[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45471-45475]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19263]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2011 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 45471]]



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

10 CFR Chapter II

[Docket Number EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048]
RIN 1904-AC04


Energy Efficiency Standards for Distribution Transformers; Notice 
of Intent To Negotiate Proposed Rule

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) is 
giving notice that it intends to establish a negotiated rulemaking 
subcommittee under ERAC in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (FACA) and the Negotiated Rulemaking Act (NRA) to 
negotiate proposed Federal standards for the energy efficiency of 
liquid immersed and medium voltage dry-type distribution transformers. 
The purpose of the subcommittee will be to discuss and, if possible, 
reach consensus on a proposed rule for the energy efficiency of 
distribution transformers, as authorized by the Energy Policy and 
Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975, as amended. The subcommittee will 
consist of representatives of parties having a defined stake in the 
outcome of the proposed standards, and will consult as appropriate with 
a range of experts on technical issues.

DATES: Written comments and requests to be appointed as members of the 
subcommittee are welcome and should be submitted by August 15, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket 
number EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected]. 
Include EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048 and/or RIN 1904-AC04 in the subject line 
of the message.
     Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, EERE-2010-BT-STD-0048 
and/or RIN 1904-AC04, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Phone: (202) 586-2945. 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. Phone: (202) 586-2945. Please submit 
one signed paper original.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number or RIN for this rulemaking.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents, a 
copy of the transcript of the public meeting, or comments received, go 
to 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Building Technologies (EE-2J), 1000 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-1692. E-
mail: [email protected].
    Ms. Jennifer Tiedeman, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the 
General Counsel (GC-71), 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-6111. E-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Preamble

I. Statutory Authority
II. Background
III. Proposed Negotiating Procedures
IV. Comments Requested

I. Statutory Authority

    This notice of intent announcing DOE's intent to negotiate a 
proposed regulation setting energy efficiency standards for 
distribution transformers was developed under the authority of sections 
563 and 564 of the NRA (5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  561-570, Pub. L. 104-320). 
The regulation setting energy efficiency standards for distribution 
transformers that DOE is proposing to develop under a negotiated 
rulemaking will be developed under the authority of EPCA, as amended, 
42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C) and 6317(a).

II. Background

    As required by the NRA, DOE is giving notice that it is 
establishing a subcommittee under ERAC to develop proposed energy 
efficiency standards for distribution transformers.
    EPCA, as amended, directs DOE to adopt energy conservation 
standards for those distribution transformers for which standards would 
be technologically feasible and economically justified, and would 
result in significant energy savings. (42 U.S.C. 6317(a)(2)). On 
October 12, 2007, DOE issued a final rule adopting energy efficiency 
standards for electricity distribution transformers (``final rule''). 
72 FR 58190-58241 (October 12, 2007). The standards in that final rule 
applied to liquid-immersed and medium-voltage dry-type distribution 
transformers. In December 2007, a group of States and environmental 
groups sued DOE challenging the final rule. In July 2009, the United 
States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit approved a settlement 
agreement amongst the parties to that lawsuit which allowed the 
standards in the final rule to become applicable, beginning January 1, 
2010, but required DOE to conduct a review of the standards for liquid-
immersed and medium-voltage dry-type distribution transformers and 
publish in the Federal Register, no later than October 1, 2011, either 
a determination pursuant to EPCA, that standards for these products do 
not need to be amended or a notice of proposed rulemaking including any 
new proposed standards for these products. DOE further agreed that if, 
after conducting its review, DOE determines that amendment of the 
standards is warranted, DOE will publish in the Federal Register, no 
later than October 1, 2012, a final rule including any amendments to 
the standards for liquid-immersed and medium-voltage dry-type 
distribution transformers, with any such amended standards shall 
require compliance no later than January 1, 2016.

[[Page 45472]]

A. Negotiated Rulemaking

    DOE has decided to use the negotiated rulemaking process to develop 
proposed energy efficiency standards for distribution transformers. 
Under EPCA, Congress mandated that DOE develop regulations establishing 
energy efficiency standards for covered residential and commercial 
appliances that are designed to achieve the maximum improvement in 
energy efficiency that are technologically feasible and economically 
justified. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) The primary reason for using the 
negotiated rulemaking process for developing a proposed Federal 
standard is that stakeholders strongly support a consensual rulemaking 
effort. DOE believes such a regulatory negotiation process will be less 
adversarial and better suited to resolving complex technical issues. An 
important virtue of negotiated rulemaking is that it allows expert 
dialog that is much better than traditional techniques at getting the 
facts and issues right and will result in a proposed rule that will 
effectively reflect Congressional intent.
    A regulatory negotiation will enable DOE to engage in direct and 
sustained dialog with informed, interested, and affected parties when 
drafting the regulation, rather than obtaining input during a public 
comment period after developing and publishing a proposed rule. Gaining 
this early understanding of all parties' perspectives allows DOE to 
address key issues at an earlier stage of the process, thereby allowing 
more time for an iterative process to resolve issues. A rule drafted by 
negotiation with informed and affected parties is expected to be 
potentially more pragmatic and more easily implemented than a rule 
arising from the traditional process. Such rulemaking improvement is 
likely to provide the public with the full benefits of the rule while 
minimizing the potential negative impact of a proposed regulation 
conceived or drafted without the full prior input of outside 
knowledgeable parties. Because a negotiating subcommittee includes 
representatives from the major stakeholder groups affected by or 
interested in the rule, the number of public comments on the proposed 
rule may be decreased. DOE anticipates that there will be a need for 
fewer substantive changes to a proposed rule developed under a 
regulatory negotiation process prior to the publication of a final 
rule.

B. The Concept of Negotiated Rulemaking

    Usually, DOE develops a proposed rulemaking using Department staff 
and consultant resources. Typically, a preliminary analysis is vetted 
for stakeholder comments after a Framework Document is published and 
comments taken thereon. After the notice of proposed rulemaking is 
published for comment, affected parties may submit arguments and data 
defining and supporting their positions with regard to the issues 
raised in the proposed rule. Congress noted in the NRA, however, that 
regulatory development may ``discourage the affected parties from 
meeting and communicating with each other, and may cause parties with 
different interests to assume conflicting and antagonistic positions * 
* *.'' (5 U.S.C. 561(2)(2)) Congress also stated that ``adversarial 
rulemaking deprives the affected parties and the public of the benefits 
of face-to-face negotiations and cooperation in developing and reaching 
agreement on a rule. It also deprives them of the benefits of shared 
information, knowledge, expertise, and technical abilities possessed by 
the affected parties.'' (5 U.S.C. 561(2)(3))
    Using negotiated rulemaking to develop a proposed rule differs 
fundamentally from the Department-centered process. In negotiated 
rulemaking, a proposed rule is developed by an advisory committee or 
subcommittee, chartered under FACA (5 U.S.C. App. 2), composed of 
members chosen to represent the various interests that will be 
significantly affected by the rule. The goal of the advisory committee 
or subcommittee is to reach consensus on the treatment of the major 
issues involved with the rule. The process starts with the Department's 
careful identification of all interests potentially affected by the 
rulemaking under consideration. To help with this identification, the 
Department publishes a notice of intent such as this one in the Federal 
Register, identifying a preliminary list of interested parties and 
requesting public comment on that list. Following receipt of comments, 
the Department establishes an advisory committee or subcommittee 
representing the full range of stakeholders to negotiate a consensus on 
the terms of a proposed rule. Representation on the advisory committee 
or subcommittee may be direct; that is, each member may represent a 
specific interest, or may be indirect, such as through trade 
associations and/or similarly-situated parties with common interests. 
The Department is a member of the advisory committee or subcommittee 
and represents the Federal government's interests. The advisory 
committee or subcommittee chair is assisted by a neutral mediator who 
facilitates the negotiation process. The role of the mediator, also 
called a facilitator, is to apply proven consensus-building techniques 
to the advisory committee or subcommittee process.
    After an advisory committee or subcommittee reaches consensus on 
the provisions of a proposed rule, the Department, consistent with its 
legal obligations, uses such consensus as the basis of its proposed 
rule, which then is published in the Federal Register. This publication 
provides the required public notice and provides for a public comment 
period. Other participants and other interested parties retain their 
rights to comment, participate in an informal hearing (if requested), 
and request judicial review. DOE anticipates, however, that the pre-
proposal consensus agreed upon by the advisory committee or 
subcommittee will narrow any issues in the subsequent rulemaking.

C. Proposed Rulemaking for Energy Efficiency Standards for Distribution 
Transformers

    The NRA enables DOE to establish an advisory committee or 
subcommittee if it is determined that the use of the negotiated 
rulemaking process is in the public interest. DOE intends to develop 
Federal regulations that build on the depth of experience accrued in 
both the public and private sectors in implementing standards and 
programs.
    DOE has determined that the regulatory negotiation process will 
provide for obtaining a diverse array of in-depth input, as well as an 
opportunity for increased collaborative discussion from both private-
sector stakeholders and government officials who are familiar with 
energy efficiency of distribution transformers. In July of 2011, DOE 
initiated the convening stage of the negotiated rulemaking process to 
identify and interview appropriate public- and private-sector 
stakeholders. DOE retained an expert convener to contact parties 
potentially affected by energy efficiency standards for distribution 
transformers to determine whether stakeholders are interested in 
participating in a negotiated rulemaking process and whether they 
believe stakeholder issues can be addressed and resolved through a 
regulatory negotiation. Following an evaluation of initial stakeholder 
interest and input, the independent convener determined that there is 
sufficient enthusiasm

[[Page 45473]]

among stakeholders to support a negotiated rulemaking process and that 
there is a reasonably good chance of successfully reaching a consensus 
agreement among stakeholders on the rule.

D. Department Commitment

    In initiating this regulatory negotiation process to develop energy 
efficiency standards for distribution transformers, DOE is making a 
commitment to provide adequate resources to facilitate timely and 
successful completion of the process. This commitment includes making 
the process a priority activity for all representatives, components, 
officials, and personnel of the Department who need to be involved in 
the rulemaking, from the time of initiation until such time as a final 
rule is issued or the process is expressly terminated. DOE will provide 
administrative support for the process and will take steps to ensure 
that the advisory committee or subcommittee has the dedicated resources 
it requires to complete its work in a timely fashion. Specifically, DOE 
will make available the following support services: properly equipped 
space adequate for public meetings and caucuses; logistical support; 
word processing and distribution of background information; the service 
of a facilitator; and such additional research and other technical 
assistance as may be necessary.
    To the maximum extent possible consistent with the legal 
obligations of the Department, DOE will use the consensus of the 
advisory committee or subcommittee as the basis for the rule the 
Department proposes for public notice and comment.

E. Negotiating Consensus

    As discussed above, the negotiated rulemaking process differs 
fundamentally from the usual process for developing a proposed rule. 
Negotiation enables interested and affected parties to discuss various 
approaches to issues rather than asking them only to respond to a 
proposal developed by the Department. The negotiation process involves 
a mutual education of the various parties on the practical concerns 
about the impact of standards. Each advisory committee or subcommittee 
member participates in resolving the interests and concerns of other 
members, rather than leaving it up to DOE to evaluate and incorporate 
different points of view.
    A key principle of negotiated rulemaking is that agreement is by 
consensus of all the interests. Thus, no one interest or group of 
interests is able to control the process. The NRA defines consensus as 
the unanimous concurrence among interests represented on a negotiated 
rulemaking committee or subcommittee, unless the committee or 
subcommittee itself unanimously agrees to use a different definition. 
(5 U.S.C. Sec.  562) In addition, experience has demonstrated that 
using a trained mediator to facilitate this process will assist all 
parties, including DOE, in identifying their real interests in the 
rule, and thus will enable parties to focus on and resolve the 
important issues.

III. Proposed Negotiating Procedures

A. Key Issues for Negotiation

    The convener identified the following issues and concerns that will 
underlie the work of the Negotiated Rulemaking Committee on Energy 
Efficiency Standards for Distribution Transformers:
     DOE's key issues include assuring full compliance with 
statutory mandates. Congress has mandated that DOE establish minimum 
energy efficiency standards that are technologically feasible and 
economically justified.
     The committee must find ways to balance the goals and 
priorities of State regulatory programs and DOE's program for energy 
efficiency standards.
     Manufacturers desire that standards not diminish or 
constrain innovation for these products.
     Environmental advocates seek to ensure that standards 
achieve the maximum energy savings that are technologically feasible 
and economically justifiable.
    To examine the underlying issues outlined above, and others not yet 
articulated, all parties in the negotiation will need DOE to provide 
data and an analytic framework complete and accurate enough to support 
their deliberations. DOE's analyses must be adequate to inform a 
prospective negotiation--for example, a preliminary Technical Support 
Document or equivalent must be available and timely.

B. Formation of Subcommittee

    A subcommittee will be formed and operated in full compliance with 
the requirements of FACA and in a manner consistent with the 
requirements of the NRA. DOE has determined that the subcommittee not 
exceed 25 members. The Department believes that more than 25 members 
would make it difficult to conduct effective negotiations. DOE is aware 
that there are many more potential participants than there are 
membership slots on the subcommittee. The Department does not believe, 
nor does the NRA contemplate, that each potentially affected group must 
participate directly in the negotiations; nevertheless, each affected 
interest can be adequately represented. To have a successful 
negotiation, it is important for interested parties to identify and 
form coalitions that adequately represent significantly affected 
interests. To provide adequate representation, those coalitions must 
agree to support, both financially and technically, a member of the 
subcommittee whom they choose to represent their interests.
    DOE recognizes that when it establishes energy efficiency standards 
for residential products and commercial equipment, various segments of 
society may be affected in different ways, in some cases producing 
unique ``interests'' in a proposed rule based on income, gender, or 
other factors. The Department will pay attention to providing that any 
unique interests that have been identified, and that may be 
significantly affected by the proposed rule, are represented.
    FACA also requires that members of the public have the opportunity 
to attend meetings of the full committee and speak or otherwise address 
the committee during the public comment period. In addition, any member 
of the public is permitted to file a written statement with the 
advisory committee. DOE plans to follow these same procedures in 
conducting meetings of the subcommittee.

C. Interests Involved/Subcommittee Membership

    DOE anticipates that the subcommittee will comprise no more than 25 
members who represent affected and interested stakeholder groups, at 
least one of whom must be a member of the ERAC. As required by FACA, 
the Department will conduct the negotiated rulemaking with particular 
attention to ensuring full and balanced representation of those 
interests that may be significantly affected by the proposed rule 
governing standards for the energy efficiency of distribution 
transformers. Section 562 of the NRA defines the term interest as 
``with respect to an issue or matter, multiple parties which have a 
similar point of view or which are likely to be affected in a similar 
manner.'' Listed below are parties the Department to date has 
identified as being ``significantly affected'' by a proposed rule 
regarding the energy efficiency of distribution transformers.
     The Department of Energy
     Distribution transformers manufacturers and trade 
associations representing manufacturers

[[Page 45474]]

     Component manufacturers and related suppliers
     Utilities
     Energy efficiency/environmental advocacy groups
     Consumers
    One purpose of this notice of intent is to determine whether 
Federal standards regarding the energy efficiency of distribution 
transformers will significantly affect interests that are not listed 
above. DOE invites comment and suggestions on its initial list of 
significantly affected interests.
    DOE also developed an initial list of stakeholders who could serve 
on the subcommittee to represent the above-listed interests. The 
following list includes organizations DOE tentatively has identified as 
being either potential members of the subcommittee, or potential 
members of a coalition that would in turn nominate a candidate to 
represent one of the significantly affected interests listed above. DOE 
invites comment and suggestions on whether the following list of 
stakeholders identifies an accurate and comprehensive pool of 
stakeholders, or subcommittee members.

 Department of Energy
     John Cymbalsky
 EarthJustice
     Tim Ballo
 Cooper Power Systems
     Jerry Corkran
 Prolec GE
     Greg Coulter
 National Electrical Manufacturers Association
     Jim Creevy
     Clark Silcox
 Appliance Standards Awareness Program
     Andrew DeLaski
 Kentucky Association of Electric Cooperatives/United Utility 
Supply
     Charlie Drexler
 Northwest Power and Conservation Council
     Tom Eckman
 Pacific Gas and Electric
     Gary Fernstrom
 Federal Pacific
     Robert Greeson
 Howard Industries, Inc.
     Gerald Hodge
 American Public Power
     Michael Hyland
 MGM Transformer Company
     Mike Iman
 Niagara Transformer Corporation
     Sheldon Kennedy
 Metglass Inc.
     Dave Millure
 American Council for an Energy Efficiency Economy
     Steve Nadel
 ABB Inc.
     Wes Patterson
 Edison Electric Institute
     Steve Rosenstock
 Natural Resources Defense Council
     Robin Roy
 National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
     Robert Saint
 AK Steel Corporation
     Jerry Schoen
 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
     Charles Stevens
 ONYX Power Inc.
     Vijay Tendulkar
 Moon Lake Electric Association
     Ken Winder
 California Energy Commission (as resource party)

    The list provided above includes stakeholders whom DOE tentatively 
has identified as being either a potential member of the subcommittee 
or a potential member of a coalition that would in turn nominate a 
candidate to represent one of the significantly affected interests, 
also listed above. The list is not presented as a complete or exclusive 
list from which subcommittee members will be selected. Nor does 
inclusion on the list of potential parties mean that a listed party has 
agreed to participate as a member of the subcommittee or as a member of 
a coalition. The list merely indicates parties that DOE tentatively has 
identified as representing significantly affected interests in the 
proposed rule establishing energy efficiency standards for distribution 
transformers.
    DOE requests comments and suggestions regarding its tentative list 
of potential members of the subcommittee on energy efficiency standards 
for distribution transformers. Members may be individuals or 
organizations. If the effort is to be fruitful, participants on the 
subcommittee should be able to fully and adequately represent the 
viewpoints of their respective interests. This document gives notice of 
DOE's process to other potential participants and affords them the 
opportunity to request representation in the negotiations. Those who 
wish to be appointed as members of the subcommittee, including those 
that have been tentatively identified by DOE in this notice of intent, 
should submit a request to DOE, in accordance with the public 
participation procedures outlined in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections 
of this notice of intent. Membership of the subcommittee is likely to 
involve:
     Attendance at approximately five (5), one (1) to two (2) 
day meetings;
     Travel costs to those meetings; and
     Preparation time for those meetings.
    Members serving on the subcommittee will not receive compensation 
for their services.
    Interested parties who are not selected for membership on the 
subcommittee may make valuable contributions to this negotiated 
rulemaking effort in any of several ways:
     The person may request to be placed on the subcommittee 
mailing list and submit written comments as appropriate.
     The person may attend subcommittee meetings, which are 
open to the public; caucus with his or her interest's member on the 
subcommittee; or even address the subcommittee during the public 
comment portion of the subcommittee meeting.
     The person could assist the efforts of a workgroup that 
the subcommittee might establish.
    A subcommittee may establish informal workgroups, which usually are 
asked to facilitate committee deliberations by assisting with various 
technical matters (e.g., researching or preparing summaries of the 
technical literature or comments on specific matters such as economic 
issues). Workgroups also might assist in estimating costs or drafting 
regulatory text on issues associated with the analysis of the costs and 
benefits addressed, or formulating drafts of the various provisions and 
their justifications as previously developed by the subcommittee. Given 
their support function, workgroups usually consist of participants who 
have expertise or particular interest in the technical matter(s) being 
studied. Because it recognizes the importance of this support work for 
the subcommittee, DOE will provide appropriate technical expertise for 
such workgroups.

D. Good Faith Negotiation

    Every subcommittee member must be willing to negotiate in good 
faith and have the authority, granted by his or her constituency, to do 
so. The first step is to ensure that each member has good 
communications with his or her constituencies. An intra-interest 
network of communication should be established to bring information 
from the support organization to the member at the table, and to take 
information from the table back to the support organization. Second, 
each organization or coalition therefore should designate as its 
representative a person having the credibility and authority to ensure 
that needed information is provided and decisions are made in a timely 
fashion. Negotiated rulemaking can require the appointed members to 
give a significant

[[Page 45475]]

amount of time, which must be sustained for as long as the duration of 
the negotiated rulemaking. Although the ERAC advisory committee charter 
will be in effect for 2 years from the date it is filed with Congress, 
DOE expects the subcommittee's deliberations to conclude or be 
terminated earlier than that. Other qualities of members that can be 
helpful are negotiating experience and skills, and sufficient technical 
knowledge to participate in substantive negotiations.
    Certain concepts are central to negotiating in good faith. One is 
the willingness to bring all issues to the bargaining table in an 
attempt to reach a consensus, as opposed to keeping key issues in 
reserve. The second is a willingness to keep the issues at the table 
and not take them to other forums. Finally, good faith includes a 
willingness to move away from some of the positions often taken in a 
more traditional rulemaking process, and instead explore openly with 
other parties all ideas that may emerge from the subcommittee's 
discussions.

E. Facilitator

    The facilitator will act as a neutral in the substantive 
development of the proposed standard. Rather, the facilitator's role 
generally includes:
     Impartially assisting the members of the subcommittee in 
conducting discussions and negotiations; and
     Impartially assisting in performing the duties of the 
Designated Federal Official under FACA.

F. Department Representative

    The DOE representative will be a full and active participant in the 
consensus-building negotiations. The Department's representative will 
meet regularly with senior Department officials, briefing them on the 
negotiations and receiving their suggestions and advice so that he or 
she can effectively represent the Department's views regarding the 
issues before the subcommittee. DOE's representative also will ensure 
that the entire spectrum of governmental interests affected by the 
standards rulemaking, including the Office of Management and Budget, 
the Attorney General, and other Departmental offices, are kept informed 
of the negotiations and encouraged to make their concerns known in a 
timely fashion.

G. Subcommittee and Schedule

    After evaluating the comments submitted in response to this notice 
of intent and the requests for nominations, DOE will either inform the 
members of the subcommittee that they have been selected or determine 
that conducting a negotiated rulemaking is inappropriate. Due to the 
court-ordered deadline, DOE plans for the subcommittee to conduct 
deliberations in the summer and fall of 2011 and hopes that the 
subcommittee will come to an agreement on a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking in time to publish that proposal by the October 1, 2011 date 
contained in the settlement agreement described above.
    DOE will advise subcommittee members of administrative matters 
related to the functions of the subcommittee before beginning. DOE will 
establish a meeting schedule based on the settlement agreement and 
produce the necessary documents so as to adhere to that schedule. While 
the negotiated rulemaking process is underway, DOE is committed to 
performing much of the same analysis as it would during a normal 
standards rulemaking process and to providing information and technical 
support to the subcommittee.

IV. Comments Requested

    DOE requests comments on whether it should use negotiated 
rulemaking for its rulemaking pertaining to the energy efficiency of 
distribution transformers and the extent to which the issues, parties, 
and procedures described above are adequate and appropriate. DOE also 
requests comments on which parties should be included in a negotiated 
rulemaking to develop draft language pertaining to the energy 
efficiency of distribution transformers and suggestions of additional 
interests and/or stakeholders that should be represented on the 
subcommittee. All who wish to participate as members of the 
subcommittee should submit a request for nomination to DOE.

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary

    The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of today's notice 
intent to negotiate a proposed rulemaking.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on July 26, 2011.
Kathleen Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011-19263 Filed 7-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P