Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18425 

1The Report on the 2008 analysis is available on 

the DOE Web site at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ 

buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/ 

five_lamp_types_report.pdf. 

* * * * * 

Dated: March 29, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7826 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–NOA–0013] 

Energy Conservation Program: Data 

Collection and Comparison With 

Forecasted Unit Sales of Five Lamp 

Types 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of data availability. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) is informing the public of 

its collection of shipment data and 

creation of spreadsheet models to 

provide comparisons between actual 

and benchmark estimate unit sales of 

five lamp types (i.e., rough service 

lamps, vibration service lamps, 3-way 

incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 lumen 

general service incandescent lamps, and 

shatter-resistant lamps), which are 

currently exempt from energy 

conservation standards. As the actual 

sales do not exceed the forecasted 

estimate by 100 percent for any lamp 

type (i.e., the threshold triggering 

rulemaking for an energy conservation 

standard for that lamp type has not been 

exceeded), DOE has determined that no 

regulatory action is necessary at this 

time. However, DOE will continue to 

track sales data for these exempted 

lamps. Relating to this activity, DOE has 

prepared and is making available on its 

Web site a spreadsheet showing the 

comparisons of anticipated versus 

actual sales, as well as the model used 

to generate the original sales estimates. 

The spreadsheet is available at: http:// 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/residential/ 

five_lamp_types.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Tina Kaarsberg, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1393. E-mail: 

Tina.Kaarsberg@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9507. E-mail: 

Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Definitions 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

III. Comparison Methodology 

IV. Comparison Results 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

V. Conclusion 

I. Background 

The Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007) (Pub. 

L. 110–140) was enacted on December 

19, 2007. Among the requirements of 

subtitle B (Lighting Energy Efficiency) of 

title III of EISA 2007 were provisions 

directing the U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) to collect, analyze, and monitor 

unit sales of five lamp types (i.e., rough 

service lamps, vibration service lamps, 

3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps, and shatter-resistant lamps). In 

relevant part, section 321(a)(3)(B) of 

EISA 2007 amended section 325(l) of 

the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 

of 1975 (EPCA) by adding paragraph 

(4)(B) which generally directs DOE, in 

consultation with the National Electrical 

Manufacturers Association (NEMA), to: 

(1) Collect unit sales data for each of the 

five lamp types for calendar years 1990 

through 2006 in order to determine the 

historical growth rate for each lamp 

type; and (2) construct a model for each 

of the five lamp types based on 

coincident economic indicators that 

closely match the historical annual 

growth rates of each lamp type to 

provide a neutral comparison 

benchmark estimate of future unit sales. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(B)) Section 

321(a)(3)(B) of EISA 2007 also amends 

section 325(l) of EPCA by adding 

paragraph (4)(C), which in relevant part, 

directs DOE to collect unit sales data for 

calendar years 2010 through 2025, in 

consultation with NEMA, for each of the 

five lamp types. DOE must then 

compare the actual lamp sales in that 

year with the benchmark estimate, 

determine if the unit sales projection 

has been exceeded, and issue the 

findings within 90 days after the end of 

the analyzed calendar year. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(4)(C)) 

On December 18, 2008, DOE issued a 

notice of data availability for the Report 

on Data Collection and Estimated 

Future Unit Sales of Five Lamp Types 

(hereafter ‘‘the 2008 analysis’’) 1 which 

was published in the Federal Register 

on December 24, 2008. 73 FR 79072. 

The 2008 analysis presented the 1990 

through 2006 shipment data collected in 

consultation with NEMA, the 

spreadsheet model DOE constructed for 

each lamp type, and the benchmark unit 

sales estimate for 2010 through 2025. 

Today’s NODA presents the first of the 

mandated follow-up comparisons. 

Section IV of this report compares the 

actual unit sales against benchmark unit 

sales estimates for 2010. 

EISA 2007 also amends section 325(l) 

of EPCA by adding paragraphs (4)(D) 

through (4)(H) which state that if DOE 

finds that the unit sales for a given lamp 

type in any year between 2010 and 2025 

exceed the benchmark estimate of unit 

sales by at least 100 percent (i.e., more 

than double the anticipated sales), then 

DOE must take regulatory action to 

establish an energy conservation 

standard for such lamps. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(4)(D)–(H)) For 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps, DOE must adopt a statutorilyprescribed energy conservation 

standard, and for the other four types of 

lamps, the statute requires DOE to 

initiate an accelerated rulemaking to 

establish energy conservation standards. 

If the Secretary does not complete the 

accelerated rulemakings within one year 

of the end of the previous calendar year, 

there is a ‘‘backstop requirement’’ for 

each lamp type, which would establish 

energy conservation standard levels and 

related requirements by statute. Id. 

As in the 2008 analysis, in this 

NODA, DOE uses manufacturer 

shipments as a surrogate for unit sales, 

because manufacturer shipment data is 

tracked and aggregated by the trade 

organization, NEMA. DOE believes that 

annual shipments track closely with 

actual unit sales of these five lamp 

types, as DOE presumes that retailer 

inventories remain constant from year to 

year. DOE believes this is a reasonable 

assumption because the markets for 

these five lamp types have existed for 

many years, thereby enabling 

manufacturers and retailers to establish 

appropriate inventory levels that reflect 

market demand. Furthermore, in the 

long-run, unit sales could not increase 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

18426 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

2 ‘‘General service incandescent lamp’’ is defined 

as a standard incandescent or halogen type lamp 

that—(I) is intended for general service 

applications; (II) has a medium screw base; (III) has 

a lumen range of not less than 310 lumens and not 

more than 2,600 lumens; and (IV) is capable of 

being operated at a voltage range at least partially 

within 110 and 130 volts. (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(D)) 

3The Federal Trade Commission issued the lamp 

labeling requirements in 1994 (see 59 FR 25176 

(May 13, 1994)). Further amendments were made to 

the lamp labeling requirements in 2007 (see 16 CFR 

305.15(b); 72 FR 49948, 49971–72 (August 29, 

2007)). The package must display the lamp’s light 

output (in lumens), energy use (in watts), and lamp 

life (in hours). 

in any one year without manufacturer 

shipments increasing either that year or 

the following one. In either case, 

increasing unit sales must eventually 

result in increasing manufacturer 

shipments. This is the same 

methodology presented in DOE’s 2008 

analysis, and the Department did not 

receive any comments challenging this 

assumption or the general approach. 

II. Definitions 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘rough service 

lamp.’’ The statutory definition reads as 

follows: ‘‘The term ‘rough service lamp’ 

means a lamp that—(i) has a minimum 

of 5 supports with filament 

configurations that are C–7A, C–11, 

C–17, and C–22 as listed in Figure 6–12 

of the 9th edition of the IESNA 

[Illuminating Engineering Society of 

North America] Lighting handbook, or 

similar configurations where lead wires 

are not counted as supports; and (ii) is 

designated and marketed specifically for 

‘rough service’ applications, with—(I) 

the designation appearing on the lamp 

packaging; and (II) marketing materials 

that identify the lamp as being for rough 

service.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(X)) 

As noted above, rough service 

incandescent lamps must have a 

minimum of five filament support wires 

(not counting the two connecting leads 

at the beginning and end of the 

filament), and must be designated and 

marketed for ‘‘rough service’’ 

applications. This type of incandescent 

lamp is typically used in applications 

where the lamp would be subject to 

mechanical shock or vibration while it 

is operating. Standard incandescent 

lamps have only two support wires 

(which also serve as conductors), one at 

each end of the filament coil. When 

operating (i.e., when the tungsten 

filament is glowing so hot that it emits 

light), a standard incandescent lamp’s 

filament is brittle, and rough service 

applications could cause it to break 

prematurely. To address this problem, 

lamp manufacturers developed lamp 

designs that incorporate additional 

support wires along the length of the 

filament to ensure that it has support 

not just at each end, but at several other 

points as well. The additional support 

protects the filament during operation 

and enables longer operating life for 

incandescent lamps in rough service 

applications. Typical applications for 

these rough service lamps might include 

commercial hallways and stairwells, 

gyms, storage areas, and security areas. 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘vibration 

service lamp.’’ The statutory definition 

reads as follows: ‘‘The term ‘vibration 

service lamp’ means a lamp that—(i) has 

filament configurations that are C–5, 

C–7A, or C–9, as listed in Figure 6–12 

of the 9th Edition of the IESNA Lighting 

Handbook or similar configurations; (ii) 

has a maximum wattage of 60 watts; (iii) 

is sold at retail in packages of 2 lamps 

or less; and (iv) is designated and 

marketed specifically for vibration 

service or vibration-resistant 

applications, with—(I) the designation 

appearing on the lamp packaging; and 

(II) marketing materials that identify the 

lamp as being vibration service only.’’ 

(42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(AA)) 

The statute mentions three examples 

of filament configurations for vibration 

service lamps in Figure 6–12 of the 

IESNA Lighting Handbook, one of 

which (i.e., C–7A) is also listed in the 

statutory definition of ‘‘rough service 

lamp.’’ The definition of ‘‘vibration 

service lamp’’ requires that such lamps 

have a maximum wattage of 60 watts 

and be sold at a retail level in packages 

of two lamps or less. Similar to rough 

service lamps, vibration service lamps 

must be designated and marketed for 

vibration service or vibration-resistant 

applications. As the name suggests, this 

type of incandescent lamp is generally 

used in applications where the 

incandescent lamp would be subject to 

a continuous low level of vibration, 

such as in a ceiling fan light kit. In such 

applications, standard incandescent 

lamps without additional filament 

support wires may not achieve the full 

rated life, because the filament wire is 

brittle and would be subject to breakage 

at typical operating temperature. To 

address this problem, lamp 

manufacturers typically use a more 

malleable tungsten filament to avoid 

damage and short circuits between coils. 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘3-way 

incandescent lamp.’’ The statutory 

definition reads as follows: ‘‘The term 

‘3-way incandescent lamp’ includes an 

incandescent lamp that—(i) employs 2 

filaments, operated separately and in 

combination, to provide 3 light levels; 

and (ii) is designated on the lamp 

packaging and marketing materials as 

being a 3-way incandescent lamp.’’ (42 

U.S.C. 6291(30)(Y)) 

Three-way lamps are commonly 

found in wattage combinations such as 

50, 100, and 150 watts or 30, 70, and 

100 watts. These lamps use two 

filaments (e.g., a 30-watt and a 70-watt 

filament) and can be operated separately 

or together to produce three different 

lumen outputs (e.g., 305 lumens with 

one filament, 995 lumens with the 

other, or 1,300 lumens using the 

filaments together). When used in 3-way 

sockets, these lamps allow users to 

control the light level. Three-way 

incandescent lamps are typically used 

in residential multi-purpose areas, 

where consumers may adjust the light 

level to be appropriate for the task they 

are performing. 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

The statute does not provide a 

definition of ‘‘2,601–3,300 Lumen 

General Service Incandescent Lamps’’; 

however, DOE is interpreting this term 

to be a general service incandescent 

lamp 2 that emits between 2,601 and 

3,300 lumens. In this lumen range, the 

wattages of covered general service 

incandescent lamps are between 140 

and 170 watts. Within that range, the 

only commonly made lamp that meets 

other general service incandescent lamp 

criteria is rated at 150 watts. Should 

other rated wattages enter the market 

that fall within this lumen range, they 

will be immediately recognizable 

because as required by the Energy 

Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102–486, 

all general service incandescent lamps 

must be labeled with lamp lumen 

output.3 These lamps are used in 

general service applications when high 

light output is needed. 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

Section 321(a)(1)(B) of EISA 2007 

amended section 321(30) of EPCA by 

adding the definition of a ‘‘shatterresistant lamp, shatter-proof lamp, or 

shatter-protected lamp.’’ The statutory 

definition reads as follows: ‘‘The terms 

‘shatter-resistant lamp,’ ‘shatter-proof 

lamp,’ and ‘shatter-protected lamp’ 

mean a lamp that—(i) has a coating or 

equivalent technology that is compliant 

with [National Sanitation Foundation/ 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 18427 

