Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Distribution Transformers, 44347-44353 [2017-20225]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
44347
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 82, No. 183
Friday, September 22, 2017
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE–2017–BT–TP–0055]
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedure for Distribution
Transformers
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information (RFI).
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (‘‘DOE’’) is initiating a data
collection process through this RFI to
consider whether to amend DOE’s test
procedure for distribution transformers.
To inform interested parties and to
facilitate this process, DOE has gathered
data, identifying several issues
associated with the currently applicable
test procedure on which DOE is
interested in receiving comment. The
issues outlined in this document mainly
concern the degree to which the perunit load (‘‘PUL’’) testing measurement
accurately represents in-service
distribution transformer performance,
and provides test results that reflect
energy efficiency, energy use, and
estimated operating costs during a
representative average use cycle of an
in-service transformer; sampling;
representations; alternative energy
determination methods (‘‘AEDMs’’); and
any additional topics that may inform
DOE’s decisions in a future test
procedure rulemaking, including
methods to reduce regulatory burden
while ensuring the procedure’s
accuracy. DOE welcomes written
comments from the public on any
subject within the scope of this
document (including topics not raised
in this RFI).
DATES: Written comments and
information are requested and will be
accepted on or before October 23, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Sep 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
instructions for submitting comments.
Alternatively, interested persons may
submit comments, identified by docket
number EERE–2017–BT–TP–0055, by
any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: DistributionTransformers
2017TP0055@ee.doe.gov. Include docket
number EERE–2017–BT–TP–0055 in the
subject line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible,
please submit all items on a compact
disc (‘‘CD’’), in which case it is not
necessary to include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance
and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, 950 L’Enfant
Plaza SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC
20024. Phone: (202) 287–1445. If
possible, please submit all items on a
CD, in which case it is not necessary to
include printed copies.
No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see section III of this document.
Docket: The docket for this activity,
which includes Federal Register
notices, comments, and other
supporting documents/materials, is
available for review at https://
www.regulations.gov. All documents in
the docket are listed in the https://
www.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.
The docket Web page can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docket
Detail;D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0055. The
docket Web page contains simple
instructions on how to access all
documents, including public comments,
in the docket. See section III for
information on how to submit
comments through https://
www.regulations.gov.
Mr.
Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Building
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Technologies Program, EE–5B 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–9870. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Mary Greene, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–1817. Email:
mary.greene@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to
submit a comment or review other
public comments and the docket,
contact the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 586–
6636 or by email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
B. Rulemaking History
II. Request for Information
A. Scope and Definitions
B. Test Procedure
1. PUL Testing Requirements
2. Temperature Correction
C. Efficiency Metric
D. Sampling, Representations, AEDMs
E. Other Test Procedure Topics
III. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
DOE is authorized to establish and
amend energy conservation standards
and test procedures for certain
industrial equipment, including
distribution transformers. (42 U.S.C.
6317(a)) DOE’s test procedures for
distribution transformers are prescribed
at 10 CFR 431.193 and appendix A to
subpart K of part 431. The following
sections discuss DOE’s authority to
establish and amend test procedures for
distribution transformers, as well as
relevant background information
regarding DOE’s consideration of test
procedures for this equipment.
A. Authority and Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation
Act of 1975 (‘‘EPCA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’),1
Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291–
6317, as codified), among other things,
authorizes DOE to regulate the energy
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through the Energy
Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015 (EEIA 2015),
Public Law 114–11 (April 30, 2015).
E:\FR\FM\22SEP1.SGM
22SEP1
44348
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 183 / Friday, September 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
efficiency of a number of covered
consumer products and industrial
equipment. Title III, Part C 2 of EPCA,
added by Public Law 95–619, Title IV,
§ 441(a), established the Energy
Conservation Program for Certain
Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a
variety of provisions designed to
improve energy efficiency. This
equipment includes distribution
transformers, the subject of this RFI. (42
U.S.C. 6317(a))
Under EPCA, DOE’s energy
conservation program consists of four
parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3)
Federal energy conservation standards,
and (4) certification and enforcement
procedures. Relevant provisions of the
Act for distribution transformers
include definitions (42 U.S.C. 6291; 42
U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation
standards (42 U.S.C. 6295; 42 U.S.C.
6317), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293;
42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42
U.S.C. 6294; 42 U.S.C. 6315), and the
authority to require information and
reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C.
6316).
Federal energy efficiency
requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally
supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing,
labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 6316)
DOE may, however, grant waivers of
Federal preemption for particular State
laws or regulations, in accordance with
the procedures and other provisions of
EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D))
The Federal testing requirements
consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered equipment
must use as the basis for: (1) Certifying
to DOE that their equipment complies
with the applicable energy conservation
standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42
U.S.C. 6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296), and (2)
making representations about the
efficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)) Similarly, DOE uses these test
procedures to determine whether the
equipment complies with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA.
Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth
the criteria and procedures DOE must
follow when prescribing or amending
test procedures for covered equipment.
EPCA requires that any test procedures
prescribed or amended under this
section must be reasonably designed to
produce test results which measure
energy efficiency, energy use or
estimated annual operating cost of a
covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle or
2 For editorial purposes, upon codification into
the U.S. Code, Part C was redesignated
as Part A–1.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Sep 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
period of use and requires that test
procedures not be unduly burdensome
to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
If DOE determines that a test
procedure amendment is warranted, it
must publish proposed test procedures
and offer the public an opportunity to
present oral and written data, views and
arguments on the proposed test
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))
EPCA also requires that, at least once
every 7 years, DOE evaluate test
procedures for each type of covered
equipment, including distribution
transformers, to determine whether
amended test procedures would more
accurately or fully comply with the
requirements for the test procedures to
not be unduly burdensome to conduct
and to be reasonably designed to
produce test results that reflect energy
efficiency, energy use, and estimated
operating costs during a representative
average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)).
DOE is publishing this RFI to collect
data and information to inform DOE’s
7-year review requirement specified in
EPCA, which requires that DOE publish
either an amendment to the test
procedures or a determination that
amended test procedures are not
required. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1))
B. Rulemaking History
DOE’s current test procedure for
distribution transformers is prescribed
at 10 CFR 431.193 and appendix A to
subpart K of part 431. EPCA states that
the testing requirements for distribution
transformers shall be based on the
‘‘Standard Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Distribution
Transformers’’ prescribed by the
National Electrical Manufacturers
Association (NEMA TP 2–1998). (42
U.S.C. 6293(b)(10)(A))
Accordingly, DOE prescribed the test
procedure for distribution transformers
on April 27, 2006 (hereafter ‘‘April 2006
DT TP final rule’’). 71 FR 24972. In an
April 2013 final rule amending the
standards for distribution transformers
(hereafter ‘‘April 2013 DT ECS final
rule’’), DOE determined that the test
procedures did not require amendment
at that time, concluding that the test
procedure as established in the April
2006 DT TP final rule was reasonably
designed to produce test results that
reflect energy efficiency and energy use,
as required by 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2). 78
FR 23336, 23347 (April 18, 2013).
However, in the April 2013 DT ECS
final rule, DOE responded to
stakeholder comments regarding the
appropriateness of the test PUL 3
3 PUL
is the same concept and quantity as the
‘‘percent of nameplate-rated load’’ used in 10 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirement in its test procedure, stating
that it may examine the topic of
potential loading points in a dedicated
test procedure rulemaking in the future.
78 FR 23336, 23350. Therefore, as part
of this RFI DOE is giving further
consideration to the appropriateness of
the test PUL requirements, as discussed
in the April 2013 DT ECS final rule.
II. Request for Information
In the following sections, DOE has
identified a variety of issues on which
it seeks input to aid in the development
of the technical and economic analyses
regarding whether amended test
procedures for distribution transformers
may be warranted. Specifically, DOE is
requesting comment on any
opportunities to streamline and simplify
testing requirements for distribution
transformers.
Additionally, DOE welcomes
comments on other issues relevant to
the conduct of this process that may not
specifically be identified in this
document. In particular, DOE notes that
under Executive Order 13771,
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs,’’ Executive Branch
agencies such as DOE are directed to
manage the costs associated with the
imposition of expenditures required to
comply with Federal regulations. See 82
FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Pursuant to that
Executive Order, DOE encourages the
public to provide input on measures
DOE could take to lower the cost of its
regulations applicable to distribution
transformers consistent with the
requirements of EPCA.
A. Scope and Definitions
A ‘‘transformer’’ is a device consisting
of 2 or more coils of insulated wire that
transfers alternating current by
electromagnetic induction from 1 coil to
another to change the original voltage or
current value. 10 CFR 431.192. A
‘‘distribution transformer’’ is a
transformer that: (1) Has an input
voltage of 34.5 kV or less; (2) has an
output voltage of 600 V or less; (3) is
rated for operation at a frequency of 60
Hz; and (4) has a capacity of 10 kVA to
2500 kVA for liquid-immersed units and
15 kVA to 2500 kVA for dry-type units.
Id. The term ‘‘distribution transformer’’
does not include a transformer that is an
autotransformer; drive (isolation)
transformer; grounding transformer;
machine-tool (control) transformer;
nonventilated transformer; rectifier
transformer; regulating transformer;
sealed transformer; special-impedance
431.196 and ‘‘percent of the rated load’’ used in
section 3.5 of 10 CFR part 431, subpart K,
appendix A.
E:\FR\FM\22SEP1.SGM
22SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 183 / Friday, September 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
transformer; testing transformer;
transformer with tap range of 20 percent
or more; uninterruptible power supply
transformer; or welding transformer. Id.
A ‘‘liquid-immersed distribution
transformer’’ is a distribution
transformer in which the core and coil
assembly is immersed in an insulating
liquid. Id. A ‘‘low-voltage dry-type
distribution transformer’’ is a
distribution transformer that has an
input voltage of 600 volts or less; is aircooled; and does not use oil as a
coolant. Id. A ‘‘medium-voltage dry-type
distribution transformer’’ means a
distribution transformer in which the
core and coil assembly is immersed in
a gaseous or dry-compound insulating
medium, and which has a rated primary
voltage between 601 V and 34.5 kV. Id.
B. Test Procedure
1. PUL Testing Requirements
PUL specification is a key component
of the distribution transformer test
procedure because the efficiency of the
transformer varies based on PUL. The
test procedure for distribution
transformers must be reasonably
designed to produce test results that
reflect energy efficiency, energy use,
and estimated operating costs during a
representative average use cycle, and to
have a test procedure is not unduly
burdensome to conduct. To this end, the
test PUL is intended to represent the
typical 4 PUL experienced by in-service
distribution transformers. However,
some complications exist, including: (1)
A given customer may not operate the
transformer at a single constant PUL,
and (2) a transformer model may be
used at different PULs by different
customers. To further examine the test
PUL specification, DOE reviewed the
test PUL requirements in the current test
procedure and the load analysis from
the April 2013 DT ECS final rule.
The current PUL specifications
required for rating transformers are
specified in 10 CFR 431.196 and section
3.5 of 10 CFR part 431, subpart K,
appendix A (hereafter ‘‘Appendix A’’).
The current test procedure in Appendix
A requires that both liquid-immersed
transformers and medium-voltage, drytype (‘‘MVDT’’) transformers are rated at
50 percent PUL, and that low-voltage,
dry-type (‘‘LVDT’’) transformers are
rated at 35 percent PUL. Specifically, in
section 3.5(a) of Appendix A, the test
procedure requires that the reference
temperature at which winding
resistance is measured is 55 °C for
4 Industry commonly uses the root mean square
(‘‘RMS’’) PUL as an estimate of the ‘‘typical’’ or
‘‘average’’ PUL experienced by a transformer in
service.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Sep 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
liquid-immersed transformers and
MVDT transformers loaded at 50
percent of the rated load, and is 75 °C
for LVDT transformers loaded at 35
percent of the rated load. In addition, 10
CFR 431.196 notes that all efficiency
values are at 35 percent of nameplaterated load for LVDT transformers, and at
50 percent of nameplate-rated load for
liquid-immersed and MVDT
transformers, determined according to
the DOE test procedure in Appendix A.
These test PULs are consistent with
NEMA TP 2–1998, the test method
required by EPCA. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(10)) DOE is requesting input as
to whether the test PUL values used in
the test method reflect PULs
experienced in practice.
DOE’s research in support of its April
2013 DT ECS final rule indicated that
distribution transformers in service
experience a large load diversity and, on
average, are operated at a difference of
a RMS PUL from those at which they are
rated for some equipment classes. 78 FR
23336, 23349–23350. DOE’s analysis
produced a distribution of typical RMS
PULs for the considered liquidimmersed and MVDT, and LVDT
distribution transformers.5
DOE estimated that, on average, the
initial (first year) RMS PUL for liquidimmersed transformers ranged from 34
and 40 percent for single- and threephase equipment, respectively, with a
one percent annual increase over the life
of the transformer to account for
connected load growth. This resulted in
a lifetime 6 average PUL of 49 and 56
percent for single- and three-phase
liquid-immersed transformers,
respectively.7 This is consistent with
the current test procedure requirements
of rating liquid-immersed transformers
at 50 percent PUL. In the April 2013 DT
ECS final rule, DOE it had received
public comment stating that utilities
had oversized transformers due to their
inability to accurately monitor
transformer loading and due to their
assumption that loading will increase in
the future. In the case of liquidimmersed transformers, this may
5 The details of this analysis are documented in
the final rule Technical Support Document: Energy
Efficiency Program for Consumer Products and
Commercial and Industrial Equipment Distribution
Transformers; chapter 7 and appendix 7A.
(available at: https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048-0760).
6 DOE estimated the average lifetime for
distribution transformers to be 32 years. 78 FR
23336, 23377.
7 The result of DOE’s transformer load analysis for
medium-voltage liquid-immersed distribution
transformers are contained in the Life-cycle Cost
and Payback Period spreadsheet tools for design
lines (DL) 1 through 5 on the Forecast Cells tab.
(available at: https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048-0767).
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44349
account for the relatively low PUL as a
function of transformer capacity. See, 78
FR 23336, 23349, citing comment from
Baltimore Gas and Electric.
Further, in the April 2013 DT ECS
final rule, DOE estimated that, on
average, the RMS PUL for LVDT
transformers ranged from 20 and 25
percent for commercial and industrial
customers, respectively.8 Finally, DOE
estimated that, on average, the PUL for
MVDT transformers ranged from 32 and
38 percent for commercial and
industrial customers, respectively.9
However, the current test procedure
requirements for rating LVDT and
MVDT transformers are 35 and 50
percent PUL, respectively. DOE also
assumed in its April 2013 DT ECS final
rule that there would be no load growth
over the life of LVDT and MVDT
distribution transformers. 78 FR 23336,
23375.
Therefore, the PUL requirements in
the test procedure might not fully reflect
the PUL experienced by in-service
distribution transformers. Consequently,
the degree of alignment of test PUL with
in-service PUL of a customer’s
individual distribution transformer may
affect how closely the test procedureestimated energy use mirrors the actual
energy use experienced by the customer.
Currently, a customer can specify that
transformer efficiency be optimized to
their in-service PUL, but that customer
is limited to purchasing transformers
that comply with the energy
conservation standard at the test PUL.
However, DOE estimated that
approximately 10 percent of liquidimmersed, and 2 percent of LVDT and
MVDT customers evaluate transformer
efficiency when making a purchase,
indicating that the remainder of
customers prioritize low price (and
ignore efficiency) when purchasing
transformers of their required
specification. 77 FR 7323.
To the extent that transformer
purchases are market-price driven, DOE
would expect that the lowest-cost
transformer design would likely have an
efficiency peak at or near the test PUL.
This low-cost transformer would
experience reduced efficiency when
8 The result of DOE’s transformer load analysis for
low-voltage dry-type distribution transformers are
contained in the Life-cycle Cost and Payback Period
spreadsheet tools for DLs 6 through 8 on the
Forecast Cells tab. (available at: https://
www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2011-BTSTD-0051-0085).
9 The result of DOE’s transformer load analysis for
medium-voltage dry-type distribution transformers
are contained in the Life-cycle Cost and Payback
Period spreadsheet tools for DL 9 through 13B on
the Forecast Cells tab. (available at: https://
www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2010-BTSTD-0048-0764).
E:\FR\FM\22SEP1.SGM
22SEP1
44350
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 183 / Friday, September 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
operated at PULs other than the test
PUL for which it was likely optimized.
If in-service PUL differs from test PUL,
equipment may be suboptimal for the
expected operating conditions. If
instead, the test procedure (via PUL
specification) incentivized optimization
at the in-service PUL, increased inservice performance may be possible
with no increase in purchase price
relative to transformers designed to
meet existing standards via the existing
test procedure. DOE also recognizes that
many transformer purchasers are
utilities that likely well understand
these relationships. As such, as
described above, factors other than
efficiency (such as requirements by
Public Utility Commissions) are likely
driving purchasing decisions. DOE
understands there may be variation
between the PUL specified in the test
procedure and actual use and seeks
comment on how these factors should
be considered given the sophisticated
nature of transformer purchases.
As discussed, in-service distribution
transformers experience a wide range of
load conditions. In addition, based on
DOE’s initial analysis, distribution
transformers may be operated at PULs
different from those at which they are
rated. To evaluate in-service PUL
further, DOE is seeking to understand
the relation between in-service PUL as
compared to rated PUL. To that end,
DOE requests any related information or
data that commenters believe would
assist DOE in its understanding. This
information may include PUL data for
liquid-immersed, MVDT, and LVDT
distribution transformers in operation,
including the kVA ranges, number of
phases (single- or three-phase) and
application type associated with the
PUL data. In addition, DOE also
requests data on the potential annual
load growth expected for newly
installed transformers. Finally, DOE
requests information on the extent to
which the identified issue is taken into
account by utilities purchasing
transformers.
DOE is interested in PUL data
gathered from distribution transformers
in operation, including information
from manufacturers, utilities, and
industry groups (e.g., the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers).
Issue 1. DOE seeks comment, data,
and information regarding initial (first
year of service) PUL data for
distribution transformers.
Issue 2. DOE requests input on the
initial RMS PUL values presented in
section I.B of this RFI. More broadly,
DOE requests input on the distribution
of PUL values experienced by the
population of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Sep 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
Issue 3. transformers of a given
category (e.g., specific kVA, phases,
application, etc.). Specifically,
commenters should specify whether the
distributional data they provide
represents the first year of service, or the
full lifetime.
Issue 4. DOE seeks comment, data and
information regarding the load growth
estimate over the life of distribution
transformers currently being installed.
Specifically, DOE seeks comment, data
and information on whether loads will
increase over time, and if so, what the
annual load growth would be for liquidimmersed, LVDT, and MVDT
transformers, respectively.
Issue 5. DOE seeks comment, data and
information regarding the extent to
which efficiency is taken into account
in transformer purchasing decisions.
2. Temperature Correction
DOE’s current test procedure specifies
temperature correction of measured loss
values, a process that calculates the
losses of a transformer as though its
internal temperature during testing was
equal to a ‘‘reference’’ temperature. The
reference temperature provides a
common point of comparison, so that
the effect of temperature on efficiency is
diminished. In general, higher internal
temperature increases load losses, in
part due to increased resistivity of the
conductor/windings. If transformers in
service do not reach the same internal
temperature (under identical operating
conditions, including ambient
temperature and PUL), temperature
correction may weaken the ability of the
test procedure to predict relative inservice performance. For example, two
otherwise-identical transformers may
have different inherent abilities to shed
heat. As a result, one may operate at a
lower internal temperature under
identical operating conditions, and
produce lower losses. If a test procedure
evaluates both units as though they had
reached the same internal temperature,
then those lower in-service losses
(which are an advantage to the
customer) may not be reflected.
DOE is requesting comments, data,
and information from interested parties
on whether the current temperature
correction is appropriate or whether
alternative approaches should be
considered.
Issue 6. DOE seeks comments, data,
and information regarding the
appropriateness of the current test
procedure requirements with respect to
temperature correction. Specifically,
DOE requests comment on whether
testing at specified ambient conditions
or correcting to the same internal
temperature is more representative of
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
distribution transformer in-service
performance.
Issue 7. DOE seeks comments, data,
and information regarding how
temperature varies with PUL, and how
significantly it affects transformer
performance over a PUL range.
Specifically, under the current internal
temperature correction methodology,
DOE requests comment on how it could
specify the reference temperature for
testing at PULs other than the current
test PUL.
C. Efficiency Metric
As noted, the current DOE test
procedure measures efficiency at a
single test PUL. Based on the data and
information received in response to this
RFI, DOE may consider either
continuing to use the current single test
PUL requirements for rating distribution
transformers, or revising the single test
PUL to an alternative single test PUL, if
it better reflects how distribution
transformers operate in service.
Alternatively, DOE may consider an
alternative efficiency metric altogether,
such as a multiple-PUL weightedaverage efficiency metric. Use of a
weighted-average efficiency metric
comprised of more than one test PUL
may better reflect how distribution
transformers operate in service because
a given distribution transformer
commonly experiences a range of PULs
in service depending on the end-use of
the customer. In addition, a given
customer is unlikely to operate a
distribution transformer at a single,
constant PUL equal to the typical PUL.
Thus, a single test PUL may not fully
capture how distribution transformers
operate in service.
While a weighted-average efficiency
could result in additional test burden,
DOE understands that this metric may
more effectively characterize operation
in-service. In addition, the additional
test burden could be mitigated via the
AEDM for distribution transformers.
This is because AEDMs would allow
manufacturers to determine the
efficiency of one or more of its untested
basic models using a mathematical
model instead of testing.
Issue 8. DOE seeks comments, data,
and information on the continued use of
a single test PUL requirement. Further,
if a single test PUL requirement is
maintained, DOE seeks comment on
whether the existing single test PUL
requirements should be maintained or
whether alternate single test PUL
requirements may better match the
typical or RMS value in service. In
addition, DOE seeks comment on the
testing burden using an alternate single
E:\FR\FM\22SEP1.SGM
22SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 183 / Friday, September 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
requirements may be necessary under a
multiple PUL test procedure.
Issue 11. DOE seeks comments, data,
and information on whether there are
any other options or alternative metrics
not presented in this RFI that should be
considered for measuring and rating the
efficiency of distribution transformers.
Where:
¯
x = the arithmetic mean of the sample units’
tested efficiencies, and
n = number of units in the sample.
covered products and equipment.
AEDM application to distribution
transformers is permitted pursuant to 10
CFR 429.47(a)(2) and may serve a
manufacturer who finds it burdensome
to physically test units of each basic
model sold. However, DOE notes that
currently, manufacturers frequently test
every basic model instead of calculating
efficiency using the AEDM provisions.
Issue 15. DOE seeks information
regarding the usefulness of the AEDM
provisions, and whether and why
manufacturers select the option to use
AEDMs.
This provision permits representation
of a basic model efficiency greater than
the arithmetic mean of the sample units’
tested efficiencies. The degree to which
it may exceed the mean is a function of
the sample size; smaller samples may
exceed the mean by a greater amount.
As a result, manufacturers may
represent an efficiency for a basic model
between the value of Equation 1 and the
minimum efficiency requirements at 10
CFR 431.196.
DOE notes that distribution
transformer test reports do not always
indicate how efficiency is calculated,
nor do they always provide information
about the measured values.
Issue 13. DOE seeks comment
regarding the represented values of
efficiency relative to calculated values,
specifically, whether manufacturers
typically represent the minimum
efficiency standard, the maximum
represented efficiency (RE) allowable, or
a different value; how manufacturers
determine what value to represent; and
why.
Issue 14. DOE’s requirements related
to AEDMs are at 10 CFR 429.70. This
section specifies under which
circumstances an AEDM may be
developed, validated, and applied to
product performance ratings for certain
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Sep 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
D. Sampling, Representations, AEDMs
The certification and compliance
requirements for distribution
transformers are codified under 10 CFR
429.11, 429.12, 429.47, 429.70, 429.110,
and in Appendix C to Subpart C of Part
429. DOE’s sampling requirements are
listed at 10 CFR 429.47. The sampling
requirements, among other things, state
that, (1) the provisions of 10 CFR 429.11
apply, (2) efficiency of a basic model
may be determined through testing or
through application of an AEDM under
the requirements of 10 CFR 429.70, and
E. Other Test Procedure Topics
In addition to the issues identified
earlier in this document, DOE welcomes
comment on any other aspect of the
existing test procedures for distribution
transformers not already addressed by
the specific areas identified in this
document. DOE particularly seeks
information that would improve the
repeatability, reproducibility, and
consumer representativeness of the test
procedures. DOE also requests
information that would help DOE create
a procedure that would limit
manufacturer test burden through
streamlining or simplifying testing
requirements. Comments regarding the
repeatability and reproducibility are
also welcome.
DOE also requests feedback on any
potential amendments to the existing
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(3) a manufacturer must use a sample of
at least five units if more than five units
have been manufactured over a span of
six months (10 CFR 429.47(a)(2)(i)(B)),
or as many as have been produced if
five or fewer have been manufactured
over a span of six months (10 CFR
429.47(a)(2)(i)(A)).
Issue 12. DOE seeks comment
regarding the sampling requirements for
distribution transformers. Specifically,
DOE seeks information on how
manufacturers have been applying the
sampling provisions. DOE also seeks
comments from manufacturers on
whether there are instances in which
there are questions as to how to apply
the sampling requirements or select the
appropriate sample size.
10 CFR 429.47(a)(2)(ii) states that any
represented value of efficiency of a basic
model must be less than or equal to:
test procedure that could be considered
to address impacts on manufacturers,
including small businesses. Regarding
the Federal test method, DOE seeks
comment on the degree to which the
DOE test procedure should consider and
be harmonized with the most recent
relevant industry standards for
distribution transformers and whether
there are any changes to the Federal test
method that would provide additional
benefits to the public. DOE also requests
comment on the benefits and burdens of
adopting any industry/voluntary
consensus-based or other appropriate
test procedure, without modification. As
discussed, the Federal test method for
distribution transformers is based on the
industry standard NEMA TP 2–1998.
The Federal test method is also based on
IEEE C57.12.90–1999 ‘‘IEEE Standard
Test Code for Liquid-Immersed
Distribution, Power and Regulating
Transformers and IEEE Guide for Short
Circuit Testing of Distribution and
Power Transformers;’’ IEEE C57.12.91–
2001, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test Code for DryType Distribution and Power
Transformers;’’ IEEE C57.12.00–2000,
‘‘IEEE Standard General Requirements
for Liquid-Immersed Distribution,
Power and Regulating Transformers;’’
and IEEE C57.12.01–1998, ‘‘IEEE
Standard General Requirements for DryType Distribution and Power
Transformers Including those with Solid
Cast and/or Resin Encapsulated
E:\FR\FM\22SEP1.SGM
22SEP1
EP22SE17.002</GPH>
test PUL as compared to the current test
procedure.
Issue 9. DOE seeks comments, data,
and information regarding testing a
single transformer at multiple PULs.
Specifically, DOE seeks comment on the
degree to which a multiple-PUL
weighted-average efficiency would more
accurately reflect distribution
transformer operation in service, as
compared to the current test procedure.
In addition, DOE seeks comment on any
additional testing burden that might be
associated with testing at multiple
PULs.
Issue 10. DOE seeks comments, data,
and information regarding the number
of PULs (and the corresponding test
PUL values) that parties believe may be
appropriate for a multiple PUL test
procedure. In addition, DOE seeks
comments, data, and information
regarding what weightings or additional
44351
44352
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 183 / Friday, September 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Windings.’’ When establishing the
Federal test procedure for distribution
transformers, DOE determined that
basing the procedure on multiple
industry standards, as opposed to
adopting an industry test procedure (or
procedures) without modification, was
necessary to provide the detail and
accuracy required for the Federal test
procedure, with the additional benefit of
providing manufacturers the Federal
test procedure in a single reference. 71
FR 24972, 24982.
Additionally, DOE requests comment
on whether the existing test procedures
limit a manufacturer’s ability to provide
additional features to consumers on
distribution transformers. DOE
particularly seeks information on how
the test procedures could be amended to
reduce the cost of new or additional
features and make it more likely that
such features are included on
distribution transformers.
III. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to
submit in writing by October 23, 2017,
comments, and information on matters
addressed in this notice and on other
matters relevant to DOE’s consideration
of amended test procedures for
distribution transformers. These
comments and information will aid in
the development of a test procedure
NOPR for distribution transformers if
DOE determines that amended test
procedures may be appropriate for these
products.
Submitting comments via https://
regulations.gov. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web page will
require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact
information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your
contact information will not be publicly
viewable except for your first and last
names, organization name (if any), and
submitter representative name (if any).
If your comment is not processed
properly because of technical
difficulties, DOE will use this
information to contact you. If DOE
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, DOE may not be
able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information
will be publicly viewable if you include
it in the comment or in any documents
attached to your comment. Any
information that you do not want to be
publicly viewable should not be
included in your comment, nor in any
document attached to your comment.
Persons viewing comments will see only
first and last names, organization
names, correspondence containing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Sep 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
comments, and any documents
submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to https://
www.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 https://
www.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 https://www.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 https://
www.regulations.gov provides after you
have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand
delivery, or mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand
delivery, or mail also will be posted to
https://www.regulations.gov. If you do
not want your personal contact
information to be publicly viewable, do
not include it in your comment or any
accompanying documents. Instead,
provide your contact information on a
cover letter. Include your first and last
names, email address, telephone
number, and optional mailing address.
The cover letter will not be publicly
viewable as long as it does not include
any comments.
Include contact information each time
you submit comments, data, documents,
and other information to DOE. If you
submit via mail or hand delivery, please
provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It
is not necessary to submit printed
copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other
information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in
PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file
format. Provide documents that are not
secured, written in English and free of
any defects or viruses. Documents
should not contain special characters or
any form of encryption and, if possible,
they should carry the electronic
signature of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit
campaign form letters by the originating
organization in batches of between 50 to
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
500 form letters per PDF or as one form
letter with a list of supporters’ names
compiled into one or more PDFs. This
reduces comment processing and
posting time.
Confidential Business Information.
According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he
or she believes to be confidential and
exempt by law from public disclosure
should submit via email, postal mail, or
hand delivery two well-marked copies:
one copy of the document marked
confidential including all the
information believed to be confidential,
and one copy of the document marked
non-confidential with the information
believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email or on
a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own
determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it
according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when
evaluating requests to treat submitted
information as confidential include (1) a
description of the items, (2) whether
and why such items are customarily
treated as confidential within the
industry, (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from
other sources, (4) whether the
information has previously been made
available to others without obligation
concerning its confidentiality, (5) an
explanation of the competitive injury to
the submitting person which would
result from public disclosure, (6) when
such information might lose its
confidential character due to the
passage of time, and (7) why disclosure
of the information would be contrary to
the public interest.
It is DOE’s policy that all comments
may be included in the public docket,
without change and as received,
including any personal information
provided in the comments (except
information deemed to be exempt from
public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to
be a very important part of the process
for developing test procedures and
energy conservation standards. DOE
actively encourages the participation
and interaction of the public during the
comment period in each stage of the
rulemaking process. Interactions with
and between members of the public
provide a balanced discussion of the
issues and assist DOE in the rulemaking
process. Anyone who wishes to be
added to the DOE mailing list to receive
future notices and information about
this rulemaking should contact
Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program staff at (202) 287–6636
or via email at ApplianceStandards
Questions@ee.doe.gov.
E:\FR\FM\22SEP1.SGM
22SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 183 / Friday, September 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 29,
2017.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2017–20225 Filed 9–21–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2017–0896; Product
Identifier 2017–SW–034–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky
Aircraft Corporation Helicopters
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
We propose to supersede
airworthiness directive (AD) 2017–07–
02 for Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation
(Sikorsky) Model 269D and Model 269D
Configuration A helicopters. AD 2017–
07–02 currently requires reducing the
life limit of and inspecting certain drive
shafts. This proposed AD would retain
the requirements of AD 2017–07–02 and
propose repeating the inspections. The
actions of this proposed AD are
intended to detect and prevent an
unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: We must receive comments on
this proposed AD by November 21,
2017.
SUMMARY:
You may send comments by
any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: Send comments to the U.S.
Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M–30, West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the
‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
ADDRESSES:
Examining the AD Docket
You may examine the AD docket on
the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2017–
0896; or in person at the Docket
Operations Office between 9 a.m. and 5
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:19 Sep 21, 2017
Jkt 241001
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. The AD docket
contains this proposed AD, the
economic evaluation, any comments
received and other information. The
street address for the Docket Operations
Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in
the ADDRESSES section. Comments will
be available in the AD docket shortly
after receipt.
For service information identified in
this proposed rule, contact Sikorsky
Aircraft Corporation, Customer Service
Engineering, 124 Quarry Road,
Trumbull, CT 06611; telephone 1–800–
Winged–S or 203–416–4299; email wcs_
cust_service_eng.gr-sik@lmco.com. You
may review service information at the
FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel,
Southwest Region, 10101 Hillwood
Pkwy., Room 6N–321, Fort Worth, TX
76177.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Schwetz, Aviation Safety
Engineer, Boston ACO Branch,
Compliance and Airworthiness
Division, FAA, 1200 District Avenue,
Burlington, Massachusetts 01803;
telephone (781) 238–7761; email
michael.schwetz@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
We invite you to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written
comments, data, or views. We also
invite comments relating to the
economic, environmental, energy, or
federalism impacts that might result
from adopting the proposals in this
document. The most helpful comments
reference a specific portion of the
proposal, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include
supporting data. To ensure the docket
does not contain duplicate comments,
commenters should send only one copy
of written comments, or if comments are
filed electronically, commenters should
submit only one time.
We will file in the docket all
comments that we receive, as well as a
report summarizing each substantive
public contact with FAA personnel
concerning this proposed rulemaking.
Before acting on this proposal, we will
consider all comments we receive on or
before the closing date for comments.
We will consider comments filed after
the comment period has closed if it is
possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. We may change this
proposal in light of the comments we
receive.
Discussion
On March 20, 2017, we issued a Final
rule; request for comments to add AD
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44353
2017–07–02, Amendment 39–18840 (82
FR 15120, March 27, 2017) for Sikorsky
Model 269D and Model 269D
Configuration A helicopters with a
KAflex engine side drive shaft part
number (P/N) SKCP2738–7 and KAflex
pulley side drive shaft P/N SKCP2738–
5 installed. AD 2017–07–02 requires
reducing the life limit of the drive shafts
and performing several inspections of
the drive shafts within 25 hours time-inservice (TIS). AD 2017–07–02 also
specifies replacing the drive shaft
assemblies as an optional terminating
action for the requirements of the AD.
AD 2017–07–02 was prompted by four
incidents involving failure of the engine
side drive shaft. The actions required by
AD 2017–07–02 are intended to prevent
failure of the drive shaft, loss of rotor
drive, and subsequent loss of control of
the helicopter.
This NPRM would retain the
requirements of AD 2017–07–02 but
would require that some of the
inspections be repeated every 100 hours
TIS or 400 hours TIS. Repeating these
inspections is necessary to detect and
prevent the unsafe condition. Because
these proposed requirements are for
longer intervals, we are providing the
public an opportunity to comment.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all the relevant information
and determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop in other products of these same
type designs.
Related Service Information
We reviewed Appendix B to Sikorsky
S–330 Model 269D Helicopter Basic
Handbook of Maintenance Instructions
No. CSP–D–2, dated February 1, 1993,
and revised October 15, 2014; and
Appendix B to Sikorsky S–333 Model
269D Config. ‘‘A’’ Helicopter Basic
Handbook of Maintenance Instructions
No. CSP–D–9, dated July 20, 2001, and
revised October 15, 2014. This service
information specifies repetitive
inspection procedures, overhaul and
retirement schedules, and weight and
balance procedures. The Airworthiness
Limitations section, which is included
in this service information, contains the
life limits for drive shaft assembly P/Ns
SKCP2738–5 and SKCP2738–7.
We also reviewed Sikorsky 269D
Helicopter Alert Service Bulletin DB–
052, Basic Issue, dated January 16, 2014,
which distributes the service life
reduction information and implements a
new 1,200-hour overhaul inspection for
drive shaft assembly P/Ns SKCP2738–3,
SKCP2738–5, and SKCP2738–7.
E:\FR\FM\22SEP1.SGM
22SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 183 (Friday, September 22, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44347-44353]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20225]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 183 / Friday, September 22, 2017 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 44347]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Parts 429 and 431
[EERE-2017-BT-TP-0055]
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Distribution
Transformers
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information (RFI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is initiating a data
collection process through this RFI to consider whether to amend DOE's
test procedure for distribution transformers. To inform interested
parties and to facilitate this process, DOE has gathered data,
identifying several issues associated with the currently applicable
test procedure on which DOE is interested in receiving comment. The
issues outlined in this document mainly concern the degree to which the
per-unit load (``PUL'') testing measurement accurately represents in-
service distribution transformer performance, and provides test results
that reflect energy efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating
costs during a representative average use cycle of an in-service
transformer; sampling; representations; alternative energy
determination methods (``AEDMs''); and any additional topics that may
inform DOE's decisions in a future test procedure rulemaking, including
methods to reduce regulatory burden while ensuring the procedure's
accuracy. DOE welcomes written comments from the public on any subject
within the scope of this document (including topics not raised in this
RFI).
DATES: Written comments and information are requested and will be
accepted on or before October 23, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested
persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2017-BT-
TP-0055, by any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: DistributionTransformers2017TP0055@ee.doe.gov. Include
docket number EERE-2017-BT-TP-0055 in the subject line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-5B,
1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:
(202) 287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc
(``CD''), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies.
4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance and Equipment Standards
Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202) 287-
1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is
not necessary to include printed copies.
No telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see section III of this document.
Docket: The docket for this activity, which includes Federal
Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials,
is available for review at https://www.regulations.gov. All documents in
the docket are listed in the https://www.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.
The docket Web page can be found at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0055. The docket Web page contains
simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public
comments, in the docket. See section III for information on how to
submit comments through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeremy Dommu, 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) 586-9870. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
Ms. Mary Greene, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-1817. Email: mary.greene@hq.doe.gov.
For further information on how to submit a comment or review other
public comments and the docket, contact the Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 586-6636 or by email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
A. Authority and Background
B. Rulemaking History
II. Request for Information
A. Scope and Definitions
B. Test Procedure
1. PUL Testing Requirements
2. Temperature Correction
C. Efficiency Metric
D. Sampling, Representations, AEDMs
E. Other Test Procedure Topics
III. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
DOE is authorized to establish and amend energy conservation
standards and test procedures for certain industrial equipment,
including distribution transformers. (42 U.S.C. 6317(a)) DOE's test
procedures for distribution transformers are prescribed at 10 CFR
431.193 and appendix A to subpart K of part 431. The following sections
discuss DOE's authority to establish and amend test procedures for
distribution transformers, as well as relevant background information
regarding DOE's consideration of test procedures for this equipment.
A. Authority and Background
The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (``EPCA'' or ``the
Act''),\1\ Public Law 94-163 (42 U.S.C. 6291-6317, as codified), among
other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy
[[Page 44348]]
efficiency of a number of covered consumer products and industrial
equipment. Title III, Part C \2\ of EPCA, added by Public Law 95-619,
Title IV, Sec. 441(a), established the Energy Conservation Program for
Certain Industrial Equipment, which sets forth a variety of provisions
designed to improve energy efficiency. This equipment includes
distribution transformers, the subject of this RFI. (42 U.S.C. 6317(a))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act of 2015
(EEIA 2015), Public Law 114-11 (April 30, 2015).
\2\ For editorial purposes, upon codification into the U.S.
Code, Part C was redesignated as Part A-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under EPCA, DOE's energy conservation program consists of four
parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement procedures. Relevant
provisions of the Act for distribution transformers include definitions
(42 U.S.C. 6291; 42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation standards (42
U.S.C. 6295; 42 U.S.C. 6317), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6293; 42
U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6294; 42 U.S.C. 6315), and
the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers (42
U.S.C. 6316).
Federal energy efficiency requirements for covered equipment
established under EPCA generally supersede State laws and regulations
concerning energy conservation testing, labeling, and standards. (42
U.S.C. 6316) DOE may, however, grant waivers of Federal preemption for
particular State laws or regulations, in accordance with the procedures
and other provisions of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(b)(2)(D))
The Federal testing requirements consist of test procedures that
manufacturers of covered equipment must use as the basis for: (1)
Certifying to DOE that their equipment complies with the applicable
energy conservation standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 U.S.C.
6316(b); 42 U.S.C. 6296), and (2) making representations about the
efficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) Similarly, DOE uses
these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies with
relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.
Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures
DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for
covered equipment. EPCA requires that any test procedures prescribed or
amended under this section must be reasonably designed to produce test
results which measure energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual
operating cost of a covered equipment during a representative average
use cycle or period of use and requires that test procedures not be
unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2))
If DOE determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted, it
must publish proposed test procedures and offer the public an
opportunity to present oral and written data, views and arguments on
the proposed test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))
EPCA also requires that, at least once every 7 years, DOE evaluate
test procedures for each type of covered equipment, including
distribution transformers, to determine whether amended test procedures
would more accurately or fully comply with the requirements for the
test procedures to not be unduly burdensome to conduct and to be
reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy
efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs during a
representative average use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)).
DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information to
inform DOE's 7-year review requirement specified in EPCA, which
requires that DOE publish either an amendment to the test procedures or
a determination that amended test procedures are not required. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(1))
B. Rulemaking History
DOE's current test procedure for distribution transformers is
prescribed at 10 CFR 431.193 and appendix A to subpart K of part 431.
EPCA states that the testing requirements for distribution transformers
shall be based on the ``Standard Test Method for Measuring the Energy
Consumption of Distribution Transformers'' prescribed by the National
Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA TP 2-1998). (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(10)(A))
Accordingly, DOE prescribed the test procedure for distribution
transformers on April 27, 2006 (hereafter ``April 2006 DT TP final
rule''). 71 FR 24972. In an April 2013 final rule amending the
standards for distribution transformers (hereafter ``April 2013 DT ECS
final rule''), DOE determined that the test procedures did not require
amendment at that time, concluding that the test procedure as
established in the April 2006 DT TP final rule was reasonably designed
to produce test results that reflect energy efficiency and energy use,
as required by 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2). 78 FR 23336, 23347 (April 18,
2013). However, in the April 2013 DT ECS final rule, DOE responded to
stakeholder comments regarding the appropriateness of the test PUL \3\
requirement in its test procedure, stating that it may examine the
topic of potential loading points in a dedicated test procedure
rulemaking in the future. 78 FR 23336, 23350. Therefore, as part of
this RFI DOE is giving further consideration to the appropriateness of
the test PUL requirements, as discussed in the April 2013 DT ECS final
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ PUL is the same concept and quantity as the ``percent of
nameplate-rated load'' used in 10 CFR 431.196 and ``percent of the
rated load'' used in section 3.5 of 10 CFR part 431, subpart K,
appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Request for Information
In the following sections, DOE has identified a variety of issues
on which it seeks input to aid in the development of the technical and
economic analyses regarding whether amended test procedures for
distribution transformers may be warranted. Specifically, DOE is
requesting comment on any opportunities to streamline and simplify
testing requirements for distribution transformers.
Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the
conduct of this process that may not specifically be identified in this
document. In particular, DOE notes that under Executive Order 13771,
``Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,'' Executive
Branch agencies such as DOE are directed to manage the costs associated
with the imposition of expenditures required to comply with Federal
regulations. See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). Pursuant to that Executive
Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on measures DOE could
take to lower the cost of its regulations applicable to distribution
transformers consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
A. Scope and Definitions
A ``transformer'' is a device consisting of 2 or more coils of
insulated wire that transfers alternating current by electromagnetic
induction from 1 coil to another to change the original voltage or
current value. 10 CFR 431.192. A ``distribution transformer'' is a
transformer that: (1) Has an input voltage of 34.5 kV or less; (2) has
an output voltage of 600 V or less; (3) is rated for operation at a
frequency of 60 Hz; and (4) has a capacity of 10 kVA to 2500 kVA for
liquid-immersed units and 15 kVA to 2500 kVA for dry-type units. Id.
The term ``distribution transformer'' does not include a transformer
that is an autotransformer; drive (isolation) transformer; grounding
transformer; machine-tool (control) transformer; nonventilated
transformer; rectifier transformer; regulating transformer; sealed
transformer; special-impedance
[[Page 44349]]
transformer; testing transformer; transformer with tap range of 20
percent or more; uninterruptible power supply transformer; or welding
transformer. Id.
A ``liquid-immersed distribution transformer'' is a distribution
transformer in which the core and coil assembly is immersed in an
insulating liquid. Id. A ``low-voltage dry-type distribution
transformer'' is a distribution transformer that has an input voltage
of 600 volts or less; is air-cooled; and does not use oil as a coolant.
Id. A ``medium-voltage dry-type distribution transformer'' means a
distribution transformer in which the core and coil assembly is
immersed in a gaseous or dry-compound insulating medium, and which has
a rated primary voltage between 601 V and 34.5 kV. Id.
B. Test Procedure
1. PUL Testing Requirements
PUL specification is a key component of the distribution
transformer test procedure because the efficiency of the transformer
varies based on PUL. The test procedure for distribution transformers
must be reasonably designed to produce test results that reflect energy
efficiency, energy use, and estimated operating costs during a
representative average use cycle, and to have a test procedure is not
unduly burdensome to conduct. To this end, the test PUL is intended to
represent the typical \4\ PUL experienced by in-service distribution
transformers. However, some complications exist, including: (1) A given
customer may not operate the transformer at a single constant PUL, and
(2) a transformer model may be used at different PULs by different
customers. To further examine the test PUL specification, DOE reviewed
the test PUL requirements in the current test procedure and the load
analysis from the April 2013 DT ECS final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Industry commonly uses the root mean square (``RMS'') PUL as
an estimate of the ``typical'' or ``average'' PUL experienced by a
transformer in service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current PUL specifications required for rating transformers are
specified in 10 CFR 431.196 and section 3.5 of 10 CFR part 431, subpart
K, appendix A (hereafter ``Appendix A''). The current test procedure in
Appendix A requires that both liquid-immersed transformers and medium-
voltage, dry-type (``MVDT'') transformers are rated at 50 percent PUL,
and that low-voltage, dry-type (``LVDT'') transformers are rated at 35
percent PUL. Specifically, in section 3.5(a) of Appendix A, the test
procedure requires that the reference temperature at which winding
resistance is measured is 55 [deg]C for liquid-immersed transformers
and MVDT transformers loaded at 50 percent of the rated load, and is 75
[deg]C for LVDT transformers loaded at 35 percent of the rated load. In
addition, 10 CFR 431.196 notes that all efficiency values are at 35
percent of nameplate-rated load for LVDT transformers, and at 50
percent of nameplate-rated load for liquid-immersed and MVDT
transformers, determined according to the DOE test procedure in
Appendix A. These test PULs are consistent with NEMA TP 2-1998, the
test method required by EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(10)) DOE is requesting
input as to whether the test PUL values used in the test method reflect
PULs experienced in practice.
DOE's research in support of its April 2013 DT ECS final rule
indicated that distribution transformers in service experience a large
load diversity and, on average, are operated at a difference of a RMS
PUL from those at which they are rated for some equipment classes. 78
FR 23336, 23349-23350. DOE's analysis produced a distribution of
typical RMS PULs for the considered liquid-immersed and MVDT, and LVDT
distribution transformers.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The details of this analysis are documented in the final
rule Technical Support Document: Energy Efficiency Program for
Consumer Products and Commercial and Industrial Equipment
Distribution Transformers; chapter 7 and appendix 7A. (available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048-0760).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE estimated that, on average, the initial (first year) RMS PUL
for liquid-immersed transformers ranged from 34 and 40 percent for
single- and three-phase equipment, respectively, with a one percent
annual increase over the life of the transformer to account for
connected load growth. This resulted in a lifetime \6\ average PUL of
49 and 56 percent for single- and three-phase liquid-immersed
transformers, respectively.\7\ This is consistent with the current test
procedure requirements of rating liquid-immersed transformers at 50
percent PUL. In the April 2013 DT ECS final rule, DOE it had received
public comment stating that utilities had oversized transformers due to
their inability to accurately monitor transformer loading and due to
their assumption that loading will increase in the future. In the case
of liquid-immersed transformers, this may account for the relatively
low PUL as a function of transformer capacity. See, 78 FR 23336, 23349,
citing comment from Baltimore Gas and Electric.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ DOE estimated the average lifetime for distribution
transformers to be 32 years. 78 FR 23336, 23377.
\7\ The result of DOE's transformer load analysis for medium-
voltage liquid-immersed distribution transformers are contained in
the Life-cycle Cost and Payback Period spreadsheet tools for design
lines (DL) 1 through 5 on the Forecast Cells tab. (available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048-0767).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, in the April 2013 DT ECS final rule, DOE estimated that,
on average, the RMS PUL for LVDT transformers ranged from 20 and 25
percent for commercial and industrial customers, respectively.\8\
Finally, DOE estimated that, on average, the PUL for MVDT transformers
ranged from 32 and 38 percent for commercial and industrial customers,
respectively.\9\ However, the current test procedure requirements for
rating LVDT and MVDT transformers are 35 and 50 percent PUL,
respectively. DOE also assumed in its April 2013 DT ECS final rule that
there would be no load growth over the life of LVDT and MVDT
distribution transformers. 78 FR 23336, 23375.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The result of DOE's transformer load analysis for low-
voltage dry-type distribution transformers are contained in the
Life-cycle Cost and Payback Period spreadsheet tools for DLs 6
through 8 on the Forecast Cells tab. (available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2011-BT-STD-0051-0085).
\9\ The result of DOE's transformer load analysis for medium-
voltage dry-type distribution transformers are contained in the
Life-cycle Cost and Payback Period spreadsheet tools for DL 9
through 13B on the Forecast Cells tab. (available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048-0764).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the PUL requirements in the test procedure might not
fully reflect the PUL experienced by in-service distribution
transformers. Consequently, the degree of alignment of test PUL with
in-service PUL of a customer's individual distribution transformer may
affect how closely the test procedure-estimated energy use mirrors the
actual energy use experienced by the customer.
Currently, a customer can specify that transformer efficiency be
optimized to their in-service PUL, but that customer is limited to
purchasing transformers that comply with the energy conservation
standard at the test PUL. However, DOE estimated that approximately 10
percent of liquid-immersed, and 2 percent of LVDT and MVDT customers
evaluate transformer efficiency when making a purchase, indicating that
the remainder of customers prioritize low price (and ignore efficiency)
when purchasing transformers of their required specification. 77 FR
7323.
To the extent that transformer purchases are market-price driven,
DOE would expect that the lowest-cost transformer design would likely
have an efficiency peak at or near the test PUL. This low-cost
transformer would experience reduced efficiency when
[[Page 44350]]
operated at PULs other than the test PUL for which it was likely
optimized. If in-service PUL differs from test PUL, equipment may be
suboptimal for the expected operating conditions. If instead, the test
procedure (via PUL specification) incentivized optimization at the in-
service PUL, increased in-service performance may be possible with no
increase in purchase price relative to transformers designed to meet
existing standards via the existing test procedure. DOE also recognizes
that many transformer purchasers are utilities that likely well
understand these relationships. As such, as described above, factors
other than efficiency (such as requirements by Public Utility
Commissions) are likely driving purchasing decisions. DOE understands
there may be variation between the PUL specified in the test procedure
and actual use and seeks comment on how these factors should be
considered given the sophisticated nature of transformer purchases.
As discussed, in-service distribution transformers experience a
wide range of load conditions. In addition, based on DOE's initial
analysis, distribution transformers may be operated at PULs different
from those at which they are rated. To evaluate in-service PUL further,
DOE is seeking to understand the relation between in-service PUL as
compared to rated PUL. To that end, DOE requests any related
information or data that commenters believe would assist DOE in its
understanding. This information may include PUL data for liquid-
immersed, MVDT, and LVDT distribution transformers in operation,
including the kVA ranges, number of phases (single- or three-phase) and
application type associated with the PUL data. In addition, DOE also
requests data on the potential annual load growth expected for newly
installed transformers. Finally, DOE requests information on the extent
to which the identified issue is taken into account by utilities
purchasing transformers.
DOE is interested in PUL data gathered from distribution
transformers in operation, including information from manufacturers,
utilities, and industry groups (e.g., the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers).
Issue 1. DOE seeks comment, data, and information regarding initial
(first year of service) PUL data for distribution transformers.
Issue 2. DOE requests input on the initial RMS PUL values presented
in section I.B of this RFI. More broadly, DOE requests input on the
distribution of PUL values experienced by the population of
Issue 3. transformers of a given category (e.g., specific kVA,
phases, application, etc.). Specifically, commenters should specify
whether the distributional data they provide represents the first year
of service, or the full lifetime.
Issue 4. DOE seeks comment, data and information regarding the load
growth estimate over the life of distribution transformers currently
being installed. Specifically, DOE seeks comment, data and information
on whether loads will increase over time, and if so, what the annual
load growth would be for liquid-immersed, LVDT, and MVDT transformers,
respectively.
Issue 5. DOE seeks comment, data and information regarding the
extent to which efficiency is taken into account in transformer
purchasing decisions.
2. Temperature Correction
DOE's current test procedure specifies temperature correction of
measured loss values, a process that calculates the losses of a
transformer as though its internal temperature during testing was equal
to a ``reference'' temperature. The reference temperature provides a
common point of comparison, so that the effect of temperature on
efficiency is diminished. In general, higher internal temperature
increases load losses, in part due to increased resistivity of the
conductor/windings. If transformers in service do not reach the same
internal temperature (under identical operating conditions, including
ambient temperature and PUL), temperature correction may weaken the
ability of the test procedure to predict relative in-service
performance. For example, two otherwise-identical transformers may have
different inherent abilities to shed heat. As a result, one may operate
at a lower internal temperature under identical operating conditions,
and produce lower losses. If a test procedure evaluates both units as
though they had reached the same internal temperature, then those lower
in-service losses (which are an advantage to the customer) may not be
reflected.
DOE is requesting comments, data, and information from interested
parties on whether the current temperature correction is appropriate or
whether alternative approaches should be considered.
Issue 6. DOE seeks comments, data, and information regarding the
appropriateness of the current test procedure requirements with respect
to temperature correction. Specifically, DOE requests comment on
whether testing at specified ambient conditions or correcting to the
same internal temperature is more representative of distribution
transformer in-service performance.
Issue 7. DOE seeks comments, data, and information regarding how
temperature varies with PUL, and how significantly it affects
transformer performance over a PUL range. Specifically, under the
current internal temperature correction methodology, DOE requests
comment on how it could specify the reference temperature for testing
at PULs other than the current test PUL.
C. Efficiency Metric
As noted, the current DOE test procedure measures efficiency at a
single test PUL. Based on the data and information received in response
to this RFI, DOE may consider either continuing to use the current
single test PUL requirements for rating distribution transformers, or
revising the single test PUL to an alternative single test PUL, if it
better reflects how distribution transformers operate in service.
Alternatively, DOE may consider an alternative efficiency metric
altogether, such as a multiple-PUL weighted-average efficiency metric.
Use of a weighted-average efficiency metric comprised of more than one
test PUL may better reflect how distribution transformers operate in
service because a given distribution transformer commonly experiences a
range of PULs in service depending on the end-use of the customer. In
addition, a given customer is unlikely to operate a distribution
transformer at a single, constant PUL equal to the typical PUL. Thus, a
single test PUL may not fully capture how distribution transformers
operate in service.
While a weighted-average efficiency could result in additional test
burden, DOE understands that this metric may more effectively
characterize operation in-service. In addition, the additional test
burden could be mitigated via the AEDM for distribution transformers.
This is because AEDMs would allow manufacturers to determine the
efficiency of one or more of its untested basic models using a
mathematical model instead of testing.
Issue 8. DOE seeks comments, data, and information on the continued
use of a single test PUL requirement. Further, if a single test PUL
requirement is maintained, DOE seeks comment on whether the existing
single test PUL requirements should be maintained or whether alternate
single test PUL requirements may better match the typical or RMS value
in service. In addition, DOE seeks comment on the testing burden using
an alternate single
[[Page 44351]]
test PUL as compared to the current test procedure.
Issue 9. DOE seeks comments, data, and information regarding
testing a single transformer at multiple PULs. Specifically, DOE seeks
comment on the degree to which a multiple-PUL weighted-average
efficiency would more accurately reflect distribution transformer
operation in service, as compared to the current test procedure. In
addition, DOE seeks comment on any additional testing burden that might
be associated with testing at multiple PULs.
Issue 10. DOE seeks comments, data, and information regarding the
number of PULs (and the corresponding test PUL values) that parties
believe may be appropriate for a multiple PUL test procedure. In
addition, DOE seeks comments, data, and information regarding what
weightings or additional requirements may be necessary under a multiple
PUL test procedure.
Issue 11. DOE seeks comments, data, and information on whether
there are any other options or alternative metrics not presented in
this RFI that should be considered for measuring and rating the
efficiency of distribution transformers.
D. Sampling, Representations, AEDMs
The certification and compliance requirements for distribution
transformers are codified under 10 CFR 429.11, 429.12, 429.47, 429.70,
429.110, and in Appendix C to Subpart C of Part 429. DOE's sampling
requirements are listed at 10 CFR 429.47. The sampling requirements,
among other things, state that, (1) the provisions of 10 CFR 429.11
apply, (2) efficiency of a basic model may be determined through
testing or through application of an AEDM under the requirements of 10
CFR 429.70, and (3) a manufacturer must use a sample of at least five
units if more than five units have been manufactured over a span of six
months (10 CFR 429.47(a)(2)(i)(B)), or as many as have been produced if
five or fewer have been manufactured over a span of six months (10 CFR
429.47(a)(2)(i)(A)).
Issue 12. DOE seeks comment regarding the sampling requirements for
distribution transformers. Specifically, DOE seeks information on how
manufacturers have been applying the sampling provisions. DOE also
seeks comments from manufacturers on whether there are instances in
which there are questions as to how to apply the sampling requirements
or select the appropriate sample size.
10 CFR 429.47(a)(2)(ii) states that any represented value of
efficiency of a basic model must be less than or equal to:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22SE17.002
Where:
x = the arithmetic mean of the sample units' tested efficiencies,
and
n = number of units in the sample.
This provision permits representation of a basic model efficiency
greater than the arithmetic mean of the sample units' tested
efficiencies. The degree to which it may exceed the mean is a function
of the sample size; smaller samples may exceed the mean by a greater
amount. As a result, manufacturers may represent an efficiency for a
basic model between the value of Equation 1 and the minimum efficiency
requirements at 10 CFR 431.196.
DOE notes that distribution transformer test reports do not always
indicate how efficiency is calculated, nor do they always provide
information about the measured values.
Issue 13. DOE seeks comment regarding the represented values of
efficiency relative to calculated values, specifically, whether
manufacturers typically represent the minimum efficiency standard, the
maximum represented efficiency (RE) allowable, or a different value;
how manufacturers determine what value to represent; and why.
Issue 14. DOE's requirements related to AEDMs are at 10 CFR 429.70.
This section specifies under which circumstances an AEDM may be
developed, validated, and applied to product performance ratings for
certain covered products and equipment. AEDM application to
distribution transformers is permitted pursuant to 10 CFR 429.47(a)(2)
and may serve a manufacturer who finds it burdensome to physically test
units of each basic model sold. However, DOE notes that currently,
manufacturers frequently test every basic model instead of calculating
efficiency using the AEDM provisions.
Issue 15. DOE seeks information regarding the usefulness of the
AEDM provisions, and whether and why manufacturers select the option to
use AEDMs.
E. Other Test Procedure Topics
In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document, DOE
welcomes comment on any other aspect of the existing test procedures
for distribution transformers not already addressed by the specific
areas identified in this document. DOE particularly seeks information
that would improve the repeatability, reproducibility, and consumer
representativeness of the test procedures. DOE also requests
information that would help DOE create a procedure that would limit
manufacturer test burden through streamlining or simplifying testing
requirements. Comments regarding the repeatability and reproducibility
are also welcome.
DOE also requests feedback on any potential amendments to the
existing test procedure that could be considered to address impacts on
manufacturers, including small businesses. Regarding the Federal test
method, DOE seeks comment on the degree to which the DOE test procedure
should consider and be harmonized with the most recent relevant
industry standards for distribution transformers and whether there are
any changes to the Federal test method that would provide additional
benefits to the public. DOE also requests comment on the benefits and
burdens of adopting any industry/voluntary consensus-based or other
appropriate test procedure, without modification. As discussed, the
Federal test method for distribution transformers is based on the
industry standard NEMA TP 2-1998. The Federal test method is also based
on IEEE C57.12.90-1999 ``IEEE Standard Test Code for Liquid-Immersed
Distribution, Power and Regulating Transformers and IEEE Guide for
Short Circuit Testing of Distribution and Power Transformers;'' IEEE
C57.12.91-2001, ``IEEE Standard Test Code for Dry-Type Distribution and
Power Transformers;'' IEEE C57.12.00-2000, ``IEEE Standard General
Requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power and Regulating
Transformers;'' and IEEE C57.12.01-1998, ``IEEE Standard General
Requirements for Dry-Type Distribution and Power Transformers Including
those with Solid Cast and/or Resin Encapsulated
[[Page 44352]]
Windings.'' When establishing the Federal test procedure for
distribution transformers, DOE determined that basing the procedure on
multiple industry standards, as opposed to adopting an industry test
procedure (or procedures) without modification, was necessary to
provide the detail and accuracy required for the Federal test
procedure, with the additional benefit of providing manufacturers the
Federal test procedure in a single reference. 71 FR 24972, 24982.
Additionally, DOE requests comment on whether the existing test
procedures limit a manufacturer's ability to provide additional
features to consumers on distribution transformers. DOE particularly
seeks information on how the test procedures could be amended to reduce
the cost of new or additional features and make it more likely that
such features are included on distribution transformers.
III. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by October
23, 2017, comments, and information on matters addressed in this notice
and on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended test
procedures for distribution transformers. These comments and
information will aid in the development of a test procedure NOPR for
distribution transformers if DOE determines that amended test
procedures may be appropriate for these products.
Submitting comments via https://regulations.gov. The https://www.regulations.gov Web page will require you to provide your name and
contact information. Your contact information will be viewable to DOE
Building Technologies staff only. Your contact information will not be
publicly viewable except for your first and last names, organization
name (if any), and submitter representative name (if any). If your
comment is not processed properly because of technical difficulties,
DOE will use this information to contact you. If DOE cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, DOE may not be able to consider your comment.
However, your contact information will be publicly viewable if you
include it in the comment or in any documents attached to your comment.
Any information that you do not want to be publicly viewable should not
be included in your comment, nor in any document attached to your
comment. Persons viewing comments will see only first and last names,
organization names, correspondence containing comments, and any
documents submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to https://www.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 https://www.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 https://www.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 https://www.regulations.gov provides after you have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand delivery, or mail. Comments and
documents submitted via email, hand delivery, or mail also will be
posted to https://www.regulations.gov. If you do not want your personal
contact information to be publicly viewable, do not include it in your
comment or any accompanying documents. Instead, provide your contact
information on a cover letter. Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time you submit comments, data,
documents, and other information to DOE. If you submit via mail or hand
delivery, please provide all items on a CD, if feasible. It is not
necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles (faxes) will be
accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, written in English and free of any defects or viruses.
Documents should not contain special characters or any form of
encryption and, if possible, they should carry the electronic signature
of the author.
Campaign form letters. Please submit campaign form letters by the
originating organization in batches of between 50 to 500 form letters
per PDF or as one form letter with a list of supporters' names compiled
into one or more PDFs. This reduces comment processing and posting
time.
Confidential Business Information. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he or she believes to be
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via
email, postal mail, or hand delivery two well-marked copies: one copy
of the document marked confidential including all the information
believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked non-
confidential with the information believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if feasible. DOE will make
its own determination about the confidential status of the information
and treat it according to its determination.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include (1) a description of the
items, (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry, (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources, (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality, (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure, (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time, and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
It is DOE's policy that all comments may be included in the public
docket, without change and as received, including any personal
information provided in the comments (except information deemed to be
exempt from public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to be a very important part of
the process for developing test procedures and energy conservation
standards. DOE actively encourages the participation and interaction of
the public during the comment period in each stage of the rulemaking
process. Interactions with and between members of the public provide a
balanced discussion of the issues and assist DOE in the rulemaking
process. Anyone who wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to
receive future notices and information about this rulemaking should
contact Appliance and Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-
6636 or via email at ApplianceStandardsQuestions@ee.doe.gov.
[[Page 44353]]
Issued in Washington, DC, on August 29, 2017.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2017-20225 Filed 9-21-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
