Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48745 

Respondents: Persons who handle 

California kiwifruit. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

27. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 1. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 20.25 hours. 

Final Packout Report 

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting 

burden for this collection of information 

is estimated to be an average of 0.75 

hours per response. 

Respondents: Persons who handle 

California kiwifruit. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

27. 

Estimated Number of Responses per 

Respondent: 1. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 20.25 hours. 

Comments: Comments are invited on: 

(1) Whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

the use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Comments should reference OMB No. 

0581–New and the Marketing Order for 

Kiwifruit Grown in California, and 

should be sent to the USDA in care of 

the Docket Clerk at the previouslymentioned address or at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

All responses to this notice will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for OMB approval. All comments 

received will become a matter of public 

record and will be available for public 

inspection during regular business 

hours at the address of the Docket Clerk 

or at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Upon publication of the final rule, 

this collection will be merged with the 

forms currently approved for use under 

OMB No. 0581–0189 ‘‘Generic OMB 

Fruit Crops.’’ 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 920 

Kiwifruit, Marketing agreements, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 7 CFR part 920 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 920—KIWIFRUIT GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 920 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

§ 920.160 [Amended] 

2. § 920.160 is amended by adding 

paragraphs (f) and (g) to read as follows: 

§ 920.160 Reports. 

* * * * * 

(f) Each handler shall file annually 

with the Committee an End-of-Season 

F.O.B. Sales Report, due within 30 days 

after such handler has completed 

current season shipments, reporting 

gross f.o.b. sales value and number of 

containers by pack style and size for 

fresh market shipments for the season. 

The report shall also show the company 

name, contact person, and phone 

number of the handler. 

(g) Each handler shall file annually 

with the Committee a Final Packout 

Report, due within 30 days after such 

handler has completed current season 

shipments, reporting total containers 

shipped, by pack style for fresh market 

shipments, for each grower entity 

during the season. The report shall also 

include the grower entity and farm 

name, mailing address, the county in 

which the farm is located, and total 

acreage for each reported grower entity. 

Also, the report shall show the company 

name, contact person, and phone 

number of the handler. 

Dated: August 3, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–20116 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Parts 429 and 431 

[Docket No. EERE–2011–BT–CE–0050] 

RIN 1904–AC58 

Energy Conservation Program: 

Compliance Date Regarding the Test 

Procedures for Walk-In Coolers and 

Freezers and the Certification for Metal 

Halide Lamp Ballasts and Fixtures 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NOPR). 

SUMMARY: This document clarifies the 

compliance date by which 

manufacturers must begin to use 

portions of a recently promulgated test 

procedure (i.e., the April 15, 2011 final 

rule) when certifying walk-in coolers 

and walk-in freezers. This document 

also proposes regulatory text changes to 

reflect U.S. Department of Energy’s 

(DOE) intent that only manufacturers of 

components of walk-in coolers and 

walk-in freezers are required to submit 

certification reports. Additionally, the 

NOPR proposes clarifications as to the 

types of test data needed to support the 

certification of compliance per DOE’s 

existing test procedures for walk-in 

coolers and walk-in freezers and the 

recently promulgated test procedure for 

this equipment. Finally, this document 

proposes to extend the compliance date 

for certification of metal halide lamp 

ballasts and fixtures. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information regarding the notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NOPR) 

postmarked no later than August 30, 

2011. See section III, ‘‘Public 

Participation,’’ for details. 

ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted 

must identify the NOPR for walk-in 

coolers and walk-in freezers and metal 

halide lamp ballasts and fixtures by 

providing the docket number EERE– 

2011–BT–CE–0050 and/or RIN number 

1904–AC58. 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: WICF-MHL-2011-CE0050@ee.doe.gov. Include docket 

number EERE–2011–BT–CE–0050 and/ 

or RIN 1904–AC58 in the subject line of 

the message. Submit electronic 

comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft 

Word, PDF, or ASCII file format and 

avoid the use of special characters or 

any form of encryption. 

