742 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 1997 / Notices

of the defueled S 1 C Prototype reactor

plant, located in Windsor, Connecticut,

pursuant to Section 102(2) of the

National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),

and in accordance with the Council on

Environmental Quality regulations

implementing NEPA procedures (40

CFR parts 1500-1508), and Department

of Energy regulations implementing

NEPA procedures (10 CFR part 1021).

The Department of Energy (DOE) Office

of Naval Reactors (Naval Reactors) has

decided to promptly dismantle the

defueled SIC Prototype reactor plant.

To the extent practical, the resulting

low-level radioactive metals will be

recycled at existing commercial

facilities that recycle radioactive metals.

The remaining low-level radioactive

wastes will be disposed of at the

Department of Energy Savannah River

Site in South Carolina.

Requests for further information

should be directed to Mr. Christopher G.

Overton, Chief, Windsor Field Office,

Office of Naval Reactors, U.S.

Department of Energy, P.O. Box 393,

Windsor, CT 06095, telephone (860)

687-5610.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : The SiC

Prototype reactor plant is located on the

10.8-acre Windsor Site in Windsor,

Connecticut, approximately 5 miles

north of Hartford. As a result of the end

of the Cold War and the downsizing of

the Navy, the S 1 C Prototype reactor

plant was permanently shut down in

March 1993. Removal of the spent

nuclear fuel from the SIC Prototype

reactor was completed in February

1995. After defueling, SIC Prototype

reactor plant systems were drained and

placed in a stable protective storage

condition. Since the S 1 C Prototype

reactor plant is the only activity at this

small site and there is no further need

for this plant, a decision is needed on

its disposal.

The alternatives analyzed in detail in

the Final Environmental Impact

Statement were the preferred alternative

of prompt dismantlement, a deferred

dismantlement alternative, and a "no

action" alternative of keeping the

defueled SIC Prototype reactor plant in

protective storage indefinitely.

The alternative that DOE is selecting,

the preferred alternative, involves the

prompt dismantlement of the reactor

plant. All structures will be removed

from the Windsor Site, and the Windsor

Site will be released for unrestricted

use. To the extent practical, the

resulting low-level radioactive metals

will be recycled at existing commercial

facilities that recycle radioactive metals.

The remaining low-level radioactive

waste will be disposed of at the DOE

Savannah River Site in South Carolina.

There will be an estimated total of

twenty-three radioactive material

shipments to the Savannah River Site

and to commercial recycling facilities.

One or two of the shipments to the

Savannah River Site will be by rail and

the remainder of the radioactive

material shipments will be by truck. The

Savannah River Site currently receives

low-level radioactive waste from Naval

Reactors sites in the eastern United

States. Both the volume and radioactive

content of the SIC Prototype reactor

plant low-level waste fall within the

projections of Naval Reactors waste

provided to the Savannah River Site,

which were included and analyzed in

the Savannah River Site Waste

Management Final Environmental

Impact Statement dated July 1995.

The deferred dismantlement

alternative would involve keeping the

defueled SIC Prototype reactor plant in

protective storage for 30 years before

dismantling it. Deferring dismantlement

for 30 years would allow nearly all of

the gamma radiation within the reactor

plant to decay away.

The "no action" alternative would

involve keeping the defueled SIC

Prototype reactor plant in protective

storage indefinitely. This alternative

would leave long-lived radioactivity at

the Windsor Site indefinitely.

Naval Reactors distributed the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement on the

SiC Prototype Reactor Plant Disposal in

June 1996. Comments from 28

individuals and agencies were received

in either oral or written statements at a

public hearing or in letters. Nearly all of

the commenters expressed a preference

for the prompt dismantlement

alternative. The Final Environmental

Impact Statement, which includes

responses to public comments, has been

issued and distributed to interested

parties.

From an environmental perspective,

no single alternative stands out as the

environmentally preferred alternative.

The no action alternative is the least

preferable since it would leave longlived radioactivity at the Windsor Site

indefinitely and does not provide for

eventual re-use of the Windsor Site.

Regarding prompt dismantlement and

deferred dismantlement, neither

alternative stands out in this

comparison, and neither is considered

on balance to be environmentally

preferred. Deferred dismantlement has

the advantage of lower occupational

radiation exposure while still providing

for eventual unrestricted release of the

Windsor Site. Prompt dismantlement

has the advantage of not requiring long

term commitment of the land for

surveillance and maintenance of the

S 1C Prototype reactor plant. The

occupational radiation exposure

associated with the prompt

dismantlement alternative is

comparable in magnitude to the

radiation exposure routinely received

during operation and maintenance of

Naval prototype reactors. Also, the

impacts associated with the prompt

dismantlement alternative have a higher

degree of certainty than those associated

with actions thirty years in the future.

Since prompt dismantlement will result

in unrestricted release of the Windsor

Site at the earliest time with little

occupational exposure risk to the

workers, and given that the impacts

associated with prompt dismantlement

have a higher degree of certainty, Naval

Reactors has decided to proceed with

the preferred alternative of prompt

dismantlement.

As discussed in the Final

Environmental Impact Statement, Naval

Reactors implements a large number of

conservative engineering practices in its

operations. These conservative

engineering practices will serve to

assure that environmental impacts will

be very small. No additional mitigative

measures have been identified which

are needed to further reduce the small

impacts which were described in the

Final Environmental Impact Statement.

Accordingly, all practicable means to

avoid or minimize environmental harm

from the preferred alternative have been

adopted.

Issued at Arlington, VA this 30th day of

December 1996.

F.L. Bowman,

Admiral, U.S. Navy, Director, Naval Nuclear

Propulsion Program.

[FR Doc. 97-169 Filed 1-3-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy

Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products: Granting of the

Application for Interim Waiver and

Publishing of the Petition for Waiver of

CFM Majestic Inc. from the DOE

Vented Home Heating Equipment Test

Procedure. (Case No. DH-008)

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, Department of

Energy.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY : Today's notice grants an

Interim Waiver to CFM Majestic Inc.

from the existing Department of Energy

(DOE or Department) test procedure

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 157
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 1997 / Notices

regarding pilot light energy

consumption and weighted average

steady-state efficiency for its models

A120, A125, A130, A132, A230, A232,

AB132, D130, D132, D230, D232, D332,

D334, D336, DR333, DR336, DR339,

DT336, DT339, DT343, DVR33, DVR36,

DVR39, DVRS3, DVT36, DVT39, DVT43,

DVTS2, FS22, FS32, FSDV22, FSDV32,

HE25, HE32, HEB32, and HEDV32

vented heaters.

Today's notice also publishes a

"Petition for Waiver" from CFM

Majestic Inc. CFM Majestic Inc.'s

Petition for Waiver requests DOE to

grant relief from the DOE vented home

heating equipment test procedure

relating to the use of pilot light energy

consumption in calculating the Annual

Fuel Utilization Efficiency (AFUE) and

the calculation of weighted average

steady state efficiency of its models

A120, A125, A130, A132, A230, A232,

A13132, D130, D132, D230, D232, D332,

D334, D336, DR333, DR336, DR339,

DT336, DT339, DT343, DVR33, DVR36,

DVR39, DVRS3, DVT36, DVT39, DVT43,

DVTS2, FS22, FS32, FSDV22, FSDV32,

HE25, HE32, HEB32, and HEDV32

vented heaters. CFM Majestic Inc. seeks

to delete the required pilot light

measurement (QE,) in the calculation of

AFUE when the pilot is off, and to test

at a minimum fuel input rate of twothirds of the maximum fuel input rate

instead of the specified 50 percent ± 5

percent of the maximum fuel input rate

in the calculation of AFUE. The

Department is soliciting comments,

data, and information respecting the

Petition for Waiver.

DATES : DOE will accept comments, data,

and information not later than February

5, 1997.

ADDRESSES : Written comments and

statements shall be sent to: Department

of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy, Case No. DH008, Mail Stop EE-43, Room 1J-018,

Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-

0121, (202) 586-7140.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William W. Hui

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy

Mail Stop EE-43

Forrestal Building

1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20585-0121

(202) 586-9145

Eugene Margolis, Esq.

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of General Counsel

Mail Stop GC-72

Forrestal Building

1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20585-0103

(202) 586-9507

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Energy Conservation Program for

Consumer Products (other than

automobiles) was established pursuant

to the Energy Policy and Conservation

Act, as amended (EPCA), which requires

DOE to prescribe standardized test

procedures to measure the energy

consumption of certain consumer

products, including vented home

heating equipment. The intent of the

test procedures is to provide a

comparable measure of energy

consumption that will assist consumers

in making informed purchasing

decisions. These test procedures appear

at Title 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B.

The Department amended the test

procedure rules to provide for a waiver

process by adding § 430.27 to Title 10

CFR Part 430. 45 FR 64108, September

26, 1980. Subsequently, DOE amended

the waiver process to allow the

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency

and Renewable Energy (Assistant

Secretary) to grant an Interim Waiver

from test procedure requirements to

manufacturers that have petitioned DOE

for a waiver of such prescribed test

procedures. Title 10 CFR Part 430,

§ 430.27 (a) (2).

The waiver process allows the

Assistant Secretary to waive temporarily

test procedures for a particular basic

model when a petitioner shows that the

basic model contains one or more

design characteristics which prevent

testing according to the prescribed test

procedures, or when the prescribed test

procedures may evaluate the basic

model in a manner so unrepresentative

of its true energy consumption as to

provide materially inaccurate

comparative data. Waivers generally

remain in effect until final test

procedure amendments become

effective, resolving the problem that is

the subject of the waiver.

An Interim Waiver will 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 on the Petition

for Waiver. Title 10 CFR Part 430,

§ 430.27(g). An Interim Waiver remains

in effect for a period of 180 days, or

until DOE issues a determination on the

Petition for Waiver, whichever is

sooner, and may be extended for an

additional 180 days, if necessary.

On October 31, 1996, CFM Majestic

Inc. filed an Application for Interim

Waiver and a Petition for Waiver

regarding (a) pilot light energy

743

consumption and (b) weighted average

steady state efficiency.

CFM Majestic Inc. seeks an Interim

Waiver from the DOE test provisions in

section 3.5 of Title 10 CFR Part 430,

Subpart B, Appendix 0, that requires

measurement of energy input rate of the

pilot light (Qp), and the use of this data

in section 4.2.6 for the calculation of

AFUE, where:

AFUE = (4400T1 ssTluQin-max)/

(4400r1ssQin-max + 2.5(4600)iuQp)

Instead, CFM Majestic Inc. requests

that it be allowed to delete Qp and

accordingly, the (2.5(4600)rl„ Qp) term

in the calculation of AFUE. CFM

Majestic Inc. states that instructions to

turn off the transient pilot by the user

when the heater is not in use are in the

User Instruction Manual and on a label

adjacent to the gas control valve.

Therefore, the additional energy savings

that result when the pilot is turned off

(Qp = 0) should be credited. Since the

current DOE test procedure does not

address pilot light energy savings, CFM

Majestic Inc. asks that the Interim

Waiver be granted.

CFM Majestic Inc. also seeks an

Interim Waiver from the DOE test

provisions in section 3.1.1 of Title 10

CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix 0,

which requires steady state efficiency of

manually controlled vented heaters with

various input rates to be determined at

a fuel input rate of 50 percent ± 5

percent of the maximum fuel input rate,

and the use of this data in section 4.2.4

to determine the weighted average

steady state efficiency needed in the

calculation of AFUE. Instead, CFM

Majestic Inc. requests that it be allowed

to determine steady state efficiency,

weighted average steady state efficiency,

and AFUE at a minimum fuel input rate

of two-thirds of the maximum fuel input

rate for its manually controlled vented

heaters which do not adjust to an input

rate as low as 50 percent ± 5 percent.

Since the current DOE test procedure

does not address steady state testing for

manually controlled vented heaters with

various input rates at fuel input rates

other than 50 percent ± 5 percent of the

maximum fuel input rate, CFM Majestic

Inc. asks that the waiver be granted.

Previous Petitions for Waiver to

exclude the pilot light energy input term

in the calculation of AFUE for home

heating equipment with a manual

transient pilot control and allowance to

determine weighted average steady state

efficiency used in the calculation of

AFUE at a minimum fuel input rate no

greater than two-thirds of the maximum

fuel input rate instead of the specified

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 157
744 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 1997 / Notices

50 percent ± 5 percent of the maximum

fuel input rate have been granted by

DOE to Appalachian Stove and

Fabricators, Inc., 56 FR 51711, October

15, 1991; Valor Incorporated, 56 FR

51714, October 15, 1991; CFM

International Inc., 61 FR 17287, April

19, 1996; Vermont Castings, Inc., 61 FR

17290, April 19, 1996; Superior

Fireplace Company, 61 FR 17885, April

23, 1996; and Vermont Castings, Inc., 61

FR 57857, November 8, 1996.

Thus, it appears likely that CFM

Majestic Inc.'s Petition for Waiver for

pilot light and weighted average steady

state efficiency for home heating

equipment will be granted. In those

instances where the likely success of the

Petition for Waiver has been

demonstrated based upon DOE having

granted a waiver for a similar product

design, it is in the public interest to

have similar products tested and rated

for energy consumption on a

comparable basis.

Therefore, based on the above, DOE is

granting CFM Majestic Inc. an Interim

Waiver for its models A120, A125,

A130, A132, A230, A232, A13132, D130,

D132, D230, D232, D332, D334, D336,

DR333, DR336, DR339, DT336, DT339,

DT343, DVR33, DVR36, DVR39, DVRS3,

DVT36, DVT39, DVT43, DVTS2, FS22,

FS32, FSDV22, FSDV32, HE25, HE32,

HEB32, and HEDV32 vented heaters.

CFM Majestic Inc. shall be permitted to

test its models A120, A125, A130, A132,

A230, A232, A13132, D130, D132, D230,

D232, D332, D334, D336, DR333,

DR336, DR339, DT336, DT339, DT343,

DVR33, DVR36, DVR39, DVRS3, DVT36,

DVT39, DVT43, DVTS2, FS22, FS32,

FSDV22, FSDV32, HE25, HE32, HEB32,

and HEDV32 vented heaters on the basis

of the test procedures specified in Title

10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix

0, with the modifications set forth

below:

(i) Delete paragraph 3.5 of Appendix

0.

(ii) Delete paragraph 4.2.4 of

Appendix 0 and replace with the

following paragraph:

4.2.4 Weighted Average Steady-State

Efficiency. (a) For manually controlled

heaters with various input rates, the

weighted average steady-state efficiency

(TISS-WT) is:

(1) At 50 percent ± 5 percent of the

maximum fuel input rate as measured in

either section 3.1.1 to this appendix for

manually controlled gas vented heaters

or section 3.1.2 to this appendix for

manually controlled oil vented heaters,

or

(2) At the minimum fuel input rate as

measured in either section 3.1.1 to this

appendix for manually controlled gas

vented heaters or section 3.1.2 to this

appendix for manually controlled oil

vented heaters if the design of the heater

is such that 50 percent ± 5 percent of the

maximum fuel input rate can not be set,

provided the tested input rate is no

greater than two-thirds of maximum

input rate of the heater.

(b) For manually controlled heater

with one single firing rate, the weighted

average steady-state efficiency is the

steady-state efficiency measured at the

single firing rate.

(iii) Delete paragraph 4.2.6 of

Appendix 0 and replace with the

following paragraph:

4.2.6 Annual Fuel Utilization

Efficiency. For manually controlled

vented heaters, calculate the Annual

Fuel Utilization Efficiency (AFUE) as a

percent and defined as:

AFUE = rl„

Where:

rlq = as defined in section 4.2.5 of this

appendix.

(iv) With the exception of the

modification set forth above, CFM

Majestic Inc. shall comply in all

respects with the procedures specified

in Appendix 0 of Title 10 CFR Part 430,

Subpart B.

This Interim Waiver is based upon the

presumed validity of statements and all

allegations submitted by the company.

This Interim Waiver may be removed or

modified at any time upon a

determination that the factual basis

underlying the Application is incorrect.

This Interim Waiver is effective on the

date of issuance by the Assistant

Secretary for the Office of Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy. The

Interim Waiver shall remain in effect for

a period of 180 days or until DOE acts

on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is

sooner, and may be extended for an

additional 180-day period, if necessary.

CFM Majestic Inc.'s Petition for

Waiver requests DOE to grant relief from

the DOE vented home heating

equipment relating to the pilot light and

weighted average steady state efficiency.

CFM Majestic Inc. seeks (a) to exclude

the pilot light energy consumption in

the calculation of AFUE, and (b) to

determine the weighted average steady

state efficiency used in the calculation

of AFUE at a minimum fuel input rate

of two-thirds of the maximum fuel input

rate instead of the specified 50 percent

± 5 percent of the maximum fuel input

rate. Pursuant to paragraph (b) of Title

10 CFR Part 430.27, the Department is

hereby publishing the "Petition for

Waiver."

The Department solicits comments,

data, and information respecting the

Petition.

Issued in Washington, DC December 27,

1996.

Christine A. Ervin,

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy.

October 31, 1996.

The Honorable Christine Ervin,

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency &

Renewable Energy,

United States Department of Energy,

Forrestal Building,

1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20585,

USA.

Dear Madame: We would like to inform

you that our name was recently changed to

reflect the current growth in our company.

Accordingly, CFM International Inc. which

was previously granted with the same

waivers mentioned below was changed to

CFM Majestic Inc.

Furthermore, CFM Majestic Inc. now have

four subsidiaries namely, The CFM Majestic

Products Company; The Majestic Products

Company; Vermont Casting Inc.; and

Timberline Gas Logs Inc.

CFM Majestic Inc. models DV32, DV34,

DV36, DV40, DVS2, DVS3, FA20, FS30,

FSDV30, HE30, HEDV30/HEDV30-1 which

were granted waivers for pilot energy

consumption relief for manually controlled

heaters in the calculation of Annual Fuel

Utilization Efficiency (AFUE) and calculation

procedure for weighted average steady state

efficiency for manually controlled heaters

with various input rates (please refer to

Federal Register Notice dated Dec. 28, 1995

& April 19, 1996-Case No. DH-004)-have

been upgraded with new logs, new ceramic

front burner and new model number namely

DVR33, DVR36, DVT36, DVT43, DVTS2,

DVRS3, HE25, FS32, FSDV32, HE32, HEB32,

HEDV32 respectively. However, the same

transient pilot and manually controlled gas

valve which were petitioned and granted in

the aforementioned waivers were used to

models DVR33, DVR36, DVT36, DVT43,

DVTS2, DVRS3, HE25, FS32, FSDV32, HE32,

HEB32, HEDV32.

Also, we would like to inform you that

models HE40 and FADV20 which were

granted waivers for pilot energy consumption

relief for manually controlled heaters in the

calculation of Annual Fuel Utilization

Efficiency (AFUE) and calculation procedure

for weighted average steady state efficiency

for manually controlled heaters with various

input rates (please refer to Federal Register

Notice dated Dec. 28, 1995 & April 19,

1996-Case No. DH-004) will not be

manufactured, hence waivers previously

granted to these models are no longer

required.

CFM Majestic Inc. would like to submit a

Petition for Waiver and an Application for

Interim Waiver pursuant to Title 10 Code of

Federal Regulations 430.27, as amended on

November 14, 1986 for models DVR33,

DVR36, DVT36, DVT43, DVTS2, DVRS3,

HE25, FS32, FSDV32, HE32, HEB32,

HEDV32.

Accordingly, CFM Majestic Inc. would like

to request acceptance of two waivers from the

test procedures which appears at 10 CFR,

part 430, subpart B, Appendix O-Uniform

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 157
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 1997 / Notices

Test Method for Measuring the Energy

Consumption of Vented Home Heating

Equipment for gas appliance models

included in this request. Below are excerpts

from Vermont Castings Inc.'s letter to The

Honorable Christine Ervin dated July 7,

1995-explaining in detail the particulars

regarding the waivers requested above.

Waiver Request No. 1

This request refers to section 3 . 1.1-Gas

fueled vented home heating equipment and

section 4 . 2.4-Weighted average steady state

efficiency. These sections state that for

manually controlled heaters with various

input rates the weighted average steady state

efficiency is measured at a fuel rate input rate

of plus or minus 5 percent of 50 percent of

the maximum fuel input rate . All the gas

appliance models included in this request

utilize a combination gas control which has

a variable pressure regulator set point which

allows the user to easily vary the manifold

pressure of the appliance within a fixed

range of pressures. Specifically the range of

manifold pressure adjustment for Natural Gas

is 3.5" w.c. to 1.7" w.c. and for Propane Gas

from 10. 0" w.c. to 4 . 9" w.c. These pressure

ranges allow the user to vary the fuel input

rates on all models included in this request

from maximum input to minimum input

which is 70% of maximum input and it is

therefore not possible to obtain a rate of 50%

of the maximum input when the heater is

operated according to Manufacturer's

Installation Operating Manual. Since the

50% rate specified in the Regulations can not

be normally achieved on these products we

request that this requirement be waived for

the gas appliances included in this request.

CFM Majestic Inc. requests to utilize the

test procedure proposed by DOE on August

23, 1993-58 FR 44538. Accordingly, we

request to calculate the weighted average

steady state efficiency using the minimum

obtainable fuel input rate provided this rate

is no greater than z/3 the maximum input rate

of the heater. Specifically, the models

included in this request will be tested at 2/3

of maximum fuel input rate.

The current test procedure does not credit

CFM Majestic Inc. for the additional energy

savings that occur when the minimum fuel

input rate is limited to 70% of maximum

input rate. Test data shows a significant

increase in the actual overall AFUE when

compared to results obtained at a rate of 50%

of maximum fuel input rate . Copies of

confidential test data confirming the energy

savings will be forwarded to you upon

request.

Waiver Request No. 2

This request refers to section 3 . 5-Pilot

Light Measurement and section 4.2.6-

Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency (AFUE).

These sections require the measurement of

energy input to the pilot light (Qp) and the

use of this data in the calculation of AFUE

for the energy consumed by the pilot light

when the heater is not in operation.

All gas appliance models included in this

request are designed with a transient pilot

which is to be turned off by the user when

the heater is not in use. The control knob on

the combination gas control in these heaters

has three positions-"OFF", "PILOT" and

"ON". Gas flow to the pilot is obtained by

rotating the control knob from "OFF" to

"PILOT", depressing the knob, holding in,

and pressing the piezo ignitor. When the

pilot heats a thermocouple element,

sufficient voltage is supplied to the

combination gas control for the pilot to

remain lit when the knob is released and

turned to the "ON" position. The main

burner can then be ignited by moving an

"ON/OFF" switch to the "ON" position.

Since the current test procedure does not

credit CFM Majestic Inc. for the additional

savings that occur when the pilot is turned

off, we request the requirement to include

energy input to the pilot light in AFUE

calculation be waived for these appliances.

CFM Majestic Inc. requests to utilize the

test procedure proposed by DOE on August

23, 1993-58 FR44538. Specifically, we

request the term involving the pilot light

energy consumption be deleted from the

calculation of AFUE for all gas appliance

models included in this request. This results

in an AFUE which is equal to the heating

seasonal efficiency.

Test data shows a significant increase in

the actual overall AFUE when compared to

results obtained when energy input to the

pilot is included in the overall AFUE. Copies

of confidential test data confirming the

energy savings will be forwarded to you upon

request.

CFM Majestic Inc. is confident that both of

these waivers will be granted, as similar

waivers have been granted in the past to

Vermont Casting Inc., CFM International Inc.

and other U.S. manufacturers. Also, the

revisions to the test procedures which we

request have been published by DOE as

proposed changes on August 23, 1993-58

FR 44538.

Any question regarding this subject, please

contact me at the above address. Your help

is highly appreciated. Thank you.

Yours Truly,

Ferdinand M. Francisco,

Lab. Manager, CFM Majestic Inc.

[FR Doc. 97-168 Filed 1-3-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6456-01-M

745

the Commission's Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and

157.211) for authorization to upgrade

the Indiana Gas Company, Inc.'s

(Indiana Gas) Bloomingdale Meter and

Regulation Station, an existing delivery

point located in Parke County, Indiana.

Panhandle makes such request under its

blanket certificate issued in Docket No.

CP83-83-000 pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set

forth in the request on file with the

Commission and open to public

inspection.

Panhandle proposes to replace certain

inefficient and undersized facilities

with more efficient upgraded facilities

so as to allow increased pressure at this

delivery point. The proposed facility

upgrade is classified as minor, above

ground modifications, which will

include the upgrade of internal

components of the regulators, such as

removing the current 500 psi maximum

spring in the pilot of each of the four 3-

inch Mooney regulators and replacing it

with a 400-900 psi range spring. It is

stated that such facility upgrade is

proposed to increase the maximum

capacity of the Bloomingdale meter

station to approximately 23,700 Mcf per

day, and increase the operating pressure

from 275 psig to 500 psig. Panhandle

indicates that the increased service

availability will be provided within

Indiana Gas' existing entitlements.

The estimated cost of upgrading the

proposed facilities is $5,000. Panhandle

states that Indiana Gas will reimburse

the cost of the facilities.

Any person or the Commission's staff

may, within 45 days after issuance of

the instant notice by the Commission,

file pursuant to Rule 214 of the

Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR

385.214) a motion to intervene or notice

of intervention and pursuant to

§ 157.205 of the Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP97-158-000]

Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line

Company ; Notice of Request Under

Blanket Authorization

December 30, 1996.

Take notice that on December 17,

1996, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line

Company (Panhandle), Post Office Box

1642, Houston, Texas 77251-1642, filed

in Docket No. CP97-158-000 a request

pursuant to §§ 157.205 and 157.211 of

protest to the request. If no protest is

filed within the time allowed therefor,

the proposed activity shall be deemed to

be authorized effective the day after the

time allowed for filing a protest. If a

protest is filed and not withdrawn

within 30 days after the time allowed

for filing a protest, the instant request

shall be treated as an application for

authorization pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97-113 Filed 1-3-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M

 CAS-RM-79-104 COMMENT 157