A federal appeals court has set aside the Department of Energy’s 2024 efficiency standards for conventional cooking products, removing requirements that had been scheduled to apply to newly manufactured or imported gas and electric ranges, cooktops and ovens beginning Jan. 31, 2028.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled Aug. 11 that DOE should have withdrawn the direct final rule after states filed adverse comments that raised a reasonable basis for questioning whether the rule met the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. The court granted the states’ petition, set aside the rule and remanded the matter to DOE for further proceedings.
The decision does not itself establish replacement efficiency levels. For appliance manufacturers, the immediate effect is that the 2024 standards and their Jan. 31, 2028 compliance deadline no longer govern the affected cooking products. DOE can still pursue standards through further rulemaking consistent with the court’s opinion.
Court Set Aside the 2024 Cooking-Product Rule
DOE’s February 2024 direct final rule established maximum integrated annual energy consumption levels of 207 kilowatt-hours per year for electric smooth-element cooktops and the cooktop portions of electric ranges, and 1,770 kBtu per year for standalone gas cooktops and the cooktop portions of gas ranges. Electric open-coil cooking tops had no new standard.
For conventional gas and electric ovens, the rule imposed prescriptive requirements tied to the oven’s standby-mode power supply. The Fifth Circuit described that provision as barring linear power supplies in favor of switching-mode power supplies, which use less standby power but contain more components.
Those requirements had taken effect as a rule in June 2024, but manufacturers were not required to comply until Jan. 31, 2028. That distinction matters for product planning: the court did not erase a requirement that was about to begin in 2027. It removed a future 2028 compliance obligation before that manufacturing deadline arrived.
More Read
DOE had projected that, by the first compliance year, 77% of electric smooth-element cooktops, 97% of gas cooktops, 95% of electric ovens and 96% of gas ovens would already meet or exceed the adopted standards. The agency estimated the rule would save 0.22 quadrillion Btu over products purchased from 2028 through 2057.
Why the Fifth Circuit Found the Process Unlawful
The ruling turned on DOE’s use of the direct-final-rule procedure, not a judicial determination that efficiency standards for cooking appliances are categorically unlawful.
EPCA allows DOE to issue a direct final rule when it receives a joint statement from interested persons that are fairly representative of relevant viewpoints. The statute then requires at least 110 days of public comment. If adverse comments may provide a reasonable basis for withdrawing the rule under EPCA’s statutory factors, DOE “shall withdraw” it and can proceed through ordinary notice-and-comment rulemaking.
In this case, Nebraska and 22 other states filed one adverse comment, while Utah and Montana filed another. The Fifth Circuit concluded that two issues raised in those comments cleared the statute’s relatively low threshold for mandatory withdrawal.
First, the court found that the joint statement behind the direct final rule was not fairly representative because it did not include states that DOE knew had opposed similar cooking-product standards in the earlier rulemaking. The court rejected DOE’s reliance on later support from agencies in California, Massachusetts and New York as a substitute for state participation in the joint statement itself.
Second, Utah and Montana challenged the oven power-supply provision on reliability and product-life grounds. The court said DOE had not adequately accounted for the possibility that requiring more complex switching power supplies could affect maintenance costs, reliability and lifespan — factors EPCA requires the department to weigh when determining whether a standard is economically justified.
The majority did not require the states to prove those concerns correct before DOE withdrew the rule. It held that the comments only had to provide a reasonable basis for withdrawal and further study. DOE violated the statute, the court concluded, when it retained the direct final rule instead.
The Court Also Rejected DOE’s Timing Argument
DOE argued that the states’ challenge came too late because EPCA generally requires a petition for review within 60 days after a rule is “prescribed.” If the clock had started when the direct final rule was first published Feb. 14, 2024, the October petition would have been untimely.
The Fifth Circuit disagreed. It held that a direct final rule is not “prescribed” for purposes of judicial review until DOE finishes the statutory comment process and decides to adhere to the rule. DOE formally rejected the adverse comments in an Aug. 12, 2024 confirmation notice, and the states filed their petition 59 days later.
Judge Catharina Haynes concurred in the jurisdictional result and agreed the case should be remanded, but wrote separately that she would have directed DOE to reconsider its decisions in light of the record rather than joining the majority’s full merits analysis.
Manufacturers Lose a 2028 Compliance Target — for Now
For manufacturers of ranges, cooktops and ovens, the ruling removes the federal design target that had been set for production and imports beginning in 2028. Companies that had already designed products to meet the vacated levels can still sell those products, but the court’s decision means those particular 2024 levels are no longer a federal compliance mandate.
The practical uncertainty is what DOE does next. The court said the department remains free to propose standards through an ordinary notice of proposed rulemaking, respond to public comments and issue a final rule that satisfies EPCA. The remand gives DOE the next procedural move; it does not prescribe the standards DOE must ultimately choose.
Retailers are unlikely to see an immediate showroom change because the vacated requirements were still more than a year away from their compliance date. The larger near-term issue falls on product-development and regulatory teams that had been planning model portfolios, components, testing and certification around the 2028 rule.
DOE Is Also Reworking How Appliance Standards Are Made
The court decision arrives while DOE is separately reconsidering the procedures it uses to develop appliance standards. In its ongoing Process Rule proceeding, DOE has proposed making parts of its rulemaking framework binding on the department, adding a definition of “significant energy savings,” restoring a comparative “walk-up” analysis, adding economic thresholds and returning other provisions to language used in the 2020 Process Rule.
DOE’s current deadline for comments on that proposal is Aug. 21. The proceeding does not by itself reinstate or replace the cooking-product standards, but it could shape the procedures and analytical thresholds used in future appliance-efficiency rulemakings.
As Appliance News reported earlier this month, Congress is also debating legislation that would put new limits on DOE appliance standards into federal law. Together, the Fifth Circuit ruling, the Process Rule proceeding and the congressional fight leave manufacturers facing a moving federal policy framework even as long product-development cycles require compliance decisions years in advance.
