[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 30, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17577-17582]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7440]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Part 431

[Docket Number EERE-2010-BT-STD-0027]
RIN 1904-AC28


Increased Scope of Coverage for Electric Motors

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

ACTION: Request for information (RFI).

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) seeks 
certain information to help inform its current rulemaking to set energy 
conservation standards for electric motors. Specifically, DOE seeks 
information to assist DOE in determining whether to develop energy 
conservation standards for certain types of electric motors that are 
currently unregulated by any standards. Should DOE receive sufficient 
information supporting the inclusion of these motor types, DOE will 
consider including these motor types in the electric motors standards 
rulemaking.

DATES: Written comments and information are requested on or before 
April 19, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are encouraged to submit comments using 
the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested 
persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE-2010-BT-
STD-0027, by any of the following methods:
    <bullet> E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4b0e272e2806243f24393866797b7a7b66181f0f667b7b797c0b2e2e652f242e652c243d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9cd9f0f9ffd1f3e8f3eeefb1aeacadacb1cfc8d8b1acacaeabdcf9f9b2f8f3f9b2fbf3ea">[email protected]</span></a>. Include 
docket number EERE-2010-BT-STD-0027 and/or RIN 1904-AC28 in the subject 
line of the message.
    <bullet> Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, Revisions to Energy 
Efficiency Enforcement Regulations, EERE-2010-BT-STD-0027, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585- 0121. Phone: (202) 586-
2945. Please submit one signed paper original.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant 
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202) 586-2945. Please submit 
one signed paper original.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number or RIN for this rulemaking.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, or 
comments received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. James Raba, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building 
Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, 
DC 20585-0121, (202) 586-8654, e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fab09397d4a89b989bba9f9fd49e959fd49d958c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="612b080c4f330003002104044f050e044f060e17">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Authority and Background: DOE intends to publish a final rule 
determining whether to amend the current energy conservation standards 
for electric motors. On September 28, 2010, DOE published a notice of 
availability of the ``Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking 
Framework Document for Electric Motors'' (Framework Document), which 
describes the procedural and analytical approaches DOE anticipates 
using in its evaluation. 75 FR 59657. DOE must publish a final rule 
determining whether to amend the electric motors standards by December 
19, 2012. (42 U.S.C. 6313(b)(4)(B)).
    The current energy conservation standards for electric motors, as 
set forth in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 
2007) amendments to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (ECPA), 
establish energy conservation standards for two types of general 
purpose electric motors: (1) Subtype I, and (2) subtype II. (42 U.S.C. 
6313(b)(2)) These broad categories include various types of motors, 
such as the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) Design 
B motors rated from 1 to 500 horsepower, NEMA Design A and C motors 
rated from 1 to 200 horsepower, vertical solid shaft motors and close-
coupled pump motors. These standards do not apply to vertical hollow 
shaft motors, integral shafted partial motors, brake motors, or NEMA 
Design A motors between 200 and 500 horsepower, among other motor 
types. This is so because these types of electric motors do not meet 
currently prescribed definitions for general purpose electric motor 
(subtype I) and general purpose electric motor (subtype II), in that 
they are not general purpose motors and cannot be used in most general 
purpose applications. (42 U.S.C. 6311(13)(A)-(B); 10 CFR 431.12).
    During the Framework Document comment period, energy efficiency 
advocates (the Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP) and the 
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE)), 
manufacturers (NEMA and Baldor), and utilities (the Pacific Gas and 
Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Gas Company (SCGC), San 
Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), and Southern California Edison (SCE)) 
urged DOE to consider including additional motor types currently 
without energy conservation standards in DOE's analyses and 
establishing such standards. (ASAP/NEMA, No. 12 at p. 1; ACEEE, No. 10 
at p. 1; Baldor, No. 8 at p. 2; PG&E/SCGC/SDG&E/SCE, No. 11 at p. 1) 
\1\ In the commenters' view, this approach would more effectively 
increase energy savings than setting more stringent standards for the 
electric motors that are currently being examined as part of the energy 
conservation standards rulemaking that DOE has initiated. See 75 FR 
59657 (September 28, 2010). These parties also asserted that expanding 
the scope of DOE's current efforts, along with specially tailored 
exemptions for certain types of electric motors,would enable DOE to 
simplify its compliance and enforcement efforts. (ASAP/NEMA, No. 12 at 
p. 1-2; ACEEE, No. 10 at p. 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Notations of this form appear throughout this document and 
identify statements made in written comments or at public hearings 
that DOE has received and has included in the docket for this 
rulemaking. For example, ``NEMA, No. 12 at p. 7'' refers to a 
comment: (1) From the National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 
(2) in document number 12 in the docket of this rulemaking; and (3) 
appearing on page 7 of the submission, while ``Baldor, Framework 
Public Meeting Transcript, p.126'' refers to a comment: (1) From 
Baldor Electric Company; (2) in the transcript for the public 
meeting on the Framework document; and (3) appearing on page 126 of 
the transcript.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of these comments, DOE requests information regarding 
definite purpose and special purpose motors, including the additional 
motor types that DOE describes in Table 1 and Table 2. DOE is 
considering including definite and special purpose motors in the 
electric motors standards rulemaking.

