Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2010 / Notices 4795 

825, Washington, DC 20002. 

Attention: Tessa Regis. FAX: (202) 

357–6945. E-mail: tessa.regis@ed.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Munira Mwalimu at (202) 357–6906. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

You may view this document, as well as 

all other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF) on the Internet at the 

following site: http://www.ed.gov/news/ 

fedregister/index.html. 

To use PDF you must have Adobe 

Acrobat Reader, which is available free 

at this site. If you have questions about 

using PDF, call the U.S. Government 

Printing Office (GPO), toll free at 1–888– 

293–6498; or in the Washington, DC, 

area at (202) 512–1530. 

Note: The official version of this document 

is the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the Code 

of Federal Regulations is available on GPO 

Access at: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/ 

index.html. 

Dated: January 25, 2010. 

Munira Mwalimu, 

Operations Officer, U. S. Department of 

Education, National Assessment Governing 

Board. 

[FR Doc. 2010–1798 Filed 1–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[Case No. CAC–026] 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Certain Industrial Equipment: 

Publication of the Petition for Waiver 

From Daikin AC (Americas), Inc. and 

Granting of the Interim Waiver From 

the Department of Energy Commercial 

Package Water-Source Air Conditioner 

and Heat Pump Test Procedure 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, 

granting of application for interim 

waiver, and request for comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt 

of and publishes a petition for waiver 

from Daikin AC (Americas), Inc. 

(Daikin). The petition for waiver 

(hereafter ‘‘petition’’) requests a waiver 

from the U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) test procedure applicable to 

commercial package water-source 

central air conditioners and heat pumps. 

The petition is specific to the Daikin 

variable capacity VRV–WIII 

(commercial) multi-split heat pumps. 

Through this document, DOE solicits 

comments, data, and information with 

respect to the Daikin Petition, and 

announces the grant of an interim 

waiver to Daikin from the existing DOE 

test procedure for the subject 

commercial water-source, multi-split air 

conditioners and heat pumps. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information with respect to the 

Daikin Petition until, but no later than 

March 1, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by case number ‘‘CAC–026,’’ 

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 either the case number [CAC– 

026], and/or ‘‘Daikin Petition’’ 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, 

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 central 

air conditioning and heat pump 

equipment. 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: 

AS_Waiver_Requests@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Francine Pinto or Mr. Michael 

Kido, U.S. Department of Energy, Office 

of the General Counsel, Mail Stop GC– 

72, Forrestal Building, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0103. 

Telephone: (202) 586–7432 or (202) 

586–5827, respectively. E-mail: 

Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov or 

Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority 

Title III of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (EPCA) sets forth a 

variety of provisions concerning energy 

efficiency, including Part A of Title III, 

which establishes the ‘‘Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles.’’ (42 

U.S.C. 6291–6309) Similar to the 

program in Part A, Part A–1 of Title III 

provides for an energy efficiency 

program titled, ‘‘Certain Industrial 

Equipment,’’ which includes 

commercial air conditioning equipment, 

package boilers, water heaters, and other 

types of commercial equipment. (42 

U.S.C. 6311–6317) 

Today’s notice involves commercial 

equipment under Part A–1. Part A–1 

specifically includes definitions (42 

U.S.C. 6311), test procedures (42 U.S.C. 

6314), labeling provisions (42 U.S.C. 

6315), energy conservation standards 

(42 U.S.C. 6313), and the authority to 

require information and reports from 

manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 6316). With 

respect to test procedures, Part A–1 

authorizes the Secretary of Energy (the 

Secretary) to prescribe test procedures 

that are reasonably designed to produce 

results which measure energy 

efficiency, energy use, and estimated 

annual operating costs, and that are not 

unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 

U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) 

For commercial package airconditioning and heating equipment, 

EPCA provides that ‘‘the test procedures 

shall be those generally accepted 

industry testing procedures or rating 

procedures developed or recognized by 

the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration 

Institute [ARI] or by the American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and 

Air-Conditioning Engineers [ASHRAE], 

as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 

90.1 and in effect on June 30, 1992.’’ (42 

U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) Under 42 U.S.C. 

6314(a)(4)(B), the statute further directs 

the Secretary to amend the test 

procedure for a covered commercial 

product if the industry test procedure is 

amended, unless the Secretary 

determines, by rule and based on clear 

and convincing evidence, that such a 

modified test procedure does not meet 

the statutory criteria set forth in 42 

U.S.C. 6314(a)(2) and (3). 

On December 8, 2006, DOE published 

a final rule adopting test procedures for 

commercial package air-conditioning 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
4796 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2010 / Notices 

1 DOE notes that it has also previously granted 

interim waivers to Fujitsu (70 FR 5980 (Feb. 4, 

2005)), Samsung (70 FR 9629 (Feb. 28, 2005)), 

Mitsubishi (72 FR 17533 (April 9, 2007)), and 

Daikin (72 FR 35986 (July 2, 2007)), for comparable 

commercial multi-split air conditioners and heat 

pumps. 

and heating equipment, effective 

January 8, 2007. 71 FR 71340. DOE 

adopted the International Organization 

for Standardization (ISO) Standard 

13256–1–1998, ‘‘Water-source heat 

pumps—Testing and rating for 

performance—Part 1: Water-to-air and 

brine-to-air heat pumps,’’ for small 

commercial package water-source heat 

pumps with capacities < 135,000 British 

thermal units per hour (Btu/h). Id. at 

71371. Pursuant to this rulemaking, 

DOE’s regulations under Title 10 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 

431.95(b)(2) incorporate by reference 

ARI Standard 340/360–2004, and Table 

1 to 10 CFR 431.96 directs 

manufacturers of commercial package 

water-source air conditioning and 

heating equipment to use the 

appropriate procedure when measuring 

energy efficiency of those products. The 

cooling capacities of Daikin’s 

commercial VRV–WIII multi-split heat 

pump products at issue in the waiver 

petition filed by Daikin range from 

72,000 Btu/hr to 252,000 Btu/hr. The 

Daikin products with capacities greater 

than 135,000 Btu/hr are not covered by 

this waiver because there is no DOE test 

procedure for water-source heat pumps 

with capacities greater than 135,000 

Btu/hr. 

DOE’s regulations for covered 

products permit a person to seek a 

waiver from the test procedure 

requirements for covered commercial 

equipment if at least one of the 

following conditions is met: (1) The 

petitioner’s basic model contains one or 

more design characteristics which 

prevent testing according to the 

prescribed test procedures; or (2) 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. 10 CFR 

431.401(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. 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). 

The Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

(Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver 

subject to conditions, including 

adherence to alternate test procedures. 

10 CFR 431.401(f)(4). Waivers remain in 

effect pursuant to the provisions of 10 

CFR 431.401(g). 

The waiver process also permits 

parties submitting a petition for waiver 

to file an application for interim waiver 

of the applicable test procedure 

requirements. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2). The 

Assistant Secretary will grant an interim 

waiver request 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. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(3). An 

interim waiver remains in effect for a 

period of 180 days or until DOE issues 

its determination on the petition for 

waiver, whichever occurs first, and it 

may be extended by DOE for an 

additional 180 days, if necessary. 10 

CFR 431.401(e)(4). 

II. Petition for Waiver 

On November 9, 2009, Daikin filed a 

petition for waiver from the test 

procedures at 10 CFR 431.96 applicable 

to commercial package water-source 

central air conditioners and heat pumps, 

as well as an application for interim 

waiver. The capacities of the Daikin 

VRV–WIII multi-split heat pumps range 

from 72,000 Btu/hr to 252,000 Btu/hr, 

making the applicable test procedure for 

Daikin’s commercial VRV–WIII multisplit heat pumps with capacities less 

than 135,000 Btu/hr ISO Standard 

13256–1 (1998), which manufacturers 

are directed to use pursuant to Table 1 

of 10 CFR 431.96. 

Daikin seeks a waiver from the 

applicable test procedures under 10 CFR 

431.96 on the grounds that its VRV–WIII 

multi-split heat pumps contain design 

characteristics that prevent testing 

according to the current DOE test 

procedures. Specifically, Daikin asserts 

that the two primary factors that prevent 

testing of its multi-split variable speed 

products are the same factors stated in 

the waivers that DOE granted to 

Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, 

Inc. (Mitsubishi) and other 

manufacturers for similar lines of 

commercial multi-split air-conditioning 

systems: 

• Testing laboratories cannot test 

products with so many indoor units; 

and 

• There are too many possible 

combinations of indoor and outdoor 

units to test. 69 FR 52660 (August 27, 

2004) (Mitsubishi waiver); 72 FR 17528 

(April 9, 2007) (Mitsubishi waiver); 72 

FR 71387 (Dec. 17, 2007) (Samsung 

waiver); 72 FR 71383 (Dec. 17, 2007) 

(Fujitsu waiver); 73 FR 39680 (July 10, 

2008) (Daikin waiver); 74 FR 15955 

(April 8, 2009) (Daikin waiver); 74 FR 

16193 (April 9, 2009) (Sanyo waiver); 74 

FR 16373 (April 10, 2009) (Daikin 

waiver) 

The VRV–WIII systems have 

operational characteristics similar to the 

commercial multi-split products 

manufactured by Mitsubishi, Samsung, 

Fujitsu and Sanyo. As indicated above, 

DOE has already granted waivers for 

these products. The VRV–WIII system 

can be connected to the complete range 

of Daikin ceiling mounted, concealed, 

ducted, corner, cassette, wall-mounted 

and floor-mounted and other indoor fan 

coil units. Each of these units has nine 

different indoor static pressure ratings 

as standard, with additional pressure 

ratings available. There are over one 

million combinations possible with the 

Daikin VRV–WIII system. Accordingly, 

Daikin requested that DOE grant a 

waiver from the applicable test 

procedures for its VRV–WIII product 

designs, until a suitable test method can 

be prescribed. 

III. Application for Interim Waiver 

On November 9, 2009, in addition to 

its petition for waiver, Daikin submitted 

to DOE an application for interim 

waiver. DOE determined that Daikin’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 Daikin might experience 

absent a favorable determination on its 

application for interim waiver. DOE 

understands, however, that absent an 

interim waiver, Daikin’s products would 

not be tested and rated for energy 

consumption on an equal basis with 

equivalent products where DOE 

previously granted waivers, placing 

Daikin at a competitive disadvantage. 

