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.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

11345 

Vol. 79, No. 40 

Friday, February 28, 2014 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. code, Part B was re-designated Part A. 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–DET–0035] 

RIN 1904–AD04 

Energy Conservation Program: 

Proposed Determination of Computer 

and Battery Backup Systems as a 

Covered Consumer Product 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Proposed determination. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE or the ‘‘Department’’) has 

determined tentatively that computer 

and battery backup systems (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘computer systems’’) 

qualify as a covered product under Part 

A of Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended. 

This notice supersedes DOE’s previous 

proposed determination of coverage 

relating to computers, and expands the 

scope of coverage to include computer 

systems. DOE has determined that 

computer systems meet the criteria for 

covered products because classifying 

products of such type as covered 

products is necessary or appropriate to 

carry out the purposes of EPCA, and the 

average U.S. household energy use for 

computer systems is likely to exceed 

100 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year. 

DATES: DOE will accept written 

comments, data, and information on this 

notice, but no later than March 31, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may 

submit comments, identified by docket 

number EERE–2013–BT–DET–0035, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: Computers2013DET0035@

ee.doe.gov. Include EERE–2013–BT– 

DET–0035 and/or RIN 1904–AD04 in 

the subject line of the message. 

• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, 

Proposed Determination for computers, 

EERE–2013–BT–DET–0035 and/or RIN 

1904–AD04, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121. Phone: (202) 586–2945. Please 

submit one signed paper original. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Office, 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. 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: 

DOE_computer_standards@

ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Celia Sher, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–6122. Email: 

Celia.Sher@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On July 12, 2013, DOE published a 

proposed determination (July 2013 

Notice) in the Federal Register (78 FR 

41873) tentatively determining that 

computers qualify as a covered product 

under Part A of Title III of EPCA, as 

amended. The Department is 

superseding the July 2013 Notice with 

this updated notice. 

II. Authority 

Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291, et 

seq.) sets forth a variety of provisions 

designed to improve energy efficiency. 

Part A of Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6309) established the ‘‘Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles,’’ 

which covers consumer products and 

certain commercial products (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘covered products’’).1 In 

addition to specifying a list of covered 

residential and commercial products, 

EPCA contains provisions that enable 

the Secretary of Energy to classify 

additional types of consumer products 

as covered products. (42 U.S.C. 

6292(a)(20)) DOE may prescribe test 

procedures for any product it classifies 

as a ‘‘covered product.’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6293(b)) For a given product to be 

classified as a covered product, the 

Secretary must determine that: 

(1) Classifying the product as a 

covered product is necessary for the 

purposes of EPCA; and 

(2) The average annual per-household 

energy use by products of such type is 

likely to exceed 100 kilowatt-hours 

(kWh) per year. (42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1)) 

For the Secretary to prescribe an 

energy conservation standard pursuant 

to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) for covered 

products added pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

6292(b)(1), he must also determine that: 

(1) The average household energy use 

of the products has exceeded 150 kWh 

per household for a 12-month period; 

(2) The aggregate 12-month energy use 

of the products has exceeded 4.2 TWh; 

(3) Substantial improvement in energy 

efficiency is technologically feasible; 

and 

(4) Application of a labeling rule 

under 42 U.S.C. 6294 is unlikely to be 

sufficient to induce manufacturers to 

produce, and consumers and other 

persons to purchase, covered products 

of such type (or class) that achieve the 

maximum energy efficiency that is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(1)). 

If DOE issues a final determination 

that computer systems are a covered 

product, DOE will consider test 

procedures and energy conservation 

standards for them. DOE will determine 

if computer systems satisfy the 

provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(1) during 

the course of any energy conservation 

standards rulemaking. 

III. Discussion 

In the July 2013 Notice, DOE 

tentatively determined that computers 

qualify as a covered product. DOE 

further proposed that a definition for 

computers be added to the Code of 

Federal Regulations to clarify coverage 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11346 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

of any potential test procedure or energy 

conservation standard. Accordingly, 

DOE proposed the following definition 

of computers and sought comment from 

interested parties: 

A consumer product which performs 

logical operations and processes data. A 

computer is composed of, at a 

minimum: (a) A central processing unit 

(CPU) to perform operations, or the 

ability to function as a client gateway to 

a server which acts as a computational 

CPU; (b) user input devices such as a 

keyboard, mouse, or touchpad; and (c) 

an integrated display screen and/or the 

ability to support an external display 

screen to output information. 78 FR 

41874. 

DOE also proposed a notice to 

tentatively cover computer servers 

(servers) as a covered product. 78 FR 

41868 (July 12, 2013). In that notice, 

DOE proposed that servers be defined 

as: 

A computer that provides services 

and manages networked resources for 

client devices (e.g., desktop computers, 

notebook computers, thin clients, 

wireless devices, PDAs, IP telephones, 

other computer servers, or other 

network devices). A computer server is 

primarily accessed via network 

connections, versus directly connected 

user input devices such as a keyboard 

or mouse. 78 FR 41870. 

By separate action published 

elsewhere in today’s Federal Register, 

DOE is withdrawing its proposed rule to 

determine servers as a covered product. 

Upon further consideration, DOE 

believes that computers and servers 

share numerous technical and physical 

characteristics which would make it 

more appropriate to cover them together 

as a single covered product. Because 

battery backup functions are closely tied 

to computers and servers, DOE believes 

that backup batteries such as 

uninterruptible power supplies (UPSs), 

which provide emergency power in case 

of failure, should also be included in the 

covered product to which this notice 

relates. Thus, DOE is proposing that the 

name of the covered product in this 

notice be changed to ‘‘computer and 

battery backup systems’’ and be defined 

as: 

A consumer product whose primary 

function is to perform logical operations 

and process data, or equipment whose 

primary function is to maintain 

continuity of load power for such 

products in case of input power failure. 

While DOE recognizes that this 

revised definition further broadens the 

scope of the covered product that this 

notice relates, DOE believes that is 

necessary given the increasingly 

networked environment in which these 

products operate. For example, the 

increased use of tablets, smart phones 

and cloud services has shifted energy 

use from personal computers like 

desktop and notebook computers to 

servers (e.g. more disc storage in servers, 

less disc storage in desktop computers). 

Consumers commonly use battery 

backups for their computers to allow 

users to save all data in the event of 

power loss. Some servers integrate these 

backup batteries within the server itself, 

and notebook computers contain their 

own battery systems to run when either 

not connected to mains power or in the 

event of a power loss. This revised 

definition would allow DOE to account 

for shifts in energy use between 

products, and also help to ensure that 

the covered product remains relevant as 

technology trends in computer systems 

advance. Based on DOE’s revised 

definition for computer systems, DOE 

would consider consumer products, 

such as computers, servers, and UPSs, 

to be within the scope of coverage. 

While all of these consumer products 

are related, DOE recognizes that 

different test methods and efficiency 

metrics would be necessary to measure 

the energy consumption and energy 

efficiency of such products. As such, 

DOE is considering dividing computer 

systems into separate product classes 

based on the type of energy used, the 

capacity, and any other performancerelated feature that justifies different 

standard levels, such as features 

affecting consumer utility. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(q)) DOE will propose specific 

definitions for product classes as part of 

the efficiency standards rulemaking. As 

suggested by the Information 

Technology Industry Council (ITI), DOE 

will look to harmonize the definitions of 

each potential product class with 

already established industry terms and 

definitions (ITI, No. 0035 at p.1). 

DOE notes that the scope for the test 

procedure and standards rulemakings 

that DOE initiates may not cover all 

products that would otherwise meet the 

definition of computer systems. DOE 

further clarifies that the proposed 

definition of computer systems only 

covers those products whose primary 

function is to perform logical operations 

and process data, or whose primary 

function is to maintain continuity of 

load power in case of input power 

failure. 

DOE received comment from Cisco 

Systems, Inc. (Cisco), ITI, the Consumer 

Electronics Association (CEA), and 

Telecommunications Industry 

Association (TIA) on DOE’s proposed 

definition of ‘‘server’’ in its July 12, 

2013 proposed rule to determine servers 

as a covered product (78 FR 41868). 

Specifically, these parties commented 

that the proposal improperly attempts to 

combine a variety of consumer 

products, which DOE has authority to 

regulate, with entirely dissimilar 

commercial products that DOE does not 

currently have the authority to regulate. 

(EERE–2013–BT–DET–0034, Cisco, No. 

0017 at p. 3) (EERE–2013–BT–DET– 

0034, ITI, No. 0018 at p. 1) (EERE–2013– 

BT–DET–0034, CEA, No. 0015 at p. 3) 

(EERE–2013–BT–DET–0034, TIA, No. 

0019 at p. 2) In light of these comments, 

DOE clarifies that the proposed scope of 

coverage for this rulemaking relates only 

to consumer products. Thus, this rule 

applies to those computer systems that 

are of a type which, to any significant 

extent, are distributed into commerce 

for personal use or consumption. See 42 

U.S.C. 6291(1). These consumer 

products can be distinguished from 

commercial/industrial equipment, 

which are of a type not sold for 

consumer use. See 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(A). 

DOE is seeking assistance from 

interested parties in identifying those 

computer systems that are of a type that 

make them a consumer product as 

distinguished from those that are 

objectively commercial. 

IV. Evaluation of Computer and Battery 

Backup Systems as a Covered Product 

Subject to Energy Conservation 

Standards 

The following sections describe DOE’s 

evaluation of whether computer systems 

fulfill the criteria for being added as a 

covered product pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

6292(b)(1). As stated previously, DOE 

may classify a consumer product as a 

covered product if (1) classifying 

products of such type as covered 

products is necessary and appropriate to 

carry out the purposes of EPCA; and (2) 

the average annual per-household 

energy use by products of such type is 

likely to exceed 100 kWh (or its Btu 

equivalent) per year. 

A. Coverage Necessary or Appropriate 

to Carry Out Purposes of EPCA 

Coverage of computer systems is 

necessary or appropriate to carry out the 

purposes of EPCA, which include: (1) 

To conserve energy supplies through 

energy conservation programs, and, 

where necessary, the regulation of 

certain energy uses; and (2) to provide 

for improved energy efficiency of motor 

vehicles, major appliances, and certain 

other consumer products. (42 U.S.C. 

6201) The aggregate energy use of 

computer systems is significant. For 

example, recent estimates of national 

electricity usage for computers alone are 

30.3 billion kWh in the residential 

sector, and 31.3 billion kWh in the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 11347 

2Urban, B. et al., 2011. Energy Consumption of 

Consumer Electronics in U.S. Homes in 2010. 

Prepared by the Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable 

Energy Systems for the Consumer Electronics 

Association; Zogg, R. et al., 2009. Energy Savings 

Potential and RD&D Opportunities for Commercial 

Building Appliances. Prepared by Navigant 

Consulting, Inc. for DOE. 

3 Koomey, J.G. 2011. Growth in Data Center 

Electricity Use 2005 to 2010. Analytics Press. 

4Zogg, R. et al., 2009. Energy Savings Potential 

and RD&D Opportunities for Commercial Building 

Appliances. Prepared by Navigant Consulting, Inc. 

for DOE; Roth, K.W. et al. 2007. Residential 

Miscellaneous Electric Loads: Energy Consumption 

Characterization and Savings Potential. Prepared 

by TIAX LLC for DOE. 

5Consumer Electronics Association, 2013. 15th 

Annual CE Ownership and Market Potential Study; 

Urban, B. et al., 2011. Energy Consumption of 

Consumer Electronics in U.S. Homes in 2010. 

Prepared by the Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable 

Energy Systems for the Consumer Electronics 

Association; Roth, K.W. et al. 2007. Residential 

Miscellaneous Electric Loads: Energy Consumption 

Characterization and Savings Potential. Prepared 

by TIAX LLC for DOE. 

6Urban, B. et al., 2011. Energy Consumption of 

Consumer Electronics in U.S. Homes in 2010. 

Prepared by the Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable 

Energy Systems for the Consumer Electronics 

Association; Zogg, R. et al., 2009. Energy Savings 

Potential and RD&D Opportunities for Commercial 

Building Appliances. Prepared by Navigant 

Consulting, Inc. for DOE. 

7Consumer Electronics Association, 2013. 15th 

Annual CE Ownership and Market Potential Study. 

8 Koomey, J.G. 2011. Growth in Data Center 

Electricity Use 2005 to 2010. Analytics Press; 

Koomey, J.G. 2008. Worldwide Electricity Used in 

Data Centers. Environmental Research Letters, 3; 

Zogg, R. et al. 2009. Energy Savings Potential and 

RD&D Opportunities for Commercial Building 

Appliances. Prepared by Navigant Consulting, Inc. 

for DOE; Masanet, E.R. et al. 2011. Estimating the 

Energy Use and Efficiency Potential of U.S. Data 

Centers. Proceedings of the IEEE 99 (8), 1440–1453. 

9ENERGY STAR Uninterruptible Power Supplies 

Qualified Products List, posted October 30, 2013 

(accessed October 31, 2013). http://

downloads.energystar.gov/bi/qplist/

Uninterruptible_Power_Supplies_Product_List.xls. 

commercial sector.2 For servers, total 

national electricity usage is estimated to 

be 26.5 billion kWh as a lower bound.3

The national energy use of UPSs is 

estimated to be at least 6.9 billion kWh.4

The penetration of computer systems in 

the residential sector is high, with 63% 

of U.S. households owning a desktop 

computer, 65% of U.S. households 

owning a notebook, laptop, or netbook 

computer, and an installed base of 8.6 

million UPSs in U.S. households.5

Coverage of computer systems will 

enable the conservation of energy 

supplies through both labeling programs 

and the regulation of computer systems 

energy efficiency. There is significant 

variation in the annual energy 

consumption of different models 

currently available for computers, 

servers, and UPSs. Therefore, 

technologies exist to reduce the energy 

consumption of computer systems. 

B. Average Household Energy Use 

DOE calculated average household 

energy use for computer systems, in 

households that use the product, based 

on data from published literature and 

under the assumption that computer 

systems contain at least one computer or 

server, and possibly a UPS as well. The 

average annual energy use for a desktop 

computer was estimated to be 220 kWh/ 

yr, and the average annual energy use 

for a portable computer was estimated 

to be 62 kWh/yr, resulting in a weighted 

average of 130 kWh/yr per computer.6

In addition, there are an estimated 1.4 

desktop computers and 1.9 portable 

computers per household that owns 

these devices in the U.S.,7 thus the total 

average household energy consumption 

of computers is likely higher than these 

estimations. The estimated annual 

energy consumption of individual 

servers ranges from approximately 

1900–2100 kWh/yr for mass-produced 

volume servers.8 Under the assumption 

that households that use servers would 

have at most one of these types of 

servers, DOE estimated the average 

annual household energy use for 

households that use servers to be at least 

1900 kWh/yr. The average annual perunit energy use of ENERGY STARqualified UPSs is approximately 190 

kWh/yr (including only standby and 

line-interactive UPSs, and assuming an 

average load of 0.7 of rated output 

power).9 Therefore, DOE tentatively 

determines that the average annual perhousehold energy use for computer 

systems is likely to exceed 100 kWh/yr, 

satisfying the provisions of 42 U.S.C. 

6292(b)(1). 

Based on the above, DOE has 

determined tentatively that computer 

systems qualify as a covered product 

under Part A of Title III of the EPCA, as 

amended. 

V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

DOE has reviewed its proposed 

determination of computer systems 

under the following Executive orders 

and Acts. 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that coverage 

determination rulemakings do not 

constitute ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993). 

Accordingly, this proposed action was 

not subject to review under the 

Executive Order by the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) in OMB. 

B. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996) requires 

preparation of an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis for any rule that, by 

law, must be proposed for public 

comment, unless the agency certifies 

that the proposed rule, if promulgated, 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis 

examines the impact of the rule on 

small entities and considers alternative 

ways of reducing negative effects. Also, 

as required by E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities in 

Agency Rulemaking’’ 67 FR 53461 

(August 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003 to ensure that the potential impact 

of its rules on small entities are properly 

considered during the DOE rulemaking 

process. 68 FR 7990 (February 19, 2003). 

DOE makes its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of the General 

Counsel’s Web site at www.gc.doe.gov./ 

gc/office-general-counsel. 

DOE reviewed today’s proposed 

determination under the provisions of 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the 

policies and procedures published on 

February 19, 2003. If adopted, today’s 

proposed determination would set no 

standards; it would only positively 

determine that future standards may be 

warranted and should be explored in an 

energy conservation standards and test 

procedure rulemaking. Economic 

impacts on small entities would be 

considered in the context of such 

rulemakings. On the basis of the 

foregoing, DOE certifies that the 

proposed determination, if adopted, 

would have no significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis 

for this proposed determination. DOE 

will transmit this certification and 

supporting statement of factual basis to 

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration for 

review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

This proposed determination, which 

proposes to determine that computer 

systems meet the criteria for a covered 

product for which the Secretary may 

prescribe an energy conservation 

standard pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) 

and (p), will impose no new information 

or record-keeping requirements. 

Accordingly, OMB clearance is not 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11348 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

required under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act. (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

In this notice, DOE proposes to 

positively determine that future 

standards may be warranted and that 

environmental impacts should be 

explored in an energy conservation 

standards rulemaking. DOE has 

determined that review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (NEPA), Public Law 91–190, 

codified at 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. is not 

required at this time. NEPA review can 

only be initiated ‘‘as soon as 

environmental impacts can be 

meaningfully evaluated’’ (10 CFR 

1021.213(b)). This proposed 

determination would only determine 

that future standards may be warranted, 

but would not itself propose to set any 

specific standard. DOE has, therefore, 

determined that there are no 

environmental impacts to be evaluated 

at this time. Accordingly, neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, 

‘‘Federalism’’ 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 

1999), imposes certain requirements on 

agencies formulating and implementing 

policies or regulations that preempt 

State law or that have Federalism 

implications. The Executive Order 

requires agencies to examine the 

constitutional and statutory authority 

supporting any action that would limit 

the policymaking discretion of the 

States and to assess carefully the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive Order also requires agencies 

to have an accountable process to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in developing 

regulatory policies that have Federalism 

implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE 

published a statement of policy 

describing the intergovernmental 

consultation process that it will follow 

in developing such regulations. 65 FR 

13735 (March 14, 2000). DOE has 

examined today’s proposed 

determination and concludes that it 

would not preempt State law or have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the Federal 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. EPCA governs and 

prescribes Federal preemption of State 

regulations as to energy conservation for 

the product that is the subject of today’s 

proposed determination. States can 

petition DOE for exemption from such 

preemption to the extent permitted, and 

based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 

U.S.C. 6297) No further action is 

required by E.O. 13132. 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

With respect to the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 

12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ 61 FR 

4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on 

Federal agencies the duty to: (1) 

Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; 

(2) write regulations to minimize 

litigation; (3) provide a clear legal 

standard for affected conduct rather 

than a general standard; and (4) promote 

simplification and burden reduction. 

Section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically 

requires that Executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation specifies the following: (1) 

The preemptive effect, if any; (2) any 

effect on existing Federal law or 

regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct while promoting 

simplification and burden reduction; (4) 

the retroactive effect, if any; (5) 

definitions of key terms; and (6) other 

important issues affecting clarity and 

general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 

requires Executive agencies to review 

regulations in light of applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b) to 

determine whether these standards are 

met, or whether it is unreasonable to 

meet one or more of them. DOE 

completed the required review and 

determined that, to the extent permitted 

by law, this proposed determination 

meets the relevant standards of E.O. 

12988. 

G. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 

104–4, codified at 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

requires each Federal agency to assess 

the effects of Federal regulatory actions 

on State, local, and tribal governments 

and the private sector. For regulatory 

actions likely to result in a rule that may 

cause expenditures by State, local, and 

Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector of $100 million or 

more in any 1 year (adjusted annually 

for inflation), section 202 of UMRA 

requires a Federal agency to publish a 

written statement that estimates the 

resulting costs, benefits, and other 

effects on the national economy. (2 

U.S.C. 1532(a) and (b)) UMRA requires 

a Federal agency to develop an effective 

process to permit timely input by 

elected officers of State, local, and tribal 

governments on a proposed ‘‘significant 

intergovernmental mandate.’’ UMRA 

also requires an agency plan for giving 

notice and opportunity for timely input 

to small governments that may be 

potentially affected before establishing 

any requirement that might significantly 

or uniquely affect them. On March 18, 

1997, DOE published a statement of 

policy on its process for 

intergovernmental consultation under 

UMRA. 62 FR 12820 (March 18, 1997). 

(This policy also is available at 

www.gc.doe.gov). DOE reviewed today’s 

proposed determination pursuant to 

these existing authorities and its policy 

statement and determined that the 

proposed determination contains 

neither an intergovernmental mandate 

nor a mandate that may result in the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any year, so the UMRA requirements do 

not apply. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act of 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

proposed determination would not have 

any impact on the autonomy or integrity 

of the family as an institution. 

Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it 

is not necessary to prepare a Family 

Policymaking Assessment. 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

Pursuant to E.O. 12630, 

‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference 

with Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 (March 15, 1988), 

DOE determined that this proposed 

determination would not result in any 

takings that might require compensation 

under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 

Constitution. 

J. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act of 2001 

The Treasury and General 

Government Appropriation Act of 2001 

(44 U.S.C. 3516, note) requires agencies 

to review most disseminations of 

information they make to the public 

under guidelines established by each 

agency pursuant to general guidelines 

issued by OMB. The OMB’s guidelines 

were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 

22, 2002), and DOE’s guidelines were 

published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 

2002). DOE has reviewed today’s 

proposed determination under the OMB 

and DOE guidelines and has concluded 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 11349 

that it is consistent with applicable 

policies in those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

E.O. 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 

FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires 

Federal agencies to prepare and submit 

to OMB a Statement of Energy Effects 

for any proposed significant energy 

action. A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is 

defined as any action by an agency that 

promulgates a final rule or is expected 

to lead to promulgation of a final rule, 

and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory 

action under E.O. 12866, or any 

successor order; and (2) is likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy; or 

(3) is designated by the Administrator of 

OIRA as a significant energy action. For 

any proposed significant energy action, 

the agency must give a detailed 

statement of any adverse effects on 

energy supply, distribution, or use if the 

proposal is implemented, and of 

reasonable alternatives to the proposed 

action and their expected benefits on 

energy supply, distribution, and use. 

DOE has concluded that today’s 

regulatory action proposing to 

determine that computer systems meet 

the criteria for a covered product for 

which the Secretary may prescribe an 

energy conservation standard pursuant 

to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p) would not 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

This action is also not a significant 

regulatory action for purposes of E.O. 

12866, and the OIRA Administrator has 

not designated this proposed 

determination as a significant energy 

action under E.O. 12866 or any 

successor order. Therefore, this 

proposed determination is not a 

significant energy action. Accordingly, 

DOE has not prepared a Statement of 

Energy Effects for this proposed 

determination. 

L. Review Under the Information 

Quality Bulletin for Peer Review 

On December 16, 2004, OMB, in 

consultation with the Office of Science 

and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued 

its Final Information Quality Bulletin 

for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR 

2664 (January 14, 2005). The Bulletin 

establishes that certain scientific 

information shall be peer reviewed by 

qualified specialists before it is 

disseminated by the Federal 

government, including influential 

scientific information related to agency 

regulatory actions. The purpose of the 

Bulletin is to enhance the quality and 

credibility of the Government’s 

scientific information. DOE has 

determined that the analyses conducted 

for this rulemaking do not constitute 

‘‘influential scientific information,’’ 

which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific 

information the agency reasonably can 

determine will have or does have a clear 

and substantial impact on important 

public policies or private sector 

decisions.’’ 70 FR 2667 (January 14, 

2005). The analyses were subject to predissemination review prior to issuance 

of this rulemaking. 

DOE will determine the appropriate 

level of review that would be applicable 

to any future rulemaking to establish 

energy conservation standards for 

computer systems. 

VI. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this notice of 

proposed determination no later than 

the date provided at the beginning of 

this notice. After the close of the 

comment period, DOE will review the 

comments received and determine 

whether computer systems are a covered 

product under EPCA. 

Comments, data, and information 

submitted to DOE’s email address for 

this proposed determination should be 

provided in WordPerfect, Microsoft 

Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format. 

Submissions should avoid the use of 

special characters or any form of 

encryption, and wherever possible 

comments should include the electronic 

signature of the author. No 

telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. 

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 two copies: one copy of 

the document should have all the 

information believed to be confidential 

deleted. DOE will make its own 

determination as to the confidential 

status of the information and treat it 

according to its determination. 

Factors of interest to DOE when 

evaluating requests to treat submitted 

information as confidential include (1) 

A description of the items; (2) whether 

and why such items are customarily 

treated as confidential within the 

industry; (3) whether the information is 

generally known or available from 

public sources; (4) whether the 

information has previously been made 

available to others without obligations 

concerning its confidentiality; (5) an 

explanation of the competitive injury to 

the submitting persons which would 

result from public disclosure; (6) a date 

after which such information might no 

longer be considered confidential; and 

(7) why disclosure of the information 

would be contrary to the public interest. 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks 

Comments 

DOE welcomes comments on all 

aspects of this proposed determination. 

DOE is particularly interested in 

receiving comments from interested 

parties on the following issues related to 

the proposed determination for 

computer systems: 

• Definition of computer and battery 

backup systems; 

• Whether classifying computer 

systems as a covered product is 

necessary or appropriate to carry out the 

purposes of EPCA; 

• Scope of this proposed 

determination; 

• Identifying those computer systems 

that are of a type that make them a 

consumer product as distinguished from 

those computer systems that are 

objectively commercial; 

• Calculations and values for average 

household energy consumption; and 

• Availability or lack of availability of 

technologies for improving energy 

efficiency of computer systems. 

The Department is interested in 

receiving views concerning other 

relevant issues that participants believe 

would affect DOE’s ability to establish 

test procedures and energy conservation 

standards for computer systems. The 

Department invites all interested parties 

to submit in writing by March 31, 2014, 

comments and information on matters 

addressed in this notice and on other 

matters relevant to consideration of a 

determination for computer systems. 

After the expiration of the period for 

submitting written statements, the 

Department will consider all comments 

and additional information that is 

obtained from interested parties or 

through further analyses, and it will 

prepare a final determination. If DOE 

determines that computer systems 

qualify as a covered product, DOE will 

consider a test procedure and energy 

conservation standards for computer 

systems. Members of the public will be 

given an opportunity to submit written 

and oral comments on any proposed test 

procedure and standards. 

VII. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this revised proposed 

determination. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11350 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. code, Part B was re-designated Part A. 

Household appliances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Small 

businesses. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 21, 

2014. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04423 Filed 2–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–DET–0034] 

RIN 1904–AD03 

Energy Conservation Program: 

Proposed Determination of Computer 

Servers as a Covered Consumer 

Product 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Proposed determination; 

withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) withdraws for further 

consideration a proposed determination 

that computer servers (servers) qualify 

as a covered product under Part A of 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended. 

DATES: The proposed determination is 

withdrawn February 28, 2014. 

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: 

DOE_computer_standards@

EE.Doe.Gov. 

Ms. Celia Sher, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–6122. Email: 

Celia.Sher@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Authority 

Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291, et 

seq.) sets forth a variety of provisions 

designed to improve energy efficiency. 

Part A of Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6309) established the ‘‘Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles,’’ 

which covers consumer products and 

certain commercial products (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘covered products’’).1 In 

addition to specifying a list of covered 

residential and commercial products, 

EPCA contains provisions that enable 

the Secretary of Energy to classify 

additional types of consumer products 

as covered products. (42 U.S.C. 

6292(a)(20)) DOE may prescribe test 

procedures for any product it classifies 

as a ‘‘covered product.’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6293(b)) 

II. Discussion 

On July 12, 2013, DOE published a 

notice of proposed determination 

(Notice) that tentatively determined that 

servers qualify as a covered product. 78 

FR 41868. In light of public comments 

received from interested parties 

addressing the nature and use of servers, 

DOE is withdrawing the Notice. DOE’s 

current approach with regard to the 

coverage of servers can be found in its 

updated coverage proposal for 

computers, published elsewhere in 

today’s Federal Register. 

III. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this withdrawal. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Household appliances, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Small 

businesses. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 21, 

2014. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04422 Filed 2–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD 

12 CFR Parts 914 and 917 

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE 

AGENCY 

12 CFR Parts 1236 and 1239 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

Office of Federal Housing Enterprise 

Oversight 

12 CFR Parts 1710 and 1720 

RIN 2590–AA59 

Responsibilities of Boards of 

Directors, Corporate Practices and 

Corporate Governance Matters 

AGENCIES: Federal Housing Finance 

Board; Federal Housing Finance 

Agency; Office of Federal Housing 

Enterprise Oversight, HUD. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: On January 28, 2014, the 

Federal Housing Finance Agency 

(FHFA) published in the Federal 

Register a notice of proposed 

rulemaking for public comment 

proposing to amend its regulations by 

relocating, consolidating, and modifying 

as necessary, certain Federal Housing 

Finance Board and Office of Federal 

Housing Enterprise Oversight 

regulations that pertain to the 

responsibilities of boards of directors, 

corporate practices, and corporate 

governance matters. The proposed rule 

would also amend a definition within 

FHFA’s Prudential Management and 

Operations Standards regulations and 

the introductory language to the 

standards themselves. The comment 

period for the proposed rule is set to 

expire on March 31, 2014 April 29, 

2014. This document extends the 

comment period by an additional 45 

days, through and including May 15, 

2014, to allow the public additional 

time to comment on the proposed rule. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published January 28, 

2014, at 79 FR 4414, is extended. 

Written comments must be received on 

or before May 15, 2014. For additional 

information, see the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit your 

comments, identified by regulatory 

information number (RIN) 2590–AA59, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov: Follow the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS