Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 225 / Thursday, November 21, 2013 / Notices 69839 

proposed information collection or to 

obtain a copy of the proposal and 

associated collection instruments, 

please write to the Department of the 

Army, Army Safety Office, Chief of Staff 

DACS–SF, 2221 S. Clark Street, Room 

1113, Arlington, VA 22202 Attn: Mr. 

Greg Komp, telephone (703) 601–2405. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title; Associated Form; and OMB 

Number: Letter Permit for Non-Army 

Agency Radiation Sources on Army 

Land; OMB Control Number 0702–0109. 

Needs and Uses: Army radiation 

permits are required for use, storage, or 

possession of radiation sources by nonArmy agencies (including their civilian 

contractors) on an Army installation. 

The non-Army applicant will apply 

by letter, email or facsimile with 

supporting documentation to the 

garrison commander through the 

appropriate tenant commander or 

garrison director. 

The Army radiation permit 

application will specify the effective 

date and duration for the Army 

radiation permit and describe the 

purposes for which the Army radiation 

permit is being sought. The application 

will include identification of the trained 

operating personnel who will be 

responsible for implementation of the 

activities authorized by the permit and 

a summary of their professional 

qualifications; the point-of-contact name 

and phone number for the application; 

the applicant’s radiation safety Standing 

Operating Procedures (SOPs); storage 

provisions when the radiation source is 

not in use; and procedures for notifying 

the installation of reportable incidents/ 

accidents. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit entities; not-for-profit institutions; 

State, local or Tribal governments. 

Annual Burden Hours: 470 hours. 

Number of Respondents: 235. 

Responses per Respondent: 1. 

Average Burden per Response: 2 

hours. 

Frequency: On occasion. 

Dated: November 15, 2013. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27877 Filed 11–20–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Applications for New Awards; National 

Institute on Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research—Disability 

and Rehabilitation Research Projects 

and Centers Program—MinorityServing Institution Field-Initiated 

Projects Program 

Correction 

In notice document 2013–27559 

appearing on pages 69398–69402 in the 

issue of November 19, 2013, make the 

following correction: 

On page 69398, in the first column, in 

the 21st line from the bottom, ‘‘February 

18, 2014’’ should read ‘‘January 21, 

2014’’. 

[FR Doc. C1–2013–27559 Filed 11–20–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

DOE/NSF High Energy Physics 

Advisory Panel 

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of 

Science. 

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

meeting of the DOE/NSF High Energy 

Physics Advisory Panel (HEPAP). The 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 

L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that 

public notice of these meetings be 

announced in the Federal Register. 

DATES: Friday, December 6, 2013; 9:00 

a.m.–6:00 p.m. Saturday, December 7, 

2013; 9:00 a.m.–4:00 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Gaithersburg Marriott, 9751 

Washingtonian Boulevard, Gaithersburg, 

Maryland 20878. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Kogut, Executive Secretary; High Energy 

Physics Advisory Panel; U.S. 

Department of Energy; SC–25/

Germantown Building, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–1290; 

Telephone: (301) 903–1298. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose of Meeting: To provide 

advice and guidance on a continuing 

basis to the Department of Energy and 

the National Science Foundation on 

scientific priorities within the field of 

high energy physics research. 

Tentative Agenda: Agenda will 

include discussions of the following: 

December 6–7, 2013 

• Discussion of Department of Energy 

High Energy Physics Program 

• Discussion of National Science 

Foundation Elementary Particle 

Physics Program 

• Reports on and Discussions of Topics 

of General Interest in High Energy 

Physics 

• Public Comment (10-minute rule) 

Public Participation: The meeting is 

open to the public. A webcast of this 

meeting will be available. Please check 

the Web site below for updates and 

information on how to view the 

meeting. If you would like to file a 

written statement with the Committee, 

you may do so either before or after the 

meeting. If you would like to make oral 

statements regarding any of these items 

on the agenda, you should contact John 

Kogut, (301) 903–1298 or John.Kogut@

science.doe.gov. You must make your 

request for an oral statement at least five 

business days before the meeting. 

Reasonable provision will be made to 

include the scheduled oral statements 

on the agenda. The Chairperson of the 

Panel will conduct the meeting to 

facilitate the orderly conduct of 

business. Public comment will follow 

the 10-minute rule. 

Minutes: The minutes of the meeting 

will be available on the U.S. Department 

of Energy’s Office of High Energy 

Physics Advisory Panel Web site: 

http://science.energy.gov/hep/hepap/

meetings/. 

Issued at Washington, DC, on November 

15, 2013. 

LaTanya R. Butler, 

Deputy Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27939 Filed 11–20–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Building Technologies Office 

Prioritization Tool 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Request for information (RFI). 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy’s (DOE) Building Technologies 

Office (BTO) developed the 

Prioritization Tool to improve its 

programmatic decision-making. The tool 

provides an objective framework for 

most energy-saving measures and 

scenarios, as well as methodology, 

comparing long-term benefits and enduser costs applied to various markets, 

end-uses, and lifetimes. Currently, BTO 

seeks comments and information related 

to the Prioritization Tool that improves 

the tool’s accuracy and applicability for 

technology planning within BTO. 

Specifically, this notice solicits 

comments and information on data, 

assumptions and outputs of various 

energy efficiency technologies and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
69840 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 225 / Thursday, November 21, 2013 / Notices 

1http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/

0383(2010).pdf. The AEO provides annual 

projections through the year 2035 of national 

equipment stock and energy consumption based on 

end-use, type of fuel, geographic region, and type 

of building or home. 

activities analyzed by the Prioritization 

Tool. 

DATES: Responses to this RFI must be 

submitted electronically to BTO_P_

Tool_RFI@go.doe.gov no later than 5:00 

p.m. (EST) on December 24, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Patrick Phelan, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE 2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1906. Email: 

patrick.phelan@ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Program Overview 

B. Prioritization Tool Description 

C. Methodology 

D. Inputs and Outputs 

II. Purpose 

III. Disclaimer and Important Notes 

IV. Proprietary Information 

V. Evaluation and Administration by Federal 

and Non-Federal Personnel 

VI. Request for Information Categories and 

Questions 

A. Category 1 

B. Category 2 

C. Category 3 

D. Category 4 

E. Category 5 

F. Category 6 

I. Background 

A. Program Overview 

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 

Building Technologies Office (BTO) 

focuses on three key areas in order to 

develop innovative and cost-effective 

energy saving solutions: 

• Supporting research and development 

of high impact building technologies 

• Accelerating market penetration of 

technologies that will save the 

country energy by assisting to 

overcome key market barriers 

• Organizing and facilitating 

enforcement of minimum efficiency 

standards and building codes to 

ensure energy savings within 

buildings. 

BTO has developed a new technology 

prioritization framework to provide 

analytical support for its programmatic 

decision-making in order to further 

accelerate the transformation of the U.S. 

building energy efficiency sector. 

B. Prioritization Tool Description 

The tool was designed to inform 

programmatic decision-making and 

facilitate the setting of programmatic 

goals. It also allows the evaluation of 

‘‘what if’’ scenarios when pursuing 

potential competing energy efficiency 

measures, and it ultimately helps the 

BTO to create Funding Opportunity 

Announcements (FOAs) objectives. 

Currently, the tool contains data on over 

500 energy efficiency measures along 

with their markets. It has the capability 

to perform extensive analyses using 

established methodology for calculating 

energy savings potential and the costs of 

conserved energy associated with each 

measure. 

The Prioritization Tool enables open 

and objective comparison of hundreds 

of technology and market-based 

investment opportunities available to 

BTO. The energy efficiency measures 

identified in the tool cover a spectrum 

of market opportunities, including 

residential and commercial buildings, 

new and existing buildings, as well as 

industrial and outdoor applications. 

Most of the measures considered fall 

within one of BTO’s main focus areas in 

building energy end-use sectors: 

• Heating, ventilation and airconditioning (HVAC) 

• Water heating 

• Appliances 

• Lighting 

• Windows 

• Envelope: insulation and roofing 

• Sensors and controls 

• Miscellaneous electric loads 

The tool strives to be comprehensive by 

including most known energy efficiency 

measures proven to save energy; 

laboratory-demonstrated, field-tested, 

analytically derived (with peer review) 

savings, and inclusive by integrating 

inputs from hundreds of sources and 

expert reviews. 

While BTO has identified over five 

hundred energy efficiency measures, it 

chose to narrow the scope of analysis to 

focus on the most promising measures 

that have the greatest potential for 

energy savings across the United States. 

By excluding measures based on the 

following predefined criteria, BTO has 

created a portfolio consisting of 261 

measures which, by using the 

Prioritization Tool, were subsequently 

subjected to a more extensive 

quantitative analysis to assure only the 

highest impact measures are the focus of 

further effort. The approach was first for 

BTO to focus on technologies which had 

the highest data quality (i.e., where 

peer-reviewed energy efficiency and 

cost data are available in published 

reports or from technology experts). 

Then, measures were excluded from 

further analysis if they: 

• Offered low energy savings 

potential (less than 100 TBtu in the year 

2030); 

• Involved fuel switching (unless the 

analysis team deemed a technology as 

important to assess); 

• Had one or more significant market 

barriers; 

• Were deemed impractical by the 

analysis team; 

• Were already included in the 

Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2010 

baseline, which takes into account 

known technologies, technological and 

demographic trends, and current laws 

and regulations. 

These criteria were considered as 

general guidelines; exceptions for 

certain promising or cost effective 

measures were made on a case-by-case 

basis based on expert analysis. Finally, 

BTO analyzed and prioritized, both 

individually and in the context of the 

full portfolio of measures, all 261 

measures having relatively high energy 

savings potential and significant ability 

to compete in the market place. 

C. Methodology 

The BTO Prioritization Tool uses 

established methodologies to evaluate 

under a variety of scenarios the 

incremental lifetime costs of a measure’s 

energy savings potential. The tool 

calculates potential savings at the 

national or regional level and compares 

the results to a business-as-usual 

baseline defined in the U.S. Energy 

Information Administration’s (EIA) 

Annual Energy Outlook 2010 (AEO).1

The following scenarios are used for the 

prioritization analysis and represent 

potential annual energy savings 

associated for each measure: 

• Technical Potential is the annual 

energy savings achieved by instant 

replacement of all technically suitable 

existing stock in 2010 and beyond with 

the proposed measure, regardless of 

cost. Although the technical potential 

cannot be realized, it provides an upper 

bound to the maximum energy savings 

that can be achieved by the proposed 

measure assuming instant and complete 

market adoption of the technology. 

• Maximum Adoption Potential is the 

total annual savings based on 

deployment of the evaluated measure 

given 100% market penetration for all 

end-of-life or accelerated replacements 

and new purchases or new construction 

installations. The entire existing stock is 

replaced at an accelerated schedule for 

cases when a retrofit opportunity is cost 

effective, which means the present 

value of the energy savings of other 

efficiency measures exceeds the full, 

installed cost of the evaluated efficiency 

measure. Therefore, it becomes 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 225 / Thursday, November 21, 2013 / Notices 69841 

2Bass, F.M., 1969, ‘‘A New Product Growth 

Model for Consumer Durables,’’ Management 

Science, Vol. 15, pp. 215–227. 

economically rational to replace all of 

the currently deployed stock 

immediately with the efficiency 

measure. This scenario corresponds to 

the least expensive means to deploy a 

given efficiency measure into the 

marketplace. This potential is also 

referred to as Unstaged Maximum 

Adoption Potential. 

• Staged Maximum Adoption 

Potential adjusts the savings of the 

Maximum Adoption Potential to avoid 

double-counting energy savings for 

measures with overlapping markets 

within a given portfolio. For example, 

the installation of compact fluorescent 

light bulbs would reduce the potential 

energy savings from light-emitting 

diodes (LEDs). The savings of the 

lowest-cost measures are accounted for 

first. 

• Adoption-Based Potential uses the 

Bass diffusion model2 2 to represent a 

more realistic potential impact on 

energy savings in the marketplace. This 

scenario allows simulation of the DOE 

programs’ impact on measure diffusion 

and assumes that research and 

development and deployment activities 

would accelerate market introduction. It 

also allows for evaluation of standards 

by replacing all purchased stock with 

the technology being evaluated once a 

standard is set in place. For this RFI, 

outputs from this scenario are not 

available but will be addressed in future 

publications. 

For the unstaged and staged 

Maximum Adoption Potential scenarios, 

the tool also calculates the levelized 

cost of conserved energy (CCE), which 

is an annualized value of discounted 

costs and benefits of each measure. 

More specifically, the CCE allows 

comparison of end-user costs per unit of 

conserved energy for each measure. The 

end-user cost refers to the difference in 

capital, operations, and maintenance 

costs between the measure being 

analyzed and a typical baseline, 

adjusted for potential cost differences 

resulting from the variation in lifetimes 

between the proposed measure and the 

baseline. CCE is used during staging 

analysis, which involves adjusting the 

energy savings of each measure by 

taking into account competition for 

savings within the same or overlapping 

markets, and allocating savings within 

specific markets to measures with the 

lowest unstaged CCE first. 

Consequently, the staged CCE is 

calculated based on adjusted staged 

savings. Hence the staged CCE is 

defined as the annualized value of 

discounted cost per unit of conserved 

energy after staging of energy savings for 

each measure. Results are presented for 

both unstaged and staged scenarios by 

graphing unstaged or staged CCE versus 

unstaged or staged Maximum Adoption 

Potential savings, respectively. 

For further overview, discussion and 

examples of how the Prioritization Tool 

analyses are conducted, please view the 

video presentation at http://media.

navigant.com/videotest/EN_

DOEWebex_VID_0913.html. For more 

detailed description and discussion of 

the methodologies underlying the BTO 

Prioritization Tool’s analytical 

capabilities, as well as its outputs, 

caveats, and functions, refer to the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

(NREL) Technical Report: NREL/TP– 

6A20–54799, available at http://www.

nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/54799.pdf. 

D. Inputs and Outputs 

DOE seeks comments and information 

on measure inputs and assumptions 

used by the BTO Prioritization Tool as 

well as the outputs generated by the 

tool. The details of the inputs and 

outputs for the defined portfolio of 261 

measures are provided in the 

spreadsheet, available at https://eereexchange.energy.gov/Default.aspx?

Search=prioritization%20tool&Search

Type=#FoaIdc83baeea-4a16-48fa-a123- 

7c03796b503b and titled: RFI 

attachments_v11. The spreadsheet is 

divided into eight energy end-uses: 

Heating, ventilation and airconditioning (HVAC), water heating, 

envelope, windows, appliances, sensors 

and controls, lighting, and 

miscellaneous electric loads (MELs). 

Information on each end-use is 

presented in two tabs: An input tab that 

contains relevant input information on 

each measure and an output tab that 

contains the analytical results for the 

year 2030. The inputs include data, 

calculations and assumptions based on 

the sources listed for each energy 

efficiency measure. More specifically, 

the inputs include a description of each 

measure, targeted market sector, typical 

technology life expectancy, energy 

consumption, and installed costs for 

both the baseline and high-efficiency 

measures. It also includes the 

percentage energy savings and cost 

premium of an efficient measure 

compared to the baseline measure. DOE 

also seeks comments and information 

with regard to the tool’s outputs, which 

include estimated Technical Potential 

energy savings, Unstaged Maximum 

Adoption Potential savings, unstaged 

cost of conserved energy (CCE), Staged 

Maximum Adoption Potential savings, 

and staged CCE for each measure in the 

year 2030. Each column of the 

spreadsheet referenced above contains 

specific input or output data, and is 

annotated with a comment box that 

further explains the data in that column. 

For further information on the 

Prioritization Tool’s individual measure 

inputs, refer to its notes and references 

columns. For further information on the 

tool’s outputs, refer to NREL TP 6A20– 

54799 and the BTO video presentation, 

which can be found at links referenced 

above. 

II. Purpose 

The purpose of this RFI is to solicit 

comments and information from 

industry, academia, research 

laboratories, government agencies, and 

other stakeholders on input and output 

data for all measures evaluated in the 

tool. DOE seeks data on new measures 

that may be missing from the tool or 

measures that have not been evaluated 

but have potential for significant 

national energy savings. This is solely a 

request for information and not a 

Funding Opportunity Announcement 

(FOA). EERE is not accepting 

applications for funding related to this 

RFI at this time. 

III. Disclaimer and Important Notes 

This RFI is not a Funding 

Opportunity Announcement (FOA); 

therefore, EERE is not accepting 

applications at this time. EERE may 

issue a FOA in the future based on or 

related to the content and responses to 

this RFI; however, EERE may also elect 

not to issue a FOA. There is no 

guarantee that a FOA will be issued as 

a result of this RFI. Responding to this 

RFI does not provide any advantage or 

disadvantage to potential applicants if 

EERE chooses to issue a FOA regarding 

the subject matter. Final details, 

including the anticipated award size, 

quantity, and timing of EERE funded 

awards, will be subject to Congressional 

appropriations and direction. 

Any information obtained as a result 

of this RFI is intended to be used by the 

Government on a non-attribution basis 

for planning and strategy development; 

this RFI does not constitute a formal 

solicitation for proposals or abstracts. 

Your response to this notice will be 

treated as information only. EERE will 

review and consider all responses in its 

formulation of program strategies for the 

identified materials of interest that are 

the subject of this request. In accordance 

with the Federal Acquisition 

Regulations, 48 CFR 15.201(e), 

responses to this notice are not offers 

and cannot be accepted by the 

Government to form a binding contract. 

EERE will not provide reimbursement 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
69842 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 225 / Thursday, November 21, 2013 / Notices 

for costs incurred in responding to this 

RFI. Respondents are advised that DOE 

is under no obligation to acknowledge 

receipt of the information received or 

provide feedback to respondents with 

respect to any information submitted 

under this RFI. Responses to this RFI do 

not bind EERE to any further actions 

related to this topic. 

IV. Proprietary Information 

Because information received in 

response to this RFI may be used to 

structure future programs and FOAs 

and/or otherwise be made available to 

the public, respondents are strongly 

advised to NOT include any information 

in their responses that might be 

considered business sensitive, 

proprietary, or otherwise confidential. 

If, however, a respondent chooses to 

submit business sensitive, proprietary, 

or otherwise confidential information, it 

must be clearly and conspicuously 

marked as such in the response. 

Responses containing confidential, 

proprietary, or privileged information 

must be conspicuously marked as 

described below. Failure to comply with 

these marking requirements may result 

in the disclosure of the unmarked 

information under the Freedom of 

Information Act or otherwise. The U.S. 

Federal Government is not liable for the 

disclosure or use of unmarked 

information, and may use or disclose 

such information for any purpose. 

If your response contains confidential, 

proprietary, or privileged information, 

you must include a cover sheet marked 

as follows identifying the specific pages 

containing confidential, proprietary, or 

privileged information: 

Notice of Restriction on Disclosure and Use 

of Data: Pages [list applicable pages] of this 

response may contain confidential, 

proprietary, or privileged information that is 

exempt from public disclosure. Such 

information shall be used or disclosed only 

for the purposes described in this RFI: DE– 

FOA–0001024. The Government may use or 

disclose any information that is not 

appropriately marked or otherwise restricted, 

regardless of source. 

In addition, (1) the header and footer 

of every page that contains confidential, 

proprietary, or privileged information 

must be marked as follows: ‘‘Contains 

Confidential, Proprietary, or Privileged 

Information Exempt from Public 

Disclosure’’ and (2) every line and 

paragraph containing proprietary, 

privileged, or trade secret information 

must be clearly marked with double 

brackets or highlighting. 

V. Evaluation and Administration by 

Federal and Non-Federal Personnel 

Federal employees are subject to the 

non-disclosure requirements of a 

criminal statute, the Trade Secrets Act, 

18 U.S.C. 1905. The Government may 

seek the advice of qualified non-Federal 

personnel. The Government may also 

use non-Federal personnel to conduct 

routine, nondiscretionary administrative 

activities. The respondents, by 

submitting their response, consent to 

DOE providing their response to nonFederal parties. Non-Federal parties 

given access to responses must be 

subject to an appropriate obligation of 

confidentiality prior to being given the 

access. Submissions may be reviewed 

by support contractors and private 

consultants. 

VI. Request for Information Categories 

and Questions 

DOE requests that manufacturers, 

utilities, research organizations, state 

and municipal energy programs, and 

other stakeholders submit their 

comments and additional information 

on the Prioritization Tool’s inputs and 

outputs for measures as attachments to 

an email. It is recommended that 

attachments with file sizes exceeding 

25MB be compressed (i.e., zipped) to 

ensure message delivery. Only 

electronic responses will be accepted. 

Respondents may answer as many or as 

few questions as they wish. EERE will 

not respond to individual submissions 

or publish publicly a compendium of 

responses. A response to this RFI will 

not be viewed as a binding commitment 

to develop or pursue the project or ideas 

discussed, nor does it provide an 

advantage to future Funding 

Opportunity Announcements. 

Respondents are requested to provide 

the following information in their 

response to this RFI: 

• Company/institution name; 

• Company/institution contact; 

• Contact’s address, phone number, 

and email address. 

DOE invites comments and 

information from respondents on all of 

the input and output data that are 

provided in the spreadsheet (https:// 

eere-exchange.energy.gov/

Default.aspx?Search=prioritization

%20tool&SearchType=#FoaIdc83baeea4a16-48fa-a123-7c03796b503b), as well 

as any of the elements previously 

discussed or additional issues the 

respondent deems important. Use the 

following email address: 

BTO_P_Tool_RFI@go.doe.gov. 

Additional high-quality data sources 

and references are needed to evaluate 

any other possible initiatives to expand 

the portfolio and help identify the most 

promising cost-effective energy 

reduction measures for buildings. 

Specifically, DOE is requesting 

comment and information on the 

following topics: 

A. Category 1: Information on BTO 

Prioritization Tool’s Inputs 

Please provide your comments on the 

accuracy of the inputs of the 

Prioritization Tool, listed in the input 

tab for each energy end-use field in the 

spreadsheet (https://eereexchange.energy.gov/

Default.aspx?Search=prioritization%20

tool&SearchType=#FoaIdc83baeea4a16-48fa-a123-7c03796b503b). These 

inputs include the measure’s 

description, targeted market sector, 

technology typical life expectancy, 

energy consumption and installed cost 

for both baseline and efficient measures, 

and/or percentage energy savings and 

cost premium of an efficient measure 

compared to the baseline measure. 

B. Category 2: Additional Information 

on BTO Prioritization Tool’s Inputs 

Please provide additional up-to-date, 

peer-reviewed and published 

information, studies, and reports on any 

of the inputs of the evaluated energy 

efficiency measures. 

C. Category 3: BTO Prioritization Tool’s 

Generated Outputs 

Please provide your comments on the 

perceived accuracy of the tool’s 

generated outputs listed in the 

spreadsheet, whether as a whole for the 

entire portfolio of measures or in part 

for each measure. Specifically, these 

outputs include: Technical Potential; 

Unstaged Maximum Adoption Potential, 

unstaged CCE; Staged Maximum 

Adoption Potential, and staged CCE. 

D. Category 4: Information on Absent 

Buildings-Related Energy Efficiency 

Measures That May Enhance the Tool or 

Measures That Are Listed But Were 

Excluded From Analysis 

Please provide any up-to-date, peerreviewed and published information, 

studies and reports on buildings-related 

energy efficiency measures missing from 

the tool or measures that are listed but 

were excluded from analysis due to a 

lack of reliable peer-reviewed, 

published data. While only a couple 

hundred measures are included in the 

final analysis, hundreds of others are 

available for analysis and can be viewed 

in the tab called ‘‘Excluded Measures’’ 

in the spreadsheet referenced above. For 

each measure, DOE is specifically 

interested in information on measure 

description, its incremental cost and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 225 / Thursday, November 21, 2013 / Notices 69843 

1 15 U.S.C. 717–817–w. 

2 15 U.S.C. 3301–3432. 

3The Commission defines burden as the total 

time, effort, or financial resources expended by 

persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 

provide information to or for a Federal agency. For 

further explanation of what is included in the 

information collection burden, reference 5 Code of 

Federal Regulations 1320.3. 

energy savings over its baseline 

technology, life expectancy, and a 

description of the market to which the 

measure can be applied. 

E. Category 5: Benefits or Risks of Using 

the BTO Prioritization Tool 

What are potential or perceived 

benefits or risks of using the BTO 

Prioritization Tool to inform decisionmaking within BTO? 

F. Category 6: Public Access to the BTO 

Prioritization Tool 

What is the perceived value in the 

BTO Prioritization Tool models and 

analysis, and interest in having public 

access to the BTO Prioritization Tool? If 

the BTO Prioritization Tool is to be 

made publically available, what format 

is preferred (e.g., real-time online 

execution, downloadable Excel file, 

downloadable non-Excel file, etc.)? An 

example of a similar publically available 

software tool is the System Advisor 

Model for renewable energy systems 

(https://sam.nrel.gov/). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on November 

13, 2013. 

Roland J. Risser, 

Director, Building Technologies Office, 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27941 Filed 11–20–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. IC14–3–000] 

Commission Information Collection 

Activities (Ferc–Ferc–549d); Comment 

Request; Extension 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of information collection 

and request for comments. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission or 

FERC) is soliciting public comment on 

the currently approved information 

collection, FERC–549D (Quarterly 

Transportation and Storage Report for 

Intrastate Natural Gas and Hinshaw 

Pipelines). 

DATES: Comments on the collection of 

information are due January 21, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

(identified by Docket No. IC14–3–000) 

by either of the following methods: 

• eFiling at Commission’s Web site: 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/

efiling.asp. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

Instructions: All submissions must be 

formatted and filed in accordance with 

submission guidelines at: http:// 

www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide.asp. For user assistance contact 

FERC Online Support by email at 

ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or by phone 

at: (866) 208–3676 (toll-free), or (202) 

502–8659 for TTY. 

Docket: Users interested in receiving 

automatic notification of activity in this 

docket or in viewing/downloading 

comments and issuances in this docket 

may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docsfiling/docs-filing.asp. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Brown may be reached by email 

at DataClearance@FERC.gov, telephone 

at (202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273– 

0873. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Quarterly Transportation and 

Storage Report for Intrastate Natural Gas 

and Hinshaw Pipelines. 

OMB Control No.: 1902–0253 

Type of Request: Three-year extension 

of the FERC–549D information 

collection requirements with no changes 

to the current reporting requirements. 

Abstract: The reporting requirements 

under FERC–549D are required to carry 

out the Commission’s policies in 

accordance with the general authority in 

Sections 1(c) of the Natural Gas Act 

(NGA) 1 and Sections 311 of the Natural 

Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA).2 This 

collection promotes transparency by 

collecting and making available 

intrastate and Hinshaw pipeline 

transactional information. The 

Commission collects the data upon a 

standardized form with all requirements 

outlined in 18 CFR 284.126. 

The FERC Form 549D collects the 

following information: 

• Full legal name and identification 

number of the shipper receiving service; 

• Type of service performed for each 

transaction; 

• The rate charged under each 

transaction; 

• The primary receipt and delivery 

points for the transaction, specifying the 

rate schedule/name of service and 

docket were approved; 

• The quantity of natural gas the 

shipper is entitled to transport, store, 

and deliver for each transaction; 

• The term of the transaction, 

specifying the beginning and ending 

month and year of current agreement; 

• Total volumes transported, stored, 

injected or withdrawn for the shipper; 

and 

• Annual revenues received for each 

shipper, excluding revenues from 

storage services. 

Filers submit the Form-549D on a 

quarterly basis. 

Access to the FERC–549D Information 

Collection Materials: A copy of the 

current form and related materials can 

be found at http://www.ferc.gov/docsfiling/forms.asp#549d, but will not be 

included in the Federal Register. The 

Commission will not publish these 

materials in the Federal Register. 

Type of Respondents: Intrastate 

natural gas and Hinshaw pipelines. 

Estimate of Annual Burden: 3 The 

Commission estimates the total Public 

Reporting Burden for this information 

collection as: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES