On August 23, 2022, the Sierra Club and 25 other environmental NGOs filed a petition for rulemaking demanding that EPA develop new source performance standards (NSPS) encompassing appliances that generate heat for some purpose in residential or commercial buildings (except for wood-burning appliances, which are already regulated under section 111). This category would cover several different end-uses, including space heating, water heating, cooking, and clothes drying. Their proposal, if adopted, would effectively impose a federal gas heating appliance ban through section 111(b) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by designating electric heat pumps as the “best system of emission reductions” and setting a zero-nitrogen oxide (NOx) limit.   The next day, AGA  issued a press statement responding to the NGO’s petition.  

 

Yesterday, AGA filed a detailed formal response opposing the petition with EPA. The response requests that EPA, if it opts to act on the Petition, deny it for the following reasons:  

·       First, creating the suggested “heating appliances” source category under section 111 – essentially a space-heating, water-heating, clothes-drying, and food-cooking appliance mega-category – is inconsistent with the Clean Air Act and past EPA practice. 

 

·       Second, the emissions data cited in the Petition do not support an endangerment finding under CAA section 111.

 

·       Third, Congress already delegated to DOE the authority to regulate the “heating appliance” source category for energy efficiency, and EPA cannot use an inventive interpretation of the CAA to go beyond what Congress authorized DOE to do under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.

 

·       Fourth, electric heat pump technology is not a best system of emission reduction (BSER) for new gas water heaters and furnaces.

 

·       Fifth, the Supreme Court’s holding in West Virginia v. EPA prohibits EPA from designating electric heat-pumps as the BSER for new water heaters and furnaces, because this would entail exactly the kind of generation shifting and economic impact that the Court found requires a clear delegation of authority from Congress, which EPA does not have.

   

AGA’s full response to the NGO’s petition can be found here.   AGA will continue to closely monitor developments related to this petition and will engage with EPA, as necessary. 

Please do not hesitate to contact AGA’s Deputy General Counsel, Tim Parr ([email protected]) or Chief Regulatory Counsel, Pam Lacey ([email protected] )  with any questions.  

 

On Tuesday, DOE held a webinar to discuss the “model” used by the department to justify the proposed 95% AFUE minimum efficiency requirement for residential non-weatherized and manufactured home furnaces that requires condensing technology and would eliminate the manufacturing of non-condensing type furnaces.  The webinar was in response to a request submitted by  AGA, APGA, NPGA, Spire Inc., Spire Missouri Inc., Spire Alabama Inc., and Atmos Energy  based on concerns with being able to replicate the results that the DOE had posted in its Technical Support Documents (TSD’s) and Life-Cycle Cost spread sheets supporting the proposed minimum efficiency level of 95% AFUE. As reported in last week’s BECS Update,  AGA, APGA, NPGA, Spire Inc., Spire Missouri Inc., Spire Alabama Inc., and Atmos Energy  filed the attached, August 29^th request of a list of topics that we requested be considered at the webinar and allocating adequate time for consideration for those topics.  The topics are designed to obtain additional information, identify errors that have come to light in the model and seeks clarification on the model that was used to justify the DOE proposal for a 95% AFUE requirement.  Unfortunately, DOE limited the discussion at the Tuesday webinar primarily to the actual operation of the model with very limited discussion from DOE staff and consultants, to address topics regarding the LCC model on the specific questions and issues requested  in the August 29th correspondence. To help ensure that the DOE will address and respond to the questions and topics of concern, AGA, APGA, NPGA, Spire Inc., Spire Missouri Inc., Spire Alabama Inc., and Atmos Energy are preparing correspondence to DOE requesting that they do so in a meaningful manner prior to issuance of a final rule, hopefully by a public forum,  such that the responses  are  consistent with DOE’s Process Rule, which pledges DOE will “use qualitative and quantitative analytical methods that are fully documented for the public and that produce results that can be explained and reproduced, so that the analytical underpinnings for policy decisions on standards are as sound and well-accepted as possible.

Please don’t hesitate to contact with us if you have any questions on the DOE proposed consumer furnace rulemaking.