[[Page 17578]]

Although DOE is particularly interested in information on the specific 
motor types identified in comments received in response to the 
Framework Document, commenters are welcome to provide information 
similar to the information sought for any additional motor type that 
the commenter believes should be included in this rulemaking and the 
reasons for their inclusion as part of the standards rulemaking.
    Description: Public comments are sought from interested parties 
regarding establishment of energy conservation standards for several 
types of definite and special purpose motors for which EISA 2007 did 
not provide energy conservation standards. DOE has the authority to set 
energy conservation standards for a wider range of electric motors than 
those classified as general purpose electric motors (e.g., definite or 
special purpose motors). The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPAct 1992'') 
amendments to EPCA defined ``electric motor'' to include a certain type 
of ``general purpose'' motor. (42 U.S.C. 6311(13)(A) (1992)) EPAct 1992 
set energy conservation standards for such ``electric motors'' and 
explicitly stated that the standards did not apply to definite purpose 
or special purpose motors. (42 U.S.C. 6313(b)(1)) (1992)) In EISA 2007, 
Congress removed the definition of ``electric motors,'' added a 
definitional heading for ``electric motors,'' and then denoted several 
types of ``electric motors,'' including general purpose electric 
motors, definite purpose motors, and special purpose motors. (See 42 
U.S.C. 6311(13) (2010)) EISA 2007 also amended the energy conservation 
standards for general purpose motors and removed the exclusion for 
definite purpose and special purpose motors. (42 U.S.C. 6313(b)(2)-(3) 
(2010)) Based on these changes, in spite of the absence of any current 
standards for these types of motors, it is DOE's view that definite and 
special purpose motors are ``electric motor'' categories covered under 
EPCA. Accordingly, DOE is considering establishing standards for 
certain definite and special purpose motors in the context of the 
electric motors rulemaking.
    While existing energy conservation standards cover a majority of 
the electric motors market, based on DOE's initial findings, several 
categories of the definite or special purpose motors that interested 
parties recommended for standards coverage have significant sales 
volumes, and thus energy savings potential. Adding these motors to the 
group of motors for which DOE has already set energy conservation 
standards would also reduce the incentive for manufacturers to attempt 
to circumvent existing or amended standards by substituting unregulated 
motors for regulated motors. To this end, DOE examined each motor type 
to determine whether it would require an engineering analysis separate 
from covered general purpose electric motors, and whether it could be 
evaluated using DOE's current test procedure, located in subpart B of 
10 CFR part 431.
    To inform its decision-making process, DOE seeks information 
regarding whether any of the motor types listed in Table 1 below have 
any unique design features that affect the cost or efficiency of the 
motor. For instance, DOE is interested in whether a particular design 
feature for a brake motor would prevent it from meeting an efficiency 
level that its general purpose counterpart can meet. Furthermore, if 
the cost-efficiency relationship for a comparable general purpose motor 
cannot be applied to the motor type in question, DOE requests 
information on the relationship between cost and efficiency. DOE seeks 
information on whether a scaling relationship can be used to extend the 
cost-efficiency relationship of a general purpose motor to the motor 
type in question.
    DOE also requests comments on whether inclusion of each of the 
motor types listed in Table 1 in the electric motors rulemaking would 
require changes to the current DOE test procedure. DOE requests 
information on whether the change would require that a new test method 
or test procedure be incorporated by reference, or whether it would 
require a slight modification or clarification as to how the test is 
performed, similar to what is currently done for vertical solid shaft 
motors, which, as DOE understands the current practice, are tested in 
the horizontal configuration. If a new test procedure is needed, DOE 
requests information on any test procedures or test methods that are 
applicable and available and the reasons for those procedures or 
methods.
    Table 1 summarizes DOE's preliminary findings for each of the motor 
types that stakeholders support including within the electric motors 
standards rulemaking. DOE requests comment on the preliminary 
conclusions included in the table, as well as the market share of each 
of these motor types, and the potential energy saved by including each 
motor type. The market analysis consists of motors sold in the U.S. by 
NEMA-member companies and does not include any imports. DOE also 
requests comment on whether there are any other types of motors not 
listed in Table 1 that DOE should consider including in the standards 
rulemaking.

                    Table 1--Electric Motor Types Which Stakeholder Comments Indicated Should be Included in the Standards Rulemaking
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Requires separate
              Motor type                  analysis from general     Requires changes to the    Approximate percentage of               Notes
                                             purpose motors?          DOE test procedure?          the motor market
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEMA Design A Motors from 200 to 500    No.......................  No......................                       Unknown  DOE believes that these
 HP.                                                                                                                        motors are similar to the
                                                                                                                            lower horsepower Design A
                                                                                                                            electric motors already
                                                                                                                            covered.
Brake Motors..........................  No.......................  No......................                         10.1%  DOE believes that when not
                                                                                                                            applied, the brake unit does
                                                                                                                            not interfere with normal
                                                                                                                            operation and therefore the
                                                                                                                            motor can be tested with the
                                                                                                                            brake in the off position
                                                                                                                            using the current test
                                                                                                                            procedure. DOE believes that
                                                                                                                            the cost-efficiency
                                                                                                                            relationship is similar to
                                                                                                                            that of a general purpose
                                                                                                                            electric motor.

[[Page 17579]]

 
Partial Motors or Component Sets......  Yes......................  Yes.....................                         11.9%  DOE has been advised that
                                                                                                                            these motors do not include
                                                                                                                            a full frame, front plate,
                                                                                                                            bearings, shaft, or shaft
                                                                                                                            support. Because the ability
                                                                                                                            of these components to
                                                                                                                            dissipate heat is strongly
                                                                                                                            dependent on the type of
                                                                                                                            frame, bearings, etc.
                                                                                                                            chosen, the efficiency of
                                                                                                                            these motors is therefore
                                                                                                                            dependent on the
                                                                                                                            application. Because of
                                                                                                                            this, they would also
                                                                                                                            require a new test
                                                                                                                            procedure.
Integral Shafted Partial Motors.......  No.......................  No......................  ............................  DOE believes that unlike
                                                                                                                            partial motors or component
                                                                                                                            sets, integral shafted
                                                                                                                            partial motors are only
                                                                                                                            missing the drive end face
                                                                                                                            plate, and therefore can be
                                                                                                                            tested with a ``dummy test
                                                                                                                            bracket'' using the current
                                                                                                                            test procedure. DOE believes
                                                                                                                            that when equipped with a
                                                                                                                            dummy end plate, the cost-
                                                                                                                            efficiency relationship of
                                                                                                                            this type of motor would be
                                                                                                                            similar to that of a general
                                                                                                                            purpose motor.
Vertical Hollow Shaft Motors..........  No.......................  No......................                          0.8%  DOE believes that these
                                                                                                                            motors do not differ from
                                                                                                                            vertical solid shaft motors
                                                                                                                            in performance or electrical
                                                                                                                            characteristics. When tested
                                                                                                                            with their bearings swapped
                                                                                                                            for ball bearings and in a
                                                                                                                            horizontal configuration,
                                                                                                                            these motors can meet
                                                                                                                            designated efficiency levels
                                                                                                                            of general purpose motors.
                                                                                                                            DOE believes that the test
                                                                                                                            procedure would mirror that
                                                                                                                            performed on vertical solid
                                                                                                                            shaft motors, which are
                                                                                                                            currently covered by DOE
                                                                                                                            standards.
Integral Gear Motors..................  No.......................  No......................                         15.6%  DOE has been advised that
                                                                                                                            these motors are almost
                                                                                                                            identical to integral
                                                                                                                            shafted partial motors in
                                                                                                                            function, and therefore can
                                                                                                                            be tested similarly, with a
                                                                                                                            ``dummy test bracket'' in
                                                                                                                            lieu of a standard face
                                                                                                                            plate. As with integral
                                                                                                                            shafted motors, DOE believes
                                                                                                                            that when equipped with a
                                                                                                                            dummy end plate, the cost-
                                                                                                                            efficiency relationship of
                                                                                                                            this type of motor would be
                                                                                                                            similar to that of a general
                                                                                                                            purpose motor.
TENV Motors...........................  Yes......................  No......................                          3.0%  DOE understands that these
                                                                                                                            motors have no built-in fan,
                                                                                                                            and therefore require enough
                                                                                                                            exterior clearance to allow
                                                                                                                            for free convection.
                                                                                                                            Furthermore, the frame is
                                                                                                                            generally larger to aid in
                                                                                                                            dissipation of heat. Because
                                                                                                                            of this, DOE believes that
                                                                                                                            the cost-efficiency
                                                                                                                            relationship for a general
                                                                                                                            purpose motor cannot be
                                                                                                                            directly applied to a TENV
                                                                                                                            motor, as TENV motors have
                                                                                                                            unique efficiency-affecting
                                                                                                                            features that distinguish
                                                                                                                            them from general purpose
                                                                                                                            motors.

[[Page 17580]]

 
TEAO Motors...........................  Yes......................  Yes.....................  ............................  DOE understands that these
                                                                                                                            motors are intended to be
                                                                                                                            cooled by ventilation means
                                                                                                                            external to the motor and
                                                                                                                            that the motor must be
                                                                                                                            provided with additional
                                                                                                                            ventilation to prevent it
                                                                                                                            from overheating. DOE
                                                                                                                            believes the addition of a
                                                                                                                            separate means for cooling
                                                                                                                            would require a new test
                                                                                                                            procedure. Furthermore, DOE
                                                                                                                            believes that the cost-
                                                                                                                            efficiency relationship for
                                                                                                                            a general purpose motor
                                                                                                                            cannot be directly applied
                                                                                                                            to a TEAO motor, as TEAO
                                                                                                                            motors have unique
                                                                                                                            efficiency-affecting
                                                                                                                            features that distinguish
                                                                                                                            them from general purpose
                                                                                                                            motors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The joint comments from ASAP and NEMA also identified several types 
of motors that the commenters believe should not be included in the 
standards rulemaking. (ASAP/NEMA, No. 12 at p. 9) These motors are 
presented in Table 2. To inform its decision-making process, DOE seeks 
information regarding the merits of this recommendation and whether any 
of the motor types listed in Table 2 have any unique design features 
that affect the cost or efficiency of the motor. Furthermore, if the 
cost-efficiency relationship for a comparable general purpose motor 
cannot be applied to the motor type in question, DOE requests 
information on the relationship between cost and efficiency. DOE seeks 
information on whether a scaling relationship can be used to extend the 
cost-efficiency relationship of a general purpose motor to the motor 
type in question.
    DOE also requests comments on whether inclusion of each of the 
motor types listed in Table 2 in the electric motors rulemaking would 
require changes to the current DOE test procedure and if so, whether 
those changes would require that a new test method or test procedure be 
incorporated by reference. If a new test procedure is needed, DOE 
requests information on any test procedures or test methods that are 
applicable and available and why those procedures or methods are 
needed.
    Table 2 summarizes DOE's preliminary findings for each of the motor 
types that ASAP and NEMA do not support for inclusion within the 
electric motors standards rulemaking. DOE requests comment on the 
preliminary conclusions included in Table 2, as well as the market 
share of each of these motor types and their potential energy savings.

    Table 2--Electric Motor Types Which Stakeholder Comments Indicated Should be Excluded From the Standards
                                                   Rulemaking
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Requires separate
                                  analysis from     Requires changes
          Motor type             general purpose    to the DOE test                      Notes
                                     motors?           procedure?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multispeed Motors.............  Yes..............  Yes..............  The current standards only cover single-
                                                                       speed motors, and therefore, DOE believes
                                                                       that the cost-efficiency relationship for
                                                                       general purpose motors cannot be directly
                                                                       applied to multispeed motors. Also, these
                                                                       motors would require a new test
                                                                       procedure.
DC Motors.....................  Yes..............  Yes..............  The current standards only cover AC
                                                                       motors, and therefore, DOE believes that
                                                                       the cost-efficiency relationship for
                                                                       general purpose motors cannot be directly
                                                                       applied to DC motors. Also, these motors
                                                                       would require a new test procedure.
Single Phase Motors...........  Yes..............  Yes..............  The current standards only cover polyphase
                                                                       motors, and therefore, DOE believes that
                                                                       the cost-efficiency relationship for
                                                                       general purpose motors cannot be directly
                                                                       applied to single phase motors. Also,
                                                                       these motors would require a new test
                                                                       procedure.
Liquid Cooled and Submersible   DOE Requests       Yes..............  DOE understands that the submersible motor
 or Immersible Motors.           Comment.                              is completely sealed for use in
                                                                       submersible applications, and that
                                                                       cooling is accomplished by surrounding
                                                                       liquid. DOE requests comment on whether
                                                                       the cost-efficiency relationship for a
                                                                       general purpose motor can be directly
                                                                       applied to a submersible motor.

[[Page 17581]]

 
Electronically Commutated       Yes..............  Yes..............  The current standards only cover squirrel-
 Motors.                                                               cage induction motors, and therefore, DOE
                                                                       believes that the cost-efficiency
                                                                       relationship for general purpose motors
                                                                       cannot be directly applied to
                                                                       electrically commutated motors. Also,
                                                                       these motors would require a new test
                                                                       procedure.
Switched Reluctance Motors....  Yes..............  Yes..............  The current standards only cover squirrel-
                                                                       cage induction motors, and therefore, DOE
                                                                       believes that the cost-efficiency
                                                                       relationship for general purpose motors
                                                                       cannot be directly applied to switched
                                                                       reluctance motors. Also, these motors
                                                                       would require a new test procedure.
Interior Permanent Magnet       Yes..............  Yes..............  The current standards only cover squirrel-
 Motors.                                                               cage induction motors, and therefore, DOE
                                                                       believes that the cost-efficiency
                                                                       relationship for general purpose motors
                                                                       cannot be directly applied to interior
                                                                       permanent magnet motors. Also, these
                                                                       motors would require a new test
                                                                       procedure.
Inverter-duty Motors..........  Yes..............  No...............  DOE is aware that these motors are
                                                                       designed to run on variable frequency
                                                                       drives and typically are designed to run
                                                                       at lower speeds. Because they are
                                                                       designed to run at lower speeds where
                                                                       they won't be cooled as effectively, in
                                                                       order to prevent the motor from
                                                                       overheating, the insulation differs from
                                                                       that used in a general purpose motor.
                                                                       This difference in internal design leads
                                                                       to a different cost-efficiency curve.
Intermittent-duty Motors......  Yes..............  Yes..............  DOE is aware that these motors are
                                                                       designed to run on an intermittent basis
                                                                       to allow for proper cooling without
                                                                       overheating. The current standards and
                                                                       test procedure only cover continuous duty
                                                                       motors. Therefore, DOE believes that the
                                                                       cost-efficiency relationship for general
                                                                       purpose motors cannot be directly applied
                                                                       to intermittent-duty motors. Also, these
                                                                       motors would require a new test
                                                                       procedure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the above issues, DOE seeks information and comment 
regarding the possible consolidation of two different sets of motors 
into one equipment class for the purposes of its analysis. 
Specifically, Baldor and NEMA both recommended that DOE combine Design 
A and Design B motors into a single equipment class. (Baldor, Framework 
Public Meeting Transcript, p.77; NEMA, No. 13, p.4) (``Design A'' and 
``Design B'' are NEMA-developed designations that define a motor's 
performance characteristics such as the locked-rotor torque, pull-up 
torque, breakdown torque, inrush current, and locked-rotor current.) 
These motors are identical except with respect to the limit on inrush 
current \2\--Design B motors are limited to certain prescribed levels 
while Design A motors have no such limitation. DOE is interested in 
receiving information about any differences in efficiencies between 
similar Design A and Design B motors. DOE is also interested in 
receiving information about the respective market shares of Design A 
and Design B motors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Inrush current refers to the maximum, instantaneous input 
current drawn by an electrical device when first turned on. For 
example, an alternating current electric motor may draw several 
times its normal full-load current when first energized, for a few 
cycles of the input waveform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Baldor and NEMA made a similar recommendation for U-frame and T-
frame motors. (Baldor, Framework Public Meeting Transcript, p.126; 
NEMA, No. 13, p.13) T-frame motors, which are more compact than U-frame 
motors, are increasingly being used as replacements for their U-frame 
counterparts. While installing a T-frame motor into a U-frame 
application requires minor adjustments (e.g. shimming of the mounting 
plate and/or using a different shaft coupling, which are changes that a 
technician can make expeditiously) to enable it to fit within a U-frame 
application, this motor would provide the same functionality as the U-
frame motor it replaces. Partly because of their smaller size and lower 
weight for similarly rated motors (i.e. horsepower), information 
reviewed by DOE indicates that T-frame motors are replacing U-frame 
motors in both new and existing applications. (NEMA/ACEEE, No. 25, p. 
6) \3\ DOE is interested in receiving information about the difference 
in efficiencies between similar T-frame and U-frame motors. DOE is also 
interested in receiving information about the respective market shares 
of T-frame and U-frame motors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This written comment was submitted to the docket of the 
supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking on test procedures for 
electric motors and small electric motors (refer to http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. EERE-2008-BT-TP-0008; RIN number 
1904-AB71).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

A. Submission of Information

    DOE will accept comments in response to this RFI under the timeline 
provided in the DATES section. Comments submitted to the Department 
through the eRulemaking Portal or by e-mail should be provided in 
WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, portable document format (PDF), or text 
file format. Those responding should avoid the use of special 
characters or any form of encryption. No facsimiles will be accepted. 
Comments submitted in response to this notice will become a matter of 
public record and will be made publicly available.

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Information

    For this RFI, DOE requests comments, information, and 
recommendations on the following concepts for the purpose of 
determining whether additional motor types currently without energy

[[Page 17582]]

conservation standards can and should be assigned energy conservation 
standards. DOE also seeks information and comment regarding the 
possible consolidation of NEMA Design A and Design B motors into one 
equipment class and NEMA T- and U-frame motors into one equipment class 
for the purpose of its analysis and energy conservation standards.
    1. DOE requests comment on the preliminary conclusions included in 
Table 1 and Table 2.
    2. DOE seeks comment on whether the analyses performed for motors 
that currently have standards can be extended to those electric motors 
listed in Table 1 and Table 2.
    3. DOE seeks information regarding whether any of the motor types 
listed in Table 1 and Table 2 have any unique design features that 
affect the cost or efficiency of the motor compared to general purpose 
motors.
    a. If the cost-efficiency relationship for a comparable general 
purpose motor cannot be applied to the motor type in question, DOE 
requests information on the relationship between cost and efficiency.
    b. DOE requests information on whether a scaling relationship can 
be used to extend the cost-efficiency relationship of a general purpose 
motor to the motor type in question.
    4. DOE requests comment on the market share of each of these motor 
types listed in Table 1 and Table 2.
    5. DOE requests comment on the potential energy saved by including 
each motor type listed in Table 1 and Table 2 in the standards 
rulemaking.
    6. DOE seeks information on methods for testing the motors listed 
in Table 1 and Table 2, and how they may differ from the current test 
procedures for electric motors. If a new test procedure is needed, DOE 
requests information on the reasons why such a new procedures is needed 
and the current availability and applicability of any test procedures 
or test methods. DOE also seeks confirmation of the accuracy of its 
understanding with respect to the testing of vertical shaft motors.
    7. DOE seeks information on any other types of definite purpose or 
special purpose motors not listed in Table 1 and Table 2 that DOE 
should consider including in this rulemaking.
    8. DOE seeks comment on the possible consolidation of NEMA Design A 
and Design B motors into one equipment class, and NEMA T- and U-frame 
motors into one equipment class.
    a. What are the possible differences in achievable efficiency 
between Design A and Design B motors?
    b. What are the respective market shares of Design A and Design B 
motors?
    c. What are the possible differences in achievable efficiency 
between U-frame and T-frame motors?
    d. What are the respective market shares of U-frame and T-frame 
motors?

    Statutory Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6313(b)(4).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 24, 2011.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Office of Technology 
Development, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-7440 Filed 3-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>