This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

3229 

Vol. 87, No. 14 

Friday, January 21, 2022 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[EERE–2020–BT–STD–0039] 

RIN 1904–AF00 

Energy Conservation Program: Energy 

Conservation Standards for 

Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products, 

Webinar and Availability of the 

Preliminary Technical Support 

Document 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notification of a webinar and 

availability of preliminary technical 

support document. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (‘‘DOE’’ or ‘‘the Department’’) 

will hold a webinar to discuss and 

receive comments on the preliminary 

analysis it has conducted for purposes 

of evaluating energy conservation 

standards for miscellaneous 

refrigeration products (‘‘MREFs’’). The 

meeting will cover the analytical 

framework, models, and tools that DOE 

is using to evaluate potential standards 

for these products; the results of 

preliminary analyses performed by 

DOE; the potential energy conservation 

standard levels derived from these 

analyses that DOE could consider for 

this product should it determine that 

proposed amendments are necessary; 

and any other issues relevant to the 

evaluation of energy conservation 

standards for MREFs. In addition, DOE 

encourages written comments on these 

subjects. To inform interested parties 

and to facilitate this process, DOE has 

prepared an agenda, a preliminary 

technical support document (‘‘TSD’’), 

and briefing materials, which are 

available on the DOE website at: 

www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ 

appliance_standards/standards.aspx?

productid=39&action=viewlive. 

DATES: 

Meeting: DOE will hold a webinar on 

Thursday, February 17, 2022, from 

12:30 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. See section IV, 

‘‘Public Participation,’’ for webinar 

registration information, participant 

instructions and information about the 

capabilities available to webinar 

participants. 

Comments: Written comments and 

information will be accepted on or 

before, March 22, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are 

encouraged to submit comments using 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Alternatively, interested persons may 

submit comments, identified by docket 

number EERE–2020–BT–STD–0039, by 

any of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: To MRP2020STD0039@

ee.doe.gov. Include docket number 

EERE–2020–BT–STD–0039 in the 

subject line of the message. 

No telefacsimiles (‘‘faxes’’) will be 

accepted. For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on this process, see section 

IV of this document. 

Although DOE has routinely accepted 

public comment submissions through a 

variety of mechanisms, including postal 

mail and hand delivery/courier, the 

Department has found it necessary to 

make temporary modifications to the 

comment submission process in light of 

the ongoing corona virus 2019 

(‘‘COVID–19’’) pandemic. DOE is 

currently suspending receipt of public 

comments via postal mail and hand 

delivery/courier. If a commenter finds 

that this change poses an undue 

hardship, please contact Appliance 

Standards Program staff at (202) 586– 

1445 to discuss the need for alternative 

arrangements. Once the COVID–19 

pandemic health emergency is resolved, 

DOE anticipates resuming all of its 

regular options for public comment 

submission, including postal mail and 

hand delivery/courier. 

Docket: The docket for this activity, 

which includes Federal Register 

notices, comments, public meeting 

transcripts, and other supporting 

documents/materials, is available for 

review at www.regulations.gov. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov index. 

However, some documents listed in the 

index, such as those containing 

information that is exempt from public 

disclosure, may not be publicly 

available. 

The docket web page can be found at 

www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE2020-BT-STD-0039. The docket web 

page contains instructions on how to 

access all documents, including public 

comments in the docket. See section IV 

for information on how to submit 

comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dr. Stephanie Johnson, U.S. 

Department of Energy, Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

Building Technologies, EE–2J, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (202) 287– 

1943. Email: ApplianceStandards

Questions@ee.doe.gov. 

Mr. Michael Kido, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–8145. Email: 

Michael.Kido@hq.doe.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment, review other public 

comments and the docket, contact the 

Appliance and Equipment Standards 

Program staff at (202) 287–1445 or by 

email: ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

A. Authority 

B. Rulemaking Process 

C. Deviation from Appendix A 

II. Background 

A. Current Standards 

B. Current Process 

III. Summary of the Analyses Performed by 

DOE 

A. Market and Technology Assessment 

B. Screening Analysis 

C. Engineering Analysis 

D. Markups Analysis 

E. Energy Use Analysis 

F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analyses 

G. National Impact Analysis 

IV. Public Participation 

A. Participation in the Webinar 

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared 

General Statements for Distribution 

C. Conduct of the Webinar 

D. Submission of Comments 

V. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
3230 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

1All references to EPCA in this document refer 

to the statute as amended through the Energy Act 

of 2020, Public Law 116–260 (Dec. 27, 2020). 2For editorial reasons, upon codification in the 

U.S. Code, Part B was redesignated Part A. 3See 86 FR 70892, 70901 (Dec. 13, 2021). 

I. Introduction 

A. Authority 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act, as amended (‘‘EPCA’’),1 authorizes 

DOE to regulate the energy efficiency of 

a number of consumer products and 

certain industrial equipment. (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6317) Title III, Part B 2 of EPCA 

established the Energy Conservation 

Program for Consumer Products Other 

Than Automobiles, which, in addition 

to identifying particular consumer 

products and commercial equipment as 

covered under the statute, permits the 

Secretary of Energy to classify 

additional types of consumer products 

as covered products. (42 U.S.C. 

6292(a)(20)) DOE added MREFs as 

covered products through a final 

determination of coverage published in 

the Federal Register on July 18, 2016 

(the ‘‘July 2016 Final Coverage 

Determination’’). 81 FR 46768. MREFs 

are consumer refrigeration products 

other than refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, or freezers, which include 

coolers and combination cooler 

refrigeration products. 10 CFR 430.2. 

MREFs include refrigeration products 

such as coolers (e.g., wine chillers and 

other specialty products) and 

combination cooler refrigeration 

products (e.g., wine chillers and other 

specialty compartments combined with 

a refrigerator, freezer, or refrigeratorfreezer). 

EPCA further provides that, not later 

than 6 years after the issuance of any 

final rule establishing or amending a 

standard, DOE must publish either a 

notification of determination that 

standards for the product do not need to 

be amended, or a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (‘‘NOPR’’) including new 

proposed energy conservation standards 

(proceeding to a final rule, as 

appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) Not 

later than three years after issuance of 

a final determination not to amend 

standards, DOE must publish either a 

notice of determination that standards 

for the product do not need to be 

amended, or a NOPR including new 

proposed energy conservation standards 

(proceeding to a final rule, as 

appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(B)) 

Under EPCA, any new or amended 

energy conservation standard must be 

designed to achieve the maximum 

improvement in energy efficiency that 

DOE determines is technologically 

feasible and economically justified. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, the 

new or amended standard must result in 

a significant conservation of energy. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) 

DOE is publishing this Preliminary 

Analysis to collect data and information 

to inform its decision consistent with its 

obligations under EPCA. 

B. Rulemaking Process 

DOE must follow specific statutory 

criteria for prescribing new or amended 

standards for covered products, 

including MREFs. As noted, EPCA 

requires that any new or amended 

energy conservation standard prescribed 

by the Secretary of Energy (‘‘Secretary’’) 

be designed to achieve the maximum 

improvement in energy efficiency (or 

water efficiency for certain products 

specified by EPCA) that is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(2)(A)) Furthermore, DOE may 

not adopt any standard that would not 

result in the significant conservation of 

energy. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)) The 

Secretary may not prescribe an amended 

or new standard that will not result in 

significant conservation of energy, or is 

not technologically feasible or 

economically justified. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)(3)) 

To adopt any new or amended 

standards for a covered product, DOE 

must determine that such action would 

result in significant energy savings. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)) Although the term 

‘‘significant’’ is not defined in the 

EPCA, the U.S. Court of Appeals, for the 

District of Columbia Circuit in Natural 

Resources Defense Council v. 

Herrington, 768 F.2d 1355, 1373 (D.C. 

Cir. 1985), opined that Congress 

intended ‘‘significant’’ energy savings in 

the context of EPCA to be savings that 

were not ‘‘genuinely trivial.’’ 

The significance of energy savings 

offered by a new or amended energy 

conservation standard cannot be 

determined without knowledge of the 

specific circumstances surrounding a 

given rulemaking.3 For example, the 

United States rejoined the Paris 

Agreement on February 19, 2021. As 

part of that agreement, the United States 

has committed to reducing GHG 

emissions in order to limit the rise in 

mean global temperature. As such, 

energy savings that reduce GHG 

emissions have taken on greater 

importance. Additionally, some covered 

products and equipment have most of 

their energy consumption occur during 

periods of peak energy demand. The 

impacts of these products on the energy 

infrastructure can be more pronounced 

than products with relatively constant 

demand. In evaluating the significance 

of energy savings, DOE considers 

differences in primary energy and FFC 

effects for different covered products 

and equipment when determining 

whether energy savings are significant. 

Primary energy and FFC effects include 

the energy consumed in electricity 

production (depending on load shape), 

in distribution and transmission, and in 

extracting, processing, and transporting 

primary fuels (i.e., coal, natural gas, 

petroleum fuels), and thus present a 

more complete picture of the impacts of 

energy conservation standards. 

Accordingly, DOE evaluates the 

significance of energy savings on a caseby-case basis. DOE estimates a 

combined total of 0.45 quads of FFC 

energy savings at the max-tech 

efficiency levels for MREFs. This 

represents 44.4 percent energy savings 

relative to the no-new-standards case 

energy consumption for MREFs. DOE 

has initially determined the energy 

savings for the candidate standard levels 

considered in this preliminary analysis 

are ‘‘significant’’ within the meaning of 

42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B). 

To determine whether a standard is 

economically justified, EPCA requires 

that DOE determine whether the 

benefits of the standard exceed its 

burdens by considering, to the greatest 

extent practicable, the following seven 

factors: 

(1) The economic impact of the standard 

on the manufacturers and consumers of the 

products subject to the standard; 

(2) The savings in operating costs 

throughout the estimated average life of the 

covered products in the type (or class) 

compared to any increase in the price, initial 

charges, or maintenance expenses for the 

covered products that are likely to result 

from the standard; 

(3) The total projected amount of energy (or 

as applicable, water) savings likely to result 

directly from the standard; 

(4) Any lessening of the utility or the 

performance of the products likely to result 

from the standard; 

(5) The impact of any lessening of 

competition, as determined in writing by the 

Attorney General, that is likely to result from 

the standard; 

(6) The need for national energy and water 

conservation; and 

(7) Other factors the Secretary of Energy 

(Secretary) considers relevant. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(i)(I)–(VII)) 

DOE fulfills these and other 

applicable requirements by conducting 

a series of analyses throughout the 

rulemaking process. Table I.1 shows the 

individual analyses that are performed 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Proposed Rules 3231 

to satisfy each of the requirements 

within EPCA. 

TABLE I.1—EPCA REQUIREMENTS AND CORRESPONDING DOE ANALYSIS

EPCA requirement Corresponding DOE analysis 

Significant Energy Savings ....................................................................... • Shipments Analysis. 

• National Impact Analysis. 

• Energy Use Analysis. 

Technological Feasibility .......................................................................... • Market and Technology Assessment. 

• Screening Analysis. 

• Engineering Analysis. 

Economic Justification: 

1. Economic impact on manufacturers and consumers ................... • Manufacturer Impact Analysis. 

• Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis. 

• Life-Cycle Cost Subgroup Analysis. 

• Shipments Analysis. 

2. Lifetime operating cost savings compared to increased cost for 

the product.

• Markups for Product Price Analysis. 

• Energy Use Analysis. 

• Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period Analysis. 

3. Total projected energy savings ..................................................... • Shipments Analysis. 

• National Impact Analysis. 

4. Impact on utility or performance ................................................... • Screening Analysis. 

• Engineering Analysis. 

5. Impact of any lessening of competition ........................................ • Manufacturer Impact Analysis 

6. Need for national energy and water conservation ........................ • Shipments Analysis. 

• National Impact Analysis. 

7. Other factors the Secretary considers relevant ............................ • Employment Impact Analysis. 

• Utility Impact Analysis. 

• Emissions Analysis. 

• Monetization of Emission Reductions Benefits. 

• Regulatory Impact Analysis. 

Further, EPCA establishes a rebuttable 

presumption that a standard is 

economically justified if the Secretary 

finds that the additional cost to the 

consumer of purchasing a product 

complying with an energy conservation 

standard level will be less than three 

times the value of the energy savings 

during the first year that the consumer 

will receive as a result of the standard, 

as calculated under the applicable test 

procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(B)(iii)) 

EPCA also contains what is known as 

an ‘‘anti-backsliding’’ provision, which 

prevents the Secretary from prescribing 

any amended standard that either 

increases the maximum allowable 

energy use or decreases the minimum 

required energy efficiency of a covered 

product. (42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(1)) Also, the 

Secretary may not prescribe an amended 

or new standard if interested persons 

have established by a preponderance of 

the evidence that the standard is likely 

to result in the unavailability in the 

United States in any covered product 

type (or class) of performance 

characteristics (including reliability), 

features, sizes, capacities, and volumes 

that are substantially the same as those 

generally available in the United States. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(o)(4)) 

Additionally, EPCA specifies 

requirements when promulgating an 

energy conservation standard for a 

covered product that has two or more 

subcategories. DOE must specify a 

different standard level for a type or 

class of product that has the same 

function or intended use, if DOE 

determines that products within such 

group: (A) Consume a different kind of 

energy from that consumed by other 

covered products within such type (or 

class); or (B) have a capacity or other 

performance-related feature which other 

products within such type (or class) do 

not have and such feature justifies a 

higher or lower standard. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(q)(1)) In determining whether a 

performance-related feature justifies a 

different standard for a group of 

products, DOE must consider such 

factors as the utility to the consumer of 

the feature and other factors DOE deems 

appropriate. Id. Any rule prescribing 

such a standard must include an 

explanation of the basis on which such 

higher or lower level was established. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(q)(2)) 

Finally, pursuant to the amendments 

contained in the Energy Independence 

and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), 

Public Law 110–140, any final rule for 

new or amended energy conservation 

standards promulgated after July 1, 

2010, is required to address standby 

mode and off mode energy use. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)) Specifically, when 

DOE adopts a standard for a covered 

product after that date, it must, if 

justified by the criteria for adoption of 

standards under EPCA (42 U.S.C. 

6295(o)), incorporate standby mode and 

off mode energy use into a single 

standard, or, if that is not feasible, adopt 

a separate standard for such energy use 

for that product. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(gg)(3)(A)–(B)) DOE’s current test 

procedure for MREFs measures the 

energy use of these products during 

extended time periods that include 

periods when the compressor and other 

key components are cycled off. All of 

the energy these products use during the 

‘‘off cycles’’ is already included in the 

measurements. By measuring the energy 

use during ‘‘off cycles,’’ the current test 

procedure already addresses EPCA’s 

requirement to include standby mode 

and off mode energy consumption in the 

overall energy descriptor for MREFs. 

See 86 FR 56790 (October 12, 2021) 

(final rule amending the test procedures 

for consumer refrigeration products). As 

a result, DOE’s current energy 

conservation standards and any 

amended energy conservation standards 

account for such energy use. 

Before proposing a standard, DOE 

typically seeks public input on the 

analytical framework, models, and tools 

that DOE intends to use to evaluate 

standards for the product at issue and 

the results of the preliminary analyses 

DOE performed for the product. 

DOE is examining whether to amend 

the current standards pursuant to its 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
3232 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

obligations under EPCA. This document 

announces the availability of the 

preliminary technical support document 

(‘‘TSD’’), which details the preliminary 

analyses and summarizes the 

preliminary results of DOE’s analyses. 

In addition, DOE is announcing a public 

meeting to solicit feedback from 

interested parties on its analytical 

framework, models, and preliminary 

results. 

C. Deviation From Appendix A 

In accordance with section 3(a) of 10 

CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A 

(‘‘appendix A’’), DOE notes that it is 

deviating from the provision in 

appendix A regarding the pre-NOPR 

stages for an energy conservation 

standards rulemaking. (See 86 FR 70892 

(Dec. 13, 2021) (effective January 12, 

2022)) Section 6(a)(2) of appendix A 

states that if the Department determines 

it is appropriate to proceed with a 

rulemaking (after initiating the 

rulemaking process through an early 

assessment), the preliminary stages of a 

rulemaking to issue or amend an energy 

conservation standard that DOE will 

undertake will be a framework 

document and preliminary analysis, or 

an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking (‘‘ANOPR’’). DOE is opting 

to deviate from this step by publishing 

a preliminary analysis without a 

framework document. A framework 

document is intended to introduce and 

summarize the various analyses DOE 

conducts during the rulemaking process 

and requests initial feedback from 

interested parties. As discussed further 

in the following section, prior to this 

notification of the preliminary analysis, 

DOE issued an early assessment request 

for information (‘‘RFI’’) in which DOE 

identified and sought comment on the 

analyses conducted in support of the 

most recent energy conservation 

standards rulemaking (81 FR 75194; 

Oct. 28, 2016 (the ‘‘October 2016 Direct 

Final Rule’’)). 85 FR 78964, 78965– 

78966 (Dec. 8, 2020) (the ‘‘December 

2020 Early Assessment Review RFI’’). 

DOE provided a 75-day comment period 

for the early assessment RFI. 85 FR 

78964. As DOE is intending to rely on 

substantively the same analytical 

methods as in the most recent 

rulemaking, publication of a framework 

document would be largely redundant 

with the published early assessment 

RFI. As such, DOE is not publishing a 

framework document. 

Section 6(d)(2) of appendix A 

specifies that the length of the public 

comment period for pre-NOPR 

rulemaking documents will vary 

depending upon the circumstances of 

the particular rulemaking, but will not 

be less than 75 calendar days. For this 

preliminary analysis, DOE has opted to 

instead provide a 60-day comment 

period. As stated, DOE requested 

comment in the December 2020 Early 

Assessment Review RFI on the analysis 

conducted in support of the October 

2016 Direct Final Rule and provided 

stakeholders a 75-day comment period. 

For this preliminary analysis, DOE has 

relied on many of the same analytical 

assumptions and approaches as used in 

the previous rulemaking and has 

determined that a 60-day comment 

period in conjunction with the prior 75- 

day comment period provides sufficient 

time for interested parties to review the 

preliminary analysis and develop 

comments. 

II. Background 

A. Current Standards 

As noted, DOE added MREFs as 

covered products through its July 2016 

Final Coverage Determination. 81 FR 

46768. In that determination, DOE noted 

that MREFs, on average, consume more 

than 150 kilowatt hours per year (‘‘kWh/ 

yr’’) and that the aggregate annual 

national energy use of these products 

exceeds 4.2 terawatt hours (‘‘TWh’’). 81 

FR 46768, 46775. In addition to 

establishing coverage, the July 2016 

Final Coverage Determination 

established definitions for 

‘‘miscellaneous refrigeration products,’’ 

‘‘coolers,’’ and ‘‘combination cooler 

refrigeration products’’ in 10 CFR 430.2. 

81 FR 46768, 46791–46792. 

In the October 2016 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE adopted energy conservation 

standards for MREFs consistent with the 

recommendations from a negotiated 

rulemaking working group established 

under the Appliance Standards and 

Rulemaking Federal Advisory 

Committee. 81 FR 75194. Concurrent 

with the October 2016 Direct Final Rule, 

DOE published a NOPR in which it 

proposed and requested comments on 

the standards set forth in the direct final 

rule. 81 FR 74950. On May 26, 2017, 

DOE published a notice in the Federal 

Register in which it determined that the 

comments received in response to the 

October 2016 Direct Final Rule did not 

provide a reasonable basis for 

withdrawing the rule and, therefore, 

confirmed the adoption of the energy 

conservation standards established in 

that direct final rule. 82 FR 24214. 

These current standards for MREFs 

are set forth in DOE’s regulations at 10 

CFR 430.32(aa)(1)–(2) and are repeated 

solely for reference in Table II.1 to aid 

the reader. 

TABLE II.1—FEDERAL ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR MREFS

Product class 

Equations for maximum 

energy use 

(kWh/yr) 

1. Built-in compact coolers ............................................................................................................................................ 7.88AV + 155.8. 

2. Built-in coolers ........................................................................................................................................................... 7.88AV + 155.8. 

3. Freestanding compact coolers .................................................................................................................................. 7.88AV + 155.8. 

4. Freestanding coolers ................................................................................................................................................. 7.88AV + 155.8. 

C–3A. Cooler with all-refrigerator—automatic defrost ................................................................................................... 4.57AV + 130.4. 

C–3A–BI. Built-in cooler with all-refrigerator—automatic defrost .................................................................................. 5.19AV + 147.8. 

C–9. Cooler with upright freezer with automatic defrost without an automatic icemaker ............................................. 5.58AV + 147.7. 

C–9–BI. Built-in cooler with upright freezer with automatic defrost without an automatic icemaker ............................ 6.38AV + 168.8. 

C–9I. Cooler with upright freezer with automatic defrost with an automatic icemaker ................................................. 5.58AV + 231.7. 

C–9I–BI. Built-in cooler with upright freezer with automatic defrost with an automatic icemaker ................................ 6.38AV + 252.8. 

C–13A. Compact cooler with all-refrigerator—automatic defrost .................................................................................. 5.93AV + 193.7. 

C–13A–BI. Built-in compact cooler with all-refrigerator—automatic defrost ................................................................. 6.52AV + 213.1. 

AV = Total adjusted volume, expressed in ft3, as determined in appendix A to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Proposed Rules 3233 

B. Current Process 

In the December 2020 Early 

Assessment Review RFI, DOE published 

a notice that it was initiating an early 

assessment review to determine whether 

any new or amended standards would 

satisfy the relevant requirements of 

EPCA for a new or amended energy 

conservation standard for MREFs and a 

request for information. 85 FR 78964. 

Comments received to date as part of 

the current process have helped DOE 

identify and resolve issues related to the 

preliminary analyses. Chapter 2 of the 

preliminary TSD summarizes and 

addresses the comments received. 

III. Summary of the Analyses 

Performed by DOE 

For the products covered in this 

preliminary analysis, DOE conducted 

in-depth technical analyses in the 

following areas: (1) Engineering; (2) 

markups to determine product price; (3) 

energy use; (4) life cycle cost (‘‘LCC’’) 

and payback period (‘‘PBP’’); and (5) 

national impacts. The preliminary TSD 

that presents the methodology and 

results of each of these analyses is 

available at www.regulations.gov/ 

docket/EERE-2020-BT-STD-0039. 

DOE also conducted, and has 

included in the preliminary TSD, 

several other analyses that support the 

major analyses or are preliminary 

analyses that will be expanded if DOE 

determines that a NOPR is warranted to 

propose amended energy conservation 

standards. These analyses include: (1) 

The market and technology assessment; 

(2) the screening analysis, which 

contributes to the engineering analysis; 

and (3) the shipments analysis, which 

contributes to the LCC and PBP analysis 

and the national impact analysis 

(‘‘NIA’’). In addition to these analyses, 

DOE has begun preliminary work on the 

manufacturer impact analysis and has 

identified the methods to be used for the 

consumer subgroup analysis, the 

emissions analysis, the employment 

impact analysis, the regulatory impact 

analysis, and the utility impact analysis. 

DOE will expand on these analyses in 

a NOPR, should one be issued. 

A. Market and Technology Assessment 

DOE develops information in the 

market and technology assessment that 

provides an overall picture of the 

market for the products concerned, 

including general characteristics of the 

products, the industry structure, 

manufacturers, market characteristics, 

and technologies used in the products. 

This activity includes both quantitative 

and qualitative assessments, based 

primarily on publicly available 

information. The subjects addressed in 

the market and technology assessment 

include: (1) A determination of the 

scope of the rulemaking and product 

classes, (2) manufacturers and industry 

structure, (3) existing efficiency 

programs, (4) shipments information, (5) 

market and industry trends, and (6) 

technologies or design options that 

could improve the energy efficiency of 

the product. 

See chapter 3 of the preliminary TSD 

for further discussion of the market and 

technology assessment. 

B. Screening Analysis 

DOE uses the following five screening 

criteria to determine which technology 

options are suitable for further 

consideration in an energy conservation 

standards rulemaking: 

(1) Technological feasibility. 

Technologies that are not incorporated 

in commercial products or in working 

prototypes will not be considered 

further. 

(2) Practicability to manufacture, 

install, and service. If it is determined 

that mass production and reliable 

installation and servicing of a 

technology in commercial products 

could not be achieved on the scale 

necessary to serve the relevant market at 

the time of the projected compliance 

date of the standard, then that 

technology will not be considered 

further. 

(3) Impacts on product utility or 

product availability. If it is determined 

that a technology would have a 

significant adverse impact on the utility 

of the product for significant subgroups 

of consumers or would result in the 

unavailability of any covered product 

type with performance characteristics 

(including reliability), features, sizes, 

capacities, and volumes that are 

substantially the same as products 

generally available in the United States 

at the time, it will not be considered 

further. 

(4) Adverse impacts on health or 

safety. If it is determined that a 

technology would have significant 

adverse impacts on health or safety, it 

will not be considered further. 

(5) Unique-pathway proprietary 

technologies. If a design option utilizes 

proprietary technology that represents a 

unique pathway to achieving a given 

efficiency level, that technology will not 

be considered further due to the 

potential for monopolistic concerns. 

10 CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix 

A, sections 6(c)(3) and 7(b). 

If DOE determines that a technology, 

or a combination of technologies, fails to 

meet one or more of the listed five 

criteria, it will be excluded from further 

consideration in the engineering 

analysis. 

See chapter 4 of the preliminary TSD 

for further discussion of the screening 

analysis. 

C. Engineering Analysis 

The purpose of the engineering 

analysis is to establish the relationship 

between the efficiency and cost of 

MREFs. There are two elements to 

consider in the engineering analysis; the 

selection of efficiency levels to analyze 

(i.e., the ‘‘efficiency analysis’’) and the 

determination of product cost at each 

efficiency level (i.e., the ‘‘cost 

analysis’’). In determining the 

performance of higher-efficiency 

products, DOE considers technologies 

and design option combinations not 

eliminated by the screening analysis. 

For each product class, DOE estimates 

the manufacturer production cost 

(‘‘MPC’’) for the baseline as well as 

higher efficiency levels. The output of 

the engineering analysis is a set of costefficiency ‘‘curves’’ that are used in 

downstream analyses (i.e., the LCC and 

PBP analyses and the NIA). 

DOE converts the MPC to the 

manufacturer selling price (‘‘MSP’’) by 

applying a manufacturer markup. The 

MSP is the price the manufacturer 

charges its first customer, when selling 

into the product distribution channels. 

The manufacturer markup accounts for 

manufacturer non-production costs and 

profit margin. DOE developed the 

manufacturer markup by examining 

publicly available financial information 

for manufacturers of the covered 

product. 

See Chapter 5 of the preliminary TSD 

for additional detail on the engineering 

analysis. 

D. Markups Analysis 

The markups analysis develops 

appropriate markups (e.g., retailer 

markups, distributor markups, 

contractor markups) in the distribution 

chain and sales taxes to convert MSP 

estimates derived in the engineering 

analysis to consumer prices, which are 

then used in the LCC and PBP analysis. 

At each step in the distribution channel, 

companies mark up the price of the 

product to cover business costs and 

profit margin. 

DOE develops baseline and 

incremental markups for each actor in 

the distribution chain (after the product 

leaves the manufacturer). Baseline 

markups are applied to the price of 

products with baseline efficiency, while 

incremental markups are applied to the 

difference in price between baseline and 

higher-efficiency models (the 

incremental cost increase). The 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
3234 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

4Because the projected price of standardscompliant products is typically higher than the 

price of baseline products, using the same markup 

for the incremental cost and the baseline cost would 

result in higher per-unit operating profit. While 

such an outcome is possible, DOE maintains that in 

markets that are reasonably competitive it is 

unlikely that standards would lead to a sustainable 

increase in profitability in the long run. 

5The NIA accounts for impacts in the 50 states 

and U.S. territories. 

incremental markup is typically less 

than the baseline markup and is 

designed to maintain similar per-unit 

operating profit before and after new or 

amended standards.4

Chapter 6 of the preliminary TSD 

provides details on DOE’s development 

of markups for MREFs. Chapter 12 of 

the preliminary TSD provides 

additional detail on the manufacturer 

markup. 

E. Energy Use Analysis 

The purpose of the energy use 

analysis is to determine the annual 

energy consumption of MREFs at 

different efficiencies in representative 

U.S. single-family homes, and multifamily residences, and to assess the 

energy savings potential of increased 

MREF efficiency. The energy use 

analysis estimates the range of energy 

use of MREFs in the field (i.e., as they 

are actually used by consumers). The 

energy use analysis provides the basis 

for other analyses DOE performed, 

particularly assessments of the energy 

savings and the savings in consumer 

operating costs that could result from 

adoption of amended or new standards. 

Chapter 7 of the preliminary TSD 

addresses the energy use analysis. 

F. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analyses 

The effect of new or amended energy 

conservation standards on individual 

consumers usually involves a reduction 

in operating cost and an increase in 

purchase cost. DOE used the following 

two metrics to measure consumer 

impacts: 

• The LCC is the total consumer 

expense of an appliance or product over 

the life of that product, consisting of 

total installed cost (manufacturer selling 

price, distribution chain markups, sales 

tax, and installation costs) plus 

operating costs (expenses for energy use, 

maintenance, and repair). To compute 

the operating costs, DOE discounts 

future operating costs to the time of 

purchase and sums them over the 

lifetime of the product. 

• The PBP is the estimated amount of 

time (in years) it takes consumers to 

recover the increased purchase cost 

(including installation) of a moreefficient product through lower 

operating costs. DOE calculates the PBP 

by dividing the change in purchase cost 

at higher efficiency levels by the change 

in annual operating cost for the year that 

amended or new standards are assumed 

to take effect. 

Chapter 8 of the preliminary TSD 

addresses the LCC and PBP analyses. 

G. National Impact Analysis 

The NIA estimates the national energy 

savings (‘‘NES’’) and the net present 

value (‘‘NPV’’) of total consumer costs 

and savings expected to result from 

amended standards at specific efficiency 

levels (referred to as candidate standard 

levels).5 DOE calculates the NES and 

NPV for the potential standard levels 

considered based on projections of 

annual product shipments, along with 

the annual energy consumption and 

total installed cost data from the energy 

use and LCC analyses. For the present 

analysis, DOE projected the energy 

savings, operating cost savings, product 

costs, and NPV of consumer benefits 

over the lifetime of MREFs sold from 

2029 through 2058. 

DOE evaluates the impacts of new or 

amended standards by comparing a case 

without such standards with standardscase projections (‘‘no-new-standards 

case’’). The no-new-standards case 

characterizes energy use and consumer 

costs for each product class in the 

absence of new or amended energy 

conservation standards. For this 

projection, DOE considers historical 

trends in efficiency and various forces 

that are likely to affect the mix of 

efficiencies over time. DOE compares 

the no-new-standards case with 

projections characterizing the market for 

each product class if DOE adopted new 

or amended standards at specific energy 

efficiency levels for that class. For each 

efficiency level, DOE considers how a 

given standard would likely affect the 

market shares of those products with 

efficiencies greater than the standard. 

DOE uses a spreadsheet model to 

calculate the energy savings and the 

national consumer costs and savings 

from each efficiency level. Interested 

parties can review DOE’s analyses by 

changing various input quantities 

within the spreadsheet. The NIA 

spreadsheet model uses typical values 

(as opposed to probability distributions) 

as inputs. Critical inputs to this analysis 

include shipments projections, 

estimated product lifetimes, product 

installed costs and operating costs, 

product annual energy consumption, 

the base case efficiency projection, and 

discount rates. 

DOE estimates a combined total of 

0.16 quads of site energy savings at the 

max-tech efficiency levels for MREFs. 

This represents 44.4 percent energy 

savings relative to the no-new-standards 

case energy consumption for MREFs. 

Chapter 10 of the preliminary TSD 

addresses the NIA. 

IV. Public Participation 

DOE invites public participation in 

this process through participation in the 

webinar and submission of written 

comments and information. After the 

webinar and the closing of the comment 

period, DOE will consider all timelysubmitted comments and additional 

information obtained from interested 

parties, as well as information obtained 

through further analyses. Following 

such consideration, the Department will 

publish either a determination that the 

standards for MREFs need not be 

amended or a NOPR proposing to 

amend those standards. The NOPR, 

should one be issued, would include 

proposed energy conservation standards 

for the products covered by that 

rulemaking, and members of the public 

would be given an opportunity to 

submit written and oral comments on 

the proposed standards. 

A. Participation in the Webinar 

The time and date for the webinar 

meeting are listed in the DATES section 

at the beginning of this document. 

Webinar registration information, 

participant instructions, and 

information about the capabilities 

available to webinar participants will be 

published on DOE’s website: 

www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/publicmeetings-and-comment-deadlines. 

