Energy Conservation Program for Certain Consumer Appliances: Test Procedures for Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies, 31750-31783 [2011-12595]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 1, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31750-31783]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12595]



[[Page 31749]]

Vol. 76

Wednesday,

No. 105

June 1, 2011

Part III





Department of Energy





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



10 CFR Part 430



Energy Conservation Program for Certain Consumer Appliances: Test 
Procedures for Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 105 / Wednesday, June 1, 2011 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 31750]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 430

[Docket No. EERE-2009-BT-TP-0019]
RIN 1904-AC03


Energy Conservation Program for Certain Consumer Appliances: Test 
Procedures for Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is amending its test 
procedures for battery chargers and external power supplies. In 
particular, DOE is inserting a new active mode energy consumption test 
procedure for battery chargers, which is necessary to develop energy 
conservation standards for battery chargers as mandated by the Energy 
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007). DOE is also amending 
portions of its existing standby and off mode battery charger test 
procedure by decreasing the required testing time. Further, DOE is 
amending its active mode single-voltage external power supply test 
procedure to permit the testing of certain types of external power 
supplies. Finally, DOE is inserting a new procedure to address 
multiple-voltage external power supplies, which are not covered under 
the current single-voltage external power supply test procedure.

DATES: This rule is effective July 1, 2011. After November 28, 2011, 
manufacturers may not make any representation regarding battery charger 
or external power supply energy consumption or efficiency unless such 
battery charger or external power supply has been tested in accordance 
with the final rule provisions in appendix Y (for battery chargers) and 
appendix Z (for external power supplies).

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of all materials related to this 
rulemaking at the U.S. Department of Energy, Resource Room of the 
Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 600, 
Washington, DC, (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal Holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards 
at the above telephone number for additional information regarding 
visiting the Resource Room.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Victor Petrolati, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building 
Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, 
DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-4549. E-mail: 
Victor.Petrolati@ee.doe.gov.
    For legal issues, contact Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue, 
SW., Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 586-9507. E-mail: 
Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Authority and Background
II. Summary of the Final Rule
    A. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure
    B. Review of Battery Charger and External Power Supply Standby 
Mode and Off Mode Test Procedures
    C. Review of Single-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
    D. Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
III. Discussion
    A. Effective Date for the Amended Test Procedures
    B. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure
    1. Incorporation of the CEC Test Procedure
    2. Scope
    a. Battery Chargers versus External Power Supplies
    b. Input Voltage and Frequency
    c. DC Input Battery Chargers
    d. High-Power Battery Chargers
    e. Consumer Motive Equipment
    3. Definitions
    a. Deleting Existing Definitions
    b. Revising Existing Definitions
    c. Adding New Definitions
    4. Test Apparatus and General Instructions
    a. Confidence Intervals
    b. Test Laboratory Temperature
    c. Charge Rate Selection
    d. Battery Selection
    e. Non-Battery Charging Functions
    f. Battery Chargers With Protective Circuitry
    g. Charge Capacity of Batteries With No Rating
    h. Battery Conditioning
    i. Rest Period
    5. Test Measurement
    a. Removing Inactive Mode Energy Consumption Test Apparatus and 
Measurement
    b. Charge Test Duration
    c. Testing Order
    d. End-of-Discharge Voltages
    e. E 24 Measurement
    C. Review of Battery Charger and External Power Supply Standby 
and Off Mode Test Procedures
    1. Battery Charger Test Procedure Off Mode Definition
    2. Test Duration
    D. Review of the Single-Voltage External Power Supply Test 
Procedure
    1. External Power Supplies That Communicate With Their Loads
    2. External Power Supplies With Output Current Limiting
    3. High-Power External Power Supplies
    4. Active Power
    E. Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
    F. Test Procedure Amendments Not Incorporated in This Final Rule
    1. Incorporating Usage Profiles
    2. Measuring Charger Output Energy
    3. Alternative Depth-of-Discharge Measurement
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
    D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
    E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
    F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
    G. Review Under Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government 
Appropriations Act, 1999
    I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
    J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001
    K. Review Under Executive Order 13211
    L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration 
Act of 1974
    M. Congressional Notification
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

    Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, 42 U.S.C. 
6291, et seq. (EPCA or the Act), sets forth a variety of provisions 
designed to improve energy efficiency. Part A of Title III (42 U.S.C. 
6291-6309) establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program for Consumer 
Products Other Than Automobiles,'' which covers consumer products and 
certain commercial products (all of which are referred to below as 
``covered products''), including battery chargers and external power 
supplies.
    Under EPCA, the overall energy conservation program for consumer 
products and commercial equipment consists essentially of the following 
parts: testing, labeling, and Federal energy conservation standards. 
The testing requirements consist of procedures that manufacturers of 
covered products must use to certify to the U.S. Department of Energy 
(DOE) that their products comply with the required energy conservation 
standards and to rate the efficiency of their products. These test 
procedures would also be used during enforcement-related testing when 
determining whether a given product complies with the relevant 
standards.
    Today's final rule provides, among other things, a new active mode 
energy consumption test procedure for battery chargers, which is 
necessary to develop energy conservation standards for battery chargers 
as mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 
2007). Today's rule also

[[Page 31751]]

modifies the existing procedure found in appendix Y to 10 CFR part 430, 
subpart B. In particular, the test procedure that DOE is adopting today 
provides a uniform method to test the energy efficiency of a battery 
charger, which is a necessary prerequisite to the setting of any energy 
conservation standard for these products. Consequently, DOE is 
promulgating today's rule in anticipation of the final rule that will 
set standards for battery chargers.
    Additionally, today's rule introduces other changes to the 
procedures found in 10 CFR 430, subpart B, appendix Z, which covers the 
energy efficiency testing of an external power supply. In particular, 
the rule amends aspects of the current procedure when measuring the 
energy consumption of a Class A external power supply. A Class A 
external power supply is one that is: designed to convert line voltage 
AC input into lower voltage AC or DC output; able to convert to only 1 
AC or DC output voltage at a time; sold with, or intended to be used 
with, a separate end-use product that constitutes the primary load; 
contained in a separate physical enclosure from the end-use product; is 
connected to the end-use product via a removable or hard-wired male/
female electrical connection, cable, cord, or other wiring; and has 
nameplate output power that is less than or equal to 250 watts. See 42 
U.S.C. 6291(36)(C). Today's rule also adds a procedure to facilitate 
testing of a multiple-voltage external power supply. The test procedure 
requires loading the multiple-voltage external power supply at five 
separate loading levels and requires that these five outputs be 
reported individually.
    EPCA sets forth generally applicable criteria and procedures for 
DOE's adoption and amendment of such test procedures. See generally 42 
U.S.C. 6293. As part of these requirements, the procedures must be 
reasonably designed to measure the energy use, energy efficiency, or 
annual operating cost during a period that is representative of typical 
use and not be ``unduly burdensome.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In 
addition, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2) and Executive Order 
12899, 58 FR 69681 (Dec. 30, 1993), if DOE determines that a test 
procedure amendment is warranted, it must publish proposed test 
procedures and offer the public an opportunity to present oral and 
written comments on them, with a comment period of not less than 75 
days. Finally, in any rulemaking to amend a test procedure, DOE must 
determine ``to what extent the proposed test procedure would alter the 
measured energy efficiency as determined under the existing test 
procedure.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)) If DOE determines that the amended 
test procedure would alter the measured efficiency of a covered 
product, DOE must amend the applicable energy conservation standard 
accordingly. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2)) DOE discusses its consideration of 
the amendments to the test procedures for battery chargers and external 
power supplies in the section that follows.
    DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) on April 2, 
2010 (75 FR 16958) in which it discussed in more detail many of the 
testing issues brought forward in the framework document and an 
accompanying public meeting to discuss the approach that DOE planned to 
use in setting energy conservation standards for battery chargers and 
external power supplies. See 74 FR 26816 (June 4, 2009) (discussing the 
framework document for battery chargers and external power 
supplies).\1\ (The public meeting discussing the framework document was 
held on July 16, 2009. That meeting also included discussions related 
to test procedure issues. A related meeting to discuss the preliminary 
analysis DOE performed in examining standards for these products also 
generated some discussion related to test procedure issues.) DOE held a 
public meeting to discuss its test procedure NOPR on May 7, 2010, where 
it also received comments on the proposals set forth in the NOPR 
(hereafter referred to as the NOPR public meeting). A 75-day comment 
period as prescribed by EPCA was afforded to interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ U.S. Department of Energy--Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products 
Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking for Battery Chargers and 
External Power Supplies. May 2009. Washington, DC. Available at: 
https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/bceps_frameworkdocument.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Battery chargers and external power supplies operate similarly in 
that they both take electricity from a power source, usually from a 
wall outlet, and convert it into a form that can be used either to 
power an application directly or to charge and maintain the energy in a 
battery. Specifically, they both take power at one voltage and current 
type, typically 120 volts alternating current (AC), and convert it to 
lower-voltage direct current (DC) power. Because these products operate 
in a similar manner, DOE is consolidating its evaluation of potential 
energy conservation standards for battery chargers and external power 
supplies together in a single rulemaking proceeding. Additional details 
related to the authority and background of this rulemaking can be found 
in section I of the NOPR. 75 FR 16958, 16959-16960.

II. Summary of the Final Rule

    Today's final rule does two key things. First, it adopts new test 
procedures for the active mode of battery chargers and all modes of 
multiple-voltage external power supplies. Second, it modifies existing 
parts of the battery charger and external power supply test procedures 
(for example, the duration of the battery charger standby and off mode 
tests). In doing so, it amends both appendices Y and Z in multiple 
places. Furthermore, although DOE is retaining the current language of 
certain sections of appendices Y and Z, in selecting amendments for 
inclusion in today's final rule, DOE considered all aspects of the 
existing battery charger and external power supply test procedures. By 
examining these procedures in this comprehensive manner, this 
rulemaking satisfies the 7-year review requirement of 42 U.S.C. 
6293(b). Subsequent amendments will, as needed, be made in a manner 
consistent with the schedule set out in that provision.
    As explained in greater detail in this notice, the final rule makes 
the following specific changes to the current regulations:
    (1) Inserts a new test procedure to measure the energy consumption 
of battery chargers in active mode to assist in the development of 
energy conservation standards;
    (2) Amends the battery charger test procedure to decrease the 
testing time of battery chargers in standby and off modes;
    (3) Amends the single-voltage external power supply test procedure 
to accommodate external power supplies with Universal Serial Bus (USB) 
outputs and other types of external power supplies that cannot be 
tested in accordance with the current test procedure; and
    (4) Inserts a new test procedure for multiple-voltage external 
power supplies, a type of non-Class A external power supply that DOE 
evaluated in its non-Class A determination analysis and that will be 
covered under the energy conservation standard.
    Table II.1 lists the sections of 10 CFR part 430 affected by the 
amendments in this rule. The left-hand column in the table cites the 
locations of the affected CFR provisions, while the right-hand column 
lists the changes.

[[Page 31752]]



 Table II.1--Summary of Proposed Changes and Affected Sections of 10 CFR
                                Part 430
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Existing Section in 10 CFR Part 430        Summary of modifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 430.23 of Subpart B--Test         Modify `(aa) battery
 procedures for the measurement of        charger' to include energy
 energy and water consumption.            consumption in active mode.
Appendix Y to Subpart B of Part 430--     Renumber the existing
 Uniform Test Method for Measuring the    sections to ease referencing
 Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers.  and use by testing
                                          technicians.
    1. Scope...........................   Limit scope to include
                                          only battery chargers intended
                                          for operation in the United
                                          States.
    2. Definitions.....................   Add definitions for:
                                            [cir] Active power or real
                                             power (P).
                                            [cir] Ambient temperature.
                                            [cir] Apparent power (S).
                                            [cir] Batch charger.
                                            [cir] Battery rest period.
                                            [cir] C-rate.
                                            [cir] Equalization.
                                            [cir] Instructions or
                                             manufacturer's
                                             instructions.
                                            [cir] Measured charge
                                             capacity.
                                            [cir] Rated battery voltage.
                                            [cir] Rated charge capacity.
                                            [cir] Rated energy capacity.
                                            [cir] Total harmonic
                                             distortion (THD).
                                            [cir] Unit under test (UUT).
                                          Remove definitions
                                          for:
                                            [cir] Accumulated nonactive
                                             energy.
                                            [cir] Energy ratio or
                                             nonactive energy ratio.
                                          Modify definitions
                                          for:
                                            [cir] Active mode.
                                            [cir] Multi-port charger.
                                            [cir] Multi-voltage [agrave]
                                             la carte charger.
                                            [cir] Standby mode.
    3. Test Apparatus and General         Insert apparatus and
     Instructions.                        instructions to measure energy
                                          consumption in active mode.
    4. Test Measurement................   Insert procedures to
                                          measure energy consumption in
                                          active mode.
                                          Modify 4(c) to change
                                          standby mode measurement time.
                                          Modify 4(d) to change
                                          off mode measurement time.
Appendix Z to Subpart B of Part 430--
 Uniform Test Method for Measuring the
 Energy Consumption of External Power
 Supplies.
    1. Scope...........................   No change.
    2. Definitions.....................   Modify definition of
                                          active power.
    3. Test Apparatus and General         Modify 3(b) to
     Instructions.                        accommodate multiple-voltage
                                          external power supplies.
    4. Test Measurement................   Modify 4(a) to
                                          accommodate external power
                                          supplies that communicate with
                                          the load, perform current
                                          limiting, or have output power
                                          greater than 250 watts.
                                          Modify 4(b) to
                                          accommodate multiple-voltage
                                          external power supplies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In developing today's amendments, DOE considered comments received 
from interested parties in response to the standby and off mode test 
procedure, framework document, NOPR, and NOPR public meeting. Although 
a part of the standards rulemaking, DOE also considered comments to the 
framework document insofar as these comments had any bearing with 
respect to test procedure-related items. Numerous commenters sought to 
have DOE require testing in additional modes of operation in which 
products had not been tested under the current procedure, such as 
active or charge mode. DOE reviewed the existing test procedures for 
battery chargers and external power supplies and found that, with some 
modifications, they could be used as a basis for updating DOE's test 
procedures to address some of the limitations identified by commenters. 
These modifications are discussed in greater detail below.
    Interested parties who commented on the NOPR consisted of 
manufacturers (Associate of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM), Power 
Tool Institute (PTI), Euro-Pro, Phillips, Sony Electronics, Inc., 
Delta-Q Technologies Corp. and Wahl Clipper); an energy efficiency 
advocate (Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP)); and utility 
companies (Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and Southern California 
Edison).
    DOE also examined whether the amendments to its test procedures 
would significantly change the measured energy consumption or 
efficiency of battery chargers or external power supplies. This 
question is particularly important for Class A external power supplies, 
which are subject to the EISA minimum efficiency standard that took 
effect on July 1, 2008. (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(3)(A))
    The amendments to the single-voltage external power supply test 
procedure, which is used to test compliance with Class A external power 
supply standards, affect the measured efficiency of external power 
supplies with USB outputs and external power supplies that communicate 
with their loads--which together comprise the subset of Class A 
external power supplies to which these amendments would apply. The term 
``communicating'' with a load refers to an external power supply's 
ability to identify or otherwise exchange

[[Page 31753]]

information with its load (i.e., the end-use product to which it is 
connected). This technique is used to tailor the operation of the 
external power supply to the needs of the load as well as to prevent 
the possibility of the supply being used with incompatible loads, which 
could damage the product. While most external power supplies provide 
power at a fixed output voltage regardless of what load is connected to 
their outputs, some external power supplies will only provide power 
once they have ``communicated'' with the load and identified it as the 
intended load.
    The remaining amendments included in today's final rule have the 
following impacts on measured energy consumption or efficiency:
    (1) The battery charger active mode test procedure amendment 
changes the measured energy consumption of battery chargers by 
eliminating the nonactive energy ratio metric and replacing it with a 
new metric that measures energy consumption in active mode;
    (2) The standby and off mode test procedure amendment changes the 
measured energy consumption of battery chargers or external power 
supplies when operating in these modes; and
    (3) The multiple-voltage external power supply amendment inserts a 
new test procedure for these products.
    The procedure being adopted today will be used to help DOE in 
establishing the energy conservation standards for these products 
through a separate rulemaking that is currently underway.

A. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure

    Prior to this final rule, the DOE battery charger test procedure, 
first created by the EPACT 2005 En Masse final rule (71 FR 71340 
(December 8, 2006)) and amended by the standby and off mode test 
procedure final rule (74 FR 13318 (March 27, 2009)), did not measure 
battery charger energy consumption in all modes. Instead, it excluded 
the energy consumed by the battery charger while charging a battery 
(i.e. active mode energy consumption). The procedure measured energy 
consumption only in standby (or no battery) and off modes (i.e. 
inactive mode energy consumption). DOE had adopted this earlier 
approach because the timing of the rulemaking did not permit an 
addition of an active mode test procedure at that time. 71 FR 71340, 
71360.
    The battery charger active mode test procedure in today's final 
rule removes the inactive mode calculation. This calculation, found in 
section 4(a) of appendix Y, is a composite of different operational 
modes that, under the changes introduced by today's final rule, are to 
be measured separately.
    The final rule also makes three additional key changes to the 
battery charger test procedure. First, it adds an active mode 
measurement to section 4(b) to account for the energy consumed by a 
battery charger while it is charging a battery. Second, it amends the 
scope, definitions, and test apparatus and general instructions 
(sections 1, 2, and 3) to address the changes brought about by the 
introduction of the new active mode test procedure. Third, it 
reorganizes the battery charger sections to enhance their readability 
and ease of use to help reduce the prospect of differing 
interpretations while conducting the test.
    The active mode amendment that DOE is adopting today is based in 
large part on the battery charger system test procedure already adopted 
by the California Energy Commission (CEC).\2\ DOE, however, has 
modified that procedure to help decrease the overall testing burden 
faced by manufacturers when testing these products and by increasing 
the procedure's clarity. Examples of how DOE has accomplished these 
goals include modifying the procedure to use terms consistent with 
other DOE rulemakings and dividing more complex procedures into 
simpler, discrete steps for testing technicians to follow. These 
changes are discussed further in section III.B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Ecos Consulting, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) 
Solutions, Southern California Edison (SCE). Energy Efficiency 
Battery Charger System Test Procedure. Version 2.2. November 12, 
2008. https://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/2008rulemaking/2008-AAER-1B/2008-11-19_BATTERY_CHARGER_SYSTEM_TEST_PROCEDURE.PDF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Review of Battery Charger and External Power Supply Standby Mode and 
Off Mode Test Procedures

    DOE addressed the EPCA requirements to prescribe definitions and 
test procedures for measuring the energy consumption of external power 
supplies and battery chargers in standby and off modes (42 U.S.C. 
6298(gg)(A) and (B)) in its March 27, 2009, test procedure final rule. 
That final rule incorporated standby and off mode measurements as well 
as updated definitions into appendices Y and Z. 74 FR 13318.
    In today's final rule, DOE amends the battery charger test 
procedure by requiring the use of a 30-minute warm-up period followed 
by a 10-minute measurement period. Previously, the DOE test procedure 
required a 1-hour measurement period. This amendment harmonizes DOE's 
standby and off mode measurement requirement for battery chargers with 
the requirement contained in section IV of part 1 of the CEC battery 
charger test procedure. DOE is harmonizing its procedure with the CEC 
battery charger test procedure to produce a less burdensome procedure 
while preserving testing accuracy. No changes are being made to the 
standby and off mode test procedures for external power supplies. 
Detailed discussion of the changes can be found in section III.C.

C. Review of Single-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure

    DOE is amending the test procedure for single-voltage external 
power supplies to accommodate several classes of external power 
supplies that cannot be tested in a representative or repeatable manner 
under the current test procedure. These external power supplies include 
those devices that (1) communicate with their loads through USB and 
other protocols (e.g. I2C and TCP/IP),\3\ (2) limit their output 
current below the maximum current listed on their nameplates, and (3) 
have output power in excess of 250 watts. In its NOPR, DOE presented a 
general outline for a possible test method for these products, but 
stated that because these types of external power supplies did not 
exist in significant numbers in the market, DOE was unable to analyze 
them in depth and develop a testing approach using the single-voltage 
external power supply procedure. 75 FR 16958, 16962. DOE received 
generally supportive comments on its proposals for dealing with the 
three different external power supply types, especially those proposals 
regarding external power supplies that communicate with their loads. 
The test procedure revisions adopted in this final rule are described 
in greater detail in section III.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Devices of this type include cellular telephones and 
portable media players such as MP3 players.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure

    Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(1)(E)(i)(I), DOE performed a 
determination analysis and concluded that those external power supplies 
equipped with multiple simultaneous output voltages were appropriate 
candidates for separate energy conservation standards. 75 FR 16958, 
16974. Because DOE was unaware of any procedure that could be used to 
measure the energy consumption of these devices, DOE sought to develop 
such a procedure by modifying the

[[Page 31754]]

procedures currently used by the CEC when measuring the energy 
consumption of single-voltage external power supplies \4\ and internal 
power supplies.\5\ 73 FR 48054, 48058 (August 15, 2008). DOE looked to 
the CEC's test procedure as the starting point for creating a multiple 
voltage external power supply procedure because of the aforementioned 
positive determination. DOE also believed that the CEC test procedure 
was the most accurate and appropriate of all the test procedures it 
examined and that adopting the CEC test procedure would allow DOE to 
maintain consistency with DOE's single-voltage external power supply 
test procedure, which was also based on a CEC test procedure. DOE's 73 
FR 48064.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Calwell, C., Foster, S., and Reeder, T. Test Method for 
Calculating the Energy Efficiency of Single-Voltage External Ac-Dc 
and Ac-Ac Power Supplies, August 11, 2004, previously incorporated 
by reference into appendix Y. Ecos Consulting for the California 
Energy Commission; Sacramento, CA. https://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/EPSupplyEffic_TestMethod_0804.pdf.
    \5\ Mansoor, A., et al. and May-Ostendorp, P., et al. 
Generalized Test Protocol for Calculating the Energy Efficiency of 
Internal Ac-Dc Power Supplies, Rev. 6.4.3. October 22, 2009. EPRI 
and Ecos Consulting for the California Energy Commission; 
Sacramento, CA. https://efficientpowersupplies.epri.com/pages/Latest_Protocol/Generalized_Internal_Power_Supply_Efficiency_Test_Protocol_R6.4.3.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In today's final rule, DOE is adopting a test procedure generally 
consistent with both its earlier approach from its August 2008 proposal 
to address multiple-voltage external power supplies within the context 
of its standby mode test procedure and its more recent proposal. See 73 
FR 48054, 48064 and 75 FR 16958, 16974. Although DOE had initially 
considered the adoption of a multiple-voltage external power supply 
procedure as part of its August 2008 NOPR, it declined to include such 
a procedure in the March 2009 final rule because of the substantial 
number of issues raised by commenters and the limited time provided by 
EISA 2007 to fully consider all of these concerns. 74 FR 13322. These 
concerns have since been resolved in light of additional comments, 
data, and information developed as part of today's final rule.
    Incorporating this amendment into the external power supply test 
procedure will enable DOE to evaluate power consumption for multiple-
voltage external power supplies in all modes of operation: active, 
standby (or no-load), and off. A detailed discussion of DOE's test 
procedure for multiple-voltage external power supplies can be found in 
section III.E.

III. Discussion

    Commenters raised a variety of issues related to DOE's proposal. 
These issues are addressed in greater detail in the sections that 
follow.

