Department of Energy

Washington, DC 20585

JUN 122001

Ms. Lenore Berman

Engineering Group Leader

Underwriters Laboratories Inc.

333 Pfingsten Road

Northbrook, IL 60062

Dear Ms. Berman:

Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL) has submitted to the Department of Energy (Department).

on February 16. 2001. a petition to have its Energy Verification Service program (Program) fo:

electric motors classified as a nationally recognized certification program for electric motor

efficiency.

For a certification program to be classified by the Department as being nationally recognized the

program must (1) have satisfactory procedures for conducting and administering a certification

system. (2) be independent. (3) operate in a highly competent manner. (4) have personnel expert

in the content and application of IEEE Standard 112-1996 Test Method B and CSA Standard

C390-93 Test :Method (1). and (3;) must have satisfactory criteria and procedures for selection and

sampling of electric motors. See section 431.27(b) of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part

431 (10 CFR Pan 431). Guidance as to the documentary evidence a petitioning organization

should provide to the Department. including evidence that establishes experience in the

application of guidelines contained in ISO/IEC Guides 65. 27, 28, and 25. is found in section

431.27(c).

Summary ofIn7ormation Needed

We have examined the UL petition and find that, in pan. it is deficient to be classified as a

`'nationally recognized program." More information is needed before the UL program can

become a'.nationally recognized program." The Department would classify the UL petition as

nationally recognized provided that the findings of the Department's investigation are satisfactor

and UL submits satisfactory information as to the following:

1) Copies of the specific documents. that have been approved by appropriately authorized UL

personnel . and are used as the standard operating procedures for the UL Energy Verification

Service program as it pertains to electric motors.

Well documented procedures, including a copy of the UL Client Interactive Manual, as

evidence of rigorous oversight of testing performed at a motor manufacturer's facility to

ensure that the measurement of a motor's efficiency follows the test procedures under section

431.23 of 10 CFR Part 431.

Punted with soy ink on reccycred paper

EE-RM-96-400-UL COMMENT 10
3) Evidence that the UL motor sampling procedures are statistically valid, including evidence

that the sample is of sufficient size, and individual units to be tested are selected at random,

and that the sampling procedures render confidence limits such that the true mean energy

efficiency of a basic model (i.e.. the average efficiency of all units manufactured) meets or

exceeds the motor's represented energy efficiency level.

4) Explanation as to what are the critical design and construction features UL evaluates to

predict an electric motor's energy efficiency, and how UL evaluates the alternative efficiency

determination methods a manufacturer uses to predict the efficiency of a particular motor

design.

5) Evidence of the technical qualifications and experience in the electric motor industry that the

UL personnel directly involved with the UL Energy Verification Service for Electric Motors

have for making technical evaluations and technical decisions with regard to critical product

construction features. motor efficiency performance and efficiency testing using IEEE 11-2-

1996 Test Method B and CS.A C390-93 Test Method 1.

6) Evidence as to the nature and extent of training that the current staff. actually involved with

the energy verification service for motors, regularly undergoes to maintain proficiency in the

evaluation of motor designs and construction. and the practice of energy efficiency testing.

7) Information as to how the actual audit procedure for energy verification for electric motors is

conducted. what the auditor looks for. how often such audits occur. and whether such audits

are unannounced.

8) Evidence as to (a) the number of motor manufacturing facilities that are involved in the UL

Program. (b) how many "unannounced" follow-up visits concerning the energy efficiency

verification of motors are. in fact. carried out each year at a manufacturer's facility. (c)

qualifications of UL staff involved in such visits. (d) what statistical sampling process is used

and does it involve random sampling. (e) whether actual testing is conducted or witnessed by

UL staff. and (f) what constitutes a "qualified facility.''

9) Explanation of the procedures for dealing with an electric motor found to be in nonconformance with the applicable energy efficiency standard.

10) Documents that set forth the policies or procedures that distinguish (a) a direct or indirect

relationship with a motor manufacturer, importer, or private labeler that is in a situation

where UL both provides a safety Listing service and an Energy Verification Service for its

motors, and (b) where a manufacturer's representative serves on a UL Standards Technical

Panel (STP), such as a STP for UL 1004, Electric Motors. Such relationships need more

explanation as to why each would not create or appear to create a conflict of interest.

compromise UL's independence. or bias information presented to UL for the purposes of

compliance with 10 CFR Part 431.

EE-RM-96-400-UL COMMENT 10
11) Evidence as to whether the UL Energy Verification Service program for electric motors is or

will become accredited by another organization , such as the American National Standards

Institute.

Further elaboration as to the Department 's initial review of the UL petition and requests for

additional information are found below.

Review by the Department

1) Standards and Procedures for Conducting and Administering a Certification System

Sections 431.27(b)(1) and (c)(1) of 10 CFR Part 431 set forth criteria and guidelines for the

standards and procedures to be used in administering a certification system and granting a

certificate of conformity.

In Attachment 1. "431.27(c)(1) Standards and Operating Procedures." of the UL petition. it is

stated that "Underwriters Laboratories Inc. product safety certification program is an ISO Guide

65 compliant program" and that "ULs Energy Verification utilizes the same operation manuals as

UL's product safety certification services with minor variations that are detailed in the UL Energy

Verification Manual." The Department understands that overall UL verification services are

offered in various product areas and are based on national and international accreditation

requirements. and that UL carries out the ISO/IEC Guide 65 requirements through its Energy

Verification service.

It appears to the Department that the UL procedures for operating a certification system.

provided as attachments to the petition . are very general in nature and could be satisfactorily

applied to any certification program conducted by UL. The aforementioned "minor variations" in

the UL Directory, "Products Verified to Energy Efficiency Standards," include the scope of

motors that are I through 200 horsepower, three-phase induction motors, and a declaration of the

test procedures to used : CSA C390-93 and the test procedures under section 431.23 of Title 10

Code of Federal Regulations Part 431. The Department has concerns as to whether the specific

standards and procedures by which the UL Program for electric motors operates under are

adequate , properly documented , well established and maintained. as per ISO/IEC Guide 65. and

in particular sections 4.3. 4.8, 5. and 13.

UL should submit to the Department copies of the specific documents that have been approved by,

appropriately authorized UL personnel. and are used as the standard operating procedures for the

UL Energy Verification Service program as it pertains to electric motors.

Also, in Attachment 1. "Test Facility Evaluation," of the UL petition, it is generally stated that

UL's Energy Verification Service is designed to make use of a manufacturer's test facilities, and

that a client may utilize the UL Client Test Data Program. under which "all tests are witnessed by

UL staff." or the UL Witness Test Data Program. which requires "initial and annual assessments

of the clients testing capabilities." It appears that the UL Program relies heavily on the

EE-RM-96-400-UL COMMENT 10
manufacturer to conduct testing and provide most of the data by which a motor's efficiency

would be evaluated. However, it is not clear how each of these programs operates and what are

the specific procedures UL follows to qualify a (manufacturer's) laboratory to test motors for

energy efficiency under either program, and whether these programs follow the guidelines

contained in section 431.27(c)(3) and (4) of 10 CFR Part 431. In addition to IEEE 112-1996

Test Method B and CSA Standard C390 Test Method (1), what does UL require a motor

manufacturer to have in the way of specific detailed test procedures for its test facility?

UL should submit to the Department well documented procedures, including a copy of the UL

Client Interactive Manual, as evidence of rigorous oversight of testing performed at a motor

manufacturer 's facility to ensure that the measurement of a motor's efficiency adheres to the test

procedures under section 431.23 of 10 CFR Part 431.

Also. in Attachment 1. "Sample Selection ." of the UL petition it is stated that representative

samples are selected for use in testing ; these samples adequately represent a manufacturer 's line of

motors. and the objective is to obtain sufficient confidence that the series of motors both meet the

applicable efficiency standard and the number of tests is minimized.

It is not clear to the Department what constitutes 'representative samples." and in particular. the

criteria and procedures for the random selection and sampling of electric motors to be tested and

verified for energy efficiency. Under section 431.24(a)(1) of 10 CFR Part 431, the average full

load efficiency of each basic model of electric motor must either be determined by testing or by

the application of an alternative efficiency determination method. What is the specific compliance

testing sampling plan that UL requires a motor manufacturer to follow. including the criteria used

to determine if the results of the testing using this plan are in compliance. If this plan differs from

section 431 24 of 10 CFR Part 43 1. UL should provide a statistical substantiation and confidence

level basis for its plan, including evidence that the sample is of sufficient size and individual units

to be tested are selected at random, and that the sampling procedures render confidence limits

such that the true mean energy efficiency of a basic model (i.e.. the average efficiency of all units

manufactured) meets or exceeds the motor's represented energy efficiency level.

Also. in Attachment 1. "Product Construction Evaluation." UL asserts that it evaluates critical

electric motor construction features that affect energy efficiency, and evaluates a manufacturer's

quality control methods for consistent production of energy efficient motors. UL should submit

to the Department further explanation as to what are the critical design and construction features

it evaluates to predict an electric motor's energy efficiency . Also, UL should submit evidence as

to the nature and extent of training that its current staff, actually involved in the UL Energy

Verification Service program for motors, regularly undergoes to maintain proficiency in the

evaluation of motor designs and construction , and the practice of energy efficiency testing.

Also, in Attachment I. "On-Going Production Testing." UL asserts that it periodically audits the

results of a manufacturer 's production testing in order to monitor continued compliance with

energy efficiency requirements. What frequency of on-going production testing does UL require

a motor manufacturer to comply with? UL should submit to the Department information as to

4

EE-RM-96-400-UL COMMENT 10
how the actual audit procedure for energy verification for motors is conducted , what it looks for,

how often such audits occur, and whether such audits are unannounced . Also, does UL require a

motor manufacturer , that does not have an accredited laboratory , to participate in a proficiency

testing program? If not, why not? If so, how is the program administered?

Also, in Attachment 1, "Follow-Up Visits and Testing." it is stated that UL representatives

conduct "unannounced inspections " and "typically, two visits to each manufacturing facility are

carried out each year ." Also, UL asserts that during each visit, samples are selected by the UL

representative and tested "by the manufacturer at its own or other qualified facility." What are the

technical qualifications and experience in the electric motor industry of the UL representatives

that perform the follow-up visits and testing ? UL should submit to the Department evidence as to

(a) the number of motor manufacturing facilities that are involved in the UL Program , (b) how

many "unannounced " follow-up visits concerning the energy efficiency verification of motors are,

in fact, carried out each year at a manufacturer's facility, ( c) qualifications of UL staff involved in

such visits. (d) what statistical sampling process is used and whether it involves random sampling,

(e) are the samples for testing selected at random and promptly tested to preclude the motor

manufacturer from pretesting and/or production modification. (f) whether actual testing is

conducted or witnessed by UL staff. and (g) what constitutes a "qualified facility."

Also, in Attachment 1. "Non-Conformance." the UL petition generally describes what a

manufacturer must do if a product is found to be out of conformance with the applicable energy

efficiency requirements . It is not clear to the Department how a manufacturer would "cull" out

any non-conforming motors, nor is it clear how it would be determined that "no other sample will

exhibit non-conformance." UL should submit a clear explanation of the procedures for dealing

with non-conformance.

Also, in Attachment 1, "Certification." the UL petition generally describes the events that follow a

satisfactory determination by UL that a manufacturer meets the applicable standard and

regulation, which include authorization to receive the UL Energy Verification Mark, a follow-up

report that identifies the motors found in compliance , efficiency ratings, critical construction

features. test results. and follow-up testing requirements . UL should submit its standards and/or

procedures for granting a certificate of conformity to a motor manufacturer.

2) Independence

Section 431.27(c)(2) and (3) of 10 CFR Part 431 provide guidance to a certification program as

to how it should address its "independent status" and types of documentary evidence by which to

substantiate that independent status. Sections 4.2 (1-n) of ISO/IEC Guide 65 provide guidance

for operating a certification system and set forth guidelines whereby a certification body shall have

policies and procedures that distinguish between product certification and other activities , be free

from commercial , financial, and other pressures , have formal rules and structures for the

appointment and operation of any committees involved in the certification process, and those

committees shall be free from pressures that might influence decisions. and where committee

members represent a balance of interests and no one interest predominates . It appears that UL

5

EE-RM-96-400-UL COMMENT 10
has not followed this guidance in the preparation of its petition.

In Attachment 2, "431.27(c)(2) Independence," of the UL petition. it is stated that "UL is

independent and impartial of any individual supplier or purchaser and is free from any other

conflict of interest."

The Department understands that UL administers development of standards for safety, such as

UL 1004, "Electric Motors." through a Standards Technical Panel (STP) comprised of producers.

users, and generally interested parties. and through open meetings where any manufacturer could

attend. It appears that UL could have an ongoing relationship, direct or indirect, with a motor

manufacturer, importer, or private labeler where (a) the Efficiency Verification Service is

combined with the safety Listing service for that manufacturer, or (b) a manufacturer's

representative serves on an STP. Because independence means freedom from control by others.

UL needs to explain why the fact that it has ongoing relationships with many motor

manufacturers. who pay UL for its services, does not result in a situation where a motor

manufacturer might influence UL to make a biased decision. Such relationships need more

explanztion as to why each would not compromise UL's independence, or bias information

presented to UL for the purposes of compliance with 10 CFR Part 431. UL should submit to the

Department documents that set forth the policies or procedures that distinguish such direct or

indirect relationships from its Energy Verification Service program for motors. Such relationships

need more explanation as to why each would not create or appear to create_a conflict of interest.

compromise UL's independence. or bias information presented to UL for the purposes of

compliance with 10 CFR Part 431.

3) Operation of a Certification System in a Highly Competent Manner

Sections 431.27(b)(3 ). (c)(3). and (c)(4) of 10 CFR Pan 431 set forth criteria and guidelines for

operating a certification system in a highly competent manner and expertise in motor test

procedures. Section 431.27(c)(4) calls for documentary evidence that establishes, in pan.

experience in overseeing compliance with the guidelines contained in ISO,'IEC Guide 25.

In Attachment 3. "431.27( c)(3) Qualifications," of the UL petition there is mention of UL's

history, principal safety investigation activities . standards development. corporate growth, testing

experience , and expertise in various areas. Also. mention is made of UL 's involvement in over 80

accreditation programs. Is the UL Energy Verification Service program for electric motors. or

will it become , accredited by another organization such as the American National Standards

Institute?

4) Expertise in IEEE 112-1996 Test Method B and CS A C390-93 Test Method (1). and

Satisfactory Criteria and Procedures for Statistical Sampling

In Attachment 4, "General," UL asserts that it has been providing Energy Verification

certification services since 1995, and that it has evaluated I through 200 horsepower motors using

the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standard 112 Test Method B or CSA^

International Standard CSA C390. After examination of the UL Directory for "Products Verified

6

EE-RM-96-400-UL COMMENT 10
to Energy Efficiency Standards," it appears to the Department that only one manufacturer's

electric motors have been verified, using CSA Standard C390-93, for energy efficiency in

accordance with United States standards. Furthermore, in Attachment 4, "431.27(c)(4) Expertise

in Motor Test Procedures " of the UL petition it is stated that UL engineering staff maintains a

minimum four-year Bachelor of Science in engineering. Additionally, UL provides supporting

documents with its petition as to the qualifications of certain managing engineers.

It appears to the Department of Energy that only UL Department 3018CNBK at Northbrook,

Illinois. evaluates 1 through 200 horsepower electric motors for energy efficiency . It is not clear

to the Department how many UL staff are, in fact, directly involved in motor efficiency testing,

what are each person 's technical qualifications and experience in the electric motor industry,

what is the capability of UL staff to evaluate an alternative efficiency determination method that

would be used tocalculate the predicted energy efficiency of a particular motor design, and

whether those staff persons in fact conduct witness testing and periodic followup inspections and

testing at manufz,Mirrer 's facilities. UL should submit to the Department evidence of the

technical qualifications and experience in the electric motor industry of each staff person that is

directly involved in its Energy Verification Service program for electric motors.

Also, the UL Director;, "Products Verified to Energy Efficiency Standards." lists only one

manufacturer that it has evaluated according to United States regulations. Since the publication

of this directory , have any additional electric motor manufacturers been listed?

Conclusion

The Department believes that the UL Energy Verification Service program for electric motors

could meet the evaluation criteria set forth in section 431.27 of 10 CFR Part 431. Thus. the

Department would publish in the Federal Register its intention to classify the UL Energy

Verification Service program for electric motors as "nationally recognized," provided that the

findings of the Department's investigation are met satisfactorily. Also, that within 30 days UL

submits the additional information requested in this letter to: U.S. Department of Energy. Office

of Building Research and Standards, EE-41. 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.. Washington, DC

20585-0121. In case you have any questions concerning the above, please contact Mr. James

Raba, of my staff, at (202) 586-9127.

Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

L.

Edward O. Pollock, Jr., Director

Office of Building Research and Standar

Office of Building Technology, State

and Community Programs

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

EE-RM-96-400-UL COMMENT 10