• Postal Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, 

U.S. Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–2945. Please 

submit one signed original paper copy. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, 950 

L’Enfant Plaza, SW., 6th Floor, 

Washington, DC 20024. Please submit 

one signed original paper copy. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, visit the U.S. 

Department of Energy, Resource Room 

of the Building Technologies Program, 

950 L’Enfant Plaza, SW., 6th Floor, 

Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586–2945, 

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48746 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards at the 

above telephone number for additional 

information regarding visiting the 

Resource Room. Please note: DOE’s 

Freedom of Information Reading Room 

(Room 1E–190 at the Forrestal Building) 

no longer houses rulemaking materials. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Ashley Armstrong, 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. E-mail: 

Ashley.Armstrong@ee.doe.gov. 

In the Office of the General Counsel, 

contact Ms. Laura Barhydt, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of the 

General Counsel, GC–32, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–5772. E-mail: 

Laura.Barhydt@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act (EPCA), as amended by section 

312(c) of the Energy Independence and 

Security Act (EISA 2007), requires the 

DOE to prescribe a test procedure to 

measure the energy use of walk-in 

coolers and freezers (collectively, walkins). See 42 U.S.C. 6314(a). DOE 

recently satisfied this requirement by 

issuing a final rule establishing a test 

procedure for manufacturers to use 

when measuring the energy use or 

energy efficiency of certain walk-in 

components: panels, non-display doors, 

display doors, and refrigeration systems. 

See 76 FR 21580 (April 15, 2011) (final 

rule prescribing walk-in test procedures) 

and 76 FR 33631 (June 9, 2011) (notice 

containing corrected formulas). 

Since the publication of that 

rulemaking, DOE recognized a need to 

clarify the date by which manufacturers 

must begin using the test procedure. 

The SUMMARY and DATES sections of the 

preamble text to the final rule stated 

that the test procedures will be 

mandatory for making representations of 

energy usage or energy efficiency 

starting October 12, 2011; that is, 180 

days after publication of the test 

procedure final rule. In this notice, DOE 

proposes to add regulatory text to clarify 

that the compliance date for using the 

test procedure for certifications of 

compliance is the same as the date for 

compliance with the energy 

conservation standards currently under 

development. DOE plans to issue the 

final rule by 2012 and manufacturers 

must comply with these standards 

within three years of publication of the 

final rule. DOE may also provide for a 

delayed effective date if the Secretary 

determines this three-year period is 

inadequate. (42 U.S.C. 6313(f)(4)(B)) 

DOE is also proposing to add regulatory 

text to clarify that only component 

manufacturers are required to submit 

certifications of compliance with the 

current standards. 

II. Need for Clarification 

DOE is publishing this notice to 

address questions from walk-in 

manufacturers regarding how to comply 

with their certification requirements 

under 10 CFR part 429, subpart B and 

Appendix A, which collectively 

prescribe the process for manufacturers 

to follow when certifying their 

commercial equipment as compliant 

under the relevant energy conservation 

standards. DOE recently indicated that 

walk-in manufacturers must comply 

with these requirements starting on 

October 1, 2011. 76 FR 38287, 38292 

(June 30, 2011). EPCA, through 

amendments established by the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007, 

Pub. L. 140–110 (Dec. 19, 2007) (EISA 

2007), specified a test procedure that 

must be followed when determining the 

insulation value of the insulating foam 

used in walk-in applications, and 

manufacturers have raised questions as 

to whether they should continue using 

these procedures when certifying their 

equipment or use the new procedures 

that DOE promulgated in April 2011. 

EISA 2007 prescribed several design 

requirements for walk-ins and specified 

that the R value (a representation of the 

thermal insulating characteristics of 

insulating foam) shall be the 1/K factor 

multiplied by the thickness of the panel, 

and the K factor shall be based on 

ASTM test procedure C518–2004. EPCA 

also prescribed certain temperature 

conditions for calculating the R value. 

(42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(9)(A)) Since 2009, 

these design requirements and test 

procedure provisions currently apply to 

all newly manufactured walk-ins. See 

42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(9). See also 10 CFR 

Part 431.306(a)–(b) and 10 CFR 

304(b)(1)–(4). 

In addition to the above provisions, 

EPCA requires that DOE issue a test 

procedure for walk-ins. See 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(9)(b). As noted above, DOE 

complied with that requirement by 

publishing a final rule prescribing a test 

procedure that covers the various key 

components comprising a walk-in. See 

76 FR 21580 and 76 FR 33631. 

Although the April 2011 test 

procedure continues to remain effective 

under today’s proposal, the procedure 

prescribed by the EISA 2007 

amendments must continue to be used 

by manufacturers for certification 

purposes. At this time, the statutorilyprescribed procedure for determining an 

R value must also continue to be used 

when making representations regarding 

the energy-related performance of the 

relevant walk-in components. To the 

extent that a manufacturer chooses to 

make representations regarding the 

energy-related performance of the 

relevant walk-in components beyond 

the R-value of the foam used in panels, 

the April 2011 test procedure must be 

used for those representations. Once 

energy conservation standards that are 

performance based are established in 

2012 for walk-in equipment, 

manufacturers must exclusively use the 

April 2011 test procedure when 

certifying their components as well as 

when making representations regarding 

that equipment’s energy-related 

performance. 

To clarify walk-in manufacturer 

responsibilities, DOE is proposing to 

add regulatory text to specify when the 

current and new test procedures must 

be used. DOE is also proposing 

additional language to clarify when tests 

must be performed on walk-in panels 

and when tests may be performed on 

insulation foam used in the construction 

of panels, but that has not yet been 

incorporated into a walk-in panel. DOE 

invites comment on its proposed 

resolution to this issue. Finally, DOE is 

also clarifying that manufacturers are 

not and will not be required to test nonfoam members and/or edge regions 

using the ASTM C518 test procedure 

prescribed in EPCA. Non-foam members 

and edge regions are only considered in 

the U-factor testing using ASTM C1363, 

which is part of the new DOE test 

procedures. 

In addition, DOE’s recent 

certification, compliance and 

enforcement rulemaking indicated that 

only manufacturers of walk-in cooler 

and freezer components are required to 

submit certification reports. 76 FR 

38287, 38292 (June 30, 2011). As such, 

DOE is proposing to add regulatory text 

to clarify that the WICF component 

manufacturers are the entities 

responsible for certifying compliance to 

the Department. 

Finally, DOE’s recent certification, 

compliance and enforcement 

rulemaking extended the compliance 

dates for certification of several types of 

commercial equipment. 76 FR 38287, 

38292. Specifically, DOE extended the 

certification compliance date for 

manufacturers of metal halide lamp 

fixtures to October 1, 2011. Since the 

issuance of the final rule, additional 

information has come to the attention of 

the DOE regarding a lack of sufficient 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48747 

test data to support certification on the 

full sample required by DOE’s 

regulations. To provide parity with 

similarly situated manufacturers of 

other types of commercial equipment, 

DOE is proposing to extend the 

certification compliance date further for 

manufacturers of metal halide lamp 

fixtures, requiring submittal of a 

certification report no later than 1 year 

following publication of a final rule. 

III. Public Participation 

DOE will accept comments, data, and 

information regarding this proposed 

rule no later than the date provided in 

the DATES section at the beginning of 

this proposed rule. Interested parties 

may submit comments, data, and other 

information using any of the methods 

described in the ADDRESSES section at 

the beginning of this notice. 

Submitting Comments via 

www.regulations.gov 

The regulations.gov web page will 

require you to provide your name and 

contact information. Your contact 

information will be viewable to DOE 

Building Technologies staff only. Your 

contact information will not be publicly 

viewable except for your first and last 

names, organization name (if any), and 

submitter representative name (if any). 

If your comment is not processed 

properly because of technical 

difficulties, DOE will use this 

information to contact you. If DOE 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, DOE may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

However, your contact information 

will be publicly viewable if you include 

it in the comment itself or in any 

documents attached to your comment. 

