### 25505 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 86 / Monday, May 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

(2) The lower 95 percent confidence limit (LCL) of the true mean divided by 0.95, where:

And x  ̄ is the sample mean; s is the sample standard deviation; n is the number of samples; and t0.95 is the t statistic for a 95% one-tailed confidence interval with n

¥ 1 degrees of freedom (from Appendix A to subpart B of part 429).

(2) Alternative efficiency determination methods. In lieu of testing, a represented value of efficiency or consumption for a basic model of commercial packaged boiler must be determined through the application of an AEDM pursuant to the requirements of § 429.70 and the provisions of this section, where:

(i) Any represented value of energy consumption or other measure of energy use of a basic model for which consumers would favor lower values shall be greater than or equal to the output of the AEDM and less than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model; and

(ii) Any represented value of energy efficiency or other measure of energy consumption of a basic model for which consumers would favor higher values shall be less than or equal to the output of the AEDM and greater than or equal to the Federal standard for that basic model.

(b) Certification reports. (1) The requirements of § 429.12 are applicable to commercial packaged boilers; and

(2) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a certification report must include the following public equipment-specific information: The combustion efficiency in percent (%) or the thermal efficiency in percent (%), as required in § 431.87 of this chapter; and the maximum rated input capacity in British thermal units per hour (Btu/h).

(3) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a certification report must include the following additional equipment-specific information:

(i) Whether the basic model is engineered-to-order; and

(ii) For any basic model rated with an AEDM, whether the manufacturer elects the witness test option for verification testing. (See § 429.70(c)(5)(iii) for options). However, the manufacturer may not select more than 10% of AEDM-rated basic models to be eligible for witness testing.

(4) Pursuant to § 429.12(b)(13), a certification report may include supplemental testing instructions in PDF format. A manufacturer may also include with a certification report other supplementary items in PDF format (e.g., manuals) for DOE consideration in performing testing under subpart C of this part.

(c) Alternative methods for determining efficiency or energy use for commercial packaged boilers can be found in § 429.70.

■ 10. Section 429.70 is amended by revising the section heading and the heading of paragraph (c) to read as follows:

**§ 429.70 Alternative methods for determining energy efficiency and energy** 

**use.** * * * * *

(c) Alternative efficiency determination method (AEDM) for commercial HVAC (includes commercial warm air furnaces and commercial packaged boilers), WH, and refrigeration equipment —(1) * * *

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2014–10085 Filed 5–2–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6450–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE**

**Office of the Secretary**

**32 CFR Part 312**

**[Docket ID: DoD–2014–OS–0060]**

**Privacy Act of 1974; Implementation**

**AGENCY :**  Office of Inspector General, DoD.

**ACTION :**  Direct final rule with request for
comments.

**SUMMARY :**  The Office of Inspector General is exempting a new system of records, CIG–29, entitled, ‘‘Privacy and Civil Liberties Complaint Reporting System’’ from subsections (c)(3); (d)(1), (2), (3), (4); (e)(1) and (e)(4); (G), (H), (I); and (f) of the Privacy Act, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a.

This direct final rule makes no substantive changes to the Office of Inspector General Privacy Program rules.

These changes will allow the Department to add an exemption rule to the Office of Inspector General Privacy Program rules that will exempt applicable Department records and/or material from certain portions of the Privacy Act. This will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of DoD’s program by preserving the exempt status of the applicable records and/or material when the purposes underlying the exemption(s) are valid and
necessary. This rule is being published as a direct final rule as the Department of Defense does not expect to receive any adverse comments, and so a proposed rule is unnecessary.

**DATES :**  This rule will be effective on July 14, 2014 unless adverse comment is received by July 7, 2014. If adverse comment is received, the Department of Defense will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the Federal Register

. **ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods:

* Federal Rulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

* Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, 2nd Floor, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350–3100.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Mark Dorgan, DoD IG FOIA/Privacy Office, Department of Defense, Inspector General, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA 22350–1500 or telephone: (703) 699–5680.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Direct Final Rule and Significant Adverse Comments

DoD has determined this rulemaking meets the criteria for a direct final rule because it involves nonsubstantive changes dealing with DoD’s management of its Privacy Programs. DoD expects no opposition to the changes and no significant adverse comments. However, if DoD receives a significant adverse comment, the Department will withdraw this direct final rule by publishing a notice in the Federal Register . A significant adverse comment is one that explains: (1) Why the direct final rule is inappropriate, including challenges to the rule’s underlying premise or approach; or (2) why the direct final rule will be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether a comment necessitates withdrawal of this direct final rule, DoD will consider whether it warrants a substantive response in a notice and comment
process.


### 25506 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 86 / Monday, May 5, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ and Executive Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review’’

It has been determined that this rule is not a significant rule. This rule does not (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy; a sector of the economy; productivity; competition; jobs; the environment; public health or safety; or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another Agency; (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in these Executive orders. Public Law 96–354, ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility Act’’ (5 U.S.C. Chapter 6)

This rule will not have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it is concerned only with the administration of Privacy Act systems of records within the Department of Defense. A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Public Law 96–511, ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act’’ (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35)

This rule does not contain any information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Section 202, Public Law 104–4, ‘‘Unfunded Mandates Reform Act’’

These amendments do not involve a Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more and that such rulemaking will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’

These amendments do not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, no Federalism assessment is required. List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 312

Privacy. Accordingly, 32 CFR part 312 is amended as follows: **PART 312—OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (OIG) PRIVACY**  **PROGRAM**

■ 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR part 312 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat. 1896 (5 U.S.C. 552a).

■ 2. Section 312.12 is amended by adding paragraph (k) to read as follows:

**§ 312.12 Exemptions.**
* * * * *

(k) System identifier: CIG–29. (1) System Name: Privacy and Civil Liberties Complaint Reporting System.

(2) Exemptions: Any portion of this record system which falls within the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552a (j)(2), (k)(2)and (k)(5) may be exempt from the following subsections of 5 U.S.C. 552a: (c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I).

(3) Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a(j)(2), (k)(2), and (k)(5).

(4) Reasons: To ensure the integrity of the privacy and civil liberties process. The execution requires that information be provided in a free and open manner without fear of retribution or harassment in order to facilitate a just, thorough, and timely resolution of the complaint or inquiry. Disclosures from this system can enable individuals to conceal their wrongdoing or mislead the course of the investigation by concealing, destroying, or fabricating evidence or documents. In addition, disclosures can subject sources and witnesses to harassment or intimidation which may cause individuals not to seek redress for wrongs through privacy and civil liberties channels for fear of retribution or harassment. There is a clear need to protect national security information from inadvertent disclosure.

Dated: April 30, 2014. Aaron Siegel, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2014–10190 Filed 5–2–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 5001–06–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0005; FRL–9910–33– Region 3]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Delaware;**  **Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report State Implementation Plan** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). **ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Delaware through the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC). Delaware’s SIP revision addresses requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s rules that require states to submit periodic reports describing progress towards reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy of the state’s existing implementation plan addressing regional haze (regional haze SIP). EPA is approving Delaware’s SIP revision on the basis that it addresses the progress report and adequacy determination requirements for the first implementation period for regional haze.

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on June 4, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0005. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 1401, Dover, Delaware 19903.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Irene Shandruk, (215) 814–2166, or by email at shandruk.irene@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  I. Background

On February 25, 2014 (79 FR 10442), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the State of Delaware. In the NPR, EPA proposed approval of Delaware’s progress report SIP, a report on progress made in the first implementation period towards RPGs for the Class I area outside the State that is affected by emissions from