Notice of Intent to Negotiate Proposed Rule on Energy Efficiency Standards for Distribution Transformers, 50148-50152 [2011-20541]
Download as PDF
50148
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules
• DOE requests additional
information and data on the effects of
using different automatic cycle
termination settings. When providing
test results, please also indicate the type
of sensor technology used for the
clothes dryers under test (e.g.,
temperature sensors or moisture
sensors) and the starting and final
moisture content of the test load (when
possible use the starting moisture
content of 57.5 percent with an 8.45
pound (lb) test load for standard size
dryers and 3.00 lb test load for compact
dryers).
• DOE requests comments on
methodology for accounting for various
cycle setting options in the DOE test
procedure. In particular, if interested
parties believe that DOE should test
multiple cycles, please provide
consumer usage data on the percentage
of drying cycles that consumers use for
each automatic cycle termination
setting.
• DOE also requests comment on the
additional testing burden associated
with a requirement to measure multiple
cycle settings.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 9,
2011.
Roland J. Risser,
Program Manager, Building Technologies
Program, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011–20604 Filed 8–11–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket Number EERE–2010–BT–STD–
0051]
RIN 1904–AC62
Notice of Intent to Negotiate Proposed
Rule on Energy Efficiency Standards
for Distribution Transformers
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of intent to establish a
subcommittee and negotiate a proposed
rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE or the Department) is
giving notice that it intends to establish
a negotiated rulemaking subcommittee
under ERAC in accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA) and the Negotiated Rulemaking
Act (NRA) to negotiate proposed Federal
standards for the energy efficiency of
low-voltage dry-type distribution
transformers. The purpose of the
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 Aug 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
subcommittee will be to discuss and, if
possible, reach consensus on a proposed
rule for the energy efficiency of
distribution transformers, as authorized
by the Energy Policy Conservation Act
(EPCA) of 1975, as amended. The
subcommittee will consist of
representatives of parties having a
defined stake in the outcome of the
proposed standards, and will consult as
appropriate with a range of experts on
technical issues.
DATES: Written comments and requests
to be appointed as members of the
subcommittee are welcome and should
be submitted by August 29, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may
submit comments, identified by docket
number EERE–2011–BT–STD–0051, by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: LVDT-2011-STD0051@ee.doe.gov. Include EERE–2011–
BT–STD–0051 and/or RIN 1904–AC62
in the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J,
EERE–2011–BT–STD–0051 and/or RIN
1904–AC62, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–
0121. Phone: (202) 586–2945. Please
submit one signed paper original.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda
Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, 6th
Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza, SW.,
Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202)
586–2945. Please submit one signed
paper original.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or RIN for this
rulemaking.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents, a copy of
the transcript of the public meeting, or
comments received, go to the U.S.
Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950
L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC
20024, (202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. Please call Ms.
Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 for
additional information regarding
visiting the Resource Room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of Energy,
Office of Building Technologies (EE–2J),
1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–1692. E-mail:
John.Cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov. Ms.
Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel
(GC–71), 1000 Independence Ave., SW.,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–6111. E-mail:
Jennifer.Tiedeman@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble
I. Statutory Authority
II. Background
III. Proposed Negotiating Procedures
IV. Comments Requested
I. Statutory Authority
This notice announcing DOE’s intent
to negotiate a proposed regulation
setting energy efficiency standards for
distribution transformers was developed
under the authority of sections 563 and
564 of the NRA (5 U.S.C. 561–570, Pub.
L. 104–320). The regulation setting
energy efficiency standards for
distribution transformers that DOE is
proposing to develop under a negotiated
rulemaking will be developed under the
authority of EPCA, as amended, 42
U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C) and 6317(a).
II. Background
As required by the NRA, DOE is
giving notice that it is establishing a
subcommittee under ERAC to develop
proposed energy efficiency standards for
distribution transformers.
EPCA, as amended, directs DOE to
adopt energy conservation standards for
those distribution transformers for
which standards would be
technologically feasible and
economically justified, and would result
in significant energy savings. (42 U.S.C.
6317(a)(2)). DOE published a final rule
in October 2007 that established energy
conservation standards for liquidimmersed and medium-voltage dry-type
(MVDT) distribution transformers. 72
FR 58190 (October 12, 2007); see 10 CFR
431.196(b)–(c). During the course of that
rulemaking, the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (EPACT 2005), Public Law 109–58,
amended EPCA to set standards for lowvoltage dry-type (LVDT) distribution
transformers. (EPACT 2005, Section
135(c); codified at 42 U.S.C. 6295(y))
Consequently, DOE removed these
transformers from the scope of that
rulemaking. 72 FR at 58191 (October 12,
2007).
On July 29, 2011, DOE published a
notice of its intent to establish a
subcommittee under the ERAC to
negotiate a proposed rule for liquidimmersed and MVDT distribution
transformers (76 FR 45472). The
negotiated rulemaking contemplated in
today’s notice is complimentary of that
process.
A. Negotiated Rulemaking
DOE has decided to use the negotiated
rulemaking process to develop proposed
E:\FR\FM\12AUP1.SGM
12AUP1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules
energy efficiency standards for
distribution transformers. Under EPCA,
Congress mandated that DOE develop
regulations establishing energy
efficiency standards for covered
residential and commercial appliances
that are designed to achieve the
maximum improvement in energy
efficiency that are technologically
feasible and economically justified. (42
U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) The primary reason
for using the negotiated rulemaking
process for developing a proposed
Federal standard is that stakeholders
strongly support a consensual
rulemaking effort. DOE believes such a
regulatory negotiation process will be
less adversarial and better suited to
resolving complex technical issues. An
important virtue of negotiated
rulemaking is that it allows expert
dialog that is much better than
traditional techniques at getting the
facts and issues right and will result in
a proposed rule that will effectively
reflect Congressional intent.
A regulatory negotiation will enable
DOE to engage in direct and sustained
dialog with informed, interested, and
affected parties when drafting the
regulation, rather than obtaining input
during a public comment period after
developing and publishing a proposed
rule. Gaining this early understanding of
all parties’ perspectives allows DOE to
address key issues at an earlier stage of
the process, thereby allowing more time
for an iterative process to resolve issues.
