### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 1

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

APPLIANCE STANDARDS AND RULEMAKING FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C.

Tuesday, July 2, 2013 8:08 a.m.

Reported by: Christine Allen, Capital Reporting Company

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 2 1 A P P E A R A N C E S 2 Neil Eisner, Facilitator 3 DOE and ASRAC Representatives: 4 John Cymbalsky, ASRAC Designated Federal Officer, Supervisory Operations Research 5 Analyst, U.S. Department of Energy 6 Laura Barhydt, U.S. Department of Energy 7 Ashley Armstrong, U.S. Department of Energy 8 Other Selected Members: 9 Karim Amrane, ACHRI 10 Timothy Ballo, Earth Justice 11 Jeff Bauman, National Refrigeration & Air- Conditioning 12 John Bean, Schneider Electric 13 Rodney Beever, United Cool Air 14 Mary Dane, Traulsen 15 Paul Doppel, Mitsubishi Electric U.S., Inc. 16 Mark Fly, AAON 17 Geoffrey Halley, SJI Consultants, Inc. 18 John Hurst, Lennox International, Inc. 19 Charles Hon, True Manufacturing 20 Jill Hootman, Trane 21 Marshall Hunt, Pacific Gas and Electric Company 22 Diane Jakobs, Rheem

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 3 1 A P P E A R A N C E S (Continued) 2 Other Selected Members (Cont'd): 3 Tom Johnson, Daikin McQuay 4 Michael Kojak, Underwriters Laboratories, LLC 5 Karen Meyers, Rheem Manufacturing Co. 6 Peter Molvie, Cleaver-Brooks Product Development 7 Frank Myers, PVI Industries 8 Jeff Kleiss, Lochinvar, LLC 9 Harvey Sachs, American Council for an Energy- Efficient Economy 10 Ronald Shebik, Hussmann Corporation 11 Louis Starr, Northwest Energy Efficiency 12 Alliance 13 Frank Stanonik, ACHRI 14 Russell Tharp, Goodman Manufacturing 15 Robert Whitwell, Carrier 16 Wes Wostal, Climate Master 17 Navigant: 18 Aris Maranton 19 Michael Rivest 20 Collin Weber 21 Laura Degitsz 22 Corey Tucker

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 4 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 (8:08 a.m.) 3 MR. EISNER: Can we get started? We're on 4 certification of variable refrigerant flow multi5 split, air conditioners, heat pumps. Do you want to 6 finish this one and then go back to the ones where we 7 had IOUs from yesterday or do you want to go to the 8 IOUs first? 9 MS. BARHYDT: We can keep going through. 10 MR. EISNER: Okay. All right. We agreed to 11 some of these things. There were a few things people 12 wanted to check overnight. 13 MS. BARHYDT: So we were talking about 14 having the tested combination indoor unit, whether 15 it's ducted or non-ducted, and the cooling capacity, 16 the EER, the high heating COP for air source and the 17 heating COP for water source as well as the specific 18 test information. 19 You also had on there, "Controller necessary 20 to test." That would be included in the PDF or -- 21 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel, Mitsubishi. It's 22 a -- for most companies it's an actual piece and

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 5 1 probably a PC is needed, also. 2 MS. BARHYDT: So meaning that you'd be 3 reporting a model number for the controller or what 4 exactly -- what's the piece of information that you're 5

-- 6 MR. DOPPEL: Well, it's a piece of 7 equipment. It's like at -- 8 MR. THARP: Like a channel changer for a TV. 9 MS. BARHYDT: Well, you wouldn't be 10 submitting a piece of equipment with your 11 certification report, I don't think. 12 MR. DOPPEL: No, no, no, but that's -- 13 MR. THARP: This is just for information for 14 certification. 15 MR. DOPPEL: Okay. Oh, for certification, 16 and we wouldn't need to do that. That would be in the 17 PDF. 18 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. 19 MR. THARP: Information about the 20 controller. 21 MR. DOPPEL: Right. That'll be in the PDF. 22 MR. WHITWELL: Yeah, what's required to set

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 6 1 the unit to run at the proper speed. Bob Whitwell 2 from Carrier. 3 Paul, I think, also, for the heat recovery 4 we would have the matching boxes. 5 MR. DOPPEL: That's listed. 6 MR. WHITWELL: That would have to be part of 7 the tested combination in the case of heat recovery, I 8 think; right? 9 MR. DOPPEL: Yeah. 10 MS. BARHYDT: Hold on one second. Is there 11 any other information? 12 MR. DOPPEL: That should be it. 13 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. Computer room air 14 conditioners. AHRI doesn't have a program for 15 computer room air conditioners. DOE regulations don't 16 have any specific requirements for computer room air 17 conditioners. I think our thought is that the 18 information would be very similar to the information 19 that's collected for other HVAC equipment, although 20 are there additional components? I know some of the 21 computer room air conditioners provide other 22 functionalities, such as controlling the humidity.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 7 1 Are there additional model numbers associated with 2 that or is that all just built into the models that 3 are the indoor/outdoor? 4 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. I don't 5 think I can answer that question, but I think maybe we 6 should add that topic to the discussion -- 7 MS. BARHYDT: To the meeting with the -- 8 okay. 9 MR. AMRANE: -- next meeting. 10 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr with NEEA. 11 For computer room air conditioners, ASHRAE 127 has a 12 whole rating procedure, ASHRAE Standard 127. It 13 actually is different. They have an SCOP and some 14 other different metrics. 15 MS. BARHYDT: Right. The metric is 16 different, but in terms of what information we would 17 collect, what I meant was that we would collect them 18 metrically, collect the capacity, we'd collect model 19 numbers. It's just a question of how many different 20 model numbers are there that we would need to be 21 collecting so that we can account for that. 22 And then if we go back --

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 8 1 MS. BARHYDT: So actually I think that goes 2 through the full list of all of the product types for 3 certification, so if you all want to go back to some 4 of the basic model outstanding issues. Was anyone 5 able to get any additional information about -- let's 6 see, did you actually have a slide that was dedicated 7

-- 8 MS. TUCKER: No. 9 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. I've got a list. 10 MS. TUCKER: Not linking the list. 11 MS. JAKOBS: About the filters? 12 MS. BARHYDT: That was one of them, yes. 13 MS. JAKOBS: Yeah. This is Diane Jakobs 14 from Rheem. So MERV-6, that's a rating, it has to do 15 with what size particles and how much particles. It 16 doesn't have to do with static, so I'm kind of -- I 17 think that maybe if what we're trying to specify is a 18 static, we should do it some other way because you can 19 have MERV- 6, one inch thick MERV-6, that's one 20 pressure drop. You can have pleated ones, that would 21 be a lower pressure drop. So it seems like we're 22 trying to restrict or specify the pressure drop, and

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 9 1 using MERV rating, I don't think that's -- 2 MS. BARHYDT: Is not -- 3 MS. JAKOBS: -- a good way to do it. 4 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. 5 MS. JAKOBS: The test entered, I think it 6 has a default of 0.08 if you test without a filter. 7 So I don't know if that would be a good kind of 8 standard value and then anything that's above a 0.08 9 inch water column pressure drop would be a premium 10 filter or some percentage above that. 11 MS. BARHYDT: So when we had spoken before, 12 I was under the impression that there was not a 13 provision in the test procedure that dealt with 14 filters, so you're saying that there is, in fact -- 15 MS. JAKOBS: You have an option of testing 16 with a filter or using the 0.08. I called the 17 engineers at home. 18 MR. THARP: This is Rusty Tharp with 19 Goodman. The 0.08 is the residential product, 210/240. 20 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. 21 MR. THARP: 340/360 itself does not mention 22 static filter requirements at all.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 10 1 MS. JAKOBS: At all? 2 MR. THARP: The ULE OM does not mention 3 filters. ASHRAE 37 does not mention filters. So for 4 the ULE product there actually is no requirement -- 5 MS. JAKOBS: Okay. 6 MR. THARP: -- for filters at all in 7 today's specs. 8 MS. BARHYDT: Okay, because I thought that 9 was why we had the issue in the first place was that 10 there was nothing in the test procedure dealing with 11 it. 12 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp again with Goodman. 13 And that's something obviously that needs to be 14 addressed, but my suggestion would be to test without 15 filters and just have pressure drop adjustment for 16 filters. That way the issue that Diane brought up of 17

-- 18 MS. JAKOBS: I believe, yeah. 19 MR. THARP: Because she's absolutely right, 20 you can have MERV-6 that's a one inch, a MERV 6 that's 21 a four inch and those are going to have significantly 22 different pressure drops, and that could be, you know,

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 11 1 the pass/fail difference for some product and it's 2 nice to have it consistent across the board. 3 MR. CYMBALSKY: So, John Cymbalsky, DOE. So 4 getting back to, you know, what goes shipped into the 5 real world versus the test procedure, so you do the 6 test without a filter, that's fine, but the customers 7 probably want -- I'm guessing, want some type of 8 filter in there or get some type of filter. So is 9 there -- we talked a lot about it yesterday. There's 10 a range 4 to 8 maybe, 6 sounded good, but -- 11 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp again. You're 12 correct. Some manufacturers, though, shipped product 13 without filters. 14 MR. CYMBALSKY: And let them do it in the 15 field. 16 MR. THARP: And let them do it in the field, 17 whatever they want. I will comment that I sat in on 18 an ASHRAE 62.2 meeting in Denver, and they have some 19 fairly extensive data on various filter MERV ratings 20 and pressure drop data that might be useful for 21 somebody to make that determination. 22 MR. FLY: Mark Fly with AAON. Just

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 12 1 remember, Rusty, though, that 210 is used for the 2 stuff under five tons and it's three-phased, so it is 3 a test standard that we will be using in this program. 4 MR. AMRANE: Good point. This is Karim 5 Amrane with AHRI. And maybe one solution would be to 6 amend the test procedure to account for a default 7 pressure drop that we have in 210/240 standard. 8 MS. JAKOBS: This is Diane Jakobs again. So 9 you were talking about they would have filters, but I 10 think in the field you have to do maintenance and some 11 contractors like to do their own thing, you know, so 12 there's a lot of variability. And we don't always 13 supply the filters because they don't like it, so they 14 just throw it all away and they prefer to do their own 15 thing. So it's something that's kind of beyond the 16 equipment in many times, beyond our equipment that 17 we're supplying. 18 MS. BARHYDT: So we'll take another look at 19 this. I'm thinking probably what we will do is issue 20 some kind of short-term guidance and deal with it 21 long- term in the test procedure. I don't see that we 22 can do a whole lot other than that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 13 1 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr with NEEA. 2 Just one thing to consider is that if you're trying to 3 mimic real world conditions, obviously there will be 4 filters in the unit and also they will probably be 5 loaded up with dirt. So it seems like in order to 6 approximate the true performance of the equipment you 7 would want some kind of pressure drop allowance that 8 kind of reflects maybe what the real world conditions 9 might be of the operation of the equipment. 10 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi. 11 We keep trying to make this an installed test and it's 12 not. It's a representative test. It's a test of the 13 basic refrigeration system. And, you know, if there's 14 a desire to do an installed efficiency, that's 15 totally, totally different than what we're talking 16 about here. 17 MR. CYMBALSKY: So I agree with that. I 18 guess what we're trying to do here is going back to 19 the motors example, which I don't want to actually 20 talk about right now, but if we're testing them all 21 without a filter, that's what the test procedure 22 allows you to do, but we know that all of them are

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 14 1 going to have a filter. I think we should just try to 2 do -- I'm not asking for the perfect way out here, but 3 I think we can make a slight change and improve it and 4 we'd be happy, hopefully you'd be happy. I'm not 5 asking for the 8 or the 12, something that just would 6 be a more reasonable application to what we know is 7 happening. I think we could all agree that they're 8 going to put a filter in. It may be an 8, it may be a 9 4, it may be a 2, I don't know. But can we agree on 10 anything? 11 MS. MEYERS: So John, this is Karen with 12 Rheem, are you talking just for the equipment tested, 13 to 340/360? 14 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yes. 15 MS. MEYERS: Because we already have a 16 default value for the less than 510 three-phase. So 17 you're talking about -- 18 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah, for the 210, the 210 19 provisions would apply. 20 MR. CYMBALSKY: Right. 21 MR. SACHS: John, this is Harvey, and I want 22 to thank Paul for representing the strict

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 15 1 constructionist perspective so nicely, but it's not 2 just about the refrigerant cycle. It's about the 3 piece of equipment and that includes the airflow 4 through it. It's going to be an arbitrary decision 5 what the appropriate filter pressure drop is. It may 6 or may not reflect the concern with what it really is 7 in a dirty RTU on the top of a scumbag office 8 building, but it's not just, in my humble opinion, 9 maybe it's not humble, it's not just about the 10 refrigerant cycle. It's about the piece of equipment 11 and that means the airflow and thus the pressure drop 12 across the filter matter. I'm completely comfortable 13 with leaving this for the test procedure, but I think, 14 Paul, I belong to a different church. 15 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL. I 16 just wanted to bring up, well, actually two things. 17 One, I wanted to suggest maybe we can do the same 18 thing that 210/240 has with the point, you know, if 19 you're running it without a filter you use the 20 default. And also, I just wanted to bring up for the 21 CRE people when we were talking about the filtration 22 for their units, I think it was brought up that we

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 16 1 were going to test them without any kind of filtration 2 on it. So, you know, I just wanted to bring up is it 3 the same thing if a commercial refrigeration unit has 4 some filtrations you know, a filter on it, is it fair 5 that they get to remove it for the test, but the HVAC 6 people can't? 7 MS. BARHYDT: The issue for the commercial 8 refrigeration equipment was that if it had a specialty 9 filter, such as a flour filter, that would be removed. 10 It wasn't that all filters would be removed. 11 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi. 12 You know, it seems that since we have several churches 13 represented that, you know, I mean, there's a reason 14 why we do this test. And if we can't agree, I mean, 15 we should be able to come up with an agreement on what 16 the reason for the test is and the criteria and the 17 circumstances. Because, you know, again, my 18 understanding and everything I've read, and I'm sure 19 other manufacturers would agree and Rusty's got it 20 right here. Is that, you know, the purpose of the 21 test is to do the basic refrigeration system test in a 22 test room condition that's based on, you know, a

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 17 1 building, a configuration. It's not installed. It's 2 not what's going to happen installed. And, you know, 3 we have to be able to come up to some agreement that 4 it's either that or it's not. And if it's not that, 5 then what is it? 6 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr with NEEA. 7 You know, I realize the limitations of the 8 refrigeration, that we're looking at the refrigeration 9 system, but, in reality, DOE test procedures are 10 actually supposed to mimic real world conditions of 11 how equipment's used. Because it can't really be 12 done, we're doing kind of the compromise, which is to 13 just look at the refrigeration as the most practical 14 thing at this time. It doesn't mean it wouldn't be 15 different in the future. So the closer we can get to 16 the more ideal thing where we're actually simulating 17 equipment that exists in the real world, the better. 18 So that would be my thought about it. 19 MR. THARP: This is Rusty Tharp with 20 Goodman. Actually the Section 42, U.S. Code 6314, 21 says, "Test procedures prescribed in accordance with 22 this section shall be reasonably designed to produce

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 18 1 test results which reflect energy efficiency, energy 2 use, and estimated operating costs of a type of 3 industrial equipment or class thereof during a 4 representative average use cycle as determined by the 5 Secretary and shall not be unduly burdensome to 6 conduct." So it sort of goes in line with both 7 schools of thought, but a lot to what Harvey says. 8 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane with AHRI. And I 9 think I agree we probably should have some sort of a 10 default in the test procedure. At the same time, DOE 11 has to recognize the fact that the federal minimum 12 standards established today are based on the current 13 test procedure which does not account for a filter, or 14 at least this procedure doesn't account for it now. 15 So any future changes in test procedures should 16 account for that, too. 17 MR. SACHS: Harvey Sachs. And the question, 18 Karim, to me is, okay, we've all agreed in theory that 19 we ought to have some default added to the test 20 method. There are two questions. How do we get to 21 some sort of an agreement on a date certain by which 22 we do that? And the second question is, gee, is that a

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 19 1 single value for all the 340/360 equipment or does it 2 scale with capacity? So I sure would sleep better 3 tonight if I understood that in 2037 we would finally 4 have this settled. 5 MS. BARHYDT: So, this originally came up 6 because there was a question about high-efficiency 7 filters. Is the norm right now to test with whatever 8 the manufacturer standard filter is or is the practice 9 right now to test with no filter at all? What do you 10 do right now if it doesn't have a high-efficiency 11 filter? 12 MS. MEYERS: This is Karen Meyers with 13 Rheem. For us, and, again, we just build kind of the 14 light commercial, we do it both ways, so it's kind of 15 a cross. If we test it without the filter and it's 16 the small equipment, we use the default value. So for 17 our equipment most high-efficiency filters are applied 18 in the field. So, you know, we have -- I don't even 19 know if I would call it a high-efficiency option, but 20 most of the time that is, you know -- it's definitely 21 not a MERV-8, but most of the time the high-efficiency 22 filtration for our product is applied in the field.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 20 1 MS. BARHYDT: But so if it's not high2 efficiency and it's not the small equipment being 3 tested under 210 what do you do? 4 MS. MEYERS: It's usually a standard 5 throwaway filter and it's not a high-efficiency filter 6 that's supplied, and it's tested with the filter. 7 MS. BARHYDT: And do you what the pressure 8 drop is from that filter? 9 MS. MEYERS: I don't, but I could get it. 10 But I think it's very minor. I know it's, you know, a 11 MERV, but -- well, we didn't have the MERV rating. 12 MS. JAKOBS: I was running out talking to 13 the guys yesterday, but they were saying if we sell it 14 with a filter, they'll put the filter in. It's a 15 filter that's so inexpensive they never actually ran a 16 MERV test and they're estimating it's between 3 and 4. 17 And if we sell it without a filter, they were using 18 the 0.08 even though I guess it's not required, but 19 they felt like probably they needed something, you 20 know, so they did that. But many times it seems like 21 people don't -- they didn't want to do their own 22 thing. That's part of the design for the installation.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 21 1 MR. SACHS: Laura, this is Harvey and maybe 2 I could translate what we've just heard from the 3 contractor's perspective. If it's not an extra cost 4 option, at best they put in what the contractors refer 5 to as a rock catcher. It keeps the largest particles 6 away from the evaporator coil. 7 MS. BARHYDT: Right. So my question is not 8 about the high-efficiency filters. It's about what do 9 you do right now for units with a standard filter, how 10 do you test? With or without the filter? And what 11 kind of filter is that or what is the pressure drop 12 associated with that filter? 13 MS. HOOTMAN: This is Jill from Trane. But 14 all of our models, it's a mixed bag. Literally, I 15 mean, there are customers that don't want them, just 16 like Diane was saying, so we ship them without. We 17 ship them with. 18 MS. BARHYDT: What do you test? 19 MS. HOOTMAN: And then test is done 20 typically with the lowest value of that particular 21 product family, but that varies across all these 22 products we're talking about. So some are very --

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 22 1 MS. BARHYDT: But you would typically test 2 with a filter in there? 3 MS. HOOTMAN: Test is done with a filter. 4 MR. THARP: I think it's really a question, 5 I guess, would be what does AHRI do? Since it's not 6 in the ULE OM, do we just test with whatever's 7 received? 8 MR. AMRANE: Maybe he would know better than 9 me. 10 MR. STEM: Mike Stem, Intertek. If the unit 11 comes in with the filter, we test with a filter. If 12 it does not, then we go through the installation 13 manual and see what's recommended. If it's 14 recommended, we would go get one, put it in and test 15 it. If there's no mention of it in the installation 16 manual, then we test without a filter. 17 MS. BARHYDT: Okay, again, I think we're 18 going to go back and look at this. If anyone else, 19 there are still more manufacturers around the table, 20 have information about what they do when they test. I 21 mean, in the short-term, what we're going to be 22 looking to do is to reproduce current practice until

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 23 1 we can actually address this through the test 2 procedure. 3 MR. CYMBALSKY: I mean, I guess my point is 4 wouldn't the manufacturers just want this to be 5 consistent? The competitors, I think, would say why 6 do they get no filter? There's this ambiguity here 7 where Mike just told us a bunch of these could be 8 tested without a filter. The ones that have a filter 9 are getting penalty with the pressure drop. So I 10 guess what I'm trying to -- what we want to do for 11 you, and, hopefully, this is a good thing, is if we 12 can just put a number there that we both can be happy 13 with, we're looking for consistency here in the short 14 run. If we could say it's a 6 or a 5, if we could 15 agree to something, I think it would make everybody -- 16 MR. HURST: This is John Hurst from Lennox. 17 We do very similar to what Rheem does. What I'm 18 hearing is we're trying to approximate a MERV rating, 19 but MERV-4 isn't the approximation of a pressure drop. 20 Why wouldn't we come up with a consistent pressure 21 drop that approximates what we agreed on yesterday? 22 MS. BARHYDT: I agree. I think based on the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 24 1 information this morning that the MERV rating isn't a 2 good proxy for pressure drop, then, by all means, we 3 can look at a pressure drop. 4 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. But again, 5 here we're talking about the high filtration, the 6 high- efficiency filter here; right? 7 MS. BARHYDT: No, so the idea is to come up 8 with a standard way to do a standard test with a 9 standard filtration and that is what we would do for 10 people who are selling a high-efficiency. The whole 11 idea was how do we deal with high-efficiency? And 12 it's like, well, we do whatever we do for standard. 13 But then we've realized we don't know what standard 14 is. 15 MR. AMRANE: Well, that's the thing. The 16 current test procedure, it is a 340/360 test 17 procedure. It does not require a filter. So the 18 default should be testing without a filter. That 19 should be, I guess, the baseline today because that's 20 how the test procedure is written. Now, tomorrow we 21 can change that and that's fine. I mean, I'm not 22 arguing against that. But the baseline should be

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 25 1 based on what the test procedure says today, which for 2 small product it should be the default -- whatever, 3 0.08 inches or for the large it should be nothing. 4 MS. BARHYDT: The test procedure doesn't 5 actually say test without a filter either. So by that 6 standard, if it ships with a high-efficiency filter, 7 we would test it with the filter that it's shipped 8 with, and that's what we were hearing people did not 9 want us to do. But the default isn't just to remove 10 the filter. The test procedure doesn't specify that. 11 MR. THARP: This is Rusty Tharp with 12 Goodman. This is obviously one thing that the ULE 13 Compliance Committee and Engineering Committee will 14 address in the near future and I'm sure we'll come up 15 with something as far as what industry recommendation 16 is to be consistent. So my recommendation will be 17 test without filter and add a delta-P for pressure 18 drop. 19 MR. CYMBALSKY: For the short run do you 20 have any -- for guidance, you know, in this really 21 short period of time? Because right now it seems -- 22 MS. HOOTMAN: It will affect all of our

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 26 1 ratings, John, so, I mean, just even to say right now 2 if we wanted to put a 0.5 in there or a 0.8 in there 3 of pressure drop, all of us would have to go back and 4 look at our ratings and see what that means to us 5 because it affects the fan watts, so, therefore, it 6 affects EER. And I don't know that any of us can just 7 sit here and say that. That might mean, in the end 8 run, how much we say it's going to take us to even 9 become compliant with this. You see what I'm saying? 10 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yes, I get it. I guess the 11 real issue is, you know, you want an exemption for the 12 really thick filters and so we don't even know where 13 we're starting from, and so that's a little bit, we 14 don't know how much we're giving up in the EER based 15 on that. 16 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp with Goodman. I 17 would suggest that we come back at the next session in 18 two weeks with specific values. I don't know if we 19 can, I can try to get something together for my 20 company. I don't know if anybody else can or not, but 21 I think we can probably grab something. 22 MS. HOOTMAN: Well, I could have probably

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 27 1 done it overnight, but I just didn't. 2 MS. MEYERS: But how practically can we 3 implement that? I mean, I understand the long-term 4 request, but the current federal law says 340/360 and 5 so I don't see how we make this change in the short6 term. I mean, how would that guidance work? 7 I mean, if we decide as a group, for 8 instance, let's use the same default value that we use 9 in 210/240, if that affects everyone's ratings does 10 that mean the 11.0 EER suddenly becomes 10.95? I 11 mean, how practically can you implement that? 12 Long term I get it. We need to change the 13 test procedure to account for it. But I don't see how 14 we do this short-term. 15 MS. BARHYDT: The alternative will be for us 16 to ship however, I mean, test however it's shipped. 17 And if it's shipped with high-efficiency, it's tested 18 with high-efficiency. 19 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey. Laura, just to 20 be clear, what I'm hearing is, manufacturers, you want 21 to make sure that you're not offering high-efficiency 22 except as an option so that DOE doesn't penalize you

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 28 1 on a test that you didn't mean to have tested. 2 MR. CYMBALSKY: Correct. 3 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi. I 4 think what everyone is saying is that, you know, we 5 have been testing according to the test procedures: 6 340/360, 1230, 210/240 have all been test standards 7 that have been accepted for many, many, many years and 8 in the 10 CFR are annotated as the test procedures. 9 And, you know, if the procedures need to be changed, 10 then, you know, DOE needs to add that somewhere that 11 we put the filters in there. But, you know, right 12 now, we've been testing in a certain way and the 13 efficiency targets that have been established are 14 based on the current test standards. And if we're 15 changing the current test standards, then 16 consideration needs to be given to the efficiency 17 standards. 18 No one's saying that we're trying to outwit 19 DOE. We're just trying to say that, you know, there 20 are certain procedures that we've been going by and we 21 would like to be able to, you know, have somewhat 22 knowledge other than with systems already in AHRI

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 29 1 directory. All of a sudden now they say, okay, you 2 have to add a dirty high-efficiency filter; you have 3 to have the alternate static motor. There's no way 4 that anyone is going to be able to meet the minimum 5 efficiency. 6 So it's just any time there's -- in the past 7 I think it's a requirement there has to be a five-year 8 delay if there's a significant change in the 9 efficiency levels. 10 MS. BARHYDT: So we're not trying to change 11 the test procedure. We're trying to accommodate a 12 request to not test with a high-efficiency filter. 13 MR. DOPPEL: Right, but that's not where the 14 conversation has been going. 15 MS. BARHYDT: And in the process we 16 discovered that nobody in this room is testing the 17 same way. 18 MR. EISNER: So, Paul, why is it a good idea 19 to continue testing the way they're testing if people 20 in the room feel that's not fair? 21 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel. What I'm saying 22 is that it's the -- everybody has been going by what

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 30 1 they know as the test procedure. And, you know, we 2 can get clarification, but if there is clarification 3 given to that testing, then consideration has to be 4 made to the changes that manufacturers are required to 5 make. 6 MS. JAKOBS: Diane Jakobs from Rheem. So 7 going back to we're trying to differentiate between 8 high-efficiency filters and regular or plain 9 efficiency or whatever. So I think I would use 0.08 10 inch water column value from the residential and maybe 11 we can make it a tenth of an inch water column 12 pressure drop, and anything with a higher than that 13 pressure drop would be categorized as high-efficiency 14 and that would be it. 15 MR. AMRANE: This is Karim Amrane with AHRI. 16 I think, Diane, before we can agree to any level I 17 think we need to really make sure of what this level, 18 this pressure drop will do on the efficiency of the 19 product. I mean, apparently -- 20 MS. JAKOBS: But below everything would just 21 be the same as it is now, whatever we're doing now. 22 It's just that if it's higher than a tenth of an inch

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 31 1 or 0.08 inch water column, DOE would not select that 2 unit. 3 MR. RIVEST: Mike Rivest. Can I ask you a 4 couple of questions? Is there an option to buy a unit 5 without filters? 6 (Chorus of yeses.) 7 MR. RIVEST: Okay. How do you implement 8 that one inch pressure drop? Is that restriction put 9 in the apparatus? 10 MS. JAKOBS: Did you say one inch? 11 MR. RIVEST: Point one inch, I'm sorry. 12 MS. JAKOBS: We're messing with the orders 13 of magnitude. 14 MR. RIVEST: It's just a number. To me it's 15 just a number, you understand this. 16 MS. JAKOBS: I'm getting really nervous. I 17 keep jumping up and I want -- yeah. So what was your 18 question? 19 MR. RIVEST: How do you implement that 0.1 20 or 0.08? Is it changing the apparatus to put more 21 restriction in it and measuring -- 22 MS. JAKOBS: Okay, add the 0.08?

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 32 1 MR. RIVEST: -- or it's a calculation? 2 MS. JAKOBS: Yeah, just the external static. 3 It would be additional, added to the external static 4 pressure when we run the test. 5 MR. STEM: You turn down the airflow tunnel. 6 Turn down the airflow; I think this one is on the 7 airflow. 8 MR. RIVEST: So if the test procedure to 9 says run the unit at 0.45, you would actually be 10 running it at 0.45 plus 0.08? 11 MS. JAKOBS: Yeah. 12 MR. RIVEST: All right. 13 MR. STEM: Right. And I just want to say, 14 you know, the 0.08 for smaller systems is probably 15 realistic because it's a smaller area. For the larger 16 systems, I think Harvey made a comment about bigger 17 systems, bigger pressure drop. You actually have more 18 area, so the pressure's not going to be as high for 19 the larger systems, so it's probably going to be a 20 little bit counterintuitive when you think about 21 pressure drop on the larger systems. But, you know, 22 there are a lot of other standards that have set

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 33 1 precedent for, you know, if they're meant to be 2 installed with the filters, and not just 210/240, but, 3 you know, the fan cooled standards. I think was it 4 430 that does the -- 5 MS. HOOTMAN: The air handlers. 6 MR. STEM: -- air handlers, yeah. And I 7 think it's, you know, at least for the fan cools you 8 have 0.05 for Furr end units, things like that. So, I 9 mean, I think Rusty was on the right path with the 10 ASHRAE committee that already did the research work. 11 So, you know, if you could bring that into the picture 12 and actually have the details for what pressure drops 13 from what style of filters that would give you a 14 pretty good direction of where to set those numbers. 15 MS. MEYERS: So, Neil, this is Karen Meyers 16 with Rheem. I have a recommendation. So since high17 efficiency air filtration is an option for most units 18 that we treat this like we do the economizers and 19 such, so that if DOE were to pull one of these units 20 for tests, they would pull the one without the high21 efficiency air filtration or they would remove it 22 prior to the test.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 34 1 MS. BARHYDT: So I think what we're thinking 2 is along those lines, but we'll just make a point of 3 buying one with a standard air filter and we'll test 4 it with the air filter that it's shipped with. And if 5 the manufacturer doesn't ship it with an air filter, 6 it'll be tested as it arrives. And that's for the 7 larger units. The ones that are subject to 210/240 8 are still subject to the provisions of 210/240. 9 MR. KOJAK: I have a question about that. 10 If it arrives without a filter, but in the 11 installation manual that we're supposed to go by when 12 we install it and the lab to test it and it says in 13 there to add a filter, I would think you'd have to add 14 a filter. 15 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah, we always follow the 16 manual. 17 MR. KOJAK: Okay. So if it doesn't say it 18 at all and it doesn't ship, then you'd test without 19 it? 20 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. 21 MR. KOJAK: And if it comes without, but it 22 says to put it in, then you put it in.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 35 1 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. 2 MR. KOJAK: Okay. 3 MR. EISNER: And does it pay to write up 4 this guidance before the next meeting and talk about 5 it? 6 MS. BARHYDT: I think we're going to be 7 doing a whole lot of drafting. 8 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr with NEEA. 9 So the ASHRAE standard's 52.2 and they actually go 10 through a little list that, you know, typically air 11 handlers are always -- well, I should say in 12 commercial markets the schedules come out and it used 13 to be 30 percent air filters with the core response 14 MERV-5 to MERV-8. And they're usually just one inch 15 because the four inch costs a lot more money. There 16 is kind of a typical standard of how things are done. 17 Obviously, there's multiple markets and so they sell 18 equipment to many markets. 19 But I don't have the solution of following 20 the instructions out of the installation manuals. A 21 lot of times they're put in there more for liability 22 purposes. In other words, it's going to say, you know,

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 36 1 install the filters because maybe if you don't put the 2 filters there could be some, you know, effect the 3 warranty, so they're trying to make sure that isn't. 4 So, in other words, the people that do due diligence 5 in doing what they should do is putting filters in 6 there are going to be penalized, so it does seem like 7 you should come up with some magic number of 0.08 or 8 whatever it is. 9 MS. BARHYDT: And the Department agrees, but 10 I think we're going to address that through a 11 rulemaking. 12 MR. EISNER: Any other discussion on this 13 issue? 14 MR. CYMBALSKY: So I'll just end it by 15 saying we like the high-efficiency air filters. I 16 think that's a great idea. And honestly, we just want 17 the testing to be a level playing field for all of you 18 and for us to understand it. We're not trying to put 19 a requirement in today so we can go buy a bunch and do 20 our thing. That's not the intention here at all. 21 So it sounds like a long-term fix, but if 22 Rusty and your group come back with any ideas in two

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 37 1 weeks that we can think about long-term or short-term, 2 that would be great. 3 MS. BARHYDT: So did anyone have any 4 additional information about coated coils? 5 Not yet? 6 MR. HON: Charlie Hon, True Manufacturing. 7 We've come up with a lot of different pieces of 8 information, none of which are definitive by any 9 stretch of the imagination, because we could do a 10 multitude of different ways to decide if it's truly a 11 coated coil or not. You could use some arbitrary salt 12 spray number to prove that it was actually doing 13 something worthwhile. You could use some thickness, 14 but it may or may not be worthwhile. There's no 15 perfect answer to it without some actual field tests 16 or product tests requirements, and so we didn't really 17 get a good answer. 18 There are some NSF requirements in Standard 19 7 which give you different levels of coating 20 thicknesses and different levels of coating salt spray 21 for different levels of protection. Those range 22 anywhere from fairly low volumes, fairly low times up

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 38 1 to 500 hours, but that would certainly be unrealistic 2 for what we're doing here. 3 MR. SHEBIK: Ron Shebik with Hussmann. 4 Yeah, unfortunately, I tried to get a hold of some of 5 our competitors to get their feedback and I have not - 6 - I only heard back from one so far. So, 7 unfortunately, nothing to report on this. 8 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. 9 MR. RIVEST: Mike Rivest. You know, when 10 you go to market you make representations about these 11 products. Could the requirements be linked to the 12 representations that you make? So if you say to be 13 used in coastal areas and a five-year warranty, then 14 that would be, you know, beyond what you would be 15 saying about your baseline model, for example. 16 MS. MEYERS: Do you want to share that? 17 MS. HOOTMAN: Corey, I mean, I can somehow 18 send this to you -- 19 MS. TUCKER: Yeah, or we can get -- 20 MS. HOOTMAN: -- if you want after I say 21 this. This is Jill Hootman from Trane. "Corrosion22 protected condenser coils -- an optional coil that is

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 39 1 likely to provide excellent resistance and durability 2 to corrosive effects of alkalis, acids, alcohols, 3 petroleum, seawater, salty air, and other corrosive 4 environments. Typical processes include a baked 5 phenolic, cathodic epoxy-type electrodeposition, 6 coating or thermoset vinyl, coating that is bonded 7 after coil is assembled, covering the coil tubes, 8 headers, and fin surface. For mildly corrosive 9 environments coils can be assembled from aluminum fin 10 stock that has been coated prior to the fin stamping 11 process. Corrosion durability shall be confirmed 12 through testing per ASTM B117 salt spray test." 13 It's a kind of a definition that -- 14 MS. MEYERS: That was what you asked, was 15 this 16

-- 17 MS. HOOTMAN: How do we define this coil -- 18 MS. MEYERS: How do we define it? 19 MS. HOOTMAN: -- versus a standard coil? 20 (Off microphone discussion.) 21 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi. I 22 think we're also looking, first, like a 500-hour or a

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 40 1 1,000-hour test standard. 2 MS. HOOTMAN: Well, it's all over the map, 3 so I just said that it might. I saw all over the map 4 how many people -- what people did on the hour test, 5 but I said that it had to at least be tested to that. 6 And yeah, I think you have to determine what your 7 durability, you know, needs to be because there are 8 people doing 500, there's people doing one-thousands, 9 there's two-thousands, there's everything. So I kind 10 of didn't want to recommend exactly one, but saying 11 that durability tests had to be done. 12 MS. BARHYDT: So the ASTM is a test method 13 and you test it and you basically see how long your 14 particular coating lasts? 15 MS. HOOTMAN: That's right. 16 MS. BARHYDT: So we probably would want to 17 set some limit, like if it added five hours, that 18 wasn't good enough. And if it had it -- 19 MS. HOOTMAN: Most minimums I saw were 500. 20 There are a lot that exceed that. 21 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon. 22 MS. HOOTMAN: Five hundred hours.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 41 1 MR. HON: That's in the external environment 2 that they're facing. We're talking a different world 3 as well. We have wire shelving which is used directly 4 inside the product. It goes through dishwashers and 5 all kinds of other things. That has a 500-hour salt 6 spray. It's taken out every day and washed. 7 There are other components that are inside 8 of the cabinet which require, what, it's 192-hour salt 9 spray. That is considered wiped down, scrubbing all 10 the time type salt spray in our market, so we're 11 talking two different worlds here. Five hundred for 12 us would be totally unrealistic. 13 MR. THARP: Okay. 14 MR. DOPPEL: This is Paul Doppel with 15 Mitsubishi. We're talking coils. You don't have 16 coils that are -- 17 MR. HON: Yes, we have coils inside the 18 refrigerator. 19 MR. DOPPEL: That are washed every day? 20 MR. HON: No, but they are subject to the 21 same -- a lot of the same corrosive activities. 22 Unfortunately, they're not washed every day.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 42 1 MR. DOPPEL: Well, do they have coatings on 2 them? 3 MR. HON: Yes, some of them do. We have 4 options for coatings. And if you do not wash them 5 every day, you have a much worse condition than if you 6 wash them every day. So that's a thing that we have 7 to consider because they do not get cleaned. They're 8 behind a shroud. 9 MR. DOPPEL: So how often are they replaced 10 then? 11 MR. HON: With an actually coated coil we 12 have a very, very low replacement record. With an 13 uncoated coil it'd be very bad. We'd be replacing 14 coils every couple years. 15 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel. But then it seems 16 that that coating would surpass the 500-hour. 17 MR. HON: Our records indicate that it 18 doesn't; 250 or 300 hours is quite normal for us to 19 see coating records testing. 20 MS. JAKOBS: This is Diane Jakobs from 21 Rheem. And I think that really we need to look for a 22 threshold between kind of the plain one and the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 43 1 corrosive- resistant one. You're not really looking 2 for what's a good corrosive-resistant to prove that 3 you have a good corrosion-resistant product. It's 4 just are you trying or you're not trying, and then the 5 Department's not going to select that equipment if 6 it's specially designed for a corrosive environment. 7 So I think that, you know, the bar isn't as high, so, 8 you know, the idea that you market it for a specific 9 purpose. 10 And the definition, it seems like that would 11 be sufficient that you don't really need -- if you're 12 selling it as a corrosive-resistant product and it's 13 not, then people will know before too long that it's 14 not working. So maybe we're overthinking it too much. 15 MR. SACHS: John, this is Harvey Sachs. I 16 want to try to capture what I think I've heard in the 17 hopes that it's helpful. A small fraction, but I 18 don't know what that fraction is, of units are shipped 19 with coils that are designed to inhibit destruction in 20 the environment in which they're to be used. Does 21 anyone have an idea of what that is? Is it one 22 percent or 10 percent across these indoor markets for

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 44 1 CRE versus the outdoor markets for condenser coils? 2 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp with Goodman. I'd 3 say that it's low single digits for outdoor product. 4 MR. SACHS: Okay. No, that's very helpful 5 where I'm going. The second point to me is the real 6 thing is that these coatings may decrease the 7 efficiency of the unit. 8 MR. DOPPEL: Initially. 9 MR. SACHS: Initially, as tested, given Paul 10 Doppel's constraints. 11 (Laughter.) 12 MR. SACHS: After all, it's in the lab. I'm 13 teasing you, Paul. 14 But the important point to me is the 15 Department wants everything that's shipped to meet the 16 efficiency standard and the manufacturers don't want 17 to have to ship these corrosive ones with a different 18 color chassis, a different refrigeration system to 19 compensate for the losses, whether those are heat 20 transfer losses or airflow losses. So the question 21 really boils down, to put it blunt, to whether there's 22 some percentage of product you're willing to wink at

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 45 1 knowing that it would not pass, so you won't test it. 2 Because that's really what I think this discussion's 3 about. 4 MR. CYMBALSKY: So I think the enforcement 5 issue's different than what you just stated, which 6 sounds a lot like backsliding to me, which you would 7 allow a certain percentage of product to not meet the 8 standards. So instead of a 10 it could be a 9-point9 whatever, so that's kind of an issue that we have with 10 that. 11 Enforcement-wise, I think a lot of the 12 topics we're talking about are driven towards 13 enforcement guidance or test procedure guidance, but I 14 think with this one, if we're sticking to the CRE 15 guys, I think they may have a difference of opinion on 16 this one because I think some of them, at least what I 17 heard, all their products, whether it has coating or 18 not, are going to meet the standards. So I think -- 19 did I hear that? I think I heard that from you, 20 Charlie. 21 MR. HON: Charlie Hon. We are self22 contained. You know, you just roll it and plug it,

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 46 1 plug and play and you're ready to go type equipment, 2 more than 90, 95 percent of our market. When we ship, 3 everything we have right now, there are probably less 4 than five percent of our total -- definitely less than 5 five percent of our total sales that have coated 6 coils. There are two categories within that, one of 7 which is a specialty item, which is a customer order 8 and an upcharge-type of design for a coated coil 9 insert and applications. Others are standard product 10 which have a coated coil because we know that the 11 entire market is aggressive, such as service-over12 counter. That service-over-counter has a special set 13 of numbers which are more lenient to compensate 14 because everybody's done this in the industry. 15 So when you start talking specials, 16 nonstandard, we're talking far less than one percent 17 of the market in our area. That does not do, I don't 18 want to ever speak for the grocery store-type units 19 because that's a different market that I do not know 20 the numbers for. 21 MR. RIVEST: Mike Rivest. So, you know, I 22 always go back to how we do the engineering analysis

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 47 1 and derive the cost efficiency curves, and then what 2 is assumed to be the baseline system and the utility 3 of that baseline system. And then when we add 4 features that create utility but also cost, we create 5 product classes for that. 6 The idea of having certain product classes 7 that have coating in the base unit, you know, sort of 8 renders it difficult to say -- to define a base 9 coating and then a better coating. And I come back to 10 looking at it from the perspective of the market. You 11 probably wouldn't sell any of those cases without a 12 coating, so the baseline there is a coating. So if 13 you have an option in your product literature that 14 would be the standard case and then there would be the 15 special coil, you know, it's a market representation 16 that you make and you're liable. If you were to sell 17 a coil that doesn't meet that very basic requirement 18 under -- you know, you're not going to invent uncoated 19 coils if they don't exist today because you have to 20 meet your warranties. 21 So that takes away all the need for 22 specification. It just becomes a representation that

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 48 1 this is a coil intended for these conditions. It 2 would be a more expensive coil and it's one that you 3 need for your warranty purposes and for your liability 4 purposes, and we get away from the specification. 5 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon. That's 6 exactly the reason the service-over-counters have 7 those. We don't build any without it because of the 8 need of the marketplace. 9 MR. RIVEST: So there would be no exemption 10 in your case -- 11 MR. HON: No. 12 MR. RIVEST: -- because -- 13 MR. HON: I do not know what other groups do 14 because service-over-counter goes well beyond the 15 self- contained units. 16 MR. RIVEST: Right. 17 MR. HON: So I do not know what happens as 18 far as the remote cases go because I do not had a big 19 enough database to ever know that information. 20 MR. RIVEST: Right, whereas if we're talking 21 about a split system or a rooftop that clearly has a 22 design as an option to purchase a covered coil

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 49 1 recommended for these applications, then it's clear 2 that it's something different, more coated, more 3 costly. 4 MR. HURST: This is John Hurst with Lennox. 5 If you had 100 percent of your product with a coated 6 coil, by definition that would be your base model. 7 Okay? 8 MR. DOPPEL: Yes. 9 MR. THARP: Right. 10 MR. HURST: If you have a coated coil on a 11 product line that has one, two percent of a total 12 volume, another alternative is instead of the 13 manufacturer designing a specific model to account for 14 the addition of the coated coil, manufacturers may say 15 it's not worth it for that volume. It'll be a field16 installed option. And I'm concerned that if it goes 17 to being a field-installed option you're not going to 18 get the consistency or the quality that you would have 19 as a factory-installed option. But manufacturers may 20 just back off and say it'll be a field-installed 21 option from this point on, and I think we defeat the 22 purpose of what we're trying to accomplish.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 50 1 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon again. In 2 self- contained equipment, field-installed options 3 like that don't exist. That's the base core of your 4 product. 5 MR. HURST: I'm not talking about the 100 6 percent. 7 MR. HON: Right. 8 MR. HURST: I'm talking about the one 9 percent 10 MR. HON: Even at one percent we would never 11 do that. It would never work in the field. In remote 12 cases -- 13 MR. HURST: I didn't say it worked. 14 MR. HON: In remote -- 15 MR. HURST: I didn't say it would work and I 16 didn't say it would be installed properly. 17 MR. SHEBIK: Ron Shebik with Hussmann. I 18 would agree with you, you would not want a coil to be 19 field-installed on a remote grocery case. And 20 speaking for my company, the cases that we do have 21 coated coils, we test all those coils. We test those 22 cases. The problem is I cannot speak for our

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 51 1 competitors. I don't know the background. I don't 2 know if they have some low-volume coating coils that 3 they would wish to not test because of the low volume, 4 so I can't give a firm answer on that other than the 5 fact that speaking on behalf of my own company we test 6 everything that goes out and the coated coils are all 7 tested because it's the third-party application 8 requirement. 9 MR. HON: Charlie Hon. Everything that we 10 produce with coated coils could meet the standard. 11 It's not a problem to us, but I don't want to speak 12 for other parts of the industry. We have always 13 tested and when they were normally applied we have 14 tested with them. Our numbers are set; we know where 15 they are. So from my company's viewpoint, coated 16 coils are not a problem under the existing numbers. I 17 do not know about other companies. 18 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from 19 National. I agree with this. And I think we started 20 out, in talking about the issues with CRE, we put 21 coated coils kind of -- it wasn't something I think 22 any of us really thought would be a big issue on CRE,

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 52 1 but I think we're kind of becoming more an issue, 2 again, because we use coated coils. But the fact that 3 I think Charlie's products, Ron's products, our 4 products, Mary's products, we use coated coils in our 5 evaporators because of the applications. I don't know 6 of anybody around this table that it's an issue for 7 because we all test with the coated coils. 8 I don't know of products that, again, Ron, 9 you know, as representatives, our job here is 10 representatives of what we know about the industry, I 11 don't think this is an issue for commercial 12 refrigeration equipment, coated coils, personally. If 13 somebody else has a comment, obviously they'll have a 14 chance to talk about that later when you guys get 15 comments back and, hopefully, people on the phone 16 listening in, they can raise those issues if they're 17 out there. But I think as far as this, you know, our 18 positions of representing the industry, I don't think 19 we have an issue with coated coils. 20 MS. DANE: This is Mary from Traulsen. The 21 only thing I can think of outside, and I do have 22 requests out, too, would be not so much in the under-

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 53 1 counters, but maybe with something that has an outdoor 2 or a military application where it goes on a ship or 3 something like that would maybe have a different 4 higher coated coil, but we can find that out and 5 report back. 6 MR. CYMBALSKY: Okay, thanks. I guess 7 that's what I was trying to say. I don't know if I 8 said that precisely, but I thought I heard earlier 9 that that -- it wasn't a real big issue for you. 10 Okay. 11 MR. BAUMAN: And I'm to sit back and let you 12 duke it out with the HVAC people. 13 MR. CYMBALSKY: Well, I may be willing to 14 throw something on the table for this. 15 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey again. We were 16 trying to think about the HVAC side rather than the 17 refrigeration side and I wonder if there's more to be 18 asked and answered about that. 19 MR. CYMBALSKY: I guess the program's point 20 of view here is that so for residential AC, if you 21 have coated coils, you know, you don't get an 22 exemption. It is what it is. Frankly, for commercial

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 54 1 AC, I see it the same way personally. You know, it is 2 what it is there. So maybe we can horse trade with 3 the motors requirement for the coated coils. I don't 4 know. 5 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. You're 6 saying it is what it is, but when DOE does its 7 analysis on the efficiency standard I don't believe 8 the DOE accounts for that either. 9 MR. RIVEST: We just do an analysis. 10 MR. AMRANE: Well, the one that you did in 11 the past never accounted for coated coils. 12 MR. RIVEST: We never did one in the past. 13 MR. AMRANE: I'm talking about residential. 14 We're talking about residential. We're talking about 15 even the commercial. All the analysis that I've seen 16 never accounted for the coated coils. So, again, I 17 mean, yes, if you do this, then it has to be accounted 18 for, that's all I'm saying. 19 MS. JAKOBS: This is Diane Jakobs from 20 Rheem. And I looked it up and I was curious about 21 that, too, because when I looked up the last 22 regulation, whatever, you referenced ARI, the data in

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 55 1 the ARI database. So it just seemed to me the way I 2 think about things that you would have, by doing that, 3 been adopting the ARI characterization, definitions, 4 basic model by using their data, so, to me, it didn't 5 seem right that we could be changing the definitions. 6 You based a regulation on how ARI tested and 7 characterized and listed the data, and ARI looked at 8 the refrigeration system and the smallest, simplest 9 blower. And whatever we were doing, if you used that 10 data when you did the regulation, it is what it is, to 11 me, I mean, that you had adopted that method of 12 looking at characterizing the equipment. 13 So all through this whole thing I've been 14 kind of confused about how you can be changing 15 definitions now. It could be that people didn't 16 understand everything about it, but I think by 17 actually, when I read in the CFR what the -- the 18 discussion, part of it, it seemed like DOE didn't do 19 any specific testing or analysis, but they did 20 reference ARI directory data, so. 21 MR. CYMBALSKY: So, again, going -- so we're 22 talking the residential ones now?

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 56 1 MS. JAKOBS: No. 2 MR. CYMBALSKY: No, okay. 3 MS. JAKOBS: Commercial. 4 MR. CYMBALSKY: I guess my question is, if 5 you -- your basic model's going to be the one without 6 coated coils, but then you coat them and what happens 7 to the efficiency of that unit, all else equal? So 8 the question is do you rate -- again, the rating 9 should be -- of the basic model, in my mind, should be 10 the lower of those two numbers. Otherwise, you can 11 coat any -- coat all the coils and have 12 SEER. I'm 12 going to use the residential example because that's 13 the one I'm more familiar with. So now you have a 12 14 instead of a 13 SEER as your basic model, in my 15 opinion. And I don't see anything in our rule that 16 would say that that was an okay thing to do. 17 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp with Goodman. I 18 guess along those lines it goes back to it's still the 19 difference in the definition of "basic model." The 20 industry position has always been that the basic model 21 is a base model. And we feel that, you know, all the 22 base models, the basic models that we ship, are in

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 57 1 compliance and then any of the bells and whistles or 2 adders for the application requirements may, you know, 3 all those alter the applied efficiency, going back to 4 what Mr. Doppel likes to talk about. 5 But that's the same story with the 6 residential product in that, you know, there's a 7 testing efficiency that we try to make as -- you know, 8 the Department tries to make the test procedure as 9 realistic as possible. And any differences from that 10 test procedure as applied will alter the efficiency in 11 the field, some improving energy consumption, some 12 hurting energy consumption. So that's the same case 13 residential or commercial. And for the commercial 14 products our industry position is that the base model 15 is basic and all the basic models we ship are in 16 compliance. 17 And I'll also go back to the U.S. Code 42 18 USC 6314, Section 4, says that -- it basically talks 19 about that DOE's to adopt the industry test procedure 20 wherever possible. So it goes back, even when this 21 was written, that the industry test procedure, which 22 our test procedure's always reference to the -- well,

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 58 1 our definition of basic model, the BMG, and that's 2 where -- you know, that's the basic model and that's 3 the test procedure we have. 4 MS. JAKOBS: This is Diane Jakobs from 5 Rheem. But, you know, the ARI directory predated the 6 efficiency. And to me, the basic models were like the 7 cheapest thing, the plainest thing you could buy. And 8 in our installation instructions, and I don't know if 9 anyone else does it, but we give calculations, say, if 10 you add, I think for the high static blower there's a 11 calculation that you can do about how your capacity is 12 affected. So if you're smart you know that, you know, 13 if you're losing capacity, you're probably losing 14 efficiency. 15 So there is something there that states you 16 buy the plain one, you add this option, your output 17 capacity will be affected. But to this audience of 18 engineers, you know. It's not the same residential 19 guys, it's a different -- it's an engineer 20 installation. It's kind of a different way of looking 21 at it. And I'm struggling, too, because my 22 background's residential furnaces.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 59 1 But, yeah, I've been trying to make sense 2 out of it for myself and that's just the way it seems 3 to be, you know, that there was this directory of -- 4 it's kind of amazing when you think about the whole 5 variety of applications and all the things that Mark 6 has talked about, about operating rooms and warehouses 7 and all this stuff. And they figured out a way, ARI, 8 to sort it all out and kind of give a comparable 9 number that you could work from. And then you add 10 stuff on and -- but it was all based around the sealed 11 refrigeration system and then all these bells and 12 whistles were add- ons. And I think, you know, the 13 criteria might have been at a cost, so. 14 And for sure, it wasn't efficiency. That's 15 not the way people have thought about it, you know. 16 And that's probably why we're all here because it was 17 like, oh, my gosh, that's not what we're -- you know, 18 that's not how we think. And you can tell from the 19 natural reaction that there's a mismatch, yeah. 20 MR. CYMBALSKY: I appreciate your candor. I 21 mean, so when you say -- you use those words like I 22 think of them. You said the base model is the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 60 1 cheapest. 2 MS. JAKOBS: Yeah, like an economy car. 3 MR. CYMBALSKY: The least efficient one. 4 MS. JAKOBS: I don't know, you know. 5 MR. CYMBALSKY: Right. It's the one that 6 MS. JAKOBS: It doesn't have a radio. 7 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yeah, I mean, that's the way 8 I'm looking at it. So, you know, to me, if you make 9 and, again, I'm going to use the residential example, 10 you know, if you have a 13 SEER unit, you're designing 11 it just to meet the standard, which is fine, but if 12 you're going to spray the coils with noncorrosive for 13 the people who need it, it seems to me that it should 14 still be a 13 SEER unit. I mean, that's my -- 15 MS. JAKOBS: But I think it evolved 16 differently. It was like outside people started 17 coating them and then it would be -- there were 18 problems with that and then it'd be better if it was 19 done in the factories. So all these things, they 20 started out as being options, add-ons in the field, 21 and I think everyone agrees that it's better if it's 22 done in a more controlled way in the factory. So they

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 61 1 just kind of evolved, but the -- go ahead, someone 2 else. 3 MS. MEYERS: So this is Karen with Rheem. 4 And I think it's important to note that, you know, you 5 have your base model, but then all these other options 6 that can be added to the unit are not done at a -- 7 there is a cost associated with that. So under no 8 instances would somebody be adding an option to get 9 away from meeting the minimum efficiency standard. 10 It's just not practical. So the options are added to 11 meet -- there's a utility out there to meet a 12 commercial installation and it's not done as a way to 13 -- as a loophole to meet the minimum efficiency 14 standard. 15 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi. 16 When I was with another company, we found out that -- 17 and Rusty may have been associated with that company, 18 too. 19 But we found out that we were getting a 20 significant business on sea coast applications because 21 we had a good warranty for our products, but our coils 22 were not coated. And so every two years people would

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 62 1 just get a new coil from us because their coils were 2 totally gone. And once we, you know, kind of figured 3 this out, we said, well, no, this isn't going to work, 4 so you're going to have to have a coated coil. 5 So, you know, I guarantee you that after 6 6 months those people were not getting 13 SEER without 7 that coating, and that's the purpose of that. 8 MR. CYMBALSKY: And I don't disagree. I 9 guess what we're saying is why wouldn't that 10 necessarily be a different basic model that should be 11 rated? You know, and this is why we're here having 12 this discussion. I mean -- 13 MS. MEYERS: So, John, why do you look at 14 this different than high-efficiency filtration? 15 MR. CYMBALSKY: Because I actually -- yeah, 16 I mean, I personally think the way -- if you want an 17 exemption for the spray coils, hey, we can spray -- if 18 we're not sure, let's just spray them. If they test 19 it, it gets a credit or whatever. I mean, I'm not 20 saying you would do that, but I'm just -- I see that 21 differently than the filter thing. You're providing a 22 benefit and you're testing it in a way where, you

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 63 1 know, it makes sense that we can see the airflow. But 2 the coil, you know you're going to do this, there's 3 some changes you can -- I think. 4 MS. MEYERS: It's a significant issue to 5 coat a coil in a manufacturing facility. 6 MR. DOPPEL: It's not spraying. It's 7 sending the coil out, in most cases having it dipped, 8 and then brought back as special. 9 MS. MEYERS: It is a significant deal. 10 MR. DOPPEL: And because, you know, if you 11 try to add more fin stock to create, you know, higher 12 efficiency, then you squeeze out -- I mean, you just 13 make it a worse situation because you decrease the 14 amount of space that air can flow through. So you 15 have to keep fin spacing the way it is. 16 MS. BARHYDT: But you're always talking 17 about the refrigeration system is the heart and it's 18 what you are rating and the coil is part of the 19 refrigeration system. So if you have changed your 20 refrigeration system why is that not a different base 21 model? 22 MS. MEYERS: We haven't changed the design

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 64 1 of the refrigeration system. 2 MR. THARP: This is Rusty. I guess a 3 comment to John's comment is that I don't think we're 4 looking for an exception because it, in our view, is 5 that the base model without any of the bells and 6 whistles if what we're rating and that's what we're 7 claiming as the performance. So anything that's added 8 outside of that is not the basic model. 9 And to go to your question of why wouldn't 10 we consider that a different basic model, that goes 11 back to the fact that if we did that for everything, 12 then, you know, some companies would have tens of 13 thousands or hundreds of thousands or millions or 14 trillions of basic models, and that's a way excessive 15 burden if we took that position. 16 MR. CYMBALSKY: Right. We agree and that's 17 why we're here. So I guess we were trying to go 18 through that whole big list and what are the ones we 19 can live with, what are the ones maybe you can live 20 with, and take the list of 12 and maybe there's only 21 two that we need to come up with an opinion on. 22 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr with NEEA.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 65 1 You know, one of the things I think the residential 2 may have been okay with the coating thing is they 3 don't sell into industrial markets that probably need 4 that coating on the evaporator coil, so that's why 5 they may not have cared about that. 6 I would be kind of concerned if this did 7 become -- if everybody just started coating their 8 coils you're going to have more, you're going to 9 actually use more energy or the other option is that 10 maybe some of the better manufacturers will continue 11 to coat their coils because they're concerned with 12 their warranty, but some of the people that are not so 13 much concerned, that maybe have worse equipment, will 14 not coat the coils and not care about the warranty, 15 and so you'd sort of be penalizing some of your better 16 market players. So that's kind of -- would also be a 17 concern in my mind. 18 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers. In keeping 19 with that, earlier there was a suggestion that perhaps 20 this could be linked to an option that says, "For 21 severe duty or corrosion resistance." And it really 22 sounds like that would be something, it we can do

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 66 1 that, that would be a good way to characterize this. 2 Then if it's a standard, you have to test it. It's 3 part of your basic model. But if you offer this as an 4 option, where only those people that, hey, I need 5 corrosion protection, it's going to be self-regulating 6 because if they don't get that, they need that, 7 they're going to complain. So the black paint idea 8 wouldn't be -- it wouldn't work out in the 9 marketplace, so the marketplace would regulate that. 10 And then those people that do need this efficiency 11 saving over the long haul coating could get that 12 option. Is that not something that's workable for the 13 industry and for DOE? It sounds like a pretty 14 reasonable solution. 15 MS. JAKOBS: This is Diane Jakobs again. So 16 our options would be if we did a coated coil, it would 17 double our testing because you would have with the 18 coating and without the coating, so that would be 19 twice. Or the option would be that you would have to 20 take the rating with the coated coil, so it would be a 21 reduction in our efficiency that would only affect 22 single digit percentages of the market. So it would

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 67 1 just be a reduction of our efficiency if we didn't 2 want to test with and without the coating, so that's 3 kind of the problem. 4 MS. HOOTMAN: This is Jill -- 5 MR. BALLO: Go ahead. 6 MS. HOOTMAN: This is Jill from Trane. A 7 couple points back to, Laura, your question on -- it's 8 the same refrigeration system. It is the same exact 9 refrigeration system. That definition said the exact 10 same tubes, the exact same headers; the exact same fin 11 stock gets coated with a coating. So it is the same 12 refrigeration system. When you define a refrigeration 13 system it is the same one. 14 These come at a cost. We would not want to 15 put them in -- no one in their right mind would put 16 these in 100 percent of the time when they only needed 17 them 10. It comes at a cost. It has a lot of OSHA -- 18 I mean, we don't like doing this. This is a -- these 19 chemicals have a problem in the plant. You've got to 20 deal with their off-gassing, et cetera. You don't 21 want to do this. We only do this because it is the 22 best thing for our customers that need it in their

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 68 1 application. Otherwise, we will be forced to have 2 them do it in the field and they will cobble up 3 refrigeration systems that will be pitiful by doing 4 this in the field. 5 MR. BALLO: Tim Ballo with EarthJustice. I 6 have just a comment on the idea of using a marketing 7 standard for this and I think that in combination with 8 some sort of minimum performance requirement for any 9 coatings, whether it's the salt spray number that's 10 different for HVAC or CRE if we want to have this for 11 CRE, also, the two things in combination, I think, 12 would work pretty well. 13 MR. STEM: Mike Stem with Intertek. I just 14 want to touch on both points about the standard for 15 testing. We talked about the B117. It gives you 16 methodologies and conditions, but it doesn't 17 necessarily give you any kind of metrics of saying 18 it's to this level or not to this level. You have to 19 use other standards with that in conjunction. 20 And so, you know, I think basically what 21 you're saying, you're really close on the definition, 22 but I think what John's wanting is what's truly a

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 69 1 coated coil and what's not. You know, how do you 2 exclude the people that are trying to skate the 3 system? And you kind of have to set some kind of level 4 and, right now, we don't have a definition of what 5 that level would be. So, I mean, you could look at 6 1654 or 3359 for the adhesion tape to see creeping or 7 other things, but somebody still has to set that level 8 and I think we're still pretty far from that, so. 9 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon. I have a 10 couple of comments. Number one is that in our 11 industry a coated coil is not the same because the fin 12 spacing's different, things that inherently changes 13 the nature of the evaporate, so it inherently changes 14 the energy efficiency of the system, plus the coating 15 on there is another insulation layer. So we have to 16 redesign to put a different coil into the system. 17 They are not exactly the same. The copper may change 18 to steel, depends on how much corrosion resistance we 19 really want. It just doesn't -- our industry and 20 their industry don't agree on this at all. 21 MR. HURST: This is John Hurst with Lennox. 22 I think my earlier comments were misconstrued as

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 70 1 commercial refrigeration. I think there is a big 2 difference and our company does both. We do 3 commercial refrigeration and commercial HVAC. Where 4 it's a standard, I don't even want to say option, but 5 where it's standard to the equipment, it should be the 6 base model. 7 When you talk about commercial equipment, 8 where it's such a small percentage, if you had to 9 redesign a product portfolio to a higher level to 10 accept a coated coil, which is a small percentage of 11 the sales in the marketplace, what I was saying is a 12 manufacturer of commercial equipment may choose not to 13 make that option and have it tested. It goes to 14 Jill's point that it'll be field-installed. 15 So where it's a large portion of the market 16 and customers, you know, need it, that's the base. 17 But in a situation where it could be 3 percent of the 18 market, manufacturers may choose not to offer that as 19 a factory-installed option. All I was saying is make 20 sure we understand the implications of that. So where 21 it fits, it fits, and where it doesn't, we ask that 22 you consider it.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 71 1 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik with AHRI. I 2 just want to go back to this suggestion that you need 3 to quantify -- you have this test to determine that 4 it's a protective coating, the salt spray test or 5 whatever, but this suggestion you need to quantify it 6 I don't think really is necessary. 7 Keep in mind, I mean, okay, so if you run 8 some kind of test to determine that it does qualify as 9 an ASTM protective coating, that's all you really need 10 because, don't forget, it's the manufacturers' 11 products' reputation that's on the line here. They're 12 doing this because they know it goes into an 13 environment that if they don't provide a quality 14 coating their coils wear out very quickly, their 15 efficiency goes to hell in a hand basket, and their 16 customers will tell them that. And the fact that -- 17 once you've determined, okay, it's a protective 18 coating as described by ASTM, that should be enough. 19 If it's a thin coating or whatever, 20 honestly, that's going to be the manufacturer's 21 problem. And, on top of that, that would 22 theoretically have the minimum effect on the heat

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 72 1 transfer of the coil anyhow if it's the thinnest of 2 coatings. But the issue of is it a good enough 3 coating doesn't really apply here. I mean, once you 4 establish it's a protective coating for the purpose of 5 protecting against these harsh environments, that's 6 enough to say it's a coating that was there because 7 the manufacturer if he doesn't provide it and that 8 product gets installed in that environment you're not 9 going to have a very good operating product. 10 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, if I may. I 11 mean, he was looking at the coated coil as being a 12 penalty on the efficiency, which is true. I mean, 13 when a unit it will be a penalty on the efficiency of 14 the unit. But if you look at the benefit of the 15 coated coil you will see that overall, maybe over a 16 few years, it will help energy efficiency because if 17 it's not coated, if it's in an environment with a lot 18 of corrosion, the coil will leak, the refrigerant will 19 leak, and the efficiency of the product will go down. 20 I mean, this is so overall, I mean, you 21 have to look at this as well as what is the impact of 22 a coated coil on the life of the equipment and whether

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 73 1 overall, if you have it, you'll probably be better 2 off. So it's not just detrimental. Yes, if you do 3 want a brand-new unit, obviously you will probably 4 lose efficiency, but if you look over the lifetime of 5 the product, probably it's a benefit to the efficiency 6 of the product. 7 MR. EISNER: Wes, did you have a question or 8 a comment? 9 MR. WOSTAL: Yes, thank you. I just wanted 10 to point out there's been some discussion regarding a 11 metric to determine if it's -you know, what kind of 12 protection the coating gives, such as the salt spray 13 test B117. There are some coatings out there, such as 14 tin plating, that are coatings for coils. Now, that 15 would just be the tubes. It wouldn't cover the fin 16 stock as well, but they are protective coatings and 17 they probably would not fare very well in a B117 test. 18 So I just wanted to throw that out there and put that 19 out for everybody to think about, that passing a B117 20 isn't necessarily the threshold for everything. And 21 that's it. 22 MR. KLEISS: Jeff Kleiss, Lochinvar. I

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 74 1 don't think that there's -- I think everybody at the 2 table understands that coatings are a good thing, 3 manufacturer-applied coatings are a good thing, a good 4 option as far as lifetime efficiency of the product. 5 I also don't think that there's anybody at the table 6 that doesn't understand that adding a coating to a 7 product is going to reduce its efficiency from a basic 8 product or an uncoated coil. 9 Do I understand correctly that DOE's concern 10 on this is that by adding a coating to a product that 11 it -- is the concern that it might be misrepresenting 12 the efficiency of the product or is it more that we 13 might be selling noncompliant product? 14 MS. BARHYDT: The latter. 15 MR. KLEISS: Okay, so if the major concern 16 of DOE is not selling a noncompliant product, then to 17 the manufacturers is the greater concern or is the 18 biggest concern the excess of test burden, of testing 19 with coating? Then could it be a reasonable 20 compromise to say that there'd be a generic penalty 21 applied for applying a coating that could be used to 22 qualify whether or not a product would be compliant?

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 75 1 And it could still be an option of manufacturers to 2 actually test to get a less restrictive -- they could 3 have the option of either taking their basic number 4 and being hit with a certain penalty on efficiency for 5 coating or else they could actually choose to test if 6 they have an exceptionally good coating process. 7 Would that be a reasonable compromise that would cover 8 both parties? 9 MR. WHITWELL: Bob Whitwell from Carrier. I 10 think the other issue that the manufacturers have is 11 if all products have to meet the base efficiency level 12 with coated coils or would the impact -- assuming an 13 impact of coated coils is going to increase the cost 14 of all the products for a small percentage of market? 15 MR. HURST: If the entire portfolio -- 16 MR. WHITWELL: So it's the tail wagging the 17 dog here is the concern I would have with that. 18 MR. THARP: And it also goes back to the 19 burden of the certification and documentation required 20 for all these additional base models. 21 MR. WHITWELL: Right. 22 MS. HOOTMAN: It goes back to --

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 76 1 MR. EISNER: Use your microphone. 2 MS. MEYERS: So, Neil, I'm going to make a 3 recommendation to try and move this along. I'm going 4 to recommend that coated coils be treated like 5 economizers in ERVs, that they not be tested as long 6 as there is a model available without the coated 7 option. So, you know, if it is your complete 8 portfolio, then, of course, you know, it would be 9 pulled and subject to verification, but since this is 10 an option that it be treated like economizers, ERVs, 11 high-efficiency air filtration, et cetera, and that 12 the model that is subject to testing and verification 13 is without this option. 14 MR. EISNER: Your reactions? 15 MS. MEYERS: Or commercial HVAC. 16 MS. BARHYDT: And that was your starting 17 position. 18 MS. MEYERS: Neil, the way I understand this 19 works is, you know, it's a negotiation and we can take 20 a vote and see if this passes or not. 21 MR. EISNER: There seem to be so many 22 variables that it's hard to say you've got to test for

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 77 1 each variable or a very, very small percentage to 2 begin with, but does the statute -- 3 MS. BARHYDT: And we have given on virtually 4 every single one of them. There are a few of them 5 that we have concerns with. 6 MR. HON: Charlie Hon. Isn't this why we 7 have AEDM programs? 8 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah, the AEDM addresses the 9 testing burden. 10 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think here's the problem 11 as I see it, I think, from their point of view, is if 12 you're designing a unit just to meet the standard, 13 let's say it's 10, anything you do to that unit is 14 going to cause it to fail the standard. So if they 15 sprayed -- as soon as they spray the coil, it's a 16 failure. I think that's what the concern is. If 17 they're designing over the standard by 10 or 15 18 percent, I don't think this is -- 19 MS. MEYERS: So, John, I'm going to disagree 20 with you on that because it may or may not fail. It 21 may fall within this five percent, I don't know. But 22 you are making an assumption that any unit that you

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 78 1 test with a coated coil is not going to meet the 2 standard and I don't think -- 3 MR. CYMBALSKY: No. 4 MS. MEYERS: -- that's an honest -- 5 MR. CYMBALSKY: Not at all. 6 MS. MEYERS: That's just exactly what you 7 said. 8 MR. CYMBALSKY: No, I said if you design to 9 it, a residential unit to a 13 and you spray the coil, 10 the efficiency goes down. That's what I've been told 11 in the room, so that, I think, is what the problem is 12 here. If you design it to a 14 and spray it, it won't 13 fail, I don't think, but. 14 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane with AHRI. But, 15 again, we're changing the rule of the games, in a way, 16 because, as I said, any of the analysis DOE has done 17 on those products never counted for the coils. As a 18 matter of fact, it's a very common practice for DOE to 19 look at our directory and to say, yes, this is what 20 the market is, this is what industry. What we have 21 rated in our directory is not coated coils. So I 22 think if you want to change the game, that's fine. I

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 79 1 mean, I'm not against changing the game. But then it 2 has to be done accordingly, I mean, not use the 3 current federal standard to say, well, you know, you 4 have to meet it with the coated coil where that was 5 not how those standards were established in the first 6 place. 7 MR. CYMBALSKY: Right. So I think we're not 8 saying like as of now if, you know, boom, you know, 9 we're not -- at least that not what I'm here to say. 10 MR. AMRANE: Okay. I thought that's -- 11 MR. CYMBALSKY: You know, we're talking 12 about how to move this forward, not come tomorrow, you 13 know, if you have a coated coil, you know, I don't 14 think we're trying to say that at all. We're trying 15 to solve what we think is -- 16 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi. I 17 think one last time I'd like to make it sure that 18 everyone, that you guys understand that coating on the 19 coil extends the life and the efficiency of that 20 system wherever it's installed. And without that, 21 then the energy usage goes up significantly and the 22 cost to the consumer goes up significantly. This is

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 80 1 something that is beneficial. There may be a trade2 off, but it provides, in the long run, it provides so 3 much more that I agree with what Karen said in that 4 this should be treated like an economizer. 5 MR. EISNER: Why don't we take a break for 6 10 minutes? 7 (Whereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 8 MR. EISNER: All right, we're ready to get 9 going again. And as usual, I believe Karim has a 10 proposal to put on the table to fix everything. 11 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. Just a 12 suggestion to move this issue forward. What we would 13 like to recommend is that DOE study the impact of 14 coated coil on efficiency. And maybe as part of the 15 rulemaking the DOE's currently doing on this type of 16 product, to establish maybe a new product class for 17 coated coil, if necessary. 18 Meanwhile, however, until that is done, you 19 should grant an exemption for product that are shipped 20 that way. 21 MS. BARHYDT: So by exemption you mean the 22 same sort of guidance that says that we will not test

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 81 1 a product with a coated coil? 2 MR. AMRANE: That's correct, that you will 3 test an equivalent product without, yeah. 4 MS. BARHYDT: If one is available. 5 MR. AMRANE: Yes, of course. If it's to do 6 only what's -- 7 MS. BARHYDT: If it's the -- 8 MR. AMRANE: -- provided by the 9 manufacturer, that's fine, it has to be tested that 10 way. But if it's just an option, then you will test 11 the one without the coated coil. 12 MR. CYMBALSKY: Okay, I think I can live 13 with that, but I'm not sure we should apply it to 14 PTACs and other product classes other than what we've 15 been discussing because I think, like I said, for 16 residential and I think for PTACs, maybe SPVUs, is a 17 different issue altogether. But I would live with 18 your proposal for the product class we were just 19 talking about. Does that sound good? 20 MR. AMRANE: Well, again, I mean, I think 21 the same approach should be taken for the other 22 products, too. I mean, SPVUs are very much like the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 82 1 product we're talking about. I mean, they're used in 2 commercial applications the same way. 3 PTACs, I would say, you know, the same. I 4 mean, we need to study the impact and maybe there's no 5 need for a special product class or maybe there will 6 be a need for it, I don't know. But I think if we 7 apply these requirements today, we're changing the 8 rule of the games. I don't think that's how 9 manufacturers have been, I guess, interpreting the 10 regs or testing that way. 11 So I think it's fair that we are willing to 12 consider this in future rulemakings and you'll be 13 doing one and we are doing one on (inaudible) 14 products. You'll be doing one on PTACs, too, I 15 believe; SPVU as well. So it can be looked at as part 16 of the rulemaking process. We're not talking about 10 17 years here. We're talking about something that you 18 are currently doing or will be doing shortly. 19 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers with PVI. I 20 was asking during the break around the room a number 21 of manufacturers, I didn't get to everybody, but the 22 general sense that I got for coatings as an option in

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 83 1 the commercial industry is less than 1 percent of the 2 total units sold have this option, so it's a really 3 small slice. If there are those around the room that 4 disagree with that number that I didn't talk with, 5 again, I'm not talking about those that are standards. 6 It might be a little bit higher for those that are 7 standard, but those would be tested. It's when it's 8 an option; the number for the industry of the percent 9 sold of total is less than one percent. 10 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey Sachs. And I 11 certainly think we need to find something workable in 12 the short run and sustainable in the long run. There 13 are several pieces of information I would like to see 14 that require some actual measurements in some cases. 15 One is what Frank was talking about. Across 16 this 340/360 ranges, as well as for other products, 17 what is the fraction shipped or should be shipped with 18 these anti-corrosion coatings? What's a good test for 19 this being a good coating or an adequate coating so we 20 don't get loopholing? What's the impact on pressure 21 drop and energy on the fan side from using these 22 coatings range? Is it de minimis or this a fair

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 84 1 amount of fan energy? And what's the change in heat 2 transfer across these things? 3 I think if these numbers all point to a de 4 minimis, it's going to be a whole lot easier for 5 everybody. But whether or not it's de minimis, I 6 think it's going to guide us in figuring out what the 7 right path is. 8 MR. CYMBALSKY: So are you okay with us 9 dealing with it in the current rulemaking, as Karim 10 suggested, or do you need this information before you 11 would vote on this proposal? 12 MR. SACHS: Well, I think there's -- this is 13 Harvey again. There's some information which we can 14 get in two weeks. Is this stuff one percent, five 15 percent, or 10 percent of the various product classes? 16 My sense is that that's information that's at-hand 17 from the manufacturers. And for the rest of it, 18 nobody in this room's in the position to do that 19 testing in time constraints of this process, so the 20 rulemaking is the least bad way to proceed that I can 21 think of. 22 MR. EISNER: Do we know of any tests that

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 85 1 have been done, that could be obtained from reliable 2 sources? 3 MR. SACHS: That was our facilitator asking. 4 MR. CYMBALSKY: Has AHRI tested any? Do you 5 have any test results coated, uncoated? 6 MR. AMRANE: This is Karim again. I don't 7 believe that we do, but many manufacturers do, I don't 8 know. I mean, that's -- 9 MR. THARP: This is Rusty with Goodman. I 10 guess my comment would be that if you install the 11 system with an uncoated coil, take that coil out, get 12 it coated, put it back together, you've now adjusted 13 the charge in the system and other factors in the test 14 setup, and I would say that you have just as much -- 15 anything difference would be noise in the testing 16 because, you know, you've changed the way the unit's, 17 you know, put in. Because obviously in testing you're 18 going to pull that unit out and take the coil out and 19 wait for it to go get coated, et cetera. And we don't 20 have any significant amount of data that would -- like 21 where you test the coils to I think it's AHRI 420 or 22 410 for coil-only where we have, you know, X-number of

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 86 1 samples uncoated and X-number of samples that are 2 coated and a good comparison between those. 3 So I don't think -- the bottom line is I 4 don't think we really have any good data that says 5 here's a substantial difference. I would say, from my 6 engineering background, that for what we do there's 7 probably less than 1 percent difference. 8 MR. WHITWELL: In performance? 9 MR. THARP: Yes, in system performance. 10 MR. WHITWELL: Yeah, we have some data that 11 suggests if it's just the outdoor coil that's coated, 12 it's in the 1 percent range. If it's the indoor coil 13 as well that's coated, which sometimes it can be 14 because of corrosive products in the air entering the 15 indoor side, it can be higher on the evaporator side, 16 so up to a combined four percent if both coils are 17 coated. Rough data. 18 MR. THARP: And then, again, one of our 19 concerns is if those are -- you know, because it is 20 such a small portion of the market -- and I commented 21 to you offhand I don't think we offer it, but we do 22 offer it, an ultra-gold coating. Our coating is a we

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 87 1 get a thin stock that's pre-coated with a corrosion 2 inhibitor and then we stamp out the fins and that's 3 what we provide our customers if they ask for it. And 4 they just -- there's not enough volume to make a 5 different basic model for us, but yet if we include 6 that to be tested, that just -- since we're only 7 allowed five percent across the board and, you know, 8 we feel that there's eight percent plus variance just 9 in the test procedure. So if you take the same unit 10 and test it different places, you're going to get a 11 significant difference in the results. We just don't 12 want a penalty to be applied because of the variance 13 that's there in the test procedure necessarily, 14 throwing on top of that the unit performance 15 differences. 16 MR. EISNER: Are we talking about the 17 possibility, when we talk about guidance, adding 18 something to the preamble that perhaps everybody could 19 agree to adhere? Because I hear a lot of agreement. 20 It will improve efficiency over the life of the 21 system. It will cause a decrease in efficiency at the 22 test. There's so much room for a variance within the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 88 1 testing itself that that's going to affect doing one 2 or two tests, what results you're going to get. You 3 put all that information in a preamble and you say, as 4 a result we have decided -- we, the agency, have 5 decided -- that we're going to address this through a 6 separate rulemaking in the future because it is such a 7 small percentage of the sales. We believe that for 8 the near future we will test without the corrosion in 9 there and not require that it be added in, but we 10 want, you could even say we will put a footnote and 11 number saying if you add corrosion control it will 12 have an effect, something like that. Or you could 13 just explain it in the preamble and make that 14 available on a website. Are we going in the right 15 direction? 16 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah, I think we can agree to 17 that framework where in the short run we won't be 18 testing anything with a coated coil and that long-term 19 we'll deal with it through the rulemaking process. 20 MR. EISNER: And you could use some of the 21 data that some of the members can give you to show it 22 may even be a very, very small problem.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 89 1 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. 2 MR. EISNER: Is that a satisfactory 3 solution, everybody? 4 MR. THARP: John, you had commented that we 5 had a proposal. Is that along the same lines or is it 6 different? 7 MR. CYMBALSKY: We're willing to live with 8 that one. Mine was much better, but. 9 But I'm saving by aces for the next topic. 10 Yeah, so for the PTAC, I think. I don't know if I 11 want to buy-off on the PTACs yet. Yet. Can we table 12 the other two products and just focus on what we've 13 been discussing? I really need to think more about -- 14 MR. THARP: I guess -- this is Rusty, I 15 would suggest that we all, I think we have a general 16 consensus, but I would suggest that we wait to do any 17 official voting until next time because I'll have time 18 to think on all the options would be my suggestion. 19 MR. CYMBALSKY: Okay, I think that's fair. 20 MR. EISNER: Should we try to have preamble 21 language to talk about for the next meeting or at 22 least an outline?

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 90 1 MS. BARHYDT: I will commit to do my best to 2 get stuff written up, but we've actually gone through 3 a lot of material so far. And so we'll try and put 4 some pen to paper and get something out to everyone to 5 read. It may not be final draft, but we'll get 6 something down. 7 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think we agree in 8 principle I think is the best way to say this. And so 9 I think we'll dot the I's. 10 MR. BALLO: Just one addendum to that. I do 11 not have a problem with not testing coated coils while 12 we wait for the rulemaking to work that out. I do 13 think, though, that it sounds like we're not too far 14 from getting some sort of maybe just a temporary 15 definition for some sort of standard that a coil would 16 have to meet to be considered coated, whether that's 17 500 hours on a salt spray test or whatever. But I 18 think that would be really helpful to prevent 19 loopholes in the interim until we do get to a 20 rulemaking. 21 MS. BARHYDT: I agree. My only concern is 22 the gentleman who was on the phone was talking about a

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 91 1 different type of corrosion, a way of addressing 2 corrosion that he said that that test method wouldn't 3 work on. So I just want to make sure that we don't 4 inadvertently limit it to a certain type of 5 technology. 6 MR. BALLO: That one sounded like maybe a 7 case for a test procedure waiver if that one's really 8

-- 9 MR. EISNER: I mean, are we talking -- we 10 had been talking during -- I was talking during the 11 break - 12 - 13 MS. HOOTMAN: When I -- 14 MR. EISNER: -- about ASTM standard. Is 15 that the one that would be acceptable to DOE? 16 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think Jill had a good 17 definition. 18 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, and I admit I did 19 everybody's equipment that's in the room and Wes is a 20 water source heat pump manufacturer. I am also, so I 21 only did look at my water source heat pumps, but when 22 I looked at commercial HVAC, all of us had an ASTM

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 92 1 test. And those words or those kinds of coatings were 2 what we are using. So what he suggested is a kind of 3 coating that is only to the tubes and not to the fin 4 stock. It would not be truly a corrosive and would 5 not likely work under alkalis, acids, salt spray, et 6 cetera. It would not be in. 7 MR. WHITWELL: Yeah, it could help to 8 prevent leaks, but is not going to prevent having the 9 fin corrode away. 10 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. So it sounds like, and 11 keeping in mind that you are representing the whole 12 industry, not just your companies, it sounds like this 13 is a good description of what a corrosion-protected 14 coil would be. 15 MR. FLY: This is Mark Fly with AAON. The 16 B117 salt spray test is a good test for acidic and 17 salt, chlorine-based environments. There may be other 18 chemicals that need a different kind of test, but the 19 vast majority of the units sold, even though we're 20 talking about this less than, you know, small single 21 digits, are really for sea coast application for most 22 of our products, for this product class. And that's

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 93 1 usually saltwater environment and so a salt spray test 2 is an appropriate kind of test for that. It's an 3 accelerated life test. 4 So, you know, I think that this is the 5 appropriate test for the vast majority of what it is. 6 And if you had a special requirement for a special 7 chemistry, then I think a test waiver would be the 8 appropriate way to go about getting around that. 9 MR. THARP: This is Rusty with Goodman. On 10 that definition, it only discusses processes that are 11 after the coil is completely assembled and, as I 12 mentioned, what our company provides is a coated coil 13 where the coating is applied to the fin stock prior to 14 stamping of the fins, as Jill had mentioned, also, 15 previously. 16 MS. HOOTMAN: So look at the sentence near 17 the end, "For mildly corrosive environments coils can 18 be assembled from aluminum fin stock -- " 19 MR. THARP: Thank you, 20 MS. HOOTMAN: " -- that has been coated 21 prior to fin stamping." 22 MR. THARP: You mean you've got to read all

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 94 1 of it? 2 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. 3 MR. EISNER: Wes, you wanted to add 4 something? 5 MR. WOSTAL: Yes, Wes Wostal, ClimateMaster. 6 Just to add a little bit to what was being discussed 7 earlier, we do also offer an E-coating which, I agree 8 100 percent, applies to the B117 salt spray test. And 9 the tin plating that I brought up is a very, very, 10 very -- I would say probably less than one percent, 11 which I think you were talking about, going around the 12 room there, that most companies are less than one 13 percent. You know, it is -- for commercial 14 applications it is very, very seldom that we do that. 15 So I just wanted to bring it up so that in 16 the future, if it did come up, it was something that 17 everybody -- that had been discussed here. And I 18 think a waiver would probably be a perfect solution. 19 Thank you. 20 MS. BARHYDT: Thank you. 21 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers. Could that 22 all be condensed down to corrosion-protected condenser

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 95 1 coils, "Corrosion durability shall be confirmed 2 through testing per ASTM B117 salt spray test," and 3 leave the rest of that out? That's really the 4 operative term. The rest of it is marketing-speak. 5 MR. CYMBALSKY: Do they market with those 6 words in it? Wow. Really? 7 MR. MYERS: Yeah, that appears to be a 8 marketing specification as opposed to -- 9 MS. HOOTMAN: It's truly out of our guide 10 spec, yes. 11 MR. MYERS: And the operative element in 12 that entire diatribe is the last sentence. So it 13 looks like for us going with the definition is having 14 that last sentence. 15 MR. CYMBALSKY: If I ever "baked phenolic" 16 on a menu anywhere, I'm going to run. 17 Whatever that is. 18 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon. I'd also 19 like to take the part of the last sentence where it 20 says, "aluminum fin stock." Just take the word 21 "aluminum" out of that because there are other 22 possible fin stocks. The second to the last sentence

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 96 1 says, "aluminum fin stock." 2 MR. THARP: I got it, but if we're going to 3 get rid of the whole thing -- 4 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yeah, we might get rid of 5 the whole -- I mean, it's open for discussion how much 6 we need in here. 7 MR. EISNER: I mean, does anybody disagree 8 with the suggestion? 9 MS. MEYERS: Just one little suggestion. 10 The third word, we should put "evaporator/condenser 11 coils." 12 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes, right. Good 13 catch. 14 MR. MYERS: Yeah, in terms of being 15 universal it would seem just taking that last sentence 16 with the change that was just added in and leaving the 17 rest of that out, everything else appears to be 18 restrictive. If we go with that last sentence, then it 19 will cover everything no matter how you produce it. 20 Whatever is coated has to comply with the B117. 21 MR. CYMBALSKY: So, Frank, you're suggesting 22 starting with "typical," cross out "typical" all the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 97 1 way down to "process." 2 MR. THARP: This is Rusty. Before we do 3 that, just to the point that Mike Stem made earlier, 4 ASTM B117 is a test procedure. It doesn't provide 5 pass/fall criteria. It doesn't provide duration. So 6 you'd have to say -- we'd have to add in something 7 that says what the pass/fail criteria is. Is it just 8 withholding pressure? Is it, you know, performance 9 before and after? There's other factors there. 10 So I personally think that the information 11 in between is salient to the description of what a 12 coated corrosion protection coil is. Maybe you want 13 to put it after. You know, put the last sentence 14 first, but the rest of the information is salient to 15 the discussion at hand, especially without a pass/fail 16 criteria on the test procedure. 17 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI, again. 18 I understand what you're saying. If one goes through 19 the trouble of actually conducting that test, they 20 have differentiated themselves between those that 21 don't conduct that test. If there was a need, again, 22 rather than include all that intervening information,

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 98 1 then the lowest number that I've heard that a 2 manufacturer use I believe was 192 hours. 3 MS. BARHYDT: But that -- I believe 500 was 4 the lowest number we heard for HVAC. 5 MR. MYERS: No. Yes, but to cover 6 everything and to get over the hump of you have to 7 test to some hours -- 8 MS. BARHYDT: I think we would prefer to 9 have this specific to products, not just a generic 10 statement. 11 MR. MYERS: Maybe I don't understand what 12 the effort is here. I thought we were trying to make 13 sure that this was not a coat of black paint. And 14 you're going to have significant compliance at 192. 15 I'm not sure that those pre-coated pieces will comply 16 even with 192. It's all a matter of the level of 17 corrosion protection you're offering. And if we have 18 a low number or no number, we'll be able to cover 19 every variation of this so that somebody doesn't, 20 well, I have a protective coating that's an option. 21 And if they do, they have to have done this. They 22 can't just say it and throw something on. They will

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 99 1 have had to have run the B117 salt spray test. 2 MS. BARHYDT: Rusty, you mentioned the pre3 treated before stamping. How many hours? 4 MR. THARP: My guess is the fins would last 5 500 hours. The performance before and after, I don't 6 know what the degradation is. 7 MS. BARHYDT: Right. 8 MR. THARP: But I know that the fins with 9 the coating last better than the ones without. 10 MS. HOOTMAN: Yes, I would agree, fin stock 11 still at that point would be a 500-hour test on 12 commercial HVAC. And I understand what you're saying, 13 you want to now make this commercial HVAC different 14 from -- right. 15 I'm sorry, this is Jill from Trane. I agree 16 with Rusty. I think that the other words need to be 17 in there. They are describing a specific thing. 18 You're trying to get away from just the "I'm just 19 going to paint a coil." It has a specific purpose. 20 MR. THARP: Just tacking onto that. A 21 standard coil, copper tube, aluminum plate fin, would 22 probably endure 500 hours of an ASTM B117 without

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 100 1 leaking. The performance would probably stink pretty 2 bad, but it would still be, you know, able to 3 pressurized in all likelihood after 500 hours. So 4 it's a matter of the heat transfer, which is why we're 5 putting the coating on to begin with. 6 MR. FLY: Rusty, I'm not sure you'd have any 7 fins left. 8 MR. THARP: (Off microphone.) 9 MR. FLY: Right. 10 MR. CYMBALSKY: Okay, I'm going to propose 11 we just leave it as is unless somebody really, really 12 has a problem with it. I mean, at this point, I think 13 we're getting -- turning the screw and stripping the - 14

- 15 MR. SACHS: Harvey Sachs. I'm not real 16 excited about that mildly corrosive environments 17 language for coated fin stock. Among other things it 18 sounds to me like something that has all sorts of 19 opportunities for galvanic and it just doesn't seem to 20 fit the category we're talking about of seaside 21 environments and equivalent. I don't have a dog in 22 this fight, but I'm a little uncomfortable with that

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 101 1 approach and nobody's telling me that it's pervasive, 2 common, or -- 3 MR. THARP: No, I'm just removing the phrase 4 for mildly corrosive environments. 5 MR. STANONIK: Yeah, Frank Stanonik, AHRI. 6 That's high-risk concern, so where it says "typical 7 processes" at the very end, simply add "fin stock that 8 is coated prior to the stamping process," or something 9 like "the use of fin stock that is coated prior." I 10 mean, this goes to the end of the list. A typical 11 process includes baked phenolic, blah, blah, blah. 12 MR. THARP: Just like that. 13 MR. STANONIK: And then just make it one 14 more of the possibilities. 15 MR. EISNER: Does this work for everybody 16 now? 17 MR. BALLO: I still have a concern that we 18 haven't specified any level of performance. All we've 19 said is corrosion durability shall be confirmed, but 20 all we've said is we're going to run the test, not 21 what the outcome would be. 22 MS. HOOTMAN: This is Jill from Trane.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 102 1 "Shall be confirmed to a minimum of 500 hours," or put 2 "500 hours after ASTM B117 salt spray test." 3 MR. EISNER: Is that number acceptable to 4 everybody? 5 MR. THARP: For commercial HVAC. 6 MR. CYMBALSKY: This is only applying to the 7 commercial HVAC at this point. 8 MS. TUCKER: We'll put it here just so we 9 know. 10 MR. EISNER: Okay, everybody agree? Okay, 11 no objections are heard. 12 MR. CYMBALSKY: Tim, this is okay? This is 13

-- 14 MR. BALLO: (Nods.) 15 MR. CYMBALSKY: Okay, good. 16 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane with AHRI. I hope 17 we're not forgetting about the other product because I 18 think maybe a similar definition would -- 19 MR. CYMBALSKY: No, we're going to come back 20 to it. 21 MR. AMRANE: Exactly, eventually we should 22 come back to that. Yeah, not now.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 103 1 MR. CYMBALSKY: Okay. No more coated coils. 2 You want to talk about motors now? 3 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. 4 MR. CYMBALSKY: All right. What do you got, 5 Karim? What do you got for motors? 6 MR. AMRANE: Nothing. 7 (Laughter.) 8 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: We're coating them. 9 MR. CYMBALSKY: No, I think they're called 10 encased; right? You encase them. 11 Okay. So we thought about the motor issue a 12 little bit. I think we have a proposal that's similar 13 in feature to what we just discussed with the coated 14 coil, so. 15 So if you're going to use -- I'm going to 16 talk in terms that I can understand, which may not be 17 engineering specifically correct. So if you use a 2 18 horsepower motor, let's say, I'm making up numbers, in 19 your base model, the NEMA chart will have the 20 efficiency of what it is and all that. If you go up 21 to a five horsepower motor, what we're proposing is 22 that you map to the NEMA chart with that motor. And

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 104 1 then everything else, we won't test the five horse, et 2 cetera, et cetera. 3 So what we're trying to do here is guarantee 4 that if you're swapping out motors, the efficiency 5 band is the same. It's just scaled higher. Does that 6 make sense? 7 I'm sorry? 8 (Off microphone discussion.) 9 MR. CYMBALSKY: We've done several 10 rulemakings here, so I think we have tables that can 11 help out. But the rest would go -- we wouldn't test 12 the bigger motor as their basic model, so the rest 13 would fall in line with what we just talked about with 14 the coils. 15 MS. HOOTMAN: This is Jill from Trane. 16 You're falling back to the tables that you have for 17 just the motors only, when you have the motor-only 18 rulings? Is that what you're saying, those tables? 19 Like 2 percent -- you know, 97 percent or 98? 20 Okay, I understand what you're getting at. 21 MR. THARP: So if you have a -- 22 MS. HOOTMAN: I understand what you're

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 105 1 getting at. I'm not sure what that means to our 2 units. 3 MR. THARP: So if you have a two horsepower 4 that's 95 percent efficient and we offer two through 5 20 horsepower range, you'll test the two horsepower as 6 long as all motors we provide are at the 95 percent 7 efficiency level, so that's the same -- 8 MR. RIVEST: This is Mike Rivest. So 9 actually, not quite. So NEMA has several grades of 10 motors, the minimum being the minimum standard. I 11 think it's probably backed right now. We're in the 12 process of looking at higher standards. 13 Conceptually, what we're trying to make sure 14 is that the motor you supply for your compliance 15 testing is not of a higher grade than the ones you use 16 in your actual products that you sell. So in theory, 17 just purely in theory, you could come in with an ECM 18 motor as your test unit and you could have maybe even 19 a blower section that's been specially tuned or just 20 an efficient blower design and that would help meet 21 the minimum standard. And that would be fine so long 22 as you continued using an ECM motor for every product

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 106 1 that you were capturing with that test. Same with the 2 blower. 3 So the NEMA charts simply refer to an 4 efficiency scale. So efficiency on motors, it gets 5 better as the motors get bigger. So it's not just a 6 matter of establishing 95 and then everything else has 7 to be 95. If it's 95 and it scales and the NEMA 8 premium motor would be a band above, so we want to 9 make sure that you're switching out motors to motors 10 of equivalent performance level, not equivalent 11 efficiency. 12 And that would apply, also, to other 13 components in the system that are key. So we talked 14 earlier yesterday about having different blower 15 designs. Now, some may just be different for reasons 16 such as static or things like that, but there may be 17 designs that are inherently more expensive and 18 efficient. So we wouldn't want, you know, a specially 19 designed test unit to throw technologies -- have 20 technologies thrown at it that wouldn't be 21 incorporated in the other products. So I don't know 22 how we put that in words, in writing, but that's the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 107 1 concept. 2 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI. I'm 3 not an expert in all motor types, but I would question 4 whether all motor types, this mapping you're talking 5 about is available in every size and configuration and 6 type of motor. And we certainly wouldn't want to 7 lower the base model's motor efficiency so that you 8 could use a higher efficiency of that same class. So 9 you might want to consider putting in something like 10 it maps over or the highest class available for that 11 specialty motor, the highest class that's available so 12 that you're not having to lower the efficient of the 13 base model down to be able to use it. 14 MR. CYMBALSKY: So if you lowered the 15 efficiency of the base model, you'd have to recertify 16 with that less-efficient motor, I would assume. 17 MR. MYERS: Or that might keep you from 18 putting a higher efficiency motor in the base model if 19 you wanted to improve the efficiency of the base model 20 because that might lock you out of some of these 21 after- the-fact -- or you let somebody in the field do 22 it. And one way around that would be just to say it

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 108 1 either maps or the highest available for that category 2 of motor. 3 MR. RIVEST: I mean, it's feasible that, you 4 know, the most efficient motor's available at 5 5 horsepower, but not at 20. That's possible. 6 MR. MYERS: That's the thought. 7 MR. RIVEST: So you're just trying to make 8 sure that there's a motor available. 9 MR. MYERS: If you can't do the direct map, 10 you have to go to the highest in that category class - 11

- 12 MR. RIVEST: That's available. 13 MR. MYERS: -- whatever the description 14 would be. 15 (Off microphone discussion.) 16 MR. CYMBALSKY: So I think you get the 17 flavor of what we're trying to do here. I'm not 18 asking for a decision on the spot, you know. And 19 again, so current practice today would go along with 20 what we did with the coil, so. 21 MR. WHITWELL: Bob Whitwell, Carrier. Can 22 we get something drafted up there on the screen so

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 109 1 that we can take it home with us and have it to look 2 at over the next few days? 3 MR. CYMBALSKY: We'll draft something to 4 send around before the week's up. How about that? 5 MR. WHITWELL: Before the end of this week? 6 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yes. 7 MR. WHITWELL: Okay. 8 MS. BARHYDT: We'll find the band so that we 9 can point you at that as well. 10 MR. WHITWELL: Okay. 11 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. So this is Jill from 12 Trane. Carrier, ah. 13 I didn't do that. Nope, I never. Not yet 14 anyway. 15 MS. MEYERS: What's your name? 16 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, Jill. I got that. 17 Mike, I kind of -- I mean, I understand what you're 18 getting at and I would agree that as you go up in 19 motor size, you're going to higher. The only thing 20 that I'm kind of worried about -- and maybe those 21 tables, I'm visualizing them -- is the fractional 22 horsepowers. And, of course, in our three through 510

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 110 1 products we've got the fractional horses that we're 2 dealing with. 3 MR. RIVEST: It's always true. I believe 4 it's always true that bigger is always more efficient. 5 MR. THARP: But when you get to the smaller 6 sizes, five ton and less, those aren't always not 7 very often are belt drive, are they? Most are direct 8 drive with multispeed. 9 MS. HOOTMAN: They're direct drive. 10 MR. DOPPEL: We have both. 11 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, you got both belt drive 12 and direct drive smatterings through those product 13 lines. 14 MR. FLY: Mark Fly with AAON. So I'm just 15 going to clarify a few things and nod if you agree. 16 But what you're talking about is we should be rating 17 with the least efficient that we offer within that 18 line and that that will be available in commerce for 19 you to pull in test, the least efficient in that line. 20 That doesn't prevent me from putting an ECM motor as 21 an option in there. But if I want to rate it as an 22 ECM motor and have a higher rating, then I need to go

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 111 1 in and create another model group. 2 So, you know, that's -- so if you pull an 3 ECM motor and I've rated it something better, then I'm 4 going to perform better. If you pull the lowest 5 common denominator, this Plain Jane unit that's got 6 the cheapest motor in there, then you should be able 7 to get the -- and then the other is a paperwork 8 exercise. If you look at one that's got a five 9 horsepower motor, you look at the efficiency, you 10 compare it back to the efficiency of the tested rated 11 motor and see if it follows the curve. Is that 12 correct? Okay. I'm fine with that. It seems like a 13 reasonable compromise. 14 MR. CYMBALSKY: So my going in position was 15 nothing, just to let you know. 16 I'm a reasonable person. 17 MR. EISNER: Any other concerns? 18 Everybody's okay with this approach? 19 MR. CYMBALSKY: And then in the long run, 20 the test procedure issue, I think, is still a long-run 21 debate here about what we should do about the static 22 and all that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 112 1 MR. SACHS: And that leads me to my concern, 2 which is that motor wouldn't be there if it wasn't 3 hooked to a blower. And I'm really worried about the 4 watts per CFM at external static much more than what 5 the rating is on the motor. There is no motor that I 6 can't defeat with a bad fan to say nothing of the bad 7 ductwork downstream. But the manufacturer's 8 responsible in my mind for the air movement efficiency 9 and the motor is just a poor means of trying to 10 reflect that. 11 MR. MYERS: Harvey, this is Frank Myers, 12 PVI. Harvey, I would remind you of the example that 13 was given a number of meetings ago of the gentleman 14 who had been requested to put one of his air15 conditioning units for a docked submarine where its 16 standard horsepower was quite low, but they had to put 17 in, and I forget the number, but let's say 100 18 horsepower motor to be driving that against the 19 pressure that was contained within the submarine in 20 order to air-condition it. 21 I don't disagree that the best would be to 22 be able to get the -- come up with the watts for the

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 113 1 amount of air that is moved, in this case I think what 2 DOE has done is said, well, that's perhaps not 3 practical, not reasonable, but here's something that 4 is reasonable. They're offering out something that's 5 not the best, but it captures at least that element of 6 it. So I think it's a reasonable compromise. 7 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey. And, Frank, I 8 think we're in violent agreement. My concern is that 9 that was a 30 inch of static application and my 10 concern is how many building are approaching that. 11 And I doubt there are very many at 30, but we're 12 certainly seeing a lot which are designed to several 13 inches of external static and that's where the fan and 14 motor together -- well, across the board that's where 15 they matter. 16 MR. RIVEST: This is Mike Rivest. Now, I 17 know we're going through a blower rulemaking at this 18 point, but are all your motor-blower combinations 19 available with ratings of watts per CFM? 20 MS. HOOTMAN: No. 21 MR. RIVEST: Okay, because if they were that 22 would be nice.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 114 1 MR. SACHS: But, Mike, the context is that - 2

- 3 MS. HOOTMAN: Read the comments. They were 4 bad. 5 MR. RIVEST: I read a lot of comments. 6 MR. SACHS: The context is that this is 7 going to be linked one way or another to what's 8 happening in 90.1 in looking at system efficiencies. 9 The information is going to have to be generated in a 10 useful way from the manufacturer for the designer. So 11 it may not be married up, but it's certainly linked. 12 MR. FLY: This is Mark Fly with AAON. Mike, 13 I'd caution you a little bit about looking at fan 14 efficiency grades inside packaged equipment because I 15 can apply a much lower FEG fan in application blowing 16 through, say, a gas heater and I could apply a much 17 higher fan and end up using more horsepower than the 18 fan that has a much lower FEG because of the system 19 effects. A lot of the really high FEG fans are going 20 to have very high discharge velocities, which is not 21 compatible with filters and coils and things like that 22 nor is it compatible with a bullhead tee that's 3 feet

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 115 1 down below the end of the discharge of the ductwork. 2 It causes terrible system effects. 3 So here, again, we're kind of in one of 4 these situations where the test -- the ideal test 5 setup may not fit reality very well. So I understand 6 the concern and I don't have a solution, but I don't 7 think we should be -- we need to be real careful about 8 over- constraining components within packaged 9 equipment where we're giving it a package rating. 10 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI. That 11 was a bit of what I was attempting to get at by saying 12 the highest available for what you need to meet those 13 needs. So if you need a motor that can do those 14 things that you're talking about, then it needs to be 15 equal to the efficiency of your base or the highest 16 efficiency available in a motor that does those 17 things. So it wasn't just in general, it was when you 18 specify what that motor needs, what the blower needs 19 to do, then the highest efficiency for the motor that 20 will achieve that that's available. 21 MS. BARHYDT: So we'll get some information 22 out about the bands, and it sounds like otherwise

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 116 1 we're generally -- we have a way forward on the motors 2 issue. 3 Let's see, I believe some people were going 4 to go look at dehumidification. 5 MS. TUCKER: Do you want me to go back to 6 that? 7 MR. AMRANE: Thank you. 8 MS. TUCKER: Yeah, no problem. I'm sure 9 that's not going to be the final language. 10 MS. BARHYDT: We had a question about 11 dehumidification. How is the unit with 12 dehumidification components differentiated from a unit 13 that doesn't have them? Did anyone have a chance to 14 look at this issue? 15 There was a request that we not test units 16 that had dehumidification. And we're asking how would 17 we know. Is it -- 18 MS. HOOTMAN: (Inaudible.) 19 MS. BARHYDT: -- clear that this is an 20 option? 21 MR. DOPPEL: Somebody brought up advanced 22 technology.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 117 1 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey. I brought up 2 advanced technologies and the issue there is what you 3 would do to test something like the proverbial Cromer 4 cycle, which is a novel application of a desiccant 5 wheel that is built into the end of the packaged unit. 6 I'm able to raise the issue. I don't know how to test 7 these. And my concern is that we not get in a 8 position which we're inadvertently discouraging or 9 penalizing innovation, whether it's that or 10 direct/indirect evaporative cooling or whatever it is. 11 MS. BARHYDT: And we're okay with saying we 12 won't test units that have dehumidification 13 components. Our question was just how do we know which 14 models do and don't have that because we don't want to 15 be in a situation where we get something and we test 16 it and someone says, oh, well, that has this 17 dehumidification aspect to it. 18 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane. I think if you 19 get the unit you will see right away if it has the 20 component or not. I think it can be obvious. Now, 21 whether it can be distinguished with the model number, 22 I don't know. Maybe that's something that you have to

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 118 1 ask the manufacturers. 2 MR. FLY: This is Mark Fly with AAON. As 3 far as I know, that's always an optional feature. 4 It's really a specialty feature. It's only going to 5 happen in a few of the units, mostly high-end units. 6 It kind of figures in to dedicated outdoor air 7 systems. You see them more often in those kind of 8 systems than not. But in my view, what we intended 9 when we wrote this section was to have a heat wheel, a 10 plate, a desiccant spray section. It is an additional 11 component besides the evaporator coil. Not just an 12 evaporator coil could be called a dehumidifier even 13 though it does dehumidify. 14 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. 15 MR. FLY: An additional component -- 16 MS. BARHYDT: That's our concern. 17 MR. FLY: In addition to the evaporator 18 coil. And then we address reheat coils further down 19 and we've already talked about those. And that's 20 another way of doing dehumidification is you cool it 21 down and reheat it up through the evaporator coil. 22 And we've already addressed that, also. So between

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 119 1 the reheat coils and this dehumidification additional 2 component that would be a feature, an optional 3 feature, that would cover, I think, for everyone in 4 the HVAC world what we intended by this item. 5 MS. HOOTMAN: And they're all options -- 6 MR. FLY: But it would not just be an 7 evaporator coil or some magic evaporator coil that 8 just dehumidifies better than everybody else's. 9 MR. KOJAK: I would think that would be a 10 concern of the contractor that's contracted to obtain 11 the test unit, that you just make sure to let them 12 know to get a unit that doesn't have that equipment on 13 it. Because every manufacturer's going to designate it 14 differently within their model numbers, so they would 15 have to have some prior research to look up what model 16 numbers that you would want to obtain that doesn't 17 have that in there. 18 MS. HOOTMAN: This is Jill from Trane. 19 Along with what Mark said, it's a separate digit than 20 the coil, the standard coil in the unit. So what 21 we're getting at, it's not mutually exclusive. I 22 mean, it's totally an additional. So it would be

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 120 1 pretty clear that you either had it or you didn't have 2 it. 3 MS. BARHYDT: So the other issues that I 4 show as remaining are both CRE issues, one deals with 5 display lighting and one deals with methodology for 6 dealing with the condensate pan. And DOE is not 7 prepared yet to really propose something on how to 8 address those yet. We do agree that they need to be 9 addressed. We just haven't quite figured out what our 10 position would be on that, so. 11 MR. CYMBALSKY: Right. I saw the e-mail 12 trail from last night and I think part of the issue is 13 I don't think you guys have general agreement on -- at 14 least the condensate pan seemed to be an issue. It 15 seemed like you had a good proposal for the lights 16 that I read, but. 17 MR. SHEBIK: Ron Shebik with Hussmann. As 18 far as lights go, I mean, from the grocery case 19 perspective, I think it's pretty comfortable that if 20 the lights are -- I want to say lights or TV monitors 21 or audio monitors, whatever are used to illuminate the 22 product inside the case, those are items that would

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 121 1 definitely be included within the testing. Dry goods 2 shelves, displays, and stuff like that, that's 3 external to the case. It's on the outside of the 4 case. We would propose that they would not be part of 5 the test requirement because it's not inherent to the 6 case itself. It's something that's driven by the 7 customer. The self-containing case was kind of the 8 gray area with the panel. 9 MR. HON: In self-contains all testing and 10 all base information has been done with external 11 lighting included in it, so we have no problem with 12 that. We understand it completely. But we're getting 13 now into the market where the market is asking for 14 more and more and more. And eventually, we have to 15 say, well, where do we cut it off? Because if it's 16 purely lighting, do we absorb all lighting or do we 17 end up with some other marketing feature which is put 18 on there besides just the lighting? We don't know the 19 answer to that because we have customers who would 20 want unbelievable amount of stuff hanging on the unit 21 powered from it. So we have to -- we are sort of 22 stumped as to what the right answer is because we will

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 122 1 have customers that will push that limit. 2 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from 3 National. John, when you said that you felt like we 4 had -- basically e-mails, that you were getting a 5 grasp on the lighting almost sounds like we're less 6 confident than you are on that. Can you tell us what 7 you kind of took out of the e-mails last night? And, 8 I mean, I think there were some proposals there. I'm 9 not sure which you're referring to. 10 MR. CYMBALSKY: I guess I was focusing on 11 the lighting that was directed at the product versus 12 not. In one of the proposals I read it was a 13 distinguishing characteristic. Now, Charlie's just 14 said that a lot of the external lighting actually gets 15 tested and it may not be directed at the product, from 16 what I'm hearing. 17 MR. HON: That's correct. A lot of the 18 external lighting's directed at the customer. 19 MR. CYMBALSKY: At the customer. 20 MR. HON: For marketing reasons. 21 MR. CYMBALSKY: And you're counting that now 22 in the --

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 123 1 MR. HON: Yes. 2 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yeah. 3 MR. BAUMAN: Yeah, I agree with that. And I 4 think, also, one of the things that I know I discussed 5 in my portion of the e-mail was defining external -- 6 you know, we kind of take -- if it lights the product 7 internal or is internal, it's got to be part of it 8 because it's going to affect refrigeration and affect 9 the performance. If it's external I believe there 10 becomes, hopefully, a separation point that we may be 11 able to determine where it's integral to the product 12 or an essential part of the product versus a 13 nonessential part where it would be something you 14 could remove without affecting the function of the 15 unit. I don't know how easy that's going to be to 16 define, but that seems to be -- because, like Charlie 17 said, it might be -- companies come in, put video 18 displays and things like that on there. Where do you 19 draw that line? And I think that's that line that is 20 the challenge to try to define. 21 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon again. 22 There's also questions because in the display cabinet

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 124 1 market there are multiple different designs of display 2 cabinets, some which include pass- through-type units 3 where they have doors on both sides of the unit. And 4 those quite often are used in grocery stores and major 5 marketers where they put it at the end of a checkout 6 counter and thereby rather than have two separate 7 refrigerators, actually have one that can be accessed 8 from either side of the counter and cut down their 9 total number of items in the store. 10 Those quite often have double lighting: 11 double lighting going in inside the unit on 12 the product because there's two different sizes to 13 view the product from, also double lighting on the 14 outside of the product, marketing. And that gets 15 really dicey, but we have a parallel to that in the 16 refrigeration testing. And the refrigeration test has 17 if you have a pass- through cabinet, you do not open 18 all the doors. You only open the doors on one side 19 during the test cycle because they know the extra load 20 that it puts on the unit. 21 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr with NEEA. 22 You know, if the Department of Energy wouldn't -- it

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 125 1 kind of depends whether they consider that you can 2 have multiple metrics, but I think -- they're not 3 going to say it now. 4 Okay, well, the second metric would be an 5 exterior power allowance and interior power allowance, 6 and then because they're -- 7 MR. CYMBALSKY: That sounds so easy, I know. 8 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey Sachs and I'm 9 conflicted because the efficiency advocate in me wants 10 to limit all the energy waste and, at the same time, 11 I'm really hit by Ron's comment that there's lighting 12 that is mounted within the refrigeration case to 13 attract the customer. So its load is included even 14 though it's not illuminating the product. Did I 15 misunderstand? 16 MR. SHEBIK: Yeah, I think, yeah. I'm 17 talking about lighting in the case that shines on the 18 product itself. 19 MR. SACHS: Oh, okay. 20 MR. SHEBIK: So it draws the customer to the 21 product itself. It's not advertisement lighting. 22 MR. SACHS: It's not advertising it.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 126 1 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon. But I did 2 refer to those. 3 MR. SACHS: Well, I shouldn't confuse you 4 two. 5 MR. HON: We only worked across the hall 6 from each other for years. 7 MR. SACHS: In my concern for fairness I 8 still come back to what I tried to say yesterday, that 9 if it's -- one easy discriminator to me conceptually 10 is if the lighting is within the refrigerated case, 11 then it's presumptively about lighting the product. 12 And if it's outside the refrigerated case, it seems to 13 me that it's mostly about advertising, drawing 14 customers. 15 MR. CYMBALSKY: Well, you can envision a 16 case. I'm sure this -- I don't know. I don't know if 17 I've ever seen it, but you could just like make bolt 18 on, like, hanging lights that shine down on the food 19 that are external to the case, mounted in the field 20 maybe, not have any illumination in the case, but have 21 some, like, spotlights that -- 22 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Shadow makers.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 127 1 MR. CYMBALSKY: Whatever you call them. And 2 they could be very high wattage, torchiere-type bulbs 3 for that. 4 MR. SACHS: But they would not be integral 5 to the product. 6 MR. CYMBALSKY: Well, they wouldn't be, but 7 then they would be mounted externally and not include. 8 I mean, the question is that's the kind of thing that 9 is troubling; right? You could add maybe 400 watts of 10 lighting that way. 11 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon. There's also 12 another factor in there and that is the fact that a 13 lot of these glass-doored merchandisers are ENERGY 14 STAR. And the numbers we've been -- the comments we've 15 heard in the past is that the listings on DOE listings 16 should match that of ENERGY STAR. And ENERGY STAR 17 requires all lights on all the time. And they do not 18 give you an exception for inside and outside. 19 MR. BALLO: To Harvey's point, not to 20 disagree with Harvey, but the definition for 21 commercial refrigeration equipment does indicate that 22 it both refrigerates and displays product. And to me

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 128 1 that marketing aspect is part of the display of the 2 product. So, you know, I'm willing to draw a line 3 somewhere, but I think there is some level of 4 marketing that has to be included. 5 MR. HON: If we would draw the line on the 6 inside cabinet lighting only, we would have so many 7 ENERGY STAR products you wouldn't believe it. That'd 8 be about three to five years away. 9 MR. CYMBALSKY: okay, so it sounds like 10 we'll need to think more. 11 MR. HON: We're just asking for guidance 12 here because the market as we stand today is pushing 13 the envelope. Where do we as a supplier to our 14 customers say I can't do that because it doesn't meet 15 energy standards? Or I can't do that because I cannot 16 make it into ENERGY STAR. You will have to give up 17 that criteria if you wish to have this. So we have a 18 series of levels upward that we stop into and whenever 19 we have potential add-on features, we understand we 20 balance out our customers all the time with the lights 21 and the sign panels and the size of the sign panels 22 all the time. That's just a constant activity that we

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 129 1 always function under. But when we get to these newer 2 features, when somebody wants to put an LED display on 3 there with a commercial playing over and over and over 4 again, eventually when does that come away from the 5 value of the unit itself and go into a separate market 6 and category? 7 MR. EISNER: Other comments? Thoughts? Do 8 you guys need more? Do you know where you want to go 9 on this? 10 MR. CYMBALSKY: We don't know where -- 11 MS. BARHYDT: We don't know where we want to 12 go on it yet, but I don't think we need more 13 information right now. We just need to sit down and 14 hash through it some. 15 I think that wraps up everything that we had 16 wanted to accomplish during this 2-day session. 17 MR. EISNER: Okay. 18 MS. BARHYDT: So if people want to go catch 19 a plane. 20 I'm shocked there hasn't already been a 21 stampede out the door. 22 MR. KLEISS: Jeff Kleiss. There is one

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 130 1 thing I would like to ask. 2 MS. BARHYDT: Sure. 3 MR. KLEISS: We talked about the FOIA 4 information yesterday. And on the DOE website there's 5 a -- let me get to my file here, there's a test 6 report, a standard default test report. And in that 7 standard default test report it provides -- DOE's 8 asking for the third-party lab to provide information 9 that includes the specific components that are in it: 10 pictures of the unit, pictures of the setup, you know, 11 coil information, et cetera. And I feel confident 12 that you would understand that that's confidential 13 business information as far as the specific components 14 are installed. And I guess what I would like to ask 15 is that you allow either us or DOE perhaps would mark 16 up the standard test report to indicate which of those 17 data you would consider confidential and which are not 18 confidential. 19 MS. BARHYDT: How are the components 20 confidential business information? Anyone who 21 purchases one -- 22 MR. THARP: Well, if they want to go

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 131 1 purchase it -- 2 MS. BARHYDT: -- would see it. 3 MR. THARP: -- that's fine, but it 4 shouldn't be -- 5 MS. BARHYDT: But that doesn't make it 6 confidential business information. Confidential 7 business information is information that you as a 8 corporation hold close, do not share except under 9 contractual licensing agreements with other people who 10 are bound to keep that information confidential. 11 MR. WHITWELL: So confidential may be not 12 the right word for it, but there is a value to it; 13 right? 14 UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Right. 15 MR. WHITWELL: It's maybe proprietary or 16 something because someone would have to go out and 17 spend the money to buy that unit in order to get that 18 information that through FOIA they could get free. 19 MR. THARP: And part of the difference is 20 getting the information for free through FOIA versus 21 going out and doing, pretty much all competitors do 22 competitive analysis and we support Bob and Jill and

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 132 1 everybody by buying one of their units every few 2 years. 3 MR. WHITWELL: Our new models, our first 4 sales we generally know where they're going, right. 5 MR. THARP: So we do that, but that's part 6 of our business cost and we don't want somebody else 7 getting that information at no cost. 8 MR. EISNER: So maybe we make you guys pay 9 the money to the government instead. 10 MS. HOOTMAN: And you've paid a price for 11 it, so I don't think you should give that away free, 12 also. 13 MR. AMRANE: Next year's money, I guess, is 14 what it is. 15 MR. THARP: I'm sure we as an industry would 16 be happy to mark up these reports and tell you what we 17 believe is confidential information or proprietary 18 information that should not be openly shared. 19 MS. BARHYDT: So I will bring with me to the 20 next meeting the legal standard. 21 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay. 22 MR. EISNER: Do you want them mark it up so

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 133 1 we can discuss the issues? What Laura's saying is she 2 cautions whether she's got the legal authority to 3 protect it once she's got it. 4 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. 5 MR. EISNER: You're saying you think it's 6 proprietary and it should -- maybe you should be going 7 back and asking not only what information you think 8 should be protected, but come back with the arguments 9 your lawyers would make as to why they think it should 10 be protected. 11 MR. HON: Charlie Hon. As a manufacturer 12 I'm concerned because if we're starting to report 13 every supplier and every component into a system, then 14 we're bound where we can't substitute products. 15 MS. BARHYDT: No, this isn't a reporting 16 issue. This is an issue of if we purchase a product 17 and we test it, we have that information. It's not 18 something that you would be submitting in the 19 certification report. 20 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon again. But 21 even at that point I do not necessarily know which fan 22 you got if you buy a unit from me. We've chosen the -

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 134 1 - if we're doing a normal marketing process, we have 2 an option on several different component choices. 3 MS. BARHYDT: Right. 4 MR. HON: So we may not know which one you 5 actually have. And then if we have to submit all of 6 our possible alternatives, then we have a real mess. 7 MS. BARHYDT: No, no. So there's nothing 8 that you're submitting in this scenario. 9 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane. Changing the 10 subject before leaving. Can we review the timeline 11 and where we are and what's left and quickly? 12 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. Do you have the 13 MR. EISNER: Before we get into that, Wes, 14 you had a question or a comment? 15 MR. WOSTAL: Yes. Wes Wostal, 16 ClimateMaster. I just wanted to state that I had sent 17 -- I owed the definition of condenser water reheat for 18 water source heat pumps to you guys, and I sent that 19 to Karim yesterday morning, so we don't have to go 20 over it at this point. It's basically exactly the 21 same as the definition for hot gas reheat. I just -- 22 where the differences applied I changed the words in

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 135 1 that definition, so it follows exactly the way that 2 the hot gas reheat definition does. And I just wanted 3 to let you guys know that so can put it in. So that's 4 it. 5 MR. KLEISS: Also, Jeff Kleiss, we had 6 talked yesterday some about the volume measurements 7 for storage water heaters and unfired storage tanks. 8 I did go back and look at the Federal Register on 9 that. I would like to have a discussion on that. 10 MS. BARHYDT: Oh, okay. We can discuss 11 that. 12 MR. KLEISS: Okay. It's page 35 of the 13 slides if you still are -- in terms of the federal 14 regulations for the minimums, according to 10 CFR Part 15 431.110, for electric storage water heaters it is 16 based on the measured storage volume. So what we've 17 got listed there is appropriate. 18 For commercial gas-fired and oil-fired 19 storage water heaters, the required value should be 20 the rated storage vale, and that's what determines the 21 federal minimums that have to be met. The measured 22 storage volume is used to calculate the standby loss,

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 136 1 but there doesn't seem to be any reason why that would 2 need to be reported. 3 Same thing for, well, really for all the 4 gas- and oil-fired products. 5 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, AHRI. To be 6 clear on that last point, the measured volume is used 7 when you actually run the test, so you're actually 8 measuring the volume of the test unit. You're not 9 having a measured volume of a theoretical model. 10 MR. KLEISS: Right. 11 MS. BARHYDT: So I think we're okay with not 12 collecting the measured volume for the commercial gas13 fired and oil-fired, but I think we do want to add a 14 few pieces of information to collect for units that 15 are greater than 140 gallons to reflect the design 16 requirements. 17 MR. KLEISS: Right. The standing pile at R18 12.5. 19 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. 20 MR. KLEISS: With regard to the 21 instantaneous units that are less than 10 gallons, I 22 appreciate that in the slide that it shows the storage

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 137 1 volume and it doesn't specify whether it's rated or 2 measured. There is no, you know, measurement method 3 or a standard associated with it other than it being a 4 threshold to determine whether or not it's low to the 5 gallons. So I don't know if that is something that 6 does need to be reported or not. 7 MS. BARHYDT: That was for instantaneous? 8 MR. KLEISS: That's for commercial gas9 fired. It's on the next page. 10 MS. TUCKER: Instantaneous less than 10, 11 okay. 12 MR. KLEISS: Less than 10. 13 MS. BARHYDT: We'll take a look at it. 14 MR. KLEISS: Okay. And then, of course, we 15 did have a discussion about the unfired storage tanks, 16 but I don't think there's anything new that I have to 17 add to that that I haven't already said several times. 18 MR. EISNER: Anything else on this subject? 19 MS. BARHYDT: Nope. 20 MR. EISNER: You wanted to go over the 21 calendar? 22 MS. BARHYDT: So the schedule. We have down

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 138 1 - - so this still isn't the updated one. 2 MS. TUCKER: Oh, sorry. 3 MS. BARHYDT: So, at this point, on 7/17 4 we're finishing up basic model and certification. 5 Hopefully, we can actually vote on those on the 17th 6 and then we'll start the verification laboratory 7 accreditation process on the 18th. So everything is 8 just bumped down accordingly. 9 We will meet with SPVU and CRAC before the 10 17th so that we can have all of the basic model issues 11 resolved at the 17th meeting. 12 MR. AMRANE: Send me your -- 13 MS. BARHYDT: Definitely. And we will also 14 be sending out all of the information that I think 15 we've pretty much resolved. I know we haven't voted 16 on anything, so we'll put it all on paper so that 17 everybody can review it in preparation for the meeting 18 on the 17th. 19 If you have any issues, by all means go on 20 SharePoint, mark stuff up, e-mail so that, hopefully, 21 we can get issues resolved in advance so that we're 22 really ready to go in and vote on the 17th.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 139 1 MR. EISNER: Questions? 2 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey. Could you send 3 out that calendar when it's updated? I think you 4 heard you saying -- 5 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah, it's no SharePoint, but 6 we can e-mail it. 7 MS. HOOTMAN: The updated one's on 8 SharePoint? 9 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. Actually, I think the 10 way it shows it right now is verification starts on 11 the 17th because I was thinking we might wrap up basic 12 model and certification this trip. 13 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay. 14 MS. BARHYDT: But it doesn't sound like 15 we're ready to do that yet, so it'll bump down. 16 MS. HOOTMAN: And then are you -- this is 17 Jill at Trane. Are you going to send out slides about 18 verification, specifically the laboratory 19 accreditation process, what you're thinking there? Or 20 what -- do we have those slides already? Were those 21 out there? 22 MS. BARHYDT: Are they in that -- I think

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 140 1 they were in the last packet. 2 MS. HOOTMAN: They are, okay. All right. 3 MS. TUCKER: They're at the end of this 4 packet. 5 MS. HOOTMAN: Oh, we just never got there on 6 this? 7 MS. TUCKER: Yeah. 8 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay. 9 MR. SHEBIK: Laura, for CRE, in order to get 10 to the voting next week, what's the takeaway that you 11 need -- well, what do you need from us? Like what's 12 our action item? The heating condensate pan, 13 lighting? What kind of information do you need or do 14 you need anything from us? 15 MS. BARHYDT: If you all reach an agreement 16 with an industry as to what you think would work, that 17 would be ideal. 18 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think we can float at 19 least one idea for one of those. Not the lighting. 20 MR. SHEBIK: Okay. 21 MR. CYMBALSKY: The lighting one, yeah, I 22 don't know. I have to think about that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 141 1 MR. SHEBIK: Okay. 2 MS. BARHYDT: Anything else? Everybody have 3 a safe flight. 4 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yes. 5 (Whereupon, at 11:23 a.m., the 6 Appliance Standards and Rulemaking 7 Federal Advisory Committee Meeting was 8 adjourned.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22Capital Reporting Company Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013

1 CERTIFICATE OF COURT REPORTER 2 3 I, CHRISTINE ALLEN, the Court Reporter before whom 4 the foregoing proceeding was taken, do hereby certify 5 that the proceeding was recorded by me; that the 6 proceeding was thereafter reduced to typewriting under 7 my direction; that said transcript is a true and 8 accurate record of the proceeding; that I am neither 9 related to nor employed by any of the parties to this 10 proceeding; and, further, that I have no financial 11 interest in this proceeding. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

# sts~lJ14~

# L~~)~ CHRISTINE ALLEN Digital Court Reporter Date

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitaIReportingCompany.com © 2013 142Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 1

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 0 0.05 33:8 0.08 9:6,8,16,19 20:18 25:3 30:9 31:1,20,22 32:10,14 36:7 0.1 31:19 0.45 32:9,10 0.5 26:2 0.8 26:2 1 1 83:1 86:7,12 1,000-hour40:1 10 28:8 43:22 45:8 67:17 77:13,17 80:6 82:16 84:15 135:14 136:21 137:10,12 10.95 27:10 100 49:5 50:5 67:16 94:8 112:17 1000 1:9 11.0 27:10 11:23 141:5 12 14:5 56:11,13 64:20 12.5 136:18 1230 28:6 127 7:11,12 13 56:14 60:10,14 62:6 78:9 14 78:12 140 136:15 15 77:17 1654 69:6 17th 138:5,10,11,18,2 2 139:11 18th 138:7 192 98:2,14,16 192-hour41:8 2 2 1:12 14:9 103:17 104:19 20 105:5 108:5 2013 1:12 2037 19:3 210 12:1 14:18 20:3 210/240 9:19 12:7 15:18 27:9 28:6 33:2 34:7,8 250 42:18 2-day129:16 3 3 20:16 70:17 114:22 30 35:13 113:9,11 300 42:18 3359 69:6 340/360 9:21 14:13 19:1 24:16 27:4 28:6 83:16 35 135:12 37 10:3 4 4 11:10 14:9 20:16 57:18 400 127:9 410 85:22 42 17:20 57:17

420 85:21 430 33:4 431.110 135:15 5 5 23:14 108:4 500 38:1 40:8,19 90:17 98:3 99:5,22 100:3 102:1,2 500-hour39:22 41:5 42:16 99:11 510 14:16 109:22 52.2 35:9 6 6 8:19 10:20 11:10 23:14 62:5 62.2 11:18 6314 17:20 57:18 7 7 37:19 7/17 138:3 8 8 11:10 14:5,8 8:08 1:13 4:2 9 90 46:2 90.1 114:8 95 46:2 105:4,6 106:6,7 97 104:19 98 104:19 9-point45:8 A

a.m1:13 4:2 141:5 AAON 2:16 11:22 92:15 110:14 114:12 118:2 able 8:5 16:15 17:3 28:21 29:4 98:18 100:2 107:13 111:6 112:22 117:6 123:11 absolutely10:19 absorb 121:16 AC 53:20 54:1 accelerated 93:3 accept 70:10 acceptable91:15 102:3 accepted28:7 accessed124:7 accommodate 29:11 accomplish 49:22 129:16 accordance17:21 according28:5 135:14 accordingly79:2 138:8 account7:21 12:6 18:13,14,16 27:13 49:13 accounted 54:11,16,17 accounts 54:8 accreditation 138:7 139:19Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 2

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 accurate142:8 aces 89:9 achieve 115:20 ACHRI 2:9 3:13 acidic 92:16 acids 39:2 92:5 across 11:2 15:12 21:21 43:22 83:15 84:2 87:7 113:14 126:5 action 140:12 activities 41:21 activity 128:22 actual4:22 37:15 83:14 105:16 actually7:13 8:1,6 10:4 13:19 15:16 17:10,16,20 20:15 23:1 25:5 32:9,17 33:12 35:9 37:12 42:11 55:17 62:15 65:9 75:2,5 90:2 97:19 105:9 122:14 124:7 134:5 136:7 138:5 139:9 add 7:6 25:17 28:10 29:2 31:22 34:13 47:3 58:10,16 59:9,12 63:11 88:11 94:3,6 97:6 101:7 127:9 136:13 137:17 added 18:19 32:3 40:17 61:6,10 64:7 88:9 96:16 addendum 90:10 adders 57:2 adding 61:8 74:6,10 87:17 addition 49:14 118:17 additional 6:20 7:1 8:5 32:3 37:4 75:20 118:10,15 119:1,22 add-on 128:19 add-ons 60:20 address 23:1 25:14 36:10 88:5 118:18 120:8 addressed 10:14 118:22 120:9 addresses 77:8 addressing 91:1 adequate 83:19 adhere 87:19 adhesion 69:6 adjourned 141:8 adjusted 85:12 adjustment10:15 admit 91:18 adopt57:19 adopted 55:11 adopting 55:3 advance 138:21 advanced 116:21 117:2 advertisement 125:21 advertising 125:22 126:13 Advisory1:6 141:7 advocate125:9 AEDM77:7,8

affect25:22 66:21 88:1 123:8 affected 58:12,17 affecting 123:14 affects 26:5,6 27:9 against24:22 72:5 79:1 112:18 agency88:4 aggressive46:11 ago 112:13 agreed4:10 18:18 23:21 agreement16:15 17:3 18:21 87:19 113:8 120:13 140:15 agreements 131:9 ah 109:12 ahead 61:1 67:5 AHRI 6:14 7:4 12:5 18:8 22:5 24:4 28:22 30:15 54:5 71:1 78:14 80:11 85:4,21 101:5 102:16 136:5 air2:11,13 4:5,16 6:13,15,16,21 7:11 33:5,6,17,21 34:3,4,5 35:10,13 36:15 39:3 63:14 76:11 86:14 112:8,14 113:1 118:6 air-condition 112:20 airflow 15:3,11 32:5,6,7 44:20 63:1 alcohols 39:2 alkalis 39:2 92:5 Allen 1:16 142:3,17 Alliance 3:12 allow 45:7 130:15 allowance 13:7 125:5 allowed 87:7 allows 13:22 already14:15 28:22 33:10 118:19,22 129:20 137:17 139:20 alter57:3,10 alternate29:3 alternative27:15 49:12 alternatives 134:6 altogether

81:17 aluminum39:9 93:18 95:20,21 96:1 99:21 am91:20 142:8 amazing 59:4 ambiguity

23:6 amend 12:6 American 3:9 Among 100:17 amount 63:14 84:1 85:20 113:1 121:20 Amrane 2:9 7:4,9 12:4,5 18:8 22:8Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 3

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 24:4,15 30:15 54:5,10,13 72:10 78:14 79:10 80:11 81:2,5,8,20 85:6 102:16,21 103:6 116:7 117:18 132:13 134:9 138:12 analysis 46:22 54:7,9,15 55:19 78:16 131:22 Analyst2:5 annotated 28:8 answer 7:5 37:15,17 51:4 121:19,22 answered 53:18 anti-corrosion 83:18 anybody 26:20 52:6 74:5 96:7 anyhow 72:1 anyone 8:4 22:18 29:4 37:3 43:21 58:9 116:13 130:20 anything 9:8 14:10 30:12 56:15 64:7 77:13 85:15 88:18 137:16,18 138:16 140:14 141:2 anyway 109:14 anywhere 37:22 95:16 apparatus 31:9,20 apparently30:19 appears 95:7 96:17 Appliance 1:5 141:6 application 14:6 51:7 53:2 57:2 68:1 92:21 113:9 114:15 117:4 applications 46:9 49:1 52:5 59:5 61:20 82:2 94:14 applied 19:17,22 51:13 57:3,10 74:21 87:12 93:13 134:22 applies 94:8 apply 14:19 72:3 81:13 82:7 106:12 114:15,16 applying 74:21 102:6 appreciate59:20 136:22 approach 81:21 101:1 111:18 approaching 113:10 appropriate 15:5 93:2,5,8 135:17 approximate13:6 23:18 approximates 23:21 approximation 23:19 arbitrary 15:4 37:11 area32:15,18 46:17 121:8 areas 38:13 aren't110:6

arguing 24:22 arguments 133:8 ARI 54:22 55:1,3,6,7,20 58:5 59:7 Aris 3:18 Armstrong2:7 arrives 34:6,10 Ashley2:7 ASHRAE 7:11,12 10:3 11:18 33:10 35:9 aspect117:17 128:1 ASRAC 2:3,4 assembled 39:7,9 93:11,18 associated 7:1 21:12 61:7,17 137:3 assume107:16 assumed47:2 assuming75:12 assumption 77:22 ASTM 39:12 40:12 71:9,18 91:14,22 95:2 97:4 99:22 102:2 at-hand 84:16 attempting 115:11 attract 125:13 audience 58:17 audio 120:21 authority133:2 available 76:6 81:4 88:14 107:5,10,11 108:1,4,8,12 110:18 113:19 115:12,16,20 Avenue 1:9 average18:4 away12:14 21:6 47:21 48:4 61:9 92:9 99:18 117:19 128:8 129:4 132:11 B B117 39:12 68:15 73:13,17,19 92:16 94:8 95:2 96:20 97:4 99:1,22 102:2 backed 105:11 background 51:1 86:6 background's 58:22 backsliding 45:6 bad 42:13 84:20 100:2 112:6 114:4 bag 21:14 baked 39:4 95:15 101:11 balance 128:20 Ballo 2:10 67:5 68:5 90:10 91:6 101:17 102:14 127:19 band 104:5 106:8 109:8 bands 115:22 bar43:7 Barhydt2:6Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 4

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 4:9,13 5:2,9,18 6:10,13 7:7,15 8:1,9,12 9:2,4,11,20 10:8 12:18 14:18 16:7 19:5 20:1,7 21:7,18 22:1,17 23:22 24:7 25:4 27:15 29:10,15 34:1,15,20 35:1,6 36:9 37:3 38:8 40:12,16 63:16 74:14 76:16 77:3,8 80:21 81:4,7 88:16 89:1 90:1,21 92:10 94:20 98:3,8 99:2,7 109:8 115:21 116:10,19 117:11 118:14,16 120:3 129:11,18 130:2,19 131:2,5 132:19 133:4,15 134:3,7,12 135:10 136:11,19 137:7,13,19,22 138:3,13 139:5,9,14,22 140:15 141:2 base 47:7,8 49:6 50:3 56:21,22 57:14 59:22 61:5 63:20 64:5 70:6,16 75:11,20 103:19 107:7,13,15,18,1 9 115:15 121:10 based 16:22 18:12 23:22 25:1 26:14 28:14 55:6 59:10 135:16

baseline 24:19,22 38:15 47:2,3,12 basic 8:4 13:13 16:21 47:17 55:4 56:5,9,14,19,20, 22 57:15 58:1,2,6 62:10 64:8,10,14 66:3 74:7 75:3 87:5 104:12 138:4,10 139:11 basically40:13 57:18 68:20 122:4 134:20 basket71:15 Bauman 2:11 51:18 53:11 122:2 123:3 Bean 2:12 become 26:9 65:7 becomes 27:10 47:22 123:10 becoming 52:1 Beever2:13 begin 77:2 100:5 behalf 51:5 behind 42:8 believe 10:18 54:7 80:9 82:15 85:7 88:7 98:2,3 110:3 116:3 123:9 128:7 132:17 bells 57:1 59:11 64:5 belong 15:14 belt110:7,11 beneficial 80:1 benefit 62:22 72:14 73:5 besides 118:11 121:18 best21:4 67:22 90:1,8 112:21 113:5 better 17:17 19:2 22:8 47:9 60:18,21 65:10,15 73:1 89:8 99:9 106:5 111:3,4 119:8 beyond 12:15,16 38:14 48:14 bigger32:16,17 104:12 106:5 110:4 biggest74:18 bit26:13 32:20 83:6 94:6 103:12 114:13 115:11 black 66:7 98:13 blah 101:11 blower 55:9 58:10 105:19,20 106:2,14 112:3 113:17 115:18 blowing 114:15 blunt 44:21 BMG 58:1 board 11:2 87:7 113:14 Bob 6:1 75:9 108:21 131:22 boils 44:21 bolt126:17 bonded 39:6 boom79:8

bottom86:3 bound 131:10 133:14 boxes 6:4 brand-new 73:3 break 80:5 82:20 91:11 brief 80:7 bring 15:16,20 16:2 33:11 94:15 132:19 brought10:16 15:22 63:8 94:9 116:21 117:1 build 19:13 48:7 building 15:8 17:1 113:10 built 7:2 117:5 bulbs 127:2 bullhead 114:22 bump 139:15 bumped 138:8 bunch 23:7 36:19 burden 64:15 74:18 75:19 77:9 burdensome18:5 business 61:20 130:13,20 131:6,7 132:6 buy 31:4 36:19 58:7,16 131:17 133:22 buying 34:3 132:1 buy-off 89:11 CCapital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 5

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 cabinet41:8 123:22 124:17 128:6 cabinets 124:2 calculate 135:22 calculation 32:1 58:11 calculations 58:9 calendar137:21 139:3 candor59:20 capacity 4:15 7:18 19:2 58:11,13,17 Capital1:17 capture43:16 captures 113:5 capturing 106:1 car60:2 care65:14 cared65:5 careful115:7 Carrier 3:15 6:2 75:9 108:21 109:12 case 6:7 47:14 48:10 50:19 57:12 91:7 113:1 120:18,22 121:3,4,6,7 125:12,17 126:10,12,16,19, 20 cases 47:11 48:18 50:12,20,22 63:7 83:14 catch 96:13 129:18 catcher 21:5 categories 46:6 categorized 30:13 category 100:20 108:1,10 129:6 cathodic 39:5 cause 77:14 87:21 causes 115:2 caution 114:13 cautions 133:2 certain 18:21 28:12,20 45:7 47:6 75:4 91:4 certainly 38:1 83:11 107:6 113:12 114:11 CERTIFICATE 142:1 certification 4:4 5:11,14,15 8:3 75:19 133:19 138:4 139:12 certify142:4 cetera 67:20 76:11 85:19 92:6 104:2 130:11 CFM 112:4 113:19 CFR 28:8 55:17 135:14 challenge 123:20 chance 52:14 116:13 change 14:3 24:21 27:5,12 29:8,10 69:17 78:22 84:1 96:16 changed 28:9 63:19,22 85:16 134:22 changer5:8 changes 18:15 30:4 63:3 69:12,13 changing 28:15 31:20 55:5,14 78:15 79:1 82:7 134:9 channel5:8 characteristic 122:13 characterization 55:3 characterize 66:1 characterized 55:7 characterizing 55:12 charge85:13 Charles 2:19 Charlie 37:6 40:21 45:20,21 48:5 50:1 51:9 69:9 77:6 95:18 123:16,21 126:1 127:11 133:11,20 Charlie's 52:3 122:13 chart103:19,22 charts 106:3 chassis 44:18 cheapest 58:7 60:1 111:6 check 4:12 checkout124:5 chemicals 67:19 92:18 chemistry93:7 chlorine-based 92:17

choices 134:2 choose 70:12,18 75:5 Chorus 31:6 chosen 133:22 Christine 1:16 142:3,17 church 15:14 churches 16:12 circumstances 16:17 claiming64:7 clarification 30:2 clarify110:15 class 18:3 80:16 81:18 82:5 92:22 107:8,10,11 108:10 classes 47:5,6 81:14 84:15 cleaned 42:7 clear27:20 49:1 116:19 120:1 136:6 clearly48:21 Cleaver-Brooks 3:6 Climate3:16 ClimateMaster 94:5 134:16 close 68:21 131:8 closer17:15 Co 3:5 coast61:20 92:21 coastal38:13 coat56:6,11 63:5Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 6

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 65:11,14 98:13 coated37:4,11 39:10 42:11 46:5,8,10 49:2,5,10,14 50:21 51:6,10,15,21 52:2,4,7,12,19 53:4,21 54:3,11,16 56:6 61:22 62:4 66:16,20 67:11 69:1,11 70:10 72:11,15,17,22 75:12,13 76:4,6 78:1,21 79:4,13 80:14,17 81:1,11 85:5,12,19 86:2,11,13,17 88:18 90:11,16 93:12,20 96:20 97:12 100:17 101:8,9 103:1,13 coating 37:19,20 39:6 40:14 42:16,19 45:17 47:7,9,12 51:2 60:17 62:7 65:2,4,7 66:11,18 67:2,11 69:14 71:4,9,14,18,19 72:3,4,6 73:12 74:6,10,19,21 75:5,6 79:18 83:19 86:22 92:3 93:13 98:20 99:9 100:5 103:8 coatings 42:1,4 44:6 68:9 72:2 73:13,14,16 74:2,3 82:22 83:18,22 92:1 cobble 68:2 Code 17:20 57:17 coil21:6 37:11 38:22 39:7,17,19 42:11,13 46:8,10 47:15,17 48:1,2,22 49:6,10,14 50:18 53:4 62:1,4 63:2,5,7,18 65:4 66:16,20 69:1,11,16 70:10 72:1,11,15,18,22 74:8 77:15 78:1,9 79:4,13,19 80:14,17 81:1,11 85:11,18 86:11,12 88:18 90:15 92:14 93:11,12 97:12 99:19,21 103:14 108:20 118:11,12,18,21 119:7,20 130:11 coil-only85:22 coils 37:4 38:22 39:9 41:15,16,17 42:14 43:19 44:1 46:6 47:19 50:21 51:2,6,10,16,21 52:2,4,7,12,19 53:21 54:3,11,16 56:6,11 60:12 61:21 62:1,17 65:8,11,14 71:14 73:14 75:12,13 76:4 78:17,21 85:21 86:16 90:11 93:17 95:1 96:11 103:1 104:14 114:21 118:18 119:1 collect 7:17,18 136:14 collected6:19

collecting7:21 136:12 Collin 3:20 color44:18 column 9:9 30:10,11 31:1 combination 4:14 6:7 68:7,11 combinations 113:18 combined 86:16 comes 22:11 34:21 67:17 comfortable 15:12 120:19 comment 11:17 32:16 52:13 64:3 68:6 73:8 85:10 125:11 134:14 commented 86:20 89:4 comments 52:15 69:10,22 114:3,5 127:14 129:7 commerce 110:18 commercial16:3,7 19:14 35:12 52:11 53:22 54:15 56:3 57:13 61:12 70:1,3,7,12 76:15 82:2 83:1 91:22 94:13 99:12,13 102:5,7 127:21 129:3 135:18 136:12 137:8 commit 90:1 committee 1:6 25:13 33:10 141:7 common 78:18 101:2 111:5 companies 4:22 51:17 64:12 92:12 94:12 123:17 company 1:17 2:21 26:20 50:20 51:5 61:16,17 70:2 93:12 company's 51:15 comparable 59:8 compare 111:10 comparison 86:2 compatible 114:21,22 compensate 44:19 46:13 competitive 131:22 competitors 23:5 38:5 51:1 131:21 complain 66:7 complete 76:7 completely15:12 93:11 121:12 compliance 25:13 57:1,16 98:14 105:14 compliant 26:9 74:22 comply 96:20 98:15 component117:20 118:11,15 119:2 133:13 134:2 components 6:20Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 7

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 41:7 106:13 115:8 116:12 117:13 130:9,13,19 compromise17:12 74:20 75:7 111:13 113:6 computer 6:13,15,16,21 7:11 concept 107:1 conceptually 105:13 126:9 concern 15:6 65:17 74:9,11,15,17,18 75:17 77:16 90:21 101:6,17 112:1 113:8,10 115:6 117:7 118:16 119:10 126:7 concerned49:16 65:6,11,13 133:12 concerns 77:5 86:19 111:17 condensate 120:6,14 140:12 condensed 94:22 condenser38:22 44:1 94:22 134:17 condition 16:22 42:5 conditioners 4:5 6:14,15,17,21 7:11 conditioning 2:11 112:15 conditions 13:3,8 17:10 48:1 68:16 conduct18:6 97:21 conducting 97:19 confident 122:6 130:11 confidential 130:12,17,18,20 131:6,10,11 132:17 configuration 17:1 107:5 confirmed39:11 95:1 101:19 102:1 conflicted 125:9 confuse 126:3 confused 55:14 conjunction 68:19 consensus 89:16 consider13:2 42:7 64:10 70:22 82:12 107:9 125:1 130:17 consideration 28:16 30:3 considered 41:9 90:16 consistency23:13 49:18 consistent11:2 23:5,20 25:16 constant128:22 constraining 115:8 constraints 44:10 84:19 constructionist 15:1

Consultants 2:17 consumer

79:22 consumption 57:11,12 contained 45:22 48:15 50:2 112:19 Cont'd 3:2 context 114:1,6 continue 29:19 65:10 continued 3:1 105:22 contracted 119:10 contractor119:10 contractors 12:11 21:4 contractor's 21:3 contractual

131:9 control88:11 controlled 60:22 controller4:19 5:3,20 controlling 6:22 conversation 29:14 cool2:13 118:20 cooled 33:3 cooling 4:15 117:10 cools 33:7 COP 4:16,17 copper69:17 99:21 core35:13 50:3 Corey 3:22 38:17 corporation 3:10 131:8 correct11:12 28:2 81:2 103:17 111:12 122:17 correctly74:9 corrode92:9 corrosion 38:21 39:11 65:21 66:5 69:18 72:18 87:1 88:8,11 91:1,2 95:1 97:12 98:17 101:19corrosionprotected 92:13 94:22corrosionresistant 43:3 corrosive39:2,3,8 41:21 43:1,6 44:17 86:14 92:4 93:17 100:16 101:4corrosiveresistant 43:2,12 cost21:3 47:1,4 59:13 61:7 67:14,17 75:13 79:22 132:6,7 costly49:3 costs 18:2 35:15 Council3:9 counted 78:17 counter46:12 124:6,8 counterintuitive 32:20Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 8

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 counters 53:1 counting 122:21 couple 31:4 42:14 67:7 69:10 course 76:8 81:5 109:22 137:14 Court142:1,3,17 cover73:15 75:7 96:19 98:5,18 119:3 covered48:22 covering39:7 CRAC 138:9 CRE 15:21 44:1 45:14 51:20,22 68:10,11 120:4 140:9 create47:4 63:11 111:1 credit62:19 creeping69:6 criteria16:16 59:13 97:5,7,16 128:17 Cromer117:3 cross 19:15 96:22 curious 54:20 current 18:12 22:22 24:16 27:4 28:14,15 79:3 84:9 108:19 currently 80:15 82:18 curve 111:11 curves 47:1 customer46:7 121:7 122:18,19 125:13,20 customers 11:6 21:15 67:22 70:16 71:16 87:3 121:19 122:1 126:14 128:14,20 cut121:15 124:8 cycle 15:2,10 18:4 117:4 124:19 Cymbalsky 2:4 11:3,14 13:17 14:14,20 23:3 25:19 26:10 28:2 36:14 45:4 53:6,13,19 55:21 56:2,4 59:20 60:3,5,7 62:8,15 64:16 77:10 78:3,5,8 79:7,11 81:12 84:8 85:4 89:7,19 90:7 91:16 95:5,15 96:4,21 100:10 102:6,12,15,19 103:1,4,9 104:9 107:14 108:16 109:3,6 111:14,19 120:11 122:10,19,21 123:2 125:7 126:15 127:1,6 128:9 129:10 140:18,21 141:4 D D.C 1:10 Daikin 3:3 Dane 2:14 52:20 data 11:19,20 54:22 55:4,7,10,20 85:20 86:4,10,17 88:21 130:17

database 48:19 55:1 date 18:21 day41:6,19,22 42:5,6 days 109:2 de 83:22 84:3,5 deal12:20 24:11 63:9 67:20 88:19 dealing 10:10 84:9 110:2 120:6 deals 120:4,5 dealt9:13 debate 111:21 decide 27:7 37:10 decided 88:4,5 decision 15:4 108:18 decrease44:6 63:13 87:21 dedicated 8:6 118:6 default 9:6 12:6 14:16 15:20 18:10,19 19:16 24:18 25:2,9 27:8 130:6,7 defeat49:21 112:6 define 39:17,18 47:8 67:12 123:16,20 defining 123:5 definitely 19:20 46:4 121:1 138:13 definition 39:13 43:10 49:6 56:19 58:1 67:9 68:21

69:4 90:15 91:17 93:10 95:13 102:18 127:20 134:17,21 135:1,2 definitions 55:3,5,15 definitive 37:8 Degitsz3:21 degradation 99:6 dehumidification 116:4,11,12,16 117:12,17 118:20 119:1 dehumidifier 118:12 dehumidifies 119:8 dehumidify 118:13 delay29:8 delta-P25:17 denominator 111:5 Denver11:18 Department1:3,8 2:5,6,7 36:9 44:15 57:8 124:22 Department's 43:5 depends 69:18 125:1 derive 47:1 described 71:18 describing 99:17 description 92:13 97:11 108:13Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 9

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 desiccant117:4 118:10 design 20:22 46:8 48:22 63:22 78:8,12 105:20 136:15 designate 119:13 Designated 2:4 designed 17:22 43:6,19 106:19 113:12 designer114:10 designing 49:13 60:10 77:12,17 designs 106:15,17 124:1 desire 13:14 destruction 43:19 details 33:12 determination 11:21 determine 40:6 71:3,8 73:11 123:11 137:4 determined 18:4 71:17 determines 135:20 detrimental73:2 Development3:6 Diane 2:22 8:13 10:16 12:8 21:16 30:6,16 42:20 54:19 58:4 66:15 diatribe 95:12 dicey124:15 difference 11:1 45:15 56:19 70:2 85:15 86:5,7 87:11 131:19

differences 57:9 87:15 134:22 different 7:13,14,16,19 10:22 13:15 15:14 17:15 37:7,10,19,20,21 41:2,11 44:17,18 45:5 46:19 49:2 53:3 58:19,20 62:10,14 63:20 64:10 68:10 69:12,16 81:17 87:5,10 89:6 91:1 92:18 99:13 106:14,15 124:1,12 134:2 differentiate 30:7 differentiated 97:20 116:12 differently 60:16 62:21 119:14 difficult47:8 digit 66:22 119:19 Digital142:17 digits 44:3 92:21 diligence 36:4 dipped 63:7 direct108:9 110:7,9,12 direct/indirect 117:10 directed 122:11,15,18 direction 33:14 88:15 142:7 directly41:3 directory 29:1 55:20 58:5 59:3

78:19,21 dirt13:5 dirty15:7 29:2 disagree 62:8 77:19 83:4 96:7 112:21 127:20 discharge 114:20 115:1 discouraging 117:8 discovered 29:16 discriminator 126:9 discuss 133:1 135:10 discussed 94:6,17 103:13 123:4 discusses 93:10 discussing 81:15 89:13 discussion 7:6 36:12 39:20 55:18 62:12 73:10 96:5 97:15 104:8 108:15 135:9 137:15 discussion's 45:2 dishwashers 41:4 display 120:5 123:22 124:1 128:1 129:2 displays 121:2 123:18 127:22 distinguished 117:21 distinguishing 122:13 docked 112:15

documentation 75:19 DOE 2:3 6:15 11:3 17:9 18:10 27:22 28:10,19 31:1 33:19 54:6,8 55:18 66:13 74:16 78:16,18 80:13 91:15 113:2 120:6 127:15 130:4,15 DOE's 57:19 74:9 80:15 130:7 dog 75:17 100:21 done 17:12 21:19 22:3 27:1 35:16 40:11 46:14 60:19,22 61:6,12 78:16 79:2 80:18 85:1 98:21 104:9 113:2 121:10 door129:21 doors 124:3,18 Doppel2:15 4:21 5:6,12,15,21 6:5,9,12 13:10 16:11 28:3 29:13,21 39:21 41:14,19 42:1,9,15 44:8 49:8 57:4 61:15 63:6,10 79:16 110:10 116:21 Doppel's 44:10 dot90:9 double 66:17 124:10,11,13 doubt 113:11 downstream112:7Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 10

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 draft90:5 109:3 drafted 108:22 drafting 35:7 draw 123:19 128:2,5 drawing 126:13 draws 125:20 drive 110:7,8,9,11,12 driven 45:12 121:6 driving 112:18 drop 8:20,21,22 9:9 10:15 11:20 12:7 13:7 15:5,11 20:8 21:11 23:9,19,21 24:2,3 25:18 26:3 30:12,13,18 31:8 32:17,21 83:21 drops 10:22 33:12 Dry121:1 ducted 4:15 ductwork

112:7 115:1 due 36:4 duke 53:12 durability 39:1,11 40:7,11 95:1 101:19 duration 97:5 during 18:3 82:20 91:10 124:19 129:16 duty65:21 E earlier53:8 65:19 69:22 94:7 97:3 106:14 Earth 2:10 EarthJustice 68:5 easier84:4 easy123:15 125:7 126:9 ECM105:17,22 110:20,22 111:3 E-coating94:7 economizer80:4 economizers 33:18 76:5,10 economy3:9 60:2 EER 4:16 26:6,14 27:10 effect36:2 71:22 88:12 effects 39:2 114:19 115:2 efficiencies 114:8 efficiency 3:11 13:14 18:1 20:2 24:6 28:13,16 29:5,9 30:9,18 33:17,21 44:7,16 47:1 54:7 56:7 57:3,7,10 58:6,14 59:14 61:9,13 63:12 66:10,21 67:1 69:14 71:15 72:12,13,16,19 73:4,5 74:4,7,12 75:4,11 78:10 79:19 80:14 87:20,21 103:20 104:4 105:7 106:4,11 107:7,8,15,18,19 111:9,10 112:8 114:14

115:15,16,19 125:9 efficient 3:9 60:3 105:4,20 106:18 107:12 108:4 110:4,17,19 effort98:12 eight87:8 Eisner 2:2 4:3,10 29:18 35:3 36:12 73:7 76:1,14,21 80:5,8 84:22 87:16 88:20 89:2,20 91:9,14 94:3 96:7 101:15 102:3,10 111:17 129:7,17 132:8,22 133:5 134:13 137:18,20 139:1 either17:4 25:5 54:8 75:3 108:1 120:1 124:8 130:15 electric2:12,15,21 135:15 electrodeposition 39:5 element95:11 113:5 else 22:18 26:20 52:13 56:7 58:9 61:2 75:5 96:17 104:1 106:6 132:6 137:18 141:2 else's 119:8 e-mail 120:11 123:5 138:20 139:6 e-mails 122:4,7

employed 142:9 encase 103:10 encased 103:10 endure 99:22 energy 1:3,8 2:5,6,7 3:9,11 18:1 57:11,12 65:9 69:14 72:16 79:21 83:21 84:1 124:22 125:10 127:13,16 128:7,15,16 enforcement 45:4,13 Enforcement-wise 45:11 engineer58:19 engineering 25:13 46:22 86:6 103:17 engineers 9:17 58:18 entered9:5 entering86:14 entire 46:11 75:15 95:12 envelope 128:13 environment41:1 43:6,20 71:13 72:8,17 93:1 environments 39:4,9 72:5 92:17 93:17 100:16,21 101:4 envision 126:15 epoxy-type39:5 equal56:7 115:15Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 11

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 equipment

5:7,10 6:19 12:16 13:6,9 14:12 15:3,10 16:8 17:17 18:3 19:1,16,17 20:2 35:18 43:5 46:1 50:2 52:12 55:12 65:13 70:5,7,12 72:22 91:19 114:14 115:9 119:12 127:21 equipment's 17:11 equivalent81:3 100:21 106:10 ERVs 76:5,10 especially97:15 essential123:12 establish 72:4 80:16 established 18:12 28:13 79:5 establishing 106:6 estimated 18:2 estimating 20:16 et67:20 76:11 85:19 92:5 104:1,2 130:11 evaporate69:13 evaporative 117:10 evaporator

21:6 65:4 86:15 118:11,12,17,21 119:7 evaporator/ condenser96:10 evaporators 52:5 eventually102:21 121:14 129:4 everybody

23:15 29:22 65:7 73:19 74:1 82:21 84:5 87:18 89:3 94:17 101:15 102:4,10 119:8 132:1 138:17 141:2 everybody's 46:14 91:19 111:18 everyone28:4 60:21 79:18 90:4 119:3 everyone's 27:9 everything16:18 30:20 40:9 44:15 46:3 51:6,9 55:16 64:11 73:20 80:10 96:17,19 98:6 104:1 106:6 129:15 138:7 evolved 60:15 61:1 exact 67:8,9,10 exactly 5:4 40:10 48:6 69:17 78:6 102:21 134:20 135:1 example 13:19 38:15 56:12 60:9 112:12 exceed40:20 excellent 39:1 except 27:22 131:8 exception 64:4 127:18 exceptionally75:6 excess 74:18 excessive64:14 excited100:16

exclude 69:2 exclusive 119:21 exemption 26:11 48:9 53:22 62:17 80:19,21 exercise111:8 exist47:19 50:3 existing 51:16 exists 17:17 expensive 48:2 106:17 expert 107:3 explain 88:13 extends 79:19 extensive11:19 exterior 125:5 external 32:2,3 41:1 112:4 113:13 121:3,10 122:14,18 123:5,9 126:19 externally

127:7 extra21:3 124:19 F facilitator2:2 85:3 facility 63:5 facing 41:2 fact9:14 18:11 51:5 52:2 64:11 71:16 78:18 127:12 factor127:12 factories 60:19 factors 85:13 97:9 factory60:22 factory-installed 49:19 70:19 fail 77:14,20 78:13 failure 77:16 fair 16:4 29:20 82:11 83:22 89:19 fairly 11:19 37:22 fairness 126:7 fall 77:21 104:13 falling 104:16 familiar56:13 family21:21 fan 26:5 33:3,7 83:21 84:1 112:6 113:13 114:13,15,17,18 133:21 fans 114:19 fare 73:17 feasible 108:3 feature 103:13 118:3,4 119:2,3 121:17 features 47:4 128:19 129:2 federal1:6 2:4 18:11 27:4 79:3 135:8,13,21 141:7 feedback 38:5 feel29:20 56:21 87:8 130:11 feet114:22 FEG 114:15,18,19 felt20:19 122:3 field 11:15,16 12:10 19:18,22Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 12

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 36:17 37:15 49:15 50:11 57:11 60:20 68:2,4 107:21 126:19 field-installed 49:17,20 50:2,19 70:14 fight 100:22 figured 59:7 62:2 120:9 figures 118:6 figuring 84:6 file 130:5 filter 9:6,10,16,22 11:6,8,19 13:21 14:1,8 15:5,12,19 16:4,9 18:13 19:8,9,11,15 20:5,6,8,14,15,1 7 21:9,10,11,12 22:2,3,11,16 23:6,8 24:6,17,18 25:5,6,7,10,17 29:2,12 34:3,4,5,10,13,1 4 62:21 filters 8:11 9:14 10:3,6,15,16 11:13 12:9,13 13:4 16:10 19:7,17 21:8 26:12 28:11 30:8 31:5 33:2,13 35:13 36:1,2,5,15 114:21 filtration 15:21 16:1 19:22 24:5,9 33:17,21 62:14 76:11

filtrations 16:4 fin 39:8,9,10 63:11,15 67:10 69:11 73:15 92:3,9 93:13,18,21 95:20,22 96:1 99:10,21 100:17 101:7,9 final 90:5 116:9 finally 19:3 financial 142:10 fine 11:6 24:21 60:11 78:22 81:9 105:21 111:12 131:3 finish 4:6 finishing 138:4 fins 87:2 93:14 99:4,8 100:7 fired 136:13 137:9 firm 51:4 first4:8 10:9 39:22 79:5 97:14 132:3 fit 100:20 115:5 fits 70:21 five 12:2 40:17,22 41:11 46:4,5 77:21 84:14 87:7 103:21 104:1 110:6 111:8 128:8 five-year29:7 38:13 fix 36:21 80:10 flavor 108:17 flight 141:3

float 140:18 flour 16:9 flow 4:4 63:14 Fly 2:16 11:22 92:15 100:6,9 110:14 114:12 118:2,15,17 119:6 focus 89:12 focusing 122:10 FOIA 130:3 131:18,20 food 126:18 footnote 88:10 forced 68:1 foregoing 142:4 forget71:10 112:17 forgetting102:17 forward 79:12 80:12 116:1 fraction 43:17,18 83:17 fractional109:21 110:1 framework

88:17 Frank 3:7,13 65:18 71:1 82:19 83:15 94:21 96:21 97:17 101:5 107:2 112:11 113:7 115:10 136:5 Frankly53:22 free 131:18,20 132:11 full 8:2 function 123:14 129:1 functionalities 6:22 furnaces 58:22 Furr 33:8 future 17:15 18:15 25:14 82:12 88:6,8 94:16 G gallons 136:15,21 137:5 galvanic 100:19 game78:22 79:1 games 78:15 82:8 gas 2:21 114:16 134:21 135:2 136:4,12 137:8 gas-fired 135:18 gee 18:22 general82:22 89:15 115:17 120:13 generally116:1 132:4 generated114:9 generic74:20 98:9 gentleman 90:22 112:13 Geoffrey 2:17 gets 62:19 67:11 72:8 106:4 122:14 124:14 getting11:4 23:9 31:16 61:19 62:6 90:14 93:8 100:13 104:20 105:1 109:18Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 13

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 119:21 121:12 122:4 131:20 132:7 given 28:16 30:3 44:9 77:3 112:13 gives 68:15 73:12 giving 26:14 115:9 glass-doored 127:13 gone 62:2 90:2 Goodman 3:14 9:19 10:12 17:20 25:12 26:16 44:2 56:17 85:9 93:9 goods 121:1 gosh 59:17 government132:9 grab 26:21 grade 105:15 grades 105:9 114:14 grant80:19 grasp 122:5 gray121:8 great 36:16 37:2 greater 74:17 136:15 grocery 46:18 50:19 120:18 124:4 group 27:7 36:22 111:1 groups 48:13 guarantee62:5 104:3 guess 13:18 20:18 22:5 23:3,10 24:19 26:10 53:6,19 56:4,18 62:9 64:2,17 82:9 85:10 89:14 99:4 122:10 130:14 132:13 guessing 11:7 guidance 12:20 25:20 27:6 35:4 45:13 80:22 87:17 128:11 guide 84:6 95:9 guys 20:13 45:15 52:14 58:19 79:18 120:13 129:8 132:8 134:18 135:3 H hall 126:5 Halley2:17 hand 71:15 97:15 handlers 33:5,6 35:11 hanging 121:20 126:18 happen 17:2 118:5 happens 48:17 56:6 happy 14:4 23:12 132:16 hard 76:22 harsh 72:5 Harvey 3:9 14:21 18:7,17 21:1 27:19 32:16 43:15 53:15 83:10 84:13 100:15 112:11,12 113:7 117:1 125:8 127:20 139:2

Harvey's 127:19 hash 129:14 haul 66:11 haven't63:22 101:18 120:9 137:17 138:15 having 4:14 47:6 62:11 63:7 92:8 95:13 106:14 107:12 136:9 headers 39:8 67:10 hear45:19 87:19 heard 21:2 38:6 43:16 45:17,19 53:8 98:1,4 102:11 127:15 139:4 hearing 23:18 25:8 27:20 122:16 heart63:17 heat4:5 6:3,7 44:19 71:22 84:1 91:20,21 100:4 118:9 134:18 heater114:16 heaters 135:7,15,19 heating 4:16,17 140:12 hell 71:15 help 72:16 92:7 104:11 105:20 helpful 43:17 44:4 90:18 hereby142:4 here's 77:10 86:5 113:3

hey62:17 66:4 high 4:16 20:1 24:5,6 32:18 33:16,20 43:7 58:10 114:19,20 127:2 high-efficiency 19:6,10,17,19,21 20:5 21:8 24:10,11 25:6 27:17,18,21 29:2,12 30:8,13 36:15 62:14 76:11 high-end 118:5 higher 30:12,22 53:4 63:11 70:9 83:6 86:15 104:5 105:12,15 107:8,18 109:19 110:22 114:17 highest107:10,11 108:1,10 115:12,15,19 high-risk 101:6 hit75:4 125:11 hold 6:10 38:4 131:8 home9:17 109:1 Hon 2:19 37:6 40:21 41:1,17,20 42:3,11,17 45:21 48:5,11,13,17 50:1,7,10,14 51:9 69:9 77:6 95:18 121:9 122:17,20 123:1,21 126:1,5 127:11 128:5,11 133:11,20 134:4Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 14

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 honest78:4 honestly36:16 71:20 hooked 112:3 Hootman 2:20 21:13,19 22:3 25:22 26:22 33:5 38:17,20,21 39:17,19 40:2,15,19,22 67:4,6 75:22 91:13,18 93:16,20 94:2 95:9 99:10 101:22 104:15,22 109:11,16 110:9,11 113:20 114:3 116:18 119:5,18 132:10,21 139:7,13,16 140:2,5,8 hope 102:16 hopefully 14:4 23:11 52:15 123:10 138:5,20 hopes 43:17 horse 54:2 104:1 horsepower 103:18,21 105:3,5 108:5 111:9 112:16,18 114:17 horsepowers 109:22 horses 110:1 hot134:21 135:2 hour 40:4 hours 38:1 40:17,22 42:18 90:17 98:2,7 99:3,5,22 100:3 102:1,2 humble 15:8,9 humidity6:22 hump 98:6 hundred 40:22 41:11 hundreds 64:13 Hunt 2:21 Hurst2:18 23:16 49:4,10 50:5,8,13,15 69:21 75:15 hurting 57:12 Hussmann 3:10 38:3 50:17 120:17 HVAC 6:19 16:5 53:12,16 68:10 70:3 76:15 91:22 98:4 99:12,13 102:5,7 119:4 I I'd 44:2 79:17 95:18 114:13 idea 24:7,11 29:18 36:16 43:8,21 47:6 66:7 68:6 140:19 ideal17:16 115:4 140:17 ideas 36:22 I'll 36:14 57:17 89:17 illuminate 120:21 illuminating 125:14 illumination

126:20 I'm 8:16 11:7 12:19 14:2,4 15:12 16:18 23:10,17 24:21 25:14 26:9 27:20 29:21 31:11,16 44:5,12 49:16 50:5,8 53:11 54:13,18 56:11,13 58:21 60:8,9 62:19,20 76:2,3 77:19 79:1,9 81:13 83:5 89:9 95:16 98:15 99:15,18 100:6,10,15,22 101:3 103:15,18 104:7 105:1 107:2 108:17 109:20,21 110:14 111:3,12,16 112:3 116:8 117:6 122:8,16 125:8,11,16 126:16 128:2 129:20 132:15 133:12 imagination 37:9 impact 72:21 75:12,13 80:13 82:4 83:20 implement27:3,11 31:7,19 implications 70:20 important

44:14 61:4 impression 9:12 improve14:3 87:20 107:19 improving57:11

inadvertently91:4 117:8 inaudible 82:13 116:18 Inc 2:15,17,18 inch 8:19 9:9 10:20,21 30:10,11,22 31:1,8,10,11 35:14,15 113:9 inches 25:3 113:13 include 39:4 87:5 97:22 124:2 127:7 included 4:20 121:1,11 125:13 128:4 includes 15:3 101:11 130:9 incorporated 106:21 increase75:13 Independence 1:9 indicate 42:17 127:21 130:16 indoor 4:14 43:22 86:12,15 indoor/outdoor 7:3 industrial 18:3 65:3 Industries 3:7 industry25:15 46:14 51:12 52:10,18 56:20 57:14,19,21 66:13 69:11,19,20Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 15

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 78:20 83:1,8 92:12 132:15 140:16 inexpensive 20:15 information 4:18 5:4,13,19 6:11,18 7:16 8:5 22:20 24:1 37:4,8 48:19 83:13 84:10,13,16 88:3 97:10,14,22 114:9 115:21 121:10 129:13 130:4,8,11,13,20 131:6,7,10,18,20 132:7,17,18 133:7,17 136:14 138:14 140:13 inherent121:5 inherently 69:12,13 106:17 inhibit 43:19 inhibitor 87:2 Initially 44:8,9 innovation 117:9 insert46:9 inside 41:4,7,17 114:14 120:22 124:11 127:18 128:6 install 34:12 36:1 85:10 installation 20:22 22:12,15 34:11 35:20 58:8,20 61:12 installed 13:11,14 17:1,2 33:2 49:16 50:16 72:8 79:20 130:14 instance 27:8

instances 61:8 instantaneous 136:21 137:7,10 instead 45:8 49:12 56:14 132:9 instructions 35:20 58:8 insulation 69:15 integral123:11 127:4 intended 48:1 118:8 119:4 intention 36:20 interest 142:11 interim90:19 interior125:5 internal123:7 International2:18 interpreting82:9 Intertek 22:10 68:13 intervening 97:22 invent47:18 IOUs 4:7,8 I's 90:9 isn't 23:19 24:1 25:9 36:3 43:7 62:3 73:20 77:6 133:15 138:1 issue 10:9,16 12:19 16:7 26:11 36:13 45:9 51:22 52:1,6,11,19 53:9 63:4 72:2 75:10 80:12 81:17 103:11 111:20 116:2,14 117:2,6

120:12,14 133:16 issues 8:4 51:20 52:16 120:3,4 133:1 138:10,19,21 issue's 45:5 it'd 42:13 60:18 item46:7 119:4 140:12 items 120:22 124:9 it'll 34:6 49:15,20 70:14 139:15 it's 4:15,21,22 5:6,7 7:19 11:1 12:2,15 13:11,12 15:1,2,4,8,9,10 17:1,4 19:14,15,20 20:1,2,4,5,6,10,1 4,16,18 21:3,8,14 22:4,5,13 23:14 24:12 25:7 26:8 27:16,17 29:6,7,22 30:22 31:14 32:1,15,19 33:7 34:4 35:22 37:10 39:13 40:2 41:6,8 43:3,6,12,13,17 44:3,12 47:15 48:2 49:1,2,15 51:7,11 52:6 56:18 58:18,19,20 59:4 60:5,21 61:4,10,12 63:4,6,17 66:2,5 67:7 68:9,18 70:4,5,8,15 71:4,10,17,19 72:1,4,6,17

73:2,5,11 75:16 76:19,22 77:13,15 78:18 79:20 81:5,7,10 82:11 83:2,7 84:4,5,6 85:21 86:11,12 93:2 95:9 96:5 98:16 100:4 101:1 104:5 105:11 106:5,7 108:3 110:3,4 113:6 114:11 117:9 118:4 119:19,21,22 120:19 121:3,5,6,15 123:7,8,9,11 125:14,21,22 126:9,11,12,13 131:15 133:5,17 134:20 135:12 137:1,4,9 139:3,5 I've 8:9 16:18 43:16 54:15 55:13 59:1 78:10 98:1 111:3 126:17 J Jakobs 2:22 8:11,13 9:3,5,15 10:1,5,18 12:8 20:12 30:6,20 31:10,12,16,22 32:2,11 42:20 54:19 56:1,3 58:4 60:2,4,6,15 66:15 Jane 111:5 Jeff 2:11 3:8 51:18 73:22 122:2Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 16

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 129:22 135:5 Jill 2:20 21:13 38:21 67:4,6 91:16 93:14 99:15 101:22 104:15 109:11,16 119:18 131:22 139:17 Jill's 70:14 job 52:9 John 2:4,12,18 11:3 14:11,21 23:16 26:1 43:15 49:4 62:13 69:21 77:19 89:4 122:3 John's 64:3 68:22 Johnson 3:3 July1:12 jumping31:17 Justice 2:10 K Karen 3:5 14:11 19:12 33:15 61:3 80:3 Karim2:9 7:4 12:4 18:8,18 24:4 30:15 54:5 72:10 78:14 80:9,11 84:9 85:6 102:16 103:5 117:18 134:9,19 key106:13 kinds 41:5 92:1 Kleiss 3:8 73:22 74:15 129:22 130:3 135:5,12 136:10,17,20 137:8,12,14

knowledge 28:22 Kojak 3:4 15:15 34:9,17,21 35:2 119:9 L lab 34:12 44:12 130:8 Laboratories 3:4 laboratory

138:6 139:18 language 89:21 100:17 116:9 large 25:3 70:15 larger32:15,19,21 34:7 largest 21:5 last54:21 79:17 95:12,14,19,22 96:15,18 97:13 99:4,9 120:12 122:7 136:6 140:1 lasts 40:14 later52:14 latter74:14 Laughter44:11 103:7 Laura 2:6 3:21 21:1 27:19 67:7 140:9 Laura's 133:1 law 27:4 lawyers 133:9 layer69:15 leads 112:1 leak 72:18,19 leaking 100:1

leaks 92:8 least18:14 33:7 40:5 45:16 60:3 79:9 84:20 89:22 110:17,19 113:5 120:14 140:19 leave 95:3 100:11 leaving 15:13 96:16 134:10 LED 129:2 legal132:20 133:2 lenient46:13 Lennox 2:18 23:16 49:4 69:21 less 14:16 46:3,4,16 75:2 83:1,9 86:7 92:20 94:10,12 110:6 122:5 136:21 137:10,12 less-efficient 107:16 let's 8:5 27:8 62:18 77:13 103:18 112:17 116:3 level30:16,17 36:17 68:18 69:3,5,7 70:9 75:11 98:16 101:18 105:7 106:10 128:3 levels 29:9 37:19,20,21 128:18 liability 35:21 48:3 liable 47:16 licensing 131:9 life 72:22 79:19 87:20 93:3 lifetime73:4 74:4 light 19:14 lighting 120:5 121:11,16,18 122:5,11,14 124:10,11,13 125:11,17,21 126:10,11 127:10 128:6 140:13,19,21 lighting's 122:18 lights 120:15,18,20 123:6 126:18 127:17 128:20 likelihood 100:3 likely 39:1 92:5 limit 40:17 91:4 122:1 125:10 limitations 17:7 line 18:6 49:11 71:11 86:3 104:13 110:18,19 123:19 128:2,5 lines 34:2 56:18 89:5 110:13 linked 38:11 65:20 114:7,11 linking 8:10 list8:2,9,10 35:10 64:18,20 101:10 listed 6:5 55:7 135:17 listening 52:16 listings 127:15 Literally21:14Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 17

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 literature47:13 little 26:13 32:20 35:10 83:6 94:6 96:9 100:22 103:12 114:13 live 64:19 81:12,17 89:7 LLC 3:4,8 load 124:19 125:13 loaded 13:5 Lochinvar 3:8 73:22 lock 107:20 long 12:21 27:12 40:13 43:13 66:11 76:5 80:2 83:12 105:6,21 111:19 long-run 111:20 long-term

27:3 36:21 37:1 88:18 loophole 61:13 loopholes 90:19 loopholing 83:20 lose 73:4 losing 58:13 loss 135:22 losses 44:19,20 lot11:9 12:12,22 18:7 32:22 35:7,15,21 37:7 40:20 41:21 45:6,11 67:17 72:17 84:4 87:19 90:3 113:12 114:5,19 122:14,17 127:13 Louis 3:11 7:10 13:1 17:6 35:8 64:22 124:21 low 37:22 42:12 44:3 51:3 98:18 112:16 137:4 lower 8:21 56:10 107:7,12 114:15,18 lowered 107:14 lowest21:20 98:1,4 111:4 low-volume51:2 M magic36:7 119:7 magnitude31:13 maintenance 12:10 major74:15 124:4 majority92:19 93:5 makers 126:22 manual22:13,16 34:11,16 manuals 35:20 manufacturer 19:8 34:5 49:13 70:12 72:7 81:9 91:20 98:2 114:10 133:11manufacturerapplied 74:3 manufacturers 11:12 16:19 22:19 23:4 27:20 30:4 44:16 49:14,19 65:10 70:18 71:10 74:17 75:1,10 82:9,21 84:17

85:7 118:1 manufacturer's 71:20 112:7 119:13 manufacturing 2:19 3:5,14 37:6 63:5 map 40:2,3 103:22 108:9 mapping107:4 maps 107:10 108:1 Maranton 3:18 mark 2:16 11:22 59:5 92:15 110:14 114:12 118:2 119:19 130:15 132:16,22 138:20 market38:10 41:10 43:8 46:2,11,17,19 47:10,15 65:16 66:22 70:15,18 75:14 78:20 86:20 95:5 121:13 124:1 128:12 129:5 marketers 124:5 marketing 68:6 95:8 121:17 122:20 124:14 128:1,4 134:1 marketing-speak 95:4 marketplace 48:8 66:9 70:11 markets 35:12,17,18 43:22 44:1 65:3 married 114:11

Marshall2:21 Mary 2:14 52:20 Mary's 52:4 Master 3:16 match 127:16 matching 6:4 material90:3 matter15:12 78:18 96:19 98:16 100:4 106:6 113:15 may 14:8,9 15:5,6 37:14 44:6 45:15 49:14,19 53:13 57:2 61:17 65:2,5 69:17 70:12,18 72:10 77:20,21 80:1 88:22 90:5 92:17 103:16 106:15,16 114:11 115:5 122:15 123:10 131:11 134:4 maybe7:5 8:17 11:10 12:5 13:8 15:9,17 21:1 22:8 30:10 36:1 43:14 53:1,3 54:2 64:19,20 65:10,13 72:15 80:14,16 81:16 82:4,5 90:14 91:6 97:12 98:11 102:18 105:18 109:20 117:22 126:20 127:9 131:15 132:8 133:6 McQuay3:3Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 18

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 mean 16:13,14 17:14 21:15 22:21 23:3 24:21 26:1,7 27:3,6,7,10,11,1 6 28:1 30:19 33:9 38:17 54:17 55:11 59:21 60:7,14 62:12,16,19 63:12 67:18 69:5 71:7 72:3,11,12,20 79:1,2 80:21 81:20,22 82:1,4 85:8 91:9 93:22 96:5,7 100:12 101:10 108:3 109:17 119:22 120:18 122:8 127:8 meaning 5:2 means 15:11 24:2 26:4 105:1 112:9 138:19 meant7:17 33:1 Meanwhile 80:18 measured 135:16,21 136:6,9,12 137:2 measurement 137:2 measurements 83:14 135:6 measuring 31:21 136:8 meet29:4 44:15 45:7,18 47:17,20 51:10 60:11 61:11,13 75:11 77:12 78:1 79:4 90:16 105:20 115:12 128:14 138:9 meeting 1:6 7:7,9 11:18 35:4 61:9 89:21 132:20 138:11,17 141:7 meetings 112:13 members 2:8 3:2 88:21 mention 9:21 10:2,3 22:15 mentioned 93:12,14 99:2 menu 95:16 merchandisers 127:13 MERV8:19 9:1 10:20 11:19 20:11,16 23:18 24:1 MERV-4 23:19 MERV-5 35:14 MERV-6 8:14,19 10:20 MERV-8 19:21 35:14 mess 134:6 messing31:12 met 135:21 method 18:20 40:12 55:11 91:2 137:2 methodologies 68:16 methodology 120:5 metric 7:15 73:11 125:4 metrically7:18

metrics 7:14 68:17 125:2 Meyers 3:5 14:11,15 19:12 20:4,9 27:2 33:15 38:16 39:14,18 61:3 62:13 63:4,9,22 76:2,15,18 77:19 78:4,6 96:9 109:15 Michael3:4,19 microphone 39:20 76:1 100:8 104:8 108:15 Mike 15:15 22:10 23:7 31:3 38:9 46:21 68:13 97:3 105:8 109:17 113:16 114:1,12 mildly39:8 93:17 100:16 101:4 military 53:2 millions 64:13 mimic 13:3 17:10 mind 56:9 65:17 67:15 71:7 92:11 112:8 Mine 89:8 minimis 83:22 84:4,5 minimum 18:11 29:4 61:9,13 68:8 71:22 102:1 105:10,21 minimums 40:19 135:14,21 minor 20:10 minutes 80:6

misconstrued 69:22 mismatch 59:19 misrepresenting 74:11 misunderstand 125:15 Mitsubishi 2:15 4:21 13:10 16:11 28:3 39:21 41:15 61:15 79:16 mixed21:14 model 5:3 7:1,18,20 8:4 38:15 49:6,13 55:4 56:9,14,19,20,21 57:14 58:1,2 59:22 61:5 62:10 63:21 64:5,8,10 66:3 70:6 76:6,12 87:5 103:19 104:12 107:13,15,18,19 111:1 117:21 119:14,15 136:9 138:4,10 139:12 models 7:2 21:14 56:22 57:15 58:6 64:14 75:20 117:14 132:3 model's 56:5 107:7 Molvie 3:6 money 35:15 131:17 132:9,13 monitors 120:20,21 months 62:6 morning 24:1Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 19

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 134:19 mostly118:5 126:13 motor29:3 103:11,18,21,22 104:12 105:14,18,22 106:8 107:3,4,6,7,11,1 6,18 108:2,8 109:19 110:20,22 111:3,6,9,11 112:2,5,9,18 113:14 115:13,16,18,19 motor-blower 113:18 motor-only104:17 motors 13:19 54:3 103:2,5 104:4,17 105:6,10 106:4,5,9 116:1 motor's 108:4 mounted125:12 126:19 127:7 move76:3 79:12 80:12 moved 113:1 movement

112:8 multi 4:4 multiple 35:17 124:1 125:2 multispeed110:8 multitude37:10 mutually 119:21 Myers 3:7 65:18 82:19 94:21 95:7,11 96:14 97:17 98:5,11 107:2,17 108:6,9,13 112:11 115:10 myself 59:2 N National2:11 51:19 122:3 natural59:19 nature 69:13 Navigant3:17 necessarily

62:10 68:17 73:20 87:13 133:21 necessary

4:19 71:6 80:17 NEEA7:10 13:1 17:6 35:8 64:22 124:21 negotiation 76:19 Neil2:2 33:15 76:2,18 neither142:8 NEMA103:19,22 105:9 106:3,7 nervous 31:16 newer129:1 nice 11:2 113:22 nicely15:1 night 120:12 122:7 nobody 29:16 84:18 nobody's 101:1 nod 110:15 Nods 102:14 noise 85:15 noncompliant 74:13,16

noncorrosive 60:12 non-ducted 4:15 none 37:8 nonessential 123:13 nonstandard 46:16 Nope 109:13 137:19 nor114:22 142:9 norm19:7 normal 42:18 134:1 normally 51:13 Northwest3:11 note 61:4 nothing 10:10 25:3 38:7 103:6 111:15 112:6 134:7 novel117:4 NSF 37:18 O objections 102:11 obtain 119:10,16 obtained 85:1 obvious 117:20 obviously 10:13 13:3 25:12 35:17 52:13 73:3 85:17 offer 66:3 70:18 86:21,22 94:7 105:4 110:17 offering 27:21 98:17 113:4

off-gassing 67:20 offhand 86:21 office 15:7 Officer 2:4 official 89:17 oh 5:15 59:17 117:16 125:19 135:10 138:2 140:5 oil-fired 135:18 136:4,13 okay4:10 5:15,18 6:13 7:8 8:9 9:4 10:5,8 18:18 22:17 29:1 31:7,22 34:17 35:2 38:8 41:13 44:4 49:7 53:6,10 56:2,16 65:2 71:7,17 74:15 79:10 81:12 84:8 89:19 92:10 100:10 102:10,12,15 103:1,11 104:20 109:7,10 111:12,18 113:21 117:11 118:14 125:4,19 128:9 129:17 132:21 135:10,12 136:11 137:11,14 139:13 140:2,8,20 141:1 OM 10:2 22:6 ones 4:6 8:20 23:8 34:7 44:17 55:22 64:18,19 99:9 105:15Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 20

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 one's 28:18 91:7 139:7 one-thousands 40:8 ons 59:12 onto 99:20 open 96:5 124:17,18 openly132:18 operating18:2 59:6 72:9 operation 13:9 Operations 2:4 operative95:4,11 opinion 15:8 45:15 56:15 64:21 opportunities 100:19 opposed 95:8 option 9:15 19:19 21:4 27:22 31:4 33:17 47:13 48:22 49:16,17,19,21 58:16 61:8 65:9,20 66:4,12,19 70:4,13,19 74:4 75:1,3 76:7,10,13 81:10 82:22 83:2,8 98:20 110:21 116:20 134:2 optional 38:22 118:3 119:2 options 42:4 50:2 60:20 61:5,10 66:16 89:18 119:5 order13:5 46:7 112:20 131:17 140:9 orders 31:12 originally 19:5 OSHA 67:17 Others 46:9 otherwise 56:10 68:1 115:22 ought18:19 outcome 101:21 outdoor44:1,3 53:1 86:11 118:6 outline 89:22 output58:16 outside 52:21 60:16 64:8 121:3 124:14 126:12 127:18 outstanding 8:4 outwit 28:18 overall72:15,20 73:1 overnight4:12 27:1 overthinking 43:14 owed 134:17 P Pacific 2:21 package 115:9 packaged 114:14 115:8 117:5 packet140:1,4 page 135:12 137:9 paid 132:10 paint 66:7 98:13 99:19

pan 120:6,14 140:12 panel121:8 panels 128:21 paper90:4 138:16 paperwork

111:7 parallel124:15 particles 8:15 21:5 particular21:20 40:14 parties 75:8 142:9 pass 45:1 124:2,17 pass/fail 11:1 97:7,15 pass/fall 97:5 passes 76:20 passing 73:19 past29:6 54:11,12 127:15 path 33:9 84:7 Paul2:15 4:21 6:3 13:10 14:22 15:14 16:11 28:3 29:18,21 39:21 41:14 42:15 44:9,13 61:15 79:16 pay35:3 132:8 PC 5:1 PDF4:20 5:17,21 pen 90:4 penalize 27:22 penalized 36:6 penalizing 65:15 117:9 penalty23:9 72:12,13 74:20 75:4 87:12 people 4:11 15:21 16:6 20:21 24:10 25:8 29:19 36:4 40:4,8 43:13 52:15 53:12 55:15 59:15 60:13,16 61:22 62:6 65:12 66:4,10 69:2 116:3 129:18 131:9 per39:12 95:2 112:4 113:19 percent 35:13 43:22 46:2,4,5,16 49:5,11 50:6,9,10 67:16 70:17 77:18,21 83:1,8,9 84:14,15 86:7,12,16 87:7,8 94:8,10,13 104:19 105:4,6 percentage9:10 44:22 45:7 70:8,10 75:14 77:1 88:7 percentages 66:22 perfect14:2 37:15 94:18 perform111:4 performance 13:6 64:7 68:8 86:8,9 87:14 97:8 99:5 100:1 101:18 106:10 123:9 perhaps 65:19 87:18 113:2Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 21

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 130:15 period 25:21 person 111:16 personally52:12 54:1 62:16 97:10 perspective15:1 21:3 47:10 120:19 pervasive 101:1 Peter3:6 petroleum39:3 phenolic 39:5 95:15 101:11 phone 52:15 90:22 phrase 101:3 picture 33:11 pictures 130:10 piece 4:22 5:4,6,10 15:3,10 pieces 37:7 83:13 98:15 136:14 pile 136:17 pitiful 68:3 places 87:10 plain 30:8 42:22 58:16 111:5 plainest58:7 plane 129:19 plant 67:19 plate 99:21 118:10 plating 73:14 94:9 play46:1 players 65:16 playing 36:17 129:3 pleated 8:20 plug 45:22 46:1 plus 32:10 69:14 87:8 point 12:4 15:18 23:3 31:11 34:2 44:5,14 49:21 53:19 70:14 73:10 77:11 84:3 97:3 99:11 100:12 102:7 109:9 113:18 123:10 127:19 133:21 134:20 136:6 138:3 points 67:7 68:14 poor112:9 portfolio 70:9 75:15 76:8 portion 70:15 86:20 123:5 position 56:20 57:14 64:15 76:17 84:18 111:14 117:8 120:10 positions 52:18 possibilities 101:14 possibility 87:17 possible 57:9,20 95:22 108:5 134:6 potential128:19 power 125:5 powered 121:21 practical 17:13 61:10 113:3 practically27:2,11 practice19:8 22:22 78:18 108:19 pre 99:2 preamble 87:18 88:3,13 89:20 precedent

33:1 precisely53:8 pre-coated 87:1 98:15 predated 58:5 prefer12:14 98:8 premium 9:9 106:8 preparation 138:17 prepared 120:7 prescribed 17:21 pressure 8:20,21,22 9:9 10:15,22 11:20 12:7 13:7 15:5,11 20:7 21:11 23:9,19,20 24:2,3 25:17 26:3 30:12,13,18 31:8 32:4,17,21 33:12 83:20 97:8 112:19 pressure's 32:18 pressurized 100:3 presumptively 126:11 pretty 33:14 66:13 68:12 69:8 100:1 120:1,19 131:21 138:15 prevent 90:18 92:8 110:20 previously93:15 price 132:10

principle 90:8 prior33:22 39:10 93:13,21 101:8,9 119:15 probably 5:1 11:7 12:19 13:4 18:9 20:19 26:21,22 32:14,19 40:16 46:3 47:11 58:13 59:16 65:3 73:1,3,5,17 86:7 94:10,18 99:22 100:1 105:11 problem50:22 51:11,16 67:3,19 71:21 77:10 78:11 88:22 90:11 100:12 116:8 121:11 problems 60:18 procedure7:12 9:13 10:10 11:5 12:6,21 13:21 15:13 18:10,13,14 23:2 24:16,17,20 25:1,4,10 27:13 29:11 30:1 32:8 45:13 57:8,10,19,21 58:3 87:9,13 91:7 97:4,16 111:20 procedures 17:9,21 18:15 28:5,8,9,20 procedure's 57:22 proceed84:20 proceeding 142:4,5,6,8,10,1 1Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 22

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 process 29:15 39:11 75:6 82:16 84:19 88:19 97:1 101:8,11 105:12 134:1 138:7 139:19 processes 39:4 93:10 101:7 produce 17:22 51:10 96:19 product3:6 8:2 9:19 10:4 11:1,12 19:22 21:21 25:2 30:19 37:16 41:4 43:3,12 44:3,22 45:7 46:9 47:5,6,13 49:5,11 50:4 57:6 70:9 72:8,9,19 73:5,6 74:4,7,8,10,12,1 3,16,22 80:16,19 81:1,3,14,18 82:1,5 84:15 92:22 102:17 105:22 110:12 120:22 122:11,15 123:6,11,12 124:12,13,14 125:14,18,21 126:11 127:5,22 128:2 133:16 products 21:22 38:11 45:17 52:3,4,8 57:14 61:21 71:11 75:11,14 78:17 81:22 82:14 83:16 86:14 89:12 92:22 98:9 105:16 106:21 110:1 128:7 133:14 136:4

program6:14 12:3 programs 77:7 program's 53:19 proper6:1 properly50:16 proposal80:10 81:18 84:11 89:5 103:12 120:15 proposals 122:8,12 propose 100:10 120:7 121:4 proposing 103:21 proprietary 131:15 132:17 133:6 protect 133:3 protected 38:22 133:8,10 protecting72:5 protection 37:21 66:5 73:12 97:12 98:17 protective 71:4,9,17 72:4 73:16 98:20 prove 37:12 43:2 proverbial117:3 provide 6:21 39:1 71:13 72:7 87:3 97:4,5 105:6 130:8 provided 81:8 provides 80:2 93:12 130:7 providing 62:21 provision 9:13

provisions 14:19 34:8 proxy24:2 PTAC 89:10 PTACs 81:14,16 82:3,14 89:11 pull 33:19,20 85:18 110:19 111:2,4 pulled 76:9 pump 91:20 pumps 4:5 91:21 134:18 purchase 48:22 131:1 133:16 purchases 130:21 purely105:17 121:16 purpose 16:20 43:9 49:22 62:7 72:4 99:19 purposes 35:22 48:3,4 push 122:1 pushing 128:12 puts 124:20 putting 36:5 100:5 107:9,18 110:20 PVI3:7 82:19 97:17 107:2 112:12 115:10 Q qualify 71:8 74:22 quality 49:18 71:13 quantify 71:3,5 question 7:5,19 18:17,22 19:6 21:7 22:4 31:18 34:9 44:20 56:4,8 64:9 67:7 73:7 107:3 116:10 117:13 127:8 134:14 questions 18:20 31:4 123:22 139:1 quickly 71:14 134:11 quite 42:18 105:9 112:16 120:9 124:4,10 R radio 60:6 raise 52:16 117:6 ran 20:15 range 11:10 37:21 83:22 86:12 105:5 ranges 83:16 rate56:8 110:21 rated62:11 78:21 111:3,10 135:20 137:1 rather53:16 97:22 124:6 rating 7:12 8:14 9:1 20:11 23:18 24:1 56:8 63:18 64:6 66:20 110:16,22 112:5 115:9 ratings 11:19 26:1,4 27:9 113:19Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 23

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 reach 140:15 reaction 59:19 reactions 76:14 ready46:1 80:8 138:22 139:15 real11:5 13:3,8 17:10,17 26:11 44:5 53:9 100:15 115:7 134:6 realistic 32:15 57:9 reality17:9 115:5 realize17:7 realized 24:13 really15:6 17:11 22:4 25:20 26:12 30:17 31:16 37:16 42:21 43:1,11 44:21 45:2 51:22 65:21 68:21 69:19 71:6,9 72:3 83:2 86:4 89:13 90:18 91:7 92:21 95:3,6 100:11 112:3 114:19 118:4 120:7 124:15 125:11 136:3 138:22 reason 16:13,16 48:6 136:1 reasonable 14:6 66:14 74:19 75:7 111:13,16 113:3,4,6 reasonably17:22 reasons 106:15 122:20 received22:7 recertify 107:15 recess 80:7 recognize18:11 recommend40:10 76:4 80:13 recommendation 25:15,16 33:16 76:3 recommended 22:13,14 49:1 record42:12 142:8 recorded142:5 records 42:17,19 recovery6:3,7 redesign 69:16 70:9 reduce 74:7 reduced 142:6 reduction 66:21 67:1 refer21:4 106:3 126:2 reference55:20 57:22 referenced54:22 referring122:9 reflect 15:6 18:1 112:10 136:15 reflects 13:8 refrigerant

4:4 15:2,10 72:18 refrigerated 126:10,12 refrigerates 127:22 refrigeration 2:11 13:13 16:3,8,21 17:8,13 44:18 52:12 53:17 55:8

59:11 63:17,19,20 64:1 67:8,9,12 68:3 70:1,3 123:8 124:16 125:12 127:21 refrigerator

41:18 refrigerators 124:7 regard136:20 regarding73:10 Register 135:8 regs 82:10 regular30:8 regulate66:9 regulation 54:22 55:6,10 regulations 6:15 135:14 reheat 118:18,21 119:1 134:17,21 135:2 related142:9 reliable 85:1 remaining 120:4 remember

12:1 remind 112:12 remote 48:18 50:11,14,19 remove 16:5 25:9 33:21 123:14 removed 16:9,10 removing 101:3 renders 47:8 replaced 42:9 replacement42:12 replacing 42:13

report 5:11 38:7 53:5 130:6,7,16 133:12,19 reported1:16 136:2 137:6 Reporter 142:1,3,17 reporting1:17 5:3 133:15 reports 132:16 representation 47:15,22 representations 38:10,12 representative 13:12 18:4 representatives 2:3 52:9,10 represented 16:13 representing 14:22 52:18 92:11 reproduce22:22 reputation 71:11 request27:4 29:12 116:15 requested112:14 requests 52:22 require 24:17 41:8 83:14 88:9 required 5:22 20:18 30:4 75:19 135:19 requirement10:4 29:7 36:19 47:17 51:8 54:3 68:8 93:6 121:5Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 24

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 requirements 6:16 9:22 37:16,18 38:11 57:2 82:7 136:16 requires 127:17 research 2:4 33:10 119:15 residential9:19 30:10 53:20 54:13,14 55:22 56:12 57:6,13 58:18,22 60:9 65:1 78:9 81:16 resistance39:1 65:21 69:18 resistant 43:1 resolved 138:11,15,21 response 35:13 responsible 112:8 rest 84:17 95:3,4 96:17 97:14 104:11,12 restrict 8:22 restriction 31:8,21 restrictive 75:2 96:18 result88:4 results 18:1 85:5 87:11 88:2 review134:10 138:17 Rheem2:22 3:5 8:14 14:12 19:13 23:17 30:6 33:16 42:21 54:20 58:5 61:3 rid 96:3,4 Rivest3:19 31:3,7,11,14,19 32:1,8,12 38:9 46:21 48:9,12,16,20 54:9,12 105:8 108:3,7,12 110:3 113:16,21 114:5 Robert 3:15 rock 21:5 Rodney2:13 roll45:22 Ron 38:3 50:17 52:8 120:17 Ronald 3:10 Ron's 52:3 125:11 rooftop 48:21 room 6:13,15,16,21 7:11 16:22 29:16,20 78:11 82:20 83:3 87:22 91:19 94:12 rooms 59:6 room's 84:18 Rough 86:17 RTU15:7 rule 56:15 78:15 82:8 rulemaking1:5 36:11 80:15 82:16 84:9,20 88:6,19 90:12,20 113:17 141:6 rulemakings 82:12 104:10 rulings 104:18 run 6:1 23:14 25:19 26:8 32:4,9 71:7 80:2 83:12 88:17

95:16 99:1 101:20 111:19 136:7 running 15:19 20:12 32:10 Russell3:14 Rusty9:18 10:12 11:11 12:1 17:19 25:11 26:16 33:9 36:22 44:2 56:17 61:17 64:2 85:9 89:14 93:9 97:2 99:2,16 100:6 Rusty's 16:19 S S.W1:9 Sachs 3:9 14:21 18:17 21:1 27:19 43:15 44:4,9,12 53:15 83:10 84:12 85:3 100:15 112:1 113:7 114:1,6 117:1 125:8,19,22 126:3,7 127:4 139:2 safe 141:3 sales 46:5 70:11 88:7 132:4 salient97:11,14 salt37:11,20 39:12 41:5,8,10 68:9 71:4 73:12 90:17 92:5,16,17 93:1 94:8 95:2 99:1 102:2 saltwater93:1 salty39:3 samples 86:1

sat11:17 satisfactory

89:2 saving 66:11 89:9 saw 40:3,19 120:11 scale 19:2 106:4 scaled 104:5 scales 106:7 scenario 134:8 schedule 137:22 schedules 35:12 Schneider2:12 schools 18:7 SCOP 7:13 screen 108:22 screw100:13 scrubbing 41:9 scumbag15:7 sea61:20 92:21 sealed 59:10 seaside 100:20 seawater39:3 second 6:10 18:22 44:5 95:22 125:4 Secretary18:5 section 17:20,22 57:18 105:19 118:9,10 seeing 113:12 seem36:6 55:5 76:21 96:15 100:19 136:1 seemed 55:1,18 120:14,15 seems 8:21 13:5Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 25

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 16:12 20:20 25:21 42:15 43:10 59:2 60:13 111:12 123:16 126:12 seen 54:15 126:17 SEER 56:11,14 60:10,14 62:6 seldom94:14 select 31:1 43:5 Selected2:8 3:2 self 45:21 48:15 50:2 self-containing 121:7 self-contains 121:9 self-regulating 66:5 sell20:13,17 35:17 47:11,16 65:3 105:16 selling 24:10 43:12 74:13,16 send 38:18 109:4 138:12 139:2,17 sending 63:7 138:14 sense 59:1 63:1 82:22 84:16 104:6 sent134:16,18 sentence93:16 95:12,14,19,22 96:15,18 97:13 separate88:6 119:19 124:6 129:5 separation 123:10 series 128:18 service-over46:11service-overcounter46:12 48:14service-overcounters 48:6 session 26:17 129:16 settled19:4 setup 85:14 115:5 130:10 several 16:12 83:13 104:9 105:9 113:12 134:2 137:17 severe65:21 Shadow 126:22 share 38:16 131:8 shared 132:18 SharePoint

138:20 139:5,8 Shebik3:10 38:3 50:17 120:17 125:16,20 140:9,20 141:1 shelves 121:2 shelving 41:3 she's 10:19 133:2,3 shine 126:18 shines 125:17 ship 21:16,17 27:16 34:5,18 44:17 46:2 53:2 56:22 57:15 shipped 11:4,12 25:7 27:16,17 34:4 43:18 44:15 80:19 83:17 ships 25:6 shocked 129:20 short23:13 25:19,21 27:5 83:12 88:17 shortly82:18 short-term12:20 22:21 27:14 37:1 shows 136:22 139:10 shroud 42:8 sides 124:3 sign 128:21 significant 29:8 61:20 63:4,9 85:20 87:11 98:14 significantly 10:21 79:21,22 similar6:18 23:17 102:18 103:12 simplest 55:8 simply101:7 106:3 simulating17:16 single 19:1 44:3 66:22 77:4 92:20 sit26:7 53:11 129:13 situation 63:13 70:17 117:15 situations 115:4 size 8:15 107:5 109:19 128:21 sizes 110:6 124:12 SJI 2:17

skate 69:2 sleep 19:2 slice 83:3 slide 8:6 136:22 slides 135:13 139:17,20 slight 14:3 small 19:16 20:2 25:2 43:17 70:8,10 75:14 77:1 83:3 86:20 88:7,22 92:20 smaller 32:14,15 110:5 smallest 55:8 smart58:12 smatterings 110:12 sold 83:2,9 92:19 solution 12:5 35:19 66:14 89:3 94:18 115:6 solve 79:15 somebody 11:21 52:13 61:8 69:7 98:19 100:11 107:21 116:21 129:2 132:6 somehow 38:17 someone 61:1 117:16 131:16 somewhat 28:21 somewhere 28:10 128:3 sorry 31:11 99:15 104:7 138:2 sort18:6,9,21 47:7Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 26

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 59:8 65:15 68:8 80:22 90:14,15 121:21 sorts 100:18 sound 81:19 139:14 sounded 11:10 91:6 sounds 36:21 45:6 65:22 66:13 90:13 92:10,12 100:18 115:22 122:5 125:7 128:9 source 4:16,17 91:20,21 134:18 sources 85:2 space 63:14 spacing 63:15 spacing's 69:12 speak 46:18 50:22 51:11 SPEAKER

96:12 103:3,8 126:22 131:14 speaking 50:20 51:5 spec 95:10 special46:12 47:15 63:8 82:5 93:6 specially43:6 105:19 106:18 specials 46:15 specialty16:8 46:7 107:11 118:4 specific 4:17 6:16 26:18 43:8 49:13 55:19 98:9 99:17,19 130:9,13 specifically 103:17 139:18 specification 47:22 48:4 95:8 specified 101:18 specify8:17,22 25:10 115:18 137:1 specs 10:7 speed 6:1 spend 131:17 split 4:5 48:21 spoken 9:11 spot108:18 spotlights 126:21 spray37:12,20 39:12 41:6,9,10 60:12 62:17,18 68:9 71:4 73:12 77:15 78:9,12 90:17 92:5,16 93:1 94:8 95:2 99:1 102:2 118:10 sprayed 77:15 spraying 63:6 SPVU82:15 138:9 SPVUs 81:16,22 squeeze 63:12 stamp 87:2 stampede 129:21 stamping 39:10 93:14,21 99:3 101:8 stand 128:12 standard 7:12 9:8 12:3,7 19:8 20:4 21:9 24:8,9,12,13 25:6 34:3 35:16 37:18 39:19 40:1 44:16 46:9 47:14 51:10 54:7 60:11 61:9,14 66:2 68:7,14 70:4,5 77:12,14,17 78:2 79:3 83:7 90:15 91:14 99:21 105:10,21 112:16 119:20 130:6,7,16 132:20 137:3 standards 18:12 28:6,14,15,17 32:22 33:3 45:8,18 68:19 79:5 83:5 105:12 128:15 standard's 35:9 Standards 1:5 141:6 standby135:22 standing 136:17 Stanonik 3:13 71:1 101:5,13 136:5 STAR 127:14,16 128:7,16 Starr3:11 7:10 13:1 17:6 35:8 64:22 124:21 start 46:15 138:6 started4:3 51:19 60:16,20 65:7 starting26:13 76:16 96:22 133:12 starts 139:10

state134:16 stated 45:5 statement98:10 states 58:15 static8:16,18 9:22 29:3 32:2,3 58:10 106:16 111:21 112:4 113:9,13 statute77:2 steel69:18 Stem22:10 32:5,13 33:6 68:13 97:3 sticking 45:14 stink 100:1 stock 39:10 63:11 67:11 73:16 87:1 92:4 93:13,18 95:20 96:1 99:10 100:17 101:7,9 stocks 95:22 stop 128:18 storage 135:7,15,16,19,2 0,22 136:22 137:15 store124:9 stores 124:4 store-type 46:18 story 57:5 stretch 37:9 strict 14:22 stripping 100:13 struggling 58:21 stuff 12:2 59:7,10Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 27

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 84:14 90:2 121:2,20 138:20 stumped121:22 style 33:13 subject34:7,8 41:20 76:9,12 134:10 137:18 submarine 112:15,19 submit134:5 submitting5:10 133:18 134:8 substantial 86:5 substitute 133:14 sudden 29:1 suddenly 27:10 sufficient 43:11 suggest15:17 26:17 89:15,16 suggested 84:10 92:2 suggesting 96:21 suggestion 10:14 65:19 71:2,5 80:12 89:18 96:8,9 suggests 86:11 Supervisory2:4 supplied 20:6 supplier 128:13 133:13 supply 12:13 105:14 supplying 12:17 support131:22 supposed 17:10 34:11 sure 16:18 19:2 25:14 27:21 30:17 36:3 59:14 62:18 70:20 79:17 81:13 91:3 98:13,15 100:6 105:1,13 106:9 108:8 116:8 119:11 122:9 126:16 130:2 132:15 surface 39:8 surpass 42:16 sustainable 83:12 swapping 104:4 switching 106:9 system13:13 16:21 17:9 44:18 47:2,3 48:21 55:8 59:11 63:17,19,20 64:1 67:8,9,12,13 69:3,14,16 79:20 85:11,13 86:9 87:21 106:13 114:8,18 115:2 133:13 systems 28:22 32:14,16,17,19,2 1 68:3 118:7,8 T table 22:19 52:6 53:14 74:2,5 80:10 89:11 tables 104:10,16,18 109:21 tacking 99:20 tail75:16 takeaway140:10 taking 75:3 96:15

talk 13:20 35:4 52:14 57:4 70:7 83:4 87:17 89:21 103:2,16 talked 11:9 59:6 68:15 104:13 106:13 118:19 130:3 135:6 talking 4:13 12:9 13:15 14:12,17 15:21 20:12 21:22 24:5 41:2,11,15 45:12 46:15,16 48:20 50:5,8 51:20 54:13,14 55:22 63:16 79:11 81:19 82:1,16,17 83:5,15 87:16 90:22 91:9,10 92:20 94:11 100:20 107:4 110:16 115:14 125:17 talks 57:18 tanks 135:7 137:15 tape 69:6 targets 28:13 teasing 44:13 technologies 106:19,20 117:2 technology91:5 116:22 tee114:22 temporary90:14 tens 64:12 tenth 30:11,22 term 12:21 27:6,12 95:4

terms 7:16 96:14 103:16 135:13 terrible115:2 test 4:18,20 9:5,6,13 10:10,14 11:5,6 12:3,6,21 13:11,12,21 15:13 16:1,5,14,16,21, 22 17:9,21 18:1,10,13,15,19 19:7,9,15 20:16 21:10,18,19 22:1,3,6,11,14,1 6,20 23:1 24:8,16,20 25:1,4,5,7,10,17 27:13,16 28:1,5,6,8,14,15 29:11,12 30:1 32:4,8 33:22 34:3,12,18 39:12 40:1,4,12,13 45:1,13 50:21 51:3,5 52:7 57:8,10,19,21,22 58:3 62:18 66:2 67:2 71:3,4,8 73:13,17 74:18 75:2,5 76:22 78:1 80:22 81:3,10 83:18 85:5,13,21 87:9,10,13,22 88:8 90:17 91:2,7 92:1,16,18 93:1,2,3,5,7 94:8 95:2 97:4,16,19,21 98:7 99:1,11 101:20 102:2Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 28

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 104:1,11 105:5,18 106:1,19 110:19 111:20 115:4 116:15 117:3,6,12,15 119:11 121:5 124:16,19 130:5,6,7,16 133:17 136:7,8 tested4:14 6:7 14:12 20:3,6 23:8 27:17 28:1 34:6 40:5 44:9 51:7,13,14 55:6 70:13 76:5 81:9 83:7 85:4 87:6 111:10 122:15 testing9:15 13:20 24:18 28:5,12 29:16,19 30:3 36:17 39:12 42:19 55:19 57:7 62:22 66:17 68:15 74:18 76:12 77:9 82:10 84:19 85:15,17 88:1,18 90:11 95:2 105:15 121:1,9 124:16 tests 33:20 37:15,16 40:11 84:22 88:2 thank 14:22 73:9 93:19 94:19,20 116:7 thanks 53:6 Tharp 3:14 5:8,13,19 9:18,21 10:2,6,12,19 11:11,16 17:19 22:4 25:11 26:16 41:13 44:2 49:9 56:17 64:2 75:18 85:9 86:9,18 89:4,14 93:9,19,22 96:2 97:2 99:4,8,20 100:8 101:3,12 102:5 104:21 105:3 110:5 130:22 131:3,19 132:5,15 That'd 128:7 That'll 5:21 that's 5:12 6:5,19 8:14,19 9:1,8 10:13,20 11:6 12:15 13:14,21 16:22 20:6,15,22 24:15,19,21 25:8 26:13 29:13,20 34:6 36:16,20 40:15 41:1 42:6 44:4,15 45:2,9 46:19 48:5 50:3 53:7 54:18 56:12 57:5,12 58:1,2 59:2,14,16,17,18 60:7,14 62:7 64:6,7,14,16 65:4,16 66:12 67:2 68:9 70:16 71:9,11,20 72:5 73:21 77:16 78:4,6,10,22 79:10 81:2,9 82:8 84:16 85:8 86:11,13 87:1,2,13 88:1 89:19 90:16 91:19 92:22 95:3 98:20 101:6 103:12 105:4,7,19 106:22 107:11 108:5,6,12

111:2,5,8 113:2,4,13,14 114:22 115:20 116:9 117:22 118:3,16,19 119:10 121:2,6 122:17 123:15,19 127:8 128:22 130:12 131:3 132:5 135:3,20 137:8 the-fact 107:21 themselves 97:20 theoretical136:9 theoretically 71:22 theory 18:18 105:16,17 thereafter

142:6 thereby 124:6 there'd 74:20 therefore26:5 thereof 18:3 there's 11:9 12:12 13:13 16:13 22:15 23:6 29:3,6,8 35:17 37:14 40:8,9 44:21 53:17 57:6 58:10 59:19 61:11 63:2 64:20 73:10 74:1,5 82:4 84:12,13 86:6 87:4,8,22 97:9 108:8 123:22 124:12 125:11 127:11 130:4,5 134:7 137:16 thermoset39:6 they'll20:14 52:13 they're14:7 20:16 29:19 33:1 35:14,21 36:3 41:2,22 42:7 43:20 52:16 65:11 66:7 71:11 77:17 82:1 103:9 110:9 113:4 119:5 125:2,6 132:4 140:3 thick 8:19 26:12 thickness 37:13 thicknesses 37:20 thin 71:19 87:1 thinnest72:1 third 96:10 third-party

51:7 130:8 Thoughts 129:7 thousands 64:13 three-phase14:16 three-phased12:2 threshold 42:22 73:20 137:4 through-type 124:2 throw12:14 53:14 73:18 98:22 106:19 throwaway 20:5 throwing 87:14 thrown 106:20 thus 15:11 Tim 68:5 102:12 timeline 134:10 Timothy 2:10 tin 73:14 94:9Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 29

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 today18:12 24:19 25:1 36:19 47:19 82:7 108:19 128:12 today's 10:7 Tom 3:3 tomorrow24:20 79:12 ton 110:6 tonight19:3 tons 12:2 top 15:7 71:21 87:14 topic 7:6 89:9 topics 45:12 torchiere-type 127:2 total46:4,5 49:11 83:2,9 124:9 totally13:15 41:12 62:2 119:22 touch 68:14 towards 45:12 trade 54:2 80:1 trail120:12 Trane 2:20 21:13 38:21 67:6 99:15 101:22 104:15 109:12 119:18 139:17 transcript

142:7 transfer44:20 72:1 84:2 100:4 translate21:2 Traulsen 2:14 52:20 treat 33:18 treated 76:4,10

80:4 99:3 tried 38:4 126:8 tries 57:8 trillions 64:14 trip 139:12 trouble 97:19 troubling 127:9 true 2:19 13:6 37:6 72:12 110:3,4 142:7 truly37:10 68:22 92:4 95:9 try14:1 26:19 43:16 57:7 63:11 76:3 89:20 90:3 123:20 trying 8:17,22 13:2,11,18 23:10,18 28:18,19 29:10,11 30:7 36:3,18 43:4 49:22 53:7,16 59:1 64:17 69:2 79:14 98:12 99:18 104:3 105:13 108:7,17 112:9 tube 99:21 tubes 39:7 67:10 73:15 92:3 Tucker3:22 8:8,10 38:19 102:8 116:5,8 137:10 138:2 140:3,7 Tuesday1:12 tuned 105:19 tunnel32:5

turn 32:5,6 turning 100:13 TV5:8 120:20 twice 66:19 two-thousands 40:9 type 11:7,8 18:2 41:10 46:1 80:15 91:1,4 107:6 types 8:2 107:3,4 typewriting 142:6 typical35:16 39:4 96:22 101:6,10 typically21:20 22:1 35:10 U U.S 2:5,6,7,15 17:20 57:17 UL 15:15 ULE 10:2,4 22:6 25:12 ultra-gold 86:22 unbelievable 121:20 uncoated 42:13 47:18 74:8 85:5,11 86:1 uncomfortable 100:22 understand 27:3 31:15 36:18 55:16 70:20 74:6,9 76:18 79:18 97:18 98:11 99:12 103:16 104:20,22 109:17 115:5

121:12 128:19 130:12 understanding 16:18 understands 74:2 understood 19:3 Underwriters 3:4 unduly 18:5 unfired 135:7 137:15 unfortunately 38:4,7 41:22 UNIDENTIFIED 96:12 103:3,8 126:22 131:14 unit 4:14 6:1 13:4 16:3 22:10 31:2,4 32:9 44:7 47:7 56:7 60:10,14 61:6 72:13,14 73:3 77:12,13,22 78:9 85:18 87:9,14 105:18 106:19 111:5 116:11,12 117:5,19 119:11,12,20 121:20 123:15 124:3,11,20 129:5 130:10 131:17 133:22 136:8 United 2:13 units 15:22 21:9 33:8,17,19 34:7 43:18 46:18 48:15 83:2 92:19 105:2 112:15 116:15 117:12 118:5 124:2Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 30

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 132:1 136:14,21 unit's 85:16 universal96:15 unless 100:11 unrealistic 38:1 41:12 upcharge-type 46:8 updated 138:1 139:3,7 upward 128:18 usage 79:21 USC 57:18 useful 11:20 114:10 usual 80:9 usually 20:4 35:14 93:1 utility47:2,4 61:11 V vale 135:20 value 9:8 14:16 19:1,16 21:20 27:8 30:10 129:5 131:12 135:19 values 26:18 variability12:12 variable 4:4 77:1 variables 76:22 variance 87:8,12,22 variation 98:19 varies 21:21 variety 59:5 various 11:19 84:15 vast92:19 93:5 velocities 114:20 verification 76:9,12 138:6 139:10,18 versus 11:5 39:19 44:1 122:11 123:12 131:20 video 123:17 view 53:20 64:4 77:11 118:8 124:13 viewpoint 51:15 vinyl 39:6 violent113:8 virtually77:3 visualizing 109:21 volume49:12,15 51:3 87:4 135:6,16,22 136:6,8,9,12 137:1 volumes 37:22 vote 76:20 84:11 138:5,22 voted 138:15 voting 89:17 140:10 W wagging 75:16 wait 85:19 89:16 90:12 waiver 91:7 93:7 94:18 warehouses 59:6 warranties 47:20 warranty36:3 38:13 48:3 61:21 65:12,14 wash 42:4,6 washed 41:6,19,22 Washington 1:10 wasn't 16:10 40:18 51:21 53:9 59:14 112:2 115:17 waste 125:10 water4:17 9:9 30:10,11 31:1 91:20,21 134:17,18 135:7,15,19 wattage 127:2 watts 26:5 112:4,22 113:19 127:9 ways 19:14 37:10 wear71:14 Weber3:20 website 88:14 130:4 we'd 7:18 14:4 42:13 97:6 week 109:5 140:10 weeks 26:18 37:1 84:14 week's 109:4 we'll 12:18 25:14 34:2,3 88:19 90:3,5,9 98:18 102:8 109:3,8 115:21 128:10 137:13 138:6,16 we're 4:3 8:17,21 12:17 13:15,18,20 17:8,12,16 21:22

22:17,21 23:13,18 24:5 26:13,14 28:14,18,19 29:10,11 30:7,21 31:12 34:1,11 35:6 36:10,18 38:2 39:22 41:2,10,15 43:14 45:12,14 46:16 48:20 49:22 52:1 54:14 55:21 59:16,17 62:9,11,18 64:3,6,17 69:8 78:15 79:7,9,11,14 80:8 82:1,7,16,17 87:6 88:5 89:7 90:13 92:19 96:2 100:4,13,20 101:20 102:17,19 103:8,21 104:3 105:11,13 108:17 110:1 113:8,11,17 115:3,9 116:1,16 117:8,11 119:21 121:12 122:5 128:11 133:12,14 134:1 136:11 138:4,21 139:15 Wes 3:16 73:7 91:19 94:3,5 134:13,15 we've 18:18 21:2 24:13 28:12,20 37:7 81:14 89:12 90:2 101:18,20 104:9 110:1 118:19,22Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 07-02-2013 Page 31

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013 127:14 133:22 135:16 138:15 whatever11:17 19:7 24:12 25:2 30:9,21 36:8 45:9 54:22 55:9 62:19 71:5,19 90:17 95:17 96:20 108:13 117:10 120:21 127:1 whatever's 22:6 wheel 117:5 118:9 whenever128:18 whereas 48:20 Whereupon 80:7 141:5 wherever57:20 79:20 whether4:14 44:19,21 45:17 68:9 72:22 74:22 84:5 90:16 107:4 117:9,21 125:1 133:2 137:1,4 whistles 57:1 59:12 64:6 Whitwell 3:15 5:22 6:1,6 75:9,16,21 86:8,10 92:7 108:21 109:5,7,10 131:11,15 132:3 whole 7:12 12:22 24:10 35:7 55:13 59:4 64:18 84:4 92:11 96:3,5 whom 142:3 willing 44:22 53:13 82:11 89:7 128:2

wink44:22 wiped 41:9 wire 41:3 wish 51:3 128:17 withholding 97:8 wonder 53:17 work 27:6 33:10 50:11,15 59:9 62:3 66:8 68:12 90:12 91:3 92:5 101:15 140:16 workable 66:12 83:11 worked 50:13 126:5 working 43:14 works 76:19 world 11:5 13:3,8 17:10,17 41:2 119:4 worlds 41:11 worried 109:20 112:3 worse 42:5 63:13 65:13 worth 49:15 worthwhile 37:13,14 Wostal3:16 73:9 94:5 134:15 Wow 95:6 wrap 139:11 wraps 129:15 write 35:3 writing 106:22 written 24:20 57:21 90:2

wrote 118:9 X X-number

85:22 86:1 Y year's 132:13 yeses 31:6 yesterday

4:7 11:9 20:13 23:21 106:14 126:8 130:4 134:19 135:6 yet37:5 87:5 89:11 109:13 120:7,8 129:12 139:15 you'll 73:1 82:12,14 105:5 you've 67:19 71:17 76:22 85:12,16 93:22 132:10