Energy Conservation Program: Certification, Compliance, Labeling, and Enforcement for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors, 41377-41410 [2016-14479]

Download as PDF Vol. 81 Friday, No. 122 June 24, 2016 Part II Department of Energy sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 Energy Conservation Program: Certification, Compliance, Labeling, and Enforcement for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors; Proposed Rule VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41378 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 [Docket No. EERE–2014–BT–CE–0019] RIN 1904–AD25 Energy Conservation Program: Certification, Compliance, Labeling, and Enforcement for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. AGENCY: The U.S. Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’ or the ‘‘Department’’) is proposing to revise its certification, compliance, and enforcement regulations for electric motors and small electric motors to conform to the enforcement regulations for all other covered products and equipment and to consolidate, to the extent possible, the certification and compliance regulations for electric motors and small electric motors with those for other types of covered products and equipment. In addition to bringing the certification, compliance, and enforcement regulations for electric motors and small electric motors under the umbrella and general regulatory scheme of DOE’s existing certification, compliance, and enforcement regulations for other equipment and products, this proposal provides specific sampling plans, certification of efficiency requirements, independent testing laboratory and certification program requirements, and labeling requirements for electric motors and small electric motors. DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this NOPR no later than July 25, 2016. See section V, Public Participation, for details. ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the NOPR for Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors, and provide docket number EERE–2014–BT–CE– 0019 and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 1904–AD25. 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: MotorsCCE2014CE0019@ 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., sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 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, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be submitted to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy through the methods listed above and by email to Chad_S_ Whiteman@omb.eop.gov. 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: http://www.energy.gov/eere/ buildings/implementation-certificationand-enforcement. This Web page will contain a link to the docket for this notice on the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov site contains simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section V for further information on how to submit comments through www.regulations.gov. For further information on how to submit a comment, or review other public comments and the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or by email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, EE–5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–6590 or Ashley.Armstrong@ee.doe.gov. Ms. Laura Barhydt, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 GC–32, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 287–5772 or Email: Laura.Barhydt@hq.doe.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the following industry standards into part 429: (1) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/ IEC Guide 17025:2005(E), ‘‘General requirements for the competence of calibration and testing laboratories,’’ Third edition, December 1, 1990; (2) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/ IEC Guide 27, Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse of its mark of conformity’’, First edition, March 1, 1983; (3) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/ IEC Guide 17026:2015, ‘‘Conformity assessment—Example of a certification scheme for tangible products,’’ First edition, February 1, 2015; (4) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/ IEC Guide 17065:2012, ‘‘Conformity assessment—Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services,’’ First edition, September 15, 2012. Copies of these ISO/IEC Guides can be obtained from the International Organization for Standardization, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, 1214 Vernier, ` Geneve, Switzerland, or by going to http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store.htm. See section IV.M for a further discussion of these standards. Table of Contents I. Authority and Background II. Summary of the Proposal A. Conformance With Existing Certification, Compliance and Enforcement Regulations B. Changes to Existing Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, Enforcement and Labeling Regulations C. Changes to Existing Small Electric Motor Regulations III. Discussion of Specific Revisions and Additions to Electric Motor and Small Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, Enforcement and Labeling Regulations A. General Changes B. Compliance Certification Numbers C. Electric Motor Certification and Compliance 1. Certification Testing 2. Submittal of a Certification Report 3. Sampling Plan 4. Certification E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules D. Small Electric Motor Certification and Compliance 1. Certification testing 2. Sampling Plan 3. Certification Reports E. Alternative Methods for Determining Energy Efficiency or Energy Use F. Certification Programs Classified by DOE as Nationally Recognized 1. Petitions for Recognition 2. DOE Petition for Recognition and Withdrawal G. Labeling 1. Electric Motors 2. Small Electric Motors H. Enforcement Provisions for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors 1. Prohibited Acts and Remedies 2. Test Notices 3. Enforcement Testing 4. Notices of Noncompliance and Penalties I. Other Revisions to Existing Electric Motors Regulations J. Other Revisions to Existing Small Electric Motors Regulations 1. Delayed Compliance Date 2. Component IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act 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 the 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 Materials Incorporated by Reference V. Public Participation A. Submission of Comments B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 I. Authority and Background Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’ or, in context, ‘‘the Act’’) sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. Part A of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) provides for the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. The National Energy Conservation Policy Act (NECPA), Public Law 95–619, amended EPCA to add Part B of Title III, which established an energy conservation program for certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317) 1 Included among the 1 For editorial reasons, Parts B (consumer products) and C (commercial equipment) of Title III VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 various equipment types addressed by EPCA 2 are electric and small electric motors. As relevant here, DOE’s energy conservation program under EPCA 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.3 Further, 42 U.S.C. 6299–6305, 6316, and 6317 authorize DOE to enforce compliance with the energy conservation standards related to a variety of consumer products and commercial equipment, including electric motors and small electric motors. This document proposes to move the current compliance- and certificationrelated procedures and requirements for electric motors into DOE’s regulations at 10 CFR part 429. It also proposes adding product-specific provisions for small electric motors at 10 CFR part 429. The provisions related to the compliance, certification, and enforcement (‘‘CCE’’) of electric motors in this proposal are based on the existing compliance certification procedures for electric motors. Under 42 U.S.C. 6316(c), DOE must require manufacturers of electric motors for which energy conservation standards are established at 42 U.S.C. 6313(b) to certify, through an ‘‘independent testing or certification program nationally recognized in the United States’’ that those electric motors meet the applicable standard. DOE codified this requirement by developing a regulatory process for laboratory accreditation (for independent testing) and for the recognition and withdrawal of recognition for certification programs nationally recognized in the U.S. Under 10 CFR 431.17(a)(5), a manufacturer can establish compliance either through: (1) of EPCA were codified as parts A and A–1, respectively, in the United States Code. 2 All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, Public Law 114–11 (April 30, 2015). 3 The test procedures for electric motors are described in appendix B to subpart B of 10 CFR part 431; the test procedures for small electric motors are described in 10 CFR 431.444. PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41379 A certification program that DOE has classified as nationally recognized,4 or (2) testing in an accredited laboratory for which the accreditation body was the National Institute of Standards and Technology/National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (‘‘NIST/NVLAP’’), a laboratory accreditation body having a mutual recognition arrangement with NIST/ NVLAP, or an organization classified by DOE as an accreditation body pursuant to 10 CFR 431.19. Existing DOE regulations detail the certification program national recognition process at 10 CFR 431.20–431.21 and laboratory accreditation at 10 CFR 431.18–431.19. On May 4, 2012, DOE published certain compliance testing regulations for small electric motors. See 77 FR 26608 (‘‘2012 test procedure’’) (codified at 10 CFR 431.445, 431.447, 431.448). Under these regulations, manufacturers of small electric motors have the option of self-certifying the efficiency of their small electric motors or using a certification program nationally recognized in the U.S. to certify the efficiency of these motors. See 10 CFR 431.445. In the 2012 test procedure, DOE noted that there were no existing certification programs for small electric motors. 77 FR at 26630. Since then, DOE has recognized two certification programs for small electric motors. See 78 FR 72077 (December 2, 2013) (recognition of UL) and 79 FR 24700 (May 1, 2014) (recognition of CSA). DOE also noted in the 2012 test procedure that it would work with NIST/NVLAP on small electric motor laboratory accreditation programs. See 77 FR at 26630. EPCA sets different labeling requirements for electric motors and small electric motors. For electric motors in general, EPCA directed DOE to prescribe labeling requirements, taking into consideration NEMA Standards Publication MG1–1987. (42 U.S.C. 6315(d)) Consistent with this requirement, DOE established labeling requirements for electric motors on October 5, 1999 (October 1999 final rule). See 64 FR 54114. In contrast, although EPCA directs DOE to prescribe labeling requirements for those small electric motors for which the Secretary of Energy has prescribed energy efficiency standards, the statute does not require DOE to consider MG1–1987. (42 U.S.C. 6317(d)) 4 To date, DOE has only classified Canadian Standards Association (CSA) and Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL) as certification programs nationally recognized in the U.S. E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41380 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules II. Summary of the Proposal This proposal seeks to revise DOE’s certification and enforcement regulations for electric motors and small electric motors to encourage compliance, achieve energy savings, and help ensure a fair and equitable competitive field among all manufacturers. As summarized below, the proposal would conform the existing CCE requirements for electric motors to the same structure and substance already used with respect to DOE’s CCE regulations found at 10 CFR part 429 for all other consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. It also proposes the use of productspecific sampling plans and certification mechanisms for electric motors. For small electric motors, this proposal also provides product-specific sampling plans and certification mechanisms. DOE is proposing to adopt labeling requirements for small electric motors similar to those for electric motors. sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 A. Conformance With Existing Certification, Compliance and Enforcement Regulations This proposal would make the provisions for electric motors and small electric motors consistent with the general provisions already in place for all other EPCA-covered products and equipment found in 10 CFR part 429, subpart A (general provisions), subpart B (certification), and subpart C (enforcement). The proposed rule would: (1) Move and amend certification testing, sampling, and certification provisions specific to electric motors, (2) move the sampling and certification testing provisions specific to small electric motors, and (3) add certification provisions specific to small electric motors. This proposal would also add new paragraphs (h) and (i) to 10 CFR 429.70, which would address the use of alternative methods for determining energy efficiency or energy use (also known as alternative efficiency determination methods, or ‘‘AEDMs’’) for electric motors and small electric motors. The proposal would move and amend existing AEDM provisions for electric motors and for small electric motors. The proposal would move and amend the administrative process for recognizing certification programs to new sections 10 CFR 429.73 and 429.75. The proposal would add an administrative process for recognizing testing laboratories, either directly or through recognition of accreditation organizations, to new sections 10 CFR 429.74 and 429.75. Finally, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 proposed rule would move the electric motor labeling requirements from 10 CFR 431.31 to a new 10 CFR 429.76 and add labeling requirements for small electric motors. The proposal also would add a definition for ‘‘independent’’ to describe how DOE evaluates the independence of testing laboratories and certification programs. The proposed definition of the term ‘‘independent’’ would replace the currently defined term ‘‘independent laboratory’’ found at 10 CFR 431.2. Finally, the proposed rule would amend the procedures applicable to electric motor and small electric motor manufacturers and private labelers who are involved in an enforcement action with DOE by applying the process already codified at 10 CFR part 429, subpart C. DOE notes that it anticipates publishing in the near future a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend part 429 for all products, which could impact the proposals in this rule. Therefore, for the purposes of this proposed rule, the Department is only soliciting comments on 10 CFR part 429 as it pertains to electric motors. DOE is not re-opening the application of part 429 as it pertains to manufacturers of any other covered product or equipment. B. Changes to Existing Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, Enforcement and Labeling Regulations This proposal would retain the subpart that separately addresses test methodology and standards for electric motors (10 CFR part 431, subpart B). Regarding the definitions applicable to electric motors in § 431.12, the proposal would revise the current ‘‘basic model’’ definition as applied to electric motors to more closely align with the definition used for other DOEregulated products and equipment, add a definition for ‘‘equipment class’’ to accompany the ‘‘basic model’’ definition, and remove definitions related to accreditation as a result of the proposed changes regarding laboratory accreditation. The proposal would also address how to treat electric motors that are capable of operation at voltages other than 230 or 460 volts with respect to testing and representations of energy efficiency. Finally, the current CCE and labeling provisions for electric motors would be removed from 10 CFR part 431, subpart B. More specifically, the current Subpart U would be removed and reserved so that all CCE and labeling requirements for electric motors would be located together in 10 CFR part 429. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 C. Changes to Existing Small Electric Motor Regulations This proposal would retain the subpart that addresses standards and the testing methodology for small electric motors (10 CFR part 431, subpart X). The provisions addressing sampling of units for testing, including sampling statistics, test facility requirements, and the certification requirements, are being addressed in this rule. For the definitions applicable to small electric motors in § 431.442, this proposal would revise the existing definition of ‘‘basic model’’ to more closely align with the definition used for other DOE-regulated products and equipment, and add a definition for ‘‘equipment class’’ to accompany the ‘‘basic model’’ definition. Finally, the proposal would amend 10 CFR 431.446 to explain how DOE would apply the exemption for small electric motors that are installed in another type of covered product or equipment. III. Discussion of Specific Revisions and Additions to Electric Motor and Small Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, Enforcement and Labeling Regulations In this portion of the notice, DOE details all of the new and amended provisions of this proposed rule. DOE proposes to both amend and add new sections to 10 CFR part 429 and to remove or amend portions of 10 CFR part 431, subparts B, U, and X. These proposed changes are discussed separately below. A. General Changes In addition to the reorganization described in detail later in this document, this proposal would change the existing electric motor regulations at 10 CFR part 431, subpart B in several ways. The portions of the existing electric motor regulations that pertain to certification, compliance, and enforcement would be amended and moved to 10 CFR part 429. It would also amend other sections of 10 CFR part 431, subpart B to ensure the regulatory structure comprising 10 CFR part 431, subpart B and 10 CFR part 429 remains coherent. This proposal would also amend the ‘‘Purpose and Scope’’ in § 431.11 by removing references to labeling and compliance, which this proposal would address in part 429. Additionally, the existing definition of ‘‘basic model’’ would become similar to the definitions used for other DOEregulated products and equipment and would eliminate an ambiguity found in the current regulation. The definition currently specifies that basic models of E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 electric motors are all units of a given type manufactured by the same manufacturer, which have the same rating, and have electrical characteristics that are essentially identical, and do not have any differing physical or functional characteristics that affect energy consumption or efficiency. (10 CFR 431.12) For the purposes of this definition, the term ‘‘rating’’ is specified to mean one of 113 combinations of horsepower, poles, and open or enclosed construction. (See id.) The reference to 113 combinations dates from the Department’s implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (‘‘EPACT 1992’’) (Pub. L. 102–486), which set initial standards for motors based on that categorization. Since then, EISA 2007 and DOE’s regulations have established standards for additional motor categories. See 10 CFR 431.25. To clarify that the concept of a ‘‘basic model’’ reflects the categorization in effect under the prevailing standard, as it stands today and as it may evolve in future rulemakings, the proposed rule would refer only to the combinations of horsepower (or standard kilowatt equivalent), number of poles, and open or enclosed construction for which 10 CFR 431.25 prescribes standards; it would drop the current reference to 113 such combinations. In addition, the proposal would modify the basic model definition for electric motors by replacing the ‘‘rating’’ term with the term ‘‘equipment class,’’ which also would be defined. The term ‘‘equipment class’’ would have a meaning similar to the notion of ‘‘rating’’ in the current regulation but, as noted, would clearly encompass the full range of equipment classes for which DOE ultimately sets standards. It will also limit confusion between the use of the term ‘‘rating’’ in this specific case and the use of the term as it applies to represented values of other individual characteristics of an electric motor, such as its rated horsepower, voltage, torque, or energy efficiency.5 The proposed basic model definition would retain the current language about a ‘‘basic model’’ having essentially identical electrical characteristics without any differing physical or functional characteristics 5 In this document, DOE uses the verb ‘‘to rate’’ to refer to a manufacturer determining a value through measurements or use of an AEDM and then setting the represented value for that characteristic. Any use of the term ‘‘rating’’ to refer to the combination of characteristics under the current basic model definition will be clearly identified. All other occurrences of ‘‘rating’’ refer to a manufacturer’s rated (i.e., represented) values. A rated or represented value is the value that the manufacturer uses in its marketing, labeling, and certification of compliance. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 that affect energy consumption or efficiency. Similarly, the existing small electric motor regulations at 10 CFR part 431, subpart X would be changed by this proposed rule in several ways. The portions of the existing small electric motor regulations that pertain to certification testing would be amended and moved to 10 CFR part 429. This proposal would amend or remove other sections of 10 CFR part 431, subpart X to ensure coherence between 10 CFR part 431, subpart X and 10 CFR part 429. As with electric motors, for small electric motors, this proposal would revise the existing definition of ‘‘basic model’’ to make it similar to the definitions used for other DOE-regulated products and equipment. The existing ‘‘basic model’’ definition found at 10 CFR 431.442 would remain largely intact except the proposal would replace the term ‘‘rating’’ and its definition in the current regulations with the term ‘‘equipment class’’ and its accompanying definition. The current language about a ‘‘basic model’’ having essentially identical electrical characteristics without any differing physical or functional characteristics that affect energy consumption or efficiency is retained in the proposed ‘‘basic model’’ definition. The proposal would add a new definition for ‘‘equipment class’’ under 10 CFR 431.442. Similar to the ‘‘ratings’’ concept currently in DOE’s ‘‘basic model’’ definition, each small electric motor ‘‘equipment class’’ would be the combination of each small electric motor group (i.e., capacitor-start, capacitor-run; capacitor-start, inductionrun; or polyphase), horsepower (or standard kilowatt equivalent), and number of poles, for which 10 CFR 431.446 prescribes average full-load efficiency standards. B. Compliance Certification Numbers This proposed rule would replace the currently used compliance certification (‘‘CC’’) number for electric motors with a new Manufacturer’s Identification Number (‘‘MIN’’). Under current DOE regulations at 10 CFR 431.36(c), electric motor manufacturers must obtain a compliance certification number (‘‘CC number’’) to affix to the permanent nameplate of an electric motor for which standards are prescribed under 10 CFR 431.25. A CC number is a unique number assigned by DOE for any brand name, trademark, or other label name under which a manufacturer or private labeler distributes covered electric motors and for which the manufacturer or private labeler submits PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41381 compliance certifications to DOE under 10 CFR 431.36. While the CC number is unique to a specific manufacturer or private labeler’s brand name, trademark, or other label name, it is not unique to individual basic models and does not uniquely identify the original equipment manufacturer (‘‘OEM’’). DOE has determined that the current system has certain disadvantages, including the inability to trace a unit back to a specific OEM. Nonetheless, the use of such a numbering system, where the numbers are unique to brand and manufacturer combinations, would enable DOE to readily identify the OEM for a given unit, which would facilitate DOE enforcement of applicable energy conservation standards. Without sufficient information identifying the OEM and brand name for covered electric motors, DOE can neither efficiently ascertain whether a manufacturer or private labeler has certified compliance for a given, covered electric motor, nor necessarily identify the responsible parties when responding to third-party claims that a given, covered electric motor does not comply with applicable energy conservation standards. The currently used CC numbers are not assigned on this basis and cannot provide this requisite information. By using the MIN system proposed in this document, DOE seeks to remedy this problem. The MIN system would require a single party (such as an OEM or a private labeler) to first request and obtain from DOE a MIN that would be listed in the certification report and stamped on the nameplate of a covered electric motor before its distribution in commerce. Under the proposed version of 10 CFR 431.17, DOE would provide a unique MIN for each OEM-brand name combination. The term ‘‘original equipment manufacturer’’ or ‘‘OEM’’ would be defined as the manufacturer that produces or assembles an electric motor covered by a certification of compliance. DOE would issue a MIN for use only with a single OEM-brand name combination. No overlap with other OEM-brand name combinations would be permitted. In other words, once DOE has issued a MIN for a particular OEMbrand name combination, that MIN will be the only MIN applicable to those electric motors manufactured by that OEM and labeled under that brand name. Further, in the event the brand name to which a MIN is applicable is discontinued, the OEM would notify DOE within 30 days of the discontinuance, after which time the MIN would become invalid for use on any newly produced units. As described in the proposed § 431.17(b)(4), the MIN E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 41382 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules could not be transferred to another entity or used on the nameplates of basic models manufactured by an OEM other than the OEM associated with the MIN. In accordance with the proposed § 431.17(d), MIN requests would be submitted to DOE either electronically at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms or via email at: MotorMINRequest@ ee.doe.gov. For small electric motors, due to the significant volume of manufacturerbasic model combinations in today’s small electric motor market and that market’s dynamic nature, DOE is proposing that small electric motor manufacturers also must first request and obtain from DOE a MIN for use with each specific OEM-brand name combination before distributing a covered small electric motor in commerce. As described in detail previously for electric motors, under the proposed 10 CFR 431.447, DOE would provide a unique MIN for each OEMbrand name combination. Although the process for manufacturers of small electric motors to obtain a MIN would be the same, DOE is proposing to issue different MINs for electric motor manufacturer-brand name combinations and small electric motor manufacturerbrand name combinations. In other words, there would be no overlapping MINs because different MINs would be used with each manufacturer-brand combination for electric motors and small electric motors—with each small electric motor manufacturer having a unique MIN that is separate from each electric motor manufacturer MIN. DOE requests comments on this proposal, particularly with respect to the amount of time needed for manufacturers to transition to MINs. DOE also requests comment regarding whether the OEM-brand relationship is confidential business information, and whether a list of MINs and associated OEMs and brands should be posted on DOE’s Certification Compliance Management System (‘‘CCMS’’) Web site. DOE also requests comment on whether, if the OEM-brand relationship is confidential business information, the brand-MIN listing should be published. To evaluate whether the OEM-brand relationship is confidential business information, DOE specifically requests comment on whether the OEM-brand relationship is held in confidence by the OEM, private labeler, and importer; whether the OEM-brand relationship is available in public sources; whether disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the OEM, private labeler, or importer; and the nature of that harm. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 DOE is proposing that a MIN may not be transferred to another entity. DOE requests comment regarding how much time would be required to transition a MIN on a nameplate to a new MIN if an OEM were acquired by another company or underwent some other corporate reorganization that would require the assignment and use of a new MIN. C. Electric Motor Certification and Compliance This proposal would amend sections of 10 CFR part 429 by removing language that currently excludes electric motors from coverage under this part. Part 429 includes subpart A (General Provisions), subpart B (Certification), and subpart C (Enforcement). After the proposed removal of this exclusionary language, part 429 would apply to all covered products and equipment, including electric motors and small electric motors. DOE requests comment on this proposed change, which would impact the certification and enforcement procedures applicable to electric motor manufacturers and private labelers. These changes, as well as changes to labeling and sampling provisions, are discussed in the subsections that follow. 1. Certification Testing As described in section I of this proposed rule, DOE codified at 10 CFR 431.17(a)(5) the statutory requirement prescribing that manufacturers must certify electric motors as compliant with the applicable standard through the use of an ‘‘independent testing or certification program nationally recognized in the United States.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6316(c)) In its October 1999 final rule establishing certification, labeling and test procedures for electric motors, DOE explained that testing conducted in a laboratory accredited by a body such as NIST/NVLAP would satisfy the ‘‘independent testing’’ requirement under the statute. 64 FR 54124. The accreditation requirements applicable to testing laboratories for electric motors are at 10 CFR 431.18, and the specific provisions for DOE recognition of accreditation bodies are at 10 CFR 431.19. DOE has found through examination of certification information submitted by manufacturers that most independent testing laboratories that currently conduct electric motor efficiency testing are accredited by NIST/NVLAP. Among the manufacturers that did not appear to use a NIST/NVLAP accredited laboratory, nearly all appear to have used a certification program classified by DOE as nationally recognized. Because PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 manufacturers are not currently required to report the specific laboratory or certification program that was used for their testing, DOE typically does not receive this information. Accordingly, DOE has reached these conclusions based on communications with manufacturers and other information submitted concurrently with certifications of compliance, such as test reports. Laboratories accredited by NIST/ NVLAP are governed by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program ‘‘Procedures and General Requirements’’ NIST Handbook 150–10 (February 2007) and Lab Bulletin LB– 42–009. (See 10 CFR 431.18(b).) NIST Handbook 150–10 (via incorporation by reference of ‘‘Procedures and General Requirements’’ NIST Handbook 150 (February 2006)) describes the level of independence that a laboratory must have in relation to the organization for which it is conducting testing. The requirements include organizational arrangements that are necessary for inhouse laboratories and additional levels of independence that must be demonstrated for third-party laboratories. An organization can petition DOE to be classified as a nationally recognized certification program. (See 10 CFR 431.20(a)) DOE evaluates such petitions based on several criteria, including: (1) The standards and procedures for conducting and administering a certification program; (2) independence from electric motor manufacturers, importers, distributors, private labelers or vendors; (3) the qualifications to operate the certification system; and (4) expertise in the DOE’s electric motor test procedures. 10 CFR 431.20(b). After a petition is submitted, DOE publishes the petition in the Federal Register and solicits comments on whether the petition should be granted, after which the petitioner has the option of responding to any adverse comments before DOE announces an interim determination, followed by a final determination. 10 CFR 431.21. The Department can also withdraw recognition if DOE believes that the certification program is failing to meet the above-referenced criteria. A recognized program may also voluntarily withdraw its program from recognition. (See 10 CFR 431.21(g).) Since the October 1999 final rule, DOE has recognized two organizations as nationally recognized certification programs, CSA Group (‘‘CSA’’) and UL Verification Services (‘‘UL’’), both of which were recognized in final determinations published on December E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules 27, 2002. See 67 FR 79480 and 67 FR 79490. Consistent with the requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6316(c), this proposal continues to offer the option of using an independent testing or certification program nationally recognized in the U.S. However, DOE is proposing to add further specificity regarding which parties can test electric motors and certify compliance with the applicable energy conservation standards to DOE. This proposal provides three options in this regard: (1) A manufacturer can have the electric motor tested using a testing program that is nationally recognized in the United States (as described in § 429.74 of this proposal) and then certify on its own behalf or have a third party submit the manufacturer’s certification report; (2) a manufacturer can test the electric motor at a testing laboratory other than a testing program that is nationally recognized and then have a certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (as described in § 429.73 of this proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor; or (3) a manufacturer can use an alternative efficiency determination method (‘‘AEDM,’’ discussed in section III.E of this proposed rule) and then have a thirdparty certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (as described in § 429.73 of this proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor. These options are included in the proposed testing and sampling provisions applicable to electric motors in § 429.63. Under this regulatory structure, a manufacturer cannot both test in its own laboratories and directly submit the certification of compliance to DOE for its own electric motors. This document proposes a definition for ‘‘independent’’ that would pertain to the testing program evaluation criteria and the certification program evaluation criteria as described in the proposed §§ 429.74(c) and (d) and 429.73(c) and (d), respectively. The term, ‘‘independent,’’ would refer to an entity that is not controlled by, or under common control with, electric motor manufacturers, importers, private labelers, or vendors. Control, for these purposes, would mean ownership of or the power to vote 25 percent of the shares of any single class of securities of a company, or the power to control the election of a majority of directors of a company. ‘‘Independent’’ would also mean that the testing laboratory has no affiliation or financial ties or contractual agreements, apparently or otherwise, with such entities that would: (1) Hinder the ability of the laboratory to VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 evaluate fully or report the measured or calculated energy efficiency of any electric motor, or (2) create any potential or actual conflict of interest that would undermine the validity of said evaluation. This definition is largely based on the descriptions of independence currently in 10 CFR 431.19(b)(2) and 431.19(c)(2). In the existing regulations, DOE addresses the requirement to use an independent testing program nationally recognized in the United States by requiring that testing laboratories be accredited by NIST/NVLAP, a laboratory accreditation program having a mutual recognition program with NIST/NVLAP, or an organization classified by DOE as an accreditation body. 10 CFR 431.18. DOE is proposing to revise these requirements by creating a system by which testing programs may attain recognition, similar to the existing provisions for certification programs. In DOE’s view, a key criterion for a testing program to receive recognition will be demonstrating independence, as previously described. Another criterion will be demonstrating the ability to perform testing in accordance with the DOE test procedure, which may or may not be adequately reflected through accreditation.6 Accordingly, DOE proposes to remove the definitions of ‘‘accreditation,’’ ‘‘accreditation body,’’ ‘‘accreditation system,’’ and ‘‘accredited laboratory’’ from 10 CFR 431.12. Further, DOE proposes to remove the definition of ‘‘independent laboratory’’ from 10 CFR 431.2. DOE believes that ‘‘independent’’ as defined in this proposed rule is a more appropriate interpretation of the statutory language found in 42 U.S.C. 6316(c) than the agency’s prior application of this provision. The 1999 rule assumed that a laboratory could be meaningfully independent, in a way that would satisfy the statutory criterion, while being owned by a manufacturer, so long as the laboratory was NIST/NVLAP certified. In light of experience since that time, DOE is concerned that this premise is not justified. Testing at a manufacturer’s own laboratory allows the opportunity for a manufacturer to gain a competitive advantage by administering the testing in such a manner that could yield better results. It also further exacerbates the differential treatment between those businesses that are financially able to own their own test facilities and small 6 Accreditation means recognition by an accreditation body that a laboratory is competent to test the efficiency of electric motors according to the scope and procedures given in the Test Method B of IEEE Std 112–2004 and CSA 390–10. See 10 CFR 431.12. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41383 businesses that may not have the capital to afford such large investments. Of course, a reasonable contract under which an otherwise independent laboratory conducts a test would not, on its own, cause the laboratory not to be independent of the manufacturer. In this proposal, DOE also allows for the option of testing in a manufacturer’s own laboratory if the manufacturer uses a third-party certification program, as described above. DOE believes this combination of the three options explained above to determine the efficiency and losses for electric motors subject to DOE’s test procedures and standards provides manufacturers with the most flexibility while satisfying the statute. DOE recognizes that the concerns expressed in the rulemaking that culminated in the October 1999 final rule may still apply. See, e.g., 61 FR 60455–60456 (November 27, 1996). At that time, DOE noted that there were few test facilities that could meet this level of independence and noted the concerns of commenters that test facilities could not handle the necessary volume of testing given the potential for ‘‘thousands’’ of basic models. Nonetheless, DOE believes that the proposed change should have little practical impact on manufacturers’ current practices due to the volume of motors rated using AEDMs and/or through participation in certification programs. DOE understands that most models are rated based on modeling and thus will be subject to the AEDM provisions, which are virtually unchanged by this proposal. Instead, the changes should provide more clarity to manufacturers about the testing required, which should increase the consistency between representations based on the three testing options discussed in the next section. DOE does not expect these changes to have any impact on manufacturer ratings (i.e., energy efficiency representations) or compliance, because, in principle, an independent testing laboratory (under the proposed definition of ‘‘independent’’) should obtain measurements for a given sample of motors similar to those an in-house NIST/NVLAP-certified laboratory would have reached. 2. Submittal of a Certification Report As stated above, under this proposal, a manufacturer of electric motors regulated under 10 CFR part 431 would have three options when testing and certifying compliance with energy conservation standards: (1) A manufacturer can have the electric motor tested using a testing program that is nationally recognized in the E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 41384 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules United States (as described in § 429.74 of this proposal) and then certify on its own behalf or have a third party submit the manufacturer’s certification report; (2) a manufacturer can test the electric motor at a testing laboratory other than a testing program that is nationally recognized and then have a certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (as described in § 429.73 of this proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor; or (3) a manufacturer can use an alternative efficiency determination method (‘‘AEDM,’’ discussed in section III.E of this proposed rule) and then have a third-party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (as described in § 429.73 of this proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor. A manufacturer that chooses the first option must have its electric motors tested through a testing program that is nationally recognized under the proposed provisions of 10 CFR 429.74. Under this first option, after a manufacturer retains an independent testing laboratory to conduct electric motor testing, the manufacturer can use those test results to certify compliance to DOE itself or through a third-party representative, or the manufacturer may still choose to employ the services of a nationally recognized certification program. A manufacturer using a nationally recognized testing program may use a third-party representative to complete certification reports on its behalf under the certification provisions at § 429.12(g) and (h). A third-party representative may be any party authorized by the manufacturer to complete the reports on the manufacturer’s behalf; common thirdparty representatives are foreign OEMs and private testing laboratories. The third-party representative would certify the accuracy of the information it submits but is only performing the ministerial function of completing the report. A manufacturer using a testing program could employ the services of a certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (under the proposed § 429.73) to submit the certification reports for the manufacturer. In that situation, the certification program would be acting as a third-party representative and may or may not be employed by the manufacturer to certify the compliance of the motors (i.e., issue a certificate of conformity). A manufacturer that chooses the second option tests its electric motors at the manufacturer’s own testing laboratory or at any other testing VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 laboratory that does not meet the proposed definition of ‘‘independent.’’ In DOE’s view, a supervised witness test at a manufacturer-owned laboratory does not meet the proposed definition of independent because the lab has financial ties to the manufacturer and would, therefore, fall under the second option. The manufacturer would employ a certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (under the proposed § 429.73) to certify the efficiency of the electric motor basic models. The petition process and requirements for DOE to recognize third-party certification programs as nationally recognized in the U.S. would be part of new sections 10 CFR 429.73 and 429.75, and are more fully discussed in section III.F of this proposed rule. A manufacturer that chooses the third option would conduct its testing to validate its AEDM at any testing laboratory. The manufacturer would apply the AEDM to determine the efficiency of its basic models, as long as the AEDM regulations are followed, but would be required to employ a thirdparty certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States to certify the efficiency of the electric motor basic models to DOE. Under all three options, a manufacturer must itself certify to DOE the compliance of each basic model of the motors it manufactures and distributes in commerce in the U.S. As discussed in the October 1999 final rule, the statute requires a manufacturer to certify the compliance to DOE. That certification, in turn, must be based on the use of a nationally recognized, independent testing program or a nationally recognized certification program. A nationally recognized certification program would verify the reliability of testing, such as by reviewing a laboratory’s protocols and procedures. But the nationally recognized certification program would not necessarily itself make the declaration to DOE that a manufacturer’s motor complies with the applicable standard or has a given efficiency. The manufacturer itself remains responsible for stating that declaration, either directly or through a representative authorized to do so. See 64 FR at 54124 (October 5, 1999). DOE anticipates that manufacturers using certification programs may often authorize their certification programs to provide the necessary declarations on their behalf. Indeed, some manufacturers may not often want to submit certifications directly. Nevertheless, DOE seeks comment regarding the conditions under which PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 DOE should accept a certification submitted directly by a manufacturer that used a certification program to fulfill the certification testing requirements. DOE also requests comment regarding whether DOE should, in those cases, require the certification report to include a certificate of conformity or whether DOE should only require the certification report to identify the certification program used (with a certificate of conformity available from the certification program upon request by DOE). DOE proposes conforming changes to 10 CFR part 431, including removal of existing provisions regarding the determination of efficiency (10 CFR 431.17), testing laboratories (10 CFR 431.18), DOE recognition of accreditation bodies (10 CFR 431.19), DOE recognition of certification programs (10 CFR 431.20), and procedures for the withdrawal of recognition for accreditation bodies and certification programs (10 CFR 431.21). The new provisions regarding certification of efficiency and associated requirements would be addressed in 10 CFR 429.63 (certification of electric motors), 429.70 (AEDMs), 429.73 (requirements for certification programs), and 429.74 (requirements for testing programs) and 429.75 (procedures related to independent testing programs and certification programs). DOE also proposes to remove 10 CFR 431.14, as the reference citations were provided solely for convenience. DOE seeks comments on the three proposed options for manufacturers to use when conducting certification testing for electric motor compliance with energy conservation standards. 3. Sampling Plan The current sampling requirements for electric motors were established through the October 1999 final rule. 64 FR at 54129. The current regulations require that each basic model must either be tested or rated using an AEDM. (10 CFR 431.17(a)) § 431.17 goes on to specify the requirements for use of an AEDM, including requirements for substantiation (i.e., the initial validation) and verification of an AEDM. Those requirements ensure the accuracy and reliability of the AEDM both prior to use and then through ongoing verification checks on the estimated efficiency. (10 CFR 431.17(a)(4)) This verification can be achieved in one of three ways: through participation in a certification program; by additional, periodic testing in an independent lab; or by verification by a professional engineer. (10 CFR E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 431.17(a)(4)) For basic models that are not rated with an AEDM, paragraph (a)(5) of § 431.17 explains that a manufacturer may choose between either having a certification program certify a basic model’s efficiency or conducting testing in an accredited laboratory. (10 CFR 431.17(a)(5)) It also explains that the motors tested to substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM must either be in a certification program or must have been tested in an accredited laboratory. Paragraph (b) of 10 CFR 431.17 provides further clarity regarding testing if a certification program is not used. Paragraph (b)(1) explains the criteria for selecting basic models (in an accredited laboratory) for certification testing and to substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM. (See 10 CFR 431.17(b)(1), (b)(3)) Paragraph (b)(2) provides the criteria for selecting units for testing, including a minimum sample size of 5 units in most cases. For manufacturers using AEDMs, paragraph (b)(2) applies to those basic models selected for substantiating (i.e., validating) the AEDM. (See 10 CFR 431.17(b)(2) and (3)) For manufacturers testing each basic model, paragraph (b)(2) applies to each basic model. (For manufacturers using a certification program, these selection and sampling requirements are specified in the certification program’s operational documents.) Rated Efficiency Before distribution in commerce, electric motors manufacturers and private labelers of electric motors subject to energy conservation standards must submit a Compliance Certification to the Department that includes, among other things, a nominal full-load efficiency for each basic model. Provisions for determining a basic model’s efficiency through testing or with an AEDM are currently described in 10 CFR 431.17. Included in this section are provisions to verify the nominal full-load efficiency of a basic model for which a certification program is not used. As part of these requirements, a sample (in most cases, five or more) must be tested for each basic model. The results of that sample are then evaluated to ensure that the average measured full-load efficiency of the sample is no less than a prescribed margin from the represented nominal full-load efficiency of the basic model, where the margin is part of a mathematical formula described in § 431.17(b)(2). The basic model is also evaluated using a second formula to verify that the measured efficiency of the least efficient tested motor in the sample is no less than a prescribed VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 margin from the represented nominal full-load efficiency. (See 10 CFR 431.17(b).) DOE imposes one set of sampling provisions for manufacturers to use when rating their products and a second set of sampling provisions for DOE to use when evaluating the compliance of those products. The sampling provisions for determining a represented value (e.g., nominal efficiency) reflect the fact that an important function of represented values is to inform prospective purchasers how efficiently various products operate. In light of that purpose, DOE designed the regulation with respect to the represented value so that purchasers are more likely than not to get a unit that actually performs as efficiently as advertised. The enforcement statistical formulas are designed to determine if a basic model is compliant with the applicable energy conservation standard and are weighted in favor of the manufacturer to minimize the likelihood of erroneous noncompliance determinations. The certification statistical formulas are designed to protect purchasers; the enforcement statistical formulas are designed to protect manufacturers. DOE emphasizes that not every, individual unit of a motor basic model must be at or above the standard; however, the represented nominal efficiency must not exceed the population mean. NEMA previously stated that DOE’s proposed requirement that the average efficiency of any sample to not be less than the represented efficiency places an unreasonable burden on manufacturers and would require that all electric motors be designed to substantially exceed the represented value in order to assure that any sample would pass the compliance test. (EE–RM–96–400, NEMA, No. 38 at pg. 3) The part 429 requirements ensure the tests of each basic model, whether for determining the model’s efficiency or for the substantiation (i.e., initial validation) of an AEDM, are based on a sample of units that is large enough to account for reasonable manufacturing variability among individual units of the basic model or variability in the test methodology such that the test results for the overall sample will be reasonably representative of the efficiency of the whole population of production units of that basic model. Under these certification statistical formulas, manufacturers can increase their sample size to narrow the margin of error. After reviewing these various provisions for determining efficiency, DOE is concerned that its current provisions give rise to too high a risk PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41385 that a manufacturer may state a nominal efficiency for a basic model that is greater than the actual population mean for that model. In the previous rulemaking, DOE adopted a formula under which a manufacturer could represent an efficiency of ‘‘RE’’ (i.e., represented efficiency) only if the average full load losses of the sample are less or equal to 105 percent of the full load losses corresponding to the represented value, and if the minimum full load losses are less than or equal to 115 percent of the full load losses corresponding to the represented value. Because these formulas do not require the average full load efficiency of the sample to be at least equal to the represented value, DOE is concerned that these formulas create too large a likelihood that the average efficiency of a manufacturer’s production of given basic model will actually be below the model’s stated efficiency.7 Accordingly, DOE is proposing to adopt a variety of modifications to decrease that likelihood. DOE recognizes that these proposed changes might impact the ratings that manufacturers assign to their models and whether a given model would be deemed compliant with the standards. Whether and how the changes would affect a particular basic model, in either of these respects, would depend on the detailed distribution of efficiencies for units of that model. That distribution might vary by manufacturer or model. Therefore, although NEMA has previously represented that the actual population mean for a basic model will always be above the rated nominal efficiency (see NEMA, Docket EE–RM– 96–400_Comment_23, p. 1), DOE is proposing to allow manufacturers to continue to use the current formulas for determining nominal efficiency and compliance until June 1, 2017. These new formulas would be used to demonstrate compliance with the standards for which compliance was required as of June 1, 2016. DOE is proposing to adopt sampling provisions similar to those for other types of equipment for certifications of compliance with the 2016 standards and for representations of efficiency as of June 1, 2017. In past comments, NEMA has suggested that these sampling provisions would force manufacturers to ‘‘over design’’ the performance of their motors. See 64 FR 54129. However, if tests on a small sample produce a mean sample efficiency that is lower than 7 The full load losses corresponding to a value of full load efficiency (FLE) are equal to the horsepower of the motor multiplied by (100/FLE– 1). E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 41386 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules what a manufacturer believes to be the true mean across manufactured units, the regulations would permit the manufacturer to enlarge the sample. The mean of a larger sample would tend to have smaller departures from the population mean. Specifically, DOE proposes to adopt a sampling plan for certification testing of electric motors similar to those used for other consumer products and commercial equipment. Under the proposal, the represented efficiency could be no greater than the lesser of the arithmetic mean of the tested sample or the lower 97.5 percent one-tailed confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95. As further clarification, to determine the appropriate representative efficiency of a basic model, the results of at least five samples would be used to calculate both the arithmetic mean and the lower 97.5 percent one-tailed confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95. These two values are compared and whichever is lower creates an upper bound on the represented efficiency. For example, if the arithmetic mean is the lower value, then the represented efficiency of a basic model must be greater than or equal to the standard (the applicable nominal efficiency found at 10 CFR 431.25), but no higher than the arithmetic mean of the sample. Manufacturers can then determine the nominal full-load efficiency of a basic model by selecting an efficiency from the ‘‘nominal efficiency’’ column of Table 12–10, NEMA MG1–2009 that is not greater than the representative efficiency of the basic model. In addition, the general sampling plan provisions at 10 CFR 429.11 would apply to both electric motors and small electric motors under the proposal (with the current minimum number of units per basic model that must be tested (five) superseding the general minimum sample size). The sampling provisions at 10 CFR 429.11 are also amended to state that if fewer than the minimum number of units required for testing is manufactured, each unit must be tested. DOE proposes to insert the formulas from 10 CFR 431.17(b)(2)(i) and (ii) into a new section 10 CFR 429.138, which would contain product-specific provisions dealing with verification of representations. Because part 429 currently does not address any products with labeling requirements, DOE has no parallel provisions. This provision would be used to evaluate whether a representation is permitted for purposes of the prohibited acts related to labeling and representations. See section III.H.3 of this proposed rule for discussion. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 Different sampling provisions apply during enforcement testing to determine noncompliance with the energy conservation standards. Those sampling provisions are discussed in detail in section III.H.3 of this proposed rule. DOE requests comments on these proposals, specifically the proposed confidence intervals. Use of Certification Programs As discussed in section III.F.1 of this proposed rule, DOE is proposing to require that any motor rated using an AEDM must be certified by a nationally recognized certification program. DOE is proposing to make explicit that a certification program must conduct ongoing verification testing. DOE requests comment regarding whether DOE should more explicitly require specific sampling provisions for use in verification testing by certification programs and, if so, what those sampling requirements should be. DOE is not proposing to change the current requirement to test a minimum of five units of a basic model to determine the represented efficiency (rating) of the basic model. DOE is also retaining the current provision that allows for testing of fewer than five individual units of a basic model if fewer than five units will be produced over a period of about 180 days, which is intended to address low-volume models. However, DOE is clarifying that the smaller sample size is only allowed for models rated based on testing (not for models used to substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM). DOE is also not proposing to change the requirement that at least five units of each basic model must be tested to substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM. These two provisions combined ensure that an AEDM is based on testing of at least five units of at least five basic models. DOE is not proposing to change the requirements for selection of the basic models used to substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM but is proposing to remove the note: ‘‘[c]omponents of similar design may be substituted without requiring additional testing if the represented measures of energy consumption continue to satisfy the applicable sampling provision’’ because the basic model concept permits manufacturers to test representative units and group similar models without additional testing. Use of Testing Programs Similarly, DOE is not proposing to change the current requirement to test a minimum of five units of a basic model to determine the represented efficiency (rating) of the basic model. DOE is also PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 retaining the current provision that allows for testing of fewer than five individual units of a basic model if fewer than five units will be produced over a period of about 180 days, which is intended to address low-volume models. DOE is clarifying that, if testing is conducted through an independent testing program that is nationally recognized, then each basic model must be tested. 4. Certification While the current regulations in 10 CFR part 431 only require electric motor manufacturers to certify compliance before a basic model is distributed in commerce for the first time (see 10 CFR 431.36), this proposal would also require electric motor manufacturers to certify compliance annually. (See 76 FR 12422, 12424–12425 (March 11, 2007) for a discussion of the rationale for this change.) Although annual certification would be required, additional testing would not be required as long as the represented nominal efficiency continued to remain valid (e.g., the manufacturer did not make changes to a given basic model that would result in a less efficient motor). A manufacturer could conduct periodic testing of the basic model as part of its quality assurance process, but it would be at the discretion of the manufacturer. There would be no requirement to perform additional testing (apart from any verification testing requirements associated with the use of an AEDM or certification body). As part of these proposed changes, DOE would also require electric motor manufacturers to certify their products using the more detailed certification report at 10 CFR 429.12(b) in place of the current certification report described at 10 CFR part 431, appendix C to subpart B. Importers, which are manufacturers under EPCA, would be required to certify the compliance of the electric motors they import. Under the proposed rule, private labelers would no longer be required to certify the compliance of the products they label. See 76 FR at 12427 (March 11, 2007) for a discussion of the rationale for this change. Currently, DOE’s regulations provide a manufacturer with two methods for submitting a certification to DOE that its electric motors comply with the prescribed energy conservation standards, as identified in § 431.36(d): (1) They can submit the certification electronically using the Certification Compliance Management System (‘‘CCMS’’) found at http:// www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms; or (2) they can submit a hard copy of the E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules completed certification form via certified mail. (See 10 CFR part 429, subpart B, appendix C (providing an exemplary copy of the certification form.)) In this proposed rule, both 10 CFR 431.36 and 10 CFR part 431, appendix C to subpart B would be removed, which would eliminate the option of submitting a hard-copy certification report. In place of these provisions, the proposed rule would make electric motors subject to the general certification report requirements found at 10 CFR 429.12 and add certification report parameters for electric motors in paragraph (c) of the proposed 10 CFR 429.63. The general certification report requirements already contained in 10 CFR 429.12 require that, before distributing in U.S. commerce any basic model of a covered product or equipment subject to standards under EPCA, and annually thereafter, each manufacturer must submit a certification report to DOE certifying that each basic model meets the applicable energy conservation standard. In accordance with 10 CFR 429.12(h), all such reports must be submitted to DOE electronically using CCMS. The general components of each certification report are listed at 10 CFR 429.12(b) and (c) and are similar to the parameters currently reported by electric motor manufacturers. DOE’s current CCE regulations for products and equipment other than electric motors require certification of the compliance of each basic model (10 CFR 429.12), unlike DOE’s current electric motor regulations in 10 CFR 431.36, which require the filing of a certification report for the least efficient basic model within each ‘‘rating’’ (as defined at 10 CFR 431.12).8 This proposal would require the filing of certification reports for all basic models of electric motors. See 10 CFR 429.12(d). In other words, a manufacturer would need to certify any new basic model (but not each individual model) prior to distribution in commerce and to file certification reports every year thereafter. Discontinued basic models would be required to be reported on the annual report when production has ceased and the manufacturer is no longer offering the basic model for sale. See 10 CFR 431.12(f). The proposed electric motors-specific certification report requirements would largely reflect the type of information already currently reported by electric 8 Manufacturers are not currently required to certify to DOE the compliance of basic models within the same ‘‘rating’’ (as defined at 10 CFR 431.12) that are more efficient than the certified basic model. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 motor manufacturers and includes: the electric motor equipment category as described at 10 CFR 431.25 (e.g., fire pump electric motors); the horsepower on which the electric motor basic model was tested; the number of poles; the enclosure type (i.e., open or enclosed); the rated voltage; the operating frequency; whether the basic model is subject to specific test procedure provisions listed in section 4 of appendix B to subpart B of part 431 and, if so, which provision(s); the represented nominal full-load efficiency and the represented total losses; the sampling methodology used; whether the represented values are based on testing in an independent testing laboratory or a nationally recognized certification program; and the name of the independent testing laboratory or nationally recognized certification program. Additionally, the manufacturer identification number or ‘‘MIN’’ applied to the relevant basic model must be provided. (See section III.A of this proposed rule for discussion of the proposal for a MIN.) The general certification report requirements at 10 CFR 429.12(b) would also apply to electric motors under this proposal.9 (The represented full-load efficiency to be reported as part of a certification report is discussed earlier in this section.) To conform with the proposed shifting of the compliance certification provisions for electric motors to 10 CFR part 429, DOE proposes to (1) amend 10 CFR 431.35 (‘‘Applicability of certification requirements’’) to reflect that certification procedures are set forth in 10 CFR 429.12 and 429.63, (2) remove 431.36 (‘‘Compliance certification’’), and (3) remove appendix C to subpart B of part 431. The certification report requirements would be located at 10 CFR 429.12 and 429.63. DOE provides templates in Excel format at https://www.regulations.doe.gov/ ccms/templates.10 9 These requirements include: manufacturer’s name and address; private labeler’s name and address (if applicable); brand name; basic model number and individual manufacturer’s model numbers covered by that basic model; whether the submission is for a new model, a discontinued model, a correction to a submitted model, a carryover model, or a model in violation of a voluntary industry certification program; the test sample size; whether certification is based on a test procedure waiver; whether certification is based on exception relief from DOE’s Office of Hearing and Appeals; and whether certification is based on an AEDM. See 10 CFR 429.12(b). 10 DOE will provide a revised template in Excel format for certification of electric motors and a new template for small electric motors after DOE has finalized certification requirements for this equipment; however, commenters may wish to familiarize themselves with existing templates for PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41387 DOE proposes that manufacturers would be permitted to continue certifying compliance for electric motors based on the current sampling provisions until July 1, 2017. As all electric motors subject to energy conservation standards that are currently distributed in commerce should have already been previously tested and certified by manufacturers, DOE proposes that manufacturers would submit the first certification report under the new certification provisions by November 1, 2016, if the final rule is issued by October 1, 2016, or otherwise by July 1, 2017—in which case, the certification would be based on testing in accordance with the new sampling plan. Any new basic models to be introduced to the U.S. market would be required to be tested using the new sampling plan and certification requirements starting 30 days following the publication of a final rule. DOE requests comments on these proposals. D. Small Electric Motor Certification and Compliance This section, like the prior section, addresses each aspect of certifying small electric motors as compliant with the applicable energy conservation standards. Compliance with the energy conservation standards for certain small electric motors has been required since March 2015. DOE is proposing certification requirements specific to small electric motors. Existing provisions regarding the determination of efficiency (10 CFR 431.445), recognition of nationally recognized certification programs (10 CFR 431.447), and procedures for the withdrawal of recognition for accreditation bodies and certification programs (10 CFR 431.448) would be removed under this proposal. The new provisions regarding certification of efficiency and associated requirements would, consistent with DOE’s overall approach for consolidating the locations of its certification and compliance provisions, be placed in 10 CFR 429.64, 429.70, 429.73, 429.74, and 429.75. 1. Certification Testing In the 2012 test procedure final rule, DOE noted that there were no existing certification programs or independent testing laboratory accreditation programs for small electric motors. 77 FR 26630. Since that time, two entities have been recognized by DOE for classification as nationally recognized certification programs for small electric electric motors and other products to understand better the proposals in this rule. E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41388 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 motors: UL Verification Services (78 FR 72077 (December 2, 2013)) and CSA Group (79 FR 24700 (May 1, 2014)). DOE has also identified three test laboratories that are accredited by the NIST/NVLAP program to perform the IEEE 114–2010 test procedure, which DOE requires when testing single-phase small electric motors.11 These labs are also accredited to perform IEEE 112– 2004 Method B, which is the required DOE test method for polyphase small electric motors of greater than 1 horsepower. When testing polyphase small electric motors of 1 horsepower or less, DOE requires the use of IEEE 112– 2004 Method A. Although DOE has not identified any laboratories accredited by NVLAP to perform Method A testing, NVLAP’s listing of labs accredited to perform IEEE 114 testing also covers the CSA equivalent to Method A.12 In light of these developments, and to conform the small electric motor regulations with those proposed for electric motors, DOE is proposing that small electric motor manufacturers follow the same efficiency testing and certification procedures, which would be included in the testing and sampling provisions applicable to small electric motors in § 429.64. As described in detail previously, manufacturers would have three options when testing and certifying compliance with energy conservation standards: (1) A manufacturer could test the small electric motor using a testing program nationally recognized in the United States (as described in § 429.74 of this proposal) and then certify that motor on its own behalf or have a third party submit the manufacturer’s certification report; (2) a manufacturer could test the small electric motor at a testing laboratory other than a nationally recognized testing program and then have a third-party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (under § 429.73 of the proposal) certify the efficiency of the motor; or (3) a manufacturer could use an AEDM (as discussed in section III.E of this proposed rule) to model the energy efficiency performance of the 11 The list of test laboratories accredited by NVLAP to perform energy efficiency testing of electric motors, as of June 10, 2016, is available in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/ ?#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-CE-0019-0002. 12 Small electric motor test procedures are detailed at 10 CFR 431.444. In this section, DOE identifies the C747 procedure as the CSA equivalent test method for testing of polyphase small electric motors of less than or equal to 1 horsepower. Although the NVLAP accreditation is not explicit, the C747 accreditation covers testing of both singlephase small electric motors and polyphase small electric motors of less than or equal to 1 horsepower. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 small electric motor and then have a third-party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (under § 429.73 of the proposal) certify the efficiency of the motor on the manufacturer’s behalf. DOE notes that, unlike with electric motors (see 42 U.S.C. 6316(c)), the statute does not require manufacturers of small electric motors to certify that a small electric motor meets the applicable standard through an independent testing or certification program nationally recognized in the United States. Therefore, DOE could adopt another framework 13 for certification testing of small electric motors and is proposing the same framework as electric motors only for consistency. DOE requests comments on this proposal. DOE notes that Baldor had previously submitted a letter to DOE identifying a number of issues related to the certification of small electric motors. (Baldor, No. 1) In its letter, Baldor indicated that DOE’s regulations specifying additional instructions when a certification program is not used found at § 431.445(c) are unclear. Baldor stated that there is no provision in § 431.445(c) requiring basic models to be tested in accordance with the DOE test procedure. (Baldor, No. 1 at p. 5) While DOE believes that the language at 10 CFR 431.444 makes clear that the efficiency of small electric motors must be determined with the DOE test procedure, this proposed rule moved and reorganized the provisions for certification testing to § 429.64. DOE welcomes comments regarding the clarity of the text proposed for § 429.64. 2. Sampling Plan In general, DOE requires represented values to be determined by the application of basic statistical concepts. Baldor requested that DOE clarify some of these concepts. Specifically, Baldor commented that the term ‘‘population’’ used in the definition of average fullload efficiency was unclear. (Baldor, No. 1 at p. 2) The terms ‘‘population’’ and ‘‘sample’’ are standard statistical concepts. A population of objects consists of all the objects that are relevant in a particular study.14 A population of small electric motors 13 Based on the comments received, DOE would consider adopting provisions akin to those for most other types of covered products/equipment, which rely entirely upon manufacturer self-certification. Another possibility would be to adopt provisions akin to those for certain lighting products, which require all certification testing to be conducted by an accredited laboratory. 14 Wilcox, Rand R. Basic Statistics: Understanding Conventional Methods and Modern Insights. New York: Oxford UP, 2009: 4. Print. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 consists of all the small electric motors produced for a basic model. As Baldor states, testing all the units of a basic model to determine the mean of the fullload efficiency of the total population is not practical. (Baldor, No. 1 at pp. 2 and 3) For this reason, DOE only requires manufacturers to test a sample of the population in order to make inferences about the basic model’s population. DOE assumes that its covered products have a normal efficiency distribution and uses Student’s t-distribution to estimate numerical characteristics of a population. This document proposes to require using a sampling plan specific to small electric motors to allow a manufacturer to make representations of average full-load efficiency and other energy consumption metrics for its basic models. DOE believes it is likely that the sources of variation in the testing of small electric motors that would affect the statistical validity of small electric motor testing results will be substantially similar to those for electric motors. This belief is based on the fact that small electric motors and electric motors overlap considerably in structure, function, input materials, and manufacturing processes—all of which contribute to variability in overall equipment performance in a similar manner for both electric motors and small electric motors. In addition, small electric motors are tested using methods similar to those for electric motors. On this basis, DOE proposes to adopt certification testing sampling requirements for small electric motors similar to those for electric motors. Specifically, DOE proposes that the represented efficiency cannot exceed the lesser of the arithmetic mean of the tested sample or the lower 97.5 percent confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95. The represented total losses would be no lower than the greater of the arithmetic mean or the upper 97.5 percent confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95. In addition, as required with electric motors, at least 5 units per basic model must be tested to determine the represented efficiency (rating) of the basic model. For low-volume models with fewer than five individual units of a basic model produced over a period of about 180 days, DOE proposes to require that each unit manufactured be tested and the manufacturer must certify the average full-load efficiency for the lowvolume basic model. This certification sampling plan would be placed in a new § 429.64. Different sampling provisions apply during enforcement testing to determine noncompliance with the energy E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules conservation standards. Those sampling provisions are discussed in detail in section III.H.3 of this proposed rule. DOE requests comment on this proposal. sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 3. Certification Reports There are currently no regulatory requirements governing the submission of certification reports specifically for small electric motors. This document proposes product-specific certification provisions for small electric motors that would appear in a new § 429.64(c). The general certification report requirements are described more fully in section III.C.3 of this proposed rule. The proposed certification report requirements that would apply specifically to small electric motors include: small electric motor type as described at 10 CFR 431.446(a), the horsepower on which the basic model was tested, the number of poles, the represented average full-load efficiency, the represented total losses, the MIN applied to the basic model, whether the represented values are based on testing in an independent testing laboratory or nationally recognized certification program, and the name of the independent testing laboratory or nationally recognized certification. DOE requests comment on the productspecific certification requirements proposed for small electric motors. In its letter, Baldor stated that there is no requirement that a manufacturer obtain approval of compliance from DOE before entering any small electric motor into commerce. (Baldor, No. 1 at p. 7) DOE confirms that it does not issue any notice of approval once a manufacturer has certified compliance of its basic models. Manufacturers are responsible for ensuring that their products are compliant with the applicable provisions found at 10 CFR parts 429 and 431. As part of the certification report, DOE requires a manufacturer to submit a compliance statement acknowledging its responsibility. DOE proposes to require manufacturers of small electric motors to submit the first certification report 90 days after publication of a final rule.15 E. Alternative Methods for Determining Energy Efficiency or Energy Use Under current DOE regulations for both electric motors and small electric 15 Pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12(i), a manufacturer is not required to submit a certification report for a product subject to an energy conservation standard for which the compliance date has not yet occurred. The certification report must be submitted not later than the compliance date for the energy conservation standard. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 motors, a manufacturer can determine that the electric motor or small electric motor complies with energy conservation standards either through testing or through the use of an AEDM for determining energy efficiency or energy use that meets the requirements of 10 CFR 431.17(a)(2) and (3) for electric motors or 10 CFR 431.445(a)(2) and (3) for small electric motors. DOE proposes to retain these AEDM-based options but to move them from 10 CFR 431.17 and 10 CFR 431.445 to 10 CFR 429.70, the location of the AEDM provisions for other covered products and equipment. Moreover, this proposed rule would adjust the structure of the AEDM requirements for electric motors and small electric motors to more closely conform to the general format of the other 10 CFR 429.70 provisions, including appropriate references to other sections of part 429 and part 431 where required, although the requirements for using an AEDM for electric motors and small electric motors effectively remain the same. Further, DOE proposes to change the term ‘‘substantiation’’ to ‘‘validation’’ to better align the relevant terminology with the AEDM provisions in 10 CFR 429.70. Finally, DOE proposes to modify one of the requirements for selecting small electric motor basic models for validation testing. Within the context of the certification scheme described previously, manufacturers using an AEDM in lieu of testing would be required to rate their motors using an AEDM and certify compliance of their basic models through a nationally recognized certification program for those basic models of electric motors and small electric motors not tested. DOE received a letter from Baldor requesting that DOE clarify the substantiation (i.e., validation) requirements for AEDMs for small electric motors. Baldor stated that there are no requirements as to how to select the basic models used for substantiation (i.e., validation), there are no requirements specifying the minimum number of units tested for each basic model, and there is no defined test procedure for measuring the efficiency of each basic model. Baldor commented that the AEDM provisions could be improved by directly referencing the requirements for selecting basic models found at 10 CFR 431.445(c)(1). (Baldor, No. 1 at pp. 4 and 6) As part of this proposal to move the AEDM provisions to § 429.70, DOE is reorganizing these provisions for clarity. As previously stated, in today’s notice DOE is proposing to use the term ‘‘validation’’ instead of PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41389 ‘‘substantiation.’’ Section 429.70(i)(2) specifies how to validate an AEDM. This section states how many basic models are required for validation, explicitly references the test procedure for small electric motors, and explains how the test results must compare to the results produced by the AEDM. Additionally, § 429.70(i)(3) details specific instructions for selecting basic models for validation. In addition to reorganizing the AEDM provisions for small electric motors, DOE is proposing to modify one of the requirements for selecting small electric motor basic models for validation testing. Currently, small electric motor manufacturers must adhere to the provisions in 10 CFR 431.445(c)(1) to select basic models for validation testing. One of these provisions states that at least one basic model is selected from each of the frame number series for which the manufacturer is seeking compliance. DOE proposes to change that language to better align with the requirements for electric motors by amending the requirement to state that no two basic models may have the same frame number series. DOE believes that this proposed language would reduce small electric motor manufacturer testing burdens because it would not require a manufacturer to test more than five motor basic models even if the manufacturer is validating an AEDM that will apply to more than five frame number series of motors. DOE requests comment on this proposal. F. Independent Testing and Certification Programs Classified by DOE as Nationally Recognized Under 42 U.S.C. 6316(c), DOE must require manufacturers of electric motors for which energy conservation standards are established at 42 U.S.C. 6313(b) to certify, through an ‘‘independent testing or certification program nationally recognized in the United States’’ that such electric motor meets the applicable standard. DOE developed a process for national recognition of certification programs, which is codified at 10 CFR 431.20 and 431.21. On May 4, 2012, DOE added the same requirements for small electric motors. See 77 FR 26639– 26640 (codified at 10 CFR 431.447 and 431.448). In its prior comments regarding the certification of small electric motors, Baldor stated, ‘‘even if a certification program is used . . . it is still mandatory that the average full-load efficiency of any basic model being certified under the program be determined in accordance with DOE test procedure and not in accordance with any different procedures set forth in the E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41390 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 certification program.’’ (Baldor, No. 1 at p. Y) DOE affirms that regardless of whether a certification program is used or not, the average full-load efficiency of each basic model must either be determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure and sampling provisions or by applying an AEDM that meet the requirements set forth in the rule. 1. Petitions for Recognition The petition requirements for DOE to recognize independent testing and certification programs as nationally recognized in the U.S. are proposed in a new section, 10 CFR 429.73 and .74 respectively. The proposed nationally recognized certification program petition process is nearly identical to the existing petition process in 10 CFR 431.20 (for electric motors) and 431.447 (for small electric motors). The proposal would remove the existing provision that a certification program must be qualified to operate a certification system ‘‘in a highly competent manner,’’ which is a subjective requirement. While DOE believes that this is a necessary attribute of such a program, DOE is proposing instead to specify individual characteristics that are more readily evaluated for a program seeking classification as a nationally recognized certification program. DOE believes this approach would provide improved transparency and equitability among programs. Petition requirements for both electric motors and small electric motors, which are identical except for references to ‘‘small electric motor’’ in lieu of ‘‘electric motor,’’ are both included in the proposed § 429.73. In its prior comments, Baldor expressed confusion over the purpose of a certification program. It noted that there is no actual requirement in 10 CFR 431.447 that any testing be performed within the structure of the certification body. (Baldor, No. 1 at pp. 4–5) The purpose of a nationally recognized certification program is to provide independent oversight of a manufacturer’s representations of efficiency. For this reason, DOE is proposing that all nationally recognized certification programs have an ongoing verification testing process. DOE is proposing that petitioners provide documentation of their processes as part of the petition for recognition, including sampling provisions, selection criteria, a process for determining compliance with standards, and a process for reporting failures to DOE. DOE seeks comment regarding whether the UL and CSA small electric motors certification programs meet the criteria specified in this proposal and should remain nationally recognized certification VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 programs under this proposal. Because DOE based its recognition of these programs in large part on DOE’s prior recognition of their electric motors certification programs, DOE is also seeking comment regarding whether the UL and CSA electric motors certification programs meet the new criteria as specified in this proposal and should remain nationally recognized certification programs under this proposal. DOE requests comment regarding whether, in light of the changes to the petition criteria, the currently recognized certification programs should renew their petitions and DOE should conduct a new review for recognition under the new regulations once this rulemaking is finalized. In contrast, the purpose of a nationally recognized independent testing program is to ensure that testing is being performed in a consistent manner without bias by personnel who have appropriate technical qualifications, appropriate equipment, and familiarity with DOE regulations. DOE is considering two possible approaches. One option would be for DOE to directly recognize testing facilities. The other alternative would be for DOE to recognize accreditation programs subject to those programs meeting specific criteria. In either instance, petitioners would be required to provide documentation as part of the petition for recognition. Both the accreditation program and the testing facilities would have to demonstrate independence under the proposed definition. The accreditation program and/or DOE would evaluate the capability of the testing facility to conduct repeatable, reliable testing. If DOE were to recognize accreditation programs, DOE would evaluate the capability of the program to accredit testing facilities in a manner consistent with the proposed requirements. 2. DOE Petition for Recognition and Withdrawal DOE’s proposes to move the procedures for the recognition and withdrawal of recognition of certification programs to 10 CFR 429.75. The proposed procedures for petitioning DOE to review a given recognition or withdrawal are similar to those procedures currently found at 10 CFR 431.21 (for electric motors) and 431.448 (for small electric motors), with a few exceptions, as follows. This proposal would require the submission of these petitions via email. Current requirements provide for a published, interim determination and solicitation of comments on that determination PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 before announcement of a final determination. (See, e.g., 10 CFR 431.21(d).) Because the current process (and the process proposed here) already allows for public comment on the petition under consideration and provides the petitioner with 10 working days after receipt of comments to respond to these comments, DOE does not believe a second round of comments on a pending petition is necessary and proposes to remove that provision from the current requirements. However, DOE may allow for a second round of comments if deemed necessary based upon specific circumstances. The same processes would apply to the recognition of independent testing programs. This proposed rulemaking offers a more detailed process for the withdrawal of recognition than is currently provided. If DOE believes that an independent testing or certification program that has been recognized under the proposed §§ 429.73 and 429.74 fails to meet the criteria outlined in that section, DOE may initiate withdrawal of the program after providing written notification to the affected program describing the corrective action that must occur to comply with the criteria in the proposed 10 CFR 429.73(c) and (d) or 429.74(c) and (d) and associated timeframes within which the program must complete the prescribed corrective actions, which in no case will exceed 180 days. The program would be provided 30 days to respond to DOE’s notification of withdrawal if it wishes to dispute DOE’s basis for the determination. After the period for corrective action has passed, DOE will withdraw recognition from that program if the specified corrective action has not been taken. This proposal would also explicitly provide any party aggrieved by an action under this section with the right to file an appeal with DOE’s Office of Hearings and Appeals, as provided in 10 CFR part 1003, subpart C. Under the proposed § 429.75, independent testing or certification programs would also be permitted to voluntarily withdraw from recognition, which is what current §§ 431.21(g)(2) (for electric motors) and 431.448(g)(2) (for small electric motors) already permit. This proposal would add that the voluntary withdrawal notice to DOE must include the date on which the withdrawal is effective, the product or equipment types covered by the certification program to be withdrawn, and any effect the withdrawal has on the validity of certifications previously issued by the certification program. DOE would also require that withdrawal notifications be received by DOE at least E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules 30 days prior to the effective date of withdrawal. Finally, DOE proposes to continue to publish in the Federal Register a notice of withdrawal of recognition, except that the notice would now include all of the required information in the program’s voluntary withdrawal notice. G. Labeling Under the current labeling requirements at 10 CFR 431.31, electric motor manufacturers must mark the permanent nameplate of those motors subject to the energy conservation standards in § 431.25 with the motor’s nominal full-load efficiency and the CC number issued to the manufacturer pursuant to 10 CFR 431.36(f); manufacturers may also include an optional display with the encircled lowercase letters ‘‘ee’’ or with a comparable designation if the electric motor meets the standards in § 431.25.16 DOE proposes to retain the requirement for manufacturers of electric motors to include certain information on the nameplates of motors covered by DOE efficiency standards, but with modifications to the current requirements. DOE is also proposing to require labels on small electric motors. These proposals are described in more detail in the following sections. sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 1. Electric Motors DOE proposes to require electric motor manufacturers to place on the nameplate the motor’s represented fullload efficiency, derived from the electric motor’s average full-load efficiency as determined pursuant to § 429.63(a). This proposed approach is similar to the current requirement except that the labels currently must display the electric motor’s nominal full-load efficiency. In contrast, this proposal would allow manufacturers to use the represented efficiency rating determined in accordance with § 429.63. DOE would also require that, in place of the CC number currently used on electric motor nameplates, the nameplate bear instead the MIN issued to the manufacturer as described in section III.A of this proposal. DOE proposes to remove the ‘‘optional display’’ provision at 10 CFR 431.31(a)(3). DOE is also proposing that any voltages manufacturers place on the label constitute the motor’s rated voltages and that the electric motor must meet the standard at that (or those) rated voltage(s). See section III.I of this 16 Whether a particular covered motor must comply with the energy conservation standards is based on its date of manufacture (i.e., importation, if manufactured outside the U.S.). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 proposed rule for more discussion of this issue. Finally, the proposal would relocate the labeling requirements for electric motors from § 431.31 to a new § 429.76 in 10 CFR part 429. DOE requests comment regarding whether model number, basic model number, or some other type of design information should be required on the nameplate to permit DOE and customers to tie a certification of compliance to a particular unit being distributed in commerce. DOE also requests comment regarding whether manufacturers could transition to any new nameplate requirements by June 1, 2017. Additionally, DOE is proposing to retain the current requirement in 10 CFR 431.31(b) that the same information that appears on the motor’s nameplate also appear on each page of a catalog that lists the motor and in other materials used to market the motor. However, DOE would not require the MIN to be repeated in catalog and other marking materials. These requirements would be moved to § 429 .76 with the other labeling requirements for electric motors. Section 431.32 of 10 CFR part 431 contains a provision explaining that the labeling requirements of § 431.31 supersede any State regulation and that, pursuant to the Act, all State regulations that require the disclosure for any electric motor of information with respect to energy consumption, other than the information required to be disclosed in accordance with this part, are superseded. This provision would also apply to the requirements proposed in this notice. DOE proposes to retain this provision in the regulations, but to relocate it to the proposed § 429.76 with the other labeling requirements. 2. Small Electric Motors As required by EPCA, DOE is proposing to require small electric motors to bear a label similar to the existing requirements for electric motors. Specifically, DOE is proposing to require that small electric motors for which standards are prescribed in 10 CFR 431.446 bear a permanent nameplate that is marked clearly with the small electric motor basic model’s MIN and represented average full-load efficiency as certified pursuant to 10 CFR 429.64. In this case, ‘‘prescribed’’ means a small electric motor for which a standard has been set, even if compliance with that standard is not yet required. In addition, all orientation, spacing, type sizes, type-faces, and line widths to display this required information would be required to be the same as, or similar to, the display of any other performance data on the motor’s PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41391 permanent nameplate, with the represented full-load efficiency identified either by the term ‘‘Represented Average Full-Load Efficiency’’ or ‘‘Rep. Avg. Full-Load. Eff.’’, and the MIN presented as ‘‘MIN: lll’’. In considering whether the electric motors regulatory language is appropriate for small electric motors without modification, DOE requests comment regarding whether small electric motors currently, always, bear a ‘‘nameplate’’ or whether other forms of labeling should be permitted. As with electric motors, DOE also requests comment regarding whether DOE should require some specific model, basic model, or other design-specific information to be displayed on the nameplate. Labeling of small electric motors would be required six months following the publication of the final rule. DOE is proposing that only small electric motors manufactured in the U.S. (including motors imported into the U.S.) starting on that date bear a label when distributed in commerce and that this requirement would apply irrespective of when compliance with standards is required (e.g., small electric motors that qualify for the 2017 compliance date would also be subject to the labeling requirement as of six months following publication of the final rule). H. Enforcement Provisions for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors As for other types of covered products and equipment, DOE’s current regulations for electric motors in part 431 prescribe an enforcement process through which DOE determines whether an electric motor manufacturer is in violation of the energy conservation requirements of EPCA. The enforcement provisions for electric motors are currently located at 10 CFR part 431, subpart U. These provisions identify prohibited acts that may subject a manufacturer to civil penalties if the manufacturer is found by DOE to have committed them knowingly. These prohibited acts include distribution in commerce of an electric motor that does not comply with the applicable energy conservation standard. Subpart U also details an enforcement process DOE uses to determine whether a particular motor complies with the applicable energy efficiency standards, the conditions under which a manufacturer must cease distribution of a basic model, remedies for addressing cases of noncompliance, and a process for the assessment and recovery of civil penalties. These provisions are similar to the general enforcement provisions E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41392 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 applicable to other types of products and equipment, including small electric motors, which are found in 10 CFR part 429, subpart C. DOE is proposing to apply the same enforcement provisions in subpart C to part 429 that apply to all other types of covered products and equipment to electric motors. These provisions are similar to the current provisions in subpart U to part 431, but with certain specific differences, as described in the following sections. There are also several proposed prohibited acts regarding electric motors and small electric motors that reflect the unique statutory provisions for each type of equipment. The proposed rule removes the enforcement provisions currently in place for electric motors from 10 CFR part 431, subpart U, and moves them to a new 10 CFR 429.110 and moves the enforcement sampling provisions to a new appendix D to subpart C of part 429. Subpart U would be reserved in the proposed rule. 1. Prohibited Acts and Remedies The prohibited acts provisions currently applicable to electric motors differ somewhat from those of other covered products and equipment, namely, by describing specific prohibited acts related to violations of the labeling and advertisement requirements applicable to electric motors. Thus, DOE is proposing to add these prohibited acts, which are currently listed in 10 CFR 431.382(a)(1), (2), and (4), to 10 CFR 429.102. The inclusion of electric motors in § 429.102 would also clarify that four additional prohibited acts not currently specified in § 431.382 also apply to electric motor manufacturers, which, as discussed in the March 7, 2011 CCE final rule (see 76 FR at 12440), are within the scope of the prohibited acts specified in EPCA at 42 U.S.C. 6302 (See 42 U.S.C. 6316(a).) These include prohibitions against the following actions: Failure to test any covered product or covered equipment subject to an applicable energy conservation standard in conformance with the applicable test requirements prescribed in 10 CFR parts 430 or 431 (§ 429.102(a)(2)); deliberate use of controls or features in a covered product or covered equipment to circumvent the requirements of a test procedure that produce test results that are unrepresentative of a product’s energy or water consumption if measured pursuant to DOE’s required test procedure (§ 429.102(a)(3)); distribution in commerce by a manufacturer or private labeler of a basic model of covered product or covered equipment after a notice of noncompliance VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 determination has been issued to the manufacturer or private labeler (§ 429.102(a)(7)); and knowing misrepresentation by a manufacturer or private labeler by certifying an energy use or efficiency rating of any covered product or covered equipment distributed in commerce in a manner that is not supported by test data (§ 429.102(a)(8)). For small electric motors (and distribution transformers and highintensity discharge (‘‘HID’’) lamps for which standards are set pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6317), 42 U.S.C. 6316(a) provides that the prohibited acts in 42 U.S.C. 6302 apply to those types of equipment. Prohibited acts at 42 U.S.C. 6302(a) (i.e., distributing in commerce new products/ equipment that are not labeled as required and removing or rendering illegible any required label) do not apply to small electric motors because these acts only apply to types of equipment with labeling provisions promulgated pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6294 and small electric motor labeling provisions are promulgated pursuant to section 6317. Accordingly, in 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(A), Congress created prohibited acts identical in effect to those found at section 6302(a)(1) and (2) that apply to small electric motors (and distribution transformers and HID lamps). Therefore, it would be a prohibited act for any manufacturer or private labeler to distribute in commerce a unit that is not labeled as required by 10 CFR 429.76, and it would be a prohibited act for a manufacturer or private labeler to remove or render illegible any label required by 10 CFR 429.76. These prohibited acts, which are identical to existing prohibited acts for electric motors that are proposed to be moved to paragraphs 11 and 12 at 10 CFR 429.102, would become enforceable with respect to small electric motors six months after publication of the final rule—i.e., when labeling of small electric motors would be required. DOE notes that there is no statutory prohibited act for small electric motors akin to the prohibited act for electric motors that is proposed to be moved to paragraph 13, restricting representations in advertising materials. In 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B), Congress prohibited the distribution in commerce of a small electric motor that does not comply with the applicable standard. With respect to small electric motors that do not comply with the applicable standard, however, 42 U.S.C. 6302(a)(5) applies through application of 42 U.S.C. 6316(a). Thus, DOE concludes that section 6317(f)(1)(B) creates a new, different prohibited act regarding small electric motors—one that is tied to the PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 labeling requirement. (See introductory text to 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1) ‘‘After the date on which a manufacturer must provide a label for a product pursuant to subsection (e) of this section . . .’’) DOE is proposing to add a prohibited act to § 429.102 that is specific to small electric motors to reflect the statutorily created prohibited act in 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B). It would be a prohibited act for a manufacturer or private labeler to distribute in commerce any new small electric motor required to be labeled under 10 CFR 429.76 that is not in conformity with an applicable standard under 10 CFR 431.446. In most cases, a manufacturer can ‘‘sellthrough’’ inventory of units manufactured prior to the compliance date for a new standard. This prohibited act specific for small electric motors would alter the typical transition for products subject to a new energy conservation standard. The statute requires that small electric motors bear a label six months after publication of the final rule. (42 U.S.C. 6317(e)) That means all small electric motors manufactured starting on that date will be required to bear a label. And since the statute makes it a prohibited act to distribute in commerce a small electric motor required to have a label if that small electric motor does not meet the applicable standard, 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B), it is a prohibited act for a manufacturer or private labeler to distribute in commerce a new small electric motor if the following criteria are met: (1) The small electric motor was manufactured six months after the date of the final rule in this proceeding, (2) the small electric motor is a kind of motor for which DOE has prescribed a standard, (3) compliance with that standard is now required, and (4) the small electric motor does not meet that standard. Small electric motors not required to bear a label (i.e., manufactured before six months after the publication of the final rule in this proceeding) and manufactured prior to the energy conservation standard compliance date would not be required to meet the standard and could continue to be distributed in commerce in the U.S. That is, ‘‘sell-through’’ would be permitted for motors manufactured prior to 6 months following publication of the final rule and would not be permitted for motors manufactured on or after the compliance date for the labeling provision. DOE notes that manufacturers of small electric motors that qualify for the delayed compliance date of March 9, 2017, could be subject to the labeling requirement before a standard must be E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 met, depending on the timing of the final rule. For example, if Manufacturer X manufactures a small electric motor on February 2, 2017, the motor would be required to be labeled (assuming that the final rule in this proceeding is published at least six months prior) under 10 CFR 429.76. If this motor qualifies for the 2017 delayed compliance date and does not conform to the 2017 standard as of that date of manufacture, the manufacturer could distribute this motor in commerce even though the motor would not conform to the standard specified in 10 CFR 431.446. However, as of March 9, 2017, if that small electric motor were still in stock, the manufacturer would be subject to civil penalties for distribution in commerce of that motor. DOE proposes to add a new paragraph 14 to the list of prohibited acts at 10 CFR 429.102 for this prohibited act as follows: For any manufacturer or private labeler of a small electric motor to distribute in commerce any small electric motor required by [the proposed] § 429.76 to be labeled that is not in conformity with the relevant energy conservation standard found at 10 CFR 431.446. 2. Test Notices Section 431.383 contains the enforcement process for electric motors, which is conducted when a basic model is suspected of noncompliance with the applicable standard. Paragraph (a)(1) of this section requires DOE to provide formal notification to a manufacturer that DOE has received information that one of the manufacturer’s basic models may not comply with the applicable efficiency standard and that DOE intends to test the basic model to assess its compliance. This paragraph specifies that a test notice may only be issued after the Secretary or his or her designated representative has examined the underlying test data (or, where appropriate, data as to use of an AEDM) provided by the manufacturer and after the manufacturer has been offered the opportunity to meet with the Department to verify, as applicable, compliance with the applicable efficiency standard, or the accuracy of labeling information, or both. DOE eliminated this process for all other types of products and equipment in the March 2011 CCE rule. For the same reasons stated in that rulemaking (see 76 FR 12422, 12434–12435), DOE proposes to adopt for electric motors the process used in enforcement actions for other types of products or equipment. In addition, 10 CFR 431.383 provides that, where compliance of a basic model was certified based on an AEDM, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 Department has discretion to pursue the provisions of 10 CFR 431.17(a)(4)(iii) prior to invoking the test notice procedure and that a representative designated by the Secretary shall be permitted to observe any re-validation procedures, and to inspect the results of such re-validation. This process is addressed by the provisions applicable to the use of an AEDM that would be applied to electric motors through adoption of the proposed additions to 10 CFR 429.70 as well as the application of 10 CFR 429.71 to electric motors. 3. Enforcement Testing In the event that DOE has reason to believe an electric motor is noncompliant with the applicable energy conservation standard, DOE may test that electric motor to verify whether it complies with the applicable standard. This process for electric motors currently is specified at 10 CFR 431.383. For all other products and equipment covered by DOE energy conservation standards, the enforcement testing process is in 10 CFR 429.110. DOE intends through this proposal to apply the requirements of § 429.110 to electric motors in place of § 431.383, which would alter the process by which enforcement testing is conducted for electric motors in certain respects. In addition to the process for issuing test notices, DOE notes that using § 429.110 in place of § 431.383 would result in the following changes: The maximum number of units that may be tested would increase from 20 to 21 units; enforcement testing would only be conducted by a laboratory that is accredited to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/ International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ‘‘General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories,’’ ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E); and testing of additional unit(s) as a result of a defective unit in the initial sample would be at DOE’s discretion. In addition, 10 CFR 431.383(f) currently allows a manufacturer to request that DOE conduct additional testing (at the manufacturer’s expense). DOE is not proposing to retain this provision in the proposed rule as the additional testing is not allowed for any other covered products or equipment. As stated in the March 7, 2011 CCE final rule, the Department removed the regulatory provision allowing manufacturers to request additional testing because it is both unnecessary— given that manufacturers are free to perform additional testing on their own at any time—and otherwise delays the finality of a compliance determination. PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41393 76 FR at 12438. Therefore, once a product has been found noncompliant by DOE as a result of this process, there would be no further option for additional testing. Regarding enforcement sampling, DOE is proposing to move the current enforcement sampling plan for electric motors to a new appendix D to subpart C of part 429. DOE proposes to modify the new appendix D to reflect the maximum number of units that may be tested is 21. Additionally, DOE proposes to make these enforcement sampling provisions applicable to small electric motors. For small electric motors, DOE notes that 10 CFR 431.445 presents a formula for evaluating compliance. DOE proposes to retain this approach in appendix D, as it better ensures that DOE bases any final determination of compliance on a sufficiently large sample size and mitigates the risk of incorrect determinations of noncompliance. However, DOE requests comments regarding whether the formula currently in 10 CFR 431.445 should be retained for evaluation of representations, similar to the provision for electric motors that DOE has proposed to move to 10 CFR 429.138. As part of the October 1999 rulemaking, NEMA commented argued that the sampling plan for enforcement testing does not yield an estimate of the true mean full-load efficiency of the population of motors because it incorrectly applies the t-distribution. The confidence interval for the true population mean efficiency should not be anchored to the energy conservation standard. (EE–RM–96–400, NEMA, No. 0J at p. 8) Baldor commented that the DOE statistical formulation has the potential to penalize those manufacturers that minimize the variation in efficiency from motor to motor (standard deviation). Baldor continued to explain that this is particularly true for a set of samples whose mean is slightly below the statutory efficiency. (EE–RM–96–400, Baldor, No. 0E at p. 6) DOE requests comment on alternative methods of evaluating compliance to ensure that manufacturers that can produce motors with low variability are not disadvantaged. DOE will consider adopting an alternative formula based on the comments received. 4. Notices of Noncompliance and Penalties When DOE determines that a basic model of a covered product or type of covered equipment does not comply with the applicable energy conservation standard, or if a manufacturer or private labeler determines that a basic model is E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 41394 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules noncompliant, § 429.114 provides that DOE may issue a notice of noncompliance determination to the manufacturer. This notice explains to the manufacturer its obligations to: (1) Immediately cease distribution of the basic model; (2) immediately notify in writing those individuals to whom units of the basic model have been distributed about the finding of noncompliance; and (3) provide DOE with pertinent records about the manufacture and distribution of units of the basic model within 30 days of the proposed rule. Similarly, § 431.385 requires electric motor manufacturers to: (1) Immediately cease distribution of the noncompliant basic model; (2) give immediate written notification of the determination of noncompliance to all persons to whom the manufacturer has distributed units of the basic model; and (3) provide DOE, within 30 calendar days of the notification, records, reports and other documentation pertaining to the acquisition, ordering, storage, shipment, or sale of a basic model determined to be in noncompliance. An electric motor manufacturer’s obligations immediately after a determination of noncompliance would, therefore, be unchanged by applying the provisions of § 429.114 to electric motors in place of § 431.385. Actions required following a finding of noncompliance are similar in scope between subpart U of part 431 and subpart C of part 429, except for certain minor differences. Section 431.385 provides, in paragraph (a)(4), that a manufacturer may modify a noncompliant model in such manner as to bring it into compliance with the applicable standard. Such modified basic model would then be treated as a new basic model and must be certified in accordance with the provisions of Subpart U, except that, in addition to satisfying those requirements, the manufacturer must also maintain records that demonstrate that modifications have been made to all units of the new basic model prior to distribution in commerce. These requirements are identical to those in § 429.114(d), except that the latter also requires that, after modifying a basic model to be compliant with DOE standards, the manufacturer must also assign new individual model numbers to the models within the basic model. This requirement would also apply to electric motors as a result of the changes proposed in this proposed rule. Section 429.116 requires that, if DOE determines that independent, thirdparty testing is necessary to ensure a manufacturer’s compliance with the rules of part 429 or part 431, a manufacturer must base its certification VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 of a basic model under subpart B of part 429 on independent, third-party laboratory testing. No such provision exists in subpart U of part 431, but DOE is proposing to apply this provision to electric motors. Additionally, under section §§ 431.386 and 429.118, DOE has the option to seek a judicial order to stop distribution of a noncompliant model and may assess civil penalties for violations of such provisions. However, § 429.118 allows the use of an injunction for the purposes of enjoining any prohibited act, while § 431.386 applies only to distribution in commerce of noncompliance models. DOE is proposing to apply the broader injunctive authority in § 429.118 to electric motors. Finally, both subpart C of part 429 and subpart U of part 431 define processes for assessing and collecting civil penalties. Except for minor differences in wording and the format of statutory references, the process in § 431.387, which currently applies to electric motors, and §§ 429.122 through 429.132, which apply to other products and equipment, are substantially the same. Thus, DOE intends to apply these sections of part 429 to electric motors. I. Other Revisions to Existing Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors Regulations DOE proposes to add a sentence to 10 CFR 431.25 that would describe testing of electric motors rated for use at multiple voltages, such as on a 230- or 460-volt electrical system, to address questions that DOE has received over the past year. The test procedures specified in appendix B to subpart B of part 431 require the basic model to be tested at the rated voltage, without specifying what to do when a manufacturer elects to include multiple rated voltages on the nameplate and marketing materials. DOE is clarifying in this proposed rule that the basic model of electric motor must be tested and meet energy conservation standards at all of the voltages for which the electric motor is rated by the manufacturer to be used. For example, some motors are labeled with a voltage rating of 208–230/460 volts, while others are marked as ‘‘230/ 460V Usable at 208V.’’ In DOE’s view, at any voltage at which the manufacturer declares that an electric motor may be installed and operated by making a representation in its literature or its nameplate, the electric motor must meet the standards when measured by the DOE test procedure. DOE proposes that only the lowest efficiency (when tested and rated for multiple voltages) be placed on the nameplate. PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 DOE requests comment on whether there should be some indication of which rated voltage is the lower efficiency voltage corresponding to the rated efficiency. DOE notes that the certification report on file with DOE will indicate the corresponding voltage. DOE seeks comment on whether the additional information would provide sufficient benefit to purchasers to warrant the additional cost. DOE requests comment regarding whether, for each rated voltage, the manufacturer should also put a corresponding efficiency on the nameplate. DOE requests comment regarding the costs associated with requiring additional information on the nameplate. DOE requests comment on whether similar provisions should be implemented for basic models of small electric motors as well. As DOE is proposing to require small electric motors to bear a label, DOE requests information as to whether small electric motors will list multiple rated voltages on such label. If comments suggest that DOE should implement similar provisions, then DOE will consider adopting those requirements in the final rule. This proposed rule would also clarify which small electric motors would be subject to energy conservation standards in 10 CFR 431.446 in light of the statutory exclusion for those small electric motors that are components of covered products or covered equipment. Small electric motors that are a component of another covered product under 42 U.S.C. 6292(a) or covered equipment under 42 U.S.C. 6311 are not subject to energy conservation standards. (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)(3)) Therefore, a small electric motor that is distributed in commerce (i.e., sold or imported) separately—i.e., not integrated into another covered product/ equipment—is subject to the standards. DOE considered another interpretation of this provision—excluding small electric motors ‘‘intended’’ to be used in a covered product/equipment—but DOE rejected that interpretation. This rejection is based on the fact that all small electric motors for which energy conservation standards have been set are general purpose motors—not specific or definite-purpose motors—so no small electric motor that would otherwise be subject to standards has any defining features or characteristics to identify it as ‘‘intended’’ for use in a covered product/equipment. DOE also rejected this interpretation because the plain language of section 6317(b)(3) designates ‘‘any small electric motor which is a component’’ as exempt from standards and a determination of E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules whether a national standard applies is made at the time of manufacture under EPCA. The prohibition on distributing in commerce a non-compliant small electric motor in 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B) centers on the time of distribution in commerce. Reading 42 U.S.C. 6317(b)(3) in conjunction with 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B), the determination of whether a small electric motor meets energy conservation standards would be made no later than when the manufacturer or private labeler of the small electric motor distributes the motor in commerce in the U.S. Further, because the purpose of this provision appears to be to exempt small electric motors that are already effectively being regulated through the implementation of a standard for another type of covered product or equipment, DOE interprets this provision as exempting small electric motors that are distributed in commerce as a component of a type of covered product or equipment that is currently subject to a standard. Small electric motors that are a component of a type of covered product or equipment that is not subject to a standard would not be exempt. Therefore, DOE concludes that, if a small electric motor is not already a component (of a covered product/equipment subject to an energy conservation standard) when it is distributed in commerce by the small electric motor manufacturer or private labeler, then it is subject to standards. Similarly, small electric motors imported prior to integration into a unit of another type of covered product/ equipment also would be subject to standards upon importation. DOE proposes to add a new paragraph (d) to § 431.446 to explain this exclusion from standards. IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 This regulatory action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this action was not subject to review under that Executive Order by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (‘‘OIRA’’) of the Office of Management and Budget (‘‘OMB’’). DOE has also reviewed this regulation pursuant to Executive Order 13563, issued on January 18, 2011. 76 FR 3281 (January 21, 2011). Executive Order 13563 is supplemental to and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 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 (‘‘IRFA’’) 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 rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General Counsel’s Web site (http://energy.gov/ gc/office-general-counsel). For manufacturers of electric motor and small electric motors, 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 (Sept. 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 http:// www.sba.gov/content/table-smallbusiness-size-standards. Electric motor and small electric motor manufacturing is classified under NAICS 335312, ‘‘Motor and Generator Manufacturing.’’ The SBA sets a threshold of 1,000 employees or less for an entity to be considered as a small business for this category. DOE reviewed the certification and reporting requirements in this proposed rule under the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. This proposed rule would make certain amendments to the existing certification requirements applicable to electric motors and would establish certification requirements for small electric motors. These proposed changes have potential impacts on electric motor manufacturers who will be required to revise their current certification process to comply with the proposed amendments, and have potential impacts on small electric motor manufacturers who must PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41395 commence certification of products subject to an energy conservation standard. Based upon its review of these proposed amendments, DOE believes the changes to the compliance certification (‘‘CC’’) number system is the only proposed amendment that would represent an increase in certification burden for electric motor manufacturers. For small electric motor manufacturers, DOE believes that the proposed certification requirements affecting these entities will result in reporting and record-keeping burdens commensurate with the estimates presented in DOE’s review under the Paperwork Reduction Act, as discussed in section IV.C of this proposal. DOE estimates that there are 13 small business manufacturers of electric motors and 9 of those manufacturers also make small electric motors. The estimate for small business manufacturers of electric motors is based upon the regulatory flexibility analysis conducted as part of the May 29, 2014 final rule establishing amended energy conservation standards for electric motors (79 FR 30934). In that rule, DOE calculated the number of electric motor manufacturers, including the number of manufacturers qualifying as small businesses, based on interviews with electric motor manufacturers and publicly available data. Since the promulgation of this rule, and after further examining the motor industry, which included surveying the motor industry and determining the number of manufacturers remaining, DOE has not discovered the presence of any new manufacturers of electric motors that would necessitate a change to this previous estimate. The estimate for small manufacturers of small electric motors is based on a market survey of publicly available information. DOE evaluated the manufacturers identified in the March 9, 2010 final rule establishing energy conservations standards for small electric motors (75 FR 10874) and manufacturers of electric motors identified in the May 2014 final rule (79 FR 30934) for product offerings meeting the definition of a small electric motor. From its market survey, DOE identified that 9 of the 13 small manufacturers of electric motors also manufacture small electric motors. DOE then determined the expected impacts of the rule on affected small businesses and whether an IRFA was needed (i.e., whether DOE could certify that this rulemaking would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities). For electric motors, for which DOE identified 13 manufacturers that are small businesses, the incremental E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 41396 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules burden associated with this rule is expected to be minimal. DOE already requires that manufacturers of electric motors test their motors according to a prescribed DOE test procedure and certify their efficiency to DOE prior to distributing them in commerce. DOE also has existing labeling requirements for electric motors and requires the use of a CC number on the label of each motor covered by an energy conservation standard. While this rule proposes no changes to the testing or certification requirements that would result in increased burden, and either makes clarifying changes to the regulatory text or relocates certain provisions from part 431 to part 429 without changing their effect, the proposed replacement of the CC number system with manufacturer identification number (‘‘MIN’’) system may result in an incremental record-keeping burden, as well as certain financial burden associated with modifying labels on existing products to comply with the proposed requirements. However, because the proposed process for obtaining a MIN is essentially identical to the current process for obtaining a CC number, DOE believes that the one-time incremental burden associated with that change will be very low. With respect to the use of the MIN on product labels, DOE anticipates that the switch from CC numbers to the MIN could result in a one-time incremental burden for those existing models that will need their CC number replaced with a MIN. However, in reviewing the initial rulemaking that created the current requirement for manufacturers to include the CC number on the motor nameplate, DOE found that the estimate of burden was considered to be insignificant, and that no manufacturers provided comments disputing this finding. (See 61 FR 60440, at 60461 (November 27, 1996) and 64 FR 54114, at 54140 (October 5, 1999)) Thus, DOE similarly finds the replacement of the CC number with a MIN on the nameplates of covered electric motors would result in an insignificant incremental burden. For small electric motors, for which DOE identified 9 manufacturers that are small businesses, the incremental burden associated with this rule is expected to be minimal. DOE currently requires small electric motor manufacturers to test their motors according to a prescribed DOE test procedure, and this document does not propose changes to these requirements that would result in increased burden. This proposal does, however, include certification and labeling requirements for small electric motors. While the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 certification and labeling requirements may result in an incremental recordkeeping burden, DOE believes that this burden will be negligible. To the extent possible, DOE proposed consistent certification and labeling requirements for electric motors and small electric motors—and since electric motors and small electric motors are similar equipment types, DOE believes that these requirements will present an analogous burden. DOE reviewed its prior rulemakings that created labeling and certification requirements for electric motors manufacturers and found that the estimated burden was considered to be insignificant. No manufacturers disputed this finding. (See 61 FR 60440, at 60461 (November 27, 1996) and 64 FR 54114, at 54140 (October 5, 1999)) Therefore, DOE concludes that these same requirements will not have a significant impact on small business manufacturers of small electric motors. Based on the criteria outlined above, DOE has determined that the proposed amendments to the certification, compliance, and enforcement requirements for electric motors and small electric motors would not have a ‘‘significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities,’’ and the preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis is not warranted. DOE will transmit the certification and supporting statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). DOE seeks comment on its estimated additional costs from the proposed changes to the CC number system. Specifically, DOE seeks comment on the impacts of the additional cost of testing on small manufacturers. DOE also seeks comment on its reasoning that the proposed changes would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act Manufacturers of electric motors must certify to DOE that their equipment complies with any applicable energy conservation standards. This rulemaking adds small electric motorspecific certification provisions. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their equipment according to the DOE test procedures for electric motors and small electric motors, including any amendments adopted for those test procedures. The collection-ofinformation requirement for the certification and recordkeeping is subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 (‘‘PRA’’). This requirement has previously been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910–1400 and was recently renewed to include small electric motors. As indicated in the supporting statement, DOE’s renewal included revisions and expansion of the information collected on the energy and water efficiency of consumer products and commercial equipment manufactured for distribution in commerce in the United States. This proposal is not expected to increase burdens for manufacturers of electric motors or change the burden for manufacturers of small electric motors that otherwise would have been imposed as a result of having to comply with the existing certification requirements. Public reporting burden for the certification was 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. This proposed rule would require one party to submit a one-time request for a manufacturer’s identification number (‘‘MIN’’) for each manufacturer of electric motors or small electric motors. The MIN would be used on motor nameplates to identify the original equipment manufacturer and facilitate DOE’s ability to contact the relevant party in the event of finding a noncompliant motor. DOE expects that completion of the form, including downloading the form, filling out the form, and submitting the form via email, would take approximately 5 minutes. Each manufacturer would only submit one form and would not have to submit a new form unless the contact information changed. 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 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 rule amends an existing rule without changing its environmental effect and, therefore, is covered by the Categorical Exclusion in 10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, paragraph E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules A5. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism.’’ 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 10, 1999) imposes certain requirements on Federal 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 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. 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) No further action is required by Executive Order 13132. F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 With respect to the review of existing regulations and the promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ 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; and (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard and promote simplification and burden reduction. 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 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 section 3(a) and section 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, this 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. DOE’s policy statement is also available at http:// energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. This proposed rule contains neither an intergovernmental mandate nor a mandate that may result in an 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 proposed rule would not have any PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41397 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 (Mar. 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation would not result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. J. Review Under the 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 Federal 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 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed this proposal 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 OIRA at 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 promulgates 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. DOE has tentatively concluded that this proposed rule, which would revise certification and compliance requirements for electric and small E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41398 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules electric motors, is not a significant energy action because the proposed standards are not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been designated as such by the Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects on the proposed rule. sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 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 FTC concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on competition. This proposal solely addresses certification provisions for electric motors and small electric motors. This proposal does not require or authorize the use of any commercial standards. M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference In this NOPR, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference standards published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/ International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) specifies general requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. ISO/ IEC Guide 27 specifies methods of indicating conformity with standards for third-party certification systems. ISO/ IEC Guide 17026:2015 gives general guidelines for a specific product certification system, including a thirdparty certification system. ISO/IEC Guide 17065:2012 specifies general requirements for third parties operating a product certification system. For a certification program to be classified by the Department as nationally recognized, it must meet certain criteria, including that the petitioning organization must describe its experience in operating a certification program, such as its experience applying the guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guides 17025:2005(E), 27, 17026:2015, and 17065:2012. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 These ISO/IEC guides are available at http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/ catalogue_ics.htm. V. Public Participation A. Submission of Comments DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this proposed rule no later than the date provided in the DATES section at the beginning of this proposed rule. Interested parties may submit comments, data, and other information using any of the methods described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this proposed rule. When 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 itself 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. Otherwise, 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 below. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 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/courier, 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 in 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/ courier, 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, that are written in English, and that are 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/courier 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) E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 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). B. 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 requests comments on its proposal to replace compliance certification (CC) numbers with a Manufacturer Identification Number (MIN) system. In particular, DOE requests comment on the following items: a. The amount of time needed for manufacturers to transition to MINs. b. Any additional costs due to the proposal to replace CC numbers with a MIN system. c. Whether the OEM-brand relationship is confidential business information and whether a list of MINs and associated OEMs and brands should be posted on DOE’s CCMS Web site. If the OEM-brand relationship is confidential business information, whether the brand-MIN combination should be published. d. Whether the OEM-brand relationship is held in confidence by the OEM and importer, whether the OEMbrand relationship is available in public sources, whether disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the OEM or importer, and the nature of that harm. e. As DOE is proposing that a MIN may not be transferred to another entity, how much time would be required to transition a MIN on a nameplate to a new MIN in the event that an OEM was acquired by another company. 2. In this proposal, DOE proposing to define the term ‘‘independent’’ at 10 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 CFR 431.12 and 431.442 and applying these requirements to the laboratories used by manufacturers for determining the efficiency of their basic modes. As part of this proposal, DOE is revising the requirements currently located in Section 431.18, which require that testing laboratories be accredited by NIST/NVLAP laboratory, accredited by a laboratory accreditation program having a mutual recognition program with NIST/NVLAP, or a laboratory accredited by an organization classified by DOE as an accreditation body. DOE seeks comment regarding whether DOE should also require that independent labs be accredited and what accreditations such laboratories should have. 3. DOE anticipates that manufacturers using certification programs will have their certification programs act as thirdparty representatives; however, DOE seeks comment regarding whether DOE should accept certification reports directly from manufacturers that use certification programs to fulfill the certification testing requirements. 4. DOE requests comment as to whether DOE should require the certification report to include a certificate of conformity or whether DOE should only require the certification report to identify the certification program used (with a certificate of conformity available from the certification program upon request by DOE). 5. DOE requests comment on its proposal for electric motors manufacturers to test and certify compliance with energy conservation standards by either: (i) Testing the electric motor using a recognized testing program (under § 429.74 of the proposal); (ii) testing the electric motor at a testing laboratory other than a recognized testing program and then have a certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (under § 429.73 of the proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor; or (iii) using an alternative efficiency determination method (‘‘AEDM,’’ discussed in section III.E.) and then have a third-party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States (under § 429.73 of the proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor. 6. As discussed in section III.C.2, DOE is proposing to make explicit that a certification program must conduct ongoing verification testing. DOE requests comment regarding whether DOE should more require specific sampling provisions for use in verification testing by certification PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41399 programs, and, if so, what those sampling requirements should be. 7. DOE requests comment on its proposal to retain a minimum sample size of 5 units for basic models rated by testing at an independent laboratory unless fewer than five individual units of a basic model are manufactured over a period of 180 days. 8. DOE requests comment on its proposal to retain the requirement that at least five units of each basic model must be tested to validate an AEDM. 9. DOE requests comment on its proposal to adopt a sampling plan for electric motors similar to those used for other consumer products and commercial equipment. Additionally, DOE requests comment on its proposal to use the formulas from 10 CFR 431.17(b)(2)(i) and 10 CFR 431.17(b)(2)(ii) and add them to 10 CFR 429.138 to verify representations used for labeling. 10. DOE requests comment on its proposal to make the general certification report requirements at 10 CFR 429.12(b) applicable to electric motors and require additional specific reporting requirements including detailed in Section III.C.3 of this proposed rule. 11. DOE requests comment on its proposal that small electric motor manufacturers follow the same efficiency testing and certification procedures as electric motors manufacturers. Unlike with electric motors (see 42 U.S.C. 6316(c)), the statute does not require manufacturers of small electric motors to certify that a motor meets the applicable standard through an independent testing or certification program nationally recognized in the United States. Therefore, DOE requests stakeholders suggest other frameworks for certification testing of small electric motors if the stakeholder opposes DOE’s proposal for consistency. 12. DOE requests comment on the sampling provisions proposed for small electric motors discussed in detail in section III.D.2. 13. DOE requests comment on its proposal requiring specific reporting requirements for small electric motors detailed in section III.D.3. 14. DOE proposes to add periodic verification testing as a criteria to be a nationally recognized certification program. DOE requests comment regarding whether, in light of the changes to the petition criteria, the currently recognized certification programs should renew their petitions and DOE should conduct a new review once this rulemaking is finalized. E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 41400 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules 15. DOE requests comment regarding whether model number, basic model number, or some other type of design information should be required on the nameplate to permit DOE and customers to tie a certification of compliance to a particular unit being distributed in commerce. 16. DOE requests comment on time required to transition to new nameplate requirements. Specifically, whether manufacturers could make the proposed changes within six month of publication of a final rule or whether the nameplate changes should be required on all electric motors manufactured on or after June 1, 2016, when compliance with amended standards is required. 17. DOE requests comment regarding whether small electric motors currently, always, bear a ‘‘nameplate’’ or whether other forms of labeling should be permitted. DOE also requests comment regarding whether DOE should require some sort of model, basic model, or other design-specific information to be displayed on the nameplate. 18. DOE requests comments regarding whether the formula currently in 10 CFR 431.445 should be retained for evaluation of representations. 19. DOE proposes that only the lowest efficiency (when tested and rated for multiple voltages) be placed on the nameplate of an electric motor. a. DOE requests comment on whether there should be some indication of which rated voltage is the lower efficiency voltage corresponding to the rated efficiency. b. As certification reports will indicate the corresponding voltage, DOE is accepting comment on whether the additional information would provide sufficient benefit to purchasers to warrant the additional cost. c. DOE requests comment regarding whether, for each rated voltage, the manufacturer should also put a corresponding efficiency on the nameplate and the associated costs of such a requirement. d. DOE also requests comment on whether small electric motors will include multiple rated voltages on its nameplate and if DOE should adopt similar provisions for small electric motors. 20. DOE requests comment on the change in validation testing requirements for small electric motors described in section III.D. 21. DOE seeks comment on the impacts of the any additional cost of testing on small manufacturers imposed by this proposal. DOE also seeks comment on its reasoning specified in section IV.B that the proposed changes VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of proposed rulemaking. List of Subjects 10 CFR Part 429 Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Test procedures. 10 CFR Part 431 Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business information, Energy conservation, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Test procedures. Issued in Washington, DC, on June 10, 2016. Kathleen B. Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend parts 429 and 431 of chapter II of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows: PART 429—CERTIFICATION, COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT 1. The authority citation for part 429 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. ■ 2. Revise § 429.1 to read as follows: § 429.1 Purpose and scope. This part sets forth the procedures to be followed for certification and enforcement of compliance of covered products and equipment with the applicable conservation standards set forth in 10 CFR parts 430 and 431 of this subchapter. ■ 3. Amend § 429.2 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows: § 429.2 Definitions. (a) The definitions found in 10 CFR parts 430 and 431 of this subchapter apply for purposes of this part. * * * * * ■ 4. Amend § 429.4 by revising paragraph (d)(1) and adding paragraphs (d)(2) through (4) to read as follows: PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 § 429.4 Materials incorporated by reference. * * * * * (d) * * * (1) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (‘‘ISO/IEC’’) Guide 17025:2005(E)’’, ‘‘General requirements for the competence of calibration and testing laboratories,’’ Second edition, May 15, 2005. IBR approved for §§ 429.73, 429.74, and 429.110. (2) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (‘‘ISO/IEC’’) Guide 27, ‘‘Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in the event of misuse of its mark of conformity’’, First edition, March 1, 1983, IBR approved for § 429.73. (3) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (‘‘ISO/IEC’’) Guide 17026:2015, ‘‘Conformity assessment—Example of a certification scheme for tangible products,’’ First edition, February 1, 2015, IBR approved for § 429.73. (4) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (‘‘ISO/IEC ’’) Guide 17065:2012, ‘‘Conformity assessment—Requirements for bodies certifying products, processes and services,’’ First edition, September 15, 2012, IBR approved for § 429.73. ■ 5. Revise § 429.11 to read as follows: § 429.11 General requirements applicable to certification reports. (a) When testing of covered products or covered equipment is required to comply with section 323(c) of the Act, or to comply with rules prescribed under sections 324, 325, 342, 344, 345 or 346 of the Act, a sample comprised of production units (or units representative of production units) of the basic model being tested must be selected at random and tested, and must meet the criteria found in §§ 429.14 through 429.64. Any represented values of measures of energy efficiency, water efficiency, energy consumption, or water consumption for all individual models represented by a given basic model must be the same; and (b) The minimum number of units tested must be no less than two, unless otherwise specified. A different minimum number of units may be specified for certain products in §§ 429.14 through 429.64. If fewer than the number of units required for testing is manufactured, each unit must be tested. E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules * * * * * (b) * * * (6) For each brand, the basic model number and the manufacturer’s individual model number(s) in that basic model with the following exceptions: For external power supplies that are certified based on design individual manufacturer model number may be identified as a ‘‘private model number’’ if it meets the requirements of § 429.7(b). * * * * * (13) Product specific information listed in §§ 429.14 through 429.64 of this chapter. * * * * * (d) Annual filing. All data required by paragraphs (a) through (c) must be submitted to DOE annually, on or before the following dates: Deadline for data submission Product category Fluorescent lamp ballasts, Medium base compact fluorescent lamps, Incandescent reflector lamps, General service fluorescent lamps, General service incandescent lamps, Intermediate base incandescent lamps, Candelabra base incandescent lamps, Residential ceiling fans, Residential ceiling fan light kits, Residential showerheads, Residential faucets, Residential water closets, and Residential urinals. Small electric motors ................................................................................................................................................................................. Residential water heater, Residential furnaces, Residential boilers, Residential pool heaters, Commercial water heaters, Commercial hot water supply boilers, Commercial unfired hot water storage tanks, Commercial packaged boilers, Commercial warm air furnaces, Commercial unit heaters and Residential furnace fans. Residential dishwashers, Commercial prerinse spray valves, Illuminated exit signs, Traffic signal modules, Pedestrian modules, and Distribution transformers. Room air conditioners, Residential central air conditioners, Residential central heat pumps, Small duct high velocity system, Space constrained products, Commercial package air-conditioning and heating equipment, Packaged terminal air conditioners, Packaged terminal heat pumps, and Single package vertical units. Residential refrigerators, Residential refrigerators-freezers, Residential freezers, Commercial refrigerator, freezer, and refrigeratorfreezer, Automatic commercial automatic ice makers, Refrigerated bottled or canned beverage vending machine, Walk-in coolers, and Walk-in freezers. Torchieres, Residential dehumidifiers, Metal halide lamp fixtures, and External power supplies ............................................................ Residential clothes washers, Residential clothes dryers, Residential direct heating equipment, Residential cooking products, and Commercial clothes washers. Electric motors ........................................................................................................................................................................................... * ■ * * * * 7. Add § 429.63 to read as follows: sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 § 429.63 Electric motors. (a) Compliance certification. A manufacturer may not certify the compliance of an electric motor pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12 unless: (1) Testing of the electric motor basic model was conducted using a recognized testing program (see § 429.74); or (2) A third party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States under § 429.73 has certified the efficiency of the electric motor basic model through issuance of a certificate of conformity for the basic model; or (3) The efficiency of the electric motor basic model was determined through the application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of § 429.70 and a third party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States under § 429.73 has certified the efficiency of the electric motor basic model through issuance of a certificate of conformity for the basic model. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 (4) Under paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section, the manufacturer and the third-party certification program must certify the compliance of the electric motor pursuant to § 429.12. (b) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must determine the represented value of efficiency, which includes the certified rating, for each basic model of electric motor either by testing, in conjunction with the applicable sampling provisions, or by applying an AEDM. (1) Units to be tested. The requirements of § 429.11 apply except that, for electric motors, a sample of sufficient size is a minimum of five units. (i) For each basic model, a sample of sufficient size must be randomly selected and tested to ensure that any represented value of full-load efficiency or other measure of energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor higher values shall be less than or equal to the lower of: (A) The mean of the sample, where: PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Mar. 1. April 1. May 1. June 1. July 1. Aug. 1. Sept. 1. Oct. 1. Nov. 1. ¯ And, x is the sample mean; n 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 0.95, where: ¯ 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). (ii) Prior to June 1, 2017, a manufacturer may evaluate compliance for electric motors as follows. (A manufacturer must indicate the use of this provision when certifying compliance.) (A) The average full-load efficiency shall satisfy the condition: E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 EP24JN16.001</GPH> § 429.12 General requirements applicable to certification reports. families, the design family model number and the individual manufacturer’s model numbers covered by that design family must be submitted for each brand. For walk-in coolers, electric motors, and small electric motors, the basic model number for each brand must be submitted. For distribution transformers, the basic model number or kVA grouping model number (depending on the certification method) for each brand must be submitted. For commercial HVAC, WH, and refrigeration equipment, an EP24JN16.000</GPH> 6. Amend § 429.12 by revising paragraphs (b)(6), (b)(13), and (d) to read as follows: ■ 41401 41402 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules shall satisfy the condition: § 429.64 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Where RE is the rated nominal full-load efficiency. (2) Alternative efficiency determination methods. In lieu of testing, a represented value of efficiency and of total losses for a basic model of electric motor must be determined through the application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of § 429.70 and the provisions of this section, where: (i) The represented value of energy efficiency of any basic model used to validate an AEDM must be calculated under paragraph (b)(1) of this section; and (ii) Any represented value of energy efficiency or other measure of energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor higher values must be less than or equal to the output of the AEDM and greater than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model. (c) Certification reports. (1) The requirements of § 429.12 apply to electric motors; (2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a certification report must include the following public, product-specific information for each basic model: (i) The electric motor category described at 10 CFR 431.25 (e.g., fire pump electric motor); (ii) The horsepower at which the basic model was tested; (iii) The number of poles; (iv) The enclosure type (i.e., open or enclosed); (v) The rated voltage; (vi) The operating frequency; (vii) Whether the basic model is subject to specific test procedure VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 Small electric motors. (a) Compliance certification. A manufacturer may not certify the compliance of a small electric motor pursuant to § 429.12 unless: (1) Testing of the small electric motor basic model was conducted using a recognized testing program (see § 429.74); or (2) A third-party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States under § 429.73 has certified the efficiency of the small electric motor basic model through issuance of a certificate of conformity for the basic model; or (3) The efficiency of the small electric motor basic model was determined through the application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of § 429.70 and a third-party certification program that is nationally recognized in the United States under § 429.73 has certified the efficiency of the small electric motor basic model through issuance of a certificate of conformity for the basic model. (4) Under paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section, the manufacturer and the third-party certification program must certify the compliance of the small electric motor pursuant to § 429.12. (b) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must determine the represented value of efficiency, which includes the certified rating, for each basic model of small electric motor either by testing, in conjunction with the applicable sampling provisions, or by applying an AEDM. (1) Units to be tested. The requirements of § 429.11 apply to small electric motors, except that, for small electric motors, a sample of sufficient size is a minimum of five units. For each basic model, a sample of sufficient size must be randomly selected and tested to ensure that: PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 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 n1 degrees of freedom (from appendix A to subpart B of part 429). (2) Alternative efficiency determination methods. In lieu of testing, a represented value of efficiency and of total losses for a basic model of small electric motor must be determined through the application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of § 429.70 and the provisions of this section, where: (i) The represented value of energy efficiency of any basic model used to validate an AEDM must be calculated under paragraph (b)(1) of this section; and (ii) Any represented value of energy efficiency or other measure of energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor higher values must be less than or equal to the output of the AEDM and greater than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model. (c) Certification reports. (1) The requirements of § 429.12 apply to small electric motors; (2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a certification report must include the following public product-specific information for each basic model: (i) The small electric motor category described at 10 CFR 431.446(a) (e.g., capacitor-start induction-run); (ii) The horsepower on which the rating for the basic model is based; (iii) The number of poles; (iv) The represented average full-load efficiency; (v) The represented total losses; (vi) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applied to the basic model (see 10 CFR 431.17); (vii) Whether the represented values are based on testing in an independent E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 EP24JN16.006</GPH> xmin = min(xi) (B) The lower 97.5 percent confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean divided by 0.95, where: EP24JN16.005</GPH> (B) The lowest full-load efficiency in the sample xmin, which is defined by ¯ And, x is the sample mean; n is the number of samples; and xi is the ith sample; Or, EP24JN16.003</GPH> EP24JN16.004</GPH> Where xi is the measured full-load efficiency of unit i and n is the number of units tested. (i) Any represented value of full-load efficiency or other measure of energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor higher values is less than or equal to the lower of: (A) The mean of the sample, where: EP24JN16.002</GPH> where ‘‘RE’’ is the rated nominal fullload efficiency for the basic model and ¯ x equals: provisions listed in section 4 of appendix B to subpart B of part 431 and the type of motor and the motor category of such basic model; (viii) The represented full-load efficiency; (ix) The represented total losses; (x) The sampling methodology used per § 429.63(c); (xi) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applied to the basic model (see 10 CFR 431.17); and (xii) Whether the represented values are based on testing conducted in an independent testing laboratory or by a nationally recognized certification program and the name of the nationally recognized testing or certification program. ■ 8. Add § 429.64 to read as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules testing laboratory or nationally recognized certification program; and (viii) The name of the nationally recognized testing or certification program. ■ 9. Amend § 429.70 by revising paragraph (a) and by adding paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as follows: sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 § 429.70 Alternative methods for determining energy efficiency or energy use. (a) General. A manufacturer of covered products or covered equipment explicitly authorized to use an AEDM in §§ 429.14 through 429.64 may not distribute any basic model of such product or equipment in commerce unless the manufacturer has determined the energy efficiency of the basic model, either by testing the basic model in conjunction with DOE’s certification sampling plans and statistics or by applying an alternative method for determining energy efficiency or energy use (i.e. AEDM) to the basic model in accordance with the requirements of this section. In instances where a manufacturer has tested a basic model to validate the AEDM, the represented value of energy efficiency of that basic model must be determined and certified according to results from actual testing in conjunction with this part 429, subpart B certification sampling plans and statistics. In addition, a manufacturer may not knowingly use an AEDM to overrate the efficiency of a basic model. * * * * * (h) Alternative efficiency determination method (AEDM) for electric motors—(1) Criteria an AEDM must satisfy. A manufacturer is not permitted to apply an AEDM to a basic model of electric motor to determine its efficiency pursuant to this section unless: (i) The AEDM is derived from a mathematical model that estimates the energy efficiency characteristics and losses of the basic model as measured by the applicable DOE test procedure and accurately represents the mechanical and electrical characteristics of that basic model, and (ii) The AEDM is based on engineering or statistical analysis, computer simulation or modeling, or any other analytical evaluation of actual performance data. (iii) The manufacturer has validated the AEDM, in accordance with paragraph (h)(2) of this section with basic models that meet the current Federal energy conservation standards. (2) Validation of an AEDM. Before using an AEDM, the manufacturer must VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 validate the AEDM’s accuracy and reliability as follows: (i) Apply the AEDM to at least five basic models that have been selected for testing in accordance with paragraph (h)(3) of this section, and calculate the predicted average full-load efficiency and predicted total power losses for each of these basic models; (ii) Test at least five units of each of these basic models in accordance with 10 CFR 431.16, and use the measured full-load efficiency of the tested units to determine the average full-load efficiency for each of these basic models in accordance with § 429.63 (Basic models used for validation must be certified pursuant to the provisions of § 429.63(a)(2).); and (iii) The predicted average full-load efficiency for each such basic model calculated by applying the AEDM pursuant to paragraph (h)(2)(i) of this section must not be more than five percent greater than the measured average full-load efficiency determined from the testing of that basic model pursuant to paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this section; and (iv) A manufacturer may not use a basic model with a sample size of fewer than five units to validate an AEDM. (3) Selection of basic models for testing. (i) A manufacturer must select basic models for testing in accordance with the following criteria: (A) Two of the basic models must be among the five basic models with the highest unit volumes of production by the manufacturer in the prior year. In identifying these five basic models, any basic model of electric motor that does not comply with § 431.25 shall be excluded from consideration. (B) No two basic models may have the same horsepower rating; (C) No two basic models may have the same frame number series; and (D) Each basic model must have the lowest average full-load efficiency among the basic models within the same equipment class. (ii) In any instance where it is impossible for a manufacturer to select basic models for testing in accordance with all of these criteria, the criteria shall be given priority in the order in which they are listed. Within the limits imposed by the criteria, select basic models randomly. (4) Verification of an AEDM. (i) Each manufacturer that has used an AEDM under this section must have available for inspection by the Department of Energy records showing: (A) The method or methods used to develop the AEDM; (B) The mathematical model, the engineering or statistical analysis, PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41403 computer simulation or modeling, and any other analytical evaluation of performance data on which the AEDM is based; (C) Complete test data, product information, and related information that the manufacturer has generated or acquired pursuant to paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(4)(ii) of this section; and (D) The calculations used to determine the average full-load efficiency of each basic model to which the AEDM was applied. (ii) If requested by the Department, the manufacturer must: (A) Conduct simulations to predict the performance of particular basic models of electric motors specified by the Department; (B) Provide analyses of previous simulations conducted by the manufacturer; and/or (C) Conduct testing of basic models selected by the Department. (i) Alternative efficiency determination method (AEDM) for small electric motors. (1) Criteria an AEDM must satisfy. A manufacturer is not permitted to apply an AEDM to a basic model of small electric motor to determine its efficiency pursuant to this section unless: (i) The AEDM is derived from a mathematical model that estimates the energy efficiency characteristics and losses of the basic model as measured by the applicable DOE test procedure and represents the mechanical and electrical characteristics of that basic model, and (ii) The AEDM is based on engineering or statistical analysis, computer simulation or modeling, or other analytic evaluation of actual performance data. (iii) The manufacturer has validated the AEDM, in accordance with paragraph (h)(2) of this section with basic models that meet the current Federal energy conservation standards. (2) Validation of an AEDM. Before using an AEDM, the manufacturer must validate the AEDM’s accuracy and reliability as follows: (i) A manufacturer must first apply the AEDM to at least five basic models that have been selected for testing in accordance with paragraph (i)(3) of this section, and calculate the predicted average full-load efficiency for each of these basic models; (ii) Test at least five units of each of these basic models in accordance with 10 CFR 431.444 and use the measured full-load efficiency of the tested units to determine the measured average fullload efficiency in accordance with § 429.64. (Basic models used for E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 41404 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules validation must be certified pursuant to the provisions of § 429.64(a)(2).); and (iii) The predicted average full-load efficiency for each such basic model calculated by applying the AEDM pursuant to paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section must not be more than five percent greater than the measured average full-load efficiency determined from the testing of that basic model pursuant to paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this section; and (iv) A manufacturer may not use a basic model with a sample size of fewer than five units to validate an AEDM. (3) Selection of basic models for testing. (i) A manufacturer must select basic models for testing in accordance with the following criteria: (A) Two of the basic models must be among the five basic models with the highest unit volumes of production by the manufacturer in the prior year. In identifying these five basic models, any small electric motor that does not comply with § 431.446 shall be excluded from consideration. (B) No two basic models may have the same horsepower rating; (C) No two basic models may have the same frame number series; and (D) Each basic model must have the lowest average full-load efficiency among the basic models within the same equipment class. (ii) In any instance where it is impossible for a manufacturer to select basic models for testing in accordance with all of these criteria, the criteria shall be given priority in the order in which they are listed. Within the limits imposed by the criteria, select basic models randomly. (4) Verification of an AEDM. (i) Each manufacturer that has used an AEDM under this section must have available for inspection by the Department of Energy records showing: (A) The method or methods used to develop the AEDM; (B) The mathematical model, the engineering or statistical analysis, computer simulation or modeling, and any other analytical evaluation of performance data on which the AEDM is based; (C) Complete test data, product information, and related information that the manufacturer has generated or acquired pursuant to paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(4)(ii) of this section; and (D) The calculations used to determine the average full-load efficiency of each basic model to which the AEDM was applied. (ii) If requested by the Department, the manufacturer must: (A) Conduct simulations to predict the performance of particular basic VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 models of small electric motors specified by the Department; (B) Provide analyses of previous simulations conducted by the manufacturer; and/or (C) Conduct testing of basic models selected by the Department. ■ 10. Add § 429.73 to subpart B to read as follows: § 429.73 Department of Energy recognition of nationally recognized certification programs for electric motors and small electric motors. (a) Purpose. This section sets forth the process by which a certification program may be classified by the Department of Energy as being nationally recognized in the United States for the purposes of certifying that basic models of electric motors or small electric motors meet applicable energy conservation standards. (b) Petition. For a certification program to be classified by the Department of Energy as being nationally recognized, the organization operating the program must submit a petition to the Department requesting such classification, in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section and § 429.75. The petition must demonstrate that the program meets the criteria in paragraph (c) of this section. (c) Evaluation criteria. (1) General. For a certification program to be classified by the Department as nationally recognized, it must meet the following criteria: (i) It must have standards and procedures for conducting and administering a certification system that, at a minimum, are consistent with the certification requirements of this part. Such standards and procedures must also include periodic follow-up activities to ensure that basic models of electric motors and small electric motors continue to conform to the efficiency levels for which they were certified and granted a certificate of conformity. Periodic follow-up activities must include: Periodic verification testing, including sampling provisions; selection criteria; a process for determining compliance with standards; and a process for reporting models that perform worse than the applicable standard to DOE; and (ii) It must be independent of any electric motor or small electric motor manufacturer for which it is providing certification as defined at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors and 10 CFR 431.442 for small electric motors. (2) Electric motors. The certification program must be expert in the content and application of the test procedures and methodologies at 10 CFR 431.16 and 10 CFR 429.63. PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 (3) Small electric motors. The certification program must be expert in the content and application of the test procedures and methodologies at 10 CFR 431.444 and 10 CFR 429.64. (d) Petition format. Each petition requesting classification as a nationally recognized certification program must contain a narrative statement as to why the program meets the criteria listed in paragraph (c) of this section, must be signed on behalf of the organization operating the program by an authorized representative, and must be accompanied by documentation that supports the narrative statement. The following provides additional requirements as to the specific criteria: (1) Standards and procedures. The petitioning organization must include a copy of the standards and procedures it uses for operating its certification system and for granting a certificate of conformity, including any accreditations that the petitioning organization holds. These documents must include a program manual or handbook that describes how the program conducts periodic verification testing, including, but not limited to, information such as the percentage of basic models tested annually, the process for selecting basic models for verification testing, the process for selecting or obtaining units for testing, any controls to ensure that tested units are production units or are representative of production units, etc. (2) Independent status. The petitioning organization must describe how it is independent (as defined at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors and 10 CFR 431.442 for small electric motors) from electric motor or small electric motor manufacturers, importers, distributors, private labelers, vendors, and trade associations. (3) Qualifications to operate a certification system. The petitioning organization must describe its experience in operating a certification system. The experience should be discussed in detail and substantiated by supporting documents. Of particular relevance would be documentary evidence that establishes experience in running a certification program, such as the application of guidelines contained in the ISO/IEC Guide 17065:2012 (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), ISO/IEC Guide 27 (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), and ISO/IEC Guide 17026:2015, (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), as well as experience in overseeing compliance with the guidelines contained in ISO/ IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4). E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules (4) Expertise in test procedures—(i) General. This part of the petition should include items such as, but not limited to, a description of prior projects and qualifications of staff members. Of particular relevance would be documentary evidence that establishes experience in laboratory calibration procedures such as those guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), and with energy efficiency testing of the equipment to be certified. (ii) Electric motors. The petition should set forth the program’s experience with the test procedures and methodologies detailed in 10 CFR 431.16 and § 429.63. (iii) Small electric motors. The petition should set forth the program’s experience with the test procedures and methodologies detailed in 10 CFR 431.444 and § 429.64. (5) Laboratory requirements. The petition must include documentary evidence that establishes experience in applying and maintaining laboratory calibration procedures, such as those contained in ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), to energy efficiency testing of the equipment to be certified. (e) Disposition. The Department will evaluate the petition in accordance with § 429.75, and will determine whether the applicant meets the criteria in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section for classification as a nationally recognized certification program. ■ 11. Add § 429.74 to subpart B to read as follows: sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 § 429.74 Department of Energy recognition of independent testing programs for electric motors and small electric motors. (a) Purpose. This section sets forth the process by which a testing program may be classified by the Department of Energy as being nationally recognized in the United States for the purposes of certifying that basic models of electric motors or small electric motors meet applicable energy conservation standards. (b) Petition. For a testing program to be classified by the Department of Energy as being nationally recognized, the organization operating the program must submit a petition to the Department requesting such classification, in accordance with § 429.75. A petition for recognition of an independent testing program must include the information specified in paragraph (d) of this section. The petition must demonstrate that the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 program meets the criteria in paragraph (c) of this section. (c) Evaluation criteria for independent testing programs. (1) General. For a testing program to be classified by the Department as nationally recognized, it must meet the following criteria: (i) It must have standards and procedures for conducting and administering an accreditation system that, at a minimum, ensures compliance with the testing requirements of this part and part 431. Such standards and procedures must also include periodic follow-up activities to ensure that the testing facilities continue to generate test results that are reliable and reproducible. Periodic follow-up activities must include: verification that testing is conducted in accordance with DOE regulatory requirements, including sampling provisions; assurance that independence is maintained; and that appropriate laboratory procedures are followed, including lab accreditation to ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4) and to the DOE test method. (ii) It must be independent of any electric motor or small electric motor manufacturer as defined at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors and 10 CFR 431.442 for small electric motors. (iii) It must demonstrate the ability to accredit testing facilities as meeting the following additional criteria: test facilities must be independent of electric motor or small electric motor manufacturers, importers, distributors, private labelers, vendors, and trade associations; test facilities must have the expertise necessary to conduct testing in accordance with the DOE test procedure, test facilities must have appropriate equipment, and recordkeeping and calibration procedures. (2) Electric motors. The testing program must be expert in the content and application of the test procedures and methodologies at 10 CFR 431.16 and 10 CFR 429.63. (3) Small electric motors. The testing program must be expert in the content and application of the test procedures and methodologies at 10 CFR 431.444 and 10 CFR 429.64. (d) Petition format. Each petition requesting classification as a nationally recognized testing program must contain a narrative statement as to why the program meets the criteria listed in paragraph (c) of this section, must be signed on behalf of the organization operating the program by an authorized representative, and must be accompanied by documentation that supports the narrative statement. The PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41405 following provides additional requirements as to the specific criteria: (1) Standards and procedures. The petitioning organization must include a copy of the standards and procedures it uses for operating its accreditation system and for granting a testing facility accreditation, including any accreditations that the petitioning organization holds. These documents must include a program manual or handbook that describes how the program conducts periodic assessments to ensure the testing facility continues to meet the required criteria, including, but not limited to, the number of motors tested annually to ensure repeatable results, the process for verifying the labs methods for selecting or obtaining units for testing, any controls to ensure that tested units are production units or are representative of production units, etc. (2) Independent status. The petitioning organization must describe how it is independent (as defined at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors and 10 CFR 431.442 for small electric motors) from electric motor or small electric motor manufacturers, importers, distributors, private labelers, vendors, and trade associations and the methods it uses to ensure that testing facilities recognized are also independent. (3) Qualifications to operate a testing program. The petitioning organization must describe its experience in operating an accreditation system for testing facilities. The experience should be discussed in detail and substantiated by supporting documents. Of particular relevance would be documentary evidence that establishes experience in running an accreditation program, such as the application of guidelines contained in the ISO/IEC Guide 17065:2012 (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), ISO/IEC Guide 27 (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), and ISO/IEC Guide 17026:2015, (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), as well as experience in overseeing compliance with the guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4). (4) Expertise in test procedures—(i) General. This part of the petition should include items such as, but not limited to, a description of prior projects and qualifications of staff members. Of particular relevance would be documentary evidence that establishes experience in laboratory calibration procedures such as those guidelines contained in the ISO/IEC Guide 17025: 2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4), and with energy efficiency testing of the equipment to be certified. The petitioning organization is E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41406 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules responsible for having expertise so as to be qualified to assess the expertise of recognized testing facilities. (ii) Electric motors. The petition should set forth the program’s experience with the test procedures and methodologies in 10 CFR 431.16 and § 429.63. (iii) Small electric motors. The petition should set forth the program’s experience with the test procedures and methodologies 10 CFR 431.444 and § 429.64. (5) Laboratory requirements. The petition must include documentary evidence that establishes experience in applying and maintaining laboratory calibration procedures, such as those contained in ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 429.4) to energy efficiency testing of the equipment to be certified. (e) Disposition. The Department will evaluate the petition in accordance with § 429.75, and will determine whether the applicant meets the criteria in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section for classification as a nationally recognized certification program. ■ 12. Add § 429.75 to subpart B to read as follows: sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 § 429.75 Procedures for recognition and withdrawal of recognition of independent testing or certification programs. (a) Filing of petition. Any petition submitted to the Department pursuant to § 429.73(a) or § 429.74(a), shall be entitled ‘‘Petition for Recognition’’ (‘‘Petition’’) and must be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121, or via email to [email address TBD]. In accordance with the provisions set forth in 10 CFR 1004.11, any request for confidential treatment of any information contained in such a Petition or in supporting documentation must be accompanied by a copy of the Petition or supporting documentation from which the information claimed to be confidential has been deleted. (b) Public notice and solicitation of comments. DOE shall publish in the Federal Register the petition from which confidential information, as determined by DOE, has been deleted in accordance with 10 CFR 1004.11 and shall solicit comments, data and information on whether the Petition should be granted. The Department shall also make available for inspection and copying the Petition’s supporting documentation from which confidential information, as determined by DOE, has VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 been deleted in accordance with 10 CFR 1004.11. Any person submitting written comments to DOE with respect to a petition shall also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner. (c) Responsive statement by the petitioner. A petitioner may, within 10 business days of receipt from DOE of a copy of any comments submitted in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section, respond to such comments in a written statement submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. A petitioner may address more than one set of comments in a single responsive statement. (d) Optional second round of public comment. If, after reviewing comments on the Petition and the petitioner’s response, DOE determines that a second round of comments is necessary to resolve conflicting information or gather additional information crucial to DOE’s decision, DOE may solicit through a Federal Register notice additional comments, data and information on whether the Petition should be granted. (e) Public announcement of final determination. The Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy shall, as soon as practicable, publish in the Federal Register a notice of final determination on the petition. (f) Additional information. DOE may, at any time during the recognition process, request additional relevant information or conduct an investigation concerning the petition. DOE’s determination on a petition may be based solely on the petition and supporting documents, or may also be based on such additional information as DOE deems appropriate. (g) Withdrawal of recognition—(1) Withdrawal by the Department. If DOE believes that a program that has been recognized under §§ 429.73 or 429.74 is failing to meet the criteria of paragraphs (c) and (d) of that section, DOE may initiate withdrawal of recognition as follows: (i) DOE will provide a written notification to the affected program citing the basis or bases for its belief that corrective action is warranted. The notification will indicate the time period within which the program must complete such corrective actions and report the status of completion to DOE. In no case shall the time allowed for corrective action exceed 180 days from the date of the notice (inclusive of the 30 days allowed under paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section for disputing the bases for DOE’s notification of withdrawal). (ii) If the program wishes to dispute any bases identified in the notification, PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 the program must respond to DOE within 30 days of receipt of the notification. (iii) If, after the time period for corrective action has expired, DOE believes that the applicable criteria that were identified in the notification under paragraph (i) have not been met, DOE will withdraw its recognition from that program and provide a formal written notification to the program of such action. DOE shall identify the effective date of withdrawal in the notice required by paragraph (g)(3) of this section, which in no case shall be more than 30 days following the publication date of the notice. (iv) In order to exhaust administrative remedies, any person aggrieved by an action under this section must file an appeal with the DOE’s Office of Hearings and Appeals as provided in 10 CFR part 1003, subpart C, within 30 days of receipt of the notice of DOE’s withdrawal of recognition. (2) Voluntary withdrawal. A program may, under 10 CFR 429.75, unilaterally withdraw its recognition by advising DOE in writing of such withdrawal. It must also advise manufacturers utilizing the certification program of such withdrawal. Any notice provided to DOE or to manufacturers pursuant to this paragraph must identify the date on which the withdrawal is effective, the equipment types covered by the program to be withdrawn, and any effect the withdrawal has on the validity of certifications, recognition, or accreditation previously issued by the program. In no case shall such notification occur less than 30 days prior to the effective date of withdrawal. (3) Notice of withdrawal of recognition. DOE will publish in the Federal Register a notice of any withdrawal of recognition that occurs pursuant to this paragraph. Such notice will identify the effective date of withdrawal, the product or equipment types covered by the program being withdrawn, and any effect the withdrawal has on the validity of certifications or other recognition previously issued by the program. ■ 13. Add § 429.76 to subpart B to read as follows: § 429.76 Labeling and other representations. (a) General. If a basic model is a type of covered product or equipment for which DOE requires a label, the label must be in conformance with the requirements of this section. (b) Electric motors—(1) Required information. All units produced of any basic model of electric motor for which standards are prescribed in § 431.25 of E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules this chapter must bear a permanent nameplate that is marked clearly with the following information: (i) The electric motor’s represented full-load efficiency as certified pursuant to § 429.63. If a motor is rated at multiple voltages, then only display the lowest represented full-load efficiency as certified pursuant to § 429.63; and (ii) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applicable to that unit. Such MIN must be on the nameplate of an electric motor at the time of its distribution in commerce. (2) Display of required information. All orientation, spacing, type sizes, typefaces, and line widths to display this required information must be the same as or similar to the display of any other performance data on the motor’s permanent nameplate. The represented full-load efficiency must be identified either by the term ‘‘Represented FullLoad Efficiency’’ or ‘‘Rep. Full-Load. Eff.’’ The MIN must be in the form ‘‘MIN: __’’. (3) Disclosure of efficiency information in marketing materials. The electric motor’s represented full-load efficiency as certified pursuant to § 429.63 must be prominently displayed: (i) On each page of a catalog that lists the motor; and (ii) In other materials used to market the motor. (4) Preemption of State regulations. The provisions of this paragraph supersede any State regulation to the extent required by section 327 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 6297), as applied to electric motors via section 345 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 6316). Pursuant to the Act, all State regulations that require the disclosure for any electric motor of information with respect to energy consumption, other than the information required to be disclosed in accordance with this paragraph, are superseded. (c) Small electric motors—(1) Required information. All units produced of any basic model of small electric motor for which standards are prescribed in § 431.446 of this chapter must bear a permanent nameplate that is marked clearly with the following information: (i) The small electric motor’s represented average full-load efficiency as certified pursuant to § 429.64; and (ii) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applicable to that unit. Such MIN must be on the nameplate of a small electric motor at the time of its distribution in commerce. (2) Display of required information. All orientation, spacing, type sizes, typefaces, and line widths to display VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 this required information must be the same as or similar to the display of any other performance data on the motor’s permanent nameplate. The represented average full-load efficiency must be identified either by the term ‘‘Represented Average Full-Load Efficiency’’ or ‘‘Rep. Avg. Full-Load. Eff.’’ The MIN must be in the form ‘‘MIN: ll’’. ■ 14. Amend § 429.102 by revising the section heading and by adding paragraphs (a)(11) through (14) to read as follows: § 429.102 Prohibited acts. (a) * * * (11) Distribution in commerce by a manufacturer or private labeler of any covered equipment which is not labeled in accordance with this part; (12) Removal from any covered equipment or rendering illegible, by a manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or private labeler, any label required to be provided under this part; (13) Advertisement of an electric motor, by a manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or private labeler, in a catalog from which the equipment may be purchased, without including in the catalog all information as required by § 429.76(b)(3), provided, however, that this shall not apply to an advertisement of an electric motor in a catalog if distribution of the catalog began before the effective date of the labeling rule applicable to that motor; or (14) For any manufacturer or private labeler of a small electric motor to distribute in commerce any small electric motor required by § 429.76 to be labeled that is not in conformity with the relevant energy conservation standard found at 10 CFR 431.446. ■ 15. Amend § 429.110 by revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii), (c)(3), and (e)(6) through (8) to read as follows: § 429.110 Enforcement testing. * * * * * (c) * * * (1) * * * (i) Manufacturer’s warehouse, distributor, or other facility affiliated with the manufacturer. DOE will select a batch sample at random in accordance with the provisions in paragraph (e) of this section and the conditions specified in the test notice. DOE will randomly select an initial test sample of units from the batch sample for testing in accordance with appendices A through D of this subpart. DOE will make a determination whether an alternative sample size will be used in accordance with the provisions in paragraph (e) of this section. (ii) Retailer or other facility not affiliated with the manufacturer. DOE PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 41407 will select an initial test sample of units at random that satisfies the minimum number of units necessary for testing in accordance with the provisions in appendices A through D of this subpart and the conditions specified in the test notice. Depending on the results of the testing, DOE may select additional units for testing from a retailer in accordance with appendices A through D of this subpart. If the full sample is not available from a retailer, DOE will make a determination whether an alternative sample size will be used in accordance with the provisions in paragraph (e) of this section. * * * * * (3) The resulting test data shall constitute official test data for the basic model. Such test data will be used by DOE to make a determination of compliance or noncompliance if a sufficient number of tests have been conducted to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (e) of this section and appendices A through D of this subpart. * * * * * (e) * * * (6) For electric motors and small electric motors, DOE will use an initial sample size of at least five units and follow the sampling plans in appendix D of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement Testing of Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors). 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 (for a total sample of at least five); or (B) At least five of the other units that subsequently become available. (7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(6) 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. (8) When DOE makes a determination in accordance with paragraph (e)(6) to test less than the number of units specified in paragraph (e)(1) through (e)(6) of this section, DOE will base the compliance determination on the results E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41408 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. § 431.2 [Amended] 19. Amend § 431.2 by removing the definition of ‘‘Independent laboratory’’. ■ 20. Revise § 431.11 to read as follows: ■ where S1, RE and t have the values used in Steps 3 and 5, respectively. The factor Where RE is the represented nominal fullload efficiency. § 431.11 17. 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 Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 Step 1. The first sample size (n1) must be five or more units. ¯ Step 2. Compute the mean (X1) of the measured energy performance of the n1 units in the first sample as follows: where Xi is the measured full-load efficiency of unit i. Step 3. Compute the sample standard deviation (S1) of the measured energy efficiency of the n1 units in the first sample as follows: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 is based on a 20 percent tolerance in the total power loss at full-load and fixed output power. Given the value of n, determine one of the ¯ following:X1 (i) If the value of n is less than or equal to n1 and if the mean energy efficiency of the ¯ first sample (X1) is equal to or greater than the lower control limit (LCL1), the basic model is compliant and testing is at an end. (ii) If the value of n is greater than n1, the basic model is in non-compliance. The size of a second sample n2 is determined to be the smallest integer equal to or greater than the difference n¥n1 . If the value of n2 so calculated is greater than 21¥n1, set n2 equal to 21¥n1. ¯ Step 8. Compute the combined (X2) mean of the measured energy performance of the n1 and n2 units of the combined first and second samples as follows: PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 Purpose and scope. This subpart contains energy conservation requirements for electric motors, including test procedures, energy conservation standards, and related requirements prescribed or authorized by EPCA. This subpart does not cover ‘‘small electric motors,’’ which are addressed in subpart X of this part. ■ 21. Amend § 431.12 by: ■ a. Removing the definitions of ‘‘Accreditation’’, ‘‘Accreditation body’’, ‘‘Accreditation system’’, and ‘‘Accredited laboratory’’; ■ b. Revising the definition of ‘‘Basic model;’’ and ■ c. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definitions of ‘‘Equipment class’’ and ‘‘Independent’’. The revisions and additions read as follows: § 431.12 * E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM * Definitions. * 24JNP2 * * EP24JN16.016</GPH> EP24JN16.015</GPH> EP24JN16.014</GPH> 18. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows: ■ EP24JN16.013</GPH> ¯ Xmin = min(xi) must satisfy the condition PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT EP24JN16.012</GPH> Where xi is the measured full-load efficiency of unit i and n is the number of units tested. And, the lowest measured full-load efficiency in the sample, xmin, which is defined by: (Note that S1 is the value obtained above in Step 3.) Step 10. Set the lower control limit (LCL2) to, ¯ (LCL1) = RE¥tSE(X1) where t has the value obtained in Step 5, and ¯ compare the combined sample mean (X2) to the lower control limit (LCL2) to find one of the following: ¯ (i) If the mean of the combined sample (x2) is less than the lower control limit (LCL2), the basic model is in non-compliance and testing is at an end. (ii) If the mean of the combined sample ¯ (X2) is equal to or greater than the lower control limit (LCL2), the basic model is not found to be in non-compliance and testing is at an end. EP24JN16.011</GPH> Where, RE is the represented nominal fullload efficiency and the average full-load ¯ efficiency of the sample, x is defined by: Step 5. Compute the lower control limit (LCL1) for the mean of the first sample using RE as the desired mean as follows: ¯ (LCL1)= RE¥tSE(X1) where: RE is the applicable standard full-load efficiency when the test is to determine compliance with the applicable statutory standard, or is the represented average fullload efficiency when the test is to determine compliance with the labeled efficiency value, and t is the 2.5th percentile of a t-distribution for a sample size of n1, which yields a 97.5 percent confidence level for a one-tailed ttest. Step 6. Compare the mean of the first ¯ sample (X)1) with the lower control limit (LCL1) to determine one of the following: (i) If the mean of the first sample is below the lower control limit, then the basic model is in non-compliance and testing is at an end. (ii) If the mean is equal to or greater than the lower control limit, no final determination of compliance or noncompliance can be made; proceed to Step 7. Step 7. Determine the recommended sample size (n) as follows: EP24JN16.010</GPH> Electric motors representations. (a) Purpose. This provision is used to evaluate whether a representation is permitted for purposes of the prohibited acts related to labeling and representations. (b) Electric motors. Any represented value of nominal full-load efficiency must satisfy the condition: Step 9. Compute the standard error ¯ (SE(X2)) of the mean full-load efficiency of the n1 and n2 units in the combined first and second samples as follows: EP24JN16.008</GPH> EP24JN16.009</GPH> § 429.138 Step 4. Compute the standard error ¯ (SE(X1)) of the mean full-load efficiency of the first sample as follows: EP24JN16.007</GPH> 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. (9) For the purposes of this section, available units are those that are available for distribution in commerce within the United States. ■ 16. Add § 429.138 to read as follows: 41409 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules Basic model means, with respect to an electric motor, all units of a given type of electric motor (or class thereof) manufactured by a single manufacturer, and which are part of the same equipment class, have electrical characteristics that are essentially identical, and do not have any differing physical or functional characteristics that affect energy consumption or efficiency. * * * * * Equipment class means one of the combinations of an electric motor’s horsepower (or standard kilowatt equivalent), number of poles, and open or enclosed construction, with respect to which § 431.25 prescribes nominal full-load efficiency standards. * * * * * Independent means, in the context of a testing laboratory or certification program, an entity that is not controlled by, or under common control with, electric motor manufacturers, importers, private labelers, or vendors, and that has no affiliation, financial ties, or contractual agreements, apparently or otherwise, with such entities that would: (1) Hinder the ability of the laboratory or program to evaluate fully or report the measured or calculated energy efficiency of any electric motor, or (2) Create any potential or actual conflict of interest that would undermine the validity of said evaluation. * * * * * § 431.14 ■ ■ [Removed] 22. Remove § 431.14. 23. Revise § 431.16 to read as follows: sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 § 431.16 Test procedures for measurement of energy efficiency. For purposes of this part and EPCA, the test procedures for measuring the energy efficiency of an electric motor shall be the test procedures specified in appendix B to this subpart B. For each basic model of electric motor for which a manufacturer wishes to make a representation of the motor’s ability to be installed and operated at multiple voltages, the electric motor must meet each of the energy conservation standards at the voltages for which the manufacturer has claimed it can be installed and operated. ■ 24. Revise § 431.17 to read as follows: § 431.17 Manufacturer identification numbers. (a) For the purposes of compliance with the labeling requirements of 10 CFR 429.76, before an electric motor may be distributed in commerce, DOE must issue a manufacturer identification VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 number (MIN) in accordance with this paragraph for display on the permanent nameplate of each unit of a basic model of electric motor for which part 431 prescribes an energy conservation standard. For purposes of this section, ‘‘original equipment manufacturer’’ (OEM) means the manufacturer that produces or assembles a unit; only one OEM is responsible for the manufacture (production or assembly) of a unit. (b) Issuance of manufacturer identification numbers. (1) Before a certification report is submitted for a basic model, a MIN must be requested from DOE for use with each specific brand name to be listed in the certification report. (2) DOE will provide a unique MIN for each OEM-brand name combination, subject to the following provisions: (i) DOE will not issue a MIN for use with the same brand name if a MIN has already been issued for that combination of OEM and brand name, and (ii) DOE will issue a MIN for use only with a single OEM-brand name combination. (3) Once DOE has issued a MIN for a particular OEM-brand name combination, that MIN shall be the only MIN applicable to all electric motors manufactured by the OEM and labeled under that brand name. (4) A MIN issued by DOE may not be transferred to another entity or used on the nameplates of basic models other than the OEM and brand name associated with the MIN to which DOE initially issued the MIN. (c) Discontinuance of manufacturer identification numbers. In the event the brand name(s) to which a MIN is applicable ceases to be manufactured, the OEM must notify DOE of such discontinuation within 30 days of the discontinuation, after which time the MIN will terminate and be invalid for use on nameplates of electric motors manufactured after such date. (d) Method of submitting requests and notifications. MIN requests required by paragraph (a) of this section or MIN discontinuance notifications required by paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted to DOE either electronically at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (CCMS) or via email to MotorMINRequest@ee.doe.gov. The applicable form for each action online is available at http:// www.regulations.doe.gov/forms. §§ 431.18, 431.19, 431.20, and 431.21 [Removed] 25. Remove §§ 431.18, 431.19, 431.20 and 431.21. ■ PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 26. Section 431.25 is amended by adding paragraph (m) to read as follows: ■ § 431.25 Energy conservation standards and effective dates. * * * * * (m) Rated voltages. A basic model of electric motor for which there are energy conservations standards must comply with such standards at all of the voltages for which the motor is rated by the manufacturer to be used. §§ 431.31 and 431.32 [Removed] 27. Remove §§ 431.31 and 431.32 and the undesignated center heading ‘‘Labeling’’ preceeding them. ■ 28. Revise § 431.35 to read as follows: ■ § 431.35 Applicability of certification requirements. Sections 429.12 and 429.63 of this chapter set forth the procedures for manufacturers to certify that electric motors comply with the applicable energy efficiency standards set forth in this subpart. § 431.36 ■ [Removed] 29. Remove § 431.36. Appendix C to Subpart B of Part 431— [Removed] ■ 30. Remove appendix C to subpart B of part 431. Subpart U—[Removed and Reserved] 31. Remove and reserve subpart U, consisting of §§ 431.381 through 431.387 and appendix A to subpart U of part 431. ■ 32. Amend § 431.442 by: ■ a. Revising the definition of ‘‘Basic model’’; and ■ b. Adding, in alphabetical order, definitions of ‘‘Equipment class’’ and ‘‘Independent.’’ The revisions and additions read as follows: ■ § 431.442 Definitions. * * * * * Basic model means, with respect to a small electric motor, all units of a given type of small electric motor (or class thereof) manufactured by a single manufacturer, and which are part of the same equipment class, have electrical characteristics that are essentially identical, and do not have any differing physical or functional characteristics which affect energy consumption or efficiency. * * * * * Equipment class means one of the combinations of a small electric motor’s type (i.e., capacitor-start capacitor-run, capacitor-start induction-run, or polyphase), horsepower (or standard kilowatt equivalent), and number of E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2 41410 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / Proposed Rules poles, with respect to which § 431.446 prescribes average full-load efficiency standards. * * * * * Independent means, in the context of a testing laboratory or nationally recognized certification program, an entity that is not controlled by or under common control with small electric motor manufacturers, importers, private labelers, or vendors, and that has no affiliation, financial ties, or contractual agreements, apparently or otherwise, with such entities that would: (1) Hinder the ability of the laboratory or program to evaluate fully or report the measured or calculated energy efficiency of any small electric motor, or (2) Create any apparent or actual conflict of interest that would undermine the validity of said evaluation. For purposes of this definition, financial ties or contractual agreements between an electric motor manufacturer, importer, private labeler or vendor and a testing laboratory or certification program exclusively for testing or certification services does not negate an otherwise independent relationship. * * * * * § 431.445 [Removed] 33. Remove § 431.445. 34. Amend § 431.446 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: ■ ■ § 431.446 Small electric motors energy conservation standards and their effective dates. * * * * (c) A small electric motor that is installed as a component of a unit of an sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS2 * VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Jun 23, 2016 Jkt 238001 enumerated type of covered product under 42 U.S.C. 6302(a) or covered equipment under 42 U.S.C. 6311 at the time of distribution in commerce by the small electric motor manufacturer or private labeler is not subject to the standards specified in paragraph (a) of this section. ■ 35. Revise § 431.447 to read as follows: § 431.447 Manufacturer Identification Numbers. (a) For the purposes of compliance with the labeling requirements of 10 CFR 429.76, before a small electric motor may be distributed in commerce, DOE must issue a manufacturer identification number (MIN) in accordance with this paragraph. For purposes of this section, ‘‘original equipment manufacturer’’ (OEM) means the manufacturer that produces or assembles the small electric motor at issue. (b) Issuance of manufacturer identification numbers. (1) Before a certification report is submitted for a basic model, a MIN must be requested from DOE for use with each specific brand name to be listed in the certification report. (2) DOE will provide a unique MIN for each OEM-brand name combination, subject to the following provisions: (i) DOE will not issue a MIN for use with the same brand name if a MIN has already been issued for that combination of OEM and brand name, and (ii) DOE will issue a MIN for use only with a single OEM-brand name combination. PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 (3) Once DOE has issued a MIN for a particular OEM-brand name combination, that MIN shall be the only MIN applicable to all small electric motors manufactured by the OEM and labeled under that brand name. (4) A MIN issued by DOE may not be transferred to another entity or used on the nameplates of basic models other than the OEM associated with the MIN to which DOE initially issued the MIN. (c) Discontinuance of manufacturer identification numbers. In the event the brand name(s) to which a MIN is applicable ceases to manufactured, the OEM must notify DOE of such discontinuation within 30 days of the discontinuation, after which time the MIN will terminate and be invalid for use on nameplates of small electric motors distributed in commerce in the United States. (d) Method of submitting requests and notifications. MIN requests required by paragraph (a) of this section or MIN discontinuance notifications required by paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted to DOE either electronically at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (CCMS) or via email to MotorMINRequest@ee.doe.gov. The applicable form for each action online is available at https:// www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms/forms/. § 431.448 ■ [Removed] 36. Remove § 431.448. [FR Doc. 2016–14479 Filed 6–23–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P E:\FR\FM\24JNP2.SGM 24JNP2

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 122 (Friday, June 24, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41377-41410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14479]



[[Page 41377]]

Vol. 81

Friday,

No. 122

June 24, 2016

Part II





 Department of Energy





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





10 CFR Parts 429 and 431





Energy Conservation Program: Certification, Compliance, Labeling, and 
Enforcement for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors; Proposed 
Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 122 / Friday, June 24, 2016 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 41378]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431

[Docket No. EERE-2014-BT-CE-0019]
RIN 1904-AD25


Energy Conservation Program: Certification, Compliance, Labeling, 
and Enforcement for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'' or the ``Department'') 
is proposing to revise its certification, compliance, and enforcement 
regulations for electric motors and small electric motors to conform to 
the enforcement regulations for all other covered products and 
equipment and to consolidate, to the extent possible, the certification 
and compliance regulations for electric motors and small electric 
motors with those for other types of covered products and equipment. In 
addition to bringing the certification, compliance, and enforcement 
regulations for electric motors and small electric motors under the 
umbrella and general regulatory scheme of DOE's existing certification, 
compliance, and enforcement regulations for other equipment and 
products, this proposal provides specific sampling plans, certification 
of efficiency requirements, independent testing laboratory and 
certification program requirements, and labeling requirements for 
electric motors and small electric motors.

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
NOPR no later than July 25, 2016. See section V, Public Participation, 
for details.

ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the NOPR for 
Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement for Electric Motors and 
Small Electric Motors, and provide docket number EERE-2014-BT-CE-0019 
and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 1904-AD25. 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: MotorsCCE2014CE0019@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, in which case it is not necessary to 
include printed copies.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this 
proposed rule may be submitted to the Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy through the methods listed above and by email to 
Chad_S_Whiteman@omb.eop.gov.
    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: http://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/implementation-certification-and-enforcement. This Web page will contain a link to the docket for this 
notice on the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov site contains 
simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public 
comments, in the docket. See section V for further information on how 
to submit comments through www.regulations.gov.
    For further information on how to submit a comment, or review other 
public comments and the docket, contact Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 
586-2945 or by email: Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building 
Technologies Program, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, 
DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-6590 or 
Ashley.Armstrong@ee.doe.gov.
    Ms. Laura Barhydt, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General 
Counsel, GC-32, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 287-5772 or Email: Laura.Barhydt@hq.doe.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE proposes to incorporate by reference the 
following industry standards into part 429:
    (1) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/IEC Guide 
17025:2005(E), ``General requirements for the competence of calibration 
and testing laboratories,'' Third edition, December 1, 1990;
    (2) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/IEC Guide 27, 
Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification body in 
the event of misuse of its mark of conformity'', First edition, March 
1, 1983;
    (3) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/IEC Guide 
17026:2015, ``Conformity assessment--Example of a certification scheme 
for tangible products,'' First edition, February 1, 2015;
    (4) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), ISO/IEC Guide 
17065:2012, ``Conformity assessment--Requirements for bodies certifying 
products, processes and services,'' First edition, September 15, 2012.
    Copies of these ISO/IEC Guides can be obtained from the 
International Organization for Standardization, Chemin de Blandonnet 8, 
1214 Vernier, Gen[egrave]ve, Switzerland, or by going to http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store.htm.
    See section IV.M for a further discussion of these standards.

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background
II. Summary of the Proposal
    A. Conformance With Existing Certification, Compliance and 
Enforcement Regulations
    B. Changes to Existing Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, 
Enforcement and Labeling Regulations
    C. Changes to Existing Small Electric Motor Regulations
III. Discussion of Specific Revisions and Additions to Electric 
Motor and Small Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, 
Enforcement and Labeling Regulations
    A. General Changes
    B. Compliance Certification Numbers
    C. Electric Motor Certification and Compliance
    1. Certification Testing
    2. Submittal of a Certification Report
    3. Sampling Plan
    4. Certification

[[Page 41379]]

    D. Small Electric Motor Certification and Compliance
    1. Certification testing
    2. Sampling Plan
    3. Certification Reports
    E. Alternative Methods for Determining Energy Efficiency or 
Energy Use
    F. Certification Programs Classified by DOE as Nationally 
Recognized
    1. Petitions for Recognition
    2. DOE Petition for Recognition and Withdrawal
    G. Labeling
    1. Electric Motors
    2. Small Electric Motors
    H. Enforcement Provisions for Electric Motors and Small Electric 
Motors
    1. Prohibited Acts and Remedies
    2. Test Notices
    3. Enforcement Testing
    4. Notices of Noncompliance and Penalties
    I. Other Revisions to Existing Electric Motors Regulations
    J. Other Revisions to Existing Small Electric Motors Regulations
    1. Delayed Compliance Date
    2. Component
IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
    A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
    B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
    C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
    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 the 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 Materials Incorporated by Reference
V. Public Participation
    A. Submission of Comments
    B. 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, as 
amended (``EPCA'' or, in context, ``the Act'') sets forth a variety of 
provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. Part A of Title III 
(42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) provides for the Energy Conservation Program for 
Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles. The National Energy 
Conservation Policy Act (NECPA), Public Law 95-619, amended EPCA to add 
Part B of Title III, which established an energy conservation program 
for certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317) \1\ Included 
among the various equipment types addressed by EPCA \2\ are electric 
and small electric motors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For editorial reasons, Parts B (consumer products) and C 
(commercial equipment) of Title III of EPCA were codified as parts A 
and A-1, respectively, in the United States Code.
    \2\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute 
as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015, 
Public Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As relevant here, DOE's energy conservation program under EPCA 
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.\3\ 
Further, 42 U.S.C. 6299-6305, 6316, and 6317 authorize DOE to enforce 
compliance with the energy conservation standards related to a variety 
of consumer products and commercial equipment, including electric 
motors and small electric motors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The test procedures for electric motors are described in 
appendix B to subpart B of 10 CFR part 431; the test procedures for 
small electric motors are described in 10 CFR 431.444.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This document proposes to move the current compliance- and 
certification-related procedures and requirements for electric motors 
into DOE's regulations at 10 CFR part 429. It also proposes adding 
product-specific provisions for small electric motors at 10 CFR part 
429.
    The provisions related to the compliance, certification, and 
enforcement (``CCE'') of electric motors in this proposal are based on 
the existing compliance certification procedures for electric motors. 
Under 42 U.S.C. 6316(c), DOE must require manufacturers of electric 
motors for which energy conservation standards are established at 42 
U.S.C. 6313(b) to certify, through an ``independent testing or 
certification program nationally recognized in the United States'' that 
those electric motors meet the applicable standard. DOE codified this 
requirement by developing a regulatory process for laboratory 
accreditation (for independent testing) and for the recognition and 
withdrawal of recognition for certification programs nationally 
recognized in the U.S. Under 10 CFR 431.17(a)(5), a manufacturer can 
establish compliance either through: (1) A certification program that 
DOE has classified as nationally recognized,\4\ or (2) testing in an 
accredited laboratory for which the accreditation body was the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology/National Voluntary Laboratory 
Accreditation Program (``NIST/NVLAP''), a laboratory accreditation body 
having a mutual recognition arrangement with NIST/NVLAP, or an 
organization classified by DOE as an accreditation body pursuant to 10 
CFR 431.19. Existing DOE regulations detail the certification program 
national recognition process at 10 CFR 431.20-431.21 and laboratory 
accreditation at 10 CFR 431.18-431.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ To date, DOE has only classified Canadian Standards 
Association (CSA) and Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL) as 
certification programs nationally recognized in the U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 4, 2012, DOE published certain compliance testing 
regulations for small electric motors. See 77 FR 26608 (``2012 test 
procedure'') (codified at 10 CFR 431.445, 431.447, 431.448). Under 
these regulations, manufacturers of small electric motors have the 
option of self-certifying the efficiency of their small electric motors 
or using a certification program nationally recognized in the U.S. to 
certify the efficiency of these motors. See 10 CFR 431.445. In the 2012 
test procedure, DOE noted that there were no existing certification 
programs for small electric motors. 77 FR at 26630. Since then, DOE has 
recognized two certification programs for small electric motors. See 78 
FR 72077 (December 2, 2013) (recognition of UL) and 79 FR 24700 (May 1, 
2014) (recognition of CSA). DOE also noted in the 2012 test procedure 
that it would work with NIST/NVLAP on small electric motor laboratory 
accreditation programs. See 77 FR at 26630.
    EPCA sets different labeling requirements for electric motors and 
small electric motors. For electric motors in general, EPCA directed 
DOE to prescribe labeling requirements, taking into consideration NEMA 
Standards Publication MG1-1987. (42 U.S.C. 6315(d)) Consistent with 
this requirement, DOE established labeling requirements for electric 
motors on October 5, 1999 (October 1999 final rule). See 64 FR 54114. 
In contrast, although EPCA directs DOE to prescribe labeling 
requirements for those small electric motors for which the Secretary of 
Energy has prescribed energy efficiency standards, the statute does not 
require DOE to consider MG1-1987. (42 U.S.C. 6317(d))

[[Page 41380]]

II. Summary of the Proposal

    This proposal seeks to revise DOE's certification and enforcement 
regulations for electric motors and small electric motors to encourage 
compliance, achieve energy savings, and help ensure a fair and 
equitable competitive field among all manufacturers. As summarized 
below, the proposal would conform the existing CCE requirements for 
electric motors to the same structure and substance already used with 
respect to DOE's CCE regulations found at 10 CFR part 429 for all other 
consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment. It also 
proposes the use of product-specific sampling plans and certification 
mechanisms for electric motors.
    For small electric motors, this proposal also provides product-
specific sampling plans and certification mechanisms. DOE is proposing 
to adopt labeling requirements for small electric motors similar to 
those for electric motors.

A. Conformance With Existing Certification, Compliance and Enforcement 
Regulations

    This proposal would make the provisions for electric motors and 
small electric motors consistent with the general provisions already in 
place for all other EPCA-covered products and equipment found in 10 CFR 
part 429, subpart A (general provisions), subpart B (certification), 
and subpart C (enforcement). The proposed rule would: (1) Move and 
amend certification testing, sampling, and certification provisions 
specific to electric motors, (2) move the sampling and certification 
testing provisions specific to small electric motors, and (3) add 
certification provisions specific to small electric motors.
    This proposal would also add new paragraphs (h) and (i) to 10 CFR 
429.70, which would address the use of alternative methods for 
determining energy efficiency or energy use (also known as alternative 
efficiency determination methods, or ``AEDMs'') for electric motors and 
small electric motors. The proposal would move and amend existing AEDM 
provisions for electric motors and for small electric motors. The 
proposal would move and amend the administrative process for 
recognizing certification programs to new sections 10 CFR 429.73 and 
429.75. The proposal would add an administrative process for 
recognizing testing laboratories, either directly or through 
recognition of accreditation organizations, to new sections 10 CFR 
429.74 and 429.75. Finally, the proposed rule would move the electric 
motor labeling requirements from 10 CFR 431.31 to a new 10 CFR 429.76 
and add labeling requirements for small electric motors. The proposal 
also would add a definition for ``independent'' to describe how DOE 
evaluates the independence of testing laboratories and certification 
programs. The proposed definition of the term ``independent'' would 
replace the currently defined term ``independent laboratory'' found at 
10 CFR 431.2.
    Finally, the proposed rule would amend the procedures applicable to 
electric motor and small electric motor manufacturers and private 
labelers who are involved in an enforcement action with DOE by applying 
the process already codified at 10 CFR part 429, subpart C. DOE notes 
that it anticipates publishing in the near future a notice of proposed 
rulemaking to amend part 429 for all products, which could impact the 
proposals in this rule. Therefore, for the purposes of this proposed 
rule, the Department is only soliciting comments on 10 CFR part 429 as 
it pertains to electric motors. DOE is not re-opening the application 
of part 429 as it pertains to manufacturers of any other covered 
product or equipment.

B. Changes to Existing Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, 
Enforcement and Labeling Regulations

    This proposal would retain the subpart that separately addresses 
test methodology and standards for electric motors (10 CFR part 431, 
subpart B).
    Regarding the definitions applicable to electric motors in Sec.  
431.12, the proposal would revise the current ``basic model'' 
definition as applied to electric motors to more closely align with the 
definition used for other DOE-regulated products and equipment, add a 
definition for ``equipment class'' to accompany the ``basic model'' 
definition, and remove definitions related to accreditation as a result 
of the proposed changes regarding laboratory accreditation. The 
proposal would also address how to treat electric motors that are 
capable of operation at voltages other than 230 or 460 volts with 
respect to testing and representations of energy efficiency. Finally, 
the current CCE and labeling provisions for electric motors would be 
removed from 10 CFR part 431, subpart B. More specifically, the current 
Subpart U would be removed and reserved so that all CCE and labeling 
requirements for electric motors would be located together in 10 CFR 
part 429.

C. Changes to Existing Small Electric Motor Regulations

    This proposal would retain the subpart that addresses standards and 
the testing methodology for small electric motors (10 CFR part 431, 
subpart X). The provisions addressing sampling of units for testing, 
including sampling statistics, test facility requirements, and the 
certification requirements, are being addressed in this rule.
    For the definitions applicable to small electric motors in Sec.  
431.442, this proposal would revise the existing definition of ``basic 
model'' to more closely align with the definition used for other DOE-
regulated products and equipment, and add a definition for ``equipment 
class'' to accompany the ``basic model'' definition. Finally, the 
proposal would amend 10 CFR 431.446 to explain how DOE would apply the 
exemption for small electric motors that are installed in another type 
of covered product or equipment.

III. Discussion of Specific Revisions and Additions to Electric Motor 
and Small Electric Motor Certification, Compliance, Enforcement and 
Labeling Regulations

    In this portion of the notice, DOE details all of the new and 
amended provisions of this proposed rule. DOE proposes to both amend 
and add new sections to 10 CFR part 429 and to remove or amend portions 
of 10 CFR part 431, subparts B, U, and X. These proposed changes are 
discussed separately below.

A. General Changes

    In addition to the reorganization described in detail later in this 
document, this proposal would change the existing electric motor 
regulations at 10 CFR part 431, subpart B in several ways. The portions 
of the existing electric motor regulations that pertain to 
certification, compliance, and enforcement would be amended and moved 
to 10 CFR part 429. It would also amend other sections of 10 CFR part 
431, subpart B to ensure the regulatory structure comprising 10 CFR 
part 431, subpart B and 10 CFR part 429 remains coherent. This proposal 
would also amend the ``Purpose and Scope'' in Sec.  431.11 by removing 
references to labeling and compliance, which this proposal would 
address in part 429.
    Additionally, the existing definition of ``basic model'' would 
become similar to the definitions used for other DOE-regulated products 
and equipment and would eliminate an ambiguity found in the current 
regulation. The definition currently specifies that basic models of

[[Page 41381]]

electric motors are all units of a given type manufactured by the same 
manufacturer, which have the same rating, and have electrical 
characteristics that are essentially identical, and do not have any 
differing physical or functional characteristics that affect energy 
consumption or efficiency. (10 CFR 431.12) For the purposes of this 
definition, the term ``rating'' is specified to mean one of 113 
combinations of horsepower, poles, and open or enclosed construction. 
(See id.) The reference to 113 combinations dates from the Department's 
implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPACT 1992'') (Pub. 
L. 102-486), which set initial standards for motors based on that 
categorization. Since then, EISA 2007 and DOE's regulations have 
established standards for additional motor categories. See 10 CFR 
431.25. To clarify that the concept of a ``basic model'' reflects the 
categorization in effect under the prevailing standard, as it stands 
today and as it may evolve in future rulemakings, the proposed rule 
would refer only to the combinations of horsepower (or standard 
kilowatt equivalent), number of poles, and open or enclosed 
construction for which 10 CFR 431.25 prescribes standards; it would 
drop the current reference to 113 such combinations.
    In addition, the proposal would modify the basic model definition 
for electric motors by replacing the ``rating'' term with the term 
``equipment class,'' which also would be defined. The term ``equipment 
class'' would have a meaning similar to the notion of ``rating'' in the 
current regulation but, as noted, would clearly encompass the full 
range of equipment classes for which DOE ultimately sets standards. It 
will also limit confusion between the use of the term ``rating'' in 
this specific case and the use of the term as it applies to represented 
values of other individual characteristics of an electric motor, such 
as its rated horsepower, voltage, torque, or energy efficiency.\5\ The 
proposed basic model definition would retain the current language about 
a ``basic model'' having essentially identical electrical 
characteristics without any differing physical or functional 
characteristics that affect energy consumption or efficiency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In this document, DOE uses the verb ``to rate'' to refer to 
a manufacturer determining a value through measurements or use of an 
AEDM and then setting the represented value for that characteristic. 
Any use of the term ``rating'' to refer to the combination of 
characteristics under the current basic model definition will be 
clearly identified. All other occurrences of ``rating'' refer to a 
manufacturer's rated (i.e., represented) values. A rated or 
represented value is the value that the manufacturer uses in its 
marketing, labeling, and certification of compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the existing small electric motor regulations at 10 CFR 
part 431, subpart X would be changed by this proposed rule in several 
ways. The portions of the existing small electric motor regulations 
that pertain to certification testing would be amended and moved to 10 
CFR part 429. This proposal would amend or remove other sections of 10 
CFR part 431, subpart X to ensure coherence between 10 CFR part 431, 
subpart X and 10 CFR part 429.
    As with electric motors, for small electric motors, this proposal 
would revise the existing definition of ``basic model'' to make it 
similar to the definitions used for other DOE-regulated products and 
equipment. The existing ``basic model'' definition found at 10 CFR 
431.442 would remain largely intact except the proposal would replace 
the term ``rating'' and its definition in the current regulations with 
the term ``equipment class'' and its accompanying definition. The 
current language about a ``basic model'' having essentially identical 
electrical characteristics without any differing physical or functional 
characteristics that affect energy consumption or efficiency is 
retained in the proposed ``basic model'' definition.
    The proposal would add a new definition for ``equipment class'' 
under 10 CFR 431.442. Similar to the ``ratings'' concept currently in 
DOE's ``basic model'' definition, each small electric motor ``equipment 
class'' would be the combination of each small electric motor group 
(i.e., capacitor-start, capacitor-run; capacitor-start, induction-run; 
or polyphase), horsepower (or standard kilowatt equivalent), and number 
of poles, for which 10 CFR 431.446 prescribes average full-load 
efficiency standards.

B. Compliance Certification Numbers

    This proposed rule would replace the currently used compliance 
certification (``CC'') number for electric motors with a new 
Manufacturer's Identification Number (``MIN''). Under current DOE 
regulations at 10 CFR 431.36(c), electric motor manufacturers must 
obtain a compliance certification number (``CC number'') to affix to 
the permanent nameplate of an electric motor for which standards are 
prescribed under 10 CFR 431.25. A CC number is a unique number assigned 
by DOE for any brand name, trademark, or other label name under which a 
manufacturer or private labeler distributes covered electric motors and 
for which the manufacturer or private labeler submits compliance 
certifications to DOE under 10 CFR 431.36. While the CC number is 
unique to a specific manufacturer or private labeler's brand name, 
trademark, or other label name, it is not unique to individual basic 
models and does not uniquely identify the original equipment 
manufacturer (``OEM'').
    DOE has determined that the current system has certain 
disadvantages, including the inability to trace a unit back to a 
specific OEM. Nonetheless, the use of such a numbering system, where 
the numbers are unique to brand and manufacturer combinations, would 
enable DOE to readily identify the OEM for a given unit, which would 
facilitate DOE enforcement of applicable energy conservation standards. 
Without sufficient information identifying the OEM and brand name for 
covered electric motors, DOE can neither efficiently ascertain whether 
a manufacturer or private labeler has certified compliance for a given, 
covered electric motor, nor necessarily identify the responsible 
parties when responding to third-party claims that a given, covered 
electric motor does not comply with applicable energy conservation 
standards. The currently used CC numbers are not assigned on this basis 
and cannot provide this requisite information. By using the MIN system 
proposed in this document, DOE seeks to remedy this problem. The MIN 
system would require a single party (such as an OEM or a private 
labeler) to first request and obtain from DOE a MIN that would be 
listed in the certification report and stamped on the nameplate of a 
covered electric motor before its distribution in commerce.
    Under the proposed version of 10 CFR 431.17, DOE would provide a 
unique MIN for each OEM-brand name combination. The term ``original 
equipment manufacturer'' or ``OEM'' would be defined as the 
manufacturer that produces or assembles an electric motor covered by a 
certification of compliance. DOE would issue a MIN for use only with a 
single OEM-brand name combination. No overlap with other OEM-brand name 
combinations would be permitted. In other words, once DOE has issued a 
MIN for a particular OEM-brand name combination, that MIN will be the 
only MIN applicable to those electric motors manufactured by that OEM 
and labeled under that brand name. Further, in the event the brand name 
to which a MIN is applicable is discontinued, the OEM would notify DOE 
within 30 days of the discontinuance, after which time the MIN would 
become invalid for use on any newly produced units. As described in the 
proposed Sec.  431.17(b)(4), the MIN

[[Page 41382]]

could not be transferred to another entity or used on the nameplates of 
basic models manufactured by an OEM other than the OEM associated with 
the MIN. In accordance with the proposed Sec.  431.17(d), MIN requests 
would be submitted to DOE either electronically at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms or via email at: 
MotorMINRequest@ee.doe.gov.
    For small electric motors, due to the significant volume of 
manufacturer-basic model combinations in today's small electric motor 
market and that market's dynamic nature, DOE is proposing that small 
electric motor manufacturers also must first request and obtain from 
DOE a MIN for use with each specific OEM-brand name combination before 
distributing a covered small electric motor in commerce. As described 
in detail previously for electric motors, under the proposed 10 CFR 
431.447, DOE would provide a unique MIN for each OEM-brand name 
combination. Although the process for manufacturers of small electric 
motors to obtain a MIN would be the same, DOE is proposing to issue 
different MINs for electric motor manufacturer-brand name combinations 
and small electric motor manufacturer-brand name combinations. In other 
words, there would be no overlapping MINs because different MINs would 
be used with each manufacturer-brand combination for electric motors 
and small electric motors--with each small electric motor manufacturer 
having a unique MIN that is separate from each electric motor 
manufacturer MIN.
    DOE requests comments on this proposal, particularly with respect 
to the amount of time needed for manufacturers to transition to MINs. 
DOE also requests comment regarding whether the OEM-brand relationship 
is confidential business information, and whether a list of MINs and 
associated OEMs and brands should be posted on DOE's Certification 
Compliance Management System (``CCMS'') Web site. DOE also requests 
comment on whether, if the OEM-brand relationship is confidential 
business information, the brand-MIN listing should be published. To 
evaluate whether the OEM-brand relationship is confidential business 
information, DOE specifically requests comment on whether the OEM-brand 
relationship is held in confidence by the OEM, private labeler, and 
importer; whether the OEM-brand relationship is available in public 
sources; whether disclosure of the information is likely to cause 
substantial harm to the competitive position of the OEM, private 
labeler, or importer; and the nature of that harm.
    DOE is proposing that a MIN may not be transferred to another 
entity. DOE requests comment regarding how much time would be required 
to transition a MIN on a nameplate to a new MIN if an OEM were acquired 
by another company or underwent some other corporate reorganization 
that would require the assignment and use of a new MIN.

C. Electric Motor Certification and Compliance

    This proposal would amend sections of 10 CFR part 429 by removing 
language that currently excludes electric motors from coverage under 
this part. Part 429 includes subpart A (General Provisions), subpart B 
(Certification), and subpart C (Enforcement). After the proposed 
removal of this exclusionary language, part 429 would apply to all 
covered products and equipment, including electric motors and small 
electric motors.
    DOE requests comment on this proposed change, which would impact 
the certification and enforcement procedures applicable to electric 
motor manufacturers and private labelers. These changes, as well as 
changes to labeling and sampling provisions, are discussed in the 
subsections that follow.
1. Certification Testing
    As described in section I of this proposed rule, DOE codified at 10 
CFR 431.17(a)(5) the statutory requirement prescribing that 
manufacturers must certify electric motors as compliant with the 
applicable standard through the use of an ``independent testing or 
certification program nationally recognized in the United States.'' (42 
U.S.C. 6316(c)) In its October 1999 final rule establishing 
certification, labeling and test procedures for electric motors, DOE 
explained that testing conducted in a laboratory accredited by a body 
such as NIST/NVLAP would satisfy the ``independent testing'' 
requirement under the statute. 64 FR 54124. The accreditation 
requirements applicable to testing laboratories for electric motors are 
at 10 CFR 431.18, and the specific provisions for DOE recognition of 
accreditation bodies are at 10 CFR 431.19. DOE has found through 
examination of certification information submitted by manufacturers 
that most independent testing laboratories that currently conduct 
electric motor efficiency testing are accredited by NIST/NVLAP. Among 
the manufacturers that did not appear to use a NIST/NVLAP accredited 
laboratory, nearly all appear to have used a certification program 
classified by DOE as nationally recognized. Because manufacturers are 
not currently required to report the specific laboratory or 
certification program that was used for their testing, DOE typically 
does not receive this information. Accordingly, DOE has reached these 
conclusions based on communications with manufacturers and other 
information submitted concurrently with certifications of compliance, 
such as test reports.
    Laboratories accredited by NIST/NVLAP are governed by the National 
Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program ``Procedures and General 
Requirements'' NIST Handbook 150-10 (February 2007) and Lab Bulletin 
LB-42-009. (See 10 CFR 431.18(b).) NIST Handbook 150-10 (via 
incorporation by reference of ``Procedures and General Requirements'' 
NIST Handbook 150 (February 2006)) describes the level of independence 
that a laboratory must have in relation to the organization for which 
it is conducting testing. The requirements include organizational 
arrangements that are necessary for in-house laboratories and 
additional levels of independence that must be demonstrated for third-
party laboratories.
    An organization can petition DOE to be classified as a nationally 
recognized certification program. (See 10 CFR 431.20(a)) DOE evaluates 
such petitions based on several criteria, including: (1) The standards 
and procedures for conducting and administering a certification 
program; (2) independence from electric motor manufacturers, importers, 
distributors, private labelers or vendors; (3) the qualifications to 
operate the certification system; and (4) expertise in the DOE's 
electric motor test procedures. 10 CFR 431.20(b). After a petition is 
submitted, DOE publishes the petition in the Federal Register and 
solicits comments on whether the petition should be granted, after 
which the petitioner has the option of responding to any adverse 
comments before DOE announces an interim determination, followed by a 
final determination. 10 CFR 431.21. The Department can also withdraw 
recognition if DOE believes that the certification program is failing 
to meet the above-referenced criteria. A recognized program may also 
voluntarily withdraw its program from recognition. (See 10 CFR 
431.21(g).) Since the October 1999 final rule, DOE has recognized two 
organizations as nationally recognized certification programs, CSA 
Group (``CSA'') and UL Verification Services (``UL''), both of which 
were recognized in final determinations published on December

[[Page 41383]]

27, 2002. See 67 FR 79480 and 67 FR 79490.
    Consistent with the requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6316(c), this 
proposal continues to offer the option of using an independent testing 
or certification program nationally recognized in the U.S. However, DOE 
is proposing to add further specificity regarding which parties can 
test electric motors and certify compliance with the applicable energy 
conservation standards to DOE. This proposal provides three options in 
this regard: (1) A manufacturer can have the electric motor tested 
using a testing program that is nationally recognized in the United 
States (as described in Sec.  429.74 of this proposal) and then certify 
on its own behalf or have a third party submit the manufacturer's 
certification report; (2) a manufacturer can test the electric motor at 
a testing laboratory other than a testing program that is nationally 
recognized and then have a certification program that is nationally 
recognized in the United States (as described in Sec.  429.73 of this 
proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor; or (3) a 
manufacturer can use an alternative efficiency determination method 
(``AEDM,'' discussed in section III.E of this proposed rule) and then 
have a third-party certification program that is nationally recognized 
in the United States (as described in Sec.  429.73 of this proposal) 
certify the efficiency of the electric motor. These options are 
included in the proposed testing and sampling provisions applicable to 
electric motors in Sec.  429.63. Under this regulatory structure, a 
manufacturer cannot both test in its own laboratories and directly 
submit the certification of compliance to DOE for its own electric 
motors.
    This document proposes a definition for ``independent'' that would 
pertain to the testing program evaluation criteria and the 
certification program evaluation criteria as described in the proposed 
Sec. Sec.  429.74(c) and (d) and 429.73(c) and (d), respectively. The 
term, ``independent,'' would refer to an entity that is not controlled 
by, or under common control with, electric motor manufacturers, 
importers, private labelers, or vendors. Control, for these purposes, 
would mean ownership of or the power to vote 25 percent of the shares 
of any single class of securities of a company, or the power to control 
the election of a majority of directors of a company. ``Independent'' 
would also mean that the testing laboratory has no affiliation or 
financial ties or contractual agreements, apparently or otherwise, with 
such entities that would: (1) Hinder the ability of the laboratory to 
evaluate fully or report the measured or calculated energy efficiency 
of any electric motor, or (2) create any potential or actual conflict 
of interest that would undermine the validity of said evaluation. This 
definition is largely based on the descriptions of independence 
currently in 10 CFR 431.19(b)(2) and 431.19(c)(2).
    In the existing regulations, DOE addresses the requirement to use 
an independent testing program nationally recognized in the United 
States by requiring that testing laboratories be accredited by NIST/
NVLAP, a laboratory accreditation program having a mutual recognition 
program with NIST/NVLAP, or an organization classified by DOE as an 
accreditation body. 10 CFR 431.18. DOE is proposing to revise these 
requirements by creating a system by which testing programs may attain 
recognition, similar to the existing provisions for certification 
programs. In DOE's view, a key criterion for a testing program to 
receive recognition will be demonstrating independence, as previously 
described. Another criterion will be demonstrating the ability to 
perform testing in accordance with the DOE test procedure, which may or 
may not be adequately reflected through accreditation.\6\ Accordingly, 
DOE proposes to remove the definitions of ``accreditation,'' 
``accreditation body,'' ``accreditation system,'' and ``accredited 
laboratory'' from 10 CFR 431.12. Further, DOE proposes to remove the 
definition of ``independent laboratory'' from 10 CFR 431.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Accreditation means recognition by an accreditation body 
that a laboratory is competent to test the efficiency of electric 
motors according to the scope and procedures given in the Test 
Method B of IEEE Std 112-2004 and CSA 390-10. See 10 CFR 431.12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE believes that ``independent'' as defined in this proposed rule 
is a more appropriate interpretation of the statutory language found in 
42 U.S.C. 6316(c) than the agency's prior application of this 
provision. The 1999 rule assumed that a laboratory could be 
meaningfully independent, in a way that would satisfy the statutory 
criterion, while being owned by a manufacturer, so long as the 
laboratory was NIST/NVLAP certified. In light of experience since that 
time, DOE is concerned that this premise is not justified. Testing at a 
manufacturer's own laboratory allows the opportunity for a manufacturer 
to gain a competitive advantage by administering the testing in such a 
manner that could yield better results. It also further exacerbates the 
differential treatment between those businesses that are financially 
able to own their own test facilities and small businesses that may not 
have the capital to afford such large investments. Of course, a 
reasonable contract under which an otherwise independent laboratory 
conducts a test would not, on its own, cause the laboratory not to be 
independent of the manufacturer.
    In this proposal, DOE also allows for the option of testing in a 
manufacturer's own laboratory if the manufacturer uses a third-party 
certification program, as described above. DOE believes this 
combination of the three options explained above to determine the 
efficiency and losses for electric motors subject to DOE's test 
procedures and standards provides manufacturers with the most 
flexibility while satisfying the statute. DOE recognizes that the 
concerns expressed in the rulemaking that culminated in the October 
1999 final rule may still apply. See, e.g., 61 FR 60455-60456 (November 
27, 1996). At that time, DOE noted that there were few test facilities 
that could meet this level of independence and noted the concerns of 
commenters that test facilities could not handle the necessary volume 
of testing given the potential for ``thousands'' of basic models. 
Nonetheless, DOE believes that the proposed change should have little 
practical impact on manufacturers' current practices due to the volume 
of motors rated using AEDMs and/or through participation in 
certification programs. DOE understands that most models are rated 
based on modeling and thus will be subject to the AEDM provisions, 
which are virtually unchanged by this proposal.
    Instead, the changes should provide more clarity to manufacturers 
about the testing required, which should increase the consistency 
between representations based on the three testing options discussed in 
the next section. DOE does not expect these changes to have any impact 
on manufacturer ratings (i.e., energy efficiency representations) or 
compliance, because, in principle, an independent testing laboratory 
(under the proposed definition of ``independent'') should obtain 
measurements for a given sample of motors similar to those an in-house 
NIST/NVLAP-certified laboratory would have reached.
2. Submittal of a Certification Report
    As stated above, under this proposal, a manufacturer of electric 
motors regulated under 10 CFR part 431 would have three options when 
testing and certifying compliance with energy conservation standards: 
(1) A manufacturer can have the electric motor tested using a testing 
program that is nationally recognized in the

[[Page 41384]]

United States (as described in Sec.  429.74 of this proposal) and then 
certify on its own behalf or have a third party submit the 
manufacturer's certification report; (2) a manufacturer can test the 
electric motor at a testing laboratory other than a testing program 
that is nationally recognized and then have a certification program 
that is nationally recognized in the United States (as described in 
Sec.  429.73 of this proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric 
motor; or (3) a manufacturer can use an alternative efficiency 
determination method (``AEDM,'' discussed in section III.E of this 
proposed rule) and then have a third-party certification program that 
is nationally recognized in the United States (as described in Sec.  
429.73 of this proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor.
    A manufacturer that chooses the first option must have its electric 
motors tested through a testing program that is nationally recognized 
under the proposed provisions of 10 CFR 429.74. Under this first 
option, after a manufacturer retains an independent testing laboratory 
to conduct electric motor testing, the manufacturer can use those test 
results to certify compliance to DOE itself or through a third-party 
representative, or the manufacturer may still choose to employ the 
services of a nationally recognized certification program.
    A manufacturer using a nationally recognized testing program may 
use a third-party representative to complete certification reports on 
its behalf under the certification provisions at Sec.  429.12(g) and 
(h). A third-party representative may be any party authorized by the 
manufacturer to complete the reports on the manufacturer's behalf; 
common third-party representatives are foreign OEMs and private testing 
laboratories. The third-party representative would certify the accuracy 
of the information it submits but is only performing the ministerial 
function of completing the report. A manufacturer using a testing 
program could employ the services of a certification program that is 
nationally recognized in the United States (under the proposed Sec.  
429.73) to submit the certification reports for the manufacturer. In 
that situation, the certification program would be acting as a third-
party representative and may or may not be employed by the manufacturer 
to certify the compliance of the motors (i.e., issue a certificate of 
conformity).
    A manufacturer that chooses the second option tests its electric 
motors at the manufacturer's own testing laboratory or at any other 
testing laboratory that does not meet the proposed definition of 
``independent.'' In DOE's view, a supervised witness test at a 
manufacturer-owned laboratory does not meet the proposed definition of 
independent because the lab has financial ties to the manufacturer and 
would, therefore, fall under the second option. The manufacturer would 
employ a certification program that is nationally recognized in the 
United States (under the proposed Sec.  429.73) to certify the 
efficiency of the electric motor basic models. The petition process and 
requirements for DOE to recognize third-party certification programs as 
nationally recognized in the U.S. would be part of new sections 10 CFR 
429.73 and 429.75, and are more fully discussed in section III.F of 
this proposed rule.
    A manufacturer that chooses the third option would conduct its 
testing to validate its AEDM at any testing laboratory. The 
manufacturer would apply the AEDM to determine the efficiency of its 
basic models, as long as the AEDM regulations are followed, but would 
be required to employ a third-party certification program that is 
nationally recognized in the United States to certify the efficiency of 
the electric motor basic models to DOE.
    Under all three options, a manufacturer must itself certify to DOE 
the compliance of each basic model of the motors it manufactures and 
distributes in commerce in the U.S. As discussed in the October 1999 
final rule, the statute requires a manufacturer to certify the 
compliance to DOE. That certification, in turn, must be based on the 
use of a nationally recognized, independent testing program or a 
nationally recognized certification program. A nationally recognized 
certification program would verify the reliability of testing, such as 
by reviewing a laboratory's protocols and procedures. But the 
nationally recognized certification program would not necessarily 
itself make the declaration to DOE that a manufacturer's motor complies 
with the applicable standard or has a given efficiency. The 
manufacturer itself remains responsible for stating that declaration, 
either directly or through a representative authorized to do so. See 64 
FR at 54124 (October 5, 1999).
    DOE anticipates that manufacturers using certification programs may 
often authorize their certification programs to provide the necessary 
declarations on their behalf. Indeed, some manufacturers may not often 
want to submit certifications directly. Nevertheless, DOE seeks comment 
regarding the conditions under which DOE should accept a certification 
submitted directly by a manufacturer that used a certification program 
to fulfill the certification testing requirements. DOE also requests 
comment regarding whether DOE should, in those cases, require the 
certification report to include a certificate of conformity or whether 
DOE should only require the certification report to identify the 
certification program used (with a certificate of conformity available 
from the certification program upon request by DOE).
    DOE proposes conforming changes to 10 CFR part 431, including 
removal of existing provisions regarding the determination of 
efficiency (10 CFR 431.17), testing laboratories (10 CFR 431.18), DOE 
recognition of accreditation bodies (10 CFR 431.19), DOE recognition of 
certification programs (10 CFR 431.20), and procedures for the 
withdrawal of recognition for accreditation bodies and certification 
programs (10 CFR 431.21). The new provisions regarding certification of 
efficiency and associated requirements would be addressed in 10 CFR 
429.63 (certification of electric motors), 429.70 (AEDMs), 429.73 
(requirements for certification programs), and 429.74 (requirements for 
testing programs) and 429.75 (procedures related to independent testing 
programs and certification programs). DOE also proposes to remove 10 
CFR 431.14, as the reference citations were provided solely for 
convenience.
    DOE seeks comments on the three proposed options for manufacturers 
to use when conducting certification testing for electric motor 
compliance with energy conservation standards.
3. Sampling Plan
    The current sampling requirements for electric motors were 
established through the October 1999 final rule. 64 FR at 54129. The 
current regulations require that each basic model must either be tested 
or rated using an AEDM. (10 CFR 431.17(a)) Sec.  431.17 goes on to 
specify the requirements for use of an AEDM, including requirements for 
substantiation (i.e., the initial validation) and verification of an 
AEDM. Those requirements ensure the accuracy and reliability of the 
AEDM both prior to use and then through ongoing verification checks on 
the estimated efficiency. (10 CFR 431.17(a)(4)) This verification can 
be achieved in one of three ways: through participation in a 
certification program; by additional, periodic testing in an 
independent lab; or by verification by a professional engineer. (10 CFR

[[Page 41385]]

431.17(a)(4)) For basic models that are not rated with an AEDM, 
paragraph (a)(5) of Sec.  431.17 explains that a manufacturer may 
choose between either having a certification program certify a basic 
model's efficiency or conducting testing in an accredited laboratory. 
(10 CFR 431.17(a)(5)) It also explains that the motors tested to 
substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM must either be in a certification 
program or must have been tested in an accredited laboratory.
    Paragraph (b) of 10 CFR 431.17 provides further clarity regarding 
testing if a certification program is not used. Paragraph (b)(1) 
explains the criteria for selecting basic models (in an accredited 
laboratory) for certification testing and to substantiate (i.e., 
validate) an AEDM. (See 10 CFR 431.17(b)(1), (b)(3)) Paragraph (b)(2) 
provides the criteria for selecting units for testing, including a 
minimum sample size of 5 units in most cases. For manufacturers using 
AEDMs, paragraph (b)(2) applies to those basic models selected for 
substantiating (i.e., validating) the AEDM. (See 10 CFR 431.17(b)(2) 
and (3)) For manufacturers testing each basic model, paragraph (b)(2) 
applies to each basic model. (For manufacturers using a certification 
program, these selection and sampling requirements are specified in the 
certification program's operational documents.)
Rated Efficiency
    Before distribution in commerce, electric motors manufacturers and 
private labelers of electric motors subject to energy conservation 
standards must submit a Compliance Certification to the Department that 
includes, among other things, a nominal full-load efficiency for each 
basic model. Provisions for determining a basic model's efficiency 
through testing or with an AEDM are currently described in 10 CFR 
431.17. Included in this section are provisions to verify the nominal 
full-load efficiency of a basic model for which a certification program 
is not used. As part of these requirements, a sample (in most cases, 
five or more) must be tested for each basic model. The results of that 
sample are then evaluated to ensure that the average measured full-load 
efficiency of the sample is no less than a prescribed margin from the 
represented nominal full-load efficiency of the basic model, where the 
margin is part of a mathematical formula described in Sec.  
431.17(b)(2). The basic model is also evaluated using a second formula 
to verify that the measured efficiency of the least efficient tested 
motor in the sample is no less than a prescribed margin from the 
represented nominal full-load efficiency. (See 10 CFR 431.17(b).)
    DOE imposes one set of sampling provisions for manufacturers to use 
when rating their products and a second set of sampling provisions for 
DOE to use when evaluating the compliance of those products. The 
sampling provisions for determining a represented value (e.g., nominal 
efficiency) reflect the fact that an important function of represented 
values is to inform prospective purchasers how efficiently various 
products operate. In light of that purpose, DOE designed the regulation 
with respect to the represented value so that purchasers are more 
likely than not to get a unit that actually performs as efficiently as 
advertised. The enforcement statistical formulas are designed to 
determine if a basic model is compliant with the applicable energy 
conservation standard and are weighted in favor of the manufacturer to 
minimize the likelihood of erroneous noncompliance determinations. The 
certification statistical formulas are designed to protect purchasers; 
the enforcement statistical formulas are designed to protect 
manufacturers. DOE emphasizes that not every, individual unit of a 
motor basic model must be at or above the standard; however, the 
represented nominal efficiency must not exceed the population mean. 
NEMA previously stated that DOE's proposed requirement that the average 
efficiency of any sample to not be less than the represented efficiency 
places an unreasonable burden on manufacturers and would require that 
all electric motors be designed to substantially exceed the represented 
value in order to assure that any sample would pass the compliance 
test. (EE-RM-96-400, NEMA, No. 38 at pg. 3) The part 429 requirements 
ensure the tests of each basic model, whether for determining the 
model's efficiency or for the substantiation (i.e., initial validation) 
of an AEDM, are based on a sample of units that is large enough to 
account for reasonable manufacturing variability among individual units 
of the basic model or variability in the test methodology such that the 
test results for the overall sample will be reasonably representative 
of the efficiency of the whole population of production units of that 
basic model. Under these certification statistical formulas, 
manufacturers can increase their sample size to narrow the margin of 
error.
    After reviewing these various provisions for determining 
efficiency, DOE is concerned that its current provisions give rise to 
too high a risk that a manufacturer may state a nominal efficiency for 
a basic model that is greater than the actual population mean for that 
model. In the previous rulemaking, DOE adopted a formula under which a 
manufacturer could represent an efficiency of ``RE'' (i.e., represented 
efficiency) only if the average full load losses of the sample are less 
or equal to 105 percent of the full load losses corresponding to the 
represented value, and if the minimum full load losses are less than or 
equal to 115 percent of the full load losses corresponding to the 
represented value. Because these formulas do not require the average 
full load efficiency of the sample to be at least equal to the 
represented value, DOE is concerned that these formulas create too 
large a likelihood that the average efficiency of a manufacturer's 
production of given basic model will actually be below the model's 
stated efficiency.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The full load losses corresponding to a value of full load 
efficiency (FLE) are equal to the horsepower of the motor multiplied 
by (100/FLE-1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, DOE is proposing to adopt a variety of modifications 
to decrease that likelihood. DOE recognizes that these proposed changes 
might impact the ratings that manufacturers assign to their models and 
whether a given model would be deemed compliant with the standards. 
Whether and how the changes would affect a particular basic model, in 
either of these respects, would depend on the detailed distribution of 
efficiencies for units of that model. That distribution might vary by 
manufacturer or model. Therefore, although NEMA has previously 
represented that the actual population mean for a basic model will 
always be above the rated nominal efficiency (see NEMA, Docket EE-RM-
96-400_Comment_23, p. 1), DOE is proposing to allow manufacturers to 
continue to use the current formulas for determining nominal efficiency 
and compliance until June 1, 2017. These new formulas would be used to 
demonstrate compliance with the standards for which compliance was 
required as of June 1, 2016.
    DOE is proposing to adopt sampling provisions similar to those for 
other types of equipment for certifications of compliance with the 2016 
standards and for representations of efficiency as of June 1, 2017. In 
past comments, NEMA has suggested that these sampling provisions would 
force manufacturers to ``over design'' the performance of their motors. 
See 64 FR 54129. However, if tests on a small sample produce a mean 
sample efficiency that is lower than

[[Page 41386]]

what a manufacturer believes to be the true mean across manufactured 
units, the regulations would permit the manufacturer to enlarge the 
sample. The mean of a larger sample would tend to have smaller 
departures from the population mean.
    Specifically, DOE proposes to adopt a sampling plan for 
certification testing of electric motors similar to those used for 
other consumer products and commercial equipment. Under the proposal, 
the represented efficiency could be no greater than the lesser of the 
arithmetic mean of the tested sample or the lower 97.5 percent one-
tailed confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95. As further 
clarification, to determine the appropriate representative efficiency 
of a basic model, the results of at least five samples would be used to 
calculate both the arithmetic mean and the lower 97.5 percent one-
tailed confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95. These two 
values are compared and whichever is lower creates an upper bound on 
the represented efficiency. For example, if the arithmetic mean is the 
lower value, then the represented efficiency of a basic model must be 
greater than or equal to the standard (the applicable nominal 
efficiency found at 10 CFR 431.25), but no higher than the arithmetic 
mean of the sample. Manufacturers can then determine the nominal full-
load efficiency of a basic model by selecting an efficiency from the 
``nominal efficiency'' column of Table 12-10, NEMA MG1-2009 that is not 
greater than the representative efficiency of the basic model.
    In addition, the general sampling plan provisions at 10 CFR 429.11 
would apply to both electric motors and small electric motors under the 
proposal (with the current minimum number of units per basic model that 
must be tested (five) superseding the general minimum sample size). The 
sampling provisions at 10 CFR 429.11 are also amended to state that if 
fewer than the minimum number of units required for testing is 
manufactured, each unit must be tested.
    DOE proposes to insert the formulas from 10 CFR 431.17(b)(2)(i) and 
(ii) into a new section 10 CFR 429.138, which would contain product-
specific provisions dealing with verification of representations. 
Because part 429 currently does not address any products with labeling 
requirements, DOE has no parallel provisions. This provision would be 
used to evaluate whether a representation is permitted for purposes of 
the prohibited acts related to labeling and representations. See 
section III.H.3 of this proposed rule for discussion.
    Different sampling provisions apply during enforcement testing to 
determine noncompliance with the energy conservation standards. Those 
sampling provisions are discussed in detail in section III.H.3 of this 
proposed rule.
    DOE requests comments on these proposals, specifically the proposed 
confidence intervals.
Use of Certification Programs
    As discussed in section III.F.1 of this proposed rule, DOE is 
proposing to require that any motor rated using an AEDM must be 
certified by a nationally recognized certification program. DOE is 
proposing to make explicit that a certification program must conduct 
ongoing verification testing. DOE requests comment regarding whether 
DOE should more explicitly require specific sampling provisions for use 
in verification testing by certification programs and, if so, what 
those sampling requirements should be.
    DOE is not proposing to change the current requirement to test a 
minimum of five units of a basic model to determine the represented 
efficiency (rating) of the basic model. DOE is also retaining the 
current provision that allows for testing of fewer than five individual 
units of a basic model if fewer than five units will be produced over a 
period of about 180 days, which is intended to address low-volume 
models. However, DOE is clarifying that the smaller sample size is only 
allowed for models rated based on testing (not for models used to 
substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM).
    DOE is also not proposing to change the requirement that at least 
five units of each basic model must be tested to substantiate (i.e., 
validate) an AEDM. These two provisions combined ensure that an AEDM is 
based on testing of at least five units of at least five basic models. 
DOE is not proposing to change the requirements for selection of the 
basic models used to substantiate (i.e., validate) an AEDM but is 
proposing to remove the note: ``[c]omponents of similar design may be 
substituted without requiring additional testing if the represented 
measures of energy consumption continue to satisfy the applicable 
sampling provision'' because the basic model concept permits 
manufacturers to test representative units and group similar models 
without additional testing.
Use of Testing Programs
    Similarly, DOE is not proposing to change the current requirement 
to test a minimum of five units of a basic model to determine the 
represented efficiency (rating) of the basic model. DOE is also 
retaining the current provision that allows for testing of fewer than 
five individual units of a basic model if fewer than five units will be 
produced over a period of about 180 days, which is intended to address 
low-volume models. DOE is clarifying that, if testing is conducted 
through an independent testing program that is nationally recognized, 
then each basic model must be tested.
4. Certification
    While the current regulations in 10 CFR part 431 only require 
electric motor manufacturers to certify compliance before a basic model 
is distributed in commerce for the first time (see 10 CFR 431.36), this 
proposal would also require electric motor manufacturers to certify 
compliance annually. (See 76 FR 12422, 12424-12425 (March 11, 2007) for 
a discussion of the rationale for this change.) Although annual 
certification would be required, additional testing would not be 
required as long as the represented nominal efficiency continued to 
remain valid (e.g., the manufacturer did not make changes to a given 
basic model that would result in a less efficient motor). A 
manufacturer could conduct periodic testing of the basic model as part 
of its quality assurance process, but it would be at the discretion of 
the manufacturer. There would be no requirement to perform additional 
testing (apart from any verification testing requirements associated 
with the use of an AEDM or certification body).
    As part of these proposed changes, DOE would also require electric 
motor manufacturers to certify their products using the more detailed 
certification report at 10 CFR 429.12(b) in place of the current 
certification report described at 10 CFR part 431, appendix C to 
subpart B. Importers, which are manufacturers under EPCA, would be 
required to certify the compliance of the electric motors they import. 
Under the proposed rule, private labelers would no longer be required 
to certify the compliance of the products they label. See 76 FR at 
12427 (March 11, 2007) for a discussion of the rationale for this 
change.
    Currently, DOE's regulations provide a manufacturer with two 
methods for submitting a certification to DOE that its electric motors 
comply with the prescribed energy conservation standards, as identified 
in Sec.  431.36(d): (1) They can submit the certification 
electronically using the Certification Compliance Management System 
(``CCMS'') found at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms; or (2) they 
can submit a hard copy of the

[[Page 41387]]

completed certification form via certified mail. (See 10 CFR part 429, 
subpart B, appendix C (providing an exemplary copy of the certification 
form.))
    In this proposed rule, both 10 CFR 431.36 and 10 CFR part 431, 
appendix C to subpart B would be removed, which would eliminate the 
option of submitting a hard-copy certification report. In place of 
these provisions, the proposed rule would make electric motors subject 
to the general certification report requirements found at 10 CFR 429.12 
and add certification report parameters for electric motors in 
paragraph (c) of the proposed 10 CFR 429.63. The general certification 
report requirements already contained in 10 CFR 429.12 require that, 
before distributing in U.S. commerce any basic model of a covered 
product or equipment subject to standards under EPCA, and annually 
thereafter, each manufacturer must submit a certification report to DOE 
certifying that each basic model meets the applicable energy 
conservation standard. In accordance with 10 CFR 429.12(h), all such 
reports must be submitted to DOE electronically using CCMS. The general 
components of each certification report are listed at 10 CFR 429.12(b) 
and (c) and are similar to the parameters currently reported by 
electric motor manufacturers.
    DOE's current CCE regulations for products and equipment other than 
electric motors require certification of the compliance of each basic 
model (10 CFR 429.12), unlike DOE's current electric motor regulations 
in 10 CFR 431.36, which require the filing of a certification report 
for the least efficient basic model within each ``rating'' (as defined 
at 10 CFR 431.12).\8\ This proposal would require the filing of 
certification reports for all basic models of electric motors. See 10 
CFR 429.12(d). In other words, a manufacturer would need to certify any 
new basic model (but not each individual model) prior to distribution 
in commerce and to file certification reports every year thereafter. 
Discontinued basic models would be required to be reported on the 
annual report when production has ceased and the manufacturer is no 
longer offering the basic model for sale. See 10 CFR 431.12(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Manufacturers are not currently required to certify to DOE 
the compliance of basic models within the same ``rating'' (as 
defined at 10 CFR 431.12) that are more efficient than the certified 
basic model.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed electric motors-specific certification report 
requirements would largely reflect the type of information already 
currently reported by electric motor manufacturers and includes: the 
electric motor equipment category as described at 10 CFR 431.25 (e.g., 
fire pump electric motors); the horsepower on which the electric motor 
basic model was tested; the number of poles; the enclosure type (i.e., 
open or enclosed); the rated voltage; the operating frequency; whether 
the basic model is subject to specific test procedure provisions listed 
in section 4 of appendix B to subpart B of part 431 and, if so, which 
provision(s); the represented nominal full-load efficiency and the 
represented total losses; the sampling methodology used; whether the 
represented values are based on testing in an independent testing 
laboratory or a nationally recognized certification program; and the 
name of the independent testing laboratory or nationally recognized 
certification program. Additionally, the manufacturer identification 
number or ``MIN'' applied to the relevant basic model must be provided. 
(See section III.A of this proposed rule for discussion of the proposal 
for a MIN.) The general certification report requirements at 10 CFR 
429.12(b) would also apply to electric motors under this proposal.\9\ 
(The represented full-load efficiency to be reported as part of a 
certification report is discussed earlier in this section.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ These requirements include: manufacturer's name and address; 
private labeler's name and address (if applicable); brand name; 
basic model number and individual manufacturer's model numbers 
covered by that basic model; whether the submission is for a new 
model, a discontinued model, a correction to a submitted model, a 
carryover model, or a model in violation of a voluntary industry 
certification program; the test sample size; whether certification 
is based on a test procedure waiver; whether certification is based 
on exception relief from DOE's Office of Hearing and Appeals; and 
whether certification is based on an AEDM. See 10 CFR 429.12(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To conform with the proposed shifting of the compliance 
certification provisions for electric motors to 10 CFR part 429, DOE 
proposes to (1) amend 10 CFR 431.35 (``Applicability of certification 
requirements'') to reflect that certification procedures are set forth 
in 10 CFR 429.12 and 429.63, (2) remove 431.36 (``Compliance 
certification''), and (3) remove appendix C to subpart B of part 431. 
The certification report requirements would be located at 10 CFR 429.12 
and 429.63. DOE provides templates in Excel format at https://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms/templates.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ DOE will provide a revised template in Excel format for 
certification of electric motors and a new template for small 
electric motors after DOE has finalized certification requirements 
for this equipment; however, commenters may wish to familiarize 
themselves with existing templates for electric motors and other 
products to understand better the proposals in this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE proposes that manufacturers would be permitted to continue 
certifying compliance for electric motors based on the current sampling 
provisions until July 1, 2017. As all electric motors subject to energy 
conservation standards that are currently distributed in commerce 
should have already been previously tested and certified by 
manufacturers, DOE proposes that manufacturers would submit the first 
certification report under the new certification provisions by November 
1, 2016, if the final rule is issued by October 1, 2016, or otherwise 
by July 1, 2017--in which case, the certification would be based on 
testing in accordance with the new sampling plan. Any new basic models 
to be introduced to the U.S. market would be required to be tested 
using the new sampling plan and certification requirements starting 30 
days following the publication of a final rule.
    DOE requests comments on these proposals.

D. Small Electric Motor Certification and Compliance

    This section, like the prior section, addresses each aspect of 
certifying small electric motors as compliant with the applicable 
energy conservation standards. Compliance with the energy conservation 
standards for certain small electric motors has been required since 
March 2015. DOE is proposing certification requirements specific to 
small electric motors. Existing provisions regarding the determination 
of efficiency (10 CFR 431.445), recognition of nationally recognized 
certification programs (10 CFR 431.447), and procedures for the 
withdrawal of recognition for accreditation bodies and certification 
programs (10 CFR 431.448) would be removed under this proposal. The new 
provisions regarding certification of efficiency and associated 
requirements would, consistent with DOE's overall approach for 
consolidating the locations of its certification and compliance 
provisions, be placed in 10 CFR 429.64, 429.70, 429.73, 429.74, and 
429.75.
1. Certification Testing
    In the 2012 test procedure final rule, DOE noted that there were no 
existing certification programs or independent testing laboratory 
accreditation programs for small electric motors. 77 FR 26630. Since 
that time, two entities have been recognized by DOE for classification 
as nationally recognized certification programs for small electric

[[Page 41388]]

motors: UL Verification Services (78 FR 72077 (December 2, 2013)) and 
CSA Group (79 FR 24700 (May 1, 2014)). DOE has also identified three 
test laboratories that are accredited by the NIST/NVLAP program to 
perform the IEEE 114-2010 test procedure, which DOE requires when 
testing single-phase small electric motors.\11\ These labs are also 
accredited to perform IEEE 112-2004 Method B, which is the required DOE 
test method for polyphase small electric motors of greater than 1 
horsepower. When testing polyphase small electric motors of 1 
horsepower or less, DOE requires the use of IEEE 112-2004 Method A. 
Although DOE has not identified any laboratories accredited by NVLAP to 
perform Method A testing, NVLAP's listing of labs accredited to perform 
IEEE 114 testing also covers the CSA equivalent to Method A.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The list of test laboratories accredited by NVLAP to 
perform energy efficiency testing of electric motors, as of June 10, 
2016, is available in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov/?#!documentDetail;D=EERE-2014-BT-CE-0019-0002.
    \12\ Small electric motor test procedures are detailed at 10 CFR 
431.444. In this section, DOE identifies the C747 procedure as the 
CSA equivalent test method for testing of polyphase small electric 
motors of less than or equal to 1 horsepower. Although the NVLAP 
accreditation is not explicit, the C747 accreditation covers testing 
of both single-phase small electric motors and polyphase small 
electric motors of less than or equal to 1 horsepower.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of these developments, and to conform the small electric 
motor regulations with those proposed for electric motors, DOE is 
proposing that small electric motor manufacturers follow the same 
efficiency testing and certification procedures, which would be 
included in the testing and sampling provisions applicable to small 
electric motors in Sec.  429.64. As described in detail previously, 
manufacturers would have three options when testing and certifying 
compliance with energy conservation standards: (1) A manufacturer could 
test the small electric motor using a testing program nationally 
recognized in the United States (as described in Sec.  429.74 of this 
proposal) and then certify that motor on its own behalf or have a third 
party submit the manufacturer's certification report; (2) a 
manufacturer could test the small electric motor at a testing 
laboratory other than a nationally recognized testing program and then 
have a third-party certification program that is nationally recognized 
in the United States (under Sec.  429.73 of the proposal) certify the 
efficiency of the motor; or (3) a manufacturer could use an AEDM (as 
discussed in section III.E of this proposed rule) to model the energy 
efficiency performance of the small electric motor and then have a 
third-party certification program that is nationally recognized in the 
United States (under Sec.  429.73 of the proposal) certify the 
efficiency of the motor on the manufacturer's behalf. DOE notes that, 
unlike with electric motors (see 42 U.S.C. 6316(c)), the statute does 
not require manufacturers of small electric motors to certify that a 
small electric motor meets the applicable standard through an 
independent testing or certification program nationally recognized in 
the United States. Therefore, DOE could adopt another framework \13\ 
for certification testing of small electric motors and is proposing the 
same framework as electric motors only for consistency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Based on the comments received, DOE would consider adopting 
provisions akin to those for most other types of covered products/
equipment, which rely entirely upon manufacturer self-certification. 
Another possibility would be to adopt provisions akin to those for 
certain lighting products, which require all certification testing 
to be conducted by an accredited laboratory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE requests comments on this proposal.
    DOE notes that Baldor had previously submitted a letter to DOE 
identifying a number of issues related to the certification of small 
electric motors. (Baldor, No. 1) In its letter, Baldor indicated that 
DOE's regulations specifying additional instructions when a 
certification program is not used found at Sec.  431.445(c) are 
unclear. Baldor stated that there is no provision in Sec.  431.445(c) 
requiring basic models to be tested in accordance with the DOE test 
procedure. (Baldor, No. 1 at p. 5) While DOE believes that the language 
at 10 CFR 431.444 makes clear that the efficiency of small electric 
motors must be determined with the DOE test procedure, this proposed 
rule moved and reorganized the provisions for certification testing to 
Sec.  429.64. DOE welcomes comments regarding the clarity of the text 
proposed for Sec.  429.64.
2. Sampling Plan
    In general, DOE requires represented values to be determined by the 
application of basic statistical concepts. Baldor requested that DOE 
clarify some of these concepts. Specifically, Baldor commented that the 
term ``population'' used in the definition of average full-load 
efficiency was unclear. (Baldor, No. 1 at p. 2) The terms 
``population'' and ``sample'' are standard statistical concepts. A 
population of objects consists of all the objects that are relevant in 
a particular study.\14\ A population of small electric motors consists 
of all the small electric motors produced for a basic model. As Baldor 
states, testing all the units of a basic model to determine the mean of 
the full-load efficiency of the total population is not practical. 
(Baldor, No. 1 at pp. 2 and 3) For this reason, DOE only requires 
manufacturers to test a sample of the population in order to make 
inferences about the basic model's population. DOE assumes that its 
covered products have a normal efficiency distribution and uses 
Student's t-distribution to estimate numerical characteristics of a 
population. This document proposes to require using a sampling plan 
specific to small electric motors to allow a manufacturer to make 
representations of average full-load efficiency and other energy 
consumption metrics for its basic models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Wilcox, Rand R. Basic Statistics: Understanding 
Conventional Methods and Modern Insights. New York: Oxford UP, 2009: 
4. Print.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE believes it is likely that the sources of variation in the 
testing of small electric motors that would affect the statistical 
validity of small electric motor testing results will be substantially 
similar to those for electric motors. This belief is based on the fact 
that small electric motors and electric motors overlap considerably in 
structure, function, input materials, and manufacturing processes--all 
of which contribute to variability in overall equipment performance in 
a similar manner for both electric motors and small electric motors. In 
addition, small electric motors are tested using methods similar to 
those for electric motors. On this basis, DOE proposes to adopt 
certification testing sampling requirements for small electric motors 
similar to those for electric motors.
    Specifically, DOE proposes that the represented efficiency cannot 
exceed the lesser of the arithmetic mean of the tested sample or the 
lower 97.5 percent confidence limit of the true mean divided by 0.95. 
The represented total losses would be no lower than the greater of the 
arithmetic mean or the upper 97.5 percent confidence limit of the true 
mean divided by 0.95. In addition, as required with electric motors, at 
least 5 units per basic model must be tested to determine the 
represented efficiency (rating) of the basic model. For low-volume 
models with fewer than five individual units of a basic model produced 
over a period of about 180 days, DOE proposes to require that each unit 
manufactured be tested and the manufacturer must certify the average 
full-load efficiency for the low-volume basic model. This certification 
sampling plan would be placed in a new Sec.  429.64.
    Different sampling provisions apply during enforcement testing to 
determine noncompliance with the energy

[[Page 41389]]

conservation standards. Those sampling provisions are discussed in 
detail in section III.H.3 of this proposed rule.
    DOE requests comment on this proposal.
3. Certification Reports
    There are currently no regulatory requirements governing the 
submission of certification reports specifically for small electric 
motors. This document proposes product-specific certification 
provisions for small electric motors that would appear in a new Sec.  
429.64(c). The general certification report requirements are described 
more fully in section III.C.3 of this proposed rule. The proposed 
certification report requirements that would apply specifically to 
small electric motors include: small electric motor type as described 
at 10 CFR 431.446(a), the horsepower on which the basic model was 
tested, the number of poles, the represented average full-load 
efficiency, the represented total losses, the MIN applied to the basic 
model, whether the represented values are based on testing in an 
independent testing laboratory or nationally recognized certification 
program, and the name of the independent testing laboratory or 
nationally recognized certification. DOE requests comment on the 
product-specific certification requirements proposed for small electric 
motors.
    In its letter, Baldor stated that there is no requirement that a 
manufacturer obtain approval of compliance from DOE before entering any 
small electric motor into commerce. (Baldor, No. 1 at p. 7) DOE 
confirms that it does not issue any notice of approval once a 
manufacturer has certified compliance of its basic models. 
Manufacturers are responsible for ensuring that their products are 
compliant with the applicable provisions found at 10 CFR parts 429 and 
431. As part of the certification report, DOE requires a manufacturer 
to submit a compliance statement acknowledging its responsibility.
    DOE proposes to require manufacturers of small electric motors to 
submit the first certification report 90 days after publication of a 
final rule.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12(i), a manufacturer is not 
required to submit a certification report for a product subject to 
an energy conservation standard for which the compliance date has 
not yet occurred. The certification report must be submitted not 
later than the compliance date for the energy conservation standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Alternative Methods for Determining Energy Efficiency or Energy Use

    Under current DOE regulations for both electric motors and small 
electric motors, a manufacturer can determine that the electric motor 
or small electric motor complies with energy conservation standards 
either through testing or through the use of an AEDM for determining 
energy efficiency or energy use that meets the requirements of 10 CFR 
431.17(a)(2) and (3) for electric motors or 10 CFR 431.445(a)(2) and 
(3) for small electric motors. DOE proposes to retain these AEDM-based 
options but to move them from 10 CFR 431.17 and 10 CFR 431.445 to 10 
CFR 429.70, the location of the AEDM provisions for other covered 
products and equipment. Moreover, this proposed rule would adjust the 
structure of the AEDM requirements for electric motors and small 
electric motors to more closely conform to the general format of the 
other 10 CFR 429.70 provisions, including appropriate references to 
other sections of part 429 and part 431 where required, although the 
requirements for using an AEDM for electric motors and small electric 
motors effectively remain the same. Further, DOE proposes to change the 
term ``substantiation'' to ``validation'' to better align the relevant 
terminology with the AEDM provisions in 10 CFR 429.70. Finally, DOE 
proposes to modify one of the requirements for selecting small electric 
motor basic models for validation testing. Within the context of the 
certification scheme described previously, manufacturers using an AEDM 
in lieu of testing would be required to rate their motors using an AEDM 
and certify compliance of their basic models through a nationally 
recognized certification program for those basic models of electric 
motors and small electric motors not tested.
    DOE received a letter from Baldor requesting that DOE clarify the 
substantiation (i.e., validation) requirements for AEDMs for small 
electric motors. Baldor stated that there are no requirements as to how 
to select the basic models used for substantiation (i.e., validation), 
there are no requirements specifying the minimum number of units tested 
for each basic model, and there is no defined test procedure for 
measuring the efficiency of each basic model. Baldor commented that the 
AEDM provisions could be improved by directly referencing the 
requirements for selecting basic models found at 10 CFR 431.445(c)(1). 
(Baldor, No. 1 at pp. 4 and 6)
    As part of this proposal to move the AEDM provisions to Sec.  
429.70, DOE is reorganizing these provisions for clarity. As previously 
stated, in today's notice DOE is proposing to use the term 
``validation'' instead of ``substantiation.'' Section 429.70(i)(2) 
specifies how to validate an AEDM. This section states how many basic 
models are required for validation, explicitly references the test 
procedure for small electric motors, and explains how the test results 
must compare to the results produced by the AEDM. Additionally, Sec.  
429.70(i)(3) details specific instructions for selecting basic models 
for validation.
    In addition to reorganizing the AEDM provisions for small electric 
motors, DOE is proposing to modify one of the requirements for 
selecting small electric motor basic models for validation testing. 
Currently, small electric motor manufacturers must adhere to the 
provisions in 10 CFR 431.445(c)(1) to select basic models for 
validation testing. One of these provisions states that at least one 
basic model is selected from each of the frame number series for which 
the manufacturer is seeking compliance. DOE proposes to change that 
language to better align with the requirements for electric motors by 
amending the requirement to state that no two basic models may have the 
same frame number series. DOE believes that this proposed language 
would reduce small electric motor manufacturer testing burdens because 
it would not require a manufacturer to test more than five motor basic 
models even if the manufacturer is validating an AEDM that will apply 
to more than five frame number series of motors. DOE requests comment 
on this proposal.

F. Independent Testing and Certification Programs Classified by DOE as 
Nationally Recognized

    Under 42 U.S.C. 6316(c), DOE must require manufacturers of electric 
motors for which energy conservation standards are established at 42 
U.S.C. 6313(b) to certify, through an ``independent testing or 
certification program nationally recognized in the United States'' that 
such electric motor meets the applicable standard. DOE developed a 
process for national recognition of certification programs, which is 
codified at 10 CFR 431.20 and 431.21. On May 4, 2012, DOE added the 
same requirements for small electric motors. See 77 FR 26639-26640 
(codified at 10 CFR 431.447 and 431.448).
    In its prior comments regarding the certification of small electric 
motors, Baldor stated, ``even if a certification program is used . . . 
it is still mandatory that the average full-load efficiency of any 
basic model being certified under the program be determined in 
accordance with DOE test procedure and not in accordance with any 
different procedures set forth in the

[[Page 41390]]

certification program.'' (Baldor, No. 1 at p. Y) DOE affirms that 
regardless of whether a certification program is used or not, the 
average full-load efficiency of each basic model must either be 
determined in accordance with the DOE test procedure and sampling 
provisions or by applying an AEDM that meet the requirements set forth 
in the rule.
1. Petitions for Recognition
    The petition requirements for DOE to recognize independent testing 
and certification programs as nationally recognized in the U.S. are 
proposed in a new section, 10 CFR 429.73 and .74 respectively. The 
proposed nationally recognized certification program petition process 
is nearly identical to the existing petition process in 10 CFR 431.20 
(for electric motors) and 431.447 (for small electric motors). The 
proposal would remove the existing provision that a certification 
program must be qualified to operate a certification system ``in a 
highly competent manner,'' which is a subjective requirement. While DOE 
believes that this is a necessary attribute of such a program, DOE is 
proposing instead to specify individual characteristics that are more 
readily evaluated for a program seeking classification as a nationally 
recognized certification program. DOE believes this approach would 
provide improved transparency and equitability among programs. Petition 
requirements for both electric motors and small electric motors, which 
are identical except for references to ``small electric motor'' in lieu 
of ``electric motor,'' are both included in the proposed Sec.  429.73.
    In its prior comments, Baldor expressed confusion over the purpose 
of a certification program. It noted that there is no actual 
requirement in 10 CFR 431.447 that any testing be performed within the 
structure of the certification body. (Baldor, No. 1 at pp. 4-5)
    The purpose of a nationally recognized certification program is to 
provide independent oversight of a manufacturer's representations of 
efficiency. For this reason, DOE is proposing that all nationally 
recognized certification programs have an ongoing verification testing 
process. DOE is proposing that petitioners provide documentation of 
their processes as part of the petition for recognition, including 
sampling provisions, selection criteria, a process for determining 
compliance with standards, and a process for reporting failures to DOE. 
DOE seeks comment regarding whether the UL and CSA small electric 
motors certification programs meet the criteria specified in this 
proposal and should remain nationally recognized certification programs 
under this proposal. Because DOE based its recognition of these 
programs in large part on DOE's prior recognition of their electric 
motors certification programs, DOE is also seeking comment regarding 
whether the UL and CSA electric motors certification programs meet the 
new criteria as specified in this proposal and should remain nationally 
recognized certification programs under this proposal. DOE requests 
comment regarding whether, in light of the changes to the petition 
criteria, the currently recognized certification programs should renew 
their petitions and DOE should conduct a new review for recognition 
under the new regulations once this rulemaking is finalized.
    In contrast, the purpose of a nationally recognized independent 
testing program is to ensure that testing is being performed in a 
consistent manner without bias by personnel who have appropriate 
technical qualifications, appropriate equipment, and familiarity with 
DOE regulations. DOE is considering two possible approaches. One option 
would be for DOE to directly recognize testing facilities. The other 
alternative would be for DOE to recognize accreditation programs 
subject to those programs meeting specific criteria. In either 
instance, petitioners would be required to provide documentation as 
part of the petition for recognition. Both the accreditation program 
and the testing facilities would have to demonstrate independence under 
the proposed definition. The accreditation program and/or DOE would 
evaluate the capability of the testing facility to conduct repeatable, 
reliable testing. If DOE were to recognize accreditation programs, DOE 
would evaluate the capability of the program to accredit testing 
facilities in a manner consistent with the proposed requirements.
2. DOE Petition for Recognition and Withdrawal
    DOE's proposes to move the procedures for the recognition and 
withdrawal of recognition of certification programs to 10 CFR 429.75. 
The proposed procedures for petitioning DOE to review a given 
recognition or withdrawal are similar to those procedures currently 
found at 10 CFR 431.21 (for electric motors) and 431.448 (for small 
electric motors), with a few exceptions, as follows. This proposal 
would require the submission of these petitions via email. Current 
requirements provide for a published, interim determination and 
solicitation of comments on that determination before announcement of a 
final determination. (See, e.g., 10 CFR 431.21(d).) Because the current 
process (and the process proposed here) already allows for public 
comment on the petition under consideration and provides the petitioner 
with 10 working days after receipt of comments to respond to these 
comments, DOE does not believe a second round of comments on a pending 
petition is necessary and proposes to remove that provision from the 
current requirements. However, DOE may allow for a second round of 
comments if deemed necessary based upon specific circumstances. The 
same processes would apply to the recognition of independent testing 
programs.
    This proposed rulemaking offers a more detailed process for the 
withdrawal of recognition than is currently provided. If DOE believes 
that an independent testing or certification program that has been 
recognized under the proposed Sec. Sec.  429.73 and 429.74 fails to 
meet the criteria outlined in that section, DOE may initiate withdrawal 
of the program after providing written notification to the affected 
program describing the corrective action that must occur to comply with 
the criteria in the proposed 10 CFR 429.73(c) and (d) or 429.74(c) and 
(d) and associated timeframes within which the program must complete 
the prescribed corrective actions, which in no case will exceed 180 
days. The program would be provided 30 days to respond to DOE's 
notification of withdrawal if it wishes to dispute DOE's basis for the 
determination. After the period for corrective action has passed, DOE 
will withdraw recognition from that program if the specified corrective 
action has not been taken. This proposal would also explicitly provide 
any party aggrieved by an action under this section with the right to 
file an appeal with DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals, as provided 
in 10 CFR part 1003, subpart C.
    Under the proposed Sec.  429.75, independent testing or 
certification programs would also be permitted to voluntarily withdraw 
from recognition, which is what current Sec. Sec.  431.21(g)(2) (for 
electric motors) and 431.448(g)(2) (for small electric motors) already 
permit. This proposal would add that the voluntary withdrawal notice to 
DOE must include the date on which the withdrawal is effective, the 
product or equipment types covered by the certification program to be 
withdrawn, and any effect the withdrawal has on the validity of 
certifications previously issued by the certification program. DOE 
would also require that withdrawal notifications be received by DOE at 
least

[[Page 41391]]

30 days prior to the effective date of withdrawal. Finally, DOE 
proposes to continue to publish in the Federal Register a notice of 
withdrawal of recognition, except that the notice would now include all 
of the required information in the program's voluntary withdrawal 
notice.

G. Labeling

    Under the current labeling requirements at 10 CFR 431.31, electric 
motor manufacturers must mark the permanent nameplate of those motors 
subject to the energy conservation standards in Sec.  431.25 with the 
motor's nominal full-load efficiency and the CC number issued to the 
manufacturer pursuant to 10 CFR 431.36(f); manufacturers may also 
include an optional display with the encircled lowercase letters ``ee'' 
or with a comparable designation if the electric motor meets the 
standards in Sec.  431.25.\16\ DOE proposes to retain the requirement 
for manufacturers of electric motors to include certain information on 
the nameplates of motors covered by DOE efficiency standards, but with 
modifications to the current requirements. DOE is also proposing to 
require labels on small electric motors. These proposals are described 
in more detail in the following sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Whether a particular covered motor must comply with the 
energy conservation standards is based on its date of manufacture 
(i.e., importation, if manufactured outside the U.S.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Electric Motors
    DOE proposes to require electric motor manufacturers to place on 
the nameplate the motor's represented full-load efficiency, derived 
from the electric motor's average full-load efficiency as determined 
pursuant to Sec.  429.63(a). This proposed approach is similar to the 
current requirement except that the labels currently must display the 
electric motor's nominal full-load efficiency. In contrast, this 
proposal would allow manufacturers to use the represented efficiency 
rating determined in accordance with Sec.  429.63. DOE would also 
require that, in place of the CC number currently used on electric 
motor nameplates, the nameplate bear instead the MIN issued to the 
manufacturer as described in section III.A of this proposal. DOE 
proposes to remove the ``optional display'' provision at 10 CFR 
431.31(a)(3). DOE is also proposing that any voltages manufacturers 
place on the label constitute the motor's rated voltages and that the 
electric motor must meet the standard at that (or those) rated 
voltage(s). See section III.I of this proposed rule for more discussion 
of this issue. Finally, the proposal would relocate the labeling 
requirements for electric motors from Sec.  431.31 to a new Sec.  
429.76 in 10 CFR part 429.
    DOE requests comment regarding whether model number, basic model 
number, or some other type of design information should be required on 
the nameplate to permit DOE and customers to tie a certification of 
compliance to a particular unit being distributed in commerce. DOE also 
requests comment regarding whether manufacturers could transition to 
any new nameplate requirements by June 1, 2017.
    Additionally, DOE is proposing to retain the current requirement in 
10 CFR 431.31(b) that the same information that appears on the motor's 
nameplate also appear on each page of a catalog that lists the motor 
and in other materials used to market the motor. However, DOE would not 
require the MIN to be repeated in catalog and other marking materials. 
These requirements would be moved to Sec.  429 .76 with the other 
labeling requirements for electric motors.
    Section 431.32 of 10 CFR part 431 contains a provision explaining 
that the labeling requirements of Sec.  431.31 supersede any State 
regulation and that, pursuant to the Act, all State regulations that 
require the disclosure for any electric motor of information with 
respect to energy consumption, other than the information required to 
be disclosed in accordance with this part, are superseded. This 
provision would also apply to the requirements proposed in this notice. 
DOE proposes to retain this provision in the regulations, but to 
relocate it to the proposed Sec.  429.76 with the other labeling 
requirements.
2. Small Electric Motors
    As required by EPCA, DOE is proposing to require small electric 
motors to bear a label similar to the existing requirements for 
electric motors. Specifically, DOE is proposing to require that small 
electric motors for which standards are prescribed in 10 CFR 431.446 
bear a permanent nameplate that is marked clearly with the small 
electric motor basic model's MIN and represented average full-load 
efficiency as certified pursuant to 10 CFR 429.64. In this case, 
``prescribed'' means a small electric motor for which a standard has 
been set, even if compliance with that standard is not yet required. In 
addition, all orientation, spacing, type sizes, type-faces, and line 
widths to display this required information would be required to be the 
same as, or similar to, the display of any other performance data on 
the motor's permanent nameplate, with the represented full-load 
efficiency identified either by the term ``Represented Average Full-
Load Efficiency'' or ``Rep. Avg. Full-Load. Eff.'', and the MIN 
presented as ``MIN: ___''.
    In considering whether the electric motors regulatory language is 
appropriate for small electric motors without modification, DOE 
requests comment regarding whether small electric motors currently, 
always, bear a ``nameplate'' or whether other forms of labeling should 
be permitted. As with electric motors, DOE also requests comment 
regarding whether DOE should require some specific model, basic model, 
or other design-specific information to be displayed on the nameplate. 
Labeling of small electric motors would be required six months 
following the publication of the final rule. DOE is proposing that only 
small electric motors manufactured in the U.S. (including motors 
imported into the U.S.) starting on that date bear a label when 
distributed in commerce and that this requirement would apply 
irrespective of when compliance with standards is required (e.g., small 
electric motors that qualify for the 2017 compliance date would also be 
subject to the labeling requirement as of six months following 
publication of the final rule).

H. Enforcement Provisions for Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors

    As for other types of covered products and equipment, DOE's current 
regulations for electric motors in part 431 prescribe an enforcement 
process through which DOE determines whether an electric motor 
manufacturer is in violation of the energy conservation requirements of 
EPCA. The enforcement provisions for electric motors are currently 
located at 10 CFR part 431, subpart U. These provisions identify 
prohibited acts that may subject a manufacturer to civil penalties if 
the manufacturer is found by DOE to have committed them knowingly. 
These prohibited acts include distribution in commerce of an electric 
motor that does not comply with the applicable energy conservation 
standard. Subpart U also details an enforcement process DOE uses to 
determine whether a particular motor complies with the applicable 
energy efficiency standards, the conditions under which a manufacturer 
must cease distribution of a basic model, remedies for addressing cases 
of noncompliance, and a process for the assessment and recovery of 
civil penalties. These provisions are similar to the general 
enforcement provisions

[[Page 41392]]

applicable to other types of products and equipment, including small 
electric motors, which are found in 10 CFR part 429, subpart C.
    DOE is proposing to apply the same enforcement provisions in 
subpart C to part 429 that apply to all other types of covered products 
and equipment to electric motors. These provisions are similar to the 
current provisions in subpart U to part 431, but with certain specific 
differences, as described in the following sections. There are also 
several proposed prohibited acts regarding electric motors and small 
electric motors that reflect the unique statutory provisions for each 
type of equipment. The proposed rule removes the enforcement provisions 
currently in place for electric motors from 10 CFR part 431, subpart U, 
and moves them to a new 10 CFR 429.110 and moves the enforcement 
sampling provisions to a new appendix D to subpart C of part 429. 
Subpart U would be reserved in the proposed rule.
1. Prohibited Acts and Remedies
    The prohibited acts provisions currently applicable to electric 
motors differ somewhat from those of other covered products and 
equipment, namely, by describing specific prohibited acts related to 
violations of the labeling and advertisement requirements applicable to 
electric motors. Thus, DOE is proposing to add these prohibited acts, 
which are currently listed in 10 CFR 431.382(a)(1), (2), and (4), to 10 
CFR 429.102. The inclusion of electric motors in Sec.  429.102 would 
also clarify that four additional prohibited acts not currently 
specified in Sec.  431.382 also apply to electric motor manufacturers, 
which, as discussed in the March 7, 2011 CCE final rule (see 76 FR at 
12440), are within the scope of the prohibited acts specified in EPCA 
at 42 U.S.C. 6302 (See 42 U.S.C. 6316(a).) These include prohibitions 
against the following actions: Failure to test any covered product or 
covered equipment subject to an applicable energy conservation standard 
in conformance with the applicable test requirements prescribed in 10 
CFR parts 430 or 431 (Sec.  429.102(a)(2)); deliberate use of controls 
or features in a covered product or covered equipment to circumvent the 
requirements of a test procedure that produce test results that are 
unrepresentative of a product's energy or water consumption if measured 
pursuant to DOE's required test procedure (Sec.  429.102(a)(3)); 
distribution in commerce by a manufacturer or private labeler of a 
basic model of covered product or covered equipment after a notice of 
noncompliance determination has been issued to the manufacturer or 
private labeler (Sec.  429.102(a)(7)); and knowing misrepresentation by 
a manufacturer or private labeler by certifying an energy use or 
efficiency rating of any covered product or covered equipment 
distributed in commerce in a manner that is not supported by test data 
(Sec.  429.102(a)(8)).
    For small electric motors (and distribution transformers and high-
intensity discharge (``HID'') lamps for which standards are set 
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6317), 42 U.S.C. 6316(a) provides that the 
prohibited acts in 42 U.S.C. 6302 apply to those types of equipment. 
Prohibited acts at 42 U.S.C. 6302(a) (i.e., distributing in commerce 
new products/equipment that are not labeled as required and removing or 
rendering illegible any required label) do not apply to small electric 
motors because these acts only apply to types of equipment with 
labeling provisions promulgated pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6294 and small 
electric motor labeling provisions are promulgated pursuant to section 
6317. Accordingly, in 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(A), Congress created 
prohibited acts identical in effect to those found at section 
6302(a)(1) and (2) that apply to small electric motors (and 
distribution transformers and HID lamps). Therefore, it would be a 
prohibited act for any manufacturer or private labeler to distribute in 
commerce a unit that is not labeled as required by 10 CFR 429.76, and 
it would be a prohibited act for a manufacturer or private labeler to 
remove or render illegible any label required by 10 CFR 429.76. These 
prohibited acts, which are identical to existing prohibited acts for 
electric motors that are proposed to be moved to paragraphs 11 and 12 
at 10 CFR 429.102, would become enforceable with respect to small 
electric motors six months after publication of the final rule--i.e., 
when labeling of small electric motors would be required. DOE notes 
that there is no statutory prohibited act for small electric motors 
akin to the prohibited act for electric motors that is proposed to be 
moved to paragraph 13, restricting representations in advertising 
materials.
    In 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B), Congress prohibited the distribution in 
commerce of a small electric motor that does not comply with the 
applicable standard. With respect to small electric motors that do not 
comply with the applicable standard, however, 42 U.S.C. 6302(a)(5) 
applies through application of 42 U.S.C. 6316(a). Thus, DOE concludes 
that section 6317(f)(1)(B) creates a new, different prohibited act 
regarding small electric motors--one that is tied to the labeling 
requirement. (See introductory text to 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1) ``After the 
date on which a manufacturer must provide a label for a product 
pursuant to subsection (e) of this section . . .'') DOE is proposing to 
add a prohibited act to Sec.  429.102 that is specific to small 
electric motors to reflect the statutorily created prohibited act in 42 
U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B). It would be a prohibited act for a manufacturer 
or private labeler to distribute in commerce any new small electric 
motor required to be labeled under 10 CFR 429.76 that is not in 
conformity with an applicable standard under 10 CFR 431.446. In most 
cases, a manufacturer can ``sell-through'' inventory of units 
manufactured prior to the compliance date for a new standard. This 
prohibited act specific for small electric motors would alter the 
typical transition for products subject to a new energy conservation 
standard. The statute requires that small electric motors bear a label 
six months after publication of the final rule. (42 U.S.C. 6317(e)) 
That means all small electric motors manufactured starting on that date 
will be required to bear a label. And since the statute makes it a 
prohibited act to distribute in commerce a small electric motor 
required to have a label if that small electric motor does not meet the 
applicable standard, 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B), it is a prohibited act 
for a manufacturer or private labeler to distribute in commerce a new 
small electric motor if the following criteria are met: (1) The small 
electric motor was manufactured six months after the date of the final 
rule in this proceeding, (2) the small electric motor is a kind of 
motor for which DOE has prescribed a standard, (3) compliance with that 
standard is now required, and (4) the small electric motor does not 
meet that standard. Small electric motors not required to bear a label 
(i.e., manufactured before six months after the publication of the 
final rule in this proceeding) and manufactured prior to the energy 
conservation standard compliance date would not be required to meet the 
standard and could continue to be distributed in commerce in the U.S. 
That is, ``sell-through'' would be permitted for motors manufactured 
prior to 6 months following publication of the final rule and would not 
be permitted for motors manufactured on or after the compliance date 
for the labeling provision.
    DOE notes that manufacturers of small electric motors that qualify 
for the delayed compliance date of March 9, 2017, could be subject to 
the labeling requirement before a standard must be

[[Page 41393]]

met, depending on the timing of the final rule. For example, if 
Manufacturer X manufactures a small electric motor on February 2, 2017, 
the motor would be required to be labeled (assuming that the final rule 
in this proceeding is published at least six months prior) under 10 CFR 
429.76. If this motor qualifies for the 2017 delayed compliance date 
and does not conform to the 2017 standard as of that date of 
manufacture, the manufacturer could distribute this motor in commerce 
even though the motor would not conform to the standard specified in 10 
CFR 431.446. However, as of March 9, 2017, if that small electric motor 
were still in stock, the manufacturer would be subject to civil 
penalties for distribution in commerce of that motor.
    DOE proposes to add a new paragraph 14 to the list of prohibited 
acts at 10 CFR 429.102 for this prohibited act as follows: For any 
manufacturer or private labeler of a small electric motor to distribute 
in commerce any small electric motor required by [the proposed] Sec.  
429.76 to be labeled that is not in conformity with the relevant energy 
conservation standard found at 10 CFR 431.446.
2. Test Notices
    Section 431.383 contains the enforcement process for electric 
motors, which is conducted when a basic model is suspected of 
noncompliance with the applicable standard. Paragraph (a)(1) of this 
section requires DOE to provide formal notification to a manufacturer 
that DOE has received information that one of the manufacturer's basic 
models may not comply with the applicable efficiency standard and that 
DOE intends to test the basic model to assess its compliance. This 
paragraph specifies that a test notice may only be issued after the 
Secretary or his or her designated representative has examined the 
underlying test data (or, where appropriate, data as to use of an AEDM) 
provided by the manufacturer and after the manufacturer has been 
offered the opportunity to meet with the Department to verify, as 
applicable, compliance with the applicable efficiency standard, or the 
accuracy of labeling information, or both. DOE eliminated this process 
for all other types of products and equipment in the March 2011 CCE 
rule. For the same reasons stated in that rulemaking (see 76 FR 12422, 
12434-12435), DOE proposes to adopt for electric motors the process 
used in enforcement actions for other types of products or equipment.
    In addition, 10 CFR 431.383 provides that, where compliance of a 
basic model was certified based on an AEDM, the Department has 
discretion to pursue the provisions of 10 CFR 431.17(a)(4)(iii) prior 
to invoking the test notice procedure and that a representative 
designated by the Secretary shall be permitted to observe any re-
validation procedures, and to inspect the results of such re-
validation. This process is addressed by the provisions applicable to 
the use of an AEDM that would be applied to electric motors through 
adoption of the proposed additions to 10 CFR 429.70 as well as the 
application of 10 CFR 429.71 to electric motors.
3. Enforcement Testing
    In the event that DOE has reason to believe an electric motor is 
noncompliant with the applicable energy conservation standard, DOE may 
test that electric motor to verify whether it complies with the 
applicable standard. This process for electric motors currently is 
specified at 10 CFR 431.383. For all other products and equipment 
covered by DOE energy conservation standards, the enforcement testing 
process is in 10 CFR 429.110. DOE intends through this proposal to 
apply the requirements of Sec.  429.110 to electric motors in place of 
Sec.  431.383, which would alter the process by which enforcement 
testing is conducted for electric motors in certain respects. In 
addition to the process for issuing test notices, DOE notes that using 
Sec.  429.110 in place of Sec.  431.383 would result in the following 
changes: The maximum number of units that may be tested would increase 
from 20 to 21 units; enforcement testing would only be conducted by a 
laboratory that is accredited to the International Organization for 
Standardization (ISO)/International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 
``General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration 
laboratories,'' ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E); and testing of additional 
unit(s) as a result of a defective unit in the initial sample would be 
at DOE's discretion.
    In addition, 10 CFR 431.383(f) currently allows a manufacturer to 
request that DOE conduct additional testing (at the manufacturer's 
expense). DOE is not proposing to retain this provision in the proposed 
rule as the additional testing is not allowed for any other covered 
products or equipment. As stated in the March 7, 2011 CCE final rule, 
the Department removed the regulatory provision allowing manufacturers 
to request additional testing because it is both unnecessary--given 
that manufacturers are free to perform additional testing on their own 
at any time--and otherwise delays the finality of a compliance 
determination. 76 FR at 12438. Therefore, once a product has been found 
noncompliant by DOE as a result of this process, there would be no 
further option for additional testing.
    Regarding enforcement sampling, DOE is proposing to move the 
current enforcement sampling plan for electric motors to a new appendix 
D to subpart C of part 429. DOE proposes to modify the new appendix D 
to reflect the maximum number of units that may be tested is 21. 
Additionally, DOE proposes to make these enforcement sampling 
provisions applicable to small electric motors. For small electric 
motors, DOE notes that 10 CFR 431.445 presents a formula for evaluating 
compliance. DOE proposes to retain this approach in appendix D, as it 
better ensures that DOE bases any final determination of compliance on 
a sufficiently large sample size and mitigates the risk of incorrect 
determinations of noncompliance. However, DOE requests comments 
regarding whether the formula currently in 10 CFR 431.445 should be 
retained for evaluation of representations, similar to the provision 
for electric motors that DOE has proposed to move to 10 CFR 429.138.
    As part of the October 1999 rulemaking, NEMA commented argued that 
the sampling plan for enforcement testing does not yield an estimate of 
the true mean full-load efficiency of the population of motors because 
it incorrectly applies the t-distribution. The confidence interval for 
the true population mean efficiency should not be anchored to the 
energy conservation standard. (EE-RM-96-400, NEMA, No. 0J at p. 8) 
Baldor commented that the DOE statistical formulation has the potential 
to penalize those manufacturers that minimize the variation in 
efficiency from motor to motor (standard deviation). Baldor continued 
to explain that this is particularly true for a set of samples whose 
mean is slightly below the statutory efficiency. (EE-RM-96-400, Baldor, 
No. 0E at p. 6) DOE requests comment on alternative methods of 
evaluating compliance to ensure that manufacturers that can produce 
motors with low variability are not disadvantaged. DOE will consider 
adopting an alternative formula based on the comments received.
4. Notices of Noncompliance and Penalties
    When DOE determines that a basic model of a covered product or type 
of covered equipment does not comply with the applicable energy 
conservation standard, or if a manufacturer or private labeler 
determines that a basic model is

[[Page 41394]]

noncompliant, Sec.  429.114 provides that DOE may issue a notice of 
noncompliance determination to the manufacturer. This notice explains 
to the manufacturer its obligations to: (1) Immediately cease 
distribution of the basic model; (2) immediately notify in writing 
those individuals to whom units of the basic model have been 
distributed about the finding of noncompliance; and (3) provide DOE 
with pertinent records about the manufacture and distribution of units 
of the basic model within 30 days of the proposed rule.
    Similarly, Sec.  431.385 requires electric motor manufacturers to: 
(1) Immediately cease distribution of the noncompliant basic model; (2) 
give immediate written notification of the determination of 
noncompliance to all persons to whom the manufacturer has distributed 
units of the basic model; and (3) provide DOE, within 30 calendar days 
of the notification, records, reports and other documentation 
pertaining to the acquisition, ordering, storage, shipment, or sale of 
a basic model determined to be in noncompliance. An electric motor 
manufacturer's obligations immediately after a determination of 
noncompliance would, therefore, be unchanged by applying the provisions 
of Sec.  429.114 to electric motors in place of Sec.  431.385.
    Actions required following a finding of noncompliance are similar 
in scope between subpart U of part 431 and subpart C of part 429, 
except for certain minor differences. Section 431.385 provides, in 
paragraph (a)(4), that a manufacturer may modify a noncompliant model 
in such manner as to bring it into compliance with the applicable 
standard. Such modified basic model would then be treated as a new 
basic model and must be certified in accordance with the provisions of 
Subpart U, except that, in addition to satisfying those requirements, 
the manufacturer must also maintain records that demonstrate that 
modifications have been made to all units of the new basic model prior 
to distribution in commerce. These requirements are identical to those 
in Sec.  429.114(d), except that the latter also requires that, after 
modifying a basic model to be compliant with DOE standards, the 
manufacturer must also assign new individual model numbers to the 
models within the basic model. This requirement would also apply to 
electric motors as a result of the changes proposed in this proposed 
rule.
    Section 429.116 requires that, if DOE determines that independent, 
third-party testing is necessary to ensure a manufacturer's compliance 
with the rules of part 429 or part 431, a manufacturer must base its 
certification of a basic model under subpart B of part 429 on 
independent, third-party laboratory testing. No such provision exists 
in subpart U of part 431, but DOE is proposing to apply this provision 
to electric motors. Additionally, under section Sec. Sec.  431.386 and 
429.118, DOE has the option to seek a judicial order to stop 
distribution of a noncompliant model and may assess civil penalties for 
violations of such provisions. However, Sec.  429.118 allows the use of 
an injunction for the purposes of enjoining any prohibited act, while 
Sec.  431.386 applies only to distribution in commerce of noncompliance 
models. DOE is proposing to apply the broader injunctive authority in 
Sec.  429.118 to electric motors. Finally, both subpart C of part 429 
and subpart U of part 431 define processes for assessing and collecting 
civil penalties. Except for minor differences in wording and the format 
of statutory references, the process in Sec.  431.387, which currently 
applies to electric motors, and Sec. Sec.  429.122 through 429.132, 
which apply to other products and equipment, are substantially the 
same. Thus, DOE intends to apply these sections of part 429 to electric 
motors.

I. Other Revisions to Existing Electric Motors and Small Electric 
Motors Regulations

    DOE proposes to add a sentence to 10 CFR 431.25 that would describe 
testing of electric motors rated for use at multiple voltages, such as 
on a 230- or 460-volt electrical system, to address questions that DOE 
has received over the past year. The test procedures specified in 
appendix B to subpart B of part 431 require the basic model to be 
tested at the rated voltage, without specifying what to do when a 
manufacturer elects to include multiple rated voltages on the nameplate 
and marketing materials. DOE is clarifying in this proposed rule that 
the basic model of electric motor must be tested and meet energy 
conservation standards at all of the voltages for which the electric 
motor is rated by the manufacturer to be used.
    For example, some motors are labeled with a voltage rating of 208-
230/460 volts, while others are marked as ``230/460V Usable at 208V.'' 
In DOE's view, at any voltage at which the manufacturer declares that 
an electric motor may be installed and operated by making a 
representation in its literature or its nameplate, the electric motor 
must meet the standards when measured by the DOE test procedure. DOE 
proposes that only the lowest efficiency (when tested and rated for 
multiple voltages) be placed on the nameplate.
    DOE requests comment on whether there should be some indication of 
which rated voltage is the lower efficiency voltage corresponding to 
the rated efficiency. DOE notes that the certification report on file 
with DOE will indicate the corresponding voltage. DOE seeks comment on 
whether the additional information would provide sufficient benefit to 
purchasers to warrant the additional cost. DOE requests comment 
regarding whether, for each rated voltage, the manufacturer should also 
put a corresponding efficiency on the nameplate. DOE requests comment 
regarding the costs associated with requiring additional information on 
the nameplate.
    DOE requests comment on whether similar provisions should be 
implemented for basic models of small electric motors as well. As DOE 
is proposing to require small electric motors to bear a label, DOE 
requests information as to whether small electric motors will list 
multiple rated voltages on such label. If comments suggest that DOE 
should implement similar provisions, then DOE will consider adopting 
those requirements in the final rule.
    This proposed rule would also clarify which small electric motors 
would be subject to energy conservation standards in 10 CFR 431.446 in 
light of the statutory exclusion for those small electric motors that 
are components of covered products or covered equipment.
    Small electric motors that are a component of another covered 
product under 42 U.S.C. 6292(a) or covered equipment under 42 U.S.C. 
6311 are not subject to energy conservation standards. (42 U.S.C. 
6317(b)(3)) Therefore, a small electric motor that is distributed in 
commerce (i.e., sold or imported) separately--i.e., not integrated into 
another covered product/equipment--is subject to the standards. DOE 
considered another interpretation of this provision--excluding small 
electric motors ``intended'' to be used in a covered product/
equipment--but DOE rejected that interpretation. This rejection is 
based on the fact that all small electric motors for which energy 
conservation standards have been set are general purpose motors--not 
specific or definite-purpose motors--so no small electric motor that 
would otherwise be subject to standards has any defining features or 
characteristics to identify it as ``intended'' for use in a covered 
product/equipment. DOE also rejected this interpretation because the 
plain language of section 6317(b)(3) designates ``any small electric 
motor which is a component'' as exempt from standards and a 
determination of

[[Page 41395]]

whether a national standard applies is made at the time of manufacture 
under EPCA.
    The prohibition on distributing in commerce a non-compliant small 
electric motor in 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B) centers on the time of 
distribution in commerce. Reading 42 U.S.C. 6317(b)(3) in conjunction 
with 42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)(B), the determination of whether a small 
electric motor meets energy conservation standards would be made no 
later than when the manufacturer or private labeler of the small 
electric motor distributes the motor in commerce in the U.S. Further, 
because the purpose of this provision appears to be to exempt small 
electric motors that are already effectively being regulated through 
the implementation of a standard for another type of covered product or 
equipment, DOE interprets this provision as exempting small electric 
motors that are distributed in commerce as a component of a type of 
covered product or equipment that is currently subject to a standard. 
Small electric motors that are a component of a type of covered product 
or equipment that is not subject to a standard would not be exempt. 
Therefore, DOE concludes that, if a small electric motor is not already 
a component (of a covered product/equipment subject to an energy 
conservation standard) when it is distributed in commerce by the small 
electric motor manufacturer or private labeler, then it is subject to 
standards. Similarly, small electric motors imported prior to 
integration into a unit of another type of covered product/equipment 
also would be subject to standards upon importation. DOE proposes to 
add a new paragraph (d) to Sec.  431.446 to explain this exclusion from 
standards.

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    This regulatory action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, this action 
was not subject to review under that Executive Order by the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs (``OIRA'') of the Office of 
Management and Budget (``OMB''). DOE has also reviewed this regulation 
pursuant to Executive Order 13563, issued on January 18, 2011. 76 FR 
3281 (January 21, 2011). Executive Order 13563 is supplemental to and 
explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions 
governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866.

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 (``IRFA'') 
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 rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made its 
procedures and policies available on the Office of the General 
Counsel's Web site (http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel).
    For manufacturers of electric motor and small electric motors, 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 (Sept. 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 http://www.sba.gov/content/table-small-business-size-standards. Electric motor and small electric motor manufacturing is 
classified under NAICS 335312, ``Motor and Generator Manufacturing.'' 
The SBA sets a threshold of 1,000 employees or less for an entity to be 
considered as a small business for this category.
    DOE reviewed the certification and reporting requirements in this 
proposed rule under the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
and the procedures and policies published on February 19, 2003. This 
proposed rule would make certain amendments to the existing 
certification requirements applicable to electric motors and would 
establish certification requirements for small electric motors. These 
proposed changes have potential impacts on electric motor manufacturers 
who will be required to revise their current certification process to 
comply with the proposed amendments, and have potential impacts on 
small electric motor manufacturers who must commence certification of 
products subject to an energy conservation standard. Based upon its 
review of these proposed amendments, DOE believes the changes to the 
compliance certification (``CC'') number system is the only proposed 
amendment that would represent an increase in certification burden for 
electric motor manufacturers. For small electric motor manufacturers, 
DOE believes that the proposed certification requirements affecting 
these entities will result in reporting and record-keeping burdens 
commensurate with the estimates presented in DOE's review under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, as discussed in section IV.C of this proposal.
    DOE estimates that there are 13 small business manufacturers of 
electric motors and 9 of those manufacturers also make small electric 
motors. The estimate for small business manufacturers of electric 
motors is based upon the regulatory flexibility analysis conducted as 
part of the May 29, 2014 final rule establishing amended energy 
conservation standards for electric motors (79 FR 30934). In that rule, 
DOE calculated the number of electric motor manufacturers, including 
the number of manufacturers qualifying as small businesses, based on 
interviews with electric motor manufacturers and publicly available 
data. Since the promulgation of this rule, and after further examining 
the motor industry, which included surveying the motor industry and 
determining the number of manufacturers remaining, DOE has not 
discovered the presence of any new manufacturers of electric motors 
that would necessitate a change to this previous estimate. The estimate 
for small manufacturers of small electric motors is based on a market 
survey of publicly available information. DOE evaluated the 
manufacturers identified in the March 9, 2010 final rule establishing 
energy conservations standards for small electric motors (75 FR 10874) 
and manufacturers of electric motors identified in the May 2014 final 
rule (79 FR 30934) for product offerings meeting the definition of a 
small electric motor. From its market survey, DOE identified that 9 of 
the 13 small manufacturers of electric motors also manufacture small 
electric motors.
    DOE then determined the expected impacts of the rule on affected 
small businesses and whether an IRFA was needed (i.e., whether DOE 
could certify that this rulemaking would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities).
    For electric motors, for which DOE identified 13 manufacturers that 
are small businesses, the incremental

[[Page 41396]]

burden associated with this rule is expected to be minimal. DOE already 
requires that manufacturers of electric motors test their motors 
according to a prescribed DOE test procedure and certify their 
efficiency to DOE prior to distributing them in commerce. DOE also has 
existing labeling requirements for electric motors and requires the use 
of a CC number on the label of each motor covered by an energy 
conservation standard. While this rule proposes no changes to the 
testing or certification requirements that would result in increased 
burden, and either makes clarifying changes to the regulatory text or 
relocates certain provisions from part 431 to part 429 without changing 
their effect, the proposed replacement of the CC number system with 
manufacturer identification number (``MIN'') system may result in an 
incremental record-keeping burden, as well as certain financial burden 
associated with modifying labels on existing products to comply with 
the proposed requirements. However, because the proposed process for 
obtaining a MIN is essentially identical to the current process for 
obtaining a CC number, DOE believes that the one-time incremental 
burden associated with that change will be very low. With respect to 
the use of the MIN on product labels, DOE anticipates that the switch 
from CC numbers to the MIN could result in a one-time incremental 
burden for those existing models that will need their CC number 
replaced with a MIN. However, in reviewing the initial rulemaking that 
created the current requirement for manufacturers to include the CC 
number on the motor nameplate, DOE found that the estimate of burden 
was considered to be insignificant, and that no manufacturers provided 
comments disputing this finding. (See 61 FR 60440, at 60461 (November 
27, 1996) and 64 FR 54114, at 54140 (October 5, 1999)) Thus, DOE 
similarly finds the replacement of the CC number with a MIN on the 
nameplates of covered electric motors would result in an insignificant 
incremental burden.
    For small electric motors, for which DOE identified 9 manufacturers 
that are small businesses, the incremental burden associated with this 
rule is expected to be minimal. DOE currently requires small electric 
motor manufacturers to test their motors according to a prescribed DOE 
test procedure, and this document does not propose changes to these 
requirements that would result in increased burden. This proposal does, 
however, include certification and labeling requirements for small 
electric motors. While the certification and labeling requirements may 
result in an incremental record-keeping burden, DOE believes that this 
burden will be negligible. To the extent possible, DOE proposed 
consistent certification and labeling requirements for electric motors 
and small electric motors--and since electric motors and small electric 
motors are similar equipment types, DOE believes that these 
requirements will present an analogous burden. DOE reviewed its prior 
rulemakings that created labeling and certification requirements for 
electric motors manufacturers and found that the estimated burden was 
considered to be insignificant. No manufacturers disputed this finding. 
(See 61 FR 60440, at 60461 (November 27, 1996) and 64 FR 54114, at 
54140 (October 5, 1999)) Therefore, DOE concludes that these same 
requirements will not have a significant impact on small business 
manufacturers of small electric motors.
    Based on the criteria outlined above, DOE has determined that the 
proposed amendments to the certification, compliance, and enforcement 
requirements for electric motors and small electric motors would not 
have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities,'' and the preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis is 
not warranted. DOE will transmit the certification and supporting 
statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    DOE seeks comment on its estimated additional costs from the 
proposed changes to the CC number system. Specifically, DOE seeks 
comment on the impacts of the additional cost of testing on small 
manufacturers. DOE also seeks comment on its reasoning that the 
proposed changes would not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    Manufacturers of electric motors must certify to DOE that their 
equipment complies with any applicable energy conservation standards. 
This rulemaking adds small electric motor-specific certification 
provisions. In certifying compliance, manufacturers must test their 
equipment according to the DOE test procedures for electric motors and 
small electric motors, including any amendments adopted for those test 
procedures. 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 
previously been approved by OMB under OMB control number 1910-1400 and 
was recently renewed to include small electric motors. As indicated in 
the supporting statement, DOE's renewal included revisions and 
expansion of the information collected on the energy and water 
efficiency of consumer products and commercial equipment manufactured 
for distribution in commerce in the United States. This proposal is not 
expected to increase burdens for manufacturers of electric motors or 
change the burden for manufacturers of small electric motors that 
otherwise would have been imposed as a result of having to comply with 
the existing certification requirements. Public reporting burden for 
the certification was 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.
    This proposed rule would require one party to submit a one-time 
request for a manufacturer's identification number (``MIN'') for each 
manufacturer of electric motors or small electric motors. The MIN would 
be used on motor nameplates to identify the original equipment 
manufacturer and facilitate DOE's ability to contact the relevant party 
in the event of finding a noncompliant motor. DOE expects that 
completion of the form, including downloading the form, filling out the 
form, and submitting the form via email, would take approximately 5 
minutes. Each manufacturer would only submit one form and would not 
have to submit a new form unless the contact information changed.
    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

    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 rule 
amends an existing rule without changing its environmental effect and, 
therefore, is covered by the Categorical Exclusion in 10 CFR part 1021, 
subpart D, paragraph

[[Page 41397]]

A5. 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 (Aug. 10, 1999) 
imposes certain requirements on Federal 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 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. 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) No 
further action is required by Executive Order 13132.

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    With respect to the review of existing regulations and the 
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988, 
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 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; and (3) 
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a 
general standard and promote simplification and burden reduction. 61 FR 
4729 (Feb. 7, 1996). 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 section 3(a) and 
section 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, this 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. DOE's policy 
statement is also available at http://energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. This proposed rule contains neither an intergovernmental 
mandate nor a mandate that may result in an 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 proposed 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 (Mar. 18, 1988), that this proposed regulation 
would not result in any takings that might require compensation under 
the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under the 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 Federal 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 (Feb. 22, 
2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (Oct. 7, 
2002). DOE has reviewed this proposal 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 OIRA 
at 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 promulgates 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.
    DOE has tentatively concluded that this proposed rule, which would 
revise certification and compliance requirements for electric and small

[[Page 41398]]

electric motors, is not a significant energy action because the 
proposed standards are not likely to have a significant adverse effect 
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy, nor has it been 
designated as such by the Administrator at OIRA. Accordingly, DOE has 
not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects on the proposed rule.

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 FTC 
concerning the impact of the commercial or industry standards on 
competition. This proposal solely addresses certification provisions 
for electric motors and small electric motors. This proposal does not 
require or authorize the use of any commercial standards.

M. Description of Materials Incorporated by Reference

    In this NOPR, DOE proposes to incorporate by reference standards 
published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) 
specifies general requirements for the competence of testing and 
calibration laboratories. ISO/IEC Guide 27 specifies methods of 
indicating conformity with standards for third-party certification 
systems. ISO/IEC Guide 17026:2015 gives general guidelines for a 
specific product certification system, including a third-party 
certification system. ISO/IEC Guide 17065:2012 specifies general 
requirements for third parties operating a product certification 
system. For a certification program to be classified by the Department 
as nationally recognized, it must meet certain criteria, including that 
the petitioning organization must describe its experience in operating 
a certification program, such as its experience applying the guidelines 
contained in ISO/IEC Guides 17025:2005(E), 27, 17026:2015, and 
17065:2012.
    These ISO/IEC guides are available at http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics.htm.

V. Public Participation

A. Submission of Comments

    DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this 
proposed rule no later than the date provided in the DATES section at 
the beginning of this proposed rule. Interested parties may submit 
comments, data, and other information using any of the methods 
described in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this proposed 
rule.
    When 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 itself 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. Otherwise, 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 
below.
    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/courier, 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 in 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/courier, 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, that are written in English, and that are 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/courier 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)

[[Page 41399]]

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).

B. 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 requests comments on its proposal to replace compliance 
certification (CC) numbers with a Manufacturer Identification Number 
(MIN) system. In particular, DOE requests comment on the following 
items:
    a. The amount of time needed for manufacturers to transition to 
MINs.
    b. Any additional costs due to the proposal to replace CC numbers 
with a MIN system.
    c. Whether the OEM-brand relationship is confidential business 
information and whether a list of MINs and associated OEMs and brands 
should be posted on DOE's CCMS Web site. If the OEM-brand relationship 
is confidential business information, whether the brand-MIN combination 
should be published.
    d. Whether the OEM-brand relationship is held in confidence by the 
OEM and importer, whether the OEM-brand relationship is available in 
public sources, whether disclosure of the information is likely to 
cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the OEM or 
importer, and the nature of that harm.
    e. As DOE is proposing that a MIN may not be transferred to another 
entity, how much time would be required to transition a MIN on a 
nameplate to a new MIN in the event that an OEM was acquired by another 
company.
    2. In this proposal, DOE proposing to define the term 
``independent'' at 10 CFR 431.12 and 431.442 and applying these 
requirements to the laboratories used by manufacturers for determining 
the efficiency of their basic modes. As part of this proposal, DOE is 
revising the requirements currently located in Section 431.18, which 
require that testing laboratories be accredited by NIST/NVLAP 
laboratory, accredited by a laboratory accreditation program having a 
mutual recognition program with NIST/NVLAP, or a laboratory accredited 
by an organization classified by DOE as an accreditation body. DOE 
seeks comment regarding whether DOE should also require that 
independent labs be accredited and what accreditations such 
laboratories should have.
    3. DOE anticipates that manufacturers using certification programs 
will have their certification programs act as third-party 
representatives; however, DOE seeks comment regarding whether DOE 
should accept certification reports directly from manufacturers that 
use certification programs to fulfill the certification testing 
requirements.
    4. DOE requests comment as to whether DOE should require the 
certification report to include a certificate of conformity or whether 
DOE should only require the certification report to identify the 
certification program used (with a certificate of conformity available 
from the certification program upon request by DOE).
    5. DOE requests comment on its proposal for electric motors 
manufacturers to test and certify compliance with energy conservation 
standards by either: (i) Testing the electric motor using a recognized 
testing program (under Sec.  429.74 of the proposal); (ii) testing the 
electric motor at a testing laboratory other than a recognized testing 
program and then have a certification program that is nationally 
recognized in the United States (under Sec.  429.73 of the proposal) 
certify the efficiency of the electric motor; or (iii) using an 
alternative efficiency determination method (``AEDM,'' discussed in 
section III.E.) and then have a third-party certification program that 
is nationally recognized in the United States (under Sec.  429.73 of 
the proposal) certify the efficiency of the electric motor.
    6. As discussed in section III.C.2, DOE is proposing to make 
explicit that a certification program must conduct ongoing verification 
testing. DOE requests comment regarding whether DOE should more require 
specific sampling provisions for use in verification testing by 
certification programs, and, if so, what those sampling requirements 
should be.
    7. DOE requests comment on its proposal to retain a minimum sample 
size of 5 units for basic models rated by testing at an independent 
laboratory unless fewer than five individual units of a basic model are 
manufactured over a period of 180 days.
    8. DOE requests comment on its proposal to retain the requirement 
that at least five units of each basic model must be tested to validate 
an AEDM.
    9. DOE requests comment on its proposal to adopt a sampling plan 
for electric motors similar to those used for other consumer products 
and commercial equipment. Additionally, DOE requests comment on its 
proposal to use the formulas from 10 CFR 431.17(b)(2)(i) and 10 CFR 
431.17(b)(2)(ii) and add them to 10 CFR 429.138 to verify 
representations used for labeling.
    10. DOE requests comment on its proposal to make the general 
certification report requirements at 10 CFR 429.12(b) applicable to 
electric motors and require additional specific reporting requirements 
including detailed in Section III.C.3 of this proposed rule.
    11. DOE requests comment on its proposal that small electric motor 
manufacturers follow the same efficiency testing and certification 
procedures as electric motors manufacturers. Unlike with electric 
motors (see 42 U.S.C. 6316(c)), the statute does not require 
manufacturers of small electric motors to certify that a motor meets 
the applicable standard through an independent testing or certification 
program nationally recognized in the United States. Therefore, DOE 
requests stakeholders suggest other frameworks for certification 
testing of small electric motors if the stakeholder opposes DOE's 
proposal for consistency.
    12. DOE requests comment on the sampling provisions proposed for 
small electric motors discussed in detail in section III.D.2.
    13. DOE requests comment on its proposal requiring specific 
reporting requirements for small electric motors detailed in section 
III.D.3.
    14. DOE proposes to add periodic verification testing as a criteria 
to be a nationally recognized certification program. DOE requests 
comment regarding whether, in light of the changes to the petition 
criteria, the currently recognized certification programs should renew 
their petitions and DOE should conduct a new review once this 
rulemaking is finalized.

[[Page 41400]]

    15. DOE requests comment regarding whether model number, basic 
model number, or some other type of design information should be 
required on the nameplate to permit DOE and customers to tie a 
certification of compliance to a particular unit being distributed in 
commerce.
    16. DOE requests comment on time required to transition to new 
nameplate requirements. Specifically, whether manufacturers could make 
the proposed changes within six month of publication of a final rule or 
whether the nameplate changes should be required on all electric motors 
manufactured on or after June 1, 2016, when compliance with amended 
standards is required.
    17. DOE requests comment regarding whether small electric motors 
currently, always, bear a ``nameplate'' or whether other forms of 
labeling should be permitted. DOE also requests comment regarding 
whether DOE should require some sort of model, basic model, or other 
design-specific information to be displayed on the nameplate.
    18. DOE requests comments regarding whether the formula currently 
in 10 CFR 431.445 should be retained for evaluation of representations.
    19. DOE proposes that only the lowest efficiency (when tested and 
rated for multiple voltages) be placed on the nameplate of an electric 
motor.
    a. DOE requests comment on whether there should be some indication 
of which rated voltage is the lower efficiency voltage corresponding to 
the rated efficiency.
    b. As certification reports will indicate the corresponding 
voltage, DOE is accepting comment on whether the additional information 
would provide sufficient benefit to purchasers to warrant the 
additional cost.
    c. DOE requests comment regarding whether, for each rated voltage, 
the manufacturer should also put a corresponding efficiency on the 
nameplate and the associated costs of such a requirement.
    d. DOE also requests comment on whether small electric motors will 
include multiple rated voltages on its nameplate and if DOE should 
adopt similar provisions for small electric motors.
    20. DOE requests comment on the change in validation testing 
requirements for small electric motors described in section III.D.
    21. DOE seeks comment on the impacts of the any additional cost of 
testing on small manufacturers imposed by this proposal. DOE also seeks 
comment on its reasoning specified in section IV.B that the proposed 
changes would not have a significant impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.

VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of 
proposed rulemaking.

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 429

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Incorporation by reference, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Test procedures.

10 CFR Part 431

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Energy conservation, Incorporation by reference, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Test procedures.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 10, 2016.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, DOE is proposing to 
amend parts 429 and 431 of chapter II of title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations to read as follows:

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.  429.1 to read as follows:


Sec.  429.1  Purpose and scope.

    This part sets forth the procedures to be followed for 
certification and enforcement of compliance of covered products and 
equipment with the applicable conservation standards set forth in 10 
CFR parts 430 and 431 of this subchapter.
0
3. Amend Sec.  429.2 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  429.2  Definitions.

    (a) The definitions found in 10 CFR parts 430 and 431 of this 
subchapter apply for purposes of this part.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec.  429.4 by revising paragraph (d)(1) and adding paragraphs 
(d)(2) through (4) to read as follows:


Sec.  429.4  Materials incorporated by reference.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (``ISO/IEC'') Guide 
17025:2005(E)'', ``General requirements for the competence of 
calibration and testing laboratories,'' Second edition, May 15, 2005. 
IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  429.73, 429.74, and 429.110.
    (2) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (``ISO/IEC'') Guide 
27, ``Guidelines for corrective action to be taken by a certification 
body in the event of misuse of its mark of conformity'', First edition, 
March 1, 1983, IBR approved for Sec.  429.73.
    (3) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (``ISO/IEC'') Guide 
17026:2015, ``Conformity assessment--Example of a certification scheme 
for tangible products,'' First edition, February 1, 2015, IBR approved 
for Sec.  429.73.
    (4) International Organization for Standardization (ISO)/
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), (``ISO/IEC '') Guide 
17065:2012, ``Conformity assessment--Requirements for bodies certifying 
products, processes and services,'' First edition, September 15, 2012, 
IBR approved for Sec.  429.73.
0
5. Revise Sec.  429.11 to read as follows:


Sec.  429.11  General requirements applicable to certification reports.

    (a) When testing of covered products or covered equipment is 
required to comply with section 323(c) of the Act, or to comply with 
rules prescribed under sections 324, 325, 342, 344, 345 or 346 of the 
Act, a sample comprised of production units (or units representative of 
production units) of the basic model being tested must be selected at 
random and tested, and must meet the criteria found in Sec. Sec.  
429.14 through 429.64. Any represented values of measures of energy 
efficiency, water efficiency, energy consumption, or water consumption 
for all individual models represented by a given basic model must be 
the same; and
    (b) The minimum number of units tested must be no less than two, 
unless otherwise specified. A different minimum number of units may be 
specified for certain products in Sec. Sec.  429.14 through 429.64. If 
fewer than the number of units required for testing is manufactured, 
each unit must be tested.

[[Page 41401]]

0
6. Amend Sec.  429.12 by revising paragraphs (b)(6), (b)(13), and (d) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  429.12  General requirements applicable to certification reports.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) For each brand, the basic model number and the manufacturer's 
individual model number(s) in that basic model with the following 
exceptions: For external power supplies that are certified based on 
design families, the design family model number and the individual 
manufacturer's model numbers covered by that design family must be 
submitted for each brand. For walk-in coolers, electric motors, and 
small electric motors, the basic model number for each brand must be 
submitted. For distribution transformers, the basic model number or kVA 
grouping model number (depending on the certification method) for each 
brand must be submitted. For commercial HVAC, WH, and refrigeration 
equipment, an individual manufacturer model number may be identified as 
a ``private model number'' if it meets the requirements of Sec.  
429.7(b).
* * * * *
    (13) Product specific information listed in Sec. Sec.  429.14 
through 429.64 of this chapter.
* * * * *
    (d) Annual filing. All data required by paragraphs (a) through (c) 
must be submitted to DOE annually, on or before the following dates:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Deadline for data
                 Product category                        submission
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fluorescent lamp ballasts, Medium base compact     Mar. 1.
 fluorescent lamps, Incandescent reflector lamps,
 General service fluorescent lamps, General
 service incandescent lamps, Intermediate base
 incandescent lamps, Candelabra base incandescent
 lamps, Residential ceiling fans, Residential
 ceiling fan light kits, Residential showerheads,
 Residential faucets, Residential water closets,
 and Residential urinals.
Small electric motors............................  April 1.
Residential water heater, Residential furnaces,    May 1.
 Residential boilers, Residential pool heaters,
 Commercial water heaters, Commercial hot water
 supply boilers, Commercial unfired hot water
 storage tanks, Commercial packaged boilers,
 Commercial warm air furnaces, Commercial unit
 heaters and Residential furnace fans.
Residential dishwashers, Commercial prerinse       June 1.
 spray valves, Illuminated exit signs, Traffic
 signal modules, Pedestrian modules, and
 Distribution transformers.
Room air conditioners, Residential central air     July 1.
 conditioners, Residential central heat pumps,
 Small duct high velocity system, Space
 constrained products, Commercial package air-
 conditioning and heating equipment, Packaged
 terminal air conditioners, Packaged terminal
 heat pumps, and Single package vertical units.
Residential refrigerators, Residential             Aug. 1.
 refrigerators-freezers, Residential freezers,
 Commercial refrigerator, freezer, and
 refrigerator-freezer, Automatic commercial
 automatic ice makers, Refrigerated bottled or
 canned beverage vending machine, Walk-in
 coolers, and Walk-in freezers.
Torchieres, Residential dehumidifiers, Metal       Sept. 1.
 halide lamp fixtures, and External power
 supplies.
Residential clothes washers, Residential clothes   Oct. 1.
 dryers, Residential direct heating equipment,
 Residential cooking products, and Commercial
 clothes washers.
Electric motors..................................  Nov. 1.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
0
7. Add Sec.  429.63 to read as follows:


Sec.  429.63  Electric motors.

    (a) Compliance certification. A manufacturer may not certify the 
compliance of an electric motor pursuant to 10 CFR 429.12 unless:
    (1) Testing of the electric motor basic model was conducted using a 
recognized testing program (see Sec.  429.74); or
    (2) A third party certification program that is nationally 
recognized in the United States under Sec.  429.73 has certified the 
efficiency of the electric motor basic model through issuance of a 
certificate of conformity for the basic model; or
    (3) The efficiency of the electric motor basic model was determined 
through the application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of 
Sec.  429.70 and a third party certification program that is nationally 
recognized in the United States under Sec.  429.73 has certified the 
efficiency of the electric motor basic model through issuance of a 
certificate of conformity for the basic model.
    (4) Under paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section, the 
manufacturer and the third-party certification program must certify the 
compliance of the electric motor pursuant to Sec.  429.12.
    (b) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must 
determine the represented value of efficiency, which includes the 
certified rating, for each basic model of electric motor either by 
testing, in conjunction with the applicable sampling provisions, or by 
applying an AEDM.
    (1) Units to be tested. The requirements of Sec.  429.11 apply 
except that, for electric motors, a sample of sufficient size is a 
minimum of five units.
    (i) For each basic model, a sample of sufficient size must be 
randomly selected and tested to ensure that any represented value of 
full-load efficiency or other measure of energy consumption of a basic 
model for which consumers would favor higher values shall be less than 
or equal to the lower of:
    (A) The mean of the sample, where:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.000
    
And, x is the sample mean; n 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 0.95, where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.001

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).

    (ii) Prior to June 1, 2017, a manufacturer may evaluate compliance 
for electric motors as follows. (A manufacturer must indicate the use 
of this provision when certifying compliance.)
    (A) The average full-load efficiency shall satisfy the condition:

[[Page 41402]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.002


where ``RE'' is the rated nominal full-load efficiency for the basic 
model and x equals:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.003

Where xi is the measured full-load efficiency of unit i 
and n is the number of units tested.

    (B) The lowest full-load efficiency in the sample xmin, 
which is defined by

    xmin = min(xi)


shall satisfy the condition:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.004

Where RE is the rated nominal full-load efficiency.

    (2) Alternative efficiency determination methods. In lieu of 
testing, a represented value of efficiency and of total losses for a 
basic model of electric motor must be determined through the 
application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of Sec.  429.70 and 
the provisions of this section, where:
    (i) The represented value of energy efficiency of any basic model 
used to validate an AEDM must be calculated under paragraph (b)(1) of 
this section; and
    (ii) Any represented value of energy efficiency or other measure of 
energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor 
higher values must be less than or equal to the output of the AEDM and 
greater than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model.
    (c) Certification reports. (1) The requirements of Sec.  429.12 
apply to electric motors;
    (2) Pursuant to Sec.  429.12(b)(13), a certification report must 
include the following public, product-specific information for each 
basic model:
    (i) The electric motor category described at 10 CFR 431.25 (e.g., 
fire pump electric motor);
    (ii) The horsepower at which the basic model was tested;
    (iii) The number of poles;
    (iv) The enclosure type (i.e., open or enclosed);
    (v) The rated voltage;
    (vi) The operating frequency;
    (vii) Whether the basic model is subject to specific test procedure 
provisions listed in section 4 of appendix B to subpart B of part 431 
and the type of motor and the motor category of such basic model;
    (viii) The represented full-load efficiency;
    (ix) The represented total losses;
    (x) The sampling methodology used per Sec.  429.63(c);
    (xi) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applied to the 
basic model (see 10 CFR 431.17); and
    (xii) Whether the represented values are based on testing conducted 
in an independent testing laboratory or by a nationally recognized 
certification program and the name of the nationally recognized testing 
or certification program.
0
8. Add Sec.  429.64 to read as follows:


Sec.  429.64  Small electric motors.

    (a) Compliance certification. A manufacturer may not certify the 
compliance of a small electric motor pursuant to Sec.  429.12 unless:
    (1) Testing of the small electric motor basic model was conducted 
using a recognized testing program (see Sec.  429.74); or
    (2) A third-party certification program that is nationally 
recognized in the United States under Sec.  429.73 has certified the 
efficiency of the small electric motor basic model through issuance of 
a certificate of conformity for the basic model; or
    (3) The efficiency of the small electric motor basic model was 
determined through the application of an AEDM pursuant to the 
requirements of Sec.  429.70 and a third-party certification program 
that is nationally recognized in the United States under Sec.  429.73 
has certified the efficiency of the small electric motor basic model 
through issuance of a certificate of conformity for the basic model.
    (4) Under paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section, the 
manufacturer and the third-party certification program must certify the 
compliance of the small electric motor pursuant to Sec.  429.12.
    (b) Determination of represented value. Manufacturers must 
determine the represented value of efficiency, which includes the 
certified rating, for each basic model of small electric motor either 
by testing, in conjunction with the applicable sampling provisions, or 
by applying an AEDM.
    (1) Units to be tested. The requirements of Sec.  429.11 apply to 
small electric motors, except that, for small electric motors, a sample 
of sufficient size is a minimum of five units. For each basic model, a 
sample of sufficient size must be randomly selected and tested to 
ensure that:
    (i) Any represented value of full-load efficiency or other measure 
of energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor 
higher values is less than or equal to the lower of:
    (A) The mean of the sample, where:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.005
    
And, x is the sample mean; n 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 0.95, where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.006

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).

    (2) Alternative efficiency determination methods. In lieu of 
testing, a represented value of efficiency and of total losses for a 
basic model of small electric motor must be determined through the 
application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of Sec.  429.70 and 
the provisions of this section, where:
    (i) The represented value of energy efficiency of any basic model 
used to validate an AEDM must be calculated under paragraph (b)(1) of 
this section; and
    (ii) Any represented value of energy efficiency or other measure of 
energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor 
higher values must be less than or equal to the output of the AEDM and 
greater than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model.
    (c) Certification reports. (1) The requirements of Sec.  429.12 
apply to small electric motors; (2) Pursuant to Sec.  429.12(b)(13), a 
certification report must include the following public product-specific 
information for each basic model:
    (i) The small electric motor category described at 10 CFR 
431.446(a) (e.g., capacitor-start induction-run);
    (ii) The horsepower on which the rating for the basic model is 
based;
    (iii) The number of poles;
    (iv) The represented average full-load efficiency;
    (v) The represented total losses;
    (vi) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applied to the 
basic model (see 10 CFR 431.17);
    (vii) Whether the represented values are based on testing in an 
independent

[[Page 41403]]

testing laboratory or nationally recognized certification program; and
    (viii) The name of the nationally recognized testing or 
certification program.
0
9. Amend Sec.  429.70 by revising paragraph (a) and by adding 
paragraphs (h) and (i) to read as follows:


Sec.  429.70  Alternative methods for determining energy efficiency or 
energy use.

    (a) General. A manufacturer of covered products or covered 
equipment explicitly authorized to use an AEDM in Sec. Sec.  429.14 
through 429.64 may not distribute any basic model of such product or 
equipment in commerce unless the manufacturer has determined the energy 
efficiency of the basic model, either by testing the basic model in 
conjunction with DOE's certification sampling plans and statistics or 
by applying an alternative method for determining energy efficiency or 
energy use (i.e. AEDM) to the basic model in accordance with the 
requirements of this section. In instances where a manufacturer has 
tested a basic model to validate the AEDM, the represented value of 
energy efficiency of that basic model must be determined and certified 
according to results from actual testing in conjunction with this part 
429, subpart B certification sampling plans and statistics. In 
addition, a manufacturer may not knowingly use an AEDM to overrate the 
efficiency of a basic model.
* * * * *
    (h) Alternative efficiency determination method (AEDM) for electric 
motors--(1) Criteria an AEDM must satisfy. A manufacturer is not 
permitted to apply an AEDM to a basic model of electric motor to 
determine its efficiency pursuant to this section unless:
    (i) The AEDM is derived from a mathematical model that estimates 
the energy efficiency characteristics and losses of the basic model as 
measured by the applicable DOE test procedure and accurately represents 
the mechanical and electrical characteristics of that basic model, and
    (ii) The AEDM is based on engineering or statistical analysis, 
computer simulation or modeling, or any other analytical evaluation of 
actual performance data.
    (iii) The manufacturer has validated the AEDM, in accordance with 
paragraph (h)(2) of this section with basic models that meet the 
current Federal energy conservation standards.
    (2) Validation of an AEDM. Before using an AEDM, the manufacturer 
must validate the AEDM's accuracy and reliability as follows:
    (i) Apply the AEDM to at least five basic models that have been 
selected for testing in accordance with paragraph (h)(3) of this 
section, and calculate the predicted average full-load efficiency and 
predicted total power losses for each of these basic models;
    (ii) Test at least five units of each of these basic models in 
accordance with 10 CFR 431.16, and use the measured full-load 
efficiency of the tested units to determine the average full-load 
efficiency for each of these basic models in accordance with Sec.  
429.63 (Basic models used for validation must be certified pursuant to 
the provisions of Sec.  429.63(a)(2).); and
    (iii) The predicted average full-load efficiency for each such 
basic model calculated by applying the AEDM pursuant to paragraph 
(h)(2)(i) of this section must not be more than five percent greater 
than the measured average full-load efficiency determined from the 
testing of that basic model pursuant to paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this 
section; and
    (iv) A manufacturer may not use a basic model with a sample size of 
fewer than five units to validate an AEDM.
    (3) Selection of basic models for testing. (i) A manufacturer must 
select basic models for testing in accordance with the following 
criteria:
    (A) Two of the basic models must be among the five basic models 
with the highest unit volumes of production by the manufacturer in the 
prior year. In identifying these five basic models, any basic model of 
electric motor that does not comply with Sec.  431.25 shall be excluded 
from consideration.
    (B) No two basic models may have the same horsepower rating;
    (C) No two basic models may have the same frame number series; and
    (D) Each basic model must have the lowest average full-load 
efficiency among the basic models within the same equipment class.
    (ii) In any instance where it is impossible for a manufacturer to 
select basic models for testing in accordance with all of these 
criteria, the criteria shall be given priority in the order in which 
they are listed. Within the limits imposed by the criteria, select 
basic models randomly.
    (4) Verification of an AEDM. (i) Each manufacturer that has used an 
AEDM under this section must have available for inspection by the 
Department of Energy records showing:
    (A) The method or methods used to develop the AEDM;
    (B) The mathematical model, the engineering or statistical 
analysis, computer simulation or modeling, and any other analytical 
evaluation of performance data on which the AEDM is based;
    (C) Complete test data, product information, and related 
information that the manufacturer has generated or acquired pursuant to 
paragraphs (h)(2) and (h)(4)(ii) of this section; and
    (D) The calculations used to determine the average full-load 
efficiency of each basic model to which the AEDM was applied.
    (ii) If requested by the Department, the manufacturer must:
    (A) Conduct simulations to predict the performance of particular 
basic models of electric motors specified by the Department;
    (B) Provide analyses of previous simulations conducted by the 
manufacturer; and/or
    (C) Conduct testing of basic models selected by the Department.
    (i) Alternative efficiency determination method (AEDM) for small 
electric motors. (1) Criteria an AEDM must satisfy. A manufacturer is 
not permitted to apply an AEDM to a basic model of small electric motor 
to determine its efficiency pursuant to this section unless:
    (i) The AEDM is derived from a mathematical model that estimates 
the energy efficiency characteristics and losses of the basic model as 
measured by the applicable DOE test procedure and represents the 
mechanical and electrical characteristics of that basic model, and
    (ii) The AEDM is based on engineering or statistical analysis, 
computer simulation or modeling, or other analytic evaluation of actual 
performance data.
    (iii) The manufacturer has validated the AEDM, in accordance with 
paragraph (h)(2) of this section with basic models that meet the 
current Federal energy conservation standards.
    (2) Validation of an AEDM. Before using an AEDM, the manufacturer 
must validate the AEDM's accuracy and reliability as follows:
    (i) A manufacturer must first apply the AEDM to at least five basic 
models that have been selected for testing in accordance with paragraph 
(i)(3) of this section, and calculate the predicted average full-load 
efficiency for each of these basic models;
    (ii) Test at least five units of each of these basic models in 
accordance with 10 CFR 431.444 and use the measured full-load 
efficiency of the tested units to determine the measured average full-
load efficiency in accordance with Sec.  429.64. (Basic models used for

[[Page 41404]]

validation must be certified pursuant to the provisions of Sec.  
429.64(a)(2).); and
    (iii) The predicted average full-load efficiency for each such 
basic model calculated by applying the AEDM pursuant to paragraph 
(i)(2)(i) of this section must not be more than five percent greater 
than the measured average full-load efficiency determined from the 
testing of that basic model pursuant to paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this 
section; and
    (iv) A manufacturer may not use a basic model with a sample size of 
fewer than five units to validate an AEDM.
    (3) Selection of basic models for testing. (i) A manufacturer must 
select basic models for testing in accordance with the following 
criteria:
    (A) Two of the basic models must be among the five basic models 
with the highest unit volumes of production by the manufacturer in the 
prior year. In identifying these five basic models, any small electric 
motor that does not comply with Sec.  431.446 shall be excluded from 
consideration.
    (B) No two basic models may have the same horsepower rating;
    (C) No two basic models may have the same frame number series; and
    (D) Each basic model must have the lowest average full-load 
efficiency among the basic models within the same equipment class.
    (ii) In any instance where it is impossible for a manufacturer to 
select basic models for testing in accordance with all of these 
criteria, the criteria shall be given priority in the order in which 
they are listed. Within the limits imposed by the criteria, select 
basic models randomly.
    (4) Verification of an AEDM. (i) Each manufacturer that has used an 
AEDM under this section must have available for inspection by the 
Department of Energy records showing:
    (A) The method or methods used to develop the AEDM;
    (B) The mathematical model, the engineering or statistical 
analysis, computer simulation or modeling, and any other analytical 
evaluation of performance data on which the AEDM is based;
    (C) Complete test data, product information, and related 
information that the manufacturer has generated or acquired pursuant to 
paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(4)(ii) of this section; and
    (D) The calculations used to determine the average full-load 
efficiency of each basic model to which the AEDM was applied.
    (ii) If requested by the Department, the manufacturer must:
    (A) Conduct simulations to predict the performance of particular 
basic models of small electric motors specified by the Department;
    (B) Provide analyses of previous simulations conducted by the 
manufacturer; and/or
    (C) Conduct testing of basic models selected by the Department.
0
10. Add Sec.  429.73 to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec.  429.73  Department of Energy recognition of nationally recognized 
certification programs for electric motors and small electric motors.

    (a) Purpose. This section sets forth the process by which a 
certification program may be classified by the Department of Energy as 
being nationally recognized in the United States for the purposes of 
certifying that basic models of electric motors or small electric 
motors meet applicable energy conservation standards.
    (b) Petition. For a certification program to be classified by the 
Department of Energy as being nationally recognized, the organization 
operating the program must submit a petition to the Department 
requesting such classification, in accordance with paragraph (d) of 
this section and Sec.  429.75. The petition must demonstrate that the 
program meets the criteria in paragraph (c) of this section.
    (c) Evaluation criteria. (1) General. For a certification program 
to be classified by the Department as nationally recognized, it must 
meet the following criteria:
    (i) It must have standards and procedures for conducting and 
administering a certification system that, at a minimum, are consistent 
with the certification requirements of this part. Such standards and 
procedures must also include periodic follow-up activities to ensure 
that basic models of electric motors and small electric motors continue 
to conform to the efficiency levels for which they were certified and 
granted a certificate of conformity. Periodic follow-up activities must 
include: Periodic verification testing, including sampling provisions; 
selection criteria; a process for determining compliance with 
standards; and a process for reporting models that perform worse than 
the applicable standard to DOE; and
    (ii) It must be independent of any electric motor or small electric 
motor manufacturer for which it is providing certification as defined 
at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors and 10 CFR 431.442 for small 
electric motors.
    (2) Electric motors. The certification program must be expert in 
the content and application of the test procedures and methodologies at 
10 CFR 431.16 and 10 CFR 429.63.
    (3) Small electric motors. The certification program must be expert 
in the content and application of the test procedures and methodologies 
at 10 CFR 431.444 and 10 CFR 429.64.
    (d) Petition format. Each petition requesting classification as a 
nationally recognized certification program must contain a narrative 
statement as to why the program meets the criteria listed in paragraph 
(c) of this section, must be signed on behalf of the organization 
operating the program by an authorized representative, and must be 
accompanied by documentation that supports the narrative statement. The 
following provides additional requirements as to the specific criteria:
    (1) Standards and procedures. The petitioning organization must 
include a copy of the standards and procedures it uses for operating 
its certification system and for granting a certificate of conformity, 
including any accreditations that the petitioning organization holds. 
These documents must include a program manual or handbook that 
describes how the program conducts periodic verification testing, 
including, but not limited to, information such as the percentage of 
basic models tested annually, the process for selecting basic models 
for verification testing, the process for selecting or obtaining units 
for testing, any controls to ensure that tested units are production 
units or are representative of production units, etc.
    (2) Independent status. The petitioning organization must describe 
how it is independent (as defined at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors 
and 10 CFR 431.442 for small electric motors) from electric motor or 
small electric motor manufacturers, importers, distributors, private 
labelers, vendors, and trade associations.
    (3) Qualifications to operate a certification system. The 
petitioning organization must describe its experience in operating a 
certification system. The experience should be discussed in detail and 
substantiated by supporting documents. Of particular relevance would be 
documentary evidence that establishes experience in running a 
certification program, such as the application of guidelines contained 
in the ISO/IEC Guide 17065:2012 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
429.4), ISO/IEC Guide 27 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  429.4), 
and ISO/IEC Guide 17026:2015, (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  
429.4), as well as experience in overseeing compliance with the 
guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  429.4).

[[Page 41405]]

    (4) Expertise in test procedures--(i) General. This part of the 
petition should include items such as, but not limited to, a 
description of prior projects and qualifications of staff members. Of 
particular relevance would be documentary evidence that establishes 
experience in laboratory calibration procedures such as those 
guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  429.4), and with energy efficiency testing of the 
equipment to be certified.
    (ii) Electric motors. The petition should set forth the program's 
experience with the test procedures and methodologies detailed in 10 
CFR 431.16 and Sec.  429.63.
    (iii) Small electric motors. The petition should set forth the 
program's experience with the test procedures and methodologies 
detailed in 10 CFR 431.444 and Sec.  429.64.
    (5) Laboratory requirements. The petition must include documentary 
evidence that establishes experience in applying and maintaining 
laboratory calibration procedures, such as those contained in ISO/IEC 
Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  429.4), to 
energy efficiency testing of the equipment to be certified.
    (e) Disposition. The Department will evaluate the petition in 
accordance with Sec.  429.75, and will determine whether the applicant 
meets the criteria in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section for 
classification as a nationally recognized certification program.
0
11. Add Sec.  429.74 to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec.  429.74  Department of Energy recognition of independent testing 
programs for electric motors and small electric motors.

    (a) Purpose. This section sets forth the process by which a testing 
program may be classified by the Department of Energy as being 
nationally recognized in the United States for the purposes of 
certifying that basic models of electric motors or small electric 
motors meet applicable energy conservation standards.
    (b) Petition. For a testing program to be classified by the 
Department of Energy as being nationally recognized, the organization 
operating the program must submit a petition to the Department 
requesting such classification, in accordance with Sec.  429.75. A 
petition for recognition of an independent testing program must include 
the information specified in paragraph (d) of this section. The 
petition must demonstrate that the program meets the criteria in 
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (c) Evaluation criteria for independent testing programs. (1) 
General. For a testing program to be classified by the Department as 
nationally recognized, it must meet the following criteria:
    (i) It must have standards and procedures for conducting and 
administering an accreditation system that, at a minimum, ensures 
compliance with the testing requirements of this part and part 431. 
Such standards and procedures must also include periodic follow-up 
activities to ensure that the testing facilities continue to generate 
test results that are reliable and reproducible. Periodic follow-up 
activities must include: verification that testing is conducted in 
accordance with DOE regulatory requirements, including sampling 
provisions; assurance that independence is maintained; and that 
appropriate laboratory procedures are followed, including lab 
accreditation to ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by 
reference, see Sec.  429.4) and to the DOE test method.
    (ii) It must be independent of any electric motor or small electric 
motor manufacturer as defined at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors and 
10 CFR 431.442 for small electric motors.
    (iii) It must demonstrate the ability to accredit testing 
facilities as meeting the following additional criteria: test 
facilities must be independent of electric motor or small electric 
motor manufacturers, importers, distributors, private labelers, 
vendors, and trade associations; test facilities must have the 
expertise necessary to conduct testing in accordance with the DOE test 
procedure, test facilities must have appropriate equipment, and 
recordkeeping and calibration procedures.
    (2) Electric motors. The testing program must be expert in the 
content and application of the test procedures and methodologies at 10 
CFR 431.16 and 10 CFR 429.63.
    (3) Small electric motors. The testing program must be expert in 
the content and application of the test procedures and methodologies at 
10 CFR 431.444 and 10 CFR 429.64.
    (d) Petition format. Each petition requesting classification as a 
nationally recognized testing program must contain a narrative 
statement as to why the program meets the criteria listed in paragraph 
(c) of this section, must be signed on behalf of the organization 
operating the program by an authorized representative, and must be 
accompanied by documentation that supports the narrative statement. The 
following provides additional requirements as to the specific criteria:
    (1) Standards and procedures. The petitioning organization must 
include a copy of the standards and procedures it uses for operating 
its accreditation system and for granting a testing facility 
accreditation, including any accreditations that the petitioning 
organization holds. These documents must include a program manual or 
handbook that describes how the program conducts periodic assessments 
to ensure the testing facility continues to meet the required criteria, 
including, but not limited to, the number of motors tested annually to 
ensure repeatable results, the process for verifying the labs methods 
for selecting or obtaining units for testing, any controls to ensure 
that tested units are production units or are representative of 
production units, etc.
    (2) Independent status. The petitioning organization must describe 
how it is independent (as defined at 10 CFR 431.12 for electric motors 
and 10 CFR 431.442 for small electric motors) from electric motor or 
small electric motor manufacturers, importers, distributors, private 
labelers, vendors, and trade associations and the methods it uses to 
ensure that testing facilities recognized are also independent.
    (3) Qualifications to operate a testing program. The petitioning 
organization must describe its experience in operating an accreditation 
system for testing facilities. The experience should be discussed in 
detail and substantiated by supporting documents. Of particular 
relevance would be documentary evidence that establishes experience in 
running an accreditation program, such as the application of guidelines 
contained in the ISO/IEC Guide 17065:2012 (incorporated by reference, 
see Sec.  429.4), ISO/IEC Guide 27 (incorporated by reference, see 
Sec.  429.4), and ISO/IEC Guide 17026:2015, (incorporated by reference, 
see Sec.  429.4), as well as experience in overseeing compliance with 
the guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  429.4).
    (4) Expertise in test procedures--(i) General. This part of the 
petition should include items such as, but not limited to, a 
description of prior projects and qualifications of staff members. Of 
particular relevance would be documentary evidence that establishes 
experience in laboratory calibration procedures such as those 
guidelines contained in the ISO/IEC Guide 17025: 2005(E) (incorporated 
by reference, see Sec.  429.4), and with energy efficiency testing of 
the equipment to be certified. The petitioning organization is

[[Page 41406]]

responsible for having expertise so as to be qualified to assess the 
expertise of recognized testing facilities.
    (ii) Electric motors. The petition should set forth the program's 
experience with the test procedures and methodologies in 10 CFR 431.16 
and Sec.  429.63.
    (iii) Small electric motors. The petition should set forth the 
program's experience with the test procedures and methodologies 10 CFR 
431.444 and Sec.  429.64.
    (5) Laboratory requirements. The petition must include documentary 
evidence that establishes experience in applying and maintaining 
laboratory calibration procedures, such as those contained in ISO/IEC 
Guide 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  429.4) to 
energy efficiency testing of the equipment to be certified.
    (e) Disposition. The Department will evaluate the petition in 
accordance with Sec.  429.75, and will determine whether the applicant 
meets the criteria in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section for 
classification as a nationally recognized certification program.
0
12. Add Sec.  429.75 to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec.  429.75  Procedures for recognition and withdrawal of recognition 
of independent testing or certification programs.

    (a) Filing of petition. Any petition submitted to the Department 
pursuant to Sec.  429.73(a) or Sec.  429.74(a), shall be entitled 
``Petition for Recognition'' (``Petition'') and must be submitted to 
the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 
U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue 
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121, or via email to [email address TBD]. In 
accordance with the provisions set forth in 10 CFR 1004.11, any request 
for confidential treatment of any information contained in such a 
Petition or in supporting documentation must be accompanied by a copy 
of the Petition or supporting documentation from which the information 
claimed to be confidential has been deleted.
    (b) Public notice and solicitation of comments. DOE shall publish 
in the Federal Register the petition from which confidential 
information, as determined by DOE, has been deleted in accordance with 
10 CFR 1004.11 and shall solicit comments, data and information on 
whether the Petition should be granted. The Department shall also make 
available for inspection and copying the Petition's supporting 
documentation from which confidential information, as determined by 
DOE, has been deleted in accordance with 10 CFR 1004.11. Any person 
submitting written comments to DOE with respect to a petition shall 
also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner.
    (c) Responsive statement by the petitioner. A petitioner may, 
within 10 business days of receipt from DOE of a copy of any comments 
submitted in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section, respond to 
such comments in a written statement submitted to the Assistant 
Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. A petitioner may 
address more than one set of comments in a single responsive statement.
    (d) Optional second round of public comment. If, after reviewing 
comments on the Petition and the petitioner's response, DOE determines 
that a second round of comments is necessary to resolve conflicting 
information or gather additional information crucial to DOE's decision, 
DOE may solicit through a Federal Register notice additional comments, 
data and information on whether the Petition should be granted.
    (e) Public announcement of final determination. The Assistant 
Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy shall, as soon as 
practicable, publish in the Federal Register a notice of final 
determination on the petition.
    (f) Additional information. DOE may, at any time during the 
recognition process, request additional relevant information or conduct 
an investigation concerning the petition. DOE's determination on a 
petition may be based solely on the petition and supporting documents, 
or may also be based on such additional information as DOE deems 
appropriate.
    (g) Withdrawal of recognition--(1) Withdrawal by the Department. If 
DOE believes that a program that has been recognized under Sec. Sec.  
429.73 or 429.74 is failing to meet the criteria of paragraphs (c) and 
(d) of that section, DOE may initiate withdrawal of recognition as 
follows:
    (i) DOE will provide a written notification to the affected program 
citing the basis or bases for its belief that corrective action is 
warranted. The notification will indicate the time period within which 
the program must complete such corrective actions and report the status 
of completion to DOE. In no case shall the time allowed for corrective 
action exceed 180 days from the date of the notice (inclusive of the 30 
days allowed under paragraph (g)(1)(ii) of this section for disputing 
the bases for DOE's notification of withdrawal).
    (ii) If the program wishes to dispute any bases identified in the 
notification, the program must respond to DOE within 30 days of receipt 
of the notification.
    (iii) If, after the time period for corrective action has expired, 
DOE believes that the applicable criteria that were identified in the 
notification under paragraph (i) have not been met, DOE will withdraw 
its recognition from that program and provide a formal written 
notification to the program of such action. DOE shall identify the 
effective date of withdrawal in the notice required by paragraph (g)(3) 
of this section, which in no case shall be more than 30 days following 
the publication date of the notice.
    (iv) In order to exhaust administrative remedies, any person 
aggrieved by an action under this section must file an appeal with the 
DOE's Office of Hearings and Appeals as provided in 10 CFR part 1003, 
subpart C, within 30 days of receipt of the notice of DOE's withdrawal 
of recognition.
    (2) Voluntary withdrawal. A program may, under 10 CFR 429.75, 
unilaterally withdraw its recognition by advising DOE in writing of 
such withdrawal. It must also advise manufacturers utilizing the 
certification program of such withdrawal. Any notice provided to DOE or 
to manufacturers pursuant to this paragraph must identify the date on 
which the withdrawal is effective, the equipment types covered by the 
program to be withdrawn, and any effect the withdrawal has on the 
validity of certifications, recognition, or accreditation previously 
issued by the program. In no case shall such notification occur less 
than 30 days prior to the effective date of withdrawal.
    (3) Notice of withdrawal of recognition. DOE will publish in the 
Federal Register a notice of any withdrawal of recognition that occurs 
pursuant to this paragraph. Such notice will identify the effective 
date of withdrawal, the product or equipment types covered by the 
program being withdrawn, and any effect the withdrawal has on the 
validity of certifications or other recognition previously issued by 
the program.
0
13. Add Sec.  429.76 to subpart B to read as follows:


Sec.  429.76  Labeling and other representations.

    (a) General. If a basic model is a type of covered product or 
equipment for which DOE requires a label, the label must be in 
conformance with the requirements of this section.
    (b) Electric motors--(1) Required information. All units produced 
of any basic model of electric motor for which standards are prescribed 
in Sec.  431.25 of

[[Page 41407]]

this chapter must bear a permanent nameplate that is marked clearly 
with the following information:
    (i) The electric motor's represented full-load efficiency as 
certified pursuant to Sec.  429.63. If a motor is rated at multiple 
voltages, then only display the lowest represented full-load efficiency 
as certified pursuant to Sec.  429.63; and
    (ii) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applicable to 
that unit. Such MIN must be on the nameplate of an electric motor at 
the time of its distribution in commerce.
    (2) Display of required information. All orientation, spacing, type 
sizes, typefaces, and line widths to display this required information 
must be the same as or similar to the display of any other performance 
data on the motor's permanent nameplate. The represented full-load 
efficiency must be identified either by the term ``Represented Full-
Load Efficiency'' or ``Rep. Full-Load. Eff.'' The MIN must be in the 
form ``MIN: __''.
    (3) Disclosure of efficiency information in marketing materials. 
The electric motor's represented full-load efficiency as certified 
pursuant to Sec.  429.63 must be prominently displayed:
    (i) On each page of a catalog that lists the motor; and
    (ii) In other materials used to market the motor.
    (4) Preemption of State regulations. The provisions of this 
paragraph supersede any State regulation to the extent required by 
section 327 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 6297), as applied to electric motors 
via section 345 of the Act (42 U.S.C. 6316). Pursuant to the Act, all 
State regulations that require the disclosure for any electric motor of 
information with respect to energy consumption, other than the 
information required to be disclosed in accordance with this paragraph, 
are superseded.
    (c) Small electric motors--(1) Required information. All units 
produced of any basic model of small electric motor for which standards 
are prescribed in Sec.  431.446 of this chapter must bear a permanent 
nameplate that is marked clearly with the following information:
    (i) The small electric motor's represented average full-load 
efficiency as certified pursuant to Sec.  429.64; and
    (ii) The manufacturer identification number (MIN) applicable to 
that unit. Such MIN must be on the nameplate of a small electric motor 
at the time of its distribution in commerce.
    (2) Display of required information. All orientation, spacing, type 
sizes, typefaces, and line widths to display this required information 
must be the same as or similar to the display of any other performance 
data on the motor's permanent nameplate. The represented average full-
load efficiency must be identified either by the term ``Represented 
Average Full-Load Efficiency'' or ``Rep. Avg. Full-Load. Eff.'' The MIN 
must be in the form ``MIN: __''.
0
14. Amend Sec.  429.102 by revising the section heading and by adding 
paragraphs (a)(11) through (14) to read as follows:


Sec.  429.102  Prohibited acts.

    (a) * * *
    (11) Distribution in commerce by a manufacturer or private labeler 
of any covered equipment which is not labeled in accordance with this 
part;
    (12) Removal from any covered equipment or rendering illegible, by 
a manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or private labeler, any label 
required to be provided under this part;
    (13) Advertisement of an electric motor, by a manufacturer, 
distributor, retailer, or private labeler, in a catalog from which the 
equipment may be purchased, without including in the catalog all 
information as required by Sec.  429.76(b)(3), provided, however, that 
this shall not apply to an advertisement of an electric motor in a 
catalog if distribution of the catalog began before the effective date 
of the labeling rule applicable to that motor; or
    (14) For any manufacturer or private labeler of a small electric 
motor to distribute in commerce any small electric motor required by 
Sec.  429.76 to be labeled that is not in conformity with the relevant 
energy conservation standard found at 10 CFR 431.446.
0
15. Amend Sec.  429.110 by revising paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii), 
(c)(3), and (e)(6) through (8) to read as follows:


Sec.  429.110  Enforcement testing.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Manufacturer's warehouse, distributor, or other facility 
affiliated with the manufacturer. DOE will select a batch sample at 
random in accordance with the provisions in paragraph (e) of this 
section and the conditions specified in the test notice. DOE will 
randomly select an initial test sample of units from the batch sample 
for testing in accordance with appendices A through D of this subpart. 
DOE will make a determination whether an alternative sample size will 
be used in accordance with the provisions in paragraph (e) of this 
section.
    (ii) Retailer or other facility not affiliated with the 
manufacturer. DOE will select an initial test sample of units at random 
that satisfies the minimum number of units necessary for testing in 
accordance with the provisions in appendices A through D of this 
subpart and the conditions specified in the test notice. Depending on 
the results of the testing, DOE may select additional units for testing 
from a retailer in accordance with appendices A through D of this 
subpart. If the full sample is not available from a retailer, DOE will 
make a determination whether an alternative sample size will be used in 
accordance with the provisions in paragraph (e) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) The resulting test data shall constitute official test data for 
the basic model. Such test data will be used by DOE to make a 
determination of compliance or noncompliance if a sufficient number of 
tests have been conducted to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (e) 
of this section and appendices A through D of this subpart.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (6) For electric motors and small electric motors, DOE will use an 
initial sample size of at least five units and follow the sampling 
plans in appendix D of this subpart (Sampling Plan for Enforcement 
Testing of Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors). 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 (for a total sample of at least five); or
    (B) At least five of the other units that subsequently become 
available.
    (7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(6) 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.
    (8) When DOE makes a determination in accordance with paragraph 
(e)(6) to test less than the number of units specified in paragraph 
(e)(1) through (e)(6) of this section, DOE will base the compliance 
determination on the results

[[Page 41408]]

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.
    (9) For the purposes of this section, available units are those 
that are available for distribution in commerce within the United 
States.
0
16. Add Sec.  429.138 to read as follows:


Sec.  429.138  Electric motors representations.

    (a) Purpose. This provision is used to evaluate whether a 
representation is permitted for purposes of the prohibited acts related 
to labeling and representations.
    (b) Electric motors. Any represented value of nominal full-load 
efficiency must satisfy the condition:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.007

Where, RE is the represented nominal full-load efficiency and the 
average full-load efficiency of the sample, x is defined by:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.008

Where xi is the measured full-load efficiency of unit i 
and n is the number of units tested. And, the lowest measured full-
load efficiency in the sample, xmin, which is defined by:


Xmin = min(xi)

must satisfy the condition
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.009

Where RE is the represented nominal full-load efficiency.

0
17. 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 Electric Motors and Small Electric Motors

    Step 1. The first sample size (n1) must be five or 
more units.
    Step 2. Compute the mean (X1) of the measured energy 
performance of the n1 units in the first sample as 
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.010

where Xi is the measured full-load efficiency of unit i.
    Step 3. Compute the sample standard deviation (S1) of 
the measured energy efficiency of the n1 units in the 
first sample as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.011

    Step 4. Compute the standard error (SE(X1)) of the 
mean full-load efficiency of the first sample as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.012

    Step 5. Compute the lower control limit (LCL1) for 
the mean of the first sample using RE as the desired mean as 
follows:

(LCL1)= RE-tSE(X1)

where: RE is the applicable standard full-load efficiency when the 
test is to determine compliance with the applicable statutory 
standard, or is the represented average full-load efficiency when 
the test is to determine compliance with the labeled efficiency 
value, and t is the 2.5th percentile of a t-distribution for a 
sample size of n1, which yields a 97.5 percent confidence 
level for a one-tailed t-test.
    Step 6. Compare the mean of the first sample (X)1) 
with the lower control limit (LCL1) to determine one of 
the following:
    (i) If the mean of the first sample is below the lower control 
limit, then the basic model is in non-compliance and testing is at 
an end.
    (ii) If the mean is equal to or greater than the lower control 
limit, no final determination of compliance or non-compliance can be 
made; proceed to Step 7.
    Step 7. Determine the recommended sample size (n) as follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.013
    
where S1, RE and t have the values used in Steps 3 and 5, 
respectively. The factor
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.014

is based on a 20 percent tolerance in the total power loss at full-
load and fixed output power.

    Given the value of n, determine one of the 
following:X1
    (i) If the value of n is less than or equal to n1 and 
if the mean energy efficiency of the first sample (X1) is 
equal to or greater than the lower control limit (LCL1), 
the basic model is compliant and testing is at an end.
    (ii) If the value of n is greater than n1, the basic 
model is in non-compliance. The size of a second sample 
n2 is determined to be the smallest integer equal to or 
greater than the difference n-n1 . If the value of 
n2 so calculated is greater than 21-n1, set 
n2 equal to 21-n1.
    Step 8. Compute the combined (X2) mean of the 
measured energy performance of the n1 and n2 
units of the combined first and second samples as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.015

    Step 9. Compute the standard error (SE(X2)) of the 
mean full-load efficiency of the n1 and n2 
units in the combined first and second samples as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP24JN16.016

(Note that S1 is the value obtained above in Step 3.)
    Step 10. Set the lower control limit (LCL2) to,

(LCL1) = RE-tSE(X1)

where t has the value obtained in Step 5, and compare the combined 
sample mean (X2) to the lower control limit 
(LCL2) to find one of the following:
    (i) If the mean of the combined sample (x2) is less 
than the lower control limit (LCL2), the basic model is 
in non-compliance and testing is at an end.
    (ii) If the mean of the combined sample (X2) is equal 
to or greater than the lower control limit (LCL2), the 
basic model is not found to be in non-compliance and testing is at 
an end.

PART 431--ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND 
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT

0
18. The authority citation for part 431 continues to read as follows:

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


Sec.  431.2  [Amended]

0
19. Amend Sec.  431.2 by removing the definition of ``Independent 
laboratory''.
0
20. Revise Sec.  431.11 to read as follows:


Sec.  431.11  Purpose and scope.

    This subpart contains energy conservation requirements for electric 
motors, including test procedures, energy conservation standards, and 
related requirements prescribed or authorized by EPCA. This subpart 
does not cover ``small electric motors,'' which are addressed in 
subpart X of this part.
0
21. Amend Sec.  431.12 by:
0
a. Removing the definitions of ``Accreditation'', ``Accreditation 
body'', ``Accreditation system'', and ``Accredited laboratory'';
0
b. Revising the definition of ``Basic model;'' and
0
c. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definitions of ``Equipment 
class'' and ``Independent''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  431.12  Definitions.

* * * * *

[[Page 41409]]

    Basic model means, with respect to an electric motor, all units of 
a given type of electric motor (or class thereof) manufactured by a 
single manufacturer, and which are part of the same equipment class, 
have electrical characteristics that are essentially identical, and do 
not have any differing physical or functional characteristics that 
affect energy consumption or efficiency.
* * * * *
    Equipment class means one of the combinations of an electric 
motor's horsepower (or standard kilowatt equivalent), number of poles, 
and open or enclosed construction, with respect to which Sec.  431.25 
prescribes nominal full-load efficiency standards.
* * * * *
    Independent means, in the context of a testing laboratory or 
certification program, an entity that is not controlled by, or under 
common control with, electric motor manufacturers, importers, private 
labelers, or vendors, and that has no affiliation, financial ties, or 
contractual agreements, apparently or otherwise, with such entities 
that would:
    (1) Hinder the ability of the laboratory or program to evaluate 
fully or report the measured or calculated energy efficiency of any 
electric motor, or
    (2) Create any potential or actual conflict of interest that would 
undermine the validity of said evaluation.
* * * * *


Sec.  431.14  [Removed]

0
22. Remove Sec.  431.14.
0
23. Revise Sec.  431.16 to read as follows:


Sec.  431.16  Test procedures for measurement of energy efficiency.

    For purposes of this part and EPCA, the test procedures for 
measuring the energy efficiency of an electric motor shall be the test 
procedures specified in appendix B to this subpart B. For each basic 
model of electric motor for which a manufacturer wishes to make a 
representation of the motor's ability to be installed and operated at 
multiple voltages, the electric motor must meet each of the energy 
conservation standards at the voltages for which the manufacturer has 
claimed it can be installed and operated.
0
24. Revise Sec.  431.17 to read as follows:


Sec.  431.17  Manufacturer identification numbers.

    (a) For the purposes of compliance with the labeling requirements 
of 10 CFR 429.76, before an electric motor may be distributed in 
commerce, DOE must issue a manufacturer identification number (MIN) in 
accordance with this paragraph for display on the permanent nameplate 
of each unit of a basic model of electric motor for which part 431 
prescribes an energy conservation standard. For purposes of this 
section, ``original equipment manufacturer'' (OEM) means the 
manufacturer that produces or assembles a unit; only one OEM is 
responsible for the manufacture (production or assembly) of a unit.
    (b) Issuance of manufacturer identification numbers. (1) Before a 
certification report is submitted for a basic model, a MIN must be 
requested from DOE for use with each specific brand name to be listed 
in the certification report.
    (2) DOE will provide a unique MIN for each OEM-brand name 
combination, subject to the following provisions:
    (i) DOE will not issue a MIN for use with the same brand name if a 
MIN has already been issued for that combination of OEM and brand name, 
and
    (ii) DOE will issue a MIN for use only with a single OEM-brand name 
combination.
    (3) Once DOE has issued a MIN for a particular OEM-brand name 
combination, that MIN shall be the only MIN applicable to all electric 
motors manufactured by the OEM and labeled under that brand name.
    (4) A MIN issued by DOE may not be transferred to another entity or 
used on the nameplates of basic models other than the OEM and brand 
name associated with the MIN to which DOE initially issued the MIN.
    (c) Discontinuance of manufacturer identification numbers. In the 
event the brand name(s) to which a MIN is applicable ceases to be 
manufactured, the OEM must notify DOE of such discontinuation within 30 
days of the discontinuation, after which time the MIN will terminate 
and be invalid for use on nameplates of electric motors manufactured 
after such date.
    (d) Method of submitting requests and notifications. MIN requests 
required by paragraph (a) of this section or MIN discontinuance 
notifications required by paragraph (c) of this section must be 
submitted to DOE either electronically at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (CCMS) or via email to 
MotorMINRequest@ee.doe.gov. The applicable form for each action online 
is available at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/forms.


Sec. Sec.  431.18, 431.19, 431.20, and 431.21  [Removed]

0
25. Remove Sec. Sec.  431.18, 431.19, 431.20 and 431.21.
0
26. Section 431.25 is amended by adding paragraph (m) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  431.25  Energy conservation standards and effective dates.

* * * * *
    (m) Rated voltages. A basic model of electric motor for which there 
are energy conservations standards must comply with such standards at 
all of the voltages for which the motor is rated by the manufacturer to 
be used.


Sec. Sec.  431.31 and 431.32  [Removed]

0
27. Remove Sec. Sec.  431.31 and 431.32 and the undesignated center 
heading ``Labeling'' preceeding them.
0
28. Revise Sec.  431.35 to read as follows:


Sec.  431.35  Applicability of certification requirements.

    Sections 429.12 and 429.63 of this chapter set forth the procedures 
for manufacturers to certify that electric motors comply with the 
applicable energy efficiency standards set forth in this subpart.


Sec.  431.36  [Removed]

0
29. Remove Sec.  431.36.

Appendix C to Subpart B of Part 431--[Removed]

0
30. Remove appendix C to subpart B of part 431.

Subpart U--[Removed and Reserved]

0
31. Remove and reserve subpart U, consisting of Sec. Sec.  431.381 
through 431.387 and appendix A to subpart U of part 431.
0
32. Amend Sec.  431.442 by:
0
a. Revising the definition of ``Basic model''; and
0
b. Adding, in alphabetical order, definitions of ``Equipment class'' 
and ``Independent.''
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  431.442  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Basic model means, with respect to a small electric motor, all 
units of a given type of small electric motor (or class thereof) 
manufactured by a single manufacturer, and which are part of the same 
equipment class, have electrical characteristics that are essentially 
identical, and do not have any differing physical or functional 
characteristics which affect energy consumption or efficiency.
* * * * *
    Equipment class means one of the combinations of a small electric 
motor's type (i.e., capacitor-start capacitor-run, capacitor-start 
induction-run, or polyphase), horsepower (or standard kilowatt 
equivalent), and number of

[[Page 41410]]

poles, with respect to which Sec.  431.446 prescribes average full-load 
efficiency standards.
* * * * *
    Independent means, in the context of a testing laboratory or 
nationally recognized certification program, an entity that is not 
controlled by or under common control with small electric motor 
manufacturers, importers, private labelers, or vendors, and that has no 
affiliation, financial ties, or contractual agreements, apparently or 
otherwise, with such entities that would:
    (1) Hinder the ability of the laboratory or program to evaluate 
fully or report the measured or calculated energy efficiency of any 
small electric motor, or
    (2) Create any apparent or actual conflict of interest that would 
undermine the validity of said evaluation. For purposes of this 
definition, financial ties or contractual agreements between an 
electric motor manufacturer, importer, private labeler or vendor and a 
testing laboratory or certification program exclusively for testing or 
certification services does not negate an otherwise independent 
relationship.
* * * * *


Sec.  431.445  [Removed]

0
33. Remove Sec.  431.445.
0
34. Amend Sec.  431.446 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  431.446  Small electric motors energy conservation standards and 
their effective dates.

* * * * *
    (c) A small electric motor that is installed as a component of a 
unit of an enumerated type of covered product under 42 U.S.C. 6302(a) 
or covered equipment under 42 U.S.C. 6311 at the time of distribution 
in commerce by the small electric motor manufacturer or private labeler 
is not subject to the standards specified in paragraph (a) of this 
section.
0
35. Revise Sec.  431.447 to read as follows:


Sec.  431.447  Manufacturer Identification Numbers.

    (a) For the purposes of compliance with the labeling requirements 
of 10 CFR 429.76, before a small electric motor may be distributed in 
commerce, DOE must issue a manufacturer identification number (MIN) in 
accordance with this paragraph. For purposes of this section, 
``original equipment manufacturer'' (OEM) means the manufacturer that 
produces or assembles the small electric motor at issue.
    (b) Issuance of manufacturer identification numbers. (1) Before a 
certification report is submitted for a basic model, a MIN must be 
requested from DOE for use with each specific brand name to be listed 
in the certification report.
    (2) DOE will provide a unique MIN for each OEM-brand name 
combination, subject to the following provisions:
    (i) DOE will not issue a MIN for use with the same brand name if a 
MIN has already been issued for that combination of OEM and brand name, 
and
    (ii) DOE will issue a MIN for use only with a single OEM-brand name 
combination.
    (3) Once DOE has issued a MIN for a particular OEM-brand name 
combination, that MIN shall be the only MIN applicable to all small 
electric motors manufactured by the OEM and labeled under that brand 
name.
    (4) A MIN issued by DOE may not be transferred to another entity or 
used on the nameplates of basic models other than the OEM associated 
with the MIN to which DOE initially issued the MIN.
    (c) Discontinuance of manufacturer identification numbers. In the 
event the brand name(s) to which a MIN is applicable ceases to 
manufactured, the OEM must notify DOE of such discontinuation within 30 
days of the discontinuation, after which time the MIN will terminate 
and be invalid for use on nameplates of small electric motors 
distributed in commerce in the United States.
    (d) Method of submitting requests and notifications. MIN requests 
required by paragraph (a) of this section or MIN discontinuance 
notifications required by paragraph (c) of this section must be 
submitted to DOE either electronically at http://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms (CCMS) or via email to 
MotorMINRequest@ee.doe.gov. The applicable form for each action online 
is available at https://www.regulations.doe.gov/ccms/forms/.


Sec.  431.448  [Removed]

0
36. Remove Sec.  431.448.

[FR Doc. 2016-14479 Filed 6-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P