4NSF/ANSI 51 applies specifically to materials 

and coatings used in the manufacturing of 

equipment and objects destined for contact with 

foodstuffs. 

5The least squares function is an analytical tool 

that DOE uses to minimize the sum of the squared 

residual differences between the actual historical 

data points and the modeled value (i.e., the linear 

curve fit). In minimizing this value, the resulting 

curve fit will represent the best fit possible to the 

data provided. 

6See DOE’s 2008 forecast spreadsheet models of 

the lamp types for greater detail. The spreadsheet 

models are available at: http:// 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/residential/docs/ 

five_lamp_types_models.xls. 

American National Standards Institute] 

NSF/ANSI 51 and is designed to contain 

the glass if the glass envelope of the 

lamp is broken; and (ii) is designated 

and marketed for the intended 

application, with—(I) the designation on 

the lamp packaging; and (II) marketing 

materials that identify the lamp as being 

shatter-resistant, shatter-proof, or 

shatter-protected.’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6291(30)(Z)) Although the definition 

provides three names commonly used to 

refer to these lamps, DOE simply refers 

to them collectively as ‘‘shatter-resistant 

lamps.’’ 

Shatter-resistant lamps incorporate a 

special coating designed to prevent glass 

shards from being strewn if a lamp’s 

glass envelope breaks. Shatter-resistant 

lamps incorporate a coating compliant 

with industry standard NSF/ANSI 51,4

‘‘Food Equipment Materials,’’ and are 

labeled and marketed as shatterresistant, shatter-proof, or shatterprotected. The coatings protect the lamp 

from breakage in applications subject to 

heat and thermal shock that may occur 

from water, sleet, snow, soldering, or 

welding. 

III. Comparison Methodology 

In the 2008 analysis, DOE reviewed 

each of the five sets of shipment data 

that were collected in consultation with 

NEMA and applied two curve fits to 

generate unit sales estimates for the five 

lamp types after calendar year 2006. 

One curve fit applied a linear regression 

to the historical data and extends that 

line into the future. The other curve fit 

applied an exponential growth function 

to the shipment data and projects unit 

sales into the future. For this 

calculation, linear regression treats the 

year as a dependent variable and 

shipments as the independent variable. 

The linear regression curve fit is 

modeled by minimizing the differences 

among the data points and the best 

curve-fit linear line using the least 

squares function.5 The exponential 

curve fit is also a regression function 

and uses the same least squares function 

to find the best fit. For some data sets, 

an exponential curve provides a better 

characterization of the historical data, 

and, therefore, a better projection of the 

future data. 

For 3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601– 

3,300 lumen general service 

incandescent lamps, and shatterresistant lamps, DOE found that the 

linear regression and exponential 

growth curve fits produced nearly the 

same estimates of unit sales (i.e., the 

difference between the two forecasted 

values was less than 1 or 2 percent). 

However, for rough service and 

vibration service lamps, the linear 

regression curve fit projects lamp unit 

sales would decline to zero for both 

lamp types by 2018. In contrast, the 

exponential growth curve fit projected a 

more gradual decline in unit sales, such 

that lamps will still be sold beyond 

2018, and it was, therefore, considered 

the more realistic forecast. While DOE 

would be satisfied that either the linear 

regression or exponential growth 

spreadsheet model would generate a 

reasonable benchmark unit sales 

estimate for 3-way incandescent lamps, 

2,601–3,300 lumen general service 

incandescent lamps, and shatterresistant lamps, DOE is selecting the 

exponential growth curve fit for these 

lamp types for consistency with the 

selection made for rough service and 

vibration service lamps.6 DOE examines 

the benchmark unit sales estimates and 

actual sales for each of the five lamp 

types in the following section and also 

makes the comparisons available in a 

spreadsheet online at: http:// 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/residential/ 

five_lamp_types.html. 

