Publication of the Petition for Waiver From Sanyo E&E Corporation From the Department of Energy Residential Refrigerator and Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure, 29331-29333 [2012-11998]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2012 / Notices
building codes. Today’s action would
not impose a Federal mandate on State,
local or tribal governments, and it
would not result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
Accordingly, no assessment or analysis
is required under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
G. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires
Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule
that may affect family well-being.
Today’s action would not have any
impact on the autonomy or integrity of
the family as an institution.
Accordingly, DOE has concluded that it
is not necessary to prepare a Family
Policymaking Assessment.
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
H. Review Under the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note)
provides for agencies to review most
disseminations of information to the
public under guidelines established by
each agency pursuant to general
guidelines issued by OMB. OMB’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
8452 (Feb. 22, 2002), and DOE’s
guidelines were published at 67 FR
62446 (Oct. 7, 2002). DOE has reviewed
today’s action under the OMB and DOE
guidelines and has concluded that it is
consistent with applicable policies in
those guidelines.
I. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to
prepare and submit to the OMB a
Statement of Energy Effects for any
proposed significant energy action. A
‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as
any action by an agency that
promulgated or is expected to lead to
promulgation of a final rule, and that:
(1) Is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866, or any
successor order; and (2) is likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy, or
(3) is designated by the Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) as a significant energy
action. For any proposed significant
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:20 May 16, 2012
Jkt 226001
energy action, the agency must give a
detailed statement of any adverse effects
on energy supply, distribution, or use,
should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the
action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
Today’s action would not have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy and is
therefore not a significant energy action.
Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
J. Review Under Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175. ‘‘Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments’’ (65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9,
2000)), requires DOE to develop an
accountable process to ensure
‘‘meaningful and timely input by tribal
officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ refers to regulations that
have ‘‘substantial direct effects on one
or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.’’ Today’s
regulatory action is not a policy that has
‘‘tribal implications’’ under Executive
Order 13175.
DOE has reviewed today’s action
under Executive Order 13175 and has
determined that it is consistent with
applicable policies of that Executive
Order.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2012.
David T. Danielson,
Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2012–12000 Filed 5–16–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy
[Case No. RF–022]
Publication of the Petition for Waiver
From Sanyo E&E Corporation From the
Department of Energy Residential
Refrigerator and Refrigerator-Freezer
Test Procedure
Office of Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of re-opening of public
comment period.
AGENCY:
On April 2, 2012, the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) published
the Sanyo E&E Corporation (Sanyo)
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29331
petition for waiver from the residential
refrigerator and refrigerator-freezer test
procedure. Comments were required to
be submitted by May 2, 2012. This
document announces that the period for
submitting comments on the Sanyo
petition for waiver is re-opened until
June 18, 2012.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data,
and information regarding the Sanyo
petition for waiver received no later
than June 18, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted
must identify the Sanyo E&E
Corporation petition for waiver, and
provide case number RF–022.
Comments may be submitted using any
of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Email:
AS_Waiver_Requests@ee.doe.gov.
Include the case number [Case No. RF–
022] in the subject line of the message.
• Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S.
Department of Energy, Building
Technologies Program, Mailstop EE–2J/
1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–2945. Please
submit one signed original paper copy.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda
Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, 950
L’Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600,
Washington, DC 20024. Please submit
one signed original paper copy.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, visit the U.S.
Department of Energy, Resource Room
of the Building Technologies Program,
950 L’Enfant Plaza SW., 6th Floor,
Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586–2945,
between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. Please call Ms. Brenda
Edwards at the above telephone number
for additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department of
Energy, Building Technologies Program,
Mail Stop EE–2J, Forrestal Building,
1000 Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0121.
Telephone: (202) 586–0371. Email:
Bryan.Berringer@ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April
2, 2012, DOE published the Sanyo
petition for waiver from the residential
refrigerator, refrigerator-freezer, and
freezer test procedure in the Federal
Register (77 FR 19654). The notice
provided for the submission of
comments by May 2, 2012. After the
notice of petition for waiver was
published, Sanyo provided DOE with
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
29332
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2012 / Notices
clarifications on certain items in its
original petition, and requested that the
comment period for its petition for
waiver be extended so that commenters
would have an opportunity to comment
on the petition with these clarifications
included. DOE is publishing Sanyo’s
request in its entirety. The request
contains no confidential information.
The request includes a suggested
alternate test procedure to determine the
energy consumption of Sanyo’s
specified hybrid refrigerators. To
provide all manufacturers of
domestically marketed units of the same
product type additional time to submit
comments on the additional information
provided by Sanyo, DOE has
determined that re-opening of the public
comment period is appropriate and is
hereby re-opening the comment period.
DOE will consider any comments
received by June 18, 2012 and deems
any comments received between May 2,
2012 and June 18, 2012 to be timely
submitted.
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Further Information on Submitting
Comments
Under 10 CFR part 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he
or she believes to be confidential and
exempt by law from public disclosure
should submit two copies: One copy of
the document including all the
information believed to be confidential,
and one copy of the document 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.
Factors of interest to DOE when
evaluating requests to treat submitted
information as confidential include (1) a
description of the items, (2) whether
and why such items are customarily
treated as confidential within the
industry, (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from
other sources, (4) whether the
information has previously been made
available to others without obligation
concerning its confidentiality, (5) an
explanation of the competitive injury to
the submitting person which would
result from public disclosure, (6) when
such information might lose its
confidential character due to the
passage of time, and (7) why disclosure
of the information would be contrary to
the public interest.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:20 May 16, 2012
Jkt 226001
Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on May
9, 2012.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
ENERGY
Washington, DC 20585
In the Matter of: SANYO E&E Corp.,
Petitioner).
Case Number: RF–022
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF
COMMENT DEADLINE
SANYO E&E Corporation (‘‘SEE’’)
submits this Request for Extension of
Comment Deadline (‘‘Request’’) with
respect to its Petition for Waiver
(‘‘Petition’’) filed with the Department
of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) on June 2, 2011.
Notice of SEE’s Petition was published
in the April 2, 2012 Federal Register
(Vol. 77, No. 63, p. 19654) (‘‘Notice’’)
and the public comment period is
currently scheduled to close on May 2,
2012. SEE respectfully requests that
interested parties be granted thirty (30)
additional days from the publication of
this Request to file comments on SEE’s
Petition so that any commenters have
sufficient time to provide a response
incorporating the clarifications to the
Petition SEE provides below. Granting
the extension will not prejudice any
interested parties, and will promote the
efficient resolution of SEE’s Petition.
1. SEE’s Proposed Alternative Testing
Method For Its Hybrid Models
As SEE explained in its Petition,
which SEE incorporates herein, SEE’s
hybrid models contain design
characteristics that prevent testing of the
basic models according to the test
procedures prescribed in 10 C.F.R.
§ 430, subpart B, appendix A1.
Specifically, while the beverage
compartment of these hybrid models is
cable of achieving temperatures at or
below 38 °F, the wine storage
compartment of these single-cabinet
units can only achieve a minimum
temperature of 45 °F. As a result, it is
impossible to test these hybrid models
under DOE’s current testing procedures,
which mandate that energy
consumption be measured when each
compartment temperature is set at 38 °F.
In order to properly certify and rate
these hybrid models, SEE proposed the
following two formulas to measure the
maximum allowable energy
consumption of the wine storage and
beverage compartments, respectively:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Energy consumption of the wine storage
compartment:
EWine = {ET1 + [(ET2¥ET1) × (55
°F¥TW1)/(TW2¥TW1)]} *0.85 1
Energy consumption of the refrigerated
beverage compartment:
EBeverage Compartment= ET1 +
[(ET2¥ET1) × (38 °F¥TBC1)/
(TBC2¥TBC1)].
As SEE also explained, the K factor
from CAN/CSA 300–08 6.3.1.2 and
HRF–1–2007 8.7.2.1.1 was used because
SEE’s hybrid models will typically have
a door-opening usage aligned with
household freezers, and thus 0.85 was
the employed K factor (correction
factor). Further, to evaluate the models
in a manner truly representative of their
actual energy consumption
characteristics, the standard
temperature of single wine coolers (55
°F) for the wine storage compartment
and the standard temperature (38 °F) for
the refrigerated beverage compartment
was used.2
Applying these proposals, and in
accordance with 10 C.F.R. § 430, subpart
B, Appendix A1, SEE hybrid model
MBCM24FW, which would be classified
as a compact refrigerator with automatic
defrost without through-the-door ice
service and which has a total adjusted
volume of 5.75 cubic feet, would have
a maximum allowable annual energy
usage of 436 kWh/year. Similarly, SEE
hybrid models JUB248LB, JUB248RB,
JUB248LW, JUB248RW, KBCO24LS,
KBCS24LS, KBCO24RS, and KBCS24RS,
which would also be classified as
compact refrigerators with automatic
defrost without through-the-door ice
service and which have a total adjusted
volume of 5.41 cubic feet, would have
a maximum allowable annual energy
usage of 431 kWh/year.
2. Clarification Of SEE Proposed
Alternative Testing Method
In its Notice, DOE stated that ‘‘[w]e
also note that the energy consumption
of the basic models detailed in Sanyo’s
1 SEE clarifies here that the .85 correction factor
should be applied to the entire formula for the wine
storage compartment, {ET1 + [(ET2¥ET1) × (55
°F¥TW1)/(TW2¥TW1)]}.
2 As DOE itself noted in its Framework Public
Meeting for Wine Chillers and Miscellaneous
Refrigeration Products, the Association of Home
Appliance Manufacturers, the California Energy
Commission, and Natural Resources Canada ‘‘all
use a standardized compartment temperature of 55
°F’’ and a .85 K factor. Framework at pp. 34–35,
available at https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/
appliance_standards/pdfs/
wc_fw_meeting_presentation_draft.pdf. In the
absence of an existing federal standard, SEE
accordingly employed these prevailing standards in
its proposed alternative testing method with respect
to the wine storage compartment of SEE’s hybrid
models.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
mstockstill on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 96 / Thursday, May 17, 2012 / Notices
petition suggests that these products,
when tested in accordance with the
alternate test procedure Sanyo is
requesting to use, would appear to use
an amount of energy that exceeds the
energy conservation standards for the
likely product classes that would
apply.’’ Notice at 19655. SEE apologizes
for any confusion caused by the
proposed formulas in its Petition, as
SEE did not mean to suggest that 436
kWh/year and 431 kWh/year were the
actual energy consumption values for
the applicable hybrid models. Rather,
SEE was attempting to demonstrate that
these energy consumption figures would
be the theoretical maximum allowable
annual values under SEE’s proposed
alternative testing method. In order to
avoid further confusion, SEE provides
below a more detailed explanation as to
how it derived these maximum
allowable values.
With respect to basic model
MBCM24FWBS, the total adjusted
volume of the beverage compartment is
2.8 cubic feet, while the total adjusted
volume of the wine storage
compartment is 2.95 cubic feet, for a
total adjusted volume of 5.75 cubic feet.
To calculate the maximum allowable
annual energy consumption figure,
however, SEE first calculated the
maximum allowable energy
consumption of this model as if it were
entirely governed by the class 13 allrefrigerator standard, and then
calculated the maximum allowable
energy consumption figure as if it were
entirely governed by the current CAN/
CSA–C300–08 type 20 wine chiller
standard:
10 CFR 430.32 class 13 all-refrigerator:
12.70 × 5.75 + 355 kWh/year = 428
kWh/year
CAN/CSA–C300–08 type 20 wine
chiller: 17.4 × 5.75 + 344 kWh/year
= 444 kWh/year
SEE then took the weighted average of
these figures based upon the actual total
adjusted volume of the beverage
compartment (2.8 cubic feet) and the
wine storage compartment (2.95 cubic
feet) to derive the proposed maximum
allowable energy consumption figure
contained in its Petition:
Combined standard: (428 kWh/year ×
2.8/5.75) + (444 kWh/year × 2.95/
5.75) = 436 KWh/year
With respect to basic models
JUB248LB, JUB248RB, JUB248LW,
JUB248RW, KBCO24LS, KBCS24LS,
KBCO24RS, and KBCS24RS, SEE
derived the maximum allowable energy
consumption figure in the same manner,
with the only difference being that the
total adjusted volume of the wine
storage compartment is 2.61 cubic feet
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:20 May 16, 2012
Jkt 226001
for these basic models (the beverage
compartment for these basic models is
also 2.8 cubic feet), for a total adjusted
volume of 5.41 cubic feet:
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR 430.32 class 13 all-refrigerator:
12.70 × 5.41 + 355 kWh/year = 424
kWh/year
CAN/CSA–C300–08 type 20 wine
chiller: 17.4 × 5.41 + 344 kWh/year
= 438 kWh/year
Combined standard: (424 kWh/year ×
2.8/5.41) + (438 kWh/year × 2.61/
5.41) = 431 kWh/year
29333
[Project No. 12968–001]
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
City of Norwich Department of Public
Utilities; Notice of Proposed Restricted
Service List for a Programmatic
Agreement for Managing Properties
Included in or Eligible for Inclusion in
the National Register of Historic Places
Rule 2010 of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission’s (Commission)
Rules of Practice and Procedure
Thus, the 436 kWh/year and 431
provides that, to eliminate unnecessary
kWh/year figures reflect the weighted
expense or improve administrative
average of the maximum allowable
efficiency, the Secretary may establish a
energy consumption standard pertaining restricted service list for a particular
to class 13 all-refrigerators, as applied to phase or issue in a proceeding.1 The
SEE’s hybrid models’ beverage
restricted service list should contain the
compartment, and the CAN/CSA–C300– names of persons on the service list
08 type 20 standard for wine chillers, as who, in the judgment of the decisional
applied to SEE’s hybrid models’ wine
authority establishing the list, are active
storage compartment. SEE realizes that
participants with respect to the phase or
the bases for these figures may not have issue in the proceeding for which the
been entirely clear from SEE’s Petition,
list is established.
The Commission staff is consulting
and therefore SEE respectfully requests
with the Connecticut State Historic
that DOE publish this clarification in
Preservation Officer (hereinafter,
order to provide interested parties with
Connecticut SHPO), and the Advisory
a more thorough understanding of how
Council on Historic Preservation
SEE derived its proposed alternative
(hereinafter, Advisory Council)
testing method and related maximum
pursuant to the Advisory Council’s
allowable energy consumption figures.
regulations, 36 CFR Part 800,
SEE further requests that interested
implementing section 106 of the
parties be granted thirty (30) additional
National Historic Preservation Act, as
days from the publication of this
amended, (16 U.S.C. section 470f), to
Request to file comments on SEE’s
prepare and execute a programmatic
Petition so that interested parties have
agreement for managing properties
sufficient time to provide a proper
included in, or eligible for inclusion in,
response without the need for an
the National Register of Historic Places
additional round of comments.
that could be affected by issuance of a
If DOE requires any additional
new license for the Scotland
Hydroelectric Project No. 12968–001.
information to properly consider SEE’s
The programmatic agreement, when
Petition, please do not hesitate to
executed by the Commission and the
contact the undersigned.
Connecticut SHPO would satisfy the
Respectfully submitted,
Commission’s section 106
/s lllllllllllllllllll responsibilities for all individual
Alan G. Fishel
undertakings carried out in accordance
Adam D. Bowser
with the license until the license expires
ARENT FOX LLP
or is terminated (36 CFR 800.13[e]). The
1050 Connecticut Avenue NW
Commission’s responsibilities pursuant
Washington, DC 20036–5369
to section 106 for the Scotland
(202) 857–6450
Hydroelectric Project would be fulfilled
fishel.alan@arentfox.com
through the programmatic agreement,
bowser.adam@arentfox.com
which the Commission proposes to draft
April 20, 2012
in consultation with certain parties
listed below. The executed
[FR Doc. 2012–11998 Filed 5–16–12; 8:45 am]
programmatic agreement would be
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
incorporated into any Order issuing a
license.
City of Norwich Department of Public
Utilities, as the competitor applicant for
the Scotland Hydroelectric Project No.
PO 00000
1 18
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
CFR section 385.2010.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 96 (Thursday, May 17, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29331-29333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11998]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
[Case No. RF-022]
Publication of the Petition for Waiver From Sanyo E&E Corporation
From the Department of Energy Residential Refrigerator and
Refrigerator-Freezer Test Procedure
AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of re-opening of public comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 2, 2012, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
published the Sanyo E&E Corporation (Sanyo) petition for waiver from
the residential refrigerator and refrigerator-freezer test procedure.
Comments were required to be submitted by May 2, 2012. This document
announces that the period for submitting comments on the Sanyo petition
for waiver is re-opened until June 18, 2012.
DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding the
Sanyo petition for waiver received no later than June 18, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Any comments submitted must identify the Sanyo E&E
Corporation petition for waiver, and provide case number RF-022.
Comments may be submitted using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Email: AS_Waiver_Requests@ee.doe.gov. Include the case
number [Case No. RF-022] in the subject line of the message.
Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy,
Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J/1000 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. Please
submit one signed original paper copy.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Suite
600, Washington, DC 20024. Please submit one signed original paper
copy.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, visit the U.S. Department of Energy, Resource Room
of the Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., 6th
Floor, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 586-2945, between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Please call Ms.
Brenda Edwards at the above telephone number for additional
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bryan Berringer, U.S. Department
of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE-2J, Forrestal
Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121.
Telephone: (202) 586-0371. Email: Bryan.Berringer@ee.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 2, 2012, DOE published the Sanyo
petition for waiver from the residential refrigerator, refrigerator-
freezer, and freezer test procedure in the Federal Register (77 FR
19654). The notice provided for the submission of comments by May 2,
2012. After the notice of petition for waiver was published, Sanyo
provided DOE with
[[Page 29332]]
clarifications on certain items in its original petition, and requested
that the comment period for its petition for waiver be extended so that
commenters would have an opportunity to comment on the petition with
these clarifications included. DOE is publishing Sanyo's request in its
entirety. The request contains no confidential information. The request
includes a suggested alternate test procedure to determine the energy
consumption of Sanyo's specified hybrid refrigerators. To provide all
manufacturers of domestically marketed units of the same product type
additional time to submit comments on the additional information
provided by Sanyo, DOE has determined that re-opening of the public
comment period is appropriate and is hereby re-opening the comment
period. DOE will consider any comments received by June 18, 2012 and
deems any comments received between May 2, 2012 and June 18, 2012 to be
timely submitted.
Further Information on Submitting Comments
Under 10 CFR part 1004.11, any person submitting information that
he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public
disclosure should submit two copies: One copy of the document including
all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the
document 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.
Factors of interest to DOE when evaluating requests to treat
submitted information as confidential include (1) a description of the
items, (2) whether and why such items are customarily treated as
confidential within the industry, (3) whether the information is
generally known by or available from other sources, (4) whether the
information has previously been made available to others without
obligation concerning its confidentiality, (5) an explanation of the
competitive injury to the submitting person which would result from
public disclosure, (6) when such information might lose its
confidential character due to the passage of time, and (7) why
disclosure of the information would be contrary to the public interest.
Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2012.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy.
BEFORE THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Washington, DC 20585
In the Matter of: SANYO E&E Corp., Petitioner).
Case Number: RF-022
REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF COMMENT DEADLINE
SANYO E&E Corporation (``SEE'') submits this Request for Extension
of Comment Deadline (``Request'') with respect to its Petition for
Waiver (``Petition'') filed with the Department of Energy (``DOE'') on
June 2, 2011. Notice of SEE's Petition was published in the April 2,
2012 Federal Register (Vol. 77, No. 63, p. 19654) (``Notice'') and the
public comment period is currently scheduled to close on May 2, 2012.
SEE respectfully requests that interested parties be granted thirty
(30) additional days from the publication of this Request to file
comments on SEE's Petition so that any commenters have sufficient time
to provide a response incorporating the clarifications to the Petition
SEE provides below. Granting the extension will not prejudice any
interested parties, and will promote the efficient resolution of SEE's
Petition.
1. SEE's Proposed Alternative Testing Method For Its Hybrid Models
As SEE explained in its Petition, which SEE incorporates herein,
SEE's hybrid models contain design characteristics that prevent testing
of the basic models according to the test procedures prescribed in 10
C.F.R. Sec. 430, subpart B, appendix A1. Specifically, while the
beverage compartment of these hybrid models is cable of achieving
temperatures at or below 38 [deg]F, the wine storage compartment of
these single-cabinet units can only achieve a minimum temperature of 45
[deg]F. As a result, it is impossible to test these hybrid models under
DOE's current testing procedures, which mandate that energy consumption
be measured when each compartment temperature is set at 38 [deg]F.
In order to properly certify and rate these hybrid models, SEE
proposed the following two formulas to measure the maximum allowable
energy consumption of the wine storage and beverage compartments,
respectively:
Energy consumption of the wine storage compartment:
EWine = {ET1 + [(ET2-ET1) x (55 [deg]F-TW1)/(TW2-TW1)]{time} *0.85
\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SEE clarifies here that the .85 correction factor should be
applied to the entire formula for the wine storage compartment, {ET1
+ [(ET2-ET1) x (55 [deg]F-TW1)/(TW2-TW1)]{time} .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy consumption of the refrigerated beverage compartment:
EBeverage Compartment= ET1 + [(ET2-ET1) x (38 [deg]F-TBC1)/(TBC2-
TBC1)].
As SEE also explained, the K factor from CAN/CSA 300-08 6.3.1.2 and
HRF-1-2007 8.7.2.1.1 was used because SEE's hybrid models will
typically have a door-opening usage aligned with household freezers,
and thus 0.85 was the employed K factor (correction factor). Further,
to evaluate the models in a manner truly representative of their actual
energy consumption characteristics, the standard temperature of single
wine coolers (55 [deg]F) for the wine storage compartment and the
standard temperature (38 [deg]F) for the refrigerated beverage
compartment was used.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ As DOE itself noted in its Framework Public Meeting for Wine
Chillers and Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products, the Association
of Home Appliance Manufacturers, the California Energy Commission,
and Natural Resources Canada ``all use a standardized compartment
temperature of 55 [deg]F'' and a .85 K factor. Framework at pp. 34-
35, available at https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/wc_fw_meeting_presentation_draft.pdf. In the
absence of an existing federal standard, SEE accordingly employed
these prevailing standards in its proposed alternative testing
method with respect to the wine storage compartment of SEE's hybrid
models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applying these proposals, and in accordance with 10 C.F.R. Sec.
430, subpart B, Appendix A1, SEE hybrid model MBCM24FW, which would be
classified as a compact refrigerator with automatic defrost without
through-the-door ice service and which has a total adjusted volume of
5.75 cubic feet, would have a maximum allowable annual energy usage of
436 kWh/year. Similarly, SEE hybrid models JUB248LB, JUB248RB,
JUB248LW, JUB248RW, KBCO24LS, KBCS24LS, KBCO24RS, and KBCS24RS, which
would also be classified as compact refrigerators with automatic
defrost without through-the-door ice service and which have a total
adjusted volume of 5.41 cubic feet, would have a maximum allowable
annual energy usage of 431 kWh/year.
2. Clarification Of SEE Proposed Alternative Testing Method
In its Notice, DOE stated that ``[w]e also note that the energy
consumption of the basic models detailed in Sanyo's
[[Page 29333]]
petition suggests that these products, when tested in accordance with
the alternate test procedure Sanyo is requesting to use, would appear
to use an amount of energy that exceeds the energy conservation
standards for the likely product classes that would apply.'' Notice at
19655. SEE apologizes for any confusion caused by the proposed formulas
in its Petition, as SEE did not mean to suggest that 436 kWh/year and
431 kWh/year were the actual energy consumption values for the
applicable hybrid models. Rather, SEE was attempting to demonstrate
that these energy consumption figures would be the theoretical maximum
allowable annual values under SEE's proposed alternative testing
method. In order to avoid further confusion, SEE provides below a more
detailed explanation as to how it derived these maximum allowable
values.
With respect to basic model MBCM24FWBS, the total adjusted volume
of the beverage compartment is 2.8 cubic feet, while the total adjusted
volume of the wine storage compartment is 2.95 cubic feet, for a total
adjusted volume of 5.75 cubic feet. To calculate the maximum allowable
annual energy consumption figure, however, SEE first calculated the
maximum allowable energy consumption of this model as if it were
entirely governed by the class 13 all-refrigerator standard, and then
calculated the maximum allowable energy consumption figure as if it
were entirely governed by the current CAN/CSA-C300-08 type 20 wine
chiller standard:
10 CFR 430.32 class 13 all-refrigerator: 12.70 x 5.75 + 355 kWh/year =
428 kWh/year
CAN/CSA-C300-08 type 20 wine chiller: 17.4 x 5.75 + 344 kWh/year = 444
kWh/year
SEE then took the weighted average of these figures based upon the
actual total adjusted volume of the beverage compartment (2.8 cubic
feet) and the wine storage compartment (2.95 cubic feet) to derive the
proposed maximum allowable energy consumption figure contained in its
Petition:
Combined standard: (428 kWh/year x 2.8/5.75) + (444 kWh/year x 2.95/
5.75) = 436 KWh/year
With respect to basic models JUB248LB, JUB248RB, JUB248LW,
JUB248RW, KBCO24LS, KBCS24LS, KBCO24RS, and KBCS24RS, SEE derived the
maximum allowable energy consumption figure in the same manner, with
the only difference being that the total adjusted volume of the wine
storage compartment is 2.61 cubic feet for these basic models (the
beverage compartment for these basic models is also 2.8 cubic feet),
for a total adjusted volume of 5.41 cubic feet:
10 CFR 430.32 class 13 all-refrigerator: 12.70 x 5.41 + 355 kWh/year =
424 kWh/year
CAN/CSA-C300-08 type 20 wine chiller: 17.4 x 5.41 + 344 kWh/year = 438
kWh/year
Combined standard: (424 kWh/year x 2.8/5.41) + (438 kWh/year x 2.61/
5.41) = 431 kWh/year
Thus, the 436 kWh/year and 431 kWh/year figures reflect the
weighted average of the maximum allowable energy consumption standard
pertaining to class 13 all-refrigerators, as applied to SEE's hybrid
models' beverage compartment, and the CAN/CSA-C300-08 type 20 standard
for wine chillers, as applied to SEE's hybrid models' wine storage
compartment. SEE realizes that the bases for these figures may not have
been entirely clear from SEE's Petition, and therefore SEE respectfully
requests that DOE publish this clarification in order to provide
interested parties with a more thorough understanding of how SEE
derived its proposed alternative testing method and related maximum
allowable energy consumption figures. SEE further requests that
interested parties be granted thirty (30) additional days from the
publication of this Request to file comments on SEE's Petition so that
interested parties have sufficient time to provide a proper response
without the need for an additional round of comments.
If DOE requires any additional information to properly consider
SEE's Petition, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Respectfully submitted,
/s---------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan G. Fishel
Adam D. Bowser
ARENT FOX LLP
1050 Connecticut Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20036-5369
(202) 857-6450
fishel.alan@arentfox.com
bowser.adam@arentfox.com
April 20, 2012
[FR Doc. 2012-11998 Filed 5-16-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P