Furthermore, DOE has determined that 

it appears likely that Daikin’s Petition 

for Waiver will be granted and that is 

desirable for public policy reasons to 

grant Daikin immediate relief pending a 

determination on the petition for 

waiver. DOE believes that it is likely 

Daikin’s petition for waiver for the new 

VRV–WIII multi-split models will be 

granted because, as noted above, DOE 

has previously granted a number of 

waivers for similar product designs.1

The two principal reasons supporting 

the grant of the previous waivers also 

apply to Daikin’s VRV–WIII products: 

(1) Test laboratories cannot test 

products with so many indoor units; 

and (2) it is impractical to test so many 

combinations of indoor units with each 

outdoor unit. In addition, DOE believes 

that similar products should be tested 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2010 / Notices 4797 

and rated for energy consumption on a 

comparable basis. For these same 

reasons, DOE also determined that it is 

desirable for public policy reasons to 

grant immediate relief pending a 

determination on the petition for 

waiver. 

Therefore, it is ordered that: 

The application for interim waiver 

filed by Daikin is hereby granted for 

Daikin’s VRV–WIII water-source multisplit heat pumps, subject to the 

specifications and conditions below. 

1. Daikin shall not be required to test 

or rate its VRV–WIII commercial watersource multi-split products on the basis 

of the existing test procedure under 10 

CFR 431.96, which incorporates by 

reference ISO Standard 13256–1 (1998). 

2. Daikin shall be required to test and 

rate its VRV–WIII commercial watersource multi-split products according to 

the alternate test procedure as set forth 

in section IV(3), ‘‘Alternate test 

procedure.’’ 

The interim waiver applies to the 

following basic model groups: 

VRV–WIII Series Outdoor Units: 

• Models RWEYQ72PTJU, 

RWEYQ84PTJU 

• Compatible Indoor Units For Above 

Listed Outdoor Units: 

Æ FXAQ Series wall mounted indoor 

units with nominally rated capacities of 

7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 18,000 and 24,000 

Btu/hr. 

Æ FXLQ Series floor mounted indoor 

units with nominally rated capacities of 

12,000, 18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXNQ Series concealed floor 

mounted indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 12,000, 18,000 and 

24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXDQ Series low static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXSQ Series medium static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000, 24,000, 30,000, 36,000 and 

48,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–M Series high static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 30,000, 36,000, 48,000, 

72,000 and 96,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–P Series high static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,0000, 

18,000, 24,000, 30,000, 36,000 and 

48,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–MF Series Outdoor Air 

Processing indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 48,000, 72,000 and 

96,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXTQ–P Series Vertical Air 

Handler indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 12,000, 18,000, 

24,000, 30,000, 36,000, 42,000, 48,000 

and 54,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXZQ Series recessed cassette 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXFQ Series recessed cassette 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 12,000, 18,000, 24,000, 

30,000 and 36,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXHQ Series ceiling suspended 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 12,000, 24,000 and 36,000 

Btu/hr. 

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 

Responding to two recent petitions for 

waiver from Mitsubishi, DOE specified 

an alternate test procedure to provide a 

basis from which Mitsubishi could test 

and make valid energy efficiency 

representations for its R410A CITY 

MULTI products, as well as for its R22 

multi-split products. Alternate test 

procedures related to the Mitsubishi 

petitions were published in the Federal 

Register on April 9, 2007. See 72 FR 

17528 and 72 FR 17533. For reasons 

similar to those published in these prior 

notices, DOE believes that an alternate 

test procedure is appropriate in this 

instance. 

DOE understands that existing testing 

facilities have a limited ability to test 

multiple indoor units simultaneously, 

and the large number of possible 

combinations of indoor and outdoor 

units for some variable refrigerant flow 

zoned systems makes it impractical for 

manufacturers to test. We further note 

that subsequent to the waiver that DOE 

granted for Mitsubishi’s R22 multi-split 

products, ARI formed a committee to 

discuss the issue and to work on 

developing an appropriate testing 

protocol for variable refrigerant flow 

systems. The committee has developed 

a test procedure which has been 

adopted by AHRI–AHRI Standard 

1230—2009: ‘‘Performance Rating of 

Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) MultiSplit Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump 

Equipment.’’ This test procedure has not 

yet been adopted by ASHRAE 90.1, so 

it cannot yet be considered for adoption 

by DOE. 

Therefore, as discussed below, as a 

condition for granting this interim 

waiver to Daikin, DOE is including an 

alternate test procedure similar to those 

granted to Mitsubishi for its R22 and 

R410A products. DOE plans to consider 

the same alternate test procedure in the 

context of the subsequent Decision and 

Order pertaining to Daikin’s petition for 

waiver. Use of this alternate test 

procedure will allow Daikin to test and 

make energy efficiency representations 

for its VRV–WIII products. DOE has 

applied a similar alternate test 

procedure to other waivers for similar 

residential and commercial central air 

conditioners and heat pumps 

manufactured by Mitsubishi (72 FR 

17528, April 9, 2007); Samsung (72 FR 

71387, Dec. 17, 2007); Fujitsu (72 FR 

71383, Dec. 17, 2007); Daikin (73 FR 

39680, July 10, 2008); Daikin (74 FR 

15955, April 8, 2009); Sanyo (74 FR 

16193, April 9, 2009); and Daikin (74 FR 

16373, April 10, 2009). 

The alternate test procedure 

developed in conjunction with the 

Mitsubishi waiver permits Daikin to 

designate a ‘‘tested combination’’ for 

each model of outdoor units. The indoor 

units designated as part of the tested 

combination must meet specific 

requirements. For example, the tested 

combination must have from two to five 

indoor units so that it can be tested in 

available test facilities. The tested 

combination must be tested according to 

the applicable DOE test procedure, as 

modified by the provisions of the 

alternate test procedure as set forth 

below. The alternate test procedure also 

allows manufacturers of such products 

to make valid and consistent 

representations of energy efficiency for 

their air-conditioning and heat pump 

products. 

DOE plans to consider inclusion of 

the following waiver language in the 

Decision and Order for Daikin’s VRV– 

WIII commercial multi-split watersource heat pump models: 

(1) The ‘‘Petition for Waiver’’ filed by 

Daikin Electronics, Inc. is hereby 

granted as set forth in the paragraphs 

below. 

(2) Daikin shall not be required to test 

or rate its VRV–WIII variable capacity 

multi-split heat pump products listed 

above in section III, on the basis of the 

existing test procedures, but shall be 

required to test and rate such products 

according to the alternate test procedure 

as set forth in paragraph (3). 

(3) Alternate test procedure. 

(A) Daikin shall be required to test the 

products listed in section III above 

according to the test procedures for 

central air conditioners and heat pumps 

prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR 431.96, 

except that Daikin shall test a ‘‘tested 

combination’’ selected in accordance 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
4798 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2010 / Notices 

2The AHRI has updated this standard from 

version ARI 340/360–2004 to version AHRI 340– 

360–2007. However, DOE has not yet updated the 

reference to the standard in 10 CFR part 431. 

3 Detailed citations to the test procedures for 

which DACA is requesting a waiver are included on 

page 3 of this petition. 

with the provisions of subparagraph (B) 

of this paragraph. For every other 

system combination using the same 

outdoor unit as the tested combination, 

Daikin shall make representations 

concerning the VRV–WIII products 

covered in this waiver according to the 

provisions of subparagraph (C) below. 

(B) Tested combination. The term 

‘‘tested combination’’ means a sample 

basic model comprised of units that are 

production units, or are representative 

of production units, of the basic model 

being tested. For the purposes of this 

waiver, the tested combination shall 

have the following features: 

(1) The basic model of a variable 

refrigerant flow system used as a tested 

combination shall consist of one 

outdoor unit, with one or more 

compressors, that is matched with 

between 2 and 5 indoor units; for multisplit systems, each of these indoor units 

shall be designed for individual 

operation. 

(2) The indoor units shall— 

(i) Represent the highest sales model 

family or another indoor model family 

if the highest sales model family does 

not provide sufficient capacity (see ii); 

(ii) Together, have a nominal cooling 

capacity that is between 95% and 105% 

of the nominal cooling capacity of the 

outdoor unit; 

(iii) Not, individually, have a nominal 

cooling capacity that is greater than 

50% of the nominal cooling capacity of 

the outdoor unit; 

(iv) Operate at fan speeds that are 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

specifications; and 

(v) Be subject to the same minimum 

external static pressure requirement 

while being configurable to produce the 

same static pressure at the exit of each 

outlet plenum when manifolded as per 

section 2.4.1 of 10 CFR Part 430, subpart 

B, appendix M. 

(C) Representations. In making 

representations about the energy 

efficiency of its VRV–WIII variable 

capacity water-source multi-split heat 

pump products, for compliance, 

marketing, or other purposes, Daikin 

must fairly disclose the results of testing 

under the DOE test procedure, doing so 

in a manner consistent with the 

provisions outlined below: 

(1) For VRV–WIII combinations tested 

in accordance with this alternate test 

procedure, Daikin may make 

representations based on these test 

results. 

(2) For VRV–WIII combinations that 

are not tested, Daikin may make 

representations based on the testing 

results for the tested combination at the 

same energy efficiency level as the 

tested combination with the same 

outdoor unit and which is consistent 

with either of the two following 

methods: 

(i) Representation of non-tested 

combinations according to an 

Alternative Rating Method (ARM) 

approved by DOE; or 

(ii) Representation of non-tested 

combinations at the same energy 

efficiency level as the tested 

combination with the same outdoor 

unit. 

V. Summary and Request for Comments 

Through today’s notice, DOE 

announces receipt of the Daikin petition 

for waiver from the test procedures 

applicable to Daikin’s VRV–WIII 

commercial multi-split heat pump 

products. For the reasons articulated 

above, DOE also grants Daikin an 

interim waiver from those procedures. 

As part of this notice, DOE is publishing 

Daikin’s petition for waiver in its 

entirety. The petition contains no 

confidential information. Furthermore, 

today’s notice includes an alternate test 

procedure that Daikin is required to 

follow as a condition of its interim 

waiver and that DOE is considering 

including in its subsequent Decision 

and Order. In this alternate test 

procedure, DOE is defining a ‘‘tested 

combination’’ that Daikin could use in 

lieu of testing all retail combinations of 

its VRV–WIII multi-split heat pump 

products. 

DOE is interested in receiving 

comments on the issues addressed in 

this notice. Pursuant to 10 CFR 

431.401(d), any person submitting 

written comments must also send a 

copy of such comments to the 

petitioner. The contact information for 

the petitioner is: Mr. Akinori Atarashi, 

President, Daikin AC (Americas), Inc., 

1645 Wallace Drive, Suite 110, 

Carrollton, Texas 75006. 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: 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 January 22, 

2010. 

Cathy Zoi, 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

Daikin AC (Americas), Inc., 1645 

Wallace Drive, Suite 110, Carrollton, 

TX 75006 USA. TEL: 866–4DAIKIN, 

FAX: 972–245–1038, 

http://www.daikinac.com 

November 9, 2009. 

Ms. Catherine Zoi, Assistant Secretary 

for Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Ave., SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Re: Petition for Waiver of Test 

Procedure 

Dear Assistant Secretary Zoi: 

Daikin AC (Americas) Inc. (DACA) 

respectfully petitions the Department of 

Energy (DOE) pursuant to 10 CFR 

431.401(a)(1) (2009) for a waiver of the 

test procedures applicable to 

commercial air conditioners and heat 

pumps, as established in 10 CFR 431.96 

(2009) and ARI Standard 340/360– 

2004 2 and ISO Standard 13256–1 

(1998) 3, for the Daikin VRV–WIII 

system. The specific models for which 

DACA requests this waiver in the Daikin 

VRV–WIII product class are listed below 

in this Petition. DACA seeks a waiver 

from the existing central air conditioner 

and central air conditioning heat pump 

test procedure for the listed Daikin 

VRV–WIII systems because the basic 

models contain design criteria that 

prevent testing of the basic models 

according to the prescribed test 

procedures. We are simultaneously 

requesting an interim waiver for the 

same systems pursuant to 10 CFR 

431.401(a)(2) (2009). 

Background 

DACA is a leading manufacturer of 

variable speed and Variable Refrigerant 

Volume (VRV) zoning systems that 

DACA offers for sale in the North 

American market. These products 

combine advanced technologies such as 

high efficiency variable speed 

compressors and fan motors with 

electronic expansion valves and other 

devices to insure peak operating 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2010 / Notices 4799 

4 DOE granted DACA a waiver for its VRV and 

VRV–S product lines on July 10, 2008. 73 FR 

39,680. DOE granted MEUS a waiver for its CITY 

MULTI VRFZ class of products. 69 FR 52,660 

(August 27, 2004). DOE also granted DACA a waiver 

for its VRV–WII product lines on January 7, 2008. 

73 FR 1,213. 

performance of the overall system and 

to optimize energy efficiency. DACA has 

designed the VRV–WIII systems to 

operate in commercial applications, and 

this product class employs zoning to 

provide users with peak utility of the 

system and with significant energy 

savings compared to competing 

technologies. 

General Characteristics of DACA’s 

Water Source VRV–WIII Products 

DACA’s VRV–WIII system has the 

following characteristics and 

applications: 

• DACA’s water source VRV–WIII is 

an air conditioning system that includes 

numerous individually controllable 

discrete indoor units utilizing water as 

a heat source. In this unique system, 

water is piped from a cooling tower or 

boiler to the VRV–WIII (which is the 

equivalent of the outdoor unit of an air 

cooled conditioning system). After heat 

exchange, refrigerant is piped from the 

VRV–WIII to each indoor unit. 

• The VRV–WIII system consists of 

multi-split, multi-zone units utilizing 

one or multiple outdoor units that serve 

up to twenty indoor units. 

• The VRV–WIII system employs 

variable speed technology that matches 

system capacity to the current load 

thereby utilizing the minimum amount 

of energy required for optimal system 

operation. 

• Due to its multi-zone applications, 

each VRV–WIII indoor unit can be 

independently controlled with a local 

controller allowing the occupant to alter 

their environmental condition to meet 

their needs. Individually controlled 

system functions include temperature, 

fan speed and mode of operation. 

• The VRV–WIII system can 

efficiently operate the compressor at 

loads as small as 10% of the rated 

capacity of the system, resulting in 

significant energy savings. 

• Some VRV–WIII products offer a 

‘‘heat recovery’’ mode that allows heat 

that is absorbed from one indoor zone 

(operating in the cooling mode) to be 

discharged into another indoor zone 

that is calling for heat. This function 

reduces the load on the outdoor unit 

and improves overall system 

performance and utility. 

• The VRV–WIII system employs 

variable speed indoor and outdoor high 

efficiency fan motors to precisely 

control operating pressures and airflow 

rates. 

• The VRV–WIII system uses 

electronically controlled expansion 

valves to precisely control refrigerant 

flow, superheat, sub-cooling, pump 

down functions and even oil flow 

throughout the system. 

• The VRV–WIII can be applied into 

a Geothermal or Ground Source 

application for additional energy 

savings and use of the renewable energy 

in the earth. 

Particular Basic Models for Which a 

Waiver Is Requested 

DACA requests a waiver from the test 

procedures for the following VRV–WIII 

basic model groups: 

• VRV–WIII Series Outdoor Units: 

Æ Models RWEYQ72PTJU, 

RWEYQ84PTJU, RWEYQ144PTJU, 

RWEYQ168PTJU, RWEYQ216PTJU, and 

RWEYQ252PTJU with capacities 

ranging from 72,000 to 252,000 Btu/hr. 

• Compatible Indoor Units For Above 

Listed Outdoor Units: 

Æ FXAQ Series wall mounted indoor 

units with nominally rated capacities of 

7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 18,000 and 24,000 

Btu/hr. 

Æ FXLQ Series floor mounted indoor 

units with nominally rated capacities of 

12,000, 18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXNQ Series concealed floor 

mounted indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 12,000, 18,000 and 

24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXDQ Series low static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXSQ Series medium static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000, 24,000, 30,000, 36,000 and 

48,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–M Series high static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 30,000, 36,000, 48,000, 

72,000 and 96,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXMQ–P Series high static ducted 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000, 24,000, 30,000, 36,000 and 

48,000 Btu/hr 

Æ FXMQ–MF Series Outdoor Air 

Processing indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 48,000, 72,000 and 

96,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXTQ–P Series Vertical Air 

Handler indoor units with nominally 

rated capacities of 12,000, 18,000, 

24,000, 30,000, 36,000, 42,000, 48,000 

and 54,000 Btu/hr 

Æ FXZQ Series recessed cassette 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 7,000, 9,000, 12,000, 

18,000 and 24,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXFQ Series recessed cassette 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 12,000, 18,000, 24,000, 

30,000 and 36,000 Btu/hr. 

Æ FXHQ Series ceiling suspended 

indoor units with nominally rated 

capacities of 12,000, 24,000 and 36,000 

Btu/hr. 

Design Characteristics Constituting the 

Grounds for DACA’s Petition 

DACA’s VRV–WIII product offering 

consists of multiple indoor units being 

connected to a water-cooled outdoor 

unit. The indoor units for these 

products are available in a very large 

number of potential configurations, 

including but not limited to the 

following: 4–Way Cassette, Wall 

Mounted, Ceiling Suspended, and Floor 

Standing. DACA is currently developing 

additional indoor unit models for future 

market introduction. Each of these units 

has nine different indoor static pressure 

ratings as standard, with additional 

pressure ratings available. 

There are over one million 

combinations possible with the current 

DACA VRV–WIII product offering. It is 

completely impractical for testing 

laboratories to test a product such as the 

VRV–WIII with multiple indoor units 

because of the astronomical number of 

potential system configurations. 

DACA’s VRV–WIII products share 

many of the design characteristics and 

features of DACA’s VRV, VRV–S and 

VRV–WIII product lines, and of 

Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics 

USA, Inc.’s (MEUS) CITY MULTI 

product class, for all of which DOE has 

previously granted waivers.4 The 

principal design characteristic 

difference between DACA’s VRV and 

VRV–S products, and its VRV–WIII 

products, is the method of heat 

rejection. Similarly, the method of heat 

rejection is the most significant design 

characteristic that distinguishes the 

basic operation of the VRV–WIII 

product class and the MEUS CITY 

MULTI product class that has received 

a waiver from DOE. Like the VRV–W– 

II products for which DOE granted a 

waiver, the VRV–WIII products use 

water instead of air to reject heat. In 

contrast, the VRV and VRV–S products, 

as well as MEUS’ CITY MULTI products 

use air to reject heat. The same testing 

constraints and limitations apply to all 

of these products. 

The DOE relied on similar rationales 

to grant MEUS’ petition for waiver and 

DACA’s VRV–WII waiver. DOE stated 

the following in the notice granting 

DACA a waiver for VRV–WII: 

DOE believes that the VRV–WII 

Daikin equipment and equipment for 

which waivers have previously been 

granted [MEUS, Fujitsu General Ltd. 

and Samsung] are alike with respect to 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
4800 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2010 / Notices 

the factors that make them eligible for 

test procedure waivers. 

74 FR 16,375. Based on these 

conclusions, the DOE proceeded to 

grant DACA’s VRV–WII waiver request. 

Id. 

The DACA VRV–WIII system operates 

in the same configurations as the VRV– 

WII system. The reasons and rationale 

that DOE has already articulated to 

support previous DACA, MEUS, Sanyo, 

and Fujitsu waivers for multi-split, 

multi-zoned air conditioners (including 

the DACA VRV W–II system) also apply 

to the DACA VRV–WIII products. 

Therefore, DOE should conclude that 

the design characteristics of DACA’s 

VRV–WIII product class prevent testing 

of the basic VRV–WIII model according 

to the prescribed test procedures. 

Specific Testing Requirements Sought 

To Be Waived 

The test procedures from which 

DACA is requesting a waiver are ARI 

Standard 340/360–2004 and ISO 

Standard 13256–1 (1998). These 

standards, which are applicable to large 

commercial and industrial unitary air 

conditioning and heat pump equipment 

with a capacity of ≥65,000 Btu/hr to 

<240,000 Btu/hr, are referenced in Table 

2 to 10 CFR 431.96, and are made 

applicable to DACA’s large commercial 

water source VRV–WIII products in 10 

CFR 431.96(a). 

Detailed Discussion of Need for 

Requested Waiver 

Although the capacity of DACA’s 

VRV–WIII product class is within the 

scope of ARI 340/360–2004 and ISO 

Standard 13256–1 (1998), the design 

characteristics of the VRV–WIII product 

class prevent testing of the basic model 

according to the prescribed test 

procedures. The testing procedures 

outlined in these standards do not 

provide for: 

• The testing of multi-split products 

when all connected indoor units 

physically cannot be located in a single 

room. 

• The operation of indoor units at 

several different static pressure ratings 

during a single test. 

• The precise number of part load 

tests that ARI Standard 340/360–2004 

requires for fully or infinitely variable 

speed products. 

DACA especially requires the 

requested waiver because ARI Standard 

340/360–2004 and ISO Standard 13256– 

1 (1998) provide no direction or 

guidance about how to test systems with 

millions of combinations of indoor units 

configurable to a single outdoor unit. 

A further reason that DACA needs the 

requested waiver is that ARI Standard 

340/360–2004 and ISO Standard 13256– 

1 (1998) do not provide a test method 

to measure part load performance of a 

system operating in simultaneous 

cooling and heating modes (i.e., 

performing both heating and cooling 

functions at the same time). 

Yet another problem that prevents 

testing of the VRV–WIII product class 

under these two standards, and another 

major reason why DACA requires the 

requested waiver, is the wide variety of 

indoor unit static pressure ratings 

available with these and other multisplit products. Testing facilities cannot 

effectively control multiple indoor static 

pressures as would be required to test 

many of the indoor unit combinations 

available. To accomplish such testing, a 

testing lab would be required to use a 

large number of test rooms 

simultaneously, and each test room 

would have to be networked into the 

data recording instrumentation. Also, 

extensive piping configurations would 

need to be routed throughout the 

various test rooms. This process would 

be extraordinarily expensive, and the 

logistical challenges presented by the 

testing might be insurmountable. 

Manufacturers of Other Basic Models 

Incorporating Similar Design 

Characteristics 

DACA is aware of the following 

manufacturers that produce basic 

models incorporating similar design 

characteristics to the VRV–WIII in the 

United States market: 

• Sanyo Fisher (USA) Corp. 

• Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics 

USA, Inc. 

• Fujitsu General America, Inc. 

Alternative Test Procedures 

DACA proposes that DOE apply the 

same alternate test procedure to the 

covered VRV–WIII products as DOE 

applied to DACA’s VRV–WII products 

in the waiver that DOE granted for those 

products on April 10, 2009. 74 FR 

16,373. The alternate test method 

appears on pages 16,375–76 of the VRV– 

WII waiver. 

Application for Interim Waiver 

DACA also hereby applies pursuant to 

10 CFR 431.401(a)(2) for an interim 

waiver of the applicable test procedure 

requirements for the VRV–WIII product 

class models listed above. The basis for 

DACA’s Application for Interim Waiver 

follows. 

DACA is likely to succeed in its 

Petition for Waiver because there is no 

reasonable argument that ARI Standard 

340/360 can be properly applied to 

DACA’s VRV–WIII product class. As 

explained above in the DACA’s Petition 

for Waiver, the design characteristics of 

the VRV–WIII product class clearly 

prevent testing of the basic model 

according to the prescribed test 

procedures. The likelihood of DOE 

approving DACA’s Petition for Waiver is 

buttressed by the DOE’s history of 

approving previous waiver requests 

from DACA and from several other 

manufacturers for other products that 

are similar to the VRV–WIII product 

class, based on the same rationale put 

forth by DACA in this Petition for 

Waiver. See preceding discussion of 

waivers granted by DOE to MEUS, 

Fujitsu General, and Sanyo Fisher 

(USA) Corp. 

Additionally, DACA is likely to suffer 

economic hardship and competitive 

disadvantage if DOE does not grant its 

interim waiver request. DACA is now 

preparing to introduce its VRV–WIII 

product class in a matter of months. If 

we must wait for completion of the 

normal waiver consideration and 

issuance process, DACA will be forced 

to delay the opportunity to begin 

recouping through product sales its 

research, development and production 

costs associated with the VRV–WIII 

product class. In addition to these 

economic hardship costs, DACA will 

lose market share to MEUS, especially if 

DOE grants MEUS’ pending interim 

waiver application for its CITY MULTI 

WR2 and WY product classes, which 

will compete directly with DACA’s 

VRV–WIII product class. 

DOE approval of DACA’s interim 

waiver application is also supported by 

sound public policy reasons. As DOE 

stated in its August 14, 2006 approval 

of DACA’s interim waiver for the VRV 

and VRV–S product classes: 

[I]n 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. 

The VRV–WIII product class will 

provide superior comfort to the end 

user, will allow for independent zoning 

of facilities from a single outdoor unit, 

and will incorporate state of the art 

technology such as variable speed 

compressors utilizing neodymium 

magnets to increase efficiency and 

electronic control of compressor speed, 

fan speed and even metering device 

opening positions. The VRV–WIII 

product class includes technologies that 

will increase system efficiency and 

reduce national energy consumption, 

and that will also offer a new level of 

comfort and control to end users. 

DACA requests that DOE grant our 

Application for Interim Waiver so we 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 19 / Friday, January 29, 2010 / Notices 4801 

can bring the new highly energy 

efficient technology represented by the 

VRV–WIII product class to the market as 

soon as possible, thereby allowing the 

U.S. consumer to benefit from our high 

technology and high efficiency product, 

and from competition for other 

manufacturers who may have already 

received waivers. 

Confidential Information 

DACA makes no request to DOE for 

confidential treatment of any 

information contained in this Petition 

for Waiver and Application for Interim 

Waiver. 

Conclusion 

Daikin AC (Americas), Inc. 

Corporation respectfully requests DOE 

to grant its Petition for Waiver of the 

applicable test procedure to DACA for 

the VRV–WIII product design, and to 

grant its Application for Interim Waiver. 

DOE’s failure to issue an interim waiver 

from test standards would cause 

significant economic hardship to DACA 

by preventing DACA from marketing 

these products even though DOE has 

previously granted a waiver to other 

products currently being offered in the 

market with similar design 

characteristics. 

We would be pleased to respond to 

any questions you may have regarding 

this Petition for Waiver and Application 

for Interim Waiver. Please contact Lee 

Smith, Director of Product Marketing at 

972–245–1510 or by e-mail at 

Lee.smith@daikinac.com. 

Sincerely, 

Akinori Atarashi, 

President. 

[FR Doc. 2010–1759 Filed 1–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Notice of Availability of the Draft LongTerm Management and Storage of 

Elemental Mercury Environmental 

Impact Statement and Notice of Public 

Hearings 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE) announces the availability of the 

Draft Long-Term Management and 

Storage of Elemental Mercury 

Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/ 

EIS–0423D, ‘‘Draft Mercury Storage EIS’’ 

or ‘‘Draft EIS’’) for public review and 

comment during a public comment 

period that extends through March 30, 

2010. This Draft EIS has been prepared 

in accordance with the implementing 

regulations under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

evaluates the potential health and 

environmental effects of storing a 

projected total of up to 10,000 metric 

tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury. 

Seven alternative sites across the U.S. 

are evaluated. DOE invites the public to 

comment through the several avenues 

listed under ADDRESSES and 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. The U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and the Mesa County (Colorado) Board 

of Commissioners are cooperating 

agencies on this Draft EIS. 

DATES: The public is invited to submit 

oral and/or written comments on this 

Draft EIS during the public comment 

period, which extends through March 

30, 2010. DOE will consider all 

comments received or postmarked by 

that date in preparing the Final EIS, 

expected in fall 2010, and will consider 

late comments to the extent practicable. 

DOE will hold public hearings on the 

dates and at the times and locations 

listed under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION below. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

Draft Mercury Storage EIS may be 

submitted by U.S. mail to the following 

address. Mr. David Levenstein, EIS 

Document Manager, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Draft Mercury Storage EIS 

Comments, P.O. Box 2612, 

Germantown, Maryland 20874. 

Comments may be submitted 

electronically via the Mercury Storage 

EIS Web site at http:// 

www.mercurystorageeis.com, where the 

Draft EIS can be found, or by faxing tollfree to (877) 274–5462. The Draft EIS is 

also available on DOE’s NEPA Web site 

at http://www.gc.energy.gov/nepa. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information about this Draft EIS, 

please contact Mr. Levenstein at the 

mailing address or EIS Web site listed 

above. 

For information regarding the DOE 

NEPA process, please contact: Ms. Carol 

M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 

Policy and Compliance (GC–54), U. S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585, Telephone: 

(202) 586–4600, or leave a message at 

(800) 472–2756. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Mercury Export Ban Act (the Act) 

prohibits the export of elemental 

mercury from the U.S., effective January 

1, 2013 (subject to certain essential use 

exemptions). Section 5 of the Act, LongTerm Storage, directs DOE to designate 

a facility or facilities for the long-term 

management and storage of elemental 

mercury generated within the U.S. and, 

by January 1, 2013, to have the facility 

or facilities operational and ready to 

accept custody of such elemental 

mercury delivered there. 

DOE thus needs to develop a 

capability for the safe and secure longterm management and storage of 

elemental mercury generated within the 

U.S. as required by the Act. To this end, 

DOE proposes to select one or more 

existing (including modifications if 

needed) or new facilities for this 

purpose. Facilities to be constructed as 

well as existing or modified facilities 

must comply with applicable 

requirements of Section 5(d) of the Act, 

Management Standards for a Facility, 

including the requirements of the Solid 

Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA). DOE is using the NEPA 

process to identify and evaluate 

candidate sites for the facility or 

facilities. EPA and the Mesa County 

(Colorado) Board of Commissioners are 

cooperating agencies on the EIS, which 

has been prepared pursuant to Council 

on Environmental Quality NEPA 

implementing regulations at 40 CFR 

Parts 1500–1508 and DOE NEPA 

Implementing Procedures at 10 CFR Part 

1021. 

DOE issued a Notice of Intent to 

prepare the EIS on July 2, 2009 (74 FR 

31723). Comments received during the 

subsequent scoping period were 

considered in preparing the Draft EIS. 

Based on a structured process described 

in the Draft EIS, DOE identified seven 

government and commercial sites as the 

range of reasonable alternatives to be 

evaluated in the EIS: DOE Grand 

Junction Disposal Site, Grand Junction, 

Colorado; DOE Hanford Site, Richland, 

Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot, 

Hawthorne, Nevada; DOE Idaho 

National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho; 

DOE Kansas City Plant, Kansas City, 

Missouri; DOE Savannah River Site, 

Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste 

Control Specialists, LLC, Andrews, 

Texas. As required under NEPA, the 

Draft EIS also analyzes a No Action 

Alternative to serve as a basis for 

comparison. 

DOE’s evaluation includes the 

facilities themselves and their locations, 

their construction, facility operations, 

and transportation to the storage 

facility(ies). Consideration of potential 

location includes climate, proximity of 

human populations, and environmental 

resource areas for each alternative, along 

with the potential human health and 

socioeconomic impacts. DOE has 

identified the Waste Control Specialists, 

LLC facility as its preferred alternative. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES