Quiero saber acerca de...

60380

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 209 / Tuesday, November 2, 2021 / Proposed Rules
TABLE IIISUMMARY OF CHANGES IN PROPOSED TEST PROCEDURE RELATIVE TO CURRENT TEST PROCEDURE AND TO
AMENDMENTS PROPOSED IN THE DECEMBER 2019 NOPRContinued Current DOE test procedure
December 2019 NOPR proposals
Proposed test procedure
Does not explicitly provide instructions for testing EPSs that are not supplied with output cords..
10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix Z generally.
Requires adaptive EPSs that meet the IEC 6268012 specification to test at 3 amps for the 100%
loading condition at the lowest operating output voltage of 5
volts.

Proposed to require EPSs that are not supplied with an output cord to test at the output electrical contact that can be connected to a physical wire.
Proposed to define an adaptive EPS that meets the voltage/current specifications of IEC
6268012 as a USBPD
EPS and require that it be tested at 2 amps for the 100%
loading condition at the lowest operating output voltage of 5
volts.

Requires EPSs that are not supplied with an output cord to test with an output cord recommended for use by the manufacturer.
Defines an adaptive EPS that meets the voltage/current specifications of IEC 6268012 as a USBPD EPS and requires that it be tested at 2 amps for the 100% loading condition at the lowest operating output voltage, which can be as low as 3.3 volts.

To the extent that DOE has tentatively determined that its proposed amendments would impact the measured energy efficiency of an EPS, DOE proposes that testing according to such amendments, if made final, would not be required until such time as compliance is required with new and amended energy conservation standards, should such standard be established or amended. DOE has also tentatively determined that the proposal, if adopted, would not be unduly burdensome to conduct. DOEs proposed actions are addressed in detail in section III of this document.
III. Discussion
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

A. Scope of Applicability 1. Scope of Appendix Z
In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to revise section 1 of appendix Z, which specifies the scope of the EPS test procedure, by removing references to direct operation EPSs and indirect operation Class A EPSs and instead state that the test procedures scope includes all EPSs subject to the energy conservation standards set forth at 10
CFR 430.32w1, except for those that meet the definition of a commercial and industrial power supply as defined in 10 CFR 430.2.
Deleting references to direct operation EPSs and indirect operation Class A
EPSs from the scope section of the EPS
test procedure at appendix Z would not alter the scope or the applicability of appendix Z. The test procedure to test direct operation and indirect operation EPSs is the same for both types of EPSs, and including these terms in the scope is unnecessary; therefore, DOE is proposing to remove the references.
Also, as part of the December 2019
NOPR, DOE proposed to define commercial and industrial power
VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:38 Nov 01, 2021

Jkt 256001

supply and exclude it from the definition of an EPS altogether. In this SNOPR, DOE proposes to maintain the current definition of an EPS and instead use the definition of a commercial and industrial power supply to exclude these EPSs from the scope of the appendix as described previously.
DOE requests feedback on its proposal to revise section 1 of appendix Z to remove references to direct operation EPSs and indirect operation Class A
EPSs. DOE also requests feedback on its proposal to use the proposed definition of a commercial and industrial power supply to exclude such EPSs from the scope of the EPS test procedure.
2. Devices for Which the Primary Load of the Converted Voltage Is Not Delivered to a Separate End Use Product In response to inquiries as to whether the EPS test procedure permits nonEPS-related functions to be disconnected when testing products with universal serial bus USB ports, DOE proposed in the December 2019
NOPR to specify that components and circuits unrelated to the EPSs functionality may be disconnected during testing as long as that disconnection does not impact the functionality of the EPS itself. 80 FR
67106, 67115 December 6, 2019. For example, a surge protector with USB
output ports may be tested with the surge protector circuit disconnected if it is distinct from the USB circuit and does not impact the EPSs functionality i.e., the circuit from household AC
input to the USB output. Id.
Additionally, in a request for information RFI regarding the energy conservation standards for EPSs published on May 20, 2020 May 2020
RFI, DOE solicited comment regarding how to differentiate between EPSs and products with power conversion as an
PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

Attribution Improve representativeness test procedure.

of
Address waivers for adaptive EPSs and updates to industry test standard.

auxiliary function. 85 FR 30636, 30639.
DOE received comments that mostly supported the exclusion of devices with power conversion as an auxiliary function from EPS regulations.
In response to the December 2019
NOPR, CTA and NEMA/ALA raised concern that the proposed amendment would expand the scope of what is covered as an EPS as a result of what they understood to be a proposal to consider all devices with power conversion as an ancillary function specifically products with USB, HDMI, CAT5, or similar ports to be within the scope of EPS regulations. CTA, No. 11
at pp. 34; NEMA/ALA, No. 12 at pp.
13, 6
CTA commented that DOEs proposed addition of regulatory language referencing circuits in section 4h of the proposed amendments to appendix Z may lead to questions about the scope of the EPS regulations if DOE intends to further classify circuits as a type of EPS.
CTA, No. 11 at pp. 34 CTA also asserted that devices such as laptops, connected televisions, and mobile phone docking ports would potentially be brought under EPS regulations if devices with USB, HDMI, CAT5 or similar ports are considered EPSs. CTA, No. 11 at p. 4 In addition, CTA raised the concern of potential double regulations for certain products that contain USB ports and are also subject to other energy conservations standards for another product, such as battery chargers. CTA, No. 11 at p. 3 CTA
recommended that DOE classify EPSs with other major functions into a separate product class, and state that such products are not subject to current EPS regulations. CTA, No. 11 at p. 4
NEMA/ALA stated that it would be impractical for DOE to enforce EPS
regulations upon every product containing a USB, HDMI, or RJ45 port.

E:FRFM02NOP1.SGM

02NOP1