[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 50 (Monday, March 16, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13671-13753]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03733]

Vol. 80

Monday,

No. 50

March 16, 2015

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Part 60

Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New
Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 80 , No. 50 / Monday, March 16, 2015 / Rules
and Regulations

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734; FRL-9920-50-OAR]
RIN 2060-AP93

Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters, New
Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to revise the Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood
Heaters and to add a new subpart: Standards of Performance for New
Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces. Today's rule is
authorized by section 111(b) and section 114 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA). The EPA is not finalizing, at this time, the proposed Standards
of Performance for New Residential Masonry Heaters in order to allow
additional time for the Masonry Heater Association to finish their
efforts to develop revised test methods, an emissions calculation
program and an alternative dimensioning standard. This final rule
achieves several objectives for new residential wood heaters, including
applying updated emission limits that reflect the current best systems
of emission reduction; eliminating exemptions over a broad suite of
residential wood combustion devices; strengthening test methods as
appropriate; and streamlining the certification process. Residential
wood smoke emissions are a significant national air pollution problem
and human health issue. These emissions occur in many neighborhoods
across the country, including minority and low-income neighborhoods,
and impact people in their homes. To the extent that children and other
sensitive populations are particularly susceptible to asthma, and that
minority populations and low-income populations are more vulnerable,
this rule will significantly reduce the pollutants that adversely
affect their health. On an economic basis, the public benefits of this
rule vastly outweigh the costs, with every dollar in additional cost
producing more than $100 in public benefit. This final action does not
include any requirements for heaters solely fired by gas, oil or coal.
In addition, it does not include any new requirements associated with
appliances that are already in use. The EPA continues to strongly
encourage state, local, tribal, industry and consumer efforts to change
out (replace) older heaters with newer, cleaner, more efficient
heaters. Additional information is on the EPA Burn Wise Web site at
www.epa.gov/burnwise. Also, we encourage state, local, and tribal
authorities to develop site-specific installation and operating
requirements to help ensure healthy air for all.

DATES: This final action is effective on May 15, 2015. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule
is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of May 15, 2015.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734. All documents in the docket are
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available (e.g., confidential
business information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute). Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center,
Public Reading Room, EPA WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Air Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this final rule
for new residential wood heaters, hydronic heaters, and forced-air
furnaces, contact Ms. Amanda Aldridge, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, Outreach and Information Division (C304-05), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number<PHONE_NUMBER>;
email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and
abbreviations are used in this document:

[mu]g/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials (now ASTM
International)
BSER Best System of Emissions Reduction
BTU British Thermal Unit
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CDX Central Data Exchange
CEDRI Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CSA Canadian Standards Association
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERT Electronic Reporting Tool
EJ Environmental Justice
FR Federal Register
g/hr Grams per hour
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant(s)
HPBA Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association
IBR Incorporation by Reference
ICR Information Collection Request
ISO International Organization for Standardization
lb Pound(s)
lb/hr Pound(s) per hour
lb/mmBtu Pound(s) per million British Thermal Units
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NESCAUM Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
NSPS New Source Performance Standards
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
NYSERDA New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (U.S. EPA)
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (U.S. EPA)
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon
PFI Pellet Fuels Institute
POM Polycyclic Organic Matter
PM Particulate Matter
PM2.5 Particulate Matter with an aerodynamic diameter of
2.5 micrometers or less (``fine particles'')
ppm Parts per million
R&D Research and Development
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RTC Response to Comments
U.S. United States
U.S.C. United States Code
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
vs. Versus
VCS Voluntary Consensus Standard(s)
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
yr Year(s)

    Response to Comments (RTC) Document. On February 3, 2014 (79 FR
6330), the EPA proposed revisions to the Standards of Performance for
New Residential Wood Heaters based on the EPA's review of these
standards. On July 1, 2014 (79 FR 37259), the EPA published a Notice of
Data Availability (NODA) that solicited comment on additional
information regarding residential wood heater testing using cord wood
and emissions by burn rate excerpted from EPA certification test
reports. In this action, we are finalizing

revisions to the rule, as well as Standards of Performance for New
Residential Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces. A document
summarizing the public comments on the proposal and the NODA and the
EPA responses to the significant comments is available in Docket ID
Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734. A summary of responses to the major
comments is in section V.
    Organization of this Document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. General Information
    A. Executive Summary
    B. Does this action apply to me?
    C. Where can I get a copy of this document?
    D. Judicial Review
II. Background Information for This Final Rule
    A. What is the NSPS program?
    B. Why is residential wood smoke a concern?
III. Summary of the Final Rule
    A. General
    B. Room Heaters (Revised Subpart AAA)
    C. Central Heaters: Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces
(Subpart QQQQ)
IV. Summary of Significant Changes Following Proposal
    A. Best Systems of Emission Reduction/Particulate Emission
Limits
    B. Appliance Certification, Laboratory Accreditation and Third-
Party Certification
    C. Cost and Economic Impacts
    D. Test Methods and Compliance Certification Calculation
Procedures
    E. Sell-Through of Inventory
    F. Appeals and Administrative Hearing Procedures
V. Summary of Responses to Major Comments
    A. BSER and Particulate Emission Limits for Room Heaters
(Revised Subpart AAA)
    B. BSER and Particulate Emission Limits for Central Heaters
(Subpart QQQQ)
    C. Appliance Certification
    D. Laboratory Accreditation, Third-Party Certification and
Administrative Approval Process
    E. Costs and Economic Impacts
    F. Test Methods
    G. Health Effects and Benefits
VI. Summary of Environmental, Cost, Economic, and Non-Air Health and
Energy Impacts
    A. What are the air quality impacts?
    B. What are the benefits?
    C. What are the cost impacts?
    D. What are the economic impacts?
    E. What are the non-air quality health and energy impacts?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and 1 CFR
Part 51
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. General Information

A. Executive Summary

    The purpose of this action is to finalize amendments to the
Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters (40 CFR part
60, subpart AAA) and to add one new subpart: Standards of Performance
for New Residential Hydronic Heatersand Forced-Air Furnaces (40 CFR
part 60, subpart QQQQ). This final action was developed following a CAA
section 111(b)(1)(B) review of the 1988 promulgated subpart AAA (53 FR
5860, February 26, 1988), i.e., the 1988 New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS). Section 111 requires the EPA to establish standards
based on best systems of emission reduction (BSER). Section 111(b)
requires emission standards for affected sources and section
111(h)(2)(B) allows the EPA to establish work practices and operational
standards or combinations of standards in certain cases, such as when
testing is impractical due to technological or economic limitations.
The current body of evidence strongly supports revision of the 1988
NSPS to capture the technology improvements and enhanced performance of
such units since 1988 and to expand the applicability of these
standards to include additional wood-burning residential heating
devices that are available today. Section 111 requires the EPA to
consider costs and economic impacts. The potential impact on this
industry that is comprised of over 90 percent small businesses was a
concern to the EPA, and we have minimized these potential impacts to
the degree possible while still achieving significant emission
reductions. For example, we have incorporated stepped (phased) emission
limits and streamlined certification procedures to ease the transition.
The health benefits associated with these regulations are substantially
greater than the cost to manufacture cleaner, lower-emitting
appliances. In fact, the public health benefits of this rule outweigh
the costs by more than 100 times.
    As discussed in the preamble to the February 3, 2014, proposed
rule, particulate pollution from wood heaters is a significant national
air pollution problem and human health issue. Residential wood smoke
contains fine particles with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers
or less (PM2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic
compounds (VOC), toxic air pollutants (e.g., benzene and formaldehyde),
and climate-forcing emissions (e.g., methane and black carbon).
Residential wood smoke can contribute to unhealthy levels of
PM2.5 in many neighborhoods nationwide, including in
minority and low-income neighborhoods, and impact people in their
homes. To the extent that children and other sensitive populations are
particularly susceptible to asthma, and that minority populations and
low-income populations are more vulnerable to the effects of air
pollution, this rule will significantly reduce the pollutants that
adversely affect their health.
    Populations that are at greater risk for experiencing health
effects related to fine particle exposures include older adults,
children and individuals with pre-existing heart or lung disease. Each
year, smoke from wood heaters produces hundreds of thousands of tons of
fine particles throughout the country--mostly during the winter months.
Nationally, residential wood combustion accounts for 44 percent of
total stationary and mobile polycyclic organic matter (POM) emissions,
which account for nearly 25 percent of all area source air toxics
cancer risks and 15 percent of noncancer respiratory effects.\1\
Residential wood smoke causes many counties in the U.S. to either
exceed the EPA's health-based national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) for fine particles or places them on the cusp of exceeding
those standards.\2\ To the degree that older, higher emitting, less
efficient wood heaters are replaced by newer heaters that meet the
requirements of this rule, these requirements for cleaner new stoves
will result in substantial reductions in emissions, and thus in
exposure, producing reduced health impacts. A summary of the estimated
health

benefits is shown in Table 1 below. More details are in the final
Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) in the docket for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Strategies for Reducing Residential Wood Smoke. EPA-456/B-
13-001, March 2013. Prepared by Outreach and Information Division,
Air Quality Planning Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711. pp. 4-5.
    \2\ Air Quality and Emissions Data; Supporting Information for
the Residential Wood Heater New Source Performance Standard, August
14, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with Executive Order 13563, ``Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review,'' we have estimated the cost and benefits of the
final rule. The estimated annual net benefits at a 3-percent discount
rate are $3.4 billion to $7.6 billion, and $3.1 billion to $6.9 billion
at a 7-percent discount rate in 2013 dollars. The net benefits estimate
reflects 8,269 tons of PM2.5 emission reductions per year,
and a total annualized cost of $45.7 million, producing an unusually
large net benefit for this rule of more than 100 times the costs, and
even greater net benefits coming from the new rule applied to single
burn rate stoves. We estimate that this rule will result in 360
(Krewski, et. al., 2009) or 810 (Lepeule, et. al., 2012) avoided
premature deaths per year. The non-monetized benefits include 46,000
tons of CO reductions per year; 9,300 tons of VOC reductions per year;
reduced exposure to hazardous air pollutants (HAP), including
formaldehyde, benzene, and polycyclic organic matter (POM); reduced
climate effects due to reduced black carbon emissions and reduced
greenhouse gases emissions; reduced ecosystem effects; and reduced
visibility impairments. Table 1 is a summary of the results of the
analysis per type of residential wood heater. We have provided
estimates reflecting average annual impacts for the 2015 to 2020
timeframe, which are the implementation years analyzed in the RIA for
this final rule.

 Table 1--Summary of Compliance Costs, Monetized Benefits, and Monetized Net Benefits (2013 dollars) by Type of
                              Heater in the 2015-2020 Time Frame for the Final Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Total
                                                  annualized     Monetized benefits ($    Monetized net benefits
                Type of heater                     costs ($         millions) \a b\            ($ millions)
                                                   millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wood stoves...................................           $3.02               $14 to $31               $11 to $28
Single burn rate stoves.......................            0.87               280 to 630               280 to 630
Pellet stoves.................................            1.52                   2 to 5                   0 to 3
Forced-air furnaces...........................           15.36           1,700 to 3,700           1,700 to 3,700
Hydronic heating systems......................           24.88           1,400 to 3,200           1,400 to 3,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ All estimates are for the time frame from 2015 to 2020 inclusive. These results include units anticipated to
  come online and the lowest cost disposal assumption. Total annualized costs shown in this table are estimated
  at a 7-percent interest rate to be consistent with guidance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
  Total annualized costs are also estimated at a 3 percent interest rate for each source category to be
  consistent with OMB guidance, and these costs are about 13 percent less than the total annualized costs
  presented in this table. These costs are presented in the RIA and in the cost memoranda for this final rule.
  The monetized net benefits with total annualized costs at a 3 percent interest rate are minimally different
  than those calculated with total annualized costs at a 7 percent interest rate.
\b\ Total monetized benefits are estimated at a 3-percent discount rate. The total monetized benefits reflect
  the human health benefits associated with reducing exposure to PM2.5 through reductions of directly emitted
  PM2.5. It is important to note that the monetized benefits include many but not all health effects associated
  with PM2.5 exposure. Benefits are shown as a range from Krewski et al. (2009) to Lepeule et al. (2012). These
  models assume that all fine particles, regardless of their chemical composition, are equally potent in causing
  premature mortality because the scientific evidence is not yet sufficient to allow differentiation of effect
  estimates by particle type. Because these estimates were generated using benefit-per-ton estimates, we do not
  break down the total monetized benefits into specific components.

B. Does this action apply to me?

    Table 2 of this preamble lists categories and entities that will be
regulated by this action. Table 2 is not intended to be exhaustive, but
rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this final action. These standards, and any changes
considered in this rulemaking, are directly applicable to sources as a
federal program. Other federal, state, local and tribal government
entities are not directly affected by this final action. States may
decide to request partial delegation of enforcement of some parts of
this rule, e.g., ensuring permanent labels are on new heaters in retail
stores.

                       Table 2--Regulated Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Examples of
            Category                NAICS \a\ code    regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential Wood Heating........  333414--Heating     Manufacturers,
                                   Equipment (except   owners and
                                   Warm Air            operators of wood
                                   Furnaces)           heaters, pellet
                                   Manufacturing.      heaters/stoves
                                                       and hydronic
                                                       heaters.
                                  333415--Air-        Manufacturers,
                                   Conditioning and    owners and
                                   Warm Air Heating    operators of
                                   Equipment and       forced-air
                                   Commercial and      furnaces.
                                   Industrial
                                   Refrigeration
                                   Equipment
                                   Manufacturing.
Testing Laboratories............  541380--Testing     Testers of wood
                                   Laboratories        heaters, pellet
                                   (except Medical,    heaters/stoves
                                   Veterinary).        and hydronic
                                                       heaters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System

C. Where can I get a copy of this document?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this final rule, is posted at the following address: http://www2.epa.gov/residential-wood-heaters.

D. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review
of these final rules is available only by filing a petition for review
in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit by May 15, 2015. Under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the
requirements established by these final rules may not be challenged
separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to
enforce these requirements. Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further
provides that ``[o]nly an objection to a rule or procedure which was
raised with reasonable specificity

during the period for public comment (including any public hearing) may
be raised during judicial review.'' This section also provides a
mechanism for us to convene a proceeding for reconsideration, ``[i]f
the person raising an objection can demonstrate to the EPA that it was
impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for public
comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period
for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review)
and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the
rule.'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration to us should
submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the person(s) listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate
General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General
Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.

II. Background Information for This Final Rule

A. What is the NSPS program?

    Under section 111 of the CAA, ``Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources,'' the EPA lists categories of sources that, in the
EPA's judgment, cause or contribute significantly to air pollution,
which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or
welfare pursuant to section 111(b)(1)(A). Section 111(b)(1)(B) requires
the EPA to promulgate federal standards of performance for new sources
within those categories. At the time the EPA establishes standards for
a source category, the EPA prepares an analysis of the potential costs
and benefits associated with the NSPS, which also includes the benefits
from reductions in pollutants for which the standards do not set
limits. For example, emission reductions associated with the
requirements of this final rule will generate health benefits by
reducing emissions of PM2.5, other criteria pollutants, such
as CO, and non-criteria HAP. In addition, section 111(h) authorizes the
EPA to promulgate design, equipment, work practice, operational, or
combinations of standards to reflect the best systems of continuous
emission reduction. The NSPS established under section 111(b)(1)(B) do
not establish standards of performance for existing sources. However,
numerous states have acted independently of this rule to address new
and existing sources as part of state implementation plan (SIP)
measures necessary to ensure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
    The level of control prescribed by section 111 of the CAA is BSER.
In analyzing BSER, the EPA uses available information and considers the
emissions reductions and incremental costs for different systems
available at reasonable cost. The residential wood heaters source
category is different from most NSPS source categories in that it is
for mass-produced residential consumer products. Thus, important
elements in determining BSER include the significant costs and
environmental impacts of delaying production while models with those
systems are designed, tested, field evaluated and certified. Section
111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA requires that the standards be effective upon
the effective date of the NSPS. As noted earlier and discussed more
fully later in this preamble, the stepped (phased) approach for
residential wood stoves/heaters, hydronic heaters and forced-air
furnaces that the EPA is promulgating considers these factors. That is,
for this rulemaking, the EPA has determined the appropriate emission
limits and compliance deadlines that together are representative of
BSER.
    Section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA requires the EPA to periodically
(every 8 years) review an NSPS unless it determines ``that such review
is not appropriate in light of readily available information on the
efficacy of such standard.'' In making revisions to an NSPS, the EPA
will revise the standards of performance to reflect improvements in
methods for reducing emissions, including consideration of what
emissions limitation is achieved in practice. Numerous stakeholders
have stated that the current body of evidence strongly justifies the
revision of the current residential wood heaters NSPS to capture the
improvements in performance of such units since 1988 and to expand the
applicability of this NSPS to include additional residential wood-
burning heating devices that are available today. Some stakeholders
have suggested that the EPA also develop additional NSPS to regulate
residential heating devices that burn fuels other than or in addition
to wood, e.g., coal, corn or grass. This final rule does not include
any new federal requirements for heaters that solely burn fuels other
than wood. However, the EPA may consider the need for such requirements
during the next review.

B. Why is residential wood smoke a concern?

    There is widespread recognition of the health impacts of particle
pollution, to which wood smoke is a contributing factor in many areas.
Wood smoke contains a mixture of fine particles and toxic air
pollutants (e.g., benzene and formaldehyde) that can cause burning
eyes, runny nose, and bronchitis. Exposure to fine particles has been
associated with a range of health effects, including aggravation of
heart or respiratory problems, changes in lung function and increased
respiratory symptoms, as well as premature death. Populations that are
at greater risk for experiencing health effects related to fine
particle exposures include older adults, children and individuals with
pre-existing heart or lung disease. Each year smoke from wood heaters
contributes hundreds of thousands of tons of fine particles throughout
the country--mostly during the winter months. Nationally, residential
wood combustion accounts for 44 percent of total stationary and mobile
polycyclic organic matter (POM) emissions, which accounts for nearly 25
percent of all area source air toxics cancer risks and 15 percent of
noncancer respiratory effects.\3\ Residential wood smoke causes many
counties in the U.S. to either exceed the EPA's health-based NAAQS for
fine particles or places them on the cusp of exceeding those standards.
For example, in places such as Keene, New Hampshire; Sacramento,
California; Tacoma, Washington; and Fairbanks, Alaska; wood combustion
can contribute over 50 percent of daily wintertime fine particle
emissions.\4\ The concerns are heightened because wood stoves, hydronic
heaters, and other heaters are often used around the clock in many
residential areas. To the degree that older, dirtier, less efficient
wood heaters are replaced by newer heaters that meet or exceed the
requirements of this rule, the emissions would be reduced, and thus
exposure as well, and fewer health impacts should occur. The health and
air quality concerns associated with particle pollution and the effects
of wood smoke are discussed in detail in the original listing of
residential wood heaters under section 111(b) in the February 18, 1987,
Federal

Register, the original subpart AAA proposal in the February 18, 1987,
Federal Register, the original subpart AAA promulgation in the February
26, 1988, Federal Register, the February 3, 2014 proposal of revisions
to subpart AAA and the addition of subpart QQQQ and numerous other
documents in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Strategies for Reducing Residential Wood Smoke. EPA-456/B-
13-001, March 2013. Prepared by Outreach and Information Division,
Air Quality Planning Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711. pp. 4-5.
    \4\ Air Quality and Emissions Data; Supporting Information for
the Residential Wood Heater New Source Performance Standard, August
14, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the February 3, 2014, proposed
rule, and, in the Executive Summary (section I.A) of this preamble,
particulate pollution from wood heaters is a significant national air
pollution problem and human health issue. To the degree that older,
higher emitting, less efficient wood heaters are replaced by newer
heaters that meet the requirements of this rule, setting these
requirements for cleaner new stoves will result in substantial
reductions in exposure and reduced health impacts.

III. Summary of the Final Rule

A. General

    In response to the results of the review of the 1988 NSPS and in
response to comments on the proposed rule and the NODA, the EPA is
amending 40 CFR part 60, subpart AAA, Standards of Performance for New
Residential Wood Heaters, and adding a new subpart QQQQ, Standards of
Performance for New Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces. Subpart
AAA applies to room heaters. This final rule broadens the applicability
of wood heaters subject to the 1988 NSPS beyond adjustable burn rate
wood heaters (the focus of the 1988 regulation) to specifically include
all single burn rate wood heaters/stoves/appliances and pellet heaters/
stoves/appliances and all other residential wood heaters except those
specifically exempt in the rule, e.g., hydronic heaters and forced air
furnaces regulated by subpart QQQQ. (Some pellet heaters/stoves/
appliances were not affected by the 1988 regulation.) This preamble
uses the following terms interchangeably for appliances subject to
subpart AAA: wood heaters, stoves and heaters/stoves/appliances.
Subpart QQQQ applies to two specific types of wood heaters: hydronic
heaters and forced-air furnaces plus any other wood-burning affected
appliance that meets the definition of central heater. This preamble
uses the terms forced-air furnaces and warm-air furnaces
interchangeably for such heaters/furnaces/appliances affected by
subpart QQQQ. Wood heaters, hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces
manufactured after the effective date of this final rule will be
required to meet PM emission limits.
    This final rule does not include any federal emission limitations
that would apply to heaters fueled solely by gas, oil or coal. In
addition, this final rule does not include any new federal requirements
associated with wood heaters or other wood-burning appliances that are
already in use in people's homes. The EPA continues to encourage state,
local, tribal, manufacturer, retailer and consumer efforts to change
out (replace) older heaters with newer, cleaner, more efficient
heaters. Also, we continue to encourage state, local, and tribal
authorities to develop site-specific installation and operating
requirements and oversight to help ensure healthy air for all.
    For this final action, the effective date is May 15, 2015 to allow
for Congressional Review under the Congressional Review Act (CRA).
Under the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(3), the effective dates of all ``major''
rules are delayed for 60 calendar days after they are submitted to
Congress or after they are published in the Federal Register, whichever
date is later. This final action is a ``major'' rule within the meaning
of the CRA.
    Section IV summarizes the changes to the proposed rule reflected in
the final rule, and section V provides a summary of the major comments
received and our responses.
1. Certification Testing and Compliance
    As with the 1988 NSPS, because of concern regarding potential
negative impacts on small businesses and potential certification
delays, this revised subpart AAA for wood heaters/stoves and new
subpart QQQQ for hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces require
manufacturers to participate in a certification program that tests a
representative heater per model line rather than testing every heater.
If the representative heater meets the applicable emission limits
contained in this rule, the entire model line may be certified.
Individual heaters within the model line are still subject to all other
requirements, including labeling and operational requirements.
Manufacturers are required to have quality assurance programs to ensure
that all heaters within the model line conform to the certified design
and meet the applicable emission limits. The EPA will continue to have
the authority to conduct audits to ensure compliance.
    Additional requirements apply to entities other than the
manufacturer. Wholesalers and retailers are also subject to the limits
on sales of non-certified affected heaters. Wood heater test
laboratories and certifying entities are subject to quality assurance
and reporting requirements. This final rule for subpart AAA and subpart
QQQQ requires the proper burn practices that have applied to the owner
or operator of a wood heating appliance regulated under subpart AAA
since 1988. In addition, new pellet heater/stove owners and operators
will be required to use only the grades of pellet fuels and wood chips
that are included in the owner's manual based on the heater/stove
certification tests. In this final rule, we are revising the original
1988 enforcement and audit provisions to reflect changes in industry
practices and development of new tools and procedures. We are also
taking final action to improve the previous test methods as well as
adding new test methods. More details are in sections IV.D and V.
2. Stepped Compliance Approach
    The 1988 NSPS addressed some of the specific characteristics of
this source category by developing a stepped compliance approach that
provided manufacturers a two-phased implementation of emission limits.
Considering that over 90 percent of the manufacturers and retailers are
small businesses, we have included this approach in the revised subpart
AAA and new subpart QQQQ in order to allow manufacturers lead time to
develop, test, field evaluate and certify current technologies across
their consumer product lines to meet Step 2 emission limits and in most
cases to allow retailers to sell-through inventory. Upon the effective
date of this final rule, all new residential wood heaters subject to
subparts AAA and QQQQ will be required to meet the NSPS standards. The
standards are phased from immediate requirements on the effective date
to Step 2 emission limits five years later. The specific emission
limits and dates for subparts AAA and QQQQ are shown in Table 3 and
Table 4, respectively. To further ease the transition on small
businesses, the EPA will not require new testing of heaters that have
current certificates of compliance under the 1988 NSPS that show they
meet the Step 1 emission levels. Those certificates are automatically
extended beyond their current expiration date until the compliance
deadline for the Step 2 emission limits. Also, this final rule
automatically deems certified hydronic heaters that have been qualified
at the Step 1 emission level (or better) under the EPA voluntary
partnership program for hydronic heaters or forced-air furnaces that
have been independently certified at the Step 1 emission level (or

better) or under Canadian Standards Association B415.1-10.
3. NSPS Labels
    The final rule requires that each room heater under subpart AAA and
central heater under subpart QQQQ be equipped with a permanent label
meeting the applicable requirements in Sec.  60.536 and Sec.  60.5478,
respectively. The permanent label must include identifying information
for the unit and its compliance certification status. The permanent
label must be installed so that it is readily visible both before and
after the unit is installed. This requirement is needed to assist
state, local and tribal officials in determining if a unit complies
with state, local and tribal rules and in determining eligibility for
any future change out (replacement) programs. Note that ``readily
visible'' does not mean under the body of freestanding stove but it
does allow an easily removable decorative fa[ccedil]ade to cover the
label.
    In the 1988 NSPS, temporary labels (e.g., hangtags) were required
for wood heaters that are subject to the standards, as well as ones
that are not (e.g., coal heaters/stoves). These temporary labels were
intended to assist consumers in comparing different appliance models
and to inform the consumer about the importance of proper operation and
maintenance. We proposed to remove the requirement for temporary
labels, and we requested comment. After reviewing the comments
received, the EPA now concludes that these temporary labels are most
valuable if they assist purchasers in identifying the cleanest and most
efficient heaters. Therefore, in this final rule the EPA is allowing
(voluntary) a temporary NSPS label (hangtag) for each adjustable burn
rate heater, single-burn rate heater, pellet heater/stove, hydronic
heater and forced-air furnace sold at retail that meets the Step 2
emission limits before the Step 2 compliance date. This temporary label
option will end upon the Step 2 compliance date.
    In addition, we are providing an alternative compliance option for
manufacturers who choose to demonstrate compliance with Step 2 emission
limits using cord wood testing rather than the standardized crib wood
testing, currently used for the primary compliance option for
appliances regulated under subpart AAA and for hydronic heaters under
subpart QQQQ. As discussed in the preamble to the February 3, 2014,
proposed rule, crib wood is a specified configuration and quality of
dimensional lumber and spacers that improves the repeatability of the
test method. Cord wood is a different specified configuration and
quality of wood that more closely resembles what a typical homeowner
would use. Cord wood testing is a better measure of how the heaters
will perform on the type of fuel commonly used in homes.
    Each of these models would be equipped with both a permanent label
and the voluntary option of a special temporary label (hangtag)
informing consumers that these wood heaters were tested and certified
when burning cord wood. The specific emission limits are discussed in
sections III.B and III.C.
4. New Residential Masonry Heaters (Proposed Subpart RRRR)
    The EPA is not taking final action at this time on proposed subpart
RRRR for new residential masonry heaters. Our reason for taking no
action at this time is to allow additional time for the Masonry Heater
Association (MHA) to finish their efforts to develop revised test
methods, an emissions calculation program and an alternative
dimensioning standard. The MHA believes these efforts are critical
because most masonry heaters are custom built on-site and testing each
custom model would be difficult. The nationwide emission impacts of
delaying regulating subpart RRRR are small relative to the impacts of
regulating subparts AAA and QQQQ. Fewer than approximately 1,000
masonry heaters are manufactured each year and a total of less than 10
tons per year of PM2.5 are currently emitted. In comparison,
new wood burning appliances covered by subparts AAA and QQQQ are
estimated to number more than 200,000 (2015) and currently emit more
than 11,000 tons per year of PM2.5.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Memo to USEPA from EC/R, Inc. Estimated Emissions from Wood
Heaters. January 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Room Heaters (Revised Subpart AAA)

1. Applicability
    After the effective date, new heaters will be required to meet the
updated standards. The new standards apply not only to adjustable burn
rate wood heaters (the focus of the original regulation), but also to
single burn rate wood heaters/stoves, pellet heaters/stoves, and any
other affected appliance as defined in revised subpart AAA as a ``room
heater.'' Subpart AAA, as amended, does not apply to new residential
hydronic heaters or new residential forced-air furnaces because they
are subject to their own subpart. The revised subpart AAA does not
apply to fireplaces as defined in Subpart AAA. This final rule tightens
the definition for ``cook stoves'' and adds definitions for ``camp
stoves'' and ``traditional Native American bake ovens'' to clarify that
they are not subject to the standard other than appropriate labeling
for cook stoves and camp stoves and no requirements for traditional
Native American bake ovens. Finally, the revised subpart AAA clarifies
that the emission limits apply only to wood-burning devices (i.e., not
to devices that only burn fuels other than wood, e.g., gas, oil or
coal).
2. Automatic EPA Certification for Currently Certified Heaters/Stoves
That Meet the Step 1 Emission Levels
    In this final rule we make clear that those heaters/stoves with EPA
certifications under the 1988 NSPS that show compliance with the Step 1
emission levels will be automatically deemed as certified to meet the
Step 1 emission limits under this final rule until the Step 2
compliance date. No separate certification will be required. Over 85
percent of heaters/stoves being sold today already meet the Step 1
emission limit. This automatic certification will avoid unnecessary
economic impacts on those manufacturers (over 90 percent are small
businesses) who can then focus their efforts on developing a full range
of cleaner models that meet Step 2 emission levels. This measure should
also help avoid potential delays at laboratories conducting
certification testing for heaters newly subject to the NSPS.
3. Two-Step Compliance Approach
    We are promulgating a two-step compliance approach that will apply
to all new adjustable burn rate wood heaters, single burn rate wood
heaters and pellet heaters/stoves. Under this approach, Step 1 emission
limits for these sources will apply to each source manufactured on or
after the effective date of the final rule or sold at retail on or
after December 31, 2015. The approximately 8-month additional time for
the retail sale requirement will allow retailers to sell their
inventories of heaters that do not comply with the Step 1 emission
limits. Step 2 emission limits for these sources will apply to each
heater manufactured or sold at retail on or after the date 5 years
after the effective date of the final rule. We are not including the
alternative three-step emission limit compliance approach for which we
also requested comment in the proposal. The comments overwhelmingly
indicated that the three-step emission limit approach was inferior not
only environmentally but also economically because it would, in effect,
require

many small manufacturers to engage in two rounds of research and
development (R&D) rather than one in order to obtain the same eventual
endpoint.
    Table 3 summarizes the PM emissions limits that apply to each wood
heater under this two-step approach. Note that the emissions standards
are ``as measured'' by the test methods specified in the rule and are
labeled as PM although the PM is essentially all PM2.5. This
avoids the potential extra testing costs of measuring PM2.5
specifically.

                Table 3--Subpart AAA PM Emissions Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Phases/steps                      PM emissions limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Upon the effective date of final    4.5 g/hr.
 rule.
Step 2: 5 years after the effective date    2.0 g/hr.
 of the final rule.
Step 2: Cord wood alternative compliance    2.5 g/hr.
 option.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are allowing an alternative compliance option for manufacturers
who choose to certify using cord wood (rather than crib wood) to meet
the Step 2 limits. (As discussed earlier in this preamble, crib wood is
a specified configuration and quality of dimensional lumber and spacers
that improves the repeatability of the test method. Cord wood is a
different specified configuration and quality of wood that more closely
resembles what a typical homeowner would use.) Special permanent and
temporary labels for room heaters certified with cord wood would
specify that they meet a PM emissions limit of 2.5 g/hr. The bases for
the crib wood primary emission limit of 2.0 g/hr and the cord wood
alternative compliance option emission level of 2.5 g/hr for wood
stoves, as well as the limited environmental impact of the differences
in these levels, are discussed in section V.A BSER and Particulate
Emission Limits for Room Heaters (revised subpart AAA).
    The proposal would have required cord wood testing for all Step 2
compliance certifications. Cord wood testing is a better measure of how
stoves actually perform in home use; however, we are concerned that
many manufacturers (over 90 percent are small businesses) do not yet
have experience with designing their stoves to perform well with cord
wood testing. Some manufacturers may not be ready for cord wood testing
by the Step 2 compliance date and that would result in unreasonable
economic impacts. Allowing the cord wood alternative compliance option
acknowledges the efforts of the industry leaders and encourages others
to follow their example.
    The revised subpart AAA does not include a compliance extension for
small volume manufacturers. An extension for manufacture of adjustable
burn rate heaters is not necessary because over 85 percent of these
appliances already comply with Step 1 emission levels.
    We are making a single determination of BSER for catalytic,
noncatalytic and hybrid heater systems so as not to restrict open
market competition. As in the 1988 NSPS, we are requiring manufacturers
to provide warranties on the catalysts, prohibit the operation of
catalytic heaters/stoves without a catalyst and require operation
according to the owner's manual. In addition, we are requiring
manufacturers to provide warranties for noncatalytic and hybrid
heaters/stoves and require operation according to the owner's manual.
    As discussed at proposal, we considered requiring efficiency
standards (heat output divided by fuel input) to ensure that stoves are
efficient and burn no more wood than necessary for the heat demand so
that the consumers can save money on fuel and so that the emissions are
lower. We did not propose an efficiency standard because we did not
have sufficient data, but the final rule uses our authority under
section 114 to require the manufacturer to submit third-party
efficiency test data, submit the test data report to the EPA and post
the results on the manufacturer's Web site. Also, we will include this
submitted information on the EPA Web site. This will help consumers to
make informed choices to reduce fuel costs and emissions now and
provide data for us to consider for future rulemaking.
4. Emission Testing, Reporting and Certification
    We are requiring emission testing, reporting and certification
based on crib wood to demonstrate compliance with Step 1 and Step 2
emissions limits. As discussed in the preamble to the February 3, 2014,
proposed rule, ``crib wood'' is a specified configuration and quality
of dimensional lumber and spacers that improves the repeatability of
the test method. In this final rule, we are also establishing an
alternative compliance option that allows manufacturers to use cord
wood for the certification tests. ``Cord wood'' is a different
specified configuration and quality of wood that more closely resembles
what a typical homeowner would use.
    Commenters overwhelmingly agreed that tuning heaters for crib wood
certification tests often results in poorer performance in homes. Based
on the existence of a viable draft cord wood test method and the
expectation at proposal that the ASTM International (formerly known as
American Society of Testing and Materials) test methods for cord wood
would be complete soon after the NSPS proposal and that significant
testing of wood heaters re-tuned to perform well on cord wood would
occur before promulgation of this final rule, the EPA proposed to
require testing only with cord wood for compliance with Step 2
emissions limits. We still encourage manufacturers to design wood
heaters that best represent in-home performance on cord wood that
consumers use as soon as possible. However, the ASTM cord wood test
methods have not been completed and only limited testing using the
draft methods has occurred.
    We received numerous comments from noncatalytic stove manufacturers
and laboratories and some states with concerns about when the cord wood
test methods would be ready and how quickly noncatalytic stoves could
be redesigned to perform well with cord wood certification testing that
we proposed for Step 2, i.e., 5 years after the effective date. As
discussed in the NODA, as of May 2014, we had test data for three
catalytic or hybrid wood heaters/stoves that performed very well on
cord wood. However, considering all of the above, we have determined
that we do not have sufficient data at this time to support a
regulatory requirement for cord wood testing.
    We expect that many manufacturers will choose the alternative cord
wood compliance testing option so that consumers will have more
opportunities to purchase stoves that are tuned for in-home use. We
will consider alternative cord wood test method requests on a case-by-
case basis until we are convinced that improved test methods have been
sufficiently demonstrated that they can be relied upon for regulatory
purposes. For now, we will be receptive to alternative test method
requests that use the current ASTM draft method. Also, we will be
receptive to other requests that are sufficiently demonstrated, ideally
using the EPA Method 301 validation procedures. Additionally, we expect
that within the next few years we will receive enough cord wood test
data for the EPA to establish revised certification requirements based
on cord wood testing.
    The final rule requires that pellets for the certification tests be
only those that

