Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Battery Chargers, 46855-46870 [2015-19105]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules additional certifications to the Performance Standards required under 7 CFR 3560.308(c). The borrower will be asked to certify there have been no changes in project ownership other than those approved by the Agency and identified in the certification; and that, real estate taxes are paid in accordance with state and/or local requirements and are current. List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 3560 Aged loan programs—Agriculture, Loan programs—Housing and Community Development, Low- and moderate-income housing, Public housing, Rent subsidies. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, chapter XXXV, Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 3560—DIRECT MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING LOANS AND GRANTS 1. The authority citation for Part 3560 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1480. Subpart A—General Provisions and Definitions 2. Amend § 3560.11 by removing the definition of ‘‘Engagement’’. ■ Subpart G—Financial Management 3. Section 3560.301 is revised to read as follows: ■ § 3560.301 General. This subpart contains requirements for the financial management of Agencyfinanced multi-family housing (MFH) projects, including accounts, budgets, and reports. Financial management systems and procedures must cover all housing operations and provide adequate documentation to ensure that program objectives are met. ■ 4. Amend § 3560.302 by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(1) and (2), and (e)(1) to read as follows: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS § 3560.302 Accounting, bookkeeping, budgeting, and financial management systems. (a) General. Borrowers must establish the accounting, bookkeeping, budgeting and financial management procedures necessary to conduct housing project operations in a financially safe and sound manner. Borrowers must maintain records in a manner suitable for an audit, and must be able to report accurate operational results to the Agency from these accounts and records. (b) * * * (1) Borrowers may use a cash, accrual, or modified accrual method of VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 accounting, bookkeeping, and budget preparations as long as they are prepared in accordance with the standards identified in § 3560.308. (2) Borrowers must describe their accounting, bookkeeping, budget preparation, and financial reporting procedures in their management plan. * * * * * (e) * * * (1) Borrowers must retain all housing project financial records, books, and supporting material for at least three years after the issuance of their financial reports. Upon request, these materials will immediately be made available to the Agency, its representatives, the USDA Office of the Inspector General (OIG), or the General Accountability Office (GAO). * * * * * ■ 5. Amend § 3560.303 by revising paragraph (b)(1)(vi)(Q) to read as follows: § 3560.303 Housing project budgets. * * * * * (b) * * * (1) * * * (vi) * * * (Q) Professional service contracts (audits, owner-certified submissions in accordance with § 3560.302(a)(2), tax returns, energy audits, utility allowances, architectural, construction, rehabilitation and inspection contracts, etc.) * * * * * ■ 6. Amend § 3560.308 by: ■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2). ■ b. Removing paragraph (b). ■ c. Redesignating paragraphs (c) and (d) as (b) and (c) respectively. ■ d. Revising the newly designated (b) introductory text. ■ e. Adding paragraphs (b)(8) and (b)(9). ■ f. Revising the newly designated (c)(1). The revisions and additions read as follows: § 3560.308 Annual financial reports. (a) General. (1) Borrowers that receive $500,000 or more in combined Federal financial assistance must include an independent auditor’s report, financial statements and notes to the financial statements, supplemental information containing Agency approved forms for project budgets and borrower balance sheets, report on internal controls and compliance, and a schedule of current and prior year finding and corrective actions (if applicable). Borrowers must include the audit with their annual financial reports submitted to the Agency. Federal Financial Assistance is defined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.40. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 46855 (2) Borrowers that receive less than $500,000 in combined Federal financial assistance must submit annual owner certified financial statements presented in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Ownercertified submissions will not include an auditor’s opinion or auditor’s report on compliance or internal controls. Borrowers may use a CPA to prepare this report. * * * * * (b) Performance standards. All Borrowers must certify that the housing meets the performance standards below: * * * * * (8) There have been no changes in project ownership other than those approved by the Agency and Identified in the certification. (9) Real estate taxes are paid in accordance with state and/or local requirements and are current. (c) * * * (1) Non-profit and public borrower entities subject to OMB Circular A–133 requirements must submit audits in accordance with 2 CFR part 200. * * * * * Dated: July 9, 2015. Tony Hernandez, Administrator, Rural Housing Service. [FR Doc. 2015–19342 Filed 8–5–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–XV–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Parts 429 and 430 [Docket No. EERE–2014–BT–TP–0044] RIN 1904–AD45 Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Battery Chargers Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is proposing to revise its test procedure for battery chargers established under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended (EPCA). These proposed revisions, if adopted, would harmonize the instrumentation resolution and uncertainty requirements with the second edition of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 62301 standard and other international standards for measuring standby power. Additionally, the proposed amendments would update and propose new battery selection criteria for multi-voltage, multi-capacity battery chargers, and SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 46856 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules provide specific steps on how to select a battery for those chargers when more than one battery meets the selection criteria, such as with a multi-chemistry battery charger. The proposal also outlines new provisions for conditioning and discharging lead acid batteries. DATES: Comments: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this notice of proposed rulemaking before and after the public meeting, but no later than October 20, 2015. See section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. Meeting: DOE will hold a public meeting on Tuesday, September 15, 2015 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., in Washington, DC. The meeting will also be broadcast as a webinar. See section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for webinar registration information, participant instructions, and information about the capabilities available to webinar participants. The public meeting will be held at the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 8E–089, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. Any comments submitted must identify the NOPR for Test Procedures for battery chargers and provide docket number EERE–2014–BT–TP–0044 and/ or regulatory information number (RIN) number 1904–AD45. Comments may be submitted using any of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: BatteryChargers2014TP0044@ EE.Doe.Gov Include the docket number and/or RIN in the subject line of the message. 3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20585–0121. If possible, please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies. 4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC, 20024. Telephone: (202) 586–2945. If possible, please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see section V of this document (Public Participation). mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS ADDRESSES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available. A link to the docket Web page can be found at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/ buildings/appliance_standards/ product.aspx?productid=84. This Web page will contain a link to the docket for this notice on the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov Web page will contain simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section V for information on how to submit comments through regulations.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct requests for additional information may be sent to Mr. Jeremy Dommu, 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) 586–9870. Email: battery_chargers_and_ external_power_supplies@EE.Doe.Gov In the office of the General Counsel, contact Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email: Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov. For further information on how to submit a comment, review other public comments and the docket, or participate in the public meeting, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Authority and Background II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking III. Discussion A. Battery Selection and Testing of MultiVoltage, Multi-Capacity Battery Chargers B. Back-Up Battery Chargers C. Measurement Accuracy and Precision D. Conditioning and Discharge Rate for Lead Acid Battery Chargers E. Sampling and Certification Requirements F. Enforcement Testing Sampling Plan G. Other Proposed Updates H. Effective Date and Compliance Date of Test Procedure PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 I. Impact from the Test Procedure J. Wireless Power 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 of 1995 D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 G. Review Under the 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. Description of Material Incorporated by Reference V. Public Participation A. Attendance at Public Meeting B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for Distribution C. Conduct of Public Meeting D. Submission of Comments E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary I. Authority and Background Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.; ‘‘EPCA’’ or, ‘‘the Act’’) sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (All references to EPCA refer to the statute as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law 114–11 (April 30, 2015). Part B of Title III, which for editorial reasons was re-designated as Part A upon incorporation into the U.S. Code (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309, as codified), establishes the ‘‘Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.’’ Battery chargers are among the products affected by these provisions. Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. The testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use as the basis for (1) certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted under EPCA, and (2) making representations about the efficiency of those products. Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to determine whether the products comply with any relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules General Test Procedure Rulemaking Process Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE follows when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered products. EPCA provides in relevant part that any test procedures prescribed or amended under this section shall be reasonably designed to produce test results that measure the energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) In addition, when DOE determines that a test procedure requires amending, it publishes a notice with the proposed changes and offers the public an opportunity to comment on the proposal. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) As part of this process, DOE determines the extent to which, if any, the proposed test procedure would alter the measured energy efficiency of any covered product as determined under the existing test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)) Section 135 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (‘‘EPACT 2005’’), Public Law 109–58 (Aug. 8, 2005), amended sections 321 and 325 of EPCA by adding certain provisions related to battery chargers. Among these provisions were new definitions defining what constitutes a battery charger and a requirement that DOE prescribe ‘‘definitions and test procedures for the power use of battery chargers and external power supplies.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(1)(A)) DOE complied with this requirement by publishing a test procedure final rule on December 8, 2006, that established a new Appendix Y to address the testing of battery chargers to measure their energy consumption and adopted several definitions related to the testing of battery chargers. See 71 FR 71340 (codified at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y ‘‘Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers’’). Lastly, DOE incorporated by reference specific sections of the EPA’s ‘‘Test Methodology for Determining the Energy Performance of Battery Charging Systems’’ when measuring inactive mode energy consumption. Section 310 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (‘‘EISA 2007’’), Public Law 110–140 (Dec. 19, 2007) then amended section 325 of EPCA by defining active mode, standby mode, and off mode. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)) This section also VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 directed DOE to amend its existing test procedures by December 31, 2008, to measure the energy consumed in standby mode and off mode for battery chargers. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(B)(i)) Further, it authorized DOE to amend, by rule, any of the definitions for active, standby, and off modes (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(B)) Accordingly, the Department issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) in 2008, 73 FR 48054 (Aug. 15, 2008), and a final rule in early 2009 to establish definitions for these terms. (74 FR 13318, March 27, 2009) Subsequently, in response to numerous testing issues raised by commenters in the context of DOE’s energy conservation standards rulemaking efforts for battery chargers,1 DOE issued another NOPR on April 2, 2010 (75 FR 16958). The NOPR proposed adding a new active mode energy consumption test procedure for battery chargers that would assist in developing potential energy conservation standards for these products. DOE also proposed amending portions of its standby and off mode battery charger test procedure to shorten the overall measurement time. 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. After receiving comments at the public meeting, DOE published a final rule that codified a new active-mode test procedure and amended the standby and off-mode test procedures thenpresent in appendix Y to subpart B of part 430 in the CFR. 76 FR 31750 (June 1, 2011). That rule became effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, but manufacturers were allotted 180 days from the rule’s publication to use the new test procedure when making written representations of the energy efficiency of their chargers. As federal standards for battery chargers have yet to be finalized, DOE has not required manufacturers to submit energy efficiency data for their products tested under the battery charger test procedure. Following the publication of the most recent final rule, DOE continued to receive additional questions and requests for clarification regarding the testing, rating, and classification of 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. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 46857 battery chargers. As part of the continuing effort to establish federal efficiency standards for battery chargers and to develop a clear and widely applicable test procedure, DOE published a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) on May 15, 2014 (79 FR 27774). This NODA sought comment from stakeholders concerning the repeatability of the test procedure when testing battery chargers with several consumer configurations, and on the anticipated market penetration of new battery charging technologies that may require further revisions to DOE’s regulations. DOE also sought comment on the reporting methodologies for manufacturers attempting to comply with the California Energy Commission’s (CEC’s) efficiency standards for battery chargers in order to understand certain data discrepancies in the CEC database. DOE indicated its interest in soliciting feedback to determine whether the current procedure contained any ambiguities requiring clarification. These issues were discussed during DOE’s NODA public meeting on June 3, 2014. To ensure the test procedure’s clarity, DOE’s proposal, which is based on commenter feedback to the NODA, would make certain clarifications to appendix Y to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 and include a sampling plan for battery chargers in 10 CFR part 429. These proposed changes would include updated references to the latest version of IEC 62301 and clarify DOE’s test methods for specific types of battery chargers to better reflect evolving technologies. II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking This proposal seeks to make several changes to the current test procedure for measuring the energy use of battery chargers. First, DOE is proposing to amend the existing battery selection criteria to limit the number of batteries selected for testing to a single battery. DOE is proposing that only the battery with the highest rated voltage and/or highest rated charge capacity, from those among which the battery charger is capable of charging, would be tested for each basic model. Additionally, DOE is proposing that if at least two distinct batteries meet the criteria of having the highest rated voltage and highest rated charge capacity, the battery charger and battery combination with the highest maintenance mode power would be selected for testing. (‘‘Maintenance mode’’ is defined as ‘‘the mode of operation when the battery charger is connected to the main electricity supply E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 46858 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules and the battery is fully charged, but is still connected to the charger.’’ See 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y, Sec. 2.8.) Second, the proposed changes would exclude back-up battery chargers embedded in continuous use devices from being required to be tested under the DOE procedure. This proposed exclusion would harmonize with DOE’s approach currently under consideration regarding the potential regulation of battery back-up systems (including uninterruptible power supplies (UPSs)) as part of the Computer and Back-up Battery Systems rulemaking. Third, the proposed changes would harmonize DOE’s test procedure with the latest version of IEC 62301 by providing specific resolution and measurement tolerances. These specifications would assist in ensuring that testing is performed with equipment that is capable of reaching these tolerances and that the resulting measurements are repeatable and reproducible. Fourth, DOE is proposing to change how lead acid batteries are conditioned and discharged by applying the protocol currently used for all other battery chemistries (excluding lithium-ion) to lead acid batteries. DOE has become aware that a lead acid battery’s condition may vary upon purchase and this variation can impact lead acid battery performance. In an effort to minimize these effects, DOE is proposing to require that the batteries be conditioned prior to testing. Additionally, DOE has been informed that discharge rate can significantly impact the nominal battery energy of lead acid batteries, especially in the case of flooded lead acid batteries. Stakeholders have claimed that the discharge rate as determined by the current DOE test procedure is higher than that during typical use, and therefore does not give an accurate representation of the battery energy in lead acid batteries. (NMMA, No. 12, p. 4) Accordingly, DOE is proposing to lengthen the discharge time for lead acid batteries to mitigate these effects. Fifth, DOE is proposing to add product-specific certification reporting requirements into 10 CFR 429.39(b), which is currently reserved. DOE is also proposing to add a sampling methodology to be used for determining representations of efficiency, energy and power consumption, and other key battery charger characteristics. These proposals would specify the required data elements to certify compliance with any energy conservation standards for battery chargers that DOE may adopt, and also would provide a method for DOE to enforce compliance with any energy conservation standards for battery chargers that DOE may promulgate. Sixth, DOE is proposing to correct an internal cross-reference in the current version of Table 3.1 contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y and to add units to the measured and calculated values in the table. The updates would also remove the empty value column currently found in Table 3.1. DOE is also proposing to specify in section 430.23(aa) that battery discharge energy should be measured according to section 3.8 of appendix Y. The table below summarizes the changes and the affected sections of 10 CFR parts 429 and 430. TABLE II.1—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES AND AFFECTED SECTIONS OF 10 CFR PARTS 429 AND 430 Sections to modify Summary of proposed modifications Subpart B of Part 429—Certification 429.39(b) Certification Reports ................................................................ • Create new paragraph (b), specifying requirements for certifications of compliance with energy conservation standards for battery chargers. Subpart C of Part 429—Enforcement Appendix D ............................................................................................... • Create new appendix to include sampling plan for enforcement testing. Subpart A of Part 430—General Provisions § 430.2. Definitions ................................................................................... • Amend definitions of ‘‘direct operation external power supply.’’ • Add definition of ‘‘back-up battery charger.’’ Appendix Y to Subpart B of Part 430—Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers 1. Scope ................................................................................................... 3. Standard Test Conditions ..................................................................... mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 4. Unit Under Test (UUT) Setup Requirements ....................................... 5. Test Measurement ............................................................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 • Insert exceptions for back-up battery chargers embedded in continuous use devices and wireless charging systems that do not fix the position of the device during charging. • Incorporate by reference the uncertainty requirements of IEC 62301 (2nd Ed.) in 3.2(a). • Correct the internal cross-reference in Table 3.1 for item 4 and modify the table by removing the current ‘‘value’’ column and adding units to the table as appropriate. • Clarify in section 4.3.b that a single battery should be selected as a result of applying the battery selection criteria in Table 4.1. • Insert section 4.3.b.1 to require selecting the single battery resulting in the highest maintenance mode power when following Table 4.1 results in two or more distinct batteries. • Update Table 4.1 to remove instances of multiple batteries for test and to instruct that, where applicable, the highest voltage or highest charge capacity battery, or combination for multi-port battery chargers, must be tested. Remove column ‘‘number of tests.’’ • Remove reference to lead acid batteries from section 5.3(a). • Insert provision for lead acid batteries to be discharged to 50% of rated voltage in section 5.3(c)(2)(i). Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 46859 TABLE II.1—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES AND AFFECTED SECTIONS OF 10 CFR PARTS 429 AND 430—Continued Sections to modify Summary of proposed modifications • Remove reference to lead acid from section 5.3(d). • Removed discharge current value ‘‘.2C’’ from section 5.8(c)(2). • Updated discharge rate and termination voltage for VRLA and Flooded Lead Acid in Table 5.2. III. Discussion standards development organizations, and energy efficiency advocacy groups. Table III.1 lists the entities that commented on that NODA and their affiliation. These comments are discussed in more detail below, and the In response to the May 2014 NODA, DOE received written comments from 15 interested parties, including manufacturers, trade associations, full set of comments can be found at: https://www.regulations.gov/ #!docketBrowser;rpp=25;po=0;D=EERE2014-BT-NOA-0012;dct=PS. TABLE III–1—INTERESTED PARTIES THAT COMMENTED ON THE MAY 2014 NODA Commenter Acronym Organization type/ affiliation Alliance for Wireless Power ..................................... Arris Group, Inc. ....................................................... Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers ....... California Investor-Owned Utilities ........................... Consumer Electronics Association ........................... Energizer Holdings, Inc. ........................................... Information Technology Industry Council ................. Johnson Outdoors Marine Electronics ..................... National Electrical Manufacturers Association ......... National Marine Manufacturers Association ............. Natural Resources Canada/ECOVA ........................ National Resources Defense Council ...................... Power Tool Institute .................................................. Proctor & Gamble ..................................................... Telecommunications Industry Association ............... A4WP ..................... ARRIS .................... AHAM ..................... CA IOUs ................. CEA ........................ Energizer ................ ITI ........................... JOME ..................... NEMA ..................... NMMA .................... NRCan (ECOVA) ... NRDC ..................... PTI .......................... P&G ........................ TIA .......................... Trade Association .................................................... Manufacturer ............................................................ Standard Development Organization ...................... Utilities ..................................................................... Trade Association .................................................... Manufacturer ............................................................ Trade Association .................................................... Manufacturer ............................................................ Trade Association .................................................... Trade Association .................................................... Efficiency Advocacy Group ..................................... Efficiency Advocacy Group ..................................... Trade Association .................................................... Manufacturer ............................................................ Standard Development Organization ...................... mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS A. Battery Selection and Testing of Multi-Voltage, Multi-Capacity Battery Chargers DOE sought comments on the existing battery selection methodology included in section 4.3 ‘‘Selection of Batteries To Use for Testing’’ of the test procedure in its recent NODA as it relates to multivoltage, multi-voltage and multicapacity, and multi-chemistry battery chargers. See 79 FR 27774, 27776–27777 (May 15, 2014).The submitted comments suggested that errors may be introduced when testing these types of battery chargers and raised questions about the repeatability of the test procedure when testing battery chargers capable of charging batteries of different chemistries (i.e., chargers capable of handling multiple battery chemistries such as lithium and nickel metal hydride). PTI urged DOE to state explicitly how each battery charger and battery combination should be rated. (PTI, Pub. Mtg. Transcript, No. 6 at p. 77) ITI commented that the current test procedure leaves significant room for error and does not employ effective, reasonable and repeatable test conditions for these types of battery VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 chargers. (ITI, No. 19, pp. 2–3) The CA IOUs and NRDC both offered solutions to eliminate ambiguity in battery selection for these battery chargers by suggesting that the least expensive battery or the battery which represents the most common intended use be selected. (California IOUs, No. 15, p. 2, NRDC, No. 20, p. 2) DOE took all of these comments into account when developing its proposal. Under the current provisions for battery selection, a multi-voltage, multicapacity battery charger must be tested with as many as three distinct battery types. The battery selection procedure under Appendix Y, Section 4, Table 4.1, lays out three sets of testing scenarios: (a) Test unit with the lowest voltage, lowest capacity battery utilizing only one port. (b) Test unit with the highest voltage, lowest capacity battery utilizing only one port. (c) Use all ports and use the battery or configuration of batteries with the highest total rated energy capacity. Per section 4.3.a(2), if no batteries are packaged with the charger, but the instructions specify or recommend batteries for use with the charger, PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Comment No. (Docket reference) 17 12 18 15 21 8 19 9 7 11 16 20 13 10 14 batteries for testing must be those recommended or specified in the instructions and must be selected according to the procedure in section 4.3.b, which generally requires that a tester use Table 4.1 to determine which batteries to use when testing the efficiency of a given battery charger. In the case of multi-chemistry battery chargers, multiple batteries of differing chemistries may meet the criteria outlined in 4.3.b for a single battery selection and test. Specifically, the current test procedure is not clear which battery chemistry, or chemistries, should be selected for testing—it indicates only that the battery with the highest voltage or highest rated charge capacity be selected. In this case, the test results for each battery of differing chemistries may be inconsistent even though they have the same voltage and charge capacity. Finally, DOE realizes that the current battery selection criteria can result in the selection of up to three separate batteries for testing, which increases testing burden and may create ambiguity as to which test result to use when making a representation about the energy efficiency of a battery charger. E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 46860 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules DOE is proposing an approach that would reduce ambiguity and testing burden, while yielding repeatable measurements of a tested unit’s energy use. Specifically, to eliminate potential ambiguity and reduce testing burden, DOE is proposing to modify Table 4.1 to eliminate the multiple tests currently required for multi-voltage and multicapacity battery chargers and instead require that only the battery with the highest voltage and/or highest charge capacity be selected. In doing so, DOE’s goal is to test the charger in the mode for which the battery charger is designed to operate optimally. Based on feedback from industry representatives and consultation with subject matter experts, DOE understands that, if required to operate over a range of outputs, power electronics, including battery chargers, are typically designed to optimize components at the high output range of the device. Therefore, DOE believes these test results will be representative of the typical energy consumption of the battery charger and reduce the possibility of placing undue burden on manufacturers of chargers that are able to charge lower voltage, lower capacity batteries. To address these same issues, DOE is also proposing that if a battery charger is multi-voltage and multi-capacity and capable of charging batteries of multiple chemistries (such that two or more batteries, each with a unique chemistry, meet the proposed selection criteria) the battery and battery charger combination resulting in the highest maintenance mode power would be chosen for testing. DOE anticipates that, with these proposed changes, there will be only one set of test results, and a single rating, for each basic model of battery charger. The resulting energy consumption calculation would be repeatable and representative of each basic model’s energy use for which it has been optimized, while eliminating the ambiguity that appears to be present in the current version of the procedure. Additionally, by reducing the number of tests required, DOE believes that the overall test burden would be reduced. DOE seeks comment on the proposed methodology for selecting batteries for multi-voltage, multi-capacity battery chargers, and for those cases when the battery selection criteria results in two or more unique batteries (e.g., multichemistry battery chargers). DOE notes that it also considered several other options to modify the test procedure to clarify how to measure the energy use of, and obtain a single set of energy consumption ratings for, multi- VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 voltage and multi-capacity battery chargers. First, DOE considered requiring the existing battery selection criteria to be applied and then averaging the test results to produce one set of test results. Second, DOE considered modifying the battery selection criteria to require that only the battery with the lowest voltage and/or lowest rated charge capacity be selected for testing. Lastly, in the case of multi-chemistry battery chargers, DOE considered requiring the battery charger be considered a basic model for each base chemistry it was capable of charging and apply the battery selection criteria separately for each chemistry, or basic model. Each one of these proposed solutions, however, resulted in solutions that did not fully accomplish DOE’s goals. The first option, while producing a single set of test results, could result in an unrepresentative measurement of the true energy consumption consistent with any configuration of batteries the battery charger is capable of charging. The second option, while similar to DOE’s proposal, would not produce results representative of the higher range for which battery chargers are, typically, optimally designed when capable of charging multiple voltages and capacities. Finally, in addressing battery chemistry, treating each chemistry mode as a unique basic model, with either of the previous options discussed above, did not produce a single metric and could increase the testing burden on some manufacturers. In DOE’s view, this approach would produce test results that are repeatable and representative of the typical energy consumption of the battery charger under test and at the same time reduce testing burden on manufacturers. While DOE’s preliminary determination is that these options conflict with those intentions, DOE is seeking comment on these other options as well. B. Back-Up Battery Chargers DOE sought comments on applying the current test procedure to battery chargers embedded in continuous use products, or back-up battery chargers, in the recent NODA. See 79 FR 27774. Based on comments received from interested parties and DOE’s own analysis, DOE is proposing to define back-up battery chargers and exclude them from the scope of this test procedure. DOE is proposing to define back-up battery chargers in 10 CFR 430.2 as a battery charger that: (1) Is embedded in a separate end-use product that is designed to continuously operate using main power (AC or DC) and (2) PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 has as its sole purpose to recharge a battery used to maintain continuity of load power in case of input power failure. DOE previously referred to these battery chargers in the context of continuous use devices in the May 2014 NODA. Examples of such devices that integrate back-up battery chargers include UPSs and some cable modems. Interested parties noted to DOE that continuous use devices are becoming increasingly integrated with a variety of products that do not perform back-up battery charging as a primary function of the device. As a result of this integrated approach, the battery charging function in these products often cannot be isolated during testing (ARRIS, No. 22, p. 2). While the test procedure is designed to measure the energy consumption and efficiency of the battery charging functionality, the method is limited when applied to a battery charger that is embedded among other functions that cannot be isolated during testing. Citing this reason, ARRIS suggested that these types of devices be excluded from the scope of the test procedure. (ARRIS, No. 22, p. 2). ARRIS also noted that, in the event that DOE does not exclude these types of back-up battery chargers embedded in continuous use devices from the scope of this procedure, DOE should add provisions specifically to address the testing of these units. ARRIS suggested amending the test procedure to provide for measurement of only the battery charging functionality of continuous use devices that lack an on/off switch and for which the battery cannot be removed. The suggested alternative includes measuring 24-hour energy consumption (‘‘E24’’) with a fully charged battery, then again measuring E24 with a discharged battery. ARRIS’s approach would use the absolute difference between these two values to represent the 24-hour energy consumption of the unit under test (UUT). (ARRIS, No. 12, p. 4–6) Additionally, the CA IOUs and NRDC both suggested that if DOE plans to require back-up battery chargers embedded in continuous use devices to be tested under the current test procedure, manufacturers should add an on-off switch to turn off all additional functionality. (CA IOUs, No. 15, p. 3, NRDC, No. 20, p. 3) ARRIS argued, however, that adding switches to disable non-charging functionality in a device where multiple functions, including battery charging, have been integrated at the system or chipset level—which helps achieve lower manufacturing costs and increased reliability and energy efficiency—is not feasible. (ARRIS, No. 22, p. 3). E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Based on its own testing data and the feedback received from commenters, at this time, DOE is proposing to exclude back-up battery chargers that are embedded in continuous devices from the testing requirements of the DOE battery charger test procedure. DOE may revisit this decision in the future as circumstances permit. Consistent with this proposed approach, DOE is also proposing to define the term ‘‘back-up battery charger’’ in § 430.2 and add to Section 1 of Appendix Y language specifying that back-up battery chargers would be excluded from the scope of the test procedure. DOE recognizes that its previously proposed standards for battery chargers considered products that would now be excluded from the scope of the test procedure. If back-up battery chargers were removed from the scope of test procedure, DOE would no longer consider establishing conservation standards for these types of products as part of a standards rulemaking for battery chargers. However, DOE is considering energy conservation standards for some battery back-up systems (including UPSs) as part of the Computer and Back-up Battery Systems rulemaking. DOE seeks comments on this approach. C. Measurement Accuracy and Precision On June 13, 2005, the IEC published its first edition of testing standard IEC 62301, which provided a method for measuring standby power of household appliances. The standard quantified minimum resolution requirements for energy measurement instruments and outlined the necessary procedures to ensure stable energy readings for any UUT. The standard also set limits on the uncertainties associated with any measurement taken that is meant to represent the energy consumption of a household device. It has since become recognized by many regulatory bodies as the default guideline for any power or energy measurement required for formal certification. DOE subsequently adopted instrumentation resolution and measurement uncertainty requirements for testing battery chargers identical to those in the IEC 62301 standard and codified these requirements at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y on June 1, 2011. 76 FR 31750. The IEC published Edition 2.0 of IEC 62301 in January 2011. This revised version of the testing standard refined the test equipment specifications, measuring techniques, and uncertainty determination to improve the method for measuring loads with high crest factors and/or low power factors, such as the low power modes typical of VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 battery chargers operating in standby mode. These provisions were contained in Section 4 of IEC 62301, with informative guidance provided in Annex B and Annex D on measuring low power modes and determining measurement uncertainty. To continue to ensure test methods are harmonized, DOE is proposing to incorporate by reference the resolution parameters for power measurements and uncertainty methodologies found in Section 4 of the second edition of the IEC 62301 standard. DOE seeks comment on the merits of incorporating these revisions into the current battery chargers test procedure in Appendix Y. DOE also seeks comment regarding whether the use of Annex B and Annex D should be mandatory to ensure the most accurate test results. D. Conditioning and Discharge Rate for Lead Acid Battery Chargers DOE received several comments from stakeholders suggesting changes to both the conditioning of lead acid batteries and the discharge rate for lead acid batteries. In some cases, DOE’s own research also points to a potential need to modify the current procedure to better account for the specific characteristics of lead acid batteries. Currently, no conditioning is performed for lead acid batteries. See 10 CFR part 430, appendix Y, sec. 5.3.a. First, Johnson Outdoor Marine Electronics (JOME) provided test results with its comments indicating that the discharge energy of lead acid batteries varies over several cycles. These results are contrary to certain lead acid battery manufacturers’ claims that conditioning is not required. JOME stated that typical lead acid batteries are only at 75 to 80 percent capacity when they are delivered in new condition, and JOME’s test results show that lead acid battery discharge energy could increase after just two cycles, the current value for all other battery chemistries. (JOME, No. 9, p. 4–5) These data suggest that applying the conditioning protocol outlined in the current appendix Y, section 5.3.c (for batteries of other chemistries) as a prerequisite, prior to testing lead acid batteries, will produce a more accurate representation of battery discharge energy. Providing the option of various discharge rates during battery conditioning would also allow manufacturers to increase conditioning if needed. JOME’s data suggest that additional conditioning may be needed to maximize discharge energy—in some cases up to 4 cycles or more. Furthermore, JOME added that its conversations with battery PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 46861 manufacturers indicate that a 50%-80% depth of discharge would produce more accurate and representative results for lead acid batteries. (JOME, No. 9, p. 4) To account for these issues, DOE is proposing to apply the same battery conditioning provisions found in appendix Y, Section 5.3.c, to lead acid batteries and use a 50% depth of discharge during conditioning. DOE is seeking comment on applying the conditioning protocol (two charges and two discharges, followed by a charge, as a minimum) outlined in section 5.3.c of the test procedure to lead acid batteries. DOE also seeks comment on amending the depth of discharge requirement, during conditioning only, to 50% of the rated voltage of the battery and what alternative depth of discharge requirements (if any) should apply to lead acid batteries. Second, JOME, the National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA), and DOE’s own research, indicate that the amount of usable energy extracted from a lead acid battery is inversely proportional to its discharge rate.2 (NMMA, No. 12, p. 3) Thus, a lead acid battery discharged over a span of 10 hours produces a higher amount of overall measured energy than one discharged over a period of 5 hours. To address this issue, NMMA suggested that DOE allow for a longer discharge cycle than the current 5 hours required in the battery charger test procedure. (NMMA, No. 12, p. 4) Given that a longer discharge rate may be more representative for certain lead acid batteries, particularly those used in marine applications, DOE is proposing to amend its procedure by providing manufacturers with the option to choose between a 5-hour (C/5 or .2C), 10-hour (C/10 OR .1C), or 20-hour (C/20 OR .05C) discharge rate when testing with batteries that are rated above 1,000 watthours (Wh). DOE is limiting this option to those batteries that are above 1,000 Wh because a longer discharge cycle would do little to maximize discharge energy for batteries under 1,000 Wh, but would have a more significant impact on maximizing discharge energy for batteries greater than 1,000 Wh. DOE seeks comment on its proposed approach for lead acid batteries and whether the approach as described above would require any adjustments. Should adjustments be needed, DOE seeks feedback on what those adjustments should be. 2 Perez, Richard. ‘‘Lead-Acid Battery State of Charge vs. Voltage.’’ Home Power #36 (August/ September 1993). Web 2014. https:// www.zetatalk4.com/docs/Batteries/FAQ/State_Of_ Charge_Ver_Voltage_2004+.pdf. E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 46862 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS E. Sampling and Certification Requirements DOE is proposing to update 10 CFR 429.39, section (a), ‘‘Determination of represented value,’’ and reserved section (b), ‘‘Certification Reports,’’ to detail how to apply the sampling plan to calculate a represented value for each measure of energy consumption, time, and power recorded as part of the battery charger test procedure, and subsequently report those ratings during certification. For each basic model, these ratings would be determined by applying the statistical requirements outlined in 10 CFR 429.39 to a sample of battery charger units that are tested according to the test procedure in appendix Y. Specifically, a represented value would be calculated in watts (W) for the measured maintenance mode power, the measured standby mode power, and the measured off mode power; the Wh rating would be calculated for the measured battery discharge energy and the measured 24hour energy consumption. Additionally, the proposal would require the certification report for each basic model of battery charger to include each of the aforementioned represented values, along with the manufacturer and model of the test battery used; the nameplate battery voltage of the test battery in volts (V); the nameplate charge capacity of the test battery in ampere-hours (Ah); the nameplate charge energy, if available, of the battery in watt hours (Wh); the brand and model, when applicable, of the external power supply (EPS) used for testing; 3 and the average duration of the charge and maintenance mode test in hours (hr). In 2012, DOE proposed to regulate battery charger energy use with a single metric—Unit Energy Consumption (UEC)—derived from a calculation of the amount of energy consumed by the battery charger over the course of year. 77 FR 18478 (March 27, 2012). The inputs into this calculation would include the represented values that DOE is proposing to include as part of the certification requirements, along with 3 The test procedure states in section 4.1.a that ‘‘[t]he battery charger system shall be prepared and set up in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.’’ See 10 CFR 430 appendix Y to subpart B. Battery charger systems that include an EPS should be tested with the EPS that is sold with the battery charger system in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. For battery chargers that use an EPS but are not sold with an EPS, the system should be tested according to the manufacturer’s instructions on how to supply power to the battery charger. Providing the manufacturer and model for the EPS in the certification report would help ensure test result repeatability in cases where the EPS necessary to supply power to the charger is not included. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 constants used to represent the estimated number of charges per day and the number of hours each day that the battery charger spends in each mode of operation. These usage profile assumptions were originally proposed as part of the March 2012 NOPR. Therefore, should DOE finalize energy conservation standards using the same UEC approach proposed in the NOPR, the represented values included on the certification report would allow DOE to calculate the UEC of each certified basic model of battery charger and ensure compliance with energy conservation standards. DOE seeks comment on its proposal to update the sampling requirements and reporting requirements for battery chargers to include the data required to identify the battery charger and battery, as well as measured ratings recorded in the test procedure. DOE is particularly interested in whether the inclusion of these proposed categories of information would present a significant burden on manufacturers to produce as part of a submitted certification report—and if so, why. F. Enforcement Testing Sampling Plan To ensure that manufacturers of consumer products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards, DOE conducts enforcement testing by randomly selecting a sample of units and testing them according to the test procedure. DOE then compares the results obtained through this enforcement testing to the applicable energy conservation standard to determine whether the basic model meets that standard. DOE is proposing a sampling and calculation method for DOE to assess the compliance of battery charger basic models. When conducting enforcement testing for battery chargers, DOE is proposing to test a sample of at least 4 units of a battery charger basic model according to the provisions of the test procedure. DOE would then determine the sample mean for each of the output metrics of the test procedure, and then use those sample means to calculate the basic model’s UEC according to the UEC equation that would be set forth as part of an energy conservation standard for battery chargers. DOE would then determine compliance by comparing the UEC calculated as part of enforcement testing to the applicable energy conservation standard. DOE is proposing to add Appendix D to Subpart C of Part 429 of the CFR to describe the methodology that DOE would use when conducting enforcement testing of battery chargers. DOE seeks comments on this proposal. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 G. Other Proposed Updates DOE is also proposing to update Table 3.1 of Appendix Y to correct a crossreference error and eliminate a redundant column. The Active and Maintenance Mode Energy Consumption item on the fourth line in this table currently references section 5.8, when it should reference section 5.6, ‘‘Testing Charge Mode and Battery Maintenance Mode.’’ Additionally, DOE is proposing to remove the current ‘‘Value’’ column because the information from that column can be inserted in the column labeled ‘‘Name of measured or calculated value’’ column to reduce the table’s complexity. DOE seeks comment on these proposed simplification changes. H. Effective Date and Compliance Date of Test Procedure If adopted, the effective date for the battery charger test procedure would be 30 days after publication of the test procedure final rule in the Federal Register. At that time, any measure of energy consumption relying on these metrics may be represented pursuant to the final rule. Consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6293(c), representations of the energy consumption or energy efficiency of battery chargers must be based on the new test procedure and sampling plans as of 180 days after the date of publication of the test procedure final rule. Starting on that date, any such representations, including those made on marketing materials, Web sites (including qualification with a voluntary or State program), and product labels would be required to be based on results generated using the proposed procedure as well as the sampling plan in 10 CFR part 429. I. Impact From the Test Procedure When proposing to amend a test procedure, DOE typically determines the extent to which, if any, the proposed test procedure would alter the measured energy efficiency of any covered product when compared to the existing test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)). Because DOE does not currently have energy conservation standards for battery chargers, this proposal would not affect this provision. J. Wireless Power In a March 2012 standards NOPR for battery chargers and EPSs, DOE noted that there are a number of different products under the broad umbrella of ‘‘wireless power,’’ including both battery chargers and EPSs. See 77 FR 18478 (March 27, 2012) (notice of proposed rulemaking to set standards for battery chargers and external power E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules supplies). In the May 2014 battery charger NODA, DOE sought input on wireless charging stations that are specifically designed to operate in dry environments, although DOE did not explicitly consider these products when first developing the battery charger test procedure. (79 FR at 27776–27777) DOE plans to address this issue in a separate rulemaking. IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that test procedure rulemakings do not constitute ‘‘significant regulatory actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). Accordingly, this action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IFRA) for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required by Executive Order 13272, ‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General Counsel’s Web site: https://energy.gov/ gc/office-general-counsel. For manufacturers of battery chargers, the Small Business Administration (SBA) has set a size threshold, which defines those entities classified as ‘‘small businesses’’ for the purposes of the statute. DOE used the SBA’s small business size standards to determine whether any small entities would be subject to the requirements of the rule. 65 FR 30836, 30848 (May 15, 2000), as amended at 65 FR 53533, 53544 (September 5, 2000) and codified at 13 CFR part 121. The size standards are listed by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and industry description and are available at https://www.sba.gov/content/summary- VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 size-standards-industry. Battery charger manufacturers are classified under NAICS 335999, ‘‘All Other Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets a threshold of 500 employees or less for an entity to be considered as a small business for this category. As discussed in the March 2012 NOPR, DOE identified one battery charger original device manufacturer with domestic manufacturing. Based on manufacturer interviews and DOE’s research, DOE believes that almost all battery charger manufacturing takes place abroad. Also, in the NOPR and at the NOPR public meeting DOE asked for comment regarding the impacts on small battery charger manufacturers and it received no comments. Therefore, based on the information DOE currently has at hand, DOE certifies that this proposed rule is unlikely to have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. DOE reviewed this proposed rule under the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. This proposed rule prescribes certain limited clarifying amendments to an already-existing test procedure that will help manufacturers and testing laboratories to consistently conduct that procedure when measuring the energy efficiency of a battery charger, including in those instances where compliance with the applicable Federal energy conservation standard is being assessed. DOE has tentatively concluded that the proposed rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis for this rulemaking. DOE will transmit the certification and supporting statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 If DOE adopts energy conservation standards for battery chargers, manufacturers of battery chargers will be required to certify that their products comply with those standards. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their products according to the applicable DOE test procedure, including any amendments adopted for those test procedures. DOE has established regulations for the certification and recordkeeping requirements for all covered consumer products and commercial equipment and is proposing specific requirements for battery chargers in this rule. See 10 CFR part 429, subpart B. The collection- PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 46863 of-information requirement for the certification and recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910–1400. This information collection was renewed in January 2015 to include certification requirements for battery chargers. 80 FR 5099 (January 30, 2015). Public reporting burden for the certification is estimated to average 30 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 The proposed test procedure amendments will likely be used to develop and implement future energy conservation standards for battery chargers. DOE has determined that this rule falls into a class of actions that are categorically excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE’s implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, this proposed rule would amend the existing test procedures without affecting the amount, quality or distribution of energy usage, and, therefore, would not result in any environmental impacts. Thus, this rulemaking is covered by Categorical Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, which applies to any rulemaking that interprets or amends an existing rule without changing the environmental effect of that rule. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999) imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have Federalism implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess the necessity for such actions. The E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 46864 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules Executive Order also requires agencies to have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have Federalism implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy describing the intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in the development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has determined that it would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the products that are the subject of this proposed rule. States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)) No further action is required by Executive Order 13132. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on Federal agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law, the proposed VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order 12988. G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. (2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan for giving notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small governments before establishing any requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE published a statement of policy on its process for intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available at https://energy.gov/gc/office-generalcounsel. DOE examined this proposed rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and determined that the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, so these requirements do not apply. H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being. This rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment. I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation, if adopted, would not result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most disseminations of information to the public under guidelines established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed this proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in those guidelines. K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB, a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy action. A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as any action by an agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use. This regulatory action to amend the test procedure for measuring the energy efficiency of battery chargers is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy action, and, accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– 91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA) Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where a proposed rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to consult with the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on competition. Certain of the proposed amendments would incorporate testing methods contained in the following commercial standards: IEC Standard 62301 ‘‘Household electrical appliances— Measurement of standby power.’’ DOE has evaluated these testing standards and believes that the IEC standard complies with the requirements of section 32(b) of the Federal Energy Administration Act, (i.e., that they were developed in a manner that fully provides for public participation, comment, and review). DOE is, however, consulting with the Attorney General and the Chairwoman of the FTC concerning the effect on competition of requiring manufacturers to use the test method in this standard. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS M. Description of Material Incorporated by Reference DOE previously adopted instrumentation resolution and measurement uncertainty requirements for testing battery chargers identical to those in the IEC 62301 standard and codified these requirements at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix Y on June 1, 2011. 76 FR 31750. The IEC published Edition 2.0 of IEC 62301 in January 2011, which is available from the American National Standards Institute, 25 W. 43rd Street, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10036 or at https:// webstore.ansi.org/. This revised version of the testing standard refined the test equipment specifications, measuring techniques, and uncertainty determination to improve the method for measuring loads with high crest factors and/or low power factors, such as the low power modes typical of battery chargers operating in standby mode. These provisions were contained VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 in Section 4 of IEC 62301, with informative guidance provided in Annex B and Annex D on measuring low power modes and determining measurement uncertainty. DOE has already incorporated by reference Edition 2.0 of IEC 62301in 10 CFR part 430 for use with other test procedures, and is now proposing to also incorporate by reference Edition 2.0 in appendix Y as well. V. Public Participation A. Attendance at Public Meeting The time, date and location of the public meeting are listed in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of this document. If you plan to attend the public meeting, please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. Please note that foreign nationals visiting DOE Headquarters are subject to advance security screening procedures which require advance notice prior to attendance at the public meeting. If a foreign national wishes to participate in the public meeting, please inform DOE of this fact as soon as possible by contacting Ms. Regina Washington at (202) 586–1214 or by email: Regina.Washington@ee.doe.gov so that the necessary procedures can be completed. DOE requires visitors to have laptops and other devices, such as tablets, checked upon entry into the building. Any person wishing to bring these devices into the Forrestal Building will be required to obtain a property pass. Visitors should avoid bringing these devices, or allow an extra 45 minutes to check in. Please report to the visitor’s desk to have devices checked before proceeding through security. Due to the REAL ID Act implemented by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), there have been recent changes regarding ID requirements for individuals wishing to enter Federal buildings from specific states and U.S. territories. Driver’s licenses from the following states or territory will not be accepted for building entry and one of the alternate forms of ID listed below will be required. DHS has determined that regular driver’s licenses (and ID cards) from the following jurisdictions are not acceptable for entry into DOE facilities: Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Oklahoma, and Washington. Acceptable alternate forms of Photo-ID include: U.S. Passport or Passport Card; an Enhanced Driver’s License or Enhanced ID-Card issued by the states of Minnesota, New York or Washington (Enhanced licenses PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 46865 issued by these states are clearly marked Enhanced or Enhanced Driver’s License); a military ID or other Federal government issued Photo-ID card. In addition, you can attend the public meeting via webinar. Webinar registration information, participant instructions, and information about the capabilities available to webinar participants will be published on DOE’s Web site: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/ buildings/appliance_standards/ product.aspx?productid=84. Participants are responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible with the webinar software. B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for Distribution Any person who has plans to present a prepared general statement may request that copies of his or her statement be made available at the public meeting. Such persons may submit requests, along with an advance electronic copy of their statement in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format, to the appropriate address shown in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this NOPR. The request and advance copy of statements must be received at least one week before the public meeting and may be emailed, hand-delivered, or sent by mail. DOE prefers to receive requests and advance copies via email. Please include a telephone number to enable DOE staff to make a follow-up contact, if needed. C. Conduct of Public Meeting DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the public meeting and may also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, but DOE will conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6306). A court reporter will be present to record the proceedings and prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of the public meeting. After the public meeting and until the end of the comment period, interested parties may submit further comments on the proceedings and any aspect of the rulemaking. The public meeting will be conducted in an informal, conference style. DOE will present summaries of comments received before the public meeting, allow time for prepared general statements by participants, and encourage all interested parties to share their views on issues affecting this rulemaking. Each participant will be allowed to make a general statement E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 46866 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS (within time limits determined by DOE), before the discussion of specific topics. DOE will permit, as time permits, other participants to comment briefly on any general statements. At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit participants to clarify their statements briefly and comment on statements made by others. Participants should be prepared to answer questions by DOE and by other participants concerning these issues. DOE representatives may also ask questions of participants concerning other matters relevant to this rulemaking. The official conducting the public meeting will accept additional comments or questions from those attending, as time permits. The presiding official will announce any further procedural rules or modification of the above procedures that may be needed for the proper conduct of the public meeting. A transcript of the public meeting will be included in the docket, which can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the beginning of this NOPR. In addition, any person may buy a copy of the transcript from the transcribing reporter. D. Submission of Comments DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this proposed rule before or after the public meeting, but no later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this proposed rule. Interested parties may submit comments using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this NOPR. Submitting comments via regulations.gov. The regulations.gov Web page will require you to provide your name and contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment. However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment. Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your comment. Persons viewing comments will see only VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 first and last names, organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any documents submitted with the comments. Do not submit to regulations.gov information for which disclosure is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through regulations.gov cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the Web site will waive any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section. DOE processes submissions made through regulations.gov before posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment. Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also will be posted to regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any comments. Include contact information each time you submit comments, data, documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses. Documents should not contain special characters or any form of encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature of the author. Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters per PDF or as one form PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 letter with a list of supporters’ names compiled into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting time. Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email, postal mail, or hand delivery two well-marked copies: one copy of the document marked confidential including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination. Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the information has previously been made available to others without obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest. It is DOE’s policy that all comments may be included in the public docket, without change and as received, including any personal information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be exempt from public disclosure). E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of interested parties concerning the following issues: 1. DOE seeks comments on the methodology for selecting a battery for multi-capacity, multi-voltage, multichemistry battery chargers. (See section III.A.1) 2. DOE seeks comments on the methodology for selecting a single battery based on the battery and battery charger combination that results in the highest maintenance mode power when Table 4.1 results in two or more unique batteries. (See section III.A.1) E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules 1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 2. Revise § 429.39 to read as follows: Battery chargers. (a) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must determine represented values, which includes certified ratings, for each basic model of battery charger in accordance with following sampling provisions. (1) Represented values include: Battery discharge energy in watt hours (Wh), 24-hour energy consumption in watt hours (Wh), maintenance mode power in watts (W), standby mode power in watts (W), and off mode power in watts (W). (2) Units to be tested. The requirements of § 429.11 are applicable to battery chargers; and, for each basic model of battery charger, a sample of sufficient size must be randomly selected and tested to ensure that— (i) Any represented value of energy consumption or power for which consumers would favor lower values must be greater than or equal to the higher of: (A) The mean of the sample, where: List of Subjects 10 CFR Part 429 Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. ¯ And, x is the sample mean; h is the number of samples; and xi is the ith sample; or, (B) The upper 97.5 percent confidence limit (UCL) of the true mean divided by 1.05, where: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 10 CFR Part 430 Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small businesses. Issued in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2015. Kathleen B. Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend parts 429 and 430 of chapter II of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 ¯ And x is the sample mean; s is the sample standard deviation; n is the number of samples; and t0.975 is the t statistic for a 97.5% one-tailed confidence interval with n-1 degrees of freedom (from appendix A to subpart B of part 429); and (ii) Any represented value energy consumption or power of a basic model for which consumers would favor higher values must be less than or equal to the lower of: (A) The mean of the sample, where: PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 ¯ And x is the sample mean; s is the sample standard deviation; n is the number of samples; and t0.975 is the t statistic for a 97.5% one-tailed confidence interval with n-1 degrees of freedom (from appendix A to subpart B of part 429). (b) Certification reports. (1) The requirements of § 429.12 are applicable to battery chargers; (2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a certification report must include the following public product-specific information: The manufacturer and model of the test battery; the nameplate battery voltage of the test battery in volts (V); the nameplate charge capacity of the test battery in ampere-hours (Ah); the nameplate charge energy, if available, of the battery in watt hours (Wh); the manufacturer and model, when applicable, of the external power supply used for testing; the average duration of the charge and maintenance mode test in hours (hr) for the units sampled; battery discharge energy in watt hours (Wh); 24-hour energy consumption in watt hours (Wh); maintenance mode power in watts (W); standby mode power in watts (W); and off mode power in watts (W). ■ 3. Revise paragraph (e) of § 429.110 to read as follows: § 429.110 Enforcement testing. * * * * * (e) Basic model compliance. DOE will evaluate whether a basic model complies with the applicable energy conservation standard(s) based on testing conducted in accordance with the applicable test procedures specified in parts 430 and 431 of this chapter, and with the following statistical sampling procedures: (1) For products with applicable energy conservation standard(s) in § 430.32, and commercial prerinse spray valves, illuminated exit signs, traffic signal modules and pedestrian modules, commercial clothes washers, and metal halide lamp ballasts, DOE will use a sample size of not more than 21 units and follow the sampling plans in E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 ER06AU15.009</GPH> § 429.39 ER06AU15.008</GPH> ■ ¯ And, x is the sample mean; h is the number of samples; and xi is the ith sample; or, (B) The lower 97.5 percent confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean divided by 1.05, where: ER06AU15.007</GPH> VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this proposed rule. PART 429—CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT ER06AU15.006</GPH> 3. DOE seeks comment on the other options considered for addressing multivoltage, multi-capacity battery chargers. (See section III.A.1) 4. DOE seeks comments on the exclusion of back-up battery chargers from the scope of the test procedure. (See section III.A.2) 5. DOE seeks comments on the merits of incorporating IEC 62301 V.2 updates into the current battery chargers test procedure in Appendix Y. (See section III.A.3) 6. DOE seeks comments on amending the depth of discharge to 50% of the rated voltage of the battery for lead acid batteries during conditioning. (See section III.DA.4) 7. DOE seeks comment on adding optional discharge rates at 10 hrs. (or C/10) and 20 hrs. (or C/20) in the Battery Discharge Energy Test for lead acid batteries. (See section III.A.4) 8. DOE seeks comment on its proposal to amend the sampling and certification requirements for battery chargers. (See section III.A.5) 9. DOE seeks comment on the updates to Table 3.1 to correct for a reference error and update units for the required values identified in the table. (See section III.A.7) 10. DOE seeks comment on the burden estimates outlined in the review of the Paperwork Reduction Act. (See section IV.C) 46867 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules appendix A of this subpart (Sampling for Enforcement Testing of Covered Consumer Products and Certain HighVolume Commercial Equipment). (2) For automatic commercial ice makers; commercial refrigerators, freezers, and refrigerator-freezers; refrigerated bottled or canned vending machines; and commercial HVAC and WH equipment, DOE will use an initial sample size of not more than four units and follow the sampling plans in appendix B of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of Covered Equipment and Certain Low-Volume Covered Products). (3) If fewer than four units of a basic model are available for testing when the manufacturer receives the notice, then: (i) DOE will test the available unit(s); or (ii) If one or more other units of the basic model are expected to become available within 30 calendar days, DOE may instead, at its discretion, test either: (A) The available unit(s) and one or more of the other units that subsequently become available (up to a maximum of four); or (B) Up to four of the other units that subsequently become available. (4) For battery chargers, DOE will use a sample size of not more than 21 units and follow the sampling plan in appendix D of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of Battery Chargers). (5) For distribution transformers, DOE will use an initial sample size of not more than five units and follow the sampling plans in appendix C of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of Distribution Transformers). If fewer than five units of a basic model are available for testing when the manufacturer receives the test notice, then: (i) DOE will test the available unit(s); or (ii) If one or more other units of the basic model are expected to become available within 30 calendar days, the Department may instead, at its discretion, test either: (A) The available unit(s) and one or more of the other units that subsequently become available (up to a maximum of five); or (B) Up to five of the other units that subsequently become available. (6) Notwithstanding paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) of this section, if testing of the available or subsequently available units of a basic model would be impractical, as for example when a basic model has unusual testing requirements or has limited production, DOE may in its discretion decide to base the determination of compliance on the VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 testing of fewer than the otherwise required number of units. (7) When DOE makes a determination in accordance with section (e)(6) to test less than the number of units specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) of this section, DOE will base the compliance determination on the results of such testing in accordance with appendix B of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of Covered Equipment and Certain Low-Volume Covered Products) using a sample size (n1) equal to the number of units tested. (8) For the purposes of this section, available units are those that are available for distribution in commerce within the United States. ■ 4. Add appendix D to subpart C of part 429 to read as follows: § 430.2 Appendix D to Subpart C of Part 429— Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of Battery Chargers § 430.23 Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water consumption. a. The initial sample size (n) for enforcement testing of battery chargers is four units. b. Test each unit in the sample according to the test procedure in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y, recording the following metrics: 24-hour energy (Wh), battery discharge energy (Wh), maintenance mode power (W), standby mode power (W), off mode power (W), and the duration of the charge and maintenance mode test. c. Compute the sample mean for each of the metrics, where ¯ and, x is the sample mean; n is the number of samples; and xi is the ith sample. d. Compute Unit Energy Consumption (UEC) for the sample using the applicable equation from the applicable energy conservation standard for battery chargers in § 430.32 and the sample means for each of the metrics, as calculated in step c. e. Determine the applicable standard for the basic model being tested (ECS), using the sample mean for battery discharge energy. f. Compare the UEC to the ECS. g. If the UEC of the sample is greater than the ECS, then the basic model is not compliant. PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS 5. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note. 6. Section 430.2 is amended by adding in alphabetical order a definition for ‘‘back-up battery charger’’ to read as follows: ■ PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Definitions. * * * * * Back-up battery charger means a battery charger: (1) That is embedded in a separate end-use product that is designed to continuously operate using main power (AC or DC); and (2) Whose sole purpose is to recharge a battery used to maintain continuity of load power in case of input power failure. * * * * * § 430.3 [Amended] 7. In § 430.3, paragraph (p)(4) is amended by removing ‘‘and X’’ and adding in its place ‘‘X, and Y’’. ■ 8. In § 430.23, revise paragraph (aa) to read as follows: ■ * * * * * (aa) Battery chargers. Measure battery discharge energy, expressed in watthours, in accordance with section 5.8 of appendix Y of this subpart. Measure the 24-hour energy consumption of a battery charger in active and maintenance modes, expressed in watt-hours, and the power consumption of a battery charger in maintenance mode, expressed in watts, in accordance with section 5.10 of appendix Y of this subpart. Measure the power consumption of a battery charger in standby mode and off mode, expressed in watts, in accordance with sections 5.11 and 5.12, respectively, of appendix Y of this subpart. * * * * * ■ 9. Appendix Y to subpart B of part 430 is amended by: ■ a. Revising the introductory text to appendix Y; ■ b. Revising section 1. Scope; ■ c. Revising Table 3.1 and section 3.2; ■ d. Revising the undesignated center heading directly above section 4.1. General Setup; ■ e. Revising section 4.3b. and Table 4.1; ■ f. Revising sections 5.3a., 5.3c.(2)(i), 5.3d., 5.8c.(2); and ■ g. Moving Table 5.2 to appear after section 5.8d. and revising it. The revisions and additions read as follows: Appendix Y to Subpart B of Part 430— Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers Note: On or after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], any representation regarding the energy consumption of battery chargers must be E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1 ER06AU15.010</GPH> mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 46868 46869 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules based upon results generated under this test procedure. Upon the compliance date(s) of any energy conservation standard(s) for battery chargers, use of the applicable provisions of this test procedure to demonstrate compliance with the energy conservation standard will also be required. 1. Scope This appendix covers the test requirements used to measure the energy consumption for battery chargers operating at either DC or United States AC line voltage (115V at 60Hz). This appendix does not provide a method for testing back-up battery chargers. * * * * * * * * 3. * * * * * TABLE 3.1—LIST OF MEASURED OR CALCULATED VALUES Name of measured or calculated value Reference Duration of the charge and maintenance mode test (Hrs) ............................................................................................................ Battery Discharge Energy (Wh) ..................................................................................................................................................... Initial time and power (W) of the input current of connected battery (A) ...................................................................................... Active and Maintenance Mode Energy Consumption (W, Hrs) .................................................................................................... Maintenance Mode Power (W) ...................................................................................................................................................... 24-Hour Energy Consumption (Wh) .............................................................................................................................................. Standby Mode Power (W) ............................................................................................................................................................. Off Mode Power (W) ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3.2. Verifying Accuracy and Precision of Measuring Equipment uncertainty of measurement,’’ of IEC 62301 (incorporated by reference, see § 430.3). Any power measurements recorded, as well as any power measurement equipment utilized for testing, shall conform to the uncertainty and resolution requirements outlined in Section 4, ‘‘General conditions for measurements,’’ as well as Annexes B, ‘‘Notes on the measurement of low power modes,’’ and D, ‘‘Determination of * * * * * Unit Under Test Setup Requirements 4.3. * * * b. From the detachable batteries specified above, use Table 4.1 of this appendix to select the batteries to be used for testing depending on the type of battery charger being tested. Each row in the table represents a mutually exclusive battery charger type. In the table, find the single applicable row for Section Section Section Section Section Section Section Section 5.2. 4.6. 5.8. 5.6. 5.9. 5.10. 5.11. 5.12. the UUT, and test according to those requirements. Select a single battery configuration for testing, according to the battery selection criteria in Table 4.1. If the battery selection criteria outlined in Table 4.1 results in two or more batteries of differing configurations, but with equal voltage and capacity ratings, use the battery that results in the highest maintenance mode power, as determined in section 5.9 of this appendix, for testing. * * * * * TABLE 4.1—BATTERY SELECTION FOR TESTING Type of charger Tests to perform Multi-voltage Multi-port Multi-capacity Battery selection (from all configurations of all associated batteries) No ........................................ No ........................................ No ........................................ No ...................................... No ...................................... Yes .................................... No ...................................... Yes .................................... Yes or No .......................... Yes ....................................... No ...................................... No ...................................... Any associated battery. Highest charge capacity battery. Use all ports and use the maximum number of identical batteries with the highest rated charge capacity that the charger can accommodate. Highest voltage battery. Yes ....................................... Yes to either or both * (i) A battery analyzer at a rate not to exceed 1 C, until its average cell voltage under load reaches the end-of-discharge voltage specified in Table 5.2 of this appendix for the relevant battery chemistry, with the exception of VRLA and Flooded Lead Acid batteries with a capacity of greater than 1000Wh which may be discharged at .2C, .1C, or .05C and must be discharged to 50% of their rated voltage; or * * * * 5. * * * 5.3. * * * a. No conditioning is to be done on lithium-ion batteries. Proceed directly to battery preparation, section 5.4 of this appendix, when testing chargers for these batteries. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS * * * * * * c. * * * (2) * * * VerDate Sep<11>2014 * * * Use all ports and use the battery or the configuration of batteries with the highest individual voltage and highest total rated energy capacity. * d. Batteries of chemistries, other than lithium-ion, that are known to have been 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 through at least two previous full charge/ discharge cycles shall be fully charged only once as in step c.(1) of this section. * * * * * 5.8. * * * c. * * * (2) Set the battery analyzer for a constant discharge current and the end-of-discharge voltage in Table 5.2 of this appendix for the relevant battery chemistry. * E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM * * 06AUP1 * * 46870 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 151 / Thursday, August 6, 2015 / Proposed Rules TABLE 5.2—REQUIRED BATTERY DISCHARGE RATES AND END-OF-DISCHARGE BATTERY VOLTAGES Discharge rate (C) Battery chemistry Valve-Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA) ...................................................................................................................... Flooded Lead Acid ................................................................................................................................................. Nickel Cadmium (NiCd) ......................................................................................................................................... Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH) ................................................................................................................................. Lithium Ion (Li-Ion) ................................................................................................................................................. Lithium Polymer ..................................................................................................................................................... Rechargeable Alkaline ........................................................................................................................................... Nanophosphate Lithium Ion ................................................................................................................................... Silver Zinc .............................................................................................................................................................. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2015–19105 Filed 8–5–15; 8:45 a.m.] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 [Docket No. EERE–2015–BT–TP–0015] RIN 1904–AD54 Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Small, Large, and Very Large Air-Cooled Commercial Package Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to reaffirm that the currently prescribed test procedure must be used when measuring the energy efficiency ratio, integrated energy efficiency ratio, and coefficient of performance for small, large, and very large air-cooled commercial unitary air conditioners (CUAC) and commercial unitary heat pumps (CUHP). With this test procedure rulemaking, DOE fulfills its obligation under EPCA to review its test procedures for covered equipment at least once every seven years and either amend the applicable test procedures or publish a determination in the Federal Register not to amend them. The proposed amendments would limit the incorporation by reference of the industry test procedure AHRI Standard 340/360–2007, ‘‘2007 Standard for Performance Rating of Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment’’ to certain sections and addenda; specify requirements for indoor airflow tolerance and adjustment to meet other rating conditions; clarify requirements mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:37 Aug 05, 2015 Jkt 235001 for condenser head pressure controls; clarify units of measurement for airflow; and establish a tolerance on part-load rating points. DOE also proposes to amend the certification, compliance, and enforcement provisions for CUACs and CUHPs to specify additional reporting requirements for indoor airflow and add enforcement provisions for verifying the rated cooling capacity, as the rated cooling capacity determines which class of equipment the product belongs to and also determines certain testing conditions. DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting on this proposed test procedure if one is requested by August 13, 2015. If a public meeting is requested, DOE will announce its date and location on the DOE Web site and via email. The meeting will also be broadcast as a webinar. DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) before and after any public meeting, but no later than September 8, 2015. See section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. Any comments submitted must identify the NOPR for Test Procedures for Small, Large, and Very Large Air-Cooled Commercial Package Air Conditioning and Heating Equipment, and provide docket number EERE–2015–BT–TP–0015 and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 1904–AD54. Comments may be submitted using any of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: CommPkgACHeat2015TP0015@ ee.doe.gov Include the docket number EERE–2015–BT–TP–0015 and/or RIN 1904–AD54 in the subject line of the message. 3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 End-ofdischarge voltage (volts per cell) 1.75 1.70 1.0 1.0 2.5 2.5 0.9 2.0 1.2 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC, 20585–0121. If possible, please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies. 4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC, 20024. Telephone: (202) 586–2945. If possible, please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ near the end of this document. Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at regulations.gov. All documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index. However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available. A link to the docket Web page can be found at: [www.regulations.gov/ #!docketDetail;D=EERE-2015-BT-TP0015]. This Web page contains a link to the docket for this notice on the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov Web page contains instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section V for information on how to submit comments through regulations.gov. For further information on how to submit a comment, review other public comments and the docket, or participate in the public meeting, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building E:\FR\FM\06AUP1.SGM 06AUP1

Agencies

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 151 (Thursday, August 6, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46855-46870]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-19105]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 430

[Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-TP-0044]
RIN 1904-AD45

Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Battery Chargers

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is proposing to revise its
test procedure for battery chargers established under the Energy Policy
and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended (EPCA). These proposed
revisions, if adopted, would harmonize the instrumentation resolution
and uncertainty requirements with the second edition of the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 62301 standard and
other international standards for measuring standby power.
Additionally, the proposed amendments would update and propose new
battery selection criteria for multi-voltage, multi-capacity battery
chargers, and

[[Page 46856]]

provide specific steps on how to select a battery for those chargers
when more than one battery meets the selection criteria, such as with a
multi-chemistry battery charger. The proposal also outlines new
provisions for conditioning and discharging lead acid batteries.

DATES: Comments: DOE will accept comments, data, and information
regarding this notice of proposed rulemaking before and after the
public meeting, but no later than October 20, 2015. See section V,
``Public Participation,'' for details.
Meeting: DOE will hold a public meeting on Tuesday, September 15,
2015 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., in Washington, DC. The meeting will also be
broadcast as a webinar. See section V, ``Public Participation,'' for
webinar registration information, participant instructions, and
information about the capabilities available to webinar participants.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the U.S. Department of
Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 8E-089, 1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585.
Any comments submitted must identify the NOPR for Test Procedures
for battery chargers and provide docket number EERE-2014-BT-TP-0044
and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 1904-AD45. Comments
may be submitted using any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: BatteryChargers2014TP0044@EE.Doe.Gov Include the docket
number and/or RIN in the subject line of the message.
3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC, 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a
CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Suite
600, Washington, DC, 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. If possible,
please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed
copies.
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see section V of this document
(Public Participation).
Docket: The docket, which includes Federal Register notices, public
meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting
documents/materials, is available for review at regulations.gov. All
documents in the docket are listed in the regulations.gov index.
However, some documents listed in the index, such as those containing
information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly
available.
A link to the docket Web page can be found at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/product.aspx?productid=84.
This Web page will contain a link to the docket for this notice on
the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov Web page will contain
simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public
comments, in the docket. See section V for information on how to submit
comments through regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct requests for additional
information may be sent to Mr. Jeremy Dommu, 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) 586-9870.
Email: battery_chargers_and_external_power_supplies@EE.Doe.Gov
In the office of the General Counsel, contact Mr. Michael Kido,
U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-33, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202)
586-8145. Email: Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to submit a comment, review other
public comments and the docket, or participate in the public meeting,
contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 or by email:
Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
III. Discussion
A. Battery Selection and Testing of Multi-Voltage, Multi-
Capacity Battery Chargers
B. Back-Up Battery Chargers
C. Measurement Accuracy and Precision
D. Conditioning and Discharge Rate for Lead Acid Battery
Chargers
E. Sampling and Certification Requirements
F. Enforcement Testing Sampling Plan
G. Other Proposed Updates
H. Effective Date and Compliance Date of Test Procedure
I. Impact from the Test Procedure
J. Wireless Power
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 of 1995
D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
E. Review Under Executive Order 13132
F. Review Under Executive Order 12988
G. Review Under the 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. Description of Material Incorporated by Reference
V. Public Participation
A. Attendance at Public Meeting
B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for
Distribution
C. Conduct of Public Meeting
D. Submission of Comments
E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

I. Authority and Background

Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (42
U.S.C. 6291 et seq.; ``EPCA'' or, ``the Act'') sets forth a variety of
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (All references to
EPCA refer to the statute as amended through the Energy Efficiency
Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015). Part B of
Title III, which for editorial reasons was re-designated as Part A upon
incorporation into the U.S. Code (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309, as codified),
establishes the ``Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products
Other Than Automobiles.'' Battery chargers are among the products
affected by these provisions.
Under EPCA, the energy conservation program consists essentially of
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. The
testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of
covered products must use as the basis for (1) certifying to DOE that
their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards
adopted under EPCA, and (2) making representations about the efficiency
of those products. Similarly, DOE must use these test procedures to
determine whether the products comply with any relevant standards
promulgated under EPCA.

[[Page 46857]]

General Test Procedure Rulemaking Process

Under 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE follows when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered
products. EPCA provides in relevant part that any test procedures
prescribed or amended under this section shall be reasonably designed
to produce test results that measure the energy efficiency, energy use,
or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a
representative average use cycle or period of use and shall not be
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))
In addition, when DOE determines that a test procedure requires
amending, it publishes a notice with the proposed changes and offers
the public an opportunity to comment on the proposal. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(2)) As part of this process, DOE determines the extent to
which, if any, the proposed test procedure would alter the measured
energy efficiency of any covered product as determined under the
existing test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1))
Section 135 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (``EPACT 2005''),
Public Law 109-58 (Aug. 8, 2005), amended sections 321 and 325 of EPCA
by adding certain provisions related to battery chargers. Among these
provisions were new definitions defining what constitutes a battery
charger and a requirement that DOE prescribe ``definitions and test
procedures for the power use of battery chargers and external power
supplies.'' (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(1)(A)) DOE complied with this
requirement by publishing a test procedure final rule on December 8,
2006, that established a new Appendix Y to address the testing of
battery chargers to measure their energy consumption and adopted
several definitions related to the testing of battery chargers. See 71
FR 71340 (codified at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y ``Uniform
Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Battery
Chargers''). Lastly, DOE incorporated by reference specific sections of
the EPA's ``Test Methodology for Determining the Energy Performance of
Battery Charging Systems'' when measuring inactive mode energy
consumption.
Section 310 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
(``EISA 2007''), Public Law 110-140 (Dec. 19, 2007) then amended
section 325 of EPCA by defining active mode, standby mode, and off
mode. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)) This section also directed DOE to
amend its existing test procedures by December 31, 2008, to measure the
energy consumed in standby mode and off mode for battery chargers. (42
U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(B)(i)) Further, it authorized DOE to amend, by rule,
any of the definitions for active, standby, and off modes (42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(1)(B)) Accordingly, the Department issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NOPR) in 2008, 73 FR 48054 (Aug. 15, 2008), and a final
rule in early 2009 to establish definitions for these terms. (74 FR
13318, March 27, 2009)
Subsequently, in response to numerous testing issues raised by
commenters in the context of DOE's energy conservation standards
rulemaking efforts for battery chargers,\1\ DOE issued another NOPR on
April 2, 2010 (75 FR 16958). The NOPR proposed adding a new active mode
energy consumption test procedure for battery chargers that would
assist in developing potential energy conservation standards for these
products. DOE also proposed amending portions of its standby and off
mode battery charger test procedure to shorten the overall measurement
time. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

After receiving comments at the public meeting, DOE published a
final rule that codified a new active-mode test procedure and amended
the standby and off-mode test procedures then-present in appendix Y to
subpart B of part 430 in the CFR. 76 FR 31750 (June 1, 2011). That rule
became effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, but
manufacturers were allotted 180 days from the rule's publication to use
the new test procedure when making written representations of the
energy efficiency of their chargers. As federal standards for battery
chargers have yet to be finalized, DOE has not required manufacturers
to submit energy efficiency data for their products tested under the
battery charger test procedure.
Following the publication of the most recent final rule, DOE
continued to receive additional questions and requests for
clarification regarding the testing, rating, and classification of
battery chargers. As part of the continuing effort to establish federal
efficiency standards for battery chargers and to develop a clear and
widely applicable test procedure, DOE published a Notice of Data
Availability (NODA) on May 15, 2014 (79 FR 27774). This NODA sought
comment from stakeholders concerning the repeatability of the test
procedure when testing battery chargers with several consumer
configurations, and on the anticipated market penetration of new
battery charging technologies that may require further revisions to
DOE's regulations. DOE also sought comment on the reporting
methodologies for manufacturers attempting to comply with the
California Energy Commission's (CEC's) efficiency standards for battery
chargers in order to understand certain data discrepancies in the CEC
database. DOE indicated its interest in soliciting feedback to
determine whether the current procedure contained any ambiguities
requiring clarification. These issues were discussed during DOE's NODA
public meeting on June 3, 2014.
To ensure the test procedure's clarity, DOE's proposal, which is
based on commenter feedback to the NODA, would make certain
clarifications to appendix Y to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 and
include a sampling plan for battery chargers in 10 CFR part 429. These
proposed changes would include updated references to the latest version
of IEC 62301 and clarify DOE's test methods for specific types of
battery chargers to better reflect evolving technologies.

II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

This proposal seeks to make several changes to the current test
procedure for measuring the energy use of battery chargers.
First, DOE is proposing to amend the existing battery selection
criteria to limit the number of batteries selected for testing to a
single battery. DOE is proposing that only the battery with the highest
rated voltage and/or highest rated charge capacity, from those among
which the battery charger is capable of charging, would be tested for
each basic model. Additionally, DOE is proposing that if at least two
distinct batteries meet the criteria of having the highest rated
voltage and highest rated charge capacity, the battery charger and
battery combination with the highest maintenance mode power would be
selected for testing. (``Maintenance mode'' is defined as ``the mode of
operation when the battery charger is connected to the main electricity
supply

[[Page 46858]]

and the battery is fully charged, but is still connected to the
charger.'' See 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y, Sec. 2.8.)
Second, the proposed changes would exclude back-up battery chargers
embedded in continuous use devices from being required to be tested
under the DOE procedure. This proposed exclusion would harmonize with
DOE's approach currently under consideration regarding the potential
regulation of battery back-up systems (including uninterruptible power
supplies (UPSs)) as part of the Computer and Back-up Battery Systems
rulemaking.
Third, the proposed changes would harmonize DOE's test procedure
with the latest version of IEC 62301 by providing specific resolution
and measurement tolerances. These specifications would assist in
ensuring that testing is performed with equipment that is capable of
reaching these tolerances and that the resulting measurements are
repeatable and reproducible.
Fourth, DOE is proposing to change how lead acid batteries are
conditioned and discharged by applying the protocol currently used for
all other battery chemistries (excluding lithium-ion) to lead acid
batteries. DOE has become aware that a lead acid battery's condition
may vary upon purchase and this variation can impact lead acid battery
performance. In an effort to minimize these effects, DOE is proposing
to require that the batteries be conditioned prior to testing.
Additionally, DOE has been informed that discharge rate can
significantly impact the nominal battery energy of lead acid batteries,
especially in the case of flooded lead acid batteries. Stakeholders
have claimed that the discharge rate as determined by the current DOE
test procedure is higher than that during typical use, and therefore
does not give an accurate representation of the battery energy in lead
acid batteries. (NMMA, No. 12, p. 4) Accordingly, DOE is proposing to
lengthen the discharge time for lead acid batteries to mitigate these
effects.
Fifth, DOE is proposing to add product-specific certification
reporting requirements into 10 CFR 429.39(b), which is currently
reserved. DOE is also proposing to add a sampling methodology to be
used for determining representations of efficiency, energy and power
consumption, and other key battery charger characteristics. These
proposals would specify the required data elements to certify
compliance with any energy conservation standards for battery chargers
that DOE may adopt, and also would provide a method for DOE to enforce
compliance with any energy conservation standards for battery chargers
that DOE may promulgate.
Sixth, DOE is proposing to correct an internal cross-reference in
the current version of Table 3.1 contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B, appendix Y and to add units to the measured and calculated values in
the table. The updates would also remove the empty value column
currently found in Table 3.1. DOE is also proposing to specify in
section 430.23(aa) that battery discharge energy should be measured
according to section 3.8 of appendix Y.
The table below summarizes the changes and the affected sections of
10 CFR parts 429 and 430.

Table II.1--Summary of Proposed Changes and Affected Sections of 10 CFR
Parts 429 and 430
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of proposed
Sections to modify modifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart B of Part 429--Certification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
429.39(b) Certification Reports........ Create new paragraph
(b), specifying requirements
for certifications of
compliance with energy
conservation standards for
battery chargers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart C of Part 429--Enforcement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix D............................. Create new appendix to
include sampling plan for
enforcement testing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A of Part 430--General Provisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 430.2. Definitions.............. Amend definitions of
``direct operation external
power supply.''
Add definition of
``back-up battery charger.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix Y to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Scope............................... Insert exceptions for
back-up battery chargers
embedded in continuous use
devices and wireless charging
systems that do not fix the
position of the device during
charging.
3. Standard Test Conditions............ Incorporate by
reference the uncertainty
requirements of IEC 62301 (2nd
Ed.) in 3.2(a).
Correct the internal
cross-reference in Table 3.1
for item 4 and modify the
table by removing the current
``value'' column and adding
units to the table as
appropriate.
4. Unit Under Test (UUT) Setup Clarify in section
Requirements. 4.3.b that a single battery
should be selected as a result
of applying the battery
selection criteria in Table
4.1.
Insert section 4.3.b.1
to require selecting the
single battery resulting in
the highest maintenance mode
power when following Table 4.1
results in two or more
distinct batteries.
Update Table 4.1 to
remove instances of multiple
batteries for test and to
instruct that, where
applicable, the highest
voltage or highest charge
capacity battery, or
combination for multi-port
battery chargers, must be
tested. Remove column ``number
of tests.''
5. Test Measurement.................... Remove reference to
lead acid batteries from
section 5.3(a).
Insert provision for
lead acid batteries to be
discharged to 50% of rated
voltage in section
5.3(c)(2)(i).

[[Page 46859]]

Remove reference to
lead acid from section 5.3(d).
Removed discharge
current value ``.2C'' from
section 5.8(c)(2).
Updated discharge rate
and termination voltage for
VRLA and Flooded Lead Acid in
Table 5.2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

In response to the May 2014 NODA, DOE received written comments
from 15 interested parties, including manufacturers, trade
associations, standards development organizations, and energy
efficiency advocacy groups. Table III.1 lists the entities that
commented on that NODA and their affiliation. These comments are
discussed in more detail below, and the full set of comments can be
found at: https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketBrowser;rpp=25;po=0;D=EERE-2014-BT-NOA-0012;dct=PS.

Table III-1--Interested Parties That Commented on the May 2014 NODA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment No.
Commenter Acronym Organization type/ (Docket
affiliation reference)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alliance for Wireless Power............. A4WP...................... Trade Association......... 17
Arris Group, Inc........................ ARRIS..................... Manufacturer.............. 12
Association of Home Appliance AHAM...................... Standard Development 18
Manufacturers. Organization.
California Investor-Owned Utilities..... CA IOUs................... Utilities................. 15
Consumer Electronics Association........ CEA....................... Trade Association......... 21
Energizer Holdings, Inc................. Energizer................. Manufacturer.............. 8
Information Technology Industry Council. ITI....................... Trade Association......... 19
Johnson Outdoors Marine Electronics..... JOME...................... Manufacturer.............. 9
National Electrical Manufacturers NEMA...................... Trade Association......... 7
Association.
National Marine Manufacturers NMMA...................... Trade Association......... 11
Association.
Natural Resources Canada/ECOVA.......... NRCan (ECOVA)............. Efficiency Advocacy Group. 16
National Resources Defense Council...... NRDC...................... Efficiency Advocacy Group. 20
Power Tool Institute.................... PTI....................... Trade Association......... 13
Proctor & Gamble........................ P&G....................... Manufacturer.............. 10
Telecommunications Industry Association. TIA....................... Standard Development 14
Organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Battery Selection and Testing of Multi-Voltage, Multi-Capacity
Battery Chargers

DOE sought comments on the existing battery selection methodology
included in section 4.3 ``Selection of Batteries To Use for Testing''
of the test procedure in its recent NODA as it relates to multi-
voltage, multi-voltage and multi-capacity, and multi-chemistry battery
chargers. See 79 FR 27774, 27776-27777 (May 15, 2014).The submitted
comments suggested that errors may be introduced when testing these
types of battery chargers and raised questions about the repeatability
of the test procedure when testing battery chargers capable of charging
batteries of different chemistries (i.e., chargers capable of handling
multiple battery chemistries such as lithium and nickel metal hydride).
PTI urged DOE to state explicitly how each battery charger and battery
combination should be rated. (PTI, Pub. Mtg. Transcript, No. 6 at p.
77) ITI commented that the current test procedure leaves significant
room for error and does not employ effective, reasonable and repeatable
test conditions for these types of battery chargers. (ITI, No. 19, pp.
2-3) The CA IOUs and NRDC both offered solutions to eliminate ambiguity
in battery selection for these battery chargers by suggesting that the
least expensive battery or the battery which represents the most common
intended use be selected. (California IOUs, No. 15, p. 2, NRDC, No. 20,
p. 2) DOE took all of these comments into account when developing its
proposal.
Under the current provisions for battery selection, a multi-
voltage, multi-capacity battery charger must be tested with as many as
three distinct battery types. The battery selection procedure under
Appendix Y, Section 4, Table 4.1, lays out three sets of testing
scenarios:
(a) Test unit with the lowest voltage, lowest capacity battery
utilizing only one port.
(b) Test unit with the highest voltage, lowest capacity battery
utilizing only one port.
(c) Use all ports and use the battery or configuration of batteries
with the highest total rated energy capacity.
Per section 4.3.a(2), if no batteries are packaged with the
charger, but the instructions specify or recommend batteries for use
with the charger, batteries for testing must be those recommended or
specified in the instructions and must be selected according to the
procedure in section 4.3.b, which generally requires that a tester use
Table 4.1 to determine which batteries to use when testing the
efficiency of a given battery charger. In the case of multi-chemistry
battery chargers, multiple batteries of differing chemistries may meet
the criteria outlined in 4.3.b for a single battery selection and test.
Specifically, the current test procedure is not clear which battery
chemistry, or chemistries, should be selected for testing--it indicates
only that the battery with the highest voltage or highest rated charge
capacity be selected. In this case, the test results for each battery
of differing chemistries may be inconsistent even though they have the
same voltage and charge capacity. Finally, DOE realizes that the
current battery selection criteria can result in the selection of up to
three separate batteries for testing, which increases testing burden
and may create ambiguity as to which test result to use when making a
representation about the energy efficiency of a battery charger.

[[Page 46860]]

DOE is proposing an approach that would reduce ambiguity and testing
burden, while yielding repeatable measurements of a tested unit's
energy use.
Specifically, to eliminate potential ambiguity and reduce testing
burden, DOE is proposing to modify Table 4.1 to eliminate the multiple
tests currently required for multi-voltage and multi-capacity battery
chargers and instead require that only the battery with the highest
voltage and/or highest charge capacity be selected. In doing so, DOE's
goal is to test the charger in the mode for which the battery charger
is designed to operate optimally. Based on feedback from industry
representatives and consultation with subject matter experts, DOE
understands that, if required to operate over a range of outputs, power
electronics, including battery chargers, are typically designed to
optimize components at the high output range of the device. Therefore,
DOE believes these test results will be representative of the typical
energy consumption of the battery charger and reduce the possibility of
placing undue burden on manufacturers of chargers that are able to
charge lower voltage, lower capacity batteries.
To address these same issues, DOE is also proposing that if a
battery charger is multi-voltage and multi-capacity and capable of
charging batteries of multiple chemistries (such that two or more
batteries, each with a unique chemistry, meet the proposed selection
criteria) the battery and battery charger combination resulting in the
highest maintenance mode power would be chosen for testing.
DOE anticipates that, with these proposed changes, there will be
only one set of test results, and a single rating, for each basic model
of battery charger. The resulting energy consumption calculation would
be repeatable and representative of each basic model's energy use for
which it has been optimized, while eliminating the ambiguity that
appears to be present in the current version of the procedure.
Additionally, by reducing the number of tests required, DOE believes
that the overall test burden would be reduced. DOE seeks comment on the
proposed methodology for selecting batteries for multi-voltage, multi-
capacity battery chargers, and for those cases when the battery
selection criteria results in two or more unique batteries (e.g.,
multi-chemistry battery chargers).
DOE notes that it also considered several other options to modify
the test procedure to clarify how to measure the energy use of, and
obtain a single set of energy consumption ratings for, multi-voltage
and multi-capacity battery chargers. First, DOE considered requiring
the existing battery selection criteria to be applied and then
averaging the test results to produce one set of test results. Second,
DOE considered modifying the battery selection criteria to require that
only the battery with the lowest voltage and/or lowest rated charge
capacity be selected for testing. Lastly, in the case of multi-
chemistry battery chargers, DOE considered requiring the battery
charger be considered a basic model for each base chemistry it was
capable of charging and apply the battery selection criteria separately
for each chemistry, or basic model.
Each one of these proposed solutions, however, resulted in
solutions that did not fully accomplish DOE's goals. The first option,
while producing a single set of test results, could result in an
unrepresentative measurement of the true energy consumption consistent
with any configuration of batteries the battery charger is capable of
charging. The second option, while similar to DOE's proposal, would not
produce results representative of the higher range for which battery
chargers are, typically, optimally designed when capable of charging
multiple voltages and capacities. Finally, in addressing battery
chemistry, treating each chemistry mode as a unique basic model, with
either of the previous options discussed above, did not produce a
single metric and could increase the testing burden on some
manufacturers. In DOE's view, this approach would produce test results
that are repeatable and representative of the typical energy
consumption of the battery charger under test and at the same time
reduce testing burden on manufacturers. While DOE's preliminary
determination is that these options conflict with those intentions, DOE
is seeking comment on these other options as well.

B. Back-Up Battery Chargers

DOE sought comments on applying the current test procedure to
battery chargers embedded in continuous use products, or back-up
battery chargers, in the recent NODA. See 79 FR 27774. Based on
comments received from interested parties and DOE's own analysis, DOE
is proposing to define back-up battery chargers and exclude them from
the scope of this test procedure. DOE is proposing to define back-up
battery chargers in 10 CFR 430.2 as a battery charger that: (1) Is
embedded in a separate end-use product that is designed to continuously
operate using main power (AC or DC) and (2) has as its sole purpose to
recharge a battery used to maintain continuity of load power in case of
input power failure. DOE previously referred to these battery chargers
in the context of continuous use devices in the May 2014 NODA. Examples
of such devices that integrate back-up battery chargers include UPSs
and some cable modems. Interested parties noted to DOE that continuous
use devices are becoming increasingly integrated with a variety of
products that do not perform back-up battery charging as a primary
function of the device. As a result of this integrated approach, the
battery charging function in these products often cannot be isolated
during testing (ARRIS, No. 22, p. 2). While the test procedure is
designed to measure the energy consumption and efficiency of the
battery charging functionality, the method is limited when applied to a
battery charger that is embedded among other functions that cannot be
isolated during testing. Citing this reason, ARRIS suggested that these
types of devices be excluded from the scope of the test procedure.
(ARRIS, No. 22, p. 2).
ARRIS also noted that, in the event that DOE does not exclude these
types of back-up battery chargers embedded in continuous use devices
from the scope of this procedure, DOE should add provisions
specifically to address the testing of these units. ARRIS suggested
amending the test procedure to provide for measurement of only the
battery charging functionality of continuous use devices that lack an
on/off switch and for which the battery cannot be removed. The
suggested alternative includes measuring 24-hour energy consumption
(``E24'') with a fully charged battery, then again measuring E24 with a
discharged battery. ARRIS's approach would use the absolute difference
between these two values to represent the 24-hour energy consumption of
the unit under test (UUT). (ARRIS, No. 12, p. 4-6)
Additionally, the CA IOUs and NRDC both suggested that if DOE plans
to require back-up battery chargers embedded in continuous use devices
to be tested under the current test procedure, manufacturers should add
an on-off switch to turn off all additional functionality. (CA IOUs,
No. 15, p. 3, NRDC, No. 20, p. 3) ARRIS argued, however, that adding
switches to disable non-charging functionality in a device where
multiple functions, including battery charging, have been integrated at
the system or chipset level--which helps achieve lower manufacturing
costs and increased reliability and energy efficiency--is not feasible.
(ARRIS, No. 22, p. 3).

[[Page 46861]]

Based on its own testing data and the feedback received from
commenters, at this time, DOE is proposing to exclude back-up battery
chargers that are embedded in continuous devices from the testing
requirements of the DOE battery charger test procedure. DOE may revisit
this decision in the future as circumstances permit.
Consistent with this proposed approach, DOE is also proposing to
define the term ``back-up battery charger'' in Sec. 430.2 and add to
Section 1 of Appendix Y language specifying that back-up battery
chargers would be excluded from the scope of the test procedure. DOE
recognizes that its previously proposed standards for battery chargers
considered products that would now be excluded from the scope of the
test procedure. If back-up battery chargers were removed from the scope
of test procedure, DOE would no longer consider establishing
conservation standards for these types of products as part of a
standards rulemaking for battery chargers. However, DOE is considering
energy conservation standards for some battery back-up systems
(including UPSs) as part of the Computer and Back-up Battery Systems
rulemaking. DOE seeks comments on this approach.

C. Measurement Accuracy and Precision

On June 13, 2005, the IEC published its first edition of testing
standard IEC 62301, which provided a method for measuring standby power
of household appliances. The standard quantified minimum resolution
requirements for energy measurement instruments and outlined the
necessary procedures to ensure stable energy readings for any UUT. The
standard also set limits on the uncertainties associated with any
measurement taken that is meant to represent the energy consumption of
a household device. It has since become recognized by many regulatory
bodies as the default guideline for any power or energy measurement
required for formal certification. DOE subsequently adopted
instrumentation resolution and measurement uncertainty requirements for
testing battery chargers identical to those in the IEC 62301 standard
and codified these requirements at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix
Y on June 1, 2011. 76 FR 31750.
The IEC published Edition 2.0 of IEC 62301 in January 2011. This
revised version of the testing standard refined the test equipment
specifications, measuring techniques, and uncertainty determination to
improve the method for measuring loads with high crest factors and/or
low power factors, such as the low power modes typical of battery
chargers operating in standby mode. These provisions were contained in
Section 4 of IEC 62301, with informative guidance provided in Annex B
and Annex D on measuring low power modes and determining measurement
uncertainty.
To continue to ensure test methods are harmonized, DOE is proposing
to incorporate by reference the resolution parameters for power
measurements and uncertainty methodologies found in Section 4 of the
second edition of the IEC 62301 standard. DOE seeks comment on the
merits of incorporating these revisions into the current battery
chargers test procedure in Appendix Y. DOE also seeks comment regarding
whether the use of Annex B and Annex D should be mandatory to ensure
the most accurate test results.

D. Conditioning and Discharge Rate for Lead Acid Battery Chargers

DOE received several comments from stakeholders suggesting changes
to both the conditioning of lead acid batteries and the discharge rate
for lead acid batteries. In some cases, DOE's own research also points
to a potential need to modify the current procedure to better account
for the specific characteristics of lead acid batteries. Currently, no
conditioning is performed for lead acid batteries. See 10 CFR part 430,
appendix Y, sec. 5.3.a.
First, Johnson Outdoor Marine Electronics (JOME) provided test
results with its comments indicating that the discharge energy of lead
acid batteries varies over several cycles. These results are contrary
to certain lead acid battery manufacturers' claims that conditioning is
not required. JOME stated that typical lead acid batteries are only at
75 to 80 percent capacity when they are delivered in new condition, and
JOME's test results show that lead acid battery discharge energy could
increase after just two cycles, the current value for all other battery
chemistries. (JOME, No. 9, p. 4-5) These data suggest that applying the
conditioning protocol outlined in the current appendix Y, section 5.3.c
(for batteries of other chemistries) as a prerequisite, prior to
testing lead acid batteries, will produce a more accurate
representation of battery discharge energy.
Providing the option of various discharge rates during battery
conditioning would also allow manufacturers to increase conditioning if
needed. JOME's data suggest that additional conditioning may be needed
to maximize discharge energy--in some cases up to 4 cycles or more.
Furthermore, JOME added that its conversations with battery
manufacturers indicate that a 50%-80% depth of discharge would produce
more accurate and representative results for lead acid batteries.
(JOME, No. 9, p. 4) To account for these issues, DOE is proposing to
apply the same battery conditioning provisions found in appendix Y,
Section 5.3.c, to lead acid batteries and use a 50% depth of discharge
during conditioning. DOE is seeking comment on applying the
conditioning protocol (two charges and two discharges, followed by a
charge, as a minimum) outlined in section 5.3.c of the test procedure
to lead acid batteries. DOE also seeks comment on amending the depth of
discharge requirement, during conditioning only, to 50% of the rated
voltage of the battery and what alternative depth of discharge
requirements (if any) should apply to lead acid batteries.
Second, JOME, the National Marine Manufacturers Association (NMMA),
and DOE's own research, indicate that the amount of usable energy
extracted from a lead acid battery is inversely proportional to its
discharge rate.\2\ (NMMA, No. 12, p. 3) Thus, a lead acid battery
discharged over a span of 10 hours produces a higher amount of overall
measured energy than one discharged over a period of 5 hours. To
address this issue, NMMA suggested that DOE allow for a longer
discharge cycle than the current 5 hours required in the battery
charger test procedure. (NMMA, No. 12, p. 4) Given that a longer
discharge rate may be more representative for certain lead acid
batteries, particularly those used in marine applications, DOE is
proposing to amend its procedure by providing manufacturers with the
option to choose between a 5-hour (C/5 or .2C), 10-hour (C/10 OR .1C),
or 20-hour (C/20 OR .05C) discharge rate when testing with batteries
that are rated above 1,000 watt-hours (Wh). DOE is limiting this option
to those batteries that are above 1,000 Wh because a longer discharge
cycle would do little to maximize discharge energy for batteries under
1,000 Wh, but would have a more significant impact on maximizing
discharge energy for batteries greater than 1,000 Wh. DOE seeks comment
on its proposed approach for lead acid batteries and whether the
approach as described above would require any adjustments. Should
adjustments be needed, DOE seeks feedback on what those adjustments
should be.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ Perez, Richard. ``Lead-Acid Battery State of Charge vs.
Voltage.'' Home Power #36 (August/September 1993). Web 2014. https://www.zetatalk4.com/docs/Batteries/FAQ/State_Of_Charge_Ver_Voltage_2004+.pdf.

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

[[Page 46862]]

E. Sampling and Certification Requirements

DOE is proposing to update 10 CFR 429.39, section (a),
``Determination of represented value,'' and reserved section (b),
``Certification Reports,'' to detail how to apply the sampling plan to
calculate a represented value for each measure of energy consumption,
time, and power recorded as part of the battery charger test procedure,
and subsequently report those ratings during certification. For each
basic model, these ratings would be determined by applying the
statistical requirements outlined in 10 CFR 429.39 to a sample of
battery charger units that are tested according to the test procedure
in appendix Y. Specifically, a represented value would be calculated in
watts (W) for the measured maintenance mode power, the measured standby
mode power, and the measured off mode power; the Wh rating would be
calculated for the measured battery discharge energy and the measured
24-hour energy consumption. Additionally, the proposal would require
the certification report for each basic model of battery charger to
include each of the aforementioned represented values, along with the
manufacturer and model of the test battery used; the nameplate battery
voltage of the test battery in volts (V); the nameplate charge capacity
of the test battery in ampere-hours (Ah); the nameplate charge energy,
if available, of the battery in watt hours (Wh); the brand and model,
when applicable, of the external power supply (EPS) used for testing;
\3\ and the average duration of the charge and maintenance mode test in
hours (hr).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ The test procedure states in section 4.1.a that ``[t]he
battery charger system shall be prepared and set up in accordance
with the manufacturer's instructions.'' See 10 CFR 430 appendix Y to
subpart B. Battery charger systems that include an EPS should be
tested with the EPS that is sold with the battery charger system in
accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. For battery
chargers that use an EPS but are not sold with an EPS, the system
should be tested according to the manufacturer's instructions on how
to supply power to the battery charger. Providing the manufacturer
and model for the EPS in the certification report would help ensure
test result repeatability in cases where the EPS necessary to supply
power to the charger is not included.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 2012, DOE proposed to regulate battery charger energy use with a
single metric--Unit Energy Consumption (UEC)--derived from a
calculation of the amount of energy consumed by the battery charger
over the course of year. 77 FR 18478 (March 27, 2012). The inputs into
this calculation would include the represented values that DOE is
proposing to include as part of the certification requirements, along
with constants used to represent the estimated number of charges per
day and the number of hours each day that the battery charger spends in
each mode of operation. These usage profile assumptions were originally
proposed as part of the March 2012 NOPR. Therefore, should DOE finalize
energy conservation standards using the same UEC approach proposed in
the NOPR, the represented values included on the certification report
would allow DOE to calculate the UEC of each certified basic model of
battery charger and ensure compliance with energy conservation
standards.
DOE seeks comment on its proposal to update the sampling
requirements and reporting requirements for battery chargers to include
the data required to identify the battery charger and battery, as well
as measured ratings recorded in the test procedure. DOE is particularly
interested in whether the inclusion of these proposed categories of
information would present a significant burden on manufacturers to
produce as part of a submitted certification report--and if so, why.

F. Enforcement Testing Sampling Plan

To ensure that manufacturers of consumer products comply with the
applicable energy conservation standards, DOE conducts enforcement
testing by randomly selecting a sample of units and testing them
according to the test procedure. DOE then compares the results obtained
through this enforcement testing to the applicable energy conservation
standard to determine whether the basic model meets that standard. DOE
is proposing a sampling and calculation method for DOE to assess the
compliance of battery charger basic models.
When conducting enforcement testing for battery chargers, DOE is
proposing to test a sample of at least 4 units of a battery charger
basic model according to the provisions of the test procedure. DOE
would then determine the sample mean for each of the output metrics of
the test procedure, and then use those sample means to calculate the
basic model's UEC according to the UEC equation that would be set forth
as part of an energy conservation standard for battery chargers. DOE
would then determine compliance by comparing the UEC calculated as part
of enforcement testing to the applicable energy conservation standard.
DOE is proposing to add Appendix D to Subpart C of Part 429 of the CFR
to describe the methodology that DOE would use when conducting
enforcement testing of battery chargers. DOE seeks comments on this
proposal.

G. Other Proposed Updates

DOE is also proposing to update Table 3.1 of Appendix Y to correct
a cross-reference error and eliminate a redundant column. The Active
and Maintenance Mode Energy Consumption item on the fourth line in this
table currently references section 5.8, when it should reference
section 5.6, ``Testing Charge Mode and Battery Maintenance Mode.''
Additionally, DOE is proposing to remove the current ``Value'' column
because the information from that column can be inserted in the column
labeled ``Name of measured or calculated value'' column to reduce the
table's complexity. DOE seeks comment on these proposed simplification
changes.

H. Effective Date and Compliance Date of Test Procedure

If adopted, the effective date for the battery charger test
procedure would be 30 days after publication of the test procedure
final rule in the Federal Register. At that time, any measure of energy
consumption relying on these metrics may be represented pursuant to the
final rule. Consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6293(c), representations of the
energy consumption or energy efficiency of battery chargers must be
based on the new test procedure and sampling plans as of 180 days after
the date of publication of the test procedure final rule. Starting on
that date, any such representations, including those made on marketing
materials, Web sites (including qualification with a voluntary or State
program), and product labels would be required to be based on results
generated using the proposed procedure as well as the sampling plan in
10 CFR part 429.

I. Impact From the Test Procedure

When proposing to amend a test procedure, DOE typically determines
the extent to which, if any, the proposed test procedure would alter
the measured energy efficiency of any covered product when compared to
the existing test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)). Because DOE does
not currently have energy conservation standards for battery chargers,
this proposal would not affect this provision.

J. Wireless Power

In a March 2012 standards NOPR for battery chargers and EPSs, DOE
noted that there are a number of different products under the broad
umbrella of ``wireless power,'' including both battery chargers and
EPSs. See 77 FR 18478 (March 27, 2012) (notice of proposed rulemaking
to set standards for battery chargers and external power

[[Page 46863]]

supplies). In the May 2014 battery charger NODA, DOE sought input on
wireless charging stations that are specifically designed to operate in
dry environments, although DOE did not explicitly consider these
products when first developing the battery charger test procedure. (79
FR at 27776-27777) DOE plans to address this issue in a separate
rulemaking.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that test
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). Accordingly, this
action was not subject to review under the Executive Order by the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of
Management and Budget.

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IFRA) for
any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the
agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
As required by Executive Order 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE
published procedures and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that
the potential impacts of its rules on small entities are properly
considered during the DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General
Counsel's Web site: https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel.
For manufacturers of battery chargers, the Small Business
Administration (SBA) has set a size threshold, which defines those
entities classified as ``small businesses'' for the purposes of the
statute. DOE used the SBA's small business size standards to determine
whether any small entities would be subject to the requirements of the
rule. 65 FR 30836, 30848 (May 15, 2000), as amended at 65 FR 53533,
53544 (September 5, 2000) and codified at 13 CFR part 121. The size
standards are listed by North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) code and industry description and are available at https://www.sba.gov/content/summary-size-standards-industry. Battery charger
manufacturers are classified under NAICS 335999, ``All Other
Miscellaneous Electrical Equipment and Component Manufacturing.'' The
SBA sets a threshold of 500 employees or less for an entity to be
considered as a small business for this category.
As discussed in the March 2012 NOPR, DOE identified one battery
charger original device manufacturer with domestic manufacturing. Based
on manufacturer interviews and DOE's research, DOE believes that almost
all battery charger manufacturing takes place abroad. Also, in the NOPR
and at the NOPR public meeting DOE asked for comment regarding the
impacts on small battery charger manufacturers and it received no
comments. Therefore, based on the information DOE currently has at
hand, DOE certifies that this proposed rule is unlikely to have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
DOE reviewed this proposed rule under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on
February 19, 2003. This proposed rule prescribes certain limited
clarifying amendments to an already-existing test procedure that will
help manufacturers and testing laboratories to consistently conduct
that procedure when measuring the energy efficiency of a battery
charger, including in those instances where compliance with the
applicable Federal energy conservation standard is being assessed. DOE
has tentatively concluded that the proposed rule would not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis for
this rulemaking. DOE will transmit the certification and supporting
statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA
for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

If DOE adopts energy conservation standards for battery chargers,
manufacturers of battery chargers will be required to certify that
their products comply with those standards. In certifying compliance,
manufacturers must test their products according to the applicable DOE
test procedure, including any amendments adopted for those test
procedures. DOE has established regulations for the certification and
recordkeeping requirements for all covered consumer products and
commercial equipment and is proposing specific requirements for battery
chargers in this rule. See 10 CFR part 429, subpart B. The collection-
of-information requirement for the certification and recordkeeping is
subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). This requirement has been approved by OMB under OMB control
number 1910-1400. This information collection was renewed in January
2015 to include certification requirements for battery chargers. 80 FR
5099 (January 30, 2015). Public reporting burden for the certification
is estimated to average 30 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.

D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

The proposed test procedure amendments will likely be used to
develop and implement future energy conservation standards for battery
chargers. DOE has determined that this rule falls into a class of
actions that are categorically excluded from review under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and DOE's
implementing regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. Specifically, this
proposed rule would amend the existing test procedures without
affecting the amount, quality or distribution of energy usage, and,
therefore, would not result in any environmental impacts. Thus, this
rulemaking is covered by Categorical Exclusion A5 under 10 CFR part
1021, subpart D, which applies to any rulemaking that interprets or
amends an existing rule without changing the environmental effect of
that rule. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required.

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999)
imposes certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have Federalism
implications. The Executive Order requires agencies to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority supporting any action that would
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess
the necessity for such actions. The

[[Page 46864]]

Executive Order also requires agencies to have an accountable process
to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have Federalism
implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE published a statement of policy
describing the intergovernmental consultation process it will follow in
the development of such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this
proposed rule and has determined that it would not have a substantial
direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. EPCA governs
and prescribes Federal preemption of State regulations as to energy
conservation for the products that are the subject of this proposed
rule. States can petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the
extent, and based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d))
No further action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

Regarding the review of existing regulations and the promulgation
of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on Federal
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1)
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification
and burden reduction. Section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires Executive
agencies to review regulations in light of applicable standards in
sections 3(a) and 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to the extent permitted by law,
the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order
12988.

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a proposed regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may
cause the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one
year (adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. On March 18, 1997,
DOE published a statement of policy on its process for
intergovernmental consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 12820; also available
at https://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. DOE examined this
proposed rule according to UMRA and its statement of policy and
determined that the rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate,
nor a mandate that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or
more in any year, so these requirements do not apply.

H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999

Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being.
This rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or integrity of the
family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it is not
necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

DOE has determined, under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation, if
adopted, would not result in any takings that might require
compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001

Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the public under guidelines
established by each agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by
OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002),
and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 2002).
DOE has reviewed this proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines
and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in
those guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211

Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to prepare and submit to OMB,
a Statement of Energy Effects for any proposed significant energy
action. A ``significant energy action'' is defined as any action by an
agency that promulgated or is expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866, or any successor order; and (2) is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy; or (3) is designated by the Administrator of OIRA as a
significant energy action. For any proposed significant energy action,
the agency must give a detailed statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
This regulatory action to amend the test procedure for measuring
the energy efficiency of battery chargers is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Moreover, it would not
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy, nor has it been designated as a significant energy action by
the Administrator of OIRA. Therefore, it is not a significant energy
action, and, accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy
Effects.

[[Page 46865]]

L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of
1974

Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA)
Section 32 essentially provides in relevant part that, where a proposed
rule authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of
proposed rulemaking must inform the public of the use and background of
such standards. In addition, section 32(c) requires DOE to consult with
the Attorney General and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on
competition.
Certain of the proposed amendments would incorporate testing
methods contained in the following commercial standards: IEC Standard
62301 ``Household electrical appliances--Measurement of standby
power.'' DOE has evaluated these testing standards and believes that
the IEC standard complies with the requirements of section 32(b) of the
Federal Energy Administration Act, (i.e., that they were developed in a
manner that fully provides for public participation, comment, and
review). DOE is, however, consulting with the Attorney General and the
Chairwoman of the FTC concerning the effect on competition of requiring
manufacturers to use the test method in this standard.

M. Description of Material Incorporated by Reference

DOE previously adopted instrumentation resolution and measurement
uncertainty requirements for testing battery chargers identical to
those in the IEC 62301 standard and codified these requirements at 10
CFR part 430, subpart B, Appendix Y on June 1, 2011. 76 FR 31750. The
IEC published Edition 2.0 of IEC 62301 in January 2011, which is
available from the American National Standards Institute, 25 W. 43rd
Street, 4th Floor, New York, NY 10036 or at https://webstore.ansi.org/.
This revised version of the testing standard refined the test equipment
specifications, measuring techniques, and uncertainty determination to
improve the method for measuring loads with high crest factors and/or
low power factors, such as the low power modes typical of battery
chargers operating in standby mode. These provisions were contained in
Section 4 of IEC 62301, with informative guidance provided in Annex B
and Annex D on measuring low power modes and determining measurement
uncertainty. DOE has already incorporated by reference Edition 2.0 of
IEC 62301in 10 CFR part 430 for use with other test procedures, and is
now proposing to also incorporate by reference Edition 2.0 in appendix
Y as well.

V. Public Participation

A. Attendance at Public Meeting

The time, date and location of the public meeting are listed in the
DATES and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of this document. If you
plan to attend the public meeting, please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at
(202) 586-2945 or Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.
Please note that foreign nationals visiting DOE Headquarters are
subject to advance security screening procedures which require advance
notice prior to attendance at the public meeting. If a foreign national
wishes to participate in the public meeting, please inform DOE of this
fact as soon as possible by contacting Ms. Regina Washington at (202)
586-1214 or by email: Regina.Washington@ee.doe.gov so that the
necessary procedures can be completed.
DOE requires visitors to have laptops and other devices, such as
tablets, checked upon entry into the building. Any person wishing to
bring these devices into the Forrestal Building will be required to
obtain a property pass. Visitors should avoid bringing these devices,
or allow an extra 45 minutes to check in. Please report to the
visitor's desk to have devices checked before proceeding through
security.
Due to the REAL ID Act implemented by the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS), there have been recent changes regarding ID
requirements for individuals wishing to enter Federal buildings from
specific states and U.S. territories. Driver's licenses from the
following states or territory will not be accepted for building entry
and one of the alternate forms of ID listed below will be required. DHS
has determined that regular driver's licenses (and ID cards) from the
following jurisdictions are not acceptable for entry into DOE
facilities: Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, Louisiana, Maine,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Oklahoma, and Washington.
Acceptable alternate forms of Photo-ID include: U.S. Passport or
Passport Card; an Enhanced Driver's License or Enhanced ID-Card issued
by the states of Minnesota, New York or Washington (Enhanced licenses
issued by these states are clearly marked Enhanced or Enhanced Driver's
License); a military ID or other Federal government issued Photo-ID
card.
In addition, you can attend the public meeting via webinar. Webinar
registration information, participant instructions, and information
about the capabilities available to webinar participants will be
published on DOE's Web site: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/product.aspx?productid=84. Participants are
responsible for ensuring their systems are compatible with the webinar
software.

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for
Distribution

Any person who has plans to present a prepared general statement
may request that copies of his or her statement be made available at
the public meeting. Such persons may submit requests, along with an
advance electronic copy of their statement in PDF (preferred),
Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format, to
the appropriate address shown in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning
of this NOPR. The request and advance copy of statements must be
received at least one week before the public meeting and may be
emailed, hand-delivered, or sent by mail. DOE prefers to receive
requests and advance copies via email. Please include a telephone
number to enable DOE staff to make a follow-up contact, if needed.

C. Conduct of Public Meeting

DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the public meeting
and may also use a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The
meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary-type public hearing, but
DOE will conduct it in accordance with section 336 of EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6306). A court reporter will be present to record the proceedings and
prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of
presentations and to establish the procedures governing the conduct of
the public meeting. After the public meeting and until the end of the
comment period, interested parties may submit further comments on the
proceedings and any aspect of the rulemaking.
The public meeting will be conducted in an informal, conference
style. DOE will present summaries of comments received before the
public meeting, allow time for prepared general statements by
participants, and encourage all interested parties to share their views
on issues affecting this rulemaking. Each participant will be allowed
to make a general statement

[[Page 46866]]

(within time limits determined by DOE), before the discussion of
specific topics. DOE will permit, as time permits, other participants
to comment briefly on any general statements.
At the end of all prepared statements on a topic, DOE will permit
participants to clarify their statements briefly and comment on
statements made by others. Participants should be prepared to answer
questions by DOE and by other participants concerning these issues. DOE
representatives may also ask questions of participants concerning other
matters relevant to this rulemaking. The official conducting the public
meeting will accept additional comments or questions from those
attending, as time permits. The presiding official will announce any
further procedural rules or modification of the above procedures that
may be needed for the proper conduct of the public meeting.
A transcript of the public meeting will be included in the docket,
which can be viewed as described in the Docket section at the beginning
of this NOPR. In addition, any person may buy a copy of the transcript
from the transcribing reporter.

D. Submission of Comments

DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
proposed rule before or after the public meeting, but no later than the
date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this proposed
rule. Interested parties may submit comments using any of the methods
described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this NOPR.
Submitting comments via regulations.gov. The regulations.gov Web
page will require you to provide your name and contact information.
Your contact information will be viewable to DOE Building Technologies
staff only. Your contact information will not be publicly viewable
except for your first and last names, organization name (if any), and
submitter representative name (if any). If your comment is not
processed properly because of technical difficulties, DOE will use this
information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, DOE
may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names,
organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any
documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to regulations.gov information for which disclosure
is restricted by statute, such as trade secrets and commercial or
financial information (hereinafter referred to as Confidential Business
Information (CBI)). Comments submitted through regulations.gov cannot
be claimed as CBI. Comments received through the Web site will waive
any CBI claims for the information submitted. For information on
submitting CBI, see the Confidential Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through regulations.gov before
posting. Normally, comments will be posted within a few days of being
submitted. However, if large volumes of comments are being processed
simultaneously, your comment may not be viewable for up to several
weeks. Please keep the comment tracking number that regulations.gov
provides after you have successfully uploaded your comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also will be
posted to regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal contact
information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your comment
or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact
information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand
delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not
necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses.
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature
of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery two well-marked copies: one copy
of the document marked confidential including all the information
believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-
confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make
its own determination about the confidential status of the information
and treat it according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include: (1) A description of the
items; (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry; (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure; (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time; and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).

E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment

Although DOE welcomes comments on any aspect of this proposal, DOE
is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of
interested parties concerning the following issues:
1. DOE seeks comments on the methodology for selecting a battery
for multi-capacity, multi-voltage, multi-chemistry battery chargers.
(See section III.A.1)
2. DOE seeks comments on the methodology for selecting a single
battery based on the battery and battery charger combination that
results in the highest maintenance mode power when Table 4.1 results in
two or more unique batteries. (See section III.A.1)

[[Page 46867]]

3. DOE seeks comment on the other options considered for addressing
multi-voltage, multi-capacity battery chargers. (See section III.A.1)
4. DOE seeks comments on the exclusion of back-up battery chargers
from the scope of the test procedure. (See section III.A.2)
5. DOE seeks comments on the merits of incorporating IEC 62301 V.2
updates into the current battery chargers test procedure in Appendix Y.
(See section III.A.3)
6. DOE seeks comments on amending the depth of discharge to 50% of
the rated voltage of the battery for lead acid batteries during
conditioning. (See section III.DA.4)
7. DOE seeks comment on adding optional discharge rates at 10 hrs.
(or C/10) and 20 hrs. (or C/20) in the Battery Discharge Energy Test
for lead acid batteries. (See section III.A.4)
8. DOE seeks comment on its proposal to amend the sampling and
certification requirements for battery chargers. (See section III.A.5)
9. DOE seeks comment on the updates to Table 3.1 to correct for a
reference error and update units for the required values identified in
the table. (See section III.A.7)
10. DOE seeks comment on the burden estimates outlined in the
review of the Paperwork Reduction Act. (See section IV.C)

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this proposed
rule.

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 429

Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Household
appliances, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 430

Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business
information, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Small
businesses.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 27, 2015.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
parts 429 and 430 of chapter II of title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations as set forth below:

PART 429--CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

0
1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6317.

0
2. Revise Sec. 429.39 to read as follows:

Sec. 429.39 Battery chargers.

(a) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must
determine represented values, which includes certified ratings, for
each basic model of battery charger in accordance with following
sampling provisions.
(1) Represented values include: Battery discharge energy in watt
hours (Wh), 24-hour energy consumption in watt hours (Wh), maintenance
mode power in watts (W), standby mode power in watts (W), and off mode
power in watts (W).
(2) Units to be tested. The requirements of Sec. 429.11 are
applicable to battery chargers; and, for each basic model of battery
charger, a sample of sufficient size must be randomly selected and
tested to ensure that--
(i) Any represented value of energy consumption or power for which
consumers would favor lower values must be greater than or equal to the
higher of:
(A) The mean of the sample, where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06AU15.006

And, x is the sample mean; [eta] is the number of samples; and
xi is the ith sample; or,

(B) The upper 97.5 percent confidence limit (UCL) of the true mean
divided by 1.05, where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06AU15.007

And x is the sample mean; s is the sample standard deviation; n is the
number of samples; and t0.975 is the t statistic for a 97.5%
one-tailed confidence interval with n-1 degrees of freedom (from
appendix A to subpart B of part 429); and

(ii) Any represented value energy consumption or power of a basic
model for which consumers would favor higher values must be less than
or equal to the lower of:
(A) The mean of the sample, where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06AU15.008

And, x is the sample mean; [eta] is the number of samples; and
xi is the ith sample; or,

(B) The lower 97.5 percent confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean
divided by 1.05, where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06AU15.009

(b) Certification reports. (1) The requirements of Sec. 429.12 are
applicable to battery chargers;
(2) Pursuant to Sec. 429.12(b)(13), a certification report must
include the following public product-specific information: The
manufacturer and model of the test battery; the nameplate battery
voltage of the test battery in volts (V); the nameplate charge capacity
of the test battery in ampere-hours (Ah); the nameplate charge energy,
if available, of the battery in watt hours (Wh); the manufacturer and
model, when applicable, of the external power supply used for testing;
the average duration of the charge and maintenance mode test in hours
(hr) for the units sampled; battery discharge energy in watt hours
(Wh); 24-hour energy consumption in watt hours (Wh); maintenance mode
power in watts (W); standby mode power in watts (W); and off mode power
in watts (W).
0
3. Revise paragraph (e) of Sec. 429.110 to read as follows:

Sec. 429.110 Enforcement testing.

* * * * *
(e) Basic model compliance. DOE will evaluate whether a basic model
complies with the applicable energy conservation standard(s) based on
testing conducted in accordance with the applicable test procedures
specified in parts 430 and 431 of this chapter, and with the following
statistical sampling procedures:
(1) For products with applicable energy conservation standard(s) in
Sec. 430.32, and commercial prerinse spray valves, illuminated exit
signs, traffic signal modules and pedestrian modules, commercial
clothes washers, and metal halide lamp ballasts, DOE will use a sample
size of not more than 21 units and follow the sampling plans in

[[Page 46868]]

appendix A of this subpart (Sampling for Enforcement Testing of Covered
Consumer Products and Certain High-Volume Commercial Equipment).
(2) For automatic commercial ice makers; commercial refrigerators,
freezers, and refrigerator-freezers; refrigerated bottled or canned
vending machines; and commercial HVAC and WH equipment, DOE will use an
initial sample size of not more than four units and follow the sampling
plans in appendix B of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement
Testing of Covered Equipment and Certain Low-Volume Covered Products).
(3) If fewer than four units of a basic model are available for
testing when the manufacturer receives the notice, then:
(i) DOE will test the available unit(s); or
(ii) If one or more other units of the basic model are expected to
become available within 30 calendar days, DOE may instead, at its
discretion, test either:
(A) The available unit(s) and one or more of the other units that
subsequently become available (up to a maximum of four); or
(B) Up to four of the other units that subsequently become
available.
(4) For battery chargers, DOE will use a sample size of not more
than 21 units and follow the sampling plan in appendix D of this
subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of Battery Chargers).
(5) For distribution transformers, DOE will use an initial sample
size of not more than five units and follow the sampling plans in
appendix C of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of
Distribution Transformers). If fewer than five units of a basic model
are available for testing when the manufacturer receives the test
notice, then:
(i) DOE will test the available unit(s); or
(ii) If one or more other units of the basic model are expected to
become available within 30 calendar days, the Department may instead,
at its discretion, test either:
(A) The available unit(s) and one or more of the other units that
subsequently become available (up to a maximum of five); or
(B) Up to five of the other units that subsequently become
available.
(6) Notwithstanding paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) of this section,
if testing of the available or subsequently available units of a basic
model would be impractical, as for example when a basic model has
unusual testing requirements or has limited production, DOE may in its
discretion decide to base the determination of compliance on the
testing of fewer than the otherwise required number of units.
(7) When DOE makes a determination in accordance with section
(e)(6) to test less than the number of units specified in paragraphs
(e)(1) through (4) of this section, DOE will base the compliance
determination on the results of such testing in accordance with
appendix B of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of
Covered Equipment and Certain Low-Volume Covered Products) using a
sample size (n1) equal to the number of units tested.
(8) For the purposes of this section, available units are those
that are available for distribution in commerce within the United
States.
0
4. Add appendix D to subpart C of part 429 to read as follows:

Appendix D to Subpart C of Part 429--Sampling Plan for Enforcement
Testing of Battery Chargers

a. The initial sample size (n) for enforcement testing of
battery chargers is four units.
b. Test each unit in the sample according to the test procedure
in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Y, recording the following
metrics: 24-hour energy (Wh), battery discharge energy (Wh),
maintenance mode power (W), standby mode power (W), off mode power
(W), and the duration of the charge and maintenance mode test.
c. Compute the sample mean for each of the metrics, where
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR06AU15.010

and, x is the sample mean; n is the number of samples; and
xi is the ith sample.

d. Compute Unit Energy Consumption (UEC) for the sample using
the applicable equation from the applicable energy conservation
standard for battery chargers in Sec. 430.32 and the sample means
for each of the metrics, as calculated in step c.
e. Determine the applicable standard for the basic model being
tested (ECS), using the sample mean for battery discharge energy.
f. Compare the UEC to the ECS.
g. If the UEC of the sample is greater than the ECS, then the
basic model is not compliant.

PART 430--ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS

0
5. The authority citation for part 430 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291-6309; 28 U.S.C. 2461 note.

0
6. Section 430.2 is amended by adding in alphabetical order a
definition for ``back-up battery charger'' to read as follows:

Sec. 430.2 Definitions.

* * * * *
Back-up battery charger means a battery charger:
(1) That is embedded in a separate end-use product that is designed
to continuously operate using main power (AC or DC); and
(2) Whose sole purpose is to recharge a battery used to maintain
continuity of load power in case of input power failure.
* * * * *

Sec. 430.3 [Amended]

0
7. In Sec. 430.3, paragraph (p)(4) is amended by removing ``and X''
and adding in its place ``X, and Y''.

0
8. In Sec. 430.23, revise paragraph (aa) to read as follows:

Sec. 430.23 Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water
consumption.

* * * * *
(aa) Battery chargers. Measure battery discharge energy, expressed
in watt-hours, in accordance with section 5.8 of appendix Y of this
subpart. Measure the 24-hour energy consumption of a battery charger in
active and maintenance modes, expressed in watt-hours, and the power
consumption of a battery charger in maintenance mode, expressed in
watts, in accordance with section 5.10 of appendix Y of this subpart.
Measure the power consumption of a battery charger in standby mode and
off mode, expressed in watts, in accordance with sections 5.11 and
5.12, respectively, of appendix Y of this subpart.
* * * * *
0
9. Appendix Y to subpart B of part 430 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text to appendix Y;
0
b. Revising section 1. Scope;
0
c. Revising Table 3.1 and section 3.2;
0
d. Revising the undesignated center heading directly above section 4.1.
General Setup;
0
e. Revising section 4.3b. and Table 4.1;
0
f. Revising sections 5.3a., 5.3c.(2)(i), 5.3d., 5.8c.(2); and
0
g. Moving Table 5.2 to appear after section 5.8d. and revising it.
The revisions and additions read as follows:

Appendix Y to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers

Note: On or after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL
RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], any representation regarding the
energy consumption of battery chargers must be

[[Page 46869]]

based upon results generated under this test procedure. Upon the
compliance date(s) of any energy conservation standard(s) for
battery chargers, use of the applicable provisions of this test
procedure to demonstrate compliance with the energy conservation
standard will also be required.

1. Scope

This appendix covers the test requirements used to measure the
energy consumption for battery chargers operating at either DC or
United States AC line voltage (115V at 60Hz). This appendix does not
provide a method for testing back-up battery chargers.
* * * * *
3. * * *
* * * * *

Table 3.1--List of Measured or Calculated Values
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of measured or calculated value Reference
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duration of the charge and maintenance Section 5.2.
mode test (Hrs).
Battery Discharge Energy (Wh)......... Section 4.6.
Initial time and power (W) of the Section 5.8.
input current of connected battery
(A).
Active and Maintenance Mode Energy Section 5.6.
Consumption (W, Hrs).
Maintenance Mode Power (W)............ Section 5.9.
24-Hour Energy Consumption (Wh)....... Section 5.10.
Standby Mode Power (W)................ Section 5.11.
Off Mode Power (W).................... Section 5.12.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

3.2. Verifying Accuracy and Precision of Measuring Equipment

Any power measurements recorded, as well as any power
measurement equipment utilized for testing, shall conform to the
uncertainty and resolution requirements outlined in Section 4,
``General conditions for measurements,'' as well as Annexes B,
``Notes on the measurement of low power modes,'' and D,
``Determination of uncertainty of measurement,'' of IEC 62301
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 430.3).
* * * * *

Unit Under Test Setup Requirements

4.3. * * *
b. From the detachable batteries specified above, use Table 4.1
of this appendix to select the batteries to be used for testing
depending on the type of battery charger being tested. Each row in
the table represents a mutually exclusive battery charger type. In
the table, find the single applicable row for the UUT, and test
according to those requirements. Select a single battery
configuration for testing, according to the battery selection
criteria in Table 4.1.
If the battery selection criteria outlined in Table 4.1 results
in two or more batteries of differing configurations, but with equal
voltage and capacity ratings, use the battery that results in the
highest maintenance mode power, as determined in section 5.9 of this
appendix, for testing.
* * * * *

Table 4.1--Battery Selection for Testing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of charger Tests to perform
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Battery selection (from
Multi-voltage Multi-port Multi-capacity all configurations of all
associated batteries)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No................................. No.................... No.................... Any associated battery.
No................................. No.................... Yes................... Highest charge capacity
battery.
No................................. Yes................... Yes or No............. Use all ports and use the
maximum number of
identical batteries with
the highest rated charge
capacity that the charger
can accommodate.
Yes................................ No.................... No.................... Highest voltage battery.
------------------------------------------------
Yes................................ Yes to either or both Use all ports and use the
battery or the
configuration of batteries
with the highest
individual voltage and
highest total rated energy
capacity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
5. * * *
5.3. * * *
a. No conditioning is to be done on lithium-ion batteries.
Proceed directly to battery preparation, section 5.4 of this
appendix, when testing chargers for these batteries.
* * * * *
c. * * *
(2) * * *
(i) A battery analyzer at a rate not to exceed 1 C, until its
average cell voltage under load reaches the end-of-discharge voltage
specified in Table 5.2 of this appendix for the relevant battery
chemistry, with the exception of VRLA and Flooded Lead Acid
batteries with a capacity of greater than 1000Wh which may be
discharged at .2C, .1C, or .05C and must be discharged to 50% of
their rated voltage; or
* * * * *
d. Batteries of chemistries, other than lithium-ion, that are
known to have been through at least two previous full charge/
discharge cycles shall be fully charged only once as in step c.(1)
of this section.
* * * * *
5.8. * * *
c. * * *
(2) Set the battery analyzer for a constant discharge current
and the end-of-discharge voltage in Table 5.2 of this appendix for
the relevant battery chemistry.
* * * * *

[[Page 46870]]

Table 5.2--Required Battery Discharge Rates and End-of-Discharge Battery
Voltages
------------------------------------------------------------------------
End-of-
Discharge rate discharge
Battery chemistry (C) voltage (volts
per cell)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve-Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA)........ 0.1 1.75
Flooded Lead Acid....................... 0.1 1.70
Nickel Cadmium (NiCd)................... 0.2 1.0
Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH)............. 0.2 1.0
Lithium Ion (Li-Ion).................... 0.2 2.5
Lithium Polymer......................... 0.2 2.5
Rechargeable Alkaline................... 0.2 0.9
Nanophosphate Lithium Ion............... 0.2 2.0
Silver Zinc............................. 0.2 1.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-19105 Filed 8-5-15; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.