against control measures by other countries. The Council also took note of the statements
made by …, …, and … , and of the statement made by China in response to these concerns .]
32 VIET NAM – DECREE ON THE REGULATION ON CONDIT IONS FOR AUTOMOBILES
MANUFACTURING, ASSEM BLING, IMPORTING, AN D AUTOMOTIVE WARRANT Y AND
MAINTENANCE SERVICES
32.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the United States
reiterating its concern s over Viet Nam's Decree No. 116 and Circular No. 3, which established testing
procedures and submission of a quality certificate issued by foreign authorities for the importation
of automobiles into Viet Nam.15 The Council also took note of the statement s made by the European
13 This issue had already been raised at the meetings of 3 July and 12 November 2018.
14 This issue had already b een raised at the meetings of 23 March, 3 July, and 12 November 2018.
15 This issue had already b een raised at the meetings of 23 March, 3 July, and 12 November 2018. G/C/W/772
- 16 -
Union , the Russian Federation, and Thailand; and of the statement made by Viet Nam in response
to these concerns.
32.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement s made by the Russian
Federation and the United States , over Viet Nam 's Decree No. 116/2018 establishi ng the submission
of a quality certificate issued by foreign authorities for the importation of automobiles into Viet Nam .
The Council also took note of the statement s made by the European Union and Mexico; and of the
statement made by Viet Nam in response to these concerns.
32.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took note of the statements made by the
Russian Federation and the United States concerning Viet Nam 's Dec ree No. 116/2018; and of the
statement made by … . The Council also took note of Viet Nam 's response to these concerns. ]
33 MONGOLIA – QUANTITAT IVE RESTRICTIONS AND PROHIBITIONS ON IMP ORTATION
OF CERTAIN AGRICULTU RAL PRODUCTS – REQUE ST FROM THE RUSSIAN FEDERA TION
33.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the Russian
Federation concerning Mongolia 's quantitative restrictions and prohibitions on the importation of
certain agricultural products, including flour and milk, and their subsequent import prohibition.16 The
Council also took note of the statement made by Canada; and of the statement by Mongolia in
response to these concerns.
33.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council again took note of the statement made by the Russian
Federati on reiterating its concerns on the quantitative restrictions and prohibitions on the
importation of certain agricultural products , including flour and milk, and their subsequent import
prohibition . Russia also asked for a clarification of the rationale beh ind the use of a quantitative
quotas regime to ensure that imported food products contained iron, zinc, and vitamins B or D . The
Council also took note of the statement made by Mongolia in response to these concerns.
33.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Cou ncil again took note of the statement made by the
Russian Federation , concerning the quantitative restrictions and prohibitions on the importation of
certain agricultural products applied by Mongolia. The Council also took note of the response
provided by Mongolia. ]
34 INDIA – QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTION ON IMPO RTS OF CERTAIN PULSE S – REQUEST
FROM AUSTRALIA, CANA DA, THE EUROPEAN UNI ON, THE RUSSIAN FEDE RATION, AND THE
UNITED STATES
34.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement s made by Australia, Canada,
the European Union, the Russian Federation, and the United States, reiterating their concerns over
India's quantitative restrictions on imports of pulses and the new measures announced by India on
29 March 2019 to impose these r estrictions for an additional year , commencing 1 April 2019.17 The
Council also took note of the statement made by Ukraine; and of the statement made by India in
response to these concerns.
34.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements m ade by Australia, Canada,
the European Union, the Russian Federation, and the United States, reiterat ing their concerns over
India's restrictions on imports of pulses which, in March 2019, had been extended for an additional
year. The Council also took not e of the statements made by New Zealand and Ukraine ; and of the
statement made by India in response to these concerns.
34.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statements made by Australia,
Canada, the European Union, the Russian Federa tion, the United States, on the quantitative
restrictions imposed by India on the import of beans, yellow peas, chickpeas, and other pulses. The
Council also took note of the statements made by …; and of the statement made by India in response
to these concerns ].
16 This issue h ad already been raised at the meeti ngs of 23 March, 3 July, and 12 November 2018.
17 This concern had already b een raised at the meetings of 23 March, 3 July, and 12 November 2018. G/C/W/772
- 17 -
35 CHINA – CUSTOMS DUTI ES ON CERTAIN INTEGR ATED CIRCUITS – REQUEST FROM THE
EUROPEAN UNION, JAPA N, AND CHINESE TAIPE I
35.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by the European
Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei , reiterating their concerns over a change in China 's applied duty
rates for semiconductor products and the calculation it had used for the HS transposition of tariffs
on multi -component semi -conductors (MCOs) and the use of two different averages when
implem enting their reclassification under HS2017.18 The Council also took note of the statements
made by the Republic of Korea, Switzerland, and the United States; and of the statement made by
China in response to these concerns.
35.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Cou ncil again took note of the statements made by the European
Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei , regarding China 's application of tariffs which were higher than the
bound levels contained in China 's Schedule of Concessions , particularly r egarding its applied rate for
the IGBT -IPM (semi -conductor products) . The Council also took note of the statement s made by
Switzerland and the United States; and of the statement made by China in response to these
concerns.
35.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took note of the statements made by the
European Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei , relating to the customs duties imposed by China on
certain integrated circuits. The Council also took note of the statements made by …, and …; and of
the statement made by China in response to these concerns. ]
36 CHINA – MEASURES RES TRICTING THE IMPORT OF SCRAP MATERIALS – REQUEST
FROM THE UNITED STAT ES
36.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by the United States
concerning China 's measures, notified to the Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT),
banning or limiting the import of scrap materials, including paper, plastics, and ferrous and
non-ferrous scrap and wires.19 The Council also took note of the statements made by Australia,
Canada, the Dominican Republic, the European Union, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand ; and
of the statement made by China in response to this concern.
36.2. At its meeting on 8 July, the Council again took note of the statement made by the United
States reiterating its concerns over China 's measures notified to the TBT Committee, banning or
limiting the import of scrap material since July 2018. The Council also took note of the state ments
made by Australia, Canada, the Dominican Republic, the European Union, and New Zealand; and of
the statement made by China in response to this concern.
36.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by the United
States r eiterating its concerns over China 's ban on imports of scrap materials and the border
inspections and identification rules for materials considered as waste. The Council also took note of
the statements made by …, …, and …; and of the statement made by Chi na in response to these
concerns. ]
37 EUROPEAN UNION – AMENDMENTS TO THE DIREC TIVE 2009/28/EC, REN EWABLE
ENERGY DIRECTIVE (RE D) – REQUEST FROM COLOMBIA AND MALAYSIA
37.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement s made by Colombia and
Malay sia about the discriminatory treatment provided to biofuels and bio -liquids from palm oil in the
amendments proposed to the RED, which would not be counted towards the EU 's renewable energy
targets from 20 30.20 The Council also took note of the statements m ade by Costa Rica, Guatemala,
Honduras, Indonesia, and Thailand; and of the statement made by the European Union in response
to these concerns.
18 This concern had already been raised at the meetings of 10 November 2017, and 23 March, 3 July
and 12 Novembe r 2018.
19 This concern had already been raised at the meetings of 23 March, 3 July, and 12 November 2018.
20 This concern had already been raised at the meetings of 23 March (under agenda item "Other
Business"), 3 July, and 12 November 2018. G/C/W/772
- 18 -
37.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council again took note of the statement s made by Colombia and
Malaysia reiteratin g their concerns over the discriminatory treatment provided to biofuels and
bio-liquids from palm oil in the amendments proposed to the RED being discussed in Brussels. The
Council also took note of the statements made by Ecuador, Guatemala, and Honduras; and of the
statement made by the European Union in response to these concerns.
37.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took no te of the statements made by
Colombia and Malaysia over the …. The Council also took note of the statements made by …, …, and
…; and of the statement made by the European Union in response to these concerns.]
38 UNITED STATES – PROH IBITIVE PROPOSAL ON COMMUNI CATION EQUIPMENT OR
SERVICES RELEASED BY THE FCC – REQUEST F ROM CHINA
38.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council again took note of the statement made by China on an
announcement made by the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) prohibiting the use of
the Universal Service Fund to purchase equipment or services from any communications equipment
or service providers identified as posing a national security risk to the United States communications
networks or the US communications supply chain.21 The Council also took note of the statement
made by the United States in response to this concern.
38.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council again took note of the statement made by China on the
above -mentioned announcement made by the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
prohibiting the use of the Universal Service Fund to purchase equipment or services from any
communications equipment or service providers identified as posing a national security risk to the
United States communications net works or the US communications supply chain. The Council also
took note of the sta tement made by the United States in response to this concern.
38.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took note of the statement made by China
on this issue; and of the statement made by the United States in response to this concern. ]
39 UNITED STATES – MEAS URES ON AVIATION SEC URITY EQUIPMENT – REQUEST FROM
CHINA
39.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council again took note of the statement made by China about
the conformit y assessment procedures (CAPs) conducted by the Transportation Security
Administration of the United States (TAS), which were not in compliance with the national treatment
principle as CAPs to aviation security equipment of Chinese origin were not accepted or delayed.22
The Council also took note of the statement made by the United States in response to this concern.
39.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council again took note of the statement made by China regarding
the refusal by the US Transportation Security Ad ministration 's (TSA) of applications by Chinese
enterprises for TSA certification , and the US failure to notify any WTO body, including the
TBT Committee , on the TSA Certification requirements . The Council also took note of the statement
made by the United States in response to this concern.
39.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took note of the statement made by China
on this issue and of the statement made by the United States in response to this concern. ]
40 EUROPEAN UNION – QUALITY SCHEMES FOR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCT S AND
FOODSTUFFS – THE REGISTRATION OF CERTAIN TERMS OF CHE ESE AS GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS – REQUES T FROM ARGENTINA, TH E UNITED STATES, AND URUGUAY
40.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council again took note of the statements made by Argentina,
the United States, and Uruguay, reiterating their concerns over the registration by the European
Union, without notification, of the term "Danbo " as a G eographical Indicati on (GI) , without
considering the exis tence of Codex Stan dard 264 of 1996; and of the use of the term "Havarti ", on
21 This concer n had already been raised at the meetings of 3 July and 12 November 2018.
22 This concern had already b een raised at the meetings of 23 March (under Agenda item "Other
Business"), 3 July, and 12 November 2018. G/C/W/772
- 19 -
which there also existed a Codex Stan dard.23 The Council also took note of the statements made by
Australia and New Zealand; and of the statement made by the European Union in res ponse to these
concerns.
40.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council again took note of the statements made by Argentina,
the United States , and Uruguay, reiterating their concerns over the registration by the European
Union of the term s "Danbo" and "Havarti" as GIs, disregarding the fact that these are generic terms
according to the Codex Alimentarius and by the lack of transparency in the EU registration process .
The Council also took note of the statement made by Australia; and of the statement made by the
European Union in response to these concerns.
40.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council again took note of the statements made by
Argentina, the United States, and Uruguay, reiterating their concerns over the registration by the
European Union of the term "Danbo " as a GI. The Council also took note of the statements made by
…, …, and …; and of the statement made by the European Union in response to these concerns.]
41 EUROPEAN UNION – DRAFT IMPLEMENTING REGU LATIONS REGARDING PR OTECTED
DESIGNATION OF ORIGI N AND GEOGRAPHICAL INDICAT IONS, TRADITIONAL TE RMS,
LABELLING AND PRESEN TATION OF CERTAIN WI NE SECTOR PRODUCTS – REQUEST FROM
ARGENTINA AND THE UN ITED STATES
41.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statements made by Argentina and the
United Stat es in relation to concerns already expressed at the TBT Committee over the EU 's revision
to the draft implementing regulations regarding protected designation of origin and geographical
indications, traditional terms, labelling and presentation of certain wine sector products and concerns
regarding Regulation Nos. 607/2009 (which had been repealed by EU Regulation No. 2019/33), and
479/2008 , which have been raised for more than ten years. The Council also took note of the
response provided by the European U nion.
41.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statements made by the United States,
reiterating its concerns over the EU 's regulations regarding protected designation of origin and
geographical indications (GIs) and traditional terms for win e, and specifically, the United States'
pending applications for traditional terms.24 The Council also took note of the statement s made by
Argentina, Brazil, and New Zealand ; and of the statement made by the European Union in response
to these concerns .
41.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statements made by …, …, and
…, in relation to their concerns over the EU 's regulations regarding protected designation of origin
and geographical indications (GIs) and traditional term s for wine. The Council also took note of the
statement made by the European Union in response to these concerns .]
42 AUSTRALIA – DISCRIMI NATORY MARKET ACCESS PROHIBITION ON 5G EQUIPMENT –
REQUEST FROM CHINA
42.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note o f the statement made by China concerning
the prohibition to participate in 5G projects imposed by Australia on two Chinese companies. The
Council also took note of the statement made by Australia in response to this concern.
42.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the C ouncil took note of the statement made by China reiterating its
concerns over Australia 's prohibition of Chinese equipment from Australian 5G projects and the lack
of clarity regarding the information provided by Australia on its Telecommunication Sector S ecurity
Reform (TCSSR) . The Council also took note of the statement made by Australia in response to this
concern.
42.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by China
concerning the prohibition to participate in 5G projects imposed by Australia on two Chinese
23 This concer n had already been raised at the mee tings of 3 July and 12 November 2018.
24 This concern had already been raised at the meetings of 23 March, 3 July, and 12 November 2018. G/C/W/772
- 20 -
companies. The Council also took note of the statement made by Australia in response to this
concern.]
43 JAPAN – EXPORT CONTROL MEAS URES ON MATERIALS ES SENTIAL FOR
SEMICONDUCTORS AND D ISPLAYS
43.1. At its meeting of 9 July, under agenda item "Other Business ", the Council took note of the
statement made by the Republic of Korea expressing concerns over Japan's recent expor t control
measures on materials essential to the production of semiconductors and displays towards Korea.
The Council also took note of the statement made by Japan in response to these concerns.
44 TRANSPARENCY AND NOT IFICATION REQUIREMEN TS UNDER WTO AGREEMEN TS
44.1 Communication from Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, the European Union,
Japan, New Zealand, the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and
Matsu, and the United States (JOB/GC/204/R ev.1–JOB/CTG/14/R ev.1 –
JOB/GC/204/R ev.2–JOB/CTG/14/R ev.2)
44.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council considered document JOB/GC/204/Rev.1 –
JOB/CTG/14/Rev.1 , containing a revised draft decision for the General Council's consideration on
procedures to enhance transparency and strengthen notification requirements under the
WTO Agreements25, and took note of the statements made by Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa
Rica, the European Union, Japan, New Zealand, Chinese Taipei, and the United States, introducing
the revised version and explaining the main aspects of their submission, the changes that had been
introduced following comments and suggestions made by other delegations at the previous
CTG meeting , and in consultations that had taken place following that meeting. The Council also
took note of the statements made by the Plurinational State of Bolivia; Brazil; Chad; Chile; Colombia;
Cuba; Djibouti; Ecuador; Egypt; El Salvador; Guatemala; Hong Kong, China; India; Indonesia;
Jamaica; the Republic of Korea; Mexico; Nigeria; Norway; Pakistan; Panama; Paraguay; the Russian
Federation; Senegal; Singapore; South Africa; Sri Lanka ; Switzerland; Thailand; Turkey; Ukraine;
and Uruguay ; and of the responses to these statements provided by Argentina, Australia, the
European Union, Chinese Taipei , and t he United States . All Members that intervened continued to
highlight the importance of transparency as a fundamental pillar of the WTO. Although some
considered the proposal to be a good basis for discussion, others remained concerned about various
of its aspect s.
44.2. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council considered document JOB/GC/204/Rev.2 –
JOB/CTG/14/Rev.2 , containing a revised draft decision for the General Council's consideration on
procedures to enhance transparency and strengthen notification requirements under the
WTO Agreements, and took note of the statements made by Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa
Rica, the European Union, Japan, New Zealand, Chinese Taipei, and the United States, introducing
the second revision and explaining the main aspects of t heir submission, the changes that had been
introduced following comments and suggestions made by other delegations at the previous
CTG meeting , and in consultations that had taken place following that meeting. The Council also
took note of the statements m ade by Bangladesh; Brazil; Chad; Chile; China; Egypt; Hong Kong,
China; India; Indonesia; Israel; the Republic of Korea; Mexico; Nigeria; Norway; Panama; Paraguay;
the Russian Federation; Saint Lucia; Singapore; South Africa; Switzerland; Thailand; Turkey;
Ukraine; and Uruguay; and of the responses to these statements provided by Australia and the
European Union.
44.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statements made by …, …, … ,
…, and …. The Council also took note of the statements made by …, …, …, …, and …. ]
25 This issue had already been raised by the United States at the Council's meeting of
10 November 2017. At the Council's meeting of 23 March 2018, the United States had submitted a revised
version of the proposal (JOB/GC/148/Rev.1 –JOB/CTG/10/Rev.1). At the Council's 12 November 2018 meeting,
various delegations co -sponsored a joint proposal to enhance transparency (JOB/GC/204 –JOB/CTG/14 and
JOB/GC/204/Add.1 –JOB/CTG/14/Add.1). G/C/W/772
- 21 -
44.2 An Inclusive Approach to Transparency and Notification Requirements in the WTO –
Communication from Cuba, India, Nigeria, South Africa, Tunisia, Uganda, and Zimbabwe
(JOB/GC/218, JOB/CTG/15, JOB/SERV/292, JOB/IP/33, JOB/DEV/58, JOB/AG/158)
44.4. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council considered document JOB/CTG/15, and took note of the
statements made by India, Mauritius, Nigeria, South Africa, Tunisia, and Zimbabwe, introduc ing the
document and indicating that their submission recognized that developing countries faced challenges
in meeting their transparency obligations due to limited capacities and resources.26 The Council also
took note of the statements made by Australia, Canada, Chad, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, the
European Union, Japan, New Zealand, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Sri Lanka,
Switzerland, Chinese Taipei, the United States, and Uruguay . The Council also took note of the
statements made by India an d South Africa in response to some of the comments made on their
proposal.
44.5. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statements made by …, …, …,
and … . The Council also took note of the statements made by ….]
45 WORK PROGRAMME ON EL ECTRONIC COMMERCE
45.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Chairperson recalled that Ministers in Buenos Aires had adopted
the decision contained in document WT/MIN(17)/6527 on the "Work Programme on Electronic
Commerce" (Work Programme, or WPEC). In that Decision, Ministers had agreed to continue the
work under the existing Work Programme since their last session, based on the existing mandate as
set out in document WT/L/274 , adopted on 25 September 1998, and endeavour to reinvigorate the
work of the WTO on electronic commerce (E -Commerce). To this end, the Decision had also
instructed the General Council to hold periodic reviews in its sessions of July and December 2018,
and July 2019, based on the reports submitted by the relevant bodies, among them the Goods
Council; and to maintain the current practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic
transmissions. To fulfil the renewed mandate, the E -Commerce issue had been i ncluded as a
stand -alone agenda item and, in this vein, the Chairperson invited delegations to continue to express
their opinions and to make suggestions as to how to work on the preparation of the periodic review
to be held in the General Council at its s ession of July 2019.
45.2. At the same meeting, the Council took note of the statement made by Chad, on behalf of the
LDC Group , expressing their interest in exploring and benefitting from the opportunities presented
by E-Commerce, identifying some issues that t hey considered should be part of the Work Programme
on E-Commerce , and indicating that the Group intended to hold a dedicated internal workshop on
these issues.
45.3. At its meeting of 8 July, the Council took note of the statement made by China sharing several
case examples on E -Commerce that illustrated how E -Commerce could help to promote industrial
development and international trade in goods. The Council also took note of the statement made by
Mali on the potential advantages and benefits of E-Commerce and r equesting the implementation of
the Doha and Hong Kong Ministerial Declarations before engaging in E -Commerce negotiations.
45.4. Considering that MC12 would now take place in June 2020, and not in December 2019, the
Council agreed that the Chairperson also subm it to the General Council 's meeting in December 2019
a factual report of the discussion s that had taken place at the CTG level.
45.5. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Chairperson recalled the mandate contained in
document WT/L/1032, adopted by Ministers at th e Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires, in
December 2017; and the Chairperson also reminded delegations that, as agreed at the July meeting,
he would submit, on his own responsibility, a factual report to the General Council meeting of
December 2019 base d on the discussions held in this Council in November 2019. The Council took
note of the statements made by …, …, …, …, and … .]
26 After the airgram had been issued , the African Group, Mauritius, and Oman, had requested to be
included as co -sponsors of this communication (see documents JOB/CTG/15/Rev.1 and JOB/CTG/ 15/Rev.2) .
27 See document WT/L/1032. G/C/W/772
- 22 -
46 BETTER FUNCTIONING O F THE COUNCIL FO R TRADE IN GOODS AND SUBSIDIARY
COMMITTEES – STATEME NT BY HONG KONG, CHI NA
46.1. At its meeting of 11 April, the Council took note of the statement made by Hong Kong, China
encouraging Members to work together to develop ideas relating to the better functioning of the CTG
and its subsidiary bodies in a fast -evolving trading environment. The Council also took note of the
statements made by Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, the European Union,
Guatemala, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Paraguay, Singapore, Switzerland,
and the United States.
46.2. At its meeting of 9 July, the Council took note of the statement made by Hong Kong, China
recalling that it had requested the inclusion of this agenda item at the previous and at this meeting,
as a platform to focus attention on small steps to improve the functioning of the CTG and its
subsidiary bodies, such as an annotated agenda and a year plan for meetings. The Council also took
note of the statements mad e by Argentina, Australia, Canada, the European Union, India, Japan,
New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, and the United
States.
46.3. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the statement made by Hong Kon g,
China. The Council also took note of the statements made by … , …, …, and …. ]
47 CONSIDERATION OF ANN UAL REPORTS OF SUBSI DIARY BODIES OF THE COUNCIL FOR
TRADE IN GOODS
47.1. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council took note of the annual reports of its subsid iary
bodies.28 The Annual Reports of the Committees on …, …., and … would be submitted directly to the
General Council at its December 2019 meeting. ]
48 ADOPTION OF THE ANNU AL REPORT OF THE COU NCIL FOR TRADE IN GO ODS TO THE
GENERAL COUNCIL
48.1. [At its meeting of 14 November , the Council adopted its Annual Report (201 9) to the
General Council. ]
49 OTHER BUSINESS
49.1 Optimization of the CTG 's Work in Line with the Practice of the General Council
49.1. At its meeting of 9 July, the Council took note of the question posed to deleg ations by the
Chairperson about the appropriateness of optimizing the Council 's meetings and use of its time to
put it in line with the practice by the General Council to limit speakers' interventions to a maximum
of five minutes per delegation. The Counci l also took note of the statements made by India, South
Africa, and the United States.
__________
28 Agriculture (G/L/1332); TRIMs (G/L/1XXX and G/TRIMS/X); Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures (G/L/1XXX and G/SCM/XXX); Anti -dumping (G/L/1XXX and G/ADP/XX); Safeguards (G/L/1XX and
G/SG/XXX); Market Access (G/L/1XXX); Import Licensing (G/L/1328); Customs Valuation (G/L/1333); Sanitary
and Phytosanitary Measures (G/L/1XXX); ITA (G/L/1334); Pre -shipment Inspection and Independent Entity
(G/L/1330); Rules of Origin (G/L/1331); Trade Facilitation (G/L/1329); and Working Party on State Trading
Enterprises (G/L /1XXX and G/STR/XX).
| 13,877
| 90,019
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_PLURI_GPATHR_CAN2.pdf
|
q_PLURI_GPATHR_CAN2
|
GPA/THR/CAN/2
24 January 2020
(20-0619) Page: 1/1
Committee on Government Procurement Original: English
THE THRESHOLDS IN AP PENDIX I OF THE AGRE EMENT AS EXPRESSED
IN NATIONAL CURRENCI ES FOR 2020 -2021
CANADA
Pursuant to the agreed procedures (GPA/1, Annex 3), delegations have been invited to notify their
respective threshold values in national currencies.
The information notified by Canada for the period 20202021 is reproduced below.1
_______________
1 THRESHOLDS IN APPEND IX I OF THE GPA, AS EXPRESSED IN NATIONA L CURRENCIES
1.1 Central Government Entities (Annex 1)
Threshold Value in Special
Drawing Right (SDR) Threshold Value in
Canadian Dollar (CAD)
Goods 130,000 238,000
Services 130,000 238,000
Construction services 5,000,000 9,100,000
1.2 Sub-central Government Entities (Annex 2)
Threshold Value in SDR Threshold Value in CAD
Goods 355,000 650,000
Services 355,000 650,000
Construction services 5,000,000 9,100,000
1.3 Other Entities (Annex 3)
Threshold Value in SDR Threshold Value in CAD
Goods 355,000 650,000
Services 355,000 650,000
Construction services 5,000,000 9,100,000
2 PERIOD OF VALIDITY F OR THE THRESHOLD
The thresholds would be effective from 1 January 2020 to 31 December 2021.
3 METHOD OF CALCULATIO N
The calculation of the GPA threshold values in national currencies is based on the daily average
exchange rates of the Canadian Dollar (CAD) in terms of the Special Drawing Right (SDR) over
the two-year period from October 1 2015 to September 30 2017 (SDR 1 = CAD 1.831175386).
__________
1 The Secretariat notes that the Protocol amending the Agreement on Government Procurement has
entered into force for Canada on 6 April 2014 and that the Canada’s threshold values as expressed in SDR are
the same under the revised and the 1994 Agreement.
| 276
| 1,915
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN22_TPKM492.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN22_TPKM492
|
G/TBT/N/TPKM/492
1er juin 2022
(22-4140) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : TERRITOIRE DOUANIER DISTINCT DE TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN
ET MATSU
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable:
Water Resource Agency, Ministry of Economic Affairs (Agence des ressources en eau,
Ministère des affaires économiques)
12F,No.41 -3, Hsin -Yi Road, Sec 3, Taipei 106, Taiwan
Téléphone : (886-2) 8941 -5082
Fax: (886-2) 8941 -5028
Courrier électronique: a64p510@wra.gov.tw
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'autorit é désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organisme susmentionné:
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ],
7.2 [ ], autres:
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être i ndiqués, le cas
échéant) : Robinet à fermeture automatique - Autres appareils (SH 848180)
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : Mandatory Requirements
of Water Efficiency Labeling Products for Water Use Equipment, Sanitary Ware or Oth er
Equipment (Prescriptions obligatoires en rapport à l'étiquetage d'efficacité hydrique des
équipements d'approvisionnement en eau, des appareils sanitaires et d'autres
équipements), 2 pages, en chinois ; 3 pages en anglais
6. Teneur : Dans le but de promo uvoir l'utilisation d'équipements à faible consommation
d'eau dans la vie quotidienne, l'Agence des ressources en eau propose de désigner les
robinets à fermeture automatique comme un des produits sur lesquels doit figurer une
étiquette d'efficacité hydriq ue, conformément à l'article 95 -1 de la Loi sur
l'approvisionnement en eau.
Les robinets à fermeture automatique vendus sur le marché intérieur doivent obtenir une
licence pour l'utilisation de l'étiquette d'efficacité hydrique conformément au Règlement
relatif à la gestion de l'étiquetage de l'efficacité hydrique.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Économies d'eau et protection des ressources en eau ; Information des
consommateurs, étiquetage ; protection de l'environnement G/TBT/N/TPKM/492
- 2 -
8. Documents pertinents : Regulations for the Management of the Water Efficiency Label ;
Water Supply Act
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : 31 juillet 2 022
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : 1er juillet 2 023
10. Date limi te pour la présentation des observations : 60 jours à compter de la date de
notification
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [X] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
WTO/TBT Enquiry Point
Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection
Ministry of Economic Affairs
No. 4, Sec. 1, Jinan Rd., Zhongzheng Dist.
Taipei City 100 (Taiwan)
Téléphone : +(886-2) 23431916
Fax: +(886 2) 2343 1804
Courrier électronique: tbtenq@bsmi.gov.tw
https://members.wto.org/crnattachmen ts/2022/TBT/TPKM/22_3814_00_x.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2022/TBT/TPKM/22_3814_00_e.pdf
| 525
| 3,650
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_WT_REG_294N2.pdf
|
r_WT_REG_294N2
|
WT/REG294/N/2
7 octobre 2019
(19-6449) Page: 1/1
Comité des accords commerciaux régionaux Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION PRÉSENTÉE PAR LA JORDANIE ET LA TURQUIE
La communication ci-après , datée du 3 octobre 2 019, est distribuée à la demande des
délégations de la Jordanie et de la Turquie .
_______________
La Jordanie et la Turquie souhaitent informer les Membres que l'Accord d'association
établissant une zone de libre -échange entre la Jordanie et la Turquie, qui a été notifié au titre de
l'article XXIV:7 a) du GATT, a été dénoncé par la Jordanie le 22 novembre 2 018.1
__________
1 La série de documents pertinente est la suivante: WT/REG294.
| 106
| 745
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN22_USA1842A4.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN22_USA1842A4
|
G/TBT/N/USA/1842/Add.4
13 septembre 2022
(22-6740) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
La communication ci -après, datée du 1 2 septembre 2 022, est distribuée à la demande de la
délégation des États-Unis d'Amérique .
_______________
Intitulé : Commercial and Industrial Fans and Blowers (Ventilateurs et aspirateurs -souffleurs
commerciaux et industriels)
Motif de l'addendum:
[X] Modification du délai pour la présentation des observations - date: 22 septembre 2 022
[ ] Adoption de la mesure notifiée - date:
[ ] Publication de la mesure notifiée - date:
[ ] Entrée en vigueur de la mesure notifiée - date:
[ ] Accès au texte final de la mesure1:
[ ] Retrait ou abrogation de la mesure notifiée - date:
Cote pertinente si la mesure fait l'objet d'une nouvelle notification:
[X] Modification de la teneur ou du champ d'application de la mesure notifiée1:
Avis annonçant la deuxième période de 15 jours prévue pour la présentation
d'observations par le public concernant la proposition de règlement relatif aux
ventilateurs et aspirateurs -souffleurs commerciaux et industriels:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=245897&DocumentConten tId=80
073
Conditions expresses des modifications apportées au règlement proposé pour les
ventilateurs et aspirateurs -souffleurs commerciaux et industriels
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=245898&DocumentContentId=80
074
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2022/TBT/USA/modif ication/22_6055_00_e
.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2022/TBT/USA/modification/22_6055_01_e
.pdf
Nouveau délai pour la présentation d es observations (le cas échéant) : 22 septembre
2022
1 Il est possible d'indiquer une adresse de site Web, de joindre un fichier en format pdf ou de fournir
tout autre renseignement permettant d'accéder au texte de la mesure finale/modifiée et/ou des directives
d'interprétation. G/TBT/N/USA/1842/Add.4
- 2 -
[ ] Publication de directives d'interprétation et accès au texte1:
[ ] Autres:
Teneur : INTITULÉ : Commercial and Industrial Fans and Blowers (Ventilateurs et aspirateurs -
souffleurs commerciaux et industriels)
ORGANISME : California Resources Agency, Energy Commission, State of California (Agence de
gestion des ressources naturelles de l'État de Californie, Commission de l'énergie, État de Californie)
ACTION : Avis annonçant la deuxième période de 15 jours prévue pour la présentation d'observations
par le public concernant la proposition de règlement relatif aux ventilateurs et aspirateurs -souffleurs
commerciaux et industriels . Le texte de la réglementation modifiée est disponible en lig ne à l'adresse
suivante: https://www.energy.ca.gov/rules -and-regulations/appliance -efficiency -regulations -title-
20/appliance -efficiency -proceedings -11 (cliquez sur la section "Rulemaking" puis "15 -day New
Proposed Regulatory Language") . Les modifications apportées au code existant qui ont été rendues
publiques avec le préavis de 45 jours du 2 5 février 2 022 (notifiées dans le document
G/TBT/N/USA/1842 ) sont indiquées en caractères biffés pour les suppressions et en caractères
souligné pour les ajouts . Les modifications proposées dans le cadre du premier préavis de 15 jours
du 11 juillet 2 022 (notifié dans le document G/TBT/N/USA/1842/Add.3 ) sont indiquées en double
biffé pour les suppre ssions et en double souligné pour les ajouts . Les modifications proposées dans
le cadre de ce deuxième préavis de 15 jours sont indiquées en caractères gras et italiques barrés
pour les suppressions et en caractères gras et italiques soulignés pour les ajo uts.
Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 22 septembre 2 022
L'avis d'ouverture d'un délai de 15 jours pour la présentation d'observations par le public notifié
ainsi que les précédentes actions notifiées sous la cote G/TBT/N/USA/1842 portent le numéro de
dossier de consultation ( docket ) 22-AAER -01. Le registre des fiches de renseignement de la
Commission de l'énergie de la Californi e est disponible à l'adresse suivante :
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=22 -AAER -01 et permet
d'accéder aux documents principaux et aux documents justific atifs. Les Membres de l'OMC et leurs
parties prenantes sont priés de présenter leurs observations au point d'information OTC des États -
Unis d'ici au 2 2 septembre 2 022 à 16 heures , heure de l'Est . Les observation reçues par le point
d'information OTC des États -Unis de la part des Membres de l'OMC et de leurs parties prenant es
seront transmises à l'organisme de réglementation et seront aussi versées au registre des fiches de
renseigneme nt de la Commission de l'énergie de la Californie si elles sont reçues pendant le délai
prévu pour la présentation des observations.
Des renseignements sont disponibles dans le registre des fiches de renseignement ( Docket Log ) de
la CEC à l'adresse https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=22 -AAER -01.
TN # 245897, 7 septembre 2 022 - Avis annonçant la deuxième période de 15 jours prévue pour la
présentation d'observations par le public concernant la proposition de règlement relatif aux
ventilateurs et aspirateurs -souffleurs commerciaux et industriels:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=245897&DocumentContentId=80073
TN # 245897, 7 septembre 2 022 - Conditions expresses des modifications apportées au règlement
proposé pour les ventilateurs et aspirateurs -souffleurs commerciaux et industriels :
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/GetDocument.aspx?tn=245898&DocumentContentId=80074
Des renseignements sur la procédure relative au dossier ( docket ) 22-AAER -01 sont disponibles en
ligne à l'adresse suivante: https://www.energy.ca.gov/rules -and-regulations/appliance -efficiency-
regulations -title-20/appliance -efficiency -proceedings -11
__________
| 804
| 6,001
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/289432_2022_IP_DNK_22_7166_00_x.pdf
|
289432_2022_IP_DNK_22_7166_00_x
|
LBK nr 90 af 29/01/2019
Ministerium: Erhvervsministeriet Senere ændringer til forskriften
Journalnummer: Erhvervsmin., LOV nr 1057 af 23/12/1992
Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen, j. nr. 19/00137
Bekendtgørelse af patentloven1)
Herved bekendtgøres patentloven, jf. lovbekendtgørelse nr. 221 af 26. februar 2017, med den ændring,
der følger af § 3 i lov nr. 1533 af 18. december 20182).
De ændringer, der følger af § 1, nr. 1 og 34, i lov nr. 1057 af 23. december 1992 om ændring af patent‐
loven (Ratifikation af aftale om EF-patenter m.v.), er ikke indarbejdet i denne lovbekendtgørelse, da tids‐punktet for ikrafttræden af disse ændringer fastsættes af erhvervsministeren, jf. § 2, stk. 2, i lov nr. 1057
af 23. december 1992.
De ændringer, der følger af § 5 i lov nr. 551 af 2. juni 2014 om en fælles patentdomstol m.v., er ikke
indarbejdet i denne lovbekendtgørelse, da tidspunktet for ikrafttræden af disse ændringer fastsættes af er‐hvervsministeren, jf. § 3, stk. 1, i lov nr. 551 af 2. juni 2014.
Kapitel 1
Almindelige bestemmelser
§ 1. Den, der har gjort en opfindelse, som kan udnyttes industrielt, eller den, til hvem opfinderens ret er
overgået, har i overensstemmelse med denne lov ret til efter ansøgning at få patent på opfindelsen og der‐
ved opnå eneret til at udnytte den erhvervsmæssigt. Opfindelser kan patenteres på alle teknologiske områ‐
der.
Stk. 2. Som opfindelser anses især ikke, hvad der alene udgør
1) opdagelser, videnskabelige teorier og matematiske metoder,
2) kunstneriske frembringelser,
3) planer, regler eller metoder for intellektuel virksomhed, for spil eller for erhvervsvirksomhed eller programmer for datamaskiner,
4) fremlæggelse af information.
Stk. 3. Fremgangsmåder til kirurgisk eller terapeutisk behandling eller til diagnosticering, som anvendes
på mennesker eller dyr, anses heller ikke som opfindelser. Dette er ikke til hinder for, at der meddeles
patent på produkter, herunder stoffer og stofblandinger, til brug i disse fremgangsmåder.
Stk. 4. Patent meddeles ikke på plantesorter eller dyreracer. Patent kan dog meddeles på opfindelser,
hvis genstand er planter eller dyr, hvis opfindelsens udøvelse ikke er teknisk begrænset til en bestemt
plantesort eller dyrerace. Med plantesort forstås i denne lov en plantesort som defineret i artikel 5 i Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2100/94 om EF-sortsbeskyttelse.
Stk. 5. Patent meddeles ikke på væsentligt biologiske fremgangsmåder til fremstilling af planter eller
dyr. Med væsentligt biologisk fremgangsmåde forstås i denne lov en fremgangsmåde, der i sin helhed be‐ror på naturlige fænomener som krydsning eller udvælgelse. Patent kan dog meddeles på mikrobiologiske fremgangsmåder eller andre tekniske fremgangsmåder eller et produkt, der er frembragt ved sådanne
1
fremgangsmåder. Med mikrobiologisk fremgangsmåde forstås i denne lov enhver fremgangsmåde, der
udnytter et mikrobiologisk materiale, udføres på et mikrobiologisk materiale eller frembringer et mikrobi‐ologisk materiale.
Stk. 6. Opfindelser kan være patenterbare, også selvom de vedrører et produkt, der består af eller inde‐
holder biologisk materiale, eller vedrører en fremgangsmåde til fremstilling, bearbejdning eller anvendel‐se af biologisk materiale. Biologisk materiale, der er isoleret fra sit naturlige miljø eller frembragt ved hjælp af en teknisk fremgangsmåde, kan være genstand for en opfindelse, også selvom det i forvejen fin‐des i naturen. Med biologisk materiale forstås i denne lov materiale, som indeholder genetisk information, og som kan reproducere sig selv eller kan reproduceres i et biologisk system.
§ 1 a. Det menneskelige legeme på alle de forskellige stadier af dets opståen og udvikling og den blotte
opdagelse af en del af det, herunder en sekvens eller delsekvens af et gen, kan ikke udgøre patenterbare opfindelser.
Stk. 2. Uanset stk. 1 kan en del af det menneskelige legeme, der er isoleret herfra eller på anden måde
fremstillet ved en teknisk fremgangsmåde, herunder en sekvens eller delsekvens af et gen, udgøre en pa‐
tenterbar opfindelse, selv om en sådan del i sin opbygning er identisk med opbygningen i en naturligt fo‐rekommende del.
§ 1 b. Patent meddeles ikke på opfindelser, hvis kommercielle udnyttelse ville stride mod sædelighed
eller offentlig orden.
Stk. 2. En udnyttelse skal ikke anses for at stride mod sædelighed eller offentlig orden alene af den
grund, at udnyttelsen er forbudt ved en lov eller administrativ forskrift.
Stk. 3. I medfør af stk. 1, kan der blandt andet ikke meddeles patent på
1) fremgangsmåder til kloning af mennesker,
2) fremgangsmåder til ændring af den genetiske identitet hos menneskets kønsceller ,
3) anvendelse af menneskelige embryoner til industrielle eller kommercielle formål og
4) fremgangsmåder til ændring af dyrs genetiske identitet, som kan påføre dem lidelser, der ikke er be‐
grundet i en væsentlig medicinsk nytteværdi for mennesker eller dyr, samt dyr frembragt ved sådanne fremgangsmåder.
§ 2. Patent meddeles kun på opfindelser, som er nye i forhold til, hvad der var kendt før patentansøgnin‐
gens indleveringsdag, og som tillige adskiller sig væsentligt derfra.
Stk. 2. Som kendt anses alt, hvad der er blevet almindeligt tilgængeligt gennem skrift, foredrag, udnyt‐
telse eller på anden måde. Ligeledes anses indholdet i en før patentansøgningens indleveringsdag her i
landet indleveret patentansøgning som kendt, såfremt denne ansøgning bliver almindeligt tilgængelig i overensstemmelse med reglerne i § 22. Det samme gælder indholdet i en før patentansøgningens indleve‐ringsdag her i landet indleveret ansøgning om registrering af brugsmodel, hvis denne ansøgning bliver almindeligt tilgængelig i overensstemmelse med reglerne for brugsmodeller. Kravet i stk.1 om, at opfin‐delsen skal adskille sig væsentligt fra det kendte, gælder dog ikke i forhold til indholdet af sådanne ansøg‐ninger.
Stk. 3. Bestemmelser om, at ansøgning, som omhandles i kapitel 3, ved anvendelse af reglen i stk. 2 i
visse tilfælde skal have samme virkning som en her i landet indgivet patentansøgning, er fastsat ved §§ 29 og 38.
Stk. 4. Betingelsen i henhold til stk. 1, hvorefter opfindelser skal være nye, er ikke til hinder for, at pa‐
tent meddeles på kendte stoffer eller stofblandinger til anvendelse i de i § 1, stk. 3, nævnte fremgangsmå‐
der, såfremt anvendelsen af stoffet eller blandingen ikke er kendt ved nogen af disse fremgangsmåder.
Stk. 5. Betingelsen i stk. 1, hvorefter opfindelser skal være nye, er ligeledes ikke til hinder for, at der
meddeles patent på de stoffer eller stofblandinger, der er nævnt i stk. 4 i overensstemmelse med frem‐
gangsmåderne efter § 1, stk. 3, hvis der er tale om en specifik anvendelse af stoffet eller stofblandingen og denne specifikke anvendelse ikke er kendt ved nogen af disse fremgangsmåder .
2
Stk. 6. Patent kan dog meddeles på en opfindelse, uanset at den inden for de sidste 6 måneder før ansøg‐
ningens indlevering er blevet almindeligt tilgængelig, når dette er en følge af
1) et åbenbart misbrug i forhold til ansøgeren eller nogen, fra hvem hans ret hidrører , eller
2) at ansøgeren eller nogen, fra hvem hans ret hidrører, har forevist opfindelsen på sådan officiel eller
officielt anerkendt international udstilling, som omhandles i den i Paris den 22. november 1928 ind‐gåede konvention om internationale udstillinger.
§ 3. Den ved patent opnåede eneret indebærer, at andre end patenthaveren ikke uhjemlet må udnytte
opfindelsen ved 1) at fremstille, udbyde, bringe i omsætning eller anvende et produkt, der er genstand for patent, eller importere eller besidde produktet med sådant formål, eller
2) at anvende en fremgangsmåde, der er genstand for patent, eller udbyde den til anvendelse her i landet, såfremt den, der udbyder fremgangsmåden, ved, eller omstændighederne gør det åbenbart, at frem‐gangsmåden ikke må anvendes uden patenthaverens samtykke, eller
3) at udbyde, bringe i omsætning eller anvende et produkt, som er fremstillet ved en fremgangsmåde, der er genstand for patent, eller importere eller besidde produktet med sådant formål.
Stk. 2. Eneretten indebærer ligeledes, at andre end patenthaveren ikke uhjemlet må udnytte opfindelsen
ved at levere eller tilbyde nogen, som ikke er berettiget til at udnytte opfindelsen, midler til at udøve den‐ne her i landet, såfremt disse midler vedrører et væsentligt element i opfindelsen og leverandøren eller
tilbudsgiveren ved, eller det efter omstændighederne er åbenbart, at de er egnede og bestemt til sådan an‐vendelse. Er midlet en i handelen almindeligt forekommende vare, gælder dette dog kun, såfremt den, der leverer eller tilbyder at levere midlet, tilskynder modtageren til at begå handlinger som nævnt i stk. 1. Ved
anvendelsen af bestemmelserne i 1. og 2. pkt. anses personer, der udfører handlinger som nævnt i stk. 3,
nr. 1, 3, 4 eller 5, ikke for berettigede til at udnytte opfindelsen.
Stk. 3. Eneretten omfatter ikke
1) handlinger, der udføres i ikkeerhvervsmæssigt øjemed,
2) handlinger angående produkter, som af patenthaveren eller med dennes samtykke er bragt i omsæt‐ning her i landet eller i et andet land inden for Det Europæiske Økonomiske Samarbejdsområde (EØS),
3) handlinger, som udføres i forsøgsøjemed i forbindelse med genstanden for den patenterede opfindel‐
se,
4) handlinger, der er afgrænset til genstanden for den patenterede opfindelse, som er nødvendige for at
kunne opnå en markedsføringstilladelse for et lægemiddel til mennesker eller dyr i EU, i en EU-med‐lemsstat eller i andre lande, eller
5) tilberedning i et apotek af et lægemiddel efter lægerecept i individuelle tilfælde eller handlinger, der vedrører det således fremstillede lægemiddel.
§ 3 a. Den beskyttelse, der er knyttet til et patent på et biologisk materiale, som i kraft af opfindelsen
har bestemte egenskaber, omfatter ethvert biologisk materiale, der er fremstillet ud fra dette biologiske materiale ved reproduktion eller formering i identisk eller differentieret form, og som har de samme egen‐
skaber.
Stk. 2. Den beskyttelse, der er knyttet til et patent på en fremgangsmåde til fremstilling af et biologisk
materiale, som i kraft af opfindelsen har bestemte egenskaber, omfatter det biologiske materiale, der di‐rekte fremstilles ved denne fremgangsmåde, samt ethvert biologisk materiale, der er fremstillet ud fra det direkte fremstillede biologiske materiale ved reproduktion eller formering i identisk eller differentieret
form, og som har de samme egenskaber.
Stk. 3. Den beskyttelse, der er knyttet til et patent på et produkt, som indeholder eller består af genetisk
information, omfatter ethvert materiale, hvori produktet indgår, og hvori den genetiske information er in‐
deholdt og udøver sin funktion, jf. dog § 1 a.
3
Stk. 4. Beskyttelsen efter stk. 1, 2 og 3, omfatter ikke biologisk materiale, der er fremstillet ved repro‐
duktion eller formering af et biologisk materiale, som er markedsført på en medlemsstats område af pa‐
tenthaveren eller med dennes samtykke, hvis denne reproduktion eller formering er foretaget som et nød‐vendigt led i den anvendelse, hvortil det biologiske materiale er markedsført, forudsat at det fremstillede materiale ikke efterfølgende anvendes til yderligere reproduktion eller formering.
§ 3 b. Uanset bestemmelserne i § 3 a, stk. 1-3, indebærer salg eller anden form for markedsføring af
formeringsmateriale fra planter, som foretages af patenthaveren eller med dennes samtykke, til en land‐bruger til landbrugsmæssige formål, at landbrugeren har tilladelse til selv at anvende sit høstudbytte til reproduktion eller formering på sin egen bedrift, idet dog omfanget af og vilkårene for dette er anført i
artikel 14 i Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 2100/94 om EF-sortsbeskyttelse.
Stk. 2. Uanset bestemmelserne i § 3 a, stk. 1-3, indebærer salg eller anden form for markedsføring af
avlsdyr eller andet animalsk reproduktionsmateriale, som foretages af patenthaveren eller med dennes samtykke, til en landbruger, at landbrugeren har tilladelse til at anvende dyret eller andet animalsk repro‐duktionsmateriale til egne landbrugsformål, men ikke til at sælge det i forbindelse med eller med henblik på reproduktion i kommercielt øjemed. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter bestemmelser for omfanget af og vilkårene for landbrugerens anvendelse af sådanne avlsdyr og animalske reproduktionsmaterialer til egne landbrugsformål.
§ 4. Den, som, da patentansøgningen blev indleveret, her i landet erhvervsmæssigt udnyttede opfindel‐
sen, må uanset et meddelt patent fortsætte udnyttelsen med bibeholdelse af dennes almindelige karakter, såfremt udnyttelsen ikke udgjorde et åbenbart misbrug i forhold til ansøgeren eller nogen, fra hvem hans ret hidrører. Sådan ret til udnyttelse tilkommer under tilsvarende forudsætninger også den, som havde
truffet væsentlige foranstaltninger til erhvervsmæssig udnyttelse af opfindelsen her i landet.
Stk. 2. Den i stk.1 omhandlede ret kan kun overgå til andre sammen med den virksomhed, hvori den er
opstået, eller hvori udnyttelsen var tilsigtet.
§ 5. Uanset at der er meddelt patent på en opfindelse, må andre end patenthaveren udnytte opfindelsen
ved brugen af et udenlandsk køretøj, fartøj eller luftfartøj under det pågældende samfærdselsmiddels mid‐lertidige eller tilfældige tilstedeværelse her.
Stk. 2. Erhvervsministeren kan bestemme, at reservedele og tilbehør til luftfartøjer uanset et meddelt
patent må indføres og anvendes her til reparation af luftfartøjer hjemmehørende i en fremmed stat, der indrømmer tilsvarende rettigheder for danske luftfartøjer.
§ 6. Ansøgning om patent på en opfindelse, der tidligst 12 måneder før ansøgningsdagen er angivet i en
ansøgning, som angår patent eller brugsmodelregistrering her i landet eller patent, opfindercertifikat eller brugsmodelbeskyttelse i et andet land, som er tilsluttet Pariserkonventionen af 20. marts 1883 om beskyt‐
telse af industriel ejendomsret, skal i forhold til § 2, stk. 1, 2, 4 og 5, samt § 4 på begæring anses for indleveret samtidig med den tidligere ansøgning. Den samme ret til prioritet gælder, selv om ansøgningen om beskyttelse ikke hidrører fra et land, der er tilsluttet konventionen, når en tilsvarende prioritet fra en dansk patentansøgning eller brugsmodelansøgning i kraft af bilateral eller multilateral aftale indrømmes i det land, hvor den tidligere ansøgning blev indleveret, og dette sker på betingelser og med virkninger, der
i det væsentlige stemmer overens med konventionen.
Stk. 2. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter de nærmere vilkår for retten til at gøre sådan prioritet gældende.
Kapitel 2
Patentansøgninger og deres behandling m.v.
§ 7. Patentmyndigheden her i landet er Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen, der ledes af en direktør, og An‐
kenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker (Patentankenævnet). Ved patentmyndigheden forstås i denne lov patentmyndigheden her i landet, medmindre andet er angivet.
4
Stk. 2. Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker nedsættes af erhvervsministeren til behandling af kla‐
ger over styrelsens afgørelser, jf. §§ 25 og 67, samt klager over afgørelser efter designloven, varemær‐
keloven m.v. Patentankenævnet består af indtil 18 medlemmer, der udnævnes for 5 år ad gangen. 2 af medlemmerne, heraf formanden, skal opfylde de almindelige betingelser for at kunne beskikkes til lands‐dommer, mens nævnet i øvrigt skal sammensættes således, at medlemmerne tilsammen besidder den bedst mulige sagkundskab vedrørende patenter, design, varemærker samt på områder, der i henhold til lovgivningen i øvrigt er henlagt under ankenævnets kompetence. De skal have afgangseksamen fra Dan‐marks Tekniske Universitet, anden højere læreanstalt eller på anden vis have erhvervet den fornødne sag‐kundskab.
Stk. 3. Formanden bestemmer under hensyn til den enkelte sags beskaffenhed, hvem og hvor mange af
nævnets medlemmer, der skal deltage i sagens behandling.
Stk. 4. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter nærmere regler for ankenævnets virksomhed, herunder regler om
sagsbehandlingen og regler om, at klageren skal betale gebyr for at få behandlet en klage.
§ 8. Ansøgning om patent indleveres til patentmyndigheden eller i de i kapitel 3 nævnte tilfælde til pa‐
tentmyndigheden i fremmed stat eller til en international organisation.
Stk. 2. Ansøgningen skal indeholde en beskrivelse af opfindelsen omfattende tegninger, når sådanne er
nødvendige, samt en bestemt angivelse af, hvad der søges beskyttet ved patentet (patentkrav). Den om‐stændighed, at opfindelsen angår en kemisk forbindelse, medfører ikke, at en bestemt anvendelse skal an‐gives i patentkravet. Beskrivelsen skal være så tydelig, at en fagmand på grundlag deraf kan udøve opfin‐delsen. En opfindelse, som vedrører eller indebærer brugen af biologisk materiale, skal i de tilfælde, som er angivet i § 8 a, kun anses for tilstrækkelig tydeligt angivet, såfremt betingelserne i § 8 a tillige er op‐fyldt.
Stk. 3. Ansøgningen skal endvidere indeholde et sammendrag af beskrivelse og patentkrav . Sammendra‐
get skal alene tjene som teknisk information og må ikke tillægges betydning i andre henseender .
Stk. 4. I ansøgningen skal opfinderens navn angives. Søges patent af en anden end opfinderen, skal det
fremgå af ansøgningen, at ansøgeren har ret til opfindelsen, og at opfinderen er informeret om, at der sø‐ges patent på opfindelsen. Patentmyndigheden kan dog kræve yderligere dokumentation for ansøgerens ret til opfindelsen.
Stk. 5. Ansøgeren skal betale det fastsatte ansøgningsgebyr. For patentansøgning skal også betales det
fastsatte årsgebyr for hvert gebyrår, som påbegyndes, inden ansøgningen endeligt afgøres. Årsgebyret omfatter 1 år og regnes første gang fra den dag, da ansøgningen blev indleveret, og derefter fra den tilsva‐rende dag i kalenderåret.
§ 8 a. Skal der ved udøvelsen af opfindelsen anvendes biologisk materiale, som hverken er almindeligt
tilgængeligt eller kan beskrives således i ansøgningens akter, at en fagmand på grundlag af disse kan udø‐ve opfindelsen, skal en prøve af det biologiske materiale deponeres senest den dag, da ansøgningen bliver
indleveret. Prøven skal herefter fortløbende være deponeret således, at den, som ifølge denne lov er beret‐
tiget til at få udleveret en prøve, kan få udleveret prøven i Danmark. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter be‐
stemmelser om, hvor deponering kan foretages.
Stk. 2. Ophører en deponeret prøve med at være levedygtig, eller kan en prøve af andre grunde ikke
udleveres, skal denne erstattes med en ny prøve af samme biologiske materiale inden for den frist og i øvrigt i overensstemmelse med de regler, der fastsættes af erhvervsministeren. Den nye deponering anses
for foretaget allerede fra den dag, da den tidligere deponering blev foretaget.
§ 8 b. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen tildeler ansøgningen en indleveringsdag, hvis
1) der foreligger en tilkendegivelse af, at det indleverede materiale er en ansøgning,
2) det indleverede materiale muliggør, at ansøgerens identitet kan fastlægges, eller at ansøgeren kan kontaktes, og
3) det indleverede materiale indeholder en beskrivelse.
5
Stk. 2. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter nærmere regler for ansøgerens mulighed for efterfølgende at få til‐
delt en indleveringsdag, hvor kravene i stk. 1 ikke er opfyldt.
Stk. 3. Hvis kravene i stk. 1 ikke er opfyldt, giver Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen ansøgeren en frist på 2
måneder til opfyldelse heraf.
§ 9. Såfremt ansøgeren fremsætter begæring herom og betaler det fastsatte gebyr, skal patentmyndighe‐
den i overensstemmelse med regler, der fastsættes af erhvervsministeren, foranledige, at ansøgningen ny‐
hedsundersøges hos en international nyhedsundersøgende myndighed i henhold til bestemmelserne i arti‐kel 15, stk. 5, i den i Washington den 19. juni 1970 indgåede patentsamarbejdstraktat.
§ 10. I samme ansøgning må ikke søges patent på to eller flere af hinanden uafhængige opfindelser .
§ 11. Søges patent på en opfindelse, som fremgår af en af ansøgeren tidligere indleveret patentansøg‐
ning, der ikke er endeligt afgjort, skal den senere ansøgning på ansøgerens begæring og på de af erhvervs‐
ministeren fastsatte vilkår anses som indleveret på det tidspunkt, da de akter, hvoraf opfindelsen fremgår,
indkom til patentmyndigheden.
§ 12. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen kan opfordre ansøgeren til at udpege en i Det Europæiske Økono‐
miske Samarbejdsområde (EØS) bosat fuldmægtig, som kan repræsentere ansøgeren i alt vedrørende an‐søgningen. Fuldmægtigens navn og adresse skal indføres i patentregistret.
§ 13. En ansøgning om patent må ikke ændres således, at patent søges på noget, som ikke fremgik af
ansøgningen, da denne blev indleveret.
§ 14. (Ophævet)
§ 15. Har ansøgeren ikke iagttaget de om ansøgningen givne forskrifter, eller finder patentmyndighe‐
den, at der af andre grunde er noget til hinder for at imødekomme ansøgningen, skal ansøgeren underret‐
tes herom og opfordres til inden en nærmere angiven frist at udtale sig eller berigtige ansøgningen. Pa‐tentmyndigheden kan dog uden at høre ansøgeren foretage de ændringer i sammendraget, som den finder nødvendigt.
Stk. 2. Undlader ansøgeren inden fristens udløb at afgive den begærede udtalelse eller at træffe foran‐
staltninger til berigtigelse af ansøgningen, henlægges denne. Den i stk. 1 nævnte meddelelse skal indehol‐de oplysning herom.
Stk. 3. Behandlingen af ansøgningen genoptages dog, hvis ansøgeren inden 4 måneder efter udløbet af
den fastsatte frist fremkommer med sine ytringer eller træffer foranstaltninger til berigtigelse af ansøgnin‐gen samt betaler det fastsatte genoptagelsesgebyr.
Stk. 4. Betales der ikke årsgebyr efter §§ 8, 41 og 42, henlægges ansøgningen uden forudgående under‐
retning. Behandlingen af en af denne grund henlagt ansøgning kan ikke genoptages.
§ 16. Finder patentmyndigheden, også efter at ansøgerens besvarelse er indkommet, noget til hinder for
at imødekomme ansøgningen, og har ansøgeren haft lejlighed til at udtale sig om hindringen, skal ansøg‐
ningen afslås, medmindre patentmyndigheden finder grund til på ny at give ansøgeren opfordring som omhandlet i § 15, stk. 1.
§ 17. Påstår nogen over for patentmyndigheden, at han og ikke ansøgeren er berettiget til opfindelsen,
kan patentmyndigheden, hvis den finder spørgsmålet tvivlsomt, opfordre ham til inden en nærmere angi‐ven frist at anlægge retssag herom. Efterkommes opfordringen ikke, kan påstanden lades ude af betragt‐ning ved afgørelse af patentansøgningen. Underretning herom skal gives i opfordringen.
Stk. 2. Er der anlagt sag om retten til en opfindelse, på hvilken der søges patent, kan behandlingen af
patentansøgningen stilles i bero, indtil retssagen er endeligt afgjort.
6
§ 18. Godtgør nogen over for patentmyndigheden, at han og ikke ansøgeren er berettiget til opfindelsen,
skal patentmyndigheden overføre ansøgningen til ham, såfremt han begærer det. Den, til hvem patentan‐
søgningen således overføres, skal betale nyt ansøgningsgebyr.
Stk. 2. Er der fremsat begæring om overførelse af en patentansøgning, må ansøgningen ikke henlægges,
afslås eller imødekommes, før der er taget endelig stilling til begæringen.
§ 19. Er ansøgningen i overensstemmelse med forskrifterne, og er intet fundet til hinder for meddelelse
af patent, og er det konstateret, at ansøgeren er enig i den tekst, hvormed patent vil kunne meddeles, sen‐der patentmyndigheden meddelelse til ansøgeren om, at patent kan meddeles mod betaling af det fastsatte gebyr for publicering af patentskriftet.
Stk. 2. Efter at patentmyndigheden har sendt meddelelse som nævnt i stk. 1, må patentkravene ikke æn‐
dres således, at patentbeskyttelsens omfang udvides.
Stk. 3. Patentskriftet kan efter ansøgerens anmodning herom publiceres på dansk eller på engelsk med
patentkrav på dansk.
Stk. 4. Gebyret for publicering af patentskriftet skal betales inden 2 måneder efter, at patentmyndighe‐
den har givet meddelelse efter stk. 1. Sker dette ikke, henlægges ansøgningen. Behandlingen genoptages dog, hvis ansøgeren inden 4 måneder efter udløbet af fristen betaler gebyret for patentmeddelelse samt det fastsatte genoptagelsesgebyr.
§ 20. Når betingelserne i § 19 er opfyldt, skal patentmyndigheden meddele patent og udfærdige patent‐
brev. Samtidig bekendtgøres patentmeddelelsen.
Stk. 2. Patentskrift, som indeholder beskrivelse, patentkrav og sammendrag, skal kunne fås hos patent‐
myndigheden samtidig med patentmeddelelsens bekendtgørelse. Patentskriftet skal angive patenthaveren og opfinderen.
§ 21. Enhver er berettiget til over for patentmyndigheden at fremsætte indsigelse mod et meddelt patent.
Indsigelsen skal være begrundet og være kommet frem til patentmyndigheden inden 9 måneder fra be‐kendtgørelsen af patentmeddelelsen. Med indsigelsen skal følge det fastsatte gebyr .
Stk. 2. Indsigelse kan alene begrundes med, at patentet er meddelt, uanset at
1) betingelserne i §§ 1-2 ikke er opfyldt,
2) det angår en opfindelse, som ikke er så tydeligt beskrevet, at en fagmand på grundlag af beskrivelsen kan udøve den, eller
3) dets genstand går ud over indholdet af ansøgningen, som den blev indleveret.
Stk. 3. Patentmyndigheden bekendtgør, at indsigelse er indleveret.
§ 22. Fra og med den dag, da patentet meddeles, skal akterne i ansøgningssagen holdes tilgængelige for
enhver.
Stk. 2. Når 18 måneder er forløbet fra ansøgningsdagen eller, hvis der er begæret prioritet i henhold til §
6, fra den dag, fra hvilken prioriteten er begæret, skal akterne, selv om patent ikke er meddelt, holdes
tilgængelige for enhver. Er der truffet beslutning om henlæggelse eller afslag, må akterne dog ikke holdes
tilgængelige, medmindre ansøgeren begærer genoptagelse, påklager det meddelte afslag eller i henhold til §§ 72 eller 73 begærer genoprettelse af rettigheder.
Stk. 3. På begæring af ansøgeren skal sagens akter gøres tilgængelige tidligere end foreskrevet i stk. 1
og 2.
Stk. 4. Når akterne bliver tilgængelige i henhold til stk. 2 eller 3, skal bekendtgørelse herom udfærdiges.
Stk. 5. Indeholder et dokument forretningshemmeligheder, som ikke angår en opfindelse, på hvilken der
søges eller er meddelt patent, kan patentmyndigheden, når særlige grunde foreligger, på begæring bestem‐
me, at dokumentet helt eller delvis ikke skal være tilgængeligt. Er sådan begæring indgivet, må dokumen‐tet ikke gøres tilgængeligt, før afgørelse er truffet, eller i det tidsrum, hvori afgørelsen kan påklages. Kla‐ge har opsættende virkning.
7
Stk. 6. Er en prøve af biologisk materiale deponeret i henhold til § 8 a, har enhver ret til at få en prøve
af materialet, når akterne bliver tilgængelige i henhold til stk. 1, 2 eller 3. Efter meddelelsen af patent kan
udleveringen ske til enhver, der anmoder herom, uanset om patentet er ophørt eller er kendt ugyldigt. Det‐
te medfører dog ikke, at en prøve skal udleveres til nogen, som efter bestemmelser fastsat i eller i medfør af lov ikke må befatte sig med det deponerede materiale. En prøve skal heller ikke udleveres til nogen, hvis det på grund af materialets farlige egenskaber antages, at være forbundet med åbenbar fare, at
vedkommende befatter sig med prøven.
Stk. 7. Uanset stk. 6 kan ansøgeren begære, at udlevering af en prøve i tiden, indtil patent er meddelt,
kun kan ske til en særlig sagkyndig. Hvis en ansøgning er blevet afslået, tilbagetaget eller anses for tilba‐
getaget, kan ansøgeren begære, at en prøve af det deponerede materiale i 20 år fra patentansøgningens indlevering, kun må udleveres til en særlig sagkyndig. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter bestemmelser om fremsættelse af begæring om udlevering, om fristen for fremsættelse af sådanne begæringer og om, hvem der kan benyttes som sagkyndig.
Stk. 8. Begæring om udlevering af prøven skal fremsættes over for patentmyndigheden og indeholde en
erklæring om at iagttage de begrænsninger i brugen af prøven, som fremgår af regler, der fastsættes af
erhvervsministeren. Såfremt prøven skal udleveres til en særlig sagkyndig, skal erklæringen i stedet afgi‐
ves af denne.
§ 23. Er indsigelse fremkommet, skal patenthaveren gøres bekendt med indsigelsen og have lejlighed til
at udtale sig om denne.
Stk. 2. Patentmyndigheden kan behandle en indsigelse, selv om patentet er ophørt eller ophører i hen‐
hold til §§ 51, 54 eller 96, selv om indsigelsen tages tilbage, eller selv om indsigeren afgår ved døden eller mister evnen til at indgå retshandler.
Stk. 3. Patentmyndigheden kan erklære patentet ugyldigt eller opretholde det i uændret eller ændret
form. Hvis patentmyndigheden finder, at patentet kan opretholdes i ændret form, og det er konstateret, at patenthaveren er enig heri, ændres patentskriftet tilsvarende, efter at patenthaveren har betalt det fastsatte
gebyr for publicering heraf. Hos patentmyndigheden skal der kunne fås eksemplarer af det ændrede pa‐tentskrift.
Stk. 4. Hvis patenthaveren ikke er enig i opretholdelsen af patentet i ændret form eller ikke betaler ge‐
byret for publicering af nyt patentskrift rettidigt, erklæres patentet for ugyldigt.
Stk. 5. Patentmyndigheden bekendtgør afgørelsen af indsigelsen.
§ 24. Klage over styrelsens endelige afgørelse af en patentansøgning kan indgives til Ankenævnet for
Patenter og Varemærker af ansøgeren. Patenthaveren kan klage til Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemær‐ker, når et patent er anset for ugyldigt, eller hvis Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen finder, at patentet kan
opretholdes i ændret form efter indsigelse. Indsigeren kan klage til Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemær‐ker, når et patent opretholdes i uændret form, eller hvis Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen finder, at patentet kan opretholdes i ændret form trods behørigt fremsat indsigelse. Frafalder indsigeren sin klage, kan kla‐
gen alligevel prøves, når særlige grunde hertil foreligger.
Stk. 2. Afgørelser, hvorved en begæring om genoptagelse i henhold til § 15, stk. 3, eller § 19, stk. 4, er
afslået, eller hvorved begæring om overførelse i henhold til § 18 er imødekommet, kan påklages af ansø‐geren. Afgørelser, hvorved en begæring om overførelse af ansøgningen er afslået, kan påklages af den,
der har fremsat begæringen.
Stk. 3. Afgørelser, hvorved begæring i henhold til § 22, stk. 5, er afslået, kan påklages af den, der har
fremsat begæringen.
§ 25. Klage efter § 24 indgives til Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker senest 2 måneder efter, at
styrelsen har givet den pågældende underretning om afgørelsen. Inden samme frist skal det herfor fastsat‐te gebyr betales. Sker dette ikke, skal klagen afvises.
Stk. 2. Ankenævnets afgørelser kan ikke indbringes for højere administrativ myndighed.
8
Stk. 3. Søgsmål til prøvelse af afgørelser truffet af styrelsen, som kan påklages til Ankenævnet for Pa‐
tenter og Varemærker, kan ikke indbringes for domstolene, forinden ankenævnets afgørelse foreligger, jf.
dog §§ 52 og 53. Søgsmål til prøvelse af afgørelser, hvorved Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker
afslår en ansøgning om patent eller erklærer et patent ugyldigt, skal anlægges inden 2 måneder efter, at der er givet den pågældende underretning om afgørelsen.
Stk. 4. Bestemmelsen i § 22, stk. 5, finder tilsvarende anvendelse med hensyn til dokumenter, der ind‐
kommer til Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker.
§ 26. Bliver en ansøgning, som er tilgængelig for enhver, endeligt afslået eller henlagt, skal bekendtgø‐
relse herom udfærdiges.
§ 27. Meddelte patenter indføres i et patentregister, der føres af patentmyndigheden.
Kapitel 3
International patentansøgning
§ 28. Ved international patentansøgning forstås en ansøgning i henhold til den i Washington den 19.
juni 1970 indgåede patentsamarbejdstraktat.
Stk. 2. International patentansøgning indleveres til en patentmyndighed eller international organisation,
som i henhold til traktaten og gennemførelsesforskrifterne er berettiget til at modtage sådan ansøgning (modtagende myndighed). Til patentmyndigheden her i landet kan en international patentansøgning indle‐veres i overensstemmelse med regler, der fastsættes af erhvervsministeren. Ansøgeren skal til patentmyn‐digheden betale det for ansøgningen fastsatte gebyr.
Stk. 3. Bestemmelserne i §§ 29-38 finder anvendelse på internationale patentansøgninger, som omfatter
Danmark.
§ 29. En international patentansøgning, for hvilken den modtagende myndighed har fastsat international
indleveringsdag, har samme virkning som en her i landet den pågældende dag indleveret patentansøgning. Bestemmelsen i § 2, stk. 2, 2. pkt., finder dog kun anvendelse, såfremt ansøgningen er videreført i hen‐hold til § 31.
§ 30. En international patentansøgning skal anses for tilbagetaget for så vidt angår Danmark i de tilfæl‐
de, som omhandles i traktatens artikel 24, stk. 1 i og ii.
§ 31. Ønsker ansøgeren at videreføre en international ansøgning for Danmark, skal han inden 31 måne‐
der fra den internationale indleveringsdag eller, hvis prioritet begæres, fra prioritetsdagen til patentmyn‐digheden betale det fastsatte gebyr samt indlevere en oversættelse til dansk eller engelsk af den internatio‐nale ansøgning i det omfang, som erhvervsministeren fastsætter, eller, såfremt ansøgningen er affattet på dansk eller engelsk, en genpart af ansøgningen.
Stk. 2. Såfremt ansøgeren har betalt det fastsatte gebyr inden de i stk. 1 fastsatte frister, kan den kræve‐
de oversættelse eller genpart indleveres inden en yderligere frist på 2 måneder, mod at der betales et fast‐sat tillægsgebyr inden udløbet af den yderligere frist.
Stk. 3. Opfylder ansøgeren ikke kravene i denne paragraf, skal ansøgningen anses for tilbagetaget for så
vidt angår Danmark.
§ 32. (Ophævet)
§ 33. Når en international patentansøgning er videreført i henhold til § 31, finder bestemmelserne i ka‐
pitel 2 anvendelse på ansøgningen og dens behandling med de afvigelser, der er fastsat i nærværende pa‐
ragraf og i §§ 34-37. Ansøgningen må kun efter ansøgerens begæring optages til behandling forinden ud‐
løbet af de frister, som gælder i henhold til § 31, stk. 1.
Stk. 2. Bestemmelsen i § 12 kan først bringes til anvendelse fra det tidspunkt, hvor patentmyndigheden
kan optage ansøgningen til behandling.
9
Stk. 3. Bestemmelserne i § 22, stk. 2 og 3, finder anvendelse, allerede inden ansøgningen er videreført,
når ansøgeren har opfyldt sin forpligtelse i henhold til § 31 til at indlevere en oversættelse af ansøgnin‐
gen, eller hvis ansøgningen er affattet på dansk eller engelsk, når ansøgeren har indleveret en genpart af
den til patentmyndigheden.
Stk. 4. Ved anvendelsen af §§ 48, 56 og 60 anses en international patentansøgning at være gjort tilgæn‐
gelig for enhver, når den er gjort tilgængelig i henhold til stk. 3.
Stk. 5. Opfylder patentansøgningen traktatens krav med hensyn til form og indhold, skal den godkendes
i så henseende.
§ 34. I en international patentansøgning må der ikke meddeles patent eller gives afslag før efter udløbet
af en af erhvervsministeren fastsat frist, medmindre ansøgeren har givet samtykke til, at ansøgningen af‐gøres forinden.
§ 35. Patentmyndigheden må ikke uden ansøgerens samtykke meddele patent i en international patent‐
ansøgning eller offentliggøre den, før den er offentliggjort af Det Internationale Bureau ved Verdensorga‐nisationen for Intellektuel Ejendomsret (WIPO) eller der er hengået 20 måneder fra den internationale indleveringsdag eller, hvis prioritet begæres, fra prioritetsdagen.
§ 36. Har en del af en international patentansøgning ikke været genstand for international nyhedsunder‐
søgelse eller international forberedende patenterbarhedsprøvning, fordi ansøgningen er blevet anset at omfatte to eller flere af hinanden uafhængige opfindelser, og har ansøgeren ikke inden for den fastsatte
frist betalt tillægsgebyr i henhold til traktaten, skal patentmyndigheden undersøge, om bedømmelsen var
rigtig. Findes dette at være tilfældet, skal den pågældende del af ansøgningen anses for tilbagetaget hos
patentmyndigheden, medmindre ansøgeren betaler det fastsatte gebyr inden 2 måneder efter, at patent‐myndigheden har givet ham underretning om udfaldet af undersøgelsen. Finder patentmyndigheden, at bedømmelsen ikke var rigtig, skal den fortsætte behandlingen af ansøgningen i dens helhed.
Stk. 2. Ansøgeren kan påklage en afgørelse i henhold til stk. 1, hvorved det er antaget, at en patentan‐
søgning omfatter to eller flere af hinanden uafhængige opfindelser . Bestemmelserne i § 25, stk. 1-3, finder
tilsvarende anvendelse.
Stk. 3. Stadfæstes styrelsens afgørelse, regnes fristen for betaling af gebyr i henhold til stk. 1, 2. pkt., fra
den dag, da endelig afgørelse foreligger.
§ 37. Har en del af en international patentansøgning ikke været genstand for en international forbered‐
ende patenterbarhedsprøvning, fordi ansøgeren efter krav fra den internationale prøvningsmyndighed har
begrænset patentkravene, skal den pågældende del af ansøgningen anses for tilbagetaget hos patentmyn‐digheden, medmindre ansøgeren betaler det fastsatte gebyr inden 2 måneder efter, at patentmyndigheden har anmodet herom under henvisning til begrænsningen i den foretagne prøvning.
§ 38. Har en modtagende myndighed afvist at fastsætte international indleveringsdag for en internatio‐
nal patentansøgning, eller har den besluttet, at ansøgningen eller en begæring om, at ansøgningen skal omfatte Danmark, skal anses for tilbagetaget, skal patentmyndigheden på ansøgerens begæring efterprøve rigtigheden af afgørelsen. Det samme gælder en afgørelse fra Det Internationale Bureau, hvorefter en an‐
søgning skal anses som tilbagetaget.
Stk. 2. Begæring om fornyet prøvelse i henhold til stk. 1 skal fremsættes over for Det Internationale
Bureau inden udløbet af en af erhvervsministeren fastsat frist. Ansøgeren skal inden udløbet af samme frist i det omfang, som erhvervsministeren fastsætter, indlevere en oversættelse af ansøgningen til patent‐myndigheden samt betale det fastsatte ansøgningsgebyr.
Stk. 3. Finder patentmyndigheden, at den modtagende myndigheds eller Det Internationale Bureaus af‐
gørelse er urigtig, skal patentmyndigheden behandle ansøgningen i henhold til kapitel 2. Hvis internatio‐nal indleveringsdag ikke er fastsat af den modtagende myndighed, skal ansøgningen anses for indleveret
10
den dag, som patentmyndigheden finder burde have været fastsat som international indleveringsdag. Op‐
fylder ansøgningen traktatens krav med hensyn til form og indhold, skal den godkendes i så henseende.
Stk. 4. Bestemmelsen i § 2, stk. 2, 2. pkt., finder anvendelse på ansøgninger, som er optaget til behand‐
ling i henhold til stk. 3, såfremt ansøgningen bliver almindeligt tilgængelig i henhold til § 22.
Kapitel 4
Patentets omfang og gyldighedstid
§ 39. Patentbeskyttelsens omfang bestemmes af patentkravene. Til forståelse af patentkravene kan vej‐
ledning hentes fra beskrivelsen.
§ 40. Et meddelt patent kan opretholdes, indtil 20 år er forløbet fra den dag, patentansøgningen blev
indleveret. For patent skal betales årsgebyr for hvert gebyrår, som påbegyndes efter at patentet er meddelt.
Kapitel 5
Betaling af årsgebyrer
§ 41. Årsgebyret forfalder den sidste dag i den måned, i hvilken gebyråret begynder. Årsgebyrerne for
de første 2 gebyrår forfalder dog først samtidig med gebyret for det tredie gebyrår. Årsgebyr kan tidligst betales 3 måneder før forfaldsdagen.
Stk. 2. For en senere ansøgning som omhandlet i § 11 forfalder årsgebyrer for de gebyrår, som er be‐
gyndt før den dag, den senere ansøgning blev indleveret, eller som begyndes inden 2 måneder efter denne dag, ikke i noget tilfælde før 2 måneder er forløbet efter denne dag. For en international patentansøgning forfalder årsgebyrer for gebyrår, som er begyndt før den dag, ansøgningen blev videreført efter § 31 eller
optaget til behandling efter § 38, eller som begynder inden 2 måneder efter denne dag, ikke i noget tilfæl‐
de før 2 måneder efter den dag ansøgningen blev videreført eller optaget til behandling.
Stk. 3. Årsgebyr kan med den fastsatte forhøjelse betales indtil 6 måneder efter , at det forfalder.
Stk. 4. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen opkræver årsgebyrer hos patentansøgeren, patenthaveren eller en
eventuel udpeget fuldmægtig, men Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen er ikke ansvarlig for rettighedstab som følge af manglende opkrævning.
§ 42. Er opfinderen ansøger eller indehaver af patentet, og skønnes det at være forbundet med betydeli‐
ge vanskeligheder for ham at betale årsgebyrer, kan patentmyndigheden meddele ham henstand med beta‐ling af disse, såfremt begæring herom fremsættes senest den dag, da årsgebyrerne første gang forfalder. Henstand kan meddeles for indtil 3 år ad gangen, dog ikke længere end indtil 3 år fra patentets meddelel‐
se. Begæring om forlænget henstand skal fremsættes senest den dag, da meddelt henstand udløber .
Stk. 2. Afslås begæring om henstand eller forlænget henstand, anses betaling inden 2 måneder derefter
for rettidig.
Stk. 3. Årsgebyr, med hvis betaling der er givet henstand efter stk. 1, kan med samme forhøjelse som
nævnt i § 41, stk. 3, betales inden 6 måneder efter det tidspunkt, til hvilket henstand er givet.
Kapitel 6
Licens, overdragelse m.v.
§ 43. Har patenthaveren givet en anden ret til erhvervsmæssigt at udnytte opfindelsen (licens), kan li‐
censhaveren ikke overdrage denne ret til andre, medmindre andet måtte være aftalt.
§ 44. Er et patent overgået til en anden, er licens givet, er et patent pantsat, er der foretaget udlæg i
patentet eller er patenthaver taget under konkursbehandling, skal dette på begæring indføres i patentregis‐tret.
Stk. 2. Godtgøres det, at en registreret licens er ophørt, skal licensen slettes af registret.
11
Stk. 3. Bestemmelserne i stk. 1 og 2 gælder også for tvangslicens og rettigheder i henhold til § 53, stk.
2.
Stk. 4. Søgsmål vedrørende et patent kan altid anlægges mod den, som i registret er indført som patent‐
haver, og meddelelse fra patentmyndigheden kan sendes til ham.
§ 45. Hvis en patenteret opfindelse, når der er forløbet 3 år fra patentets meddelelse og 4 år fra patent‐
ansøgningens indlevering, ikke udøves her i landet i et rimeligt omfang, kan den, som her i landet vil udø‐
ve opfindelsen, opnå tvangslicens dertil, medmindre der foreligger skellig grund til undladelsen.
Stk. 2. Erhvervsministeren kan bestemme, at udøvelse i et andet land skal sidestilles med udøvelse her i
landet ved anvendelsen af bestemmelsen i stk. 1. Sådan bestemmelse kan gøres betinget af gensidighed.
§ 46. Indehaveren af et patent på en opfindelse, hvis udnyttelse er afhængig af et patent eller en regi‐
streret brugsmodel, der tilhører en anden, kan opnå tvangslicens til udnyttelse af den ved det sidstnævnte patent beskyttede opfindelse eller den ved brugsmodelregistreringen beskyttede frembringelse, hvis den førstnævnte opfindelse udgør et vigtigt teknisk fremskridt af væsentlig økonomisk betydning.
Stk. 2. Indehaveren af patentet på den opfindelse eller af den registrerede brugsmodel, til hvis udnyttel‐
se der er meddelt tvangslicens i medfør af bestemmelsen i stk. 1, skal på rimelige vilkår kunne opnå tvangslicens til udnyttelse af den anden opfindelse.
§ 46 a. En sortsejer, der ikke kan opnå eller udnytte en plantenyhedsbeskyttelse uden at krænke et ældre
patent, kan ansøge om tvangslicens til udnyttelse af opfindelsen, hvis tvangslicensen er nødvendig for ud‐
nyttelsen af den sort, der skal nyhedsbeskyttes, og mod betaling af en rimelig licensafgift. Tvangslicens meddeles kun, hvis sortsejeren godtgør, at sorten udgør et vigtigt teknisk fremskridt af væsentlig økono‐misk betydning i forhold til opfindelsen.
Stk. 2. Har en patenthaver efter lov om plantenyheder fået tvangslicens til at udnytte en beskyttet plan‐
tenyhed, har sortsejeren ret til på rimelige vilkår at opnå gensidig licens til udnyttelse af opfindelsen.
§ 47. Når vigtige almene interesser gør det påkrævet, kan den, der erhvervsmæssigt vil udnytte en op‐
findelse, på hvilken en anden har patent, få tvangslicens hertil.
§ 48. Den, som, da en patentansøgning blev gjort tilgængelig for enhver, her i landet erhvervsmæssigt
udnyttede den opfindelse, på hvilken patent søges, kan, hvis ansøgningen fører til patent, få tvangslicens til udnyttelsen, når ganske særlige grunde taler herfor, og han ikke havde kendskab til ansøgningen og ej heller med rimelighed har kunnet skaffe sig sådant kendskab. Sådan ret tilkommer under tilsvarende for‐udsætninger også den, som havde truffet væsentlige foranstaltninger til erhvervsmæssig udnyttelse af op‐findelsen her i landet.
Stk. 2. Sådan tvangslicens kan omfatte tiden forud for patentets meddelelse. Stk. 3. Erhvervsministeren kan bestemme, at udnyttelse i et andet land skal sidestilles med udnyttelse
her i landet ved anvendelsen af bestemmelsen i stk. 1. Sådan bestemmelse kan gøres betinget af gensidig‐hed.
§ 49. Tvangslicens må kun meddeles den, som ikke ved aftale har kunnet opnå licens på rimelige vilkår,
og som kan antages at være i stand til at udnytte opfindelsen på rimelig og forsvarlig måde og i overens‐stemmelse med licensen.
Stk. 2. Tvangslicens er ikke til hinder for, at patenthaveren selv udnytter opfindelsen eller meddeler li‐
cens til andre.
Stk. 3. Tvangslicens kan kun overgå til andre sammen med den virksomhed, hvori den udnyttes, eller
hvori udnyttelsen var tilsigtet. For tvangslicens meddelt efter § 46, stk. 1, gælder endvidere, at overdra‐gelse af tvangslicensen skal ske sammen med det patent, hvis udnyttelse er afhængig af et patent eller en registreret brugsmodel, der tilhører en anden.
12
Stk. 4. Tvangslicens vedrørende halvlederteknologi kan kun meddeles til offentlig ikkekommerciel ud‐
nyttelse eller for at bringe en konkurrencebegrænsende adfærd, som er fastslået ved dom eller administra‐
tiv afgørelse, til ophør.
§ 50. Sø- og Handelsretten afgør i første instans, om tvangslicens skal meddeles og bestemmer ligele‐
des, i hvilket omfang opfindelsen må udnyttes, samt fastsætter vederlaget og de øvrige vilkår for tvangsli‐censen. For så vidt forholdene måtte ændre sig væsentligt, kan retten på begæring af hver af parterne op‐
hæve licensen eller fastsætte nye vilkår for denne.
Kapitel 7
Patentets ophør, administrativ omprøvning m.v.
§ 51. Betales årsgebyr ikke i overensstemmelse med reglerne i §§ 40, 41 og 42, bortfalder patentet fra
og med begyndelsen af det gebyrår, for hvilket gebyr ikke er betalt.
§ 52. Et patent kan ved dom kendes ugyldigt, hvis
1) det er meddelt, uanset at betingelserne i §§ 1-2 ikke er opfyldt,
2) det angår en opfindelse, som ikke er så tydeligt beskrevet, at en fagmand på grundlag af beskrivelsen kan udøve den,
3) dets genstand går ud over indholdet af ansøgningen, som den blev indleveret, eller
4) omfanget af patentbeskyttelsen er blevet udvidet, efter at patentmyndigheden i henhold til § 19, stk. 1, har sendt meddelelse til ansøgeren om, at patent kan meddeles.
Stk. 2. Et patent kan dog ikke kendes ugyldigt i sin helhed af den grund, at patenthaveren var blot delvis
berettiget til patentet.
Stk. 3. Sag kan, bortset fra de i stk. 4 nævnte tilfælde, rejses af enhver .
Stk. 4. Sager, som begrundes med, at patent er meddelt en anden end den, der i henhold til § 1, er beret‐
tiget hertil, kan alene rejses af den, der påstår sig berettiget til patentet. Sagen skal rejses inden 1 år efter, at den berettigede har fået kundskab om patentets meddelelse og de øvrige forhold, på hvilke søgsmålet støttes. Var patenthaveren i god tro, da patentet blev meddelt, eller da han erhvervede patentet, kan sagen ikke rejses senere end 3 år efter patentets meddelelse.
§ 53. Er patent meddelt en anden end den, der i henhold til § 1 er berettiget dertil, skal retten, hvis der
nedlægges påstand derom af den berettigede, overføre patentet til denne. Bestemmelserne i § 52, stk. 4, om tidspunktet for sagens anlæg finder tilsvarende anvendelse.
Stk. 2. Den, hvem patentet frakendes, er, når han i god tro her i landet erhvervsmæssigt har udnyttet
opfindelsen eller truffet væsentlige foranstaltninger hertil, berettiget til mod rimeligt vederlag og i øvrigt
på rimelige vilkår at fortsætte den påbegyndte eller iværksætte den planlagte udnyttelse med bibeholdelse
af dennes almindelige karakter. Sådan ret tilkommer under samme forudsætninger også indehavere af re‐
gistrerede licensrettigheder.
Stk. 3. Rettigheder i henhold til stk. 2 kan kun overgå til andre sammen med den virksomhed, hvori de
udnyttes, eller hvori udnyttelsen var tilsigtet.
§ 53 a. Sag om ugyldigkendelse, som rejses, mens en indsigelse i henhold til § 21 ikke er færdigbe‐
handlet af patentmyndigheden, kan af retten stilles i bero, indtil der er truffet endelig afgørelse af patent‐
myndigheden.
§ 53 b. Enhver kan over for patentmyndigheden fremsætte begæring om, at et patent, der er meddelt af
patentmyndigheden eller er meddelt med virkning for Danmark efter § 75, omprøves.
Stk. 2. Begæring efter stk. 1 kan ikke indleveres, så længe indsigelse endnu kan fremsættes, eller så
længe en indsigelsessag ikke er endeligt afgjort. Hvis en sag ved domstolene vedrørende et patent ikke er endeligt afgjort, kan der ikke fremsættes en begæring efter stk. 1 vedrørende det pågældende patent.
13
Stk. 3. Rejses sag ved domstolene om et patent, inden der er truffet endelig afgørelse om en begæring
efter stk. 1 vedrørende samme patent, skal patentmyndigheden stille behandlingen af begæringen i bero,
indtil sagen er endeligt afgjort, medmindre begæringen er fremsat af patenthaveren.
Stk. 4. Er begæring om omprøvning indleveret, skal patenthaveren gøres bekendt hermed og have lejlig‐
hed til at udtale sig om denne. Patentmyndigheden bekendtgør, at begæring om omprøvning er indleveret.
Stk. 5. Patentmyndigheden kan behandle en begæring om omprøvning, selv om patentet er ophørt eller
ophører i henhold til §§ 51, 54 eller 96. Patentmyndigheden kan ligeledes behandle begæringen, selv om
begæringen tages tilbage, eller selv om den, der har begæret omprøvningen, afgår ved døden eller mister
evnen til at indgå retshandler.
Stk. 6. Med begæringen om administrativ omprøvning efter stk. 1 skal følge det fastsatte gebyr .
§ 53 c. Begæring om omprøvning fra andre end patenthaveren kan alene støttes på de ugyldighedsgrun‐
de, der er nævnt i § 52, stk. 1.
Stk. 2. Patentmyndigheden kan erklære patentet ugyldigt eller opretholde det i ændret eller uændret
form. Patentmyndigheden undersøger, om begæringen kan imødekommes, og hvis begæringen kan imø‐dekommes, om de grunde, der er nævnt i § 52, stk. 1, er til hinder for, at patentet opretholdes i ændret
form.
§ 53 d. Hvis en begæring fra andre end patenthaveren ikke kan imødekommes, afslås begæringen, og
patentet opretholdes i uændret form.
Stk. 2. Kan begæringen imødekommes, men kan patentet ikke opretholdes i ændret form, erklærer pa‐
tentmyndigheden patentet for ugyldigt. Kan patentet opretholdes i ændret form, ændres patentet tilsvaren‐de, såfremt patenthaveren er enig i den ændrede formulering, som patentmyndigheden vil give patentet. Er patenthaveren ikke enig i den ændrede formulering, erklæres patentet for ugyldigt.
Stk. 3. Når der er truffet afgørelse om at opretholde patentet i ændret form, skal patenthaveren betale det
fastsatte gebyr for publicering af nyt patentskrift inden for den fastsatte frist. Betales gebyret ikke retti‐
digt, erklæres patentet for ugyldigt.
Stk. 4. Patentmyndigheden bekendtgør afgørelsen af en administrativ omprøvning.
§ 53 e. Patenthaveren selv kan på de i § 53 b, stk. 2 og 6, anførte betingelser begære sit patent begræn‐
set ved ændring af beskrivelsen, kravene eller tegningerne. Hvis patenthaveren anmoder om eller har an‐
modet om begrænsning eller ophævelse af patentet ved Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed i medfør af den europæiske patentkonventions artikel 105 a-105 c, skal patentmyndigheden her i landet stille behand‐lingen af en begæring i medfør af 1. pkt. i bero, indtil Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed har truffet afgø‐
relse i sagen. Patentmyndigheden her i landet genoptager på patenthavers begæring herom anmodningen i
henhold til 1. pkt., såfremt der ikke var fuld identitet mellem denne anmodning og den begæring om cen‐
tral begrænsning, som patenthaver indleverede til Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed.
Stk. 2. Patentmyndigheden undersøger da, om de grunde, der er nævnt i § 52, stk. 1, er til hinder for at
opretholde patentet i den ændrede form, patenthaveren ønsker. Kan den begærede begrænsning herefter godkendes, ændres patentet i overensstemmelse hermed, og § 53 d, stk. 3 og 4, finder da tilsvarende an‐
vendelse, dog at patentet ophæves, såfremt gebyret for publicering af nyt patentskrift ikke betales retti‐digt.
Stk. 3. Hvis patentet derimod ikke kan opretholdes i den begærede begrænsede form, skal begæringen
om begrænsning afslås.
§ 53 f. Hvis et patent er ændret i henhold til §§ 53 d eller 53 e, skal der fra det tidspunkt, hvor der sker
bekendtgørelse ifølge § 53 d, stk. 4, hos patentmyndigheden kunne fås eksemplarer af det nye patentskrift med beskrivelse, tegninger og patentkrav i den ændrede form.
§ 54. Giver patenthaveren over for patentmyndigheden afkald på patentet, skal patentmyndigheden er‐
klære patentet for ophævet i sin helhed.
14
Stk. 2. Er der rejst søgsmål om overførelse af patent, kan patentet ikke erklæres ophævet, før søgsmålet
er endeligt afgjort.
§ 55. Når et patent er bortfaldet eller erklæret ophævet eller ved endelig dom erklæret ugyldigt eller
overført til en anden, skal patentmyndigheden udfærdige bekendtgørelse herom.
§ 55 a. Hvis et patent erklæres helt eller delvis ugyldigt, anses patentet, i det omfang det er blevet er‐
klæret ugyldigt, allerede fra den dag, patentansøgningen blev indleveret, ikke at have haft de virkninger,
der er angivet i § 3.
Kapitel 8
Pligt til at give oplysning om patent
§ 56. En patentansøger, som over for en anden påberåber sig en ansøgning om patent, inden akterne
vedrørende ansøgningen er blevet tilgængelige for enhver, er pligtig på begæring at give sit samtykke til,
at vedkommende får adgang til at gøre sig bekendt med akterne i ansøgningssagen. Omfatter ansøgningen en deponeret prøve af biologisk materiale som nævnt i § 8 a, skal vedkommende også have ret til at få udleveret en prøve. Bestemmelserne i § 22, stk. 6, 2. og 3. pkt., stk. 7 og 8, finder anvendelse i disse
tilfælde.
Stk. 2. Den, som enten ved direkte henvendelse til en anden eller i annoncer eller ved påskrift på varer
eller deres indpakning eller på anden måde angiver, at patent er ansøgt eller meddelt, uden samtidig at angive patentets eller ansøgningens nummer, er pligtig uden unødigt ophold at give den, der begærer det, sådan oplysning. Angives det vel ikke udtrykkeligt, at patent er ansøgt eller meddelt, men er oplysningen egnet til at fremkalde den opfattelse, at dette er tilfældet, skal der på begæring uden unødigt ophold gives
oplysning om, hvorvidt patent er ansøgt eller meddelt.
Kapitel 9
Straf- og erstatningsansvar m.v.
§ 57. Med bøde straffes den, som forsætligt eller groft uagtsomt gør indgreb i den eneret, som et patent
medfører (patentindgreb).
Stk. 2. Er overtrædelsen begået forsætligt og under skærpende omstændigheder, kan straffen stige til
fængsel indtil 1 år og 6 måneder, medmindre højere straf er forskyldt efter straffelovens § 299 b. Skær‐pende omstændigheder anses navnlig at foreligge, hvis der ved overtrædelsen tilsigtes en betydelig og
åbenbart retsstridig vinding.
Stk. 3. Der kan pålægges selskaber m.v. (juridiske personer) strafansvar efter reglerne i straffelovens 5.
kapitel.
Stk. 4. Overtrædelser, som omfattes af stk. 1, påtales af den forurettede. Overtrædelser, som omfattes af
stk. 2, påtales kun efter den forurettedes begæring, medmindre almene hensyn kræver påtale.
§ 58. Den, som forsætligt eller uagtsomt begår patentindgreb, skal betale
1) et rimeligt vederlag til den forurettede for udnyttelsen og 2) en erstatning til den forurettede for den yderligere skade, som overtrædelsen har medført.
Stk. 2. Ved fastsættelse af erstatning efter stk. 1, nr. 2, skal der tages hensyn til bl.a. den forurettedes
tabte fortjeneste og krænkerens uberettigede fortjeneste.
Stk. 3. I sager, der omfattes af stk. 1, kan der derudover fastsættes en godtgørelse til den forurettede for
ikkeøkonomisk skade.
§ 59. Med henblik på at forebygge yderligere patentindgreb kan retten efter påstand ved dom bl.a. be‐
stemme, at et produkt, der udgør et patentindgreb, skal 1) tilbagekaldes fra handelen,
2) endeligt fjernes fra handelen,
15
3) tilintetgøres,
4) udleveres til den forurettede eller
5) ændres på en nærmere angiven måde.
Stk. 2. Stk. 1 finder tilsvarende anvendelse på apparater, materialer, redskaber el.lign., der primært har
været anvendt til ulovlig fremstilling af en patenteret opfindelse.
Stk. 3. Foranstaltningerne efter stk. 1 skal gennemføres uden godtgørelse til krænkeren og berører ikke
en mulig erstatning til den forurettede. Foranstaltningerne skal gennemføres for krænkerens regning,
medmindre særlige grunde taler herimod.
Stk. 4. Ved en dom om foranstaltninger efter stk. 1 skal retten tage hensyn til forholdet mellem krænkel‐
sens omfang, de beordrede foranstaltninger og tredjemands interesser .
Stk. 5. Retten kan efter påstand give krænkeren tilladelse til at råde over de i stk. 1 og 2 nævnte produk‐
ter, apparater, materialer, redskaber el.lign. i patentets gyldighedstid eller en del af denne mod et rimeligt
vederlag. Dette gælder dog kun, hvis 1) krænkeren hverken har handlet forsætligt eller uagtsomt,
2) foranstaltningerne efter stk. 1 ville skade krænkeren uforholdsmæssigt meget og
3) et rimeligt vederlag er tilstrækkeligt.
§ 60. Udnytter nogen uhjemlet erhvervsmæssigt en opfindelse, efter at akterne i ansøgningssagen er
gjort tilgængelige for enhver, og fører ansøgningen til patent, finder bestemmelserne om patentindgreb bortset fra § 57 tilsvarende anvendelse. I tiden, indtil patent er meddelt, omfatter patentbeskyttelsen kun det, som fremgår såvel af patentkravene, som de forelå, da ansøgningen blev almindeligt tilgængelig, som af patentet, som det er meddelt eller er opretholdt i ændret affattelse efter § 23, stk. 3.
Stk. 2. Hvis akterne i ansøgningssagen foreligger på engelsk, finder stk. 1 alene anvendelse fra det tids‐
punkt, hvor ansøger har indleveret en oversættelse af patentkravene til dansk.
Stk. 3. Den pågældende skal kun betale erstatning efter § 58 for skade som følge af indgreb, der er sket
før bekendtgørelsen om patentets meddelelse efter § 20, i det omfang det skønnes rimeligt.
Stk. 4. Forældelse af erstatningskrav efter stk. 1 indtræder tidligst 1 år efter, at indsigelsesfristen for pa‐
tentet er udløbet, eller efter at patentmyndigheden har besluttet at opretholde patentet.
§ 60 a. I en dom, hvorved nogen dømmes efter §§ 58-60, kan retten på begæring bestemme, at dommen
skal offentliggøres i sin helhed eller i uddrag.
Stk. 2. Pligten til offentliggørelsen påhviler krænkeren. Offentliggørelsen skal ske for krænkerens reg‐
ning og på en så fremtrædende måde, som det med rimelighed kan forlanges.
§ 61. I sager om patentindgreb kan kun gøres gældende, at patentet er ugyldigt, dersom påstand om, at
patentet kendes ugyldigt, nedlægges over for patenthaveren, eventuelt efter at denne er tilstævnet efter
reglerne i § 63, stk. 4. Kendes patentet ugyldigt, kommer bestemmelserne i §§ 57-60 ikke til anvendelse.
§ 62. Den, som i de i § 56 nævnte tilfælde undlader at efterkomme, hvad der påhviler ham, eller giver
urigtig oplysning, straffes med bøde, for så vidt ikke strengere straf er forskyldt efter anden lovgivning, og er pligtig at erstatte derved forvoldt skade i det omfang, dette skønnes rimeligt.
Stk. 2. Bestemmelserne i § 57, stk. 3 og 4, finder tilsvarende anvendelse.
§ 63. Den, der anlægger sag om et patents ugyldighed, om overførelse af patent eller om tvangslicens,
skal samtidig meddele dette til patentmyndigheden og i anbefalet postforsendelse give meddelelse om
sagsanlægget til enhver i patentregistret indført licenshaver, hvis adresse er angivet i registret. Den, der
begærer et patent omprøvet administrativt, skal samtidig hermed give de nævnte licenshavere meddelelse
herom. En licenshaver, der vil anlægge sag om indgreb i patentet, skal på tilsvarende måde give medde‐lelse herom til patenthaveren, hvis dennes adresse er angivet i registret.
Stk. 2. Dokumenterer sagsøgeren, eller den, der har begæret administrativ omprøvning, ikke på sagens
første tægtedag eller ved begæring om omprøvning ved dennes indlevering, at meddelelse efter stk. 1, har
16
fundet sted, kan retten eller ved begæring af omprøvning patentmyndigheden fastsætte en frist til opfyl‐
delse af betingelserne i stk. 1. Oversiddes den fastsatte frist, afvises sagen.
Stk. 3. I sager om patentindgreb, anlagt af patenthaveren, skal sagsøgte give meddelelse efter reglerne i
stk. 1 til patentmyndigheden og registrerede licenshavere, såfremt han vil nedlægge påstand om, at patent‐et kendes ugyldigt. Bestemmelsen i stk. 2 finder tilsvarende anvendelse, således at påstanden om, at pa‐tentet kendes ugyldigt, afvises, hvis den fastsatte frist oversiddes.
Stk. 4. I sager om patentindgreb, anlagt af en licenshaver, kan sagsøgte tilstævne patenthaveren uden
hensyn til dennes værneting for over for ham at nedlægge påstand om, at patentet kendes ugyldigt. Be‐stemmelserne i retsplejelovens kap. 34 finder tilsvarende anvendelse.
§ 64. Ansøgere og patenthavere, der ikke er bosat her i landet, anses i sager, der anlægges efter denne
lov, for at have hjemting i København.
§ 64 a. Hvis et patents genstand er en fremgangsmåde til fremstilling af et nyt produkt, betragtes samme
produkt, når det er fremstillet af en anden person end patenthaveren, som fremstillet ved den patenterede fremgangsmåde, medmindre det modsatte bevises.
Stk. 2. I forbindelse med bevisførelsen for det modsatte skal sagsøgtes berettigede interesse i at beskytte
sine fabrikations- og forretningshemmeligheder tilgodeses.
§ 65. Udskrift af domme i sager, der anlægges efter denne lov, sendes til patentmyndigheden ved rettens
foranstaltning.
§ 65 a. Hvis told- og skatteforvaltningen får en formodning om krænkelser omfattet af § 57, kan oplys‐
ninger herom videregives til rettighedshaver.
Kapitel 9 A
Særlig enhed om håndhævelse og piratkopiering
§ 65 b. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsens opgaver vedrørende håndhævelse af patentrettigheder og be‐
kæmpelse af piratkopiering varetages af en særlig enhed, hvor forbrugere, virksomheder og myndigheder kan henvende sig og modtage information og vejledning.
Stk. 2. I konkrete sager om piratkopiering vejleder enheden forbrugere og små og mellemstore virksom‐
heder. Enheden kan efter anmodning og mod betaling af et gebyr afgive en skriftlig vejledende udtalelse.
Stk. 3. Enheden bistår politiet og anklagemyndigheden i deres indsats mod piratkopiering. Stk. 4. Erhvervsministeren kan fastsætte nærmere regler om enhedens opgaver og or ganisering m.v.
Kapitel 10
Forskellige bestemmelser
§ 66. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen kan opfordre patenthaver til at udpege en i Det Europæiske Øko‐
nomiske Samarbejdsområde (EØS) bosat fuldmægtig, som på patenthaverens vegne kan modtage forkyn‐delser og andre meddelelser vedrørende patentet. Fuldmægtigens navn og adresse skal indføres i patentre‐gistret.
§ 67. Klage over styrelsens afgørelser i medfør af §§ 44, 53 d, 53 e, 72, stk. 1 og 2, 73 samt 96 kan af
ansøgeren, patenthaveren eller den, der har begæret administrativ omprøvning eller patentets ophør, ind‐
gives til Ankenævnet for Patenter og Varemærker senest 2 måneder efter, at der er givet vedkommende underretning om afgørelsen. Andre, der har interesse i den pågældende afgørelse, kan senest 2 måneder efter, at afgørelsen er bekendtgjort, indgive tilsvarende klage.
Stk. 2. Inden den i stk. 1 nævnte frist skal det for klagen fastsatte gebyr betales. Sker dette ikke, skal
klagen afvises.
Stk. 3. Bestemmelserne i § 25, stk. 2-4, finder tilsvarende anvendelse.
17
§ 68. Erhvervsministeren kan fastsætte regler om betaling for særlige ekspeditioner, publikationer, ud‐
skrifter, kurser m.v.
§ 69. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter nærmere regler om patentansøgninger og deres behandling, om be‐
handling af indsigelser, om administrativ omprøvning, om genoprettelse, om afkald på patent, om patent‐registrets indretning og førelse, om Patenttidendes udgivelse og indhold, om udveksling af elektroniske
data med patentmyndigheden samt om styrelsens forretningsgang. Det kan herunder bestemmes, at pa‐
tentmyndighedens journaler over indkomne ansøgninger skal være tilgængelige for enhver. Erhvervsmini‐steren kan fastsætte nærmere regler til bestemmelse af, hvilke dage der betragtes som lukkedage for pa‐
tentmyndigheden.
Stk. 2. Erhvervministeren kan bestemme, at patentmyndigheden på begæring af et andet lands myndig‐
hed kan give denne oplysning om behandlingen af her indleverede patentansøgninger, samt at patentmyn‐digheden ved afgørelsen af, om betingelserne for patenterbarhed foreligger, kan godtage nyhedsundersø‐
gelser, som i denne henseende har fundet sted ved tilsvarende myndighed i et andet land eller ved en in‐ternational institution.
Stk. 3. Erhvervsministeren kan endvidere bestemme, at ansøgere, der i et land har indgivet en tilsvaren‐
de ansøgning om patent, på begæring af patentmyndigheden og inden for en af denne fastsat frist skal give oplysning om det resultat af undersøgelsen af opfindelsens patenterbarhed, der er meddelt ham af vedkommende lands patentmyndighed, samt fremsende genpart af skriftvekslingen med denne. Oplys‐ningspligt kan dog ikke foreskrives for så vidt angår sådan i kapitel 3 omhandlet patentansøgning, som har været genstand for international forberedende patenterbarhedsprøvning, om hvilken der er indleveret
rapport til patentmyndigheden.
§ 70. På opfindelser, der vedrører krigsmateriel eller fremgangsmåder til fremstilling af krigsmateriel,
kan der meddeles hemmeligt patent i overensstemmelse med de herom givne særlige regler .
§ 71. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen kan efter anmodning påtage sig at løse særlige opgaver, der har
karakter af teknologisk service.
Stk. 2. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter regler om denne service, om betalingen herfor samt om betalingen
af gebyr for rykkerskrivelser ved for sen betaling.
Stk. 3. Lov om offentlighed i forvaltningen gælder, bortset fra § 8, ikke for de opgaver, der er nævnt i
stk. 1.
§ 72. Vil en patentansøger eller patenthaver lide retstab, fordi han ikke har overholdt en i denne lov
eller med hjemmel heri over for patentmyndigheden fastsat frist, men har han udvist al den omhu, som med rimelighed kunne kræves af ham, skal patentmyndigheden på begæring genoprette rettighederne. Be‐gæringen skal indgives til patentmyndigheden inden 2 måneder efter , at den hindring, som bevirkede frist‐
overskridelsen, er bortfaldet, dog senest 1 år efter fristens udløb. Inden for samme frister skal han foretage den undladte handling og betale det for genoprettelse fastsatte gebyr .
Stk. 2. Bestemmelsen i stk. 1 finder anvendelse på den i § 6, stk. 1, nævnte frist, hvis en patentansøger i
en efterfølgende ansøgning begærer genoprettelse af sin prioritet inden 2 måneder fra udløbet af den i § 6, stk. 1, nævnte frist.
§ 73. Har ansøgeren i de i § 31 nævnte tilfælde benyttet forsendelse med post, og fremkommer forsen‐
delsen ikke rettidigt, men træffes foranstaltningen inden 2 måneder efter, at ansøgeren indså eller burde
have indset, at fristen var overskredet, og senest 1 år efter fristens udløb, skal patentmyndigheden genop‐
rette rettighederne, såfremt 1) postforbindelserne har været afbrudt inden for de sidste 10 dage forud for fristens udløb på grund af krig, revolution, borgerlige uroligheder, strejke, naturkatastrofe eller anden lignende omstændighed på det sted, hvor afsenderen har sin virksomhed eller opholder sig, og forsendelsen er afsendt til pa‐tentmyndigheden inden 5 dage efter, at postforbindelserne er genoptaget, eller
18
2) forsendelsen har været afsendt rekommanderet til patentmyndigheden senest 5 dage før fristens ud‐
løb, dog kun hvis forsendelsen har været sendt som luftpost, hvor dette har været muligt, eller hvis afsenderen har haft grund til at antage, at forsendelsen ved befordring med almindelig post ville være
modtaget senest 2 dage fra afsendelsesdagen.
Stk. 2. Ønsker patentansøgeren rettighederne genoprettet i henhold til stk. 1, skal han inden den nævnte
frists udløb indgive begæring herom til patentmyndigheden.
§ 74. Når en begæring i henhold til §§ 72 eller 73 er imødekommet, og en patentansøgning, der er hen‐
lagt eller afslået efter, at den er blevet tilgængelig for enhver, som følge deraf skal optages til fortsat be‐handling, eller et bortfaldet patent skal anses for opretholdt, skal der udfærdiges bekendtgørelse herom.
Stk. 2. Den, som, efter at den fastsatte frist for genoptagelse af en henlagt ansøgning er udløbet, eller
efter at ansøgningen er afslået, eller efter at patentets bortfald er bekendtgjort, men inden bekendtgørelse i henhold til stk. 1 er udfærdiget, i god tro har påbegyndt erhvervsmæssig udnyttelse af opfindelsen her i landet eller har truffet væsentlige foranstaltninger hertil kan fortsætte udnyttelsen med bibeholdelse af
dennes almindelige karakter.
Stk. 3. Den i stk. 2 omhandlede ret kan kun overgå til andre sammen med den virksomhed, hvori den er
opstået, eller hvori udnyttelsen var tilsigtet.
§ 74 a. Henlægger erhvervsministeren sine beføjelser efter loven til Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen, kan
ministeren fastsætte regler om klageadgangen, herunder at klager ikke kan indbringes for højere admini‐strativ myndighed.
Kapitel 10 A
Europæisk patent
§ 75. Ved europæisk patent forstås et patent, der er meddelt af Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed i hen‐
hold til den i München den 5. oktober 1973 indgåede europæiske patentkonvention. Ved europæisk pa‐
tentansøgning forstås en ansøgning i henhold til denne konvention.
Stk. 2. Der kan meddeles europæisk patent for Danmark.
Stk. 3. Ansøgning om europæisk patent indleveres til Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed, jf. dog de i §
70 nævnte bestemmelser om hemmeligt patent. Ansøgning om europæisk patent kan også indleveres til patentmyndigheden her i landet, der videresender den til Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed. De i konven‐tionens artikel 76 nævnte ansøgninger kan kun indleveres til Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed.
Stk. 4. Bestemmelserne i §§ 76-90 finder anvendelse på europæisk patent for Danmark og på europæisk
patentansøgning, som omfatter Danmark.
§ 76. Europæisk patent anses for meddelt, når Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed har bekendtgjort sin
afgørelse herom. Det har samme virkning som patent meddelt af patentmyndigheden her i landet og er
undergivet samme bestemmelser som sådant patent, medmindre andet fremgår af §§ 77-90.
§ 77. Et europæisk patent har kun virkning her i landet, såfremt indehaveren inden 3 måneder fra den
dag, hvor Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed har bekendtgjort patentmeddelelse eller afgørelse om at op‐retholde patentet i ændret affattelse, til patentmyndigheden her i landet indleverer 1) patentkravene oversat til dansk, såfremt patentet er meddelt på engelsk, eller
2) patentkravene oversat til dansk og en oversættelse af det øvrige indhold i det meddelte eller ændrede patent til dansk eller engelsk, såfremt patentet er meddelt på tysk eller fransk.
Stk. 2. Inden for fristen som angivet i stk. 1 skal indehaveren betale det fastsatte gebyr for publicerin‐
gen.
Stk. 3. Tekst som angivet i stk. 1 skal holdes tilgængelig for enhver. Er den europæiske patentansøgning
endnu ikke offentliggjort af Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed, holdes teksten dog først tilgængelig fra
denne offentliggørelse.
19
Stk. 4. Når tekst som angivet i stk. 1 er indleveret, gebyret som angivet i stk. 2 er betalt og Den Europæ‐
iske Patentmyndighed har bekendtgjort patentmeddelelsen eller sin afgørelse om at opretholde det euro‐pæiske patent i ændret affattelse, skal patentmyndigheden her i landet udfærdige en bekendtgørelse her‐om. Eksemplarer af teksten skal snarest derefter kunne fås hos patentmyndigheden.
§ 78. Bestemmelserne i § 72, stk. 1, gælder også indlevering af oversættelse og betaling af gebyr i hen‐
hold til § 77, stk. 1 og 2.
Stk. 2. Bestemmes det i henhold til § 72, at indlevering af oversættelse og betaling af gebyr som nævnt i
§ 77, stk. 1 og 2, skal anses for rettidig indlevering, skal patentmyndigheden her i landet udfærdige be‐kendtgørelse herom.
Stk. 3. Den, som, efter at den i § 77, stk. 1, fastsatte frist er udløbet, men inden bekendtgørelse i henhold
til stk. 2 er udfærdiget, i god tro har påbegyndt erhvervsmæssig udnyttelse af opfindelsen her i landet eller har truffet væsentlige foranstaltninger hertil, har ret som anført i § 74, stk. 2 og 3.
§ 79. Bestemmelsen i § 52, stk. 1, nr. 4, gælder for europæiske patenter, såfremt udvidelse er sket efter,
at patentet er meddelt.
§ 80. Ophæver Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed helt eller delvis et europæisk patent, skal dette have
virkning, som om patentet i tilsvarende omfang er kendt ugyldigt her i landet. Patentmyndigheden her i landet skal udfærdige bekendtgørelse om ophævelsen.
§ 80 a. Begrænser eller ophæver Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed et europæisk patent i medfør af
reglerne herfor i den europæiske patentkonventions artikel 105 a-105 c, har dette virkning, som om pa‐
tentet er begrænset i medfør af § 53 e eller ophævet her i landet i medfør af § 54, når afgørelsen offentlig‐gøres af Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed.
Stk. 2. Afgørelsen om begrænsning eller ophævelse af et patent i henhold til stk. 1 har virkning allerede
fra den dag, patentansøgningen blev indleveret, hvorfor det begrænsede eller ophævede patent ikke har haft de virkninger, der er angivet i § 3, jf. artikel 68 i den europæiske patentkonvention.
Stk. 3. Bestemmelserne i § 77 finder tilsvarende anvendelse på afgørelser truf fet i henhold til stk. 1.
Stk. 4. Patentmyndigheden her i landet offentliggør Den Europæiske Patentmyndigheds beslutning om
ophævelse af et europæisk patent, såfremt det ophævede patent tidligere har været offentliggjort i medfør af § 77.
§ 81. For et europæisk patent skal der betales årsgebyr til patentmyndigheden her i landet for hvert ge‐
byrår efter det år, i hvilket Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed har bekendtgjort sin afgørelse om at imøde‐
komme patentansøgningen.
Stk. 2. Betales der ikke årsgebyr for det europæiske patent i overensstemmelse med stk. 1, jf. § 41, fin‐
der § 51 tilsvarende anvendelse. For så vidt angår det første årsgebyr, forfalder dette dog først 3 måneder fra den dag, patentet er meddelt.
§ 82. En europæisk patentansøgning, for hvilken Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed har fastsat indleve‐
ringsdag, har fra denne dag samme virkning her i landet som en her indleveret ansøgning. Har ansøgnin‐gen i henhold til den europæiske patentkonvention prioritet fra en tidligere dag end indleveringsdagen, gælder denne prioritet også her i landet.
Stk. 2. Ved anvendelse af § 2, stk. 2, 2. pkt., skal offentliggørelse af en europæisk patentansøgning i
henhold til artikel 93 i den europæiske patentkonvention sidestilles med, at ansøgningen er blevet tilgæn‐gelig for enhver i henhold til § 22. Det samme gælder offentliggørelse i henhold til konventionens artikel 153, stk. 3, såfremt denne af Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed sidestilles med offentliggørelse i henhold til artikel 93.
§ 83. Når en europæisk patentansøgning er blevet offentliggjort i henhold til den europæiske patentkon‐
vention, og ansøgeren til patentmyndigheden her i landet har indleveret en oversættelse til dansk af pa‐
20
tentkravene i den således offentliggjorte ansøgning, skal patentmyndigheden her i landet holde oversæt‐
telsen tilgængelig for enhver og udfærdige bekendtgørelse herom.
Stk. 2. Udnytter nogen uhjemlet erhvervsmæssigt en opfindelse, som er genstand for en europæisk pa‐
tentansøgning, efter at bekendtgørelse er udfærdiget i henhold til stk. 1, og fører ansøgningen til patent for Danmark, gælder bestemmelserne om patentindgreb. I sådanne tilfælde omfatter patentbeskyttelsen dog kun det, som fremgår såvel af de offentliggjorte patentkrav som af patentkravene i henhold til patentet. I tilfælde af, at patentet er begrænset eller ophævet af Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed, jf. artikel 105a-105c i den europæiske patentkonvention, omfatter patentbeskyttelsen kun det, der fremgår af de of‐fentliggjorte rettede patentkrav. § 57 finder ikke anvendelse, og den pågældende skal kun betale erstat‐ning efter § 58 for skade, i det omfang det skønnes rimeligt.
Stk. 3. Forældelse af erstatningskrav efter stk. 2 indtræder tidligst 1 år efter, at indsigelsesfristen for det
europæiske patent er udløbet, eller efter at Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed har besluttet at opretholde patentet.
§ 84. Tilbagetages en europæisk ansøgning eller en begæring om, at den skal omfatte Danmark, eller
skal ansøgningen eller begæringen i henhold til den europæiske patentkonvention anses for tilbagetaget, og genoptages ansøgningen ikke i henhold til konventionens artikel 121, har dette samme virkning som
tilbagetagelse af en ansøgning hos patentmyndigheden her i landet.
Stk. 2. Såfremt en europæisk patentansøgning er afslået, har dette samme virkning, som om ansøgnin‐
gen var afslået af patentmyndigheden her i landet.
§ 85. Stemmer de i §§ 77 eller 83 nævnte oversættelser ikke overens med teksten på det sprog, som har
været behandlingssproget ved Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed, omfatter patentbeskyttelsen alene det, som fremgår af begge tekster.
Stk. 2. Stk. 1 finder tilsvarende anvendelse, for så vidt angår oversættelse af afgørelser truffet i medfør
af § 80 a, stk. 1.
Stk. 3. I sager om ugyldighed skal alene teksten på behandlingssproget være afgørende.
§ 86. Indleverer ansøgeren eller patenthaveren til patentmyndigheden her i landet en rettelse af den i §
77 nævnte oversættelse, og betaler han det for publicering fastsatte gebyr, skal den rettede oversættelse træde i stedet for den tidligere indleverede. Den rettede oversættelse skal holdes tilgængelig for enhver, såfremt den oprindelige oversættelse er tilgængelig. Når en sådan rettelse er indleveret og gebyr er betalt rettidigt, udfærdiger patentmyndigheden her i landet bekendtgørelse om rettelsen, såfremt den oprindelige oversættelse er tilgængelig. Eksemplarer af oversættelsen skal snarest derefter kunne fås hos patentmyn‐digheden her i landet.
Stk. 2. Indleverer ansøgeren en rettelse af den i § 83 nævnte oversættelse, udfærdiger patentmyndighe‐
den her i landet bekendtgørelse herom og holder den rettede oversættelse tilgængelig for enhver. Når be‐
kendtgørelsen er udfærdiget, træder den rettede oversættelse i stedet for den oprindelige.
Stk. 3. Den, som, da den rettede oversættelse fik gyldighed, i god tro erhvervsmæssigt udnyttede opfin‐
delsen her i landet på en måde, som ifølge den tidligere oversættelse ikke udgjorde indgreb i ansøgerens eller patenthaverens ret, eller har truffet væsentlige foranstaltninger hertil har ret som anført i § 74, stk. 2 og 3.
§ 87. Genopretter Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed rettighederne for en patenthaver eller patentansø‐
ger, som ikke har overholdt en frist, gælder denne afgørelse også her i landet.
Stk. 2. Den, som, efter at tab af rettigheder er indtrådt, men inden Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed har
genoprettet rettighederne og udfærdiget bekendtgørelse herom, i god tro har påbegyndt erhvervsmæssig
udnyttelse af opfindelsen her i landet eller har truffet væsentlige foranstaltninger hertil, har ret som anført i § 74, stk. 2 og 3.
21
§ 87 a. Den, som i god tro har påbegyndt erhvervsmæssig udnyttelse eller har truffet væsentlige foran‐
staltninger til udnyttelse af en opfindelse, der er anført i en publiceret europæisk patentansøgning eller et
publiceret europæisk patent i perioden regnet fra tidspunktet for den afgørelse, som er genstand for anke i henhold til artikel 112 a i den europæiske patentkonvention og til publiceringen af afgørelsen heraf, har ret som anført i § 74, stk. 2 og 3.
§ 88. Anses en europæisk patentansøgning, som er indleveret til en national patentmyndighed, som til‐
bagetaget som følge af, at ansøgningen ikke er fremsendt til Den Europæiske Patentmyndighed inden for den fastsatte frist, skal patentmyndigheden på ansøgerens begæring anse den for konverteret til en ansøg‐
ning om patent her i landet, såfremt 1) begæringen fremsættes over for den nationale myndighed, som modtog ansøgningen, inden 3 måne‐der efter, at der er givet ansøgeren underretning om, at ansøgningen anses for tilbagetaget,
2) begæringen indleveres til patentmyndigheden her i landet inden 20 måneder regnet fra ansøgningens indleveringsdag eller, hvis prioritet er begæret, fra prioritetsdagen og
3) ansøgeren inden for en af erhvervsministeren fastsat frist betaler det fastsatte ansøgningsgebyr og ind‐leverer en oversættelse af ansøgningen til dansk eller engelsk.
Stk. 2. Opfylder patentansøgeren den europæiske patentkonventions krav med hensyn til ansøgningens
form, skal den godkendes i så henseende.
§ 89. Bestemmelserne i den europæiske patentkonventions artikler 9, 60 og 131 samt i den til konventi‐
onen knyttede protokol om retternes kompetence og anerkendelse af afgørelser om retten til at få meddelt et europæisk patent (anerkendelsesprotokollen) gælder her i landet.
§ 89 a. Denne lovs bestemmelser om deponering af biologisk materiale finder ikke anvendelse på euro‐
pæiske patenter.
§ 90. Erhvervsministeren fastsætter nærmere regler til gennemførelse af den europæiske patentkonven‐
tion og til gennemførelse af bestemmelserne i dette kapitel.
Kapitel 10 B
Supplerende beskyttelsescertifikater
§ 91. Erhvervsministeren kan fastsætte regler, der er nødvendige for anvendelsen her i landet af Det
Europæiske Fællesskabs forordninger om indførelse af supplerende beskyttelsescertifikater .
Stk. 2. For behandlingen af sager vedrørende supplerende beskyttelsescertifikat betales et gebyr .
Stk. 3. § 57 om strafansvar for patentindgreb finder tilsvarende anvendelse ved indgreb i den eneret,
som et beskyttelsescertifikat som omhandlet i stk. 1 medfører.
Stk. 4. Erhvervsministeren kan efter forhandling med Færøernes og Grønlands hjemmestyre fastsætte
bestemmelser om, at de i stk. 1 nævnte forordninger om supplerende beskyttelsescertifikater finder anven‐delse på Færøerne og Grønland.
Kapitel 10 C
EF-patent m.v.
3)
Kapitel 10 D
Gebyrer
§ 98. For ansøgning om dansk patent betales et gebyr på 3.000 kr., jf. § 8, stk. 5. Der betales endvidere
et tillægsgebyr på 300 kr. for hvert patentkrav, der overstiger de første 10 krav.
Stk. 2. For konvertering af en europæisk patentansøgning til en dansk patentansøgning betales et gebyr
på 3.000 kr., jf. § 88, stk. 1, nr. 3. Der betales endvidere et tillægsgebyr på 300 kr. for hvert patentkrav, der overstiger de første 10 krav.
22
Stk. 3. For ansøgning om videreførelse af en international patentansøgning for Danmark betales et ge‐
byr på 3.000 kr., jf. § 31, stk. 1, og § 38, stk. 2. Der betales endvidere et tillægsgebyr på 300 kr. for hvert
patentkrav, der overstiger de første 10 krav. For senere indlevering af en oversættelse af eller genpart af den internationale patentansøgning betales et tillægsgebyr på 1.100 kr ., jf. § 31, stk. 2.
Stk. 4. For Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsens behandling i henhold til §§ 36 og 37 om internationale pa‐
tentansøgninger betales 3.800 kr.
Stk. 5. For Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsens ekspedition i forbindelse med nyhedsundersøgelse hos en
international nyhedsundersøgende myndighed betales 500 kr., jf. § 9.
Stk. 6. For publicering af patentskrift betales et gebyr på 2.000 kr., jf. § 19, stk. 1. Stk. 7. For publicering af europæisk patentskrift i henhold til § 77, stk. 2, betales et gebyr på 2.000 kr .
§ 99. For patentansøgning, patent og europæisk patent betales et årsgebyr, jf. § 8, stk. 5, § 40 og § 81,
stk. 1, med følgende beløb pr. år: 1) 1. gebyrår: 500 kr.
2) 2. gebyrår: 500 kr.
3) 3. gebyrår: 500 kr.
4) 4. gebyrår: 1.100 kr.
5) 5. gebyrår: 1.250 kr.
6) 6. gebyrår: 1.400 kr.
7) 7. gebyrår: 1.600 kr.
8) 8. gebyrår: 1.800 kr.
9) 9. gebyrår: 2.050 kr.
10) 10. gebyrår: 2.300 kr.
11) 11. gebyrår: 2.550 kr.
12) 12. gebyrår: 2.800 kr.
13) 13. gebyrår: 3.050 kr.
14) 14. gebyrår: 3.300 kr.
15) 15. gebyrår: 3.600 kr.
16) 16. gebyrår: 3.900 kr.
17) 17. gebyrår: 4.200 kr.
18) 18. gebyrår: 4.500 kr.
19) 19. gebyrår: 4.800 kr.
20) 20. gebyrår: 5.100 kr.
Stk. 2. Årsgebyrer, der betales efter forfaldsdagen og indtil 6 måneder derefter, forhøjes med 20 pct.
§ 100. For fremsættelse af indsigelse mod et meddelt patent betales 2.500 kr ., jf. § 21, stk. 1.
Stk. 2. For begæring om administrativ omprøvning betales 7.000 kr., jf. § 53 b, stk. 6.
Stk. 3. For publicering af ændret patentskrift i henhold til § 23, stk. 3, § 53 d, stk. 3, eller § 53 e, stk. 2,
betales et gebyr på 2.000 kr.
Stk. 4. For publicering af ændret patentskrift i henhold til § 86, stk. 1, betales et gebyr på 2.000 kr .
§ 101. For anmodning om genoptagelse af en patentansøgning betales 700 kr., jf. § 15, stk. 3, og § 19,
stk. 4.
Stk. 2. For anmodning om genoprettelse af en patentansøgning eller et meddelt patent betales 3.000 kr.,
jf. § 72.
Stk. 3. For en skriftlig vejledende udtalelse i henhold til § 65 b, stk. 2, betales 1.500 kr .
§ 102. For Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsens ekspedition i sager vedrørende indlevering af international
patentansøgning betales 1.500 kr., jf. § 28.
23
§ 103. For ansøgning om supplerende beskyttelsescertifikat betales 3.000 kr., jf. § 91, stk. 2. For ansøg‐
ning om forlængelse af supplerende beskyttelsescertifikat betales 2.500 kr .
Stk. 2. For supplerende beskyttelsescertifikat betales et årsgebyr på 5.100 kr. pr. påbegyndt gebyrår, jf. §
91, stk. 2. Årsgebyrer, der betales efter forfaldsdagen og indtil 6 måneder derefter, forhøjes med 20 pct.
Stk. 3. For anmodning om genoptagelse af en ansøgning om supplerende beskyttelsescertifikat betales
600 kr., jf. § 91, stk. 2.
Stk. 4. For anmodning om genoprettelse af en ansøgning om supplerende beskyttelsescertifikat eller ud‐
stedte rettigheder betales 3.000 kr., jf. § 91, stk. 2.
Stk. 5. For begæring om administrativ omprøvning betales 1.500 kr., jf. § 91, stk. 2.
§ 104. Gebyrer indbetalt i henhold til §§ 98-103 tilbagebetales ikke, når betalingen er foretaget rettidigt.
Stk. 2. Gebyrer, der ikke er betalt i rette tid, eller som ved fristens udløb er betalt med utilstrækkeligt
beløb med den følge, at betalingen ikke kan godkendes, tilbagebetales.
Stk. 3. Afviser Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen den behandling, der er betalt for, vil der ske tilbagebeta‐
ling af gebyrer indbetalt i forbindelse med behandlingen.
§ 105. Gebyrerne anført i §§ 98-103 er angivet i 2011-niveau. Stk. 2. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen kan regulere beløbene anført i §§ 98-103 i overensstemmelse
med den generelle pris- og lønudvikling, der anvendes på finansloven. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen of‐fentliggør de gældende gebyrer i en prisliste.
§ 106. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen kan overføre indtægter fra gebyrer, der er opkrævet i medfør af
denne lov, til dækning af omkostninger forbundet med Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsens administration af andre områder under styrelsens ressortområde, hvor der opkræves gebyrer .
Stk. 2. Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen kan overføre indtægter fra gebyrer, der er opkrævet i medfør af
denne lov, til Nævnenes Hus til dækning af omkostninger forbundet med Ankenævnet for Patenter og Va‐remærker.
Kapitel 11
Ikrafttrædelses- og overgangsbestemmelser
1. Denne lov træder i kraft den 1. januar 1968. Samtidig ophæves patentloven, jf. lovbekendtgørelse nr.
361 af 19. december 1958. Endvidere ophæves § 4 i lov nr. 142 af 29. april 1955 om arbejdstageres opfin‐delser.
Stk. 2. Patent på opfindelser af næringsmidler og lægemidler samt patent på fremgangsmåder ved til‐
virkning af næringsmidler kan dog først meddeles efter et af erhvervsministeren fastsat senere tidspunkt.
2. Patent, der er meddelt eller meddeles i henhold til den hidtidige lovgivning, kan kun kendes ugyldigt
i overensstemmelse med bestemmelserne i den hidtidige patentlovs § 24.
Lov nr. 1533 af 18. december 2018 om ændring af varemærkeloven og forskellige andre love og om
ophævelse af fællesmærkeloven (Behandling af ansøgninger, registreringshindringer, gengivelse af vare‐
mærker, varer i transit, overførsel af gebyrindtægter m.v.)
4) indeholder følgende ikrafttrædelsesbestem‐
melse:
§ 8
Stk. 1. Loven træder i kraft den 1. januar 2019.
24
Stk. 2. (Stk. 2-7 udelades)
Patent- og Varemærkestyrelsen, den 29. januar 2019
Sune Stampe Sørensen
/ Anne Rejnhold Jørgensen
25
1) Loven indeholder bestemmelser, der gennemfører dele af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2004/48/EF af 29. april 2004 om håndhævelsen af intel‐
lektuelle ejendomsrettigheder (EU-Tidende 2004 nr. L 195, s. 15). Loven indeholder bestemmelser, der gennemfører dele af Europa-Parlamentets og Rå‐dets direktiv 2001/82/EF om oprettelse af en fællesskabskodeks for veterinærlægemidler (EF-Tidende 2001 nr. L 311, s. 1), som ændret ved direktiv 2004/28/EF (EU-Tidende 2004 nr. L 136, s. 58) og dele af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2001/83/EF om oprettelse af en fællesskabskodeks for humanmedicinske lægemidler (EF-Tidende 2001 nr. L 311, s. 67), som ændret ved direktiv 2004/27/EF (EU-Tidende 2004 nr. L 136, s. 34).
26
2) Denne lovbekendtgørelse indeholder bemærkninger om ikrafttrædelses- og overgangsbestemmelser for love, der er vedtaget i folketingsåret 2018/2019.
Ikrafttrædelses- og overgangsbestemmelser for tidligere vedtagne ændringer af patentloven findes i lovbekendtgørelse nr. 221 af 26. februar 2017. Den
nedenfor angivne ændring som følge af lov nr. 1533 af 18. december 2018 gælder ikke for Færøerne og Grønland, men kan ved kongelig anordning sættes
helt eller delvist i kraft for Færøerne og Grønland med de ændringer , som de færøske og grønlandske forhold tilsiger.
3) Kapitel 10 C om EF-patent m.v. er ikke indarbejdet i denne lovbekendtgørelse, da tidspunktet for ikrafttræden af de ændringer, der følger af § 1, nr. 34, i
lov nr. 1057 af 23. december 1992 om ændring af patentloven (Ratifikation af aftale om EF-patenter m.v.) fastsættes af erhvervsministeren, jf. § 2, stk. 2, i lov nr. 1057 af 23. december 1992.
4) Lovændringen vedrører § 106.
27
| 13,593
| 95,153
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/306072_2024_TBT_USA_final_measure_24_03124_00_e.pdf
|
306072_2024_TBT_USA_final_measure_24_03124_00_e
|
37778 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 430
[EERE 2017–BT–STD–0019]
RIN 1904–AD91
Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Consumer Water Heaters
AGENCY : Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.
ACTION : Final rule.
SUMMARY : The Energy Policy and
Conservation Act, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’), prescribes energy conservation standards for various consumer products and certain commercial and industrial equipment, including consumer water heaters. EPCA also requires the U.S. Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’ or ‘‘the Department’’) to periodically determine whether more stringent standards would be technologically feasible and economically justified, and would result in significant energy savings. In this final rule, DOE is adopting amended energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. It has determined that the new and amended energy conservation standards for these products would result in significant conservation of energy, and are technologically feasible and economically justified.
DATES : The effective date of this rule is
July 5, 2024. Compliance with the new and amended standards established for consumer water heaters in this final rule is required on and after May 6, 2029.
ADDRESSES : The docket for this
rulemaking, which includes Federal Register notices, public meeting
attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at www.regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index.
However, not all documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt from public disclosure.
The docket web page can be found at
www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE- 2017-BT-STD-0019. The docket web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :
Ms. Julia Hegarty, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585–0121. Email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Melanie Lampton, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (240) 751– 5157. Email: Melanie.Lampton@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to
review the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287–1445 or by email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :
Table of Contents
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
A. Benefits and Costs to Consumers
B. Impact on Manufacturers C. National Benefits and Costs D. Conclusion
II. Introduction
A. Authority B. Background 1. Current Standards 2. History of Standards Rulemaking for
Consumer Water Heaters
3. Scope of This Final Rule
III. General Discussion
A. General Comments 1. General Support 2. General Opposition 3. Selection of Standards Levels B. Scope of Coverage and Definitions C. Test Procedure D. Technological Feasibility 1. General 2. Maximum Technologically Feasible
Levels
E. Energy Savings 1. Determination of Savings 2. Significance of Savings F. Economic Justification 1. Specific Criteria a. Economic Impact on Manufacturers and
Consumers
b. Savings in Operating Costs Compared To
Increase in Price (LCC and PBP)
c. Energy Savings d. Lessening of Utility or Performance of
Products
e. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition f. Need for National Energy Conservation g. Other Factors 2. Rebuttable Presumption
IV. Methodology and Discussion of Related
Comments
A. Market and Technology Assessment 1. Product Classes a. Circulating Water Heaters b. Low-Temperature Water Heaters
c. Storage-Type and Instantaneous-Type
Product Classes
d. Gas-Fired Water Heaters e. Very Large Gas-Fired Storage Water
Heaters
f. Electric Storage Water Heaters 2. Technology Options B. Screening Analysis 1. Screened-Out Technologies 2. Remaining Technologies C. Engineering Analysis
1. Product Classes With Current UEF-Based
Standards
a. Efficiency Levels b. Design Options c. Cost Analysis d. Shipping Costs e. Cost-Efficiency Results 2. Product Classes Without Current UEF-
Based Standards
a. Crosswalk to Equivalent-Stringency
UEF-Based Standards
b. Consideration of More Stringent
Standards
c. Circulating Water Heaters 3. Manufacturer Selling Price D. Markups Analysis E. Energy Use Analysis 1. Building Sample 2. Hot Water Use Determination 3. Energy Use Determination F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
Analysis
1. Product Cost 2. Installation Cost a. Basic Installation Costs and Inputs b. Gas-Fired and Oil-Fired Storage Water
Heater Installation Costs
c. Heat Pump Water Heater Installation
Costs
3. Annual Energy Consumption 4. Energy Prices 5. Maintenance and Repair Costs 6. Product Lifetime 7. Discount Rates
8. Energy Efficiency Distribution in the No-
New-Standards Case
9. Payback Period Analysis 10. Accounting for Product Switching 11. Analytical Results G. Shipments Analysis 1. Impact of Potential Standards on
Shipments
a. Impact of Consumer Choice for Electric
Storage Water Heaters
b. Impact of Repair vs. Replace H. National Impact Analysis 1. Product Efficiency Trends 2. National Energy Savings 3. Net Present Value Analysis I. Consumer Subgroup Analysis 1. Low-Income Households 2. Senior-Only Households 3. Small Business Subgroup J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 1. Overview 2. Government Regulatory Impact Model
and Key Inputs
a. Manufacturer Production Costs b. Shipments Projections c. Product and Capital Conversion Costs d. Manufacturer Markup Scenarios 3. Discussion of MIA Comments a. Conversion Costs b. Cumulative Regulatory Burden c. Manufacturing Capacity K. Emissions Analysis 1. Air Quality Regulations Incorporated in
DOE’s Analysis
L. Monetizing Emissions Impacts 1. Monetization of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
a. Social Cost of Carbon b. Social Cost of Methane and Nitrous
Oxide
c. Sensitivity Analysis Using Updated SC–
GHG Estimates
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637779 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
1All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the
Energy Act of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27,
2020), which reflect the last statutory amendments
that impact Parts A and A–1 of EPCA.
2For editorial reasons, upon codification in the
U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A. 2. Monetization of Other Emissions
Impacts
M. Utility Impact Analysis
N. Employment Impact Analysis
V. Analytical Results and Conclusions
A. Trial Standard Levels B. Economic Justification and Energy
Savings
1. Economic Impacts on Individual
Consumers
a. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period b. Consumer Subgroup Analysis c. Rebuttable Presumption Payback 2. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers a. Industry Cash Flow Analysis Results
b. Direct Impacts on Employment c. Impacts on Manufacturing Capacity d. Impacts on Subgroups of Manufacturers e. Cumulative Regulatory Burden 3. National Impact Analysis a. National Energy Savings b. Net Present Value of Consumer Costs
and Benefits
c. Indirect Impacts on Employment 4. Impact on Utility or Performance of
Products
5. Impact of Any Lessening of Competition 6. Need of the Nation To Conserve Energy 7. Other Factors 8. Summary of Economic Impacts C. Conclusion 1. Benefits and Burdens of TSLs
Considered for Consumer Water Heater Standards
2. Annualized Benefits and Costs of the
Adopted Standards
3. Conversion Factor Final Rule
Enforcement Policy
4. Severability D. Test Procedure Applicability 1. High-Temperature Testing a. Maximum Tank Temperature b. Verification of Maximum Tank
Temperature
c. Very Small and Large Electric Storage
Water Heaters
d. Optional Representations for Heat Pump
Water Heaters
e. Temporary Mode f. Demand-Response Water Heaters g. Summary of the High-Temperature Test
Method Applicability
2. Circulating Water Heaters a. Separate Storage Tank Requirements b. Product-Specific Enforcement Provisions 3. Water Heaters Less Than 2 Gallons 4. Other Topics
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866,
13563, and 14094
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
1. Need for, and Objectives of, Rule
2. Significant Issues Raised by Public
Comments in Response to the IRFA
3. Description and Estimated Number of
Small Entities Affected
4. Description of Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
5. Significant Alternatives Considered and
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impacts on Small Entities
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 J. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 L. Information Quality M. Congressional Notification
VII. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Synopsis of the Final Rule
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act, Public Law 94–163, as amended
(‘‘EPCA’’),1authorizes DOE to regulate
the energy efficiency of a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291– 6317) Title III, Part B of EPCA
2
established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. (42 U.S.C. 6291– 6309) These products include consumer water heaters, the subject of this rulemaking. As discussed in section II.B.3 of this document, DOE is finalizing standards for all consumer water heaters, with the exception of gas- fired instantaneous water heaters, in this Final Rule.
Pursuant to EPCA, any new or
amended energy conservation standard must be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that DOE determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the new or amended standard must result in significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) EPCA also provides that not later than 6 years after issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE must publish either a notice of determination that standards for the product do not need to be amended, or a notice of proposed rulemaking including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m))
In accordance with these and other
statutory provisions discussed in this document, DOE analyzed the benefits and burdens of six trial standard levels (‘‘TSLs’’) for consumer water heaters. The TSLs and their associated benefits and burdens are discussed in detail in sections V.A through V.C of this document. As discussed in section V.C of this document, DOE has determined that TSL 2 represents the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically justified. The adopted standards, which are expressed in terms of uniform energy factor (‘‘UEF’’), are shown in Table I.1. These standards apply to all products listed in Table I.1 and manufactured in, or imported into, the United States starting on May 6, 2029.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637780 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.000</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table 1.1 Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Water Heaters
Compliance Startin2 May 6, 2029)
Effective Storage Volume Uniform Energy Product Class and Input Rating Draw Pattern
(if avvlicable) Factor*
Verv Small 0.2062 -(0.0020 x V,rr)
< 20 gal Low 0.4893 -(0.0027 x V,rr)
Medium 0.5758 -(0.0023 x V,rr)
Hhrh 0.6586 -(0.0020 x V,rr)
Very Small 0.3925 -(0.0020 X V,rr)
2: 20 gal and :S 55 gal Low 0.6451 -(0.0019 x V,rr)
Medium 0.7046- (0.0017 X V,rr)
Pas-fired Storage Water Heater Hi!!h 0.7424 -(0.0013 X V,rr)
Verv Small 0.6470 -(0.0006 x V,rr)
>55 gal and :S 100 gal Low 0.7689 -(0.0005 x V,rr)
Medium 0.7897 -(0.0004 x V,rr)
Hi~h 0.8072 -(0.0003 x V,rr)
Verv Small 0.1482 -(0.0007 x V,rr)
> 100 gal Low 0.4342 -(0.0017 x V,rr)
Medium 0.5596 -(0.0020 x V,,r)
Hi!!h 0.6658 -(0.0019 x V,,r)
Veiy Small 0.2909 -(0.0012 x V,,r)
Low 0.5730 -(0.0016 x V,,r)
:S 50 gal Medium 0.6478 -(0.0016 X V,ff)
bil-fired Storage Water Heater High 0.7215 -(0.0014 x V,,r)
Verv Small 0.1580 -(0.0009 x V,,r)
> 50 gal Low 0.4390 -(0.0020 x V,,r)
Medium 0.5389 -(0.0021 x V,,r)
High 0.6172 -(0.0018 x V,,r)
Veiy Small 0.5925 -(0.0059 x V,ff)
K,'ery Small Electric Storage Water < 20 gal Low 0.8642 -(0.0030 x V,,r)
Heater Medium 0.9096 -(0.0020 x V,,r)
High 0.9430 -(0.0012 x V,,r)
Small Electric Storage Water Heater 2: 20 gal and :S 35 gal Verv Small 0.8808 -(0.0008 x V,,r)
Low 0.9254 -(0.0003 x V,,r)
> 20 and :S 55 gal Verv Small 2.30
Low 2.30 ( excluding small electric Medium 2.30 storage water heaters) Hi~h 2.30
Verv Small 2.50
~lectric Storage Water Heaters > 55 gal and :Sl20 gal Low 2.50
Medium 2.50
Hi!!h 2.50
Veiy Small 0.3574 -(0.0012 X V,ff)
> 120 gal Low 0.7897 -(0.0019 x V,,r)
Medium 0.8884 -(0.0017 X V,ff)
Hi!!h 0.9575 -(0.0013 x V,,r)
< 20 gal Verv Small 0.5925 -(0.0059 X V,ff)
Low 0.8642 -(0.0030 X V,ff) rrabletop Water Heater Veiy Small 0.6323 -(0.0058 X V,ff) 2: 20 gal Low 0.9188 -(0.0031 X V,ff)
Very Small 0.80
~nstantaneous Gas-fired Water <2 gal and >50,000 Btu/h Low 0.81
Heater** Medium 0.81
Hi!!h 0.81
OCnstantaneous Oil-fired Water Heater < 2 gal and :S 210,000 Verv Small 0.61
Btu/h Low 0.61 37781 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
3The average LCC savings refer to consumers that
are affected by a standard and are measured relative
to the efficiency distribution in the no-new- standards case, which depicts the market in the compliance year in the absence of new or amended
standards (see section IV.F.9 of this document). The
simple PBP, which is designed to compare specific
efficiency levels, is measured relative to the baseline product (see section IV.C of this
document).
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
A. Benefits and Costs to Consumers
Table I.2 summarizes DOE’s
evaluation of the economic impacts of
the adopted standards on consumers of consumer water heaters, as measured by
the average life-cycle cost (‘‘LCC’’) savings and the simple payback period (‘‘PBP’’).
3The average LCC savings are
positive for all product classes, and the PBP is less than the average lifetime of consumer water heaters, which is estimated to be about 15 years for storage water heaters (see section IV.F of
this document).
DOE’s analysis of the impacts of the
adopted standards on consumers is described in section IV.F of this document. B. Impact on Manufacturers
The industry net present value
(‘‘INPV’’) is the sum of the discounted cash flows to the industry from the base year through the end of the analysis period (2023–2059). Using a real discount rate of 9.6 percent, DOE
estimates that the INPV for
manufacturers of consumer water heaters in the case without amended standards is $1,478.8 million in 2022$. Under the adopted standards, DOE estimates the change in INPV to range
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.001</GPH> ER06MY24.002</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Medium 0.61
High 0.61
Very Small 0.2780 -(0.0022 X V,ff)
;::: 2 gal and :S 210,000 Low 0.5151 -(0.0023 X V,ff)
Btu/h Medium 0.5687 -(0.0021 X V,ff)
High 0.6147 -(0.0017 X V,ff)
Very Small 0.91
<2 gal Low 0.91
Medium 0.91
Instantaneous Electric Water Heater High 0.92
Very Small 0.8086 -(0.0050 X V,ff)
;::: 2 gal Low 0.9123 -(0.0020 X V,ff)
Medium 0.9252 -(0.0015 X V,ff)
High 0.9350 -(0.0011 X V,ff)
Very Small 1.0136 -(0.0028 X V,ff)
Grid-Enabled Water Heater > 75 gal Low 0.9984 -(0.0014 X V,ff)
Medium 0.9853 -(0.0010 X V,ff)
High 0.9720 -(0.0007 X V,ff)
* Veff is the Effective Storage Volume (in gallons), as determined pursuant to 10 CFR 429 .17.
** As discussed in section 11.B.3 of this document, DOE is still considering amended energy conservation
standards for gas-fired instantaneous water heaters.
Table 1.2 Impacts of Adopted Energy Conservation Standards on Consumers of
Consumer Water Heaters
Effective Storage Volume Average LCC Savings Simple Payback Product Class and Input Rating
(if annlicable) 2022$ vears
Gas-fired Storage Water ;:::20 gal and :S55 gal 29 9.1 Heater
Oil-fired Storage Water :S50 gal 141 6.5 Heater
Small Electric Storage
Water Heaters NIA NIA ;:::20 gal and :S35 gal
Electric Storage Water (<51 gal FHR)
Heaters ;:::20 gal and :S55 gal,
Excluding Small Electric 859 5.6
Storage Water Heaters
>55 gal and :S120 gal 458 0.2 37782 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
4All monetary values in this document are
expressed in 2022 dollars.
5The quantity refers to full-fuel-cycle (FFC)
energy savings. FFC energy savings includes the
energy consumed in extracting, processing, and transporting primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas,
petroleum fuels), and, thus, presents a more complete picture of the impacts of energy efficiency standards. For more information on the FFC metric, see section IV.H.1 of this document. 6A metric ton is equivalent to 1.1 short tons.
Results for emissions other than CO 2are presented
in short tons.
7DOE calculated emissions reductions relative to
the no-new-standards-case, which reflects key
assumptions in the Annual Energy Outlook 2023 (‘‘AEO2023’’). AEO2023 reflects, to the extent
possible, laws and regulations adopted through mid-November 2022, including the Inflation Reduction Act. See section IV.K of this document
for further discussion of AEO2023 assumptions that
affect air pollutant emissions.
8To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG
emissions this analysis uses the interim estimates
presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Intereim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the IWG. (‘‘February 2021 SC–GHG TSD’’). www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Technical/ SupportDocument_ SocialCostof
CarbonMethaneNitrousOxide.pdf. 9U.S. EPA. Estimating the Benefit per Ton of
Reducing Directly Emitted PM 2.5, PM 2.5Precursors
and Ozone Precursors from 21 Sectors. Available at www.epa.gov/benmap/estimating-benefit-ton- reducing-pm25-precursors-21-sectors .
10DOE estimates the economic value of these
emissions reductions resulting from the considered TSLs for the purpose of complying with the requirements of Executive Order 12866. from ¥18.6 percent to 1.9 percent,
which is a loss of $275.3 million to a
gain of $28.2 million. In order to bring products into compliance with amended standards, it is estimated that industry will incur total conversion costs of $239.8 million.
DOE’s analysis of the impacts of the
adopted standards on manufacturers is described in sections IV.J and V.B.2 of this document.
C. National Benefits and Costs
4
DOE’s analyses indicate that the
adopted energy conservation standards
for consumer water heaters would save a significant amount of energy. Relative to the case without amended standards, the lifetime energy savings for consumer water heaters purchased in the 30-year period that begins in the anticipated year of compliance with the amended standards (2030–2059), amount to 17.6 quadrillion British thermal units (‘‘Btu’’), or quads.
5This represents a
savings of 10 percent relative to the energy use of these products in the case without amended standards (referred to as the ‘‘no-new-standards case’’).
The cumulative net present value
(‘‘NPV’’) of total consumer benefits of the standards for consumer water heaters ranges from $25 billion (at a 7- percent discount rate) to $82 billion (at a 3-percent discount rate). This NPV expresses the estimated total value of future operating-cost savings minus the estimated increased product and installation costs for consumer water heaters purchased during the period 2030–2059. In addition, the adopted standards for
consumer water heaters are projected to
yield significant environmental benefits. DOE estimates that the standards will result in cumulative emission reductions (over the same period as for energy savings) of 332 million metric tons (‘‘Mt’’)
6of carbon dioxide (‘‘CO 2’’),
90 thousand tons of sulfur dioxide (‘‘SO
2’’), 665 thousand tons of nitrogen
oxides (‘‘NO X’’), 3,058 thousand tons of
methane (‘‘CH 4’’), 2.9 thousand tons of
nitrous oxide (‘‘N 2O’’), and 0.6 tons of
mercury (‘‘Hg’’).7
DOE estimates the value of climate
benefits from a reduction in greenhouse gases (‘‘GHG’’) using four different estimates of the social cost of CO
2(‘‘SC–
CO 2’’), the social cost of methane (‘‘SC–
CH 4’’), and the social cost of nitrous
oxide (‘‘SC–N 2O’’). Together these
represent the social cost of GHG (‘‘SC– GHG’’). DOE used interim SC–GHG values (in terms of benefit per ton of GHG avoided) developed by an Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases (‘‘IWG’’).
8The derivation of these values
is discussed in section IV.L of this document. For presentational purposes, the climate benefits associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3-percent discount rate are estimated to be $17 billion. DOE
does not have a single central SC–GHG point estimate and it emphasizes the value of considering the benefits calculated using all four sets of SC–GHG estimates. DOE notes, however, that the adopted standards would be economically justified even without inclusion of monetized benefits of reduced GHG emissions.
DOE estimated the monetary health
benefits of SO
2and NO Xemissions
reductions, using benefit per ton estimates from the Environmental Protection Agency,
9as discussed in
section IV.L of this document. DOE estimated the present value of the health benefits would be $12 billion using a 7- percent discount rate, and $33 billion using a 3-percent discount rate.
10DOE
is currently only monetizing health benefits from changes in ambient fine particulate matter (PM
2.5)
concentrations from two precursors (SO
2and NO X), and from changes in
ambient ozone from one precursor (for NO
X), but will continue to assess the
ability to monetize other effects such as health benefits from reductions in direct PM
2.5emissions.
Table I.3 summarizes the monetized
benefits and costs expected to result from the amended standards for consumer water heaters. There are other important unquantified effects, including certain unquantified climate benefits, unquantified public health benefits from the reduction of toxic air pollutants and other emissions, unquantified energy security benefits, and distributional effects, among others.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637783 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.003</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table 1.3 Summary of Monetized Benefits and Costs of Adopted Energy
Conservation Standards for Consumer Water Heaters
Billion $2022
3% discount rate
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 124
Climate Benefits* 17
Health Benefits** 33
Total Benefitst 175
Consumer Incremental Product Costst 42
Net Benefits 132
Change in Producer Cashflow (INPVft (0.28) -0.03
7% discount rate
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 47
Climate Benefits* (3% discount rate) 17
Health Benefits** 12
Total Benefitst 76
Consumer Incremental Product Costst 22
Net Benefits 54
Change in Producer Cashflow (INPV)H (0.28) -0.03
Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with consumer water heaters shipped during
the
period 2030-2059. These results include consumer, climate, and health benefits that accrue after 2059
from the products shipped during the period 2030-2059.
* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the social cost of carbon (SC-CO2),
methane (SC-CH4), and nitrous oxide (SC-N2O) (model average at
2.5 percent, 3 percent, and 5 percent
discount rates; 95th percentile at 3 percent discount rate) (see section IV.L of this document). Together
these represent the global SC-GHG. For presentational purposes of this table, the climate benefits
associated with the average SC-GHG at a 3 percent discount rate are shown; however, DOE emphasizes the
value of considering the benefits calculated using all four sets of SC-GHG estimates. To monetize the
benefits ofreducing GHG emissions, this analysis uses the interim estimates presented in the Technical
Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates Under Executive
Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the IWG.
** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOx and SO2. DOE is currently only
monetizing (for SO2 and NOx) PM2.s precursor health benefits and (for NOx) ozone precursor health
benefits, but will continue to assess the ability to monetize other effects such as health benefits from
reductions in direct PM2.s emissions. See section IV.L of this document for more details. t Total and net benefits include those consumer, climate, and health benefits that can be quantified and
monetized. For presentation purposes, total and net benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are
presented using the average SC-GHG with 3-percent discount rate.
t Costs include incremental equipment costs as well as installation costs.
H Operating Cost Savings are calculated based on the life cycle costs analysis and national impact analysis
as discussed in detail below. See sections IV.F and IV.Hof this document. DOE's national impacts
analysis includes all impacts (both costs and benefits) along the distribution chain beginning with the
increased costs to the manufacturer to manufacture the product and ending with the increase in price
experienced by the consumer. DOE also separately conducts a detailed analysis on the impacts on
manufacturers (i.e., manufacturer impact analysis, or "MIA"). See section IV.J of this document. In the 37784 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
11To convert the time-series of costs and benefits
into annualized values, DOE calculated a present
value in 2022, the year used for discounting the NPV of total consumer costs and savings. For the benefits, DOE calculated a present value associated with each year’s shipments in the year in which the shipments occur (e.g., 2020 or 2030), and then
discounted the present value from each year to 2022. Using the present value, DOE then calculated the fixed annual payment over a 30-year period, starting in the compliance year, that yields the same present value.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
The benefits and costs of the proposed
standards can also be expressed in terms
of annualized values. The monetary values for the total annualized net benefits are (1) the reduced consumer operating costs, minus (2) the increase in product purchase prices and installation costs, plus (3) the value of climate and health benefits of emission reductions, all annualized.
11
The national operating cost savings
are domestic private U.S. consumer monetary savings that occur as a result of purchasing the covered products and are measured for the lifetime of consumer water heaters shipped during the period 2030–2059. The benefits associated with reduced emissions achieved as a result of the adopted standards are also calculated based on the lifetime of consumer water heaters shipped during the period 2030–2059. Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are presented using the average GHG social costs with 3-percent discount rate. Estimates of total benefits are presented for all four SC–GHG value discount rates in section IV.L.1 of this document.
Table I.4 presents the total estimated
monetized benefits and costs associated with the proposed standard, expressed in terms of annualized values. The results under the primary estimate are as follows.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs and health benefits from reduced NO
Xand SO 2
emissions, and the 3-percent discount rate case for climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions, the estimated cost of the standards adopted in this rule is $2,623 million per year in increased equipment costs, while the estimated annual benefits are $5,655 million in reduced equipment operating costs, $1,051 in monetized climate benefits, and 1,416 in monetized health benefits. In this case, the net benefit would amount to $5,499 per year.
Using a 3-percent discount rate for all
benefits and costs, the estimated cost of the standards is $2,586 million per year in increased equipment costs, while the estimated annual benefits are $7,566 million in reduced operating costs, $1,051 million in monetized climate benefits, and $2,033 million in monetized health benefits. In this case, the net benefit would amount to $8,065 million per year.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.004</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6detailed MIA, DOE models manufacturers' pricing decisions based on assumptions regarding investments,
conversion costs, cashflow, and margins. The MIA produces a range of impacts, which is the rule's
expected impact on the INPV. The change in INPV is the present value of all changes in industry cash
flow, including changes in production costs, capital expenditures, and manufacturer profit margins. Change
in INPV is calculated using the industry weighted average cost of capital value of9.6 percent that is
estimated in the manufacturer impact analysis (see chapter 12 of the final rule technical support document
("TSD") for a complete description of the industry weighted average cost of capital). For consumer water
heaters, the change in INPV ranges from -$275 million to $28 million. DOE accounts for that range of
likely impacts in analyzing whether a trial standard level is economically justified. See section V.C of this
document. DOE is presenting the range of impacts to the INPV under two scenarios: the Preservation of
Gross Margin scenario, which is the manufacturer markup scenario used in the calculation of Consumer
Operating Cost Savings in this table; and the Preservation of Operating Profit scenario, where DOE
assumed manufacturers would not be able to increase per-unit operating profit in proportion to increases in
manufacturer production costs. DOE includes the range of estimated INPV in the above table, drawing on
the MIA explained further in section IV.J of this document to provide additional context for assessing the
estimated impacts of this final rule to society, including potential changes in production and consumption,
which is consistent with OMB's Circular A-4 and E.O. 12866. IfDOE were to include the INPV into the
net benefit calculation for this final rule, the net benefits would range from $131.7 billion to $132.0 billion
at 3-percent discount rate and would range from $53.7 billion to $54.0 billion at 7-percent discount rate. 37785 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.005</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table 1.4 Annualized Benefits and Costs of Adopted Standards for Consumer Water
Heaters
Million 2022$/year
Primary Estimate Low-Net-Benefits High-Net-Benefits
Estimate Estimate
3% discount rate
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 7,566 7,078 8,065
Climate Benefits* 1,051 1,039 1,063
Health Benefits** 2,033 2,009 2,058
Total Benefitst 10,650 10,125 11,186
Consumer Incremental Product Costs; 2,586 3,023 2,398
Net Benefits 8,065 7,102 8,788
Change in Producer Cashflow (INPVfl (28) - 3 (28)-3 (28) - 3
7% discount rate
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 5,655 5,294 6,024
Climate Benefits* (3% discount rate) 1,051 1,039 1,063
Health Benefits** 1,416 1,400 1,432
Total Benefitst 8,122 7,732 8,519
Consumer Incremental Product Costs; 2,623 2,984 2,467
Net Benefits 5,499 4,748 6,052
Change in Producer Cashflow (INPV)i* (28) - 3 (28) - 3 (28) - 3
Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with consumer water heaters shipped during the
period 2030-2059. These results include consumer, climate, and health benefits that accrue after 2059
from the products shipped during the period 2030-2059. The Primary, Low Net Benefits, and High Net
Benefits Estimates utilize projections of energy prices from the AE0202 3 Reference case, Low Economic
Growth case, and High Economic Growth case, respectively. In addition, incremental equipment costs
reflect a medium decline rate in the Primary Estimate, a low decline rate in the Low Net Benefits Estimate,
and a high decline rate in the High Net Benefits Estimate. The methods used to derive projected price
trends are explained in sections IV.F.1 and IV.F.4 of this document. Note that the Benefits and Costs may
not sum to the Net Benefits due to rounding.
* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the global SC-GHG (see section IV.L of
this document). For presentational purposes of this table, the climate benefits associated with the average
SC-GHG at a 3 percent discount rate are shown; however, DOE emphasizes the value of considering the benefits
calculated using all four sets of SC-GHG estimates. To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, this analysis
uses the interim estimates presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous
Oxide Interim Estimates Under £-.:ecutive Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the IWG.
** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOx and SO2. DOE is currently only
monetizing (for SO2 and NOx) PM2_5 precursor health benefits and (for NOx) ozone precursor health
benefits, but will continue to assess the ability to monetize other eITecls such as health benefits from
reductions in direct PM2.s emissions. See section IV.L of this document for more details. t Total benefits for both the 3-percent and ?-percent cases are presented using the average SC-GHG with 3-
percent discount rate.
t Costs include incremental equipment costs as well as installation costs.
t:~ Operating Cost Savings are calculated based on the life cycle costs analysis and national impact analysis
as discussed in detail below. See sections IV.F and IV.Hof this document. DOE's national impacts 37786 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
12Procedures, Interpretations, and Policies for
Consideration in New or Revised Energy
Conservation Standards and Test Procedures for Consumer Products and Commercial/Industrial Equipment, 86 FR 70892, 70901 (Dec. 13, 2021).
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
DOE’s analysis of the national impacts
of the adopted standards is described in
sections IV.H, IV.K, and IV.L of this document.
D. Conclusion
DOE concludes that the standards
adopted in this final rule represent the
maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically justified, and would result in the significant conservation of energy. Specifically with regards to technological feasibility, products achieving these standard levels are already commercially available for all product classes covered by this rule. As for economic justification, DOE’s analysis shows that the estimated benefits of the standards exceed, to a great extent, the estimated burdens of the standards.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs and NO
X
and SO 2reduction benefits, and a 3-
percent discount rate case for GHG social costs, the estimated cost of the standards for consumer water heaters is $2,623 million per year in increased product costs, while the estimated annual benefits are $5,655 million in reduced product operating costs, $1,051 million in climate benefits, and $1,416 million in health benefits. The net benefit amounts to $5,499 million per year.
The significance of energy savings
offered by a new or amended energy conservation standard cannot be
determined without knowledge of the specific circumstances surrounding a given rulemaking.
12For example, some
covered products and equipment have most of their energy consumption occur during periods of peak energy demand. The impacts of these products on the energy infrastructure can be more pronounced than products with relatively constant demand. Accordingly, DOE evaluates the significance of energy savings on a case- by-case basis.
As previously mentioned, the
standards are projected to result in estimated cumulative national energy savings of 17.6 quads (full-fuel cycle (‘‘FFC’’)), the equivalent of the primary annual energy use of 116 million homes. In addition, they are projected to reduce CO
2emissions by 332 Mt. Based on
these findings, DOE has determined the energy savings from the standard levels adopted in this final rule are ‘‘significant’’ within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B). A more detailed discussion of the basis for these conclusions is contained in the remainder of this document and the accompanying TSD. II. Introduction
The following section briefly
discusses the statutory authority
underlying this final rule, as well as some of the relevant historical background related to the establishment of standards for consumer water heaters.
A. Authority
EPCA authorizes DOE to regulate the
energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain industrial equipment. Title III, Part B of EPCA established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. These products include consumer water heaters, the subject of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(4)) EPCA prescribed
energy conservation standards for these products (42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(1)), and directs DOE to conduct future rulemakings to determine whether to amend these standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(4)) EPCA further provides that, not later than 6 years after the issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE must publish either a notice of determination that standards for the product do not need to be amended, or a NOPR including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1))
The energy conservation program
under EPCA, consists essentially of four parts: (1) testing, (2) labeling, (3) the establishment of Federal energy conservation standards, and (4)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.006</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6analysis includes all impacts (both costs and benefits) along the distribution chain beginning with the
increased costs to the manufacturer to manufacture the product and ending with the increase in price
experienced by the consumer. DOE also separately conducts a detailed analysis on the impacts on
manufacturers (i.e., manufacturer impact analysis, or "MIA"). See section IV.J of this document. In the
detailed MIA, DOE models manufacturers' pricing decisions based on assumptions regarding investments,
conversion costs, cashflow, and margins. The MIA produces a range of impacts, which is the rule's
expected impact on the INPV. The change in INPV is the present value of all changes in industry cash
flow, including changes in production costs, capital expenditures, and manufacturer profit margins. The
annualized change in INPV is calculated using the industry weighted average cost of capital value of 9 .6
percent that is estimated in the manufacturer impact analysis (see chapter 12 of the final rule TSD for a
complete description of the industry weighted average cost of capital). For consumer water heaters, the
annualized change in INPV ranges from -$28 million to $3 million. DOE accounts for that range of likely
impacts in analyzing whether a trial standard level is economically justified. See section V.C of this
document. DOE is presenting the range of impacts to the INPV under two scenarios: the Preservation of
Gross Margin scenario, which is the manufacturer markup scenario used in the calculation of Consumer
Operating Cost Savings in this table; and the Preservation of Operating Profit scenario, where DOE
assumed manufacturers would not be able to increase per-unit operating profit in proportion to increases in
manufacturer production costs. DOE includes the range of estimated annualized change in INPV in the
above table, drawing on the MIA explained further in section IV.J of this document to provide additional
context for assessing the estimated impacts of this final rule to society, including potential changes in
production and consumption, which is consistent with OMB's Circular A-4 and E.O. 12866. IfDOE were
to include the INPV into the annualized net benefit calculation for this final rule, the annualized net
benefits would range from $8,037 million to $8,068 million at 3-percent discount rate and would range
from $5,471 million to $5,502 million at 7-percent discount rate. 37787 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of the EPCA specifically include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6296).
Federal energy efficiency
requirements for covered products established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297(a)–(c)) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption in limited instances for particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures and other provisions set forth under EPCA. (See 42 U.S.C.
6297(d))
Subject to certain statutory criteria
and conditions, DOE is required to develop test procedures to measure the energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of each covered product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A) and 42 U.S.C. 6295(r)) Manufacturers of covered products must use the prescribed DOE test procedure as the basis for certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted under EPCA and when making representations to the public regarding the energy use or efficiency of those products. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c) and 6295(s)) Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the products comply with standards adopted pursuant to EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) The DOE test procedures for consumer water heaters appear at title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (‘‘CFR’’) part 430, subpart B, appendix E (‘‘appendix E’’).
DOE must follow specific statutory
criteria for prescribing new or amended standards for covered products, including consumer water heaters. Any
new or amended standard for a covered product must be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that the Secretary of Energy determines is technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, DOE may not adopt any standard that would not result in the significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3))
Moreover, DOE may not prescribe a
standard (1) for certain products, including consumer water heaters, if no test procedure has been established for the product, or (2) if DOE determines by rule that the standard is not technologically feasible or economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(A)–(B))
In deciding whether a proposed standard is economically justified, DOE must determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed its burdens. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) DOE must make this determination after receiving comments on the proposed standard, and by considering, to the greatest extent practicable, the following seven statutory factors:
(1) The economic impact of the standard
on manufacturers and consumers of the products subject to the standard;
(2) The savings in operating costs
throughout the estimated average life of the covered products in the type (or class) compared to any increase in the price, initial charges, or maintenance expenses for the covered products that are likely to result from the standard;
(3) The total projected amount of energy (or
as applicable, water) savings likely to result directly from the standard;
(4) Any lessening of the utility or the
performance of the covered products likely to result from the standard;
(5) The impact of any lessening of
competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from the standard;
(6) The need for national energy and water
conservation; and
(7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy
(‘‘Secretary’’) considers relevant.
(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)–(VII))
Further, EPCA, as codified,
establishes a rebuttable presumption that a standard is economically justified if the Secretary finds that the additional cost to the consumer of purchasing a product complying with an energy conservation standard level will be less than three times the value of the energy savings during the first year that the consumer will receive as a result of the standard, as calculated under the applicable test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii))
EPCA, as codified, also contains what
is known as an ‘‘anti-backsliding’’ provision, which prevents the Secretary from prescribing any amended standard that either increases the maximum allowable energy use or decreases the minimum required energy efficiency of a covered product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Also, the Secretary may not prescribe an amended or new standard if interested persons have established by a preponderance of the evidence that the standard is likely to result in the unavailability in the United States in any covered product type (or class) of
performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as those generally available in the United States. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4))
Additionally, EPCA specifies
requirements when promulgating an energy conservation standard for a covered product that has two or more subcategories. DOE must specify a different standard level for a type or class of products that has the same function or intended use if DOE determines that products within such group (A) consume a different kind of energy from that consumed by other covered products within such type (or class); or (B) have a capacity or other performance-related feature which other products within such type (or class) do not have and such feature justifies a higher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1)) In determining whether a performance-related feature justifies a different standard for a group of products, DOE must consider such factors as the utility to the consumer of such a feature and other factors DOE deems appropriate. Id. Any rule
prescribing such a standard must include an explanation of the basis on which such higher or lower level was established. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2))
Finally, pursuant to the amendments
contained in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 110–140, any final rule for new or amended energy conservation standards promulgated after July 1, 2010, is required to address standby mode and off mode energy use. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) Specifically, when DOE adopts a standard for a covered product after that date, it must, if justified by the criteria for adoption of standards under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)), incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into a single standard, or, if that is not feasible, adopt a separate standard for such energy use for that product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)(A)–(B)) In this rulemaking, DOE is applying the UEF metric (which addresses standby mode and off mode energy use) to all product classes of consumer water heaters, including those product classes for which there are no currently applicable UEF-based standards.
B. Background 1. Current Standards
As directed by EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6295(e)(4)), DOE conducted two cycles
of rulemakings to determine whether to amend the statutory standards for consumer water heaters found in 42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(1). The most recent rulemaking from April 2010 resulted in amended standards using the energy factor (‘‘EF’’) metric originally prescribed by EPCA with a requirement for compliance starting on April 16, 2015. 75 FR 20112 (the ‘‘April 2010 Final Rule’’). Later amendments to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637788 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
13The requirement for a consumer water heater
test procedure using uniform energy factor as a
metric, as well as the requirement for DOE to undertake a conversion factor rulemaking to translate existing consumer water heater standards denominated in terms of EF to ones denominated in terms of UEF, were part of the amendments to
EPCA contained in the American Energy
Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act (AEMTCA), Public Law 112–210 (Dec. 18, 2012). EPCA directed DOE to establish a
uniform efficiency metric for consumer water heaters (see 42 U.S.C.
6295(e)(5)(B)).
13The Federal test procedure was revised to use a new
metric, UEF, in a final rule published on July 11, 2014 (the ‘‘July 2014 UEF TP Final Rule’’). 79 FR 40542. In a final rule published in the Federal Register on December 29, 2016, the existing EF- based energy conservation standards were then translated from EF to UEF using a ‘‘conversion factor’’ method for water heater basic models that were in existence at the time. 81 FR 96204 (‘‘December 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule’’).
These standards are set forth in DOE’s
regulations at 10 CFR 430.32(d) and are repeated in Table II.1.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637789 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
In the December 2016 Conversion
Factor Final Rule, DOE declined to
develop conversion factors and UEF- based standards for consumer water heaters of certain sizes (by rated storage volume or input rating) and of certain types (i.e., oil-fired instantaneous water
heaters) where models did not exist on the market at the time to inform the analysis of the standards conversion. 81 FR 96204, 96210–96211. For consumer water heaters that did not receive converted UEF-based standards, DOE provided its interpretation that the original statutory standards—found at 42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(1) and expressed in terms of the EF metric—still applied; however, DOE would not enforce those statutorily-prescribed standards until such a time conversion factors are developed for these products and they can be converted to UEF. Id. Thus, the
EF-based standards specified by EPCA apply to any consumer water heaters which do not have UEF-based standards found at 10 CFR 430.32(d). These EF- based standards are set forth at 42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(1) and are repeated in Table II.2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.007</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table 11.1 Current UEF-Based Federal Energy Conservation Standards for
Consumer Water Heaters
Rated Storage Volume and
Product Class Input Rating Draw Pattern* Uniform Energy Factor**
(if armlicable)
Very Small 0.3456 -(0.0020 X Vr)
~ 20 gal and :S 55 gal Low 0.5982 -(0.0019 X Vr)
Medium 0.6483 -(0.0017 X Vr)
Gas-frred Storage High 0.6920 -(0.0013 X Vr)
Water Heater Very Small 0.6470 -(0.0006 X Vr)
> 55 gal and :S 100 gal Low 0.7689 -(0.0005 X Vr)
Medium 0.7897 -(0.0004 X Vr)
High 0.8072 -(0.0003 X Vr)
Very Small 0.2509 -(0.0012 X Vr)
Oil-frred Storage Low 0.5330 -(0.0016 X Vr)
Water Heater :S 50 gal Medium 0.6078 -(0.0016 X Vr)
Hicll 0.6815 -(0.0014 X Vr)
Very Small 0.8808 -(0.0008 X Vr)
~ 20 gal and :S 55 gal Low 0.9254 -(0.0003 X Vr)
Medium 0.9307 -(0.0002 X Vr)
Electric Storage Hicll 0.9349 -(0.0001 X Vr)
Water Heaters Very Small 1.9236 -(0.0011 X Vr)
> 55 gal and :S 120 gal Low 2.0440 -(0.0011 X Vr)
Medium 2.1171-(0.0011 xVr)
Hicll 2.2418 -(0.0011 X Vr)
Very Small 0.6323 -(0.0058 X Vr)
Tabletop Water
~ 20 gal and :S 120 gal Low 0.9188 -(0.0031 X Vr)
Heater Medium 0.9577 -(0.0023 X Vr)
Hicll 0.9884 -(0.0016 X Vr)
Very Small 0.80
Instantaneous Gas-< 2 gal and >50,000 Btu/h Low 0.81
frred Water Heater Medium 0.81
Hicll 0.81
Very Small 0.91
Instantaneous <2 gal Low 0.91
Electric Water Heater Medium 0.91
Hicll 0.92
Very Small 1.0136 -(0.0028 X Vr)
Grid-enabled Water > 75 gal Low 0.9984 -(0.0014 X Vr)
Heater Medium 0.9853 -(0.0010 X Vr)
Hicll 0.9720 -(0.0007 X Vr)
* The draw pattern dictates the frequency and duration of hot water draws during the 24-hour simulated use test, and is
an indicator of delivery capacity of the water heater. Draw patterns are assigned based on the first hour rating ("FHR"),
for non-flow-activated water heaters, or maximum GPM rating ("Max GPM"), for flow-activated water heaters. For the
specific FHR and Max GPM ranges which correspond to each draw pattern, see section 5.4.1 of appendix E to subpart
B of 10 CFR part 430.
** V, is the rated storage volume (in gallons), as determined pursuant to 10 CFR 429.17. 37790 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
14In this final rule, ‘‘Joint Stakeholders’’ refers to
the group of stakeholders who submitted and
continued to support the October 21, 2022, comment even though the makeup of this group has
changed since the July 2023 NOPR. Specifically, BWC removed itself as a signatory after the July 2023 NOPR.
2. History of Standards Rulemaking for
Consumer Water Heaters
On May 21, 2020, DOE initiated the
current rulemaking by publishing in the Federal Register a request for information (‘‘May 2020 RFI’’), soliciting public comment on various aspects of DOE’s planned analyses to help DOE determine whether to amend energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. 85 FR 30853 (May 21, 2020). DOE subsequently published a notice requesting feedback on its preliminary analysis and technical support document (‘‘preliminary TSD’’) on March 1, 2022 (the ‘‘March 2022 Preliminary Analysis’’) with a 60-day comment period. 87 FR 11327 (Mar. 1, 2022). The comment period was extended by 14 days in a notice published on May 4, 2022. 87 FR 26303.
On October 21, 2022, DOE received a
set of recommendations on amended
energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters from a coalition of seven public- and private-sector organizations, including two water
heater manufacturers, three energy efficiency organizations, one environmental group, and one consumer organization—collectively the Joint Stakeholders
14—which addressed
standards for electric storage water heaters, gas-fired storage water heaters, and gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. This coalition’s submission is herein referred to as the ‘‘Joint Stakeholder Recommendation.’’
On July 28, 2023, DOE published in
the Federal Register a notice of
proposed rulemaking (‘‘July 2023 NOPR’’) and technical support document (‘‘NOPR TSD’’) with a 60-day comment period. 88 FR 49058 (Jul. 28, 2023). In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed new and amended standards for consumer water heaters and addressed stakeholder feedback on the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis, including the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation. On September 13,
2023, DOE presented the proposed standards and accompanying analysis at
a public meeting.
DOE received 2,950 comments in
response to the July 2023 NOPR from interested parties, some of which were docketed together as multiple comments or commenters, resulting in a total of 1,140 docketed items. Note that of these total comments, 2,800 comments were ‘‘form letter’’ email submissions. In total, four distinct form letters were received. Additionally, several commenters submitted more than one comment to the docket. DOE directly references 54 of these written submissions in this final rule, which contain substantive comments regarding product classes within the scope of this final rule and are shown in Table II.3. The remainder of the comments were from individual commenters either expressing general opposition or support for the rulemaking. Total counts of both supportive and non-supportive comments received are included in section III.A of this document.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.008</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table 11.2 EF-Based Federal Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Water
Heaters
Product Class Energy Factor*
Gas water heaters 0.62 -(0.0019 x V,)
Oil water heaters 0.59 -(0.0019 x V,)
Electric water heaters 0.95 -(0.00132 x V,)
* V, is the rated storage volume (in gallons), as determined pursuant to 10 CFR 429.17. 37791 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.009</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table 11.3 List of Commenters with Written Submissions in Response to the July
2023 NOPR
Comment No.
Commenter(s) Abbreviation Commenter Type
in the Docket
GreenTECH Innovation Coro Green TECH 0071 Manufacturer
Individual Ravnitzkv 0073 Individual
NPGA,APGA, Trade Associations and NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai AGA, and 0441 Manufacturer Rinnai
Crystal IS, Inc. Crystal 0577 Manufacturer
Uponor, Inc. Uponor 0606 Manufacturer
American Enterprise Institute AEI 0817 Consumer Advocate
Jackson Energy Authority JEA 0865 Utility
Watertown Municipal Utilities WMU 0872 Utility
Southeast Gas Southeast Gas 0887 Utility
Sunrise Movement Pittsburgh Sunrise 0905 Consumer Advocate Pittsburgh
Tennessee Valley Authority TVA 0978 Utility
National Apartment Association and NMHCand 0996 Trade Association National Multifamily Housing Council NAA
Chesapeake Utilities Corporation CHPK 1008 Utility
Attorneys General of NY, CO, CT, IL, Joint State
ME, MD, MN, NV, OR, VT, WA, Attorneys 1035 State Official/ Agency
MA, PA, DC, NYC General
Advanced Water Heating Initiative AWHI 1036 Efficiency Organization
Eccotemp Systems, LLC Ecotemp 1092 Manufacturer
National Rural Electric Cooperative NRECA 1127 Utility Association Association
Gas Analytics and Advisory Services,
LLC (GAAS) (Formally Gas End-use GAAS 1139 Utility Association
Advocacy Group GEAG)
National Caucus of Environmental NCEL 1144 Utility Association Legislators 37792 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.010</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Comment No.
Commenter(s) Abbreviation Commenter Type
in the Docket
Tennessee Attorney General's Office Attorney 1149 State Official/ Agency General of TN
Plumbing- Heating-Cooling PHCC 1151 Trade Association Contractors Association
Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance,
Northeast Energy Efficiency
Partnerships, Northwest Energy Joint Regional Efficiency Alliance, South-central Advocacy 1154 Efficiency Organization Partnership for Energy Efficiency as a
Resource, Southeast Energy Efficiency Groups
Alliance, Southwest Energy Efficiency
Proiect
American Council for an Energy-
Efficient Economy, Natural Resources
Defense Council, Appliance Standards Joint Awareness Project, Northwest Energy Stakeholders 1156 Coalition
Efficiency Alliance, Consumer
Federation of America, Rheem
Manufacturing
Puget Sound Energy, Until, Avangrid,
ConEd, PG&E Corporation, National Joint Utilities 1158 Utility Associations
Grid, Eversource
Efficiency Organization,
153 various organizations Joint 1159 Coalition,
Comm enters Environmental/Consumer
Advocate
American Supply Association ASA 1160 Efficiency Organization
Bradford White Corporation BWC 1164 Manufacturer
Appliance Standards Awareness
Project, American Council for an
Energy-Efficient Economy, CLASP, Joint Natural Resources Defense Council, Advocacy 1165 Efficiency Organization Oregon Department of Energy,
Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, Groups
Washington State Department of
Commerce
Air-conditioning, Heating, and AHRl 1167 Trade Association Refrigeration Institute
RV Industry Association RVIA 1168 Trade Association
New York State Public Service NYSPSC 1169 State Official/ Agency Commission
Association for Energy Affordability,
Green & Healthy Homes Initiative,
Consumer Federation of America, NC Consumer Justice Center, Consumer Reports, Advocates 1172 Consumer Advocate
Pennsylvania Utility Law Project,
Green Energy Consumers Alliance,
Poder Latinx
California Energy Commission CEC 1173 State Official/ Agency
Pacific Gas and Electric Company;
Southern California Edison; and San CAIOUs 1175 Utility
Diego Gas & Electric Company
Rheem Manufacturing Company Rheem 1177 Manufacturer 37793 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
15The parenthetical reference provides a
reference for information located in the docket of
DOE’s rulemaking to develop energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. (Docket No.
EERE–2017–BT–STD–0019, which is maintained at www.regulations.gov). The references are arranged
as follows: (commenter name, comment docket ID
number, page of that document).
A parenthetical reference at the end of
a comment quotation or paraphrase
provides the location of the item in the public record.
15To the extent that interested parties have provided written comments that are substantively consistent with any oral comments provided during the September 13, 2023, public meeting, DOE cites the written comments throughout this final rule. Any oral comments provided during the webinar that are not
substantively addressed by written comments are summarized and cited
separately throughout this final rule.
Additionally, DOE received
comments from stakeholders in response to the July 2023 NOPR regarding the scope and classification of circulating water heaters as defined at 10 CFR 430.2 by the June 2023 TP Final
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.011</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Comment No.
Commenter(s) Abbreviation Commenter Type
in the Docket
American Lung Association, American
Public Health Association, Asthma
and Allergy Foundation of America, Health Climate Psychiatry Alliance, National Advocates 1179 Consumer Advocate
Association of Pediatric Nurse
Practitioners, Physicians for Social
Responsibility, Public Health Institute
Gas
AGA, APGA, NPGA, Spire Association 1181 Utility Association
Comm enters
A. 0. Smith Corporation A.O. Smith 1182 Manufacturer
Atmos Energy Atmos Energy 1183 Utility
Electric Cooperatives of South ECSC 1185 Utility Association Carolina
Rinnai America Corporation Rinnai 1186 Manufacturer
Multiple Individual Architecture Firms Joint 1188 Trade Association Architects
Earth justice Earth justice 1189 Efficiency Organization
SkyCentrics SkyCentrics 1191 Manufacturer
New York State Energy Research and NYSERDA 1192 State Official/ Agency Development Authority
Armada Power, LLC Armada 1193 Manufacturer
Essency Water Heaters Essency 1194 Manufacturer
Physicians for Social Responsibility PSR 1196 Consumer Advocate
Individual Stanonik 1197 Individual
Edison Electric Institute EEi 1198 Utility Association
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance NEEA 1199 Efficiency Organization
ONE Gas, Inc. ONE Gas 1200 Utility
Noritz America Corporation Noritz 1202 Efficiency Organization
GE Appliances, a Haier company GEA 1203 Manufacturer
Robert Bosch LLC Bosch 1204 Manufacturer
Vermont Department of Public
Service, New Jersey Board of Public
Utilities, Maine Governor's Energy
Office, New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority,
Washington State Department of State Agencies 1213 State Official/ Agency
Commerce, Government of the District
of Columbia, Colorado Energy Office,
Maryland Energy Administration, New
Mexico State Energy Office, Oregon
Department of Energy 37794 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
16The number of comments reflects the number
of individual party submissions. Specifically, form
letters with multiple submissions count each submission individually. 17Commenters who are directly referenced in this
final rule and appear in Table II.3 are not counted in these statistics because these submitters typically expressed detailed views that could not be generalized as either clear support or clear opposition for all aspects of the proposal.
18One comment in support of the proposed
standards had 8,357 signatories. Rule. DOE subsequently published a
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking on December 27, 2023 (‘‘December 2023 SNOPR’’), that discussed the comments received on this topic and proposed to amend the definition for ‘‘circulating water heater’’ to reclassify these products as storage- type water heaters. 88 FR 89330. DOE received 195 comments in response to the December 2023 SNOPR from interested parties. DOE directly references 14 of these written submissions which provided remarks about the rulemaking analysis pertinent
to standards for circulating water heaters or comments relevant to the issues discussed in the December 2023 SNOPR, and these submissions are shown in Table II.4.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
3. Scope of This Final Rule
Following review of comments on the
July 2023 NOPR and December 2023 SNOPR, DOE has decided to finalize at this time standards for all consumer water heaters with the exception of gas- fired instantaneous water heaters, as defined in 10 CFR 430.2 and replicated in section III.B of this final rule. DOE is not summarizing or responding to any comments specific to gas-fired instantaneous water heaters in this document, nor discussing any analytical methodologies or results for this product class as DOE continues to consider the comments submitted in response to the July 2023 NOPR and December 2023 SNOPR in informing DOE’s decision on amended energy conservation standards for GIWHs. III. General Discussion
DOE developed this final rule after
considering oral and written comments,
data, and information from interested parties that represent a variety of interests. The following discussion addresses issues raised by these commenters.
A. General Comments
This section summarizes general
comments received from interested
parties regarding rulemaking timing and process.
1. General Support
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
DOE received 966
16general comments (those which provided general remarks
on the impact of the rulemaking)17
related to product classes within the scope of this final rule, with 931, or 96 percent of, these comments expressing support of the proposed standards and a majority acknowledging the significant energy savings that would result from the adoption of the proposed standards.
18
NYSERDA, GreenTECH, the CA IOUs,
NCEL, Joint Regional Advocacy Groups, Joint Stakeholders, Joint Utilities, Joint Commenters, Joint Advocacy Groups, NYSPSC, Consumer Advocates, Health
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.012</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table 11.4 List of Commenters with Written Submissions in Response to the
December 2023 SNOPR
Commenter(s) Abbreviation Comment No. Commenter
in the Docket Type
Individual Great Plains 1267 Individual Resource
Individual Johnson 1271 Individual
Individual Harley 1341 Individual
Air-conditioning, Heating, and ARRI 1389 Trade
Refrigeration Institute Association
Francis R. Pickering Pickering 1399 Individual
New York State Energy Research and NYSERDA 1406 State
Development Authority Official/ Agency
Appliance Standards Awareness
Project; American Council for an Efficiency Energy-Efficient Economy; National ASAP et al. 1407 Organization Consumer Law Center; Natural
Resources Defense Council
Rheem Manufacturing Company Rheem 1408 Manufacturer
Pacific Gas and Electric Company;
Southern California Edison; San Diego CAIOUs 1409 Utility
Gas & Electric Company
A.O. Smith Corporation A.O. Smith 1411 Manufacturer
California Energy Commission CEC 1412 State
Official/ Agency
Bradford White Corporation BWC 1413 Manufacturer
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance NEEA 1414 Efficiency
Organization
Rinnai America Corporation Rinnai 1415 Manufacturer 37795 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Advocates, Joint Architects, PSR, NEEA
and State Agencies all stated their support of the standards proposed in the July 2023 NOPR. These commenters highlighted the associated benefits of the proposal including utility bill savings, reduced GHG emissions, protection of human health, reduced energy consumption, and the ability to design more energy efficient buildings. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 1; GreenTECH, No. 71 at p. 1; CA IOUs, No. 1175 at pp. 1–2; NCEL, No. 1144 at p. 1; Joint Regional Advocacy Groups, No. 1154 at p. 1; Joint Stakeholders, No. 1156 at p. 1; Joint Utilities, No. 1158 at p. 1; Joint Commenters, No. 1159 at p. 1–2; Joint Advocacy Groups, No. 1165 at p. 1; NYSPSC, No. 1169 at p. 1; Consumer Advocates, No. 1172 at p. 1; Health Advocates, No. 1179 at p. 1; Joint Architects, No. 1188 at p. 1; PSR, No. 1196 at p. 1–2; NEEA, No. 1199 at p. 2; State Agencies, No. 1213 at p. 1–2)
NCEL noted that, according to a report
by the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, water heaters represent the largest potential for emissions reductions among regulated consumer products, and the proposed standards would reduce CO
2emissions by more
than 500 Mt over 30 years of sales, helping the United States meet its climate goals. (NCEL, No. 1144 at p. 1) The Joint Regional Advocacy Groups supported, specifically, the proposed standards for electric storage water heaters at heat pump efficiency levels. (Joint Regional Advocacy Groups, No. 1154 at p. 1) The Joint State Attorneys General also commented in support of the proposed standards for consumer water heaters and recommended that DOE finalize the proposed rule as soon as possible. The Joint State Attorneys General further emphasized that the proposed standards would significantly improve the energy efficiency of both electric and gas water heaters while providing economic benefits to consumers. The Joint State Attorneys General stated that the proposed standards for consumer water heaters are projected to yield significant environmental benefits, climate benefits, and monetized health benefits. The Joint State Attorneys General also commented that the transition to more efficient consumer water heating will be increasingly cost effective and affordable as time progresses, particularly considering the Federal investment in weatherization, energy efficiency, and beneficial electrification programs that would help address cost concerns related to installing new or replacement products. (Joint State Attorneys General, No. 1035 at pp. 1–3) State Agencies claimed that while State
regulations have the potential to reduce GHG emissions, individual States cannot adopt standards for products for which the Federal government has promulgated an existing standard (such as consumer water heaters) and that collaboration is required for impactful climate action. (State Agencies, No. 1213 at p. 1) DOE understands the commenter to be referring to provisions at 42 U.S.C. 6297, by which Federal energy standards supersede State regulations with exceptions for certain products that do not include consumer water heaters. State Agencies also indicated that the proposed standards would reduce the energy burden for low-income households, which spend larger portions of their income on energy bills. (State Agencies, No. 1213 at p. 2)
Rheem generally supported DOE’s
proposed amended standards and the analysis behind them but expressed concern regarding potential unintended consequences of the proposed standards for certain product classes caused in part by the application of the high- temperature test method and effective storage volume metric. Rheem suggested possible solutions to resolve these issues, which are discussed further in section V.D of this document. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 1) Rheem stated that, for electric storage water heaters between 20 and 120 gallons (except for small electric storage water heaters), heat pump-level standards are appropriate. Rheem recommended that DOE act to prevent a market shift away from heat pump technologies if standards are amended to require this for a larger fraction of the electric storage water heater market because not only would it result in reduction of energy savings, but it also would pose a risk to manufacturers’ return on investment in heat pump water heater development in a timely manner. Rheem noted that there would be significant changes to product design and manufacturing facilities as a result of a heat pump standard in this rulemaking. (Id. at p. 7)
The Joint Stakeholders stated that the
proposed standards for gas-fired water heaters are consistent with their recommendations and noted that the proposal follows the established rationale that separate standards be maintained for gas-fired storage water heaters and their instantaneous counterparts. (Joint Stakeholders, No. 1156 at p. 2) NEEA, the Joint Regional Advocacy Groups (citing the estimated FFC and monetary savings), and Bosch supported the proposed standards for
gas-fired storage water heaters. (NEEA, No. 1199 at p. 9; Joint Regional Advocacy Groups, No. 1154 at p. 1;
Bosch, No. 1204 at p. 2)
The CA IOUs encouraged DOE to set
more stringent standards for gas-fired storage water heaters. According to the CA IOUs, more stringent standards for all gas-fired consumer water heater sub- classes, specifically at condensing efficiencies, would result in significant savings of natural gas in California and across the United States. (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at p. 2) AWHI also encouraged DOE to set more stringent standards for gas-fired storage water heaters. (AWHI, No. 1036 at pp. 3–4)
NYSERDA stated that the proposals in
the July 2023 NOPR substantially aligned with the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation, which was supported by NYSERDA. The commenter noted that, by allowing less stringent standards for small electric storage water heaters, DOE would ensure that there are replacement units available for lowboy water heaters, while still allowing innovation and expansion for heat pump water heaters. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 2)
Additionally, some commenters
offered general support in response to the December 2023 SNOPR.
NYSERDA commented that the
proposals in the December 2023 SNOPR
fully address their concerns raised at the NOPR stage regarding the potential use of electric resistance circulating water heaters in place of heat pump electric storage water heaters. (NYSERDA, No. 1406 at p. 2) NEEA expressed support for the changes proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR and urged DOE to move forward with these proposals, as well as those made in the July 2023 NOPR. (NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 1) NEEA reiterated its support for effective storage volume-based standards and high temperature test methods to prevent small, overheated products from being used in place of products that meet the proposed standards. (NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 2) CEC reiterated its appreciation for DOE’s efforts to address potential loopholes in the proposed regulatory language for circulating water heaters and high temperature test methods. (CEC, No. 1412 at p. 2)
2. General Opposition
Of the 966 general comments DOE
received in response to the July 2023
NOPR related to product classes within the scope of this final rule, 29, or 3 percent, were in opposition of new standards, with the majority of opposition comments focused on the concerns of government overreach and interference with a free market, impacts on product cost, and overestimation of energy savings. Commenters also
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637796 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
expressed concerns about potential
outsourcing to foreign companies due to the proposed standards, installation costs for gas-fired and heat pump water heaters, and the performance of heat pump water heaters. These topics are discussed in this section through section III.A.3 of this document.
Ravnitzky supported DOE’s efforts to
improve the energy efficiency of consumer water heaters and reduce greenhouse gas emissions but expressed concern for the impact of the proposed standards on consumers and manufacturers. Ravnitzky urged DOE to reconsider the proposed standards and account for the efficiency potential and resiliency benefits of non-heat pump water heaters. (Ravnitzky, No. 73 at p. 1)
Ravnitzky stated that the proposed
standards do not account for the resiliency benefits of non-heat pump water heaters, which can operate without electricity. Ravnitzky stated that heat pump water heaters cannot function during a power outage, which could inconvenience consumers and result in health risks. Ravnitzky also stated that gas-fired water heaters are beneficial to consumers prone to natural disasters and extreme weather events that disrupt the power grid because they do not require electricity to operate. (Ravnitzky, No. 73 at p. 1)
Throughout this rulemaking, DOE has
assessed the impacts of potential amended standards on consumers and manufacturers, specifically quantifying these impacts as national benefits and costs (see section I of this document). In
response to the concerns raised by Ravnitzky, DOE notes that gas-fired water heaters will still be available as an option to consumers at the levels adopted in this final rule. Further, DOE notes that, while for certain classes of electric storage water heaters the adopted standards are currently only met through use of heat pump technology, electric storage water heaters that rely on electric resistance technology also require a continuous supply of electricity to operate. Therefore, without a backup supply of electricity a power outage would render both types of electric storage water heaters inoperable. DOE also notes that some gas-fired water heaters do require electricity to operate. However, as discussed in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE maintains its interpretation of EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1) that gas-fired water heaters that do not require electricity should not be treated differently (i.e., constitute a separate product class) from gas-fired water heaters that do. 88 FR 49058, 49079. AEI stated its belief that the rule is
based on the need to confront the global
climate crisis, and therefore it is fatally flawed and should not be finalized due to the lack of evidence of a climate ‘‘threat’’ or ‘‘crisis.’’ (AEI, No. 817 at p. 2)
DOE is finalizing amendments to the
test procedure and energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters based on its authority described in section II.A of this document, which requires the Department to consider seven (7) factors prior to finalizing such amendments. This final rule outlines DOE’s analysis of all seven factors, with additional details provided in the TSD.
The Attorney General of TN
commented that the proposed standards have significant federalism implications within the meaning of Executive Order 13132 for the following reasons: (1) DOE’s standards have a preemptive effect on States’ procurement standards; and (2) States own and purchase water heaters, and therefore the proposed standards’ effect on water heater costs directly affect States as purchasers. (Attorney General of TN, No. 1149 at pp. 2–3) The Attorney General of TN commented that DOE must show that the intrastate activity covered by the proposed standards substantially affects the interstate market for water heaters and there is no such analysis in the July 2023 NOPR. The Attorney General of TN commented that the proposed standards will dominate the regulation of consumer goods—authority traditionally belonging to the States. (Attorney General of TN, No. 1149 at p. 3)
DOE responds that it believes the
scope of both the standard proposed in the July 2023 NOPR and the amended standard adopted in this final rule properly includes all consumer water heaters distributed in commerce for personal use or consumption because intrastate state activity regulated by 42 U.S.C. 6291(17) and 6302 is inseparable from and substantially affects interstate commerce. DOE has clear authority under EPCA to regulate the energy use of a variety of consumer products and certain commercial and industrial equipment, including the subject consumer water heaters. See 42 U.S.C.
6295. Based on this statutory authority, DOE has a long-standing practice of
issuing energy conservation standards with the same scope as the standard in this final rule. For example, DOE has maintained a similar scope of products in the April 2010 Final Rule and in the December 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule. DOE disagrees with the Attorney General of TN’s contention that the Commerce Clause, the Tenth Amendment, the Major Questions
Doctrine, or any canons of statutory construction limit DOE’s clear and long- standing authority under EPCA to adopt the standard, including its scope, in this final rule. A further discussion regarding the Attorney General of TN’s Federalism concerns can be found at section VI.E of this document.
BWC, a former signatory to the Joint
Stakeholder Recommendation, urged DOE to reconsider re-aligning certain aspects of its proposal to what was originally recommended by the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 1)
The July 2023 NOPR proposed
product classes and efficiency levels incorporating the feedback from the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation; however, the Department did not align entirely with the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation. DOE provided its rationale for product class definitions, efficiency level selection, and effective storage volume throughout the July 2023 NOPR (see section IV of the July 2023
NOPR). These topics are discussed further in this final rule in sections IV.A.1.f, IV.C.1.a, and V.D.1 of this document, respectively.
BWC noted that the July 2023 NOPR
was published only shortly after the June 2023 TP Final Rule, and that this period of time was too short for manufacturers to provide adequate feedback on new aspects of the test procedure, such as effective storage volume and high temperature testing. BWC expressed its concern over this and the 60-day comment period provided for the July 2023 NOPR, noting that these were both deviations from appendix A. The Gas Association Commenters and Rinnai also commented on this deviation, with ASA and the Gas Association Commenters stating that the 60-day comment period was insufficient to develop responses to the July 2023 NOPR and Rinnai stating that DOE did not have an adequate basis to depart from the standard 75-day comment period. ASA recommended extending the comment period to provide commenters additional time for research and feedback and the Gas Association Commenters stated this deviation placed undue burden on commenters to review and evaluate a proposal that could have significant
ramifications on the water heater industry and consumers. Rinnai claimed that DOE has rushed the rulemaking process by relying on a preliminary TSD from 2022 and not producing a final TSD with the July 2023 NOPR and believed the compressed schedule between the September 2023 Webinar and the end of the comment period was
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637797 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
19In reference to appendix A as it appeared at the
time of the publication of the July 2023 NOPR. unjustified (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 6–7;
Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181, pp. 37–38; Rinnai, No. 1186 at p. 35; ASA, No. 1160 at p. 1) JEA, WMU, and Southeast Gas commented that as members of APGA, they supported APGA’s submitted comments that offer more details on their concerns. (JEA, No. 865 at p. 2; WMU, No. 872 at p. 2; Southeast Gas, No. 887 at p. 1)
DOE has determined that the length of
the comment period was appropriate and provided a meaningful opportunity to comment on the NOPR. In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE explained its deviation from section 6(f)(2) of 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A,
19
which specifies that the length of the public comment period for a NOPR be not less than 75 calendar days. However, with respect to NOPRs, EPCA requires at least a 60-day comment period. (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(2)), and similarly, Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993) states that in most cases a comment period should not be less than 60 days. On April 8, 2024, DOE published in the Federal Register a final rule amending section 6 of appendix A to specify that comment periods for standards rulemaking documents will be
determined on a case-by-case basis with a minimum 60-day comment period for NOPRs based on the requirements of EPCA and recommendations in E.O. 12866. 89 FR 24360 (April 8, 2024). As discussed in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE determined that a 60-day comment period provided sufficient time because the NOPR relied on many of the same analytical assumptions and approaches as used in the preliminary assessment, on which the public had an opportunity to comment. 88 FR 49058. In particular, a 60-day comment period (followed by 14-day extension) was provided for the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis, and a 45-day period for the May 2020 RFI. 87 FR 11327; 85 FR 30853.
In response to the December 2023
SNOPR, DOE received 176 comments, or 90 percent of comments, in opposition of new standards along similar concerns as those expressed in response to the July 2023 NOPR.
DOE also received feedback from
some stakeholders that the comment period provided for the December 2023 SNOPR was too short. AHRI requested that DOE extend the comment period to provide stakeholders adequate time to properly respond. (AHRI, No. 1389 at p. 1) BWC stated that the opportunity to comment on the December 2023 SNOPR was severely limited due to its seasonal
timing and comment period duration. (BWC, No. 1413 at p. 3) Rinnai stated that there was little meaningful time for a detailed assessment of the December 2023 SNOPR due to the timing of the comment period and that only a limited number of inputs were collected. (Rinnai, No. 1415 at p. 1)
The scope of the December 2023
SNOPR was limited to a definitional change for circulating water heaters, with only two requests for comment, and therefore DOE believes the comment period was sufficient. The CA IOUs, NEEA, CEC, and NYSERDA expressed support for the December 2023 SNOPR comment period being limited to 14 days because its scope is limited to circulating water heaters. (CA IOUs, No. 1409 at p. 1; NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 2; CEC, No. 1412 at p. 3; NYSERDA, No. 1406 at p. 1)
Additionally, DOE’s proposal in the
SNOPR was mainly responsive to more substantive stakeholder feedback received in response to the July 2023 NOPR, as discussed throughout that notice (see 88 FR 89330).
Many individual commenters also
expressed concerns regarding the implementation of heat pump water heaters due to efficiency concerns in colder areas and weather, lack of expertise in maintaining a more complex product, reliability, potential for mold, and potentially high purchase and installation costs and requirements for a product with the same expected lifetime as a standard electric water heater. Individual commenters also stated that the proposed standards are counterproductive because heat pump water heaters eject cold air into the house which then has to be heated up by the household HVAC system. Individual commenters stated that consumers may face high costs and long wait times associated with retrofitting due to the proposed standards, and due to increased insulation, which results in larger products. These high costs will
increase the cost of home ownership and may prevent first-time buyers from obtaining a home.
DOE accounts for differences between
rated efficiency and on-site efficiency in its energy use analysis, which considers factors like climate and heating load. Heat pump water heaters can help with cooling demand in the summer but can work against the home heating system in the winter if they are not ducted separately. DOE’s energy use analysis includes these impacts (see appendix 7B
to the TSD). DOE quantifies these impacts in the energy use analysis to include them in the expected operating expenses for the LCC analysis. One individual commenter requested
that equipment and repair costs be
factored into savings and that consumers should decide the return in savings when investing in new equipment. (Johnson, No. 1271 at p. 1) Great Plains Resource supported the proposed standard and stated that if a redesign of water heaters helps to control pollution, it should be passed. Great Plains Resource stated, however, that DOE should plan to mitigate costs for consumers associated with manufacturers increasing costs of water heaters. Other commenters suggested that DOE subsidize new water heater technologies or introduce a tax incentive rather than seeking energy efficiency through regulations. Great Plains Resource suggested that DOE should consider extending the time frame to help manufacturers create new equipment and create competition to control cost of equipment to consumers. (Great Plains Resource, No. 1267 at p. 1) An individual commented that condensing gas-fired water heaters use expensive vent pipes due to the corrosiveness of condensation. (Harley, No. 1341 at p. 1)
DOE notes that its analysis
incorporates installation and equipment costs into its analysis, including the necessary venting, as well as repair and maintenance costs. Pickering expressed concern that the definitions proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR for circulating water heaters may not be compatible with solar photovoltaic direct water heating systems, which the commenter described as a low-cost system where DC electric output from the solar photovoltaic panel is wired (without grid connection) directly to the heating elements of an electric resistance storage water heater. (Pickering, No. 1399, at pp. 1–3)
DOE understands this comment to be
opposing the proposed heat pump-level standards for most electric storage water heaters due to the fact that the direct solar photovoltaic water heating systems described by the commenter is dependent upon a DC-compatible electric storage water heater. DOE notes that electric resistance storage water heaters will still be available within the small electric storage water heater (and grid-enabled water heater product
classes for cases where the home is still connected to a utility grid), however.
According to NPGA, APGA, AGA, and
Rinnai, DOE is seeking to promote the market for electric heat pumps at the expense of gas-fired water heaters, diminishing competition and profoundly affecting consumer choice. They also stated that the proposed rule fails to meet EPCA’s 3-year rebuttable
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637798 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
presumption of economic justification
under pure economic terms and would be an enormous burden on manufacturing and on competition between gas and electric water heaters. (NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, No. 441 at pp. 3–4) EEI noted that while the proposed standards for electric storage water heaters increase by 21 to 140 percent in efficiency, the July 2023 NOPR only proposed an increase of 0 to 9.7 percent for gas-fired and oil-fired storage water heaters, and this disparity would cause fuel-fired storage water heaters to gain a competitive advantage because buyers’ decisions are strongly motivated by cost considerations. (EEI, No. 1198 at pp. 3–4) Sunrise Pittsburgh stated that the proposed standard would require electric and gas-fired water heaters to meet vastly different standards, which could potentially result in consumers switching to gas- fired water heaters given the lower upfront cost associated with gas-fired water heaters compared to heat pump water heaters. In turn, Sunrise Pittsburgh stated this may result in more carbon emissions. According to Sunrise Pittsburgh, revising the proposed standard to apply the same standard across all water heaters regardless of the technology or fuel source used would benefit consumers, especially it removes gas-fired water heaters from the market, as this would save consumers from asthma and carcinogens as well as dangerous gas-fired water heater explosions associated with gas fueled products. (Sunrise Pittsburgh, No. 905 at pp. 1–2)
In this rulemaking DOE has provided
its analytical approach and results which have led to the selection of more stringent standards for some product classes compared to others. When determining whether the benefits of amended standards outweigh the burdens, DOE considers the trial standards levels, which are comprised of different efficiency levels for each product class. The construction of trial standards levels is discussed in section V.A of this document. In the shipments analysis, which is detailed in section IV.G of this document, DOE considers the impacts of product life-cycle costs on consumer purchasing decisions, which ultimately is used to assess the total energy savings, economic impacts to consumers, and impacts to health (summarized in section I.C of this document).
With respect to Sunrise Pittsburgh’s
suggestion to apply the same standard across all water heaters regardless of the technology or fuel source, DOE
establishes separate standards for different product classes of consumer water heaters based on statutory
requirements from EPCA, which includes a consideration for products that consume different types of energy (e.g., electricity, oil, or gas). (42 U.S.C.
6295(q)(1)-(2)) The product classes established by this final rule are discussed in section IV.A.1 of this document.
3. Selection of Standards Levels
DOE received several comments
regarding the selection of proposed
efficiency levels.
CEC agreed with DOE’s analysis
recognizing that the majority of electric storage water heaters can meet heat pump-level standards but encouraged DOE to consider improving the minimum standard for electric storage water heaters >20 and ≤55 gal to a level closer to EL 2. CEC noted that while a UEF of 2.3 (as proposed) is sufficient to drive the core shift in technology, the least efficient heat pump water heaters on the market today have a UEF of 2.8 or greater. (CEC, No. 1173 at pp. 3–4)
As stated in the July 2023 NOPR,
split-system and 120-volt heat pump water heaters may not be able to achieve the same efficiency levels as conventional 240-volt products, as suggested by less stringent ENERGY STAR Residential Water Heaters
Specification Version 5.0 (‘‘ENERGY STAR v5.0’’) criteria at 2.20 UEF. DOE has observed products certified to both the ENERGY STAR database and DOE’s Compliance Certification Database (‘‘CCD’’) capable of meeting these criteria and determined EL 2 such that novel 120-volt products would not be prevented from entering the market. 88 FR 49058, 49090. DOE continued to consider these factors when evaluating the standard levels for this final rule.
DOE received comments from BWC
regarding the potential manufacturer impacts and capacity constraints related to transitioning all electric storage water heater products to heat pump designs. BWC stated appreciation that DOE recognized that a 5-year compliance window may be challenging for many manufacturers to redesign 100 percent of electric storage water heater products to incorporate heat pump designs. BWC noted that change of this scale would indeed require a commitment of significant time, resources, and capital to ensure these units can be produced at a rate that would satisfy sharply increased demand while meeting and exceeding consumers’ needs and expectations. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 14– 15)
NRECA recommended that DOE delay
implementation of the proposed electric storage water heater standard for 40- gallon model sizes to allow more time
for manufacturers to innovate and design heat pump water heaters that are more adaptable to a variety of installation scenarios. NRECA also recommended that DOE allow electric resistance options for storage tank sizes up to 50 gallons for space constrained installations, and that DOE apply the proposed standard for electric storage water heaters to new construction only, since new homes can be designed to accommodate heat pump water heaters. (NRECA, No. 1127 at p. 13)
In response, DOE notes that the
timing of amended standards for consumer water heaters is mandated by EPCA. Furthermore, DOE finds that a 5- year lead time is sufficient for manufacturers to prepare given that heat pump water heaters available today can be installed in a variety of installation scenarios. For consumer water heaters DOE does not have the authority to regulate water heaters in new construction only. As discussed in section V.C of this document, DOE has fully weighed the burdens of its proposed standards for electric storage water heaters against its benefits in determining the appropriate standards level.
DOE acknowledges that requiring all
electric storage water heater products to utilize heat pump designs would require notably higher levels of investment and development effort compared to only requiring a portion of the electric storage water heater market to transition to heat pump designs. In this final rule, DOE is adopting TSL 2, which, for electric storage water heaters, includes standards for larger products that are met through the use of heat pump technology while leaving standards for smaller products that can be met through the use of electric resistance heating. See section V.C.1 of this
document for the benefits and burdens of the TSLs considered in this rulemaking.
In this rulemaking, DOE did not
analyze more stringent standards for product classes for which there are currently no UEF-based standards. Several commenters raised the concern that establishing such standards for certain product classes and then raising standards for other product classes would create a market condition where
manufacturers can shift their models to meet the requirements of the new product classes with less stringent standards, hence undermining the energy savings potential of this rulemaking. This issue is discussed in detail throughout this document. The creation of separate product classes for the models that do not have current
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637799 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
20See, for example, the Generac ARA Load
Control Switch. Product literature can be found
online at: www.generacgs.com/wp-content/uploads/ 2023/04/ARA_ LoadControlSwitch_ SpecSheet_ B-
1.pdf (Last accessed Oct. 11, 2023). UEF-based standards is detailed in
section IV.A.1 of this document. The selection of standards for these products is explained in section IV.C.1 of this document. Finally, the impact of market transition (i.e., product class switching)
is addressed in the shipments analysis in section IV.G of this document.
DOE received comments from some
stakeholders regarding the impact of the proposed standards for electric storage water heaters (which correspond to efficiencies attainable by heat pump water heaters) on electric grids.
Armada claimed that the proposed
standards would cause serious business harm to companies that provide technologies to convert traditional electric storage water heaters into demand-response products. (Armada, No. 1193 at p. 3) Armada emphasized the importance of American-made technologies for grid-reliability as critical to tackling the climate crisis and advancing environmental justice initiatives, but these technologies are at risk of being regulated out of existence by the proposed standards. (Armada, No. 1193 at p. 7) Armada commented that due to the long recovery cycle of heat pump water heaters, these products are limited in their demand response capabilities. Armada stated that while they can be used for scheduled time-of- use programs, they do not work well responding to grid congestion or to the intermittent availability of renewable energy sources (e.g., wind or solar)
because water heater energy use times do not line up with when renewable energy resources are available during the day. (Armada, No. 1193 at p. 3)
NRECA stated that heat pump water
heaters may be beneficial to electrical grid demand peaks because they draw lower demand than electric resistance storage water heaters, however they expressed concern that heat pump water heaters may not yield enough savings for demand response programs to be cost-effective. NRECA also stated that most electric cooperatives use load control switches to manage electric water heater demand, but have found that this strategy is generally incompatible with heat pump water heaters, which take more time to reboot after a cut in power than an electric resistance storage water heater. NRECA added that heat pump water heater can
be managed using more sophisticated strategies such as CTA 2045, AHRI 1430, or the manufacturer’s API; however, NRECA commented that electric cooperatives are concerned about the time, expense, and security risks associated with implementing a new control strategy. (NRECA, No. 1127 at p. 11) NRECA stated many of their member electric cooperatives mitigate
demand peaks by running demand response programs, using both grid- enabled water heaters and 50-gallon electric storage water heaters and added that few of the cooperatives they interviewed include or plan to include heat pump water heaters, due to incompatible load control strategies or reduced grid management benefits. (NRECA, No. 1127 at p. 11)
ECSC urged DOE to retain electric
resistance options for electric storage water heater installations where heat pump water heaters impose a time- consuming, costly burden, and to consider restrictions on tankless electric water heaters instead. ECSC stated that if consumers cannot afford or install heat pump water heaters, the remaining options of a small electric storage water heater (‘‘ESWH’’) or a tankless electric water heater pose a significant threat to existing electric grid demand management programs, which rely on electric storage water heaters as a thermal resource. ECSC added that the proposed standards for electric storage water heaters will likely disproportionately harm low-to- moderate income consumers. (ECSC, No. 1185 at p. 2)
NEEA, however, noted that heat
pump water heaters have been successfully deployed in demand response programs in the Pacific Northwest, and added that, similar to electric resistance storage water heaters, heat pump water heaters are capable of shifting load from on-peak to off-peak hours, and are also capable of handling load-up events since they have both electric resistance backup elements and a compressor. NEEA cited a pilot program conducted by Bonneville Power Administration and Portland General Electric which enrolled 175 heat pump water heaters and 90 electric resistance water heaters in a demand response program and controlled them through 600 events over the course of 220 days. NEEA noted the pilot found that electric resistance and heat pump water heaters alike were able to reduce load substantially. (NEEA, No. 1199 at pp. 8–9)
NRECA’s comment indicates that
utilities may employ more strategies for water heater load management than CTA–2045 or OpenADR communication protocols. DOE reviewed load control switch technology in more detail.
20
These load control switches appear to be capable of implementing schedule- based control. However, if utilities need to cut power to water heaters at unplanned times to manage electricity demand, heat pump water heaters are expected to still be able to return to operation in a reasonable amount of time. DOE’s teardown analyses of heat pump water heaters on the market show that nearly all heat pump water heater designs today have backup electric resistance elements should the household require a faster recovery rate. DOE does not expect heat pump water heaters to remove these backup elements as a result of amended standards. Additionally, DOE finds that the studies conducted by NEEA provide evidence towards the compatibility of heat pump water heaters with present- day load control strategies.
In response to ECSC, there is an
increasing number of heat pump water heaters available with demand-response capabilities. The ENERGY STAR v5.0 specification incentivizes the manufacture of heat pump water heaters that meet a list of criteria for connected product design, including the use of the standardized CTA–2045 or OpenADR communications protocols for utilities to send signals to enrolled water heaters. Load management strategies are expected to still be compatible with heat pump water heater designs. Additionally, DOE reiterates that electric resistance storage water heaters which elevate the storage tank temperature beyond 135 °F when
responding to utility load management signals are exempt from having to test to the high temperature test method and will likely remain on the market. Beyond small electric storage water heaters and heat pump water heaters, grid-enabled water heaters (which are larger than 75 gallons of rated storage volume) are designed for this explicit purpose. DOE does not expect the availability of grid-enabled water heaters to decline as a result of this final rule (because no substantial amendments to the standards for these products are being adopted in this rulemaking), so there will remain electric resistance products available to consumers to connect to utility grid programs.
NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai
stated that DOE should consider the effects the additional demand for electricity for water heaters may have on the energy grid as it has presently failed to consider such an impact its proposed standards may have on grid reliability. According to NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, DOE should heed the guidance of the Government Accountability
Office and analyze options for grid resilience to avoid enhanced strain
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637800 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
21In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE amended
the definition of ‘‘commercial heat pump water
heater’’ at 10 CFR 431.102 to align with the amperage and voltage requirements for consumer heat pump type units as specified in EPCA. without a demand management or
supply plan and would benefit by reviewing analysis of grid strain during extreme weather events. (NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, No. 441 at p. 4) NMHC and NAA also advised that such an increase in electric product usage should be coupled with efforts to ensure the electric grid is prepared and suggested that DOE consider the costs and barriers in this rulemaking. (NMHC and NAA, No. 996 at p. 5)
DOE does not expect a significant
fraction of consumers to switch from gas-fired or oil-fired water heaters to electric water heaters as a result of this rulemaking. See section IV.F.10 of this
document. DOE does expect a significant fraction of consumers to switch from electric resistance storage water heaters to heat pump water heaters as a result of the more stringent standards for electric storage water heaters, however. Heat pump water heaters are significantly more efficient than electric resistance storage water heaters, and, as a result, consume significantly less electricity than electric resistance storage water heaters, which actually reduces strain on electrical
grids.
The Attorney General of TN
commented that the proposed rulemaking does not address the additional strain these standards would place on the national energy infrastructure and power grid. The Attorney General of TN stated that, by encouraging a 5 percent to 63 percent shift among consumers from gas-fired water heaters to those powered by electric pumps, the demand for additional electricity will place further stress on an already overworked energy grid. (Attorney General of TN, No. 1149 at p. 3)
DOE has carefully considered the
potential impact of proposed standards on the national energy infrastructure and power grid. With reduced energy consumption and appropriate configuration, the proposed standards would actually benefit national energy infrastructure and power grid.
B. Scope of Coverage and Definitions
As discussed in section II.B.3 of this
document, this final rule covers those
consumer products that meet the definition of ‘‘water heater,’’ as codified at 10 CFR 430.2 and as described by EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6291(27), with the exception of ‘‘Gas-fired instantaneous water heater,’’ as codified at 10 CFR 430.2.
Generally, DOE defines a ‘‘water
heater,’’ consistent with EPCA’s definition, as a product which utilizes oil, gas, or electricity to heat potable water for use outside the heater upon
demand, including:
(a) Storage type units which heat and
store water at a thermostatically controlled temperature, including gas storage water heaters with an input of 75,000 Btu per hour or less, oil storage water heaters with an input of 105,000 Btu per hour or less, and electric storage water heaters with an input of 12 kilowatts (kW) or less;
(b) Instantaneous type units which
heat water but contain no more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input, including gas instantaneous water heaters with an input of 200,000 Btu per hour or less, oil instantaneous water heaters with an input of 210,000
Btu per hour or less, and electric instantaneous water heaters with an input of 12 kilowatts or less; and
(c) Heat pump type units, with a
maximum current rating of 24 amperes at a voltage no greater than 250 volts,
21
which are products designed to transfer thermal energy from one temperature level to a higher temperature level for the purpose of heating water, including all ancillary equipment such as fans, storage tanks, pumps, or controls necessary for the device to perform its function.
10 CFR 430.2; (42 U.S.C. 6291(27))
In addition, at 10 CFR 430.2, DOE
further defines several specific
categories of consumer water heaters as follows:
•‘‘Electric instantaneous water
heater’’ means a water heater that uses electricity as the energy source, has a nameplate input rating of 12 kW or less, and contains no more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input.
•‘‘Electric storage water heater’’
means a water heater that uses electricity as the energy source, has a nameplate input rating of 12 kW or less, and contains more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input.
•‘‘Gas-fired instantaneous water
heater’’ means a water heater that uses gas as the main energy source, has a nameplate input rating less than 200,000 Btu per hour, and contains no more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input.
•‘‘Gas-fired storage water heater’’
means a water heater that uses gas as the main energy source, has a nameplate input rating of 75,000 Btu per hour or less, and contains more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input.
•‘‘Grid-enabled water heater’’ means
an electric resistance water heater that— ÆHas a rated storage tank volume of
more than 75 gallons;
ÆIs manufactured on or after April
16, 2015;
ÆIs equipped at the point of
manufacture with an activation lock; and
ÆBears a permanent label applied by
the manufacturer that—
DIs made of material not adversely
affected by water;
DIs attached by means of non-water-
soluble adhesive; and
DAdvises purchasers and end-users
of the intended and appropriate use of the product with the following notice printed in 16.5 point Arial Narrow Bold font: ‘‘IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This water heater is intended only for use as part of an electric thermal storage or demand response program. It will not provide adequate hot water unless enrolled in such a program and activated by your utility company or another program operator. Confirm the availability of a program in your local area before purchasing or installing this product.’’
•‘‘Oil-fired instantaneous water
heater’’ means a water heater that uses oil as the main energy source, has a nameplate input rating of 210,000 Btu/ h or less, and contains no more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input.
•‘‘Oil-fired storage water heater’’
means a water heater that uses oil as the main energy source, has a nameplate input rating of 105,000 Btu/h or less, and contains more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input.
In the June 2023 Test Procedure Final
Rule, DOE amended 10 CFR 430.2 (effective on July 21, 2023), adding the following definitions for circulating, low-temperature, and tabletop water heaters:
•‘‘Circulating water heater’’ means
an instantaneous or heat pump-type water heater that does not have an operational scheme in which the burner, heating element, or compressor initiates and/or terminates heating based on sensing flow; has a water temperature sensor located at the inlet or the outlet of the water heater or in a separate storage tank that is the primary means of initiating and terminating heating; and must be used in combination with a recirculating pump and either a separate storage tank or water circulation loop in order to achieve the water flow and temperature conditions recommended in the manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions.
•‘‘Low-temperature water heater’’
means an electric instantaneous water heater that is not a circulating water heater and cannot deliver water at a
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637801 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
22On October 6, 2023 the Department published
a final rule amending standards for commercial
water heating equipment, including commercial circulating water heaters. 88 FR 69686.
23DOE defines residential-duty commercial gas-
fired storage water heaters as commercial gas-fired
storage water heaters that are not designed to provide outlet hot water at temperatures greater than 180 °F, do not have a rated input greater than
105,000 Btu/h, and do not have a rated storage volume greater than 120 gallons. (10 CFR 431.102) 24For example, Rheem offers a commercial
electric water heater that is marketed for light-duty
commercial applications. In certain storage volumes (i.e., 66, 80, and 119.9 gallon models) the input
rating as shipped from the manufacturer is only available at 12.1 kW which qualifies the product as a commercial water heater. However, the product literature states that this product is factory shipped with two 6.05 kW elements that operate simultaneously, but can be easily converted in field for non-simultaneous element operation. When converted, the input rating would be effectively 6.05 kW. This causes the product to meet the definition of a consumer water heater. For more information see: https://s3.amazonaws.com/ WebPartners/ProductDocuments/9A53AD9F-75C2-
Continued temperature greater than or equal to the
set point temperature specified in section 2.5 of appendix E to subpart B of this part when supplied with water at the supply water temperature specified in section 2.3 of appendix E to subpart B of part 430 and the flow rate specified in section 5.2.2.1 of appendix E to subpart B of part 430.
•‘‘Tabletop water heater’’ means a
water heater in a rectangular box enclosure designed to slide into a kitchen countertop space with typical dimensions of 36 inches high, 25 inches deep, and 24 inches wide.
As stated in section I of this
document, EPCA prescribed energy conservation standards for all consumer water heaters (i.e., those that meet the
definition of ‘‘water heater’’ above). For the purposes of this final rule, DOE is considering all consumer water heaters, as defined by EPCA, with the exception of ‘‘gas-fired instantaneous water heaters.’’ This rulemaking does include consumer water heaters for which there are no current UEF-based standards codified at 10 CFR 430.32(d).
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
responded to inquiries concerning coverage of hot water dispensing products (not to be confused with low- temperature electric instantaneous water heaters or point-of-use electric storage water heaters), which operate at less than 2 kW of power and generally provide water at temperatures between 160°F and 210 °F for food preparation
purposes. DOE stated that while it has the authority to set standards for products that meet the definition of a consumer water heater (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(4)), this rulemaking is not currently considering standards for hot water dispensing products. 88 FR 49058, 49070.
Additionally, DOE received
comments from stakeholders in response to the July 2023 NOPR regarding the scope and classification of circulating water heater as defined at 10 CFR 430.2 by the June 2023 TP Final Rule. DOE subsequently published an
SNOPR on December 27, 2023 (‘‘December 2023 SNOPR’’), that discussed the comments received on this topic and proposed to amend the definition for ‘‘circulating water heater’’ to reclassify these products as storage- type water heaters. 88 FR 89330. In the December 2023 SNOPR, DOE proposed amending the definition of ‘‘circulating water heaters’’ to re-classify these products as storage-type water heaters. Id. After considering the comments on
the December 2023 SNOPR, DOE is adopting its proposal to amend the definition for ‘‘circulating water heater’’ as it appears at 10 CFR 430.2 to reclassify these products as storage-type
water heaters. The SNOPR comments received from stakeholders and DOE’s responses, along with the definition of a ‘‘circulating water heater,’’ are discussed in detail in section IV.A.1.a of this document. As a result of this reclassification, the scope of coverage for circulating water heaters is limited to those products which meet the statutory input rate limits for storage- type water heaters. Specifically, electric circulating water heaters must have a nameplate input rating of 12 kW or less, gas-fired circulating water heaters must have a nameplate input rating of 75,000 Btu/h or less, oil-fired circulating water heaters must have a nameplate input rating of 105,000 Btu/h or less, and heat pump circulating water heaters must have a maximum current rating of 24 amperes (‘‘A’’) at a voltage no greater than 250 volts (‘‘V’’). Circulating water heaters that have input rates greater than these specifications would be considered commercial water heaters.
In response to the December 2023
SNOPR, BWC indicated that commercial circulating water heaters are not separately defined at 10 CFR 431.102 and the recent final rule regarding energy conservation standards for commercial water heaters
22did not
establish separate standards for circulating water heaters. BWC requested that DOE clarify how the provisions in the December 2023 SNOPR will impact commercial circulating water heaters if adopted. (BWC, No. 1413 at p. 2) A.O. Smith agreed with DOE’s determination that circulating water heaters with input rates surpassing those defined for consumer storage water heaters as outlined in 10 CFR 430.2, should be classified as commercial water heaters. A.O. Smith suggested that DOE formalize this categorization by establishing definitions for commercial gas-fired circulating water heaters with input rates between 75,000 Btu/h and 200,000 Btu/h at 10 CFR 431.102. (A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at p. 2)
Rheem concluded that gas-fired
circulating water heaters with input rates greater than 75,000 but less than or equal to 105,000 Btu/h could be categorized as residential-duty commercial water heating equipment,
23 and therefore could be subject to the energy conservation standards recently established in the commercial water heater equipment final rule. Rheem requested DOE confirm its understanding that the proposed definitions circulating water heaters would extend to residential-duty commercial water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1408 at p. 3)
The scope of this rulemaking pertains
specifically to consumer water heaters, and the amended standards and definitions addressed herein do not apply to residential-duty commercial water heaters (which are commercial water heating equipment defined at 10 CFR 431.102). The definition of circulating water heater DOE is establishing at 10 CFR 430.2 will be supplemented by additional definitions for electric, gas-fired, and oil-fired circulating water heaters that specify input rate limits consistent with consumer water heaters. Circulating water heaters that exceed these input rates will be commercial water heaters and therefore are outside the scope of
standards established in this rulemaking. DOE may consider addressing standards and test procedures for commercial circulating water heaters in a future rulemaking for commercial water heaters.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
the Joint Advocacy Groups urged DOE to clarify that electric water heaters that can operate at inputs both above and below 12 kW must meet both the relevant consumer and commercial water heater standards. (Joint Advocacy Groups, No. 1165 at p. 8)
DOE is aware of certain ‘‘field-
convertible’’ electric storage water heaters which can be sold with elements rated above 12 kW (e.g., 12.1 kW), but
the product is designed in a way that allows the user to change the elements to a lower input rate (e.g., 6 kW). Field-
convertible electric storage water heaters are, therefore, sold as commercial water heaters but can be converted into consumer water heaters.
24
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637802 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
4E66-8967-1BAE91B17CAC.pdf (Last accessed on
Dec. 20, 2023) 25A diagram of an indirect water heater and
further description of this design configuration is
provided on DOE’s website at: www.energy.gov/ energysaver/tankless-coil-and-indirect-water- heaters (Last accessed: Oct. 30, 2023). Consistent with its determinations in
other rulemakings, DOE has concluded
that if a product can be configured to meet either the commercial water heater definition or the consumer water heater definition, then it must comply with the standards applicable to all types of product/equipment in which it can be configured. For example, in a recent final rule addressing convertible consumer refrigeration products, DOE specified that if a product is capable of operating with compartment temperatures as specified in multiple product category definitions (i.e., a
‘‘convertible product’’), the model must be tested and certified to each applicable product category. 88 FR 7840, 7843 (Feb. 7, 2023). Also, in a recent final rule addressing the test procedure for consumer boilers (which are a space-heating appliance that can often also be configured to provide domestic water heating), DOE determined that if a combination appliance meets the definition of a consumer boiler, the product must be tested per the boiler test procedure and demonstrate compliance with those standards. 88 FR 15510, 15515 (Mar. 13, 2023). Similarly, field-convertible electric storage water heaters are subject to the appendix E test procedure and the standards adopted by this final rule to the extent that they can be configured to meet the consumer water heater definition.
Uponor stated that other countries
have generated domestic hot water via a heat exchanger connected to a hydronic mechanical system to improve
water quality and energy efficiencies for decades. Uponor provided product literature from its technology offerings and requested clarification about how such products would be covered under DOE’s standards. (Uponor, No. 606 at p. 1)
DOE reviewed the product literature
cited by the commenter and found that the technology being referenced is an unfired heat exchange device which can couple hydronic piping to domestic hot water piping far downstream of the point of heat generation so that the heat exchange can occur in commercial high- rise buildings to produce domestic hot water using heat from the building’s hydronic heating system. While DOE does not disagree that these technologies could improve high-rise building system efficiencies, the heat exchangers referenced by Uponor may be better characterized as heat recovery devices that function based on diverting excess heat to the domestic hot water supply and work in conjunction with
the appliance providing the heat.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
DOE received questions from BWC asking whether space-heating products that are capable of heating domestic hot water by means of an indirect water heater tank would be considered circulating water heaters. In response to the December 2023 SNOPR, Pickering provided comments raising concerns about the potential for evaluating efficiency gains if there is overlap between these types of systems and circulating water heaters.
Pickering commented that definitions
that do not account for the array of equipment that is on the market or coming on the market, and that do not recognize the efficiency gains to be had with multiple pieces of equipment operating as a system, may limit choice and stifle innovation. Specifically, Pickering commented that the proposed definitions for circulating water heaters may be incompatible with or otherwise create regulatory impediments to air-to- water heat pumps that provide domestic hot water as an ancillary function to space conditioning. Pickering added that these combined systems can increase overall system efficiency over a more typical separated system, but that the proposed definitions mean that it may be difficult to quantity the efficiency of the domestic hot water function of a combined system specifically, and that they may not account for or accommodate the combinations of equipment (assembled on site) that produce domestic hot water in such a combined system. (Pickering, No. 1399 at pp. 1–3)
Pickering recommended DOE
consider removing indirect tanks from the definition of conventional electric storage water heaters, refrain from setting water heater efficiency standards for heat pumps that produce domestic hot water as an ancillary function, clarify that gas-fueled heat pumps are not considered to be electric storage
water heaters, and take a systems approach to energy efficiency for domestic hot water. (Pickering, No. 1399 at p. 3)
BWC requested that DOE provide
answers to the following questions: (1) Are split-system heat pump products that provide space heating, as well as domestic hot water through an indirect unfired hot water storage tank (‘‘UFHWST’’) classified as a circulating heat pump water heater, or instead as an air-to-water heat pump? (2) Would such a product need to be tested under the residential water heater test procedure, the air-to-water heat pump test procedure once such a procedure is created, or both? (3) Will such a product
need to represent its efficiency using UEF or annualized fuel utilization efficiency, or both? (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 11–12) While these questions pertain specifically to air-to-water heat pump appliances, DOE understands the need for general clarification regardless of the fuel type or technology.
Circulating water heaters circulate
potable water through a heat exchanger: warm water from the stored volume of water enters the circulating water heater and exits after being heated to the setpoint temperature. By contrast, an indirect water heater uses the main furnace or boiler of a home to heat a fluid that is circulated through a heat exchanger in the storage tank.
25An
indirect water heater does not circulate the potable domestic hot water supply to and from the boiler (it is a separate heating fluid which circulates through the tank and boiler), therefore, DOE has determined that a boiler paired with an indirect water heater is not a circulating water heater.
Pickering also commented that the
proposed definitions for circulating water heaters may be incompatible with or otherwise create regulatory impediments to solar thermal water heating systems. (Pickering, No. 1399 at p. 2)
DOE understands the commenter to
be referring to solar water heating systems that circulate a hot heat transfer fluid between a solar heat collector and a heat exchanger inside a domestic hot water storage tank. Such a setup is parallel to an indirect-fired water heater: it is not the potable hot water that circulates between the heat source and the tank, it is an intermediate heat transfer fluid instead. As such, solar thermal water heating systems designed in this way do not constitute circulating water heaters.
This is in contrast to a boiler with a
tankless coil (or a combination boiler- water heater). A tankless coil water heater provides hot water on demand without a tank, much like an instantaneous water heater. When a hot water faucet is turned on, water is heated as it flows through a heating coil or heat exchanger installed in a main furnace or boiler. In the tankless coil configuration, the domestic hot water supply does circulate through the boiler. However, these systems are typically flow-activated, and thus most do not meet the definition of a ‘‘circulating water heater,’’ either.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637803 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
26The Boilers Discussion Guide can be found
online at: www.energystar.gov/products/residential_
boilers_ specification (Last accessed: Nov. 3, 2023). BWC requested clarification on
whether air-to-water heat pumps would
be covered as both circulating water heaters and as hydronic heating system boilers, which are being discussed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) with regards to amendments to the consumer boiler specification. Specifically, BWC called attention to the potential overlap between the definition of circulating water heater and what the EPA is considering regulating as air-to-water (hydronic) heat pumps for space-heating in a potential revision or new specification for consumer boilers. BWC stated that both heat pump circulating water heaters and hydronic heat pumps are air-to-water heat pumps, and there would be an issue if multiple product definitions overlapped, thereby encompassing the same covered product within scope and subjecting it to two separate test procedures and efficiency standards. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 11–12)
There is currently no codified
definition for an air-to-water hydronic heat pump used for space heating purposes. However, in a March 2023
final rule amending the test procedure for consumer boilers (the ‘‘March 2023 Boilers TP Final Rule’’), DOE determined that hydronic heat pump appliances which meet the consumer boiler definition would be classified as consumer boilers. 88 FR 15510, 15516 (Mar. 13, 2023). However, the March 2023 Boilers TP Final Rule did not establish a test method for these hydronic heat pump boilers. Id. At this
time, there is no Federal test procedure to determine the Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency (‘‘AFUE’’) of such a product, hence, there are also no AFUE requirements for these heat pumps. In the March 2023 Boilers TP Final Rule, DOE also stated that, to the extent that a combination space and water heating product meets the definition of electric boiler or low pressure steam or hot water boiler, it is subject to the boilers test procedure and energy conservation standards for consumer boilers at 10 CFR 430.32(e)(2), and must be tested and rated accordingly. Id. at 15515. Therefore, per
DOE’s test procedure requirements, if an air-to-water heat pump meets both the definition of a consumer boiler and a consumer water heater, then it must be tested to both test procedures, should the boilers test procedure be amended at a future date to include an applicable method of test. On June 5, 2023, EPA released a Discussion Guide
26 requesting information from
stakeholders about a method of test for hydronic heat pump boiler systems. DOE will monitor the development of this method of test but notes that it is a draft specification that has not been released as of this final rule.
RVIA commented that based on the
plain language of the consumer product statute, appliances designed specifically for use in a recreational vehicle (‘‘RV’’) are exempted from new standards. RVIA urged DOE to continue to recognize the uniqueness of RVs and the importance of excluding specific component parts designed for RVs from new appliance standards. (RVIA, No. 1168 at p. 4)
The scope of this rulemaking excludes
water heaters designed exclusively for RV applications because the definition of ‘‘consumer product’’ in EPCA excludes consumer products designed solely for use in recreational vehicles and other mobile equipment. (See 42
U.S.C. 6292(a)) In the market and technology assessment, DOE evaluated certification data to ensure that the model information used throughout this rulemaking analysis aligned with the scope of coverage.
Section IV.A.1 of this document
contains detailed discussion of the
product classes analyzed in this final rule.
C. Test Procedure
EPCA sets forth generally applicable
criteria and procedures for DOE’s
adoption and amendment of test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6293) Manufacturers of covered products must use these test procedures to certify to DOE that their product complies with energy conservation standards and to quantify the efficiency of their product. DOE’s current energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters are expressed in terms of UEF. (See 10
CFR 430.32(d).)
DOE most recently amended the test
procedure for these products at appendix E in the consumer and residential-duty commercial water heater test procedure final rule published on June 21, 2023 (‘‘June 2023 TP Final Rule’’) pursuant to the 7-year review requirement as specified by EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A) and 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)) In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE added definitions and, where necessary, additional test procedure provisions for circulating water heaters, low-temperature water heaters, and tabletop water heaters, as well as provisions for high-temperature testing. However, DOE deferred the implementation of high-temperature testing provisions to this energy conservation standards rulemaking. 88 FR 40406, 40448. DOE also established effective storage volume as a metric and provided additional optional ambient test conditions for heat pump water heaters. Id. The test procedure for
consumer water heaters incorporates by reference current versions of industry standards ASHRAE 41.1, ASHRAE 41.6, ASHRAE 118.2, ASTM D2156, and ASTM E97 and harmonizes various aspects of the test procedure with industry test procedures ASHRAE 118.2–2022 and NEEA Advanced Water Heating Specification v8.0. The amended test procedure established by the June 2023 TP Final Rule is mandatory for consumer water heater testing starting December 18, 2023, 180 days after publication, with the exception of certain provisions (i.e., the
new high temperature test method and the circulating water heater test method). For these specific provisions, compliance is mandatory on and after the compliance date of this final rule. (See Note at the beginning of appendix
E).
D. Technological Feasibility 1. General
In each energy conservation standards
rulemaking, DOE conducts a screening
analysis based on information gathered on all current technology options and prototype designs that could improve the efficiency of the products or equipment that are the subject of the rulemaking. As the first step in such an analysis, DOE develops a list of technology options for consideration in consultation with manufacturers, design engineers, and other interested parties. DOE then determines which of those means for improving efficiency are technologically feasible. DOE considers technologies incorporated in commercially available products or in working prototypes to be technologically feasible. Sections 6(b)(3)(i) and 7(b)(1) of appendix A to 10 CFR part 430 subpart C (‘‘appendix A’’).
After DOE has determined that
particular technology options are technologically feasible, it further evaluates each technology option in light of the following additional screening criteria: (1) practicability to manufacture, install, and service; (2) adverse impacts on product utility or availability; (3) adverse impacts on health or safety and (4) unique-pathway proprietary technologies. Section 7(b)(2)–(5) of the Appendix A. Section IV.B of this document discusses the results of the screening analysis for consumer water heaters, particularly the designs DOE considered, those it screened out, and those that are the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637804 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
27DOE also presents a sensitivity analysis that
considers impacts for products shipped in a 9-year
period. 28The FFC metric is discussed in DOE’s
statement of policy and notice of policy amendment. 76 FR 51282 (Aug. 18, 2011), as amended at 77 FR 49701 (Aug. 17, 2012).
29The numeric threshold for determining the
significance of energy savings established in a final rule published on Feb. 14, 2020 (85 FR 8626, 8670) was subsequently eliminated in a final rule published on Dec. 13, 2021 (86 FR 70892). basis for the standards considered in
this rulemaking. For further details on the screening analysis for this rulemaking, see chapter 4 of the final
rule TSD.
2. Maximum Technologically Feasible
Levels
When DOE proposes to adopt a new
or amended standard for a type or class of covered product, it must determine the maximum improvement in energy efficiency or maximum reduction in energy use that is technologically feasible for such product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(p)(1)) Accordingly, in the engineering analysis, DOE determined the maximum technologically feasible (‘‘max-tech’’) improvements in energy efficiency for consumer water heaters, using the design parameters for the most efficient products available on the market or in working prototypes. The max-tech levels that DOE determined for this rulemaking are described in section IV.C of this final rule and in chapter 5 of the final rule TSD.
E. Energy Savings 1. Determination of Savings
For each trial standard level (‘‘TSL’’),
DOE projected energy savings from
application of the TSL to consumer water heaters purchased in the 30-year period that begins in the first full year of compliance with the amended standards (2030–2059).
27The savings
are measured over the entire lifetime of consumer water heaters purchased in the 30-year analysis period. DOE quantified the energy savings attributable to each TSL as the difference in energy consumption
between each standards case and the no- new-standards case. The no-new- standards case represents a projection of energy consumption that reflects how the market for a product would likely evolve in the absence of amended energy conservation standards.
DOE used its national impact analysis
(‘‘NIA’’) spreadsheet models to estimate national energy savings (‘‘NES’’) from potential amended standards for consumer water heaters. The NIA spreadsheet model (described in section IV.H of this document) calculates energy savings in terms of site energy, which is the energy directly consumed by products at the locations where they are used. For electricity, DOE reports national energy savings in terms of primary energy savings, which is the savings in the energy that is used to generate and transmit the site electricity. For natural gas, the primary
energy savings are considered to be equal to the site energy savings. DOE also calculates NES in terms of full-fuel- cycle (‘‘FFC’’) energy savings. The FFC metric includes the energy consumed in extracting, processing, and transporting primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas,
petroleum fuels), and thus presents a more complete picture of the impacts of energy conservation standards.
28DOE’s
approach is based on the calculation of an FFC multiplier for each of the energy types used by covered products or equipment. For more information on
FFC energy savings, see section IV.H.2 of this document.
2. Significance of Savings
To adopt any new or amended
standards for a covered product, DOE
must determine that such action would result in significant energy savings. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B))
The significance of energy savings
offered by a new or amended energy conservation standard cannot be determined without knowledge of the specific circumstances surrounding a given rulemaking.
29For example, some
covered products and equipment have most of their energy consumption occur during periods of peak energy demand. The impacts of these products on the energy infrastructure can be more pronounced than products with relatively constant demand. Accordingly, DOE evaluates the significance of energy savings on a case- by-case basis, taking into account the significance of cumulative FFC national energy savings, the cumulative FFC emissions reductions, and the need to confront the global climate crisis, among other factors.
As stated, the standard levels adopted
in this final rule are projected to result in national energy savings of 17.6 quads, the equivalent of the primary annual energy use of 116 million homes. Based on the amount of FFC savings, the corresponding reduction in emissions, and the need to confront the global climate crisis, DOE has determined the energy savings from the standard levels adopted in this final rule are ‘‘significant’’ within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B). F. Economic Justification
1. Specific Criteria
As noted previously, EPCA provides
seven factors to be evaluated in
determining whether a potential energy conservation standard is economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)(VII)) The following sections discuss how DOE has addressed each of those seven factors in this rulemaking.
a. Economic Impact on Manufacturers
and Consumers
In determining the impacts of
potential new or amended standards on manufacturers, DOE conducts an MIA, as discussed in section IV.J of this
document. DOE first uses an annual cash-flow approach to determine the quantitative impacts. This step includes both a short-term assessment—based on the cost and capital requirements during the period between when a regulation is issued and when entities must comply with the regulation—and a long-term assessment over a 30-year period. The industry-wide impacts analyzed include (1) INPV, which values the industry on the basis of expected future cash flows; (2) cash flows by year; (3) changes in revenue and income; and (4) other measures of impact, as appropriate. Second, DOE analyzes and reports the impacts on different types of manufacturers, including impacts on small manufacturers. Third, DOE considers the impact of standards on domestic manufacturer employment and manufacturing capacity, as well as the potential for standards to result in plant closures and loss of capital investment. Finally, DOE takes into account cumulative impacts of various DOE regulations and other regulatory requirements on manufacturers.
For individual consumers, measures
of economic impact include the changes in LCC and PBP associated with new or amended standards. These measures are discussed further in the following section. For consumers in the aggregate, DOE also calculates the national net present value of the consumer costs and benefits expected to result from particular standards. DOE also evaluates the impacts of potential standards on identifiable subgroups of consumers that may be affected disproportionately by a standard.
b. Savings in Operating Costs Compared
To Increase in Price (LCC and PBP)
EPCA requires DOE to consider the
savings in operating costs throughout the estimated average life of the covered product in the type (or class) compared to any increase in the price of, or in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637805 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
initial charges for, or maintenance
expenses of, the covered product that are likely to result from a standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(II)) DOE conducts this comparison in its LCC and PBP analysis.
The LCC is the sum of the purchase
price of a product (including its installation) and the operating cost (including energy, maintenance, and repair expenditures) discounted over the lifetime of the product. The LCC analysis requires a variety of inputs, such as product prices, product energy consumption, energy prices, maintenance and repair costs, product lifetime, and discount rates appropriate for consumers. To account for
uncertainty and variability in specific inputs, such as product lifetime and discount rate, DOE uses a distribution of values, with probabilities attached to each value.
The PBP is the estimated amount of
time (in years) it takes consumers to recover the increased purchase cost (including installation) of a more- efficient product through lower operating costs. DOE calculates the PBP by dividing the change in purchase cost due to a more stringent standard by the change in annual operating cost for the year that standards are assumed to take effect.
For its LCC and PBP analysis, DOE
assumes that consumers will purchase the covered products in the first year of compliance with new or amended standards. The LCC savings for the considered efficiency levels are calculated relative to the case that reflects projected market trends in the absence of new or amended standards. DOE’s LCC and PBP analysis is discussed in further detail in section IV.F of this document.
c. Energy Savings
Although significant conservation of
energy is a separate statutory
requirement for adopting an energy conservation standard, EPCA requires DOE, in determining the economic justification of a standard, to consider the total projected energy savings that are expected to result directly from the standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(III)) As discussed in section IV.H of this document, DOE uses the NIA spreadsheet models to project national energy savings.
d. Lessening of Utility or Performance of
Products
In establishing product classes, and in
evaluating design options and the impact of potential standard levels, DOE evaluates potential standards that would not lessen the utility or performance of the considered products. (42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(IV)) Based on data available to DOE, the standards adopted in this document would not reduce the utility or performance of the products under consideration in this rulemaking.
e. Impact of Any Lessening of
Competition
EPCA directs DOE to consider the
impact of any lessening of competition, as determined in writing by the Attorney General, that is likely to result from a standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V)) It also directs the Attorney General to determine the impact, if any, of any lessening of competition likely to result from a standard and to transmit such determination to the Secretary within 60 days of the publication of a proposed rule, together with an analysis of the nature and extent of the impact. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(ii)) To assist the Department of Justice (‘‘DOJ’’) in making such a determination, DOE transmitted copies of its proposed rule and the NOPR TSD to the Attorney General for review, with a request that the DOJ provide its determination on this issue. In its assessment letter responding to DOE, DOJ concluded that the proposed energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters are unlikely to substantially lessen competition. DOE is publishing the Attorney General’s assessment at the end of this final rule.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai asserted that the standards proposed in the July 2023 NOPR would have a significant market effect, with manufacturers likely choosing to leave the market rather than expend the millions of dollars it would take to redesign their products and production especially in requiring condensing technology in order to be in compliance with the standards proposed. (NPGA,
APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, No. 441 at p. 3)
Although commenters focus primarily
on condensing technologies as it relates to GIWHs, which are not amended in this final rule, DOE continued to look at the impact of competition as it relates to the other product classes for which DOE is adopting standards in this final rule. DOE does not expect that the adopted standard would significantly alter the level of concentration in the consumer water heater market. Additionally, DOJ stated, in a letter to DOE written in response to the July 2023 NOPR, that ‘‘we do not have an evidentiary basis to conclude that the proposed energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters are likely to substantially lessen competition.’’ (See Attorney General’s assessment at the end of this
final rule). For this final rule, DOE reviewed up-to-date information on the consumer water heater models available on the U.S. market to ensure a comprehensive analysis of the current manufacturer landscape. In response to stakeholders’ comments, DOE carefully reviewed product offerings of original equipment manufacturers (‘‘OEMs’’) of gas-fired storage water heaters. DOE identified five OEMs of gas-fired storage water heaters that would be subject to more stringent standards under this rulemaking. Of the five OEMs identified, four OEMs currently manufacture gas-fired storage water heaters that meet the adopted TSL (EL 2 for gas-fired storage water heaters). Collectively, the four OEMs that already offer gas-fired storage water heaters that meet EL 2 account for approximately 95 percent of gas-fired storage water heater shipments.
f. Need for National Energy
Conservation
DOE also considers the need for
national energy and water conservation in determining whether a new or amended standard is economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VI)) The energy savings from the adopted standards are likely to provide improvements to the security and reliability of the Nation’s energy system. Reductions in the demand for electricity also may result in reduced costs for maintaining the reliability of the Nation’s electricity system. DOE conducts a utility impact analysis to estimate how standards may affect the Nation’s needed power generation capacity, as discussed in section IV.M of this document.
DOE maintains that environmental
and public health benefits associated with the more efficient use of energy are important to take into account when considering the need for national energy conservation. The adopted standards are likely to result in environmental benefits in the form of reduced emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases (‘‘GHGs’’) associated with energy production and use. DOE conducts an emissions analysis to estimate how potential standards may affect these emissions, as discussed in section IV.K of this document; the estimated emissions impacts are reported in section V.B.6 of this document. DOE also estimates the
economic value of emissions reductions resulting from the considered TSLs, as discussed in section IV.L of this document.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637806 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
g. Other Factors
In determining whether an energy
conservation standard is economically
justified, DOE may consider any other factors that the Secretary deems to be relevant. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VII)) To the extent DOE identifies any relevant information regarding economic justification that does not fit into the other categories described previously, DOE could consider such information under ‘‘other factors.’’
2. Rebuttable Presumption
As set forth in 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)(B)(iii), EPCA creates a
rebuttable presumption that an energy conservation standard is economically justified if the additional cost to the consumer of a product that meets the standard is less than three times the value of the first year’s energy savings resulting from the standard, as calculated under the applicable DOE test procedure. DOE’s LCC and PBP analyses generate values used to calculate the effect potential amended energy conservation standards would have on the payback period for consumers. These analyses include, but are not limited to, the 3-year payback period contemplated under the rebuttable-presumption test. In addition, DOE routinely conducts an economic analysis that considers the full range of impacts to consumers, manufacturers, the Nation, and the environment, as required under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i). The results of this analysis serve as the basis for DOE’s evaluation of the economic justification for a potential standard level (thereby supporting or rebutting the results of any preliminary determination of economic justification). The rebuttable presumption payback calculation is discussed in section IV.F of this document.
IV. Methodology and Discussion of
Related Comments
This section addresses the analyses
DOE has performed for this rulemaking with regard to consumer water heaters. Separate subsections address each component of DOE’s analyses.
DOE used several analytical tools to
estimate the impact of the standards considered in this document. The first tool is a spreadsheet that calculates the
LCC savings and PBP of potential amended or new energy conservation standards. The national impacts analysis uses a second spreadsheet set that provides shipments projections and calculates national energy savings and net present value of total consumer costs and savings expected to result from potential energy conservation standards. DOE uses the third spreadsheet tool, the Government Regulatory Impact Model (‘‘GRIM’’), to assess manufacturer impacts of potential standards. These three spreadsheet tools are available on the DOE website for this rulemaking: www.regulations.gov/
docket/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0019. Additionally, DOE used output from the latest version of the Energy Information Administration’s (‘‘EIA’s’’) Annual Energy Outlook (‘‘AEO’’) for the emissions and utility impact analyses.
A. Market and Technology Assessment
DOE develops information in the
market and technology assessment that
provides an overall picture of the market for the products concerned, including the purpose of the products, the industry structure, manufacturers, market characteristics, and technologies used in the products. This activity includes both quantitative and qualitative assessments, based primarily on publicly available information. The subjects addressed in the market and technology assessment for this rulemaking include (1) a determination of the scope of the rulemaking and product classes, (2) manufacturers and industry structure, (3) existing efficiency programs, (4) shipments information, (5) market and industry trends, and (6) technologies or design options that could improve the energy efficiency of consumer water heaters. The key findings of DOE’s market assessment are summarized in the following sections. See chapter 3 of the
final rule TSD for further discussion of the market and technology assessment.
1. Product Classes
When evaluating and establishing
energy conservation standards for a type
(or class) of covered products, DOE divides covered products into product classes by the type of energy used, or by capacity or other performance-related features which other products within such type (or class) do not have and that justify differing standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)) In making a determination whether a performance-related feature justifies a different standard, DOE must consider such factors as the utility of the feature to the consumer and other factors DOE determines are appropriate. Id.
EPCA, as amended by the National
Appliance Energy Act (NAECA; Pub. L. 100–12), established initial energy conservation standards, expressed as EF, that were based on three product classes differentiated by fuel type: (1) gas-fired, (2) oil-fired, and (3) electric. (42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(1)) These standards applied to consumer water heaters manufactured on or after January 1, 1990.
DOE subsequently amended these EF
standards twice, most recently in the April 2010 Final Rule, with which compliance was required starting on April 16, 2015. 75 FR 20112. In the April 2010 Final Rule, DOE further divided consumer water heaters into product classes based on fuel type (gas- fired, oil-fired, or electric), product type (storage, instantaneous, tabletop), storage volume, and input rate.
The Energy Efficiency Improvement
Act of 2015 (‘‘EEIA 2015’’) (Pub. L. 114– 11), enacted on April 30, 2015, added a definition of ‘‘grid-enabled water heater’’ and a standard in terms of EF for such products to EPCA’s energy conservation standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(6)(A)(ii)) DOE codified the definition for grid-enabled water heater and the associated energy conservation standards in a final rule published and effective on August 11, 2015. 80 FR 48004.
Most recently, the December 2016
Conversion Factor Final Rule, published and effective on December 29, 2016, translated the EF-based standards to UEF-based standards for certain classes of consumer water heaters, which are shown in Table IV.1. Although the classes of consumer water heaters with UEF-based standards have limitations on the stored volume, as discussed in that final rule, the standards established in EPCA do not place any limitation on the storage volume of consumer water heaters. Therefore, the original standards established by EPCA in terms of EF remain applicable to all products without UEF-based standards. 81 FR 96204, 96209–96211.
The 32 product classes covered in this
final rule for which DOE has currently established UEF-based standards are summarized in Table IV.1. The product classes without UEF-based standards, for which EF-based standards from EPCA apply, are shown in Table IV.2.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637807 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
The CA IOUs suggested that DOE
reconsider its approach to setting
minimum UEF standards for the water heaters formerly subject to EF standards. Citing the provisions in EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1)(B)), the CA IOUs stated that DOE must consider capacity, consumer utility, and other performance-related features when establishing separate product classes for different types of water heaters. The CA IOUs questioned whether converting an EF standard to a
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.013</GPH> ER06MY24.014</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.1 Consumer Water Heater Product Classes with Current UEF-Based Standards
Product Type Covered in this Final Rated Storage Volume and Input Draw Patterns Rule Rating (if applicable)
Very Small
Gas-Fired Storage Water Heater 2: 20 gal and :S 55 gal Low
Medium
Hi2:h
Very Small
Gas-Fired Storage Water Heater > 55 gal and :S 100 gal Low
Medium
Hi!!h
Very Small
Oil-Fired Storage Water Heater :S 50 gal Low
Medium
Hi!!h
Very Small
Electric Storage Water Heater 2: 20 gal and :S 55 gal Low
Medium
Hi2:h
Very Small
Electric Storage Water Heater > 55 gal and :S 120 gal Low
Medium
Hi!!h
Very Small
Tabletop Water Heater 2: 20 gal and :S 120 gal Low
Medium
Hi!!h
Very Small
Instantaneous Electric Water Heater <2 gal Low
Medium
Hi2:h
Very Small
Grid-Enabled Water Heater > 75 gal Low
Medium
Hi!!h
Table IV.2 Consumer Water Heater Product Classes without Current UEF-Based
Standards
Product Class Covered in Rated storage volume and input rating
this Final Rule (if applicable)
Gas-fired Storage < 20 gal
> 100 gal
Oil-fired Storage > 50 gal
Electric Storage < 20 gal
> 120 gal
Tabletop < 20 gal
> 120 gal*
Oil-fired Instantaneous < 2gal
~ 2 gal
Electric Instantaneous ~ 2 gal
* Note: products larger than 120 gallons are not possible to fit into the design description of a tabletop water heater, as discussed
in section IV.A.1.f.iv. 37808 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
30Prior to the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE
became aware of gas-fired instantaneous water
heaters meeting the definition of consumer water heaters which operated differently than those DOE had previously considered in test procedure rulemakings. On September 5, 2019, DOE issued an enforcement policy for consumer water heaters meeting the definition of gas-fired ‘‘circulating
water heater’’ as described in said enforcement policy in which DOE stated that it would not seek civil penalties for failing to certify these products, or if these products failed to comply with applicable standards, on or before December 31, 2021. The June 2023 TP Final Rule has since addressed this issue by establishing test procedures to determine UEF ratings for circulating water heaters. UEF standard should result in a new
product class. The commenter urged DOE to immediately initiate a new
rulemaking to address appropriate standards levels or the new product classes, if established. (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at p. 5)
In response to the CA IOUs, DOE
originally established these product classes in the 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule. 81 FR 96204, 96210. At this time, DOE does not have sufficient data to perform an analysis of costs versus benefits of subjecting these products to standards of the same stringency as the amended standards proposed in the July 2023 NOPR. While these products may not have performance-related ‘‘features’’ distinguishing them from currently covered products, these models come in different capacities than the products
for which DOE has already established UEF-based standards. As has been observed in DOE’s teardown analyses and has been indicated by comments from manufacturers, the applicability of efficiency-improving design options is often predicated upon the size or capacity of the water heater; therefore, at this time, the capacities of these products do appear to justify separate
standards. However, should future product designs demonstrate that the same efficiency-improving design options are equally as applicable for these capacities, DOE would consider the need for distinguishing these product classes by evaluating whether separate standards are justified for these capacities in a future standards rulemaking (see 42 U.S.C.
6295(q)(1)(B)).
a. Circulating Water Heaters
In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE
established a definition for ‘‘circulating
water heater’’ in 10 CFR 430.2, and also established test procedures to determine the UEF of these types of water heaters. 88 FR 40406. In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE identified three potential classes of circulating water heater based on fuel type and input ratings derived from instantaneous water heater definitions in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6291(27), which are shown in 88 FR 49058, 49077.
Table IV.3, and proposed their
addition to the definitions found at 10 CFR 430.2. 88 FR 49058, 49077.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
As discussed in the June 2023 TP
Final Rule, DOE had at that time
determined that circulating water heaters with input ratings below 200,000 Btu/h (for gas-fired), 210,000 Btu/h (for oil-fired), or 12 kW (for electric) met the definitional criteria for instantaneous consumer water heaters. As such, these products were to be subject to the applicable energy conservation standards; however, DOE previously provided an enforcement policy for circulating water heaters.
30
Because an amended test procedure that includes new provisions for testing circulating water heaters was recently
finalized in the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE proposed in the July 2023 NOPR to establish updated UEF standards that reflect the new test method and requested feedback on the proposed standards. In response to the July 2023 NOPR, DOE received comments that largely suggested that circulating water heaters are storage- type water heaters. As noted in section III.B, on December 27, 2023, therefore, DOE published the December 2023 SNOPR that proposed to reclassify these products as configurations of storage- type water heaters, thus proposed that separate product classes for circulating water heaters are not required. 88 FR 89330.
A ‘‘circulating water heater’’ is
currently defined at 10 CFR 430.2 as an ‘‘instantaneous or heat pump-type water heater that does not have an operational scheme in which the burner, heating element, or compressor initiates and/or terminates heating based on sensing flow; has a water temperature sensor located at the inlet or the outlet of the water heater or in a separate storage tank that is the primary means of initiating and terminating heating; and must be used in combination with a recirculating pump and either a separate storage tank or water circulation loop in order to achieve the water flow and temperature conditions recommended in the manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions.’’
As described in the December 2023
SNOPR, circulating water heaters contain very little to no water on their own (i.e., are ‘‘tankless’’), but, as was
determined in the June 2023 TP Final Rule, require a separate volume of water in order to function properly when installed in the field. In that rulemaking, circulating water heaters were designated as instantaneous-type water heaters because of the minimal storage volume contained within the product. However, comments received in response to the July 2023 NOPR led DOE to reevaluate circulating water heaters and propose in the December 2023 SNOPR to classify them as storage- type water heaters because they necessarily operate in tandem with a stored volume of water; hence, the circulating water heater and its separate tank or recirculation loop must be
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.015</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.3 Proposed Classes of Circulating Water Heaters from July 2023 NOPR
Product Class Characteristics
A circulating water heater with a nominal input of 200,000
Gas-fired Circulating Water Heater Btu/h or less; contains no more than one gallon of water per
4,000 Btu/h of input
A circulating water heater with a nominal input of 210,000
Oil-fired Circulating Water Heater Btu/h or less; contains no more than one gallon of water per
4,000 Btu/h of input
A circulating water heater with an input of 12 kW or less;
Electric Circulating Water Heater contains no more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu/h of
input (including heat pump-only units with power inputs of no
more than 24 A at 250 V) 37809 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
treated as one system. When
considering the entire system—the circulating water heater plus the stored water volume required for its operation in the field—these water heaters are operationally very similar to storage- type water heaters and, as a result, DOE had tentatively determined that it is appropriate to classify them as such under its regulations. 88 FR 89330, 89333. The December 2023 SNOPR proposed the following revised definition for circulating water heaters:
‘‘Circulating water heater means a
water heater that does not have an operational scheme in which the burner, heating element, or compressor initiates and/or terminates heating based on sensing flow; has a water temperature sensor located at the inlet or the outlet of the water heater or in a separate storage tank that is the primary means of initiating and terminating heating; and must be used in combination with a recirculating pump to circulate water and either a separate storage tank or water circulation loop in order to achieve the water flow and temperature conditions recommended in the manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions. Paired with a separate storage tank, a circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater.’’
88 FR 89330, 89339.
CEC, BWC, NEEA, NYSERDA, ASAP
et al., and A.O. Smith expressed support
for DOE’s tentative determination that circulating water heaters be considered storage-type water heaters and subject to the appropriate standards. (CEC, No. 1412 at pp. 1–2; BWC, No. 1413 at p. 1; NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 2; NYSERDA, No. 1406 at p. 2; ASAP et al., No. 1407 at pp. 1–2; A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at p. 2) NEEA and ASAP et al. noted that, compared to other storage-type water heaters, circulating water heaters do not provide any additional utility or performance-related features that would warrant a separate product class. (NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 2; ASAP et al.,
No. 1407 at pp. 1–2) NEEA and A.O. Smith commented that defining circulating water heaters as storage-type will address concerns regarding these products potentially being used as a circumvention pathway for more stringent storage-type standards. (NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 2; A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at p. 2) A.O. Smith added that this will provide more business certainty. (A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at p. 2)
DOE specifically requested comment
and information on whether gas-fired circulating water heaters could offer the same utility as gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. 88 FR 89330, 89334. DOE sought to understand whether gas-fired circulating water heaters could be a
potential loophole to gas-fired instantaneous water heater standards enforcement after receiving comments in response to the NOPR identifying such a possibility.
BWC agreed with DOE that gas-fired
circulating water heaters would not be direct substitutes for gas-fired instantaneous water heaters, indicating that gas-fired circulating water heaters as defined in the December 2023 SNOPR are better suited towards providing large volumes of hot water in short periods of time and gas-fired instantaneous water heaters for lengthier periods of time. (BWC, No. 1413 at p. 3) Rheem supported DOE’s tentative determination that circulating water heaters do not provide the same consumer utility as gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. Rheem added that though they do not currently exist on the market, the combination of the non-flow-activated operational scheme, storage tank or recirculation loop requirement, and input rate limits consistent with other storage-type water heaters present in DOE’s definition ensures that any future gas-fired circulating water heaters would not serve as direct replacements for gas- fired instantaneous water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1408 at p. 2) A.O. Smith agreed with DOE’s tentative determination that gas-fired circulating water heaters do not provide the same consumer utility as gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. (A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at p. 6) CEC noted that circulating water heaters provide different utilities from instantaneous water heaters and experience thermal standby losses more than a typical non- circulating storage water heater due to plumbing acting as a storage volume for a significant volume of hot water. (CEC, No. 1412 at p. 3) ASAP et al. agreed with DOE’s tentative determination that gas-fired circulating water heaters do not provide the same consumer utility as gas-fired instantaneous water heaters due to the fact that gas-fired instantaneous water heaters utilize flow- activated control schemes and larger burners (compared to gas-fired circulating water heaters) in order to meet demand on a continuous basis, whereas gas-fired circulating water heaters must operate with a separate stored volume of hot water. (ASAP et al., No. 1407 at p. 2)
Rinnai agreed with DOE that gas-fired
circulating water heaters do not provide the same utility as gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. Rinnai also stated that gas-fired circulating water
heaters do not provide consumers with the same features, energy efficiency and reduced emissions benefits as gas-fired
instantaneous water heaters at the proposed UEF levels. Rinnai reiterated its comments made in response to the July 2023 NOPR that UEFs of 0.80 to 0.81 result in increased energy savings and reduction of CO
2emissions in
comparison with the levels gas-fired circulating water heaters would be subject to as gas-fired storage water heaters. Thus, Rinnai arrived at a different conclusion from DOE and claimed that there is not a sufficient basis for allowing gas-fired circulating water heaters to be held to a lower UEF standard than other consumer products and requested that DOE instead establish the more stringent standards proposed in the July 2023 NOPR. (Rinnai, No. 1415 at pp. 1–2)
As discussed in section IV.A.1.c of
this document, DOE has found sufficient justification in accordance with the provisions of EPCA to establish separate standards for storage-type and instantaneous-type water heaters.
Rheem, however, noted an additional
concern that circulating water heaters can be paired with any size storage tank in the field, and that there is still a concern that circulating water heaters certified to a lower capacity energy conservation standard would be installed with higher capacity storage tanks where higher energy conservation standards would be required. Because of this, Rheem recommended DOE establish separate energy conservation standards for circulating water heaters, but at levels consistent with the higher capacity energy conservation standards. In its recommendation, Rheem showed that the standards equations for larger storage-type product classes (i.e., gas-
fired storage water heaters 55–100 gallons, and electric storage water heaters 55–120 gallons) would apply to both circulating water heaters and their analogous traditional storage-type water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1408 at pp. 2–3)
DOE understands Rheem to be
suggesting that, in the case that a circulating water heater is designed and marketed to be paired with multiple volumes of storage tanks in the field, it is useful for the rating to reflect larger storage volumes. However, DOE notes that the size of the separate storage tank that the product is tested with (in accordance with section 4.10 of the test
procedure) results in the effective storage volume of the circulating water heater, which, for most types of circulating water heaters will be 80 to 120 gallons. This already results in circulating water heaters being held to the same standards as larger storage water heaters. The only exception to this is electric heat pump circulating
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637810 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
water heaters, which are paired with
smaller tanks. Separate storage tank pairings are discussed further in section V.D.2 of this document. Additionally, the commenter does not provide evidence as to how different standards for circulating water heaters would be justified under the provisions of EPCA.
After reviewing these comments DOE
has concluded that circulating water heaters do not have any characteristics which justify separate standards under the provisions of EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1). DOE has determined not to create separate product classes for circulating water heaters.
To accomplish this, in the December
2023 SNOPR DOE had proposed an addition to the definition that stated, ‘‘Paired with a separate storage tank, a circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater.’’ 88 FR 89330, 89335.
Multiple stakeholders raised concern
that DOE’s proposed revised definition for ‘‘circulating water heater’’ seemingly implies that circulating water heaters are only storage-type water heaters if they are paired with a separate storage tank. These commenters—NEEA, ASAP et al., the CA IOUs, CEC, A.O. Smith and NYSERDA—all indicated that circulating water heaters paired with a circulating loop also constitute storage- type water heaters. (NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 3; ASAP et al., No. 1407 at p. 2; CA
IOUs, No. 1409 at pp. 1–2; CEC, No. 1412 at p. 2; A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at pp. 4–5; NYSERDA, No. 1406 at p. 2)
NEEA requested that DOE define
circulating water heaters as constituting storage-type water heaters regardless of the configuration in which they are sold or installed. (NEEA, No. 1414 at p. 3) ASAP et al. encouraged DOE to clarify the proposed definition for circulating water heaters so that it is clear all circulating water heaters, whether paired with a separate storage tank or recirculation loop, would be considered storage-type water heaters. (ASAP et al., No. 1407 at p. 2)
The CA IOUs also stated that
excluding mention of circulation loops would be inconsistent with the earlier definitional requirements indicating that they must be paired with either a separate storage tank or a water circulation loop and recommend that DOE modify the definition as ‘‘Paired with a separate storage tank or circulation loop, a circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater.’’ (CA IOUs, No. 1409 at pp. 1– 2)
CEC provided similar statements,
adding that the exclusion of pairings with water circulation loops may become a loophole exploited by manufacturers. CEC recommended that
DOE modify the definition to simply state that ‘‘a circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater’’ to avoid potential misreading. (CEC, No. 1412 at p. 2)
A.O. Smith recommended DOE
remove the phrase ‘‘paired with’’ from the statement ‘‘paired with a separate storage tank a circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater’’ in the definition for circulating water heater to avoid implying that only circulating water heaters that come with a manufacturer-specified or supplied tank would be considered circulating water heaters. In place of this phrasing, A.O. Smith suggested DOE incorporate the definition for a ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank’’ currently outlined in section 1.9 of appendix E to subpart B into § 430.2 and reference this definition in the circulating water heater definition to ensure clarity. A.O. Smith commented that, given the input capacity limits placed on circulating water heaters in their respective definitions, a recirculation loop without the use of a storage tank is unlikely to be an applicable configuration in the residential context. Therefore, A.O. Smith recommended DOE remove the term ‘‘either’’ and the phrase ‘‘or water recirculation loop’’ from the circulating water heater definition proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR. (A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at pp. 4–5)
NYSERDA recommended that DOE
update the definition for circulating water heater to read as follows: ‘‘When paired with a separate storage tank or as part of a water circulation loop, a circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater’’. (NYSERDA, No. 1406 at p. 2)
In response to these requests for
further clarification, DOE agrees with most commenters that circulating water heaters would constitute storage water heaters whether they are paired with a tank or a recirculation loop. The loop serves to store hot water in pipes
instead of in a tank. In both cases, the product does not function properly unless the hot water can be maintained outside of the water heater prior to delivery at a fixture.
While A.O. Smith suggested that a
circulating water heater be defined as a ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank,’’ this is not necessarily reflective of field usage to the extent that it can be used to define the product at 10 CFR 430.2. Numerous other comments indicate that a circulating water heater can also function with a recirculation loop. DOE has found examples of gas-fired instantaneous water heaters with input rates that modulate as low as 15,000 Btu/h and can be outfitted with
recirculation loops in residential homes. While these specific products are not circulating water heaters because they have flow-activated control schemes and do not explicitly require a separate volume of stored hot water to function, they do demonstrate that it is possible for gas-fired products with input rates lower than 75,000 Btu/h to be used in conjunction with a recirculation loop and no tank.
Circulating water heaters are treated
as ‘‘water heaters requiring a storage tank’’ in appendix E for the purpose of conducting the test procedure because they are not sold with a tank. The appendix E test procedure refers to ‘‘water heaters requiring a storage tank’’ in section 1.19 order to provide instruction on how to set up such a water heater with a representative volume of stored water. Therefore, DOE is not amending 10 CFR 430.2 to define a ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank’’ because this terminology has limited application to the test setup instructions in appendix E only. DOE is also not incorporating this terminology in the definition of ‘‘circulating water heater’’ so as not to contradict how these products can be designed, marketed, and used in the field.
After considering the suggestions
provided by interested parties, DOE is amending the definition of ‘‘circulating water heater’’ at 10 CFR 430.2 to read as:
Circulating water heater means a
water heater that does not have an operational scheme in which the burner, heating element, or compressor initiates and/or terminates heating based on sensing flow; has a water temperature
sensor located at the inlet or the outlet of the water heater or in a separate storage tank that is the primary means of initiating and terminating heating; and must be used in combination with a recirculating pump to circulate water and either a separate storage tank or water circulation loop in order to achieve the water flow and temperature conditions recommended in the manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions. A circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater.
The December 2023 SNOPR had also
proposed to amend the definitions of the three different fuel types of circulating water heater to align with the re-classification of these products as storage water heaters. 88 FR 89330, 89339.
CA IOUs stated that specifying the
volume of stored water per 4,000 Btu/ h of input in these definitions is unnecessary because circulating water
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637811 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
heaters are already defined as storage-
type water heaters and recommended that DOE remove this requirement from the definitions of electric, gas-fired and oil-fired circulating water heaters as proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR. (CA IOUs, No. 1409 at p. 2)
DOE also agrees with the CA IOUs’
suggestion to revise the definitions for the different types of circulating water heaters. As discussed in section III.B, these additional definitions serve mainly to clarify the input rate cutoffs to distinguish these products from commercial water heaters. DOE is amending these definitions to read as:
Electric circulating water heater
means a circulating water heater with an input of 12 kW or less (including heat pump-only units with power inputs of no more than 24 A at 250 V).
Gas-fired circulating water heater
means a circulating water heater with a nominal input of 75,000 Btu/h or less.
Oil-fired circulating water heater
means a circulating water heater with a nominal input of 105,000 Btu/h or less.
In the December 2023 SNOPR DOE
requested comment on what the implications to industry might be if circulating water heaters were to be treated as storage water heaters. 88 FR 89330, 89335. In response, several commenters agreed that DOE’s analysis for amended standards of storage-type water heaters is still representative if circulating water heaters are included in these product classes.
CEC agreed with DOE that the
definition of circulating water heater as
proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR would not change the results of the life- cycle cost, national impact, and other downstream analyses, stating that the proposed changes would not cause DOE’s analysis to become unrepresentative and agreeing that no additional analysis is necessary. (CEC, No. 1412 at p. 2) The CA IOUs stated that there are few to no shipments of consumer water heaters meeting the definition of ‘‘circulating water heater’’ as proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR. CA IOUs stated that DOE may therefore maintain its July 2023 NOPR analyses with respect to storage-type water heaters and apply the associated proposed standards to circulating water heaters. (CA IOUs, No. 1409 at p. 1) NYSERDA and ASAP et al. stated their agreement with DOE’s assessment that, because DOE has not identified consumer water heaters on the U.S. market that qualify as circulating water heaters, analytical results from the July 2023 NOPR remain representative and do not need to be updated due to changes proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR. (NYSERDA, No. 1406 at p. 2; ASAP et al., No. 1407 at p. 3) ASAP et al. added that, if introduced, circulating water heaters would likely have similar cost and usage characteristics to existing storage-type consumer water heaters. (ASAP et al., No. 1407 at p. 3)
Rinnai, however, requested that DOE
clarify the justification for amending the definition of products that do not currently exist on the market. (Rinnai, No. 1415 at p. 1) BWC agreed with DOE that circulating water heaters as defined in the June 2023 TP Final Rule are not deployed in residential applications. (BWC, No. 1413 at p. 1) BWC agreed with DOE that there are no consumer products that meet the definition of ‘‘circulating water heater’’ as proposed in the December 2023 SNOPR and requested that DOE clarify how it determined that these products would have similar cost and use profiles as storage-type water heaters. (BWC, No. 1413 at p. 2)
In the December 2023 SNOPR the
Department had erroneously stated that there are no longer heat pump circulating water heaters available on the market (see 88 FR 89330, 89333) due
to changes in a manufacturer’s website. Product literature for these models exists and has been added to the docket for this rulemaking. In addition to stakeholder comments, this literature demonstrates the use of these products in a manner similar to storage-type water heaters. Shipments of these products, though they are fewer than those of traditional storage-type water heaters, are not zero. These products are included in historical data on heat pump water heater shipments as they would meet efficiency level 1 for small electric storage water heaters. Hence DOE’s analysis does include circulating heat pump water heaters as storage-type water heaters.
b. Low-Temperature Water Heaters
As stated previously in section III.B of
this document, in the June 2023 TP
Final Rule, DOE established the following definition for ‘‘low- temperature water heater’’ in 10 CFR 430.2:
‘‘Low-temperature water heater’’
means an electric instantaneous water heater that is not a circulating water heater and cannot deliver water at a temperature greater than or equal to the set point temperature specified in section 2.5 of appendix E to subpart B of this part when supplied with water at the supply water temperature specified in section 2.3 of appendix E to subpart B of part 430 and the flow rate specified in section 5.2.2.1 of appendix E to subpart B of part 430. DOE also established test procedures
to determine the UEF of these types of
water heaters. 88 FR 40406. Regarding low-temperature water heaters, DOE notes that they are covered as electric instantaneous water heaters. As discussed in section IV.C of this document, DOE is not considering updated standards for electric instantaneous water heaters in this rulemaking because it was unable to determine technologies associated with increased efficiencies in these products. Therefore, although low-temperature water heaters are tested in a slightly different manner from other electric instantaneous water heaters, DOE is maintaining low-temperature water heaters within the broader electric instantaneous water heater product class as proposed in the July 2023 NOPR and is not establishing a separate class for them.
c. Storage-Type and Instantaneous-Type
Product Classes
In the March 2022 Preliminary
Analysis, DOE addressed comments received in response to the May 2020 RFI that suggested that DOE should consider eliminating the separate product classes for instantaneous water heaters. For the preliminary analysis, DOE analyzed separate classes for instantaneous water heaters, but sought feedback from stakeholders on whether storage-type and instantaneous-type water heater product classes should be combined. (See section 2.3 of the preliminary TSD.)
In response to the March 2022
Preliminary Analysis, DOE received comments indicating that storage and instantaneous product classes should not be combined because each type of product provides unique utility to consumers and combining their product classes would lead to UEF standards that are not technologically feasible.
DOE tentatively agreed with these comments, which were addressed in the July 2023 NOPR, and maintained separate product classes for storage and instantaneous water heaters for its analyses and proposed standards. 88 FR 49058, 49078.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
BWC agreed with DOE’s tentative determination to maintain separate product classes for instantaneous-type and storage-type water heaters because they offer distinct utilities to consumers in both their designs and capabilities. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 14) Rheem also agreed with DOE’s tentative determination to maintain separate product classes for storage-type and instantaneous-type water heaters given that these water heaters have different
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637812 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
3112 kW is approximately 41,000 Btu/h.
Instantaneous-type water heaters contain no more
than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu/h of input, resulting in a maximum of about 10 gallons for an electric instantaneous water heater with 12 kW of input. 32See A.O. Smith’s Info Center on Gas Tank High
Efficiency Water Heaters, available at www.hotwater.com/info-center/gas-water-heaters/ gas-tank-high-efficiency.html (last accessed Apr. 3,
2024).
33Id. utilities and operational characteristics
which necessitate separate consideration. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 11) However, Rheem noted that the proposed standards for electric instantaneous water heaters with 2 or more gallons of rated storage volume are significantly higher than the standards proposed for very small electric storage water heaters despite these products all having similar under-sink or commercial applications. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 13–14) Rheem also requested clarification on whether rated or effective storage volume should be used when determining the storage-type and instantaneous-type water heater classification. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 2)
NEEA stated that, while it does not
disagree with DOE’s conclusion to create separate standards for gas-fired storage and gas-fired instantaneous water heaters, standby energy losses should not be considered in a determination of product class as they do not constitute a performance-related feature. NEEA noted that in DOE’s decision to set separate product classes for storage and tankless water heaters, DOE stated that ‘‘storage water heaters have associated standby energy losses that instantaneous water heaters do not.’’ (NEEA, No. 1199 at p. 10)
AWHI, however, urged DOE to
investigate combining gas-fired instantaneous and gas-fired storage water heater categories in a future rulemaking such that the same minimum UEF requirements would apply to both product classes. (AWHI, No. 1036 at pp. 3–4)
After reviewing the comments
received on the July 2023 NOPR, DOE has determined that different product classes and standards for storage and instantaneous water heaters remain necessary at this time, and DOE is not combining them in this rulemaking. As stated in the July 2023 NOPR, storage and instantaneous water heaters offer distinct utilities to a consumer. For example, instantaneous water heaters
provide a continuous supply of hot water, up to the maximum flow rate, while storage water heaters are often better suited to handle large initial demands for hot water as opposed to continuous draws. 88 FR 49058, 49078. These products are, therefore, designed differently to suit these different needs. As a result of the design differences (i.e., the storage of hot water in storage-type water heaters), storage-type water heaters incur standby losses to the surrounding ambient air.
In response to Rheem, DOE notes that
although electric instantaneous water heaters with 2 or more gallons of rated storage volume and very small electric storage water heaters may be used for
many of the same under-sink-type applications, each still offers distinct utility to the consumer. Per their definitions at 10 CFR 430.2, electric instantaneous water heaters will necessarily have a higher input rate to volume ratio, and thus will be capable of operating on a more continuous basis than very small electric storage water heaters within the flow rate expectations of these applications. DOE expects these products to have design differences because the scope of coverage is limited to products with electric input rates no greater than 12 kW (see section III.B of this document);
therefore, electric instantaneous water heaters cannot contain more than approximately 10 gallons of hot water,
31
whereas very small electric storage water heaters can contain up to 20 gallons.
In response to NEEA, DOE does not
consider standby losses to be a performance-related feature; rather, the performance-related features are as previously described and the standby losses create the difference in energy consumption between storage-type and instantaneous-type water heaters that justifies different standard levels for the two types of products. In accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6295(q), DOE has
concluded that separate standards for storage-type and instantaneous-type water heaters are justified not only because these types offer distinct utilities to the consumer, but also because the design necessary to provide this utility (i.e., a stored volume of water
for storage-type water heaters) affects the UEF rating.
EPCA defines instantaneous-type
water heaters as units which heat water but contain no more than one gallon of water per 4,000 Btu per hour of input. (42 U.S.C. 6291(27)(B)) Based on the specific use of the term ‘‘contain,’’ the rated storage volume, which reflects the amount of water that can be contained, should be used when determining the storage-type and instantaneous-type water heater classification. For circulating water heaters, which operate in a system that contains a stored volume of hot water, this is the rated storage volume of the separate storage tank (see section IV.A.1.a of this
document). d. Gas-Fired Water Heaters
Gas-fired water heaters operate by
burning fuel to generate heat, which is
then transferred from the products of combustion (i.e., flue gases) to the water
using a heat exchanger before the flue gases are expelled through venting to the outside. Regardless of efficiency, gas-fired water heaters operate in the same manner, by transferring heat to potable water for use within residences. Any combustion heat not transferred to the water is lost to the environment as waste heat, primarily through the exhaust venting. The difference between high-efficiency water heaters and low- efficiency water heaters is the amount of heat that is lost to the environment. Condensing gas-fired water heaters are able to transfer more heat from the flue gases to the water, which results in less heat being lost to the environment. As a result, flue gases exhausted from a condensing gas-fired water heater are typically less than 130 °F, while flue
gases exhausted to the environment from a non-condensing gas-fired storage water heater may be in the 300–400 °F
range or even higher. Condensing gas- fired water heaters are able to extract more heat due to improved heat exchanger designs.
For example, A.O. Smith notes that
their high-efficiency condensing gas storage water heaters ‘‘are built similarly to standard [non-condensing] gas tank water heaters with some modifications for higher efficiency and performance.’’
32More specifically, A.O.
Smith notes that their condensing models ‘‘are built with [a] helical internal heat exchanger that keeps combustion gasses in the tank longer to transfer more heat into the water, increasing efficiency and reducing operating cost.’’
33
On December 29, 2021, DOE
published a final interpretive rule (‘‘December 2021 Venting Interpretive Final Rule’’) reinstating its long- standing interpretation that the heat exchanger technology and associated venting used to supply heated air or hot water is not a performance-related ‘‘feature’’ that provides a distinct consumer utility under EPCA. 86 FR 73947. Throughout this rulemaking, some commenters have urged DOE to reconsider the conclusions reached in the December 2021 Venting Interpretive Final Rule, and in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE considered these comments but
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637813 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
again concluded that heat exchanger
technology and venting do not constitute any of the characteristics upon which DOE has the authority to establish separate product classes under EPCA. 88 FR 49058, 49079.
i. General Comments
Earthjustice supported DOE’s
tentative determination in the NOPR
that separate product classes for condensing and non-condensing products are not warranted, and stated that this is consistent with DOE’s determinations in the December 2021 Venting Interpretive Rule. (Earthjustice, No. 1189 at pp. 2–3)
In response to comments that DOE
should establish separate product classes for condensing and non- condensing gas-fired water heaters, DOE notes that when evaluating and establishing energy conservation standards, DOE is required to establish product classes based on: (1) the type of energy used; and (2) capacity or other performance-related feature which other products within such type (or class) do not have and that DOE determines justify a different standard. In making a determination of whether a performance-related feature justifies a different standard, DOE must consider factors such as the utility to the consumer of the feature and other factors DOE determines are appropriate. (42 U.S.C. 6295(q))
ii. Performance-Related Feature Under
42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1)(B)
DOE received several comments on
whether non-condensing technology should be considered a performance- related feature for the purpose of establishing a separate product class under 42 U.S.C. 6295(q). For example, Rinnai stated that, pursuant to section 6295(q) of EPCA, DOE is required to issue higher or lower energy conservation standards for non- condensing and condensing gas-fired instantaneous water heaters because the products have distinct capacities and performance-related features that provide consumer utility and justify separate standards. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at p. 15) Rinnai asserted that DOE’s finding in the July 2023 NOPR that non- condensing technology does not constitute a performance-related feature as prescribed by EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1) exceeds DOE’s authority because it errs in limiting the analysis to non-condensing technology, ignoring features associated with non-condensing technology such as ease of installation and reduced installation cost, and because it interprets ‘‘utility’’ too narrowly by only considering the impact the technology has on
consumer’s operation of or interaction with the appliance. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at pp. 12–14) Similarly, TPPF commented that DOE should set a separate standard for condensing water heaters because, according to TPPF, a non-condensing water heater serves a separate consumer utility because it is more compact, easier to install, and requires less maintenance. TPPF asserted that the consumer utility of a design is not limited to that which is accessible to the layperson or based upon the consumer’s operation of or interaction with the product, even the ease of installation of a non-condensing gas-fired instantaneous water heater should be considered a consumer utility. (TPPF, No. 1153 at pp. 3–4)
ONE Gas asserted that minimizing
installed cost is a distinct product utility. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 5) ONE Gas asserted that the availability of products that can serve as a ‘‘drop-in’’ replacement for consumers who already have non-condensing products without modifications to the installation space is a consumer utility. ONE Gas also asserted that the ability of ‘‘drop-in’’ replacements to restore water heating ability without delays associated with switching to other products is a consumer utility. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 5) ONE Gas stated that the December 2021 Venting Interpretive Final Rule did not consider the technical and economic burdens of installation when it concluded that product classes based on combustion system types (i.e., non-
condensing and condensing) did not provide distinct customer utility among combustion appliances. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 6) ONE Gas reiterated its comments that DOE’s determination that condensing/non-condensing combustion and power/atmospheric venting do not provide unique customer utility is unreasonable and that DOE is required to separately consider minimum energy standards for ‘‘covered products that [have] two or more subcategories’’ under EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1). (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 8)
With respect to commenters’
statements that venting associated with non-condensing technology itself is a performance-related feature that justifies a separate product class, DOE first notes that venting, like a gas burner or heat exchanger, is one of the basic components found in every gas-fired water heater (whether condensing or noncondensing). As such, assuming venting is a performance-related feature, it is a feature that all gas-fired water heaters possess. As a result, it cannot be
the basis for a product class. See 42
U.S.C. 6295(q)(1)(B). Thus, in order to meet the product class requirements in
42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1)(B), these commenters are requesting DOE determine that a specific type of venting is a capacity or other performance- related feature.
A specific venting technology—
including non-condensing venting—is not a ‘‘capacity or other performance related feature’’ under 42 U.S.C. 6295(q)((1)(B). As discussed in the December 2021 final interpretive rule, DOE has concluded that performance- related features are those that a consumer would be aware of and would recognize as providing additional benefits during operation of the covered product or equipment. 86 FR 73947, 73955.
DOE also notes that almost every
component of a covered product could be broken down further by any of a number of factors. For example, heat exchangers, which are used in a variety of covered products, could be divided further by geometry or material; refrigerator compressors could be further divided by single-speed or variable-speed; and air-conditioning refrigerants could be further divided by global warming potential. As a general matter, energy conservation standards save energy by removing the least- efficient technologies and designs from the market. For example, DOE set energy conservation standards for furnace fans at a level that effectively eliminated permanent split capacitor (PSC) motors from several product classes, but which could be met by brushless permanent magnet (BPM) motors, which are more efficient. 79 FR 38130 (July 3, 2014). As another example, DOE set energy conservation standards for microwave oven standby mode and off mode at a level that effectively eliminated the use of linear power supplies, but which could be met by switch-mode power supplies, which exhibit significantly lower standby mode and off mode power consumption. 78 FR 36316 (June 17, 2013). The energy-saving purposes of EPCA would be completely frustrated if DOE were required to set standards that maintain less-energy-efficient covered products and equipment in the market based simply on the fact that they use a specific type of less efficient heat
exchanger, motor, power supply, etc.
In this rule and many others, DOE has
considered whether the purported ‘‘feature’’ provides additional performance benefits to the consumer during operation. Using the previous example of furnace fan motors, if an interested person had wanted to preserve furnace fans with PSC motors in the market, they would have had to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637814 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
show that furnace fans with PSC motors
offered some additional performance benefit during operation as compared to furnace fans with BPM motors. Refrigerator-freezers, on the other hand, are an example of where DOE determined that a specific type of performance-related feature offered additional performance benefit during operation. Some refrigerator-freezers have automatic icemakers. Additionally, some automatic icemakers offer through-the-door ice service, which provides consumers with an additional benefit during operation. As such, DOE further divided refrigerator-freezers into product classes based on the specific type of automatic icemaker (i.e., whether the automatic icemaker offers through-the-door ice service). See 10
CFR 430.32(a).
After reviewing comments from
stakeholders provided in this
rulemaking, DOE has concluded that commenters have not pointed to any additional performance benefits during operation offered by non-condensing water heaters that use non-condensing venting as compared to water heaters that use other types of venting. Instead, these commenters generally cite compatibility with existing venting (i.e.,
convenience of installation) and other economic considerations as reasons why non-condensing venting should be considered a performance-related feature for the purposes of EPCA’s unavailability provision. To be sure, DOE considers installation costs in determining whether a standard is economically justified. The costs of installing condensing venting may, in certain installations, be substantial, and DOE accounts for such costs in its analysis. See section IV.F.2 of this document. But such installation costs are not a ‘‘capacity or other performance-related feature’’ for purposes of section 6295(q).
DOE has determined, based on its
own research as well as information presented in stakeholder comments, that differences in cost or complexity of installation between different methods of venting (e.g., a condensing water
heater versus a non-condensing water heater) do not make specific methods of venting a performance-related feature under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4), so as to justify separating the products/ equipment into different product/ equipment classes under 42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(1). 86 FR 73947, 73951 (Dec. 29, 2021). iii. Whether Stakeholders Have Shown
by a Preponderance of Evidence That Standards Would Result in Unavailability
DOE received public comments in
reference to the ‘‘unavailability provision’’ found in EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4), contending that if the proposed amended standard for GIWH were adopted, it would eliminate non- condensing GIWH from the market. DOE is not summarizing or responding to these comments in this notice, as DOE continues to consider these comments in informing DOE’s decision on amended energy conservation standards for GIWH.
iv. Proper Treatment of Economic
Considerations
According to NPGA, APGA, AGA, and
Rinnai, the proposed UEF requirements for gas-fired storage water heaters would require new venting requirements and other additional equipment even if the adopted standards did not require condensing gas-fired storage water heaters. Based on these proposed UEF requirements, NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai asserted that DOE failed to understand the market for water heaters and what differentiates consumer decisions, apparent in its discussion of product classes in the July 2023 NOPR. NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai further asserted that DOE’s failure to separate product classes based on relevant features preferred by consumers shows a fundamental market misunderstanding, questioning DOE’s capacity to regulate the market. According to NPGA, APGA, and Rinnai, DOE continues to strain to show that the consumer gains no utility from features associated with condensing and non- condensing products, insisting that the design and operation of the unit ‘‘does not provide any utility to the consumer that is accessible to the layperson, which is based upon the consumer’s operation of or interaction with the appliance;’’ however, these commenters stated, these design and installation issues are certainly accessible to the consumer when choosing the appliance. (NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, No. 441 at pp. 2–3)
NPGA, APGA, AGA, Rinnai, and
TPPF commented that DOE does not capture what differentiates consumer decisions to purchase non-condensing over condensing water heaters. DOE recognizes, however, that purchase price, installation cost, and maintenance cost—factors which some commenters suggested could be ‘‘features’’ of non- condensing models that lead some consumer to pick these models over condensing models—are relevant to
consumer decision-making. Accordingly, DOE has treated those variables as inputs to evaluate the costs and benefits to consumers of standards requiring differing technologies. But as stated previously, those factors, while relevant to consumer decision-making and DOE’s standard setting, are not ‘‘features’’ for purpose of sections 6295(o)(4) or (q)(1)(B). As stated in the December 2021 Venting Interpretive Final Rule, the ‘‘features’’ DOE considers separately pertain to those aspects of the appliance with which the consumer interacts during the operation of the product (i.e., when the product is
providing its ‘‘useful output’’) and the utility derived from those features during normal operation. 86 FR 73947, 73955. The installation and purchase decision factors mentioned by commenters do not affect the performance of the water heater and how a consumer uses it, but instead impact the cost of owning and operating one.
Because DOE views the issues
discussed here to be matters of cost, the Department finds it appropriate under the statute to address these issues through the rulemaking’s economic analysis. 86 FR 73947, 73951 (Dec. 29, 2021). This interpretation is consistent with EPCA’s requirement for a separate analysis of economic justification for the adoption of any new or amended energy conservation standard (see 42 U.S.C.
6295(o)(2)–(3); 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(A)–
(C); 42 U.S.C. 6316(a)). These costs are addressed in the LCC in section IV.F of this document.
v. Comparison to Ventless Clothes
Dryers
Rinnai noted that, in the case of
ventless clothes dryers, DOE recognized consumer costs associated with venting as a basis for establishing separate product classes. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at p. 11)
In response to Rinnai’s discussion of
ventless clothes dryers, DOE notes that venting in the case of clothes dryers is different from venting of gas-fired appliances, where combustion gases must be exhausted outside of the home, and these differences are outlined in the December 2021 Venting Interpretative Final Rule.
Venting for clothes dryers refers to the
method of removal of evaporated moisture from the cabinet space. Vented clothes dryers exhaust this evaporated moisture from the cabinet outside of the home whereas ventless clothes dryers instead use a closed-loop system with an internal condenser to remove the evaporated moisture from the heated air.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637815 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
34Technical Support Document: Energy
Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and
Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Residential Clothes Dryers and Room Air Conditioners, pp. 3– 6 (Available at: www.regulations.gov/ document?D=EERE-2007-BT-STD-0010-0053). In the TSD accompanying a 2011 direct
final rule pertaining to residential clothes dryers, DOE explained that ventless clothes dryers can be installed where vented dryers would be precluded due to restrictions preventing any sort of vent from being installed, and thus the Department noted that how a clothes dryer is vented is not simply an issue of initial costs or a consumer choosing one product over another.
34As
discussed in the December 2021 Venting Interpretive Final Rule, unlike consumers of ventless dryers, consumers facing the prospect of replacing a non-condensing water heater with a condensing water heater do have options available to either modify existing venting or install a new venting system to accommodate a condensing product, or to install a feasible alternative to have heated air or water provided (i.e., an electric appliance); but
in all cases, the consumer would not be precluded from having access to heated water, a result which is distinctly different from the one at issue in the ventless clothes dryers example. 86 FR 73947, 73957. Condensing gas-fired water heaters can still be installed in buildings where non-condensing gas- fired water heaters currently are. This is because, unlike the case of clothes dryers, both non-condensing and condensing gas-fired water heaters use a vent—the difference in installation is in
the type of venting material and its cost.
vi. Conclusion
For the reasons discussed in this
section and in the December 2021 Final
Interpretive Rule, DOE continues to find that there is no basis for altering the Department’s approach regarding the establishment of product classes for gas- fired water heaters for this rulemaking.
e. Very Large Gas-Fired Storage Water
Heaters
A.O. Smith identified that a product
class for > 100 gallon gas-fired storage water heaters with a non-condensing efficiency level is likely to incentivize the circumvention of current condensing standards for 55–100 gallon gas-fired storage water heaters and residential-duty commercial gas-fired storage water heaters. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 14) NYSERDA commented that a non-condensing-level standard for gas-fired storage water heaters > 100 gallons would result in market confusion and the possibility of circumventing residential-duty
commercial water heater standards, because residential-duty commercial gas-fired storage water heaters may typically only be just over the 75,000 Btu/h input rate limit and could easily be converted to consumer water heaters. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 6)
DOE notes that the non-condensing
level for >100 gallon gas-fired storage water heaters is simply a crosswalk of existing standards, and, as discussed in section IV.C.2 of this document, DOE did not evaluate more stringent standards for this product class in this rulemaking.
However, DOE understands the
concerns from these stakeholders and may consider evaluating amended standards for these product classes in a future rulemaking.
f. Electric Storage Water Heaters
In response to the March 2022
Preliminary Analysis, DOE received
comments requesting that DOE establish separate product classes for heat pump electric storage water heaters and electric resistance storage water heaters, citing concern with expanding heat pump-level standards for electric storage water heaters. DOE responded to these comments in the July 2023 NOPR, tentatively determining that the conclusions reached in the April 2010 Final Rule that separate classes are not justified (see 75 FR 20112, 20135)
remain valid and that heat pump electric storage water heaters and electric resistance storage water heaters do not warrant separate product classes as they do not exhibit any unique
performance-related features. 88 FR 49058, 49079–49080.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
DOE received additional comments regarding the creation of separate product classes for heat pump electric storage water heaters and electric resistance storage water heaters. EEI asserted that DOE should create separate product classes or require lower efficiency levels for electric resistance storage water heaters rather than maintaining these technologies in the same classes with heat pump water heaters, as this would allow newer technologies at more economic price points a chance to meaningfully compete in the marketplace and would, in turn, support the Administration’s climate and clean energy goals. EEI stated that the proposed standards would cause a significant increase in efficiency for existing electric resistance storage water heaters. (EEI, No. 1198 at pp. 2–3) Earthjustice, however, stated that separate product classes for heat pump and electric resistance storage water heaters are not warranted, as the
NOPR correctly determines. Earthjustice added, specifically, that separate product classes would not be justifiable under EPCA because heat pump and electric resistance water heaters provide equivalent service to the end-user. (Earthjustice, No. 1189 at pp. 1–2)
DOE agrees with EarthJustice and
maintains its longstanding position, outlined most recently in the July 2023 NOPR, that separate product classes for heat pump and electric resistance water heaters are not warranted under EPCA. DOE establishes separate product classes based on two criteria: (1) fuel source; and (2) whether a type of product offers a unique capacity or other performance-related feature that justifies a different standard. (See 42
U.S.C. 6295(q)(1))
Heat pump electric storage water
heaters and electric resistance water heaters both use electricity as the fuel source. 88 FR 49058, 49079–49080. They both offer similar delivery capacities, and DOE has not identified any unique performance-related features offered by either heat pump electric storage water heaters or electric resistance storage water heaters. Id. DOE
considers performance-related features to be those aspects of the appliance with which the consumer interacts during operation of the product. The technology used to heat the water, heat pump or electric resistance, is not something a consumer would interact with during operation of the water heater. Therefore, DOE has maintained both heat pump and electric resistance technologies within the electric storage water heater classes in this rulemaking analysis, consistent with its approach in the April 2010 Final Rule.
i. Configurations of Electric Water
Heaters
In response to the December 2023
SNOPR, A.O. Smith requested
clarification as to what test procedure provisions apply to electric resistance booster water heaters that meet the definition of a ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank’’ but not of a ‘‘circulating water heater’’. A.O. Smith added that the June 2023 TP Final Rule preamble seems to indicate that electric resistance booster water heaters are to be tested to section 4.10 of appendix E, but that the heading for section 4.10 indicates the section is intended for circulating water heaters and does not include provisions for electric resistance booster water heaters. A.O. Smith commented that electric resistance booster water heaters and circulating water heaters both should be considered as ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank’’ and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637816 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
recommended that the same test
procedure apply to both. A.O. Smith recommended DOE implement this approach by establishing a definition for electric resistance booster water heaters and updating section 4.10 of appendix E to include provisions for testing electric resistance booster water heaters. (A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at p. 6)
In response to A.O. Smith, DOE notes
that this section provides a description of electric water heater design examples and how they should be tested and classified for the applicable standards. An electric instantaneous water heater product that is designed to operate in tandem with a storage tank but not circulate the water between itself and the tank is not a circulating water heater because it does not meet the definitional criteria ‘‘must be used in combination with a recirculating pump to circulate water.’’ A.O. Smith suggested that this type of add-on product might qualify as a ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank’’ per section 1.19 of appendix E; however, DOE does not find this to necessarily be true. Appendix E defines a ‘‘Water Heater Requiring a Storage Tank’’ in part as a water heater without a storage tank that cannot meet the requirements of sections 2 and 5 of this appendix without the use of a storage water heater or unfired hot water storage tank. However, section 5.2.2.1 specifies that, for flow-activated water heaters, if the water heater is not capable of providing the discharge temperature specified in section 2.5 of appendix E when the flow rate is 1.7 gallons ± 0.25
gallons per minute, then adjust the flow rate as necessary to achieve the specified discharge water temperature. Based on these requirements, electric resistance booster water heaters would indeed be able to be tested in accordance with appendix E without the use of a storage water heater or separate storage tank.
A.O. Smith said that it agreed with
DOE’s clarifications in the December 2023 SNOPR which classify all split- system heat pump water heaters, regardless of whether or not they include a tank, as electric storage water heaters. (A.O. Smith, No. 1411 at p. 3– 4)
To offer additional clarity on how
different electric water heaters would be regulated as a result of this final rule, Table IV.4 shows the distinguishing characteristics of circulating water heaters, split-system heat pump water heaters, and other water heaters that operate in tandem with a separate tank but are instantaneous-type.
A split-system heat pump water
heater is defined in section 1.13 of appendix E and reads, ‘‘Split-system heat pump water heater means a heat pump-type water heater in which at least the compressor, which may be installed outdoors, is separate from the storage tank’’ (therefore, a split-system heat pump water heater is supplied with a storage tank). These designs are discussed more in the following subsection of this document. The definition of a circulating water heater is provided in section IV.A.1.a of this document, and the key distinction between a heat pump circulating water heater and a split-system heat pump water heater is that a circulating water heater is not sold with a tank (but must be paired with a tank or other stored volume of water in the field to operate), whereas a split system heat pump water heater is sold with a tank. Although heat pump circulating water heaters and split system heat pump water heaters are functionally very similar when installed in the field, they are differentiated in DOE’s regulations due to differences in the test methods, which are outlined in Table IV.4. The definition of a low- temperature water heater is provided in section IV.A.1.b of this document, and these units are instantaneous-type (they do not include circulating water heaters).
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637817 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.016</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6No.
1
2
3
4 Table IV.4 Electric Water Heater Design Exam oles and Classifications
Design Example Product Category Test Method
A heat pump module that is
not sold with a hot water
storage tank or auxiliary
electric storage water heater,
but must be paired with one in
the field to operate. The heat
pump intakes water and
outputs it at an elevated
temperature using a
recirculation pump. The heat
pump only activates when a
temperature sensor indicates
that a separately stored
quantity of water cools below
an activation temperature.
A heat pump module sold with
a storage tank (which may or
may not include backup
heating elements). The system
is designed to circulate water
between the heat pump and the
tank and could contain the
temperature sensors for the
heat pump in the stored water
in the tank.
A heat pump module sold with
a storage tank (which may or
may not include backup
heating elements) having a
specific design to
accommodate the temperature
sensor for the heat pump and
the refrigerant lines. The
system is designed with
refrigerant lines connecting the
heat pump to the tank and
provide the heat transfer
(rather than circulating water
between the heat pump and
tank as in design example #2
in this table).
An electric resistance heating
module that is not sold with a
hot water storage tank, but
must be paired with one in the
field to operate. The electric
resistance module intakes Electric storage water
heater.
This design meets the
definition of a
circulating water
heater, which is a
storage-type water
heater. It heats a
remotely-stored
quantity of water and
returns the hot water to
that stored water, but is
sold without a storage
tank.
Electric storage water
heater.
This design meets the
definition of a split
system heat pump
water heater, which is
a storage-type water
heater because it
contains more than one
gallon of water per
4,000 Btu per hour of
input.
Electric storage water
heater.
This design meets the
definition of a split
system heat pump
water heater, which is
a storage-type water
heater because it
contains more than one
gallon of water per
4,000 Btu per hour of
input.
Electric storage water
heater.
This design meets the
defmition of a
circulating water
heater, which is a Test with a separate
storage tank per section
4.10 of appendix E.
Because this is a heat
pump, the tank pairing
would be a 30 ± 5
gallon small electric
storage water heater.
Test conditions for the
tank and heat pump are
to be in accordance
with section 2.2.2 of
appendixE.
Test with the tank that
is sold with the heat
pump. Test conditions
for the tank and heat
pump are to be in
accordance with section
2.2.2 of appendix E.
Test with the tank that
is sold with the heat
pump. Test conditions
for the tank and heat
pump are to be in
accordance with section
2.2.2 of appendix E.
Test with a separate
storage tank per section
4.10 of appendix E.
Because this is an
electric resistance
heater, the tank pairing Determining
Applicable Standard
Per section 6.3.1.1 of
appendix E, the
effective storage
volume is the volume
of the tank (30 ± 5
gallons). If the first
hour rating is below 51
gallons, the product is a
small electric storage
water heater.
The effective storage
volume is determined
based on the provisions
of section 6.3.1.1 of
appendix E.
The effective storage
volume is determined
based on the provisions
of section 6.3.1.1 of
appendix E.
Per section 6.3 .1.1 of
appendix E, the
effective storage
volume is the volume
of the tank (80-120
gallons).* 37818 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
The same concepts would apply for
any other fuel type (e.g., gas or oil).
ii. Plug-In and Split-System Heat Pump
Electric Storage Water Heaters
DOE received comments in response
to the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis recommending that DOE create a separate product class for split-system and plug-in (120-volt) heat pump water heaters. Commenters cited their utility in installation scenarios unable to be met by other heat pump water heaters. DOE responded to these comments in the July 2023 NOPR stating that, while plug-in heat pump water heaters were not considered in the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis because they were not commercially available in the United States at the time, DOE did not have enough information to determine whether a higher or lower efficiency standard would be justified. DOE also
stated that it had not identified any unique performance-related features that would warrant a separate product class for split-system heat pump water heaters or plug-in heat pump water heaters. 88 FR 49058, 49080.
Responding to the July 2023 NOPR,
Rheem supported DOE’s tentative determination not to assign separate
product classes to 120-volt heat pump water heaters, noting that its 120-volt design configurations are able to meet the proposed standards. Rheem also stated that there is no need to amend the test procedure for 120-volt heat pump water heaters at this time. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 8) A.O. Smith, however, recommended that DOE separate 120- volt heat pump water heaters into their own product class and align the efficiency levels for this product class to ENERGY STAR
®Version 5.0. A.O.
Smith added that 120-volt heat pump
water heaters are relatively new designs and are limited in capacity due to the absence of backup electric resistance elements (because the product must operate at a lower voltage of 120 volts as opposed to conventional 240-volt products). To ensure consumer
satisfaction, A.O. Smith stated, these products will tend to favor maintaining higher FHRs at the detriment of UEF. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182, pp. 15–16)
BWC also supported DOE’s tentative
determination not to create a separate product class for 120-volt heat pump water heaters. BWC stated it does not believe that otherwise identical electric products differentiated only by their operating voltage meet the criteria for establishing separate product classes; the commenter asserted that the voltage
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.017</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES65
6 water and outputs it at an storage-type water would be an 80-120
elevated temperature using a heater. It heats a gallon unfired hot water
recirculation pump. The remotely-stored storage tank.
electric resistance element(s) quantity of water and
only activate when a returns the hot water to
temperature sensor indicates that stored water, but is
that a separately stored sold without a storage
quantity of water cools below tank.
an activation temperature.
An electric resistance heating Electric storage water Test with the tank that The effective storage
module that identical to design heater. is sold with the heater. volume is determined
example # 4 in this table, but is This design contains based on the provisions
sold with a storage tank. more than one gallon of of section 6.3.1.1 of
water per 4,000 Btu per appendixE.
hour of input.
An electric resistance heater Electric instantaneous Test as a stand-alone The draw pattern is
that operates in tandem with a water heater. water heater (i.e., determined based on
separate storage tank, but is This design contains without a storage tank). maximumGPM
not sold with a tank. It less than one gallon of If it cannot raise water determined by testing
activates during draws if the water per 4,000 Btu per from the required the design per section
temperature of the water hour of input. While it supply temperature to a 5.2.2.1 of appendix E.
delivered by the tank falls is typically installed nominal delivery
below an activation with a separate tank temperature of 125 °F
temperature. The heater that it is not sold with, (i.e., meets the
intakes water from the tank it does not circulate hot defmition of a low-
and outputs it at an elevated water with the tank and temperature water
temperature directly to the does not need to a heater), test per the
distribution system and not recirculation pump to instructions in section
back to the tank. operate. The design is 5.2.2.1 of appendix E.
flow-activated by the
draw and not
thermostatically
activated by the
temperature inside the
tank to replenish the
hot water storage.
* Note that, because the standards for 55 to 120 gallon electric storage water heaters correspond to heat pump efficiencies, such a
product would not be compliant with current or amended standards. 37819 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
of the product does not cause the
consumer to interact with the product differently; not does it enhance the utility being provided directly to the consumer by the product. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 14)
Based on its review of the few models
of 120-volt heat pump water heaters that have been released at the time of this final rule, DOE agrees with BWC in that it has not identified any unique consumer utility provided by the 120- volt plug-in configuration. As discussed in the assessment of benefits and burdens of each TSL (section V.C.1 of this document), DOE has determined that the amended standards adopted in this final rule will not significantly inhibit the future development of 120- volt heat pump water heaters. Further details of 120-volt heat pump water heaters are provided in DOE’s market and technology assessment in chapter 3 of the final rule TSD.
In addition to 120-volt plug-in heat
pump water heaters, split-system heat pump water heaters are another possible configuration of electric storage water heater.
A.O. Smith stated that commercially
available split-system heat pump water heaters fall under two main categories: refrigerant-split systems (for electric storage water heaters) and water-split or ‘‘monoblock’’ systems (for electric circulating water heaters). (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 16)
As discussed in section IV.A.1.a of
this document, DOE has determined that circulating water heaters are a configuration of storage-type water heater. Therefore, refrigerant-split systems and water-split systems must meet the same the standards adopted under this final rule. As was tentatively
determined in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE has determined not to create a separate product class for split-system heat pump water heaters. Split-system heat pump water heaters use the same fuel source—electricity—as other electric storage water heaters. DOE also has not identified any unique performance- related features offered by split-system heat pump water heaters that would warrant a separate product class consideration at this time. And, as DOE stated previously, the type of technology used to heat the water, in this case a split-system heat pump, is not something a consumer would interact with during operation of the water heater.
In the December 2023 SNOPR DOE
explained that treating circulating water heaters as storage water heaters was parallel to how split-system heat pump water heaters are treated: a heat pump module and a separate storage tank, which, altogether, are treated as a
storage-type water heater. 88 FR 89330, 89333. Specifically, DOE wrote that these products ‘‘have long been considered to be electric storage water heaters.’’ Id.
Pickering noted that while most air-
to-water heat pumps are electric, systems using natural gas or propane as the fuel source are emerging. Pickering added that the emergence of such technologies is not in agreement with DOE’s statement that heat pump water heaters ‘‘have long been considered to be electric storage water heaters’’. (Pickering, No. 1399 at p. 2)
DOE agrees with Pickering that the
statement in the December 2023 SNOPR implicitly was only referring to electric heat pumps. Split-system heat pump water heaters that do not rely on electricity as the main fuel source would not be electric storage water heaters. For example, split-system heat pump water heaters that are gas-fired would be considered gas-fired storage water heaters. Gas-fired heat pump water heaters are addressed in section IV.B.1 of this document.
iii. Grid-Enabled Water Heaters
Grid-enabled water heaters are a
specific type of electric storage water
heater with separate standards established by EPCA. (See 42 U.S.C.
6295I(6)(A)(ii), also discussed in section III.B of this document). The statutory definition of a grid-enabled water heater describes its characteristics as a product which must be activated when enrolled with a utility, but it does not specifically define what connected
features the product must have once enrolled. In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE did not propose to define the connected features because DOE had not found it necessary at the time to further define connectivity.
SkyCentrics and TVA requested that
DOE include a requirement for an open standard communication port such as EcoPort (CTA–2045) or equivalent to be added to the product requirements for all electric storage water heaters with a storage volume larger than or equal to 32 gallons. (TVA, No. 978 at pp. 1–2; SkyCentrics, No. 1191 at p. 1) TVA added that there are many water heater models with the port currently on or soon to be on the market, and stated that DOE can help promote this port as a national standard, helping OEMs benefit from volume production and reducing the cost of production by reducing SKUs with models that can be sold nationally. (TVA, No. 978 at pp. 1–2) AWHI also urged DOE to require CTA–2045 EcoPort in new electric storage water heaters, stating that industry partners would be ready for compliance with
CTA 2045–B Level 2 as of July 1, 2025. (AWHI, No. 1036 at pp. 4–6)
DOE is maintaining its determination
from the July 2023 NOPR not to adopt any specific requirements to define connectivity in this rulemaking. With respect to grid-enabled water heaters, the scope of this product class is defined by EPCA, which does not posit any specific design requirements for the demand-response communication protocol. While DOE recognizes that industry may benefit from standardization of the communication protocols, demand-response technology is not known to be a design option to improve efficiency of the product over an average use cycle (see chapter 3 of
the final rule TSD, which discusses DOE’s technology assessment); hence, it was not considered in the design pathway for compliance with more stringent standards. While EPCA establishes the authority for DOE to amend energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters, it does not directly grant DOE the authority to establish prescriptive design requirements for consumer water heaters, particularly as it relates to a requirement that would not directly impact the measured energy efficiency as measured by the DOE test procedure. Instead, the ongoing work by the EPA’s ENERGY STAR program is expected to promote the standardization of demand- response technology. Specifically, ENERGY STAR’s version 5.0 specification contains criteria for meeting the connected product designation, which references the CTA– 2045 and OpenADR protocols.
Additionally, in the July 2023 NOPR,
DOE did not propose to amend standards for grid-enabled water heaters because there remains uncertainty as to whether these products can achieve higher UEF values with added insulation (reduced standby losses being the main pathway towards higher efficiency because grid-enabled water heaters are statutorily defined as having electric resistance heating). 88 FR 49058, 49086.
NRECA and ECSC supported DOE’s
proposed retention of existing standards for grid-enabled water heaters, adding that these larger water heaters remain an important load-control tool for their
member electric cooperatives. (NRECA, No. 1127 at pp. 2, 10; ECSC, No. 1185 at p. 2) NYSERDA also supported DOE’s proposals regarding grid-enabled water heaters and stated that there is additional opportunity to address demand-response functionality in a future rulemaking. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 4)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637820 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
35DOE included an assessment of grid-enabled
water heaters in the March 2022 Preliminary
Analysis. In shipments estimates, it was approximated that there were about 15 thousand shipments of grid-enabled water heaters in 2021, compared to 3.8 million shipments of other electric storage water heaters. See the NIA spreadsheet to the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis, docketed as Document No. EERE–2017–BT–STD–0019–0024 and available online at www.regulations.gov/ document/EERE-2017-BT-STD-0019-0024. CEC, however, urged DOE to
reevaluate its conclusion that heat
pump technology is not applicable as a technology option for grid-enabled water heaters, adding that although they are statutorily defined as ‘‘electric resistance water heaters’’ (see 42 U.S.C.
6295(e)(6)(A)(ii)), this definition does not preclude additional technologies, such as heat pumps. Therefore, CEC stated, the vast majority of hybrid grid- enabled water heaters employing both heat pump and electric resistance technologies would meet the statutory definition of grid-enabled water heater. (CEC, No. 1173 at pp. 11–12) The CA IOUs recommended that DOE amend standards for grid-enabled water heaters to be equivalent in stringency to those of other electric storage water heaters in a future rulemaking because these products directly compete with heat pump water heaters between 55 and 120
gallons. The CA IOUs also requested that DOE comply with the terms of the 2015 legislation creating the grid- enabled water heater product type and release the two market data reports described in 42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(6)(D)(i). (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at p. 5)
At this time, DOE is not aware of any
commercially available heat pump water heaters that also meet the statutory definition of a grid-enabled water heater. Grid-enabled water heaters constitute an entirely separate product class, defined at 42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(6)(A)(ii) and must have a rated storage volume of more than 75 gallons. Not all demand-response water heaters meet the definition of a grid-enabled water heater. While DOE agrees that it is technologically feasible for grid- enabled water heaters to employ heat pumps to increase efficiency, such a product does not exist on the market. Manufacturers of certain models of heat pump water heaters in the electric storage water heater category, however, have certified these units’ demand- response capabilities (which can be incorporated in water heaters outside of the grid-enabled product class) to ENERGY STAR, which indicates that heat pump innovation for grid- connected products can continue to occur in the absence of heat pump-level standards for grid-enabled water heaters; thus, it is unclear whether heat pump-level standards for grid-enabled water heaters would result in significant energy savings considering that shipments of electric storage water heaters dwarf those of grid-enabled water heaters today.
35In other words, consumers seeking demand-response
capabilities with heat pump technology could be more likely to seek an electric storage water heater with a
communication module than a grid- enabled water heater. DOE may further evaluate the potential for more stringent standards for grid-enabled water heaters in a future rulemaking addressing energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters.
Rheem noted that EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6295(e)(6)(A)(ii)(I)) specifically defines grid-enabled water heaters on the basis that such a product ‘‘has a rated storage tank volume of more than 75 gallons,’’ and that DOE would be misaligning the scope of coverage of the grid-enabled water heater product classes if it were to define these classes as being greater than 75 gallons of effective storage volume. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 3)
DOE agrees with Rheem and will
maintain the current product class definition for grid-enabled water heaters, which is based on rated storage volume rather than effective storage volume. However, as discussed in section V.D.1.f of this document, DOE is adopting amendments to the appendix E test procedure that will effectively exempt grid-enabled water heaters from the high temperature test method such that there is not likely to be any appreciable difference between the two volume metrics as they pertain to standards for grid-enabled water heaters. Therefore, the standards for grid-enabled water heaters will apply to products with rated storage volume greater than 75 gallons instead of an effective storage volume greater than 75 gallons, and this change from the July 2023 NOPR proposal is not expected to have any impact on the results of DOE’s analysis or the scope of applicability of standards.
AHRI indicated that there is an
additional backsliding concern for grid- enabled water heaters but did not elaborate on details of the concern. The commenter claimed that grid-enabled water heaters will not work correctly unless they are enrolled in a utility program and noted that DOE is collecting information to determine if these products are used properly in the field. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 5)
DOE has not identified any
backsliding concerns for grid-enabled water heaters. Furthermore, maintaining the definition of this product class in
terms of rated storage volume will mean no change to the standards for grid- enabled water heaters and therefore, no backsliding will occur. Regarding the functionality of grid-enabled water heaters, DOE agrees that grid-enabled water heaters will not function correctly unless enrolled in a utility program. Specifically, per 42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(6)(A)(i), grid-enabled water heaters must possess an activation lock that requires a key to enable the product to operate at its designed specifications and capabilities and without which activation the product will provide not greater than 50 percent of the rated first hour delivery of hot water certified by the manufacturer. This requirement sets these products apart from other large electric storage water heaters with grid connectivity.
iv. Small Electric Storage Water Heaters
and Tabletop Water Heaters
Current product classes for electric
storage water heaters are based on rated storage volume (capacity) and draw pattern. See 10 CFR 430.32(d). There are
product classes for electric storage water heaters with storage volumes greater than 20 gallons and less than or equal to 55 gallons, and product classes for electric storage water heaters with storage volumes greater than 55 gallons and less than or equal to 120 gallons. As discussed in section II.B.2 of this document, DOE received a Joint Stakeholder Recommendation for amended water heater standards that included recommended standard levels for electric storage water heaters. In particular, the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation suggested setting different standards for smaller electric storage water heaters. In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE tentatively concluded that separate product classes for smaller electric storage water heaters are warranted. 88 FR 49058, 49080–49081. Specifically, DOE noted that market data for electric storage water heaters suggest there is a certain category of electric storage water heaters that are limited in their physical size due to the places they are typically installed,
which are commonly referred to as ‘‘lowboy’’ water heaters. The physical size limitation of these water heaters restricts the amount of hot water that can be provided to the household. Id.
In reviewing the market for these
water heaters, DOE found that most ‘‘small electric storage water heaters’’ offer an effective storage volume greater than or equal to 20 gallons and less than or equal to 35 gallons and deliver FHRs less than 51 gallons. Due to their low capacities, ‘‘small electric storage water
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637821 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
heaters’’ fall into the very small or low
usage draw patterns. Thus, DOE tentatively concluded that this physical limitation is a performance-related feature affecting energy efficiency that would warrant a separate product class. DOE also explained that the physical size limitation constrains the technology options that can be considered to increase the efficiency of these water heaters. DOE, therefore, analyzed splitting the existing 20–55-gallon product classes for electric storage water heaters by establishing new ‘‘small electric storage water heater’’ product classes. Id.
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
identified the following proposed product classes for electric storage water heaters: (1) electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume greater than or equal to 20 gallons and less than or equal to 35 gallons, with FHRs less than 51 gallons (i.e., very small and low
draw patterns) (‘‘small electric storage water heaters’’); and (2) electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume greater than or equal to 20 gallons and less than or equal to 55 gallons (excluding small electric storage water heaters).
Responding to the July 2023 NOPR,
NEEA supported DOE’s proposed creation of the small electric storage water heater product class, and noted that heat pump water heaters are sometimes too large to physically fit in the spaces currently occupied by these types of water heaters. (NEEA, No. 1199 at p. 8) The CA IOUs also supported DOE’s proposal to create a new product class and separate electric resistance- level standards for small electric storage water heaters with effective storage volumes of ≥ 20 and ≤ 35 gallons limited
to very small and low draw patterns. The CA IOUs agreed with DOE that there is a specific practicality provided by small electric resistance water heaters (also referred to as ‘‘lowboys’’), and that it is impractical to install
currently available heat pump water heater in some spaces where lowboy water heaters are commonly installed. (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at p. 3)
Rheem asserted that a large portion of
35–40-gallon heat pump water heater sales would be at risk with the structure of the product classes proposed in the July 2023 NOPR. Rheem stated that either the threshold for small electric storage water heaters should be lowered to 30 gallons or the small electric storage water heater category be additionally restricted to products less than 36 inches in height (i.e., lowboys).
(Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 7)
PHCC stated that if DOE wished to
limit certain products based on effective storage volume, the height is not a significant factor. The commenter asked DOE about the relevance of establishing the small electric storage water heater class based on a 36-inch height limitation while asserting that removing a height consideration would take pressure off the industry and streamline available models. PHCC also suggested DOE adjust the current heat pump-level standard for >55-gal electric storage water heaters to apply to those >40 gallons as well. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 2)
DOE is aware that certain 20–55-
gallon heat pump water heaters may be interchangeable for some of the larger electric resistance water heaters in the small electric storage water heater product class and agrees with Rheem that some small electric storage water heaters may be substituted for larger products that would be subject to more stringent standards. As discussed in section IV.G.1 of this document, DOE has accounted for this in its analysis. Although the current limitation could lead to more substitution than if the volume threshold were lowered, DOE believes the small electric storage water heater product class, as proposed in the July 2023 NOPR, strikes the balance between preserving consumer utility at smaller storage volumes and ensuring heat pump water heaters are utilized where practicable to install. As such, DOE is adopting the small electric storage water heater product class, as proposed in the July 2023 NOPR. In response to PHCC, DOE notes that although a height restriction was included in the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation, DOE did not propose a height restriction on the small electric storage water heater product class in the July 2023 NOPR. As shown in Table IV.4 of the July 2023 NOPR, small electric storage water heaters are defined by volume and delivery capacity only. 88 FR 49058,49081. Additionally, DOE notes that PHCC’s suggestion for expanding the applicability of heat pump-level standards is essentially what was proposed and is being adopted in this final rule. DOE is using a 35-gallon effective storage volume cutoff combined with a draw pattern requirement for small electric storage water heaters to be in the very small or low draw patterns. In its market assessment, DOE found that many products with nominal volumes of 40 gallons have rated storage volumes from 35 to 36 gallons because manufacturers may nominally report volumes that are within 10 percent of the actual storage volume. With respect to Rheem’s suggestion that a height requirement be
implemented, DOE notes that although most products on the market that fit into this category are ‘‘lowboy’’ products with limited overhead space, there are also products on the market that are physically constrained by their width or diameter. These tall, small-diameter water heaters also have smaller storage capacities and delivery capacities. They also have the same energy consumption characteristics as lowboy water heaters based on certification data. In the April 2010 Final Rule, when DOE had first declined to establish a separate product class for lowboy water heaters, DOE stated that it does not believe each different combination of physical dimensions currently available on the market warrants a separate product class. 75 FR 20112, 20131–20132. Consistent with the approach taken in the previous rulemaking, DOE has determined that separate standards for lowboy water heaters and these other shapes of small electric storage water heaters are not justified and, as a result, the product class definition should not specify a height restriction.
Tabletop water heaters, which
typically have rated storage volumes of around 35 gallons, also have very particular dimensions in order to be used in a kitchen workspace. DOE is not amending the standards for tabletop water heaters in this final rule based on the market assessment for these products (see section IV.C.2 of this
document for details). There are only two basic models of tabletop water heaters on the market currently. Because of the similarities between tabletop water heaters and small electric storage water heaters, DOE proposed, in the July 2023 NOPR, to create alignment between the standards for these types of products. Specifically, DOE proposed to amend the definition of ‘‘tabletop water heater’’ to specify that the tabletop designation of electric storage water heaters is only applicable to products in the very small or low draw pattern, and any tabletop water heaters in the medium and high draw patterns would henceforth be considered in the broader electric storage water heater product classes. 88 FR 49058, 49081. In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE requested comment on its proposal to limit the tabletop water heater designation to products in the very small and low draw patterns.
In response, AHRI supported the
proposal to limit the tabletop water heater designation to the products in the very small and low draw patterns as it will prevent the use of tabletop water heaters as an avenue to bypass the
current limitations on small electric storage water heaters. (AHRI, No. 1167
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637822 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
at p. 10) The Joint Advocacy Groups
also supported DOE’s proposal to limit the tabletop water heater designation to products in the very small and low draw patterns, as it would align the standards for tabletop water heaters with those for small electric storage water heaters and help ensure tabletop water heaters are not used as a less efficient substitute for conventional electric storage water heaters. (Joint Advocacy Groups, No. 1165 at pp. 6–7) Rheem supported DOE’s proposed amendments to the tabletop water heater definition, indicating that this otherwise low-sales- volume product has the potential to be installed in place of heat pump water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 8) A.O. Smith supported the changes proposed to the tabletop water heater standards even though it asserted that this may cause some issues for existing products. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 15)
BWC stated that re-defining tabletop
water heaters as products that only meet either the very small or low draw pattern would remove half of the products from the market, even though this is a very small number of models. As a result, BWC stated, there would be a drastic reduction in model availability for consumers who rely on tabletop water heaters, many of which may be in densely populated, low-income households that have higher household occupancies and therefore require products with delivery capacities in the medium draw pattern. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 15–16)
In response to BWC, DOE notes that,
in its market assessment of tabletop water heaters, there are only two basic models found to be certified and commercially available. One is in the low draw pattern, and the other has an FHR of 55 gallons, putting it into the medium draw pattern. Water heaters with FHRs less than 51 gallons can remain categorized as tabletop water heaters. Because the medium draw pattern tabletop water heater on the market today is very close to this FHR cutoff, in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE surmised that, with minimal design changes, a modified version of this model may remain on the market and be certified in the tabletop water heater category (see 88 FR 49058, 49081). This
would avoid limitations to consumer choice. In written comments in response to the NOPR, the two manufacturers that produce tabletop water heaters both supported the proposed updates to the tabletop water heater definition. Additionally, DOE is not aware of, nor did BWC provide, information to support BWC’s assertion that many
tabletop water heaters are used in households with higher occupancies that require the medium draw pattern.
Therefore, DOE is finalizing the definition for tabletop water heaters as proposed.
Additionally, given these insights
regarding the market for tabletop water heaters, DOE is amending the product classes for tabletop water heaters to remove the storage volume-based product class boundary at 120 gallons. Comments indicate that the market for these products is limited and requires the specific use of the rectangular casing configuration with typical dimensions of 36 inches high, 25 inches deep, and 24 inches wide. The maximum possible volume contained in these dimensions is approximately 94 gallons, hence DOE does not expect there to exist a market for tabletop water heaters larger than 120 gallons. The amended product class structure for tabletop water heaters results in two volume-based categories: products less than 20 gallons, and products greater than or equal to 20 gallons.
v. Very Large Electric Storage Water
Heaters
Responding to the July 2023 NOPR,
Bosch, the Joint Advocacy Groups, the CA IOUs, Rheem, A.O. Smith, and AHRI all expressed concern that defining the >120-gallon electric storage water heater product class in terms of effective storage volume (rather than rated storage volume) could pose backsliding concerns given that it would be possible for electric resistance storage water heaters between 55 and 120 gallons to increase their effective storage volume to over 120 gallons by elevating tank temperatures, such that these products could circumvent the existing heat pump-level standards for electric storage water heaters which apply to rated storage volumes between 55 and 120 gallons. (Bosch, No. 1204 at pp. 2– 3; Joint Advocacy Groups, No. 1165 at
p. 8; CA IOUs, No. 1175 at pp. 3–4; Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 3; A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 14; AHRI, No. 1167, pp. 5–6) Bosch and the CA IOUs also suggested that defining the greater than 120-gallon electric storage water heater product class in terms of effective storage volume could encourage a market shift towards larger electric resistance storage water heaters in place of smaller, <55-gallon heat pump water heaters. (Bosch, No. 1204 at pp. 2–3; CA IOUs, No. 1175 at pp. 3–4) Rheem noted that a product with a rated storage volume of 75 gallons could achieve an effective storage volume of 120 gallons at a storage tank temperature of 160 °F.
(Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 3)
Multiple stakeholders suggested
remedies to this potential problem. Bosch recommended that all electric
storage water heaters (apart from very small electric storage water heaters) be required to utilize heat pump technology. (Bosch, No. 1204 at pp. 2– 3) The CA IOUs suggested that DOE amend the calculations for effective storage volume such that products with rated storage volumes less than or equal to 120 gallons would be capped at an effective storage volume of 120 gallons. (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at pp. 3–4) Rheem suggested that DOE exempt products with rated storage volumes greater than 120 gallons from the high temperature test method because a >120-gallon product can already provide the same or more hot water than a heat pump water heater and thus does not rely on increasing its temperature to have a large effective storage volume. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 3) NYSERDA suggested that, rather than creating a separate product class for electric storage water heaters >120 gallons, DOE could instead remove the 120-gallon cap and apply the same standards for electric storage water heaters >55 gallons to those >120 gallons. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 5)
DOE agrees with stakeholders that
defining the >120-gallon electric storage water heater product class in terms of effective storage volume, rather than rated storage volume, would pose a backsliding risk. However, as discussed in V.D.1 of this document, the high- temperature test method does not apply to water heaters that are larger than 55 gallons in rated storage volume. Therefore, the scenarios described above of an electric resistance water heater having a rated volume less than 120 gallons and an effective storage volume greater than 120 gallons is not likely to occur without the use of the high temperature test method. As a result, there would be no risk of backsliding for these standards.
2. Technology Options
DOE conducts a technology
assessment to identify a complete list of
technologies for consumer water heaters (‘‘technology options’’) with the potential to improve the UEF ratings of products. Section IV.B of this document describes the process by which
technology options are screened in a separate screening analysis that aims to determine which technology options could feasibly be adopted based on five screening criteria. In the engineering analysis (section IV.C of this document), DOE selects the technology options that are most likely to constitute the design pathway to higher efficiency levels in a standards-case scenario (thereafter referred to as ‘‘design options’’). Thus, after DOE identifies a comprehensive
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637823 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
list of technologies for the technology
assessment, the subsequent analysis focuses only on those technologies that are the most likely to be implemented in response to amended standards. In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE presented a list of technologies that it identified for initial consideration in the NOPR analysis. 88 FR 49058, 49082–49083.
In the technology assessment for the
July 2023 NOPR, DOE examined 120- volt heat pump water heater technology and noted that there were very few models of 120-volt heat pump water heater available on the market at the time. DOE therefore requested comment on the outlook for the emergence of 120- volt heat pump water heaters, information regarding how their design and operation could differ from 240-volt heat pump water heaters, and data on performance characteristics and efficiencies. 88 FR 49058, 49082.
In response, AWHI commented that
NEEA’s Advanced Water Heating Specification version 8.01 contains a technical specification for a load shifting-capable 120-volt heat pump water heater, and that there are now three manufacturers that offer commercially available 120-volt heat pump water heaters ranging from 50 to 80 gallons. AWHI cited a preliminary market assessment conducted by New Buildings Institute stating that 22 to 30 percent of existing California homes could transition from fossil fuel-based water heaters to 120-volt heat pump water heaters without substantial site upgrades, and that the installation cost of 120-volt heat pump water heaters is significantly less that for 240-volt units due to minimal electrical interventions. AWHI stated that 120-volt heat pump
water heaters do not need a dedicated circuit to be installed and can instead share a circuit with other appliances, reducing the impact of installation on the existing electrical infrastructure of the home. AWHI also stated that 120- volt heat pump water heaters do not
have electric resistance elements, which results in slower recovery than 240-volt heat pump water heaters and are therefore more sensitive to environmental factors that impact compressor performance, such as input water temperature and ambient air temperature. AWHI stated that 120-volt heat pump water heaters incorporate integrated mixing valves and store water at temperatures above the delivery temperature to increase hot water capacity, which allows for easier participation in load shifting and demand-response programs. Lastly, AWHI stated that a 120-volt heat pump water heater performed at an overall average UEF of 2.90 and varied by season and use characteristics in a field study conducted in California by New Buildings Institute. (AWHI, No. 1036 at pp. 1–3)
BWC supported DOE’s tentative
determination not to include 120-volt heat pump water heaters in its analysis because these products are relatively new and do not have significant market share at the present time. BWC stated a belief that it is appropriate for DOE, and the industry, to take more time to better understand these products before establishing regulations. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 14)
DOE appreciates the insight into 120-
volt heat pump water heaters and continues to evaluate this technology. While DOE considers 120-volt heat pump water heaters to be a technology for improving the efficiency of electric water heaters, due to the nascent status of 120-volt heat pump water heaters, DOE did not consider 120-volt designs to constitute the main pathway towards
higher efficiency for electric storage water heaters. However, as discussed in section V.C.1 of this document, the Department assessed TSLs with consideration of these designs. Specifically, when evaluating TSLs, DOE considered whether the potential
standards levels would likely prevent new 120-volt designs from emerging onto the market.
Responding to the July 2023 NOPR,
NEEA supported DOE’s inclusion of the gas pressure-actuated non-powered damper as a technology option, stating that it is likely the lowest cost pathway to achieving EL 2. (NEEA, No. 1199 at p. 9) DOE has maintained non-powered dampers as a technology option for the final rule.
Additionally, while DOE identified
modulating burners as a technology option for all gas-fired water heaters in the July 2023 NOPR technology analysis, DOE tentatively determined that modulating burners were used to increase UEF only in instantaneous gas- fired water heaters. 88 FR 49058, 49082. DOE did not receive any comments on that tentative determination. As discussed in section II.B.3 of this document, gas-fired instantaneous water heaters are no longer within the scope of this rulemaking. However, modulating burners could still be used in circulating gas-fired water heaters, which are a type of gas-fired storage
water heater. Hence, in light of the classification of circulating water heaters as storage-type water heaters (see section IV.A.1.a of this document),
DOE is retaining modulating burners in its list of technology options investigated for this final rule; however, as shown in chapter 5 of the TSD, modulating burners are not expected to be part of the representative, cost- effective design pathway to increasing efficiency for gas-fired storage water heaters. The technology options for Improving UEF in consumer water heaters are listed in Table IV.5 and described in chapter 3 of the final rule TSD.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637824 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.018</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.5 Potential Technologies for Increasing Consumer Water Heater
Efficiency
Technology Option
Heat traps
Increased thickness
Insulation on tank bottom
Less conductive tank materials (e.g., plastic)
Foam insulation
Improved insulation
Pipe and fitting insulation
Aerogel
Advanced insulation types Vacuum panels
Inert gas-filled panels
Direct spark ignition
Electronic ignition systems Intermittent pilot ignition
Hot surface ignition
Pulse combustion
Pressurized combustion
Side-arm heating
Improved burners Two-phase thermosiphon technology
Modulating burners Step Modulating Burners
Fully Modulating Burners
Reduced burner size (slow recovery)
Increased heat exchanger surface area
Enhanced flue baffle
Submerged combustion chamber
Multiple flues
Heat exchanger improvements Alternative flue geometry (Helical)
U-Tube
Condensing technology
Induced-draft (negative vent pressure) heat exchanger
Direct-fired heat exchange
Externally-powered
Thermopile-operated (non-
Flue damper powered)
Gas-actuated (non-powered)
Improved venting Buoyancy-operated (non-
powered)
Concentric direct venting
Power vent
Improved heat pump water heater Compressor improvements I Increased capacity 37825 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
B. Screening Analysis
DOE uses the following five screening
criteria to determine which technology
options are suitable for further consideration in an energy conservation standards rulemaking:
(1) Technological feasibility.
Technologies that are not incorporated in commercial products or in commercially viable, existing prototypes will not be considered further.
(2) Practicability to manufacture,
install, and service. If it is determined that mass production of a technology in commercial products and reliable installation and servicing of the technology could not be achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time of the projected compliance date of the standard, then that technology will not be considered further.
(3) Impacts on product utility. If a
technology is determined to have a significant adverse impact on the utility of the product to subgroups of consumers, or result in the unavailability of any covered product type with performance characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as products generally available in the United States at the time, it will not be considered further.
(4) Safety of technologies. If it is
determined that a technology would have significant adverse impacts on health or safety, it will not be considered further.
(5)Unique-pathway proprietary
technologies. If a technology has
proprietary protection and represents a unique pathway to achieving a given efficiency level, it will not be
considered further, due to the potential for monopolistic concerns.
10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix
A, sections 6(b)(3) and 7(b).
In sum, if DOE determines that a
technology, or a combination of technologies, fails to meet one or more of the listed five criteria, it will be excluded from further consideration in the engineering analysis. The reasons for eliminating any technology are discussed in the following sections.
The subsequent sections include
comments from interested parties pertinent to the screening criteria, DOE’s evaluation of each technology option against the screening analysis criteria, and whether DOE determined that a technology option should be excluded (‘‘screened out’’) based on the screening criteria.
1. Screened-Out Technologies
The following subsections describe
the technologies that DOE eliminated
for failure to meet one of the following five factors: (1) technological feasibility; (2) practicability to manufacture, install, and service; (3) impacts on equipment utility or equipment availability; (4) adverse impacts on health or safety; and (5) unique-pathway proprietary technologies.
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE screened
out the following technology options based on the above criteria: absorption and adsorption heat pump water heaters, advanced insulation types, condensing pulse combustion, direct- fired heat exchange, dual-fuel heat pumps, buoyancy-operated flue dampers, thermopile-operated flue dampers, reduced burner size (slow recovery), side-arm heating, two-phase thermosiphon technology, and U-tube flues. 88 FR 49058, 49083. Each of these
technology options and the reasons for which they were screened out are discussed in detail in chapter 4 of the final rule TSD.
BWC stated that it is aware of
exclusive intellectual property protections that it asserted may inhibit manufacturers from utilizing certain technologies that are assumed by DOE to be available in the market to increase energy efficiency on certain consumer water heater products, and that BWC would be able to provide information in a confidential interview with DOE’s consultants. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 16)
In selecting design options to improve
efficiency in the engineering analysis, DOE performed teardowns of models manufactured by multiple companies to ensure that each efficiency level is achievable using non-proprietary designs.
BWC supported DOE’s tentative
determination not to consider thermopile-powered flue dampers for gas-fired storage water heaters. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 16)
BWC stated that direct-vent and
power-direct-vent gas-fired water heaters are not necessarily unsafe, but that their construction imposes limits on how these products can vent and operate; a major consideration for these products would be restrictions on the
maximum allowable vent length that safety standards would permit. BWC requested that DOE consider these venting factors for gas-fired water heaters to avoid unintentionally encouraging installations that conflict with the requirements of safety standards such as ANSI Z21.10.1 and ANSI Z21.10.3. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 16)
DOE agrees with BWC that direct-vent
and power-direct-vent gas-fired water
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.019</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Technology Option
components Increased efficiency
Variable-speed drive
Fan improvements Hifili-efficiency fan motors
Hif!h-efficiency fan blades
Expansion device improvements
Increased evaporator surface area
Increased condenser surface area
Gas-fired absorption heat pump water heaters
Gas-fired adsorption heat pump water heaters
Carbon dioxide heat pump water heaters
Thermophotovoltaic and thermoelectric generators
Improved controls Modulating controls 37826 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
heaters are safe to use when installed
and operated in accordance with manufacturer recommendations and/or applicable safety standards. Therefore, DOE has not screened these technologies out of its analysis. In evaluating these technologies, DOE accounts for the necessary differences in venting systems installations (see
section IV.F.2.b of this document).
2. Remaining Technologies
Through a review of each technology,
DOE concludes that all of the other
identified technologies listed in section IV.A.2 of this document meet all five
screening criteria to be examined further as design options in DOE’s final rule
analysis. In summary, DOE did not screen out the following technology options listed in Table IV.6. These technology options are shown from left to right from broader categories to specific design options.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
DOE determined that these
technology options are technologically
feasible because they are being used or have previously been used in commercially available products or working prototypes. DOE also finds that all of the remaining technology options meet the other screening criteria (i.e.,
practicable to manufacture, install, and service and do not result in adverse impacts on consumer utility, product availability, health, or safety). For additional details, see chapter 4 of the
final rule TSD. C. Engineering Analysis
The purpose of the engineering
analysis is to establish the relationship between the efficiency and cost of consumer water heaters. There are two elements to consider in the engineering analysis; the selection of efficiency
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.020</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.6 Remainine: Technolo!!V Options
Technology Option
Increased thickness
Insulation on tank bottom
Improved insulation Less conductive tank materials ( e.£., plastic)
Foam insulation
Pipe and fitting insulation
Direct spark ignition
Electronic ignition systems Intermittent pilot ignition
Hot surface ignition
Pressurized combustion
Step modulating
Burner improvements Modulating burners burners
Fully modulating
burners
Increased heat exchanger surface area
Enhanced flue baffle
Submerged combustion chamber
Gas-fired and Oil-fired Heat exchanger improvements Multiple flues
Alternative flue geometry (Helical)
Condensing technology
Induced-draft (negative vent pressure) heat
exchanger
Externally-powered
Flue damper Gas-actuated (non-
Improved venting powered)
Power vent
Concentric direct venting
Improved heat pump water Compressor Increased capacity
heater components improvements
Increased efficiency
Variable-speed drive
Fan Improvements High-efficiency fan motors
Hi!!h-efficiency fan blades
Expansion device improvements
Increased evaporator surface area
Increased condenser surface area
Carbon dioxide (alternative refrigerant) heat pump water heaters
Improved controls Modulating controls
Heat traps ( all types) 37827 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
levels to analyze (i.e., the ‘‘efficiency
analysis’’) and the determination of
product cost at each efficiency level (i.e., the ‘‘cost analysis’’). In determining
the performance of higher-efficiency products, DOE considers technologies and design option combinations not eliminated by the screening analysis. For each product class, DOE estimates the baseline cost, as well as the incremental cost for the product at efficiency levels above the baseline. The output of the engineering analysis is a set of cost-efficiency ‘‘curves’’ that are used in downstream analyses (i.e., the
LCC and PBP analyses, the MIA, and the
NIA).
As discussed in section IV.A.1 of this
document, certain classes of consumer water heaters currently have UEF-based standards, while for others EPCA’s EF- based standards apply. For this rulemaking, DOE analyzed amended UEF standards for the product classes that currently have standards in terms of UEF. For the product classes with EF- based standards, DOE developed translated standards in terms of UEF for use in the analysis.
In this final rule, DOE has analyzed
standards with respect to the effective storage volume metric (as proposed in the July 2023 NOPR). Compared to rated storage volume and FHR, effective storage volume is a superior descriptor
of the thermal energy stored in the hot water of the water heater which can be made immediately available for consumer use. As outlined in the July 2023 NOPR, there are two types of water heaters that can cause the system to store more energy than would be otherwise determined by the rated storage volume: (1) water heaters capable of operating with an elevated tank temperature, and (2) circulating water heaters. 88 FR 49058, 49086. In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE established that compliance with the effective storage volume provisions (and, relatedly, the high temperature testing method and testing with separate storage tanks for circulating water heaters) would not be required until compliance with amended standards is required. For circulating water heaters, the effective storage volume of the water heater is determined by the measured storage volume of the separate storage tank used in testing because these types of water heaters are designed to operate with a volume of stored water in the field. 88 FR 40406, 40461–40462. Certain provisions for circulating water heater testing are discussed further in
detail in section V.D.2 of this document. Section V.D.1 of this document discusses the proposed approach to consider efficiency determinations for water heaters tested using the high temperature testing method.
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined not to propose amended standards for gas-fired storage water heaters (55 gal < V
eff≤ 100 gal),
tabletop water heaters (20 gal ≤ Veff≤
120 gal), electric instantaneous water heaters (V
eff< 2 gal), and grid-enabled
water heaters at that time based on the results of the market and technology assessment, screening analysis, interviews with manufacturers, and comments from interested parties. These assessments were discussed further in chapters 3 and 5 of the NOPR TSD. 88 FR 49058, 49086.
In this final rule, DOE has maintained
the analytical approaches proposed in the July 2023 NOPR. For circulating water heaters, as discussed in section IV.A.1.a of this document, based on information from the December 2023 SNOPR, DOE has determined that these products offer the same consumer utility as storage-type water heaters, so the storage-type water heater standards would apply. In summary, Table IV.7 presents the consumer water heater product classes along with the approach to analyzing them for this final rule.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637828 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
Several commenters provided
feedback about transitioning the energy
conservation standards from a rated storage volume basis to an effective storage volume basis.
AHRI provided comments
emphasizing the possibility of market confusion resulting from amended standards being prescribed in terms of effective storage volume instead of rated
storage volume, noting that the previous conversion from the EF to the UEF
metric itself was not without issue, leading to market disruption given that utility programs across the United States and in Canada have still not fully adopted the UEF metric. AHRI stated that the effective storage volume metric needs to be further scrutinized to evaluate the representativeness and
repeatability of the metric, and that manufacturers require additional time to
analyze the effective storage volume calculation to determine its accuracy, representativeness, and repeatability, as well as to conduct laboratory testing to this end. AHRI asserted that the 60-day comment period for the July 2023 NOPR was insufficient to conduct this review.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.021</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6T bl IV7 A 1 • A a e . na1ys1s ,p l)roac IY ro uc h b P d t Cl ass
Product Category Distinguishing Characteristics
Analyzed in this Final (Effective Storage Volume and Input Analysis
Rule Rating)
Converting EF-based
< 20 gal standards to UEF-based
standards
Gas-fired Storage Water 2: 20 gal and :S 55 gal Amending UEF-based
standards Heater > 55 gal and< 100 gal No amendments
Converting EF-based
> 100 gal standards to UEF-based
standards
:S 50 gal Amending UEF-based
standards Oil-fired Storage Water Converting EF-based Heater > 50 gal standards to UEF-based
standards
< 20 gal Converting EF-based
standards to UEF-based
standards
2: 20 gal and :S 35 gal, Amending UEF-based FHR < 51 gal
(Small electric storage water heaters) standards
Electric Storage Water 2: 20 gal and :S 55 gal, excluding small Amending UEF-based Heater electric storage water heaters standards
> 55 gal and :S 120 gal Amending UEF-based
standards
Converting EF-based
> 120 gal standards to UEF-based
standards
Converting EF-based
< 20 gal standards to UEF-based
standards
Tabletop Water Heater Remove boundary at 120 gal
due to these sizes not being
2: 20 gal and :S 120 gal feasible within the
description of a tabletop
water heater
Electric Instantaneous <2 gal No amendments
Water Heater (including Converting EF-based
Low-Temperature Water ~ 2 gal standards to UEF-based
Heaters) standards
Grid-enabled Water Heater > 75 gal No amendments
Circulating Water Heater All Sizes Included as storage-type
water heaters 37829 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
36As discussed in section III.C of this document,
the effective storage volume metric accounts for
both temperature and tank size, whereas rated storage volume alone only accounts for tank size. AHRI recommended using only effective
storage volume in the energy conservation standards equations for products for which the metric applies to limit confusion. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 5) AHRI requested clarification on whether the effective storage volume metric would apply to grid-enabled water heaters, tabletop water heaters, and electric instantaneous water heaters larger than 2 gallons in rated storage volume, recommending that the effective storage volume metric not apply to grid-enabled water heaters. AHRI proposed two possible options to mitigate potential market confusion from the new effective storage volume metric: use rated storage volume for all product categories not subject to high temperature testing; or (the option AHRI stated was less preferable), include a footnote with the standards to indicate those product categories for which effective storage volume is identical to rated storage volume. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 6)
BWC commented that the
replacement of the rated storage volume metric with effective storage volume deviates from the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation and could create situations where products may not be capable of supplying adequate hot water to the home. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 1) BWC requested DOE not change the standards for all product classes to be in terms of effective storage volume, but instead to use the new metric only for product classes for which the rated storage volume and effective storage volume are expected to be different in order to avoid confusion. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 9)
CEC identified a drafting error in the
proposed regulatory language in the heading at 10 CFR 430.32(d)(1) and (2), where ‘‘rated storage volume’’ is used rather than ‘‘effective storage volume.’’ (CEC, No. 1173 at pp. 12–13) This was a publication error printed at 88 FR 49058, 49176. Stakeholders were notified of this typographical error in the September 13 Public Meeting. (Public Meeting Transcript, No. 1190 at p. 101).
In response, DOE maintains that
effective storage volume is appropriate for use for all classes. In light of the reclassification of circulating water heaters as storage-type water heaters,
defining all classes in terms of effective storage volume (rather than just electric storage classes, as was suggested by stakeholders) and delineating the standards as a function of effective storage volume is necessary to ensure the appropriate classification of these products. More specifically, because circulating water heaters will be considered part of the storage-type
product classes, the same standards will apply to circulating water heaters. Where the standards for storage-type product classes are linear functions of volume, the purpose of this is to account for the additional standby loss that comes with more hot water being contained in the system. The effective storage volume of a circulating water heater is what captures the amount of hot water contained in this type of system, and therefore is most appropriate to base the standards equations on. Stakeholders correctly noted that the use of the high temperature test method (described in section V.D.1 of this document), which will apply to certain types of electric storage water heaters, is one way by which a model can have an effective storage volume different from its rated storage volume. Further, per section 6.3.1.1 of appendix E test procedure, the effective storage volume can be higher than the rated storage volume for any storage-type water heater if the mean tank temperature is more than 5 °F
higher than the delivery temperature (see section V.D.1 of this document for
details). Therefore, DOE adopts use of effective storage volume rather than storage volume in this final rule.
1. Product Classes With Current UEF-
Based Standards
DOE typically uses one of two
approaches to develop energy efficiency levels for the engineering analysis: (1) relying on observed efficiency levels in the market (i.e., the efficiency-level
approach), or (2) determining the incremental efficiency improvements associated with incorporating specific design options to a baseline model (i.e., the design-option approach). Using the efficiency-level approach, the efficiency levels established for the analysis are determined based on the market distribution of existing products (in other words, based on the range of efficiencies and efficiency-level ‘‘clusters’’ that already exist on the market). Using the design option approach, the efficiency levels established for the analysis are determined through detailed engineering calculations and/or computer simulations of the efficiency improvements from implementing specific design options that have been identified in the technology assessment. DOE may also rely on a combination of these two approaches. For example, the
efficiency-level approach (based on actual products on the market) may be extended using the design-option approach to ‘‘gap fill’’ levels (to bridge large gaps between other identified efficiency levels) and/or to extrapolate to the max-tech level (particularly in cases where the max-tech level exceeds the maximum efficiency level currently available on the market).
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
developed efficiency levels with a combination of the efficiency-level and design-option approaches. DOE conducted a market analysis of currently available models listed in DOE’s CCD to determine which efficiency levels were most representative of the current distribution of consumer water heaters available on the market. DOE also completed physical teardowns of commercially available units to determine which design options manufacturers may use to achieve certain efficiency levels for each water heater category analyzed. DOE requested comments from stakeholders and conducted interviews with manufacturers concerning these initial efficiency levels, which have been updated based on the feedback DOE received.
a. Efficiency Levels
In this final rule, as noted previously,
DOE has analyzed efficiency levels for
UEF that are a function of effective storage volume (with the exception of certain levels which were analyzed when DOE incorporated feedback from the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation). For products with substantial storage volumes, the UEF is expected to decrease with higher volumes because standby losses (i.e., energy lost from the
stored water to the surroundings when the water heater is not actively heating water) are related to the temperature of the water stored and the size of the tank.
36The efficiency levels analyzed in
this rulemaking assume that the relationships between standby losses and storage volume for baseline products (i.e., the slopes of the current
standards equations) would remain consistent for higher efficiency levels. In other words, the higher efficiency levels are linear equations that are parallel to the current standards. The exception to this is for DOE’s analysis of the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation, which included certain efficiency levels that were not specified as a function of storage volume.
In this final rule, DOE has analyzed
the same efficiency levels as were considered in the July 2023 NOPR. The details of the efficiency level analysis
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637830 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
37Product information can be found online at:
www.intergas-verwarming.nl/consument/
producten/xtend/ (Last accessed: Nov. 17, 2023). are presented in chapter 5 of the final
rule TSD, and a summary of the efficiency levels is presented in the following sections.
i. Baseline Efficiency
For each product class, DOE generally
selects a baseline model as a reference
point for each class and measures changes resulting from potential energy conservation standards against the baseline. The baseline model in each product class represents the characteristics of a product/equipment typical of that class (e.g., capacity,
physical size). Generally, a baseline model is one that just meets current energy conservation standards, or, if no standards are in place, the baseline is typically the most common or least
efficient unit on the market. For this final rule, the baseline efficiency levels for product classes with current UEF- based standards are equal to the current energy conservation standards (see Table II.1).
ii. Higher Efficiency Levels
As part of DOE’s analysis, the
maximum available efficiency level is
the highest efficiency unit currently available on the market. DOE also defines a ‘‘max-tech’’ efficiency level to represent the maximum possible efficiency for a given product.
In July 2023 NOPR, the max-tech
efficiency levels generally corresponded to the maximum available efficiency level on the market. DOE also analyzed multiple intermediate efficiency levels between the baseline and max-tech in order to develop the cost-efficiency relationship for each product class. Intermediate efficiency levels were chosen based on the market assessment where there were clear groupings in the market’s efficiency distribution. In some cases, efficiency levels were observed for one draw pattern but not the others.
DOE has constructed cost versus
efficiency curves for the representative capacities and representative draw patterns which exist on the market today, as opposed to directly analyzing every possible draw pattern. However, DOE is increasing the stringency of standards for draw patterns where products do not currently exist in order to match the stringency of standards for draw patterns where products in the same category do exist, in the event that products become available with draw patterns not currently on the market.
For these cases, DOE estimated these
max-tech levels using existing relationships between efficiency levels observed in other draw patterns where products do exist. Products in different draw patterns are typically differentiated by rated storage volume and heating capacity (burner input rate, compressor capacity, or element wattage), and the design options used to improve UEF in one draw pattern can generally also be applied to water heaters of the same type in a different draw pattern. For the cases where products at additional intermediate efficiency levels were observed in the market at one draw pattern but not the others, DOE estimated efficiency levels in the other draw patterns based on what was observed for the one available draw pattern. The approach took into account how each product type’s efficiency correlates to its delivery capacity (i.e., either FHR or maximum
GPM, the delivery capacity metrics assigned for non-flow-activated water heaters and flow-activated water heaters, respectively), recovery efficiency, and technological feasibility of design-option implementation. A detailed discussion of efficiency level selection on a product-class by product- class basis is provided in chapter 5 of the final rule TSD.
In the NOPR engineering analysis,
DOE considered split-system heat pump water heaters as a representative design strategy for small electric storage water heaters because small electric storage water heaters are typically configured for applications with limited vertical clearance. Whereas integrated heat pump water heaters are typically designed with the heat pump components affixed to the top of the storage tank (significantly increasing the height of the water heater), split-system heat pump water heaters have the advantage of being able to install the heat pump in a remote location so that the storage tank height does not change. However, there are currently no models of split-system heat pumps for small electric storage water heaters on the market today, so DOE estimated the performance of a hypothetical design based on circulating heat pump water heaters and lowboy water heaters that were available at the time of the July 2023 NOPR. See chapter 5 of the NOPR
TSD for further details. To ensure that the analysis is representative, in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE requested information about the potential design specifications, manufacturing processes, and efficiencies of split-system heat pump water heaters. 88 FR 49058, 49091.
In response to DOE’s request for
information regarding split-system heat pump water heaters, Rheem noted that it had identified a dual-fuel combination heat pump water heater and boiler product manufactured by its sister company in the Netherlands.
(Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 8)
DOE reviewed product literature for
the dual-fuel split-system heat pump water heater mentioned by Rheem, marketed in the Netherlands as the Intergas Xtend model. While dual-fuel heating is being screened out from this rulemaking analysis (see section IV.B.1
of this document), details about this design provide valuable information about the performance potentials for split-system heat pump water heaters (operating in heat pump-only mode). The Xtend split-system heat pump water heater has a reported coefficient of performance (‘‘COP’’) of 4.68, uses R– 32 refrigerant, has a total heating capacity of 5 kW (over 17,000 Btu/h), and is designed for combination space
and domestic hot water heating.
37Based
on the COP rating, DOE understands that this product identified by Rheem would likely have a UEF rating higher than the max-tech efficiency analyzed for small electric storage water heaters. However, after reviewing this design, DOE determined two main factors which lead to uncertainty as to whether this design is viable for small electric storage water heaters. First, the use of R–32 refrigerant (which has not been demonstrated in water heaters in the United States market) and the resulting total capacity of over 17,000 Btu/h is more akin to the designs of single-split space-constrained air-source heat pump air conditioners, which range between 15,200 and 23,800 Btu/h in DOE’s CCD. In contrast, teardown analyses of heat pump water heaters show that these systems typically have much smaller compressors than do central (i.e., whole-
home) air conditioners, and therefore the Xtend water heater model as well. In addition, due to the higher capacity of the Xtend model, this product is more likely to function in the medium or high draw patterns, meaning that it does not serve the same consumer utility as a small electric storage water heater. This is because a much larger compressor would have very low run time (causing technical difficulties for refrigerant circulation), be noisier, and significantly increase the footprint of the heat pump module. As a result, it remains unclear whether split-system heat pump small electric storage water heaters are able to employ the same design options to achieve the higher efficiency of the Xtend model. DOE will continue to evaluate technologies for split-system heat pump water heaters in future
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637831 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
rulemakings addressing consumer water
heater standards.
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
presented its efficiency levels for analysis and specifically requested further information on the technologies employed in 45-gallon medium draw pattern electric storage products at a UEF of 3.50 (which would potentially help with re-evaluating EL 2). 88 FR 49058, 49090. DOE did not, however, receive any comments on this particular topic.
Commenting more specifically on the
electric storage water heater efficiency levels analyzed in the July 2023 NOPR, BWC noted that the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation originally suggested a minimum UEF of 2.0 for some of the smallest volumes of electric storage water heaters, and the NOPR proposes a level of 2.3 UEF. BWC asserted that a minimum UEF of 2.0 would be necessary in some products to allow manufacturers more flexibility to innovate new designs and reduce the cost of heat pump water heaters, which it stated will be critical for consumers to purchase these products because key rebates and tax incentives will expire in the early 2030s. However, BWC stated that it still supported electric resistance- level standards for small and very small electric storage water heaters, and that, generally, redesigns for these products would not be necessary to meet the proposed minimum efficiency standards. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 1–2)
In response to BWC, DOE notes that
products exceeding 2.3 UEF are widely available across a range of capacities, indicating that this level is readily achievable, and thus analyzing an additional efficiency level at a UEF of 2.0 would be unlikely to provide additional benefit. As discussed in chapter 5 of the final rule TSD, a UEF of 2.0 is expected to correspond to split- system heat pump water heaters in the small electric storage water heater product category, which, as a result of the heat pump design, have certain limitations to achieving higher efficiencies. Electric storage water heaters that are not ‘‘small electric storage water heaters’’ do not have the same design limitations and can achieve higher efficiencies with integrated heat pump water heater designs (where the heat pump is adjoined at the top of the
tank). Additionally, split-system designs are typically more expensive to manufacture compared to integrated designs, meaning that the most cost- effective pathway to achieving higher efficiencies would most likely be through integrated designs. (See section
IV.C.1.e of this document and chapter 5 of the final rule TSD for estimated manufacturer production costs of both
styles of heat pump designs.) In the selection of efficiency levels for these larger water heaters, DOE considered the certified UEF ratings of integrated heat pump water heaters on the market, the ENERGY STAR v5.0 specification, the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation, and its own test data. Based on these sources, a UEF of 2.3 was determined to be most representative of a low-cost heat pump water heater design for non-small electric storage water heaters.
Earlier in this rulemaking DOE
received comments from some stakeholders who suggested that DOE consider establishing a ‘‘heat pump- only’’ level, which would exclude the use of electric resistance elements, as max tech for heat pump water heaters. In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE noted that its own test data indicate that heat pump water heaters with backup electric resistance elements typically do not use the elements during DOE’s 24- hour simulated use test. Therefore, adding an efficiency level that corresponds to a ‘‘heat-pump only’’ design option as max tech would not be expected to change the UEF. 88 FR 49058, 49090.
BWC agreed with not including an
efficiency level for electric storage water heaters that specifically pertained to a heat pump design that did not have backup electric resistance elements on the basis that not only would a higher efficiency standard pose significant challenges for the industry transition to heat pump water heaters, but also that the efficiency benefits of not having a backup electric resistance element would not be demonstrated by the current appendix E test procedure and UEF metric. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 16– 17)
Essency stated it has achieved an FHR
of 80 gallons and a UEF of 0.93 with electric resistance technology and suggested that max tech for electric resistance water heaters has not yet been reached. (Essency, No. 1194 at p. 1)
GreenTECH stated that it is currently developing a fully electric consumer heat pump water heater with projected energy savings of 50 percent compared to current models and that utilizes peak amperage of less than 10 amps at 220 volts for a 50-gallon comparable model. (GreenTECH, No. 71 at p.1)
In response to Essency, DOE
previously considered an efficiency level that corresponded to increased insulation for electric resistance storage water heaters (see the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis). However, DOE received many comments from manufacturers indicating that it may not be practical to incorporate more insulation in the manufacturing process, after which DOE had revised EL 1 to reflect a baseline heat pump efficiency instead. 88 FR 49058, 49089. In response to GreenTECH, based on its review of the components that are used in conventional 240-volt heat pump water heaters, DOE expects that there would not be any appreciable difference in technology or design between conventional 240-volt heat pump water heaters and a 220-volt heat pump water heater as described by GreenTECH. However, because GreenTECH did not provide further details regarding their design, which is currently commercially unavailable, DOE was unable to evaluate GreenTECH’s suggestions as a max-tech efficiency level.
NEEA urged DOE to consider gas
absorption or adsorption heat pump water heaters as max-tech, adding that statutorily, DOE is not limited to commercially available technologies. NEEA noted that multiple technology developers and manufacturers are advancing gas heat pump water heaters for the residential market, many of which are expected to be commercialized by 2025. (NEEA, No. 1199 at pp. 9–10)
In response to comments from NEEA,
DOE did not consider gas-fired absorption or adsorption heat pumps for the max-tech levels because, as discussed in section IV.B of this document, these technologies were screened out for not being practicable to manufacture, install, or service on the scale necessary to serve the consumer water heater market upon the compliance date of the amended standards. For more details on the screening analysis, see chapter 4 of the
final rule TSD.
AWHI encouraged DOE to consider
efficiency levels for gas-fired storage water heaters that couple 120-volt electric-readiness with gas-fired water heater installations to minimize the burden of future electrification requirements. AWHI cited a comment from Rheem made in response to the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis recommending that DOE add a higher efficiency level for gas-fired storage water heaters that would require electricity but is achievable with a Category-I venting solution. AHWI stated that adopting such a standard level would, upon the second replacement of an existing gas-fired water heater after the compliance date of this rule, give consumers the option to install drop-in replacement 120-volt heat pump water heaters because the 120-volt electricity connection would already exist (being necessary to meet
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637832 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
such a standard). (AWHI, No. 1036 at p.
4)
In response to AWHI, DOE notes that
it does consider an efficiency level for gas-fired storage water heaters that requires electricity and is achievable with category I venting, which is identified as EL 2B (see section IV.C.1.b of this document) and includes an electric flue damper but uses category I venting. Beyond that level, based on review of the market and technologies currently being used, DOE has concluded the most likely design pathway to improved UEF would be to increase flue baffling, which would require use of category III venting (i.e., ‘‘power venting’’).
CEC requested DOE establish more
stringent standards for gas-fired storage water heaters and, if necessary, proceed with a separate rule for gas-fired storage water heaters to avoid delaying the finalization of other settled portions of
the proposed rule. CEC added that primary innovation needed make
substantial efficiency improvements to gas-fired storage water heaters is to implement a spiral flue, which will exchange more heat from the combusted gas to the water. (CEC, No. 1173 at p. 4)
In response to CEC, DOE agrees that
a ‘‘spiral’’ (helical) flue is one of the main technological improvements that allows gas-fired storage water heaters to have condensing-level efficiencies. DOE
notes that the manufacture and design of these flues is a complicated and expensive process, and spiraling flues have added material costs due to the significantly longer flue length. Additionally, manufacturers must adjust designs to account for the tank volume that the flue takes up: the more space the flue takes up in the tank, the less tank volume there is left to store the hot water. These costs are reflected in the manufacturer production costs (‘‘MPCs’’) and conversion cost estimates for ELs 4 and 5 for gas-fired storage
water heaters, and they eventually result in higher-priced products for consumers. DOE evaluated whether standards at condensing efficiency levels were economically justified taking into account these costs (see section V.C.1 of this document.)
After considering these comments,
DOE has maintained the efficiency levels from the July 2023 NOPR.
iii. Efficiency Levels by Product Class
DOE’s analysis for efficiency levels
above baseline is discussed in more
detail in chapter 5 of the final rule TSD. Efficiency levels, including baseline and higher efficiencies, across all product classes are listed in the tables that follow. The efficiency levels which correspond closely to the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation are indicated with ‘‘JSR’’.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.022</GPH> ER06MY24.023</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.8 Gas-fired Storage: 20 gal< Verr< 55 gal, Standard, Low, and Ultra Low NOx
Efficiency UEF
Level Very Small* Low Medium High
0 (Baseline) 0.3456 -(0.0020 X 0.5982 -(0.0019 X 0.6483 -(0.0017 X 0.6920 -(0.0013 X
Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
1 0.3725 -(0.0020 X 0.6251 -(0.0019 X 0.6646 -(0.0017 X 0.7024 -(0.0013 X
Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
2 (JSR) 0.3925 -(0.0020 X 0.6451 -(0.0019 X 0.7046 -(0.0017 X 0.7424 -(0.0013 X
Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
3 0.4025 -(0.0020 X 0.6551 -(0.0019 X 0.7146 -(0.0017 X 0.7524 -(0.0013 X
Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
4 0.5125 -(0.0020 X 0.7651 -(0.0019 X 0.8146 -(0.0017 X 0.8624 -(0.0013 X
Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
5 (Max- 0.5725 -(0.0020 X 0.8251 -(0.0019 X 0.8746 -(0.0017 X 0.9224 -(0.0013 X
Tech) Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
* No products exist in the very small draw pattern at the time of this analysis. DOE applied the differences in efficiency levels
from the low draw pattern to define the Efficiency Levels 1 throu2:h 5 for the very small draw pattern.
Table IV.9 Oil-fired Storage: Verr:S 50 gal
Efficiency UEF
Level Very Small* Low* Medium* High
0 (Baseline) 0.2509 -(0.0012 X 0.5330 -(0.0016 X 0.6078 -(0.0016 X 0.6815 -(0.0014 X
Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
1 0.2709 -(0.0012 X 0.5530 -(0.0016 X 0.6278 -(0.0016 X 0.7015 -(0.0014 X
Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
2 (Max- 0.2909 -(0.0012 X 0.5730 -(0.0016 X 0.6478 -(0.0016 X 0.7215 -(0.0014 X
Tech) Verr) Verr) Verr) Verr)
* No products exist in these draw patterns at the time of this analysis. DOE applied the differences in efficiency levels from the
high draw pattern to define the Efficiency Levels 1 and 2 for the other draw patterns. 37833 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
38Specifically, DOE explained that feedback from
multiple sources indicated that increasing the
thickness may not be practical in the manufacturing process because the R-value of polyurethane diminishes when the compound is blown into larger cavities, and the increase in thickness does not offset the increase in water heater surface area (which will increase standby losses).
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
b. Design Options
Based on its teardown analyses and
feedback provided by manufacturers in
confidential interviews, DOE determined the technology options that are most likely to constitute the pathway to achieving the efficiency levels assessed. These technology options are referred to as ‘‘design options.’’ While manufacturers may achieve a given efficiency level using more than one design strategy, the selected design options reflect what DOE expects to be the most likely approach for the market in general in a standards-case scenario. Further details are provided in chapter 5 of the final
rule TSD.
Ravnitzky indicated that DOE
acknowledges that increased tank insulation can improve the efficiency of storage-type water heaters and questioned DOE’s decision not to consider increased insulation thickness as a feasible technology option for electric storage water heaters. Ravnitzky claimed that, with sufficient insulation, non-heat pump water heaters can be nearly as efficient as heat pump water heaters. (Ravnitzky, No. 73 at p. 1)
DOE agrees that increased insulation
thickness can improve the efficiency of storage-type water heaters and notes that increased insulation thickness is considered as a design option for increasing the efficiency of gas-fired and
oil-fired storage water heaters. In addition, as discussed in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE initially considered an efficiency level for electric storage water heaters based on increased insulation thickness in the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis. However, in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE explained that in response to stakeholder feedback
38on
the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.024</GPH> ER06MY24.025</GPH> ER06MY24.026</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.10 Small Electric Stora2e: 20 2al < Verr< 35 2al, FHR < 51 2al
Efficiency UEF
Level Very Smallt Low
0 0.8808 -(0.0008 X Veff) 0.9254 -(0.0003 X Veff) (Baseline)
1 (JSR) 2.00* 2.00
* DOE applied the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation for low draw pattern units to the very small draw pattern in its analysis.
t No products exist in the verv small draw pattern at the time of this analvsis.
Table IV.11 Electric Stora2e: 20 2al < Verr< 55 2al, excludin2 Small Electric Stora2e
Efficiency UEF
Level Very Small** Low Medium High
0 (Baseline) 0.8808 -(0.0008 X 0.9254 -(0.0003 X 0.9307 -(0.0002 X 0.9349 -(0.0001 X
Veff) Veff) Veff) Veff)
1 (JSR) 2.30* 2.30 2.30 2.30
2 3.2602 -(0.0008 X 3.3048 -(0.0003 X 3.3590 -(0.0002 X 3.4742 -(0.0001 X
Veff) t Veff) Veff) Veff)
3 (Max- 3.6602 -(0.0008 X 3.7048 -(0.0003 X 3.7590 -(0.0002 X 3.8742 -(0.0001 X
Tech) Veff) t Veff) Veff) Veff)
* DOE applied the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation for low draw pattern units to the very small draw pattern in its analysis.
** No products exist in the very small draw pattern at the time of this analysis. t DOE applied the differences in efficiency levels from the low draw pattern to define the Efficiency Levels 2 and 3 for the very
small draw pattern.
Table IV.12IVIV Electric Stora2e: 55 2al < Vetr:S 120 2al
Efficiency UEF
Level Very Small** Low** Medium High
0 (Baseline) 1.9236 -(0.0011 X 2.0440 -(0.0011 X 2.1171-(0.0011 X 2.2418 -(0.0011 X
Veff) Veff) Veff) Veff)
1 (JSR) 2.50* 2.50 2.50 2.50
2 3.2198 -(0.0011 X 3.3402 -(0.0011 X 3.4133 -(0.0011 X 3.5380 -(0.0011 X
Veff) t Veff) t Veff) Veff)
3 (Max- 3.7698 -(0.0011 X 3.8902 -(0.0011 X 3.9633 -(0.0011 X 4.0880-(0.0011 X
Tech) Veff) t Veff) t Veff) Veff)
* DOE applied the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation for low draw pattern units to the very small draw pattern in its analysis.
** Only one product exists in the low draw pattern at the time of this analysis. No products exist in the very small draw pattern at
the time of this analysis. t DOE applied the differences in efficiency levels from the medium draw pattern and high draw pattern to define the Efficiency
Levels 2 and 3 for the verv small draw pattern and the low draw pattern. 37834 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
39There are no gas-fired storage products certified
within the very small draw pattern. the first efficiency level design option
for electric storage water heaters was changed to include heat pump technology, which DOE noted was more representative of the next level up from baseline. 88 FR 49058, 49089. Given the insulation thicknesses DOE has observed in models currently on the market, DOE maintains its position that the most likely design path for improving heat pump water heater efficiency above the baseline level would be through use of heat pump technology. Increasing insulation thicknesses to the point required to substantially increase the UEF of electric storage water heaters beyond what is required by the current standard may not be feasible. Therefore, for this final rule DOE has maintained the efficiency levels (and associated design options) for electric storage waters from the July 2023 NOPR.
In addition, DOE disagrees with the
notion that non-heat pump water
heaters could be made to be as efficient as heat pump water heaters through insulation thickness increases. Even if standby losses were to be completely eliminated, the electric resistance elements used for heating non-heat pump electric storage water heaters have a maximum theoretical efficiency of 100 percent, resulting in a maximum UEF of 1.00. Heat pump water heaters
achieve efficiencies greater than 1.00 by extracting more heat energy from their surroundings than is required for them to operate, which non-heat pump water heaters are incapable of.
BWC generally supported the design
options DOE selected at the NOPR stage. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 16) However, BWC reiterated its comments indicating that gas-fired storage water heaters can only use 1 inch of insulation in certain circumstances, and that it should not be considered as the baseline design option. BWC stated that 1 inch of insulation would not be capable of
meeting the current standards, and only certain models designed to accommodate space constraints may come with 1 inch of insulation. The decreased insulation from 2 inches, BWC stated, has a drawback in lowering the FHR and recovery rate of the model. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 17)
DOE believes that BWC may have
misunderstood the design options that were modeled for the baseline efficiency level for gas-fired storage water heaters in the engineering analysis. Based on teardown analyses, DOE did determine that products with 1 inch of insulation can meet the existing standards, but only for the low draw pattern and the medium draw pattern.
39At the NOPR stage, DOE took into account BWC’s
feedback about decreased FHRs and slower recovery rates. 88 FR 49058, 49094. These factors lead to gas-fired storage water heaters with only 1 inch of insulation also having smaller burners with lower input ratings. Products in the high draw pattern require larger burners. In the NOPR engineering analysis, DOE increased the insulation thickness for the high draw pattern designs of gas-fired storage water heaters. A thickness of 1.5 inches was used based on teardown samples of high draw pattern gas-fired storage water heaters at the representative size. Id. (See chapter 5 of the NOPR TSD.)
However, this specifically pertained to side insulation. After reviewing BWC’s comments and its own teardown samples, DOE has again updated the design option for high draw pattern gas- fired storage water heaters to use 1.5 inches of side insulation and 2 inches of top insulation to reflect the minimum amount of insulation necessary to meet the current standards.
Table IV.13 through Table IV.17 show
the design options at each UEF level analyzed for this final rule. DOE maintained the design options as they were discussed in the July 2023 NOPR.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.027</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.13 -Desi • as-fired Stora al
EL
0
1
2A
2B
3
4
5 Standard burner;
Standing pilot
1 " side, 1" top insulation*;
Cat I venting (atmospheric);
Strai t flue
Electronic ignition;
Cat I ventin electric flue dam er
Electronic ignition
Cat III venting (power venting)
Increased heat exchan er bafflin
Cat IV venting (power venting)
Condensin helical flue Ultra-Low NOx premix burner;
Standing pilot
1" side, 1" top insulation*;
Cat I venting (atmospheric);
Strai ht flue
Electronic ignition;
Cat I ventin electric flue dam er
Electronic ignition
Cat III venting (power venting)
Increased heat exchan er bafflin
Cat IV venting (power venting)
Condensin helical flue
Increased heat exchan er surface area 37835 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.028</GPH> ER06MY24.029</GPH> ER06MY24.030</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.14 -Design Options for Oil-fired Storage: Verr:S 50 gal
EL Design Options
0 Single flue heat exchanger;
Foam Insulation 1 11 side, 1 .5'' top insulation
1 Foam Insulation 211 side, 2.511 top insulation
2 Multi-flue heat exchanger
Table IV.15 -Design Options for Small Electric Storage: 20 gal :S Verr:S 35 gal, FHR
< 51 1 ,a
EL Design Options
3" side 3" top insulation;
0 Lowboy aspect ratio (less than 36 inches in
hei2:ht)
Split-system R134A rotary compressor;
Capillary expansion device;
1 Counterflow condenser design;
Tube-and-fm evaporator design;
Shaded Pole Motor ("SPM") evaporator fan
2" side 2" top insulation
Table IV.16 -Design Options for Electric Storage: 20 gal :S Verr:S 55 gal, excluding
Small Electric Storage
EL Design Options
3" side 3" top insulation;
0 Short aspect ratio for products ::; 3 5 gal or in the low draw pattern, tall aspect ratio
for products> 35 gal and in the medium or hi!!h draw patterns
Integrated R134A rotary compressor;
Capillary expansion device;
1 Hotwall condenser;
Tube-and-fin evaporator design;
SPM evaporator fan
2 11 side 2 11 top insulation
Electronic expansion valve;
2 Larger condenser;
Larger evaporator;
ECM evaporator fan
Larger condenser;
3 Larger evaporator;
Insulated sealed system;
Hi!!h efficiency fan blades 37836 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
c. Cost Analysis
The cost analysis portion of the
engineering analysis is conducted using
one or a combination of cost approaches. The selection of cost approach depends on a suite of factors, including the availability and reliability of public information, characteristics of the regulated product, the availability and timeliness of purchasing the product on the market. The cost approaches are summarized as follows:
bPhysical teardowns: Under this
approach, DOE physically dismantles a commercially available product, component-by-component, to develop a detailed bill of materials for the product.
bCatalog teardowns: In lieu of
physically deconstructing a product, DOE identifies each component using parts diagrams (available from manufacturer websites or appliance repair websites, for example) to develop the bill of materials for the product.
bPrice surveys: If neither a physical
nor catalog teardown is feasible (for example, for tightly integrated products such as fluorescent lamps, which are infeasible to disassemble and for which parts diagrams are unavailable) or cost- prohibitive and otherwise impractical (e.g., large commercial boilers), DOE
conducts price surveys using publicly available pricing data published on major online retailer websites and/or by soliciting prices from distributors and other commercial channels.
In this rulemaking, DOE utilizes a
combination of the physical and catalog teardown approaches to develop estimates of the MPC at each UEF efficiency level analyzed. Data from the teardowns were used to create bills of materials (‘‘BOMs’’) that capture all of the materials, components, and manufacturing processes necessary to manufacture products that achieve each UEF level. DOE used the BOMs along with publicly available material and component cost data as the basis for estimating the MPCs. DOE refined its cost estimates and its material and component cost data based on feedback received during confidential manufacturer interviews.
To perform this analysis, DOE selects
representative capacities for each product class. These capacities reflect the most common or average size of a water heater in that product class, and this step is important because the MPC is dependent upon the size of the water heater—larger water heaters cost more to manufacture. The representative capacities analyzed in this rulemaking are detailed in chapter 5 of the final rule TSD. With the exception of one case, DOE has determined that the representative capacities analyzed in the July 2023 NOPR remain representative at this final rule stage. In this final rule analysis, DOE determined that a capacity of 75 gallons is more representative of units within the high draw pattern for electric storage water heaters in the 55–120-gallon range than 80 gallons, based on the distribution of units currently on the market (see appendix 3A to the final rule TSD). DOE therefore updated its analysis accordingly for this product class to use 75 gallons as the representative capacity.
In this rulemaking, DOE selected
representative capacities for storage- type water heaters based on rated storage volume. A.O. Smith agreed that heat pump
water heaters are technologically feasible alternatives to electric resistance storage water heaters; however, A.O. Smith stated that 50- gallon heat pump water heaters are not always feasible replacements for 50- gallon electric resistance storage water heaters because, even for units with the same FHR, the heat pump offers a slower recovery that may not keep up with household demand. Additionally, A.O. Smith commented, homeowners must consider factors like ambient air temperature conditions when switching to a heat pump water heater, and it is often recommended to ‘‘upsize’’ when transitioning to a heat pump water heater so that performance expectations are not diluted. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 7–8)
DOE understands the commenter to
be suggesting that, when evaluating the cost to improve efficiency, it may be more appropriate to consider representative capacities using a metric other than rated storage volume (e.g., the FHR delivery capacity metric). The FHR determines which draw pattern a water heater falls into, and the engineering analysis selects representative characteristics for each draw pattern to determine cost and efficiency. While some consumers may opt to upsize when transitioning to heat pump water heaters, because the efficiency levels analyzed do not preclude designs with backup resistance heating elements, such ‘‘hybrid’’ heat pump water heaters can still achieve faster recoveries when the backup elements are used (the recovery rate of a backup element is independent of the ambient air conditions). Hence it would
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.031</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.17 -Desi~n Options for Electric Storage: 55 gal< Verr~ 120 gal
EL Design Options
Integrated Rl34A rotary compressor;
Electronic expansion valve;
0 Hotwall condenser design;
Tube-and- fin evaporator design;
SPM evaporator fan
2" side 2" top insulation
1 Larger evaporator
Higher efficiency compressor;
2 Larger condenser;
Larger evaporator;
ECM evaporator fan
Higher efficiency compressor;
3 Larger condenser;
Larger evaporator;
High efficiency fan blades 37837 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
40National Academy of Science, Engineering and
Medicine, ‘‘Review of Methods Used by the U.S.
Department of Energy in Setting Appliance and Equipment Standards’’ (2021), ISBN 978–0–309– 68545–0/DOI 10.17226/25992. not be mandatory to upsize if installing
a typical hybrid heat pump water heater. Thus, in this engineering analysis, DOE has maintained analysis points based on rated storage volume as opposed to other capacity metrics such as input rate or FHR. A separate consideration for maintaining the FHR is not necessary given the analysis is performed for each draw pattern separately. DOE did, however, perform a separate analysis to address the impact of ambient air conditions on heat pump water heater energy usage (see section
IV.E of this document).
The results of DOE’s cost-efficiency
analysis for this final rule are shown in section IV.C.1.e of this document.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
Rinnai pointed to a peer review report by the National Academy of Science, Engineering and Medicine (‘‘NAS’’)
40
and stated that DOE’s teardown analyses and cost reconstructions for existing products and newer high-efficiency designs is flawed and produces systematically underestimated costs (Rinnai suggested these costs were underestimated by roughly 30–50 percent). Rinnai stated that these underestimates to MPC lead to overstated LCC savings, and that DOE should instead look to market pricing to determine product cost or use market prices to validate other estimates. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at p. 33)
The rulemaking process for standards
of covered products and equipment are outlined at appendix A to subpart C of 10 CFR part 430, and DOE periodically examines and revises these provisions in separate rulemaking proceedings. The recommendations in the NASEM report, which pertain to the processes by which DOE analyzes energy conservation standards, will be considered in a separate rulemaking considering all product categories.
As described in section IV.D of this
document, under a more stringent standard, the mark-ups incorporated into the sales price may also change relative to current mark-ups. Therefore, DOE has concluded that basing the engineering analysis on prices of water heaters as currently seen in the marketplace would be a less accurate method of estimating future water heater prices following an amended standard than DOE’s approach of conducting an engineering analysis and mark-ups analysis. (However, as noted earlier, price surveys are sometimes required when other methods are infeasible.) When relying on retail
market data, the prices will include ‘‘premium’’ (i.e., non-efficiency-related)
features and do not account for the likely changes in designs, market, and pricing that would occur under an amended standard. Differences between online vendors with respect to mark-up and pricing practices could lead to online prices being unrepresentative for the overall market.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
Rheem generally agreed with DOE’s manufacturer production cost estimates, stating that they appeared reasonable for electric storage water heaters when the removal of non-efficiency related features and economies of scale are accounted for. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 8) BWC generally agreed with the gas-fired storage water heater manufacturer production cost estimates provided in the July 2023 NOPR, but noted that the MPC estimates for electric storage water heaters were inconsistent with its experience. BWC stated that it would welcome further opportunities to discuss this specific matter confidentially with DOE for this rulemaking. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 17)
As discussed in the July 2023 NOPR,
DOE’s consultants routinely conduct confidential manufacturer interviews to gather feedback on various analytical inputs, which are then aggregated for use in the analysis. Cost analyses are updated based on feedback where appropriate. 88 FR 49058, 49095. In addition, due to the volatility of metal prices, DOE uses 5-year average metal prices to minimize the impact of large fluctuations in metal prices. Id. DOE’s 5-
year average metal cost data have been updated to reflect prices for the most recent 5-year period ending August 2023. For all other material and component prices, DOE used the most recent prices available at the time of the analysis (i.e., August 2023). As
discussed, the MPC estimates used in this rulemaking reflect what would be the market-average product cost to manufacture a model that meets the efficiency level, excluding the cost of optional features that do not affect the efficiency of the product, and these estimates take into account what the designs and component costs would be in a standards-case-scenario. Because the metal prices used may deviate from the most recent year’s and because the designs modeled reflect market averages in a standards-case-scenario without optional non-efficiency-related components, the MPC estimates resulting from this analysis may not exactly reflect the designs of any one specific manufacturer today. d. Shipping Costs
Shipping costs for storage-type
consumer water heater product classes were determined based on the area of floor space occupied by the unit, including packaging, and the weight. Most consumer water heaters cannot be shipped in any orientation other than vertical and are too tall to be double- stacked in a vertical fashion, though some units analyzed by DOE can be double-stacked. For small units that can be double-stacked, including lowboy electric storage water heaters and non- lowboy electric storage water heaters less than or equal to 35 gallons in storage volume, the floor area available effectively doubles, reducing the overall shipping cost compared to taller products. DOE also accounted for electric storage water heaters sold as split-system heat pumps stacking the heat pump assembly atop the tank assembly. DOE research suggests that consumer water heaters are usually shipped together in nearly fully loaded trailers, rather than in less than truckload (‘‘LTL’’) configurations, where the consumer water heaters only occupy a portion of the trailer volume. Therefore, shipping costs have been calculated assuming fully loaded trailers; however, DOE applied an assumption that each truckload would only consist of one type of water heater, which may result in a conservative estimate of shipping costs.
To calculate the shipping costs, DOE
estimated the cost per trailer based on standard trailer sizes, shipping the products between the middle of the country to the coast, using the most recent reference year for prices (i.e., 2022 for the July 2023 NOPR and 2023 for this final rule). Next, DOE estimated the shipped size (including packaging) of products in each product class at each efficiency level and, for each product class and efficiency level, determined the number of units that would fit in a trailer. DOE then calculated the average shipping cost per unit by dividing the cost per trailer load by the number of units that would fit per trailer (based on a calculation of whether the quantity is limited by space or by weight), for each product class and efficiency level.
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
requested feedback on the analysis assumptions used to estimate shipping costs for consumer water heaters.
BWC stated that the shipping cost
estimates provided in the July 2023 NOPR were generally consistent with its expectations, and that it is correct to assume that water heaters typically do not ship in less-than-truckload
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637838 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
configurations; however, real-world
circumstances (such as one truck delivering orders to multiple wholesalers) prevent truckloads from consisting of solely one type of water heater. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 18) However, BWC did not agree with the Department’s assumption that each truckload would only consist of one type of water heater. In their experience this rarely occurs since truckloads are scheduled to fulfill multiple orders from multiple customers who are rarely ordering identical products. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 18)
DOE agrees with BWC that
manufacturers do not always ship trucks completely full of one type of water heater. The shipping costs in the real world vary with a multitude of factors that are difficult to model and predict. For storage-type water heaters that are shipped with tankless water heaters, DOE expects the shipping costs it assumed to be conservatively high, because the estimate is based on a truck full of only storage-type water heaters (which would, as a result, not be able to carry as many products due to the size of the storage-type water heaters).
After considering the feedback
received on shipping costs, DOE maintained the methodology from the July 2023 NOPR for this final rule but updated the cost per trailer using the most recent data available. The shipping costs are shown in section IV.C.1.e of this document.
e. Cost-Efficiency Results
The results of the engineering analysis
are reported as cost-efficiency data in
the form of MPCs and shipping costs calculated for each efficiency level of each product class for which DOE is proposing amended UEF-based standards. As discussed previously,
DOE determined these costs by developing BOMs based on a combination of physical and catalog teardowns and using information in the BOMs along with component and material price data to estimate MPCs.
For heat pump water heaters
specifically, BWC urged the Department to consider price impacts related to the Federal American Innovation and Manufacturing (‘‘AIM’’) Act of 2020, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7675. BWC noted that this legislation calls for a gradual phasedown of refrigerant products that are currently predominant in heat pump water heater designs, and stated that the provisions in the AIM Act will compel manufacturers to pivot to more costly refrigerants when producing heat pump
water heater products. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 18)
In response, DOE notes that the AIM
Act authorizes EPA to address hydrofluorocarbons (‘‘HFCs’’) in three main ways: phasing down HFC production and consumption through an allowance allocation program; promulgating certain regulations for purposes of maximizing reclamation and minimizing releases of HFCs from equipment; and facilitating sector-based transitions to next- generation technologies. (See 42 U.S.C.
7675) Regarding the gradual phasedown of HFC refrigerants with high global warming potential (‘‘GWP’’), the AIM Act mandates the phasedown of HFCs by 85 percent over a period ending in 2036, following the schedule outlined in the AIM Act. (42 U.S.C. 7675(e)(2)(C)) DOE notes that the engineering analysis incorporates up-to-date cost estimates (including the cost of refrigerants currently used in heat pump water heaters). For this final rule, DOE reviewed EPA
rulemakings pertaining to the
phasedown of HFC production and
consumption and sector-based transitions to next-generation technologies. Regarding the sector-based transitions under subsection (i) of the AIM Act, EPA published a final rule restricting the use of HFCs in specific sectors or subsectors on October 24, 2023 (‘‘October 2023 EPA Final Rule’’). 88 FR 73098. In the October 2023 EPA Final Rule, EPA does not adopt provisions to restrict the use of high- GWP refrigerants in heat pump water heaters. DOE understands that manufacturers may voluntarily invest in low-GWP systems for future heat pump water heater designs, however, such systems would not be mandatory as a result of Federal regulation at this time. However, the October 2023 EPA Final Rule does restrict the use of HFCs and blends containing HFCs with a GWP of 150 or greater beginning January 1, 2025 for all foam subsectors, including rigid polyurethane for use in water heaters. 88 FR 73098, 73183–73184. As discussed in chapter 3 of the final rule TSD, DOE has found that water heater manufacturers have already begun transitioning to alternative blowing agents for insulation foam, therefore this regulation is not expected to impact manufacturer production costs for consumer water heaters.
DOE maintained the same
methodology as the July 2023 NOPR to develop the cost-efficiency results for this final rule, as detailed in section IV.C.1.c of this document. The results of DOE’s analysis are listed in Table IV.18 through Table IV.23.
See chapter 5 of the final rule TSD for
more details concerning these results.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637839 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.032</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.18 -Engineering Analysis Results for Gas-fired Storage: 20 gal~ Verr~ 55
1 St d d dL NO ~a' an ar an ow X
UEF
EL Very Low Medium High MPC (2022$) Shipping (2022$)
Small 29 gal 38 gal 48 gal
Low: 172.98 Low: 25.67
0 NIA 0.54 0.58 0.63 Med: 197.89 Med: 28.43
High: 227.72 High: 42.45
Low: 189.41 Low: 28.43
1 NIA 0.57 0.60 0.64 Med: 215.70 Med: 30.61
High: 236.99 High: 44.22
Low: 243.26 Low: 28.43
2A NIA 0.59 0.64 0.68 Med: 269.55 Med: 30.61
High: 290.85 High: 44.22
Low: 277.73 Low: 28.43
2B NIA 0.59 0.64 0.68 Med: 303.77 Med: 30.61
High: 324.76 Hi!!h: 44.22
Low: 290.19 Low: 28.43
3 NIA 0.60 0.65 0.69 Med: 316.40 Med: 30.61
High: 338.00 Hi!!h: 44.22
Low: 372.91 Low: 28.43
4 NIA 0.71 0.75 0.80 Med: 398.70 Med: 30.61
High: 426.00 Hi!!h: 44.22
Low: 385.61 Low: 30.61
5 NIA 0.77 0.81 0.88 Med: 415.61 Med: 44.22
Hi!!h: 447.15 Hi!!h: 48.24 37840 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.033</GPH> ER06MY24.034</GPH> ER06MY24.035</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.19 -Engineering Analysis Results for Gas-fired Storage: 20 gal~ Verr~ 55 gal,
Ultra Low NOx
UEF
EL Very Low Medium High MPC (2022$) Shipping (2022$)
Small 29 gal 38 gal 48 gal
Low: 256.02 Low: 25.67
0 NIA 0.54 0.58 0.63 Med: 286.10 Med: 28.43
High: 322.46 High: 42.45
Low: 272.76 Low: 28.43
1 NIA 0.57 0.60 0.64 Med: 304.67 Med: 30.61
High: 331.85 High: 44.22
Low: 326.61 Low: 28.43
2A NIA 0.59 0.64 0.68 Med: 358.52 Med: 30.61
High: 385.70 High: 44.22
Low: 361.08 Low: 28.43
2B NIA 0.59 0.64 0.68 Med: 392.82 Med: 30.61
High: 419.69 High: 44.22
Low: 377.03 Low: 28.43
3 NIA 0.60 0.65 0.69 Med: 409.28 Med: 30.61
High: 436.57 High: 44.22
Low: 451.23 Low: 28.43
4 NIA 0.71 0.75 0.80 Med: 481.31 Med: 30.61
High: 513.03 High: 44.22
Low: 463.93 Low: 30.61
5 NIA 0.77 0.81 0.88 Med: 498.22 Med: 44.22
High: 534.19 High: 48.24
Table IV.20 -Engineering Analysis Results for Oil-fired Storage: Verr< 50 gal
UEF
EL Very High MPC (2022$) Shipping (2022$)
Small Low Medium 30 gal
0 NIA NIA NIA 0.64 893.59 30.61
1 NIA NIA NIA 0.66 922.63 44.22
2 NIA NIA NIA 0.68 1003.56 44.22
Table IV.21 -Engineering Analysis Results for Small Electric Storage: 20 gal~ Verr~ 35
gal, FHR < 51 gal
UEF MPC (2022$) Shipping, (2022$) EL Low Low Very Small 26 gal 35 gal Draw Pattern (Verr) Draw Pattern (Verr)
0 NIA 0.92 0.91 Low (26): 149.92 Low (26): 16.08
Low (35): 176.41 Low (35): 25.27
1 NIA 2.00 2.00 Low (26): 523.46 Low (26): 48.24
Low (35): 547.91 Low (35): 50.53 37841 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
2. Product Classes Without Current
UEF-Based Standards
In the December 2016 Conversion
Factor Final Rule, DOE established that EF-based standards as established by EPCA are applicable to consumer water
heaters but would not be enforced until conversion factors and converted standards are adopted. 81 FR 96204, 96209–96211. To convert these EF- based standards to UEF-based
standards, DOE first developed conversion factors that convert tested values measured under the DOE test procedure in effect prior to the July 2014 TP Final Rule (which produces the EF metric) to values found under the current DOE test procedure (which produces the UEF metric). DOE then applied these conversion factors to representative baseline models and derived the UEF-based energy conservation standards from the resulting UEF values.
For the July 2023 NOPR, DOE applied
a similar methodology to translate from minimum efficiency levels denominated in EF to those in UEF for classes of covered consumer water heaters that do not yet have UEF-based standards. The translated standards are shown in Table IV.24.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.036</GPH> ER06MY24.037</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.22 -Engineering Analysis Results for Electric Storage: 20 gal::: Verr:S 55
1 1 d. S 11 El t • St !?:a, exc u me: ma ec nc orae:e
UEF
EL Very Low Medium Medium Medium High MPC (2022$) Shipping (2022$)
Draw Pattern (Verr) Draw Pattern (Verr) Small 36 gal 30 gal 36 gal 45 gal 55 gal
Low (36): 175.16 Low (36): 42.45
Med (30): 162.38 Med (30): 22.11
0 NIA 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.93 Med (36): 178.62 Med (36): 29.48
Med (45): 192.16 Med (45): 30.61
High (55): 207.87 High (55): 46.14
Low (36): 419.80 Low (36): 42.45
Med (30): 405.14 Med (30): 44.22
1 NIA 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Med (36): 421.36 Med (36): 29.48
Med ( 45): 436.17 Med (45): 30.61
High (55): 446.41 High (55): 46.14
Low (36): 445.22 Low (36): 42.45
Med (30): 432.13 Med (30): 44.22
2 NIA 3.29 3.35 3.35 3.35 3.47 Med (36): 446.75 Med (36): 29.48
Med (45): 461.48 Med (45): 30.61
High (55): 479.57 High (55): 46.14
Low (36): 496.68 Low (36): 42.45
Med (30): 478.86 Med (30): 44.22
3 NIA 3.69 3.75 3.75 3.75 3.87 Med (36): 495.06 Med (36): 29.48
Med (45): 512.85 Med (45): 30.61
High (55): 526.86 High (55): 46.14
Table IV.23 Engineering Analysis Results for Electric Storage: 55 gal< Verr:S 120
~a 1
UEF Shipping EL Very Medium High MPC (2022$)
Small Low 58 gal 75 gal (2022$)
0 NIA NIA 2.05 2.15 Med: 466.55 Med: 44.22
High: 493 .93 High: 48.24
1 NIA NIA 2.50 2.50 Med: 473.18 Med: 44.22
Hie:h: 498.43 Hie:h: 48.24
2 NIA NIA 3.35 3.45 Med: 498.33 Med: 44.22
High: 515.77 High: 48.24
3 NIA NIA 3.90 4.00 Med: 559.99 Med: 44.22
Hie:h: 576.94 Hie:h: 48.24 37842 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.038</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.24 Translated UEF-based Energy Conservation Standards for Product
Classes without established UEF -based Standards
Product Class Nominal Input Effective Storage Draw Pattern Uniform Energy
Volume Factor
Very Small 0.2062 -(0.0020 X
Verr)
Low 0.4893 -(0.0027 X
Verr) < 20 gal 0.5758 -(0.0023 X Medium Verr)
High 0.6586 -(0.0020 X
Gas-fired Storage :::; 75,000 Btu/h Verr)
Water Heater Very Small 0.1482 -(0.0007 X
Verr)
Low 0.4342 -(0.0017 X
> 100 gal Verr)
0.5596 -(0.0020 X Medium Verr)
High 0.6658 -(0.0019 X
Verr)
Very Small 0.1580 -(0.0009 X
Verr)
Low 0.4390 -(0.0020 X
Oil-fired Storage :::; 105,000 Btu/h > 50 gal Verr)
Water Heater 0.5389 -(0.0021 X Medium Verr)
High 0.6172 -(0.0018 X
Verr)
Very Small 0.5925 -(0.0059 X
Verr)
Low 0.8642 -(0.0030 X
Electric Storage :::; 12kW < 20 gal Verr)
Water Heaters 0.9096 -(0.0020 X Medium Verr)
High 0.9430 -(0.0012 X
Verr) 37843 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
41See 81 FR 96204, 96211.
42Found online at: www.regulations.gov/
comment/EERE-2015-BT-TP–0007-0028.
a. Crosswalk to Equivalent-Stringency
UEF-Based Standards
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
requested feedback regarding the appropriateness of the proposed converted UEF-based standards and
whether products on the market can meet or exceed the proposed levels. 88 FR 49058, 49100.
A.O. Smith noted that DOE initially
proposed UEF levels for several of these classes in the supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking published on August 30, 2016 (‘‘August 2016 Conversion Factor SNOPR’’). 81 FR 59736. DOE, however, decided to forgo adopting the proposed levels for these classes in the December 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule. A.O. Smith stated that DOE wrote it ‘‘Received voluminous comments regarding the technical merits of the conversion factors and the converted standards expressed in UEF for the water heaters listed in Table III.1 for which DOE is going to defer finalizing and implementing these statutory
standards and further consider the comments.’’
41A.O. Smith reiterated its
comments submitted in response to the August 2016 SNOPR.
42Throughout the
July 2023 NOPR TSD, DOE notes that for most of the product classes being converted, there are currently no models on the market, and therefore it did not
use test data to adjust its analytical model. However, there are products on the market that comport to several of the product classes for which DOE has proposed UEF energy conservation standard levels. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 11)
In the August 2016 Conversion Factor
SNOPR, DOE explained that it had considered the applicability of standards to the products which eventually did not receive UEF-based standards because these products were not considered in DOE’s rulemakings
that culminated in the April 16, 2010 and January 17, 2001 final rules (75 FR 20112 and 66 FR 4474, respectively), and accordingly, the standards adopted in those final rules are not applicable to these products. 81 FR 59736, 59742. Hence, the statutory EF-based standards were deemed most applicable to these product classes. Id. A.O. Smith
generally raised the concern of needing test data to validate the converted standards when responding to the August 2016 Conversion Factor SNOPR, but did not explicitly indicate that the conversion equations were incorrect for the products which did not get converted. Rather, A.O. Smith had iterated that it was inappropriate at the time to establish standards without the basis of a test procedure that covered
the sizes of water heaters in question. (A.O. Smith, EERE–2015–BT–TP–0007– 0028 at pp. 2–3) As of the June 2023 TP Final Rule, the appendix E test procedure does cover all of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.039</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Product Class Nominal Input Effective Storage
Volume Draw Pattern Uniform Energy
Factor
Very Small 0.3574 -(0.0012 X
Verr)
> 120 gal Low 0.7897 -(0.0019 X
Verr)
Medium 0.8884 -(0.0017 X
Verr)
High 0.9575 -(0.0013 X
Verr)
Tabletop Water
Heater :S 12 kW < 20 gal Very Small 0.5925 -(0.0059 X
Verr)
Low 0.8642 -(0.0030 X
Verr)
<2 gal Verv Small 0.61
Low 0.61
Medium 0.61
Hioh 0.61
Instantaneous Oil-> 2 gal
fired Water Heater :S 210,000 Btu/h Very Small 0.2780 -(0.0022 X
Verr)
Low 0.5151 -(0.0023 X
Verr)
Medium 0.5687 -(0.0021 X
Verr)
High 0.6147 -(0.0017 X
Verr)
Very Small 0.8086 -(0.0050 X
Verr)
Instantaneous
Electric Water :S 12 kW Low 0.9123 -(0.0020 X
Heater 2: 2 gal Verr)
Medium 0.9252 -(0.0015 X
Verr)
High 0.9350 -(0.0011 X
Verr) 37844 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
43Data for consumer water heaters tested during
the development of the 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule were reported in an SNOPR published
in the Federal Register on August 30, 2016. 81 FR
59736. consumer water heaters being addressed
in this analysis, and it is clearly established which EF-based standards do apply to these products.
Rheem supported DOE’s methodology
to conduct the EF to UEF crosswalk for electric storage water heaters and gas- fired storage water heaters that currently do not have UEF-based standards. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 9–11) Other commenters requested that DOE publish data to demonstrate that the crosswalk results in appropriate standards compared to how these products would be rated if tested to the UEF test procedure.
A.O. Smith emphasized that DOE
must have test data to demonstrate that the crosswalked UEF standards are achievable by products on the market today, especially for very small electric storage water heaters, where there are several models on the market. A.O. Smith noted that previous experience with test procedure changeovers has shown that new test methods and test metrics impact water heaters differently and often unpredictably depending upon their specific attributes. The commenter indicated that it conducted its own testing and provided a limit set of results showing that very small electric storage water heaters could pass the crosswalked standards at a normal temperature setpoint. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 11–12)
NYSERDA noted that the crosswalked
product classes begin with the statutory EF standards, which result in the converted standards being significantly lower than those proposed for products with current UEF standards. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at pp. 4–5) NYSERDA commented that, when the conversion factors were developed, these equations did not apply to the products that DOE is crosswalking to UEF standards in this rulemaking. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 5) Additionally, NYSERDA stated that the conversion factors were developed using rated storage volume; therefore the converted standards should be in rated storage volume also (instead of effective storage volume). (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 5) NYSERDA recommended two approaches for setting standards for the product classes where there are no current models: a first option would be to test similarly
sized products that do exist on the market; otherwise, the volume thresholds can be removed. NYSERDA commented that if DOE determines that these converted standards require additional analysis, it could simply clarify in the final rule that these products are still subject to the statutory EF standards and continue to rely on the waiver process to accommodate any
products introduced within these categories; however, the commenter still encouraged DOE to further examine the converted EF standards. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 5)
Bosch stated there is insufficient
information to fully justify the proposed converted UEF values for the very small electric storage water heater product class, adding that the 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule was not originally intended for this product group. Bosch requested DOE release its analysis of the efficiency testing conducted on the 17 models in this product class, as there are significant differences between tanks and element types within this product class. (Bosch, No. 1204 at pp. 3–4)
BWC expressed concerns regarding
the EF-to-UEF crosswalk DOE has
analyzed in this rulemaking. BWC stated that using the December 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule equations to establish UEF-based standards for these products is not appropriate because these products were never subjected to the EF test procedure, and that DOE’s approach in the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis and July 2023 NOPR could set an improper baseline. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 10)
As discussed in the July 2023 NOPR
TSD, DOE conducted its own testing to verify that products on the market, when tested to the appendix E test procedure, would comply with the crosswalked standards. In response to the numerous requests for additional test data, DOE has published the results of the testing in chapter 5 of the final rule TSD. Additionally, DOE notes that A.O. Smith’s test data also indicates that the standards are achievable (so long as the high temperature test is not used, which results in lower ratings). As discussed in section V.D.1 of this document, DOE has determined not to subject very small electric storage water heaters to high temperature testing; therefore, this would not be expected to reduce their UEF to a level below the adopted standards.
DOE notes that during the 2016
Conversion Factor rulemaking, it conducted testing of 55 consumer storage water heaters and 22 consumer instantaneous water heaters to validate the conversion factors used to determine the UEF-based standards DOE is establishing in this rulemaking. In addition, AHRI provided data for 130 consumer storage water heaters and 36 consumer instantaneous water heaters using both EF and UEF test procedures.
4381 FR 96204, 96214– 96216. DOE concluded that these conversion factors resulted in UEF- based standards that were neither more nor less stringent than the equivalent EF-based standards. 81 FR 96204, 96207.
Rheem supported the translated UEF
standards for very small electric storage water heaters, but recommended that DOE remove the high draw and medium draw pattern standards for very small electric storage water heaters because these levels are generally not achievable or necessary. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 9)
Removing the high and medium draw
pattern standards for very small electric storage water heaters would result in a gap in coverage of standards, however, should products meeting this description become available in the future. Therefore, DOE is maintaining its approach to adopt standards for each draw pattern for very small electric storage water heaters. Should more data become available after this rulemaking, DOE may consider consolidating standards for different draw patterns if it can be determined conclusively that the medium and high draw pattern standards are not justified.
Rheem added further that reducing
the crosswalked electric instantaneous water heater standards to align with those for very small electric storage water heaters would reduce manufacturer burden and design costs. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 13–14)
While DOE acknowledges that electric
instantaneous water heaters and very small electric storage water heaters may be installed in similar applications, as discussed in section IV.A.1.c of this document, storage-type and instantaneous-type water heaters generally have differences in operation that can lead to different utilities. Hence, DOE is maintaining its approach to treat these as separate product classes and evaluate standards separately.
BWC provided that it did not believe
an approach that relied on a market analysis of currently listed models, along with an efficiency level and design option (teardown) analysis, was appropriate for these product classes that did not previously have a minimum efficiency standard. BWC stated that accounting for the stored water temperature and rated storage volume largely influence a product’s efficiency rating, but there are other factors that can strongly influence the UEF, such as insulation thickness (for electric-type storage water heaters) and modulating controls (for instantaneous water
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637845 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
heaters). BWC thus requested DOE to
docket the analysis conducted to establish the new minimum UEF levels for these product classes. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 10)
For this final rule DOE maintains its
approach for converting standards from EF to UEF. EPCA directed DOE to establish a uniform efficiency descriptor to be used to regulate all covered water heaters, with certain exceptions for water heaters used only in commercial applications. (42 U.S.C. 6295I(5)) Therefore, DOE has conducted this analysis in satisfaction of its statutory obligation to delineate standards for all consumer water heaters in terms of UEF. The statute provides that, in the case of a test procedure or metric change, DOE must determine what equivalent standards are on the basis of the new test procedure or metric. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)) The conversion factor calculations serve to accomplish this purpose. Because the UEF-based standards for these product classes reflect the same stringency as the statutory EF-based standards that are currently applicable—i.e., these are not
standards that would require higher efficiency to comply— it is not necessary for DOE to conduct an assessment of energy savings or economic justification prior to proposing such standards. The Department believes that BWC may have misinterpreted the analysis for product classes with current UEF-based
standards as also applying to these product classes which have EF-based standards. To reiterate, these standards are not being established pursuant to EPCA provisions at 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(A), but instead in accordance with those at 42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2). Additionally, the statutory EF-based standards are provided within EPCA and do not require separate justification to adopt these stringencies.
b. Consideration of More Stringent
Standards
DOE also requested information and
data regarding the UEF of products within these product classes if they are found to generally exceed the proposed levels. 88 FR 49058, 49100.
BWC supported DOE’s tentative
determination not to propose more stringent standards for product classes that are currently covered by the statutory EF-based standards because these product classes have low market share and would present limited opportunity for energy savings. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 3)
Rheem commented that there may be
no or very few water heaters on the market in the volume ranges for which crosswalked standards were proposed
for gas-fired storage water heaters and therefore did not support more stringent standards for these sizes of gas-fired storage water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 11)
Rheem recommended against
increasing the >120-gallon standards for electric storage water heaters to a level that would require heat pump technology because ASME tank construction is required for water heaters with a measured volume >120 gallons, significantly increasing the cost of the water heater to the point where it is not a low-cost replacement for a heat pump water heater. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 10) However, Rheem recommended increasing the energy conservation standards for <20-gallon tabletop water heaters to the levels proposed for ≥20-gallon tabletop water heaters and simplifying the energy conservation standards table. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 10)
In general, while there are few (or
sometimes no) models on the market that fall within these product classes, comments received in response to the July 2023 NOPR suggested that, within the 5-year compliance period of this final rule, manufacturers would be incentivized to develop new models in these product classes in lieu of developing designs for product classes with current UEF-based standards that have to comply with more stringent standards. Based on the comments, which are summarized in the following paragraphs, DOE understands that this is possible if the design changes required to transfer an existing model to a product class without current UEF- based standards are less expensive than the design changes required to increase the efficiency of that model to meet the amended standard for the product class with a current UEF-based standard. Commenters provided feedback on whether or not more stringent standards were justified based on whether or not
the product class could be used to ‘‘circumvent’’ other standards for similar product classes that have higher standards.
A.O. Smith indicated that
simultaneous establishment of baseline UEF levels for converted product classes while increasing the efficiency levels for existing product classes creates a scenario where new products may emerge, and shipments may shift from product classes with more stringent standards to very similar products in new product classes with less stringent standards. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 14)
DOE does not currently possess data
supporting more stringent standards than those being established as part of
this rulemaking. However, DOE may conduct a separate rulemaking to determine the benefits and burdens of higher standards for these products at a later time. For example, after the compliance date of this final rule, the availability of certifications of UEF may enable DOE to consider more stringent standards in a future rulemaking.
A.O. Smith provided some test data
for very small electric storage water heaters showing that these products would not pass the proposed standards when tested to the high temperature test method, and thus recommended that very small electric storage water heaters be exempt from the high temperature test method. A.O. Smith stated that this test method would not be representative of an average use cycle for very small electric storage water heaters, and the company would rather dedicate its engineering resources toward the development of future heat pump offerings rather than redesigning existing product lines for modest efficiency gains resulting from overlapping test procedure changeovers. A.O. Smith recommended DOE test baseline very small and small electric storage water heaters according to the proposed test procedure to ensure that crosswalked standards do not result in a stringency increase. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 11–12)
Rheem recommended against setting a
standard for very small electric storage water heaters at any higher stringency because a forced redesign for these products may not be necessary and would divert manufacturers’ resources away from the heat pump water heater innovation. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 9)
DOE understands that, if the high
temperature test method were to apply to very small electric storage water heaters, then that test method would result in lower efficiency ratings for these products, and these lower ratings would not comply with the crosswalked standards. Therefore, manufacturers would have to redesign very small electric storage water heaters to be more efficient in order to comply with the standards that resulted from the EF-to- UEF crosswalk, and this would effectively constitute an increase in stringency of standards for these products. In section V.D.1.c of this document, DOE explains its determination to exempt very small electric storage water heaters from the high temperature test. As a result, there would be no increase to stringency for these products.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637846 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
44U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Company Filings. Available atwww.sec.gov/edgar/
searchedgar/companysearch.html (last accessed
December 1, 2023). 45DOE estimates that 2 percent of gas-fired
storage heaters (‘‘GSWHs’’), 29 percent of oil-fired
storage water heaters (‘‘OSWHs’’), and 9 percent of electric storage water heaters (‘‘ESWHs’’) will be shipped to commercial applications in 2030.
46BRG Building Solutions, The North American
Heating & Cooling Product Markets (2023 Edition). Available at www.brgbuildingsolutions.com/reports- insights (last accessed December 1, 2023).
47Clear Seas Research, 2022 Mechanical
System—Water Heater. Available at clearseasresearch.com/reports/industries/ mechanical-systems/ (last accessed December 1,
2023).
48Based on available data, DOE assumed that the
consumer water heater goes through the: wholesaler/contractor 50 percent of the time for GSWHs, 90 percent of the time for OSWHs, and 45 percent of the time for ESWHs; directly form the retailer 45 percent of the time for GSWHs, 5 percent of the time for OSWHs, and 50 percent of the time for ESWHs, and retailer/contractor 5 percent of the time for GSWHs, OSWHs, and ESWHs.
49Based on available data, DOE assumed that the
consumer water heater in mobile homes goes through the: wholesaler/contractor 5 percent of the time for GSWHs, 90 percent of the time for OSWHs, and 5 percent of the time for ESWHs; directly form c. Circulating Water Heaters
Prior to the publication of the June
2023 TP Final Rule, the test procedure
did not provide sufficient clarity regarding how circulating water heaters should be tested, and the June 2023 TP Final Rule established a new method of testing circulating water heaters with separate storage tanks (see section 4.10
of appendix E) to represent how these products are used in the field. As a result of this method of testing, the efficiency ratings for circulating water heaters will reflect the standby losses incurred by the separate storage tank. As discussed previously in section IV.A.1.a of this document, DOE is classifying circulating water heaters as storage-type water heaters subject to the storage water heaters standards. In the July 2023 NOPR, however, DOE considered circulating water heaters as instantaneous water heaters and developed proposed standards using the instantaneous water heater efficiency levels as a starting point.
In response to the levels proposed in
the July 2023 NOPR, NYSERDA suggested that DOE could address more stringent, heat pump-level standards for electric circulating water heaters in a separate rulemaking to ensure that the energy savings from this rulemaking are realized. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 7)
BWC requested clarification on how
DOE derived the minimum efficiency levels for electric circulating water heaters in the NOPR, noting that the efficiencies corresponded to electric resistance technology, not heat pump circulating water heaters. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 2–3)
As discussed in section IV.A.1.a of
this document, circulating water heaters will be subject to the applicable standards for storage-type water heaters. As such, there is no separate analysis to address UEF-based standards for circulating water heaters in this final rule.
In response to the December 2023
SNOPR proposing to treat circulating water heaters as part of the storage-type water heater product classes, BWC claimed that establishing heat pump- level standards for electric circulating water heaters would be inappropriate because they would favor one design option over another, as heat pump water heaters are not considered a separate product class from electric storage water heaters, stating that EPCA requires DOE to determine standards without regards to the technologies utilized by manufacturers or preferred by consumers. BWC requested that DOE clarify its understanding of its authority under EPCA with respect to these
standards. (BWC, No. 1413 at pp. 2–3)
DOE notes that the analysis
conducted in this rulemaking has determined that the amended standards for electric storage water heaters (which include electric circulating water heaters) are both technologically feasible and economically justified, and result in significant savings. These conclusions are discussed in detail in section V.C.1 of this document. DOE uses the screening criteria found in sections 6(b)(3) and 7(b) of appendix A to 10 CFR part 430, subpart C to determine which technology options are suitable for further consideration in an energy conservation standards rulemaking. Under the criteria for technological feasibility, DOE considers technologies incorporated in commercially-available products or in working prototypes to be technologically feasible. As such, EPCA does not prohibit DOE from establishing a standard that can only be met through the use of a certain technology. Heat pump technology is the only technology available to allow electric circulating water heaters to achieve higher efficiency levels. DOE is not establishing a prescriptive design requirement that electric circulating water heaters must implement heat pump technology.
3. Manufacturer Selling Price
To account for manufacturers’ non-
production costs and profit margin, DOE
applies a multiplier (the manufacturer markup) to the MPC. The resulting manufacturer selling price (‘‘MSP’’) is the price at which the manufacturer distributes a unit into commerce. DOE developed an average manufacturer markup by examining the annual Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’) 10–K
44reports filed by
publicly traded manufacturers that produce consumer water heaters, the manufacturer markups from the April 2010 Final Rule, and feedback from confidential manufacturer interviews. 75 FR 20112. See chapter 12 of the final
rule TSD for additional detail on the manufacturer markup.
D. Markups Analysis
The markups analysis develops
appropriate markups (e.g., retailer
markups, distributor markups,
contractor markups) in the distribution chain and sales taxes to convert the MSP estimates derived in the engineering analysis to consumer prices, which are then used in the LCC and PBP
analysis. At each step in the distribution channel, companies mark up the price of the product to cover business costs and profit margin.
For consumer water heaters, the main
parties in the distribution chain are (1) manufacturers, (2) wholesalers or distributors, (3) retailers, (4) plumbing contractors, (5) builders, (6) manufactured home manufacturers, and (7) manufactured home dealers/retailers.See chapter 6 and appendix 6A of the
final rule TSD for a more detaileddiscussion about parties in thedistribution chain.
For this final rule, DOE characterized
how consumer water heater products pass from the manufacturer to residential and commercial consumers
45by gathering data from
several sources, including consultant reports (available in appendix 6A of the final rule TSD), the 2023 BRG report,
46
and the 2022 Clear Seas Research Water Heater contractor survey
47to determine
the distribution channels and fraction of shipments going through each distribution channel. The distribution channels for replacement or new owners of consumer water heaters in residential applications (not including mobile homes) are characterized as follows:
48
Manufacturer → Wholesaler →
Plumbing Contractor → Consumer
Manufacturer → Retailer → Consumer
Manufacturer → Retailer → Plumbing
Contractor → Consumer
For mobile home replacement or new
owner applications, there is one additional distribution channel where manufacturers sell to mobile home dealers/retail outlets that then sell to the customer.
49
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637847 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
the retailer 10 percent of the time for GSWHs, 5
percent of the time for OSWHs, and 25 percent of the time for ESWHs; retailer/contractor 5 percent of the time for GSWHs, OSWHs, and ESWHs; and directly through mobile home retailer 80 percent of the time for GSWHs, 0 percent of the time for OSWHs, and 65 percent of the time for ESWHs.
50DOE estimates that in the residential market 10
percent of GSWHs, 2 percent of OSWHs, and 15 percent of ESWHs will be shipped to new construction applications in 2030.
51DOE believes that many builders are large
enough to have a master plumber and not hire a separate contractor, and assigned about half of water heater shipments to new construction to this channel. DOE estimated that in the new construction market, 90 percent of the residential (not including mobile homes) and 80 percent in commercial applications goes through a wholesalers to builders channel and the rest go through national account distribution channel.
52Because the projected price of standards-
compliant products is typically higher than the price of baseline products, using the same markup for the incremental cost and the baseline cost would result in higher per-unit operating profit. While such an outcome is possible, DOE maintains that in markets that are reasonably competitive it is unlikely that standards would lead to a sustainable increase in profitability in the long run.
53U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Company Filings. Available at www.sec.gov/edgar/ searchedgar/companysearch.html (last accessed
December 1, 2023).
54U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Annual Retail Trade
Report, available at www.census.gov/programs-
surveys/arts.html (last accessed December 1, 2023).
Note that the 2017 Annual Retail Trade Report is the latest version of the report that includes detailed operating expenses data.
55U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census
Data. available at www.census.gov/programs-
surveys/economic-census.html (last accessed
December 1, 2023). Note that the 2017 Economic Census Data is the latest version of this data.
56U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Annual Wholesale
Trade Report. available at www.census.gov/ wholesale/index.html (last accessed December 1,
2023). Note that the 2017 AWTR Census Data is the latest version of this data.
57Air Conditioning Contractors of America
(‘‘ACCA’’), Financial Analysis for the HVACR
Contracting Industry (2005), available at www.acca.org/store#/storefront (last accessed
December 1, 2023). Note that the 2005 Financial Analysis for the HVACR Contracting Industry is the latest version of the report and is only used to disaggregate the mechanical contractor markups into replacement and new construction markets. Mainly for consumer water heaters in
commercial applications, DOE considers
an additional distribution channel for which the manufacturer sells the equipment to the wholesaler and then to the consumer through a national account in both replacement and new construction markets.
The new construction distribution
channel includes an additional link in the chain—the builder. The distribution channels for consumer water heaters in new construction
50in residential
applications (not including mobile homes) are characterized as follows:
51
Manufacturer → Wholesaler →
Plumbing Contractor → Builder →
Consumer
Manufacturer → Wholesaler → Builder
→ Consumer
Manufacturer → Wholesaler (National
Account) → Consumer
For new construction, all mobile
home GSWHs and ESWHs are sold as part of mobile homes in a specific distribution chain characterized as follows:
Manufacturer → Mobile Home
Manufacturer → Mobile Home Dealer
→ Consumer
DOE developed baseline and
incremental markups for each actor in
the distribution chain. Baseline markups are applied to the price of products with baseline efficiency, while incremental markups are applied to the difference in price between baseline and higher-efficiency models (the incremental cost increase). The incremental markup is typically less than the baseline markup and is designed to maintain similar per-unit operating profit before and after new or amended standards.
52 To estimate average baseline and
incremental markups, DOE relied on
several sources, including: (1) form 10– K
53from U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘SEC’’) for Home Depot, Lowe’s, Wal-Mart, and Costco (for retailers); (2) U.S. Census Bureau 2017 Annual Retail Trade Report for miscellaneous store retailers (NAICS 453) (for online retailers);
54(3) U.S.
Census Bureau 2017 Economic Census data
55on the residential and
commercial building construction industry (for builder, plumbing contractor, mobile home manufacturer, mobile home retailer/dealer); and (4) the U.S. Census Bureau 2017 Annual Wholesale Trade Report data
56(for
wholesalers). DOE assumes that the
markups for national accounts is half of the value of wholesaler markups. In addition, DOE used the 2005 Air Conditioning Contractors of America’s (‘‘ACCA’’) Financial Analysis on the Heating, Ventilation, Air-Conditioning, and Refrigeration (‘‘HVACR’’) contracting industry
57to disaggregate
the mechanical contractor markups into replacement and new construction markets for consumer water heaters used in commercial applications.
PHCC commented that DOE’s
approach of incremental markups is not representative of how contractors set markups. PHCC commented that contractors know the required profit margin and set markups accordingly, rather than determining a markup for a baseline product and deciding a lower appropriate markup based on additional costs due to increased standards. (PHCC, No. 1151 at pp. 5–6) Rheem agreed that DOE’s estimates of manufacturers’ production costs for electric resistance and heat pump water heaters appear reasonable and that the retail price for electric resistance water heaters is accurate but the retail price of heat pump water heaters is a little low. Rheem recommended reviewing incremental markups for heat pump water heaters. Rheem also requested clarification on whether incremental markups are current markups or estimated for the compliance date of the rulemaking. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 8– 9)
In response, the development of all
markup values is based on the most current data available, representing current markups applied to the products. The markups analysis is intended to represent products sold and installed at higher volume, since such products become the new baseline efficiency in the standards cases. Comparisons to current retail prices are therefore not necessarily applicable if such products are not common, high- volume products. For example, heat pump water heaters currently have a small market share and have higher profit margins. In a standards case with heat pump water heaters as the new baseline efficiency, their markups will be more representative of high-volume products. DOE also acknowledges that the contractor and customer relationship is of value and hence assigns contractors as an active market participant for a major portion of its distribution channels. For contractor markups, DOE utilized the 2017 Economic Census data, the latest data source consisting of the detailed operating costs needed to derive incremental markups. DOE believes that while contractors are unlikely to directly estimate an incremental markup in response to the cost change due to efficiency standards, contractor behavior is consistent with the characterization of DOE’s markup approach which results in lower overall markup than baseline markup. DOE does not mean to suggest that contractors will directly adjust their markups on equipment if the price they pay goes up as a result of appliance standards. Rather, the approach assumes that such adjustment will occur over a (relatively short) period of time as part of a business management process. In summary, DOE acknowledges that its approach to estimating distributor and contractor markup practices after amended standards take effect is an approximation of real-world practices that are both complex and varying with business conditions. However, it
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637848 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
58Sales Tax Clearinghouse Inc., State Sales Tax
Rates Along with Combined Average City and
County Rates (June 14, 2023). Available at www.thestc.com/STrates.stm) (last accessed December 1, 2023). 59Energy Information Administration (‘‘EIA’’),
2015 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (‘‘RECS’’). Available at www.eia.gov/consumption/ residential/ (last accessed December 1, 2023). 60Energy Information Administration (‘‘EIA’’),
2020 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (‘‘RECS’’). Available at www.eia.gov/consumption/ residential/ (last accessed December 1, 2023).
61According to published data and EIA website,
RECS 2020 is based upon responses collected from in total 18,496 households which is three times greater than 5,686 respondents in RECS 2015.
62U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information
Administration, Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (2018). Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2018/ index.php?view=microdata (last accessed Dec. 1,
2023). continues to believe that its assumption
that standards do not facilitate a sustainable increase in profitability is reasonable.
In addition to the markups, DOE
obtained State and local taxes from data provided by the Sales Tax Clearinghouse.
58These data represent
weighted average taxes that include county and city rates. DOE derived shipment-weighted average tax values for each State considered in the analysis.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
AHRI advised that DOE’s process should include industry participation by surveying manufacturers, distributors, and consumers and DOE should conduct another round of confidential interviews with manufacturers and reevaluate based on those interviews. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 11)
In support of the July 2023 NOPR,
DOE conducted confidential interviews with OEMs representing approximately 80 percent of domestic industry consumer water heater shipments. In those interviews, DOE requested information about a range of topics including distribution channels. See appendix 12–A of the final rule TSD for a copy of the manufacturer interview guide. DOE also conducted confidential interviews with consumer water heater OEMs in support of the March 2022 Preliminary Analysis. Data collected through this process was recent and sufficient to conduct the analysis given that market conditions have remained largely the same since those confidential interviews. Chapter 6 of the final rule TSD provides details on DOE’s development of markups for consumer water heaters.
E. Energy Use Analysis
The purpose of the energy use
analysis is to determine the annual
energy consumption of consumer water heaters at different efficiencies in representative U.S. single-family homes, mobile homes, multi-family residences, and commercial buildings, and to assess the energy savings potential of increased consumer water heater efficiency. The energy use analysis estimates the range of energy use of consumer water heaters
in the field (i.e., as they are actually
used by consumers). The energy use analysis provides the basis for other analyses DOE performed, particularly assessments of the energy savings and the savings in consumer operating costs that could result from adoption of amended or new standards.
DOE estimated the annual energy
consumption of consumer water heaters at specific energy efficiency levels across a range of climate zones, building characteristics, and water heating applications. The annual energy consumption includes the natural gas, liquid petroleum gas (‘‘LPG’’), and electricity used by the consumer water heater.
1. Building Sample
To determine the field energy use of
consumer water heaters used in homes,
DOE established a sample of households using consumer water heaters from EIA’s 2015 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (‘‘RECS 2015’’) in the July 2023 NOPR, which was the most recent such survey that was then fully available.
59The RECS data provide
information on the vintage of the home, as well as water heating energy use in each household. DOE used the household samples not only to determine water heater annual energy consumption, but also as the basis for conducting the LCC and PBP analyses. DOE projected household weights and household characteristics in 2030, the first year of compliance with any amended or new energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. To characterize future new homes, DOE used a subset of homes in RECS that were built after 2000.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
Gas Association Commenters, Essency, Rinnai, and Atmos Energy commented that RECS 2015 should not have been used for the analysis and therefore the entire analysis is flawed. Gas Association Commenters stated that DOE had plenty of time to use RECS 2020 data and chose not to make their results look better. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 32; Essency, No. 1194 at p. 3; Atmos Energy, No. 1183 at pp. 5–6; Rinnai, No. 1186 at p. 33) NYSERDA supported DOE’s analysis, including RECS data and the consumer choice model analysis methodology. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at pp. 3–4)
In response, DOE notes that RECS
2020 published finalized microdata in June 2023, with further updates published in July and September 2023. When conducting the analysis for the NOPR, the full set of microdata was not available. For this final rule, however, DOE incorporated RECS 2020 as the basis of the building sample
development and updated the analyses accordingly.
60DOE agrees that
incorporating RECS 2020 improves the representativeness of the residential building sample as RECS 2020 brings a threefold increase in sample size compared to RECS 2015.
61A larger
sample size generally results in smaller
standard errors, especially for estimates of smaller subpopulations. In this final rule, DOE maintains a similar methodology in sample development for the analyzed product classes. The details of selection criteria and the resulting sample size for each product class are presented in the final rule TSD (see chapter 7 and appendix 7A).
To determine the field energy use of
consumer water heaters used in commercial buildings, DOE established a sample of buildings using consumer water heaters from EIA’s 2018 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (‘‘CBECS 2018’’), which is the most recent such survey that is currently fully available.
62DOE
has maintained its sample development methodology used in July 2023 NOPR for consumer water heaters used in commercial applications.
2. Hot Water Use Determination
Calculating hot water use for each
sample household requires assigning the
water heater a specific tank size (referred to as rated volume). For each household, RECS reports the size bin of the water heater (30 gallons and less, 31 to 49 gallons, and 50 gallons and more); for each commercial building, DOE assumes that the water heater generally falls under the biggest size option applicable for each product class. For each size bin, DOE derived the fraction of models falling under each draw patterns and assigns the sampled water heater to an appropriate one (i.e., low,
medium, and high). A specific tank size is then assigned based on the size bin and the draw pattern from the typical water heater sizes. Typical water heater sizes are the most common sizes for each product class and have the minimum energy factor allowed by current energy conservation standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637849 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
63U.S. Department of Energy’s Compliance
Certification Database is available at
regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (last accessed
December 1, 2023).
64Air Conditioning Heating and Refrigeration
Institute. Consumer’s Directory of Certified Efficiency Ratings for Heating and Water Heating Equipment. December 1, 2023. (Available at www.ahridirectory.org) (last accessed December 1, 2023).
65BRG Building Solutions. The North American
Heating & Cooling Product Markets (2023 Edition). 2023.
66U.S. Census Bureau. Current Industrial Reports
for Major Household Appliances 2003–2008. Washington, DC Report No. MA335F. They are 30, 40, and 50 gallon for gas
and electric storage water heaters, 30 and 50 gallon for oil, and 60 and 75 gallon for electric storage water heaters larger than 55 gallons. For the product class of ESWHs smaller than 35 gallons, DOE also assigned a fraction the tank size of 35 gallons. These sizes are referred to as ‘‘standard’’ sizes. Finally, DOE calculated the hot water use for each household and building based on the characteristics of the water heater and the reported water heating energy use.
In order to disaggregate the selected
sampled water heaters into draw patterns and standard sizes, DOE used a variety of sources including RECS historical data on reported tank sizes, input from an expert consultant, and model data from DOE’s public CCD
63
and AHRI certification directory64
together with other publicly available data from manufacturers’ catalogs of consumer water heaters. For all product classes, DOE used disaggregated shipments data by rated volume from BRG Building Solutions 2023 report from 2007 to 2022
65and data from U.S.
Census Bureau data (2003–2008).66
Finally to determine the appropriate product type and size for different applications, DOE used manufacturer- produced consumer water heater sizing guidelines and calculators.
AHRI recommended DOE explain its
inputs in the energy use calculations. AHRI commented that DOE’s use of nesting of various assumptions for residential water heaters leads to unlikely results that DOE does not, or cannot, explain. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 19) AHRI also asked why DOE has not accepted the suggestion by AHRI and others to use median, not the mean values for consumption and LCC savings to avoid the effects of these outliers and to alleviate, at least in part, the deficiencies of its base case random assignment issue. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 20)
In response, DOE notes that RECS
data provides the information on the household size and water heating energy use. RECS is the most comprehensive, nationally- representative, and robust data source on household energy consumption available to DOE. In general, DOE has found that the weighted average energy use for water heating correlates with the size of the household, i.e., the reported
number of people in that household. Greater energy expenditure on water heating largely falls into the bins of households of larger sizes (4 people and above). The hot water use derived based on the water heating energy use follows similar pattern (see chapter 7 of the final rule TSD for the calculation of hot water use). When reporting the distribution of the derived hot water use, DOE takes into account both consumer water heaters in residential as well as consumer water heaters used in commercial applications and close to 40 percent of the top 5 percent of water consuming sample buildings/ households are commercial applications which generally have higher upper bound of hot water use. These outlier data points therefore represent either data directly reported from RECS for larger households or commercial applications using consumer water heaters, both of which represent real- world usage. In addition, DOE evaluates each sampled building/household individually by calculating its hot water use and the corresponding cost efficiency thereafter and that DOE believes the average LCC savings as reported is a good representation of the aggregated national values. Nevertheless, the LCC spreadsheet includes a calculation of median LCC savings, as well as LCC savings at various percentiles. Even if DOE were to rely on the median LCC savings instead of the mean LCC savings, DOE’s conclusion of economic justification would remain the same.
Gas Association Commenters argued
that water consumption should be based on household size and that there are problems with water consumption calculations. Gas Association Commenters argue the model results in unrealistic outliers for smaller households reaching consumption levels equivalent to space heating. Gas Association Commenters argue that a potential reason for this failure is how the model calculates daily water usage. For example, Gas Association Commenters argued that in DOE’s model, some single person households use 200–350 gallons a day which is far from reasonable (4–7 baths of water a day every day of the year). Gas Association Commenters argued that Draw Pattern ID is based on randomly assigned distribution. Gas Association Commenters argue that for small storage units, there is a 5 percent chance of a large draw pattern Gas Association Commenters argues that a better solution would be to use the test procedure for water heaters as a basis for modeling energy usage rather than assuming draw rates based on the size of the original equipment in RECS. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at pp. 25–31) Rinnai argued that hot water usage should be determined through less opaque methods than the current method. Rinnai stated that rather than using RECS data to determine water usage, DOE should use test procedure defined hot water usage rates for comparisons of ELs. Rinnai stated that they believe that doing so would provide clearer consistency in comparison of residential water heater technologies generally and for EL comparison for proposed efficiency thresholds. Rinnai also stated that this would make DOE’s analysis more consistent with other federal rating programs such as the FTC energy guide labeling program. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at p. 26 and p. 33) Furthermore, Rinnai commented that if RECS is to be used, RECS 2015 is outdated and RECS 2020 should be used for this analysis. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at p. 33) On the contrary, NEEA supported DOE’s overall method of analysis using Monte Carlo simulations informed by RECS data. NEEA commented that the Monte Carlo approach can successfully represent the true distribution of water product classes, hot water use, energy use and costs and that NEEA uses a similar approach when conducting similar analysis. NEEA commented that RECS serves as a reliable national dataset that helps account for the diversity found in the water heater market. (NEEA, No. 1199 at p. 5)
In response, for this final rule, DOE
incorporated the latest RECS 2020 data for its analyses. With the increased sample size and the most recent timeline of the fielding of the survey, DOE believes that it provides a sample pool of more up to date national representation of housing characteristics and energy consumption of the home appliances. As discussed previously, the weighted average of the energy use on water heating and the derived hot water use generally correlates with the size of the household with deviations that represent the real world complexities of the use of hot water heater in households of different types. DOE continues to rely on RECS as the basis of its analyses for its incomparable scope of coverage on housing
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637850 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
67If the heat pump water heater is installed in a
conditioned space and is un-ducted, the cooling
byproduct of the heat pump operation could produce a cooling effect that could increase space heating energy use in the heating season and decrease space cooling energy use in the cooling season. In addition, heat pump operation could also produce a dehumidifying effect that could reduce dehumidifier equipment energy use. characteristics and energy consumption
and believes that it is an objective reflection of the landscape in the national water heater market. In terms of the assignment of draw pattern, DOE derived the distribution of different draw patterns based on market research of the number of models in each bin that are available on the market. The
breakdown can be found in chapter 7 of the final rule TSD.
Ecotemp commented that the DOE
consumer usage assumptions do not match the water use patterns of cabins, vacation homes, rental properties, or any other intermittent use dwelling. (Ecotemp, No. 1092 at p. 2) In response, RECS does not include in the survey house types like vacant, seasonal, vacation homes and group quarters and thus DOE build its analysis around regular households. However, in both residential households (sample by RECS) and commercial buildings (CBECS) DOE has observed samples with lower than usual water heating energy use. As stated previously, DOE believes that RECS and CBECS provide a nationally representative sample pool that includes a variety of housing types.
3. Energy Use Determination
To calculate the energy use of
consumer water heaters, DOE
determined the energy consumption associated with water heating and any auxiliary electrical use. In addition, for heat pump water heaters, DOE also accounted for the indirect effects of heat pump water heaters on heating, cooling, and dehumidification systems to compensate for the effects of the heat pump operation.
67DOE calculated the
energy use of water heaters using a simplified energy equation, the water heater analysis model (‘‘WHAM’’). WHAM accounts for a range of operating conditions and energy efficiency characteristics of water heaters. Water heater operating conditions are indicated by the daily hot water draw volume, inlet water temperature, thermostat setting, and air temperature around the water heater (ambient air temperature). To describe energy efficiency characteristics of water heaters, WHAM uses three parameters that also are used in the DOE test procedure: recovery efficiency (‘‘RE’’), standby heat-loss coefficient
(‘‘UA’’), and rated input power (‘‘P
ON’’).
The current version of WHAM is
appropriate for calculating the energy use of electric resistance storage water heaters. To account for the characteristics of other types of water heaters, energy use must be calculated using modified versions of the WHAM equation. These modified versions are further discussed in chapter 7 and appendix 7B of the final rule TSD.
The daily hot water draw volume is
estimated based on the water heater energy use estimated from RECS 2020 and CBECS 2018. The inlet water temperature is based on weather station temperature data and RECS 2020 ground water temperature data for each household. The consumer water heater thermostat setting is based on multiple sources including contractor survey data and field data. To estimate the air temperature around the water heater (ambient air temperature), DOE assigned the sampled water heaters a water heater installation location including indoors (in the living space, such as an indoor closet), basement, garages, crawlspaces, outdoor closets, attics, etc. These fractions vary significantly by region and type of home, and match available survey data. Once the water heater is assigned an installation location, DOE then uses a methodology to determine the surrounding water heater ambient temperature. For example, in indoor locations the temperatures are assumed to be equal to the thermostat temperature. Other locations such as unconditioned attics or unconditioned basements/ crawlspaces, outdoor closets, garages could have temperatures that are either lower than 32 deg. or above 100 deg. for a fraction of the year. See chapter 7 and
appendix 8D (installation costs) of the final rule TSD for more details about the installation location methodology and ambient temperature methodology.
ONE Gas commented that DOE
responded that it uses test procedure energy descriptor performance to determine energy use that is then ‘‘convert[ed] . . . to field energy use using modified WHAM equations,’’ but ONE Gas’s review of these procedures as found in appendix 7B of the Preliminary Analysis TSD suggests that the energy consumption estimates modeled do not
meet the intent of the NASEM peer review, and DOE’s response is effectively incomplete. ONE Gas recommended that DOE (1) use the test procedure assumptions of hot water consumption (based on the UEF draw patterns for residential water heating products) as the basis for comparing efficiency levels and alternatives for minimum efficiency standards, and (2) use WHAM calculations or other methods for scaling up efficiency level savings for the forecasted market under the ELs analyzed. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 9) In response, the appendix 7B in Preliminary Analysis TSD was merged in chapter 7 in NOPR TSD. Cross- reference pointing to appendix 7B for the energy use methodology in the TSD in the July 2023 NOPR was a typo DOE now has corrected. Description of the use of WHAM can be found in chapter 7 of the final rule TSD. As discussed in section IV.E.2 of this document, DOE determines that calculating the hot water use based on RECS reports presents a representative distribution of real world energy consumption and the use of WHAM equation is essential for translating energy consumption into hot water use. DOE maintains its methodology in this final rule to use RECS-reported water heating energy use and WHAM equation to calculate the corresponding energy use for each efficiency level of each product classed for sampled households/buildings.
For heat pump water heaters, energy
efficiency and consumption are dependent on ambient temperature. To account for this factor, DOE expanded the WHAM to include a heat pump performance adjustment factor. The equation for determining the energy consumption of heat pump water heaters is similar to the WHAM equation, but a performance adjustment factor that is a function of the average ambient temperature is applied to adjust RE. In response to the July 2023 NOPR, Essency noted that the energy consumption model used in the analysis utilizes a recovery efficiency model that is too simplified and overestimated. They stated that the recovery efficiency model is a quadratic function with a minimum temperature of roughly 45 °F–
50°F which gives it a recovery
efficiency at 37 °F, which Essency
commented is a temperature where most of the current heat pump water heaters are working with electric resistance only. Essency also commented that the energy removed from the air is deducted in warmer months but this energy is not considered for cold months where the energy is removed from a heated space, which Essency asserted creates a bias in the published efficiency of heat pump water heaters. Essency also commented that the surrounding air temperature was used to calculate the efficiency of the heat pump even in the ducted configuration. (Essency, No. 1194 at p. 2) Armada argued that the energy savings are only realized under specific space and climate conditions, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637851 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
68Crystal BallTMis commercially-available
software tool to facilitate the creation of these types
of models by generating probability distributions and summarizing results within Excel, available at www.oracle.com/technetwork/middleware/ crystalball/overview/index.html (last accessed
December 1, 2023). deviations from these ideal conditions
diminish the efficiency of a heat pump water heater. Armada noted that many heat pump water heaters have back up electric resistance heating, and when these space and climate conditions are not met, the water heater will utilize resistance heating—all of the cost of a heat pump with none of the anticipated benefits. (Armada, No. 1193 at pp. 5–6) NRECA commented that stakeholders in cold climates are concerned about the effectiveness of heat pump water heaters during extreme cold events. In cold climates, and particularly during extreme cold events, heat pump water heater in garages or other unconditioned spaces would operate electric resistive heating elements for a large portion of the day, resulting in high energy use and reducing LCC savings. NRECA commented that cooperatives such as Agralite Electric Cooperative in Minnesota and Iowa Lakes Electric Cooperative in Iowa expressed concerns related to the energy the heat pump water heater removes from the home if installed in the conditioned space. Because the heat pump water heater draws its energy from the air in the home, the space heating system must resupply heat taken up by the heat pump water heater. (NRECA, No. 1127 at p. 12)
In response, DOE notes that the
analyses account for the energy consumption when the heat pump water heater is operating on electric resistance mode. DOE estimated that the electric resistance mode of operation is used 100 percent of the time when the monthly ambient temperature is less than 32 °F or more than 100 °F. As Essency noted, DOE adjusts the recovery efficiency in a quadratic function to account for the changes in performance of the heat pump under different conditions. DOE slightly updated the adjustment function for this final rule so that when below 32 °F and above 100 °F the electric resistance mode is considered. DOE also modified the methodology to take into account the outdoor temperature in ducted setting per Essency’s comment. A heat pump water heater also operates in the electric resistance mode for part of the time even when the monthly ambient temperature (where the equipment is installed) is between 32 °F and 100 °F
because this product has a slower recovery rate than an electric resistance water heater. DOE determined that, depending on household hot water consumption patterns, the electric resistance mode of operation varies significantly from household to household; on average DOE estimated that electric resistance mode accounts
for 10 percent of the heat pump water heater unit’s operating time. Lastly, because of the cooling effect heat pump water heater can have during heating season, DOE also estimated that two- thirds of heat extracted from the air by the heat pump water heater is replaced by the space conditioning system, which was taken in account for the heating season.
Gas Association Commenters
commented that there is a bug in the LCC tool that causes it to use only a single year of weather data rather than 10-year average. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 34) In response, DOE notes that the analysis uses the NOAA’s 30 year average weather data for the outside air temperature for all product classes.
Chapter 7 of the final rule TSD
provides details on DOE’s energy use
analysis for consumer water heaters.
F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
Analysis
DOE conducted LCC and PBP
analyses to evaluate the economic impacts on individual consumers of potential energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. The effect of new or amended energy conservation standards on individual consumers usually involves a reduction in operating cost and an increase in purchase cost. DOE used the following two metrics to measure consumer impacts:
ŸThe LCC is the total consumer
expense of an appliance or product over the life of that product, consisting of total installed cost (manufacturer selling price, distribution chain markups, sales tax, and installation costs) plus operating costs (expenses for energy use, maintenance, and repair). To compute the operating costs, DOE discounts future operating costs to the time of purchase and sums them over the lifetime of the product.
ŸThe PBP is the estimated amount
of time (in years) it takes consumers to recover the increased purchase cost (including installation) of a more- efficient product through lower operating costs. DOE calculates the PBP by dividing the change in purchase cost at higher efficiency levels by the change in annual operating cost for the year that amended or new standards are assumed to take effect.
For any given efficiency level, DOE
measures the change in LCC relative to the LCC in the no-new-standards case, which reflects the estimated efficiency distribution of consumer water heaters in the absence of new or amended energy conservation standards. In contrast, the PBP for a given efficiency
level is measured relative to the baseline product.
For each considered efficiency level
in each product class, DOE calculated the LCC and PBP for a nationally representative set of housing units and commercial buildings. As stated previously, DOE developed household samples from the RECS 2020 and CBECS 2018. For each sample household and commercial building, DOE determined the energy consumption for the consumer water heaters and the appropriate energy price. By developing a representative sample of households and commercial buildings, the analysis captured the variability in energy consumption and energy prices associated with the use of consumer water heaters.
Inputs to the calculation of total
installed cost include the cost of the product—which includes MPCs, manufacturer markups, retailer and distributor markups, shipping costs, and sales taxes—and installation costs. Inputs to the calculation of operating expenses include annual energy consumption, energy prices and price projections, repair and maintenance costs, product lifetimes, and discount rates. DOE created distributions of values for product lifetime, discount
rates, and sales taxes, with probabilities attached to each value, to account for their uncertainty and variability.
The computer model DOE uses to
calculate the LCC relies on a Monte Carlo simulation to incorporate uncertainty and variability into the analysis. The Monte Carlo simulations randomly sample input values from the probability distributions and consumer water heater user samples. For this rulemaking, the Monte Carlo approach is implemented in MS Excel together with the Crystal Ball
TMadd-on.68The
model calculated the LCC for products at each efficiency level for 10,000 water heater installations in housing and commercial building units per simulation run. The analytical results include a distribution of 10,000 data points showing the range of LCC savings for a given efficiency level relative to the no-new-standards case efficiency distribution (as shown in chapter 8 of the final rule TSD). In performing an iteration of the Monte Carlo simulation for a given consumer, product efficiency is chosen based on its probability. At
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637852 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
69Desroches, L.-B., K. Garbesi, C. Kantner, R. Van
Buskirk, and H.-C. Yang. Incorporating Experience
Curves in Appliance Standards Analysis. Energy Policy. 2013. 52 pp. 402–416; Weiss, M., M.
Junginger, M.K. Patel, and K. Blok. A Review of Experience Curve Analyses for Energy Demand Technologies. Technological Forecasting and Social
Change. 2010. 77(3): pp. 411–428. the high end of the range, if the chosen
product efficiency is greater than or equal to the efficiency of the standard level under consideration, the LCC calculation reveals that the hypothetical consumer represented by that data point is not impacted by the standard level because that consumer is already purchasing a more-efficient product. At the low end of the range, if the chosen product efficiency is less than the efficiency of the standard level under consideration, the LCC calculation reveals that the hypothetical consumer represented by that data point is
impacted by the standard level. By accounting for consumers who already purchase more-efficient products, DOE avoids overstating the potential benefits from increasing product efficiency.
DOE calculated the LCC and PBP for
consumers of consumer water heaters as if each were to purchase a new product in the first year of required compliance with new or amended standards. New and amended standards apply to consumer water heaters manufactured 5 years after the date on which any new
or amended standard is published. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(4)(A)(ii)) Therefore, DOE
used 2030 as the first full year of compliance with any amended standards for consumer water heaters.
Table IV.25 summarizes the approach
and data DOE used to derive inputs to
the LCC and PBP calculations. The subsections that follow provide further discussion. Details of the spreadsheet
model, and of all the inputs to the LCC and PBP analyses, are contained in chapter 8 of the final rule TSD and its appendices.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
1. Product Cost
To calculate consumer product costs,
DOE multiplied the MSPs developed in
the engineering analysis by the markups described previously (along with sales taxes). DOE used different markups for baseline products and higher-efficiency products, because DOE applies an incremental markup to the increase in MSP associated with higher-efficiency products. Examination of historical price data
for certain appliances and equipment that have been subject to energy conservation standards indicates that the assumption of constant real prices may, in many cases, overestimate long- term trends in appliance and equipment prices. Economic literature and historical data suggest that the real costs of these products may in fact trend downward over time according to
‘‘learning’’ or ‘‘experience’’ curves.
69
In the experience curve method, the
real cost of production is related to the cumulative production or ‘‘experience’’ with a manufactured product. This
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.040</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.25 Summary of Inputs and Methods for the LCC and PBP Analysis*
Inputs Source/Method
Derived by multiplying MPCs by manufacturer and retailer markups and sales
Product Cost tax, as appropriate. Used historical data to derive a price scaling index to project
product costs.
Installation Costs Baseline installation cost determined with data from RSMeans. Assumed no
change with efficiency level.
The total annual energy use multiplied by the hours per year. Average number of
Annual Energy Use hours based on field data.
Variability: Based on the RECS 2020 and CBECS 2018.
Natural Gas: Based on EIA's Natural Gas Navigator data for 2022.
Electricity: Based on EIA's Form 861 data for 2022.
Propane and Fuel Oil: Based on EIA's State Energy Data System ("SEDS") for
Energy Prices 2021.
Variability: Regional energy prices determined for 50 states and District of
Columbia for residential and commercial applications.
Marginal prices used for natural gas, propane, and electricity prices.
Energy Price Trends Based on AE02023 price projections.
Repair and Based on RSMeans data and other sources. Assumed variation in cost by
Maintenance Costs efficiency.
Product Lifetime Based on shipments data, multi-year RECS, American Housing Survey,
American Home Comfort Survey data.
Residential: approach involves identifying all possible debt or asset classes that
might be used to purchase the considered appliances, or might be affected
Discount Rates indirectly. Primary data source was the Federal Reserve Board's Survey of
Consumer Finances.
Commercial: Calculated as the weighted average cost of capital. Primary data
source was Damodaran Online.
Compliance Date 2030
* Not used for PBP calculation. References for the data sources mentioned in this table are provided in the sections
following the table or in chapter 8 of the final rule TSD. 37853 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
70Series ID PCU33522033522081 and
PCU33522833522083; see www.bls.gov/ppi/. 71RSMeans Company Inc., RSMeans Mechanical
Cost Data. Kingston, MA (2023) (Available at:
www.rsmeans.com/products/books/2022-cost-data- books) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
72RSMeans Company Inc., RSMeans Residential
Repair & Remodeling Cost Data. Kingston, MA (2023) (Available at: www.rsmeans.com/products/ books/2022-cost-data-books) (Last accessed December 1, 2023). 73RSMeans Company Inc., RSMeans Plumbing
Cost Data. Kingston, MA (2023) (Available at: www.rsmeans.com/products/books/2022-cost-data- books) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
74RSMeans Company Inc., RSMeans Electrical
Cost Data. Kingston, MA (2023) (Available at: www.rsmeans.com/products/books/2022-cost-data- books) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
75See: www.rsmeans.com/info/contact/about-us
(Last accessed March 6, 2024). experience is usually measured in terms
of cumulative production. As experience (production) accumulates, the cost of producing the next unit decreases. The percentage reduction in cost that occurs with each doubling of cumulative production is known as the learning rate. In typical experience curve formulations, the learning rate parameter is derived using two historical data series: cumulative production and price (or cost). DOE obtained historical PPI data for water heating equipment from 1950–1961, 1968–1973, and 1977–2022 for electric consumer water heaters and from 1967– 1973 and 1977–2022 for all other consumer water heaters from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (‘‘BLS’’).
70
The PPI data reflect nominal prices, adjusted for product quality changes. An inflation-adjusted (deflated) price index for heating equipment manufacturing was calculated by dividing the PPI series by the implicit price deflator for Gross Domestic Product Chained Price Index.
From 1950 to 2006, the deflated price
index for consumer water heaters was mostly decreasing, or staying flat. Since then, the index has risen, primarily due to rising prices of copper, aluminum, and steel products which are the major raw material used in water heating equipment. The rising prices for copper and steel products were attributed to a series of global events, from strong demand from China and other emerging economies to the recent severe delay in commodity shipping due to the COVID– 19 pandemic. Given the slowdown in global economic activity in recent years and the lingering impact from the global pandemic, DOE believes that the extent to which the trends of the past five years will continue is very uncertain. DOE also assumes that any current supply chain constraints are short-lived and will not persist to the first year of compliance. Given the uncertainty regarding the magnitude and direction of potential future price trends, DOE decided to use constant prices as the default price assumption to project future consumer water heater prices. Thus, projected prices for the LCC and PBP analysis are equal to the 2022 values for each efficiency level in each product class. However, DOE performed a sensitivity analysis utilizing both a decreasing and an increasing price trend (see appendix 8C). The relative comparison of potential standard levels remains the same regardless of which price trend is utilized and the conclusions of the analysis do not change.
BWC requested that DOE detail its
methods in utilizing price learning curves for both heat pump water heater and condensing gas products, as was indicated in Section IV(F)(1) of the July 2023 NOPR, so that stakeholders may review them. BWC suggested the additional components required to manufacture higher efficiency products required by this proposal, in addition to their more complex manufacturing processes, will continue to compel higher product costs than is currently expected of non-condensing gas and electric resistance water heaters common in the market today, economies of scale notwithstanding. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 17) The available data only allow estimation of price trends for water heaters as a group, not for different efficiency levels of water heaters. DOE agrees that the product costs of heat pump water heater and condensing gas products will continue to be higher than non-condensing gas and electric resistance water heaters. However, it is reasonable to expect that factors affecting water heaters as a whole, such as growing experience in production or changes in commodity prices, will affect all water heaters. Thus, for this final rule, it used the same price trend projection for all water heaters.
2. Installation Cost
The installation cost is the cost to the
consumer of installing the consumer
water heater, in addition to the cost of the water heater itself. The cost of installation covers all labor, overhead, and material costs associated with the replacement of an existing water heater or the installation of a water heater in a new home, as well as delivery of the new water heater, removal of the existing water heater, and any applicable permit fees. Higher-efficiency water heaters may require consumers to incur additional installation costs.
DOE’s analysis of installation costs
estimated specific installation costs for each sample household based on building characteristics given in RECS 2020 and CBECS 2018. For this final rule, DOE used 2023 RSMeans data for the installation cost estimates, including labor costs.
71 72 73 74 DOE’s analysis of installation costs accounted for regional
differences in labor costs by aggregating city-level labor rates from RSMeans into 50 U.S. States and the District of Columbia to match RECS 2020 data and CBECS 2018 data.
PHCC stated that the costs calculated
for the installation costs are too low. PHCC commented that the data source
RSMeans is intended for larger contractor businesses and the data has not been properly adjusted for small businesses. PHCC noted a discrepancy in the water heater installation time between their RSMeans source and DOE’s report. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 4) PHCC stated that the values listed in the overhead category for costs are not correct and questioned the 10% profit, believing it to be understated. PHCC commented that the overhead category will include office utilities and rent, support staff, supervisors, estimators, advertising, truck and tool acquisition expenses, fuel and maintenance, technician non-productive time and depreciation. PHCC estimated that vehicle and tooling can be 15% to 20% of a technician’s hourly rate. PHCC commented that DOE’s assumption of $27 per hour overhead for 1 residential plumber is too low. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 5) In response, RSMeans is areputable source for cost estimation andit provides the national average laborrate for different crew types as well asregional rates, regardless of businesssize. DOE acknowledges that someindividual contractors may depart fromcost estimates determined by RSMeans,however RSMeans remains the mostcomprehensive and nationallyrepresentative data source for contractorrates and costs. The RSMeans databaseincludes tens of thousands of individualline items and cost engineers spend tensof thousands of hours validating thesecosts every year. Thousands ofcontractors rely on RSMeans todetermine cost estimates.
75DOE adjust
the labor rates for different regionsbased on where the sample householdor building is located. In regards toPHCC’s concern over the labor rate andoverhead, DOE notes that the $27 perhour overhead for a residential plumberis pointing to 63% markup compared tothe bare hourly rate. Taking intoaccount regional difference, the exact
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637854 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
dollar value of the markup increases for
regions with labor rates higher than national average. For this final rule, DOE maintained the method of calculating labor rates as used in the July 2023 NOPR.
a. Basic Installation Costs and Inputs
First, DOE estimated basic installation
costs that are applicable to all consumer
water heaters, in replacement, new owner, and new home or building installations. These costs include putting in place and setting up the consumer water heater, gas piping and/ or electrical hookup, permits, water piping, removal of the existing consumer water heater, and removal or disposal fees.
NMHC and NAA commented that in
existing or future commercial-to- residential conversions, by the nature of the building construction, historic building considerations or zero lot lines result in building facades that are frequently not available for vent terminations. They claimed that these buildings may be taller than a new residential building and existing structural frame geometries and shaft locations significantly influence dwelling unit configurations, in which cases new vent piping or condensate drains may need to traverse space outside of the affected dwelling unit to reach a building shaft with sufficient space to add piping. NMHC and NAA claimed that such piping runs will virtually always exceed the lengths cited for cost-analysis in the TSD and entail substantial additional costs unconsidered by DOE. (NMHC and NAA, No. 996 at p. 4) Gas Association Commenters argued that the installation cost did not address the breadth of existing multifamily configurations like high-rise, low-rise buildings, historic structures and adaptive reuse projects (i.e., commercial to residential
conversions). (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 4) In response, DOE notes that current shipments of consumer water heaters to commercial buildings are small, approximately 5 percent of total shipments (see chapter 9 of final rule TSD). These are typically small offices,
restaurants, or smaller retailers with similar hot water demand to residential households, otherwise they would be utilizing commercial water heating equipment outside the scope of this final rule. Any existing commercial-to- residential building conversions would be present in the CBECS 2018. Any future commercial-to-residential conversions are speculative at this time. Even if vent piping for gas-fired water heaters were prohibitive for a given building, electric water heaters are
available to supply hot water at lower cost to each individual unit, so there is no reason to expect substantially higher costs for these residential units. Their impacts would be very similar to those estimated for medium ESWH in new construction and/or multi-family buildings and thus captured by the analysis. Furthermore, if the existing commercial building utilizes a central commercial boiler to supply hot water, DOE expects that such building conversions will take advantage of the existing central commercial boiler system to supply hot water to the newly built residential units. Also, in order to satisfy the building codes, these conversions typically require very extensive reconstructions including building new central shafts that accommodate all of the piping and vents related to plumbing, HVAC and water heating needs. These shafts could serve the condensation withdrawal as required for the heat pump water heaters or condensing gas water heaters. In regards to the length of the piping runs, DOE’s analysis includes a distribution of a wide range of piping length which covers the additional piping requirements. Regarding existing multi-family buildings, DOE clarifies that the analysis does include costs separately for multi-family buildings of various sizes (see appendix 8D), and the RECS sample includes such multi- family buildings, therefore they are captured in the LCC analysis. The majority of multi-family buildings utilize electric storage water heaters.
b. Gas-Fired and Oil-Fired Storage
Water Heater Installation Costs
For gas-fired and oil-fired water
heater installations, DOE included a number of additional costs (‘‘adders’’) for a fraction of the sample households. Most of these additional cost adders are associated with installing higher efficiency consumer water heater designs in replacement installations.
For replacement installations, DOE
conducted a detailed analysis of installation costs when a baseline (or minimum efficiency) consumer water heater is replaced with higher efficiency
design options, with particular attention to space constraint issues (associated with larger dimensions for certain higher efficiency consumer water heaters), venting issues, and condensate withdrawal (for power vented and condensing gas-fired water heaters). Due to the larger dimensions of higher efficiency storage water heaters, installation adders included removing and replacing door jambs (to be able to fit the larger sized water heater). DOE also takes into account that a fraction of
installations would include adding tempering valves for water heaters with increased set-point temperatures due to the household preference. For non- condensing gas-fired and oil-fired water heaters, additional costs included updating flue vent connectors, vent resizing, and chimney relining. For non- condensing power vented and condensing gas-fired storage water heaters, additional costs included adding a new flue vent, combustion air intake for direct vent installations, concealing vent pipes for indoor installations, addressing an orphaned furnace (by updating flue vent connectors, vent resizing, or chimney relining), and condensate removal. Freeze protection is accounted for in the cost of condensate removal for a fraction of condensing gas-fired water heaters installed in non-conditioned spaces.
DOE also included installation adders
for new owner and new construction installations. For non-condensing gas- fired and oil-fired storage water heaters, a new flue vent and accounting for other commonly vented heating appliances are the only adders. For power vented and condensing gas-fired water heaters, the adders include new flue vent, combustion air vent for direct vent installations, and condensate removal.
ONE Gas commented that venting
costs are systematically under-estimated but did not provide more data. ONE Gas argued that the Department does not provide illustrations of the full range of site conditions covered or confirmation data for its distributional data. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 10) ONE Gas argued that the Department uses a simplistic presumption of single-family household replacement installation requirements (e.g., venting into masonry chimneys,
common venting with furnace) for multifamily households whose water heater vents atmospherically into a common vent shared with other households, which neglects various concerns. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 10) PHCC requested clarification on the language on page 8D–7 of the NOPR TSD surrounding masonry chimneys. PHCC commented that the language gets confusing as it discusses lined masonry chimneys but then considers metal lining systems. PHCC noted that masonry chimneys must be tile lined for gas venting and it is unclear if DOE views the use of a flexible metal liner kit as a lined chimney. Furthermore, PHCC indicated the need for more clarification on the use of flexible liners in chases, as those chases should contain metallic double wall vents. Finally, PHCC
requested clarification on the discussion surrounding isolated water heaters that
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637855 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
are not gas-fired nor vented products, as
PHCC is not clear on why they are called isolated and what their relationship is with common venting. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 3)
In response, DOE notes that sources
and references used in the analysis for deriving the methodology are presented in chapter 8 of the TSD and its appendices. DOE is aware that in some multifamily buildings, existing non- condensing storage water heaters of more than one unit can be commonly vented with other equipment vented using a Category I vent. In some cases, replacement of one water heater may require re-assessment of the shared vent path. However, this final rule does not require a condensing level for gas storage water heaters. DOE notes that it is challenging to acquire data on how frequently water heaters are commonly vented in multifamily buildings that allow DOE to statistically account for the cost impact on its own. DOE estimates, however, certain fractions by region where chimney venting is applied and believes that, besides those typical cases where chimney venting is shared by a water heater and a furnace, those installation cases have captured to some extent the costs applicable for vent path reassessment. In regards to the PHCC’s comment on appendix 8D of NOPR TSD, to clarify, DOE accounts for different types of venting used in the field; venting through a masonry chimney and venting through a metal vent going through the roof are both included. For venting in the masonry chimney, DOE takes into account the cost for relining the chimney and venting for orphaned furnace/boiler where applicable in retrofits. Specifically, when venting through the chimney, DOE accounts for the cost of chimney re-lining and resizing of the vent connector should the retrofit require that. Additionally, ‘‘isolated’’ water heaters as explained in the documentation refer to water heaters that are not commonly vented or do not require venting at all, for which there are no common venting related costs considered. See chapter 8 and appendix 8D of the final rule TSD for details.
CHPK stated that the modification
associated with increasing insulation, the addition of a thermal flue damper, or an electronic ignition and an electronic flue damper would require an electric supply to gas-fired storage water heaters, and would potentially reduce vent temperatures resulting in excessive condensation developing in the vent. According to CHPK, these modifications would result in additional costs of
providing an electric outlet for gas storage water heaters in a replacement situation and perhaps venting issues.
(CHPK, No. 1008 at p. 1) DOE took into account in the calculation of installation costs the issues CHPK raised and applied a cost adder for an electric outlet and condensate treatment for the efficiency levels that require those.
Regarding statements from some
stakeholders that significant installation barriers are associated with gas condensing water heaters, the CA IOUs referred DOE to a report docketed in 2019 titled ‘‘Investigation of Installation Barriers and Costs for Condensing Gas Appliances.’’ Key findings from this report indicate that these challenges impact less than 5 percent of condensing gas retrofit installations for residential and commercial applications, and that condensate management and chimney relining were minor concerns for installing gas condensing products. (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at p. 2) DOE agrees that installation challenges will impact only a subset of consumers, and even in those cases, DOE has included additional installation costs into the analysis.
c. Heat Pump Water Heater Installation
Costs
For heat pump water heater
installations, DOE included a number of adders for a fraction of the sample households. Most of these adders are associated with installing heat pump water heaters in replacement installations.
For replacement installations, DOE
conducted a detailed analysis of installation costs when a baseline consumer water heater is replaced with higher efficiency designs, with particular attention to space constraint issues (associated with larger dimensions for heat pump water heaters compared to electric resistance water heaters), condensate withdrawal, and ductwork for heat pump water heaters
installed in conditioned spaces. To address the larger dimensions of heat pump water heaters, installation adders included removing and replacing door jambs (to be able to fit the larger sized water heater) or relocating water heater. Freeze protection is accounted for in the cost of condensate removal for a fraction of heat pump water heaters installed in non-conditioned spaces. DOE also included condensate removal installation adders for new owner and new construction heat pump water heater installations. DOE also accounted for the airflow requirements as specified in manufacturer installation manuals in its installation cost model. The additional costs of adding louvered doors, venting, or relocating a water heater are included for a fraction of installations, mainly for heat pump water heaters installed in indoor locations. See appendix 8D of the final rule TSD for more details.
PHCC commented that DOE
acknowledges that up to 40% of installations could face space constrained heat pump installations and the suggestion that DOE provides to use louvered doors may not be applicable to all installations and the use of ducted air installations should be accounted for. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 4) PHCC noted that on page 8D–6 of NOPR TSD there are no modifications to remove and replace door jambs for basements and garages, but plumbing, building and mechanical codes require doorways to be of sufficient size to replace equipment without future removal of doors and door frames. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 3) NMHC and NAA noted that DOE’s suggestion that it may be possible to ignore manufacturers’ specified volume of space for heat pump water heater installation based on ‘‘current research’’ is not acceptable as it conflicts with building code requirements to comply with manufacturer’s instructions. NMHC and NAA also commented that DOE’s suggestion for installation of heat pump water heaters by replacing utility closet doors with louvered doors is not viable as it ignores the impacts of increases in equipment noise in the smaller area of the typical apartment home. (NMHC and NAA, No. 996 at p. 4) Essency argued that the cost of moving the heat pump water heater was not calculated as there are significant additional electrical, plumbing, and other construction work that are required. (Essency, No. 1194 at p. 2) EEI commented that it is important to recognize that installing heat pump water heater units in space-constrained areas (like closets or under stairs or in crawl spaces) will require significant retrofit costs given heat pump water heaters’ physical operating requirements and the potential need for additional equipment. EEI commented that non- ducted heat pump water heaters require at least 700 cu ft of space to operate properly and achieve DOE’s estimated efficiency levels, as shown in manufacturer specifications. EEI noted that 10 to 40 percent of water heaters are located in closets based on a survey by Southern Company. EEI commented that DOE’s analysis does not include a realistic cost estimate for replacing electric resistance water heaters with heat pump water heaters in closets where walls, ceilings, and doors must be removed and replaced or ductwork
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637856 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
added in space constrained areas. EEI
argued that DOE’s analysis does not accurately account for the replacement costs in other space-constrained environments such as crawl spaces, attics, utility rooms, or laundry rooms (EEI, No. 1198 at pp. 5–6) Armada argued that ideal efficiency conditions for heat pump water heaters require 1000 cubic feet of air. Armada argued that many homes cannot support such space demands, and use of heat pump water heaters will increase home heating costs for many consumers, diminishing any savings. Armada argued that only in very rare circumstances would consumers be able to quickly replace an electric storage water heater in an emergency, as many homes will require construction to accommodate the space and environment requirements of a heat pump water heater such as installing louvered doors or building ductwork. (Armada, No. 1193 at p. 6)
In response to the preceding
comments, DOE notes that the analysis takes into account the cost of moving the water heater to a different location or adding a louvered door for some installations. In the field, plumbers would guide the customers to select a way that works for them. In the analysis, DOE acknowledges the possible occurrence of those additional costs and on top of those DOE also applied a distribution of installation cost adders that ranges from $0 to $4,000 in total for the most challenging installations, averaging $2,000 (see appendix 8D).
NRECA commented that
manufactured and small homes experience greater impact from both noise and cold air exhaust than larger homes that have more space to isolate the noise of the water heater and more air volume to buffer cold air exhaust. They commented that constrained spaces may not have enough room for mitigation measures such as supply and exhaust air ducting or noise dampening equipment. NRECA added that consumers will not welcome any increase in their electricity bills resulting from their heating system needing to work harder because of the heat pump water heater drawing on the warm air as its heat source. (NRECA, No. 1127 at p. 6). NRECA commented that manufactured and small homes will face unique installation challenges with heat pump water heaters. They noted that small and manufactured homes in NRECA member territories typically use 40- to 50-gallon lowboys, tall tanks, or tanks specifically designed for manufactured home closets, and that
although DOE created a small electric storage water heater product class that covers some lowboy products this does
not include tank sizes and form factors that electric cooperatives typically observe in space constrained spaces. NRECA cited the La Plata Electric Association (‘‘LPEA’’) pilot study where 20 heat pump water heaters were installed in owner-occupied manufactured homes and due to the complexity of installation, concluded that a majority of manufactured homes are not good candidates for a heat pump water heater. NRECA stated that although heat pump water heaters can be installed in some constrained spaces, they are likely not the best option when they cause high installation costs, noise and cold air impacts, and potentially unsightly installations to make the heat pump water heater fit a space that was never designed to accommodate it, and there often is no other available space in a small home to relocate the water heater, and reducing tank size can cause negative user experience. (NRECA, No. 1127 at pp. 6–7) NRECA commented that because low-and-moderate income consumers disproportionately face complex installations, they are likely to disproportionately bear costs rather than savings as a result of the proposed rule and they received multiple examples from electric cooperatives illustrating that installation costs are far higher than DOE’s estimates. (NRECA, No. 1127 at p. 8)
NEEA noted that its research shows
that heat pump water heaters can be installed in a wide range of conditions and climates, including very cold climates, and continue to deliver significant energy savings. (NEEA, No. 1199 at pp. 3–4) NEEA commented that its research supports DOE’s installation cost analysis. (NEEA, No. 1199 at p. 7). However, BWC highlighted that NEEA is a regional organization that operates its programs primarily in the Northwestern United States and only included those consumers who had already made the decision to take advantage of available heat pump water heater rebate programs. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 20)
In response, DOE acknowledges that
manufactured homes and small homes typically have greater challenges in installing a heat pump water heater. Installing a heat pump water heater in such homes may require additional installation costs, as described above, more so than an average single-family home. The LCC analysis accounts for the higher installation costs for such homes. However, in many cases, such homes can utilize a small electric storage water heater instead of a heat
pump water heater, significantly reducing their total installed cost. In terms of the cooling effect of the heat
pump module, DOE took that into account in its energy use analysis the additional heating it might need in compensation, as discussed in section IV.E.3 of this document. DOE acknowledges that for low income homeowners, higher installation costs would indeed need more years of energy savings to pay back or may even lead to net cost, and this is accounted for in the overall LCC results. For renters, since they won’t bear the first cost, it will more likely be economically beneficial (as discussed in section IV.I.1 of this document).
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE did
extensive revisions to its installation cost model to include installations of low-boy water heaters. DOE estimated around 10 percent of the total 20 to 55 gallon electric storage water heater market to be low boy water heaters. DOE assessed that many of these installations would require significant installation costs in order to install a heat pump water heater. DOE notes that at the proposed standard, most models currently serving the small electric water heater market will remain available.
A.O. Smith argued that retrofit costs
associated with space-constrained installs are under-represented, especially for the lowboy electric resistance water heater to heat pump water heater transition. A.O. Smith also argued that undersizing an electric storage water heater (‘‘ESWH’’) and raising the temperature would not be possible in scenarios where a heat pump water heater would not fit in a confined space (which represents half of the modeled outcomes). A.O. Smith stated that while the difference in size for tall ESWH replacements is accounted for with a ∼3 inch diameter increase, this
same change is not accounted for in a substantial way for lowboys which present an even greater size constraint challenge. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 8–9) A.O. Smith pointed out that they could not find the referenced ‘‘review of studies’’ mentioned in Appendix 8D of the NOPR TSD which was supposed to include a literature review and a comparison of results of studies (related to lowboy costs) in response to previously submitted comments. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 9) AHRI commented that DOE is not adequately considering the retrofit costs associated with space constrained retrofits. Specifically, DOE did not consider the added product and installation costs that would be faced by homeowners when replacing medium draw pattern
lowboy or ‘‘short’’ electric resistance water heater with a heat pump water
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637857 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
76See www.geappliances.com/appliance/GE-
Smart-50-Gallon-Electric-Water-Heater-with-
Flexible-Capacity-GE50S10BMM. 77U.S. Department of Energy-Energy Information
Administration, Form EIA–861M (formerly EIA– 826) detailed data (2022) (Available at: www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861m/) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
78U.S. Department of Energy-Energy Information
Administration, Natural Gas Navigator (2022) (Available at: www.eia.gov/naturalgas/data.php) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
79U.S. Department of Energy-Energy Information
Administration, State Energy Data System (‘‘SEDS’’) (2021) (Available at: www.eia.gov/state/seds/) (Last accessed December 1, 2023). heater. AHRI noted that consumers
would not have the option to install an over-heated tank in lieu of facing space constrained scenarios as electric resistance storage water heaters with the capability of being overheated will not be permitted under the proposed energy conservation standard. AHRI stated that replacement of a lowboy with a heat pump would require the use of a more expensive split heat pump and would have additional installation costs. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 7)
DOE is aware of the challenges of
replacing a low boy water heater with a heat pump water heater, especially in confined space and in small homes or manufactured homes. As discussed above and in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE applied significant installation cost adders to those installations to encompass the additional labor hour and materials needed to install such water heaters.
A.O. Smith argued that DOE did not
fully account for the increased product and installation costs associated with split-system heat pump water heater designs that would be used to replace lowboy installations. A.O. Smith recommended that DOE incorporate higher product and installation costs associated with split designs for 13.7 percent of shipments in the medium electric storage water heater product class. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 9) For this final rule DOE conducted further research on installing a heat pump water heater in a split system configuration. Currently there are not many models available for split system configuration and thus there are limited installation examples. DOE maintained its main analytical approach while adding a local installation cost sensitivity analysis for installing a split system heat pump water heater. Specifically, DOE modeled the cost line items needed for the installation of a 44- gallon low boy tank with a split heat pump module, which is a commonly used lowboy tank size for medium ESWHs. Appendix 8D of the final rule TSD provides more details on this sensitivity analysis. In summary, DOE found that the installation costs of a split system heat pump water heater are not necessarily higher than an integrated heat pump in a constrained space. Since DOE already applies a significant adder to the installation of an integrated heat pump water heater in these households, the overall average LCC savings would be more positive for the adopted heat pump level had DOE included this split heat pump option for medium electric storage water heaters in
the main analysis. Even though the retail price for a split system heat pump water heater may be higher than an
integrated heat pump, the lower installation cost for a split system heat pump water heater compared to an integrated heat pump water heater in a confined space and in small homes or manufactured homes is likely to result in an overall lower total installed cost. Should the market include more split heat pump models in the future, the likely cost impacts will decrease for consumers with water heaters in a confined space and in small homes or manufactured homes.
A.O. Smith argued that DOE’s
analysis assumed that all water heaters in manufactured homes are 30 gal and therefore did not account for the costs of these units transitioning to heat pump levels. A.O. Smith also pointed out that DOE acknowledges that 40 gal
are also common standards for manufactured homes. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 10) In response, DOE notes that the statement A.O. Smith was referencing was in a consultant report, where 30 gallon was only an example made to represent the cost breakdown of water heaters typically used in mobile homes. In DOE’s actual analysis, different standard sizes were considered (see section IV.E.2 for more information).
Rheem found the reported installation
costs for heat pump water heater to be lower than expected, but the incremental installation costs between EL 0 and EL 3 aligned with their internal installation cost data. Rheem noted that as operation at high tank temperatures is expected to be representative of electric resistance water heater operation, the installation of a mixing valve should be included in DOE’s analysis. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 9) DOE has found that for some applications mixing valves are currently being used in order to have higher hot water temperature for dishwashers or clothes washers, to provide more hot water capacity, and to reduce bacterial growth, while making sure the delivered water is within a safe range.
76Some
water heaters have internal mixing valves that are meant to increase available hot water. In some cases, mixing valves could be used to address the increased hot water needs when the number of people in the household increases without replacing the entire water heater. DOE’s updated test procedure includes a method to test water heaters in the highest storage tank temperature mode, which would be more representative for these types of installations (this is discussed more in section V.D.1). DOE’s analysis in this final rule accounts for a fraction of installations that utilize a mixing valve.
3. Annual Energy Consumption
For each sampled household and
building, DOE determined the energy
consumption for consumer water heaters at different efficiency levels using the approach described previously in section IV.E of this document.
Higher-efficiency water heaters
reduce the operating costs for a consumer, which can lead to greater use of the water heater. A direct rebound effect occurs when a product that is made more efficient is used more intensively, such that the expected energy savings from the efficiency improvement may not fully materialize. At the same time, consumers benefit from increased utilization of products due to rebound. Although some households may increase their water heater use in response to increased efficiency, DOE does not include the rebound effect in the LCC analysis because the increased utilization of the water heater provides value to the consumer. DOE does include rebound in the NIA for a conservative estimate of national energy savings and the corresponding impact to consumer NPV. See chapter 10 of the FR TSD for more details.
4. Energy Prices
Because marginal energy price more
accurately captures the incremental
savings associated with a change in energy use from higher efficiency, it provides a better representation of incremental change in consumer costs than average electricity prices. Therefore, DOE applied average energy prices for the energy use of the product purchased in the no-new-standards case, and marginal energy prices for the incremental change in energy use associated with the other efficiency levels considered.
DOE derived average monthly
marginal residential and commercial electricity, natural gas, and LPG prices for each state using data from EIA.
77 78 79
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637858 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
80EIA. Annual Energy Outlook 2023 with
Projections to 2050. Washington, DC. Available at
www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/ (last accessed December
1, 2023).
81Lavappa, Priya D. and J.D. Kneifel. Energy Price
Indices and Discount Factors for Life-Cycle Cost Analysis—2022 Annual Supplement to NIST Handbook 135. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). NISTIR 85–3273–37, available at www.nist.gov/publications/energy-price-indices-
and-discount-factors-life-cycle-cost-analysis-2022- annual (last accessed December 1, 2023).
82RSMeans Company, Inc., RS Means Facilities
Repair and Maintenance (2023), available at www.rsmeans.com/ (last accessed December 1,
2023). DOE calculated marginal monthly
regional energy prices by: (1) first estimating an average annual price for each region; (2) multiplying by monthly energy price factors, and (3) multiplying by seasonal marginal price factors for electricity, natural gas, and LPG. The analysis used historical data up to 2022 for residential and commercial natural gas and electricity prices and historical data up to 2021 for LPG and fuel oil prices. Further details may be found in chapter 8 of the final rule TSD.
GAAS argued that DOE has not fully
responded to their previous suggestion of using the CMER (Consumer Marginal Energy Rates) method for energy prices. (GAAS, No. 1139 at p. 1)
DOE has evaluated other estimates of
marginal energy prices but maintains its approach in the final rule, since the data used to develop those prices are nationally representative. Stakeholders have previously proposed alternative methods and data to estimate marginal natural gas prices. However, DOE compared its seasonal marginal price factors developed from the EIA data to marginal price factors for 23 gas tariffs provided by the Gas Technology Institute for the 2016 residential boilers energy conservation standards rulemaking. DOE found that the winter price factors used by DOE are generally comparable to those computed from the tariff data, indicating that DOE’s marginal price estimates are reasonable at average usage levels. The summer price factors are also generally comparable. Of the 23 tariffs analyzed, eight have multiple tiers, and of these eight, six have ascending rates and two have descending rates. The tariff-based marginal factors use an average of the two tiers as the commodity price. A full tariff-based analysis would require information about the household’s total baseline gas usage (to establish which tier the consumer is in), and a weight factor for each tariff that determines how many customers are served by that utility on that tariff. These data are generally not available in the public domain. DOE’s use of EIA State-level data effectively averages overall consumer sales in each State, and so incorporates information from all utilities. DOE’s approach is, therefore, more representative of a large group of consumers with diverse baseline gas usage levels than an approach that uses only tariffs. DOE notes that within a State, there could be significant variation in the marginal price factors, including differences between rural and urban rates. In order to take this to account, DOE developed marginal price
factors for each individual household using RECS 2015 billing data. These data are then normalized to match the
average State marginal price factors, which are equivalent to a consumption- weighted average marginal price across all households in the State. DOE’s methodology allows energy prices to vary by sector, region and season. For more details on the comparative analysis and marginal price analysis, see appendix 8E of the final rule TSD.
To estimate energy prices in future
years, DOE multiplied the 2022 energy prices by the projection of annual average price changes for each of the 50 U.S. states and District of Columbia from the reference case in AEO2023, which has an end year of 2050.
80To
estimate price trends after 2050, DOE used the average annual growth rate in prices from 2046 to 2050 based on the methods used in the 2022 Life-Cycle Costing Manual for the Federal Energy Management Program (‘‘FEMP’’).
81
AWHI suggested that the CA IOUs
outline a price forecast scenario that more accurately accounts for future changes in energy costs. (AWHI, No. 1036 at p. 4) Gas Association Commenters argued that energy price assumptions from AEO are consistently overestimated and therefore should not be used (70% of the time was an overestimate for residential and 86% of the time was an overestimate for commercial sector between the 2010 and 2023 AEO projections). They argued that a distribution of prices should be used and not a forecasted mean. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 34) Rinnai stated that DOE’s average and marginal consumer energy price forecasts (from EIA) for electricity and gaseous fuels have historically overstated prices (particularly for natural gas). Rinnai stated that DOE should instead use energy prices employed in the Federal Trade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) Energy Guide labels because the uncertainty of applying forecasted prices shouldn’t be primary drivers of LCC costs/savings and because FTC’s use of AEO energy
prices is audited annually and approved as published in the Federal Register prior to use for the EnergyGuide program. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at pp. 26– 28) ONE Gas argued that consumer energy price forecasts from the AEO have been shown to be notoriously unreliable from forecasting year to forecasting year, and they systematically overpredict natural gas prices over time. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at pp. 10–11) In response, DOE relies on AEO forecast for the energy price projection across appliance standards work as a cross- cutting methodology. Current energy prices are developed using other EIA data sources as described above. DOE acknowledges that it is difficult to project the future trend for any source given the uncertainty and unpredictability. However, AEO 2023 projects relatively flat energy price trends out to 2050 (see appendix 8E). AEO as issued by EIA remains the most comprehensive and trustworthy source and DOE maintains its methodology for this final rule. The energy prices developed for FTC are consistent with DOE’s development of current energy prices (although here the analysis relies on marginal energy prices).
5. Maintenance and Repair Costs
Repair costs are associated with
repairing or replacing product
components that have failed in an appliance; maintenance costs are associated with maintaining the operation of the product. Typically, small incremental increases in product efficiency produce no, or only minor, changes in repair and maintenance costs compared to baseline efficiency products. DOE included additional maintenance and repair costs for higher efficiency consumer water heaters (including maintenance costs associated with condensate withdrawal, heat pump component filter cleaning, and deliming of the heat exchanger and repair costs associated with electronic ignition, controls, and blowers for fan-assisted designs, compressor, evaporator fan) based on 2023 RSMeans data.
82DOE
accounted for regional differences in labor costs by using RSMeans regional cost factors.
Ravnitzky stated that non-heat pump
water heaters are less likely to require maintenance or repair than heat pump water heaters because they have a less complex design with fewer moving parts. (Ravnitzky, No. 73 at p. 1) Essency argued that maintenance costs are underestimated for heat pump water heaters because the lifetime of some components in heat pump water heaters will require replacements of parts once the heater is out of warranty. (Essency, No. 1194 at p. 3) Rheem voiced support
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637859 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
83Lutz, J., A. Hopkins, V. Letschert, V. Franco,
and A. Sturges, Using national survey data to
estimate lifetimes of residential appliances, HVAC&R Research (2011) 17(5): pp. 28 (Available at: www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/
10789669.2011.558166) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
84U.S. Department of Energy: Energy Information
Administration, Residential Energy Consumption
Survey (‘‘RECS’’), Multiple Years (1990, 1993, 1997,
2001, 2005, 2009, 2015, and 2020) (Available at: www.eia.gov/consumption/residential/) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
85U.S. Census Bureau: Housing and Household
Economic Statistics Division, American Housing
Survey, Multiple Years (1974, 1975, 1976, 1977,
1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2021) (Available at: www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ ahs/) (Last accessed December 1, 2023). 86The implicit discount rate is inferred from a
consumer purchase decision between two otherwise identical goods with different first cost and operating cost. It is the interest rate that equates the increment of first cost to the difference in net present value of lifetime operating cost, incorporating the influence of several factors: transaction costs; risk premiums and response to uncertainty; time preferences; interest rates at which a consumer is able to borrow or lend. The
Continued for DOE’s handling of operational and
maintenance costs over the life of the water heater. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 9)
In response to Ravnitzky, research
conducted by DOE has not shown that heat pump water heaters have different lifetimes than electric resistance storage water heaters. DOE has factored any additional maintenance or repair costs into the LCC. DOE takes into account replacement of certain parts after the warranty period. For the replacement of the heating element (which Essency provided as an example in its comment), the replacement cost is accounted for the fraction where it occurs and annualized across the years of use. The repair and maintenance cost summary in the final rule TSD represents the average cost with some households experiencing more or less than the reported value.
6. Product Lifetime
Product lifetime is the age at which an
appliance is retired from service. DOE
conducted an analysis of water heater lifetimes based on the methodology described in a journal paper.
83For this
analysis, DOE relied on RECS 1990, 1993, 2001, 2005, 2009, 2015, and 2020.
84DOE also used the U.S. Census’s
biennial American Housing Survey (‘‘AHS’’), from 1974–2021, which surveys all housing, noting the presence of a range of appliances.
85DOE used the
appliance age data from these surveys, as well as the historical water heater shipments, to generate an estimate of the survival function. The survival function provides a lifetime range from minimum to maximum, as well as an average lifetime. DOE estimates the average product lifetime to be around 15 years for storage water heaters.
Stanonik argued that increased
average lifetimes for consumer storage water heaters are calculated estimates rather than based on field data thus leading to overstatements of average lifetime. Stanonik also argued that the increased complexity of newer products realistically would result in shorter lifetimes and more scenarios where ‘‘replace’’ might be a cheaper alternative than ‘‘repair,’’ and that these scenarios are not reflected well in the analysis. (Stanonik, No. 1197 at p. 2) NMHC and NAA noted that AHRI assumes a 10–13 year lifespan for water heaters, which is less than DOE’s estimated lifetime. (NMHC and NAA, No. 996 at p. 6) DOE has conducted an extensive literature review, including studies and surveys and warranty information, to determine its product lifetimes, as discussed in appendix 8G. DOE also utilizes Weibull distribution for the product lifetime to capture the field variations.
Noritz disputed that condensing and
non-condensing products have the same average lifespan based on their internal testing. Noritz argued that the less complex nature of the non-condensing product in their testing typically lasts between 10 and 20 percent longer than a similar condensing product. Noritz argued that the analysis conducted by DOE that proposes the average lifespan of the two products to be identical will impact the LCC and payback analysis. (Noritz, No. 1202 at p. 3). In response, DOE has not found any evidence in its research pointing to a significantly different lifespan for the two types of water heaters. As described in appendix 8G, the data sources cited did not indicate any systematic decrease in lifetime for gas-fired condensing products. For this final rule, DOE maintains its methodology of assuming the same lifetime within product classes.
BWC noticed that the 2010
rulemaking reports an average lifetime of 13 years, rather than the assumed 15 years in the current rulemaking. BWC claimed that the lower product lifetime conclusions reached by DOE in the 2010 rulemaking appear to be more consistent with the evidence presented in the NOPR TSD. Specifically, in Figure 8G.4.6 in the TSD, the inflection points of the curves in this figure more closely align with the assumed product lifetimes established as part of DOE’s 2010 rulemaking, and in the case of electric storage water heaters, indicate a product lifetime that is lower still. The assumed lifetime of 13 years for heat pump water heater products is also shared by the ENERGY STAR program in its materials that promote these products. BWC requested that DOE elaborate on the reason for an increase in product lifetimes from the assumptions deployed in the 2010 rulemaking to the longer product
lifetimes assumed in the July 2023 NOPR. BWC also requested that DOE explain the apparent discrepancies
between the graphic demonstration of product lifetimes in 8G.4.6 and those expressed in Table 8G.4.1. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 3–4)
From the 2010 Final Rule to this
rulemaking, DOE was able to collect more evidence from literature review on product lifetime as well as develop a more robust survival function to calculate the lifetimes. Regarding the figure in the NOPR TSD, the inflection point represents the lifetime most water heaters will live to, whereas the average takes into account those who live an unusually short or long lifetime. The lifetime distribution in this rulemaking, compared to that of the 2010 rulemaking, has an early start, taking into account those that retire starting from year two, and a longer tail, allowing some water heaters to survive much longer than average. DOE believes that it is beneficial to capture the variations in lifetime and thus maintain its methodology in this final rule.
BWC expressed support for DOE
conducting a sensitivity analysis for all water heater product classes, as they
claimed this is an effective way for this rulemaking to account for the reality that product lifetimes are not constant across efficiency levels and decrease with increased efficiency and complexity of a system. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 4) In order to evaluate the impact of the lifetime on the economic analysis results, for this final rule DOE conducted a sensitivity analysis, where two additional lifetime scenarios were evaluated. The sensitivity results do not change DOE’s conclusion of economic justification of the adopted standards (see appendix 8G of the final rule TSD for the comparison of results).
7. Discount Rates
In the calculation of LCC, DOE
applies discount rates appropriate to
households to estimate the present value of future operating cost savings. DOE estimated a distribution of discount rates for consumer water heaters based on the opportunity cost of consumer funds.
DOE applies weighted average
discount rates calculated from consumer debt and asset data, rather than marginal or implicit discount rates.
86The LCC
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637860 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
implicit discount rate is not appropriate for the LCC
analysis because it reflects a range of factors that influence consumer purchase decisions, rather than the opportunity cost of the funds that are used in purchases.
87The Federal Reserve Board, Survey of
Consumer Finances (1995, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2016, and 2019) (Available at: www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scfindex.htm) (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023). The Federal Reserve Board is currently processing the 2022 Survey of Consumer Finances, which is expected to be fully available in late 2023. 88Damodaran Online, Data Page: Costs of Capital
by Industry Sector (2021) (Available at:
pages.stern.nyu.edu/∼adamodar/) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
89Fujita, S., Commercial, Industrial, and
Institutional Discount Rate Estimation for Efficiency Standards Analysis: Sector-Level Data 1998—2018 (Available at: ees.lbl.gov/publications/commercial- industrial-and) (Last accessed December 1, 2023). 90AHRI. Gas-fired and Electric Storage Water
Heater Shipments Data to DOE. March 11, 2008;
AHRI. Gas-fired Storage Heater Shipments Data to DOE. March 18, 2009.
91ENERGY STAR. Unit Shipments data 2010–
2021. multiple reports. (Available at: www.energystar.gov/partner_ resources/products_
partner_ resources/brand_ owner_ resources/unit_
shipment_ data) (Last accessed December 1, 2023).
92BRG Building Solutions. The North American
Heating & Cooling Product Markets (2023 Edition). 2023.
93U.S. Department of Energy’s Compliance
Certification Database is available at regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (last accessed
Dec. 1, 2023).
94Air Conditioning Heating and Refrigeration
Institute. Consumer’s Directory of Certified
Efficiency Ratings for Heating and Water Heating Equipment. May 16, 2023. (Available at www.ahridirectory.org) (Last accessed December 1, 2023). analysis estimates net present value
over the lifetime of the product, so the appropriate discount rate will reflect the general opportunity cost of household funds, taking this time scale into account. Given the long time horizon modeled in the LCC analysis, the application of a marginal interest rate associated with an initial source of funds is inaccurate. Regardless of the method of purchase, consumers are expected to continue to rebalance their
debt and asset holdings over the LCC analysis period, based on the restrictions consumers face in their debt payment requirements and the relative size of the interest rates available on debts and assets. DOE estimates the aggregate impact of this rebalancing using the historical distribution of debts and assets.
To establish residential discount rates
for the LCC analysis, DOE identified all relevant household debt or asset classes in order to approximate a consumer’s opportunity cost of funds related to appliance energy cost savings. It estimated the average percentage shares of the various types of debt and equity by household income group using data from the Federal Reserve Board’s triennial Survey of Consumer Finances
87(‘‘SCF’’) starting in 1995 and
ending in 2019. Using the SCF and other sources, DOE developed a distribution of rates for each type of debt and asset by income group to represent the rates that may apply in the year in which amended standards would take effect. DOE assigned each sample household a specific discount rate drawn from one of the distributions. The average rate across all types of household debt and
equity and income groups, weighted by market share of each product class, is 4.2 percent. See chapter 8 of the final rule TSD for further details on the development of consumer discount rates.
To establish commercial discount
rates for the small fraction of consumer water heaters installed in commercial buildings, DOE estimated the weighted- average cost of capital using data from Damodaran Online.
88The weighted-
average cost of capital is commonly used to estimate the present value of cash flows to be derived from a typical company project or investment. Most companies use both debt and equity capital to fund investments, so their cost of capital is the weighted average of the cost to the firm of equity and debt financing. DOE estimated the cost of equity using the capital asset pricing model, which assumes that the cost of equity for a particular company is proportional to the systematic risk faced by that company. DOE’s commercial discount rate approach is based on the methodology described in a Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory report, and the distribution varies by business activity.
89The average rate for
consumer water heaters used in commercial applications in this final rule analysis, across all business activity and weighted by the market share of each product class, is 6.9 percent.
See chapter 8 of this final rule TSD for
further details on the development of consumer and commercial discount rates.
8. Energy Efficiency Distribution in the
No-New-Standards Case
To accurately estimate the share of
consumers that would be affected by a potential energy conservation standard
at a particular efficiency level, DOE’s LCC analysis considered the projected distribution (market shares) of product efficiencies under the no-new-standards case (i.e., the case without amended or
new energy conservation standards).
This approach reflects the fact that some consumers may purchase products with efficiencies greater than the baseline levels.
To estimate the energy efficiency
distribution of consumer water heaters for 2030, DOE used available shipments data by efficiency including in previous AHRI submitted historical shipment data,
90ENERGY STAR unit shipments
data,91and data from a 2023 BRG
Building Solutions report. 92To cover
gaps in the available shipments data,
DOE used DOE’s public CCD model database
93and AHRI certification
directory.94
The estimated market shares for the
no-new-standards case for consumer water heaters are shown in Table IV.26. See chapter 8 of the final rule TSD for further information on the derivation of the efficiency distributions.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637861 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
95Decision Analysts, 2019 American Home
Comfort Studies (Available at:
www.decisionanalyst.com/Syndicated/ HomeComfort/) (Last accessed January 5, 2024).
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
The LCC Monte Carlo simulations
draw from the efficiency distributions
and assign an efficiency to the water heater purchased by each sample household in the no-new-standards case according to these distributions.
Finally, DOE considered the 2019
AHCS survey,
95which includes
questions to recent purchasers of HVAC equipment regarding the perceived efficiency of their equipment (Standard, High, and Super High Efficiency), as well as questions related to various household and demographic characteristics. DOE did not find similar data for consumer water heaters, but believes that the HVAC data is relevant to other larger appliances such as consumer water heaters since they similarly represent large energy end uses. From these data, DOE found that households with larger square footage exhibited a higher fraction of High- or Super-High efficiency equipment installed. The fraction of respondents with ‘‘super high efficiency’’ equipment was larger by approximately 5 percent for larger households and correspondingly smaller for smaller households. DOE therefore used the AHCS data to adjust its water heater efficiency distributions as follows: (1) the market share of higher efficiency equipment for households under 1,500 sq. ft. was decreased by 5 percentage points; and (2) the market share of condensing equipment for households above 2,500 sq. ft. was increased by 5 percentage points.
DOE acknowledges that economic
factors may play a role when consumers, commercial building owners, or builders decide on what type of water heater to install. However, assignment of water heater efficiency for a given installation based solely on economic measures such as life-cycle cost or simple payback period most likely would not fully and accurately reflect actual real-world installations. There are a number of market failures discussed in the economics literature that illustrate how purchasing decisions with respect to energy efficiency are unlikely to be perfectly correlated with energy use, as described below. While this literature is not specific to water heaters, DOE finds that the method of assignment, which is in part random, simulates behavior in the water heater market, where market failures and other consumer preferences result in purchasing decisions not being perfectly aligned with economic interests, more realistically than relying only on apparent cost-effectiveness criteria derived from the limited information in CBECS or RECS. DOE further emphasizes that its approach does not assume that all purchasers of water
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.041</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.26 No-New-Standards Case Energy Efficiency Distributions in 2030 for
Consumer Water Heaters
Draw Pattern
Efficiency ,__ ____ L_ow ____ -----1 ____ M_e~d_i_u_m _________ H ..... i-h ____ __.
Level Market Market UEF* UEF* Share (% Share (% UEF*
Gas-Fired Stora e Water Heaters, 2:20 al and :555 al
0 0.54 52% 0.58 57% 0.63
1 0.57 25% 0.60 22% 0.64
2 0.59 4% 0.64 5% 0.68
3 0.60 19% 0.65 14% 0.69
4 0.71 0% 0.75 1% 0.80
5 0.77 0% 0.81 1% 0.88
0 0.64
1 0.66
2 0.68
s
Electric Sto aterHeat ,_
0 0.91 88% 0.92 88% 0.93
1 2.30 1% 2.30 1% 2.30
2 3.29 8% 3.35 7% 3.47
3 3.69 3% 3.75 4% 3.87
Electric Stora e Water Heaters, >55 al and :5120 al
0 2.05 4% 2.15
1 2.50 11% 2.50
2 3.35 75% 3.45
3 3.90 10% 4.00
* UEF at the representative rated capacity. Market
Share(%
56%
22%
5%
15%
1%
1%
67%
17% 17%
84%
1%
10%
5%
4%
12%
74%
11%
** 0.91 UEF at 30 gallon effective storage volume and 0.92 UEF at 35 gallon effective storage volume. 37862 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
96Ward, D.O., Clark, C.D., Jensen, K.L., Yen, S.T.,
& Russell, C.S. (2011): ‘‘Factors influencing
willingness-to pay for the ENERGY STAR®label,’’
Energy Policy, 39(3), 1450–1458. (Available at: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/ S0301421510009171) (Last accessed January 5, 2024).
97Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.R., and Balz, J.P.
(2014). ‘‘Choice Architecture’’ in The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy, Eldar Shafir (ed).
98Thaler, R.H., and Bernartzi, S. (2004). ‘‘Save
More Tomorrow: Using Behavioral Economics in Increase Employee Savings,’’ Journal of Political Economy 112(1), S164–S187. See also Klemick, H.,
et al. (2015) ‘‘Heavy-Duty Trucking and the Energy Efficiency Paradox: Evidence from Focus Groups and Interviews,’’ Transportation Research Part A: Policy & Practice, 77, 154–166. (providing evidence that loss aversion and other market failures can affect otherwise profit-maximizing firms).
99Thaler, R.H., and Sunstein, C.R. (2008). Nudge:
Improving Decisions on Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 100Davis, L.W., and G.E. Metcalf (2016): ‘‘Does
better information lead to better choices? Evidence from energy-efficiency labels,’’ Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 3(3), 589–625. (Available at:
www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/ 686252) (Last accessed January 5, 2024).
101Attari, S.Z., M.L. DeKay, C.I. Davidson, and W.
Bruine de Bruin (2010): ‘‘Public perceptions of energy consumption and savings.’’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(37), 16054– 16059 (Available at: www.pnas.org/content/107/37/ 16054) (Last accessed January 5, 2024).
102Houde, S. (2018): ‘‘How Consumers Respond
to Environmental Certification and the Value of Energy Information,’’ The RAND Journal of Economics, 49 (2), 453–477 (Available at: heaters make economically irrational
decisions (i.e., the lack of a correlation
is not the same as a negative correlation). As part of the random assignment, some homes or buildings with large hot water use will be assigned higher efficiency water heaters, and some homes or buildings with
particularly low hot water use will be assigned baseline water heaters. By using this approach, DOE acknowledges the variety of market failures and other consumer behaviors present in the water heater market, and does not assume certain market conditions unsupported by the available evidence.
First, consumers are motivated by
more than simple financial trade-offs. There are consumers who are willing to pay a premium for more energy-efficient products because they are environmentally conscious.
96There are
also several behavioral factors that can influence the purchasing decisions of complicated multi-attribute products, such as water heaters. For example, consumers (or decision makers in an organization) are highly influenced by choice architecture, defined as the framing of the decision, the surrounding circumstances of the purchase, the alternatives available, and how they’re presented for any given choice scenario.
97The same consumer or
decision maker may make different choices depending on the characteristics of the decision context (e.g., the timing
of the purchase, competing demands for funds), which have nothing to do with the characteristics of the alternatives themselves or their prices. Consumers or decision makers also face a variety of other behavioral phenomena including loss aversion, sensitivity to information salience, and other forms of bounded rationality.
98R.H. Thaler, who won the
Nobel Prize in Economics in 2017 for his contributions to behavioral economics, and Sunstein point out that these behavioral factors are strongest when the decisions are complex and infrequent, when feedback on the
decision is muted and slow, and when there is a high degree of information asymmetry.
99These characteristics
describe almost all purchasing situations of appliances and equipment, including water heaters. The installation of a new or replacement water heater is done infrequently, as evidenced by the mean lifetime for water heaters. Additionally, it would take at least one full water heating season for any impacts on operating costs to be fully apparent. Further, if the purchaser of the water heater is not the entity paying the energy costs (e.g., a building owner
and tenant), there may be little to no feedback on the purchase. Additionally, there are systematic market failures that are likely to contribute further
complexity to how products are chosen by consumers, as explained in the following paragraphs.
The first of these market failures—the
split-incentive or principal-agent problem—is likely to affect water heaters more than many other types of appliances. The principal-agent problem is a market failure that results when the consumer that purchases the equipment does not internalize all of the costs associated with operating the equipment. Instead, the user of the product, who has no control over the purchase decision, pays the operating costs. There is a high likelihood of split incentive problems in the case of rental properties where the landlord makes the choice of what water heater to install, whereas the renter is responsible for paying energy bills. In the LCC sample, a significant fraction of households with a water heater are renters. For example, for the medium electric storage water heaters LCC sample, nearly 30 percent of households are renters, whereas for the small electric storage water heater LCC sample, nearly 50 percent of households are renters. These fractions are significantly higher for low-income households (see section IV.I of this document and chapter 11 of the final rule TSD). The principle-agent problem can also impact homeowners. For example, in new construction, builders influence the type of water heater used in many homes but do not pay operating costs. Finally, contractors install a large share of water heaters in replacement situations, and they can exert a high degree of influence over the type of water heater purchased based on which products they are familiar with.
In addition to the split-incentive
problem, there are other market failures that are likely to affect the choice of
water heater efficiency made by consumers. For example, emergency replacements of essential equipment such as water heaters are strongly biased toward like-for-like replacement (i.e., replacing the non-functioning equipment with a similar or identical product). Time is a constraining factor during emergency replacements and it may not be possible to consider the full range of available options on the market. The consideration of alternative product options is far more likely for planned replacements and installations in new construction.
Additionally, Davis and Metcalf
100
conducted an experiment demonstrating that the nature of the information available to consumers from EnergyGuide labels posted on air conditioning equipment results in an inefficient allocation of energy efficiency across households with different usage levels. Their findings indicate that households are likely to make decisions regarding the efficiency of the climate control equipment of their homes that do not result in the highest net present value for their specific usage pattern (i.e., their decision is based on
imperfect information and, therefore, is not necessarily optimal).
In part because of the way
information is presented, and in part because of the way consumers process information, there is also a market failure consisting of a systematic bias in the perception of equipment energy usage, which can affect consumer choices. Attari, et al.
101show that
consumers tend to underestimate the energy use of large energy-intensive appliances but overestimate the energy use of small appliances. Water heaters are one of the largest energy-consuming end-uses in a home. Therefore, it is likely that consumers systematically underestimate the energy use associated
with water heater, resulting in less cost- effective water heater purchases.
These market failures may affect a
sizeable share of the consumer population. A study by Houde
102
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637863 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1756-
2171.12231) (Last accessed January 5, 2024).
103Houde, S. and Meyers, E. (2021). ‘‘Are
consumers attentive to local energy costs? Evidence from the appliance market,’’ Journal of Public Economics, 2011 (Available at: sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S004727272100116X) (Last accessed March 7, 2024).
104Vernon, D., and Meier, A. (2012).
‘‘Identification and quantification of principal— agent problems affecting energy efficiency investments and use decisions in the trucking industry,’’ Energy Policy, 49, 266–273.
105Blum, H. and Sathaye, J. (2010). ‘‘Quantitative
Analysis of the Principal-Agent Problem in Commercial Buildings in the U.S.: Focus on Central Space Heating and Cooling,’’ Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBNL–3557E. (Available at:
escholarship.org/uc/item/6p1525mg) (Last accessed January 5, 2024).
106Prindle, B., Sathaye, J., Murtishaw, S.,
Crossley, D., Watt, G., Hughes, J., and de Visser, E. (2007). ‘‘Quantifying the effects of market failures in the end-use of energy,’’ Final Draft Report Prepared for International Energy Agency. (Available from International Energy Agency, Head of Publications Service, 9 rue de la Federation, 75739 Paris, Cedex 15 France).
107Bushee, B.J. (1998). ‘‘The influence of
institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior,’’ Accounting Review, 305–333. DeCanio,
S.J. (1993). ‘‘Barriers Within Firms to Energy Efficient Investments,’’ Energy Policy, 21(9), 906– 914. (explaining the connection between short- termism and underinvestment in energy efficiency).
108International Energy Agency (IEA). (2007).
Mind the Gap: Quantifying Principal-Agent Problems in Energy Efficiency. OECD Pub. (Available at: www.iea.org/reports/mind-the-gap) (Last accessed January 5, 2024). 109DeCanio, S.J. (1994). ‘‘Agency and control
problems in US corporations: the case of energy-
efficient investment projects,’’ Journal of the Economics of Business, 1(1), 105–124.
Stole, L.A., and Zwiebel, J. (1996).
‘‘Organizational design and technology choice under intrafirm bargaining,’’ The American Economic Review, 195–222.
110Rohdin, P., and Thollander, P. (2006).
‘‘Barriers to and driving forces for energy efficiency in the non-energy intensive manufacturing industry in Sweden,’’ Energy, 31(12), 1836–1844.
Takahashi, M and Asano, H (2007). ‘‘Energy Use
Affected by Principal-Agent Problem in Japanese Commercial Office Space Leasing,’’ In Quantifying the Effects of Market Failures in the End-Use of Energy. American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy. February 2007.
Visser, E and Harmelink, M (2007). ‘‘The Case of
Energy Use in Commercial Offices in the Netherlands,’’ In Quantifying the Effects of Market Failures in the End-Use of Energy. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. February 2007.
Bjorndalen, J. and Bugge, J. (2007). ‘‘Market
Barriers Related to Commercial Office Space Leasing in Norway,’’ In Quantifying the Effects of Market Failures in the End-Use of Energy. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. February 2007.
Schleich, J. (2009). ‘‘Barriers to energy efficiency:
A comparison across the German commercial and services sector,’’ Ecological Economics, 68(7), 2150– 2159.
Muthulingam, S., et al. (2013). ‘‘Energy Efficiency
in Small and Medium-Sized Manufacturing Firms,’’ Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 15(4), 596–612. (Finding that manager inattention contributed to the non-adoption of energy efficiency initiatives).
Boyd, G.A., Curtis, E.M. (2014). ‘‘Evidence of an
‘energy management gap’ in US manufacturing:
Spillovers from firm management practices to energy efficiency,’’ Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 68(3), 463–479.
111Lovins, A. (1992). Energy-Efficient Buildings:
Institutional Barriers and Opportunities. (Available at: rmi.org/insight/energy-efficient-buildings-
institutional-barriers-and-opportunities/) (Last accessed January 5, 2024). indicates that there is a significant
subset of consumers that appear to purchase appliances without taking into account their energy efficiency and operating costs at all, though subsequent studies using alternative methodologies have highlighted other consumer groups who are to some extent responsive to local energy prices with their appliance purchases.
103The extent to which
consumers are perceptive of energy prices and product efficiency when making appliance purchasing decisions is a topic of ongoing research.
Although consumer water heaters are
predominantly installed in the residential sector, some are also installed in commercial buildings (less than 10 percent of projected shipments; see chapter 9 of the final rule TSD). There are market failures relevant to consumer water heaters installed in commercial applications as well. It is often assumed that because commercial and industrial customers are businesses that have trained or experienced individuals making decisions regarding investments in cost-saving measures, some of the commonly observed market failures present in the general population of residential customers should not be as prevalent in a commercial setting. However, there are many characteristics of organizational structure and historic circumstance in commercial settings that can lead to underinvestment in energy efficiency.
First, a recognized problem in
commercial settings is the principal- agent problem, where the building owner (or building developer) selects the equipment and the tenant (or subsequent building owner) pays for energy costs.
104 105 Indeed, more than a quarter of commercial buildings in the
CBECS 2018 sample are occupied at least in part by a tenant, not the building owner (indicating that, in DOE’s experience, the building owner in some cases is not responsible for paying energy costs). Additionally, some commercial buildings have multiple tenants. There are other similar misaligned incentives embedded in the organizational structure within a given firm or business that can impact the choice of a water heater. For example, if one department or individual within an organization is responsible for capital expenditures (and therefore equipment selection) while a separate department or individual is responsible for paying the energy bills, a market failure similar to the principal-agent problem can result.
106Additionally, managers may
have other responsibilities and often have other incentives besides operating cost minimization, such as satisfying shareholder expectations, which can sometimes be focused on short-term returns.
107Decision-making related to
commercial buildings is highly complex and involves gathering information from and for a variety of different market actors. It is common to see conflicting goals across various actors within the same organization as well as information asymmetries between market actors in the energy efficiency context in commercial building construction.
108
Second, the nature of the
organizational structure and design can influence priorities for capital budgeting, resulting in choices that do
not necessarily maximize profitability.
109Even factors as simple
as unmotivated staff or lack of priority-
setting and/or a lack of a long-term energy strategy can have a sizable effect on the likelihood that an energy efficient investment will be undertaken.
110U.S. tax rules for
commercial buildings may incentivize
lower capital expenditures, since capital costs must be depreciated over many years, whereas operating costs can be fully deducted from taxable income or passed through directly to building tenants.
111
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637864 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
113Mills, E., Kromer, S., Weiss, G., and Mathew,
P. A. (2006). ‘‘From volatility to value: analysing
and managing financial and performance risk in energy savings projects,’’ Energy Policy, 34(2), 188– 199.
Jollands, N., Waide, P., Ellis, M., Onoda, T.,
Laustsen, J., Tanaka, K., and Meier, A. (2010). ‘‘The 25 IEA energy efficiency policy recommendations to the G8 Gleneagles Plan of Action,’’ Energy Policy,
38(11), 6409–6418.
114Reed, J.H., Johnson, K., Riggert, J., and Oh, A.
D. (2004). ‘‘Who plays and who decides: The structure and operation of the commercial building market,’’ U.S. Department of Energy Office of Building Technology, State and Community Programs. (Available at: www1.eere.energy.gov/ buildings/publications/pdfs/commercial_ initiative/
who_ plays_ who_ decides.pdf) (Last accessed January
5, 2024).
115Cooremans, C. (2012). ‘‘Investment in energy
efficiency: do the characteristics of investments matter?’’ Energy Efficiency, 5(4), 497–518.
116Lovins 1992, op. cit. The Atmospheric Fund.
(2017). Money on the table: Why investors miss out on the energy efficiency market. (Available at:
taf.ca/publications/money-table-investors-energy- efficiency-market/) (Last accessed January 5, 2024). 117Blumstein, C. and Taylor, M. (2013).
Rethinking the Energy-Efficiency Gap: Producers,
Intermediaries, and Innovation. Energy Institute at Haas Working Paper 243. (Available at: haas.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/WP243.pdf) (Last accessed January 5, 2024).
118A hurdle rate is the minimum rate of return
on a project or investment required by an organization or investor. It is determined by assessing capital costs, operating costs, and an estimate of risks and opportunities.
119DeCanio 1994, op. cit.
120DeCanio, S.J. (1998). ‘‘The Efficiency Paradox:
Bureaucratic and Organizational Barriers to Profitable Energy-Saving Investments,’’ Energy Policy, 26(5), 441–454.
121Andersen, S.T., and Newell, R.G. (2004).
‘‘Information programs for technology adoption: the case of energy-efficiency audits,’’ Resource and Energy Economics, 26, 27–50. 122Prindle 2007, op. cit. Howarth, R.B., Haddad,
B.M., and Paton, B. (2000). ‘‘The economics of
energy efficiency: insights from voluntary participation programs,’’ Energy Policy, 28, 477– 486.
123Klemick, H., Kopits, E., Wolverton, A. (2017).
‘‘Potential Barriers to Improving Energy Efficiency in Commercial Buildings: The Case of Supermarket Refrigeration,’’ Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis,
8(1), 115–145.
124de Almeida, E.L.F. (1998). ‘‘Energy efficiency
and the limits of market forces: The example of the electric motor market in France’’, Energy Policy, 26(8), 643–653. Xenergy, Inc. (1998). United States Industrial Electric Motor Systems Market Opportunity Assessment. (Available at: www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2014/04/f15/ mtrmkt.pdf) (Last accessed January 5, 2024). Third, there are asymmetric
information and other potential market
failures in financial markets in general, which can affect decisions by firms with regard to their choice among alternative investment options, with energy efficiency being one such option.
112
Asymmetric information in financial markets is particularly pronounced with regard to energy efficiency investments.
113There is a dearth of
information about risk and volatility related to energy efficiency investments, and energy efficiency investment metrics may not be as visible to investment managers,
114which can bias
firms towards more certain or familiar options. This market failure results not because the returns from energy efficiency as an investment are inherently riskier, but because information about the risk itself tends not to be available in the same way it is for other types of investment, like stocks or bonds. In some cases energy efficiency is not a formal investment category used by financial managers, and if there is a formal category for energy efficiency within the investment portfolio options assessed by financial managers, they are seen as weakly strategic and not seen as likely to increase competitive advantage.
115This
information asymmetry extends to commercial investors, lenders, and real- estate financing, which is biased against new and perhaps unfamiliar technology (even though it may be economically beneficial).
116Another market failure
known as the first-mover disadvantage can exacerbate this bias against adopting new technologies, as the successful integration of new technology in a particular context by one actor generates information about cost-savings, and other actors in the market can then benefit from that information by
following suit; yet because the first to adopt a new technology bears the risk but cannot keep to themselves all the informational benefits, firms may inefficiently underinvest in new technologies.
117
In sum, the commercial and industrial
sectors face many market failures that can result in an under-investment in energy efficiency. This means that discount rates implied by hurdle rates
118and required payback periods
of many firms are higher than the appropriate cost of capital for the investment.
119The preceding arguments
for the existence of market failures in the commercial and industrial sectors are corroborated by empirical evidence. One study in particular showed evidence of substantial gains in energy efficiency that could have been achieved without negative repercussions on profitability, but the investments had not been undertaken by firms.
120The study found that multiple
organizational and institutional factors caused firms to require shorter payback periods and higher returns than the cost of capital for alternative investments of similar risk. Another study demonstrated similar results with firms requiring very short payback periods of 1–2 years in order to adopt energy- saving projects, implying hurdle rates of 50 to 100 percent, despite the potential economic benefits.
121A number of other
case studies similarly demonstrate the existence of market failures preventing the adoption of energy-efficient technologies in a variety of commercial sectors around the world, including office buildings,
122supermarkets,123
and the electric motor market.124
The existence of market failures in the
residential and commercial sectors is
well supported by the economics literature and by a number of case studies. Although these studies are not specifically targeted to the water heater market, they cover decision-making generally and the impact of energy efficiency, operating costs, and future savings/expenditures on those decisions, all of which apply to the purchase of a consumer water heater. DOE is not aware of any market failure studies specifically and narrowly focused on water heaters and so relies on the available literature discussed above. If DOE developed an efficiency distribution that assigned water heater efficiency in the no-new-standards case solely according to energy use or economic considerations such as life- cycle cost or payback period, the resulting distribution of efficiencies within the building sample would not reflect any of the market failures or behavioral factors above. DOE thus concludes such a distribution would not be representative of the water heater market.
DOE further notes that, in the case of
gas-fired storage, oil-fired storage, and electric storage water heaters (≤55 gal), the distribution of efficiency in the current market is heavily weighted toward baseline efficiency or efficiency at EL 1. Accordingly, in the no new- standards case, most consumers are assigned EL 0 or EL 1 in accordance with the market data. As a result, any variation to DOE’s efficiency assignment
methodology will not produce substantially differing results than presented in this final rule, as most consumers will continue to be assigned the same efficiency regardless of the details of the methodology. In other words, as most consumers in the storage water heater market are choosing baseline or near-baseline efficiency products, there would be no significant difference between a random
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637865 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
assignment of those efficiency levels to
consumers as to another type of assignment methodology such as one that tried to consider consumer rationality more explicitly—in either case nearly every individual consumer would be assigned a baseline or near- baseline efficiency product. This may be in contrast to a product with a broad distribution of efficiency levels purchased in the market, where changing the assignment methodology could more significantly impact the assignment of an efficiency level to individual consumers and therefore impact the results.
Gas Association Commenters and
Atmos Energy argued that random assignment methodology is unreasonable because it overstates standards-compliant outcomes in the base case by capturing decisions that consumers would naturally choose on their own for economically beneficial reasons and it understates outcomes in the rule case by disproportionately including unattractive economic outcomes. Gas Association Commenters argued that consumer economic preference is not accounted for in random assignments, and argued that consumer choice models, which were used for fuel switching scenarios in gas furnaces, should be used in water heaters. Gas Association Commenters argued that random assignment creates extreme examples of economic benefits and consequences that heavily skew averages and are the least realistic outcomes as they would be the most obvious economic consumer choice. Gas Association Commenters argued that DOE has cases in their analysis where a standards-compliant product is the cheapest option but because of random assignment, a less-efficient, more expensive option is initially assigned, skewing benefits for rule scenarios. In its comment, Gas Association Commenters proposed alternatives to random assignment. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 10 and pp. 11–23; Atmos Energy, No. 1183 at pp. 6–7) Rinnai argued that DOE has not yet addressed the central criticism of the random assignment of base case efficiencies which is that DOE has not justified through either correlation or causation of random assignment to the alleged market failures it represents. Rinnai argued that there are many better alternate approaches to solving market failures beyond appliance standards. Rinnai argued that base case random assignment implies that consumers only make rational economic decisions in rulemaking scenarios. Rinnai argued many of the same points made in other comments already mentioned in this document; namely: consumers in base case choosing worse efficiency products even when doing so is more expensive; highly favorable economic outcomes that skew results; base case irrationality versus rulemaking case rational economic decision making. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at pp. 31–33)
ONE Gas argued that in its comments
that past issues of random assignment of consumers to appliance purchase decisions in the base case life cycle cost analysis has been an enduringly contentious issue with the Department’s TSD approach, and the Department appears to have not undertaken measures to address stakeholder concerns of that kind. ONE Gas noted that more detailed review of this issue by industry stakeholders is ongoing. ONE Gas argued that the Department has never presented analysis that justifies linkages between market failure and random purchase behavior and no evidence is provided in the Preliminary Analysis TSD document that the Department has included additional consideration of NASEM peer review recommendation that calls on the Department to improve its coverage of market failure in relation to the setting of appliance minimum efficiency standards. ONE Gas proposed to the Department that it use alternative means of defining consumer base case efficiencies based upon one of two of the following base case definition strategies for consumer simulations: correlated consumer attributes approach or rational consumer economic choice approach. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at pp. 11–12) NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai noted that DOE’s response to comments on its failing to address consumer choice and to account for consumers making choices based on rational economic terms in the July 2023 NOPR is arbitrary, capricious, and without foundation. NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai commented that instead of referencing actual interviews or studies, DOE pivoted to a ‘‘cherry-picked’’ library of behavioral economics papers that have no bearing or relevance to water heaters or the proposed rule. (NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, No. 441 at p. 4) AHRI recommended that DOE provide a theory of market performance tailored to the specific situation for each and every rulemaking. AHRI commented that DOE should build an analytical approach that reflects some degree of market efficiency, rather than assuming complete market efficiency. AHRI acknowledges that this may necessitate a rethinking of the Monte Carlo method and the assignment of base and standard
case efficiencies. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 17) AHRI highlighted that AHRI demonstrated there are ways to use the current Monte Carlo approach to generate results and then use alternative ranking systems to assign base and standards case efficiencies. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 18) AHRI commented that DOE misunderstands the role of plumbing contractors in the decision process and DOE implies that the influence of plumbing contractors on water heater type purchased in the replacement scenario is a form of market failure. AHRI claimed this is incorrect as contractors serve as the information mediators to overcome one of the key sources of possible market failure identified by DOE—the absence of knowledge from consumers who rarely
purchase water heaters. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 18) AHRI posed the following questions for DOE related to market failure: ‘‘Why has DOE not adopted the National Academies of Sciences (NAS) peer review recommendations and when will it do so? On what basis has DOE determined that there are significant market failures for residential water heaters, how prevalent are these failures and do standards address them? How will DOE modify its random assignment approach to be more responsive to actual market conditions? ’’ (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 18) Gas Association Commenters argued the tab ‘‘No-New Standards Case UEF’’ of the analysis tool incorrectly states an equation (relative to the coded version) for how square footage of residences impacts likelihood of efficiency of products. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 35) Gas Association Commenters argued that adjustment factors used based on square footage do not make sense for this analysis and instead size of household should be used. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 35) Gas Association Commenters argued that estimated fractions of shipments by market shares do not exactly match the stated distributions (see specifics in comment). (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 35) ONE Gas commented that, unlike many other products covered by EPCA, consumers rarely have opportunity to consider other water heating options when hot water is unavailable in a residence, a premium exists to restore service, especially since water heater failure is rarely anticipated by an average consumer; when time or other circumstances allow, the consumer is likely to make a rational consumer choice based, first and foremost, on minimizing installed cost;
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637866 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
life cycle cost considerations and other
factors play a role in decision making, provided comparative installed costs are available to the consumer. (ONE Gas, No. 1200 at p. 5)
In response, DOE notes that even for
consumers who are motivated and informed, the choice of product efficiency that perfectly minimizes life- cycle cost is highly nuanced and requires access to many sources of information. To make a decision that maximizes benefits for any given consumer, that consumer would need to consider information including utility bills for at least a year (and have the ability to disaggregate the portion of the utility bill specific to the water heater), the expected lifetime of the product, knowledge of equipment and installation costs up front, knowledge of each potential product’s efficiency and performance in the field, future repair and maintenance costs, the value of future operating savings and costs in the present year, etc. This is a time-
consuming and nontrivial calculation for even the most motivated consumer and requires significant data collection to make even a decent approximation. While there is some information easily available to the consumer prior to making a purchase (e.g., labels,
technical specifications, price estimates, etc.), this information typically assumes an average household. Therefore, for a consumer wishing to make an informed decision that results in minimization of life-cycle costs in the no-new-standards case based on such a label, it would require knowing how their own situation differs from an average national household (e.g., hot water
usage, energy price, ambient indoor air temperature, inlet water temperature, etc.). This evaluation is very complex. These challenges are part of the reason why consumer perception of energy consumption of appliances is varied and the extent to which consumers choose product efficiency based on this perceived energy consumption is mixed, as discussed in some of the literature cited above. There is empirical evidence that, on average, consumers’ perceived energy consumption of household appliances and equipment does not match the actual energy consumption.
Acknowledging this consumer
behavior, PHCC commented that in the case of replacement due to a failed water heater, many consumers will prioritize a water heater that is readily available within their price range and will not consider energy efficiency in their decision. They further comment that most consumers never even look at the energy label, they just want hot water at the lowest cost. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 6)
As stated above, the use of a random
assignment of water heater efficiency in the no-new-standards case of LCC model is a methodological approach that reflects the full range of consumer behaviors in this market, including consumers who make informed and economically beneficial decisions and other consumers who, due to the market failures discussed, do not or cannot make such perfectly economically beneficial decisions. The methodology is further constrained by shipments data by efficiency level; it must produce an overall distribution that matches the available data. In the simplest case, where baseline market shares are split between one lower efficiency level and one higher efficiency level, DOE’s methodology results in the following groups of consumers:
(1) Consumers who, in the absence of
standards, choose a lower efficiency product
with a lower life-cycle cost based on their surveyed hot water usage. These consumers are making an optimal choice from the perspective of cost savings in the model in the no-new-standards case. With amended standards, they are made to purchase a more efficient product and therefore experience a net cost in the standards case. The efficiency assignment model is already assigning minimal-cost choices to this fraction of
consumers in the no-new-standards case.
(2) Consumers who, in the absence of
standards, choose a higher efficiency product that also lowers their life-cycle cost compared to the baseline efficiency product. These consumers are making a cost- minimizing choice in the model in the no- new-standards case. With amended standards, these consumers are not impacted because they are already purchasing a standards-compliant product. The efficiency assignment model is already assigning minimal-cost choices to this fraction of consumers in the no-new-standards case.
(3) Consumers who, in the absence of
standards, choose a lower efficiency product that does not minimize their life-cycle cost. The market failures discussed above apply to these consumers, preventing them from making the choice that minimizes their costs in the no-new-standards case. With amended standards, they are made to purchase a more efficient product that ultimately results in a lower life-cycle cost. These consumers experience a net benefit as a result of the standard.
(4) Consumers who, in the absence of
standards, choose a higher efficiency product that does not lower their life-cycle cost compared to the baseline or lower efficiency product. Although these consumers are choosing a higher efficiency product in the no-new-standards case, they may have incomplete knowledge of the energy consumption of the equipment or may value environmental features such as efficiency more heavily, resulting in a choice of a higher efficiency product that does not lower life-cycle cost compared to a baseline or
lower efficiency product. With amended standards, these consumers are not impacted because they are already purchasing a standards-compliant product.
DOE’s methodological approach is a
proxy that ultimately reflects a diversity of scenarios for consumers and therefore the range of outcomes that will result from this diversity. The approach already reflects market share outcomes consistent with some degree of market efficiency and optimal decision-making among some consumers, but the approach also acknowledges a number of factors that hinder perfect decision- making for others. Furthermore, the model produces an overall distribution of efficiency that matches the available shipments data.
Although DOE’s random assignment
methodology does not explicitly model consumer decision making, nor does it take a stance on the rationality or irrationality of specific consumers, DOE believes that the approach would be consistent with a model in which some share of consumers make economically optimal decisions, and some consumers—in the face of market failures—do not. The use of a random assignment of water heater efficiency is a methodological approach that reflects the full range of consumer behaviors in this market, including consumers who make economically beneficial decisions and consumers who, due to market failures, do not or cannot make such economically beneficial decisions, both of which occur in reality. Within those constraints, DOE then assigns product efficiencies to consumers in the LCC, consistent with the economics literature discussed above, to reflect neither purely rational nor purely irrational
decision-making.
DOE’s analytical approach reflects
some degree of market efficiency. An alternative approach which assumes consumer behavior is based solely on cost outcomes, for example by ranking LCCs and using those to assign efficiencies as suggested by the commenters, is not evidenced by the scientific literature surveyed above or by any data submitted in the course of this rulemaking. Such an approach would depend on the assumption, for example, that homeowners know—as a rule—the efficiency of their homes’ water heater and water heating energy use, such that they always make water heating investments accordingly. Similarly, such an approach would assume that, faced with a water heater failure, homeowners will always select as a replacement the most economically beneficial available model. Given the work documenting market failures in
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637867 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
energy efficiency contexts described
above, DOE believes that such assumptions would bias the outcome of the analysis to the least favorable results. DOE’s approach, by contrast, recognizes that assumptions like these hold for some consumers some of the time—but not all consumers and not at all times.
As part of the random assignment,
some households or buildings with large water heating loads will be assigned higher-efficiency water heaters in the no-new-standards case, and some households or buildings with particularly low water heating loads will be assigned baseline water heaters—i.e., the lowest cost
investments.
DOE ran a sensitivity to look at the
base-case shipment distribution in 2030 that would be expected if every consumer made their purchasing decision based on minimizing their life- cycle costs to understand how this compares to actual consumer purchases based on the data on shipments by efficiency. If every consumer in the LCC sample chose a product that minimized their total life-cycle cost (i.e., perfectly
rational, cost-minimizing consumers), the resulting distribution of products by efficiency would deviate significantly from the actual efficiency distribution, as determined from market share data and shipments data by efficiency. For example, for medium ESWHs, the baseline efficiency (EL 0, representing an electric resistance water heater) results in a minimum life-cycle cost for only 36 percent of all consumers in the LCC analysis, while higher efficiency heat pump water heaters (ELs 1, 2, and 3) result in a minimum life-cycle cost for the remaining 64 percent of consumers. Therefore, in a scenario in which all consumers made cost- minimizing choices, one would expect the efficiency distribution of new shipments in 2030, without any amended standards, to be 36 percent electric resistance medium ESWHs and 64 percent heat pump medium ESWHs (at various efficiencies). However, the projected efficiency distribution in 2030, based on existing market share and actual shipments data (and even accounting for the recent growth trend of heat pump water heaters), is that only 12 percent of the market will be heat pump water heaters despite the fact that these water heaters would result in lower total life-cycle costs for 64 percent of consumers, i.e., at least half of
consumers will be selecting a water heater that does not minimize their costs. This significant discrepancy
suggests the presence of the market failures discussed previously in the medium ESWH market, which prevents
a significant portion of consumers from making purchasing decisions that would minimize their life-cycle costs.
Regarding the role of contractors, DOE
notes that they can exert a high degree of influence over the type of water heater purchased. DOE acknowledges that they can serve as an information mediator. However, it is possible for a contractor to also influence the decision toward a familiar like-for-like replacement, for example, or perhaps the quickest replacement option available (e.g., based on equipment
availability). An individual contractor may not be familiar with every product option available on the market. Ultimately, there are multiple actors involved in the decision-making process which results in complex purchasing behavior.
As DOE has noted, there is a complex
set of behavioral factors, with sometimes opposing effects, affecting the water heater market. It is impractical to model every consumer decision incorporating all of these effects at this extreme level of granularity given the limited available data. Given these myriad factors, DOE estimates the resulting distribution of such a model would be very scattered with high variability. It is for this reason DOE utilizes a random distribution (after accounting for market share constraints) to approximate these effects. This is the standard methodological approach used on all of DOE’s prior rules. The methodology is not an assertion of economic irrationality, but instead, it is a methodological approximation of complex consumer behavior. The analysis is neither necessarily biased toward high or low energy savings. The methodology does not preferentially assign lower-efficiency water heaters to households in the no-new-standards case where savings from the rule would be greatest, nor does it preferentially assign lower-efficiency water heaters to households in the no-new-standards case where savings from the rule would be smallest. However, it is worth noting that energy use could be improperly estimated if preferences for energy efficiency are correlated with demand for hot water. Some consumers were assigned the water heaters that they would have chosen if they had engaged in the kind of perfect economic thinking upon which the commenters have focused. Others were assigned less- efficient water heaters even where a more-efficient water heater would eventually result in life-cycle savings, simulating scenarios where, for
example, various market failures prevent consumers from realizing those savings. Still others were assigned water
heaters that were more efficient than one would expect simply from life-cycle costs analysis, reflecting, say, ‘‘green’’ behavior, whereby consumers ascribe independent value to minimizing harm to the environment.
DOE cites the available economic
literature of which it is aware on this subject, supporting the existence of the various market failures in other appliance markets which would give rise to such a distribution, and has requested more data or studies on this topic in the May 2020 RFI, March 2022 preliminary analysis, and July 2023 NOPR. DOE is not aware of any specific study regarding how consumer water heaters (and their efficiency) are purchased.
In summary, DOE’s efficiency
assignment methodology produces overall results that are consistent with the observed distribution of efficiency across products as seen in the shipments data. The methodology also results in a share of consumers being assigned product efficiencies that minimize their lifetime costs in the absence of standards. This represents consumers making informed decisions regarding the efficiency of their products, without amended standards. These consumers will be negatively impacted by the adopted standard levels and the analysis accounts for these impacts. However, the methodology also acknowledges that some consumers are unable to minimize the life-cycle costs of their products for a variety of reasons discussed in the economics literature (e.g., renters with no say in the products
purchased for their household). Even for motivated and informed consumers, the information and data required to ultimately make the best product choice that minimizes life-cycle cost is complex and time-consuming. As a result, there are a subset of consumers for whom adopting more stringent standard levels will result in life-cycle savings. In contrast to some commenters’ characterization, DOE’s methodology already reflects some degree of market efficiency in terms of consumer choice of product efficiency, but it also reflects a variety of observed effects that inhibit perfect market efficiency. This is representative of the
water heater market. On the whole, when accounting for both consumers negatively impacted by, as well as those benefiting from, amended standards, DOE’s analysis demonstrates that there are economically justified savings.
Finally, DOE notes that the
recommendations of the NAS report, which pertain to the processes by which DOE analyzes energy conservation
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637868 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
125For example, see: www.homeadvisor.com/
cost/electrical/upgrade-an-electrical-panel/
#upgrade (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023). standards, will be addressed as part of
a separate notice-and-comment process.
9. Payback Period Analysis
The payback period is the amount of
time (expressed in years) it takes the
consumer to recover the additional installed cost of more-efficient products, compared to baseline products, through energy cost savings. Payback periods that exceed the life of the product mean that the increased total installed cost is not recovered in reduced operating expenses.
The inputs to the PBP calculation for
each efficiency level are the change in total installed cost of the product and the change in the first-year annual operating expenditures relative to the baseline. DOE refers to this as a ‘‘simple PBP’’ because it does not consider changes over time in operating cost savings. The PBP calculation uses the same inputs as the LCC analysis when deriving first-year operating costs.
As noted previously, EPCA
establishes a rebuttable presumption that a standard is economically justified if the Secretary finds that the additional cost to the consumer of purchasing a product complying with an energy conservation standard level will be less than three times the value of the first year’s energy savings resulting from the standard, as calculated under the applicable test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) For each considered efficiency level, DOE determined the value of the first year’s energy savings by calculating the energy savings in accordance with the applicable DOE test procedure, and multiplying those
savings by the average energy price projection for the year in which compliance with the amended standards would be required.
Armada noted that the EPCA creates
a rebuttable presumption that an energy conservation standard is economically justified if the additional cost is less than three times the value of the first year’s energy savings, but the initial costs to switch from an electric resistance storage water heater to one with heat pump technology is greater than a three-year payback period, and that assumes the consumer’s home can accommodate a heat pump water heater. (Armada, No. 1193 at pp. 5–6) In response, DOE notes that the rebuttable presumption provision is not a requirement that the average PBP of a standard must be less than three years. Rather, it establishes a presumption that a standard meeting that criteria is economically justified, which is then evaluated further using the other criteria used to evaluate economic justification. Whether the presumption is or is not met, a determination of economic
justification must be based on the criteria specified by EPCA, as is the case for this final rule.
10. Accounting for Product Switching
For the preliminary analysis, DOE did
not account for the product switching
under potential standards. For the July 2023 NOPR and this final rule, DOE maintained the same approach and did not include any product switching in its analysis, other than consumers potentially downsizing their electric storage water heater to a small electric water heater, as discussed in more detail in section IV.G.1 of this document. DOE assumes that any product switching as a result of the proposed standards is likely to be minimal.
As discussed in the specific examples
below, the costs to switch to another product class are higher than simply purchasing a standards-compliant product in the same product class. When faced with the need to replace a water heater, a consumer can either install a standards-compliant product of the same product class as they originally had, or spend even more to switch to an alternative product class. Because of this higher cost to switch, DOE concludes it is extremely unlikely that consumers would choose to spend more to switch product classes specifically in response to amended standards. In the absence of amended standards, some consumers choose to switch for reasons other than simply cost, and that is reflected in historical market trends that are incorporated into the analysis. However, for the purposes of the analysis, the issue is whether more consumers would switch due to the higher incremental costs of standards- compliant products. DOE concludes that this is very unlikely and therefore market trends will be unaffected.
In the hypothetical case of a consumer
switching from a gas-fired storage water
heater to an electric water heater (storage or instantaneous), there are likely additional installation costs necessary to add an electrical connection since both of these types of electric water heaters require high wattage. These are costs above and beyond the normal installation costs included in the LCC analysis. In some cases, it may be possible to install a 120- volt heat pump storage water heater with minimal additional installation costs, particularly if there is a standard electrical outlet nearby already. In most cases, however, a standard 240-volt electrical storage water heater would be installed. To do so, the consumer would need to add a 240-volt circuit to either an existing electrical panel or upgrade the entire panel if there is insufficient
room for the additional amperage. The installation of a new 240-volt circuit by a qualified electrician will be at least several hundred dollars. Panel upgrade costs are significant and can be approximately $750—$2,000 to upgrade to a 200-amp electrical panel.
125Older
homes and homes with gas-fired space heating (e.g., homes with gas furnaces)
are more likely to need an electrical panel upgrade in order to install an electric storage water heater, given the relatively modest electrical needs of the home at the time of construction. Given the significant additional installation costs for nearly all homes potentially switching to an electric water heater, DOE estimates that very few consumers would switch from gas-fired storage water heaters to electric water heaters as a result of an energy conservation standard, especially at the proposed standard at TSL 2. At TSL 2, the average total installed cost of an electric storage water heater is $1,855 compared to the average total installed cost of $1,578 for a gas-fired storage water heater (see
section V.B.1 of this document). Further, these costs do not include the electrical upgrade costs necessary when switching from a gas-fired to an electric water heater. When including those costs, the average total installed cost to switch to an electric water heater is significantly higher than the standards- compliant gas-fired storage water heater (electric instantaneous water heaters were not analyzed in this rule, however the electrical panel upgrade cost alone is nearly as much as a standards- compliant gas-fired storage water heater). Switching from a gas-fired to an electrical water heater is especially unlikely in the case of an emergency replacement where time is a critical factor. When a water heater fails, consumers typically have limited time to make a decision on which new water heater the consumer is going to choose to purchase and rely upon replacing the water heater with one that is similar to the one that failed. Consumers are unlikely to invest in switching fuels to a water heater that utilizes a different fuel source in the emergency replacement scenario.
In the hypothetical case of a consumer
switching from an electric storage water heater to a gas-fired water heater, there are, similarly, additional installation costs necessary to add a gas connection. Based on RECS 2020, DOE estimates that only 25 percent of homes with an electric storage water heater currently
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637869 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
126For example, see: www.homeadvisor.com/
cost/plumbing/install-or-repair-gas-pipes/ (last
accessed March 8, 2024). 127Ravnitsky incorrectly asserted that the
proposed standards would require a minimum UEF
of 0.96 for gas-fired water heaters, 0.95 for electric resistance water heaters, and 0.85 for heat pump water heaters. use natural gas and an additional 25
percent reported that natural gas is available in the neighborhood. Therefore, the option to switch to a gas- fired water heater is not available to half of consumers and for another 25 percent, it would require bringing in a natural gas connection from the street level to the home. Additionally, switching to a gas-fired water heater would require the installation of new gas plumbing in the home, even if the home currently uses natural gas, which would add several hundreds of dollars to the installation costs.
126An
additional 10 percent of homes use LPG, but the fuel costs are much more expensive than natural gas and requires significant gas line connection upgrades to connect the LPG tank to the water heater. Even in homes with an existing gas connection, new venting would need to be installed for either gas-fired storage water heaters or gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. Installing new venting represents a significant additional cost when switching from an electric water heater to a gas fired
heater. The LCC averages presented in V.B.1 of this document for the gas-fired water heaters include some situations where vent replacement is not necessary, and none of the replacement situations require adding gas lines, therefore typical installation costs for switching from an electric water heater to a gas-fired water heater would be higher than the averages presented in section V.B.1 of this document. Therefore, the total installed costs for either gas-fired option, including all the necessary venting and additional gas lines in the home, are larger than replacing the electrical storage water heater with a standards-compliant model (at the proposed level). As a result, DOE estimates that very few consumers would switch from electric storage water heaters to gas-fired water heaters as a result of an energy conservation standard, particularly in the case of an emergency replacement.
Even if some consumers of medium
ESWHs elected to switch to a non- electric water heater (e.g., a GSWH),
despite the additional costs of doing so and instead of simply purchasing a standards-compliant medium ESWH, the rule would still save a significant amount of energy. These consumers would still need to purchase a standards-compliant GSWH. Such switching from medium ESWHs to GSWHs or GIWHs would result in a slight increase in FFC energy consumption for these consumers,
however that is more than made up for by the rest of the savings from medium ESWH consumers, even after accounting for consumers switching to small ESWHs. The energy savings for the rest of the medium ESWHs are at least an order of magnitude larger than any incremental increase in energy consumption from a small subset of consumers who might switch to GSWHs or GIWHs. Under the assumption that all such consumers who switch to gas- fired water heaters face an increase in cost, the total percentage of existing medium ESWH consumers experiencing a net cost as a result of the rule would therefore increase by a proportional amount. For example, even if 10 percent of medium ESWH consumers elected to switch to gas-fired water heaters despite the costs, the percentage of consumers experiencing a net cost would increase by at most 10 percent and the average LCC savings for medium ESWH consumers would still be positive, which would not change DOE’s conclusion that the standards adopted are economically justified.
Lastly, in the hypothetical case of a
consumer switching from a GSWH to a GIWH, there are additional installation costs necessary as well. The vast majority of GSWHs utilize non- condensing technology that utilizes Category I type B metal vent material, whereas switching to GIWHs would require Category III or Category IV venting material. Regarding non- condensing GIWHs, A.O. Smith noted that these utilize Category III venting (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 15). Condensing GIWHs require Category IV venting. Switching from a GSWH to a GIWH would therefore require replacing the venting in either case. Replacing the venting system would result in significant installation costs. Additionally, given the significantly higher Btu/h input required for instantaneous water heaters, it may be necessary to upgrade the gas line feeding the water heater to a larger diameter when switching from GSWH to GIWH. This is especially true if the line also services a gas furnace. Upgrading a gas line could add several hundred dollars in extra costs or more. As a result of all the cost considerations above, DOE estimates that very few consumers would switch from GSWHs to GIWHs specifically as a result of the incremental costs of the amended energy conservation standard for GSWH, particularly in the case of an emergency replacement.
Ravnitzky expressed concern that the
proposed standards favor heat pump
water heaters over gas-fired or electric resistance water heaters. Ravnitzky
claimed that the proposed standards would result in non-heat pump water heaters becoming more expensive and less competitive in the market and may force some consumers to switch to heat pump water heaters.
127(Ravnitzky, No.
73 at p. 1)
In response, given the upfront cost
differential for heat pump electric storage water heaters and gas-fired water storage heaters, DOE does not expect that the adopted standards would induce consumers to switch to heat pump water heaters. In addition, DOE notes that gas-fired storage water heaters are not being eliminated as a result of the standards being established in this final rule.
According to NPGA, APGA, AGA, and
Rinnai, DOE made an assumption about product switching, then reinforced its assumption without analysis, ignoring the possibility that consumers may want to switch product classes based on the proposed rule, but product classes may not be available for such switching, and based on this assumption, DOE conveniently omitted any installation costs in its LCC and PBP analysis, showing its market analysis is inherently flawed and must be reevaluated. (NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, No. 441 at p. 4–5) DOE notes that its assessment is based on the comparison of total installed costs needed to switch from product class to product class. In response, DOE determined that there would be minimal switching due to the additional installation cost for a variety of possible scenarios, as discussed above. Specifically in the case of switching from a GSWH to a GIWH, these costs include upgrading gas lines and replacing the venting. Like-for-like replacement for the water heater product classes considered in this rulemaking, as DOE determined and summarized in the installation cost analysis, is the most cost efficient. DOE does not reject the idea that consumers may choose a different product class in response to the no new standards case for reasons other than just total costs. Indeed, the shipments projection accounts for recent market trends that show growing consumer demand for GIWHs compared to GSWHs.
NMHC and NAA stated that DOE’s
assumption of minimal product switching as a result of the proposed standard fails to account for forced product switching driven by typical
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637870 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
space limitations in existing multifamily
dwellings where frequently the water heater shares a small closet with stacked laundry facilities and owners will be forced to switch to instantaneous water heaters with additional installation costs associated with venting, larger- sized gas supply piping, or electrical panel upsizing. (NMHC and NAA, No. 996 at p. 5) In response, DOE notes that existing market trends are incorporated into the shipments analysis and projection. To the extent that some product classes are becoming more prevalent in certain types of buildings, that is reflected in the no-new-standards case shipments projection. The most commonly used electric water heater for the scenario described by NMHC and NAA would be a low-boy electric storage water heater, likely to be in the small ESWH product class. This rule does not amend standards for small ESWHs and therefore the consumers of this product class will not be impacted. As DOE has discussed above, the costs to switch product classes in response to amended standards are larger than simply purchasing standards-compliant products within the same product classes. Therefore DOE estimates that no additional switching will occur beyond existing market trends.
NRECA stated that a large percentage
of co-op consumers have no access to natural gas service and have no affordable alternative option for a product that performs equivalent to electric resistance water heating, and therefore eliminating electric resistance water heating as an option in the market would pose a serious problem for many of the consumer-members served by cooperatives. They commented that these consumers that could not afford heat pump water heaters or their housing stock does not allow for their installation may be forced to choose electric tankless (or instantaneous) water heaters, which units may provide good comfort to consumers but have negative impacts to utilities by potentially creating spikes in demand of 20 kW instantaneously. NRECA commented that adding to a cooperative’s peak demand can significantly raise their costs and add to the electric rates of all their consumer- members who must bear the cost. NRECA stated that at least one cooperative told them that most new housing stock in their territory is being equipped with electric tankless units and that it is not clear that DOE’s analysis accounts for switching from electric storage to instantaneous electric. (NRECA, No. 1127 at p. 9) In response, DOE reiterates that a significant cost adder has been applied to the fraction of electric storage consumers that have challenging installation cases. For these consumers, DOE considered several downsizing options with significantly lower installation costs, including switching to a small electric storage water heater, and took that impact into account in its shipment analysis (see section IV.G.1.a of this document). In regards to the grid impact, this is discussed more in section III.A.3 of this document. Finally, DOE notes that although it did not analyze electric instantaneous water heaters, they represent a very small market share at present. DOE did include, however, an option to pair a small electric storage water heater with a ‘‘booster’’ instantaneous water heater as one of the switching options for medium electric storage water heaters (see section IV.G.1.a of this document).
Atmos Energy argued that because the
cost to fuel switch is high, DOE fails to ‘‘acknowledge the equally prohibitive costs that will be associated with high efficiency gas appliances as a result of this proposal and the lack of gas-fired replacements in the market.’’ (Atmos Energy, No. 1183 at p. 6). Rinnai argued that DOE has failed to take into account substitution effects in replacement markets. Rinnai stated that the following are lacking from the analysis: replacement of water heaters with same category of consumer water heaters that meet a particular standard level; replacement with water heaters using different fuel or different product category (e.g., GSWH to GIWH; GSWH
to ESWH; ESWH to GSWH, etc.); and repair of existing product; thereby delaying the replacement. (Rinnai, No. 1186 at pp. 30–31) The Gas Association Commenters commented that the proposals in the July 2023 NOPR would create an enhanced market for heat pumps, diminishing competition between gas and electric water heaters. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at pp. 32–39) A.O. Smith stated that storage and tankless water heaters use incompatible venting systems (GSWH use Cat I while non-condensing tankless water heaters use Cat III). (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 15) As discussed above, DOE estimates that switching between gas-fired and electric water heaters as a result of the rule is likely to be negligible, as is switching from gas-fired storage to instantaneous water heaters, due to the high installation costs of such switching, (costs that are acknowledged to be high by Atmos Energy in their comment). DOE finds no evidence that there would be a lack of gas-fired water heater models available in the standards case for replacements. Many such
models are currently available by multiple manufacturers. DOE acknowledges that in the standards case, many electric water heaters would transition to heat pump water heaters. However, since DOE estimates negligible switching between electric and gas-fired water heaters, there is no reason to expect this would alter the competition between electric and gas- fired water heater markets. Furthermore, many manufacturers produce both electric and gas-fired water heaters. Lastly, DOE agrees that gas-fired storage and instantaneous water heaters use incompatible venting systems and therefore switching from storage to instantaneous would require significant extra installation costs. See chapter 8 and appendix 8D of the final rule TSD for detailed description of the installation costs.
Noritz commented that the ability to
replace a water heater in an emergency is an important attribute of value to consumers, and changes in installation patterns raise costs and impose other time-related constraints such as changing venting patterns, carpentry to make changes to the house, and possible electrical work to complete installation. (Noritz, No. 1202 at pp. 1–2) PHCC commented that in the case of replacement due to a failed water heater, many consumers will prioritize a water heater that is readily available within their price range and will not consider energy efficiency in their decision. According to PHCC, energy efficiency increases costs and decreases demand which leads to a longer wait time for installation and makes a more energy efficient water heater an unattractive option in a time when households simply care about having hot water and a working water heater as soon as possible. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 6) DOE agrees that in emergency replacement, like-for-like equipment provides the most convenience to the consumer. However, DOE estimates that the installation of condensing equipment, including the flue venting,
the condensate pump, and neutralizer can be accomplished as part of an emergency replacement, meaning that for emergency replacements, non- condensing equipment do not bring significant additional value.
11. Analytical Results
AHRI commented that DOE does not
provide a measure of uncertainty in LCC
results. AHRI commented that each independent variable in LCC analysis has uncertainty, and DOE does not document how confident DOE should be in its estimates. AHRI asked DOE the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637871 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
128DOE uses data on manufacturer shipments as
a proxy for national sales, as aggregate data on sales
are lacking. In general, one would expect a close correspondence between shipments and sales. following questions related to model
uncertainty: What is the estimated standard deviation around the mean change in LCC at each EL and for each product class? (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 23) AHRI commented that DOE does not take account of the fact that operating costs, including energy, are deductible as business expenses for Federal and some state income taxes for commercial customers in its LCC analysis and asks for DOE’s justification for not taking it into account. AHRI recommended that DOE considers the effects of this tax deductibility in computing the change in life cycle cost. AHRI claimed that failing to account for this is inconsistent with other aspects of DOE’s analyses. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 16)
In response, DOE clarifies that it uses
probability distributions for a number of input variables that are reasonably expected to exhibit natural variation and diversity in practice (e.g., lifetime,
repair cost, installation costs). These probability distributions are modeling diversity. In contrast, DOE addresses input uncertainty primarily with the use of sensitivity scenarios. To determine whether the conclusions of the analysis are robust, DOE performed several sensitivity scenarios with more extreme versions of these input variables (e.g., high/low economic growth and energy price scenarios, alternative price trend scenarios, alternative mean lifetime scenarios). The relative comparison of potential standard levels in the analysis remains the same throughout these sensitivity scenarios, confirming that the conclusion of economic justification is robust despite some input uncertainty. Furthermore, DOE provides a range of statistics in the LCC spreadsheet, including median values and values at various percentiles for many intermediate variables, as well as the full data output table for all 10,000 samples. For example, the 25th and 75th percentiles of average LCC savings for all ELs for all product classes are available in the LCC spreadsheet. DOE also provides a distribution of impacts, including consumers with a net benefit, net cost, and not impacted by the rule in the LCC spreadsheet and in chapter 8 of the final rule TSD.
DOE develops probabilities for as
many inputs to the LCC analysis as possible, to reflect the distribution of impacts as comprehensively as possible. For example, DOE develops probabilities for building sampling, installation costs, lifetime, discount rate, and efficiency distribution, among other inputs. If there are insufficient data with respect to a specific input
parameter to create a robust probability distribution, DOE will utilize a single input parameter. Such approach is
neither arbitrary nor capricious; it is informed by the available data.
The installation cost estimates are the
result of a significant research and cite multiple sources, as discussed at length in section IV.F.2 and appendix 8D of the final rule TSD. DOE has incorporated feedback from various stakeholders and revised those costs for this final rule.
Regarding deductible business
expenses, DOE notes that equipment purchases would also be deductible, and that increased equipment expenses and lower operating expenses would have opposing effects on total deductions. Even if overall deductions were to decrease as a result of the rule, those savings could be easily invested in other parts of the business in order to have no net impact on a business’ tax burden. Furthermore, DOE notes that the estimation of commercial discount rates accounts for the tax deductibility of the energy costs and capital investment depreciation and therefore the net present value of the future operating cost savings in the LCC analysis should already reflect that effect.
DOE provides stakeholders with the
opportunity to provide accurate data to represent a breadth of operating conditions, prices, and use cases. In the absence of stakeholder provided information, DOE makes a good-faith effort to collect reliable data from various sources and summarize assumptions on the missing parameters. The Monte Carlo simulation and its large number of samples (10,000 for each product class) ensures that the results converge to a representative average. For some inputs whose uncertainty is not well characterized, such as future equipment prices or economic growth conditions, DOE performed a series of sensitivity analyses to ensure that the results of the analysis are not strongly dependent on those inputs and that the conclusions of the analysis remain the same. As a
result, DOE’s conclusion of economic justification is robust to a broad range of sensitivity scenarios which capture the uncertainty inherent in economic projections.
DOE acknowledges that in the LCC,
there may be a handful of outcomes with large benefits or costs. Large outlier LCC savings, both positive and negative, may affect the average of LCC savings across the whole sample of impacted consumers. In particular, for medium ESWHs, there are some outcomes with LCC savings that are over 10 times the average across the whole sample. Therefore, for medium ESWHs, DOE considered an additional sensitivity analysis that eliminated these outcomes with large benefits. Specifically, DOE removed outcomes with positive LCC savings that exceed the absolute magnitude of the largest LCC costs, so that the final distribution of outcomes is bounded by similar extremes (positive and negative). This sensitivity removes 245 outcomes out of 8,801 impacted consumers. The resulting average LCC savings in the sensitivity analysis are reduced to $581, compared to $859 in the reference case. Although the average LCC savings are reduced in this sensitivity analysis, they remain positive and there continue to be significant energy and environmental savings. DOE continues to conclude that the adopted standard level for medium ESWHs is economically justified even in this sensitivity analysis that eliminates large positive results.
DOE further notes that such cases in
the LCC, represented with outcomes resulting in large benefits or large costs, are likely to occur in the real-world as a reflection of the variability in the household characteristics across the United States. For example, a household with high usage (e.g., 5 plus occupants
with frequent showering) located in an area with higher than average electricity rates, with lower than average installation costs (e.g., there is sufficient
electrical, drainage, and space to accommodate the heat pump water heater) will result in that household seeing net benefits greater than the average population. Such a scenario is reflected in the model as a high-benefits case. While DOE conducted the sensitivity to test its conclusion that the standards adopted are economically justified even with conservative assumptions, DOE also believes that such high benefits or high costs cases reflect the realities of household characteristics across the United States.
G. Shipments Analysis
DOE uses projections of annual
product shipments to calculate the
national impacts of potential amended or new energy conservation standards on energy use, NPV, and future manufacturer cash flows.
128The
shipments model takes an accounting approach, tracking market shares of each product class and the vintage of units in the stock. Stock accounting uses product shipments as inputs to estimate the age distribution of in-service product stocks for all years. The age distribution of in-service product stocks
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637872 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
129The new owners primarily consist of
households that add or switch to a different water
heater option during a major remodel. Because DOE calculates new owners as the residual between its shipments model compared to historical shipments, new owners also include shipments that switch away from water heater product class to another.
130Appliance Magazine. Appliance Historical
Statistical Review: 1954–2012. 2014. UBM Canon.
131Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration
Institute. Water Heaters Historical Data. Available at: www.ahrinet.org/resources/statistics/historical-
data/residential-storage-water-heaters-historical- data (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
132AHRI. Confidential Instantaneous Gas-fired
Water Heater Shipments Data from 2004–2007 to LBNL. March 3, 2008; AHRI. Oil-fired Storage Water Heater (30/32 gallons) Shipments Data provided to DOE. 2008.
133ENERGY STAR. Unit Shipments data 2010–
2021. multiple reports. Available at www.energystar.gov/partner_ resources/products_
partner_ resources/brand_ owner_ resources/unit_
shipment_ data (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
134Oil Heating Magazine. Merchandising News:
Monthly Data on Water Heaters Installed by Dealers 1997–2007. 2007. 135U.S. Census. Characteristics of New Housing
from 1999–2022. Available at www.census.gov/ construction/chars/ (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
136U.S. Census. Characteristics of New Housing
(Multi-Family Units) from 1973–2022. Available at www.census.gov/construction/chars/mfu.html (last
accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
137Home Innovation Research Labs (independent
subsidiary of the National Association of Home Builders (‘‘NAHB’’). Annual Builder Practices Survey (2015–2019). Available at www.homeinnovation.com/trends_ and_ reports/
data/new_ construction (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
138Note that DOE does not project housing
regionally. New housing is therefore assumed to grow in the same regional distribution as the current data would suggest.
139Decision Analysts, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008,
2010, 2013, 2016, 2019, and 2022 American Home Comfort Study. Available at www.decisionanalyst.com/Syndicated/ HomeComfort/ (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023). is a key input to calculations of both the
NES and NPV, because operating costs for any year depend on the age distribution of the stock.
DOE developed shipment projections
based on historical data and an analysis of key market drivers for each product. DOE estimated consumer water heater shipments by projecting shipments in three market segments: (1) replacement of existing consumer water heaters; (2) new housing; and (3) new owners in buildings that did not previously have a consumer water heater or existing water heater owners that are adding an additional consumer water heater.
129
To project water heater replacement
shipments, DOE developed retirement functions from water heater lifetime estimates and applied them to the existing products in the housing stock, which are tracked by vintage. DOE calculated replacement shipments using historical shipments and lifetime estimates. Annual historical shipments sources are: (1) Appliance Magazine;
130
(2) the Air-Conditioning, Heating, andRefrigeration Institute (‘‘AHRI’’)
website;
131(3) multiple AHRI data
submittals;132(4) the BRG Building
Solutions 2022 report; (5) ENERGYSTAR unit shipments data;
133(6) Oil
Heating Magazine;134and the 2010
Heating Products Final Rule. Inaddition, DOE adjusted replacementshipments by taking into accountdemolitions, using the estimatedchanges to the housing stock fromAEO2023.
To project shipments to the new
housing market, DOE used the AEO2023 housing starts and commercial building
floor space projections to estimate future numbers of new homes and commercial building floor space. DOE then used data from U.S. Census Characteristics of New Housing,
135 136
Home Innovation Research Labs Annual Builder Practices Survey,
137RECS 2020,
AHS 2021, and CBECS 2018 to estimate new construction water heater saturations by consumer water heater product class.
138
DOE estimated shipments to the new
owners’ market based on residual shipments from the calculated replacement and new construction shipments compared to historical
shipments in the last 5 years (2018– 2023 for this NOPR). DOE compared this with data from the Decision Analysts’ 2002 to 2022 American Home Comfort Study
139and 2022 BRG data,
which showed similar historical fractions of new owners. DOE assumed that the new owner fraction in 2030 would be equal to the 10-year average of the historical data (2013–2022) and then decrease to zero by the end of the analysis period (2059). If the resulting fraction of new owners is negative, DOE assumed that it was primarily due to equipment switching or non- replacement and added this number to replacements (thus reducing the replacements value).
For the preliminary analysis and
NOPR, assumptions regarding future policies encouraging electrification of households and electric water heating were speculative at that time, so such policies were not incorporated into the shipments projection.
DOE acknowledges, however, that
ongoing electrification policies at the Federal, State, and local levels are likely to encourage installation of electric
water heaters in new homes and adoption of electric water heaters in homes that currently use gas-fired water heaters. For example, the Inflation Reduction Act includes incentives for heat pump water heaters and electrical panel upgrades. However, there are many uncertainties about the timing and impact of these policies that make it difficult to fully account for their likely impact on gas and electric water heater market shares in the time frame for this analysis (i.e., 2030 through 2059).
Nonetheless, DOE’s shipments projections account for impacts that are most likely in the relevant time frame. The assumptions are described in chapter 9 and appendix 9A of the final rule TSD. The changes result in a decrease in gas-fired storage water heater shipments in the no-new- standards case in 2030 compared to the preliminary analysis. DOE acknowledges that electrification policies may result in a larger decrease in shipments of gas-fired water heaters than projected in this final rule, especially if stronger policies are adopted in coming years. However, this would occur in the no-new amended standards case and thus would only reduce the energy savings estimated in this adopted rule. For example, if incentives and rebates shifted 5 percent of shipments in the no-new amended standards case from gas-fired storage water heaters to heat pump electric storage water heaters, then the energy savings estimated for gas-fired storage water heaters in this adopted rule would decline by approximately 5 percent. The estimated consumer impacts are likely to be similar, however, except that the percentage of consumers with no impact
at a given efficiency level would increase. DOE notes that the economic justification for the adopted rule would not change if DOE included the impact of incentives and rebates in the no-new- standards case, even if the absolute magnitude of the savings were to decline.
Gas Association Commenters advised
that DOE should use State-level data rather than national data with differentiation between new and replacement market shares for each efficiency level in its analysis. Gas Association Commenters included specifics that they believe support this approach. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at pp. 35–37)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637873 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
140See Rheem’s booster instantaneous water
heater, which can increase the availability of hot
water for storage tank water heaters at www.rheem.com/innovations/innovation_residential/water-heater-booster/. DOE has taken into account
differences between new and
replacement market throughout its shipments analysis. DOE does not have detailed State-level data and so did not consider it in its analysis.
GAAS commented that the shipment
analysis should include historical and projections of shipments for water heaters broken down by end use applications and replacement versus new construction values. GAAS stated this would show that high efficiency options are gaining in market share without the need for more stringent energy efficiency standards. GAAS also commented that the Inflation Reduction Act (‘‘IRA’’) projections should be included in electric water heater sale projections. (GAAS, No. 1139 at p. 7)
DOE’s shipments analysis has
considered historical and projected shipments disaggregated by applications and by replacement vs. new constructions markets using available data. Further details are available in chapter 9 and appendix 9A of the final rule TSD. DOE has accounted for recent trends in the adoption of high efficiency products in its analysis, including the impacts of recent policies incentivizing higher efficiency products in some jurisdictions.
BWC asked for further clarification on
what measures were taken by DOE to ensure that product shipments that may have been recorded in several of the referenced sources in section IV.G of this document were not accounted for multiple times, thus skewing the results of the data. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 22)
DOE carefully evaluated each data
source and then cross-checked against multiple available data sources. DOE validated its estimates to avoid double-
counting. Chapter 9 and appendix 9A provide a description of how data sources were utilized in the shipments analysis. In summary, some data sources provided an overview of the overall market (e.g., BRG data) whereas other
data sources focused on a narrower subset (e.g., ENERGY STAR shipments)
by efficiency level, capacity, or other characteristic. All of these data sources complement each other.
BWC disagreed with DOE’s estimate
that heat pump water heaters currently account for approximately 8 percent of current sales in the United States. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 14) BWC disagreed with DOE’s assumption that small electric storage water heaters make up 11 percent of the total market for electric storage water heaters with capacities ranging from 20 to 55 gallons and expressed that the actual figure is much higher. BWC commented that it is prepared to discuss the basis for this belief in a confidential conversation
with DOE. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 15)
DOE derived its estimates based on
available data sources of historical shipments and markets shares as discussed in further detail in chapter 9 and appendix 9A. DOE clarifies that its estimate of small electric storage water heaters are specifically for those that meet the definition of the small electric storage water heater product class, based on the distribution of capacities and first-hour ratings available in the data sources and model databases. Some smaller capacity storage water heaters may not meet the definition of small electric storage water heaters. DOE also clarifies that its estimate of market shares at various efficiency levels (including heat pump water heaters), based on the data sources discussed in chapter 8 and appendix 8I, are presented for the first year of compliance (2030) and account for any recent historical trends. By 2030, DOE estimates that the heat pump water heater market share of the electric storage water heater market will exceed 10 percent.
EEI commented that DOE projects
electric storage water heater (20–55 gallons except small electric storage water heaters) shipments dropping by well over 30 percent in the first year and never recovering compared to the ‘‘no new standards’’ case under the proposed rule, and this type of demand destruction could lead manufacturers to invest in and increase production of other less-efficient products. (EEI, No. 1198 at p. 4)
DOE acknowledges that some
consumers may opt to change products, from electric storage water heaters to small electric storage water heaters, in response to the standard. This market dynamic is discussed in more detail in section IV.G.1.a of this document. Although DOE estimates that approximately 30 percent of electric storage water heater shipments will shift to small electric storage water heaters in the amended-standards case, this is not demand destruction as the commenter as characterized. This is a shift in consumer demand to an alternate product that is currently available. DOE acknowledges that that this shift will result in lower energy savings than if no consumers switched products, and this
is accounted for in the analyses. DOE further notes that at the adopted standard level, the minimum efficiency requirement for small electric storage water heaters is still achievable with electric resistance heating technology; therefore, for this product class, manufacturers will continue to produce similar water heaters to those that are produced today. While there will be an
increase in production for small electric water heaters to meet this increased demand, there will also be an increase in the production of efficient water heaters to meet the demand of the rest
of the electric storage water heater market.
1. Impact of Potential Standards on
Shipments
a. Impact of Consumer Choice for
Electric Storage Water Heaters
DOE applied a consumer choice
model to estimate the impact on electric storage water heaters shipments in the case of a heat pump water heater standard. As noted previously (see section IV.F.10 of this document), DOE did not include other product switching (e.g., using different fuels) in its analysis
as this is likely to be a minimal effect. This is especially true in the case of an emergency replacement.
DOE accounted for the potential of
consumers selecting one or more smaller electric storage water heaters with or without a ‘‘booster’’ instantaneous water heater instead of replacing a larger electric storage water heater with a heat pump water heater.
140DOE analyzed two main
scenarios for a heat pump standard: (1) When electric storage water heaters ≥20
gal and ≤55 gal, excluding small
ESWHs, could potentially downsize to the small electric storage water heater product class, due to a heat pump standard to electric storage water heaters ≥20 gal and ≤55 gal, excluding
small ESWHs only; and (2) A heat pump water heater standard for all ESWH product classes, where ESWHs could potentially downsize to very small water heaters. DOE identified households from the electric consumer water heater sample that might downsize at each of the considered standard levels based on water heater sizing criteria and matching to the different consumer choice options that would result in no loss of utility. DOE assigned an effective storage volume and draw pattern to sampled consumer water heaters based on data from RECS 2020 and CBECS 2018. DOE selected the households or buildings that would downsize based on the fact that the consumer would have a financial incentive to downsize in the short term (e.g., lower first cost), even though in
some cases downsizing might not be advantageous in the long run compared
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637874 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
to installing a heat pump water heater.
Table IV.27 and Table IV.28 show the resulting estimated shipment market share impacted for each scenario.
Additional details of this analysis can be found in chapter 9 and appendix 8D of the TSD.
The shipments model considers the
switching that might occur in each year
of the analysis period (2030–2059). To do so, DOE estimated the switching in the first year of the analysis period (2030), using data on willingness to pay, in the LCC analysis and derived trends from 2030 to 2059. The shipments model also tracks the number of additional consumer water heaters shipped in each year. See appendix 9A
of this final rule TSD for further details regarding how DOE estimated switching between various electric water heater options.
BWC commented that the findings
presented in appendix 9A of the July 2023 NOPR TSD do not align with its understanding of what has occurred in the residential water heater market since the most recent rulemaking on these products took effect in 2015. BWC also questioned how DOE could have accounted for grid-enabled water heater shipments in this appendix when the BRG report, referenced as the source for this appendix’s findings, does not account for shipments of these types of products. For these reasons, BWC would welcome an opportunity to discuss this matter further confidentially with DOE. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 22)
DOE derived its estimates based on
multiple available data sources and shipments model. The BRG report is only one data source. Other sources include AHRI shipments data available online, shipments data submitted confidentially to DOE, shipment estimates from ENERGY STAR, EIA’s Annual Electric Power Industry Report, and estimates from trade magazines, as discussed in chapter 9. DOE used the combination of all these data to estimate shipments of the smaller product classes, such as electric storage water heaters greater than 55 gallons. DOE also clarifies that it did not propose or adopt standards for grid-enabled water heaters and therefore they were not specifically considered in the analysis.
BWC recommended that DOE utilize
information that is specific to the residential water heater market in supporting its claims relative to consumer preferences. In the absence of such information, BWC asked that DOE take a proactive approach by working directly with manufacturers, trade associations, consumer advocates, and other knowledgeable stakeholders to collect information that is timely and relevant to the products that are subject to this rulemaking through confidential interviews and disaggregated surveys. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 24)
DOE has considered available
information and data sources, including interviews with manufacturers, industry market research reports, confidentially submitted data, and feedback from an industry consultant. There are, however, no specific data or studies on consumer decision-making preferences that DOE is aware of, specifically with respect to the water heater market, other than what is revealed by shipments data and the market share of various products currently available. DOE derived its estimates of efficiency distributions based on these market data. Regarding DOE’s estimates of consumer preferences and market failures, these are based on a wide body of economics literature as discussed in more detail in section IV.F.8 of this document.
b. Impact of Repair vs. Replace
DOE estimated a fraction of consumer
water heater replacement installations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.042</GPH> ER06MY24.043</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.27 Consumer Choice Results for Electric Storage Water Heaters
(Assuming Heat Pump Standard for Electric Storage Water Heaters,~ 20 gal and:::
55 gal, excluding Small ESWHs Only)
Consumer Choice Options Efficiency Level, Market Share Impacted (%)
0 1 2
Not Switching 100% 70% 70%
SmallESWH 0% 15% 15%
Small ESWH + Booster 0% 9% 9%
Two Small ESWH 0% 5% 5%
Table IV.28 Consumer Choice Results for Electric Storage Water Heaters
(Assuming Heat Pump Standard for all Electric Storage Water Heater Product
Classes
Consumer Choice Options Efficienc Level, Market Share Im acted %
Small Electric Stora e Water Heaters, ~ 20 al and :S 35
Not Switchin 100% 6%
Small ESWH 0% 3%
0% 0%
Electric Stora e Water Heaters,~ 20 al and :S 55 al, excludin
Not Switchin 100% 82% 83%
Ve Small ESWH + One Booster 0% 9% 9%
Two Ve SmallESWH 0% 6% 6%
0% 3% 3% 3
70%
15%
9%
5%
81%
9%
6%
4% 37875 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
141The NIA accounts for impacts in the United
States and U.S. territories. that choose to repair their equipment,
rather than replace their equipment in the new standards case. The approach captures not only a decrease in consumer water heater replacement shipments, but also the energy use from continuing to use the existing consumer water heater and the cost of the repair. DOE assumes that the demand for water heating is inelastic and, therefore, that no household or commercial building will forgo either repairing or replacing their equipment (either with a new consumer water heater or a suitable water heating alternative).
For details on DOE’s shipments
analysis, consumer choice, and the repair option, see chapter 9 of the final
rule TSD.
H. National Impact Analysis
The NIA assesses the national energy
savings (‘‘NES’’) and the NPV from a
national perspective of total consumer costs and savings that would be expected to result from new or amended standards at specific efficiency levels.
141
(‘‘Consumer’’ in this context refers to consumers of the product being regulated.) DOE calculates the NES and NPV for the potential standard levels considered based on projections of annual product shipments, along with the annual energy consumption and total installed cost data from the energy use and LCC analyses. For the present analysis, DOE projected the energy savings, operating cost savings, product costs, and NPV of consumer benefits over the lifetime of consumer water heaters sold from 2030 through 2059.
DOE evaluates the impacts of new or
amended standards by comparing a case without such standards with standards- case projections. The no-new-standards case characterizes energy use and consumer costs for each product class in the absence of new or amended energy conservation standards. For this projection, DOE considers historical trends in efficiency and various forces that are likely to affect the mix of efficiencies over time. DOE compares the no-new-standards case with projections characterizing the market for each product class if DOE adopted new or amended standards at specific energy efficiency levels (i.e., the TSLs or
standards cases) for that class. For the standards cases, DOE considers how a given standard would likely affect the market shares of products with efficiencies greater than the standard.
DOE uses a spreadsheet model to
calculate the energy savings and the national consumer costs and savings from each TSL. Interested parties can review DOE’s analyses by changing various input quantities within the spreadsheet. The NIA spreadsheet model uses typical values (as opposed to probability distributions) as inputs.
Table IV.29 summarizes the inputs
and methods DOE used for the NIA analysis for the final rule. Discussion of these inputs and methods follows the table. See chapter 10 of the final rule
TSD for further details.
1. Product Efficiency Trends
A key component of the NIA is the
trend in energy efficiency projected for
the no-new-standards case and each of the standards cases. Section IV.F.8 of this document describes how DOE developed an energy efficiency distribution for the no-new-standards case (which yields a shipment-weighted average efficiency) for each of the considered product classes for the year of anticipated compliance with an amended or new standard. To project the trend in efficiency absent amended standards for consumer water heaters over the entire shipments projection period, DOE used available historical shipments data and manufacturer input. The approach is further described in
chapter 10 of the final rule TSD.
For the standards cases, DOE used a
‘‘roll-up’’ scenario to establish the shipment-weighted efficiency for the year that standards are assumed to become effective (2030). In this scenario, the market shares of products in the no-new-standards case that do not meet the standard under consideration
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.044</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.29 Summary of Inputs and Methods for the National Impact Analysis
Inputs Method
Shipments Annual shipments from shipments model.
Compliance Date of Standard 2030
No-new-standards case: Based on historical data.
Efficiency Trends Standard cases: Roll-up in the compliance year and then DOE
estimated growth in shipment-weighted efficiency in all the
standards cases.
Annual Energy Consumption per Unit Annual weighted-average values are a function of energy use at
each TSL.
Annual weighted-average values are a function of cost at each
Total Installed Cost per Unit TSL.
Incorporates projection of future product prices based on
historical data.
Annual Energy Cost per Unit Annual weighted-average values as a function of the annual
energy consumption per unit and energy prices.
Repair and Maintenance Cost per Unit Annual values do not change with efficiency level.
Energy Price Trends AEO2023 projections (to 2050) and extrapolation thereafter.
Energy Site-to-Primary and FFC A time-series conversion factor based on AEO2023. Conversion
Discount Rate Three and seven percent.
Present Year 2023 37876 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
142Steven Sorrell, et al., Empirical Estimates of
the Direct Rebound Effect: A Review, 37 Energy
Policy 1356–71 (2009). Available at www.science
direct.com/science/article/pii/S0301421508007131 (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
143Steven Nadel, ‘‘The Rebound Effect: Large or
Small?’’ ACEEE White Paper (August 2012). Available at www.aceee.org/files/pdf/white-paper/ rebound-large-and-small.pdf (last accessed Dec. 1,
2023).
144Brinda Thomas and Ines Azevedo, Estimating
Direct and Indirect Rebound Effects for U.S. Households with Input-Output Analysis, Part 1:
Theoretical Framework, 86 Ecological Econ. 199– 201 (2013). Available at www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0921800912004764 ) (last
accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
145Lorna A. Greening, et al., Energy Efficiency
and Consumption—The Rebound Effect—A Survey, 28 Energy Policy 389–401 (2002). Available at
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0301421500000215 (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023). 146See www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/nems/
documentation/residential/pdf/m067(2020).pdf
(last accessed Dec. 1, 2023.
147DOE. Energy Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment: Energy Conservation Standards for Small, Large, and Very Large Air- Cooled Commercial Package Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment and Commercial Warm Air Furnaces; Direct final rule. 81 FR 2419 (Jan. 15, 2016). Available at www.regulations.gov/document/ EERE-2013-BT-STD-0021-0055 (last accessed Dec.
1, 2023).
148DOE. Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Residential Boilers;
Final rule. 81 FR 2319 (Jan. 15, 2016). Available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2012-BT-STD-0047-0078 (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
149DOE. Energy Conservation Program: Energy
Conservation Standards for Commercial Packaged Boilers; Final Rule. 85 FR 1592 (Jan. 10, 2020). Available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE- 2013-BT-STD-0030-0099 (last accessed Dec. 1,
2023). would ‘‘roll up’’ to meet the new
standard level, and the market share of products above the standard would remain unchanged.
To develop standards-case efficiency
trends after 2030, DOE used historical shipment data and current consumer water heater model availability by efficiency level (see chapter 8). DOE
estimated growth in shipment-weighted efficiency by assuming that the implementation of ENERGY STAR’s performance criteria and other incentives would gradually increase the market shares of higher efficiency water heaters meeting ENERGY STAR requirements such as EL 3 and above for gas-fired storage water heaters and EL 2 and above for electric storage water heaters (≥20 gal V
eff>55 gal).DOE also
took into account increased incentives for higher efficiency equipment and electrification efforts. For oil-fired storage water heaters and electric storage water heaters (>55 gal V
eff≤120
gal), DOE assumed a constant market share throughout the analysis period (2030–2059).
BWC cautioned DOE against using
ENERGY STAR performance criteria data to assume growth in market shares for higher efficiency water heaters after 2030 in the no-new-standards case. BWC noted that ENERGY STAR’s Residential Water Heater Specification 4.0 (effective March 29, 2022, to April 18, 2023) incentivized the purchase of high efficiency water heater products, such as heat pump water heaters, but the penetration rate for these products in the market remains low, as ENERGY STAR’s 2022 Unit Shipment and Market Penetration Report Summary reports only a 3-percent market penetration for these products. In contrast, Figure 10.2.2 of the NOPR TSD assumes heat pump water heaters making up 11 percent of the market by 2030 in the no- new-standards case, which appears unlikely when considering the information released by ENERGY STAR cited above. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 3)
DOE derived its estimates based on
multiple available data sources and shipments model, not just ENERGY STAR shipment data. DOE’s estimated market share of higher efficiency equipment is based on these data as well as on existing policies and incentives that drive a higher adoption
of higher efficiency equipment in the no-new-standards case, as discussed in more detail in appendix 8I and 9A. DOE notes that if the analysis assumed a lower market share projection of heat pump water heaters in the no-new- standards case, this would result in a higher estimate of energy savings from the adopted standards, which would only further support DOE’s conclusion
of economic justification.
2. National Energy Savings
The national energy savings analysis
involves a comparison of national
energy consumption of the considered products between each potential standards case (‘‘TSL’’) and the case with no new or amended energy conservation standards. DOE calculated the national energy consumption by multiplying the number of units (stock) of each product (by vintage or age) by the unit energy consumption (also by vintage). DOE calculated annual NES based on the difference in national energy consumption for the no-new- standards case and for each higher efficiency standard case. DOE estimated energy consumption and savings based on site energy and converted the electricity consumption and savings to primary energy (i.e., the energy
consumed by power plants to generate site electricity) using annual conversion factors derived from AEO2023. Cumulative energy savings are the sum of the NES for each year over the timeframe of the analysis.
Use of higher-efficiency products is
sometimes associated with a direct rebound effect, which refers to an increase in utilization of the product due to the increase in efficiency. DOE examined a 2009 review of empirical estimates of the rebound effect for various energy-using products.
142This
review concluded that the econometric and quasi-experimental studies suggest a mean value for the direct rebound effect for household water heating of around 10 percent. DOE also examined a 2012 ACEEE paper
143and a 2013
paper by Thomas and Azevedo.144Both
of these publications examined the same studies that were reviewed by Sorrell, as well as Greening et al.,
145and identified
methodological problems with some of the studies. The studies believed to be most reliable by Thomas and Azevedo show a direct rebound effect for water heating products in the 1-percent to 15- percent range, while Nadel concludes that a more likely range is 1 to 12 percent, with rebound effects sometimes higher for low-income households that could not afford to adequately heat their homes prior to weatherization. DOE applied a rebound effect of 10 percent for consumer water heaters used in residential applications based on studies of other residential products and the value used for consumer water heaters in the 2010 Final Rule for Heating Products, and 0 percent for consumer water heaters in commercial applications, which also matches EIA’s National Energy Modeling System (‘‘NEMS’’) for residential and commercial water heating and is consistent with other recent energy conservation standards rulemakings.
146 147 148 149 The calculated
NES at each efficiency level is therefore reduced by 10 percent in residential applications. DOE also included the rebound effect in the NPV analysis by accounting for the additional net benefit from increased consumer water heaters usage, as described in section IV.H.3 of this document.
In 2011, in response to the
recommendations of a committee on ‘‘Point-of-Use and Full-Fuel-Cycle Measurement Approaches to Energy Efficiency Standards’’ appointed by the National Academy of Sciences, DOE announced its intention to use FFC measures of energy use and greenhouse gas and other emissions in the national impact analyses and emissions analyses included in future energy conservation standards rulemakings. 76 FR 51281 (Aug. 18, 2011). After evaluating the approaches discussed in the August 18, 2011 notice, DOE published a statement of amended policy in which DOE explained its determination that EIA’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637877 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
150For more information on NEMS, refer to The
National Energy Modeling System: An Overview
2009, DOE/EIA–0581(2009), October 2009.
Available at www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/index.cfm (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023). 151U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
Circular A–4: Regulatory Analysis. Available at
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-for- agencies/circulars (last accessed Mar. 5, 2024). DOE
used the prior version of Circular A–4 (September 17, 2003) in accordance with the effective date of the November 9, 2023 version. Available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_
drupal_ files/omb/circulars/A4/a-4.pdf (last
accessed Dec. 1, 2023). National Energy Modeling System
(‘‘NEMS’’) is the most appropriate tool for its FFC analysis and its intention to use NEMS for that purpose. 77 FR 49701 (Aug. 17, 2012). NEMS is a public domain, multi-sector, partial equilibrium model of the U.S. energy sector
150that EIA uses to prepare its
Annual Energy Outlook. The FFC factors in corporate losses in production and delivery in the case of natural gas (including fugitive emissions) and additional energy used to produce and deliver the various fuels used by power plants. The approach used for deriving FFC measures of energy use and emissions is described in appendix 10B of the final rule TSD.
EEI commented that the fossil fuel
equivalency methodology, employed in DOE’s impact assessment of proposed changes to efficiency standards, was developed in an earlier era when the penetration of renewable energy generation was low. EEI commented that continuing to apply fossil fuel equivalency factors leads to the false conclusion that renewable energy generation has the same primary energy losses as fossil generation and that these energy losses represent similar economic loss. EEI stated that EIA is moving to the captured energy approach in all of its analyses as of June 2023, and DOE should follow EIA’s lead and update its methodology as soon as possible to create more realistic estimates of primary energy savings and electricity sector emissions reductions. (EEI, No. 1198 at pp. 6–8)
As previously mentioned, DOE
converts electricity consumption and savings to primary energy using annual conversion factors derived from the EIA’s AEO2023. Traditionally, EIA has
used the fossil fuel equivalency approach to report noncombustible renewables’ contribution to total primary energy. The fossil fuel equivalency approach applies an annualized weighted-average heat rate for fossil fuel power plants to the electricity generated (in kWh) from noncombustible renewables. EIA recognizes that using captured energy (the net energy available for direct consumption after transformation of a noncombustible renewable energy into electricity) or incident energy (the mechanical, radiation, or thermal energy that is measurable as the ‘‘input’’ to the device) are possible approaches for converting renewable electricity to a common measure of primary energy, but used the fossil fuel equivalency approach in AEO2023 and other
reporting of energy statistics used in this final rule. DOE contends that it is important for it to maintain consistency with AEO2023 in DOE’s accounting of
primary energy savings from energy efficiency standards.
3. Net Present Value Analysis
The inputs for determining the NPV
of the total costs and benefits
experienced by consumers are (1) total annual installed cost, (2) total annual operating costs (energy costs and repair and maintenance costs), and (3) a discount factor to calculate the present value of costs and savings. DOE calculates net savings each year as the difference between the no-new- standards case and each standards case in terms of total savings in operating costs versus total increases in installed costs. DOE calculates operating cost savings over the lifetime of each product shipped during the projection period.
As discussed in section IV.F.1 of this
document, DOE used constant prices as the default price assumption to project future consumer water heater prices. However, DOE also developed consumer water heater price trends based on historical PPI data. DOE applied the same trends to project prices for each product class at each considered efficiency level as a sensitivity analysis. DOE’s projection of product prices is described in appendix 10C of the final rule TSD.
To evaluate the effect of uncertainty
regarding the price trend estimates, DOE investigated the impact of different
product price projections on the consumer NPV for the considered TSLs for consumer water heaters. In addition to the default price trend, DOE considered two product price sensitivity cases: (1) a price decline case and (2) price increase case based on PPI data. The derivation of these price trends and the results of these sensitivity cases are described in appendix 10C of the final rule TSD.
The energy cost savings are calculated
using the estimated energy savings in each year and the projected price of the appropriate form of energy. To estimate energy prices in future years, DOE multiplied the average regional energy prices by the projection of annual national-average residential energy price changes in the Reference case from AEO2023, which has an end year of
2050. To estimate price trends after 2050, the 2046–2050 average was used for all years. As part of the NIA, DOE also analyzed scenarios that used inputs from variants of the AEO2023 Reference
case that have lower and higher economic growth. Those cases have
lower and higher energy price trends compared to the Reference case. NIA results based on these cases are presented in appendix 10C of the final rule TSD.
In considering the consumer welfare
gained due to the direct rebound effect, DOE accounted for change in consumer surplus attributed to additional water heating from the purchase of a more efficient unit. Overall consumer welfare is generally understood to be enhanced from rebound. The net consumer impact of the rebound effect is included in the calculation of operating cost savings in the consumer NPV results. See appendix 10E of the final rule TSD for details on DOE’s treatment of the monetary valuation of the rebound effect.
In calculating the NPV, DOE
multiplies the net savings in future years by a discount factor to determine their present value. For this final rule, DOE estimated the NPV of consumer benefits using both a 3-percent and a 7- percent real discount rate. DOE uses these discount rates in accordance with guidance provided by the Office of Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) to Federal agencies on the development of regulatory analysis.
151The discount
rates for the determination of NPV are in contrast to the discount rates used in the LCC analysis, which are designed to reflect a consumer’s perspective. The 7- percent real value is an estimate of the average before-tax rate of return to private capital in the U.S. economy. The 3-percent real value represents the ‘‘social rate of time preference,’’ which is the rate at which society discounts future consumption flows to their present value.
Atmos Energy argued that increased
efficiency in water heaters could lead to an increase in water usage which could further drought in southern and western states. Atmos Energy argued that a full evaluation of rebound effects of the proposal should be conducted and that increased water usage should be calculated and evaluated as an environmental cost of the proposal. (Atmos Energy, No. 1183 at p. 5)
DOE has considered rebound effects
in its analysis. DOE notes that the impacts of changes in water usage on regional water supply are not captured
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637878 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
152RECS 2020 includes a category for households
that pay only some of the gas bill. For the low-
income consumer subgroup analysis, DOE assumes that these households pay 50 percent of the gas bill, and, therefore, would receive 50 percent of operating cost benefits of an amended energy conservation standard. within the scope of DOE’s standards
analysis.
I. Consumer Subgroup Analysis
In analyzing the potential impact of
new or amended energy conservation
standards on consumers, DOE evaluates the impact on identifiable subgroups of consumers that may be disproportionately affected by a new or amended national standard. The purpose of a subgroup analysis is to determine the extent of any such disproportional impacts. DOE evaluates impacts on particular subgroups of consumers by analyzing the LCC impacts and PBP for those particular consumers from alternative standard levels. For this final rule, DOE analyzed the impacts of the considered standard levels on three subgroups: (1) low-
income households, (2) senior-only households, and (3) small businesses. The analysis used subsets of the RECS 2020 sample composed of households and CBECS 2018 sample composed of commercial buildings that meet the criteria for the three subgroups. DOE used the LCC and PBP spreadsheet model to estimate the impacts of the considered efficiency levels on these subgroups. Chapter 11 in the FR TSD describes the consumer subgroup analysis.
1. Low-Income Households
Low-income households are
significantly more likely to be renters or
live in subsidized housing units and less likely to be homeowners. DOE notes that in these cases, the landlord purchases the equipment and may pay the gas bill as well. RECS 2020 includes data on whether a household pays for the gas bill, allowing DOE to categorize households appropriately in the analysis.
152For this consumer subgroup
analysis, DOE considers the impact on the low-income household narrowly, excluding any costs or benefits that are accrued by either a landlord or subsidized housing agency. This allows DOE to determine whether low-income households are disproportionately affected by an amended energy conservation standard in a more representative manner. DOE takes into account a fraction of renters that face product switching (when landlords switch to products that have lower upfront costs but higher operating costs,
which will be incurred by tenants).
The majority of low-income
households that experience a net cost at higher efficiency levels are homeowner households, as opposed to renters. These households either have a smaller capacity water heater or lower hot water use. Unlike renters, homeowners would bear the full cost of installing a new water heater. For these households, a potential rebate program to reduce the total installed costs would be effective in lowering the percentage of low- income consumers with a net cost. DOE understands that the landscape of low- income consumers with a water heater may change before the compliance date of amended energy conservation standards, if finalized. For example, point-of-sale rebate programs are being considered that may moderate the impact on low-income consumers to help offset the total installed cost of a higher efficiency water heater, particularly given the lower total installed cost of smaller capacity water heater. Currently, DOE is aware that the Inflation Reduction Act will likely include incentives for certain water heaters, although the specific implementation details have yet to be finalized. DOE is also aware of State or utility program rebates in the Northeast or California, for example, that support additional heat pump deployment as a result of decarbonization policy goals. Point-of-sale rebates or weatherization programs could also reduce the total number of low-income consumers that would be impacted because the household no longer has a water heater to upgrade.
BWC cautioned DOE against relying
as heavily as it does in this proposal on state, local, and/or utility rebate programs to decrease the upfront installation costs for condensing gas- fired water heaters, as well as heat pump water heaters. While recognizing the existence of many rebate programs today, BWC questions how many of these rebates will continue in place if the Department finalizes this proposal. This is therefore a scenario BWC urged DOE to account for in its subgroup analysis as BWC believes it will reveal cost burdens that are much higher on the low-income households than what is presently assumed in this NOPR. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 19). For consumers in subsidized housing, BWC urged the Department to consider two realistic outcomes regarding product rebates that are designed to cover upfront installation costs. The first is that many or all third parties will stop offering
these rebates once federal, state, and/or local regulatory bodies require the use of high-efficiency appliances. (BWC No.
1164 at p. 26) The second is the cost that these consumers will experience when their highly efficient product reaches the end of its useful life. Many rebate programs are designed to assist consumers with project costs associated with fuel-switching or upgrading a lower efficiency product with a more expensive, higher efficiency counterpart. However, many if not most of these rebate programs do not apply to installations where a highly efficient product is undergoing a like-for-like replacement. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 27)
Rheem argued that IRA will not
impact water heaters sold at the efficiency levels proposed by DOE; therefore, low-income households will not benefit from 25C tax credits. Rheem pointed out that Energy Star specification has recently been updated and recommended that DOE address the new levels. This includes that Energy Star has indicated that they will sunset gas-fired water heater specification and therefore should not be used to determine uptake of higher efficiency gas-fired WH. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 16–17).
In response to the above comments
regarding rebates, DOE clarifies that it does not rely on the existence of rebate programs to justify the energy conservation standards. DOE’s installation costs are estimated based on labor and material costs, as described in chapter 8 and appendix 8D, without any rebates. DOE merely notes that the potential existence of such programs in the future would only improve the economic justification of this rule.
Health Advocates and Joint Advocates
of Energy Efficiency argued that 67 percent of low-income households face a high-energy burden where they must spend 3 times more of their income on energy costs compared to median spending (8.1 percent vs 2.3 percent). Health Advocates argued that renters (disproportionately low-income households) would benefit from this rule because landlords have no incentive to install efficient water heaters as tenants usually pay the energy bills. (Health Advocates, No. 1179 at p. 2; Joint Advocates of Energy Efficiency, No. 1165 at p. 2) In response, DOE notes that it has considered the impacts on low-income households.
Low-income homeowners (including owners of manufactured homes) are more likely to have smaller water heaters that either are not subject to amended standards (in the case of small ESWHs) or have modest incremental costs. Low-income renters are unlikely to bear the equipment and installation costs of replacing their water heater but
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637879 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
are more likely to pay energy costs and
therefore see operating benefits from the rule. DOE has evaluated the full distribution of impacts in the LCC analysis, including consumers that experience a net cost and consumers that experience a net benefit, and concludes that on the whole, the rule is economically justified.
Gas Association Commenters argued
that if better regional market share data were used, regions with low or negative LCC savings would impact the overall outcome differently. Gas Association Commenters included tables in their submitted comment summarizing these argued regional impacts. Gas Association Commenters also argued that DOE is missing subsets of low- income households by only using those who are most likely to directly pay utility bills. They stated that utilities can also be a function of rent where higher utility costs can still be passed on to the end user. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 6 and pp. 23–25) DOE acknowledges that there may be some regional variation in LCC impacts and these results are available in the LCC spreadsheet. DOE further acknowledges that some fraction of consumers will experience a net cost, as presented in the LCC. However, DOE concludes that on the whole, the rule continues to be economically justified, with the incorporation of a much larger RECS 2020 sample. The average LCC savings remain positive. With respect to low-income households, DOE took into account both scenarios where the households do or do not directly pay their utility bills, and these are included in the low-income subgroup analysis as discussed in chapter 11.
NRECA commented that the subgroup
is too narrowly defined to include low- income homeowners and urged DOE to account for consumers near but above the poverty level who can also experience a high burden when the installation cost for a heat pump water heater easily takes up 10 percent of their annual income. NRECA also noted that manufactured housing comprises 25 percent or more of the co-op’s residential housing stock and that these same homes present challenges for heat pump water heater adoption due to space constraints. NRECA suggested that DOE should improve its analysis by using low-and-moderate income instead of poverty-level in the subgroup and assigning proportionally higher occurrences of expensive installations to this subgroup. (NRECA, No. 1127 at pp. 5–6) In contrast, NYSERDA commented that the proposed standard will bring
significant benefits to low-and-moderate income households and to disadvantaged communities.
(NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 3) DOE notes that the low-income subgroup is specifically defined for households meeting poverty thresholds, as defined in chapter 11. While households slightly above these thresholds are not included in the low-income subgroup analysis, they are part of the overall LCC analysis. On the whole, DOE concludes that the rule is economically justified for both the overall LCC consumer sample as well as the low-income subgroup. Households that do not meet the low- income threshold but are nonetheless energy insecure are likely to experience impacts that fall in between the overall LCC results and the low-income subgroup results, which would still be economically justified. As noted above, energy insecure homeowners with smaller water heaters will either experience smaller incremental equipment costs on average or have water heaters not subject to amended standards, and energy insecure renters would benefit similarly to low-income renters.
ECSC argued that heat pump water
heater installations will be hindered by lack of contractor availability in rural areas. (ECSC, No. 1185 at pp. 1–2) Regarding contractor availability, DOE notes that while heat pump water heaters are not as common today, they will become very common by the compliance date of the rule. Many contractors at present are able to install different types of water heaters, including heat pump water heaters. At the adopted standard level, the existing market for small electric storage water heaters is preserved, which reduces the level of contractor training and investment needed than if higher standards were adopted for all electric storage water heaters. While DOE acknowledges there is a ramp up in contractor training required by 2030, the adopted standard level allows for a more incremental transition to heat pump technology. Furthermore, DOE notes that the emergence of workforce programs supported by the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will begin to support the training and education of the workforce needed to support the clean energy transition.
BWC disagreed with the Department
excluding any costs or benefits that are accrued by a landlord when analyzing impacts to the low-income household subgroup. While BWC understood that these costs and benefits are not imposed directly on renters, they will indirectly lead to impacts on renters that DOE
should account for, such as increased rent rates resulting from landlords attempting to recoup the initial project
installation costs, as well as increased maintenance costs likely to result for the installation of a higher efficiency product. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 26) Armada argued that DOE failed to acknowledge that landlords will be forced to increase rent or other costs to cover the purchase and installation of more efficient options, and a landlord will have to dedicate a bedroom to a water heater or reconfigure the duct- work of the property to accommodate the water heater. Armada argued that these are major changes that will harm residents the most, and these proposed efficiency standards which will effectively mandate heat pump technology will only compound the existing affordable housing issue. (Armada, No. 1193 at pp. 6–7) DOE
finds no evidence that significant rental cost increases would occur. Rental prices are largely dictated by supply and demand of housing in individual locations, not the sum of equipment costs in those rentals, such that two similar rentals could have widely differing prices in different cities. Furthermore, a landlord would be responsible for replacing an end-of-life water heater in the no-new-standards case as well yet the rent is unlikely to increase simply because of this regular maintenance. The installation costs estimated in the LCC already include any potential replacement of venting for gas-fired water heaters and other installation costs for ESWHs, however there is never a need to ‘‘dedicate a bedroom’’ to a new water heater. Additionally, even if there are significant extra costs for the installation of a heat pump water heater (see section IV.F.2.d of this document), the analysis includes the potential to switch to a small ESWH for consumers with lower hot water demand as an alternative to minimize installation costs (see section IV.G.1 of this document). Finally, even if a landlord were to fully pass on the incremental costs due to amended standards, those costs would presumably be spread out over a monthly rent spanning many years, possibly the lifetime of the water heater, resulting in relatively small monthly rent increases. It is for these reasons that the low-income subgroup analyzes impacts assuming renters do not bear installation costs. However, as described in section IV.F of this document, for the overall LCC analysis, DOE makes the simplifying assumption that all installation and equipment costs are paid for by the consumer of the equipment, including renters. Therefore, the main LCC results do assume that
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637880 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
153U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Company Filings. Available atwww.sec.gov/edgar/
searchedgar/companysearch.html (last accessed
Aug. 2, 2022).
154The U.S. Census Bureau. Quarterly Survey of
Plant Capacity Utilization. Available at www.census.gov/programs-surveys/qpc/data/ tables.html (last accessed Aug. 2, 2022).
155U.S. Census Bureau’s Annual Survey of
Manufactures: 2018–2021 (Available at: www.census.gov/programs-surveys/asm/data/ tables.html) (last accessed January 18, 2024).
156The D&B Hoovers login is available at
app.dnbhoovers.com (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023). landlords pass on all costs and yet the
analysis still finds that the rule is economically justified.
For consumers in subsidized housing,
BWC urged the Department to consider two realistic outcomes regarding product rebates that are designed to cover upfront installation costs. The first is that many or all third parties will stop offering these rebates once federal, state, and/or local regulatory bodies require the use of high-efficiency appliances. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 26) The second is the cost that these consumers will experience when their highly efficient product reaches the end of its useful life. Many rebate programs are designed to assist consumers with project costs associated with fuel- switching or upgrading a lower efficiency product with a more expensive, higher efficiency counterpart. However, many if not most of these rebate programs do not apply to installations where a highly efficient product is undergoing a like-for-like replacement. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 27)
DOE clarifies that the analysis does
not assume that installation costs are reduced by rebates or incentives. Rather, the analysis uses these existing programs as part of the shipments projection and the projection of market shares at different efficiency levels in the no-new-standards case. This merely characterizes the market up to the compliance date of the adopted standards.
2. Senior-Only Households
Senior-only households are
households with occupants who are all
at least 65 years of age. RECS 2020 includes information on the age of household occupants, allowing for the identification of senior-only households from the sample. Senior-only households comprised 23.5 percent of the country’s households. In estimating the LCC impacts to senior-only households, it is assumed that any residual value of a long-lived product is capitalized in the value of the home.
3. Small Business Subgroup
DOE identified small businesses in
CBECS 2018 using threshold levels for
maximum number of employees within each building principal building activity. DOE received no comments regarding small businesses impacts relevant to products within the scope of this final rule.
J. Manufacturer Impact Analysis1. Overview
DOE performed an MIA to estimate
the financial impacts of amended energy conservation standards on
manufacturers of consumer water heaters and to estimate the potential impacts of such standards on direct employment and manufacturing capacity. The MIA has both quantitative and qualitative aspects and includes analyses of projected industry cash flows, the INPV, investments in research and development (‘‘R&D’’) and manufacturing capital, and domestic manufacturing employment. Additionally, the MIA seeks to determine how amended energy conservation standards might affect manufacturing employment, capacity, and competition, as well as how standards contribute to overall regulatory burden. Finally, the MIA serves to identify any disproportionate impacts on manufacturer subgroups, including small business manufacturers.
The quantitative part of the MIA
primarily relies on the GRIM, an industry cash flow model with inputs specific to this rulemaking. The key GRIM inputs include data on the industry cost structure, unit production costs, product shipments, manufacturer markups, and investments in R&D and manufacturing capital required to produce compliant products. The key GRIM outputs are the INPV, which is the sum of industry annual cash flows over the analysis period, discounted using the industry-weighted average cost of capital, and the impact to domestic manufacturing employment. The model uses standard accounting principles to estimate the impacts of more stringent energy conservation standards on a given industry by comparing changes in INPV and domestic manufacturing employment between a no-new-standards case and the various standards cases. To capture the uncertainty relating to manufacturer pricing strategies following amended standards, the GRIM estimates a range of possible impacts under different manufacturer markup scenarios.
The qualitative part of the MIA
addresses manufacturer characteristics and market trends. Specifically, the MIA considers such factors as a potential standard’s impact on manufacturing capacity, competition within the industry, the cumulative impact of other DOE and non-DOE regulations, and
impacts on manufacturer subgroups. The complete MIA is outlined in chapter 12 of the final rule TSD.
DOE conducted the MIA for this
rulemaking in three phases. In Phase 1 of the MIA, DOE prepared a profile of the consumer water heater manufacturing industry based on the market and technology assessment, preliminary manufacturer interviews, and publicly available information. This
included a top-down analysis of consumer water heater manufacturers that DOE used to derive preliminary financial inputs for the GRIM (e.g., revenues; materials, labor, overhead, and depreciation expenses; selling, general, and administrative expenses (‘‘SG&A’’); and R&D expenses). DOE also used public sources of information to further calibrate its initial characterization of the consumer water heater manufacturing industry, including company filings of form 10– K from the SEC,
153corporate annual
reports, the U.S. Census Bureau’s Quarterly Survey of Plant Capacity Utilization,
154U.S. Census Bureau’s
Annual Survey of Manufactures (‘‘ASM’’),
155and reports from D&B
Hoovers.156
In Phase 2 of the MIA, DOE prepared
a framework industry cash-flow analysis
to quantify the potential impacts of amended energy conservation standards. The GRIM uses several factors to determine a series of annual cash flows starting with the announcement of the standard and extending over a 30-year period following the compliance date of the standard. These factors include annual expected revenues, costs of sales, SG&A and R&D expenses, taxes, and capital expenditures. In general, energy conservation standards can affect manufacturer cash flow in three distinct ways: (1) creating a need for increased investment, (2) raising production costs per unit, and (3) altering revenue due to higher per-unit prices and changes in sales volumes.
In addition, during Phase 2, DOE
developed interview guides to distribute to manufacturers of consumer water heaters in order to develop other key GRIM inputs, including product and capital conversion costs, and to gather additional information on the anticipated effects of energy conservation standards on revenues, direct employment, capital assets, industry competitiveness, and subgroup impacts.
In Phase 3 of the MIA, DOE
conducted structured, detailed
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637881 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
interviews with representative
manufacturers. During these interviews, DOE discussed engineering, manufacturing, procurement, and financial topics to validate assumptions used in the GRIM and to identify key issues or concerns. As part of Phase 3, DOE also evaluated subgroups of manufacturers that may be disproportionately impacted by amended standards or that may not be accurately represented by the average cost assumptions used to develop the industry cash flow analysis. Such manufacturer subgroups may include small business manufacturers, low- volume manufacturers, niche players, and/or manufacturers exhibiting a cost structure that largely differs from the industry average. DOE identified one subgroup for a separate impact analysis: small business manufacturers. The small business subgroup is discussed in section VI.B of this document, ‘‘Review under the Regulatory Flexibility Act’’ and in chapter 12 of the final rule TSD.
2. Government Regulatory Impact Model
and Key Inputs
DOE uses the GRIM to quantify the
changes in cash flow due to new or amended standards that result in a higher or lower industry value. The GRIM uses a standard, annual, discounted cash-flow analysis that incorporates manufacturer costs, manufacturer markups, shipments, and industry financial information as inputs. The GRIM models changes in costs, distribution of shipments, investments, and manufacturer margins that could result from an amended energy conservation standard. The GRIM spreadsheet uses the inputs to arrive at a series of annual cash flows, beginning in 2023 (the base year of the analysis) and continuing to 2059. DOE calculated INPVs by summing the stream of annual discounted cash flows during this period. For manufacturers of consumer water heaters, DOE used a real discount rate of 9.3 percent, which was derived from industry financials and then modified according to feedback received during manufacturer interviews.
The GRIM calculates cash flows using
standard accounting principles and
compares changes in INPV between the no-new-standards case and each standards case. The difference in INPV between the no-new-standards case and a standards case represents the financial impact of the new or amended energy conservation standard on manufacturers. As discussed previously, DOE developed critical GRIM inputs using a number of sources, including publicly available data, results of the engineering analysis, and information gathered from industry stakeholders
during the course of manufacturer interviews. The GRIM results are presented in section V.B.2 of this document. Additional details about the GRIM, the discount rate, and other financial parameters can be found in chapter 12 of the final rule TSD.
a. Manufacturer Production Costs
Manufacturing more efficient
products is typically more expensive
than manufacturing baseline products due to the use of more complex components, which are typically more costly than baseline components. The
changes in the MPCs of covered products can affect the revenues, gross margins, and cash flow of the industry.
As discussed in section IV.C.1 of this
document, DOE conducted a market analysis of currently available models listed in DOE’s CCD to determine which efficiency levels were most representative of the current distribution of consumer water heaters available on the market. DOE also completed physical teardowns of commercially available units to determine which design options manufacturers may use to achieve certain efficiency levels for each water heater category analyzed. DOE requested comments from stakeholders and conducted interviews with manufacturers concerning these initial efficiency levels, which have been updated based on the feedback DOE received. For a complete description of the MPCs, see section IV.C of this
document and chapter 5 of the final rule TSD.
b. Shipments Projections
The GRIM estimates manufacturer
revenues based on total unit shipment
projections and the distribution of those shipments by efficiency level. Changes in sales volumes and efficiency mix over time can significantly affect manufacturer finances. For this analysis, the GRIM uses the NIA’s annual shipment projections derived from the shipments analysis from 2023 (the base year) to 2059 (the end year of the analysis period). See section IV.G of this
document and chapter 9 of the final rule TSD for additional details.
c. Product and Capital Conversion Costs
Amended energy conservation
standards could cause manufacturers to
incur conversion costs to bring their production facilities and equipment designs into compliance. DOE evaluated the level of conversion-related expenditures that would be needed to comply with each considered efficiency level in each product class. For the MIA, DOE classified these conversion costs into two major groups: (1) product conversion costs; and (2) capital conversion costs. Product conversion costs are investments in research, development, testing, marketing, and other non-capitalized costs necessary to make product designs comply with amended energy conservation standards. Capital conversion costs are investments in property, plant, and equipment necessary to adapt or change existing production facilities such that new compliant product designs can be fabricated and assembled.
To evaluate the level of product
conversion costs manufacturers would likely incur to comply with amended energy conservation standards, DOE relied on feedback from manufacturer interviews. DOE contractors conducted interviews with manufacturers of gas- fired storage, gas-fired instantaneous, oil-fired storage, electric storage, electric instantaneous, tabletop, and grid- enabled water heaters. The interviewed manufacturers account for approximately 84 percent of sales of consumer water heaters covered by this rulemaking. DOE used market share weighted feedback from interviews to extrapolate industry-level product conversion costs from the manufacturer feedback.
To evaluate the level of capital
conversion costs manufacturers would likely incur to comply with amended energy conservation standards, DOE relied on estimates of equipment and tooling from its engineering analysis and on feedback from manufacturer interviews. DOE modeled the green field investments required for a major manufacturer to set up a production facility. The investment figures included capital required for manufacturing equipment, tooling, conveyors, and facility. DOE then modeled the incremental investment required by more stringent standards. DOE multiplied the incremental investment by the number of ‘‘major’’ (i.e., high-volume) manufacturers. These
investment levels aligned with feedback from interviews. Additionally, DOE determined that smaller manufacturers would have lower investment levels given their lower production volumes, relative to ‘‘major’’ manufacturers, and accounted for those lower investments for manufacturers with lower market share. DOE updated its conversion cost estimates for the product classes analyzed in this final rule by incorporating refined equipment, tooling, conveyor, and space estimates generated from the product teardown analysis, but otherwise maintained its
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637882 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
157The gross margin percentage of 24 percent for
gas-fired storage is based on a manufacturer markup
of 1.31. The gross margin percentage of 22 percent for electric storage is based on a manufacturer markup of 1.28. The gross margin percentage of 23 percent for oil-fired storage is based on a manufacturer markup of 1.30. 158Technical Support Document: Energy
Efficiency Program For Commercial And Industrial
Equipment: Microwave Ovens. Available at www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2017-BT- STD-0023-0022. conversion cost methodology from the
July 2023 NOPR.
In general, DOE assumes all
conversion-related investments occur between the year of publication of the final rule and the year by which manufacturers must comply with the new standard. The conversion cost figures used in the GRIM can be found in section V.B.2 of this document. For additional information on the estimated product and capital conversion costs, see chapter 12 of the final rule TSD.
d. Manufacturer Markup Scenarios
MSPs include direct manufacturing
production costs (i.e., labor, materials,
and overhead estimated in DOE’s MPCs) and all non-production costs (i.e., SG&A, R&D, and interest), along with profit. To calculate the MSPs in the GRIM, DOE applied manufacturer markups to the MPCs estimated in the engineering analysis for each analyzed
product class and efficiency level. Modifying these manufacturer markups in the standards case yields different sets of impacts on manufacturers. For the MIA, DOE modeled two standards- case manufacturer markup scenarios to represent uncertainty regarding the potential impacts on prices and profitability for manufacturers following the implementation of amended energy conservation standards: (1) a preservation of gross margin percentage scenario; and (2) a preservation of operating profit scenario. These scenarios lead to different manufacturer markup values that, when applied to the MPCs, result in varying revenue and cash flow impacts.
Under the preservation of gross
margin percentage scenario, DOE applied a single uniform ‘‘gross margin percentage’’ across all efficiency levels, which assumes that manufacturers would be able to maintain the same amount of profit as a percentage of revenues at all efficiency levels within a product class. As MPCs increase with efficiency, this scenario implies that the per-unit dollar profit will increase. DOE estimated gross margin percentages of 24 percent for the gas-fired storage water heaters, 22 percent for electric storage water heaters, and 23 percent for oil- fired storage water heaters.
157
Manufacturers tend to believe it is optimistic to assume that they would be able to maintain the same gross margin percentage as their production costs increase, particularly for minimally efficient products. Therefore, this scenario represents a high bound to industry profitability under an amended energy conservation standard.
Under the preservation of operating
profit scenario, DOE modeled a situation in which manufacturers are not able to increase per-unit operating profit in proportion to increases in MPCs. In the preservation of operating profit scenario, as the cost of production goes up under a standards case, manufacturers are generally required to reduce their manufacturer markups to a level that maintains base-case operating profit. DOE implemented this scenario in the GRIM by lowering the manufacturer markups at each TSL to yield approximately the same earnings before interest and taxes in the standards case as in the no-new- standards case in the year after the compliance date of the amended standards. The implicit assumption behind this scenario is that the industry can only maintain its operating profit in absolute dollars after the standard.
A comparison of industry financial
impacts under the two scenarios is presented in section V.B.2.a of this document.
3. Discussion of MIA Comments
a. Conversion Costs
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
BWC submitted written comments about
the accuracy of DOE’s conversion cost estimates. BWC stated that it continues to appreciate DOE considering conversion costs as part of its analysis. However, BWC asserted that the industry conversion costs DOE estimated in the July 2023 NOPR are understated and far lower than the cost that manufacturers will realistically incur. BWC offered to discuss these findings during confidential conversation with the consultants that DOE engaged for this rulemaking. (BWC, 1164 at pp. 4–5)
AHRI asserted that under the
standards proposed in the July 2023 NOPR, manufacturers would need to produce exponentially more heat pump water heaters, requiring many manufacturers to build new plants, retrofit existing lines, or both. Additionally, AHRI expressed concern that supply chains and labor shortages could compound these difficulties. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 12)
To evaluate the level of conversion
costs industry would likely incur to comply with potential amended energy conservation standards, DOE relied on feedback from confidential manufacturer interviews and estimates of equipment, tooling, conveyor, and
space from the engineering and product teardown analyses. DOE interviewed a range of manufacturers in advance of the July 2023 NOPR, which together account for approximately 84 percent of U.S. sales of consumer water heaters covered by this final rule. For this final rule, DOE reexamined its conversion cost estimates from the July 2023 NOPR. For all product classes analyzed in this final rule, DOE updated its conversion cost estimates by incorporating refined equipment, tooling, conveyor, and space estimates generated from the product teardown analysis, but otherwise maintained its conversion cost methodology from the July 2023 NOPR. See section IV.J.2.c of this document
and chapter 12 of the final rule TSD for additional details on DOE’s conversion cost methodology and investment estimates.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
AHRI stated that it supported the inclusion of amortization of product conversion costs under standards into the projected MSP in a recent rulemaking for microwave ovens, and urges DOE to use this methodology in all rulemakings.
158AHRI further asked
DOE to explain the justification for amortizing conversion costs in one instance but not in all. (AHRI, No. 1167 at pp. 20–21)
DOE models different standards-case
manufacturer markup scenarios to represent uncertainty regarding the potential impacts on prices and profitability for manufacturers following the implementation of amended energy conservation standards. The analyzed manufacturer markup scenarios vary by rulemaking as they are meant to reflect the potential range of financial impacts for manufacturers of the specific covered product or equipment. For the July 2023 NOPR, DOE applied a preservation of gross margin percentage scenario to reflect an upper bound to industry profitability under amended standards and a preservation of operating profit scenario to reflect a lower bound of industry profitability under amended standards. 88 FR 49058, 49128. For consumer water heaters, manufacturing more efficient products is generally more expensive than manufacturing baseline or minimally efficient products, as reflected by the MPCs estimated in the engineering analysis (see section IV.C.1.e of this
document). Under the preservation of gross margin scenario for consumer
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637883 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
159California Air Resources Board (‘‘CARB’’) has
stated that it is committed to explore developing
and proposing zero-emission GHG standards for new space and water heaters sold in California as part of the 2022 State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan adopted in September 2022. However, at the time of issuance, CARB has not proposed or adopted such standards for consumer water heaters. Additional information is available at: ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/zero-
emission-appliance-standards/about. (Last accessed Nov. 29, 2023).
160Available at: www.baaqmd.gov/∼/media/
dotgov/files/rules/reg-9-rule-4-nitrogen-oxides- from-fan-type-residential-central-furnaces/2021- amendments/documents/20230315_ rg0906-
pdf.pdf?rev=436fcdb037324b0b8f0c981d869e684d&sc_ lang=en. water heaters, incremental increases in
MPCs at higher efficiency levels result in an increase in per-unit dollar profit per unit sold. As shown in Table V.18, under the preservation of gross margin scenario, the standards case INPV increases relative to the no-new- standards case INPV for the adopted TSL (i.e., TSL 2). This implies that the
increase in cashflow from the higher MSP is outweighed by the estimated conversion costs at the adopted level. In other words, under the preservation of gross margin scenario, the consumer water heater industry recovers conversion costs incurred as a result of amended standards. The approach used in the microwave ovens rulemaking (i.e., a conversion cost recovery
scenario) modeled a scenario in which manufacturers recover investments through an increase in their manufacturer markup. 88 FR 39912, 39935. DOE implemented this scenario in the microwave ovens GRIM by calibrating the standards case manufacturer markups for each product class at each efficiency level to cause manufacturer INPV in the standards cases to be equal to the INPV in the no- new-standards case. Thus, if DOE applied a conversion cost recovery scenario in this rulemaking, the potential change in INPV at the adopted TSL would be within the range of estimated impacts resulting from the preservation of gross margin scenario and preservation of operating profit scenario. As such, DOE maintained the two standards-case manufacturer markup scenarios used in the July 2023 NOPR for this final rule as they most appropriately reflect the upper (least severe) and lower (more severe) impacts to manufacturer profitability under amended standards.
b. Cumulative Regulatory Burden
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
AHRI submitted written comments
regarding cumulative regulatory burden. AHRI urged DOE to consider the high volume of regulatory activity that directly affects manufacturers of consumer water heaters and expressed concern that DOE was rushing to publish recent rulemakings, risking significant revision that will prolong uncertainty, confuse consumers, and potentially undermine broader policy goals. AHRI cited standards and test procedure rulemakings in regards not only to consumer water heaters, but also to consumer boilers, consumer pool
heaters, a final rule pertaining to standards for commercial water heaters, small electric motors, commercial and industrial pumps, commercial and multifamily high-rise and low-rise residential, as well as low and zero NOx
actions by California Air Resources Board (‘‘CARB’’) and individual air quality management districts, State building code changes, ENERGY STAR potentially setting a max-tech requirement for gas storage water heaters, and Federal and State refrigerant regulations as regulatory actions that impact consumer water heater manufacturers. (AHRI, No. 1167 at pp. 7–9)
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
BWC commented that the impact of cumulative regulatory burden experienced by manufacturers is not limited to conversion costs, but also to the preparations manufacturers must undergo in order to respond to proposed rules. BWC further stated that DOE has promulgated several major rulemakings that will directly impact the products that BWC manufactures, in addition to actions undertaken by other governments and programs, and that the ability of manufacturers to draw on outside resources for assistance will be severely limited by the concurrent needs of many manufacturers across rulemakings, particularly in the case of third-party laboratories. BWC stated that due to the burden this rulemaking will place on third-party labs, as well as the general burden of multiple concurrent ongoing regulatory actions, BWC strongly disagreed with DOE’s decision not to consider test rulemakings as part of its analysis. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 24–26) BWC also stated that, due to concurrent regulatory actions regarding energy efficiency at both the State and Federal levels, it disagreed with DOE’s conclusion in section VI.B.5 of the July 2023 NOPR that there are no rules or regulations that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule and encouraged DOE to account for all of these issues, ideally allowing manufacturers more time to review and respond to DOE rulemakings when requested. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 24)
DOE analyzes cumulative regulatory
burden pursuant to section 13(g) of Appendix A. 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, section 13(g); 10 CFR 431.4. DOE notes some of the rules (e.g., consumer boilers) detailed by AHRI are not finalized. Regulations that are not yet finalized are not considered as cumulative regulatory burden, as the timing, cost, and impacts of unfinalized rules are speculative. However, to aid stakeholders in identifying potential cumulative regulatory burden, DOE does list rulemakings that have proposed rules, which have tentative compliance dates, compliance levels,
and compliance cost estimates. The results of this analysis can be found in section V.B.2.e of this document. As
shown in Table V.21, DOE analyzed the consumer boilers, consumer pool heaters, and commercial water heaters rulemakings as part of its cumulative regulatory burden analysis. Regarding small electric motors, DOE published a notice of proposed determination (‘‘NOPD’’) on February 6, 2023. As such, DOE would not consider the small electric motors rulemaking as contributing to cumulative regulatory burden since DOE did not propose to amend its energy conservation standards. 88 FR 7629. Regarding commercial and industrial pumps, DOE similarly would not consider the commercial and industrial pumps rulemaking as contributing to cumulative regulatory burden since DOE did not propose to amend its energy conservations standards.
Regarding AHRI’s comment about
ultra-low NO
Xand zero NO X
regulations, DOE notes that in its analysis of cumulative regulatory burden, DOE considers Federal, product specific regulations that have compliance dates within 3 years of one another. DOE is not aware of any Federal or State ultra-low NO
Xor zero
NO Xregulations specific to consumer
water heaters with compliance dates within the 7-year cumulative regulatory burden timeframe (2027–2033).
159DOE
notes that certain localities (i.e., California Air Districts) have adopted regulations requiring ultra-low NO
X
consumer water heaters. DOE accounts
for the portion of ultra-low NO X
shipments in its analysis. DOE notes that a California Air District—the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board of Directors—has adopted amendments to eliminate NO
X
emissions from certain gas-fired consumer water heaters beginning in 2027.
160There are currently no natural
gas-fired water heaters on the market that would meet the zero NO
X
standards, though manufacturers may choose to develop them. Regarding building code changes in states
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637884 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
requiring heat pump water heating,
DOE’s accounts for increased incentives for higher efficiency equipment and electrification efforts in its shipments analysis. See section IV.H.1 of this
document for additional information on product efficiency trends.
Regarding Federal and State
refrigerant regulations, EPA published a final rule pertaining to the phaseout of HFC refrigerants with high global warming potential (‘‘GWP’’) in specific sectors or subsectors on October 24, 2023. 88 FR 73098. However, EPA does not adopt provisions to limit the manufacture of heat pump water heaters with HFC refrigerants in that final rule. EPA restricts the use of HFCs and blends containing HFCs with a GWP of 150 or greater beginning January 1, 2025 for all foam subsectors, including rigid polyurethane for use in water heaters. As discussed in chapter 3 of the final rule TSD, DOE found that water heater manufacturers have already begun transitioning to alternative blowing agents for insulation foam. Additionally, DOE notes that the January 1, 2025 compliance date falls outside the cumulative regulatory burden timeframe. Regarding the comments about EPA’s new ENERGY STAR levels, DOE notes that participating in ENERGY STAR is voluntary and not considered in DOE’s analysis of cumulative regulatory burden.
Regarding BWC’s request that DOE
not discount the costs for stakeholders to review rulemakings, although appreciative that monitoring and responding to rulemakings does impose costs for stakeholders, DOE believes that this is outside the scope of analysis for individual product rulemakings. Because EPCA requires DOE to establish and maintain the energy conservation program for consumer products and to
periodically propose new and amended standards (or propose that standards for products do not need to be amended) and test procedures, DOE considers this rulemaking activity to be part of the analytical baseline (i.e., in the no-new-
standards case and the standards case). That is, these activities (e.g., reviewing
proposed rules or proposed determinations) would exist regardless of the regulatory option that DOE adopts through a rulemaking and would be independent from the conversion costs required to adapt product designs and manufacturing facilitates to meet an amended standard.
c. Manufacturing Capacity
A.O. Smith noted that while it
supports the intent of DOE’s proposal to
move the minimum energy conservation standards for a subset of consumer water heaters, A.O. Smith remains
concerned with the feasibility of implementing these dramatic shifts in the time frame proposed. A.O. Smith commented that the July 2023 NOPR would drive an unprecedented transformation for the water heater industry, impacting manufacturers, its supply chain, distributors, plumbers, and installers. A.O. Smith noted that it invested significant capital in its heat pump manufacturing facility following the April 2010 Final Rule in anticipation of a ramp up in demand, which did not materialize. A.O. Smith noted it plans to make the necessary investments to transition to heat pump water heaters, but expressed concern that uncertainty in the market may place these investments at risk. A.O. Smith further expressed concern about the availability of the necessary components at the scale the July 2023 NOPR would require, as well as the current shortage of workers with the necessary skills and experience to manufacture heat pump water heaters. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 17–19) Gas Association Commenters questioned the realism of ramping up heat pump water heater capacity, stating that DOE did not provide sufficient analysis showing how manufacturers could produce an additional 3 to 4 million electric heat pump water heaters per year. (Gas Association Commenters, No. 1181 at p. 33)
Rheem commented it is committed to
transitioning the majority of its electric storage water heaters to heat pump water heaters within the 5-year compliance period, which Rheem views as sufficiently long to complete the conversion. Rheem recommended that DOE and other Federal agencies promote awareness of this rulemaking and the future of water heating in the United States, particularly among plumbers, contractors, and consumers. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 10)
DOE recognizes that the standards
proposed in the July 2023 NOPR and adopted in this final rule would require investments to update production facilities and redesign products. DOE accounts for product and capital conversion costs in the MIA. See section
IV.J.2.c of this document. Regarding industry’s ability to ramp up production within the 5-year compliance period, DOE believes that having a major manufacturer sign on to the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation is a testament to industry’s ability to ramp up capacity to produce the volumes necessary to support the heat pump water heater market that will be required by TSL 2 by the compliance
date of the amended standards. Regarding the uncertainty in the market related to heat pump water heaters, DOE
recognizes that amended standards could lead to shifts in the market towards smaller electric storage water heater sizes which can meet the adopted standard levels without the use of heat pump technology. DOE accounts for the potential market shift in its shipments analysis, a key input to the GRIM. For this final rule, DOE assumes a portion of consumers would select one or more smaller electric storage water heaters with or without a ‘‘booster’’ instantaneous water heater instead of replacing a larger electric storage water heater with a heat pump water heater under amended standards, see IV.G.1 of
this document for additional details. DOE notes that measures such as requiring high-temperature testing will be required for certain electric storage water heaters. As discussed in section V.D.1 of this document, the use of high- temperature testing will be required for small electric resistance water heaters that are able to continuously store water at a higher temperature than the delivered water temperature setpoint since DOE expects that consumers will use the high-temperature mode as part of the regular operation of their water heater. By implementing the high- temperature test method for certain smaller electric storage water heaters designed to compete with larger electric storage water heaters by operating at a higher temperature, DOE will ensure that representations for such products are accurate and provide consumers with the means to directly compare these products to the larger water heaters they will likely compete with. In other words, the high-temperature test method would create an equivalent basis of comparison for products which can offer the same effective storage capacity. See section V.D.1 of this
document for information on high- temperature testing.
K. Emissions Analysis
The emissions analysis consists of
two components. The first component
estimates the effect of potential energy conservation standards on power sector and site (where applicable) combustion
emissions of CO
2, NO X, SO 2, and Hg.
The second component estimates the impacts of potential standards on emissions of two additional greenhouse gases, CH
4and N 2O, as well as the
reductions in emissions of other gases due to ‘‘upstream’’ activities in the fuel production chain. These upstream activities comprise extraction, processing, and transporting fuels to the site of combustion.
The analysis of electric power sector
emissions of CO
2, NO X, SO 2, and Hg
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637885 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
161Available at www.epa.gov/sites/production/
files/2021–04/documents/emission-factors _
apr2021.pdf (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
162U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
External Combustion Sources. In Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors. AP–42. Fifth Edition. Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources. Chapter 1. Available at www.epa.gov/air-emissions- factors-and-quantification/ap-42-compilation-air- emissions-factors#Proposed/ (last accessed July 12,
2021). 163Appendix A to Subpart C of Part 430—
Procedures, Interpretations, and Policies for
Consideration of New or Revised Energy Conservation Standards and Test Procedures for Consumer Products and Certain Commercial/ Industrial Equipment. https://www.ecfr.gov/
current/title-10/chapter-II/subchapter-D/part-430/ subpart-C/appendix-Appendix%20A%20to%20Subpart%20C%20of%20Part%20430 .
164For further information, see the Assumptions
to AEO2023 report that sets forth the major
assumptions used to generate the projections in the Annual Energy Outlook. Available at www.eia.gov/ outlooks/aeo/assumptions/ (last accessed Dec. 1,
2023). 165CSAPR requires States to address annual
emissions of SO 2and NO X, precursors to the
formation of fine particulate matter (‘‘PM 2.5’’)
pollution, in order to address the interstate
transport of pollution with respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM
2.5National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(‘‘NAAQS’’). CSAPR also requires certain States to address the ozone season (May–Sept.) emissions of NO
X, a precursor to the formation of ozone
pollution, in order to address the interstate transport of ozone pollution with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 76 FR 48208 (Aug. 8, 2011). EPA subsequently issued a supplemental rule that included an additional five States in the CSAPR ozone season program; 76 FR 80760 (Dec. 27, 2011) (Supplemental Rule), and EPA issued the CSAPR Update for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 81 FR 74504 (Oct. 26, 2016).
166In order to continue operating, coal power
plants must have either flue gas desulfurization or dry sorbent injection systems installed. Both technologies, which are used to reduce acid gas emissions, also reduce SO
2emissions. uses emissions intended to represent the
marginal impacts of the change in electricity consumption associated with amended or new standards. The methodology is based on results published for the AEO, including a set
of side cases that implement a variety of efficiency-related policies. The methodology is described in appendix 13A in the final rule TSD. The analysis presented in this notice uses projections from AEO2023. Power sector emissions
of CH
4and N 2O from fuel combustion
are estimated using Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories published by the EPA.
161
The on-site operation of consumer
water heaters involves combustion of fossil fuels and results in emissions of CO
2, NO X, SO 2, CH 4, and N 2O where
these products are used. Site emissions of these gases were estimated using Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories and, for NO
Xand SO 2,
emissions intensity factors from an EPA publication.
162
FFC upstream emissions, which
include emissions from fuel combustion during extraction, processing, and transportation of fuels, and ‘‘fugitive’’ emissions (direct leakage to the atmosphere) of CH
4and CO 2, are
estimated based on the methodology described in chapter 15 of the final rule TSD.
The emissions intensity factors are
expressed in terms of physical units per MWh or MMBtu of site energy savings. For power sector emissions, specific emissions intensity factors are calculated by sector and end use. Total emissions reductions are estimated using the energy savings calculated in the national impact analysis.
BWC recommended including
emissions as a result of increased manufacturing of parts at a higher standard level, such as compressors, evaporators, and other parts for heat pump water heaters. Additionally, BWC mentioned that the leaking of refrigerant in heat pump water heaters may result in additional unaccounted-for emissions and BWC is discouraged that DOE has already declined to take the emission from refrigerant leakages into account in the Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Pool Heater Final Rule. BWC
commented that ASHRAE standards are in development to measure refrigerant
leakage expectations for heat pump products that could be leveraged in future DOE analysis. (BWC No. 1164 at p. 5)
DOE’s emissions analysis is guided by
section 16.h of Appendix A,
163which
states that DOE calculates emissions reductions of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, methane, nitrous oxides, and mercury likely to be avoided based on an analysis that includes specific components. These components only include direct emissions from use of covered products and emissions in the full-fuel-cycle. DOE has never considered air pollutant emissions associated with manufacturing or transport of products or emissions of refrigerants. Even if DOE considered the emissions from refrigerants, DOE estimates that refrigerant leakages in heat pump water heaters will be rare and can be prevented with regular inspection and repair, which DOE accounts for as repair and maintenance costs in its LCC analysis. If refrigerant leaks do occur, the associated emissions increase would still be negligible compared to the emissions savings of this rule. Accounting for refrigerant leakage would not change the economic justification of the rule.
1. Air Quality Regulations Incorporated
in DOE’s Analysis
DOE’s no-new-standards case for the
electric power sector reflects the AEO, which incorporates the projected impacts of existing air quality regulations on emissions. AEO2023 reflects, to the extent possible, laws and regulations adopted through mid- November 2022, including the emissions control programs discussed in the following paragraphs the emissions control programs discussed in the following paragraphs, and the Inflation Reduction Act.
164
SO 2emissions from affected electric
generating units (‘‘EGUs’’) are subject to nationwide and regional emissions cap- and-trade programs. Title IV of the Clean Air Act sets an annual emissions cap on SO
2for affected EGUs in the 48 contiguous States and the District of
Columbia (‘‘DC’’). (42 U.S.C. 7651 et seq.) SO
2emissions from numerous
States in the eastern half of the United States are also limited under the Cross- State Air Pollution Rule (‘‘CSAPR’’). 76 FR 48208 (Aug. 8, 2011). CSAPR requires these States to reduce certain emissions, including annual SO
2
emissions, and went into effect as of
January 1, 2015.165The AEO
incorporates implementation of CSAPR, including the update to the CSAPR ozone season program emission budgets and target dates issued in 2016. 81 FR 74504 (Oct. 26, 2016). Compliance with CSAPR is flexible among EGUs and is enforced through the use of tradable emissions allowances. Under existing EPA regulations, for states subject to SO
2emissions limits under CSAPR, any
excess SO 2emissions allowances
resulting from the lower electricity demand caused by the adoption of an efficiency standard could be used to permit offsetting increases in SO
2
emissions by another regulated EGU.
However, beginning in 2016, SO 2
emissions began to fall as a result of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (‘‘MATS’’) for power plants.
16677 FR
9304 (Feb. 16, 2012). The final rule establishes power plant emission standards for mercury, acid gases, and non-mercury metallic toxic pollutants. Because of the emissions reductions under the MATS, it is unlikely that excess SO
2emissions allowances
resulting from the lower electricity demand would be needed or used to permit offsetting increases in SO
2
emissions by another regulated EGU. Therefore, energy conservation standards that decrease electricity generation will generally reduce SO
2
emissions. DOE estimated SO 2
emissions reduction using emissions factors based on AEO2023.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637886 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
167Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of
Greenhouse Gases. 2021. Technical Support
Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under Executive Order 13990. February. United States Government. Available at www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/ blog/2021/02/26/a-return-to-science-evidence- based-estimates-of-the-benefits-of-reducing-climate- pollution/. CSAPR also established limits on NO X
emissions for numerous States in the
eastern half of the United States. Energy conservation standards would have little effect on NO
Xemissions in those
States covered by CSAPR emissions limits if excess NO
Xemissions
allowances resulting from the lower electricity demand could be used to permit offsetting increases in NO
X
emissions from other EGUs. In such case, NOx emissions would remain near the limit even if electricity generation goes down. Depending on the configuration of the power sector in the different regions and the need for allowances, however, NO
Xemissions
might not remain at the limit in the case of lower electricity demand. That would mean that standards might reduce NOx emissions in covered States. Despite this possibility, DOE has chosen to be conservative in its analysis and has maintained the assumption that standards will not reduce NO
X
emissions in States covered by CSAPR. Standards would be expected to reduce NO
Xemissions in the States not covered
by CSAPR. DOE used AEO2023 data to
derive NO Xemissions factors for the
group of States not covered by CSAPR.
The MATS limit mercury emissions
from power plants, but they do not include emissions caps and, as such, DOE’s energy conservation standards would be expected to slightly reduce Hg emissions. DOE estimated mercury emissions reduction using emissions factors based on AEO2023, which incorporates the MATS.
L. Monetizing Emissions Impacts
As part of the development of this
final rule, for the purpose of complying
with the requirements of Executive Order 12866, DOE considered the estimated monetary benefits from the reduced emissions of CO
2, CH 4, N2O,
NO X, and SO 2that are expected to result
from each of the TSLs considered. In order to make this calculation analogous to the calculation of the NPV of consumer benefit, DOE considered the reduced emissions expected to result over the lifetime of products shipped in the projection period for each TSL. This section summarizes the basis for the values used for monetizing the emissions benefits and presents the values considered in this final rule.
To monetize the benefits of reducing
GHG emissions, this analysis uses the interim estimates presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the IWG. 1. Monetization of Greenhouse GasEmissions
DOE estimates the monetized benefits
of the reductions in emissions of CO
2,
CH 4, and N 2O by using a measure of the
SC (‘‘SC’’) of each pollutant (e.g., SC–
CO 2). These estimates represent the
monetary value of the net harm to society associated with a marginal increase in emissions of these pollutants in a given year, or the benefit of avoiding that increase. These estimates are intended to include (but are not limited to) climate-change-related changes in net agricultural productivity, human health, property damages from increased flood risk, disruption of energy systems, risk of conflict, environmental migration, and the value of ecosystem services.
DOE exercises its own judgment in
presenting monetized climate benefits as recommended by applicable Executive orders, and DOE would reach the same conclusion presented in this rulemaking in the absence of the social cost of greenhouse gases. That is, the social costs of greenhouse gases, whether measured using the February 2021 interim estimates presented by the IWG on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases or by another means, did not affect the rule ultimately adopted by DOE.
DOE estimated the global social
benefits of CO
2, CH 4, and N 2O
reductions using SC–GHG values that were based on the interim values presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide Interim Estimates under Executive Order 13990, published in February 2021 by the IWG (‘‘February 2021 SC–GHG TSD’’). The SC–GHG is the monetary value of the net harm to society associated with a marginal increase in emissions in a given year, or the benefit of avoiding that increase. In principle, the SC–GHG includes the value of all climate change impacts, including (but not limited to) changes in net agricultural productivity, human health effects, property damage from increased flood risk and natural disasters, disruption of energy systems, risk of conflict, environmental migration, and the value of ecosystem services. The SC–GHG therefore, reflects the societal value of reducing emissions of the gas in question by one metric ton. The SC–GHG is the theoretically appropriate value to use in conducting benefit-cost analyses of policies that affect CO
2, N2O and CH4 emissions.
As a member of the IWG involved in
the development of the February 2021 SC–GHG TSD, DOE agreed that the interim SC–GHG estimates represent the most appropriate estimate of the SC– GHG until revised estimates are developed reflecting the latest, peer- reviewed science. See 87 FR 78382,
78406–78408 for discussion of the development and details of the IWG SC– GHG estimates.
There are a number of limitations and
uncertainties associated with the SC– GHG estimates. First, the current scientific and economic understanding of discounting approaches suggests discount rates appropriate for intergenerational analysis in the context of climate change are likely to be less than 3 percent, near 2 percent or lower.
167Second, the IAMs used to
produce these interim estimates do not include all of the important physical, ecological, and economic impacts of climate change recognized in the climate change literature and the science underlying their ‘‘damage functions’’—i.e., the core parts of the
IAMs that map global mean temperature changes and other physical impacts of climate change into economic (both market and nonmarket) damages—lags behind the most recent research. For example, limitations include the incomplete treatment of catastrophic and non-catastrophic impacts in the integrated assessment models, their incomplete treatment of adaptation and technological change, the incomplete way in which inter-regional and intersectoral linkages are modeled, uncertainty in the extrapolation of damages to high temperatures, and inadequate representation of the relationship between the discount rate and uncertainty in economic growth over long time horizons. Likewise, the socioeconomic and emissions scenarios used as inputs to the models do not reflect new information from the last decade of scenario generation or the full range of projections. The modeling limitations do not all work in the same direction in terms of their influence on the SC–CO
2estimates. However, as
discussed in the February 2021 SC–GHG TSD, the IWG has recommended that, taken together, the limitations suggest that the interim SC–GHG estimates used in this final rule likely underestimate the damages from GHG emissions. DOE concurs with this assessment.
DOE’s derivations of the SC–CO
2, SC–
N2O, and SC–CH 4values used for this
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637887 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
168Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of
Greenhouse Gases, United States Government.
Technical Update on the Social Cost of Carbon for Regulatory Impact Analysis Under Executive Order 12866. August 2016. (Last accessed January 18, 2022.) www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016–12/
documents/sc_ co2_ tsd_august_ 2016.pdf.
169An overview is presented in section 4.1 of the
February 2021 SC–GHG TSD.
170See www.epa.gov/environmental-economics/
scghg. 171See EPA, Revised 2023 and Later Model Year
Light-Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions Standards:
Regulatory Impact Analysis, Washington, DC, December 2021. Available at nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P1013ORN.pdf (last accessed
Dec. 1, 2023). final rule are discussed in the following
sections, and the results of DOE’s analyses estimating the benefits of the reductions in emissions of these GHGs are presented in section V.B.6 of this document.
The Attorney General of TN asserted
that the standards improperly rely on faulty social-cost-of-carbon estimate. (Attorney General of TN, No. 1149 at p. 2) In response, DOE noted that theInteragency Working Group’s (IWG) Social Costs of Greenhouse Gas (SC– GHG) estimates were developed over many years, using transparent process, peer-reviewed methodologies, the best science available at the time of that process, and with input from the public. The IWG’s 2016 TSD
168and the 2017
National Academies report provide detailed discussions of the ways in which the modeling underlying the development of the SC–GHG estimates addressed quantified sources of uncertainty.
169In the February 2021
SC–GHG TSD, the IWG stated that the models used to produce the interim estimates do not include all of the important physical, ecological, and economic impacts of climate change recognized in the climate change literature. In the judgment of the IWG, these and other limitations suggest that the range of four interim SC–GHG estimates presented in the TSD likely underestimate societal damages from GHG emissions.
DOE is aware that in December 2023,
EPA issued a new set of SC–GHG estimates in connection with a final rulemaking under the Clean Air Act.
170
As DOE had used the IWG interim values in proposing this rule and is currently reviewing the updated 2023 SC–GHG values, for this final rule, DOE used these updated 2023 SC–GHG values to conduct a sensitivity analysis of the value of GHG emissions reductions. DOE notes that because EPA’s estimates are considerably higher than the IWG’s interim SC–GHG values applied for this final rule, an analysis that uses the EPA’s estimates results in significantly greater climate-related benefits. However, such results would not affect DOE’s decision in this final rule. As stated elsewhere in this document, DOE would reach the same conclusion regarding the economic justification of the standards presented in this final rule without considering the IWG’s interim SC–GHG values, which DOE agrees are conservative
estimates. For the same reason, if DOE were to use EPA’s higher SC–GHG estimates, they would not change DOE’s conclusion that the standards are economically justified.
a. Social Cost of Carbon
The SC–CO
2values used for this final
rule were based on the values developed
for the February 2021 SC–GHG TSD, which are shown in Table IV.30 in 5- year increments from 2020 to 2050. The set of annual values that DOE used, which was adapted from estimates published by EPA,
171is presented in
appendix 14A of the final rule TSD.
These estimates are based on methods, assumptions, and parameters identical to the estimates published by the IWG (which were based on EPA modeling) and include values for 2051 to 2070. DOE expects additional climate benefits to accrue for products still operating after 2070, but a lack of available SC– CO
2estimates for emissions years
beyond 2070 prevents DOE from monetizing these potential benefits in this analysis.
DOE multiplied the CO 2emissions
reduction estimated for each year by the
SC–CO 2value for that year in each of
the four cases. DOE adjusted the values to 2022$ using the implicit price deflator for gross domestic product (‘‘GDP’’) from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. To calculate a present value of the stream of monetary values, DOE discounted the values in each of the four cases using the specific discount rate that had been used to obtain the SC–CO
2values in each case.
b. Social Cost of Methane and NitrousOxide
The SC–CH
4and SC–N 2O values used
for this final rule were based on the values developed for the February 2021 SC–GHG TSD. Table IV.31 shows the updated sets of SC–CH
4and SC–N 2O
estimates from the latest interagency update in 5-year increments from 2020 to 2050. The full set of annual values used is presented in appendix 14A of the final rule TSD. To capture the uncertainties involved in regulatory impact analysis, DOE has determined it is appropriate to include all four sets of SC–CH
4and SC- N 2O values, as
recommended by the IWG. DOE derived values after 2050 using the approach described above for the SC–CO
2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.045</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.30. Annual SC-CO2 Values from 2021 Interagency Update, 2020-2050
1 2020$ per Metric Ton CO2)
Discount Rate and Statistic
Year 5% 3% 2.5% 3%
95th Average Average Average percentile
2020 14 51 76 152
2025 17 56 83 169
2030 19 62 89 187
2035 22 67 96 206
2040 25 73 103 225
2045 28 79 110 242
2050 32 85 116 260 37888 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
172See www.epa.gov/environmental-economics/
scghg. 173U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Estimating the Benefit per Ton of Reducing
Directly-Emitted PM 2.5,PM 2.5Precursors and Ozone
Precursors from 21 Sectors. Available at www.epa.gov/benmap/estimating-benefit-ton- reducing-directly-emitted-pm25-pm25-precursors- and-ozone-precursors (last accessed Dec. 1, 2023).
174‘‘Area sources’’ represents all emission sources
for which states do not have exact (point) locations in their emissions inventories. Because exact locations would tend to be associated with larger sources, ‘‘area sources’’ would be fairly representative of small dispersed sources like homes and businesses. 175‘‘Area sources’’ are a category in the 2018
document from EPA but are not used in the 2021 document cited above. See: www.epa.gov/sites/ default/files/2018-02/documents/sourceapportionmentbpttsd _2018.pdf.
DOE multiplied the CH 4and N 2O
emissions reduction estimated for each
year by the SC–CH 4and SC–N 2O
estimates for that year in each of the cases. DOE adjusted the values to 2022$ using the implicit price deflator for gross domestic product (‘‘GDP’’) from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. To calculate a present value of the stream of monetary values, DOE discounted the values in each of the cases using the specific discount rate that had been used to obtain the SC–CH
4and SC–N 2O
estimates in each case.
c. Sensitivity Analysis Using Updated
SC–GHG Estimates
In December 2023, EPA issued an
updated set of SC–GHG estimates (2023 SC–GHG) in connection with a final rulemaking under the Clean Air Act.
172
These estimates incorporate recent research and address recommendations of the National Academies (2017) and comments from a 2023 external peer review of the accompanying technical report. For this rulemaking, DOE used these updated 2023 SC–GHG values to conduct a sensitivity analysis of the value of GHG emissions reductions associated with alternative standards for consumer water heaters. This sensitivity analysis provides an expanded range of potential climate benefits associated with amended standards. The final year of EPA’s new 2023 SC–GHG estimates is 2080; therefore, DOE did not monetize the climate benefits of GHG emissions reductions occurring after 2080.
The overall climate benefits are
greater when using the higher, updated 2023 SC–GHG estimates, compared to the climate benefits using the older IWG SC–GHG estimates. The results of the sensitivity analysis are presented in appendix 14C of the final rule TSD. 2. Monetization of Other Emissions
Impacts
For the final rule, DOE estimated the
monetized value of NO
Xand SO 2
emissions reductions from electricity generation using benefit-per-ton estimates for that sector from the EPA’s Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program.
173DOE used EPA’s values for
PM 2.5-related benefits associated with
NO Xand SO 2and for ozone-related
benefits associated with NO Xfor 2025
and 2030, and 2040, calculated with discount rates of 3 percent and 7 percent. DOE used linear interpolation to define values for the years not given in the 2025 to 2040 period; for years beyond 2040, the values are held constant. DOE combined the EPA regional benefit-per-ton estimates with regional information on electricity
consumption and emissions from AEO2023 to define weighted-average
national values for NO
Xand SO 2(see
appendix 14B of the final rule TSD).
DOE also estimated the monetized
value of NO Xand SO 2emissions
reductions from site use of natural gas in consumer water heaters using benefit per ton estimates from the EPA’s Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program. Although none of the sectors covered by EPA refers specifically to residential and commercial buildings, the sector called ‘‘area sources’’ would be a reasonable proxy for residential and commercial buildings.
174The EPA document provides high and low
estimates for 2025 and 2030 at 3- and 7- percent discount rates.
175DOE used the
same linear interpolation and extrapolation as it did with the values for electricity generation.
DOE multiplied the site emissions
reduction (in tons) in each year by the associated $/ton values, and then discounted each series using discount rates of 3 percent and 7 percent as appropriate.
M. Utility Impact Analysis
The utility impact analysis estimates
the changes in installed electrical
capacity and generation projected to result for each considered TSL. The analysis is based on published output from the NEMS associated with AEO2023. NEMS produces the AEO
Reference case, as well as a number of side cases that estimate the economy- wide impacts of changes to energy supply and demand. For the current analysis, impacts are quantified by comparing the levels of electricity sector generation, installed capacity, fuel consumption and emissions in the AEO2023 Reference case and various
side cases. Details of the methodology are provided in the appendices to chapter 15 of the final rule TSD.
The output of this analysis is a set of
time-dependent coefficients that capture
the change in electricity generation, primary fuel consumption, installed capacity and power sector emissions due to a unit reduction in demand for a given end use. These coefficients are multiplied by the stream of electricity savings calculated in the NIA to provide estimates of selected utility impacts of potential new or amended energy conservation standards. The utility
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.046</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table IV.31. Annual SC-CH4 and SC-N2O Values from 2021 Interagency Update,
2020-2050 (2020$ per Metric Ton)
SC-CH4 SC-N20
Discount Rate and Statistic Discount Rate and Statistic
Year 5% 3% 2.5% 3% 5% 3% 2.5% 3%
Average Average Average 95th Average Average Average 95th
percentile percentile
2020 670 1500 2000 3900 5800 18000 27000 48000
2025 800 1700 2200 4500 6800 21000 30000 54000
2030 940 2000 2500 5200 7800 23000 33000 60000
2035 1100 2200 2800 6000 9000 25000 36000 67000
2040 1300 2500 3100 6700 10000 28000 39000 74000
2045 1500 2800 3500 7500 12000 30000 42000 81000
2050 1700 3100 3800 8200 13000 33000 45000 88000 37889 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
176See U.S. Department of Commerce—Bureau of
Economic Analysis. Regional Input-Output
Modeling System (RIMS II) User’s Guide. Available at: www.bea.gov/resources/methodologies/RIMSII-
user-guide (last accessed Jan. 18, 2024).
177Livingston, O.V., S.R. Bender, M.J. Scott, and
R.W. Schultz. ImSET 4.0: Impact of Sector Energy Technologies Model Description and User’s Guide. 2015. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Richland, WA. PNNL–24563. analysis also estimates the impact on
gas utilities in terms of projected changes in natural gas deliveries to consumers for each TSL.
N. Employment Impact Analysis
DOE considers employment impacts
in the domestic economy as one factor
in selecting a standard. Employment impacts from new or amended energy conservation standards include both direct and indirect impacts. Direct employment impacts are any changes in the number of employees of manufacturers of the products subject to standards. The MIA addresses those impacts. Indirect employment impacts are changes in national employment that occur due to the shift in expenditures and capital investment caused by the purchase and operation of more-efficient appliances. Indirect employment impacts from standards consist of the net jobs created or eliminated in the national economy, other than in the manufacturing sector being regulated, caused by (1) reduced spending by consumers on energy, (2) reduced spending on new energy supply by the utility industry, (3) increased consumer spending on the products to which the new standards apply and other goods and services, and (4) the effects of those three factors throughout the economy.
One method for assessing the possible
effects on the demand for labor of such shifts in economic activity is to compare sector employment statistics developed by the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (‘‘BLS’’). BLS regularly publishes its estimates of the number of jobs per million dollars of economic activity in different sectors of the economy, as well as the jobs created elsewhere in the economy by this same economic activity. Data from BLS indicate that expenditures in the utility sector generally create fewer jobs (both directly and indirectly) than expenditures in other sectors of the economy.
176There are many reasons for
these differences, including wage differences and the fact that the utility sector is more capital-intensive and less labor-intensive than other sectors. Energy conservation standards have the effect of reducing consumer utility bills. Because reduced consumer expenditures for energy likely lead to increased expenditures in other sectors of the economy, the general effect of efficiency standards is to shift economic activity from a less labor-intensive
sector (i.e., the utility sector) to more
labor-intensive sectors (e.g., the retail
and service sectors). Thus, the BLS data suggest that net national employment may increase due to shifts in economic activity resulting from energy conservation standards.
DOE estimated indirect national
employment impacts for the standard levels considered in this final rule using an input/output model of the U.S. economy called Impact of Sector Energy Technologies version 4 (‘‘ImSET’’).
177
ImSET is a special-purpose version of the ‘‘U.S. Benchmark National Input- Output’’ (‘‘I–O’’) model, which was designed to estimate the national employment and income effects of energy-saving technologies. The ImSET software includes a computer-based I–O model having structural coefficients that characterize economic flows among 187 sectors most relevant to industrial, commercial, and residential building energy use.
DOE notes that ImSET is not a general
equilibrium forecasting model, and that there are uncertainties involved in projecting employment impacts, especially changes in the later years of the analysis. Because ImSET does not incorporate price changes, the employment effects predicted by ImSET may over-estimate actual job impacts over the long run for this rule. Therefore, DOE used ImSET only to generate results for near-term timeframes (2030–2034), where these uncertainties are reduced. For more details on the employment impact analysis, see chapter 16 of the final rule TSD.
V. Analytical Results and Conclusions
The following section addresses the
results from DOE’s analyses with
respect to the considered energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. It addresses the TSLs examined by DOE, the projected impacts of each of these levels if adopted as energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters, and the standards levels that DOE is adopting in this final rule. Additional details regarding DOE’s analyses are contained in the final rule TSD supporting this document.
A. Trial Standard Levels
In general, DOE typically evaluates
potential new or amended standards for
products and equipment by grouping individual efficiency levels for each
class into TSLs. Use of TSLs allows DOE to identify and consider manufacturer cost interactions between the product classes, to the extent that there are such interactions, and price elasticity of consumer purchasing decisions that may change when different standard levels are set. The changes to the shipments model will drive differential national impacts both on the consumer and manufacturer side that are more realistic of how the market may change in response to amended DOE standards.
In the analysis conducted for this
final rule, DOE analyzed the benefits and burdens of six TSLs for consumer water heaters. DOE developed TSLs that combine efficiency levels for each analyzed product class. DOE presents the results for the TSLs in this document, while the results for all efficiency levels that DOE analyzed are in the final rule TSD.
Table V.1 presents the TSLs and the
corresponding efficiency levels that DOE has identified for potential amended energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. TSL 6
represents the maximum technologically feasible (‘‘max-tech’’) energy efficiency for all product classes. TSL 5 represents the highest efficiency level for each product class with a positive NPV at the 7-percent discount rate for all product classes. For gas-fired gas storage water heater, the NPV at the 7-percent discount rate is negative from EL 3 to EL 5. Therefore, TSL 5 is constructed by reducing the efficiency level for gas-fired storage water heaters (i.e., EL 2) and with the same efficiency
level for all other product classes compared to the max-tech. TSL 4 represents the highest efficiency level for each product class with the maximum NPV at the 7-percent discount rate for all product classes. Therefore, TSL 4 is constructed by reducing the efficiency level for electric storage water heaters (i.e., EL 2). TSL 3
represents an interim energy efficiency level between the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation (i.e., TSL 2) and TSL
4. TSL 2 represents the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation. Finally, because EL 1 is the lowest analyzed efficiency level above baseline, TSL 1 is constructed with EL 1 for all product classes, except for electric storage water heaters (20 gal ≤ V
eff≤ 55 gal) which is
set equal to the current standard level.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637890 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
178Efficiency levels that were analyzed for this
final rule are discussed in section IV.C of this document. Results by efficiency level are presented
in TSD chapters 8, 10, and 12.
DOE constructed the TSLs for this
final rule to include ELs representative
of ELs with similar characteristics (i.e., using similar technologies and/or efficiencies, and having roughly comparable equipment availability). The use of representative ELs provided for greater distinction between the TSLs. While representative ELs were included in the TSLs, DOE considered all efficiency levels as part of its analysis.
178
B. Economic Justification and Energy Savings
1. Economic Impacts on Individual
Consumers
DOE analyzed the economic impacts
on consumer water heater consumers by looking at the effects that potential new and amended standards at each TSL would have on the LCC and PBP. DOE also examined the impacts of potential
standards on selected consumer subgroups. These analyses are discussed in the following sections.
a. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period
In general, higher-efficiency products
affect consumers in two ways: (1)
purchase price increases and (2) annual operating costs decrease. Inputs used for calculating the LCC and PBP include total installed costs (i.e., product price
plus installation costs), and operating costs (i.e., annual energy use, energy
prices, energy price trends, repair costs, and maintenance costs). The LCC calculation also uses product lifetime and a discount rate. Chapter 8 of the final rule TSD provides detailed information on the LCC and PBP
analyses.
Table V.2 through Table V.11 show
the LCC and PBP results for the TSLs considered for each product class. In the
first of each pair of tables, the simple payback is measured relative to the baseline product. In the second table, the impacts are measured relative to the efficiency distribution in the in the no- new-standards case in the compliance year (see section IV.F.8 of this document). Because some consumers purchase products with higher efficiency in the no-new-standards case, the average savings are less than the difference between the average LCC of the baseline product and the average LCC at each TSL. The savings refer only
to consumers who are affected by a standard at a given TSL. Those who already purchase a product with efficiency at or above a given TSL are not affected. Consumers for whom the LCC increases at a given TSL experience a net cost.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.047</GPH> ER06MY24.048</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.l Trial Standard Levels for Consumer Water Heaters
Trial Standard Level
Product Class 1 2 3 4 5 6
Efficiency Level
Gas-fired Storage Water 1 2 2 2 2 5 Heaters (20 gal::; Verr::; 55 gal)
Oil-fired Storage Water 1 2 2 2 2 2 Heaters (Verr::; 50 gal)
Small electric storage water
heaters (20 gal ::; V eff ::; 3 5 gal 0 0 1 1 1 1
and FHR < 51 gal)
Electric Storage Water Heaters
(20 gal ::; Verr::; 55 gal, 0 1 1 2 3 3 excluding small electric storage
water heaters)
Electric Storage Water Heaters 1 1 1 2 3 3 (55 gal< Verr::; 120 gal)
Table V.2 Average LCC and PBP Results for Gas-fired Storage Water Heaters (20 gal:::;
Verr < 55 ~al) -
Average Costs
Efficiency 2022$ Simple Average
TSL Level Installed First Year's Lifetime Payback Lifetime
Cost Operating Cost Operating LCC years years
Cost
0 0 1,432 242 2,868 4,300 NA 14.5
1 1 1,470 237 2,815 4,285 8.4 14.5
2,3,4,5 2 1,578 226 2,689 4,267 9.1 14.5
6 5 2,241 198 2,410 4,651 18.5 14.5
Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is
measured relative to the baseline product. 37891 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.049</GPH> ER06MY24.050</GPH> ER06MY24.051</GPH> ER06MY24.052</GPH> ER06MY24.053</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.3 Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New-Standards Case for Gas-fired
Storage Water Heaters (20 gal~ Vere~ 55 gal)
Efficiency Life-Cycle Cost Savine:s
TSL Average LCC Savings * Percent of Consumers that Level 2022$ Experience Net Cost
1 1 15 20.3
2,3,4,5 2 29 40.5
6 5 (285) 69.8
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers. Numbers in parentheses denote negative values.
Table V.4 Average LCC and PBP Results for Oil-fired Storage Water Heaters (Vere~ 50
~a 1)
Average Costs
Efficiency 2022$ Simple Average
TSL Lifetime Payback Lifetime Level Installed First Year's
Cost Operating Cost Operating LCC years years
Cost
0 0 3,934 794 8,441 12,375 NA 15.5
1 1 4,029 773 8,222 12,251 4.7 15.5
2,3,4,5,6 2 4,189 755 8,017 12,206 6.5 15.5
Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is
measured relative to the baseline product.
Table V.5 Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New-Standards Case for Oil-fired
Storage Water Heaters (Vere< 50 gal) -
Efficiency Life-Cvcle Cost Savine:s
TSL Average LCC Savings . Percent of Consumers that Level 2022$ Experience Net Cost
1 1 123 10.8
2,3,4,5,6 2 141 26.8
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers. Numbers in parentheses denote negative values.
Table V.6 Average LCC and PBP Results for Small Electric Storage Water Heaters (20 gal
< Vere< 35 gal and FHR < 51 gal)
Average Costs
Efficiency 2022$ Simple Average
TSL Level Installed First Year's Lifetime Payback Lifetime
Cost Operating Cost Operating LCC years years
Cost
1,2 0 780 314 3,623 4,403 NA 15.1
3,4,5,6 1 3,015 178 2,138 5,153 16.5 15.1
Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is
measured relative to the baseline product.
Table V.7 Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New-Standards Case for Small Electric
Storage Water Heaters (20 gal< Vere< 35 gal and FHR < 51 gal)
Efficiency Life-O cle Cost Savine:s
TSL Average LCC Savings * Percent of Consumers that Level 2022S Experience Net Cost
1,2 0 NA 0.0
3,4,5,6 1 (750) 76.5
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers. Numbers in parentheses denote negative values. 37892 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
b. Consumer Subgroup Analysis
In the consumer subgroup analysis,
DOE estimated the impact of the considered TSLs on low-income
households, senior-only households, and small businesses. Table V.12 through Table V.16 compare the average LCC savings and PBP at each efficiency level for the consumer subgroups with
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.054</GPH> ER06MY24.055</GPH> ER06MY24.056</GPH> ER06MY24.057</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.8 Average LCC and PBP Results for Electric Storage Water Heaters (20 gal::: Verr
< 55 gal, excluding Small Electric Storage Water Heaters) -
Average Costs
Efficiency 2022$ Simple Average
TSL First Year's Lifetime Payback Lifetime Level Installed
Cost Operating Operating LCC years years
Cost Cost
I 0 902 340 3,891 4,793 NA 15.1
2,3 1 1,855 171 2,047 3,902 5.6 15.1
4 2 1,903 139 1,700 3,602 5.0 15.1
5,6 3 1,995 130 1,600 3,594 5.2 15.1
Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is
measured relative to the baseline product.
Table V.9 Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New-Standards Case for Electric
Storage Water Heaters (20 gal::: Verr:S 55 gal, excluding Small Electric Storage Water
Heaters)
Efficiency Life-Cycle Cost Savin2s
TSL Average LCC Savings . Percent of Consumers that Level 2022$ Experience Net Cost
1,2 0 NA 0.0
2,3 1 859 34.7
4 2 1,146 32.7
5,6 3 1,067 38.2
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers. Numbers in parentheses denote negative values.
Table V.10 Average LCC and PBP Results for Electric Storage Water Heaters (55 gal<
Verr < 120 gal) -
Average Costs
Efficiency 2022$ Simple Average
TSL Level Installed First Year's Lifetime Payback Lifetime
Cost Operating Operating LCC years years
Cost Cost
0 0 2,019 290 3,368 5,387 NA 15.1
1,2,3 1 2,028 244 2,857 4,885 0.2 15.1
4 2 2,064 194 2,303 4,367 0.5 15.1
5,6 3 2,180 176 2,101 4,282 1.4 15.1
Note: The results for each TSL are calculated assuming that all consumers use products at that efficiency level. The PBP is
measured relative to the baseline product.
Table V.11 Average LCC Savings Relative to the No-New-Standards Case for Electric
Storage Water Heaters (55 gal< Verr< 120 gal)
Efficiency Life-Cycle Cost Savin2s
TSL Average LCC Savings * Percent of Consumers that Level 2022$ Experience Net Cost
1,2,3 1 458 0.3
4 2 613 1.4
5,6 3 190 38.8
* The savings represent the average LCC for affected consumers. Numbers in parentheses denote negative values. 37893 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
similar metrics for the entire consumer
sample for each consumer water heater product class analyzed. In most cases, the average LCC savings and PBP for low-income households and senior-only households at the considered efficiency levels are not substantially different from the average for all households. Chapter 11 of the final rule TSD
presents the complete LCC and PBP results for the subgroups.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.058</GPH> ER06MY24.059</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.12 Comparison of LCC Savings and PBP for Consumer Subgroups and All
H h Id G fi d St W t H t '20 I < V < 55 I) ouse o s; as-ire ora re a er ea ers, 2a eff ,a
TSL Low-Income Senior-Only Small Businesses All Households Households Households
Average LCC Savin~ s (2022$)
1 31 25 (11) 15
2,3,4,5 81 47 (39) 29
6 71 (282) (372) (285)
Simple Payback Period (years)
1 4.0 7.2 9.6 8.4
2,3,4,5 4.6 8.1 9.9 9.1
6 9.3 20.1 15.3 18.5
Consumers with Net Cost (%)
1 11.4 15.1 37.4 20.3
2,3,4,5 26.1 37.8 61.3 40.5
6 37.7 66.0 76.2 69.8
Consumers with Net Benefit (%)
1 41.4 39.9 21.2 36.4
2,3,4,5 50.7 40.7 17.9 38.2
6 57.3 31.3 23.8 29.3
Table V.13 Comparison of LCC Savings and PBP for Consumer Subgroups and All
Households; Oil-fired Storae;e Water Heaters (Verr< 50 e;al)
TSL I Low-Income
I Senior-Only Small Businesses I All Households Households Households
Average LCC Savings (2022$)
1 I 159 I 134 33 I 123
2,3,4,5,6 I 236 I 158 (10) I 141
Simple Payback Period(: ears)
1 I 2.5 I 4.5 5.3 I 4.7
2,3,4,5,6 I 3.4 I 6.3 7.4 I 6.5
Consumers with Net Cost (%)
1 I 5.3 I 7.7 19.5 I 10.8
2,3,4,5,6 I 8.9 I 23.9 48.3 I 26.8
Consumers with Net Benefit (%)
1 I 58.3 I 57.0 47.4 I 55.7
2,3,4,5,6 I 74.3 I 59.6 36.2 I 56.7 37894 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.060</GPH> ER06MY24.061</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.14 Comparison ofLCC Savings and PBP for Consumer Subgroups and All
Households; Small Electric Storage Water Heaters (20 gal~ Verr~ 35 gal and FHR < 51 gal)
TSL I Low-Income Senior-Only
I Small All
Households Households Businesses Households
Average LCC Savini s (2022$)
1,2* I NA NA I NA NA
3,4,5,6 I 788 (321) I (1662) (750)
Simple Payback Period (years)
1,2* I NA NA I NA NA
3,4,5,6 I 6.0 15.1 I 28.0 16.5
Consumers with Net Cost (%)
1,2* I NA NA I NA NA
3,4,5,6 I 29.5 57.0 I 88.8 76.5
Consumers with Net Benefit (%)
1,2* I NA NA I NA NA
3,4,5,6 I 65.0 39.2 I 9.9 22.5
* TSLs 1 and 2 represent no new amended standards for small electric storage water heaters.
Table V.15 Comparison of LCC Savings and PBP for Consumer Subgroups and All
Households; Electric Storage Water Heaters (20 gal~ Verr~ 55 gal, Except Small Electric
Storage Water Heaters)
TSL Low-Income Households Senior-Only Households Small Businesses All Households
Average LCC Savings (2022$)
1* NA NA NA NA
2,3 1579 433 295 859
4 1934 610 453 1146
5,6 1858 555 374 1067
Simple Payback Period (years)
1* NA NA NA NA
2,3 2.8 6.9 4.8 5.6
4 2.5 6.1 4.3 5.0
5,6 2.5 6.4 4.6 5.2
Consumers with Net Cost(%)
1* NA NA NA NA
2,3 16.2 32.7 63.9 34.7
4 14.6 31.0 63.7 32.7
5,6 16.2 36.1 70.1 38.2
Consumers with Net Benefit(%)
1* NA NA NA NA
2,3 69.2 53.0 24.1 53.4
4 71.6 55.6 24.9 56.4
5,6 77.0 57.5 26.7 58.1
* TSL 1 represents no new amended standards for electric storage water heaters (20 gal::; Vetr::; 55 gal, except small electric
storage water heaters). 37895 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
c. Rebuttable Presumption Payback
As discussed in section III.F.2 of this
document, EPCA establishes a
rebuttable presumption that an energy conservation standard is economically justified if the increased purchase cost for a product that meets the standard is less than three times the value of the first-year energy savings resulting from the standard. In calculating a rebuttable presumption payback period for each of the considered TSLs, DOE used discrete values, and, as required by EPCA, based the energy use calculation on the DOE
test procedures for consumer water heaters. In contrast, the PBPs presented in section V.B.1.a of this document were calculated using distributions that reflect the range of energy use in the field.
Table V.17 presents the rebuttable-
presumption payback periods for the considered TSLs for consumer water heaters. While DOE examined the
rebuttable-presumption criterion, it considered whether the standard levels considered for this rule are economically justified through a more
detailed analysis of the economic impacts of those levels, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i), that considers the full range of impacts to the consumer, manufacturer, Nation, and environment. The results of that analysis serve as the basis for DOE to definitively evaluate the economic justification for a potential standard level, thereby supporting or rebutting the results of any preliminary determination of economic justification.
2. Economic Impacts on Manufacturers
DOE performed an MIA to estimate
the impact of amended energy
conservation standards on manufacturers of consumer water heaters. The next section describes the expected impacts on manufacturers at each considered TSL. Chapter 12 of the final rule TSD explains the analysis in further detail.
a. Industry Cash Flow Analysis Results
In this section, DOE provides GRIM
results from the analysis, which examines changes in the industry that
would result from a standard. The following tables summarize the estimated financial impacts (represented by changes in INPV) of potential amended energy conservation standards on manufacturers of consumer water heaters, as well as the conversion costs that DOE estimates manufacturers of consumer water heaters would incur at each TSL.
As discussed in section IV.J.2.d of this
document, DOE modeled two scenarios to evaluate a range of cash flow impacts on the consumer water heater industry:
(1) the preservation of gross margin percentage scenario and (2) the preservation of operating profit. Under the preservation of gross margin
percentage scenario, DOE applied a single uniform ‘‘gross margin percentage’’ across all efficiency levels. As MPCs increase with efficiency, this scenario implies that the per-unit dollar profit would also increase. DOE assumed a ‘‘gross margin percentage’’ of 31 percent for gas-fired storage water heaters, 30 percent for oil-fired storage
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.062</GPH> ER06MY24.063</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.16 Comparison of LCC Savings and PBP for Consumer Subgroups and All
Households; Electric Storage Water Heaters (55 gal< Verr< 120 gal) -
TSL Low-Income Senior-Only Small Businesses All Households Households Households
Average LCC Savings (2022$)
1,2,3 464 372 398 458
4 674 432 419 613
5,6 279 97 84 190
Simple Payback Period (, ears)
1,2,3 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2
4 0.2 0.7 0.4 0.5
5,6 0.7 2.1 1.3 1.4
Consumers with Net Cost (%)
1,2,3 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.3
4 0.4 1.0 4.8 1.4
5,6 16.5 36.0 66.2 38.8
Consumers with Net Benefit (%)
1,2,3 4.4 3.9 2.8 3.4
4 14.8 13.6 9.1 13.9
5,6 69.7 47.1 24.0 50.5
Table V.17 Comparison of Rebuttable-Presumption Payback Periods
TSL 1 2 3 4 5 6
GSWH 5.8 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 12.4
OSWH 4.1 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7
ESWH (20 gal:::; Verr:::; 35 gal, FHR NA NA 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4
< 51 gal)
ESWH (20 gal:::; Verr:::; 55 gal, NA 3.7 3.7 3.2 3.4 3.4
excluding Small ESWH)
ESWH (55 gal< Verr< 120 gal) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.5 1.5 37896 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
water heaters, and 28 percent for all
electric storage water heaters. These gross margin percentages (and corresponding manufacturer markups) are the same as the ones DOE assumed in the engineering analysis and the no- new-standards case of the GRIM. Because this scenario assumes that a
manufacturer’s absolute dollar markup would increase as MPCs increase in the standards cases, it represents the upper bound to industry profitability under potential new energy conservation standards. The preservation of operating profit
scenario reflects manufacturers’ concerns about their inability to maintain margins as MPCs increase to reach more stringent efficiency levels. In this scenario, while manufacturers make the necessary investments required to convert their facilities to produce compliant products, operating profit does not change in absolute dollars and decreases as a percentage of revenue.
Each of the modeled manufacturer
markup scenarios results in a unique set of cash flows and corresponding industry values at each TSL. In the
following discussion, the INPV results refer to the difference in industry value between the no-new-standards case and each standards case resulting from the sum of discounted cash flows from 2023 through 2059. To provide perspective on the short-run cash flow impact, DOE includes in the discussion of results a comparison of free cash flow between the no-new-standards case and the standards case at each TSL in the year before new standards are required.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.064</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.18 Manufacturer Impact Analysis for Consumer Water Heaters under the
Preservation of Gross Margin Scenario
No-New-
Units Standards 1 Case
INPV 2022$ 1,478.8 1,484.2 millions
2022$
Change in millions -
INPV* % -
Free Cash 2022$ 124.0 Flow (2029) millions
Change in 2022$ -Free Cash millions
Flow (2029) % -
Product 2022$ Conversion millions -
Costs
Capital 2022$ Conversion millions -
Costs
Total 2022$ Investment millions -
Required**
* Numbers in parentheses indicate a negative number.
**Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding. 5.5
0.4
121.0
(3.0)
(2.4)
3.5
4.0
7.5 2
1,506.9
28.2
1.9
17.3
(106.7)
(86.0)
11.1
228.7
239.8 Trial Standard Level
3 4 5 6
1,438.9 1,447.6 1,447.5 1,473.5
(39.8) (31.2) (31.3) (5.2)
(2,7) (2.1) (2.1) (0.4)
(24.1) (29.3) (48.8) (155.0)
(148.1) (153.3) (172.8) (279.0)
(119.4) (123.6) (139.4) (225.0)
13.3 13.6 14.6 25.1
319.0 330.4 373.1 601.1
332.4 344.0 387.6 626.2 37897 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
At TSL 1, DOE estimates that impacts
on INPV would range from ¥$8.4
million to $5.5 million, or a change in INPV of ¥0.6 percent to 0.4 percent. At TSL 1, industry free cash flow is $121.0 million, which is a decrease of $3.0 million, or a drop of 2.4 percent, compared to the no-new-standards case value of $124.0 million in 2029, the year
leading up to the standards year. Industry conversion costs total $7.5 million. At TSL 1, approximately 73 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the required efficiency levels by the analyzed 2030 compliance date.
TSL 1 would set the energy
conservation standard for gas-fired storage water heaters at EL 1, oil-fired storage water heaters at EL 1, small electric storage water heaters at baseline efficiency level (i.e., EL 0), electric
storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of at least 20 gallons and less than or equal to 55 gallons (excluding small electric storage water heaters) at baseline, and electric storage water heaters with effective storage volumes above 55 gallons at EL 1. At TSL 1, DOE estimates that manufacturers would incur approximately $3.5 million in product conversion costs, as some gas-fired storage water heaters and electric storage water heaters would need to be redesigned to comply with the standard. DOE also estimates that manufacturers would incur approximately $4.0 million in capital conversion costs at TSL 1 to accommodate the need for increased capacity for gas-fired and electric storage water heaters.
At TSL 1, the shipment-weighted
average MPC for consumer water heaters covered by this rulemaking increases by 1.6 percent relative to the no-new- standards case shipment-weighted average MPC for all water heaters in 2030. Given the relatively small increase in production costs, DOE does not project a notable drop in shipments in the year the standard takes effect. In the preservation of gross margin scenario, manufacturers are able to fully pass on this slight cost increase to consumers. In the preservation of gross margin percentage scenario, the slight increase in cashflow from the higher MSP outweighs the $7.5 million in conversion costs, causing a slightly positive change in INPV at TSL 1 under this scenario.
Under the preservation of operating
profit scenario, manufacturers earn the same per-unit operating profit as would be earned in the no-new-standards case in 2031 (a year after the analyzed compliance year), but manufacturers do not earn additional profit from their investments. In this scenario, the manufacturer markup decreases in 2031. This reduction in the manufacturer markup and the $7.5 million in conversion costs incurred by manufacturers cause a slightly negative change in INPV at TSL 1 under the preservation of operating profit scenario.
At TSL 2, DOE estimates that impacts
on INPV would range from ¥$275.3 million to $28.2 million, or a change in INPV of ¥18.6 percent to 1.9 percent. At TSL 2, industry free cash flow is $17.3 million, which is a decrease of $106.7 million, or a drop of 86.0 percent compared to the no-new-standards case value of $124.0 million in 2029, the year leading up to the standards year. Industry conversion costs total $239.8 million. At TSL 2, approximately 24 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the required efficiency levels by the analyzed 2030 compliance date.
TSL 2 would set the energy
conservation standard for gas-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, oil-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, small electric storage water heaters at baseline, electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of at least 20 gallons and less than 55 gallons (excluding small electric storage water heaters) at EL 1, and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.065</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.19 Manufacturer Impact Analysis for Consumer Water Heaters under the
Preservation of Operatin~ Profit Scenario
No-New-
Units Standards 1 Case
INPV 2022$ 1,478.8 1,470.3 millions
Change in 2022$ (8.4) INPV millions -
% - (0.6)
Free Cash 2022$ 124.0 121.0 Flow (2029) millions
Change in 2022$ (3.0) Free Cash millions -
Flow (2029) % - (2.4)
Product 2022$ Conversion millions - 3.5
Costs
Capital 2022$ Conversion millions - 4.0
Costs
Total 2022$ Investment millions - 7.5
Required**
* Numbers in parentheses indicate a negative number.
**Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding. Trial Standard Level*
2 3 4 5 6
1,203.4 1,087.2 1,058.6 1,000.7 769.2
(275.3) (391.5) (420.1) (478.1) (709.5)
(18.6) (26.5) (28.4) (32.3) (48.0)
17.3 (24.1) (29.3) (48.8) (155.0)
(106.7) (148.1) (153.3) (172.8) (279.0)
(86.0) (119.4) (123.6) (139.4) (225.0)
11.1 13.3 13.6 14.6 25.1
228.7 319.0 330.4 373.1 601.1
239.8 332.4 344.0 387.6 626.2 37898 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
volume of above 55 gallons at EL 1. At
TSL 2, DOE estimates that manufacturers would incur approximately $11.1 million in product conversion costs, as some gas-fired storage water heaters and electric storage water heaters would need to be redesigned to comply with the standard. While small electric storage water heaters could remain reliant on electric resistance technology, most electric storage water heaters would need to transition to heat pump technology. In 2023, heat pump electric storage water heaters comprise approximately 3 percent of the electric storage water heater market. At TSL 2, heat pump water heaters are expected to comprise approximately 61 percent of the electric storage water heater market in 2030 since all electric storage water heaters (except for small electric storage) would need to meet heat pump levels, driving large investments to expand production capacity of heat exchangers and to optimize production costs. Driven by the need for increased heat exchanger production capacity, DOE estimates that manufacturers would incur approximately $207.6 million in capital conversion costs for electric storage water heaters (and $228.7 million in capital conversion costs for all product classes) at TSL 2.
At TSL 2, the shipment-weighted
average MPC for consumer water heaters covered by this rulemaking increases by 36.6 percent relative to the no-new- standards case shipment-weighted average MPC for all water heaters in 2030. Despite an increase in production costs, DOE does not project a notable drop in shipments in the year the standard takes effect. In the preservation of gross margin scenario, manufacturers are able to fully pass on this cost increase to consumers. In the preservation of gross margin percentage scenario, the increase in cashflow from the higher MSP outweighs the $239.8 in conversion costs, causing a slightly positive change in INPV at TSL 2 under this scenario.
Under the preservation of operating
profit scenario, manufacturers earn the same per-unit operating profit as would be earned in the no-new-standards case in 2031 (a year after the analyzed compliance year), but manufacturers do not earn additional profit from their investments. In this scenario, the manufacturer markup decreases in 2031. This reduction in the manufacturer markup and the $239.8 million in conversion costs incurred by manufacturers cause a negative change in INPV at TSL 2 under the preservation of operating profit scenario. At TSL 3, DOE estimates that impacts
on INPV would range from ¥$391.5
million to ¥$39.8 million, or a change in INPV of ¥26.5 percent to ¥2.7
percent. At TSL 3, industry free cash flow is ¥$24.1 million, which is a
decrease of $148.1 million, or a drop of 119.4 percent, compared to the no-new- standards case value of $124.0 million in 2029, the year leading up to the standards year. Industry conversion costs total $332.4 million. At TSL 3, approximately 17 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the required efficiency levels by the analyzed 2030 compliance date.
TSL 3 would set the energy
conservation standard for gas-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, oil-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, small electric storage water heaters at EL 1, electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of at least 20 gallons and less than 55 gallons (excluding small electric storage water heaters) at EL 1, and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of above 55 gallons at EL 1. At TSL 3, DOE estimates that manufacturers would incur approximately $13.3 million in product conversion costs, as some gas-fired storage water heaters and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of between 20 and 55 gallons would need to be redesigned to comply with the standard. In 2023, heat pump electric storage water heaters comprise approximately 3 percent of the electric storage water heater market. In 2030 (the analyzed compliance year), heat pump electric storage water heaters would comprise 100 percent of the electric storage water heater market, driving large investments in product redesign and expanding heat exchanger manufacturing capacity. This would necessitate small electric storage water heater manufacturers developing split- system heat pump designs. Driven by the need for increased heat exchanger production capacity, DOE estimates that the industry would incur approximately $297.9 million in capital conversion costs for electric storage water heaters (and $319.0 million in capital conversion costs for all product classes) at TSL 3.
At TSL 3, the large conversion costs
result in a free cash flow dropping
below zero in the years before the standards year. The negative free cash flow calculation indicates manufacturers may need to access cash reserves or outside capital to finance conversion efforts.
At TSL 3, the shipment-weighted
average MPC for consumer water heaters covered by this rulemaking increases by 54.7 percent relative to the no-new-
standards case shipment-weighted average MPC for all water heaters in 2030. Given the projected increase in production costs, DOE expects an estimated 15.4 percent drop in shipments in the year the standard takes effect relative to the no-new-standards case. The increase in cashflow from the higher MSP is outweighed by the $332.4 million in conversion costs and the drop in annual shipments, causing a slightly negative change in INPV at TSL 3 under this scenario.
Under the preservation of operating
profit scenario, manufacturers earn the same per-unit operating profit as would be earned in the no-new-standards case in 2031 (a year after the analyzed compliance year), but manufacturers do not earn additional profit from their investments. In this scenario, the manufacturer markup decreases in 2031. This reduction in the manufacturer markup, $332.4 million in conversion costs incurred by manufacturers, and the drop in annual shipments cause a large negative change in INPV at TSL 3 under the preservation of operating profit scenario.
At TSL 4, DOE estimates that impacts
on INPV would range from ¥$420.1 million to ¥$31.2 million, or a change in INPV of ¥28.4 percent to ¥2.1
percent. At TSL 4, industry free cash flow is ¥$29.3 million, which is a
decrease of ¥$153.3 million, or a drop of 123.6 percent, compared to the no- new-standards case value of $124.0 million in 2029, the year leading up to the standards year. Industry conversion costs total $344.0 million. At TSL 4, approximately 17 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the required efficiency levels by the analyzed 2030 compliance date.
TSL 4 would set the energy
conservation standard for gas-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, oil-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, small electric storage water heaters at EL 1, electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of at least 20 gallons and less than 55 gallons (excluding small electric storage water heaters) at EL 2, and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of above 55 gallons at EL 2. At TSL 4, DOE estimates that manufacturers would incur
approximately $13.6 million in product conversion costs, as some gas-fired storage water heaters, electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of between 20 and 55 gallons, and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of above 55 gallons would need to be redesigned to comply with the standard. In 2023, heat
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637899 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
pump electric storage water heaters
comprise approximately 3 percent of the electric storage water heater market. In 2030 (the analyzed compliance year), heat pump electric storage water heaters would comprise 100 percent of the electric storage water heater market, driving large investments in product redesign and expanding heat exchanger manufacturing capacity. This would necessitate small electric storage water heater manufacturers developing split- system heat pump designs. Driven by the need for increased heat exchanger production capacity, DOE estimates that the industry would incur approximately $309.3 million in capital conversion costs for electric storage water heaters (and $330.4 million in capital conversion costs for all product classes) at TSL 4.
At TSL 4, the large conversion costs
result in a free cash flow dropping below zero in the years before the standards year. The negative free cash flow calculation indicates manufacturers may need to access cash reserves or outside capital to finance conversion efforts.
At TSL 4, the shipment-weighted
average MPC for consumer water heaters covered by this rulemaking increases by 58.7 percent relative to the no-new- standards case shipment-weighted average MPC for all water heaters in 2030. Given the projected increase in production costs, DOE expects an estimated 15.2 percent drop in shipments in the year the standard takes effect relative to the no-new-standards case. The increase in cashflow from the higher MSP is outweighed by the $344.0 million in conversion costs and the drop in annual shipments, causing a slightly negative change in INPV at TSL 4 under this scenario.
Under the preservation of operating
profit scenario, manufacturers earn the same per-unit operating profit as would be earned in the no-new-standards case in 2031 (a year after the analyzed compliance year), but manufacturers do
not earn additional profit from their investments. In this scenario, the manufacturer markup decreases in 2031. This reduction in the manufacturer markup, $344.0 million in conversion costs incurred by manufacturers, and the drop in annual shipments cause a large negative change in INPV at TSL 4 under the preservation of operating profit scenario.
At TSL 5, DOE estimates that impacts
on INPV would range from ¥$478.1 million to ¥$31.3 million, or a change in INPV of ¥32.3 percent to ¥2.1
percent. At TSL 5, industry free cash flow is ¥$48.8 million, which is a
decrease of $172.8 million, or a drop of 139.4 percent compared to the no-new-
standards case value of $124.0 million in 2029, the year leading up to the standards year. Industry conversion costs total $387.6 million. At TSL 5, approximately 14 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the required efficiency levels by the analyzed 2030 compliance date.
TSL 5 would set the energy
conservation standard for gas-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, oil-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, small electric storage water heaters at EL 1, electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of less than 55 gallons (excluding small electric storage water heaters) at EL 3, and electric storage water heaters with effective an volume of above 55 gallons at EL 3. At TSL 5, DOE estimates that manufacturers would incur approximately $14.6 million in product conversion costs, as some gas-fired storage water heaters, electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of between 20 and 55 gallons, and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume above 55 gallons would need to be redesigned to comply with the standard. In 2023, heat pump electric storage water heaters comprise approximately 3 percent of the electric storage water heater market. At TSL 5, 100 percent of electric storage water heaters would need to meet heat pump levels, driving large investments in product redesign and expanding heat exchanger manufacturing capacity. This would necessitate small electric storage water heater manufacturers developing split-system heat pump designs. Additionally, requiring larger condensers for gas-fired storage water heaters would require significant investments in capacity. Driven by the need for increased heat exchanger production capacity for electric storage water heaters and increased production capacity for larger condensers for gas- fired storage water heaters, DOE estimates that the industry would incur approximately $373.1 million in capital conversion costs at TSL 5.
At TSL 5, the large conversion costs
result in a free cash flow dropping below zero in the years before the standards year. The negative free cash flow calculation indicates
manufacturers may need to access cash reserves or outside capital to finance conversion efforts.
At TSL 5, the shipment-weighted
average MPC for consumer water heaters covered by this rulemaking increases by 66.6 percent relative to the no-new- standards case shipment-weighted average MPC for all water heaters in 2030. Given the projected increase in production costs, DOE expects an
estimated 16.0 percent drop in shipments in the year the standard takes effect relative to the no-new-standards case. The increase in cashflow from the higher MSP is outweighed by the $387.6 million in conversion costs and the drop in annual shipments, causing a slightly negative change in INPV at TSL 5 under this scenario.
Under the preservation of operating
profit scenario, manufacturers earn the same per-unit operating profit as would be earned in the no-new-standards case in 2031 (a year after the analyzed compliance year), but manufacturers do not earn additional profit from their investments. In this scenario, the manufacturer markup decreases in 2031. This reduction in the manufacturer markup, the $387.6 million in conversion costs incurred by manufacturers, and the drop in annual shipments cause a large negative change in INPV at TSL 5 under the preservation of operating profit scenario.
At TSL 6, DOE estimates that impacts
on INPV would range from ¥$709.5 million to ¥$5.2 million, or a change in INPV of ¥48.0 percent to ¥0.4 percent. At TSL 6, industry free cash flow is ¥$155.0 million, which is a decrease of $279.0 million, or a drop of 225.0 percent, compared to the no-new- standards case value of $124.0 million in 2029, the year leading up to the standards year. Industry conversion costs total $626.2 million. At TSL 6, approximately 2 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the required efficiency levels by the analyzed 2030 compliance date.
TSL 6 would set the energy
conservation standard for gas-fired storage water heaters at EL 5, oil-fired storage water heaters at EL 2, small electric storage water heaters at EL 1, electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of less than 55 gallons (excluding small electric storage water heaters) at EL 3, and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of above 55 gallons at EL 3. At TSL 6, DOE estimates that manufacturers would incur approximately $25.1 million in product conversion costs, as some gas-fired storage water heaters and electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume of between 20 and 55
gallons would need to be redesigned to comply with the standard. In 2023, heat pump electric storage water heaters comprise approximately 3 percent of the electric storage water heater market. At TSL 6, 100 percent of electric storage water heaters would need to meet heat pump levels, driving large investments in product redesign and expanding heat
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637900 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
179U.S. Census Bureau’s Annual Survey of
Manufactures: 2018–2021 (Available at:
www.census.gov/programs-surveys/asm/data/ tables.html) (last accessed January 18, 2024).
180U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employer
Costs for Employee Compensation. (September 2023) (Dec. 15, 2023) Available at www.bls.gov/ news.release/archives/ecec_ 12152023.pdf (last
accessed Jan. 1, 2024). exchanger manufacturing capacity. This
would necessitate small electric storage water heater manufacturers developing split-system heat pump designs. Additionally, requiring larger condensers, electronic ignition, power venting, and larger heat exchangers for gas-fired storage water heaters would require significant investments in capacity. Driven by the need for increased heat exchanger production capacity for electric storage water heaters and increased production capacity for electronic ignition, power venting, larger heat exchangers, and larger condensers for gas-fired storage water heaters, DOE estimates that the industry would incur approximately $601.1 million in capital conversion costs at TSL 6.
At TSL 6, the large conversion costs
result in a free cash flow dropping below zero in the years before the standards year. The negative free cash flow calculation indicates manufacturers may need to access cash reserves or outside capital to finance conversion efforts.
At TSL 6, the shipment-weighted
average MPC for consumer water heaters covered by this rulemaking increases by 101.6 percent relative to the no-new- standards case shipment-weighted average MPC for all water heaters in 2030. Given the projected increase in production costs, DOE expects an estimated 19.4 percent drop in shipments in the year the standard takes effect relative to the no-new-standards case. In this scenario, the increase in cashflow from the higher MSP is outweighed by the $626.2 million in conversion costs and the drop in annual shipments, causing a slightly negative change in INPV at TSL 6 under this scenario.
Under the preservation of operating
profit scenario, manufacturers earn the same per-unit operating profit as would be earned in the no-new-standards case in 2031 (a year after the analyzed compliance year), but manufacturers do not earn additional profit from their investments. In this scenario, the manufacturer markup decreases in 2031. This reduction in the manufacturer markup, the $626.2 million in conversion costs, and the drop in annual shipments incurred by manufacturers cause a significant negative change in INPV at TSL 6 under the preservation of operating profit scenario.
b. Direct Impacts on Employment
To quantitatively assess the potential
impacts of amended energy
conservation standards on direct employment in the consumer water heater industry, DOE used the GRIM to estimate the domestic labor expenditures and number of direct employees in the no-new-standards case and in each of the standards cases during the analysis period.
Labor expenditures related to product
manufacturing depend on the labor intensity of the product, the sales volume, and an assumption that wages remain fixed in real terms over time. The total labor expenditures in each year are calculated by multiplying the total MPCs by the labor percentage of MPCs. The total labor expenditures in the GRIM were then converted to total production employment levels by dividing production labor expenditures by the average fully burdened wage multiplied by the average number of hours worked per year per production worker. To do this, DOE relied on hourly wages from the engineering analysis and the ASM inputs:
179
Production Workers’ Annual Hours, Production Workers for Pay Period, and Number of Employees. DOE also relied on the BLS employee compensation data
180to determine the fully burdened
wage ratio. The fully burdened wage ratio factors in paid leave, supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and savings, and legally required benefits.
The number of production employees
is then multiplied by the U.S. labor percentage to convert total production employment to total domestic production employment. The U.S. labor percentage represents the industry fraction of domestic manufacturing production capacity for the covered product. This value is derived from manufacturer interviews, product database analysis, and publicly available information. DOE estimates that 80 percent of consumer water heaters analyzed in this final rule are produced domestically.
The domestic production employees
estimate covers production line workers, including line supervisors, who are directly involved in fabricating and assembling products within the OEM facility. Workers performing services that are closely associated with production operations, such as materials handling tasks using forklifts, are also included as production labor. DOE’s estimates only account for production workers who manufacture the specific products covered by this final rule.
Non-production employees account
for the remainder of the direct employment figure. The non-production employees estimate covers domestic workers who are not directly involved in the production process, such as sales, engineering, human resources, and management. Using the amount of domestic production workers calculated above, non-production domestic employees are extrapolated by multiplying the ratio of non-production workers in the industry compared to production employees. DOE assumes that this employee distribution ratio remains constant between the no-new- standards case and standards cases.
Direct employment is the sum of
domestic production employees and non-production employees. Using the GRIM, DOE estimates in the absence of new energy conservation standards there would be 4,110 domestic production and non-production employees for consumer water heaters in 2030. Table V.20 shows the range of the impacts of energy conservation standards on U.S. manufacturing employment in the consumer water heaters industry. The following discussion provides a qualitative evaluation of the range of potential impacts presented in Table V.20.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637901 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
The direct employment impacts
shown in Table V.20 represent the
potential domestic employment changes that could result following the compliance date for the consumer water heater product classes analyzed in this final rule. Manufacturing employment could increase or decrease due to the labor content of the various products being manufactured domestically or if manufacturers decided to move production facilities abroad because of the amended standards. The upper- bound estimate corresponds to an increase in the number of domestic workers that would result from amended energy conservation standards if manufacturers continue to produce the same scope of covered products within the United States after compliance takes effect. The lower- bound estimate reflects the risk of manufacturers re-evaluating production siting decisions in response to amended energy conservation standards. This conservative lower bound of domestic direct employment varies by TSL and product class. For this final rule, DOE reassessed and adjusted its conservative lower bound of potential domestic direct employment impacts to account for the potential that gas-fired storage water heater OEMs may re-evaluate
domestic manufacturing locations at certain analyzed TSLs.
For electric storage water heaters
(which account for approximately 51 percent of shipments in 2030), the lower end of the domestic employment range represents the potential decrease in production workers if manufacturing of heat pump electric storage water heaters moves to lower labor-cost countries in response to the large investments necessary to expand heat exchanger production capacity. To establish the estimated change in domestic direct employment for electric storage water heaters, the direct employment analysis assumed a reduction in domestic employment commensurate with the
percentage of electric storage water heater shipments that transition to heat pump designs. For gas-fired storage water heaters (which account for approximately 49 percent of shipments in 2030), the lower bound represents a shift of all domestic production workers to foreign production locations at max- tech (TSL 6). At max-tech, it is possible that manufacturers would revisit their siting decisions based on the need for increased production capacity for larger
condensers. DOE applied this conservative assumption to establish a lower bound that avoids underestimating the potential direct employment impacts.
Additional detail on the analysis of
direct employment can be found in chapter 12 of the final rule TSD. Additionally, the employment impacts discussed in this section are independent of the employment impacts from the broader U.S. economy, which are documented in chapter 16 of the final rule TSD.
c. Impacts on Manufacturing Capacity
Industry concerns around
manufacturing capacity were driven by
potential technology transitions. In particular, manufacturers focused on the transition to heat pump technology for electric storage water heaters with rated storage volumes of between 20 and 55 gallons. The vast majority of sales today in this product class are electric resistance water heaters. DOE estimates that approximately 3 percent of current electric storage consumer water heater sales are heat pump units. At the final rule level, all electric storage water heaters, excluding small electric storage water heaters, would need to incorporate heat pump technology. Industry would need to add capacity to produce an additional three to four million heat pump electric storage water heater units per year. In interviews, manufacturers noted that heat pump
electric storage water heaters are more complex to manufacture than electric resistance water heaters. DOE estimated conversion costs based on both industry feedback and estimates of capital investment from the engineering analysis. DOE’s analysis indicated significant investment in additional production floor space and in production capacity for heat exchangers. At TSL 2, conversion costs total $239.8 million, presuming all OEMs of electric
storage water heaters, excluding small electric storage water heaters, invest in the transition to heat pump models.
d. Impacts on Subgroups of
Manufacturers
As discussed in section IV.J.1 of this
document, using average cost assumptions to develop an industry cash flow estimate may not be adequate for assessing differential impacts among manufacturer subgroups. Small manufacturers, niche manufacturers, and manufacturers exhibiting a cost structure substantially different from the industry average could be affected disproportionately. DOE used the results of the industry characterization to group manufacturers exhibiting similar characteristics. Consequently, DOE identified small business manufacturers as a subgroup for a separate impact analysis.
For the small business subgroup
analysis, DOE applied the small business size standards published by the U.S. Small Business Administration (‘‘SBA’’) to determine whether a company is considered a small business. The size standards are codified at 13 CFR part 121. To be categorized as a small business under North American Industry Classification System (‘‘NAICS’’) code 335220, ‘‘Major Household Appliance Manufacturing,’’ a consumer water heater manufacturer and its affiliates may employ a
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.066</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.20 Domestic Direct Employment Impacts for Consumer Water Heater
Manufacturers in 2030
No-New-
Standards TSLl TSL2 TSL3 TSL4 TSL5
Case
Direct Employment
in 2030 (Production 4,110 4,110 to 2,941 to 2,393 to 2,393 to 2,393 to
workers + Non- 4,120 5,544 5,480 5,504 5,760
Production Workers)
Potential Changes in (1,168) (1,716) (1,716) (1,716) Direct Employment - 0 to 10 to 1,434 to 1,370 to 1,394 to 1,650 Workers in 2030*
*DOE presents a range of potential employment impacts. Numbers in parentheses denote negative values. TSL6
441 to
7,350
(3,669)
to 3,240 37902 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
maximum of 1,500 employees. The
1,500-employee threshold includes all employees in a business’s parent company and any other subsidiaries. Based on this classification, DOE identified three manufacturers that qualify as domestic small businesses.
The small business subgroup analysis
is discussed in more detail in chapter 12 of the final rule TSD. DOE examines the potential impacts of this final rule on small business manufacturers in section VI.B of this document. e. Cumulative Regulatory Burden
One aspect of assessing manufacturer
burden involves looking at the
cumulative impact of multiple DOE standards and the regulatory actions of other Federal agencies and States that affect the manufacturers of a covered product or equipment. While any one
regulation may not impose a significant burden on manufacturers, the combined effects of several existing or impending regulations may have serious consequences for some manufacturers, groups of manufacturers, or an entire industry. Multiple regulations affecting the same manufacturer can strain profits and lead companies to abandon product lines or markets with lower expected future returns than competing products. For these reasons, DOE conducts an analysis of cumulative regulatory burden as part of its rulemakings pertaining to appliance efficiency.
For the cumulative regulatory burden
analysis, DOE examined Federal, product-specific regulations that could affect consumer water heater manufacturers and that take effect approximately 3 years before or after the estimated compliance date (2030). This information is presented in Table V.21.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637903 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.067</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.21 Compliance Dates and Expected Conversion Expenses of Federal
Energy Conservation Standards Affecting Consumer Water Heater Original
Equipment Manufacturers
Number of Approx. Industry
Federal Energy Number OEMs Affected Standards Conversion
Conservation Standard ofOEMs* by Today's Compliance Costs Industry
Conversion
Costs/
Equipment Rule** Year (millions) Revenue***
Miscellaneous
Refrigeration Productst 38 2 2029 $126.9 3.1% 88 FR 19382 (2021$)
(March 31, 2023)
Dishwashers t $125.6 88 FR 32514 22 3 2027 2.1%
(May 19, 2023) (2021$)
Room Air Conditioners $24.8 88 FR34298 8 3 2026 0.4%
(May 26, 2023) (2021$)
Consumer
Pool Heaters $48.4 88 FR34624 20 3 2028 1.5%
(May 30, 2023) (2021$)
Microwave Ovens $46.1 88 FR 39912 18 3 2026 0.7%
(June 20, 2023) (2021$)
Consumer Boilerst $98.0 88 FR 55128 24 5 2030 (2022$) 3.6%
(Au!!l.lst 14, 2023)
Walk-in Coolers and
Freezerst 79 2 2027 $89.0 0.8% 88 FR60746 (2022$)
(September 5, 2023)
Commercial Water
Heating Equipment 15 5 2026 $42.7 5.3% 88 FR69686 (2022$)
(October 6, 2023)
Commercial
Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, 83 1 2028 $226.4 1.6% and Freezerst (2022$)
88 FR 70196
(October 10, 2023)
Dehumidifiers t $6.9 88 FR 76510 20 2 2028 0.4%
(November 6, 2023) (2022$)
Consumer Furnaces $162.0 88 FR 87502 15 3 2029 1.8%
(December 18, 2023) (2022$) 37904 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
DOE received several comments in
response to the July 2023 NOPR about
cumulative regulatory burden. DOE addresses those comments in section IV.J.3.b of this document.
3. National Impact Analysis
This section presents DOE’s estimates
of the national energy savings and the
NPV of consumer benefits that would result from each of the TSLs considered as potential amended standards.
a. National Energy Savings
To estimate the energy savings
attributable to potential amended
standards for consumer water heaters, DOE compared their energy consumption under the no-new- standards case to their anticipated energy consumption under each TSL. The savings are measured over the entire lifetime of products purchased in the 30-year period that begins in the year of anticipated compliance with amended standards (2030–2059). Table V.22 presents DOE’s projections of the national energy savings for each TSL considered for consumer water heaters. The savings were calculated using the approach described in section IV.H.2 of this document.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.068</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Refrigerators,
Refrigerator-Freezers, 2029 and $830.3 and Freezers 63 3 2030t (2022$) 1.3%
89 FR3026
(J anuarv 17, 2024)
Consumer Conventional
Cooking Products 35 3 2028 $66.7 0.3% 89 FR 11434 (2022$)
(February 14, 2024)
Consumer Clothes Dryers $180.7 89 FR 18164 19 3 2028 (2022$) 1.4%
(March 12, 2024)
Residential Clothes
Washers 22 3 2028 $320.0 1.8% 89 FR 19026 (2022$)
(March 15, 2024)
* This column presents the total number ofOEMs identified in the energy conservation standard rule that is contributing to
cumulative regulatory burden.
* * This column presents the number of OEMs producing consumer water heaters that are also listed as OEMs in the
identified energy conservation standard that is contributing to cumulative regulatory burden.
*** This column presents industry conversion costs as a percentage of product revenue during the conversion period.
Industry conversion costs are the upfront investments manufacturers must make to sell compliant products/equipment. The
revenue used for this calculation is the revenue from just the covered product/equipment associated with each row. The
conversion period is the timeframe over which conversion costs are made and lasts from the publication year of the final
rule to the compliance year of the energy conservation standard. The conversion period typically ranges from 3 to 5 years,
depending on the rulemaking.
t These rulemakings are at the NOPR stage, and all values are subject to change until finalized through publication of a
final rule.
t For the refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, and freezers energy conservation standards direct final rule, the
compliance year (2029 or 2030) varies by product class. 37905 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
181U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
Circular A–4: Regulatory Analysis. Available at
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-for- agencies/circulars (last accessed Jan. 18. 2024). DOE
used the prior version of Circular A–4 (September 17, 2003) in accordance with the effective date of the November 9, 2023 version. 182EPCA requires DOE to review its standards at
least once every 6 years, and requires, for certain
products, a 3-year period after any new standard is promulgated before compliance is required, except that in no case may any new standards be required within 6 years of the compliance date of the previous standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)) While adding a 6-year review to the 3-year compliance period adds up to 9 years, DOE notes that it may undertake reviews at any time within the 6-year period and that the 3-year compliance date may yield to the 6-year backstop. A 9-year analysis period may not be appropriate given the variability that occurs in the timing of standards reviews and the fact that for some products, the compliance period is 5 years rather than 3 years.
OMB Circular A–4181requires
agencies to present analytical results,
including separate schedules of the monetized benefits and costs that show the type and timing of benefits and costs. Circular A–4 also directs agencies to consider the variability of key elements underlying the estimates of benefits and costs. For this rulemaking, DOE undertook a sensitivity analysis using 9 years, rather than 30 years, of product shipments. The choice of a 9- year period is a proxy for the timeline in EPCA for the review of certain energy conservation standards and potential revision of and compliance with such revised standards.
182The review
timeframe established in EPCA is generally not synchronized with the product lifetime, product manufacturing cycles, or other factors specific to consumer water heaters. Thus, such results are presented for informational
purposes only and are not indicative of any change in DOE’s analytical methodology. The NES sensitivity analysis results based on a 9-year analytical period are presented in Table V.23. The impacts are counted over the lifetime of consumer water heaters purchased during the period 2030–2038.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.069</GPH> ER06MY24.070</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.22 Cumulative National Energy Savings for Consumer Water Heaters; 30
Years of Shipments (2030-2059)
Trial Standard Level
1 2 3 4 5 6
quads
Primary Ener!!V
GSWH 0.37 1.71 1.71 1.71 1.71 6.93
OSWH 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75
MediumESWH 0.00 15.33 17.91 21.12 21.73 21.73
LargeESWH 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.013 0.013
Total Primary Ener!!V 0.4 17.0 20.4 23.6 24.2 29.4
FFC Energ 1
GSWH 0.42 1.91 1.91 1.91 1.91 7.80
OSWH 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.77 0.77 0.77
MediumESWH 0.00 15.65 18.29 21.61 22.24 22.24
LargeESWH 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.014 0.014
Total FFC Energy 0.4 17.6 21.0 24.3 24.9 30.8
Table V.23 Cumulative National Energy Savings for Consumer Water Heaters;
9 Years of Shipments (2030-2038)
Trial Standard Level
1 2 3 4 5 6
quads
Primary Energy
GSWH 0.12 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.55 2.13
OSWH 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17
MediumESWH 0.00 4.57 5.26 6.20 6.35 6.35
LargeESWH 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.004
Total Primary Energy 0.1 5.1 6.0 6.9 7.1 8.7
FFC Energv
GSWH 0.13 0.61
0.61 0.61 0.61 2.39
OSWH 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18
MediumESWH 0.00 4.67 5.38 6.34 6.51 6.51
LargeESWH 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.004 0.004
Total FFC Energy 0.1 5.3 6.2 7.1 7.3 9.1 37906 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
183U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
Circular A–4: Regulatory Analysis. September 17, 2003. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/ uploads/legacy_ drupal_ files/omb/circulars/A4/a-
4.pdf (last accessed July 1, 2021). b. Net Present Value of Consumer Costs
and Benefits
DOE estimated the cumulative NPV of
the total costs and savings for consumers that would result from the
TSLs considered for consumer water heaters. In accordance with OMB’s guidelines on regulatory analysis,
183
DOE calculated NPV using both a 7- percent and a 3-percent real discount rate. Table V.24 shows the consumer NPV results with impacts counted over the lifetime of products purchased during the period 2030–2059.
The NPV results based on the
aforementioned 9-year analytical period are presented in Table V.25. The impacts are counted over the lifetime of products purchased during the period 2030–2038. As mentioned previously, such results are presented for informational purposes only and are not indicative of any change in DOE’s
analytical methodology or decision criteria.
The previous results reflect the use of
a default trend to estimate the change in price for consumer water heaters over the analysis period (see section IV.F.1 of this document). DOE also conducted a sensitivity analysis that considered one
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.071</GPH> ER06MY24.072</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.24 Cumulative Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits for Consumer
Water Heaters; 30 Years of Shipments (2030-2059)
Trial Standard Level
Discount Rate 1 2 3 4 5 6
billion 2022$
3 percent discount rate
GSWH 1.53 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 9.31
OSWH 0.006 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 (2.81) (2.81) (2.81) (2.81)
MediumESWH 0.00 75.66 84.69 107.68 108.09 108.09
LargeESWH 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.031 0.068 0.068
Total 3 percent 1.5 82 88 111 111 115
7 percent discount rate
GSWH 0.43 1.54 1.54 1.54 1.54 (1.74)
OSWH 0.002 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 (2.15) (2.15) (2.15) (2.15)
MediumESWH 0.00 23.53 25.63 33.99 33.58 33.58
LargeESWH 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.011 0.022 0.022
Total 7 percent 0.4 25 25 33 33 30
Table V.25 Cumulative Net Present Value of Consumer Benefits for Consumer
Water Heaters; 9 Years of Shipments (2030-2038)
Trial Standard Level
Discount Rate 1 2 3 4 5 6
billion 2022$
3 percent discount rate
GSWH 0.58 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 0.64
OSWH 0.004 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 (1.51) (1.51) (1.51) (1.51)
MediumESWH 0.00 27.08 30.09 38.65 38.73 38.73
LargeESWH 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.011 0.024 0.024
Total 3 percent 0.6 29 31 39 40 38
7 percent discount rate
GSWH 0.21 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 (2.31)
OSWH 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
SmallESWH 0.00 0.00 (1.25) (1.25) (1.25) (1.25)
MediumESWH 0.00 11.09 12.02 16.18 15.95 15.95
LargeESWH 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.005 0.010 0.010
Total 7 percent 0.2 12 12 16 15 12 37907 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
scenario with a price decline compared
to the reference case and one scenario with a price increase compared to the reference case. The results of these alternative cases are presented in appendix 10C of the final rule TSD. In the price-decline case, the NPV of consumer benefits is higher than in the default case. In the price increase case, the NPV of consumer benefits is lower than in the default case.
c. Indirect Impacts on Employment
DOE estimates that amended energy
conservation standards for consumer
water heaters will reduce energy expenditures for consumers of those products, with the resulting net savings being redirected to other forms of economic activity. These expected shifts
in spending and economic activity could affect the demand for labor. As described in section IV.N of this document, DOE used an input/output model of the U.S. economy to estimate indirect employment impacts of the TSLs that DOE considered. There are uncertainties involved in projecting employment impacts, especially changes in the later years of the analysis. Therefore, DOE generated results for near-term timeframes (2030– 2034), where these uncertainties are reduced.
The results suggest that the adopted
standards are likely to have a negligible impact on the net demand for labor in the economy. The net change in jobs is so small that it would be imperceptible in national labor statistics and might be offset by other, unanticipated effects on employment. Chapter 16 of the final
rule TSD presents detailed results regarding anticipated indirect employment impacts.
4. Impact on Utility or Performance of
Products
As discussed in section III.F.1.d of
this document, DOE has concluded that
the standards adopted in this final rule will not lessen the utility or performance of the consumer water heaters under consideration in this rulemaking. Manufacturers of these products currently offer units that meet or exceed the adopted standards.
5. Impact of Any Lessening of
Competition
DOE considered any lessening of
competition that would be likely to result from new or amended standards. As discussed in section III.F.1.e of this document, EPCA directs the Attorney General of the United States (‘‘Attorney General’’) to determine the impact, if any, of any lessening of competition likely to result from a proposed standard and to transmit such determination in writing to the Secretary within 60 days of the publication of a proposed rule, together with an analysis of the nature and extent of the impact. To assist the Attorney General in making this determination, DOE provided the Department of Justice (‘‘DOJ’’) with copies of the NOPR and the TSD for review. In its assessment letter responding to DOE, DOJ concluded that the proposed energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters are unlikely to have a significant adverse impact on competition. DOE is publishing the Attorney General’s assessment at the end of this final rule.
6. Need of the Nation To Conserve
Energy
Enhanced energy efficiency, where
economically justified, improves the Nation’s energy security, strengthens the economy, and reduces the environmental impacts (costs) of energy production. Reduced electricity demand due to energy conservation standards is also likely to reduce the cost of maintaining the reliability of the electricity system, particularly during peak-load periods. Chapter 15 in the final rule TSD presents the estimated impacts on electricity-generating capacity, relative to the no-new- standards case, for the TSLs that DOE considered in this rulemaking.
Energy conservation resulting from
potential energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters is expected to yield environmental benefits in the form of reduced emissions of certain air pollutants and greenhouse gases. Table V.26 provides DOE’s estimate of cumulative emissions reductions expected to result from the TSLs considered in this rulemaking. The emissions were calculated using the multipliers discussed in section IV.K of this document. DOE reports annual emissions reductions for each TSL in chapter 13 of the final rule TSD.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637908 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
As part of the analysis for this rule,
DOE estimated monetary benefits likely
to result from the reduced emissions of CO
2that DOE estimated for each of the
considered TSLs for consumer water heaters. Section IV.L of this document discusses the estimated SC–CO
2values
that DOE used. Table V.27 presents the value of CO
2emissions reduction at
each TSL for each of the SC–CO 2cases. The time-series of annual values is
presented for the selected TSL in chapter 14 of the final rule TSD.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
As discussed in section IV.L.2, DOE
estimated the climate benefits likely to
result from the reduced emissions of methane and N
2O that DOE estimated for each of the considered TSLs for
consumer water heaters. Table V.28 presents the value of the CH
4emissions
reduction at each TSL, and Table V.29 presents the value of the N
2O emissions reduction at each TSL. The time-series
of annual values is presented for the selected TSL in chapter 14 of the final rule TSD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.073</GPH> ER06MY24.074</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.26 Cumulative Emissions Reduction for Consumer Water Heaters Shipped
in 2030-2059
Trial Standard Level
1 2 3 4 5 6
Electric Power Sector and Site Emissions
CO2 (million metric
tons) 20 299 342 404 417 716
CHi (thousand tons) 0.4 20 24 28 29 34
N2O (thousand tons) 0.0 2.8 3.3 3.8 3.9 4.5
SO2 (thousand tons) 0.1 88 107 123 126 124
NOx (thousand tons) 17 153 166 201 209 475
Hg (tons) 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9
Upstream Emissions
CO2 (million metric
tons) 2.7 33 37 44 45 87
CHi (thousand tons) 280 3,038 3,389 4,050 4,199 8,500
N2O (thousand tons) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3
SO2 (thousand tons) 0.0 1.6 2.0 2.3 2.3 2.5
NOx(thousand tons) 43 512 576 685 710 1,375
Hg (tons) 0.000 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003
Total FFC Emissions
CO2 (million metric
tons) 22 332 379 448 462 803
CHi (thousand tons) 280 3,058 3,413 4,078 4,228 8,534
N2O (thousand tons) 0.0 2.9 3.5 4.0 4.1 4.7
SO2 (thousand tons) 0.1 90 109 126 128 127
NOx (thousand tons) 61 665 742 886 919 1,851
Hg (tons) 0.0 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9
Note: Totals may not equal sums due to rounding.
Table V.27 Present Value of CO2 Emissions Reduction for Consumer Water Heaters
Shipped in 2030-2059
SC-CO2 Case
Discount Rate and Statistics
TSL 5% 3% 2.5% 3%
Avera2:e Avera2:e Avera2:e 95th percentile
billion 2022$
1 0.2 0.9 1.4 2.8
2 3.0 13 21 40
3 3.4 15 24 46
4 4.0 18 28 54
5 4.1 18 29 56
6 7.2 32 51 97 37909 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
DOE is well aware that scientific and
economic knowledge about the
contribution of CO 2and other GHG
emissions to changes in the future global climate and the potential resulting damages to the global and U.S. economy continues to evolve rapidly. DOE, together with other Federal agencies, will continue to review methodologies for estimating the monetary value of reductions in CO
2
and other GHG emissions. This ongoing review will consider the comments on this subject that are part of the public
record for this and other rulemakings, as well as other methodological assumptions and issues. DOE notes, however, that the adopted standards are economically justified even without inclusion of monetized benefits of
reduced GHG emissions.
DOE also estimated the monetary
value of the economic benefits associated with NO
Xand SO 2emissions
reductions anticipated to result from the considered TSLs for consumer water heaters. The dollar-per-ton values that DOE used are discussed in section IV.L
of this document. Table V.30 presents the present value for NO
Xemissions
reduction for each TSL calculated using 7-percent and 3-percent discount rates, and Table V.31 presents similar results for SO
2emissions reductions. The
results in these tables reflect application of EPA’s low dollar-per-ton values, which DOE used to be conservative. The time-series of annual values is presented for the selected TSL in chapter 14 of the final rule TSD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.075</GPH> ER06MY24.076</GPH> ER06MY24.077</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.28 Present Value of Methane Emissions Reduction for Consumer Water
Heaters Shipped in 2030-2059
SC-CH4 Case
Discount Rate and Statistics
TSL 5% 3% 2.5% 3%
Average Average Average 95th percentile
billion 2022$
1 0.1 0.4 0.5 1.0
2 1.3 4.0 5.6 11
3 1.4 4.4 6.2 12
4 1.7 5.3 7.4 14
5 1.8 5.5 7.7 14
6 3.6 11 16 30
Table V.29 Present Value of Nitrous Oxide Emissions Reduction for Consumer
Water Heaters Shipped in 2030-2059
SC-N20 Case
Discount Rate and Statistics
TSL 5% 3% 2.5% 3%
Average Average Average 95th percentile
billion 2022$
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.11
3 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.13
4 0.01 0.06 0.09 0.15
5 0.01 0.06 0.09 0.16
6 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.18
Table V.30 Present Value ofNOx Emissions Reduction for Consumer Water
Heaters Shipped in 2030-2059
TSL 7% Discount Rate 3% Discount Rate
million 2022$
1 710 2,020
2 9,781 27,898
3 11,061 31,658
4 13,023 37,373
5 13,430 38,594
6 23,946 69,019 37910 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Not all the public health and
environmental benefits from the
reduction of greenhouse gases, NO X,
and SO 2are captured in the values
above, and additional unquantified benefits from the reductions of those pollutants as well as from the reduction of direct PM and other co-pollutants may be significant. DOE has not included monetary benefits of the reduction of Hg emissions because the amount of reduction is very small. 7. Other Factors
The Secretary of Energy, in
determining whether a standard is
economically justified, may consider
any other factors that the Secretary deems to be relevant. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(VII)) No other factors were considered in this analysis.
8. Summary of Economic Impacts
Table V.32 presents the NPV values
that result from adding the estimates of
the economic benefits resulting from reduced GHG and NO
Xand SO 2
emissions to the NPV of consumer benefits calculated for each TSL
considered in this rulemaking. The consumer benefits are domestic U.S. monetary savings that occur as a result of purchasing the covered products, and are measured for the lifetime of products shipped during the period 2030–2059. The climate benefits associated with reduced GHG emissions resulting from the adopted standards are global benefits, and are also calculated based on the lifetime of consumer water heaters shipped during the period 2030– 2059.
C. Conclusion
When considering new or amended
energy conservation standards, the standards that DOE adopts for any type (or class) of covered product must be designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that the Secretary determines is
technologically feasible and economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) In determining whether a standard is economically justified, the Secretary must determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed its
burdens by, to the greatest extent practicable, considering the seven
statutory factors discussed previously. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)) The new or amended standard must also result in significant conservation of energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B))
For this final rule, DOE considered
the impacts of new and amended
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.078</GPH> ER06MY24.079</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.31 Present Value of SO2 Emissions Reduction for Consumer Water Heaters
Shipped in 2030-2059
TSL 7% Discount Rate 3% Discount Rate
million 2022$
1 2.0 5.6
2 1,926 5,477
3 2,324 6,648
4 2,666 7,626
5 2,723 7,796
6 2,667 7,642
Table V.32 Consumer NPV Combined with Present Value of Climate Benefits and
Health Benefits
Cate~ory TSL 1 TSL2 TSL3 TSL4 TSLS TSL6
Using 3% Discount Rate for Consumer NPV and Health Benefits (billion 2022$)
5% Average SC-
GHG case 3.9 119 131 162 164 202
3% Average SC-
GHG case 4.8 132 146 179 182 235
2.5% Average SC-
GHG case 5.5 142 156 192 195 258
3% 95th percentile
SC-GHG case 7.3 166 184 224 228 318
Using 7% Discount Ratefor Consumer NPV and Health Bene_fits (billion 2022$)
5% Average SC-
GHG case 1.5 41 43 55 55 67
3% Average SC-
GHG case 2.4 54 58 72 73 100
2.5% Average SC-
GHG case 3.1 63 69 85 86 123
3% 95th percentile
SC-GHG case 4.9 88 96 117 119 183 37911 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
184P.C. Reiss and M.W. White. Household
Electricity Demand, Revisited. Review of Economic
Studies. 2005. 72(3): pp. 853–883. doi: 10.1111/
0034–6527.00354. 185Sanstad, A.H. Notes on the Economics of
Household Energy Consumption and Technology Choice. 2010. Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory. www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/
appliance_ standards/pdfs/consumer_ ee_theory.pdf
(last accessed July 1, 2021). standards for consumer water heaters at
each TSL, beginning with the maximum technologically feasible level, to determine whether that level was economically justified. Where the max- tech level was not justified, DOE then considered the next most efficient level and undertook the same evaluation until it reached the highest efficiency level that is both technologically feasible and economically justified and saves a significant amount of energy.
To aid the reader as DOE discusses
the benefits and/or burdens of each TSL, tables in this section present a summary of the results of DOE’s quantitative analysis for each TSL. In addition to the quantitative results presented in the tables, DOE also considers other burdens and benefits that affect economic justification. These include the impacts on identifiable subgroups of consumers who may be disproportionately affected by a national standard and impacts on employment.
DOE also notes that the economics
literature provides a wide-ranging discussion of how consumers trade off up-front costs and energy savings in the absence of government intervention. Much of this literature attempts to explain why consumers appear to undervalue energy efficiency improvements. There is evidence that consumers undervalue future energy savings as a result of (1) a lack of information; (2) a lack of sufficient salience of the long-term or aggregate benefits; (3) a lack of sufficient savings to warrant delaying or altering purchases; (4) excessive focus on the short term, in the form of inconsistent weighting of future energy cost savings relative to available returns on other
investments; (5) computational or other difficulties associated with the evaluation of relevant tradeoffs; and (6) a divergence in incentives (for example, between renters and owners, or builders and purchasers). Having less than perfect foresight and a high degree of uncertainty about the future, consumers may trade off these types of investments at a higher than expected rate between current consumption and uncertain future energy cost savings.
In DOE’s current regulatory analysis,
potential changes in the benefits and costs of a regulation due to changes in consumer purchase decisions are included in two ways. First, if consumers forego the purchase of a product in the standards case, this decreases sales for product manufacturers, and the impact on manufacturers attributed to lost revenue is included in the MIA. Second, DOE accounts for energy savings attributable only to products actually used by consumers in the standards case; if a standard decreases the number of products purchased by consumers, this decreases the potential energy savings from an energy conservation standard. DOE provides estimates of shipments and changes in the volume of product purchases in chapter 9 of the final rule TSD. However, DOE’s current analysis does not explicitly control for heterogeneity in consumer preferences, preferences across subcategories of products or specific features, or consumer price sensitivity variation according to household income.
184
While DOE is not prepared at present
to provide a fuller quantifiable framework for estimating the benefits and costs of changes in consumer purchase decisions due to an energy conservation standard, DOE is committed to developing a framework that can support empirical quantitative tools for improved assessment of the consumer welfare impacts of appliance standards. DOE has posted a paper that discusses the issue of consumer welfare impacts of appliance energy conservation standards, and potential enhancements to the methodology by which these impacts are defined and estimated in the regulatory process.
185
DOE welcomes comments on how to more fully assess the potential impact of energy conservation standards on consumer choice and how to quantify this impact in its regulatory analysis in future rulemakings.
1. Benefits and Burdens of TSLs
Considered for Consumer Water Heater Standards
Table V.33 and Table V.34 summarize
the quantitative impacts estimated for each TSL for consumer water heaters. The national impacts are measured over the lifetime of consumer water heaters purchased in the 30-year period that begins in the anticipated year of compliance with amended standards (2030–2059). The energy savings, emissions reductions, and value of emissions reductions refer to full-fuel- cycle results. DOE is presenting monetized benefits of GHG emissions reductions in accordance with the applicable Executive orders, and DOE would reach the same conclusion presented in this notice in the absence of the social cost of greenhouse gases, including the Interim Estimates presented by the Interagency Working Group because the consumer benefits alone outweigh the costs of the adopted rule (as described in section V.C of this document). The efficiency levels contained in each TSL are described in section V.A of this document.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637912 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.080</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.33 Summary of Analytical Results for Consumer Water Heater TSLs:
National Impacts
Cate2orv TSL 1 TSL2 TSL3 TSL4 TSL5 TSL6
Cumulative FFC National Energy Savings
Quads 0.4 17.6 21.0 24.3 24.9 30.8
Cumulative FFC Emissions Reduction
CO2 (million metric tons) 22 332 379 448 462 803
CH4 (thousand tons) 280 3,058 3,413 4,078 4,228 8,534
N2O (thousand tons) 0.0 2.9 3.5 4.0 4.1 4.7
SO2 (thousand tons) 0.1 90 109 126 128 127
NOx(thousand tons) 61 665 742 886 919 1,851
Hg (tons) 0.0 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9
Present Value of Benefits and Costs (3% discount rate, billion 2022$)
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 2.9 124 148 173 179 212
Climate Benefits* 1.3 17 20 23 24 43
Health Benefits** 2.0 33 38 45 46 77
Total Benefitst 6.2 175 206 241 249 332
Consumer Incremental Product Costs! 1.3 42 60 62 67 97
Consumer Net Benefits 1.5 82 88 111 111 115
Total Net Benefits 4.8 132 146 179 182 235
Present Value of Benefits and Costs (7% discount rate, billion 2022$)
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 1.1 47 56 65 67 80
Climate Benefits* 1.3 17 20 23 24 43
Health Benefits** 0.7 12 13 16 16 27
Total Benefitst 3.1 76 88 104 107 149
Consumer Incremental Product Costs! 0.7 22 30 32 34 50
Consumer Net Benefits 0.4 25 25 33 33 30
Total Net Benefits 2.4 54 58 72 73 100
Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with consumer water heaters shipped during the period
2030-2059. These results include benefits to consumers which accrue after 2059 from the products shipped during the
period 2030-2059.
* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the SC-CO2, SC-CH4, and SC-N2O. Together, these
represent the global SC-GHG. For presentational purposes of this table, the climate benefits associated with the average
SC-GHG at a 3-percent discount rate are shown; however, DOE emphasizes the value of considering the benefits
calculated using all four sets of SC-GHG estimates. To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, this analysis
uses the interim estimates presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous
Oxide Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the IWG.
** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOx and SO2. DOE is currently only monetizing (for
NOx and SO2) PM2.s precursor health benefits and (for NOx) ozone precursor health benefits, but will continue to
assess the ability to monetize other effects such as health benefits from reductions in direct PM2.s emissions. The
health benefits are presented at real discount rates of 3 and 7 percent. See section IV.L of this document for more
details. t Total and net benefits include consumer, climate, and health benefits. For presentation purposes, total and net benefits
for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are presented using the average SC-GHG with 3-percent discount rate. t Costs include incremental equipment costs as well as installation costs. 37913 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
DOE first considered TSL 6, which
represents the max-tech efficiency levels
for all product classes. At TSL 6, the design options for GSWHs include condensing technology; the design options for ESWHs include heat pump technology; and the design options for oil-fired storage water heaters (‘‘OSWHs’’) include extra insulation and multi-flue heat exchangers. TSL 6 would require extensive changes to the way manufacturers currently produce water heaters. At TSL 6, approximately 2 percent of consumer water heater
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.081</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.34 Summary of Analytical Results for Consumer Water Heater TSLs:
Manufacturer and Consumer Impacts
Cate~ory TSL 1 TSL2 TSL3 TSL4 TSLS TSL6
Manufacturer Imnacts
Industry NPV
(million 2022$) <No- 1,470.3 to 1,203.4 to 1,087.2 to 1,058.6 to 1,000.7 to 769.2 to
new-standards case 1,484.2 1,506.9 1,438.9 1,447.6 1,447.5 1,473.5
INPV = $1.478.8)
Industry NPV (Yo (0.6) to 0.4 (18.6) to (26.5) to (28.4) to (32.3) to (48.0) to
chane-e) 1.9 (2.7) (2.1) (2.1) (0.4)
Consumer Averae:e LCC Savine:s 12022$)
GSWH 15 29 29 29 29 (285)
OSWH 123 141 141 141 141 141
Small ESWH (20 gal
< Ve!'!:< 35 gal and NA NA (750) (750) (750) (750)
FHR < 51 2:al)
ESWH (20 gal< Veff
< 55 gal excluding NA 859 859 1,146 1,067 1,067
SmallESWH)
ESWH (55 gal< Veff 458 458 458 613 190 190 < 120 2:al)
Shi2ment- Weighted 15 429 340 472 458 251 Avera2:e*
Consumer Simnle PBP {years}
GSWH 8.4 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 18.5
OSWH 4.7 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5
Small ESWH (20 gal
< Ve!'!:< 35 gal and NA NA 16.5 16.5 16.5 16.5
FHR < 51 2:al)
ESWH (>20 gal and
<55 gal excluding NA 5.6 5.6 5.0 5.2 5.2
SmallESWH)
ESWH (>55 gal and 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.4 1.4 <120 2:al)
Shi2ment- Weighted 3.3 6.9 8.5 8.3 8.5 14.3 Avera2:e*
Percent of Consumers that Exnerience a Net Cost
GSWH 20 41 41 41 41 70
OSWH 11 27 27 27 27 27
SmallESWH 0 0 77 77 77 77
ESWH (>20 gal and
<55 gal excluding 0 35 35 33 38 38
SmallESWH)
ESWH (>55 gal and 0 0 0 1 39 39 <120 2:al)
Shi2ment- Weighted 10 35 40 39 42 57 Avera2:e*
*Weighted by market share in start year of 2030. 37914 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
shipments are expected to meet the
required efficiency levels by the 2030 compliance date. This includes approximately 0.2 percent of shipments for GSWHs, 17 percent of shipments for OSWHs, 1 percent of small ESWH, 5 percent of ESWH with an effective storage volume of less than 55 gallons (excluding small ESWH) shipments, and 11 percent of ESWHs with an effective storage volume greater than or equal to 55 gallons shipments. There would be a significant ramp up in manufacturing capacity, especially for gas storage and electric storage water heaters, needed to support the market due to the transition to accommodate these advanced technologies.
TSL 6 would save an estimated 30.8
quads of energy, an amount DOE considers significant. Under TSL 6, the NPV of consumer benefit would be $30 billion using a discount rate of 7 percent, and $115 billion using a discount rate of 3 percent.
The cumulative emissions reductions
at TSL 6 are 803 Mt of CO
2, 8,534
thousand tons of CH 4, 4.7 thousand tons
of N 2O, 1,851 thousand tons of NO X,
127 thousand tons of SO 2, and 0.9 tons
of Hg. The estimated monetary value of the climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions (associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3-percent discount rate) at TSL 6 is $43 billion. The estimated monetary value of the health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO Xemissions at
TSL 6 is $27 billion using a 7-percent discount rate and $77 billion using a 3- percent discount rate.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs, health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO X
emissions, and the 3-percent discount rate case for climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions, the estimated total NPV at TSL 6 is $100 billion. Using a 3-percent discount rate for all benefits and costs, the estimated total NPV at TSL 6 is $235 billion. The estimated total NPV is provided for additional information; however, DOE primarily relies upon the NPV of consumer benefits when determining whether a proposed standard level is economically justified.
At TSL 6, consumers will experience
an average LCC cost of $285 for GSWHs, which is primarily driven by the total installed cost increases for gas condensing technology. For OSWHs, consumers will experience an average LCC savings of $141. For electric storage water heaters 20 to 35 gallons, consumers will experience an LCC cost of $750. For GSWHs, the consumers experiencing a net LCC cost is 70 percent, and for small ESWHs, the consumers experiencing a net LCC cost
is 77 percent.
At TSL 6, the projected change in
INPV ranges from a decrease of $709.5 million to a decrease of $5.2 million, which corresponds to a decrease of 48.0 percent and a decrease of 0.4 percent, respectively. The range of the impacts is driven primarily by the ability of manufacturers to recover their compliance costs. DOE estimates that industry must invest $626.2 million to comply with standards set at TSL 6. DOE understands that manufacturers would need to significantly upgrade their facilities to accommodate heat pump technology for ESWHs. Upgrades to produce heat pump electric storage water heaters include expansion of heat exchanger facilities and inclusion of refrigeration charging systems. In addition, manufacturers would need to expand their component sourcing of compressors and more sophisticated controls to produce these more advanced technology products. DOE estimates that manufacturers would need to scale up production of heat pump electric storage water heaters from approximately 3 percent of ESWH sales today (0.14 million units in 2023) to 100 percent of ESWH units in 2030. DOE believes significant research and development efforts would also be needed to support the introduction of a wider variety of heat pump water heater models in the market to meet the various needs of consumers, especially split-system heat pump water heaters that would be needed to support the replacement of small electric storage water heaters. Currently, there are very limited split-system heat pump water heater models commercially available in the United States, which are produced by only a few manufacturers and are sold in low quantities. DOE is concerned that sufficient products may not be available to support the small electric storage water heaters market, and new products may not be introduced by a large majority of water heater manufacturers by the compliance date of this final rule. In sum, DOE is concerned that industry will not be able to transition to 100 percent of electric storage water heaters to heat pump designs within a 5-year compliance window, as would be necessary to comply with TSL 6.
DOE is also concerned about training
the workforce that would be needed to install and service the heat pump water heater market by the compliance date of the standards. ESWHs are typically installed by plumbers. Advanced- technology water heaters require the
ability to work with refrigerants similar to that of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning servicing contractors. DOE
hopes that the emergence of workforce programs supported by the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will begin to support the training and education of the workforce needed to support the clean energy transition. However, DOE understands this transition will take time and the workforce may not be ready at the scale necessary to support TSL 6.
The Secretary concludes that at TSL
6 for consumer water heaters, the benefits of energy savings, positive NPV of consumer benefits, emission reductions, and estimated monetary value of the emissions reductions would be outweighed by economic impacts to manufacturers, primarily driven by the ramp up in scale and offerings needed to support both ESWH and GWSH efficiencies at TSL 6, the economic costs for small ESWH consumers (many of whom are low income), and the distinct impact of high initial costs for low- income consumers purchasing replacement water heaters in emergency circumstances. Approximately 0.2 percent of gas storage water heater shipments and approximately 4 percent of all electric storage water heaters shipments would meet TSL 6 efficiencies by 2030. DOE also notes that new technologies have recently been introduced into the heat pump water heater market, such as 120-volt water heaters, whose efficiencies are lower than TSL 6. Such 120-volt water heaters can be more readily adopted by more households, lowering installation costs. While DOE expects continued innovation in the heat pump water heater market at this time, DOE is worried that prematurely requiring TSL 6 efficiency levels will remove these new products from the market prematurely. The Secretary is also concerned about the uncertainty in the market to ensure GSWHs and ESWHs will continue to be available to all consumers, including small ESWH replacements. Consequently, the Secretary has concluded that TSL 6 is not economically justified.
DOE then considered TSL 5, which
represents the max-tech efficiency levels for all product classes except for GSWHs, which includes a lower non- condensing efficiency level. At TSL 5, the design options for GSWHs include either gas-actuated or electric flue dampers instead of condensing technologies. For the remainder of the product classes, the efficiency levels and technologies are the same as in TSL 6: that is, for ESWHs, TSL 5 includes
max-technology efficiency levels for heat pump water heaters across all
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637915 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
ESWH product classes, including small
ESWHs. Approximately 14 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the TSL 5 efficiency levels by the 2030 compliance date. The percentage of shipments expected to meet or exceed the efficiency levels in TSL 5 is the same as TSL 6 for all product classes except for GSWH. For GSWHs, approximately 23 percent of shipments are expected to meet TSL 5 efficiencies by the compliance date of the amended standards. At TSL 5, the standard would transition all consumer electric storage water heaters to heat pump technology across all effective storage volumes, delivery capacity offerings, and sizes in the market.
TSL 5 would save an estimated 24.9
quads of energy, an amount DOE considers significant. Under TSL 5, the NPV of consumer benefit would be $33 billion using a discount rate of 7 percent, and $111 billion using a discount rate of 3 percent.
The cumulative emissions reductions
at TSL 5 are 462 Mt of CO
2, 4,228
thousand tons of CH 4, 4.1 thousand tons
of N 2O, 919 thousand tons of NO X, 128
thousand tons of SO 2, and 0.9 tons of
Hg. The estimated monetary value of the climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions (associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3-percent discount rate) at TSL 5 is $24 billion. The estimated monetary value of the health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO Xemissions at
TSL 5 is $16 billion using a 7-percent discount rate and $46 billion using a 3- percent discount rate.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs, health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO X
emissions, and the 3-percent discount rate case for climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions, the estimated total NPV at TSL 5 is $73 billion. Using a 3-percent discount rate for all benefits and costs, the estimated total NPV at TSL 5 is $182 billion. The estimated total NPV is provided for additional information; however, DOE primarily relies upon the NPV of consumer benefits when determining whether a proposed standard level is economically justified.
At TSL 5, DOE estimates that
consumers will see a life-cycle cost savings for all product classes, except for small ESWH. At TSL 5, the average LCC savings is $29 for GSWH consumers, which is driven by the lower installed costs as compared to the TSL 6 condensing level. While the LCC savings are positive for a majority of consumers across TSL 5 product classes, 77 percent of small ESWH consumers will experience a net cost when installing a split-system heat pump
water heater.
At TSL 5, the projected change in
INPV ranges from a decrease of $478.1 million to a decrease of $31.3 million, which corresponds to a decrease of 32.3 percent and a decrease of 2.1 percent, respectively. DOE estimates that industry must invest $387.6 million to comply with standards set at TSL 5. The primary driver of high conversion costs is the industry’s investment to meet market demand for heat pump electric storage water heaters. DOE estimates that manufacturers would need to scale up production of heat pump electric storage water heaters from approximately 3 percent of all ESWH units (0.14 million units in 2023) to 100 percent of units in 2030. As a part of this scale-up, manufacturers would need to develop new split-system heat pumps for the small electric storage water heater market. Manufacturers would likely need to invest in cost optimization of existing designs, in new designs, and in additional manufacturing capacity for heat pump water heaters.
Similar to the discussion at TSL 6,
DOE’s concerns continue to be driven by the ramp up in manufacturing, research, and development that would be needed to support the heat pump water heater market to continue today’s volumes. TSL 5 would require the expansion of heat pump lines and the introduction of new products to support the entire market, especially small ESWHs.
The Secretary concludes that at TSL
5 for consumer water heaters, the benefits of energy savings, positive NPV of consumer benefits, emission reductions, and estimated monetary value of the emissions reductions would be outweighed by the impacts on manufacturers, driven by the uncertainty in the ramp up needed to support a full transition of all volumes to heat pump water heaters for ESWHs, the impacts on consumers of small ESWHs, and the increase in initial costs. While the LCC savings are positive for a majority of consumers across TSL 5 product classes, 56 percent of small ESWH consumers would experience net costs when installing a split-system heat pump water heater. DOE is concerned about the increase in first costs for
consumers forced to purchase a replacement water heater when their existing water heater fails and the inability for the market to introduce cost-optimized heat pump water heaters as an offering to consumers to help mitigate the initial first cost increase. As at TSL 5, DOE is also concerned about the workforce being ready to service and install at the volumes necessary to
support such a transition in 5 years. Consequently, the Secretary has concluded that TSL 5 is not economically justified.
DOE then considered TSL 4, which
represents a lower efficiency level for ESWHs and maintains the same efficiency levels for OSWHs and GSWHs as at TSL 5. At TSL 4, the design options for GSWHs include either gas-actuated or electric flue dampers; the design options for OSWHs include extra insulation and multi-flue heat exchangers; and the design options for ESWHs include heat pump technology. Approximately 17 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the TSL 4 efficiency levels by the 2030 compliance date. The percentage of shipments in 2030 expected to meet the analyzed level in TSL 4 for ESWHs is approximately 11 percent, which is a significant increase from the max-tech efficiency levels required at TSL 5 and TSL 6. However, for small ESWH, the percentage of shipments expected to meet TSL 4 remains at approximately 1 percent. At TSL 4, the standard would transition all consumer electric storage water heaters to heat pump technology, but at a more moderate efficiency level for ESWHs except for small ESWHs. DOE still expects this transition to be significant, but DOE notes that manufacturers have more experience producing ESWHs, excluding small ESWHs, at these efficiency levels due to the prevalence of the ENERGY STAR program. DOE also expects the programs from the Inflation Reduction Act, including the appliance rebates and tax credits, would help support the expansion of this market.
TSL 4 would save an estimated 24.3
quads of energy, an amount DOE considers significant. Under TSL 4, the NPV of consumer benefit would be $33 billion using a discount rate of 7 percent, and $111 billion using a
discount rate of 3 percent.
The cumulative emissions reductions
at TSL 4 are 448 Mt of CO
2, 4,078
thousand tons of CH 4, 4.0 thousand tons
of N 2O, 886 thousand tons of NO X, 126
thousand tons of SO 2, and 0.9 tons of
Hg. The estimated monetary value of the climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions (associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3-percent discount rate) at TSL 4 is $23 billion. The estimated monetary value of the health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO Xemissions at
TSL 4 is $16 billion using a 7-percent discount rate and $45 billion using a 3- percent discount rate.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs, health
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637916 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
benefits from reduced SO 2and NO X
emissions, and the 3-percent discount
rate case for climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions, the estimated total NPV at TSL 4 is $72 billion. Using a 3-percent discount rate for all benefits and costs, the estimated total NPV at TSL 4 is $179 billion. The estimated total NPV is provided for additional information; however, DOE primarily relies upon the NPV of consumer benefits when determining whether a proposed standard level is economically justified.
The average LCC across all product
classes is positive, except for the small ESWH. DOE continues to be concerned about the development of new models that would need to be introduced into the split-system heat pump water heater market to support the small ESWH replacements. As DOE noted in discussing TSL 6, only a few manufacturers produce consumer water heaters today in very small volumes and would not be able to support the entire small ESWH market today. Similar to TSLs 5 and 6, 77 percent of small ESWH consumers will experience a net cost when installing a split-system heat pump water heater.
At TSL 4, the projected change in
INPV ranges from a decrease of $420.1 million to a decrease of $31.2 million, which corresponds to a decrease of 28.4 percent and a decrease of 2.1 percent, respectively. DOE estimates that industry must invest $344.0 million to comply with standards set at TSL 4. For ESWH manufacturers, stepping down from max-tech provides greater flexibility in the design process and reduces the level of model-specific optimization. This results in lower conversion costs. However, manufacturers would still need to develop new split-system heat pumps for the small ESWH market and scale up production capacity for integrated heat pump water heaters. As previously discussed, DOE estimates that manufacturers would need to scale up production of heat pump electric storage water heaters from approximately 3 percent of ESWH sales in 2023 to 100 percent of units in 2030.
The Secretary concludes that at TSL
4 for consumer water heaters, the benefits of energy savings, positive NPV of consumer benefits, emission
reductions, and estimated monetary value of the emissions reductions would be outweighed by the manufacturing concerns and by the uncertainty associated with the industry’s ability to ramp up production at the levels necessary to meet a standard at TSL 4 within a 5-year period. Given TSL 4 represents a lower efficiency level that would require less model-specific
optimization, DOE expects the research and development efforts to be smaller and DOE does expect significant ramp- up of this greater efficiency market segment in response to the incentive programs. However, DOE continues to be concerned about industry’s ability to produce more than three million heat pump water heater units a year, while introducing new innovative products to meet consumers’ needs and optimizing to produce lower-cost products. As at TSLs 6 and 5, DOE is concerned that the efficiency level required by TSL 4 may preclude the introduction of 120-volt water heaters into the broader market, which DOE considered as a qualitative factor and has considered in its decision-making. Adopting a standard level at TSL 4 would prevent innovation around these technologies (such as reducing their costs). Consequently, the Secretary has concluded that TSL 4 is
not economically justified.
DOE then considered TSL 3, which
represents the same levels as TSL 4 except includes a lower efficiency level for ESWHs. For those ESWHs less than 55 gallons of effective storage volume (including small ESWHs), TSL 3 includes an ‘‘entry’’ level heat pump efficiency level to accommodate some of the new product innovations that have been recently introduced into the market. At TSL 3, currently available 120–V heat pump water heaters would be able to comply with the required efficiencies. For ESWHs greater than 55 gallons of effective storage volume, TSL 3 includes an incremental increase in heat pump efficiency over the current standards. At TSL 3, the standard would still transition all consumer electric storage water heaters to heat pump technology. As previously noted, heat pump technology currently comprises approximately 3 percent of the electric storage water heater market. TSL 3 would shift 100 percent of electric storage water heaters to heat pumps, driving large investments in design of new heat pump offerings and new product capacity. Approximately 17 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the TSL 3 efficiency levels by the 2030 compliance date. The percentage of shipments expected to meet or exceed the efficiency levels at TSL 3 is the same as TSL 4 for all product classes except for ESWHs. The percentage of shipments in 2030 expected to meet the analyzed level in TSL 3 for ESWHs is approximately 11 percent. However, for small ESWHs, the percentage of shipments expected to meet TSL 3 remains at approximately 1 percent in
2030.
TSL 3 would save an estimated 21.0
quads of energy, an amount DOE considers significant. Under TSL 3, the NPV of consumer benefit would be $25 billion using a discount rate of 7 percent and $88 billion using a discount rate of 3 percent.
The cumulative emissions reductions
at TSL 3 are 379 Mt of CO
2, 3,413
thousand tons of CH 4, 3.5 thousand tons
of N 2O, 742 thousand tons of NO X, 109
thousand tons of SO 2, and 0.8 tons of
Hg. The estimated monetary value of the climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions (associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3-percent discount rate) at TSL 3 is $20 billion. The estimated monetary value of the health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO Xemissions at
TSL 3 is $13 billion using a 7-percent discount rate and $38 billion using a 3- percent discount rate.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs, health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO X
emissions, and the 3-percent discount rate case for climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions, the estimated total NPV at TSL 3 is $58 billion. Using a 3-percent discount rate for all benefits and costs, the estimated total NPV at TSL 3 is $146 billion. The estimated total NPV is provided for additional information; however, DOE primarily
relies upon the NPV of consumer benefits when determining whether a proposed standard level is economically justified.
At TSL 3, the average LCC impact is
a savings across all product classes, except for the small ESWH. Similar to TSLs 4, 5, and 6, 77 percent of small ESWH consumers will experience a net cost when installing a split-system heat pump water heater.
At TSL 3, the projected change in
INPV ranges from a decrease of $391.5 million to a decrease of $39.8 million, which corresponds to a decrease of 26.5 percent and a decrease of 2.7 percent, respectively. DOE estimates that industry must invest $332.4 million to comply with standards set at TSL 3. Manufacturers would need to develop new split-system heat pumps for the small ESWH market. They would also need to scale up production capacity for integrated heat pump water heaters.
The Secretary concludes that at TSL
3 for consumer water heaters, the benefits of energy savings, positive NPV of consumer benefits, emission reductions, and estimated monetary value of the emissions reductions would be outweighed by the uncertainty associated with the ability for industry to meet the demand necessary to
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637917 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
186As detailed in II.B.2 of this document, Rheem
is a signatory to the Joint Stakeholder
Recommendation. BWC was an original signatory to the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation, which included a recommendation of heat pump levels for ESWHs with rated storage volumes greater than 35 gallons, but subsequently removed itself as a signatory after the July 2023 NOPR after raising concerns about how DOE proposed to align with the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation. support the entire market for ESWHs,
including the workforce transition needed to service and install all of these heat pump water heaters. For small ESWHs, DOE estimates that the fraction of consumers experiencing a net cost is 56 percent. Based on those costs to small ESWH consumers and the possible difficulty of meeting the market needs within the compliance timeframe, the Secretary has concluded that TSL 3 is not economically justified.
DOE then considered TSL 2, which
represents the baseline efficiency level for small ESWHs and heat pump efficiency levels for all other ESWHs. TSL 2 also includes max-tech efficiency levels for OSWHs and a moderate increase in efficiency for GSWHs. TSL 2 also aligns most closely with the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation efficiency levels, with minor differences to the small ESWH product class as discussed in section IV.C of this document. Approximately 24 percent of consumer water heater shipments are expected to meet the TSL 2 efficiency levels by the 2030 compliance date. The percentage of shipments expected to meet or exceed the efficiency levels at TSL 2 is the same as TSL 3 for all product classes except for small ESWHs. The percentage of shipments in 2030 expected to meet the TSL 2 efficiency levels for ESWHs is approximately 24 percent. However, since TSL 2 for small ESWHs represents the baseline efficiency level, all small ESWHs are expected to meet TSL 2 levels, compared to only 1 percent of small ESWH shipments at TSL 3. While DOE recognizes that TSL 2 is not the TSL that maximizes net monetized benefits, DOE has determined that TSL 2 is designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically justified.
TSL 2 would save an estimated 17.6
quads of energy, an amount DOE considers significant. Under TSL 2, the NPV of consumer benefit would be $25 billion using a discount rate of 7 percent and $82 billion using a discount rate of 3 percent.
The cumulative emissions reductions
at TSL 2 are 332 Mt of CO
2, 3,058
thousand tons of CH 4, 2.9 thousand tons
of N 2O, 665 thousand tons of NO X, 90
thousand tons of SO 2, and 0.6 ton of Hg.
The estimated monetary value of the
climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions (associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3-percent discount rate) at TSL 3 is $17 billion. The estimated monetary value of the health benefits from reduced SO
2and NO Xemissions at
TSL 2 is $12 billion using a 7-percent discount rate and $33 billion using a 3- percent discount rate. Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs, health
benefits from reduced SO
2and NO X
emissions, and the 3-percent discount rate case for climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions, the estimated total NPV at TSL 2 is $54 billion. Using a 3-percent discount rate for all benefits and costs, the estimated total NPV at TSL 2 is $132 billion. The estimated total NPV is provided for additional information; however, DOE primarily relies upon the NPV of consumer benefits when determining whether a proposed standard level is economically justified.
At TSL 2, the average LCC impact is
a savings for all product classes. The average LCC impact is a savings of $29 for GSWHs, savings of $141 for OSWHs, savings of $859 for ESWHs (20 gal ≤ V
eff
≤ 55 gal) excluding small ESWHs, and
savings of $458 for ESWHs (55 gal < V eff
≤ 120 gal). The fraction of consumers
experiencing a net LCC cost is 41 percent for GSWHs, 27 percent for OSWHs, 35 percent for ESWHs (20 gal ≤ V
eff≤ 55 gal) excluding small ESWHs,
and 0 percent for ESWHs (55 gal < V eff
≤ 120 gal). Consumers of small ESWH
(20 gal ≤ Veff≤ 35 gal) are not impacted
at TSL 2, as the standard is not proposed to be amended.
At TSL 2, the projected change in
INPV ranges from a decrease of $275.3 million to an increase of $28.2 million, which corresponds to a decrease of 18.6 percent and an increase of 1.9 percent, respectively. DOE estimates that industry must invest $239.8 million to comply with standards set at TSL 2.
At higher TSLs, the primary driver of
high conversion costs is the industry’s investment to meet market demand for heat pump electric storage water heaters. TSL 2 preserves the existing market for small ESWHs, allowing small ESWHs utilizing only electric resistance technology (i.e., that do not utilize a
heat pump) to remain in the market. In turn, this reduces the level of investment needed to meet market demand for heat pump water heaters. DOE estimates industry would need to scale up production of heat pump electric storage water heaters from approximately 3 percent of ESWHs today to 61 percent of ESWHs in 2030, a significant reduction from higher TSLs. This approach, while still
requiring a significant ramp up in manufacturing capacity for heat pump water heaters, allows for a more incremental transition to heat pump technology. It limits the investment required of manufacturers relative to higher TSLs that would require transitioning the entire ESWH market to heat pump technology and recognizes the benefits of providing additional time
for small electric storage water heater designs using heat pump technology to mature. DOE believes that having a major manufacturer sign on to the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation is a testament to industry’s ability to ramp up capacity to produce the volumes necessary to support the heat pump water heater market that will be required by TSL 2 by the compliance date of the amended standards.
186
After considering the analysis and
weighing the benefits and burdens, the Secretary has concluded that standards set at TSL 2 for consumer water heaters would be economically justified. At this TSL, the average LCC savings for consumers of all product classes are expected to be positive. The average LCC savings across all ESWH, excluding small ESWHs, consumers is $1,867. At TSL 2, the efficiency levels for ESWHs allow for continued development and innovation with 120–V heat pump ESWHs as well as split-system heat pump ESWHs. The efficiency levels at TSL 2 also allow for existing small ESWHs to remain on the market, providing an important option for a subset of consumers. The FFC national energy savings are significant and the NPV of consumer benefits is positive using both a 3-percent and 7-percent discount rate. These national benefits vastly outweigh the costs. The positive LCC savings—a different way of quantifying consumer benefits— reinforces this conclusion. The standard levels at TSL 2 are economically justified even without weighing the estimated monetary value of emissions reductions. When those emissions reductions are included—representing $17 billion in climate benefits (associated with the average SC–GHG at a 3-percent discount rate), and $12 billion (using a 7-percent discount rate) or $33 billion (using a 3-percent discount rate) in health benefits—the rationale becomes stronger still.
In addition, DOE considered that the
efficiency levels across TSL 2 are generally representative of the Joint Stakeholder Recommendation. More specifically, DOE believes the Joint Stakeholder agreement from a cross section group of stakeholders provides DOE with a good indication of stakeholder views on this rulemaking
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637918 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
and with some assurance that industry
can transition to these levels and the market will see significant benefits, as indicated by DOE’s analysis.
Accordingly, the Secretary has
concluded that TSL 2 would offer the maximum improvement in efficiency that is technologically feasible and economically justified, and would result in the significant conservation of energy. Although results are presented here in terms of TSLs, DOE analyzes and evaluates all possible ELs for each product class in its analysis. TSL 2 comprises efficiency levels that offer significant LCC savings while keeping the percentage of consumers experiencing a net cost at a modest level. In particular, lower-income homeowners who currently use small ESWHs are significantly less likely to be disproportionately impacted at TSL 2 than at higher TSLs. TSL 2 also reduces the percentage of the market that would be transitioning to heat pump water heaters within a 5-year period. While DOE understands the ramp up to accommodate heat pump water heaters at TSL 2 is still significant, DOE believes manufacturers can leverage their existing operations, knowledge, workforce networks, and R&D to scale at a level needed to support an amended standard at TSL 2. Lastly, TSL 2 most closely represents the recommended standard levels submitted by Joint Stakeholders to DOE, providing further support for standard levels set at TSL 2, a factor the Secretary considers significant.
As discussed in section IV.F.9 of this
document, DOE does not expect any significant amount of switching across product classes as a result of the adopted standards, with the exception of ESWHs and small ESWHs. There are a number of significant additional costs involved in switching from electric equipment to gas equipment and vice versa, such as replacing an electrical panel or installing new gas lines (both inside and outside of the home) and new venting. These additional costs can possibly exceed $1,000 on top of the installed costs estimated in this final rule, making product switching as a result of standards very likely to be a minimal effect at most.
Therefore, based on the above
considerations, DOE adopts the conservation standards for consumer water heaters at TSL 2 for those product classes where there are existing applicable UEF standards. For the remaining product classes, DOE adopts converted standards in the UEF metric based on the amended appendix E test procedure. Altogether, the new and amended energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters, which are expressed as UEF, are shown in Table V.35. Note that this table does not show product classes for which standards remain unchanged by this final rule.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637919 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.082</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.35 New and Amended Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Water
Heaters
Effective Storage Volume and
Product Class Input Rating* Draw Pattern Uniform Energy Factor
(if applicable)
Very Small 0.2062 -(0.0020 X V0rr)
< 20 gal Low 0.4893 -(0.0027 X V0rr)
Medium 0.5758 -(0.0023 x Verr)
Hi!!h 0.6586 -(0.0020 X V0rr)
Very Small 0.3925 -(0.0020 x V0rr)
Gas-fired Storage ::::20 gal and :'o55 gal Low 0.6451 -(0.0019 x Verr)
Water Heater Medium 0.7046 -(0.0017 x V0rr)
High 0.7424 -(0.0013 x Verr)
Very Small 0.1482 -(0.0007 X V0rr)
> 100 gal Low 0.4342 -(0.0017 x Verr)
Medium 0.5596 -(0.0020 X V0rr)
High 0.6658 -(0.0019 X V0rr)
Very Small 0.2909 -(0.0012 x Verr)
Low 0.5730 -(0.0016 x V0rr)
:'o50 gal Medium 0.6478 -(0.0016 x Verr)
Oil-fired Storage Hi!!h 0.7215 -(0.0014 x V0rr)
Water Heater Very Small 0.1580 -(0.0009 x Verr)
> 50 gal Low 0.4390 -(0.0020 X Verr)
Medium 0.5389 -(0.0021 X V0rr)
High 0.6172 -(0.0018 X Verr)
Very Small 0.5925 -(0.0059 X V0rr)
Very Small Electric < 20 gal Low 0.8642 -(0.0030 x Verr)
Storage Water Heater Medium 0.9096 -(0.0020 X V0rr)
Hi!!h 0.9430 -(0.0012 x Verr)
Small Electric ::::20 gal and :'o35 gal Very Small 0.8808 -(0.0008 x Verr)
Storage Water Heater Low 0.9254 -(0.0003 x V0rr)
c::20 and :'o 55 gal Very Small 2.30
Low 2.30 (excluding small electric storage Medium 2.30 water heaters) Hi!!h 2.30
Very Small 2.50
Electric Storage >55 gal and :'o120 gal Low 2.50
Water Heaters Medium 2.50
Hi!!h 2.50
Very Small 0.3574 -(0.0012 X V0rr)
>120 gal Low 0.7897 -<0.0019 x Verr)
Medium 0.8884 -(0.0017 X V0rr)
High 0.9575 -(0.0013 x V0rr)
<20 gal Very Small 0.5925 -(0.0059 X Verr)
Tabletop Water Low 0.8642 -(0.0030 X V0rr)
Heater ::::20 gal Very Small 0.6323 -(0.0058 X V0rr)
Low 0.9188 -(0.0031 X V0rr)
Very Small 0.61
<2 gal and :'o210,000 Btu/h Low 0.61
Medium 0.61
Instantaneous Oil- High 0.61
fired Water Heater Very Small 0.2780 -(0.0022 X V0rr)
::,:2 gal and :'o210,000 Btu/h Low 0.5151 -(0.0023 X V0rr)
Medium 0.5687 -(0.0021 X V0rr)
Hi!!h 0.6147 -(0.0017 X V0rr)
Very Small 0.8086 -(0.0050 X V0rr)
Instantaneous ::,:2 gal Low 0.9123 -(0.0020 X V0rr)
Electric Water Heater Medium 0.9252 -(0.0015 x V0rr)
High 0.9350 -(0.0011 X Verr) 37920 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
2. Annualized Benefits and Costs of the
Adopted Standards
The benefits and costs of the adopted
standards can also be expressed in terms of annualized values. The annualized net benefit is (1) the annualized national economic value (expressed in 2022$) of the benefits from operating products that meet the adopted standards (consisting primarily of operating cost savings from using less energy), minus increases in product purchase costs, and (2) the annualized monetary value of the climate and health benefits. Table V.36 shows the annualized
values for consumer water heaters under TSL 2, expressed in 2022$. The results under the primary estimate are as follows.
Using a 7-percent discount rate for
consumer benefits and costs and health benefits from reduced NO
Xand SO 2
emissions, and the 3-percent discount rate case for climate benefits from reduced GHG emissions, the estimated cost of the standards adopted in this rule is $2,623 million per year in increased equipment costs, while the estimated annual benefits are $5,655 million in reduced equipment operating costs, $1,051 in monetized climate benefits, and 1,416 in monetized health benefits. In this case, the net benefit would amount to $5,499 per year.
Using a 3-percent discount rate for all
benefits and costs, the estimated cost of the standards is $2,586 million per year in increased equipment costs, while the estimated annual benefits are $7,566 million in reduced operating costs, $1,051 million in monetized climate benefits, and $2,033 million in monetized health benefits. In this case, the net benefit would amount to $8,065 million per year.
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00144 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637921 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.083</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.36 Annualized Benefits and Costs of Adopted Standards (TSL 2) for
Consumer Water Heaters
Million 2022$/year
Primary Low-Net-Benefits High-Net-
Estimate Estimate Benefits Estimate
3% discount rate
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 7,566 7,078 8,065
Climate Benefits* 1,051 1,039 1,063
Health Benefits** 2,033 2,009 2,058
Total Benefitst 10,650 10,125 11,186
Consumer Incremental Product 2,586 3,023 2,398 Costs:!:
Net Benefits 8,065 7,102 8,788
Change in Producer Cashflow (28) - 3 (28) - 3 (28) - 3 (INPV)tt
7% discount rate
Consumer Operating Cost Savings 5,655 5,294 6,024
Climate Benefits* (3% discount rate) 1,051 1,039 1,063
Health Benefits** 1,416 1,400 1,432
Total Benefitst 8,122 7,732 8,519
Consumer Incremental Product 2,623 2,984 2,467 Costs:!:
Net Benefits 5,499 4,748 6,052
Change in Producer Cashflow (28)-3 (28) - 3 (28) - 3 (INPV)ti
Note: This table presents the costs and benefits associated with consumer water heaters shipped during the
period 2030-2059. These results include consumer, climate, and health benefits that accrue after 2059
from the products shipped during the period 2030-2059. The Primary, Low Net Benefits, and High Net
Benefits Estimates utilize projections of energy prices from the AE02023 Reference case, Low Economic
Growth case, and High Economic Growth case, respectively. In addition, incremental equipment costs
reflect a medium decline rate in the Primary Estimate, a low decline rate in the Low Net Benefits Estimate,
and a high decline rate in the High Net Benefits Estimate. The methods used to derive projected price
trends are explained in sections IV.F.l and IV.F.4 of this document. Note that the Benefits and Costs may
not sum to the Net Benefits due to rounding.
* Climate benefits are calculated using four different estimates of the global SC-GHG (see section IV.L of
this document). For presentational purposes of this table, the climate benefits associated with the average
SC-GHG at a 3 percent discount rate are shown; however, DOE emphasizes the value of considering the benefits
calculated using all four sets of SC-GHG estimates. To monetize the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, this analysis
uses the interim estimates presented in the Technical Support Document: Social Cost of Carbon, Methane, and Nitrous
Oxide Interim Estimates Under Executive Order 13990 published in February 2021 by the IWG.
** Health benefits are calculated using benefit-per-ton values for NOx and SO2. DOE is currently only
monetizing (for SO2 and NOx) PM2.s precursor health benefits and (for NOx) ozone precursor health 37922 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 6450–01–C
3. Conversion Factor Final Rule
Enforcement Policy
As discussed in section II.B.1 of this
document, the currently applicable standards were established by the December 2016 Conversion Factor Final Rule, which utilized mathematical conversion equations to translate EF- based standards to the UEF metric for products that were on the market at the time. 81 FR 96204.
In that final rule, DOE issued an
enforcement policy to ensure that individual models manufactured prior to July 13, 2015 that complied with the existing EF standards and remained unchanged in design would be tested to the EF metric and not be harmed by the transition to the UEF metric. 81 FR 96204, 96226–96227. This was done to prevent ‘‘overrating’’ to the minimum UEF standard; manufacturers are required to disclose the actual performance in the same metric as all other products. Id. The Department
stated that these models will continue to remain subject to the enforcement policy until compliance with amended energy conservation standards is
required. Id.
As a result, today’s market continues
to offer consumer water heaters that do
not meet the current UEF-based standards (this is depicted in appendix 3A to the TSD). This final rule adopts amended energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. Upon the compliance date of this final rule, the 2016 enforcement policy is terminated for all water heaters.
4. Severability
Finally, DOE added a new paragraph
to 10 CFR 430.32 to make explicit the
agency’s intent that each energy conservation standard for each product class is separate and severable from one another, and that if any energy conservation standard for any product class is stayed or determined to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining energy conservation standards for the other product classes shall continue in effect. Because this is an expression of DOE’s intent, public comment on this paragraph is not relevant. This severability clause is intended to clearly express the Department’s intent that
should an energy conservation standard for any product class be stayed or invalidated, energy conservation standards for the other product classes shall continue in effect. In the event a court were to stay or invalidate one or more energy conservation standards for any product class as finalized, the Department would want the remaining energy conservation standards for the other product classes as finalized to remain in full force and legal effect.
D. Test Procedure Applicability
Manufacturers, including importers,
must use product-specific certification
templates to certify compliance to DOE. For consumer water heaters, the
certification template reflects the general certification requirements specified at 10 CFR 429.12 and the product-specific requirements specified at 10 CFR 429.17. DOE has not proposed to amend the product-specific certification requirements for these products in this standards rulemaking. These requirements will be addressed in a separate rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.084</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6benefits, but will continue to assess the ability to monetize other effects such as health benefits from
reductions in direct PM2.s emissions. See section IV.L of this document for more details. t Total benefits for both the 3-percent and 7-percent cases are presented using the average SC-GHG with 3-
percent discount rate. t Costs include incremental equipment costs as well as installation costs.
U Operating Cost Savings are calculated based on the life cycle costs analysis and national impact analysis
as discussed in detail below. See sections IV.F and IV.Hof this document. DOE's national impacts
analysis includes all impacts (both costs and benefits) along the distribution chain beginning with the
increased costs to the manufacturer to manufacture the product and ending with the increase in price
experienced by the consumer. DOE also separately conducts a detailed analysis on the impacts on
manufacturers (i.e., manufacturer impact analysis, or "MIA"). See section IV.J of this document. In the
detailed MIA, DOE models manufacturers' pricing decisions based on assumptions regarding investments,
conversion costs, cashflow, and margins. The MIA produces a range of impacts, which is the rule's
expected impact on the INPV. The change in INPV is the present value of all changes in industry cash
flow, including changes in production costs, capital expenditures, and manufacturer profit margins. The
annualized change in INPV is calculated using the industry weighted average cost of capital value of 9 .6
percent that is estimated in the manufacturer impact analysis (see chapter 12 of the final rule TSD for a
complete description of the industry weighted average cost of capital). For consumer water heaters, the
annualized change in INPV ranges from -$28 million to $3 million. DOE accounts for that range oflikely
impacts in analyzing whether a trial standard level is economically justified. See section V.C of this
document. DOE is presenting the range of impacts to the INPV under two scenarios: the Preservation of
Gross Margin scenario, which is the manufacturer markup scenario used in the calculation of Consumer
Operating Cost Savings in this table; and the Preservation of Operating Profit scenario, where DOE
assumed manufacturers would not be able to increase per-unit operating profit in proportion to increases in
manufacturer production costs. DOE includes the range of estimated annualized change in INPV in the
above table, drawing on the MIA explained further in section IV.J of this document to provide additional
context for assessing the estimated impacts of this final rule to society, including potential changes in
production and consumption, which is consistent with OMB's Circular A-4 and E.O. 12866. IfDOE were
to include the INPV into the annualized net benefit calculation for this final rule, the annualized net
benefits would range from $8,037 million to $8,068 million at 3-percent discount rate and would range
from $5,471 million to $5,502 million at 7-percent discount rate. 37923 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
187Clear Seas Research. 2017 Water Heater Study.
clearseasresearch.com (Last accessed: Dec. 1, 2023).
188Clear Seas Research. Water Heater Study.
2006. Plumbing and Mechanical.
189Clear Seas Research. 2020 Water Heater Study,
available online at: clearseasresearch.com. (Last
accessed: May 1, 2023). As discussed in section III.C of this
document, DOE most recently amended
the test procedure for these products at appendix E in the June 2023 TP Final Rule.
In light of the new and amended
standards being adopted by this final rule, DOE is creating new provisions to specify how the appendix E test procedure should be applied. DOE is providing further clarifications around certain aspects of the appendix E test procedure to account for the products which would use this test procedure to determine UEF ratings. These amendments to the test procedure and related provisions are discussed in the following sections.
1. High-Temperature Testing
The current DOE test procedure calls
for an outlet water temperature of 125 °F
± 5°F. 88 FR 40406, 40422. This
temperature is consistent with data DOE
has on water heater thermostat settings in the field. For example, as discussed in chapter 7 of the final rule TSD, a 2015 study of 127 homes with electric resistance water heaters in central Florida showed that audited hot water setpoint temperatures averaged 127 °F
(52.8 °C) (Std. Dev: 11.5 °F (6.4 °C)) and
field measurement studies in California showed the median setpoint temperature to be 123 °F (50.6 °C).
Additionally, as of 2017, survey data show that over 75% of contractors usually or always set the tank thermostat to 120 °F (see chapter 7 of the
final rule TSD).
187Further, the energy
use analysis in this rulemaking uses water heater thermostat settings that are based on a 2006–2020 contractor survey conducted by Clear Seas.
188 189 This
annual survey of more than 300 plumbing/hydronic heating contractor firms indicated that 41 percent of responding contractors always install a
water heater with a setpoint temperature of 120 °F, 20 percent always install with
a setpoint temperature higher than 120°F, and 39 percent usually install
with a setpoint of 120 °F. DOE assumed
that half of the latter portion installed
the water heater at 120 °F, resulting in
an overall distribution of 61 percent of water heaters set to 120 °F, and 39
percent with setpoints uniformly distributed between 120 °F and 140 °F,
resulting in an average setpoint of approximately 124 °F. In the July 2014
UEF TP Final Rule, DOE cited data that found the average set point temperature
for consumer water heaters in the field is 124.2 °F (51.2 °C). 79 FR 40542,
40554. A compilation of field data across the United States and southern Ontario by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory had also found a median daily outlet water temperature of 122.7 °F (50.4 °C). Id. Taken together,
these data indicate that the outlet water temperature of 125 °F ± 5°F used in the
DOE test procedure is representative of average water heater temperature settings in the field, with 120 °F being
the most common setting.
However, after the December 2016
Conversion Factor Final Rule issued amended standards for electric storage water heaters with rated storage volumes above 55 gallons that could only be met through the use of heat pump technology, DOE observed a market shift towards smaller electric storage water heater sizes where the standards could be met through electric resistance heating. These smaller water heaters have a setting or mode that continuously stores water at a higher temperature then uses a mixing valve to deliver water at the temperature setpoint. As a result, a new market began to emerge for consumers who still desired effective storage volumes above 55 gallons but did not want to install heat pump water heaters: electric resistance storage water heaters with rated storage volumes less than 55 gallons but with significantly higher effective storage volumes due to higher storage tank temperatures. 88 FR 40406, 40446. DOE anticipates a similar market shift in response to this final rule as the new standards for electric storage water heaters with capacities greater than or equal to 20 gallons and less than or equal to 55 gallons are met through the use of heat pump technology, while the standards for small electric storage water heaters (capacities greater than or equal to 20 gallons and less than or equal to 35 gallons) can be met by electric resistance heating technology.
As stated in the July 2022 TP SNOPR
and the June 2023 TP Final Rule, consumers would be expected to use the high-temperature mode on these small electric storage water heaters as part of the regular operation of their water heater because consumers are electing to purchase an undersized water heater based on its capacity-boosting ability. Accordingly, for such products, a representative average use cycle must encompass the ‘‘capacity boosting’’ capability, as this is the mode that the consumer will likely be using once the water heater is installed in the field. 88
FR 49058, 49164. However, before the June 2023 TP Final Rule, the DOE test procedure did not have a provision for
measuring energy use of water heaters that continuously store water at a higher temperature to boost capacity. The June 2023 TP Final Rule established a high- temperature test method that would allow consumers to compare the energy efficiency of water heaters that increase capacity through elevated storage temperatures with water heaters that use larger tank volumes to achieve the same capacity. However, DOE deferred the implementation of high-temperature testing provisions to this energy conservation standards rulemaking. 88 FR 40406, 40448. This has allowed DOE to consider details of the implementation to best suit the needs of the market in a standards-case-scenario.
Whereas the June 2023 TP Final Rule
established how to conduct a high- temperature test, this standards rulemaking establishes which products must use the high-temperature test method. In this final rule, DOE is adopting the proposed provisions for the application of the high-temperature test method, clarifying how the maximum tank temperature can be verified, adopting additional exemptions for very small and large electric storage water heaters, and permitting optional representations for heat pump water heaters using the high- temperature test method.
DOE received the following general
comments in response to the July 2023 NOPR and December 2023 SNOPR regarding general support, applicability, and potential concerns around high- temperature testing and the use of effective storage volume. DOE also addresses information received regarding impacts associated with high- temperature testing.
The Joint Advocacy Groups supported
DOE’s proposed implementation of the effective storage volume and high temperature testing provisions, stating their agreement with DOE’s determination that high-temperature testing is representative of the average use cycle for electric storage water heaters that offer consumers the ability to increase storage tank temperature. The Joint Advocacy Groups added that this proposal would also help ensure the expected savings from the proposed standards are realized. (Joint Advocacy Groups, No. 1165 at p. 7) NEEA
supported DOE’s proposed use of effective storage volume and high- temperature testing, asserting that it would effectively inhibit the use of small, overheated tanks installed with mixing valves as a means of circumventing heat pump-level standards, and would ensure the energy savings projected in the NOPR are
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00147 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637924 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
190Tmax,1 is the maximum measured mean tank
temperature after cut-out following the first draw of
the 24-hour simulated-use test. T del,2is the average
outlet water temperature during the 2nd draw of the 24-hour simulated-use test. See section 1.15 of appendix E. realized. (NEEA, No. 1199 at pp. 7–8)
CEC supported DOE’s proposed high- temperature testing provisions, stating that they would close a significant loophole that would allow smaller, less- efficient storage water heaters to operate with higher effective storage volumes. (CEC, No. 1173 at p. 12) The Joint Stakeholders stated their support of the effective storage volume provisions, conditional on their narrow application to certain electric resistance storage water heaters, to aid in ensuring the expected savings from the proposed standards are realized.
The CA IOUs agreed that rated storage
volume is no longer an appropriate measure for hot water service and supported the transition to using the effective storage volume metric, stating that such an approach is consistent with comments that they and others have provided previously in this rulemaking. The CA IOUs noted that only certain electric resistance storage water heaters would be subject to the high- temperature test method, and the effective storage volume would be equivalent to the rated storage volume for all other consumer water heaters. The CA IOUs recommended that DOE plainly state that high-temperature testing is applicable only for those electric storage water heaters with a maximum set point temperature above 135°F, and that the effective storage
volume for all other consumer water heaters is equal to the rated volume. (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at p. 2) The Joint Stakeholders also requested that DOE clarify the application of high- temperature testing and effective storage volume requirements with regards to product classes other than electric storage water heaters. (Joint Stakeholders, No. 1156 at pp. 1–2)
Rheem requested clarification on
whether high-temperature testing is intended for electric instantaneous water heaters with rated storage volumes greater than or equal to 2 gallons. Rheem recommended that the high-temperature test method not apply to these products, as they are not direct replacements for heat pump water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 3)
To clarify, the high-temperature test
method is applicable only to electric storage water heaters. It is not applicable to electric instantaneous
water heaters. Consumer electric instantaneous water heaters, like consumer electric storage water heaters, are statutorily limited to an input rate of 12 kW (which corresponds to the typical household circuit limitations in residential buildings). (42 U.S.C. 6291(27)(A)–(B)) Instantaneous-type water heaters have at least 4,000 Btu/h of input per gallon of water stored. (42
U.S.C. 6291(27)(B)) Considering these two limitations, the maximum volume that a consumer electric instantaneous water heater could have is approximately 10 gallons. For the reasons detailed in section V.D.1.c of this document, products of this size are unlikely to use elevated temperatures to directly replace the consumer utility of a water heater with a larger stored volume of water. And, in response to the CA IOUs’ request, DOE clarifies the verification of the maximum tank temperature in section V.D.1.b of this document, which does more than simply state the applicability of the high-temperature test method is based on a maximum setpoint.
NYSERDA supported the use of the
effective storage volume and the high- temperature test method, but noted that, although the high-temperature test applies only to certain electric storage water heaters, the appendix E test procedure would also result in an effective storage volume greater than rated storage volume for all other water heaters when T
max,1 is greater than
130°F and also more than 5 °F higher
than the delivery temperature, T del,2.190
NYSERDA therefore asked for clarification on how the effective storage volume metric is applied to different water heaters. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at pp. 5–6, 7)
DOE is maintaining the provisions in
appendix E, which result in a higher effective storage volume to products that have an internal tank temperature five degrees above the delivery set point temperature in order to assess products on an equivalent effective storage volume basis. As discussed in the June 2023 TP Final Rule, this would typically only apply if the product has a built-in mixing valve and normally operates in a manner that elevates the storage tank temperature in its default mode. Therefore, the increased effective storage volume is representative of the actual performance of such a model in its default mode. In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE presented test data
which demonstrated that only models with this specific design had effective storage volumes greater than rated storage volumes, and that all other traditional models of storage water heaters were unaffected.
GEA expressed support for DOE’s
proposals regarding high-temperature testing and the scope of products to which it would apply. GEA stated that
DOE’s proposed rule appropriately recognizes the importance of integrated mixing valves and accounts for them. However, GEA concurred with AHRI’s comments regarding needed clarifications to the test procedure and standard and to the appropriate temperature limits for high-temperature testing (which are discussed in more detail later in this section). (GEA, No. 1203 at pp. 1–2)
Rheem agreed that the transition from
electric resistance to heat pump storage water heaters presents an incentive to increase the temperature of an electric resistance storage water heater to increase the amount of hot water it can deliver. Rheem also stated that high- temperature testing should only be valid for products that operate with a stored volume of water (i.e., storage-type or
circulating). (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 2) Relatedly, Rheem supported the application of the high-temperature test method to tabletop water heaters because these products can be used to replace heat pump water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 3)
Other commenters provided feedback
for DOE to consider additional potential impacts of the high-temperature test method on the market. BWC stated that elements of the test procedure, such as the method for circulating water heaters and the application of high-temperature testing, appeared to be incomplete in the June 2023 TP Final Rule, and that DOE has continued to revise these aspects of the test procedure in the July 2023 NOPR. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 7) AHRI raised concerns with the high- temperature test provisions for electric storage water heaters, stating that these provisions and their implications should have been fully addressed in the recent test procedure rulemaking because manufacturers require additional time to understand the proposal and how it would be implemented. AHRI stated that DOE has not provided clear direction in the July 2023 NOPR as to how the high- temperature test will be applied and enforced. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 2) AHRI and its members asserted that DOE has not provided sufficient test data for stakeholders to understand the impacts of the high-temperature test method on
electric resistance storage water heaters. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 2)
A.O. Smith commented that the
purpose of the high-temperature test method was to prevent circumvention of heat pump-level standards for larger electric storage water heaters by means of using a smaller electric resistance storage water heater operating at a higher temperature. A.O. Smith also
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637925 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
noted that there may be additional
avenues by which industry could avoid transitioning the market to heat pump water heaters. A.O. Smith recommended addressing these concerns in a supplemental NOPR prior to finalizing this rulemaking. A.O. Smith commented that understanding the relationship between maximum temperature offering, effective storage volume, FHR, and UEF is a prerequisite for evaluating the proposed efficiency levels for the electric storage water heater product classes. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 3– 4)
A.O. Smith also asserted that DOE has
not provided justification nor testing data to demonstrate that the direct substitution of effective storage volume instead of rated storage volume will make up for the known negative impact that testing at higher temperatures will have on UEF. Citing EPCA, A.O. Smith noted that DOE must account for the change in efficiency resulting from an amended test procedure and recommended that DOE test baseline very small and small electric storage water heaters according to the new test procedure to ensure that the proposed standards do not result in a stringency increase. To this end, A.O. Smith also provided its own test data, which demonstrate the reduction in UEF as a result of the high-temperature test method. A.O. Smith recommended that DOE adjust the standards to allow for these reduced ratings to remain compliant and minimize manufacturer redesign burden. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 3–4)
Rheem and A.O. Smith provided data
that demonstrate the impact of high- temperature testing on these rated values for very small and small electric storage water heaters, while NEEA provided insights from its own testing regarding the relationship between temperature and FHR. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 21; A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 6– 7) NEEA stated that the FHR increases by 2.5 gallons for every 5 °F increase in
tank temperature from 125 °F. (NEEA,
No. 1199 at pp. 7–8) Rheem stated that the boost in FHR from the high temperature will occur only for the first draw of the FHR test, and then afterwards the recovery rate will be the same, and the commenter provided an
equation to estimate the increased FHR. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 21)
DOE reviewed the information from
Rheem, A.O. Smith, and NEEA in addition to its own test data to evaluate the impact of the high-temperature test. For example, in the process of developing the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE collected data on one 50-gallon electric storage water heater set to three different tank temperature set points
(one of them being the maximum setting that would be used for the high- temperature test method). 88 FR 40406, 40447.
The results of DOE’s assessments on
very small electric storage water heaters follow in section V.D.1.c of this document. DOE’s calculations and data from stakeholders have led DOE to conclude that the high-temperature test method should not be required for very small electric storage water heaters.
In its own modeling analysis, Rheem
identified that electric storage water heaters with rated storage volumes between 20 and 35 gallons would be noncompliant with the proposed standards if tested to the high- temperature test method, and therefore, all such products would have to be redesigned to use an exemption. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 2)
DOE has identified 35 certified basic
models of small electric storage water heaters in its market assessment (see appendix 3A to the final rule TSD) and determined that all of these models heat water using electric resistance elements and, as currently designed, do not meet any of the criteria for an exemption to the requirement to determine UEF according to the high temperature test method. For example, most of these products are likely capable of heating and storing water at or above the temperature threshold criterion that would, if they were capable of only heating and storing water at that temperature or less, exempt them from high temperature testing (the temperature criterion is discussed in more detail in the following section of this document). (Heat pump small electric storage water heaters, discussed later in this paragraph, were not certified to DOE.) Based on the calculations provided by Rheem and NEEA, DOE has determined that the vast majority of these small electric storage water heaters are capable of achieving an FHR of more than 51 gallons when set to the highest temperature set point (as would be required under high-temperature testing), and thus these products would qualify for the medium draw pattern when tested to the high-temperature test method. As such, these products would be subject to the standards for electric
storage water heaters under 55 gallons generally and not the standards for small electric storage water heaters, which are applicable only for products in the very small and low draw patterns. Further, the models that would remain in the low draw pattern (having an FHR less than 51 gallons) would have an effective storage volume greater than 35 gallons, such that they would not be considered small electric storage water heaters, either. Therefore, these specific small electric storage water heaters would be subject to standards being adopted for electric storage water heaters with 20–55 gallons of storage volume generally (i.e., the standards for small electric storage water heaters would not apply), which are met through use of heat pump technology, unless they are redesigned to be eligible for one of the exemptions from high- temperature testing. If a product were redesigned to become eligible for an exemption, then the high-temperature test method would not be required, and thus these electric resistance products would remain as small electric storage water heaters and be subject to the standards being adopted for small electric storage water heaters, which can be met using electric resistance heating.
Additionally, in response to A.O.
Smith’s concern regarding the potential need to adjust small electric storage water heater standards to account for the impact of the high-temperature test, DOE notes that redesigns to the thermostat capabilities of electric storage water heaters are expected to be relatively low-cost for manufacturers, and products redesigned in such a manner would still be able to serve the majority of the market based on consumer field usage data (as described above). In a final rule amending test procedures for commercial water- heating equipment, DOE evaluated the implications of removing a temperature criterion of 180 °F that previously was
part of the definition of a commercial water heater. 81 FR 79261, 79285 (Nov. 10, 2016). In that final rule, it was discussed that redesigning water heaters to account for the 180 °F temperature
threshold can be achieved through replacement of a single part, the thermostat, which can be very easily and inexpensively changed to allow for heating water to greater than 180 °F. Id.
In 2016 A.O. Smith commented that a thermostat designed to deliver water temperatures in excess of 180 °F can be
installed at no additional cost on products that are consumer water heaters in all other respects. Id. (See
also A.O. Smith, Docket No. EERE–
2014–BT–TP–0008, No. 27 at pp. 6–7). In light of these previous stakeholder comments there is no reason to believe that, for small electric storage water heaters, redesigning models to limit the temperature to 135 °F would increase
the price of the product. Hence, DOE expects thermostat redesigns to become a common strategy for manufacturers to offer small electric storage water heaters
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00149 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637926 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
191Product literature for models of heat pump
small electric storage water heaters can be found
docketed at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE- 2017-BT-STD-0019. In the December 2023 SNOPR
the Department had erroneously stated that there are no longer heat pump circulating water heaters available on the market (see 88 FR 89330, 89333)
due to changes in a manufacturer’s website. after the compliance date of this final
rule.
However, this does not mean that all
small electric storage water heaters available today would require redesign to be compliant with the amended standards set forth in this final rule. As discussed in section V.D.1.d of this document, the high-temperature test method is not required for heat pump water heaters; therefore, the high- temperature test method would not affect heat pump configurations on the market today. For example, consumers can continue to use circulating heat pump water heaters in small electric storage water heater configurations (i.e., with small separate tanks) for cases where a small electric storage water heater is desired but without the specific design exemptions that electric resistance products would require. DOE has identified four recent models on the market—two of which have been marked for sale in the United States— which offer this capability.
191
Consequently, DOE concludes that no
compliant products on the market today will be required to use the high- temperature test method in order to demonstrate compliance with the standards being adopted in this final rule. Therefore, DOE is not establishing any specific enforcement provisions beyond the requirements of the appendix E test procedure with regards to the high temperature test method.
DOE recognizes that there may be
additional ways for industry to develop alternatives to heat pump water heaters for consumers; however, DOE aims to have all products that offer the same performance, capacity, and consumer utility be treated equally under standards. The development and implementation of the high-temperature test method is one way to assure this for products that vary temperature to accomplish these ends. In addition to this, DOE is amending the definitions of the product classes to more accurately capture the branches of the market under which performance, capacity, and consumer utility can be grouped. This is
discussed in section IV.A.1.e of this document.
PHCC commented that the storage
temperature cannot be raised beyond the ability of a mixing valve to safely regulate the outlet water temperature, and that mixing valves are not inexpensive. PHCC asserted that the device itself can be 25 percent to 30 percent of the cost of the water heater itself, and along with additional labor, material, maintenance, and operational costs, which the commenter suggested would result in mixing valves not being a commonly used solution today. PHCC also warned that installation of water heaters at elevated temperatures without a mixing valve causes a serious safety risk in addition to increased standby losses. In its comment, PHCC stated that the creation of the limited capacity will almost ensure that the high-temperature outcomes will happen, and if so, DOE should consider mandating mixing valves to ensure safety for consumers. (PHCC, No. 1151 at p. 2)
The price of a mixing valve and its
installation would vary depending on whether the mixing valve is shipped with the water heater, built into the water heater, or part of a standard installation kit. DOE understands the
estimate of a mixing valve being 25 to 30 percent of the water heater’s material price may reflect a separately purchased mixing valve. However, as discussed throughout this rulemaking and the most recent test procedure rulemaking, water heaters with built-in mixing valves or with mixing valves in the water heater’s installation kit could become more common. Based on DOE’s teardown analyses (as described in section IV.C.1.c of this document and chapter 5 of the final rule TSD), mixing valves that are provided by the water heater manufacturer could be significantly less expensive than ones purchased separately due to the volume in which water heater manufacturers can supply these. In the LCC analysis, DOE uses an estimate of approximately $75 per unit material price (before markup) based on the aforementioned teardown analyses assuming that the mixing valve can likely be provided by the water heater manufacturer in a scenario with amended standards.
While DOE agrees with PHCC that
mixing valves are a safety feature and should be used to temper extra-hot water to a degree that does not pose such a high scalding risk, the Department notes that EPCA does not delegate DOE the authority to issue regulations mandating such a consumer safety feature. Instead, DOE is statutorily obligated to ensure that its energy conservation standards can be met by products that are safe for consumers (see the screening analysis criteria in section IV.B). In its analysis of amended standards for consumer water heaters in this final rule, DOE has determined that the standards for small electric storage water heaters can be met by products that either limit the high temperature capability or are compatible with mixing valves in order to protect consumers from scalding.
Therefore, as stated earlier, in this
final rule, DOE is adopting the proposed provisions for the high-temperature test method, clarifying how the maximum tank temperature can be verified, adopting additional exemptions for very small and large electric storage water heaters, and permitting optional representations for heat pump water heaters using the high-temperature test method.
a. Maximum Tank Temperature
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed
that certain water heaters that have a
maximum setpoint temperature capable of heating and storing water above 135°F would be required to conduct the
high temperature test, while water heaters that can only heat and store water at or below 135 °F would not be
required to undergo such testing. 88 FR 49058, 49165. In arriving at the 135 °F
setpoint, DOE considered: (1) the effective storage volume of a small electric storage water heater with a rated storage volume of 35 gallons for various mean tank temperatures; and (2) potential consumer uses for higher storage tank temperatures. Id. The
effective storage volume at various temperatures provides insight into the likelihood a small electric storage water heater would operate in a capacity- boosting mode, and in the July 2023 NOPR the Department provided a table that showed the effective storage volume for various tank temperature settings. Table V.37 from the July 2023 NOPR is reproduced here also. Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00150 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637927 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
192Product literature for models of heat pump
small electric storage water heaters can be found
docketed at www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE- 2017-BT-STD–0019. See, for example, models
marketed to reach up to 145 °F: www.nyle.com/wp-
content/uploads/2023/01/SB-E008T-010323.pdf and www.heatwater.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/
09/SB-C6-112923.pdf (Last accessed Jan. 18, 2024). 193According to the CDC, legionella generally
grow well between 77 °F and 113 °F, but growth
slows between 113 °F and 120 °F, and legionella
begin to die above 120 °F. See the CDC’s Legionella
Environmental Assessment Form. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Available online at www.cdc.gov/legionella/downloads/legionella- environmental-assessment-p.pdf. (Last accessed: Jan. 18, 2024).
For instance, it is unlikely a consumer
would purchase a 35-gallon small
electric storage water heater and set the tank temperature to 130 °F to increase
the effective storage volume to 38 gallons, which is less than a 9 percent increase in effective storage volume. On the other hand, at a maximum setpoint
of 140 °F, a 35-gallon small electric
storage water heater could replace up to a 44-gallon heat pump water heater, which represents more than a 25 percent increase in effective capacity. Id. The market share of medium electric
storage water heaters around 40 gallons is approximately 40 percent. As a result, DOE proposed a maximum temperature setpoint of 135 °F.
However, DOE also recognizes that
increased capacity is not the only reason a consumer may want a higher tank storage temperature. Higher temperature setpoints can allow consumers to pair water heaters with clothes washers or dishwashers that lack heating elements and can be used to reduce bacterial growth. While the data shows that only a small percentage of consumers are utilizing tank temperature setpoints greater than 135 °F, DOE notes that the
135°F maximum temperature setpoint is
not a temperature limit. There are heat pump models of small electric water heaters available on the market that are exempt from the high temperature testing provisions and have temperature setpoints of 140 °F or higher.
192
Additionally, DOE proposed that units capable of storing water at a setpoint above 135 °F only through a temporary,
consumer-initiated mode lasting no longer than 120 hours would not be subject to high temperature testing. This would allow consumers to initiate the temporary, high-heat mode prior to using a clothes washer or dishwasher that lacks a heating element for special cleaning loads, e.g., when dust mites or
norovirus may be of particular concern. This temporary mode would also allow consumers to periodically raise the temperature of the tank past 135 °F to
quickly eliminate any bacteria growth in the tank. For instance, if a consumer shuts their water heater off or puts it into a low-temperature vacation mode to conserve energy while not in use, they can use the temporary, high-heat mode to quickly eliminate any bacteria in the tank. Finally, DOE also notes that a setpoint of 135 °F is well within the
range of many recommendations for controlling bacteria growth in storage water heaters.
193
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
the Joint Advocacy Groups supported the proposed 135 °F threshold for high
temperature testing provisions, adding that a threshold of 140 °F could
significantly undermine the intent of the proposed standards by allowing 35- gallon water heaters to reach an effective storage volume of 44 gallons without being tested in a representative manner. The Joint Advocacy Groups also agreed with DOE’s tentative determination that the proposed 135 °F
threshold would not compromise the utility of the water heater for consumers who desire hotter water for certain situations. (Joint Advocacy Groups, No. 1165 at pp. 7–8) NEEA also urged DOE not to set the limit to require high- temperature testing any higher than 135°F. (NEEA, No. 1199 at pp. 7–8)
BWC, on the other hand, urged DOE
to consider increasing the temperature criterion for the high-temperature test exemption from 135 °F to 140 °F because
residential electric storage water heaters that heat water to 140 °F serve a distinct
health and safety function, as the Centers for Disease Control (‘‘CDC’’) recommends maintaining this temperature to mitigate the formation or presence of legionella bacteria. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 9) AHRI also suggested that the temperature criterion for the high-temperature test exemptions be increased to 140 °F because setting the
internal tank temperature to 140 °F may
produce significant health and safety benefits to consumers (i.e., killing
legionella, norovirus, and dust mites). AHRI provided information that showed that washing clothes and bedding at 140°F is one of the suggested guidelines
that healthcare agencies provide to kill dust mites and norovirus. Additionally, AHRI cited information from the CDC, which recommends storing hot water above 140 °F to control for legionella.
(AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 3–4)
A.O. Smith similarly commented that
a temperature of 140 °F is recommended
to wash bedding and linens to kill dust mites and norovirus. The commenter also referenced DOE’s website, which recommends that people with suppressed immune systems may want
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6
ER06MY24.085</GPH>ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6Table V.37 Effective Storage Volume of a Water Heater with a 35-gallon Rated
Storae:e Volume at Various Mean Tank Temperatures
Mean Tank VerrofWater
Temperature (°F) Heater with 35-
gallon Vr (gallons)
125 35
130 38
135 41
140 44
145 47
150 50
155 53
160 56
165 59
170 62 37928 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
194National Plumbing Code of Canada 2020, page
200. Available online at: nrc-
publications.canada.ca/eng/view/ft/?id=6e7cabf5- d83e-4efd-9a1c-6515fc7cdc71r. (Last accessed: Oct. 31, 2023).
195DOE notes that clause 23.3 of UL Standard
174, ‘‘Household Electric Storage Tank Water Heaters,’’ was recently updated to require that the temperature-regulating control shall be set before leaving the factory to a control position corresponding to a water temperature no higher than 51.7 °C (125 °F). When the water heater is
equipped with a thermostatic mixing valve in addition to the temperature regulating control, the factory setting of the water temperature mixing valve shall be no higher than 51.7 °C (125 °F), and
the temperature-regulating control shall be factory set no higher than 60 °C (140 °F). These updates
went into effect on October 14, 2023. This standard can be accessed online at:www.shopulstandards.com/ ProductDetail.aspx?productId=UL174_ 11_S_
20040429. (Last accessed: Nov. 30, 2023).
196A.O. Smith did not specify whether these
units were connected to a utility demand-response program or were otherwise equipped with WiFi- enabled controls and monitoring. to keep their tank temperature at 140 °F
and install limited devices on taps and
baths. A.O. Smith stated that several codes, including the National Plumbing Code of Canada,
194require electric
resistance storage water heaters to be shipped at a 140 °F set point; therefore,
allowing a 140 °F set point would
reduce manufacturer burden from having to produce separate model lines for the United States and Canada. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 6) A.O. Smith collected data on water heater temperatures from a survey of 500 homeowners. The data, A.O. Smith stated, showed that 63 percent of respondents adjusted the water heater set point from the factory-shipped temperature.
195Of those who adjusted
the set point, 45 percent increased the set point, 38 percent decreased the set point, and 17 percent had done both. A.O. Smith also gathered data from 40- gallon ‘‘connected’’ water heaters
196
which showed that a total of 10 percent of customers have set the temperature higher than 135 °F, whereas 5 percent of
customers have the temperature higher than 140 °F. A.O. Smith argued that it
believes a threshold of 140 °F for
exemption from high-temperature testing better maintains consumer utility. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 6)
Rheem noted that the EF test
procedure, which had been in use for over 25 years, had a representative nominal tank temperature between 130 and 140 °F, so a temperature of 140 °F is
representative for a subset of water heaters in the field today. Rheem stated that, in addition to requirements in Canada, the CDC also recommends temperature control limits that store hot water above 140 °F. (Rheem, No. 1177 at
p. 4) Finally, the CA IOUs strongly
recommended that the temperature
criterion for the high-temperature test method exemptions be reduced to no more than 130 °F. The CA IOUs
expressed concern that a temperature as high as 135 °F would still enable small
electric storage water heaters to directly compete with a larger heat pump water heaters and erode the anticipated savings from heat pump-level standards. The CA IOUs calculated that if a lowboy water heater with 35 gallons of rated storage volume and a 51-gallon FHR were to operate at 135 °F with a
thermostatic mixing valve, it would have an effective storage volume of 42 gallons and a new FHR of 56 gallons— which would appear to be in the range of the 20–55 gallon electric storage water heater class. Therefore, the CA IOUs stated that the high-temperature test should be required for electric storage water heaters that have a permanent mode or setting in which the water heater is capable of heating and storing water above the test procedure design temperature of 125 °F. (CA IOUs,
No. 1175 at pp. 3–4)
First, in response to A.O. Smith’s
concern about manufacturer burden, DOE notes that harmonizing the factory- shipped setpoint temperature between the United States and Canada may not eliminate manufacturer burden. Specifically, the current minimum efficiency requirements for electric resistance storage water heaters are different in Canada, and several manufacturers currently offer distinct models in Canada to meet these requirements. See chapter 3 of the final
rule TSD for more details on Canada’s minimum efficiency requirements.
With respect to the comments on both
raising and lowering the maximum setpoint temperature proposed in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE first notes that the maximum setpoint temperature is based on the expected use for these products. Data show that consumers do not generally use very high temperature setpoints even in light of CDC guidance, so the ‘‘upper limit’’ of temperatures found in normal installations appears to be lower than the 140 °F suggested by
some stakeholders.
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that small electric storage water heaters that can
heat and store water above 135 °F will
be substantially more likely to be used permanently at higher temperatures to increase capacity (as discussed in section V.D.1 of this document). Commenters advocating for a higher maximum setpoint temperature of 140°F do not dispute DOE’s
determination that small electric storage water heaters that can heat and store
water above 135 °F will be substantially
more likely to be used permanently at higher temperatures to increase capacity. Instead, they focus on the health and safety benefits of setting the tank temperature to 140 °F. DOE
recognizes that higher temperatures, e.g., 140°F, can more quickly control
bacterial growth in storage water heaters. But, as discussed previously, DOE is not limiting the maximum temperature setpoint for small electric water heaters. Based on DOE’s and A.O. Smith’s data, approximately 10% of consumers use a setpoint temperature greater than 135 °F. For these consumers
who prefer setpoint temperatures greater than 135 °F, there are small electric heat
pump water heaters on the market today that have setpoint temperatures above 140°F, and these models would not be
affected by the high-temperature testing provision. Further, as noted earlier, the temporary mode exemption will allow owners of electric resistance storage water heaters to periodically increase the temperature above 135 °F, and for up
to 120 hours (or five days) at a time, if desired for short-term disinfection applications.
With respect to the comment from the
CA IOUs that DOE lower the temperature to 130 °F, DOE thinks it is
unlikely that a consumer would purchase a 35 gallon small electric water heater and operate it at 130 °F to
increase the capacity by 3 gallons. While Rheem suggested that DOE refer to the outdated EF test procedure to determine what temperatures are considered typical, the current UEF test procedure can provide more recent insight. The current test method is based on a normal delivery temperature of 125 °F ± 5°F (as discussed
previously), and within this normal range, consumer storage-type water heaters may sometimes contain water at 130°F due to natural deviations from
the setpoint temperature.
For example, commercially available
electric storage water heaters that are marketed today to boost the capacity using higher storage tank temperatures all do so with temperatures above 135°F. One product tested by DOE has
a ‘‘High’’ setting that results in a tank
temperature of about 140 °F, and the
setting below that resulted in a tank temperature of 125 °F. There was no
setting observed to boost capacity at a tank temperature of 135 °F. Another
manufacturer offers a 55-gallon product with a variety of settings allowing the user to get ‘‘performance equivalency’’ of a 65-, 80-, or 100-gallon tank, stating
that the tank raises the temperature safely up to 170 °F. 88 FR 40406, 40446.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637929 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
197For more information, see product literature
available online at: www.intellihot.com/wp-content/
uploads/2023/01/Legionator-Product-Spec-Sheet- 2.23.pdf. (Last accessed: Nov. 28, 2023).
198For more information, see product press
release available online at: www.microban.com/ bradford-white. (Last accessed: Nov. 29, 2023). 199See UL 174–2021.6, UL Standard for Safety
Household Electric Storage Tank Water Heaters. At the lowest level of capacity boosting,
this model is offering 18 percent additional effective storage volume (going from 55 gallons to 65 gallons), which would indicate a temperature around 140 °F as well. These designs
demonstrate that storing water at 140 °F
is a useful temperature for boosting capacity, whereas 135 °F may not be.
Crystal also recommended that DOE
review the allowed usage of germicidal UV–C water treatment in recirculating hot- and warm-water lines to complement or substitute thermal disinfection cycles. According to Crystal, this is allowed under regulation in several countries around the world, and therefore products and research are available on the market as well as ongoing novel technology adoptions improving the sustainability and energy efficiency and maintenance of this field further. (Crystal, No. 577 at p. 1)
DOE has not found examples of
consumer water heaters using UV treatment to disinfect hot water lines. However, to address issues like this, one manufacturer produces a point-of-use water heater that uses ozone generation to disinfect the water in the pipes and at the faucet while still delivering hot water at a temperature that is
comfortable for hand-washing (the unit is advertised to have a maximum set point temperature of 120 °F).
197
Additionally, circulating water heaters (discussed more in section IV.A.1.a of this document) are a type of storage water heater that can maintain the water in the pipes at a high temperature so that all of the water in the system stays at a safe temperature and does not stagnate. The high temperature test will not impede the function of either of these types of products, as discussed later. Another manufacturer uses an antimicrobial enamel coating inside the water heater tank to prevent the growth of bacteria, mold, and mildew on the surface of the tank lining (though it is not advertised to specifically prevent legionella growth).
198
b. Verification of Maximum Tank Temperature
As discussed in the previous section,
in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed that products that are unable to heat and store water at a set point above 135 °F
would not be required to test using the high-temperature test method. 88 FR 49058, 49165. DOE received the following comments in response to the
July 2023 NOPR requesting clarification on the maximum tank temperature, how it is measured, and specific tolerances around required values as well as criteria for products exempt of the high- temperature test method.
BWC asked for DOE to further clarify
what design factors would constitute a product that is not capable of heating and storing water above 135 °F.
Specifically, BWC sought additional information on whether the exemption criteria would be based on a direct user interface function which operates the product or, instead, a thermostat capable of being set above 135 °F. The
commenter provided examples of configurations with surface-mount thermostats and electronic controls, with and without mixing valves, to inquire whether these configurations would be exempt from the high temperature test. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 7–8)
AHRI asked DOE to elaborate on how
it would enforce the high-temperature test method. The commenter stated that most electric storage water heaters utilize a surface-mount thermostat, which is unsophisticated and has a large temperature tolerance—as a result, the mean tank temperature may vary appreciably from the temperature set point. AHRI stated that the mean tank temperature will typically be lower than the thermostat setting. As a result, AHRI requested feedback on whether the enforcement of the high-temperature test method would be based on thermostat set points or on test data (in the case that it is test data, AHRI recommended a temperature tolerance of ± 5°F on T
max,1 prior to requiring
high-temperature testing in appendix E). AHRI recommended that DOE measure the maximum tank temperature using the T
max,1 measurement in the
simulated-use test because it is commonly used in the industry to evaluate the effective storage volume and is referenced in the regulations already (manufacturers and labs are familiar with how to test for T
max,1, and
there would be minimal burden associated with determining the tank temperature based on this metric). (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 4)
A.O. Smith also requested that DOE
clarify how the temperature criterion for
the high-temperature test is determined—whether it is a set point or whether it is a measurement. A.O. Smith stated that additional specificity is necessary because most electric resistance storage water heaters on the market use mechanical controls (e.g., bi-
metallic thermostats) which turn the elements on and off, resulting in larger temperature variation around the set
point. A.O. Smith also requested that DOE clarify the enforcement provisions surrounding the level of external consumer intervention required to be exempt from the high-temperature test. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 5)
Rheem requested clarification on how
the maximum temperature a water heater is capable of storing water at is measured (whether it be the maximum temperature on the thermostat settings, the maximum temperature within the tank, the maximum mean tank temperature, or the maximum outlet temperature as measured by a test in section 29 of UL 174–2021.6.
199Rheem
recommended the use of T max,1 to verify
the temperature that a water heater can heat and store water to. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 5) Rheem recommended that DOE require certification and disclosure in product literature of the maximum temperature, FHR, and UEF when tested to the high-temperature requirements. Rheem also recommended that DOE establish enforcement provisions to ensure the maximum temperature aligns with the certified values. Rheem commented that a tolerance of ± 5°F for
the maximum tank temperature and ± 3
percent on the effective storage volume would be necessary due to variability in
the test procedure and the imprecise operation of bi-metallic thermostat controllers. Rheem also asked for clarification on how DOE would conduct enforcement testing, and if DOE will run tests at both temperature conditions, then what steps must be taken between the two simulated-use tests. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 6)
In response to these requests for
clarification, DOE clarifies that the exemption will be determined based on T
max,1, which is a measured parameter in
the current test procedure that represents the maximum measured mean tank temperature after cut-out following the first draw of the 24-hour simulated-use test. In order to develop product-specific enforcement provisions for the high-temperature test method, DOE must first identify whether manufacturers should certify this value privately; as such, a certification was not suggested in the July 2023 NOPR. DOE is deferring this determination to a separate rulemaking addressing certification and enforcement provisions for consumer water heaters and is not codifying any specific requirements in this final rule.
In addition to this topic, Rheem
suggested that, instead of conducting the high-temperature test at the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637930 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
maximum tank temperature, the high-
temperature test should be conducted at a standardized temperature. Rheem recommended that the high-temperature test be performed at 160 °F ± 5°F as a
representative temperature for this type of water heater operation by 2029. Rheem stated that 160 °F is in between
the 135 °F temperature criterion and the
180°F maximum temperature (given
that UL 174–2021 safety standard limits the maximum tank temperature to 185°F). Rheem commented that future
demand-response programs will also require operation at or above 160 °F.
(Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 5)
In response to Rheem’s request for a
fixed set point temperature for high- temperature testing, DOE notes that not all water heaters with the capability to store water above 135 °F will necessarily
have the capability to store water at 160°F; hence, DOE is not adopting any
changes to the set point requirements for the high-temperature test method. While the test may not be carried out at the exact temperature to which the water heater would be set in the field, it would be representative of the maximum temperature the water heater can sustain safely, which is important for consumer purchase decisions. UEF decreases with increased tank temperature; therefore, the water heater is expected to perform at least as well as a high-temperature rating evaluated at the highest tank temperature set point, all other environmental conditions the same. Should additional information become available regarding the set point temperatures of consumer electric resistance storage water heaters in the field, DOE may consider it in a future test procedure rulemaking.
c. Very Small and Large Electric Storage
Water Heaters
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
some commenters stated that very small
electric storage water heaters (i.e., products with less than 20 gallons of rated storage volume) should not have to test to the high-temperature test method because these products are too small to reasonably substitute for larger heat pump water heaters, so it may be unlikely that these products are set to a high tank set point temperature.
Rheem suggested that the high-
temperature test should be narrowly applied only to those electric storage water heaters which have potential to introduce a circumvention risk for heat pump water heater standards. In its comments, Rheem indicated that these products would be tabletop and electric storage water heaters with rated storage volumes greater than or equal to 20 gallons and less than or equal to 35 gallons. Rheem recommended that high-
temperature testing should not apply to all other electric water heaters with storage volume. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 2) In its analysis, Rheem determined that a 19-gallon very small electric storage water heater would need to store water at 180 °F to achieve an FHR of
approximately 51 gallons, which is much higher than is typically observed in consumer water heaters. On this basis, Rheem stated that very small electric storage water heaters cannot match the delivery capacities of 20–55 gallon electric storage water heaters, which would otherwise require heat pump technology. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 2–3)
For electric resistance storage water
heaters with rated storage volumes less than 20 gallons, AHRI recommended that high-temperature testing not be required because these units are unlikely to get into medium draw patterns at higher test temperatures. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 6)
A.O. Smith commented that, because
small electric storage water heaters are the most likely to be operated at a higher temperature with a mixing valve to match the performance of larger water heaters, the high-temperature test method should be limited to small electric storage water heaters only. From its own testing of a 17-gallon very small electric storage water heater, A.O. Smith determined that increasing the set point from 125 °F to 150 °F resulted in a 43-
percent increase in effective storage volume, but only a 4-percent increase in FHR, and thus A.O. Smith concluded that very small electric storage water heaters cannot match the performance of larger water heaters, even when operating at their highest set point temperatures. A.O. Smith recommended that DOE specify the high-temperature test only applies to 20–35 gallon products in order to maintain representativeness while reducing manufacturer testing burden. A.O. Smith commented that this would still ‘‘close the loophole’’ for heat pump water heater circumvention. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 6–7) Providing this information, A.O. Smith recommended that electric resistance storage water heaters of less than 20 gallons or greater than 55 gallons should
be exempt from the high-temperature test method. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 7)
To evaluate a potential exemption,
DOE reviewed test data it had collected from very small electric storage water heaters in support of the proposed standards. These products, ranging in rated storage volume between 1.8 gallons and 19.9 gallons, all had delivery capacities in the very small or
low draw patterns. Per its calculations, DOE also came to the same conclusion as commenters: no model would be capable of achieving an FHR high enough to place the water heater in the medium draw pattern at the highest tank temperature set point.
Based on DOE’s data and information
presented by commenters, DOE agrees that products with rated storage volumes of less than 20 gallons would not likely be set to higher temperatures to boost household delivery capacity as a substitute for a larger water heater. Therefore, DOE is exempting all very small electric storage water heaters from having to test to the high-temperature test method to demonstrate compliance with new UEF-based standards.
In addition to the previous
suggestions provided by manufacturers, DOE received comments from NYSERDA and the CA IOUs suggesting that the high-temperature test method does not serve a purpose for larger electric resistance storage water heaters. NYSERDA stated that the high- temperature test method should not apply to larger-volume electric resistance storage water heaters that are already subject to heat pump-level standards. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 6) NYSERDA stated that exempting electric storage water heaters larger than 55 gallons of rated storage volume from the high-temperature test method (or potentially capping the effective storage volume) would reduce test burden and allow manufacturers to maintain the status quo for larger electric resistance storage water heaters. (NYSERDA, No. 1192 at p. 6) The CA IOUs suggested that DOE amend the calculations for effective storage volume such that products with rated storage volumes less than or equal to 120 gallons would be capped at an effective storage volume of 120 gallons. (CA IOUs, No. 1175 at pp. 3–4)
DOE agrees with NYSERDA and the
CA IOUs that for products above a certain volume threshold, it is unlikely that testing according to the high- temperature method would provide more representative ratings. Specifically, the currently applicable standards for electric storage water heaters greater than 55 gallons of rated storage volume and less than or equal to
120 gallons of rated storage volume correspond to products with heat pump technology, such that all of these products on the market today are heat pump water heaters. (See 10 CFR 430.32(d)). Heat pump water heaters, discussed further in section V.D.1.d of this document, would already be exempt from the high-temperature test
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00154 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637931 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
200Section 5.1.1 of appendix E outlines the
determination of the operational mode for testing
heat pump water heaters, which shall be the default mode unless otherwise specified. method, as it is unlikely to be more
representative for these products. Therefore, it is logical to exempt products that are 55–120 gallons of rated storage volume from the high- temperature test method, as this would be synonymous with the heat pump water heater exemption. Next, while DOE has not observed consumer electric storage water heaters on the market beyond 120 gallons of rated storage volume, it is unlikely that such very large products would rely on high- temperature operation to provide consumers with additional capacity: these products already contain rated storage volumes that are greater than those of products that have to comply with heat pump-level standards, such that the elevated temperature is not necessary to provide as much capacity as a heat pump water heater. Because of this, DOE has concluded that it is reasonable to exempt any electric storage water heater greater than 55 gallons of rated storage volume from the high-temperature test method.
This exemption for large electric
storage water heaters additionally prevents potential backsliding from the standards of 55–120 gallon products, a concern brought up by multiple stakeholders and discussed in section IV.A.1.e of this document, because the rated storage volume and effective storage volume would thus be equal for any model greater than 55 gallons. An electric storage water heater between 55
and 120 gallons of rated storage volume would be required to demonstrate compliance with standards in accordance with the normal temperature test method, meaning that it cannot use the high temperature test method to increase its effective storage volume beyond 120 gallons and become subject to less-stringent standards.
d. Optional Representations for Heat
Pump Water Heaters
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed
that high-temperature testing would not apply to products that meet the definition of ‘‘heat pump-type’’ water heater at 10 CFR 430.2. 88 FR 49058, 49166.
CEC stated their appreciation of
DOE’s recognition for the significant non-efficiency grid benefit potential provided by maximizing the thermal storage of heat pump water heaters through the use of higher set point temperatures and thermostatic mixing valves. (CEC, No. 1173 at p. 12)
Rheem supported allowing optional
high-temperature representations for certain heat pump water heaters because high-temperature operation might become more representative of heat pump water heater installations for three main reasons: (1) the increased need for demand-response water heaters that can perform advanced load-up and high-temperature energy storage, (2) the longer recovery time for heat pumps can be offset by storing water at a higher temperature to increase the amount of hot water immediately available, and (3) because a heat pump increases the size of the water heater, a comparable FHR can require elevated storage temperature. Rheem suggested that high-temperature operation for heat pump water heaters could cause even units with high UEF ratings to perform worse in the field. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 2–4)
As noted in section V.D.1 of this
document, if a water heater in its default mode of operation
200has an internal
tank temperature that significantly exceeds the delivery set point temperature, the calculation of effective storage volume captures this effect even without the high-temperature test method. (See section 6.3.1.1 of appendix
E.) The FHR test would be carried out in this default mode and capture the increased delivery capacity. The 24- hour simulated-use test would be carried out in this default mode and would capture the increased standby losses from the higher-temperature operation. Therefore, if any heat pump water heater is designed to boost the tank temperature and incorporate a mixing valve as part of its normal operation, the effective storage volume, FHR, and UEF values resulting from the appendix E test procedure as written would be representative of this type of operation in the field.
DOE did not receive any other
comments requesting that the high- temperature test method be made optional for voluntary representations of heat pump water heaters; however, DOE understands there is potential need to demonstrate storage and delivery capacity for heat pump water heaters representative of high-temperature operation that is not the default mode. Heat pump water heaters, unlike traditional electric resistance storage water heaters, can offer more modes to control the way the compressor and backup elements behave as a natural outcome of having more than one way to heat the water, and increasing storage tank temperature could be one potential way to increase delivery capacity when the compressor operates alone (i.e., offers a slower recovery speed). In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE adopted
optional metrics for voluntary representations of heat pump water heaters to demonstrate performance in a variety of different environmental conditions because this information, DOE surmised, would be relevant for consumer information, and manufacturers already tested products to these alternate conditions. 88 FR 40406, 40437–40438. Similarly, DOE has determined that optional high- temperature representations would be relevant for consumer information as the market transitions towards this technology.
First, as discussed earlier, certain
consumers using certain water heater configurations may desire higher set point temperatures, in which case the high-temperature test method could provide representative performance results. Second, as indicated by Rheem, future heat pump water heater control strategies could use variation of the storage tank temperature to compensate for slower compressor recovery periods when backup elements are either absent or disabled. A.O. Smith commented that consumers may be led to ‘‘upsize’’ when transitioning to a heat pump water heater (see section IV.C.1.b of this
document for further discussion of this comment); however, as Rheem suggested, high-temperature performance data could enable consumers to purchase smaller, less expensive heat pump water heaters if the high-temperature performance data demonstrate equivalent performance to a larger product.
Unlike the mandatory requirement for
electric resistance storage water heaters, the high-temperature test is optional for heat pump water heaters. This is because DOE expects the representativeness of this test method to
depend on the designs of heat pump water heaters that emerge within the compliance period of this final rule. At this time, heat pump water heaters comprise a relatively small portion of the market; therefore, consumer preferences and usage are not yet as well understood (whereas, for electric resistance storage water heaters, several commenters indicated that the high- temperature test method would be representative of field applications). Should higher tank temperatures become more prevalent in field use as a result of a technology transition, DOE may revisit the implementation of the high-temperature test method in a future test procedure rulemaking.
e. Temporary Mode
Some electric resistance water heaters
could offer high-temperature modes that
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00155 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637932 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
allow for set points above the intended
delivery temperature to boost delivery capacity, but only temporarily before automatically reverting to the normal temperature mode. This contrasts with several models that are currently available, which remain in the high- temperature setting until the consumer changes the mode or setting to deactivate the high-temperature mode. Temporary modes would be intended for occasional use in situations in which there is a short-term increased demand for hot water, while non-temporary modes would be more likely to be used long-term. In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE discussed comments it received from stakeholders regarding water heaters with high-temperature modes. Specifically, stakeholders indicated that high-temperature modes are not intended to be the primary mode of operation and should not be used continuously, and that testing in these modes would not reflect their intended use. 88 FR 40406, 40449.
DOE understands that temporary
high-temperature modes would be unlikely to be used long-term because they would automatically return the set point to a more typical temperature after a certain period of time has elapsed. Because these temporary modes cannot be used permanently, in the July 2023 NOPR DOE tentatively determined that units capable of storing water at a set point above 135 °F only through a
temporary, consumer-initiated, high- temperature mode lasting no longer than 120 hours should not be subject to high- temperature testing. 88 FR 49058, 49165. DOE expects that such products would operate in non-high temperature modes for the majority of the time and, therefore, testing in the high- temperature mode would not be representative. Thus, DOE proposed to limit the high-temperature mode duration to 120 hours as a reasonable amount of time that demand may be temporarily higher than normal (such as when guests are visiting). Further, DOE expected that models with permanent high-temperature modes, whether shipped from the factory with that mode as the default mode or simply as a user- selectable mode, would be likely to be used continuously in the high- temperature mode. Therefore, DOE tentatively concluded it is representative to test such water heaters in the high-temperature modes and is proposing to require such testing. Id.
GEA commented that DOE’s 120-hour
limit without user intervention for extra demand is an appropriate approach for maintaining consumer utility and the
energy-saving benefits of such features. (GEA, No. 1203 at pp. 1–2) AHRI requested that DOE provide
additional information on what meets
the definition of a ‘‘consumer-initiated’’ high-temperature mode, which, if lasting less than 120 hours, would deem the product exempt from the high- temperature test method. AHRI also inquired as to the type of interaction by the user that is necessary to satisfy the requirement and whether the user can create a schedule. AHRI raised a concern that if products fail to meet the specific requirement for the temporary mode exemption, products tested to the high-temperature test method would not be able to comply with standards. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 4) BWC also asked for DOE to further clarify what a ‘‘permanent mode or setting’’ meant for the high-temperature test exemption. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 7–8)
Stanonik stated that the proposed
addition of high-temperature testing provisions is confusing, and added that the provisions may be read to apply to most electric storage water heaters despite the fact that DOE explains the provisions are only meant to apply to a subset of them. Stanonik requested DOE clarify if the act of changing the thermostat on a consumer water heater would be considered an ‘‘external consumer intervention’’ that would then exclude the water heater from high- temperature testing. (Stanonik, No. 1197 at p. 1)
Rheem stated that it was generally
supportive of the outlined exemptions from the high-temperature test, except for the temporary setting exemption. Although Rheem had suggested that DOE investigate temporary modes of operation in the test procedure rulemaking, Rheem indicated in its comments to the July 2023 NOPR that such an exemption would not be necessary if the test method were clarified and the temperature criterion were raised from 135 °F to 140 °F.
(Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 6–7)
In response to these requests from
stakeholders, DOE is clarifying what would constitute consumer intervention for the purpose of the high-temperature test exemption. As discussed in section V.D.1.b of this document, a high- temperature mode would be one in which the water heater can achieve a T
max,1 greater than 135 °F during the 24-
hour simulated-use test. If the water
heater is set to such a mode, and the only time when it can achieve a T
max,1
greater than 135 °F is in the period of
time that lasts 120 hours or less after the mode or setting is engaged by the user, then this would constitute a temporary high-temperature mode. To be exempt from the high-temperature test method, such a temporary high-temperature mode can only be activated via user
intervention with the water heater. Once the temporary period of high- temperature operation has elapsed, the water heater must return to a lower tank temperature that would result in a T
max,1
less than or equal to 135 °F. If the user
wishes to extend the period beyond 120 hours, they must reactivate the mode manually.
The purpose of this exemption is to
allow products to increase capacity when there are limited times of high demand. Therefore, the consumer would have to manually activate the mode (e.g., pushing a physical or digital
button) if the high-temperature mode is required. If, instead, a product adheres to a regular schedule of high- temperature operation, a product would operate in a manner that demonstrates a consistent need for additional capacity, and in such a case the high- temperature test method would be more representative of the average daily use cycle of the product. For this reason, a scheduled setting would not be exempt from the high-temperature test method. For the normal-temperature test to remain representative of the ratings of the product, the water heater must permanently return to a mode in which the T
max,1 will not exceed 135 °F at any
time after the temporary high- temperature operation has elapsed, and the only way in which the water heater would return to an elevated temperature is if the consumer interacts with the product manually again.
In response to Stanonik’s question,
the act of manually changing the set point temperature to achieve a mode in which the water heater can attain a T
max,1 beyond 135 °F is generally
addressed in section V.D.1.b of this document. If the consumer can set the water heater to permanently heat and
store water beyond 135 °F, then the
water heater is not exempt from the high-temperature test. As outlined in section V.D.1.g of this document, such a model would not pass the second criterion for exemption.
f. Demand-Response Water Heaters
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed
to exempt from high-temperature testing
any water heaters that can only heat and store water at temperatures above 135 °F
in response to instructions received from a utility or third-party demand- response program. DOE reasoned that the additional energy consumption from high-temperature water storage in demand-response water heaters is compensated for by periods of water heater inactivity (i.e., a curtailment
period) and, thus, demand-response water heaters do not engage in high-
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637933 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
temperature water storage in order to
directly increase capacity over a representative average use cycle of 24 hours. 88 FR 49058, 49166.
AHRI stated that it appreciated the
exemptions from the high-temperature test method, especially regarding demand-response water heaters; however, AHRI asserted the demand- response exemption was not clearly defined. AHRI requested DOE clarify the extent of this exemption for manufacturers. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 2) AHRI commented that setting an arbitrary maximum temperature for electric storage water heaters may create potential issues for consumers in jurisdictions with demand-response requirements. Specifically, AHRI stated that load-up events for demand- response water heaters allow products to store energy, and limiting the temperature of the water heater will limit its load-up capability. AHRI requested that DOE consider increasing the temperature criterion for the high- temperature test exemptions in order to accommodate this function of demand- response water heaters. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 3)
BWC expressed concerns with how
DOE’s high-temperature test method might impact demand-response electric resistance water heaters, suggesting that there could still be complications for these products even with the exemption from the high-temperature test method. BWC stated that the purpose of demand- response controls, as required in many states, is to heat the unit to a higher temperature during off-peak hours to store energy during times of peak electric grid demand, and that these controls can be activated by either the utility or the consumer themselves. BWC commented that water heaters would be incapable of storing water at or above 135 °F if the proposal were
finalized, which would limit the load- shifting capabilities of demand-response water heaters. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 8)
In response to commenters’ concern
about demand-response water heaters being limited to 135 °F, DOE is
clarifying the meaning of its proposed exemption to the high-temperature test method. As noted previously, DOE proposed that electric storage water heaters capable of heating and storing water over 135 °F only in response to
utility demand response signals would
not be subject to high-temperature testing. This exemption was proposed so that water heaters intended for use in demand-response programs would not have to limit their temperature, provided that the ability to raise the temperature is initiated only as part of the water heater’s use in a demand- response program. (This does not,
however, preclude a demand-response water heater from also having a manual temporary high-heat mode as described in the previous section.)
In this final rule, DOE is adopting an
exemption to the high-temperature test method that will allow demand- response programs to elevate the temperature of the water heater to any temperature that the unit is capable of achieving, so long as the unit can only achieve those temperatures as a result of the demand-response operation and not as a result of the user increasing the set point temperature. For example, a product with its maximum user- operable set point can store water at or below 135 °F during normal operation,
but in response to utility signals requesting a load-up, the product can increase the temperature to 160 °F (as an
example) would be exempt from the high-temperature test method because the user cannot set the water heater to continuously operate above 135 °F.
Whereas continuous operation above 135°F would increase the effective
storage volume and FHR of the water heater, a load-up event that prompts the water heater to increase the temperature above this point does not. The load-up event only temporarily boosts the temperature so that the water heater can rely on stored energy throughout peak grid demand periods instead of relying on electricity from the grid; therefore, over the course of a representative average-use cycle (one day), the water heater does not provide extra capacity compared to when it is set to a lower temperature and allowed to recover the tank throughout the day.
Additionally, AHRI questioned
whether grid-enabled water heaters are also exempt from the high-temperature testing method. (AHRI, No. 1167 at p. 3) BWC also requested clarification on whether the high-temperature test method would apply to grid-enabled water heaters, as this was not mentioned in either the June 2023 TP Final Rule or the July 2023 NOPR. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 8–9) Rheem argued that, because grid-enabled water heaters are intended for demand-response, they are not a direct replacement for heat pump water heaters to a great extent, and that the high-temperature test method need not
apply to grid-enabled water heaters. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 3)
Grid-enabled water heaters, discussed
in section IV.A.1.e, are defined as having rated storage volumes greater than 75 gallons (see 10 CFR 430.2). In section V.D.1.c of this final rule, DOE concluded that products with rated storage volumes greater than 55 gallons would be exempt from the high- temperature test method. As a result, all
grid-enabled water heaters are exempt from the high-temperature test method. Grid-enabled water heaters are a specific subset of electric storage water heater products, which must be enrolled with a grid utility program and are designed for the purpose of demand-response control. As such, DOE expects that these products achieve higher storage temperatures as a result of utility signals and not as a result of a consumer’s need for additional hot water. Therefore, DOE has concluded that it is representative for grid-enabled water heaters to test to a normal set point temperature and not the high-temperature test method.
g. Summary of the High-Temperature
Test Method Applicability
As a result of the considerations
discussed in the previous sections, DOE is establishing that the high-temperature test method must be conducted for all electric storage water heaters, except for those meeting the following exemptions.
The first exemption is for products
that are not capable of heating the stored water beyond a T
max,1 temperature of
135°F. If the product has a T max,1 less
than or equal to 135 °F when tested in
the user-operable mode that results in its highest set point, the product is exempt. This temperature criterion allows the water heater to maintain its utility of providing hotter water for certain consumer needs without increasing the temperature so much that the water heater can be used as a direct substitute for a larger water heater that must comply with more stringent
standards. Beyond this temperature, the high-temperature test method is more representative of the product’s use in the field.
The second exemption is for heat
pump water heaters. As discussed previously, heat pump water heaters are unlikely to be used to a significant extent at high temperatures. However, in the event that a heat pump water heater is designed for high-temperature operation, the heat pump water heaters are allowed to use the high-temperature test method optionally for voluntary representations, but normal set point operation (section 5.1.1 of appendix E) is the mode that must be used to demonstrate compliance with standards.
The third exemption is for demand-
response water heaters, specifically those products which can only attain temperatures beyond 135 °F when
requested to do so by a utility signal. If a product does not allow the consumer to operate it in a manner that would result in a T
max,1 beyond 135 °F but does
allow the grid to increase the tank temperature above this point, it remains
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637934 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
201A case study published by Nyle Water Heating
Systems demonstrates the use of a circulating heat
pump water heater with a nominal 40-gallon electric storage water heater. See online at: www.nyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Case- Study-3.2.pdf (Last accessed: Jan. 5, 2024). exempt from the high-temperature test
method.
The fourth exemption is for water
heaters that allow the user to raise the temperature beyond 135 °F, but only for
a maximum of 120 hours before automatically resetting to a temperature setting that results in T
max,1 at or below
135°F. This allows water heaters to
provide flexible-capacity modes for times when consumers may experience increased occupancy in the residence and thus a greater demand for hot water. The water heater must return to a mode that would result in a T
max,1 less than or
equal to 135 °F after the 120-hour period
elapses unless the user activates the boost mode again.
The fifth exemption is for water
heaters of in-size categories where high- temperature operation is not expected to be representative of the product’s function over an average daily use cycle. Very small electric storage water heaters (those with rated storage volumes less than 20 gallons) and large electric storage water heaters (those with rated storage volumes greater than 55 gallons) are not expected to use higher temperatures to boost capacity in order to be direct substitutes for products which have significantly more stringent standards.
This final rule adopts these five
exemptions for section 5.1.2 of appendix E and 10 CFR 429.17.
2. Circulating Water Heaters
a. Separate Storage Tank Requirements
In response to the December 2023
SNOPR, NYSERDA encouraged DOE to
review the test procedure to ensure that defining circulating water heaters as storage-type water heaters is consistent with the test method developed for these products. (NYSERDA, No. 1406 at p. 2)
The test method for circulating water
heaters, as established by the June 2023 TP Final Rule, requires these products to be connected to a separate storage tank to serve as the volume of hot water that the circulating water heater requires for its function. See section 4.10 of the
appendix E test procedure. As such, when a circulating water heater is tested per the appendix E test method, the test method will account for the stored volume of hot water and the standby losses that occur from it. This is analogous to how other traditional storage-type water heaters are tested.
When considering the potential
impact of the proposed standards for electric storage water heaters on the availability of products to pair with heat pump circulating water heaters, DOE tentatively decided in the July 2023 NOPR that it would be more
representative to pair such a product with an electric resistance storage water heater, surmising that is unlikely for consumers to pair a circulating heat pump water heater with an integrated heat pump water heater because they would already receive the energy-saving benefits of the integrated heat pump water heater. 88 FR 49058, 49167. Thus, in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed to amend the separate storage tank requirement for a heat pump circulating water heater to reflect an electric resistance storage water heater that would be compliant with the proposed standards. Specifically, this proposed requirement was to pair a heat pump circulating water heater with a 30 gallon ± 5 gallon electric resistance storage
water heater in the low draw pattern. Id.
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
some commenters indicated that heat pump circulating water heaters would be paired with a variety of tank sizes, meaning it would be impractical to base a rating for these products on just one tank pairing. Additionally, some commenters recommended alternative separate storage tank requirements to those proposed, or requested clarification.
A.O. Smith noted that gas-fired
circulating water heaters present on the market today are only used in commercial applications, and the UFHWST tank pairing for these products is not common in residential applications, as it would result in a more expensive installation compared to a gas-fired storage water heater. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 13)
BWC stated that it does not believe
heat pump circulating water heaters should be coupled with 30 gallon ± 5
gallons electric storage water heaters in the appendix E test method for these products because this would not be realistic or representative of most real- world installations, which will typically rely on much larger tanks due to the slower recovery rate of a heat pump. BWC added that heat pump circulating water heaters are designed to meet a variety of unique residential applications in the field, which include different tank sizes and setups to provide adequate hot water, each of which would produce different efficiency ratings when tested; if forced
to test to just one tank size, BWC stated that it would be compelled to cite to consumers an efficiency rating that is likely inflated and inaccurate compared to what the consumer will see in practice. BWC added further that a UFHWST, like that which is used for other types of circulating water heaters, would be a more representative pairing for heat pump circulating water heaters. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 12–13) Rheem suggested that heat pump circulating water heaters be certified with an UFHWST similar to other types of circulating water heaters because heat pump circulating water heaters may be developed to not rely on the use of backup electric resistance elements in an electric storage water heater tank. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 14–15)
In section IV.A.1.a of this document,
DOE discussed its decision to consider circulating water heaters as storage-type water heaters. Therefore, circulating electric heat pump water heaters would be classified as electric storage water heaters and subject to the applicable electric storage water heater standards. DOE does not intend to stifle innovation in or misinform consumers on the efficiency and performance characteristics of heat pump circulating water heaters, which could be used by consumers in lieu of traditional heat pump water heaters. In the test procedure rulemaking, DOE received an abundance of feedback indicating that these products are most likely to be paired with electric resistance storage water heaters, which was the basis for the proposed tank pairing in the July 2023 NOPR. Notwithstanding the recommendations from BWC and Rheem, there remains uncertainty regarding the sizes of UFHWSTs that could be paired with a heat pump circulating water heater should these products not be used with electric resistance storage water heaters. Products DOE has found on the market have demonstrated positive results from case studies while being paired up with nominal 40-gallon electric resistance storage water heaters,
201so it is
expected that the products available today would remain compatible with slightly smaller tanks as well. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE concludes that an electric resistance storage water heater that is 30 gallons ± 5 gallons and in the
low draw pattern is still a representative pairing based on feedback received in the test procedure rulemaking.
In response to the December 2023
SNOPR, BWC commented that manufacturers will need to be able to test gas-fired circulating water heaters with a greater range of unfired hot water storage tank volumes than that which is specified in the June 2023 TP Final Rule. (BWC, No. 1413 at p. 2)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637935 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
However, without consumer gas-fired
circulating water heaters on the market,
there is insufficient information (other than the feedback received during the test procedure rulemaking) to make a determination to amend the separate storage tank pairing for these products. The test method to pair gas-fired circulating water heaters with 80- to 120-gallon unfired hot water storage tanks was developed after careful consideration of numerous comments provided in that rulemaking. While finalizing the amendment as proposed, DOE will continue to assess the representativeness of the separate storage tank provisions in the appendix E test procedure and address these concerns in a future test procedure rulemaking if necessary.
Rheem stated its understanding that
circulating water heaters would be tested with a manufacturer-specified storage tank, and that the storage tanks described in section 4.10 of appendix E would only be used if there was no manufacturer-specified storage tank. (Rheem, No. 1408 at p. 2) AHRI and A.O. Smith requested that DOE clarify whether a manufacturer would be able to make efficiency representations of circulating water heaters that are designed and specified (or shipped) for use with a storage tank that does not fall into the volume ranges outlined in the test procedure and enforcement provisions. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 7; AHRI, No. 1167 at pp. 13–14)
The Department intends for the
separate storage tank requirements in section 4.10 to apply to circulating water heaters, which are storage-type water heaters that are not sold with a tank. DOE understands that there may be some confusion based on the wording of section 1.19 of appendix E, which reads that a ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank’’ means a water heater without a storage tank specified or supplied by the manufacturer that cannot meet the requirements of sections 2 and 5 of appendix E without the use of a storage water heater or unfired hot water storage tank. The current wording of section 1.19 in appendix E inadvertently conflates circulating water heaters with split- system water heaters—the distinctions between these two are discussed in section IV.A.1.f.i of this document. As such, DOE is making a minor amendment to section 1.19 of appendix E to resolve industry confusion around these distinctions after determining that it is clearer to define a ‘‘water heater requiring a storage tank’’ as a water heater without a storage tank supplied
by the manufacturer that cannot meet the requirements of sections 2 and 5 of appendix E without the use of a storage
water heater or unfired hot water storage tank. This edit removes the possibility that a water heater could have a manufacturer-specified tank pairing but would have to be tested with a different separate storage tank. Simultaneously DOE is clarifying in section 4.10 of appendix E that those setup provisions apply to water heaters requiring a storage tank—a term that is essentially synonymous with ‘‘circulating water heater.’’
In response to the questions from
AHRI and A.O. Smith, representations of circulating water heaters must be made in accordance with the separate storage tank requirements in the appendix E test procedure. The compliance of the circulating water heater with the appropriate storage water heater standards would be determined based on the storage volume of the tank selected, which in turn determines the effective storage volume of the circulating water heater. For all types of circulating water heaters, should a manufacturer desire to report its performance to multiple tank sizes, each tank size would constitute a separate basic model.
Reporting requirements are not being
established in this rulemaking addressing energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters, however, and DOE will propose these requirements in a separate rulemaking.
b. Product-Specific Enforcement
Provisions
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed
a series of steps it would take to ensure
that the UFHWST used in assessment testing is as close as possible to the model that was used to determine the circulating water heater’s rating. As stated earlier, reporting requirements are not being addressed in this rulemaking, but will be considered separately. 88 FR 49058, 49167. The intent of DOE’s proposal was to create a procedure that would default to using the same tank that the circulating water heater manufacturer used, but in the extenuating circumstance wherein that tank is unavailable to DOE, the model could still be tested.
A.O. Smith recommended that DOE
bolster the enforcement provisions and definitions outlining what would constitute a circulating water heater to prevent the emergence of electric resistance circulating water heater configurations. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at pp. 12–13) A.O. Smith also asked DOE to clarify certification requirements for circulating water heaters. (A.O. Smith, No. 1182 at p. 7) BWC stated that several provisions leave open the possibility that DOE could conduct
enforcement testing with a significantly different UFHWST, including the possibility of testing with a different manufacturer’s tank. BWC added that this could lead to unfair results, and that instead DOE should allow manufacturers to provide DOE with the UFHWST that is to be paired with the circulating water heater. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 13–14) BWC requested that DOE reconsider its proposed product- specific enforcement provisions for circulating water heaters, which include the steps DOE would take to test with an UFHWST as similar as possible to the one used by the manufacturer to rate the circulating water heater, so that the manufacturer could provide the UFHWST to DOE for testing. (BWC, No. 1164 at pp. 13–14) Rheem requested that DOE clarify whether the effective storage volume is a more appropriate metric to use than rated storage volume in the enforcement provisions proposed. Rheem supported the enforcement provisions proposed for testing these products but suggested that DOE test at the lowest storage volume available within the 80–120 gallon range for UFHWSTs. (Rheem, No. 1177 at pp. 14– 15)
In response to the request from BWC,
DOE does not directly source the tank from manufacturers as it would limit the ability for independent assessment testing given that manufacturers are not always notified when assessment testing
occurs.
In response to Rheem’s question about
rewriting provisions to use the effective storage volume metric, it is unclear where a change would apply, because the provisions outline the steps with regard to the characteristics of the UFHWST, and UFHWSTs have a certified storage volume rather than an effective storage volume.
As such, DOE is finalizing the
product-specific enforcement provisions for circulating water heaters as proposed in the July 2023 NOPR. DOE may re- evaluate the product-specific enforcement provisions for these products in a separate rulemaking.
3. Water Heaters Less Than 2 Gallons
The July 2023 NOPR proposed to
establish new UEF-based standards for
electric and gas storage-type water heaters with less than 20 gallons of effective storage volume. In its market assessment DOE has found models of consumer electric storage-type water heaters which are less than 2 gallons in nominal volume. In order for manufacturers to determine compliance for these products, the test procedure must include provisions for calculating
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637936 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
202Representations of rated values for consumer
water heaters must be made in accordance with the
provisions of the Federal test procedure, appendix E. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)). the rated storage volume and effective
storage volume.
The current method to determine
storage tank volume in the appendix E test procedure, as amended by the June 2023 TP Final Rule, states:
‘‘For water heaters with a rated
storage volume greater than or equal to 2 gallons and for separate storage tanks used for testing circulating water heaters, determine the storage capacity, of the water heater or separate storage tank under test, in gallons (liters), by subtracting the tare weight from the gross weight of the storage tank when completely filled with water at the supply water temperature specified in section 2.3.’’
(See section 5.2.1 of the amended
appendix E test procedure); 88 FR 40406, 40478.
However, this method does not
explicitly cover storage-type water heaters less than 2 gallons which will be covered under the proposed new UEF- based standards. Therefore, in the July 2023 NOPR, DOE proposed to amend section 5.2.1 such that it is applicable to water heaters of all volumes and not restricted to only products greater than or equal to 2 gallons.
No comments were received in
response to this proposal. Therefore, DOE is adopting this update to appendix E as proposed in the July 2023 NOPR.
4. Other Topics
In the June 2023 TP Final Rule, DOE
adopted optional provisions at section
2.8 of appendix E to allow manufacturers to make voluntary representations of heat pump water heater performance in a variety of alternative conditions that could be useful for consumers installing these products in different locations. These alternative conditions would not be used to determine compliance with the UEF standards at 10 CFR 430.32(d) but were provided to permit representations at the NEEA Advanced Water Heating Specification version 8.0 conditions.
202
88 FR 40406, 40476.
Rheem requested that DOE address
certification and enforcement provisions for heat pump water heaters being tested to the optional test conditions in section 2.8 of appendix E. (Rheem, No. 1177 at p. 7)
DOE reiterates that optional
conditions cannot be used to demonstrate compliance with standards. DOE is not adopting certification and enforcement provisions for optional test conditions in this final rule but may consider this in a future rulemaking addressing these topics.
VI. Procedural Issues and Regulatory
Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders
12866, 13563, and 14094
Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ as supplemented and reaffirmed by E.O. 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ 76 FR 3821 (Jan. 21, 2011) and amended by E.O. 14094, ‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review,’’ 88 FR 21879 (April 11, 2023), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by law, to (1) propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of cumulative regulations; (3) select, in choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices can be made by the public. DOE emphasizes as well that E.O. 13563 requires agencies to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible. In its guidance, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (‘‘OIRA’’) in the Office of Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) has emphasized that such techniques may include identifying changing future compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes. For the reasons stated in this preamble, this final regulatory action is consistent with these principles.
Section 6(a) of E.O. 12866 also
requires agencies to submit ‘‘significant regulatory actions’’ to OIRA for review. OIRA has determined that this final regulatory action constitutes a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ within
the scope of section 3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, pursuant to section 6(a)(3)(C) of E.O. 12866, DOE has provided to OIRA an assessment, including the underlying analysis, of benefits and costs anticipated from the final regulatory action, together with, to the extent feasible, a quantification of those costs; and an assessment, including the underlying analysis, of costs and benefits of potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives to the planned regulation, and an explanation why the planned regulatory action is preferable to the identified potential alternatives. These assessments are summarized in this preamble, and further detail can be found in the technical support document for this rulemaking.
B. Review Under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation
of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (‘‘IRFA’’) and a final regulatory flexibility analysis (‘‘FRFA’’) for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly considered during the rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General Counsel’s website (www.energy.gov/gc/ office-general-counsel). DOE has prepared the following FRFA for the products that are the subject of this rulemaking.
For manufacturers of consumer water
heaters, the SBA has set a size threshold, which defines those entities classified as ‘‘small businesses’’ for the purposes of the statute. DOE used the SBA’s small business size standards to determine whether any small entities
would be subject to the requirements of the rule. (See 13 CFR part 121.) The size standards are listed by North American Industry Classification System (‘‘NAICS’’) code and industry description and are available at www.sba.gov/document/support-table- size-standards. Manufacturing of consumer water heaters is classified under NAICS 335220, ‘‘Major Household Appliance Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets a threshold of 1,500
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637937 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
203DOE completed the first of these rulemaking
cycles on January 17, 2001, by publishing in the
Federal Register a final rule amending the energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. 66 FR 4474. Subsequently, DOE completed the second rulemaking cycle to amend the standards for consumer water heaters by publishing a final rule in the Federal Register on April 16, 2010. 75 FR
20112.
204U.S. Department of Energy’s Compliance
Certification Database is available at regulations.doe.gov/certification-data (last accessed
May 16, 2023). 205California Energy Commission’s Modernized
Appliance Efficiency Database System is available at cacertappliances.energy.ca.gov/Pages/Search/
AdvancedSearch.aspx (last accessed November 13,
2023).
206U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s
ENERY STAR Product Finder dataset is available at www.energystar.gov/productfinder/ (last accessed
November 13, 2023).
207AHRI’s Directory of Certified Product
Performance is available at www.ahridirectory.org/ Search/SearchHome?ReturnUrl=%2f (last accessed
May 16, 2023).
208The D&B Hoovers subscription login is
available at app.dnbhoovers.com. employees or fewer for an entity to be
considered as a small business for this category.
1. Need for, and Objectives of, Rule
EPCA prescribed energy conservation
standards for consumer water heaters
(42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(1)) and directed DOE to conduct two cycles of rulemakings
203
to determine whether to amend these standards. (42 U.S.C. 6295(e)(4)) EPCA further provides that, not later than 6 years after the issuance of any final rule establishing or amending a standard, DOE must publish either a notice of determination that standards for the product do not need to be amended, or a NOPR including new proposed energy conservation standards (proceeding to a final rule, as appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1))
2. Significant Issues Raised by Public
Comments in Response to the IRFA
In response to the July 2023 NOPR,
the Gas Association Commenters submitted comments noting that DOE identified only two small businesses, neither of which produce gas-fired water heaters. As a result, the Gas Association Commenters stated that DOE has no data on small businesses that produce gas-fired water heaters relative to redesign costs, product availability, or whether the proposed efficiency levels could cause small businesses to exit the market. (Gas Association Commenters No. 1181, pp. 38–39)
NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai
stated that as the two small businesses DOE identified in the July 2023 NOPR analysis do not produce gas-fired water heaters, DOE cannot know what the effect on small businesses that manufacture gas-fired water heaters could be as DOE has no data on their redesign costs, product availability, or whether the standards proposed in the July 2023 NOPR would force these manufacturers to leave the market. Therefore, NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai asserted that the July 2023 NOPR fails to comply with Executive Order 13272, ‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,’’ and must be addressed. (NPGA, APGA, AGA, and Rinnai, No. 441 at p. 5)
For the IRFA conducted in support of
the July 2023 NOPR, DOE identified one small domestic original equipment manufacturer (‘‘OEM’’) of oil-fired
storage water heaters and one small domestic OEM of electric storage water heaters. For this FRFA, DOE refreshed its product database to include up-to- date information on the consumer water heater models marketed for the United States. Based on its comprehensive review of the market, DOE identified an additional small, domestic OEM of electric storage water heaters. Therefore, DOE maintains its finding from the IRFA that there are no small, domestic OEMs that manufacture gas-fired water heaters. As such, DOE does not expect that the standards adopted in this final rule would directly impact small businesses that manufacture gas-fired water heaters.
BWC expressed concern about the
extensive resources such an undertaking would divert from ongoing projects, as well as its potentially more severe impacts on smaller manufacturers, including component suppliers. (BWC, No. 1164 at p. 15) ASA stated that manufacturers and distributors, including small businesses, would be negatively affected by increased costs for both units and installation and that consumer choice would be restricted. ASA requested that DOE update data used to develop these standards. (ASA, No. 1160 at p. 1)
DOE agrees that the impacts small
manufacturers experience may differ compared to larger, more diversified manufacturers. DOE conducts a regulatory flexibility analysis to understand and assess the potential impacts to small domestic OEMs that produce consumer water heaters for the U.S. market in accordance with the procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. 68 FR 7990. See section VI.B.3 of this document for a discussion of potential impacts of amended standards on the three small businesses with U.S. manufacturing facilities identified.
3. Description and Estimated Number of
Small Entities Affected
For this FRFA, DOE refreshed its
product database to use up-to-date information on the models available on the U.S. market and estimate the number of companies that could be small business manufacturers of products covered by this rulemaking. DOE’s research involved reviewing its CCD,
204California Energy Commission’s
Modernized Appliance Efficiency Database System (‘‘MAEDbS’’),205EPA’s
Energy Star Product Finder dataset,206
AHRI’s Directory of Certified Product
Performance,207individual company
websites, and market research tools (e.g., reports from D&B Hoovers)
208to
create a list of companies that manufacture, produce, import, or assemble the products covered by this rulemaking. DOE also asked stakeholders and industry representatives if they were aware of any other small manufacturers during manufacturer interviews.
DOE identified 22 OEMs of electric
instantaneous, electric storage, gas-fired instantaneous, gas-fired storage, or oil- fired storage water heaters sold in the United States as part of its July 2023 NOPR analysis. In preparation for the final rule, DOE conducted additional research to ensure an up-to-date data on the consumer water heater market. After a further comprehensive review of the model listings, DOE concluded that three of the manufacturers previously identified do not manufacture consumer water heaters in-house (i.e., they do not
own and operate manufacturing
facilities that produce consumer water heaters). However, DOE determined there are three additional manufacturers not previously identified that manufacture consumer water heaters in- house. DOE also revised its OEM count estimate to exclude manufacturers of gas-fired instantaneous water heaters since this final rule does not cover gas- fired instantaneous water heaters. Therefore, excluding manufacturers that only offer gas-fired instantaneous water heaters, DOE identified 16 OEMs of consumer water heaters covered by this final rule. Of these 16 OEMs, DOE identified three small, domestic manufacturers affected by amended standards for gas-fired storage water heater, oil-fired storage water heater, or electric storage water heater products. The first small business is an OEM of oil-fired storage water heaters. The other two small businesses are OEMs of electric storage water heaters.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637938 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
209DOE calculated total conversion costs as a
percent of revenue over the 5-year conversion
period using the following calculation: ($0.25 million)/(5 years × $50 million).
210DOE calculated total conversion costs as a
percent of revenue over the 5-year conversion period using the following calculation: ($6,000)/(5 years × $7,700,000). 4. Description of Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
The first small business is an OEM
that certifies three models of oil-fired storage water heaters. One of the three models would meet the standard. Given the small and shrinking market for oil- fired storage water heaters, DOE does not expect the small manufacturer would redesign non-compliant models. Rather, the company would likely reduce its range of model offerings. DOE requested input on the potential impacts of standards on this manufacturer in the July 2023 NOPR, but did not receive any feedback. DOE, therefore, maintains its assumption from the IRFA that this manufacturer would not incur significant conversion costs as a result of this rulemaking.
The second small business is an OEM
that certifies eleven models of electric storage water heaters. The company offers two small electric storage water heaters, six electric storage water heaters with an effective storage volume greater than or equal to 20 gallons and less than or equal to 55 gallons, and three electric storage water heaters with effective storage volumes above 55 gallons. At the adopted level (TSL 2), DOE does not expect the two small electric water heater models would require notable redesign as standard levels would remain at the baseline efficiency level (i.e., EL 0) for small
electric water heaters. None of the six electric storage water heaters (between 20 and 55 gallons, excluding small electric storage water heaters) would meet the amended standard. However, one of the six electric storage water heaters (between 20 and 55 gallons, excluding small electric storage water heaters) is a heat pump model that would likely not require significant redesign to meet the amended standards. DOE expects the company would expand its heat pump offering rather than redesign the electric resistance products that do not meet the amended standard. The company offers three electric storage water heaters with effective storage volumes above 55 gallons. All three of these are heat pumps that do not meet the amended standard. After reviewing the three electric storage water heaters with effective storage volumes above 55 gallons, DOE believes the three models could be updated to meet the amended standard. In total, the company would need to redesign up to nine models.
DOE assumed the company would
need to invest the equivalent of one year of its R&D resources to update its product lines to meet amended standards. Therefore, to derive this
company’s estimated product conversion costs, DOE scaled the annual industry R&D expenditures for electric storage water heaters in the GRIM by the company’s estimated market share. DOE does not anticipate significant capital conversion costs, as the company offers a broad line of heat pump electric storage water heaters today. DOE estimates total conversion costs to be $250,000 for this small manufacturer. Based on market research tools, DOE estimated the company’s annual revenue to be approximately $50 million. Taking into account the 5-year conversion period, DOE expects conversion costs to be less than 1
percent of conversion period revenue.
209
The third small business is an OEM
that produces two models of circulating water heaters, which are not currently required to comply with a UEF standard. DOE expects that both of these models would qualify as small electric storage water heaters, and thus would likely be subject to new and amended UEF standards. At the adopted level (TSL 2), the standard required for small electric storage water heaters would remain at the baseline efficiency level. DOE notes that both of the models identified utilize heat pump technology. Therefore, DOE assumes these models would not need to be redesigned to comply with new and amended UEF standards. However, this small manufacturer would need to certify these models at the time of compliance with new and amended standards, incurring testing costs of $3,000 per basic model. 88 FR 40406, 40467. Based on market research tools, DOE estimated the company’s annual revenue to be approximately $7.7 million. Taking into account the 5-year conversion period, DOE expects conversion costs to be less than 1 percent of conversion period revenue.
210
5. Significant Alternatives Considered and Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impacts on Small Entities
The discussion in the previous
section analyzes impacts on small businesses that would result from adopted standards, represented by TSL 2. In reviewing alternatives to the adopted standards, DOE examined energy conservation standards set at lower efficiency levels. While TSL 1 would reduce the impacts on small business manufacturers, it would come at the expense of a reduction in energy savings. TSL 1 achieves 98-percent lower energy savings compared to the energy savings at TSL 2.
Based on the presented discussion,
establishing standards at TSL 2 balances the benefits of the energy savings with the potential burdens placed on consumer water heater manufacturers, including small business manufacturers. Accordingly, DOE does not adopt one of the other TSLs considered in the analysis, nor the other policy alternatives examined as part of the regulatory impact analysis and included in chapter 17 of the final rule TSD.
Additional compliance flexibilities
may be available through other means. EPCA provides that a manufacturer whose annual gross revenue from all its operations does not exceed $8 million may apply for an exemption from all or part of an energy conservation standard for a period not longer than 24 months after the effective date of a final rule establishing the standard. (42 U.S.C. 6295(t)) Additionally, manufacturers subject to DOE’s energy efficiency standards may apply to DOE’s Office of Hearings and Appeals for exception relief under certain circumstances. Manufacturers should refer to 10 CFR part 430, subpart E, and 10 CFR part 1003 for additional details.
C. Review Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act
Manufacturers of consumer water
heaters must certify to DOE that their products comply with any applicable energy conservation standards. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their products according to the DOE test procedures for consumer water heaters, including any amendments adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial equipment, including consumer water heaters. (See generally 10 CFR part 429). The collection-of-information requirement for the certification and recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (‘‘PRA’’). This requirement has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910–1400. Public reporting burden for the certification is estimated to average 35 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637939 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.
D. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (‘‘NEPA’’), DOE has analyzed this proposed action rule in accordance with NEPA and DOE’s NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE has determined that this rule qualifies for categorical exclusion under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, appendix B5.1 because it is a rulemaking that establishes energy conservation standards for consumer products or industrial equipment, none of the exceptions identified in B5.1(b) apply, no extraordinary circumstances exist that require further environmental analysis, and it meets the requirements
for application of a categorical exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410.
Therefore, DOE has determined that promulgation of this rule is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of NEPA and does not require an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 64 FR
43255 (Aug. 10, 1999), imposes certain
requirements on Federal agencies formulating and implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism implications. The Executive order requires agencies to examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess the necessity for such actions. The Executive order also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735.
In the July 2023 NOPR, DOE
tentatively determined that the proposed rule would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. 88 FR 49058, 49170. Furthermore, DOE stated that EPCA governs and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the products that are the subject of the proposed rule and that States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. Id. (citing 42 U.S.C. 6297).
Accordingly, DOE concluded that no further action was required by E.O. 13132.
As initially discussed in section
III.A.2 of this document, the Attorney General of TN commented that the proposed standards have significant federalism implications within the meaning of Executive Order 13132 because: (1) DOE’s standards have a preemptive effect on States’ procurement standards; and (2) States own and purchase water heaters and therefore the proposed standards’ effect on water heater costs directly affect States as purchasers. (Attorney General of TN, No. 1149 at pp. 2–3)
DOE reiterates that this final rule does
not have significant federalism implications. DOE has examined this rule and has determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the products that are the subject of this final rule. Additionally, Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered products established under EPCA, including consumer water heaters, generally supersede State laws and regulations concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6297(a)–(c)) States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297) Therefore, no further action is required by Executive Order 13132.
Even if DOE were to find otherwise,
with regards to the Attorney General of TN’s arguments regarding E.O. 13132,
DOE notes that the Attorney General of TN does not provide any examples of a state procurement rule that conflicts with the standards adopted in this rulemaking and DOE is not aware of any such conflicts, nor has the Attorney General of TN provided any examples of States owning and purchasing a substantial number of consumer water heaters. While it is possible that a State
may have to revise its procurement standards to reflect the new standards, States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. Absent such information, DOE concludes that no further action would be required by E.O. 13132 even if the Executive order were applicable here. Moreover, assuming the hypothetical preemption alleged by the Attorney General of TN were to present itself, DOE notes that, like all interested parties, states were presented with an opportunity to engage in the rulemaking process early in the development of the proposed rule. Prior to publishing the proposed rulemaking, on May 21, 2020, DOE published and sought public comment on an RFI to collect data and information to help DOE determine whether any new or amended standards for consumer water heaters would result in a significant amount of additional energy savings and whether those standards would be technologically feasible and economically justified. 85 FR 30853. DOE then published a notice of public meeting and availability of the preliminary TSD on March 1, 2022, and sought public comment again. 87 FR 11327. DOE then held a public meeting on April 12, 2022, to discuss and receive comments on the preliminary TSD, which was open to the public, including state agencies. As such, states were provided the opportunity for meaningful and substantial input as envisioned by the Executive order.
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ imposes on Federal agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, (2) write regulations to minimize litigation, (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard, and (4) promote simplification and burden reduction. 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). Regarding the review required by section 3(a), section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation (1) clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any, (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation, (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction, (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any, (5) adequately defines key terms, and (6) addresses other important issues
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637940 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
affecting clarity and general
draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, this final rule meets the relevant standards of E.O. 12988.
G. Review Under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘UMRA’’) requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a),(b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers of State, local, and Tribal governments on a ‘‘significant intergovernmental mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan for giving notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small governments before establishing any requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect them. On March 18, 1997, DOE published a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation under
UMRA. 62 FR 12820. DOE’s policy statement is also available at energy.gov/ sites/prod/files/gcprod/documents/ umra_ 97.pdf.
DOE has concluded that this final rule
may require expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year by the private sector. Such expenditures may include (1) investment in research and development and in capital expenditures by consumer water heater manufacturers in the years between the final rule and the compliance date for the new standards, and (2) incremental additional expenditures by consumers to purchase higher-efficiency consumer water heaters, starting at the compliance date for the applicable standard.
Section 202 of UMRA authorizes a
Federal agency to respond to the content requirements of UMRA in any other statement or analysis that accompanies
the final rule. (2 U.S.C. 1532(c)) The content requirements of section 202(b) of UMRA relevant to a private sector mandate substantially overlap the economic analysis requirements that apply under section 325(o) of EPCA and Executive Order 12866. The
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document and the TSD for this final rule respond to those requirements.
Under section 205 of UMRA, DOE is
obligated to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives before promulgating a rule for which a written statement under section 202 is required. (2 U.S.C. 1535(a)) DOE is required to select from those alternatives the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule unless DOE publishes an explanation for doing otherwise, or the selection of such an alternative is inconsistent with law. As required by 42 U.S.C. 6295(m), this final rule establishes new and amended energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters that are designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy efficiency that DOE has determined to be both technologically feasible and economically justified, as required by 6295(o)(2)(A) and 6295(o)(3)(B). A full discussion of the alternatives considered by DOE is presented in chapter 17 of the TSD for this final rule.
H. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family Policymaking Assessment for any proposed rule or policy that may affect family well-being. Although this final rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution as defined, this rule could impact a family’s well-being. When developing a Family Policymaking Assessment, agencies must assess whether: (1) the action strengthens or erodes the stability or safety of the family and, particularly, the marital
commitment; (2) the action strengthens or erodes the authority and rights of parents in the education, nurture, and supervision of their children; (3) the action helps the family perform its functions, or substitutes governmental activity for the function; (4) the action increases or decreases disposable income or poverty of families and children; (5) the proposed benefits of the action justify the financial impact on the family; (6) the action may be carried out by State or local government or by
the family; and whether (7) the action establishes an implicit or explicit policy concerning the relationship between the behavior and personal responsibility of youth, and the norms of society.
DOE has considered how the benefits
of this rule compare to the possible financial impact on a family (the only factor listed that is relevant to this rule). As part of its rulemaking process, DOE must determine whether the energy conservation standards contained in this final rule are economically justified. As discussed in section V.C.1 of this document, DOE has determined that the standards are economically justified because the benefits to consumers far outweigh the costs to manufacturers. Families will also see LCC savings as a result of this rule. Moreover, as discussed further in section V.B.1 of this document, DOE has determined that for the for low-income households, average LCC savings and PBP at the considered efficiency levels are improved (i.e., higher LCC savings and lower payback period) as compared to the average for all households. Further, the standards will also result in climate and health benefits for families.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630,
‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988),
DOE has determined that this rule would not result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for Federal agencies to review most disseminations of information to the public under information quality guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). Pursuant to OMB Memorandum M–19–15, Improving Implementation of the Information Quality Act (April 24, 2019), DOE published updated guidelines which are available at www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/ 7=2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf. DOE has reviewed this final rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637941 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
211The 2007 ‘‘Energy Conservation Standards
Rulemaking Peer Review Report’’ is available at the
following website: energy.gov/eere/buildings/ downloads/energy-conservation-standards- rulemaking-peer-review-report-0 (last accessed
April 1, 2023).
212The report is available at www.national
academies.org/our-work/review-of-methods-for- setting-building-and-equipment-performance- standards. concluded that it is consistent with
applicable policies in those guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OIRA at OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for any significant energy action. A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as any action by an agency that promulgates or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final rule, and that (1) is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
DOE has concluded that this
regulatory action, which sets forth new and amended energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters, is not a significant energy action because the standards are not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as such by the Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects on this final rule.
L. Information Quality
On December 16, 2004, OMB, in
consultation with the Office of Science
and Technology Policy (‘‘OSTP’’), issued its Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (‘‘the Bulletin’’). 70 FR 2664 (Jan. 14, 2005). The Bulletin establishes that certain scientific information shall be peer reviewed by qualified specialists before it is disseminated by the Federal Government, including influential scientific information related to agency regulatory actions. The purpose of the Bulletin is to enhance the quality and credibility of the Government’s scientific information. Under the Bulletin, the energy conservation standards rulemaking analyses are ‘‘influential scientific information,’’ which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific information the agency reasonably can determine will have, or does have, a clear and substantial impact on important public policies or private sector decisions.’’ 70 FR 2664, 2667. In response to OMB’s Bulletin, DOE
conducted formal peer reviews of the energy conservation standards development process and the analyses that are typically used and prepared a report describing that peer review.
211
Generation of this report involved a rigorous, formal, and documented evaluation using objective criteria and qualified and independent reviewers to make a judgment as to the technical/ scientific/business merit, the actual or anticipated results, and the productivity and management effectiveness of programs and/or projects. Because available data, models, and technological understanding have changed since 2007, DOE has engaged with the National Academy of Sciences to review DOE’s analytical methodologies to ascertain whether modifications are needed to improve DOE’s analyses. DOE is in the process of evaluating the resulting report.
212
M. Congressional Notification
As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will
report to Congress on the promulgation of this rule prior to its effective date. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule meets the criteria set forth in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
VII. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this final rule.
List of Subjects 10 CFR Part 429
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
10 CFR Part 430
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Small businesses.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on April 24, 2024, by Jeffrey Marootian Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on April 24,
2024.
Treena V. Garrett, Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, DOE amends parts 429 and
430 of chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 429—CERTIFICATION,
COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT
■1. The authority citation for part 429
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
■2. Amend § 429.17 by revising
paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(C) and addingparagraph (a)(1)(ii)(E) to read as follows:
§ 429.17 Water heaters.
(a) * * *
(1) * * * (ii) * * * (C) Any represented value of the rated
storage volume must be equal to the
mean of the measured storage volumes of all the units within the sample. Any represented value of the effective storage volume must be equal to the mean of the effective storage volumes of all the units within the sample.
* * * * *
(E) For an electric storage water heater
that has a permanent mode or setting in
which it is capable of heating and storing water above 135 °F, where
permanent mode or setting means a mode of operation that is continuous and does not require any external consumer intervention to maintain for longer than 120 hours, except for those that meet the definition of ‘‘heat pump- type’’ water heater at § 430.2 of this chapter, whose rated storage volumes
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637942 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
are less than 20 gallons or greater than
55 gallons, or that are only capable of heating the stored water above 135 °F in
response to instructions received from a utility or third-party demand-response program, the following applies:
(1) To demonstrate compliance with
the energy conservation standards in § 430.32(d)(1) of this chapter, any represented value of uniform energy factor shall be determined based on testing in accordance with section 5.1.1 of appendix E to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.
(2) To demonstrate compliance with
the energy conservation standards in § 430.32(d)(2) of this chapter, any represented value of uniform energy factor shall be determined based on high temperature testing in accordance with section 5.1.2 of appendix E to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.
* * * * *
■3. Amend § 429.134 by adding
paragraph (d)(4) to read as follows:
§ 429.134 Product-specific enforcement
provisions.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(4) Circulating water heaters. A
storage tank for testing will be selected
as described in paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section. The effective storage volume of the circulating water heater determined in testing will be measured in accordance with appendix E to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 with the storage tank that is used for testing.
(i) Electric heat pump circulating
water heaters. For UEF and first-hour rating testing, electric heat pump circulating water heaters will be tested with a minimally-compliant electric storage water heater (as defined at § 430.2 of this chapter) that has a rated storage volume of between 25 and 35 gallons, and is in the low draw pattern, as determined in accordance with appendix E to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 and the standards set at § 430.32(d) of this chapter. If the manufacturer certifies the specific model of electric storage water heater used for testing to determine the certified UEF and first- hour rating of the electric heat pump circulating water heater, that model of electric storage water heater will be used for testing. If this is not possible (such as if the electric storage water heater model is no longer available or has been discontinued), testing will be performed with an electric storage water heater that has a minimally-compliant UEF rating, in the low draw pattern, and a rated storage volume that is within ± 3 gallons of the rated storage volume of the electric storage water heater used to determine the certified ratings of the electric heat pump circulating water heater (but not less than 25 gallons and not greater than 35 gallons). If no such model is available, then testing will be performed with a minimally-compliant electric storage water heater that has a rated storage volume of between 25 and 35 gallons and is in the low draw pattern.
(ii) All other circulating water heaters.
For UEF and first-hour rating testing, circulating water heaters are paired with unfired hot water storage tanks (‘‘UFHWSTs’’) that have certified storage volumes between 80 and 120 gallons and are at exactly the minimum thermal insulation standard, in terms of R-value, for UFHWSTs, as per the standards set at § 431.110(a) of this chapter. Testing will be performed as follows:
(A) If the manufacturer certifies the
specific model of UFHWST used for testing to determine the certified UEF and first-hour rating of the circulating water heater, that model of UFHWST will be used for testing.
(B) If it is not possible to perform
testing with the same model of UFHWST certified by the manufacturer, testing will be carried out with a different model of UFHWST accordingly:
(1) Testing will be performed with an
UFHWST from the same manufacturer as the certified UFHWST, with the same certified storage volume as the certified UFHWST, and with a certified R-value that meets but does not exceed the standard set at § 431.110(a) of this chapter. If this is not possible,
(2) Testing will be performed with an
UFHWST from a different manufacturer than the certified UFHWST, with the same certified storage volume as the certified UFHWST, and with a certified R-value that meets but does not exceed the standard set at § 431.110(a) of this chapter. If this is not possible,
(3) Testing will be performed with an
UFHWST from the same manufacturer as the certified UFHWST, having a certified storage volume within ±5 gallons of the certified UFHWST, and with a certified R-value that meets but does not exceed the standard set at § 431.110(a) of this chapter. If this is not possible,
(4) Testing will be performed with an
UFHWST from a different manufacturer than the certified UFHWST, having a certified storage volume within ±5 gallons of the certified UFHWST, and with a certified R-value that meets but does not exceed the standard set at § 431.110(a) of this chapter. If this is not possible, (5) Testing will be performed with an
UFHWST having a certified storage volume between 80 gallons and 120 gallons and with a certified R-value that meets but does not exceed the standard set at § 431.110(a) of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION
PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS
■4. The authority citation for part 430
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
■5. Amend § 430.2 by:
■a. Revising the definition of
‘‘Circulating water heater’’;
■b. Adding in alphabetical order the
definitions of ‘‘Electric circulating water heater’’, ‘‘Gas-fired circulating water heater’’, and ‘‘Oil-fired circulating water heater’’; and
■c. Revising the definition of ‘‘Tabletop
water heater’’.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
§ 430.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Circulating water heater means a
water heater that does not have an operational scheme in which the burner, heating element, or compressor initiates and/or terminates heating based on sensing flow; has a water temperature sensor located at the inlet or the outlet of the water heater or in a separate storage tank that is the primary means of initiating and terminating heating; and must be used in combination with a recirculating pump to circulate water and either a separate storage tank or water circulation loop in order to achieve the water flow and temperature conditions recommended in the manufacturer’s installation and operation instructions. A circulating water heater constitutes a storage-type water heater.
* * * * *
Electric circulating water heater
means a circulating water heater with an
input of 12 kW or less (including heat pump-only units with power inputs of no more than 24 A at 250 V).
* * * * *
Gas-fired circulating water heater
means a circulating water heater with a
nominal input of 75,000 Btu/h or less.
* * * * *
Oil-fired circulating water heater
means a circulating water heater with a
nominal input of 105,000 Btu/h or less.
* * * * *
Tabletop water heater means a water
heater in a rectangular box enclosure
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637943 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
designed to slide into a kitchen
countertop space with typical dimensions of 36 inches high, 25 inches deep, and 24 inches wide, and with a certified first-hour rating that results in either the very small draw pattern or the low draw pattern, as specified in Table I in section 5.4.1 of appendix E to subpart B of this part.
* * * * *
■6. Amend § 430.23 by revising
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
§ 430.23 Test procedures for the
measurement of energy and water consumption.
* * * * *
(e) Water heaters. (1) The estimated
annual operating cost is calculated as:
(i) For a gas-fired or oil-fired water
heater, the sum of:
(A) The product of the annual gas or
oil energy consumption, determined
according to section 6.3.11 or 6.4.7 of appendix E to this subpart, times the representative average unit cost of gas or oil, as appropriate, in dollars per Btu as provided by the Secretary; plus
(B) The product of the annual electric
energy consumption, determined according to section 6.3.10 or 6.4.6 of appendix E to this subpart, times the representative average unit cost of electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary. Round the resulting sum to the nearest dollar per year.
(ii) For an electric water heater, the
product of the annual energy consumption, determined according to section 6.3.10 or 6.4.6 of appendix E to this subpart, times the representative average unit cost of electricity in dollars per kilowatt-hour as provided by the Secretary. Round the resulting product to the nearest dollar per year.
(2) For an individual unit, the
uniform energy factor is rounded to the nearest 0.01 and determined in accordance with section 6.3.8 or section 6.4.4 of appendix E to this subpart.
* * * * *
■7. Appendix E to subpart B is
amended by revising the Note and
sections 1.19, 4.10, 5.1.2 and 5.2.1 to read as follows:
APPENDIX E TO SUBPART B OF PART
430—UNIFORM TEST METHOD FOR MEASURING THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION OF WATER HEATERS
Note: Prior to December 18, 2023,
representations with respect to the energy
use or efficiency of consumer water heaters covered by this test method, including compliance certifications, must be based on testing conducted in accordance with either this appendix as it now appears or appendix E as it appeared at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B revised as of January 1, 2021. Prior to June
15, 2024, representations with respect to the energy use or efficiency of residential-duty commercial water heaters covered by this test method, including compliance certifications, must be based on testing conducted in
accordance with either this appendix as it now appears or appendix E as it appeared at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B revised as of January 1, 2021.
On and after December 18, 2023,
representations with respect to energy use or efficiency of consumer water heaters covered by this test method, including compliance certifications, must be based on testing conducted in accordance with this appendix, except as described in the paragraphs that follow. On and after June 15, 2024, representations with respect to energy use or efficiency of residential-duty commercial water heaters covered by this test method, including compliance certifications, must be based on testing conducted in accordance with this appendix, except as follows.
Prior to May 6, 2029, consumer water
heaters subject to section 4.10 of this appendix may optionally apply the requirements of section 4.10 of this appendix. For residential-duty commercial water heaters subject to section 4.10 of this appendix the requirements of section 4.10 of this appendix may optionally be applied prior to the compliance date of any final rule reviewing potential amended energy conservation standards for this equipment published after June 21, 2023.
Prior to May 6, 2029, consumer water
heaters subject to section 5.1.2 of this appendix (as specified at § 429.17(a)(1)(ii)(E) of this chapter) may optionally apply the requirements of section 5.1.2 of this appendix in lieu of the requirements in section 5.1.1 of this appendix.
On or after May 6, 2029, representations
with respect to energy use or efficiency of consumer water heaters subject to sections 4.10 and 5.1.2 of this appendix must be based on testing conducted in accordance with those provisions.
* * * * *
1. * * * 1.19 Water Heater Requiring a Storage
Tank means a water heater without a storage
tank supplied by the manufacturer that cannot meet the requirements of sections 2 and 5 of this appendix without the use of a storage water heater or unfired hot water storage tank.
* * * * *
4. * * * 4.10 Storage Tank Requirement for Water
Heaters Requiring a Storage Tank (i.e., Circulating Water Heaters). On or after May 6, 2029, when testing a gas-fired, oil-fired, or electric resistance circulating water heater (i.e., any circulating water heater that does
not use a heat pump), the tank to be used for testing shall be an unfired hot water storage tank having volume between 80 and 120 gallons (364–546 liters) determined using the method specified in section 5.2.1 of this appendix that meets but does not exceed the minimum energy conservation standards required according to § 431.110 of this chapter. When testing a heat pump circulating water heater, the tank to be used for testing shall be an electric storage water
heater that has a measured volume of 30 gallons (±5 gallons), has a First-Hour Rating less than 51 gallons resulting in classification under the low draw pattern, and has a rated UEF equal to the minimum UEF standard specified at § 430.32(d), rounded to the nearest 0.01. The operational mode of the heat pump circulating water heater and storage water heater paired system shall be set in accordance with section 5.1.1 of this appendix. If the circulating water heater is supplied with a separate non-integrated circulating pump, install this pump as per the manufacturer’s installation instructions and include its power consumption in energy use measurements.
* * * * *
5. * * * 5.1.2 High Temperature Testing. This
paragraph applies to electric storage water heaters capable of achieving a T
max,1 above
135°F. The following exceptions apply:
(1) Electric storage water heaters that do
not have a permanent mode or setting in which the water heater is capable of heating and storing water above 135 °F (as measured
by T
max,1), where permanent mode or setting
means a mode of operation that is continuous
and does not require any external consumer intervention to maintain for longer than 120 hours;
(2) Electric storage water heaters that meet
the definition of ‘‘heat pump-type’’ water heater at § 430.2;
(3) Electric storage water heaters that are
only capable of heating the stored water above 135 °F in response to instructions
received from a utility or third-party demand-response program.
(4) Electric storage water heaters with
measured storage volumes (V
st) less than 20
gallons or greater than 55 gallons.
This paragraph may optionally apply to
electric heat pump water heaters for voluntary representations of high- temperature operation only.
For those equipped with factory-installed
or built-in mixing valves, set the unit to maintain the highest mean tank temperature possible while delivering water at 125 °F
±5°F. For those not so equipped, install an
ASSE 1017-certified mixing valve in accordance with the provisions in section 4.3 of this appendix and adjust the valve to deliver water at 125 °F ±5°F when the water
heater is operating at its highest storage tank temperature setpoint. Maintain this setting throughout the entirety of the test.
* * * * *
5.2 * * *2.1 Determination of Storage
Tank Volume. For water heaters and separate storage tanks used for testing circulating water heaters, determine the storage capacity, V
st,of the water heater or separate storage
tank under test, in gallons (liters), by subtracting the tare weight, W
t, (measured
while the tank is empty) from the gross weight of the storage tank when completely filled with water at the supply water temperature specified in section 2.3 of this appendix, W
f, (with all air eliminated and
line pressure applied as described in section 2.6 of this appendix) and dividing the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00167 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637944 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
resulting net weight by the density of water
at the measured temperature.
* * * * *
■8. Amend § 430.32 by revising
paragraph (d) to read as follows: § 430.32 Energy and water conservation standard and their compliance dates.
* * * * *
(d) Water Heaters. (1) The uniform
energy factor of water heaters manufactured May 6, 2029 shall not be
less than the following:
Product class Rated storage volume
and input rating
(if applicable) Draw pattern Uniform energy factor1
Gas-fired Storage Water Heater ...................... ≥20 gal and ≤55 gal ......................................... Very Small ..... 0.3456 ¥ (0.0020 × Vr)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.5982 ¥ (0.0019 × Vr)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.6483 ¥ (0.0017 × Vr)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.6920 ¥ (0.0013 × Vr)
>55 gal and ≤100 gal ....................................... Very Small ..... 0.6470 ¥ (0.0006 × Vr)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.7689 ¥ (0.0005 × Vr)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.7897 ¥ (0.0004 × Vr)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.8072 ¥ (0.0003 × Vr)
Oil-fired Storage Water Heater ........................ ≤50 gal .............................................................. Very Small ..... 0.2509 ¥ (0.0012 × Vr)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.5330 ¥ (0.0016 × Vr)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.6078 ¥ (0.0016 × Vr)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.6815 ¥ (0.0014 × Vr)
Electric Storage Water Heaters ....................... ≥20 gal and ≤55 gal ......................................... Very Small ..... 0.8808 ¥ (0.0008 × Vr)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.9254 ¥ (0.0003 × Vr)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.9307 ¥ (0.0002 × Vr)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.9349 ¥ (0.0001 × Vr)
>55 gal and ≤120 gal ....................................... Very Small ..... 1.9236 ¥ (0.0011 × Vr)
........................................................................... Low ................ 2.0440 ¥ (0.0011 × Vr)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 2.1171 ¥ (0.0011 × Vr)
........................................................................... High ............... 2.2418 ¥ (0.0011 × Vr)
Tabletop Water Heater ..................................... ≥20 gal and ≤120 gal ....................................... Very Small ..... 0.6323 ¥ (0.0058 × Vr)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.9188 ¥ (0.0031 × Vr)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.9577 ¥ (0.0023 × Vr)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.9884 ¥ (0.0016 × Vr)
Instantaneous Gas-fired Water Heater ............ <2 gal and >50,000 Btu/h ................................ Very Small ..... 0.80
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.81
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.81
........................................................................... High ............... 0.81
Instantaneous Electric Water Heater ............... <2 gal ................................................................ Very Sm all ..... 0.91
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.91
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.91
........................................................................... High ............... 0.92
Grid-enabled Water Heater .............................. >75 gal .............................................................. Very Small ..... 1.0136 ¥ (0.0028 × Vr)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.9984 ¥ (0.0014 × Vr)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.9853 ¥ (0.0010 × Vr)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.9720 ¥ (0.0007 × Vr)
1Vris the rated storage volume (in gallons), as determined pursuant to § 429.17 of this chapter.
(2) The uniform energy factor of water
heaters manufactured on or after May 6, 2029 shall not be less than the
following:
Product class Rated storage volume
and input rating
(if applicable) Draw pattern Uniform energy factor1
Gas-fired Storage Water Heater ...................... <20 gal .............................................................. Very S mall ..... 0.2062 ¥ (0.0020 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.4893 ¥ (0.0027 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.5758 ¥ (0.0023 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.6586 ¥ (0.0020 × Veff)
≥20 gal and ≤55 gal ......................................... Very Small ..... 0.3925 ¥ (0.0020 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.6451 ¥ (0.0019 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.7046 ¥ (0.0017 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.7424 ¥ (0.0013 × Veff)
>55 gal and ≤100 gal ....................................... Very Small ..... 0.6470 ¥ (0.0006 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.7689 ¥ (0.0005 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.7897 ¥ (0.0004 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.8072 ¥ (0.0003 × Veff)
>100 gal ............................................................ Very Small ..... 0.1482 ¥ (0.0007 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.4342 ¥ (0.0017 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.5596 ¥ (0.0020 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.6658 ¥ (0.0019 × Veff)
Oil-fired Storage Water Heater ........................ ≤50 gal .............................................................. Very Small ..... 0.2909 ¥ (0.0012 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.5730 ¥ (0.0016 × Veff)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00168 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637945 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Product class Rated storage volume
and input rating
(if applicable) Draw pattern Uniform energy factor1
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.6478 ¥ (0.0016 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.7215 ¥ (0.0014 × Veff)
> 50 gal ............................................................ Very Small ..... 0.1580 ¥ (0.0009 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.4390 ¥ (0.0020 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.5389 ¥ (0.0021 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.6172 ¥ (0.0018 × Veff)
Very Small Electric Storage Water Heater ...... < 20 gal ............................................................ Very Small ... .. 0.5925 ¥ (0.0059 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.8642 ¥ (0.0030 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.9096 ¥ (0.0020 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.9430 ¥ (0.0012 × Veff)
Small Electric Storage Water Heater ............... ≥20 gal and ≤35 gal ......................................... Very Small ..... 0.8808 ¥ (0.0008 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.9254 ¥ (0.0003 × Veff)
Electric Storage Water Heaters ....................... >20 and ≤55 gal (excluding small electric stor-
age water heaters).Very Small ..... 2.30
........................................................................... Low ................ 2.30
........................................................................... Medium .......... 2.30
........................................................................... High ............... 2.30
>55 gal and ≤120 gal ....................................... Very Small ..... 2.50
........................................................................... Low ................ 2.50
........................................................................... Medium .......... 2.50
........................................................................... High ............... 2.50
>120 gal ............................................................ Very Small ..... 0.3574 ¥ (0.0012 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.7897 ¥ (0.0019 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.8884 ¥ (0.0017 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.9575 ¥ (0.0013 × Veff)
Tabletop Water Heater ..................................... <20 gal .............................................................. Very Small ..... 0.5925 ¥ (0.0059 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.8642 ¥ (0.0030 × Veff)
≥20 gal .............................................................. Very Small ..... 0.6323 ¥ (0.0058 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.9188 ¥ (0.0031 × Veff)
Instantaneous Oil-fired Water Heater .............. <2 gal and ≤210,000 Btu/h ............................... Very Small ..... 0.61
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.61
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.61
........................................................................... High ............... 0.61
≥2 gal and ≤210,000 Btu/h ............................... Very Small ..... 0.2780 ¥ (0.0022 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.5151 ¥ (0.0023 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.5687 ¥ (0.0021 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.6147 ¥ (0.0017 × Veff)
Instantaneous Electric Water Heater ............... <2 gal ................................................................ Very Sm all ..... 0.91
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.91
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.91
........................................................................... High ............... 0.92
≥2 gal ................................................................ Very Small ..... 0.8086 ¥ (0.0050 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.9123 ¥ (0.0020 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.9252 ¥ (0.0015 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.9350 ¥ (0.0011 × Veff)
Grid-Enabled Water Heater .............................. >75 gal .............................................................. Very Small ..... 1.0136 ¥ (0.0028 × Veff)
........................................................................... Low ................ 0.9984 ¥ (0.0014 × Veff)
........................................................................... Medium .......... 0.9853 ¥ (0.0010 × Veff)
........................................................................... High ............... 0.9720 ¥ (0.0007 × Veff)
1Veffis the Effective Storage Volume (in gallons), as determined pursuant to § 429.17 of this chapter.
(3) The provisions of paragraph (d) of
this section are separate and severable
from one another. Should a court of competent jurisdiction hold any provision(s) of paragraph (d) of this section to be stayed or invalid, such action shall not affect any other provision of paragraph (d) of this section.
* * * * *
Note: The following letter will not
appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
October 12, 2023
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Antitrust Division, Ami Grace-Tardy, Assistant General Counsel for
Legislation, Regulation and Energy Efficiency, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, DC 20585
Re: Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Water Heaters DOE Docket No. EERE–2017–BT–STD–0019
Dear Assistant General Counsel Grace-
Tardy:
I am responding to your August 23,
2023 letter seeking the views of the Attorney General about the potential impact on competition of proposed energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters. Your request was submitted under
Section 325(o)(2)(B)(i)(V) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (ECPA), 42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(V), which requires the Attorney General to determine the impact of any lessening of competition that is likely to result from the imposition of proposed energy conservation standards. The Attorney General’s responsibility for responding
to requests from other departments about the effect of a program on competition has been delegated to the Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division in 28 CFR 0.40(g). The Assistant Attorney General for the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00169 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES637946 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Antitrust Division has authorized me, as
the Policy Director for the Antitrust Division, to provide the Antitrust Division’s views regarding the potential impact on competition of proposed energy conservation standards on his behalf.
In conducting its analysis, the
Antitrust Division examines whether a proposed standard may lessen competition, for example, by
substantially limiting consumer choice, by placing certain manufacturers at an unjustified competitive disadvantage, or by inducing avoidable inefficiencies in
production or distribution of particular products. A lessening of competition could result in higher prices to manufacturers and consumers.
We have reviewed the proposed
standards contained in the notice of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) (88 FR 49058, July 28, 2023) and the related Technical Support Document. We have also reviewed public comments and
information provided by industry participants and have reviewed the transcript and information presented at the Webinar of the Public Meeting held
on September 13, 2023. Based on this review, we do not have an evidentiary basis to conclude that the proposed energy conservation standards for consumer water heaters are likely to substantially lessen competition.
Sincerely,
David G.B. Lawrence, Policy Director.
[FR Doc. 2024–09209 Filed 5–3–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:56 May 03, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00170 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06MYR6.SGM 06MYR6ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES6
| 155,396
| 1,019,855
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/264269_2020_SPS_TPKM_20_3627_00_x.pdf
|
264269_2020_SPS_TPKM_20_3627_00_x
|
1 附件
農藥殘留容許量標準第三條 附表一修正案
(僅修訂部分 )
第三條附表一 農藥殘留容許量標準表
國際普通名稱 普通名稱 作物類別 容許量
(ppm) 備註
Ametoctradin 滅脫定 青蔥 10.0 殺菌劑
Ametoctradin 滅脫定 菠菜 40 殺菌劑
Azoxystrobin 亞托敏 油桃 1.5 殺菌劑
Boscalid 白克列 茶 10.0 殺菌劑
Cyazofamid 賽座滅 不結球萵苣 10.0 殺菌劑
Cyazofamid 賽座滅 半結球萵苣 10.0 殺菌劑
Cyazofamid 賽座滅 蕪菁 0.2 殺菌劑
Cyclaniliprole - 蘋果 0.3 殺蟲劑
Cyclaniliprole - 梨 0.3 殺蟲劑
Cyclaniliprole - 茶 15 殺蟲劑
Cyenopyrafen 賽派芬 木瓜 0.3 殺蟎劑
Cyenopyrafen 賽派芬 蘋果 2.0 殺蟎劑
Cyenopyrafen 賽派芬 梨 2.0 殺蟎劑
Cyenopyrafen 賽派芬 柑桔 1.5 殺蟎劑
Cyenopyrafen 賽派芬 草莓 3.0 殺蟎劑
Dinotefuran 達特南 蒜 2.0 殺蟲劑
Dinotefuran 達特南 小松菜 6.0 殺蟲劑
Dinotefuran 達特南 蕪菁葉 5.0 殺蟲劑
Dinotefuran 達特南 蕪菁 0.3 殺蟲劑
Etofenprox 依芬寧 香瓜 0.06 殺蟲劑
Etofenprox 依芬寧 洋香瓜 0.06 殺蟲劑
Etofenprox 依芬寧 青蔥 2.0 殺蟲劑
Fenazaquin 芬殺蟎 鳳梨 0.2 殺蟎劑
Flonicamid 氟尼胺 柑桔 1.5 殺蟲劑
Fludioxonil 護汰寧 玉米 0.02 殺菌劑
Flufenoxuron 氟芬隆 草莓 0.3 殺蟎劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 落花生 0.02 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 豇豆 (乾) 0.15 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 菜豆 1.5 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 萊豆 0.09 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 豌豆 1.5 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 豌豆仁 0.15 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 黑莓 2.0 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 藍莓 2.0 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 穗醋栗 2.0 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 草莓 1.5 殺菌劑
2 Fluopyram 氟派瑞 玉米 0.02 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 高粱 1.0 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 小麥 0.8 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 葡萄柚 0.3 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 檸檬 0.5 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 柳橙 0.5 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 洋蔥 0.1 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 夏南瓜 0.3 殺菌劑
Fluopyram 氟派瑞 櫻桃 1.5 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 杏仁 0.6 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 美洲胡桃 0.02 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 棉籽 0.5 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 甜菜根 0.07 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 柑桔 (柳橙除
外) 0.3 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 柑桔油 20 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 葡萄柚 0.5 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 檸檬 0.8 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 柳橙 0.8 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 咖啡豆 0.2 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 芒果 0.5 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 青蔥 0.6 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 木瓜 0.4 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 花生油 0.02 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 高粱 0.7 殺菌劑
Fluxapyroxad 氟克殺 甘蔗 3.0 殺菌劑
Glufosinate -ammonium 固殺草 紅豆 2.0 除草劑
Imicyafos - 香瓜 0.02 殺蟲劑
Imicyafos - 洋香瓜 0.02 殺蟲劑
Isofetamid - 葡萄 5.0 殺菌劑
Kasugamycin 嘉賜黴素 蒜 0.2 殺菌劑
Kasugamycin 嘉賜黴素 韭菜 0.2 殺菌劑
Kasugamycin 嘉賜黴素 韭黃 0.2 殺菌劑
Kasugamycin 嘉賜黴素 韭菜花 0.2 殺菌劑
Kasugamycin 嘉賜黴素 珠蔥 0.2 殺菌劑
Kasugamycin 嘉賜黴素 蕗蕎 0.2 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 薑 0.01 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 甘藷 0.01 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 芋頭 0.01 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 豆薯 0.01 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 闊葉大豆根 0.01 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 狗尾草根 0.01 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 牛蒡 0.01 殺菌劑
3 Mandipropamid 曼普胺 蒜頭 0.1 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 紅蔥頭 0.1 殺菌劑
Mandipropamid 曼普胺 蕎頭 0.1 殺菌劑
Metazosulfuron 美速隆 米類 0.05 除草劑
Metolachlor 莫多草 青蔥 2.0 除草劑
Metrafenone 滅芬農 啤酒花 50 殺菌劑
Myclobutanil 邁克尼 梨 0.7 殺菌劑
Myclobutanil 邁克尼 紫蘇 0.5 殺菌劑
Myclobutanil 邁克尼 茶 20 殺菌劑
Oxolinic acid 歐索林酸 十字花科包葉
菜類 1.0 殺菌劑
Phosmet 益滅松 藍莓 1.0 殺蟲劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 米類 0.2 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 菠菜 2.0 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 芥菜 2.0 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 芹菜 2.0 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 莧菜 2.0 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 菾菜 2.0 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 秋葵 0.5 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 山葵 0.5 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 蕪菁 0.5 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 黑皮婆羅門參 0.5 殺菌劑
Pyraclostrobin 百克敏 藜 0.5 殺菌劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 蘋果 0.3 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 油桃 0.4 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 梨 0.5 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 柿 0.3 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 李 0.1 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 柑桔 0.5 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 葡萄 1.0 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 草莓 1.0 殺蟲劑
Pyrifluquinazon - 茶 15 殺蟲劑
Pyrimethanil 派美尼 黑莓 4.0 殺菌劑
Pyrimethanil 派美尼 藍莓 7.0 殺菌劑
Pyrimethanil 派美尼 覆盆子 10.0 殺菌劑
Pyriofenone - 葡萄 2.0 殺菌劑
Pyriofenone - 草莓 1.5 殺菌劑
Quinclorac 快克草 蔓越莓 1.5 除草劑
Saflufenacil 殺芬草 鷹嘴豆 0.3 除草劑
Saflufenacil 殺芬草 亞麻籽 0.6 除草劑
Saflufenacil 殺芬草 小扁豆 0.3 除草劑
Saflufenacil 殺芬草 紅花籽 0.6 除草劑
Saflufenacil 殺芬草 小麥 0.3 除草劑
4 Silafluofen 矽護芬 蘋果 2.0 殺蟲劑
Silafluofen 矽護芬 柑桔 2.0 殺蟲劑
Spinetoram 賜諾特 蘿蔔 0.02 殺蟲劑
Spinetoram 賜諾特 蕪菁 0.02 殺蟲劑
Spinetoram 賜諾特 山葵 0.02 殺蟲劑
Spiromesifen 賜滅芬 青花菜 1.0 殺蟎劑
Spiromesifen 賜滅芬 甘藍 2.0 殺蟎劑
Spiromesifen 賜滅芬 柑桔類 1.0 殺蟲劑
Spiromesifen 賜滅芬 胡瓜 0.08 殺蟎劑
Spiromesifen 賜滅芬 夏南瓜 0.09 殺蟎劑
Spiromesifen 賜滅芬 香瓜 0.1 殺蟎劑
Spiromesifen 賜滅芬 洋香瓜 0.1 殺蟎劑
Spiroxamine - 香蕉 3.0 殺菌劑
Spiroxamine - 葡萄 0.5 殺菌劑
Sulfentrazone - 藍莓 0.1 除草劑
Sulfentrazone - 菜豆 (乾) 0.05 除草劑
Sulfentrazone - 豌豆 (乾) 0.1 除草劑
Sulfentrazone - 榛果 0.1 除草劑
Sulfentrazone - 馬鈴薯 0.1 除草劑
Tecloftalam 克枯爛 蒜 1.0 殺菌劑
Tecloftalam 克枯爛 韭菜 1.0 殺菌劑
Tecloftalam 克枯爛 韭黃 1.0 殺菌劑
Tecloftalam 克枯爛 韭菜花 1.0 殺菌劑
Tecloftalam 克枯爛 珠蔥 1.0 殺菌劑
Tecloftalam 克枯爛 蕗蕎 1.0 殺菌劑
Trinexapac -ethyl - 大麥 2.0 除草劑
Trinexapac -ethyl - 小麥 4.0 除草劑
Zoxamide 座賽胺 洋蔥 0.7 殺菌劑
(僅修訂部分 )
第四條附表三 得免訂容許量之農藥一覽表
農藥名稱 英文名稱
液化澱粉芽孢桿菌 QST713 Bacillus amyloliquefaciens QST713
(僅修訂部分 )
第六條附表五 農藥殘留容許量標準表中 農作物類農產品之分 類表
類別 農作物類農產品
4. 乾豆類 菜豆(乾)
6. 小葉菜類 小松菜
6. 小葉菜類 蕪菁葉
5 動物產品中 農藥殘留容許量標準第三條 修正案
(僅修訂部分 )
第三條
國際普通名稱 普通名稱 殘留部位 動物種類 容許量
(ppm) 備註
Acetamiprid 亞滅培 肌肉、脂肪 畜(豬除外) 0.1 殺蟲劑
Acetamiprid 亞滅培 內臟 畜(豬除外) 0.2 殺蟲劑
Acetamiprid 亞滅培 肝 禽 0.05 殺蟲劑
Acetamiprid 亞滅培 乳 0.2 殺蟲劑
Acetamiprid 亞滅培 蛋 0.01 殺蟲劑
Azoxystrobin 亞托敏 內臟(肝除
外)、脂肪 畜 0.05 殺菌劑
Azoxystrobin 亞托敏 肝 畜 0.07 殺菌劑
Clothianidin 可尼丁 肝 畜 0.2 殺蟲劑
Clothianidin 可尼丁 肌肉、脂
肪、內臟 (肝
除外) 畜 0.02 殺蟲劑
Clothianidin 可尼丁 內臟 禽 0.02 殺蟲劑
Clothianidin 可尼丁 乳 0.02 殺蟲劑
Cyfluthrin 賽扶寧 肌肉 畜 0.02 殺蟲劑
Cyfluthrin 賽扶寧 脂肪 畜(豬除外) 0.2 殺蟲劑
Cyfluthrin 賽扶寧 脂肪 豬 0.1 殺蟲劑
Cyfluthrin 賽扶寧 內臟、脂肪 禽 0.05 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 肌肉、內臟
(肝、腎除
外) 畜(豬除外) 0.04 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 肝 畜(豬除外) 0.1 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 腎 畜(豬除外) 0.02 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 脂肪 畜(豬除外) 0.4 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 肌肉、內臟
(肝除外) 豬 0.01 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 肝、脂肪 豬 0.02 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 肌肉 禽 0.01 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 內臟、脂肪 禽 0.02 殺蟲劑
Fipronil 芬普尼 乳 0.02 殺蟲劑
Fludioxonil 護汰寧 內臟、脂肪 畜(豬除外) 0.05 殺菌劑
Fludioxonil 護汰寧 肝、腎 禽 0.05 殺菌劑
Flutolanil 福多寧 肝、腎 畜 0.5 殺菌劑
Flutolanil 福多寧 內臟(肝、腎
除外) 、肌
肉、脂肪 畜 0.05 殺菌劑
Flutolanil 福多寧 肌肉、內
臟、脂肪 禽 0.05 殺菌劑
6 Flutolanil 福多寧 乳 0.05 殺菌劑
Flutolanil 福多寧 蛋 0.05 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 肝 畜 0.5 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 腎 畜 0.1 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 肌肉、內臟
(肝、腎除
外)、脂肪 畜 0.05 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 內臟(腎除
外) 、脂肪 禽 0.05 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 腎 禽 0.02 殺菌劑
Flutriafol 護汰芬 蛋 0.05 殺菌劑
Imidacloprid 益達胺 內臟 畜 0.3 殺蟲劑
Imidacloprid 益達胺 肌肉、脂肪 畜 0.05 殺蟲劑
Imidacloprid 益達胺 肝 禽 0.05 殺蟲劑
Imidacloprid 益達胺 肌肉、內臟
(肝除外) 、
脂肪 禽 0.02 殺蟲劑
Imidacloprid 益達胺 乳 0.1 殺蟲劑
Imidacloprid 益達胺 蛋 0.02 殺蟲劑
Tebuconazole 得克利 內臟(腎除
外) 畜 0.2 殺菌劑
Tebuconazole 得克利 腎、肌肉、
脂肪 畜 0.05 殺菌劑
Tebuconazole 得克利 肌肉、內
臟、脂肪 禽 0.05 殺菌劑
Tebuconazole 得克利 蛋 0.05 殺菌劑
Thiamethoxam 賽速安 肌肉 畜 0.02 殺蟲劑
Thiamethoxam 賽速安 乳 0.05 殺蟲劑
Trifloxystrobin 三氟敏 肌肉 畜(豬除外) 0.05 殺菌劑
Trifloxystrobin 三氟敏 腎 畜(豬除外) 0.04 殺菌劑
Trifloxystrobin 三氟敏 內臟(肝、腎
除外) 畜(豬除外) 0.07 殺菌劑
Trifloxystrobin 三氟敏 脂肪 畜(豬除外) 0.1 殺菌劑
Trifloxystrobin 三氟敏 肌肉、內
臟、脂肪 豬、禽 0.02 殺菌劑
Trifloxystrobin 三氟敏 乳 0.02 殺菌劑
Trifloxystrobin 三氟敏 蛋 0.02 殺菌劑
| 1,156
| 7,082
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_Jobs_GC_346.pdf
|
r_Jobs_GC_346
| 0
| 0
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
|
WTO_1/270512_2021_TBT_OMN_21_0721_00_x.pdf
|
270512_2021_TBT_OMN_21_0721_00_x
|
ﻫ اﻟﻌر اﻟ ﻟدول اﻟ ﻣ ﻟدول اﻟ
GCC STANDARDIZATION ORGANIZATION (GSO)
ﻧﻬﺎﺋﻲﻣﺸﺮﻭﻉ ﻣﻮﺍﺻﻔﺔ
Draft of Standard FDS
TC05 رﻗ اﻟ اﻟﻠ اﻋداد
Prepared by GSO Technical Committee No. TC05
GSO 05 FDS 147 / 2020
اﻟﻌ
HONEY
ﺗ ﺧﻠ ﻗ ﻟ ﻣ اﻟ ﻫذﻩ
ʷǼ واﻟ اﻟرأ ﻹﺑداء ﺗ ﻓﺈﻧﻬﺎ ﻟذﻟ ،
واﻟ ﻟﻠ ﻋرﺿﺔ إﻟ اﻟرﺟ ʨʳǽ وﻻ
اﻟﻬ ﻣ اﻋ Ǽ إﻻ ﺧﻠ ﻗ ﻛ . This document is a draft GSO Standard
،
subject to alteration and modification
and may not be referred to as a GSO
Standard until approved by GSO.
ﺗﻘد
اﻟ اﻷﺟﻬزة ﻋ ﻓﻲ ﺗ إﻗﻠ ﻫ اﻟﻌر اﻟ ﻟدول اﻟ ﻣ ﻟدول اﻟ ﻫ
واﻟ ﻟﻠ ﻟ ﺑ اﻟﻘ اﻟ إﻋداد اﻟﻬ ﻣﻬﺎم وﻣ اﻟﻌر اﻟ دول ﻓﻲ س
.ﻣ ﻓ
رﻗـ اﻟﻔ اﻟﻠ ﻋ ﺑرﻧﺎﻣﺞ ﺿ اﻟﻌر اﻟ ﻟدول اﻟ ﻣ ﻟدول اﻟ ﻫ ﻗﺎﻣت وﻗد
5 ( " اﻟ ﺑ " واﻟزراﻋ اﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟ ﻣ ﻗ اﻟ اﻟﻘ ﻔﺔGSO 147
"اﻟ ﻋ ﻗ ﻣ ، " اﻟ اﻟﻌر اﻻﻣﺎرات اﻟﻌر Ǽ اﻟ إﻋداد ﺗ وﻗد
واﻹﻧ اﺳ اﻟ ذات اﻟ واﻟ واﻟدوﻟ واﻷﺟ اﻟﻌر اﻟﻘ اﻟ
اﻋ اﻟ ﻓ ؗﻼﺋ ﺧﻠ اﺟ ﺑ ﻋﻘد اﻟذ ، ) ( رﻗ اﻹدارة ﻣ/
) / / ( / ﻫـ رﻗ اﻟ ﺗﻠﻐﻰ أن ﻋﻠﻰGSO 147:2008 .ﻣ وﺗ
اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
1
اﻟﻌ
1. اﻟ
اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻫذﻩ ﺗ اﻟ ﻓﻲ ﺗ اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﻣ اﻟ ،اﻟ
اﻟ اﻟﻌ أﺷ ﻼﻟوﺗﻐ اﻵدﻣﻲﺳ ذﻟ ﻓﻲ ʺǼ ؗ ﻋ ﺿ اﻟ
ﯾ واﻟ اﻟ إ ﺗ وﻻ Ǽ اﻟ ﻋ ﺿ ﻻﺣﻘﺎً ﺗﻌ ﻌ إﻟ اﻟ
اﻷ أو اﻟ ﻣ أﺧر ﻋ اﻟﻌ أو اﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟ ﻣ ﻏ أو اﻟ أو
ﻟﻼاﻟ ﺳ اﻟ ﻓﻲ(. اﻟ ﻋ )اﻟﻐذاﺋﻲ
2. اﻟ ﺔاﻟ
1.2 GSO 9 .اﻟ اﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟ ʢǼ :
2.2 GSO 150-2 اﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟ ﺻﻼﺣ ﻓ –: ا اﻟ ﻓ: اﻟ ﻻاﻟ . ﺧ
3.2 GSO 122اﻟ ﻋ اﺧ ʡ : .
4.2 GSO 1016اﻟ اﻟ. : اﻟﻐذاﺋ واﻟ ﻟﻠ ʨ
5.2 GSO /CAC 193 .واﻷﻋﻼف اﻷﻏذ ﻓﻲ واﻟ ﻟﻠ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ اﻟ :
6.2 GSO 382 .واﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟزراﻋ اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻵﻓﺎت ﻣ ﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ :
7.2 GSO 839 اﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟ ﻋ -: اﻷول اﻟ - اﺷ. ﻋﺎﻣﺔ
8.2 GSO 988واﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟزراﻋ اﻟ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻬﺎ اﻟ اﻹﺷﻌﺎﻋ اﻟ ﺣدود - : اﻟ
.اﻷول
9.2 GSO 1694 .اﻟﻐذاء ﻟ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ اﻟﻘ :
10.2 GSO 2233: .اﻟ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟ اﻟ اﺷ
11.2 2333ا ذات اﻷﻏذ اﺷـ: ﻻ اﻟ دﻋﺎءات. واﻟ Ȅ
12.2 GSO CAC GL 1ا: ﻹ اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ ﻟﻼدﻋﺎءاترﺷﺎدات . ﻟﻸﻏذ اﻟ
13.2 GSO 2481 .اﻷﻏذ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻷدو Ǽ ﻣ ﺑﻬﺎ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ :
14.2 GSO OIML R 87: .اﻟﻌ ﻓﻲ اﻟ ؗ
15.2 GSO CAC GL 32وﺗ اﻟﻌ اﻷﻏذ إﻧ دﻟ. : ﻋﻠ اﻟ ووﺿﻊ وﺗ ﺎ
16.2 GSO 168 :واﻟ اﻟ اﻟﻐذاﺋ اﻟ ﺣﻔظ ﻣ اﺷ . اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
2
17.2 GSO 2481 :اﻷﻏذ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻷدو Ǽ ﻣ ﺑﻬﺎ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ .
18.2 GSO 2504 : (واﻟ اﻟ ﻏ )اﻷﻏذ ﻟ ﻋﺎﻣﺔ اﺷ .
3. اﻟ
: أدﻧﺎﻩ اﻟ اﻟ ﺗ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻫذﻩ ﻷﻏراض
1.3 :اﻟ ﻋ
اﻟ ʴ ʽʰʢ اﻟ ﺗ ʳʱʻ أﺻ ﻧ اﻟﻌApis mellifera أوApis Florea
رﺣ اﻟ أو اﻟ ﻣ اﻟ اﻷﺟزاء ﺎتإﻓرازات أو ﻣ اﻟ اﻟ إﻓرازات ﺗ
اﻟ ﻋ ﺣ و ʺʳǼ اﻟ ﺗ ʨʴȄ و إﻓرازاﺗﻪ Ǽ ﻣﻊ ﻣزﺟﻬﺎ ﺧﻼل ﻣ ﻠﻬﺎ ﻣ
وﺗ إﯾداﻋﻬﺎ ﺛ وﺗ ʵ وإ أﻗراص اﻟ ﻣ ؗﻲ. ﺗ
2.3 ا ﻻﻋ أزﻫﺎر و ﻋ: اﻟرﺣ
اﻟ ﻣ اﻟ رﺣ أزﻫﺎر اﻟ.ﺎت
3.3 اﻟ ﻋ(: اﻟﻌ اﻟ )
اﻟ إﻓرازات ﻣ اﻟ اﻟ اﻷﺟ ﻧ اﻟ ﻟﻠﻌ أاﻟ ﻹو ﻓرازات
ﻣ اﻟ اﻷﺟزاء. اﻟ
4.3 (اﻟﻔرز )اﻟ اﻟﻌ :
اﻟﻌ ﻋﻠ اﻟ ﯾ اﻟ اﻷﻗراص ﻣ( اﻟ ʰʡ ﻧزع Ǽ) ﺎ ﺟﻬﺎز ﺳ
اﻟﻌ ﻓراز(. اﻟ اﻟ ﺟﻬﺎز )ﻞ
5.3 :اﻟ اﻟﻌ
ﻣ ﻋﻠ اﻟ ﯾ اﻟذ اﻟﻌ ﺿﻐط اﻟ اﻷﻗراص .
6.3 :اﻟ اﻟﻌ
ﻋﻠ اﻟ ﯾ اﻟذ Ǽ ﺗ ﻣ( اﻟ )اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﻧزع ﺗ ﺷ أﻗراص
اﻟ ʰʡ .
7.3 :اﻟ اﻷﻗراص ﻋ
ﻓﻲاﻟﻌ اﻟ ʵǽ اﻟذ ʺʷ اﻟ ﻣ ؗﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﺷ أﻗراص ﻓﻲ ﺗ واﻟ
(اﻟ ʰʡ ﻋﻠ ) اﻷﻗراص ﻫذﻩ ﻣ أﺟزاء أو . اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
3
8.3 اﻟ اﻟﻌ أو اﻟﻌ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟ أﻗراص :
ﻣ أﻛ أو واﺣدة ﻗ ﻋﻠﻰ ȑʨʱʴǽ اﻟذ اﻟﻌ ﻋ اﻟ ﻗراص .
9.3 :اﻟ اﻟﻌ
ﺗرﺷ ﯾ اﻟذ اﻟﻌ( ﻣ )ﻣرﺷ ﺑ اﻟﻠﻘﺎح ﺣ ﻣ ﺟزء Ǽ ﺗ ʢǼ .
10.3 ﺗ: اﻟﻌ
ﺳﺎﺋﻼً ﻣ ﺟزءً ʨȞǽ ﻗد أو ﻣ Ǽ ʨȞǽ ﻗد ﻣ ﻗ إﻟﻰ اﻟﻠزج اﻟﻌ ﻗ ﺗ
اﻟ أﺳﻔﻠﻪ ﻓﻲ ﯾ ﺑ اﻟ ﻋﻠﻰ ʢǽ ﻣ ﻧ ﻋ ﻟزﺟﺎً ﺳﺎﺋﻼً اﻟﻌ ʨȞǽ ﺣ ات
اﻟ ﻓ ﯾ اﻟ اﻟ وﺗ اﻷﻧ Ǽ ﻓﻲ ﯾ أن إﻟﻰ ﺗدر Ǽ ǽ
اﻟﻌ أﻧ Ǽ .
11.3 وﺣدات: ﺷﺎد
اﻹﻧز ﻟ اﻟﻼزﻣﺔ0.01 واﺣدة ﺳﺎﻋﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟ ﻧﻘ إﻟﻰ اﻟ ﻣ ﻋ
درﺟﺔ40° .اﻻﺧ ʣ ﺗ س
12.3 ﻋ: ﻣ ﻧ
ﺑﻠ وﺗؔ اﻟ اﻟ ʣ ﺗ اﻟ ʣ ﻟﻪ ﺣدﺛت اﻟذ اﻟ اﻟ ﻋ
.ﻓ اﻟ ﺳ ﻟ ﻧ ﻧﺎﻋ ﻣﻠ وذات اﻟ دﻗ ﻣ
13.3 :ʽʰʡ اﻹﻧز ﻣ اﻟﻌ
ﻣ اﻧ ﻧ ﻋ ʽʰʡ ﻓ اﻟد اﻧز ﻋ ﻣ اﻟ ﻣ ʰʶǼ
.اﻟ
4 . :اﻟ
1.4 اﻟﻌ أﺳﺎﺳﻲﯾ ȞʷǼ اﻟ ﻣ ﻋدد ﻣ ﺧﺎص و واﻟ اﻟﻔرؗ وﻧ
اﻟ ﻣ وﻏ اﻟ ﻣ ﺿئ ﻋﻠﻰؗ ȑʨʱʴǽ اﻟﻌ ؗﺎﻷﺣ أﺧر ﻣ
واﻷﻧز ﻋ اﻟ اﻟ واﻟ اﺳ. اﻟﻌ
2.4 اﻟﻌ ﻟ ﯾ ﻣ ﺗﻘر اﻟﻠ ﻋد( ﺷﻔﺎف ) اﻟ اﻟﻠ إﻟﻰ. اﻟداﻛ
3.4 ﺗ ؗ ﺳﺎﺋﻠ ﺔاﻟﻌ ﻟزﺟ أو ﺔ ﻣ أو. ﺟزﺋ أو ؗﻠ ة
4.4 اﻟ ǽ ʽʴǼ اﻟ ﻣ ﻋﻠ ﯾ اﻟ ﻬﺎ.
اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
4
5 . :اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ اﻟ
1.5 أن اﻹﻧ اﻟ ﻓﻲ وﺗداوﻟﻪ ﺗ ﻋ اﻟ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻻﺷ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟ
ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ ) رﻗ اﻟ9.2(.
2.5 أﻻ ȑʨʱʴǽ أ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺔاﻟﻌ ﻣ أو اﻟ ذﻟ ﻓﻲ ʺǼ) ﺻ أو ʽʰʡ ﻏذاﺋ ﺎت ʨ اد
اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﻏ أﺧر إﺿﺎﻓﺎت أ ﻋﻠﻰ ȑʨʱʴǽ وﻻ ،(اﻷﻏذ ﻟﻰ.
3.5 ﺧﺎﻟ ʨȞǽ أن ﺎً أ ﻣ أو ﻣذاق أو ﻧؔﻬراﺋ ﺗ ﻓ ﻋﺎﻣﻞ أو ﻏر اﻛ ﻣ أو اﻟ ﻣ
ﻏر ﻣ. وﺗ ﺗ أﺛ
4.5 أﻻ ﺑدأ ﻗد اﻟﻌ ʨȞǽ Ǽ أو ﻔ ﻋ ﻧﺎﺗ رﻏ(.) اﻟ ʧ
5.5 ﻋدم اﻟﻌ ﻣ ﻣ ﻣ أ أو رﺣ أ إزاﻟﺔ ذﻟ ﺗ ﺗﻌذر إذا أﺛ اﻟ إزاﻟﺔ
ﻏ اﻟ اﻟ أو. اﻟﻌ
6.5 ﻣ ﻋ اﻟﻐر اﻟ ﻣ ʵǽ ؗأن ﺎﻟ و أﺟزاﺋﻬﺎ و ﯾرﻗﺎت )أ – ﺑ( … اﻟﺦ
وأ اﻟرﻣﻞ ﺔوﺣ ﺷ. أﺧر ﺋب
7.5اﻟ اﺳ ﯾ ﻻ ﻟ أو ؔ اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﺗ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻟﻠ.
8.5 ǽ ʺʶ ﺑ. ﻟﻠﻌ اﻟ اﻟ ʱ
9.5 /و اﻷﺳﺎﺳﻲ ﺗؔ ǽ اﻟذ اﻟ إﻟﻰ ﻣﻌﺎﻟ أو اﻟﻌ ﺗ ʨʳǽ ﯾؤﺛرﻻ أو ﺟ ﻋﻠﻰ
/ ﯾ أو ﻓﻌﺎﻟ أو ʽʰʡ اﻟ اﻹﻧز ﻧ ﻘﻠﻞ .
10.5 اﻻ ﯾ ز ﻣ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟر23 اﻟ ﻧ ﻟﻌ ،٪ وﻋﻠﻰ20 اﻷﺧر اﻷﻧ ﻟﻌ ٪ .
11.5 اﻻﯾ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟ اﻟ ﺗز50 /ﻣ ﻣﻠ1000 ﻏرام ﻣ اﻷﻛﺎﺳ ﻋ ʻʲʱʶǽ)
ﻋ ﺗز ﻻ ʽʴǼ اﻟ اﻟ ﻗ ﺗﻘدﯾر ﻣ اﻟﺦ، ... واﻟ واﻟ واﻟ اﻟ ﻋ
100 ﻟؔﻞ ﻣ ﻣﻠ1000.(ﻏرام
12.5 ﻻأﯾ اﻟد إﻧز ﻓﻌﺎﻟ ﺗﻘﻞ اﻟ أو/و اﻟ Ǽ ﻋ8 وﻻوﺣدات ﺷﺎد ǽ ﻋ3
ﺷﺎدوﺣدات ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ أﻧ ﯾاﻟﻌ ʵʻ ﻓ اﻹﻧز ʽʰʡ.
13.5 أ ﻻﯾ اﻟ أو/و اﻟ Ǽ اﻟﻌ ﻓﻲ ﻓ ﻣ اﻟﻬ ﻣ ʺ ﻋﻠﻰ40
ﻛﻎ/،ﻣﻎ ﺑ ﺗ اﻟ اﻷﻗﺎﻟ أو اﻟ ﻣ ﻟﻪ اﻟ ﺑﻠد ʨȞǽ اﻟذ اﻟﻌ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ درﺟﺎت
ﻣرﺗﻔﻌﺔﺣرارة ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ز اﻟﻬ ﻣ ﯾز ﻻ أن ﻓ اﻟﻌ ﻣ اﻟ ﻫذا
ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓ ﻣ80 ﻛﻎ/ﻣﻎ . اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
5
14.5 اﻟ ﻣ ʨȞǽ Ȅ ﯾﻠﻲ ؗ :
ﻣ ﻣ
واﻟﻔرؗ اﻟ ﻋ ǽ ﻻ45 /غ100
ﻏرام اﻷزﻫﺎر رﺣ وﻋ اﻟ ﻋ ﻣز وﻓﻲ اﻟ ﻋ
ﻋ ǽ ﻻ60/غ100
ﻏرام اﻷﺧر اﻷﻧ
اﻟ ﻣ ﻋﻠﻰ ﯾز ﻻ10 /غ100
ﻏرام اﻟﻔ ﻋMedicago sativa) اﻟ أﻧ
اﻟؔﺎذ واﻷﻛﺎﺳRobinia pseudoacacia ) واﻟﻌ
اﻟﻔرﻧHedysarum )،Menzies Banksia ،
Banksia menziesii ) اﻷﺣ اﻟ ،Eucalyptus
(camaldulensis )ﻧ ،Leatherwood ( Eucryphia
lucida) ،Eucryphia milligani.
ﻋﻠﻰ ﯾز ﻻ15 /غ100
ﻏرام أﻧ )اﻟLavandula )اﻟ ﻟ ،Borago
officinalis )
ﻋﻠﻰ ﯾز ﻻ5 /غ100
ﻏرام اﻷﺧر اﻷﻧ ﻋ ﻓﻲ
15.5 أن ﻏ اﻟ اﻟ ﻣ اﻟذاﺋ ﻓﻲ اﻟ: ﯾﻠﻲ ؗ
أﻻ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗز0.5 /غ100 رامﻏ. اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﻓﻲ
أﻻ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗز0.1 /غ100رامﻏ اﻟﻓﻲ أﻧ. اﻷﺧر ﻌ
16.5 أنﯾ: ﯾﻠﻲ ؗ اﻟؔﻬر اﻟ ﻗ ﺗؔ
أ. أﻻ اﻟؔﻬر اﻟ ﻋﻠﻰﯾز 0.8 ﺳ/ اﻟﻣﻠ ﻌ( ج)و( ب )ﻓﻲ اﻟ ﻏ
ﻣ اﻷﻧ ﻫذﻩ ﻣ اﻟﻌ .
ب. أﻻ ﻋ اﻟؔﻬر اﻟ ǽ 0.8 ﺳ/ ﻣﻠ ﻓﻲ اﻟؔ وﻋ اﻟ ﻋ ﻣ ؗﻞ
و Ǽ (ج )ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌ . اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
6
ت. اﻟﻔراوﻟﺔ ﻧ وﻋ اﻟ وﻋ اﻟ ﻋ: اﻟؔﻬر اﻟ ﻗ ﻣ ʻʲʱʶǽ اﻟ وﻋ
اﻷُﻛﺎﻟ وﻋ اﻟرﻣﺎد وﻋ اﻟ وﻋ اﻟ ʵ اﻷﺳ ﺑ اﻟ وﻋ أو
وﻋ اﻟ ﻋ ﺷ. اﻷﻧ ﻫذﻩ وﺧﻠ اﻟ
Ziziphus spina-Christi tree (Ziziphus), Ac acia tortilis Tree , Strawberry tree
(Arbutus unedo ), Bell Heather ( Erica), Eucalyptus, Lime ( Tilia spp ), Heather
(Calluna vulgaris ), Manuka or Jelly bush ( Leptospermum ), Tea tree ( Melaleuca
spp).
17.5 ﻣﻊ ) Ǽ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻓﻲ ورد ﻣﺎ ﻣراﻋﺎة5.2 ﻣ ﺧﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﻌ ʨȞǽ أن ʳǽ (
ﺧ ﺗ ﻗد ʽʺȞǼ ﺗ اﻟ اﻟ اﻟ اً. اﻹﻧ ﺻ ﻋﻠﻰ
18.5 ʳǽ ﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﺗز أﻻ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻓﻲ ﻣ ﻫ ﻋ اﻟ ﻘ
اﻟ6.2) .
19.5 ʳǽ ) اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻓﻲ ﻣ ﻫ ﻋ اﻻﺷﻌﺎﻋ اﻟ ﺗز أﻻ8.2(.
20.5 وا اﻟ ﻓﻲ ﻟﻠ اﻟ اﻟ ʺʺǼ اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﻣ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻻ ﺧﻼل ﻣ ﻋﻔﺎن
)اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻣﻊ ﻟ اﻟ اﻟ ﺗ4.2.(
21.5 ʳǽ أﻻ اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻓﻲ ﻣ ﻫ ﻋ اﻟ اﻷدو ﻣ ﺣدود ﺗز
17.2).(
22.5 اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﻓﻲ اﻟ ؗ ﺗ اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ ʻʰ
(14.2).
23.5 ﻧ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟ ﻓ ﯾ اﻟ اﻟ اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟCoriaria arborea (
أﻻ ) اﻟ ﺳ ﺗزTutin (ﻋﻠﻰ0.7 .ؗﻎ/ ﻣﻎ
6 . واﻻﺧ اﻟﻌ ﺧذ
ʰʡ اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﻋﻠﻰ واﻻﺧ واﻟﻔ اﻟﻌ أﺧذ ﯾ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ ﻟﻠ اﻟ
3.2) رﻗ اﻟدوﻟ اﻟﻐذاﺋﻲ اﻟدﺳ ﻫ ﻣ ﻓﻲ وارد ﻫ ﻣﺎ ʶʴǼ أوCXS 12:
.Ǽ اﻟ اﻟ
اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
7
7 . واﻟ اﻟ واﻟ
1.7 اﻟ
ﻣ ﻋ ﻓﻲ اﻟ ﻋ ﻣ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟﻟﻠ ʻʰ رﻗ7.2).
2.7 اﻟ
ﻓﻲ ﻣ ﻫ ﻟ ʰʡ واﻟ اﻟ اﻟ ﻣ ﺗ ʢǼ اﻟﻌ ﻋ ﺗ
)اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ18.2.(
3.7 اﻟ
1.3.7 ﻣ ﻫ ﻟ ʰʡ اﻟ درﺟﺔ ارﺗﻔﺎع أو اﻟ اﻟ ﻣ ﻋ Ǽ اﻟﻌ ﻋ ﺗ
)اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻓﻲ16.2.(
2.3.7 .اﻟ اﻟ ﺿ إﻟﻰ اﻟ أﺛ اﻟ اﻟﻌ ﯾ أﻻ ʳǽ
3.3.7 ʨȞǽ ﺟ أﻣﺎﻛ ﻓﻲ ةاﻟ اﻟ .
4.3.7 اﻻﻟ ﻟ واﻷﺳ Ǽ اﻟ ﻣ ﻋ Ǽ اﻟ ﻣ ﻓﻲ اﻟ واﻟ
ʽʺʽ .
8 . اﻻ اﻟ
اﻟ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟﻘ اﻟ ﻓﻲ ورد ʺǼ اﻹﺧﻼل ﻋدم ﻣﻊ ʨ) د1.2 11.2/ 10.2 /2.2
12.2( ،: ﯾﻠﻲ ﻣﺎ Șʰʢǽ
1.8 ) اﻟ ﻋ .(
2.8 ʧȞʺǽ ﺳ اﻟﻌ ﻣ اﺳ اﻟ ﺣ ﻣ اﻟ ʢʻʺǼ ﺧﺎﺻﺎً ﻣ ؗﺎن إذا)
( أوﺟﻐراﻓ( اﻟﺦ...ﺻ/ ﺟ )اﻷرض ﺗ ﺣ ؗﺎن إذا )اﻟ اﻟ أو
ﻓﻲ واﺿ و ﻣ(. واﻟ واﻟؔ واﻟﻔ اﻟ ﺧ
3.8 ا ʨȞǽ أن ﻓ اﻟ أو اﻟزﻫر ﻟ ʰʡ اﻟﻌ ʻʸǽ اﻻﻋ أو اﻟ ﻻﺳ ﺳ
( ﯾ )ﻣﻼﺻ اﻟزﻫر ﻟﻠ ﺳﻻاﻟ (اﻟﻌ )اﻟ ʦ .
4.8 اﺳ اﻟﻌ إﻧ ﻓ ﺗ اﻟ اﻟ. اﻟ او اﻟ اﻟ واﺳ اﻟ و
5.8 ﻋ ﻣﻊ اﻷزﻫﺎر ﻋ ﻣ ﻣز "ﻋ اﻟ" ﻋ جﻣز اﻷ ﻋ أزﻫﺎر اﻟرﺣ و ﻣﻊ
. اﻟ ﻋ اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
8
6.8 وﺿﻊ " ﻋ اﻟﻌ ﻋﻠﻰ ﯾ ﻋ اﻟﻌ واﺟﻬﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ " اﻟ Ǽ ورد ﻣﺎ ʶ 3.3
7.8 اﻹ ﻣ اﻟﻌ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻓﻲ ʽʰʡ ﻧز اﻟ ʢǼ ﻋﻠﻰ ذﻟ ذؗر ʳǽ .
8.8 ʨʳǽ ʡ ﺣ اﻟﻌ اﺗ : ؗﺎﻟ ﺳ
1.8.8 ﻣ .
2.8.8 .ﻣ ﻋ
3.8.8 .ﻣ ﻋ
9.8 ʨʳǽ :اﻟ اﻷﺷ ﺣ اﻟﻌ ﺗ
5.9.8 )ﻋ/اﻟ ﻋ (ﻟﻠﻌ اﻟ أو اﻟ أو ﻣز. ﻣ
6.9.8 ) اﻟ ﻗراص (.
7.9.8 .اﻟ اﻟﻌ أو اﻟﻌ ﻓﻲ اﻟ اﻟ أﻗراص
10.8 وﺿﻊ" ﻣرﺷﺢ ﻋ "اﻋ ﻗرب Ǽ ورد ﻣﺎ اﻟﻌ ﻋﻠﻰ ﯾ ﻋ اﻟ ﺳ9.3.
اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
9
اﻟﻔ اﻟ
ﻧ ﻋHoney
ﻋ رﺣ أو زﻫر ﻞBlossom or nectar honey
ﻗرص ﻋComb honey
ﻣ ﻋGranulated honey
اﻟ ﻋHoneydew honey
ﻋ) ﻣﻔروزﻣExtracted honey
ﻣ ﻋPressed honey
اﻷﺳling heather
اﻟرﻣﺎد اﻟBell heather
اﻟرﻣﺎد اﻟ ﻋHeather honey
ﻧ اﻟد إﻧزDiastase activity
ﻓEffervescence
ﺷﺎد أووﺣدات ﺟSchade or Gothe unit
ﻣ ﺳReducing sugars
ﻣ ʨʴ ................. ............... .................. .............. ....... Inverted sugar
اﻟﻠﻘﺎح ﺣPollen grains
اﻟ اﻟOrganoleptic
اﻟ اﻟؔPhysicochemical
ﺗ ʺ .................. .............. .................. .............. .............. Fermentation
اﻟؔﻬر اﻟElectrical conductivity
ﻓ ﻣ ﻫHydroxymethylfurfural (HMF)
اﻷﺟ ﻧHemiptera
اﻟ اﻟCoriaria arborea
اﻟﻘ اﻟGSO FDS 147/2020
10
:اﻟ
1 . ) اﻟ اﻟﻘ ﻟﻠ اﻟ اﻟGSO 05 FDS…/2014،. ( اﻟ ﻋ
2. STANDARD FOR HONEY, CXS 12-19811 Adopted in 1981. Revised in 1987,
2001. Amended in 2019.
3. Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code - Standard 1.4.1 Contaminants and
Natural Toxicants.
4. Australian Government, Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicine Authority.
Australia New Zealand.
5. Food Standards Code — Standard 1.4.2 — Ma ximum Residue Limits Amendment
Instrument No. APVMA 1, 2014.
6. Jordan Standard: Sugar and sugar products – Honey.
| 2,198
| 10,005
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_AG_NCHL63R1.pdf
|
r_G_AG_NCHL63R1
|
G/AG/N/CHL/63/Rev.1
27 juillet 2020
(20-5171) Page: 1/2
Comité de l'agriculture Original: espagnol
NOTIFICATION
Révision
La communication ci -après, datée du 14 avril 2020 , est distribuée à la demande de la délégation du
Chili. La notification révisée concerne les importations soumises à contingents tarifaires
(tableau MA:2 ) pour l'année civile 2018 .
_______________
G/AG/N/CHL/63/Rev.1
- 2 -
Tableau MA:2
ACCÈS AUX MARCHÉS: CHILI
PÉRIODE CONSIDÉRÉE: ANNÉE CIVILE DU 1ER JANVIER 2018 AU 31 DÉCEMBRE 2018
Listes relatives aux engagements en matière de contingents tarifaires et autres
Code
d'identification
du contingent
tarifaire Désignation des
produits Numéro(s) du tarif
compris dans la
désignation des
produits Non
ouvert * Période considérée Unité Montant du
contingent
tarifaire pour la
période en
question Importations
dans le cadre
du contingent
au cours de la
période Taux
d'utilisation
((4/3)*100) Note
(d'après la Section
I-B (ou I -A) de la
Partie I de la Liste) (d'après la Section I -B (ou I -A)
de la Partie I de la Liste) Type Du Au
1 2 3 4 5
CHLQ001 Sucres de canne ou de
betterave et saccharose
chimiquement pur, à l'état
solide:
- Autres
- De canne, raffiné
- De betterave, raffiné
- Autres 17019910, 17019920,
17019990 Année
civile 01/01/ 2018 31/12/ 2018 t 60 000 1)
* Le droit appliqué est identique au droit contingentaire consolidé.
Source : ODEPA, sur la base de renseignements du Service national des douanes.
1) Le droit appliqué est de 0%.
__________
| 241
| 1,609
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_SPS_NTPKM517.pdf
|
r_G_SPS_NTPKM517
|
G/SPS/N/TPKM/517
12 décembre 2019
(19-8575) Page: 1/3
Comité des mesures sanitaires et phytosanitaires Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
1. Membre notifiant : TERRITOIRE DOUANIER DISTINCT DE TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN
ET MATSU
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés:
2. Organisme responsable : Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine
(Bureau d'inspection et de mise en quarantaine zoosanitaires et phytosanitaires), Council
of Agriculture (Conseil de l'agriculture)
3. Produits visés (Prière d'indiquer le(s) numéro(s) du tarif figurant dans les listes
nationales déposées à l'OMC . Les numéros de l'ICS devraient aussi être indiqués,
le cas échéant) : Raisins et myrtilles, à l'état frais
4. Régions ou pays susceptibles d'être concernés, si cela est pertinent ou faisable:
[ ] Tous les partenaires commerciaux
[X] Régions ou pays spécifiques : Pérou
5. Intitulé du texte notifié : The summary amendment of the "Quarantine Requirements
for the Importation of Fresh Fruits from Peru" and the draft of the "Quarantine
Requirements for the Importation of Fres h Blueberries ( Vaccinium spp.) from Peru"
(Résumé des modifications des prescriptions quarantenaires régissant l'importation de
fruits frais en provenance du Pérou et projet de prescriptions quarantenaires régissant
l'importation de myrtilles ( Vaccinium spp.) fraîches en provenance du Pérou . Langue(s) :
anglais . Nombre de pages : 2
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2019/SPS/TPKM/19_7140_00_e.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2019/SPS/TPKM/19_7140_01_e.pdf
6. Teneur : 1. Prescriptions quarantenaires régissant l'importation de fruits frais en
provenance du Pérou:
1) Modification de la désignation des produits végétaux réglementés : raisins frais
(Vitis vinifera ) et du titre : "Prescriptions quarantenaires régissant l'importation de raisins
frais en provenance du Pérou".
2) Suppression des tableau x de l'Annexe 1 (Fruits frais importés à Taiwan en
provenance du Pérou, à savoir raisins) et de l'Annexe 2 (Références pour le déparasitage
par le froid en cours de transit), dont le contenu est repris dans le texte des prescriptions.
2. Prescriptions quar antenaires régissant l'importation de myrtilles ( Vaccinium spp.)
fraîches en provenance du Pérou:
Le projet de texte notifié établit les prescriptions quarantenaires régissant l'importation
de myrtilles péruviennes . Ces fruits devront avoir fait l'objet d' une approche systémique
incluant l'enregistrement des vergers et des établissements d'emballage, avoir été soumis
à l'une des méthodes d'atténuation du risque phytosanitaire réglementées, avoir été
conditionnés et transportés conformément à l'une des métho des réglementées et avoir
fait l'objet d'une inspection à l'exportation . Ils devront aussi être importés dans le cadre
d'expéditions commerciales et être accompagnés de certificats phytosanitaires délivrés G/SPS/N/TPKM/517
- 2 -
par l'Organisation nationale de protection des vég étaux du Pérou attestant du respect des
prescriptions quarantenaires.
7. Objectif et raison d'être : [ ] innocuité des produits alimentaires, [ ] santé des
animaux, [X] préservation des végétaux, [ ] protection des personnes contre les
maladies ou les parasites des animaux/des plantes, [ ] protection du territoire
contre d'autres dommages attribuables à des parasites.
8. Existe -t-il une norme internationale pertinente ? Dans l'affirmative, indiquer
laquelle:
[ ] Commission du Codex Alimentarius (par exemple, intitulé ou numéro de
série de la norme du Codex ou du texte apparenté) :
[ ] Organisation mondiale de la santé animale (OIE) (par exemple, numéro
de chapitre du Code sanitaire pour les animaux terr estres ou du Code
sanitaire pour les animaux aquatiques) :
[X] Convention internationale pour la protection des végétaux (par exemple,
numéro de la NIMP) : NIMP 28 et 32
[ ] Néant
La réglementation projetée est -elle conforme à la norme internationale
pertinente?
[X] Oui [ ] Non
Dans la négative, indiquer, chaque fois que cela sera possible, en quoi et
pourquoi elle diffère de la norme internationale:
9. Autres documents pertinents et langue(s) dans laquelle (les quelles) ils sont
disponibles : Le résumé des modifications des prescriptions quarantenaires régissant
l'importation de fruits frais en provenance du Pérou et le projet de prescriptions
quarantenaires régissant l'importation de myrtilles ( Vaccinium spp.) fr aîches en
provenance du Pérou (Nong Shou Fang Zi No.1081495045A du 6 décembre 2 019) sont
accessible s à l'adresse suivante: http://www.coa.gov.tw/ . (disponible s en chinois)
10. Date projetée pour l'adoptio n (jj/mm/aa) : à déterminer
Date projetée pour la publication (jj/mm/aa) : à déterminer
11. Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : [ ] Six mois à compter de la date de
publication, et/ou (jj/mm/aa) : à déterminer
[X] Mesure de facilitation du commerce
12. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : [X] Soixante jours à compter
de la date de distribution de la notification et/ou ( jj/mm/aa ): 10 février 2 020
Organisme ou autorité désigné pour traiter les observations : [ ] autorité
national e responsable des notifications, [X] point d'information national .
Adresse, numéro de fax et adresse électronique (s'il y a lieu) d'un autre
organisme:
Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine (Bureau d'inspection et de
mise en quarantai ne zoosanitaires et phytosanitaires), Council of Agriculture (Conseil de
l'agriculture)
9F, No.100, Sec. 2, Heping W. R d., Zhongzheng Dist., Taipei City, 10070 (Taiwan)
Téléphone : +(886) 2 3343 2091
Fax: +(886) 2 2332 2200
Courrier électronique : wtosps@mail.baphiq.gov.tw G/SPS/N/TPKM/517
- 3 -
13. Texte(s) disponible(s) auprès de : [ ] autorité nationale responsable des
notifications, [X] point d'information national . Adresse, numéro de fax et
adresse électronique (s'il y a lieu) d'un autre organisme:
Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine (Bureau d'inspection et de
mise en quarantaine zoosanitaires et phytosanitaires), Council of Agriculture (Consei l de
l'agriculture)
9F, No.100, Sec. 2, Heping W. R d., Zhongzheng Dist., Taipei City, 10070 (Taiwan)
Téléphone : +(886) 2 3343 2091
Fax: +(886) 2 2332 2200
Courrier électronique : wtosps@mail.baphiq.gov.tw
| 923
| 6,438
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_SG_N11ZAF5S3.pdf
|
s_G_SG_N11ZAF5S3
|
G/SG/N/ 11/ZAF/5/Suppl.3
9 de noviembre de 2021
(21-8464) Página: 1/3
Comité de Salvaguardias Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN EN VIRTUD DEL ARTÍCULO 9, NOTA 2, DEL ACUERDO
SOBRE SALVAGUARDIAS
SUDÁFRICA
Elementos de fijación fileteados, de fundición, hierro o acero: cabezas
de pernos y clavijas y las demás tuercas hexagonales
(con exclusión de las de acero inoxidable y las
reconocibles como destinadas a la aviación)
Suplemento
La siguiente notificación, fechada y recibida el 8 de noviembre de 2021, se distribuye a petición de
la delegación de S udáfrica.
_______________
De conformidad con lo dispuesto en la nota 2 del artículo 9.1 del Acuerdo sobre Salvaguardias , el
Gobierno de Sudáfrica presenta la siguiente notificación relativa a la modificación de los países en
desarrollo Miembros excluido s de las medidas de salvaguardia , que consiste en la supresión de
Belarús, Indonesia y Turquía de la lista .
La medida es la siguiente :
Período Tipo de la medida de salvaguardia
24 de julio de 2020-23 de julio de 2021 54,04%
24 de julio de 2021-23 de julio de 2022 52,04%
24 de julio de 2022- 23 de julio de 2023 50,04%
El producto en cuestión son las cabezas de pernos y clavijas (clasificables en la subpartida
arancelaria 7318.15.41), las clavijas totalmente fileteadas (clasificables en la subpartida
arancelaria 7318.15.42) y las demás tuercas hexagonales (clasificables en la subpartida
arancelaria 7318.16.30) de fundición, hierro y acero (con exclusión de las de acero inoxidable y las
reconocibles como destinadas a la a viación).
La Comisión consideró que las importaciones de los productos en cuestión procedentes de Belarús,
Indonesia y Turquía correspondientes a l período comprendido entre el 25 de julio de 2020 y
el 30 de junio de 2021 superaban e l 3% de las importacione s totales del período anual completo
examinado en la investigación iniciada el 1º de marzo de 2019. A continuación figura la lista de
países en desarrollo que quedan excluidos del derecho de salvaguardia durante el resto del período
de vigencia de los dere chos de salvaguardia.
G/SG/N/ 11/ZAF/5/Suppl.3
- 2 -
PAÍSES EN DESARROLLO QUE QUEDAN EXCLUIDOS DEL DERECHO
Afganistán Macedonia del Norte
Albania Madagascar
Angola Malawi
Antigua y Barbuda Maldiv as
Arabia Saudita, Reino de la Malí
Argelia Marruecos
Argentina Mauricio
Armenia Mauritania
Azerbaiyán México
Bahrein, Reino de Micronesia, Estados Federados de
Bangladesh Moldova, República de
Belice Mongolia
Benin Montenegro
Bolivia, Estado Plurinacional de Mozambique
Bosnia y Herzegovina Myanmar
Botswana Namibia
Brasil Nepal
Brunei Darussalam Nicaragua
Bulgaria Níger
Burkina Faso Nigeria
Burundi Omán
Bután Pakistán
Cabo Verde Palau
Cambo ya Palestin a
Camer ún Panamá
Colombia Papua N ueva Guinea
Comor as Paraguay
Corea, República Popular Democrática de Perú
Costa Rica Qatar
Côte d'Ivoire República Árabe Siria
Cuba República Centroafricana
Chad República del Congo
Chile República Democrática del Congo
Djibouti República Democrática Popular Lao
Dominica República Dominicana
Ecuador República Kirguisa
Egipto, República Árabe de Ribera Occidental y Gaza
El Salvador Rumania
Emiratos Árabes Unidos Rwanda
Eritrea Saint Kitts y Nevis
Eswatini Samoa
Etiopía Samoa Americana
Federación de Rusia San Vicent e y las Granadin as
Fiji Santa Lucía
Filipinas Santo Tomé y Príncipe
Gabón Senegal
Gambia Serbia
Georgia Seychelles
Ghana Sierra Leon a
Granada Singapur
Guatemala Somalia
Guinea Sri Lanka
Guinea Ecuatorial Sudán
Guinea -Bissau Sudán del Sur
Guyana Suriname
Haití Tailandia
Honduras Tanzania
Irán, República Islámica del Tayikistán
Iraq Timor -Leste
Islas Marshall Togo
Islas Salomón Tonga
Jamaica Trinidad y Tabago
Jordan ia Túnez
Kazajstán Turkmenistán G/SG/N/ 11/ZAF/5/Suppl.3
- 3 -
__________ Kenya Tuvalu
Kiribati Ucrania
Kosovo Uganda
Kuwait, Estado de Uruguay
Lesotho Uzbekistán
Letonia Vanuatu
Líbano Venezuela, República Bolivariana de
Líbano Vietnam
Liberia Yemen
Libia Zambia
Lituania Zimbabwe
| 600
| 4,280
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN19_KEN890A1.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN19_KEN890A1
|
G/TBT/N/KEN/890/Add.1
31 mars 2020
(20-2564) Page: 1/1
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
La communication ci -après, datée du 30 mars 2020, est distribuée à la demande de la délégation
du Kenya .
_______________
KS 2886 : Wood based panels - Melamine faced boards for interior uses - Definition, requirements
and classification (Panneaux à base de bois - Panneaux surfacés mélaminés pour usages intérieurs
- Définition, exigences et classification)
Le Kenya informe les Membres de l'OMC que la Norme kényane KS 2886 "Panneaux à base de bois
- Panneaux surfacés mélaminés pour usages intérieurs - Définition, exigences et classification",
notifiée au moyen du document G/TBT/N/KEN/890 en tant que Norme DKS 2886 , a été adoptée le
1er novembre 2019 au moyen de l'avis n°10377 publié au Journal officiel en date du
1er novembre 2019. Une copie de ce document peut être obtenue via le lien suivant moyennant le
paiement d'une redevance de base.
https://webstore.kebs.org/
__________
| 159
| 1,081
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_WT_DAILYB_21_53.pdf
|
q_WT_DAILYB_21_53
| 0
| 0
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
|
WTO_1/s_G_AG_GEN86R42.pdf
|
s_G_AG_GEN86R42
|
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
4 de junio de 2021
(21-4597) Página: 1/21
Comité de Agricultura
CUMPLIMIENTO DE LAS OBLIGACIONES DE NOTIFICACIÓN
NOTA DE LA SECRETARÍA1
Revisión
El presente documento ha sido elaborado para facilitar el examen del punto del orden del día relativo
a las notificaciones pendientes en la nonagésima octava reunión del Comité de Agricultura, que se
celebrará los días 17 y 18 de junio de 2021. R efleja la situación de los Miembros en lo que respecta
al cumplimiento de sus obligaciones de notificación periódica a 3 de junio de 2021.2
Para la elaboración de esta nota, la Secretaría se ha basado en gran medida en el Sistema de Gestión
de la Información sobre la Agricultura (Ag -IMS).3
_______________
1 El presente documento ha sido elaborado bajo la responsabilidad de la Secretaría y se entiende sin
perjuicio de las posiciones de los Miembros ni de sus derechos y obligaciones en el marco de la OMC.
2 Véanse los documentos G/AG/2 y G/AG/2/Add.1. Así pues, este docume nto no refleja la situación en lo
que respecta al cumplimiento de las prescripciones en materia de notificaciones ad hoc , es decir, las
notificaciones relativas a: i) la activación de las disposiciones de salvaguardia especial (cuadros MA.3 y MA.4);
ii) la introducción o modificación de medidas de ayuda interna que se pretenda queden eximidas de los
compromisos de reducción (cuadro DS.2); y iii) prohibiciones y restricciones a la exportación (cuadro ER.1).
3 Se puede consultar en línea en la siguiente direc ción: http://agims.wto.org . G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 2 -
ÍNDICE
1 OBLIGACIONES DE NOTIFICACIÓN ................................ ................................ .............. 3
1.1 Obligaciones de notificación anual ................................ ................................ ................. 4
1.1.1 Notificaciones del cuadro MA.1, iniciales completas (Aplicación de los compromisos
sobre contingentes arancelarios y de otro tipo; artículo 18.2 - 30 días) ................................ ..... 5
1.1.2 Notificaciones del cuadro MA.2 (Importaciones sujet as a contingentes arancelarios
y de otro tipo; artículo 18.2 - 60 días) ................................ ................................ ................. 5
1.1.3 Notificaciones del cuadro MA.5 (Salvaguardia especial; artículos 5.7 y 18.2 -
30 días) ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 6
1.1.4 Notificaciones del cuadro DS.1 (Ayuda interna; artículo 18.2 - 90 días, o 120 días
si la notificación inicial es provisional) ................................ ................................ .................. 7
1.1.5 Notificaciones del cuadro ES.1 (Subvenciones a la exportación; artículo 18.2 -
60 días, o 120 días si la notificación inicial es provisional) ................................ ....................... 7
1.1.6 Notificaciones del cuadro ES.2 (Exportaciones totales; artículos 10 y 18.2 -
120 días) ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 8
1.2 Otras obligaciones de notificación periódica aplicables solamente en caso de
mantenimiento de medidas específicas ................................ ................................ ................. 9
1.2.1 Notificaciones del cuadro ES.3 (Volumen total d e ayuda alimentaria; artículos 10
y 18.2 - 120 días) ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 9
1.2.2 Notificaciones del cuadro NF.1 (Ayuda alimentaria y de otro tipo en el contexto de
la Decisión de Marrakech; artículo 16.2 - 60 días) ................................ ................................ .. 9
1.3 Símbolos y abreviaturas ................................ ................................ .............................. 9
2 CUMPLIMIENTO DE LAS OBLIGACIONES DE NOTIFICACIÓN ANUAL ........................... 10
2.1 Compromisos sobre contingentes arancelarios y de otro tipo (cuadros MA.1 y MA.2) ........... 10
2.2 Salvaguardia especial (cuadro MA.5) ................................ ................................ ............ 11
2.3 Ayuda interna (cuadro DS.1) ................................ ................................ ....................... 12
2.4 Subvenciones a la exportación: Compromisos de reducción de los desembolsos
presupuestarios y las cantidades (cuadro ES.1) ................................ ................................ .... 15
2.5 Subvenciones a la exportación: Notificación de las exportaciones totales
(cuadro ES.2) ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 18
3 OTRAS O BLIGACIONES DE NOTIFICACIÓN PERIÓDICA APLICABLES
SOLAMENTE EN CASO DE MANTENIMIENTO DE MEDIDAS ESPECÍFICAS ......................... 20
3.1 Subvenciones a la exportación: Notificación del v olumen total de ayuda alimentaria
(cuadro ES.3), 2007 -2020 ................................ ................................ ................................ . 20
3.2 Notificación de conformidad con el artículo 16.2 del Acuerdo sobre la Agricultura
(cuadro NF.1), 2007 -2020 ................................ ................................ ................................ . 21
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 3 -
1 OBLIGACIONES DE NOTIFICACIÓN
1.1. Hay un total de 12 obligaciones de notificación distintas aplicables en el ámbito de la agricultura
que abarcan las cinco esferas siguientes : i) acceso a los mercados (cuadros MA.1 a MA.5) ; ii) ayuda
interna (cuadros DS.1 y DS.2) ; iii) subvenciones a la exportación (cuadros ES.1 a ES.3) ;
iv) prohibiciones o restricciones a la exportación (cua dro ER.1) ; y v) seguimiento de la Decisión de
Marrakech sobre los países en desarrollo importadores netos de productos alimenticios
(cuadro NF.1) . Las obligaciones de notificación aplicables a cada Miembro son diferentes, ya que
dependen en gran medida de los compromisos específicos que haya asumido en virtud del Acuerdo
sobre la Agricultura . En muchos casos, solo será aplicable a un determinado Miembro un número
limitado de obligaciones de notificación . Al mismo tiempo, hay algunas obligaciones de notifica ción,
especialmente en la esfera de las subvenciones a la agricultura (cuadros DS.1 y ES.1), que se aplican
a todos los Miembros de la OMC.
1.2. De las 12 obligaciones de notificación, 5 son de carácter "periódico" o "anual", a saber, el
cuadro MA.2, el cuadro MA.5, el cuadro DS.1, el cuadro ES.1 y el cuadro ES.2 . Las notificaciones
anuales deben presentarse dentro de un determinado número de días contados a partir del final
del año, campaña, ejercicio, etc., en cuestión . Los plazos para la presentación de las notificaciones
varían en función del tipo de notificación y se indican infra. Para más información, véase el
documento G/AG/2.
1.3. A 3 de junio de 2021, se ha n presentado a la OMC un total de 5. 400 notificaciones relativas a
la agricultura (incluidas adiciones, correcciones y revisiones) . El número de notificaciones
presentadas a la OMC disminuyó sensiblemente entre 2002 y 2007 . La cantidad de notificaciones
presentadas anualmente volvió a aumentar a partir de 2008, con niv eles variables en los últimos
años. En 2019 se presentaron 440 notificaciones en total, por lo que es el año en el que se ha
registrado el mayor número de notificaciones desde la creación del Comité de Agricultura (gráfico 1).
Gráfico 1 : Notificaciones pre sentadas a la OMC (1995 -2021*)
* Hasta el 3 de junio de 2021.
1.4. Para el período 1995 -2019 hay un total de 1.969 notificaciones periódicas pendientes, lo que
representa aproximadamente el 25 % de las notificaciones previstas .4 De las cinco obligaciones de
notificación anual, las esferas de la ayuda interna (cuadro DS.1) y de las subvenciones a la
exportación (cuadro ES.1) son las que registran un mayor número de notificaciones pendientes :
el 34% (895 notificaciones) y el 31% (918 notificaciones), respectivamente.
4 Quedan excluidas las obligaciones de notificación ad hoc aplicables solamente en caso de
mantenimiento de una medida específica (por ejemplo, se exige la presentación del cuadro ER.1 cu ando se
aplican restricciones a la exportación) y las notificaciones anuales cuando no es posible determinar a priori
si es aplicable la obligación de notificación en cuestión (por ejemplo, el cuadro NF.1, aplicable únicamente a los
Miembros donantes).
050100150200250300350400450Número de notificacionesG/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 4 -
Gráfico 2 : Número total de notificaciones pendientes, por tipo de obligación de
notificación (1995 -2019)
* Esta cifra corresponde al número de años abarcados por las notificaciones y no coincide
necesariamente con el núm ero de notificaciones presentadas, ya que algunas de estas abarcan más
de un año.
1.5. En el gráfico 3 infra se muestra el número de notificaciones pendientes por categoría de
Miembros (es decir, países desarrollados, países en desarrollo o países menos adelant ados (PMA)
Miembros) .
Gráfico 3 : Número de notificaciones pendientes, por tipo de Miembro (1995 -2019*)
* Hasta el 3 de junio de 2021.
1.1 Obligaciones de notificación anual
1.6. Ya han vencido los plazos para la presentación de las notificaciones que abarcan los años de
aplicación 1995 -2019. Los siete cuadros que figuran en la segunda parte del presente documento
(cumplimiento de las obligaciones de notificación anual) muestran el nivel de cumplimiento por los
Miembros de sus obligaciones en materia de notificación . En los cuadros solo figuran los Miembros
a los que son aplicables las obligaciones de notificación . A excepción de los cuadros MA.1 y MA.2, e l
Reino Unido no figura por separado en los diversos cuadros, ya que las notificaciones anuales de la
Unión Europea incluyen información con respecto al Reino Unido para los años de aplicación
abarcados por el presente documento . En la última columna de cada cuadro se indica el cumplimiento
por cada Miembro de la obligación de notificación correspondiente , expresado en porcentaje . La
información presentada en los cuadros corresponde a los 18 últimos años (200 3-2020). La columna
Presentadas
(6.030*)MA.2 (47)
MA.5 (69)
DS.1 (895)
ES.1 (918)
ES.2 (40)Pendientes
(1.969)
0501001502001995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019
Países desarrollados Países en desarrollo PMAG/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 5 -
relativa al año de aplicación 20 20 se incluye exclusivamente a efectos de información y no indica
necesariamente que deban present arse ahora las notificaciones . La serie cronológica completa
(1995 -2020) de datos sobre el cumplimiento de las obligaciones de notificación puede consultarse
en la sección "Cumplimiento de las obligaciones de notificación" de la página web del Sistema de
Gestión de la Información sobre la Agricultura ( http://agims.wto.org ).
1.7. El cumplimiento de las obligaciones en materia de notificación varía en gran medida en función
de los Miembros y el tipo de notificación . Solo unos pocos Miembros cumplen todas sus obligaciones
de notificación al 100 % (24 Miembros para las notificaciones del cuadro DS.1 y 45 Miembros para
las del cuadro ES.1 ). Al mismo tiempo, hay un porcentaje importante de Miembros cuya tasa de
cumplimiento de algunas de sus obligaciones en materia de notificación es del 0 % (28 Miembros
para las notificaciones del cuadro DS.1 y 20 Miembros para las notificaciones del cuadro ES.1)
(cuadro 1).
Cuadro 1 : Cumplimiento de las notificaciones por ran gos (1995 -2019)
% de cumplimiento MA.2 MA.5 DS.1 ES.1 ES.2
Miembros % Miembros % Miembros % Miembros % Miembros %
100% 29 72 25 76 24 18 45 33 20 74
≥ 50% pero < 100% 10 25 6 18 65 48 52 39 6 22
> 0% pero < 50% 1 3 1 3 18 13 18 13 1 4
0% 0 0 1 3 28 21 20 15 0 0
Total 40 100 33 100 135 100 135 100 27 100
Nota: Las cifras se basan en las notificaciones distribuidas a 3 de junio de 2021. N o tienen en cuenta los
aspectos relacionados con la puntualidad o la calidad de las notificaciones.
1.1.1 Notificaciones del cuadro MA.1, iniciales completas (Aplicación de los compromisos
sobre contingentes arancelarios y de otro tipo ; artículo 18.2 - 30 días)
1.8. Las notificaciones del cuadro MA.1 deben ser presentadas por todos los Miembros que hayan
asumido compromisos sobre contingentes arancelarios y de otro tipo, antes de la fecha de apertura
de los contingentes en cuestión o dentro de los 30 días siguientes a esa fecha . Las modificaciones
posteriores que se produzcan en la administración de los co ntingentes arancelarios y de otro tipo se
incluyen en ulteriores notificaciones del cuadro MA.1, que deben presentarse en un plazo de 30 días
contados a partir de la fecha de la modificación.
1.1.2 Notificaciones del cuadro MA.2 (Importaciones sujetas a continge ntes arancelarios
y de otro tipo ; artículo 18.2 - 60 días)
1.9. Las notificaciones del cuadro MA.2 deben ser presentadas anualmente por los Miembros que
hayan especificado compromisos sobre contingentes arancelarios y de otro tipo en la Sección I -B
(o la Secció n I-A) de la Parte I de su Lista para los productos de que se trate , no más tarde de los
60 días posteriores al año en cuestión .
1.10. Para el período 1995 -2019 hay 47 notificaciones del cuadro MA.2 pendientes, lo que
representa el 5% del total de notificaciones de este tipo previstas para este período .
De los 40 Miembros que tienen esta obligación de notificación, 29 están al día con sus notificaciones,
10 Miembros tienen tasas de cumplimiento de entre el 50 % y el 99 %, y solo 1 Miembro está por
debajo del umbral del 50 % (gráfico 4). G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 6 -
Gráfico 4 : Cumplimiento de la obligación de notificación del cuadro MA.2, 1995 -2019
(número de Miembros)
1.1.3 Notificaciones del cuadro MA.5 (Salvaguardia especial ; artículos 5.7 y 18.2 -
30 días)
1.11. Las notificaciones del cuadro MA.5 deben ser presentadas anualmente por los Miembros que
se hayan reservado el derecho a recurrir a las disposiciones de salvaguardia especial, según lo
indicado en la Sección I -A de la Parte I de su Lista , no más tarde de los 30 días posteriores al año
en cu estión .
1.12. Para el período 1995 -2019 hay 69 notificaciones del cuadro MA.5 pendientes, lo que
representa el 8% del total de notificaciones de este tipo previstas para este período .
De los 33 Miembros que tienen esta obligación de notificación, 25 Miembros est án al día con sus
obligaciones correspondientes al período considerado . Un total de 6 Miembros tienen una tasa de
cumplimiento de entre el 50 % y el 99 %, 1 Miembro tiene una tasa de entre el 1 % y el 49%, y otro
Miembro tiene una tasa de cumplimiento equival ente a cero (gráfico 5).
Gráfico 5 : Cumplimiento de la obligación de notificación del cuadro MA.5, 1995 -2019
(número de Miembros)
29101
100%
≥50% y <100%
>0% y <50%
0%
25611
100%
≥50% y <100%
>0% y <50%
0%G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 7 -
1.1.4 Notificaciones del cuadro DS.1 (Ayuda interna ; artículo 18.2 - 90 días, o 120 días si
la notificación inicial es provisional)
1.13. Las notificaciones del cuadro DS.1 deben ser presentadas anualmente por los Miembros que
hayan especificado niveles de base y anuales de compromiso en la Sección I de la Parte IV de su
Lista, no más tarde de los 90 días posteriores al año en c uestión . Todos los demás Miembros, excepto
los países menos adelantados (PMA) Miembros, deben presentar una notificación anual del
cuadro DS.1.5 Los PMA Miembros deben presentar cada dos años los cuadros justificantes DS.1
a DS.3 (lo que se indica con la anotación "(NA)").
1.14. Para el período 1995 -2019 hay 895 notificaciones del cuadro DS.1 pendientes . Esta categoría
de notificación tiene el porcentaje más alto de notificaciones pendientes : el 34% de las notificaciones
de este tipo están pendientes . Las tasas de cumplimiento respecto del cuadro DS.1 varían en gran
medida . Hay 24 Miembros con un cumplimiento del 100 %; mientras que 2 8 Miembros registra n una
tasa de cumplimiento del 0% (gráfico 6).
Gráfico 6 : Cumplimiento de la obligación de notificación del cuadro DS.1, 1995 -2019
(número de Miembros)
1.1.5 Notificaciones del cuadro ES.1 (Subven ciones a la exportación ; artículo 18.2 -
60 días, o 120 días si la notificación inicial es provisional)
1.15. Las notificaciones del cuadro ES.1 deben ser presen tadas anualmente por los Miembros que
hayan especificado niveles de base y anuales de compromiso en la Sección II de la Parte IV de su
Lista, no más tarde de los 60 días posteriores al año en cuestión . Los Miembros que no hayan
consignado tales compromisos deben presentar una notificación anual (en un plazo de 30 días
contados a partir del final del año en cuestión) en forma de declaración en la que confirmen que no
hay subvenciones a la exportación o, en el caso de los países en desarrollo Miembros que oto rguen
determinadas subvenciones a la exportación de conformidad con el artículo 9.4, en los términos del
cuadro justificante ES.2.
1.16. Para el período 1995 -2019 hay 918 notificaciones del cuadro ES.1 pendientes, lo que
representa el 31% del total de notificaciones de este tipo previstas para este período . Al igual que
en el caso del cuadro DS.1, las tasas de cumplimiento de la obligación de notificación del cuadro ES.1
varían en gran medida . Un total de 45 Miembros han presentado todas las notificaciones que les
corresponden, mientras que 20 Miembros tienen una tasa de cumplimiento del 0 % (gráfico 7).
5 Según lo previsto en el documento G/AG/2 y a petición de un país en desarrollo Miembro, el Comité
podrá dejar sin efecto esta prescripción, salvo en lo que respecta a los cuadros justificantes DS.1 a DS.3.
24
651828
100%
≥50% y <100%
>0% y <50%
0%G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 8 -
Gráfico 7 : Cumplimiento de la obligación de notificación del cuadro ES.1 , 1995 -2019
(número de Miembros)
1.1.6 Notificaciones del cuadro ES.2 (Exportaciones totales ; artículos 10 y 18.2 -
120 días)
1.17. Las notificaciones del cuadro ES.2 deben ser presentadas anualmente por los Miembros que
hayan especificado compromisos en materia de subvenciones a la exportación en la Sección II de la
Parte IV de su Lista y los "exportadores importantes" enumerados en el documento G/AG/2/Add.1 ,
no más tarde de los 120 días posteriores al año en cuestión . Algunos Miembros también presentan
una notificación del cuadro ES.2 de manera voluntaria, sobre la base del informe del Presidente
relativo a la revisión de la lista de exportadores importantes (G/AG/W/123) .
1.18. Para el período 1995 -2019 hay 40 notificaciones del cuadro ES.2 pendientes, lo que
representa el 6% del total de notificaciones de este tipo previstas para este período . Un total
de 20 Miembros han presentado todas las notificaciones que les corresponden del cuadro ES.2.
Además, 6 Miembros tienen una tasa de cumplimiento de entre el 50 % y el 99%. El Miembro
restante tiene una tasa de cumplimiento inferior al 50 % (gráfico 8).
Gráfico 8 : Cumplimiento de la obligación de notificación del cuadro ES.2, 1995 -2019
(número de Miembros)
45
521820
100%
≥50% y <100%
>0% y <50%
0%
2061
100%
≥50% y <100%
>0% y <50%
0%G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 9 -
1.2 Otras obligaciones de notificación periódica aplicables solamen te en caso de
mantenimiento de medidas específicas
1.2.1 Notificaciones del cuadro ES.3 (Volumen total de ayuda alimentaria ; artículos 10
y 18.2 - 120 días)
1.19. Las notificaciones del cuadro ES.3 deben ser presentadas anualmente por todos los Miembros
donantes de al imentos para todos los productos donados (excepto los productos respecto de los
cuales la información haya de presentarse en el cuadro ES.1) , no más tarde de los 120 días
posteriores al año en cuestión . Los Miembros que no proporcionan ayuda alimentaria no están
obligados a presentar una "notificación negativa" . Desde 1995 hasta el 3 de junio de 2021, se ha n
presentado a la OMC un total de 228 notificaciones del cuadro ES.3 (con inclusión de las adiciones,
correcciones y revisiones).
1.2.2 Notificaciones del cuadro NF.1 (Ayuda alimentaria y de otro tipo en el contexto de
la Decisión de Marrakech ; artículo 16.2 - 60 días)
1.20. Las notificaciones del cuadro NF.1 deben ser presentadas por todos los Miembros donantes
respecto de las medidas adoptadas en el marco de la Decisión sobre medidas relativas a los posibles
efectos negativos del programa de reforma en los países menos adelantados y en los países en
desarrollo importadores netos de productos alimenticios , no más tarde de los 60 días posteriores al
año en cuestión . Los Miembros que no proporcionan ayuda alimentaria o de otro tipo a los países de
que se trata no están obligados a presentar una "notificación negativa" . Desde 1995 hasta el 3 de
junio de 2021, se ha n presentado a la OMC un total de 232 notificaciones del cuadro NF.1 (con
inclusión de las adiciones, correcciones y revisiones).
1.3 Símbolos y abreviaturas
Un espacio en blanco (" ") indica que la notificación está pendiente.
Un doble guion (" --") indica, con respecto a las notificaciones del cuadro NF.1 y el cuadro ES.3,
que no se ha presentado ninguna notificación.
Una "equis" mayúscula (" X") indica que se ha distribuido una notificación . De esto no se ha de
deducir necesariamente que se trata de una notificación completa o satisfactoria en lo que respecta
a las prescripciones.
Una "equis" mayúscula seguida de un asterisco en forma de superíndice (" X*") indica que se ha
presentado una revisión o suplemento de la notificación inicial única del cuadro MA.1.
Una "pe" mayúscula (" P") indica que s e ha recibido una notificación que está siendo procesada o
está pendiente de que el Miembro que notifica presente información adicional . Las notificaciones
pendientes llevarán el símbolo "P" durante un período máximo de seis meses.
Una "ene" mayúscula y un a "a" mayúscula (" NA") indica que la prescripción no era aplicable en el
período considerado, sea porque no había ningún compromiso pertinente (por ejemplo, en relación
con contingentes arancelarios), sea porque el país en cuestión aún no era Miembro de la OMC.
Una "ene" mayúscula y una "a" mayúscula entre paréntesis (" (NA) ") se utiliza en el caso de los PMA
Miembros, que deben presentar cada dos años las notificaciones relativas a la ayuda interna.
Las celdas sombreadas indican que el Miembro ha consignado en su Lista un compromiso de
reducción de la ayuda interna y/o de las subvenciones a la exportación.
La Unión Europea hace referencia a la UE -15 a partir de 1995, la UE -25 a partir de 2004, la UE -27
a partir de 2007 y la UE -28 a partir de 2013. E l Reino Unido dejó de ser Estado miembro de la
Unión Europea el 1 de febrero de 2020; l as notificaciones anuales sobre agricultura de la Unión
Europea incluyen información con respecto al Reino Unido para los años de aplicaci ón abarcados
por el presente documento.
Suiza hace referencia a Suiza -Liechtenstein en todos los cuadros, excepto en las notificaciones del
cuadro NF.1.
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 10 -
2 CUMPLIMIENTO DE LAS OBLIGACIONES DE NOTIFICACIÓN ANUAL
Los porcentajes correspondientes al "cumplimiento (%)" que figuran en la última columna de los cuadros 2.1 a 2.5 infra se calculan sobre la base del número de
años abarcados por las notificaciones de cada Miembro, distribuidas al 3 de junio de 2021, en comparación con el número total de años de aplicación
correspondientes a ese Miembro para el período 1995 -2019. Un cumpli miento del 100 % de la obligación en materia de notificación indica que se distribuyeron
todas las notificaciones pertinentes correspondientes al período 1995 -2019 antes de la fecha límite del 3 de junio . No se tiene en cuenta la fecha efectiva de
presentac ión/distribución de las notificaciones, y por lo tanto el porcentaje de cumplimiento no tiene en cuenta la "puntualidad" de l as notificaciones presentadas
por los Miembros . El cumplimiento tampoco se refiere a la calidad ni al contenido de las notificacion es. Habida cuenta de los diferentes tipos de años de aplicación
(año civil, campaña de comercialización, ejercicio financiero, etc.) utilizados en las notificaciones anuales de los Miembros , el año 2020 no se ha tenido en cuenta
en los cálculos sobre el cu mplimiento ya que es posible que en algunos casos no se hayan cumplido los plazos de presentación de las notificaciones
correspondientes a 2020 . En los cuadros se han incluido las notificaciones de los Miembros correspondientes a 2020 distribuidas al 3 de junio. La información
detallada sobre el cumplimiento (para el período 1995 -2020) también puede consultarse en la sección "Cumplimiento de las obligaciones de notificación" del
Sistema de Gestión de la Información sobre la Agricultura ( http://agims.wto.org/es ).
2.1 Compromisos sobre contingentes arancelarios y de otro tipo (cuadros MA.1 y MA.2)
MA.1 MA.2
Inicial 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento
(%)
1 Australia X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
2 Barbados X* 24
3 Brasil X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
4 Canadá X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
5 Chile X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
6 China X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
7 Colombia X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
8 Costa Rica X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
9 República Dominicana X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
10 Ecuador X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
11 El Salvador X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
12 Unión Europea X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
13 Guatemala X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
14 Islandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
15 India X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
16 Indonesia X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
17 Israel X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
18 Japón X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
19 Kazajstán X NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X 100
20 Corea, República de X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
21 Malasia X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
22 México X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
23 Moldova, República de X NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X X 100
24 Marruecos X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
25 Nueva Zelandia X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
26 Nicaragua X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
27 Macedonia del Norte X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 94
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 11 -
MA.1 MA.2
Inicial 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento
(%)
28 Noruega X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
29 Panamá X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
30 Filipinas X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
31 Federación de Rusia X* NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X 100
32 Sudáfrica X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
33 Suiza X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
34 Taipei Chino X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
35 Tailandia X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
36 Túnez X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X P P 92
37 Ucrania X* NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
38 Reino Unido X NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
39 Estados Unidos de
América X* X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
40 Venezuela, República
Bolivariana X*
X X X X
X
X X
56
41 Viet Nam X NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X 77
2.2 Salvaguardia especial (cuadro MA.5)
MA.5
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
1 Australia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
2 Barbados X X X X X X X X X X X 76
3 Botswana X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
4 Canadá X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
5 Colombia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
6 Costa Rica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
7 Ecuador X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
8 El Salvador X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
9 Eswatini 0
10 Unión Europea X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
11 Guatemala X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
12 Islandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
13 Indonesia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
14 Israel X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
15 Japón X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
16 Corea, República de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
17 Malasia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
18 México X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
19 Marruecos X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
20 Namibia X X X X X X X 60
21 Nueva Zelandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
22 Nicaragua X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
23 Noruega X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
24 Panamá X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 12 -
MA.5
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
25 Filipinas X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
26 Sudáfrica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
27 Suiza X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
28 Taipei Chino X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
29 Tailandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
30 Túnez X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
31 Estados Unidos de
América X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
32 Uruguay X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
33 Venezuela, República
Bolivariana de 16
2.3 Ayuda interna (cuadro DS.1)
DS.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento
(%)
1 Afganistán NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
2 Albania X X X X X X X X X X 65
3 Angola (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
4 Antigua y Barbuda 0
5 Argentina X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
6 Armenia X X X X X X X X X X X X 71
7 Australia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
8 Bahrein, Reino de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
9 Bangladesh (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 53
10 Barbados X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
11 Belice 0
12 Benin (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 8
13 Bolivia, Estado
Plurinacional de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
96
14 Botswana X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
15 Brasil X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
16 Brunei Darussalam 0
17 Burkina Faso X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) 92
18 Burundi (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X X X X X (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) 86
19 Camboya NA X X X X X X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) 91
20 Camerún X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
21 Canadá X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
22 Cabo Verde NA NA NA NA NA 0
23 República
Centroafricana (NA)
(NA)
(NA)
(NA)
(NA)
(NA)
(NA)
(NA)
(NA)
0
24 Chad X X X X X X X X X X X X (NA) (NA) (NA) 90
25 Chile X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
26 China X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 86
27 Colombia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 13 -
DS.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento
(%)
28 Congo X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
29 Costa Rica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
30 Côte d'Ivoire X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 80
31 Cuba X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
32 República Democrática
del Congo (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
33 Djibouti (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
34 Dominica 0
35 República Dominicana X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
36 Ecuador X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
37 Egipto X X X X X X X X X X X X 64
38 El Salvador X X X X X X X X X 68
39 Eswatini 0
40 Unión Europea X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
41 Fiji X X X X X X X X X X X X X 83
42 Gabón X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
43 Gambia X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 75
44 Georgia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
45 Ghana 0
46 Granada 0
47 Guatemala X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
48 Guinea (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) X X X (NA) 21
49 Guinea -Bissau (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
50 Guyana X X 40
51 Haití (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 17
52 Honduras X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
53 Hong Kong, China X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
54 Islandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
55 India X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
56 Indonesia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
57 Israel X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
58 Jamaica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
59 Japón X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
60 Jordania X X X X X X X X X X X X 75
61 Kazajstán NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA P 0
62 Kenya 8
63 Corea, República de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
64 Kuwait, Estado de 0
65 República Kirguisa X X X X X X X X 41
66 República Democrática
Popular Lao NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA (NA)
X
(NA)
(NA)
25
67 Lesotho (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 8
68 Liberia NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
69 Macao, China X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
70 Madagascar (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 75
71 Malawi (NA) X X X X X X X (NA) (NA) X X (NA) (NA) 75
72 Malasia X X X X X X X X X X X X 80
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 14 -
DS.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento
(%)
73 Maldivas (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 21
74 Malí (NA) X X X X X X X X X X X X X 80
75 Mauritania (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
76 Mauricio X X X X X X X X 32
77 México X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X P 96
78 Moldova, República de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
79 Mongolia X X 22
80 Montenegro NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X 13
81 Marruecos X X X X X 52
82 Mozambique (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
83 Myanmar (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 53
84 Namibia X X X X X X X 60
85 Nepal NA (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X X X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) X (NA) 89
86 Nueva Zelandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
87 Nicaragua X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
88 Níger (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
89 Nigeria X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
90 Macedonia del Norte X X X X X 29
91 Noruega X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
92 Omán X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 95
93 Pakistán X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
94 Panamá X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
95 Papua Nueva Guinea X X X X 17
96 Paraguay X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
97 Perú X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
98 Filipinas X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
99 Qatar X X X X X X X X X X 67
100 Federación de Rusia NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X 100
101 Rwanda (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
102 Saint Kitts y Nevis 0
103 Santa Lucía 0
104 San Vicente y las
Granadinas X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
96
105 Samoa NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA (NA) X X X X X X X 100
106 Arabia Saudita, Reino
de la NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X X X 86
107 Senegal X X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) 88
108 Seychelles NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X 60
109 Sierra Leona (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
110 Singapur X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
111 Islas Salomón (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
112 Sudáfrica X X X X X X X X X X X X 80
113 Sri Lanka X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
114 Suriname 0
115 Suiza X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
116 Taipei Chino X X X X X X X X X X X X X X P 83
117 Tayikistán NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X 86
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 15 -
DS.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento
(%)
118 Tanzanía (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
119 Tailandia X X X X X X X X X 68
120 Togo (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) 92
121 Tonga NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
122 Trinidad y Tabago X X X X X X X X X X X 76
123 Túnez X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
124 Turquía X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
125 Uganda (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 42
126 Ucrania NA NA NA NA NA X X X X 33
127 Emiratos Árabes
Unidos X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
128 Estados Unidos de
América X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
129 Uruguay X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
130 Vanuatu NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA (NA) (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) 50
131 Venezuela, República
Bolivariana de 16
132 Viet Nam NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X X 85
133 Yemen NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 0
134 Zambia (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) X (NA) (NA) (NA) 67
135 Zimbabwe 20
2.4 Subvenciones a la exportación : Compromisos de reducción de los desembolsos presupuestarios y las cantidades (cuadro ES.1)
ES.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
1 Afganistán NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X 100
2 Albania X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
3 Angola X 4
4 Antigua y Barbuda 0
5 Argentina X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
6 Armenia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 82
7 Australia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
8 Bahrein, Reino de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
9 Bangladesh X X X X 48
10 Barbados X X X X X X 56
11 Belice 0
12 Benin 0
13 Bolivia, Estado
Plurinacional de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
96
14 Botswana X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
15 Brasil X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
16 Brunei Darussalam 0
17 Burkina Faso X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
18 Burundi X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 16 -
ES.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
19 Camboya NA X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
20 Camerún X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
21 Canadá X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
22 Cabo Verde NA NA NA NA NA X 8
23 República Centroafricana 0
24 Chad X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 83
25 Chile X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
26 China X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
27 Colombia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
28 Congo X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
29 Costa Rica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
30 Côte d'Ivoire X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
31 Cuba X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
32 República Democrática
del Congo 0
33 Djibouti 0
34 Dominica 12
35 República Dominicana X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
36 Ecuador X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
37 Egipto 16
38 El Salvador X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
39 Eswatini X X X X X X X X X 64
40 Unión Europea X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
41 Fiji X X X X X X X X X X X X X 83
42 Gabón X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
43 Gambia X X X X X X X X 58
44 Georgia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
45 Ghana 24
46 Granada 0
47 Guatemala X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
48 Guinea X X X X X X X X X 36
49 Guinea -Bissau 0
50 Guyana X X 40
51 Haití X X X X X X X X X X X X 79
52 Honduras X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
53 Hong Kong, China X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
54 Islandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
55 India X X X X X X X X X X X 76
56 Indonesia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
57 Israel X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
58 Jamaica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
59 Japón X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
60 Jordania X X X X X X X X X X X X 75
61 Kazajstán NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X 25
62 Kenya 12
63 Corea, República de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
64 Kuwait, Estado de X X X X X X X X X 68
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 17 -
ES.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
65 República Kirguisa X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 95
66 República Democrática
Popular Lao NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X
14
67 Lesotho X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
68 Liberia NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0
69 Macao, China X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
70 Madagascar X X X X X X X X 64
71 Malawi X X X X X X X X X X X X X 84
72 Malasia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
73 Maldivas 16
74 Malí X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
75 Mauritania 0
76 Mauricio X X X X X X X X 32
77 México X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
78 Moldova, República de X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
79 Mongolia X X X X X X X X X X X X X 83
80 Montenegro NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X 100
81 Marruecos X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
82 Mozambique 0
83 Myanmar X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
84 Namibia X X X X X X X 60
85 Nepal NA X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 94
86 Nueva Zelandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
87 Nicaragua X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
88 Níger 0
89 Nigeria X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
90 Macedonia del Norte X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
91 Noruega X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
92 Omán X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 95
93 Pakistán X X X X X X X X X X X 76
94 Panamá X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
95 Papua Nueva Guinea 0
96 Paraguay X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
97 Perú X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
98 Filipinas X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
99 Qatar X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
100 Federación de Rusia NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X 100
101 Rwanda 0
102 Saint Kitts y Nevis 0
103 Santa Lucía 20
104 San Vicente y las
Granadinas X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
96
105 Samoa NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X 100
106 Arabia Saudita, Reino de la NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
107 Senegal X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
108 Seychelles NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X 100
109 Sierra Leona 0
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 18 -
ES.1
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
110 Singapur X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
111 Islas Salomón 0
112 Sudáfrica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
113 Sri Lanka X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
114 Suriname 24
115 Suiza X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
116 Taipei Chino X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
117 Tayikistán NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X 86
118 Tanzanía 0
119 Tailandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
120 Togo X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
121 Tonga NA NA NA NA X X 15
122 Trinidad y Tabago X X X X X X X X X X X 76
123 Túnez X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
124 Turquía X X X X X X X X X X X 68
125 Uganda X X 40
126 Ucrania NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X X X X 92
127 Emiratos Árabes Unidos X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
128 Estados Unidos de América X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
129 Uruguay X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
130 Vanuatu NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X 88
131 Venezuela, República
Bolivariana de 16
132 Viet Nam NA NA NA NA X X X X X X X X X 69
133 Yemen NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0
134 Zambia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
135 Zimbabwe X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
2.5 Subvenciones a la exportación : Notificación de las exportaciones totales (cuadro ES.2)
ES:2
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
1 Argentina X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
2 Australia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
3 Brasil X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
4 Canadá X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
5 Chile X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
China6 X X X X X X X NA
6 Colombia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X NA NA 100
7 Costa Rica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
6 China y Ucrania notificaron sus exportaciones to tales (cuadro ES.2) de forma voluntaria sobre la base del informe del Presidente relativo a la revisión de la lista de
exportadores importantes (G/AG/W/123).
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 19 -
ES:2
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Cumplimiento (%)
8 Cuba7 X X X X X X X X X NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 100
9 Unión Europea X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
10 Honduras X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
11 Islandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X NA NA NA 100
12 Indonesia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 96
13 Israel X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
14 Malasia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 88
15 México X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X NA NA 100
16 Nueva Zelandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
17 Noruega X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
18 Pakistán X X X X X X X X X X X 76
19 Filipinas X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
20 Sudáfrica X X X X X X X X X X X X X X NA NA 92
21 Suiza X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X NA NA NA 100
22 Tailandia X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
23 Turquía X X X X X X X X X X X 76
Ucrania12 X X X X X X NA
24 Estados Unidos de América X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
25 Uruguay X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X NA NA 100
26 Venezuela, República Bolivariana de 16
27 Zimbabwe X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 100
7 Cuba notificó al Comité de Agricultura lo siguiente: "De conformidad con los debates de la reuni ón del Comité de marzo de 2014 (párrafo 2.6 del documento G/AG/R/74),
la República de Cuba desea informar que a partir de 2011 ya no notificará más las cifras del cuadro ES.2, ya que ha dejado de ser un exportador importante de azúcar, razón que
justificab a este tipo de notificaciones" (G/AG/N/CUB/52).
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 20 -
3 OTRAS OBLIGACIONES DE NOTIFICACIÓN PERIÓDICA APLICABLES SOLAMENTE EN CASO DE MANTENIMIENTO DE MEDIDAS ESPECÍFICAS
3.1 Subvenciones a la exportación : Notificación del volumen total de ayuda alimentaria (cuadro ES.3), 200 7-2020
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Brasil Cuba Australia Australia
Brasil Brasil Brasil Brasil Brasil Brasil Brasil Brasil Brasil Cuba Unión
Europea Brasil Brasil
Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Cuba Japón Suiza China "P" Cuba
Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Japón Noruega China "P" Cuba Suiza
Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Estados
Unidos de
América Suiza Estados
Unidos de
América
Japón Japón Japón Japón Japón Noruega Suiza Tailandia
Japón Japón Japón Corea,
República de Corea,
República de Corea,
República de Corea,
República de Noruega Suiza Estados
Unidos de
América
Estados
Unidos de
América
Corea,
República de Corea,
República de Corea,
República de Noruega Noruega Noruega Noruega Sudáfrica Tailandia
Noruega Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Sudáfrica
Sudáfrica Suiza Suiza Suiza Suiza Suiza Suiza
G/AG/GEN/86/Rev.42
- 21 -
3.2 Notificación de conformidad con el artículo 16.2 del Acuerdo sobre la Agricultura (cuadro NF.1), 200 7-2020
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Australia Unión
Europea Unión
Europea
Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Cuba Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Canadá Unión
Europea Corea,
República de Federación
de Rusia
Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Unión
Europea Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Cuba Indonesia Nueva
Zelandia
Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Japón Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Unión
Europea Corea,
República de Noruega
Japón Japón Japón Japón Japón Nueva
Zelandia Indonesia Indonesia Indonesia Indonesia Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Federación
de Rusia
Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Noruega Japón Japón Japón Japón Noruega Noruega Suiza
Noruega Noruega Noruega Noruega Noruega Sudáfrica Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Nueva
Zelandia Federación
de Rusia Federación
de Rusia Estados
Unidos de
América
Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Sudáfrica Suiza Noruega Noruega Noruega Noruega Suiza Suiza
Suiza Suiza Suiza Suiza Suiza Estados
Unidos de
América Sudáfrica Federación
de Rusia Federación
de Rusia Federación
de Rusia Estados
Unidos de
América Estados
Unidos de
América
Estados
Unidos de
América Estados
Unidos de
América Estados
Unidos de
América Estados
Unidos de
América Estados
Unidos de
América
Suiza Sudáfrica Suiza Suiza
Estados
Unidos de
América Suiza Estados
Unidos de
América Estados
Unidos de
América
Estados
Unidos de
América
__________
| 10,998
| 53,736
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_SPS_NUSA3123.pdf
|
r_G_SPS_NUSA3123
|
G/SPS/N/USA/3123
6 novembre 2019
(19-7525) Page: 1/2
Comité des mesures sanitaires et phytosanitaires Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
1. Membre notifiant : ÉTATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés:
2. Organisme responsable : Environmental Protection Agency (Agence pour la protection
de l'environnement)
3. Produits visés (Prière d'indiquer le(s) numéro(s) du tarif figurant dans les listes
nationales déposées à l'OMC . Les numéros de l'ICS devraient aussi être indiqués,
le cas échéant) : Légumes à feuilles du genre Brassica , sous -groupe 4 -16B; laitue-
asperge ; pois chiches à gousse comestible ; pois-chiches verts, écossés ; pois nain à
gousse comestible ; pois à gousse comestible ; petits pois, verts, écossés ; fenouil de
Florence, feuilles fraîches et tiges ; pois potagers, verts, écossés ; gesse à graines
sphériques, à gousse comestible ; pois verts à gousse comestible ; pois verts écossés ;
chou-rave; légumes à feuilles à pétioles du sous -groupe 22B ; légumes à feuilles du sous -
groupe 4 -16A; lentilles à gousse comestible ; lentilles vertes écossées ; oignons en bulbes
du sous -groupe 3 -07A; oignons verts du sous -groupe 3 -07B; oignons ; pommes de terre ;
poivrons/aubergines du sous -groupe 8 -10B; pois cajan à gousse comestible ; pois cajan
verts écossés ; pois snap à gousse comestible ; pois mange -tout à gousse comestible ; pois
sugar snap à gousse comestible ; tomates du sous -groupe 8 -10A; légumes du genre
Brassica à pomme et tige du sous -groupe 5 -16, à l'e xception des brocolis ; légumes
tubéreux ou à corme du sous -groupe 1C
4. Régions ou pays susceptibles d'être concernés, si cela est pertinent ou faisable:
[X] Tous les partenaires commerciaux
[ ] Régions ou pays spécifiques:
5. Intitulé du texte notifié : Cyromazine ; Pesticide Tolerances . Final Rule (Cyromazine .
Limites maximales de résidus pour pesticide . Règle finale) . Langue(s) : anglais . Nombre
de pages : 7
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2019-10-07/html/2019 -21542.htm
6. Teneur : Le texte réglementaire notifié établit des limites maximales pour les résidus de
cyromazine dans ou sur de multiples produits, qui sont recensées et examinées dans le
document.
7. Objectif et raison d'être : [X] innocuité des produits alimentaires, [ ] santé des
animaux, [ ] préservation des végétaux, [ ] protection des personnes contre les
maladies ou les parasites des animaux/des plantes, [ ] protection du territoire
contre d'autres dommages attribuables à des parasites.
8. Existe -t-il une norme internationale pertinente ? Dans l'affirmative, indiquer
laquelle:
[ ] Commission du Codex Alimentarius (par exemple, intitulé ou numéro de
série de la norme du Codex ou du texte apparenté) : G/SPS/N/USA/3123
- 2 -
[ ] Organisation mondiale de la santé animale (OIE) (par exemple, numéro
de chapitre du Code sanitaire pour les animaux terr estres ou du Code
sanitaire pour les animaux aquatiques) :
[ ] Convention internationale pour la protection des végétaux (par exemple,
numéro de la NIMP) :
[X] Néant
La réglementation projetée est -elle conforme à la norme internationale
pertinente?
[ ] Oui [ ] Non
Dans la négative, indiquer, chaque fois que cela sera possible, en quoi et
pourquoi elle diffère de la norme internationale:
9. Autres documents pertinents et langue(s) dans laquelle (les quelles) ils sont
disponibles: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2018-07-24/html/2018 -
15722.htm (disponible en anglais)
10. Date projetée pour l'adoption (jj/mm/aa) : 7 octobre 2 019
Date projetée pour la publication (jj/mm/aa) : 7 octobre 2 019
11. Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : [ ] Six mois à compter de la date de
publication, et/ou (jj/mm/aa) : 7 octobre 2 019
[ ] Mesure de facilitation du commerce
12. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : [ ] Soixante jours à compter
de la date de distribution de la notification et/ou ( jj/mm/aa ): sans objet
Organisme ou autorité désigné pour traiter les observations : [ ] autorité
nationale responsable des notifications, [ ] point d'information national .
Adresse, numéro de fax et adresse électronique (s'il y a lieu) d'un autre
organisme:
Michael L. G oodis, P.E., Director, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pestici de
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave . NW., Washington,
DC 20460 -0001. Numéro de téléphone central : +(703) 305 7090 ; courrier électronique :
RDFRNotices@epa.gov
13. Texte(s) disponible(s) auprès de : [ ] autorité nationale responsable des
notifications, [ ] point d'information national . Adresse, numéro de fax et adresse
électronique (s'il y a lieu) d'un autre organisme:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2019-10-07/html/2019 -21542.htm
| 742
| 4,843
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN23_BDI345.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN23_BDI345
|
G/TBT/N/BDI/345, G/TBT /N/KEN/1413
G/TBT/N/RWA/852, G/TBT/N/TZA/935
G/TBT/N/UGA/1761
12 avril 2023
(23-2584) Page: 1/3
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : BURUNDI, KENYA, OUGANDA, RWANDA, TANZANIE
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable:
Uganda National Bureau of Standards (Office national de normalisation)
Plot 2 -12 ByPass Link, Bweyogerere Industrial and Business Park
P.O. Box 6329
Kampala (Ouganda)
Téléphone : +(256) 4 1733 3250/1/2
Fax: +(256) 4 1428 6123
Courrier électronique: info@unbs.go.ug
Site Web: https://www.unbs.go.ug
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'autorité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organisme susmentionné:
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ],
7.2 [ ], autres:
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être indiqués, le cas
échéant) : Fils retors ou câblés contenant au moins 85% en poids de fibres discontinues
acryliques ou modacryliques (à l'exclusion des fils à coudre et des fils conditionnés pour
la vente au détail) (SH 550932) ; Textiles en général ( ICS 59.080.01).
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : DEAS 1140:2023 . Acrylic
yarn - Specification (Fils en acrylique - Spécifications), première édition, 14 pages, en
anglais.
6. Teneur : Le projet de norme est -africaine notifié spécifie les exigences et les méthodes
d'essai et d'échantillonnage applicables aux fils en acrylique destinés à être utilisés pour
le tissage à la machine ou à la main et le tricotage à la main ou à la machine.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Information des consommateurs, étiquetage ; prévention des pratiques de
nature à induire en erreur et protection des consommateurs ; protection de la santé ou de
la sécurit é des personnes ; exigences en matière de qualité ; harmonisation . G/TBT/N/BDI/345 • G/TBT/N/KEN/1413 • G/TBT/N/RWA/852 • G/TBT/N/TZA/935 •
G/TBT/N/UGA/1761
- 2 -
8. Documents pertinents:
1. ISO 2 . Textiles - Indication du sens de torsion des fils et produits associés
2. ISO 105 -B02. Textiles - Essais de solidité des coloris - Partie B02 : Solidité des
coloris à la lumière artificielle : Lampe à arc au xénon
3. ISO 105 -C10. Textiles - Essais de solidité des teintures - Partie C10 : Solidité des
teintures au lavage au savon ou au savon et à la soude
4. ISO 105 -D02. Textiles - Essais de solidité des teintures - Partie D02 : Solidité des
coloris au frottement : Solvants organiques
5. ISO 105 -E04. Textiles - Essais de solidité des coloris - Partie E04 : Solidité des
coloris à la sueur
6. ISO 105 -X11. Textiles - Essais de solidité des tein tures - Partie X11 : Solidité des
teintures au repassage à chaud
7. ISO 105 -X12. Textiles - Essais de solidité des coloris - Partie X12 : Solidité des
coloris au frottement - Petites surfaces
8. ISO 1833 -12. Textiles - Analyse chimique quantitative - Partie 12 : Mélanges
d'acrylique, certains modacryliques, certaines chlorofibres, certains élasthannes
avec certaines autres fibres (méthode au diméthylformamide)
9. ISO 2060. T extiles - Fils sur enroulements - Détermination de la masse linéique
(masse par unité de longueu r) par la méthode de l'écheveau
10. ISO 2061 . Textiles - Détermination de la torsion des fils - Méthode par comptage
direct
11. ISO 2062. T extiles - Fils sur enroulements - Détermination de la force de rupture
et de l'allongement à la rupture des fils individuels à l'aide d'un appareil d'essai à
vitesse constante d'allongement
12. ISO 3758. T extiles - Code d'étiquetage d'entretien au moyen de symboles
13. ISO 14362 -1. Textiles - Méthodes de détermination de certaines amines
aromatiques dérivées de colorants azoïques - Partie 1 : Détection de l'utilisation
de certains colorants azoïques accessibles avec ou sans extraction
14. ISO 14362 -3. Textiles - Méthodes de détermination de certaines a mines
aromatiques dérivées de colorants azoïques - Partie 3 : Détection de l'utilisation
de certains colorants azoïques susceptibles de libérer du 4 -aminoazobenzène
15. ISO 16373 -1. Textiles - Colorants - Partie 1 : Principes généraux d'essais des
textiles color és pour l'identification des colorants
16. ISO 16373 -2. Textiles - Colorants - Partie 2 : Méthode générale de détermination
des colorants extractibles, notamment les colorants allergènes et cancérigènes
(méthode utilisant un mélange pyridine/eau)
17. ISO 16373 -3. Textiles - Colorants - Partie 3 : Méthode de détermination de
certains colorants cancérigènes (méthode à la triéthylamine et au méthanol)
18. ISO 16549 . Textiles - Irrégularité des fils textiles - Méthode capacitive
19. ISO 17202 . Textiles - Détermination de la tors ion des filés de fibres simples -
Méthode de détorsion/retorsion
20. ISO/TR 11827 . Textiles - Essai de composition - Identification des fibres
21. KS 496 : 2018. Acrylic yarn - Specification
22. US 2150 : 2021. Textiles - Acrylic yarn - Specification
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : à déterminer
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : à déterminer G/TBT/N/BDI/345 • G/TBT/N/KEN/1413 • G/TBT/N/RWA/852 • G/TBT/N/TZA/935 •
G/TBT/N/UGA/1761
- 3 -
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 60 jours à compter de la date de
notification
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [X] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
Uganda National Bureau of Standards
Plot 2 -12 ByPass Link, Bweyogerere Industria l and Business Park
P.O. Box 6329
Kampala (Ouganda)
Téléphone : +(256) 4 1733 3250/1/2
Fax: +(256) 4 1428 6123
Courrier électronique: info@unbs.go.ug
Site Web: https://www.unbs.go.ug
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/TBT/UGA/23_8880_00_e.pdf
| 1,003
| 6,502
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN23_EU1041.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN23_EU1041
|
G/TBT/N/EU/1041
21 December 2023
(23-8748) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
The following notification is being circulated in accordance with Article 10.6
1. Notifying Member: EUROPEAN UNION
If applicable, name of local government involved (Article 3.2 and 7.2):
2. Agency responsible: European Commission
Name and address (including telephone and fax numbers , email and website
addresses, if available) of agency or authority designated to handle comments
regarding the notification shall be indicated if different from above:
European Comm ission,
EU-TBT Enquiry Point,
Fax: +(32) 2 299 80 43,
E-mail: grow-eu-tbt@ec.europa.eu
Website: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools -databases/tbt/en/
3. Notified under Article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ], 7.2 [ ],
other :
4. Products covered (HS or CCCN where applicable, otherwise national tariff
heading. ICS numbers may be provided in addition, where applicable): 1509,
Olive oil and its fractions, whether or not refined, but not chemically modified; 1510,
Other oi ls and their fractions, obtained solely from olives, whether or not refined, but not
chemically modified, including blends of these oils or fractions with oils or fractions of
heading 1509;
5. Title, number of pages and language(s) of the notified documen t: Draft
Commission Delegated Regulation amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2104
supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the
Council as regards marketing standards for olive oil; (4 page(s), in English), (16 page(s ),
in English)
6. Description of content: Limit values for the characteristics of olive oil set out in
Regulation (EU) 2022/2104 are set in accordance with the IOC Trade Standard applying
to olive oil and olive -pomace oil (IOC Trade Standard). The IOC Tra de Standard changed
with regard to one chemical parameter, Δ -7-stigmastenol, and Delegated Regulation (EU)
2022/2104 should be amended accordingly.
7. Objective and rationale, including the nature of urgent problems where
applicable: The purpose of this a ct is to align Commission Delegated Regulation (EU)
2022/2104 of 29 July 2022 with IOC Trade standard with regard to one chemical
parameter, Δ -7-stigmastenol; Reducing trade barriers and facilitating trade G/TBT/N/EU/1041
- 2 -
8. Relevant documents:
Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2104 of 29 July 2022 supplementing
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards
marketing standards for olive oil, and repealing Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2568/91
and Commission I mplementing Regulation (EU) No 29/2012
https://eur -lex.europa.eu/legal -
content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2022.284.01.0 001.01.ENG&toc=OJ%3AL%3A20
22%3A284%3ATOC
9. Proposed date of adoption: March 2024 (estimation)
Proposed date of entry into force: June 2024 (On the twentieth day following that of
its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union).
10. Final date for comments: 60 days from notification
11. Texts available from: National enquiry point [ ] or address, telephone and fax
numbers and email and website addresses, if available , of other body:
European Commission,
EU-TBT Enquiry Point,
Fax: + (32) 2 299 80 43,
E-mail: grow-eu-tbt@ec.europa.eu
The text is available on the EU -TBT Website : http://ec.europa.eu/growth/tools -
databases/tbt/en/
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/TBT/EEC/23_14793_00_e.pdf
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/TBT/EEC/23_14793_01_e.pdf
| 502
| 3,684
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_PLURI_GPALEGIS_JPN8.pdf
|
s_PLURI_GPALEGIS_JPN8
|
GPA/LEGIS/JPN/8
6 de abril de 2023
(23-2468) Página: 1/2
Comité de Contratación Pública Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN DE LA LEGISLACIÓN INTERNA RELACIONADA CON
EL ACUERDO SOBRE CONTRATACIÓN PÚBLICA DE 2012
NOTIFICACIÓN DEL JAPÓN
La siguiente comunicación, de fecha 30 de marzo de 2023 , se distribuye a petición de la delegación
del Japón.
_______________
Parte que
presenta la
notificación JAPÓN
Fundamento
jurídico ARTÍCULO XXII.5 DEL ACP DE 2012
Decisión del Comité sobre las prescripciones de notificación establecidas
en los artículos XIX y X XII.5 del ACP de 2012 (documento GPA/113 , Anexo A
del Apéndice 2, párrafo 1 , páginas 436 y 437 )
Título del texto
jurídico
notificado Revisión de la Política Básica de Promoción de la Contratación Pública
Ecológica , en virtud de la Ley de Fomento de la Contratación de Productos y
Servicios Ecológicamente Inocuos por parte del Estado y otras Entidades
Enlace al texto
jurídico https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/GPA/JPN/23_8759_00.e.pdf
Situación de la
notificación Primera notificación (a saber, legislación nacional nueva)
Cambio, modificación o revisión del texto jurídico notificado
Sustitución o refundición del/de los texto(s) jurídico(s) notificado(s)
Referencias de
notificaciones
anteriores GPA/LEGIS/JPN/5 ; GPA/LEGIS/JPN/4 ; GPA/LEGIS/JPN/3 ; GPA/LEGIS/JPN/1
Breve descripción del texto jurídico notificado
La Política Básica de Promoción de la Contratación Pública Ecológica (denominada en adelante la
"Política Básica") fue aprobada en una reunión del Consejo de Ministros en febrero de 2001, de
conformidad con la Ley de Fomento de la Contratación de Productos y Servicios Ecológicamente
Inocuos por parte del Estado y otras Ent idades, que entró en vigor en enero de 2001.
Por lo que se refiere a las partidas de contratación designadas en el marco de la Política Básica,
el 24 de febrero de 202 3 se aprobaron, en una reunión del Consejo de Ministros, 4 partida s
adicional es y la revisión de los criterios de evaluación específicos de 32 partidas.
El texto de la Política Básica revisada se puede consultar en el sitio web del Ministerio del Medio
Ambiente, cuya dirección s e indica a continuación:
https://www.env.go.jp/policy/hozen/green/g -law/net/kihonhoushin.html (en japonés)
http://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/policy/green/index.html (en inglés) GPA/LEGIS/JPN/8
- 2 -
Idioma(s) del
texto jurídico
notificado Japonés e inglés
Fecha de
adopción 24 de febrero de 202 3
Entrada en vigor 1 de abril de 202 3
Organismo o
autoridad
responsable División de Medio Ambiente y Economía
Secretaría del Ministro
Ministerio de Medio Ambiente
Teléfono:+81 -3-5521-8229
Fax: +81 -3-3580-9568
__________
| 391
| 2,792
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_STR_N19KHM.pdf
|
r_G_STR_N19KHM
|
G/STR/N/19/KHM
31 août 2022
(22-6507) Page: 1/1
Groupe de travail des entreprises
commerciales d'État Original: anglais
COMMERCE D'ÉTAT
NOUVELLE NOTIFICATION COMPLÈTE CONFORMÉMENT À L'ARTICLE XVII:4 A)
DU GATT DE 1994 ET AU PARAGRA PHE 1 DU MÉMORANDUM D'ACCORD
SUR L'INTERPRÉTATION DE L'ARTICLE XVII
CAMBODGE
La communication ci -après, datée du 30 août 2 022 et reçue à la même date , est distribuée à la
demande de la délégation d u Cambodge .
_______________
Cette notification est présentée conformément à l'article XVII:4 a) du GATT de 1994 et au
paragraphe 1 du Mémorandum d'accord sur l'interprétation de l'article XVII du GATT de 1994.
En réponse à la demande de notifications figurant dans le document G/STR/N/19, l e gouvernement
royal du Cambodge a l'honneur d'informer le s Membres que pendant la période 2020 -2021 le
Cambodge n'a ma intenu aucune entreprise commerciale d'État au sens du paragraphe 1 du
Mémorandum d'accord susmentionné.
__________
| 152
| 1,022
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SPS_NBRA1650A1.pdf
|
q_G_SPS_NBRA1650A1
|
G/SPS/N/BRA/1650/Add.1
24 June 2020
(20-4408) Page: 1/2
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original: English
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
The following communication, received on 23 June 2020, is being circulated at the request of the
Delegation of Brazil .
_______________
Resolution - RE number 1818, 4 June 2020
The Draft Resolution number 799, 26 March 2020 - previously notified through G/SPS/N/BRA/1650 -
was adopted as Resolution - RE number 1818, 4 June 2020.
The final text is available only in Portuguese and can be downloaded at:
http://pesquisa.in.gov.br/imprensa/jsp/visualiza/index.jsp?data=08/06/2020&jornal=515&pagina=
91
This addendum concerns a:
[ ] Modifi cation of final date for comments
[X] Notification of adoption, publication or entry into force of regulation
[ ] Modification of content and/or scope of previously notified draft regulation
[ ] Withdrawal of proposed regulation
[ ] Change in proposed date of adoption, publication or date of entry into force
[ ] Other:
Comment period: (If the addendum extends the scope of the previously notified measure
in terms of products and/or potentially affected Members, a new deadline for receipt of
comments should be provided, normally of at least 60 calendar days. Under other
circumstances, such as extension of originally announced final date for comments, the
comment period provided in the addendum may vary.)
[ ] Sixty days from the date of circul ation of the addendum to the notification and/or
(dd/mm/yy) : Not applicable.
Agency or authority designated to handle comments: [ ] National Notification Authority,
[X] National Enquiry Point. Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other
body:
Assessoria de Assuntos Internacionais - AINTE
International Affairs Office
Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária - Anvisa
Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency
Tel: +(55 61) 3462 5402/5404/5406
E-mail: rel@anvisa.gov.br G/SPS/N/BRA/1650/Add.1
- 2 -
Text(s) available from: [ ] National Notification Authority, [X] National Enquiry Point.
Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other body:
Assessoria de Assuntos Internacionais - AINTE
International Affairs Office
Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária - Anvisa
Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency
Tel: +(55 61) 3462 5402/5404/5406
E-mail: rel@anvisa.gov.br
__________
| 338
| 2,450
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/286301_2022_TBT_USA_final_measure_22_4658_00_e.pdf
|
286301_2022_TBT_USA_final_measure_22_4658_00_e
|
41618 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
184 FR 48866.
2Final Rule, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Minimum Sound Requirements for
Hybrid and Electric Vehicles 81 FR 90416, effective September 5, 2017; docket No. NHTSA–2016–0125. FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this rule, the EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. The EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988), by examining the takings implications of this action in accordance with the ‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings’’ issued under the executive order. This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). ‘‘Burden’’ is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. Because this action authorizes pre- existing State rules which are at least equivalent to, and no less stringent than existing Federal requirements, and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law, and there are no anticipated significant adverse human health or environmental effects, this rule is not subject to Executive Order 12898.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this
document and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This final action will be effective September 12, 2022.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information,
Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste transportation, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of sections 2002(a), 3006, and
7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and 6974(b).
Dated: June 28, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022–14512 Filed 7–12–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
49 CFR Part 571
[Docket No. NHTSA–2022–0061]
RIN 2127–AL93
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards; Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles
AGENCY : National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION : Final rule.
SUMMARY : This final rule amends the
test procedure in section S6.7.3 of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 141, Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles, as proposed in the September
17, 2019, notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), to specify the single point in time that should be used when determining one-third octave band levels of ambient noise measurements used in compliance tests. The agency has chosen not to adopt the remaining portions of the NPRM, including a proposal which would have allowed manufactures of hybrid and electric vehicles (HEVs) to install a number of driver-selectable pedestrian alert sounds in each HEV they manufacture. The driver-selectable alert sounds proposal is not being adopted because of a lack of supporting data. In addition, this final rule acknowledges that a proposed technical change included in the September 17, 2019, NPRM to correct two dates in NHTSA’s phase-in reporting requirements for FMVSS No. 141 is no longer needed. That change was addressed previously by the agency’s September 1, 2020, interim final rule that extended the FMVSS No. 141 compliance deadline and phase-in dates by six months. The interim final
rule included adjustments to NHTSA’s reporting dates, superseding the need for the proposed corrections.
DATES : This final rule is effective on
August 12, 2022.
ADDRESSES : All correspondence,
comments and other information relating to this document should refer to the docket number shown in the heading and should be submitted to: Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Washington, DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Mr.
Michael Pyne, NHTSA Office of Crash Avoidance Standards, by email to mike.pyne@dot.gov or at 202–366–4171,
or Mr. Paul Connet, NHTSA Office of the Chief Counsel, by email to paul.connet@dot.gov or at 202–366–
5547.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : On
September 17, 2019, NHTSA issued an NPRM to amend FMVSS No. 141, Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles (the ‘‘quiet vehicles’’ rule) to remove the numerical limit on compliant sounds that a manufacturer may choose to install in a vehicle.
1Under the proposal, a
manufacturer would be allowed to install any number of compliant sounds on each HEV make/model/body style/ trim they produce for sale in the United States. NHTSA requested comment on that proposal and on whether the safety standard should allow more than one compliant sound and if so, what the allowable number should be.
The NPRM included two other
proposed changes, one to amend the FMVSS No. 141 test procedure for measuring ambient sound levels during compliance tests, and the other to correct phase-in reporting dates.
Background
To protect pedestrians and other road
users, FMVSS No. 141 requires HEVs to
emit a pedestrian alert sound while operating in certain conditions.
2The
alert sound on a given vehicle is
allowed to change with vehicle operating speed or direction—the standard defines five different operating conditions: stationary in neutral or forward gear and with constant forward speed less than 10 km/h; reverse; and moving at constant forward speed from 10 km/h up to but not including 20 km/
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES141619 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
3Section S5.5.1 of FMVSS No. 141, as published
in December 2016, allowed the alert sound to vary
by model year as well as make and model (see 81 FR 90472). This was further amended on February 26, 2018, to allow alert sounds to vary by trim level and body style within a make/model/model year (see 83 FR 8189).
4See 81 FR 90416, 90472.
5Public Law 111–373, 124 Stat. 4086 (January 4,
2011).
6Id.
7See 78 FR 2798, 2804. 8See 81 FR 90416, 90475.
9In the 2016 final rule, NHTSA stated: ‘‘Given
our understanding of the PSEA, we are not
including provisions requested by these commenters that would allow for driver-selectable pedestrian alert sounds. . . . We believe that this approach is necessary to satisfy the requirements contained in the PSEA language and that allowing a means for owners to select or modify alert sounds . . . would be in conflict with the language of the PSEA. Furthermore, by not allowing driver- selectable sounds, the final rule adheres more closely to the PSEA requirement that vehicles of a given make and model must have the same alert sound.’’ 81 FR 90416, 90475.
10Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0125–0012. At the
time of their petition, Alliance and Global were
separate entities. Subsequently, they joined to form a single entity called the Alliance for Automotive Innovation with member companies.
11NHTSA issued a final rule on February 26,
2018, to address the other requested actions in the Alliance/Global petition for reconsideration (83 FR 8182). In that petition response, the agency announced that it was planning to publish a notice of proposed rulemaking to allow driver-selectable sounds.
12Docket No. NHTSA–2011–0148–0322.
13Docket No. NHTSA–2016–0125–0016. h, from 20 km/h up to 30 km/h, and at
or just above 30 km/h. Beyond that speed, alert sounds are no longer required by FMVSS No. 141 as other sounds such as tires and airflow produce enough sound to make the vehicle detectable.
Section 5.5 of the standard, titled
‘‘Sameness requirement’’, requires any two vehicles of the same make, model, model year, body type, and trim level to have the same pedestrian alert sound per operating condition.
3The sameness
requirement prevents manufacturers from equipping multiple sounds for the same operating condition. Additional details of NHTSA’s implementation of the sameness requirement are discussed in the preamble of the FMVSS No. 141 final rule.
4
The sameness requirement in FMVSS
No. 141 originates from section 3(a)(2) of the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act (PSEA) of 2010 which states that the Federal regulation ‘‘shall allow manufacturers to provide each vehicle with one or more sounds that comply with the motor vehicle safety standard at the time of manufacture.’’
5Section
3(a)(2) further states that the regulation ‘‘shall require manufacturers to provide, within reasonable manufacturing tolerances, the same sound or set of sounds for all vehicles of the same make and model and shall prohibit manufacturers from providing any mechanism for anyone other than the manufacturer or the dealer to disable, alter, replace, or modify the sound or set of sounds.’’
6The PSEA did not provide
any further specifics about the number of sounds that hybrid and electric vehicles may have or how sounds may vary among vehicles of the same make and model.
In the original proposal for FMVSS
No. 141, NHTSA interpreted this section of the PSEA to mean that a manufacturer may choose to equip different sounds for the different operating modes described above.
7In a
joint comment to the proposal, several commenters stated that the PSEA permitted the regulation to allow for multiple sounds to be equipped for each operating conditions from which drivers could choose from, and requested the agency to adopt driver-selectable sounds.
8As discussed in the final rule
establishing FMVSS No. 141, NHTSA reaffirmed its understanding that the PSEA language restricted the agency from promulgating a rule that would permit vehicles to be equipped with more than one alert sound for a given operating condition, hence foreclosing the possibility of driver-selectable sounds.
9
Alliance/Global Petition on Driver- Selectable Sounds
The issue of permitting driver-
selectable sounds was raised as one aspect of a multi-part petition for reconsideration that was jointly submitted to NHTSA in 2017 by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance) and Global Automakers (Global).
10Their petition requested
several amendments, one of which was that NHTSA modify the sameness requirement in section S5.5 of FMVSS No. 141 to allow each HEV to be equipped with multiple compliant pedestrian alert sounds from which a vehicle owner/operator could select according to their preference.
11
As the agency weighed the petition
for reconsideration, the agency concluded that amending the standard to permit driver-selectable sounds would represent a significant—and likely unforeseeable—change in the agency’s position. The agency determined that it was in the public’s best interest to publish a new proposal on the issue to facilitate comment. The agency published an NPRM in September 2019 soliciting public comment on a proposal to allow unlimited sounds on HEVs, provided the manufacturer certified that each sound complies with the requirements of FMVSS No. 141, as well as related questions including whether the safety
standard should be amended to allow only a limited number of sounds.
In their petition, Alliance/Global
stated that NHTSA’s implementation of FMVSS No. 141 adopted an inflexible approach to ensuring sameness and did not account for specific statutory language in the PSEA that permits multiple alert sounds per vehicle. Alliance/Global stated that the words ‘‘one or more sounds’’ in Section 3(a)(2) of the PSEA provide this flexibility. Alliance/Global said that providing a selection of sounds is essential for customer acceptance of HEVs, stating:
Satisfying our customers is a primary
concern for OEMs [Original Equipment
Manufacturers]. Since ‘one size does not fit all’ neither will one alert sound for a given make, model, trim level and model year satisfy all those consumers purchasing all these same vehicles.
The petition also discussed comments
submitted to the agency in February
2014 jointly by the Alliance, Global, the American Council of the Blind (ACB), and the National Federation of the Blind (NFB), in which the commenters, including the two advocate organizations, recognized the need to provide consumers with a reasonable number of driver-selectable sound choices for customer acceptance reasons.
12
In a March 2017 follow-up letter,
Alliance/Global supplemented their petition with additional information and included a recommendation that not more than five sounds should be allowed per vehicle. The letter included the following explanation:
13
Because every additional driver-selectable
choice of sound requires a separate
certification test as well as a compliance test, the number of driver-selectable choices provided by manufacturers would naturally be limited for practical reasons. However, to address potential concerns that manufacturers might provide too many optional sounds, we recommend that the number of permitted driver-selectable sounds be limited to no more than five driver- selectable alert sounds for any make, model, trim level, model year vehicle.
Alliance/Global did not provide data
in the form of consumer surveys,
research, or economic impact analysis to support the request to allow multiple sounds in their petition. Similarly, besides the qualitative explanation mentioned above, the specific recommendation of not-more-than-five sounds per HEV was not accompanied by supporting research or analysis.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES141620 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
14The NPRM also noted that an international
regulation, United Nations Economic Commission
for Europe (ECE) Regulation No. 138 on Audible Vehicle Alerting Systems, allows vehicle manufacturers to define alternative sounds which can be selected by the driver and does not specify a particular limit on the number of alternative sounds that may be provided.
15Docket No. NHTSA–2019–0085. 16As a general note, some of NHTSA’s earliest
research on quiet vehicle human factors during the 2011 timeframe utilized volunteers from the Perkins School for the Blind located in Cambridge, MA, to evaluate detectability of different vehicle sounds. Proposed Rule on Driver-Selectable
Sounds
In response to the Alliance/Global
petition, NHTSA proposed amending FMVSS No. 141 to allow an unlimited number of pedestrian alert sounds per vehicle for any operating condition. In the proposal, NHTSA acknowledged that the PSEA language regarding the sameness of sounds was subject to more than one interpretation, and that alternative readings of the statute could accommodate an amendment to allow vehicles to be equipped with multiple FMVSS No. 141-compliant sounds for the same operating conditions. The proposal reasoned that consumer preferences depend on subjective factors, such as how a vehicle sounds. The NPRM also suggested that the proposal to allow multiple alert sounds in theory should not impair safety as all additional sounds would still have to comply with FMVSS No. 141.
NHTSA requested comment and
supporting information on any safety implications, compliance issues, consumer-acceptance factors, cost issues, or other possible alternatives that were relevant to allowing an unlimited number of compliant driver-selectable sounds in FMVSS No. 141. In particular,
the NPRM asked for comments on the potential safety issues related to HEV recognition by pedestrians if a multitude of new compliant driver- selectable sounds are available, and the extent to which having an unlimited number of sounds would lead to the potential for a pedestrian to be unable to identify the sounds as coming from a motor vehicle.
14
Summary of Comments on the NPRM
NHTSA received comments from a
variety of sources, including some in favor of the proposal, some opposing it, and other comments offering additional information, not all of it directly related to the proposal.
15Fifty-two commenters
responded to the NPRM: four were from advocacy groups representing people who are blind, have low vision or other disabilities, including the National Federation of the Blind (NFB), the American Council of the Blind (ACB), the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD), and The Seeing Eye; two were from organizations representing the automotive industry, including a joint comment from the Alliance and Global Automakers and a comment from SAE International; one submittal was from an educational institution, the Perkins School for the Blind; and 45 were from individual members of the public.
The NFB commented that a
‘‘reasonable number’’ of sounds that meet the requirements should be allowed so that HEVs with alert sounds are more palatable to consumers but did not recommend any specific limit on the number of allowable sounds. The NFB stated that it fully supports the Alliance/Global petition, including the assertion that the number of sounds per HEV will be effectively limited by the cost to certify.
Other advocacy groups including the
ACB, The Seeing Eye, and the CCD expressed safety concerns about allowing an unlimited number of sounds. The ACB comment diverged from the position it had supported previously in the joint comment letter of February 2014, discussed above. In response to the NPRM, the ACB urged NHTSA to limit the number of sounds from which car owners can select and stated that uniformity is imperative for safety. The ACB stated, ‘‘a distinguishable and uniform sound is necessary to assist the blind community in quickly identifying hybrid or electric cars.’’ ACB said that sounds need to be recognizable as a vehicle, ideally that of a car engine, and said that car owners should not be involved in selecting sounds. The CCD reiterated these same comments.
The Seeing Eye commented, ‘‘For
recognition purposes, it is important that all vehicles emit the same standardized sound regardless of manufacturer.’’ Furthermore, it said that restricting the number of sounds is not enough, and that clear specifications for the types of sounds are needed.
The Perkins School for the Blind
submitted a spreadsheet containing 554 individual comments from students, staff members, and others associated with the school.
16Of these, more than
half (282) consisted of nearly identical responses that included the following statement or a very similar one:
I believe silent cars should be required to
emit a set of clear, consistent and
recognizable sounds. These sounds should be researched and set by a national governing body. I feel strongly that owners should not be allowed to select from a menu of sounds. A few commenters in this group
elaborated on that core statement,
providing statements of fact, opinions, or personal experiences with quiet vehicles in traffic. The large collection of comments from the Perkins School also included the following:
•In addition to the 282 pro forma
comments, 57 comments conveyed a similar message in the commenters’ own words; many of these elaborated on the general need for ‘silent’ vehicles to emit a sound or sounds for pedestrian safety.
•Another 117 comments called for a
consistent, recognizable sound or sounds in vehicles so blind persons can detect that a vehicle is nearby. Of these, 109 called for a single, uniform sound.
•Eighty comments were generally
supportive of finding a solution to quiet car dangers but did not address the question of allowing multiple sounds.
•Fourteen addressed miscellaneous
issues outside the scope of the proposal, and four comments focused on opposing the idea of a menu of sound options (though these seem to have mistakenly assumed that drivers could create their own sounds).
There were 45 comments submitted to
the docket by individual members of the public, some of which did not directly address the proposal in the NPRM to allow unlimited driver-selectable alert sounds. Among those that did address the proposal, almost all did not support it. These comments did not provide additional data or research, though some offered anecdotal evidence. Many comments from individuals focused on other issues that were out of scope, including one or more of the following:
•expressing a general like or dislike
for the concept of adding noise to HEVs;
•pointing out the beneficial
reduction in traffic noise that electric vehicles make possible;
•suggesting that quiet gas-engine
vehicles should be subject to the same requirements as HEVs.
Based on statements in some of these
comments, it seems likely there was some misunderstanding of either the proposal or NHTSA’s existing minimum sound requirements. For example, it was apparent that one or more of the commenters believed that vehicle owners would be allowed to create their own sounds or use random recorded sounds, or that the existing NHTSA regulation specifies a single, universal alert sound for all HEVs. Others did not acknowledge that every additional driver-selectable alert sound allowed under the proposal would have to meet the minimum safety requirements.
The Alliance/Global comment fully
supported the proposal for an unlimited number of driver selectable sounds and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES141621 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
17The agency notes that, under the self-
certification statute in the Motor Vehicle Safety Act,
manufacturers have some discretion in how they certify, and there is no explicit requirement for a manufacturer to test each sound. However, in certifying compliance, the manufacturer must exercise reasonable care, and NHTSA would find a vehicle noncompliant if an alert sound failed to meet the standard when tested by NHTSA. reiterated their position that ‘‘offering
drivers a selection of pedestrian alert sounds . . . facilitates an increase in consumer choice and promotes consumer satisfaction and acceptance.’’ The comment stated that compliance costs will be prohibitive enough to limit the number of sounds that automakers install in a vehicle and will thus prevent them from offering more than a reasonable number.
17The Alliance/
Global comment did not recommend any specific limit on the allowable number of sounds or mention their previous recommendation of not more than five allowable sounds. They maintained their position that a ‘‘reasonable number of choices should be permitted as long as each selectable choice meets the minimum sound requirements.’’
Prior to issuing the NPRM, NHTSA
considered alternatives to the proposal to allow an unlimited number of alert sounds. One alternative entailed proposing to allow a limited number of driver-selectable alert sounds. The NPRM did not include that specific proposal, but it sought comment on allowing a limited number and, in that case, how many alert sounds should be allowed. NHTSA did not receive any comments in response to the alternative of allowing a limited number of sounds.
The SAE International provided a
comment that did not pertain to the proposed rulemaking on selectable sounds but focused exclusively on the test procedure issue raised in the NPRM concerning ambient noise measurement, as discussed later in this document.
Comment Analysis
The great majority of the comments
on the NPRM, including those
submitted by organizations and people who are blind or who have low vision, did not favor the proposal to allow HEVs to have an unlimited number of different pedestrian alert sounds. To the contrary, most of those comments were in favor of more uniformity, rather than less, in the number and types of alert sounds allowed on HEVs. In fact, while out-of-scope of the NPRM, at least one organization expressed a preference for permitting only a single, uniform sound for all HEVs regardless of vehicle make or model. These commenters stated that having greater uniformity makes it easier for sight-impaired pedestrians to
recognize vehicles, and thus safer for them to navigate in traffic. Several comments from individuals included descriptions of unsafe encounters with quiet vehicles.
The joint comment from the Alliance/
Global supported the proposal to amend FMVSS No. 141 to allow HEVs to have an unlimited number of pedestrian alert sounds. Similarly, the comment from the NFB favored providing drivers with a ‘‘reasonable number’’ of sounds per vehicle from which drivers could choose a preferred sound.
However, these comments were not
accompanied by any data or analysis to show that unlimited sounds would have no impact on pedestrian safety. The Alliance/Global and the NFB did not provide information such as data from research or analyses, like consumer surveys for example, or other information to support an amendment to allow either multiple alert sounds or an unlimited number of sounds. They also did not provide any economic or market analysis to support their contention that allowing multiple alert sounds is likely to increase acceptance of HEVs in the U.S. new-vehicle market. Furthermore, the agency has no specific information of its own that addresses these questions of safety and consumer acceptance.
In addition, the Alliance and the NFB
submitted a late comment in the form of a letter to the agency on March 17, 2022. The organizations stated that material, including tutorials, guides, and videos, is currently available online to assist individuals that would like to disable the pedestrian alert sound, a mandated vehicle safety system, required under FMVSS No. 141. The organizations asserted that individuals that dislike the alert sound provided by a vehicle manufacturer may seek to disable the sound but that, if provided the option to choose from alternative sounds, such individuals would be more likely to select one than to disable the system.
The organizations suggested that NHTSA should therefore allow up to five driver-selectable sounds as a means to ensure that the benefits associated with the requirements contained FMVSS No. 141 are not eliminated.
The agency notes that these
commenters did not provide any data or analysis as part of the late comment to support their claims. FMVSS No. 141 sets requirements that apply to manufacturers, modifiers, repair shops, and others, but does not set requirements for end-users. Furthermore, the use and treatment of vehicles by individual end-users generally is not subject to NHTSA’s vehicle safety regulations. However, States may choose to require individuals to maintain vehicles after first sale in such a way that they comply with Federal motor vehicle safety standards. In addition, states regulate insurance companies, which may impose deterrents on individuals to dissuade them from disabling important vehicle safety systems such as the one required by FMVSS No. 141. The organizations did not provide any data or analysis about the potential actions of individuals to intentionally make inoperative a required vehicle safety system, nor did they provide any data or analysis to quantify how their requested action to allow multiple driver-selectable sounds would cause individuals determined to silence their vehicle alert sound required by FMVSS No. 141 to instead just select a different sound from among those that could be installed on their vehicle. The agency finds it speculative to suggest that allowing multiple driver-selectable sounds might dissuade vehicle owners from disabling a safety system required by FMVSS No. 141, especially given that a vocal minority of commenters over the course of several rulemakings have argued that HEVs should not be required to have any alert sound because they prefer quiet vehicles, not that there is a lack of preferrable alternative sounds.
Although the commenters that
opposed the proposal also did not provide substantial information in the form of research or analyses to support their position, NHTSA believes it prudent to err on the side of caution and safety in the absence of data or other evidence.
While the current standard does not
require a uniform sound across manufacturers or even carlines, by restricting the variation of sounds among make/model/trim groups there is an incentive to manufacturers to apply sounds that appeal to a broader range of tastes. Removing this restriction would allow manufacturers to make more obscure sounds that only appeal to a small minority of HEV owners.
After reviewing the comments,
NHTSA also is concerned about the potential compliance and safety impacts of the proposal. There are unanswered questions relating to the cost/benefit impact of unlimited driver-selectable sounds including:
•How can the costs and benefits be
accurately determined?
•Is it reasonable to expect costs of
certification to be the primary factor in limiting the number of driver-selectable sounds?
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES141622 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
18See Docket No. NHTSA–2018–0018–0004. 19See SAE comment, Docket No. NHTSA–2016–
0125–0021, at p. 1. 20The reporting requirements and associated due
dates for phase-in of compliance with FMVSS No.
141 are contained in 49 CFR part 585, subpart N.
2185 FR 8182.
2285 FR 54273.
23As per normal procedure, the interim final rule
allowed for public comment. In response to the IFR, there were no comments submitted on the topic of phase-in reporting dates for FMVSS No. 141.
24As stipulated in the IFR, the phase-in period for
FMVSS No. 141, covering 50 percent of a manufacturer’s HEV production, ran from March 1, 2020, through February 28, 2021. Full compliance with FMVSS No. 141, covering 100 percent of each manufacturer’s HEV production, began on March 1, 2021. •What is the safety impact? Will
HEV recognition be compromised as the
number of allowable sounds increases, and can that be quantified?
•Will selectable sounds increase
consumer acceptance?
•Will there be unintended
consequences, e.g., incentives for
manufacturers to develop a larger number of customized sounds that appeal to narrow driver populations?
Considering the comments and all
other factors, NHTSA has concluded that there is insufficient data or other compelling information to support amending FMVSS No. 141 to allow more than one pedestrian alert sound per HEV, and there is significant opposition from many commenters to the proposal to allow unlimited driver- selectable sounds.
As a result, the agency has concluded
that the existing requirement—that HEVs of the same make, model, model year, body style, and trim level, must have the same alert sound—should remain in effect, and the provisions in S5.5 of FMVSS No. 141 should not be amended at this time.
Accordingly, NHTSA is not adopting
the proposal from the September 17, 2019, NPRM relating to driver-selectable alert sounds.
Amendment To Clarify Ambient Noise
Measurement Procedure
The NPRM proposed modifying the
text of section 6.7.3 in FMVSS No. 141 to remove ambiguity in the procedure for evaluating ambient (background) noise during compliance tests. This issue was raised by the Alliance and Global in an April 2018 letter.
18
Evaluation of ambient sounds during
vehicle compliance tests as required in section S6.7 of FMVSS No. 141 is necessary to ensure ambient noise remains acceptably low and to apply ambient corrections to vehicle measurements. Ambient sound is any background noise that is present at the test site during a vehicle compliance evaluation that is not emitted by the test vehicle itself. Table 8 and Table 9 of FMVSS No. 141 specify ambient noise limits for overall sound level and one- third octave band level, respectively, relative to the sound level of the test vehicle.
In prescribing how ambient one-third
octave band levels are to be evaluated for correction of vehicle measurements, section S6.7.3 indicates that the ambient levels used are the minimum levels at any point in time over the required 60 seconds of recorded ambient noise. The wording used in S6.7.3 implies that the levels of different one-third octave
bands may be evaluated at different times. This was not NHTSA’s intention. The correct method intended by the
agency is to evaluate ambient levels of all 13 one-third octave bands at the same point in time for an individual microphone. For each microphone, the point in time used is the unique point during the 60 seconds (or more) of recorded ambient noise when the overall sound pressure level of the ambient is at a minimum for that same microphone, as identified in the preceding step, S6.7.2, in the test procedure. Consequently, the point used for computing the 13 one-third octave bands may vary across microphones but, for a single microphone, all 13 one-third octave bands are computed at the same point in time.
To resolve this, NHTSA proposed
amending S6.7.3 to state the intended method of evaluating ambient one-third octave bands more clearly for the purpose of applying corrections to measurements of vehicle sound.
There was one comment submitted on
this topic in response to the NPRM, from SAE International (SAE). SAE did not comment on the details of the proposed amendment of S6.7.3, but rather expressed a broader concern with NHTSA’s approach to ambient noise measurement more generally. This is something SAE has written to the agency about on a previous occasion.
19
SAE’s present comment maintained that FMVSS No. 141 compliance test procedures should not use the minimum ambient sound level. SAE stated the correct method is to ascertain and apply the maximum ambient sound level. However, NHTSA considered that approach in the past and was not persuaded to change the ambient correction methodology in FMVSS No. 141.
Because the SAE comment did not
specifically address the proposal to reword S6.7.3 and instead focused on a broader test procedure concern that NHTSA has previously considered but chose not to adopt, the agency is proceeding with a final rule to adopt the amended test procedure as proposed.
An amended S6.7.3 is included
below. This amendment is scheduled to take effect 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register.
Proposed Correction of Phase-In
Reporting Dates
The NPRM included a proposal to
correct two dates in the part 585 phase- in reporting requirements associated with FMVSS No. 141. However, those
changes are no longer necessary.
The FMVSS No. 141 final rule
published in December 2016 required vehicle manufacturers to report on their production of compliant HEVs during a one-year phase-in period from September 1, 2018, to August 31, 2019.
20NHTSA later acknowledged that
part 585, subpart N, incorrectly refers to this one-year period in two places as ‘‘the production year ending August 31, 2018’’ instead of ‘‘the production year ending August 31, 2019.’’ When NHTSA granted a petition for reconsideration in February 2018 to extend the FMVSS No. 141 phase-in and compliance deadlines by one year, the reporting dates in part 585, subpart N, were all adjusted by adding one year.
21However, because
those two dates were off by one year, the adjusted dates also were off by one year. In the NPRM, NHTSA proposed correcting this discrepancy.
On September 1, 2020, NHTSA
published an interim final rule (IFR) to extend the FMVSS No. 141 phase-in and compliance deadlines by an additional six months to provide relief to automakers experiencing vehicle
manufacturing disruptions resulting from the Covid-19 national health emergency.
22The IFR included six-
month adjustments to the due dates for FMVSS No. 141 phase-in reporting contained in part 585, subpart N.
23
Those newly adjusted reporting dates supersede the corrections NHTSA proposed in September 2019 and obviate the need for any further changes. In addition, the agency did not receive any comments on the proposed date change. Therefore, in this document, NHTSA is making no changes to the phase-in reporting dates.
24
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866, Executive
Order 13563, and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
NHTSA has considered the impact of
this rulemaking action under Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13563,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES141623 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
25Department of Transportation, Adoption of
Regulatory Policies and Procedures, 44 FR 11034
(Feb. 26, 1979). and the Department of Transportation
Order 2100.6, ‘‘Policies and Procedures for Rulemakings.’’ This rulemaking is not considered significant and was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review.’’ Given the minimal impact of the rule, in accordance with the Department’s regulatory policies and procedures, we have not prepared a full regulatory evaluation.
25The agency has further
determined that the impact of this rule is so minimal that the preparation of a full regulatory evaluation is not required.
This final rule does not add any cost,
as it does not change the scope or applicability of FMVSS No. 141 and does not add new requirements or increase design or production burden for vehicle manufacturers.
This final rule does not have any
effect on safety, as the modification of a step in the test procedures related to ambient noise correction does not change the safety requirements in the standard that apply to all pedestrian alert sounds.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions). The Small Business Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR part 121 define a small business, in part, as a business entity ‘‘which operates primarily within the United States’’ (13 CFR 121.105(a)). No regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of an agency certifies the rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
NHTSA has considered the effects of
this final rule under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This final rule would directly impact manufacturers of hybrid and electric vehicles. Most
manufacturers affected by this final rule are not small businesses. To the extent any manufacturers of hybrid or electric vehicles are small businesses, we do not believe this final rule would have a significant economic impact on any small businesses as this final rule would not impose any additional costs on manufacturers.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
NHTSA has examined this final rule
pursuant to Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and concluded that no additional consultation with States, local governments or their representatives is mandated beyond the rulemaking process. The agency has concluded that the rulemaking would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant consultation with State and local officials or the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The final rule would not have ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.’’
NHTSA rules can preempt in two
ways. First, the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act contains an express preemption provision: When a motor vehicle safety standard is in effect under chapter 301, a State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe or continue in effect a standard applicable to the same aspect of performance of a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment only if the standard is identical to the standard prescribed under chapter 301. 49 U.S.C. 30103(b)(1). It is this statutory command by Congress that preempts any non- identical State legislative and administrative law addressing the same aspect of performance.
The express preemption provision
described above is subject to a savings clause under which ‘‘[c]ompliance with a motor vehicle safety standard prescribed under this chapter does not exempt a person from liability at common law.’’ 49 U.S.C. 30103(e).
Pursuant to this provision, State
common law tort causes of action against motor vehicle manufacturers that might otherwise be preempted by the express preemption provision are generally preserved. However, the Supreme Court has recognized the possibility, in some instances, of implied preemption of such State common law tort causes of action by virtue of NHTSA’s rules, even if not expressly preempted. This second way that NHTSA rules can preempt is
dependent upon there being an actual conflict between an FMVSS and the higher standard that would effectively be imposed on motor vehicle manufacturers if someone obtained a State common law tort judgment against the manufacturer, notwithstanding the manufacturer’s compliance with the NHTSA standard. Because most NHTSA standards established by an FMVSS are minimum standards, a State common law tort cause of action that seeks to impose a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers will generally not be preempted. However, if and when such a conflict does exist—for example, when the standard at issue is both a minimum and a maximum standard— the State common law tort cause of action is impliedly preempted. See Geier v. American Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861 (2000).
Pursuant to Executive Order 13132
and 12988, NHTSA has considered whether this rulemaking action could or should preempt State common law causes of action. The agency’s ability to announce its conclusion regarding the preemptive effect of one of its rules reduces the likelihood that preemption will be an issue in any subsequent tort litigation.
To this end, the agency has examined
the nature (e.g., the language and
structure of the regulatory text) and objectives of this final rule and finds that this rule prescribes only a minimum safety standard. As such, NHTSA does not intend that this rule preempt State tort law that would effectively impose a higher standard on motor vehicle manufacturers than that established by this rule. Establishment of a higher standard by means of State tort law would not conflict with the minimum standard announced here.
Without any conflict, there could not be any implied preemption of a State common law tort cause of action.
D. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
With respect to the review of the
promulgation of a new regulation, section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ (61 FR 4729; Feb. 7, 1996), requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the preemptive effect; (2) clearly specifies the effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct, while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) clearly specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) specifies whether administrative proceedings are to be required before
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES141624 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
2681 FR 90416. 27Docket no. NHTSA–2016–0125, https://
www.regulations.gov/document?D=NHTSA-2016-
0125-0009. parties file suit in court; (6) adequately
defines key terms; and (7) addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. This document is consistent with that requirement.
Pursuant to E.O. 12988, NHTSA notes
that the issue of preemption is discussed separately in this final rule. NHTSA notes further that there is no requirement that individuals submit a petition for reconsideration or pursue other administrative proceedings before they may file suit in court.
E. Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19855, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically significant’’ as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health, or safety risk that the agency has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the agency.
This final rule is not expected to have
a disproportionate health or safety impact on children. Consequently, no further analysis is required under Executive Order 13045.
F. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless the collection displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. There is not any new information collection requirement associated with this final rule.
G. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) requires NHTSA to evaluate and use existing voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law (e.g., the statutory provisions regarding NHTSA’s vehicle safety authority) or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. Technical standards are defined by the NTTAA as ‘‘performance-based or
design-specific technical specification and related management systems practices.’’ They pertain to ‘‘products and processes, such as size, strength, or technical performance of a product, process or material.’’ Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards bodies include ASTM International, the SAE International, and the American National Standards Institute. If NHTSA does not use available and potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards, we are required by the Act to provide Congress, through OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such standards.
NHTSA considered and utilized
voluntary consensus standards in the development of the FMVSS No. 141 standard. NHTSA utilized SAE J2889 as a basis for the test procedures in FMVSS No. 141, as discussed in the preamble to the original final rule establishing the safety standard in 2016.
26NHTSA’s test
procedures include a specific deviation from the J2889 procedures for reasons discussed in the original final rule preamble. That deviation was raised in a comment and is addressed in this final rule document in the discussion of comments pertaining to the amended test procedure.
There are no other voluntary
consensus standards developed by voluntary consensus standards bodies pertaining to this final rule.
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final
rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted for inflation with base year of 1995). Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the agency to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the agency to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the agency publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that
alternative was not adopted.
This final rule will not result in any
expenditure by State, local, or tribal
governments or the private sector of more than $100 million, adjusted for inflation.
I. National Environmental Policy Act
NHTSA analyzed the original FMVSS
No. 141 final rule for the purposes of the
National Environmental Policy Act. The agency determined that implementation of that rule would not have any significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
27
The final rule amends FMVSS No.
141 in a way that would not change the impact for the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act. Therefore, the agency has determined that implementation of this action will not have any significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
J. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
The Department of Transportation
assigns a regulation identifier number
(RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document to find this action in the Unified Agenda.
K. Privacy Act
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT’s complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–78).
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 571
Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor
vehicles, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Rubber and rubber products.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration amends 49 CFR part 571 as follows:
PART 571—FEDERAL MOTOR
VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS
■1. The authority citation for part 571
continues to read as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES141625 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115,
30117, and 30166; delegation of authority at
49 CFR 1.95.
■2. Amend § 571.141 by revising
paragraph S6.7.3 to read as follows:
§ 571.141 Standard No. 141; Minimum Sound Requirements for Hybrid and Electric Vehicles.
* * * * *
S6.7.3 For each microphone,
compute an ambient level for each of
the 13 one-third octave bands using the time that is associated with the minimum A-weighted overall ambient identified in S6.7.2 of this section.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.95 and 501.8.
Steven S. Cliff, Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2022–14733 Filed 7–12–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 300
[Docket No. 220527–0125; RTID 0648–
XC133]
International Fisheries; Western and
Central Pacific Fisheries for Highly Migratory Species; Extension of Emergency Decisions of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission
AGENCY : National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION : Temporary specification.
SUMMARY : NMFS is extending the
effective date of a temporary specification that implements a short- notice decision of the Commission on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Commission or WCPFC). NMFS issued temporary specifications on June 11, 2021, to implement short-notice WCPFC decisions regarding purse seine observer coverage, purse seine transshipments at sea, and transshipment observer coverage. NMFS is extending the effective date of the temporary specification on purse seine observer coverage until December 31, 2022. NMFS is also revoking the temporary specification on transshipment observer coverage. NMFS is undertaking this action under the authority of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries
Convention Implementation Act (WCPFC Implementation Act) to satisfy the obligations of the United States as a Contracting Party to the Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean (Convention).
DATES : The temporary specification on
purse seine observer coverage is in effect from July 13, 2022 until December 31, 2022. The temporary specification on transshipment observer coverage is revoked from July 13, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Rini
Ghosh, NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office, 808–725–5033.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : Under
authority of the WCPFC Implementation Act (16 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.), NMFS published an interim final rule that established a framework to implement short-notice WCPFC decisions (50 CFR
300.228). NMFS simultaneously issued temporary specifications to implement three short-notice WCPFC decisions until September 14, 2021. Additional background information on the Commission, the Convention, the interim final rule, and temporary specifications, is available in the Federal Register document that includes the interim final rule and temporary specifications (86 FR 31178; June 11, 2021). Pursuant to a WCPFC decision, NMFS extended the effective date of the temporary specifications for purse seine observer coverage and transshipment observer coverage until June 10, 2022, and revoked the temporary specification on purse seine transshipment at sea (87 FR 21812; April 13, 2022). Under the interim final rule at 86 FR 31178, temporary specifications can only remain in effect for less than one year. NMFS published a final rule on June 7, 2022, to make final this interim rule, effective on July 7, 2022 (87 FR 34580).
In response to the ongoing COVID–19
pandemic, NMFS published another interim final rule to extend the time period that temporary specifications issued to implement short-notice WCPFC decisions related to the COVID– 19 pandemic may remain in effect(87 FR 34584; June 7, 2022). Such temporary specifications may be continued, as appropriate, until December 31, 2023. NMFS simultaneously extended the temporary specifications on purse seine observer coverage and at-sea transshipment observer coverage until July 15, 2022 (87 FR 34584; June 7, 2022).
Based on a recent WCPFC decision,
NMFS is now extending the temporary specification on purse seine observer coverage until December 31, 2022, and revoking the temporary specification on transshipment observer coverage.
WCPFC Emergency Decisions
On April 8, 2020, in response to the
international concerns over the health of
observers and vessel crews due to COVID–19, the Commission made an intersessional decision to suspend the requirements for observer coverage on purse seine vessels on fishing trips in the Convention Area through May 31, 2020. The Commission subsequently extended that decision several times, and the current extension is effective until December 31, 2022.
On April 20, 2020, in response to the
international concerns over the health of vessel crews and port officials due to COVID–19, the Commission made an intersessional decision to modify the prohibition on at-sea transshipment for purse seine vessels as follows—purse seine vessels can conduct at-sea transshipment in an area under the jurisdiction of a port State, if transshipment in port cannot be conducted, in accordance with the domestic laws and regulations of the port State. The Commission decided not to extend that decision past March 15, 2022.
On May 13, 2020, in response to the
international concerns over the health of observers and vessel crews due to COVID–19, the Commission made an intersessional decision to suspend the requirements for observer coverage for at-sea transshipments. The Commission decided not to extend that decision past June 15, 2022.
Extension of Temporary Specification
NMFS is using the framework as set
forth at 50 CFR 300.228 to extend the
effective date of the temporary specification implementing one of the three recent WCPFC intersessional decisions (WCPFC decision dated April 8, 2020), described above, that is in effect until December 23, 2022. The regulations to implement short-notice WCPFC decisions at 50 CFR 300.228 provide that short-notice decisions related to the COVID–19 pandemic may be continued, as appropriate, until December 31, 2023.
Accordingly, the requirements of the
following regulations are waived. Such waiver shall remain in effect until December 31, 2022, unless NMFS earlier rescinds this waiver by publication in the Federal Register:
•50 CFR 300.223(e)(1). During the
term of this waiver, U.S. purse seine vessels are not required to carry WCPFC
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:43 Jul 12, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM 13JYR1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
| 9,192
| 59,802
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN21_JPN696.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN21_JPN696
|
G/TBT/N/JPN/696
6 April 2021
(21-2844) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
The following notification is being circulated in accordance with Article 10.6
1. Notifying Member: JAPAN
If applicable, name of local government involved (Article 3.2 and 7.2):
2. Agency responsible: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare
Name and address (including telephone and fax numbers , email and website
addresses, if available) of agency or authority designated to handle comments
regarding the notification shall be indicated if different from above:
3. Notified under Article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], other :
4. Products covered (HS or CCCN where applicable, otherwise national tariff
heading. ICS numbers may be provided in addition, where applicable):
PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS (HS 30)
5. Title, number of pages and language(s) of the notified document: 1) Partial
amendment to the Regulation for Enforcement of the Act on Securing Quality, Efficacy
and Safety of Products including Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices, and 2) Partial
amend ment to the Public Notice on Designated Biological Products under Article 197,
Paragraph 2 of the Regulation for Enforcement of the Act on Securing Quality, Efficacy
and Safety of Products including Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices (1 page(s), in
Englis h)
6. Description of content: The Regulation for Enforcement of the Act on Securing Quality,
Efficacy and Safety of Products including Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices, and the
Public Notice on Designated Biological Products under Article 197, Paragraph 2 of the
Regulation for Enfo rcement will be partially amended to reflect the World Health
Organization (WHO) standard on Summary Lot Protocol (SLP).
7. Objective and rationale, including the nature of urgent problems where
applicable: With regard to National Release Testing of biolo gical pharmaceuticals such
as vaccines and blood products by national regulatory authority, an international standard
for assessment process of SLP has been provided by WHO. In Japan, the SLP dossiers to
be submitted for application of National Release Tes ting are specified under Article 197,
Paragraph 2 of the Regulation for Enforcement, for biological pharmaceuticals designated
by the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare. This partial amendment will extend the
designated biological pharmaceuticals to an y biological pharmaceuticals.; Other
8. Relevant documents:
The Act on Securing Quality, Efficacy and Safety of Products Including Pharmaceuticals
and Medical Devices. This amendment will be published in " KAMPO " (Official Gazette)
when adopted. G/TBT/N/JPN/696
- 2 -
9. Proposed date of adoption: June 2021.
Proposed date of entry into force: July 2021.
10. Final date for comments: 60 days from notification
11. Texts available from: National enquiry point [X] or address, telephone and fax
numbers and email and website addresses, if available , of other body:
Japan Enquiry Point
International Trade Division
Economic Affairs Bureau
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Fax: (+81 3) 5501 8343
E-mail: enquiry@mofa.go.jp
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/TBT/JPN/21_2467_00_e.pdf
| 469
| 3,317
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN14_BRA583C1.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN14_BRA583C1
|
G/TBT/N/BRA/583/Corr.1
19 avril 2022
(22-3128) Page: 1/1
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
Corrigendum
La communication ci -après, datée du 1 9 avril 2 022, est distribuée à la demande de la délégation du
Brésil .
_______________
Modification de l'article 4 de l'Arrêté INMETRO n° 487 du 8 décembre 2 021, publié au Journal officiel
le 17 décembre 2 021, pages 69 à 72, section 1,
https://www.in.gov.br/web/dou/ -/retificacao -391059215
__________
| 73
| 532
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/279304_2021_SPS_JPN_21_7575_00_e.pdf
|
279304_2021_SPS_JPN_21_7575_00_e
|
Mandipropamid
MRL
Commodity (current)
ppm
Soybeans, dry 0.2 0.2
Beans, dry10.1 0.1
Potato ○ 0.1 0.09
Taro 0.01 0.01
Sweet potato 0.01 0.01
Japanese yam (including Chinese yam) 0.01 0.01
Other potatoes20.01 0.01
Japanese radish, leaves (including radish) 25 25
Turnip, leaves (including rutabaga) 25 25
Watercress 25 25
Chinese cabbage 25 25
Cabbage 3 3
Brussels sprouts 3 3
Kale 25 25
Komatsuna (Japanese mustard spinach) 25 25
Kyona 25 25
Qing-geng-cai 25 25
Cauliflower 3 3
Broccoli 5 5
Other cruciferous vegetables325 25
Chicory 25 25
Endive 25 25
Shungiku 25 25
Lettuce (including cos lettuce and leaf lettuce) 25 25
Other composite vegetables425 25
Onion 0.1 0.1
Welsh (including leek) ● 4 7
Garlic 0.05 0.05
Other liliaceous vegetables57 7
Parsley 20 20
Celery 20 20
Tomato ○ 3 2
Pimiento (sweet pepper) 2 2
Egg plant 2 2
Other solanaceous vegetables625 25
Cucumber (including gherkin) 0.3 0.3
Pumpkin (including squash) 0.3 0.3
Oriental pickling melon (vegetable) ○ 0.5 0.3
Water melon 0.2MRL
(draft)
ppmMRL
Commodity (current)
ppm
Water melon (whole commodity after removal of stems) 0.2
Melons 0.01
Melons (whole commodity after removal of stems) 0.5
Makuwauri melon 0.01
Makuwauri melon (whole commodity after removal of stems) 0.5
Other cucurbitaceous vegetables725 25
Spinach 25 25
Okra 1 1
Ginger 0.01 0.01
Kidney beans, immature (with pods) ○ 1
Green soybeans ○ 3 2
Other vegetables825 25
Unshu orange, pulp 0.3
Unshu orange (whole commodity) 3
Citrus natsudaidai, whole 3 3
Lemon 3 3
Orange (including navel orange) 3 3
Grapefruit 3 3
Lime 3 3
Other citrus fruits93 3
Strawberry 5 5
Grape 3 3
Other fruits103 3
Cacao beans ○0.06
Hop 90 90
Other spices1110 10
Other herbs1225 25
Cattle, muscle 0.01
Pig, muscle 0.01
Other terrestrial mammals13, muscle 0.01
Cattle, fat 0.01
Pig, fat 0.01
Other terrestrial mammals, fat 0.01
Cattle, liver 0.01
Pig, liver 0.01
Other terrestrial mammals, liver 0.01
Cattle, kidney 0.01
Pig, kidney 0.01
Other terrestrial mammals, kidney 0.01
Cattle, edible offal140.01
Pig, edible offal 0.01MRL
(draft)
ppmMRL
Commodity (current)
ppm
Other terrestrial mammals, edible offal 0.01
Milk 0.01
Chicken, muscle 0.01
Other poultry15, muscle 0.01
Chicken, fat 0.01
Other poultry, fat 0.01
Chicken, liver 0.01
Other poultry, liver 0.01
Chicken, kidney 0.01
Other poultry, kidney 0.01
Chicken, edible offal 0.01
Other poultry, edible offal 0.01
Chicken eggs 0.01
Other poultry, eggs 0.01
Honey (including royal-jelly) 0.05 ※0.05
4. “Other composite vegetables” refers to all composite vegetables, except burdock, salsify,
artichoke, chicory, endive, shungiku, lettuce (including cos lettuce and leaf lettuce) and herbs.2. “Other potatoes” refers to all potatoes, except potato, taro, sweet potato, yam and konjac.
3. “Other cruciferous vegetables” refers to all cruciferous vegetables, except Japanese radish
roots and leaves (including radish), turnip roots and leaves, horseradish, watercress,
Chinese cabbage, cabbage, brussels sprouts, kale, komatsuna (Japanese mustard spinach),
kyona, qing-geng-cai, cauliflower, broccoli and herbs. ●：Commodities for which MRLs are to be lowered.
○：Commodities for which MRLs are to be raised.
NOTE: The residue definition is Mandipropamid only.
* The residue definition will not be changed.
* The uniform limit 0.01 ppm will be applied to commodities not listed above.
* Diagonal line means the food category to which MRL applies is not set.
* Regarding the MRLs in food categories, ”Water melon", "Melons", "Makuwauri melon" and ”Unshu orange,
pulp" will be deleted , whereas new MRLs will be established in foods categorized as "Water melon (whole
commodity after removal of stems)", "Melons (whole commodity after removal of stems)", "Makuwauri
melons (whole commodity after removal of stems)" and "Unshu orange (whole commodity)", respectively.
1. “Beans, dry” includes butter beans, cowbeans (red beans), lentil, kidney beans, lima beans,
pegia, sultani, sultapya and white beans.※ The MRL has not been enforced yet. It is currently being processed. It is going to be notified before the
revision of this pesticide. For detail, see the material at FSG242 on July 16, 2021.MRL
(draft)
ppm13. “Other terrestrial mammals” refers to all terrestrial mammals, except cattle and pig.
14. “Edible offal” refers to all edible parts, except muscle, fat, liver and kidney.
15. “Other poultry” refers to all poultry, except chicken.10. “Other fruits” refers to all fruits, except citrus fruits, apple, Japanese pear, pear, quince,
loquat, peach, nectarine, apricot, Japanese plum (including prune), mume plum, cherry,
berries, grape, Japanese persimmon, banana, kiwifruit, papaya, avocado, pineapple, guava,
mango, passion fruit, date and spices.
11. “Other spices” refers to all spices, except horseradish, wasabi (Japanese horseradish)
rhizomes, garlic, peppers chili, paprika, ginger, lemon peels, orange peels (including navel
orange), yuzu (Chinese citron) peels and sesame seeds.
12. “Other herbs” refers to all herbs, except watercress, nira, parsley stems and leaves, celery
stems and leaves.7. “Other cucurbitaceous vegetables” refers to all cucurbitaceous vegetables, except cucumber
(including gherkin), pumpkin (including squash), oriental pickling melon (vegetable),
watermelon, melons and makuwauri melon.
8. “Other vegetables” refers to all vegetables, except potatoes, sugar beet, sugarcane,
cruciferous vegetables, composite vegetables, liliaceous vegetables, umbelliferous
vegetables, solanaceous vegetables, cucurbitaceous vegetables, spinach, bamboo shoots,
okra, ginger, peas (with pods, immature), kidney beans (with pods, immature), green
soybeans, mushrooms, spices and herbs.
9. “Other citrus fruits” refers to all citrus fruits, except unshu orange, citrus natsudaidai, lemon,
orange (including navel orange), grapefruit, lime and spices.5. “Other liliaceous vegetables” refers to all liliaceous vegetables, except onion, welsh (including
leek), garlic, nira, asparagus, multiplying onion and herbs.
6. “Other solanaceous vegetables” refers to all solanaceous vegetables, except tomato, pimiento
(sweet pepper) and egg plant.
| 904
| 6,203
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/FE_Search_MultiDDFDocuments_283473_r:_WT_LET_1565-01.pdf;r:_WT_LET_1565-02..pdf
|
FE_Search_MultiDDFDocuments_283473_r:_WT_LET_1565-01.pdf;r:_WT_LET_1565-02.
| 0
| 0
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN21_KOR975.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN21_KOR975
|
G/TBT/N/KOR/975
18 juin 2021
(21-5022) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : RÉPUBLIQUE DE CORÉE
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable : Korean Agency for Technology and Standards - KATS (Office
coréen des normes et de la technologie)
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de fax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'aut orité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organisme susmentionné:
Electrical & Telecommunications Product Safety Division
Bureau of Product Safety Po licy
Korean Agency for Technology and Standards
Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy
93, Isu -ro, Maengdong -myeon, Eumseong -gun,
Chungcheongbuk -do, 27737
République de Corée
Téléphone : (+82) 43 870 5443
Fax: (+82) 43 870 5676
Courrier électronique: psd0@korea.kr
Site Web: http://www.kats.go.kr
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], autres:
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être indiqués, le cas
échéant) : Luminaires ; Luminaires ( ICS 29 .140.40).
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : Amendment of Technical
Regulations for Luminaires Part 1 : General requirements and tests (KC 60598 -1)
(Modification des règlements techniques sur les luminaires Partie 1 : Exigences générales
et essais (KC 60598 -1)), 174 pages, en coréen
6. Teneur : Les règle s particulières pour les luminaires (KC 60598 -1) seront harmonisées
aux normes internationales pertinentes ( CEI 60598 -1). Les principales modifications
apportées sont les suivantes:
1. Ajout des essais relatifs à la sécurité photobiologique (clause 4.24, Risq ues pour
la rétine liés à lumière bleue).
2. Ajout des règles relatives à la sécurité photobiologique (clause 3, Marquage).
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Harmonisation G/TBT/N/KOR/975
- 2 -
8. Documents pertinents : Avis au public n° 2020-0156 de l'Office coréen des normes et
de la technologie (KATS) du 7 mai 2 021;
CEI 60598 -1(Ed 8.0 2014 -05): Luminaires - Partie 1: Exigences générales et essais
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : à déterminer
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : à déterminer
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 60 jours à compter de la date de
notification
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [X] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
Korea WTO TBT Enquiry Point
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Division
Korean Agency for Technology and Standards (KATS)
93 Isu -ro Maengdong -myeon Eumseong -gun
Chungchungbuk -do
27737
+(82) 43 870 5525
+(82) 43 870 5682 (Fax)
tbt@korea.kr
http://www.knowtbt.kr
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/TBT/KOR/21_4235_00_x.pdf
https://members.wto .org/crnattachments/2021/TBT/KOR/21_4235_01_x.pdf
| 511
| 3,486
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SPS_NUGA159.pdf
|
q_G_SPS_NUGA159
|
G/SPS/N/UGA/159
8 June 2021
(21-4671) Page: 1/2
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original: English
NOTIFICATION
1. Notifying Member: UGANDA
If applicable, name of local government involved:
2. Agency responsible: Uganda National Bureau of Standards
3. Products covered (provide tariff item number(s) as specified in national
schedules deposited with the WTO; ICS numbers should be provided in addition,
where applicable): Tomato concentrates (paste and puree)
4. Regions or countries likely to be affected, to the extent relevant or practicable :
[X] All trading partners
[ ] Specific regions or countries:
5. Title of the notified document: DUS DEAS 66 -4:2021, Tomato products - Specification -
Part 4: Tomato concentrates (paste and puree), Second Edition . Language(s): English .
Number of pages: 19
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/SPS/UGA/21_3944_00_e.pdf
6. Description of content: This Draft Uganda Standard specifies the requirements,
sampling and test methods for tomato concentrates (paste and puree).
7. Objective and rationale: [X] food safety, [ ] animal health, [ ] plant protection,
[ ] protect humans from animal/plant pest or disease, [ ] protect territory from
other damage from pests.
8. Is there a relevant international standard? If so, identify the standard:
[X] Codex Alimentarius Commission (e.g. title or serial number of Codex
standard or related text) : CXS 57 -1981, Sta ndard for Processed Tomato
Concentrates
[ ] World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) (e.g. Terrestrial or Aquatic
Animal Health Code, chapter number) :
[ ] International Plant Protection Convention (e.g. ISPM number) :
[ ] None
Does this proposed regulation conform to the relevant international standard?
[X] Yes [ ] No
If no, describe, whenever possible, how and why it deviates from the
international standard: G/SPS/N/UGA/159
- 2 -
9. Other relevant documents and language(s) in which these are available:
− AOAC 971. 27, Sodium chloride in canned vegetables. Method
− EAS 12, Potable water - Specification
− EAS 35, Edible salts - Specification
− EAS 38, Labelling of pre -packaged foods - Specification
− EN 12631, Fruit and vegetable juices. Enzymatic determination of D - and L-lactic acid
(lactate) content. NAD spectrometric method
− ISO 762, Fruit and vegetable products - Determination of mineral impurities content
− ISO 1842, Fruit and vegetable products - Determination of pH
− United States Standards for Grades of Canned Tomato P aste, Effective date
19 September 1977
− Uganda Gazette
(available in English)
10. Proposed date of adoption (dd/mm/yy) : September 2021
Proposed date of publication (dd/mm/yy) : To be determined.
11. Proposed date of entry into force: [ ] Six months from date of publication , and/or
(dd/mm/yy) : Upon declaration as mandatory by the Minister for Trade, Industry and
Cooperatives.
[X] Trade facilitating measure
12. Final date for comments: [X] Sixty days from the date of circulation of the
notification a nd/or (dd/mm/yy) : 7 August 2021
Agency or authority designated to handle comments: [ ] National Notification
Authority, [ ] National Enquiry Point. Address, fax number and e -mail address (if
available) of other body:
Uganda National Bureau of Standards
Plot 2 -12 ByPass Link, Bweyogerere Industrial and Business Park
P.O. Box 6329
Kampala, Uganda
Tel: +(256) 4 1733 3250/1/2
Fax: +(256) 4 1428 6123
E-mail: info@unbs.go.ug
Website: https://www.unbs.go.ug
13. Text(s) available from: [ ] National Notification Authority, [ ] National Enquiry
Point. Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other body:
Uganda National Bureau of Standards
Plot 2 -12 ByPass Link, Bweyogerere Industrial and Business Park
P.O. Box 6329
Kampala, Uganda
Tel: +(256) 4 1733 3250/1/2
Fax: +(256) 4 1428 6123
E-mail: info@unbs.go.ug
Website: https://www.unbs.go.ug
| 588
| 4,033
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/279692_2021_TBT_TZA_21_7957_00_e.pdf
|
279692_2021_TBT_TZA_21_7957_00_e
|
DEAS 1079 : 2021
ICS 67.220
© EAC 2021 First Edition 2021
DRAFT EAST AFRICAN STANDARD
Mustard seed — Specification
EAST AFRICAN COMMUNITY DEAS 1079 : 2021
ii © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
Copyright notice
This EAC document is copyright -protected by EAC. While the reproduction of this document by
participants in the EAC standards development process is permitted without prior permission from EAC,
neither this document nor any extract from it may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form for
any other purpose without prior written permission from EAC.
Requests for permission to reproduce this document for t he purpose of selling it should be addressed
as shown below or to EAC’s member body in the country of the requester:
© East African Community 2021 — All rights reserved
East African Community
P.O. Box 1096 ,
Arusha
Tanzania
Tel: + 255 27 2 162100
Fax: + 255 27 2162190
E-mail: eac@eachq.org
Web: www.eac -quality.net
Reproduction for sales purposes may be subject to royalty payments or a licensing agreement.
Violators may be prosecuted .
DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved iii
Foreword
Development of the East African Standards has been necessi tated by the need for harmonizing requirements
governing quality of products and services in the East African Community. It is envisaged that through
harmonized standardization, trade barriers that are encountered when goods and services are exchanged
within the Community will be removed.
The Community has established an East African Standards Committee (EASC) mandated to develop and
issue East African Standards (EAS) . The Committee is composed of representatives of the National
Standards Bodies in Partner States, together with the representatives from the public and private sector
organizations in the community .
East African Standards are developed through Technical Committees that are representative of key
stakeholders including government, academia, con sumer groups, private sector and other interested parties.
Draft East African Standards are circulated to stakeholders through the National Standards Bodies in the
Partner States. The comments received are discussed and incorporated before finalization of standards, in
accordance with the Principles and procedures for development of East African Standards.
East African Standards are subject to review, to keep pace with technological advances. Users of the East
African Standards are therefore expected to en sure that they always have the latest versions of the standards
they are implementing .
The committee responsible for this document is Technical Committee EASC/TC 006, Spices , condiments and
culinary herbs .
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some o f the elements of this document may be subject of patent
rights. EAC shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
DRAFT EAST AFRICAN STANDARD DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 1
Mustard seed — Specification
1 Scope
This draft East African Standard specifies requirements, methods of s ampling and tests for seeds of white
mustard ( Sinapis alba or Brassica hirta ), brown and yellow mustard ( Brassica juncea ) or black mustard
(Brassica nigra )”.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that so me or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
Codex online guideline for pesticide residues in food
CODEX STAN 193, Codex g eneral standard for contaminants and toxins in food and feed
CODEX STAN 228, General method of analysis for contaminants
EAS 38, Labelling of pre -packaged foods — General requirements
EAS 39, Hygiene in the food and drink manufacturing industry — Code of practice
EAS 803, Nutrition labelling — Requirements
EAS 804, Claims — General requirements
IS0 927, Spices and condiments — Determination of ex traneous matter content
IS0 928, Spices and condiments — Determination of total ash
IS0 930, Spices and condiments — Determination of acid -insoluble ash
IS0 948, Spices and condiments — Sampling
IS0 1108, Spices and condiments — Determination of non -volatile ether extract
ISO 4833 -1, Microbiology of the food ch ain — Horizontal method for the enumeration of
microorganisms — Part 1: Colony count at 30 oC by the pour plate technique
ISO 6579 (all parts), Microbiology of the food chain — Horizontal method for the detection, enum eration
and serotyping of salmone lla
ISO 21527 -2, Microbiology of food and animal feeding stuffs — Horizontal method for the enumeration of
yeasts and moulds — Part 2: Colony count technique in products with water activity less than or equal to 0.95 DEAS 1079 : 2021
2 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
ISO 16649 -2, Microbiology of food and animal feeding stuffs — Horizontal method for the enumeration of
beta –glucuronidase -positive Escherichia coli — Part 2: Colony count technique at 44ºC using 5 -bromo -4-
chloro -3-indolyl beta –D-glucuronide
3 Terms and definitions
For the purpo ses of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at http:// www.iso.org/obp
3.1
immature or shriveled seed
mustard seed that has indications of lack of maturity or full development
3.2
damaged seeds
seeds that are damaged mechanically, or by mould or weevils, or those showing internal discoloration of
seeds m aterially affecting the quality
4 Requirements
4.1 Description
Mustard seed is the dried clean seed of one or more of the following plants :
a) Sinapis alba or Brassica hirta — White mustard ;
b) Brassi ca nigra — Black mustard;
c) Brassica juncea — Brown and yellow mu stard
4.2 General requirements
4.2.1 Odour and flavour
The odour and flavour of the seeds when ground and moist ened shall be fresh and pungent, and free from
rancidity and mustiness.
4.2.2 Freedom from moulds, insects, etc.
The seeds shall be free fro m living insects, mites and moulds, dead insects, insect fragments and rodent
contami nation visible to the naked eye.
4.3 Specific requirements
The mustard seed shall comply with the requirements given in the table.
Table — Requirements for mustard seed
S/No. Characteristics Requirement Test method
i) Loss in mass at 103 C, % (m/m) max. 10 Annex A DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 3
ii) Total ash, % (m/m) on dry basis, max. 6.5 IS0 928
iii) Acid-insoluble ash, % (m/m) on dry
basis, min. 1.0 IS0 930
iv) Non-volatile ether extract, % (m/m) on
dry ba sis, min. 28 IS0 1108
v) Allyl isothiocyanate, % (m/m) on dry
basis
Annex B a) in B. nigra, min. 1.0
b) in B. juncea , min. 0.70
vi) p-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate, %
(m/m) on dry basis in Sinapis alba , min. 2.3 Annex C or Annex D
vii) Extraneous matter, m/m 0.7 % IS0 927
viii) Damaged or shrivelled seeds (m/m). 2 %
5. Contaminants
5.1 Pesticide residues
Pesticide residues in mustard seed shall not exceed maximum residue limits as established in the Codex
online guideline for pesticide residues in food.
5.2 Heavy metals
Heavy metals in mustard seed shall not exceed maximum heavy metal limits as stipulated in CODEX STAN
193.
6 Hygiene
Mustard seed shall be manufactured and handled in a hygienic manner in accordance with EAS 39 and shall
comply with the microb iological limits stipulated in Table 2 when tested in accordance with the methods
specified therein.
Table 2 — Microbiological requirements for mustard seed
S/No Characteristic Requirement Test method
i. Total plate count, cfu/g, max. 105 ISO 4833 -1
ii. Yeast and moulds, cfu/g, max. 104 ISO 21527 -2
iii. Salmonella spp ., per 25 g Absent ISO 6579
iv. E coli , MPN/g, max. Absent ISO 16649 -2
7 Packaging
The mustard seed shall be packaged in food grade packaging material that secure s the integrity and the safety
of the product .
8. Labelling
In addition to the requirements of EAS 38, EAS 803 and EAS 804, each container shall be legibly and indelibly
labelled with the following information: DEAS 1079 : 2021
4 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
a) name of the product as “mustard seed”;
b) trade name or brand name if any;
c) name, p hysical and postal address of manufacturer and / or packer;
d) batch or code number;
e) net weight in metric units;
f) storage conditions;
g) manufacturing date;
h) expiry date ; and
i) instructions for use.
8 Sampling and test
8.1 Sampling
Sample the mustard seed by the me thod specified in IS0 948.
8.2 Methods of test
8.2.1 The samples of mustard seed shall be tested for conformity with the requirements of - this International
Standard by the methods of test referred to in 3.4 and the table.
8.2.2 For the determination of t otal ash, use the method specified in IS0 928, with the following modifications _
to sub - clause 8.3.2.
Leach the ash with hot water, filter through a medium -fine, ash less filter paper and wash thoroughly. Transfer
the filter paper and contents to the di sh (6.11, dry and heat again in the muffle furnace (6.2) for 1 h. Cool and
add 5 to 10 drops of analytical quality nitric acid, evaporate to dryness on the steam bath (6.4) and heat in the
muffle furnace for 30 min. Repeat the addition of 5 to 10 drops of the nitric acid, again evaporate to dryness
and heat in the muffle furnace for 1 h. Cool the dish, add the filtrate, and evaporate to dryness on the steam
bath. Heat again in the muffle furnace for 1 h, cool and weigh. Repeat these operations until the dif ference
between two successive weighing is less than 0.002 g. Record the lower mass.
The total ash may be retained for the insoluble ash and acid -insoluble ash.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 5
Annex A
(normative )
Determination of loss in mass at 103 C1)
A.1 Apparatus
A.1.1 Dish , of corrosion -resistant metal, with a suitable tight-fitting lid.
A.1.2 Constant temperature oven , controlled at 103 + 2 °C.
A.1.3 Desiccator, provided with an efficient desiccant.
A.1.4 Analytical balance.
A.2 Procedure
A.2.1 Test portion
Weigh, to the nearest 0.001 g, about 2 g of the sample in the tared dish (A.1.1).
A.2.2 Determination
Heat the dish and contents, with the lid alongside the dish, in the oven (A.1.21 at 103 + 2 °C for 3 h. Fit the lid, cool in the
desiccator (A.1.3) and weigh. Heat in the oven for 1 h, cool in the desiccator and weigh again. Repeat the operations of
heating for 1 h in the oven, cooling and weighing, until the difference beWveen two successive weighings does not
exceed 0,001 g.
A.2.3 Number of determinations
Carry out two determi nations on the same sample.
A.3 Expression or results
A.3.1 Method of calculation and formula
The loss in mass at 103 °C, i-I, expressed as a percentage by mass of the sample, is equal to :
(m0 – m1) × 100
m0
where
m0 is the initial mass, in grams, of the test portion;
m1 is the mass, in grams, of the test portion after heating in the oven.
Take as the result the arithmetic mean of the two determinations (A.2.3), provided that the requirement for
repeatability (see A.3.2) is satisfied.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
6 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
A.3.2 Repeatabili ty
The differenc e between the results of the two determinations (A.2.3), carried out simultaneously or in rapid
succession by the same analyst, shall not exceed 1 % of the mean value.
1) For the purpose of calculating the results of tests on the dry basis, it is assumed that the loss in mass at
103 °C. as determined by the method described in annex A, is equal to the moisture content.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 7
Annex B
(normative)
Determination of allyl isothiocyanate
B.1 Principle
After two successive soakings of the sample, the first in water at a temperature of 70 °C and the second in
alcoholic medium, distillation of the allyl isothiocyanate liberated into an alcoholic ammonium hydroxide
solution, addition to the distillate of a s tandard volumetric silver nitrate solution, and titration of the excess
silver nitrate with standard volumetric potassiurri, or ammonium, thiocyanate solution in the presence of
ammonium iron(III) sulphate.
B.2 Reagents
All reagents shall be of recognized ana lytical quality. The water used shall be distilled water or water of at
least equivalent purity.
B.2.1 Ethanol , 95 % ( V/V).
B.2.2 Amm onium hydroxide solution , e20 = 0. 925 g/ ml.
B.2.3 Nitric acid , e 20 = 1. 40 g/ml.
B.2.4 Silver nitrate , standard volumetric solution, c(AgNO 3) = 0.1 mol/I.
B.2.5 Potassiu m thiocyanate or ammonium thio cyanate, standard volumetric solution, c(KCNS) or
c(NH 4CNS) = 0. 1 mol/I.
B.2.6 Ammonium iron(III) sulphate solution , saturated when cold.
B.3 Apparatus
Usual laboratory apparatus, and in particular
B.3.1 Grinding mill.
B.3.2 Entrainment distillation apparatus (see the figure for a suitable example).
B.3.3 Burette , graduated at 0. 05 ml intervals, complying with the requirements of ISO/ R 385, class A.
B.3.4 Analytical balance .
B.4 Procedure
B.4.1 Preparation of the sampl e
After very careful mixing of the sample, take 15 to 20 g and grind it (see ISO 2825).
B.4.2 Test portion
Take about 2 g of the ground sample and weigh it to the nearest 0.001 g. DEAS 1079 : 2021
8 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
B.4.3 Determination
Transfer the test portion to the pe ar-shaped flask of the distilla tion ap paratus, add 80 ml of water previously
heated to 70 ± 2 °C, close the flask with its ground glass stopper and leave to stand for 15 min. Then add 20
ml of the ethanol (B.2.1) and allow to soak for 45 min.
After the soaking, connect the flask quickly to the distillation apparatus. Distil, and collect the dis tillate in a
conical flask con taining a mixture of 5 ml of the ammonium hydroxide solution (B.2.2) and 10 ml of the
ethanol (B.2.1). (Entrainment distilla tion lasts, on average, for 5 min.) The quantity o f the distillate should be
at least 100 ml.
Add to the distillate 10 ml of the standard volumetric silver nitrate solution (B.2.4) and leave for 12 h at
ambient temperature (the operation will be faster if the conical flask is placed for 1 h in a water bat h heated
to 70 to 80 °C).
Filter through a fine filter paper, rinse the flask and residue several times with hot water (approximately 90
°C).
To the bulked filtrate and washings add 10 ml of the nitric acid (B.2.3) and then titrate with the standard
volume tric potassium, or ammonium, thiocyanate solution (B.2.5) using the ammonium iron(III) sulphate
solution (B.2.6) as indicator, until a persistent pink colour is obtained.
B.4.4 Number of determinations
Carry out two determinations on the same prepared sa mple.
B.5 Expression of results
B.5.1 Method of calculation and formula
The allyl isothiocyanate content, expressed as a percentage by mass on the dry basis, is equal to
4.95 (10 – V) x 100 x 100
103 m 100 – H
Where;
m is the mass, in g rams, of the test portion;
V is the volume, in millilitres, of the standard volumetric potassium, or ammonium, thiocyanate
solution used in the titration;
H is the moisture content of the sample, expressed as a percentage by mass, determined by the
method specified in annex A.
NOTE — If the standard vo lumetric solutions used are not of the exact concentrations indicated in clause B.2,
a suitable correction factor should be used in calculating the result.
Take as the result the arith metic mean of the two det ermina tions (B.4.4), provided that the requirement for
repeatability (see B.5.2) is satisfied.
B.5.2 Repeatability
The difference between the results of the two determinations (B.4.4), carried out simultaneously or in rapid
succession by the same analyst, shall not exceed 1 % of the mean value. DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 9
B.6 Notes on procedure
B.6.1 During the analysis, all contact with copper or rubber shall be avoided, especially in the
distillation apparatus. Use cork or, preferably, ground glass stoppers.
B.6.2 The enzymic activity of the must ard seed diminishes with age; thus, it may be necessary to
modify the analytical method in the case of old seed.
After a preliminary determination giving particularly low figures for allyl isothiocyanate, add to the
distillation residue 5 g of Sinapis alb a (take care to check that sulphur -containing volatile s ubstances are
not present in it and then proceed to a second determination.
The addition of the two results will give the real figure of allyl isothiocyanate that may be formed in the
sample. However , the actual quality of the sample should be considered as very reduced and it is
recommended that the two figures, found before and after the addition of Sinapis alba , should be given
in the test report.
B.6.3 The enzymic activity of the se eds increases during certain periods of the year (particularly in spring);
thus, identical results are not always found with a given lot of seed, according to the season in which
the analysis is carried out.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
10 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
Annex C
(normative)
Determination of ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate (Colorimetric
method)
C.1 Principle
Decomposition, by enzymatic hydrolysis, of the sinalbin (glucoside of Sinapis al bal) into glucose, the
hydrogen sulphate of sinapin and ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate, the last mentioned giving ρ-
hydroxybenzyl and thiocyanate. CoIorimetric determination of the thiocyanate so formed.
C.2 Reagents
All reagents shall be of recognized analytical quality. The water used shall be distilled water or water of at
least equivalent purity.
C.2.1 Calcium carbonate, pulverized.
C.2.2 Mercury (II) chloride, 50 g/I solution.
C.2.3 Potassium hexacyanoferrate (II), 106 g/l solution.
C.2.4 Zinc acetate solution
Dissolve 21. 9 g of zinc acetate [(CH3COO) 2Zn] in water, add 3 ml of glacial acetic acid (CH 3COOH) and
dilute to 100 ml with water.
C.2.5 Nitric acid , approximately 1 mol/I solution.
C.2.6 Sodium hydroxide, approximately 1 mol/I solution.
C.2.7 Ammonium iron (III) sulphate , 200 g/l solution in approximately 0.5 mol/I sulphuric acid
solution.
C.2.8 Potassium thiocyanate or ammonium thio cyanate , standard volumetric solution, c(KCNS) or
c(NH 4CNS) = 0.1 mol/I, i.e. containing 5.808 g of CNS - per litre.
C.3 Apparatus
Usual laboratory apparatus, and in particular .
DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 11
C.3.1 Grinding mill
C.3.2 One-mark volumetric flasks, of capacities 50, 250 and 1 000 ml, complying with the
requirements of ISO 1042, class A.
C.3.3 Pipettes , delivering 2 ml and 5 ml, complying with the requirements of ISO 648, class A, ISO/R
835.
C.3.4 Colorimeter, suitable for measurements at a wavelength of 450 nm.
C.3.5 Analytical balance
C.4 Procedure
C.4.1 Preparation of test sample
Carefully render the sample homogeneous, then take a portion of 20 to 25 g of the mustard seed and
grind it (see ISO 2825).
C.4.2 Test portion
Take approximately 5 g of the ground sample and weigh it to the nearest 0.001 g.
C.4.3 Hydrolysis
Transfer the test portion to a 250 ml beaker.
Add 100 ml of water at 70 ± 2 °C and at least 100 mg of the calcium carbonate (C.2.1). Cover the
beaker with a watch glass. Leave to soak for 15 min at 70 °C, cool, add 20 ml of the sodium hydro xide
solution (C.2.6), and leave in contact for 15 min.
C.4.4 Clarification
Add a sufficient quantity of the nitric acid solution (C.2.5), to bring the contents of the beaker to a pH of
about 6.0 to 6. 5. Pour the contents of the beaker into a 250 ml volumetric flask and, shaking the flask,
add 2 ml of the potassium hexa -cyanoferrate(II) solution (C.2.3) and then 2 ml of the zinc acetate
solution (C.2.4).
Dilute to 250 ml with water and add 2 ml of water by pipette (C.3.3) (to take into account the volume of
the precipitate). Shake, and filter through a rapid filter shaded from bright light. The filtrate (F) should be
clear and colourless.
C.4.5 Determination
Add to a 50 ml volumetric flask:
— 5 ml of the filtrate (F),
— . 5 ml of the ammonium iron(III) sulphate soluti on (C.2.7).
DEAS 1079 : 2021
12 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
Dilute to 50 ml with water, shake, and measure the absorbance at a wavelength of 450 nm by means of the
colorimeter (C.3.4).
C.4.6 Calibration curve
Transfer, by means of a pipette (C.3.3), 5 ml of the standard volumetric potassium, or ammonium,
thiocyanate solution (C.2.8) to a 1 000 ml volumetric flask and dilute to the mark with water.
Into a series of five 50 ml volumetric flasks, transfer the volumes of this diluted potassium, or ammonium,
thiocyanate solution indicated in the following table :
Volum e of diluted p otassium, or ammonium,
thiocyanate solution Corresponding mass of thiocyanate ion
ml μg
5 145.2
10 290.4
15 435.6
20 580.8
25 726
Add to each flask, 5 ml of the ammonium iron (III) sulphate solution (C.2.7), dilute to the mark with water, shake,
and measure the absorbance as indicated in C.4.5.
Plot a calibration curve, giving the a bsorbance as a function of the number of micrograms of thiocyanate.
C.4.7 Matching test
Carry out a matching test in the same conditions as the actual test, but adding 2 drops of the mercury (Ill chloride
solution (C.2.2) to correct for errors due to the react ion of phenols with the iron(III) salts.
Note on the calibration curve the dif ference in absorbance be tween the test solution, containing the
thiocyanate and phenols, and the matching test solution.
C.4.8 Number of determinations
Carry out two determinations on the same prepared sample.
C.5 Expression of results
C.5.1 Method of calculation and formula
The ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate content, expressed as a percentage by mass on the dry basis, is equal to
DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 13
2.84 m 1 × 250 × 100 × 100
106 5 mo 100 – H
where
mo is the mass, in grams, of the test portion;
m1 is the mass, in micrograms, of thiocyanate read from the calibration curve;
H is the moisture content of the sample, expressed as a percentage by mass, determined by the method
specified in annex A;
2.84 is the conversion factor from thiocyanate ion (CNS -) to ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate.
Take as the result the arithmetic mean of the two determinations (C.4.8), provided that the requirement for
repeatability (see C.5.2) is satisfied.
C.5.2 Repeatability
The difference between the results of the two determin ations (C.4.8), carried out simultaneously or in rapid
succession by the same analyst, shall not exceed 2 % of the mean value.
C.6 Note on procedure
The enzymic activity of the seeds increases during certain periods of the year (particularly in spring); thus,
identical results are not always found with a given lot of seed, according to the season in which the analysis is
carried out.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
14 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
Annex D
(normative)
Determination of ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate (Argentimetric
method)
D.0 Introduction
Laboratories not in possession of a colorimeter may determine thiocyanate by argentimetry. In this case it is
necessary either
a) to carry out a preliminary check for the absence of CI—ions in the seed (no reaction with sil ver nitrate on
the ash of the mustard seed); or
b) to provide for correction by carrying out the determination of CI—ions on an aliquot portion of the filtrate.
This method may be substituted for the colorimetric method by agreement between the parties concerned.
D.1 Principle
Decomposition, by enzymic hydrolysis, of sinalbin (glucoside of Sinapis albas into glucose, the hydrogen
sulphate of sinapin and ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate, the last -mentioned giving ρ-hydroxybenzyl alcohol and
thiocyanate. Determination of the thiocyanate thus formed, by argentimetry in nitric acid medium; back titration
of the excess of silver nitrate using stan dard volumetric potassium thiocyanate solution in the presence of
ammonium iron(III) sulphate.
D.2 Reagents
All reagents shall be of recognized analytical quality. The water used shall be distilled water or water of at
least equivalent purity.
The reagents necessary for hydrolysis and clarification (see annex C), together with
D .2.1 Nitric acid , e 20 = 1.40 g/ ml.
D.2.2 Silver nitrate, standard volumetric solution, c(AgNO3) = 0.1 mol/I.
D.2.3 Potassium thiocyanate , standard volumetric solution, c(KCNS) 0.1 mol/I.
D.2.4 Ammonium iron (III) sulphate solution, saturated when cold.
D.3 Apparatus
The apparatus necessary for the preparation of the sample hydrolysis and clarification (see annex C),
together with
D.3.1 One-mark pipettes , of capacities 5 and 100 ml, complying with the requirements of ISO 648, class
A.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 15
D.3.2 Burette , graduated at every 0.05 ml, complying with the requirements of ISO/ R 385, class A.
D.4 Procedure
D.4.1 Preparation of test sample, test portion, hydrolysis and clarification
Proceed as specified in C.4.1 to C.4.4 of annex C.
D.4.2 Titratio n
Add to the beaker, shaking after each addition:
— 100 ml, by means of a pipette (D.3.1), of the filtrate (F) (see C.4.4), and approximately equivalent to 2 g of
mustard seed;
— 1 ml of the nitric acid (D.2.1);
— 5 ml, by means of a pipette (D.3.1), of the standard volumetric silver nitrate solution (D.2.2);
— 2 ml of the ammonium iron(III) sulphate solution (D.2.4).
Shake the flask to coagulate the precipitate, and bitrate with the potassium thiocyanate solution (D.2.3) until a
persistent faint red colour is obtained.
D.4.3 Number of determinations
Carry out two determinations on the same prepared sample.
D.5 Expression of results
D.5.1 Method of calculation and formula
The ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate content, expressed as a percentage by mass on the dry basis, is
equal to
0.016 5 (5 V) × 250 100 × 100
100 m 100 H
Where
m is the mass, in grams, of the test portion (see annex C, C.4.2);
V is the volume, in millilitres, of the sta ndard volumetric potassium thiocyanate solution (D.2.3) used in the
titration.
H is the moisture content of the sample, expressed as a percentage by mass, determined by the method
specified in annex A.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
16 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
NOTE — If the standard volumetric solutions used are not of the exact concentrations specified in clause D.2, a
suitable corr ection factor should be used in calculating the result.
Take as the result the arith metic mean of the two determina tions ( D.4.3), provided that the requirement for
repeatability (see D.5.2) is satisfied.
D.5.2 Repeatability
The differenc e between the results o f the two determinations (D.4.3), carried out simultaneously or in
rapid succession by the s ame analyst, shall not exceed 0.1 g of ρ-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate per 100
g of dry matter in the sample. DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved 17
Annex E
(informative)
Recommendations relating to storage and transport
E.1 The packs of mustard seed should be stored in covered prem ises well protected from the sun, rain and
excessive heat.
E.2 The store room should be dry, free from objectionable odours and proofed against entry of insects and vermin.
The ventilation should be controlled so as to give good ventilation under dry condi tions and no ventilation
under damp conditions. In a storage warehouse, suitable facilities should be available for fumigation.
E.3 The packs should be so handled and transported that they are protected from the rain, from the sun or other
sources of ex cessive heat, from objectionable odours and from cross -infestation, especially in the holds of
ships.
DEAS 1079 : 2021
18 © EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
Bibliography
[1] ISO 1237 : Mustard seed
. DEAS 1079 : 2021
© EAC 2021 – All rights reserved
| 4,712
| 29,558
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN21_SAU1188.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN21_SAU1188
|
G/TBT/N/SAU/1188
29 de abril de 2021
(21-3632) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Se da traslado de la notificación siguiente de conformidad con el artículo 10.6.
1. Miembro que notifica : REINO DE LA ARABIA SAUDITA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate (artículos 3.2 y 7.2):
2. Organismo responsable : Saudi Standards and Quality Organization (SASO)
(Organización de Normalización, Metrología y Calidad de la Arabia Saudita)
Nombre y dirección (incluidos los números de teléfono y de fax, así como las
direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso) del organismo o
autoridad encargado de la tramitación de observaciones sobre la notificación,
en caso de que se trate de un organismo o autoridad diferente:
Saudi Standards and Quality Organization (Organización de Normalización, Metrología y
Calidad de la Arabia Saudita)
P.O. Box: 3437 Riad 11471
Teléfono : +966(11)252 Ext. (9081 -9072-9065)
Fax: +966(1)4520193
Correo electrónico: enquirypoint@saso.gov.sa
3. Notificación hecha en virtud del artículo 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ],
o en virtud de:
4. Productos abarcados (partida del SA o de la NCCA cuando corresponda ; en otro
caso partida del arancel nacional . Podrá indicarse además, cuando proced a, el
número de partida de la ICS) : Iluminación en general (ICS : 91.160.01).
5. Título, número de páginas e idioma(s) del documento notificado : Energy
efficiency, functionality and labelling requirements for lighting products - Part 1
(Requisitos de efici encia energética, funcionalidad y etiquetado de productos de
iluminación . Parte 1) . Documento en inglés (9 páginas).
6. Descripción del contenido : Norma S ASO 2870 :2018/AMD1:2021, Requisitos de
eficiencia energética, funcionalidad y etiquetado de productos de iluminación . Parte 1.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser, incluida, cuando proceda, la naturaleza de los
problemas urgentes : Se modifica la Norma S ASO 2870 , Requisitos de eficiencia
energética, funcionalidad y etiquetado de productos de iluminación . Parte 1 ; información
al consumidor y etiquetado.
8. Documentos pertinentes:
SASO 2870 :2018.
9. Fecha propuesta de adopción : No se ha determinado.
Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : 6 meses después de su adopción G/TBT/N/SAU/1188
- 2 -
10. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : 60 días después de la fecha de
notificación
11. Textos disponibles en : Servicio nacional de información [ ], o dirección, números
de teléfono y de fax y direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso,
de otra ins titución:
enquirypoint@saso.gov.sa
http://www.saso.gov.sa
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/TBT/SAU/21_3068_00_e.pdf
| 417
| 2,820
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN22_BWA148.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN22_BWA148
|
G/TBT/N/BWA/148
25 May 2022
(22-4007) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
The following notification is being circulated in accordance with Article 10.6
1. Notifying Member: BOTSWANA
If applicable, name of local government involved (Article 3.2 and 7.2):
2. Agency responsible:
BOTSWANA BUREAU OF STANDARDS
Private Bag B0 48
Gaborone,
Botswana.
Tel : (+267) 3903200
Fax:(+267)3903120
Toll Free Number : (0800 600 900)
E-mail : infoc@hq.bobstandards.bw
Name and address (including telephone and fax numbers , email and website
addresses, if available) of agency or authority designated to handle comments
regarding the notification shall be indicated if different from above:
3. Notified under Article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], 3.2 [ ], 7.2 [ ],
other :
4. Products covered (HS or CCCN where applicable, otherwise national tariff
heading. ICS numbers may be provided in addition, where applicable): Films and
sheets (ICS code(s): 83.140.10)
5. Title, number of pages a nd language(s) of the notified document: BOS 823:2019
Plastic Pill bag — Specification; (16 page(s), in English)
6. Description of content: This standard specifies requirements for primary packaging for
pills and tablets made from low density polyethylene (LDPE) plastic.
The standard is applicable to plastic packaging bags of zip lock top.
7. Objective and rationale, including the nature of urgent problems where
applicable: National security requirements; Prevention of deceptive practices and
consumer protection; Protection of human health or safety; Protection of the
environment; Quality requirements; Harmonization
8. Relevant documents:
ISO 4591, Plastics – Film and sheeting – Determination of average thickness of a sample,
and average thic kness and yield of a roll, by gravimetric techniques (gravimetric
thickness)
ISO 4593, Plastics – Film and sheeting – Determination of thickness by mechanical
scanning. G/TBT/N/BWA/148
- 2 -
9. Proposed date of adoption: To be determined
Proposed date of entry into force: To be determined
10. Final date for comments: 60 days from notification
11. Texts available from: National enquiry point [X] or address, telephone and fax
numbers and email and website addresses, if available , of other body:
BOTSWANA BUREAU OF STANDARDS
Private Bag B0 48
Gaborone,
Botswana.
Tel : (+267) 3903200
Fax:(+267)3903120
Toll Free Number : (0800 600 900)
E-mail : infoc@hq.bobstandards.bw
| 371
| 2,594
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SCMQ2_EU88.pdf
|
q_G_SCMQ2_EU88
|
G/SCM/Q2/EU/88
20 October 2022
(22-7891) Page: 1/4
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Original: English
SUBSIDIES
REPLIES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS1 POSED BY THE UNITED STATES REGARDING
THE NEW AND FULL NOTIFICATION OF THE EUROPEAN UNION2
The following communication, dated and received on 20 October 2022, is being circulated at the
request of the delegation of the European Union .
_______________
Question 1
European Regional Development Fund
When describing the forms of assistance provided, the notification states that grants
provided are used for the development of endogenous potential by measures which
support regional and local development. Please describe what is meant by "endogenous
potential"? How, and using what specific measures, does this program achieve the goal
of developing endogenous po tential at the regional and local levels?
Reply :
Concerning ERDF, 'endogenous potential ' merely refers to the potential of the areas/territories that
we support. It refers to measures supporting fixed investments in equipment and infrastructure,
including cultural and sustainable tourism infrastructure, services to enterprises, in particular SMEs,
support to research and innovation bodies and investment in technology and applied research in
enterprises, as specified in Article 3(1)(e) of Regulation 1301/201 3, which cover the period
2014-2020.
Question 2
Connecting Europe Facility (in the field of energy) (2014 -2020)
Connecting Europe Facility EU Financing Programme (in the field of transport) (Regulation
EU 1316/2013)
For the two programs above, in response to whom and how the subsidy is provided, it is
simply stated that "Others" are the recipients of these subsidies. Please clarify and
provide greater details on which entities and/or sectors are eligible for this subsidy. In
addition, please provid e information on how this subsidy is provided to its recipients.
Reply :
"CEF-Transport Financing Programme supports key transport infrastructure for all transport modes.
Projects must be located on the TEN -T.
1 G/SCM/Q2/EU/77.
2 G/SCM/N/372/EU . G/SCM/Q2/EU/88
- 2 -
The following entities are eligible:
(a) legal entities established in: (i) a Member State, including joint ventures; (ii) a third country
associated to the CEF; or (iii) an overseas country or territory;
(b) legal entities created under Union law and, if provided for in the work programmes,
international organisations.
Two types of applicants can submit their proposal under the CEF -Transport Financing Programme:
- One or more Member States
- With the agreement of the Member State(s) concerned, international organisations or
public or private bodies established in an EU Member State.
Following every call for proposals based on the work programmes, the Commission adopts an
implementing act setting the amount of financial support to be granted to the projects selected and
specifying the conditions and methods for their implementation.
Facilities and infrastructure supported under CEF must be accessible for use by all oper ators on a
non-discriminatory basis ."
In order to be eligible for CEF -Energy grants for studies or works, a project must be on the most
recent list of Projects of Common Interest (PCI). Such PCIs concern cross -border energy
infrastructure projects linking EU Member States ' energy systems, or connecting the EU to
neighbouring third countries. The CEF grant would go to the (public or private) entity promoting,
implementing and operating such an infrastructure project. Recipients include operators of electrici ty
or natural gas transmission systems as well as LNG terminals. CEF grants are the exception, as the
bulk of PCIs are delivered by the market and their costs recovered through user tariffs. With the
revised TEN -E Regulation in force since this year, suppo rt for oil and gas infrastructure is excluded
in future PCI lists.
Grants are direct financial contributions from the European Union budget awarded by way of a
donation to third -party beneficiaries engaged in activities that serve EU policies. Grants are based
on the costs actually incurred by the beneficiaries for carrying out the activities in question, and the
results of the action remain the property of the beneficiaries.
Question 3
Research on Coal and Steel (Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS)
The notification claims that demonstration projects "aim at constructing and/or operating
an industrial -scale installation or a significant part of an industrial -scale installation."
Given global overcapacity in the steel industry, how does the EU ensure that these
projects do not lead to an overall capacity increase in the steel sector?
Reply :
COUNCIL DECISION (EU) 2021/1094 of 28 June 2021 revised the programme 's research objectives,
in line with the European Green Deal and the Just Transition Mechanism . The Research Progra mme
provides support for collaborative research in the coal and steel sectors. As regards steel, the
program provides support for clean steel breakthrough leading to near -zero-carbon steel making
projects. This fits with the EU 's objectives to achieve clim ate neutrality by 2050 and is consistent
with the political, scientific, and technological objectives of the Union, and shall complement the
activities carried out in the Member States and within the existing Union Framework Programme for
research, technol ogical development and demonstration activities.
Question 4
Additional Programs Not Notified: Publicly available information indicates that the
European Union (EU) maintains other subsidy programs, such as those described below,
that may meet the criteria for notification under Article 25 of the Subsidies Agreement .
Please explain why the following programs have not been notified. Will the EU notify these
subsidies in sufficient detail that satisfies the informational requirements of Article 25.3
of the SCM Agreement? G/SCM/Q2/EU/88
- 3 -
European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI)
The Secretariat Report on EU's latest Trade Policy Review (TPR) (WT/TPR/S/395/Rev.1)3
states that the EFSI has up to EUR 315 billion in funds available and has "already
supported more than 750,000 jobs, with the figure set to rise to 1.4 million jobs by 2 020."4
The plan is aimed at boosting long -term economic growth and competitiveness in the EU
in areas such as infrastructure, research and innovation, education, health, information
and communications technology and others.5
Reply :
The European fund for strategic investments (EFSI) is aimed at boosting long -term economic growth
and competitiveness in the European Union. The fund covers projects in areas such as infrastructure,
research and innovation, education, health, information and communications tec hnology and also
supports small and medium sized enterprises. The fund is managed by the European Investment
Bank (EIB) and the Commission. Without prejudice to the status of the fund, the Commission is
analysing if the EFSI may be subject to the notificat ion requirements under Article 25 of the ASCM.
InvestEU
InvestEU aims to supports sustainable investment, innovation, and job creation in Europe.
It aims to provide more than €372 billion in additional investment over the period 2021 -
27. The programme supports four main policy areas, including 1) Sustainable
infrastructure 2) Research, innovation and digitalization, 3) SMEs, and 4) Social
investment and skills.6
Reply :
In accordance with Article 37, InvestEU Regulation 2021/523 applies from 1 January 2021.
The implementation of the InvestEU programme started in 2022 when the first guarantee agreement
was signed in February 2022. Consequently, it is outside of the notification period covering the years
2019-2020 and without prejudice to determi nation whether it would be subject to notification for
subsequent periods.
Innovation Fund
The Innovation Fund is one of the world's largest programmes for the demonstration of
innovative low -carbon technologies.7 Accounting firm Ernest Young describes th e
programme as "being used to support floating wind farms, carbon capture mechanisms
and energy storage, all of which could help make sectors such as cement and steelmaking
more sustainable."8 The Fund will provide around EUR 10 billion of support over 20 20-
2030.9
3 WT/TPR/S/395/Rev.1 ( 7 July 2020), Trade Policy Review Report by the Secretariat: European Union
("TPR/395 ")
4 TPR/395, page 23, paragraph 1.28 and page 217, paragraph 4.202.
5 "European fund for strategic investments (EFSI) ", European Council, 5 March 2020,
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/investment -plan/strategic -investments -fund/ (accessed on
13 July 2022).
6 "What is the InvestEU Programme? " European Union, https://investeu.europa.eu/what -investeu -
programme_en (accessed on 13 July 2022).
7 "Innovation Fund. " European Commission, https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu -action/funding -climate -
action/innovation -fund_en (accessed on 12 July 2022).
8 Smith, Brian. "How Europe, India and Africa are incentivizing foreign investment. " Ernest Young,
29 July 2021, https://www.ey.com/en_fi/tax/how -europe -india-and-africa -are-incentivizing -foreign -
investment (accessed on 12 July 2022).
9 "Discover the Innovation F und, one of the world 's largest funding programmes, with EUR 10 billion
funding. " Cl erens, https://www.euinnovationfund.eu/ (accessed 14 July 2022). G/SCM/Q2/EU/88
- 4 -
Reply :
There was no funding granted under the EU Innovation fund in 2019 and 2020. Therefore , it is
outside of the notification period and without prejudice to determination whether it would be subject
to notification for subsequent periods.
Just Transition Fund (JTF)
The JTF is a "financial instrument within the Cohesion Policy which aims to provide
support to territories facing serious socio -economic challenges arising from the transition
towards climate neutrality." The fund provi des grants to Member States in territories
expected to be the most negatively impacted by the green transition. For eligible
territories, the JTF provides benefits such as investments in Small and Medium -sized
Enterprises, creation of new firms, research a nd innovation incentives, environmental
rehabilitation, clean energy, up - and reskilling of workers, job -search assistance, and the
transformation of existing carbon -intensive installations. The JTF has an overall budget
of EUR 17.5 billion for 2021 -2027.10
Reply :
This fund covers the programming period 2021 -2027. Therefore, it is outside of the notification
period covering the years 2019 -2020 and without prejudice to whether it would be subject to
notification for subsequent periods.
__________
10 Kolodziejski, Marek. "Just Transition Fund. " European Pa rliament, March 2022,
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/214/just -transition -fund (accessed on
12 July 2022).
| 1,619
| 11,125
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_IP_N_1MEX21.pdf
|
s_IP_N_1MEX21
|
IP/N/1/MEX/21
IP/N/1/MEX/I/15
30 de julio de 2020
(20-5330) Página: 1/3
Consejo de los Aspectos de los Derechos de Propiedad
Intelectual relacionados con el Comercio Original: español
NOTIFICACIÓN DE LEYES Y REGLAMENTOS DE CONFORMIDAD CON
EL PÁRRAFO 2 DEL ARTÍCULO 63 DEL ACUERDO SOBRE LOS ADPIC
MÉXICO : LEY FEDERAL DE PROTECCIÓN A LA PROPIEDAD INDUSTRIAL
Miembro que
presenta la
notifica ción MÉXICO
Información sobre el texto jurídico notificado
Título Ley Federal de Protección a la Propiedad Industrial
Materia Propiedad industrial (general)
Naturaleza de la
notificación [X] Principales leyes o reglamentos dedicados a la propiedad intelectual
[ ] Otras leyes o reglamentos
Enlace al texto
jurídico* https://ip -documents.info/2020/IP/MEX/20_4644_00_s.pdf
Situación de la
notificación [ ] Primera notificación
[ ] Modificación o revisión del texto jurídico notificado
[X] Sustitución o refundición del/de los texto (s) jurídico (s) notificado (s)
Referencias de
notificaciones
anteriores IP/N/1/MEX/I/13, IP/N/1/MEX/16 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/12, IP/N/1/MEX/15 ;
IP/N/1/MEX/I/11, IP/N/1/MEX/12 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/4 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/5 ;
IP/N/1/MEX/I/7 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/3 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/6 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/8 ;
IP/N/1/MEX/I/9, IP/N/1/MEX/C/3 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/10 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/1/Add.2 ;
IP/N/1/MEX/I/1/Add.3 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/1/Add.1 ; IP/N/1/MEX/I/1
Breve descripción del texto jurídico notificado
La Ley tiene por objeto proteger la propiedad industrial mediante la regulación y otorgamiento de
patentes de invención; registros de modelos de utilidad, diseños industriales, esquemas de trazado
de circuitos int egrados, marcas y avisos comerciales; publicación de nombres comerciales;
declaración de protección de denominaciones de origen e indicaciones geográficas; regular los
secretos industriales; prevenir los actos que atenten contra la propiedad industrial o q ue constituyan
competencia desleal relacionada con la misma y establecer las sanciones y penas respecto de ellos,
y promover y fomentar la actividad inventiva de aplicación industrial, las mejoras técnicas, la
creatividad para el diseño y la presentación d e productos nuevos y útiles, así como la difusión de los
conocimientos tecnológicos en el país.
Se describen de manera general los cambios más relevantes en relación a la Ley que sustituye.
En PATENTES:
• Recoge las mejores prácticas internacionales rel acionadas con la patentabilidad y sus
exclusiones, así como con lo que se considera invención.
IP/N/1/MEX/21 • IP/N/1/MEX/I/15
- 2 -
• Prevé expresamente la "Cláusula Bolar", permitiendo realizar los preparativos necesarios para
obtener el registro sanitario de un medicamento relacionado con una patente próxima a vencer.
• Establece de forma expresa el mecanismo de coordinación directa entre el Instituto Mexicano
de la Propiedad industrial y la autoridad sanitaria, para proporcionar la información que se requiera
dentro del tr ámite de autorización de comercialización de medicamentos alopáticos.
• Incrementa la vigencia de los modelos de utilidad a 15 años.
• Incorpora los productos artesanales como diseños Industriales y fortalece su regulación, dada
la entrada en vigor del A rreglo de La Haya relativo al Registro Internacional de Dibujos y Modelos
Industriales en México.
• Establece procedimientos específicos para la renuncia, rectificación y limitación de derechos
del titular de una patente o registro, lo que reditúa en cert eza jurídica sobre la materia que se
encuentra protegida.
• Esclarece las causales de nulidad para patentes, registros de modelos de utilidad y diseños
industriales, atendiendo a sus características particulares.
En SECRETOS INDUSTRIALES:
• Introduce el concepto de apropiación indebida y sus excepciones.
• Precisa la responsabilidad por el acceso a secretos industriales en un procedimiento judicial o
administrativo.
• Crea infracciones administrativas, con lo que se facilita la imposición de medidas provisionales
para detener una posible violación.
• Elimina la obligación de inscribir las licencias de derechos para que surtan efectos ante
terceros.
En MARCAS:
• Modifica el momento a partir del cual se computa la vigencia de los registros de las marcas,
avisos y nombres comerciales, pasando de la fecha de presentación a la fecha del otorgamiento, lo
que proporciona 10 años efectivos de protección al titular.
• Reduce los requisitos para reconocer a una marca como notoriamente conocida o famo sa.
• Evita abusos: establece causales de cancelación para marcas de certificación, propiciando que
el titular cumpla con su mandato y atribuciones como ente certificador.
• Elimina la obligación de inscribir las licencias de derechos para que surtan efe ctos ante
terceros.
• Reduce los requisitos del contrato de franquicia.
• Elimina la incertidumbre creada con la última reforma a la Ley vigente, relacionada con qué
registros y en qué fecha deberán presentar la declaración de uso de una marca.
En DENOM INACIONES DE ORIGEN e INDICACIONES GEOGRÁFICAS:
• Mejora los conceptos de Denominación de Origen e indicación Geográfica, fortalece su
reconocimiento al individualizar sus requisitos y precisa su naturaleza jurídica como bienes
nacionales.
• Establece qu e corresponde al Instituto ejercer las acciones para su protección y defensa y lo
faculta para delegar dicha facultad a un tercero.
IP/N/1/MEX/21 • IP/N/1/MEX/I/15
- 3 -
• Permite que las Cámaras del Congreso de la Unión, presenten una Solicitud de Declaración
General de Protección (con aprobación de las 2/3 partes de los miembros presentes).
• Define las características de las reglas de uso de una IG protegida.
• Establece la figura del responsable de certificar el cumplimiento de las reglas de uso, el
proceso para su acreditación y, a nte el incumplimiento, el de su cancelación.
• Elimina la presentación de documentos para los trámites de autorización de uso de una
denominación de origen o indicación geográfica protegida.
En materia de OBSERVANCIA:
• Prevé la determinación de los dañ os y perjuicios ante IMPI o de manera directa ante los
tribunales, sin necesidad de declaración administrativa previa.
• Fortalece el esquema de medidas en frontera y en el entorno digital.
• Establece a la conciliación como un medio alternativo de soluc ión de controversias. El convenio
resultante pondrá fin al procedimiento, tendrá el carácter de cosa juzgada y traerá aparejada
ejecución.
• Crea medidas de apremio, incrementa sanciones e incorpora la posibilidad de que éstas sean
acumulables.
• Elimina procedimientos innecesarios que retrasan la aprobación de la destrucción de productos
pirata asegurados por el Instituto.
• Introduce nuevos tipos penales para secretos industriales e indicaciones geográficas.
• Define lo que se entenderá por fal sificación marcaria, lo que resultará en una mejor integración
del expediente, proporcionando seguridad jurídica a los titulares.
• Incrementa las sanciones de los delitos.
Idioma (s) del
texto jurídico
notificado Español
Entrada en vigor 5 de noviembre de 2020
Otra fecha Publicación : 1 de julio de 2020
Información sobre la notificación
Fecha de
presentación de la
notificación 24 de julio de 2020
Otra información
Organismo o
autoridad
responsable Instituto Mexicano de la Propiedad Industrial
* Se facilitan enlaces a los textos de las leyes y los reglamentos notificados en el marco del Acuerdo sobre
los ADPIC según los proporcionó el Miembro en cuestión; la Secretaría de la OMC no suscribe ni revisa su
contenido.
| 1,112
| 7,777
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_AG_NKOR96.pdf
|
s_G_AG_NKOR96
|
G/AG/N/KOR/96
10 de enero de 2024
(24-0217) Página: 1/3
Comité de Agricultura Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
La siguiente comunicación, de fecha 8 de enero de 2024, se distribuye a petición de la delegación
de la República de Corea . La notificación se refiere a la introducción o modificación de medidas de
ayuda interna exentas de la reducción ( cuadro DS.2 ).
_______________
G/AG/N/KOR/96
- 2 -
Cuadro DS.2
AYUDA INTERNA: REPÚBLICA DE COREA
Notificación de conformidad con el artículo 18.3 del Acuerdo:
introducción o modificación de medidas de ayuda interna exentas de la reducción
1) DENOMINACIÓN COMPLETA DE LA MEDIDA:
Desarrollo tecnológico para la industrializac ión de las explotaciones agrícolas inteligentes de
primera generación
2) REFERENCIA A LA LEGISLACIÓN NACIONAL:
Artículo 36 de la Ley Marco de Agricultura, Comunidades Rurales e Industria Alimentaria (Avance
del Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Agricultura y las Industrias Alimentarias), artículo 6 de la Ley de
Promoción de la Ciencia y la Tecnología para la Alimentación, la Agricultura y la Silvicultura
(Promoción de Proyectos de Investigación y Desarrollo)
3) DESCRIPCIÓN DETALLADA DE LA MEDIDA CON REFERENCIA A LOS CRITERIOS
ESTABLECIDOS EN:
Anexo 2.2 a) Investigación
Este proyecto tiene por objeto promover las tecnologías agrícolas inteligentes y desarrollar
tecnologías que contribuyan a resolver las cuestiones que puedan surgir al aplicarlas en esta esfera.
Con este proyecto, el Gobierno de Corea se propone sentar las bases para la aplicación de
explotaciones agrícolas inteligentes que puedan mejorar la productividad del sector agropecuario,
optimizando al mismo tiempo la utilización de insumos agrícolas y recursos naturales. Algunos
ejemplos en el marco de este proyecto son las tecnologías destinadas a mejorar las ventajas y la
calidad de los equipos y herramientas de TIC que se utilizan en invernaderos inteligentes o en
establos inteligentes, y los sistemas de control integrados que son aplicables a diversas variedades
o razas.
4) COSTO DE LA MEDIDA:
KRW 9.960 millones (2019), KRW 11.980 millones (2020)
5) FECHA DE ENTRADA EN VIGOR:
1 de enero de 2019
6) PERÍODO DE APLICACIÓN:
31 de diciembre de 2020
7) PRODUCTOS QUE SE BENEFICIAN PRINCIPALMENTE DE LA MEDIDA
(SI SE BENEFICIAN DE ELLA PRODUCTOS CONCRETOS):
Ninguno
G/AG/N/KOR/96
- 3 -
Cuadro DS.2
AYUDA INTERNA: REPÚBLICA DE COREA
Notificación de conformidad con el artículo 18.3 del Acuerdo:
introducción o modificaci ón de medidas de ayuda interna exentas de la reducción
___________________________________________________________________________
1) DENOMINACIÓN COMPLETA DE LA MEDIDA:
Programa de pagos directos básicos para promover las funciones públicas de la agricultura y las
comunidades rurales
2) REFERENCIA A LA LEGISLACIÓN NACIONAL:
Ley sobre el Funcionamiento del Programa de Pagos Directos para la Promoción de las Funciones
Públicas de la Agricultura y las Comunidades Rurales
3) DESCRIPCIÓN DETALLADA DE LA MEDIDA CON REFERENCIA A LOS CRITERIOS
ESTABLECIDOS EN:
Anexo 2.6 Ayuda a los ingresos desconectada
Se ha introducido el Programa de Pagos Básicos para proporcionar ayuda a los ingresos de los
agricultores que contribuyen a promover el papel de la agricultura y las comunidades rurales que
suministran bienes públicos a la sociedad a través de actividades agrícolas. En términos de
admisibilidad, dado que el programa está desconectado tanto de la producción como del precio a fin
de evitar efectos de di storsión en los mercados y el comercio, cumple los requisitos descritos en los
párrafos 1 y 6 (Ayuda a los ingresos desconectada) del Anexo 2 del Acuerdo sobre la Agricultura.
Para recibir los pagos básicos, los agricultores seguirán las 17 normas de condi cionalidad relativas
al medio ambiente, la ecología, la inocuidad de los alimentos, etc.
4) COSTO DE LA MEDIDA:
KRW 2,35877 billones (2020)
5) FECHA DE ENTRADA EN VIGOR:
1 de mayo de 2020
6) PERÍODO DE APLICACIÓN:
Sin límite
7) PRODUCTOS QUE SE BENEFICIAN PRINCIPALMENTE DE LA MEDIDA
(SI SE BENEFICIAN DE ELLA PRODUCTOS CONCRETOS):
Ninguno
__________
| 626
| 4,243
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/268339_2020_SPS_THA_20_6927_00_x.pdf
|
268339_2020_SPS_THA_20_6927_00_x
| 0
| 0
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBTN21_USA1704.pdf
|
r_G_TBTN21_USA1704
|
G/TBT/N/USA/1704
15 mars 2021
(21-2086) Page: 1/2
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
NOTIFICATION
La notification suivante est communiquée conformément à l'article 10.6.
1. Membre notifiant : ÉTATS-UNIS D'AMÉRIQUE
Le cas échéant, pouvoirs publics locaux concernés (articles 3.2 et 7.2):
2. Organisme responsable : Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), Department of
Agriculture (USDA) (Service de la commercialisation des produits agricoles (AMS) du
Département de l'agriculture des États -Unis (USDA)) [1733]
Les nom et adresse (y compris les numéros de téléphone et de f ax et les
adresses de courrier électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant) de l'organisme
ou de l'autorité désigné pour s'occuper des observations concernant la
notification doivent être indiqués si cet organisme ou cette autorité est différent
de l'organ isme susmentionné:
Les observations sont à envoyer à : USA WTO TBT Enquiry Point (Point d'information OTC
pour l'OMC des États -Unis d'Amérique) . Courrier électronique: usatbtep@nist.gov
3. Notification au titre de l'article 2.9.2 [ ], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [ ], 5.7.1 [ ], autres
[X]:
4. Produits visés (le cas échéant, position du SH ou de la NCCD, sinon position du
tarif douanier national . Les numéros de l'ICS peuvent aussi être indiqués, le ca s
échéant) : Pastèques ; Melons (y compris les pastèques) et papayes, frais (SH 0807) ;
Fruits. Légumes ( ICS 67 .080)
5. Intitulé, nombre de pages et langue(s) du texte notifié : Revision of US Standards
for Grades of Watermelons (Révision des normes des États -Unis concernant les qualités
de pastèques), 2 pages en anglais
6. Teneur : Avis et invitation à formuler des observations - Le Service de la
commercialisation des produits agricoles (AMS) du Département de l'agriculture (USDA)
propose de réviser les norme s des États -Unis concernant les qualités de pastèques . Les
modifications proposées visent à établir une terminologie uniforme pour le commerce des
pastèques.
7. Objectif et justification, y compris la nature des problèmes urgents, le cas
échéant : Prévention de pratiques de nature à induire en erreur et protection des
consommateurs ; harmonisation. G/TBT/N/USA/1704
- 2 -
8. Documents pertinents:
86 Federal Register (FR) 13874, 1 1 mars 2 021; Titre 7 du Code des règlements
fédéraux (CFR) Partie 36:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-03-11/html/2021 -05044.htm
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-03-11/pdf/2021 -05044.pdf
L'Avis et l'invitation à formuler des observations portent le numéro de dossier ( Docket )
AMS-SC-20-0096. L e dossier est disponible à l'adresse
https://www.regulations.gov/docket/AMS -AMS-20-0096/document et permet d'accéder
aux documents principaux et aux documents justificatifs, ainsi qu'aux observations
reçues . Les documents sont également dispo nibles sur le site Regulations.gov en
effectuant une recherche par numéro de dossier ( docket ). Les Membres de l'OMC et leurs
parties prenantes sont priés de formuler des observations à l'intention du point
d'information OTC des États -Unis. Les observations reçues par le point d'information OTC
des États -Unis de la part des Membres de l'OMC et de leurs parties prenantes seront
transmises au Service de la commercialisation des produits agricoles et seront aussi
versées au dossier sur Regulations.gov si elles sont reçues pendant le délai prévu à cet
effet.
9. Date projetée pour l'adoption : à déterminer
Date projetée pour l'entrée en vigueur : à déterminer
10. Date limite pour la présentation des observations : 10 mai 2 021
11. Entité auprès de laquelle les textes peuvent être obtenus : point d'information
national [ ] ou adresse, numéros de téléphone et de fax et adresses de courrier
électronique et de site Web, le cas échéant, d'un autre organisme:
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2021/TBT/USA/21_1888_00_e.pdf
| 580
| 3,972
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_WT_DS_160-24A219.pdf
|
r_WT_DS_160-24A219
|
WT/DS160/24/Add. 219
17 novembre 2023
(23-7761) Page: 1/1
Original: anglais
ÉTATS -UNIS – ARTICLE 110 5) DE LA LOI SUR LE DROIT D'AUTEUR
RAPPORT DE SITUATION DES ÉTATS -UNIS
Addendum
La communication ci -après, datée du 16 novembre 2023 et adressée par la délégation des États -Unis
au Président de l'Organe de règlement des différends, est distribuée conformément à l'article 21:6
du Mémorandum d'accord sur le règlement des différends.
_______________
Rapport de situation sur la mise en œuvre des recommandations et décisions
de l'ORD concernant le différend États-Unis − Article 110 5 )
de la Loi sur le droit d'auteur
(WT/DS160 )
Les États -Unis soumettent le présent rapport conformément à l'article 21:6 du Mémorandum
d'accord sur les règles et procédures régissant le règlement des différe nds ("Mémorandum d'accord
sur le règlement des différends") .
Le 27 juillet 2000, l'Organe de règlement des différends ("ORD") a adopté ses recommandations et
décisions concernant le différend États-Unis – Article 110 5) de la Loi sur le droit d'auteur
(WT/DS160) . À la réunion suivante de l'ORD, les États -Unis ont informé l'ORD de leur intention de
mettre en œuvre les recommandations et décisions de l'ORD en rapport avec cette affaire . À la suite
des discuss ions engagées pour parvenir à un règlement mutuellement acceptable du différend, les
États-Unis et les Communautés européennes sont convenus de recourir à l'arbitrage au titre de
l'article 25 du Mémorandum d'accord afin de déterminer le niveau de l'annulat ion ou de la réduction
d'avantages résultant des dispositions de l'article 110 5) B) de la Loi des États -Unis sur le droit
d'auteur . Après l'arbitrage, les parties sont parvenues à un règlement temporaire du différend, qui
a été notifié à l'ORD le 2 3 juin 2003. Cet arrangement temporaire portait sur la période allant
jusqu'au 2 0 décembre 2004.
L'Administration des États -Unis collaborera étroitement avec le Congrès des États -Unis et continuera
de s'entretenir avec l'Union européenne afin d'arriver à une solu tion mutuellement satisfaisante de
la question.
__________
| 334
| 2,167
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN21_VNM211A1.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN21_VNM211A1
|
G/TBT/N/VNM/211/Add.1
11 de enero de 2024
(24-0245) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Addendum
La siguiente comunicación, de fecha 11 de enero de 2024 , se distribuye a petición de la delegación
de Viet Nam .
_______________
Título : Amendment 1:2021 of Q CVN 20 :2019/BKHCN National technical regulation on stainless steel
(Modificación 1:2021 del Q CVN 20 :2019/BKHCN, Reglamento Técnico Nacional sobre el Acero
Inoxidable).
Motivo del addendum :
[ ] Modificación del plazo para presentar observaciones - fecha:
[ ] Adopción de la medida notificada - fecha:
[ ] Publicación de la medida notificada - fecha:
[ ] Entrada en vigor de la medida notificada - fecha:
[ ] Indicación de dónde se puede obtener el texto de la medida definitiva1:
[ ] Retiro o derogación de la medida notificada - fecha:
Signatura pertinente, en el caso de que se vuelva a notificar la medida:
[ ] Modificación del contenido o del ámbito de aplicación de la medida notificada e indicación
de dónde se puede obtener el texto1:
Nuevo plazo para presentar observaciones (si proce de):
[X] Publicación de documentos interpretativos e indicación de dónde se puede obtener el
texto1:
Publicación de documentos interpretativos e indicación de dónde se puede obtener el texto1:
Proyecto de Circular por la que se suspende la aplicación de la Circular Nº 15/2019/TT -BKHCN y la
Circular Nº 09/2021/TT -BKHCN sobre el acero inoxidable (notificada en los documentos
G/TBT/N/VNM/137 y G/TBT/N/VNM/211, respectivamente).
Plazo para presentar observaciones (si procede) : 60 días después de la fecha de notificación
1 Entre otras cosas, puede aportarse la dirección de un sitio web, un anexo en pdf u otra información
que indique dónde se puede obtener el texto de la medida definitiva/modificada y/o documentos
interpretativos. G/TBT/N/VNM/211/Add.1
- 2 -
[ ] Otro motivo:
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2024/TBT/VNM/24_00385_00_x.pdf
Descripción : Se suspende la aplicación de la Circular Nº 15/2019/TT -BKHCN, de fecha 15 de
noviembre de 2019 , del Ministro de Ciencia y Tecnología por la que se promulga el "Reglamento
Técnico Nacional sobre el Acero Inoxidable" y la Circular Nº 09/2021/TT -BKHCN, de fecha 1 de
noviembre de 2021 , del Ministro de Ciencia y Tecnología por la que se promulga la
"Modificación 1:20212 del Q CVN 20 :2019/BKHCN, Reglamento Técnico Nacional sobre el Acero
Inoxidable del 1 de marzo de 2024 al 1 de marzo de 20 26.
El acero inoxidable de producción nacional e importado que ha sido certificado/inspeccionado de
conformidad con el Reglamento Técnico Nacional 20:2019/BKHCN del QCVN y la Modificación 1:2021
del Q CVN 20 :2019/BKHCN y distribuido en el mercado antes del 1 de marzo de 2024 seguirá
comercializándose con la marca de conformidad emitida hasta que expire la validez del certificado o
la inspección.
__________
| 456
| 2,979
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_TBTN19_BDI45.pdf
|
q_G_TBTN19_BDI45
|
G/TBT/N/BDI/45
23 May 2019
(19-3572) Page: 1/2
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original: English
NOTIFICATION
The following notification is being circulated in accordance with Article 10.6
1. Notifying Member: BURUNDI
If applicable, name of local government involved (Article 3.2 and 7.2):
2. Agency responsible:
Burundi Bureau of Standards and Quality Control (BBN)
Boulevard de la Tanzanie N° 500
BP: 3535 Bujumbura, Burundi
Tel: +25722221815/+25722221577
E- Mail: info@bbn -burundi.org
Website: www.bbn -burundi.org
Name and address (including telephone and fax numbers , email and website
addresses, if available) of agency or authority designated to handle comments
regarding the notification shall be indicated if different from above:
3. Notified under Article 2.9.2 [X], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ], other :
4. Products covered (HS or CCCN where applicable, otherwise national tariff
heading. ICS numbers may be provided in addition, where applicable): Cosmetics.
Toiletries (ICS 71.100.70)
5. Title, number of pages and language(s) of the notified document: Body oil s —
Specification (12 page(s), in English)
6. Description of content: This Draft East African Standard specifies the requirements,
sampling and test methods for body oils based on refined vegetable oils or vegetable oils
blends, mineral oils or mixture of the vegetable oils and mineral oils meant for application
on the skin.
It does not cover skin creams, lotions, hair oils and pure essential oils.
Body oils for which therapeutic claims are made are not covered by this standard.
7. Objective and rationale, including the nature of urgent problems where
applicable: Consumer information, labelling; Prevention of deceptive practices and
consumer protection; Protection of human health or safety; Quality requirements;
Harmonization; Reducing trade barri ers and facilitating trade
8. Relevant documents:
• EAS 346, Labelling of cosmetics — General requirements
• EAS 846, Glossary of terms relating to the cosmetic industry
• EAS 847 - 2, Cosmetics — Analytical methods — Part 2: Determination of
Moisture Content G/TBT/N/BDI/45
- 2 -
• EAS 847 - 13, Cosmetics — Analytical methods — Part 13: Determination of
rancidity
• EAS 847 -16, Cosmetics — Analytical methods test — Part 16: Determination of
Heavy metal Content
• EAS 847 -17, Cosmetics — Analytical methods — Part 17: Physio -chemical tests
• EAS 847 -18, Cosmetics — Analytical methods — Part 18: Determination of
thermal stability
• EAS 377 (all parts), Cosmetics and cosmetic products
• ISO 3960, Animal and vegetable fats and oils -- Determination of peroxide value
-- Iodometric (visual) endpoint dete rmination
• ISO 18416, Cosmetics — Microbiology — Detection of candida albicans
• ISO 21148, Cosmetics — Microbiology — General instructions for microbiological
examination
• ISO 21149, Cosmetics -- Microbiology -- Enumeration and detection of aerobic
mesophilic bacteria
• ISO 22717, Cosmetics — Microbiology — Detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa
• ISO 22718, Cosmetics — Microbiology — Detection of Staphylococcus aureus
• ISO 22716, Cosmetics — Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) — Guidelines on
Good Manufacturing Practi ces
• DEAS 959:2019
• ISO 24153, Random sampling and randomisation procedures
• 76/768/EEC, The European Economic Community Cosmetics Directive
• FDUS 1921: 2018, Body oils — Specification
• ISO 9001:2015, Quality management systems — Requirements
• KS 1766:2006, Spec ification for body oils
• TZS 1133: 2017, Skin care oils — Specification
• US EAS 339:2013, Hair creams, lotions and gels — Specification
9. Proposed date of adoption: To be determined
Proposed date of entry into force: To be determined
10. Final date for comments: 60 days from notification
11. Texts available from: National enquiry point [X] or address, telephone and fax
numbers and email and website addresses, if available , of other body:
Documentation and Information Centre Division at BBN
Boulevard de la Tanzanie N° 500
BP: 3535 Bujumbura, Burundi
Tel: +25722221815 or +25722221577
E- Mail: info@bbn -burundi.org
Website: www.bbn -burundi.org
| 626
| 4,292
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_SPS_NBRA2048A2.pdf
|
s_G_SPS_NBRA2048A2
|
G/SPS/N/BRA/2048/Add.2
16 de diciembre de 2022
(22-9402) Página: 1/2
Comité de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Addendum
La siguiente comunicación, recibida el 16 de diciembre de 2022 , se distribuye a petición de la
delegación del Brasil .
_______________
Draft Resolution number 1097, 3 June 2022 (Proyecto de Resolución Nº 1097, de 3 de junio de 2022 )
Se ha rectificado la Instrucción Normativa Nº 185, de 28 de septiembre de 2022 , notificada
previamente con la signatura G/SPS/N/BRA/2048/Add.1.
La rectificación está disponible solamente en portugués y puede descargarse del siguiente enlace:
https://www.in.gov.br/en/web/dou/ -/retificacao -450428899 .
Este addendum se refiere a:
[ ] la modificación de la fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones
[ ] la notificación de la adopción, publicación o entrada en vigor del reglamento
[X] la modificación del contenido y/o ámbito de aplicación de un proyecto de reglamento
previamente notificado
[ ] el retiro del reglamento propuesto
[ ] la modificación de la fecha propuesta de adopción, publicación o entrada en vigor
[ ] otro aspecto:
Plazo para la presentación de observaciones : (Si el addendum amplía el ámbito de
aplicación de la medida anteriormente notificada en cuanto a los productos abarcados y/o
los Miembros a los que puede afectar, deberá preverse un nuevo plazo para recibir
observaciones, normalmente de 60 días naturales como mínimo . En otros casos, como el
aplazamiento de la fecha límite anunciada inicialmente para la presentación de
observaciones, el plazo previsto en el addendum podrá variar.)
[X] Sesenta días a partir de la fecha de distribución del addendum a la notificación y/o
(día/mes/año) : 14 de febrero de 2023
Organismo o autoridad encargado de tramitar las observaciones : [ ] Organismo nacional
encargado de la notificación, [X] Servicio nacional de información . Dirección, número de
fax y dirección de correo electrónico (en su c aso) de otra institución:
International Affairs Office (AINTE)
(Asesoría de Asuntos Internacionales)
Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA)
(Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria)
Teléfono : +(55 61) 3462 5402/5404/5406
Correo electrónico: rel@anvisa.gov.br G/SPS/N/BRA/2048/Add.2
- 2 -
Texto(s) disponible(s) en : [ ] Organismo nacional encargado de la notificación, [X] Servicio
nacional de información . Dirección, número de fax y dirección de correo electrónico (en su
caso) de otra institución:
International Affairs Office (AINTE)
(Asesoría de Asuntos Internacionales)
Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA)
(Agencia Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria)
Teléfono : +(55 61) 3462 5402/5404/5406
Correo electrónico: rel@anvisa.gov.br
__________
| 401
| 2,839
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/300713_2023_SPS_NZL_23_13297_00_e.pdf
|
300713_2023_SPS_NZL_23_13297_00_e
|
Issued under the
Biosecurity Act 1993
Actinidia
Plants for Planting
MPI.IHS.ACTINIDIA.PFP
[
Document Date
]
Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 1 of 23 TITLE
Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
COMMENCEMENT
This import health standard comes into force on [Effective Date] .
REVOCATION
This import health standard revokes and replaces Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants
for Planting and all prior amendments to that standard.
The amendment history to this import health standard is set out in the introduction.
ISSUING AUTHORITY
Dated at Wellington, [Document Date]
Janine Collier
Contact for further information
Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI)
Biosecurity New Zealand
Plant Imports
PO Bo x 2526
Wellington 6140
Email: plantimports@mpi.govt.nz
This import health s tandard is issued under section 24A of the Biosecurity Act 1993 to incorporate
amendments made pursuant to sections 24B and 166A of that Act.
Acting Manager Plant Health
Ministry for Primary Industries
(
acting under delegated authority of the Director -General) Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 2 of 23 Contents Page
Introduction 3
Part 1: General requirements 5
1.1 Application 5
1.2 Incorporation by reference 5
1.3 Definitions 5
1.4 Movement and clearance 5
1.5 Labelling and packaging 6
1.6 Import permit 6
1.7 Exporting country system 6
1.8 Options for import 6
Appendix 3: Regulated pest list – Actinidia plants for planting 22
Appendix 4: Definitions 23
Introduction
This introduction is not part of the Import Health Standard (IHS), but is intended to indicate
its general effect.
Purpose
An IHS specifies the requirements for importing risk goods into New Zealand from all
countries.
Background
An IHS issued under the New Zealand Biosecurity Act (the Act) specifies the requirements
to be met to effectively manage biosecurity risks associat ed with importing goods, including
the risks from incidentally imported new organisms. IHSs include measures that must be
applied in the exporting country before the goods are exported. IHSs also include
Part 2:
Specific requirements
8
2.1
Dormant cuttings
8
2.2
Tissue cultures
8
2.3
Screening for regulated pests
9
2.4
Post entry quarantine greenhouse
11
Part 3:
Phytosanitary inspection and certification
16
3.1
Phytosanitary inspection
16
3.2
Phytosanitary certificate
16
Appendix 1: Approved insecticide treatments –
Actinidia
dormant cuttings
18
Appendix 2: Approved miticide treatments –
Actinidia
dormant cuttings
20
Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 3 of 23
requirements that must be met by importers during im portation including while the goods
are in transit and held in a transitional facility (TF), before biosecurity clearance can be
given.
Post-clearance conditions may also be specified in an IHS.
Guidance accompanies an IHS as either a separate document or as guidance boxes
throughout the IHS itself. Guidance provides information on how the requirements may be
met.
Who should read this?
Anyone who is involved in the process of importing risk good s into New Zealand, or who
has an interest in importing risk goods into New Zealand, should read and be familiar with
the relevant IHS.
Why is this important?
It is the responsibility of the importer to ensure that risk goods comply with the requirements
of the relevant
IHS. Risk goods that do not comply with the requirements of an IHS may not be cleared for
entry into New
Zealand and may be directed for treatment, re -shipment, destruction or further action
deemed appropriate by a Chief Technical Office r (CTO). The pathway may be suspended
if certain types of viable regulated pests or viable unwanted organisms are intercepted on
the consignment.
Importers are liable for all associated expenses.
Equivalence
A CTO may consider an ap plication for an equivalent phytosanitary measure to be
approved, different from that provided for in this IHS, to maintain at least the same
level of protection assured by the current measures.
Equivalence will be considered with reference to the International Standard for
Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) 24: Guidelines for the determination and recognition of
equivalence of phy tosanitary measures . Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 4 of 23 Document History
Other information
Guidance for this Import Health Standard will be provided after this standard is issued.
Part 1: General requirements
1.1 Application
(1) This import health standard applies to species and hybrids of Actinidia plants for
planting that are listed as permitted in the MPI Plants Biosecurity Index (PBI) .
(2) The following types of Actinidia plants for planting are eligible for import from all
countries under this standard:
a) tissue cultures;
b) dormant cuttings.
Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 5 of 23
1.2 Incorporation by reference
(1) The following documents are incorporated by reference under section 142M of the
Act:
a) Official New Zealand Pest Register (ONZPR). Wellington, M PI;
b) MPI Plants Biosecurity Index (PBI) ;
c) MPI Standard PIT -OS-TRA-ACPQF: Accreditation of Offshore Plant Quarantine
Facilities and
Operators ;
d) MPI Standard 155.04.03: A standard for diagnostic facilities which undertake
the identification of new organisms, excluding animal pathogens ;
e) ISPM 4: Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas . Rome, IPPC,
FAO;
f) ISPM 5: Glossary of phytosanitary terms . Rome, IPPC, FAO;
g) ISPM 7: Phytosanitary certification system . Rome, IPPC, FAO;
h) ISPM 8: Determination of pest status in an area . Rome, IPPC, FAO;
i) ISPM 10: Requirements for the establishment of pest free places of production
and pest free production sites . Rome, IPPC, FAO;
j) ISPM 12: Phytosanitary certificates. Rome, IPPC, FAO;
k) ISPM 23: Guidelines for Inspection . Rome, IPPC, FAO;
l) ISPM 24: Guidelines for the determination and recognition of equivalence of
phytosanitary measures . Rome, IPPC, FAO;
m) ISPM 27: Diagnostic protocols for regulated pests. Rome, IPPC, FAO;
n) ISPM 36: Integrated measures for plants for planting . Rome, IPPC, FAO.
o) Approved Biosecurity Treatments for Risk Goods (MPI -ABTRT) (MPI)
(2) Under section 142O(3) of the Act, it is declared that section 142O(1) does not apply,
that is, a notice under section 142O(2) of the Act is not required to be published
before material that amends or replaces any material incorporated by reference that
has legal effect as part of those documents.
1.3 Definitions
(1) Definitions are listed in Appendix 4 .
1.4 Movement and clearance
(1) In order for Actinidia plants for planting to obtain authorisation for movement to a
transitional facility, Actinidia plants for planting must:
a) meet the requirements of Part 1 and Part 3 ; and
b) meet the requirements of Part 2.1 or 2.2.
(2) In order for Actinidia plants for planting to obtain a biosecurity clearance, they must
also meet the requirements of Parts 2.3 and 2.4.
a) There are no further requirements that apply to a tissue culture that is directly
traceable to a plant that has been deflasked into a greenhouse and that has met
the requirements of Parts 2.3 and 2.4. Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 6 of 23
1.5 Labelling and packaging
(1) All consignments of Actinidia plants for planting must be:
a) clearly labelled with the full botanical name (genus and species) of all plants; and
b) shipped in packaging that:
(i) is clean and free from soil, regulated pests and other regulated articles;
(ii) preven ts the plant material from becoming contaminated with regulated
pests or other regulated articles.
1.6 Import permit
(1) An import permit is required for all consignments of Actinidia plants for planting.
(2) The import permit will identify the following:
a) the regulated pests for which screening is required in New Zealand;
b) the minimum quarantine period, based on those regulated pests for which
screening is required;
c) the level of post entry quarantine greenhouse and/or tissue cultur e laboratory in
which consi gnments must be held, based on those regulated pests for which
screening is required.
1.7 Exporting country system
(1) Importers may only import Actinidia plants for planting from a country where:
a) the National Plant Protection Organisation (NPPO) has provided evidence to the
satisfaction of a CTO that the exporting country has an Exporting Country
System that complies with ISPM 7: Phytosanitary certification system .
(i) the Exporting Country Syst em (including programmes and standards)
must demonstrate the process used to provide export assurance.
(2) Importers may not import from a country where a CTO has determined that the
Exporting Country System no longer meets the requirements of ISPM 7.
1.8 Options for import
(1) All Actinidia plants for planting must be produced using one of the following options:
a) produced under an Export Plan as described in Part 1.8.1 ; or
b) produced at an MPI approved Offshore Facility as described in Part 1.8.2 ; or
c) produ ced in any way other than listed above as described in Part 1.8.3 .
1.8.1 Actinidia plants for planting produced under an Export Plan
(1) Importers may only import Actinidia plants for planting produced under an Export Plan
from a country where an Export Plan has been approved by a CTO. The Export Plan
will detail the activities and processes established to achieve the measures identified
in clause 1.8.1(2) .
(2) Actinidia plants for planting must meet one of the following measures to manage the
risk in relation to each regulated pest ( Appendix 3 ) listed in the Export Plan : Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 7 of 23
a) Country freedom : The Actinidia plants for planting are sourced from a country
for which country freed om has been established in relation to a particular pest
in accordance with measures described in ISPM 8: Determination of pest status
in an area and ISPM 4: Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas ;
b) Pest free area : The Actinidia plants for p lanting are sourced from a pest free
area established in accordance with ISPM 4: Requirements for the
establishment of pest free areas ;
c) Pest free place of production : The Actinidia plants for planting are sourced from
a pest free place of production esta blished in accordance with ISPM 10:
Requirements for the establishment of pest free places of production and pest
free production sites ;
d) Integrated measures for plants for planting : The Actinidia plants for planting are
sourced from a production site that uses integrated measures for plants for
planting in accordance with ISPM 36: Integrated measures for plants for
planting .
(3) If a phytosanitary measure is not applied in relation to any regulated pest listed in
Appendix 3 , this measure must be applied on a rrival in New Zealand as described in
Part 2.3.
1.8.2 Actinidia plants for planting produced at an MPI approved offshore
facility
(1) The Actinidia plants for planting to be produced at an MPI approved offshore facility
must be produced at a facility that m eets the requirements of the MPI Standard PIT -
OS-TRA-ACPQF: Accreditation of Offshore Plant Quarantine Facilities and Operators .
(2) All Actinidia plants for planting produced at an offshore facility must meet all of the
phytosanitary measures described in Part 2.3 in relation to each regulated pest listed
in Appendix 3.
(3) If a phytosanitary measure is not applied in relation to any regulated pest listed in
Appendix 3 , this measure must be applied on arrival in New Zealand .
1.8.3 Actinidia plants for planti ng produced in any other way
(1) For Actinidia plants for planting that are not produced under an Export Plan or at an
approved offshore facility, all phytosanitary measures described in Parts 2.3 and 2.4
must be applied for each regulated pest listed in Appendix 3 on arrival in New Zealand.
Part 2: Specific requirements
(1) All dormant cuttings must meet all requirements described in Part 2.1.
(2) All tissue cultures must meet all requirements described in Part 2.2.
(3) All Actinidia plants for planting must be screened for each regulated pest listed in
Appendix 3 , as described in Part 2.3, unless:
a) phytosanitary measures in relation to a regulated pest have been applied in
accordance with an agreed Export Plan or at an MPI approved offshore facility.
In this case the import permit will identify the regulated pests for which
phytosanitary measures must be applied on arrival in New Zealand. Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 8 of 23
(4) All Actinidia plants for planting that require phytosanitary measures to be applied on
arrival in New Zealand must be hel d in a post entry quarantine facility approved to the
MPI Facility Standard: Post Entry Quarantine for Plants as described in Part 2.4.
2.1 Dormant cuttings
(1) All dormant cuttings must be:
a) imported to generate tissue cultures which will undergo screening for regulated
pests as described in Part 2.3;
b) free from soil and other regulated articles;
c) accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate as described in Part 3 ;
d) treated for insects and mites prior to export using one of the treatment options
listed in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 respectively . Cuttings must be held and
packaged in a manner which prevents recontamination.
e) imported into a Level 3 tissue culture laboratory approved to the MPI Facility
Standard: Post Entry Quarantine for Plants ;
f) dipped in 1% sodium hypochlorite for a minimum period of 2 minutes on arrival
at the tissue
culture facility;
g) destroyed in the quarantine waste after tissue culture plants have been
generated.
(2) If dormant cuttings are sprouted to generate explant material, this must be done
according to one of the following options:
a) cuttings must be held in a Level 3B post entr y quarantine facility;
b) cuttings must be held in a sealed vessel in a growth chamber within a Level 3
tissue culture facility. The sealed vessel may only be opened in a biological safety
cabinet.
(3) Each tissue culture that is generated from a dormant cuttin g will be considered as an
individual tissue culture plantlet.
(4) Stage 1 tissue cultures must not be deflasked directly into the greenhouse. All plants
must enter the stage 2 (multiplication) phase prior to hardening off and deflasking.
(5) If tissue cultures are sub -cultured before they are transferred to the greenhouse, the
process must be done as described in clause 2.2(3).
2.2 Tissue cultures
(1) All tissue cultures must be:
a) derived from aerial plant parts;
b) grown in a pest proof and transparent vessel, with a maximum of one plant per
vessel;
c) grown in a medium free from fungicides, antibiotics and charcoal;
d) grown in the vessel in which they will be exported for at least 14 days prior to
shipment;
e) free from visible fungal or bacterial contamination;
f) in the stage 2 (multiplication) or stage 3 (rooting) phase;
g) accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate as described in Part 3 . Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 9 of 23
(2) Tissue cultures may be imported directly into a Level 3 tissue culture laboratory
approved to the MPI Facility Standard: Post Entry Quarantine for Plants for sub -
culturing before they are transferred to the greenhouse.
(3) If tissue cultures are sub -cultured before they are transferred to a greenhouse, the
following requirements must be met:
a) at least one sub -culture from each imported stage 2 or st age 3 tissue culture
plant must be developed to the stage where it can be screened for regulated
pests after it is deflasked into the greenhouse (see Parts 2.3 and 2.4):
(i) this sub -culture should be taken during the first round of multiplication;
(ii) if only o ne plant is obtained during the first round of multiplication, further
rounds of multiplication may be undertaken. In this case, a sub -culture for
transfer to the greenhouse must be taken from the first round of
multiplication where more than one plant is obtained.
b) surplus sub -cultures that are produced during the round of multiplication used to
generate the plant which is transferred to the greenhouse may be retained at the
Level 3 tissue culture laboratory throughout the quarantine period as follows:
(i) these plants may be sub -cultured and multiplied during the post entry
quarantine period;
(ii) these plants may also be eligible for biosecurity clearance provided that
traceability is maintained as described below.
c) clear records of traceability must be retaine d throughout the quar antine period;
d) only sub -cultures that can be directly traced back to both the original imported
tissue culture plant, and the plant that has been transferred to the greenhouse,
will be eligible for clearance.
2.3 Screening for regulated pests
(1) To ensure freedom from regulated pests all Actinidia plants for planting must be
screened for each regulated pest listed in Appendix 3 , on arrival in New Zealand as
described in this Part unless:
a) phytosanitary measure s for a particular pest have been applied as described under
an agreed Export Plan or, at an MPI approved offshore facility. In this case, the
import permit will identify the requirements of Part 2.3 that must be applied in
New Zealand.
2.3.1 Environmental conditions
(1) Specific environmental conditions must be applied in the first and the second growing
seasons, as follows:
a) a continuous three -month period of spring -like conditions with a daytime
temperature of 19.5 °C
(±3 °C) and a night -time temperature of 16.5 °C (±3 °C);
b) a continuous four -month period of summer -like conditions, with a daytime
temperature of 22.5 °C (±3 °C) and a night -time temperature of 19.5 °C (±3 °C)
(apart from when additional conditions described in clause 2.3.1(3) are applied);
c) a continuous two month period of autumn -like conditions, with a daytime
temperature of 16.5 °C (±3 °C). Lower temperatures may be applied at night. Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 10 of 23
(2) Plants must be held dormant at around 4 °C for at least two months between the first
and second growing season.
(3) The following additional environmental conditions must be incorporated into the four
month period of summer -like conditions in the first growing season:
a) a continuous 28 day period at a minimum relative humidity of 75% (±5%), which
includes two 48 hour periods of continuous misting. There must be a minimum
period of at least two weeks between each misting period;
b) A continuous 28 -day period with a daytime t emperature of 27.5 °C (±3 °C) and a
night -time temperature above 23 °C (±3 °C). Relative humidity must be at least
75% (±5%) during this time..
(4) The operating manual for the post entry quarantine facility must describe the
environmental conditions that wil l be applied during each growing season, and how
these will be monitored, maintained and recorded.
Guidance for PEQ operators
• You can use control system settings to either gradually or instantly shift between
“daytime” and “night -time” environmental co nditions.
• The required temperatures in clause 2.3.1 apply to measurements averaged over
periods relevant to biological impacts (e.g., 1 -hour averages for humidity, 24 -hour
averages for temperature).
• It is expected that deviations beyond the average tem perature and humidity limits will
be infrequent (i.e., < 1% of averaged periods).
2.3.2 Testing
(1) All testing must be done at a facility approved to the MPI Standard 155.04.03: A
standard for diagnostic facilities which undertake the identification of new
organisms, excluding animal pathogens .
2.3.2.1 Diagnostic testing
(1) If a pest is found, or signs or symptoms of a pest are observed during inspections by
the facility operator or by the MPI Inspector, samples must be sent for diagnostic
testing as described in Part 3.7 of the MPI Facility Standard: Post Entry Quarantine
for Plants .
2.3.2.2 Pre-determ ined testing
(1) Pre-determined testing is required for all regulated pests listed in Table 1.
(2) All samples for pre -determined testing must be collected during the first growing
season according to the schedule shown in Table 1.
(3) The unit for pre -determined t esting is an individual greenhouse plant. Each plant must
be labelled individually and tested separately, with the following exception:
a) for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing , samples taken from up to five plants
of the same species can be combin ed to form a single composite sample for pre -
determined testing. Import Health Stan dard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 11 of 23 2.3.3 Inspection
(1) All plants must be inspected for signs and symptoms of regulated pests by the facility
operator as described in Part 3.6.1 of the MPI Facility Standard: Post Entry
Quarantine for Plants .
(2) All plants mu st be inspected for signs and symptoms of regulated pests by the MPI
Inspector according to the schedule shown in Table 1. A total of ten inspections must
be done by the MPI Inspector.
(3) The operator of the post entry quarantine facility must ensure that the MPI Inspector
is notified:
a) when plants are deflasked into a greenhouse;
b) when deflasked plants start active growth;
c) before the environmental conditions described in clause 2.3.1(3) are applied;
d) when plants start active growth at the start of the second growing season.
2.4 Post entry quarantine greenhouse
(1) For all Actinidia plants for planting, all requirements must be applied as described in
this Part, unless:
a) phytosanitary meas ures for a particular pest have been applied as described under
an agreed Export Plan or at an MPI approved offshore facility. In this case, the
import permit will identify the requirements of Part 2.4 that must be applied in
New Zealand;
(2) Individual tissu e culture plants must be deflasked into a post entry quarantine
greenhouse approved to the MPI Facility Standard: Post Entry Quarantine for Pla nts.
The level of greenhouse will be specified on the import permit.
(3)
The total quarantine period will:
a)
begin after tissue cultures have been deflasked and started active growth;
b)
be a minimum of 20 months;
c)
include two distinct growing seasons, each of at least nine months long, with a two month
dormancy period in between the first and second growing seasons. Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 12 of 23 Table 1: Schedule of inspections by the MPI Inspector and pre -determined testing requirements
Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 13 of 23
Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 14 of 23
Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting Draft for Consultation [Document Date]
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 15 of 23 Season Timing of
inspection by
MPI Inspector Pre-determined testing requirements
Timing of sample
collection Tissue type Organism Test
‘Summer -like’
conditions as
described in
clause
2.3.1(1)b) Inspection 8
Within the first 14 to 28 days of the summer
growth period.
Inspection 9
Within the last 28 days of the summer growth
period. Pre-determined testing to be repeated for C. fimbriata, P.
carotovorum subsp.
actinidiae and V. nonalfalfae within the last 28 days of the summer
growth period. The same test methods and sampling regimes used in
the first growing season must be used.
‘Autumn -like’
conditions as
described in
clause
2.3.1(1)c) Inspection 10
Within the last 28 days of the autumn growth
period ,
Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 16 of 23 Part 3: Phytosanitary inspection and certification
3.1 Phytosanitary inspection
(1) The NPPO of the exporting country must:
a) visually inspect each sample unit according to official procedures in accordance
with ISPM 23:
Guidelines for Inspection for all visually detectable pests that are regulated by
New Zealand;
b) reconcile that the number of units presented for inspection is consistent with
documentation;
c) verify that traceability labelling is complete; and
d) verify that phytosanitary security is maintained for the consignment.
(2) If pests are found which are not listed in Appendix 3 , or in the Official New Zealand
Pest Register (ONZPR) , the NPPO must contact MPI to establish their regulatory
status before issuing the phytosanitary certificate.
(3) For plants in tissue culture , the NPPO must verify that all plants comply with all
requirements set out in clause (1) of Part 2.2.
(4) For dormant cuttings , the NPPO mus t verify that:
a) the insect and mite treatments have been applied as described in Part 2.1.
(5) For Actinidia plants for planting produced under an Export Plan , the NPPO must verify
that the Actinidia plants for planting are:
a) free from regulated pests described in the Export Plan ; and
b) held in a manner to ensure that infestation/reinfestation does not occur following
inspection and certification.
(6) For Actinidia plants for planting produced at an MPI approved offshore facility, the
NPPO must verify that the Actinidia plants for planting are:
a) free from regulated pests described in the agreement between MPI and the
approved offshore
facility; and
b) held in a manner to ensure that infestation/reinfestation does not occur following
inspection and certification.
3.2 Phytosanitary certificate
(1) All consignments of Actinidia plants for planting must be accompanied by a
phytosanitary certificate issued by the NPPO of the exporting country in accordance
with ISPM 12: Phytosanitary certificates ; and must include:
a) all relevant additional declaration(s) as described in Part 3.2.1 ;
b) the botanical name of all Actinidia plants for planting in the consignment;
c) full treatment details in the “Disinfestation and/or Disinfection Treatment” section
of the phytosanitary certificate (applies to dormant cuttings only, as described in
Part 2.1);
d) the following declaration:
(i) “This is to certify that the plants, plant products or other regulated articles
described herein have been inspected and/or tested according to Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 17 of 23 appropriate official procedures and are considered to be free from the
quarantine pests specified by the importi ng contracting party and to
conform with the current phytosanitary requirements of the importing
contracting party, including those for regulated non -quarantine pests.”
3.2.1 Additional declarations
(1) The NPPO must include the following additional dec larations on the phytosanitary
certificate:
a) for all Actinidia plants for planting produced under an agreed Export Plan :
(i) “This consignment was produced and prepared for export in
accordance with the agreed
Export Plan .”
b) for all Actinidia plants for planting produced at an MPI approved offshore facility:
(i) “This consignment was produced and prepared for export in
accordance with the agreement between MPI and [list name of
approved offshore facility].” Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 18 of 23 Appendix 1: Approved insecticide trea tments –
Actinidia dormant cuttings
(1) One of the treatment options listed below must be applied as described in Part 2.1.
Treatment Specification
Methyl bromide
(MeBr)
(Option 1) Apply one of the treatment options from the table below:
CT Initial
dose Minimum
end point
dose Temperature
(°C) Time Comments
74 48 g/m3 28.8 g/m3 10–15 2 hrs The treatment
must achieve the
CT product,
minimum
concentration,
temperature,
and time listed.
Used packaging
is to be dipped or
fumigated as per
FVT9* or
destroyed. 62 40 g/m3 24 g/m3 16–20 2 hrs
50 32 g/m3 19.2 g/m3 21–27 2 hrs
37.2 28 g/m3 14.4 g/m3 28–32 2 hrs
*See the ABTRT for more details
Guidance:
• While a number of combinations of time and initial
concentration may be used to achieve the minimum
requirements (CT and minimum final concentration
(g/m3)) of the treatment, care must be taken to avoid
phytotoxicity. Phytotoxic effects of the treatment may increase
when a higher initial concentration at lower temperature and
reduced duration is used.
• It is the importers responsibility to choose which ‘dur ation of
treatment (time (h))’ option will be undertaken.
• The importer undertakes treatments at their own risk (see legal
disclaimer in Approved Biosecurity Treatments (ABTRT))
The concentration -time product (CT) utilized for methyl bromide
treatment in this standard is the sum of the fumigant concentration
readings (g/m3) over time (h). This is in accordance with ISPM 43 :
Requirements for the use of fumigation as a phytosanitary measure .
Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 19 of 23 Hot water
treatment
followed by
chemical
treatment
(Option 2) All treatments must be applied in the following order:
1) Immersion in water at a minimum continuous temperature of
24 °C for a minimum period of 2 hours;
2) Immersion in water at a minimum continuous temperature of
45 °C for a minimum period of 3 hours;
3) Dipping (with agitation) for a minimum of two minutes in
chlorpyrifos dip
(2.4 g active ingredient per litre, or label rates) containing a non -
ionic surfact ant. If bubbles are present on the plant surface after
the initial two -minute period, the immersion period must be
extended to a minimum of five minutes.
Chemical
treatment
(Option 3) Apply two active ingredients via spraying or dipping, one
organophosp hate and one from another different chemical group listed
below:
Treatment/
Chemical Active
ingredient
(a.i.) Application
Rate
(g a.i./L) Time Comments
Organophosphate Acephate 0.75 2–5
mins Dip/spray at
room
temperature.
Refer to
pesticide
label to
check the
need for
surfactants,
the
suitability for
specific
species
See Note
below. Chlorpyrifos 0.8
Dimethoate 0.5 to 1.9
Malathion 1.5
Pirimiphos -
methyl 0.475
Carbamate Carbaryl 1.2
Diamide Cyantraniliprole 0.15
Diacylhydrazine Tebufenozide 0.06
Neonicotinoid Imidacloprid 0.16
Thiacloprid 0.16
Synthetic
pyrethroid Deltamethrin 0.025 15
mins
Esfenvalerate 0.03
Fenvalerate 0.03
Lambda -
cyhalothrin 0.05
Spinosyns Spinosad 0.048 2–5
mins
Note: The above contact and systemic insecticidal dips may be used
instead of fumigation, but only if the used packaging material is
separately fumigated (FVT8) or destroyed. Plants are to be immersed Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 20 of 23 completely or all surfaces sprayed to runoff. For dipping, t he treatment
time is normally 2 mins (except those requiring 15 mins) but must be
increased to 5 mins if bubbles remain present on the plant surface. The
chemicals, if compatible, may be combined as a single treatment. Dip
solutions must be used no more th an twice or as per manufacturer’s
recommendations.
Appendix 2: Approved miticide treatments –
Actinidia dormant cuttings
(1) One of the treatment options listed below must be applied as described in Part 2.1.
Treatment Specification Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 21 of 23 Methyl bromide
(Option 1) Apply one of the treatment options from the table below:
CT Initial
dose Minimum
end point
dose Temperature
(°C) Time Comments
120 68 g/m3 51 g/m3 10–15 2 hrs The treatment
must achieve the
CT product,
minimum
concentration,
temperature, and
time listed. Used
packaging is to be
dipped or
fumigated as per
FVT9* or
destroyed 100 57 g/m3 43 g/m3 16–20
85 48 g/m3 36 g/m3 21–27
70 40 g/m3 30 g/m3 28–32
120 56 g/m3 41 g/m3 10–15 2.5
hrs
100 48 g/m3 35 g/m3 16–20
85 40 g/m3 29 g/m3 21–27
70 32 g/m3 23 g/m3 28–32
120 48 g/m3 34 g/m3 10–15 3 hrs
100 40 g/m3 28 g/m3 16–20
85 34 g/m3 24 g/m3 21–27
70 28 g/m3 20 g/m3 28–32
*See the ABTRT for more details
Note : This treatment can be applied to manage both insects and mites.
When this treatment is used to manage mites, Methyl bromide
treatment for insects mentioned above is not required.
Guidance:
• While a number of combinations of time and initial
concentration may be used to achieve the minimum
requirements (CT and minimum final concentration (g/m3))
of the treatment, care must be taken to avoid phytotoxicity.
Phytotoxic effects of the treatment may increase when a
higher initial concentration at lower temperature and
reduced duration is used.
• It is the importers responsibility to choose which ‘duration
of treatment (time (h))’ option will be undertaken.
• The importer undertakes treatm ents at their own risk (see
legal disclaimer in Approved Biosecurity Treatments
(ABTRT))
The concentration -time product (CT) utilized for methyl bromide
treatment in this standard is the sum of the fumigant concentration
(g/m3) over time (h). This is in accordance with ISPM 43 :
Requirements for the use of fumigation as a phytosanitary
measure .
Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 22 of 23 Chemical
treatment (Option
2) Apply one of the following treatments (containing one or two active
ingredients) via spraying or dipping
Treatment/
Chemical Active
ingredient
(a.i.) Application
Rate
(g a.i./L) Time Comments
Acequinocyl 0.15 2–5
mins Dip/spray at
room
temperature.
Refer to
pesticide
label to
check the
need for
surfactants,
the
suitability
for specific
species
See Note
below Chlorfenapyr 0.087
Abamectin + pyridaben 0.012 + 0.34
Abamectin + spiromesifen 0.012 +
0.152
Emamectin benzoate +
pyridaben 0.002 + 0.34
Emamectin benzoate +
spiromesifen 0.002 +
0.152
Fenazaquin + pyridaben 0.5 + 0.34
Fenazaquin + spiromesifen 0.5 + 0.152
Note : Chemical treatment may be used instead of fumigation but only
if the packaging material is separately fumigated or destroyed.
Treatments may be in the form of spray, or preferably immerse the
item in a dip(s) with agitation, according to the following cond itions:
• Dipping – the treatment time is normally 2 mins but must be
increased to 5 mins if bubbles remain present on the plant surface.
Dip solutions must be used no more than twice or as per
manufacturer's recommendations. All treatments must be carried out
in ac cordance with manufacturer's recommendations using either
the recommended label rate or the rates shown in the table above;
or
• Spraying – all surfaces of the plant must be sprayed to the
point of runoff
(including the under surfaces of leaves). Packing material (arriving
with the plant) must be treated the same as the product or destroyed.
Appendix 3: Regulated pest list – Actinidia plants
for planting
Fungi
Ceratocystis fimbriata
Colletotrichum taiwanense
Colletotrichum simmondsii
Corynespora cassiicola Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 23 of 23 Diaporthe novem
Diaporthe tulliensis
Erysiphe actinidiae var. actinidiae
Erysiphe actinidiae var. argutae
Phyllosticta actinidiae
Pseudocercospora actinidiae
Pseudocercospora hangzhouensis
Pucciniastrum actinidiae
Verticilli um nonalfalfae
Oomycetes
Phytophthora drechsleri
Phytophthora palmivora
Phytopythium helicoides
Bacteria
Acidovorax valerianellae
Pectobacterium carotovorum subsp . actinidiae
Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae
Viruses
Actinidia chlorotic ringspot -associated virus
Actinidia yellowing ringspot virus (AYRSpV)
Actinidia yellowing virus 1 (AcYV1)
Actinidia virus C (AcVC)
Apple stem grooving virus [Actinidia -infecting strain]
Citrus leaf blotch virus [Actinidia -infectin g strain]
Emaravirus kiwi (E. kiwii)
Pelargonium zonate spot virus
Tomato necrotic spot associated virus
Phytoplasmas
16Sr1 (aster yellows) group
16SrXII (stolbur) group
16SrX (apple proliferation) group
Appendix 4: Definitions
Definitions have the same meaning as defined by the Act or ISPM 5: Glossary of
phytosanitary terms , unless set out below:
Cutting
A plants for planting commodity sub -class for propagation material from the stem only (no
roots).
Dormant
Temporarily inactive/suspended growth (cuttings of deciduous species should have no
leaves; bulbs should have no leaves or roots). Import Health Standard: Actinidia Plants for Planting
Ministry for Primary Industries Page 24 of 23 Import permit
Official document issued by the Ministry for Primary Industries that authorises import of a
commodity in accordance with specified phytosanitary requirements.
{Note: Permits for imports into New Zealand are issued by the Ministry for Primary Industries}.
Pest
Definition as per ISPM 5: Glossary of phytosanitary terms .
Regulated pest
Definition as per status definitions in ONZPR.
MPI Plants Biosecurity Index (PBI)
A database of plant species that have been approved for import into New Zealand.
Official New Zealand Pest Register (ONZPR)
The site for official information about pests and disease -causing organisms in New Zealand,
authorised by MPI.
Pre-determined testing
Specific testing for pests and diseases as stated in the import health standard.
Stage 1 (initiation) tissue culture
An explant, taken direc tly from an in vivo mother plant, that is undergoing in vitro
propagation for the purpose of generating stage 2 and stage 3 tissue cultures.
Stage 2 (multiplication) tissue culture
Plants in tissue culture that are being multiplied to rapidly increase th e quantity of plants.
Stage 3 (rooting) tissue culture
Plants in tissue culture that are being prepared for deflasking, including rooting and
hardening -off of plants.
Tissue culture
Plants in vitro that have been prepared as tissue culture from one parent by asexual
reproduction (clonal techniques) under sterile conditions.
Viable
Capable of germination or other means of maintaining life.
| 6,183
| 40,796
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_TBT_GEN343.pdf
|
r_G_TBT_GEN343
|
G/TBT/GEN/343
13 février 2023
(23-1018) Page: 1/11
Comité des obstacles techniques au commerce Original: anglais
RENSEIGNEMENTS ACTUALISÉS PRÉSENTÉS
PAR L' ARSO AU COMITÉ OTC
RENSEIGNEMENTS COMMUNIQUÉS PAR L' ARSO
Le présent document contient les renseignements communiqués par l' ARSO à la réunion du
Comité OTC des 16-18 novembre 2022 au titre du point 4 de l'ordre du jour (Renseignements
actualisés présentés par les observateurs ).1
_______________
1 Dans la langue original e seulement . G/TBT/GEN/343
- 2 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 3 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 4 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 5 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 6 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 7 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 8 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 9 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 10 -
G/TBT/GEN/343
- 11 -
__________
| 115
| 924
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SPS_NTPKM599A2.pdf
|
q_G_SPS_NTPKM599A2
|
G/SPS/N/TPKM/599/Add.2
10 July 2023
(23-4642) Page: 1/2
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original: English
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
The following communication, received on 7 July 2023, is being circulated at the request of the
Delegation of The Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu .
_______________
Those foods, food additives, food utensils, food containers or packaging classified under 138 specific
CCC codes
The measure notified as G/SPS/N/TPKM/599 on 13 October 2022, was promulgated on 6 July 2023,
and the retroactive effect is 23 June 2023.
Commodities classified under 138 specific CCC codes shall follow the "Regulations of Inspection of
Imported Foods and Related Products" if they are used for foods, food additives, food utensils, food
containers or packaging. The importers shall apply for i nspection to the Food and Drug Administration,
Ministry of Health and Welfare.
http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/newsContent.aspx?cid=3&id=28928 http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/newsCon
tent.aspx?cid=3&id=28929
http://www.fda.gov.tw/TC/newsContent.aspx?cid=3&id=28930
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/SPS/TPKM/23_10841_00_x.pdf
This addendum concerns a:
[ ] Modification of final date for comments
[X] Notification of adoption, publication or entry into force of regulation
[ ] Modification of content and/or scope of previously notified draft regulation
[ ] Withdrawal of proposed regulation
[ ] Change in proposed date of adoption, publication or date of entry into force
[ ] Other:
Comment period: (If the addendum extends the scope of the previously notified measure
in terms of products and/or potentially affected Members, a new deadline for receipt of
comments should be provided, normally of at least 60 calendar days. Under other
circumstances, such as extension of originally announced final date for comments, the
comment period provided in the addendum may vary.)
[ ] Sixty days from the date of circulation of the addendum to the notification and/or
(dd/mm/yy) : Not applicable
Agency or authority designated to handle comments: [X] National Notification Authority,
[ ] National Enquiry Point. Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other
body:
Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine, Council of Agriculture
9F, No.100, Sec. 2, Heping W. Rd., Zhongzheng Dist., Taipei City, 100060, Taiwan
Tel: +(886) 2 3343 2091 G/SPS/N/TPKM/599/Add.2
- 2 -
Fax: +(886) 2 2332 2200
E-mail: wtosps@mail.baphiq.gov.tw
Text(s) available from: [X] National Notification Authority, [ ] National Enquiry Point.
Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other body:
Bureau of Animal and Pl ant Health Inspection and Quarantine, Council of Agriculture
9F, No.100, Sec. 2, Heping W. Rd., Zhongzheng Dist., Taipei City, 100060, Taiwan
Tel: +(886) 2 3343 2091
Fax: +(886) 2 2332 2200
E-mail: wtosps@mail.baphiq.gov.tw
__________
| 413
| 3,029
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/297396_2023_IP_IRL_23_10350_00_e.pdf
|
297396_2023_IP_IRL_23_10350_00_e
|
STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS.
S.I. No. 574 of 2004 .
INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2004
S.I. No. 574 of 2004 .
INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2004.
I, MICHAEL AHERN, Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and
Employment, in exercise of the powers conf erred on me by sections 20(1), 30(1), 31(1)
and 85 of the Industrial Designs Act 2001 (No. 39 of 2001) and the Enterprise, Trade and
Employment (Delegation of Ministerial Functions) (No. 2) Order 2003 ( S.I. No. 157 of
2003 ), hereby make the following regulations:
1. These Regulations may be cited as the Industrial Designs (Amendment) Regulations
2004.
2. These Regulations come into operation on 1 November 2004.
3. The Industrial Designs Regulations 2002 ( S.I. No. 280 of 2002 ) are amended—
(a) in Regulation 22( d), by deleting “and of its featur e or features of novelty and
individual character”,
(b) in Regulation 24( f), by deleting “and of the featur e or features of novelty and
individual character claimed”, and
(c) in Schedule 2, by substituting—
(i) Form No. 1 in the Schedule to these Regulations for Form No. 1,
(ii) Form No. 1A in the Schedule to these Regulations for Form No. 1A, and (iii) Form No. 2 in the Schedule to these Regulations for Form No. 2.
SCHEDULE
FORM No. 1
INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS ACT 2001
APPLICATION FOR REGI STRATION OF A DESIGN SINGLE APPLICATION
Reference No. of Applicant
or Authorised
Agent.................................................
To: The Controller of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks,
Patents Office,
Government Buildings,
Hebron Road,
Kilkenny.
The Applicant(s) named herein hereby claim( s) to be the proprietor(s) of the design, a
representation of which is at tached, and request(s) the registration of the design on the
basis of the following information:
1. Type of Application
This is a single application in respect of one design.
2. Fees
Included with this applicati on is the prescribed fee of €70 or evidence of payment
thereof.
3. Representations
A representation of the design complying w ith the conditions set out in Regulation 11
is enclosed.
Yes [ ]
No [ ]
4. Applicant(s)
Full name(s): Address(es):
Nationality(ies): 5. Author
If the author(s) is/are not the first propri etor(s) of the design, in sert here the Design
Identification Number, name(s) and address(es) of the author(s).
Design Identification Number: Full name(s):
Address(es):
6. Brief description of design
Insert here a brief description of the design.
7. Product(s)
List here the product(s) to or in which th e design is to be appl ied or incorporated.
8. Class(es)
List here the class(es) incl uding subclass(es) of the Locar no system of International
Classification in which registra tion of the design is requested.
9. Claim for right of Priority
Complete this section where a right of priority is clai med on the basis of an earlier
application for registration of the design that was filed in a state, country, territory or
area within the meaning of section 26 of the Industrial Designs Act 2001 (“the
Principal Act”).
State/Country/Territory/Area Filing Date
File No. (if available)
10. Deferment of Publication
Is deferment of publication as provided fo r in section 32(2) of the Principal Act
requested?
Yes [ ]
No [ ] If yes, please indicate the period for wh ich deferment is requested (the maximum
period allowed is 30 months from the filing da te or, if priority is claimed, from the
date of priority).
Period of Deferment
11. Authorised Agent (if any)
The following has been authorised to act on behalf of the Applicant(s) in all
proceedings connected with this application for registration:
Name of Agent: Address:
12. Address for Service (indicate and complete as appropriate)
Same as at 11.
If not the same as at 11, state he reunder the addre ss for service.
13. Signature
(The application may be signed by a person authorised to do so by or on behalf of the
Applicant(s) or by the Agent named at 11).
Date:
FORM No. 1A
INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS ACT 2001
APPLICATION FOR REGI STRATION OF A DESIGN
MULTIPLE APPLICATION
Reference No. of Applicant
or Authorised
Agent.................................................
To: The Controller of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks,
Patents Office,
Government Buildings, Hebron Road, Kilkenny.
The Applicant(s) named herein hereby claim( s) to be the proprietor(s) of the designs,
representations of which are attached, and requests the regi stration of the designs on the
basis of the following information:
1. Type of Application
This is a multiple application covering designs.
2. Fees
Included with this application is the prescribed fee of €
(or evidence of payment thereof) which co mprises an application fee of €70 and an
additional fee of €25 for each desi gn included in the application.
3. Representations
Separate representations of each of the desi gns, complying with the conditions set out
in Regulation 11, are enclosed.
Yes [ ]
No [ ]
[IMPORTANT — PLEASE NOTE: THE REPRESENTATIONS ENCLOSED
WITH THIS APPLICATION MUST BE NUMBERED CONSECUTIVELY USING
ARABIC NUMERALS INSERTED ON THE BACK OR REVERSE SIDE OF THE
REPRESENTATIONS. THESE NUMERAL S ARE REQUIRED TO IDENTIFY
AND DISTINGUISH THE DESIGNS IN RE SPECT OF WHICH REGISTRATION
IS REQUESTED. WHERE MORE THAN ONE REPRESENTATION OF A
PARTICULAR DESIGN IS SUBMITTED, EACH OF THE REPRESENTATIONS
OF THAT DESIGN SHOULD BE ASSIGNED THE SAME IDENTIFICATION NUMERAL.]
4. Applicant(s)
Full name(s):
Address(es): Nationality(ies):
5. Author(s) If the author(s) is/are not the first propriet or(s) of the designs, insert here the Design
Identification Numeral(s) and the name(s) and address(es) of the author(s). If there is
more than one author indicate the design id entification numeral of each design (see 3
above) opposite the name of each author.
Design Identification Numeral Na me of author(s) Address(es)
6. Brief description of designs
Insert here a brief description of the de signs. If you need to provide separate
descriptions of each of the designs include d in the application, indicate the design
identification numeral of each design opposite each of the descriptions provided. Design Identification Numeral Description
7. Product(s)
List here the product(s) to or in which the designs are to be applied or incorporated. If
the different designs included in the application are to be ap plied to or incorporated in
different products, indicate the design identification numeral of each design opposite each of the products listed.
Design Identification Numeral Description
8. Class(es)
List here the class(es) including the s ubclass(es) of the Locarno system of
International Classification in which registration of the design(s) is/are requested.
[Note: Except in cases of ornamentation, al l of the designs in a multiple application
for registration must be in respect of products that bel ong to the same class of the
Locarno system of Intern ational Classification.]
Design Identification Numeral Class Sub-class
9. Claim for right of Priority
Complete this section where a right of priority is clai med on the basis of an earlier
application for registration of the design(s) th at was filed in a state, country, territory
or area within the meaning of section 26 of the Industrial Designs Act 2001 (“the
Principal Act”). If there are different claims to priority in respect of the different
designs included in the applic ation, indicate the design identification numeral of each
design opposite each of the claims listed.
Design Identification
Numeral State/Country/
Territory/Area Filing
Date File No. ( if
available )
10. Deferment of Publication
Is deferment of publication as provided fo r in section 32(2) of the Principal Act
requested?
Yes [ ]
No [ ] If yes, please indicate the period for wh ich deferment is requested (the maximum
period allowed is 30 months from the filing da te or, if priority is claimed, from the
date of priority).
Design Identification Nume ral Period of Deferment
11. Authorised Agent (if any)
The following has been authorised to act on behalf of the Applicant(s) in all
proceedings connected with this application for registration:
Name of Agent:
Address:
12. Address for Service (indicate and complete as appropriate)
Same as at 11.
If not the same as at 11, state he reunder the addre ss for service.
13. Signature
(The application may be signed by a person authorised to do so by or on behalf of the
Applicant(s) or by the Agent named at 11).
Date:
FORM No. 2 INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS ACT 2001
CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF A DESIGN
It is hereby certified that the design to wh ich this certificate relates (representation
attached) has been registered in th e Register of Designs in the name
of............................................................
(registered proprietor) at ............................................................
..............................................
............................................................ ............................................................
..........(address)
under registration No.............in respect of certain products in class(es) and sub-class(es)
............................................................ ............................................................
........................
............................................................ ............................................................
........................
............................................................ ............................................................
........................
............................................................ ............................................................
........................
............................................................ ............................................................
........................
This design has been registered as of ............................................................
............................
Dated this day
of 2 .
............................................................
................................................
Controller of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks.
Given under my Hand, 29th September 2004. MICHAEL AHERN,
Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment.
EXPLANATORY NOTE.
(This note is not part of the Instrume nt and does not purport to be a legal
interpretation.)
These Regulations amend the Industrial De signs Regulations 2002 ( S.I. No 280 of
2002 ) by removing the requirement to forms 1 and 1A of the Schedule for a statement of
novelty and individual character in the appl ication for registration of a design. These
Regulations also revise the fo rmat of the Certificate of Re gistration for a design, which is
issued by the Controller of Patents, De signs and Trade Marks upon registration of a
design. The revised format has removed the reference to and requirement for a product
listing on the Certificate of Registration.
| 1,609
| 12,261
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_IP_N_1IRL54.pdf
|
q_IP_N_1IRL54
|
IP/N/1/IRL/54
IP/N/1/IRL/P/14
2 June 2023
(23-3791) Page: 1/2
Council for Trade -Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights Original: English
NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS
UNDER ARTICLE 63.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT
IRELAND : PLANT VARIETIES (PROPRIETARY RIGHTS) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS, 2000
(S.I. NO. 490/2000)
Notifying Member IRELAND
Details of the notified legal text
Title Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations, 2000
(S.I. No. 490/2000)
Subject matter Patents (including plant variety protection)
Nature of
notification [X] Main dedicated intellectual property law or regulation
[ ] Other law or regulation
Link to legal text* https://ip -documents.info/2023/IP/IRL/23_09596_00_e.pdf
Notification status [ ] First notification
[X] Amendment or revision to notified legal text
[ ] Replacement or consolidation of notified legal text(s)
Previous
notification(s)
referred to IP/N/1/IRL/1
Brief description of the notified legal text
These Regulations , which implement certain amendments and extensions to the Plant Varieties
(Proprietary Rights) Act, 1980 prescribe:
(1) The crop species to which the grant of rights applies.
(2) Duration of rights.
(3) Fees to be charged.
(4) Allow the holder of an Irish grant of plant breeders' rights to keep in place his national plant
breeders' rights (but without exercising such rights) and thereby retain the option of reverting
to the exercise of national plant breeders' rights if the Comm unity plant breeders' rights are
surrendered, by payment of a special reduced renewal fee.
(5) Repeal of previous regulations.
1
OJ No. L227/1 of 1.9.94 IP/N/1/IRL/54 • IP/N/1/IRL/P/14
- 2 -
Language(s) of
notified legal text English
Entry into force 26 December 2000; Given under seal of Minister for Finance on 21/12/2000,
given under seal of Minister for Agriculture on 26/12/2000.
Other date Adoption: 26 December 2000
Notification details
Submission date
of notification 14 April 2023
Other information This Statutory Instrument revokes the following Statutory Instruments:
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1984
(S.I. No. 137 of 1984)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1986
(S.I. No. 46 of 1986)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1988
(S.I. No. 46 of 1988)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1990
(S.I. No. 199 of 1990)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1991
(S.I. No. 31 of 1991)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1992
(S.I. No. 35 of 1992)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 1992
(S.I. No. 369 of 1992)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1 993
(S.I. No. 78 of 1993)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment (No. 2) Regulations 1993
(S.I. No. 332 of 1993)
Plant Varieties (Proprietary Rights) (Amendment) Regulations 1994
(S.I. No. 393 of 1994)
Agency or
authority
responsible Intellectual Property Unit
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment
trademarks@enterprise.gov.ie
* Links are provided to texts of laws and regulations notified under the TRIPS Agreement in the form
supplied by the Member concerned; the WTO Secretariat does not endorse or revise their content.
| 468
| 3,479
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SPS_NUGA127A2.pdf
|
q_G_SPS_NUGA127A2
|
G/SPS/N/UGA/127/Add.2
20 September 2022
(22-7049) Page: 1/1
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original: English
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
The following communication, received on 19 September 2022, is being circulated at the request of
the Delegation of Uganda .
_______________
DUS DEAS 1013:2019, Cheese - Specification - Cream cheese, First edition
The aim of this addendum is to inform WTO Members that the Draft Uganda Standard
DUS DEAS 1013:2019, Cheese - Specification - Cream cheese, First edition, notified in
G/SPS/N/UGA/127 and G/SPS/N/UGA/127/Add.1, entered into force on 14 May 2022. The Uganda
Standard US EAS 1013:2021, Cream cheese - Specification, First edition, can be purchased o nline
through the link: https://webstore.unbs.go.ug/ .
This addendum concerns a:
[ ] Modification of final date for comments
[X] Notification of adoption, publication or entry into force of regulation
[ ] Modification of content and/or scope of previously notified draft regulation
[ ] Withdrawal of proposed regulation
[ ] Change in proposed date of adoption, publication or date of entry into force
[ ] Other:
Comment period: (If the addendum extends the scope of the previously notified measure
in terms of products and/or potentially affected Members, a new deadline for receipt of
comments should be provided, normally of at least 60 calendar days. Under other
circumstances, such as extension of originally announced final date for comments, the
comment period provided in the addendum may vary.)
[ ] Sixty days from the date of circulation of the addendum to the notification and/or
(dd/mm/yy) : Not applicable
Agency or authority designated to hand le comments: [ ] National Notification Authority,
[ ] National Enquiry Point. Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other
body:
Text(s) available from: [ ] National Notification Authority, [ ] National Enquiry Point.
Address, fax numb er and e -mail address (if available) of other body:
Uganda National Bureau of Standards
Plot 2 -12 ByPass Link, Bweyogerere Industrial and Business Park
P.O. Box 6329
Kampala, Uganda
Tel: +(256) 4 1733 3250/1/2
Fax: +(256) 4 1428 6123
E-mail: info@unbs.go.ug
Website: https://www.unbs.go.ug
__________
| 339
| 2,322
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_IP_N_1GBR90.pdf
|
s_IP_N_1GBR90
|
IP/N/1/GBR/90
IP/N/1/GBR/C/10
11 de febrero de 2021
(21-1124) Página: 1/2
Consejo de los Aspectos de los Derechos de Propiedad
Intelectual relacionados con el Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN DE LEYES Y REGLAMENTOS DE CONFORMIDAD
CON EL ARTÍCULO 63.2 DEL ACUERDO SOBRE LOS ADPIC
REINO UNIDO: DECRETO SOBRE SERVICIOS SOCIALES PERSONALES Y DE SALUD
(IRLANDA DEL NORTE) DE 1991, SI 1991/194 (N.I.1)
Miembro que
presenta la
notificación REINO UNIDO
Información sobre el texto jurídico notificado
Título Decreto sobre Servicios Sociales Personales y de Salud (Irlanda del Norte)
de 1991, SI 1991/194 (N.I.1)
Materia Derecho de autor y derechos conexos
Naturaleza de
la notificación Principales leyes o reglamentos dedicados a la propiedad intelectual
Otras leyes o reglamentos
Enlace al texto
jurídico* https://ip -documents.info/2021/IP/GBR/21_0843_00_e.pdf
Situación de la
notificación Primera notificación
Modificación o revisión del texto jurídico notificado
Sustitución o refundición del/de los texto(s) jurídico(s) notificado(s)
Referencias de
notificaciones
anteriores IP/N/1/GBR/C/1
Breve descripción del texto jurídico notificado
Modifica la Ley de Derecho de Autor, Dib ujos y Modelos y Patentes de 1988; e n el artículo 48
(Material comunicado a la Corona en el curso de actividad es públic as), párrafo 6), después
de "1978" se añadirá "e incluye también un organismo de servicios sociales y de salud, tal como
se define en el artículo 7 6) del Decreto sobre Servicios Sociales Personales y de Salud (Irlanda
del Norte) de 1991 , y un fondo fiduciario para los servicios sociales y de salud establecido en virtud
de es e Decreto" .
Idioma(s) del
texto jurídico
notificado Inglés
Entrada en vigor 1 de abril de 1991; l as siguientes disposiciones entrarán en vigor el 1 de abril
de 1991 , a saber:
a) este artículo;
b) los artículos 2, 3, 4, 6, 29 1) a) y b), 30, 32 y 33;
c) el apéndice 1;
d) la parte I del apéndice 5 y el artículo 34 en la medida en que se refiere
a esa parte; IP/N/1/GBR/90 • IP/N/1/GBR/C/10
- 2 -
e) la parte I del apéndice 6 y el artículo 35 en la medida en que se refiere
a esa parte.
Otra fecha
Información sobre la notificación
Fecha de
presentación de
la notificación 29 de enero de 2021
Otra información https://www.legislation.gov.uk/nisi/1991/194/article/1/made
Organismo o
autoridad
responsable UK Intellectual Property Office (Oficina de la Propiedad Intelectual del
Reino Unido)
Concept House
Cardiff Road
Newport
South Wales
NP10 8QQ
Reino Unido
information@ipo.gov.uk
0300 300 2000
Desde fuera del Reino Unido:
+44 (0)1633 814000
* Se facilitan enlaces a los textos de las leyes y los reglamentos notificados en el marco del Acuerdo
sobre los ADPIC según los proporcionó el Miembro en cuestión; la Secretaría de la OMC no suscribe ni revisa su
contenido.
| 446
| 2,974
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/q_G_SPS_NJPN1181A1.pdf
|
q_G_SPS_NJPN1181A1
|
G/SPS/N/JPN/1181/Add.1
28 September 2023
(23-6482) Page: 1/1
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original: English
NOTIFICATION
Addendum
The following communication, received on 28 September 2023, is being circulated at the request of
the Delegation of Japan .
_______________
Specifications and Standards for Foods, Food Additives, etc. under the Food Sanitation Act (Revision
of agricultural chemical residue standards, final rule).
The proposed maximum residue limits (MRLs) for Diminazene notified in G/SPS/N/JPN/1181
(dated 10 March 2023) were adopted and published on 26 July 2023.
The specified MRLs are available as below:
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/SPS/JPN/23_12681_00_e.pdf
This addendum c oncerns a:
[ ] Modification of final date for comments
[X] Notification of adoption, publication or entry into force of regulation
[ ] Modification of content and/or scope of previously notified draft regulation
[ ] Withdrawal of proposed regulation
[ ] Change in proposed date of adoption, publication or date of entry into force
[ ] Other:
Comment period: (If the addendum extends the scope of the previously notified measure
in terms of products and/or potentially affected Members, a new deadline for receipt of
comments should be provided, normally of at least 60 calendar days. Under other
circumstances, such as extension of originally announced final date for comments, the
comment period provided in the addendum may vary.)
[ ] Sixty day s from the date of circulation of the addendum to the notification and/or
(dd/mm/yy) : Not applicable.
Agency or authority designated to handle comments: [ ] National Notification Authority,
[X] National Enquiry Point. Address, fax number and e -mail addres s (if available) of other
body:
Text(s) available from: [ ] National Notification Authority, [X] National Enquiry Point.
Address, fax number and e -mail address (if available) of other body:
Japan Enquiry Point
International Trade Division
Economic Affairs Bureau
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Fax: +(81 3) 5501 8343
E-mail: enquiry@mofa.go.jp
__________
| 305
| 2,181
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/r_G_RO_W189C2.pdf
|
r_G_RO_W189C2
|
G/RO/W/189/Corr.2
29 octobre 2019
(19-7192) Page: 1/1
Comité des règles d'origine
VINGT -CINQUIÈME EXAMEN ANNUEL DE LA MISE EN ŒUVRE ET DU
FONCTIONNEMENT DE L'ACCORD SUR LES RÈGLES D'ORIGINE
NOTE DU SECRÉTARIAT1
Corrigendum
Page 4, "14. Hong Kong, Chin e", document G/RO/N/86 . La mention "n.d ." dans la quatrième colonne
doit être remplacée par "Version numérisée disponible ".
Page 5 . La rangée "26. Mongoli e" doit être remplacé e par ce qui suit :
26. Mongoli e G/RO/N/20
G/RO/N/20/Rev.1 14/05/1998
27/07/1998 La non -application de règles d'origine non
préférentielles avait précédemment été notifiée.
G/RO/N/164 03/04/2018 "http://www.customs.gov.mn/en/images/publish
ers/Customs_law_and_Customs_Tariff_and_Tax
_law.pdf "
"http://customs.gov.mn/2012 -03-14-03-12-
51/2017 -12-12-03-51-09"
www.legalinfo.mn/law/details/208
Page 7 . La rangée "39. Mongoli e" doit être supprimée .
__________
1 Le présent document a été établi par le Secrétariat sous sa propre responsabilité et est sans préjudice
des positions des Membres ni de leurs droits et obligations dans le cadre de l'OMC.
| 152
| 1,190
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/s_G_TBTN23_TZA951.pdf
|
s_G_TBTN23_TZA951
|
G/TBT/N/TZA/951
4 de mayo de 2023
(23-3127) Página: 1/2
Comité de Obstáculos Técnicos al Comercio Original: inglés
NOTIFICACIÓN
Se da traslado de la notificación siguiente de conformidad con el artículo 10.6.
1. Miembro que notifica : TANZANÍA
Si procede, nombre del gobierno local de que se trate (artículos 3.2 y 7.2):
2. Organismo responsable:
Tanzan ia Bureau of Standards (TBS) (Oficina de Normas de Tanzanía)
MOROGORO/Sam Nujoma Road, Ubungo
P.O. BOX: 9524, Dar es -Salam (Tanzanía)
Teléfono : +255 222450206,
Correo electrónico: nep@tbs.go.tz
Sitio web: www.tbs.go.tz
Nombre y dirección (incluidos los números de teléfono y de fax, así como las
direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web, en su caso) del organismo o
autoridad encargado de la tramitación de observaciones sobre la notificación,
en caso de que se trate de un organismo o autoridad diferente:
3. Notificación hecha en virtud del artículo 2.9.2 [ ], 2.10.1 [ ], 5.6.2 [X], 5.7.1 [ ],
3.2 [ ], 7.2 [ ], o en virtud de:
4. Productos abarcados (partida del SA o de la NCCA cuando corresponda ; en otro
caso partida del arancel nacional . Podrá indicarse además, cuando proceda, el
número de partida de la ICS) : Cultivo de plantas (ICS : 65.020.20).
5. Título, número de páginas e id ioma(s) del documento notificado : Norma del
Comité de Normalización de la Dirección de Agricultura y Alimentación A FDC 30 (1914),
Pigeonpea ( Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp ) seed - Requirements for certification (Semillas de
guandul ( Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp) . Prescripciones de certificación) . Documento en inglés
(12 páginas).
6. Descripción del contenido : En la Norma de Tanzanía notificada se establecen las
prescripciones para la certificación de las semillas de guandul ( Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp)
de prebase, de base y certificadas.
7. Objetivo y razón de ser, incluida, cuando proceda, la naturaleza de los
problemas urgentes : información al consumidor y etiquetado ; requisitos de calidad.
8. Documentos pertinentes:
• Sistemas de Semillas de la OCDE para la Certificación Varietal o el Control de las
Semillas Destinadas al Comercio Internacional.
• Sistemas de Semillas de la OCDE ; Directrices para los ensayos en las parcelas de
control y la inspección de campo de los cultivos de semillas. G/TBT/N/TZA/951
- 2 -
9. Fecha propu esta de adopción : por determinar
Fecha propuesta de entrada en vigor : por determinar
10. Fecha límite para la presentación de observaciones : 60 días después de la fecha de
notificación
11. Textos disponibles en : Servicio nacional de información [X], o dirección,
números de teléfono y de fax y direcciones de correo electrónico y sitios web,
en su caso, de otra institución:
Persona(s) de contacto:
Sra. Bahati Samillani ( NEP officer ) (funcionaria del Servicio Nacional de Información) y
Sr. Clavery Chausi
Tanzan ia Bureau of Standards (TBS) (Oficina de Normas de Tanzanía)
Morogoro/Sam Nujoma Road, Ubungo
P O Box 9524
Dar es -Salam
Teléfono : +(255) 22 2450206
Correo electrónico: nep@tbs.go. tz; bahati.samillani@tbs.go.tz
Sitio web: http://www.tbs.go.tz
https://members.wto.org/crnattachments/2023/TBT/TZA/23_09437_00_e.pdf
| 498
| 3,258
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
WTO_1/304085_2024_SPS_EEC_24_01660_00_f.pdf
|
304085_2024_SPS_EEC_24_01660_00_f
|
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2646/oj 1/3RÈGLEMENT D’EXÉCUTION (UE) 2023/2646 DE LA COMMI SSION
du 28 novembre 2023
concer nant l’aut orisation d’une préparation de Lentilactobacillus buchneri DSM 32650 en tant
qu’additif pour l’aliment ation de toutes les espèces animales
(Texte présent ant de l’intérêt pour l’EEE)
LA COMMISSION EUR OPÉENNE,
vu le trait é sur le fonctionnement de l’Union européenne,
vu le règlement (CE) no 1831/2003 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 22 sept embre 2003 relatif aux additifs destinés
à l’alimentation des animaux (1), et notamment son article 9, paragraphe 2,
considérant ce qui suit:
(1) Le règlement (CE) no 1831/2003 dispose que les additifs destinés à l’alimentation des animaux sont soumis à
autori sation et définit les motifs et les procédures d’octroi de cette autori sation.
(2) Conf ormément à l’article 7 du règlement (CE) no 1831/2003, une demande d’autorisation a été déposée pour une
préparation de Lentilactobacillus buchner i DSM 32650. Ladite demande était accompagnée des informations et
documents requis au titre de l’article 7, paragraphe 3, du règlement (CE) no 1831/2003.
(3) La demande concer ne l’aut orisation d’une préparation de Lentilactobacillus buchner i DSM 32650 en tant qu’additif
pour l’alimentation de tout es les espèces animales, à classer dans la catégor ie des «additifs technologiques» et dans le
groupe fonctionnel des «additifs pour l’ensilage».
(4) Dans son avis du 12 mai 2023 (2), l’Autorité européenne de sécur ité des aliments (ci-après l’«Aut orité») a conclu que,
dans les conditions d’utilisation proposées, la préparation de Lentilactobacillus buchner i DSM 32650 était sans dange r
pour les espèces cibles, pour les consommateur s et pour l’environnement. En l’absence de données, aucune
conclusion n’a pu être tirée sur le pote ntiel de l’additif comme agent irritant pour la peau et les yeux ou comme
sensibilisant cutané. Com pte tenu de la nature proté inique de l’agent actif, il y a lieu de considérer l’additif comme
un sensibilisant respiratoire. L’Autorité a également conclu que l’utilisation de Lentilactobacillus buchner i DSM 32650
au taux d’incor poration proposé pouvait accroître la stabilité aérobie de l’ensilage préparé à partir de matières de
fourrage faciles ou modérément difficiles à ensiler avec une fourchett e de teneur en matière sèche comprise entre 28
et 45 %. L’Autor ité a également vérifié le rappor t sur la méthode d’analyse de l’additif dans l’alimentation des
animaux soumis par le laborat oire de référence désigné par le règlement (CE) no 1831/2003.
(5) Com pte tenu de ce qui précède, la Commission considère que la préparation de Lentilactobacillus buchner i DSM 32650
rem plit les conditions prévues à l’article 5 du règlement (CE) no 1831/2003. Il convient dès lors d’autoriser
l’utilisation de ladite préparation. En outre, la Commission estime qu’il convie nt de prendre des mesures de
prote ction appropr iées pour prévenir les effets néfast es sur la santé des utilisateurs de l’additif.
(6) Les mesures prévues par le présent règlement sont conf ormes à l’avis du comité permanent des végétaux, des
animaux, des denrées alimentaires et des aliments pour animaux,
A ADOPTÉ LE PRÉSENT RÈGLEMENT :
Article premier
La préparation spécifiée en annexe, qui appar tient à la caté gorie des «additifs technologiques» et au groupe fonctionnel des
«additifs pour l’ensilage», est autorisée en tant qu’additif pour l’alimentation des animaux dans les conditions fixées en
annexe.
(1)JO L 268 du 18.10.2003, p. 29.
(2)EFSA Journal 2023;21(6):8055.
Jour nal officiel
de l’Union européenne FR
Série L
2023/2646 29.11.2023ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2646/oj 2/3Article 2
Le présent règlement entre en vigueur le vingtième jour suivant celui de sa publication au Journal officiel de l’Union européenne.
Le présent règlement est oblig atoire dans tous ses éléments et directement applicable dans tout
État membre.
Fait à Bruxelles, le 28 novembre 2023 .
Par la Commission
La présidente
Ursula VON DER LEYENJO L du 29.11.2023 FR ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2646/oj 3/3ANNEXE
Numéro
d’identi-
fication de
l’additifAdditifComposition, formule chimique, descr iption,
méthode d’analyseEspèce
animale ou
catég orie
d’animauxÂge maxi-
malTeneur
minimaleTeneur
maximale
Autres dispositionsFin de la période
d’autori-sationen UFC/kg de matière
fraîche
Catégor ie: additifs technologiques. Groupe fonctionnel: additifs pour l’ensilage
1k21902 Lentilactobacillus
buchner i DSM 32650Composition de l’additif
Préparation de Lentilactobacillus buchner i
DSM 32650 cont enant au moins
1 × 1011 UFC/g d’additif
Forme solideToutes les
espèces
animales— — 1. Le mode d’em ploi de l’additif et des
prémélanges doit indiquer les
conditions de stoc kage.
2. Dose minimale de l’additif lors
qu’il n’est pas combiné avec d’au
tres micro-organismes utilisés en
tant qu’additifs pour l’ensilage:
1 × 108 UFC/kg de matière fraîc he
facile ou modérément difficile à
ensiler (2).
3. Les exploitants du secteur de l’ali
mentation animale doivent établir ,
à l’intention des utilisateurs de
l’additif et des prémélanges , des
procédures opérationnelles et des
mesures organisationnelles pour
parer aux risques éventuels résul
tant de leur utilisation. Lorsque ces
risques ne peuvent pas être élimi
nés par ces procédures et mesures,
l’additif et les prémélange s sont
utilisés avec un équipement de
prote ction individuelle respira
toire, oculaire et cutanée.19 décembre 2033
Caractér isation de la subst ance activ e
Cellules viables de Lentilactobacillus buchner i
DSM 32650
Méthode d’analyse (1)
Dénombrement de Lentilactobacillus
buchner i DSM 32650 dans l’additif pour
l’alimentation animale:
—Méthode de dénombrement par étale
ment (ou méthode du milieu coulé) sur
gélose MRS (EN 15787)
Identif ication de Lentilactobacillus buchner i
DSM 32650:
—Amplification en chaîne par polymé
rase appliquée au consensus intergé
nique répétitif entérobactéri en (ERIC-
PCR) ou méthodes de séquençage de
l’ADN ou électrophorèse sur gel en
champ pulsé (ECP) — CEN/TS 17697
(1)La descr iption détaillée des méthodes d’analyse est publiée sur le site du laboratoire de référence, à l’adresse suivante: https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/eurl-f a-eurl-feed-additives/eurl-f a-author isation/
eurl-fa- evaluation-repor ts_en .
(2)Four rage facile à ensiler: > 3 % d’hydrat es de carbone solubles dans la matière fraîche; fourrage modérément diffi cile à ensiler: entre 1,5 et 3,0 % d’hydrat es de carbone solubles dans la matière fraîc he,
conf ormément au règlement (CE) no 429/2008 de la Commission du 25 avril 2008 relatif aux modalités d’application du règlement (CE) no 1831/2003 du Parlement européen et du Conseil en ce qui concer ne
l’établissement et la présentation des demandes ainsi que l’évaluation et l’autorisation des additifs pour l’alimentation animale (JO L 133 du 22.5.2008, p. 1).JO L du 29.11.2023 FR
| 1,048
| 7,059
|
WTO_1
|
WTO
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.