have been graded under a licensing agreement with a third-party
organization and meet the minimum quality specifications in Sec.
60.532. Commenters indicated that several organizations are currently
available and others are planned, for example, the Pellet Fuels
Institute (PFI), ENplus and CANplus. Details of the PFI program are
available at http://pelletheat.org/pfi-standards/pfi-standards-program/. Details of the ENplus program are at http://www.enplus-pellets.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/ENplus-Handbook-2.0.pdf. Details
of the CANplus program are at http://controlunion.ca/fileupload/CA/Certifications/ENplusCANplus/CANplus_handbook_v2-0.pdf. Manufacturers'
data show that pellet fuel quality assurance is necessary to ensure
that the appliances operate properly and meet the certified emission
limits.
    At this time, we lack sufficient data to issue a CO emissions limit
in today's final rule. However, this final rule uses our authority
under section 114 to require manufacturers to determine CO emissions
during the compliance tests (as is typically done already), report
those results to the EPA and include those results on the
manufacturer's Web site, so that data will be available to consumers,
and to the EPA and states for CO NAAQS compliance implementation plan
considerations and future wood heater rulemakings. We intend to include
context and consumer-friendly summaries of the submitted CO emissions
data on the EPA Burn Wise Web site also.
    Like the 1988 subpart AAA, this final rule uses the EPA authority
under section 114 of the CAA to require each manufacturer to submit
applications for certifications of compliance for all new models. We
are revising the certification process to include third-party
certifiers in order to reduce the potential for certification delays
that could result from insufficient capacity. However, commenters
expressed concern, which we share, that there may not be sufficient
third-party certifier capacity and review and approval capacity by the
EPA, especially in the first year. Therefore, to avoid unfairly
restricting the production and sales of manufacturers who do all the
things they should do and then potentially have to wait on EPA
approval, we have added a conditional, temporary approval by the EPA
based on the manufacturer's submittal of a complete certification
application. The application must include the full test report by an
EPA-accredited laboratory and all required compliance statements by the
manufacturer. The conditional approval would allow manufacture and
sales for 1 year or until EPA review of the application, whichever is
earlier. Within that year, the manufacturer must submit a certificate
of conformity by a third-party certifier. (In this preamble, we use the
terms ``third-party certifier,'' ``certifying body,'' ``certifying
entity'' and ``certifying body/entity'' interchangeably.)
    The EPA is revising the definition of ``Accredited Test
Laboratory,'' from only EPA-accredited laboratories to include
laboratories accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting body/
entity to perform testing for each of the test methods specified in
this NSPS under ISO-IEC \6\ Standard 17025. Laboratories must be
approved by the EPA before beginning certification testing. Current
EPA-accredited laboratories may retain their accreditation until 3
years after the effective date of this final rule. Laboratories that
are not currently EPA-accredited must achieve ISO-accreditation and
register with the EPA within 6 months of the effective date of this
rule. Laboratories must report any changes in their accreditation and
any deficiencies found under ISO 17025 to the EPA, and the EPA may
revoke approval if warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and
the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) prepare and
publish international standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is requiring a ``Certifying-Body-Based Certification
Process'' beginning 6 months after the effective date of this final
rule for all heaters/stoves except hydronic heaters. For hydronic
heaters, the ``Certifying-Body-Based Certification Process'' is
required upon the effective date of this final rule because this
certification process has already been required under EPA's Hydronic
Heater Partnership Program since October 2008. Under this process for
all heaters/stoves subject to subparts AAA and QQQQ, after testing is
complete, a certification of conformity with the PM emissions limits
must be issued by a certifying body with whom the manufacturer has
entered into contract for certification services. The certifying body
must be accredited under ISO-IEC Standard 17065 and register their
credentials with the EPA and receive EPA approval prior to conducting
any certifications or related work used as a basis for compliance with
this rule and report any changes in their accreditation and any
deficiencies found under ISO 17065. Any certifying body that is
approved by the EPA and is ISO-accredited is required to act in such a
way that will not create a conflict of interest and work with integrity
and honesty. The EPA will oversee the certifying body's work and retain
the right to revoke the EPA approvals if appropriate. Upon review of
the test report and quality control plan submitted by the manufacturer,
the certifying body may certify initial compliance and submit the
required documentation on behalf of the manufacturer to the EPA's
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance for review, approval and
listing of the certified appliance.
    The rule continues to require the owner or operator of a wood
heating appliance to operate the heater consistent with the owner's
manual and not burn improper fuel. Owners and operators must operate
pellet fuel appliances with the grades of pellet fuels that are
included in the owner's manual. Manufacturers are required to void
their warranties in cases of improper operation. Numerous states
expressed their support for the continuation of these requirements.
Some states and local jurisdictions have enforced similar requirements,
and this final rule will allow the EPA to approve state requests for
delegation of enforcement authority for these NSPS requirements. In
addition, we expect many state, local and tribal authorities will adopt
some of the important and very successful strategies in Strategies for
Reducing Wood Smoke,\7\ including changing out (replacing) older
heaters with newer, cleaner, more efficient heaters and developing
site-specific installation and operating requirements to ensure heaters
are not over-sized, avoid nuisance conditions, and ensure proper
operation, e.g., using EPA Method 22 observations of visible emissions
as an indicator of potential poor or improper operation to help ensure
healthy air for all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Strategies for Reducing Residential Wood Smoke. EPA-456/B-
13-001, March 2013. Prepared by Outreach and Information Division,
Air Quality Planning Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The rule continues to contain the crucial quality assurance
provisions in the 1988 NSPS. For example, manufacturers must request
EPA approval of model line re-certifications or new certifications
whenever any change is made in the original design that could
potentially affect the emissions rate for that model line or when any
of several specified tolerances of key components are changed. The 1988
requirements for manufacturer quality assurance programs are
strengthened in the revised rule by requiring the manufacturer within 6
months after the effective date to

contract for a certifying-body to conduct quality assurance audits
within 12 months. The certifying body will conduct regular, unannounced
audits to ensure that the manufacturer's quality control plan is
implemented properly.
    The EPA audit testing programs of the 1988 NSPS are retained under
the revised rule, although they are streamlined and simplified to
better ensure compliance and to clarify that audits can be based on any
information the EPA has available and that audits do not need to be
statistically random. Also, the rule clarifies that the EPA and states
are allowed to be present during the audits and that states (and other
entities, including the public) may provide the EPA with information
that may ultimately be used in any EPA enforcement and compliance
assurance efforts.

C. Central Heaters: Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces (Subpart
QQQQ)

1. Applicability
    After the effective date, new heaters will be required to meet the
new standards. In this final rule, the EPA is adding 40 CFR part 60,
subpart QQQQ, which applies to all new wood-fired residential hydronic
heaters, wood-fired forced-air furnaces and any other wood-fired
affected appliance defined in subpart QQQQ as a ``central heater.''
Wood-fired means designed or marketed to be capable of burning wood or
used to burn wood. For example, a coal-fired heater cannot be marketed
as capable of wood-burning unless it meet the requirements of this
rulemaking and the marketing brochures and owner's manuals must be
clearly specific to coal rather than wood. Hydronic heater means a
fuel-burning device designed to burn wood or wood pellet fuel for the
purpose of heating building space and/or water through the
distribution, typically through pipes, of a fluid heated in the device,
typically water or a water and antifreeze mixture. Forced-air furnace
means a fuel burning device designed to burn wood or wood pellet fuel
that warms spaces other than the space where the furnace is located, by
the distribution of air heated by the furnace through ducts.
    This new ``central heater'' categorization better ensures that all
appliances affected under this new subpart are included in this final
action. Adding subpart QQQQ addresses heater appliance types in the
1987 residential wood heater source category listing that were not
regulated by the 1988 NSPS. This new subpart is designed similar to
subpart AAA, i.e., certification testing of a representative unit in a
model line, label requirements, associated quality assurance
requirements and stepped (phased) implementation.
    The provisions of subpart QQQQ apply to each affected unit that is
manufactured or sold at retail on or after May 15, 2015.
2. Automatic EPA Certification for Currently Certified or Qualified
Central Heaters That Meet the Step 1 Emission Levels
    In this final rule we make clear that those hydronic heaters with
valid EPA Phase 2 qualifications under the voluntary EPA Hydronic
Heater Partnership Agreement of October 12, 2011, or hydronic heaters
certified by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC) that show compliance with the Step 1 emission
limits will be automatically deemed EPA certified to meet the Step 1
emission limits under this final rule until the Step 2 compliance date.
Also, residential pellet hydronic heaters/boilers that have been
qualified under the Renewable Heat New York (RHNY) program will be
automatically deemed EPA certified to meet Step 1. (Note that the RHNY
program requires pellet heating systems to include installation of
thermal storage to maintain high-efficiency and low emissions
performance throughout daily and annual cycles. The minimum size
thermal storage for boilers less than 85,000 BTU/hr is 119 gallons or
2.0 gallons per 1,000 BTU/hr, whichever is less. For boilers greater
than 85,000 BTU/hr, the minimum heat storage is 2.0 gallons per 1,000
BTU/hr.) No separate EPA certification will be required. Similarly,
forced-air furnaces independently certified (i.e., not self-tested)
under Canadian Standards Association (CSA) B415.1-10 as well as forced-
air furnaces certified by the NYSDEC that show compliance with the Step
1 emission limits will be deemed EPA certified to meet the Step 1
emission limits under this final rule until the Step 2 compliance date.
This automatic EPA certification will avoid unnecessary economic
impacts on those manufacturers (over 90 percent are small businesses)
who can then focus their efforts on developing a full range of cleaner
models that meet Step 2 emission levels. This measure should also help
avoid potential delays at laboratories conducting certification testing
for heaters newly subject to the NSPS.
3. Stepped Compliance Approach
    We are promulgating a stepped compliance approach that will apply
to all new central heaters.
    For hydronic heaters, standards will apply to each hydronic heater
manufactured after May 15, 2015 and each hydronic heater sold after
December 31, 2015. Step 1 p.m. emission limits will apply to each
hydronic heaters manufactured on or after May 15, 2015 or sold at
retail after December 31, 2015. Step 2 p.m. emission limits will apply
to each hydronic heater manufactured or sold at retail on or after May
15, 2020.
    For hydronic heaters, we are not promulgating the alternative
three-step emission limit approach for which we requested comment in
the proposal. The comments overwhelmingly indicated that the three-step
emission limit approach was inferior not only environmentally but also
economically because it would, in effect, require many small
manufacturers to engage in two rounds of R&D rather than one in order
to obtain the same eventual endpoint.
    For forced-air furnaces, standards will apply to each forced-air
furnace manufactured or sold after May 15, 2015. Work practice and
operational standards will apply to each forced-air furnace
manufactured or sold at retail after May 15, 2015. Step 1 PM emission
limits will apply to small (less than 65,000 BTU/hr heat output)
forced-air furnaces manufactured or sold on or after May 16, 2016. Step
1 PM emission limits will apply to large (65,000 BTU/hr heat output or
larger) forced-air furnaces manufactured or sold on or after May 15,
2017. Step 2 PM emission limits will apply to each forced-air furnace
manufactured or sold at retail on or after May 15, 2020.
    For forced-air furnaces, we are not promulgating the alternative
three-step emission limit approach for which we requested comment in
the proposal. The comments overwhelmingly indicated that the three-step
emission limit approach was inferior not only environmentally but also
economically because it would, in effect, require many small
manufacturers to engage in two rounds of R&D rather than one in order
to obtain the same eventual endpoint. However, commenters were very
concerned about the infeasibility of enforcing an emission limits for
forced-air furnaces due to the technical and economic impracticability
of testing and certifying approximately 50 forced-air furnaces in the
60 days between publication of this rule and the effective date. For
example, a typical forced-air

furnace certification test takes approximately 1 week in the laboratory
after the furnace is shipped to the laboratory and a time is scheduled
to begin testing. Typically, the laboratory takes approximately 3 or 4
weeks to prepare a complete test report for the manufacturer to submit
to the EPA. A reasonable overall estimate is approximately 1.25 months,
not counting potential conflicts with other testing in the
laboratories. Currently, there are only 4 laboratories that can test
forced-air furnaces. We estimate that approximately 12 small forced-air
furnaces and 38 large forced-air furnaces would need to be tested as
soon as possible. If those tests were to be divided equally among the 4
laboratories, it would take a minimum of approximately 4 months to
submit the 12 certification test reports for the small furnaces and an
additional year to submit the 38 certification test reports for the
large furnaces to the EPA, far longer than the 60 days between the
publication date and the effective date. Thus, as noted above, we are
requiring work practice and operational standards on the effective date
as allowed under section 111(h)(2)(B) of the CAA, and requiring Step 1
PM emission limits for small forced-air furnaces 1 year after the
effective date and Step 1 PM emission limits for large forced-air
furnaces 2 years after the effective date. Specifically, the
manufacturers must develop model-specific descriptions of proper
operation and best practices; include them in their owner's manuals;
provide training on them to their distributors; and provide them in
written and video format to purchasers/operators/users of their
heaters. The specific details that must be included in owner's manuals
are in Sec.  60.5474 and Appendix I of this rulemaking.
    The following are excerpts of the operational standards required in
this rule that must be included in the owner's manuals. Operators must
not burn unseasoned wood.
    The use of properly split, stored and seasoned wood has much lower
PM emission than high-moisture wood, i.e., green wood or wet wood.
Operators must not burn improper fuels such as (1) residential or
commercial garbage; (2) lawn clippings or yard waste; (3) materials
containing rubber, including tires; (4) materials containing plastic;
(5) waste petroleum products, paints or paint thinners, or asphalt
products; (6) materials containing asbestos; (7) construction or
demolition debris; and (8) paper products; cardboard, plywood or
particleboard (Note that best practices do allow the use of fire
starters made from paper, cardboard, saw dust, wax and similar
substances for the purpose of starting a fire in an affected heater);
(9) railroad ties or pressure treated lumber; (10) manure or animal
remains; (11) salt water driftwood or other or other previously salt
water saturated materials; (12) unseasoned wood; and (13) any materials
that are not included in the warranty and owner's manual for the
subject heater or furnace.
    The owner's manual and training materials must also educate
operators on the use of proper operating practices, including correct
positioning of bypasses and air dampers during startup, normal
operation and reloading. Proper practices also include checking air
tubes, catalysts (if so equipped), heat exchangers and other critical
parts of the heater to ensure they are working properly and are
maintained as needed. Best burn operational practices are already
highlighted in many manufacturers' owner's manuals, educational
materials from HPBA and Burn Tips on EPA's Burn Wise Web site. Numerous
comments noted that best work practices and proper operation and
maintenance can significantly reduce emissions at reasonable costs.
Thus, considering all of the above, the EPA has determined that these
work practice and operational standards represent the best systems of
emission reduction as required by section 111(h)(1) for the immediate
time frame from the effective date until the Step 1 PM emissions limits
apply. More discussion of comments on stepped compliance and the EPA's
responses are in section V. Summary of Major Comments and Responses.
    Table 4 summarizes the PM emissions limits for hydronic heaters and
forced-air furnaces that will apply at each step. Note that the
emissions standards are ``as measured'' by the test methods specified
in the rule and are labeled as PM although the PM is essentially all
PM2.5. This avoids the potential extra testing costs of
measuring PM2.5 specifically.

                Table 4--Subpart QQQQ PM Emissions Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Particulate matter
            Appliance                    Steps         emissions limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential Hydronic Heater.....  Step 1: on or       0.32 lb/mmBtu heat
                                   after May 15,       output (weighted
                                   2015.               average) and a
                                                       cap of 18 g/hr
                                                       for each
                                                       individual test
                                                       run.
                                  Step 2: on or       0.10 lb/mmBtu heat
                                   after May 15,       output for each
                                   2020.               individual burn
                                                       rate.
                                  Step 2: cord wood   0.15 lb/mmBtu heat
                                   alternative         output for each
                                   compliance option.  individual burn
                                                       rate.
Forced-Air Furnace..............  Work practice and   No specific PM
                                   operational         limit.
                                   standards: on or
                                   after May 15,
                                   2015.
                                  Step 1 for small    0.93 lb/mmBtu heat
                                   furnaces: on or     output (weighted
                                   after May 16,       average).
                                   2016.
                                  Step 1 for large    0.93 lb/mmBtu heat
                                   furnaces: on or     output (weighted
                                   after May 15,       average).
                                   2017.
                                  Step 2 for small    0.15 lb/mmBtu heat
                                   or large            output for each
                                   furnaces: on or     individual burn
                                   after May 15,       rate.
                                   2020 (using cord
                                   wood as specified
                                   in CSA B415.1-10).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are allowing an alternative compliance option for manufacturers
who choose to certify using cord wood (rather than crib wood) to meet
the Step 2 limits for hydronic heaters. The proposal would have
required cord wood testing for all Step 2 compliance certifications.
Cord wood testing is a better measure of how stoves actually perform in
home use; however, we are concerned that many manufacturers (over 90
percent are small businesses) do not yet have experience with designing
their stoves to perform well with cord wood testing. Numerous hydronic
heater manufacturers may not be ready by the Step 2 compliance date and
that could result in unreasonable economic impacts. Allowing this
option acknowledges the efforts of the industry leaders and encourages
others to follow their example. Special (required) permanent and
(voluntary) temporary labels for heaters certified with cord wood would
specify that they meet a PM emissions limit of 0.15 lb/mmBtu heat
output. The Step 2 PM emission

limit for forced-air furnaces matches the hydronic heater alternate
cord wood option emission level of 0.15 lb/mmBtu because CSA B415.1-10
already specifies cord wood for the certification tests. The bases for
the emission levels are discussed in section V.B BSER and Particulate
Emission Limits for Central Heaters (subpart QQQQ).
    We are making a single determination of BSER for catalytic,
noncatalytic, hybrid, cord wood and pellet heaters and furnaces in
order to not restrict open market competition. We are requiring
manufacturers to provide warranties on the catalysts, prohibit the
operation of catalytic heaters and furnaces without a catalyst and
require operation according to the owner's manual. In addition, we are
requiring manufacturers to provide warranties for noncatalytic and
hybrid heaters and furnaces and require operation according to the
owner's manual.
    As discussed at proposal, we considered requiring efficiency
standards (heat output divided by fuel input) to ensure that heaters
are efficient and burn no more wood than necessary for the heat demand
so that the consumers can save money on fuel and so that the emissions
are lower. We did not propose an efficiency standard because we
concluded we do not yet have sufficient data, but the final rule uses
our section 114 authority to require efficiency testing and reporting
to the EPA. We will include context and summaries of this information
on the EPA Burn Wise Web site. This will help better inform consumers
so they can choose the best-performing heaters now that will also save
them money on fuel costs and also reduce PM emissions by burning less
wood. This will also provide data to states and the EPA as we consider
future wood heater rulemaking.
    At this time, we lack sufficient data to issue a CO emissions limit
in today's final rule. However, this rule uses our section 114
authority to require manufacturers to determine CO emissions during the
compliance tests (as typically conducted), report those results to the
EPA and include those results on the manufacturer's Web site. This will
help better inform consumers so they can choose the best-performing
heaters that have less CO emissions and less health concerns for
themselves and their neighbors. This will also provide data to states
and the EPA as we consider future rulemaking. We intend to include
context and summaries of the submitted CO emissions data on the EPA
Burn Wise Web site also.
    In this final rule, we are not setting limits on visible emissions,
and we are not prohibiting use in non-heating seasons. However,
operators should note that some state, local and tribal jurisdictions
have limits, prohibitions and other requirements that must be followed.
    Like the subpart AAA requirements, the subpart QQQQ requirements
provide additional time for the sale of unsold hydronic heaters
manufactured before the compliance date. This additional sell-through
time does not include forced-air furnaces because EPA has determined
that it is reasonable for forced-air furnace manufacturers to revise
their owner's manuals, training and marketing materials to comply with
the work practice and operational standards by the effective date.
    As in subpart AAA, subpart QQQQ includes a list of prohibited fuels
because their use would cause poor combustion or even hazardous
conditions. As in subpart AAA, subpart QQQQ requires that the owner or
operator must operate the hydronic heater or forced-air furnace in a
manner that is consistent with the owner's manual and the rule requires
the manufacturer to discuss the best operating practices in the owner's
manual. For pellet-fueled appliances, operation according to the
owner's manual includes operation only with pellet fuels that are
specified in the owner's manual. As in subpart AAA, manufacturers must
only specify graded and licensed pellets that meet certain minimum
requirements. Data show that pellet quality is important to ensure that
the appliances operate properly such that emissions are within the
appliance certification limits.
    The permanent labeling requirements and owner's manual requirements
in subpart QQQQ are similar to the guidelines in the EPA's current
voluntary hydronic heater program with some improvements. Like in
subpart AAA, the temporary labels (hangtags) are voluntary and are only
for models that meet Step 2 levels before the compliance date and these
hangtags end upon the Step 2 compliance date. Subpart QQQQ also has a
cord wood alternative compliance option with a special permanent label
and a voluntary temporary label (hangtag) for models that meet Step 2
using cord wood. The structure of the rest of subpart QQQQ is similar
to the subpart AAA certification and quality assurance process.
4. Emission Testing, Reporting and Certification
    The final rule requires that before manufacture and sale at retail,
all affected hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces subject to
subpart QQQQ must conduct certification compliance testing, submit a
certificate of compliance and receive EPA approval for the Step 1 and
Step 2 PM emission limits by the dates shown in Table 4.
    For hydronic heaters, we are requiring emission testing, reporting
and certification based on crib wood to demonstrate compliance with
Step 1 and Step 2 emissions limits. The final rule requires crib wood
emission testing of hydronic heaters by one of the following methods:
EPA Method 28WHH in its entirety or EPA Method 28WHH-PTS (with approved
adjustment for crib wood versus cord wood) or ASTM E2618-13 with
conditions or European National (EN) test method EN 303-5 with
conditions. We note that EPA's current NSPS general provisions provide
that affected sources may request EPA approval of alternative test
methods on a case-by-case basis as appropriate. See 40 CFR 60.8(b).
    Commenters overwhelmingly agreed that tuning heaters for crib wood
certification tests often results in poorer performance in homes. Based
on the existence of viable draft cord wood test methods and the
expectation that the ASTM test methods would be final soon after the
NSPS proposal and that significant testing of heaters re-tuned to
perform well on cord wood would occur before promulgation of this final
rule, the EPA proposed to require testing with cord wood for the Step 2
emissions limits. We still encourage manufacturers to design wood
heaters that best represent in-home performance on cord wood that
consumers use as soon as possible. However, the ASTM cord wood test
methods have not been completed and only limited testing using the
draft methods has occurred.
    We received numerous comments with concerns about when the cord
wood test methods would be ready and how quickly heaters could be
redesigned to perform well with cord wood certification testing that we
proposed for Step 2, i.e., 5 years after the effective date. At
proposal, we had limited test data for heaters using cord wood.
Considering all of the above, we have determined that we do not have
sufficient data at this time to adequately support a regulatory
requirement for cord wood testing.
    We expect that many manufacturers will choose the alternative cord
wood compliance testing option so that consumers will have more
opportunities to purchase stoves that are tuned for in-home use. We
will consider alternative cord wood test method requests on a case-by-
case basis until we are convinced that improved test methods

have been sufficiently demonstrated that they can be relied upon for
regulatory purposes. For now, we will be receptive to alternative test
methods requests that use the current ASTM draft methods. We will also
be receptive to other alternative test method requests that are
adequately demonstrated, ideally according to the EPA Method 301
validation procedures. Additionally, we expect that within the next few
years we will receive enough cord wood test data for the EPA to
establish revised certification requirements based on cord wood
testing.
    In this final rule, the EPA is relying on the cord wood test method
that has been developed by the CSA for forced-air furnaces. The current
version of CSA B415.1-10 was published in March 2010, and it includes
not only the forced-air furnace test method but also Canadian emission
performance specifications for indoor and outdoor central heating
appliances.
    In this final rule, we are relying on efficiency test methods that
have been developed by the CSA. The current version of CSA B415.1-10
was published in March 2010.
    As discussed earlier in section III.B.4 of this preamble, regarding
the certification process for room heaters (revised subpart AAA), we
are also requiring third-party certifiers for hydronic heaters and
forced-air furnaces so as to reduce the potential for certification
delays that could result from errors in testing. However, for forced-
air furnaces, we are concerned that there may not be sufficient third-
party certifier capacity specific to forced-air furnace testing
according to the CSA B415.1-10 test method and review and approval
capacity by the EPA, especially in the first year. We do not want to
unfairly restrict the production and sales of forced-air furnace
manufacturers who do all the things they should do and then potentially
have to wait on EPA approval. Thus, we have added a conditional,
temporary approval by the EPA for forced-air furnaces based on the
manufacturer's submittal of a complete certification application. The
application must include the full test report by an EPA-approved
laboratory and all required compliance statements by the manufacturer.
The conditional approval would allow forced-air furnace manufacture and
sales for 1 year or until EPA review of the application, whichever is
earlier. Within that year, the manufacturer must submit a certificate
of conformity by a third-party certifier.
    The 1-year conditional, temporary approval by the EPA does not
apply to hydronic heaters because they have been required to submit
third-party certifications for the EPA hydronic heater voluntary
partnership program since 2008 and will continue to do so under this
NSPS.

IV. Summary of Significant Changes Following Proposal

    This section is a summary of the significant changes from the
proposed rule based on the comments and additional material we received
and have carefully considered. The reasons for these changes and their
potential impacts are in the Response to Comments (RTC) document and
are summarized in section V Summary of Major Comments and Responses.

A. Best Systems of Emission Reduction/Particulate Emission Limits

    We received considerable comment on the proposed PM emission limits
that is relevant to our determination of BSER. As explained in more
detail in section V, these final emission limits represent significant
advances in stove technology and substantial reductions in emissions,
both collectively and from individual units.
1. Room Heaters
    The EPA is changing the proposed Step 2 PM emissions limit for new
residential room heaters, including catalytic and noncatalytic
adjustable rate wood heaters, single burn rate wood heaters and pellet
heaters/stoves from 1.3 g/hr to 2.0 g/hr using crib wood. Compliance
for room heaters will be determined using the weighted average of burn
rates rather than requiring each individual burn rate to meet the
limit. To reduce potential certification delays and unnecessary costs
for small businesses, we are adding an automatic Step 1 EPA approval
for models with valid EPA certifications under the 1988 NSPS that show
that the models achieve the Step 1 emission levels. Manufacturers may
choose to test using either crib wood or cord wood. If the
manufacturers choose the cord wood alternative compliance option, the
PM emission limit for cord wood is 2.5 g/hr. Although the number is
higher, the cord wood test method is more reflective of fuel that is
used in homes and the data available to the EPA indicate that this PM
emission level is at least as stringent as the 2.0 g/hr primary crib
wood testing emission limit. More details on this are in section V.A
Summary of Major Comments and Responses.
    For wood heater/stove certification tests using cord wood, the EPA
is allowing (voluntary) manufacturers to use a special EPA label which
recognizes that cord wood testing more closely reflects actual in-home
use.
2. Central Heaters: Hydronic Heaters and Forced-Air Furnaces
    For new residential hydronic heaters, the final rule keeps the
proposed Step 1 weighted average PM emission rate of 0.32 lb/mmBTU heat
output, establishes a Step 1 PM emissions cap of 18 g/hr for any
individual test run and adds automatic Step 1 EPA certification for
hydronic heater models if they are already qualified as meeting the
Phase 2 emissions level of the EPA's voluntary program. The change from
the proposed Step 1 cap of 7.5 g/hr to the final rule Step 1 cap of 18
g/hr was to match the Phase 2 emission levels of the EPA voluntary
program and reduce potential certification delays. To further reduce
potential certification delays and unnecessary costs for small
businesses, we are also adding automatic Step 1 EPA certification for
hydronic heater models certified by NYSDEC that demonstrate the models
achieve the Step 1 levels and RHNY-qualified pellet hydronic heaters.
Similarly, we are adding automatic Step 1 EPA certification for new
forced-air furnaces that are independently certified (i.e., not self-
tested) under CSA B415.1-10 to meet the Step 1 emission level or that
are certified by NYSDEC and meet the Step 1 emission level. For forced-
air furnaces for Step 1, we deleted the 7.5 g/hr particulate emission
limit per individual burn rate because the CSA B415.1-10 certifications
are based on the weighted average, not the g/hr limit, and because the
manufacturers do not have experience with meeting g/hr limits for these
furnaces.
    For hydronic heaters, we are changing the proposed Step 2 PM
emissions limit of 0.06 lb/mmBtu heat output to 0.10 lb/mmBtu heat
output for each individual burn rate, tested on crib wood.
Manufacturers may choose to test using either crib wood or cord wood.
If the manufacturer chooses the cord wood alternative compliance
option, the Step 2 PM emission limit for cord wood is 0.15 lb/mmBtu
heat output. Although the number is higher, the cord wood test method
is more reflective of the fuel that is used in homes and the limited
cord wood data available to the EPA indicate that this PM emission
level is at least as stringent as the 0.10 lb/mmBtu heat output crib
wood testing emission limit. For forced-air furnaces, the Step 2 PM
emission level matches the hydronic heater cord wood

alternative option because forced-air furnaces are certified using CSA
B415.1-10, which already specifies cord wood as the test fuel. Details
on the bases of the emission levels are in section V, Summary of
Responses to Major Comments.
    For hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces tested with cord wood,
the EPA is allowing (voluntary) manufacturers to use special permanent
labels and EPA temporary labels (hangtags) which recognize that cord
wood testing more closely reflects actual operation under in-home-use
conditions.
3. Masonry Heaters
    As stated in section III of this preamble, the EPA is not taking
final action on proposed subpart RRRR for new residential masonry
heaters at this time. Comments indicated that the Masonry Heater
Association (MHA) needs more time to finish their efforts to develop
revised test methods, alternative compliance calculation procedures and
dimensioning procedures. The MHA comments stated that the cost of
testing masonry heaters is high and impractical because almost all are
custom-built onsite. After we receive additional information from MHA
and others, we will consider if we should take final action for new
residential masonry heaters in a future rulemaking.
    The potential emission impact of this delay is small. Fewer than
1,000 masonry heaters are built each year. Most manufacturers build
fewer than 15 heaters per year. The total nationwide annual emissions
are estimated to be less than 10 tons of PM2.5.

B. Appliance Certification, Laboratory Accreditation and Third-Party
Certification

    In section III.D of the preamble to the proposed rule, we described
the proposed approach for a third-party certification program by an
ISO-accredited certifying body and testing by ISO-accredited testing
laboratories. This approach requires manufacturers to use third-party,
independent ISO-accredited and EPA-approved test labs and certifying
entities to demonstrate compliance with a representative appliance for
a model line.
    Under the Administrator Approval Process (see Sec.  60.533(c) of
the proposed rule), we proposed a transition period of 1 year from the
effective date of the final rule for test labs to receive ISO
accreditation through an EPA-recognized accreditation body. In this
final rule, we are increasing the transition period for test
laboratories that are currently EPA-accredited from 1 year to 3 years
from the effective date of this final rule (i.e., until May 15, 2018).
This additional time for test laboratory accreditation will reduce
concerns about costs for these small laboratories and potential testing
delays.
    We proposed that certifying entities be required to receive ISO
accreditation upon the effective date of the final rule; however,
commenters stated that ISO accreditations can take 6 months. Requiring
use of ISO-accredited certifying bodies/entities on the effective date
of the final rule can be difficult for small manufacturers of wood
stoves/heaters and forced-air furnaces, which previously have not been
required to obtain certifications from ISO-accredited certifying
bodies/entities; therefore, we are allowing a 6-month transition for
models other than hydronic heaters. The 6-month transition period does
not apply to hydronic heaters because the use of ISO-accredited
certifying bodies/entities has been part of the EPA's voluntary
partnership program for hydronic heaters since 2008.

C. Cost and Economic Impacts

    Cost and economic impacts of the proposed rule have been revised to
reflect changes to the standards and improved estimates of costs and
emissions for room heaters and central heaters. See section VI of this
preamble for a discussion of these revised impacts, as well as the RIA
and the RTC document for this final rule for more detailed information.

D. Test Methods and Compliance Certification Calculation Procedures

    The EPA proposed a number of changes to test methods established
under the 1988 rule to improve their precision and to better reflect
real-world conditions.
1. Burn Rates in Compliance Certification Calculations
    For Step 2 emission limits, we proposed to require certification
compliance at the lowest burn rate (Category 1) and the maximum burn
rate (Category 4) rather than the weighted average of the four burn
rates, which was required in the 1988 rule.
    Many comments on the proposal and the data in the NODA strongly
supported the proposed compliance determinations per individual burn
rates. Many other comments strongly opposed the proposal. Considering
all of the comments and focusing on the available test data, especially
the EPA wood stove certification test data by burn rate that we
included in the July 1, 2014, NODA, we are requiring certification
calculations based on the weighted average of the four burn rates for
subpart AAA. More detail is presented in section V.A, BSER and
Particulate Emission Limits for Room Heaters (revised subpart AAA), and
section V.F, Test Methods.
    For subpart QQQQ, the final rule uses the weighted average with a
cap for each test run for Step 1 (for hydronic heaters), but retains
the proposed requirement for compliance at each burn rate for Step 2
(for both hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces), given concerns
about the sometimes very large emissions at individual burn rates. The
emission limits reflect the data available. For a more detailed
discussion of these comments and responses, see the RTC document in the
docket for this rule.
2. Cord Wood Test Method
    Based on the existence of viable draft cord wood test methods and
the expectation at proposal that the ASTM ``real world'' test methods
for cord wood would be complete soon after the NSPS proposal and that
significant testing of wood heaters re-tuned to perform well on cord
wood would occur before promulgation of this final rule, the EPA
proposed to require testing only with cord wood for compliance with
Step 2 emissions limits. We still encourage manufacturers to design
wood heaters that perform best on cord wood that consumers use.
However, the ASTM cord wood test methods have not been completed and
only limited testing using the draft methods has occurred. We received
numerous comments from noncatalytic stove manufacturers and
laboratories and some states with concerns about when the cord wood
test methods would be ready and how quickly noncatalytic stoves could
be redesigned to perform well with cord wood certification testing that
we proposed for Step 2, i.e., 5 years after the effective date. (We had
test data for three catalytic or hybrid wood heaters/stoves that
performed very well on cord wood at the time of proposal.) However,
considering all of the above, we have determined that we do not have
sufficient data at this time to support a regulatory requirement for
cord wood testing (other than for forced-air furnaces), but rather will
allow an alternative compliance option for cord wood testing. (Note
that forced-air furnace certification tests are conducted according to
CSA B415.1-10 which has specified cord wood as the test fuel since
2010.)
    We expect that many manufacturers will choose the alternative cord
wood

compliance testing option so that consumers will have more
opportunities to purchase stoves that are tuned for use in the ``real
world.'' We will consider alternative cord wood test method requests on
a case-by-case basis until we are convinced that improved test methods
have been sufficiently demonstrated that they can be relied upon for
regulatory purposes. For now, we will be receptive to alternative test
methods requests that use the current ASTM draft methods. Also, we will
be receptive to other alternative test method requests that are
adequately demonstrated, ideally according to the EPA Method 301
validation procedures. Additionally, we expect that within the next few
years we will receive enough cord wood test data for the EPA to
establish revised certification requirements based on cord wood
testing.
    See section III of this preamble for the specific alternative
compliance emissions limit options we are allowing under subparts AAA
and QQQQ for manufacturers of heaters who choose to certify compliance
with cord wood instead of crib wood. The bases for the options are
discussed in section V, Summary of Responses to Major Comments.
3. Additional Test Methods
    Based on comments and the need to minimize potential testing and
certification delays for Step 1, the final rule includes additional
test methods for hydronic heaters. In addition to the proposed use of
EPA Method 28WHH and EPA Method 28WHH-PTS, the final rule allows
manufacturers to use ASTM E2618-13 and EN303-05 with specified
conditions/adjustments (e.g., burn rate categories to better match EPA
Method 28WHH and use of thermal storage) for determining compliance
with the Step 1 emission limits. As with all NSPS, manufacturers may
request EPA approval of alternative test methods on a case-by-case
basis. See 40 CFR 60.8.

E. Sell-Through of Inventory

    Based on numerous comments from small business manufacturers and
small business retailers and some states, we are lengthening the retail
sell-through period for subpart AAA from 6 months from the effective
date of the final rule to December 31, 2015, approximately 8 months
from the expected effective date. That is, no manufacturer,
distributor, wholesaler or retailer may sell or offer to sell new
stoves after December 31, 2015, that do not meet the Step 1 emission
limit. Eight months will better cover the primary selling period after
the rule is final and will affect a very small number of appliances. We
are also providing a retail sell-through period for subpart QQQQ
hydronic heaters to also cover the primary selling period. We are not
allowing a retail sell-through period for forced-air furnaces because
the manufacturers and retailers can quickly revise the owner's manuals
to add best burn practices to comply with the work practice and
operational standards. These sell-through provisions do not affect
resale of used stoves/heaters; such resale is not restricted by this
rule.

F. Appeals and Administrative Hearing Procedures

    Based on the public comments and our additional review of the
history of the 1988 rule, we have determined that there is no need to
make the proposed change to a streamlined Petition for Review process.
Therefore, we are retaining the Appeals and Administrative Hearing
Procedures outlined in the 1988 rule.

V. Summary of Responses to Major Comments

    Detailed summaries are in the RTC document in the docket.

A. BSER and Particulate Emission Limits for Room Heaters (Revised
Subpart AAA)

    We received a full range of comments on the proposed BSER and
emission limits for room heaters and the data in the July 1, 2014,
NODA. Many comments agreed completely with our proposal and that
approximately 10,000 tons/yr of PM2.5 emission reduction is
very important and would lead to significant improvement in public
health protection.
    Some comments indicated that bans of wood burning would be more
appropriate. The EPA is not banning wood burning in this rule because
section 111(a)(1) of the CAA requires that the emission standards
reflect the degree of emission limitation achievable by the application
of BSER.
    Some comments suggested that we develop less stringent standards
for rural areas than other areas or no standards in rural areas at all.
The EPA is not setting different emission standards for rural areas
because section 111 of the CAA does not provide legal authority for
differentiated standards based on where the devices are used.
1. Stringency of Step 2 Level Using Cord Wood for Room Heaters
    Many noncatalytic stove manufacturers and laboratories and some
other manufacturers were concerned especially about the stringency of
the Step 2 level using cord wood 5 years after the effective date. We
considered all comments and focused on those that discussed the
emission data in detail.
    Numerous small business manufacturer comments suggested that (1)
current stove designs are focused on burning crib wood well at the
expense of burning ``real world'' cord wood well, and stoves cannot
just be tweaked to burn both well; (2) experience in homes is that some
crib wood-certified stoves smolder if the homeowner does not operate
them at high burn for at least 30 minutes before dampening down to the
low burn rate settings; (3) a cord wood test method more representative
of in-home use should be developed as soon as possible; and (4) a
voluntary option should be used to establish a cord wood database to
determine BSER.
    As discussed in the NODA, limited cord wood testing by Brookhaven
National Laboratory (BNL), under contract to the EPA, showed that
repeatability of the cord wood test method results can sometimes be
very good (i.e., within 15 percent). However, the results of the BNL
cord wood tests also showed that emissions from a popular, inexpensive,
current-model noncatalytic stove that was not adjusted by the
manufacturer for burning cord wood instead of crib wood during the
certification test can be much higher than (in several cases, over
twice as high) the crib wood emission test results.
    Other comments suggested that we stay with the proposed cord wood
testing requirement and proposed Step 2 emission level that some
heaters can already meet. For example, Washington State Department of
Ecology (WSDOE) stated that (1) the data show that hybrid stoves are
the best technology capable of meeting Step 2, better than noncatalytic
stoves; and (2) the extensive lack of Category 1 burn rate data in the
certification tests indicates a ``serious flaw'' and that EPA needs to
develop test methods more representative of in-home use that include
start-up and the lowest burn rate at which a device may be commonly
operated. We agree with WSDOE that it appears that hybrid stoves may be
the best technology capable of meeting Step 2, better than noncatalytic
stoves; however, we are concerned about setting required emission
levels that may have potential impacts on a large number of small
businesses that may not yet have much experience with that technology,
and we do not want to prematurely restrict their choices. As discussed
in section IV.D, we agree that test methods are needed that better
reflect in-home use and include start-up and the lowest burn

rate at which a device may be commonly operated.
    As discussed earlier in this preamble, based on the data and
comments, we have determined that it is premature to require a cord
wood-based Step 2 emission limit at this time. Rather, we are basing
the Step 2 requirements on crib wood testing and including an
alternative compliance option to encourage manufacturers to certify
with cord wood as soon as possible to provide consumers with better
information regarding in-home use.
    In support of the cord wood alternative compliance option, there
are three stove model lines that meet Step 2 using cord wood testing.
As discussed in section IV.D of this preamble, we expect additional
manufacturers will choose the alternative cord wood compliance testing
option so that consumers will have more opportunities to purchase
stoves that are tuned for in-home use. We will consider alternative
cord wood test method requests on a case-by-case basis until we are
convinced that improved test methods have been sufficiently
demonstrated that they can be relied upon for regulatory purposes. For
now, we will be receptive to alternative test method requests that use
the current ASTM draft methods. We will also be receptive to other
alternative test method requests that are adequately demonstrated,
ideally according to EPA Method 301 validation procedures. We expect
that within the next few years we will receive enough cord wood test
data for the EPA to establish revised certification requirements based
on cord wood testing.
    Commenters overwhelming agree that cord wood testing is a better
representation of ``real world'' conditions, provides better
information for consumers to choose the cleanest and most efficient
heaters and that the EPA should encourage cord wood testing. Thus, the
final rule includes a cord wood alternative compliance option for Step
2 and special permanent labels and allows (voluntary) temporary EPA
labels (hangtags) for units tested with cord wood. As discussed earlier
in this section, the proposal reasonably anticipated that all
manufacturers would iteratively adjust the combustion air flows,
directions and proportions to better match the change in hydrocarbon
volatilization rate due to the difference in surface-area-to-volume
ratio and spacing for crib wood versus cord wood. The proposal also
reasonably anticipated that manufacturers would have a full complement
of cord wood tested heaters available by Step 2, i.e., 5 years after
the effective date. Some stoves already perform well on cord wood.
However, comments from some small business noncatalytic stove
manufacturers, small business laboratories and some states have
questioned whether most small business manufacturers could comply with
the Step 2 emission limits based on cord wood by that date. As
discussed in the NODA, the cord wood test data submitted to us for
three catalytic or hybrid wood stoves manufactured by two small
businesses show that their EPA-certified wood stoves (when tested using
cord wood and making no design changes to adjust for testing using cord
wood versus crib wood) have similar emissions as their stoves do when
tested using crib wood. The cord wood results show that they can
achieve an emission limit of 1.3 g/hr, as proposed. Several comments
stated that they did not believe these results are representative of
most EPA-certified stoves and that typical cord wood values are likely
to be higher than the 1.3 gr/hr level, as well as the 2.0 g/hr level of
the final crib wood Step 2 emission level or any other crib wood level.
    Recognizing that the cord wood alternative compliance option is an
option rather than a requirement, we have set the cord wood Step 2
emission level at 2.5 g/hr as the alternative compliance option for
room heaters for the following reasons:
     Test data show that at least three wood stoves meet a
limit of 1.3 g/hr, which (coupled with some commenters' claims that the
test precision is no better than 1.0 g/hr) would suggest an achievable
limit on the order of 2.3 g/hr.
     The State of Washington DOE has required catalytic stoves
since 1995 to meet a limit of 2.5 g/hr.
     The Step 2 emission level does not take effect until 5
years after the effective date of this final rule.
    The cord wood alternative compliance option provides appropriate
opportunities to small manufacturers who have been leaders in
optimizing for cord wood performance and encourages other manufacturers
to follow their example. More discussion is in the RTC document in the
docket for this final rule.
2. Stringency of Step 2 Level Using Crib Wood for Room Heaters
    We have set the crib wood Step 2 emission limit at 2.0 g/hr for the
following reasons:
     Focusing on the comments that discussed the details of the
crib wood certification test data for Step 2, nearly 90 percent of
current catalytic/hybrid stoves and over 18 percent of current
noncatalytic stoves would meet the Step 2 emission limit of 2.0 g/hr in
the final rule. This compares to 20 percent of catalytic/hybrid wood
heaters/stoves and only 3 percent of noncatalytic wood heaters/stoves
for the proposed 1.3 g/hr Step 2 emission limit.
     Considering that current stove sales are approximately 20
percent catalytic/hybrid stoves and 80 percent noncatalytic stoves, the
estimated impact of adjusting the Step 2 emission level from 1.3 g/hr
to 2.0 g/hr will be to decrease the emission reduction estimated for
this rule by approximately 36 tons per year, which is relatively small
compared to the rule's total estimated emission reduction of 8,269 tons
per year. Furthermore, the impact for any individual stove is only on
the order of 2 pounds per year.
     The final Step 2 emission limit of 2.0 g/hr is more
stringent than any current state requirement.
    Thus, considering the significant emission reductions for this
final rule and the potential significant cost impacts for this industry
that is comprised of over 90 percent small businesses, and considering
that the difference between the proposal and this final rulemaking is
less than approximately 36 tons per year compared to the 8,269 tons per
year for this final rulemaking, we judge that a final Step 2 emission
level of 2.0 g/hr within 5 years as BSER for room heaters is a
reasonable balance of environmental impacts and costs.
3. Determination of BSER for Room Heaters
    Some comments questioned that BSER is adequately demonstrated. The
data in the paragraph above show that not only are the emission levels
demonstrated, the percentages of current heaters that already meet Step
2 demonstrate the reasonableness of the Step 2 emission limit,
especially considering that the Step 2 emission limit becomes
applicable 5 years after the effective date.
    Some comments recommended that the final rule be as stringent as
the cleanest stoves on the market and some comments suggested numbers
that reflect the top 5 percentile. Section 111 of the CAA does not
specify any particular floor for BSER determinations but does require
consideration of costs. As discussed above, considering that the
emission reduction difference between the proposal and this final
rulemaking is approximately 36 tons per year (compared to the 8,269
tons per year for this final rulemaking), we judge that a final Step 2
BSER of 2.0 g/hr within 5

years is a reasonable balance of environmental impacts and costs.
    Some comments suggested that the precision of the test method is
not good enough to set emission limits more stringent than the 1988
NSPS. In response, we note that the State of Washington DOE has
successfully required a 2.5 g/hr emission limit for catalytic stoves
since 1995, and several stoves have been EPA-certified at 1.0 g/hr,
which is well under the final Step 2 emission limit of 2.0 g/hr. Even
if the commenters' claims were correct that the precision is no better
than 1.0 g/hr, the final emission limit of 2.0 g/hr would still cover
these stoves, i.e., 1.0 g/hr plus 1.0 g/hr equals 2.0 g/hr, the step 2
emission limit. Further, we note that the final rule deletes the
previously required upward adjustment for Method 5G to 5H, which was
sometimes over a 30 percent increase for certification values (under
the 1988 NSPS and the State of Washington DOE) that were tested using
Method 5G.