Any information that you do not want 

to be publicly viewable should not be 

included in your comment, nor in any 

document attached to your comment. 

Otherwise, persons viewing comments 

will see only first and last names, 

organization names, correspondence 

containing comments, and any 

documents submitted with the 

comments. 

Do not submit to http:// 

www.regulations.gov information for 

which disclosure is restricted by statute, 

such as trade secrets and commercial or 

financial information (hereinafter 

referred to as Confidential Business 

Information (CBI)). Comments 

submitted through www.regulations.gov 

cannot be claimed as CBI. Comments 

received through the Web site will 

waive any CBI claims for the 

information submitted. For information 

on submitting CBI, see the Confidential 

Business Information section below. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through regulations.gov before posting. 

Normally, comments will be posted 

within a few days of being submitted. 

However, if large volumes of comments 

are being processed simultaneously, 

your comment may not be viewable for 

up to several weeks. Please keep the 

comment tracking number that 

www.regulations.gov provides after you 

have successfully uploaded your 

comment. 

Submitting Comments via E-mail, Hand 

Delivery/Courier, or Mail 

Comments and documents submitted 

via email, hand delivery, or mail also 

will be posted to www.regulations.gov. 

If you do not want your personal contact 

information to be publicly viewable, do 

not include it in your comment or any 

accompanying documents. Instead, 

provide your contact information in a 

cover letter. Include your first and last 

names, email address, telephone 

number, and optional mailing address. 

The cover letter will not be publicly 

viewable as long as it does not include 

any comments. 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. If you 

submit via mail or hand delivery/ 

courier, please provide all items on a 

CD, if feasible. It is not necessary to 

submit printed copies. No facsimiles 

(faxes) will be accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file 

format. Provide documents that are not 

secured, that are written in English, and 

that are free of any defects or viruses. 

Documents should not contain special 

characters or any form of encryption 

and, if possible, they should carry the 

electronic signature of the author. 

Campaign Form Letters 

Please submit campaign form letters 

by the originating organization in 

batches of between 50 to 500 form 

letters per PDF or as one form letter 

with a list of supporters’ names 

compiled into one or more PDFs. This 

reduces comment processing and 

posting time. 

Confidential Business Information 

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 via email, postal mail, or 

hand delivery/courier two well-marked 

copies: One copy of the document 

marked confidential including all the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document marked 

non-confidential with the information 

believed to be confidential deleted. 

Submit these documents via email or on 

a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own 

determination about 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) when 

such information might lose its 

confidential character due to the 

passage of time; and (7) why disclosure 

of the information would be contrary to 

the public interest. 

It is DOE’s policy that all comments 

may be included in the public docket, 

without change and as received, 

including any personal information 

provided in the comments (except 

information deemed to be exempt from 

public disclosure). 

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory 

Review 

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 

This proposed rule has been 

determined not to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 

this action was not subject to review 

under the Executive Order by the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) in the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). 

B. Review Under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation 

of an initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis (IRFA) 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, 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
48748 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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 this proposed rule 

under the provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act and the procedures and 

policies published on February 19, 

2003. This proposed rule would merely 

extend the compliance date of a 

rulemaking already promulgated. To the 

extent such action has any economic 

impact it would be positive in that it 

would allow regulated parties 

additional time to come into 

compliance. DOE did undertake a full 

regulatory flexibility analysis of the 

original test procedures rulemaking. 

That analysis considered the impacts of 

that rulemaking on small entities. As a 

result, DOE certifies that, if adopted, 

this proposed rule, which would clarify 

the application of the test procedures, 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

C. Review Under the National 

Environmental Policy Act 

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.) and DOE’s implementing 

regulations at 10 CFR part 1021. 

Specifically, this rule amends an 

existing rule without changing its 

environmental effect and, therefore, is 

covered by the Categorical Exclusion in 

10 CFR part 1021, subpart D, paragraph 

A5. Accordingly, neither an 

environmental assessment nor an 

environmental impact statement is 

required. 

V. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of today’s NOPR. 

List of Subjects 

10 CFR Part 429 

Energy conservation, Household 

appliances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

10 CFR Part 431 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Energy conservation, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Issued in Washington, DC on August 2, 

2011. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Office of Technology 

Development, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, DOE proposes to amend parts 

429 and 431 of chapter II of title 10 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations to read 

as follows: 

PART 429—CERTIFICATION, 

COMPLIANCE, AND ENFORCEMENT 

FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

1. The authority citation for Part 429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 

2. Revise § 429.12(i)(6) to read as 

follows: 

§ 429.12 General requirements applicable 

to certification reports. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(6) Metal halide lamp ballasts and 

fixtures, [insert date 1 year after date of 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register]. 

3. Revise § 429.53(b) to read as 

follows: 

§ 429.53 Walk-in coolers and walk-in 

freezers. 

* * * * * 

(b) Certification reports. (1) The 

requirements of § 429.12 are applicable 

to manufacturers of components of 

walk-in coolers and freezers (WICFs), 

except that paragraph § 429.12(b)(6) 

applies to the certified component; and 

(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a 

certification report shall include the 

following public product-specific 

information: 

(i) For WICF doors: The door type, 

R-value of the door insulation, and a 

declaration that the manufacturer has 

incorporated the applicable design 

requirements. In addition, for those 

WICFs with transparent reach-in doors 

and windows: The glass type of the 

doors and windows (e.g., double-pane 

with heat reflective treatment, triplepane glass with gas fill), and the power 

draw of the antisweat heater in watts. 

(ii) For WICF panels: The R-value of 

the insulation (except for glazed 

portions of the doors or structural 

members). 

(iii) For WICF fan motors: The motor 

purpose (i.e., evaporator fan motor or 

condenser fan motor), the horsepower, 

and a declaration that the manufacturer 

has incorporated the applicable design 

requirements. 

(iv) For WICF lighting: The efficacy of 

the lighting including ballast losses, and 

a declaration that the manufacturer has 

incorporated the applicable design 

requirements. 

PART 431—ENERGY EFFICIENCY 

PROGRAM FOR CERTAIN 

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL 

EQUIPMENT 

4. The authority citation for part 431 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6317. 

5. Section 431.304 is amended by: 

a. Redesignating paragraph (b) as 

paragraph (c) and adding a new 

paragraph (b); and 

b. Adding in newly redesignated 

paragraph (c), new introductory text 

prior to paragraph (c)(1); and adding a 

new sentence at the end of paragraph 

(c)(5). The additions read as follows: 

§ 431.304 Uniform test method for the 

measurement of energy consumption of 

walk-in coolers and walk-in freezers. 

* * * * * 

(b) Testing and Calculations for 

Panels. Manufacturers shall use this 

paragraph (b) for the purposes of 

certifying compliance with the 

applicable energy conservation 

standards and making representations of 

the R-value of panels until January 1, 

2015. 

(1) The R value shall be the 1/K factor 

multiplied by the thickness of the panel. 

(2) The K factor shall be based on 

ASTM C518 (incorporated by reference; 

see § 431.303). 

(3) For calculating the R value for 

freezers, the K factor of the foam at 20 

degrees Fahrenheit (average foam 

temperature) shall be used. 

(4) For calculating the R value for 

coolers, the K factor of the foam at 55 

degrees Fahrenheit (average foam 

temperature) shall be used. 

(5) Foam shall be tested after it is 

produced in its final chemical form. 

Foam produced inside of a panel 

(‘‘foam-in-place’’) must be tested in its 

final foamed state and must not include 

any structural members or non-foam 

materials other than the panel’s 

protective skins or facers. A test sample 

less than or equal to 4 inches thick must 

be taken from the center of the foam-inplace panels. Foam produced as board 

stock may be tested prior to its 

incorporation into a final panel. 

(6) Manufacturers are not required to 

consider non-foam member and/or edge 

regions in ASTM C518 testing. 

(c) Testing and Calculations. 

Manufacturers shall use this paragraph 

(c) for any representations of energy 

efficiency/energy use (other than the RVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:11 Aug 08, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09AUP1.SGM 09AUP1

jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules 48749 

value of a panel) starting on October 12, 

2011. Manufacturers shall use this 

paragraph (c) for the purposes of 

certifying compliance with the 

applicable energy conservation 

standards and for all representations of 

energy efficiency/energy use starting on 

January 1, 2015. 

* * * * * 

(5) * * * Testing must be performed 

on a completed panel; foam may not be 

used for the test sample. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–20114 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2011–0789; Directorate 

Identifier 2011–NE–04–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Honeywell 

International Inc. TPE331–10 and 

TPE331–11 Series Turboprop Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for the 

products listed above. This proposed 

AD would require inspecting certain 

serial number (S/N) first stage turbine 

disks, part number (P/N) 3101520–1 and 

P/N 3107079–1. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of an uncontained 

failure of a first stage turbine disk that 

had a metallurgical defect. We are 

proposing this AD to prevent 

uncontained failure of the first stage 

turbine disk and damage to the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 23, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Honeywell 

International Inc., 111 S. 34th Street, 

Phoenix, AZ 85034–2802; Web site: 

http://portal.honeywell.com; or call 

Honeywell toll free at (800) 601–3099 

(U.S./Canada) or (602) 365–3099 

(International Direct). You may review 

copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803. 

For information on the availability of 

this material at the FAA, call (781) 238– 

7125. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Costa, Aerospace Engineer, Los 

Angles Aircraft Certification Office, 

FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, CA 

90712–4137; phone: (562) 627–5246; 

fax: (562) 627–5210; e-mail: 

joseph.costa@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2011–0789; Directorate Identifier 2011– 

NE–04–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

In May 2008, we received a report of 

an uncontained separation of a first 

stage turbine disk, P/N 3107079–1. The 

disk was installed in a TPE331–11U 

turboprop engine. That disk, which has 

a 20,000-cycle life, failed after 

accumulating 8,314 cycles-in-service. 

The fracture revealed a large meltrelated oxide cluster inclusion in the 

web area of the disk, which occurred 

during the forging alloy melting process. 

The disk was produced from Waspaloy 

material, from Heat Lot 9–7121, which 

was melted by Special Metals in 1980. 

We have determined that approximately 

360 turbine disks were produced from 

the same heat lot as the failed forged 

turbine disk and therefore may have 

similar inclusions. This condition, if not 

corrected, could result in uncontained 

failure of the first stage turbine disks 

made from these billets and damage to 

the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed Honeywell International 

Inc. Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 

TPE331–72–A2156, dated December 2, 

2008. The Honeywell ASB TPE331–72– 

A2156, dated December 2, 2008, 

provides S/Ns of the affected turbine 

disks and describes procedures for 

initial and repetitive fluorescent 

penetrant inspection (FPI) and eddy 

current inspection (ECI) of the first stage 

turbine disk. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of the same 

type design. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require: 

• For turbine disks that have an S/N 

listed in Table 1 of this proposed AD 

with 4,100 or fewer cycles-since-new 

(CSN) on the effective date of this 

proposed AD, performing an initial FPI 

and ECI within 4,500 CSN or at the next 

access, whichever occurs first. 

• For turbine disks that have an S/N 

listed in Table 1 of this proposed AD 

with more than 4,100 CSN on the 

effective date of this proposed AD, 

performing an initial FPI and ECI within 

400 cycles-in-service after the effective 

date of this proposed AD or at the next 

access, whichever occurs first. 

• Thereafter, for turbine disks that 

have an S/N listed in Table 1 of this 

proposed AD, perform a repetitive FPI 

and ECI at each scheduled hot section 

inspection, but not to exceed 3,600 

hours-since-last inspection. 

The proposed AD would require that 

you do these actions using the service 

information described previously. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS