### 16760 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2011 / Notices

Sub-recommendation 4—Amend 10 CFR Part 830 by incorporating the revised version of DOE Standard 3009– 94 into the text as a requirement, instead of as a safe harbor cited in Table
2

. The purpose of a ‘‘ safe-harbor ’’ is to provide a standard methodology that, if followed, will provide credible analyses and adequate safety. Nothing in the concept implies that ‘‘ safe-harbor ’’ methodologies are the only way to meet requirements. Of course, alternative approaches must be approved by DOE, and the criteria for accepting these alternatives should be clearly defined.

DOE is planning to review 10 CFR 830 (issued in 2001), which identifies nuclear safety requirements, but we cannot commit to the exact language prescribed in the Recommendation-that is placing Standard 3009 in the body of the rule. As a part of our review, we will update DOE Standard 3009, clearly identifying those provisions that are mandatory. When DOE Standard 3009 is not applied, appropriate means for reviewing and improving alternative methodologies will be established. This will assure implementation of DOE Standard 3009, where appropriate, while maintaining the flexibility to improve the standard, as needed. This approach has allowed DOE to make several important improvements to DOE Standards in the past. Details of the revision process will be provided in the Implementation Plan.

Sub-recommendation 5—Formally establish the minimum criteria and requirements that govern Federal approval of the DSA, by revision of DOE Standard 1104–2009, and other appropriate documents. The criteria and requirements should include: (followed by five paragraphs labeled a–e).

DOE agrees with the need for clear guidelines and requirements on the appropriate delegation of nuclear safety authorities and will revise DOE Standard 1104–2009 and other appropriate DOE documents to achieve this. DOE will implement the specific steps identified in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this sub-recommendation. However, DOE cannot commit to implementing paragraph (e) as written,because it implies that quantitative riskbased decision making must be established and used. The Department is exploring how quantitative methodscould be applied to support decisionmaking on safety issues at our sites and will keep the Board apprised of developments in this area. Today, deterministic and qualitative means are used. The Department agrees that the decision to approve safety bases must rest on a documented conclusion. The conclusion should indicate that the safety basis provides a reasonable assurance that the facility can be operated safely, that the hazards have been adequately analyzed, and that the engineered and administrative controls provide adequate protection for the public, workers and the environment. The Implementation Plan will outline DOE’s revision to standard 3009 and the safety basis development process, will clarify the safety basis approval process,and identify how the steps in this subrecommendation will be addressed.

Sub-recommendation 6—Formally identify the responsible organization and identify the processes for performing independent oversight to ensure the responsibilities identified in Item 5 above are fully implemented.

DOE has already identified the responsible organization for performing independent oversight for the Secretary: the Office of Independent Oversight, within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS). However, HSS Independent Oversight protocols and delegation processes will be reviewed and modified as necessary to assure adequate oversight of nuclear safety delegations. The Implementation Plan will describe the steps DOE will take, review and update the protocols and delegation processes.

We appreciate your advice and will continue working closely with the Board to improve the Department’s Directives in a manner that meets our shared objectives to the safe, effective, and efficient execution of our mission. We look forward to working further with the Board and its staff as we prepare the Implementation Plan.

If you have any further questions please contact Glenn Podonsky, Chief, Office of Health, Safety and Security, at

202–287–6071. Sincerely,

Steven Chu.

[FR Doc. 2011–7085 Filed 3–24–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6450–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY** 

**Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy** 

**[Case No. RF–018]**

**Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the**  **Petition for Waiver and Notice of Granting the Application for Interim**  **Waiver of Samsung From the Department of Energy Residential**  **Refrigerator and Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure** 

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

**ACTION :**  Notice of petition for waiver, notice of granting application for interim waiver, and request for public
comments.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces receipt of and publishes the Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (Samsung) petition for waiver (hereafter, ‘‘ petition ’’ ) from specified portions of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) test procedure for determining the energy consumption of electric refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. The waiver request pertains to Samsung’s product lines that incorporate multiple defrost cycles. In its petition, Samsung provides an alternate test procedure that DOE recently published in an interim final rule. DOE solicits comments, data, and information concerning Samsung’s petition and the suggested alternate test procedure. DOE also publishes notice of the grant of an interim waiver to Samsung.

**DATES :**  DOE will accept comments, data, and information with respect to the Samsung Petition until, but no later than April 25, 2011.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by case number ‘‘ RF–017, ’’ by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

• E-mail: AS

_ Waiver

_ Requests@ee.doe.gov Include the case number [Case No. RF– 017] in the subject line of the message.

• 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., Suite 600,


### 16761 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2011 / Notices

1 For editorial reasons, upon codification in the U.S. Code, part B was re-designated part A. Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one signed original paper copy.

Docket: For access to the docket to review the background documents relevant to this matter, you may visit the U.S. Department of Energy, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., (Resource Room of the Building Technologies Program), Washington, DC 20024; (202) 586–2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Available documents include the following items: (1) This notice; (2) public comments received; (3) the petition for waiver and application for interim waiver; and (4) prior DOE rulemakings regarding similar refrigerator-freezers. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards at the above telephone number for additional information regarding visiting the Resource Room.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE–2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–9611. E-mail: Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov.

Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC–71, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–0103. Telephone: (202) 586–7796. E-mail: Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background and Authority

Title III, part B of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291– 6309, as codified, established the Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles, a program covering most major household appliances, which includes the electric refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers that are the focus of this notice. 1 Part B includes definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation standards, and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. Further, part B authorizes the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to produce results which measure the energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating costs of a covered product, and that are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The test procedure for automatic electric refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers is contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1.

DOE’s regulations for covered products contain provisions allowing a person to seek a waiver for a particular basic model from the test procedure requirements for covered consumer products when (1) the petitioner’s basic model for which the petition for waiver was submitted contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedure, or (2) when prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1). Petitioners must include in their petition any alternate test procedures known to the petitioner to evaluate the basic model in a manner representative of its energy consumption characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iii).

The Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (the Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(l). Waivers remain in effect pursuant to the pro-visions of 10 CFR 430.27(m).

Any interested person who has submitted a petition for waiver may also file an application for interim waiver of the applicable test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(2). The Assistant Secretary will grant an interim waiver request if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the interim waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the petition for waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g).

II. Petition for Waiver of Test Procedure

On January 27, 2011, Samsung filed a petition for waiver from the test procedure applicable to residentialelectric refrigerators and refrigeratorfreezers set forth in 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1. Samsung is designing new refrigerator-freezers that incorporate multiple defrost cycles. In its petition, Samsung seeks a waiver from the existing DOE test procedure applicable to refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers under 10 CFR part 430 because the existing test procedure does not account for multiple defrost cycles. Therefore, Samsung has asked to use an alternate test procedure that DOE recently published in an interim final rule (75 FR 78810, December 16, 2010). III. Application for Interim Waiver
Samsung also requests an interim waiver from the existing DOE test procedure. Under 10 CFR 430.27(b)(2), each application for interim waiver must demonstrate likely success of the Petition for Waiver and address the economic hardship and/or competitive disadvantage that is likely to result absent a favorable determination on the application for interim waiver. ’’ An interim waiver may be granted if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the application for interim waiver is denied; if it appears likely that the petition for waiver will be granted; and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination of the petition for waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g).

DOE has determined that Samsung’s application for interim waiver does not provide sufficient market, equipment price, shipments and other manufacturer impact information to permit DOE to evaluate the economic hardship Samsung might experience absent a favorable determination on its application for interim waiver. DOE understands, however, that absent an interim waiver, Samsung’s products would not be accurately tested and rated for energy consumption because the current energy test procedure does not include test procedures for products with multiple defrost cycle types. Therefore, it appears likely that Samsung’s petition for waiver will be granted.

For the reasons stated above, DOE grants Samsung’s application for interimwaiver from testing of its refrigeratorfreezer product line containing relative humidity sensors and adaptive control anti-sweat heaters. Therefore, it is ordered that:

The application for interim waiver filed by Samsung is hereby granted for Samsung’s refrigerator-freezer product lines that incorporate multiple defrost cycles subject to the specifications and conditions below.

1. Samsung shall not be required to test or rate its refrigerator-freezer product lines that incorporate multiple defrost cycles on the basis of the test procedure under 10 CFR part 430 subpart B, appendix A1.

2. Samsung shall be required to test and rate its refrigerator-freezer product line containing relative humidity sensors and adaptive control anti-sweat heaters according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in section IV,

‘‘ Alternate test procedure. ’’


### 16762 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2011 / Notices

The interim waiver applies to the following basic model groups:

RS26*T*** RF266  GFSF6KEX** ** RSG257  RF267** ** GFSF6KKY  RF428** *** RF268  GFSL6KEX** ** RFG293  RF26X** ** GFSL6KKY  RFG295** ** RB194  GFSS6KEX** ** RFG296  RB195** ** GFSS6KIX  RFG297** ** RB196  GFSS6KKY** ** RFG298  RB197** ** 592 6570* RFG299**** RB214**** 592 6571* RFG237**** RB215  401.4100** ** RFG238  RB216** ** 401.40483800 RF4267  RB217** ** PFSF6PKX  RFG267** ** RF215  PFSS6PKX** ** RFG263  RF217** ** PFSS6SKX  RSG309** ** RF195  PFSS9PKY** ** RSG307  RF197** ** PFSS9SKY  RF263** ** DFSS9VKBSS DFSS9VKBWW RFG29P  RFG29T** ** DFSS9VKBBB DFSF9VKBWW DFSF9VKBBB

DOE makes decisions on waivers and interim waivers for only those models specifically set out in the petition, not future models that may be manufactured by the petitioner. Samsung may submit a new or amended petition for waiver and request for grant of interim waiver, as appropriate, for additional models of refrigerator-freezers for which it seeks a waiver from the DOE test procedure. In addition, DOE notes that grant of an interim waiver or waiver does not release a petitioner from the certification requirements set forth at 10 CFR 430.62.

Further, this interim waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of statements, representations, and documents provided by the petitioner. DOE may revoke or modify this interim waiver at any time upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the petition for waiver is incorrect, or upon a determination that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models’ true energy consumption characteristics.

IV. Alternate Test Procedure

For the duration of the interim waiver, Samsung shall be required to test the products listed above according to the test procedures for residential electric refrigerator-freezers prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix A1, except that, for the Samsung products listed above only, include:

1. In section 1, Definitions, the following definition:

‘‘ Defrost cycle type ’’ means a distinct sequence of control whose function is to remove frost and/or ice from a refrigerated surface. There may be variations in the defrost control sequence such as the number of defrost heaters energized. Each such variation establishes a separate distinct defrost cycle type. However, defrost achievedregularly during the compressor offcycles by warming of the evaporator without active heat addition is not a defrost cycle type. 2. In section 4, Test Period, the following:

Systems with Multiple Defrost Frequencies. This section applies to models with long-time automatic or variable defrost control with multiple defrost cycle types, such as models with single compressors and multiple evaporators in which the evaporators have different defrost frequencies. A two-part method shall be used. The first part is a stable period of compressor operation that includes no portions of the defrost cycle, such as precooling or recovery, that is otherwise the same as the test for a unit having no defrost provisions. The second part is designed to capture the energy consumed during all of the events occurring with the defrost control sequence that are outside of stable operation, and will be conducted separately for each distinct defrost cycle type. For defrost cycle types involving the defrosting of both fresh food and freezer compartments, the freezer compartment temperature shall be used to determine test period start and stop times.

3. In section 5, Test Measurements, the following:

Long-time or Variable Defrost Control for Systems with Multiple Defrost cycle Types. The energy consumption in kilowatt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent to:

Where: 1440 = conversion factor to adjust to a 24- hour period in minutes per day; EP1 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the first part of the test; T1 = length of time in minutes of the first part of the test; 12 = factor to adjust for a 50-percent run time of the compressor in hours per day; i is a variable that can equal 1, 2, or more that identifies the distinct defrost cycle types applicable for the refrigerator or refrigerator-freezer; EP2 i = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the second part of the test for defrost cycle type i; T2 i = length of time in minutes of the second part of the test for defrost cycle type i; CT i is the compressor run time betweeninstances of defrost cycle type i, for longtime automatic defrost control equal to a fixed time in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour, and for variable defrost control equal to (CT Li × CT Mi )/(F

× (CT Mi ¥ CT Li ) + CT Li ); CT Li = least or shortest compressor run time between instances of defrost cycle type i in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (CT L must be greater than or equal to 6 but less than or equal to 12 hours); CT Mi = maximum compressor run time between instances of defrost cycle type i in hours rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour (greater than CT Li but not more than 96 hours);
For cases in which there are more than one fixed CT value (for long-time defrost models) or more than one CT M and/or CT L value (for variable defrost models) for a given defrost cycle type, an average fixed CT value or average CT M and CT L values shall be selected for this cycle type so that 12 divided by this value or values is the frequency of occurrence of the defrost cycle type in a 24 hour period, assuming 50% compressor run time. F = default defrost energy consumption factor, equal to 0.20.
For variable defrost models with no values for CT Li and CT Mi in the algorithm, the default values of 12 and 84 shall be used, respectively. D is the total number of distinct defrost cycle types. V. Summary and Request for Comments

Through today’s notice, DOE grants Samsung an interim waiver from the specified portions of the test procedure applicable to Samsung’s new line of refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles and announces receipt of Samsung’s petition for waiver from those same portions of the test procedure. DOE publishes Samsung’s petition for waiver pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv). The petition includes a suggested alternate test procedure and calculation methodology to determine the energy consumption of Samsung’s specified refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles. Samsung is required to follow this alternate procedure as a condition of its interim waiver, and DOE is considering including this alternate procedure in its subsequent Decision and Order.


### 16763 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2011 / Notices

2 In DOE’s view, the current energy test procedure does not include test procedures for products with multiple defrost cycle types. For this reason, there is no basis for manufacturers’ claims that the amendment would impact energy use measurements. DOE has no documentation regarding the test procedures manufacturers are using to certify these products, and has received no petitions for waivers suggesting the need for any such test procedures.

3 Until these amendments are required in conjunction with the 2014 standards, manufacturers introducing products equipped with multiple defrost cycle types should, consistent with 10 CFR 430.27, petition for a waiver since the modified version of Appendix A1 set out in today’s notice will not include a specified method for capturing this energy usage. DOE solicits comments from interested parties on all aspects of the petition, including the suggested alternate test procedure and calculation methodology. Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv), any person submitting written comments to DOE must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner. The contact information for the petitioner is: Michael Moss, Director of Corporate Environmental Affairs, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 18600 Broadwick St., Rancho Dominguez, CA 90220. All submissions received must include the agency name and case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Portable Document Format (PDF), or text (American Standard Code for Information Interchange (ASCII)) file format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the author. DOE does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes).

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 two copies to DOE: one copy of the document including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination.

Issued in Washington, DC on March 18,
2011. Henry Kelly, Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. January 27, 2011 Catherine Zoi Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 Dear Assistant Secretary Zoi: Samsung Electronics America, Inc. ( ‘‘ Samsung ’’ ) respectfully submits this request Application for Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver to the Department of Energy ( ‘‘ DOE ’’ or ‘‘ the Department ’’ ) for Samsung’s single compressor refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles.
Reasoning

10 CFR Part 430.27(a)(1) allows a person to submit a petition to waive for a particular basic model any requirements of § 430.23 upon the grounds that the basic model contains one or more design characteristics which either prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures, or the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. Additionally, 10 CFR Part 430.27(b)(2) allows an applicant to request an Interim Waiver if economic hardship and/or competitive disadvantage is likely to result absent a favorable determination on the Application for Interim Waiver.

Current test procedures as prescribed in Appendix A1 to Subpart B of Part 430 ( ‘‘ Appendix A1 ’’ ) inadequately addresses refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles, providing Samsung little ability to represent the energy data of its refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost. DOE also recognized in 75 FR
78837 2 that Appendix A1 to Subpart Bof Part 430 does not address refrigeratorfreezers with multiple defrost cycles, which supports Samsung’s concerns about the ability to apply Appendix A1to Samsung manufactured refrigeratorfreezers. DOE also communicated that all manufacturers planning on marketing refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles must seek a waiver from the Department. 3

Samsung expects that 0 of its new 2011 refrigerator-freezer models will utilize the multiple defrost cycles. Without the Interim Waiver, Samsung will face economic hardship due to inability to accurately represent its refrigerator-freezer’s energy consumption, losing $ 00 in sales. For these reasons, Samsung believes that the granting of Interim Waiver and Waiver to Samsung is warranted.
Request

In 75 FR 78810 (December 16, 2010), DOE issued an interim final rule for Appendix A ( ‘‘ Appendix A ’’ ), effective April 15, 2011, that effectively addresses test methodologies for refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles. Samsung requests that the April 15, 2011 Appendix A test methodology be expeditiously granted for Samsung refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles.

The new test methodology of Appendix A, effective on April 15, 2011, is appropriate and necessary for our refrigerator-freezers with multiple defrost cycles. Meanwhile, Samsung believes for the time being that the existing energy efficiency limits are adequate. Samsung therefore does not seek an alternate energy efficiency limit for these models at this time.

Samsung requests that the efficient limits under § 430.32(a) are applied to the following Samsung manufactured basic models:

RS26*T*** RF266  GFSF6KEX** ** RSG257  RF267** ** GFSF6KKY  RF428** *** RF268  GFSL6KEX** ** RFG293  RF26X** ** GFSL6KKY  RFG295** ** RB194  GFSS6KEX** ** RFG296  RB195** ** GFSS6KIX  RFG297** ** RB196  GFSS6KKY** ** RFG298  RB197** ** 592 6570* RFG299**** RB214**** 592 6571* RFG237**** RB215  401.4100** ** RFG238  RB216** ** 401.40483800 RF4267  RB217** ** PFSF6PKX  RFG267** ** RF215  PFSS6PKX** ** RFG263  RF217** ** PFSS6SKX  RSG309** ** RF195  PFSS9PKY** ** RSG307  RF197** ** PFSS9SKY  RF263** **

Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver. I will be happy to discuss should any questions arise.

Sincerely, Michael Moss, Director of Corporate Environmental Affairs. [FR Doc. 2011–7089 Filed 3–24–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6450–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY**

**Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy** 

**State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB)**

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

**ACTION :**  Notice of open teleconference.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces a teleconference call of the State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92– 463; 86 Stat.770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register

. **DATES :**  Thursday, April 21, 2011 3:30 to 4:30 p.m. (EST) The call in number is


· Mail Drop 3005

· Benton Harbor, Michigan 49022

· Phone: 269/923-4647

· j.b.hoyt@whirlpool.com

J.B. HOYT DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS



### April 7, 2011

Mr. Henry Kelly Acting Assistant Secret ary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J 1000 Independence Avenue, SW. Washington, DC 20585–0121

Re: Case Number RF–017, Samsung Refrigerator Waiver Request

Dear Mr. Kelly:

On March 25, 2011 the Department granted an interim waiver in this matter to Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”). We a sk that this interim wa iver be immediately withdrawn.

An interim waiver is to be granted only if there is a high like lihood of the waiver ultimately being approved. That is not the case here as this test procedure situation is one which has not previously co me before the Department. Secondly, product in this configuration has been in the marketplace since at least 2010 without any waiver. Finally, we believe the test method granted is flawed.

Whirlpool Corporation will substantiate the flawed test procedure in written comments to be submitted prior to the April 25, 2011 deadline for such comments. We will show why the test procedure does not yield results representative of the actual energy consumption of this unit.

We also seek prompt withdrawal of the inte rim waiver as Samsung failed to properly serve Whirlpool with a copy of their waiv er request as required by the regulation.

Consequently, we respectfully ask the Depar tment to follow the complete process for considering a waiver request.

### Sincerely,

cc: Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov AS

_ Waiver

_ Requests@ee.doe.gov

, Dr. Michael Raymond, Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov Elizabeth Kohl, esq, Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov Michael Moss, Samsung, mikem@sea.samsung.com

# tll'YfJ iUi •
ELECTR ONI CS

April 

### 2 0 ,2 011

Mr. H e nr y K e ll y SAMSUNG E L ECTRONICS AMERICA

, IN C. QA Lab Amer i c a 18600 Broadwick Street Rancho Dominguez, CA 90220
TEL 310 900 5230 FAX 310 5375500

Act in g A ss i s t a nt S ec r eta r y , E n e r gy Eff i c i e nc y a nd R e n ewa bl e E n e r gy U

. S. D e p a rtm e nt of E n e r gy Buildin g T ec hn o l og i es Pro g r a m 

### 1000 Ind e p e nd e n ce A ve nu e , SW
W as hin g t o n , D C 

### 2 0 585- 01 21



### Re: Case Number RF-017, Samsung Refrigerator Waiver Request

D ea r Mr. K e ll y:

Sa m s un g E l ec tr o ni cs A m e ri ca , In c

. ( " Sa m s un g") h e r e b y pro v id es i t s r es p o n se to Whirlp oo l
Co rp ora ti o n 's ( " Whirlp ool") l e t te r d ate d A pril 7, 

### 2 011

, (e nti t l e d : Case Num be r RF -017,
Sa m s un g R e fri ge r ato r W a i ve r R e qu es t ) r e qu est in g th a t th e int e rim wa i ve r g r a n te d b y t h e D e p a rtm e nt o f E n e r gy ( " DO E " ) to S a m s un g o n M a r c h 

### 25, 2 011 b e withdr aw n

.

Whirlp oo l' s r e qu es t co n s i s t s so l e l y of co ncl u so r y r e m a rk s a nd i s unf o und e d fo r a numb e r of

r easo n s.

Fi r st

, as sta t e d in t h e F in a l Rul e a nd In te rim F in a l Rul e d ate d D ece mb e r 16

, 

### 2010 (75 FR 

### 788 10 )

, th e D e p a r t m e nt o f E n e r gy's ( " DO E " ) c urr e n t e n e r gy tes t p roce dur es d o n ot in cl ud e

test sta nd a rd s fo r p r o du c t s w ith multipl e d efros t cy cl e t y p es

. A cco rdin g l y , D OE ' s ow n rul es

s t a t e in p a rt t h at " m a nuf ac tur e r s introdu c in g produ cts e quipp e d wi t h mul t ipl e d efrost cycle

t y p es s h o uld

.. . p e ti tio n fo r a w a i ve r

... M a nuf ac tur e r s wh o a tt e mpt t o m eas ur e th e e n e r gy u se of s u c h pr o du c t s w ith o ut a w a i ve r wo uld b e un a bl e to ce rtif y th ese produ c t s. " 

### (75 FR 

### 78837)

In acco rd a n ce w i t h DO E ' s g uid e lin es, Sa m s un g prop e rl y a ppli e d f o r a n in te rim wa i ve r a nd

p e t i t i o n e d fo r a wa i ver o n J a nu a r y 27, 

### 2 0 1 1

, a nd a n i n te rim w a i ve r was g r a nt e d by DO E o n M a r c h 

### 25

, 2 0 1 1. 1

Seco nd

, as t o W hirlp oo l' s a ll ega ti o n th a t t h e tes t m et h o d g r a nt e d i s " fl awe d ," we wo uld li ke

to n ote t h at t h e test m e th o d g r a n te d t o Sa m s un g fo r t h e test in g of i ts mul ti pl e- d efros t

r ef r ige r ato r

- f r eeze r s i s th e sa m e as th at pr esc rib e d in DO E ' s Int e rim Fin a l Rul e

. Whirlp oo l
h a d a mpl e o pp o r t uni ty t o co mm e n t o n DO E ' s pr o p ose d t es t m e th o d durin g D OE's
rul e m a kin g pr ocess; t hu s , u s in g th e o pp o rtunit y t o co mm e nt on th e g r a ntin g of a n int e rim

wa i ve r fo r Sa m s un g ' s r e fri ge r a t o r t o c h a ll e n ge D OE's t es t m e th o d

- a n i ss u e th at h as a l rea d y bee n d ec id e d by DO E

- i s in a ppr o p r i ate

.

1 The proposed amendme nt s addi n g pr oce dur es to a ddr ess pr o du c t s wit h o n e compressor and

two or more evapo r a t ors are n ot sc hedul e d t o g o i nt o e f fec t until 2014

.

### Finally. although this issue has already been resolved, we note that Whirlpool erroneously
claimed that "Sam sung fa il ed to properly serve Whirlpool with a copy of their waiver request". Sam sung sent out a copy of its application for interim waiver and petition for
waiver to all identified stakeholders, including Whirlpool, at the same time that Samsung sent such application and petition to DOE. The attached document shows the delivery status of the
letter sent to Whirlpool and demonstrates that the waiver request was delivered to Whirlpool.

Accordingly, for all of the foregoing reasons, Samsung respectfully requests that Whirlpool's request be denied and that the interim waiver already granted by DOE to Samsung remain in
effect.

Samsung looks forward to working with DOE to address comments as they relate to this case.

Sincerely,

Michael Moss
Director of Corporate Environmental Affairs

Cc: Michael Raymond, MichaeI.Raymond @ ee .d oe

. govPrint page | Close

Detailed Results
Tracking no.: 470195804681 Select time format: 12H



### Delivered Delivered Signed for by: B.BROWN

Shipment Dates Ship date Jan 28, 2011 Delivery date Feb 1, 2011 11:32 AM Destination BENTON HARBOR, MI Signature Proof of Delivery

Shipment Options

Hold at FedEx Location Hold at FedEx Location service is not available for this shipment.

Shipment Facts

Service type FedEx 2Day Envelope Weight 0.5 lbs/.2 kg Delivered to Shipping/Receiving

Shipment Travel History

Select time zone: Local Scan Time

Date/Time Activity Location Details

Feb 1, 2011 11:32 AM Delivered BENTON HARBOR, MI

Feb 1, 2011 9:31 AM On FedEx vehicle for delivery SOUTH BEND, IN

Feb 1, 2011 7:51 AM At local FedEx facility SOUTH BEND, IN

Jan 31, 2011 3:14 AM At dest sort facility SOUTH BEND, IN

Jan 30, 2011 5:21 PM In transit MEMPHIS, TN

Jan 30, 2011 3:52 PM Departed FedEx location MEMPHIS, TN

Jan 29, 2011 3:14 PM In transit MEMPHIS, TN

Jan 29, 2011 11:41 AM Arrived at FedEx location MEMPHIS, TN

Jan 28, 2011 7:35 PM Left FedEx origin facility GARDENA, CA

Jan 28, 2011 3:40 PM Picked up GARDENA, CA

Jan 28, 2011 2:15 PM Shipment information sent to FedEx All shipment travel activity is displayed in local time for the location

1 of 12000 M 63

· Mail Drop 3005

· Benton Harbor, Michigan 49022

· Phone: 269/923-4647

· j.b.hoyt@whirlpool.com

J.B. HOYT DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS



### April 25, 2011

Mr. Henry Kelly Acting Assistant Secret ary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J 1000 Independence Avenue, SW. Washington, DC 20585–0121

Re: Case Number RF–017, Samsung Refrigerator Waiver Request

Dear Mr. Kelly:

On March 25, 2011 the Department of Ener gy (“DOE”) granted an interim waiver in this matter to Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”). These comments are in response to that waiver and recommend three specific actions by DOE:

1) That no permanent waiver be grant ed without correction of significant calculation errors in the testprocedure as out lined below. 2) As indicated in our lett er of April 7, 2011, we also request that the interim waiver in this matter be immediately withdrawn. 3) Finally, we point out that Samsung sought this waiver only after introducing product in the marketplace, in clear violation of the regulations (10CFR430.27(f) and (k)). Conseq uently, DOE should require that Samsung remove all such product from the marketplace and cease selling of such products until a pr oper waiver is granted.

Overview The current DOE test procedure for l ong-time automatic defrost freezer compartment (FC) energy calculations is reflected in 10CFR430, Subpart B, Appendix A1. This secti on does not address units t hat have separate defrost systems for the FC and refrigeration (RC) compartments, nor does the current test procedure provide guidance on how to test or measure units where FC and RC defrost schemes are tied together; i.e. where the RC always defrosts simultaneously with the FC but also def rosts one additional ti me midway between

### the FC defrosts. 1 

### Samsung’s waiver request currently pending before the Department seeks to extend this pr ocedure to include RC defrost energy measurement, which as this comment explai ns in detail below, produces illogical results.

FC Test Procedure The current test procedure for long-time automatic defrost freezer compartment (FC) energy calculations is as follows: 5.2.1.2 Long-time Automatic Defrost. If the two-part test method is used, the energy consumption in kilowa tt-hours per day shall be calculated equivalent to:

ET = (1440 × EP1/T1) + (EP2

− (EP1 × T2/T1)) × (12/CT)

Where:

ET and 1440 are defined in 5.2.1.1;

EP1 = energy expended in kilowatt-hours during the first part of the test;

EP2 = energy expended in kilowatt- hours during the second part of the test;

T1 and T2 = length of time in minutes of the first and second test parts respectively;

The first and second parts of the test are as defined in section 4.2.1, which is as follows:

4.2.1 Long-time Automatic Defrost. Ifthe model being tested has a longtime automatic defrost system, the test time period may consist of two parts. The first part would be the same as the test for a unit having no defrost provisions (section 4.1). The second part would start when a defrost cycle is initiated when the compressor “on” cycle is terminated prior to start of the defrost heater and terminates at the second turn “on” of the compressor or 4 hours from the initiation of the defrost heater, whichever comes first. See diagram in Figure 1 to this section.

1 Fed. Reg. vol. 75, No. 241, p. 78837 (December 16, 2010): “In DOE’s view, the current energy test procedure does not include test procedures for products with multiple defrost cycle types.”A ‐ End of compressor cycle just prior to defrost

B ‐ Start of defrost cycle

C ‐ End of first compressor cycle after defrost

D ‐ Start of second compressor cycle after defrost

E ‐ End of second compressor cycle after defrost 

### A B C D E



### The time period T2 prior to 2003 went from point B to point D in the diagram. In 2003 it was modified to point A to point D. This modification was to allow the energy test to capture the benefits of natural warming during a compressor off cycle just prior to defrost.

Explanation of E nergy Credit Phenomena The Samsung waiver proposes to utilize this approach for its RC defrost system as is done for the FC defrost system. But when applied to an RC defrost the result becomes a net energy credit from including the RC defrost energy. In other words, it’s as if the RC defros t system is creating energy, which is not logical. The following will explain how we arrived at this conclusion. Samsung model RFG297AAPN wa s energy tested at CSA. Due to its warm compartment temperatures at the warm/warm control setting this unit was tested at only this temperature control setting. Two tests were performed (energy saver on and energy saver off) and the average of those two tests was 573 KWh/yr. This unit has separate def rost systems for the FC and RC compartments. The current DOE test procedure does not address how to test such a unit. This unit’s

### FC and RC defrost schem es are tied together – t he RC always defrosts simultaneously with the FC but it also defrosts one additional time midway between the FC defrosts. Reportedly based on guidanc e from Navigant, CSA treated this separate RC defrost as a second defrost system with its own EP2 and T2 values, and then averaged the two EP2 and T2 values from the two defrost systems to determine the total ene rgy consumption. The result is an illogical energy credi t for the Samsung unit. In order to explain this energy credi t phenomena we elected to depict the average wattage during different time periods of operation. For example, for the EP2 and T2 value for a defrost system to add incremental ener gy it’s average wattage must be higher than the average wa ttage when no defrost is occurring, i.e. EP1 and T1. Inserted below is a portion of a spread sheet showing these calculations from the CSA test data, incl uding calculations us ing alternatives for defining the EP2 and T2 time periods:

Event Watt Hours Event Watt Hours

A 13/01/11 8:23:03 6451.6 A 14/01/11 2:54:32 7786.7

B 13/01/11 9:20:13 6458.6 B 14/01/11 3:51:00 7793.5

C 13/01/11 11:38:58 6746.2 C 14/01/11 6:16:12 8040.7

D 13/01/11 12:49:55 6754.8 D 14/01/11 7:11:53 8047.4

E 13/01/11 14:35:27 6942.9 E 14/01/11 8:45:00 8212.1

Duration Watt Hours Avg Watts Duration Watt Hours Avg Watts

A to B 0:57:10 7.0 7.3 A to B 0:56:28 6.8 7.2

B to C 2:18:45 287.6 124.4 B to C 2:25:12 247.2 102.1

C to D 1:10:57 8.6 7.3 C to D 0:55:41 6.7 7.2

D to E 1:45:32 188.1 106.9 D to E 1:33:07 164.7 106.1

Duration Watt Hours Avg Watts Duration Watt Hours Avg Watts

T2 per App A1 (A to D) 4:26:52 303.2 68.2 4:17:21 260.7 60.8

T2 per Whp RTS (B to D) 3:29:42 296.2 84.7 3:20:53 253.9 75.8

T2 from A to E 6:12:24 491.3 79.2 5:50:28 425.4 72.8

T2 from A to C 3:15:55 294.6 90.2 3:21:40 254.0 75.6

T1 (ie no defrost operation) 7:22:26 503.6 68.3 7:22:26 503.6 68.3 

## Energy Saver Off (Htrs Hi)

Time Time

FC Defrost RC Defrost



### For this test point the average wattage when no defrost occurs is 68.3 watts (i.e. EP1 and T1). The average wattage during FC defrost is 68.2, which understates the FC defrost impact. But most importantly, the average wattage for the RC defrost is 60.8 watts. This results in the ironic conclusion that including the incremental energy associ ated with the RC defrost actually reduces the measured energy consumpti on of the refrigerator.

### Below is a summary of the annual KWh for several different approaches to the defrost energy calculation. The current te st procedure calls for using time period A to D for EP2 and T2, and with that approach and using the averages for the RC and FC values the 573 KWh/yr from CSA is confirmed. Howe ver, if the RC defrost is removed from the calculatio n -- but the time period A to D remains unchanged, then the energy measurement increased by 5.6 KWh/yr to 578.1. This illustrates the illogi cal energy credit that occu rs when the RC defrost is included, as is proposed in the waiver. At a minimum the DOE should not allow Samsung to take this credi t from including the RC def rost’s incremental energy.

Kwh/yr RC
Defrost Impact

Rated energy Consumption 550.0

T2 per App A1, A to D, both defrosts 572.5

‐ 5.6

T2 B to D, both defrosts 590.2 3.2

T2 A to E, both defrosts 592.1 3.4

T2 A to C, both defrosts 592.2 3.1

T2 per App A1, A to D, FC defrost only 578.1

T2 B to D, FC defrost only 586.9

T2 A to E, FC only defrost 588.7

T2 A to C, FC only defrost 589.1 

## Samsung FDBM Impact of ADC Calculation Methods

Potential Alternative Measures To avoid an unintended energy credit under the current waiver request, a modification of the time periods for RC defrost measurement (s uch as B to D, A to E, or A to C) would yield a more reasonable 3.1 to 3.4 kWh/yr incremental additional energy consumption. Wh irlpool would pr opose using time period A to E since it includes the same number of compressor on/off cycles plus provides a more complete view of defrost recovery.

### For this particular refrigerator we woul d propose the most a ccurate depiction of its energy consumption would be 581.5 KWh/year – the 578.1 including FC defrost only per the curr ent App A1 test procedur e and then adding the 3.4 kWh/yr for RC defrost. This is an increase of 9.0 KWh/ year or 1.6% from its current test result of 572.5.

For the reasons stated in this comment, Whirlpool objects to Samsung’s waiver request, and requests that the interi m waiver granted to Samsung be immediately withdrawn. We further request that no permanent waiver be granted without correction of the calculation erro rs cited herein. Finally, DOE should require that Samsung remove all such product from the ma rketplace and cease selling of such products until a proper waiver is granted.

Sincerely,

cc: Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov AS

_ Waiver

_ Requests@ee.doe.gov

, Dr. Michael Raymond, Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov Elizabeth Kohl, esq, Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov Michael Moss, Samsung, mikem@sea.samsung.com

# 01:",,101.

ELECTRONICS



### May 6, 2011

Mr. Henry Kelly SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA

. I N

C

. QA Lab Amer i ca 18600 Broadwick Street
Rancho Dominguez

. CA 90220 TEL 310 900 5230 FAX 3105375500



### Acting Assistant Secretary

, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
U

. S. Department of Energy Building Technologies Program
1000 Independenc e Avenue, SW Washington

, DC 20585-0121



### Re: Case Number RF-017, Samsung Refrigerator Waiver Request

D ear Mr. K e lly:

Samsung Electronics America, Inc

. ("Samsung") hereby provides its response to Whirlpool Corporation ' s ( " Whirlpool " ) letter dated April 25, 2011 requesting

, inter alia, that the interim
waiver granted by the Department of Energy ( " DOE " ) to Samsung on March 25

, 2011 be
withdrawn.

As already stated in Samsung ' s prior letter dated April 20, 2011, Samsung sought a waiver
with respect to the product in question in accordance with the Final Rule and Interim Final
Rule dated Decemb e r 16

, 2010 (75 FR 78810) (the " Final Rule " )

. We will not reiterate the

statements made in our previous letter except to state that Samsung 's actions were proper and
in accordance with DOE ' s rules.

To the extent that Whirlpool claims that the test method published by DOE is somehow

" flawed ," we believe that this has been fully addressed by the relevant stakeholders prior to the implem e ntation of the Final Rule. The accuracy of DOE ' s test methods and calculations
i s not a matt er for Samsung to comment upon at this juncture in time, and therefore, has no bearing on Samsung ' s waiver request

, which was properly obtained in accordance with
DOE ' s rul es.

Further, Whirlpool 's allegation that Samsung somehow violated the applicable regulations i s both misleading and misplaced because at the time the products in question were introduced
in the market (prior to obtaining the interim waiver from DOE), there was no procedure in place for Samsung to seek a waiver for a product equipped with two or more evaporators and multipl e defrost cycles. Clearly, had such a procedure been in place at the time

, Samsung
would obviously h ave sought such a waiver.

Mor eove r , once the Final Rule was implemented by DOE in December 2010 (effective 30
d ays after the final rule publication date and mandatory for product testing starting Jun e 14,
2 011)

, Samsung mo ve d quickly to obtain a waiver in January 2011. As stated in our prior
l etter, Whirlpool had ample opportunity to comment on this entire process but chose not to do

so and is only raising this issue at this late hour. In essence, Whirlpool is now claiming that Samsung so m e how violated a rule that was not even in place when the products were introduc ed in the marketplac e.

### Samsung would like to also point out that the alternate energy consumption calculation presented by Whirlpool was also fully discussed prior to the publication of the Final Rule,
which was done only after conducting a full review of the procedure and taking into
consideration the comments of various stakeholders. This is all documented in DOE's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and the public meeting held on June 22, 2010. It 

### is also noteworthy
th a t Whirlpool itself supported DOE ' s proposed test procedure, as set forth in Appendix A of
the Final Rule.

Samsung's position is and has always been to provide its customers with high efficiency products enabled by superior technology

. Further, Samsung will follow whatever rules and guidelines are implemented by DOE. For its own reasons, Whirlpool is attempting to contest DOE ' s test methods and is using the interim waiver granted to Samsung as a smokescreen for
its actions. If Whirlpool has an objection to DOE ' s test methods, then it should address its

comments to DOE rather than claiming a violation by Samsung without adequate evidentiary

s upport.

Accordingly, for all of the foregoing reasons, Whirlpool's requests should be denied in their entirety

.

Sincerely

,

Michael Moss
Director of Corporate Environmental Affairs

Cc: Michael Raymond

, Michael.Raymond @ ee.doe.gov

### 59394 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Notices

www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/ssab/ minutes.htm.

Issued at Washington, DC on September 21, 2011. LaTanya R. Butler, Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011–24614 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6450–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY**

**Bonneville Power Administration**

**Big Eddy-Knight Transmission Project**

**AGENCY :**  Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Department of Energy (DOE).

**ACTION :**  Notice of Availability of Record of Decision (ROD).

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces the availability of the ROD to implement the Big Eddy-Knight Transmission Project in Wasco County, Oregon and Klickitat County, Washington. Construction of the Big Eddy-Knight Transmission Project will accommodate long-term firm transmission requests that BPA has received by increasing BPA’s 500-kV transmission capability to move power from the east side of the Cascade Mountains (along the Oregon/ Washington border) to load centers (such as Portland, Oregon) on the west side of the Cascades and to major transmission lines serving California.

As described in the Big Eddy-Knight Transmission Project Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (DOE/EIS–0421, July 2011), this project consists primarily of constructing a new, approximately 28-mile-long, 500- kilovolt (kV) transmission line and ancillary facilities between BPA’s existing Big Eddy Substation in The Dalles, Oregon, to a proposed new Knight Substation that would be connected to an existing BPA line about 4 miles northwest of Goldendale, Washington. For the transmission line, BPA has decided to build East Alternative Option 3. For the first 14 miles, the line will use double-circuit towers (combining the new line and an existing line on one set of towers) mostly on existing right-of-way. The remaining 14 miles of the new line will be built with single-circuit towers in a newly-established 150-foot wide transmission line right-of-way. BPA has also decided to build the small (about 1 mile) realignment of the East Alternative on the Oregon side of the Columbia River, as described in the final EIS. For the proposed new Knight Substation, BPA has decided to build Knight Substation on Site 1, which is on private property about 0.5 mile west of Knight Road. For the fiber optic cable necessary for system communications, BPA has decided to build the Loop Back Option, which will string fiber optic cable on the new transmission towers from BPA’s Big Eddy Substation to the new Knight Substation and back again. The project also includes new equipment at BPA’s existing Big Eddy and Wautoma substations. BPA will install about 134 new lattice-steel transmission towers that will have an average span length between towers of about 1,200 feet. The double-circuit towers that will be used for the first 14 miles will range in heightfrom about 170–250 feet tall; the singlecircuit towers that will be used for the last 14 miles will be about 108–200 feet tall. The towers on either side of the Columbia River will be about 407 feet tall on the Oregon side and 232 feet tall on the Washington side.

The conductor, fiber optic cable, and overhead ground wire for the new transmission line will be placed on these towers, and counterpoise (which takes any lightning charge from the overhead ground wire and dissipates it into the earth) will be buried in the ground at select towers. Marker balls will be placed on the overhead ground wire across the Columbia River and bird diverters will be installed on overhead ground wire at select locations. The towers on either side of the Columbia River will have lighting for aircraft safety. Road construction will include about 16 miles of new road, 9 miles of temporary road, 13 miles of existing road improvements, and 62 culverts in intermittent streams (many stream crossings will have more than 1 culvert). In addition, portions of county roads that will be used to access the line route will be improved as necessary.

All mitigation measures identified in the EIS that are applicable to the selected alternative are adopted.

**ADDRESSES :**  Copies of the ROD and EISmay be obtained by calling BPA’s tollfree document request line, 1–800–622– 4520. The ROD and EIS are also available on our Web site, http:// www.bpa.gov/go/BEK.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Stacy Mason, Bonneville Power Administration—KEC–4, P.O. Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208–3621; toll-free telephone number 1–800–622–4519; fax number 503–230–5455; or e-mail slmason@bpa.gov. Issued in Portland, Oregon, on September 16, 2011. Stephen J. Wright, Administrator and Chief Executive Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011–24610 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6450–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY**

**Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy** 

**[Case No. RF–018]**

**Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the**  **Extension of Interim Waiver Granted to Samsung Electronics America, Inc.**  **From the Department of Energy Residential Refrigerator and**  **Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure**

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

**ACTION :**  Notice of extension of interim waiver.

**SUMMARY :**  On March 25, 2011, the Department of Energy (DOE) published in the Federal Register a petition for waiver and notice granting an application for interim waiver to Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (Samsung) from energy efficiency test procedure requirements that are applicable to residential refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers. In today’s action, DOE is extending the interim waiver for 180 days.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S.

Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE– 2J, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–9611. E-mail: Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov

. Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585– 0103, (202) 586–7796; E-mail: Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov

.
**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  On March 18, 2011, DOE granted to Samsung an interim waiver from the energy efficiency test procedure requirements in 10 CFR part 430 that are applicable to Samsung’s electric refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers that incorporate multiple defrost cycles, and requested comments on Samsung’s petition. 76 FR 16760 (March 25, 2011). Pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27(h), an interim waiver will terminate 180 days after issuance or upon the determination on the petition for waiver, whichever occurs first. An


### 59395 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Notices

interim waiver may be extended by DOE for 180 days. Notice of such extension and/or any modification of the terms or duration of the interim waiver shall be published in the Federal Register and shall be based on relevant information contained in the record and any comments received subsequent to issuance of the interim waiver.

On August 17, 2011, Samsung requested an extension of its interim waiver. DOE recently published a notice reopening the comment period on its interim final rule for the refrigerator test procedure. 76 FR 57612 (Sept. 15, 2011). DOE intends to consider the comments received in response to this notice before publishing a decision and order concerning Samsung’s petition for waiver from the energy efficiency test procedure requirements for residential refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers in 10 CFR part 430, which are applicable to Samsung’s electric refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers that incorporate multiple defrost cycles. Therefore, DOE has determined that it is appropriate to grant an extension of the interim waiver to Samsung for an additional 180 days, or until March 12, 2012, or until the determination on the petition for waiver, whichever occurs first.

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 20, 2011. Kathleen Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Office of Technology Development, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2011–24611 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6450–01–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0038; FRL–8889–5]**

**Primus Solutions, Inc.; Transfer of Data** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  This notice announces that pesticide related information submitted to EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), including information that may have been claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI) by the submitter, will be transferred to Primus Solutions, Inc., in accordance with 40 CFR 2.307(h)(3) and 2.308(i)(2). Primus Solutions, Inc., has been awarded multiple contracts to perform work for OPP, and access to this information will enable Primus Solutions, Inc., to fulfill the obligations of the contract.

**DATES :**  Primus Solutions, Inc., will be given access to this information on or before September 26, 2011.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Mario Steadman, Information Technology and Resources Management Division (7502P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (703) 305–8338, steadman.mario@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
I. General Information A. Does this action apply to me?

This action applies to the public in general. As such, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION**
**CONTACT**

. B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0038. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket
at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is (703) 305–5805.
II. Contractor Requirements

Under the contract number EP–W– 11–024, the contractor will provide assistance to Antimicrobials Division reviewers to process applications for new registrations, new uses, amendments, and notifications within the time frame set forth by the Agency in order to meet the mandated timelines required under the Food Quality Protection Act and the Pesticide Registration Improvement Renewal Act of 2007. This contract involves no subcontractors.

OPP has determined that the contracts described in this document involve work that is being conducted in connection with FIFRA, in that pesticide chemicals will be the subject of certain evaluations to be made under this contract. These evaluations may be used in subsequent regulatory decisions under FIFRA.

Some of this information may be entitled to confidential treatment. The information has been submitted to EPA under sections 3, 4, 6, and 7 of FIFRA and under sections 408 and 409 of FFDCA.

In accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR 2.307(h)(3), the contracts with Primus Solutions, Inc., prohibits use of the information for any purpose not specified in these contracts; prohibits disclosure of the information to a third party without prior written approval from the Agency; and requires that each official and employee of the contractor sign an agreement to protect the information from unauthorized release and to handle it in accordance with the FIFRA Information Security Manual. In addition, Primus Solutions, Inc., is required to submit for EPA approval a security plan under which any CBI will be secured and protected against unauthorized release or compromise. No information will be provided to Primus Solutions, Inc., until the requirements in this document have been fully satisfied. Records of information provided to Primus Solutions, Inc., will be maintained by EPA Project Officers for these contracts. All information supplied to Primus Solutions, Inc., by EPA for use in connection with these contracts will be returned to EPA when Primus Solutions, Inc., has completed its work. List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Business and industry, Government contracts, Government property, Security

measures.

Dated: September 14, 2011. Oscar Morales, Director, Information Technology and Resources Management Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011–24285 Filed 9–23–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[FRL–9471–3]**

**Notice of Webcast Meeting of the Environmental Financial Advisory**  **Board (EFAB)**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s