A rule drafted by negotiation with
informed and affected parties is
expected to be potentially more
pragmatic and more easily implemented
than a rule arising from the traditional
process. Such rulemaking improvement
is likely to provide the public with the
full benefits of the rule while
minimizing the potential negative
impact of a proposed regulation
conceived or drafted without the full
prior input of outside knowledgeable
parties. Because a negotiating
subcommittee includes representatives
from the major stakeholder groups
affected by or interested in the rule, the
number of public comments on the
proposed rule may be decreased. DOE
anticipates that there will be a need for
fewer substantive changes to a proposed
rule developed under a regulatory
negotiation process prior to the
publication of a final rule.
B. The Concept of Negotiated
Rulemaking
Usually, DOE develops a proposed
rulemaking using Department staff and
consultant resources. Typically, a
preliminary analysis is vetted for
stakeholder comments after a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 Aug 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
Framework Document is published and
comments taken thereon. After the
notice of proposed rulemaking is
published for comment, affected parties
may submit arguments and data
defining and supporting their positions
with regard to the issues raised in the
proposed rule. Congress noted in the
NRA, however, that regulatory
development may ‘‘discourage the
affected parties from meeting and
communicating with each other, and
may cause parties with different
interests to assume conflicting and
antagonistic positions * * *.’’ (5 U.S.C.
561(2)(2)) Congress also stated that
‘‘adversarial rulemaking deprives the
affected parties and the public of the
benefits of face-to-face negotiations and
cooperation in developing and reaching
agreement on a rule. It also deprives
them of the benefits of shared
information, knowledge, expertise, and
technical abilities possessed by the
affected parties.’’ (5 U.S.C. 561(2)(3))
Using negotiated rulemaking to
develop a proposed rule differs
fundamentally from the Departmentcentered process. In negotiated
rulemaking, a proposed rule is
developed by an advisory committee or
subcommittee, chartered under FACA (5
U.S.C. App. 2), composed of members
chosen to represent the various interests
that will be significantly affected by the
rule. The goal of the advisory committee
or subcommittee is to reach consensus
on the treatment of the major issues
involved with the rule. The process
starts with the Department’s careful
identification of all interests potentially
affected by the rulemaking under
consideration. To help with this
identification, the Department publishes
a notice such as this one in the Federal
Register, identifying a preliminary list
of interested parties and requesting
public comment on that list. Following
receipt of comments, the Department
establishes an advisory committee or
subcommittee representing the full
range of stakeholders to negotiate a
consensus on the terms of a proposed
rule. Representation on the advisory
committee or subcommittee may be
direct; that is, each member may
represent a specific interest, or may be
indirect, such as through trade
associations and/or similarly-situated
parties with common interests. The
Department is a member of the advisory
committee or subcommittee and
represents the Federal government’s
interests. The advisory committee or
subcommittee chair is assisted by a
neutral mediator who facilitates the
negotiation process. The role of the
mediator, also called a facilitator, is to
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50149
apply proven consensus-building
techniques to the advisory committee or
subcommittee process.
After an advisory committee or
subcommittee reaches consensus on the
provisions of a proposed rule, the
Department, consistent with its legal
obligations, uses such consensus as the
basis of its proposed rule, which then is
published in the Federal Register. This
publication provides the required public
notice and provides for a public
comment period. Other participants and
other interested parties retain their
rights to comment, participate in an
informal hearing (if requested), and
request judicial review. DOE
anticipates, however, that the preproposal consensus agreed upon by the
advisory committee or subcommittee
will narrow any issues in the
subsequent rulemaking.
C. Proposed Rulemaking for Energy
Efficiency Standards for Distribution
Transformers
The NRA enables DOE to establish an
advisory committee or subcommittee if
it is determined that the use of the
negotiated rulemaking process is in the
public interest. DOE intends to develop
Federal regulations that build on the
depth of experience accrued in both the
public and private sectors in
implementing standards and programs.
DOE has determined that the
regulatory negotiation process will
provide for obtaining a diverse array of
in-depth input, as well as an
opportunity for increased collaborative
discussion from both private-sector
stakeholders and government officials
who are familiar with energy efficiency
of distribution transformers. In July of
2011, DOE initiated the convening stage
of the negotiated rulemaking process to
identify and interview appropriate
public- and private-sector stakeholders.
DOE retained an expert convener to
contact parties potentially affected by
energy efficiency standards for
distribution transformers to determine
whether stakeholders are interested in
participating in a negotiated rulemaking
process and whether they believe
stakeholder issues can be addressed and
resolved through a regulatory
negotiation. Following an evaluation of
initial stakeholder interest and input,
the independent convener determined
that there is sufficient enthusiasm
among stakeholders to support a
negotiated rulemaking process and that
that there is a reasonably good chance
of successfully reaching a consensus
agreement among stakeholders on the
rule.
E:\FR\FM\12AUP1.SGM
12AUP1
50150
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules
D. Department Commitment
In initiating this regulatory
negotiation process to develop energy
efficiency standards for distribution
transformers, DOE is making a
commitment to provide adequate
resources to facilitate timely and
successful completion of the process.
This commitment includes making the
process a priority activity for all
representatives, components, officials,
and personnel of the Department who
need to be involved in the rulemaking,
from the time of initiation until such
time as a final rule is issued or the
process is expressly terminated. DOE
will provide administrative support for
the process and will take steps to ensure
that the advisory committee or
subcommittee has the dedicated
resources it requires to complete its
work in a timely fashion. Specifically,
DOE will make available the following
support services: properly equipped
space adequate for public meetings and
caucuses; logistical support; word
processing and distribution of
background information; the service of a
facilitator; and such additional research
and other technical assistance as may be
necessary.
To the maximum extent possible
consistent with the legal obligations of
the Department, DOE will use the
consensus of the advisory committee or
subcommittee as the basis for the rule
the Department proposes for public
notice and comment.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
E. Negotiating Consensus
As discussed above, the negotiated
rulemaking process differs
fundamentally from the usual process
for developing a proposed rule.
