This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

44895 

Vol. 78, No. 143 

Thursday, July 25, 2013 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[Docket Number EERE–BT–PET–0038] 

RIN 1904–AD05 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: First Co. Petition 

for Reconsideration 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) received a petition from Howe, 

Anderson & Steyer, P.C., on behalf of 

First Co., requesting that DOE conduct 

a rulemaking to amend certification 

regulations applicable to residential 

central air conditioners and heat pumps 

(together ‘‘CAC’’) to: collect Energy 

Efficiency Rating (EER) information 

from manufacturers through the 

Compliance, Certification Management 

System (‘‘CCMS’’) as part of annual 

certification reporting requirements; and 

publish the information in DOE’s 

Compliance Certification Database 

(‘‘CCD’’). As an interim measure prior to 

the completion of the rulemaking, they 

request that DOE collect EER 

information from manufacturers on an 

expedited and voluntary basis and 

publish EER information in the CCD. 

They contend that voluntary collection 

and publication of EER information on 

an interim basis is necessary to prevent 

harm to manufacturers and consumers. 

To the extent that the collection of EER 

information is subject to OMB approval 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

they further request that DOE seek OMB 

authorization for ‘‘emergency’’ or 

expedited processing of DOE’s request 

to collect EER information on a 

voluntary basis. DOE seeks comment on 

whether to grant the petition and 

proceed with a rulemaking on this 

matter. 

DATES: Any comments must be received 

by DOE not later than August 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be 

submitted, identified by docket number 

EERE–BT–PET–0038, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: FirstCoPetition

2013PET0038@ee.doe.gov. Include 

either the docket number EERE–BT–PET

–0038, and/or ‘‘First Co. Petition’’ in the 

subject line of the message. 

3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J, 

Room 1J–018, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585– 

0121. Please submit one signed original 

paper copy. 

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda 

Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Building Technologies Program, Room 

1J–018, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585– 0121. 

5. Instructions: All submissions 

received must include the agency name 

and docket number for this proceeding. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents, or 

comments received, go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.

gov. In addition, electronic copies of the 

Petition are available online at DOE’s 

Web site at the following URL address: 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/

appliance_standards/current_rule

makings-notices.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202) 

586–6590, or email: Ashley.Armstrong

@ee.doe.gov. 

James Silvestro, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of General Counsel, 

GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 

586–4224, email: James.Silvestro@

hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 

U.S.C. 551 et seq., provides among other 

things that, ‘‘[e]ach agency shall give an 

interested person the right to petition 

for the issuance, amendment, or repeal 

of a rule.’’ 5 U.S.C. 553(e). DOE received 

a petition from Howe, Anderson & 

Steyer, P.C., on behalf of First Co., 

requesting that DOE conduct a 

rulemaking to amend certification 

regulations applicable to residential 

central air conditioners and heat pumps 

(together ‘‘CAC’’) under 10 CFR part 

429, subpart B, to: (i) collect Energy 

Efficiency Rating (EER) information 

from manufacturers through the 

Compliance, Certification Management 

System (‘‘CCMS’’) as part of annual 

certification reporting requirements; and 

(ii) publish the information in DOE’s 

Compliance Certification Database 

(‘‘CCD’’). 

Manufacturers must certify, by means 

of an annual compliance statement and 

certification report, that each basic 

model CAC meets the applicable energy 

conservation standard. Under existing 

regulations, the annual reporting 

requirements include submission of 

various information by manufacturers, 

but not EER information. Under the 

direct final rule establishing regional 

energy conservation standards for CACs, 

the standard for CACs installed in the 

Southwestern Region includes a 

requirement for minimum EER. 76 FR 

37408 (June 27, 2011). However, the 

direct final rule did not amend existing 

certification regulations to require 

manufacturers to supply EER 

information through CCMS. The 

petition states that collecting EER 

information enhances the existing 

certification reporting system and its 

ability to enforce applicable energy 

efficiency standards, including regional 

standards. The petition further states 

that collecting and publishing EER 

information also benefits consumers, 

contractors, engineers, architects, 

utilities, manufacturers and state 

agencies that use CCMS/CCD as the 

government source of manufacturer 

certified efficiency information. Finally, 

the petition states that because of 

regional standards, CCMS/CCD must 

include EER information to continue to 

be a valuable resource for users in the 

Southwestern Region. 

As an interim measure prior to the 

completion of its requested rulemaking, 

the petition requests that DOE collect 

EER information from manufacturers on 

an expedited and voluntary basis and 

publish the EER information that is 

voluntarily submitted in the CCD. It 

contends that the voluntary collection 

and publication of EER information on 

an interim basis is necessary to prevent 

harm to manufacturers and consumers. 

The petition states that manufacturers 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
44896 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1The Southwestern Region contains the States of 

Arizona, California, Nevada and New Mexico. 

that rely on CCMS/CCD are likely to 

lose substantial business in the 

Southwestern Region until CCMS/CCD 

includes EER information, and that 

consumers will also suffer harm if they 

are unable to compare the EER of 

various models and potentially decide 

to purchase certain high-efficiency 

equipment that would better meet their 

needs. The petition notes that the 

potential harm to manufacturers and 

consumers can be averted by collecting 

information through CCMS on a 

voluntary basis and publishing it in 

CCD by January 2014. 

To the extent that the collection of 

EER information is subject to OMB 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, the petition further 

requests that DOE, pursuant to 5 CFR 

1320.13, seek OMB authorization for 

‘‘emergency’’ or expedited processing of 

DOE’s request to collect EER 

information on a voluntary basis. It 

states that the voluntary collection of 

EER information under the emergency 

procedure would place no additional 

burden on manufacturers because they 

already have and maintain the EER 

information that is derived from the test 

required under existing certification and 

compliance regulations. 

In promulgating this petition for 

public comment, DOE seeks public 

comment on whether to grant the 

petition and undertake a rulemaking to 

consider the proposals contained in the 

petition. By seeking such comment, 

DOE takes no position at this time on 

the merits of the suggested rulemaking. 

Issued in Washington, DC on July 19, 2013. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

Set forth below is the full text of the 

First Co. petition. 

May 13, 2013 

Via email 

John Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Office of Building Technologies (EE–2J), 

1000 Independence Ave. SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121 

Re: Petition for Rulemaking and Expedited 

Processing of OMB Clearance 

Dear Mr. Cymbalsky: On behalf of our 

client First Co., we request that the 

Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) conduct a 

rulemaking to amend certification regulations 

applicable to residential central air 

conditioners and heat pumps (together 

‘‘CAC’’) under 10 CFR Part 429, Subpart B, 

to: (i) collect Energy Efficiency Rating (EER) 

information from manufacturers through the 

Compliance, Certification Management 

System (‘‘CCMS’’) as part of annual 

certification reporting requirements; and (ii) 

publish the EER information in DOE’s 

Compliance Certification Database (‘‘CCD’’). 

As an interim measure prior to the 

completion of the rulemaking, we request 

that DOE collect EER information from 

manufacturers on an expedited and voluntary 

basis and publish the EER information in 

CCD. Voluntary collection and publication of 

EER information on an interim basis is 

necessary to prevent harm to manufacturers 

and consumers as described below. To the 

extent that the collection of EER information 

is subject to OMB approval under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, we further request 

that DOE, pursuant to 5 CFR § 1320.13, seek 

OMB authorization for ‘‘emergency’’ or 

expedited processing of DOE’s request to 

collect EER information on a voluntary basis. 

We respectfully request that these actions 

be undertaken as soon as possible in 2013. 

Certification Reporting and Regional 

Standards 

As you know, manufacturers must certify, 

by means of a compliance statement and 

certification report, that each basic model 

CAC meets the applicable energy 

conservation standard. Under existing 

regulations, the annual reporting 

requirements include submission of various 

information by manufacturers, but not EER 

information. 

DOE published a direct final rule on June 

27, 2011 establishing regional standards for 

various consumer products including CACs. 

Under the rule, while national standards for 

CACs remained 13 SEER, effective January 1, 

2015, the standard for CACs installed in the 

Southeastern Region becomes 14 SEER and 

the standard for CACs installed in the 

Southwestern Region 1 becomes 14 SEER and 

12.2 EER (for units installed with a rated 

cooling capacity less than 45,000 Btu/h)/11.7 

EER (for units with a rated cooling capacity 

equal to or greater than 45,000 Btu/h.) The 

direct final rule did not amend existing 

certification regulations to require 

manufacturers to supply EER information 

through CCMS. 

CCMS/CCD needs to include EER 

information. Collecting EER information 

enhances DOE’s existing certification 

reporting system and its ability to enforce 

applicable energy efficiency standards, 

including regional standards. As DOE stated 

when it proposed enhanced certification 

reporting in a prior rulemaking, ‘‘By 

requiring additional relevant data to be 

supplied in the certification report, DOE will 

be able to more effectively enforce 

compliance with the conservation standards. 

Additionally, the public would have 

information to use in evaluating the energy 

efficiency of a covered product or covered 

equipment.’’ 75 FR 56798 (Sept. 16, 2010). 

Collecting and publishing EER information 

also benefits consumers, contractors, 

engineers, architects, utilities, manufacturers 

and state agencies that use CCMS/CCD as the 

government source of manufacturer certified 

efficiency information. For example, CCMS/ 

CCD may be used by (i) architects and 

engineers to verify energy efficiency ratings 

of equipment for installation in their projects; 

(ii) utilities to qualify equipment for rebates; 

and (iii) state agencies to verify compliance 

with state laws. Manufacturers, especially 

those that do not list their products in a 

voluntary industry directory, rely on CCMS/ 

CCD as the official government source for 

energy efficiency information of their 

products. Because of regional standards, 

CCMS/CCD must include EER information to 

continue to be a valuable resource for users 

in the Southwestern Region. 

Interim Collection of EER Information 

The rulemaking requested by this petition 

is likely to extend well into 2014, even if 

commenced reasonably soon. DOE has made 

clear that regional standards are based on 

installation dates, so that CACs installed on 

or after January 1, 2015 in the Southeastern 

and Southwestern Regions must meet the 

new standards, including the EER standard 

in the Southwestern Region. 

Residential projects, especially multifamily projects, require substantial lead 

times. Architects, engineers and builders 

often select HVAC systems for such projects 

up to 9–12 months in advance of the install 

date. In practical terms, this means that an 

architect or an engineer selecting CACs for a 

multi-family project in the Southwestern 

Region must be able to verify the SEER and 

EER of the unit during the first quarter of 

2014 for an install date in January, 2015. 

CCMS/CCD, therefore, needs to include EER 

information by January 2014 in order to be 

an available resource for projects being 

‘‘spec’d’’ for installation in January 2015. 

In addition, the State of California has 

adopted new mandatory requirements for 

appliances including CACs. It is our 

understanding that under regulations 

promulgated by the California Energy 

Commission, effective January 1, 2014, 

energy efficiency ratings of CACs that exceed 

minimum federal standards (13 SEER) must 

be verified using data from an approved 

database or directory. Verification of both 

SEER and EER is required. CCMS/CCD is an 

approved directory under these regulations, 

but it cannot be used to verify ratings for 

higher efficiency CACs in California in 2014 

unless it includes EER information. 

Manufacturers that rely on CCMS/CCD are 

likely to lose substantial business in the 

Southwestern Region until CCMS/CCD 

includes EER information. The harm will be 

particularly great in California because of the 

new verification requirements for higher 

SEER/EER equipment. Consumers will also 

suffer harm if they are unable to purchase 

certain high efficiency equipment that would 

better meet their needs. 

The potential harm to manufacturers and 

consumers can be averted by collecting EER 

information through CCMS on a voluntary 

basis and publishing it in CCD by January 

2014. If adopted as an interim measure until 

the rulemaking is completed, the voluntary 

collection and publication of EER 

information could be accomplished quickly 

since manufacturers already have and 

maintain the EER information, which is 

derived from the ‘‘A’’ test required under 

existing certification and compliance 

regulations. 

Request for Emergency OMB Approval Under 

PRA 

The Paperwork Reduction Act imposes 

certain requirements on federal agencies 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 44897 

before collecting data from the public. It is 

our understanding that before a federal 

agency can require or request information 

from the public, the agency must (1) seek 

public comment on the proposed collections, 

and (2) submit the proposed collections for 

review and approval by OMB. Based on 

published guidance from the Executive 

Branch, it appears that the regular review and 

approval process can take anywhere from 6– 

9 months from the date the process is 

initiated by the agency. 

The rulemaking requested in this petition 

appears to involve the collection of 

information subject to PRA requirements. For 

the reasons stated above, however, a delay of 

up to 9 months after the initiation of the 

rulemaking will cause harm to manufacturers 

and consumers that can and must be avoided. 

Under certain circumstances, an agency 

may obtain expedited or ‘‘emergency’’ OMB 

review of an information collection request. 

The regulations applicable to a request for 

emergency processing are set forth in 5 CFR 

§ 1320.13 and state, in relevant part: 

(a) Any such request shall be accompanied 

by a written determination that: 

(1) The collection of information: 

(i) Is needed prior to the expiration of time 

periods established under this Part; and 

(ii) Is essential to the mission of the 

agency; and 

(2) The agency cannot reasonably comply 

with the normal clearance procedures under 

this Part because: 

(i) Public harm is reasonably likely to 

result if normal clearance procedures are 

followed; (or) 

(ii) An unanticipated event has occurred; 

. . . 

The circumstances described in this 

petition meet the requirements for expedited 

emergency review. Collecting EER 

information is based on regional standards 

that include minimum EER standards for 

CACs installed in the Southwestern Region. 

Collection of EER information, therefore, is 

essential to DOE’s ability to effectively 

enforce compliance with regional EER 

standards, and to provide complete 

information for the public to use in 

evaluating the energy efficiency of a covered 

product or covered equipment. [subsection 

(a)(1)(ii).] 

EER information must be collected and 

published in CCMS/CCD before completion 

of normal clearance procedures or significant 

public harm to manufacturers and consumers 

is likely to result. [subsection (a) (1) (ii), and 

(2)(i).] In addition, the adoption of 

regulations by the California Energy 

Commission applicable to higher efficiency 

CACs installed on or after January 1, 2014 

may be regarded as an unanticipated event in 

light of the January 1, 2015 effective date for 

regional standards under federal law. 

[subsection (a)(2)(ii)]. The voluntary 

collection of EER information under the 

emergency procedure would place no 

additional burden on manufacturers, because 

they already have and maintain the EER 

information which is derived from the ‘‘A’’ 

test required under existing certification and 

compliance regulations. 

Very truly yours, 

HOWE, ANDERSON & STEYER, P.C. 

Richard A. Steyer 

Attorney for First Co. 

cc: Ashley Armstrong, DOE, Laura Barhydt, 

DOE, First Co. 

[FR Doc. 2013–17894 Filed 7–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2013–0381; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NE–16–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca 

S.A. Turboshaft Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2B1, 2B1A, 2B2, 

and 2K1 turboshaft engines. This 

proposed AD was prompted by in-flight 

shutdowns caused by interrupted fuel 

supply at the hydro-mechanical 

metering unit (HMU). This proposed AD 

would require initial and repetitive 

inspections of the HMU high pressure 

pump drive gear shaft splines, cleaning 

and inspections of the sleeve assembly 

splines, and replacement of the HMU if 

it fails inspection. We are proposing this 

AD to prevent in-flight shutdown and 

damage to the engine. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by September 23, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Turbomeca, S.A., 40220 

Tarnos, France; phone: 33 (0)5 59 74 40 

00; telex: 570 042; fax: 33 (0)5 59 74 45 

15. You may view this service 

information at the FAA, Engine & 

Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA. For 

information on the availability of this 

material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Operations office between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

mandatory continuing airworthiness 

information (MCAI), the regulatory 

evaluation, any comments received, and 

other information. The street address for 

the Docket Operations office (phone: 

800–647–5527) is the same as the Mail 

address provided in the ADDRESSES

section. Comments will be available in 

the AD docket shortly after receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Frederick Zink, Aerospace Engineer, 

Engine Certification Office, FAA, Engine 

& Propeller Directorate, 12 New England 

Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; 

phone: 781–238–7779; fax: 781–238– 

7199; email: frederick.zink@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2013–0381; Directorate Identifier 

2013–NE–16–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD based on those comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact with FAA 

personnel concerning this proposed AD. 

Using the search function of the Web 

site, anyone can find and read the 

comments in any of our dockets, 

including, if provided, the name of the 

individual who sent the comment (or 

signed the comment on behalf of an 

association, business, labor union, etc.). 

You may view the DOT’s complete 

Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 

Register published on April 11, 2000 

(65 FR 19477–78). 

Discussion 

The European Aviation Safety Agency 

(EASA), which is the Technical Agent 

for the Member States of the European 

Community, has issued EASA AD 2013– 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1