This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

17755 

Vol. 76, No. 62 

Thursday, March 31, 2011 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A. 

2All references to EPCA refer to the statute as 

amended through the Energy Independence and 

Security Act of 2007, Public Law 110–140. 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket Number EERE–2008–BT–TP–0020] 

RIN 1904–AB89 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Decision and 

Order Granting 180-Day Extension of 

Compliance Date for Residential 

Furnaces and Boilers Test Procedure 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of petitions for extension 

of compliance date and Decision and 

Order granting petitions. 

SUMMARY: This document announces 

receipt by the U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) of 29 petitions from 27 

manufacturers seeking a 180-day 

extension of the compliance date related 

to recent amendments to the DOE test 

procedure for residential furnaces and 

boilers to address the standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption of those 

products. The petitioners demonstrated 

that meeting the specified compliance 

date would impose an undue hardship. 

Accordingly, today’s Decision and 

Order grants these petitions to extend 

the compliance date by the requested 

180 days. 

DATES: This Decision and Order is 

effective March 31, 2011. For 

representation purposes, petitioners 

must comply with all applicable 

provisions of the amended DOE test 

procedure for residential furnaces and 

boilers starting on October 15, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Building Technologies 

Program, Mail Stop EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9611. E-mail: 

Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Eric Stas, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–9507. E-mail: 

Eric.Stas@hq.doe.gov. 

For information on how to access the 

docket or to view hard copies of the 

docket in the Resource Room, 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: 

Brenda.Edwards@ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority 

Title III, Part B1 of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA or 

the Act), Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6309, as codified) sets forth a 

variety of provisions designed to 

improve energy efficiency and 

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles,2 a program covering 

most major household appliances 

(collectively referred to as ‘‘covered 

products’’), which includes the types of 

residential boilers and furnaces that are 

the subject of this notice. (42 U.S.C. 

6292(a)(5)) Under the Act, this program 

consists essentially of three parts: (1) 

Testing; (2) labeling; and (3) establishing 

Federal energy conservation standards. 

Of particular relevance here, the statute 

authorizes the Secretary of Energy to 

prescribe test procedures that are 

reasonably designed to produce results 

which measure energy efficiency, 

energy use, or estimated operating costs, 

and that are not unduly burdensome to 

conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) Under 

EPCA’s testing requirements, 

manufacturers of covered products must 

use these test procedures as the basis for 

certifying to DOE that their products 

comply with applicable energy 

conservation standards adopted 

pursuant to EPCA and for representing 

the efficiency of those products. (42 

U.S.C. 6293(c); 42 U.S.C. 6295(s)) 

Pursuant to the amendments to EPCA 

contained in section 310(3) of the 

Energy Independence and Security Act 

of 2007 (EISA 2007), any final rule for 

new or amended energy conservation 

standards promulgated after July 1, 2010 

must address standby mode and off 

mode energy use. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) 

Specifically, when DOE adopts an 

energy conservation standard for a 

covered product after that date, it must, 

if justified by the criteria for adoption of 

standards under 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), 

incorporate standby mode and off mode 

energy use into a single standard, if 

feasible, or, if that is not feasible, adopt 

a separate standard for such energy use 

for that product. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(3)(A)–(B)) Because the current 

energy conservation standard 

rulemaking for residential furnaces will 

be completed after July 1, 2010, DOE 

conducted a test procedure rulemaking 

for these products and published a final 

rule in the Federal Register on October 

20, 2010 (the October 2010 final rule), 

which included methods for measuring 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption. 75 FR 64621. More 

specifically, this test procedure final 

rule included a standby mode and off 

mode metric, Eso, and modified the 

calculation of annualized auxiliary 

electrical use (Eae) for gas or oil-fired 

furnaces or boilers and annual electric 

energy consumption (Ee) for electric 

furnaces or boilers to account for 

standby mode and off mode power 

consumption. Id. at 64632. The test 

procedure for residential furnaces and 

boilers is contained in title 10 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

430, subpart B, appendix N. 

The statute mandates that 180 days 

after an amended or new test procedure 

is prescribed, no manufacturer, 

distributor, retailer, or private labeler 

may make any representation about a 

product with respect to energy use or 

efficiency unless that product has been 

tested in accordance with such 

amended or new test procedure and the 

representation fairly discloses the 

results of such testing. (42 U.S.C. 

6293(c)(2)) However, if a petition is 

submitted at least 60 days prior to the 

end of the initial 180-day period, the 

Secretary may extend the 180-day 

period by up to an additional 180 days 

(but in no event for more than 180 days) 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
17756 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

3Two manufacturers submitted two essentially 

identical petitions signed by different corporate 

officials. 

4The docket is available for review at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including Federal Register 

notices and other supporting documents/materials. 

All documents in the docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. However, not all 

documents listed in the index may be publicly 

available, such as information that is exempt from 

public disclosure. A link to the docket Web page 

can be found at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!

docketDetail;dct=FR+PR+N+O+SR;

rpp=10;po=0;D=EERE-2008-BT-TP-0020. The http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web page contains simple 

instructions on how to access all documents in the 

docket. 

with respect to that petitioner, if it is 

determined that complying with the 

requirements of 42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(2) 

would impose an undue hardship on 

the petitioner. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3)) 

II. Petitions for Extension of 

Compliance Date 

Between February 14, 2011 and 

February 17, 2011, DOE received 29 

petitions from 27 manufacturers 3

regarding the compliance date for the 

October 2010 test procedure final rule 

for residential furnaces and boilers. All 

of these petitions are available as part of 

Docket Number EERE–2008–BT–TP– 

0020.4 Specifically, all but one 

petitioner requested that DOE extend 

the April 18, 2011 compliance date 

specified in the final rule by 180 days, 

arguing that compliance with the April 

18, 2011 deadline would place an 

unnecessary burden upon each 

company. The remaining petitioner, 

Rheem Manufacturing Company, 

similarly requested DOE extend the 

compliance date; however, this 

company requested that the new 

compliance date be extended to end of 

the 2011 calendar year or by the 

maximum amount allowed by law, 

whichever is longer. The petitioners 

were: (1) Adams Manufacturing 

Company; (2) Allied Air Enterprises; (3) 

Bard Manufacturing Co. Inc.; (4) 

Boyertown Furnace; (5) Carrier 

Corporation; (6) Crown Boiler; (7) De 

Dietrich Boilers; (8) ECR International 

Inc.; (9) Goodman Manufacturing 

Company; (10) HTP Inc.; (11) Johnson 

Controls Inc.; (12) Laars Heating 

Systems Company; (13) Lennox 

International Inc.; (14) Lochinvar; (15) 

Newmac Furnace Company; (16) New 

Yorker Residential Heating Boilers; (17) 

Nordyne; (18) NY Thermal Inc.; (19) 

Peerless Boilers Heat LLC; (20) Raypak 

Inc.; (21) Rheem Manufacturing 

Company; (22) Slant/Fin; (23) Thermo 

Products LLC; (24) Trane; (25) Triangle 

Tube; (26) US Boiler Company; and (27) 

Weil-McLain. All petitions were timely 

filed, in that they were submitted prior 

to 60 days before the end of the 180-day 

period specified in 42 U.S.C. 6293(c)(3). 

All 29 petitions were very similar in 

form and content, as discussed in 

further detail below. 

Eae is a measure of the electrical 

energy use of a gas or oil-fired furnace 

over a one-year period. The petitioners 

noted that the amended definition of 

Eae, which was redefined in the final 

rule to include Eso, may be considered 

a representation of standby mode and 

off mode energy consumption now 

because it includes Eso. However, 

because the final rule had focused on 

the Eso descriptor itself and because 

manufacturers were under no obligation 

to publish results for Eso by April 18, 

2011, the petitioners only recently came 

to realize the indirect implications of 

the amended test procedure on the Eae

metric, which is widely used in the 

industry. As a result, the petitioners all 

argued that under the current deadline 

the revisions to the Eae calculation to 

include Eso would force the industry to 

either: (1) Retest all of its basic models 

in two months; or (2) remove the Eae

listings from the AHRI product 

directory. On the first point, the 

petitioners asserted that it would be 

impracticable to conduct the requisite 

testing in the available time period, 

particularly given the substantial 

number of products to be tested and the 

limited capacity of facilities to conduct 

such testing. On the second point, the 

petitioners stated that the Eae listings are 

useful to customers, because many 

utilities and other third parties operate 

a variety of rebate programs and other 

programs predicated on the Eae

descriptor. For this reason, the 

petitioners argued that removal of the 

listings would be undesirable for both 

manufacturers and consumers, 

potentially leading to confusion in the 

marketplace. Furthermore, the 

manufacturers would have to change all 

their product literature and Web sites 

where Eae is used by the current 

compliance date. In practice, 

manufacturers would have to 

communicate and explain the changes 

down their distribution chains to 

distributors, retailers and customers, 

and adjust inventory management and 

order systems. Because there is no 

requirement or reason to advertise Eso at 

the present time, manufacturers argued 

these efforts would represent undue 

burden and unintended consequence of 

the October 2010 test procedure final 

rule. 

Additionally, all petitioners made the 

point that the amended DOE test 

procedure for residential furnaces and 

boilers contains provisions for 

measuring standby mode and off mode 

energy consumption that reference the 

first edition of the International 

Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 

Standard 62301, ‘‘Household electrical 

appliances—Measurement of standby 

power,’’ but that a draft second edition 

of that standard was issued on October 

29, 2010, for a final approval vote. (DOE 

notes that IEC Standard 62301 (Second 

Edition) has been issued by the IEC with 

a final publication date of January 27, 

2011.) According to the petitioners, 

granting the requested extension of the 

compliance date would allow DOE to 

update the relevant references in its test 

procedure, thereby ensuring that 

furnace and boiler manufacturers are 

not subject to procedures with obsolete 

references. 

Fourteen petitioners from 13 

companies also expressed concern about 

the effects of the amended test 

procedure on the ‘‘e’’ descriptor. While 

not an official DOE descriptor, ‘‘e’’ is 

used by utility incentive programs and 

certain Federal agencies to identify 

electrically-efficient furnaces. The value 

for this descriptor is dependent on Eae,

and because the October 2010 final 

rule’s amendments to the DOE test 

procedure redefined Eae, the petitioners 

argued that some models may no longer 

be considered electrically efficient. 

According to these petitioners, the 

revisions appear to disproportionately 

affect the ‘‘e’’ value of units with lower 

input capacities, meaning that the 

required changes to this calculation are 

not readily apparent and will require 

more testing than originally anticipated. 

Therefore, the requested extension of 

the compliance date would provide 

additional time for adequate 

consideration of the ramification of the 

changes to the ‘‘e’’ descriptor. 

III. Summary and Conclusion 

Through today’s notice, DOE 

announces receipt of petitions 

requesting a 180-day extension of the 

April 18, 2011 compliance date in the 

October 2010 furnace and boiler test 

procedure final rule from the following 

27 companies: (1) Adams Manufacturing 

Company; (2) Allied Air Enterprises; (3) 

Bard Manufacturing Co. Inc.; (4) 

Boyertown Furnace; (5) Carrier 

Corporation; (6) Crown Boiler; (7) De 

Dietrich Boilers; (8) ECR International 

Inc.; (9) Goodman Manufacturing 

Company; (10) HTP Inc.; (11) Johnson 

Controls Inc.; (12) Laars Heating 

Systems Company; (13) Lennox 

International Inc.; (14) Lochinvar; (15) 

Newmac Furnace Company; (16) New 

Yorker Residential Heating Boilers; (17) 

Nordyne; (18) NY Thermal Inc.; (19) 

Peerless Boilers Heat LLC; (20) Raypak 

Inc.; (21) Rheem Manufacturing 

Company; (22) Slant/Fin; (23) Thermo 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 17757 

Products LLC; (24) Trane; (25) Triangle 

Tube; (26) US Boiler Company; and (27) 

Weil-McLain. 

The intent of the amended test 

procedure was to require manufacturers 

to test for standby mode and off mode 

power at this time only if they intended 

to publicize such information, and for 

the above-stated reasons regarding the 

volume of and limited time available for 

testing, DOE agrees that requiring all 

basic models to be retested before April 

18, 2011, would place an undue burden 

upon the petitioners. Likewise, DOE 

does not believe that it would be 

appropriate to prevent the 

dissemination of representations 

regarding auxiliary electrical energy 

consumption of residential furnaces and 

boilers, because consumers may find 

such information beneficial. 

Furthermore, DOE agrees that a 180-day 

extension would not be expected to 

harm consumers or undermine the 

purpose of the final rule. For these 

reasons, and given that the petitioners 

fulfilled their obligations under 42 

U.S.C. 6293(c)(3), DOE hereby issues 

this Decision and Order which grants 

the 27 petitioners above an extension of 

180 days for compliance with the 

amended provisions of the furnaces and 

boilers test procedure final rule that was 

published in the Federal Register on 

October 20, 2010. Accordingly, the 

petitioners must meet a new compliance 

date of October 15, 2011. With respect 

to Rheem’s request that DOE extend the 

compliance date to the end of the 

calendar year 2011, DOE reiterates that 

the maximum extension allowed by the 

statute is 180 days. As such, DOE denies 

Rheem’s request. 

DOE notes that this extension does 

not release petitioners from the 

certification requirements set forth in 10 

CFR 430.62. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 24, 

2011. 

Kathleen Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Office of Technology 

Development, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7579 Filed 3–30–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0820; Directorate 

Identifier 2010–NE–31–AD; Amendment 

39–16646; AD 2011–07–09] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Thielert 

Aircraft Engines GmbH Models TAE 

125–01, TAE 125–02–99, and 

TAE 125–02–114 Reciprocating 

Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This AD results 

from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

issued by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI describes the unsafe 

condition as: 

Service experience has shown that a case 

of FADEC channel B manifold air pressure 

(MAP) sensor hose permeability is not always 

recognized as fault by the FADEC. The MAP 

value measured by the sensor may be lower 

than the actual pressure value in the engine 

manifold, and limits the amount of fuel 

injected into the combustion chamber and 

thus the available power of the engine. A 

change in FADEC software version 2.91 will 

change the logic in failure detection and in 

switching to channel B (no automatic switch 

to channel B if MAP difference between 

channel A and B is detected and lower MAP 

is at channel B). 

In addition, previous software versions 

allow—under certain conditions and on 

DA 42 aircraft only—the initiation of a 

FADEC self test during flight that causes an 

engine in-flight shutdown. 

We are issuing this AD to prevent 

engine in-flight shutdown or power loss, 

possibly resulting in reduced control of 

the airplane. 

DATES: This AD becomes effective May 

5, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: The Docket Operations 

office is located at Docket Management 

Facility, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Strom, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 

Certification Office, FAA, Engine and 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

e-mail: alan.strom@faa.gov; phone: 

(781) 238–7143; fax: (781) 238–7199. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR 

part 39 to include an AD that would 

apply to the specified products. That 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on November 23, 2010 (75 FR 

71371). That NPRM proposed to correct 

an unsafe condition for the specified 

products. The MCAI states: 

Service experience has shown that a case 

of FADEC channel B manifold air pressure 

(MAP) sensor hose permeability is not always 

recognized as fault by the FADEC. The MAP 

value measured by the sensor may be lower 

than the actual pressure value in the engine 

manifold, and limits the amount of fuel 

injected into the combustion chamber and 

thus the available power of the engine. A 

change in FADEC software version 2.91 will 

change the logic in failure detection and in 

switching to channel B (no automatic switch 

to channel B if MAP difference between 

channel A and B is detected and lower MAP 

is at channel B). 

In addition, previous software versions 

allow—under certain conditions and on 

DA 42 aircraft only—the initiation of a 

FADEC self test during flight that causes an 

engine in-flight shutdown. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

received no comments on the NPRM. 

We updated the revision levels to the 

two referenced Thielert Operation & 

Maintenance Manuals, and corrected a 

manual number reference error in 

paragraph (e)(2) of this AD. 

Conclusion 

We reviewed the available data and 

determined that air safety and the 

public interest require adopting the AD 

with the changes described previously. 

We determined that these changes will 

not increase the economic burden on 

any operator or increase the scope of the 

AD. 

Costs of Compliance 

Based on the service information, we 

estimate that this AD will affect about 

112 engines installed on airplanes of 

U.S. registry. We also estimate that it 

will take about 0.5 work-hour per 

engine to comply with this AD. The 

average labor rate is $85 per work-hour. 

There are no required parts cost. Based 

on these figures, we estimate the cost of 

the AD on U.S. operators to be $4,760. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with RULES_2