Negotiation enables interested and
affected parties to discuss various
approaches to issues rather than asking
them only to respond to a proposal
developed by the Department. The
negotiation process involves a mutual
education of the various parties on the
practical concerns about the impact of
standards. Each advisory committee or
subcommittee member participates in
resolving the interests and concerns of
other members, rather than leaving it up
to DOE to evaluate and incorporate
different points of view.
A key principle of negotiated
rulemaking is that agreement is by
consensus of all the interests. Thus, no
one interest or group of interests is able
to control the process. The NRA defines
consensus as the unanimous
concurrence among interests
represented on a negotiated rulemaking
committee or subcommittee, unless the
committee or subcommittee itself
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 Aug 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
unanimously agrees to use a different
definition. (5 U.S.C. 562) In addition,
experience has demonstrated that using
a trained mediator to facilitate this
process will assist all parties, including
DOE, in identifying their real interests
in the rule, and thus will enable parties
to focus on and resolve the important
issues.
III. Proposed Negotiating Procedures
A. Key Issues for Negotiation
The convener identified the following
issues and concerns that will underlie
the work of the Negotiated Rulemaking
Committee on Energy Efficiency
Standards for Distribution Transformers:
• DOE’s key issues include assuring
full compliance with statutory
mandates. Congress has mandated that
DOE establish minimum energy
efficiency standards that are
technologically feasible and
economically justified.
• The committee must find ways to
balance the goals and priorities of State
regulatory programs and DOE’s program
for energy efficiency standards.
• Manufacturers desire that standards
not diminish or constrain innovation for
these products.
• Environmental advocates seek to
ensure that standards achieve the
maximum energy savings that are
technologically feasible and
economically justifiable.
To examine the underlying issues
outlined above, and others not yet
articulated, all parties in the negotiation
will need DOE to provide data and an
analytic framework complete and
accurate enough to support their
deliberations. DOE’s analyses must be
adequate to inform a prospective
negotiation—for example, a preliminary
Technical Support Document or
equivalent must be available and timely.
B. Formation of Subcommittee
A subcommittee will be formed and
operated in full compliance with the
requirements of FACA and in a manner
consistent with the requirements of the
NRA. DOE has determined that the
subcommittee not exceed 25 members.
The Department believes that more than
25 members would make it difficult to
conduct effective negotiations. DOE is
aware that there are many more
potential participants than there are
membership slots on the subcommittee.
The Department does not believe, nor
does the NRA contemplate, that each
potentially affected group must
participate directly in the negotiations;
nevertheless, each affected interest can
be adequately represented. To have a
successful negotiation, it is important
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
for interested parties to identify and
form coalitions that adequately
represent significantly affected interests.
To provide adequate representation,
those coalitions must agree to support,
both financially and technically, a
member of the subcommittee whom
they choose to represent their interests.
DOE recognizes that when it
establishes energy efficiency standards
for residential products and commercial
equipment, various segments of society
may be affected in different ways, in
some cases producing unique
‘‘interests’’ in a proposed rule based on
income, gender, or other factors. The
Department will pay attention to
providing that any unique interests that
have been identified, and that may be
significantly affected by the proposed
rule, are represented.
FACA also requires that members of
the public have the opportunity to
attend meetings of the full committee
and speak or otherwise address the
committee during the public comment
period. In addition, any member of the
public is permitted to file a written
statement with the advisory committee.
DOE plans to follow these same
procedures in conducting meetings of
the subcommittee.
C. Interests Involved/Subcommittee
Membership
DOE anticipates that the
subcommittee will comprise no more
than 25 members who represent affected
and interested stakeholder groups, at
least one of whom must be a member of
the ERAC. As required by FACA, the
Department will conduct the negotiated
rulemaking with particular attention to
ensuring full and balanced
representation of those interests that
may be significantly affected by the
proposed rule governing standards for
the energy efficiency of distribution
transformers. Section 562 of the NRA
defines the term interest as ‘‘with
respect to an issue or matter, multiple
parties which have a similar point of
view or which are likely to be affected
in a similar manner.’’ Listed below are
parties the Department to date has
identified as being ‘‘significantly
affected’’ by a proposed rule regarding
the energy efficiency of distribution
transformers.
• The Department of Energy
• Distribution transformers
manufacturers and trade associations
representing manufacturers
• Component manufacturers and
related suppliers
• Utilities
• Energy efficiency/environmental
advocacy groups
• Consumers
E:\FR\FM\12AUP1.SGM
12AUP1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules
One purpose of this notice is to
determine whether Federal standards
regarding the energy efficiency of
distribution transformers will
significantly affect interests that are not
listed above. DOE invites comment and
suggestions on its initial list of
significantly affected interests.
DOE also developed an initial list of
stakeholders who could serve on the
subcommittee to represent the abovelisted interests. The following list
includes organizations DOE tentatively
has identified as being either potential
members of the subcommittee, or
potential members of a coalition that
would in turn nominate a candidate to
represent one of the significantly
affected interests listed above. DOE
invites comment and suggestions on
whether the following list of
stakeholders identifies an accurate and
comprehensive pool of stakeholders, or
subcommittee members.
• Department of Energy
• John Cymbalsky
• EarthJustice
• Tim Ballo
• National Electrical Manufacturers
Assocation
• Jim Creevy
• Clark Silcox
• Appliance Standards Awareness
Program
• Andrew DeLaski
• Federal Pacific
• Robert Greeson
• American Council for an Energy
Efficiency Economy
• Steve Nadel
• Natural Resources Defense Council
• Robin Roy
• AK Steel Corporation
• Jerry Schoen
• California Energy Commission (as
resource party)
• Acme Electric
• Joe Ashley
• Eaton Corp
• Carlos Siqueiros
• Federal Pacific
• Rob Greeson
• GE
• Bill Forsythe
• Hammond Power Solutions
• Dhiru Patel
• Power Paragon
• Thomas Proctor
• Mirus International
• Tony Hoevenaars
• ONYX Power
• Vijay Tendulkar
• Power Quality International
• Jeffrey Turner
• Powersmiths International
• Philip Ling
• Schneider Electric
• Thomas Patzner
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 Aug 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
• Sola HD/Emerson
• Dale Corel
• WEG Electric
• Bill Oliver
The list provided above includes
stakeholders whom DOE tentatively has
identified as being either a potential
member of the subcommittee or a
potential member of a coalition that
would in turn nominate a candidate to
represent one of the significantly
affected interests, also listed above. The
list is not presented as a complete or
exclusive list from which subcommittee
members will be selected. Nor does
inclusion on the list of potential parties
mean that a listed party has agreed to
participate as a member of the
subcommittee or as a member of a
coalition. The list merely indicates
parties that DOE tentatively has
identified as representing significantly
affected interests in the proposed rule
establishing energy efficiency standards
for distribution transformers.
DOE requests comments and
suggestions regarding its tentative list of
potential members of the subcommittee
on energy efficiency standards for
distribution transformers. Members may
be individuals or organizations. If the
effort is to be fruitful, participants on
the subcommittee should be able to
fully and adequately represent the
viewpoints of their respective interests.
This document gives notice of DOE’s
process to other potential participants
and affords them the opportunity to
request representation in the
negotiations. Those who wish to be
appointed as members of the
subcommittee, including those that have
been tentatively identified by DOE in
this Notice, should submit a request to
DOE, in accordance with the public
participation procedures outlined in the
‘‘Dates’’ and ‘‘Addresses’’ sections of
this Notice. Membership of the
subcommittee is likely to involve:
• Attendance at approximately five
(5), one (1) to two (2) day meetings;
• Travel costs to those meetings; and
• Preparation time for those meetings.
Members serving on the
subcommittee will not receive
compensation for their services.
Interested parties who are not selected
for membership on the subcommittee
may make valuable contributions to this
negotiated rulemaking effort in any of
several ways:
• The person may request to be
placed on the subcommittee mailing list
and submit written comments as
appropriate.
• The person may attend
subcommittee meetings, which are open
to the public; caucus with his or her
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
50151
interest’s member on the subcommittee;
or even address the subcommittee
during the public comment portion of
the subcommittee meeting.
• The person could assist the efforts
of a workgroup that the subcommittee
might establish.
A subcommittee may establish
informal workgroups, which usually are
asked to facilitate committee
deliberations by assisting with various
technical matters (e.g., researching or
preparing summaries of the technical
literature or comments on specific
matters such as economic issues).
Workgroups also might assist in
estimating costs or drafting regulatory
text on issues associated with the
analysis of the costs and benefits
addressed, or formulating drafts of the
various provisions and their
justifications as previously developed
by the subcommittee. Given their
support function, workgroups usually
consist of participants who have
expertise or particular interest in the
technical matter(s) being studied.
Because it recognizes the importance of
this support work for the subcommittee,
DOE will provide appropriate technical
expertise for such workgroups.
D. Good Faith Negotiation
Every subcommittee member must be
willing to negotiate in good faith and
have the authority, granted by his or her
constituency, to do so. The first step is
to ensure that each member has good
communications with his or her
constituencies. An intra-interest
network of communication should be
established to bring information from
the support organization to the member
at the table, and to take information
from the table back to the support
organization. Second, each organization
or coalition therefore should designate
as its representative a person having the
credibility and authority to ensure that
needed information is provided and
decisions are made in a timely fashion.
Negotiated rulemaking can require the
appointed members to give a significant
amount of time, which must be
sustained for as long as the duration of
the negotiated rulemaking. Although the
ERAC advisory committee charter will
be in effect for 2 years from the date it
is filed with Congress, DOE expects the
subcommittee’s deliberations to
conclude or be terminated earlier than
that. Other qualities of members that
can be helpful are negotiating
experience and skills, and sufficient
technical knowledge to participate in
substantive negotiations.
Certain concepts are central to
negotiating in good faith. One is the
willingness to bring all issues to the
E:\FR\FM\12AUP1.SGM
12AUP1
50152
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules
bargaining table in an attempt to reach
a consensus, as opposed to keeping key
issues in reserve. The second is a
willingness to keep the issues at the
table and not take them to other forums.
Finally, good faith includes a
willingness to move away from some of
the positions often taken in a more
traditional rulemaking process, and
instead explore openly with other
parties all ideas that may emerge from
the subcommittee’s discussions.
E. Facilitator
The facilitator will act as a neutral in
the substantive development of the
proposed standard. Rather, the
facilitator’s role generally includes:
• Impartially assisting the members of
the subcommittee in conducting
discussions and negotiations;
• Impartially assisting in performing
the duties of the Designated Federal
Official under FACA; and
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
F. Department Representative
The DOE representative will be a full
and active participant in the consensusbuilding negotiations. The Department’s
representative will meet regularly with
senior Department officials, briefing
them on the negotiations and receiving
their suggestions and advice so that he
or she can effectively represent the
Department’s views regarding the issues
before the subcommittee. DOE’s
representative also will ensure that the
entire spectrum of governmental
interests affected by the standards
rulemaking, including the Office of
Management and Budget, the Attorney
General, and other Departmental offices,
are kept informed of the negotiations
and encouraged to make their concerns
known in a timely fashion.
G. Subcommittee and Schedule
After evaluating the comments
submitted in response to this notice and
the requests for nominations, DOE will
either inform the members of the
subcommittee that they have been
selected or determine that conducting a
negotiated rulemaking is inappropriate.
Due to the court-ordered deadline, DOE
plans for the subcommittee to conduct
deliberations in the summer and fall of
2011 and hopes that the subcommittee
will come to an agreement on a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking in time to
publish that proposal by the October 1,
2011 date contained in the settlement
agreement described above.
DOE will advise subcommittee
members of administrative matters
related to the functions of the
subcommittee before beginning. DOE
will establish a meeting schedule based
on the settlement agreement and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:21 Aug 11, 2011
Jkt 223001
produce the necessary documents so as
to adhere to that schedule. While the
negotiated rulemaking process is
underway, DOE is committed to
performing much of the same analysis
as it would during a normal standards
rulemaking process and to providing
information and technical support to the
subcommittee.
IV. Comments Requested
DOE requests comments on whether it
should use negotiated rulemaking for its
rulemaking pertaining to the energy
efficiency of distribution transformers
and the extent to which the issues,
parties, and procedures described above
are adequate and appropriate. DOE also
requests comments on which parties
should be included in a negotiated
rulemaking to develop draft language
pertaining to the energy efficiency of
distribution transformers and
suggestions of additional interests and/
or stakeholders that should be
represented on the subcommittee. All
who wish to participate as members of
the subcommittee should submit a
request for nomination to DOE.
V. Approval of the Office of the
Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of today’s notice of intent to
establish a subcommittee and negotiate
a proposed rule.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 5,
2011.
Kathleen Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011–20541 Filed 8–11–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
The existing AD currently requires
replacing certain crankshafts. Since we
issued that AD, Lycoming Engines
discovered that the start date of affected
engine models in Mandatory Service
Bulletin (MSB) No. 569A, is incorrect.
This proposed AD would correct that
start date. We are proposing this AD to
prevent failure of the crankshaft, which
will result in total engine power loss, inflight engine failure, and possible loss of
the aircraft.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by September 26,
2011.
You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations,
M–30, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
For service information identified in
this AD, contact Lycoming, 652 Oliver
Street, Williamsport, PA 17701;
telephone (570) 323–6181; fax (570)
327–7101, or on the Internet at https://
www.Lycoming.Textron.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125.
ADDRESSES:
Examining the AD Docket
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2006–24785; Directorate
Identifier 2006–NE–20–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Lycoming
Engines (L)O–360, (L)IO–360, AEIO–
360, O–540, IO–540, AEIO–540, (L)TIO–
540, IO–580, and IO–720 Series
Reciprocating Engines
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to supersede an
existing airworthiness directive (AD)
that applies to the products listed above.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the
Docket Management Facility between
9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD
docket contains this proposed AD, the
regulatory evaluation, any comments
received, and other information. The
street address for the Docket Office
(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the
ADDRESSES section. Comments will be
available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Norm Perenson, Aerospace Engineer,
New York Aircraft Certification Office,
FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410,
Westbury, NY 11590; phone: 516–228–
7337; fax: 516–794–5531; e-mail:
norman.perenson@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\12AUP1.SGM
12AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 156 (Friday, August 12, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50148-50152]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20541]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[Docket Number EERE-2010-BT-STD-0051]
RIN 1904-AC62
Notice of Intent to Negotiate Proposed Rule on Energy Efficiency
Standards for Distribution Transformers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of intent to establish a subcommittee and negotiate a
proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) is
giving notice that it intends to establish a negotiated rulemaking
subcommittee under ERAC in accordance with the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA) and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (NRA) to
negotiate proposed Federal standards for the energy efficiency of low-
voltage dry-type distribution transformers. The purpose of the
subcommittee will be to discuss and, if possible, reach consensus on a
proposed rule for the energy efficiency of distribution transformers,
as authorized by the Energy Policy Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975, as
amended. The subcommittee will consist of representatives of parties
having a defined stake in the outcome of the proposed standards, and
will consult as appropriate with a range of experts on technical
issues.
DATES: Written comments and requests to be appointed as members of the
subcommittee are welcome and should be submitted by August 29, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket
number EERE-2011-BT-STD-0051, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: LVDT-2011-STD-0051@ee.doe.gov. Include EERE-2011-
BT-STD-0051 and/or RIN 1904-AC62 in the subject line of the message.
Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, EERE-2011-BT-STD-0051
and/or RIN 1904-AC62, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20585-0121. Phone: (202) 586-2945. Please submit one signed paper
original.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202) 586-2945. Please submit
one signed paper original.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number or RIN for this rulemaking.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, a
copy of the transcript of the public meeting, or comments received, go
to the U.S. Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant Plaza, SW.,
Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards
at (202) 586-2945 for additional information regarding visiting the
Resource Room.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Building Technologies (EE-2J), 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1692. E-
mail: John.Cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov. Ms. Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of the General Counsel (GC-71), 1000 Independence
Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-6111. E-
mail: Jennifer.Tiedeman@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble
I. Statutory Authority
II. Background
III. Proposed Negotiating Procedures
IV. Comments Requested
I. Statutory Authority
This notice announcing DOE's intent to negotiate a proposed
regulation setting energy efficiency standards for distribution
transformers was developed under the authority of sections 563 and 564
of the NRA (5 U.S.C. 561-570, Pub. L. 104-320). The regulation setting
energy efficiency standards for distribution transformers that DOE is
proposing to develop under a negotiated rulemaking will be developed
under the authority of EPCA, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C) and
6317(a).
II. Background
As required by the NRA, DOE is giving notice that it is
establishing a subcommittee under ERAC to develop proposed energy
efficiency standards for distribution transformers.
EPCA, as amended, directs DOE to adopt energy conservation
standards for those distribution transformers for which standards would
be technologically feasible and economically justified, and would
result in significant energy savings. (42 U.S.C. 6317(a)(2)). DOE
published a final rule in October 2007 that established energy
conservation standards for liquid-immersed and medium-voltage dry-type
(MVDT) distribution transformers. 72 FR 58190 (October 12, 2007); see
10 CFR 431.196(b)-(c). During the course of that rulemaking, the Energy
Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005), Public Law 109-58, amended EPCA to set
standards for low-voltage dry-type (LVDT) distribution transformers.
(EPACT 2005, Section 135(c); codified at 42 U.S.C. 6295(y))
Consequently, DOE removed these transformers from the scope of that
rulemaking. 72 FR at 58191 (October 12, 2007).
On July 29, 2011, DOE published a notice of its intent to establish
a subcommittee under the ERAC to negotiate a proposed rule for liquid-
immersed and MVDT distribution transformers (76 FR 45472). The
negotiated rulemaking contemplated in today's notice is complimentary
of that process.
A. Negotiated Rulemaking
DOE has decided to use the negotiated rulemaking process to develop
proposed
[[Page 50149]]
energy efficiency standards for distribution transformers. Under EPCA,
Congress mandated that DOE develop regulations establishing energy
efficiency standards for covered residential and commercial appliances
that are designed to achieve the maximum improvement in energy
efficiency that are technologically feasible and economically
justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A) The primary reason for using the
negotiated rulemaking process for developing a proposed Federal
standard is that stakeholders strongly support a consensual rulemaking
effort. DOE believes such a regulatory negotiation process will be less
adversarial and better suited to resolving complex technical issues. An
important virtue of negotiated rulemaking is that it allows expert
dialog that is much better than traditional techniques at getting the
facts and issues right and will result in a proposed rule that will
effectively reflect Congressional intent.
A regulatory negotiation will enable DOE to engage in direct and
sustained dialog with informed, interested, and affected parties when
drafting the regulation, rather than obtaining input during a public
comment period after developing and publishing a proposed rule. Gaining
this early understanding of all parties' perspectives allows DOE to
address key issues at an earlier stage of the process, thereby allowing
more time for an iterative process to resolve issues. A rule drafted by
negotiation with informed and affected parties is expected to be
potentially more pragmatic and more easily implemented than a rule
arising from the traditional process. Such rulemaking improvement is
likely to provide the public with the full benefits of the rule while
minimizing the potential negative impact of a proposed regulation
conceived or drafted without the full prior input of outside
knowledgeable parties. Because a negotiating subcommittee includes
representatives from the major stakeholder groups affected by or
interested in the rule, the number of public comments on the proposed
rule may be decreased. DOE anticipates that there will be a need for
fewer substantive changes to a proposed rule developed under a
regulatory negotiation process prior to the publication of a final
rule.
B. The Concept of Negotiated Rulemaking
Usually, DOE develops a proposed rulemaking using Department staff
and consultant resources. Typically, a preliminary analysis is vetted
for stakeholder comments after a Framework Document is published and
comments taken thereon. After the notice of proposed rulemaking is
published for comment, affected parties may submit arguments and data
defining and supporting their positions with regard to the issues
raised in the proposed rule. Congress noted in the NRA, however, that
regulatory development may ``discourage the affected parties from
meeting and communicating with each other, and may cause parties with
different interests to assume conflicting and antagonistic positions *
* *.'' (5 U.S.C. 561(2)(2)) Congress also stated that ``adversarial
rulemaking deprives the affected parties and the public of the benefits
of face-to-face negotiations and cooperation in developing and reaching
agreement on a rule. It also deprives them of the benefits of shared
information, knowledge, expertise, and technical abilities possessed by
the affected parties.'' (5 U.S.C. 561(2)(3))
Using negotiated rulemaking to develop a proposed rule differs
fundamentally from the Department-centered process. In negotiated
rulemaking, a proposed rule is developed by an advisory committee or
subcommittee, chartered under FACA (5 U.S.C. App. 2), composed of
members chosen to represent the various interests that will be
significantly affected by the rule. The goal of the advisory committee
or subcommittee is to reach consensus on the treatment of the major
issues involved with the rule. The process starts with the Department's
careful identification of all interests potentially affected by the
rulemaking under consideration. To help with this identification, the
Department publishes a notice such as this one in the Federal Register,
identifying a preliminary list of interested parties and requesting
public comment on that list. Following receipt of comments, the
Department establishes an advisory committee or subcommittee
representing the full range of stakeholders to negotiate a consensus on
the terms of a proposed rule. Representation on the advisory committee
or subcommittee may be direct; that is, each member may represent a
specific interest, or may be indirect, such as through trade
associations and/or similarly-situated parties with common interests.
The Department is a member of the advisory committee or subcommittee
and represents the Federal government's interests. The advisory
committee or subcommittee chair is assisted by a neutral mediator who
facilitates the negotiation process. The role of the mediator, also
called a facilitator, is to apply proven consensus-building techniques
to the advisory committee or subcommittee process.
After an advisory committee or subcommittee reaches consensus on
the provisions of a proposed rule, the Department, consistent with its
legal obligations, uses such consensus as the basis of its proposed
rule, which then is published in the Federal Register. This publication
provides the required public notice and provides for a public comment
period. Other participants and other interested parties retain their
rights to comment, participate in an informal hearing (if requested),
and request judicial review. DOE anticipates, however, that the pre-
proposal consensus agreed upon by the advisory committee or
subcommittee will narrow any issues in the subsequent rulemaking.
C. Proposed Rulemaking for Energy Efficiency Standards for Distribution
Transformers
The NRA enables DOE to establish an advisory committee or
subcommittee if it is determined that the use of the negotiated
rulemaking process is in the public interest. DOE intends to develop
Federal regulations that build on the depth of experience accrued in
both the public and private sectors in implementing standards and
programs.
DOE has determined that the regulatory negotiation process will
provide for obtaining a diverse array of in-depth input, as well as an
opportunity for increased collaborative discussion from both private-
sector stakeholders and government officials who are familiar with
energy efficiency of distribution transformers. In July of 2011, DOE
initiated the convening stage of the negotiated rulemaking process to
identify and interview appropriate public- and private-sector
stakeholders. DOE retained an expert convener to contact parties
potentially affected by energy efficiency standards for distribution
transformers to determine whether stakeholders are interested in
participating in a negotiated rulemaking process and whether they
believe stakeholder issues can be addressed and resolved through a
regulatory negotiation. Following an evaluation of initial stakeholder
interest and input, the independent convener determined that there is
sufficient enthusiasm among stakeholders to support a negotiated
rulemaking process and that that there is a reasonably good chance of
successfully reaching a consensus agreement among stakeholders on the
rule.
[[Page 50150]]
D. Department Commitment
In initiating this regulatory negotiation process to develop energy
efficiency standards for distribution transformers, DOE is making a
commitment to provide adequate resources to facilitate timely and
successful completion of the process. This commitment includes making
the process a priority activity for all representatives, components,
officials, and personnel of the Department who need to be involved in
the rulemaking, from the time of initiation until such time as a final
rule is issued or the process is expressly terminated. DOE will provide
administrative support for the process and will take steps to ensure
that the advisory committee or subcommittee has the dedicated resources
it requires to complete its work in a timely fashion. Specifically, DOE
will make available the following support services: properly equipped
space adequate for public meetings and caucuses; logistical support;
word processing and distribution of background information; the service
of a facilitator; and such additional research and other technical
assistance as may be necessary.
