Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Notices 57137 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part C was re-designated Part A–1. 

inspection at 555 New Jersey Avenue 

NW., Room 602 I, Washington, DC 

20208, from the hours of 9 a.m. to 5 

p.m., Eastern Standard Time Monday 

through Friday. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You may view this document, as well as 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: www.ed.gov/news/fedregister/index.html. 

To use PDF you must have Adobe 

Acrobat Reader, which is available free 

at this site. If you have questions about 

using PDF, call the U.S. Government 

Printing Office (GPO), toll free at 1–866– 

512–1800; or in the Washington, DC are 

at (202) 512–0000. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to this official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/

index.html. 

John Q. Easton, 

Director, Institute of Education Science. 

[FR Doc. 2013–22615 Filed 9–16–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

[Docket No. EERE–BT–2013–DET–0017] 

Energy Efficiency Program for 

Industrial Equipment: Interim 

Determination Classifying UL 

Verification Services Inc. as a 

Nationally Recognized Certification 

Program for Small Electric Motors 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of interim determination 

and request for public comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces an 

interim determination by the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) classifying 

UL Verification Services (UL) as a 

nationally recognized certification 

program under 10 CFR 431.447 and 

431.448. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information with respect to the UL 

Petition until October 17, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number ‘‘EERE– 

BT–2013–DET–0017,’’ by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: 

CertProgSmElecMotors2013DET0017@

ee.doe.gov Include the docket number 

EERE–BT–2013–DET–0017 in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–2J/

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–2945. Please 

submit one signed original paper copy. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Office, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, 

Washington, DC 20024. Please submit 

one signed original paper copy. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

review the background documents 

relevant to this matter, you may visit the 

U.S. Department of Energy, 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 the above telephone 

number for additional information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mr. Lucas Adin, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Building Technologies Office, 

Mail Stop EE–2J, Forrestal Building, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1317. Email: 

Lucas.Adin@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

Mail Stop GC–71, Forrestal Building, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0103. 

Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email: 

Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority 

Part C of Title III of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act contains energy 

conservation requirements for, among 

other things, electric motors and small 

electric motors, including test 

procedures, energy efficiency standards, 

and compliance certification 

requirements. 42 U.S.C. 6311–6316.1

Section 345(c) of EPCA directs the 

Secretary of Energy to require 

manufacturers of electric motors ‘‘to 

certify through an independent testing 

or certification program nationally 

recognized in the United States, that 

[each electric motor subject to EPCA 

efficiency standards] meets the 

applicable standard.’’ 42 U.S.C. 6316(c). 

Regulations to implement this 

statutory directive are codified in Title 

10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

Part 431 (10 CFR Part 431) at sections 

431.36, Compliance Certification, 

431.20, Department of Energy 

recognition of nationally recognized 

certification programs, and 431.21, 

Procedures for recognition and 

withdrawal of recognition of 

accreditation bodies and certification 

programs. Sections 431.20 and 431.21 

set forth the criteria and procedures for 

national recognition of an energy 

efficiency certification program for 

electric motors by DOE. With the 

support of a variety of interests, 

including industry and energy 

efficiency advocacy groups, DOE 

published a final rule on May 4, 2012, 

that established requirements for small 

electric motors that are essentially 

identical to the criteria and procedures 

for national recognition of an energy 

efficiency certification program for 

electric motors. See 77 FR 26608, 26629 

(codifying parallel provisions for small 

electric motors at 10 CFR 431.447 and 

431.448). 

For a certification program to be 

classified by the DOE as being 

nationally recognized in the United 

States for the testing and certification of 

small electric motors, the organization 

operating the program must submit a 

petition to the Department requesting 

such classification, in accordance with 

§§ 431.447 and 431.448. In sum, for the 

Department to grant such a petition, the 

certification program must: (1) Have 

satisfactory standards and procedures 

for conducting and administering a 

certification system, and for granting a 

certificate of conformity; (2) be 

independent of small electric motor 

manufacturers, importers, distributors, 

private labelers or vendors; (3) be 

qualified to operate a certification 

system in a highly competent manner; 

and (4) be expert in the test procedures 

and methodologies in IEEE Standard 

112–2004 Test Methods A and B, IEEE 

Standard 114–2010, CSA Standard 

C390–10, and CSA C747 or similar 

procedures and methodologies for 

determining the energy efficiency of 

small electric motors, and have 

satisfactory criteria and procedures for 

selecting and sampling small electric 

motors for energy efficiency testing. 10 

CFR 431.447(b). 

Each petition requesting classification 

as a nationally recognized certification 

program must contain a narrative 

statement as to why the organization 

meets the above criteria, be 

accompanied by documentation that 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
57138 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Notices 

2 DOE issued a final determination on December 

27, 2002 classifying UL as a nationally recognized 

certification program for electric motor efficiency. 

See 67 FR 79490 (December 27, 2002). 

supports the narrative statement, and be 

signed by an authorized representative. 

10 CFR 431.447(c). 

II. Discussion 

Pursuant to sections 431.447 and 

431.448, on February 20, 2013, UL 

submitted to the Department a Petition 

for ‘‘Classification in Accordance with 

10 CFR Part 431.447 and 431.448’’ 

(‘‘Petition’’ or ‘‘UL Petition’’). The 

Petition was accompanied by a cover 

letter from UL to the Department, 

containing five separate sections that 

included narrative statements for each— 

(1) Overview, (2) Standards and 

Procedures, (3) Independent Status, (4) 

Qualification of UL LCC and UL 

Verification Services, Inc. to Operate a 

Certification System, and (5) Expertise 

in Small Motor Test Procedures. In 

accordance with the requirements of 

§ 431.448(b), DOE published UL’s 

petition in the Federal Register on May 

16, 2013 and requested public 

comments. 78 FR 28812. 

In response to that notice, the 

National Electrical Manufacturers 

Association (NEMA), a trade association 

representing manufacturers of electrical 

products including small electric 

motors, submitted comments to DOE in 

a letter dated June 17, 2013 (Comment 

response to the published Notice of 

Petition, No. 5). In these comments, 

NEMA cited several concerns regarding 

UL’s petition, listing them according to 

each item on which DOE requested 

comments in the notice of petition. UL 

then submitted a letter to DOE dated 

June 26, 2013 responding to NEMA’s 

comments (Comment responding to 

NEMA’s comments on UL petition, No. 

6). 

Regarding DOE’s issue for comment 

on whether UL has satisfactory 

standards and procedures for 

conducting and administering a 

certification program, NEMA stated that 

UL operates an effective certification 

system for safety standards and, though 

it is new to certification of electric 

motor efficiency, offers certification 

programs for ‘‘EISA type’’ electric motor 

certifications (i.e., certification to the 

current DOE efficiency standards for 

electric motors). It also stated that as far 

as its members are aware, UL does not 

perform efficiency testing itself and 

instead uses outside labs for testing 

such as manufacturer labs or third-party 

labs such as Advanced Energy. 

(Comment response to the published 

Notice of Petition, No. 5, p. 3) UL 

rebutted NEMA’s statement that it is 

new to the motor efficiency certification 

market by stating that it has been 

certifying motors for energy efficiency 

for 11 years and has been recognized by 

DOE for certification of electric motors 

under 10 CFR part 431.2 In response to 

NEMA’s comment about its use of 

manufacturer and third-party 

laboratories, UL explained that because 

it currently certifies motors rated 

between 1 and 500 horsepower, many of 

the motors are large enough that the cost 

of shipping the motor could exceed the 

cost of the testing, making it impractical 

for UL to conduct testing in-house. UL 

stated that it instead sends a motor 

engineer to the manufacturer or thirdparty lab to witness the testing and 

verify the proper setup and conduct of 

the tests. (Comment responding to 

NEMA’s comments on UL petition, No. 

6, p. 1) 

In response to DOE’s request for 

comment regarding UL’s expertise in the 

procedures and methodologies required 

by DOE for certification of small electric 

motors, NEMA stated that UL is not 

recognized as an expert in this area and 

does not participate in the development 

or revision of the applicable industry 

standards. NEMA also stated that, while 

UL’s test capability is limited by its use 

of manufacturer or third-party 

laboratories, its proficiency in other 

types of testing demonstrates their 

capability to obtain the necessary 

expertise for motors testing by 

participating in review of the test 

standards. More specifically, NEMA 

stated that it is not familiar with UL’s 

capability to conduct in-house tests in 

accordance with the prescribed test 

methods and does not believe the 

information in UL’s petition provides 

sufficient information to determine UL’s 

knowledge or capability. NEMA also 

noted that UL is not listed in the 

Directory of Accredited Laboratories for 

Efficiency Testing of Electric Motors on 

the Web site of the National Voluntary 

Laboratory Accreditation Program 

(NVLAP) of the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology (NIST). 

(Comment response to the published 

Notice of Petition, No. 5, pp. 3–4) In 

response, UL stated that, while 

participation in the standards 

development process provides an 

opportunity to offer technical expertise, 

it does not lead to the attainment of 

such expertise. Responding to NEMA’s 

assertion that UL lacks NVLAP 

accreditation, UL stated that it had no 

practical or business need to attain such 

accreditation, since DOE has previously 

recognized UL as a nationally 

recognized certification program for 

electric motors. (Comment responding 

to NEMA’s comments on UL petition, 

No. 6, p. 2) 

NEMA also commented on several 

specific issues on which DOE requested 

comment regarding whether it should 

grant UL’s petition for recognition. 

Specifically, NEMA objected to UL’s 

requirement that motors tested for 

efficiency in the program would also be 

required to be tested for compliance 

with UL’s Motor Safety Standard(s), and 

stated that DOE should specifically state 

that such participation in UL programs 

other than energy efficiency testing 

must be on a voluntary basis. (Comment 

response to the published Notice of 

Petition, No. 5, p. 4) UL responded that 

the requirement for motors to meet 

safety standards at their rated 

horsepower is essential to ensuring the 

product’s safe operation under its rated 

conditions and that it would be 

unwilling to endorse through the use of 

its mark (i.e., the UL safety marking) 

that a tested motor that has not 

undergone this safety-related testing can 

safely operate at the manufacturer’s 

declared rating. UL also noted that 

manufacturers who are unwilling to 

pursue safety certification have other 

options, and need not attain DOE 

certification using their program. 

(Comment responding to NEMA’s 

comments on UL petition, No. 6, p. 2) 

NEMA also objected to UL’s stated 

sampling requirements for audit testing 

and verification of the manufacturer’s 

alternative efficiency determination 

method (AEDM) (see 78 FR at 28818– 

28819), and recommended that DOE 

clarify that these requirements are solely 

within DOE’s jurisdiction. NEMA 

disagreed with UL’s stated minimum 

sample of 20% of the manufacturer’s 

initial product submittal due to the 

testing and financial burden it may 

impose, since there may be tens of 

thousands of designs for a type of 

covered equipment. (Comment response 

to the published Notice of Petition, No. 

5, p. 4) UL responded that its ‘‘Followup Services (FUS)’’ is designed to 

ensure that products that it has tested 

and certified continue to meet the 

prescribed requirements and that the 

unit of the model that was initially 

tested is representative of production 

units. UL also explained that it set its 

specified sampling requirement based 

upon its own experience and in the 

absence of a DOE-established sampling 

requirement, and that it would adhere to 

any specific requirements established by 

DOE. (Comment responding to NEMA’s 

comments on UL petition, No. 6, p. 2) 

NEMA also commented on several 

other items regarding UL’s petition. This 

included UL’s independence from small 

electric motor manufacturers, importers, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Notices 57139 

3 DOE notes that the CFR section UL cited in its 

petition addresses the requirements for determining 

the efficiency of electric motors. § 431.17(a) 

addresses general requirements applicable to all 

electric motors, and § 431.17(b) specifies sampling 

requirements applicable when a certification 

program is not used. 

distributors, private labelers, or vendors, 

on which NEMA stated that it agrees 

that UL is independent in that it is not 

under the control of any such entities, 

and that it does not view the fees UL 

charges for its certification services as 

presenting a conflict with this 

requirement. NEMA also pointed out 

that in its petition UL incorrectly cited 

to requirements for electric motors in 10 

CFR 431.17(a)(b), which are not 

applicable to small electric motors.3

(Comment response to the published 

Notice of Petition, No. 5, pp. 3–4) UL 

did not respond to these specific 

comments. 

Finally, NEMA made a number of 

general comments stating its opposition 

to the granting of UL’s petition on the 

grounds that DOE has not yet 

sufficiently established definitions and 

certification requirements applicable to 

small electric motors. Specifically, 

NEMA stated that because DOE has not 

yet established in Subpart X to Part 431 

definitions for the terms ‘‘certificate of 

conformity,’’ ‘‘certification program,’’ 

and ‘‘certification system’’ as exist in 

§ 431.12, DOE has not yet provided a 

basis on which to determine whether a 

particular certification program should 

be recognized. NEMA also pointed out 

that the UL referred to the petition as for 

‘‘electric motors’’ rather than for ‘‘small 

electric motors,’’ which could confuse 

the scope of UL’s authority. NEMA 

recommended that either UL correct this 

aspect of its petition or that DOE specify 

that the authority extends only to small 

electric motors. NEMA further stated 

that, while it opposes the granting of the 

petition for these reasons, it supports 

the recognition of independent entities 

to assist in testing and certification of 

small electric motors and opposes any 

action that may reduce the options for 

certification. In NEMA’s view, UL’s 

petition could be reasonably considered 

only after the previously stated issues 

are addressed. (Comment response to 

the published Notice of Petition, No. 5, 

pp. 2, 5) 

In reviewing NEMA’s comments on 

the UL petition, and UL’s responses to 

these comments, DOE finds no specific 

cause to reject UL’s request for 

recognition as a nationally recognized 

certification program for small electric 

motors. This determination is based 

primarily on DOE’s previous recognition 

of UL as a nationally recognized 

certification program for electric motors, 

the sampling and testing requirements 

for which are substantially the same. In 

regard to NEMA’s specific comments 

regarding the requirement for adherence 

to UL’s safety testing requirements and 

the proposed sampling requirements for 

small electric motors, DOE notes that 

these requirements are in addition to, 

and not in place of, the requirements for 

small electric motor testing and 

certification and do not represent a 

mandatory requirement from DOE’s 

perspective. As UL correctly noted, 

manufacturers may choose not to 

participate in its program, and pursue 

certification through another process 

that does not involve its prescribed 

safety testing or follow-up audit and 

verification testing. Thus, a certification 

program may have such requirements in 

place without conflicting with the basic 

DOE requirements for certification. DOE 

also notes that such requirements 

already exist in UL’s nationally 

recognized certification program for 

electric motors. 

With respect to NEMA’s general 

comment that the granting of UL’s 

petition at this time would be premature 

due to the absence of certain definitions 

in subpart X to 10 CFR part 431, while 

DOE understands that a need may exist 

for greater clarification of certain 

aspects of the testing and certification 

requirements applicable to small 

electric motors, the absence of these 

definitions in Subpart X does not in 

itself preclude DOE from classifying 

UL’s, or any other organization that 

presents sufficient documentation, 

pursuant to the requirements in 

§ 431.447, that demonstrates that its 

program is capable of meeting, at a 

minimum, the testing and certification 

requirements in §§ 431.444 and 431.445. 

To the extent DOE finds that any of the 

certification requirements for small 

electric motors are not sufficiently clear, 

DOE will seek to provide further 

specificity through a future rulemaking 

or through guidance, as appropriate. In 

any case, UL or any other certification 

program recognized by DOE pursuant to 

§ 431.448 must operate its certification 

program in conformance with any 

specific certifications requirements or 

guidance promulgated by DOE. 

DOE also notes that NEMA’s comment 

regarding the scope of UL’s petition is 

correct in that the applicable section for 

small electric motors is § 431.445 rather 

than the cited requirements in § 431.17. 

While DOE declines to reject UL’s 

petition solely on this basis, DOE 

confirms that the authority granted to 

UL under this interim determination 

extends only to testing and certification 

of small electric motors under subpart X 

of 10 CFR part 431. 

The Department hereby announces its 

interim determination pursuant to 10 

CFR 431.448(d) that UL is classified as 

a nationally recognized certification 

program for small electric motors, and 

will accept comments on this interim 

determination until October 17, 2013. 

Any person submitting written 

comments to DOE with respect to this 

interim determination must also, at the 

same time, send a copy of such 

comments to UL. As provided under 

§ 431.448(c), UL may submit to the 

Department a written response to any 

such comments. After receiving any 

such comments and responses, the 

Department will issue a final 

determination on the UL Petition, in 

accordance with § 431.448(e) of 10 CFR 

part 431. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

11, 2013. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2013–22569 Filed 9–16–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

[Case No. RF–031] 

Decision and Order Granting a Waiver 

to Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration 

Systems Corporation of America 

Corporation (PAPRSA) From the 

Department of Energy Residential 

Refrigerator and Refrigerator-Freezer 

Test Procedures 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Decision and order. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) gives notice of its decision 

and order (Case No. RF–031) granting 

Panasonic Appliances Refrigeration 

Systems Corporation of America 

(PAPRSA) a waiver from the DOE 

electric refrigerator and refrigeratorfreezer test procedures for determining 

the energy consumption of residential 

refrigerator-freezers for the basic models 

set forth in its petition for waiver. Under 

today’s decision and order, PAPRSA 

shall be required to test and rate its 

hybrid wine chiller/beverage center 

basic models using an alternate test 

procedure that requires PAPRSA to test 

the wine chiller compartment at 55 °F 

instead of the prescribed temperature of 

38 °F. PAPRSA shall also use the K 

factor (correction factor) value of 0.85 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES