_-_ ...... - ;::0;1'."" 

A R R IS 

I\1EM()RANUlJ.\l 

10: cxpurtccollllllunicntions lit' hg ,doc. gQV 

From: Jason Friedrich and Jenni fer S~ll f"rd 

Date: August lI, 2014 

Rc: Ex parte communication 

o..'pal'llllcnt of Energy 

Docket Number EERE-2014-13T-NOA-OOI2 

Meeting 01' ALLg:,,,l 7,2014 

I I I I I I I I I 

CISCO 

Till,> memonmdum for Ihe re~ord rm)vid~, ,\ Sumrnury of ~ll Augu,[ 7,20 14 lT~din g wilh 

U.S . Depanment of bnergy staff concerning OOF's Notice of Oala Avuibbilily fOT Energy 

COll<.ervation Standards and Test Procedure for Battery Chargers, 79 Fed. Reg. 27774 (M~y 15. 

2(14). 

Meeling ~Ilendee~: 

Jeremy Dommu (DOE Office of Energy Efficiency ~nd Renew~ble Energy) 

Daniel Cohen (DOE Office of UCllCrai Counsel) 

DOlLg1a.~ Rawald (DOE OHicc of General Counsel) 

Mkh<lel Kido (DOF. Office "i' General Cnunwl) 

Jason Friedrich CARRIS) 

Tom Kdkher CARRIS) 

Jennifer Sanford (Cisco) 

John Hodges (\Vilcy Rcin) 

The p:uties di~<:u~""d issu<" n\i,ed in a Idler ,uhmiued hy ARRIS on July IS, 20 14, a 

copy of which is attached ilS Appe~di~ A; und u PSU-hallery ~hurger-m'x"'l11 inlerl'a~e hl()ck 

diagram, u copy of which is mtuched as Appendix R. 

Thc indllslry rcpres.cntatives voiC<'d their strong support for en~rgy efficiency. This has 

induded. for e~ample. participation in the Voluntary Agreemen( on energy dficiency of set-top 

bo~~s, i~dudil\g on lh~ Slttri11g COJllJlliHoe. 

They ,lressed the imporwnce of a proper hundling by rX1F. of Con(inuou, Use Pn,ldll<:l';. 

Thc~e products arc incrcasingly more integrated, with m<,'re fuoction~lity being performed by a 

'y'lern chip or chip s.ct. Backup baltery charging is not the primary fU11ction of the product. 

There i, no ubilily lO "lurn "w lll<2 l"C,l oj (he prtxluc( or chip and leave ol1ly tIl<' battcry charging 

fuoction on while resting. As il re~ulI., Ihe DOE (e,s[ pr(x:edurl:' O"l:'rSlales lhe energy uSl:'d, hy 

iocluding not only thc cncrgy usage of the backup buttery charging >yotl:'lTI but <11>0 the energy 

Uf.agc of (b~ rc,l or- the product. It is not fca~iblc to add off switches to disable tile non charging 
funclionalilY where Ihe charging fun<;lionalily is inlegraled 'II lhe sy,leTTl chip or chip ~el lev~L 

Hen~e, the I~sl prOCedlll'~ rlln>; conlr~ry lolhe fuml~menlill pllrp{)8~ under the Energy Policy and 

Conscrvation Act to test a product in a manner representative of its true energy consumption 

charactcnstics. 

Whik Ihe indu,t.ry repre."'nlulive~ urged Ihal Conlinl!()u\ Use Pnxlucl.s nol be induded in 

lhe >cope of DOE r~gul~li()n, lhey urged lh<ll ~hange, loll"" I~SI procedure are nece'~ary in orde r 

to accommodllte >uch prooucto; if they ~re in.juded. ARRIS's comments of June 30, 2014 

recommend appropriate technical changes to the test procedure that would esti.mate the energy 

consumption of the battclY backup systcm in a reasonable and cost cffeetive manner if 

Continuous Use Products are includcd in the scope of DOE regulation. 

The p<lrties uiscussed the lechnical changes sel forlh in the ARRIS cmnmelllS. The>e 

would involve m,xlilkalion of the lesl proceuure to i,olale Ihe nonnal olJer<lling power of the 

devi<:e where t.he buUery is only ulilized <IS an en"" gen~y ba~kup. The commenl> propo~e the 

addition of a "normalization" proceos to detemu1le what IXlltion of normal operating power is 

associatcd with the charging funclion, This process would allow the buttelY charging "llergy 

consumption to be quantified and comparcd rcgardless of tile product type and intendcd usc. 

This approach enables Ihe energy consumption 01 thc bauery charging functionality to be 

cakululed wbile Ihe product is be.ing used as inlended anu withoul requiring specialle,1 fixture" 

devi<:e mlxlificaliol1~> or ']J<":;aliz~d >oftwure. 

The practicability of th" sUgge,ted test procedurc changes was fUrlhcr disGusscd, Tile 

industry representatives indicatcd Ihat battcries can gcncrally he removed 01' ()/hCl"\\o'isc 

di>.Connecled from the prooud; lhe changes also pnwidc a way to addre", ,iluations where. lhe. 

barlery c,mnol lJe remoy~d or <.~herwi", disc()nneded, In uddiliol1, II"" ,~llggeoled lesl procedllre 

changes ~re broadly ~ppli<:able ~nd do nOI relate only to ARRIS product>. J leoce, there would be 

no need to write different tcst methods for different Continuous Us.e Products. Fmthcr, the 

suggcsted Ic~t pn)Ccdmc changes are not bmdensomc to conduct. 

The indu,lry repre-;enlalive, a]so urged Ihal l',ontilluow, U"" Pmdu<;ls bt: exduded from 

Ihe o\:ope of DOE regul~t.ion, In~hj(l ng lhe", pnxlll~ls ill baltery ch~rg r regulatiollo ~dd~ 

additional regul~tory burdens and C()~ts to manufacturers and consumer,> withoot pj"()viding 

meaningful cncrgy savings. 

DOE llluicated that it wrRlld cOIlsider Ihis matter further. Thc industry rcprc!icl1lmh'c<; 

indicaled lhat lhe), would likely provide addition<ll inlimnalion Ii)!" the record lilr DOE\ 

~(lnsi(kl"ilt.ion, und Ihey expr~'~ed u de~ire 10 I'urlher ~o"penlle in resolving Ihe i,we" 

2 
APPEJlimX A 
--- ~ 

A R R I S 

July 18, 20J4 

Kathkcn 13. Hogan 

Deputy As,;slant Secretary for bnergy Effkiency 

Energy Hlidcncy and Renewable Energy 

U.S. Deparlment of Encrgy 

EE-5 

1000 Indepellden<:e Ayenue. SW 

Washington, lX' 20508 

Rc: Docket "'umher I.ERI£-2014-BT-NOA-0012 

Dear \h, Hogan: 

ARRlS Group, rn~. CARRIS") has reviewed the conunell1~ suhmilled in "'Sp{)]lS~ to Ihe 

Department of Energy's C'DOE") Nolice or Data Availability ("~ODA") fOf Energy Conservalion 

Slandartls and Test Procedure for B~ttery Chargers, I ARRlS believes that it is important to bring ""rtain 

mailers 10 ooE', attention concerning those commeniS. 

ARRIS strongly di~agrees with the small minority of the commenl.~ daiming thallhe DOE lest 

procedure w; applied to "O)nl inU()ll~ Use PI'OOllC1S," products that use bat1ery p<Jwer onl y in lhe evenl of 

power fRllages or similur emergenq c(ln(lil.ion" is ~llfhcient and that it is up to manufacturen; ro modi I'y 

such producl'> so that they can be te,ted. The~e in~lude comments ot the Natural Resources Defense 

Coundl ("NROC') and California Investor Owned Ulilili~s ("CA 101)<;"). 

NRDC as>eris (('o[mUenl'> al 3) that th~ DOE test procedure a~ appli~d 10 applicalions eqUipped 

with backup batteries doe~ not re quire moditlcation and that it i, nliUlufacturen;' re>p<Jll~ibilily 10 design 

pnxluet~ that minimil:e other fllnction~ in mainlenance modc, or to provide a mechanism t.o tum orf 

lhe,e runctions for the purp<Jse of efficiency lesting. Similarly, CA IOU ~ as>C11 (Comments at 3) that 

m'J.l1 ul'acl mer, ean either minimiz.c t~ndby power or aridilional1'tLL)Clionahtic~ or incorporate an off 

swil~h to I.urn lhe.se lunctiol\S off. Thl'SC comments rio nol. wil.h'l~nd analy~i'> and ~honld be rcjccted, 

Dep'l of Energy, Energy Conservation Program, Energy Con~c.rvation Standards and r~st 

Proc~dure for Ballery Charger,: Availability of D~ a, 79 F~(L Reg. 27774 (May 15,2(14). 

MRIS Gr • .." II><. 

101 T""",,,,,,,,,,, Drl<" 

Horma", . p~ 100014 lJSA 

"".,.,.,. 'n '" CO~ 
Kathleen 3. Hogan 

JulylH,2014 

Page 2 

To begin with, DOE in the NODA xknowkdges that the "'results [of its testing] suggest that the 

current test proccdur~, whieh is intended to measure baltery eharging encrgy consumption, may he 

unable to isolate and measure the encrgy usagc of these particular products."" The NRDC and CA lOlls 

comments <;<ocm to completely disregard lhis DOE analysis. 

Cont.illlHlU' Use Prududs ure be<:uming incT1:'asingly more ill\egr~ted. Thilt is. more flmctiollality 

is performed by a system (:hip or chip set. Backup b~ttery charging is not the primJry function of the 

prodnct. There is no ability to '"turn off' the rest of the product or chip ~nd leavc only thc backup 

battcry charging [unction on while testing. As a result. the DOli test procedurc overstatcs thc energy 

used, by including not only the cnergy usage of the backup battcry eharging system but also thc C<\crgy 

usage 01 thc rcst of the product. It IS lIOt fca;;ihle to add off swi tchc~ to di~ahle the non-ch~rgillg 

funcli()nalit y where. the charging funclionali l y L~ inlegrate.d at the system chip ()r chip sel ley~1. 

Thm'. while ARIUS believes that Continuous Cse Products shoold not be inclnded in the 

proposed regnl~tions (a, discussed below), we agree with comments that changes to tbe test procedurc 

Jre necessary in order to accommodate such prooncts if they are included. Our comment~ of June 30, 

20 14 rttommcnd appropriatc tcchnical changes 10 the tcst pmccdure lhm would esti mal~ lrw: energ)' 

COllsul11pl i()n of Ihe hallery backup ~yslern in a reasonahle and ~ost effect i ve m~nnn jf Continuolls U SO! 

Pnxlucts arc included ill the !;Cope of DOR regulal ion. 

ARRIS agrees with comment, that Continuous Usc Products should be excluded from the scopc 

ot DOE rcgulation. Including thcse products in hattcry charger regulmions adds addil irmal regulalory 

'lurdell.~ and co,~t 10 manufac turers <)nd c()n~llmer, withoul providing meaningful energy ~'lVillgS, Hel1~e. 

DOE should delermi n~ t hal no ,t~lld~l"(1 is j Ilsli fied for them. Tn that reg~rd. we extract below our 

original comment on this point, submitted as Motowb Mobility, Inc" on.\1ay 2\.1, 2012: 

, 

Motomla urgcs that DOU not includc continuous use product;; - such as answcring 

machinc~, homc sccurity ~ystems, Illfx\CIllS, and LAN!W AN adapters - in the <;tandanh 

for hallery chargers. TIle very low ii"equcncy of charge comhined wilh the rel~tively high 

ong()ing row~r r~'luireTTlel1ls of cont tnU(m> u~e, or "alw~y' 011 ," pn.xlu(:t.~ me~ns that. as a 

percentage of product IXlwer, the bml"ery ch~rging represents a very slllall fractionlUld a 

very small amOllllt of eaergy, Therefore, little Of no \'~Iue is to be gain"d from ineluding 

,Udl products in the DOL stmldard for battery chargers. 

Id, at 27776, 
Kathleen 13. Hogan 

luly 18, 2014 

Pug" ::; 

In an cxmnple of a typical modem. Motorola measured normal power at approximately 6 

wallS. This translates to a UEe of 53 kWhlyr (i.e., ~24*3(5). At n '" 0.1 charges PCI' 

day (Cia,,, 3 BCS) and measured hallery charge energy oj' 21 WIL lhe l;EC for the 

hallery would he 0.766 kWh (i.e_. 0_ 1 3(i5~21) or 1.4% of lhl: pnxlll':t lWC. The oct.uul 

UEC is even "w~r ~{)l1sid~ril1g thallhl: a(:tuul ~hurg~ fr~qu~rKY is doser t.o t.hat. published 

in t.he Technical Support Ducumenl ("TSD") for a hom~ security system ofn" 0.02 or 

IWlghly 7 charge cycles per year. 

i\.RRIS rcque<;ts that this ictter be included in the reeord ot this proceeding. 

Sinc~rt y, 

lsi Jason Ii;. Friedri('h 

Jason E. Fri"tlrich 

H"ad of U _S. GCl\'"mmenl & R"gulalOIY 

Affairs 

ARRlS Group, Inc. 

101 Tournmn<-'nt Drive 

Horsham, Pi\. 19044 

ce: Jeremy D<Jnunu, DOE 
APPI:NDlX II 
l 

!l 

, 

I 

! 

, 

! 

I 

-, J h I -

,I 

, 

, 

• 

, 

I 

I 

-+-

i 

!i 

! 

, 

" F_ 

.. ,,~ ~ 

1 

• 

, 

, 

;:; 

~ 

I

, 

, 

'

I 

j 

Ii , 

• 

, 

1 

~