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

4513 

Vol. 87, No. 19 

Friday, January 28, 2022 

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. 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 430 

[EERE–2021–BT–STD–0031] 

RIN 1904–AF19 

Energy Conservation Program: Energy 

Conservation Standards for Consumer 

Furnaces 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (‘‘DOE’’) is initiating an effort to 

determine whether to amend the current 

energy conservation standards for 

certain classes of consumer furnaces. 

Under the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act, as amended, DOE 

must review these standards at least 

once every six years and publish either 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(‘‘NOPR’’) to propose new standards or 

a notification of determination that the 

existing standards do not need to be 

amended. This request for information 

(‘‘RFI’’) solicits information from the 

public to help DOE determine whether 

amended standards for non-weatherized 

oil-fired, mobile home oil-fired, 

weatherized oil-fired, weatherized gas, 

and electric consumer furnaces would 

result in significant energy savings and 

whether such standards would be 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. DOE also 

welcomes written comments from the 

public on any subject within the scope 

of this document (including those topics 

not specifically raised), as well as the 

submission of data and other relevant 

information. 

DATES: Written comments and 

information are requested and will be 

accepted on or before February 28, 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–2021–BT–STD–0031, by 

any of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

2. Email: To 

OEWGFurnaces2021STD0031@

ee.doe.gov. Include docket number 

EERE–2021–BT–STD–0031 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 coronavirus 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, 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/EERE2021-BT-STD-0031. The docket web 

page contains instructions on how to 

access all documents, including public 

comments, in the docket. See section III 

for information on how to submit 

comments through 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ms. Julia Hegarty, U.S. Department of 

Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, Building 

Technologies Office, EE–5B, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585–0121. Telephone: (240) 597– 

6737. Email: 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

Ms. Amelia Whiting, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

GC–33, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 586–2588. Email: 

amelia.whiting@hq.doe.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit a comment or 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 History 

C. Deviation From Appendix A 

II. Request for Information 

A. Scope & Product Classes 

B. Significant Savings of Energy 

1. Energy Use Analysis 

2. Shipments 

C. Technological Feasibility 

1. Technology Options 

2. Screening Analysis 

3. Engineering Efficiency Analysis 

D. Economic Justification 

1. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analysis 

2. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 

III. Submission of Comments 

I. Introduction 

A. Authority and Background 

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. These products 

include consumer furnaces, the subject 

of this document. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(5)). 

EPCA prescribed energy conservation 

standards for these products, and 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
4514 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

directed DOE to conduct two cycles of 

rulemakings to determine whether to 

amend these standards. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(f)). 

Under EPCA, DOE’s energy 

conservation program consists 

essentially of four parts: (1) Testing, (2) 

labeling, (3) Federal energy conservation 

standards, and (4) certification and 

enforcement procedures. Relevant 

provisions of EPCA include definitions 

(42 U.S.C. 6291), test procedures (42 

U.S.C. 6293), labeling provisions (42 

U.S.C. 6294), energy conservation 

standards (42 U.S.C. 6295), and the 

authority to require information and 

reports from manufacturers (42 U.S.C. 

6296). 

Federal energy efficiency 

requirements for covered products 

established under EPCA generally 

supersede State laws and regulations 

concerning energy conservation testing, 

labeling, and standards. (42 U.S.C. 

6297(a)–(c)) DOE may, however, grant 

waivers of Federal preemption in 

limited instances for particular State 

laws or regulations, in accordance with 

the procedures and other provisions set 

forth under. (42 U.S.C. 6297(d)). 

As previously noted, EPCA 

established energy conservation 

standards for consumer furnaces, which 

are expressed in terms of minimum 

annual fuel utilization efficiency 

(‘‘AFUE’’). (42 U.S.C. 6295(f)(1)–(2)) 

Pursuant to EPCA, DOE was required to 

conduct two rounds of rulemaking to 

consider amended energy conservation 

standards for consumer furnaces. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(f)(4)(B) and (C)) In 

satisfaction of the first round of 

rulemaking under 42 U.S.C. 

6295(f)(4)(B), DOE published a final rule 

on November 19, 2007 (‘‘November 

2007 final rule’’) that revised the initial 

standards for four classes of consumer 

furnaces (i.e., non-weatherized gas 

furnaces (‘‘NWGFs’’), mobile home gas 

furnaces (‘‘MHGFs’’), weatherized gas 

furnaces (‘‘WGFs’’), and nonweatherized oil-fired furnaces 

(‘‘NWOFs’’), but left them in place for 

two product classes (i.e., mobile home 

oil-fired furnaces (‘‘MHOFs’’) and 

weatherized oil-fired furnaces 

(‘‘WOFs’’)). 72 FR 65136, 65137. 

Compliance with the amended 

standards established in the November 

2007 final rule was to be required 

beginning November 19, 2015. Id. at 72 

FR 65136, 65169. 

On June 27, 2011, DOE published a 

direct final rule (‘‘DFR’’) (‘‘June 2011 

DFR’’) revising the energy conservation 

standards for consumer furnaces 

pursuant to the voluntary remand in 

State of New York, et al. v. Department 

of Energy, et al. 76 FR 37408, 37415. In 

the June 2011 DFR, DOE addressed the 

energy conservation standards for the 

same six product classes addressed in 

the November 2007 final rule (i.e., 

NWGFs, MHGFs, WGFs, NWOF, 

MHOFs, and WOFs) plus electric 

furnaces. The June 2011 DFR amended 

the existing AFUE energy conservation 

standards for NWGFs, MHGFs, and 

NWOFs, and amended the compliance 

date (but left the existing standards in 

place) for WGFs. The June 2011 DFR 

also established electrical standby mode 

and off mode standards for NWGFs, 

MHGFs, NWOFs, MHOFs, and electric 

furnaces. DOE confirmed the standards 

and compliance dates promulgated in 

the June 2011 DFR in a notice of 

effective date and compliance dates 

published on October 31, 2011 

(‘‘October 2011 notice’’). 76 FR 67037. 

After publication of the October 2011 

notice, the American Public Gas 

Association sued DOE to invalidate the 

rule as it pertained to NWGFs. Petition 

for Review, American Public Gas 

Association, et al. v. Department of 

Energy, et al., No. 11–1485 (D.C. Cir. 

filed Dec. 23, 2011). On April 24, 2014, 

the Court granted a motion that 

approved a settlement agreement that 

was reached between DOE, APGA, and 

the various intervenors in the case, in 

which DOE agreed to a remand of the 

non-weatherized gas furnace and mobile 

home gas furnace portions of the June 

2011 direct final rule in order to 

conduct further notice-and-comment 

rulemaking. Accordingly, the Court’s 

order vacated the June 2011 DFR in part 

(i.e., those portions relating to nonweatherized gas furnaces and mobile 

home gas furnaces) and remanded to the 

agency for further rulemaking. 86 FR 

43120, 43124 (Aug. 6, 2021). As a result, 

the standards established by the June 

2011 DFR for NWGFs and MHGFs did 

not go into effect. The court order left 

in place the standards for WGFs, 

NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and electric 

furnaces. Amended standards for 

NWGFs and MHGFs are being addressed 

in a separate rulemaking. This RFI 

covers WGFs, NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, 

and electric furnaces. 

On January 15, 2021, in response to a 

petition for rulemaking submitted by the 

American Public Gas Association, Spire, 

Inc., the Natural Gas Supply 

Association, the American Gas 

Association, and the National Propane 

Gas Association (83 FR 544883; Nov. 1, 

2018) DOE published a final interpretive 

rule determining that, in the context of 

residential furnaces, commercial water 

heaters, and similarly situated products/ 

equipment, use of non-condensing 

technology (and associated venting 

constitutes a performance-related 

‘‘feature’’ under EPCA that cannot be 

eliminated through adoption of an 

energy conservation standard. 86 FR 

4776 (‘‘January 2021 Final Interpretive 

Rule’’). 

However, on December 29, 2021, DOE 

subsequently published a final 

interpretive rule that returns to the 

previous and long-standing 

interpretation (in effect prior to the 

January 15, 2021 final interpretive rule), 

under which the technology used to 

supply heated air or hot water is not a 

performance-related ‘‘feature’’ that 

provides a distinct consumer utility 

under EPCA. 86 FR 73947 (‘‘December 

2021 Final Interpretive Rule’’). 

EPCA also requires that, not later than 

6 years after the issuance of any final 

rule establishing or amending a 

standard, DOE evaluate the energy 

conservation standards for each type of 

covered product, including those at 

issue here, and publish either a 

notification of determination that the 

standards do not need to be amended, 

or a NOPR that includes new proposed 

energy conservation standards 

(proceeding to a final rule, as 

appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) If 

DOE determines not to amend a 

standard based on the statutory criteria, 

not later than 3 years after the issuance 

of a final determination not to amend 

standards, DOE must publish either a 

notification 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)) 

DOE must make the analysis on which 

a determination is based publicly 

available and provide an opportunity for 

written comment. (42 U.S.C. 

6295(m)(2)). 

In proposing new standards, DOE 

must evaluate that proposal against the 

criteria of 42 U.S.C. 6295(o), as 

described in the following section, and 

follow the rulemaking procedures set 

out in 42 U.S.C. 6295(p). (42 U.S.C. 

6295(m)(1)(B)) If DOE decides to amend 

the standard based on the statutory 

criteria, DOE must publish a final rule 

not later than two years after energy 

conservation standards are proposed. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(3)(A)). 

DOE is publishing this RFI 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. EPCA 

requires that any new or amended 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 4515 

3See 86 FR 70892, 70901 (Dec. 13, 2021). 

energy conservation standard prescribed 

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

be designed to achieve the maximum 

improvement in energy or water 

efficiency that is technologically 

feasible and economically justified. (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) 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)) 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 has now 

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 emission 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 

holistic picture of the impacts of energy 

conservation standards. Accordingly, 

DOE evaluates the significance of energy 

savings on a case-by-case basis. 

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 

affected products; 

(2) The savings in operating costs 

throughout the estimated average life of the 

product compared to any increases in the 

initial cost, or maintenance expenses likely 

to result from the standard; 

(3) The total projected amount of energy 

and water (if applicable) 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 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 

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 and Water Use Determination. 

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 Determination. 

• Energy and Water Use Determination. 

• 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. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
4516 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

4 In turn, a forced-air central furnace is defined 

as a gas or oil burning furnace designed to supply 

heat through a system of ducts with air as the 

heating medium. The heat generated by combustion 

of gas or oil is transferred to the air within a casing 

by conduction through heat exchange surfaces and 

is circulated through the duct system by means of 

a fan or blower. 10 CFR 430.2. A gravity central 

furnace is defined as a gas fueled furnace which 

depends primarily on natural convection for 

circulation of heated air and which is designed to 

be used in conjunction with a system of ducts. 10 

CFR 430.2. An electric central furnace is defined as 

a furnace designed to supply heat through a system 

of ducts with air as the heating medium, in which 

heat is generated by one or more electric resistance 

heating elements and the heated air is circulated by 

means of a fan or blower. 10 CFR 430.2. 

5The rulemaking docket is available online at: 

www.regulations.gov/docket/EERE-2014-BT-STD0031. 

As detailed throughout this RFI, DOE 

is publishing this document seeking 

input and data from interested parties to 

aid in the development of the technical 

analyses on which DOE will ultimately 

rely to determine whether (and if so, 

how) to amend the standards for WGFs, 

NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and electric 

furnaces. 

C. Deviation From Appendix A 

In accordance with Section 3(a) of 10 

CFR part 430, subpart C, appendix A, 

DOE notes that it is deviating from that 

appendix’s provision requiring a 75-day 

comment period for all pre-NOPR 

standards documents. 10 CFR part 430, 

subpart C, appendix A, section 6(d)(2). 

DOE is opting to deviate from this step 

because DOE believes that 30 days is a 

sufficient time to respond to this initial 

rulemaking document because the 

market and available technologies have 

not changed substantially from the 

previous rulemaking. 

II. Request for Information 

In the following sections, DOE has 

identified a variety of issues on which 

it seeks input to aid in the development 

of the technical and economic analyses 

regarding whether amended standards 

for WGFs, NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and 

electric furnaces may be warranted. 

A. Scope & Product Classes 

When evaluating and establishing 

energy conservation standards, DOE 

divides covered products into product 

classes by the type of energy used, or by 

capacity or other performance-related 

features that justify differing standards. 

(42 U.S.C. 6295(q)) In making a 

determination whether a performancerelated feature justifies a different 

standard, DOE must consider such 

factors as the utility of the feature to the 

consumer and other factors DOE 

determines are appropriate. (Id.) As 

discussed in Section I.A, DOE has 

recently published the December 2021 

Final Interpretive Rule that returns to 

the previous and long-standing 

interpretation (in effect prior to the 

January 15, 2021 final interpretive rule), 

under which the technology used to 

supply heated air or hot water is not a 

performance-related ‘‘feature’’ that 

provides a distinct utility under EPCA. 

86 FR 73947 (Dec. 29, 2021). 

A ‘‘furnace’’ is ‘‘a product which 

utilizes only single-phase electric 

current, or single-phase electric current 

or DC current in conjunction with 

natural gas, propane, or home heating 

oil, and which— 

(1) Is designed to be the principal heating 

source for the living space of a residence; 

(2) Is not contained within the same 

cabinet with a central air conditioner whose 

rated cooling capacity is above 65,000 British 

thermal units (‘‘Btu’’) per hour; 

(3) Is an electric central furnace, electric 

boiler, forced-air central furnace, gravity 

central furnace, or low-pressure steam or hot 

water boiler; and 

(4) Has a heat input rate of less than 

300,000 Btu per hour for electric boilers and 

low-pressure steam or hot water boilers and 

less than 225,000 Btu per hour for forced-air 

central furnaces, gravity central furnaces, and 

electric central furnaces. 10 CFR 430.2. (See 

also 42 U.S.C. 6291(23)).4

DOE divides consumer furnaces into 

seven classes for the purpose of setting 

energy conservation standards: (1) 

NWGFs, (2) MHGFs, (3) WGFs, (4) 

NWOFs, (5) MHOFs, (6) WOFs, and (7) 

electric furnaces. 10 CFR 430.32(e)(ii). 

As discussed in section I.B of this 

document, NWGFs and MHGFs were 

the subject of a lawsuit that resulted in 

an order to remand the standards to 

DOE for further analysis. As a result, 

DOE has been analyzing amended 

standards for those two consumer 

furnace classes as part of a separate, 

ongoing rulemaking covering only those 

two classes (see Docket No. EERE–BT– 

STD–2014–0031 5). Therefore, DOE is 

not considering NWGFs and MHGFs as 

part of this review. The product classes 

that DOE considered for this document 

are NWOFs, WGFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and 

electric furnaces. The current standards 

for WGFs, NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and 

electric furnaces are shown in Table II– 

1. 

TABLE II–1—ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER FURNACES COVERED IN THIS RFI 

Product class AFUE 

(percent) 

PW,SB and PW,OFF

(watts) 

Non-weatherized oil-fired furnaces (not including mobile home furnaces) ................................................. 83 11 

Mobile Home oil-fired furnaces .................................................................................................................... 75 11 

Weatherized gas furnaces ........................................................................................................................... 81 N/A 

Weatherized oil-fired furnaces ..................................................................................................................... 78 N/A 

Electric furnaces .......................................................................................................................................... 78 10 

Issue 1: DOE seeks comment on 

whether there are any products that are 

covered by the definition of ‘‘furnace’’ 

and should be regulated by DOE, but are 

not covered by any of the current classes 

of consumer furnaces that are regulated 

by DOE. 

Issue 2: DOE seeks information 

regarding any other new product classes 

it should consider for inclusion in its 

analysis. DOE also requests relevant 

data detailing the corresponding 

impacts on energy use that would justify 

separate product classes (i.e., 

explanation for why the presence of 

these performance-related features 

would increase or decrease energy 

consumption). 

B. Significant Savings of Energy 

On June 27, 2011, DOE adopted 

amended energy conservations standard 

for consumer furnaces, central air 

conditioners, and heat pumps that are 

expected to result in an estimated 3.36 

to 4.38 quadrillion Btu (‘‘quads’’) of 

cumulative energy savings over a 30- 

year period for the three products. 76 FR 

37408, 37412 (June 27, 2011). Of this, 

0.012 quads were from the efficiency 

standards adopted for NWOFs at 83 

percent AFUE. Additionally, in the June 

2011 DFR, DOE estimated that an energy 

conservation standard established at the 

maximum technologically feasible 

(‘‘max-tech’’) AFUE level, which was 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 4517 

6This value was calculated by subtracting the 

energy savings in quads for furnaces at the standard 

level adopted in the June 2011 DFR (i.e., 83 percent 

AFUE which corresponded to efficiency level 1 in 

that analysis) from the energy savings in quads 

associated with max-tech level (i.e., 97 percent 

AFUE, which corresponded to efficiency level 4). 

7 In the June 2011 DFR, DOE referred to these 

motors as electronically commutated motors 

(‘‘ECM’’). BPM is a more generalized term for the 

same type of motor. 

determined to be 97 percent, would 

have resulted in 0.376 additional quads 

of savings for NWOFs.6 Potential energy 

savings for MHOFs, WOFs, and electric 

furnaces from amended AFUE standards 

were not considered in the June 2011 

DFR. (EERE–2011–BT–STD–0011–0012, 

Technical Support Document: Chapter 

10. National and Regional Impact 

Analyses at pp. 10–96–10–97) For 

MHOFs and WOFs, DOE found that 

only a very small number of these 

products are shipped, resulting in de 

minimis potential for energy savings 

from amended AFUE standards. 

Because electric furnace efficiency 

already approaches 100-percent AFUE, 

DOE concluded that electric furnaces 

would also have de minimis energy 

savings potential and did not consider 

amending the AFUE standards. 76 FR 

37408, 37443, 37445. 

While DOE’s RFI is not limited to the 

following issues, DOE is particularly 

interested in comment, information, and 

data on energy use and shipments, as 

outlined in sections II.B.1 and II.B.2 of 

this document, to inform whether 

potential amended energy conservation 

standards would result in a significant 

savings of energy. 

1. Energy Use Analysis 

As part of the rulemaking process, 

DOE conducts an energy use analysis to 

identify how products are used by 

consumers, and thereby determine the 

energy savings potential of energy 

efficiency improvements. The energy 

use analysis is meant to represent 

typical energy consumption in the field. 

Issue 3: DOE requests feedback on the 

levels of energy savings that could be 

expected from the adoption of morestringent standards for consumer 

furnaces, specifically for those classes of 

consumer furnaces covered by this 

notice (WGFs, NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, 

and electric furnaces). 

Issue 4: DOE requests data on the 

typical operating conditions for WGFs, 

NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and electric 

furnaces in high heating and reduced 

heating modes. 

Issue 5: DOE requests feedback and 

sources of data or recommendations to 

support sizing criteria of WGFs, 

NWOFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and electric 

furnaces for typical consumer spaceheating applications. 

2. Shipments 

DOE develops shipments forecasts of 

consumer furnaces to calculate the 

national impacts of potential amended 

energy conservation standards on 

energy consumption, net present value 

(‘‘NPV’’), and future manufacturer cash 

flows. DOE shipments projections are 

based on available historical data 

broken out by product class and 

efficiency. Current sales estimates allow 

for a more accurate model that captures 

recent trends in the market. 

Issue 6: DOE requests historical 

consumer furnace shipments data for 

each product class covered by this 

notice (i.e., WGFs, NWOFs, MHOFs, 

WOFs, and electric furnaces). DOE is 

interested in shipments data, broken out 

by product class, efficiency level, and 

region. If disaggregated shipments data 

are not available at the product class 

level, DOE requests shipments data at 

any broader available category. 

C. Technological Feasibility 

1. Technology Options 

In the development of the June 2011 

DFR, DOE considered a number of 

technology options that manufacturers 

could use to reduce energy consumption 

in NWOFs, WGFs, MHOFs, WOFs, and 

electric furnaces. However, as discussed 

in section II.B of this document, DOE 

did not consider amended AFUE 

standards for MHOFs, WOFs, and 

electric furnaces in the June 2011 DFR. 

Regarding NWOFs and WGFs, DOE 

considered 13 technology options that 

would be expected to impact the AFUE 

of consumer furnaces: (1) Condensing 

secondary heat exchanger for nonweatherized furnaces, (2) heat 

exchanger improvements for nonweatherized furnaces, (3) condensing 

and near-condensing technologies for 

WGFs, (4) two-stage or modulating 

combustion, (5) pulse combustion, (6) 

low NOX premix burners, (7) burner 

derating, (8) insulation improvements, 

(9) off-cycle dampers, (10) concentric 

venting, (11) low-pressure, air-atomized 

oil burners, (12) high-static oil burners, 

and (13) delayed-action oil pump 

solenoid valves. 76 FR 37408, 37449. 

DOE seeks comment on any changes to 

these technology options that could 

affect whether DOE could propose a 

‘‘no-new-standards’’ determination, 

such as an insignificant increase in the 

range of efficiencies and performance 

characteristics of these technology 

options. DOE also seeks comment on 

whether there are any other technology 

options that DOE should consider in its 

analysis. 

Issue 7: DOE seeks information on the 

aforementioned technologies, including 

their applicability to the current market 

and how these technologies may impact 

the energy use of consumer furnaces as 

measured according to the DOE test 

procedure. DOE also seeks information 

on how these technologies may have 

changed since they were considered in 

the June 2011 DFR analysis. 

Additionally, the June 2011 DFR 

established separate standby mode and 

off mode energy conservation standards 

for NWOFs and electric furnaces. 76 FR 

37408, 37433. WGFs and WOFs were 

not considered in the analysis of 

standby mode and off mode energy 

consumption because DOE did not find 

any weatherized furnaces that were not 

sold as part of a single package air 

conditioner or ‘‘dual fuel’’ single 

package heat pump systems, and 

determined that the existing test 

procedures for central air conditioners 

and heat pumps account for standby 

mode power consumption within the 

seasonal energy efficiency ratio 

(‘‘SEER’’) rating. MHOFs were not 

considered in the analysis of standby 

mode and off mode standards due to de 

minimis potential for energy savings. 76 

FR 37408, 37433. For the standby/off 

mode metric, DOE considered three 

technology options that would be 

expected to impact the standby/off 

mode efficiency rating: (1) Switching 

mode power supplies, (2) toroidal 

transformers, and (3) a relay that 

disconnects power to the blower’s 

brushless permanent magnet 7 (‘‘BPM’’) 

motor while in standby mode. 76 FR 

37408, 37450. 

Issue 8: DOE seeks information on the 

aforementioned technologies, including 

their applicability to the current market 

and how these technologies may impact 

the standby mode and/or off mode 

energy use of NWOFs and electric 

furnaces as measured according to the 

DOE test procedure. DOE also seeks 

information on how these technologies 

may have changed since they were 

considered in the June 2011 DFR 

analysis. 

Issue 9: DOE request information on 

whether other standby mode and off 

mode technologies are available to 

reduce energy consumption of 

consumer furnaces in standby mode 

and/or off mode. 

2. Screening Analysis 

The purpose of the screening analysis 

is to evaluate the technologies that 

improve product efficiency to determine 

which technologies will be eliminated 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
4518 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

from further consideration and which 

will be passed to the engineering 

analysis for further consideration. DOE 

determines whether to eliminate certain 

technology options from further 

consideration based on the following 

criteria: (1) Technological feasibility; (2) 

practicability to manufacture, install, 

and service; (3) adverse impacts on 

product utility or product availability; 

(4) adverse impacts on health or safety; 

and (5) unique-pathway proprietary 

technologies. 10 CFR part 430, subpart 

C, appendix A, 7(b). 

The technology options screened out 

in the June 2011 DFR for both AFUE 

and standby/off mode power 

consumption are summarized in Table 

II.2. 76 FR 37408, 37448–37450. 

TABLE II.2—PREVIOUS SCREENING ANALYSIS FROM THE JUNE 2011 DFR 

Technology option 

Reason for screening 

Technological 

feasibility 

Practicability 

to manufacture 

Adverse 

impacts on 

product utility 

or availability 

Adverse 

impacts on 

health and 

safety 

Unique 

pathway 

proprietary 

technologies 

Condensing and near-condensing technologies for WGFs X 

Pulse combustion ................................................................. X 

Low NOX premix burners ..................................................... X 

Burner derating .................................................................... X 

Advanced forms of insulation .............................................. X 

Low-pressure, air-atomized oil burners ............................... X 

Relay that disconnects power to the blower’s BPM motor * X 

* This technology option applies to standby mode and off mode power consumption. 

As displayed in Table II.2, a 

condensing secondary heat exchanger 

was screened out for WGFs in the June 

2011 DFR. As of the publication of the 

June 2011 DFR, DOE was not aware of 

any WGFs that included a condensing 

secondary heat exchanger. For WGFs, 

condensate disposal presented 

challenges for using condensing 

technology. In particular, condensate 

can freeze in cold climates, which could 

cause the unit to malfunction. However, 

DOE has since identified one such 

model on the market, which suggests 

that technical challenges associated 

with condensate disposal in WGFs have 

been overcome. While DOE’s RFI is not 

limited to the following issues, DOE is 

particularly interested in comment, 

information, and data on the following. 

Issue 10: DOE requests feedback on 

what impact, if any, the screening 

criteria described in this section would 

have on each of the aforementioned 

technology options. Similarly, DOE 

seeks information regarding how these 

same criteria would affect any other 

technology options not already 

identified in this document with respect 

to their potential use in consumer 

furnaces. 

Issue 11: DOE requests data and 

information on WGFs that include a 

condensing secondary heat exchanger. 

In particular, DOE requests information 

on methods for condensate disposal and 

preventing condensate freezing and any 

associated increase in installation or 

maintenance costs. Additionally, DOE 

seeks comment on whether this 

technology and associated condensing 

efficiency levels would be appropriate 

for consideration as a national standard 

for WGFs. 

3. Engineering Efficiency Analysis 

The engineering analysis estimates 

the cost-efficiency relationship of 

equipment at different levels of 

increased energy efficiency (‘‘efficiency 

levels’’). This relationship serves as the 

basis for the cost-benefit calculations for 

consumers, manufacturers, and the 

Nation. 

The current energy conservation 

standard for each consumer furnace 

product class is based on AFUE and 

determined according to appendix N to 

subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. The 

current standards for consumer furnaces 

are found at 10 CFR 430.32(e). As part 

of DOE’s analysis, DOE develops 

efficiency levels as potential energy 

conservation standards to evaluate in 

the rulemaking analyses. Among these, 

DOE typically establishes efficiency 

levels at the maximum-available and 

max-tech efficiencies. The maximumavailable efficiency level represents the 

highest efficiency units currently 

available on the market. The max-tech 

efficiency level represents the 

theoretical maximum possible efficiency 

if all available design options are 

incorporated in a model. In applying 

these design options, DOE would only 

include those that are compatible with 

each other that when combined, would 

represent the theoretical maximum 

possible efficiency. 

In the energy efficiency analysis in 

the June 2011 DFR, the max-tech level 

for NWOFs was determined to 

incorporate a condensing secondary 

heat exchanger at 97-percent AFUE. 

(EERE–2011–BT–STD–0011–0012, 

Technical Support Document: Chapter 

5. Engineering Analysis at p. 5–7). As 

discussed in section II.C.2 of this 

document, a condensing secondary heat 

exchanger was screened out as a design 

option for WGFs, so the max-tech level 

was determined to incorporate noncondensing technology at a level of 81- 

percent AFUE. 76 FR 37408, 37439. As 

discussed in section IV.A.1.a of this 

document, MHOFs, WOFs, and electric 

furnaces were not analyzed for amended 

AFUE standards and therefore no maxtech level was determined for those 

classes. For the analysis of standby 

mode and off mode in the June 2011 

DFR, which as discussed in section 

III.E.1 of this document applied only to 

NWOFs and electric furnaces, DOE 

determined the max-tech level to be 10 

and 9 watts, respectively. 76 FR 37408, 

37463. 

Issue 12: DOE seeks input on whether 

the maximum-available AFUE levels are 

appropriate and technologically feasible 

for consideration as possible energy 

conservation standards for consumer 

furnaces for each current product class. 

DOE seeks information on the design 

options incorporated into these 

maximum-available models, and also on 

the order in which manufacturers 

incorporate each design option when 

improving efficiency from the baseline 

to the maximum-available efficiency 

level (i.e., which design options would 

be included at intermediate efficiency 

levels between the baseline and 

maximum-available). 

Issue 13: DOE seeks feedback on the 

max-tech AFUE level for each product 

class, and on the design options that 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 4519 

8Available online at: www.sba.gov/document/ 

support-table-size-standards. 

would be incorporated at the max-tech 

AFUE level. As part of this request, DOE 

also seeks information as to whether 

there are limitations on the use of 

certain combinations of design options. 

DOE is particularly interested in any 

design options that may have become 

available since the June 2011 DFR that 

would allow greater energy savings 

relative to the max-tech efficiency levels 

assessed for each product class in that 

rulemaking. Specifically, DOE requests 

comment and data regarding whether 

max-tech AFUE levels and associated 

technologies considered in the June 

2011 DFR for NWOFs and WGFs are 

still appropriate. 

Issue 14: DOE seeks feedback on the 

max-tech standby mode and off mode 

power consumption (i.e., the lowest 

power consumption possible) for each 

product class, and on the design options 

that would be incorporated at the maxtech level. As part of this request, DOE 

also seeks information as to whether 

there are limitations on the use of 

certain combinations of design options. 

DOE is particularly interested in any 

design options that may have become 

available since the June 2011 DFR that 

would allow greater energy savings 

relative to the max-tech levels assessed 

for each product class in that 

rulemaking. DOE also seeks comment 

and data on whether the standby mode 

and off mode power consumption levels 

considered in the June 2011 DFR for 

NWOFs and electric furnaces are still 

appropriate. 

D. Economic Justification 

In determining whether a proposed 

energy conservation standard is 

economically justified, DOE analyzes, 

among other things, the potential 

economic impact on consumers, 

manufacturers, and the Nation. DOE 

seeks comment on whether there are 

economic barriers to the adoption of 

more-stringent energy conservation 

standards. DOE also seeks comment and 

data on any aspects of its economic 

justification analysis from the June 2011 

DFR that may indicate whether a morestringent energy conservation standard 

would be economically justified or cost 

effective. 

While DOE’s request for information 

is not limited to the following issues, 

DOE is particularly interested in 

comment, information, and data on the 

following. 

1. Life-Cycle Cost and Payback Period 

Analysis 

DOE conducts the life-cycle cost 

(‘‘LCC’’) and payback period (‘‘PBP’’) 

analysis to evaluate the economic effects 

of potential energy conservation 

standards for consumer furnaces on 

individual consumers. For any given 

efficiency level, DOE measures the PBP 

and the change in LCC relative to an 

estimated baseline level. The LCC is the 

total consumer expense over the life of 

the equipment, consisting of purchase, 

installation, and operating costs 

(expenses for energy use, maintenance, 

and repair). Inputs to the calculation of 

total installed cost include the cost of 

the equipment—which includes the 

manufacturer selling price, distribution 

channel markups, and sales taxes—and 

installation costs. Inputs to the 

calculation of operating expenses 

include annual energy consumption, 

energy prices and price projections, 

repair and maintenance costs, 

equipment lifetimes, discount rates, and 

the year that compliance with new and 

amended standards is required. 

Issue 15: DOE requests feedback on 

the typical distribution channels for 

consumer furnaces. DOE further seeks 

comment on whether there is a 

significant retail distribution channel 

for consumer furnaces. 

Issue 16: DOE requests shipments 

data for consumer furnaces, broken 

down by product class, that show 

current market shares by efficiency 

level. DOE also seeks input on similar 

historic data. 

Issue 17: DOE requests comment on 

the anticipated future market share of 

higher-efficiency products as compared 

to less-efficient products for each 

consumer furnace product class, in the 

absence of amended efficiency 

standards. 

2. Manufacturer Impact Analysis 

The purpose of the manufacturer 

impact analysis (‘‘MIA’’) is to estimate 

the financial impact of amended energy 

conservation standards on 

manufacturers of consumer furnaces, 

and to evaluate the potential impact of 

such standards on direct employment 

and manufacturing capacity. As part of 

the MIA, DOE would analyze impacts of 

amended energy conservation standards 

on subgroups of manufacturers of 

covered equipment, including small 

business manufacturers. DOE uses the 

Small Business Administration’s 

(‘‘SBA’’) small business size standards 

to determine whether manufacturers 

qualify as small businesses, which are 

listed by the North American Industry 

Classification System (‘‘NAICS’’).8

Manufacturing of consumer furnaces is 

classified under NAICS 333415, ‘‘Airconditioning and warm air heating 

equipment and commercial and 

industrial refrigeration equipment 

manufacturing,’’ and the SBA sets a 

threshold of 1,250 employees or less for 

a domestic entity to be considered as a 

small business. This employee 

threshold includes all employees in a 

business’ parent company and any other 

subsidiaries. 

One aspect of assessing manufacturer 

burden involves examining the 

cumulative impact of multiple DOE 

standards and the product-specific 

regulatory actions of other Federal 

agencies that affect the manufacturers of 

a covered product or equipment. 

Multiple regulations affecting the same 

manufacturer can strain profits and lead 

companies to abandon product lines or 

markets with lower expected future 

returns than competing products. For 

these reasons, DOE conducts an analysis 

of cumulative regulatory burden as part 

of its rulemakings pertaining to 

appliance efficiency. 

Issue 18: To the extent feasible, DOE 

seeks the names and contact 

information of any domestic or foreignbased manufacturers in the United 

States of the consumer furnaces that are 

the subject of this notification. 

Issue 19: DOE requests the names and 

contact information of small business 

manufacturers, as defined by the SBA’s 

size threshold that distribute in the 

United States consumer furnaces that 

are the subject of this notification. In 

addition, DOE requests comment on any 

other manufacturer subgroups that 

could disproportionally be impacted by 

amended energy conservation 

standards. DOE requests feedback on 

any potential approaches that could be 

considered to address impacts on 

manufacturers, including small 

businesses. 

Issue 20: DOE requests information 

regarding the cumulative regulatory 

burden impacts on manufacturers of 

consumer furnaces associated with (1) 

other DOE standards applying to 

different products or equipment that 

these manufacturers may also make, and 

(2) product-specific regulatory actions of 

other Federal agencies. DOE also 

requests comment on its methodology 

for computing cumulative regulatory 

burden and whether there are any 

flexibilities it can consider that would 

reduce this burden while remaining 

consistent with the requirements of 

EPCA. 

III. Submission of Comments 

DOE invites all interested parties to 

submit in writing by the date under the 

DATES heading, comments and 

information on matters addressed in this 

notification and on other matters 

relevant to DOE’s consideration of 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
4520 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 19 / Friday, January 28, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

amended energy conservation standards 

for the consumer furnaces covered by 

this notification (specifically, WGFs, 

NWOFs, WOFs, MHOFs, and electric 

furnaces). After the close of the 

comment period, DOE will review the 

public comments received and may 

begin collecting data and conducting the 

analyses discussed in this document. 

Submitting comments via 

www.regulations.gov. The 

www.regulations.gov web page requires 

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 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. Faxes 

will not 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, 

written in English, and 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). 

DOE considers public participation to 

be a very important part of the process 

for developing test procedures and 

energy conservation standards. DOE 

actively encourages the participation 

and interaction of the public during the 

comment period in each stage of this 

process. Interactions with and between 

members of the public provide a 

balanced discussion of the issues and 

assist DOE in the process. Anyone who 

wishes to be added to the DOE mailing 

list to receive future notices and 

information about this process should 

contact Appliance and Equipment 

Standards Program staff at (202) 287– 

1445 or via email at 

ApplianceStandardsQuestions@

ee.doe.gov. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on January 23, 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 25, 

2022. 

Treena V. Garrett, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2022–01765 Filed 1–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2022–0027; Airspace 

Docket No. 21–ANM–70] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Proposed Amendment of Domestic 

VOR Federal Airway V–356; Mile High, 

CO 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: This action proposes to 

amend Domestic VOR Federal Airway 

V–356, by revoking the segment 

between the FIDLE and ELORE 

intersections due to the absence of a 

supporting navigational aid signal. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1