## 10997 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
or disability. State agencies and school food authorities shall comply with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975; Department of Agriculture regulations on nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15, 15a and 15b); and FNS Instruction 113– 6. (b) When accommodating children due to medical or special dietary needs, schools must follow the applicable provisions in § 210.10(g) of this chapter. **§ 211.22 Program information.**



### School food authorities and schools desiring information about the Program should contact their State educational agency or the appropriate FNS Regional Office at the address or telephone number listed on the FNS Web site ( www.fns.usda.gov/cnd). **PART 235—STATE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE FUNDS** 

1. The authority citation for part 235 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 7 and 10 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, 80 Stat. 888, 889, as amended (42. U.S.C. 1776, 1779).



### 2. Section 235.1 is amended by adding the phrase ‘‘and the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (7 CFR part 211).’’ to the end of the second sentence.

Dated: February 10, 2012. Kevin W. Concannon, Under Secretary, Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services. [FR Doc. 2012–4181 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am] **BILLING CODE 3410–30–P** 

### DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY **10 CFR Part 431 [Docket Number EERE–2010–BT–STD–**  **0048] RIN 1904–AC04**  

### Energy Conservation Program: Energy **Conservation Standards for Distribution Transformers; Correction** 
**AGENCY** 

### : Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. **ACTION** 

### : Notice of proposed rulemaking and public meeting; correction.
**SUMMARY** 

### : The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice of proposed rulemaking on February 10, 2012, which proposed to amend DOE regulations regarding energy conservation standards for distribution transformers. It was recently discovered that values in certain tables of the proposed rule are inaccurate or absent. This notice corrects these inaccuracies as described. **DATES** 

### : DOE will accept comments, data and information regarding this correction before and after the February 23, 2012, public meeting, but no later than April 10, 2012. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** 

### : James Raba, 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. Telephone: (202) 586–8654. Email: Jim.Raba@ee.doe.gov.

Ami Grace-Tardy, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC–71, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 586–5709. Email: Ami.Grace-Tardy@hq.doe.gov. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** 

### : Background Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA or the Act), Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309, as codified), established the Energy Conservation Program for ‘‘Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.’’ Part C of Title III of EPCA (42 U.S.C. 6311–6317) established a similar program for ‘‘Certain Industrial Equipment,’’ including distribution transformers. The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT 1992), Public Law 102– 486, amended EPCA and directed DOE to prescribe energy conservation standards for distribution transformers. (42 U.S.C. 6317(a)) On October 12, 2007, DOE published a final rule that established energy conservation standards for liquid-immerseddistribution transformers and mediumvoltage, dry-type distribution transformers (72 FR 58190). The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005), Public Law 109–25, amended EPCA to establish energy conservation standards for low-voltage, dry-type distribution transformers. (42 U.S.C. 6295(y)) On February 10, 2012, DOE published a proposed rule with amended energyconservation standards for liquidimmersed, medium-voltage dry-type, and low-voltage, dry-type distribution transformers (77 FR 7282). Need for Correction

As published, values in certain tables of the proposed rule are inaccurate or absent. DOE solicits public comment on the changes contained in this document as part of the February 10 NOPR. Corrections

In proposed rule FR Doc. 2012–2642 appearing on page 7282 in the issue of Friday, February 10, 2012, the following corrections should be made:

1. On page 7285, Table I.5 is corrected to read as follows: 

### TABLE 

### I.5—P ROPOSED 

### E LECTRICAL 

### E FFICIENCIES FOR 

### A LL 

### L IQUID

### -I MMERSED 

### D ISTRIBUTION 

### T RANSFORMER 

### E QUIPMENT 

### C LASSES 

### (COMPLIANCE 

### STARTING 

### J ANUARY 

### 1, 2016) Standards by kVA and equipment class Equipment class 1 Equipment class 2 kVA % kVA %
10 .................................................................................. 98.70 15 ...................................

............................................... 98.65 15 .................................................................................. 98.82 30 ...................................

............................................... 98.83 25 .................................................................................. 98.95 45 ...................................

............................................... 98.92 37.5 ............................................................................... 99.05 75 ....................................

.............................................. 99.03 50 .................................................................................. 99.11 112.5 ................................

............................................. 99.11 75 .................................................................................. 99.19 150 ..................................

.............................................. 99.16 100 ................................................................................ 99.25 225 ...................................

............................................. 99.23 167 ................................................................................ 99.33 300 ...................................

............................................. 99.27 250 ................................................................................ 99.39 500 ...................................

............................................. 99.35 333 ................................................................................ 99.43 750 ...................................

............................................. 99.40 500 ................................................................................ 99.49 1000 ..................................

............................................ 99.43


## 10998 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 

### I.5—P ROPOSED 

### E LECTRICAL 

### E FFICIENCIES FOR 

### A LL 

### L IQUID

### -I MMERSED 

### D ISTRIBUTION 

### T RANSFORMER 

### E QUIPMENT 

### C LASSES 

### (COMPLIANCE 

### STARTING 

### J ANUARY 

### 1, 2016)—Continued Standards by kVA and equipment class Equipment class 1 Equipment class 2 kVA % kVA %
667 ................................................................................ 99.52 1500 ..................................

............................................ 99.48 833 ................................................................................ 99.55 2000 ..................................

............................................ 99.51

.................................................................................. 2500 .............................................................................. 99.53



### 2. On page 7344, Table V.9 is corrected to read as follows:



### TABLE 

### V.9—S UMMARY 

### L IFE

### -CYCLE 

### C OST AND 

### PAYBACK 

### P ERIOD 

### R ESULTS FOR 

### D ESIGN 

### L INE 

### 6 R EPRESENTATIVE 

### U NIT
Trial standard level 1 2 3 4 5 6 Efficiency (%) ................................................................... 98.00 98.60 98.80 99.17 99.17 99.44 Transformers with Net Increase in LCC (%) ................... 0.0 71.5 17.6 36.2 36.2 93.4 Transformers with Net LCC Savings (%) ........................ 0.0 28.5 82.4 63.8 63.8 6.6 Transformers with No Impact on LCC (%) ...................... 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mean LCC Savings ($) .................................................... 0

¥ 125 303 187 187

¥ 881 Median PBP (Years) ........................................................ 0.0 24.7 12.8 16.3 16.3 32.4



### 3. On page 7346, Table V.20 is corrected to read as follows: 

### TABLE 

### V.20—R EBUTTABLE

### -P RESUMPTION 

### PAYBACK 

### P ERIODS 

### (Y EARS

### ) FOR 

### LOW

### -VOLTAGE 

### D RY

### -TYPE 

### D ISTRIBUTION 

### T RANSFORMERS

Design line Rated capacity (kVA) Trial standard level 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 ................................... 25 0.0 15.9 13.5 15.0 15.0 26.5 7 ................................... 75 4.2 4.2 4.4 6.4 6.4 14.9 8 ................................... 300 6.8 6.8 10.4 9.7 20.2 20.2



### 4. On page 7363, Table V.39 is corrected to read as follows: 

### TABLE 

### V.39—P ROPOSED 

### E NERGY 

### C ONSERVATION 

### STANDARDS FOR 

### L IQUID

### -I MMERSED 

### D ISTRIBUTION 

### T RANSFORMERS Standards by kVA and equipment class Equipment class 1 Equipment class 2 kVA % kVA %
10 .................................................................................. 98.70 15 ...................................

............................................... 98.65 15 .................................................................................. 98.82 30 ...................................

............................................... 98.83 25 .................................................................................. 98.95 45 ...................................

............................................... 98.92 37.5 ............................................................................... 99.05 75 ....................................

.............................................. 99.03 50 .................................................................................. 99.11 112.5 ................................

............................................. 99.11 75 .................................................................................. 99.19 150 ..................................

.............................................. 99.16 100 ................................................................................ 99.25 225 ...................................

............................................. 99.23 167 ................................................................................ 99.33 300 ...................................

............................................. 99.27 250 ................................................................................ 99.39 500 ...................................

............................................. 99.35 333 ................................................................................ 99.43 750 ...................................

............................................. 99.40 500 ................................................................................ 99.49 1000 ..................................

............................................ 99.43 667 ................................................................................ 99.52 1500 ..................................

............................................ 99.48 833 ................................................................................ 99.55 2000 ..................................

............................................ 99.51 2500 .............................................................................. 99.53


## 10999 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
5. On pages 7363 and 7364, Table V.41 is corrected to read as follows: 

### TABLE 

### V.41—S UMMARY OF 

### A NALYTICAL 

### R ESULTS FOR 

### LOW

### -VOLTAGE 

### , D RY

### -TYPE 

### D ISTRIBUTION 

### T RANSFORMERS 

### : M ANUFACTURER AND 

### C ONSUMER 

### I MPACTS Category TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5 TSL 6 **Manufacturer Impacts** Industry NPV (2011$ million) ...... 203 to 236 ....... 200 to 235 ....... 193 to 240 ....... 173 to 250 ....... 164 to 263 ....... 136 to 322. Industry NPV (% change) ........... (7.7) to 7.7 ....... (8.9) to 6.8 ....... (12.2) to 9.1 ..... (21.0) to 14.1 ... (25.2) to 20.0 ... (37.9) to 46.4 **Consumer Mean LCC Savings (2010$)** Design line 6 ............................... 0 .......................

¥ 125 ............... 303 ................... 187 ................... 187 ...................

¥ 881. Design line 7 ............................... 1714 ................. 1714 ................. 1793 ................. 2270 ................ . 2270 ................. 270. Design line 8 ............................... 2476 ................. 2476 ................. 2625 ................. 4145 ................

. ¥ 2812 .............

¥ 2812. **Consumer Median PBP (years)** Design line 6 ............................... 0.0 .................... 24.7 .................. 12.8 .................. 16.3 ............ ...... 16.3 .................. 32.4. Design line 7 ............................... 4.5 .................... 4.5 .................... 4.7 .................... 6.9 ........... ......... 6.9 .................... 18.1. Design line 8 ............................... 8.4 .................... 8.4 .................... 12.3 .................. 11.0 ........... ....... 24.5 .................. 24.5. **Distribution of Consumer LCC Impacts Design line 6**  Net Cost (%) ................................ 0.0 .................... 71.5 .................. 17.6 .................. 36.2 ............ ...... 36.2 .................. 93.4. Net Benefit (%) ............................ 0.0 .................... 28.5 .................. 82.4 .................. 63.8 ............. ..... 63.8 .................. 6.6. No Impact (%) ............................. 100.0 ................ 0.0 .................... 0.0 .................... 0.0 ............... ..... 0.0 .................... 0.0. **Design line 7** Net Cost (%) ................................ 041*1.8 ............ 1.8 .................... 2.0 .................... 3.7 ............... ..... 3.7 .................... 46.4. Net Benefit (%) ............................ 98.2 .................. 98.2 .................. 98.0 .................. 96.3 .............. .... 96.3 .................. 53.6. No Impact (%) ............................. 0.0 .................... 0.0 .................... 0.0 .................... 0.0 ............. ....... 0.0 .................... 0.0. **Design line 8** Net Cost (%) ................................ 5.2 .................... 5.2 .................... 15.3 .................. 10.5 ........... ....... 78.5 .................. 78.5. Net Benefit (%) ............................ 94.8 .................. 94.8 .................. 84.7 .................. 89.5 .............. .... 21.5 .................. 21.5. No Impact (%) ............................. 0.0 .................... 0.0 .................... 0.0 .................... 0.0 ............. ....... 0.0 .................... 0.0.



### 6. The first sentence on page 7365, column 1, paragraph 7 is corrected to read as follows:

‘‘At TSL 3, the average LCC impact ranges from $303 for design line 6 to $2,625 for design line 8. The median PBP ranges from 12.8 years for design line 6 to 4.7 years for design line 7’’.

7. On pages 7379 and 7380, § 431.196, the ‘‘%’’ headings in the second row of the tables in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) are corrected to read as ‘‘Efficiency (%)’’.

8. On page 7380, § 431.196, interchange the tables in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) to read as follows:

(b) Liquid-Immersed Distribution Transformers.

(1) The efficiency of a liquidimmersed distribution transformer manufactured on or after January 1, 2010, but before January 1, 2016, shall be no less than that required for theirkVA rating in the table below. Liquidimmersed distribution transformers with kVA ratings not appearing in the table shall have their minimum efficiency level determined by linear interpolation of the kVA and efficiency values immediately above and below that kVA rating.

Single-phase Three-phase kVA Efficiency (%) kVA Efficiency (%)
10 .................................................................................. 98.62 15 ...................................

............................................... 98.36 15 .................................................................................. 98.76 30 ...................................

............................................... 98.62 25 .................................................................................. 98.91 45 ...................................

............................................... 98.76 37.5 ............................................................................... 99.01 75 ....................................

.............................................. 98.91 50 .................................................................................. 99.08 112.5 ................................

............................................. 99.01 75 .................................................................................. 99.17 150 ..................................

.............................................. 99.08 100 ................................................................................ 99.23 225 ...................................

............................................. 99.17 167 ................................................................................ 99.25 300 ...................................

............................................. 99.23 250 ................................................................................ 99.32 500 ...................................

............................................. 99.25 333 ................................................................................ 99.36 750 ...................................

............................................. 99.32 500 ................................................................................ 99.42 1000 ..................................

............................................ 99.36 667 ................................................................................ 99.46 1500 ..................................

............................................ 99.42 833 ................................................................................ 99.49 2000 ..................................

............................................ 99.46


## 11000 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules

Single-phase Three-phase kVA Efficiency (%) kVA Efficiency (%)
2500 .............................................................................. 99.49 **Note:** All efficiency values are at 50 percent of nameplate-rated load, determined according to the DOE Test-Procedure. 10 CFR Part 43 1, Subpart K, Appendix A.



### (2) The efficiency of a liquidimmersed distribution transformer manufactured on or after January 1, 2016, shall be no less than that required for their kVA rating in the table below. Liquid-immersed distribution transformers with kVA ratings not appearing in the table shall have their minimum efficiency level determined by linear interpolation of the kVA and efficiency values immediately above and below that kVA rating. Single-phase Three-phase kVA Efficiency (%) kVA Efficiency (%)
10 .................................................................................. 98.70 15 ...................................

............................................... 98.65 15 .................................................................................. 98.82 30 ...................................

............................................... 98.83 25 .................................................................................. 98.95 45 ...................................

............................................... 98.92 37.5 ............................................................................... 99.05 75 ....................................

.............................................. 99.03 50 .................................................................................. 99.11 112.5 ................................

............................................. 99.11 75 .................................................................................. 99.19 150 ..................................

.............................................. 99.16 100 ................................................................................ 99.25 225 ...................................

............................................. 99.23 167 ................................................................................ 99.33 300 ...................................

............................................. 99.27 250 ................................................................................ 99.39 500 ...................................

............................................. 99.35 333 ................................................................................ 99.43 750 ...................................

............................................. 99.40 500 ................................................................................ 99.49 1000 ..................................

............................................ 99.43 667 ................................................................................ 99.52 1500 ..................................

............................................ 99.48 833 ................................................................................ 99.55 2000 ..................................

............................................ 99.51 2500 .............................................................................. 99.53 **Note:** All efficiency values are at 50 percent of nameplate-rated load, determined according to the DOE Test-Procedure. 10 CFR Part 43 1, Subpart K, Appendix A.



### 9. On pages 7380 and 7381, § 431.196, interchange the tables in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) to read as follows:

(c) Medium-Voltage Dry-Type Distribution Transformers.

(1) The efficiency of a mediumvoltage dry-type distribution transformer manufactured on or after January 1, 2010, but before January 1, 2016, shall be no less than that required for their kVA and BIL rating in the table below. Medium-voltage dry-type distribution transformers with kVA ratings not appearing in the table shall have their minimum efficiency level determined by linear interpolation of the kVA and efficiency values immediately above and below that kVA rating.
Single-phase Three-phase

BIL* 20–45 kV 46–95 kV ≥96 kV BIL* 20–45 kV 46–95 kV ≥96 kV

kVA Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%) kVA Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%)
15 ................. 98.10 97.86 .......................... 15 97.50 97.18 .......................... 25 ................. 98.33 98.12 .......................... 30 97.90 97.63 .......................... 37.5 .............. 98.49 98.30 .......................... 45 98.10 97.86 .......................... 50 ................. 98.60 98.42 .......................... 75 98.33 98.12 .......................... 75 ................. 98.73 98.57 98.53 112.5 98.49 98.30 .......................... 100 ............... 98.82 98.67 98.63 150 98.60 98.42 .......................... 167 ............... 98.96 98.83 98.80 225 98.73 98.57 98.53 250 ............... 99.07 98.95 98.91 300 98.82 98.67 98.63 333 ............... 99.14 99.03 98.99 500 98.96 98.83 98.80 500 ............... 99.22 99.12 99.09 750 99.07 98.95 98.91 667 ............... 99.27 99.18 99.15 1000 99.14 99.03 98.99 833 ............... 99.31 99.23 99.20 1500 99.22 99.12 99.09 2000 99.27 99.18 99.15 2500 99.31 99.23 99.20 *BIL means basic impulse insulation level. **Note:** All efficiency values are at 50 percent of nameplate rated load, determined according to the DOE Test-Procedure. 10 CFR Part 43 1, Subpart K, Appendix A.



### (2) The efficiency of a mediumvoltage dry-type distribution transformer manufactured on or after January 1, 2016, shall be no less than that required for their kVA and BILrating in the table below. Mediumvoltage dry-type distribution transformers with kVA ratings not appearing in the table shall have their


## 11001 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Proposed Rules
minimum efficiency level determined by linear interpolation of the kVA and efficiency values immediately above and below that kVA rating. Single-phase Three-phase

BIL* 20–45 kV 46–95 kV ≥96 kV BIL* 20–45 kV 46–95 kV ≥96 kV

kVA Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%) kVA Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%) Efficiency (%)
15 ................. 98.10 97.86 .......................... 15 97.50 97.18 .......................... 25 ................. 98.33 98.12 .......................... 30 97.90 97.63 .......................... 37.5 .............. 98.49 98.30 .......................... 45 98.10 97.86 .......................... 50 ................. 98.60 98.42 .......................... 75 98.33 98.13 .......................... 75 ................. 98.73 98.57 98.53 112.5 98.52 98.36 .......................... 100 ............... 98.82 98.67 98.63 150 98.65 98.51 .......................... 167 ............... 98.96 98.83 98.80 225 98.82 98.69 98.57 250 ............... 99.07 98.95 98.91 300 98.93 98.81 98.69 333 ............... 99.14 99.03 98.99 500 99.09 98.99 98.89 500 ............... 99.22 99.12 99.09 750 99.21 99.12 99.02 667 ............... 99.27 99.18 99.15 1000 99.28 99.20 99.11 833 ............... 99.31 99.23 99.20 1500 99.37 99.30 99.21 2000 99.43 99.36 99.28 2500 99.47 99.41 99.33 * BIL means basic impulse insulation level. **Note:** All efficiency values are at 50 percent of nameplate rated load, determined according to the DOE Test-Procedure. 10 CFR Part 43 1, Subpart K, Appendix A.

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 15, 2012. Kathleen B. Hogan, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. [FR Doc. 2012–3987 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am] **BILLING CODE 6450–01–P**



### SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION **13 CFR Part 121 RIN 3245–AG30**  

### Small Business Size Standards: Health **Care and Social Assistance**
**AGENCY** 

### : U.S. Small Business Administration. **ACTION** 

### : Proposed rule.
**SUMMARY** 

### : The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) proposes to increase small business size standards for 28 industries in North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Sector 62, Health Care and Social Assistance. As part of its ongoing comprehensive review of all size standards, SBA has evaluated all size standards in NAICS Sector 62 to determine whether the existing size standards should be retained or revised. This proposed rule is one of a series of proposed rules that will review size standards of industries grouped by NAICS Sector. SBA issued a White Paper entitled ‘‘Size Standards Methodology’’ and published a notice in the October 21, 2009 issue of the Federal Register that the ‘‘Size Standards Methodology’’ White Paper was available on its Web site at www.sba.gov/size for public review and comments (74 FR 53940). The ‘‘Size Standards Methodology’’ White Paper explains how SBA establishes, reviews, and modifies its receipts based and employee based small business size standards. In this proposed rule, SBA has applied its methodology that pertains to establishing, reviewing, and modifying a receipts based size standard. **DATES** 

### : SBA must receive comments to this proposed rule on or before April 24, 2012. **ADDRESSES** 

### : You may submit comments, identified by RIN 3245–AG30 by one of the following methods: (1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov, following the instructions for submitting comments; or (2) Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size Standards Division, 409 Third Street SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC 20416. SBA will not accept comments to this proposed rule submitted by email.

SBA will post all comments to this proposed rule without change on www.regulations.gov. If you wish to submit confidential business information (CBI) as defined in the User Notice at www.regulations.gov, you must submit such information to U.S. Small Business Administration, Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size Standards Division, 409 Third Street SW., Mail Code 6530, Washington, DC 20416, or send an email to sizestandards@sba.gov. Highlight the information that you consider to be CBI and explain why you believe SBA should hold this information as confidential. SBA will review your information and determine whether it will make the information public or not. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** 

### : Khem R. Sharma, Ph.D., Chief, Size Standards Division, (202) 205–6618 or sizestandards@sba.gov.
**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** 

### : To determine eligibility for Federal small business assistance, SBA establishes small business size definitions (referred to as size standards) for private sector industries in the United States. SBA uses two primary measures of business size: average annual receipts and average number of employees. SBA uses financial assets, electric output, and refining capacity to measure the size of a few specialized industries. In addition, SBA’s Small Business Investment Company (SBIC), Certified Development Company (504), and 7(a) Loan Programs use either the industry based size standards or net worth and net income based alternative size standards to determine eligibility for those programs. At the beginning of the current comprehensive size standards review, there were 41 different size standards covering 1,141 NAICS industries and 18 sub-industry activities (referred to as ‘‘exceptions’’ in SBA’s table of size standards). Thirty-one of these size levels were based on average annual receipts, seven were based on average number of employees, and three were based on other measures.

Over the years, SBA has received comments that its size standards have not kept up with changes in the