Participants are responsible for ensuring 

their systems are compatible with the 

webinar software. 

B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared 

General Statements for Distribution 

Any person who has an interest in the 

topics addressed in this document, or 

who is representative of a group or class 

of persons that has an interest in these 

issues, may request an opportunity to 

make an oral presentation at the 

webinar. Such persons may submit such 

request to 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. Persons who wish to speak 

should include with their request a 

computer file in Microsoft Word, PDF, 

or text (ASCII) file format that briefly 

describes the nature of their interest in 

this rulemaking and the topics they 

wish to discuss. Such persons should 

also provide a daytime telephone 

number where they can be reached. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Proposed Rules 3235 

C. Conduct of the Webinar 

DOE will designate a DOE official to 

preside at the webinar and may also use 

a professional facilitator to aid 

discussion. The webinar will not be a 

judicial or evidentiary-type public 

hearing, but DOE will conduct it in 

accordance with section 336 of EPCA 

(42 U.S.C. 6306). A court reporter will 

be present to record the proceedings and 

prepare a transcript. DOE reserves the 

right to schedule the order of 

presentations and to establish the 

procedures governing the conduct of the 

webinar. There shall not be discussion 

of proprietary information, costs or 

prices, market share, or other 

commercial matters regulated by U.S. 

anti-trust laws. After the webinar and 

until the end of the comment period, 

interested parties may submit further 

comments on the proceedings and any 

aspect of the rulemaking. 

The webinar will be conducted in an 

informal, conference style. DOE will 

present summaries of comments 

received before the webinar, allow time 

for prepared general statements by 

participants, and encourage all 

interested parties to share their views on 

issues affecting this rulemaking. Each 

participant will be allowed to make a 

general statement (within time limits 

determined by DOE), before the 

discussion of specific topics. DOE will 

permit, as time permits, other 

participants to comment briefly on any 

general statements. 

At the end of all prepared statements 

on a topic, DOE will permit participants 

to clarify their statements briefly. 

Participants should be prepared to 

answer questions by DOE and by other 

participants concerning these issues. 

DOE representatives may also ask 

questions of participants concerning 

other matters relevant to this 

rulemaking. The official conducting the 

webinar will accept additional 

comments or questions from those 

attending, as time permits. The 

presiding official will announce any 

further procedural rules or modification 

of the above procedures that may be 

needed for the proper conduct of the 

webinar. 

A transcript of the webinar will be 

included in the docket, which can be 

viewed as described in the Docket 

section at the beginning of this 

document. In addition, any person may 

buy a copy of the transcript from the 

transcribing reporter. 

D. Submission of Comments 

DOE invites all interested parties, 

regardless of whether they participate in 

the public meeting, to submit in writing 

by March 22, 2022, comments and 

information on matters addressed in this 

notification and on other matters 

relevant to DOE’s consideration of 

amended energy conservations 

standards for MREFs. Interested parties 

may submit comments, data, and other 

information using any of the methods 

described in the ADDRESSES section at 

the beginning of this document. 

Submitting comments via 

www.regulations.gov. The 

www.regulations.gov web page will 

require you to provide your name and 

contact information. Your contact 

information will be viewable to DOE 

Building Technologies staff only. Your 

contact information will not be publicly 

viewable except for your first and last 

names, organization name (if any), and 

submitter representative name (if any). 

If your comment is not processed 

properly because of technical 

difficulties, DOE will use this 

information to contact you. If DOE 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, DOE may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

However, your contact information 

will be publicly viewable if you include 

it in the comment itself or in any 

documents attached to your comment. 

Any information that you do not want 

to be publicly viewable should not be 

included in your comment, nor in any 

document attached to your comment. If 

this instruction is followed, persons 

viewing comments will see only first 

and last names, organization names, 

correspondence containing comments, 

and any documents submitted with the 

comments. 

Do not submit to www.regulations.gov 

information for which disclosure is 

restricted by statute, such as trade 

secrets and commercial or financial 

information (hereinafter referred to as 

Confidential Business Information 

(CBI)). Comments submitted through 

www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed 

as CBI. Comments received through the 

website will waive any CBI claims for 

the information submitted. For 

information on submitting CBI, see the 

Confidential Business Information 

section. 

DOE processes submissions made 

through www.regulations.gov before 

posting. Normally, comments will be 

posted within a few days of being 

submitted. However, if large volumes of 

comments are being processed 

simultaneously, your comment may not 

be viewable for up to several weeks. 

Please keep the comment tracking 

number that www.regulations.gov 

provides after you have successfully 

uploaded your comment. 

Submitting comments via email. 

Comments and documents submitted 

via email also will be posted to 

www.regulations.gov. If you do not want 

your personal contact information to be 

publicly viewable, do not include it in 

your comment or any accompanying 

documents. Instead, provide your 

contact information in a cover letter. 

Include your first and last names, email 

address, telephone number, and 

optional mailing address. The cover 

letter will not be publicly viewable as 

long as it does not include any 

comments. 

Include contact information each time 

you submit comments, data, documents, 

and other information to DOE. No faxes 

will be accepted. 

Comments, data, and other 

information submitted to DOE 

electronically should be provided in 

PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or 

Excel, or text (ASCII) file format. 

Provide documents that are not secured, 

that are written in English, and that are 

free of any defects or viruses. 

Documents should not contain special 

characters or any form of encryption 

and, if possible, they should carry the 

electronic signature of the author. 

Campaign form letters. Please submit 

campaign form letters by the originating 

organization in batches of between 50 to 

500 form letters per PDF or as one form 

letter with a list of supporters’ names 

compiled into one or more PDFs. This 

reduces comment processing and 

posting time. 

Confidential Business Information. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person 

submitting information that he or she 

believes to be confidential and exempt 

by law from public disclosure should 

submit via email two well-marked 

copies: One copy of the document 

marked ‘‘confidential’’ including all the 

information believed to be confidential, 

and one copy of the document marked 

‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information 

believed to be confidential deleted. DOE 

will make its own determination about 

the confidential status of the 

information and treat it according to its 

determination. 

It is DOE’s policy that all comments 

may be included in the public docket, 

without change and as received, 

including any personal information 

provided in the comments (except 

information deemed to be exempt from 

public disclosure). 

V. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

publication of this notification of a 

webinar and availability of preliminary 

technical support document. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
3236 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 14 / Friday, January 21, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on January 12, 2022, 

by Kelly J. Speakes-Backman, Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

pursuant to delegated authority from the 

Secretary of Energy. That document 

with the original signature and date is 

maintained by DOE. For administrative 

purposes only, and in compliance with 

requirements of the Office of the Federal 

Register, the undersigned DOE Federal 

Register Liaison Officer has been 

authorized to sign and submit the 

document in electronic format for 

publication, as an official document of 

the Department of Energy. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on January 12, 

2022. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2022–00848 Filed 1–20–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2020–1003; Project 

Identifier MCAI–2020–00962–A] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Viking Air 

Limited (Type Certificate Previously 

Held by Bombardier Inc. and de 

Havilland, Inc.) Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a 

new airworthiness directive (AD) for all 

Viking Air Limited (Viking) (type 

certificate previously held by 

Bombardier Inc. and de Havilland, Inc.) 

Model DHC–6–1, DHC–6–100, DHC–6– 

200, DHC–6–300, and DHC–6–400 

airplanes. This proposed AD results 

from mandatory continuing 

airworthiness information (MCAI) 

originated by an aviation authority of 

another country to identify and correct 

an unsafe condition on an aviation 

product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe 

condition as cracks and corrosion 

damage to the aileron internal structure. 

This proposed AD would require 

visually inspecting the entire aileron 

internal structure, correcting any 

damage found, and reporting the 

inspection results to Viking. The FAA is 

proposing this AD to address the unsafe 

condition on these products. 

DATES: The FAA must receive comments 

on this proposed AD by March 7, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12 140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this NPRM, contact Viking Air Ltd., 

1959 de Havilland Way, Sidney British 

Columbia, Canada V8L 5V5; phone: 

(800) 663–8444; email: 

continuing.airworthiness@

vikingair.com; website: https://

www.vikingair.com. You may view this 

service information at the FAA, 

Airworthiness Products Section, 

Operational Safety Branch, 901 Locust, 

Kansas City, MO 64106. For information 

on the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call (817) 222–5110. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov by 

searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2020–1003; or in person at Docket 

Operations between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. The AD docket contains this 

NPRM, the MCAI, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for Docket Operations is 

listed above. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Deep Gaurav, Aviation Safety Engineer, 

New York ACO Branch, FAA, 1515 

Stewart Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590; 

phone: (516) 228–7300; fax: (516) 794– 

5331; email: deep.gaurav@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

The FAA invites you to send any 

written relevant data, views, or 

arguments about this proposal. Send 

your comments to an address listed 

under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2020–1003; Project Identifier 

MCAI–2020–00962–A’’ at the beginning 

of your comments. The most helpful 

comments reference a specific portion of 

the proposal, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. The FAA will consider 

all comments received by the closing 

date and may amend this proposal 

because of those comments. 

Except for Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) as described in the 

following paragraph, and other 

information as described in 14 CFR 

11.35, the FAA will post all comments 

received, without change, to https://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. The 

agency will also post a report 

summarizing each substantive verbal 

contact received about this NPRM. 

Confidential Business Information 

CBI is commercial or financial 

information that is both customarily and 

actually treated as private by its owner. 

Under the Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt 

from public disclosure. If your 

comments responsive to this NPRM 

contain commercial or financial 

information that is customarily treated 

as private, that you actually treat as 

private, and that is relevant or 

responsive to this NPRM, it is important 

that you clearly designate the submitted 

comments as CBI. Please mark each 

page of your submission containing CBI 

as ‘‘PROPIN.’’ The FAA will treat such 

marked submissions as confidential 

under the FOIA, and they will not be 

placed in the public docket of this 

NPRM. Submissions containing CBI 

should be sent to Deep Gaurav, Aviation 

Safety Engineer, New York ACO Branch, 

FAA, 1515 Stewart Avenue, Westbury, 

NY 11590. Any commentary that the 

FAA receives which is not specifically 

designated as CBI will be placed in the 

public docket for this rulemaking. 

Background 

Transport Canada, which is the 

aviation authority for Canada, has 

issued Transport Canada AD CF–2020– 

05, dated March 13, 2020 (referred to 

after this as ‘‘the MCAI’’), to address the 

unsafe condition on Viking Model 

DHC–6 series 1, DHC–6 series 100, 

DHC–6 series 110, DHC–6 series 200, 

DHC–6 series 210, DHC–6 series 300, 

DHC–6 series 310, DHC–6 series 320, 

and DHC–6 series 400 airplanes. The 

MCAI states: 

Viking Air Ltd. (Viking) received reports of 

cracks and corrosion damage to the aileron 

internal structure. During a repair of an inservice aeroplane, an aileron hinge support 

rib was found cracked at the lower flange 

along the bend radius near the hinge fitting 

attachment at wing station 247.29. 

Preliminary investigation by Viking 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1