Rule2025-07950

Energy Conservation Program: Final Withdrawal of Determination of Miscellaneous Gas Products as a Covered Consumer Product

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published
May 7, 2025
Effective
June 6, 2025

Issuing agencies

Energy Department

Abstract

DOE is withdrawing its prior determination that miscellaneous gas products ("MGPs"), which include decorative hearths and outdoor heaters, qualify as covered products under Part A of Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended ("EPCA").

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 87 (Wednesday, May 7, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 7, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19250-19255]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-07950]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[EERE-2025-BT-DET-0002]
RIN 1904-AF70


Energy Conservation Program: Final Withdrawal of Determination of 
Miscellaneous Gas Products as a Covered Consumer Product

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

ACTION: Final rule; withdrawal of determination.

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

SUMMARY: DOE is withdrawing its prior determination that miscellaneous 
gas products (``MGPs''), which include decorative hearths and outdoor 
heaters, qualify as covered products under Part A of Title III of the 
Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended (``EPCA'').

DATES: The effective date of this final rule is June 6, 2025.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal 
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, 
is available for review at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>. All documents in the 
docket are listed in the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> 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 <a href="http://www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2025-BT-DET-0002">www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2025-BT-DET-0002</a>. 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,

[[Page 19251]]

DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1445. Email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c180b1b1ada8a0afa2a492b5a0afa5a0b3a5b290b4a4b2b5a8aeafb281a4a4efa5aea4efa6aeb7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="18596868747179767b7d4b6c79767c796a7c6b496d7d6b6c7177766b587d7d367c777d367f776e">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.
    Mr. Matthew Schneider, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4798. Email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0f426e7b7b676a78215c6c67616a666b6a7d4f677e216b606a21686079"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b7fad6c3c3dfd2c099e4d4dfd9d2ded3d2c5f7dfc699d3d8d299d0d8c1">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Discussion
    A. Authority and Background
    B. March 2025 Proposed Withdrawal
    C. Scope of Coverage
II. Conclusions
III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    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. Review Under Additional Executive Orders and Presidential 
Memoranda
IV. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. General Discussion

A. Authority and Background

    Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (``EPCA''), DOE may 
add consumer products to the list of covered products for which energy 
conservation standards can be established. See 42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(20). 
After coverage is determined, DOE may adopt standards and test 
procedures regulating such products, pursuant to the requirements set 
out in the statute. See generally, 42 U.S.C. 6293, 6295. The coverage 
determination procedures require DOE to conclude that a type of 
consumer product should be a ``covered product,'' meaning that ``(1) 
classifying products of such type as covered products is necessary or 
appropriate to carry out the purposes of this chapter,'' and ``(2) 
average annual per-household energy use by products of such type is 
likely to exceed 100 kilowatt-hours (or its Btu equivalent) per year.'' 
Id. at 42 U.S.C. 6292(b).
    On February 7, 2022, DOE published a notice of proposed 
determination (``NOPD'') that proposed to determine coverage for MGPs, 
which are comprised of decorative hearths and outdoor heaters. 87 FR 
6786 (``February 2022 NOPD''). After considering public comments, data, 
and information from interested parties submitted on the February 2022 
NOPD, DOE finalized the coverage determination for MGPs. 87 FR 54330 
(Sept. 6, 2022) (``September 2022 Determination'').

B. March 2025 Proposed Withdrawal

    On March 13, 2025, DOE published a proposed withdrawal of 
determination, in which DOE proposed to withdraw its determination that 
MGPs are covered products under EPCA for which DOE is authorized to 
establish test procedures and energy conservation standards, on the 
basis that outdoor heaters and decorative hearth products are not 
similar enough in function to be grouped together for the purposes of 
establishing a new type of covered product. 90 FR 11908 (``March 2025 
Proposed Withdrawal''). This proposal included striking the definitions 
for ``miscellaneous gas products,'' ``decorative hearth product,'' and 
``outdoor heater'' from the CFR, as established by the September 2022 
Determination. Id. at 90 FR 11913.
    DOE developed this final withdrawal of coverage after considering 
comments, data, and information from interested parties that provided 
comments on the March 2025 Proposed Withdrawal.

    Table I.1--List of Commenters With Written Submissions in Response to the March 2025 Proposed Withdrawal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Comment
               Commenter(s)                        Abbreviation          number in          Commenter type
                                                                         the docket
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Moore..............................  Moore......................            2  Individual.
Logan Penna..............................  Penna......................            3  Individual.
Anonymous................................  Anonymous..................            4  Individual.
Mark Straunch............................  Straunch...................            5  Individual.
Lia Claxton..............................  Claxton....................            6  Individual.
MacGregor................................  MacGregor..................            7  Individual.
Americans for Prosperity.................  AFP........................            8  Advocacy Group.
Anonymous................................  Anonymous..................            9  Individual.
Tiffany Anne.............................  Anne.......................           10  Individual.
American Gas Association, American Public  AGA et al..................           11  Trade Association.
 Gas Association, and the National
 Propane Gas Association.
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.....  NEEA.......................           12  Advocacy Group.
Kynleigh Williams........................  Williams...................           13  Individual.
Hearth, Patio & Barbecue Association.....  HPBA.......................           14  Trade Association.
Keke Dawson..............................  Dawson.....................           15  Individual.
Appliance Standards Awareness Project and  ASAP and Earthjustice......           16  Advocacy Group.
 Earthjustice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A parenthetical reference at the end of a comment quotation or 
paraphrase provides the location of the item in the public record.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The parenthetical reference provides a reference for 
information located in the docket. (Docket No. EERE-2024-BT-DET-
0012-0001, which is maintained at <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>). The 
references are arranged as follows: (commenter name, comment docket 
ID number, page of that document).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the March 2025 proposed withdrawal, DOE received 
four general comments from individuals in support of withdrawing the 
coverage determination for MGPs. (Anonymous, No. 4, p. 1; Straunch, No. 
5, p. 1; MacGregor, No. 7, p. 1; Williams, No. 13, pp. 3-4) AFP 
commented that it supports the withdrawal of coverage for MGPs and 
supported the rationale that the products are not similar enough in 
function to be grouped together for purposes of establishing a new type 
of covered product. (AFP, No. 8 at p. 3).

[[Page 19252]]

    AGA, APGA, and the NPGA submitted a joint comment stating their 
support for the withdrawal of coverage of miscellaneous gas products as 
covered products under EPCA. (AGA et al., No. 11, pp. 2-3) Similarly, 
HPBA commented in support of the withdrawal of the coverage 
determination. HPBA further stated that establishing coverage for MGPs 
is neither ``necessary'' nor ``appropriate'' within the meaning of 42 
U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)(A), as is required by EPCA in order to establish 
coverage. (HPBA, No. 14, p. 2) In their joint comments, AGA et al. also 
contends that there is no reasonable potential that efficiency 
standards for these products would provide significant energy savings 
or be economically justified and further states their support for the 
comment submitted by HPBA. (AGA, No. 11, p. 2-3)
    ASAP and Earthjustice submitted a joint comment, in which they 
expressed support for the adoption of an energy conservation standard 
for MGPs. In their comments, they highlight the potential of a design 
standard that would disallow continuous standing pilot lights for 
decorative hearth products, as well as the potential for performance 
standards for outdoor heaters. (ASAP and Earthjustice, No. 16, p. 1) 
However, ASAP and Earthjustice note they do not oppose the withdrawal 
of coverage for these products, as they do not support DOE maintaining 
federal coverage over products that are not subject to federal energy 
standards. (ASAP and Earthjustice, No. 16, pp. 1-2) DOE responds by 
noting that it has not adopted energy conservation standards for MGPs. 
Further, in this final rule, DOE has determined that MGPs, as defined 
in the September 2022 Determination, are not a ``type of consumer 
product'' for which DOE can establish coverage under 42 U.S.C. 
6295(b)(1) and that as a result the coverage determination is not 
necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of statute. Should 
DOE decide to consider a design standard for outdoor heaters or 
decorative hearth products, it would need to initiate a new rulemaking 
or rulemakings as provided under EPCA.
    NEEA expressed their opposition to the withdrawal of coverage for 
MGPs and encouraged DOE to maintain coverage of these products. (NEEA, 
No. 12 at pp. 1-2). DOE additionally received four comments from 
individuals opposing the proposal to withdraw the coverage 
determinations for MGPs, on the basis that there is potential for 
energy savings and an opportunity to mitigate climate impacts. (Penna, 
No. 3, p. 1; Claxton, No. 6, p. 1; Anonymous, No. 9, p. 1; Dawson, No. 
15, p. 1)
    Several comments received from individuals referred to products 
outside the scope of this rulemaking. (Moore, No. 2, p. 1; Straunch, 
No. 5, p. 1; Anonymous, No. 9, p. 1; Anne, No. 10, p. 1) The coverage 
of MGPs is limited to decorative hearth heaters and outdoor heaters 
that are gas-fired. All comments are available to review in the docket 
for this rulemaking.

C. Scope of Coverage

    AFB, APGA et al., and Williams agreed with the March 2025 Proposed 
Withdrawal that MGPs, as defined in the September 2022 Determination, 
are not similar enough in function to be grouped together for purposes 
of establishing a new type of covered product. (AFB, No. 8, p. 3; APGA 
et al., No. 11, p. 2; Williams, No. 13, p. 3-4)
    HPBA expressed that they agree with DOE's rationale for withdrawing 
the determination of coverage and noted in their comments that the 
definitions for outdoor heaters and decorative hearth products are 
overly broad and encompass materially different products. (HPBA, No. 
14, p 2) As identified by their comments, the ``decorative hearth 
products'' category includes vented gas fireplaces, indoor log sets, 
and outdoor products such as fire tables, which all serve different 
consumer needs and have different design requirements. Id. Concerning 
outdoor heaters, HPBA similarly points out that strictly utilitarian 
patio heaters are materially different than those patio heaters 
intended to provide lighting and visual appeal, and portable and non-
portable infrared patio heaters are similarly materially different. 
HPBA stated that DOE could not make a lawful determination of coverage 
for MGPs unless it better defines that term to include specific 
products, and that the same extends to the terms for decorative hearth 
products and outdoor heaters. Id.
    Williams stated that DOE should withdraw coverage of MGPs as a 
category to be consistent with precedent, but that the Department 
should consider regulating outdoor heaters and decorative hearths as 
separate covered products. (Williams, No. 13, pp. 3-4) Claxton, while 
opposing the withdrawal of the determination of coverage of MGPs, also 
commented that decorative hearth products and outdoor heaters could be 
redefined and categorized as separate products. (Claxton, No. 6, p. 1)
    NEEA, ASAP and Earthjustice, and Claxton all commented that they 
disagree with the rationale that outdoor heaters and decorative hearth 
products do not share a major function and therefore cannot be grouped 
together to be regulated as a single type of consumer product. (NEEA, 
No. 12, pp. 1-2; ASAP and Earthjustice, No. 16, p. 1; Claxton, No. 6, 
p. 1) ASAP and Earthjustice stated that this action does not account 
for the complexity of the overlapping market for these products, and 
noted that DOE previously has acknowledged that aesthetic values are an 
important part of the function of both decorative hearth products and 
outdoor heaters. (ASAP and Earthjustice, No. 16, p. 1) These joint 
commenters further noted that EPCA names ``electric motors and pumps'' 
as a single type of covered equipment, despite the fact that electric 
motors have a wider array of applications than pumps. They similarly 
noted that EPCA groups battery charger and external power supplies 
together although the function of these products differs in all but the 
broadest sense of facilitating energy use in other products. (ASAP and 
Earthjustice, No. 16, p. 2)
    On a similar note, NEEA stated that while some MGP designs focus 
more on aesthetics and others focus more on supplemental heat, both 
types of these appliances provide some supplemental heat to consumers 
in indoor or outdoor spaces. (NEEA, No. 12, p. 2) Claxton additionally 
noted that both types of appliances are gas-powered, used in 
households, and consume significant amounts of energy, which could be 
used as justification for grouping these products as one covered 
product. (Claxton, No. 6, p. 1)
    Upon consideration of these comments, DOE agrees with those 
commenters which have expressed that outdoor heaters and decorative 
hearth products are not similar enough in function to be grouped 
together for the purposes of establishing a new type of covered 
product. DOE notes that the categories of outdoor heaters and 
decorative hearths cover a wide variety of products, and these varied 
products as a whole do not share a major function on a consistent 
enough basis in order to establish them as a single covered product. 
While some decorative products may provide some ambient heat, and some 
outdoor heaters may have an aesthetic component to their design, as 
defined in the September 2022 Determination these functions are not 
required to meet the definition of either a decorative hearth product 
or an outdoor heater. Indeed, while decorative hearths are defined to 
expressly exclude products ``designed to provide heat proximate to the 
unit,'' outdoor heaters are defined to be ``designed to provide

[[Page 19253]]

heat proximate to the unit.'' Therefore, the covered product, as 
established in the September 2022 Determination, encompasses products 
that may not overlap at all in any major functions. Because of this, 
DOE agrees with stakeholders that have commented that the covered 
product, as written, should be withdrawn.

II. Conclusions

    For the reasons discussed in the preceding section of this 
document, DOE has determined that outdoor heaters and decorative hearth 
products are not similar enough in function to be grouped together for 
the purposes of establishing a new type of covered product. As a 
result, DOE has determined that MGPs, as defined in the September 2022 
Determination, are not a ``type of consumer product'' for which DOE can 
establish coverage under 42 U.S.C. 6295(b)(1) and that as a result the 
coverage determination is not necessary or appropriate to carry out the 
purposes of statute.

III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    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), 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 the 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 regulatory action does not constitute a 
``significant regulatory action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. 
Accordingly, this action was not submitted to OIRA for review under 
E.O. 12866.

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 
(<a href="http://www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel">www.energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel</a>).
    DOE reviewed this final withdrawal of a determination under the 
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the policies and 
procedures published on February 19, 2003. This withdrawal does not 
establish test procedures or standards for MGPs and if adopted, DOE 
would no longer have the authority to consider adopting such measures. 
Therefore, DOE concludes that the impacts of the withdrawal would not 
have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities,'' and that the preparation of an IRFA is not warranted. DOE 
will transmit this certification and supporting statement of factual 
basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final withdrawal of a determination, which concludes that MGPs 
as defined by the September 2022 Determination do not meet the criteria 
for a covered product for which the Secretary may consider prescribing 
energy conservation standards pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p), 
imposes no new information or record-keeping requirements. Accordingly, 
the OMB clearance is not required under the Paperwork Reduction Act. 
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

    Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(``NEPA''), DOE has analyzed this final withdrawal in accordance with 
the National Environmental Policy Act (``NEPA'') and DOE's NEPA 
implementing regulations (10 CFR part 1021). DOE's regulations include 
a categorical exclusion for rulemakings that are strictly procedural. 
10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, appendix A6. DOE has determined this 
rulemaking qualifies for categorical exclusion A6 because it is a 
strictly procedural rulemaking and otherwise meets the requirements for 
application of a categorical exclusion. See 10 CFR 1021.410. DOE will 
complete its NEPA review before issuing the final determination.

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. DOE has examined this withdrawal of a 
determination and has determined that it would not have a substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national

[[Page 19254]]

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 
determination. 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 E.O. 13132.

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 
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 withdrawal of a determination 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 
<a href="http://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/documents/umra_97.pdf">www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/gcprod/documents/umra_97.pdf</a>.
    DOE examined this withdrawal of a determination according to UMRA 
and its statement of policy and determined that the withdrawal of 
coverage does not contain a Federal intergovernmental mandate, nor is 
it expected to require expenditures of $100 million or more in any one 
year by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by 
the private sector. As a result, the analytical requirements of UMRA do 
not apply.

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 rule that may affect family well-being. 
This final withdrawal of a determination would not have any impact on 
the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, 
DOE has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family 
Policymaking Assessment.

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 final withdrawal of a 
determination 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: <a href="http://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf">www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/12/f70/DOE%20Final%20Updated%20IQA%20Guidelines%20Dec%202019.pdf</a>. DOE has 
reviewed this final withdrawal of a determination under the OMB and DOE 
guidelines and has 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.
    This final withdrawal of a determination, which does not amend or 
establish energy conservation standards for MGPs, is not a significant 
regulatory action under E.O. 12866. Moreover, it would not 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,

[[Page 19255]]

DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.

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.\2\ 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 the Department's analyses. DOE is 
in the process of evaluating the resulting report.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The 2007 ``Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking Peer 
Review Report'' is available at the following website: <a href="http://energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/energy-conservation-standards-rulemaking-peer-review-report-0">energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/energy-conservation-standards-rulemaking-peer-review-report-0</a> (last accessed July 1, 2022).
    \3\ The report is available at <a href="http://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/review-of-methods-for-setting-building-and-equipment-performance-standards">www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/review-of-methods-for-setting-building-and-equipment-performance-standards</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

M. Review Under Additional Executive Orders and Presidential Memoranda

    DOE has examined this final withdrawal of a determination and has 
determined that it is consistent with the policies and directives 
outlined in E.O. 14154 ``Unleashing American Energy,'' E.O. 14192, 
``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,'' and Presidential 
Memorandum, ``Delivering Emergency Price Relief for American Families 
and Defeating the Cost-of-Living Crisis.''

IV. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this final 
rule; withdrawal of determination.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, 
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Small businesses.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 1, 
2025, by Louis Hrkman, 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 May 2, 2025.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE amends part 430 of 
chapter II, subchapter D, of title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations, to read as set forth:

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:

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


Sec.  430.2   [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  430.2 by removing the definitions of ``Decorative hearth 
product'', ``Miscellaneous gas products'', and ``Outdoor heater''.

[FR Doc. 2025-07950 Filed 5-6-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Indexed from Federal Register on May 7, 2025.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.