B. BSER and Particulate Emission Limits for Central Heaters (Subpart
QQQQ)

    Comments of many small business manufacturers of hydronic heaters
and forced-air furnaces questioned the demonstrations of BSER for
hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces, especially the proposed cord
wood Step 2 limit of 0.06 lb/mmBtu. As discussed earlier in sections
III.B and III.C of this preamble, considering the numerous comments
expressing concern about whether most small business manufacturers will
be ready in time, reviewing the data currently available, and
acknowledging that the expected ASTM cord wood test methods are not yet
completed at this time, we have determined that it is premature to
require cord wood certification tests for hydronic heaters at this
time. Rather, we are allowing a cord wood alternative compliance
option.
1. Stringency of Step 1 Level Using Crib Wood for Central Heaters
    Focusing on the crib wood test primary requirement and crib wood
test data, we see that there are already 50 hydronic heater models
Phase 2 qualified under the EPA hydronic heater voluntary partnership
program, which also meet the Step 1 emission levels of this final NSPS.
These models will be automatically deemed EPA-certified for Step 1 of
this final NSPS. (There are also 19 voluntary program qualification
tests recently submitted to the EPA that, if valid, will result in 19
additional Phase 2 model qualifications.) Similarly, models certified
by the NYSDEC that comply with Step 1 will also be automatically deemed
EPA certified until Step 2. Also, over 20 pellet heaters/boilers are
already qualified under the RHNY program, and they will be
automatically deemed to be EPA-certified for Step 1 provided they
comply with the RHNY requirements for installation and operation with
adequate thermal storage. That is, no additional certification will be
necessary for these three groups for Step 1.
    For forced-air furnaces, commenters indicated that the Step 1 p.m.
emission limit was achievable but small furnaces needed 1 year and
large furnaces needed 2 years to complete the certification testing. As
discussed earlier, the final rule incorporates the necessary additional
time for testing.
2. Stringency of Step 2 Level Using Crib Wood for Central Heaters
    For new residential hydronic heaters, we have set the crib wood
Step 2 emission level at 0.10 lb/mmBtu based on the following:
     Looking at the crib wood test primary requirement for Step
2 (0.10 lb/mmBtu), 9 of the 50 (18 percent) EPA-qualified hydronic
heater models currently achieve Step 2 on crib wood (per run); and all
20 of the RHNY-qualified models achieve 0.10 lb/mmBtu.
     The proposed Step 2 level (0.06 lb/mmBtu) currently is
achieved only by 3 of the 49 (6 percent) EPA-qualified models (per
run).
     The emission reduction difference between the proposed
Step 2 hydronic heater emission level (0.06 lb/mmBtu) and the final
Step 2 hydronic heater emission level (0.10 lb/mmBtu) is approximately
only 15 tons per year (compared to the 8,269 tons per year for this
final rulemaking).
    Considering the potential significant cost impacts for this
industry that is comprised of over 90 percent small businesses, and
that the relatively small difference in emission reductions between the
proposal and this final rulemaking, we judge that a final hydronic
heater Step 2 emission level of 0.10 lb/mmBtu within 5 years as BSER is
a reasonable balance of environmental impacts and costs.
3. Stringency of Step 2 Level Using Cord Wood for Central Heaters
    As with room heaters (subpart AAA) and for the same reasons,
hydronic heaters (subpart QQQQ) have a cord wood alternative compliance
option. Considering that it is an option designed to encourage
leadership for others to follow, that it is an option rather than a
requirement and that many European models already achieve levels better
than 0.06 lb/mmBtu, we have determined that 0.15 lb/mmBtu within 5
years as the cord wood alternative compliance option is a reasonable
balance of environmental impacts and costs. We note that the RHNY
emission qualification requirement is 0.08 lb/mmBtu. Further, we note
that even if there were to be method uncertainty on the order of
approximately four times the expected precision of 35 percent, models
at 0.06 lb/mmBtu would still be included.
    We have set the same final Step 2 emission level for forced-air
furnaces as BSER as we have for hydronic heaters based on the
following:
     The emission reduction difference between the proposed
forced-air furnace Step 2 emission limit of 0.06 lb/mmBtu and this
final rulemaking (0.15 lb/mmBtu) is approximately 40 tons per year
(compared to 8,269 tons per year emission reduction for this final
rulemaking). The difference is slightly larger for forced-air furnaces
compared to hydronic heaters because the annual sales of forced-air
furnaces are much larger (i.e., 41,000 versus 13,000).
     We considered the potential significant cost impacts for
this industry that is comprised of over 90 percent small businesses, as
well as the modest difference between the environmental impacts of the
proposal and this final rulemaking. Therefore, for forced-air furnaces,
we judge that a final Step 2 emission level of 0.15 lb/mmBtu within 5
years as BSER is a reasonable balance of environmental impacts and
costs.
    Since forced-air furnaces and indoor hydronic heaters compete in
the same market, wise consumers expect similar performance. We expect
most forced-air furnace manufacturers to transfer technology and
knowledge from wood stoves and hydronic heaters. Some small forced-air
furnaces have already transferred technology from wood heaters to
achieve good performance. Several industry comments questioned their
ability to transfer technology from hydronic heaters because of their
concerns about size limitations in order to install forced-air furnaces
indoors going through doorways and other entrances to basements. They
were especially concerned that the space limitations may affect their
ability to adequately insulate the models that may be installed in
close proximity to combustibles. We acknowledge their concerns but note
that coal, oil and natural gas forced-air furnaces and indoor hydronic
heaters that have similar space limitations and proximity to
combustibles conditions have successfully handled those concerns for
many years. For example, numerous

cord-wood-fired indoor hydronic heaters have been safely installed
without large volumes of thermal insulation around the firebox

C. Appliance Certification

    Many comments stressed the importance of easy public availability
of certification test reports (especially electronically), limited CBI
claims, more details on the EPA Web sites, better labels and more
outreach to encourage change outs to cleaner stoves. We agree with
these comments and the final rule incorporates this transparency and
consumer-friendliness. Some comments suggested wording clarifications
that we have incorporated in the final rule. More details are in the
RTC document included in the docket for this rule.

D. Laboratory Accreditation, Third-Party Certification and
Administrative Approval Process

    Many comments stressed the importance of credible data for the
certifications and the value of close EPA oversight, notwithstanding
the addition of ISO-accredited laboratories and ISO-accredited
certifying entities. Some comments suggested that the EPA should allow
the ISO-accredited certifying entities to issue NSPS certificates
directly and that the EPA's role should be solely to review the
certifications and only question their certificates upon cause. The
small business laboratories requested more time for the transition to
ISO-accreditation because of the cost. As discussed earlier in this
preamble, the final rule allows a 3-year extension of current EPA
accreditations of laboratories and allows 6 months for ISO
accreditation of certifying entities, except for hydronic heaters,
which have used ISO-accredited certifying entities since October 2008
for the EPA voluntary program. The EPA will retain its approval and
oversight functions for this final rule. As also discussed earlier in
this preamble, to address the possibility that there may not be
sufficient third-party certifier capacity and review and approval
capacity by the EPA, especially in the first year, and so as to avoid
unfairly restricting the production and sales of manufacturers who do
all the things they should do and then potentially have to wait on the
EPA approval, we have added a conditional, temporary approval by the
EPA for room heaters subject to revised subpart AAA, as well as forced-
air furnaces subject to subpart QQQQ, based on the manufacturer's
submittal of a complete certification application. The application must
include the full test report by an EPA-accredited laboratory and all
required compliance statements by the manufacturer. The conditional
approval would allow manufacture and sales for 1 year or until EPA
review of the application, whichever is earlier. Within 1 year, the
manufacturer must submit a certificate of conformity by a third-party
certifier.
    The 1-year conditional, temporary approval by the EPA does not
apply to hydronic heaters because they have used third-party
certifications for the voluntary program since 2008 and will continue
to do so under the NSPS.

E. Costs and Economic Impacts

1. Costs
    Comments received on the proposed rule included information and
opinions regarding the EPA wood heater cost estimates.\8\ Comments
ranged from criticism that the EPA overestimated costs to criticism
that the EPA underestimated costs. The comments that provided data and/
or analysis explaining why the commenter thought EPA had not accurately
estimated the costs were most persuasive, and we have revised our cost
estimates based on those detailed comments. Details of our responses to
cost comments are in the RTC document and the technical cost memoranda
in the docket for this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Comments on the proposed NSPS are available electronically
through http://www.regulations.gov by searching Docket ID EPA-HQ-
OAR-2009-0734.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Room Heaters
    For example, Washington State Department of Ecology stated that the
proposal cost estimates were overestimates and that our estimates did
not address input from Woodstock Soapstone Stoves, winner of the 2013
Wood Stove Decathlon, which estimates that the cost of new product
development is approximately $200,000, and furthermore that the
proposal cost estimates did not address the economies manufacturers
realize when they develop functionally identical models from the
originally certified model.\9\ Some other commenters generally stated
that EPA's breakdown of cost estimates faced by manufacturers is
inaccurately low. We have considered all the comments and have revised
our cost estimates based on comments that provided additional detailed
cost data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Comment on the proposed rule to Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734
from the Washington State Department of Ecology; available at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0734-1397.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prior to proposal, we heard various estimates of the costs to bring
a wood heater from concept to completion, from $200,000 for a single
model to $1,360,000 for a 4-firebox model line. For example, a Hearth
and Home article estimated the total cost to bring a model from
conception to market as $645,000 to $750,000 for steel stoves and over
$1 million for cast-iron, enameled wood stoves. The authors indicated
that costs would decrease for separate models in the same line by up to
25 percent. Based on this information, we estimated that a 4-model
steel line would cost up to $328,125 per model to develop. These costs
include marketing, design, developing first generation, second
generation and prototype units; NSPS and safety testing, equipment
tooling, etc.\10\ Two other manufacturers also provided estimated
development costs for a 4-box model line, and based on that information
at proposal we estimated average costs to develop a new model line,
including testing with both crib wood and cord wood and reporting and
recordkeeping, of $356,250 for certified wood stoves and pellet stoves.
We also estimated $356,250 for single burn rate stoves, forced-air
furnaces and hydronic heaters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------