Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 15 / Thursday, January 23, 2014 / Notices 3785 

Web site http://www.pcouncil.org/wpcontent/uploads/SRWC_MSE_2012_02_

28.pdf and by mail upon request. NMFS 

is specifically interested in comments 

and information regarding a preferred 

control rule analyzed in the MSE for 

ocean salmon fisheries south of Point 

Arena that is responsive to the 

abundance of the species. The control 

rules are described in the MSE report as 

‘‘management strategies’’ and are as 

follows: management strategy 1 allowed 

for a zero age-3 impact rate, 

management strategy 2 used a historical 

impact rate of 25 percent, management 

strategy 3 used the current era impact 

rate of 20 percent, and management 

strategies 4 through 6 required a 

reduction in impact rates at certain 

abundance thresholds. The control rule 

included in the current RPA (referred to 

as ‘‘management strategy SWR’’ in the 

Winship et al. 2012 addendum, 

beginning on page 57 of the document 

at http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/

uploads/SRWC_MSE_2012_02_28.pdf 

was also analyzed with results 

presented in Winship et al. 2012 

(addendum); we welcome comments on 

this control rule as well. 

References 

Lindley, S.T., R.S. Schick, E. Mora, P.B. 

Adams, J.J. Anderson, S. Greene, C. 

Hanson, B.P. May, D.R. McEwan, R.B. 

MacFarlane, C. Swanson, and J.G. 

Williams. 2007. Framework for assessing 

viability of threatened and endangered 

Chinook salmon and steelhead in the 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Basin. San 

Francisco Estuary and Watershed 

Science 5(1), Article 4: 26 pages. 

Available at: http://

repositories.cdlib.org/jmie/sfews/vol5/

iss1/art4. 

NMFS. 2010. Biological Opinion on the 

Authorization of Ocean Salmon Fisheries 

Pursuant to the Pacific Coast Salmon 

Fishery Management Plan and 

Additional Protective Measures as it 

affects Sacramento River Winter Chinook 

Salmon. National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Southwest Region. April 30, 

2010. Available at: http://

www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/

Final_Harvest_BiOp_April2010.pdf. 

NMFS. 2012. Final Implementation of the 

2010 Reasonable and Prudent 

Alternative Sacramento River winter-run 

Chinook Management Framework for the 

Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery 

Management Plan. National Marine 

Fisheries Service, Southwest Region. 

April 30, 2102. Available at: http://

www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/

30APR2012_Sacramento_Winter_run_

RPA_Implementation.pdf 

O’Farrell, M.R., M.S. Mohr, A.M. Grover, and 

W.H. Satterthwaite. 2012a. Sacramento 

River winter Chinook cohort 

reconstruction: analysis of ocean fishery 

impacts. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA 

Tech. Memo. NOAA–TM–NMFS– 

SWFSC–491, 68p. Available at: http://

docs.lib.noaa.gov/noaa_documents/

NMFS/SWFSC/TM_NMFS_SWFSC/

NOAA–TM–NMFS–SWFSC–491.pdf. 

O’Farrell, M.R., S.D. Allen, and M.S. Mohr. 

2012b. The winter-run harvest model 

(WRHM). U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA 

Tech. Memo. NOAA–TM–NMFS– 

SWFSC–489, 17p. Available at: http://

docs.lib.noaa.gov/noaa_documents/

NMFS/SWFSC/TM_NMFS_SWFSC/

NOAA–TM–NMFS–SWFSC–489.pdf. 

Winship, A.J., M.R. O’Farrell, and M.S. Mohr. 

2012. Management strategy evaluation 

for Sacramento River winter Chinook 

salmon. Report available at: http://

www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/

SRWC_MSE_2012_02_28.pdf. 

Winship, A.J., M.R. O’Farrell, and M.S. Mohr. 

2013. Management strategy evaluation 

applied to the conservation of an 

endangered population subject to 

incidental take. Biological Conservation 

158:155–166. 

Dated: January 16, 2014. 

Sean F. Corson, 

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–01239 Filed 1–22–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

Meeting of the Board of Advisors to 

the Presidents of the Naval 

Postgraduate School and the Naval 

War College 

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act 

(Pub. L. 92–463, as amended), notice is 

hereby given that the following meeting 

of the Board of Advisors (BOA) to the 

Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate 

School (NPS) and the Naval War College 

(NWC) and its two subcommittees will 

be held. This meeting will be open to 

the public. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

Wednesday, February 19, 2014, from 

8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and on Thursday, 

February 20, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 

Eastern Time Zone. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

900 N. Glebe Road, Arlington, VA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Jaye Panza, Naval Postgraduate School, 

Monterey, CA, 93943–5001, telephone 

number 831–656–2514. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Committee examines the effectiveness 

with which the NPS and the NWC are 

accomplishing its missions. The agenda 

is as follows: 

(1) February 19, 2014: General 

deliberations and inquiry by the NWC 

BOA Subcommittee and its parent 

committee NPS/NWC BOA into its 

programs and mission priorities; reaccreditation preparedness; 

administration; state of morale of the 

student body, faculty, and staff; fiscal 

affairs; and any other matters relating to 

the operations of the NWC as the board 

considers pertinent. 

(2) February 20, 2014: The purpose of 

the meeting is to elicit the advice of the 

NPS BOA subcommittee on the Naval 

Service’s Postgraduate Education 

Program and the collaborative exchange 

and partnership between the NPS and 

the Air Force Institute of Technology. 

With its parent committee NPS/NWC 

BOA, the board will inquire into 

programs and curricula; instruction; 

administration; state of morale of the 

student body, faculty, and staff; fiscal 

affairs; as well as reviewing the updates 

on recommendations cited in the 2012 

Navy Inspector General’s report. The 

committee will review any other matters 

relating to the operations of the NPS as 

the board considers pertinent. 

Individuals without a DoD 

Government Common Access Card 

require an escort at the meeting 

location. For access, information, or to 

send written statements for 

consideration at the committee meeting 

must contact Ms. Jaye Panza, Naval 

Postgraduate School, 1 University 

Circle, Monterey, CA 93943–5001 or by 

fax 831–656–3145 by February 7, 2014. 

Dated: January 15, 2014. 

N. A. Hagerty-Ford, 

Commander, Office of the Judge Advocate 

General, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2014–01265 Filed 1–22–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

[Case No. CD–009] 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Decision and 

Order Granting a Waiver to Indesit 

Company from the Department of 

Energy Residential Clothes Dryer Test 

Procedure 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Decision and order. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) gives notice of the 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
3786 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 15 / Thursday, January 23, 2014 / Notices 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part B was re-designated Part A. 

decision and order (Case No. CD–009) 

that grants to Indesit Company (Indesit) 

a waiver from the DOE clothes dryer test 

procedure. The waiver pertains to the 

models of condensing residential 

clothes dryer specified in Indesit’s 

petition. Condensing clothes dryers 

cannot be tested using the currently 

applicable DOE test procedure. Under 

today’s decision and order, Indesit shall 

not be required to test and rate its 

specified models of residential 

condensing clothes dryer pursuant to 

the current test procedure. 

DATES: This Decision and Order is 

effective January 23, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Building Technologies Office, 

Mail Stop EE–5B, Forrestal Building, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–0371. Email: 

Bryan.Berringer@ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Elizabeth Kohl, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

Mail Stop GC–71, Forrestal Building, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0103. 

Telephone: (202) 586–7796. Email: 

Elizabeth.Kohl@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 

430.27(l), DOE gives notice of the 

issuance of its decision and order as set 

forth below. The decision and order 

grants Indesit a waiver from the 

applicable residential clothes dryer test 

procedure at 10 CFR part 430 subpart B, 

appendix D, for the three models of 

condensing clothes dryer specified it its 

petition. 

DOE notes that it has promulgated a 

final test procedure for clothes dryers 

that provides a mechanism for testing 

condensing clothes dryers. (76 FR 972, 

Jan. 6, 2011). Use of this test procedure 

will be required on the compliance date 

of DOE’s amended standards for clothes 

dryers, established by direct final rule in 

2011. (76 FR 22454, April 21, 2011). The 

compliance date of these standards is 

January 1, 2015. (76 FR 26656, May 9, 

2011). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 16, 

2014. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

Decision and Order 

In the Matter of: Indesit Company 

(Case No. CD–009). 

Background 

Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), 

Pub. L. 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291–6309, as 

codified) established the Energy 

Conservation Program for Consumer 

Products Other Than Automobiles, a 

program covering most major household 

appliances, which includes the 

residential clothes washers that are the 

focus of this notice.1 Part B includes 

definitions, test procedures, labeling 

provisions, energy conservation 

standards, and the authority to require 

information and reports from 

manufacturers. Further, Part B 

authorizes the Secretary of Energy to 

prescribe test procedures that are 

reasonably designed to produce results 

which measure energy efficiency, 

energy use, or estimated operating costs, 

and that are not unduly burdensome to 

conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) 

DOE’s regulations contain provisions 

allowing a person to seek a waiver from 

the test procedure requirements for 

covered consumer products if at least 

one of the following conditions is met: 

(1) the petitioner’s basic model contains 

one or more design characteristics that 

prevent testing according to the 

prescribed test procedure, or (2) when 

the prescribed test procedures may 

evaluate the basic model in a manner so 

unrepresentative of its true energy 

consumption characteristics as to 

provide materially inaccurate 

comparative data. (10 CFR 430.27(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 

characteristics. 

The Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy (the 

Assistant Secretary) may grant a waiver 

subject to conditions, including 

adherence to alternate test procedures. 

(10 CFR 430.27(l)) Waivers remain in 

effect pursuant to the provisions of 10 

CFR 430.27(m). 

On October 22, 2013, Indesit filed a 

petition for waiver and an application 

for interim waiver from the test 

procedure applicable to residential 

clothes dryers set forth in 10 CFR Part 

430, subpart B, appendix D. Indesit 

seeks a waiver from the applicable test 

procedure for its Ariston TCL73XNA 

and TCL73XSNA condensing clothes 

dryers because, Indesit asserts, design 

characteristics of these models prevent 

testing in accordance with the currently 

prescribed test procedure, as described 

in greater detail in the following 

paragraph. 

In support of its petition, Indesit 

claims that the current clothes dryer test 

procedure applies only to vented 

clothes dryers because the test 

procedure requires the use of an exhaust 

restrictor on the exhaust port of the 

clothes dryer during testing. Because 

condensing clothes dryers operate by 

blowing air through the wet clothes, 

condensing the water vapor in the 

airstream, and pumping the collected 

water into either a drain line or an inunit container, these products do not 

use an exhaust port like a vented dryer 

does. Indesit plans to market its 

condensing clothes dryers for situations 

in which a conventional vented clothes 

dryer cannot be used, such as high-rise 

apartments and other buildings where 

exhaust venting is not practical or is 

cost prohibitive. 

The Indesit petition requests that DOE 

grant a waiver from the existing test 

procedure to allow for the sale of two 

models (TCL73XNA and TCL73XSNA) 

until DOE prescribes final test 

procedures and minimum energy 

conservation standards appropriate to 

condensing clothes dryers. Similar to 

the other manufacturers of condensing 

clothes dryers, Indesit did not include 

an alternate test procedure in its 

petition. 

Assertions and Determinations 

Indesit’s Petition for Waiver 

On October 22, 2013, Indesit filed a 

petition for waiver from the test 

procedure applicable to residential 

clothes dryers set forth in 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D for 

particular models of condensing clothes 

dryer. On November 13, 2013, DOE 

published in the Federal Register a 

petition for waiver from Indesit for its 

condensing clothes dryer and granted 

Indesit an interim waiver from the test 

procedure. DOE received no comments 

on the petition. DOE granted similar 

waivers for the same type of clothes 

dryer to Bosch (BSH) (76 FR 33271, June 

8, 2011), Miele Appliance, Inc. (Miele) 

(60 FR 9330, February 17, 1995; 76 FR 

17637, March 30, 2011), LG Electronics 

(73 FR 66641, November 10, 2008), 

Whirlpool Corporation (74 FR 66334, 

December 15, 2009), General Electric (75 

FR 13122, March 18, 2010), and ASKO 

Appliances, Inc. (ASKO) (78 FR 53446, 

August 29, 2013). Indesit claims that its 

condensing clothes dryers cannot be 

tested pursuant to the DOE procedure 

and requests that the same waiver 

granted to other manufacturers be 

granted for Indesit’s Ariston TCL73XNA 

and TCL73XSNA models. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 15 / Thursday, January 23, 2014 / Notices 3787 

1For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part B was re-designated Part A. 

Therefore, for the reasons discussed 

above, and in light of the previous 

waivers to other manufacturers, DOE 

grants Indesit’s petition for waiver from 

testing of its Ariston TCL73XNA and 

TCL73XSNA condenser clothes dryers. 

Consultations With Other Agencies 

DOE consulted with the Federal Trade 

Commission (FTC) staff concerning the 

Indesit petition for waiver. The FTC 

staff did not have any objections to 

granting a waiver to Indesit. 

Conclusion 

After careful consideration of all the 

material that was submitted by Indesit 

and consultation with the FTC staff, it 

is ordered that: 

(1) The petition for waiver submitted 

by Indesit Company (Case No. CD–009) 

is hereby granted as set forth in the 

paragraphs below. 

(2) Indesit shall not be required to test 

or rate its Ariston TCL73XNA and 

TCL73XSNA condensing clothes dryer 

models on the basis of the test 

procedures at 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix D. 

(3) This waiver shall remain in effect 

from the date this decision and order 

consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 

430.27(m). 

(4) This waiver is issued on the 

condition that the statements, 

representations, and documentary 

materials provided by the petitioner are 

valid. DOE may revoke or modify this 

waiver at any time if it determines the 

factual basis underlying the petition for 

waiver is incorrect. 

(5) This waiver applies to only those 

models specifically set out in Indesit’s 

petition. Indesit may submit a new or 

amended petition for waiver and request 

for grant of interim waiver, as 

appropriate, for additional models of 

clothes dryers for which it seeks a 

waiver from the DOE test procedure. 

Grant of this petition for waiver also 

does not release a petitioner from any 

applicable certification requirements set 

forth at 10 CFR Part 429. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 

16, 2014. 

lllllllllllllllllll

Kathleen B. Hogan 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

[FR Doc. 2014–01292 Filed 1–22–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

[Case No. RF–036] 

Notice of Petition for Waiver of 

Samsung Electronics America, Inc. 

From the Department of Energy 

Residential Refrigerator and 

Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure, 

and Grant of Interim Waiver 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, 

notice of grant of interim waiver, and 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt 

of a petition for waiver from Samsung 

Electronics America, Inc. (Samsung) 

regarding specified portions of the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) test 

procedure for determining the energy 

consumption of electric refrigerators 

and refrigerator-freezers. In its petition, 

Samsung provides an alternate test 

procedure identical to the test 

procedure DOE published in a final rule 

setting out testing requirements for 

manufacturers to follow starting in 

2014. DOE solicits comments, data, and 

information concerning Samsung’s 

petition and the suggested alternate test 

procedure. Today’s notice also grants 

Samsung an interim waiver from the 

electric refrigerator and refrigeratorfreezer test procedure, subject to use of 

the alternative test procedure set forth 

in this notice. 

DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, 

and information with respect to the 

Samsung Petition until February 24, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by case number ‘‘RF–036,’’ by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: AS_Waiver_Requests@

ee.doe.gov. Include the case number 

(Case No. RF–034) in the subject line of 

the message. 

• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Building 

Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–5B/ 

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., Washington, DC 20024; (202) 

586–2945, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 

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 waivers and rulemakings 

regarding similar refrigerator-freezer 

products. Please call Ms. Brenda 

Edwards at the above telephone number 

for additional information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Building Technologies 

Program, Mail Stop EE–5B, Forrestal 

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–0371. Email: 

Bryan.Berringer@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

Mail Stop GC–71, Forrestal Building, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0103. 

Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email: 

Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Authority 

Title III, Part B of the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), 

Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 6291– 

6309, as codified), established the 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products Other Than 

Automobiles, a program covering most 

major household appliances, which 

includes the electric refrigerator-freezers 

that are the focus of this notice.1 Part B 

includes definitions, test procedures, 

labeling provisions, and energy 

conservation standards for various 

consumer products and provides DOE 

with the authority to require 

information and reports from 

manufacturers. Further, Part B 

authorizes the Secretary of Energy to 

prescribe test procedures that are 

reasonably designed to produce results 

which measure the energy efficiency, 

energy use, or estimated annual 

operating costs of a covered product, 

and that are not unduly burdensome to 

conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The 

current test procedure for electric 

refrigerators and refrigerator-freezers is 

contained in 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

B, appendix A1. 

The regulations set forth in 10 CFR 

430.27 contain provisions that enable a 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES