4 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

Individuals with hearing or speech 

impairments may access the telephone 

number above by TTY by calling the 

toll-free Federal Information Relay 

Service at (800) 877–8339. 

List of Subjects 

20 CFR Part 655 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Labor certification processes 

for temporary employment. 

29 CFR Part 18 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Labor. 

29 CFR Part 503 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Obligations, Enforcement, 

Immigration and Nationality Act, 

Temporary alien non-agricultural 

workers. 

For the reasons discussed in the joint 

preamble, part 655 of title 20 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations and parts 

18 and 503 of title 29 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations are amended as 

follows: 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Title 20: Employees’ Benefits 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

PART 655—TEMPORARY 

EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN 

WORKERS IN THE UNITED STATES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 655 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Section 655.0 issued under 8 

U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(E)(iii), 1101(a)(15)(H)(i) 

and (ii), 8 U.S.C. 1103(a)(6), 1182(m), (n), (p), 

and (t), 1184(c), (g), and (j), 1188, and 1288(c) 

and (d); sec. 3(c)(1), Pub. L. 101–238, 103 

Stat. 2099, 2102 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note); sec. 

221(a), Pub. L. 101–649, 104 Stat. 4978, 5027 

(8 U.S.C. 1184 note); sec. 303(a)(8), Pub. L. 

102–232, 105 Stat. 1733, 1748 (8 U.S.C. 1101 

note); sec. 323(c), Pub. L. 103–206, 107 Stat. 

2428; sec. 412(e), Pub. L. 105–277, 112 Stat. 

2681 (8 U.S.C. 1182 note); sec. 2(d), Pub. L. 

106–95, 113 Stat. 1312, 1316 (8 U.S.C. 1182 

note); 29 U.S.C. 49k; Pub. L. 107–296, 116 

Stat. 2135, as amended; Pub. L. 109–423, 120 

Stat. 2900; 8 CFR 214.2(h)(4)(i); 8 CFR 

214.2(h)(6)(iii); and sec. 6, Pub. L. 115–218, 

132 Stat. 1547 (48 U.S.C. 1806). 

Subpart A issued under 8 CFR 214.2(h). 

Subpart B issued under 8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a), 1184(c), and 1188; and 8 

CFR 214.2(h). 

Subpart E issued under 48 U.S.C. 1806. 

Subparts F and G issued under 8 U.S.C. 

1288(c) and (d); sec. 323(c), Pub. L. 103–206, 

107 Stat. 2428; and 28 U.S.C. 2461 note, Pub. 

L. 114–74 at section 701. 

Subparts H and I issued under 8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) and (b)(1), 1182(n), (p), 

and (t), and 1184(g) and (j); sec. 303(a)(8), 

Pub. L. 102–232, 105 Stat. 1733, 1748 (8 

U.S.C. 1101 note); sec. 412(e), Pub. L. 105– 

277, 112 Stat. 2681; 8 CFR 214.2(h); and 28 

U.S.C. 2461 note, Pub. L. 114–74 at section 

701. 

Subparts L and M issued under 8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(c) and 1182(m); sec. 2(d), 

Pub. L. 106–95, 113 Stat. 1312, 1316 (8 U.S.C. 

1182 note); Pub. L. 109–423, 120 Stat. 2900; 

and 8 CFR 214.2(h). 

■ 2. In § 655.61, revise paragraph (e) to 

read as follows: 

§ 655.61 Administrative review. 

* * * * * 

(e) Review. The BALCA must review 

the CO’s determination only on the 

basis of the Appeal File, the request for 

review, and any legal briefs submitted 

and must, except in cases over which 

the Secretary has assumed jurisdiction 

pursuant to 29 CFR 18.95: 

(1) Affirm the CO’s determination; or 

(2) Reverse or modify the CO’s 

determination; or 

(3) Remand to the CO for further 

action. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 655.72, revise paragraph (b)(3) 

to read as follows: 

§ 655.72 Revocation. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Appeal. An employer may appeal 

a Notice of Revocation, or a final 

determination of the Administrator, 

OFLC after the review of rebuttal 

evidence, according to the appeal 

procedures of § 655.61. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 655.73, revise paragraph (g)(6) 

to read as follows: 

§ 655.73 Debarment. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(6) ARB decision. The ARB’s decision 

must be issued within 90 calendar days 

from the notice granting the petition and 

served upon all parties and the ALJ. 

* * * * * 

Title 29: Labor 

Office of the Secretary of Labor 

PART 18—RULES OF PRACTICE AND 

PROCEDURE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE 

HEARINGS BEFORE THE OFFICE OF 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 18 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 5 U.S.C. 551–553; 

5 U.S.C. 571 note; E.O. 12778; 57 FR 7292. 

■ 6. In § 18.95, revise paragraph (b)(1) to 

read as follows: 

§ 18.95 Review of decision and review by 

the Secretary. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) In any case for which 

administrative review is sought or 

handled in accordance with 20 CFR 

655.61, 655.171(a), or 655.461, at any 

point from when the BALCA receives a 

request for review until the passage of 

10 business days after the date on which 

BALCA has issued its decision. 

* * * * * 

Title 29: Labor 

Wage and Hour Division 

PART 503—ENFORCEMENT OF 

OBLIGATIONS FOR TEMPORARY 

NONIMMIGRANT NONAGRICULTURAL WORKERS 

DESCRIBED IN THE IMMIGRATION 

AND NATIONALITY ACT 

■ 7. The authority citation for part 503 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(b); 8 

U.S.C. 1184; 8 CFR 214.2(h); 28 U.S.C. 2461 

note (Federal Civil Penalties Inflation 

Adjustment Act of 1990); Pub. L. 114–74 at 

§ 701. 

■ 8. Revise § 503.55 to read as follows: 

§ 503.55 Decision of the Administrative 

Review Board. 

The ARB’s decision will be issued 

within 90 days from the notice granting 

the petition and served upon all parties 

and the ALJ. 

Eugene Scalia, 

Secretary of Labor. 

Chad R. Mizelle, 

Senior Official Performing the Duties of the 

General Counsel, U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 2020–28951 Filed 12–30–20; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4510–HL–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 431 

[EERE–2017–BT–TP–0047] 

RIN 1904–AE18 

Energy Conservation Program: Test 

Procedures for Small Electric Motors 

and Electric Motors 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this final rule, the 

Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) is further 

harmonizing its test procedures with 

industry practice by updating a 

currently incorporated testing standard 

to reference that standard’s latest 

version, incorporating a new industry 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 5 

1EPCA authorized DOE to prescribe test 

procedures and energy conservation standards for 

small electric motors pending a determination of 

feasibility and justification (42 U.S.C. 6317(b)), 

completed on July 10, 2006. 71 FR 38799. DOE is 

obligated to review (and amend as needed) its test 

procedures and standards under 42 U.S.C. 6314(a) 

and 6316(a). 

testing standard that manufacturers 

would be permitted to use in addition 

to those industry standards currently 

incorporated by reference, and 

harmonizing certain test conditions 

with current industry standards to 

improve the comparability of test results 

for small electric motors. None of these 

changes would affect the measured 

average full-load efficiency of small 

electric motors or the measured nominal 

full-load efficiency of electric motors 

when compared to the current test 

procedures. 

DATES: The effective date of this rule is 

February 3, 2021. The final rule changes 

will be mandatory for product testing 

starting July 6, 2021. The incorporation 

by reference of certain publications 

listed in the rule is approved by the 

Director of the Federal Register on 

February 3, 2021. The incorporation by 

reference of certain other publications 

listed in this rulemaking was approved 

by the Director of the Federal Register 

on June 4, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The docket, which includes 

Federal Register notices, public meeting 

attendee lists and transcripts, 

comments, and other supporting 

documents/materials, is available for 

review at http://www.regulations.gov. 

All documents in the docket are listed 

in the http://www.regulations.gov index. 

However, some documents listed in the 

index, such as those containing 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure, may not be publicly 

available. 

A link to the docket web page can be 

found at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

docket?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047. The 

docket web page contains instructions 

on how to access all documents, 

including public comments, in the 

docket. 

For further information on how to 

review the docket contact the Appliance 

and Equipment Standards Program staff 

at (202) 287–1445 or by email: 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mr. Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586– 

9870. Email: 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email: 

Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE 

maintains or updates previously 

approved incorporations by reference 

and newly incorporates by reference the 

following industry standards into 10 

CFR part 431: 

Canadian Standards Association (‘‘CSA’’) 

C390–10, ‘‘Test methods, marking 

requirements, and energy efficiency 

levels for three-phase induction motors,’’ 

March 2010. 

CSA C747–09, ‘‘Energy efficiency test 

methods for small motors,’’ October 

2009. 

Copies of CSA C390–10 and CSA C747–09 

can be obtained from Canadian Standards 

Association, Sales Department, 5060 

Spectrum Way, Suite 100, Mississauga, 

Ontario, L4W 5N6, Canada, 1–800–463–6727, 

or by visiting http://www.shopcsa.ca/ 

onlinestore/welcome.asp. 

Institute of Electrical and Electronics 

Engineers (‘‘IEEE’’) 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE 

Standard Test Procedure for Polyphase 

Induction Motors and Generators,’’ 

approved December 6, 2017. 

IEEE 114–2010, ‘‘Test Procedure for SinglePhase Induction Motors,’’ approved 

September 30, 2010. 

Copies of IEEE 112–2017 and IEEE 114– 

2010 can be obtained from Institute of 

Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 

Hoes Lane, P.O. Box 1331, Piscataway, NJ 

08855–1331, (732) 981–0060, or by visiting 

http://www.ieee.org. 

International Electrotechnical Commission 

(‘‘IEC’’) 60034–1:2010, Edition 12.0 

2010–02, ‘‘Rotating electric machines— 

Part 1: Rating and performance.’’ 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014, Edition 2.0 2014–06, 

‘‘Rotating electrical machines—Part 2–1: 

Standard methods for determining losses 

and their efficiency from tests (excluding 

machines for traction vehicles).’’ 

IEC 60051–1:2016, Edition 6.0 2016–02, 

‘‘Direct acting indicating analogue 

electrical measuring instruments and 

their accessories—Part 1: Definitions and 

general requirements common to all 

parts.’’ 

Copies of IEC 60034–2–1:2014, IEC 60034– 

1:2010, and IEC 60051–1:2016 may be 

purchased from International 

Electrotechnical Commission, 3 rue de 

Varembe ́, 1st Floor, P.O. Box 131, CH—1211 

Geneva 20—Switzerland, +41 22 919 02 11, 

or by visiting https://webstore.iec.ch/home. 

National Electrical Manufacturers 

Association (‘‘NEMA’’) MG 1–2016, 

‘‘American National Standard for Motors 

and Generators (‘‘NEMA MG 1–2016’’), 

ANSI approved June 1, 2018. 

Copies of NEMA MG 1–2016 may be 

purchases from National Electrical 

Manufacturers Association, 1300 North 17th 

Street, Suite 900, Arlington, Virginia 22209, 

+1 703 841 3200, or by visiting https://

www.nema.org. 

For a further discussion of these 

standards, see section IV.O. 

Table of Contents 

I. Authority and Background 

A. Authority 

B. Background 

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule 

III. Discussion 

A. Scope of the Test Procedures for 

Currently Regulated Small Electric 

Motors and Electric Motors 

1. Definition of ‘‘Small Electric Motor’’ 

2. Scope of the Small Electric Motor Test 

Procedure 

3. Scope of the Electric Motor Test 

Procedure 

B. Industry Standards 

1. IEEE 112–2017 

2. IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

C. Rated Output Power and Breakdown 

Torque of Small Electric Motors 

D. Rated Values Specified for Testing 

Small Electric Motors 

1. Rated Frequency 

2. Rated Load 

3. Rated Voltage 

E. Effective and Compliance Date 

F. Test Procedure Costs and Impacts 

1. Cost Impacts for Small Electric Motors 

2. Cost Impacts for Electric Motors 

3. Additional Amendments 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review Under Executive Orders 13771 

and 13777 

C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 

E. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

F. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

G. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

I. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 1999 

J. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

K. Review Under Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

L. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration Act of 1974 

N. Congressional Notification 

O. Description of Materials Incorporated by 

Reference 

IV. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Authority and Background 

The Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) is 

authorized to establish and amend 

energy conservation standards and test 

procedures for small electric motors and 

electric motors.1 (42 U.S.C. 6311(1)(A); 

42 U.S.C. 6317(b)) The current DOE test 

procedures for small electric motors 

appear at subpart X, part 431 of Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations 

(‘‘CFR’’). See 10 CFR 431.444. The 

current DOE test procedures for electric 

motors appear in appendix B to subpart 

6 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

2All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through America’s Water 

Infrastructure Act of 2018, Public Law 115–270 

(Oct. 23, 2018). 

3For editorial purposes, upon codification into 

the U.S. Code, Part C was re-designated as Part A– 

1. 

4A technical correction was published on April 

5, 2010, to correct the compliance date. 75 FR 

17036. 

B of 10 CFR part 431 (‘‘Appendix B’’). 

The following sections discuss DOE’s 

authority to amend test procedures for 

small electric motors and electric 

motors, as well as relevant background 

information regarding DOE’s 

consideration of test procedures for 

these motors. 

A. Authority 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’) 2 (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6317), among other things, 

authorizes DOE to regulate the energy 

efficiency of a number of consumer 

products and industrial equipment. 

Title III, Part C3 of EPCA, added by Title 

IV, section 441(a) of the National Energy 

Conservation Policy Act (Pub. L. 95–619 

(Nov. 9, 1978)), established the Energy 

Conservation Program for Certain 

Industrial Equipment, which set forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve the energy efficiency of certain 

industrial equipment. Later, the Energy 

Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102–486 

(October 24, 1992), further amended 

EPCA by adding, among other things, 

provisions governing the regulation of 

small electric motors. EPCA was further 

amended by the American Energy 

Manufacturing Technical Corrections 

Act, Public Law 112–210 (December 18, 

2012), which explicitly permitted DOE 

to examine the possibility of regulating 

‘‘other motors’’ in addition to those 

electric and small electric motors that 

Congress had already otherwise defined 

and required DOE to regulate. (42 U.S.C. 

6311(1)(A), 42 U.S.C. 6311(2)(B)(xiii); 42 

U.S.C. 6317(b)) 

The energy conservation program 

under EPCA consists essentially of four 

parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, (3) 

Federal energy conservation standards, 

and (4) certification and enforcement 

procedures. Relevant provisions of 

EPCA include definitions (42 U.S.C. 

6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 6314), 

labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 6315), 

energy conservation standards (42 

U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to 

require information and reports from 

manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316). EPCA 

includes specific authority for DOE to 

establish test procedures and standards 

for small electric motors. (42 U.S.C. 

6317(b)) 

Federal energy efficiency 

requirements for covered equipment 

established under EPCA generally 

supersede State laws and regulations 

concerning energy conservation testing, 

labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 

6316(a) and (b); 42 U.S.C. 6297) 

The Federal testing requirements 

consist of test procedures that 

manufacturers of covered equipment 

must use as the basis for: (1) Certifying 

to DOE that their equipment complies 

with the applicable energy conservation 

standards adopted pursuant to EPCA (42 

U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)), and 

(2) making representations about the 

efficiency of that equipment. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(d)) Similarly, DOE uses these test 

procedures to determine whether the 

equipment complies with relevant 

standards promulgated under EPCA. (42 

U.S.C. 6316(a); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) 

Under 42 U.S.C. 6314, EPCA sets forth 

criteria and procedures for prescribing 

and amending test procedures for 

covered equipment. EPCA provides in 

relevant part that any test procedures 

prescribed or amended under this 

section must be reasonably designed to 

produce test results which reflect the 

energy efficiency, energy use, or 

estimated annual operating cost of 

covered equipment during a 

representative average use cycle and 

requires that test procedures not be 

unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 

U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) 

In addition, if DOE determines that a 

test procedure amendment is warranted, 

it must publish test procedures and offer 

the public an opportunity to present 

oral and written comments on them. (42 

U.S.C. 6314(b)) 

EPCA also requires that, at least once 

every 7 years, DOE evaluate test 

procedures for each type of covered 

equipment including small electric 

motors to determine whether amended 

test procedures would more accurately 

or fully comply with the requirements 

for the test procedures to not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct and be 

reasonably designed to produce test 

results that reflect the energy efficiency, 

energy use, and estimated operating 

costs during a representative average 

use cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(1)) If the 

Secretary determines that a test 

procedure amendment is warranted, the 

Secretary must publish test procedures 

in the Federal Register and afford 

interested persons an opportunity (of 

not less than 45 days’ duration) to 

present oral and written data, views, 

and arguments on the test procedures. 

(42 U.S.C. 6314(b)) DOE is publishing 

this final rule to satisfy the 7-year 

review requirement for small electric 

motors specified in EPCA, which 

requires that DOE publish either a final 

rule amending the test procedures or a 

determination that amended test 

procedures are not required. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(1)(A)) This final rule also 

responds to petitions for rulemaking 

received from the National Electrical 

Manufacturers Association (‘‘NEMA’’) 

and Underwriters Laboratory (‘‘UL’’) 

pertaining to small electric motors and 

electric motors. (See section I.B) 

B. Background 

EPCA defines ‘‘small electric motor,’’ 

as ‘‘a NEMA general purpose alternating 

current single-speed induction motor, 

built in a two-digit frame number series 

in accordance with NEMA Standards 

Publication MG 1–1987.’’ (42 U.S.C. 

6311(13)(G)) EPCA directed DOE to 

establish a test procedure for those 

small electric motors for which DOE 

makes a determination that energy 

conservation standards would be 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified and would result 

in significant energy savings. (42 U.S.C. 

6317(b)(1)) On July 10, 2006, DOE 

published its determination that energy 

conservation standards for certain 

polyphase and certain single-phase, 

capacitor-start, induction-run, small 

electric motors are technologically 

feasible and economically justified, and 

would result in significant energy 

savings. 71 FR 38799. DOE later adopted 

test procedures for small electric 

motors. 74 FR 32059 (July 7, 2009) 

(‘‘July 2009 final rule’’). EPCA also 

required that following establishment of 

the required test procedures, DOE 

establish energy conservation standards 

for those small electric motors for which 

test procedures were prescribed. (42 

U.S.C. 6317(b)(2)) DOE complied with 

this requirement when it established 

energy conservation standards for small 

electric motors. 75 FR 10874 (March 9, 

2010) (‘‘March 2010 final rule’’).4

Subsequently, DOE published an 

update to the test procedures for small 

electric motors on May 4, 2012. 77 FR 

26608. The test procedures for small 

electric motors appear at 10 CFR 

431.444, and incorporate certain 

industry standards from the Institute of 

Electrical and Electronics Engineers 

(‘‘IEEE’’) and Canadian Standards 

Association (‘‘CSA’’), as listed in Table 

I–1. 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 7 

5The NEMA petition and work paper are 

available at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047-0028. The UL 

petition and supporting documentation are 

available at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047-0029. 

6All comments received in response to the July 

2017 TP RFI are available for review at http://

www.regulations.gov under docket number EERE– 

2017–BT–TP–0047. 

7Approved by ANSI on June 1, 2018 with 2018 

supplements. DOE is not incorporating by reference 

these supplements as part of this final rule. 

TABLE I–1—INDUSTRY STANDARDS CURRENTLY INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS

Equipment description Industry test procedure 

Single-phase small electric motors .......................................................... IEEE 114–2010, CSA C747–09. 

Polyphase small electric motors less than or equal to 1 horsepower ..... IEEE 112–2004 Test Method A, CSA C747–09. 

Polyphase small electric motors greater than 1 horsepower ................... IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B, CSA C390–10. 

More recently, DOE published a 

request for information pertaining to the 

test procedures for small electric motors 

and electric motors in July 2017. 82 FR 

35468 (July 31, 2017) (‘‘July 2017 RFI’’). 

In the July 2017 RFI, DOE solicited 

public comments, data, and information 

on all aspects of, and any issues or 

problems with, the existing DOE test 

procedure for small electric motors, 

including on any needed updates or 

revisions. DOE also discussed potential 

categories of electric motors (as defined 

at 10 CFR 431.12) that may be 

considered in future DOE test 

procedures. 82 FR 35470–35474. At the 

request of commenters, DOE extended 

the comment period for the July 2017 

RFI in a notice published on August 30, 

2017. 82 FR 41179. 

Separate from the July 2017 RFI, 

NEMA and Underwriter Laboratories 

(‘‘UL’’) independently submitted written 

petitions requesting that certain 

portions of International 

Electrotechnical Commission (‘‘IEC’’) 

60034–2–1:2014 be adopted as a 

permitted alternative test method for 

small electric motors and electric 

motors.5 DOE published a notice of 

receipt of these petitions on November 

2, 2017. 82 FR 50844 (‘‘November 2017 

notice of petition’’). 

On April 23, 2019, DOE published a 

NOPR (‘‘April 2019 NOPR’’) responding 

to the comments received to the July 

2017 RFI and proposing to further 

clarify the test procedures for small 

electric motors and incorporate an 

additional industry test method, IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 industry test standard, 

for testing small electric motors and 

electric motors.6 84 FR 17004 (April 23, 

2019). The April 2019 NOPR also 

addressed the test procedures for 

electric motors in response to the 

November 2017 notice of petition. Id. 

DOE received four comments in 

response to the April 2019 NOPR from 

the interested parties listed in Table I– 

2. 

TABLE I–2—APRIL 2019 NOPR WRITTEN COMMENTS

Organization(s) Reference in this final rule Organization type 

Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Alliance to Save Energy, California Energy 

Commission, Natural Resources Defense Council.

Efficiency Advocates .......... Efficiency Organizations. 

Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers & Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute.AHAM and AHRI ................ Trade Associations. 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Southern California Edison.CA IOUs ............................. Utilities. 

National Electrical Manufacturers Association .............................................................. NEMA ................................. Trade Association. 

II. Synopsis of the Final Rule 

In this final rule, DOE is amending 10 

CFR part 431 as follows: 

(1) Updating the referenced industry 

testing standard for measuring the 

energy efficiency of small electric 

motors and electric motors to its latest 

version, IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard 

Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction 

Motors and Generators;’’ 

(2) Incorporating by reference as an 

alternative test procedure for the 

measurement of energy efficiency in 

small electric motors and electric 

motors testing standard IEC 60034–2– 

1:2014, ‘‘Standard methods for 

determining losses and efficiency from 

tests (excluding machines for traction 

vehicles);’’ 

(3) Adding definitions for ‘‘rated 

load,’’ ‘‘rated output power,’’ and 

‘‘breakdown torque’’ of small electric 

motors based on NEMA MG 1–2016; 

and 7

(4) Specifying the frequency used for 

testing by defining ‘‘rated frequency,’’ 

and specify that manufacturers select 

the voltage used for testing by defining 

‘‘rated voltage.’’ 

Table II–1 summarizes the test 

procedure amendments compared to the 

current test procedure as well as the 

reason for each change. 

TABLE II–1—SYNOPSIS OF THE NOTICE OF TEST PROCEDURE

Current test procedure NOPR test procedure Final rule test procedure Reason 

Incorporates by reference IEEE 112– 

2004 to measure full-load efficiency 

of polyphase small electric motors.

—Proposed adding IEEE 112–2017 as 

an alternative to IEEE 112–2004. 

The IEEE 112–2017 version includes 

the following updates compared to 

IEEE 112–2004: 

(1) Updates to certain requirements regarding measurement instrument selection and accuracy. 

Replaces IEEE 112–2004 with IEEE 

112–2017 (considered equivalent).

—Achieves consistency with industry 

update to IEEE 112–2017. 

—Addresses comments in response to 

the April 2019 NOPR that including 

both the 2004 and 2017 versions of 

IEEE 112 is unnecessary because 

they are equivalent. See section 

III.B.1 for further discussion. 

8 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

8 In response to questions from NEMA and 

various motor manufacturers, DOE issued a 

guidance document that identifies some key design 

elements for consideration when determining 

whether a given individual motor meets the small 

electric motor definition and is subject to the energy 

conservation standards promulgated for small 

electric motors. See https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047-0082. 

9A notation in the form ‘‘NEMA, No. 84 at p. 2’’ 

identifies a written comment: (1) Made by NEMA; 

(2) recorded in document number 84 that is filed 

in the docket of this test procedure rulemaking 

(Docket No. EERE–2017–BT–TP–0047) and 

available for review at http://www.regulations.gov; 

and (3) which appears on page 2 of document 

number 84. 

TABLE II–1—SYNOPSIS OF THE NOTICE OF TEST PROCEDURE—Continued 

Current test procedure NOPR test procedure Final rule test procedure Reason 

(2) Alignment of core loss calculation 

with CSA 390–10 and Method 2–1– 

1B of IEC 60034–2–1:2014.

Does not incorporate by reference IEC 

60034–2–1:2014.

—Proposed adding Method 2–1–1B of 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 as an alternative to IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B, IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B 

and CSA C390–10.

Identical to the NOPR ........................... Addresses suggestions offered in industry petition (EERE–2017–BT–TP– 

0047–0030). 

—Proposed adding Method 2–1–1A of 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 as an alternative to IEEE 114–2010, IEEE 112– 

2004, IEEE 112–2017 Test Method 

A and CSA C747–09.

For Small Electric Motors: Specifies 

testing at rated load but does not define that term.

—Proposed defining ‘‘rated load’’ (and 

‘‘rated output power’’ and ‘‘breakdown torque’’ to support the definition of ‘‘rated load’’) of small electric 

motors based on NEMA MG 1–2016.

Similar to the NOPR. Clarifies that 

DOE will not require additional testing and measurement of breakdown 

torque. Also clarifies the definition of 

breakdown torque.

—Reflects industry practice and improves the representativeness of the 

test procedure. 

—Addresses comments to the April 

2019 NOPR regarding testing and 

reporting. See section III.C for further 

discussion. 

For Small Electric Motors: Specifies 

testing at rated voltage and rated frequency, but does not define those 

terms.

—Proposed defining ‘‘rated voltage,’’ 

which provides that manufacturers 

select the voltage that is used for 

testing, and ‘‘rated frequency’’.

Similar to the NOPR. Clarifies further 

that the rated voltage must be one of 

the voltages used by the manufacturer for making representation of the 

small electric motor performance.

Improves repeatability of the test procedure. 

DOE has determined that the 

amendments described in section III of 

this notice will not alter the measured 

efficiency of small electric motors or 

electric motors, and that the test 

procedures will not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. Discussion of 

DOE’s actions are addressed in detail in 

section III of this document. 

III. Discussion 

A. Scope of the Test Procedures for 

Currently Regulated Small Electric 

Motors and Electric Motors 

This final rule does not change the 

scope of the test procedure with respect 

to small electric motors and electric 

motors. The scope of the test procedure 

as applied to currently regulated motors 

is discussed in sections III.A.1 through 

III.A.3. 

1. Definition of ‘‘Small Electric Motor’’ 

EPCA defines the term ‘‘small electric 

motor’’ as ‘‘a NEMA general purpose 

alternating current single-speed 

induction motor, built in a two-digit 

frame number series in accordance with 

NEMA Standards Publication MG 1– 

1987.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6311(13)(G) In the July 

2009 final rule, DOE adopted a modified 

version of this definition at 10 CFR 

431.442 to specify that the term also 

encompasses those motors that are built 

as ‘‘IEC metric equivalent motors.’’ 74 

FR 32059, 32062; 10 CFR 431.442. This 

specification ensures that motors that 

otherwise satisfy the small electric 

motor definition but are built in 

accordance with metric-units are treated 

in a like manner as their counterparts 

that are built in accordance with U.S. 

customary units of measurement. 

The current definition at 10 CFR 

431.442 lists the criteria that must be 

met for a motor to be defined as a ‘‘small 

electric motor.’’ Under these criteria, a 

small electric motor is: 

A NEMA general purpose motor 8

that: 

• Uses alternating current, 

• Is single-speed, 

• Is an induction motor; and 

• Is built in a two-digit frame size in 

accordance with NEMA Standards 

Publication MG 1–1987, including IEC 

metric equivalent motors. See 10 CFR 

431.442. 

DOE did not propose to modify the 

definition of ‘‘small electric motor’’ in 

the April 2019 NOPR (See 84 FR 17004, 

17007) and DOE did not receive any 

comments suggesting that it do so. 

Accordingly, DOE is not modifying the 

current definition of small electric 

motor. 

2. Scope of the Small Electric Motor 

Test Procedure 

In the March 2010 final rule, DOE 

concluded that the following motor 

topologies satisfy the small electric 

motor definition: Capacitor-start 

induction-run (‘‘CSIR’’), capacitor-start 

capacitor-run (‘‘CSCR’’), and certain 

polyphase motors. 75 FR 10874, 10882– 

10883. DOE determined for purposes of 

its regulations that only CSIR, CSCR, 

and polyphase motors are able to meet 

the performance requirements in NEMA 

MG1 and are widely considered general 

purpose alternating current motors, as 

shown by the listings found in 

manufacturers’ catalogs. Id. As such, 

DOE concluded that CSIR, CSCR, and 

polyphase motors are the only motor 

categories that would satisfy the 

relevant criteria set by EPCA to be 

regulated as small electric motors. 75 FR 

10874, 10883. DOE established test 

procedures for these three topologies in 

subpart X of 10 CFR part 431. 

In response to the April 2019 NOPR, 

DOE received a number of comments 

relevant to the scope of applicability for 

the small electric motors test 

procedures. NEMA commented that 

there have been no significant 

technological advancements for small 

electric motors since the last rulemaking 

and that it supported maintaining the 

current scope of applicability. (NEMA, 

No. 84 at p. 2) 9 AHAM and AHRI also 

supported the current scope of the test 

procedure, (AHAM and AHRI, No. 85 at 

pp. 1–2), and opposed developing 

separate test procedures and energy 

conservation standards for special and 

definite purpose motors. In their view, 

an expanded test procedure scope 

would increase costs (equipment cost, 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 9 

10One of the methods for improving the 

efficiency of an electric motor is to increase its stack 

length—i.e., the number of rotors and stators that 

are stacked together to fit along a given motor’s 

shaft. While this may increase the efficiency of a 

given motor with specified horsepower and torque 

ratings, it also results in increasing the overall 

dimensions of the motor, thereby affecting its 

ability to fit within a given application. 

11Under EPCA, the term ‘‘definite purpose 

motor’’ means ‘‘any motor designed in standard 

ratings with standard operating characteristics or 

standard mechanical construction for use under 

service conditions other than usual or for use on a 

particular type of application and which cannot be 

used in most general purpose applications.’’ 42 

U.S.C. 6311(13)(C). Similarly, EPCA defines a 

‘‘special purpose motor’’ as ‘‘any motor, other than 

a general purpose motor or definite purpose motor, 

which has special operating characteristics or 

special mechanical construction, or both, designed 

for a particular application.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6311(13)(D). 

Given that EPCA treats these motors as being 

separate from small electric motors, and that these 

two categories of motors generally fall outside of 

general purpose motor applications, coverage of 

definite purpose and special purpose motors cannot 

be accomplished through DOE’s authority to 

regulate small electric motors. 

12The NEMA petition and work paper are 

available at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047-0028. The UL 

petition and supporting documentation are 

available at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document?D=EERE-2017-BT-TP-0047-0029. 

testing costs, and costs related to 

certification) and would not increase 

energy savings because original 

equipment manufacturers already 

consider efficient small electric motors 

as a design option to meet the energy 

conservation standards for those 

finished products regulated by DOE. Id. 

They added that an expanded scope to 

include definite and special purpose 

motors could impact the availability of 

replacement parts. They noted that 

home appliances and heating, 

ventilation, and air conditioning 

(‘‘HVAC’’) equipment have long 

lifetimes and often have sizing 

constraints. They asserted that, if motor 

sizes increase in response to efficiency 

requirements, replacement motors may 

no longer fit in those products using 

small electric motors.10 (AHAM and 

AHRI, No. 85 at p. 3) 

The CA IOUs and Efficiency 

Advocates supported expanding the 

scope of the small electric motors test 

procedures to cover a broader range of 

motors. In their view, DOE should 

expand the scope of the small electric 

motors test procedure to address a wide 

range of motors that the market 

considers ‘‘small.’’ (CA IOUs, No. 86 at 

p. 2) The Efficiency Advocates stated 

that DOE previously found that motors 

with the same characteristics as 

currently regulated small electric motors 

are widely available in larger 

horsepower ranges. They referenced 

DOE’s preliminary identification 

presented in the July 2017 RFI of 11 

motor categories that may represent 

significant shipment volumes and 

energy consumption and that were 

capable of being tested using existing 

test procedures. The Efficiency 

Advocates stated that these motor 

categories include both inefficient 

designs (e.g., shaded-pole) and highefficiency topologies (e.g., permanent 

magnet and switched reluctance). 

(Efficiency Advocates, No. 87 at p. 1) 

As previously stated, DOE is not 

modifying the test procedure’s scope. 

The test procedure continues to apply 

only to small electric motors that are 

currently subject to DOE’s existing test 

procedure at 10 CFR 431.444. As 

explained in the March 2010 final rule, 

under the definition of ‘‘small electric 

motor’’ prescribed by EPCA, CSIR, 

CSCR, and polyphase motors are the 

only motor categories that are general 

purpose motors (which is a key element 

to the statutory definition of this term), 

and therefore the only categories for 

which DOE has authority to regulate as 

a small electric motor. 75 FR 10874, 

10881. Special purpose and definite 

purpose motors are not general purpose 

motors and therefore are not covered 

under the statutory or regulatory 

definition of ‘‘small electric motor’’ and 

are not ‘‘small electric motors’’ under 

DOE’s statutory or regulatory 

framework.11 (See 42 U.S.C. 6311(13)(G) 

(defining ‘‘small electric motor’’), 42 

U.S.C. 6311(13)(C) (defining ‘‘definite 

purpose motor’’) and 42 U.S.C. 

6311(13)(D) (defining ‘‘special purpose 

motor’’); see also generally 10 CFR 

431.442) 

In the July 2017 RFI, DOE indicated 

that it may consider setting test 

procedures for electric motors that are 

considered ‘‘small’’ by customers and 

the electric motors industry, but that are 

not currently subject to the small 

electric motor test procedure. 82 FR 

35468, 35470–35471. DOE discussed 

that the motors identified in the July 

2017 RFI may have similarities to 

motors that are currently regulated as 

small electric motors (such as 

horsepower) and may be used in similar 

applications. However, DOE had not 

concluded that the identified motors are 

small electric motors or electric motors 

(nor did DOE propose such a 

conclusion). While certain commenters 

urged DOE to expand the scope of the 

test procedures to include some or all of 

the 11 categories of motors identified in 

the July 2017 RFI, these commenters did 

not provide an explanation for how 

such expansion would be consistent 

with DOE’s authority under EPCA, or 

how such motors should be classified 

and tested. 

AHAM and AHRI referenced the 

statutory exemption regarding the 

application of energy conservation 

standards for small electric motors that 

are components of covered products (42 

U.S.C. 6317(b)(3)) and requested that 

DOE interpret the exemption to apply to 

all small electric motors destined for or 

used in covered products or equipment. 

(AHAM and AHRI, No. 85 at p. 4) 

By statute, the small electric motor 

standards established by DOE shall not 

apply to any such motor that is a 

component of a covered product, or of 

covered equipment. (42 U.S.C. 

6317(b)(3)) Accordingly, consistent with 

the statute, the test procedure as 

amended in this final rule does not 

apply to a motor that is a component of 

a covered product, or of covered 

equipment. 

3. Scope of the Electric Motor Test 

Procedure 

As noted in section I.B, this final rule 

also addresses the test procedure for 

electric motors in response to a petition 

for rulemaking.12 The current electric 

motor test procedure is codified at 

subpart B of 10 CFR part 431. DOE did 

not propose to amend the scope of the 

electric motor test procedure. 

Accordingly, this final rule does not 

change the scope of that test procedure. 

B. Industry Standards 

The DOE test procedures rely on 

industry standards that are incorporated 

by reference at 10 CFR 431.443 for small 

electric motors and 10 CFR 431.15 for 

electric motors. Specifically, the 

existing DOE test procedures for small 

electric motors and electric motors rely 

on the following test methods: 

(1) For single-phase small electric 

motors: Either IEEE 114–2010, or CSA 

C747–09 (see 10 CFR 431.443(b)(1); 10 

CFR 431.443(c)(2); 10 CFR 

431.444(b)(1)); 

(2) For polyphase small electric 

motors of less than or equal to 1 hp, 

either Section 6.3 ‘‘Efficiency Test 

Method A, Input-Output’’ of IEEE 112– 

2004, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test Procedure for 

Polyphase Induction Motors and 

Generators’’ (‘‘IEEE 112–2004’’) or CSA 

C747–09 (see 10 CFR 431.443(b)(1); 10 

CFR 431.443(c)(1)(i); 10 CFR 

431.444(b)(2)); and 

(3) For polyphase small electric 

motors of greater than 1 hp and electric 

motors, either Section 6.4 ‘‘Efficiency 

Test Method B, Input-Output with Loss 

Segregation’’ of IEEE 112–2004; or CSA 

C390–10 (see 10 CFR 431.443(b)(2); 10 

CFR 431.443(c)(1)(ii); 10 CFR 

431.444(b)(3); 10 CFR 431.16 and 

Appendix B). 

10 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

13Both CSA C747–09 and CSA C390–10 have 

been reaffirmed in 2014 and 2015, respectively. 

14Appendix B to subpart B of part 431 was 

reorganized to include a new section 0 in this final 

rule. Section 0 details the applicability of the 

industry testing standards incorporated by reference 

and provides the specific provisions of the industry 

testing standards that are applicable to the DOE test 

procedure and the sections of the DOE test 

procedure in which the industry testing standards 

are incorporated. Because of this re-organization, 

the instruction in section 3 of Appendix B to 

subpart B of part 431 regarding the applicability of 

subsequent editions of the incorporated industry 

testing standards was duplicative to those in section 

0, and therefore removed in this final rule. 

15 IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B (2014), 

‘‘Rotating Electrical Machines—Part 2–1: Standard 

methods for determining losses and efficiency from 

tests (excluding machines for traction vehicles),’’ 

‘‘Summation of losses, additional load losses 

according to the method of residual loss.’’ 

In preparation for the April 2019 

NOPR, DOE reviewed each of the 

referenced industry standards to 

determine whether they still represent 

the most current procedures developed 

by industry. On February 14, 2018, IEEE 

published an updated edition of the 

IEEE 112 standard. The other referenced 

industry standards incorporated into 

DOE’s test procedure developed by CSA 

and IEEE remain current or have been 

reaffirmed without changes.13 This final 

rule maintains the references to IEEE 

114–2010, CSA C390–10, and CSA 

C747–09. As discussed in Section III.B.1 

of this document, DOE is updating the 

reference to IEEE 112 to reference the 

updated IEEE 112–2017 standard. As 

discussed in section III.B.2, DOE is also 

incorporating by reference IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 as an additional alternative 

test procedure for small electric motors 

and electric motors. IEEE 112–2017 and 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 are discussed in 

the following paragraphs. 

1. IEEE 112–2017 

On February 14, 2018, IEEE approved 

IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard Test 

Procedure for Polyphase Induction 

Motors and Generators.’’ DOE 

conducted a full review of that revised 

testing standard to identify any changes 

made relative to the industry test 

methods that are incorporated by 

reference from IEEE 112–2004. In the 

April 2019 NOPR, DOE highlighted the 

following changes between the 2004 and 

2017 version: (1) Section 4, 

‘‘Measurements’’ of IEEE 112–2017, 

includes several updates regarding 

instrument selection and measurement 

accuracy; and (2) the method for 

calculating core loss used in Section 6.4, 

‘‘Efficiency Test Method B—InputOutput with Loss Segregation’’ of IEEE 

112–2017 was revised and aligned with 

the efficiency test method specified in 

CSA C390–10, currently incorporated by 

reference at 10 CFR 431.443(b)(2). 84 FR 

17004, 17011. DOE further noted that 

this change also aligns with the Method 

2–1–1B approach of IEC 60034–2– 

1:2014. Id. In the April 2019 NOPR, 

DOE noted that the revisions in the 2017 

version aligned measurement, 

calculation methods, and 

instrumentation requirements with 

industry practice, and that the 

differences between the IEEE 112–2004 

and IEEE 112–2017 calculation methods 

were minimal, with both tests resulting 

in an accurate and similar measurement 

of efficiency. 84 FR 17004, 17011– 

17012. DOE noted that, in the small 

electric motor and electric motor final 

rule published on May 4, 2012, 

commenters indicated the difference in 

efficiency outcome between IEEE 112– 

2004 and CSA C390–10 to be within 0.2 

percent. 84 FR 17004, 17012 citing 77 

FR 26608, 26622. DOE stated that the 

core loss calculation in IEEE 112–2017 

aligns with the core loss calculation in 

CSA C390–10, and that based on this 

comparison of IEEE 112–2004 and CSA 

C390–10, the impact of the core loss 

calculation between IEEE 112–2004 and 

IEEE 112–2017 should be no greater 

than 0.2 percent. 84 FR 17004, 17012. 

To avoid any potential need to retest 

motors that have relied on IEEE 112– 

2004 for purposes of compliance, DOE 

proposed to incorporate the IEEE 112– 

2017 test method as an alternative to the 

test methods incorporated in the current 

test procedure, while retaining the 

currently incorporated IEEE 112–2004 

method, and requested data comparing 

the results of the IEEE 112–2004 and 

IEEE 112–2017. 84 FR 17004, 17012. 

In response to the April 2019 NOPR, 

NEMA supported updating the reference 

to IEEE 112 to its latest 2017 version 

and noted that IEEE 112–2017 Method 

B resolves previous technical 

differences between IEEE 112–2004 

Method B and CSA C390–10. NEMA 

added that both versions of IEEE 112 led 

to equivalent results. (NEMA, No. 84 at 

p. 2) The Efficiency Advocates 

supported referencing the latest version 

of IEEE 112 and urged DOE not to 

continue referencing the older version 

since referencing two different 

procedures introduces additional 

variability into the DOE test procedure. 

(Efficiency Advocates, No. 87 at p. 2) 

DOE has determined that IEEE 112– 

2017 will result in an accurate and 

similar measurement of efficiency as 

compared to IEEE 112–2004. Given the 

expected variation of tested efficiency 

values for small electric motors and 

electric motors due to manufacturing 

and material differences, any minor 

differences between IEEE 112–2004 and 

IEEE 112–2017 will not result in any 

significant change in overall energy 

efficiency test results. This 

determination is consistent with DOE’s 

prior comparison of IEEE 112–2004 and 

CSA C390–10, as affirmed by NEMA’s 

comment. Given the functional 

equivalency of testing under IEEE 112– 

2004 and IEEE 112–2017, DOE is 

incorporating IEEE 112–2017 in place of 

IEEE 112–2004. Referencing only the 

most recent version of IEEE 112 avoids 

the potential concerns identified by the 

Efficiency Advocates. Additionally, 

incorporating this update further aligns 

DOE’s test procedures with current 

industry practice and reduces 

manufacturer test burden, while 

ensuring that motors that have 

demonstrated compliance under IEEE 

112–2004 methods do not require 

retesting (see section III.F.1 for more 

details). 

Therefore, the updates to IEEE 112– 

2017 are in the following sections of the 

CFR (as amended by this final rule): 

For small electric motors, 10 CFR 

431.443 ‘‘Materials incorporated by 

reference,’’ paragraph (d)(1); 10 CFR 

431.444 ‘‘Test procedures for the 

measurement of energy efficiency,’’ 

paragraphs (b)(1)(vi), (b)(3)(i) and 

(b)(4)(i); and 10 CFR 431.447 

‘‘Department of Energy recognition of 

nationally recognized certification 

programs,’’ paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4). 

For electric motors, 10 CFR 431.12 

‘‘Definitions’’ (the definition for 

‘‘accreditation’’); 10 CFR 431.15 

‘‘Materials incorporated by reference,’’ 

paragraph (d)(1); 10 CFR 431.19 

‘‘Department of Energy recognition of 

accreditation bodies,’’ paragraphs (b)(4) 

and (c)(4); 10 CFR 431.20 ‘‘Department 

of Energy recognition of nationally 

recognized certification programs,’’ 

paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4); and 

Appendix B to Subpart B of Part 431 

‘‘Uniform test method for measuring 

nominal full load efficiency of electric 

motors,’’ Sections 0(d),14 2(3), 3. 

2. IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

As discussed in section I.B, NEMA 

and UL independently submitted 

written petitions requesting that certain 

portions of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 be 

adopted as a permitted alternative test 

method for small electric motors and 

electric motors. Specifically, NEMA’s 

petition requested that DOE incorporate 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B 15

as an alternative to IEEE 112–2004 Test 

Method B and CSA C390–10, which are 

currently referenced in Appendix B. 

(NEMA, No. 28.2 at p. 1) UL requested 

that (1) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2– 

1–1B be approved for Appendix B and 

section 431.444 of 10 CFR part 431 (as 

an alternative to IEEE 112–2004 Test 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11 

16 IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A (2014), 

‘‘Rotating Electrical Machines—Part 2–1: Standard 

methods for determining losses and efficiency from 

tests (excluding machines for traction vehicles),’’ 

‘‘Direct Measurement of Input and Output.’’ 

17Section 5.2.1.1.1 of IEEE 114–2010 addressees 

when torque correction is required. 

18Section 6.7.1 of CSA C747–09 addresses when 

torque correction is required. 

Method B and CSA C390–10) and (2) 

that IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– 

1A 16 be approved for section 431.444 of 

10 CFR part 431 (as an alternative to 

IEEE 112–2004 Test method A, IEEE 

114–2010, and CSA C747–09). (UL, No. 

29.1 at p. 1) The NEMA and UL 

petitions included and referenced 

papers that compare the testing 

methodologies presented in IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 to the IEEE and CSA standards 

currently referenced in the small 

electric motors and electric motors test 

procedures at 10 CFR part 431. 

The NEMA petition included a ‘‘work 

paper’’ that summarizes an evaluation 

conducted by the NEMA Motor and 

Generator Section technical committee, 

which found that IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1B was a suitable 

alternative to the IEEE 112–2004 Test 

Method B and CSA C390–10 test 

methods. (NEMA, No. 28.3 at p. 1) This 

evaluation relied on (1) comparison of 

instrumentation accuracy, test method, 

and calculation approach among the 

IEC, IEEE, and CSA industry standards, 

(2) analysis of test results from over 500 

motors tested at the Hydro-Que ́bec 

Research Institute, and (3) reference to 

one scientific research paper (the 

‘‘Angers et al. study’’), which also 

concluded that all three 

methods provide results that are very 

closely aligned. (NEMA, No. 28.3 at pp. 

1–3) 

The UL petition included two papers 

comparing the IEC 60034–2–1 test 

methods with the respective IEEE and 

CSA standards. The first paper was the 

Angers et. al. study, which concluded 

that the IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2– 

1–1B test method provides results that 

are very closely aligned with the IEEE 

112–2004 Test Method B and CSA 

C390–10 test methods. (UL, No. 29.2 at 

pp. 1–8) The second paper, written by 

IEEE member Wenping Cao, compared 

the IEEE 112 and IEC 60034–2–1 

standards and concluded that the 

resulting efficiency values were found 

to be equal or otherwise closely aligned. 

(UL, No. 29.3 at p. 7) UL requested that 

DOE incorporate IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1B as an alternative to IEEE 

112–2004 Test Method B and CSA 

C390–10 because of an increased use of 

the IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– 

1B. (UL, No 29.1 at p.1) In its comments, 

UL did not quantify how broadly IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B is 

currently being used. 

In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE 

proposed to permit use of IEC 60034–2– 

1:2014 Method 2–1–1A, with certain 

limitations regarding torque 

measurement, as an alternative to IEEE 

112–2004 Test Method B and CSA 

C390–10. 84 FR 17004, 17012–17013. 

DOE also proposed to permit use of IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B as a 

permitted alternative to the test methods 

IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B and CSA 

C390–10. 84 FR 17004, 17014. DOE 

requested comment on its proposals 

regarding IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 

2–1–1A and Method 2–1–1B, including 

data comparing test results of those 

standards with the corresponding CSA 

and IEEE test procedures. 84 FR 17004, 

17013–17014. 

The CA IOUs questioned whether 

alternative testing standards are truly 

equivalent to one another and 

commented that DOE should evaluate 

the possibility that one equivalent test 

procedure may produce a 

disproportionately favorable result 

compared to another. The CA IOUs 

recommended that, to avoid confusion 

in the market and maintain consistency 

in results, the DOE should specify a 

single version of a test procedure to be 

used for enforcement testing. (CA IOUs, 

No. 86 at p. 2–3) 

As discussed in the April 2019 NOPR 

and in the following sections, DOE 

evaluated the various industry tests as 

well as the results of comparative 

testing and concludes that the relevant 

test methods in IEC 60034–2–1:2014 are 

equivalent to the corresponding 

industry standards currently referenced 

in the test procedures for small electric 

motors and electric motors. Permitting 

use of the test methods in IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 further harmonizes DOE’s test 

standards with industry and reduces 

test burden while ensuring that the test 

procedure reflects the energy efficiency 

of the relevant motors during a 

representative average use cycle. 

a. Method 2–1–1A 

Among multiple testing methods 

provided in IEC 60034–2–1:2014, 

Method 2–1–1A ‘‘Direct measurement of 

input and output’’ is the standard’s 

preferred testing method for singlephase motors. It is based on direct 

measurement of electrical input power 

to the motor and mechanical output 

power (in the form of torque and speed) 

from the motor. This approach is 

analogous to the methods of the other 

industry standards, IEEE 114–2010 and 

CSA C747–09, currently incorporated by 

reference for testing single-phase 

motors, and IEEE 112–2004 Test Method 

A, currently incorporated by reference 

for the purpose of testing polyphase 

motors of output power less than or 

equal to one horsepower. 

In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE 

tentatively determined that IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A is likely to 

produce accurate and reproducible 

results that are consistent with results 

from the other test methods permitted 

under subparts X and B of 10 CFR part 

431. 84 FR 17004, 17013. DOE proposed 

to incorporate by reference IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A as an 

alternative to the currently incorporated 

industry testing standards IEEE 112– 

2004 Test Method A and CSA C747–09 

in 10 CFR 431.443. Id. However, DOE 

also initially determined that the 

process for dynamometer torque 

correction in section 6.1.2.2 of IEC 

60034–2–1:2014, Method 2–1–1A is 

insufficiently described. 84 FR 17004, 

17013. Specifically, IEEE 114–2010 17

and CSA C747–09 18 contain more 

detailed descriptions of torque 

correction procedures, but both state 

that torque correction is not required 

when torque is measured using either an 

inline, rotating torque transducer or 

stator reaction torque transducer. The 

insufficient specificity of IEC 60034–2– 

1:2014 Method 2–1–1A regarding 

dynamometer torque correction can be 

avoided by using a torque measurement 

method that does not require correction. 

Consequently, DOE proposed to permit 

use of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 with 

limitations to limit torque measurement 

to methods that do not require 

dynamometer torque correction (i.e., 

either in-line, shaft-coupled, rotating 

torque transducers or stationary, stator 

reaction torque transducers). 84 FR 

17004, 17012–17013. 

In response to the April 2019 NOPR, 

NEMA reiterated its support to have the 

option of using IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1A. (NEMA, No. 84 at p. 3) 

DOE did not receive any other comment 

on the incorporation of IEC 60034–2– 

1:2014 Method 2–1–1A generally, or 

regarding the proposal to limit torque 

measurement. 

For the reasons discussed in the April 

2019 NOPR, DOE is referencing IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A as an 

alternative to the referenced industry 

testing standards IEEE 112–2017 Test 

Method A (per the amendment in this 

final rule) and CSA C747–09 in 10 CFR 

431.443. As proposed, this final rule 

requires torque measurement, when 

using IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– 

1A, to be made using either in-line, 

shaft-coupled, rotating torque 

transducers or stationary, stator reaction 

torque transducers. This change will 

12 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

19Section 3.8.2 of IEC 60051–1:2016 defines 

‘‘accuracy class’’ as a ‘‘class of measuring 

instruments, all of which are intended to comply 

with a set of specifications regarding uncertainty.’’ 

Furthermore, IEC 6005–1:2016 specifies that an 

accuracy class always specifies a limit of 

uncertainty, whatever other metrological 

characteristics it specifies. While IEC 60051–1:2006 

does not define a metric for this term, in practice, 

accuracy classes are used to designate percentage 

uncertainties. For example, section 5.5.2 of IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 states that ‘‘for an accuracy class 

of 0.2, the measuring equipment shall reach an 

overall uncertainty of 0.2% of reading at power 

factor of 1.0.’’ 

20Hydro-Quebec Research Institute, NEMA Motor 

Round Robin, November 2018. Motor Summit 2018 

Proceedings. Available at https://

www.motorsummit.ch/sites/default/files/2018-11/ 

MS18_proceedings.pdf. 

further harmonize DOE’s test 

procedures with current industry 

practice and reduce manufacturer test 

burden (see section III.F.1 for more 

details). 

For small electric motors, DOE is 

adding a reference to IEC 60034–2–1 in 

10 CFR 431.443 ‘‘Materials incorporated 

by reference,’’ paragraph (c)(2) and 

making a more specific set of references 

to IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A 

in 10 CFR 431.444 ‘‘Test procedures for 

the measurement of energy efficiency,’’ 

paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (b)(3)(iii) and 

in 10 CFR 431.447 ‘‘Department of 

Energy recognition of nationally 

recognized certification programs,’’ 

paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4). 

In addition, section 6.1.2.2 of IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A 

specifies that motors under test should 

be operated at the ‘‘required load’’ until 

thermal equilibrium is achieved. As 

required under DOE’s test procedure, 

the motor must be rated and tested at 

rated load. For clarity and consistency, 

in the April 2019 NOPR, DOE proposed 

to modify these instructions by 

replacing the term ‘‘required load’’ with 

‘‘rated load.’’ 84 FR 17004, 17013. DOE 

did not receive any stakeholder 

comments on this proposal and is 

modifying these instructions by 

replacing the term ‘‘required load’’ with 

‘‘rated load.’’ 

Furthermore, IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

references IEC 60034–1:2010 and IEC 

60051–1:2016 to specify required test 

conditions and procedures when 

applying the test methods for measuring 

energy efficiency in the following 

sections: (1) Section 5.4.1 of IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 specifies that the supply 

voltage shall be in accordance with 

sections 7.2 (and 8.3.1 for thermal tests) 

of IEC 60034–1:2010; (2) section 5.5.2 of 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 specifies that the 

measuring instruments shall have the 

equivalent of an accuracy class of 0.2 in 

case of a direct test and 0.5 in case of 

an indirect test in accordance with IEC 

60051; 19 and (3) section 5.7.1 of IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 states that the 

measured resistance at the end of the 

thermal test shall be determined in a 

similar way to the extrapolation 

procedure as described in section 

8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034–1, using the 

shortest possible time instead of the 

time interval specified in Table 5 

therein, and extrapolating to zero. 

Therefore, in this final rule, DOE is also 

incorporating by reference IEC 60034– 

1:2010 and IEC 60051–1:2016 to specify 

the test conditions and procedures as 

referenced in IEC 60034–2–1:2014. 

b. Method 2–1–1B 

Among the multiple testing methods 

provided in IEC 60034–2–1:2014, 

Method 2–1–1B ‘‘Summation of losses, 

additional load losses according to the 

method of residual loss’’ is the IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 standard’s preferred 

testing method for three-phase motors. 

This method relies on the indirect 

calculation of motor losses using a 

combination of measured values (e.g., 

winding resistance) and assumptions so 

that direct measurement of motor torque 

is not needed. This method is analogous 

to the methods of the other industry 

standards, IEEE 112–2004 and CSA 

C390–10, currently incorporated by 

reference for testing polyphase small 

electric motors of output power greater 

than one horsepower and electric 

motors. 

DOE reviewed IEC 60034–2–1:2014, 

Method 2–1–1B, and stakeholder 

responses to the November 2017 notice 

of petition, as well as all of the research 

papers referenced in the NEMA and UL 

petitions. The research papers evaluated 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014, Method 2–1–1B 

and the IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B 

and CSA C390–10 testing standards 

with respect to a comparison of the 

instrumentation accuracy, test method, 

and calculation approach, in addition to 

an analysis of any variability of actual 

test results. DOE also considered a 

comparison of results from a round 

robin test program among 11 

participants, which concluded that the 

same motor tested at multiple test 

facilities showed a maximum deviation 

of ±0.4 percentage points, using the 

same IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B for 

each test.20 84 FR 17013–17014. DOE 

noted that the largest difference 

reported by stakeholders between 

measured efficiency values using IEC 

60034–2–1:2014, Method 2–1–1B and 

IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B did not 

exceed ±0.2 percentage points. 84 FR 

17004, 17014. 

DOE initially concluded that (1) these 

methods are not identical, but the 

differences between these standards are 

within the expected measurement 

variation of the existing test procedure; 

(2) all three tests would result in 

measurements of efficiency that would 

yield the same results with respect to 

motor compliance; and (3) given the 

variable nature of tested efficiency 

values for electric motors and small 

electric motors due to manufacturing 

and material differences, the variation 

in the calculated efficiency is 

insignificant and not likely to result in 

any significant change in overall energy 

efficiency test results. 84 FR 17004, 

17014. Accordingly, in the April 2019 

NOPR, DOE proposed to incorporate by 

reference IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 

2–1–1B as an alternative to the currently 

incorporated industry testing standards 

IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B and CSA 

C390–10 and to IEEE 112–2017 Test 

Method B. Id. 

In response to the April 2019 NOPR, 

NEMA reaffirmed its request for the 

addition of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 

2–1–1B as an alternative test standard 

for polyphase small electric motors 

greater than 1 hp and electric motors. 

(NEMA, No. 84 at p. 3) 

Based on the considerations presented 

in the April 2019 NOPR, DOE affirms its 

initial conclusions regarding IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B. Allowing 

manufacturers to test according to IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B further 

harmonizes DOE’s test procedures with 

current industry practice and reduces 

manufacturer test burden (see section 

III.F.2 for more details) while ensuring 

that the test procedure reflects the 

energy efficiency of the relevant motors 

during a representative average use 

cycle. Therefore, in this final rule, DOE 

is referencing IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1B as a permitted 

alternative to the current test methods 

IEEE 112–2004 Test Method B (which in 

this final rule will be replaced with 

IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B) and CSA 

C390–10. In addition, as described in 

section III.B.2.a, DOE is also 

incorporating by reference IEC 60034– 

1:2010 and IEC 60051–1:2016, which 

specify the test conditions and 

procedures for IEC 60034–2–1:2014. 

Accordingly, reference to IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B is being added 

to the following sections of the CFR: 

For small electric motors, IEC 60034– 

2–1 is referenced in 10 CFR 431.443 

‘‘Materials incorporated by reference,’’ 

paragraph (c)(2). The specific references 

to IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B 

are in 10 CFR 431.444 ‘‘Test procedures 

for the measurement of energy 

efficiency,’’ paragraph (b)(4)(iii) and 10 

CFR 431.447 ‘‘Department of Energy 

recognition of nationally recognized 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 13 

21See e.g., CSA C747–09, Section 3, Definition of 

‘‘full load’’; CSA C390–10, Section 3.1, Definition 

of ‘‘rating’’; IEEE 112–2017, Section 3.3.2 

(‘‘Specified temperature’’); and IEEE 114–2010, 

Section 8.2 (‘‘Determination of efficiency’’). 

22For purposes of this definition, NEMA MG 1– 

2016 Table 10–5 can be applied to all small electric 

motors, regardless of whether elements of NEMA 

MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 are identified as for small 

or medium motors. 

certification programs,’’ paragraphs 

(b)(4) and (c)(4). 

For electric motors, IEC 60034–2–1 is 

referenced in 10 CFR 431.12 

‘‘Definitions’’ (the definition for 

‘‘accreditation’’); and 10 CFR 431.15 

‘‘Materials incorporated by reference,’’ 

paragraph (c)(3). The specific references 

to IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B 

are in 10 CFR 431.19 ‘‘Department of 

Energy recognition of accreditation 

bodies,’’ paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4); 10 

CFR 431.20 ‘‘Department of Energy 

recognition of nationally recognized 

certification programs,’’ paragraphs 

(b)(4) and (c)(4); and Appendix B to 

Subpart B of Part 431 ‘‘Uniform test 

method for measuring nominal full load 

efficiency of electric motors,’’ Sections 

2(2) and 3. 

C. Rated Output Power and Breakdown 

Torque of Small Electric Motors 

The current regulations for small 

electric motors specify that the metric 

for energy conservation standards, 

average full-load efficiency, is to be 

measured at ‘‘full rated load.’’ 10 CFR 

431.442. The industry testing standards 

referenced in the small electric motor 

test procedure do not provide a method 

to determine the rated load of the tested 

unit but instead rely on manufacturerspecified output power, which is 

typically listed on a motor’s nameplate, 

to determine average full-load efficiency 

at full rated load.21 The industry 

standards do not define rated output 

power; rather, the output power is a 

manufacturer declaration. 

As explained in the April 2019 NOPR, 

the motors subject to the small electric 

motors test procedures are capable of 

operating over a continuous range of 

loads. 84 FR 17004, 17014. For example, 

a motor that is rated at 1 hp is also 

capable of delivering 0.75 hp, but likely 

with a different speed, torque, and 

efficiency than those of when it is 

delivering its rated load of 1 hp. The 

output power of the motor depends on 

the load and the design of the motor. 

Therefore, the load point at which the 

motor must be tested is not an intrinsic 

parameter of the motor, but rather a 

parameter that must be defined or 

specified. The test’s load point is 

relevant to efficiency testing because the 

efficiency of small electric motors varies 

according to load. 

In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define rated output power 

using breakdown torque as specified in 

NEMA MG 1–2016. 84 FR 17004, 

17014–17016. In concept, breakdown 

torque describes the maximum torque 

the motor can develop without slowing 

down and stalling. The maximum 

torque over the entire speed range could 

occur at a different condition (e.g., the 

motor start-up, zero speed condition) 

than the breakdown condition. As 

explained in the April 2019 NOPR, 

breakdown torque corresponds to a local 

maximum torque (on a plot of torque 

versus speed) that is nearest to the rated 

torque. 84 FR 17004, 17014. The phrase 

‘‘abrupt drop in speed’’ corresponds to 

the expectation that the motor will slow 

down or stall if the load increases and 

indicates that minor reductions in speed 

observed due to measurement 

sensitivities are not considered. 

The breakdown torque for a specific 

horsepower rating is specified as a range 

as a function of input frequency and 

synchronous speed of the motor in two 

tables: Table 10–5 of NEMA MG 1–2016, 

which applies to induction motors, 

except permanent-split capacitor 

(‘‘PSC’’) and shaded-pole motors; and 

Table 10–6 of NEMA MG 1–2016, which 

applies to shaded-pole and PSC motors 

for fan and pump applications. For 

polyphase motors, section 12.37 of 

NEMA MG 1–2016 specifies that the 

breakdown torque of a general-purpose 

polyphase squirrel-cage small motor 

shall not be less than 140 percent of the 

breakdown torque of a single-phase 

general purpose motor of the same 

horsepower and speed rating. 

In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE initially 

determined that NEMA MG 1–2016’s 

Table 10–5 can apply to all small 

electric motors subject to DOE’s 

standards and that most manufacturers 

already use the breakdown torque 

method as a standard practice to 

determine rated output power. 84 FR 

17004, 17016. Accordingly, DOE 

proposed to define ‘‘rated output 

power’’ as ‘‘the mechanical output 

power that corresponds to the small 

electric motor’s breakdown torque as 

specified in NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 

10–5 for single-phase motors or 140 

percent of the breakdown torque values 

specified in NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 

10–5 for polyphase motors.’’ 22 Id. DOE 

also proposed defining ‘‘breakdown 

torque’’ as ‘‘the maximum torque that 

the motor will develop with rated 

voltage and frequency applied without 

an abrupt drop in speed, determined in 

accordance with NEMA MG 1–2016.’’ 

Id. DOE requested comment on the 

proposed definitions for ‘‘rated output 

power’’ and ‘‘breakdown torque.’’ 

Additionally, DOE requested comment 

on how to determine when an ‘‘abrupt 

drop in speed’’ (e.g., the local maximum 

of the torque-speed plot closest to the 

rated torque) has occurred when testing 

the breakdown torque of a small electric 

motor. Id. 

In response to the April 2019 NOPR, 

NEMA commented that there is no need 

to define ‘‘breakdown torque’’ or 

‘‘abrupt drop in speed’’ for the purposes 

of testing electric motors. (NEMA, No. 

84 at p. 3) Specifically, NEMA stated 

that incorporating breakdown torque as 

the method to define the rated output 

power of the motor is unnecessary 

because NEMA MG 1–2016, Part 1.40 

already states the output rating of a 

machine ‘‘shall’’ consist of the output 

power. Instead, NEMA recommended 

that the declared values of output power 

be used as provided on the 

manufacturer’s nameplate and that DOE 

not require a declaration of breakdown 

torque. (NEMA, No. 84 at pp. 3–4). 

NEMA further stated that the ‘‘abrupt 

drop in speed’’ corresponds to the 

expectations that the motor will slow 

down or stall if the torque applied to the 

motor exceeds the local maximum value 

of torque that is most closely located to 

the rated torque of the motor (i.e., the 

breakdown torque). Finally, NEMA 

claimed that performing any additional 

speed-torque tests for determining 

‘‘abrupt drop in speed’’ would increase 

manufacturer burden. (NEMA, No. 84 at 

pp. 3–5) No other comments were 

received in regard to this issue. 

In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE did not 

intend to suggest that it would require 

manufacturers to test or report the value 

of breakdown torque used to establish 

the rated output power of a small 

electric motor. Rather, the intent of 

defining ‘‘breakdown torque,’’ through 

reference to the industry standard 

NEMA MG 1–2016, was to in turn 

define ‘‘rated output power’’ for the 

purpose of measuring average full-load 

efficiency. As noted previously, NEMA 

responded to the April 2019 NOPR by 

explaining that NEMA MG 1–2016 Part 

1.40 already states the output rating of 

a machine shall consist of the output 

power. (NEMA, No. 84 at p. 3–4) As 

indicated by its inclusion in NEMA MG 

1–2016, the breakdown torque method 

is commonly used by industry for 

determining rated output power. 

Defining rated output power based on 

NEMA MG 1–2016 provides additional 

detail that allows for the accurate 

comparison of small electric motors. 

Therefore, in this final rule, DOE 

defines ‘‘rated output power’’ as, the 

mechanical output power that 

corresponds to the small electric motor’s 

14 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

23The synchronous speed of a motor is calculated 

as follows: 120 × f ÷ p where f is the frequency at 

which the motor is operating and p is the number 

of poles of the motor. 

24Also referred to as ‘‘rated full-load,’’ ‘‘full rated 

load,’’ or ‘‘full-load’’ interchangeably. 

breakdown torque as specified in NEMA 

MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 for single-phase 

motors or 140 percent of the breakdown 

torque values specified in NEMA MG 1– 

2016 Table 10–5 for polyphase motors. 

For purposes of this definition, NEMA 

MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 can be applied 

to all small electric motors, regardless of 

whether elements of NEMA MG 1–2016 

Table 10–5 are identified as for small or 

medium motors. 

DOE also is defining ‘‘breakdown 

torque.’’ Consistent with the proposed 

definition, DOE is defining ‘‘breakdown 

torque,’’ in part, as ‘‘the maximum 

torque that the motor will develop with 

rated voltage and frequency applied 

without an abrupt drop in speed.’’ As 

previously noted, the phrase ‘‘abrupt 

drop in speed’’ references the intrinsic 

behavior of motors, in which a motor 

will slow down or stall if the load 

applied to the motor exceeds the 

breakdown torque, and indicates that 

minor reductions in speed observed due 

to measurement sensitivities are not 

considered. To provide additional 

specification for determining 

breakdown torque based on the physical 

attributes of a small electric motor, DOE 

is also including in the definition that 

the breakdown torque of a motor is the 

local maximum of the torque-speed plot 

of the motor, closest to the synchronous 

speed of the motor.23

Both the April 2019 NOPR and 

NEMA’s comments explained that on a 

torque-speed plot, the breakdown torque 

is the local maximum torque in the 

region of the plot characterized through 

reference to the rated torque. The 

relevant region of the plot can also be 

characterized through reference to the 

synchronous speed. The local maximum 

of the torque-speed plot in the region 

characterized by the rated torque is the 

same value as the local maximum of the 

torque-speed plot in the region 

characterized by the synchronous speed. 

DOE is providing additional detail to 

define breakdown torque using the 

synchronous speed, as it is a physical 

attribute of the motor rather than rated 

torque, which is a manufacturer 

declared value. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preceding paragraphs, DOE is defining 

‘‘breakdown torque’’ as the maximum 

torque that the motor will develop with 

rated voltage and frequency applied 

without an abrupt drop in speed. The 

breakdown torque is the local maximum 

of the torque-speed plot of the motor, 

closest to the synchronous speed of the 

motor, determined in accordance with 

NEMA MG 1–2016. 

D. Rated Values Specified for Testing 

Small Electric Motors 

DOE notes that the definition of 

average full-load efficiency at 10 CFR 

431.442 specifies that it is determined 

when the motor operates at the rated 

frequency, rated load, and rated voltage. 

Additionally, industry standards refer to 

these rated values, which are expected 

to be known or provided (e.g., on the 

nameplate). However, ‘‘rated 

frequency,’’ ‘‘rated load,’’ and ‘‘rated 

voltage’’ are not defined. To provide 

additional specificity regarding these 

terms, in the April 2019 NOPR, DOE 

proposed to define them to further 

ensure the comparability of results 

between motors, and to better ensure 

reproducible testing for all equipment. 

84 FR 17004, 17017–17018. In this final 

rule, DOE is amending 10 CFR 431.442 

to establish definitions for ‘‘rated 

frequency,’’ ‘‘rated load,’’ and ‘‘rated 

voltage,’’ as discussed in the following 

sections. 

1. Rated Frequency 

The test procedures and energy 

conservation standards established 

under EPCA apply to those regulated 

motors that are distributed in commerce 

within the United States. Within the 

United States, electricity is supplied at 

60 hertz (‘‘Hz’’); in other regions of the 

world, electricity is supplied at 50 Hz. 

Small electric motors could be designed 

to operate at frequencies in addition to 

60 Hz (e.g., motors designed to operate 

at either 60 or 50 Hz). Therefore, it 

could be unclear at which frequency the 

test should be performed. DOE proposed 

to amend the small electric motor test 

procedure at 10 CFR 431.442 by 

defining the term ‘‘rated frequency’’ as 

‘‘60 hertz.’’ See 84 FR 17004, 17017. 

NEMA commented that explicitly 

stating that rated frequency is 60 Hz 

would be beneficial in the case of a 

motor marked as 60/50 hertz. (NEMA, 

No. 84 at p. 4) The CA IOUs supported 

DOE’s proposal that all tests be 

performed using a rated frequency of 60 

Hz. (CA IOUs, No. 86 at p. 3) The 

Efficiency Advocates supported DOE’s 

proposal to specify that all small electric 

motor tests be performed using a rated 

frequency of 60 Hz to remove ambiguity 

in the test procedure and to ensure that 

the test procedure reflects the operating 

frequency in the U.S. (Efficiency 

Advocates, No. 87 at p. 2) DOE did not 

receive any comments opposing the 

proposed definition. 

DOE notes that 60 Hz as the tested 

input frequency matches the frequency 

experienced by the motor when 

installed in the field. In addition, 

commenters also recommended DOE 

require testing at a rated frequency of 60 

Hz, as noted. Therefore, in this final 

rule, DOE is amending 10 CFR 431.442 

to establish a definition of ‘‘rated 

frequency’’ as ‘‘60 hertz.’’ 

2. Rated Load 

‘‘Rated load’’ 24 is a term used in 

industry standards to specify a loading 

point for motor testing (e.g., sections 5.6 

and 6.1 in IEEE 112–2004, and section 

8.2.1 in IEEE 114–2010). Typically, a 

rated load represents a power output 

expected from the motor (e.g., a 

horsepower value on the nameplate). 

The rated load will have a 

corresponding rated speed and rated 

torque. In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE 

proposed to amend 10 CFR 431.442 by 

defining ‘‘rated load’’ as ‘‘the rated 

output power of a small electric motor’’ 

(see section III.C for definition of rated 

output power). 84 FR 17004, 17017. 

DOE also proposed that the rated output 

power (given on the motor nameplate) 

be used for any reference to rated load, 

full rated load, rated full-load, or fullload in an industry standard used for 

testing small electric motors. Id 

The Efficiency Advocates supported 

DOE’s proposed definition for rated 

load, commenting that this specification 

will help ensure that test procedures are 

applied consistently. (Efficiency 

Advocates, No. 87 at p. 2) The CA IOUs 

supported the definition for ‘‘rated 

load’’ for small electric motors based on 

NEMA MG 1–2016. (CA IOUs, No. 86 at 

p. 3) NEMA commented that qualifying 

that the rated output power stamped on 

the name plate of a small motor is 

equivalent to rated load, full rated load, 

rated full load or full-load in an 

industry standard is beneficial and 

eliminates questions regarding 

interpretation. (NEMA, No. 84 at p. 4) 

Providing a definition for ‘‘rated load’’ 

further ensures the comparability of 

results between motors, and better 

ensures reproducible testing. In 

addition, qualifying that the rated 

output power is equivalent to rated 

load, rated full-load, full rated load, or 

full-load in an industry standard used 

for testing small electric motors removes 

any confusion on the interpretation of 

terms. Commenters also supported 

clarifying the term ‘‘rated load.’’ 

Accordingly, consistent with its 

proposal, DOE is amending 10 CFR 

431.442 to establish a definition of 

‘‘rated load’’ as ‘‘the rated output power 

of a small electric motor.’’ 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 15 

25The April 2019 NOPR used the term 

‘‘nameplate voltage’’ but DOE does not require that 

a nameplate be affixed to small electric motors. 

‘‘Nameplate voltage’’ was used generally to describe 

representations made by a manufacturer either on 

a nameplate affixed to the unit or in equipment 

literature provided by the manufacturer. 

26As discussed previously, DOE does not require 

that a nameplate be affixed to small electric motors. 

DOE understands the commenter to be referring to 

representations made by a manufacturer either on 

a nameplate affixed to the unit or in equipment 

literature provided by the manufacturer. It is in this 

context that DOE uses the term ‘‘nameplate’’ in this 

document. 

3. Rated Voltage 

Industry testing standards use ‘‘rated 

voltage’’ to specify the voltage supplied 

to the motor under test (e.g., section 6.1 

in IEEE 112–2004, section 6.1 in IEEE 

112–2017, and section 3 in IEEE 114– 

2010). The industry test procedures 

incorporated into DOE’s regulations 

permit manufacturers to select the input 

voltage for testing. DOE proposed to 

continue to permit small electric motors 

to be tested at the nameplate voltage 25

value selected by the manufacturer and 

to define ‘‘rated voltage’’ at 10 CFR 

431.442 as ‘‘the input voltage of a small 

electric motor selected by the motor’s 

manufacturer to be used for testing the 

motor’s efficiency.’’ 84 FR 17004, 

17017–17018. 

In response to the April 2019 NOPR, 

the Efficiency Advocates commented 

that small electric motors should be 

tested at all nameplate voltages 26 and 

were concerned that allowing the 

manufacturer to select the voltage for 

testing will result in inconsistent ratings 

across products and will allow for 

gaming of the test procedure because of 

the fact that efficiency can vary with 

input voltage. The Efficiency Advocates 

suggested that DOE require that small 

electric motors be tested at all 

nameplate voltages and meet the 

minimum efficiency standards at all 

nameplate voltages. (Efficiency 

Advocates, No. 87 at p. 3) The CA IOUs 

opposed allowing motor manufacturers 

to select the voltage to be used when 

testing small electric motors, asserting 

that this creates uncertainty for 

consumers as to the motor’s energy 

performance in the field. Instead, they 

recommended a prescribed voltage in 

the test procedure or that the motor be 

tested at all voltages listed on the motor 

nameplate, and that, if the motor is 

tested at multiple voltages, an efficiency 

level for each tested voltage should be 

listed on the nameplate. (CA IOUs, No. 

86 at p. 3–4) 

In the March 2010 final rule, DOE 

noted that the industry test procedures 

incorporated into DOE’s regulations 

permit manufacturers to select the input 

voltage for testing. 75 FR 10874, 10892. 

In the April 2019 NOPR, DOE proposed 

to maintain the practice of permitting 

small electric motors to be tested at any 

nameplate voltage value and to specify 

this flexibility by defining the term 

‘‘rated voltage’’ at 10 CFR 431.442 as 

referring to the input voltage of a small 

electric motor selected by the motor’s 

manufacturer to be used for testing the 

motor’s efficiency. 84 FR 17004, 17081. 

DOE is adopting the proposed 

definition of ‘‘rated voltage’’ with 

additional clarification. In the April 

2019 NOPR, DOE stated that the 

proposed definition of ‘‘rated voltage’’ 

would allow small electric motors to be 

tested at any nameplate voltage value. 

Id. As noted, DOE does not require a 

nameplate to be affixed to a small 

electric motor. To properly describe the 

voltages from which the voltage is 

selected for testing, DOE is specifying 

that the selected input voltage must be 

one of the voltages used by the 

manufacturer for making 

representations of the small electric 

motor performance (i.e., a represented 

input voltage). Specifically, DOE is 

defining ‘‘rated voltage’’ as ‘‘the input 

voltage of a small electric motor used 

when making representations of the 

performance characteristics of a given 

small electric motor and selected by the 

motor’s manufacturer to be used for 

testing the motor’s efficiency.’’ Based on 

DOE’s experience in reviewing 

manufacturer reports and literature, the 

additional description reflects 

manufacturer practice (i.e., small 

electric motors are tested at one of the 

voltages at which manufacturer 

representations are made). The 

additional language also avoids any 

potential confusion as to the input 

voltage required for testing. 

DOE is not requiring a specific input 

voltage for testing. As discussed in the 

April 2019 NOPR, NEMA previously 

indicated that the input voltage setting 

can affect efficiency, noting that, if DOE 

were to require motors to comply with 

testing performed at the input voltage 

that resulted in the lowest level of 

efficiency, manufacturers would be 

forced to redesign these motors, since at 

least some motors would be out of 

compliance at voltages not currently 

selected for certification. 84 FR 17004, 

17017–17018. In its prior comment, 

NEMA explained that these redesign 

efforts would result in larger motors to 

accommodate the additional active 

material required to create a compliant 

motor and could result in the use of 

larger frame sizes, which would create 

utility problems for end users of the 

motors. (NEMA, EERE–2014–BT–CE– 

0019, No. 10 at p. 10) While the 

selection of the input voltage for testing 

may affect the measured efficiency, DOE 

does not have data to fully characterize 

any such impact. 

Moreover, EPCA requires that the test 

procedures shall be reasonably designed 

to produce test results which reflect 

energy efficiency of small electric 

motors during a representative average 

use cycle and shall not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(1) and (2)) DOE does not have 

data to indicate that a represented input 

voltage selected by a manufacturer is 

inappropriately representative of the 

average use of that small electric motor 

as compared to a different represented 

input voltage. Commenters did not 

provide data to indicate that the 

represented values being selected by 

manufacturers are not representative of 

average use. Therefore, DOE is 

maintaining the current test procedure 

direction allowing manufacturers to 

select the input voltage for testing. 

E. Effective and Compliance Date 

The effective date (i.e., the date the 

final rule is legally operative after being 

published in the Federal Register) for 

the adopted test procedure amendments 

will be 30 days after publication of this 

final rule in the Federal Register. See 10 

CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, 

section 12(b) and 10 CFR 431.4 

(applying 10 CFR part 430, subpart C, 

appendix A to commercial/industrial 

equipment). The compliance date (the 

specific date when manufacturers are 

required to use the amended test 

procedures requirements to make 

representations concerning the energy 

efficiency or use of a small electric 

motor and electric motor, including 

certification that the covered equipment 

meets an applicable energy conservation 

standard) is 180 days after the date of 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. See id. at section 

12(c). 

EPCA prescribes that all 

representations of energy efficiency and 

energy use, including those made on 

marketing materials and product labels, 

must be made in accordance with an 

amended test procedure, beginning 180 

days after publication of the final rule 

in the Federal Register. (42 U.S.C. 

6314(d)(1)) EPCA also provides an 

allowance for individual manufacturers 

of consumer products to petition DOE 

for an extension of the 180-day period 

if the manufacturer may experience 

undue hardship in meeting the 

deadline. (42 U.S.C. 6314(d)(2)). To 

receive such an extension, petitions 

must be filed with DOE no later than 60 

days before the end of the 180-day 

period and must detail how the 

16 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

27CSA 747–09, CSA 390–10, IEEE 112–2017 (per 

the amended reference under this final rule), or 

IEEE 114–2010 depending on the category of small 

electric motor. 

28NEMA and UL did not provide quantitative 

information regarding the number of small electric 

motors that are tested with either the CSA method 

or the IEEE method, and the IEC method, although 

NEMA commented that this is an increasing trend. 

Based on a review of the market, only a small 

fraction of motors are designed for operation on 50 

Hz and 60 Hz power (indicating they are suitable 

for sale in both the U.S. and foreign markets), or use 

NEMA and IEC units of measure (hp vs. kW) and 

other designators. As noted, the U.S. electrical grid 

is operated at 60 Hz, while many other countries 

and regions (e.g., Europe) operate at 50 Hz. 

manufacturer will experience undue 

hardship. (Id.) 

F. Test Procedure Costs and Impacts 

EPCA requires that test procedures 

prescribed by DOE not be unduly 

burdensome to conduct. 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(2). DOE is amending (1) the 

existing test procedure for small electric 

motors by clarifying the existing scope 

and testing instructions, updating the 

reference to industry standard IEEE 112 

to reference the 2017 version in place of 

the 2014 version, and permitting the use 

of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 as an additional 

alternative test procedure; and (2) the 

existing test procedure for electric 

motors by permitting the use of IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 as an additional 

alternative and equivalent test 

procedure. DOE has determined that the 

test procedures as amended by this final 

rule will not be unduly burdensome for 

manufacturers to conduct and instead 

will reduce test burden for 

manufacturers. 

This final rule will result in a net cost 

savings to manufacturers, as 

summarized in Table III–1 and Table 

III–2. 

TABLE III–1—SUMMARY OF COST IMPACTS FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS AND ELECTRIC MOTORS

Category Present value 

(million 2016$) 

Discount rate 

(percent) 

Cost Savings: 

Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Small Electric Motors ................................................................ 0.2 

0.1 

3 

7 

Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Electric Motors .......................................................................... 3.7 

1.4 

3 

7 

Total Net Cost Impact: 

Total Net Cost Impact ............................................................................................................................ (4.0) 

(1.5) 

3 

7 

TABLE III–2—SUMMARY OF ANNUALIZED COST IMPACTS FOR SMALL ELECTRIC MOTORS AND ELECTRIC MOTORS

Category Annualized value 

(thousand 2016$) 

Discount rate 

(percent) 

Annualized Cost Savings: 

Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Small Electric Motors ................................................................ 7 

6 

3 

7 

Reduction in Future Testing Costs for Electric Motors .......................................................................... 112 

100 

3 

7 

Total Net Annualized Cost Impact: 

Total Net Cost Impact ............................................................................................................................ (119) 

(106) 

3 

7 

Further discussion of the analyses of 

the cost impact of the test procedure 

amendments is presented in the 

following paragraphs. 

1. Cost Impacts for Small Electric 

Motors 

The clarifications of the existing 

scope and test instructions will not 

impose any new requirements on 

manufacturers of regulated small 

electric motors. Instead, this final rule 

will provide manufacturers with greater 

certainty in the conduct of the test 

procedures, offer additional equivalent 

testing options, and do not increase test 

burden. Reference to IEEE 112–2017 in 

place of IEEE 112–2004 will not 

increase test burden or require new 

testing. As discussed, results under the 

2017 version of IEEE 112 are equivalent 

to results from testing under the 2004 

version. Manufacturers will be able to 

rely on data generated under the current 

test procedure. Additionally, the 

incorporation of IEC 60034–2–1:2014 as 

an additional alternative test procedure 

further harmonizes DOE’s test 

procedures with current industry 

practice and international standards. 

Permitting manufacturers to test 

according to IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

enables manufacturers who use IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 for business purposes 

(for international markets), or to comply 

with regulatory requirements in other 

countries, to reduce the number of tests 

that they must perform by removing the 

need to conduct a test according to the 

CSA or IEEE methods 27 currently 

referenced in DOE’s test procedure for 

small electric motors. As described in 

section III.B.2, NEMA and UL petitioned 

that certain portions of IEC test 

procedure 60034–2–1:2014 be adopted 

as a permitted alternative test method 

for small electric motors and electric 

motors. UL further noted in its petition 

the increasing use of the IEC test 

procedure 60034–2–1:2014 by the 

industry worldwide. 

Recognizing that some, but not all, 

manufacturers already test their motors 

using IEC 60034–2–1:2014, DOE (as 

explained later in this section) assumed 

that 10 percent 28 of small electric motor 

models sold in the U.S. that are tested 

with either the CSA or IEEE methods 

referenced in the Federal test procedure 

are also tested with the IEC 60034–2–1 

method. 

To calculate the testing cost reduction 

associated with allowing the IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 method for testing small 

electric motors, DOE estimated the 

number of motor models that would not 

have to be tested to both the amended 

DOE test procedure and the IEC test 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 17 

29The seven-year period for which DOE reviewed 

product catalogs was from 2009 to 2016. DOE 

expects this approach will also be representative of 

the market from 2016 to the present. DOE did not 

receive comment on this approach following the 

publication of the April 2019 NOPR. 

30 DOE identified 598 small electric motor models 

introduced into the U.S. market by these four 

manufacturers during the period 2009–2016. 

31Based on this count, DOE estimates that these 

four small electric motor manufacturers collectively 

introduced approximately 85 small electric motor 

models into the U.S. market each year. 

32This scaled-up calculation yielded a value of 

128 small electric motor models introduced each 

year for the entire U.S. market, as DOE assumed 

these four small electric motor manufacturers 

represented approximately 67 percent of the entire 

U.S. market. 

33 DOE estimates that approximately 13 new 

small electric motor models are tested each year. 

34This yields an estimate of 1.28, since DOE 

estimates 10 percent of the 12.8 new small electric 

motor models introduced each year are already 

tested with the IEC 60034–2–1 method. 

35Estimate based on standard rates charged by 

third party laboratories. 

36See Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational 

Employment and Wages, 17–3027 Mechanical 

Engineer Technician, May 2018. https://

www.bls.gov/oes/2018/may/oes173027.htm. Last 

accessed February 20, 2020. United States Census 

Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufacturers, 2016 for 

NAICS Code 335312 ‘‘Motor and Generator 

Manufacturing’’. https://www.census.gov/data/ 

tables/2016/econ/asm/2016-asm.html. Last 

accessed February 20, 2020. 

37See Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational 

Employment and Wages, 17–2141 Mechanical 

Engineer, May 2018. https://www.bls.gov/oes/2018/ 

may/oes172141.htm. Last accessed February 20, 

2020. 

United States Census Bureau, Annual Survey of 

Manufacturers, 2016 for NAICS Code 335312 

‘‘Motor and Generator Manufacturing’’. https://

www.census.gov/data/tables/2016/econ/asm/2016- 

asm.html. Last accessed February 20, 2020. 

38CSA 390–10 or IEEE 112–2017 (per the 

amended reference under this final rule) depending 

on the category of electric motor. 

39The six-year period for which DOE reviewed 

product catalogs was from 2010 to 2016. DOE 

expects this approach will also be representative of 

the market from 2016 to the present. DOE did not 

receive comment on this approach following the 

publication of the April 2019 NOPR. 

40 DOE identified 8,110 electric motor models 

introduced into the U.S. market by these four 

manufacturers during the period 2010–2016. 

41Based on this count, DOE estimates that these 

four electric motor manufacturers collectively 

introduced approximately 1,352 electric motor 

models into the U.S. market each year. 

42This scaled-up calculation yielded a value of 

2,028 electric motor models introduced each year 

for the entire U.S. market, as DOE assumed these 

four electric motor manufacturers represented 

approximately 67 percent of the entire U.S. market. 

43 DOE estimates that approximately 203 new 

electric motor models are tested each year. 

method when brought to market. First, 

DOE reviewed the product catalogs of 

four major small electric motor 

manufacturers published over a sevenyear period.29 DOE compared the 

current product offerings to the 

historical catalogs to identify the total 

number of new models listed over that 

period of time.30 DOE then annualized 

that total number of new models.31

Next, DOE scaled up that annualized 

value based on the estimated market 

share of the manufacturers whose 

catalogs were reviewed. This scaled-up 

annualized value estimated the total 

number of new models listed for sale 

each year for the entire U.S. market.32

Then, DOE estimated that 10 percent of 

new models would be tested each 

year.33 DOE made this estimate based on 

(1) knowledge that many motor models 

are grouped under a single basic model 

classification (and therefore each 

individual model would not need to be 

tested), (2) observations that only a 

fraction of electric motor basic models 

are tested (the remainder have efficiency 

determined through an alternative 

efficiency determination method 

[‘‘AEDM’’]), and (3) recognition that 

many motor models may have been 

relabeled or rebranded but not 

redesigned (and therefore no new 

testing is needed). Finally, DOE 

assumed that 10 percent of small 

electric motor models sold in the U.S. 

that are tested with either the CSA or 

IEEE methods referenced in the Federal 

test procedure are also tested with the 

IEC 60034–2–1 method. Based on these 

calculations, DOE determined that 

approximately 1 new small electric 

motor basic model per year (i.e., 10 

percent of 13) that already would be 

tested with the IEC 60034–2–1 method 

would no longer have to conduct an 

additional test to comply with DOE’s 

amended test procedure when 

introduced into the U.S market and 

therefore would realize costs savings 

due to the test procedure 

amendments.34

DOE estimated the cost of testing a 

single small electric motor unit to be 

$2,000 at a third-party facility and 

approximately $500 at an in-house 

facility.35 DOE requires at least five 

units to be tested per basic model. 10 

CFR 431.445(c)(2) To estimate in-house 

testing costs, DOE assumed testing a 

single motor unit requires 

approximately nine hours of a 

mechanical engineer technician time 

and three hours from a mechanical 

engineer. The mean hourly wage for a 

mechanical engineer technician is 

$28.00 and the total hourly 

compensation paid by the employer 

(including all fringe benefits) is 

$36.25.36 The mean hourly wage for a 

mechanical engineer is $44.62 and the 

total hourly compensation paid by the 

employer (including all fringe benefits) 

is $57.76.37 In addition, DOE assumed 

that 50 percent of tests are conducted at 

third-party facilities and 50 percent of 

tests are conducted at in-house 

facilities. Based on these estimates, DOE 

anticipates annual cost savings of 

approximately $8,000 for the small 

electric motors industry. 

2. Cost Impacts for Electric Motors 

Regarding electric motors, DOE is not 

amending the scope of applicability of 

the test procedure at Appendix B. 

Consistent with the small electric 

motors analysis, the incorporation of 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 in this test 

procedure provides manufacturers 

additional flexibility by permitting an 

alternative and equivalent test 

procedure for measuring energy loss and 

would further harmonize DOE’s test 

procedures with current industry 

practice and international standards. 

DOE expects that, for those 

manufacturers who are already using 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014, this change will 

reduce the number of tests that 

manufacturers perform by avoiding the 

need to conduct a test according to the 

CSA or IEEE methods 38 currently 

referenced in DOE’s test procedure. 

To calculate the testing cost reduction 

associated with allowing the IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 method for testing electric 

motors, DOE employed a similar 

methodology to the small electric 

motors analysis and estimated the 

number of electric motor models that 

would not have to test to both the 

amended DOE test procedure and the 

IEC test method when brought to 

market. First, DOE reviewed the product 

catalogs of four major electric motor 

manufacturers published over a six-year 

period.39 DOE compared the current 

product offerings to the historical 

catalogs to identify the total number of 

new models listed over that period of 

time.40 DOE then annualized that total 

number of new models.41

Next, DOE scaled up that annualized 

value based on the estimated market 

share of the manufacturers whose 

catalogs were reviewed. This scaled-up 

annualized value estimated the total 

number of new models listed for sale 

each year for the entire U.S. market.42

Then, DOE estimated that only 10 

percent of new models would be tested 

each year.43 DOE made this estimate 

based on (1) knowledge that many 

motor models are grouped under a 

single basic model classification (and 

therefore each individual model would 

not need to be tested), (2) observations 

that only a fraction of electric motor 

basic models are tested (the remainder 

have efficiency determined through an 

AEDM), and (3) recognition that many 

motor models that may have been 

relabeled or rebranded but not 

redesigned (and therefore no new 

18 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

44This yields an estimate of 20.28, since DOE 

estimates 10 percent of the 202.8 new electric motor 

models introduced each year are already tested with 

the IEC 60034–2–1 method. 

testing is needed). Similar to what was 

done for small electric motors, DOE 

assumed that 10 percent of electric 

motor models sold in the U.S. that are 

tested with either the CSA or IEEE 

methods referenced in the Federal test 

procedure are also tested with the IEC 

60034–2–1 method. Based on these 

calculations, DOE determined that 

approximately 20 new electric motor 

basic models per year (i.e., 10 percent of 

203) that already would be tested with 

the IEC 60034–2–1 method would no 

longer have to conduct an additional 

test to comply with DOE’s amended test 

procedure when introduced into the U.S 

market and therefore would realize costs 

savings due to the test procedure 

amendments.44

DOE estimated the cost of testing a 

single electric motor unit to be $2,000 

at a third-party facility and 

approximately $500 at an in-house 

facility. DOE requires at least five units 

to be tested per basic model. 10 CFR 

431.17(b)(2) In addition, based on DOE’s 

understanding that this equipment is 

tested both in-house and at third-party 

testing labs, DOE assumed an even split 

in testing between the two venues. 

Based on these estimates, DOE 

anticipates annual industry cost savings 

of approximately $127,000 for electric 

motors that are currently subject to the 

standards at 10 CFR 431.25. 

3. Additional Amendments 

The remainder of the amendments 

adopted in this final rule will not 

impact test costs. The other 

amendments adopted in this final rule 

include new definitions for ‘‘rated 

load,’’ ‘‘rated output power,’’ 

‘‘breakdown torque,’’ ‘‘rated frequency,’’ 

and ‘‘rated voltage’’. The addition of 

these definitions will improve test 

procedure repeatability. Furthermore, 

the definitions reflect current industry 

practice, and therefore do not impose 

any new requirements on manufacturers 

of regulated small electric motors and 

electric motors. 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) has determined that this test 

procedure rulemaking does not 

constitute a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735 (Oct. 

4, 1993). Accordingly, this action was 

not subject to review under the 

Executive Order by the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(‘‘OIRA’’) in OMB. 

B. Review Under Executive Orders 

13771 and 13777 

On January 30, 2017, the President 

issued E.O. 13771, ‘‘Reducing 

Regulation and Controlling Regulatory 

Costs.’’ See 82 FR 9339 (Feb. 3, 2017). 

E.O. 13771 stated the policy of the 

executive branch is to be prudent and 

financially responsible in the 

expenditure of funds, from both public 

and private sources. E.O. 13771 stated it 

is essential to manage the costs 

associated with the governmental 

imposition of private expenditures 

required to comply with Federal 

regulations. 

Additionally, on February 24, 2017, 

the President issued E.O. 13777, 

‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform 

Agenda.’’ 82 FR 12285 (March 1, 2017). 

E.O. 13777 required the head of each 

agency designate an agency official as 

its Regulatory Reform Officer (‘‘RRO’’). 

Each RRO oversees the implementation 

of regulatory reform initiatives and 

policies to ensure that agencies 

effectively carry out regulatory reforms, 

consistent with applicable law. Further, 

E.O. 13777 requires the establishment of 

a regulatory task force at each agency. 

The regulatory task force is required to 

make recommendations to the agency 

head regarding the repeal, replacement, 

or modification of existing regulations, 

consistent with applicable law. At a 

minimum, each regulatory reform task 

force must attempt to identify 

regulations that: 

(1) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job 

creation; 

(2) Are outdated, unnecessary, or 

ineffective; 

(3) Impose costs that exceed benefits; 

(4) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with regulatory 

reform initiatives and policies; 

(5) Are inconsistent with the 

requirements of the Information Quality 

Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to 

that Act, in particular those regulations 

that rely in whole or in part on data, 

information, or methods that are not 

publicly available or that are 

insufficiently transparent to meet the 

standard for reproducibility; or 

(6) Derive from or implement 

Executive Orders or other Presidential 

directives that have been subsequently 

rescinded or substantially modified. 

DOE concludes that this rulemaking is 

consistent with the directives set forth 

in these executive orders. This final rule 

is estimated to result in a cost savings. 

The final rule yields annualized cost 

savings of approximately $106,000 

using a perpetual time horizon 

discounted to 2016 at a 7 percent 

discount rate. Therefore, this final rule 

is an E.O. 13771 deregulatory action. 

C. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation 

of a final regulatory flexibility analysis 

(‘‘FRFA’’) for any final rule where the 

agency was first required by law to 

publish a rule for public comment, 

unless the agency certifies that the rule, 

if promulgated, will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. As 

required by E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities in 

Agency Rulemaking,’’ 67 FR 53461 

(Aug. 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003 to ensure that the potential 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the DOE 

rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE 

has made its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of the General 

Counsel’s website: http://energy.gov/gc/ 

office-general-counsel. 

These amendments would neither 

expand the scope of test procedure 

applicability to small electric motors 

beyond those currently subject to test 

procedures, nor would it place 

additional requirements on those small 

electric motors currently subject to 

DOE’s test procedures. Furthermore, 

this proposal would not place any 

additional requirements on those 

electric motors that are already subject 

to DOE’s test procedures, nor would it 

require manufacturers to retest existing 

electric motors. Accordingly, 

manufacturers would not be required 

under this rule to retest any existing 

small electric motors or electric motors 

already subject to DOE’s test 

procedures. 

These amendments would also not 

increase testing costs nor would it 

impose any additional testing burden on 

any manufacturers, including all small 

businesses. Therefore, DOE concludes 

that the cost effects accruing from this 

rule would not have a ‘‘significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities,’’ and that the 

preparation of a FRFA is not warranted. 

DOE has submitted a 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). 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 19 

D. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

Manufacturers of electric motors must 

certify to DOE that their equipment 

comply with any applicable energy 

conservation standards. To certify 

compliance, manufacturers must first 

obtain test data for their equipment 

according to the DOE test procedures, 

including any amendments adopted for 

those test procedures. DOE has 

established regulations for the 

certification and recordkeeping 

requirements for all covered consumer 

products and industrial equipment, 

including electric motors. (See generally 

10 CFR part 431.) The collection-ofinformation requirement for the 

certification and recordkeeping is 

subject to review and approval by OMB 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(‘‘PRA’’). This requirement has been 

approved by OMB under OMB control 

number 1910–1400. Public reporting 

burden for the certification is estimated 

to average 35 hours per response, 

including the time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and 

reviewing the collection of information. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB Control Number. 

E. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(‘‘NEPA’’), DOE has analyzed this action 

in accordance with NEPA and DOE’s 

NEPA implementing regulations (10 

CFR part 1021). DOE has determined 

that this rule qualifies for categorical 

exclusion (‘‘CX’’) under 10 CFR part 

1021, subpart D, Appendix A5 because 

it is an interpretive rulemaking that 

does not change the environmental 

effect of the rule and meets the 

requirements for application of a CX. 

See 10 CFR 1021.410. Therefore, DOE 

has determined that promulgation of 

this rule is not a major Federal action 

significantly affecting the quality of the 

human environment within the meaning 

of NEPA, and does not require an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement. 

F. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

64 FR 43255 (Aug. 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 carefully assess 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 the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have Federalism implications. On 

March 14, 2000, DOE published a 

statement of policy describing the 

intergovernmental consultation process 

it will follow in the development of 

such regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE 

examined this final rule and determined 

that it will not have a substantial direct 

effect on the States, on the relationship 

between the national 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 products 

that are the subject of this final rule. 

States can petition DOE for exemption 

from such preemption to the extent, and 

based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 

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

required by E.O. 13132. 

G. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

Regarding the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

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

12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ 61 FR 

4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal 

agencies the general duty to adhere to 

the following requirements: (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 (1) clearly specifies the 

preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 

specifies any effect on existing Federal 

law or regulation; (3) provides a clear 

legal standard for affected conduct 

while promoting simplification and 

burden reduction; (4) specifies the 

retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately 

defines key terms; and (6) addresses 

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 they are met or it is 

unreasonable to meet one or more of 

them. DOE has completed the required 

review and determined that, to the 

extent permitted by law, this final rule 

meets the relevant standards of E.O. 

12988. 

H. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (‘‘UMRA’’) requires 

each Federal agency to assess the effects 

of Federal regulatory actions on State, 

local, and Tribal governments and the 

private sector. Public Law 104–4, sec. 

201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). For a 

regulatory action resulting in a rule that 

may cause the expenditure by State, 

local, and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100 million or more in any one 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), (b)) The 

UMRA also requires a Federal agency to 

develop an effective process to permit 

timely input by elected officers of State, 

local, and Tribal governments on a 

‘‘significant intergovernmental 

mandate,’’ and requires an agency plan 

for giving notice and opportunity for 

timely input to potentially affected 

small governments before establishing 

any requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE 

published a statement of policy on its 

process for intergovernmental 

consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 

12820; also available at http://

energy.gov/gc/office-general-counsel. 

DOE examined this final rule according 

to UMRA and its statement of policy 

and determined that the rule contains 

neither an intergovernmental mandate, 

nor a mandate that may result in the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any year, so these requirements do not 

apply. 

I. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires 

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

final rule will 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 

20 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

prepare a Family Policymaking 

Assessment. 

J. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

DOE has determined, under E.O. 

12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights’’ 53 FR 8859 

(March 18, 1988), that this regulation 

will not result in any takings that might 

require compensation under the Fifth 

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 

K. Review Under Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

Section 515 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides 

for agencies to review most 

disseminations of information to the 

public under guidelines established by 

each agency pursuant to general 

guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s 

guidelines were published at 67 FR 

62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed 

this final rule under the OMB and DOE 

guidelines and has concluded that it is 

consistent with applicable policies in 

those guidelines. 

L. 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 significant energy action. A 

‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as 

any action by an agency that 

promulgated or is expected to lead to 

promulgation of a final rule, and that (1) 

is a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 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 significant energy action, the agency 

must give a detailed statement of any 

adverse effects on energy supply, 

distribution, or use if the regulation is 

implemented, and of reasonable 

alternatives to the action and their 

expected benefits on energy supply, 

distribution, and use. 

This regulatory action is not a 

significant regulatory action under E.O. 

12866. Moreover, it would not have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy, nor has it 

been designated as a significant energy 

action by the Administrator of OIRA. 

Therefore, it is not a significant energy 

action, and, accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. 

M. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

Under section 301 of the Department 

of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95– 

91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply 

with section 32 of the Federal Energy 

Administration Act of 1974, as amended 

by the Federal Energy Administration 

Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 

788; ‘‘FEAA’’) Section 32 essentially 

provides in relevant part that, where a 

rule authorizes or requires use of 

commercial standards, the notice of 

rulemaking must inform the public of 

the use and background of such 

standards. In addition, section 32(c) 

requires DOE to consult with the 

Attorney General and the Chairman of 

the Federal Trade Commission (‘‘FTC’’) 

concerning the impact of the 

commercial or industry standards on 

competition. 

The modifications to the test 

procedure for small electric motors and 

electric motors adopted in this final rule 

incorporate certain testing methods 

contained of the following commercial 

standards: ‘‘IEC 60034–2–1:2014, 

Rotating electrical machines—Part 2–1: 

Standard methods for determining 

losses and efficiency from tests 

(excluding machines for traction 

vehicles);’’ IEC 60034–1:2010, ‘‘Rotating 

electric machines—Part 1: Rating and 

performance;’’ IEC 60051–1:2016, 

‘‘Direct acting indicating analogue 

electrical measuring instruments and 

their accessories—Part 1: Definitions 

and general requirements common to all 

parts;’’ ‘‘IEEE 112–2017, IEEE Standard 

Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction 

Motors and Generators;’’ and NEMA MG 

1–2016 Motors and Generators. DOE has 

evaluated these standards and is unable 

to conclude whether they fully comply 

with the requirements of section 32(b) of 

the FEAA (i.e., whether they were 

developed in a manner that fully 

provides for public participation, 

comment, and review.) DOE has 

consulted with both the Attorney 

General and the Chairman of the FTC 

about the impact on competition of 

using the methods contained in these 

standards and has received no 

comments objecting to their use. 

N. Congressional Notification 

As required by 5 U.S.C. 801, DOE will 

report to Congress on the promulgation 

of this rule before its effective date. The 

report will state that it has been 

determined that the rule is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

O. Description of Materials Incorporated 

by Reference 

In this final rule, DOE incorporates by 

reference standards published by IEC, 

IEEE and NEMA. The IEC standard, 

titled ‘‘IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Rotating 

electrical machines—Part 2–1: Standard 

methods for determining losses and 

efficiency from tests (excluding 

machines for traction vehicles),’’ is an 

alternative industry standard to those 

currently incorporated by reference 

(IEEE 112–2004, IEEE 114–2010, CSA 

C747–09, and CSA C390–10) for 

measurement of small electric motor 

efficiency and electric motor efficiency 

(See section III.B for more details). 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 establishes 

methods of determining efficiencies 

from tests and to specify methods of 

obtaining specific losses. In addition, 

DOE incorporates by reference two 

additional IEC standards, titled ‘‘IEC 

60034–1:2010, Rotating electrical 

machines—Part 1: Rating and 

performance’’ and ‘‘IEC 60051–1:2016, 

Direct acting indicating analogue 

measuring instruments and their 

accessories—Part 1: Definitions and 

general requirements common to all 

parts.’’ IEC 60034–1:2010 and IEC 

60051–1:2016 specify test conditions 

and procedures that are required for 

application of the test methods for 

measurement of energy efficiency 

established in IEC 60034–2–1:2014. 

The IEEE standard, titled ‘‘IEEE 112– 

2017, Test Procedure for Polyphase 

Induction Motors and Generators’’ 

establishes methods of measurement for 

current and frequency for both small 

electric motors and electric motors. DOE 

incorporates IEEE 112–2017 Test 

Method A and Test Method B as an 

update to the industry test methods that 

are currently incorporated by reference 

from IEEE 112–2004 (See section III.B 

for more details). Such action will 

harmonize the permitted test methods 

under subparts X (for small electric 

motors) and B (for electric motors) of 10 

CFR part 431 and align measurement 

and instrumentation requirements with 

industry practice. 

The NEMA standard, titled ‘‘NEMA 

MG 1–2016 Motors and Generators’’ 

establishes industry definitions for 

breakdown torque of small electric 

motors (See section III.C for more 

details). 

In summary, DOE incorporates by 

reference the following standards: 

(1) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, ‘‘Rotating 

electrical machines—Part 2–1: Standard 

methods for determining losses and 

efficiency from tests (excluding 

machines for traction vehicles)’’. 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 21 

(2) IEC 60034–1:2010, ‘‘Rotating 

electric machines—Part 1: Rating and 

performance’’. 

(3) IEC 60051–1:2016, ‘‘Direct acting 

indicating analogue electrical measuring 

instruments and their accessories—Part 

1: Definitions and general requirements 

common to all parts’’. 

(4) IEEE 112–2017, ‘‘IEEE Standard 

Test Procedure for Polyphase Induction 

Motors and Generators’’. 

(5) NEMA MG 1–2016, ‘‘Motors and 

Generators’’. 

Copies of these standards can be 

obtained from the organizations directly 

at the following addresses: 

• IEC, 3 rue de Varembe ́, 1st Floor, 

P.O. Box 131, CH—1211 Geneva 20— 

Switzerland, +41 22 919 02 11, or by 

visiting https://webstore.iec.ch/home. 

• IEEE, 445 Hoes Lane, P.O. Box 

1331, Piscataway, NJ 08855–1331, (732) 

981–0060, or by visiting http://

www.ieee.org. 

• NEMA, 1300 North 17th Street, 

Suite 900, Arlington, Virginia 22209, +1 

703 841 3200, or by visiting https://

www.nema.org. 

IV. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this final rule. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 431 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation test 

procedures, Incorporation by reference, 

and Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on December 11, 

2020, by Daniel R Simmons, Assistant 

Secretary for Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, pursuant to 

delegated authority from the Secretary 

of Energy. That document with the 

original signature and date is 

maintained by DOE. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

the Department of Energy. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on December 

11, 2020. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE is amending part 431 of 

Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal 

Regulations as set forth as follows: 

PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY 

PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 431 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 2. Section 431.12 is amended by 

revising the definition of 

‘‘Accreditation’’ to read as follows: 

§ 431.12 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Accreditation means recognition by 

an accreditation body that a laboratory 

is competent to test the efficiency of 

electric motors according to the scope 

and procedures given in IEEE 112–2017 

Test Method B, CSA C390–10, or IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.15). 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 431.15 is amended by: 

■ a. Throughout this section, removing 

the words ‘‘subpart B of part 431’’ and 

adding, in their place, ‘‘this subpart’’ 

■ b. Revising paragraph (a); 

■ c. Redesignating paragraph (c)(4) as 

paragraph (c)(7) and paragraphs (c)(2) 

and (3) as paragraphs (c)(4) and (5), 

respectively; 

■ d. Adding new paragraphs (c)(2), (3), 

and (6); and 

■ e. Revising paragraph (d)(1). 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 431.15 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

(a) General. Certain material is 

incorporated by reference into this 

subpart with the approval of the 

Director of the Federal Register under 5 

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To 

enforce any edition other than that 

specified in this section, the Department 

of Energy must publish a document in 

the Federal Register and the material 

must be available to the public. 

Standards can be obtained from the 

sources below. All approved material is 

available for inspection at U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, Sixth 

Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW, 

Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586–2945, 

or go to http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ 

buildings/appliance_standards/. It is 

also available at the National Archives 

and Records Administration (NARA). 

For information on the availability of 

this material at NARA, email: 

fedreg.legal@nara.gov, or go to: 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ 

ibr-locations.html. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) IEC 60034–1, Edition 12.0 2010– 

02, (‘‘IEC 60034–1:2010’’), Rotating 

Electrical Machines—Part 1: Rating and 

Performance, IBR approved for 

appendix B to this subpart. 

(3) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, Edition 2.0 

2014–06, (‘‘IEC 60034–2–1:2014’’), 

Rotating electrical machines—Part 2–1: 

Standard methods for determining 

losses and efficiency from tests 

(excluding machines for traction 

vehicles), IBR approved for §§ 431.12; 

431.19; 431.20; appendix B to this 

subpart. 

* * * * * 

(6) IEC 60051–1:2016, Edition 6.0 

2016–02, (‘‘IEC 60051–1:2016’’), Direct 

acting indicating analogue electrical 

measuring instruments and their 

accessories—Part 1: Definitions and 

general requirements common to all 

parts, IBR approved for appendix B to 

this subpart. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) IEEE 112TM–2017 (‘‘IEEE 112– 

2017’’), IEEE Standard Test Procedure 

for Polyphase Induction Motors and 

Generators, approved December 6, 2017, 

IBR approved for §§ 431.12; 431.19; 

431.20; appendix B to this subpart. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Section 431.19 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4) to 

read as follows: 

§ 431.19 Department of Energy recognition 

of accreditation bodies. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) It must be expert in the content 

and application of the test procedures 

and methodologies in IEEE 112–2017 

Test Method B, CSA C390–10, or IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B, 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.15). 

(c) * * * 

(4) Expertise in electric motor test 

procedures. The petition should set 

forth the organization’s experience with 

the test procedures and methodologies 

in IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B, CSA 

C390–10, or IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1B, (incorporated by 

22 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

reference, see § 431.15). This part of the 

petition should include items such as, 

but not limited to, a description of prior 

projects and qualifications of staff 

members. Of particular relevance would 

be documentary evidence that 

establishes experience in applying the 

guidelines contained in the ISO/IEC 

Guide 25, General Requirements for the 

Competence of Calibration and Testing 

Laboratories, (referenced for guidance 

only, see § 431.14) to energy efficiency 

testing for electric motors. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 431.20 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4) to 

read as follows: 

§ 431.20 Department of Energy recognition 

of nationally recognized certification 

programs. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) It must be expert in the content 

and application of the test procedures 

and methodologies in IEEE 112–2017 

Test Method B, CSA C390–10, or IEC 

60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B, 

(incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.15). It must have satisfactory 

criteria and procedures for the selection 

and sampling of electric motors tested 

for energy efficiency. 

(c) * * * 

(4) Expertise in electric motor test 

procedures. The petition should set 

forth the program’s experience with the 

test procedures and methodologies in 

IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B, CSA 

C390–10, or IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1B, (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.15). This part of the 

petition should include items such as, 

but not limited to, a description of prior 

projects and qualifications of staff 

members. Of particular relevance would 

be documentary evidence that 

establishes experience in applying 

guidelines contained in the ISO/IEC 

Guide 25, General Requirements for the 

Competence of Calibration and Testing 

Laboratories (referenced for guidance 

only, see 431.14) to energy efficiency 

testing for electric motors. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Appendix B to subpart B of part 431 

is amended by: 

■ a. Removing the introductory note; 

■ b. Adding Section 0; 

■ c. Revising Section 2; 

■ d. Removing Section 3; 

■ e. Redesignating Sections 4, 4.1,4.2, 

4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8 as Sections 

3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8 

respectively; 

■ f. Revising newly redesignated 

Section 3; and 

■ g. In newly redesignated Section 3.8, 

remove ‘‘IEEE 112 (Test Method B)’’ at 

each occurrence and add in its place, 

‘‘IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B.’’ 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

Appendix B to Subpart B of Part 431— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring 

Nominal Full Load Efficiency of 

Electric Motors 

0. Incorporation by Reference 

(a) In § 431.15, DOE incorporated by 

reference the entire standard for CSA C390– 

10, IEC 60034–1:2010, IEC 60034–2–1:2014, 

IEC 60051–1:2016, and IEEE 112–2017; 

however, only enumerated provisions of 

those documents are applicable as follows: 

(i) CSA C390–10: 

(1) Section 1.3 ‘‘Scope,’’ as specified in 

section 2(1) of this appendix; 

(2) Section 3.1 ‘‘Definitions,’’ as specified 

in section 2(1) of this appendix; 

(3) Section 5 ‘‘General test requirements— 

Measurements,’’ as specified in section 2(1) 

of this appendix; 

(4) Section 7 ‘‘Test method,’’ as specified 

in section 2(1) of this appendix; 

(5) Table 1 ‘‘Resistance measurement time 

delay,’’ as specified in section 2(1) of this 

appendix; 

(6) Annex B ‘‘Linear regression analysis,’’ 

as specified in section 2(1) of this appendix; 

and 

(7) Annex C ‘‘Procedure for correction of 

dynamometer torque readings’’ as specified 

in section 2(1) of this appendix. 

(ii) IEC 60034–1:2010: 

(1) Section 7.2 as specified in section 2(2) 

of this appendix; 

(2) Section 8.6.2.3.3 as specified in section 

2(2) of this appendix; and 

(3) Table 5 as specified in section 2(2) of 

this appendix. 

(iii) IEC 60034–2–1:2014: 

(1) Method 2–1–1B as specified in section 

2(2) and section 3, of this appendix; 

(2) Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’ as 

specified in section 2(2) of this appendix; 

(3) Section 4 ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’ 

as specified in section 2(2) of this appendix; 

(4) Section 5 ‘‘Basic requirements’’ as 

specified in section 2(2) of this appendix; 

and 

(5) Section 6.1.3 ‘‘Method 2–1–1B— 

Summation of losses, additional load losses 

according to the method of residual losses’’ 

as specified in section 2(2) of this appendix. 

(iv) IEEE 112–2017: 

(1) Test Method B, Input-Output With Loss 

Segregation as specified in section 2(3), 

section 3, and section 3.8 of this appendix; 

(2) Section 3 ‘‘General’’ as specified in 

section 2(3) of this appendix; 

(3) Section 4 ‘‘Measurements’’ as specified 

in section 2(3) of this appendix; 

(4) Section 5 ‘‘Machine losses and tests for 

losses’’ as specified in section 2(3) of this 

appendix; 

(5) Section 6.1 ‘‘General’’ as specified in 

section 2(3) of this appendix; 

(6) Section 6.4 ‘‘Efficiency test method B— 

Input-output with loss segregation’’ as 

specified in section 2(3) of this appendix; 

and 

(7) Section 9.4 ‘‘Form B—Method B’’, and 

Section 9.5 ‘‘Form B2—Method B 

calculations’’ as specified in section 2(3) of 

this appendix. 

(b) In § 431.15, DOE incorporated by 

reference the following enumerated 

provisions of NEMA MG 1–2009: 

(i) Paragraph 12.58.1, ‘‘Determination of 

Motor Efficiency and Losses’’ as specified in 

the introductory paragraph to section 2 of 

this appendix, and 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(c) In cases where there is a conflict, the 

language of this appendix takes precedence 

over those documents. Any subsequent 

amendment to a referenced document by the 

standard-setting organization will not affect 

the test procedure in this appendix, unless 

and until the test procedure is amended by 

DOE. Material is incorporated as it exists on 

the date of the approval, and a notice of any 

change in the material will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

* * * * * 

2. Test Procedures 

Efficiency and losses must be determined 

in accordance with NEMA MG 1–2009 

(incorporated by reference, see § 431.15), 

paragraph 12.58.1, ‘‘Determination of Motor 

Efficiency and Losses,’’ and one of the 

following testing methods: 

(1) CSA C390–10 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.15), Section 1.3 ‘‘Scope’’, 

Section 3.1 ‘‘Definitions’’, Section 5 ‘‘General 

test requirements—Measurements’’, Section 7 

‘‘Test method’’, Table 1 ‘‘Resistance 

measurement time delay’’, Annex B ‘‘Linear 

regression analysis’’ and Annex C ‘‘Procedure 

for correction of dynamometer torque 

readings.’’ 

(2) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.15), Method 2–1–1B, 

Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, Section 4 

‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, Section 5 

‘‘Basic requirements’’, Section 6.1.3 ‘‘Method 

2–1–1B—Summation of losses, additional 

load losses according to the method of 

residual losses.’’ The supply voltage shall be 

in accordance with section 7.2 of IEC 60034– 

1:2010 (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 431.15). The measured resistance at the end 

of the thermal test shall be determined in a 

similar way to the extrapolation procedure 

described in section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034– 

1:2010, using the shortest possible time 

instead of the time interval specified in Table 

5 therein, and extrapolating to zero. The 

measuring instruments for electrical 

quantities shall have the equivalent of an 

accuracy class of 0,2 in case of a direct test 

and 0,5 in case of an indirect test in 

accordance with IEC 60051–1:2016 

(incorporated by reference, see § 431.15), or 

(3) IEEE 112–2017, (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.15), Test Method B, 

Input-Output With Loss Segregation, Section 

3 ‘‘General’’, Section 4 ‘‘Measurements’’, 

Section 5 ‘‘Machine losses and tests for 

losses’’, Section 6.1 ‘‘General’’, Section 6.4 

‘‘Efficiency test method B—Input-output 

with loss segregation’’, Section 9.4 ‘‘Form 

B—Method B’’, and Section 9.5 ‘‘Form B2— 

Method B calculations.’’ 

3. Procedures for the Testing of Certain 

Electric Motor Types 

Prior to testing according to CSA C390–10, 

IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B, or IEEE 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 23 

112–2017 Test Method B, each basic model 

of the electric motor types listed below must 

be set up in accordance with the instructions 

of this section to ensure consistent test 

results. These steps are designed to enable a 

motor to be attached to a dynamometer and 

run continuously for testing purposes. For 

the purposes of this appendix, a ‘‘standard 

bearing’’ is a 6000 series, either open or 

grease-lubricated double-shielded, singlerow, deep groove, radial ball bearing. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Section 431.442 is amended by 

adding, in alphabetical order, 

definitions for ‘‘Breakdown torque’’, 

‘‘Rated frequency’’, ‘‘Rated load’’, 

‘‘Rated output power’’, and ‘‘Rated 

voltage’’, to read as follows: 

§ 431.442 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Breakdown torque means the 

maximum torque that the motor will 

develop with rated voltage and 

frequency applied without an abrupt 

drop in speed. The breakdown torque is 

the local maximum of the torque-speed 

plot of the motor, closest to the 

synchronous speed of the motor, 

determined in accordance with NEMA 

MG 1–2016 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 431.443). 

* * * * * 

Rated frequency means 60 hertz. 

Rated load (or full load, full rated 

load, or rated full load) means the rated 

output power of a small electric motor. 

Rated output power means the 

mechanical output power that 

corresponds to the small electric motor’s 

breakdown torque as specified in NEMA 

MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.443) for singlephase motors or 140 percent of the 

breakdown torque values specified in 

NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10–5 for 

polyphase motors. For purposes of this 

definition, NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 10– 

5 is applied regardless of whether 

elements of NEMA MG 1–2016 Table 

10–5 are identified as for small or 

medium motors. 

Rated voltage means the input voltage 

of a small electric motor used when 

making representations of the 

performance characteristics of a given 

small electric motor and selected by the 

motor’s manufacturer to be used for 

testing the motor’s efficiency. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Section 431.443 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a); 

■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c) as (d); 

■ c. Adding new paragraph (c); 

■ d. Revising newly redesignated 

paragraph (d)(1); and 

■ e. Adding paragraph (e). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 431.443 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

(a) General. Certain material is 

incorporated by reference into subpart X 

of part 431 with the approval of the 

Director of the Federal Register under 5 

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. 

Material is incorporated as it exists on 

the date of the approval, and a 

notification of any change in the 

material will be published in the 

Federal Register. Standards can be 

obtained from the sources below. All 

approved material is available for 

inspection at U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Sixth Floor, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW, Washington, DC 

20024, (202) 586–2945, or go to http:// 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/. It is also 

available at the National Archives and 

Records Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, email: fedreg.legal@

nara.gov, or go to: www.archives.gov/ 

federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

* * * * * 

(c) IEC. International Electrotechnical 

Commission, 3 rue de Varembe ́, 1st 

Floor, P.O. Box 131, CH—1211 Geneva 

20—Switzerland, +41 22 919 02 11, or 

go to https://webstore.iec.ch/home. 

(1) IEC 60034–1, Edition 12.0 2010– 

02, (‘‘IEC 60034–1:2010’’), Rotating 

electrical machines—Part 1: Rating and 

performance, IBR approved for 

§§ 431.444. 

(2) IEC 60034–2–1:2014, Edition 2.0 

2014–06, (‘‘IEC 60034–2–1:2014’’), 

Rotating electrical machines—Part 2–1: 

Standard methods for determining 

losses and efficiency from tests 

(excluding machines for traction 

vehicles), IBR approved for §§ 431.444, 

and 431.447. 

(3) IEC 60051–1:2016, Edition 6.0 

2016–02, (‘‘IEC 60051–1:2016), Direct 

acting indicating analogue electrical 

measuring instruments and their 

accessories—Part 1: Definitions and 

general requirements common to all 

parts, IBR approved for §§ 431.444. 

(d) * * * 

(1) IEEE 112TM–2017 (‘‘IEEE 112– 

2017’’), IEEE Standard Test Procedure 

for Polyphase Induction Motors and 

Generators, approved December 6, 2017, 

IBR approved for §§ 431.444, and 

431.447. 

* * * * * 

(e) NEMA. National Electrical 

Manufacturers Association, 1300 North 

17th Street, Suite 900, Arlington, 

Virginia 22209, +1 703 841 3200, or go 

to https://www.nema.org. 

(1) NEMA MG 1–2016, American 

National Standard for Motors and 

Generators, ANSI approved June 1, 

2018, IBR approved for § 431.442. 

(2) [Reserved] 

■ 9. Section 431.444 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 431.444 Test Procedures for the 

measurement of energy efficiency of small 

electric motors. 

(a) Scope. Pursuant to section 

346(b)(1) of EPCA, this section provides 

the test procedures for measuring the 

full-load efficiency of small electric 

motors pursuant to EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 

6317(b)(1)) For purposes of this part 431 

and EPCA, the test procedures for 

measuring the efficiency of small 

electric motors shall be the test 

procedures specified in paragraph (b) of 

this section. 

(b) Testing and Calculations. 

Determine the full-load efficiency of a 

small electric motor using one of the test 

methods listed in this paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (4) of this section. 

(1) Incorporation by reference: In 

§ 431.443, DOE incorporated by 

reference the entire standard for CSA 

C747–09, CSA C390–10, IEC 60034– 

1:2010, IEC 60034–2–1:2014, IEC 

60051–1:2016, IEEE 112–2017, and IEEE 

114–2010 into this section; however, 

only enumerated provisions of those 

documents referenced in this section are 

applicable as follows: 

(i) CSA C747–09: 

(A) Section 1.6 ‘‘Scope’’ as specified 

in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(3)(ii) of 

this section; 

(B) Section 3 ‘‘Definitions’’ as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and 

(b)(3)(ii) of this section; 

(C) Section 5 ‘‘General test 

requirements’’ as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(3)(ii) of this 

section; and 

(D) Section 6 ‘‘Test method’’ as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and 

(b)(3)(ii) of this section. 

(ii) CSA C390–10: 

(A) Section 1.3, ‘‘Scope’’ as specified 

in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section; 

(B) Section 3.1, ‘‘Definitions’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this 

section; 

(C) Section 5, ‘‘General test 

requirements—Measurements’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this 

section; 

(D) Section 7, ‘‘Test method’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this 

section; 

(E) Table 1, ‘‘Resistance measurement 

time delay’’ as specified in paragraph 

(b)(4)(ii) of this section; 

(F) Annex B, ‘‘Linear regression 

analysis’’ as specified in paragraph 

(b)(4)(ii) of this section; and 

(G) Annex C, ‘‘Procedure for 

correction of dynamometer torque 

24 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

readings’’ as specified in paragraph 

(b)(4)(ii) of this section. 

(iii) IEC 60034–1:2010: 

(A) Section 7.2 as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), (b)(3)(iii), and 

(b)(4)(iii) of this section; 

(B) Section 8.6.2.3.3 as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), (b)(3)(iii), and 

(b)(4)(iii) of this section; and 

(C) Table 5 as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(2)(iii), (b)(3)(iii), and (b)(4)(iii) of this 

section. 

(iv) IEC 60034–2–1:2014: 

(A) Method 2–1–1A as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(iii) and (b)(3)(iii) of 

this section; 

(B) Method 2–1–1B as specified in 

paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this section; 

(C) Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’ 

as specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), 

(b)(3)(iii), and (b)(4)(iii) of this section; 

(D) Section 4 ‘‘Symbols and 

abbreviations’’ as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), (b)(3)(iii), 

(b)(4)(iii) of this section; 

(E) Section 5 ‘‘Basic requirements’’ as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), 

(b)(3)(iii), and (b)(4)(iii) of this section; 

(F) Section 6.1.2 ‘‘Method 2–1–1A— 

Direct measurement of input and 

output’’ (except Section 6.1.2.2, ‘‘Test 

Procedure’’) as specified in paragraphs 

(b)(2)(iii) and (b)(3)(iii) of this section; 

(G) Section 6.1.3 ‘‘Method 2–1–1B— 

Summations of losses, additional load 

losses according to the method of 

residual losses’’ as specified in 

paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of this section; and 

(H) Annex D, ‘‘Test report template 

for 2–1–1B’’ as specified in paragraph 

(b)(4)(iii) of this section. 

(v) IEC 60051–1:2016: 

(A) Section 5.2 as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), (b)(3)(iii) and 

(b)(4)(iii), of this section; and 

(B) [Reserved] 

(vi) IEEE 112–2017: 

(A) Test Method A as specified in 

paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section; 

(B) Test Method B as specified in 

paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section; 

(C) Section 3, ‘‘General’’ as specified 

in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (b)(4)(i) of 

this section; 

(D) Section 4, ‘‘Measurements’’ as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and 

(b)(4)(i) of this section; 

(E) Section 5, ‘‘Machine losses and 

tests for losses’’ as specified in 

paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (b)(4)(i) of this 

section; 

(F) Section 6.1, ‘‘General’’ as specified 

in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (b)(4)(i) of 

this section; 

(G) Section 6.3, ‘‘Efficiency test 

method A—Input-output’’ as specified 

in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section; 

(H) Section 6.4, ‘‘Efficiency test 

method B—Input-output’’ as specified 

in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section; 

(I) Section 9.2, ‘‘Form A—Method A’’ 

as specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this 

section; 

(J) Section 9.3, ‘‘Form A2—Method A 

calculations’’ as specified in paragraph 

(b)(3)(i) of this section; 

(K) Section 9.4, ‘‘Form B—Method B’’ 

as specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this 

section; and 

(L) Section 9.5, ‘‘Form B2—Method B 

calculations’’ as specified in paragraph 

(b)(4)(i) of this section. 

(vii) IEEE 114–2010: 

(A) Section 3.2, ‘‘Test with load’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section; 

(B) Section 4, ‘‘Testing Facilities as 

specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section; 

(C) Section 5, ‘‘Measurements’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section; 

(D) Section 6, ‘‘General’’ as specified 

in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section; 

(E) Section 7, ‘‘Type of loss’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section; 

(F) Section 8, ‘‘Efficiency and Power 

Factor’’ as specified in paragraph 

(b)(2)(i) of this section; 

(G) Section 10 ‘‘Temperature Tests’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section; 

(H) Annex A, Section A.3 

‘‘Determination of Motor Efficiency’’ as 

specified in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 

section; and 

(I) Annex A, Section A.4 ‘‘Explanatory 

notes for form 3, test data’’ as specified 

in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section. 

(viii) In cases where there is a 

conflict, the language of this appendix 

takes precedence over those documents. 

Any subsequent amendment to a 

referenced document by the standardsetting organization will not affect the 

test procedure in this appendix, unless 

and until the test procedure is amended 

by DOE. 

(2) Single-phase small electric motors. 

For single-phase small electric motors, 

use one of the following methods: 

(i) IEEE 114–2010, Section 3.2, ‘‘Test 

with load’’, Section 4, ‘‘Testing 

Facilities, Section 5, ‘‘Measurements’’, 

Section 6, ‘‘General’’, Section 7, ‘‘Type 

of loss’’, Section 8, ‘‘Efficiency and 

Power Factor’’; Section 10 

‘‘Temperature Tests’’, Annex A, Section 

A.3 ‘‘Determination of Motor 

Efficiency’’, Annex A, Section A.4 

‘‘Explanatory notes for form 3, test 

data’’; 

(ii) CSA C747–09, Section 1.6 

‘‘Scope’’, Section 3 ‘‘Definitions’’, 

Section 5, ‘‘General test requirements’’, 

and Section 6 ‘‘Test method’’; 

(iii) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– 

1A, Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, 

Section 4 ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, 

Section 5 ‘‘Basic requirements’’, and 

Section 6.1.2 ‘‘Method 2–1–1A—Direct 

measurement of input and output’’ 

(except Section 6.1.2.2, ‘‘Test 

Procedure’’). The supply voltage shall 

be in accordance with section 7.2 of IEC 

60034–1:2010 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.443). The measured 

resistance at the end of the thermal test 

shall be determined in a similar way to 

the extrapolation procedure described 

in section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034–1:2010, 

using the shortest possible time instead 

of the time interval specified in Table 5 

therein, and extrapolating to zero. The 

measuring instruments for electrical 

quantities shall have the equivalent of 

an accuracy class of 0,2 in case of a 

direct test and 0,5 in case of an indirect 

test in accordance with section 5.2 of 

IEC 60051–1:2016 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.443). 

(A) Additional IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1A Torque Measurement 

Instructions. 

If using IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 

2–1–1A to measure motor performance, 

follow the instructions in paragraph 

(b)(2)(iii)(B) of this section, instead of 

section 6.1.2.2 of IEC 60034–2–1:2014; 

(B) Couple the machine under test to 

a load machine. Measure torque using 

an in-line, shaft-coupled, rotating torque 

transducer or stationary, stator reaction 

torque transducer. Operate the machine 

under test at the rated load until thermal 

equilibrium is achieved (rate of change 

1 K or less per half hour). Record U, I, 

Pel, n, T, qc. 

(3) Polyphase small electric motors of 

less than or equal to 1 horsepower (0.75 

kW). For polyphase small electric 

motors with 1 horsepower or less, use 

one of the following methods: 

(i) IEEE 112–2017 Test Method A, 

Section 3, ‘‘General’’, Section 4, 

‘‘Measurements’’, Section 5, ‘‘Machine 

losses and tests for losses’’, Section 6.1, 

‘‘General’’, Section 6.3, ‘‘Efficiency test 

method A—Input-output’’, Section 9.2, 

‘‘Form A—Method A’’, and Section 9.3, 

‘‘Form A2—Method A calculations’’; 

(ii) CSA C747–09, Section 1.6 

‘‘Scope’’, Section 3 ‘‘Definitions’’, 

Section 5, ‘‘General test requirements’’, 

and Section 6 ‘‘Test method’’; 

(iii) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– 

1A, Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, 

Section 4 ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, 

Section 5 ‘‘Basic requirements’’, and 

Section 6.1.2 ‘‘Method 2–1–1A—Direct 

measurement of input and output’’ 

(except Section 6.1.2.2, ‘‘Test 

Procedure’’). The supply voltage shall 

be in accordance with section 7.2 of IEC 

60034–1:2010. The measured resistance 

at the end of the thermal test shall be 

determined in a similar way to the 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 25 

extrapolation procedure described in 

section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034–1:2010 

using the shortest possible time instead 

of the time interval specified in Table 5 

therein, and extrapolating to zero. The 

measuring instruments for electrical 

quantities shall have the equivalent of 

an accuracy class of 0,2 in case of a 

direct test and 0,5 in case of an indirect 

test in accordance with section 5.2 of 

IEC 60051–1:2016. 

(A) Additional IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1A Torque Measurement 

Instructions. 

If using IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 

2–1–1A to measure motor performance, 

follow the instructions in paragraph 

(b)(3)(iii)(B) of this section, instead of 

section 6.1.2.2 of IEC 60034–2–1:2014; 

(B) Couple the machine under test to 

load machine. Measure torque using an 

in-line shaft-coupled, rotating torque 

transducer or stationary, stator reaction 

torque transducer. Operate the machine 

under test at the rated load until thermal 

equilibrium is achieved (rate of change 

1 K or less per half hour). Record U, I, 

Pel, n, T, qc. 

(4) Polyphase small electric motors of 

greater than 1 horsepower (0.75 kW). 

For polyphase small electric motors 

exceeding 1 horsepower, use one of the 

following methods: 

(i) IEEE 112–2017 Test Method B, 

Section 3, ‘‘General’’; Section 4, 

‘‘Measurements’’; Section 5, ‘‘Machine 

losses and tests for losses’’, Section 6.1, 

‘‘General’’, Section 6.4, ‘‘Efficiency test 

method B—Input-output with loss 

segregation’’, Section 9.4, ‘‘Form B— 

Method B’’, and Section 9.5, ‘‘Form 

B2—Method B calculations’’; or 

(ii) CSA C390–10, Section 1.3, 

‘‘Scope’’, Section 3.1, ‘‘Definitions’’, 

Section 5, ‘‘General test requirements— 

Measurements’’, Section 7, ‘‘Test 

method’’, Table 1, ‘‘Resistance 

measurement time delay, Annex B, 

‘‘Linear regression analysis’’, and Annex 

C, ‘‘Procedure for correction of 

dynamometer torque readings’’; or 

(iii) IEC 60034–2–1:2014 Method 2–1– 

1B Section 3 ‘‘Terms and definitions’’, 

Section 4 ‘‘Symbols and abbreviations’’, 

Section 5 ‘‘Basic requirements’’, Section 

6.1.3 ‘‘Method 2–1–1B—Summation of 

losses, additional load losses according 

to the method of residual losses.’’, and 

Annex D, ‘‘Test report template for 2– 

1–1B. The supply voltage shall be in 

accordance with section 7.2 of IEC 

60034–1:2010. The measured resistance 

at the end of the thermal test shall be 

determined in a similar way to the 

extrapolation procedure described in 

section 8.6.2.3.3 of IEC 60034–1:2010 

using the shortest possible time instead 

of the time interval specified in Table 5 

therein, and extrapolating to zero. The 

measuring instruments for electrical 

quantities shall have the equivalent of 

an accuracy class of 0,2 in case of a 

direct test and 0,5 in case of an indirect 

test in accordance with section 5.2 of 

IEC 60051–1:2016. 

■ 10. Section 431.447 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(4) and (c)(4), to 

read as follows: 

§ 431.447 Department of Energy 

recognition of nationally recognized 

certification programs. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) It must be expert in the content 

and application of the test procedures 

and methodologies in IEEE 112–2017 

Test Method A, IEEE 112–2017 Test 

Method B, IEEE 114–2010, IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1A, IEC 60034– 

2–1:2014 Method 2–1–1B, CSA C390– 

10, or CSA C747–09 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.443) or similar 

procedures and methodologies for 

determining the energy efficiency of 

small electric motors. It must have 

satisfactory criteria and procedures for 

the selection and sampling of electric 

motors tested for energy efficiency. 

(c) * * * 

(4) Expertise in small electric motor 

test procedures. The petition should set 

forth the program’s experience, as 

applicable, with the test procedures and 

methodologies in, IEEE 112–2017 Test 

Method A, IEEE 112–2017 Test Method 

B, IEEE 114–2010, IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1A, IEC 60034–2–1:2014 

Method 2–1–1B, CSA C390–10, and 

CSA C747–09 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 431.443) and with 

similar procedures and methodologies. 

This part of the petition should include 

items such as, but not limited to, a 

description of prior projects and 

qualifications of staff members. Of 

particular relevance would be 

documentary evidence that establishes 

experience in applying guidelines 

contained in the ISO/IEC Guide 25, 

General Requirements for the 

Competence of Calibration and Testing 

Laboratories to energy efficiency testing 

for electric motors. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2020–27662 Filed 12–31–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 97 

[Docket No. 31349; Amdt. No. 3938] 

Standard Instrument Approach 

Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums 

and Obstacle Departure Procedures; 

Miscellaneous Amendments 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, 

or removes Standard Instrument 

Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and 

associated Takeoff Minimums and 

Obstacle Departure Procedures for 

operations at certain airports. These 

regulatory actions are needed because of 

the adoption of new or revised criteria, 

or because of changes occurring in the 

National Airspace System, such as the 

commissioning of new navigational 

facilities, adding new obstacles, or 

changing air traffic requirements. These 

changes are designed to provide for the 

safe and efficient use of the navigable 

airspace and to promote safe flight 

operations under instrument flight rules 

at the affected airports. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 4, 

2021. The compliance date for each 

SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, 

and ODP is specified in the amendatory 

provisions. 

The incorporation by reference of 

certain publications listed in the 

regulations is approved by the Director 

of the Federal Register as of January 4, 

2021. 

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter 

incorporated by reference in the 

amendment is as follows: 

For Examination 

1. U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Ops–M30, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001; 

2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization 

Service Area in which the affected 

airport is located; 

3. The office of Aeronautical 

Navigation Products, 6500 South 

MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 

73169 or, 

4. The National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). 

For information on the availability of 

this material at NARA, email 

fedreg.legal@nara.gov or go to: https://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ 

ibr-locations.html.