Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 52 / Thursday, March 18, 2010 / Notices 13123 

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. 10 CFR 

430.27(b)(1)(iii). 

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). 

The waiver process also allows any 

interested person who has submitted a 

petition for waiver to file an application 

for an interim waiver of the applicable 

test procedure requirements. 10 CFR 

430.27(a)(2). The Assistant Secretary 

will grant an interim waiver request if 

it is determined that the applicant will 

experience economic hardship if the 

interim waiver is denied, if it appears 

likely that the petition for waiver will be 

granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary 

determines that it would be desirable for 

public policy reasons to grant 

immediate relief pending a 

determination on the petition for 

waiver. 10 CFR 430.27(g). 

On July 14, 2009, GE filed a petition 

for waiver from the test procedures 

applicable to its DCVH480E* and 

DCVH485E* product models (the two 

models differ only in color) of 

condensing clothes dryer. On March 2, 

2010, GE informed DOE that it had 

made a typographical error in the model 

numbers listed in its petition for waiver. 

The correct model numbers of the 

products for which GE seeks a waiver, 

and that DOE analyzed in determining 

whether to grant the interim waiver and 

this petition for waiver, are DCCH480E* 

and DCCH485E*. The applicable test 

procedures are contained in 10 CFR part 

430, subpart B, appendix D—Uniform 

Test Method for Measuring the Energy 

Consumption of Clothes Dryers. GE 

seeks a waiver from the applicable test 

procedures for its DCCH480E* and 

DCCH485E* basic product models 

because, GE asserts, design 

characteristics of this model prevent 

testing according to the currently 

prescribed test procedures. DOE 

previously granted Miele Appliance, 

Inc. (Miele), a waiver from test 

procedures for two similar condenser 

clothes dryer models (T1565CA and 

T1570C). (60 FR 9330 (Feb. 17, 1995)) 

GE claims that its condenser clothes 

dryers cannot be tested pursuant to the 

DOE procedure and requests that the 

same waiver granted to Miele in 1995 be 

granted for GE’s DCCH480E* and 

DCCH485E* models. 

In support of its petition, GE claims 

that the current clothes dryer test 

procedures apply only to vented clothes 

dryers because the test procedures 

require the use of an exhaust restrictor 

on the exhaust port of the clothes dryer 

during testing. Because condenser 

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 in-unit container, 

these products do not use an exhaust 

port like a vented dryer does. GE plans 

to market a condensing clothes dryer for 

situations in which a conventional 

vented clothes dryer cannot be used, 

such as high-rise apartments and 

condominiums, neither of whose 

construction permits the use of external 

venting. 

Assertions and Determinations 

GE’s Petition for Waiver 

On July 14, 2009, GE 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 December 

15, 2009, DOE published GE’s petition 

for waiver and granted GE an interim 

waiver from the current test procedure. 

74 FR 66335. DOE did not receive any 

comments on the GE petition. 

DOE previously granted Miele a 

waiver from test procedures for 

condensing clothes dryers after 

determining that the clothes dryer test 

procedure was not applicable to the 

company’s condenser clothes dryers 

because of the lack of an exhaust port 

for mounting the required exhaust 

restrictor, which is an element of the 

test procedure. 60 FR 9332 (February 17, 

1995). Subsequently, in 2008, DOE 

granted LG a similar waiver for its 

DLEC733W condenser clothes dryer. 73 

FR 66641 (Nov. 10, 2008). In 2009, DOE 

granted a similar waiver to Whirlpool. 

74 FR 66334 (December 15, 2009). 

Therefore, for the reasons discussed 

above and in light of the long-standing 

waiver granted to Miele, and the recent 

waivers to LG and Whirlpool, DOE 

grants GE’s petition for waiver from 

testing of its condenser clothes dryers. 

Consultations With Other Agencies 

DOE consulted with the Federal Trade 

Commission (FTC) staff concerning the 

GE petition for waiver. The FTC staff 

did not have any objections to granting 

a waiver to GE. 

Conclusion 

After careful consideration of all the 

material that was submitted by GE and 

consultation with the FTC staff, it is 

ordered that: 

(1) The petition for waiver submitted 

by the General Electric Co. (Case No. 

CD–004) is hereby granted as set forth 

in the paragraphs below. 

(2) GE shall not be required to test or 

rate its DCCH480E* and DCCH485E* 

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. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 10, 

2010. 

Cathy Zoi 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5937 Filed 3–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Representative 

Average Unit Costs of Energy 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In this notice, the U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) is 

forecasting the representative average 

unit costs of five residential energy 

sources for the year 2010 pursuant to 

the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. 

The five sources are electricity, natural 

gas, No. 2 heating oil, propane, and 

kerosene. 

DATES: The representative average unit 

costs of energy contained in this notice 

will become effective April 19, 2010 and 

will remain in effect until further notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mohammed Khan, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy Forrestal 

Building, Mail Station EE–2J 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
13124 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 52 / Thursday, March 18, 2010 / Notices 

Washington, DC 20585–0121, (202) 

586–7892, Mohammed.Khan@ 

ee.doe.gov 

Francine Pinto, Esq. U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of General Counsel 

Forrestal Building, Mail Station GC– 

72, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0103, (202) 

586–7432, Francine.pinto@ 

hq.doe.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

323 of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act (Act) requires that 

DOE prescribe test procedures for the 

measurement of the estimated annual 

operating costs or other measures of 

energy consumption for certain 

consumer products specified in the Act. 

(42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) These test 

procedures are found in Title 10 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

430, subpart B. 

Section 323(b)(3) of the Act requires 

that the estimated annual operating 

costs of a covered product be calculated 

from measurements of energy use in a 

representative average use cycle or 

period of use and from representative 

average unit costs of the energy needed 

to operate such product during such 

cycle. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) The section 

further requires that DOE provide 

information to manufacturers regarding 

the representative average unit costs of 

energy. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(4)) This cost 

information should be used by 

manufacturers to meet their obligations 

under section 323(c) of the Act. Most 

notably, these costs are used to comply 

with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 

requirements for labeling. 

Manufacturers are required to use the 

revised DOE representative average unit 

costs when the FTC publishes new 

ranges of comparability for specific 

covered products, 16 CFR part 305. 

Interested parties can also find 

information covering the FTC labeling 

requirements at http://www.ftc.gov/ 

appliances. 

DOE last published representative 

average unit costs of residential energy 

in a Federal Register notice entitled, 

‘‘Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products: Representative 

Average Unit Costs of Energy’’, dated 

June 3, 2009, 74 FR 26675. Effective 

April 19, 2010, the cost figures 

published on June 3, 2009, will be 

superseded by the cost figures set forth 

in this notice. 

DOE’s Energy Information 

Administration (EIA) has developed the 

2010 representative average unit aftertax costs found in this notice. The 

representative average unit after-tax 

costs for electricity, natural gas, No. 2 

heating oil, and propane are based on 

simulations used to produce the 

January, 2010, EIA Short-Term Energy 

Outlook. (EIA releases the Outlook 

monthly.) The representative average 

unit after-tax cost for kerosene is 

derived from its price relative to that of 

heating oil, based on the 2004–2008 

averages for these two fuels. The source 

for these price data is the December 

2009, Monthly Energy Review DOE/EIA– 

0035(2010/01). The Short-Term Energy 

Outlook and the Monthly Energy Review 

are available on the EIA Web site at 

http://www.eia.doe.gov. For more 

information on the two sources, contact 

the National Energy Information Center, 

Forrestal Building, EI–30, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–8800, 

e-mail: infoctr@eia.doe.gov. 

The 2010 representative average unit 

costs under section 323(b)(4) of the Act 

are set forth in Table 1, and will become 

effective April 19, 2010. They will 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 10, 

2010. 

Cathy Zoi, 

Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy. 

TABLE 1—REPRESENTATIVE AVERAGE UNIT COSTS OF ENERGY FOR FIVE RESIDENTIAL ENERGY SOURCES

[2010] 

Type of energy Per million Btu 1 In commonly used terms As required by 

test procedure 

Electricity .................................................................... $33.70 11.50¢/kWh 2 3 ............................................................ $.1150/kWh 

Natural Gas ................................................................ 11.94 $1.194/therm 4 or $12.29/MCF 5 6 .............................. .00001194/Btu 

No. 2 Heating Oil ....................................................... 20.76 $2.88/gallon 7 ............................................................. .00002076/Btu 

Propane ...................................................................... 24.31 $2.22/gallon 8 ............................................................. .00002431/Btu 

Kerosene .................................................................... 23.03 $3.11/gallon 9 ............................................................. .00002303/Btu 

Sources: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Short-Term Energy Outlook (January 2010) and Monthly Energy Review (December 2009) 

1. Btu stands for British thermal units. 

2. kWh stands for kilowatt hour. 

3. 1 kWh = 3,412 Btu. 

4. 1 therm = 100,000 Btu. Natural gas prices include taxes. 

5. MCF stands for 1,000 cubic feet. 

6. For the purposes of this table, one cubic foot of natural gas has an energy equivalence of 1,029 Btu. 

7. For the purposes of this table, one gallon of No. 2 heating oil has an energy equivalence of 138,690 Btu. 

8. For the purposes of this table, one gallon of liquid propane has an energy equivalence of 91,333 Btu. 

9. For the purposes of this table, one gallon of kerosene has an energy equivalence of 135,000 Btu. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 52 / Thursday, March 18, 2010 / Notices 13125 

[FR Doc. 2010–5936 Filed 3–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9128–2] 

Science Advisory Board Staff Office; 

Notification of a Public Meeting of the 

Science Advisory Board; 

Environmental Engineering Committee 

Augmented for the Evaluation and 

Comment on EPA’s Proposed 

Research Approach for Studying the 

Potential Relationships Between 

Hydraulic Fracturing and Drinking 

Water Resources 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or Agency) Science 

Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office 

announces a public face-to-face meeting 

of the SAB Environmental Engineering 

Committee (EEC). The SAB EEC, 

augmented with other SAB members, 

will evaluate and comment on EPA’s 

proposed approach to study the 

potential public health and 

environmental protection issues that 

may be associated with hydraulic 

fracturing. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

April 7, 2010 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., 

and April 8, 2010 from 8 a.m. to 12 

noon (Eastern Daylight Time). 

ADDRESSES: The Committee meeting 

will be held at the St. Regis Hotel 

located at 923 16th Street Northwest, 

Washington, DC 20006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Members of the public who wish to 

obtain additional information regarding 

this meeting may contact Mr. Edward 

Hanlon, Designated Federal Officer 

(DFO), EPA Science Advisory Board 

(1400F), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone/ 

voice mail: (202) 343–9946; fax (202) 

233–0643; or via e-mail at 

hanlon.edward@epa.gov. General 

information about the EPA SAB, as well 

as any updates concerning the meeting 

announced in this notice, may be found 

on the SAB Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/sab. Any inquiry 

regarding EPA’s planned research 

approach to study the potential public 

health and environmental protection 

issues that may be associated with 

hydraulic fracturing should be directed 

to Teri Richardson, EPA Office of 

Research and Development (ORD), at 

richardson.teri@epa.gov or (513) 569– 

7949. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background: Pursuant to the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 

U.S.C., App. 2, notice is hereby given 

that the SAB EEC augmented with other 

SAB members will hold a public 

meeting to evaluate and comment on 

EPA’s proposed approach to study the 

potential public health and 

environmental protection issues that 

may be associated with hydraulic 

fracturing performed for extraction of 

natural gas from geologic formations. 

The SAB was established pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. 4365 to provide independent 

scientific and technical advice to the 

Administrator on the technical basis for 

Agency positions and regulations. The 

SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee 

chartered under FACA. The SAB will 

comply with the provisions of FACA 

and all appropriate SAB Staff Office 

procedural policies. 

In its Fiscal Year 2010 Appropriation 

Conference Committee Directive to EPA, 

the U.S. House of Representatives 

approved a provision that urges EPA to 

conduct analyses to assess the potential 

risks to drinking water posed by 

hydraulic fracturing of formations 

including coalbeds and shale for 

extraction of natural gas. Hydraulic 

fracturing (or hydrofracking) generates 

vertical and horizontal fractures in 

underground geologic formations to 

facilitate extraction of gas (or oil) from 

the subsurface. While each formation 

has unique characteristics and features, 

the general process involves drilling a 

vertical well, extending the well bore 

horizontally into the formation, 

removing water, injecting hydrofracking 

fluids and then extracting the natural 

gas along with separation and 

management of fluids. To meet the 

Congressional request, EPA’s ORD has 

initiated a draft approach to gather 

existing data and information including 

a stakeholder input process; to catalog 

potential risks to drinking water 

supplies from hydraulic fracturing; to 

identify data gaps; and to develop 

research questions, research needs, and 

research products. 

ORD is seeking evaluation and 

comment from the SAB regarding EPA’s 

proposed approach. Accordingly, the 

SAB EEC augmented with other SAB 

members will hold a public meeting to 

evaluate and comment on ORD’s 

planned research approach to study the 

potential public health and 

environmental protection issues that 

may be associated with hydraulic 

fracturing. 

Availability of Meeting Materials: The 

agenda and EPA’s ORD proposed 

research approach will be available on 

the SAB Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/sab in advance of the 

meeting. 

Interested members of the public may 

submit relevant written or oral 

information on the topic of this advisory 

activity for the SAB to consider during 

the advisory process. 

Oral Statements: In general, 

individuals or groups requesting an oral 

presentation at this public meeting will 

be limited to five minutes per speaker, 

with no more than a total of one hour 

for all speakers. Interested parties 

should contact Edward Hanlon, DFO, in 

writing (preferably via e-mail), at the 

contact information noted above, by 

March 29, 2010 to be placed on the list 

of public speakers for the meeting. 

Written Statements: Written statements 

should be received in the SAB Staff 

Office by March 29, 2010 so that the 

information may be made available to 

the SAB EEC augmented with other SAB 

members for their consideration. 

Written statements should be supplied 

to the DFO in the following formats: one 

hard copy with original signature, and 

one electronic copy via e-mail 

(acceptable file format: Adobe Acrobat 

PDF, WordPerfect, MS Word, MS 

PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM– 

PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format). 

Submitters are requested to provide two 

versions of each document submitted 

with and without signatures, because 

the SAB Staff Office does not publish 

documents with signatures on its Web 

sites. 

Accessibility: For information on 

access or services for individuals with 

disabilities, please contact Edward 

Hanlon at the phone number or e-mail 

address noted above, preferably at least 

ten days prior to the meeting, to give 

EPA as much time as possible to process 

your request. 

Dated: March 11, 2010. 

Anthony F. Maciorowski, 

Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board 

Staff Office. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5956 Filed 3–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0229; FRL–8816–8] 

Pet Spot-On Analysis and Mitigation 

Plan Available for Public Comment; 

Notice of Availability 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES