The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and
February 18, 2022
Equipment Standards Program
Martin C. Offutt
Since 1978 Congress has authorized mandatory federal programs to regulate the energy
Analyst in Energy Policy
and water consumption of appliances and commercial equipment used in buildings. The

Department of Energy (DOE) has implemented this authority for over 60 categories of
devices with the statutory aim of setting standards that achieve significant conservation

of energy. In the 1978 law, Congress expressed its desire “to reduce the growth in
demand for energy in the United States, and to conserve nonrenewable energy resources produced in this Nation
and elsewhere, without inhibiting beneficial economic growth.”
Covered products and equipment are those units, devices, or appliances that are deemed subject to the national
standards program developed by DOE. Congress specifies these in many instances while in others DOE makes the
coverage determination. Some of the better-known covered products and equipment include refrigerators,
furnaces, and commercial air conditioning. The standards describe energy conservation in one of two ways. First,
the standards establish a maximum energy consumption expressed in units found on utility bills such as kilowatt-
hours (kWh) or British thermal units (Btus). For example, standard-sized dishwashers shall not exceed 307
kWh/year. Second, the standards can address the performance of the device in terms of its minimum energy
efficiency. Efficiency is sometimes a simple percentage value; for example, gas-fired water boilers must be 84%
efficient at converting fuel into heat used in the home. Efficiency can also be a combination of units, and, for
example, general service lamps (i.e., light bulbs) meet standards specified in lumens per watt.
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) states that any standard must result in significant energy
conservation and be technologically feasible and economically justified. DOE must typically reconsider standards
every six years and issue an amended standard if warranted, though such an amended standard cannot result in
increased energy use by the product in question. EPCA allows DOE to preserve certain features such as glass
oven doors that strictly speaking do not result in energy conservation. This protection of features has become
important in the case of natural-gas consuming products. Acknowledging the role of civil society, EPCA has
required the Secretary to follow the energy conservation standards set by groups such as the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) for certain commercial equipment.
DOE sets these standards using a multi-year process of analyses and stakeholder interactions. Standards, test
procedures, and coverage determinations are set utilizing rulemaking processes defined by statutory and other
requirements. EPCA further lists the factors DOE must consider in choosing the quantitative level for an energy
conservation standard for a given product. Some standards are in statute, and DOE regulations codify these. In
other cases DOE considers the standards and test methods (i.e., the procedures used to establish compliance) set
by engineering societies, independent standards organizations, or industry groups—ASHRAE, for example.
The program requires the sale or adoption of equipment that consumes less energy while providing the same
service—e.g., a refrigerator with the same storage volume that consumes less electricity. According to a 2017
DOE estimate, the program was expected to deliver energy savings of 71 quadrillion British thermal units (quads)
from inception through 2020, which is three-quarters of one year’s U.S. primary energy consumption.
Congress could amend EPCA to address the effectiveness of the program and its ability to influence energy
conservation. The setting of standards for appliances that use natural gas is subject to an unresolved debate on
fuel-switching. Also, DOE has gone back and forth on its own requirements for utilizing the standards and test
methods set by ASHRAE, with the key question being whether DOE should adopt ASHRAE standards ‘as is’ or
has latitude to change them. Lastly, DOE’s ability to maintain the tempo of issuing amended standards and follow
the every-six-year review requirement of EPCA has been challenged in recent years; the statute does not allow the
agency to prioritize the backlog. All of these issues have been the subject of recent or ongoing federal litigation.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 5 link to page 5 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 7 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 14 link to page 14 link to page 16 link to page 17 link to page 17 link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 19 link to page 22 link to page 22 link to page 23 link to page 24 link to page 24 link to page 28 link to page 8 link to page 9 link to page 11 link to page 16 link to page 18 link to page 18 link to page 26 link to page 27 link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 12 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Key Concepts in the National Standards Program .......................................................................... 3
Covered Products and Equipment ............................................................................................. 3
Classes and Definitions of Products and Equipment................................................................. 3
Point of Compliance .................................................................................................................. 6
The Form of the Standards ........................................................................................................ 6
The Quantitative Level of a Standard ................................................................................. 6
Relationship Between Standards and Energy Consumption ............................................... 9
Title III EPCA Requirements .......................................................................................................... 9
Requirement That Standards Be “Economically Justified” ...................................................... 9
ASHRAE Equipment .............................................................................................................. 10
Product Availability and the “Features Provision” .................................................................. 10
Periodic Review (“Lookback”) ............................................................................................... 12
Standards Development Process.................................................................................................... 13
Rulemaking ............................................................................................................................. 13
Statutory Factors ..................................................................................................................... 15
Executive Orders ..................................................................................................................... 15
The Process Rule ..................................................................................................................... 15
Alternatives to Rulemaking Process ....................................................................................... 18
Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement ................................................................................ 18
Test Procedures .............................................................................................................................. 19
Federal and State Authorities ......................................................................................................... 20
Impact of the Standards ................................................................................................................. 20
Issues for Congress ........................................................................................................................ 24

Figures
Figure 1. Classes of Room Air Conditioners ................................................................................... 4
Figure 2. Rulemakings on Definition of General Service Lamps ................................................... 5
Figure 3. Efficiency Levels Considered for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces ................................. 7
Figure 4. Timeline for Furnace Rulemakings ................................................................................ 12
Figure 5. Rulemaking Process for Energy Conservation Standards and Associated Test
Procedure .................................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 6. Effect of Appliance and Equipment Standards Rulemakings ........................................ 22
Figure 7. Basic Models of Furnaces at Various AFUEs ................................................................ 23

Tables
Table 1. Chronology of Select Legislative Action for the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program ....................................................................................................................... 2
Table 2. Trial Standard Levels (TSLs) for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces ................................... 8
Congressional Research Service

link to page 29 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Contacts
Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 25

Congressional Research Service

link to page 6 link to page 24 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Introduction
Since 1978 Congress has authorized mandatory federal programs to regulate the energy and water
consumption of appliances and commercial equipment used in buildings. The Department of
Energy (DOE) has implemented this authority for over 70 categories of devices to achieve energy
and water conservation. Some of the better-known covered devices include refrigerators,
furnaces, and commercial air conditioning. The regulations also cover less noticeable equipment
and equipment parts such as transformers and furnace fans. The effect of the national standards
program is to require the sale or adoption of devices that consume less energy while providing the
same service—a refrigerator with the same storage volume that consumes less electricity, for
example. According to a 2017 DOE estimate, the program was expected to deliver energy savings
of 71 quadrillion British thermal units (quads)1 from inception through 2020,2 which is roughly
three-quarters of one year’s primary energy consumption in the United States.
This report describes the regulatory concepts that underpin the national standards program; the
controlling statutes; how DOE develops and revises the standards regulations; how the program is
operated such as through certification and testing; and the impact of the program on energy
conservation.
Overview
The Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, as the national standards program is formally
known, was authorized in 1975 by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA),3 first as non-
binding targets. In 1978 Congress amended EPCA and authorized the Secretary of Energy to set
binding standards through regulations.4 In the 1978 law, Congress expressed its desire “to reduce
the growth in demand for energy in the United States, and to conserve nonrenewable energy
resources produced in this Nation and elsewhere, without inhibiting beneficial economic
growth.”5 With the passage of the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987,6
Congress set the first national energy conservation standards. Title III of EPCA established the
goal for the standards that remains in effect today: for a new standard to be promulgated, DOE
must first find that it would result in significant conservation of energy and be technologically
feasible and economically justified.7
DOE sets minimum efficiency standards or maximum water8 or energy use standards both for
consumer products and for commercial and industrial equipment—collectively, “products and
equipment.” Congress has amended EPCA multiple times; Table 1 lists the significant legislative
action related to energy efficiency. Starting in 1975, Title III of EPCA has included targets for

1 A quad represents roughly 1% of annual U.S. energy consumption.
2 See U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Buildings Technology, “History and Impacts: Buildings” at
https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/history-and-impacts. DOE has also issued estimates of the cumulative benefit of
the national standards program using a different method of calculating energy savings, discussed later in this report in
the section “Impact of the Standards.”
3 P.L. 94-163, 42 U.S.C. §§6291–6317.
4 National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA), P.L. 95-619.
5 Section 102(b) of NECPA, P.L. 95-619.
6 P.L. 100-12.
7 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(3)(B).
8 There are several plumbing products regulated for water consumption that are not discussed in this report.
Congressional Research Service

1

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

energy conservation. In 1978, Congress amended Title III to require DOE to set standards for
thirteen covered products.9 With successive amendments to EPCA, Congress increased the
number of covered products and equipment that became subject to the national standards
program, and as of February 2022 had done so for 19 products and 11 types of equipment.10
EPCA also grants the Secretary of Energy authority to identify new covered products and
equipment. Congress has directed DOE to follow standards and adopt test procedures set by
engineering societies, independent standards organizations, or industry groups in certain
instances.
Table 1. Chronology of Select Legislative Action for the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program
Date
Statute
Action
December
Energy Policy and Conservation Act (P.L. 94-163)
Set test procedures, conservation
22, 1975
targets (fol owed by standards if targets
are not set) and appliance labeling
November
National Energy Conservation Policy Act (P.L. 95-619)
Amended EPCA from targets to
9, 1978
standards
March 17,
National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987
Set standards and schedule for DOE to
1987
(P.L. 100-12)
conduct rulemakings
June 28,
National Appliance Energy Conservation Amendments of
Added fluorescent ballasts
1988
1988 (P.L. 100-357)
October 24, Energy Policy Act of 1992
Amended EPCA to expand coverage to
1992
(EPAct 1992, P.L. 102-486)
certain commercial and industrial
equipment
August 8,
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005, P.L. 109-58)
Set standards and schedule for DOE to
2005
conduct rulemakings
December
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA
Set standards, added stand-by power and
19, 2007
2007, P.L. 110-140)
a six-year look-back provision
December
American Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections
Added coverage for other types of
18, 2012
Act (AEMTCA, P.L. 112-210)
motors and a six-year look-back for
certain ASHRAE products
Source: CRS analysis; and John Cymbalski, U.S. Department of Energy, “Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program: Analysis and Methodology Discussion,” presentation to the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering
and Medicine’s Committee on Review of Methods for Setting Buildings and Equipment Performance Standards,
November 19, 2019.
Note: This is not an exhaustive list of laws that amended the appliance and equipment standards program.

9 These included (1) refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers; (2) freezers; (3) dishwashers; (4) clothes dryers; (5) water
heaters; (6) room air conditioners; (7) home heating equipment, not including furnaces; (8) television sets; (9) kitchen
ranges and ovens; (10) clothes washers; (11) humidifiers and dehumidifiers; (12) central air conditioners; and (13)
furnaces. EPCA §322(a).
10 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, “Regulatory Processes: Buildings,”
at https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/regulatory-processes.
Congressional Research Service

2

link to page 6 link to page 14 link to page 8 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Key Concepts in the National Standards Program
Covered Products and Equipment
Covered products and equipment are those units, devices, or appliances that are subject to the
national standards program. Products and equipment can be classified as “covered” in two ways.
First, Congress has enumerated specific products and equipment to be covered. For example,
when the binding national standards program was first authorized in 1978 there were 13 covered
products (i.e., consumer products such as appliances) defined by EPCA.11 The list of covered
equipment (i.e., pumps, motors etc.), cumulative from the laws described in Table 1, is codified
in 42 U.S.C. §6311(1).
Second, DOE may classify additional consumer products as “covered.” DOE has broad authority
to do so, provided the Secretary of Energy finds it is necessary to carry-out the energy
conservation goals of EPCA and DOE estimates the energy consumption of the product will
exceed 100 kilowatt hours (kWh) per household per year.12 A recent example is the Secretary’s
proposed determination of air cleaners as a covered consumer product.13
The process differs slightly for commercial and industrial equipment. EPCA, as amended,
includes a list of equipment the Secretary may choose to designate as covered.14 A recent example
is the Secretary’s final determination of fans and blowers as covered equipment.15
Lighting products are sometimes considered to be a third category, independent of their origin as
product or equipment.
Some equipment is known as “ASHRAE equipment”16—ASHRAE is the American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers—to acknowledge the standards issued
independently by that organization in conjunction with the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA). The relevant
provisions of EPCA are discussed below in the section “ASHRAE Equipment.”
Classes and Definitions of Products and Equipment
The standard for a particular covered product can be divided or split through creation of product
classes. Such classes are created in certain instances to acknowledge, as determined by the
Secretary, that a subset of products in the category “consume a different kind of energy” or have
“capacity or other performance-related feature[s]” distinct from other products in the category.17
For example, there are 18 classes of room air conditioners,18 based in part on cooling capacity, as
depicted in Figure 1. Other covered products such as water heaters have multiple classes

11 See Sections 322(a) and 325(a)(1) of EPCA.
12 42 U.S.C. §6292(b).
13 86 Federal Register 51629 (September 16, 2021).
14 42 U.S.C. §6311(2)(B).
15 86 Federal Register 46579 (August 19, 2021).
16 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6). This equipment includes “generally, commercial water heaters, commercial packaged boilers,
commercial air conditioning and heating equipment, and packaged terminal air conditioners and heat pumps.” 85
Federal Register 8708a (July 14, 2020).
17 42 U.S.C. §6295(q)(1)(A)-(B).
18 See 10 C.F.R. §430.32(b).
Congressional Research Service

3

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

depending on the type of energy consumed, the presence or absence of a storage tank, and other
attributes.19
Figure 1. Classes of Room Air Conditioners

Source: CRS based on 10 C.F.R. §430.32(b).
Notes: The two left-most categories have one standard applicable to each. The two right-most categories have
multiple standards because the product is split into classes based on the louver and the cooling capacity
(measured in British thermal units per hour [Btu/hr]).
In likewise manner, the standards for commercial and industrial equipment divide these into
“category” or “equipment category” or “product class” or similar. For example, the standards for
commercial refrigerators, freezers and refrigerator-freezers found in Subpart C of 40 C.F.R. Part
431 include a look-up table with rows for refrigerators with solid doors, refrigerators with
transparent doors, and so forth. Each has its own maximum daily energy consumption.
Congress itself has shown specific interest in creating additional classes. In the case of residential
furnaces, Congress directed DOE to consider a separate standard for the smaller models used in
warmer regions.20 EPCA required DOE to consider the possibility of fuel switching and set a
standard that “is not likely to result in a significant shift from gas heating to electric resistance
heating with respect to either residential construction or furnace replacement.”21 DOE has
estimated that 2.7% of consumers, when faced with a purchasing decision, would switch to heat

19 75 Federal Register 20111 (April 16, 2010).
20 NAECA amended Section 325 of EPCA and directed DOE to consider a separate standard level for small furnaces
with an input capacity of less than 45,000 Btu/hr. 42 U.S.C. §6295(f)(1)(B).
21 42 U.S.C. §6295(f)(1)(B)(iii).
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 9
The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

pumps, and 1.7% to electric furnaces given the new standard.22 Today there are distinct classes of
standards for small furnaces of less than 45,000 Btu/hr capacity.23
The scope of coverage of general service lamps (GSLs; i.e., “light bulbs” such as incandescent,
compact fluorescent, LEDs [light-emitting diodes] and other types) has also been at issue. EISA
amended Section 321(30), subparagraph (D), of EPCA to exclude 22 enumerated incandescent
lamps from the definition of incandescent GSLs (“GSILs”).24 The standards are not elaborated
into classes, unlike the examples above, but include look-up tables25 that apply to any and all
lamps that meet the definition of GSILs.26 The definitions are thus important because they
determine which lighting products are to be covered by the national standards program and which
are not. EISA also required DOE to conduct a future rulemaking, to start before January 1, 2014,
to determine whether the exemptions should be maintained.27 Removing the exemptions would
have the effect that more lamps would be subject to energy conservation standards to be
developed by DOE. Figure 2 shows the rulemakings DOE undertook first to remove the GSL
exemptions by revising the definitions28 and, later, to withdraw the proposed definitions (and
maintain the exemptions).29 The withdrawal took place prior to the first rulemaking having taken
effect. On August 19, 2021, DOE issued a proposed rule again to remove the exemptions.30
Figure 2. Rulemakings on Definition of General Service Lamps

Source: CRS.

22 See slide 53 of U.S. Department of Energy, “Furnaces,” presentation to the National Academy of Sciences,
Engineering and Medicine’s Committee on Review of Methods for Setting Buildings and Equipment Performance
Standards, Washington, DC, November 19, 2019.
23 10 C.F.R. §430.32(e)(1).
24 42 U.S.C. §6291(30)(BB)(ii).
25 10 C.F.R. §430.32(x).
26 The definition of GSILs may be found at 10 C.F.R. §430.2.
27 See 42 U.S.C. §6295(i)(6)(A)(i)(II).
28 Final rule at 82 Federal Register 7276 and 7322 (January 19, 2017).
29 Final rule at 84 Federal Register 46661 (September 5, 2019).
30 86 Federal Register 46611 (August 9, 2021).
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 22 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Point of Compliance
EPCA makes manufacturers responsible for certifying that their products and equipment comply
with the standards. As implemented by DOE, the regulations require testing of a “sample
comprised of production units.”31 Notionally, a manufacturer would show compliance by
“select[ing] a sample at random from a production line.”32 The regulations do not require field
testing in deployment; the unit must comply prior to its being shipped as determined by statistical
sampling. The section “Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement” includes further details on
testing.
The Form of the Standards
The standards regulations are collected in the Code of Federal Regulations and include written
sections related to testing, certification and the binding energy conservation standards that give
effect to the prescriptions of EPCA Title III. The standards describe energy conservation in one of
two ways. In the first, the standards establish a maximum allowable energy consumption
expressed in units found on utility bills such as kWh or Btus.33 For example, standard-sized
dishwashers shall not consume more than 307 kWh/year.34 Second, the standards can address the
performance of the device in terms of its minimum required energy efficiency. Efficiency is a
physical measure of the performance of the product or equipment. Efficiency is sometimes a
simple percentage value representing how much of the energy in the fuel the appliance is able to
convert into a useful service. For example, gas-fired hot water boilers manufactured after January
15, 2021, must have an Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency (AFUE) of 84%,35 representing how
much of the fuel’s energy the boiler delivers as heat inside the home. Efficiency can also be a
combination of units, and, for example, general service lamps (i.e., light bulbs) meet standards
specified in lumens per watt—the efficacy measure unique to lighting products.
Some of the standards regulations also include design standards necessitating the incorporation of
certain features into the product. Design standards have no physical units and no associated
testing requirement.36 The manufacturer submits an annual compliance report to DOE.37
Nonetheless, design standards can decrease energy consumption. An example of a design feature
is that gas-burning clothes dryers cannot have continuously-burning pilot lights.38
The Quantitative Level of a Standard
The choice of standard—what is the quantitative level—is the outcome of a detailed process.
DOE elaborates a set of possible standards of varying stringency based on the technologies. The
first step is the screening analysis, in which “DOE uses information about commercially available
technology options and prototype designs as input in identifying technologies used to attain
higher energy efficiency levels (EL).”39 In addition to technological feasibility, DOE also

31 10 C.F.R. §429.11(a).
32 76 Federal Register 12430c (March 7, 2011).
33 Gas companies will sometimes bill in units known as “therms” which are 100,000 Btus each.
34 10 C.F.R. 430.32(f).
35 10 C.F.R. 430.32(e)(2)(iii).
36 10 C.F.R. 429.13.
37 76 Federal Register 12424 (March 7, 2011).
38 10 C.F.R. §430.32(h)(1).
39 John Cymbalski, U.S. Department of Energy, “Appliance and Equipment Standards Program: Analysis and
Congressional Research Service

6

link to page 11 link to page 12 link to page 11
The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

considers the technological options for their (1) practicability to manufacture, install, and service;
(2) impacts on product utility or product availability; and (3) adverse impacts on health or
safety.40 In the engineering analysis, DOE has used an efficiency-analysis approach to elaborate a
set of ELs at discrete values of energy consumption or energy efficiency. The highest-performing
level identified in the engineering analysis is sometimes known as “max tech.” The determination
of “max tech” is the result of an analysis required by statue to determine the “maximum
improvement in energy efficiency or maximum reduction in energy use that is technologically
feasible.” 42 U.S.C. §6295(p)(1)). Figure 3 illustrates the ELs proposed for non-weatherized (i.e.,
residential) gas furnaces in 2016 and the incremental technology associated with each.
Figure 3. Efficiency Levels Considered for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces
September 23, 2016, supplemental proposed rule

Source: Efficiency levels from 81 Federal Register 65760 (September 23, 2016).
Notes: BPM = brushless permanent magnet.
The ELs are one of the pieces with which DOE assembles the various trial standard levels
(TSLs). TSLs are more fully specified than the ELs because, like the standards regulations
themselves, ELs take into account the different appliance sizes, features, and types of fuel
consumed. Once elaborated, the TSLs are candidates for the energy conservation standard DOE
ultimately promulgates. The rulemaking process solicits public comment on the appropriateness
of the various TSLs DOE creates. Table 2 lists the TSLs for the rulemaking depicted in Figure 3

Methodology Discussion,” presentation to the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine’s Committee
on Review of Methods for Setting Buildings and Equipment Performance Standards, November 19, 2019.
40 The list is not exhaustive. See 81 Federal Register 65737 (September 23, 2016).
Congressional Research Service

7

link to page 12 link to page 12 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

and the associated ELs. Note that some TSLs include two standards, and some of these apply to
different sizes of furnaces measured in Btu/hr.
Table 2. Trial Standard Levels (TSLs) for Non-Weatherized Gas Furnaces
A given TSL may have more separate standards for furnaces of different heating capacities (listed in
parentheses)
TSL
Standard
Efficiency Level
9
98%
EL 4
8
95% (>55 kBtu/hr)
EL 3
80% (≤55 kBtu/hr)
Baseline
7
95%
EL 3
6
92% (>55kBtu/hr)
EL 2
80% (≤55 kBtu/hr)
Baseline
5
92%
EL 2
4
92% (>60 kBtu/hr)
EL 2
80% (≤60 kBtu/hr)
Baseline
3
95% (North)
EL 3
80% (Rest of Country)
Baseline
2
92% (>70 kBtu/hr)
EL 2
80% (≤70 kBtu/hr)
Baseline
1
92% (>80 kBtu/hr)
EL 2
80% (≤80 kBtu/hr)
Baseline
Source: 81 Federal Register 65812 (September 23, 2016).
Notes: kBtu/hr = thousand Btus per hour, a measure of heating capacity. North = Alaska, Colorado,
Connecticut, Idaho, Il inois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana,
Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming. See U.S. Department of
Energy, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial
Equipment: Residential Furnaces, August 30, 2016, p. 9-3, at https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-
STD-0031-0217.
The manner in which DOE selects from among the various TSLs is known as a “walk-down”
approach. To evaluate at which TSL to set the standard, DOE first conducts a series of analyses of
the impacts with three principal metrics: (1) the energy savings; (2) the benefits to consumers
(savings in fuel costs over the appliance lifetime, net of incremental product cost); and (3) the
change in manufacturer cash flow.41 DOE conducts these analyses at each TSL. The walk-down
process begins with a review of these results at the highest TSL or “max tech.” (For the example
in Table 2, this is TSL 9.) If the Secretary finds that “the benefits to the nation of the standards
[defined by the given TSL] ... outweigh the burdens”42 then the max tech TSL is adopted as the
energy conservation standard. If the Secretary does not make such a finding, the process “walks
down” to the next most stringent TSL (e.g., TSL 8 in the example of Table 2), and the process
repeats until the TSL then-under consideration meets the criteria. DOE considers other metrics
and analyses as well, including, for example, the emissions or pollutants associated with
generating electricity.

41 DOE applies discounting to both the consumer savings and the manufacturer cash flow impacts.
42 This language occurs in numerous rulemakings. See for example 81 Federal Register 1033 (January 8, 2016).
Congressional Research Service

8

link to page 19 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Relationship Between Standards and Energy Consumption
Energy efficiency in general and the standards for minimum energy efficiency in particular can
alter consumer purchasing behaviors. These changes in behaviors mean that the relationship
between a more stringent energy efficiency standard and a decrease in total energy consumption
is not always direct. DOE has analyzed the situation in which a change in standards may lead to
the suboptimal use of less efficient technology; a user may continue to use and repair a less
efficient technology rather than pay the up-front cost of the appliance that complies with the new
energy conservation standard.43 DOE estimated this effect in the case of furnaces and found the
repair-versus-replace effect would occur in an additional 1% to 4% of households subject to the
standards.44
Likewise, there is a phenomenon known as the rebound effect in which better performing
appliances can erode expected energy savings. An appliance that is more energy efficient will
consume less fuel and hence have lower operating costs for the same level of energy service
provided (i.e., space conditioning [room temperature], hygienic services [hot water], etc.),
potentially leading to increased use. In its simplest form, the rebound effect can occur if the lower
operating cost induces higher demand for the energy service. DOE considers the rebound effect in
the case of furnaces, for example.45
Technological progress itself can improve the customer-facing attributes of an appliance and lead
to greater use of the energy service the appliance provides. So, for example, improved, thinner
insulation can increase the interior volume of the refrigerator and make it possible to provide
refrigeration for a greater amount of food. To the extent that this greater volume increases the
cooling requirements (i.e., Btu/hr), energy consumption may increase.46
Title III EPCA Requirements
Requirement That Standards Be “Economically Justified”
The Secretary of Energy may not prescribe a new or amended standard if doing so “will not result
in significant conservation of energy, or ... is not technologically feasible or economically
justified.”47 EPCA requires the Secretary to determine whether a proposed standard is
“economically justified” based on seven so-called statutory factors described in detail in the
section, “Statutory Factors.”48 A rough idea of what constitutes “economically justified” follows
from EPCA itself, which specifies that if the additional cost of the standards-compliant product is
less than three times the value of the energy savings in the first year, then the standard is

43 84 Federal Register 3924 (February 13, 2019).
44 U.S. Department of Energy, “Furnaces,” presentation to the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and
Medicine’s Committee on Review of Methods for Setting Buildings and Equipment Performance Standards,
Washington, DC, November 19, 2019.
45 See Chapter 8 of U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for
Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Residential Furnaces, Washington, DC, August 30,
2016, at https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0031-0217.
46 See Daniel Martinez, Ben W. Ebenhack, and Travis Wagner, Energy Efficiency: Concepts and Calculations (Elsevier
Science, 2019), p. 253.
47 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(3)(B) for consumer products and §6316(a)—the crosswalk provision conveying these to
commercial and industrial equipment.
48 42 U.S.C. §§6295(o)(2)(B)(i) and 6316(a).
Congressional Research Service

9

link to page 19 link to page 19 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

presumed to be economically justified.49 DOE, however, has favored conducting additional
analyses to consider the “full range of impacts to the consumer, manufacturer, Nation, and
environment” and believes these have “serve[d] as the basis for DOE to definitively evaluate the
economic justification for a potential standard level.”50
Further, EPCA includes an anti-backsliding provision by which a new or amended standard may
not increase the maximum allowable energy use or decrease the minimum required energy
efficiency of a covered product51 or covered equipment.52
ASHRAE Equipment
The subset of commercial and industrial equipment known as “ASHRAE equipment” includes
“generally, commercial water heaters, commercial packaged boilers, commercial air conditioning
and heating equipment, and packaged terminal air conditioners and heat pumps.”53 EPCA requires
that DOE adopt standards that, generally speaking, are “at the minimum level specified” in any
amendment to ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1 (henceforth ‘‘ASHRAE Standard 90.1’’).54
When these groups amend ASHRAE 90.1—an event known as the “ASHRAE trigger”—DOE
must publish an analysis of the energy savings potential of amended energy efficiency standards
within 180 days.55 Thereafter DOE has 18 months to amend its own standard(s) to match the
amended ASHRAE 90.1.56 An exception occurs if DOE finds “clear and convincing evidence”
that a more stringent standard than that in ASHRAE 90.1 would result in “significant additional
conservation of energy” yet still be “technologically feasible” and “economically justified.”57 In
such instances, DOE has 30 months to amend the standard. EPCA requires DOE apply similar
considerations in determining “economically justified” as for other standard-setting
rulemakings,58 described further in the section “Statutory Factors.”
Recent changes and reverted changes to the way DOE treats ASHRAE equipment are discussed
further, below, in “The Process Rule.”
Product Availability and the “Features Provision”
Congress included in EPCA the stipulation that an energy conservation standard not reduce
consumer choice, sometimes known as the “features provision.” This applies to “performance
characteristics (including reliability), features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially
the same as those generally available in the United States.”59 In the past such features have

49 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(2)(B)(iii). See also U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency
Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Residential Furnaces, August 30, 2016,
p. 12, at https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0031-0217.
50 81 Federal Register 65817c (September 23, 2016).
51 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(1).
52 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)
53 85 Federal Register 8708a (February 14, 2020).
54 The title of the ASHRAE standard is “Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings.”
55 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(A)(i).
56 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(I).
57 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II)
58 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(B)(ii).
59 See 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(4); 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(B)(iii)(II)(aa); and as applicable in certain cases through 42
U.S.C. §6316(a)). Although EPCA 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(4) applies to consumer products, it also applies to non-
Congressional Research Service

10

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

included such items as oven door windows. These were judged to provide utility to consumers by
allowing them to monitor what was cooking.60 DOE preserved this feature even though doing so
resulted in a product that raised total energy consumption relative to one without. Another
example occurred in 2020 when DOE created another class of dishwashers, “Standard size
dishwashers with a ‘normal cycle,’”61 reasoning that units with “a short ‘Normal’ cycle have a
performance-related feature that other dishwashers currently on the market lack.”62 The text box
below narrates a further example of an interpretive rule that invoked the statutory provision on
features.
Application of the Features Provision of EPCA
An example of the application of the features provision of EPCA was the splitting of efficiency standards for
furnaces into two tracks: those having condensing technology63 versus those with non-condensing technology. In
201564 and again in 201665 DOE proposed one standard applicable to both. In January 2021,66 DOE determined
that non-condensing technology (and associated venting) comprise a feature under 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(4) and in a
separate notice67 withdrew the proposed rules from 2015 and 2016.
Underlying this determination were some technical issues. DOE noted that access to venting infrastructure in a
building was not always assured.68 DOE reasoned that, for those consumers with a demonstrated preference for
natural gas furnaces,69 lack of venting infrastructure could be an issue.
In 2019 DOE stated in a proposed interpretive rule that the “totality of such concerns may raise non-condensing
appliances (and their associated venting) sufficiently in the consciousness of the consumer as to be deemed a
‘feature’ under EPCA.”70 In the final interpretive rule, issued in 2021, DOE concluded that “use of non-condensing
technology (and associated venting) constitute a performance-related ‘feature’ under EPCA that cannot be
eliminated through adoption of an energy conservation standard.”71 In the same final rule DOE formally withdrew
the March 12, 2015 proposal and the September 23, 2016 supplemental proposal covering residential (“non-
weatherized”) gas furnaces.72 It also withdrew a May 31, 2016, proposal for commercial water heating
equipment.73
Based on a rethinking of what qualifies as a feature, DOE proposed an interpretive rule in August 2021 that would
eliminate the separate tracks (effectively reinstating the 2015/2016 proposals).74 In doing so, DOE stated that “the

ASHRAE commercial equipment because of the crosswalk provision of §6316(a). See discussion at 85 Federal
Register 60091b (September 24, 2020). While EPCA has a “features” provision for standards for ASHRAE equipment,
it only applies in the instance that DOE is adopting a more stringent standard than that issued by ASHRAE. See
discussion at 85 Federal Register 60091c (September 24, 2020).
60 63 Federal Register 48041 (September 8, 1998).
61 10 C.F.R. §430.32(f)(iii).
62 85 Federal Register 68726c (October 30, 2020).
63 Condensing technology captures additional heat from the exhaust gases. The technology utilizes the latent heat of
condensation of water for home heating, rather than simply exhausting the unclaimed latent heat with the water vapor.
64 80 Federal Register 13120 (March 21, 2015).
65 81 Federal Register 65720 (September 23, 2016).
66 86 Federal Register 4776 (January 15, 2021).
67 86 Federal Register 3873 (January 15, 2021).
68 85 Federal Register 60093 (September 24, 2020).
69 DOE noted at 86 Federal Register 4782c (January 15, 2021) as follows: “Many consumers who are currently gas
customers may show a preference for that fuel type and would be negatively impacted by a standard that requires the
purchase of a condensing unit to the extent they feel compelled to change to a different fuel type.”
70 84 Federal Register 33017a (July 11, 2021).
71 86 Federal Register 4776 (January 15, 2021).
72 The rule had also included mobile home gas furnaces.
73 81 Federal Register 34440 (May 31, 2016).
74 86 Federal Register 48049 (August 27, 2021).
Congressional Research Service

11

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

technology used to supply heated air or hot water is not a performance-related ‘feature’ that provides a distinct
consumer utility under EPCA.”75 DOE noted that it had not yet implemented the January 2016 final interpretive
rule “in the context of any individual energy conservation standards rulemaking.”76 DOE issued the final rule to
make this change on December 29, 2021.77
Figure 4. Timeline for Furnace Rulemakings

Source: CRS from Federal Register notices.
Periodic Review (“Lookback”)
With the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-140), Congress required DOE
to conduct an every-six-year review of efficiency standards of covered products (42 U.S.C.
§6295(m)(1)) and covered equipment (42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(C)).78 DOE is then required to
either publish a determination that a standard does not need amending or issue a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NOPR) for a new standard.
In March 2019 the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Energy, held a
hearing after DOE had missed the deadlines for completion of 16 such reviews.79 Four of the
rulemakings accomplishing such reviews had been signed and dated in 2016 but not yet

75 86 Federal Register 48049c (August 27, 2021).
76 86 Federal Register 48052c (August 27, 2021).
77 86 Federal Register 73947 (December 29, 2021).
78 For certain ASHRAE equipment this became the case with the enactment of AEMTCA in 2012.
79 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Energy, Memorandum on Hearing,
“Wasted Energy: DOE’s Inaction on Efficiency Standards & Its Impact on Consumers and the Climate,” 116th Cong.,
1st sess., March 4, 2019.
Congressional Research Service

12

link to page 18 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

published.80 A federal court ordered DOE to issue those rulemakings,81 which DOE then
promulgated in January 2020.82
Industry has commented on the six-year review requirement. At the March 2019 hearing, both the
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) and the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) expressed their view that six years is too often given the time
needed for manufacturers to comply. AHAM further noted that successive revisions can lead to
small energy savings relative to the additional costs imposed on the manufacturer. AHRI cited
estimates from DOE’s 2016 rulemaking on commercial boilers in which DOE estimated a 0.8%
savings (0.39 quads) over the 30-year analysis period at a cost to industry of $13.1 million to
$23.8 million.83 DOE further estimated conversion costs for industry to be $27.5 million while the
change in consumer net present value (i.e., the cost savings) was to be $0.414 billion (at a 7%
discount rate) to $1.687 billion (at a 3% discount rate).84
Standards Development Process
Rulemaking
Standards, test procedures, and coverage determinations are set utilizing rulemaking processes
defined by administrative statutes and other requirements.85 EPCA has additional procedural
requirements, and for energy conservation standards, rulemakings generally have taken about
three years to complete the four phases: framework, preliminary analysis, notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR), and issuance of a final rule. The test procedures used to certify compliance
with and enforce the standards are also set by rulemaking.86 Figure 5 provides a notional
illustration of the process that applies to products and to equipment other than ASHRAE
equipment.

80 These four rulemakings included the following products and equipment: portable air conditioners, uninterruptible
power supplies, air compressors, and commercial packaged boilers. Their status is explained at 85 Federal Register
1378.
81 Pursuant to an order from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in the consolidated cases of
Natural Resources Defense Council, et al. v. Perry and People of the State of California et al. v. Perry, Case No. 17-cv-
03404-VC, as affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the consolidated cases Nos. 18-15380 and
18-15475.
82 85 Federal Register 1378 (January 10, 2020).
83 81 Federal Register 15839 (March 24, 2016).
84 Ibid.
85 See CRS In Focus IF10003, An Overview of Federal Regulations and the Rulemaking Process, by Maeve P. Carey,
and CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulemaking Process: An Overview, coordinated by Maeve P. Carey.
86 DOE had set a mandatory 180-day waiting period, to be observed after the publication of a revised test method,
before a new or revised standard may be proposed (i.e., before a NOPR may be issued). 85 Federal Register 8626. In
December 2021 DOE issued a final rule that removed the mandatory waiting period. 86 Federal Register 18901.
Congressional Research Service

13

link to page 14 link to page 14
The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Figure 5. Rulemaking Process for Energy Conservation Standards and Associated
Test Procedure
Applies to products and to equipment other than ASHRAE equipment
(sample timeline—actual timeline may vary; see notes for statutory requirements on timeframes)

Source: adapted from Daniel Cohen, U.S. Department of Energy, “The U.S. Appliance Standards Program,” at
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/administrative_law/
appliance_standards_program_deck.authcheckdam.pdf.
Notes: TP = test procedure rulemaking; ECS = energy conservation standard rulemaking; NPRM = notice of
proposed rulemaking (same as NOPR). For an ECS rulemaking, EPCA requires at least a 60-day comment period
on proposed rules and at least a 90-day period between publication of proposed rule and final rule. 42 U.S.C.
§§6295(p) and 6316(a). The differing requirements for ASHRAE equipment is discussed in the section “ASHRAE
Equipment.”
For some products, Congress established a quantitative energy conservation standard; DOE
codified the standards as given in EPCA without conducting its own rulemaking.87 DOE itself
may designate a previously unregulated type of product or equipment as a covered category as
well.88 In other instances, Congress has specified the product category as “covered” but directed
DOE to develop the energy conservation standards.
DOE makes documents available and seeks comments through all phases of the rulemaking
process until issuance of a final rule. For the framework, preliminary analysis, and NOPR phases,
DOE solicits public comment and often holds public meetings that may allow for remote
participation. In the framework phase, DOE announces the availability of a framework document
in the Federal Register and presents the approach and legal authority for the process in a public
meeting.89 The preliminary analysis phase incorporates available information and presents initial
determinations to inform the proposed rule. The framework phase and preliminary analysis phase

87 See, for example, 74 Federal Register 12058 (March 23, 2009), with DOE citing “good cause” under the
Administrative Procedure Act to issue the final rule without first issuing a proposed rule.
88 For products, this authority may be found at 42 U.S.C. §6292(b) and for equipment at 42 U.S.C. §6312.
89 See, for example, 73 Federal Register 32243 (June 6, 2008).
Congressional Research Service

14

link to page 18 link to page 13 link to page 19 link to page 19 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

are not required by statute. (These various stages are again illustrated in Figure 5.) Once DOE
issues a final rule, the rule typically sets a compliance date within three to five years.
Statutory Factors
As noted in “Requirement That Standards Be “Economically Justified”,’” DOE must first show
any new or amended standard to be economically justified. EPCA sets forth seven statutory
factors90 the Secretary must apply to “determine whether the benefits of the standard exceed its
burdens”91 for covered products. The factors cover economic impacts; savings in operating costs
versus up-front and maintenance costs; energy savings; competition; utility and performance of
the product; and the need for national energy conservation. An additional factor is “other factors
the Secretary considers relevant.” EPCA does not require these seven factors be analyzed of the
commercial and industrial equipment in the national standards program, but DOE does so.92
DOE has conducted rulemakings on the process it uses to apply these factors—in effect, it has
issued a rulemaking on how it does rulemakings. (These are discussed further below in the
section “The Process Rule.”) One such rulemaking describes how DOE evaluates the TSLs
against the seven statutory factors. The rulemaking addressed whether TSLs would be evaluated
comparatively or in a “walk-down” process that considers them seriatim compared to a no-new-
standards baseline. See further discussion in the section, “The Process Rule.”
Executive Orders
The process of regulatory development is also subject to presidential executive order. E.O. 12866,
Regulatory Planning and Review, requires that certain proposed and final regulations be
accompanied by specific analyses and further, for regulations deemed “significant,”93 that the
Office of Management and Budget review them prior to publication.94 The E.O. requires that an
agency “identify the problem that it intends to address (including, where applicable, the failures
of private markets or public institutions that warrant new agency action).”95 Later executive
orders have made changes, perhaps most significantly E.O. 13422, Further Amendment to
Executive Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review. This latter E.O. again reiterated the
need for agencies to identify the market failure or problem the draft regulation is attempting to
solve.
The Process Rule
DOE maintains a set of procedures known collectively as the Process Rule96 for setting efficiency
standards and test methods for consumer products. When originally published in 1996, the
purpose of the Process Rule was to provide “enhanced opportunities for public input, improved

90 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(2)(B)(i).
91 42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(2)(B)(i).
92 84 Federal Register 3913 (February 13, 2019).
93 There are several criteria including whether the economic impact is anticipated to exceed $100 million.
94 The process is discussed in greater detail in CRS Report RL32397, Federal Rulemaking: The Role of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, coordinated by Maeve P. Carey.
95 Section 1(b)(1) of Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review.’’
96 10 C.F.R. §430, Subpart C, Appendix A.
Congressional Research Service

15

link to page 10 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

analytical approaches, and encouragement of consensus-based standards.”97 DOE follows the
Process Rule for much of its work on the standards regulations, in addition to following other
procedural requirements established in law and executive order. For example, the Process Rule
addresses the statutory criteria provided in 42 U.S.C. §6295(o).98
DOE revised a number of provisions of the Process Rule in a February 2020 final rule99 and an
August 2020 final rule100 in order to “update and modernize”101 by changing its scope and
applicability to cover not only consumer products but also commercial and industrial
equipment;102 clarifying its treatment of test procedures; defining a threshold for what comprises
significant energy savings; and for other purposes. DOE reverted a number of these provisions in
a December 2021 final rule103 and modified the scope and applicability so as not to mandate DOE
follow the Process Rule in all cases, but may depart from it “to account for the specific
circumstances of a particular rulemaking.”104
Two particular provisions in the revised Process Rule could have had an impact on the quantity of
energy conserved. The first of these set a minimum threshold of energy conservation for a
potential new or amended standard; to be promulgated, a new or amended standard must have
resulted in site energy savings of 0.3 quads, or a 10% reduction in site energy, accrued by units
sold over, typically, a 30-year analysis period.105 DOE removed this provision in the December
2021 final rule, reasoning that the 0.3 quads threshold ignored the question of when the energy
savings had occurred. For example, DOE continued, lower energy use during periods of peak
demand—important for appliances such as air conditioners—“helps reduce stress on energy
infrastructure.”106 The December 2021 final rule also noted that, by focusing on site energy—the
physical point at which the energy conservation standards themselves apply—the 2020 revision
had neglected the energy used in generating electricity and in extracting, processing, and
transporting primary energy sources such as natural gas either to the power plant or to the site.
In the second area affecting the quantitative aspects of energy conservation standards, the
December 2021 final rule restored a provision of the Process Rule on the method of choosing
among possible quantitative levels for the energy conservation standards (i.e., the TSLs). Known
as the walk-down approach (discussed earlier in the section “The Quantitative Level of a

97 61 Federal Register 36974 (July 15, 1996).
98 John Cymbalski, U.S. Department of Energy, “Appliance and Equipment Standards Program: Analysis and
Methodology Discussion,” presentation to the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine’s Committee
on Review of Methods for Setting Buildings and Equipment Performance Standards, November 19, 2019.
99 85 Federal Register 8626 (February 14, 2020).
100 85 Federal Register 50937 (August 19, 2020).
101 84 Federal Register 3911a (February 13, 2019).
102 The February 2020 final rule modified 10 C.F.R. Part 431—the standards and test methods for commercial and
industrial equipment—so that the Process Rule “shall apply to the consideration of new or revised energy conservation
standards and test procedures considered for adoption under this part.” 85 Federal Register 8711 (February 14, 2020).
103 86 Federal Register 70892. This followed a proposed rule on April 12, 2021, 86 Federal Register 18901.
104 86 Federal Register 70920 and Section 3(a) of Appendix 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.
105 In the case of furnaces for example DOE utilized a vintage stock model that considered units sold in 30 years but
might be utilized beyond: “National cumulative energy savings (NEScum) are the sum of the annual NES over the
lifetime of products shipped in the analysis period.” See U.S. Department of Energy, “Technical Support Document:
Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Residential Furnaces,”
August 30, 2016, p. 10-18, at https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0031-0217.
106 86 Federal Register 70892 (December 13, 2021).
Congressional Research Service

16

link to page 10 link to page 14 link to page 23 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Standard”), it had been replaced in an August 2020 final rule.107 Then, DOE had changed its
approach to “include a comparison of the benefits and burdens of that TSL against the benefits
and burdens of the baseline case (‘no new standards’ case) and across all other TSLs.”108 In that
earlier final rule, DOE had reasoned that the process could otherwise result in selection of a TSL
“no matter how minute an estimated cost savings,” a reference to the way DOE might otherwise
interpret “economic justification” during a rulemaking.109 In other words, the TSL chosen might
provide marginally better energy savings than a less-stringent TSL but at much higher cost. In the
December 2021 final rule, DOE reverted to the walk-down approach, explaining that the other
approach might have resulted in a standard that “maximizes net benefits” rather than “maximizes
energy savings and is technologically feasible and economically justified.”110
Other provisions affected by the 2020 revisions still stand. DOE has issued a NOPR to revert
some of these as well;111 the final rule is pending as of this writing. For example, the 2020
revisions to the Process Rule addressed the standards that apply to ASHRAE equipment. DOE
had added to the Process Rule regarding how and to what extent it must adopt any amendments to
ASHRAE 90.1, including what finding it must make before setting a more stringent standard.112
(These and other EPCA requirements are discussed earlier in the section “ASHRAE Equipment.”)
DOE asserted, in the 2020 revisions, that there must be “no substantial doubt that a standard more
stringent ... would result in a significant additional amount of energy savings [etc.]”113 and further
that it would opt to set a more stringent standard only in “very limited circumstances.”114 DOE
further explained that there would be no opportunity for it to revise such standards without the
ASHRAE trigger first having occurred. This meant DOE could not amend standards for
ASHRAE equipment at a time of its own choosing.
In July 2021,115 DOE published a NOPR that would, if finalized, revert these changes regarding
standards for ASHRAE equipment. DOE explained that the criteria in setting more stringent
standards, both in EPCA—the “clear and convincing evidence” standard—and in case law, were
sufficiently clear and that the February 2020 final rule had introduced language that was not
needed.116 The July 2021 NOPR also proposed to restore DOE’s discretion to amend standards
for ASHRAE equipment, not only as a result of the ASHRAE trigger having occurred, but also as
a result of DOE’s own periodic reviews.117 Nonetheless, the meaning of “clear and convincing
evidence” is part of ongoing litigation.118 The litigation also touches upon whether DOE could
amend a standard for ASHRAE equipment absent the ASHRAE trigger.119
Additional revisions to the Process Rule are discussed below in the section “Test Procedures.”

107 85 Federal Register 50937 (August 19, 2020).
108 Ibid.
109 85 Federal Register 50939 (August 19, 2020).
110 86 Federal Register 70907a (December 13, 2021).
111 86 Federal Register 35668 (July 7, 2021).
112 42 U.S.C. §6313(a)(6)(A)(ii)(II).
113 84 Federal Register 3914c and 3915b (February 13, 2019).
114 85 Federal Register 8635 (February 14, 2020).
115 86 Federal Register 35668 (July 7, 2021).
116 86 Federal Register 35676b (July 7, 2021).
117 86 Federal Register 35675 (July 7, 2021).
118 See American Public Gas Association v. DOE, No. 20-1068 (D.C. Cir.).
119 Niina Farah, “D.C. Circuit Leans Toward DOE Redo of Major Efficiency Rule,” EE News, September 10, 2021.
Congressional Research Service

17

link to page 18 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Alternatives to Rulemaking Process
DOE can use variations to the above rulemaking process in certain circumstances. DOE may start
the process at the preliminary analysis phase or at the NOPR phase (see Figure 5) if it has the
necessary data and information to conduct its analysis.
In about 10% of its standards-making activities since 2008, DOE published a direct final rule that
established energy conservation standards.120 The direct final rules were based on documents
submitted jointly by stakeholders that “are fairly representative of relevant points of view.”121 An
example is the direct final rule issued on residential furnaces in June 2011.122
In a further 23% of standards rulemakings since 2008, DOE has applied a technique known as
negotiated rulemaking,123 facilitated by DOE’s Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal
Advisory Committee (ASRAC) using authority granted under the Alternative Dispute Resolution
Act (ADRA, P.L. 104-320, 5 U.S.C. §561-570).124 In 2015, for example, a working group
recommended energy conservation standards and test procedures for fans and blowers; this
supported DOE’s later determination that fans and blowers were to be covered equipment.125
Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement
The covered products and equipment cannot enter commerce (e.g., be sold or imported) without
first being certified as being in compliance with the standards regulations. DOE requires
manufacturers or a third-party labeler to submit a certification report of energy performance; such
reports are required when the basic model is first sold and annually thereafter. In addition, DOE
conducts selected testing through third-party laboratories to verify energy efficiency performance.
The basic models, which are the subject of the tests, can be “a group of models that differ in non-
energy-related characteristics like color.”126 For residential water heaters there are roughly 200
basic models but nearly 4,000 individual models.127
DOE also engages in enforcement activities and can initiate enforcement testing either under its
own initiative or when it receives written information alleging a violation.128 Such cases focus on
manufacturers that distribute products in the United States that, according to DOE, do not meet
required energy standards. Compliance certification cases focus on manufacturers that either have
submitted invalid compliance certifications or have not certified that the products have been
tested and meet the applicable efficiency standards. DOE has applied the principle of enforcement

120 Email communication from DOE Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, December 15, 2021.
121 42 U.S.C. §6295(p)(4). In a direct final rule, DOE issues a final rule without prior notice and comment and solicits
comment for a period of at least 110 days following the rule’s publication in the Federal Register. The rule will then
take effect unless at least one adverse comment is received by the agency within 120 days of publication in the Federal
Register, in which case the agency withdraws the rule and restarts the proceedings under regular notice and comment
procedures. If no adverse comments are received, the rule becomes effective.
122 76 Federal Register 37408 (January 27, 2011).
123 Email communication from DOE Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, December 15, 2021.
124 See also CRS Report R46756, Negotiated Rulemaking: In Brief, by Maeve P. Carey.
125 86 Federal Register 46579 (August 31, 2021).
126 Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, “Implementation, Certification and Enforcement: Certification:
Certification Reporting System (CCMS),” at https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/implementation-certification-and-
enforcement.
127 CRS analysis using data from DOE’s Compliance Certification Management System.
128 76 Federal Register 12434. 42 U.S.C. §6299 (consumer products), §6316 (commercial equipment).
Congressional Research Service

18

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

discretion as demonstrated by a recent enforcement policy statement. This policy allowed specific
water heater units that do not comply with the applicable energy conservation standards to be
sold. This policy was issued following a period in which the test procedures applicable to water
heaters were changed by three rulemakings following a mandate in a 2012 law.129 Stakeholders
with unsold residential water heater inventory requested DOE use enforcement discretion to allow
the continued sale of what were now non-compliant units.130 DOE issued an enforcement policy
statement to the effect that it would not seek civil penalties for certain products that failed to meet
applicable energy conservation standards for the next year.131 First issued in December 2016, the
policy was renewed several times and expired on December 31, 2021.132
Other federal agencies have roles in energy efficiency and provide consumers with information
on the performance of products—both those covered in EPCA and those that are not. The
ENERGY STAR program affixes a label to products indicating they meet minimum energy
performance requirements as a way of informing consumers on their purchases.133 The
Environmental Protection Agency ensures that the information that appears on ENERGY STAR
labels is independently certified. The Federal Trade Commission uses its authority under Title III
of EPCA134 to require manufacturers to provide EnergyGuide labels135 on energy use and
operating costs of a number of covered products.136
Test Procedures
Congress specified test procedures for certain products137 and equipment138 and further authorized
DOE itself to prescribe test procedures. DOE issues test procedures by rulemaking. For a number
of covered products and equipment, DOE adopts procedures set by engineering societies,
independent standards organizations, or industry groups in a process known as incorporation by
reference (IBR). In this fashion numerous test procedures have become part of the regulations for
energy conservation. DOE is required to review test procedures for covered products and

129 The American Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act (AEMTCA, P.L. 112-210).
130 DOE, “Enforcement Policy Statement Regarding Testing, Compliance with the Applicable Energy Conservation
Standards, and Certification for Certain Consumer Water Heaters,” December 12, 2016, at https://www.energy.gov/
sites/default/files/2016/12/f34/Enforcement%20Policy%20Statement%20-%20ConsumerWH_Definitions_12-12-
16_1.pdf.
131 DOE specifically “will not seek civil penalties for failure to certify properly or for the distribution in commerce by a
manufacturer or private labeler of certain water heaters that are not in compliance with an applicable energy
conservation standard” for water heaters meeting certain criteria. See https://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms/templates/
Enforcement_Policy_Statement_Certain_consumer_water_heaters.
132 See DOE, “Past Water Heater Enforcement Policies,” October 17, 2019, at https://www.energy.gov/gc/downloads/
past-water-heater-enforcement-policies.
133 ENERGY STAR® is administered jointly by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE). For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10753, ENERGY STAR Program, by Corrie
E. Clark.
134 42 U.S.C. §6294.
135 Further information available at Federal Trade Commission, “How To Use the EnergyGuide Label to Shop for
Home Appliances,” at https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/how-use-energyguide-label-shop-home-
appliances#EnergyGuide.
136 These products include boilers, ceiling fans, central air conditioners, clothes washers, dishwashers, freezers,
furnaces, heat pumps, pool heaters, refrigerators, televisions, water heaters, and room and portable air conditioners.
137 42 U.S.C. §6293.
138 42 U.S.C. §6314.
Congressional Research Service

19

link to page 14 link to page 26 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

equipment at least once every seven years.139 EPCA has criteria that DOE must consider when
adopting a test procedure but leaves it to DOE’s discretion to determine if the criteria have been
satisfied.140 EPCA has required that DOE develop test procedures that, for example, are “in
accord with”141 or “conform to”142 a specific test procedure named in the statute for the covered
product or equipment in question.
In 2020, DOE added,143 and then in a December 2021 final rule reverted,144 a provision in the
Process Rule on the use of IBR for test methods. In the February 2020 final rule, DOE explained
that it would be requiring “adoption, without modification, of industry standards as test
procedures for covered products and equipment unless such standards do not meet the EPCA
statutory criteria for test procedures.”145 With the promulgation of the December 2021 final rule,
DOE will retain the discretion to either adopt the test procedure “as is,” modify the standard so
that it complies with the statutory criteria, or reject it and develop a new test procedure.
Federal and State Authorities
Federal energy conservation standards, test procedures, and label requirements generally
supersede state requirements. DOE is authorized to grant a waiver of federal preemption for
“unusual and compelling State or local energy or water interests” (42 U.S.C. §6297). Legislation
introduced in the 117th Congress (H.R. 1512 and H.R. 1326) would suspend this preemption—
allowing states to set their own standards—for instances in which DOE has not updated a
standard within eight years of its most recent promulgation.146 (EPCA generally requires this
update within six years.)
Impact of the Standards
For all covered products and equipment, EPCA directs that “the Secretary may not prescribe an
amended or new standard” if it would “not result in significant conservation of energy” and is
“not technologically feasible or economically justified.”147 (See the discussion in the section
“ASHRAE Equipment” for discussion of how that type of equipment is treated.)
DOE estimates the net cumulative energy savings accrued by products purchased over the
(typically) 30-year analysis period (i.e., the period starting with the year in which the standard
becomes mandatory). The rulemakings calculate the projected energy use assuming the proposed
standard and subtract the projected energy use in the counterfactual case of no new standard.
Among revised standards, 2009 to 2017, the savings shown in Figure 6 have ranged from 14.8
quads for commercial package air conditioners and heat pumps—for which total net cost savings

139 42 U.S.C. §§6293(b)(1)(A) and 6314(a)(1)(A).
140 EPCA requires that test procedures must not be “unduly burdensome” and must “measure energy efficiency, energy
use, water use (in the case of showerheads, faucets, water closets and urinals), or estimated annual operating cost of a
covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use.” 42 U.S.C. §6293(b).
141 42 U.S.C. §6293(b)(5).
142 42 U.S.C. §6293(b)(7)(B).
143 85 Federal Register 8626 (February 14, 2020).
144 86 Federal Register 70908b (December 13, 2021).
145 85 Federal Register 8678 (February 14, 2020).
146 See §321 of H.R. 1512 and §6 of H.R. 1326 in the 117th Congress.
147 42 U.S.C. §§6295(o) and 6316(a)—the crosswalk provision.
Congressional Research Service

20

link to page 26 link to page 26 The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

to consumers were $15.2 billion (at a 7% discount rate) to $50 billion (at a 3% discount rate)148—
down to 0.16 quads for residential boilers—for which total net cost savings to consumers were
$0.35 billion (at 7%) to $1.20 billion (at 3%).149 (Both these points are labeled in Figure 6.) One
way in which DOE judges the impact on industry for a rulemaking is the effect on the industry
net present value (INPV).150 The rulemakings DOE concluded from 2009 to 2017 ranged from a
slight, one- or two-percent improvement in INPV to an almost 30% decrease (see Figure 6),151
but in all cases DOE had determined that the “the benefits to the nation of the standards ...
outweigh the burdens.”152

148 See U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for Consumer Products
and Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Small, Large, and Very Large Commercial Package Air Conditioning and
Heating Equipment, December 2015, p. 1-1.
149 81 Federal Register 2323 (January 15, 2016). Agencies are required to report the impact of regulations using the
discount rates specified in OMB Circular A-4.
150 INPV is the sum of the discounted cash flows to the industry from the base year through the end of the analysis
period, typically the 30-year period beginning with the first year of compliance.
151 Some stakeholders have drawn attention to DOE’s own analyses that show a percentage of consumers will
experience a net cost increase. See Testimony of Joseph M. McGuire, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Before the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on
Energy, U.S. House of Representatives Hearing, March 7, 2019.
152 This language occurs in numerous rulemakings. See for example 81 Federal Register 1033 (January 18, 2016).
Congressional Research Service

21

Figure 6. Effect of Appliance and Equipment Standards Rulemakings
2009-2017

Source: Federal Register notices for appliance and equipment standards rulemakings.
Notes: Each point represents one standards rulemaking and is plotted to indicate DOE’s estimates of the change in industry net present value incurred by the rule and
the energy savings accrued by products and equipment purchased over the 30-year analysis period. DOE made the calculations using the same models and methods but,
as the analyses were performed for different years, the basis for the energy savings and costs may rely on different inputs and assumptions.
CRS-22

link to page 5 link to page 14 link to page 27
The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

DOE has made calculations of the cumulative benefits of the entire national standards program.
One estimate, cited earlier in the “Introduction” section, was that the standards completed through
2016 would save 71 quads of energy by 2020 and nearly 142 quads through 2030.153 A
subsequent DOE analysis refined this by considering only the energy that is used or converted
directly by the appliance or equipment (i.e., the “site energy,” reflecting the physical location
where the standards themselves apply). This latter analysis estimated savings to be 55 quads
attributable to standards published from 1989 to 2019.154 The two analyses may not be directly
comparable because of the latter’s reliance on site energy155 and its exclusion of any benefits that
may derive from DOE’s adoption and promulgation of ASHRAE Standard 90.1 (i.e., Standard
90.1 was taken as the baseline “no standards” case).
The impact of a standards regulation is often to remove from the market or require modification
of those products or equipment that exceed the maximum allowable energy consumption or,
alternatively, fall below a minimum energy performance level. The case of a standard for gas
furnaces provides a clear example. As discussed earlier (see “Product Availability”), DOE
proposed in 2016 to amend the standards for non-weatherized (i.e., residential) gas furnaces.
Then, as now, the gas furnaces can be differentiated by technology according to whether they are
condensing and non-condensing. Figure 7 shows the number of models available at the time of
the 2016 proposed rule.
Figure 7. Basic Models of Furnaces at Various AFUEs
Models shown were those analyzed at the time of the 2016 DOE Supplemental Proposed Rule

Source: Data from U.S. Department of Energy, Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for
Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment: Residential Furnaces, August 30, 2016, p. 3-19, at
https://www.regulations.gov/document/EERE-2014-BT-STD-0031-0217.
Notes: AFUE = Annual fuel utilization efficiency.

153 See U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Buildings Technology, “History and Impacts: Buildings,” at
https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/history-and-impacts.
154 84 Federal Register 36038 (July 26, 2019).
155 Prior to 2001 DOE’s analysis in support of its rulemakings did not separately calculate site energy. Ibid. DOE
determined in 2011 that it would use the full fuel-cycle measures of energy and emissions when evaluating the impacts
of new or amended standards. 76 Federal Register 51282c (August 18, 2011).
Congressional Research Service

23

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

DOE’s proposed standard, which was not finalized, would have required an AFUE of 92% for all
non-weatherized (i.e., residential) gas furnaces with capacities greater than 55 kBtu/hr, meaning
non-condensing furnaces of that size would not have complied without modification. DOE
estimated that roughly half of such furnaces sold would first require modification “to include a
secondary heat exchanger or increased overall heat exchanger surface area.”156
Issues for Congress
The six-year lookback provision, requiring DOE to review all standards of that age, is attracting
attention in both Congress and in federal courts. DOE’s failure to meet this six-year deadline for a
number of standards was addressed in the 116th Congress in a hearing of the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Energy in March 2019; in the 117th it has been
addressed in two bills (H.R. 1512 and H.R. 1326). At the March 2019 hearing, a representative of
the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers expressed the view that revisions to an
existing standard can lead to small energy savings relative to the additional costs imposed on the
manufacturer.157 Currently, EPCA affords DOE no discretion on whether or when to conduct
these “lookback” reviews. Congress could amend EPCA to grant DOE regulatory flexibility while
balancing the EPCA purpose of energy conservation. For example, it could allow DOE to
prioritize certain energy conservation standards that could save more energy in aggregate than
other standards. Other approaches to address the backlog could be to extend the time between
review periods, or for additional DOE staff to support the regulatory process.
Recent rulemakings have gone back and forth on the question of how much deference DOE
should give to engineering societies, standards organizations, and industry groups when
considering the energy conservation standards that these groups develop. One noteworthy
example is the treatment of ASHRAE equipment. A 2020 final rule, later reverted, would have
favored DOE’s adopting any new ASHRAE equipment standard “as is.” The question of adopting
ASHRAE Standard 90.1 is also in ongoing litigation.158 Congress could clarify to what extent
DOE must defer to ASHRAE by treating the latter’s equipment standards as final—in other
words, clarify to what degree and to what legal standard DOE may exercise its discretion in
choosing the quantitative level of energy conservation.
The question of deference to ASHRAE arises, not just when setting energy conservation
standards, but also in test methods used to show compliance. For a number of covered products
and equipment, DOE adopts procedures set by engineering societies, independent standards
organizations, or industry groups in a process known as incorporation by reference (IBR). DOE
has changed its procedures back and forth on whether it must accept such test procedures “as is.”
Congress could likewise clarify to what extent DOE must defer to these organizations when
promulgating test methods.

156 81 Federal Register 65821.
157 Testimony of Joseph M. McGuire, President and Chief Executive Officer, Association of Home Appliance
Manufacturers, Before the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Energy, U.S. House of
Representatives Hearing, March 7, 2019.
158 See American Public Gas Association v. DOE, No. 20-1068 (D.C. Cir.). See also Niina Farah, EE News, “D.C.
Circuit Leans Toward DOE Redo of Major Efficiency Rule,” September 10, 2021.
Congressional Research Service

24

The Department of Energy’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program

Prior amendments to EPCA159 and court decisions160 on natural-gas consuming products have
favored mitigating the potential for fuel switching (e.g., replacing a natural gas unit with an
electric one). This long history continues, and DOE proposed and, in January 2021, finalized an
interpretive rule161 that would further mitigate against fuel switching. DOE has since reversed this
interpretive rulemaking,162 but in doing so may not have settled the question. Congress could
amend EPCA to clarify its intentions on fuel switching and thereby make implementation less
contentious.

Author Information

Martin C. Offutt

Analyst in Energy Policy

Acknowledgments
Corrie Clark, analyst in energy policy, provided substantive contributions to the development of this report.

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

159 National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-12) required DOE to establish separate standards
for residential furnaces depending on size to reduce the fuel-switching impacts of the new standards and to set a rule
which “the Secretary determines is not likely to result in a significant shift from gas heating to electric resistance
heating with respect to either residential construction or furnace replacement.” 42 U.S.C. §6295(f)(1)(B)(iii).
160 Petition for Review, American Public Gas Association, et al. v. Department of Energy, et al., No. 11– 1485 (D.C.
Cir. filed Dec. 23, 2011).
161 86 Federal Register 4776.
162 86 Federal Register 48049.
Congressional Research Service
R47038 · VERSION 1 · NEW
25