A. Effective Date for the Amended Test Procedures

    The April 2010 proposal provided for an effective date of 30 days 
after publication of the final rule. That notice also indicated that 
the amendments to the battery charger and non-Class A external power 
supply test procedures would be required to be used once DOE sets 
standards for these particular products. 75 FR 16958, 16963.
    Commenters voiced concerns with the 30-day effective date set forth 
in the test procedure NOPR. AHAM and PTI specifically asked for 
clarification on the language regarding the effective date. (AHAM, Pub. 
Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 220; PTI, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 236) 
AHAM specifically voiced that clarification is important to prevent the 
need for relabeling products and avoiding possible conflicts with 
applicable State and ENERGY STAR specifications. (AHAM, Pub. Mtg. 
Tran., No. 2 at p. 223)
    In addition to clarity, commenters requested more time to comply. 
Euro-Pro commented that it is difficult to re-label products, update 
all associated paperwork and advertisements, and sell the product in 
the marketplace within 30 days. (Euro-Pro, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 
224) Euro-Pro further commented that it is difficult to comply with the 
new test procedure, whether given 30 or 180 days, and that DOE should 
provide a calendar date by which the procedure would go into effect. 
(Euro-Pro, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 233) Finally, AHAM urged DOE to 
make the test procedure effective, including the ENERGY STAR test 
procedure, when the standard becomes effective, to avoid confusion and 
issues with non-conformance. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 4)
    Commenters indicated that providing a lead time of 30 days would be 
insufficient to transition to a new test procedure. DOE notes that, any 
representations of energy use or efficiency made by a manufacturer must 
be based on the test procedure established by DOE. Manufacturers have 
180 days from the establishment of that procedure to ensure that any 
such representations are based on that DOE-established test procedure. 
42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2)
    Currently, there are no energy conservation standards for battery 
chargers and non-Class A external power supplies. To clarify the timing 
of the test procedure requirements that DOE is adopting today, DOE is 
amending the regulatory text to address this issue. Because of the 180-
day requirement, as a practical matter, manufacturers have a full six 
months to adjust to the new procedure before having to make 
representations based on that procedure. Manufacturers would need to 
use the new procedure for battery chargers and non-Class A external 
power supplies once the this date for making representations is 
reached. Any written representations, such as those prescribed by the 
Federal Trade Commission in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 6294, would need 
to be made consistent with the test procedure as amended by today's 
final rule. Accordingly, although today's rule becomes effective 30 
days after publication in the Federal Register, manufacturers have 180 
days from the publication of today's final rule to use the test 
procedure for any written representation of energy efficiency or use. 
And since such requirements are not likely to be established until 
after DOE sets energy efficiency standards for these products in mid- 
to-late 2011, manufacturers will have considerable time to adjust to 
the new procedure before they are required to use this procedure to 
certify compliance with those new standards. (Given that today's rule 
does not prescribe any substantive changes that would affect the 
measured energy efficiency or use of Class A external power supplies, 
DOE does not anticipate any difficulties for manufacturers who are 
certifying these products.)
    Finally, interested parties asked DOE to clarify how products that 
cannot be tested can be sold in the United States. (ASAP, No. 11 at p. 
12; SCE, No. 13 at p. 12; PG&E, No. 12 at p. 12) They commented that 
DOE should disallow the sale of products that cannot be tested by the 
test procedure, but wanted to ensure that a product that must be tested 
under the procedure does not provide a path for manufacturers to avoid 
the energy conservation standard requirements. (ASAP, No. 11 at p. 12; 
SCE, No. 13 at p. 12; PG&E, No. 12 at p. 12) DOE acknowledges the 
interested parties' concerns and clarifies that, in general, products 
that cannot be tested in accordance with the DOE test procedure will 
not be permitted to be sold in the United States. However, a process is 
available to permit manufacturer to seek a waiver from the test 
procedure in special circumstances. As part of this process, an 
alternative test procedure must be provided by the manufacturer seeking 
the waiver in

[[Page 31755]]

order to provide a means to measure the energy use or efficiency of 
that product. See 10 CFR 431.27 (detailing requirements for obtaining a 
waiver from the required test procedure).

B. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure

    Prior to today's final rule, the battery charger test procedure 
consisted of four parts: (1) Scope, (2) definitions, (3) test apparatus 
and general instructions, and (4) test measurement. The test 
measurement section included four subparts to address the measurement 
of four separate energy consumption modes--inactive mode,\6\ active 
mode, standby mode, and off-mode. Inactive mode energy consumption is 
measured for purposes of evaluating battery charger performance under 
the voluntary ENERGY STAR testing program.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The inactive mode energy consumption measurement consists of 
the energy measured over 36 hours while the battery charger is in 
maintenance mode, followed by 12 hours in standby (no-battery) mode, 
with the possibility of abbreviating the measurement to 6 hours and 
1 hour, respectively under certain conditions.
    \7\ Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Test Methodology for 
Determining the Energy Performance of Battery Charging Systems. 
December 2005. Washington, DC. https://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/Battery_Chargers_Test_Method.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the standby and off mode test procedure rulemaking from 
2008, numerous interested parties commented that the current DOE test 
procedure is insufficient for the development of energy conservation 
standards because it does not measure energy consumption during active 
(i.e., charging) mode. Many of these interested parties also 
recommended that DOE adopt the optional battery charger test procedure 
then under consideration in draft form at the CEC. As mentioned in the 
standby and off mode test procedure final rule, 74 FR 13318, DOE was 
unable to act on these comments, as it had not contemplated the 
inclusion of any active mode changes in the standby and off mode test 
procedure NOPR and there was insufficient time to consider this option 
in light of the statutory deadline for that rulemaking. 73 FR 48054 
(August 15, 2008).
1. Incorporation of the CEC Test Procedure
    On December 3, 2008, CEC adopted version 2.2 of the test procedure 
developed by Ecos Consulting, EPRI Solutions, and Southern California 
Edison (SCE), as an optional test procedure for the measurement of 
battery charger energy consumption during charging (active), 
maintenance, no-battery (standby), and off modes. The test procedure 
was incorporated by reference into section 1604(w) of title 20 of the 
California Code of Regulations,\8\ alongside the DOE test procedure 
from appendix Y. Details of the CEC test procedure can be found in 
section III.1 of the NOPR. 75 FR 16964. See also 20 Cal. Code 1604(w) 
(referring to the 2008 DOE test procedure and the California test 
method for battery chargers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ California Energy Commission (CEC), ``2009 Appliance 
Efficiency Regulations,'' August 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In both the framework document and NOPR, DOE stated its intention 
to amend the battery charger test procedure in appendix Y to include an 
active mode measurement. See 74 FR 26818 and 75 FR 16958. Commenters 
supported the active mode measurement, and encouraged DOE to adopt the 
CEC test procedure in this regard. At the NOPR public meeting and in 
written comments, AHAM generally supported the proposed test procedure 
based on the CEC procedure and noted that its inclusion of an active 
mode energy measurement made it an improvement over the procedure 
already in place. (AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 25; No. 10 at p. 
2) AHAM further commented that the CEC test procedure provides a good 
method for testing active mode. (AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at pp. 
65-66) PTI agreed with DOE's decision to incorporate elements from the 
CEC test procedure into the NOPR. (PTI, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at pp. 
249-250) PG&E was supportive of DOE adopting an active mode that 
largely follows the CEC test procedure because that procedure, in 
PG&E's view, is a solid base for performing battery charger testing. 
(PG&E, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 14) PG&E, Delta-Q and AHAM also 
supported DOE's decision to drop the inactive mode procedure in favor 
of an active mode one. (PG&E, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at pp. 51-52; 
AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 47; Delta-Q, No. 5 at p. 2)
    As described in section III.B of the NOPR, DOE examined three other 
procedures that are used world-wide to measure battery charger energy 
consumption--the EPA-developed procedure used for ENERGY STAR-
qualification, Canadian Standards Association (CSA) C381.2, and the CEC 
test procedure on which DOE based its proposal. 75 FR 16964. After 
examining these procedures and conducting tests using them, DOE decided 
that the CEC test procedure provided all of the necessary outputs with 
reasonably good accuracy and minimal variability. The EPA-developed 
procedure and the CSA test procedure both lacked a method for measuring 
active mode energy consumption, a measurement that DOE and interested 
parties believe is necessary to establish meaningful energy 
conservation standards. Therefore, for these reasons, and in light of 
the general support that interested parties gave to the prospect of 
incorporating a CEC-based test procedure, DOE is basing its battery 
charger test procedure on the methodology of the CEC procedure but with 
some modifications to help increase its clarity and repeatability, and 
minimize the testing burden. (Battery Charger Test Data, No. 18.3) 
These modifications are outlined in the following sections.
2. Scope
a. Battery Chargers Versus External Power Supplies
    As discussed in the NOPR, the battery charger test procedure 
applies to: ``battery chargers operating at either DC or United States 
AC line voltage (120V at 60Hz).'' 75 FR 16958, 16979. In written and 
verbal comments, interested parties noted that the proposed battery 
charger test procedure did not clearly explain how DOE would 
distinguish a battery charger from an external power supply for 
purposes of testing requirements.
    AHAM expressed numerous concerns regarding the proposal's scope. In 
its view, the procedure should have a scope that clearly outlines what 
the test procedure covers. (AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 42) AHAM 
also asserted that any differences between the scope of coverage of the 
DOE and CEC test procedures stemming from the treatment of the battery 
charger's wall adapter (i.e., whether it is tested separately as an 
external power supply or as part of the battery charger) may cause 
problems once the DOE test procedure for battery chargers becomes 
effective. Manufacturers may not know which procedure to use with their 
particular product since the DOE and CEC definitions of battery 
chargers and external power supplies differ. As a result, in its view, 
manufacturers will be unsure how to test and label their products. 
(AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 228) As an example, AHAM argued 
that non-Class A, motor-operated or detachable battery external power 
supplies that use charge control circuitry should be viewed as part of 
a battery charging system and be tested as part of the overall battery 
charger. (AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 37) It also suggested that 
to avoid confusion and allow for greater accuracy, DOE

[[Page 31756]]

should specify that the battery charger test procedure should be the 
only test procedure used to test battery chargers and all parts of 
battery chargers.
    DOE notes that the approach suggested by AHAM would eliminate the 
possibility of regulating external power supplies packaged with battery 
chargers under the external power supplies standard. (AHAM, No. 10 at 
p. 4) This approach, however, also contains some inherent problems. 
Because an external power supply can provide power to one or more parts 
of an application simultaneously, limiting the procedure in the manner 
suggested by AHAM would similarly limit DOE's ability to capture 
certain aspects of the energy consumption characteristics of these 
products. For certain products, such as a power tool, the external 
power supply might only provide power to the battery charger. However, 
for products such as laptops, the external power supply might 
simultaneously provide power to the battery charger and other 
functions, such as the screen and processor. If DOE were to follow 
AHAM's suggestion, it would be unable to capture the potential energy 
savings from the external power supply to parts of an application other 
than the battery charger.
    AHAM also stated that it is difficult to comment on the test 
procedure without knowing how energy standards will apply to these 
products and believed it would be inappropriate to separate the testing 
of any portions of the battery recharging circuit as part of the test 
procedure. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 2)
    Separately, AHAM asserted that, in its view, DOE has not clearly 
explained how the battery charger test procedure schedule integrates 
with the test procedure for Class A or non-Class A external power 
supply devices, or any combination thereof. (AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 
2 at p. 27) AHAM also stated that manufacturers are currently 
``required to report their energy usage to California to indicate by a 
Roman numeral (`IV' or `V') the level of external power supply that the 
wall adapter may utilize.'' In its view, DOE has not yet clarified how 
a wall adapter would be treated--i.e., as a separate and distinct Non-
Class-A external power supply or as part of a battery charger--
manufacturers would not know which energy conservation standard would 
apply. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 4) Finally, AHAM commented that as a result 
of a recent memorandum of understanding (MOU) reached between DOE and 
EPA, ENERGY STAR may be obligated to use the DOE test procedure if it 
is available. (AHAM, Pub. Mtg. Tran., No. 2 at p. 236) \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 2009 EPA-DOE Memorandum of Understanding: https://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=partners.mou.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wahl recommended that DOE should have one test procedure and 
regulation for an individual product. Products should be classified as 
an external power supply or as a battery charger and regulated to one 
standard or the other but not both. (Wahl Clipper, No. 9, at p. 1)
    DOE acknowledges that interested parties have a number of concerns 
about the scope of the battery charger test procedure. DOE will address 
these issues and explain its approach in greater detail concerning how 
to delineate which products are battery chargers and which are external 
power supplies in the standards rulemaking.
b. Input Voltage and Frequency
    As proposed in the NOPR, the scope of the DOE test procedure 
encompasses products that use DC or AC input voltages of 115 volts (V) 
at 60 hertz (Hz). 75 FR 16958, 16965. This scope differs from that of 
the CEC test procedure, which requires, when possible, the testing of 
units that accept AC line-voltage input at two voltage and frequency 
combinations: 115 V at 60 Hz and 230 V at 50 Hz. At the NOPR public 
meeting, commenters expressed different opinions concerning the 
rulemaking's scope.
    Delta-Q, AHAM, and Sony believed that the scope should be limited 
to cover only products that use DC or AC 115 V at 60 Hz. (Delta-Q, No. 
5 at p. 1; Sony, No. 6 at p. 1; AHAM, No. 10 at p. 8) Delta-Q cautioned 
``against some overlap with any solar industry standards that may apply 
to battery chargers operating with DC input.'' (Delta-Q, No. 5 at p. 1) 
Sony further supported DOE's proposal by stating that limiting testing 
to a single input voltage would reduce test costs and time and would be 
consistent with the external power supply test procedure. (Sony, No. 6 
at p. 2)
    Alternatively, ASAP, PG&E and SCE encouraged DOE to allow for input 
voltages higher than 115 V, such as 230 V at 60 Hz, because there are 
some high-power consumer battery chargers that operate at 230 to 240 V 
at 60 Hz. These chargers include charger/inverter units that connect 
between the electrical grid and the battery of many consumer 
photovoltaic (PV) and wind energy systems, as well as rapid chargers 
for lead acid batteries. (ASAP, No. 11 at pp. 1-2; PG&E, No. 12 at pp. 
1-2; SCE, No. 13 at pp. 1-2) These commenters indicated that power at 
230 V is available in most U.S. households, and products that use this 
higher voltage may become more prevalent as the Federal government 
provides tax incentives for residential PV systems that employ these 
higher output voltage devices. (ASAP, No. 11 at p. 2; PG&E, No. 12 at 
p. 2; SCE, No. 13 at p. 2) To account for testing at either input 
voltage and frequency combination, ASAP, PG&E, and SCE urged DOE to 
adopt language indicating that if the unit under test (UUT) is intended 
(i.e., designed) for operation on AC line voltage-input of 110 V to 125 
V 60 Hz, it shall be tested at 115 V at 60 Hz. Similarly, these 
commenters added that if the UUT is not intended for operation at 110 V 
to 125 V at 60 Hz, but is intended for operation at 220 to 240 V at 60 
Hz, it should be tested at 230 V at 60 Hz. In the case of a UUT that is 
designed for operation on AC line-voltage input but cannot be operated 
at either of these voltages, this unit should not be tested under the 
procedure. See generally, ASAP, No. 11 at p. 2; PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; 
SCE, No. 13 at p. 2.
    Further, these commenters argued that when testing products of the 
same voltage at both 50 and 60 Hz, switch mode power supplies showed 
negligible difference in power consumption, and products with line-
frequency transformers showed higher power consumption at 50 Hz. (ASAP, 
No. 11 at p. 2; PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; SCE, No. 13 at p. 2) In their 
view, if DOE included higher voltage products in its scope, DOE could 
assume that if a product tested at 230 V at 50 Hz demonstrates 
compliance, it would also comply at 230 V at 60 Hz because at 50 Hz, it 
would be, presumably, consuming more power. Therefore, DOE could accept 
a test result at 230 V at 50 Hz as a substitute for 230 V at 60 Hz. 
(ASAP, No. 11 at p. 2; PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; SCE, No. 13 at p. 2) 
However, these commenters provided no data in support of these claims.
    Although some interested parties were concerned with the scope of 
the battery charger test procedure, DOE is retaining the scope as it 
was presented in its NOPR. DOE acknowledges that consumer products 
operate at different voltage and frequency combinations. However, DOE 
has not encountered consumer products that operate only at input 
voltages other than 115 V throughout this rulemaking process. 
Commenters provided no evidence of such products being available. For 
this reason, DOE believes that, to the extent that any such products 
exist, these products comprise, at most, an extremely small portion of 
the battery

[[Page 31757]]

charger market. Consequently, DOE has decided at this time not to 
require the use of a separate voltage in addition to 115 V. DOE does 
not anticipate that its decision to exclude them from this rulemaking 
will have a significant impact on the annual energy consumption of 
battery chargers as a whole. However, DOE may revisit this decision in 
subsequent rulemakings.
c. DC Input Battery Chargers
    In this rulemaking, DOE covers both AC- (as discussed, above) and 
DC-input battery chargers. In its comments, AHAM questioned whether DOE 
has the authority to regulate DC-input battery chargers, particularly 
within the context of those devices that have automotive-related 
applications--and how the proposed regulation of such products relates 
to the need for reducing power demanded from utilities. (AHAM, No. 10 
at p. 5) AHAM added that if this approach relates to battery charging 
energy consumption from other electronics sources (i.e. charging a cell 
phone from a laptop computer), it suggested that DOE explain how it 
will segregate the energy from the functions of the laptop to the 
battery charger. (AHAM, No. 10 at p. 5) AHAM also stated that DOE 
should not focus on DC input battery chargers, but rather focus only on 
non-Class A power supplies and AC input battery chargers. (AHAM, No. 10 
at p. 5)
    Additionally, in response to the preliminary analysis for the 
corresponding battery charger and external power supply energy 
conservation standards rulemaking, DOE received other comments 
regarding in-vehicle chargers.\10\ CEA and Motorola both stated that 
DOE's test procedure should clarify its stance regarding in-vehicle 
chargers while also recommending that such chargers be dropped from the 
scope of coverage for both the test procedure and the energy 
conservation standards rulemakings. (CEA, No. 48 at p. 3 and Motorola, 
No. 50 at pp. 2-3) Motorola commented that the CEC test procedure does 
not have a clear stance for in-vehicle electronics because the stated 
scope of the test procedure excludes battery chargers that do not 
connect to the utility grid, yet there are stipulations for testing 
devices that connect to cigarette outlets in automotive equipment and 
USB ports. (Motorola, No. 50 at pp. 2-3). CEA commented that the 
``stated scope of the DOE test procedure clearly excludes in-vehicle 
`DC-in, DC-out' battery charging systems which are not connected to the 
utility grid. However, there are instructions in the test method for 
testing these types of battery charging systems.'' (CEA, No. 48 at p. 
3)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The comments listed in this paragraph come from 
administrative record for the parallel rulemaking on energy 
conservation standards for battery chargers and external power 
supplies. The reference docket number is EERE-2008-BT-STD-0005 (RIN: 
1904-AB57).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under EPCA, DOE has the authority to cover a wide variety of 
consumer products, excluding those consumer products ``designed solely 
for use in recreational vehicles and other mobile equipment''. 42 
U.S.C. 6292(a). In DOE's view, this exclusion does not apply to any of 
the DC-input devices that would likely be affected by the procedure 
being promulgated today. While some of these products may be designed 
to work in conjunction with certain mobile equipment, such as for the 
purpose of recharging the battery of a golf car, DOE has found that 
none of the products that were considered within the context of this 
rulemaking--or of any related standards rulemaking activities--involved 
products that were designed solely for use in recreational vehicles and 
other mobile equipment. For example, cell phone chargers that work with 
DC current (as would be available in a recreational vehicle) also come 
equipped (or are designed to work) with wall adapters. As a result, 
such devices are not ``designed solely'' for use in a recreational 
vehicle and other mobile equipment.
    However, as a result of the aforementioned provision, DOE is 
modifying its procedure for determining how a product should be tested. 
If a manufacturer packages its product with a wall adapter or the 
manufacturer recommends or sells a wall adapter for use with its 
product, the battery charger shall be tested with that wall adapter. If 
this is not the case and the product, such as a GPS device, only works 
with a DC input through either a car charger or a USB port, that device 
will be tested with the 5 V DC input that corresponds to the USB port 
configuration.
    Consistent with this view, DOE plans to proceed with the scope 
proposed in the NOPR, which includes testing DC-input battery chargers. 
While EPCA specifies the input voltage that applies to an external 
power supply as part of that product's statutory definition, it does 
not place similar limitations with respect to the input voltage of 
battery chargers that DOE may regulate. Further, while many DC-input 
battery chargers may be designed to work with a recreational vehicle or 
other mobile equipment, these chargers are not ``designed solely for 
use'' in these applications since many, if not all, of these chargers 
are designed to work in conjunction with wall adapters, USB ports, or 
through other electrical connections to obtain AC mains power. In light 
of the absence of any specific language that would otherwise prevent 
DOE from regulating battery chargers that operate with a DC-input, and 
the fact that these devices are not designed exclusively for use in 
recreational vehicles or other mobile equipment, DOE believes it has 
the authority to regulate such products. Whether DOE opts to regulate 
these products is a decision based on whether energy conservation 
standards for these products achieve the maximum energy savings, are 
technologically feasible, and are economically justified. See 42 U.S.C. 
6295(o)(2). As part of the energy conservation standards setting 
process, DOE plans to separately evaluate those DC-input battery 
chargers and determine whether it is technically and economically 
feasible to set standards for them in a manner consistent with the 
applicable statutory requirements.
d. High-Power Battery Chargers
    DOE sought comment on how it should address the treatment of high-
power battery chargers. In comments, Delta-Q expressed concern with the 
approach contained in the current version of appendix Y, which tests 
all battery chargers in the same manner, irrespective of the amount of 
power they use. Delta-Q stated that they are very concerned about how 
the test procedure would measure the energy use of higher power (750-
1500W) chargers on larger (>200Ah) batteries, because the potential 
variability in the batteries is greater than in smaller batteries. This 
greater variability can impact the entire system and the calculated 
energy efficiency. To address this issue, Delta-Q suggested the use of 
an electronic load to simulate a battery pack, a standard battery make/
model with a certain age range or excluding batteries above a certain 
size from the test procedure (Delta-Q, No. 5 at p. 1).
    As proposed in the NOPR, today's final rule specifies that both the 
battery charger and its battery shall be new products of the type and 
condition that would be sold to a customer (i.e. end-user). 75 FR 
16958, 16981. DOE is aware of the potential benefit that exists from 
using a battery simulator and testing with an electronic load, namely, 
decreased variability in test results for large lead-acid batteries. 
However, DOE is unaware of any existing test procedures that rely on 
this particular method, but is aware of test procedures for battery 
chargers that require testing with the physical batteries that are 
associated with the charger being tested. The fact that there are no 
currently

[[Page 31758]]

recognized standard test procedures that rely on simulators suggests 
that testing with physical batteries rather than simulators is not only 
preferable but an appropriate and acceptable means to accurately test 
battery chargers, including those products that charge extremely large 
batteries (i.e. those used in forklifts or golf cars).
    Additionally, because DOE is unaware of test procedures that use 
battery simulators, DOE would need to develop such procedures on its 
own, which would require considerably more testing and analysis and 
potentially involve additional uncertainty given the absence of any 
currently existing protocols. Potential concerns include determining 
how such a device would be used in a test procedure and how 
representative such a device would be of an actual battery, as well as 
other considerations, all of which would need to be vetted publicly. 
DOE is confident that today's final rule will result in repeatable test 
results for all battery chargers, including those that use large 
batteries, because of the requirements that are being added when 
selecting a battery to test and from DOE's experience testing various 
battery chargers. (Battery Charger Test Data, No. 18.3) As a result, 
the procedure will permit performance comparisons across all battery 
charger types with respect to energy usage. Upon the receipt of further 
information, DOE may consider using a battery simulator in a future 
revision to the test procedure. In the absence of this information, 
however, DOE is opting to incorporate its proposed method into the 
battery charger test procedure--i.e. specifying that high-powered 
battery chargers be tested using the same method as used to test all 
battery chargers; that is, by using the associated battery.
e. Consumer Motive Equipment
    The CEC test procedure includes two parts: part 1 covers the energy 
consumption of consumer products with input power under 2 kilowatts, 
whereas part 2 covers the energy consumption of larger industrial 
chargers, which are generally larger in size and capacity. Briefly, 
part 1 measures the input energy to the battery charger when recharging 
a battery that had previously been conditioned (if necessary). Part 2 
requires this same measurement but includes charger output energy 
measurements and tests the charger with the battery at three different 
depths-of-discharge. The NOPR provided a more detailed discussion of 
these parts. See 75 FR 16958, 16964-66 (section III.B.1 and section 
III.B.2).
    DOE proposed testing all battery chargers, including large battery 
chargers for golf cars and other consumer motive equipment, according 
to part 1 of the CEC test procedure. PG&E, ASAP,