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 methods 

could 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, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2011 / Notices 16761 

1For 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 residential 

electric 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 interim 

waiver 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.’’ 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
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 achieved 

regularly 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; 

EP2i = energy expended in kilowatt-hours 

during the second part of the test for 

defrost cycle type i; 

T2i = length of time in minutes of the second 

part of the test for defrost cycle type i; 

CTi is the compressor run time between 

instances 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 (CTLi × CTMi)/(F 

× (CTMi ¥ CTLi) + CTLi); 

CTLi = least or shortest compressor run time 

between instances of defrost cycle type 

i in hours rounded to the nearest tenth 

of an hour (CTL must be greater than or 

equal to 6 but less than or equal to 12 

hours); 

CTMi = maximum compressor run time 

between instances of defrost cycle type 

i in hours rounded to the nearest tenth 

of an hour (greater than CTLi 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 CTM and/or CTL value (for 

variable defrost models) for a given defrost 

cycle type, an average fixed CT value or 

average CTM and CTL 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 CTMi 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. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICESEN25MR11.025</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 58 / Friday, March 25, 2011 / Notices 16763 

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. 

3Until 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 B 

of Part 430 does not address refrigeratorfreezers with multiple defrost cycles, 

which supports Samsung’s concerns 

about the ability to apply Appendix A1 

to 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 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
2000 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 7, 2011 

Mr. Henry Kelly 

Acting Assistant Secretary, 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 ask that this interim waiver be immediately 

withdrawn. 

 An interim waiver is to be granted only if there is a high likelihood of the waiver 

ultimately being approved. That is not the case here as this test procedure situation is 

one which has not previously come 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 interim waiver as Samsung failed to properly 

serve Whirlpool with a copy of their waiver request as required by the regulation. 

Consequently, we respectfully ask the Department 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'YfJiUi• 

ELECTRONICS 

April 20,2011 

Mr. Henry Kell y 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. 

QA Lab America 

18600 Broadwick Street 

Rancho Dominguez, CA 90220 

TEL 310 900 5230 FAX 310 5375500 

Acting Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Building Technologies Program 

1000 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20585-01 21 

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

Dea r Mr. Kell y: 

Samsung Electronics Ameri ca, Inc . ("Samsung") hereby provides its respo nse to Whirlpool 

Corporatio n's ("Whirlpool") letter dated April 7, 2011 , (entitled: Case Number RF-017, 

Samsung Refrige rator Waive r Request) requesting that the interim waive r granted by the 

Department of Energy ("DOE") to Samsung o n March 25, 2011 be withdrawn. 

Whirlpool's request consists solely of co ncl usory remarks and is unfounded for a numbe r of 

reasons. 

First, as stated in the Final Rule and In terim Final Rule dated December 16, 2010 (75 FR 

78810), the Depa rtment of Energy's (" DOE" ) current energy test procedures do not incl ude 

test standa rds fo r products with multiple defrost cycle types . Accordingly, DOE's own rules 

state in pa rt that "manufacturers introducing products equipped with multiple defrost cycle 

types should .. . peti tion fo r a waive r ... Manufacture rs who attempt to measure the e nergy use 

of such products without a waiver would be unable to certify these products." (75 FR 78837) 

In accordance with DOE's guide lines, Samsung properl y applied for an inte rim waive r and 

petitioned for a wa iver on Janua ry 27, 2011, and an inte rim waiver was granted by DOE o n 

Marc h 25, 2011. 1 

Second, as to Whirlpool's a llegation that the test method granted is " fl awed," we would li ke 

to note that the test method granted to Samsung for the testing of its multiple-defrost 

refrigerator-freezers is the same as that prescribed in DOE's Inte rim Final Rule. Whirlpool 

had ample opportunity to comment on DOE's proposed test method during DOE's 

rulemaking process; thus, using the oppo rtunity to comment on the granting of an inte rim 

wa ive r fo r Samsung's refri gerator to cha llenge DOE's test method - an issue that has already 

bee n decided by DOE - is inappropriate. 

1 The proposed amendments adding procedures to address products with one compressor and 

two or more evaporators are not scheduled to go into effect until 2014. 
Finally. although this issue has already been resolved, we note that Whirlpool erroneously 

claimed that "Sam sung fa iled 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.doe.gov 
 Print 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 1
 

2000 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 Secretary, 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 Energy (“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 granted without correction of significant 

calculation errors in the test procedure as outlined below. 

2) As indicated in our letter 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)). Consequently, DOE should require that 

Samsung remove all such product from the marketplace and cease selling 

of such products until a proper waiver is granted. 

Overview

The current DOE test procedure for long-time automatic defrost freezer 

compartment (FC) energy calculations is reflected in 10CFR430, Subpart B, 

Appendix A1. This section does not address units that 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 defrosts one additional time midway between 
the FC defrosts.1

 Samsung’s waiver request currently pending before the 

Department seeks to extend this procedure to include RC defrost energy 

measurement, which as this comment explains 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 kilowatt-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. If the 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 Energy 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 defrost system is creating energy, which is not 

logical. The following will explain how we arrived at this conclusion. 

Samsung model RFG297AAPN was 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 defrost 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 schemes are tied together – the RC always defrosts 

simultaneously with the FC but it also defrosts one additional time midway 

between the FC defrosts. Reportedly based on guidance 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 energy consumption. The result is an 

illogical energy credit for the Samsung unit. 

In order to explain this energy credit 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 energy it’s average 

wattage must be higher than the average wattage 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, including calculations using 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 associated with the RC defrost actually reduces the 

measured energy consumption of the refrigerator. 
Below is a summary of the annual KWh for several different approaches to the 

defrost energy calculation. The current test 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. However, if the RC 

defrost is removed from the calculation -- 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 illogical energy credit that occurs when the RC defrost is 

included, as is proposed in the waiver. At a minimum the DOE should not allow 

Samsung to take this credit from including the RC defrost’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 (such 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. Whirlpool would propose 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 would propose the most accurate depiction of 

its energy consumption would be 581.5 KWh/year – the 578.1 including FC 

defrost only per the current App A1 test procedure 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 interim waiver granted to Samsung be 

immediately withdrawn. We further request that no permanent waiver be granted 

without correction of the calculation errors cited herein. Finally, DOE should 

require that Samsung remove all such product from the marketplace 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. INC. 

QA Lab America 

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 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20585-0121 

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

Dear Mr. Kelly: 

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 December 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 implementation of the Final Rule. The accuracy of DOE's test methods and calculations 

is not a matter 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 rules. 

Further, Whirlpool 's allegation that Samsung somehow violated the applicable regulations is 

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 

multiple defrost cycles. Clearly, had such a procedure been in place at the time, Samsung 

would obviously have sought such a waiver. 

Moreover, once the Final Rule was implemented by DOE in December 2010 (effective 30 

days after the final rule publication date and mandatory for product testing starting June 14, 

2011), Samsung moved quickly to obtain a waiver in January 2011. As stated in our prior 

letter, 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 somehow violated a rule that was not even in place when the products were 

introduced in the marketplace. 
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 

that 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 

support. 

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 height 

from 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 EIS 

may 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 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 186 / Monday, September 26, 2011 / Notices 59395 

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 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES