Joe Hagerman

DOE Representative

Manufactured Housing WG

Manufactured Housing Working Group 

Working Group Responsibilities and Interactions with DOE and the ASRAC

August 4-5, 2014
2

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Introduction of Key Issues by Members

Prioritization and Mapping of Key Issues 

Establish Needs for Next Meeting

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1

Day 2
3

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1
4

Welcome

• Introductory remarks from DOE

• Housekeeping details

• Role of the facilitator

• Working group (WG) member introductions
5

Ethics Discussion

• Discussing the individual interest of an organization

• Interaction of Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal 

Advisory Committee (ASRAC) and the manufactured housing 

(MH) WG

• Process for asking procedural and ethical questions

1. Discussion of any questions relating to ethics.
6

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1
7

DOE and ASRAC

• DOE formed ASRAC in 2012 to further improve the DOE 

process of establishing efficiency standards 

• ASRAC is an advisory committee chartered by DOE

• ASRAC is solely advisory in nature, with focus on rulemaking 

issues and solutions

• Committee tasks originate from discussion between DOE and 

ASRAC members, defining clear goals, timeframe for task 

completion, and target date for presenting the Committee’s 

formal recommendations to DOE
8

DOE and ASRAC

• As needed, ASRAC votes to form WGs to investigate each task 

in detail and gather additional input from stakeholders

• DOE may withdraw a task from ASRAC at any time

• In the event a consensus recommendation is not reached for 

a particular task within a given timeframe, ASRAC will let DOE 

know that no recommendations will be made and it is 

determined to withdraw the task or give the WG more time

– Without a consensus recommendation from the WG and affirmation 

from ASRAC, DOE will proceed with its “normal” rulemaking activities
9

Benefits of Negotiated Rulemaking

ASRAC efforts are expected to expedite rulemaking activities 

and yield better decisions by moving to a consensus model.

• Permits expert dialog in real-time during development of the 

proposed rule

• Can be less adversarial

• Provides more time for an iterative process to resolve issues

• Potential for a more pragmatic and easier to implement 

regulation

• Potential for reduction of modifications following the 

proposed rule
10

ASRAC’s Process Flow

ASRAC

ASRAC/ DOE form 

Working Groups

WG

“Task Brief Meeting”

WG Presents 

Update/ Consensus 

to ASRAC

ASRAC

Deliberation

Update/ Consensus

Task Discussion

Recommendation

WG Update/ 

Consensus WG Deliberations

As Decided - Additional 

Work from WG As Decided –

Dissolve WG

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

8a

8b
11

ASRAC Process: Tasking Discussion

• At a public meeting, ASRAC discusses 

identified tasks and may identify additional 

tasks (with input/discussion from DOE and the 

public) and votes on whether to accept or 

reject a task

• For accepted tasks, DOE and ASRAC establish 

clear goals, timeframe for task completion/ 

deliverables, and target date for presenting 

ASRAC’s formal recommendations to DOE

• ASRAC members will be asked to volunteer to 

serve on WGs based on expertise and interest

– In instances where there are no volunteers, 

ASRAC members will be asked to nominate a 

fellow member and bring to a vote
12

ASRAC Process: WG Formation

• After tasking is finalized, DOE publishes a Federal Register 

notice that:

1. Announces the task taken on by ASRAC,

2. Solicits nominations for the WG, and

3. Establishes expected time commitment requirements for WG members

• Depending on established task deadlines, nominations may be accepted 

for up to one month

• ASRAC conducts the initial screening to select members for the working 

group

• Membership for WGs is limited to 25 members, this includes the required 

seats for at least one full Committee representative and one for DOE’s 

representative

• Once the recommendations are finalized, DOE has the opportunity to 

review and amend WG membership, as necessary

• Once formed, the DOE and ASRAC representatives for the WG select a WG 

chair
13

ASRAC Process: WG “Task Brief Meeting”

• Once a working group is finalized, DOE publishes a notice 

of open meeting in the Federal Register that announces 

the first meeting (“Task Brief Meeting”)

• At the task brief meeting:

1. DOE and the ASRAC representative outline the expectations of the WG as a 

negotiated rulemaking effort (if applicable)

2. DOE and the ASRAC representative clearly outline the task at hand

3. WG members reaffirm their commitment to the task and develop a work plan

• Work plan is emailed to ASRAC members as courtesy and chance to 

comment

– ASRAC members will have a finite amount of time to comment

– Comments will be considered at the WG next meeting and the work plan will 

be finalized
14

ASRAC Process: WG Deliberations

• After establishing a work plan, WGs meet as necessary to 

accomplish set goals

– Meetings will be announced in the Federal Register and are 

open to the public

– The outcome of the negotiation must be in full compliance 

with statutory mandates

– All participants will need to provide DOE with data and an 

analytic framework to support deliberations

– Good faith negotiation required

– DOE will perform analysis to support the negotiations

– Specifics of WG end goals and deadlines are established in 

ground rules
15

ASRAC Process: WG Deliberations

• Working groups operate by consensus

– The WG defines the meaning of consensus

– Once the WG has reached a consensus (or decided the inability to 

reach consensus) about its recommendation, it will draft a report for 

distribution to the full Committee and will notify the ASRAC chair(s)

– The WG chair will present the recommendations and efforts of the 

working group at the next full Committee meeting

– In instances there is a ASRAC meeting before consensus can be 

reached, WG will be asked to provide an update to ASRAC regarding 

their efforts
16

ASRAC Process: ASRAC Deliberation on WG Efforts

• WG chair will present any updates or their final consensus 

determination to ASRAC

– For updates (or instances a determination has been made that the 

working group cannot achieve consensus), the WG chair will present 

current majority and minority views towards the working group’s 

efforts to ASRAC

• Based on the WG’s update, ASRAC will deliberate and:

1. Give additional time allowance for a given task, decide to have the WG give the task 

further consideration or focus on specific issue raised by the Committee

2. Vote to accept the WG’s recommendation without change and form a recommendation to 

DOE with majority and minority views

3. Notify DOE that no recommendation can be made on particular task and give associated 

rationale:

a. WG cannot achieve consensus or

b. ASRAC is not able to reach majority consensus to submit WG’s recommendation 

without change
17

ASRAC Discussion

Issue 2. Discussion of the general ASRAC and WG negotiation process.
18

Manufactured Housing WG “Charter” from ASRAC

• The purpose of the working group will be to discuss and, if 

possible, reach consensus on a proposed rule for the energy 

efficiency of manufactured homes, as authorized by section 

413 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(EISA). The working group shall complete work on the term 

sheet for a proposed rule by September 30, 2014, or either 

cease activities of the working group or request and 

extension, with date certain, from ASRAC.

Issue 3. Discussion of the manufactured housing WG charter.
19

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1
20

Negotiation Ground Rules

• Negotiations will be conducted under the Federal Advisory 

Working Group Act (FACA), the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 

1990 (NRA), and DOE’s Negotiated Rulemaking Policy

• Recordkeeping

– A written transcript will be generated

– Unofficial summaries of WG meetings will be prepared by the 

facilitator 

• WG Members may discuss amendments to the ground rules
21

Negotiation Ground Rules – Participants

• Membership. The WG consists of those individuals whom 

DOE appoints, as nominated by the affected interests

• Alternates. Alternates may substitute for Members

– Only WG Members may vote on any consensus recommendation, and 

any alternate casting a vote shall do so on behalf of the Member

• Attendance. Members agree to make a good faith effort to 

attend every WG session. Attendance and voting may be by 

telephone or other electronic means

• Participation. Only Members/alternates, with exceptions

Issue 4. Discussion of amendments to ground rules for participants.
22

Negotiation Ground Rules – Decision Making

• The WG will operate and make decisions by consensus

• Consensus is defined by the Members

• Subgroups

– Subgroups can be formed to address specific issues

– Subgroups make a recommendation to the WG

– The WG ultimately must reach consensus on the subgroup issue

• WG may discontinue negotiation at any time if not productive

• Negotiations will terminate by September 30, 2014, unless 

DOE and ASRAC decide to extend the deadline

Issue 5. Discussion of amendments to ground rules for decision making.
23

Negotiation Ground Rules - Agreement

• WG agreements take the form of a written document, 

including a term sheet and supporting analysis

• DOE translates the term sheet into the NOPR documents, 

consistent with legal obligations

• Members must not oppose the agreement publically

– No negative comments

– No adverse action and support

– No challenges

• In the absence of consensus, parties shall not be bound by 

positions taken or accepted

Issue 6. Discussion of amendments to ground rules for agreement.
24

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1
25

DOE Rulemaking Process

Advanced notice 

of proposed 

Rulemaking 

(ANOPR)

 

Notice of 

Proposed 

Rulemaking 

(NOPR)

Final

Rule

• If the WG reaches agreement on proposed standards, it is 

presented to ASRAC and, if accepted, published in a NOPR

Rulemaking 

Process

 
26

Statutory Authority (42 U.S.C. § 17071)

• DOE must establish energy efficiency standards for MH

– Must provide notice and an opportunity for public comment

– In consultation with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, who 

may seek further counsel from the Manufactured Housing Consensus 

Committee

• Standards must be based on the most recent International Energy 

Conservation Code (IECC), which is the 2015 IECC, unless:

– The IECC is not cost effective

– A more stringent standard is more cost effective

– Cost-effectiveness is based on the impact of the IECC on the purchase price of 

MH and on total lifecycle construction and operating costs.

• Standards may consider the following:

– The design and factory construction techniques of MH

– The use of HUD climate zones rather than IECC climate zones

– Alternative practices that yield equal or lesser energy use
27

Analysis

DOE may conduct multiple analyses to develop the NOPR.

Technology 

Assessment

PriceEfficiency 

Analysis

Shipments

Analysis

National

Impact

Analysis

Life-Cycle

Cost and

Payback 

Period Analysis

Regulatory

Flexibility 

Analysis

Environmental

Assessment

Monetization

of Emissions

Regulatory 

Impact 

Analysis
28

Analysis

DOE’s NOPR analyses may include the following:

• Technology Assessment 

– Review of the available energy efficiency measure options

• Price-efficiency Analysis 

– Price and energy use associated with an energy efficiency measure 

option

• Life-Cycle Cost & National Impact Analysis

– Economic impact on individual consumers and consumers as a whole

• Environmental Assessment & Monetization

– Impact on reduced pollutant emissions and its monetary value

• Regulatory Impact Analysis

– Alternative means for achieving cost-effective energy savings

Issue 7. Discussion of potential analyses.
29

Current MH Analysis

• DOE is currently preparing an energy analysis of the 2015 IECC

– Compares current MH energy use to the energy use expected with MH 

constructed to 2015 IECC requirements as well as 2006, 2009, 2012 

codes.

– Some 2015 IECC requirements may be modified based on applicability 

to MH 

– Using building energy analysis software - EnergyPlus (v8.0)

• DOE is receptive to receiving information for preparing this 

analysis or relevant information that the WG may want 

analyzed alongside the 2015 IECC

Issue 8. Discussion of the current MH analysis.
30

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Rulemaking Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1
31

WG Meeting Scheduling

• Tentatively estimate the number of meetings needed

• Determine an interval for the meetings (e.g., 2 per month)

• Determine the time, date, and place of scheduled meetings

Issue 9. Discussion of WG meeting schedule.
32

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Rulemaking Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1
33

Non-Member Public Comment Session

• Non-members may make statements, provide information, or 

raise questions and issues to the WG

Issue 10. Non-Member public comments.
Joe Hagerman

DOE Representative

Manufactured Housing WG

Manufactured Housing Working Group 

Working Group Responsibilities and Interactions with DOE and the ASRAC

August 4-5, 2014
35

Agenda

Welcome, Introductions, and Ethics

Description of Negotiated Rulemakings

Establishment of Ground Rules

Analysis Summary

Scheduling Future WG Meetings

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Introduction of Key Issues by Members

Prioritization and Mapping of Key Issues 

Establish Needs for Next Meeting

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 1

Day 2
36

Agenda

Introduction of Key Issues by Members

Prioritization and Mapping of Key Issues 

Establish Needs for Next Meeting

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 2
37

Introduction of Key Issues by Members

• Each Member can speak to key areas of concern and interest.

• Future meetings will provide a venue for discussion of these 

issues and others, and for providing more detail.

Issue 1. Introduction and identification of key issues and data.
38

Agenda

Introduction of Key Issues by Members

Prioritization and Mapping of Key Issues 

Establish Needs for Next Meeting

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 2
39

Prioritization and Mapping

• How should the issues identified be prioritized by the WG?

• What information or analysis is needed for issue resolution?

Issue 2. Discussion of prioritization and mapping.
40

Needs for Next WG Meeting & Schedule

• What topics should be discussed at the next WG meeting?

• What is needed from Members and DOE in preparation?

• Confirm the schedule of future WG meetings.

Issue 3. Discussion of needs and schedule for upcoming WG meetings.
41

Agenda

Introduction of Key Issues by Members

Prioritization and Mapping of Key Issues 

Establish Needs for Next Meeting

Non-Member Public Comment Session

Day 2
42

Non-Member Public Comment Session

• Non-members may make statements, provide information, or 

raise questions and issues to the WG.

Issue 4. Non-Member public comments.