Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 140 / Thursday, July 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42579 

(iii) Upon request of the employee, 

provide a printed confirmation of the 

transaction to the person providing the 

signature. 

* * * * * 

Janet Napolitano, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17806 Filed 7–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–28–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket No. EERE–2010–BT–TP–0022] 

RIN: 1904–AC25 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Test Procedure 

for Microwave Ovens; Repeal of Active 

Mode Test Procedure Provisions 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) repeals the regulatory 

provisions establishing the cooking 

efficiency test procedure for microwave 

ovens under the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA). DOE has 

determined that the microwave oven 

test procedure to measure the cooking 

efficiency does not produce accurate 

and repeatable test results and is 

unaware of any test procedures that 

have been developed that address the 

concerns with the DOE microwave oven 

cooking efficiency test procedure. 

DATES: Effective date: This rule is 

effective on July 22, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: The public may review 

copies of all materials related to this 

rulemaking at the U.S. Department of 

Energy, Resource Room of the Building 

Technologies Program, 950 L’Enfant 

Plaza, SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC, 

(202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda 

Edwards at the above telephone number 

for additional information regarding 

visiting the Resource Room. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Wes Anderson, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. Tel.: (202) 

586–7335. E-mail: 

Wes.Anderson@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. Tel.: 

(202) 586–7796. E-mail: 

Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Legal Authority and Background 

II. Discussion 

III. Procedural Requirements 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

B. Administrative Procedure Act 

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 the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act, 2001 

L. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

M. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal 

Energy Administration (FEA) Act of 1974 

N. Congressional Notification 

IV. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Legal Authority and Background 

Legal Authority 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291 et 

seq.; EPCA or the Act) sets forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency. Part A of 

Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309) 

establishes the ‘‘Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles’’ for consumer 

products, including microwave ovens. 

(42 U.S.C. 6291(1)–(2) and 6292(a)(10)) 

Under the Act, this program consists 

essentially of three parts: testing, 

labeling, and establishing Federal 

energy conservation standards. 

Manufacturers of covered products 

must use DOE test procedures to certify 

that their products comply with energy 

conservation standards adopted under 

EPCA and to represent the efficiency of 

their products. (42 U.S.C. 6295(s); 42 

U.S.C. 6293(c)) DOE must also use DOE 

test procedures in any action to 

determine whether covered products 

comply with EPCA standards. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(s)) Criteria and procedures for 

DOE’s adoption and amendment of such 

test procedures, as set forth in EPCA, 

require that test procedures be 

reasonably designed to produce test 

results which measure energy 

efficiency, energy use, or estimated 

annual operating cost of a covered 

product during a representative average 

use cycle or period of use. Test 

procedures must also not be unduly 

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

6293(b)(3)) 

EPCA also specifies that State law 

providing for the disclosure of 

information with respect to any measure 

of energy consumption is superseded to 

the extent that such law requires testing 

or the use of any measure of energy 

consumption or energy descriptor in 

any manner other than provided under 

section 323 of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 

6297(a)(1)(A); 42 U.S.C. 6297(f)(3)(G)) 

Therefore, in the absence of a Federal 

test procedure or accompanying 

conservation standard, States may 

prescribe their own test procedures and 

standards pursuant to applicable State 

law. Id. 

Background—Active Mode Test 

Procedure 

DOE’s test procedure for microwave 

ovens is codified at appendix I to 

subpart B of Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR). That test 

procedure was part of an October 3, 

1997, final rule that also revised the test 

procedures for other cooking products 

to measure their efficiency and energy 

use more accurately. 62 FR 51976. The 

microwave oven test procedure 

incorporates portions of the 

International Electrotechnical 

Commission (IEC) Standard 705–1998 

and Amendment 2–1993, ‘‘Methods for 

Measuring the Performance of 

Microwave Ovens for Households and 

Similar Purposes,’’ (IEC Standard 705) 

and measures microwave oven cooking 

efficiency and energy factor (EF). Id. 

Background—Active Mode Standards 

The National Appliance Energy 

Conservation Act of 1987 (NAECA; Pub. 

L. 100–12), which amended EPCA, 

established prescriptive standards for 

kitchen ranges and ovens, but no 

standards were established for 

microwave ovens. (42 U.S.C. 6295(h)) 

The NAECA amendments also required 

DOE to conduct two cycles of 

rulemakings to determine whether to 

revise the standard. DOE undertook the 

first cycle of these rulemakings and 

issued a final rule on September 8, 1998 

(63 FR 48038), in which DOE found that 

no amended standards were justified for 

electric cooking products, including 

microwave ovens. In a final rule 

published on April 8, 2009 (74 FR 

16040) (hereafter referred to as the 

appliance standards rulemaking), DOE 

established amended standards for gas 

cooking products, but again found that 

no active mode cooking efficiency 

standards were justified for electric 

cooking products, including microwave 

ovens. This rulemaking completed the 

second cycle of rulemakings required by 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
42580 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 140 / Thursday, July 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1Both DOE’s and AHAM’s microwave oven 

samples contained units with manufacturer-rated 

output powers ranging from 700 to 1,300 W. 

2For more details of the cooking efficiency testing 

conducted as part of the appliance standards 

rulemaking, see the 2009 Technical Support 

Document for Residential Dishwashers, 

Dehumidifiers, and Cooking Products and 

Commercial Clothes Washers. Available online at 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/residential/ 

cooking_products.html. 

the NAECA amendments to EPCA. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(h)(2)) 

II. Discussion 

The regulatory definition of 

‘‘microwave oven’’ is set forth at 10 CFR 

430.2. ‘‘Microwave oven’’ is defined as 

‘‘a class of kitchen ranges and ovens 

which is a household cooking appliance 

consisting of a compartment designed to 

cook or heat food by means of 

microwave energy.’’ The existing test 

procedure to measure energy efficiency 

of microwave ovens is codified at 10 

CFR 430.23(i) and 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart B, appendix I, and the sampling 

plan, that is, the specific requirements 

for the number of units to be tested, is 

set forth at 10 CFR 430.24(i). 

The current DOE microwave oven test 

procedure incorporates portions of IEC 

Standard 705 for measuring the cooking 

performance of microwave ovens. The 

testing methods measure the amount of 

energy required to raise the temperature 

of 1 kilogram of water by 10 degrees 

Celsius (°C) under controlled 

conditions. The ratio of usable output 

power over input power describes the 

EF, which is also a measure of the 

cooking efficiency. 

As part of the appliance standards 

rulemaking, DOE tested 32 microwave 

ovens, and the Association of Home 

Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) 

independently tested 21 additional 

units, for a total of 53 microwave ovens, 

according to the current DOE 

microwave oven test procedure.1 The 

data from cooking tests on these units 

show a cooking efficiency range from 55 

percent to 62 percent. Reverse 

engineering conducted by DOE as part 

of the appliance standards rulemaking 

attempted to identify design options 

associated with this variation in cooking 

efficiency. Although design options 

among various microwave ovens were 

found to be highly standardized, DOE 

was unable to correlate specific design 

options or other features such as cavity 

size or output power with cooking 

efficiency. 

DOE also observed significant 

variability in the cooking efficiency 

measurements obtained using the DOE 

microwave oven test procedure for the 

53 units tested by DOE and AHAM. The 

data show test-to-test variability of 

several EF percentage points (0 to 2.5) 

for a given microwave oven (i.e., where 

a given combination of design options 

could be assigned to a number of trial 

standard levels (TSLs), depending upon 

the test results). DOE was also unable to 

ascertain why similarly designed, 

equipped, and constructed microwave 

ovens showed varying EFs and, hence, 

annual energy consumption. DOE 

further notes that manufacturers stated 

during interviews that the water used in 

the test procedure is not representative 

of an actual food load. One 

manufacturer stated, for example, that 

this could result in different microwave 

ovens being rated at the same energy 

efficiency even though true cooking 

performance is different.2 DOE 

understands that IEC, AHAM, 

manufacturers, and others are exploring 

whether a test procedure can be 

developed that addresses the highvariability concerns with its current 

cooking efficiency measure. DOE stated 

in an October 2008 notice of proposed 

rulemaking (hereinafter referred to as 

the October 2008 TP NOPR) that it 

would evaluate such test procedures to 

determine whether they address the 

concerns discussed above, thereby 

making them suitable candidates for use 

in amending the DOE test procedure. 73 

FR 62134, 62139 (Oct. 17, 2008). 

DOE also noted that IEC Standard 705 

has been declared obsolete by IEC and 

the current IEC test procedure is IEC 

Standard 60705–2006, ‘‘Household 

microwave ovens—Methods of 

measuring performance’’ (IEC Standard 

60705). In order to evaluate the key 

differences between these two IEC test 

procedures, DOE conducted a series of 

tests as part of the appliance standards 

rulemaking on a sub-sample of its 

microwave ovens (12 units total) to 

compare the efficiency measurements 

using both IEC test procedures. The 

general methodology for each test 

procedure is largely the same, and 

consists of heating 1 kg of water from 

about 10 °C below room temperature to 

room temperature, using the maximum 

power setting on the microwave oven. 

The input power over the duration of 

the test, and thus energy consumed 

during the test, are compared to the 

energy absorbed by the test load to 

obtain the efficiency measurement. 

Table II.1 below summarizes key 

differences noted between the test 

procedures that can potentially impact 

the final energy efficiency calculation. 

TABLE II.1—KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN IEC STANDARD 705 AND IEC STANDARD 60705 

IEC Standard 705–1988 and Amendment 2–1993 IEC Standard 60705–2006 

Ambient Temp.,T0 = 20 ± 2 °C ...............................................................................................

Starting Water Temp., T1 = T0¥(10 ± 1 °C) ..........................................................................

Final Water Temp., T2 = T0 ± 1 °C ........................................................................................

Ambient Temp.,T0 = 20 ± 5 °C. 

Starting Water Temp., T1 = 10 ± 1 °C. 

Final Water Temp., T2 = 20 ± 2 °C. 

Electrical Input Energy neglects the magnetron filament heat-up time, the measurement 

starting when the input current reaches 90 percent of its final value.

Measurement of Electrical Input Energy includes the 

energy consumed during the magnetron filament 

heat-up time. 

No mention of rounding off efficiency or output power calculations ...................................... Efficiency is rounded off to the nearest whole number, while output power is rounded off to the nearest 50 W. 

Temperature measurement accurate within 0.25 °C and linearity better than 1 percent. 

Time measurement accurate within 0.25 seconds.

No specifications for accuracy of temperature and 

time measurements. 

As part of this testing to compare the 

two IEC test procedures, DOE conducted 

tests to evaluate the variation of test-totest efficiency results for an individual 

microwave oven. DOE test results, 

shown below in Table II.2, showed that 

the test-to-test variation using IEC 

Standard 60705 ranged from 0 to 5 

percent of the average value, which was 

much greater than the comparable 

variation for IEC Standard 705, whose 

test-to-test variation in efficiency results 

ranged from 0 to 1.5 percent for the 

same sub-sample of microwave ovens. 

This larger range associated with IEC 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 140 / Thursday, July 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42581 

Standard 60705 is believed to be 

attributable to the effects of the 

procedure’s requirement to round the 

power output to the nearest 50 W and 

the efficiency to the nearest whole 

number after each individual test, prior 

to averaging. DOE also evaluated the 

non-rounded data from the tests using 

IEC Standard 60705, which still showed 

more test-to-test variation for a given 

unit (0 to 2.1 percent) than the 

variations test-to-test during the IEC 

Standard 705 testing. This remaining 

increment in test-to-test variation was 

likely due to the more lenient tolerances 

on the prescribed ambient and final test 

load temperatures (presented in Table 

II.2). Based on observations and analysis 

of test results, DOE believes that IEC 

Standard 60705 is likely to produce 

even less consistent or repeatable test 

results than IEC Standard 705 because 

the measurement requirements in IEC 

Standard 705 are more stringent. 

Therefore, DOE did not propose 

amendments in the October 2008 TP 

NOPR to the microwave oven test 

procedure to reference IEC Standard 

60705. 

TABLE II.2—IEC STANDARD 705 VERSUS IEC STANDARD 60705 TEST RESULTS TEST-TO-TEST VARIATION

Test unit 

Test-to-test EF range (%) 

IEC Standard 

705 

IEC Standard 

60705 

(rounded) 

IEC Standard 

60705 

(non-rounded) 

1 ................................................................................................................................................. 1.46 3.57 0.56 

2 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.06 3.45 0.96 

3 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.40 3.33 0.70 

4 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.48 5.00 1.66 

5 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.71 3.57 0.50 

6 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.47 3.45 0.20 

7 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.77 3.39 0.53 

8 ................................................................................................................................................. 0.21 1.67 0.76 

9 ................................................................................................................................................. 1.07 1.67 1.05 

10 ............................................................................................................................................... 0.96 0.00 0.87 

11 ............................................................................................................................................... 0.67 1.79 0.82 

12 ............................................................................................................................................... 1.24 5.17 2.14 

In response to the October 2008 TP 

NOPR, DOE received comments from 

interested parties regarding the accuracy 

and repeatability of the existing DOE 

microwave oven test procedure for 

measuring cooking efficiency. The 

Appliance Standards Awareness Project 

(ASAP) cited substantial problems with 

the test procedure for measuring 

cooking efficiency that have not yet 

been addressed, including a lack of 

repeatable and consistent results and 

the possibility that the challenge of 

dealing with cooking efficiency is being 

compounded by rating the cooking 

efficiency of combination ovens in their 

various cooking modes. (ASAP, Public 

Meeting Transcript, No. 7 at p. 25) 

Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) noted that 

heat transfer in a microwave oven 

depends on the specific resistivity of the 

load, and that pure water has relatively 

low specific resistivity, and items that 

might be cooked in a microwave oven 

would have more salt and thus absorb 

microwave energy more efficiently than 

pure water. PG&E noted that, while 

water is easily obtainable for testing, 

using it probably results in lower 

cooking efficiency measurements than 

would be expected from using actual 

food products. (PG&E, Public Meeting 

Transcript, No. 7 at pp. 44–45) 

DOE is unaware of any test 

procedures that have been developed 

that address the concerns with the DOE 

microwave oven cooking efficiency test 

procedure discussed above. DOE is also 

unaware of any research or data on 

consumer usage indicating what a 

representative food load would be, or 

any data showing how changes to the 

representative test load would affect the 

measured EF or repeatability of test 

results. 

Because there are currently no 

existing test procedures that produce 

representative and repeatable cooking 

efficiency measurements for microwave 

ovens, and because of the issues with 

using the existing DOE microwave oven 

test procedure, as discussed above, 

including the large test-to-test variation 

in cooking efficiency measurements, 

DOE is repealing the provisions in the 

existing microwave oven test procedure 

relating to the measurement of cooking 

efficiency and EF, and the regulatory 

provision specifying requirements for 

the number of units to be tested 

pursuant to the test procedure (i.e., the 

sampling plan). 

DOE will maintain the regulatory 

definition of microwave oven because 

kitchen ranges and ovens are listed as 

covered products in EPCA (42 U.S.C. 

6292(10)) and because DOE is currently 

considering amendments to the 

microwave oven test procedure to 

measure standby and off mode energy 

use. DOE plans to initiate a separate 

rulemaking process to consider new 

provisions for measuring microwave 

oven energy efficiency in active 

(cooking) mode and has published a 

notice of public meeting to discuss 

active mode test procedures elsewhere 

in today’s Federal Register. 

III. Procedural Requirements 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

Today’s regulatory action is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 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 the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). 

B. Administrative Procedure Act 

The Department of Energy finds good 

cause to waive notice and comment on 

these regulations pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

533(b)(B), and the 30-day delay in 

effective date pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553(d). Notice and comment are 

unnecessary and contrary to the public 

interest because this final rule is 

repealing a test procedure that DOE has 

determined to not be able to produce 

accurate and repeatable test results. 

Interested parties were provided with an 

opportunity to comment on the active 

mode test procedure in the October 

2008 TP NOPR and responded in 

support of DOE’s determination. In 

addition, DOE previously determined 

that standards for microwave ovens 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
42582 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 140 / Thursday, July 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

3Categorical Exclusion A6 provides, 

‘‘Rulemakings that are strictly procedural, such as 

rulemaking (under 48 CFR part 9) establishing 

procedures for technical and pricing proposals and 

establishing contract clauses and contracting 

practices for the purchase of goods and services, 

and rulemaking (under 10 CFR part 600) 

establishing application and review procedures for, 

and administration, audit, and closeout of, grants 

and cooperative agreements.’’ 

were not warranted. (74 FR 16040, April 

8, 2009). As a result, there is currently 

no energy conservation standard in 

place for microwave ovens for which a 

test procedure would be necessary to 

measure energy efficiency or energy use. 

A delay in effective date is unnecessary 

and contrary to the public interest for 

these same reasons. Therefore, these 

regulations are being published as final 

regulations and are effective July 22, 

2010. 

C. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 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 rule, if 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. As required by 

Executive Order 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 

impacts of its rules on small entities are 

properly considered during the 

rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE’s 

procedures and policies may be viewed 

on the Office of the General Counsel’s 

Web site (www.gc.doe.gov). Because a 

notice of proposed rulemaking is not 

required under the Administrative 

Procedure Act or other applicable law, 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not 

require certification or the conduct of a 

regulatory flexibility analysis for this 

rule. 

C. Review Under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 

Today’s final rule contains no new 

record-keeping requirements. Therefore, 

today’s final rule would not impose any 

new reporting requirements requiring 

clearance by OMB under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

D. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

DOE has determined that this rule 

falls into a class of actions that are 

categorically excluded from review 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.) and DOE’s implementing 

regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. 

Specifically, this rule amends an 

existing rule without changing its 

environmental effect, and, therefore, is 

covered by the Categorical Exclusion in 

paragraph A6 to Appendix A to subpart 

D, 10 CFR part 1021, which applies 

because this rule would revise existing 

test procedures such that the amount, 

quality, or distribution of energy usage 

will not be affected, and, therefore, not 

result in any environmental impacts.3

Accordingly, neither an environmental 

assessment nor an environmental 

impact statement is required. 

E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

imposes certain requirements on 

agencies formulating and implementing 

policies or regulations that preempt 

State law or that have Federalism 

implications. 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 

1999). 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 

that it will follow in developing such 

regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE 

examined this final rule and determined 

that it would not preempt State law and 

would 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. Executive 

Order 13132 requires no further action. 

F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 

Regarding the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of 

Executive Order 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 

Executive Order 12988 specifically 

requires that Executive agencies make 

every reasonable effort to ensure that the 

regulation specifies the following: (1) 

The preemptive effect, if any; (2) any 

effect on existing Federal law or 

regulation; (3) a clear legal standard for 

affected conduct while promoting 

simplification and burden reduction; (4) 

the retroactive effect, if any; (5) 

definitions of key terms; and (6) other 

important issues affecting clarity and 

general draftsmanship under any 

guidelines issued by the Attorney 

General. Section 3(c) of Executive Order 

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 

Executive Order 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) requires each Federal agency to 

assess the effects of Federal regulatory 

actions on State, local, and Tribal 

governments and the private sector. For 

a proposed regulatory action likely to 

result 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 estimates of 

the resulting costs, benefits, and other 

effects on the national economy. (2 

U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)) 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 proposed 

‘‘significant intergovernmental 

mandate.’’ UMRA 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 such 

governments. On March 18, 1997, DOE 

published a statement of policy on its 

process for intergovernmental 

consultation under UMRA. 62 FR 

12820. (The policy is also available at 

www.gc.doe.gov). Today’s final rule 

contains neither an intergovernmental 

mandate nor a mandate that may result 

in an expenditure of $100 million or 

more in any year, so these requirements 

do not apply. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 140 / Thursday, July 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42583 

H. 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. 

Today’s final rule would have no 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 

DOE has determined, under Executive 

Order 12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions 

and Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859 

(March 18, 1988), that this final rule 

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, 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 

today’s final rule and concluded that it 

is consistent with applicable policies in 

the OMB and DOE guidelines. 

K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 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 OIRA a Statement 

of Energy Effects for any proposed 

significant energy action. The definition 

of a ‘‘significant energy action’’ is 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 proposed 

significant energy action, the agency 

must give a detailed statement of any 

adverse effects on energy supply, 

distribution, or use if the proposal were 

to be implemented, and of reasonable 

alternatives to the action and their 

expected benefits on energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Today’s final rule 

is not a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866. 

Moreover, it would not have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. The 

Administrator of OIRA also did not 

designate the final rule as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it is not a 

significant energy action. Accordingly, 

DOE has not prepared a Statement of 

Energy Effects. 

L. Review Under Section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 

Under section 301 of the DOE 

Organization Act (Pub. L. 95–91), DOE 

must comply with section 32 of the 

Federal Energy Administration Act of 

1974 (Pub. L. 93–275), as amended by 

the Federal Energy Administration 

Authorization Act of 1977 (FEAA; Pub. 

L. 95–70) (15 U.S.C. 788). Section 32 

essentially provides that, where a 

proposed rule authorizes or requires use 

of commercial standards, the 

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. This final rule to repeal the 

test procedure for determining the 

energy efficiency of microwave ovens 

does not authorize or require the use of 

any commercial standards. Therefore, 

no consultation with either DOJ or FTC 

is required. 

M. Congressional Notification 

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

report to Congress on the promulgation 

of today’s 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. 801(2). 

VI. Approval of the Office of the 

Assistant Secretary 

The Assistant Secretary of DOE’s 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy has approved 

publication of today’s final rule. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Energy conservation, 

Household appliances. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 9, 2010. 

Cathy Zoi, 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

part 430 of chapter II of title 10, Code 

of Federal Regulations, is amended as 

set forth below: 

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

§ 430.3 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 430.3 is amended by 

removing paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2). 

■ 3. Section 430.23 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (i)(1), (i)(2), (i)(4), 

and (i)(12) to read as follows: 

§ 430.23 Test procedures for the 

measurement of energy and water 

consumption. 

* * * * * 

(i) Kitchen ranges and ovens. (1) The 

estimated annual operating cost for 

conventional ranges, conventional 

cooking tops, and conventional ovens 

shall be the sum of the following 

products: (i) The total annual electrical 

energy consumption for any electrical 

energy usage, in kilowatt-hours (kWh’s) 

per year, times the representative 

average unit cost for electricity, in 

dollars per kWh, as provided pursuant 

to section 323(b)(2) of the Act; plus (ii) 

the total annual gas energy consumption 

for any natural gas usage, in British 

thermal units (Btu’s) per year, times the 

representative average unit cost for 

natural gas, in dollars per Btu, as 

provided pursuant to section 323(b)(2) 

of the Act; plus (iii) the total annual gas 

energy consumption for any propane 

usage, in Btu’s per year, times the 

representative average unit cost for 

propane, in dollars per Btu, as provided 

pursuant to section 323(b)(2) of the Act. 

The total annual energy consumption 

for conventional ranges, conventional 

cooking tops, and conventional ovens 

shall be as determined according to 4.3, 

4.2.2, and 4.1.2, respectively, of 

appendix I to this subpart. The 

estimated annual operating cost shall be 

rounded off to the nearest dollar per 

year. 

(2) The cooking efficiency for 

conventional cooking tops and 

conventional ovens shall be the ratio of 

the cooking energy output for the test to 

the cooking energy input for the test, as 

determined according to 4.2.1 and 4.1.3, 

respectively, of appendix I to this 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
42584 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 140 / Thursday, July 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

subpart. The final cooking efficiency 

values shall be rounded off to three 

significant digits. 

* * * * * 

(4) The energy factor for conventional 

ranges, conventional cooking tops, and 

conventional ovens shall be the ratio of 

the annual useful cooking energy output 

to the total annual energy input, as 

determined according to 4.3, 4.2.3, 

4.1.4, respectively, of Appendix I to this 

subpart. The final energy factor values 

shall be rounded off to three significant 

digits. 

* * * * * 

(12) Other useful measures of energy 

consumption for conventional ranges, 

conventional cooking tops, and 

conventional ovens shall be those 

measures of energy consumption which 

the Secretary determines are likely to 

assist consumers in making purchasing 

decisions and which are derived from 

the application of appendix I to this 

subpart. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Section 430.24 is amended by 

revising paragraph (i)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 430.24 Units to be tested. 

* * * * * 

(i)(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(i)(2) of this section, for each basic 

model of conventional cooking tops, 

and conventional ovens a sample of 

sufficient size shall be tested to insure 

that— 

(i) Any represented value of estimated 

annual operating cost, energy 

consumption or other measure of energy 

consumption of a basic model for which 

consumers would favor lower values 

shall be no less than the higher of: 

(A) the mean of the sample or 

(B) the upper 971⁄2 percent confidence 

limit of the true mean divided by 1.05, 

and 

(ii) Any represented value of the 

energy factor or other measure of energy 

consumption of a basic model for which 

consumers would favor higher values 

shall be no greater than the lower of: 

(A) the mean of the sample or 

(B) the lower 971⁄2 percent confidence 

limit of the true mean divided by .95. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Appendix I to Subpart B of Part 430 

is amended: 

■ a. In section 1. Definitions, by: 

■ 1. Removing section 1.5; and 

■ 2. Redesignating sections 1.6 through 

1.11 as 1.5 through 1.10; 

■ b. In section 2. Test Conditions, by: 

■ 1. Removing section 2.1.3; 

■ 2. Revising sections 2.2.1, 2.5, and 2.6; 

■ 3. Removing and reserving section 2.8, 

consisting of sections 2.8.1, 2.8.2, and 

2.8.2.1; 

■ 4. Removing section 2.9.3.4; 

■ 5. Redesignating section 2.9.3.5 as 

2.9.3.4; and 

■ 6. Revising sections 2.9.1.1, 2.9.1.2, 

2.9.3.1, and 2.9.5; 

■ c. In section 3. Test Methods and 

Measurements, by: 

■ 1. Revising sections 3.1.1 introductory 

text, 3.1.1.1, and 3.1.2; 

■ 2. Removing section 3.1.3, consisting 

of section 3.1.3.1; 

■ 3. Removing 3.2.3, and 3.3.13; 

■ d. In section 4. Calculation of Derived 

Results From Test Measurements, by: 

■ 1. Revising sections 4.3; and 

■ 2. Removing section 4.4, consisting of 

sections 4.4.1, 4.4.2, 4.4.3, 4.4.4 and 

4.4.5; 

The revisions read as follows: 

Appendix I to Subpart B of Part 430— 

Uniform Test Method for Measuring the 

Energy Consumption of Conventional 

Ranges, Conventional Cooking Tops, 

Conventional Ovens, and Microwave 

Ovens 

* * * * * 

2. Test Conditions 

* * * * * 

2.2.1 Electrical supply. Maintain the 

electrical supply to the conventional range, 

conventional cooking top, and conventional 

oven being tested at 240/120 volts except that 

basic models rated only at 208/120 volts shall 

be tested at that rating. Maintain the voltage 

within 2 percent of the above specified 

voltages. 

* * * * * 

2.5 Ambient room air temperature. 

During the test, maintain an ambient room air 

temperature, TR, of 77° ± 9 °F (25° ± 5 °C) 

for conventional ovens and cooking tops, as 

measured at least 5 feet (1.5 m) and not more 

than 8 feet (2.4 m) from the nearest surface 

of the unit under test and approximately 3 

feet (0.9 m) above the floor. The temperature 

shall be measured with a thermometer or 

temperature indicating system with an 

accuracy as specified in Section 2.9.3.1. 

2.6 Normal nonoperating temperature. 

All areas of the appliance to be tested shall 

attain the normal nonoperating temperature, 

as defined in Section 1.5, before any testing 

begins. The equipment for measuring the 

applicable normal nonoperating temperature 

shall be as described in Sections 2.9.3.1, 

2.9.3.2, 2.9.3.3, and 2.9.3.4, as applicable. 

* * * * * 

2.8 [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

2.9.1.1 Watt-hour meter. The watt-hour 

meter for measuring the electrical energy 

consumption of conventional ovens and 

cooking tops shall have a resolution of 1 

watt-hour (3.6 kJ) or less and a maximum 

error no greater than 1.5 percent of the 

measured value for any demand greater than 

100 watts. 

2.9.1.2 Watt meter. The watt meter used 

to measure the conventional oven, 

conventional range, or range clock power 

shall have a resolution of 0.2 watt (0.2 J/s) 

or less and a maximum error no greater than 

5 percent of the measured value. 

* * * * * 

2.9.3.1 Room temperature indicating 

system. The room temperature indicating 

system shall be as specified in Section 2.9.3.4 

for ranges, ovens and cooktops. 

* * * * * 

2.9.5 Scale. The scale used for weighing 

the test blocks shall have a maximum error 

no greater than 1 ounce (28.4 g). 

* * * * * 

3. Test Methods and Measurements 

3.1 Test methods. 

3.1.1 Conventional oven. Perform a test 

by establishing the testing conditions set 

forth in Section 2, ‘‘TEST CONDITIONS,’’ of 

this Appendix, and adjust any pilot lights of 

a conventional gas oven in accordance with 

the manufacturer’s instructions and turn off 

the gas flow to the conventional cooking top, 

if so equipped. Before beginning the test, the 

conventional oven shall be at its normal 

nonoperating temperature as defined in 

Section 1.5 and described in Section 2.6. Set 

the conventional oven test block W1

approximately in the center of the usable 

baking space. If there is a selector switch for 

selecting the mode of operation of the oven, 

set it for normal baking. If an oven permits 

baking by either forced convection by using 

a fan, or without forced convection, the oven 

is to be tested in each of those two modes. 

The oven shall remain on for at least one 

complete thermostat ‘‘cut-off/cut-on’’ of the 

electrical resistance heaters or gas burners 

after the test block temperature has increased 

234 °F (130 °C) above its initial temperature. 

3.1.1.1 Self-cleaning operation of a 

conventional oven. Establish the test 

conditions set forth in Section 2, ‘‘TEST 

CONDITIONS,’’ of this Appendix. Adjust any 

pilot lights of a conventional gas oven in 

accordance with the manufacturer’s 

instructions and turn off the gas flow to the 

conventional cooking top. The temperature of 

the conventional oven shall be its normal 

nonoperating temperature as defined in 

Section 1.5 and described in Section 2.6. 

Then set the conventional oven’s selfcleaning process in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s instructions. If the selfcleaning process is adjustable, use the 

average time recommended by the 

manufacturer for a moderately soiled oven. 

* * * * * 

3.1.2 Conventional cooking top. Establish 

the test conditions set forth in Section 2, 

‘‘TEST CONDITIONS,’’ of this Appendix. 

Adjust any pilot lights of a conventional gas 

cooking top in accordance with the 

manufacturer’s instructions and turn off the 

gas flow to the conventional oven(s), if so 

equipped. The temperature of the 

conventional cooking top shall be its normal 

nonoperating temperature as defined in 

Section 1.5 and described in Section 2.6. Set 

the test block in the center of the surface unit 

under test. The small test block, W2, shall be 

used on electric surface units of 7 inches (178 

mm) or less in diameter. The large test block, 

W3, shall be used on electric surface units 

over 7 inches (177.8 mm) in diameter and on 

all gas surface units. Turn on the surface unit 

under test and set its energy input rate to the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 140 / Thursday, July 22, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 42585 

maximum setting. When the test block 

reaches 144 °F (80 °C) above its initial test 

block temperature, immediately reduce the 

energy input rate to 25 ± 5 percent of the 

maximum energy input rate. After 15 ± 0.1 

minutes at the reduced energy setting, turn 

off the surface unit under test. 

* * * * * 

4. Calculation of Derived Results From Test 

Measurements 

* * * * * 

4.3 Combined components. The annual 

energy consumption of a kitchen range, e.g. 

a cooktop and oven combined, shall be the 

sum of the annual energy consumption of 

each of its components. The annual energy 

consumption for other combinations of ovens 

and cooktops will also be treated as the sum 

of the annual energy consumption of each of 

its components. The energy factor of a 

combined component is the sum of the 

annual useful cooking energy output of each 

component divided by the sum of the total 

annual energy consumption of each 

component. 

[FR Doc. 2010–17773 Filed 7–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0174; Directorate 

Identifier 2009–NM–186–AD; Amendment 

39–16359; AD 2010–14–14] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa 

Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 

(EMBRAER) Model ERJ 170 and ERJ 

190 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are superseding an 

existing airworthiness directive (AD) for 

the products listed above. This AD 

results from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI for EMBRAER 

Model ERJ 170 airplanes describes the 

unsafe condition as: 

It has been found the occurrence of an 

engine in-flight shutdown caused by the 

LPCV [low pressure check valves] failing to 

close due to excessive wear, which leads to 

the concern that such fault may be present 

in both engines of a given aircraft. 

* * * * * 

The MCAI for EMBRAER Model ERJ 190 

airplanes describes the unsafe condition as: 

An occurrence of an uncommanded engine 

in-flight shutdown (IFSD) was reported 

* * *, which was caused by an ERJ 170 

defective LPCV * * *. The valve failed to 

close due to excessive wear. Despite there 

were no IFSD related to LPCV * * * failure, 

some ERJ 190 valves * * * were inspected 

and presented cracks due to low cycle 

fatigue. Since this failure mode also might 

lead to an engine in-flight shutdown and 

since both engines of the airplane have the 

same valves, there is a possibility of an 

occurrence of a dual engine IFSD due to 

LPCV failure. 

* * * * * 

We are issuing this AD to require 

actions to correct the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective 

August 26, 2010. 

The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this AD 

as of August 26, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may examine the AD 

docket on the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov or in person at the 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, M–30, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenny Kaulia, Aerospace Engineer, 

International Branch, ANM–116, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 227–2848; fax (425) 227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on March 4, 2010 (75 FR 9816), 

and proposed to supersede AD 2007– 

16–09, Amendment 39–15148 (72 FR 

44734, August 9, 2007). That NPRM 

proposed to correct an unsafe condition 

for the specified products. The MCAI for 

EMBRAER Model ERJ 170 airplanes 

states: 

It has been found the occurrence of an 

engine in-flight shutdown caused by the 

LPCV [low pressure check valves] failing to 

close due to excessive wear, which leads to 

the concern that such fault may be present 

in both engines of a given aircraft. 

* * * * * 

The MCAI for EMBRAER Model ERJ 190 

airplanes states: 

An occurrence of an uncommanded engine 

in-flight shutdown (IFSD) was reported on 20 

Sep. 2005, which was caused by an ERJ 170 

defective LPCV [part number] P/N 1001447– 

3 logging 3900 Flight Hours (FH). The valve 

failed to close due to excessive wear. Despite 

there were no IFSD related to LPCV P/N 

1001447–4 failure, some ERJ 190 valves P/N 

1001447–4 logging around 2472 FH were 

inspected and presented cracks due to low 

cycle fatigue. Since this failure mode also 

might lead to an engine in-flight shutdown 

and since both engines of the airplane have 

the same valves, there is a possibility of an 

occurrence of a dual engine IFSD due to 

LPCV failure. 

* * * * * 

The required actions include repetitive 

replacements of the low-stage check 

valves and associated seals of the lefthand and right-hand engine bleed 

system with new or serviceable valves, 

depending on the model. For certain 

airplanes, this AD also includes an 

optional terminating action for the 

repetitive replacements. This AD also 

requires, if the terminating action is 

done, revising the approved 

maintenance plan to include repetitive 

functional tests of the low-stage check 

valve. For certain other airplanes, this 

AD requires replacing a certain lowstage check valve with an improved 

low-stage check valve. You may obtain 

further information by examining the 

MCAI in the AD docket. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comment received. The 

Air Line Pilots Association, 

International (ALPA), supports the 

NPRM. 

Explanation of Change Made to This 

AD 

Since we issued the NPRM, we have 

received Revision 6, of EMBRAER 170 

Maintenance Review Board Report 

(MRBR), MRB–1621, dated January 14, 

2010. We have updated the final rule to 

reference EMBRAER 170 Maintenance 

Review Board Report (MRBR), MRB– 

1621, Revision 6, dated January 14, 

2010. We have added paragraph (j)(14) 

to this final rule to give credit for 

revising the maintenance program to 

include maintenance Task 36–11–02– 

002 (Low Stage Bleed Check Valve) 

specified in Section 1 of the EMBRAER 

170 Maintenance Review Board Report 

(MRBR), MRB–1621, Revision 5, dated 

November 5, 2008. 

We also revised paragraph (j)(13) of 

this AD to clarify that doing a 

replacement before the effective date of 

this AD is acceptable for compliance 

with a replacement specified in 

paragraph (j)(1) of this AD. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data, 

including the comment received, and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

with the changes described previously. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES