Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Electric Motors, 34111-34118 [2020-11764]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
34111
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 85, No. 107
Wednesday, June 3, 2020
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 Part 431
[EERE–2020–BT–TP–0011]
RIN 1904–AE62
Energy Conservation Program: Test
Procedure for Electric Motors
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy is soliciting public comment to
consider whether to amend DOE’s test
procedures for electric motors. To
inform interested parties and to
facilitate this process, this document
identifies several issues concerning the
current test procedures on which
comment is sought and invites public
comment on any relevant topic
(including those that have not been
specifically raised). While the issues
outlined in this document focus on how
to address recent industry testing
standard updates and the potential
clarification of definitions and test
settings for electric motors, information
and data regarding any additional topics
relevant to potential test procedure
amendments are also sought, including
methods to reduce regulatory burden
while ensuring the procedure’s
representativeness.
DATES: Written comments and
information will be accepted on or
before July 20, 2020.
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–2020–BT–TP–0011, by
any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: to ElecMotors2020TP0011@
ee.doe.gov. Include docket number
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
EERE–2020–BT–TP–0011 in the subject
line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Office, 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 Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza
SW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024.
Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible,
please submit all items on a CD, in
which case it is not necessary to include
printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (‘‘faxes’’) will be
accepted. For detailed instructions on
submitting comments and additional
information on this 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?D=EERE-2020-BT-TP-0011. The
docket web page contains 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 Office, EE–5B, 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–
9870. Email:
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of the General Counsel,
GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC, 20585–0121.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email:
Michael.Kido@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) 287–
1445 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. Updates to Industry Standards
2. Temperature Rise Measurement Location
3. Rated Motor Horsepower
4. Rated Values Specified for Testing
C. Other Test Procedure Topics
III. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
Electric motors are included in the list
of ‘‘covered equipment’’ for which the
Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) is
authorized to establish and amend
energy conservation standards and test
procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A))
DOE’s test procedures for electric
motors are prescribed at Appendix B to
Subpart B of 10 CFR part 431
(‘‘Appendix B’’). The following sections
discuss DOE’s authority to establish and
amend test procedures for electric
motors, 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, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’),1 among
other things, authorizes DOE to regulate
the energy efficiency of a number of
consumer products and certain
industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6291–
6317) Included within this authority are
electric motors, the subject of this RFI.
(42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A))
The energy conservation program
under EPCA consists essentially of four
parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3)
Federal energy conservation standards,
and (4) certification and enforcement
1 All references to EPCA in this document refer
to the statute as amended through America’s Water
Infrastructure Act of 2018, Public Law 115–270
(October 23, 2018).
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
34112
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
procedures. Relevant provisions of
EPCA specifically include definitions
(42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation
standards (42 U.S.C. 6313), test
procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling
provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), and the
authority to require information and
reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C.
6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6296).
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(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) 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(a))
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(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and
(2) making representations about the
efficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C.
6314(d)) Similarly, DOE must use these
test procedures to determine whether
the equipment complies with relevant
standards promulgated under EPCA. (42
U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s))
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 reflect energy
efficiency, energy use or estimated
annual operating cost of a given type of
covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle 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
comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))
EPCA, pursuant to amendments made
by the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public
Law 102–486 (October 24, 1992),
specifies that the test procedures for
electric motors subject to standards are
those specified in National Electrical
Manufacturers Association (‘‘NEMA’’)
Standards Publication MG1–1987 and
Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (‘‘IEEE’’) Standard 112 Test
Method B, as in effect on October 24,
1992. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(5)(A)). If these
test procedures are amended, DOE must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
amend its test procedures to conform to
such amended test procedure
requirements, unless DOE determines
by rule, published in the Federal
Register and supported by clear and
convincing evidence, that to do so
would not meet the statutory
requirements related to the test
procedure representativeness and
burden. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(5)(B)) As
noted later in this document, these
industry-based procedures have been
revised a number of times and DOE has
amended its regulations consistent with
these changes.
EPCA also requires DOE to evaluate
its test procedures at least once every 7
years for each type of covered
equipment, including electric motors, to
determine whether amended test
procedures would more accurately or
fully comply with the requirements that
test procedures not be unduly
burdensome to conduct but be
reasonably designed to produce test
results reflecting energy efficiency,
energy use, and estimated operating
costs during a representative average
use cycle of the equipment at issue. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)) In addition, if the
Secretary determines that a test
procedure amendment is warranted, the
Secretary must propose amended test
procedures (published in the Federal
Register) and afford interested persons
an opportunity (of not less than 45 days’
duration) to present oral and written
data, views, and arguments on the
proposed test procedures. (42 U.S.C.
6314(b)) If DOE determines that test
procedure revisions are not appropriate,
DOE must publish its determination not
to amend the test procedures. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))
DOE is publishing this RFI to collect
data and information to inform its
decision in satisfaction of its obligations
under EPCA.
B. Rulemaking History
DOE established test procedures for
electric motors that referenced NEMA
MG1–1993 and IEEE 112–1996. 64 FR
54114 (October 5, 1999) (‘‘October 1999
final rule’’). The October 1999 final rule
also incorporated by reference Canadian
Standards Association (‘‘CSA’’)
Standard C390–93, Energy Efficiency
Test Methods for Three-Phase Induction
Motors, which DOE found to be a
widely recognized alternative that was
consistent with IEEE 112–1996. Id.
On May 4, 2012, DOE amended the
test procedures for electric motors
consistent with its obligations under
EPCA to incorporate the NEMA MG 1–
2009 and the IEEE 112–2011 into its
regulations. 77 FR 26608 (‘‘May 2012
final rule’’). The May 2012 final rule
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
also updated the regulations to reference
the most current version of CSA C390.
Id.
On December 13, 2013, DOE again
amended its electric motor test
procedure by clarifying the test setup
requirements for certain electric motors.
78 FR 75962 (‘‘December 2013 final
rule’’). DOE explained that changes
brought about by the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007
(Pub. L. 110–140 (December 19, 2007))
and the American Energy
Manufacturing Technical Corrections
Act (Pub. L. 112–210, Sec. 10 (December
18, 2012)) enabled DOE to consider an
expanded scope of electric motors for
regulatory coverage. Id. at 78 FR 75965.
DOE determined that the motors
covered by the expanded scope could be
tested using the testing methods
provided in IEEE 112 (Test Method B)
and CSA C390–10 (which were both
part of DOE’s test procedure regulations)
to accurately measure their losses and
determine their energy efficiency. Id.
However, some of these motors required
additional testing set-up instructions
prior to testing, which DOE established
in the December 2013 final rule.2 Id.
DOE’s test procedures for electric
motors at 10 CFR part 431, subpart B,
Appendix B (‘‘Appendix B’’) currently
incorporate by reference NEMA MG 1–
2009, IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B,
and CSA Standard C390–10. Appendix
B also includes additional specifications
necessary for testing certain types of
electric motors. 10 CFR part 431,
subpart B, Appendix B, Sec. 4.
On March 1, 2017, NEMA published
NEMA MG 1–2016, Motors and
Generators. On February 14, 2018, IEEE
published IEEE 112–2017, IEEE
Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase
Induction Motors and Generators. DOE
subsequently proposed to amend the
current test procedure regulations for
small electric motors and electric
motors, which included a full review of
IEEE 112–2017. 84 FR 17004 (April 23,
2019) (‘‘April 2019 NOPR’’). The
relevant updates to the industry test
procedures (including NEMA MG 1–
2016), in addition to potential
clarification of definitions and test
settings for electric motors, are
discussed in the following section.
II. Request for Information
In the following sections, DOE has
identified a variety of issues on which
2 A 2011 version of NEMA MG 1 was released
prior to the publication of the December 2013 final
rule. The updates from the 2009 version, however,
did not affect the sections of NEMA MG–1
incorporated by reference in the DOE regulations.
Subsequently, DOE declined to incorporate by
reference NEMA MG 1–2011. 78 FR 75962, 75963.
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
it seeks input on deciding whether
amending its test procedures for electric
motors would (1) more accurately or
fully comply with the requirements in
EPCA that test procedures be reasonably
designed to produce test results which
reflect energy use during a
representative average use cycle,
without being unduly burdensome to
conduct (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)); or (2)
reduce testing burden. Specifically, DOE
is requesting comment on any
opportunities to streamline and simplify
testing requirements for electric motors
as well as information to help inform
DOE’s related technical and economic
analyses.
Further, DOE recently issued an RFI
to seek more broadly information on
whether its test procedures are
reasonably designed, as required by
EPCA, to produce results that measure
the energy use or efficiency of a product
during a representative average use
cycle or period of use. 84 FR 9721
(March 18, 2019). DOE seeks comment
on this issue as it pertains to the test
procedure for electric motors.
Additionally, DOE welcomes
comments on other issues relevant to
the conduct of this process. 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
(February 3, 2017). Consistent with that
Executive Order, DOE encourages the
public to provide input on measures
DOE could take to lower the cost of its
regulations applicable to electric motors
consistent with the requirements of
EPCA.
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Scope and Definitions
The term ‘‘electric motor’’ is defined
as ‘‘a machine that converts electrical
power into rotational mechanical
power.’’ 10 CFR 431.12. Manufacturers
are required to test those electric motors
subject to energy conservation standards
according to the test procedure in
Appendix B.3 (See generally 42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(5)(A); see also the introductory
paragraph to 10 CFR part 431, subpart
B, Appendix B) Currently, energy
conservation standards apply to a
variety of categories of electric motors
3 This RFI does not address small electric motors,
which are covered separately under 10 CFR part
431, subpart X. A small electric motor is ‘‘a NEMA
general purpose alternating current single-speed
induction motor, built in a two-digit frame number
series in accordance with NEMA Standards
Publication MG1–1987, including IEC metric
equivalent motors.’’ 10 CFR 431.442.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
provided that they meet the criteria
specified at 10 CFR 431.25(g). These
categories of electric motors include
NEMA Design A motors,4 NEMA Design
B motors,5 NEMA Design C motors,6 and
fire pump electric motors.7 See 10 CFR
431.25(h)–(j). The detailed criteria
specified under 10 CFR 431.25(g)
specify that the currently regulated
motors:
(1) Are single-speed, induction motors;
(2) Are rated for continuous duty (MG 1)
operation or for duty type S1 (IEC)
(3) Contain a squirrel-cage (MG 1) or cage
(IEC) rotor;
(4) Operate on polyphase alternating
current 60-hertz sinusoidal line power;
(5) Are rated 600 volts or less;
(6) Have a 2-, 4-, 6-, or 8-pole
configuration;
(7) Are built in a three-digit or four-digit
NEMA frame size (or IEC metric equivalent),
including those designs between two
consecutive NEMA frame sizes (or IEC metric
equivalent), or an enclosed 56 NEMA frame
size (or IEC metric equivalent);
(8) Produce at least one horsepower (0.746
kW) but not greater than 500 horsepower
(373 kW), and
(9) Meet all of the performance
requirements of one of the following motor
types: A NEMA Design A, B, or C motor or
an IEC Design N or H motor.
10 CFR 431.25(g).
4 ‘‘NEMA Design A’’ motor means a squirrel-cage
motor that: (1) Is designed to withstand full-voltage
starting and developing locked-rotor torque as
shown in NEMA MG 1–2009, paragraph 12.38.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 431.15); (2) Has
pull-up torque not less than the values shown in
NEMA MG 1–2009, paragraph 12.40.1; (3) Has
breakdown torque not less than the values shown
in NEMA MG 1–2009, paragraph 12.39.1; (4) Has a
locked-rotor current higher than the values shown
in NEMA MG 1–2009, paragraph 12.35.1 for 60
hertz and NEMA MG 1–2009, paragraph 12.35.2 for
50 hertz; and (5) Has a slip at rated load of less than
5 percent for motors with fewer than 10 poles. 10
CFR 430.12.
5 ‘‘NEMA Design B motor’’ means a squirrel-cage
motor that is: (1) Designed to withstand full-voltage
starting; (2) Develops locked-rotor, breakdown, and
pull-up torques adequate for general application as
specified in sections 12.38, 12.39 and 12.40 of
NEMA MG1–2009 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 431.15); (3) Draws locked-rotor current not to
exceed the values shown in section 12.35.1 for 60
hertz and 12.35.2 for 50 hertz of NEMA MG1–2009;
and (4) Has a slip at rated load of less than 5 percent
for motors with fewer than 10 poles. Id.
6 ‘‘NEMA Design C’’ motor means a squirrel-cage
motor that: (1) Is Designed to withstand full-voltage
starting and developing locked-rotor torque for
high-torque applications up to the values shown in
NEMA MG1–2009, paragraph 12.38.2 (incorporated
by reference, see § 431.15); (2) Has pull-up torque
not less than the values shown in NEMA MG1–
2009, paragraph 12.40.2; (3) Has breakdown torque
not less than the values shown in NEMA MG1–
2009, paragraph 12.39.2; (4) Has a locked-rotor
current not to exceed the values shown in NEMA
MG1–2009, paragraphs 12.35.1 for 60 hertz and
12.35.2 for 50 hertz; and (5) Has a slip at rated load
of less than 5 percent. Id.
7 ‘‘Fire pump electric motor’’ means an electric
motor, including any IEC-equivalent motor that
meets the requirements of section 9.5 of NFPA 20.
Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34113
DOE exempted certain categories of
motors from having to satisfy any
standards after determining that the
referenced industry test procedures do
not provide a standardized test method
for determining the energy efficiency of
these motor configurations.8 79 FR
30934 (May 29, 2014); see also, 78 FR
75962, 75974, 75987–75989). The
currently exempted motor categories
are:
•
•
•
•
•
Air-over electric motors;
Component sets of an electric motor;
Liquid-cooled electric motors;
Submersible electric motors; and
Inverter-only electric motors.
10 CFR 431.25(l)
Definitions for terms related to the
Federal test method for electric motors
are provided at 10 CFR 431.12. A
number of these definitions incorporate
references to specific sections of NEMA
MG 1–2009 to characterize the
construction and operation of different
categories of electric motors. DOE is
considering revising these definitions to
update its current NEMA MG 1
references to the most recent edition of
that standard, NEMA MG 1–2016. These
reference updates would align DOE’s
regulatory definitions with current
industry practice and the revisions
under consideration for the electric
motors test procedure at Appendix B
(see section II.B.1).
Twelve definitions at 10 CFR 431.12
reference the NEMA MG 1–2009
standard, of which the following five
include references to sections of NEMA
MG 1 that have not changed between
the 2009 and 2016 publications of the
standard: ‘‘electric motor with
encapsulated windings,’’ ‘‘electric motor
with moisture resistant windings,’’
‘‘electric motor with sealed windings,’’
‘‘general purpose electric motor
(subtype I),’’ and ‘‘general purpose
electric motor (subtype II).’’
Conversely, the definitions in 10 CFR
431.12 for ‘‘definite purpose motor,’’
‘‘definite purpose electric motor,’’
‘‘general purpose electric motor,’’
‘‘NEMA Design A motor,’’ ‘‘NEMA
Design B motor,’’ ‘‘NEMA Design C
motor,’’ and ‘‘nominal full-load
efficiency’’ reference provisions of
NEMA MG 1 that have changed between
the 2009 and 2016 versions. These
changes are discussed in the following
paragraphs.
The definitions for ‘‘definite purpose
motor,’’ ‘‘definite purpose electric
motor,’’ and ‘‘general purpose electric
motor’’ at 10 CFR 431.12 reference
8 DOE notes that, while these motor
configurations are not currently subject to any
energy conservation standards, they remain within
the Department’s scope of covered equipment.
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
34114
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
paragraph 14.3, ‘‘Unusual Service
Conditions,’’ of NEMA MG 1–2009.
Paragraph 14.3 of NEMA MG 1 provides
a list of service conditions that may
affect the construction or operation of a
motor. The NEMA MG 1–2016 standard
adds two conditions to the NEMA MG
1–2009 standard: ‘‘exposure to a
coupling mass that is greater than 10%
of rotor weight and/or has a center of
gravity that is beyond the shaft
extension’’ and ‘‘exposure to a coupling
or coupling/coupling guard combination
which could produce a negative
pressure at the drive end seal.’’ DOE
notes that the regulatory definition for
‘‘general purpose electric motor’’ also
references paragraph 14.2, ‘‘Usual
service conditions,’’ of NEMA MG 1–
2009, but unlike paragraph 14.3, section
14.2 remains unchanged in NEMA MG
1–2016. Prior to June 1, 2016, DOE’s
energy conservation standards for
electric motors differentiated between
general purpose electric motors (for
which standards applied) and definite
or special purpose electric motors (for
which standards did not apply). 10 CFR
431.25(a)–(d) and (f). For electric motors
manufactured on or after June 1, 2016,
DOE’s energy conservation standards no
longer differentiated between these
previous broad categories of general
purpose and definite or special purpose.
Consequently, DOE’s standards are now
differentiated according to the criteria
listed at 10 CFR 431.25(g) and NEMA
and IEC Design categories. 10 CFR
431.25(h)–(i). Therefore, the updates to
these definitions are not expected to
change the applicability of test
procedures or energy conservation
standards for electric motors
manufactured on or after June 1, 2016.
The definitions for ‘‘NEMA Design A
motor,’’ ‘‘NEMA Design B motor,’’ and
‘‘NEMA Design C motor’’ at 10 CFR
431.12 reference tables of locked-rotor
current in sections 12.35.1 and 12.35.2
of NEMA MG 1–2009. NEMA MG 1–
2016 revises these tables by adding a
column for ‘‘Locked-Rotor kVA Code’’
and a footnote regarding a tolerance that
may be applied to the locked-rotor
current values based on the associated
Locked-Rotor kVA Code.9 Section 10.37
9 Locked-Rotor kVA Code is a letter which
appears on the nameplate of an alternating-current
motor to show its range of locked-rotor kilo-voltampere (kVA) per horsepower. The letter
designations for locked rotor kVA per horsepower
are given in Section 10.37 of NEMA MG 1–2016.
For example, the letter ‘‘N’’ corresponds to a range
of locked rotor kVA per horsepower between 11.2
and 12.5.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
of NEMA MG 1–2016 provides the
applicable range of kVA per horsepower
for each locked-rotor kVA code that
would be used to calculate the lockedrotor current tolerances. These
definitions also reference other sections
in NEMA MG 1–2009, each of which
remains unchanged in the NEMA MG 1–
2016 standard. The addition of the
column for ‘‘Locked-Rotor kVA Code’’ is
not expected to impact the applicability
of test procedures or energy
conservation standards for electric
motors. Further, NEMA MG 1–2016’s
addition of the footnote regarding a
tolerance that may be applied to the
maximum locked-rotor current values is
a clarification of the existing tolerance
presented in section 10.37 of NEMA
MG1–2009, which remains unchanged
in NEMA MG1–2016, and would also
not impact the scope of electric motors
that are subject to energy conservation
standards and test procedures.
The definition for ‘‘nominal full-load
efficiency’’ at 10 CFR 431.12 references
Table 12–10 of NEMA MG 1–2009,
which provides a list of nominal
efficiencies and associated minimum
motor efficiencies based on a 20 percent
loss difference. Table 12–10 in NEMA
MG 1–2009 lists nominal efficiency
ratings ranging from 50.5 to 99.0, while
Table 12–10 in NEMA MG 1–2016 lists
nominal efficiency ratings ranging from
34.5 to 99.0. The nominal efficiency
ratings (and associated minimum
efficiencies) in the range of 50.5 to 99.0
did not change between the NEMA
MG1–2009 and NEMA MG1–2016
versions of the standard. The nominal
full-load efficiency requirements
specified by the energy conservation
standards for electric motors at 10 CFR
431.25 are efficiency values ranging
from 74.0 to 96.2; therefore, the addition
of nominal efficiency ratings ranging
from 34.5 to 50.5 in the NEMA MG 1–
2016 version of Table 12–10 will not
impact the applicability of test
procedures or energy conservation
standards for electric motors.
Issue 1: DOE requests comment on the
2016 updates to NEMA MG 1 that relate
to the electric motor definitions in 10
CFR 431.12. Specifically, DOE requests
information on how these revisions
would impact the applicability of test
procedures and energy conservation
standards for electric motors.
Issue 2: DOE requests comment on
whether any other definitions should be
modified or added to 10 CFR 431.12 to
provide additional detail or direction in
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the application of the test procedure for
electric motors.
DOE also notes that IEC standard
60034–12, published on November 23,
2016, allows the use of a new
nomenclature for certain electric motors
that are already covered by DOE’s
current standards. As an example, IEC
Design N and IEC Design H motors that
meet a ‘‘premium efficiency’’ attribute
are permitted to be designated with an
‘‘E’’ (i.e. ‘‘NE’’ and ‘‘HE’’). The
‘‘premium efficiency’’ attribute
generally aligns with the current DOE
standards prescribed at 10 CFR 431.25.
In DOE’s view, these ‘‘NE’’ and ‘‘HE’’
motors are already addressed by the
definitions and standards that DOE
currently has in place regarding ‘‘N’’
and ‘‘H’’ motors. See 10 CFR 431.12
(defining the terms ‘‘IEC Design H
motor’’ and ‘‘IEC Design N motors’’) and
10 CFR 431.25(g)–(i) and (l)
(establishing the efficiency standards
related to Design N and H motors and
their applicable scope). This view is
also held by NEMA, which asserted in
separate communications to DOE that
‘‘E’’-designated motors are drop-in
replacements for their ‘‘non-E’’designated counterparts. See Letter from
NEMA to DOE (March 26, 2018) and
Supplemental Letter from NEMA to
DOE (August 23, 2019). (Both letters
have been filed in the docket.) To
ensure the accuracy of its
understanding, DOE is seeking comment
as to whether its understanding of the
new nomenclature is correct.
Issue 3: DOE requests comment on
whether a Design NE or Design HE
motor is distinguishable in performance
(aside from energy efficiency) from a
Design N or Design H motor,
respectively, such that the ‘‘E’’designated motor merits treatment as a
separate motor type. If so, why? If not,
why not?
B. Test Procedure
1. Updates to Industry Standards
DOE has reviewed each of the
industry standards that are currently
incorporated by reference as test
methods for determining the energy
efficiency of electric motors. Since
publication of the December 2013 final
rule, IEEE 112–2004 and NEMA MG 1–
2009 have been revised, and CSA C390–
10 has been reaffirmed, as listed in
Table II–1. The following is a review of
the relevant revisions to IEEE 112–2004
and NEMA MG 1–2009.
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
34115
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE II–1—UPDATED INDUSTRY STANDARDS
Existing reference
Updated version
IEEE 112–2004 ....................................................................
CSA 390–10 .........................................................................
NEMA MG 1–2009 ...............................................................
IEEE 112–2017 ...................................................................
CSA 390–10 (R2015) .........................................................
NEMA MG 1–2016 .............................................................
a. IEEE 112
In the April 2019 NOPR DOE
proposed to incorporate by reference
IEEE 112–2017 for both small electric
motors and electric motors. 84 FR
17004. Specifically, for electric motors,
DOE has proposed to incorporate IEEE
112–2017 Test Method B as an
alternative to IEEE 112–2004 Test
Method B, and requested comment on
this proposal. 84 FR 17004, 17011–
17012. DOE tentatively determined that
this proposal would harmonize the
permitted test methods under subpart B
of 10 CFR part 431 and align
measurement and instrumentation
requirements with recent industry
practice. 84 FR 17004, 17011–17012.
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
b. NEMA MG 1
The test procedure for electric motors
specified at Appendix B requires that
efficiency and losses be determined in
accordance with NEMA MG 1–2009,
paragraph 12.58.1, ‘‘Determination of
Motor Efficiency and Losses.’’ The text
of paragraph 12.58.1 was modified in
the subsequent revisions to NEMA MG
1–2009. Notably, paragraph 12.58.1 in
the 2016 revision of MG 1 specifies an
additional industry standard, IEC
60034–2–1, for calculating the efficiency
of horizontal polyphase squirrel-cage
motors rated 1 to 500 horsepower.
Further discussion on IEC 60034–2–1 is
provided in the following section
II.B.1.c of this RFI.
c. IEC 60034–2–1
In a November 2017 notice, DOE
sought comment regarding petitions
from NEMA and Underwriters
Laboratory (‘‘UL’’) requesting that DOE
incorporate IEC 60034–2–1:2014
Method 2–1–1B 10 as an additional
alternative test method to those already
referenced in DOE’s regulations for
determining the energy efficiency of
certain electric motors and small
electric motors. 82 FR 50844 (November
2, 2017). With regard to the electric
motors test procedure, NEMA and UL’s
petition requested that DOE incorporate
IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B as
10 IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B (2014),
‘‘Rotating Electrical Machines—Part 2–1: Standard
methods for determining losses and efficiency from
tests (excluding machines for traction vehicles),’’
‘‘Summation of losses, additional load losses
according to the method of residual loss.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
an alternative to IEEE 112–2004 Test
Method B and CSA C390–10, which are
currently referenced in Appendix B.
(NEMA, Docket EERE–2017–BT–TP–
0047,11 No. 28.2 at p.1; UL, Docket
EERE–2017–BT–TP–0047, No. 29.1 at
p.1)
DOE reviewed Method 2–1–1B from
the IEC 60034–2–1:2014 standard in the
April 2019 NOPR and initially
concluded that the standard would
provide comparable energy efficiency
results to the current required test
standards (IEEE 112 and CSA C390). 84
FR 17004, 17013. Accordingly, in the
April 2019 NOPR DOE proposed to
incorporate by reference IEC 60034–2–
1:2014 Method 2–1–1B as an alternative
to the currently incorporated industry
testing standards IEEE 112–2004 Test
Method B and CSA C390–10, and
requested comment on this proposal. Id.
2. Temperature Rise Measurement
Location
The test method for measuring
electric motor nominal full-load
efficiency prescribed under Appendix B
specifies that efficiency and losses are
determined in accordance with
paragraph 12.58.1 of NEMA MG1–2009,
and either CSA C390–10 or IEEE 112–
2004 Test Method B. See 10 CFR part
431, subpart B, Appendix B, Sec. 2. CSA
390–10 and IEEE 112–2004 both require
the motor to be loaded to the rated full
load and operated until thermal
equilibrium is reached. See CSA C390–
10, Sec. 7.1.3 and IEEE 112–2004, Sec.
5.8.4.4. This segment of the efficiency
test is known as the ‘‘heat-run test.’’
Section 7.1.3 of CSA C390–10
provides the test instructions for the
heat-run test, and states that the
temperature used to establish thermal
equilibrium is determined using the
temperature measurement devices
specified in section 7.1.2 of that
standard. Section 7.1.2.2 of CSA C390–
10 explicitly specifies the permissible
locations for installing the temperature
measurement devices when conducting
the heat-run test.
Section 5.8.4.4 of IEEE 112–2004
specifies how to terminate the heat-run
test. These instructions provide that the
11 Docket EERE–2017–BT–TP–0047 is available at
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2017BT-TP-0047.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Type of update
Revision.
Reaffirmed.
Revision.
motor is operated until the temperature
rises are constant, but unlike CSA
C390–10, IEEE 112–2004 does not
explicitly indicate the locations where
these temperatures must be measured.
Instead, Section 5.8.4.3 of IEEE 112–
2004 provides a list of locations on the
motor at which temperature
measurement devices must be equipped,
but does not specify which temperature
measurement device must be used to
establish the condition of thermal
equilibrium in the heat-run test. The
same requirements are provided in
Section 5.9.4.4 of IEEE 112–2017, the
latest version of the industry standard.
Issue 4: DOE requests comment on
whether the test instructions in IEEE
112–2004 Test Method B and/or IEEE
112–2017 Test Method B provide
sufficient detail regarding placement of
temperature measurement devices for
establishing thermal equilibrium in the
heat-run test. Specifically, DOE seeks
comment, including comment based on
testing experience, regarding potential
locations for measurement to establish
thermal equilibrium. DOE is also
interested in detailed information on
any testing burden, including cost,
associated with measuring at the various
locations.
3. Rated Motor Horsepower
Nominal full-load efficiency, the
metric for energy conservation
standards for electric motors, is defined
as a representative value of efficiency
selected from the ‘‘nominal efficiency’’
column of Table 12–10 of NEMA MG 1–
2009, that is not greater than the average
full-load efficiency of a population of
motors of the same design. See 10 CFR
431.12. ‘‘Average full-load efficiency’’ is
defined as ‘‘. . . the ratio (expressed as
a percentage) of the motor’s useful
power output to its total power input
when the motor is operated at its full
rated load, rated voltage, and rated
frequency.’’ Id. Typically, a rated load
represents a power output expected
from the motor (e.g., a horsepower value
on the nameplate or a manufacturer
declared rated motor horsepower). The
industry testing standards discussed in
section II.B.1 of this RFI do not provide
a method to determine the full rated
load of the tested unit. Rather, the
standards rely on a manufacturerspecified output power, which is
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
34116
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
usually listed on a motor’s nameplate in
terms of horsepower (i.e., the rated
motor horsepower).
Rated motor horsepower is generally
not an intrinsic, observable motor
property, and motors are usually
capable of operating both above and
below the rated motor horsepower. For
example, a motor that is rated at 1 hp
is also capable of delivering 0.75 hp, but
likely with a different speed, torque,
and efficiency than those of when it is
delivering at its rated 1 hp. The output
power of the motor depends on the load
and the design of the motor. Therefore,
the load point (or horsepower) at which
the motor must be tested is not an
intrinsic parameter to the motor, but
rather a parameter that must be defined
or specified. The test’s load point (or
horsepower) is relevant to efficiency
testing because the efficiency of an
electric motor varies according to load.
While the ‘‘nominal full-load
efficiency definition’’ relies on the
definition of ‘‘average full-load
efficiency’’ (and in turn, ‘‘rated load’’),
DOE regulations do not explicitly
address how to determine the rated load
and rated motor horsepower of an
electric motor. Accordingly, as part of
the test procedure evaluation, DOE is
considering whether to define the term
‘‘rated motor horsepower’’ and whether
defining the term would provide for
more accurate comparisons of similarly
rated motors from different
manufacturers. In addition, DOE is
considering additional changes to
address the relationship between the
term ‘‘rated motor horsepower’’ to
‘‘rated load,’’ as discussed in section
II.B.4.b of this RFI.
As with a recent proposed
amendment to the test procedure for
small electric motors, DOE is
considering defining rated motor
horsepower to be based on the
breakdown torque of an electric motor,
which is a directly measurable quantity.
See 84 FR 17004, 17014–17015.
Breakdown torque is defined in section
1.50 of NEMA MG 1–2016 as the
maximum torque that the motor will
develop with rated voltage and
frequency applied without an abrupt
drop in speed,12 and is typically
12 In concept, breakdown torque describes the
maximum torque the motor can develop without
slowing down and stalling. The maximum torque
over the entire speed range could occur at a
different condition (e.g., the motor start-up, zero
speed condition) than the breakdown condition.
Therefore, breakdown torque corresponds to a local
maximum torque (on a plot of torque versus speed)
that is nearest to the rated torque. NEMA MG 1–
2016 does not quantify what would constitute ‘‘an
abrupt drop in speed,’’ but the phrase corresponds
to the expectation that the motor will slow down
or stall if the load increases and indicates that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
4. Rated Values Specified for Testing
DOE is evaluating whether clarifying
several other values used for testing
electric motors is warranted. As noted
previously, the definition of average full
load efficiency at 10 CFR 431.12
specifies that the full load efficiency of
a motor is determined when the motor
operates at the rated frequency, rated
load, and rated voltage. Additionally,
industry standards refer to ‘‘rated’’
values, which are expected to be known
or provided (e.g., on the nameplate).
However, ‘‘rated frequency,’’ ‘‘rated
load,’’ and ‘‘rated voltage’’ are not
defined in subpart B of 10 CFR part 431.
Similar to proposed amendments to the
test procedure for small electric motors,
DOE is considering whether additional
instruction regarding these terms could
improve clarity and further ensure all
motors of a given specification are
tested using the same settings. See 84
FR 17004, 17017–17018.
measured in accordance with Section 7,
‘‘Other performance tests,’’ of IEEE
Standard 112–2017.
NEMA MG1–2016 requires that the
rated horsepower be established by
identifying the horsepower that
corresponds to the appropriate value of
breakdown torque, established in
section 12.37 and section 12.39 of
NEMA MG1–2016, for general-purpose
polyphase 2-digit frame (e.g. 56-frame)
size electric motors and Design A, B,
and C polyphase 3- and 4-digit frame
size electric motors, respectively (e.g.
215). While section 12.37 applies to
general purpose polyphase 2-digit frame
size electric motors as written, DOE is
considering whether section 12.37 of
NEMA MG 1–2016 could apply to all 2digit frame size electric motors within
the DOE scope (as detailed in section
II.A of this RFI) such that DOE can
define rated motor horsepower based on
breakdown torque, as defined in NEMA
MG 1–2016. DOE would need to
consider how rated motor horsepower
should be determined in the cases of
special purpose and definite purpose 2digit frame size electric motors within
the DOE scope.
Issue 5: DOE requests comment on
how industry currently determines rated
motor horsepower of an electric motor.
Specifically, DOE requests comment on
whether the methods described in
sections 12.37 and 12.39 of NEMA
MG1–2016 reflect how industry
currently determines rated motor
horsepower of an electric motor.
Issue 6: DOE requests comment on the
whether there is a need to define the
term ‘‘rated motor horsepower,’’ and the
feasibility of establishing such a
definition. DOE requests comment and
data regarding how rated motor
horsepower determined as
contemplated in the preceding
discussion would compare to the rated
motor horsepower currently declared by
manufacturers. Additionally, DOE
requests comment on how to determine
the horsepower of a special or definite
purpose motor with breakdown torque
that is not expressly characterized by
Table 10–5 of NEMA MG 1–2016. DOE
also requests comment on any other
method that may be used to verify the
manufacturer declared horsepower of an
electric motor. DOE is also interested in
detailed information on any test burden,
including cost, associated with the
method as contemplated by DOE, or
other methods as may be suggested.
b. Rated Load
The term ‘‘rated load’’ 13 is used in
industry standards to specify a loading
point at which to test a motor (e.g.,
sections 5.6 and 6.1 in IEEE 112–2004,
and section 6.1 in CSA C390–10).
Typically, a rated load represents a
power output expected from the motor
(e.g., a horsepower value on the
nameplate or a manufacturer declared
rated motor horsepower). The rated load
minor reductions in speed observed due to
measurement sensitivities are not considered.
13 Also referred to as ‘‘full rated load,’’ ‘‘rated fullload,’’ or ‘‘full-load.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
a. Rated Frequency
‘‘Rated frequency’’ is a term
commonly used by industry standards
developed for testing electric motors
(e.g., section 6.1 in IEEE 112–2004, and
section 6.1 in CSA C390–10). The test
procedures and energy conservation
standards established under EPCA
apply to motors distributed in
commerce within the United States.
Within the United States, electricity is
supplied at 60 hertz (‘‘Hz’’). However,
electric motors could be designed to
operate at frequencies in addition to 60
Hz (e.g., motors designed to operate at
either 60 or 50 Hz, which is used in
other parts of the world).
Some electric motors subject to 10
CFR 431.16 are marketed as capable of
operating at either of these two
frequencies and could include in their
marketing information data regarding
motor performance at both frequencies
(e.g., 60 and 50 Hz). In this case, it could
be unclear at which frequency the test
should be performed. DOE is
considering defining the term ‘‘rated
frequency’’ as 60 Hz to expressly specify
this test requirement.
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
will have a corresponding rated speed
and rated torque. DOE is considering
defining the term ‘‘rated load’’ as ‘‘the
rated motor horsepower of an electric
motor’’ to clarify this test requirement.
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
c. Rated Voltage
The term ‘‘rated voltage’’ is used in
industry standards to specify the voltage
supplied to the motor under test (e.g.,
section 6.1 in IEEE 112–2004, and
section 6.1 in CSA C390–10). The test
procedures referenced in Appendix B
require a basic model to be tested at the
rated voltage, without specifying what
to do when a manufacturer includes
multiple rated voltages on the
nameplate and marketing materials.
DOE is considering specifying the input
voltage required for testing when motors
are rated for use at multiple voltages.
Options for this specification could
include testing only at the lowest rated
voltage, testing only at the highest rated
voltage, or testing at all rated voltages.
Alternatively, similar to what was
proposed for small electric motors, DOE
is considering allowing manufacturers
to test and certify motors at any rated
voltage, provided that the tested input
voltage setting is listed on the
certification report. See 84 FR 17004,
17018.
In addition, DOE has found that some
motor nameplates are labeled with a
voltage rating including a range of
values, such as ‘‘208–230/460 volts,’’ or
other qualifiers, such as ‘‘230/460V,
usable at 208V.’’ DOE is considering
how rated voltage for testing should be
determined in these cases.
Issue 7: DOE requests comment on the
potential definitions of ‘‘rated
frequency’’ and ‘‘rated load’’ for electric
motors. DOE requests comment and data
regarding how the discussed definitions
would impact the current test results.
DOE also requests comment on the
input voltage setting(s) that should be
used during testing. Specifically, DOE
requests test data that demonstrates how
motor efficiency varies at different input
voltage settings.
C. Use of an Amended Test Procedure
If required only for the evaluation and
issuance of updated efficiency
standards, use of a modified test
procedure, were DOE to finalize such a
change, typically would not be required
until the implementation date of
updated standards. Section 8(c) of
appendix A 10 CFR part 430 subpart C.
Moreover, were DOE to initiate a
rulemaking to establish methodologies
used to evaluate proposed energy
conservation standards, such a
rulemaking would be finalized at least
180 days prior to publication of a NOPR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
proposing new or amended energy
conservation standards. See 10 CFR part
430, appendix A, subpart C, sec. 8(d)–
(e).
D. Other Test Procedure Topics
In addition to the issues identified
earlier in this document, DOE welcomes
comment on any other aspect of the
current test procedures for electric
motors found at 10 CFR part 431,
subpart B. As noted earlier, DOE
recently issued an RFI to seek more
information on whether its test
procedures are reasonably designed to
produce results that measure the energy
use or efficiency of a product during a
representative average use cycle or
period of use. 84 FR 9721 (March 18,
2019).
Issue 8: DOE seeks comment on
whether its test procedures for electric
motors are reasonably designed, as
required by EPCA, to produce results
that measure the energy use or
efficiency of a product during a
representative average use cycle or
period of use.
Issue 9: DOE requests comments on
whether potential amendments based on
the issues discussed would result in a
test procedure that is unduly
burdensome to conduct, particularly in
light of any new products on the market
that have appeared since the last test
procedure update.
DOE’s established practice is to adopt
industry standards as DOE test
procedures unless such methodology
would be unduly burdensome to
conduct or would not produce test
results that reflect the energy efficiency,
energy use, water use (as specified in
EPCA) or estimated operating costs of
that product during a representative
average use cycle or period of use.
Section 8(c) of appendix A 10 CFR part
430 subpart C. In cases where the
industry standard does not meet EPCA
statutory criteria for test procedures
DOE will make modifications through
the rulemaking process to these
standards as the DOE test procedure.
DOE recognizes that adopting industry
standards with modifications imposes a
burden on industry (i.e., manufacturers
face increased costs if the DOE
modifications require different testing
equipment or facilities).
Issue 10: To the extent that potential
amendments based on the issues
discussed in this document would
result in a procedure that is, in fact,
unduly burdensome to conduct, DOE
seeks information on whether an
existing private sector-developed test
procedure would be more appropriate.
DOE requests comment on the benefits
and burdens of adopting any industry/
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34117
voluntary consensus-based or other
appropriate test procedure, without
modification.
Issue 11: Additionally, DOE requests
comment on whether the existing DOE
test procedure limits a manufacturer’s
ability to provide consumers with
additional features in the electric motors
that they purchase. DOE particularly
seeks information on how the DOE test
procedures could be amended to reduce
the cost of new or additional features
and make it more likely that electric
motors include such features while
satisfying EPCA.
Issue 12: DOE also requests comments
on any potential amendments to the
existing test procedures that would
address impacts on manufacturers,
including small businesses.
Finally, DOE published an RFI on the
emerging smart technology appliance
and equipment market. 83 FR 46886
(September 17, 2018) (‘‘September 2019
RFI’’). In that RFI, DOE sought
information to better understand market
trends and issues in the emerging
market for appliances and commercial
equipment that incorporate smart
technology. DOE’s intent in issuing the
RFI was to ensure that DOE did not
inadvertently impede such innovation
in fulfilling its statutory obligations in
setting efficiency standards for covered
products and equipment.
Issue 13: DOE seeks, as part of this
RFI, comments, data and information on
the issues presented in the September
2018 RFI as they may be applicable to
electric motors.
III. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to
submit in writing by July 20, 2020,
comments and information on matters
addressed in this notice and on other
matters relevant to DOE’s consideration
of amended test procedures for electric
motors. These comments and
information will aid in the development
of a test procedure NOPR for electric
motors if DOE determines that amended
test procedures may be appropriate for
this equipment.
Submitting comments via https://
www.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
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
lotter on DSK9F5VC42PROD with PROPOSALS
34118
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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
website will waive any CBI claims for
the information submitted. For
information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information
section.
DOE processes submissions made
through 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/courier, or postal mail.
Comments and documents submitted
via email, hand delivery/courier, or
postal 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 postal mail or hand delivery/
courier, please provide all items on a
CD, if feasible. It is not necessary to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:35 Jun 02, 2020
Jkt 250001
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/courier two well-marked
copies: One copy of the document
marked confidential including all the
information believed to be confidential,
and one copy of the document marked
‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information
believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email or on
a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own
determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it
according to its determination.
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 this
process. Interactions with and between
members of the public provide a
balanced discussion of the issues and
assist DOE in the process. Anyone who
wishes to be added to the DOE mailing
list to receive future notices and
information about this process should
contact Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287–
1445 or via email at
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on May 8, 2020, by
Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, pursuant to delegated
authority from the Secretary of Energy.
That document with the original
signature and date is maintained by
DOE. For administrative purposes only,
and in compliance with requirements of
the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register
Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in
electronic format for publication, as an
official document of the Department of
Energy. This administrative process in
no way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020–11764 Filed 6–2–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2020–0513; Product
Identifier 2019–SW–037–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus
Helicopters
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
The FAA proposes to
supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
2018–08–01 for Airbus Helicopters
Model EC225LP helicopters. AD 2018–
08–01 requires inspecting the control
rod attachment yokes (yoke) of certain
main rotor rotating swashplates
(swashplate). Since the FAA issued AD
2018–08–01, Airbus Helicopters has
identified additional swashplate serial
numbers affected by the unsafe
condition and has established a life
limit for the swashplates. This proposed
AD would retain the inspection
requirements of AD 2018–08–01,
expand the applicability, establish a life
limit, and add a one-time inspection of
stripped yokes. The actions of this
proposed AD are intended to address an
unsafe condition on these products.
DATES: The FAA must receive comments
on this proposed AD by August 3, 2020.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 107 (Wednesday, June 3, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34111-34118]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-11764]
========================================================================
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. 85, No. 107 / Wednesday, June 3, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 34111]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 431
[EERE-2020-BT-TP-0011]
RIN 1904-AE62
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Electric Motors
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy is soliciting public comment to
consider whether to amend DOE's test procedures for electric motors. To
inform interested parties and to facilitate this process, this document
identifies several issues concerning the current test procedures on
which comment is sought and invites public comment on any relevant
topic (including those that have not been specifically raised). While
the issues outlined in this document focus on how to address recent
industry testing standard updates and the potential clarification of
definitions and test settings for electric motors, information and data
regarding any additional topics relevant to potential test procedure
amendments are also sought, including methods to reduce regulatory
burden while ensuring the procedure's representativeness.
DATES: Written comments and information will be accepted on or before
July 20, 2020.
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-2020-BT-
TP-0011, by any of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments.
2. Email: to [email protected]. Include docket number
EERE-2020-BT-TP-0011 in the subject line of the message.
3. Postal Mail: Appliance and Equipment Standards Program, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 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 Office, 950
L'Enfant Plaza SW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202)
287-1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case
it is not necessary to include printed copies.
No telefacsimilies (``faxes'') will be accepted. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on this
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?D=EERE-2020-BT-TP-0011. The docket web page contains
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 Office, EE-5B, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-9870. Email:
[email protected].
Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20585-
0121. Telephone: (202) 586-8145. Email: [email protected].
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) 287-1445 or by email:
[email protected].
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. Updates to Industry Standards
2. Temperature Rise Measurement Location
3. Rated Motor Horsepower
4. Rated Values Specified for Testing
C. Other Test Procedure Topics
III. Submission of Comments
I. Introduction
Electric motors are included in the list of ``covered equipment''
for which the Department of Energy (``DOE'') is authorized to establish
and amend energy conservation standards and test procedures. (42 U.S.C.
6311(1)(A)) DOE's test procedures for electric motors are prescribed at
Appendix B to Subpart B of 10 CFR part 431 (``Appendix B''). The
following sections discuss DOE's authority to establish and amend test
procedures for electric motors, 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, as amended (``EPCA''),\1\
among other things, authorizes DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of
a number of consumer products and certain industrial equipment. (42
U.S.C. 6291-6317) Included within this authority are electric motors,
the subject of this RFI. (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All references to EPCA in this document refer to the statute
as amended through America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018,
Public Law 115-270 (October 23, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The energy conservation program under EPCA consists essentially of
four parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation
standards, and (4) certification and enforcement
[[Page 34112]]
procedures. Relevant provisions of EPCA specifically include
definitions (42 U.S.C. 6311), energy conservation standards (42 U.S.C.
6313), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C.
6315), and the authority to require information and reports from
manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316(a) and 42 U.S.C. 6296).
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(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) 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(a))
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(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and (2) making representations about the
efficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)) Similarly, DOE must
use these test procedures to determine whether the equipment complies
with relevant standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6316(a); 42
U.S.C. 6295(s))
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 reflect energy efficiency, energy use or estimated annual
operating cost of a given type of covered equipment during a
representative average use cycle 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 comments on them. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b))
EPCA, pursuant to amendments made by the Energy Policy Act of 1992,
Public Law 102-486 (October 24, 1992), specifies that the test
procedures for electric motors subject to standards are those specified
in National Electrical Manufacturers Association (``NEMA'') Standards
Publication MG1-1987 and Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (``IEEE'') Standard 112 Test Method B, as in effect on
October 24, 1992. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(5)(A)). If these test procedures
are amended, DOE must amend its test procedures to conform to such
amended test procedure requirements, unless DOE determines by rule,
published in the Federal Register and supported by clear and convincing
evidence, that to do so would not meet the statutory requirements
related to the test procedure representativeness and burden. (42 U.S.C.
6314(a)(5)(B)) As noted later in this document, these industry-based
procedures have been revised a number of times and DOE has amended its
regulations consistent with these changes.
EPCA also requires DOE to evaluate its test procedures at least
once every 7 years for each type of covered equipment, including
electric motors, to determine whether amended test procedures would
more accurately or fully comply with the requirements that test
procedures not be unduly burdensome to conduct but be reasonably
designed to produce test results reflecting energy efficiency, energy
use, and estimated operating costs during a representative average use
cycle of the equipment at issue. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)) In addition, if
the Secretary determines that a test procedure amendment is warranted,
the Secretary must propose amended test procedures (published in the
Federal Register) and afford interested persons an opportunity (of not
less than 45 days' duration) to present oral and written data, views,
and arguments on the proposed test procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6314(b)) If
DOE determines that test procedure revisions are not appropriate, DOE
must publish its determination not to amend the test procedures. (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)(A)(ii))
DOE is publishing this RFI to collect data and information to
inform its decision in satisfaction of its obligations under EPCA.
B. Rulemaking History
DOE established test procedures for electric motors that referenced
NEMA MG1-1993 and IEEE 112-1996. 64 FR 54114 (October 5, 1999)
(``October 1999 final rule''). The October 1999 final rule also
incorporated by reference Canadian Standards Association (``CSA'')
Standard C390-93, Energy Efficiency Test Methods for Three-Phase
Induction Motors, which DOE found to be a widely recognized alternative
that was consistent with IEEE 112-1996. Id.
On May 4, 2012, DOE amended the test procedures for electric motors
consistent with its obligations under EPCA to incorporate the NEMA MG
1-2009 and the IEEE 112-2011 into its regulations. 77 FR 26608 (``May
2012 final rule''). The May 2012 final rule also updated the
regulations to reference the most current version of CSA C390. Id.
On December 13, 2013, DOE again amended its electric motor test
procedure by clarifying the test setup requirements for certain
electric motors. 78 FR 75962 (``December 2013 final rule''). DOE
explained that changes brought about by the Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-140 (December 19, 2007)) and the
American Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act (Pub. L. 112-
210, Sec. 10 (December 18, 2012)) enabled DOE to consider an expanded
scope of electric motors for regulatory coverage. Id. at 78 FR 75965.
DOE determined that the motors covered by the expanded scope could be
tested using the testing methods provided in IEEE 112 (Test Method B)
and CSA C390-10 (which were both part of DOE's test procedure
regulations) to accurately measure their losses and determine their
energy efficiency. Id. However, some of these motors required
additional testing set-up instructions prior to testing, which DOE
established in the December 2013 final rule.\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A 2011 version of NEMA MG 1 was released prior to the
publication of the December 2013 final rule. The updates from the
2009 version, however, did not affect the sections of NEMA MG-1
incorporated by reference in the DOE regulations. Subsequently, DOE
declined to incorporate by reference NEMA MG 1-2011. 78 FR 75962,
75963.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE's test procedures for electric motors at 10 CFR part 431,
subpart B, Appendix B (``Appendix B'') currently incorporate by
reference NEMA MG 1-2009, IEEE 112-2004 Test Method B, and CSA Standard
C390-10. Appendix B also includes additional specifications necessary
for testing certain types of electric motors. 10 CFR part 431, subpart
B, Appendix B, Sec. 4.
On March 1, 2017, NEMA published NEMA MG 1-2016, Motors and
Generators. On February 14, 2018, IEEE published IEEE 112-2017, IEEE
Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction Motors and Generators.
DOE subsequently proposed to amend the current test procedure
regulations for small electric motors and electric motors, which
included a full review of IEEE 112-2017. 84 FR 17004 (April 23, 2019)
(``April 2019 NOPR''). The relevant updates to the industry test
procedures (including NEMA MG 1-2016), in addition to potential
clarification of definitions and test settings for electric motors, are
discussed in the following section.
II. Request for Information
In the following sections, DOE has identified a variety of issues
on which
[[Page 34113]]
it seeks input on deciding whether amending its test procedures for
electric motors would (1) more accurately or fully comply with the
requirements in EPCA that test procedures be reasonably designed to
produce test results which reflect energy use during a representative
average use cycle, without being unduly burdensome to conduct (42
U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)); or (2) reduce testing burden. Specifically, DOE is
requesting comment on any opportunities to streamline and simplify
testing requirements for electric motors as well as information to help
inform DOE's related technical and economic analyses.
Further, DOE recently issued an RFI to seek more broadly
information on whether its test procedures are reasonably designed, as
required by EPCA, to produce results that measure the energy use or
efficiency of a product during a representative average use cycle or
period of use. 84 FR 9721 (March 18, 2019). DOE seeks comment on this
issue as it pertains to the test procedure for electric motors.
Additionally, DOE welcomes comments on other issues relevant to the
conduct of this process. 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 (February 3, 2017). Consistent with
that Executive Order, DOE encourages the public to provide input on
measures DOE could take to lower the cost of its regulations applicable
to electric motors consistent with the requirements of EPCA.
A. Scope and Definitions
The term ``electric motor'' is defined as ``a machine that converts
electrical power into rotational mechanical power.'' 10 CFR 431.12.
Manufacturers are required to test those electric motors subject to
energy conservation standards according to the test procedure in
Appendix B.\3\ (See generally 42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(5)(A); see also the
introductory paragraph to 10 CFR part 431, subpart B, Appendix B)
Currently, energy conservation standards apply to a variety of
categories of electric motors provided that they meet the criteria
specified at 10 CFR 431.25(g). These categories of electric motors
include NEMA Design A motors,\4\ NEMA Design B motors,\5\ NEMA Design C
motors,\6\ and fire pump electric motors.\7\ See 10 CFR 431.25(h)-(j).
The detailed criteria specified under 10 CFR 431.25(g) specify that the
currently regulated motors:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This RFI does not address small electric motors, which are
covered separately under 10 CFR part 431, subpart X. A small
electric motor is ``a NEMA general purpose alternating current
single-speed induction motor, built in a two-digit frame number
series in accordance with NEMA Standards Publication MG1-1987,
including IEC metric equivalent motors.'' 10 CFR 431.442.
\4\ ``NEMA Design A'' motor means a squirrel-cage motor that:
(1) Is designed to withstand full-voltage starting and developing
locked-rotor torque as shown in NEMA MG 1-2009, paragraph 12.38.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.15); (2) Has pull-up
torque not less than the values shown in NEMA MG 1-2009, paragraph
12.40.1; (3) Has breakdown torque not less than the values shown in
NEMA MG 1-2009, paragraph 12.39.1; (4) Has a locked-rotor current
higher than the values shown in NEMA MG 1-2009, paragraph 12.35.1
for 60 hertz and NEMA MG 1-2009, paragraph 12.35.2 for 50 hertz; and
(5) Has a slip at rated load of less than 5 percent for motors with
fewer than 10 poles. 10 CFR 430.12.
\5\ ``NEMA Design B motor'' means a squirrel-cage motor that is:
(1) Designed to withstand full-voltage starting; (2) Develops
locked-rotor, breakdown, and pull-up torques adequate for general
application as specified in sections 12.38, 12.39 and 12.40 of NEMA
MG1-2009 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 431.15); (3) Draws
locked-rotor current not to exceed the values shown in section
12.35.1 for 60 hertz and 12.35.2 for 50 hertz of NEMA MG1-2009; and
(4) Has a slip at rated load of less than 5 percent for motors with
fewer than 10 poles. Id.
\6\ ``NEMA Design C'' motor means a squirrel-cage motor that:
(1) Is Designed to withstand full-voltage starting and developing
locked-rotor torque for high-torque applications up to the values
shown in NEMA MG1-2009, paragraph 12.38.2 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 431.15); (2) Has pull-up torque not less than
the values shown in NEMA MG1-2009, paragraph 12.40.2; (3) Has
breakdown torque not less than the values shown in NEMA MG1-2009,
paragraph 12.39.2; (4) Has a locked-rotor current not to exceed the
values shown in NEMA MG1-2009, paragraphs 12.35.1 for 60 hertz and
12.35.2 for 50 hertz; and (5) Has a slip at rated load of less than
5 percent. Id.
\7\ ``Fire pump electric motor'' means an electric motor,
including any IEC-equivalent motor that meets the requirements of
section 9.5 of NFPA 20. Id.
(1) Are single-speed, induction motors;
(2) Are rated for continuous duty (MG 1) operation or for duty
type S1 (IEC)
(3) Contain a squirrel-cage (MG 1) or cage (IEC) rotor;
(4) Operate on polyphase alternating current 60-hertz sinusoidal
line power;
(5) Are rated 600 volts or less;
(6) Have a 2-, 4-, 6-, or 8-pole configuration;
(7) Are built in a three-digit or four-digit NEMA frame size (or
IEC metric equivalent), including those designs between two
consecutive NEMA frame sizes (or IEC metric equivalent), or an
enclosed 56 NEMA frame size (or IEC metric equivalent);
(8) Produce at least one horsepower (0.746 kW) but not greater
than 500 horsepower (373 kW), and
(9) Meet all of the performance requirements of one of the
following motor types: A NEMA Design A, B, or C motor or an IEC
Design N or H motor.
10 CFR 431.25(g).
DOE exempted certain categories of motors from having to satisfy
any standards after determining that the referenced industry test
procedures do not provide a standardized test method for determining
the energy efficiency of these motor configurations.\8\ 79 FR 30934
(May 29, 2014); see also, 78 FR 75962, 75974, 75987-75989). The
currently exempted motor categories are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ DOE notes that, while these motor configurations are not
currently subject to any energy conservation standards, they remain
within the Department's scope of covered equipment.
Air-over electric motors;
Component sets of an electric motor;
Liquid-cooled electric motors;
Submersible electric motors; and
Inverter-only electric motors.
10 CFR 431.25(l)
Definitions for terms related to the Federal test method for
electric motors are provided at 10 CFR 431.12. A number of these
definitions incorporate references to specific sections of NEMA MG 1-
2009 to characterize the construction and operation of different
categories of electric motors. DOE is considering revising these
definitions to update its current NEMA MG 1 references to the most
recent edition of that standard, NEMA MG 1-2016. These reference
updates would align DOE's regulatory definitions with current industry
practice and the revisions under consideration for the electric motors
test procedure at Appendix B (see section II.B.1).
Twelve definitions at 10 CFR 431.12 reference the NEMA MG 1-2009
standard, of which the following five include references to sections of
NEMA MG 1 that have not changed between the 2009 and 2016 publications
of the standard: ``electric motor with encapsulated windings,''
``electric motor with moisture resistant windings,'' ``electric motor
with sealed windings,'' ``general purpose electric motor (subtype I),''
and ``general purpose electric motor (subtype II).''
Conversely, the definitions in 10 CFR 431.12 for ``definite purpose
motor,'' ``definite purpose electric motor,'' ``general purpose
electric motor,'' ``NEMA Design A motor,'' ``NEMA Design B motor,''
``NEMA Design C motor,'' and ``nominal full-load efficiency'' reference
provisions of NEMA MG 1 that have changed between the 2009 and 2016
versions. These changes are discussed in the following paragraphs.
The definitions for ``definite purpose motor,'' ``definite purpose
electric motor,'' and ``general purpose electric motor'' at 10 CFR
431.12 reference
[[Page 34114]]
paragraph 14.3, ``Unusual Service Conditions,'' of NEMA MG 1-2009.
Paragraph 14.3 of NEMA MG 1 provides a list of service conditions that
may affect the construction or operation of a motor. The NEMA MG 1-2016
standard adds two conditions to the NEMA MG 1-2009 standard: ``exposure
to a coupling mass that is greater than 10% of rotor weight and/or has
a center of gravity that is beyond the shaft extension'' and ``exposure
to a coupling or coupling/coupling guard combination which could
produce a negative pressure at the drive end seal.'' DOE notes that the
regulatory definition for ``general purpose electric motor'' also
references paragraph 14.2, ``Usual service conditions,'' of NEMA MG 1-
2009, but unlike paragraph 14.3, section 14.2 remains unchanged in NEMA
MG 1-2016. Prior to June 1, 2016, DOE's energy conservation standards
for electric motors differentiated between general purpose electric
motors (for which standards applied) and definite or special purpose
electric motors (for which standards did not apply). 10 CFR 431.25(a)-
(d) and (f). For electric motors manufactured on or after June 1, 2016,
DOE's energy conservation standards no longer differentiated between
these previous broad categories of general purpose and definite or
special purpose. Consequently, DOE's standards are now differentiated
according to the criteria listed at 10 CFR 431.25(g) and NEMA and IEC
Design categories. 10 CFR 431.25(h)-(i). Therefore, the updates to
these definitions are not expected to change the applicability of test
procedures or energy conservation standards for electric motors
manufactured on or after June 1, 2016.
The definitions for ``NEMA Design A motor,'' ``NEMA Design B
motor,'' and ``NEMA Design C motor'' at 10 CFR 431.12 reference tables
of locked-rotor current in sections 12.35.1 and 12.35.2 of NEMA MG 1-
2009. NEMA MG 1-2016 revises these tables by adding a column for
``Locked-Rotor kVA Code'' and a footnote regarding a tolerance that may
be applied to the locked-rotor current values based on the associated
Locked-Rotor kVA Code.\9\ Section 10.37 of NEMA MG 1-2016 provides the
applicable range of kVA per horsepower for each locked-rotor kVA code
that would be used to calculate the locked-rotor current tolerances.
These definitions also reference other sections in NEMA MG 1-2009, each
of which remains unchanged in the NEMA MG 1-2016 standard. The addition
of the column for ``Locked-Rotor kVA Code'' is not expected to impact
the applicability of test procedures or energy conservation standards
for electric motors. Further, NEMA MG 1-2016's addition of the footnote
regarding a tolerance that may be applied to the maximum locked-rotor
current values is a clarification of the existing tolerance presented
in section 10.37 of NEMA MG1-2009, which remains unchanged in NEMA MG1-
2016, and would also not impact the scope of electric motors that are
subject to energy conservation standards and test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Locked-Rotor kVA Code is a letter which appears on the
nameplate of an alternating-current motor to show its range of
locked-rotor kilo-volt-ampere (kVA) per horsepower. The letter
designations for locked rotor kVA per horsepower are given in
Section 10.37 of NEMA MG 1-2016. For example, the letter ``N''
corresponds to a range of locked rotor kVA per horsepower between
11.2 and 12.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The definition for ``nominal full-load efficiency'' at 10 CFR
431.12 references Table 12-10 of NEMA MG 1-2009, which provides a list
of nominal efficiencies and associated minimum motor efficiencies based
on a 20 percent loss difference. Table 12-10 in NEMA MG 1-2009 lists
nominal efficiency ratings ranging from 50.5 to 99.0, while Table 12-10
in NEMA MG 1-2016 lists nominal efficiency ratings ranging from 34.5 to
99.0. The nominal efficiency ratings (and associated minimum
efficiencies) in the range of 50.5 to 99.0 did not change between the
NEMA MG1-2009 and NEMA MG1-2016 versions of the standard. The nominal
full-load efficiency requirements specified by the energy conservation
standards for electric motors at 10 CFR 431.25 are efficiency values
ranging from 74.0 to 96.2; therefore, the addition of nominal
efficiency ratings ranging from 34.5 to 50.5 in the NEMA MG 1-2016
version of Table 12-10 will not impact the applicability of test
procedures or energy conservation standards for electric motors.
Issue 1: DOE requests comment on the 2016 updates to NEMA MG 1 that
relate to the electric motor definitions in 10 CFR 431.12.
Specifically, DOE requests information on how these revisions would
impact the applicability of test procedures and energy conservation
standards for electric motors.
Issue 2: DOE requests comment on whether any other definitions
should be modified or added to 10 CFR 431.12 to provide additional
detail or direction in the application of the test procedure for
electric motors.
DOE also notes that IEC standard 60034-12, published on November
23, 2016, allows the use of a new nomenclature for certain electric
motors that are already covered by DOE's current standards. As an
example, IEC Design N and IEC Design H motors that meet a ``premium
efficiency'' attribute are permitted to be designated with an ``E''
(i.e. ``NE'' and ``HE''). The ``premium efficiency'' attribute
generally aligns with the current DOE standards prescribed at 10 CFR
431.25. In DOE's view, these ``NE'' and ``HE'' motors are already
addressed by the definitions and standards that DOE currently has in
place regarding ``N'' and ``H'' motors. See 10 CFR 431.12 (defining the
terms ``IEC Design H motor'' and ``IEC Design N motors'') and 10 CFR
431.25(g)-(i) and (l) (establishing the efficiency standards related to
Design N and H motors and their applicable scope). This view is also
held by NEMA, which asserted in separate communications to DOE that
``E''-designated motors are drop-in replacements for their ``non-E''-
designated counterparts. See Letter from NEMA to DOE (March 26, 2018)
and Supplemental Letter from NEMA to DOE (August 23, 2019). (Both
letters have been filed in the docket.) To ensure the accuracy of its
understanding, DOE is seeking comment as to whether its understanding
of the new nomenclature is correct.
Issue 3: DOE requests comment on whether a Design NE or Design HE
motor is distinguishable in performance (aside from energy efficiency)
from a Design N or Design H motor, respectively, such that the ``E''-
designated motor merits treatment as a separate motor type. If so, why?
If not, why not?
B. Test Procedure
1. Updates to Industry Standards
DOE has reviewed each of the industry standards that are currently
incorporated by reference as test methods for determining the energy
efficiency of electric motors. Since publication of the December 2013
final rule, IEEE 112-2004 and NEMA MG 1-2009 have been revised, and CSA
C390-10 has been reaffirmed, as listed in Table II-1. The following is
a review of the relevant revisions to IEEE 112-2004 and NEMA MG 1-2009.
[[Page 34115]]
Table II-1--Updated Industry Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing reference Updated version Type of update
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IEEE 112-2004.......................... IEEE 112-2017.................. Revision.
CSA 390-10............................. CSA 390-10 (R2015)............. Reaffirmed.
NEMA MG 1-2009......................... NEMA MG 1-2016................. Revision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. IEEE 112
In the April 2019 NOPR DOE proposed to incorporate by reference
IEEE 112-2017 for both small electric motors and electric motors. 84 FR
17004. Specifically, for electric motors, DOE has proposed to
incorporate IEEE 112-2017 Test Method B as an alternative to IEEE 112-
2004 Test Method B, and requested comment on this proposal. 84 FR
17004, 17011-17012. DOE tentatively determined that this proposal would
harmonize the permitted test methods under subpart B of 10 CFR part 431
and align measurement and instrumentation requirements with recent
industry practice. 84 FR 17004, 17011-17012.
b. NEMA MG 1
The test procedure for electric motors specified at Appendix B
requires that efficiency and losses be determined in accordance with
NEMA MG 1-2009, paragraph 12.58.1, ``Determination of Motor Efficiency
and Losses.'' The text of paragraph 12.58.1 was modified in the
subsequent revisions to NEMA MG 1-2009. Notably, paragraph 12.58.1 in
the 2016 revision of MG 1 specifies an additional industry standard,
IEC 60034-2-1, for calculating the efficiency of horizontal polyphase
squirrel-cage motors rated 1 to 500 horsepower. Further discussion on
IEC 60034-2-1 is provided in the following section II.B.1.c of this
RFI.
c. IEC 60034-2-1
In a November 2017 notice, DOE sought comment regarding petitions
from NEMA and Underwriters Laboratory (``UL'') requesting that DOE
incorporate IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B \10\ as an additional
alternative test method to those already referenced in DOE's
regulations for determining the energy efficiency of certain electric
motors and small electric motors. 82 FR 50844 (November 2, 2017). With
regard to the electric motors test procedure, NEMA and UL's petition
requested that DOE incorporate IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B as an
alternative to IEEE 112-2004 Test Method B and CSA C390-10, which are
currently referenced in Appendix B. (NEMA, Docket EERE-2017-BT-TP-
0047,\11\ No. 28.2 at p.1; UL, Docket EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047, No. 29.1 at
p.1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B (2014), ``Rotating
Electrical Machines--Part 2-1: Standard methods for determining
losses and efficiency from tests (excluding machines for traction
vehicles),'' ``Summation of losses, additional load losses according
to the method of residual loss.''
\11\ Docket EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047 is available at https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE reviewed Method 2-1-1B from the IEC 60034-2-1:2014 standard in
the April 2019 NOPR and initially concluded that the standard would
provide comparable energy efficiency results to the current required
test standards (IEEE 112 and CSA C390). 84 FR 17004, 17013.
Accordingly, in the April 2019 NOPR DOE proposed to incorporate by
reference IEC 60034-2-1:2014 Method 2-1-1B as an alternative to the
currently incorporated industry testing standards IEEE 112-2004 Test
Method B and CSA C390-10, and requested comment on this proposal. Id.
2. Temperature Rise Measurement Location
The test method for measuring electric motor nominal full-load
efficiency prescribed under Appendix B specifies that efficiency and
losses are determined in accordance with paragraph 12.58.1 of NEMA MG1-
2009, and either CSA C390-10 or IEEE 112-2004 Test Method B. See 10 CFR
part 431, subpart B, Appendix B, Sec. 2. CSA 390-10 and IEEE 112-2004
both require the motor to be loaded to the rated full load and operated
until thermal equilibrium is reached. See CSA C390-10, Sec. 7.1.3 and
IEEE 112-2004, Sec. 5.8.4.4. This segment of the efficiency test is
known as the ``heat-run test.''
Section 7.1.3 of CSA C390-10 provides the test instructions for the
heat-run test, and states that the temperature used to establish
thermal equilibrium is determined using the temperature measurement
devices specified in section 7.1.2 of that standard. Section 7.1.2.2 of
CSA C390-10 explicitly specifies the permissible locations for
installing the temperature measurement devices when conducting the
heat-run test.
Section 5.8.4.4 of IEEE 112-2004 specifies how to terminate the
heat-run test. These instructions provide that the motor is operated
until the temperature rises are constant, but unlike CSA C390-10, IEEE
112-2004 does not explicitly indicate the locations where these
temperatures must be measured. Instead, Section 5.8.4.3 of IEEE 112-
2004 provides a list of locations on the motor at which temperature
measurement devices must be equipped, but does not specify which
temperature measurement device must be used to establish the condition
of thermal equilibrium in the heat-run test. The same requirements are
provided in Section 5.9.4.4 of IEEE 112-2017, the latest version of the
industry standard.
Issue 4: DOE requests comment on whether the test instructions in
IEEE 112-2004 Test Method B and/or IEEE 112-2017 Test Method B provide
sufficient detail regarding placement of temperature measurement
devices for establishing thermal equilibrium in the heat-run test.
Specifically, DOE seeks comment, including comment based on testing
experience, regarding potential locations for measurement to establish
thermal equilibrium. DOE is also interested in detailed information on
any testing burden, including cost, associated with measuring at the
various locations.
3. Rated Motor Horsepower
Nominal full-load efficiency, the metric for energy conservation
standards for electric motors, is defined as a representative value of
efficiency selected from the ``nominal efficiency'' column of Table 12-
10 of NEMA MG 1-2009, that is not greater than the average full-load
efficiency of a population of motors of the same design. See 10 CFR
431.12. ``Average full-load efficiency'' is defined as ``. . . the
ratio (expressed as a percentage) of the motor's useful power output to
its total power input when the motor is operated at its full rated
load, rated voltage, and rated frequency.'' Id. Typically, a rated load
represents a power output expected from the motor (e.g., a horsepower
value on the nameplate or a manufacturer declared rated motor
horsepower). The industry testing standards discussed in section II.B.1
of this RFI do not provide a method to determine the full rated load of
the tested unit. Rather, the standards rely on a manufacturer-specified
output power, which is
[[Page 34116]]
usually listed on a motor's nameplate in terms of horsepower (i.e., the
rated motor horsepower).
Rated motor horsepower is generally not an intrinsic, observable
motor property, and motors are usually capable of operating both above
and below the rated motor horsepower. For example, a motor that is
rated at 1 hp is also capable of delivering 0.75 hp, but likely with a
different speed, torque, and efficiency than those of when it is
delivering at its rated 1 hp. The output power of the motor depends on
the load and the design of the motor. Therefore, the load point (or
horsepower) at which the motor must be tested is not an intrinsic
parameter to the motor, but rather a parameter that must be defined or
specified. The test's load point (or horsepower) is relevant to
efficiency testing because the efficiency of an electric motor varies
according to load.
While the ``nominal full-load efficiency definition'' relies on the
definition of ``average full-load efficiency'' (and in turn, ``rated
load''), DOE regulations do not explicitly address how to determine the
rated load and rated motor horsepower of an electric motor.
Accordingly, as part of the test procedure evaluation, DOE is
considering whether to define the term ``rated motor horsepower'' and
whether defining the term would provide for more accurate comparisons
of similarly rated motors from different manufacturers. In addition,
DOE is considering additional changes to address the relationship
between the term ``rated motor horsepower'' to ``rated load,'' as
discussed in section II.B.4.b of this RFI.
As with a recent proposed amendment to the test procedure for small
electric motors, DOE is considering defining rated motor horsepower to
be based on the breakdown torque of an electric motor, which is a
directly measurable quantity. See 84 FR 17004, 17014-17015. Breakdown
torque is defined in section 1.50 of NEMA MG 1-2016 as the maximum
torque that the motor will develop with rated voltage and frequency
applied without an abrupt drop in speed,\12\ and is typically measured
in accordance with Section 7, ``Other performance tests,'' of IEEE
Standard 112-2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In concept, breakdown torque describes the maximum torque
the motor can develop without slowing down and stalling. The maximum
torque over the entire speed range could occur at a different
condition (e.g., the motor start-up, zero speed condition) than the
breakdown condition. Therefore, breakdown torque corresponds to a
local maximum torque (on a plot of torque versus speed) that is
nearest to the rated torque. NEMA MG 1-2016 does not quantify what
would constitute ``an abrupt drop in speed,'' but the phrase
corresponds to the expectation that the motor will slow down or
stall if the load increases and indicates that minor reductions in
speed observed due to measurement sensitivities are not considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEMA MG1-2016 requires that the rated horsepower be established by
identifying the horsepower that corresponds to the appropriate value of
breakdown torque, established in section 12.37 and section 12.39 of
NEMA MG1-2016, for general-purpose polyphase 2-digit frame (e.g. 56-
frame) size electric motors and Design A, B, and C polyphase 3- and 4-
digit frame size electric motors, respectively (e.g. 215). While
section 12.37 applies to general purpose polyphase 2-digit frame size
electric motors as written, DOE is considering whether section 12.37 of
NEMA MG 1-2016 could apply to all 2-digit frame size electric motors
within the DOE scope (as detailed in section II.A of this RFI) such
that DOE can define rated motor horsepower based on breakdown torque,
as defined in NEMA MG 1-2016. DOE would need to consider how rated
motor horsepower should be determined in the cases of special purpose
and definite purpose 2-digit frame size electric motors within the DOE
scope.
Issue 5: DOE requests comment on how industry currently determines
rated motor horsepower of an electric motor. Specifically, DOE requests
comment on whether the methods described in sections 12.37 and 12.39 of
NEMA MG1-2016 reflect how industry currently determines rated motor
horsepower of an electric motor.
Issue 6: DOE requests comment on the whether there is a need to
define the term ``rated motor horsepower,'' and the feasibility of
establishing such a definition. DOE requests comment and data regarding
how rated motor horsepower determined as contemplated in the preceding
discussion would compare to the rated motor horsepower currently
declared by manufacturers. Additionally, DOE requests comment on how to
determine the horsepower of a special or definite purpose motor with
breakdown torque that is not expressly characterized by Table 10-5 of
NEMA MG 1-2016. DOE also requests comment on any other method that may
be used to verify the manufacturer declared horsepower of an electric
motor. DOE is also interested in detailed information on any test
burden, including cost, associated with the method as contemplated by
DOE, or other methods as may be suggested.
4. Rated Values Specified for Testing
DOE is evaluating whether clarifying several other values used for
testing electric motors is warranted. As noted previously, the
definition of average full load efficiency at 10 CFR 431.12 specifies
that the full load efficiency of a motor is determined when the motor
operates at the rated frequency, rated load, and rated voltage.
Additionally, industry standards refer to ``rated'' values, which are
expected to be known or provided (e.g., on the nameplate). However,
``rated frequency,'' ``rated load,'' and ``rated voltage'' are not
defined in subpart B of 10 CFR part 431. Similar to proposed amendments
to the test procedure for small electric motors, DOE is considering
whether additional instruction regarding these terms could improve
clarity and further ensure all motors of a given specification are
tested using the same settings. See 84 FR 17004, 17017-17018.
a. Rated Frequency
``Rated frequency'' is a term commonly used by industry standards
developed for testing electric motors (e.g., section 6.1 in IEEE 112-
2004, and section 6.1 in CSA C390-10). The test procedures and energy
conservation standards established under EPCA apply to motors
distributed in commerce within the United States. Within the United
States, electricity is supplied at 60 hertz (``Hz''). However, electric
motors could be designed to operate at frequencies in addition to 60 Hz
(e.g., motors designed to operate at either 60 or 50 Hz, which is used
in other parts of the world).
Some electric motors subject to 10 CFR 431.16 are marketed as
capable of operating at either of these two frequencies and could
include in their marketing information data regarding motor performance
at both frequencies (e.g., 60 and 50 Hz). In this case, it could be
unclear at which frequency the test should be performed. DOE is
considering defining the term ``rated frequency'' as 60 Hz to expressly
specify this test requirement.
b. Rated Load
The term ``rated load'' \13\ is used in industry standards to
specify a loading point at which to test a motor (e.g., sections 5.6
and 6.1 in IEEE 112-2004, and section 6.1 in CSA C390-10). Typically, a
rated load represents a power output expected from the motor (e.g., a
horsepower value on the nameplate or a manufacturer declared rated
motor horsepower). The rated load
[[Page 34117]]
will have a corresponding rated speed and rated torque. DOE is
considering defining the term ``rated load'' as ``the rated motor
horsepower of an electric motor'' to clarify this test requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Also referred to as ``full rated load,'' ``rated full-
load,'' or ``full-load.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Rated Voltage
The term ``rated voltage'' is used in industry standards to specify
the voltage supplied to the motor under test (e.g., section 6.1 in IEEE
112-2004, and section 6.1 in CSA C390-10). The test procedures
referenced in Appendix B require a basic model to be tested at the
rated voltage, without specifying what to do when a manufacturer
includes multiple rated voltages on the nameplate and marketing
materials. DOE is considering specifying the input voltage required for
testing when motors are rated for use at multiple voltages. Options for
this specification could include testing only at the lowest rated
voltage, testing only at the highest rated voltage, or testing at all
rated voltages. Alternatively, similar to what was proposed for small
electric motors, DOE is considering allowing manufacturers to test and
certify motors at any rated voltage, provided that the tested input
voltage setting is listed on the certification report. See 84 FR 17004,
17018.
In addition, DOE has found that some motor nameplates are labeled
with a voltage rating including a range of values, such as ``208-230/
460 volts,'' or other qualifiers, such as ``230/460V, usable at 208V.''
DOE is considering how rated voltage for testing should be determined
in these cases.
Issue 7: DOE requests comment on the potential definitions of
``rated frequency'' and ``rated load'' for electric motors. DOE
requests comment and data regarding how the discussed definitions would
impact the current test results. DOE also requests comment on the input
voltage setting(s) that should be used during testing. Specifically,
DOE requests test data that demonstrates how motor efficiency varies at
different input voltage settings.
C. Use of an Amended Test Procedure
If required only for the evaluation and issuance of updated
efficiency standards, use of a modified test procedure, were DOE to
finalize such a change, typically would not be required until the
implementation date of updated standards. Section 8(c) of appendix A 10
CFR part 430 subpart C. Moreover, were DOE to initiate a rulemaking to
establish methodologies used to evaluate proposed energy conservation
standards, such a rulemaking would be finalized at least 180 days prior
to publication of a NOPR proposing new or amended energy conservation
standards. See 10 CFR part 430, appendix A, subpart C, sec. 8(d)-(e).
D. Other Test Procedure Topics
In addition to the issues identified earlier in this document, DOE
welcomes comment on any other aspect of the current test procedures for
electric motors found at 10 CFR part 431, subpart B. As noted earlier,
DOE recently issued an RFI to seek more information on whether its test
procedures are reasonably designed to produce results that measure the
energy use or efficiency of a product during a representative average
use cycle or period of use. 84 FR 9721 (March 18, 2019).
Issue 8: DOE seeks comment on whether its test procedures for
electric motors are reasonably designed, as required by EPCA, to
produce results that measure the energy use or efficiency of a product
during a representative average use cycle or period of use.
Issue 9: DOE requests comments on whether potential amendments
based on the issues discussed would result in a test procedure that is
unduly burdensome to conduct, particularly in light of any new products
on the market that have appeared since the last test procedure update.
DOE's established practice is to adopt industry standards as DOE
test procedures unless such methodology would be unduly burdensome to
conduct or would not produce test results that reflect the energy
efficiency, energy use, water use (as specified in EPCA) or estimated
operating costs of that product during a representative average use
cycle or period of use. Section 8(c) of appendix A 10 CFR part 430
subpart C. In cases where the industry standard does not meet EPCA
statutory criteria for test procedures DOE will make modifications
through the rulemaking process to these standards as the DOE test
procedure. DOE recognizes that adopting industry standards with
modifications imposes a burden on industry (i.e., manufacturers face
increased costs if the DOE modifications require different testing
equipment or facilities).
Issue 10: To the extent that potential amendments based on the
issues discussed in this document would result in a procedure that is,
in fact, unduly burdensome to conduct, DOE seeks information on whether
an existing private sector-developed test procedure would be more
appropriate. DOE requests comment on the benefits and burdens of
adopting any industry/voluntary consensus-based or other appropriate
test procedure, without modification.
Issue 11: Additionally, DOE requests comment on whether the
existing DOE test procedure limits a manufacturer's ability to provide
consumers with additional features in the electric motors that they
purchase. DOE particularly seeks information on how the DOE test
procedures could be amended to reduce the cost of new or additional
features and make it more likely that electric motors include such
features while satisfying EPCA.
Issue 12: DOE also requests comments on any potential amendments to
the existing test procedures that would address impacts on
manufacturers, including small businesses.
Finally, DOE published an RFI on the emerging smart technology
appliance and equipment market. 83 FR 46886 (September 17, 2018)
(``September 2019 RFI''). In that RFI, DOE sought information to better
understand market trends and issues in the emerging market for
appliances and commercial equipment that incorporate smart technology.
DOE's intent in issuing the RFI was to ensure that DOE did not
inadvertently impede such innovation in fulfilling its statutory
obligations in setting efficiency standards for covered products and
equipment.
Issue 13: DOE seeks, as part of this RFI, comments, data and
information on the issues presented in the September 2018 RFI as they
may be applicable to electric motors.
III. Submission of Comments
DOE invites all interested parties to submit in writing by July 20,
2020, comments and information on matters addressed in this notice and
on other matters relevant to DOE's consideration of amended test
procedures for electric motors. These comments and information will aid
in the development of a test procedure NOPR for electric motors if DOE
determines that amended test procedures may be appropriate for this
equipment.
Submitting comments via https://www.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
[[Page 34118]]
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 website will waive any CBI claims for the
information submitted. For information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information section.
DOE processes submissions made through 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/courier, or postal
mail. Comments and documents submitted via email, hand delivery/
courier, or postal 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 postal mail
or hand delivery/courier, please provide all items on a CD, if
feasible. It is not necessary to submit printed copies. No facsimiles
(faxes) will be accepted.
Comments, data, and other information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file format. Provide documents that
are not secured, 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/courier two well-marked copies:
One copy of the document marked confidential including all the
information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document
marked ``non-confidential'' with the information believed to be
confidential deleted. Submit these documents via email or on a CD, if
feasible. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it according to its determination.
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 this process.
Interactions with and between members of the public provide a balanced
discussion of the issues and assist DOE in the process. Anyone who
wishes to be added to the DOE mailing list to receive future notices
and information about this process should contact Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program staff at (202) 287-1445 or via email at
[email protected].
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 8,
2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Energy Efficiency, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary
of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance
with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on May 8, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020-11764 Filed 6-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