To the maximum extent possible consistent with the legal
obligations of the Department, DOE will use the consensus of the
advisory committee or subcommittee as the basis for the rule the
Department proposes for public notice and comment.
E. Negotiating Consensus
As discussed above, the negotiated rulemaking process differs
fundamentally from the usual process for developing a proposed rule.
Negotiation enables interested and affected parties to discuss various
approaches to issues rather than asking them only to respond to a
proposal developed by the Department. The negotiation process involves
a mutual education of the various parties on the practical concerns
about the impact of standards. Each advisory committee or subcommittee
member participates in resolving the interests and concerns of other
members, rather than leaving it up to DOE to evaluate and incorporate
different points of view.
A key principle of negotiated rulemaking is that agreement is by
consensus of all the interests. Thus, no one interest or group of
interests is able to control the process. The NRA defines consensus as
the unanimous concurrence among interests represented on a negotiated
rulemaking committee or subcommittee, unless the committee or
subcommittee itself unanimously agrees to use a different definition.
(5 U.S.C. 562) In addition, experience has demonstrated that using a
trained mediator to facilitate this process will assist all parties,
including DOE, in identifying their real interests in the rule, and
thus will enable parties to focus on and resolve the important issues.
III. Proposed Negotiating Procedures
A. Key Issues for Negotiation
The convener identified the following issues and concerns that will
underlie the work of the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee on Energy
Efficiency Standards for Distribution Transformers:
DOE's key issues include assuring full compliance with
statutory mandates. Congress has mandated that DOE establish minimum
energy efficiency standards that are technologically feasible and
economically justified.
The committee must find ways to balance the goals and
priorities of State regulatory programs and DOE's program for energy
efficiency standards.
Manufacturers desire that standards not diminish or
constrain innovation for these products.
Environmental advocates seek to ensure that standards
achieve the maximum energy savings that are technologically feasible
and economically justifiable.
To examine the underlying issues outlined above, and others not yet
articulated, all parties in the negotiation will need DOE to provide
data and an analytic framework complete and accurate enough to support
their deliberations. DOE's analyses must be adequate to inform a
prospective negotiation--for example, a preliminary Technical Support
Document or equivalent must be available and timely.
B. Formation of Subcommittee
A subcommittee will be formed and operated in full compliance with
the requirements of FACA and in a manner consistent with the
requirements of the NRA. DOE has determined that the subcommittee not
exceed 25 members. The Department believes that more than 25 members
would make it difficult to conduct effective negotiations. DOE is aware
that there are many more potential participants than there are
membership slots on the subcommittee. The Department does not believe,
nor does the NRA contemplate, that each potentially affected group must
participate directly in the negotiations; nevertheless, each affected
interest can be adequately represented. To have a successful
negotiation, it is important for interested parties to identify and
form coalitions that adequately represent significantly affected
interests. To provide adequate representation, those coalitions must
agree to support, both financially and technically, a member of the
subcommittee whom they choose to represent their interests.
DOE recognizes that when it establishes energy efficiency standards
for residential products and commercial equipment, various segments of
society may be affected in different ways, in some cases producing
unique ``interests'' in a proposed rule based on income, gender, or
other factors. The Department will pay attention to providing that any
unique interests that have been identified, and that may be
significantly affected by the proposed rule, are represented.
FACA also requires that members of the public have the opportunity
to attend meetings of the full committee and speak or otherwise address
the committee during the public comment period. In addition, any member
of the public is permitted to file a written statement with the
advisory committee. DOE plans to follow these same procedures in
conducting meetings of the subcommittee.
C. Interests Involved/Subcommittee Membership
DOE anticipates that the subcommittee will comprise no more than 25
members who represent affected and interested stakeholder groups, at
least one of whom must be a member of the ERAC. As required by FACA,
the Department will conduct the negotiated rulemaking with particular
attention to ensuring full and balanced representation of those
interests that may be significantly affected by the proposed rule
governing standards for the energy efficiency of distribution
transformers. Section 562 of the NRA defines the term interest as
``with respect to an issue or matter, multiple parties which have a
similar point of view or which are likely to be affected in a similar
manner.'' Listed below are parties the Department to date has
identified as being ``significantly affected'' by a proposed rule
regarding the energy efficiency of distribution transformers.
The Department of Energy
Distribution transformers manufacturers and trade
associations representing manufacturers
Component manufacturers and related suppliers
Utilities
Energy efficiency/environmental advocacy groups
Consumers
[[Page 50151]]
One purpose of this notice is to determine whether Federal
standards regarding the energy efficiency of distribution transformers
will significantly affect interests that are not listed above. DOE
invites comment and suggestions on its initial list of significantly
affected interests.
DOE also developed an initial list of stakeholders who could serve
on the subcommittee to represent the above-listed interests. The
following list includes organizations DOE tentatively has identified as
being either potential members of the subcommittee, or potential
members of a coalition that would in turn nominate a candidate to
represent one of the significantly affected interests listed above. DOE
invites comment and suggestions on whether the following list of
stakeholders identifies an accurate and comprehensive pool of
stakeholders, or subcommittee members.
Department of Energy
John Cymbalsky
EarthJustice
Tim Ballo
National Electrical Manufacturers Assocation
Jim Creevy
Clark Silcox
Appliance Standards Awareness Program
Andrew DeLaski
Federal Pacific
Robert Greeson
American Council for an Energy Efficiency Economy
Steve Nadel
Natural Resources Defense Council
Robin Roy
AK Steel Corporation
Jerry Schoen
California Energy Commission (as resource party)
Acme Electric
Joe Ashley
Eaton Corp
Carlos Siqueiros
Federal Pacific
Rob Greeson
GE
Bill Forsythe
Hammond Power Solutions
Dhiru Patel
Power Paragon
Thomas Proctor
Mirus International
Tony Hoevenaars
ONYX Power
Vijay Tendulkar
Power Quality International
Jeffrey Turner
Powersmiths International
Philip Ling
Schneider Electric
Thomas Patzner
Sola HD/Emerson
Dale Corel
WEG Electric
Bill Oliver
The list provided above includes stakeholders whom DOE tentatively
has identified as being either a potential member of the subcommittee
or a potential member of a coalition that would in turn nominate a
candidate to represent one of the significantly affected interests,
also listed above. The list is not presented as a complete or exclusive
list from which subcommittee members will be selected. Nor does
inclusion on the list of potential parties mean that a listed party has
agreed to participate as a member of the subcommittee or as a member of
a coalition. The list merely indicates parties that DOE tentatively has
identified as representing significantly affected interests in the
proposed rule establishing energy efficiency standards for distribution
transformers.
DOE requests comments and suggestions regarding its tentative list
of potential members of the subcommittee on energy efficiency standards
for distribution transformers. Members may be individuals or
organizations. If the effort is to be fruitful, participants on the
subcommittee should be able to fully and adequately represent the
viewpoints of their respective interests. This document gives notice of
DOE's process to other potential participants and affords them the
opportunity to request representation in the negotiations. Those who
wish to be appointed as members of the subcommittee, including those
that have been tentatively identified by DOE in this Notice, should
submit a request to DOE, in accordance with the public participation
procedures outlined in the ``Dates'' and ``Addresses'' sections of this
Notice. Membership of the subcommittee is likely to involve:
Attendance at approximately five (5), one (1) to two (2)
day meetings;
Travel costs to those meetings; and
Preparation time for those meetings.
Members serving on the subcommittee will not receive compensation
for their services.
Interested parties who are not selected for membership on the
subcommittee may make valuable contributions to this negotiated
rulemaking effort in any of several ways:
The person may request to be placed on the subcommittee
mailing list and submit written comments as appropriate.
The person may attend subcommittee meetings, which are
open to the public; caucus with his or her interest's member on the
subcommittee; or even address the subcommittee during the public
comment portion of the subcommittee meeting.
The person could assist the efforts of a workgroup that
the subcommittee might establish.
A subcommittee may establish informal workgroups, which usually are
asked to facilitate committee deliberations by assisting with various
technical matters (e.g., researching or preparing summaries of the
technical literature or comments on specific matters such as economic
issues). Workgroups also might assist in estimating costs or drafting
regulatory text on issues associated with the analysis of the costs and
benefits addressed, or formulating drafts of the various provisions and
their justifications as previously developed by the subcommittee. Given
their support function, workgroups usually consist of participants who
have expertise or particular interest in the technical matter(s) being
studied. Because it recognizes the importance of this support work for
the subcommittee, DOE will provide appropriate technical expertise for
such workgroups.
D. Good Faith Negotiation
Every subcommittee member must be willing to negotiate in good
faith and have the authority, granted by his or her constituency, to do
so. The first step is to ensure that each member has good
communications with his or her constituencies. An intra-interest
network of communication should be established to bring information
from the support organization to the member at the table, and to take
information from the table back to the support organization. Second,
each organization or coalition therefore should designate as its
representative a person having the credibility and authority to ensure
that needed information is provided and decisions are made in a timely
fashion. Negotiated rulemaking can require the appointed members to
give a significant amount of time, which must be sustained for as long
as the duration of the negotiated rulemaking. Although the ERAC
advisory committee charter will be in effect for 2 years from the date
it is filed with Congress, DOE expects the subcommittee's deliberations
to conclude or be terminated earlier than that. Other qualities of
members that can be helpful are negotiating experience and skills, and
sufficient technical knowledge to participate in substantive
negotiations.
Certain concepts are central to negotiating in good faith. One is
the willingness to bring all issues to the
[[Page 50152]]
bargaining table in an attempt to reach a consensus, as opposed to
keeping key issues in reserve. The second is a willingness to keep the
issues at the table and not take them to other forums. Finally, good
faith includes a willingness to move away from some of the positions
often taken in a more traditional rulemaking process, and instead
explore openly with other parties all ideas that may emerge from the
subcommittee's discussions.
E. Facilitator
The facilitator will act as a neutral in the substantive
development of the proposed standard. Rather, the facilitator's role
generally includes:
Impartially assisting the members of the subcommittee in
conducting discussions and negotiations;
Impartially assisting in performing the duties of the
Designated Federal Official under FACA; and
F. Department Representative
The DOE representative will be a full and active participant in the
consensus-building negotiations. The Department's representative will
meet regularly with senior Department officials, briefing them on the
negotiations and receiving their suggestions and advice so that he or
she can effectively represent the Department's views regarding the
issues before the subcommittee. DOE's representative also will ensure
that the entire spectrum of governmental interests affected by the
standards rulemaking, including the Office of Management and Budget,
the Attorney General, and other Departmental offices, are kept informed
of the negotiations and encouraged to make their concerns known in a
timely fashion.
G. Subcommittee and Schedule
After evaluating the comments submitted in response to this notice
and the requests for nominations, DOE will either inform the members of
the subcommittee that they have been selected or determine that
conducting a negotiated rulemaking is inappropriate. Due to the court-
ordered deadline, DOE plans for the subcommittee to conduct
deliberations in the summer and fall of 2011 and hopes that the
subcommittee will come to an agreement on a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in time to publish that proposal by the October 1, 2011 date
contained in the settlement agreement described above.
DOE will advise subcommittee members of administrative matters
related to the functions of the subcommittee before beginning. DOE will
establish a meeting schedule based on the settlement agreement and
produce the necessary documents so as to adhere to that schedule. While
the negotiated rulemaking process is underway, DOE is committed to
performing much of the same analysis as it would during a normal
standards rulemaking process and to providing information and technical
support to the subcommittee.
IV. Comments Requested
DOE requests comments on whether it should use negotiated
rulemaking for its rulemaking pertaining to the energy efficiency of
distribution transformers and the extent to which the issues, parties,
and procedures described above are adequate and appropriate. DOE also
requests comments on which parties should be included in a negotiated
rulemaking to develop draft language pertaining to the energy
efficiency of distribution transformers and suggestions of additional
interests and/or stakeholders that should be represented on the
subcommittee. All who wish to participate as members of the
subcommittee should submit a request for nomination to DOE.
V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of today's notice
of intent to establish a subcommittee and negotiate a proposed rule.
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 5, 2011.
Kathleen Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-20541 Filed 8-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P