IV. Comparison Results 

A. Rough Service Lamps 

For rough service lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2010 to be 6,395,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 7,971,000 rough service 

lamps in 2010. As this finding exceeds 

the estimate by only 24.6 percent, DOE 

will continue to track rough service 

lamp sales data and will not initiate 

regulatory action for this lamp type at 

this time. 

B. Vibration Service Lamps 

For vibration service lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2010 to be 3,341,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 674,000 vibration service 

lamps in 2010. As this finding is only 

20.2 percent of the estimate, DOE will 

continue to track vibration service lamp 

sales data and will not initiate 

regulatory action for this lamp type at 

this time. 

C. Three-Way Incandescent Lamps 

For 3-way incandescent lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2010 to be 51,177,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 29,140,000 3-way 

incandescent lamps in 2010. As this 

finding is only 56.9 percent of the 

estimate, DOE will continue to track 

3-way incandescent lamp sales data and 

will not initiate regulatory action for 

this lamp type at this time. 

D. 2,601–3,300 Lumen General Service 

Incandescent Lamps 

For 2,601–3,300 lumen general 

service incandescent lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2010 to be 33,848,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 7,140,000 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps in 2010. As this finding is 21.1 

percent of the estimate, DOE will 

continue to track 2,601–3,300 lumen 

general service incandescent lamp sales 

data and will not initiate regulatory 

action for this lamp type at this time. 

E. Shatter-Resistant Lamps 

For shatter-resistant lamps, the 

exponential growth forecast projected 

the benchmark unit sales estimate for 

2010 to be 1,655,000 units. The NEMAprovided shipment data reported 

shipments of 848,000 shatter-resistant 

lamps in 2010. As this finding is only 

51.2 percent of the estimate, DOE will 

continue to track shatter-resistant lamp 

sales data and will not initiate 

regulatory action for this lamp type at 

this time. 

V. Conclusion 

None of the shipments for the rough 

service lamps, vibration service lamps, 

3-way incandescent lamps, 2,601–3,300 

lumen general service incandescent 

lamps, or shatter-resistant lamps crossed 

the statutory threshold for a standard. 

DOE will monitor the situation for these 

five currently exempted lamp types and 

will reassess 2011 sales by March 31, 

2012, in order to determine whether 

energy conservation standards 

rulemaking is required, consistent with 

42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(4)(D)–(H). 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

18428 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 30, 

2011. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Office of Technology 

Development, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7939 Filed 4–1–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 431 

[Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–TP–0036] 

RIN 1904–AC38 

Energy Efficiency Program for Certain 

Commercial and Industrial Equipment: 

Test Procedures for Automatic 

Commercial Ice Makers 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) proposes to revise its test 

procedure for automatic commercial ice 

makers (ACIM) established under the 

Energy Policy and Conservation Act. 

This notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NOPR) proposes to update the 

incorporation by reference of industry 

test procedures to the most current 

published versions. The current DOE 

test procedure applies to automatic 

commercial ice makers that produce 

cube type ice. This NOPR proposes to 

expand coverage of the test procedure to 

all batch type and continuous type ice 

makers with capacities between 50 and 

4,000 pounds of ice per 24 hours. A 

batch type ice maker is defined as an ice 

maker with alternate freezing and 

harvesting periods, including machines 

that produce cube type ice, tube type 

ice, and fragmented ice. A continuous 

type ice maker is defined as an ice 

maker that continually freezes and 

harvests ice at the same time. 

Continuous type ice makers primarily 

produce flake or nugget ice. DOE also 

proposes amendments to standardize 

test results based on ice quality for 

continuous type ice makers, clarify the 

test methods and reporting requirements 

for automatic ice makers designed to be 

connected to a remote compressor rack, 

and provide test methods for 

modulating capacity ice makers. 

Furthermore, DOE proposes to 

discontinue the use of a clarified energy 

use equation. 

The test procedure applies to 

automatic commercial ice makers as 

defined in section 136 of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005. Use of any amended 

test procedures will be required on the 

compliance date of any standards 

developed in the associated energy 

conservation standard rulemaking. This 

notice announces a public meeting to 

discuss and receive comments on the 

proposed test procedure amendments. 

DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting 

in Washington, DC on April 29, 2011 

from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Additionally, DOE 

plans to make the public meeting 

available via webinar. See section V, 

‘‘Public Participation,’’ of this NOPR for 

webinar registration information, 

participant instructions, and 

information about the capabilities 

available to webinar participants. 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

other information regarding this NOPR 

before or after the public meeting, but 

no later than June 3, 2011. See section 

V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ for details. 

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be 

held at the U.S. Department of Energy, 

Forrestal Building, Room 8E–089, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. To attend, 

please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at 

(202) 586–2945. Please note that foreign 

nationals planning to participate in the 

public meeting are subject to advance 

security screening procedures. Any 

foreign national wishing to participate 

in the meeting should advise DOE as 

soon as possible by contacting Ms. 

Brenda Edwards at (202) 586–2945 to 

initiate the necessary procedures. 

Any comments submitted must 

identify the NOPR for test procedures 

for automatic commercial ice makers, 

and provide docket number EERE– 

2010–BT–TP–0036 or Regulation 

Identifier Number (RIN) 1904–AC38. 

Comments may be submitted using any 

of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: ACIM-2010-TP0036@ee.doe.gov. Include the docket 

number EERE–2010–BT–TP–0036 and/ 

or RIN 1904–AC38 in the subject line of 

the message. 

• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. If 

possible, please submit all items on CD. 

It is not necessary to include printed 

copies. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: 

(202) 586–2945. If possible, please 

submit all items on CD. It is not 

necessary to include printed copies. 

Written comments regarding the 

burden-hour estimates or other aspects 

of the collection-of-information 

requirements contained in this proposed 

rule may be submitted to Office of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy through the methods listed 

above and by e-mail to 

Christine_J._Kymn@omb.eop.gov. 

Docket: The docket is available for 

review at regulations.gov, including 

Federal Register notices, framework 

documents, public meeting attendee 

lists and transcripts, comments, and 

other supporting documents/materials. 

All documents in the docket are listed 

in the regulations.gov index. However, 

not all documents listed in the index 

may be publicly available, such as 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure. The regulations.gov web 

page will contain instructions on how to 

access all documents in the docket, 

including public comments. 

The rulemaking web page can be 

found at: http://www.eere.energy.gov/

buildings/appliance_standards/

commercial/automatic_ice_making_

equipment.html. This web page contains 

a link to the docket for this notice on 

regulations.gov. 

For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see section V, ‘‘Public Participation,’’ of 

this document. 

For further information on how to 

submit or review public comments, 

participate in the public meeting, or 

view hard copies of the docket in the 

Resource Room, contact Ms. Brenda 

Edwards at (202) 586–2945 or e-mail: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Charles Llenza, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–2192, 

Charles_Llenza@ee.doe.gov. 

In the Office of General Counsel 

contact Mr. Ari Altman, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of General 

Counsel, GC–71, 1000 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121, (202) 287–6307, 

Ari.Altman@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Legal Authority 

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule 

A. Proposed Test Procedure Amendments 

B. Association With Energy Conservation 

Standards Rulemaking 

III. Discussion 

A. Summary of the Test Procedure 

Revisions 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS