Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41873 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

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

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 5, 2013. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16730 Filed 7–11–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2013–BT–DET–0035] 

RIN 1904–AD04 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products and Certain 

Commercial and Industrial Equipment: 

Proposed Determination of Computers 

as a Covered Consumer Product 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Proposed determination. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

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

determined tentatively that computers 

qualify as a covered product under Part 

A of Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended. 

DOE has determined that computers 

meet the criteria for covered products 

because classifying products of such 

type as covered products is necessary or 

appropriate to carry out the purposes of 

EPCA, and the average U.S. household 

energy use for computers is likely to 

exceed 100 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per 

year. 

DATES: DOE will accept written 

comments, data, and information on this 

notice, but no later than August 12, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may 

submit comments, identified by docket 

number EERE–2013–BT–DET–0035, by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: 

Computers2013DET0035@ee.doe.gov. 

Include EERE–2013–BT–DET–0035 and/ 

or RIN 1904–AD04 in the subject line of 

the message. 

• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

Proposed Determination for computers, 

EERE–2013–BT–DET–0035 and/or RIN 

1904–AD04, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121. Phone: (202) 586–2945. Please 

submit one signed paper original. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 6th 

Floor, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., 

Washington, DC 20024. Phone: (202) 

586–2945. Please submit one signed 

paper original. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number or RIN for this 

rulemaking. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to the U.S. 

Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Washington, DC 

20024, (202) 586–2945, between 9:00 

a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. Please 

call Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586– 

2945 for additional information 

regarding visiting the Resource Room. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Jeremy Dommu, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9870. Email: 

DOE_computer_standards@ee.doe.gov. 

In the Office of General Counsel, 

contact Ms. Celia Sher, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–6122. Email: 

Celia.Sher@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents 

I. Statutory Authority 

II. Current Rulemaking Process 

III. Proposed Definition 

IV. Evaluation of Computers as a Covered 

Product Subject to Energy Conservation 

Standards 

A. Coverage Necessary or Appropriate To 

Carry Out Purposes of EPCA 

B. Average Household Energy Use 

V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act 

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 

H. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act of 1999 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

J. Review Under the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act of 2001 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

L. Review Under the Information Quality 

Bulletin for Peer Review 

VI. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comments 

I. Statutory Authority 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA), as amended 

(42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq.), sets forth 

various provisions designed to improve 

energy efficiency. Part A of Title III of 

EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) established 

the ‘‘Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products Other Than 

Automobiles,’’ which covers consumer 

products and certain commercial 

products (hereafter referred to as 

‘‘covered products’’).1 In addition to 

specifying a list of covered residential 

and commercial products, EPCA 

contains provisions that enable the 

Secretary of Energy to classify 

additional types of consumer products 

as covered products. For a given 

product to be classified as a covered 

product, the Secretary must determine 

that: 

(1) Classifying the product as a 

covered product is necessary for the 

purposes of EPCA; and 

(2) The average annual per-household 

energy use by products of such type is 

likely to exceed 100 kilowatt-hours 

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

For the Secretary to prescribe an 

energy conservation standard pursuant 

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

products added pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

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

(1) The average household energy use 

of the products has exceeded 150 kWh 

per household for a 12-month period; 

(2) The aggregate 12-month energy use 

of the products has exceeded 4.2 TWh; 

(3) Substantial improvement in energy 

efficiency is technologically feasible; 

and 

(4) Application of a labeling rule 

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

sufficient to induce manufacturers to 

produce, and consumers and other 

persons to purchase, covered products 

of such type (or class) that achieve the 

maximum energy efficiency that is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(l)(1)). 

Computers are devices which perform 

logical operations and process data. If 

DOE issues a final determination that 

computers are a covered product, DOE 

will consider test procedures and energy 

conservation standards for computers. 

DOE will determine if computers satisfy 

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

during the course of any energy 

conservation standards rulemaking. 

II. Current Rulemaking Process 

DOE has not previously conducted an 

energy conservation standard 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41874 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

2U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013. 

Annual Energy Outlook 2013. http://www.eia.gov/ 

forecasts/aeo/. 

3Urban, B. et al., 2011. Energy Consumption of 

Consumer Electronics in U.S. Homes in 2010. 

Prepared by the Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable 

Energy Systems for the Consumer Electronics 

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

Potential and RD&D Opportunities for Commercial 

Building Appliances. Prepared by Navigant 

Consulting, Inc. for DOE. 

4Consumer Electronics Association, 2013. 15th 

Annual CE Ownership and Market Potential Study. 

5Urban, B. et al., 2011. Energy Consumption of 

Consumer Electronics in U.S. Homes in 2010. 

Prepared by the Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable 

Energy Systems for the Consumer Electronics 

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

Potential and RD&D Opportunities for Commercial 

Building Appliances. Prepared by Navigant 

Consulting, Inc. for DOE. 

6This assumes that the probability of a household 

owning a desktop computer is independent of the 

probability of a household owning a laptop 

computer. In reality, this may or may not be the 

case. The assumption of independence provides an 

upper bound on the total percentage of households 

that own at least one computer, and therefore 

results in a conservative estimate of the annual perhousehold electricity usage. 

7U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2013. 

Annual Energy Outlook 2013. http://www.eia.gov/ 

forecasts/aeo/. 

rulemaking for computers. If, after 

public comment, DOE issues a final 

determination of coverage for this 

product, DOE will consider both test 

procedures and energy conservation 

standards for this product. 

With respect to test procedures, DOE 

will consider a proposed test procedure 

for measuring the energy efficiency, 

energy use or estimated annual 

operating cost of computers during a 

representative average use cycle or 

period of use that is not unduly 

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

6293(b)(3)) In a test procedure 

rulemaking, DOE initially prepares a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) 

and allows interested parties to present 

oral and written data, views, and 

arguments with respect to such 

procedures. In prescribing new test 

procedures, DOE takes into account 

relevant information including 

technological developments relating to 

energy use or energy efficiency of 

computers. 

With respect to energy conservation 

standards, DOE is required to publish a 

NOPR. The NOPR provides DOE’s 

proposal for potential energy 

conservations standards and a summary 

of the results of DOE’s supporting 

technical analysis. The details of DOE’s 

energy conservation standards analysis 

are provided in a technical support 

document (TSD) that describes the 

details of DOE’s analysis of both the 

burdens and benefits of potential 

standards, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

6295(o). Because computers would be a 

product that is newly covered under 42 

U.S.C. 6292(b)(1), DOE would also 

consider as part of any energy 

conservation standard NOPR whether 

computers satisfy the requirements of 42 

U.S.C. 6295(l)(1). After the publication 

of the NOPR, DOE affords interested 

persons an opportunity during a period 

of not less than 60 days to provide oral 

and written comment. After receiving 

and considering the comments on the 

NOPR and not less than 90 days after 

the publication of the NOPR, DOE 

would issue the final rule prescribing 

any new energy conservation standards 

for computers. 

III. Proposed Definition 

DOE proposes to add a definition for 

‘‘Computers’’ in the Code of Federal 

Regulations to clarify coverage of any 

potential test procedure or energy 

conservation standard that may arise 

from today’s proposed determination. 

There currently is no statutory 

definition of computers. DOE has 

determined preliminarily that adding 

computers as a covered product is 

justified. Accordingly, DOE proposes 

the following definition of computers to 

consider test procedures and energy 

conservation standards for computers 

and to provide clarity for interested 

parties as it continues its analyses: 

A consumer product which performs 

logical operations and processes data. A 

computer is composed of, at a 

minimum: (a) A central processing unit 

(CPU) to perform operations, or the 

ability to function as a client gateway to 

a server which acts as a computational 

CPU; (b) user input devices such as a 

keyboard, mouse, or touchpad; and (c) 

an integrated display screen and/or the 

ability to support an external display 

screen to output information. 

This proposed definition includes 

(but is not necessarily limited to) 

desktop computers, integrated desktop 

computers, laptop/notebook/netbook 

computers, and workstations. This 

proposed definition does not include 

servers without the ability to connect 

user input devices and/or support an 

external display screen. DOE seeks 

feedback from interested parties on its 

proposed definition of computers. 

IV. Evaluation of Computers as a 

Covered Product Subject to Energy 

Conservation Standards 

The following sections describe DOE’s 

evaluation of whether computers fulfill 

the criteria for being added as a covered 

product pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

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

may classify a consumer product as a 

covered product if (1) classifying 

products of such type as covered 

products is necessary and appropriate to 

carry out the purposes of EPCA; and (2) 

the average annual per-household 

energy use by products of such type is 

likely to exceed 100 kWh (or its Btu 

equivalent) per year. 

A. Coverage Necessary or Appropriate 

to Carry Out Purposes of EPCA 

Coverage of computers is necessary or 

appropriate to carry out the purposes of 

EPCA, which include: (1) To conserve 

energy supplies through energy 

conservation programs, and, where 

necessary, the regulation of certain 

energy uses; and (2) to provide for 

improved energy efficiency of motor 

vehicles, major appliances, and certain 

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

6201) The aggregate energy use of 

computers is significant and is projected 

to hold steady in the near future.2

Current estimates of national electricity 

usage are 30.3 billion kWh in the 

residential sector, and 31.3 billion kWh 

in the commercial sector.3 The 

penetration of computers in the 

residential sector is high, with 63% of 

U.S. households owning a desktop 

computer, and 65% of U.S. households 

owning a notebook, laptop, or netbook 

computer, in 2013.4 Coverage of 

computers will enable the conservation 

of energy supplies through both labeling 

programs and the regulation of 

computer energy efficiency. There is 

significant variation in the annual 

energy consumption of different models 

currently available, therefore 

technologies exist to reduce the energy 

consumption of computers. 

B. Average Household Energy Use 

DOE calculated average household 

energy use for computers, in households 

that use the product, based on estimates 

reported in recently published studies. 

In these studies, the average annual 

energy use for a desktop computer was 

estimated to be 220 kWh/yr, and the 

average annual energy use for a portable 

computer was estimated to be 62 kWh/ 

yr, resulting in a weighted average of 

130 kWh/yr per computer.5 However, a 

significant fraction of U.S. households 

own more than a single computer, thus 

the total average household energy 

consumption is likely to be higher than 

these estimations. If, as reported above, 

63% of households own at least one 

desktop computer, and 65% of 

households own at least one portable 

computer, then 87% of households own 

at least one computer.6 There are an 

estimated 119 million households in the 

U.S. in 2013; 7 therefore, there are 

approximately 104 million households 

that own at least one computer. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41875 

8Urban, B. et al., 2011. Energy Consumption of 

Consumer Electronics in U.S. Homes in 2010. 

Prepared by the Fraunhofer Center for Sustainable 

Energy Systems for the Consumer Electronics 

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

Potential and RD&D Opportunities for Commercial 

Building Appliances. Prepared by Navigant 

Consulting, Inc. for DOE. 

Assuming that the total national 

electricity consumption of computers in 

the residential sector is 30.3 billion 

kWh 8, DOE estimates the average 

annual per-household electricity usage 

to be approximately 291 kWh/yr. 

Therefore, DOE tentatively determines 

that the average annual per-household 

energy use for computers is likely to 

exceed 100 kWh/yr, satisfying the 

provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6292(b)(1). 

Based on the above, DOE has 

determined tentatively that computers 

qualify as a covered product under Part 

A of Title III of the EPCA, as amended. 

V. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

DOE has reviewed its proposed 

determination of computers under the 

following executive orders and acts. 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that coverage 

determination rulemakings do not 

constitute ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions’’ under section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

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

Accordingly, this proposed action was 

not subject to review under the 

Executive Order by the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) in OMB. 

B. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996) requires 

preparation of an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis for any rule that, by 

law, must be proposed for public 

comment, unless the agency certifies 

that the proposed rule, if promulgated, 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis 

examines the impact of the rule on 

small entities and considers alternative 

ways of reducing negative effects. Also, 

as required by E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities in 

Agency Rulemaking’’ 67 FR 53461 

(August 16, 2002), DOE published 

procedures and policies on February 19, 

2003 to ensure that the potential impact 

of its rules on small entities are properly 

considered during the DOE rulemaking 

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

DOE makes its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of the General 

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

gc/office-general-counsel. 

DOE reviewed today’s proposed 

determination under the provisions of 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the 

policies and procedures published on 

February 19, 2003. If adopted, today’s 

proposed determination would set no 

standards; they would only positively 

determine that future standards may be 

warranted and should be explored in an 

energy conservation standards and test 

procedure rulemaking. Economic 

impacts on small entities would be 

considered in the context of such 

rulemakings. On the basis of the 

foregoing, DOE certifies that the 

proposed determination, if adopted, 

would have no significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis 

for this proposed determination. DOE 

will transmit this certification and 

supporting statement of factual basis to 

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration for 

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

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

This proposed determination, which 

proposes to determine that computers 

meet the criteria for a covered product 

for which the Secretary may prescribe 

an energy conservation standard 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 6295(o) and (p), 

will impose no new information or 

record-keeping requirements. 

Accordingly, OMB clearance is not 

required under the Paperwork 

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

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

In this notice, DOE proposes to 

positively determine that future 

standards may be warranted and that 

environmental impacts should be 

explored in an energy conservation 

standards rulemaking. DOE has 

determined that review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (NEPA), Public Law 91–190, 

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

required at this time. NEPA review can 

only be initiated ‘‘as soon as 

environmental impacts can be 

meaningfully evaluated’’ (10 CFR 

1021.213(b)). This proposed 

determination would only determine 

that future standards may be warranted, 

but would not itself propose to set any 

specific standard. DOE has, therefore, 

determined that there are no 

environmental impacts to be evaluated 

at this time. Accordingly, neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, 

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

1999), imposes certain requirements on 

agencies formulating and implementing 

policies or regulations that preempt 

State law or that have Federalism 

implications. The Executive Order 

requires agencies to examine the 

constitutional and statutory authority 

supporting any action that would limit 

the policymaking discretion of the 

States and to assess carefully the 

necessity for such actions. The 

Executive Order also requires agencies 

to have an accountable process to 

ensure meaningful and timely input by 

State and local officials in developing 

regulatory policies that have Federalism 

implications. On March 14, 2000, DOE 

published a statement of policy 

describing the intergovernmental 

consultation process that it will follow 

in developing such regulations. 65 FR 

13735 (March 14, 2000). DOE has 

examined today’s proposed 

determination and concludes that it 

would not preempt State law or have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the Federal 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. EPCA governs and 

prescribes Federal preemption of State 

regulations as to energy conservation for 

the product that is the subject of today’s 

proposed determination. States can 

petition DOE for exemption from such 

preemption to the extent permitted, and 

based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 

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

required by E.O. 13132. 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

With respect to the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

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

12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform’’ 61 FR 

4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on 

Federal agencies the duty to: (1) 

Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; 

(2) write regulations to minimize 

litigation; (3) provide a clear legal 

standard for affected conduct rather 

than a general standard; and (4) promote 

simplification and burden reduction. 

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

requires that Executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation specifies the following: (1) 

The preemptive effect, if any; (2) any 

effect on existing Federal law or 

regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41876 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

affected conduct while promoting 

simplification and burden reduction; (4) 

the retroactive effect, if any; (5) 

definitions of key terms; and (6) other 

important issues affecting clarity and 

general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

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

requires Executive agencies to review 

regulations in light of applicable 

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

determine whether these standards are 

met, or whether it is unreasonable to 

meet one or more of them. DOE 

completed the required review and 

determined that, to the extent permitted 

by law, this proposed determination 

meets the relevant standards of E.O. 

12988. 

G. Review Under the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

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

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

requires each Federal agency to assess 

the effects of Federal regulatory actions 

on State, local, and tribal governments 

and the private sector. For regulatory 

actions likely to result in a rule that may 

cause expenditures by State, local, and 

Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector of $100 million or 

more in any 1 year (adjusted annually 

for inflation), section 202 of UMRA 

requires a Federal agency to publish a 

written statement that estimates the 

resulting costs, benefits, and other 

effects on the national economy. (2 

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

a Federal agency to develop an effective 

process to permit timely input by 

elected officers of State, local, and tribal 

governments on a proposed ‘‘significant 

intergovernmental mandate.’’ UMRA 

also requires an agency plan for giving 

notice and opportunity for timely input 

to small governments that may be 

potentially affected before establishing 

any requirement that might significantly 

or uniquely affect them. On March 18, 

1997, DOE published a statement of 

policy on its process for 

intergovernmental consultation under 

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

(This policy also is available at 

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

proposed determination pursuant to 

these existing authorities and its policy 

statement and determined that the 

proposed determination contains 

neither an intergovernmental mandate 

nor a mandate that may result in the 

expenditure of $100 million or more in 

any year, so the UMRA requirements do 

not apply. 

H. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act of 1999 

Section 654 of the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

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

Federal agencies to issue a Family 

Policymaking Assessment for any rule 

that may affect family well-being. This 

proposed determination would not have 

any impact on the autonomy or integrity 

of the family as an institution. 

Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it 

is not necessary to prepare a Family 

Policymaking Assessment. 

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 

Pursuant to E.O. 12630, 

‘‘Governmental Actions and Interference 

with Constitutionally Protected Property 

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

DOE determined that this proposed 

determination would not result in any 

takings that might require compensation 

under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 

Constitution. 

J. Review Under the Treasury and 

General Government Appropriations 

Act of 2001 

The Treasury and General 

Government Appropriation Act of 2001 

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

to review most disseminations of 

information they make to the public 

under guidelines established by each 

agency pursuant to general guidelines 

issued by OMB. The OMB’s guidelines 

were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 

22, 2002), and DOE’s guidelines were 

published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 

2002). DOE has reviewed today’s 

proposed determination under the OMB 

and DOE guidelines and has concluded 

that it is consistent with applicable 

policies in those guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

E.O. 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 

FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires 

Federal agencies to prepare and submit 

to OMB a Statement of Energy Effects 

for any proposed significant energy 

action. A ‘‘significant energy action’’ is 

defined as any action by an agency that 

promulgates a final rule or is expected 

to lead to promulgation of a final rule, 

and that: (1) Is a significant regulatory 

action under E.O. 12866, or any 

successor order; and (2) is likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy; or 

(3) is designated by the Administrator of 

OIRA as a significant energy action. For 

any proposed significant energy action, 

the agency must give a detailed 

statement of any adverse effects on 

energy supply, distribution, or use if the 

proposal is implemented, and of 

reasonable alternatives to the proposed 

action and their expected benefits on 

energy supply, distribution, and use. 

DOE has concluded that today’s 

regulatory action proposing to 

determine that computers meet the 

criteria for a covered product for which 

the Secretary may prescribe an energy 

conservation standard pursuant to 42 

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

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

This action is also not a significant 

regulatory action for purposes of E.O. 

12866, and the OIRA Administrator has 

not designated this proposed 

determination as a significant energy 

action under E.O. 12866 or any 

successor order. Therefore, this 

proposed determination is not a 

significant energy action. Accordingly, 

DOE has not prepared a Statement of 

Energy Effects for this proposed 

determination. 

L. Review Under the Information 

Quality Bulletin for Peer Review 

On December 16, 2004, OMB, in 

consultation with the Office of Science 

and Technology Policy (OSTP), issued 

its Final Information Quality Bulletin 

for Peer Review (the Bulletin). 70 FR 

2664 (January 14, 2005). The Bulletin 

establishes that certain scientific 

information shall be peer reviewed by 

qualified specialists before it is 

disseminated by the Federal 

government, including influential 

scientific information related to agency 

regulatory actions. The purpose of the 

Bulletin is to enhance the quality and 

credibility of the Government’s 

scientific information. DOE has 

determined that the analyses conducted 

for this rulemaking do not constitute 

‘‘influential scientific information,’’ 

which the Bulletin defines as ‘‘scientific 

information the agency reasonably can 

determine will have or does have a clear 

and substantial impact on important 

public policies or private sector 

decisions.’’ 70 FR 2667 (January 14, 

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

of this rulemaking. 

DOE will determine the appropriate 

level of review that would be applicable 

to any future rulemaking to establish 

energy conservation standards for 

computers. 

VI. Public Participation 

A. Submission of Comments 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this notice of 

proposed determination no later than 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 134 / Friday, July 12, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41877 

the date provided at the beginning of 

this notice. After the close of the 

comment period, DOE will review the 

comments received and determine 

whether computers are a covered 

product under EPCA. 

Comments, data, and information 

submitted to DOE’s email address for 

this proposed determination should be 

provided in WordPerfect, Microsoft 

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

Submissions should avoid the use of 

special characters or any form of 

encryption, and wherever possible 

comments should include the electronic 

signature of the author. No 

telefacsimiles (faxes) will be accepted. 

According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any 

person submitting information that he 

or she believes to be confidential and 

exempt by law from public disclosure 

should submit two copies: one copy of 

the document should have all the 

information believed to be confidential 

deleted. DOE will make its own 

determination as to the confidential 

status of the information and treat it 

according to its determination. 

Factors of interest to DOE when 

evaluating requests to treat submitted 

information as confidential include (1) 

A description of the items; (2) whether 

and why such items are customarily 

treated as confidential within the 

industry; (3) whether the information is 

generally known or available from 

public sources; (4) whether the 

information has previously been made 

available to others without obligations 

concerning its confidentiality; (5) an 

explanation of the competitive injury to 

the submitting persons which would 

result from public disclosure; (6) a date 

after which such information might no 

longer be considered confidential; and 

(7) why disclosure of the information 

would be contrary to the public interest. 

B. Issues on Which DOE Seeks 

Comments 

DOE welcomes comments on all 

aspects of this proposed determination. 

DOE is particularly interested in 

receiving comments from interested 

parties on the following issues related to 

the proposed determination for 

computers: 

• Definition(s) of computers; 

• Whether classifying computers as a 

covered product is necessary or 

appropriate to carry out the purposes of 

EPCA; 

• Calculations and values for average 

household energy consumption; and 

• Availability or lack of availability of 

technologies for improving energy 

efficiency of computers. 

The Department is interested in 

receiving views concerning other 

relevant issues that participants believe 

would affect DOE’s ability to establish 

test procedures and energy conservation 

standards for computers. The 

Department invites all interested parties 

to submit in writing by August 12, 2013, 

comments and information on matters 

addressed in this notice and on other 

matters relevant to consideration of a 

determination for computers. 

After the expiration of the period for 

submitting written statements, the 

Department will consider all comments 

and additional information that is 

obtained from interested parties or 

through further analyses, and it will 

prepare a final determination. If DOE 

determines that computers qualify as a 

covered product, DOE will consider a 

test procedure and energy conservation 

standards for computers. Members of 

the public will be given an opportunity 

to submit written and oral comments on 

any proposed test procedure and 

standards. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 5, 2013. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16728 Filed 7–11–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0574; Directorate 

Identifier 2008–SW–22–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Bell 

Helicopter Textron Canada (Bell) 

Helicopters 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

the Bell Model 407 helicopters. The 

existing AD currently requires preflight 

checking and repetitively inspecting for 

a crack in certain tailbooms that have 

been redesigned, replacing the tailboom 

if there is a crack, modifying and reidentifying certain tailbooms, installing 

an improved horizontal stabilizer 

assembly, and assigning a 5,000 hour 

time-in-service (TIS) limit. Since we 

issued that AD, we have received 

several additional reports of cracked 

tailboom skins. This proposed AD 

would retain the existing requirements 

and apply additional inspection 

requirements. The proposed actions are 

intended to prevent separation of the 

tailboom and subsequent loss of control 

of the helicopter. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 10, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Docket: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Send comments to the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Docket 

Operations, M–30, West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to the 

‘‘Mail’’ address between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

Docket Operations Office between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

economic evaluation, any comments 

received and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Operations 

Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is in 

the ADDRESSES section. Comments will 

be available in the AD docket shortly 

after receipt. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Bell 

Helicopter Textron Canada, 12,800 Rue 

de l’Avenir, Mirabel, Quebec J7J1R4, 

telephone (450) 437–2862 or (800) 363– 

8023, fax (450) 433–0272 or at http:// 

www.bellcustomer.com/files/. You may 

review service information at the FAA, 

Office of the Regional Counsel, 

Southwest Region, 2601 Meacham 

Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, Texas 

76137. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sharon Miles, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

Regulations and Policy Group, 

Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, 2601 

Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, Texas 

76137, telephone (817) 222–5110, fax 

(817) 222–5961, email 

sharon.y.miles@faa.gov. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS