FR 2020-27662

In a recent update published in the Federal Register, the Department of Energy (DOE) has issued a final rule revising its test procedures for small electric motors and electric motors. The aim of these revisions is to better align the test procedures with existing industry standards, such as the IEEE 112 and new IEC standards. These updates are designed to make testing more consistent and reduce the testing burdens on manufacturers. Importantly, the DOE assures that these changes will not alter the measured efficiency of electric motors and sets specific compliance dates for these new procedures to be adopted by manufacturers.

General Summary

The document outlines the DOE's final rule to harmonize test procedures with the latest industry standards for small electric motors and electric motors. It references the latest IEEE and IEC standards and introduces new testing methods while providing more explicit definitions to enhance consistency. The document emphasizes cost reductions, improvements in testing accuracy, and potential benefits from harmonizing with international standards.

Significant Issues and Concerns

One key issue highlighted by the document is its complexity. The technical nature and length may make it challenging for an average reader to understand without specific expertise in the field. Furthermore, the amendments incorporate complex industry standards, some of which might require stakeholders to purchase access, thereby raising concerns about transparency and accessibility.

Additionally, while the document states there will be cost savings due to these adjustments, it lacks a detailed breakdown of financial impacts on various stakeholders, including manufacturers and potentially the government.

There is also some ambiguity surrounding terms introduced in the document, such as "breakdown torque" and "abrupt drop in speed." These terms, while technical, could benefit from further clarification to provide clearer guidance for those not versed in motor operations.

The discussion on the regulatory flexibility and its impact on small businesses is somewhat vague, lacking specific data on the number of small entities affected by the rule changes. This absence of detailed analysis may present challenges in fully evaluating the economic implications for these smaller stakeholders.

Public Impact

Broadly, the document addresses changes that could impact consumers by potentially improving the efficiency of motors found in everyday electric appliances. By aligning with global standards, the changes could lead to more energy-efficient products, which might reduce energy consumption and, consequently, energy bills in households.

Stakeholder Impact

For large manufacturers, these changes might present a positive development. By aligning DOE test procedures with international standards, these manufacturers could streamline their production and testing processes, potentially reducing costs and labor involved in testing. However, there is a possibility that such changes could inadvertently favor larger manufacturers that may have more resources to adapt quickly to new standards, potentially placing smaller manufacturers at a disadvantage.

The document's assumption of a 10 percent overlap in testing using IEC methods, without clear data, raises questions regarding the accuracy of projected cost savings. This could particularly affect stakeholders who may not be accounted for within these estimates.

Moreover, the allowance for manufacturers to choose input test voltages without a detailed oversight mechanism could lead to inconsistencies in reported efficiency ratings, which may impact consumers' ability to make fully informed purchasing decisions.

Overall, while the DOE's updates aim for consistency and efficiency improvements in motor testing, several areas require further clarity and consideration to ensure that a diverse range of stakeholders benefits equitably from these regulatory changes.

The document outlines a final rule issued by the Department of Energy (DOE) concerning test procedures for small electric motors and electric motors. It emphasizes cost savings and expenditures resulting from these regulatory adjustments. Several points across the document touch on financial implications, cost savings, and potential economic impacts.

Estimated Cost Savings

The DOE anticipates financial benefits to industries involved with electric motors due to the rule changes:

• The rule predicts an annual cost saving of approximately $8,000 for the small electric motor industry. This is based on the estimates that about one new small electric motor model per year that is already tested with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) methods will not need an additional test to comply when introduced into the U.S. market.

• For electric motors, the DOE estimates an annual industry cost saving of approximately $127,000. This estimation comes from preventing the need for additional testing of approximately 20 new electric motor models annually that are already tested using IEC methods.

Testing Costs

The financial aspects of testing small electric motors are detailed:

• The cost for testing a single small electric motor unit is estimated at $2,000 at a third-party facility and approximately $500 at an in-house facility. DOE requires at least five units to be tested per basic model.

Economic Impact Consideration

The final rule recognizes broader economic impacts:

• The changes yield an annualized cost saving of approximately $106,000 using a perpetual time horizon discounted to 2016 at a 7 percent discount rate. This calculation provides a framework for understanding the long-term financial benefits of the regulatory changes.

• According to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), the document assures that the final rule does not mandate expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year by State, local, and Tribal governments or private sectors.

Relationship with Identified Issues

The financial references and projections connect with several concerns:

• Transparency and Accessibility: The document assumes cost savings based on existing overlaps in testing procedures, quantified as a 10 percent overlap, without a clear data source. This assumption could affect the accuracy of financial estimates and may not reflect the real costs or savings expected by stakeholders.

• Potential Bias and Testing Flexibility: The calculation of cost savings assumes the flexibility of manufacturers in selecting test input voltages without providing substantial assurances to prevent the manipulation of efficiency ratings. This raises concerns about whether the cost-saving benefits may be more accessible to larger manufacturers with resources to adapt more flexibly.

In summary, while the document highlights substantial cost savings and impacts due to updated testing procedures, considerations around the accuracy of assumptions and the impact on different-sized businesses suggest the need for cautious interpretation of these financial references.