[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 63 (Friday, April 2, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16958-16986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6318]
[[Page 16957]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Energy
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Part 430
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Battery Chargers and
External Power Supplies; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 63 / Friday, April 2, 2010 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 16958]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 430
[Docket No. EERE-2009-BT-TP-0019]
RIN 1904-AC03
Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedures for Battery Chargers
and External Power Supplies
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and public meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes major revisions
to its test procedures for battery chargers and external power
supplies. In particular, DOE proposes to insert a new active mode
energy consumption test procedure for battery chargers, to assist in
the development of energy conservation standards as directed by the
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. DOE also proposes to
amend portions of its existing standby and off mode battery charger
test procedure to shorten the measurement time. DOE is also considering
amending its existing active mode single-voltage external power supply
test procedure to permit testing of certain types of external power
supplies that the existing test procedure may be unable to test.
Additionally, DOE proposes to insert a new procedure to address
multiple-voltage external power supplies, which are not covered under
the current single-voltage external power supply test procedure.
Finally, DOE is announcing a public meeting to receive comment on the
issues presented in this notice of proposed rulemaking.
DATES: DOE will hold a public meeting in Washington, DC on Friday, May
7, 2010, beginning at 9 a.m. DOE must receive requests to speak at the
meeting before 4 p.m., Friday, April 23, 2010. DOE must receive a
signed original and an electronic copy of statements to be given at the
public meeting before 4 p.m., Friday, April 30, 2010.
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this
notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) before or after the public
meeting, but no later than June 16, 2010. See Section V, ``Public
Participation,'' of this NOPR for details.
ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at the U.S. Department of
Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 8E-089, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585-0121. To attend the public meeting, please notify
Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945. Please note that foreign
nationals participating in the public meeting are subject to advance
security screening procedures, requiring a 30-day advance notice. If a
foreign national wishes to participate in the workshop, please inform
DOE of this fact as soon as possible by contacting Ms. Brenda Edwards
at (202) 586-2945 so that the necessary procedures can be completed.
Any comments submitted must identify the Battery Charger Active
Mode Test Procedure NOPR, and provide the docket number EERE-2009-BT-
TP-0019 and/or Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 1904-AC03. Comments
may be submitted using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected]. Include the docket
number EERE-2009-BT-TP-0019 and/or RIN 1904-AC03 in the subject line of
the message.
Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. 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. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. Please
submit one signed paper original.
For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see section V., ``Public
Participation,'' of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, visit the U.S. Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950
L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9
a.m. and 4 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. Please note: DOE's Freedom of
Information Reading Room no longer houses rulemaking materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Victor Petrolati, 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) 586-4549. E-mail:
[email protected]. In the Office of General Counsel, contact
Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General
Counsel, GC-72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585.
Telephone: (202) 586-9507. E-mail: [email protected].
For additional information on how to submit or review public
comments and on how to participate in the public meeting, contact Ms.
Brenda Edwards, 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)
586-2945. E-mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Authority and Background
II. Summary of the Proposal
A. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure
B. Review of Battery Charger and External Power Supply Standby
Mode and Off Mode Test Procedures
C. Review of Single-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
D. Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
III. Discussion
A. Effective Date for the Amended Test Procedures
B. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure
1. Summary of the CEC Test Procedure
2. Scope
3. Definitions
(a) Deletions of Existing Definitions
(b) Revisions to Existing Definitions
(c) Additions of New Definitions
4. Test Apparatus and General Instructions
(a) Confidence Intervals
(b) Temperature
(c) AC Input Voltage and Frequency
(d) Charge Rate Selection
(e) Battery Selection
(f) Non-Battery Charging Functions
(g) Determining the Charge Capacity of Batteries With No Rating
5. Test Measurement
(a) Removing Inactive Mode Energy Consumption Test Apparatus and
Measurement
(b) Charge Test Duration
(c) Battery Conditioning
(d) Battery Preparation
(e) Reversed Testing Order
(f) End of Discharge for Other Chemistries
C. Review of Battery Charger and External Power Supply Standby
and Off Mode Test Procedures
D. Review of the Single-Voltage External Power Supply Test
Procedure
1. EPSs That Communicate With Their Loads
2. EPSs With Output Current Limiting
3. High-Power EPSs
4. Active Power Definition
E. Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
[[Page 16959]]
F. Test Procedure Amendments Not Proposed in this Notice
1. Accelerating the Test Procedure Schedule
2. Incorporating Usage Profiles
3. Measuring Charger Output Energy
4. Alternative Depth-of-Discharge Measurement
IV. Regulatory Review
A. Executive Order 12866
B. National Environmental Policy Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
F. Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999
G. Executive Order 13132
H. Executive Order 12988
I. Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001
J. Executive Order 13211
K. Executive Order 12630
L. Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974
V. Public Participation
A. Attendance at Public Meeting
B. Procedure for Submitting Requests To Speak
C. Conduct of Public Meeting
D. Submission of Comments
E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
1. BC Active Mode
2. Limiting the Scope of the Test Procedure
3. BCs for Golf Carts and Other Consumer Motive Equipment
4. Amendments to definitions
5. Selecting the Charge Rate for Testing
6. Selecting the Batteries for Testing
7. Non-Battery Charging Functions
8. Procedure for Determining the Charge Capacity of Batteries
With No Rating
9. Deletion of the Inactive Mode Energy Consumption Test
Procedure
10. Shortening the BC Charge and Maintenance Mode Test
11. Reversing Testing Order
12. End-of-Discharge Voltages for Novel Chemistries
13. Standby Mode and Off Mode Duration
14. Single-Voltage EPS Test Procedure Amendments To Accommodate
EPSs that Communicate With Their Loads
15. Further Single-Voltage EPS Test Procedure Amendments
16. Loading Conditions for Multiple-Voltage EPSs
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
I. Authority and Background
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,'' which covers consumer products and certain
commercial products (all of which are referred to below as ``covered
products''), including battery chargers (BCs) and external power
supplies (EPSs).
Under EPCA, the overall program consists essentially of the
following parts: Testing, labeling, and Federal energy conservation
standards. The testing requirements consist of procedures that
manufacturers of covered products must use to certify to the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) that their products comply with EPCA energy
conservation standards and to quantify the efficiency of their
products. Also, these test procedures must be used whenever testing is
required in an enforcement action to determine whether covered products
comply with EPCA standards.
Section 323 of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6293) sets forth generally
applicable criteria and procedures for DOE's adoption and amendment of
such test procedures. It states, for example, that test procedures for
covered products should measure energy use, energy efficiency, or
annual operating cost during a period that is representative of typical
use. The test procedure should not be ``unduly burdensome.'' (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(3)) In addition, consistent with 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2) and
Executive Order 12899, 58 FR 69681 (Dec. 30, 1993), if DOE determines
that a test procedure amendment is warranted, it must publish proposed
test procedures and offer the public an opportunity to present oral and
written comments on them, with a comment period of not less than 75
days. Finally, in any rulemaking to amend a test procedure, DOE must
determine ``to what extent the proposed test procedure would alter the
measured energy efficiency as determined under the existing test
procedure.'' (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(1)) If DOE determines that the amended
test procedure would alter the measured efficiency of a covered
product, DOE must amend the applicable energy conservation standard
accordingly. (42 U.S.C. 6293(e)(2))
Relevant to today's notice, section 135 of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 (EPACT), Public Law 109-58, amended sections 321 and 325 of EPCA
by providing definitions for BCs and EPSs and directing the Secretary
to prescribe ``definitions and test procedures for the power use of
battery chargers and external power supplies.'' (42 U.S.C.
6295(u)(1)(A)) DOE complied with this requirement by publishing a test
procedure final rule, 71 FR 71340, on December 8, 2006 (EPACT 2005 En
Masse final rule). In that notice, DOE codified the test procedure for
BCs in appendix Y to subpart B of part 430 in title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) (``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the
Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers''; hereafter referred to as
``appendix Y'') and the test procedure for EPSs in appendix Z to
subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 (``Uniform Test Method for Measuring the
Energy Consumption of External Power Supplies''; hereafter referred to
as ``appendix Z'').
On December 19, 2007, the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 110-140, further amended sections 321,
323, and 325 of EPCA, prompting DOE to propose and promulgate
amendments to its test procedures for BCs and EPSs.
Section 301 of EISA 2007 amended section 321 of EPCA by modifying
definitions concerning EPSs. EPACT had amended EPCA to define an EPS as
``an external power supply circuit that is used to convert household
electric current into DC current or lower-voltage AC current to operate
a consumer product.'' \1\ (42 U.S.C. 6291(36)(A)) Section 301 of EISA
2007 further amended this definition by creating a subset of EPSs
called Class A EPSs. EISA 2007 defined this subset as those EPSs that,
in addition to meeting several other requirements common to all EPSs,
are ``able to convert to only 1 AC or DC output voltage at a time'' and
have ``nameplate output power that is less than or equal to 250
watts.'' \2\ (42 U.S.C. 6291(36)(C)(i))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The terms ``AC'' and ``DC'' refer to the polarity (i.e.,
direction) and amplitude of current and voltage associated with
electrical power. For example, a household wall socket supplies
alternating current (AC), which varies in amplitude and reverses
polarity. In contrast, a battery or solar cell supplies direct
current (DC), which is constant in both amplitude and polarity.
\2\ EISA 2007 defines a Class A EPS as an EPS that converts AC
line voltage to only 1 lower AC or DC output, is intended to be used
with an end-use product, is in a different enclosure from the end-
use product, is wired to the end-use product, and has rated output
power that is less than 250 watts. (42 U.S.C. 6291(36)(C)(i)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 301 also amended EPCA to establish minimum standards for
these products, which became effective on July 1, 2008 (42 U.S.C.
6295(u)(3)(A)), and directed DOE to publish a final rule by July 1,
2011, to determine whether to amend these standards. (42 U.S.C.
6295(u)(3)(D)) Section 301 further directed DOE to issue a final rule
that prescribes energy conservation standards for BCs or determine that
no ``standard is technically feasible or economically justified.'' (42
U.S.C. 6295(u)(1)(E)(i)(II))
In satisfaction of this requirement, DOE is bundling BCs and Class
A EPSs together in a single rulemaking proceeding to consider
appropriate energy conservation standards for these products. DOE
published a notice of Public Meeting and Availability of Framework
Document for Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies on June 4,
2009. 74 FR 26816. DOE then
[[Page 16960]]
held a public meeting to receive comment on the framework document \3\
on July 16, 2009 (hereafter referred to as the framework document
public meeting). During this public meeting, DOE also received comments
on the BC active mode test procedure and other test procedure issues,
some of which will be discussed in today's notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Energy Conservation Standards Rulemaking for Battery
Chargers and External Power Supplies.'' May 2009. Available at:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/bceps_frameworkdocument.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Section 302 of EISA, Congress instructed DOE to review its
test procedures every seven (7) years. As needed, DOE must either amend
the test procedure to (1) Improve its measurement representativeness or
accuracy or (2) reduce its burden, or (3) determine that such
amendments are unnecessary. DOE considers this rulemaking to constitute
a 7-year review for both BC and EPS test procedures as required under
EPCA, as modified by section 302 of EISA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A))
Because DOE's existing test procedures for BCs and EPSs were in place
on December 19, 2007, when the 7-year test procedure review provisions
of EPCA were enacted (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A)), DOE would have to
review these test procedures by December 2014. But because DOE is
conducting this rulemaking, the Department has satisfied this review
requirement in advance of this date.
Section 309 of EISA further amended section 325(u)(1)(E) of EPCA,
instructing DOE to issue no later than two years after EISA's enactment
a final rule ``that determines whether energy conservation standards
shall be issued for external power supplies or classes of external
power supplies.'' (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(1)(E)(i)(I)) However, as section
301 of EISA simultaneously set standards for Class A external power
supplies, DOE interprets sections 301 and 309 jointly as a requirement
to determine, no later than two years after EISA's enactment, whether
additional energy conservation standards shall be issued for EPSs that
are outside the scope of the current Class A standards, e.g., multiple-
voltage EPSs.
Finally, section 310 of EISA 2007 amended section 325 of EPCA to
establish definitions for active mode, standby mode, and off mode. (42
U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1)(A)) This section also directed DOE to amend its
existing test procedures by December 31, 2008, to measure the energy
consumed in standby mode and off mode for both BCs and EPSs. (42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(2)(B)(i)) Further, it authorized DOE to amend, by rule, any of
the definitions for active, standby, and off mode (42 U.S.C.
6295(gg)(2)(A)) The Department presented its then-proposed amendments
during a public meeting on September 12, 2008 (hereafter referred to as
the standby and off mode test procedure public meeting) and published
them in the Test Procedures for Battery Chargers and External Power
Supplies (Standby Mode and Off Mode) Final Rule on March 27, 2009. 74
FR 13318.
Today's notice proposes (1) the adoption of new test procedures for
the active mode of BCs and all modes of multiple-voltage EPSs and (2)
the modification of existing parts of the BC and EPS test procedures
(e.g., BC standby and off mode test duration). In doing so, it proposes
to amend both appendices Y and Z in multiple places. Furthermore,
although DOE proposes to retain the current language of certain
sections of appendices Y and Z, in selecting proposed amendments for
inclusion in today's notice, DOE considered all aspects of the existing
BC and EPS test procedures. Nonetheless, DOE seeks comment on the
entirety of the BC and EPS test procedure to ensure that no additional
amendments are needed at this time to further improve the procedures'
representativeness or reduce its burden.
In the absence of comments on issues beyond those discussed in
today's notice, DOE expects to issue a final rule adopting these
proposals in a timely manner. In this case, DOE would expect this
rulemaking to satisfy the 7-year review requirement and would not
expect any further review of the test procedures until 7 years after
the effective date of the proposals in this notice--i.e., no sooner
than 2017.
To the extent that DOE receives comments on issues beyond those
discussed in today's notice, DOE may address these comments in a
separate test procedure rulemaking, which would allow DOE to finalize
today's proposed BC active mode test procedure in time to support the
corresponding standards rulemaking but allow sufficient time to take
into consideration all comments from interested parties as required by
the 7-year review provisions of 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(1)(A).
II. Summary of the Proposal
In this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR), DOE proposes to:
(1) Insert a new test procedure to measure the energy consumption
of BCs in active mode to assist in the development of energy
conservation standards;
(2) Amend the BC test procedure to decrease the testing time of BCs
in standby and off modes;
(3) Potentially amend the single-voltage EPSs test procedure to
accommodate EPSs with Universal Serial Bus (USB) outputs and others
that may not currently be tested in accordance with the test procedure;
and
(4) Insert a new test procedure for multiple-voltage EPSs, a type
of non-Class A EPS that DOE will evaluate in the non-Class A
determination analysis.
Table 1 lists the sections of 10 CFR part 430 potentially affected
by the amendments proposed in this NOPR. The left-hand column in the
table cites the locations of the potentially affected CFR provisions,
while the right-hand column lists the proposed changes.
Table 1--Summary of Proposed Changes and Affected Sections of 10 CFR
Part 430
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of proposed
Existing section in 10 CFR Part 430 modifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 430.23 of Subpart B--Test Modify `(aa) battery
procedures for the measurement of charger' to include energy
energy and water consumption. consumption in active mode.
Appendix Y to Subpart B of Part 430-- Renumber the existing
Uniform Test Method for Measuring the sections to ease referencing
Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers. and use by testing
technicians.
1. Scope........................... Limit scope to only
include BCs intended for
operation in the United
States.
[[Page 16961]]
2. Definitions..................... Add definitions for:
[cir] Active power or real
power (P).
[cir] Ambient temperature.
[cir] Apparent power (S).
[cir] Batch charger.
[cir] Battery rest period.
[cir] C-rate.
[cir] Crest factor.
[cir] Equalization.
[cir] Instructions or
manufacturer's instructions.
[cir] Measured charge capacity.
[cir] Power factor.
[cir] Rated battery voltage.
[cir] Rated charge capacity.
[cir] Rated energy capacity.
[cir] Total harmonic distortion
(THD).
[cir] Unit under test (UUT).
Remove definitions
for:
[cir] Accumulated nonactive
energy.
[cir] Energy ratio or
nonactive energy ratio.
Modify definitions
for:
[cir] Active mode.
[cir] Multi-port charger.
[cir] Multi-voltage a la
carte charger.
[cir] Standby mode.
3. Test Apparatus and General Insert apparatus and
Instructions. instructions to measure energy
consumption in active mode.
4. Test Measurement................ Insert procedures to
measure energy consumption in
active mode.
Modify 4(c) to change
standby mode measurement time.
Modify 4(d) to change
off mode measurement time.
Appendix Z to Subpart B of Part 430--
Uniform Test Method for Measuring the
Energy Consumption of External Power
Supplies.
1. Scope........................... No change.
2. Definitions..................... Modify definition of
active power.
3. Test Apparatus and General Modify 3(b) to
Instructions. accommodate multiple-voltage
EPSs.
4. Test Measurement................ Potentially modify
4(a) to accommodate EPSs that
communicate with the load,
perform current limiting, or
have output power greater than
250 watts.
Modify 4(b) to
accommodate multiple-voltage
EPSs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In developing today's proposed test procedure amendments, DOE
considered comments received from interested parties following the
standby and off mode test procedure and framework document public
meetings. Numerous comments dealt with testing new modes. In order to
incorporate such changes, DOE reviewed the existing test procedures for
BCs and EPSs, and found that, with some modifications, they could be
used as a basis for updating DOE's test procedures. This issue is
discussed in greater detail later in this notice.
DOE also examined whether the proposed amendments to its test
procedures would significantly change the measured energy consumption
or efficiency of the BC or EPS. This question is particularly important
for Class A EPSs, which are subject to the EISA minimum efficiency
standard that took effect on July 1, 2008. (42 U.S.C. 6295(u)(3)(A))
The amendments under consideration to the single-voltage EPS test
procedure (used to test compliance with Class A EPS standards) would
affect the measured efficiency of EPSs with USB output and others that
communicate with their loads--the subset of Class A EPSs to which these
amendments would apply.\4\ As described in section III.D., these
amendments are presented in today's notice because of DOE's concern
that the current single-voltage EPS test procedure may not measure the
efficiency of these EPSs in a manner representative of their typical
use, resulting in a lower measured efficiency than achievable under
typical operating conditions. Because the single voltage test procedure
amendments discussed in section III.D. would modify the test conditions
to make them more representative of typical use, the measured
efficiency of these EPSs would likely increase. Nonetheless, DOE does
not expect any commensurate increase in the standards level for these
EPSs. EPSs that communicate with their loads should be held to the same
standard as the remainder of EPSs, which do not communicate with their
loads, as long as they are measured in a representative fashion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The term ``communicating'' with a load refers to an EPS's
ability to identify or otherwise exchange information with its load
(i.e., the end-use product to which it is connected). While most
EPSs provide power at a fixed output voltage regardless of what load
is connected to their outputs, some EPSs will only provide power
once they have ``communicated'' with the load and identified it as
the intended load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remaining amendments included in today's notice, if adopted,
would have the following impacts on measured energy consumption or
efficiency:
(1) The BC active mode test procedure amendment would change the
measured energy consumption of BCs by eliminating the nonactive energy
ratio metric and replacing it with a new metric that measures energy
consumption in active mode;
(2) The standby and off mode test procedure amendment would not
change the measured energy consumption of BCs or EPSs; and
[[Page 16962]]
(3) The multiple-voltage EPS amendment would insert a new test
procedure for these products,
A. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure
The current DOE BC test procedure, first created by the EPACT 2005
En Masse final rule, 71 FR 71340, and amended by the standby and off
mode final rule, 74 FR 13318, does not measure BC energy consumption in
all modes. Instead, it excludes the energy consumed by the BC while
charging a battery. The procedure measures energy consumption only in
maintenance, standby (no battery), and off modes, when the battery has
either been fully charged or removed from the BC.
The BC active mode test procedure proposal in today's notice, if
adopted, would remove the inactive mode measurement (section 4(a) of
appendix Y--which is a composite of different operational modes that
would be measured separately under today's proposal), add active mode
measurement to section 4(b), amend the scope, definitions, and test
apparatus and general instructions (sections 1, 2, and 3) in support of
the new active mode test procedure, as well as rearrange and renumber
the sections to ease referencing and use by testing technicians. The
active mode amendment is based on the optional battery charger system
test procedure adopted by the California Energy Commission (CEC),\5\
but has been modified to decrease testing burden (e.g., by considering
a shorter test period and more efficient use of equipment) and increase
clarity (e.g., by dividing complex procedures into discrete steps).
These and other details of the proposal are discussed further in
section III.B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Ecos Consulting, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
Solutions, Southern California Edison (SCE). ``Energy Efficiency
Battery Charger System Test Procedure.'' Version 2.2. November 12,
2008. http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/2008rulemaking/2008-AAER-1B/2008-11-19_BATTERY_CHARGER_SYSTEM_TEST_PROCEDURE.PDF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Review of Battery Charger and External Power Supply Standby Mode and
Off Mode Test Procedures
DOE addressed the EPCA requirements to prescribe definitions and
test procedures for measuring the energy consumption of EPSs and BCs in
standby and off modes (42 U.S.C. 6298(gg)(A) and (B)) in the Test
Procedures for Battery Chargers and External Power Supplies (Standby
Mode and Off Mode) Final Rule. 74 FR 13318. This final rule
incorporated standby and off mode measurements as well as updated
definitions into appendices Y and Z.
In today's notice, DOE proposes amending the BC test procedure to
require the use of a 30-minute warm-up period followed by a 10-minute
measurement period. Currently, the DOE test procedure requires a 1-hour
measurement period. This amendment would harmonize DOE's standby and
off mode measurement for BCs with that contained in section IV of part
1 of the CEC BC test procedure. DOE anticipates that harmonizing its
procedure with the CEC BC test procedure will produce a test procedure
that decreases the testing burden on manufacturers while preserving
testing accuracy. No changes are proposed to the standby and off mode
test procedures for EPSs. Detailed discussion of the changes under
consideration can be found in section III.C., below.
C. Review of Single-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
DOE is also considering amending the test procedure for single-
voltage EPSs to accommodate several classes of EPSs that cannot be
tested in a representative or repeatable manner under the current test
procedure. These EPSs include (1) Those that communicate with their
loads through USB and other protocols,\6\ (2) limit their output
current below the maximum listed on their nameplate, and (3) have
output power in excess of 250 watts. However, because these EPSs do not
exist in significant numbers in the market, DOE has not been able to
analyze them in depth and develop a general approach to testing them
under the single-voltage EPS test procedure. Therefore, DOE will only
be presenting the general outline of the test procedure changes under
consideration, and will proceed in developing and promulgating a
procedure covering these EPSs if it receives comments from interested
parties verifying the approaches presented (e.g., custom test fixtures
in the case of EPSs that communicate with their loads). The three types
of EPSs that could be affected are briefly described below, while the
test procedure changes under consideration can be found in section
III.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Some EPSs feature circuitry that allows them to communicate
with their loads. This is used to tailor operation to the needs of
the load as well as prevent use with incompatible loads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USB-Based EPSs
USB EPSs typically power portable electronic products such as
cellular telephones and portable media players that frequently receive
power and data from a personal computer through its USB port. In
contrast to most EPSs, which only provide one pair of output conductors
(for power), the USB interface provides two pairs--for data and power,
respectively. Although DOE's current single-voltage EPS test procedure
accommodates testing single-voltage EPSs that have more than one pair
of output conductors, it may not result in measurements representative
of typical use if the other pairs of conductors are necessary for the
specified operation of the EPS.
EPSs That Communicate With Loads
In addition to USB-based EPSs, other EPSs exist that also
communicate with loads (e.g., notebook computers) using proprietary
protocols. To address these designs, DOE is considering amending the
single-voltage EPS test procedure to permit communication between the
EPS and the load during testing. Any changes to the EPS test procedure
to address this issue would affect only USB-compliant EPSs and other
EPSs that cannot operate in a representative fashion without
communication with the load. Additional details regarding this possible
change are presented in section III.D.1., below.
Output Current Limiting EPSs
Similarly, DOE has encountered EPSs that may not be tested due to
``output current limiting,'' i.e., a mode of operation in which the EPS
significantly lowers its output voltage once an internal limit on the
output current has been exceeded. Although all EPSs limit their output
current to provide additional safety during short-circuit conditions,
some EPSs have been found to limit current to a value below the maximum
specified on their nameplate. Because DOE's single-voltage EPS test
procedure does not provide for this possibility, DOE is considering
adding language specifying the correct loading points in this case. The
changes under consideration are detailed in section III.D.2.
EPS with Nameplate Output Exceeding 250 Watts
Finally, the current DOE single-voltage EPS test procedure may not
sufficiently accommodate the testing of single-voltage EPSs with
nameplate output power greater than 250 watts. In contrast to EPSs with
output power less than 250 watts, high-power EPSs may have several
maximum output currents, something the test procedure does not take
into consideration. DOE is therefore considering clarifying the current
regulatory language to account for this configuration. The changes
under
[[Page 16963]]
consideration are detailed in section III.D.3.
D. Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
Section 309 of EISA amended section 325 of EPCA by directing DOE to
conduct a determination analysis for EPSs such as those EPSs equipped
with multiple simultaneous output voltages. DOE is not aware of any
existing test procedure developed specifically to measure the
efficiency or energy consumption of multiple-voltage EPSs. To develop
such a procedure, DOE reviewed related test procedures currently in use
and proposed a test procedure for multiple-voltage EPSs based on the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) single-voltage EPS \7\ and
internal power supply (IPS) \8\ test procedures. 73 FR 48054. In
today's notice, DOE is proposing a test procedure generally consistent
with its August 2008 proposal, but with some changes to accommodate the
concerns of interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Test Method for Calculating the Energy Efficiency of
Single-Voltage External Ac-Dc and Ac-Ac Power Supplies,'' August 11,
2004, previously incorporated by reference into appendix Y. http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/power_supplies/EPSupplyEffic_TestMethod_0804.pdf.
\8\ ``Proposed Test Protocol for Calculating the Energy
Efficiency of Internal Ac-Dc Power Supplies, Rev. 6.4.3,'' October
26, 2009. http://efficientpowersupplies.epri.com/pages/Latest_Protocol/Generalized_Internal_Power_Supply_Efficiency_Test_Protocol_R6.4.3.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorporating this amendment into the EPS test procedure would
enable DOE to evaluate power consumption for multiple-voltage EPSs in
all modes of operation: active, standby (i.e., no-load), and off. A
detailed discussion of DOE's proposed test procedure for multiple-
voltage EPSs can be found in section III.E., below.
III. Discussion
A. Effective Date for the Amended Test Procedures
If adopted, the amendments proposed today would become effective 30
days after the publication of the final rule. As of this effective
date, manufacturers (and DOE) would be required to use the amended
appendices when testing to determine if BCs and EPSs comply with energy
conservation standards. In addition, any representations made regarding
energy use or the cost of energy use for such products manufactured on
or after the effective date would have to be based on the amended test
procedures in appendices Y and Z.
However, absent new standards, only the amendments to the single-
voltage EPS test procedure would be binding after the effective date,
since DOE does not yet have standards for non-Class A EPSs or BCs. DOE
has initiated work on standards for non-Class A EPSs and BCs, with a
framework document published on June 4, 2009. The amendments to the BC
and non-Class A test procedures would become binding following
publication of a final rule that establishes these standards.
B. Battery Charger Active Mode Test Procedure
The BC test procedure was inserted into appendix Y by the EPACT
2005 En Masse final rule, 71 FR 71368, and amended by the standby and
off mode final rule 74 FR 13334. It is composed of four parts: (1)
Scope, (2) definitions, (3) test apparatus and general instructions,
and (4) test measurement. The test measurement section is further
subdivided into:
(a) Inactive mode energy consumption measurement,\9\ which
incorporates by reference section 5 of the EPA ENERGY STAR BC test
procedure \10\;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The inactive mode energy consumption consists of the energy
measured over 36 hours in maintenance mode, followed by 12 hours in
standby (no-battery) mode, with the possibility of abbreviating the
measurement to 6 hours and 1 hour, respectively.
\10\ Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ``Test Methodology
For Determining the Energy Performance of Battery Charging
Systems.'' December 2005. http://www.energystar.gov/ia/partners/prod_development/downloads/Battery_Chargers_Test_Method.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Active mode energy consumption measurement, which is currently
reserved;
(c) Standby mode energy consumption measurement; and
(d) Off mode energy consumption measurement.
During the standby and off mode test procedure rulemaking, numerous
interested parties commented that the current DOE test procedure is
insufficient as a basis for the development of energy conservation
standards, as it does not measure energy consumption during active
(charge) mode. Many of these interested parties also recommended that
DOE adopt the optional BC test procedure then under consideration in
draft form at the CEC. As mentioned in the standby and off mode test
procedure final rule, DOE was unable to act on these comments, as it
had not proposed any active mode changes in the standby and off mode
test procedure NOPR, 73 FR 48054 (August 15, 2008). 74 FR 13322.
On December 3, 2008, CEC adopted version 2.2 of the test procedure
developed by Ecos, EPRI Solutions, and SCE, as an optional test
procedure for the measurement of BC energy consumption in charging
(active), maintenance, no-battery (standby), and off modes. The test
procedure was incorporated by reference into section 1604(w) of title
20 of the California Code of Regulations,\11\ alongside the DOE test
procedure from appendix Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ California Energy Commission (CEC), ``2009 Appliance
Efficiency Regulations,'' August 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its framework document, DOE mentioned its desire to amend the BC
test procedure in appendix Y to measure energy consumption in each of
the modes of operation of a BC (including active mode). During and
after the framework document public meeting, interested parties
expressed their general desire for DOE to adopt the CEC test procedure
as the Federal test procedure for measuring the active mode energy
consumption of BCs. In particular, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E),
CEC, and Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP) commented that
DOE should expedite the rulemaking for an active mode test procedure,
harmonizing with the CEC BC test procedure. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at
pp. 40-41,\12\ PG&E et al., No. 20 at p. 7,\13\ CEC et al., No. 19 at
p. 1 \14\). The
[[Page 16964]]
Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) similarly requested
that DOE harmonize its test procedure for battery chargers with other
jurisdictions, but consider changes in methodology where appropriate.
(AHAM, No. 16 at p. 2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ A notation in the form ``Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at pp. 40-
41'' identifies an oral comment that DOE received during the July
16, 2009, framework document public meeting. This comment was
recorded in the public meeting transcript in the docket of the BC
and EPS energy conservation standards rulemaking (Docket No. EERE-
2008-BT-STD-0005, RIN 1904-AB57), maintained in the Resource Room of
the Building Technologies Program and available at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/pdfs/bceps_standards_meeting_transcript.pdf. This particular
notation refers to a comment (1) recorded in document number 14,
which is the public meeting transcript filed in the docket, and (2)
appearing on pages 40-41 of document number 14.
\13\ A notation in the form ``PG&E et al., No. 20 at p. 7''
identifies a written comment that DOE has received and included in
the docket of the BC and EPS energy conservation standards
rulemaking (Docket No. EERE-2008-BT-STD-0005, RIN 1904-AB57). This
comment was submitted by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern
California Edison Design & Engineering Services, Southern California
Gas Company San Diego Gas and Electric Company, Appliance Standards
Awareness Project, and American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy. For referencing purposes, throughout this notice, comments
submitted from these groups will be referred to as ``PG&E et al.''
This particular notation refers to (1) A comment submitted by
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) et al., (2) in document number 20 in
the docket, and (3) appearing on page 7 of document number 20.
\14\ This comment was submitted by California Energy Commission,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison Design
& Engineering Services, Southern California Gas Company, San Diego
Gas and Electric Company, American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy, Appliance Standards Awareness Project, Consumer Federation
of America, National Consumer Law Center, on behalf of its low-
income clients, Midwest Energy Efficiency Alliance, Northwest Power
and Conservation Council, Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance, and
Southwest Energy Efficiency Project. For referencing purposes,
throughout this notice, comments submitted from these groups will be
referred to as ``CEC et al.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE researched existing worldwide test procedures for measuring BC
energy consumption in active mode and found that there are currently
three test procedures for measuring the energy consumption of consumer
battery chargers: (1) The EPA ENERGY STAR BC test procedure, (2) the
Canadian Standards Association (CSA) C381.2 test procedure,\15\ and (3)
the CEC test procedure.\5\ No energy efficiency standards-setting or
promoting organizations in Europe, Australia, or China have developed
or adopted additional BC test procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Canadian Standards Association (CSA). C381.2-08. ``Test
Method for Determining the Energy Efficiency of Battery-Charging
Systems.'' November 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA ENERGY STAR test procedure was adopted by ENERGY STAR in
2005 and has remained unchanged since then. This is the same test
procedure incorporated by reference by DOE into sections 3 and 4(a) of
appendix Y by the EPACT 2005 En Masse final rule, 71 FR 71340. Although
it has been used to test numerous BCs (over 135 BCs qualified for the
ENERGY STAR mark following testing in accordance with the test
procedure),\16\ this test procedure does not measure energy consumption
of these products in active mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ EPA ENERGY STAR. ``Qualified Product (QP) List for ENERGY
STAR Qualified Battery Charging Systems .'' October 1, 2009.
Available at: http://www.energystar.gov/ia/products/prod_lists/BCS_prod_list.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, the CSA 381.2 test procedure, adopted in 2008, does not
measure BC active mode consumption. Instead, the procedure relies on
the same inactive mode energy consumption measurement as the EPA ENERGY
STAR BC test procedure and the current DOE test procedure.
The CEC test procedure, in contrast, includes active mode energy
consumption through its 24-hour active and maintenance mode test. This
test procedure was developed over six years through a collaborative
process between energy efficiency advocates and industry experts,
including multiple meetings and revisions (PG&E, No. 13 at p. 2). The
result, according to PG&E, has been a test procedure that applies to
the full spectrum of consumer battery chargers, regardless of input
voltage (AC or DC), battery chemistry, and battery type (detachable or
integral). PG&E provided test results from the application of the test
procedure to over 142 consumer BCs (PG&E, No. 13 at p. 6).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ The above discussion applies to part 1 of the CEC test
procedure; in addition, the test procedure also includes a part 2,
which applies to larger (greater than 2000 watt output) BCs intended
for transport and industrial applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE has conducted further tests using this procedure and considers
its measurement metrics, accuracy, and variability to be appropriate
for the product being tested. Consequently, DOE is proposing to adopt
part 1 of the CEC test procedure (for consumer products with input
power under 2 kilowatts) to measure (1) BC energy consumption in active
and maintenance modes and (2) the amount of energy recovered from the
battery during discharge. DOE would, however, make several
modifications to constrain its application to BCs sold in the United
States, improve its clarity, and decrease its testing burden. DOE
expects the resulting test procedure, explained in detail below, to
produce equivalent results as the test procedure adopted by the CEC,
while reducing the required technician and equipment time to perform
the tests.
Finally, although part 1 of the CEC test procedure also contains
instructions for measuring energy consumption in standby and off modes,
DOE previously adopted standby and off mode test procedures in its
March 2009 final rule. 74 FR 13334. Today's proposal retains these test
procedures, which would be incorporated into sections 4(c) and 4(d) of
appendix Y, and be modified as described in section III.B, in lieu of
adopting their equivalents from the CEC test procedure (part 1, section
IV). A summary of the CEC test procedure follows, along with specific
modifications that DOE would make prior to incorporation in appendix Y.
As with all other sections in this proposal, DOE seeks comment
regarding all aspects of its proposed approach.
1. Summary of the CEC Test Procedure
The lengthy stakeholder consultation process conducted by the CEC
led to the development of a test procedure for measuring the energy
consumption of both consumer (part 1) and industrial (part 2)
chargers.\18\ Both parts of the test procedure measure the input energy
to the battery charger when recharging a battery that had previously
been conditioned (if necessary) and discharged to a specified depth.
(Part 2 also requires measurement of the charger output energy.) Both
parts of the test procedure then require measurement of the energy
recoverable from the battery during discharge. Finally, the test
procedure requires measurement of the charger input power with (1) The
battery fully charged and connected to the charger (maintenance mode),
(2) the battery removed from the charger (standby mode), and (3) the
battery removed from the charger and the charger turned off, if a
manual on-off switch is present (off mode). The number of tests, their
duration, and other specifics vary between the two parts and also from
charger to charger, depending on its capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Part 2 of the CEC test procedure also applies to BCs for
golf carts and other motive equipment that DOE considers to be
consumer products. This issue is discussed further in section
III.B.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The test procedure provides a set of definitions needed to test a
wide variety of BCs. While some of these definitions are necessary for
testing the larger industrial chargers, others are used in both parts
of the test procedure and provide additional specificity beyond the
definitions currently incorporated in section 2 of appendix Y.
Part 1 of the test procedure continues with specification of the
test conditions in section I. Like the test conditions section of the
EPA BC test procedure (which is incorporated into section 3 of appendix
Y), this section of the CEC test procedure sets a variety of
requirements, including limits on the input voltage to the charger, the
speed and temperature of the air surrounding the unit under test (UUT),
and measurement precision and accuracy. The AC input voltage waveform
characteristics and ambient airspeed and temperature requirements of
the CEC test procedure are equivalent to those of the EPA test
procedure. The remaining requirements are stricter, however, specifying
tighter limits on some parameters (e.g., measurement resolution, etc.)
and limits on additional parameters that may affect measurement results
(e.g., uncertainty, materials on which the BC may rest, characteristic
of input voltage waveform for DC chargers, etc.). These tighter
specifications on testing conditions should result in a more repeatable
test procedure.
Following the test condition section, the CEC test procedure
proceeds to specify the selection and setup of the battery and charger
in section II. The age of the UUT is specified, as in the EPA test
procedure. However, the CEC test procedure also specifies the mode of
operation of the BC for chargers with several charge modes and/or
additional functionality. Finally, the CEC test procedure specifies
which batteries
[[Page 16965]]
should be used for the test, how to access their terminals, and how to
estimate the energy capacity (used later in the test procedure to
calculate the discharge rate) of the battery in case the battery is not
labeled. The battery selection procedure is particularly helpful when
testing BCs not packaged with batteries. Again, these additional
specifications allow the test procedure to return repeatable results
when testing a wider variety of BCs beyond those included in the EPA
ENERGY STAR program.
Once the BC has been set to the correct mode or modes and the test
battery or batteries have been identified, the measurements can begin.
The measurement instructions are contained in section III of part 1,
and specify how to condition, prepare, rest, charge, and discharge the
battery, as well as which quantities to measure during each of these
steps. Section III.A requires the tester to condition nickel-based
batteries that have not been previously tested by charging them three
times and discharging twice. This step is necessary because nickel-
based batteries must be cycled several times before their capacity
stabilizes and the test results become representative of typical use.
The next step, preparation, consists of a controlled discharge to the
end-of-discharge voltage. This step ensures that the battery has been
fully discharged and that the energy consumed by the charger as it
takes the battery from a fully discharged to a fully charged state can
be compared to the energy recovered from the battery. Finally, the
battery is rested, allowing it to return to the ambient temperature.
Since many battery parameters depend on temperature, this step further
improves the repeatability of the test procedure. All three of these
initial steps are required for ensuring the repeatability of the test
procedure, and are incorporated into today's proposal, with the minor
modifications presented in sections III.B.5.(c) and III.B.5.(d) of this
notice.
Section III of part 1 of the CEC test procedure requires measuring
the energy consumed by the charger (as an integral of input power
samples) when recharging the fully discharged and rested battery, but
with any special charging functions (e.g., equalization) turned off.
This requirement is a significant departure from the EPA test procedure
because the EPA procedure does not record the energy consumed during
charging. The CEC test procedure also requires testers to record
further parameters such as temperature, power factor, and current crest
factor.
The CEC test procedure also specifies that the test must run for 24
hours or longer, as required by the manufacturer or as determined by
the tester through observation of the charger (see section II.E of the
part 1). Although BCs work at different rates, the CEC test procedure
subjects them all to a full 24-hour charge and maintenance test. This
is done to (1) obtain a uniform metric for comparisons and (2) increase
the likelihood that the input power to the charger measured at the end
of the 24-hour period is representative of the maintenance-mode power
usage that a user will encounter when he or she leaves a battery
connected to the charger for an extended period of time, which is the
case for BCs used in handheld vacuum cleaners and cordless telephones,
among others. While DOE believes these procedural requirements have
merit, DOE seeks comment from interested parties on whether it is
possible to shorten the measurement period that the CEC procedure
currently requires while preserving the accuracy and completeness of
that procedure's measurements. This method is described further in
section III.B.5.(b) of this notice.
Finally, section IV of part 1 of the CEC test procedure describes
the no-battery (standby) and off mode tests, while section V specifies
the reporting requirements. Because DOE has already adopted standby and
off mode test procedures for battery chargers, and because it specifies
reporting requirements separately in section 430.22, it is not
proposing today to incorporate these sections of the CEC test procedure
into appendix Y.
Part 2 of the CEC test procedure follows a similar structure to
part 1, but adds requirements to measure the output of the charger,
test the charger with the battery at three different depths-of-
discharge, and ensure charger-test battery compatibility, among others.
These requirements may be needed to fully characterize the energy
consumption of large lead-acid BCs for industrial applications;
however, because DOE's current scope covers chargers for consumer
products, DOE focused primarily on part 1, though the differences
between the two parts are discussed in further detail in III.B.2. of
this notice.
As the above summary shows, the CEC test procedure is a complete
and detailed energy efficiency test procedure that can serve as a basis
for a DOE test procedure. The steps outlined above contribute to the
accurate measurement of the energy efficiency of battery chargers and
have been incorporated into today's proposal, except where a less
burdensome or more accurate alternative exists. These departures are
presented in more detail in the subsequent sections.
2. Scope
The scope of the current DOE test procedure encompasses all
BCs,\19\ regardless of input voltage. However, following the framework
document public meeting, a member company of the Information Technology
Industry (ITI) Council submitted a comment requesting that DOE limit
testing to U.S. line-voltage AC input (115 volts at 60 hertz).\20\ (ITI
member,\21\ No. 17 at p. 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ ``The term `battery charger' means a device that charges
batteries for consumer products, including battery chargers embedded
in other consumer products. (42 U.S.C. 6291(32))
\20\ AC line voltage in the U.S. is nominally 120 volts at 60
hertz. However, several international test procedures specify
testing at 115 volts, as that test condition will also be applicable
to devices used in several South and Central American countries,
where the AC line voltage is nominally 110 volts at 60 hertz.
\21\ ITI submitted comments on behalf of one of its member
companies, who wishes to remain anonymous. The comments submitted do
not reflect the opinion of ITI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Limiting the scope of the test procedure to encompass BCs with DC
or U.S. line-voltage AC input would ensure that all consumer battery
chargers intended for use in the U.S. will be covered, while preventing
unnecessary testing of industrial BCs or consumer BCs intended for use
outside of the U.S. Such a modification to the scope would also be
consistent with DOE's treatment of EPSs, which are not only defined as
a circuit ``used to convert household [line-voltage AC] electric
current'' in the statute (42 U.S.C. 6291(36)), but are also tested at
115 volts at 60 hertz, as specified in section 3 of appendix Z part 430
of title 10 of the CFR.
This limitation on input voltage would differentiate the proposed
scope from that in the CEC BC test procedure. The proposed scope
further differs from the CEC BC test procedure by including only BCs
for consumer products. (42 U.S.C. 6291(32)) The CEC BC test procedure,
on the other hand, covers not only BCs for consumer products, but also
BCs for commercial and industrial applications such as forklifts and
emergency egress lighting.
Even though the CEC test procedure covers BCs for applications from
all market segments, it is divided by input and output parameters and
intended application, among other criteria. For example, part 1 of the
CEC BC test procedure applies to consumer chargers with input power
under 2 kilowatts, while part 2 applies primarily to larger industrial
chargers and chargers for golf carts and other consumer motive
equipment.
[[Page 16966]]
Chargers for golf carts and other motive equipment were covered by
part 2 of the CEC test procedure due to their similarity to large
industrial BCs--both typically charge flooded lead-acid batteries. Part
2 addresses the particular concerns of testing these flooded lead-acid
systems, such as different charger and battery manufacturers, high
charger efficiency (necessary due to high output power), and an
unsealed battery construction permitting measurements of the
temperature and specific gravity of the acid electrolyte to determine
battery state.
While these test procedure provisions may be necessary to
accurately measure the energy efficiency of large industrial BCs,
chargers for golf carts and other types of consumer motive equipment
(collectively, consumer motive equipment) fall at the low-power end of
the lead-acid BC range, where the need for a specialized test procedure
is not as clear. For example, high-power industrial chargers are
already highly efficient, so part 2 requires a series of tests under
various conditions to detect any differences in energy consumption. On
the other hand, there is sufficient efficiency variation in the
consumer motive equipment BC market such that a less burdensome test
procedure will suffice for energy consumption measurements. To
accommodate consumer motive equipment within the BC test procedure, DOE
has two options:
(1) Include BCs for consumer motive equipment batteries with those
for all other consumer products, in a single test procedure based on
part 1 of the CEC BC test procedure; or
(2) Include BCs for consumer motive equipment in one test procedure
based on part 2 of the CEC BC test procedure, while including BCs for
all other consumer products in a second test procedure based on part 1
of the CEC BC test procedure.
Approach 2, above, would result in an additional DOE test procedure
based on part 2 of the CEC test procedure. However, because DOE's scope
does not extend to large industrial chargers, this additional test
procedure would only cover chargers for golf carts and other consumer
motive equipment. Under this approach, separate test setup and
measurement requirements would need to be established to test a class
of products with few models and limited shipments.
However, a previous draft of the CEC test procedure included
consumer motive equipment together with smaller consumer BCs,
simplifying the testing requirements. Although the testing requirements
for consumer motive equipment and the remaining consumer BCs were later
separated into the two parts of the test procedure, an integrated test
procedure remains valid for testing the efficiency of both classes of
BCs.
Therefore, rather than proposing a separate procedure that would
cover only a single class of BCs (consumer motive equipment), DOE
proposes to follow approach 1 above and include consumer motive
equipment chargers under a general test procedure for all consumer
products. The particulars of this proposed test procedure are discussed
at length in the remainder of this section.
For the reasons stated above, DOE proposes to amend section 1 of
appendix Y to read as set out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
Nonetheless, DOE is also considering approach 2--adopting an
additional test procedure for consumer motive equipment chargers based
on part 2 of the CEC test procedure--given sufficient comment and
supporting data from interested parties. DOE invites interested parties
to comment on both approaches. In particular, DOE seeks comment on the
applicability of part 1 of the CEC test procedure, and today's proposed
test procedure, to BCs for golf carts and other consumer motive
equipment and the testing burden of part 2 of the CEC test procedure
compared to part 1 of the CEC test procedure and today's proposed test
procedure. DOE also seeks comment generally on the completeness of the
battery chemistries included in its proposal.
3. Definitions
DOE is proposing to incorporate elements of the CEC test procedure
into the current version of appendix Y. For example, some of the CEC
definitions differed slightly from those in section 2 of appendix Y,
while other terms used in the CEC test procedure were undefined in
appendix Y. Because of these discrepancies, DOE is proposing to amend
section 2 of appendix Y (definitions) by amending, deleting, and
incorporating new definitions to prevent potential confusion with
respect to today's proposal. Finally, DOE is proposing to remove
definitions used only in section 4(a) of appendix Y (inactive mode
energy consumption measurement), which DOE also proposes to remove (see
section III.B.5. (a) of this notice).
The specific changes proposed in today's notice consist of a series
of deletions, amendments and additions. First, DOE proposes to remove
the definitions of ``accumulated nonactive energy'' and ``energy ratio
or nonactive energy ratio.'' Second, DOE proposes to modify the
definitions of ``active mode,'' ``multi-port charger,'' ``multi-voltage
a la carte charger,'' and ``standby mode.'' Finally, DOE proposes to
add definitions for ``active power or real power (P),'' ``ambient
temperature,'' ``apparent power (S),'' ``batch charger,'' ``battery
rest period,'' ``rated energy capacity,'' ``C-rate,'' ``crest factor,''
``equalization,'' ``instructions or manufacturer's instructions,''
``measured charge capacity'' ``power factor,'' ``rated battery
voltage,'' ``rated charge capacity,'' ``total harmonic distortion
(THD),'' and ``unit under test (UUT).'' By amending, deleting, and
incorporating new definitions, DOE aims to improve the clarity and
utility of its test procedure for BCs.
(a) Deletions of Existing Definitions
DOE is proposing to delete the definitions of ``accumulated
nonactive energy'' and ``energy ratio or nonactive energy ratio.''
These definitions are no longer useful since they relate only to the
inactive energy consumption measurement (section 4(b)), which DOE is
proposing to remove from appendix Y in today's notice.
(b) Revisions to Existing Definitions
DOE is proposing to update some of the definitions codified in
appendix Y by the EPACT 2005 En Masse final rule, 71 FR 71368, to avoid
confusion in their application to the proposed BC active mode test
procedure. Specifically, DOE proposes to modify the definition of
``active mode'' by adding the alternative term ``charge mode'' to the
definition. As these two terms are often used interchangeably, DOE
believes that this change will reduce the confusion between the two
terms.
Also, DOE proposes to modify the definition of ``multi-port
charger'' and ``multi-voltage a la carte charger.'' The definitions of
``multi-port charger'' and ``multi-voltage a la carte charger''
included in appendix Y did not previously specify that they encompassed
a batch charger (see section III.B.3. (c)). As both the proposed BC
active mode test procedure and the CEC test procedure upon which it is
based rely on the characteristics of the charger when specifying the
batteries to be used for the test, DOE is proposing to replace the
current definitions in appendix Y with those in the CEC test procedure
to ensure that battery selection for these types of BCs will be
performed in the same manner.
Finally, DOE proposes to modify the definition of BC ``standby
mode,'' which is synonymous with ``no-battery mode.'' These two terms
are already included in the definition; however, DOE proposes
[[Page 16967]]
to remove the parenthetical and simply present both terms for
consistency with its other definitions. DOE is proposing to redefine
this term in section 2.24 of appendix Y, as set out in the regulatory
text of this NOPR.
(c) Additions of New Definitions
Although the EPACT 2005 En Masse final rule inserted numerous
definitions into appendix Y, 71 FR 71368, the expansion of the BC test
procedure to include active mode requires DOE to propose additional
definitions in today's notice. These proposed definitions (as well as
the proposed procedure) are based on those used by the CEC and help
clarify the proposed active mode test procedure. Nonetheless, these
definitions have broader applicability, as they are based in large part
on established international standards (e.g., International
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard 62301, Household Electrical
Appliances--Measurement of Standby Power, or Institute of Electrical
and Electronics Engineers standard 1515-2000, Recommended Practice for
Electronic Power Subsystems: Parameter Definitions, Test Conditions,
and Test Methods). Furthermore, some of these definitions had
previously been incorporated into the DOE EPS test procedure in
appendix Z. 74 FR 13335.
By adopting the following definitions, DOE hopes to avoid confusion
or inconsistency in the application of its proposed test procedure.
Accordingly, DOE is proposing to incorporate definitions that are
consistent with the CEC test procedure for the following terms in
section 2 of appendix Y: ``batch charger,'' ``battery rest period,''
``equalization,'' ``power factor,'' ``rated energy capacity,'' and
``rated battery voltage.'' The Department is also proposing new
definitions for ``active power or real power (P),'' ``ambient
temperature,'' ``apparent power (S),'' ``C-rate,'' ``crest factor,''
``instructions or manufacturer's instructions,'' ``measured charge
capacity,'' ``rated charge capacity,'' ``total harmonic distortion
(THD),'' and ``unit under test (UUT).'' The proposed definitions are
detailed below.
DOE is proposing to define ``active power or real power (P)'' using
the definition found in IEEE standard 1515-2000, rather than the
definition in the CEC test procedure. The CEC test procedure defines
active power as the average of instantaneous power taken over one or
more periods of time. In contrast, IEEE Standard 1515-2000 defines
active power as the integral over one period of the product of the
voltage and current waveforms divided by the period. DOE believes that
the approach of IEEE Standard 1515-2000 is preferable because it is
clearer and, as the industry standard, more widely accepted.
Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define this term in appendix Y,
section 2.2, as set out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
DOE proposes to include a definition for ``ambient temperature'' in
its test procedure based on the CEC definition except for the addition
of the word ``immediately.'' The primary reason for this change is to
make the proposed DOE definition in appendix Y consistent with appendix
Z and IEEE standard 1515-2000. Furthermore, the inclusion of the word
``immediately'' limits the definition to only the volume of air within
close proximity to the unit under test. It is the temperature of this
particular volume of air, and not of that elsewhere in the test room--
that could potentially impact the test results.\22\ DOE is proposing to
define this term as set out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ The efficiency of BCs is dependent on temperature.
Therefore, the test procedure specifies the ambient temperature to
ensure consistent results between tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE notes that although it is not proposing to set a specified
distance within which this temperature measure must be taken (e.g., 5
feet from the unit under test in all directions), it is considering the
inclusion of such a requirement in order to minimize the risks of
potential gaming during compliance certification testing. Comments from
the public on this particular issue are also sought.
To achieve consistency with the proposed definition of active mode,
DOE proposes to include a definition for ``apparent power (S)'' in its
test procedure that would incorporate language from the CEC test
procedure (which is the same as that in appendix Z and IEEE standard
1515-2000), with the sole exception of specifying that the measurement
be expressed in volt-amperes. This change achieves consistency with the
active mode because that definition also specifies the units of
measurement. Apparent power is used in the power factor definition and
is included for consistency with the CEC test procedure, which includes
a similar definition. DOE is proposing to define this term in appendix
Y, section 2.4 as set out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
DOE is also proposing a definition of ``batch charger'' based on
the CEC definition. DOE believes that the CEC definition for ``batch
charger'' is clear and concise, and is proposing that the definition be
adopted verbatim. DOE is proposing to define this term in appendix Y,
section 2.5 as set out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
DOE is proposing to include a definition for ``battery rest
period'' in the test procedure, adopted verbatim from the CEC test
procedure. ``Battery rest period'' is the period between preparing the
battery and the battery discharge test, as well as the period between
the battery discharge test and the charge and maintenance mode test.
DOE is proposing to define this term in appendix Y, section 2.9 as set
out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
The proposed ``C-rate'' definition is based on the CEC test
procedure, but has been modified to remove the example C-rate
calculation, retaining only the definition. C-rate is used in the test
procedure to describe the rate of charge and discharge during testing.
DOE is proposing to define this term in appendix Y, section 2.10 as set
out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``crest factor'' is based on the
definition in the CEC test procedure. Crest factor, which refers to the
ratio of the peak instantaneous value of a quantity to its root-mean-
square (RMS) value, is recorded when performing the charge mode and
battery maintenance mode test. IEEE standard 1515-2000 and IEC standard
62301 both define this term in a manner similar to CEC. DOE is
proposing to adopt the definition from the two industry standards, as
that version is more concise. DOE is proposing to define this term in
appendix Y, section 2.12 as set out in the regulatory text of this
NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``equalization'' has been taken
verbatim from the CEC test procedure. The equalization charge is not
tested under the proposed test procedure, since it is considered one of
the ``special charge cycles that are recommended only for occasional
use to preserve battery health.'' DOE is proposing to define this term
in appendix Y, section 2.13 as set out in the regulatory text of this
NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``instructions or manufacturer's
instructions'' is based on the ``instructions'' definition from the CEC
test procedure, which states that `` `instructions' includes any
information on the packaging or on the product itself * * *
`Instructions' also includes any service manuals or data sheets that
the manufacturer offers for sale to independent service technicians,
whether printed or in electronic form.'' DOE is proposing to expand the
scope of this definition by also including information about the
product that is
[[Page 16968]]
available on the manufacturer's website. These instructions, which only
include those materials available at the time of the test, must be
followed when setting up the battery charging system, except when in
conflict with the requirements of this test procedure. DOE is proposing
this change in the definition because the test procedure must be
representative of typical use, and users will only be influenced by
instructions publicly available at the time of the test. DOE is
proposing to define this term in appendix Y, section 2.14 as set out in
the regulatory text of this NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``measured charge capacity'' is based
on the ``measured charge capacity'' definition from the CEC test
procedure, but replaces the term ``rate'' with ``current'' and
``final'' with ``specified end-of-discharge.'' These changes were made
to clarify the definition by replacing general words with words that
are more specific. In the proposed test procedure, the measured charge
capacity must be calculated for those batteries that do not have a
rated charge capacity. DOE is proposing to define this term in Y,
section 2.15, as set out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``power factor'' has been taken
verbatim from the ``power factor'' definition in the CEC test
procedure. This definition is also present in IEEE standard 1515-2000
as ``power factor (true).'' The power factor is recorded when
performing the charge mode and battery maintenance mode test. DOE is
proposing to define this term in appendix Y, section 2.20 as set out in
the regulatory text of this NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``rated battery voltage'' is based on
the ``rated battery voltage'' definition from the CEC test procedure.
The definition varies from the CEC definition in that it replaces the
phrase ``a batch of batteries includes series connections'' with
``there are multiple batteries that are connected in series,'' replaces
``batch'' with ``batteries,'' and replaces ``times'' with ``multiplied
by.'' The rated battery voltage is recorded before testing and is used
to calculate rated energy capacity. DOE is proposing to define this
term in appendix Y, section 2.21 as set out in the regulatory text of
this NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``rated charge capacity'' is based on
the ``rated charge capacity'' definition from the CEC test procedure.
DOE is proposing to add the clause ``the manufacturer states the
battery can store under specified test conditions,'' to clarify the
definition. DOE is also proposing to replace the phrase ``a batch of
batteries included parallel connections'' with ``there are multiple
batteries that are connected in parallel,'' ``batch'' with
``batteries,'' and ``times'' with ``multiplied by.'' The rated charge
capacity is used in the proposed test procedure to select the battery
used for testing when there are no batteries packaged with the charger
and there are multiple batteries with the lowest rated voltage. DOE is
proposing to define this term in appendix Y, section 2.22 as set out in
the regulatory text of this NOPR.
The proposed definition for ``rated energy capacity'' has been
taken verbatim from the ``calculated energy capacity'' definition in
the CEC test procedure. DOE changed the word ``calculated'' to
``rated'' to emphasize that the value is computed using only rated
values. The definition is proposed to avoid confusion with the term
``measured charge capacity.'' DOE is proposing to define this term in
appendix Y, section 2.23 as set out in the regulatory text of this
NOPR.
DOE also proposes defining ``total harmonic distortion (THD),''
clarifying the input voltage requirements of the proposed test
procedure. A variation of the definition (with an associated equation)
is also present in IEEE standard 1515-2000 as well as in appendix Z.
The inclusion of a THD requirement ensures the presence of a
sufficiently sinusoidal input voltage waveform, which is necessary for
repeatability. This factor is important when measuring the energy use
of these products because the energy consumption of BCs depends on the
shape of the input voltage waveform. The THD of the input voltage is
required to be <= 2%, up to and including the 13th harmonic.\23\ The
proposed definition for this term would appear in appendix Z, section
2.25 and reads as set out in the regulatory text of this NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Any periodic signal can be decomposed into a sum of sine
waves at integer multiples of its fundamental frequency (the inverse
of the period of repetition). The signal can be represented by a
sine wave at the same frequency as the original, plus a second sine
wave at twice the frequency, plus a third sine wave at three times
the frequency, and so on. These sine waves are known as
``harmonics.'' Although the number of harmonics are infinite in
number, their amplitude tends to decrease precipitously with each
subsequent harmonic, such that it is reasonable to stop the
measurement at a particular harmonic, and the 13th has been found to
be sufficient in practice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE proposes defining the term ``unit under test (UUT)'' in its
battery charger test procedure based on the CEC test procedure
definition, to clarify the term. The abbreviation ``UUT'' is defined in
IEEE standard 1515-2000 and used throughout the proposed test procedure
in place of the terms ``battery charger'' and ``test battery.'' This
proposed change would simplify the test procedure text. DOE is
proposing to define this term in appendix Y, section 2.26 as set out in
the regulatory text of this NOPR.
4. Test Apparatus and General Instructions
Appendix Y, section 3 currently specifies that the test apparatus,
standard testing conditions, and instructions for testing battery
chargers shall conform to the requirements specified in section 4,
``Standard Testing Conditions,'' of the EPA's ``Test Methodology for
Determining the Energy Performance of Battery Charging Systems.'' As
described below, DOE is proposing to remove the existing test apparatus
and general instruction, and include sections I and II (the standard
test conditions and battery charger system set up) of part 1 of the CEC
test procedure, with minor revisions to improve the procedure's
clarity.
(a) Confidence Intervals
The CEC test procedure specifies that all ``[m]easurements of
active power of 0.5 W or greater shall be made with an uncertainty of
<= 2%. Measurements of active power of less than 0.5 W shall be made
with an uncertainty of <= 0.01 W.'' However, the CEC test procedure
does not specify any confidence levels to which these uncertainty
measurements must adhere. The proposed uncertainty requirements for
testing equipment specified are equivalent to those in the current CEC
test procedure, with the addition of an explicit confidence qualifier.
This qualifier, which is necessary when expressing uncertainty in
measurement, is the 95 percent confidence level customarily employed in
experimental work, which accounts for errors that fall within two
standard deviations of the mean of a normal distribution. The proposed
uncertainty requirements would make the test procedure consistent with
standard engineering practice.
(b) Temperature
The temperature range currently specified in the CEC test procedure
is 20 [deg]C 5 [deg]C. However, this low temperature range
is difficult to maintain while testing in warmer climates. DOE is
proposing raising the temperature specifications to 25 [deg]C 5 [deg]C to create a testing environment that is achievable
across diverse climates. All of the consumer BC tests conducted to date
by parties other than DOE \24\ and mentioned at the framework document
[[Page 16969]]
public meeting (PG&E, No. 13 at p. 6) were performed at temperatures
between 20 and 27 degrees Celsius, which would be covered by the higher
temperature range proposed in today's notice. By adjusting the
temperature control within the test room in this manner, the testing
burden will be lessened without sacrificing the accuracy and
repeatability of the test procedure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ BC efficiency test data submitted by Pacific Gas and
Electric (collected by its technical consultant Ecos) are available
on DOE's website. Please see: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/battery_external_std_2008.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) AC Input Voltage and Frequency
The CEC test procedure requires, when possible, the testing of
units that accept AC line-voltage input at two voltage and frequency
combinations, 115 volts at 60 hertz and 230 volts at 50 hertz. As
mentioned in section III.B.2., above, an ITI member company commented
that testing should be limited to the U.S. line voltage (115 volts, 60
hertz) (ITI member, No. 17 at p. 1).
Since DOE's scope of coverage extends only to consumer BCs
operating in the United States, DOE is proposing to require that BCs
only be tested at the U.S. AC line voltage, 115V at 60Hz, even if they
can also be operated at other voltages and frequencies (for worldwide
use). This change will harmonize the DOE BC test procedure with the
current EPS test procedure, which also specifies that ``[t]he UUT shall
be tested at 115 V [volts] at 60 Hz [hertz].'' Since DOE is already
proposing to limit the scope of its test procedure to cover BCs
intended for operation at U.S. AC line voltage--whether or not they are
also capable of operation at other voltages--limiting the testing to
the U.S. input voltage and frequency should reduce the testing burden
by half for BCs with universal input voltage (i.e., capable of
operating at both 115 and 230 volts) without impacting the
representativeness of the test procedure.
(d) Charge Rate Selection
Section II.A (general setup) of part 1 of the CEC test procedure
requires that, ``If the battery charger has user controls to select
from two or more charge rates (such as regular or fast charge) or
different charge currents, the test shall be conducted with each of the
possible choices.'' However, this option presents a large burden on
manufacturers as each test can take over 24 hours to complete, which
could take a manufacturer several days to complete testing of a single
unit.
DOE believes that, given a choice, users will opt for the fastest
charge that does not impact the battery's long term health, as
evidenced by the popularity of successively faster chargers in the
market. In light of this observation, to limit the test procedure
burden while still maintaining its representativeness, DOE is proposing
that, if the battery charger has user controls to select from two or
more charge rates, the test shall be conducted at the fastest charge
rate that is recommended by the manufacturer for everyday use.
(e) Battery Selection
Section II.C of part 1 of the CEC test procedure requires that
multi-voltage, multi-port, and/or multi-capacity chargers be tested
numerous times, with a variety of batteries. Again, since each test
takes over 24 hours, following this aspect of the CEC procedure will
result in more than three days of testing for some BCs. Interested
parties also acknowledge the issue: an ITI member suggested that in
cases where a battery charger offers multiple outputs, but one output
is the primary intended scenario, the BC should only be tested using
that output. (ITI member, No. 17 at p. 1)
Since any BC is a ``multi-capacity'' charger,\25\ this burden is
not limited to just a few specialty BCs. Manufacturers of products with
user-replaceable batteries (e.g., cellular telephones, power tools,
etc.) tend to sell high-capacity add-on batteries, and the capacity of
the replacement batteries increases gradually as battery technology
improves with time. As a result, many BCs would need to be tested twice
(once with the lowest and once with the highest capacity battery),
which is a step included in the CEC test procedure. Furthermore, these
BCs may require re-testing as new higher-capacity batteries are
released after the manufacture of the original product. To reduce the
number of tests, DOE is focusing on the typical usage scenario--i.e.,
testing with the battery packaged with the charger. Since most users
will not purchase the additional higher-capacity battery, the proposed
DOE test procedure would require testing using only the battery
packaged with the charger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Unless controlled by a timer, a BC designed for a specific
voltage, chemistry, and physical package can charge all batteries of
the same voltage, chemistry, and physical package, regardless of
capacity. The only difference will be the charge time, which will
increase with battery charge capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If multiple batteries or no batteries are packaged with the
charger, DOE proposes selecting batteries for testing from those
recommended for use with the BC by the manufacturer. In the absence of
any recommendation, the batteries for test would be selected from any
suitable for use with the charger. If these batteries vary in voltage
or capacity, the charger would be tested with (1) The lowest voltage,
lowest capacity battery; (2) the highest voltage, lowest capacity
battery; and (3) the highest total energy capacity battery, as
applicable. In each case, the term ``battery'' refers to one or more
cells in one or more separate enclosures.
The proposed battery selection procedure described above for
chargers packaged either with multiple or no batteries is consistent
with section II.C of part 1 of the CEC test procedure. Because this
procedure may result in multiple tests spanning several days for a
single charger, DOE is also considering an alternative battery
selection procedure that would require that the BC only be tested with
the most typical battery intended for use with the BC. This alternative
approach would attempt to reduce the testing burden while measuring ``a
representative average use cycle,'' as required by statute. (42 U.S.C.
6293(b)(3))
Nonetheless, due to insufficient information regarding the typical
batteries used with chargers that are packaged with multiple batteries
or packaged without batteries, DOE is unable to ensure that tests
limited to just one battery (e.g., the lowest capacity battery) would
be representative of typical use. Therefore, DOE welcomes comments from
interested parties on (1) the typical use of chargers for standard-
sized, AA and AAA batteries and 12 volt lead-acid batteries, which are
used with a variety of batteries, and (2) the likely burden due to the
proposed battery selection method, which is based on the CEC test
procedure.
(f) Non-Battery Charging Functions
The proposed active mode BC test procedure retains the instructions
concerning additional functionality from section II.D of part 1 of the
CEC test procedure, which requires the tester to turn off any user-
controlled functions and disconnect all auxiliary electrical
connections to the BC. These instructions address the two types of
additional functionality typically included with battery chargers,
i.e., connections with other systems (e.g., cordless telephone base)
and user interaction (e.g., power tool charger radio).
The first type of additional functionality is exemplified by
cordless telephone bases that monitor the state of the telephone line
and/or store voicemail messages. These types of devices provide an
added utility through connection with other systems, e.g., the
telephone line. Because the additional functionality relies on the
connection to other parts of the system, manufacturers can use a
physical disconnection (required by the proposed
[[Page 16970]]
BC active mode test procedure) as a signal to the device to disable the
additional functionality and reduce power consumption to the level of a
BC that is not equipped with that additional functionality.
The second type of additional functionality is exemplified by a
power tool charger radio that provides an interface for operation by
the user. Because this type of device already relies on users to
operate it, a manufacturer should be able to add or repurpose one of
the interface elements to allow a user (and tester) to turn off the
additional functionality of the device. Doing so would reduce the
device's power consumption to a level comparable with BCs and EPSs
without the additional functionality. In either case, the energy
consumption of the additional functionality can be substantially
reduced, if not eliminated, which would reduce the energy consumption
of the BC to the level of similar BCs equipped without additional
functionality.
If adopted, the instructions in section 4.4 of the proposed test
procedure would allow the BC to decrease the energy consumption of any
additional functionality to a negligible level. Therefore, DOE does not
expect to make any allowances for energy consumption due to additional
functionality in the corresponding energy conservation standard.
Nonetheless, DOE welcomes suggestions from interested parties on how it
should address additional functionality.
(g) Determining the Charge Capacity of Batteries with No Rating
Section II.G of the CEC test procedure requires the use of trial-
and-error to estimate the charge capacity \26\ of batteries when it is
not provided by the manufacturer. Reaching results in this manner would
likely not be repeatable. Therefore, the method that DOE is proposing
today explicitly lays out the iterative steps required to measure the
battery capacity, providing a clear process which will likely limit the
time required to determine the charge capacity and produce a more
repeatable result than the trial-and-error method.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ This parameter corresponds to the amount of charge a
battery can store and is a function of the size and chemical
composition of the battery. The testing technician must obtain this
parameter to calculate the discharge current necessary to measure
the battery energy during the discharge test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Test Measurement
Appendix Y, section 4 is currently divided into sections (a), (b),
(c), and (d), as discussed above. DOE is proposing to: (1) Remove the
existing inactive mode energy consumption measurement in section 4(a);
(2) retain sections 4(c) and 4(d), which contain the standby and off
mode test procedures; and (3) insert section III of part 1 of the CEC
test procedure, ``Measuring the Battery Charger System Efficiency,''
into section 4(b) with minor revisions for clarity and the following
substantive modifications. Finally, DOE proposes renumbering the
resulting section 4 for ease of reference and use by testing
technicians.
(a) Removing Inactive Mode Energy Consumption Test Apparatus and
Measurement
The inactive mode energy consumption measurement in section 4(a) of
appendix Y requires integrating the input power to the BC over numerous
hours in maintenance and no-battery modes and dividing it by the
battery energy measured during discharge, resulting in a non-active
energy ratio. The standby and off mode test procedure final rule added
a requirement to measure standby (no-battery) and off mode energy
consumption, 74 FR 13334, while today's proposal includes requirements
to measure active (charge) and maintenance modes. Because these test
procedure updates would collectively result in a BC test procedure that
measures battery charger energy consumption in all four modes--active
(charge), maintenance, standby (no-battery), and off--there is no
longer a continued need for the inactive mode test procedure adopted on
December 8, 2006. Therefore, in today's notice, DOE proposes to strike
the inactive mode energy consumption measurement from section 4(a).
(b) Charge Test Duration
During the 2009 public meeting, DOE sought comment on shortening
the 24-hour test period specified in the CEC procedure. The Power Tool
Institute (PTI) saw no problem in shortening the maintenance mode test
period (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 190), whereas AHAM and Wahl Clipper
Corporation (Wahl) commented that a 24-hour charge cycle should be used
as the basis for measuring active mode energy consumption. (AHAM, No.
16 at p. 2; Wahl, No. 23 at p. 1) Ecos Consulting (Ecos) added that a
shorter test period was considered during the development of the CEC
procedure but explained that it was not feasible to incorporate a
shorter test period since many batteries have a much longer charge
time. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 191-92) PTI specifically cited
nickel-cadmium as an example of a battery chemistry that requires
charge of at least 16 hours, cautioning that if the active charge
window were shortened, only a portion of the charge energy would be
captured by the measurement. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 190) Ecos
also indicated that although charge indicator lights are reliable
determinants of active mode duration, they are only included in roughly
one-third of chargers and therefore cannot be relied on to shorten the
measurement period in all cases. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 193)
Although a shortened test period would reduce the burden on
manufacturers, the 24-hour charge energy metric provides uniformity
between tests and enables BCs for cellular telephones to be easily
compared with BCs for cordless telephones, regardless of how long each
BC spends actually charging a battery. In today's notice, DOE is
proposing using a 24-hour charge and maintenance energy measurement
consistent with the CEC test procedure, but is inviting interested
parties to comment on incorporating an optional, shorter test period,
described below.
To accommodate the comments of interested parties, DOE is proposing
to retain the 24-hour test period but seeks comment on possibly
supplementing it with an optional shortened test period that can be
used when feasible. The proposal outlines scenarios where a shorter
test period would be appropriate. These scenarios would require that a
testing technician must determine that the BC is in steady-state
operation in maintenance mode, at which point the input power no longer
changes. In other words, continuing the test past this point under this
scenario would not yield any new information regarding the energy
consumption characteristics of the tested unit.
In the shortened test procedure, the BC would undergo an initial
charging period with a duration determined by the state of a charge
indicator light, manufacturers' instructions, or, in the absence of the
above, a minimum of 4 hours. Following this, the technician would
inspect the input power to the BC, and the BC would be in a steady
state if its input power does not vary by more than 2 percent over a 1-
hour period. A relatively constant input power over a significant
length of time indicates that the BC has finished charging the battery
and entered maintenance mode. Since, absent user interaction, the BC is
expected to remain in this mode for all future time, it should be
possible to stop the test early and extrapolate the energy measurement
to the full 24-hour period.
[[Page 16971]]
This extrapolation is done by taking the energy consumption from
the beginning of the test to the point when the BC entered steady-state
operation and adding it to the steady-state maintenance mode power
multiplied by the remaining number of hours in the test. This procedure
is shown in detail in Eq. 1, below.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP10.000
Where:
E24 EXTRAPOLATED is the 24-hour energy estimate
calculated through extrapolation;
tSTEADY-STATE is the time at which the charger entered steady-state
operation;
E CHARGE [bond] t=0
tSTEADY-STATE
is the energy consumption from the beginning of the test to the
point when the BC entered steady-state operation and the test was
interrupted;
PMAINT.STEADY-STATE is the maintenance power measured in steady
state.
In this manner, the testing time for some BCs may be shortened,
freeing valuable laboratory equipment without impacting the uniformity
of the 24-hour metric. DOE evaluated the results of shortening the test
method for six ``fast'' battery chargers (e.g., lithium-ion battery
chargers for notebook computer and DVD player applications) by
utilizing data from 24-hour tests. DOE had simulated the effects of
shortening the test period according to the proposed method described
above, from 24 hours to an average of 5.7 hours, resulting in a time
savings of 18.3 hours on average. Using only data obtained during these
shortened test periods DOE then extrapolated 24-hour energy
consumption. The calculated 24-hour energy consumption differed from
the measured 24-hour energy consumption by an average of -1.1 percent,
but with a range of -0.1 to +6.5 percent.
The 24-hour energy consumption of the fast BC with the greatest
variation was calculated to be 6.5 percent lower with the shortened
test method than that measured with the full 24-hour test method. This
BC met the steady state criteria (meaning the unit was in maintenance
mode) that allowed the shortened test period to be used. However, once
in maintenance mode, the BC would periodically ``wake up,'' presumably
to provide pulses energy to the battery to counteract any self-
discharge. Since these pluses happened once the unit was in maintenance
mode, they were not captured by the shortened test procedure (which
would have terminated the test soon after the BC had entered
maintenance mode). Therefore, the extrapolated 24-hour energy
consumption was lower than the measured 24-hour energy consumption.
Furthermore, DOE realizes that using the above method to shorten
the measurement period for some ``slow'' chargers may also result in an
extrapolated 24-hour energy consumption that differs widely from the
measured 24-hour energy. For example, when the above test method was
applied to nine slow chargers for nickel-metal hydride and lead-acid
batteries, the extrapolated 24-hour energy consumption differs by 11.2
percent from the measured 24-hour energy on average.
In general, the input power to the BC during charging decreases
with time, stopping the test early and extrapolating over the full 24
hours will tend to result in a higher calculated 24-hour energy
consumption unless the BC has entered steady state.\27\ Therefore, it
is not in the manufacturer's interest to abuse this method and shorten
the test inappropriately, as doing so will typically result in worse
measured performance.\28\ Furthermore, any DOE enforcement testing will
be performed using only the full 24-hour test procedure as the method
to determine compliance with the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Of the nine slow chargers mentioned above, all had higher
extrapolated than measured 24-hour energy consumption, some by as
much as 30 percent.
\28\ This generalization does not apply to chargers such as the
fast charge mentioned above, which periodically wake up during
maintenance mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of the potential for significant discrepancies in results
between the shortened and full, 24-hour measurement methods, DOE is not
proposing to depart from the 24-hour method currently in the CEC test
procedure. Nonetheless, DOE would like to invite interested parties to
comment on allowing the shortened test method for units that meet the
steady state criteria described above. After reviewing the comments DOE
will consider incorporating this latter test method into the test
procedure in the final rule. In particular, DOE would be interested in
(1) a comparison of testing burden for the shortened and full testing
methods, as well as (2) an assessment of the measurement variability
between the two methods across a wide range of BCs.
(c) Battery Conditioning
Section III.A of part 1 of the CEC test procedure specifies that
battery conditioning must be performed on all batteries, with the
exception of lead-acid or lithium-based batteries. Battery conditioning
is the process by which the battery is cycled several times prior to
testing to permit the battery to reach its specified capacity. By
conditioning the battery in this manner, any taken measurement will be
representative of typical use. DOE's proposed active mode test
procedure requires that the battery undergo two full charges followed
by two full discharges, ending on a discharge. The third charge present
in section III.A of the CEC test procedure has been removed from the
proposal pursuant to the reversed testing order described in section
III.B.5. (e), below.
(d) Battery Preparation
Section III.B of the CEC test procedure has a provision that
requires preparing the battery for testing by performing a controlled
discharge to a specified end-of-discharge voltage. This preparatory
step ensures that the BC test begins and ends with the battery at the
same known state--namely, fully discharged--such that all the energy
consumed during the charge test can be fairly compared to the energy
obtained from the battery during the discharge test. DOE's proposed
active mode test procedure would likewise prepare the battery by
bringing it to a known state prior to starting the test. However, the
battery preparation would consist of charging the battery instead of
discharging due to the proposed reversed testing order described below.
(e) Reversed Testing Order
In DOE's proposed BC active mode test procedure, the discharge test
would be performed prior to the charge test, in reverse order of the
CEC test procedure: The battery would be (1) Conditioned, if necessary;
(2) charged until full by the BC under test, in preparation for the
measurement; (3) discharged; and (4) recharged by the BC under test.
The discharge energy in step (3) and the input power to the BC in step
(4), above, would be measured. The proposed reversal of the test order
will have no impact on the measured charge or discharge energy because
the BC-battery system is deterministic and will behave in the same
manner given the same inputs and environmental conditions.
[[Page 16972]]
The energy recovered from the battery during discharge will be the same
whether it is measured once or many times (ignoring the long-term
effects of storage or cycling), as will the charge energy consumed by
the charger. Therefore, the order in which these steps are performed
does not matter, as long as the measurement encompasses the entirety of
a charge-discharge or discharge-charge cycle and all the energy
consumed by the charger is accounted for during discharge, and vice-
versa.
While reversing the testing order such that the discharge is
performed prior to the charge would have no impact on the measurement
results, it would allow the preparatory step to be a charge rather than
a discharge. This distinction is important because it allows
preparation to be conducted in the UUT, rather than a battery analyzer,
and require less test equipment time. Thus, the proposed test procedure
would further decrease testing burden without impacting accuracy.
(f) End of Discharge for Other Chemistries
Table D in part 1 of the CEC test procedure instructs that the end-
of-discharge voltage for any battery chemistry not listed explicitly in
the table be found ``Per appropriate IEC standard.'' However, DOE
cannot incorporate in its test procedure an open-ended reference to a
non-existent standard. To address this concern, DOE spoke with members
of industry and reviewed the literature \29\ to identify which
chemistries are likely to become popular in the near future as well as
the end-of-discharge voltages associated with them. These chemistries
would be explicitly included in the table of end-of-discharge voltages
in the proposed test procedure. The additional chemistries would
include nanophosphate lithium-ion and silver-zinc. If batteries of
other chemistries are developed in the future, they would be addressed
through the waiver process or a revision to the test procedure. DOE
invites comments on whether the battery chemistries and associated
discharge voltages contained in its proposed list are sufficient or
require modification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See, for example: A123 Systems, ``High Power Lithium Ion
ANR26650M1A,'' April 2009, http://www.a123systems.com/cms/product/pdf/1/ANR26650M1A_Datasheet_APRIL_2009.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Review of Battery Charger and External Power Supply Standby and Off
Mode Test Procedures
In the March 2009 final rule, DOE adopted a 1-hour test duration
for the BC standby and off mode tests, based on the abbreviated test
method in the EPA's ``Test Methodology for Determining the Energy
Performance of Battery Charging Systems, December 2005,'' previously
incorporated by reference into appendix Y. 74 FR 13335. However, during
the 2008 standby and off mode public meeting, interested parties
suggested that the proposed 1-hour testing period be shortened further.
Nonetheless, as mentioned in the March 2009 final rule, the BC standby
mode test procedure must take into account equipment warm up and low-
frequency pulsed operation to produce accurate and repeatable
measurement results. 74 FR 13324.
In today's notice, DOE proposes amending the test period to a 30-
minute warm up period followed by a 10-minute measurement period. This
proposed modification would harmonize DOE's standby and off mode
measurement procedures with sections IV.B and IV.C in part 1 of the
optional CEC BC test procedure. Abbreviating the measurement period
from 1 hour to 10 minutes will not affect the accuracy of the test
because the amended test procedures would retain a 30-minute warm up
period. Variations in component efficiency due to temperature are the
most common reason for changes in BC energy consumption in standby and
off modes, and the 30-minute warm up period would be sufficient to
permit the input power of most BCs to stabilize. DOE recognizes that
further instabilities (pulses) in energy consumption in standby and off
modes may be caused by periodic operation of certain BC functions, as
when a BC occasionally checks its output for the presence of the
battery. In general, there is always a potential for a limited-time
test procedure to fail to capture a behavior occurring at an arbitrary
time, such that these pulses might be captured over a 1-hour
measurement period but not in a 10-minute period. DOE has not, however,
encountered any such cases in practice.
Based on the above reasons, DOE believes that the shortened test
measurement will reduce testing burdens on manufacturers while
providing an accurate and repeatable test. Further, DOE is proposing to
retain the remainder of its BC standby and off mode test procedure.
Finally, DOE is not proposing any changes to the standby and off mode
test procedures for EPSs. The proposed measurement periods for these
test procedures are only as long as necessary to obtain a repeatable
result and would not impose an additional burden on manufacturers, as
both are based on and incorporate by reference the no-load measurement
in the EPA single-voltage EPS test procedure. DOE seeks comment on the
merits of this aspect of today's proposal.
D. Review of the Single-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
While DOE is interested in applying its single-voltage EPS test
procedure (appendix Z to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430) to all single-
voltage EPSs subject to current or potential future standards, DOE
recognizes that some EPSs may not be testable under the existing test
procedure in a representative or repeatable manner. In particular, the
following devices may pose issues for the current procedure: (1) EPSs
that communicate with their loads; (2) EPSs that limit their output
current below that specified on the nameplate; and (3) high-power EPSs
that do not display a clear maximum output power on their nameplates. A
discussion of these three types of EPSs follows, along with test
procedure changes necessary to accommodate them. DOE is considering
adopting these changes pending comment from interested parties. DOE is
also proposing to redefine ``active power'' for consistency with
appendix Y and industry standards.
1. EPSs That Communicate With Their Loads
Some EPSs used for powering cellular telephones, notebook
computers, and other consumer electronic products use USB and other
protocols that require communication between the EPS and its load.
Currently, DOE's single-voltage EPS test procedure incorporates by
reference sections 4 and 5 of the CEC single-voltage EPS test
procedure. Within these incorporated sections, the test procedure
requires that ``the tests should be conducted on the two output wires
that supply the output power * * * [t]he other wires * * * should be
left electrically disconnected.''
This requirement is problematic, however, because it may interfere
with the operation of EPSs that require additional output wires for
communication with their loads. For example, the USB specification \30\
requires devices to communicate over the data lines prior to
transferring significant amounts of power (in excess of 1 ``unit load''
or approximately 0.5 watts). DOE is concerned that by requiring the
disconnection of data lines, the existing single-voltage EPS test
procedure may not test EPSs that use interfaces such as a USB in a
[[Page 16973]]
manner that would be representative of their power consumption when
operating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ ``Universal Serial Bus Specification, Revision 2.0,'' April
27, 2000, p. 174. http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_20_122909-2.zip.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The communication issue is not limited to EPSs with multiple sets
of conductors. In some cases (e.g., EPSs for some notebook computers),
the communication between an EPS and its load can occur over the same
set of conductors that transfer power, using an AC-coupled signal.
Initial evaluations indicate that such communication may be used to set
the output voltage of an EPS intended for use with multiple computers
made by the same manufacturer. Because these EPSs may need to identify
their load prior to operation, measurements conducted in the laboratory
without the intended load (as required by the DOE test procedure) may
not be representative of typical use.
DOE is uncertain of the extent of this problem in practice. In
particular, although the cellular telephone industry is planning to
adopt the USB interface as a ``universal charging solution'' for all
handsets by 2012,\31\ DOE's analysis of EPSs for cellular applications
indicates that the transition to USB-compliant EPSs has not yet begun.
Examination of eight mobile phone EPSs with connectors with four or
more pins (including mini-USB connectors) revealed that in only one
case were these pins connected to any wires in the output cable. Even
in the single case of multiple pairs of conductors, the EPS performed
as specified when tested according to the DOE test procedure (i.e.,
with the additional wires disconnected), implying that no communication
with the load was necessary for specified operation. Similarly, DOE has
only been able to identify two models of EPSs for notebook computers
that communicate with their loads. These observations lead DOE to
believe that these products are not currently popular.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ GSM Association, ``Mobile Industry Unites to Drive
Universal Charging Solution for Mobile Phones,'' GSM World, February
17, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even though power supplies that communicate with their loads are a
rarity today, DOE does foresee a need for the test procedure to
accommodate them in the future. To address this need, DOE is
considering amending the single-voltage EPS test procedure by
permitting manufacturers to supply additional connection instructions
or fixtures for testing EPSs that require communication with the load.
Today's notice does not contain a specific proposal for amending the
test procedure but solicits comments from interested parties on
specific EPSs that cannot be tested in a representative manner
according to the DOE single-voltage EPS test procedure, due to the test
procedure's requirements that the EPS be tested with a dummy load and
that all additional conductors be disconnected. DOE is also seeking
comments regarding specific changes that the procedures would need to
permit the testing of these devices. Any amendments to the test
procedure in this regard would only apply to EPSs that must communicate
with their loads and would have no impact on existing standards for
Class A EPSs.
2. EPSs With Output Current Limiting
As mentioned in section II.C., some EPSs limit their output current
below that which is specified on their nameplate or in manufacturer
datasheets. Whether due to manufacturing variation or another cause,
this situation can be problematic because the current DOE test
procedure may be unable to consistently measure the efficiency of these
EPSs. The current DOE single-voltage EPS test procedure incorporates by
reference the CEC single-voltage EPS test procedure and requires
testing at fixed percentages (0, 25, 50, 75, and 100 percent) of
nameplate output current. However, the test procedure does not specify
what to do in cases when the EPS limits output current as described
above, such that it is unable to output 100 percent or even 75 percent
of its nameplate output current--which would prevent one from obtaining
one or more efficiency measurements specified under the procedure.
DOE is considering several changes to the single-voltage EPS test
procedure that would accommodate EPSs that limit their output current
below that listed on the nameplate. In particular, DOE is considering
adopting one of three options: (1) Ignore the loading points affected
by output current limiting when calculating the average efficiency; (2)
shift the loading points affected by output current limiting on a case-
by-case basis such that they are no longer affected by current limiting
(i.e., if the EPS limits its output current to 90 percent of nameplate
output current, calculate the active mode efficiency as the average of
efficiencies at 25, 50, 75, and 90 percent load); or (3) record the
efficiency as 0 percent for any loading points affected by output
current limiting. DOE welcomes comments from interested parties on the
prevalence of this issue as well as the above three proposed amendments
under consideration.
3. High-Power EPSs
The scope of DOE's single-voltage EPS test procedure already
permits the testing of high-power EPSs, as do most of the test setup
and test measurement instructions. The only limitation that DOE has
encountered while attempting to test high-power EPSs in accordance with
the DOE test procedure involved nameplate output current. As mentioned
above, the test procedure requires the nameplate output current to
calculate the loading points for efficiency measurements. However, some
high-power EPSs do not specify the maximum output current on the
nameplate.
DOE partially addressed this issue in the standby and off mode test
procedure final rule by modifying the definition of nameplate output
current to include the output current provided by the manufacturer ``if
absent from the housing'' of the EPS.\32\ 74 FR 13335. However, when
manufacturers do provide output current information, they may specify
two maximum values: one for intermittent output current and another for
continuous output current. To enable the testing of high-power EPSs,
DOE is considering making changes to the single-voltage EPS test
procedure that would detail what to do in cases when more than one
maximum output current is specified on the nameplate or provided by the
manufacturer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Manufacturers typically specify the performance of an EPS
through datasheets and other marketing materials.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In particular, DOE welcomes comments from interested parties on
whether the situation where both intermittent and continuous output
currents are listed on the EPS nameplate or in manufacturer
documentation may cause confusion. Furthermore, DOE welcomes comments
from interested parties on the potential impact of this confusion on
the repeatability or representativeness of the single-voltage EPS test
procedure already contained in appendix Z. DOE is considering amending
the nameplate output power definition to specify that the maximum
continuous current should be used as the nameplate output current when
two or more currents are provided but seeks comments regarding the
merits of this approach.
4. Active Power Definition
As mentioned in section III.B.3. (c) of this notice, DOE is
proposing to define ``active power'' in section 2 of appendix Y based
on the definition in IEEE standard 1515-2000. The definition in IEEE
standard 1515-2000 is the widely
[[Page 16974]]
accepted industry definition for ``active power.'' However, if adopted,
this definition would differ from the one currently in appendix Z. To
harmonize the two definitions, DOE is proposing to redefine this term
in appendix Z, section 2.c, as set out in the regulatory text of this
NOPR.
E. Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply Test Procedure
Section 325 of EPCA, as amended by section 309 of EISA, directs DOE
to promulgate a final rule determining whether energy conservation
standards shall be issued for EPSs or ``classes'' of EPSs. (42 U.S.C.
6295(u)(1)(C)) Currently, DOE divides EPSs into Class A and non-Class
A. Under section 301 of EISA, Congress required that Class A power
supplies meet specifically prescribed standards that became effective
on July 1, 2008. DOE is examining the possibility of developing
standards for the remaining, non-Class A EPSs that are not covered by
the Congressionally mandated standards.
Multiple-voltage EPSs (i.e., EPSs that provide more than one output
voltage simultaneously) have the highest shipments and widest range of
consumer product applications of the EPSs that fall outside of Class A.
Because it must develop test procedures either prior to (or
concurrently with) the development of an efficiency standard for a
product, DOE reviewed numerous test procedures in 2008 to develop a
standardized test procedure for these products. In the standby and off
mode NOPR, DOE proposed a multiple-voltage EPS test procedure that
generally followed the structure of the CEC single-voltage EPS test
procedure with some modifications specific to multiple-voltage power
supplies. See 73 FR 48064-48068. However, due to the limited time
available for review, DOE was unable to address the comments received
from interested parties and decided not to incorporate these elements
of the proposed test procedure into the March 2009 final rule until
such time when DOE could provide a greater opportunity for comment. 74
FR 13322. In today's notice, DOE proposes adopting a test procedure
generally consistent with its August 2008 proposal in the standby and
off mode NOPR. However, to accommodate the concerns of some interested
parties, DOE is also proposing several modifications to the previously
proposed approach.
During the 2008 standby and off mode rulemaking, interested parties
commented that the proposed loading conditions (25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%
of full load) may not be appropriate for all multiple-voltage EPSs,
particularly dedicated-use EPSs, because they do not provide a
representative measure of energy consumption. On the other hand, when
DOE presented a potential loading profile (as opposed to the previous
simple average of the efficiencies measured at each of the four active-
mode loading points) to incorporate into the test procedure during its
framework document public meeting, PG&E commented that multiple voltage
EPSs should be tested over their entire output current range to
represent the range of loading possible with a variety of applications.
(PG&E et al., No. 20 at p. 17)
Therefore, in this notice, DOE is proposing measuring efficiency at
no-load, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% of nameplate output, but without
averaging the results as would have been required under the previous
proposal. Instead, the currently proposed test procedure would output
five separate efficiency or input power measurements, one for each
loading point. The results could then be weighted during the standards
phase of the rulemaking to reflect typical usage. This multiple-voltage
test procedure, which otherwise remains unchanged from the one DOE
proposed in 2008, would be incorporated into sections 3(b) and 4(b) of
appendix Z.
By removing equal weighting of active-mode loading conditions
(i.e., averaging of efficiency results at each nonzero loading point)
from the test procedure and reporting these metrics separately, DOE
would be able to maintain a flexible and uniform test procedure. DOE
would then tailor the weightings to each product class during the
standards-setting phase of the rulemaking. In addition, by deciding on
how to address the power supply weighting during the standards
rulemaking, DOE will be able to receive additional comments from
interested parties on the applications that use multiple-voltage EPSs
and their expected usage to help shape the agency's decision on this
issue.
F. Test Procedure Amendments Not Proposed in This Notice
As mentioned above, DOE presented potential modifications to the
CEC test procedure during the framework document public meeting. After
receiving comments, and doing further analysis, DOE is no longer
proposing some of these amendments for incorporation into the test
procedure. Nonetheless, DOE wishes to document these potential
amendments and the comments received on these and other issues. These
include:
(1) Accelerating the test procedure schedule
(2) Incorporating usage profiles into the test procedure
(3) Measuring charger output energy
(4) Measuring alternative depths of discharge
1. Accelerating the Test Procedure Schedule
During the framework document public meeting, some interested
parties requested an expedited rulemaking schedule for the BC active
mode test procedure. In particular AHAM suggested that DOE provide
stakeholders with a revised battery charger test procedure, including
active mode, by September 30, 2009, and that DOE complete the test
procedure updates by the end of 2009 (AHAM, No. 16 at p. 2, Pub. Mtg.
Tr., No. 14 at p. 45) AHAM also expressed general concern regarding how
the Department can conduct its analyses for BCs without a finalized BC
test procedure. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 36)
DOE acknowledges the concerns of interested parties regarding an
accelerated schedule; however, due to process requirements, DOE will
continue with the current rulemaking schedule. The target date to issue
the BC Active Mode Test Procedure remains October 31, 2010.
2. Incorporating Usage Profiles
Battery charging systems consume different amounts of energy while
they are in different modes, and the amount of time that the charger
spends in each mode varies depending on the applications of the end-use
project. Some BCs, such as those for cell phones and media players,
spend more time in active mode, while others, such as those for
handheld vacuums and electric shavers, remain primarily in maintenance
or unplugged mode.
At the framework document public meeting, DOE discussed
incorporating BC usage profiles into the test procedure. These usage
profiles would weight the energy consumption of the BC in each mode
using the time spent in that mode. However, interested parties were
opposed to the incorporation of usage profiles into the test procedure,
and suggested that the consideration of usage profiles be instead
deferred to the standard.
Ecos and PG&E et al. did not favor the incorporation of usage
profiles. PG&E felt that it would be difficult to incorporate them
because of insufficient data to arrive at a ``realistic and creditable
understanding.'' (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 161, Pub. Mtg. Tr., No.
14 at p. 158-59; PG&E et al., No. 20 at
[[Page 16975]]
p. 15) Ecos similarly stated that they are not convinced that usage
profiles should be used, especially in the test procedure. (Pub. Mtg.
Tr., No. 14 at p. 182) PG&E agreed by stating that usage profiles may
be feasible for future rulemakings once more data have been collected.
(Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 178) On the other hand, CEA and Wahl
suggested that usage profiles should not be difficult to obtain. (Pub.
Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 178-79)
The DOE BC test procedure need not measure the energy consumption
over a typical use cycle. It can, for example, measure the efficiency
under abstract test conditions like the EPS test procedure. The usage
profile can instead be incorporated into the energy conservation
standard as part of the routine analysis that DOE applies during the
standards rulemaking process. Adopting a test procedure that does not
contain usage profiles will allow test results to be comparable across
a wider range of products and jurisdictions, as regions with diverse
consumer usage of BCs would be able to use the same test procedure.
Because of these considerations, DOE is not proposing to incorporate
usage profiles at this time.
3. Measuring Charger Output Energy
During the framework document public meeting, DOE suggested
measuring the charger output energy rather than the battery output
energy in order to calculate the total energy consumed by the BC during
charging. DOE felt that measuring at the charger output, thereby
bypassing the battery, could remove some of the variability from the
measurement. Interested parties were unified in opposition to this
change.
PG&E, Ecos, PTI, and AHAM all supported measuring the energy
obtained from the battery during discharge (per the methods in the
current ENERGY STAR test procedure and Part 1 of the CEC test
procedure), rather than directly measuring the output energy of the
charger. PG&E further stated that although measuring the output energy
of the charger would be more accurate and easier, it will not be
``realistic or representative of how things work in the real world''
and stressed that this portion of the CEC test procedure should not be
altered (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at pp. 162-64; PG&E et al., No. 20 at p.
14) An ITI member further stated that testing only be done with the
battery supplied by the OEM, not replacement batteries supplied by
third parties. (ITI member, No. 17 at p. 1)
Ecos commented that battery variations are not significant enough
to warrant amending the CEC test procedure and added that variation in
batteries can be averaged out statistically. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at
p. 171-72) PTI admitted that even though battery variability may have
an effect on the repeatability and reproducibility, ``some of that may
be addressed through some subsequent mathematics.'' (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No.
14 at p.166) AHAM, on the other hand, commented that manufacturers
should not be required to test multiple units, which would greatly
increase testing burden. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 172)
PTI provided further support for measuring battery output energy by
stating that it may be difficult to access the battery terminals,
making direct measurements of the charger output energy impractical.
(Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 164-65)
Ecos further justified measuring battery discharge energy by noting
that manufacturers choose the battery that they include or recommend
for testing--i.e., the battery is a design option for increasing
efficiency. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 167) PTI disagreed, stating
that the needs of the application to a large extent determine the
batteries used. (Pub. Mtg. Tr. No. 14 at pp. 174-75) However, because
there is little variation between batteries once the appropriate
chemistry has been selected, PTI also concluded that measuring the
output from the charger would not be worth the added difficulty. (Pub.
Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 176)
AHAM and Wahl both recommended that the battery energy be measured
and subsequently subtracted from the 24-hour cycle energy (AHAM, No. 16
at p. 4, Wahl, No. 23 at p. 1), whereas PTI suggested that normalizing
(i.e., dividing) the battery discharge energy by the charger input
energy provides a measurement independent of battery size (which varies
with the end-use application) and battery density (which varies with
the progress of technology over time). (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at pp.
165-66, 174)
FRIWO and Delta-Q offered contrasting comments, with FRIWO voicing
general support for separate testing for batteries and BCs, using a
dummy load to test the BC, unless the design of the product makes this
impractical (as in the case of power tools) (FRIWO, No. 21 at pp. 1-2),
while Delta-Q commented that the battery should be considered
independent of the battery charging system during testing. (Delta-Q,
No. 15 at p. 1)
The goal of the test procedure is to measure energy consumed by the
battery charger during typical use, and this energy can be measured
directly at the output of the charger or indirectly by measuring the
energy recoverable from the battery during discharge. Measuring the
discharge energy from the battery combines charger losses with battery
losses, resulting in a system-wide measurement that is more
representative of typical use. Given that interested parties voiced
overwhelming support for system-wide measurements and did not express
concern about the impact of battery variability on measurement
repeatability, the proposed test procedure does not incorporate
measurement at the output of the BC.
4. Alternative Depth-of-Discharge Measurement
At the framework document public meeting, DOE discussed the
potential for testing BCs with batteries at 40 percent depth-of-
discharge, meaning 60 percent full. (The term ``depth-of-discharge''
refers to the extent to which a battery's usable capacity has been
discharged.) This potential change would model the behavior of
consumers who recharge batteries before they are fully discharged and
was inspired by part 2 of the CEC test procedure, which requires that
batteries be tested at 100, 80, and 40 percent depth-of-discharge.
Interested parties provided comments opposing the alternative depth-of-
discharge; consequently, DOE is planning to continue using the 100
percent depth-of-discharge as the only condition for testing.
Ecos and PG&E opposed to the incorporation of a 40 percent depth-
of-discharge (DOD) measurement and commented that a measurement from
additional depths-of-discharge will complicate testing and development
of standards. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 195-96) PG&E added that a 40
percent DOD would be a generalization that is difficult to
substantiate. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 199-200; PG&E et al., No. 20
at p. 16) Furthermore, Ecos noted that if a new method relying on
testing at 40 percent DOD is developed, then many products will need to
be re-tested in order to achieve sufficient data to set a standard.
(Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 206) AHAM agreed that establishing a
typical depth-of-discharge is difficult; however, it is not going to be
100 percent but between 2 and 80 percent. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p.
201)
Stakeholders also commented on the difficulty of consistently
discharging a battery to an arbitrary depth. Ecos further commented
that cutoff voltages
[[Page 16976]]
may be used rather than a percentage depth-of-discharge (as in the
current Part 1 CEC test procedure) to terminate the discharge. (Pub.
Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 206) Wahl commented that the appropriate cutoff
voltage should depend on the battery chemistry, using IEC standards as
a precedent. (Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 201-02) PTI provided a
general statement that normalizing energy consumption by battery energy
capacity reduces the effect of depth-of-discharge on test results.
(Pub. Mtg. Tr., No. 14 at p. 204)
Due to the lack of support for measurement of BC energy consumption
while charging batteries with different depths-of-discharge, DOE is not
incorporating such measurement into today's proposal.
IV. Regulatory Review
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that test
procedure rulemakings do not constitute ``significant regulatory
actions'' under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and
Review,'' 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). Accordingly, this action was
not subject to review under that Executive Order by the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB).
B. National Environmental Policy Act
In this proposed rule, DOE proposes test procedure amendments that
it expects will be used to develop and implement future energy
conservation standards for BCs and EPSs. 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.) (NEPA) and DOE's implementing regulations at 10 CFR part
1021. Specifically, this proposed rule establishes or amends test
procedures and does not result in any environmental impacts. Thus, this
rulemaking is covered by Categorical Exclusion A6 under 10 CFR part
1021, subpart D, which applies to any rulemaking that is strictly
procedural. Accordingly, neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required.
C. 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 DOE rulemaking process. 68 FR 7990. DOE has made
its procedures and policies available on the Office of the General
Counsel's Web site: http://www.gc.doe.gov.
DOE reviewed today's proposed rule under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the policies and procedures published on
February 19, 2003. As part of this rulemaking, DOE examined the
existing compliance costs already borne by manufacturers and compared
them to the revised compliance costs due to the proposed amendments in
this NOPR, namely, the adoption of new test procedures for BC active
mode and multiple-voltage EPSs and the modification of existing test
procedures for BCs operating in standby and off mode and single-voltage
EPSs with USB outputs.
Manufacturers are only required to test products subject to
standards, and there are currently no standards for BCs or multiple-
voltage EPSs. Until energy conservation standards are adopted, no
entities, small or large, would be required to comply with the proposed
BC and EPS test procedures. Therefore, DOE believes that today's
proposed rule would not have a ``significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,'' and the preparation of a
regulatory flexibility analysis is neither required nor warranted at
this point.
Class A EPSs, however, are subject to a standard, and
manufacturers, including small entities, are required to perform
testing in accordance with the single-voltage EPS test procedure to
ensure compliance with the standard. However, the amendments discussed
in section III.D. of this notice would not significantly change the
existing test procedure, amending only the testing conditions for EPSs
with USB outputs. DOE does not expect these amendments to impose a
significant new testing and compliance burden and therefore would have
no large economic impact on a significant number of small entities.
Tentatively concluding and certifying that this proposed rule would
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities, DOE has not prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis for
this rulemaking. DOE will provide its 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).
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains an information collection requirement subject to
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and which has been approved by OMB
under control number 1910-1400. Public reporting burden for the
collection of test information and maintenance of records on regulated
EPSs based on the certification and reporting requirements is estimated
to average 2 hours per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden
estimate, or any other aspect of this data collection, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to DOE (see ADDRESSES) and by e-
mail to: [email protected].
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
E. 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 proposed 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 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 Federal agencies to develop an
effective process to permit timely input by elected officers of State,
local, and Tribal governments on a proposed ``significant
intergovernmental mandate.'' In addition, UMRA requires an agency plan
for giving notice and opportunity for timely input to small governments
that may be affected before establishing a 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
[[Page 16977]]
UMRA. 62 FR 12820. (This policy is also available at http://www.gc.doe.gov). Today's proposed rule contains neither an
intergovernmental mandate, nor a mandate that may result in the
expenditure of $100 million or more in any year, so these requirements
do not apply.
F. 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 proposed rule that may affect family
well-being. Today's proposed rule would not have any impact on the
autonomy or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE
has concluded that it is unnecessary to prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
G. Executive Order 13132
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 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 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 it will follow in the development of such
regulations. 65 FR 13735. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has
determined that it 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. EPCA governs and prescribes Federal
preemption of State regulations as to energy conservation for the
products that are the subject of today's proposed rule. States can
petition DOE for exemption from such preemption to the extent, and
based on criteria, set forth in EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6297) No further
action is required by Executive Order 13132.
H. Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of Executive Order 12988,
``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 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: (1) Clearly specifies
the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on
existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard
for affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden
reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses 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, the proposed rule meets the relevant standards of Executive Order
12988.
I. Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; 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 (February
22, 2002), and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (October
7, 2002). DOE has reviewed today's proposed rule under the OMB and DOE
guidelines and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable
policies in those guidelines.
J. 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 the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of 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 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 should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the action and their expected
benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
Today's regulatory action 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.
Therefore, it is not a significant energy action, and, accordingly, DOE
has not prepared a Statement of Energy Effects.
K. Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,'' 53 FR
8859 (March 15, 1988), DOE has determined that this rule would not
result in any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth
Amendment to the United States Constitution.
L. Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974
Under section 301 of the Department of Energy Organization Act
(Pub. L. 95-91; 42 U.S.C. 7101), DOE must comply with section 32 of the
Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974, as amended by the Federal
Energy Administration Authorization Act of 1977. (15 U.S.C. 788; FEAA.)
Section 32 essentially provides in part that, where a proposed rule
authorizes or requires use of commercial standards, the notice of
proposed 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. Because the proposed rule does not incorporate any
commercial standards, section 32 does not apply here. However,
consistent with its ordinary practice, DOE intends to
[[Page 16978]]
provide both the Attorney General and the FTC a courtesy copy of this
proposed rule.
V. Public Participation
A. Attendance at Public Meeting
The time, date and location of the public meeting are listed in the
DATES and ADDRESSES sections at the beginning of this NOPR. To attend
the public meeting, please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945.
As explained in the ADDRESSES section, foreign nationals visiting DOE
headquarters are subject to advance security screening procedures.
B. Procedure for Submitting Requests To Speak
Any person who has an interest in the topics addressed in this
notice, or who is a representative of a group or class of persons that
has an interest in these issues, may request an opportunity to make an
oral presentation at the public meeting. Such persons may hand-deliver
requests to speak to the address shown in the ADDRESSES section at the
beginning of this notice between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays. Requests may also be sent by mail or
email to: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585-0121, or [email protected]. Persons who
wish to speak should include in their request a computer diskette or CD
in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format that
briefly describes the nature of their interest in this rulemaking and
the topics they wish to discuss. Such persons should also provide a
daytime telephone number where they can be reached.
DOE requests that those persons who are scheduled to speak submit a
copy of their statements at least one week prior to the public meeting.
DOE may permit any person who cannot supply an advance copy of this
statement to participate, if that person has made alternative
arrangements with the Building Technologies Program in advance. When
necessary, the request to give an oral presentation should ask for such
alternative arrangements.
C. Conduct of Public Meeting
DOE will designate a DOE official to preside at the public meeting
and may also employ a professional facilitator to aid discussion. The
public meeting will be conducted in an informal, conference style. The
meeting will not be a judicial or evidentiary public hearing and there
shall not be discussion of proprietary information, costs or prices,
market share, or other commercial matters regulated by U.S. anti-trust
laws.
DOE reserves the right to schedule the order of presentations and
to establish the procedures governing the conduct of the public
meeting. A court reporter will record the proceedings and prepare a
transcript.
At the public meeting, DOE will present summaries of comments
received before the public meeting, allow time for presentations by
participants, and encourage all interested parties to share their views
on issues affecting this rulemaking. Each participant may present a
prepared general statement (within time limits determined by DOE)
before the discussion of specific topics. Other participants may
comment briefly on any general statements. At the end of the prepared
statements on each specific topic, participants may clarify their
statements briefly and comment on statements made by others.
Participants should be prepared to answer questions from DOE and other
participants. DOE representatives may also ask questions about other
matters relevant to this rulemaking. The official conducting the public
meeting will accept additional comments or questions from those
attending, as time permits. The presiding official will announce any
further procedural rules or modification of procedures needed for the
proper conduct of the public meeting.
DOE will make the entire record of this proposed rulemaking,
including the transcript from the public meeting, available for
inspection at the U.S. Department of Energy, 6th Floor, 950 L'Enfant
Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The official
transcript will also be posted on the Webpage at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/battery_external.html. Anyone may purchase a copy of the transcript
from the transcribing reporter.
D. Submission of Comments
DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding the
proposed rule no later than the date provided at the beginning of this
notice. Comments, data, and information submitted to DOE's e-mail
address for this rulemaking should be provided in WordPerfect,
Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format. Interested parties
should avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption,
and wherever possible, comments should include the electronic signature
of the author. Comments, data, and information submitted to DOE via
mail or hand delivery/courier should include one signed original paper
copy. 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 including
all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the
document with 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 by or available from other sources; (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality; (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure; (6) a date upon which such information might lose
its confidential nature due to the passage of time; and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment
Although DOE invites comments on all aspects of this rulemaking,
DOE is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of
interested parties concerning the following issues:
1. BC Active Mode
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the proposed approach
for testing BCs in active mode, in particular the adoption and
modification of the CEC test procedure. (See section III.B.)
2. Limiting the Scope of the Test Procedure
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the proposed
limitation of scope of the test procedure to encompass BCs with DC or
U.S. line-voltage AC input. (See section III.B.1.)
3. BCs for Golf Carts and Other Consumer Motive Equipment
DOE seeks comment on including BCs for golf carts and other
consumer motive equipment batteries in a single test procedure based on
part 1 of the CEC BC test procedure. (See section III.B.2.)
[[Page 16979]]
4. Amendments to Definitions
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the adoption of new
definitions, in particular any deviation from those currently in the
CEC test procedure. (See section III.B.3.)
5. Selecting the Charge Rate for Testing
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the proposed
modifications to section II of the CEC test procedure intended to ease
testing burden, and in particular, recommendations on which charge
rates are most representative of typical use. (See section
III.B.4.(d).)
6. Selecting the Batteries for Testing
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the batteries that are
typically used with BCs that are packaged with multiple batteries or
packaged without batteries (e.g., AA and AAA and 12 volt lead-acid
chargers) as well as the testing burdens associated with testing such
chargers multiple times under the battery selection method currently in
the CEC test procedure. (See part 1, section III.B.4.(e).)
7. Non-Battery Charging Functions
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the categorization of
non-battery charging functions and its intention not to make allowances
for energy consumption due to additional functionality. (See section
III.B.4.(f).)
8. Procedure for Determining the Charge Capacity of Batteries With No
Rating
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the proposed revision
to section II.G of the CEC test procedure to explicitly lay out the
iterative steps required to measure battery capacity when none is
provided. (See section III.B.4.(g).)
9. Deletion of the Inactive Mode Energy Consumption Test Procedure
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the proposal to strike
the inactive mode energy consumption measurement from section 4(a) of
appendix Y. (See section III.B.5.(a).)
10. Shortening the BC Charge and Maintenance Mode Test
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the optional method of
shortening the charge and maintenance mode test period in the proposed
active mode amendment to the BC test procedure, in particular its
impacts on testing burden and the accuracy and repeatability of the
measurement. (See section III.B.5.(b).)
11. Reversing Testing Order
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the proposed reversal
of the CEC test procedure order, resulting in: The battery being (1)
conditioned (if necessary); (2) charged until full by the BC under
test, in preparation for the measurement; (3) discharged; and (4)
recharged by the BC under test. The discharge energy in step (3) and
the input power to the BC in step (4), above, would be measured. (See
section III.B.5.(e).)
12. End-of-Discharge Voltages for Novel Chemistries
DOE seeks comment from interested parties on the end-of-discharge
voltages for the nanophosphate lithium-ion and silver-zinc chemistries
that are proposed for inclusion in Table 5.2 in appendix Y. (See
section III.B.5.(f).)
13. Standby Mode and Off Mode Duration
DOE also invites comment on the proposed test method for measuring
standby mode and off mode energy consumption for EPSs, including
whether the duration of the measurement is sufficiently long. (See
section III.C.)
14. Single-Voltage EPS Test Procedure Amendments To Accommodate EPSs
That Communicate With Their Loads
DOE seeks comment on the possible modification of the single-
voltage EPS test procedure to accommodate EPSs that must communicate
with their loads; in particular the prevalence of such EPSs, the need
to amend the test procedure to accommodate them, and suggestions on
amendments. (See section III.D.1.)
15. Further Single-Voltage EPS Test Procedure Amendments
DOE seeks comment on the possible further modification of the
single-voltage EPS test procedure to accommodate EPSs with output
current limiting and high output power. (See sections III.D.2. and
III.D.3.)
16. Loading Conditions for Multiple-Voltage EPSs
DOE seeks comments on all issues pertaining to testing of multiple-
voltage EPSs. In particular, DOE invites comments on reporting 5
separate loading conditions (no-load, 25, 50, 75, and 100 percent of
nameplate output current) without averaging the results. Additionally,
DOE seeks comment on how it should weigh these measurements in an
energy conservation standards rulemaking for multiple-voltage EPSs.
(See section III.E.)
VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this proposed
rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430
Administrative practice and procedure, Energy conservation,
Household appliances.
Issued in Washington, DC, on January 29, 2010.
Cathy Zoi,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
part 430 of Chapter II of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations 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.
2. In Sec. 430.23 revise paragraph (aa) to read as follows:
Sec. 430.23 Test procedures for the measurement of energy and water
consumption.
* * * * *
(aa) Battery Chargers. The 24-hour energy consumption of a battery
charger in active and maintenance modes, expressed in watt-hours, and
the power consumption of a battery charger in maintenance mode,
expressed in watts, shall be measured in accordance with section 5.10
of appendix Y of this subpart. The power consumption of a battery
charger in standby mode and off mode, expressed in watts, shall be
measured in accordance with sections 5.11 and 5.12, respectively, of
appendix Y of this subpart.
* * * * *
3. Appendix Y to subpart B of part 430 is revised to read as
follows:
Appendix Y to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of Battery Chargers
1. Scope
This appendix covers the test requirements used to measure
battery charger energy consumption for battery chargers operating at
either DC or United States AC line voltage (120V at 60Hz).
2. Definitions
The following definitions are for the purposes of understanding
terminology
[[Page 16980]]
associated with the test method for measuring battery charger energy
consumption.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For clarity on any other terminology used in the test
method, please refer to IEEE Standard 1515-2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.1. Active mode or charge mode is the state in which the
battery charger system is connected to the main electricity supply,
and the battery charger is delivering current, equalizing the cells,
and performing other one-time or limited-time functions in order to
bring the battery to a fully charged state.
2.2. Active power or real power (P) means the average power
consumed by a unit. For a two terminal device with current and
voltage waveforms i(t) and v(t) which are periodic with period T,
the real or active power P is:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP10.001
2.3. Ambient temperature is the temperature of the ambient air
immediately surrounding the unit under test.
2.4. Apparent power (S) is the product of root-mean-square (RMS)
voltage and RMS current in volt-amperes (VA).
2.5. Batch charger is a battery charger that charges two or more
identical batteries simultaneously in a series, parallel, series-
parallel, or parallel-series configuration. A batch charger does not
have separate voltage or current regulation, nor does it have any
separate indicators for each battery in the batch. When testing a
batch charger, the term ``battery'' is understood to mean,
collectively, all the batteries in the batch that are charged
together. A charger can be both a batch charger and a multi-port
charger or multi-voltage charger.
2.6. Battery or battery pack is an assembly of one or more
rechargeable cells and any integral protective circuitry intended to
provide electrical energy to a consumer product, and may be in one
of the following forms: (a) Detachable battery: A battery that is
contained in a separate enclosure from the consumer product and is
intended to be removed or disconnected from the consumer product for
recharging; or (b) integral battery: A battery that is contained
within the consumer product and is not removed from the consumer
product for charging purposes.
2.7. Battery energy is the energy, in watt-hours, delivered by
the battery under the specified discharge conditions in the test
procedure.
2.8. Battery maintenance mode or maintenance mode is the mode of
operation when the battery charger is connected to the main
electricity supply and the battery is fully charged, but is still
connected to the charger.
2.9. Battery rest period is a period of time between discharge
and charge or between charge and discharge, during which the battery
is resting in an open-circuit state in ambient air.
2.10. C-rate is the rate of charge or discharge, calculated by
dividing the charge or discharge current by the rated charge
capacity of the battery.
2.11. Cradle is an electrical interface between an integral
battery product and the rest of the battery charger designed to hold
the product between uses.
2.12. Crest factor for an AC or DC voltage or current waveform,
is the ratio of the peak instantaneous value to the root-mean-square
(RMS) value.
2.13. Equalization is a process whereby a battery is
overcharged, beyond what would be considered ``normal'' charge
return, so that cells can be balanced, electrolyte mixed, and plate
sulfation removed.
2.14. Instructions or manufacturer's instructions means the
documentation packaged with a product in printed or electronic form
and any information about the product listed on a Web site
maintained by the manufacturer and accessible by the general public
at the time of the test.
2.15. Measured charge capacity of a battery is the product of
the discharge current in amperes and the time in decimal hours
required to reach the specified end-of-discharge voltage.
2.16. Manual on-off switch is a switch activated by the user to
control power reaching the battery charger. This term does not apply
to any mechanical, optical, or electronic switches that
automatically disconnect main power from the battery charger when a
battery is removed from a cradle or charging base, or for products
with non-detachable batteries that control power to the product
itself.
2.17. Multi-port charger means a battery charger which charges
two or more batteries (which may be identical or different)
simultaneously. The batteries are not connected in series or in
parallel. Rather, each port has separate voltage and/or current
regulation. If the charger has status indicators, each port has its
own indicator(s). A charger can be both a batch charger and a multi-
port charger if it is capable of charging two or more batches of
batteries simultaneously and each batch has separate regulation and/
or indicator(s).
2.18. Multi-voltage charger is a battery charger that, by
design, can charge a variety of batteries (or batches of batteries,
if also a batch charger) that are of different rated battery
voltages. A multi-voltage charger can also be a multi-port charger
if it can charge two or more batteries simultaneously with
independent voltage and/or current regulation.
2.19. Off mode is the condition, applicable only to units with
manual on-off switches, in which the battery charger:
(1) Is connected to the main electricity supply;
(2) Is not connected to the battery; and
(3) All manual on-off switches are turned off.
2.20. Power factor is the ratio of the active power (P) consumed
in watts to the apparent power (S), drawn in volt-amperes (VA).
2.21. Rated battery voltage is specified by the manufacturer and
typically printed on the label of the battery itself. If there are
multiple batteries that are connected in series, the rated battery
voltage of the batteries is the total voltage of the series
configuration, that is, the rated voltage of each battery multiplied
by the number of batteries connected in series. Connecting multiple
batteries in parallel does not affect the rated battery voltage.
2.22. Rated charge capacity is the capacity the manufacturer
declares the battery can store under specified test conditions,
usually given in ampere-hours (Ah) or milliampere-hours (mAh) and
typically printed on the label of the battery itself. If there are
multiple batteries that are connected in parallel, the rated charge
capacity of the batteries is the total charge capacity of the
parallel configuration, that is, the rated charge capacity of each
battery multiplied by the number of batteries connected in parallel.
Connecting multiple batteries in series does not affect the rated
charge capacity.
2.23. Rated energy capacity means the product (in watt-hours) of
the rated battery voltage and the rated charge capacity.
2.24. Standby mode or no-battery mode means the condition in
which:
(1) The battery charger is connected to the main electricity
supply;
(2) The battery is not connected to the charger; and
(3) For battery chargers with manual on-off switches, all such
switches are turned on.
2.25. Total harmonic distortion (THD), expressed as a percent,
is the root mean square (RMS value of an AC signal after the
fundamental component is removed and interharmonic components are
ignored, divided by the RMS value of the fundamental component.
2.26. Unit under test (UUT) in this appendix refers to the
combination of the battery charger and battery being tested.
3. Standard Test Conditions
3.1. General
The values that may be measured or calculated during the conduct
of this test procedure have been summarized for easy reference in
Table 3.1.
Table 3.1--List of Measured or Calculated Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of measured or
calculated value Reference Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................... Time required to reach Section 4.6. ...........................
end-of discharge,
(tdischarge_0.5A ).
2........................... Charge Capacity Section 4.6. ...........................
Estimate.
[[Page 16981]]
3........................... Trial 0.2 C discharge Section 4.6. ...........................
current, (I0.2C_trial).
4........................... Improved Charge Section 4.6. ...........................
Capacity Estimate (if
second discharge lasts
for less than 4 or
more than 5 hours).
5........................... Improved 0.2 C Section 4.6. ...........................
discharge current
estimate (if second
discharge lasts for
less than 4 or more
than 5 hours),
(I'0.2C_trial).
6........................... Duration of the charge Section 5.2. ...........................
and maintenance mode
test.
7........................... Battery Discharge Section 4.6. ...........................
Energy.
8........................... Initial time, power Section 5.8. ...........................
(W), power factor, and
crest factor of the
input current of
connected battery.
9........................... Power factor and crest Section 5.8. ...........................
factor of the input
current during last 10
min of test.
10.......................... Active and Maintenance Section 5.8. ...........................
Mode Energy
Consumption.
11.......................... Maintenance Mode Power. Section 5.9. ...........................
12.......................... 24 Hour Energy Section 5.10. ...........................
Consumption.
12.......................... Standby Mode Power..... Section 5.11. ...........................
13.......................... Off Mode Power......... Section 5.12. ...........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.2. Verifying Accuracy and Precision of Measuring Equipment
a. Measurements of active power of 0.5 W or greater shall be
made with an uncertainty of <= 2% at the 95% confidence level.
Measurements of active power of less than 0.5 W shall be made with
an uncertainty of <= 0.01 W at the 95% confidence level. The power
measurement instrument shall. As applicable, have a resolution of:
(1) 0.01 W or better for measurements up to 10 W;
(2) 0.1 W or better for measurements of 10 to 100 W; or
(3) 1 W or better for measurements over 100 W.
b. Measurements of energy (Wh) shall be made with an uncertainty
of <= 2% at the 95% confidence level. Measurements of voltage and
current shall be made with an uncertainty of <= 1% at the 95%
confidence level. Measurements of temperature shall be made with an
uncertainty of <= 2 [deg]C at the 95% confidence level.
c. All equipment used to conduct the tests must be selected and
calibrated to ensure that measurements will meet the above
uncertainty requirements. For suggestions on measuring low power
levels, see IEC 62301, (Reference for guidance only, see Sec.
430.4) especially Section 5.3.2 and Annexes B and D.
3.3. Setting Up the Test Room
All tests, battery conditioning, and battery rest periods shall
be carried out in a room with an air speed immediately surrounding
the UUT of <= 0.5 m/s. The ambient temperature shall be maintained
at 25 [deg]C 5 [deg]C throughout the test. There shall
be no intentional cooling of the UUT such as by use of separately
powered fans, air conditioners, or heat sinks. The UUT shall be
conditioned, rested, and tested on a thermally non-conductive
surface. A readily available material such as Styrofoam will be
sufficient. When not undergoing active testing, batteries shall be
stored at 25 [deg]C 5 [deg]C.
3.4. Verifying the UUT's Input Voltage and Input Frequency
a. If the UUT is intended for operation on AC line-voltage input
in the United States, it shall be tested at 115 V at 60 Hz. If the
UUT is intended for operation on AC line-voltage input but cannot be
operated at 115 V at 60 Hz, it shall not be tested.
b. If a charger is powered by a low-voltage DC or AC input, and
the manufacturer packages the charger with a wall adapter, sells, or
recommends an optional wall adapter capable of providing that low
voltage input, then the charger shall be tested using that wall
adapter and the input reference source shall be 115 V at 60 Hz. If
the wall adapter cannot be operated with AC input voltage at 115 V
at 60 Hz, the charger shall not be tested.
c. If the UUT is intended for operation only on DC input voltage
and does not include a wall adapter, it shall be tested with one of
the following input voltages: 12.0 V DC for products intended for
automotive, recreational vehicle, or marine use, 5.0 V DC for
products drawing power from a computer USB port, or the midpoint of
the rated input voltage range for all other products. The input
voltage shall be within 1% of the above specified
voltage.
d. If the input voltage is AC, the input frequency shall be
within 1% of the specified frequency. The THD of the
input voltage shall be <= 2%, up to and including the 13th harmonic.
The crest factor of the input voltage shall be between 1.34 and
1.49.
e. If the input voltage is DC, the AC ripple voltage (RMS) shall
be:
(1) <= 0.2 V for DC voltages up to 10 V; or
(2) <= 2% of the DC voltage for DC voltages over 10 V.
4. Unit Under Test Setup Requirements
4.1. General Setup
a. The battery charger system shall be prepared and set up in
accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, except where those
instructions conflict with the requirements of this test procedure.
If no instructions are given, then factory or ``default'' settings
shall be used, or where there are no indications of such settings,
the UUT shall be tested as supplied.
b. If the battery charger has user controls to select from two
or more charge rates (such as regular or fast charge) or different
charge currents, the test shall be conducted at the fastest charge
rate that is recommended by the manufacturer for everyday use, or
failing any explicit recommendation, the factory-default charge
rate. If the charger has user controls for selecting special charge
cycles that are recommended only for occasional use to preserve
battery health, such as equalization charge, removing memory, or
battery conditioning, these modes are not required to be tested. The
settings of the controls shall be listed in the report for each
test.
4.2. Selection and Treatment of the Battery Charger
The UUT, including the battery charger and its associated
battery, shall be new products of the type and condition that would
be sold to a customer. If the battery is lead-acid chemistry and the
battery is to be stored for more than 24-hours between its initial
acquisition and testing, the battery shall be charged before such
storage.
4.3. Selection of Batteries To Use for Testing
a. For chargers with integral batteries, the battery packaged
with the charger shall be used for testing. For chargers with
detachable batteries, the battery or batteries to be used for
testing will vary depending on whether there are any batteries
packaged with the battery charger.
(1) If batteries are packaged with the charger, batteries for
testing shall be selected from the batteries packaged with the
battery charger, according to the procedure below.
(2) If no batteries are packaged with the charger, but the
instructions specify or recommend batteries for use with the
charger, batteries for testing shall be selected from those
recommended or specified in the instructions, according to the
procedure below.
(3) If no batteries are packaged with the charger and the
instructions do not specify or recommend batteries for use with the
charger, batteries for testing shall be selected from any that are
suitable for use with the charger, according to the procedure below.
b. From the detachable batteries specified above, the technician
shall use Table 4.1 to select the batteries to be used for testing
depending on the type of charger being tested. Each row in the table
represents a mutually exclusive charger type. The technician shall
find the single applicable row for the UUT, and test according to
those requirements.
[[Page 16982]]
c. A charger is considered as:
(1) Single-capacity if all associated batteries have the same
rated charge capacity (see definition) and, if it is a batch
charger, all configurations of the batteries have the same rated
charge capacity.
(2) Multi-capacity if there are associated batteries or
configurations of batteries that have different rated charge
capacities.
d. The selected battery or batteries will be referred to as the
test battery and will be used through the remainder of this test
procedure.
Table 4.1--Battery Selection for Testing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of charger Tests to perform
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Battery selection
(from all
Multi-voltage Multi-port Multi-capacity Number of configurations of
tests all associated
batteries)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No....................... No....................... No...................... 1 Any associated
battery.
No....................... No....................... Yes..................... 2 Lowest charge
capacity battery.
Highest charge
capacity battery.
No....................... Yes...................... Yes or No............... 2 Use only one port
and use the
minimum number of
batteries with the
lowest rated
charge capacity
that the charger
can charge.
Use all ports and
use the maximum
number of
identical
batteries of the
highest rated
charge capacity
the charger can
accommodate.
Yes...................... No....................... No...................... 2 Lowest voltage
battery.
Highest voltage
battery.
Yes...................... Yes to either or both.... ........................ 3 Of the batteries
with the lowest
voltage, use the
one with the
lowest charge
capacity. Use only
one port.
Of the batteries
with the highest
voltage, use the
one with the
lowest charge
capacity. Use only
one port.
Use all ports and
use the battery or
the configuration
of batteries with
the highest total
calculated energy
capacity.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.4. Limiting Other Non-Battery-Charger Functions
a. If the battery charger or product containing the battery
charger does not have any additional functions unrelated to battery
charging, this subsection may be skipped.
b. Any optional functions controlled by the user and not
associated with the battery charging process (e.g., the answering
machine in a cordless telephone charging base) shall be switched
off. If it is not possible to switch such functions off, they shall
be set to their lowest power-consuming mode during the test.
c. If the battery charger takes any physically separate
connectors or cables not required for battery charging but
associated with its other functionality (such as phone lines, serial
or USB connections, Ethernet, cable TV lines, etc.), these
connectors or cables shall be left disconnected during the testing.
d. Any manual on-off switches specifically associated with the
battery charging process shall be switched on for the duration of
the charge, maintenance, and no-battery mode tests, and switched off
for the off mode test.
4.5. Accessing the Battery for the Test
a. The technician may need to disassemble the end-use product or
battery charger to gain access to the battery terminals for the
Battery Discharge Energy Test in section 5.6. If the battery
terminals are not clearly labeled, the technician shall use a
voltmeter to identify the positive and negative terminals. These
terminals will be the ones that give the largest voltage difference
and are able to deliver significant current (0.2 C) into a load.
b. All conductors used for contacting the battery must be
cleaned and burnished prior to connecting in order to decrease
voltage drops and achieve consistent results.
c. Manufacturer's instructions for disassembly shall be
followed, except those instructions that:
(1) Lead to any permanent alteration of the battery charger
circuitry or function;
(2) Could alter the energy consumption of the battery charger
compared to that experienced by a user during typical use, e.g., due
to changes in the airflow through the enclosure of the UUT; or
(3) Contradict requirements of this test procedure.
d. Care shall be taken by the technician during disassembly to
follow appropriate safety precautions. If the functionality of the
device or its safety features is compromised, the product shall be
discarded after testing.
e. Some products may include protective circuitry between the
battery cells and the remainder of the device. In some cases, it is
possible that the test battery cannot be discharged without
activating protective control circuitry. If the manufacturer
provides a description for accessing connections at the output of
the protective circuitry, the energy measurements shall be made at
the terminals of the test battery, so as not to include energy used
by the protective control circuitry.
f. If the technician, despite diligent effort and use of the
manufacturer's instructions:
(1) Is unable to access the battery terminals;
(2) Determines that access to the battery terminals destroys
charger functionality; or
(3) Is unable to draw current from the test battery, then the
Battery Discharge Energy and the Charging and Maintenance Mode
Energy shall be reported as ``Not Applicable.''
4.6. Determining Charge Capacity for Batteries With No Rating
a. If the test battery has a rated charge capacity, this
subsection may be skipped. Otherwise, if there is no rating for the
battery charge capacity on the test battery or in the instructions,
then the technician shall estimate the battery capacity in
accordance with the following iterative procedure involving two or
three charge and logged discharge cycles. These cycles can be used
in lieu of the battery conditioning specified in section 5.3:
(1) The test battery shall be fully charged according to the
procedure in section 5.2.
(2) The test battery shall then be discharged at a rate of 0.5
amperes until its average cell voltage under load reaches the end-
of-discharge voltage specified in Table 5.2 for the relevant battery
chemistry. The time required to reach end-of-discharge shall be
measured, and the capacity estimated by multiplying the 0.5 ampere
discharge current by the discharge time.
(3) The test battery shall again be fully charged, as in step
a.(1), of this section.
(4) The test battery shall then be discharged at a trial 0.2 C
rate based on the above capacity estimate. The trial 0.2 C discharge
current can be calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP10.002
[[Page 16983]]
Where:
I0.2C_TRIAL = is the trial discharge current; and
tDISCHARGE_0.5A is the time required to discharge the
battery at 0.5 amperes.
(5) The time required to reach end-of-discharge shall again be
measured. If this second discharge time is greater than 4.5 hours
and less than 5.5 hours, the capacity determined using the above
method shall be used as the rated charge capacity throughout the
remainder of this test procedure. Furthermore, the current
calculated above shall be used as the 0.2 C rate.
(6) Otherwise, if the second discharge time measured in step
a.(4), of this section, is greater than 4.5 hours and less than 5.5
hours, the capacity estimate shall be updated by multiplying by the
second discharge time, and an updated trial discharge current shall
be calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP10.003
Where:
I0.2C_TRIAL is the original trial discharge current;
I'0.2C_TRIAL is the updated trial discharge current;
t'DISCHARGE_0.5A is the updated discharge time
measured at the I0.2C_TRIAL rate.
b. This updated capacity estimate and updated trial discharge
current shall then be used throughout this test procedure as the
rated battery capacity and the 0.2 C rate, respectively.
5. Test Measurement
The test sequence to measure the battery charger energy
consumption is summarized in Table 5.1, and explained in detail
below. Measurements shall be made under test conditions and with the
equipment specified in Sections 3 and 4.
Table 5.1--Test Sequence
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Equipment needed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Battery
Step Description Data taken? analyzer or Thermometer
Test battery Charger constant- AC power (for flooded
current meter lead-acid
load BCs only)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................... Record general data on UUT; Yes...................... X X ............ ............ ............
Section 5.1.
2......................... Determine test duration; No....................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............
Section 5.2.
3......................... Battery conditioning; No....................... X X X ............ ............
Section 5.3.
4......................... Prepare battery for........ No....................... X X ............ ............ ............
discharge test; Section 5.4
5......................... Battery rest period; No....................... X ............ ............ ............ X
Section 5.5.
6......................... Battery Discharge Energy Yes...................... X ............ X ............ ............
Test; Section 5.6.
7......................... Battery Rest Period; No....................... X ............ ............ ............ X
Section 5.7.
8......................... Conduct Charge Mode and Yes...................... X X ............ X ............
Battery Maintenance Mode
Test; Section 5.8.
9......................... Determining the Maintenance Yes...................... X X ............ X ............
Mode Power; Section 5.9.
10........................ Calculating the 24-Hour No....................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............
Energy Consumption;
Section 5.10.
11........................ Standby Mode Test; Section Yes...................... ............ X ............ X ............
5.11.
12........................ Off Mode Test; Section 5.12 Yes...................... ............ X ............ X ............
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.1. Recording General Data on the UUT
The technician shall record:
(1) The manufacturer and model of the battery charger;
(2) The presence and status of any additional functions
unrelated to battery charging;
(3) The manufacturer, model, and number of batteries in the test
battery;
(4) The rated battery voltage of the test battery;
(5) The rated charge capacity of the test battery; and
(6) The rated charge energy of the test battery.
(7) The settings of the controls, if battery charger has user
controls to select from two or more charge rates.
5.2. Determining the Duration of the Charge and Maintenance Mode Test
a. The charging and maintenance mode test, section 5.8, shall be
24 hours or longer, as determined by the items below, in order of
preference:
(1) If the battery charger has an indicator to show that the
battery is fully charged, that indicator shall be used as follows:
If the indicator shows that the battery is charged after 19 hours of
charging, the test shall be terminated at 24 hours. Conversely, if
the full-charge indication is not yet present after 19 hours of
charging, the test shall continue until 5 hours after the indication
is present.
(2) If there is no indicator, but the manufacturer's
instructions indicate that charging this battery or this capacity of
battery should be complete within 19 hours, the test shall be for 24
hours. If the instructions indicate that charging may take longer
than 19 hours, the test shall be run for the longest estimated
charge time plus 5 hours.
(3) If there is no indicator and no time estimate in the
instructions, but the charging current is stated on the charger or
in the instructions, calculate the test duration as the longer of 24
hours or:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP10.004
[[Page 16984]]
b. If none of the above applies, the duration of the test shall
be 24 hours.
5.4. Preparing the Battery for Discharge Testing
Following any conditioning prior to beginning the battery
discharge test (section 5.6), the test battery shall be fully
charged for the duration specified in section 5.2 or no longer using
the UUT.
5.5. Resting the Battery
The test battery shall be rested between preparation and the
battery discharge test. The rest period shall be at least one hour
and not exceed 24 hours. For batteries with flooded cells, the
electrolyte temperature shall be less than 33 [deg]C before
charging, even if the rest period must be extended longer than 24
hours.
5.6. Battery Discharge Energy Test
a. If multiple batteries were charged simultaneously during the
preparation step, the discharge energy is the sum of the discharge
energies of all the batteries.
(1) For a multi-port charger: batteries that were charged in
separate ports shall be discharged independently.
(2) For a batch charger: batteries that were charged as a group
may be discharged individually, as a group, or in sub-groups
connected in series and/or parallel. The position of each battery
with respect to the other batteries need not be maintained.
b. During discharge, the battery voltage and discharge current
shall be sampled and recorded at least once per minute. The values
recorded may be average or instantaneous values.
c. For this test, the technician shall follow these steps:
(1) Ensure that the test battery has been charged by the UUT and
rested according to the procedures above.
(2) Set the battery analyzer for a constant discharge current of
0.2 C and the end-of-discharge voltage in Table 5.2 for the relevant
battery chemistry.
(3) Connect the test battery to the analyzer and begin recording
the voltage, current, and wattage, if available from the battery
analyzer. When the end-of-discharge voltage is reached or the UUT
circuitry terminates the discharge, the test battery shall be
returned to an open-circuit condition. If for any reason, current
continues to be drawn from the test battery after the end-of-
discharge condition is first reached, this additional energy is not
to be counted in the battery discharge energy.
d. If not available from the battery analyzer, the battery
discharge energy (in watt-hours) is calculated by multiplying the
voltage (in volts), current (in amperes), and sample period (in
hours) for each sample, and then summing over all sample periods
until the end-of-discharge voltage is reached.
5.7. Resting the Battery
The test battery shall be rested between discharging and
charging. The rest period shall be at least one hour and not more
than 24-hours. For batteries with flooded cells, the electrolyte
temperature shall be less than 33 [deg]C before charging, even if
the rest period must be extended longer than 4 hours.
5.8. Testing Charge Mode and Battery Maintenance Mode
a. The Charge and Battery Maintenance Mode test measures the
energy consumed during charge mode and some time spent in the
maintenance mode of the UUT. Functions required for battery
conditioning that happen only with some user-selected switch or
other control shall not be included in this measurement. (The
technician shall manually turn off any battery conditioning cycle or
setting.) Regularly occurring battery conditioning or maintenance
functions that are not controlled by the user will, by default, be
incorporated into this measurement.
b. During the measurement period, input power values to the UUT
shall be recorded at least once every minute.
(1) If possible, the technician shall set the data logging
system to record the average power during the sample interval. This
allows the total energy to be computed as the sum of power samples
(in watts) multiplied by the sample interval (in hours).
(2) If this setting is not possible, then the power analyzer
shall be set to integrate or accumulate the input power over the
measurement period and this result shall be used as the total
energy.
c. The technician shall follow these steps:
(1) Ensure that user-controllable device functionality not
associated with battery charging and any battery conditioning cycle
or setting are turned off, as instructed in section 4.4;
(2) Ensure that the test battery used in this test has been
conditioned, prepared, discharged, and rested as described in
sections 5.3 through 5.7, above;
(3) Connect the data logging equipment to the battery charger;
(4) Record the start time of the measurement period, and begin
logging the input power;
(5) Connect the test battery to the battery charger within 3
minutes of beginning logging. For integral battery products, connect
the product to a cradle or wall adapter within 3 minutes of
beginning logging;
(6) After the test battery is connected, record the initial
time, power (W), power factor, and crest factor of the input current
to the UUT. These measurements shall be taken within the first 10
minutes of active charging;
(7) Record the input power for the duration of the ``Charging
and Maintenance Mode Test'' period, as determined by 5.2. The actual
time that power is connected to the UUT shall be within 5 minutes of the specified period;
(8) During the last 10 minutes of the test, record the power
factor and crest factor of the input current to the UUT; and
(9) Disconnect power to the UUT, terminate data logging, and
record the final time.
5.9. Determining the Maintenance Mode Power
a. After the measurement period is complete, the technician
shall determine the average maintenance mode power consumption as
follows. Examine the power-versus-time data, and:
(1) If the maintenance mode power is cyclic or shows periodic
pulses, compute the average power over a time period that spans an
integer number of cycles and includes at least the last 4 hours.
(2) Otherwise, calculate the average power value over the last 4
hours.
5.10. Determining the 24-Hour Energy Consumption
a. If the charge and maintenance test period determined in
section 5.2 was 24-hours, either the accumulated energy or the
average input power, integrated over the test period, shall be used
to calculate 24-hour energy consumption.
b. If the charge and maintenance test period was greater than
24-hours, only the first 24-hours of the accumulated energy or the
average input power, integrated over 24-hours, shall be used to
calculate the 24-hour energy consumption.
Table 5.2--Required Battery Discharge Rates and End-of-Discharge Battery
Voltages
------------------------------------------------------------------------
End-of-discharge
Battery chemistry Discharge rate C voltage Volts per
cell
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve-Regulated Lead Acid (VRLA)... 0.2 1.75
Flooded Lead Acid.................. 0.2 1.70
Nickel Cadmium (NiCd).............. 0.2 1.0
Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH)........ 0.2 1.0
Lithium Ion (Li-Ion)............... 0.2 2.5
Lithium Polymer.................... 0.2 2.5
Rechargeable Alkaline.............. 0.2 0.9
Nanophosphate Lithium Ion.......... 0.2 2.0
Silver Zinc........................ 0.2 1.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 16985]]
5.11. Standby Mode Energy Consumption Measurement
a. Conduct a measurement of standby power consumption while the
battery charger is connected to the power source. Disconnect the
battery from the charger, allow the charger to operate for at least
30 minutes, and record the power (i.e., watts) consumed as the time
series integral of the power consumed over a 10 minute test period,
divided by the period of measurement. If the battery charger has
manual on-off switches, all must be turned on for the duration of
the standby mode test.
b. Standby mode may also apply to products with integral
batteries. If the product uses a cradle and/or adapter for power
conversion and charging, then ``disconnecting the battery from the
charger'' will require disconnection of the end-use product, which
contains the batteries. The other enclosures of the battery charging
system will remain connected to the main electricity supply, and
standby mode power consumption will equal that of the cradle and/or
adapter alone.
c. If the product also contains integrated power conversion and
charging circuitry and is powered through a detachable AC power
cord, then only the cord will remain connected to mains, and standby
mode power consumption will equal that of the AC power cord (i.e.,
zero watts).
d. Finally, if the product contains integrated power conversion
and charging circuitry but is powered through a non-detachable AC
power cord or plug blades, then no part of the system will remain
connected to mains, and standby mode measurement is not applicable.
5.12 Off Mode Energy Consumption Measurement
a. If the battery charger has manual on-off switches, record a
measurement of off mode energy consumption while the battery charger
is connected to the power source. Remove the battery from the
charger, allow the charger to operate for at least 30 minutes, and
record the power (i.e., watts) consumed as the time series integral
of the power consumed over a 10-minute test period, divided by the
period of measurement, with all manual on-off switches turned off.
If the battery charger does not have manual on-off switches, record
that the off mode measurement is not applicable to this product.
b. Off mode may also apply to products with integral batteries.
If the product uses a cradle and/or adapter for power conversion and
charging, then ``disconnecting the battery from the charger'' will
require disconnection of the end-use product, which contains the
batteries. The other enclosures of the battery charging system will
remain connected to the main electricity supply, and off mode power
consumption will equal that of the cradle and/or adapter alone.
c. If the product also contains integrated power conversion and
charging circuitry and is powered through a detachable AC power
cord, then only the cord will remain connected to mains, and off
mode power consumption will equal that of the AC power cord (i.e.,
zero watts).
d. Finally, if the product contains integrated power conversion
and charging circuitry but is powered through a non-detachable AC
power cord or plug blades, then no part of the system will remain
connected to mains, and off mode measurement is not applicable.
4. Amend appendix Z to subpart B of part 430 by:
a. Revising paragraph 2(c).
b. Revising paragraphs 3(b) and 4(b).
The revisions read as follows:
Appendix Z to Subpart B of Part 430--Uniform Test Method for Measuring
the Energy Consumption of External Power Supplies
* * * * *
2. * * *
c. Active power (P) (also real power) means the average power
consumed by a unit. For a two terminal device with current and
voltage waveforms i(t) and v(t) which are periodic with period T,
the real or active power P is:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP10.005
* * * * *
3. * * *
(b) Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply. Unless otherwise
specified, measurements shall be made under test conditions and with
equipment specified below.
(i) Verifying Accuracy and Precision of Measuring Equipment
(A) Measurements of power 0.5 W or greater shall be made with an
uncertainty of <= 2% at the 95% confidence level. Measurements of
power less than 0.5 W shall be made with an uncertainty of <= 0.01 W
at the 95% confidence level. The power measurement instrument shall
have a resolution of:
(1) 0.01 W or better for measurements up to 10 W;
(2) 0.1 W or better for measurements of 10 to 100 W; or
(3) 1 W or better for measurements over 100 W.
(B) Measurements of energy (Wh) shall be made with an
uncertainty of <= 2% at the 95% confidence level. Measurements of
voltage and current shall be made with an uncertainty of <= 1% at
the 95% confidence level. Measurements of temperature shall be made
with an uncertainty of <= 2 [deg]C at the 95% confidence level.
(C) All equipment used to conduct the tests must be selected and
calibrated to ensure that measurements will meet the above
uncertainty requirements. For suggestions on measuring low power
levels, see IEC 62301, (Reference for guidance only, see Sec.
430.4) especially Section 5.3.2 and Annexes B and D.
(ii) Setting Up the Test Room
All tests shall be carried out in a room with an air speed
immediately surrounding the UUT of <= 0.5 m/s. The ambient
temperature shall be maintained at 25 [deg]C 5 [deg]C
throughout the test. There shall be no intentional cooling of the
UUT such as by use of separately powered fans, air conditioners, or
heat sinks. The UUT shall be conditioned, rested, and tested on a
thermally non-conductive surface. A readily available material such
as Styrofoam will be sufficient.
(iii) Verifying the UUT's Input Voltage and Input Frequency
(A) If the UUT is intended for operation on AC line-voltage
input in the United States, it shall be tested at 115 V at 60 Hz. If
the UUT is intended for operation on AC line-voltage input but
cannot be operated at 115 V at 60 Hz, it shall not be tested. The
input voltage shall be within 1% of the above specified
voltage.
(B) If the UUT is intended for operation only on DC input
voltage, it shall be tested with one of the following input
voltages: 12.0 V DC for products intended for automotive,
recreational vehicle, or marine use; 5.0 V DC for products drawing
power from a computer USB port; or the midpoint of the rated input
voltage range for all other products. The input voltage shall be
within 1% of the above specified voltage.
(C) If the input voltage is AC, the input frequency shall be
within 1% of the specified frequency. The THD of the
input voltage shall be <= 2%, up to and including the 13th harmonic.
The crest factor of the input voltage shall be between 1.34 and
1.49.
(D) If the input voltage is DC, the AC ripple voltage (RMS)
shall be:
(1) <= 0.2 V for DC voltages up to 10 V
(2) <= 2% of the DC voltage for DC voltages over 10 V.
4. * * *
(b) Multiple-Voltage External Power Supply--Power supplies must
be tested with the output cord packaged with the unit for sale to
the consumer, as it is considered part of the unit under test. There
are two options for connecting metering equipment to the output of
this type of power supply: Cut the cord immediately adjacent to the
output connector or attach leads and measure the efficiency from the
output connector itself. If the power supply is attached directly to
the product that it is powering, cut the cord immediately adjacent
to the powered product and connect output measurement probes at that
point. The tests should be conducted on the sets of output wires
that constitute the output busses. If the product has additional
wires, these should be left electrically disconnected unless they
are necessary for controlling the product. In this case, the
manufacturer shall supply a connection diagram or test fixture that
will allow the testing laboratory to put the unit under test into
active mode.
(i) Standby-Mode and Active-Mode Measurement--The measurement of
the multiple-voltage external power supply standby mode (also no-
load-mode) energy consumption and active-mode efficiency shall be as
follows:
(A) Loading conditions and testing sequence. (1) If the unit
under test has on-off switches, all switches shall be placed in the
``on'' position. Loading criteria for multiple-voltage external
power supplies shall be based on nameplate output current
[[Page 16986]]
and not on nameplate output power because output voltage might not
remain constant.
(2) The unit under test shall operate at 100 percent of
nameplate current output for at least 30 minutes immediately before
conducting efficiency measurements.
(3) After this warm-up period, the technician shall monitor AC
input power for a period of 5 minutes to assess the stability of the
unit under test. If the power level does not drift by more than 1
percent from the maximum value observed, the unit under test can be
considered stable and measurements can be recorded at the end of the
5-minute period. Measurements at subsequent loading conditions,
listed in Table 1, can then be conducted under the same 5-minute
stability guidelines. Only one warm-up period of 30 minutes is
required for each unit under test at the beginning of the test
procedure.
(4) If AC input power is not stable over a 5-minute period, the
technician shall follow the guidelines established by IEC Standard
62301 for measuring average power or accumulated energy over time
for both input and output.
(5) The unit under test shall be tested at the loading
conditions listed in Table 1, derated per the proportional
allocation method presented in the following section.
Table 1--Loading Conditions for Unit Under Test
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Loading Condition 1.................... 100% of Derated Nameplate
Output Current
2%.
Loading Condition 2.................... 75% of Derated Nameplate Output
Current 2%.
Loading Condition 3.................... 50% of Derated Nameplate Output
Current 2%.
Loading Condition 4.................... 25% of Derated Nameplate Output
Current 2%.
Loading Condition 5.................... 0%.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) Input and output power measurements shall be conducted in
sequence from Loading Condition 1 to Loading Condition 4, as
indicated in Table 1. For Loading Condition 5, the unit under test
shall be placed in no-load mode, any additional signal connections
to the unit under test shall be disconnected, and input power shall
be measured.
(B) Proportional allocation method for loading multiple-voltage
external power supplies. For power supplies with multiple voltage
busses, defining consistent loading criteria is difficult because
each bus has its own nameplate output current. The sum of the power
dissipated by each bus loaded to its nameplate output current may
exceed the overall nameplate output power of the power supply. The
following proportional allocation method must be used to provide
consistent loading conditions for multiple-voltage external power
supplies. For additional explanation, please refer to section 6.1.1
of the California Energy Commission's ``Proposed Test Protocol for
Calculating the Energy Efficiency of Internal Ac-Dc Power Supplies
Revision 6.2,'' November 2007.
(1) Assume a multiple-voltage power supply with N output busses,
and nameplate output voltages V1, * * *, VN, corresponding output
current ratings I1, * * *, IN, and a nameplate output power P.
Calculate the derating factor D by dividing the power supply
nameplate output power P by the sum of the nameplate output powers
of the individual output busses, equal to the product of bus
nameplate output voltage and current IiVi, as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02AP10.006
(2) If D >= 1, then loading every bus to its nameplate output
current does not exceed the overall nameplate output power for the
power supply. In this case, each output bus will simply be loaded to
the percentages of its nameplate output current listed in Table 1.
However, if D < 1, it is an indication that loading each bus to its
nameplate output current will exceed the overall nameplate output
power for the power supply. In this case, and at each loading
condition, each output bus will be loaded to the appropriate
percentage of its nameplate output current listed in Table 1,
multiplied by the derating factor D.
(C) Minimum output current requirements. Depending on their
application, some multiple-voltage power supplies may require a
minimum output current for each output bus of the power supply for
correct operation. In these cases, ensure that the load current for
each output at Loading Condition 4 in Table 1 is greater than the
minimum output current requirement. Thus, if the test method's
calculated load current for a given voltage bus is smaller than the
minimum output current requirement, the minimum output current must
be used to load the bus. This load current shall be properly
recorded in any test report.
(D) Test loads. Active loads such as electronic loads or passive
loads such as rheostats used for efficiency testing of the unit
under test shall be able to maintain the required current loading
set point for each output voltage within an accuracy of
0.5 percent. If electronic load banks are used, their settings
should be adjusted such that they provide a constant current load to
the unit under test.
(E) Efficiency calculation. Efficiency shall be calculated by
dividing the measured active output power of the unit under test at
a given loading condition by the active AC input power measured at
that loading condition. Efficiency shall be calculated at each
Loading Condition (1, 2, 3, and 4, in Table 1) and be recorded
separately.
(F) Power consumption calculation. Power consumption of the unit
under test at Loading Conditions 1, 2, 3, and 4 is the difference
between the active output power at that Loading Condition and the
active AC input power at that Loading Condition. The power
consumption of Loading Condition 5 (no-load) is equal to the AC
active input power at that Loading Condition.
(ii) Off Mode Measurement--If the multiple-voltage external
power supply unit under test incorporates any on-off switches, the
unit under test shall be placed in off mode and its power
consumption in off mode measured and recorded. The measurement of
the off mode energy consumption shall conform to the requirements
specified in paragraph 4.(b)(i) of this appendix. Note that the only
loading condition that will be measured for off mode is ``Loading
Condition 5'' in paragraph 4.(b)(i)(A) of this appendix, except that
all manual on-off switches shall be placed in the off position for
the measurement.
[FR Doc. 2010-6318 Filed 4-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P