202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 1

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

 + + + + + 

 PUBLIC MEETING 

 ON THE PROPOSED POLICY FOR ADOPTING 

 FULL-FUEL-CYCLE ANALYSES INTO 

 ENERGY CONSERVATION STANDARDS PROGRAM 

 + + + + + 

 THURSDAY 

 OCTOBER 7, 2010 

 + + + + + 

 WASHINGTON, D.C. 

 + + + + + 

 The Public Meeting convened in 

Room 1E-245 of the Forrestal Building at 1000 

Independence Avenue, Southwest, at 9:00 a.m., 

Doug Brookman, Facilitator, presiding. 

PRESENT: 

DOUG BROOKMAN, Facilitator 

KARIM AMRANE, Air-Conditioning, Heating and 

 Refrigeration Institute 

KEN BARKER, Dominion Virginia Power 

ROBERT BEAUREGARD, American Public Gas 

 Association 

DONALD BRUNDAGE, Southern Company 

MICHAEL CALDARERA, National Propane Gas 

 Association 

OWEN COMSTOCK, DOE 

ROBERT ELLIOT, National Propane Gas 

 Association 

PRESENT (Cont'd): 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 2

MARK FRIEDRICHS, DOE 

AMI GRACE-TARDY, DOE 

JEROME HINKLE, American Clean Skies 

 Foundation 

ALEX HOFMANN, American Public Power 

 Association 

TED MARKS, JVC Company 

DAVID MOHRE, National Rural Electric 

 Cooperative Association 

ANTHONEY PERKINS, DOE 

DAN REIDINGER, Edison Electric Institute 

STEVEN ROSENSTOCK, Edison Electric 

 Institute 

ANDREW SOTO, American Gas Association 

FRANK STANONIK, Air-Conditioning, Heating 

 and Refrigeration Institute 

GREGORY STAPLE, American Clean Skies 

 Foundation 

CHARLIE STEPHENS, Northwest Energy 

 Efficiency Alliance 

RICK TEMPCHIN, Edison Electric Institute 

MEG WALTNER, Natural Resources Defense 

 Council 

MICHAEL WANG, Argonne National Laboratory 

JOANMARIE WEISS, Weiss Farm 

ROGER WEISS, Weiss Farm 

TED WILLIAMS, American Gas Association 

JIM WOODWARD, Deloitte 

ERIC WOYCHIK, Black & Veatch 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 3

 C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S 

WELCOME, ATTENDEE INTRODUCTIONS, AGENDA 

REVIEW ....................................4 

 Doug Brookman 

OVERVIEW OF KEY PROPOSALS/QUESTIONS.......13 

 Anthoney Perkins/Mark Friedrichs 

BRIEF OPENING STATEMENTS FROM INTERESTED 

PARTIES...................................19 

 Doug Brookman 

SHIFT FROM PRIMARY ENERGY TO FULL-FUEL-CYCLE 

ENERGY, USING GREET MODEL, FOLLOWED BY 

DISCUSSION................................49 

Anthoney Perkins/Michael Wang/ 

 Mark Friedrichs 

ADDITION OF ENERGY-RELATED EMISSIONS OF 

METHANE AND NITROUS OXIDE TO ESTIMATED IMPACT 

ON CO2 EMISSIONS, FOLLOWED BY DISCUSSION.147 

 Mark Friedrichs 

IMPROVING INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO CONSUMERS, 

FOLLOWED BY DISCUSSION...................153 

 Anthoney Perkins/Mark Friedrichs 

FINAL REMARKS AND QUESTIONS FROM INTERESTED 

PARTIES..................................158 

 Doug Brookman 

NEXT STEPS AND CLOSING...................191 

 Anthoney Perkins/Doug Brookman 

ADJOURNMENT..............................192 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 4

1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 

2 (9:02 a.m.) 

3 MR. PERKINS: Good morning. I'm 

4 Anthoney Perkins with Department of Energy, 

5 and the Energy Conservation Program for 

6 Consumer Products and Certain Commercial 

7 Equipment. Today we're here to take comments 

8 and discuss the Full-Fuel-Cycle proposed 

9 policy. 

10 To start it off, I'm going to go 

11 ahead and introduce Doug Brookman, who will be 

12 the facilitator today, and he will take us 

13 from here for a little while. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Good 

15 morning, glad you could join us. It is our 

16 tradition to do introductions around the room. 

17 Also, as you registered this morning, I 

18 believe you handed in a business card to 

19 Brenda Edwards, or someone who registered you. 

20 If you did not, then let's do that by lunch. 

21 And, typically, the Department makes a xerox 

22 copy of the attendees that are here present. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 5

1 So, please, your name and organizational 

2 affiliation, and I'll go around the room this 

3 way. You need to push the button on the 

4 microphone. We can get in the habit of 

5 getting a little green light working. Your 

6 name and organizational affiliation. 

7 MR. MARKS: Ted Marks with JVC 

8 Company. 

9 MR. WOODWARD: Jim Woodward from 

10 Deloitte. 

11 MR. STAPLE: Greg Staple, American 

12 Clean Skies Foundation. 

13 MR. STEPHENS: Northwest Energy 

14 Efficiency Alliance. 

15 MR. CALDARERA: Mike Caldarera, 

16 National Propane Gas Association. 

17 MR. ELLIOT: Bob Elliot, National 

18 Propane Gas Association. 

19 MR. BEAUREGARD: Bob Beauregard, 

20 American Public Gas Association. 

21 MR. SOTO: Andrew Soto, American 

22 Gas Association. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 6

1 MR. WILLIAMS: Ted Williams, 

2 American Gas Association. 

3 MR. TEMPCHIN: Rick Tempchin, 

4 Edison Electric Institute. 

5 MR. BARKER: Ken Barker, Dominion 

6 Virginia Power. 

7 MR. HOFMANN: Alex Hofmann, 

8 American Public Power Association. 

9 MS. GRACE-TARDY: Ami Grace-Tardy, 

10 DOE, in the General Counsel's office. 

11 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Mark Friedrichs. 

12 I had been in the Policy and International 

13 Affairs office for many years, but I'm now in 

14 the Office of Energy Efficiency in the 

15 Building Regulatory Programs. 

16 MR. PERKINS: Anthoney Perkins, 

17 also in the Department of Energy, Energy 

18 Efficiency. 

19 MR. WANG: Michael Wang from 

20 Argonne National Lab. 

21 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

22 Edison Electric Institute. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 7

1 MR. BRUNDAGE: Don Brundage, 

2 Southern Company. 

3 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, Air4 Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration 

5 Institute. 

6 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, Air7 Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration 

8 Institute. 

9 MR. HINKLE: Jerome Hinkle, 

10 American Clean Skies Foundation. 

11 MS. WALTNER: Meg Waltner, National 

12 Resources Defense Council. 

13 MR. COMSTOCK: Owen Comstock, 

14 Energy Information Administration. 

15 MR. REIDINGER: Dan Reidinger, 

16 Edison Electric Institute. 

17 MS. WEISS: Joanmarie Weiss, Weiss 

18 Farm. 

19 MR. WEISS: Roger Weiss, Weiss 

20 Farm. 

21 (Off mic comment.) 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Once again, thanks 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 8

1 to all of you for joining us, being here on 

2 time so we can get an early start on this day. 

3 I think all of you received a packet of 

4 information as you came in this morning. In 

5 the packet is an agenda, a series of 

6 PowerPoint slides, which will be the basis for 

7 presentation and discussion today, as well as 

8 the proposed rule, so all of you will have a 

9 copy of that. 

10 I'm going to run through the 

11 agenda real quick, and then we're going to 

12 move to the substantive issues. Immediately 

13 following this agenda review, there'll be a 

14 brief overview of key proposals and questions, 

15 and following that there's an opportunity for 

16 anybody that wishes to do so, to make brief 

17 opening remarks, brief summary remarks. I 

18 have a copy, I believe, of eight -- 

19 (Off the record comments.) 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: So, immediately 

21 following this agenda review, there's an 

22 opportunity -- there's going to be a brief 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 9

1 overview of the key proposals and questions 

2 that the Department wishes to have you respond 

3 to. And then following that, there's an 

4 opportunity for anybody that wishes to do so 

5 to make brief summary statements about the key 

6 issues and concerns. 

7 I have in front of me the 

8 statements of at least eight individuals that 

9 sent comments in advance. That's very helpful 

10 to the Department. These written statements 

11 will be a part of the complete record. I'm 

12 hoping that as you make your statements, 

13 you're not going to read these all the way 

14 into the record; that is, you can condense 

15 these comments for the purposes of this 

16 hearing today. 

17 Following that, there's a 

18 significant amount of time allotted for that. 

19 If it goes a whole hour, then we'll take a 

20 break midmorning, around about 10:45, or so. 

21 And then immediately following that, we'll 

22 move to the Shift from Primary Energy to Full-
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 10

1 Fuel-Cycle Energy using GREET model. And 

2 there's an opportunity for discussion and Q&A 

3 following that. Also, we'll break around 

4 about 12:15, or so, for lunch, depending on 

5 when we're at a natural stopping point, and 

6 return from lunch. As we get to the lunch 

7 hour, those of you that are not familiar with 

8 the way it works here at the Forrestal 

9 Building, we'll acquaint you with the way to 

10 get back and forth. 

11 Immediately following lunch, 

12 Addition of Energy-Related Emissions of 

13 Methane and Nitrous Oxide to Estimated Impacts 

14 on CO2 Emissions, followed by discussion. And 

15 then Improving Information Available to 

16 Consumers, followed by discussion. There's an 

17 opportunity, again, at the end of the day for 

18 any additional comments, final remarks, and 

19 questions, issues that you do not think have 

20 been covered sufficiently. We intend to 

21 finish today Next Steps, and closing 3:15, 

22 3:30, or so. So, that's the plan for today. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 11

1 Questions and comments about the agenda? 

2 I'd ask for your consideration, 

3 what have emerged as norms, courtesies, if you 

4 will, for the conduct of these public 

5 meetings, please speak one at a time, please 

6 say your name for the record each time you 

7 speak. You don't need to say your 

8 organizational affiliation again. Some of you 

9 are in the habit of doing that, but please 

10 speak each time. There will be a complete 

11 record, a transcript of this meeting today. 

12 I'm going to be queuing people by name as best 

13 I can to speak. I also wish to encourage 

14 follow-on comments. Sometimes the back and 

15 forth is very helpful to the Department. 

16 Please be as concise as you can, 

17 share the air time with your colleagues here. 

18 And if you can keep the focus here, please 

19 turn your cell phones on silent mode, and 

20 limit the sidebar conversations. These 

21 microphones work pretty well, but they need to 

22 be turned on to work. Okay. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 12

1 So, that's the general plan for 

2 today. Questions and comments before we 

3 launch into it? Mark Friedrichs. 

4 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Just a note that 

5 the public transcript, as well as all the 

6 statements and public comments will be on 

7 www.regulations.gov as soon as they become 

8 available. Some comments are already in the 

9 docket section of regulations.gov for this 

10 proposed policy. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. And I 

12 should also welcome those that are joining us 

13 via webinar. This is a new practice over the 

14 last several meetings that the Department has 

15 initiated web contact, so I hope that the web 

16 portion of this engagement works well for 

17 those that have dialed us up and are tuned in 

18 via computer. 

19 So, having said that, let's -- 

20 MR. PERKINS: Do you want to 

21 mention where the restrooms are? 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Sure. Yes. The 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 13

1 restrooms are at both ends of the hall, and as 

2 we get to the coffee break, we'll describe 

3 where to get coffee. 

4 MR. PERKINS: Hello, again. My 

5 name is Anthoney Perkins, as I've already 

6 stated, but I just want to go ahead and, first 

7 of all, start out giving you a background of 

8 what the proposed policy is all about, and 

9 then I'll turn it over to Mark to give you 

10 some further information. 

11 We started out with Section 1802 

12 of EPACT 2005, which directed DOE to contract 

13 with the National Academy of Sciences to 

14 examine whether the goals of energy efficiency 

15 standards are best served by measurement of 

16 energy at the actual site of energy 

17 consumption, or through the FFC, the Full18 Fuel-Cycle. 

19 The National Academy of Sciences 

 th

20 transmitted its report to DOE on May 15 of 

21 2009, and you'll notice in the Federal 

22 Register Notice, as well, there is a link that 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 14

1 you can go see the full report, so you can 

2 look there if you want to see the full report. 

3 A key recommendation was to use 

4 the FFC measures of energy consumption to 

5 assess national environmental impacts of 

6 standards, and to provide more comprehensive 

7 information to the public through labels, and 

8 other means. This DOE Notice of Proposed 

9 Policy addresses this, and other NAS 

10 recommendations. 

11 So, from there, I'm going to go 

12 ahead and turn it over to Mark, and he's going 

13 to talk a little bit about what our proposal 

14 is. 

15 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Just very briefly 

16 before we get on to the general statements, I 

17 thought I'd refresh your memory about what the 

18 proposal covers. While we are trying to 

19 respond to the NAS recommendations, we've 

20 structured the proposal differently, and we've 

21 addressed some issues that weren't raised, 

22 specifically, in the NAS report. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 15

1 The first and primary focus, which 

2 you'll hear about much this morning, is our 

3 proposal to shift from the focus on primary 

4 energy as the basis for national energy 

5 savings, and environmental impacts of 

6 efficiency standards to Full-Fuel-Cycle 

7 energy, and emission impacts. 

8 A second focus, which we'll get to 

9 either late in the morning, or early in the 

10 afternoon, is a proposal to add two new 

11 greenhouse gases to our consideration. These 

12 are Methane and Nitrous Oxide, often 

13 associated with the production and 

14 distribution of energy, and that's why they 

15 are especially relevant with a shift to Full16 Fuel-Cycle. 

17 And, finally, a fairly open-ended 

18 proposal for improving the information 

19 available to consumers on the Full-Fuel-Cycle 

20 energy and emission impacts of appliances with 

21 some new ways of, hopefully, comparing across 

22 classes. But this is really, we hope, an 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 16

1 open-ended discussion later today. 

2 I just wanted to kind of quickly 

3 summarize the key kinds of questions that we 

4 would like to address today. We not only want 

5 to address our proposal to shift to the 

6 consideration of Full-Fuel-Cycle energy and 

7 emissions, but we'd also like to have some 

8 discussion of the methodology. And, 

9 obviously, we've chosen right now to use the 

10 GREET model, an Argonne National Lab model, as 

11 the basis for our estimates, but we'd like to 

12 hear your views on that. 

13 Similarly, for the addition of 

14 Methane and Nitrous Oxide, not only that 

15 addition, but the methodology for calculating 

16 those impacts. And for consumer information, 

17 not only what kind of information consumers 

18 should be provided, but the mechanisms that 

19 are likely to be most effective in providing 

20 that information. 

21 We're going to consider all 

22 comments that are made today, and that we 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 17

1 receive over the next couple of weeks, before 

 th

2 the comment period closes October 19 , in 

3 developing a Final Statement of Policy on 

4 these issues, which we hope to issue before 

5 the end of the year. But it's important to 

6 keep in mind that that Statement of Policy is, 

7 itself, not a regulatory action, actually. It 

8 will be reflected in future rulemakings, 

9 future proposed rules, future Regulatory 

10 Impact Analysis. And, at that time, there 

11 will be some further opportunity to get into 

12 some of the details of how we apply our policy 

13 in this area. So, keeping that in mind, I'd 

14 like to begin hearing the general statements. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: And it's very 

16 helpful to the Department, those of you that 

17 have submitted written comments in advance, 

18 and I have a stack of them here, and I thought 

19 as a way of beginning, I'd simply start at the 

20 top and work my way through it. Rick, before 

21 we begin. 

22 MR. TEMPCHIN: I have a question. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 18

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Say your name, Rick. 

2 MR. TEMPCHIN: Rick Tempchin, 

3 Edison Electric Institute. I have a question 

4 for Mark. 

5 Mark, the -- I just want to 

6 clarify the National Academy recommendation 

7 was to consider moving over time. Correct? 

8 Rather than to use. I'm not trying to mince 

9 words here, but it was consider moving over 

10 time, and also to clarify, it was not a 

11 unanimous recommendation, there were two 

12 strong dissents. Correct? 

13 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I think you are 

14 correct on both counts. And, obviously, this 

15 will be an extended process that the 

16 Department is now beginning to move to Full17 Fuel-Cycle, both in our regulatory analyses, 

18 and in consumer information activities. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: And you'll describe 

20 what the adoption time frame is, and all that 

21 during the course of the day. 

22 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes. I think I've 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 19

1 already begun to talk about that. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Okay. Just 

3 wanted to be clear. 

4 The first statement I have in 

5 front of me is from David, is it Mohre, 

6 National Rural Electric Cooperation 

7 Association. Is he here in the room? Then, 

8 I'll move on. How about a statement by the 

9 American Gas Association. Who is here 

10 representing them? Is that you, Andrew? 

11 Please. Can you do this in the span of -- can 

12 you do it rather succinctly? 

13 MR. SOTO: I'll be very brief. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

15 MR. SOTO: Let me just highlight, 

16 we did submit a statement in the record, and 

17 let me just highlight a few points. First of 

18 all, my name is Andrew Soto, I'm with the 

19 American Gas Association. 

20 AGA supports the Department's 

21 proposal in this proceeding. Fundamentally, 

22 customers should understand the energy use and 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 20

1 environmental impacts associated with their 

2 appliance choices, so we encourage the 

3 Department of Energy to work with the Federal 

4 Trade Commission to provide customers the 

5 information they need to make smart decisions 

6 about the appliances they purchase. 

7 The current site-based efficiency 

8 standards in appliance labels are, at best, 

9 misleading, and they are not fuel-neutral. 

10 Site energy metrics provide incomplete 

11 information regarding energy consumption and 

12 emissions, because they emit all of the 

13 upstream energy and emissions needed to 

14 deliver the fuel to its point of use. They 

15 advantage appliances where the fuel emissions 

16 and impacts are upstream, and they 

17 disadvantage appliances, such as natural gas 

18 appliances, where the energy consumption and 

19 emissions occur at the site. Therefore, Full20 Fuel-Cycle metrics enable a more complete 

21 analysis of the total energy and environmental 

22 impacts of the energy efficiency standards. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 21

1 They would level the playing field for 

2 appliances that use different fuels, and would 

3 make the Department's appliance standards 

4 truly fuel-neutral. 

5 It's for these reasons that the 

6 National Academy of Sciences recommended that 

7 the Department consider moving over time to 

8 the use of a Full-Fuel-Cycle measure of energy 

9 consumption for assessment of national energy 

10 and environmental impacts. And they also 

11 recommended, Recommendation Three, that the 

12 Department immediately implement a source13 based metric for appliances for which there is 

14 a choice of fuels. 

15 In addition, AGA also supports the 

16 Department's use of the GREET model to derive 

17 Full-Fuel-Cycle conversion factors. There has 

18 been some debate in years past over how best 

19 to derive those factors for converting site 

20 energy to Full-Fuel-Cycle energy consumption. 

21 AGA believes that the GREET model is 

22 sufficient for DOE's purposes. In fact, the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 22

1 gas industry is united on this point. On 

 th

2 September 30 , AGA, along with 12 other gas 

3 industry associations and organizations sent a 

4 letter to the Department acknowledging that 

5 the GREET model can produce appropriate 

6 conversion factors for the Department's 

7 National Impact and Environmental Assessments. 

8 The gas industry recognizes that 

9 as with all models, refinements can be made, 

10 and up-to-date information can be added as it 

11 is developed, and we encourage the Department 

12 to continue to look at those ways to improve 

13 the model, and update the information. But, 

14 at present, the conversion factors that the 

15 GREET model has produced adequately reflect 

16 the differences in energy consumption and 

17 emissions of the various fuel sources. 

18 As I indicated, the ultimate goal 

19 should be to provide consumers with better 

20 information. Working with the FTC, the 

21 Department should provide customers the 

22 information they need to make smart appliance 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 23

1 choices. So, we support the Department's 

2 proposal to improve the Federal Trade 

3 Commission's online information. Moreover, we 

4 urge the Department to work with the FTC to 

5 provide emissions information on the energy 

6 guide labels, so that customers can better 

7 understand the emissions implications of their 

8 appliance choices. 

9 AGA believes that any concerns 

10 regarding the complexity and utility of any 

11 particular energy guide label can, and should 

12 be addressed in a rulemaking proceeding by the 

13 FTC, when it revises those labels. The 

14 potential that some labels may be perceived by 

15 some users as less than clear should not be a 

16 basis for denying customers the emissions 

17 information they need to make environmentally 

18 sound appliance choices. 

19 With that, I'll submit the rest of 

20 my statement, and we'll have further comments 

 th

21 by October 19 . And I thank you for the 

22 opportunity to address these issues of great 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 24

1 importance to AGA members. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. The next 

3 statement that I have is from, I believe, CECA 

4 Solutions, and these were submitted by Ellen 

5 Berman. Is there a representative from CECA 

6 Solutions here in the room? Then I'll move 

7 on. The next statement is from the American 

8 Public Gas Association. Do we have a 

9 representative? Yes, your name, please. 

10 MR. BEAUREGARD: Yes, good morning. 

11 My name is Robert Beauregard with the 

12 American Public Gas Association. I appear in 

13 support of the EERE Notice of Proposed Policy, 

14 proposing to incorporate a Full-Fuel-Cycle or 

15 FCC analysis in the methods it uses to 

16 estimate the likely impacts of energy 

17 conservation standards on energy use and 

18 emissions. 

19 That said, I'm sorry, such 

20 analysis provides a better basis for comparing 

21 the energy use and overall emissions 

22 associated with products that use different 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 25

1 fuels, such as electric and natural gas water 

2 heaters. 

3 That said, APGA recognizes that 

4 energy costs remain an important metric for 

5 consumers to compare their product purchases. 

6 APGA also speaks in support of the proposed 

7 collaboration between DOE and FTC to make FTC 

8 energy and emissions data available to the 

9 public to enable consumers to make cross-class 

10 comparisons. 

11 As AGA stated, we joined in that 

12 letter to Assistant Secretary Zoi in support 

13 of the NEMS and GREET models. We stated, as 

14 well, that APGA believes the conversion 

15 factors produced by the models based on 

16 current data are sufficient for DOE's purposes 

17 in this docket. 

18 That said, APGA anticipates 

19 ongoing improvements over time to the models, 

20 and encourages DOE to be diligent in 

21 considering industry and government efforts to 

22 update the information on emissions. For 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 26

1 example, the Gas Technology Institute, through 

2 comments filed by Neil Leslie in this 

3 proceeding, has offered DOE its Source Energy 

4 and Emissions Analysis Tool or SEEAT, S-E-E-A5 T, and its underlying methodology for 

6 consideration as further evidence of the 

7 technical validity of using the GREET 

8 methodology. 

9 SEEAT allows calculation of the 

10 source energy, and greenhouse gas emissions 

11 related to appliance site energy consumption 

12 by fuel type for each energy consuming device, 

13 and for the whole building. 

14 While DOE already incorporates 

15 source or primary energy analysis into its 

16 assessment of the impact of minimum efficiency 

17 standards, proposed move to FTC requires a 

18 wholly different approach if the resulting 

19 standards are to achieve the greatest possible 

20 reduction in energy consumption, and 

21 greenhouse gas emissions. 

22 For appliances with fuel options, 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 27

1 DOE should perform a side-by-side analysis on 

2 an FCC basis of each proposed standard. The 

3 conversion factors produced by the NEMS and 

4 GREET models can be used to yield consistent 

5 results on an FCC basis. 

6 The new comparative FTC analysis 

7 is the needed prescription against standards 

8 that exacerbate significant fuel switching, 

9 that in turn increases primary energy use, 

10 operating costs, and greenhouse gas emissions. 

11 DOE has the opportunity in collaboration with 

12 the FTC to add meaningful FCC energy and 

13 emissions information to the energy guide 

14 label. The information will give consumers 

15 and their contractors critically needed 

16 information about the true efficiency and 

17 environmental impact of their appliance 

18 purchases. 

19 This factual efficiency and 

20 emission information is critical given DOE's 

21 current legislative restriction on rating 

22 appliances based on site energy. The proposed 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 28

1 online database and related tools need to link 

2 appliance labels so consumer can clearly 

3 distinguish among the various alternatives, 

4 both during the research, and while making 

5 their purchases. 

6 If DOE were to access output from 

7 the SEEAT tool, the source energy factor, and 

8 carbon emissions factors derived from SEEAT 

9 can be easily added to the label. The 

10 supplemental information is meaningful, easy 

11 to incorporate, and it provides an immediate 

12 helpful step until the flawed site-based 

13 energy factor can be addressed. The 

14 importance of providing consumers with 

15 credible and verifiable information on the 

16 greenhouse gas emissions of any appliance on 

17 an FCC basis cannot be overstated. 

18 In conclusion, APGA strongly 

19 encourages DOE to urge broader adoption of the 

20 full FCC methodology. Thank you for this 

21 opportunity to speak on a very important 

22 matter to our members. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 29

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. The next 

2 written statement I have was submitted by a 

3 representative of the Gas Technology 

4 Institute. Is there anybody here representing 

5 those statements? Nobody in the room 

6 presently. Okay. Next, I have a statement 

7 from the Edison Electric Institute. 

8 MR. BARKER: Good morning. My name 

9 is Ken Barker, and I'm representing Dominion 

10 Virginia Power, and members of the EEI. 

11 Dominion is a large electric and 

12 gas company, one of the largest in the nation. 

13 I'm Vice President of Customer Solutions and 

14 Energy Efficiency for Dominion. We are a 

15 member in good standing of AGA and EEI. 

16 Dominion, on behalf of EEI and its member 

17 companies, many of which are combination gas 

18 and electric energy suppliers, have several 

19 key concerns about the proposed policy, and 

20 would like to highlight some of those 

21 concerns. I'd like to go over, briefly, five 

22 concerns we have that are outlined in the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 30

1 material we presented. 

2 First of all, the proposed policy 

3 change would inflate the economic benefits of 

4 high efficiency appliances beyond what the 

5 customer would actually save. DOE is looking 

6 to change its analysis to a Full-Fuel-Cycle 

7 type of analysis to go back to the point of 

8 extraction of fossil fuels and uranium. 

9 Unfortunately, in doing so, DOE's proposal 

10 would lead consumers to believe they will save 

11 more energy than is this case, and could cause 

12 them to make inappropriate economic decisions. 

13 Concern number two, appliance 

14 efficiency standards should not eliminate 

15 entire classes of appliances. Customer choice 

16 must be preserved. Weighting the analysis too 

17 heavily with the Full-Fuel-Cycle analysis can 

18 lead to eventual elimination of entire classes 

19 of electric products, and produce undue 

20 hardships on consumers. 

21 Concern number three, Full-Fuel22 Cycle analysis penalizes electricity generated 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 31

1 from renewables, and nuclear. The DOE analysis 

2 assigns a fossil fuel heat rate to renewables, 

3 and nuclear resources; however, the assigned 

4 source BTUs for these resources provide an 

5 inflated result to the national energy savings 

6 portion of electric appliance energy standard 

7 analysis. This, inappropriately, penalizes 

8 electricity generated from these sources. 

9 Concern number four, DOE should 

10 not attempt to use imputed costs in the 

11 appliance efficiency standard setting process. 

12 Imputed greenhouse gas costs can become a 

13 lightning rod for consumer backlash against 

14 appliance standards. Customers must be 

15 assured they can save their own money over 

16 time by using a more efficient appliance. 

17 Their confidence in efficiency labeling will 

18 decline if they find out they will not 

19 actually save their own money, and, instead, 

20 are subsidizing projected social costs. 

21 And, lastly, concern number five, 

22 appliance emissions labeling is confusing, and 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 32

1 misleading for consumers. DOE should not work 

2 to include emissions labeling on the energy 

3 guide labels. Greenhouse gas emissions 

4 reporting are extremely complex for electric 

5 utilities. Each utility has its own distinct 

6 GHG emission mix, so national, or even 

7 regional average data can be very misleading. 

8 If customers are interested, most electric 

9 utilities publish their fuel content and 

10 emission data. We agree with DOE that it 

11 would be way too confusing to customers and, 

12 potentially, very misleading to place GHG data 

13 on energy guide labels. 

14 However, for those customers who 

15 are interested in GHG emissions information, 

16 EEI would be pleased to work with DOE, or 

17 other interested parties, to develop simple, 

18 utility-specific GHG emissions information 

19 that can be made available on a website. Such 

20 information must take into account all fuel 

21 sources, and be individualized for each 

22 utility, and be simple to access and 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 33

1 understand. 

2 Thank you for your time and 

3 consideration of our input. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. The next 

5 statement I have is from the National Propane 

6 Gas Association. Your name, please. 

7 MR. CALDARERA: Good morning. My 

8 name is Mike Caldarera, with National Propane 

9 Gas Association. 

10 NPGA supports DOE's efforts to 

11 adopt the recommendations of the National 

12 Academy study regarding the Full-Fuel-Cycle 

13 approach to energy conservation standards and 

14 greenhouse gas emissions. Site or point of 

15 use energy measurements fail to provide a 

16 complete energy consumption, and greenhouse 

17 gas emissions profile, because they do not 

18 account for all the upstream energy use and 

19 emissions associated with delivering the fuel 

20 to its point of use. 

21 Limiting the analyses to end-use 

22 metrics ignores the fact that most energy 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 34

1 losses associated with non-gaseous fuels occur 

2 upstream. For example, using the site-based 

3 approach gives the impression that electricity 

4 has zero end-use emissions, and mask the large 

5 fraction of emissions caused by the combustion 

6 of fossil fuels for the purpose of electricity 

7 generation. Whereas, under a Full-Fuel-Cycle 

8 approach, the delivery process for at least 

9 our industry, the propane industry, is 

10 relatively efficient, about 87 or 88 percent 

11 of energy produced reaching the consumer as 

12 useable energy. 

13 Also, with regard to greenhouse 

14 gas emissions, propane is not a greenhouse 

15 gas. Its GHG footprint is small compared to 

16 other fuel sources, and is second only to 

17 natural gas in its on-site emission rate. 

18 NPGA also supports DOE's use of 

19 the GREET model for developing conversion 

20 factors to assess the Full-Fuel-Cycle energy 

21 impacts. In fact, the propane industry 

22 utilized GREET to perform a comparative 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 35

1 analysis of propane to other fuel sources with 

2 regard to greenhouse gas emissions. The study 

3 looked at annual energy use, and annual life 

4 cycle greenhouse gas emissions for a variety 

5 of applications that included space heating 

6 and water heating, among others. Sample 

7 results showed a propane furnace produced less 

8 than one-third the total amount of annual life 

9 cycle greenhouse gas emissions that an 

10 electric furnace would. But more broadly 

11 speaking, we believe that the conversion 

12 factors developed by the GREET model 

13 adequately reflect the differences in energy 

14 consumption and emissions of various fuel 

15 sources. This includes the ability of GREET 

16 to account for non-combustion-related sources 

17 of electric power generation, such as nuclear, 

18 hydro power, or renewables. As per this 

19 propane study using GREET, we will provide an 

20 electronic copy of this study with our 

 th

21 comments by the October 19 deadline, so that 

22 the Agency can review it in more detail. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 36

1 NPGA also supports DOE's efforts 

2 to work with the Federal Trade Commission in 

3 developing a means of providing consumers with 

4 energy use information and environmental 

5 assessments when making appliance purchasing 

6 decisions. We believe DOE should work with 

7 the Federal Trade Commission to provide such 

8 information on energy guide labels, so that 

9 consumers can better understand the emissions 

10 implications of their choices. 

11 Thank you for the opportunity to 

12 comment. And, again, we will provide 

13 supplemental or additional written comments by 

14 the October deadline. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. The next 

16 statement I have is from the American Clean 

17 Skies Foundation. 

18 MR. STAPLE: Yes, thank you. My 

19 name is Greg Staple. I'm the CEO of the 

20 American Clean Skies Foundation. We are a 

21 non-profit organization based in Washington, 

22 that was founded to promote America's energy 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 37

1 independence, and measures to achieve a 

2 cleaner environment through greater use of 

3 natural gas and renewables. 

4 We support, in broad terms, the 

5 Department of Energy's proposed policy shift 

6 to move toward a Full-Fuel-Cycle standard, 

7 rather than a point of use standard. We think 

8 it is a warranted change in policy based upon 

9 the strong recommendations made by the 

10 National Academy of Sciences. 

11 It is important for consumers to 

12 know the full energy environmental impacts 

13 that flow from the purchase of home and 

14 business appliances. It's often said that 

15 information is power, and here information can 

16 spur significant power savings, while also, 

17 potentially, helping the environment. 

18 I want to stress that the stakes 

19 are very large here, and the time really is 

20 short for moving forward. Millions and 

21 millions of appliances are purchased each 

22 year, which have expected lifetimes often of a 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 38

1 decade or more. Current federal efficiency 

2 standards have done a remarkable job over the 

3 years in savings, consumers, country, fuel, 

4 and in contributing to a cleaner environment. 

5 We believe that new standards based on a 

6 Full-Fuel-Cycle approach can continue to yield 

7 additional benefits. 

8 Most importantly, I think, and 

9 perhaps this is underscored by the National 

10 Academy's report, Full-Fuel-Cycle-based 

11 standards have the potential to facilitate 

12 apples-to-apples comparisons of competing 

13 fuels and appliances that are powered or use 

14 different fuels. We haven't had that ability 

15 before, as a result of which we suspect that 

16 consumer purchasing decisions have been 

17 distorted. 

18 The fact is there is significant 

19 variation in the energy and environmental cost 

20 of appliances and commercial equipment powered 

21 by different fuels, and by different types of 

22 power generation. Operating efficiencies and 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 39

1 pollution, NOx, SOx, greenhouse gases vary 

2 considerably, and the social costs can be 

3 considerable. For example, as many people in 

4 this room know, electricity generated by 

5 modern combined cycle gas turbine emits 

6 substantially lower NOx and CO2, and virtually 

7 no SO2, as compared to coal-fired generator. 

8 Accordingly, switching from coal to natural 

9 gas, which is underway in many parts of the 

10 United States, is likely to achieve 

11 substantial reductions in pollution, 

12 particular matter, reductions in ozone, and 

13 the like. 

14 What does this all mean for 

15 appliance standards? Well, let's take the 

16 current Energy Star program, and clothes 

17 dryers, something that most of us have in our 

18 homes. There is no Energy Star label covering 

19 clothes dryers at the moment, because most of 

20 them use similar amounts of electricity, but 

21 whether a clothes dryer is powered by gas or 

22 electricity, whether the electricity comes 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 40

1 from gas, or coal, or wind, or nuclear can 

2 make a big difference in the total energy 

3 used, and the resulting emissions. It is our 

4 hope that Full-Fuel-Cycle-based labeling will 

5 make these differences visible to consumers so 

6 that the information can be factored into 

7 appliance choices. 

8 So, given that the United States 

9 is committed to reducing various kinds of 

10 harmful emissions, and to improve public 

11 health more Full-Fuel-Cycle standards are 

12 plainly desirable, in our view. We believe 

13 they offer a much stronger means of assessing 

14 appliance options, and may facilitate 

15 significant health and climate benefits. 

16 We're going to submit more 

17 detailed comments for the record, but I would 

18 like to stress the urgency of this. We are 

19 responding today, speaking today to something 

20 that was written into a piece of legislation 

21 better than five years ago. We're now 

22 contemplating changing a policy in 2010 that 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 41

1 will lead, we hope, to a policy change by the 

2 end of the year, and future proposed 

3 regulations based upon this new standard in 

4 2011, and beyond. Let's get on with it. 

5 We're talking about tens of millions of 

6 dollars, potentially, in savings, and a huge 

7 impact, potentially, on the environment if, as 

8 we suspect, consumers will tend to make some 

9 different choices as a result of having better 

10 information. Thank you. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Other 

12 brief summary remarks here at the outset? One 

13 or two individuals did not get a chance to 

14 comment. If anybody additional wishes to 

15 comment at this time? Yes, please. 

16 MR. MOHRE: Thank you. I'm sorry, 

17 I must have submitted comments late. My name 

18 is Dave Mohre. I'm Executive Director of the 

19 Energy Power Division for National Rural 

20 Electric Cooperative Association. 

21 Cooperatives, basically, supply electricity in 

22 all parts of 83 percent of the counties in the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 42

1 United States, and they're consumer-owned, 

2 consumer-controlled, not-for-profit utilities. 

3 We've been involved with DOE for the last 30 

4 years encouraging and supporting the 

5 implementation of increased energy efficiency, 

6 and this view is supported by our membership 

7 through resolutions and other things 

8 cooperatives do. 

9 By being market and fuel neutral, 

10 we think these standards of maximized energy 

11 savings, while minimizing the effect of 

12 supporting markets, the effects on supporting 

13 markets. We, as we said in our written 

14 comments, are gravely concerned about the 

15 August 2010 Federal Register Notice moving 

16 toward Full-Fuel-Cycle. And let me tell you 

17 very quickly why we are. 

18 First, we think you've done very 

19 well, DOE has done very well. First, the 

20 Energy Policy and Conservation Act of `75, and 

21 the National Energy Conservation and Policy 

22 Act of `78 provided DOE with authorization to 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 43

1 set standards. Since that time, DOE has, 

2 obviously, used site-specific standards, and 

3 we think that's been a success. Clearly, 

4 energy efficiency has improved dramatically in 

5 that time, and based on what the manufacturers 

6 have responded, we think they understand 

7 those, and have responded very well. So we 

8 think, first, the system works. 

9 Second, as consumer-owned, 

10 consumer-controlled electric cooperatives, we 

11 believe that the analysis and cost 

12 effectiveness of the efficiency standards must 

13 be based on cost and savings that customers 

14 directly experience. Okay? We believe that 

15 basing standards on a difficult, constantly 

16 changing set of calculations that consumers 

17 may or may not fully understand may confuse 

18 and, candidly, we think amounts to an attempt 

19 to direct market outcomes. 

20 But, more importantly, how useful 

21 is it to show that an electric water heater, 

22 for instance, is 27 percent efficient, instead 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 44

1 of 95 percent at the site, and emits X amount 

2 of greenhouses gases when the customer may be 

3 located in Pacific Northwest, where most of 

4 the electricity comes from hydro power, clean, 

5 non-polluting hydro power. So, locational 

6 issues are clearly an issue. 

7 Third, as mentioned just before, 

8 given the rapid current changes in industry 

9 generation resources, we see older, smaller, 

10 less efficient coal units shutting down. We 

11 see fewer new ones in the pipeline. We see 

12 far more new natural gas-fired generation, and 

13 significant coal-to-gas switching. We see 

14 nuclear units under construction, and a lot 

15 more planned. And most importantly, perhaps, 

16 substantially increased renewable generation. 

17 So, to us, placing source energy consumption 

18 on a label for consumers can be very 

19 misleading over the life cycle of the 

20 appliance. In other words, yes, it's nice to 

21 know, but when and where are also needed. 

22 Fourth, we believe that site 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 45

1 energy can be very easily measured and 

2 verified, as the National Academy's report 

3 demonstrated. There was a lot of give and 

4 take on whether to support this, and 

5 eventually did, but it issued a caution. Do 

6 this gradually. We don't really know how to 

7 do it yet. Things may change over time. We 

8 don't think the notice expressed that caution, 

9 nor a full understanding of the changes that 

10 are going on within the industry. 

11 Fifth, DOE is planning to place an 

12 estimated value on the global cost of 

13 greenhouse gas emissions. We have some 

14 problems with that. Until such time as there 

15 is a valid legislation in place that places 

16 the cost of carbon on the U.S., not the world, 

17 the U.S., we think DOE is premature in adding 

18 this to the calculation. 

19 And let me get to the final point. 

20 Six, certainly last, but certainly not least, 

21 and this is a function of my age, and the fact 

22 that I used to work at DOE back in the day, we 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 46

1 do not believe DOE should be in the business 

2 of picking technology winners or fuel winners 

3 and losers, particularly based on estimates of 

4 such unknowable cost, the greenhouse gases, 

5 unknowable resources, the structure of the 

6 future generation supply, and, again, citing 

7 this personally, we only have to refer back to 

8 the off-gas provision of the Industrial Fuel 

9 Use Act of 1978 to remember what happens when 

10 government does pick winners and losers. That 

11 was a very painful lesson to the entire 

12 country, and particularly to consumers. So, 

13 apples-to-apples, yes, if there's a way to do 

14 it, that would be great, but this is a very 

15 difficult thing. We think that it's a bad 

16 idea at this point in time. Thank you. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

18 Other comments? Yes, please, your name. 

19 MR. HOFMANN: Alex Hofmann, 

20 representing the American Public Power 

21 Association. We represent about 15 percent of 

22 the electricity sold in the U.S., and about 15 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 47

1 percent of our members are both gas and 

2 electric utilities. They're consumer-owned, 

3 consumer-controlled, non-profit utilities, and 

4 we would like to come on record as being in 

5 general support of what the EEI and the NRECA 

6 have said here today. 

7 Also, we'd like to say that site 

8 works very well. The Department of Energy -- 

9 well, first, I should say that we run an 

10 energy efficiency research and demonstration 

11 program called DEED. We work with the 

12 Department of Energy almost constantly 

13 promoting energy efficiency on various 

14 projects, and various stages of research 

15 across the U.S. We're huge supporters of 

16 energy efficiency, in general. In fact, I, 

17 personally, have lobbied -- well, not 

18 necessarily lobbied, but have worked with 

19 various environmental organizations in this 

20 room right now to promote energy efficiency. 

21 But what I'm trying to underline here is that 

22 site works very well. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 48

1 The Department of Energy has 

2 driven the amount of energy it takes to 

3 produce a unit of work down significantly, but 

4 the idea, what we're discussing here today, a 

5 partial life cycle assessment with a limited 

6 scope has created a few concerns for us. And 

7 I'd just like to offer up a question, just 

8 because I don't want to take up all your time 

9 today, but can a static label reasonably used 

10 to represent a continuously changing energy 

11 mix, not only that, but the physical path of 

12 electrons delivered, can a credible and 

13 verifiable label be created using this 

14 methodology that's proposed as a policy? So, 

15 that's a big concern for us. 

16 Thank you very much for allowing 

17 us to -- 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Other 

19 comments here at the outset, brief summary 

20 statements, issues you wish to flag here at 

21 the opening? Okay. 

22 Then let's proceed with the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 49

1 presentation of material. All of you have a 

2 copy of these PowerPoint slides that we'll be 

3 following on the screen up here. And I should 

4 note for those that are joining us via the 

5 web, as these presentation content blocks are 

6 completed, I think the Department is going to 

7 try to answer a few questions that come in via 

8 the web. If you can type then in, then Hoi 

9 will do her best to see if she can get them 

10 reviewed. So, we'll try this and see if it 

11 works. 

12 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Hello again. This 

13 is Mark Friedrichs. So, we're now going to 

14 begin the part of today's meeting that focuses 

15 a little bit more in detail on our proposal to 

16 shift from the consideration of primary energy 

17 to the consideration of Full-Fuel-Cycle 

18 energy, and emission impacts in our 

19 development of future product efficiency 

20 standards. 

21 Certainly, this proposal reflects 

22 a belief by the Department that Full-Fuel-
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 50

1 Cycle analyses would provide us with better, 

2 more comprehensive information on the likely 

3 impacts on energy and emissions of future 

4 efficiency standards. So, that's the 

5 fundamental reason why we're proposing this 

6 shift. It is consistent with the NAS 

7 recommendation. 

8 I want to make a couple of things 

9 clear, though. One, the way in which we're 

10 proposing to make this shift would not require 

11 any fundamental change in the analytical 

12 methods we now use to calculate the energy and 

13 emissions impacts of standards. Primarily, 

14 those analytical methods are rooted in the 

15 EIA's NEMS model. They produce estimates of 

16 primary energy, and of emissions, such as CO2 

17 that are associated with that primary energy. 

18 And, ultimately, what we are proposing to do 

19 is to use the GREET model to develop factors 

20 that would be used to modify those primary 

21 energy and emission impacts generated by NEMS 

22 to Full-Fuel-Cycle values. So, I think it's 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 51

1 important to understand that kind of 

2 methodological approach that we are 

3 recommending. 

4 Second, we are not proposing any 

5 change in the reliance on site-based measures 

6 of efficiency, as the metrics used in 

7 efficiency standards. We are required to use 

8 site-based methods by law, but there's still a 

9 strong feeling that all of the -- each of the 

10 standards should be fuel-specific standards. 

11 In other words, gas water heater standards 

12 would be evaluated in terms of their cost, and 

13 other impacts relative to other gas water 

14 heaters, and electric water heaters would be 

15 evaluated in terms of their energy and 

16 emission, and cost impacts relative to other 

17 electric water heaters. So, at least at this 

18 time, there's no change in that policy or 

19 approach in our efficiency standards program. 

20 And, finally, while the shift to 

21 the Full-Fuel-Cycle will have some effects on 

22 our total impact assessments, we think those 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 52

1 impacts are actually comparatively modest. 

2 I'll talk about those briefly. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's just pause 

4 right there for just a moment. 

5 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Okay. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 

7 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Yes. This is on 

8 the previous slide. Steve Rosenstock, Edison 

9 Electric Institute. For the second bullet, 

10 where "not requires significant change to 

11 methods used to estimate energy and emissions 

12 impacts of standards," when you look at 

13 primary energy and then go into Full-Fuel14 Cycle, doesn't Full-Fuel-Cycle really -- isn't 

15 primary energy really mostly a domestic type 

16 of analysis; whereas, Full-Fuel-Cycle, since 

17 you're going back to the extraction of 

18 wherever it is, isn't that more of an 

19 international type of analysis? And wouldn't 

20 that be, in my mind, a significant change? 

21 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes, if you 

22 consider that as significant change. For 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 53

1 example, if we imported electricity right now, 

2 I believe the NEMS model, the way in which we 

3 calculate primary energy -- and we do import 

4 electricity -- assesses the primary energy 

5 used to generate that electricity. In a 

6 similar way, the GREET model, I believe, 

7 estimates the energy associated with the 

8 production and transport of fuels from 

9 wherever they originate. 

10 Michael Wang from ANL will be 

11 speaking just after we get through this 

12 initial part, and he can get into a little bit 

13 more of the details of exactly how the GREET 

14 model makes those estimates. 

15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: So, it is going, 

16 basically, domestic to international with some 

17 of these analyses, isn't it? 

18 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I believe so. 

19 And, as I indicated, some of the current 

20 estimates also involve international data. 

21 Okay? Next slide. 

22 You can see this both in later 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 54

1 slides in this presentation, and in the 

2 notice. We believe the shift to Full-Fuel3 Cycle will, in the end, result in a roughly 7 

4 to 15 percent increase in our estimates of the 

5 energy savings likely to result from different 

6 standard levels, as well as the emissions 

7 associated with those different standard 

8 levels. But they would not alter the consumer 

9 life cycle cost analyses, or the net present 

10 value of consumer savings analyses, or the 

11 manufacturer impact analyses, which are also 

12 key analyses in any efficiency standards 

13 regulatory impact assessment. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's pause there. 

15 Frank Stanonik. 

16 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, 

17 AHRI. We've, obviously, been trying to figure 

18 out what exactly the impact of this Full-Fuel19 Cycle change in policy would be, and so my 

20 question is, based on these two slides, and 

21 perhaps I've oversimplified this, but my 

22 experience is that when DOE does an appliance 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 55

1 rulemaking, that I'll say the primary criteria 

2 is the life cycle cost, if you will, the 

3 direct consumer benefit. These two bullets 

4 seem to suggest to me that this policy change 

5 really doesn't change that, except that 

6 whatever level DOE picks, they would indicate 

7 well, on the national level we've actually 

8 saved this bigger amount of energy, or this -- 

9 or we've reduced this amount of emissions. Am 

10 I misconstruing this? 

11 MR. FRIEDRICHS: No, I don't think 

12 you are. There is one economic factor which 

13 the Department has been considering as a part 

14 of its efficiency standards development 

15 process for the last several years, and that 

16 is the estimated monetary value of CO2 

17 emission reductions likely to result. And 

18 because the CO2 emission reductions associated 

19 with a particular efficiency standard would 

20 likely increase by roughly that amount, 7 to 

21 15 percent, then that monetary value 

22 associated with those reductions would 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 56

1 increase. That's an economic factor that we 

2 consider in the development of our standards, 

3 and in selection of the standard that's most 

4 likely to maximize energy efficiency. But 

5 that's the single monetary value change 

6 affected by this rule, or proposal. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: So, Rick, follow-on. 

8 MR. TEMPCHIN: Yes. To follow-up on 

9 that -- 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Rick, say your name. 

11 MR. TEMPCHIN: Rick Tempchin, 

12 Edison Electric Institute. So, what you're 

13 saying is you're monetizing the costs of 

14 greenhouse gas emissions and you're assigning 

15 a value where this has not been done before, 

16 or assigning a value and rolling it into the 

17 economic analysis that customers -- so, it 

18 affects customer's economic cost and benefit. 

19 MR. FRIEDRICHS: We have been 

20 integrating that value into our consideration 

21 of efficiency standards for several years now, 

22 actually. It has been a part of the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 57

1 regulatory impact analyses. Some of the 

2 monetary values that we use for that purpose 

3 have shifted, but that has become standard 

4 practice in all of our rulemakings, so it's 

5 not associated with this proposal. 

6 MR. TEMPCHIN: So, what's the 

7 change here in terms of monetizing and 

8 incorporating social costs into the analysis, 

9 what's the change? 

10 MR. FRIEDRICHS: There's no change 

11 in our basic methodology that we would 

12 consider the monetary value of greenhouse gas 

13 reductions likely to occur as a result of a 

14 new efficiency standard. The one change is 

15 that the -- our estimated greenhouse gas 

16 impacts associated with a particular standard 

17 is likely to increase because of the shift 

18 from primary energy emissions to Full-Fuel19 Cycle emissions. And it's likely to increase 

20 by roughly that amount that I indicate, 7 to 

21 15 percent. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 58

1 MR. SOTO: Andrew Soto, AGA. As I 

2 understand the Technical Support documents on 

3 this point in prior rulemakings, there is an 

4 interagency working group that establishes 

5 these costs for carbon emissions. Could you 

6 explain that process a little bit more, 

7 please? 

8 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I'm not sure I'm 

9 the best person to explain it. I'm not expert 

10 on that process, but yes, there was an 

11 interagency process. It did result in a range 

12 of values, which we have been considering 

13 since approximately February of this year. 

14 There had been previous interagency processes, 

15 each of which produced different sets of 

16 values that we previously considered in 

17 rulemakings, and there may be future 

18 interagency processes that change those values 

19 in the future. The Department of Energy is 

20 one of the agencies that participates in the 

21 development of those values, and likely would 

22 in the future. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 59

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 

2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

3 Edison Electric Institute. Just referring to 

4 the proposed rule on refrigerators that came 

5 out a couple of weeks ago, it looks like the 

6 Department, when they're looking at the 

7 annualized benefits and costs, is using a 

8 range of $4.70 per ton up to $64.90 per ton 

9 for CO2. So, in effect, with this Full-Fuel10 Cycle, for every ton, you have that range of, 

11 I'll say $5 to $65 to round off, then you add 

12 the other 10 or 15 percent on top of that in 

13 terms of your numbers that you're going to 

14 come out with in terms of monetized benefits. 

15 Is that a good way to summarize? 

16 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes, I think 

17 that's correct. 

18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Rick. 

20 MR. TEMPCHIN: Rick Tempchin, 

21 Edison Electric Institute. Also, I just want 

22 to clarify, am I right to say that your 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 60

1 monetizing the value in a present value sense 

2 out to year 2300; in other words, the present 

3 value of the benefits of CO2? 

4 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I'm actually not 

5 an expert on the various climate impact 

6 models, and the length of time they look out, 

7 but they do look out into the distant future 

8 to assess the likely economic, and other 

9 impacts of greenhouse gases. 

10 MR. TEMPCHIN: It looks to me like 

11 it's looking at 290 years. 

12 MR. FRIEDRICHS: You may be 

13 correct, but I am not aware of that number. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Additional comments 

15 before we move on? Okay. Let's proceed. 

16 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Actually, we're at 

17 a point where we wanted to break, not break, 

18 not for coffee, I'm sorry, but to ask for 

19 comments on this part of our proposal, the 

20 shift to the Full-Fuel-Cycle before we get 

21 into the details of the GREET model. And, 

22 although, it's a little bit misplaced in the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 61

1 PowerPoint presentation, I'm going to -- this 

2 is a list of questions, some of which are 

3 relevant to this part of our morning. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Are they in the 

5 slides? 

6 MR. FRIEDRICHS: They are in the 

 th

7 slides. They're on about the 20 slide. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

9 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Unfortunately. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Well, they 

11 can look at them up on the screen. Then let's 

12 do -- yes, receive comments that the 

13 Department has prompted, and other additional 

14 comments on the slides we just completed. 

15 Please say your name. 

16 MS. WEISS: Joanmarie Weiss. I'm a 

17 dairy farmer from Michigan. And, I guess, I 

18 came to Washington to visit, and have been 

19 encouraged to be involved in the politics of 

20 Washington, so we selected this meeting to sit 

21 in on today. Did a little research, and a 

22 little research can be a dangerous thing, but 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 62

1 I do understand that we're discussing site 

2 consumption, which is the label that's on the 

3 appliances that I purchase for my farm, like 

4 the electric resistant water heater that we 

5 have, versus a full carbon footprint, which is 

6 what the Full-Fuel-Cycle would show. And in 

7 your 447-page paper that's on the internet, I 

8 took the summary of it, which I'm going to 

9 just even abbreviate the paragraph. It says, 

10 "The Energy Policy and Conservation Act is 

11 designed to achieve the maximum improvement in 

12 energy efficiency, which the Secretary of 

13 Energy determines is technologically feasible, 

14 and economically justified." 

15 I think that's a noble thing for 

16 the government, but I'm in business, and it's 

17 more important to me, as someone up here said 

18 earlier, to know the actual cost of that 

19 product that -- appliance on my farm than to, 

20 necessarily, know the cost of the whole carbon 

21 cycle. So, I would say that for business, the 

22 need is to study the -- for my business, my 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 63

1 need is to study the economic feasibility, so 

2 that I can justify a new technology on my 

3 farm. And I'm not sure that your labels that 

4 you're talking about are going to do that. 

5 And I'm hearing a lot of variance in $5 to $65 

6 for the cost of the carbon footprint. 

7 As I dairyman, I live on about a 

8 10 percent margin. We make about $250,000 a 

9 year. Our family lives on about $25,000 a 

10 year. I need to have very small margins, so 

11 if you're going to use something like this, 

12 you need to get as precise as you can, not $5 

13 to $65. And I agree that you may need to do a 

14 little more research before you jump in and do 

15 this. Thank you very much. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

17 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I just wanted to 

18 say welcome. It's unusual that we have a real 

19 user attend our meetings. I'm from Michigan, 

20 so I'm glad to see you. 

21 (Laughter.) 

22 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I should also say 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 64

1 that on the labels, and in our standards 

2 development process, the cost of the product, 

3 and the energy cost savings that are likely to 

4 result are really the primary focus of our 

5 efforts. We do consider a lot of other 

6 impacts, environmental impacts, greenhouse 

7 gases, and so forth, but costs, and cost 

8 impacts on consumers remain a central focus. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: So, looking at the 

10 slide, I think that in opening remarks, 

11 several people addressed these things, but FFC 

12 measures of energy use and emissions in these 

13 analyses in the GREET model, and also DOE 

14 seeks comments on proposed methodology for 

15 converting primary energy, and determining FFC 

16 greenhouse gases and other emissions, and any 

17 other related issues. So, do we have 

18 additional comments on that? Let's hear from 

19 this gentleman first. 

20 MR. WOYCHIK: Good morning. Yes, 

21 I'm Eric Woychik with Black & Veatch. I just 

22 wanted to ask if capacity benefits are 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 65

1 included in the calculations. And I would 

2 suggest if they're not, capacity benefits 

3 being a very important part of the electricity 

4 equation, so I think if you're leaving those 

5 out, and I would suggest you are, it's a big 

6 problem when you're trying to consider the 

7 value of various appliances and whether they 

8 can be used, for example, for demand response, 

9 not just for their energy consumption, 

10 including electric water heaters, HVAC, et 

11 cetera. Those benefits can be very large, and 

12 they're increasingly important as we integrate 

13 more renewable energy. You need more what is 

14 called dispatchable ramping capacity, and 

15 those appliances can provide that. For 

16 example, electric water heaters probably 

17 10,000 megawatts. If you just extrapolate a 

18 few short years, five years, 10,000 megawatts 

19 to integrate at a much lower cost renewable 

20 energy means you have a very different cost 

21 for those supply resources as we're trying to 

22 get more clean. So, to the extent you ignore 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 66

1 those costs, and ignore the opportunities of 

2 using those appliances in different forms, 

3 that's a real mismatch in the cost-benefit 

4 equation. 

5 By the way, my background is 

6 writing the original California Standard 

7 Practice Manual for Cost-Benefit Analysis of 

8 Conservation Load-Management programs in 1983, 

9 and I'm in a project in California for the 

10 three IOUs, the statewide integrated demand 

11 side management task force to revise that. 

12 And this is one of the things that we want to 

13 do, is better include all the benefits and 

14 costs. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: So, in your written 

16 remarks to the Department, specifying how that 

17 would get done I think would be very helpful. 

18 MR. WOYCHIK: Thank you. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Rick. 

20 MR. TEMPCHIN: Yes, Rick Tempchin, 

21 Edison Electric Institute. Mark, just a 

22 question. One of the earlier slides talked 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 67

1 about Full-Fuel-Cycle providing more complete 

2 information. Could you talk about the range 

3 of uncertainty in some of these estimates that 

4 are being made? 

5 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I'd like to defer 

6 to Michael Wang, who will be up shortly, and 

7 can talk a little bit more about the inherent 

8 uncertainties in the GREET model. There is 

9 some discussion of that in some of the 

10 underlying papers documenting the National 

11 Energy modeling system, NEMS, that we use for 

12 our primary energy estimates. All of our 

13 estimates have some uncertainties, some 

14 significant uncertainties, so it's something 

15 that we deal with. And perhaps Michael can 

16 address this issue later. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: I'll make a note. 

18 We'll make sure we cover it. Frank Stanonik. 

19 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik of 

20 AHRI. Since we're at the comment point here, 

21 first want to indicate that AHRI, we're having 

22 a very difficult time understanding the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 68

1 benefit of this policy change to the 

2 rulemaking process. I understand all these 

3 other things about trying to look at total 

4 energy savings, reducing emissions, but in 

5 terms of, specifically, the rulemaking 

6 process, and if you remember my previous 

7 question, we're having a very difficult time 

8 understanding where that's really going to 

9 benefit the rulemaking process. So, I would 

10 tell you at this point, obviously, we're 

11 looking for more information. We just don't 

12 see any reason to go to this step. 

13 I'll also raise an example -- 

14 well, our main concern as we think of that, it 

15 adds a lot of complexity, and potential 

16 confusion to the process. And, again, we're 

17 not seeing the benefit. I'll just give you 

18 one example. If you're not aware of it, 

19 there's a furnace rulemaking process going on 

20 that's going to have, very likely, regional 

21 standards. And everything I've heard about 

22 the GREET in the Full-Fuel-Cycle is on a 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 69

1 national basis. How is that going to be 

2 addressed when you're looking at regional 

3 standards? So, that's just one aspect of what 

4 becomes a more complex process, again, looking 

5 at where does it -- how does it really affect 

6 the bottom line, which is -- again, appliance 

7 rulemakings, that's our concern. So, anyhow, 

8 we're really concerned about why do this? 

9 On the question of the labels, 

10 that becomes particularly troublesome to us, 

11 because the current energy guide label, 

12 manufacturers identify the efficiency of that 

13 model. They do a number of tests, thanks to 

14 some recent activities at DOE, it's even going 

15 to be more closely scrutinized, that label 

16 information. And now the suggestion is to add 

17 this other piece of information, which is 

18 nothing more than a factor. It has nothing to 

19 do with the actual -- there's been no 

20 measurement on that appliance. There's been 

21 no measurement of that appliance in wherever 

22 it's going. It's just saying okay, if this 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 70

1 product had an efficiency of X, we're now 

2 going to add this Full-Fuel-Cycle factor of Y, 

3 and you're just going to put this number that 

4 is a generic estimate, and really doesn't add 

5 anything as far as what the energy guide label 

6 is intended to convey, which is information 

7 about that specific model. So, we have a real 

8 concern about that point. 

9 And I can't help but mention that 

10 we've heard a lot about consumers wanting this 

11 information. If you look at the National 

12 Academy's report, the only person on that 

13 committee that was a consumer representative, 

14 in fact, was opposed to this idea. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

16 MR. FRIEDRICHS: We hope to get 

17 into those consumer information-related issues 

18 in a little bit more detail later. Thanks. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Other comments, and 

20 specific -- try to address the questions that 

21 the Department has posed here. Steve 

22 Rosenstock. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 71

1 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

2 EEI. GREET, I know Mr. Wang from the 

3 Laboratory will be talking about it, but GREET 

4 has been around since 1995. And I think it's 

5 up to Version 1.8D.1, I believe is the latest 

6 one. And I think it's been changed or updated 

7 because they're trying to get all the analyses 

8 of the information for the T transportation, 

9 by the way, the last 15 years. It's been 

10 updated probably once a year, I would guess, 

11 if not more, by the experts at the Laboratory. 

12 So, one big question is, which version of 

13 GREET are you going to use? And if GREET 

14 changes during a rulemaking, what happens, 

15 because the numbers could change, the 

16 uncertainty could change, that could affect 

17 all the end outputs, as well. So, there is 

18 that issue of how often does the Department 

19 need to evaluate GREET, which version does it 

20 use, does it stick with the same version 

21 during a rulemaking, does it update it between 

22 the preliminary analysis and the NOPR, and the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 72

1 Final Rule? There's those issues, as well, 

2 that could be coming up with this. Thank you. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks. 

4 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes, just to 

5 answer that. Of course, we wrestle with those 

6 same issues with the NEMS model, and with a 

7 lot of the other analytical tools, which are 

8 regularly updated, and our general answer is 

9 that we use the most recent methodology and 

10 forecast that is available, but during a 

11 particular rulemaking process, sometimes we 

12 need to freeze that methodology and forecast 

13 to enable us to complete the rulemaking. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Don Brundage. 

15 MR. BRUNDAGE: Don Brundage, 

16 Southern Company. A related question to that. 

17 I did sort of a deep dive a few months ago on 

18 NEMS with some of your contractors on how it 

19 handled electricity, and I was impressed with 

20 the level of customization in including the 

21 various regulatory drivers, and they're not 

22 just federal, but state level. Will you have 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 73

1 the same flexibility to customize GREET that 

2 you did with NEMS to handle those sorts of 

3 issues? 

4 MR. FRIEDRICHS: I want to 

5 emphasize something I tried to say earlier, 

6 and that is, we are not moving away from NEMS. 

7 All right? We will continue to rely on NEMS 

8 as the primary method for generating our 

9 energy and emission impact estimates. We will 

10 use GREET to generate conversion factors that 

11 move us from primary energy estimates to Full12 Fuel-Cycle estimates. But those primary 

13 energy estimates will continue to be generated 

14 by NEMS with all of the benefits that that 

15 brings with it. 

16 MR. BRUNDAGE: All right. Thank 

17 you. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Additional comments, 

19 because we're about to move on. Okay. 

20 MR. FRIEDRICHS: So, I'd like to 

21 turn it over to Michael Wang. 

22 MR. WANG: Yes, thank you, Mark. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 74

1 And I'm glad to be here to address some of the 

2 technical questions for GREET model, and Full3 Fuel-Cycle analysis. What I want to do is 

4 I'll finish my slides first, and I've already 

5 wrote down several questions from the previous 

6 period, and I'll address those three questions 

7 as they open the floor for more questions. 

8 Okay. The GREET model developed 

9 at Argonne National Laboratory is already 

10 capable of estimating the Full-Fuel-Cycle 

11 energy use and emissions of all forms of 

12 energy covered by this program. Later on, 

13 I'll show you what we have in the GREET model. 

14 The model is in public domain, and 

15 has been used previously to support other 

16 federal and state regulatory activities; 

17 namely, EPA has been using GREET for some of 

18 the transportation regulation development, 

19 such as the renewable fuel standard 

20 development on the 2007 ESA requirement, and 

21 California's lower carbon fuel standard 

22 development in California. The model can 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 75

1 generate factors that would be used to convert 

2 primary energy use and emission values 

3 currently generated by DOE's NEMS model, 

4 specifically, to the Full-Fuel-Cycle analysis. 

5 And I have some details about the conversion 

6 process we worked to DOE's Buildings program. 

7 As many of you are aware, the 

8 GREET model development effort has been about 

9 15 years at Argonne with DOE's EERE support. 

10 The model, as I mentioned, is in public 

11 domain, so the model and its document are 

12 available at Argonne's great website. It is a 

13 long web address here you see, but if you just 

14 simply Google GREET in the web, the first line 

15 you are going to see is Argonne's GREET 

16 website. 

17 The most recent version, as Steve 

18 Rosenstock point out, is GREET 1.8D.1, which 

19 we released in August of this year. As of 

20 now, there are over 14,000 GREET users 

21 worldwide. They are primarily concentrated in 

22 North America, Europe, and some Asian 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 76

1 countries. The flowchart here you see show 

2 you what is covered in GREET, an off-cycle 

3 analysis. From left to right on the flowchart 

4 is the so-called Fuel Cycle Analysis, from top 

5 to bottom is the so-called Vehicle Cycle 

6 Analysis. So, what we did for this proposed 

7 rule was the Fuel Cycle Analysis, namely from 

8 left to right on this chart. 

9 The model, as the name implies, 

10 covered energy, greenhouse gases are the 

11 criteria in producing emissions. For energy, 

12 we separate energies into the so-called fossil 

13 energy, which include petroleum, natural gas, 

14 or coal. We estimate each of the three 

15 separately, so you will be able to get the 

16 result for each of the three. There we have 

17 the so-called renewable energy, which would 

18 include the biomass, hydro power, wind power, 

19 and solar energy. Then we have nuclear 

20 energy, so this is energy embedded in the 

21 uranium, but as of now, we combine the nuclear 

22 energy together with renewable energy, so we 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 77

1 do not separate these two. But we do have the 

2 ability in GREET to separate nuclear energy 

3 from renewable energy. 

4 For greenhouse gases, we cover the 

5 three major greenhouse gases besides some 

6 other optional greenhouse gases. The major 

7 ones, as we all know, are CO2, CH4, and N2O. 

8 Furthermore, we combined the three greenhouse 

9 gases with the IPCC Global Warming potential 

10 factors to generate the so-called CO2 

11 equivalent greenhouse gas emissions, the so12 called CO2e. 

13 For criteria pollutant, we have 

14 VOC, CO, NOx, PM10, PM2.5, and SOx. And for 

15 the six criteria pollutant we separate into 

16 the so-called total and urban emissions. So, 

17 of course, as we all know, urban emissions are 

18 a subset of total emissions. 

19 This chart summarize the GREET 

20 fuel production pathways already included in 

21 GREET. As you see, we have over 100-some fuel 

22 production pathways already included in GREET. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 78

1 These are from petroleum, conventional crude, 

2 and Canadian oil sand. We have natural gas 

3 both from North America, and non-North America 

4 to different liquid fuels, gaseous fuels. 

5 And, of course, for non-North America, we go 

6 through a liquefaction to bring to North 

7 America as they produce different product. We 

8 have different biofuels which are irrelevant 

9 for this group today. We have hydrogen 

10 production pathways which we include in GREET 

11 for evaluation fuel cell because with 

12 different hydrogen production pathways. But 

13 most relevantly, we have different electricity 

14 generation technologies and pathways included 

15 in GREET. 

16 This slide summarizes the electric 

17 generation technologies we include in the 

18 current GREET version. As you can see, we 

19 have coal-based power generation, natural gas20 based power generation, and, of course, we 

21 have nuclear power, we have petroleum, 

22 primarily steam boiler for power generation. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 79

1 We all know, the petroleum based power 

2 generation shows very small in the U.S. We 

3 have biomass power generation, hydro power, 

4 wind turbine, solar photovoltaics, and 

5 geothermal. These are the new pathways we 

6 added in GREET, this version. And for these 

7 so-called renewable powers, we know that 

8 greenhouse gas emissions are zero during power 

9 plant operation. But what we did this time 

10 was to add the so-called infrastructure into 

11 GREET; namely, the concrete used to build 

12 hydro dams, the nuclear plant construction, 

13 the coal plant construction, and so on. So, 

14 now for power sector we have both plant 

15 operation and plant construction. And, of 

16 course, plant construction most relevant issue 

17 is the lifetime of the plant, because you add, 

18 you level your one-time burden over the 

19 lifetime of the facilities. 

20 So, what was the process to expand 

21 from primary energy use to the Full-Fuel-Cycle 

22 energy use. This flowchart show you what we 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 80

1 did. The first group is crude oil from well 

2 all the way to the site, versus the primary 

3 energy use, or site-specific energy use as 

4 some of us use this model in this meeting. 

5 So, EIA's NEMS generate the result for site6 specific energy use, which are highlighted in 

7 yellow. But what we did was this time extend 

8 to the Full-Fuel-Cycle to cover all the stages 

9 above the yellow box. So, as you can see, we 

10 have crude recovery, crude transportation, 

11 petroleum refining, and residual oil 

12 transportation to the site, so these are 

13 additional activities we included. 

14 The next group is natural gas, so, 

15 again, from site combust -- natural gas 

16 combustion, and to the applied site to all the 

17 way to natural gas on the ground that gets 

18 that gas all the way to the site, so, namely, 

19 we have natural gas recovery processing, 

20 natural gas transport, transmission and 

21 distribution. 

22 For coal, we all know coal is used 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 81

1 for power generation. The NEMS simulation, 

2 coal combustion is included for electricity 

3 generation, as they, of course, electricity is 

4 used in appliance, so what we did, again, this 

5 time is to include coal mining, coal cleaning, 

6 and coal transportation, so these are three 

7 stages we included for coal-based electricity 

8 generation. 

9 For biomass combustion, previously 

10 in NEMS simulations only combustion only, but 

11 this time we push all the way to fertilizer 

12 production, and fertilizer transportation, 

13 biomass farming, and biomass collection, and 

14 transportation. 

15 The last study for nuclear power, 

16 besides the nuclear plant operation, we push 

17 all the way to uranium mining, uranium 

18 transportation, the enrichment, and uranium 

19 rod transportation to the power plant. So, the 

20 boxes on the left side of the yellow boxes are 

21 what we expanded from primary energy use to 

22 the Full-Fuel-Cycle energy use. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 82

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Pause right there 

2 for a moment, if you would. 

3 MR. WANG: Okay. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: We have a question. 

5 Charlie Stephens. 

6 MR. STEPHENS: Yes. Charlie 

7 Stephens, Northwest Energy Efficiency 

8 Alliance. Would you do me a favor, please, and 

9 define for me crude oil recovery, or natural 

10 gas recovery? What do you mean by "recovery?" 

11 MR. WANG: The recovery means all 

12 activities in oil and natural gas field, so 

13 the pumping energy used to recover the energy 

14 from underground to the surface, and put into 

15 a pipeline or ocean tanker. 

16 MR. STEPHENS: So, that includes 

17 drilling? 

18 MR. WANG: It does. It include 

19 drilling, but it does not include exploration, 

20 so we have not include oil field exploration. 

21 MR. STEPHENS: So, it doesn't 

22 include exploration drilling. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 83

1 MR. WANG: Yes, that's right, it 

2 does not. 

3 MR. STEPHENS: Okay. Interesting. 

4 I'm having a little problem with where you 

5 get to, ultimately, because I'm looking at 

6 this concept of energy returned on energy 

7 invested, and I don't know how many people are 

8 familiar with that, but it's, basically, the 

9 amount of units you get at the burner tip, or 

10 the gas pump for the amount of energy compared 

11 to the total energy you found. And it's going 

12 down fairly dramatically, and has been 

13 recently in Canada. I'll use natural gas, 

14 just because I have those numbers at the top 

15 of my head, but in 1995, Canada's estimated 

16 EROEI was about 45 units at the burner tip for 

17 each one invested in getting it. In 2007, the 

18 last year I have numbers for, it was about 15. 

19 And if I plot that curve, it arrives at one20 to-one in about 2014, about four years from 

21 now. Now, it'll never get there, production 

22 will taper off first, but I'm having trouble 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 84

1 reconciling some of your numbers with those 

2 numbers that I'm getting from the National 

3 Energy Board in Canada. 

4 MR. WANG: I think later on when 

5 you see the table I have slides, you are going 

6 to see our numbers in some way consistent with 

7 what you got from Canada. Of course, we all 

8 know Canada has a large share of oil sand 

9 recovery, which is somewhat energy intensive 

10 relative to conventional crude recovery. But 

11 you're right, in Canada it is about 15 

12 percent, this is efficiency number rather than 

13 energy input, versus energy output number. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's wait and see 

15 what his table reveals. Steve Rosenstock, and 

16 I'll return to you, Charlie. 

17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

18 EEI. You talked about power plant 

19 construction for nuclear and renewables, and, 

20 again, with the drilling. Are there similar 

21 things for like the methods for hydraulic 

22 fracturing, and deep water drilling, where 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 85

1 you're taking some of those energy -- do you 

2 have some of that information, as well? I'm 

3 just trying to see how far in terms of apples4 to-apples that you have that. That's one 

5 question. And then I'll wait, and I have a 

6 second follow-up question. 

7 MR. WANG: Let me address this 

8 question. Right now for in my term I use 

9 operation-related activities versus 

10 infrastructure-related activities. Plus, 

11 constructions are infrastructure-related 

12 activities. So far in GREET, we address 

13 biofuel infrastructure activities, and now we 

14 address power sector infrastructure-related 

15 activities. We have not addressed 

16 infrastructure-related activities for other 

17 sectors yet. What we do in GREET is, piece18 by-piece we add in, but when do the so-called 

19 apple-to-apple comparisons we take 

20 infrastructure-related activities out, so all 

21 the groups would be on a comparable basis. 

22 So, for example, for this proposed rule, the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 86

1 numbers we generated did not include 

2 infrastructure-related activities. We did 

3 this for the power sector, because we have 

4 some ongoing efforts to evaluate renewable 

5 power versus conventional fossil power. And 

6 for some renewable powers, such as 

7 photovoltaics and wind turbine, the 

8 infrastructure could be significant. So, for 

9 the within sector comparison, we do so. For 

10 cross-sector comparison, we do not include 

11 that. 

12 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. The second 

13 thing, and I really like the models that you 

14 have here, the various supply chains. I think 

15 it would be of interest if there was another 

16 summary slide that showed how many possible 

17 inputs at each point of the chain, for 

18 example, biomass farming, that could be 50 or 

19 75 countries that could be doing the biomass 

20 farming, where we're importing that supply 

21 chain. So, if there is a way to figure out 

22 how many I'll say different inputs at each 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 87

1 part of the chain, I think it would be very 

2 helpful for the stakeholders just to see in 

3 terms of if they want to do their own 

4 sensitivity analysis, it would be very 

5 helpful. Thank you. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's go to Dave 

7 next. 

8 MR. MOHRE: Mike, I just have this 

9 question. I'm looking at your slide that 

10 shows the outcome of these models, and I'm 

11 going in 2030 our models show a very different 

12 energy mix. Thank you. A very different 

13 energy mix, so I have two questions. First, 

14 is that a capacity slide or an energy slide 

15 for electricity? 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Since you've raised 

17 it, Michael, why don't you present the content 

18 on this slide, so we're informed. 

19 MR. MOHRE: Okay. I -- 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: No, let's do that 

21 first. Go ahead, I'm coming to you next. 

22 MR. WANG: Yes. Okay. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 88

1 MR. MOHRE: Sorry. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: It's okay. No, it's 

3 good. 

4 MR. WANG: This slide presents -- 

5 several people already commented on the 

6 complication of generation mix in the U.S. for 

7 the power sector. This slide summarize the 

8 AEO 2010 generation mix, the 2010 generation 

9 mix, and the projected 2030 generation mix. 

10 So, when we generated the FFC conversion 

11 factors for the electricity, we use the EIA 

12 generation mix for these two years. So, these 

13 are what we used. And, of course, as some of 

14 the comments alluded to us, generation mix is 

15 a very dynamic situation. First, we have 

16 geographic variations. Then we have for type 

17 of variations over time, because now we have 

18 the renewable portfolio requirement in United 

19 States. We have efficiency requirement for 

20 the power sector in United States, and we have 

21 potential greenhouse gas regulations for the 

22 power sector. We have potential mercury 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 89

1 regulations for the power sector. All this 

2 will have critical roles in the future power 

3 sector's generation mix, so it is a dynamic 

4 process. And this is what EIA predict based 

5 on what EIA assumes the power sector could be 

6 in 2030. 

7 MR. MOHRE: Okay. Can I ask my 

8 question now? Okay. I'm looking at these 

9 numbers, and these numbers show way more coal, 

10 and way less biomass and others than anything 

11 I've seen from the industry for a long time. 

12 It seems to me that this is the, what they 

13 call the EIA business-as-usual-case. 

14 MR. WANG: Yes. 

15 MR. MOHRE: Okay. At the same 

16 time, you're modeling up to $64 per ton of 

17 CO2. There's an inconsistency here, isn't 

18 there? 

19 MR. WANG: I think, yes. 

20 MR. MOHRE: The business-as-usual 

21 case, and then imputing as high as $64, or am 

22 I missing something? Very possible. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 90

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs. 

2 MR. FRIEDRICHS: The $64, that 

3 range, the $4 to $64 is not actually any 

4 projection about what kind of carbon value 

5 would be placed on CO2 emissions by public 

6 policy. It is simply an estimate of the 

7 economic and other costs that would result 

8 from the emission of that CO2 over a long 

9 period of time. So, it makes no presumption 

10 about what future public policy is regarding 

11 CO2 emissions. 

12 MR. MOHRE: I understand that, but 

13 who -- 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: You mean the 

15 absolute -- 

16 MR. MOHRE: I hate to say, who pays 

17 those costs? 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: The absolute cost of 

19 the CO2. 

20 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Obviously, if, for 

21 example, we imposed -- we, the U.S. 

22 government, imposed a tax on CO2 emissions of 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 91

1 $64 per ton, the emission -- the generation 

2 mix in 2030 would likely change considerably, 

3 as a result of such a public policy. But we 

4 are not in the business in the efficiency 

5 standards program, and neither is the EIA 

6 through the NEMS model, of trying to predict 

7 what kinds of public policy changes there 

8 would be in the future. So, all of NEMS 

9 forecasts, and all of the energy efficiency 

10 standards impact analyses are based on a kind 

11 of fundamental presumption that existing 

12 federal law and regulation remains unchanged. 

13 That may be -- that, of course, is 

14 unrealistic, but we don't know -- we don't 

15 have the ability to know -- how public policy 

16 may change over time. 

17 MR. MOHRE: That's a fine answer, 

18 and thanks for the clarification. But it 

19 seems to me that these numbers compared to 

20 what the industry, itself, is projecting are 

21 very different, but that's a discussion we'll, 

22 apparently, have to have with EIA. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 92

1 MR. WANG: Let me make an 

2 observation here. I'm not in the position to 

3 make any policy statement, but I made a 

4 technical observation. If we look at the CO2 

5 values or greenhouse gas values, monetary 

6 values, those are my observations, the 

7 societal cost of greenhouse gas. When we look 

8 at what EIA predicts, the power sector is 

9 business-as-usual, it is assuming those 

10 societal costs that were not internalized, so 

11 meaning we do not internalize those societal 

12 costs, so they predict the generation mix as 

13 business-as-usual. 

14 MR. MOHRE: Just one more -- I'm 

15 sorry. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

17 MR. MOHRE: A quick question. How 

18 many regions do you model? 

19 MR. WANG: For U.S.? 

20 MR. MOHRE: For the U.S. electric 

21 system. 

22 MR. WANG: For the U.S. electric 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 93

1 system, we study 13 NERC regions as EIA 

2 defined. I think EIA expands to 14 recently. 

3 MR. MOHRE: Thank you. 

4 MR. COMSTOCK: My name is Owen 

5 Comstock. I'm from the Energy Information 

6 Administration, and I work on the end-use 

7 modeling for the residential sector, so, 

8 unfortunately, I can't answer too many 

9 questions about the electricity market module, 

10 or oil and gas, or whatever other components. 

11 But just to clarify, that EIA does not have a 

12 business-as-usual case, we never have. It's a 

13 reference case based on current policies, so 

14 it is an important distinction. And we don't 

15 make predictions, we make projections, so it's 

16 all based on current policy. And, of course, 

17 it is going to be outdated as soon as new 

18 policies are issued, but these are -- what 

19 you've shown are projections from last year, 

20 which went out to 2030. So, I just want to 

21 make some of those clarifications. 

22 As far as what regions we have, on 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 94

1 the end-use side, demand is modeled based on 

2 census divisions, so that's nine divisions. 

3 Our electricity market is, I believe, 

4 expanding from 13 different areas to 22 areas 

5 for year 2011. And I'm not sure how many oil 

6 and gas regions we have, but it is -- 

7 typically, results are presented as national 

8 aggregations, but we do have regional detail 

9 that I believe could inform additional inputs 

10 to the GREET model. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Let's go 

12 to this next gentleman next. Thank you for 

13 being patient. Your name? 

14 MR. WEISS: Roger Weiss, Weiss 

15 Farm. I have a question on agricultural 

16 biomass generation. Now, you're talking the 

17 way through fertilizer production, 

18 transportation, all the way down. On my 

19 understanding, biomass is from many sources, 

20 such as sugarcane, switchgrass, residual from 

21 corn and things. You actually can factor in 

22 all the things, like I harvest the grain corn, 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 95

1 sell that over here, and I just have the 

2 biomass left, and you can get an accurate 

3 model on that versus the man that grows the 

4 switchgrass, and hauls it maybe 150 miles to 

5 that? I can't see how you can get some 

6 numbers in that GREET model that actually -- 

7 and that's just the line that gets to me. I 

8 don't know. I mean, there is such a 

9 variability in agriculture, that I can't -- 

10 the man across the road grows corn for a much 

11 different price than I do. I mean, our input 

12 costs are different. You can't just say 

13 fertilizer costs. I'm a dairy farmer, I've got 

14 manure for fertilizer. That cost would have 

15 be traced back through feeding the cow. Way 

16 over my head, just thought that, you know -- 

17 MR. WANG: That's right. Yes, 

18 that's a different topic at a different time. 

19 I spent half of my time on biofuels, and yes, 

20 for corn, you have stored the corn grain, we 

21 allocate the burden to store it different 

22 ways. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 96

1 MR. WEISS: Okay. 

2 MR. WANG: And for residue we do 

3 not have any fertilizer use at all. For the 

4 so-called dedicated energy crops, such as 

5 switchgrass, we do apply some large bin 

6 fertilizer in order to enhance yield. And 

7 they, of course, will presume that sugarcane 

8 is a different story. 

9 MR. WEISS: Yes. 

10 MR. WANG: We produce SNo there, 

11 but move SNo to North America. We do import 

12 some through the Caribbean Basin Initiative, 

13 so those are all the calculations I spend half 

14 of my time to work. 

15 MR. WEISS: All right. Good luck 

16 with that. 

17 MR. WANG: Thank you for your 

18 holding up the complicated issue. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Stephens. 

20 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens, 

21 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. I just 

22 wanted to make the observation that I 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 97

1 understand the policy implications. I think 

2 what the point might have been, that certain 

3 modeling assumptions are incompatible with 

4 others. When you're doing your scenario 

5 analysis, essentially, a notion of a $65 a ton 

6 carbon tax is incompatible with half of the 

7 generation in 20 years from now being coal. I 

8 think you just have to make sure when you're 

9 doing your modeling and your scenarios, like 

10 we do with the Crystal Ball-type analysis that 

11 comes out of the modeling, that your 

12 assumptions are consistent. There are certain 

13 of them that will be null sets, that won't 

14 occur at the same time, and I'm hoping we're 

15 not relying on those. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs. 

17 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Again, on that 

18 point, as Michael pointed out, that $64 is 

19 simply an estimate of the uninternalized 

20 societal cost associated with CO2 emissions. 

21 It does not bring with it any presumption 

22 about what public policy affecting CO2 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 98

1 emissions would be, or might be. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock, 

3 and then I'll come to this gentleman. 

4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

5 EEI. I know those costs might, was it 

6 uninternalized, but if you look at the rules, 

7 especially, I'll just say the refrigerator 

8 rule, in particular, in the summary table, 

9 those values, those CO2 values are shown as an 

10 annualized benefit of the new rule. And for 

11 refrigerators, let me just throw out some 

12 numbers for you. At a 3 percent discount 

13 rate, DOE estimated for the new 

14 refrigerator/freezer rule, primary estimates, 

15 kind of midrange estimate of $2.9 billion for 

16 the operational cost savings, but the carbon 

17 savings at 3 percent discount, I want to be 

18 apples-to-apples here, at $21 a ton, they 

19 monetize that at $316 million, compared to the 

20 $2.9 billion, and at $65 a ton, it was $963 

21 million. Basically, it adds I'll say anywhere 

22 from about 11 percent to 33 percent to the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 99

1 estimated annualized benefits. That's 

2 significant. And, yes, I know it's not 

3 internalized, but it's being shown by the 

4 Department in their proposed rule as an 

5 annualized benefit. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

7 MR. ROSENSTOCK: So, it is 

8 significant. Thank you. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's hear from this 

10 gentleman. 

11 MR. WOYCHIK: Thank you. Eric 

12 Woychik from Black & Veatch, again. Mr. Wang, 

13 I'm just going to, I believe back to a point I 

14 made, and I think Mr. Mohre commenting asked 

15 the question, I didn't hear an answer. Are 

16 capacity benefits, not just energy benefits 

17 used, evaluated, brought forward in the model? 

18 MR. WANG: No, we have not 

19 addressed the capacity benefit. I think 

20 capacity benefit more so economic benefit for 

21 the power sector, the consumers. It should 

22 have effect on emissions estimate because now 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 100

1 you are going to operate different facilities 

2 at different capacity factors, so that should 

3 have some effect on what I am doing with the 

4 GREET, the model. But capacity factor benefit 

5 itself, to me, is more direct economic 

6 benefit. 

7 MR. WOYCHIK: Okay. So, we're not 

8 just talking about the capacity factor of 

9 units, we're talking about the capacity value 

10 that you get if you have air conditioner 

11 cycling, or you have water heater cycling, and 

12 that's very significant. I'm formerly with 

13 Cumbrage, one of the NASDAQ traded largest 

14 demand response companies, that's all they do, 

15 and that's a multi-hundred million dollars, is 

16 a billion dollar industry just for two 

17 companies. I mean, that must be ten -- it's 

18 $10 billion for just water heating in the next 

19 10 years, so something that I think needs to 

20 be considered. Thank you. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Mark 

22 Friedrichs. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 101

1 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes. On that 

2 point, we do attempt to estimate the impacts 

3 on capacity, but I think you're focusing on a 

4 new focus of utility load-management 

5 activities, and capability that is becoming 

6 more and more prevalent in the use of certain 

7 products that are regulated by efficiency 

8 standards. And we are trying to think about 

9 new ways of assessing those kinds of benefits. 

10 For example, if a product is made with a chip 

11 that enables it to be more easily controlled 

12 by a utility management system, should that be 

13 recognized somehow in our standards 

14 development process? So, this is a difficult 

15 issue that we're at least beginning to think 

16 about, and how we resolve it, we're not sure. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's let Michael 

18 finish. I believe you have three more slides, 

19 Michael. Let's get through the rest of this 

20 presentation. 

21 MR. WANG: Okay. And the next 

22 slide, so here is the approach we developed 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 102

1 together with DOE in order to use the NEMS 

2 simulated result that expands to FFC. So, 

3 basically, we developed ratios of FFC results 

4 to combustion result. Both were from GREET in 

5 order to maintain consistent. There we 

6 applied ratios to -- we developed ratios for 

7 both for energy use and emissions. And the 

8 ratio was applied to the NEMS result, so it's 

9 this process, and I think we all understand 

10 from the proposed rule document, this whole 

11 approach. 

12 This table is in the proposed rule 

13 in Federal Register. And, basically, it give 

14 you the quantitative samples, that if we take 

15 that approach, what are the ratios we generate 

16 from GREET, which we could apply to the NEMS 

17 result in order to move from primary energy 

18 use to Full-Fuel-Cycle energy use. And if you 

19 have specific questions, we can address, but 

20 I'm not going to walk you through the table. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Let's 

22 Reference Table Two, as well. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 103

1 MR. WANG: Yes. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: And then we'll take 

3 a couple of questions. 

4 MR. WANG: Let me quickly present 

5 this slide. This was for energy, so from 

6 primary energy use to FFC energy use, for 

7 greenhouse gas emissions from CO2 to the three 

8 greenhouse gases, we use similar approach. 

9 NEMS generates CO2 only emissions, so in order 

10 to extend from CO2 to CO2, CH4, and others 

11 combine together, we generate the ratios of 

12 CH4 and N2O to CO2. And then we applied those 

13 ratios to NEMS estimated CO2 emissions in 

14 order to generated GHG emissions. So, pretty 

15 much, similar approach as we did for energy 

16 use. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: I'm a little 

18 confused. You skipped forward a few slides. 

19 Take it back to Table One and Two. And let's 

20 take comments. I saw individuals had comments 

21 on this. Steve Rosenstock. 

22 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steven Rosenstock, 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 104

1 EEI. And, again, I would probably also refer 

2 to the slide before where you showed the 

3 different supply chains. It was above the 

4 generation mix. So, this kind of really refers 

5 to, if you go back one more slide, okay, the 

6 supply chains, and then you have the tables. 

7 My question is, for these tables, and, again, 

8 you have these preliminary estimates, but all 

9 the variations in the supply chains, and the 

10 range of uncertainty, when you go back to 

11 Table One and Table Two, number one, what is 

12 the estimated range of uncertainty, and what 

13 is the range of values based on all the 

14 inputs? For example, let's say for fuel oil 

15 1.13, was that plus or minus .13 or, again, 

16 .5, depending on the supply chain model? And 

17 are these average or median values? I'm 

18 trying -- because with all different supply 

19 chains, that could make a very big statistical 

20 difference. 

21 MR. WANG: Yes, a good point. 

22 These are average or mean. Most cases, 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 105

1 average and mean are very close in our 

2 forecasting simulations. As you may be aware, 

3 GREET was designed with stochastic 

4 simulations, and we have major distribution 

5 functions built in for key input assumptions. 

6 And if that's what DOE are going to do, say 

7 to generate some uncertainty range, we can do 

8 so. We can generate statistic variations, the 

9 standard deviation, the P value, which we have 

10 the ability to do so for each of the supply 

11 chains. But for this exercise, we did not do 

12 the stochastic simulations with GREET. 

13 MR. ROSENSTOCK: This is Steve 

14 Rosenstock, EEI. You have some of those 

15 results, so for fuel oil, let's say, I guess 

16 the average value is 1.13, but the range could 

17 be, let's say, 1.02, up to 1.3. Again, I'll 

18 just throw some numbers out there, based on 

19 different supply chains, based on the 

20 information you have. 

21 MR. WANG: Yes. There will be a 

22 range, but it's not going to be 1.02 to 1.3. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 106

1 The range is narrow than what you -- 

2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Again, I'm just 

3 throwing out that this is an average value. 

4 MR. WANG: Yes. 

5 MR. ROSENSTOCK: And there is a 

6 range for all of these variables. 

7 MR. WANG: There is. 

8 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Other 

10 comments? Yes, please. 

11 MR. HOFMANN: Alex Hoffmann, APPA. 

12 I have a follow-up. I've sort of developed 

13 what might be, as I was listening to this 

14 presentation, I've developed what might be a 

15 concern on the supply chain slide, but I just 

16 sort of observed, it seems like right some 

17 resources for production are allocated in 

18 different points of production. Right? But 

19 what I thought I heard you say earlier was 

20 that if there is not enough information on 

21 various parts of the infrastructure, various 

22 sections, it's not included in the comparison. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 107

1 Is that -- 

2 MR. WANG: Right. 

3 MR. HOFMANN: Okay. So, my 

4 question is, does that, by default of limited 

5 scope and information provide some advantage 

6 to one fuel type or another? That would be my 

7 concern. It seems like -- 

8 MR. WANG: Yes, it could. And 

9 alerted us to do. Let's say if we're going to 

10 have some region which will have solar or 

11 photovoltaic provide power, versus the other 

12 regions to have coal-fired power electricity, 

13 but not including infrastructure-related 

14 emissions, we overestimate the benefit for 

15 solar or photovoltaics, because solar or 

16 photovoltaic has a larger infrastructure17 related emissions than coal-fired power plant. 

18 But within the sector, that's going to be the 

19 situation. Cross-sector has become much less 

20 a problem. If we compare natural gas sector 

21 versus electric sector, versus the petroleum 

22 sector, that's become less issue. But within 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 108

1 the sector, especially for the electric 

2 sector, by excluding that you could favor 

3 certain technologies for the electric sector 

4 more so towards that way. It does not change 

5 the overall picture, but it pulls you more 

6 towards to a given technology. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs. 

8 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Thanks. Yes, this 

9 is actually a point of some interest, and that 

10 is, where we should draw the line in terms of 

11 the Full-Fuel-Cycle analyses, and is there 

12 some point in the assessment of energy and 

13 emissions associated with infrastructure that 

14 we should not go beyond. At the risk of 

15 opening a whole new set of issues, we, 

16 obviously, have infrastructure energy and 

17 emission impacts on the efficiency side of the 

18 equation, which we haven't proposed to begin 

19 to consider. And, at some point, this kind of 

20 analysis becomes extremely complex, and of 

21 less and less usefulness. So, anyway, I 

22 wanted to raise that broader question. And if 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 109

1 anyone does have specific comments on how we 

2 should draw those lines, it would be helpful. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: As was illustrated 

4 earlier, oil exploration, for example, Don 

5 Brundage. 

6 MR. BRUNDAGE: I'm going to make a 

7 quick comment on that, and then back to my 

8 original comment. I agree with you, and the 

9 further you go back and do an infrastructure 

10 and feedback, the closer you come back to a 

11 proxy of price, and end up back where you 

12 start. I think where you're drawing the box 

13 right now is reasonable. 

14 I've got a question on Table Two, 

15 not so much for what's in it, but for what's 

16 not in it. Because I'm not seeing any place 

17 in your presentation what your Full-Fuel-Cycle 

18 efficiency assumption is for non-combustion 

19 electricity sources, such as hydro, or wind, 

20 or photovoltaic. What sort of Full-Fuel-Cycle 

21 factors are assumed for those? And, 

22 particularly, wind, that's an increasingly 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 110

1 important resource. 

2 MR. WANG: Yes, that's a good 

3 question. That come into our technical 

4 discussion, life cycle analysis. What's your 

5 starting point when you count energy, when I 

6 say energy in kilowatt-hour, for coal-fired 

7 power plant, I use roughly for U.S. 32, 35 

8 percent conversion efficiency, so I know 

9 what's embedded in that one kilowatt hour if 

10 you produce from coal. When you produce from 

11 wind, your turbine conversion efficiency is, I 

12 think it's 10 to 20 percent. Of course, the 

13 wind variability, whether you use all the 

14 wind, so what's your starting points to count 

15 energy. Do you count the energy of wind 

16 available before it reach the top blade, or do 

17 you count the energy reached one blade, or you 

18 count the energy add up your electricity. 

19 MR. BRUNDAGE: Now, I think what 

20 you really need to consider there is if it's 

21 not a depletable resource, then the efficiency 

22 going across it is irrelevant. Wasted wind 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 111

1 does not have the same -- you don't deplete 

2 wind the way you do oil in the ground. If you 

3 look at the way building codes and things like 

4 the Net Zero Energy program treat renewables 

5 at the site of use, it's considered free 

6 energy, which would be infinite efficiency. A 

7 reasonable compromise for this approach would 

8 be consider renewables in hydro 100 percent 

9 efficient. And, actually, if you look at 

10 GTRI's study, they generally assume renewables 

11 at 100 percent efficiency. Thank you. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Frank 

13 Stanonik. 

14 MR. WANG: Let me quickly to 

15 respond. That's exact our approach. 

16 MR. BRUNDAGE: Thank you. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Frank Stanonik. 

18 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, 

19 AHRI. Can you go back to Table One? I'm 

20 feeling more empathy with our visitors from 

21 outside the beltway right now than someone 

22 who's lived here. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 112

1 (Laughter.) 

2 MR. STANONIK: I don't understand 

3 that table at all, and so the title is 

4 "Preliminary Energy Conversion Factors for 

5 Fuels Used in Home Appliances." So, you've 

6 got a column that says, "Natural Gas." Okay? 

7 So, as I'm understanding this, and if DOE 

8 adopted this policy when they got to looking 

9 at national benefits, they'd say okay, for all 

10 my natural gas savings, I'm going to multiply 

11 it by some number. Okay? So, I go down the 

12 column, and I have entries for total energy, 

13 petroleum, natural gas, coal, all under 

14 natural gas. Isn't there only one factor for 

15 natural gas? What am I missing here? 

16 MR. WANG: I'm glad you asked that 

17 question. Let me spend a little bit time to 

18 walk you through that. And let's assume you 

19 consume a one milli-BTU of natural gas for 

20 your gas dryer. And EIA would say okay, so 

21 you consumed one milli-BTU of natural gas for 

22 your dryer. Now, what we do is from the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 113

1 primary energy use pushed to the Full-Fuel2 Cycle energy use, by including all these boxes 

3 of left side of the natural gas pathway, by 

4 including these three additional boxes on this 

5 chart, by do so, so now your total energy use 

6 which including natural gas would be increased 

7 about 7.3 percent from primary energy use to 

8 the Full-Fuel-Cycle energy use, total energy. 

9 Your fossil energy, which is a subset of your 

10 total energy, because total energy include 

11 fossil and renewable energy, increased about 

12 7.2 percent, less than 7.3 percent because you 

13 do have some renewable energy from electricity 

14 generation. 

15 If you look at petroleum, which is 

16 a subset of fossil energy use, it's minimum, 

17 because your natural gas pathway use very 

18 small amount of petroleum use. Your natural 

19 gas, basically, your 7.3 percent increase 

20 primarily coming from your natural gas 

21 increase, that's 6.5 percent. So, that's how 

22 you interpret or read the table. Each is a 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 114

1 subset of the above. 

2 MR. STANONIK: So, the three 

3 different fuels there are just an indication 

4 of what, let's say what part they contribute 

5 to the total number, and the total number -- 

6 the number that matters, if DOE were to do 

7 this, is the total energy number. Is that 

8 right? 

9 MR. WANG: Well, yes. Those three 

10 fuels were used in the three boxes left side 

11 of the yellow box of this flowchart, because 

12 the yellow box, you have natural gas 

13 combustion, one milli-BTU is purely natural 

14 gas. But when you make that one milli-BTU all 

15 the way from underground gas well to the point 

16 available you use electricity, which could 

17 come from nuclear, could come from hydro, 

18 could come from natural gas, or coal. 

19 MR. STANONIK: So, you're just 

20 showing us the contribution of those to the 

21 total number. 

22 MR. WANG: Exactly. Right. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 115

1 MR. STANONIK: All right. Can we go 

2 to Table Two? 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Let me just make a 

4 process note. Shortly we're going to pause 

5 for a break, for those of you that are getting 

6 antsy for whatever reasons. Mark Friedrichs 

7 is going to comment before we go to Table Two. 

8 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Just a further 

9 explanation of the reason why we need those 

10 fuel-specific values, and that is to get the 

11 emissions side. Because, obviously, the 

12 combustion of coal, combustion of petroleum, 

13 or natural gas will each be associated with 

14 different CO2 emission values, so that's why 

15 we need that detail. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Going to Table Two, 

17 Frank. 

18 MR. STANONIK: And I'm not -- well, 

19 I'm not really sure it's specific to Table 

20 Two, but I've got to ask the question. So, 

21 based on some of these preliminary estimates 

22 in these examples, what is the factor for the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 116

1 electricity that gets delivered to my house? 

2 MR. WANG: Okay. Let me give you 

3 example how to use Table Two for your 

4 question. Let's say I use electricity 

5 generated from natural gas combustion life 

6 cycle plant, so you know the efficiency is 

7 close to 50 percent, or even in some cases 

8 above 50 percent. So, from that, you know how 

9 much natural gas used for one kilowatt hour of 

10 electricity you use for your electric dryer, 

11 for example. 

12 Now, that's still at the point of 

13 the consumption, meaning at your natural gas 

14 combustion cycle power plant, how much natural 

15 gas you use. Now, push that to all the Full16 Fuel-Cycle stages, you're going to include the 

17 natural gas recovery, natural gas processing, 

18 natural gas transportation, and the 

19 distribution to power plant. That add 7.1 

20 percent additional total energy use, and of 

21 the 7.1 percent additional, 6.3 percent from 

22 natural gas use. So, now instead of let's say 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 117

1 for one kilowatt hour you use, let's half 

2 that, going to say 3 million, it's not 3 

3 million. It's three units of natural gas, 

4 you're going to multiply the three unit by 

5 1.063 get to the natural gas use of the Full6 Fuel-Cycle basis. 

7 MR. STANONIK: Just one last 

8 question with this additional explanation, 

9 which I appreciate very much. I would ask the 

10 Department of Energy to, at some point, at 

11 least give us some initial indication of what 

12 single number they would use in their analysis 

13 for electric fuel factor, for the electricity 

14 factor, because, otherwise, it's already 

15 difficult for us to comment on this not being 

16 GREET-knowledgeable, but, in fact, in the 

17 Notice of Proposed Policy, I understand how 

18 this all gets factored in. In your 

19 explanations, it's based on where's my 

20 electricity coming from, but in terms of 

21 appliance rulemakings, again, my experience is 

22 at some point they have to come up, if you 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 118

1 will, with a national average factor for 

2 electricity. And it would be useful to know 

3 what DOE thinks that number is. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs, and 

5 then I'm coming to you next. 

6 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Frank, the way in 

7 which this will show up in rulemaking 

8 documents is in the technical support 

9 document. And we will be more clearly 

10 generating, using NEMS, actually, fuel11 specific energy savings values for future 

12 years. And then we will be specifying the 

13 Full-Fuel-Cycle conversion factor applied to 

14 each specific fuel type to get the Full-Fuel15 Cycle energy value. And then they'll be 

16 totaled. So, there won't be an average value, 

17 although, you'll be able to see the change 

18 that the use of the fuel-specific values end 

19 up having on the final value. And I did 

20 provide that kind of very rough estimate of 

21 what that range is likely to be, 7 to 15 

22 percent, or something like that. We're not 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 119

1 quite sure exactly where -- and, of course, it 

2 will differ depending on product category, and 

3 so forth. But the detailed numbers will show 

4 up in the technical support documents. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Greg Staple. 

6 MR. STAPLE: Yes. I want to second 

7 comments that have been made by several people 

8 here this morning. This is a potentially far9 reaching and important change in the way we 

10 may set standards for appliances. We're 

11 trying to give consumers more information. In 

12 order for folks inside the beltway, let alone 

13 farmers in Michigan, or in Iowa, or in 

14 California to have any faith that the 

15 government has got this right, and that the 

16 standards we're setting are an improvement, 

17 and will provide more accurate information, it 

18 is essential that federal rulemaking notices 

19 be transparent, and fully spell out the 

20 implications. 

21 I can tell you, I've been a lawyer 

22 in Washington going on 25 plus years, and this 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 120

1 was a Federal Register Notice that was not 

2 easy to parse. I much appreciate the 

3 explanation from Michael Wang for Tables One 

4 and Two. There is no reason that the 

5 Department of Energy going forward cannot take 

6 the approach that the Internal Revenue 

7 Services takes in proposing, for example, new 

8 tax regulations, where you have very detailed 

9 work examples of what's going on here. 

10 This is crucial. If you want 

11 consumers to feel that you're on their side, 

12 and that we're going to clean up the air, and 

13 produce savings, you've got to spell out why 

14 this particular set of numbers translates into 

15 those perceived benefits. I don't think that 

16 was done here. It's unfortunate, because it 

17 can be done with very little additional work. 

18 And I'm also very sympathetic to 

19 the comments made by the representative from 

20 one of the appliance manufacturers. Tell us, 

21 also, going into this how new Full-Fuel-Cycle 

22 standards or policies would be worked into 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 121

1 proposed rulemaking for standards set for 

2 particular appliances. Give us some 

3 hypotheticals, so we know what the shooting is 

4 all about. Then a large number of other 

5 people can participate, and say yes, this is 

6 the type of information I want, this is not. 

7 And we will, also, damp down a number of other 

8 concerns here; that is, this is arbitrary and 

9 capricious. There are 50 different paths to 

10 getting to a number. The range of numbers that 

11 you may get out could vary by a factor of two 

12 or three, perhaps it isn't that way. But 

13 unless we know how these numbers were derived, 

14 and can work them through for explicit 

15 examples of how they will be applied, it's 

16 very difficult to know whether these 

17 criticisms are valid, or not. So, let me stop 

18 there. You know where I'm going. 

19 The whole point of our 

20 intervention, largely, and our written 

21 submission is look, we're trying to build 

22 consumer trust, and we're trying to, 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 122

1 potentially, offer people meaningful options 

2 to change their behavior. They're not going 

3 to have that trust, and they can't rely upon 

4 these numbers to change their behavior if they 

5 think it's all gobbledygook, and the people 

6 who know how biomass is produced, and how 

7 different farming techniques are used for 

8 corn, or for sugarcane, don't buy into that. 

9 That doesn't help any of us, so let me stop 

10 there. I appreciate it. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. I'm going to 

12 suggest we take a break here. We're ahead of 

13 schedule. We have not so awfully many slides 

14 left, but we've been going at this for about 

15 two hours and 15 minutes now. So, when we 

16 return, there will be the opportunity to 

17 comment yet again on the next slide, which is 

18 the Department's specific comment here slide. 

19 Let's pause right now, it's 11:15. 

20 And how many of you are not 

21 familiar with the way it works in the 

22 Forrestal Building? You need to wear the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 123

1 badge that you were given when you registered 

2 this morning. There are restrooms on both 

3 ends of the hall, both men's and women's. 

4 There's a coffee shop one floor below us on 

5 that side of the hall. If you're going to get 

6 coffee, please go quickly. 

7 Let's pause for 15 minutes. We'll 

8 resume at 11:30. And being as how we only 

9 have, I don't know, three, four, five or so 

10 slides left, something like that, it's quite 

11 possible we'll just go straight through say to 

12 12:30 or so to conclude this, so that we're 

13 not hanging people up here any longer than 

14 they need to be here. However, we don't wish 

15 to diminish your comments. 

16 So, we'll pause now. We'll resume 

17 at 11:15, see you back -- 11:30 is when we'll 

18 resume. We'll see you back here then. 

19 (Whereupon, the proceedings went 

20 off the record at 11:13 a.m., and resumed at 

21 11:32 a.m.) 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Let's start 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 124

1 back up here. I think that the slide that you 

2 see up on the screen is the same slide we had 

3 earlier. Mark? 

4 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Right. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. And so 

6 these issues remain open for your additional 

7 comment. And we'll just pause here and take 

8 additional comments and then we'll be moving 

9 on for the rest of the content in the packet. 

10 MR. BEAUREGARD: Doug, this is Bob 

11 Beauregard with APG. I just want to -- 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Is that turned on, 

13 Bob? 

14 MR. BEAUREGARD: Yes, it is. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

16 MR. BEAUREGARD: I'll get a little 

17 closer. Greg Staple has left but I just 

18 wanted to take this opportunity to echo and 

19 support the comments he made at the close just 

20 before the break. 

21 I represent an organization that 

22 is made up of over 700 public gas systems. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 125

1 And they are the closest to customers as you 

2 can get. And straightforward, understandable, 

3 transparent, easy-to-understand standards 

4 coming out of DOE is paramount to them 

5 accepting and feeling that they are serving 

6 themselves plus their consumers. 

7 And those kinds of examples that 

8 Greg called for I would simply say that they 

9 would serve everybody's purpose. And 

10 encourage DOE. And we will, as an 

11 organization, assist in any way we can to make 

12 that happen. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. That's 

14 helpful. Thanks, Bob. 

15 Yes, please? 

16 MR. CALDARERA: Mike Caldarera, 

17 NPGA. 

18 Just echoing what Bob said, I 

19 would encourage DOE, when they publish the 

20 final policy statement, if you will, to maybe 

21 develop a mock rulemaking, just an abbreviated 

22 one. It doesn't have to be, you know, three-
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 126

1 inches thick. But do something that would -- 

2 to demonstrate so that all the readers can 

3 understand how this is going to impact a 

4 rulemaking proceeding. 

5 So all the information would be 

6 there. And, you know, a picture is worth a 

7 thousand words. So if you can see how it is 

8 laid out and what the impact is going to be, I 

9 think it would be very beneficial. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew? 

11 MR. SOTO: Andrew Soto, AGA. If 

12 you do a mockup like that, it would be helpful 

13 to have a comparison of comparable appliances. 

14 Get a gas appliance, a propane appliance, an 

15 electric appliance. Run the numbers. Show 

16 the comparison. And how the full fuel cycle 

17 analysis would impact the standards develop. 

18 To implement the third 

19 recommendation or to come closer to 

20 implementing the third recommendation from the 

21 National Academies is to move immediately to a 

22 source-based -- or you could use full fuel 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 127

1 cycle there for appliances for which there is 

2 a choice of fuels. 

3 So the comparison should be -- in 

4 this mockup should be among the appliances for 

5 which there is a choice of fuels so you can 

6 actually see the impact across different 

7 appliance types. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

9 Still looking for -- yes? Dave? 

10 MR. MOHRE: During the discussion 

11 -- prior discussion, Dr. -- how do you 

12 pronounce your name -- 

13 DR. WOYCHIK: Woychik. 

14 MR. MOHRE: -- Woychik -- 

15 DR. WOYCHIK: Thank you. 

16 MR. MOHRE: -- raised the issue of 

17 making sure you know all your benefits. And I 

18 thought about that because we're heavily 

19 involved -- the cooperatives are heavily 

20 involved. As a matter of fact, leaders in 

21 Smart Grid and the Mann response for the last 

22 quite a few years, for a number of reasons we 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 128

1 don't need to discuss, but public policy, it 

2 is public policy in this country that we 

3 encourage renewable energy, okay? 

4 We have production tax credits. 

5 We don't have a standard yet but we have 

6 things that suggest that renewable energy and, 

7 particularly in most cases, wind right now is 

8 growing rather rapidly as everybody knows. 

9 And we are committed to wind 

10 development. A lot of money is going into 

11 wind as far as co-op generation resources as 

12 other utilities. 

13 When you do your benefits, I think 

14 it would be unfair to do a hypothetical 

15 benefit based on even a large range of, quote, 

16 CO2 costs and not give benefits for the very 

17 real enabling of renewable energy resources 

18 that electric appliances do. Particularly 

19 electric appliances are controllable, whether 

20 with chips or whether with load control. 

21 So what I'm saying is if you are 

22 going to do this hypothetical where you say 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 129

1 oh, we're going to give them credit for 

2 present value for 290 years or whatever it is, 

3 you know, that you equally ought to give 

4 benefit for the enabling of renewable energy 

5 that is made possible by having things like 

6 simple electric water heaters. 

7 And I would ask that, Mike, that, 

8 you know, because you were into that, the 

9 benefits, that you consider that. The fact of 

10 the matter is we couldn't reach levels of 

11 penetration of wind that we're talking about 

12 without having a number of electric 

13 appliances, particularly those with inherent 

14 storage capability. 

15 So if you can do some of these 

16 hypothetical as a global CO2, I'm asking you 

17 to do a hypothetical on this, too. Okay? 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

19 Charlie is next, Charlie Stephens. 

20 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens, 

21 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. 

22 I have two concerns. One is that 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 130

1 I don't think it is appropriate to exclude the 

2 exploration and development drilling energy 

3 use, quite frankly, from the oil and natural 

4 gas equations. There should be another box 

5 there. 

6 It's not insignificant for some 

7 fuels as it is for others. But the fact is I 

8 have got the data. The amount of drilling per 

9 unit of energy produced is going up and up and 

10 up. The drilling is going up. The energy 

11 produced is going down. And that should be 

12 somewhere reflected in these numbers. 

13 Which leads me to my second 

14 concern. As I look at the numbers that are 

15 projected from 2010 to 2030, there is an 

16 implicit assumption in the fact that they 

17 don't change for most of these fuels. And 

18 that is that there is enough of that fuel, 

19 whatever it is, available that can be produced 

20 with that ratio of full fuel cycle energy. 

21 And I don't believe that's true 

22 based on all the data I've seen, especially in 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 131

1 the last five years. I don't think there is 

2 going to be enough of some of these fossil 

3 fuels available on a BTU basis to produce at 

4 the ratios that are fixed at the same numbers 

5 they are today. 

6 And so I don't know how you can 

7 fix that but I've seen an awful lot of 

8 analysis that just kind of presumes implicitly 

9 that things will be there when, in fact, we're 

10 dealing with finite fuel supplies here. And 

11 they're changing. And we drilled and produced 

12 all the best stuff first. And best, not just 

13 in terms of energy and cost in dollars but 

14 energy and physics, BTUs. 

15 And so it is inevitable that the 

16 BTU content of what we're producing is going 

17 down, the supplies remaining are going down, 

18 the amount of energy that it takes to get it 

19 is going up for each unit produced. And I 

20 don't see these things reflected in these 20-

21 year numbers. 

22 But that's what all the data I 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 132

1 have shows. So I'm having trouble 

2 understanding how that can possibly work. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

4 Steve Rosenstock? 

5 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

6 Edison Electric Institute. 

7 In terms of some of this, I think 

8 there is also a couple of things that need to 

9 be talked about. And there was a mention of 

10 policy. Well, on January 2nd of 2011, based 

11 on EPA's regulatory policy, nearly all U.S. 

12 power plants are going to be regulated under 

13 the Clean Air Act. 

14 Any power plant or large 

15 facilities that emits over 100,000 tons of 

16 CO2, which is almost all power plants except 

17 for some peaker power plants that operate 

18 intermittently, but basically they are under -

19 - they have to get a permit every year, a 

20 Title 5 permit, to operate. 

21 And they are required under the 

22 statute to use what's called the best 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 133

1 available control technology as determined by 

2 EPA. That is a game-changer. That is a 

3 policy that is going into effect as of next 

4 January 2nd. That is huge. 

5 Another thing I would like to say 

6 is -- and all power plant owners and operators 

7 are going to have to respond to that. They're 

8 starting to respond now actually because it's 

9 out there. 

10 Another possible game-changer is 

11 if carbon capture and storage becomes 

12 economical, that could change what happens 

13 with the emissions of that CO2. That could be 

14 -- have a significant impact on some of these 

15 estimates, these upstream estimates. 

16 So as DOE considers the input, I 

17 think that those actual -- well, one is the 

18 possibility of carbon capture and storage in 

19 the 2020 time frame. But the actual real 

20 reality is that as of right now, as of, you 

21 know, today's date, EPA will regulate power 

22 plants starting January 2nd. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 134

1 And also third, in New England, 

2 the power plants have had caps on CO2 

3 emissions since 2007 under the RGGI program. 

4 Thank you. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

6 Yes, Rick? 

7 MR. TEMPCHIN: Rick Tempchin, 

8 Edison Electric Institute. 

9 I just wanted to clarify something 

10 that I mentioned earlier because I found the 

11 reference. 

12 In terms of the inter-agency 

13 report that determines the social cost of 

14 carbon, we were talking about five dollars to 

15 65 dollars per metric ton. And I'm going to 

16 read from the water-heater report April 16th. 

17 It says the value of CO2 reflects 

18 the present value of all future climate19 related impacts out 230 years due to emitting 

20 a ton of carbon dioxide in each year of the 

21 forecast period. So we're putting a present 

22 value of greenhouse gas emissions benefits 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 135

1 into the appliance efficiency standard 

2 process. 

3 And, you know, related to that 

4 coming from this report also is social costs 

5 of carbon, includes but not limited to net 

6 agricultural productivity, human health, 

7 property damages from increased flood risk, 

8 value of ecosystem services, and other costs. 

9 So that -- I just wanted to 

10 clarify. Unless I'm reading this wrong, 

11 that's what we're doing. We're taking those 

12 costs and benefits and putting that into the 

13 analysis and that is a big change from what 

14 has happened before. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs? 

16 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes, just to 

17 reiterate what I had said before. We began 

18 using those estimated monetary values back in 

19 February of this year. And we had begun using 

20 earlier monetary values for CO2 approximately 

21 three years ago. 

22 So this particular proposed policy 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 136

1 would affect our estimate of greenhouse gas 

2 emissions. But it wouldn't affect our 

3 methodology for estimating the monetary value. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

5 Steve Rosenstock? 

6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: And, again, as 

7 following on for that, under the RGGI program, 

8 the range of actual market cost for the CO2 

9 emissions from the power plants in New England 

10 has actually gone down over the last few 

11 years. It started about three dollars and 

12 fifty cents a ton. At the last auction, it 

13 was a dollar eighty-six per ton. 

14 And those costs of carbon, and 

15 they show on the RGGI website how much they've 

16 collected from consumer rates, you know, it 

17 might be let's say .2 or .3 cents per 

18 kilowatt-hour. The cost of carbon in New 

19 England is already built into their rates. So 

20 any savings from the appliance efficiency has 

21 already taken that into effect. 

22 By adding the social costs, not 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 137

1 only are double counting but by using a value 

2 that is above the market value that consumers 

3 pay, if you go to five dollars a ton, you're 

4 multiplying that market value by two and a 

5 half times, 250 percent. 

6 You get up to 65 dollars ton when 

7 they're actually paying two dollars a ton, 

8 you're multiplying it by a factor of 3,300 

9 percent -- you know, by a factor of 33. So we 

10 think that's very significant. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

12 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs? 

14 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes. Just keep 

15 in mind that those are really two very 

16 different values. One is a market value based 

17 on the RGGI program and the cost of complying 

18 with the limitations that are embedded in that 

19 program and the monetary value that we use is 

20 based on estimates of the long-run societal 

21 costs associated with greenhouse gas 

22 emissions. And those two values are really 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 138

1 not directly comparable. 

2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steven 

3 Rosenstock, EEI. Doug, may I follow up? 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve? 

5 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I appreciate 

6 that, Mr. Friedrichs, and I understand that. 

7 But the way it is presented in the 

8 refrigerator rule table, .2, they are shown as 

9 -- basically they are added up together to 

10 show the overall societal benefits and costs 

11 as they're justifying the appliance. 

12 So I understand how they're used 

13 and what they're saying but when you look at 

14 the refrigerator rule, they are -- basically 

15 in the table they are shown as basically 

16 equivalent values. 

17 Thank you. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: This gentleman is 

19 next. Yes? 

20 MR. HINKLE: Yes, Jerry Hinkle 

21 from -- 

22 PARTICIPANT: Turn the mic on. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 139

1 PARTICIPANT: It's got a green 

2 light on it. Oh, sorry. Yes, Jerry Hinkle 

3 from American Clean Skies. Just certainly to 

4 support the comments that Greg Staple has 

5 made. 

6 But let me make a little different 

7 kind of a comment here, something that is 

8 perhaps more encouraging to DOE. When I 

9 worked here numerous years ago, way before the 

10 GREET model was invented, we did a lot of work 

11 on looking at energy and economic flows and 

12 emissions through different fuel cycles, 

13 especially associated with making synthetic 

14 crudes from coal and oil shale. 

15 There is a lot of information that 

16 comes out of that thinking about these things 

17 that way than looking at it the way that these 

18 appliance standards traditionally have been. 

19 And the GREET model itself has got the 

20 potential, if the homework problems are worked 

21 very carefully, to really inform decisions on 

22 -- I think on other kinds of things. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 140

1 For instance, when we were writing 

2 large pieces of the 2005 Energy Act in the 

3 Senate, I spent a lot of time looking at GREET 

4 results, especially with regard to several 

5 advanced technologies that we were thinking 

6 about incenting in the act. And the GREET 

7 work was very, very useful in helping to think 

8 about that. 

9 I would encourage you -- in fact, 

10 if you could develop a useful -- there is a 

11 decisional framework that comes out -- that 

12 can come out of this that could be used -- and 

13 to some extent, EERE uses some of these 

14 considerations in their budgeting, but to use 

15 it more so. 

16 And also with respect to 

17 evaluating FOAs, thinking about evaluating the 

18 -- the evaluation criteria that are included 

19 in loan guarantees, tax incentives, there's -- 

20 and there's a certain expressed not only in 

21 the 2005 act but in subsequent pieces of 

22 legislation, there's certainly a Congressional 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 141

1 intent to have improved understanding of the 

2 dimensions of not just the embodied energy but 

3 all these system factors. 

4 So I would encourage you to plunge 

5 ahead. And learn more and do your homework 

6 problems here. It's a transportation model. 

7 I think you've got to do some more work in 

8 converting it -- being able to convert it to 

9 an appliance application. So anyway -- 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

11 Don Brundage? 

12 MR. BRUNDAGE: Looking at your 

13 slide up there, you've got determining full 

14 fuel cycle, greenhouse gases, and other 

15 emissions. I looked forward at the few 

16 remaining slides and you don't do anything 

17 with any specific number on NOx and SOx. 

18 Looking back at the NOPR, Table 6 

19 shows the difference in coal NOx between 2010 

20 and 2030. It goes from 1.14 to 1.12. And SOx 

21 stays the same. Those, to me, are -- I'm 

22 going to be kind -- they're not comprehensible 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 142

1 values to me because my own company is putting 

2 scrubbers, NOx controls on every major unit -- 

3 coal unit we have. And probably most of the 

4 non-scrubbed ones are going to end up getting 

5 retired or have controls added to them. 

6 And this is a trivial change. And 

7 even on CO2, Table 4 shows CO2 fuel combustion 

8 from coal 102.905 and it drops to 102.904 in 

9 2030, which is a one part per million change. 

10 We have construction on a 600 

11 mega-watt coal plant in Mississippi that will 

12 scrub two-thirds of the CO2. That unit alone 

13 would be enough to change these numbers more 

14 than that. 

15 You really need to do some work on 

16 improving the estimates of the numbers that go 

17 in here because this just seems to be a 

18 straight line. And assuming there is no 

19 emission improvement changes between 2010 and 

20 2030, and just for construction that's 

21 currently underway, without figuring any 

22 policy changes, that's simply not true. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 143

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Don, so in 

2 your written remarks, the Department would 

3 love to see that kind of data. 

4 MR. BRUNDAGE: We'll include that. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

6 Michael? Get to a microphone. 

7 Michael Wang. 

8 MR. WANG: Michael Wang from 

9 Argonne. 

10 Maybe comment on the question, 

11 Table 4 specially, if you look at the Table 4, 

12 the unit is emissions per unit BTU burned. So 

13 it does not affect efficiency. 

14 You know when you build a plant, 

15 if you increase your efficiency, the emissions 

16 per kilo-watt hours reduced. But for each 

17 unit of fuel burned, it's still the same 

18 amount of emission. So that's what -- 

19 MR. BRUNDAGE: Okay. So you're 

20 assuming on like NOx and SOx that there's no 

21 emission controls? It's just what comes out 

22 of the coal and doesn't include emission 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 144

1 controls? 

2 MR. WANG: No. For your -- I 

3 think your Table 6, right? 

4 MR. BRUNDAGE: Okay. Well, what I 

5 was saying was -- 

6 MR. WANG: Yes? 

7 MR. BRUNDAGE: -- on Table 4, 

8 that's implicitly assuming there's going to be 

9 no CO2 removal from coal combustion between 

10 now and 2030. 

11 MR. WANG: That's right. There is 

12 no assuming -- if you assume CO2 for each unit 

13 of coal burned, you would reduce your 

14 emissions. Efficiency would add per kilowatt15 hour about 90 in per count of coal burned. 

16 MR. BRUNDAGE: Well, Southern and 

17 AEP both have utility scale carbon 

18 sequestration units under construction. So 

19 even if you just assumed those two were 

20 completed, it would change these numbers more 

21 than that. 

22 And I think it is a reasonable 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 145

1 assumption that at least a little bit of 

2 scrubbing of CO2 and sequestration is going to 

3 occur by 2030. 

4 And the NOx and SOx are just 

5 totally off, even if you looked at what's 

6 currently had construction contracts awarded 

7 in 2010, and hasn't been commercialized yet, 

8 I'm not saying the GREET model in itself is 

9 wrong but it needs to get some updates for 

10 regulatory compliance for the regulations that 

11 have already been issued. 

12 MR. WANG: Yes, for the NOx and 

13 the SOx, I agree. We've seen the down-trend 

14 of NOx and SOx emissions in power plants and 

15 we continue to see that. And what you see 

16 from 2010 to 2030, there is a down-trend but 

17 not as much as you said. 

18 So this is somewhere where we're 

19 not -- how fast SOx emission control 

20 technologies is installed in power plants. 

21 But, again, I think what they assumed, maybe 

22 it's business as usual. But, of course, we 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 146

1 all know it is going to be dynamic in the next 

2 20 years. So that's something that to work 

3 on. 

4 MR. BRUNDAGE: And it may be fixed 

5 by the time you incorporate NEMS because the 

6 NEMS made reasonable assumptions on these 

7 things. So it may be solved in the more 

8 complete process. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Bob? 

10 MR. BEAUREGARD: I just wanted to 

11 thank Michael and DOE for the presentation on 

12 GREET. But I wanted to reiterate APGA's goal 

13 to continually look at input that could 

14 improve the numbers, the emission calculations 

15 under those models. 

16 And would encourage both the 

17 Argonne Labs and DOE and everybody around this 

18 table to look at the SEEAT tool that the gas 

19 technology group has developed and has offered 

20 to DOE to further validate the numbers under 

21 GREET. 

22 In my statement, I give you the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 147

1 website for that tool. It's cmictools.com and 

2 would encourage DOE and Argonne Lab to take a 

3 look at that and see how it could help you in 

4 your calculations. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Bob. 

6 Thank you. 

7 Okay. So I think we've answered 

8 questions fairly completely. So I'm going to 

9 ask that we move on to the final slides for 

10 presentation. Is that -- Mark? Mark 

11 Friedrichs? 

12 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Actually, they 

13 are not quite the final slides but they are 

14 kind of the second part of our meeting today. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

16 MR. FRIEDRICHS: And this is going 

17 to be a shorter discussion I suspect. But I 

18 did want to call out specifically the proposal 

19 to add two greenhouse gases to our estimates 

20 of the total greenhouse gas emissions effected 

21 by efficiency standards. 

22 We have traditionally, based on 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 148

1 NEMS output, focused only on CO2. But this 

2 proposal would add both methane and nitrous 

3 oxide. Both of these gases are associated 

4 with energy production and transportation, as 

5 well as use to some extent. 

6 It makes some sense in the shift 

7 to full fuel cycle analysis to add these gases 

8 to our estimates. They would have a modest, 

9 we believe, effect on the total estimated 

10 impacts of efficiency standards on greenhouse 

11 gas emissions. We think roughly in the range 

12 of four to eight percent. That would be in 

13 terms of CO2 equivalent. 

14 The GREET model is capable of 

15 giving us estimates of these emissions derived 

16 from the primary energy or CO2 emission 

17 estimates that are generated by NEMS. So we 

18 have the capability within GREET to give us 

19 the numbers that we would use. 

20 I should note one aspect, however, 

21 of our consideration of these gases and that 

22 is at this time, our consideration would be 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 149

1 only of the physical values associated with 

2 the emissions of these two greenhouse gases. 

3 The interagency analysis focused 

4 on the social cost of carbon emissions was 

5 restricted to the societal costs, 

6 uninternalized societal costs associated with 

7 CO2 emissions. It explicitly excluded other 

8 greenhouse gas emissions, although it noted 

9 that future work may actually extend its 

10 analysis to other greenhouse gas emissions. 

11 And such work is anticipated but as far as I 

12 know has not yet begun. 

13 So sometime in the future, we 

14 might place a monetary value on these non-CO2 

15 greenhouse gas emissions but at this time, if 

16 we added them to our analysis, as we propose, 

17 it would only modify the physical values of 

18 the greenhouse gas emissions affected by 

19 standards. 

20 I hope that's clear. There is a 

21 slide which Michael already referenced 

22 briefly, which kind of summarizes how GREET 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 150

1 would be used to generate these values for 

2 methane and nitrous oxide. 

3 And that's all I have to say about 

4 that. And we're certainly seeking comment or 

5 questions about this proposal -- this aspect 

6 of the proposal and that's where we are now. 

7 Thanks. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock? 

9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

10 Gas and Electric Institute. 

11 Similar concerns like what we have 

12 addressed before in terms of the range of 

13 values, especially as you are going 

14 international with some of these issues in the 

15 production process. I'll just mention one 

16 thing, flaring of natural gas at oil wells 

17 across the world in many areas. Huge range of 

18 values right there right to start. 

19 And, again, this is just showing, 

20 again, one input, one -- I'll say it's one 

21 average value and I guess the implication 

22 being okay, so for whatever fossil fuel 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 151

1 equipment is, okay, and you say it's leaning 

2 one ton at the current -- under the current 

3 scenario modeling -- I'll just go under the 

4 fuel oil one -- okay, primary energy CO2, it 

5 says 1.12 in 2010. Then you add in the CH4 

6 and N2O, it goes up to 1.16 multiplier. 

7 When you're doing your social cost 

8 of carbon, again, let's just say it's at 21 

9 dollars per ton, are you going to multiply it 

10 in future rulemakings by 1.12 or 1.16, for 

11 example, because that can have an impact. 

12 Especially with the range of social costs, 

13 that can have an impact on the ultimate 

14 efficiency standard. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

16 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes. Just to 

17 clarify once again, at least for the time 

18 being, the methane and nitrous oxide emissions 

19 would be excluded from any calculation of the 

20 monetary value. The monetary value would be 

21 restricted to the CO2 emissions. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Please. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 152

1 DR. WOYCHIK: Thank you. Eric 

2 Woychik, Black & Veatch. 

3 Mr. Friedrichs, I was a little 

4 unclear in your qualification of the 

5 additional two gases and how that's looked at. 

6 In essence, are you saying that there is no 

7 full fuel cycle analysis of those gases? 

8 MR. FRIEDRICHS: No, there is. 

9 DR. WOYCHIK: Okay. 

10 MR. FRIEDRICHS: And GREET can 

11 provide that analysis. And, in fact, it is 

12 often in that part of the cycle that is not 

13 associated with end use consumption or use in 

14 power plants where much of that emission 

15 occurs. 

16 DR. WOYCHIK: Okay. Thank you. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Other comments on 

18 the proposed additions of two new gases, 

19 methane and nitrous oxide? 

20 (No response.) 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Nothing additional 

22 on those? Okay. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 153

1 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Okay. Then I 

2 think we're moving on to our last part of the 

3 agenda which is consumer information. And 

4 Anthoney will introduce. 

5 MR. PERKINS: Thank you, Mark. 

6 Again, Anthoney Perkins. Now 

7 we're just going to talk about some of the 

8 work with improving our information to the 

9 consumers. We're going to use the FFC factors 

10 to provide product-specific data on energy use 

11 and GHG emissions associated with appliance 

12 operations, possible support of consumer 

13 research on options for encouraging consumer 

14 understanding, and use of such information, 

15 and working with the FTC will improve upon the 

16 existing online database by enabling the 

17 public to make cross-class comparisons of 

18 product-specific data, which is kind of -- 

19 we've already discussed some of those issues, 

20 and possible addition of the EnergyGuide label 

21 of an indicator of the appliance greenhouse 

22 gas emissions. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 154

1 So we're seeking some comments on 

2 whether the suggested online service would 

3 benefit the consumers. And, if so, the most 

4 effective way to present the information to 

5 the consumer, information on the full fuel 

6 cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emissions 

7 would be provided on EnergyGuide labels. I 

8 know we've already had some discussion about 

9 this today. 

10 And DOE also seeks comments on 

11 issues associated with disseminating this type 

12 of information to our consumers via other 

13 types of labels. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, please. 

15 MS. WEISS: I'm Joanmarie Weiss, 

16 your consumer. 

17 (Laughter.) 

18 MS. WEISS: When I go out and buy 

19 an appliance, the first thing -- and I usually 

20 go to a big-box store. I'm sorry for the, you 

21 know, manufacturers here who have their own 

22 businesses but the first thing I look at is 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 155

1 the price. And I compare prices. 

2 The second thing I look at is that 

3 energy sticker that's there right now. And 

4 what is it going to cost me to operate it. 

5 The third thing I look, if my 

6 husband can't install it, is what is it going 

7 to cost to install it. 

8 So I think that the greenhouse 

9 gases that you're talking about and the carbon 

10 footprint that we're talking about here is 

11 going to be a distant fourth in my decision12 making and probably in most consumer's -- we 

13 all want the world to be a better place. But 

14 we're also very concerned with cost. 

15 And what I'm hearing is, and what 

16 I read was something about the cost is going 

17 to be saved over eight years and the warranty 

18 is six years, and that kind of alarms me. 

19 There was some -- from DOE there was some 

20 Energy Star stuff where we're going with an 

21 eight-year payback with a six-year warranty, 

22 that concerns me as a consumer. That's for 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 156

1 you manufacturers to work out. 

2 I don't know. I do not believe 

3 that a full fuel cycle is going to be that 

4 important to most of us as we make that point5 of-purchase decision. It's just not. 

6 Thank you. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

8 Charlie Stephens? 

9 MR. STEPHENS: Charlie Stephens, 

10 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. 

11 Just in case, for those people who 

12 don't know, my organization represents the 

13 large-scale energy efficiency interest of 137 

14 electric utilities in the Pacific Northwest, 

15 four states, all of them. A handful of them 

16 are dual-fuel utilities. 

17 Our utilities range 100 percent 

18 renewable, mostly hydro in those cases, to one 

19 that's about 50 percent or a little more than 

20 50 percent coal-fired. The problem for us is 

21 that those consumers are frequently right next 

22 door to each other. And, in fact, they're 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 157

1 going to be shopping at the same store for the 

2 same appliances. 

3 So you've got two different 

4 consumers from two different utility service 

5 areas shopping in the same store for the same 

6 appliance. And one of them is all renewable 

7 and the other one is 50 percent coal which -- 

8 how are we going to get numbers on there that 

9 isn't going to confuse those people. 

10 Sometimes they're the same family. 

11 (Laughter.) 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs? 

13 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes, this is a 

14 big problem. I would love to hear some 

15 comment on the way in which we should think 

16 about this issue. And there is a lot of 

17 emphasis on the very big differences in the 

18 generation mix from utility to utility and 

19 certainly from region to region in the United 

20 States. 

21 But there are people who would 

22 argue that we should not emphasize just the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 158

1 differences in those generation mixes but 

2 instead we should look at the marginal source 

3 of energy in different utility systems because 

4 if more efficient appliances are going to slow 

5 the rate of demand growth or even reduce 

6 demand, it is going to help any particular 

7 utility or region to reduce the consumption of 

8 fuel in the generation of electricity on the 

9 margin. 

10 And that's not likely to be hydro 

11 and it's not likely to be nuclear or even 

12 renewable. It's more likely to be fossil fuel 

13 in every region of the country. 

14 So comment on that question would 

15 be very helpful. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's let Charlie 

17 follow on, then I'm moving over here. 

18 MR. STEPHENS: Okay, Mark, I will. 

19 Charlie Stephens, again. 

20 I don't know that there is going 

21 to be a marginal situation when you go out 

22 there and look at an individual rulemaking for 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 159

1 an individual appliance. We are -- in a 

2 utility that's 100 percent hydro, the marginal 

3 resource is hydro. It's less hydro or more 

4 hydro but it's hydro. 

5 Collectively for a long time, in 

6 some cases, we -- our projections in the 

7 Northwest are, depending on the economic 

8 circumstances and how they may change over the 

9 next few years, suggest that we can meet all 

10 of our new demand for electricity with 

11 conservation -- with efficiency. 

12 And so, you know, the marginal 

13 resource for water-heating efficiency is 

14 another more efficient water heater. So I 

15 don't think -- you're going to have -- you're 

16 just going to complicate the issue 

17 dramatically more if you start getting into 

18 marginal resources because that's just as 

19 variable across regions and even across 

20 utility boundaries as the generation mix is 

21 itself. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's let Mark 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 160

1 Friedrichs follow on. 

2 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes, just one 

3 observation. I guess the way some people 

4 would look at that situation is that for a 

5 utility system that is all hydro, what a 

6 reduction in demand or a slowing of demand 

7 does is it essentially enables that system to 

8 export more power to other utility systems and 

9 it ends up displacing fossil fuels someplace 

10 else. 

11 So it may not happen within that 

12 utility system but it happens some place else. 

13 It may happen in California. It may happen 

14 in Idaho or Montana. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock? 

16 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

17 EEI. 

18 Just following on this particular 

19 point, we have people at EEI who track 

20 capacity, you know new capacity being 

21 installed or announced in the United States. 

22 Here's some numbers for you. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 161

1 In 2009, natural gas represented 

2 respectively 43 percent and 38 percent of new 

3 additions, okay, unless those natural gas were 

4 combined cycle -- 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: New additions 

6 within what? 

7 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Within the United 

8 States, that's a national -- 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

10 MR. ROSENSTOCK: -- across the 

11 country. In 2010, what's happening? Of all 

12 announcements in the United States during the 

13 first seven months of the year, 82 percent 

14 were renewable. Wind was 48 percent, solar 

15 intake and solar thermal was 36 percent in 

16 terms of marginal resources. 

17 Now things change year by year. 

18 We know that several years ago everything that 

19 was put in was natural gas. Ten years, 15 

20 years before that, a lot of it was coal. 

21 But in terms of marginal 

22 generation, especially in terms of new 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 162

1 policies, it is much, much more likely to be a 

2 renewable or very, very high efficient natural 

3 gas based on recent history. 

4 Thank you. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Eric? 

6 DR. WOYCHIK: Thank you. Eric 

7 Woychik, Black & Veatch. 

8 As a strong expert in electric 

9 markets, I agree with the marginal analysis 

10 idea. I also agree though it is very complex 

11 and very difficult to do that. And you now 

12 have very different -- great differences 

13 region upon region. In fact, LMPs, location 

14 marginal costs, just -- so it's very difficult 

15 to do. 

16 The other thing to think about is 

17 that ideally what you have on the margin and 

18 what Jon Wellinghoff's vision is, the FERC 

19 Chairman, a whole set of people that are 

20 really trying to think about using the smart 

21 grid, is that it is the dispatchable ramping 

22 capacity on the margin based on the load side. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 163

1 So it's not even in power plant. 

2 It's cycling water heaters, cycling other 

3 appliances, using what's called Zigbee HAN, 

4 home-area network. So it could be 

5 dishwashers, a set of dishwashers. It's going 

6 to be an aggregate of things as well as 

7 ramping combustion turbines. 

8 So it's a messy analysis. But 

9 don't forget that the load side could be the 

10 marginal resource. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Dave? 

12 MR. MOHRE: I was going to 

13 reemphasize that. Thank you, Eric. 

14 The fact of the matter is the 

15 marginal resource is becoming more and more 

16 wind. Why? What's the energy cost of wind? 

17 Guess what gets dispatched, okay? 

18 The bottom line on this thing is 

19 we seem to have a right-hand, left-hand 

20 problem. One the one hand, we're saying what 

21 we need to do is go to renewables, which the 

22 industry is doing like crazy, all right? 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 164

1 And yet the very appliances that 

2 will enable that to happen, along with the 

3 smart grid, are going to be penalized by this 

4 specific approach. And the reason it is going 

5 to be penalized is it is not looking at the 

6 future so much. 

7 Now I understand it looked at 

8 2030. But -- and I won't call it business as 

9 usual, I'll call it -- what do we call it? 

10 PARTICIPANT: Reference case. 

11 MR. MOHRE: Reference case. Thank 

12 you. It means the same thing to me but that's 

13 all right. 

14 At 2030, there's hardly any 

15 change. I could see why you would reach the 

16 conclusion you do. But the fact of the matter 

17 is the industry is changing like crazy, very 

18 rapidly, and going to renewables. 

19 Let me ask you a question. Two 

20 years ago, what was the price of natural gas 

21 at the Henry hub? 

22 PARTICIPANT: Fifteen dollars? 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 165

1 MR. MOHRE: Yes, right, August, 

2 13.50 about. What is it today? Okay, who 

3 predicted that? And you're going to tell me 

4 we're going to monetize 290 years worth of 

5 financial impacts of CO2? And we couldn't 

6 estimate this in the matter of two years. And 

7 bless you for getting it down that way. 

8 (Laughter.) 

9 MR. MOHRE: You know I just think 

10 we've got some confusion. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Just -- I'm not 

12 sure we caught it on the record. What was the 

13 spread in price? 

14 MR. MOHRE: The spread in price 

15 was 13 dollars and 50 at Henry hub in April 

16 `07. Or `08, I'm sorry, July of `08. Thank 

17 you for clarification. And now it's four 

18 dollars, 4.50. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

20 MR. MOHRE: Okay? So what I'm 

21 saying is our ability to forecast these things 

22 is very limited. And yet here we're going to 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 166

1 tell consumers we know precisely the financial 

2 present value of CO2 over the next 290 years. 

3 And we're going to include that. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

5 MR. MOHRE: God bless. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Michael Wang? 

7 MR. WANG: Yes, let me comment on 

8 the 200- or 100-year societal values. 

9 Societal value, if you emit one pound of CO2, 

10 we know CO2 lasts for 100 years. That is well 

11 understood. So over the next 100 years, what 

12 damages is that one ton of CO2 will cost and 

13 what is the monetary values of that damage? 

14 So there is a whole community to 

15 evaluate this one ton of CO2 over the period 

16 of 200 years. That's different from what 

17 we're talking about which is whether we know 

18 the price two years ago, the price this year. 

19 Or we know the general recommendations, the 

20 new addition in `09, the new addition in 2010, 

21 and the new addition in 2040. I just want to 

22 add this comment. Those are very very 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 167

1 different concepts. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock? 

3 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Just a quick 

4 question. Does anyone know the social cost of 

5 the carbon that was emitted in the year 1700 

6 during the start of the Industrial Revolution 

7 in Europe? I'm just kind of curious. That 

8 was 300 years ago. What's the current price -

9 - cost of that? I'm just kind of curious. 

10 Thank you. 

11 MR. WANG: Well, yes. My part is, 

12 you know, I'm not an expert in the climate 

13 change area. I'm not saying that value isn't 

14 very important. I'm saying it's two different 

15 concepts. Let's not mix the two different 

16 concepts together. 

17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Mr. Wang, they're 

18 being mixed in the rules. They are mixed in 

19 the refrigerator rule Table I.2. 

20 Thank you. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: You are next. Go 

22 ahead. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 168

1 MR. COMSTOCK: Owen Comstock from 

2 the Energy Information Administration. 

3 As far as the social cost of 

4 carbon in 1790, I don't think we go back that 

5 far but the price definitely wasn't zero. And 

6 just because we have assigned that value of 

7 zero doesn't make it so. And I think that's 

8 the difference. 

9 And so go ahead. 

10 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Well, but that 

11 was emitted that long ago, what's the cost 

12 today of that carbon? 

13 MR. COMSTOCK: Right. But that's 

14 -- I think that's the difference is just 

15 because we said it was zero doesn't mean that 

16 those -- the emissions that happened then 

17 didn't have implications that we're still 

18 paying for in some way or the other. 

19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: And I'm asking 

20 for what are they costing us now. 

21 MR. COMSTOCK: Yes, they're 

22 difficult to quantify. That's the whole 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 169

1 point. But anyway -- 

2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Yes, thank you. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: I think we're 

4 getting into some esoterica here. And I'd 

5 like to move us back to the questions that are 

6 on the screen and see if we can be responsive 

7 to these. 

8 MR. COMSTOCK: Yes. I'll address 

9 that. Thank you. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

11 MR. COMSTOCK: So the EnergyGuide, 

12 that's the stickers that come with most 

13 appliances, have -- it tells you how many -- 

14 for instance, a refrigerator, it tells you how 

15 many kilo-watt hours typical -- that that 

16 model is going to use that year. And what the 

17 cost of that energy is going to be. 

18 But it is not exactly the cost 

19 that I pay. And it's not necessarily how I 

20 use that appliance. They are national 

21 averages that are based on manufacturer data. 

22 They are based on electricity prices that EIA 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 170

1 collects. So we're already using national 

2 averages for that point in time to inform 

3 customer decisions about the energy costs of 

4 that specific appliance. 

5 And I think using that same kind 

6 of model, we don't necessarily have to use 

7 exactly what those emissions are going to be 

8 associated based on the electron path that the 

9 different generation mix -- took to get to 

10 that appliance. 

11 But if you have, you know, the 

12 national average in the previous year, which 

13 is fairly well known based on the data we 

14 collect, the emissions associated with that 

15 generation mix at a nationwide average may be 

16 while not the best data point, may be 

17 something a consumer can use. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs. 

19 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Yes, that brings 

20 us back to kind of the question of this part 

21 of the meeting. And that is what can we do to 

22 make it easier for consumers, who are 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 171

1 interested in getting some of this 

2 information, to get information that is really 

3 valuable to them and is relevant to them in a 

4 way that is as simple as possible? 

5 And so we're struggling with that. 

6 We're not sure that modifying the label is 

7 the best way to go. It's certainly one way to 

8 go. There are certainly other ways in which 

9 we can make available this data. So that's 

10 what we're looking to do, with help from you: 

11 defining what kinds of mechanisms we should 

12 consider. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: And, of course, the 

14 slide references an online service. So maybe 

15 you could address that as well. 

16 Karim first. 

17 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

18 I guess to respond to Mark, have 

19 we asked consumers if they really are looking 

20 for that information? Our experience is that 

21 they don't even look at the CLO EnergyGuide 

22 label. It has been useless at least for air 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 172

1 conditioners and furnaces. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks, Karim. 

3 Dave, do you have a comment? 

4 MR. MOHRE: Yes. First, I think 

5 the idea, if you do anything, do it on line. 

6 Because if you do it online, you can address 

7 the regionality problem that is so important. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Can you address the 

9 problem that Charlie raised? Maybe? 

10 MR. MOHRE: Well, yes. Well, if 

11 you are 100 percent hydro, I mean that's what 

12 I'm calling a regional problem. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, okay. 

14 MR. MOHRE: Okay? And that way 

15 consumers that are interested, and I would 

16 agree with what has been stated here, 

17 including by the consumer, okay, that people 

18 are mostly interested in what is it going to 

19 cost me, okay? 

20 But those who want to be more 

21 informed -- but do it on a regional basis. 

22 You know 22 regions, that sounds good. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 173

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock? 

2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 

3 EEI. 

4 And as Mr. Barker said, you know, 

5 we support consumers having information. And 

6 many utilities actually put information about 

7 last year's emissions. Sometimes they put it 

8 in envelope stuffers. At Dominion Virginia 

9 Power, their bill stuffer, here was our 

10 emissions profile and here was our generation 

11 profile for 2009. 

12 If people wanted to do the 

13 calculations, they can go to the energy 

14 company website. And it's not just for 

15 electric utilities. Gas companies might do 

16 it, too, oil companies, propane companies, 

17 they might put some of that stuff. 

18 And we would encourage all 

19 companies, if they want to do that, to put it 

20 on there because each appliance in each home 

21 is going to have possibly different types of 

22 scenarios in terms of looking upstream. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 174

1 Also the other issue is in many 

2 areas with customer choice, in many areas 

3 there's still gas choice and choice of 

4 electric suppliers, it might depend on their 

5 supplier as well. Some of the suppliers might 

6 put out information. 

7 But to put that type of 

8 information, with all of the variabilities, on 

9 an EnergyGuide label, to us does not make 

10 sense. That's our first point. 

11 The second point is as part of the 

12 Energy Policy Act of 2005, the FTC was 

13 directed to update their label to make it 

14 better. So me being the geek that I am, I 

15 have an old refrigerator label, okay, Energy 

16 Star refrigerator label pre the current 

17 rulemaking and the new one based on consumer 

18 focus groups, based on information that they 

19 gathered from their rulemaking. 

20 Notice the difference? There's 

21 actually bigger font and information is easier 

22 to see for the consumer of the top items that 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 175

1 they wanted to see. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Hold them both up 

3 together. 

4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. Sure. 

5 Okay, sorry. Old and new based on the FTC 

6 rulemaking that was called for under the 

7 Energy Policy Act of 2005. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: So are you making a 

9 larger comment about the effectiveness of the 

10 improved model? 

11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Yes. Well, I'm 

12 saying this is a better label, much better. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

14 MR. ROSENSTOCK: And now we're 

15 saying let's add all this other information on 

16 here, whether it is emissions or full fuel 

17 cycle. Well, the FTC rejected it in their 

18 rulemaking of August 29th, 2007. 

19 And here is a key sentence. It is 

20 likely that such a significant change to the 

21 FTC's labeling requirements would require 

22 substantial changes to the DOE test procedures 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 176

1 to allow for offsite energy use calculations 

2 as well as additional research and discussion 

3 regarding whether such information would be a 

4 useful measure of energy consumption for 

5 consumers. 

6 So I would suggest that the DOE 

7 review the FTC rulemaking on the labels to see 

8 all their consumer research, to see all of the 

9 open meetings that they had, and to see how 

10 they determined that this would be a better 

11 EnergyGuide label. 

12 Another thing is that EPA is doing 

13 a similar rulemaking. They put out an RFI 

14 about doing eco-labels. So if people want to 

15 do an environmental label, do it separate from 

16 this. Don't mess up the EnergyGuide label 

17 with some of this information, some of these 

18 estimates, excuse me. 

19 Thank you. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Don Brundage? 

21 MR. BRUNDAGE: I would agree that 

22 you don't need to have it on the yellow label. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 177

1 The majority of consumers, it's just going to 

2 confuse. They're interested in how much it is 

3 going to cost to operate. 

4 And some of the regional values, I 

5 think that could be solved with a good online 

6 database. I mean you can enter your zip code 

7 and it could be like the -- and if you have 

8 multiple utilities in that zip code, they 

9 would come up with a list of three utilities 

10 in your zip code. Which one is yours? And 

11 then you really get accurate answers. 

12 You are really not going to be 

13 able to get meaningful information to 

14 consumers for the national or even a regional 

15 label. You need to have some sort of online 

16 process. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

18 Bob? 

19 MR. BEAUREGARD: Yes, you know, 

20 comments that a majority of consumers don't 

21 want this, I don't know where that information 

22 comes from. EEI talks about putting all this 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 178

1 information on a label. We don't know what 

2 the information would be. 

3 You can hold up that new label and 

4 put another little high -- big font 

5 information on there without messing up the 

6 label. Yes, the FTC looked at some things and 

7 said not yet or no, not yet. But I don't 

8 think that should be mandating how DOE 

9 proceeds on this issue. 

10 If there are some consumers, and I 

11 evidence that, that there are some consumers 

12 that won't look at this information, cost will 

13 be their only consideration, but there are a 

14 host of consumers out there that are demanding 

15 this kind of information because they want to 

16 be green. 

17 They want to be knowledgeable 

18 about the kind of appliances they're buying. 

19 And I think the federal government is right to 

20 provide them that kind of information. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

22 We'll take additional comments. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 179

1 I'm going to hand these out now. Would you 

2 pass these down? These are the photocopies of 

3 the business cards that were provided. And I 

4 guess -- do we have a question or two from 

5 online? 

6 (No response.) 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: And this is the 

8 second batch of handouts. Please take, before 

9 you leave, a moment to fill these out. 

10 Although we're not finished yet, we're getting 

11 down toward it. 

12 So as we promised you at the 

13 outset -- there's no question? Nothing? 

14 (No response.) 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: So as we promised 

16 at the outset, there is yet another 

17 opportunity, for anybody that wishes to do so, 

18 to make additional comments to supplement what 

19 was said earlier, to raise additional issues 

20 that have not been raised adequately. And so 

21 now is your opportunity to do that. 

22 Steve Rosenstock? 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 180

1 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Just one quick 

2 one. It said in the slides that you are 

3 thinking about doing -- making it be a policy 

4 by December of 2010. And I'm just kind of 

5 curious if -- what -- is there going to be 

6 another -- is there going to be an 

7 announcement in the Federal Register around 

8 that time? 

9 And then in terms of -- and, 

10 again, this is a proposed policy. Is there 

11 going to be an announcement of final policy? 

12 And that's it? 

13 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Thanks. Yes. 

14 That is basically our intent to consider the 

15 comments that we've received today and that we 

16 are likely to receive in writing before 

17 October 19th and to develop a final statement 

18 of policy on these issues that we would hope 

19 to issue by the end of the year. It might be 

20 early next year. 

21 But as I indicated before, these 

22 policies will then be reflected in future 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 181

1 rulemakings and/or other activities of the 

2 Department. And to the extent that they are 

3 reflected in future rulemakings, they will be 

4 the subject of further public comment. 

5 So we would, in a new efficiency 

6 standard, for example, propose a specific 

7 methodology for moving to full fuel cycle 

8 analysis in some future rulemaking. And as 

9 part of that rulemaking process, that proposal 

10 would be subject to comment, just like any 

11 other aspect of that rulemaking. I hope 

12 that's clear. 

13 Some of these consumer 

14 information-related activities might result in 

15 work by the Department to make available an 

16 online database. That wouldn't necessarily be 

17 the subject of a rulemaking. But it would be 

18 subject of activity. 

19 And of course if there's any 

20 action by the Federal Trade Commission to 

21 change the EnergyGuide label, that would be 

22 the subject of some future rulemaking. So you 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 182

1 would see the result of this policy statement 

2 in many different forms going out into the 

3 future. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: We have some 

5 additional comments. 

6 Please. 

7 MS. WEISS: Joanmarie Weiss from 

8 Weiss Farm. 

9 It's been an interesting morning 

10 for me. I've really learned a lot here today 

11 about this policy that I didn't understand, 

12 including just now that this is may be rules 

13 not even policy we're discussing. So maybe I 

14 count a little bit. 

15 I want to thank you all for coming 

16 here and doing this for us as Americans, doing 

17 this kind of stuff. There is a business card 

18 sheet. So if you get to Michigan and you get 

19 to Frankenmuth, which is our number one 

20 tourist destination, stop in at our farm. See 

21 what we're doing out there at the farm, how 

22 we're using energy. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 183

1 We're trying to save it every way 

2 we can. And if my husband is taking the 

3 picture, you're going to be on a blog that I 

4 do, too. 

5 (Laughter.) 

6 MS. WEISS: I do a 

7 weisscentennialfarm.com blog. And that's just 

8 something that I do to keep readers in 

9 Michigan aware of what I do as a farmer. 

10 So today I was in Washington. And 

11 participated in policymaking. 

12 Thank you. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: And, Jim, I think 

14 you had a comment? Jim Woodward? 

15 MR. WOODWARD: Yes, hi. Oh, there 

16 we go. Hi, Jim Woodward from Deloitte 

17 Consulting. 

18 Given the last segment of 

19 discussion regarding the consumer awareness 

20 and the fact that we've mentioned the FTC 

21 several times, and to my knowledge I'm not 

22 seeing a representative from the Agency here, 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 184

1 I was just wondering how closely -- how 

2 closely today you've been working with FTC in 

3 terms of this process. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Friedrichs? 

5 MR. FRIEDRICHS: We've met with 

6 the FTC staff. We're certainly aware of the 

7 history of the development of the EnergyGuide 

8 label. 

9 I believe FTC staff are online 

10 listening to today's public meeting. They 

11 certainly will see the output of this. And we 

12 will be meeting with them in the future to 

13 discuss a way forward that seems to make 

14 sense. 

15 MR. PERKINS: Yes, Anthoney 

16 Perkins. I specifically gave them the webinar 

17 information because they did want to listen in 

18 to this portion. 

19 MR. BEAUREGARD: Mark or Anthoney, 

20 do I understand that it is the FTC that has to 

21 make the initiative on amending the 

22 EnergyGuide label? That's yes? 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 185

1 MR. PERKINS: Yes. It is. It's 

2 their label. 

3 MR. BEAUREGARD: So we all have an 

4 opportunity to work directly with the FTC on 

5 this matter say in conjunction with this 

6 proceeding? 

7 MR. PERKINS: Correct. You do. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: That was Bob. 

9 Thank you, Bob. 

10 Karim, you're next. 

11 MR. AMRANE: Karim Amrane, AHRI. 

12 A question for DOE. Has the 

13 decision to switch to full fuel cycle been 

14 made already by DOE? Or is it still being 

15 considered by DOE? 

16 MR. PERKINS: It is still being 

17 considered. That's what this meeting is for 

18 so we can take your comments and your concerns 

19 into consideration. 

20 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, 

21 AHRI. 

22 I just -- something just clicked 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 186

1 in my head about this whole issue of consumer 

2 information or whatever. The EnergyGuide 

3 label is about the efficiency of the 

4 appliance. It is about an estimate of what it 

5 is going to cost the consumer to operate that 

6 appliance, okay? 

7 This discussion we've had this 

8 morning as to the -- I'll it the upstream 

9 effects of that BTU that they used in their 

10 home -- is independent of the appliance 

11 efficiency. Certainly appliance efficiency 

12 matters how many BTUs they use, okay? But the 

13 amount of energy or the emissions that 

14 occurred to deliver that kilowatt or that BTU 

15 to their house doesn't care how efficient that 

16 appliance was. 

17 And to me, that's a fundamental 

18 reason why if you're going to do any kind of 

19 information related to -- again, what I'll 

20 choose to call the upstream effects of energy 

21 use -- it has to be disassociated. It should 

22 not be on the EnergyGuide label. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 187

1 They are two very different 

2 things. And it would be very much a mixed 

3 message. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew? 

5 MR. SOTO: Andrew Soto, AGA. 

6 When it comes to labeling, this 

7 proceeding should really be about giving 

8 customers information so that they can make 

9 smart appliance choices. 

10 When I go to a big-box store and I 

11 look at an appliance, I don't have an 

12 expectation that that appliance, when 

13 installed in my house, is going to exactly 

14 equal the energy consumption that the label 

15 says or that my operating costs are going to 

16 exactly equal what the label says. These are 

17 bases for people to make comparisons within 

18 the same class of appliances and across 

19 appliance fuel sources. 

20 And in order to do that, all the 

21 appliances need to be on a level playing 

22 field. And the full fuel cycle provides an 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 188

1 opportunity to do that. 

2 I would encourage the DOE to 

3 continue their efforts to work with the FTC to 

4 provide customers with information that they 

5 can make a valid comparisons so that they can 

6 make smart appliance choices. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

8 Final comments? Yes, Eric? 

9 DR. WOYCHIK: Eric Woychik, Black 

10 & Veatch. 

11 Just a perspective. I live in 

12 California. I started working with the 

13 California Energy Commission in 1979. I also 

14 worked on the building appliance standards. 

15 That effort has created the 

16 largest single increment of energy efficiency 

17 that has occurred on the planet, without a 

18 doubt. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Improvement? 

20 DR. WOYCHIK: Improvement and 

21 everybody knows that. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 189

1 DR. WOYCHIK: If you just go to 

2 get the site standards right nationally, it is 

3 going to be a huge, huge change. So in this 

4 case, it seems to me that a conservative 

5 approach of getting the first step right 

6 following that example is very important. 

7 Thanks. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

9 Yes, Dave? 

10 MR. MOHRE: I'm thinking of an old 

11 friend of mine, Alfred Kahn, the economist 

12 from Cornell, who often said to every complex 

13 problem there is a simple solution that is 

14 generally wrong. And I think we need to think 

15 about those words right now because telling 

16 somebody who lives in the Pacific Northwest 

17 that they are going to contribute to the 

18 global warming of the planet when the 

19 electricity is from hydro, that's simply 

20 wrong. 

21 We've got to be smarter than that. 

22 If we're going to do anything, let's make 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 190

1 sure we give them good information. And that 

2 is maybe an online service with regionality. 

3 You've got the data. You've got 

4 20, 22 regions. That's a start. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, please? 

6 MR. HINKLE: Well, another thing 

7 that I was cautioned about years ago is that 

8 simulations are best at formalizing our 

9 ignorance about a system. 

10 (Laughter.) 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Say your name again 

12 for the record. 

13 (Laughter.) 

14 MR. HINKLE: Albert Einstein. 

15 (Laughter.) 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So this is 

17 yet another opportunity for final comments 

18 because I think we're nearing that point. 

19 Yes, Dave, do you want to take it 

20 to the last slide? 

21 MR. PERKINS: So, I want to thank 

22 you for being here. We've got some 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 191

1 information up here, which is in the 

2 presentation and it is also information that 

3 you can find in the Federal Register 

4 announcement. And we'll have the 

5 transcription of the public meeting and all 

6 written comments will be available on 

7 regulations.gov. 

8 All written electronic comments 

9 are due, again, by October 19th, as is stated 

10 in the Register. Just remember if you're 

11 submitting them, we've got the document up 

12 here, the RIN number. We've got the email 

13 address as well as regulations.gov website, 

14 Ms. Brenda Edwards mail address or courier 

15 address if you want to have them or couriered 

16 over to her. And this is available. 

17 Thank you on behalf of DOE. 

18 Thanks, Doug Brookman, and all of our speakers 

19 today. And we appreciate everybody here. 

20 PARTICIPANT: (Speaking from an 

21 unmiked location.) 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Please use the 
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 192

1 microphone. 

2 MR. TEMPCHIN: Rick Tempchin, any 

3 idea when the transcript will be available of 

4 today? 

5 MR. PERKINS: I can't give you an 

6 exact date. It should be hopefully soon. As 

7 soon as they can get them transcribed and to 

8 us. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: It's typically a 

10 week or so, yes. 

11 MR. BEAUREGARD: Thank you, DOE, 

12 for having this meeting. 

13 MR. PERKINS: Thank you. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Safe 

15 travels to everyone. 

16 (Whereupon, the above-entitled 

17 meeting was concluded at 12:40 p.m.) 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 193

A

abbreviate 62:9

abbreviated 125:21

ability 35:15 38:14

77:2 91:15 105:10

165:21

able 76:15 118:17

141:8 177:13

above-entitled

192:16

absolute 90:15,18

Academies 126:21

Academy 13:13,19

18:6 21:6 33:12

37:10

Academy's 38:10

45:2 70:12

accepting 125:5

access 28:6 32:22

account 32:20

33:18 35:16

accurate 95:2

119:17 177:11

achieve 26:19 37:1

39:10 62:11

acknowledging

22:4

acquaint 10:9

act 42:20,22 46:9

62:10 132:13

140:2,6,21 174:12

175:7

action 17:7 181:20

activities 18:18

69:14 74:16 80:13

82:12 85:9,10,12

85:13,15,16,20

86:2 101:5 181:1

181:14

activity 181:18

actual 13:16 62:18

69:19 133:17,19

136:8

add 15:10 27:12

59:11 69:16 70:2

70:4 79:10,17

85:18 110:18

116:19 144:14

147:19 148:2,7

151:5 166:22

175:15

added 22:10 28:9

79:6 138:9 142:5

149:16

adding 45:17

136:22

addition 3:10 10:12

16:13,15 21:15

153:20 166:20,20

166:21

additional 10:18

36:13 38:7 41:14

60:14 61:13 64:18

73:18 80:13 94:9

113:4 116:20,21

117:8 120:17

124:6,8 152:5,21

176:2 178:22

179:18,19 182:5

additions 152:18

161:3,5

address 16:4,5

23:22 67:16 70:20

74:1,6 75:13 85:7

85:12,14 102:19

169:8 171:15

172:6,8 191:13,14

191:15

addressed 14:21

23:12 28:13 64:11

69:2 85:15 99:19

150:12

addresses 14:9

adds 68:15 98:21

adequately 22:15

35:13 179:20

ADJOURNMENT

3:18

Administration

7:14 93:6 168:2

adopt 33:11

adopted 112:8

ADOPTING 1:4

adoption 18:20

28:19

advance 9:9 17:17

advanced 140:5

advantage 20:15

107:5

AEO 88:8

AEP 144:17

Affairs 6:13

affect 69:5 71:16

136:1,2 143:13

affiliation 5:2,6

11:8

afternoon 15:10

AGA 19:20 21:15

21:21 22:2 23:9

24:1 25:11 29:15

58:1 126:11 187:5

age 45:21

agencies 58:20

Agency 35:22

183:22

agenda 3:2 8:5,11

8:13,21 11:1

153:3

aggregate 163:6

aggregations 94:8

ago 40:21 59:5

72:17 135:21

139:9 161:18

164:20 166:18

167:8 168:11

190:7

agree 32:10 63:13

109:8 145:13

162:9,10 172:16

176:21

agricultural 94:15

135:6

agriculture 95:9

ahead 4:11 13:6

14:12 87:21

122:12 141:5

167:22 168:9

AHRI 54:17 67:20

67:21 111:19

171:17 185:11,21

air 7:3,6 11:17

100:10 120:12

132:13 171:22

Air-Conditioning

1:15 2:8

alarms 155:18

Albert 190:14

alerted 107:9

Alex 2:3 6:7 46:19

106:11

Alfred 189:11

Alliance 2:10 5:14

82:8 96:21 129:21

156:10

allocate 95:21

allocated 106:17

allotted 9:18

allow 176:1

allowing 48:16

allows 26:9

alluded 88:14

alter 54:8

alternatives 28:3

amending 184:21

America 1:1 75:22

78:3,3,5,7 96:11

American 1:17 2:2

2:3,7,9,14 5:11,20

5:21 6:2,8 7:10

19:9,19 24:7,12

36:16,20 46:20

139:3

Americans 182:16

America's 36:22

Ami 2:1 6:9

amount 9:18 35:8

44:1 48:2 55:8,9

55:20 57:20 83:9

83:10 113:18

130:8 131:18

143:18 186:13

amounts 39:20

43:18

Amrane 1:15 7:3,3

171:17,17 185:11

185:11

analyses 1:4 18:17

33:21 50:1 53:17

54:9,10,11,12

57:1 64:13 71:7

91:10 108:11

analysis 17:10

20:21 24:15,20

26:4,15 27:1,6

30:6,7,16,17,22

31:1,7 35:1 43:11

52:16,19 56:17

57:8 66:7 71:22

74:3 75:4 76:3,4,6

76:7 87:4 97:5,10

108:20 110:4

117:12 126:17

131:8 135:13

148:7 149:3,10,16

152:7,11 162:9

163:8 181:8

analytical 50:11,14

72:7

Andrew 2:7 5:21

19:10,18 57:22

58:1 126:10,11

187:4,5

and/or 181:1

ANL 53:10

announced 160:21

announcement

180:7,11 191:4

announcements

161:12

annual 35:3,3,8

annualized 59:7

98:10 99:1,5

answer 49:7 72:5,8

91:17 93:8 99:15

answered 147:7

answers 177:11

Anthoney 2:5 3:4,9

3:14,17 4:4 6:16

13:5 153:4,6

184:15,19

anticipated 149:11

anticipates 25:18

antsy 115:6

anybody 8:16 9:4

29:4 41:14 179:17
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 194

anyway 108:21

141:9 169:1

APG 124:11

APGA 25:3,6,14,18

28:18

APGA's 146:12

APPA 106:11

apparently 91:22

appear 24:12

apples 85:3

apples-to-apples

38:12 46:13 98:18

apple-to-apple

85:19

appliance 20:2,8

21:3 22:22 23:8

23:18 26:11 27:17

28:2,16 30:13

31:6,11,14,16,22

36:5 39:15 40:7

40:14 44:20 54:22

62:19 69:6,20,21

81:4 117:21

120:20 126:14,14

126:15 127:7

135:1 136:20

138:11 139:18

141:9 153:11,21

154:19 157:6

159:1 169:20

170:4,10 173:20

186:4,6,10,11,16

187:9,11,12,19

188:6,14

appliances 15:20

20:6,15,17,18

21:2,13 26:22

27:22 30:4,15

37:14,21 38:13,20

62:3 65:7,15 66:2

112:5 119:10

121:2 126:13

127:1,4 128:18,19

129:13 157:2

158:4 163:3 164:1

169:13 178:18

187:18,21

application 141:9

applications 35:5

applied 80:16

102:6,8 103:12

118:13 121:15

apply 17:12 96:5

102:16

appreciate 117:9

120:2 122:10

138:5 191:19

approach 26:18

33:13 34:3,8 38:6

51:2,19 101:22

102:11,15 103:8

103:15 111:7,15

120:6 164:4 189:5

appropriate 22:5

130:1

approximately

58:13 135:20

April 134:16

165:15

arbitrary 121:8

area 17:13 167:13

areas 94:4,4 150:17

157:5 174:2,2

Argonne 2:12 6:20

16:10 74:9 75:9

143:9 146:17

147:2

Argonne's 75:12

75:15

argue 157:22

arrives 83:19

Asian 75:22

asked 99:14 112:16

171:19

asking 129:16

168:19

aspect 69:3 148:20

150:5 181:11

assess 14:5 34:20

60:8

assesses 53:4

assessing 40:13

101:9

assessment 21:9

26:16 48:5 54:13

108:12

assessments 22:7

36:5 51:22

assigned 31:3

168:6

assigning 56:14,16

assigns 31:2

assist 125:11

Assistant 25:12

associated 15:13

20:1 24:22 33:19

34:1 50:17 53:7

54:7 55:18,22

57:5,16 97:20

108:13 115:13

137:21 139:13

148:3 149:1,6

152:13 153:11

154:11 170:8,14

Association 1:17

1:19,20 2:3,5,7,14

5:16,18,20,22 6:2

6:8 19:7,9,19 24:8

24:12 33:6,9

41:20 46:21

associations 22:3

assume 111:10

112:18 144:12

assumed 109:21

144:19 145:21

assumes 89:5

assuming 92:9

142:18 143:20

144:8,12

assumption 109:18

130:16 145:1

assumptions 97:3

97:12 105:5 146:6

assured 31:15

attempt 31:10

43:18 101:2

attend 63:19

ATTENDEE 3:2

attendees 4:22

auction 136:12

August 42:15 75:19

165:1 175:18

authorization

42:22

available 3:13

10:15 12:8 15:19

25:8 32:19 72:10

75:12 110:16

114:16 130:19

131:3 133:1 171:9

181:15 191:6,16

192:3

Avenue 1:12

average 32:7

104:17,22 105:1

105:16 106:3

118:1,16 150:21

170:12,15

averages 169:21

170:2

awarded 145:6

aware 60:13 68:18

75:7 105:2 183:9

184:6

awareness 183:19

awful 131:7

awfully 122:13

a.m 1:12 4:2

123:20,21

B

back 10:10 11:14

30:7 45:22 46:7

52:17 95:15 99:13

103:19 104:5,10

109:7,9,10,11

111:19 123:17,18

124:1 135:18

141:18 168:4

169:5 170:20

background 13:7

66:5

backlash 31:13

bad 46:15

badge 123:1

Ball-type 97:10

Barker 1:16 6:5,5

29:8,9 173:4

based 21:13 25:15

27:22 36:21 37:8

38:5 41:3 43:5,13

46:3 54:20 78:20

79:1 89:4 91:10

93:13,16 94:1

104:13 105:18,19

115:21 117:19

128:15 130:22

132:10 137:16,20

147:22 162:3,22

169:21,22 170:8

170:13 174:17,18

175:5

bases 187:17

basic 57:11

basically 41:21

53:16 83:8 98:21

102:3,13 113:19

132:18 138:9,14

138:15 180:14

Basin 96:12

basing 43:15

basis 8:6 15:4

16:11 23:16 24:20

27:2,5 28:17 69:1

85:21 117:6 131:3

172:21

batch 179:8

Beauregard 1:17

5:19,19 24:10,11

124:10,11,14,16

146:10 177:19

184:19 185:3

192:11

becoming 101:5

163:15

began 135:17

beginning 17:19

18:16 101:15

begun 19:1 135:19

149:12

behalf 29:16

191:17

behavior 122:2,4

belief 49:22

believe 4:18 8:18
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 195

24:3 30:10 35:11

36:6 38:5 40:12

43:11,14 44:22

46:1 53:2,6,18

54:2 71:5 94:3,9

99:13 101:18

130:21 148:9

156:2 184:9

believes 21:21 23:9

25:14

beltway 111:21

119:12

beneficial 126:9

benefit 55:3 56:18

68:1,9,17 98:10

99:5,19,20,20

100:4,6 107:14

128:15 129:4

154:3

benefits 30:3 38:7

40:15 59:7,14

60:3 64:22 65:2

65:11 66:13 73:14

99:1,16,16 101:9

112:9 120:15

127:17 128:13,16

129:9 134:22

135:12 138:10

Berman 24:5

best 11:12 13:15

20:8 21:18 49:9

58:9 131:12,12

132:22 170:16

171:7 190:8

better 22:19 23:6

24:20 36:9 40:21

41:9 50:1 66:13

155:13 174:14

175:12,12 176:10

beyond 30:4 41:4

108:14

big 40:2 48:15 65:5

71:12 104:19

135:13 157:14,17

178:4

bigger 55:8 174:21

big-box 154:20

187:10

bill 173:9

billion 98:15,20

100:16,18

bin 96:5

biofuel 85:13

biofuels 78:8 95:19

biomass 76:18 79:3

81:9,13,13 86:18

86:19 89:10 94:16

94:19 95:2 122:6

bit 14:13 49:15

53:12 58:6 60:22

67:7 70:18 112:17

145:1 182:14

Black 2:15 64:21

99:12 152:2 162:7

188:9

blade 110:16,17

bless 165:7 166:5

blocks 49:5

blog 183:3,7

Board 84:3

Bob 5:17,19 124:10

124:13 125:14,18

146:9 147:5

177:18 185:8,9

boiler 78:22

bottom 69:6 76:5

163:18

boundaries 159:20

box 80:9 109:12

114:11,12 130:4

boxes 81:20,20

113:2,4 114:10

break 9:20 10:3

13:2 60:17,17

115:5 122:12

124:20

Brenda 4:19

191:14

brief 3:5 8:14,16,17

8:22 9:5 19:13

41:12 48:19

briefly 14:15 29:21

52:2 149:22

bring 78:6 97:21

brings 73:15

170:19

broad 37:4

broader 28:19

108:22

broadly 35:10

Brookman 1:13,15

3:3,6,16,17 4:11

4:14 7:22 8:20

12:11,22 17:15

18:1,19 19:2,14

24:2 29:1 33:4

36:15 41:11 46:17

48:18 52:3,6

54:14 56:7,10

57:22 59:1,19

60:14 61:4,8,10

63:16 64:9 66:15

66:19 67:17 70:15

70:19 72:3,14

73:18 82:1,4

84:14 87:6,16,20

88:2 90:1,14,18

92:16 94:11 96:19

97:16 98:2 99:6,9

100:21 101:17

102:21 103:2,17

106:9 108:7 109:3

111:12,17 115:3

115:16 118:4

119:5 122:11

123:22 124:5,12

124:15 125:13

126:10 127:8

129:18 132:3

134:5 135:15

136:4 137:11,13

138:4,18 141:10

143:1,5 146:9

147:5,15 150:8

151:15,22 152:17

152:21 154:14

156:7 157:12

158:16 159:22

160:15 161:5,9

162:5 163:11

165:11,19 166:4,6

167:2,21 169:3,10

170:18 171:13

172:2,8,13 173:1

175:2,8,13 176:20

177:17 178:21

179:7,15 182:4

183:13 184:4

185:8 187:4 188:7

188:19,22 189:8

190:5,11,16

191:18,22 192:9

192:14

brought 99:17

Brundage 1:18 7:1

7:1 72:14,15,15

73:16 109:5,6

110:19 111:16

141:11,12 143:4

143:19 144:4,7,16

146:4 176:20,21

BTU 131:3,16

143:12 186:9,14

BTUs 31:4 131:14

186:12

budgeting 140:14

build 79:11 121:21

143:14

building 1:12 6:15

10:9 26:13 111:3

122:22 188:14

Buildings 75:6

built 105:5 136:19

bullet 52:9

bullets 55:3

burden 79:18

95:21

burned 143:12,17

144:13,15

burner 83:9,16

business 4:18 37:14

46:1 62:16,21,22

91:4 145:22 164:8

179:3 182:17

businesses 154:22

business-as-usual

89:20 92:9,13

93:12

business-as-usua...

89:13

button 5:3

buy 122:8 154:18

buying 178:18

by-piece 85:18

C

calculate 50:12

53:3

calculating 16:15

calculation 26:9

45:18 151:19

calculations 43:16

65:1 96:13 146:14

147:4 173:13

176:1

Caldarera 1:18

5:15,15 33:7,8

125:16,16

California 66:6,9

74:22 119:14

160:13 188:12,13

California's 74:21

call 89:13 147:18

164:8,9,9 186:20

called 47:11 65:14

77:12 125:8

132:22 163:3

175:6

calling 172:12

Canada 83:13 84:3

84:7,8,11

Canada's 83:15

Canadian 78:2

candidly 43:18

capability 101:5

129:14 148:18

capable 74:10

148:14

capacity 64:22 65:2

65:14 87:14 99:16

99:19,20 100:2,4

100:8,9 101:3

160:20,20 162:22

capricious 121:9

caps 134:2
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 196

capture 133:11,18

carbon 28:8 45:16

58:5 62:5,20 63:6

74:21 90:4 97:6

98:16 133:11,18

134:14,20 135:5

136:14,18 144:17

149:4 151:8 155:9

167:5 168:4,12

card 4:18 182:17

cards 179:3

care 186:15

carefully 139:21

Caribbean 96:12

case 30:11 89:21

93:12,13 156:11

164:10,11 189:4

cases 104:22 116:7

128:7 156:18

159:6

category 119:2

caught 165:12

cause 30:11

caused 34:5

caution 45:5,8

cautioned 190:7

CECA 24:3,5

cell 11:19 78:11

census 94:2

central 64:8

cents 136:12,17

CEO 36:19

certain 4:6 97:2,12

101:6 108:3

140:20

certainly 45:20,20

49:21 139:3

140:22 150:4

157:19 171:7,8

184:6,11 186:11

cetera 65:11

chain 86:17,21 87:1

104:16 106:15

chains 86:14 104:3

104:6,9,19 105:11

105:19

Chairman 162:19

chance 41:13

change 30:3,6 37:8

41:1 45:7 50:11

51:5,18 52:10,20

52:22 54:19 55:4

55:5 56:5 57:7,9

57:10,14 58:18

68:1 71:15,16

91:2,16 108:4

118:17 119:9

122:2,4 130:17

133:12 135:13

142:6,9,13 144:20

159:8 161:17

164:15 167:13

175:20 181:21

189:3

changed 71:6

changes 44:8 45:9

71:14 91:7 142:19

142:22 175:22

changing 40:22

43:16 48:10

131:11 164:17

Charlie 2:10 82:5,6

84:16 96:19,20

129:19,19,20

156:8,9 158:16,19

172:9

chart 76:8 77:19

113:5

chip 101:10

chips 128:20

choice 21:14 30:15

127:2,5 174:2,3,3

choices 20:2 23:1,8

23:18 36:10 40:7

41:9 187:9 188:6

choose 186:20

chosen 16:9

CH4 77:7 103:10

103:12 151:5

circumstances

159:8

citing 46:6

clarification 91:18

165:17

clarifications 93:21

clarify 18:6,10

59:22 93:11 134:9

135:10 151:17

class 187:18

classes 15:22 30:15

30:18

clean 2:2,9 5:12

7:10 36:16,20

44:4 65:22 120:12

132:13 139:3

cleaner 37:2 38:4

cleaning 81:5

clear 19:3 23:15

50:9 149:20

181:12

clearly 28:2 43:3

44:6 118:9

clicked 185:22

climate 40:15 60:5

134:18 167:12

CLO 171:21

close 105:1 116:7

124:19

closely 69:15 184:1

184:2

closer 109:10

124:17 126:19

closes 17:2

closest 125:1

closing 3:17 10:21

clothes 39:16,19,21

cmictools.com

147:1

coal 39:8 40:1

44:10 76:14 79:13

80:22,22 81:2,5,5

81:6 89:9 97:7

110:10 112:13

114:18 115:12

139:14 141:19

142:3,8,11 143:22

144:9,13,15 157:7

161:20

coal-based 78:19

81:7

coal-fired 39:7

107:12,17 110:6

156:20

coal-to-gas 44:13

code 177:6,8,10

codes 111:3

coffee 13:2,3 60:18

123:4,6

collaboration 25:7

27:11

colleagues 11:17

collect 170:14

collected 136:16

collection 81:13

Collectively 159:5

collects 170:1

column 112:6,12

combination 29:17

combine 76:21

103:11

combined 39:5

77:8 161:4

combust 80:15

combustion 34:5

80:16 81:2,9,10

102:4 114:13

115:12,12 116:5

116:14 142:7

144:9 163:7

come 47:4 49:7

59:14 98:3 109:10

110:3 114:17,17

114:18 117:22

126:19 140:12

169:12 177:9

comes 39:22 44:4

97:11 139:16

140:11 143:21

177:22 187:6

coming 72:2 87:21

113:20 117:20

118:5 125:4 135:4

182:15

comment 7:21 17:2

36:12 41:14,15

67:20 109:7,8

115:7 117:15

122:17,18 124:7

139:7 143:10

150:4 157:15

158:14 166:7,22

172:3 175:9 181:4

181:10 183:14

commented 88:5

commenting 99:14

comments 4:7 8:19

9:9,15 10:18 11:1

11:14 12:2,6,8

16:22 17:17 23:20

26:2 35:21 36:13

40:17 41:17 42:14

46:18 48:19 60:14

60:19 61:12,14

64:14,18 70:19

73:18 88:14

103:20,20 106:10

109:1 119:7

120:19 123:15

124:8,19 139:4

152:17 154:1,10

177:20 178:22

179:18 180:15

182:5 185:18

188:8 190:17

191:6,8

commercial 4:6

38:20

commercialized

145:7

Commission 20:4

36:2,7 181:20

188:13

Commission's 23:3

committed 40:9

128:9

committee 70:13

community 166:14

companies 29:17

100:14,17 173:15

173:16,16,19

company 1:18 2:4

5:8 7:2 29:12

72:16 142:1

173:14

comparable 85:21
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 197

126:13 138:1

comparative 27:6

34:22

comparatively 52:1

compare 25:5

107:20 155:1

compared 34:15

39:7 83:10 91:19

98:19

comparing 15:21

24:20

comparison 86:9

86:10 106:22

126:13,16 127:3

comparisons 25:10

38:12 85:19

153:17 187:17

188:5

competing 38:12

complete 9:11

11:10 20:20 33:16

67:1 72:13 146:8

completed 49:6

61:14 144:20

completely 147:8

complex 32:4 69:4

108:20 162:10

189:12

complexity 23:10

68:15

compliance 145:10

complicate 159:16

complicated 96:18

complication 88:6

complying 137:17

components 93:10

comprehensible

141:22

comprehensive

14:6 50:2

compromise 111:7

computer 12:18

Comstock 1:19

7:13,13 93:4,5

168:1,1,13,21

169:8,11

concentrated 75:21

concept 83:6

concepts 167:1,15

167:16

concern 30:13,21

31:9,21 48:15

68:14 69:7 70:8

106:15 107:7

130:14

concerned 42:14

69:8 155:14

concerns 9:6 23:9

29:19,21,22 48:6

121:8 129:22

150:11 155:22

185:18

concise 11:16

conclude 123:12

concluded 192:17

conclusion 28:18

164:16

concrete 79:11

condense 9:14

conditioner 100:10

conditioners 172:1

Conditioning 7:4,7

conduct 11:4

confidence 31:17

confuse 43:17

157:9 177:2

confused 103:18

confusing 31:22

32:11

confusion 68:16

165:10

Congressional

140:22

conjunction 185:5

conservation 1:5

4:5 24:17 33:13

42:20,21 62:10

66:8 159:11

conservative 189:4

consider 16:21

18:7,9 21:7 52:22

56:2 57:12 64:5

65:6 108:19

110:20 111:8

129:9 171:12

180:14

considerable 39:3

considerably 39:2

91:2

consideration 11:2

15:11 16:6 26:6

33:3 49:16,17

56:20 148:21,22

178:13 185:19

considerations

140:14

considered 58:16

100:20 111:5

185:15,17

considering 25:21

55:13 58:12

considers 133:16

consistent 27:4

50:6 84:6 97:12

102:5

constantly 43:15

47:12

construction 44:14

79:12,13,15,16

84:19 142:10,20

144:18 145:6

constructions

85:11

Consulting 183:17

consume 112:19

consumed 112:21

consumer 4:6

16:16 18:18 28:2

31:13 34:11 38:16

54:8,10 55:3

70:13,17 121:22

136:16 153:3,12

153:13 154:5,16

155:22 170:17

172:17 174:17,22

176:8 181:13

183:19 186:1,5

consumers 3:13

10:16 15:19 16:17

22:19 25:5,9

27:14 28:14 30:10

30:20 32:1 36:3,9

37:11 38:3 40:5

41:8 43:16 44:18

46:12 64:8 70:10

99:21 119:11

120:11 125:6

137:2 153:9 154:3

154:12 156:21

157:4 166:1

170:22 171:19

172:15 173:5

176:5 177:1,14,20

178:10,11,14

consumer's 155:12

consumer-contro...

42:2 43:10 47:3

consumer-owned

42:1 43:9 47:2

consuming 26:12

consumption 13:17

14:4 20:11,18

21:9,20 22:16

26:11,20 33:16

35:14 44:17 62:2

65:9 116:13

152:13 158:7

176:4 187:14

contact 12:15

contemplating

40:22

content 32:9 49:5

87:17 124:9

131:16

continually 146:13

continue 22:12

38:6 73:7,13

145:15 188:3

continuously 48:10

contract 13:12

contractors 27:15

72:18

contracts 145:6

contribute 114:4

189:17

contributing 38:4

contribution

114:20

control 128:20

133:1 145:19

controllable 128:19

controlled 101:11

controls 142:2,5

143:21 144:1

Cont'd 1:22

convened 1:11

conventional 78:1

84:10 86:5

conversations

11:20

conversion 21:17

22:6,14 25:14

27:3 34:19 35:11

73:10 75:5 88:10

110:8,11 112:4

118:13

convert 75:1 141:8

converting 21:19

64:15 141:8

convey 70:6

Cooperation 19:6

Cooperative 2:5

41:20

cooperatives 41:21

42:8 43:10 127:19

copy 4:22 8:9,18

35:20 49:2

corn 94:21,22

95:10,20,20 122:8

Cornell 189:12

correct 18:7,12,14

59:17 60:13 185:7

cost 38:19 43:11,13

45:12,16 46:4

51:12,16 54:9

55:2 56:18 62:18

62:20 63:6 64:2,3

64:7 65:19,20

90:18 92:7 95:14

97:20 98:16

131:13 134:13

136:8,18 137:17

149:4 151:7 155:4

155:7,14,16

163:16 166:12
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 198

167:4,9 168:3,11

169:17,18 172:19

177:3 178:12

186:5

costing 168:20

costs 25:4 27:10

31:10,12,20 39:2

56:13 57:8 58:5

59:7 64:7 66:1,14

90:7,17 92:10,12

95:12,13 98:5

128:16 135:4,8,12

136:14,22 137:21

138:10 149:5,6

151:12 162:14

170:3 187:15

cost-benefit 66:3,7

Council 2:12 7:12

Counsel's 6:10

count 110:5,14,15

110:17,18 144:15

182:14

counties 41:22

counting 137:1

countries 76:1

86:19

country 38:3 46:12

128:2 158:13

161:11

counts 18:14

couple 17:1 50:8

59:5 103:3 132:8

courier 191:14

couriered 191:15

course 18:21 72:5

77:17 78:5,20

79:16 81:3 84:7

88:13 91:13 93:16

96:7 110:12 119:1

145:22 171:13

181:19

courtesies 11:3

cover 67:18 77:4

80:8

covered 10:20

74:12 76:2,10

covering 39:18

covers 14:18

cow 95:15

co-op 128:11

CO2 3:11 10:14

39:6 50:16 55:16

55:18 59:9 60:3

77:7,10 89:17

90:5,8,11,19,22

92:4 97:20,22

98:9 103:7,9,10

103:10,12,13

115:14 128:16

129:16 132:16

133:13 134:2,17

135:20 136:8

142:7,7,12 144:9

144:12 145:2

148:1,13,16 149:7

151:4,21 165:5

166:2,9,10,12,15

CO2e 77:12

crazy 163:22

164:17

created 48:6,13

188:15

credible 28:15

48:12

credit 129:1

credits 128:4

criteria 55:1 76:11

77:13,15 140:18

critical 27:20 89:2

critically 27:15

criticisms 121:17

crops 96:4

cross-class 25:9

153:17

cross-sector 86:10

107:19

crucial 120:10

crude 78:1 80:1,10

80:10 82:9 84:10

crudes 139:14

Crystal 97:10

Cumbrage 100:13

curious 167:7,9

180:5

current 20:7 25:16

27:21 38:1 39:16

44:8 53:19 69:11

78:18 93:13,16

151:2,2 167:8

174:16

currently 75:3

142:21 145:6

curve 83:19

customer 29:13

30:5,15 44:2

170:3 174:2

customers 19:22

20:4 22:21 23:6

23:16 31:14 32:8

32:11,14 43:13

56:17 125:1 187:8

188:4

customer's 56:18

customization

72:20

customize 73:1

cycle 30:22 35:4,9

39:5 44:19 48:5

50:1 52:14 54:3,9

54:19 55:2 57:19

59:10 62:21 76:4

76:5,7 110:4

113:2 116:6,14

118:15 126:16

127:1 130:20

141:14 148:7

152:7,12 154:6

156:3 161:4

175:17 181:7

185:13 187:22

cycles 139:12

cycling 100:11,11

163:2,2

C-O-N-T-E-N-T-S

3:1

D

dairy 61:17 95:13

dairyman 63:7

damage 166:13

damages 135:7

166:12

damp 121:7

dams 79:12

Dan 2:6 7:15

dangerous 61:22

data 25:8,16 32:7

32:10,12 53:20

130:8,22 131:22

143:3 153:10,18

169:21 170:13,16

171:9 190:3

database 28:1

153:16 177:6

181:16

date 133:21 192:6

Dave 41:18 87:6

127:9 163:11

172:3 189:9

190:19

David 2:4 19:5

day 8:2 10:17 18:21

45:22

deadline 35:21

36:14

deal 67:15

dealing 131:10

debate 21:18

decade 38:1

December 180:4

decision 155:11

156:5 185:13

decisional 140:11

decisions 20:5

30:12 36:6 38:16

139:21 170:3

decline 31:18

dedicated 96:4

DEED 47:11

deep 72:17 84:22

default 107:4

Defense 2:11 7:12

defer 67:5

define 82:9

defined 93:2

defining 171:11

definitely 168:5

deliver 20:14

186:14

delivered 48:12

116:1

delivering 33:19

delivery 34:8

Deloitte 2:14 5:10

183:16

demand 65:8 66:10

94:1 100:14 158:5

158:6 159:10

160:6,6

demanding 178:14

demonstrate 126:2

demonstrated 45:3

demonstration

47:10

denying 23:16

Department 1:1

4:4,21 6:17 9:2,10

11:15 12:14 17:16

18:16 20:3 21:7

21:12 22:4,11,21

23:4 37:5 47:8,12

48:1 49:6,22

55:13 58:19 59:6

61:13 66:16 70:21

71:18 99:4 117:10

120:5 143:2 181:2

181:15

Department's

19:20 21:3,16

22:6 23:1 122:18

depend 174:4

depending 10:4

104:16 119:2

159:7

depletable 110:21

deplete 111:1

derive 21:16,19

derived 28:8

121:13 148:15

describe 13:2 18:19

designed 62:11

105:3

desirable 40:12

destination 182:20

detail 35:22 49:15
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 199

70:18 94:8 115:15

detailed 40:17

119:3 120:8

details 17:12 53:13

60:21 75:5

determined 133:1

176:10

determines 62:13

134:13

determining 64:15

141:13

develop 32:17

50:19 125:21

126:17 140:10

180:17

developed 22:11

35:12 74:8 101:22

102:3,6 106:12,14

146:19

developing 17:3

34:19 36:3

development 49:19

55:14 56:2 58:21

64:2 74:18,20,22

75:8 101:14

128:10 130:2

184:7

deviation 105:9

device 26:12

dialed 12:17

differ 119:2

difference 40:2

104:20 141:19

168:8,14 174:20

differences 22:16

35:13 40:5 157:17

158:1 162:12

different 21:2

24:22 26:18 38:14

38:21,21 41:9

54:5,7 58:15

65:20 66:2 78:4,7

78:8,12,13 86:22

87:11,12 91:21

94:4 95:11,12,18

95:18,21 96:8

100:1,2 104:3,18

105:19 106:18

114:3 115:14

121:9 122:7 127:6

137:16 139:6,12

157:3,4 158:3

162:12 166:16

167:1,14,15 170:9

173:21 182:2

187:1

differently 14:20

difficult 43:15

46:15 67:22 68:7

101:14 117:15

121:16 162:11,14

168:22

diligent 25:20

dimensions 141:2

diminish 123:15

dioxide 134:20

direct 43:19 55:3

100:5

directed 13:12

174:13

directly 43:14

138:1 185:4

Director 41:18

disadvantage 20:17

disassociated

186:21

discount 98:12,17

discuss 4:8 128:1

184:13

discussed 153:19

discussing 48:4

62:1 182:13

discussion 3:8,13

8:7 10:2,14,16

16:1,8 67:9 91:21

110:4 127:10,11

147:17 154:8

176:2 183:19

186:7

DISCUSSION.147

3:11

dishwashers 163:5

163:5

dispatchable 65:14

162:21

dispatched 163:17

displacing 160:9

disseminating

154:11

dissents 18:12

distant 60:7 155:11

distinct 32:5

distinction 93:14

distinguish 28:3

distorted 38:17

distribution 15:14

80:21 105:4

116:19

dive 72:17

Division 41:19

divisions 94:2,2

docket 12:9 25:17

document 75:11

102:10 118:9

191:11

documenting 67:10

documents 58:2

118:8 119:4

DOE 1:19 2:1,1,5

6:10 13:12,20

14:8 25:7,20 26:3

26:14 27:1,11

28:6,19 30:5 31:1

31:9 32:1,10,16

36:6 42:3,19,22

43:1 45:11,17,22

46:1 54:22 55:6

64:13 69:14 98:13

102:1 105:6 112:7

114:6 118:3 125:4

125:10,19 133:16

139:8 146:11,17

146:20 147:2

154:10 155:19

175:22 176:6

178:8 185:12,14

185:15 188:2

191:17 192:11

DOE's 21:22 25:16

27:20 30:9 33:10

34:18 36:1 75:3,6

75:9

doing 11:9 30:9

86:19 97:4,9

100:3 135:11

151:7 163:22

176:12,14 180:3

182:16,16,21

dollar 100:16

136:13

dollars 41:6 100:15

131:13 134:14,15

136:11 137:3,6,7

151:9 164:22

165:15,18

domain 74:14

75:11

domestic 52:15

53:16

Dominion 1:16 6:5

29:9,11,14,16

173:8

Don 7:1 72:14,15

109:4 141:11

143:1 176:20

DONALD 1:18

door 156:22

double 137:1

doubt 188:18

Doug 1:13,15 3:3,6

3:16 4:11 124:10

138:3 191:18

down-trend 145:13

145:16

Dr 127:11,13,15

152:1,9,16 162:6

188:9,20 189:1

dramatically 43:4

83:12 159:17

draw 108:10 109:2

drawing 109:12

drilled 131:11

drilling 82:17,19

82:22 84:20,22

130:2,8,10

driven 48:2

drivers 72:21

drops 142:8

dryer 39:21 112:20

112:22 116:10

dryers 39:17,19

dual-fuel 156:16

due 134:19 191:9

dynamic 88:15

89:3 146:1

D.C 1:9

E

earlier 62:18 66:22

73:5 106:19 109:4

124:3 134:10

135:20 179:19

early 8:2 15:9

180:20

easier 170:22

174:21

easily 28:9 45:1

101:11

easy 28:10 120:2

easy-to-understa...

125:3

echo 124:18

echoing 125:18

economic 30:3,12

55:12 56:1,17,18

60:8 63:1 90:7

99:20 100:5

139:11 159:7

economical 133:12

economically 62:14

economist 189:11

ecosystem 135:8

eco-labels 176:14

Edison 2:6,6,11 6:4

6:22 7:16 18:3

29:7 52:8 56:12

59:3,21 66:21

132:6 134:8

Edwards 4:19

191:14

EEI 29:10,15,16

32:16 47:5 71:2

84:18 98:5 104:1

105:14 138:3

160:17,19 173:3
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 200

177:22

EERE 24:13 75:9

140:13

effect 42:11 59:9

99:22 100:3 133:3

136:21 148:9

effected 147:20

effective 16:19

154:4

effectiveness 43:12

175:9

effects 42:12 51:21

186:9,20

efficiencies 38:22

efficiency 2:10 5:14

6:14,18 13:14

15:6 20:7,22

26:16 27:16,19

29:14 30:4,14

31:11,17 38:1

42:5 43:4,12

47:10,13,16,20

49:19 50:4 51:6,7

51:19 54:12 55:14

55:19 56:4,21

57:14 62:12 69:12

70:1 82:7 84:12

88:19 91:4,9

96:21 101:7

108:17 109:18

110:8,11,21 111:6

111:11 116:6

129:21 135:1

136:20 143:13,15

144:14 147:21

148:10 151:14

156:10,13 159:11

159:13 181:5

186:3,11,11

188:16

efficient 31:16

34:10 43:22 44:10

111:9 158:4

159:14 162:2

186:15

effort 75:8 188:15

efforts 25:21 33:10

36:1 64:5 86:4

188:3

EIA 88:11 89:4,5

89:13 91:5,22

92:8 93:1,2,11

112:20 169:22

EIA's 50:15 80:5

eight 8:18 9:8

148:12 155:17

eighty-six 136:13

eight-year 155:21

Einstein 190:14

either 15:9

electric 2:4,6,6,11

6:4,22 7:16 18:3

19:6 25:1 29:7,11

29:18 30:19 31:6

32:4,8 35:10,17

41:20 43:10,21

47:2 51:14,17

52:9 56:12 59:3

59:21 62:4 65:10

65:16 66:21 78:16

92:20,22 107:21

108:1,3 116:10

117:13 126:15

128:18,19 129:6

129:12 132:6

134:8 150:10

156:14 162:8

173:15 174:4

electricity 30:22

31:8 34:3,6 39:4

39:20,22,22 41:21

44:4 46:22 53:1,4

53:5 65:3 72:19

78:13 81:2,3,7

87:15 88:11 93:9

94:3 107:12

109:19 110:18

113:13 114:16

116:1,4,10 117:13

117:20 118:2

158:8 159:10

169:22 189:19

electron 170:8

electronic 35:20

191:8

electrons 48:12

eliminate 30:14

elimination 30:18

Ellen 24:4

Elliot 1:20 5:17,17

email 191:12

embedded 76:20

110:9 137:18

embodied 141:2

emerged 11:3

emission 15:7,20

27:20 32:6,10

34:17 49:18 50:21

51:16 55:17,18

73:9 75:2 90:8

91:1 108:17

115:14 142:19

143:18,21,22

145:19 146:14

148:16 152:14

emissions 3:10,11

10:12,14 16:7

20:12,13,15,19

22:17 23:5,7,16

24:18,21 25:8,22

26:4,10,21 27:10

27:13 28:8,16

31:22 32:2,3,15

32:18 33:14,17,19

34:4,5,14 35:2,4,9

35:14 36:9 40:3

40:10 45:13 50:3

50:13,16 52:11

54:6 55:9 56:14

57:18,19 58:5

64:12,16 68:4

74:11 76:11 77:11

77:16,17,18 79:8

90:5,11,22 97:20

98:1 99:22 102:7

103:7,9,13,14

107:14,17 108:13

115:11 133:13

134:3,22 136:2,9

137:22 139:12

141:15 143:12,15

144:14 145:14

147:20 148:11,15

149:2,4,7,8,10,15

149:18 151:18,21

153:11,22 154:6

168:16 170:7,14

173:7,10 175:16

186:13

emit 20:12 166:9

emits 39:5 44:1

132:15

emitted 167:5

168:11

emitting 134:19

empathy 111:20

emphasis 157:17

emphasize 73:5

157:22

enable 20:20 25:9

72:13 164:2

enables 101:11

160:7

enabling 128:17

129:4 153:16

encourage 11:13

20:2 22:11 125:10

125:19 128:3

140:9 141:4

146:16 147:2

173:18 188:2

encouraged 61:19

encourages 25:20

28:19

encouraging 42:4

139:8 153:13

ends 13:1 123:3

160:9

end-use 33:21 34:4

93:6 94:1

energies 76:12

energy 1:1,5 2:10

3:7,8 4:4,5 5:13

6:14,17,17 7:14

9:22 10:1 13:14

13:16,16 14:4

15:4,4,7,14,20

16:6 19:22 20:3

20:10,11,13,18,21

20:22 21:8,9,20

21:20 22:16 23:5

23:11 24:16,17,21

25:4,8 26:3,10,11

26:12,15,20 27:9

27:12,13,22 28:7

28:13 29:14,18

30:11 31:5,6 32:2

32:13 33:13,15,16

33:18,22 34:11,12

34:20 35:3,13

36:4,8,22 37:12

38:19 39:16,18

40:2 41:19 42:5

42:10,20,21 43:4

44:17 45:1 47:8

47:10,12,13,16,20

48:1,2,10 49:16

49:18 50:3,12,16

50:17,21 51:15

52:11,13,15 53:3

53:4,7 54:5 55:8

56:4 57:18 58:19

62:10,12,13 64:3

64:12,15 65:9,13

65:20 67:11,12

68:4 69:11 70:5

73:9,11,13 74:11

74:12 75:2 76:10

76:11,13,17,19,20

76:20,22,22 77:2

77:3 79:21,22

80:3,3,6 81:21,22

82:7,13,13 83:6,6

83:10,11 84:3,9

84:13,13 85:1

87:12,13,14 91:9

93:5 96:4,21

99:16 102:7,17,18

103:5,6,6,15

108:12,16 110:5,6

110:15,15,17,18

111:4,6 112:4,12

113:1,2,5,7,8,8,9

113:10,10,11,13

113:16 114:7
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 201

116:20 117:10

118:11,15 120:5

128:3,6,17 129:4

129:21 130:2,9,10

130:20 131:13,14

131:18 139:11

140:2 141:2 148:4

148:16 151:4

153:10 154:6

155:3,20 156:10

156:13 158:3

163:16 168:2

169:17 170:3

173:13 174:12,15

175:7 176:1,4

182:22 186:13,20

187:14 188:13,16

EnergyGuide

153:20 154:7

169:11 171:21

174:9 176:11,16

181:21 184:7,22

186:2,22

Energy's 37:5

Energy-Related

3:10 10:12

engagement 12:16

England 134:1

136:9,19

enhance 96:6

enrichment 81:18

enter 177:6

entire 30:15,18

46:11

entries 112:12

envelope 173:8

environment 37:2

37:17 38:4 41:7

environmental

14:5 15:5 20:1,21

21:10 22:7 27:17

36:4 37:12 38:19

47:19 64:6 176:15

environmentally

23:17

EPA 74:17 133:2

133:21 176:12

EPACT 13:12

EPA's 132:11

equal 187:14,16

equally 129:3

equation 65:4 66:4

108:18

equations 130:4

equipment 4:7

38:20 151:1

equivalent 77:11

138:16 148:13

Eric 2:15 64:21

99:11 152:1 162:5

162:6 163:13

188:8,9

EROEI 83:16

ESA 74:20

esoterica 169:4

especially 15:15

98:7 108:1 130:22

139:13 140:4

150:13 151:12

161:22

essence 152:6

essential 119:18

essentially 97:5

160:7

establishes 58:4

estimate 24:16

52:11 70:4 76:14

90:6 97:19 98:15

99:22 101:2

118:20 136:1

165:6 186:4

estimated 3:11

10:13 45:12 55:16

57:15 83:15 98:13

99:1 103:13

104:12 135:18

148:9

estimates 16:11

46:3 50:15 53:7

53:14,20 54:4

67:3,12,13 73:9

73:11,12,13 98:14

104:8 115:21

133:15,15 137:20

142:16 147:19

148:8,15,17

176:18

estimating 74:10

136:3

et 65:10

Europe 75:22

167:7

evaluate 71:19 86:4

166:15

evaluated 51:12,15

99:17

evaluating 140:17

140:17

evaluation 78:11

140:18

eventual 30:18

eventually 45:5

everybody 128:8

146:17 188:21

191:19

everybody's 125:9

evidence 26:6

178:11

exacerbate 27:8

exact 111:15 192:6

exactly 53:13 54:18

114:22 119:1

169:18 170:7

187:13,16

examine 13:14

example 26:1 34:2

39:3 53:1 65:8,16

68:13,18 85:22

86:18 90:21

101:10 104:14

109:4 116:3,11

120:7 151:11

181:6 189:6

examples 115:22

120:9 121:15

125:7

exclude 130:1

excluded 149:7

151:19

excluding 108:2

excuse 176:18

Executive 41:18

exercise 105:11

existing 91:11

153:16

expand 79:20

expanded 81:21

expanding 94:4

expands 93:2 102:2

expectation 187:12

expected 37:22

experience 43:14

54:22 117:21

171:20

expert 58:9 60:5

162:8 167:12

experts 71:11

explain 58:6,9

explanation 115:9

117:8 120:3

explanations

117:19

explicit 121:14

explicitly 149:7

exploration 82:19

82:20,22 109:4

130:2

export 160:8

expressed 45:8

140:20

extend 80:7 103:10

149:9

extended 18:15

extent 65:22

140:13 148:5

181:2

extraction 30:8

52:17

extrapolate 65:17

extremely 32:4

108:20

F

facilitate 38:11

40:14

facilitator 1:13,15

4:12

facilities 79:19

100:1 132:15

fact 21:22 33:22

34:21 38:18 45:21

47:16 70:14

117:16 127:20

129:9 130:7,16

131:9 140:9

152:11 156:22

162:13 163:14

164:16 183:20

factor 28:7,13

55:12 56:1 69:18

70:2 94:21 100:4

100:8 112:14

115:22 117:13,14

118:1,13 121:11

137:8,9

factored 40:6

117:18

factors 21:17,19

22:6,14 25:15

27:3 28:8 34:20

35:12 50:19 73:10

75:1 77:10 88:11

100:2 109:21

112:4 141:3 153:9

factual 27:19

fail 33:15

fairly 15:17 83:12

147:8 170:13

faith 119:14

familiar 10:7 83:8

122:21

family 63:9 157:10

far 44:12 70:5 85:3

85:12 93:22 119:8

128:11 149:11

168:3,5

farm 2:13,13 7:18

7:20 62:3,19 63:3

94:15 182:8,20,21

farmer 61:17 95:13

183:9

farmers 119:13

farming 81:13

86:18,20 122:7

fast 145:19
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 202

favor 82:8 108:2

FCC 24:15 27:2,5

27:12 28:17,20

feasibility 63:1

feasible 62:13

February 58:13

135:19

federal 13:21 20:3

23:2 36:2,7 38:1

42:15 72:22 74:16

91:12 102:13

119:18 120:1

178:19 180:7

181:20 191:3

feedback 109:10

feeding 95:15

feel 120:11

feeling 51:9 111:20

125:5

FERC 162:18

fertilizer 81:11,12

94:17 95:13,14

96:3,6

fewer 44:11

FFC 13:17 14:4

64:11,15 88:10

102:2,3 103:6

153:9

field 21:1 82:12,20

187:22

Fifteen 164:22

Fifth 45:11

fifty 136:12

figure 54:17 86:21

figuring 142:21

filed 26:2

fill 179:9

final 3:15 10:18

17:3 45:19 72:1

118:19 125:20

147:9,13 180:11

180:17 188:8

190:17

finally 15:17 51:20

financial 165:5

166:1

find 31:18 191:3

fine 91:17

finish 10:21 74:4

101:18

finished 179:10

finite 131:10

first 13:6 15:1 19:4

19:17 30:2 42:18

42:19 43:8 47:9

64:19 67:21 74:4

75:14 80:1 83:22

87:13,21 88:15

131:12 154:19,22

161:13 171:16

172:4 174:10

189:5

five 29:21 31:21

40:21 65:18 123:9

131:1 134:14

137:3

fix 131:7

fixed 131:4 146:4

flag 48:20

flaring 150:16

flawed 28:12

flexibility 73:1

flood 135:7

floor 74:7 123:4

flow 37:13

flowchart 76:1,3

79:22 114:11

flows 139:11

FOAs 140:17

focus 11:18 15:1,3

15:8 64:4,8 101:4

174:18

focused 148:1

149:3

focuses 49:14

focusing 101:3

folks 119:12

follow 138:3

158:17 160:1

followed 3:8,11,13

10:14,16

following 8:13,15

8:21 9:3,17,21

10:3,11 49:3

136:7 160:18

189:6

follow-on 11:14

56:7

follow-up 56:8 85:6

106:12

font 174:21 178:4

footprint 34:15

62:5 63:6 155:10

force 66:11

forecast 72:10,12

134:21 165:21

forecasting 105:2

forecasts 91:9

forget 163:9

formalizing 190:8

formerly 100:12

forms 66:2 74:11

182:2

Forrestal 1:12 10:8

122:22

forth 10:10 11:15

64:7 119:3

forward 37:20

99:17 103:18

120:5 141:15

184:13

fossil 30:8 31:2

34:6 76:12 86:5

113:9,11,16 131:2

150:22 158:12

160:9

found 83:11 134:10

Foundation 2:2,9

5:12 7:10 36:17

36:20

founded 36:22

four 31:9 83:20

123:9 148:12

156:15 165:17

fourth 44:22

155:11

fraction 34:5

fracturing 84:22

frame 18:20 133:19

framework 140:11

Frank 2:8 7:6

54:15,16 67:18,19

111:12,17,18

115:17 118:6

185:20

Frankenmuth

182:19

frankly 130:3

free 111:5

freeze 72:12

frequently 156:21

Friedrichs 2:1 3:4

3:9,12,14 6:11,11

12:3,4 14:15

18:13,22 49:12,13

52:5,21 53:18

55:11 56:19 57:10

58:8 59:16 60:4

60:12,16 61:6,9

63:17,22 67:5

70:16 72:4 73:4

73:20 90:1,2,20

97:16,17 100:22

101:1 108:7,8

115:6,8 118:4,6

124:4 135:15,16

137:13,14 138:6

147:11,12,16

151:16 152:3,8,10

153:1 157:12,13

160:1,2 170:18,19

180:13 184:4,5

friend 189:11

front 9:7 19:5

FTC 22:20 23:4,13

25:7,7 26:17 27:6

27:12 153:15

174:12 175:5,17

176:7 178:6

183:20 184:2,6,9

184:20 185:4

188:3

FTC's 175:21

fuel 20:14,15 22:17

26:12,22 27:8

31:2 32:9,20

33:19 34:16 35:1

35:14 38:3 42:9

46:2,8 74:19,21

76:4,7 77:20,21

78:11 104:14

105:15 107:6

117:13 118:10,14

126:16,22 130:18

130:20 131:10

139:12 141:14

142:7 143:17

148:7 150:22

151:4 152:7 154:5

156:3 158:8,12

175:16 181:7

185:13 187:19,22

fuels 21:2,14 25:1

30:8 34:1,6 38:13

38:14,21 53:8

78:4,4 112:5

114:3,10 127:2,5

130:7,17 131:3

160:9

Fuel-Cycle 10:1

13:18 15:16 18:17

20:20 73:12 74:3

116:16 117:6

fuel-neutral 20:9

21:4

fuel-specific 51:10

115:10 118:18

full 9:22 13:17 14:1

14:2 15:15 18:16

20:19 28:20 37:12

45:9 62:5 73:11

74:2 116:15 117:5

126:16,22 130:20

141:13 148:7

152:7 154:5 156:3

175:16 181:7

185:13 187:22

fully 43:17 119:19

Full-Fuel 30:21

49:22 52:13 54:2

54:18 57:18 59:9

113:1 118:14

Full-Fuel-Cycle

1:4 3:7 4:8 15:6

15:19 16:6 21:8
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 203

21:17,20 24:14

30:6,17 33:12

34:7,20 37:6 38:6

40:11 42:16 49:17

50:22 51:21 52:14

52:16 60:20 62:6

67:1 68:22 70:2

74:10 75:4 79:21

80:8 81:22 102:18

108:11 109:17,20

113:8 118:13

120:21

Full-Fuel-Cycle-...

38:10 40:4

function 45:21

functions 105:5

fundamental 50:5

50:11 91:11

186:17

Fundamentally

19:21

furnace 35:7,10

68:19

furnaces 172:1

further 13:10

17:11 23:20 26:6

109:9 115:8

146:20 181:4

Furthermore 77:8

future 17:8,9,9

41:2 46:6 49:19

50:3 58:17,19,22

60:7 89:2 90:10

91:8 118:11

134:18 149:9,13

151:10 164:6

180:22 181:3,8,22

182:3 184:12

G

game-changer

133:2,10

gas 1:17,18,20 2:7

2:14 5:16,18,20

5:22 6:2 19:9,19

20:17 22:1,2,8

24:8,12 25:1 26:1

26:10,21 27:10

28:16 29:3,12,17

31:12 32:3 33:6,9

33:14,17 34:14,15

34:17 35:2,4,9

37:3 39:5,9,21

40:1 45:13 47:1

51:11,13 56:14

57:12,15 76:13

77:11 78:2,19

79:8 80:14,15,17

80:18,19,20 82:10

82:12 83:10,13

88:21 92:5,7

93:10 94:6 103:7

107:20 112:6,10

112:13,14,15,19

112:20,21 113:3,6

113:17,19,20

114:12,14,15,18

115:13 116:5,9,13

116:15,17,17,18

116:22 117:3,5

124:22 126:14

130:4 134:22

136:1 137:21

146:18 147:20

148:11 149:8,10

149:15,18 150:10

150:16 153:22

154:6 161:1,3,19

162:3 164:20

173:15 174:3

gaseous 78:4

gases 15:11 39:1

44:2 46:4 60:9

64:7,16 76:10

77:4,5,6,9 103:8

141:14 147:19

148:3,7,21 149:2

152:5,7,18 155:9

gas-fired 44:12

gathered 174:19

geek 174:14

general 6:10 12:1

14:16 17:14 47:5

47:16 72:8 166:19

generally 111:10

189:14

generate 53:5

73:10 75:1 77:10

80:5 102:15

103:11 105:7,8

150:1

generated 30:22

31:8 39:4 50:21

73:13 75:3 86:1

88:10 103:14

116:5 148:17

generates 103:9

generating 73:8

118:10

generation 34:7

35:17 38:22 44:9

44:12,16 46:6

78:14,17,19,20,22

79:2,3 81:1,3,8

88:6,8,8,9,12,14

89:3 91:1 92:12

94:16 97:7 104:4

113:14 128:11

157:18 158:1,8

159:20 161:22

170:9,15 173:10

generator 39:7

generic 70:4

gentleman 64:19

94:12 98:3 99:10

138:18

geographic 88:16

geothermal 79:5

getting 5:5 83:17

84:2 115:5 121:10

142:4 159:17

165:7 169:4 171:1

179:10 189:5

GHG 32:6,12,15,18

34:15 103:14

153:11

give 13:9 27:14

45:3 68:17 102:13

116:2 117:11

119:11 121:2

128:16 129:1,3

146:22 148:18

190:1 192:5

given 27:20 40:8

44:8 108:6 123:1

183:18

gives 34:3

giving 13:7 148:15

187:7

glad 4:15 63:20

74:1 112:16

global 45:12 77:9

129:16 189:18

go 4:10 5:2 13:6

14:1,11 29:21

30:7 52:13 68:12

78:5 87:6,21

94:11 104:5,10

108:14 109:9

111:19 112:11

115:1,7 123:6,11

137:3 142:16

151:3 154:18,20

158:21 163:21

167:21 168:4,9

171:7,8 173:13

183:16 187:10

189:1

goal 22:18 146:12

goals 13:14

gobbledygook

122:5

God 166:5

goes 9:19 141:20

151:6

going 4:10 8:10,11

8:22 9:13 11:12

14:11,12 16:21

40:16 45:10 49:6

49:13 52:17 53:15

59:13 61:1 62:8

63:4,11 68:8,19

68:20 69:1,14,22

70:2,3 71:13

75:15 83:11 84:5

87:11 93:17 99:13

100:1 102:20

105:6,22 107:9,18

109:6 110:22

112:10 115:4,7,16

116:16 117:2,4

119:22 120:5,9,12

120:21 121:18

122:2,11,14 123:5

126:3,8 128:10,22

129:1 130:9,10,11

131:2,16,17,19

132:12 133:3,7

134:15 141:22

142:4 144:8 145:2

146:1 147:8,16

150:13 151:9

153:7,9 155:4,6

155:11,16,20

156:3 157:1,8,9

158:4,6,20 159:15

159:16 163:5,12

164:3,4,18 165:3

165:4,22 166:3

169:16,17 170:7

172:18 173:21

177:1,3,12 179:1

180:5,6,11 182:2

183:3 186:5,18

187:13,15 189:3

189:17,22

good 4:3,14 24:10

29:8,15 33:7

59:15 64:20 88:3

96:15 104:21

110:2 172:22

177:5 190:1

Google 75:14

government 25:21

46:10 62:16 90:22

119:15 178:19

Grace-Tardy 2:1

6:9,9

gradually 45:6

grain 94:22 95:20

gravely 42:14

great 23:22 46:14

75:12 162:12

greater 37:2

greatest 26:19
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 204

green 5:5 139:1

178:16

greenhouse 15:11

26:10,21 27:10

28:16 31:12 32:3

33:14,16 34:13,14

35:2,4,9 39:1

45:13 46:4 56:14

57:12,15 60:9

64:6,16 76:10

77:4,5,6,8,11 79:8

88:21 92:5,7

103:7,8 134:22

136:1 137:21

141:14 147:19,20

148:10 149:2,8,10

149:15,18 153:21

154:6 155:8

greenhouses 44:2

GREET 3:8 10:1

16:10 21:16,21

22:5,15 25:13

26:7 27:4 34:19

34:22 35:12,15,19

50:19 53:6,13

60:21 64:13 67:8

68:22 71:2,3,13

71:13,19 73:1,10

74:2,8,13,17 75:8

75:14,15,18,20

76:2 77:2,19,21

77:22 78:10,15,18

79:6,11 85:12,17

94:10 95:6 100:4

102:4,16 105:3,12

139:10,19 140:3,6

145:8 146:12,21

148:14,18 149:22

152:10

GREET-knowle...

117:16

Greg 5:11 36:19

119:5 124:17

125:8 139:4

GREGORY 2:9

grid 127:21 162:21

164:3

ground 80:17

111:2

group 58:4 78:9

80:1,14 146:19

groups 85:21

174:18

growing 128:8

grows 95:3,10

growth 158:5

GTRI's 111:10

guarantees 140:19

guess 61:17 71:10

105:15 150:21

160:3 163:17

171:18 179:4

guide 23:6,11 27:13

32:3,13 36:8

69:11 70:5

H

habit 5:4 11:9

half 95:19 96:13

97:6 117:1 137:5

hall 13:1 123:3,5

HAN 163:3

hand 163:20 179:1

handed 4:18

handful 156:15

handle 73:2

handled 72:19

handouts 179:8

hanging 123:13

happen 125:12

160:11,13,13

164:2

happened 135:14

168:16

happening 161:11

happens 46:9 71:14

133:12 160:12

hardships 30:20

harmful 40:10

harvest 94:22

hate 90:16

hauls 95:4

head 83:15 95:16

186:1

health 40:11,15

135:6

hear 15:2 16:12

64:18 99:9,15

157:14

heard 68:21 70:10

106:19

hearing 9:16 17:14

63:5 155:15

heat 31:2

heater 43:21 51:11

62:4 100:11

159:14

heaters 25:2 51:14

51:14,17 65:10,16

129:6 163:2

heating 1:15 2:8

7:4,7 35:5,6

100:18

heavily 30:17

127:18,19

Hello 13:4 49:12

help 70:9 122:9

147:3 158:6

171:10

helpful 9:9 11:15

17:16 28:12 66:17

87:2,5 109:2

125:14 126:12

158:15

helping 37:17

140:7

Henry 164:21

165:15

hi 183:15,16

high 30:4 89:21

162:2 178:4

highlight 19:15,17

29:20

highlighted 80:6

Hinkle 2:2 7:9,9

138:20,20 139:2

190:6,14

history 162:3 184:7

Hoffmann 106:11

Hofmann 2:3 6:7,7

46:19,19 106:11

107:3

Hoi 49:8

hold 175:2 178:3

holding 96:18

home 37:13 112:5

173:20 186:10

homes 39:18

homework 139:20

141:5

home-area 163:4

hope 12:15 15:22

17:4 40:4 41:1

70:16 149:20

180:18 181:11

hopefully 15:21

192:6

hoping 9:12 97:14

host 178:14

hour 9:19 10:7

110:9 116:9 117:1

144:15

hours 122:15

143:16 169:15

house 116:1 186:15

187:13

hub 164:21 165:15

huge 41:6 47:15

133:4 150:17

189:3,3

human 135:6

husband 155:6

183:2

HVAC 65:10

hydraulic 84:21

hydro 35:18 44:4,5

76:18 79:3,12

109:19 111:8

114:17 156:18

158:10 159:2,3,3

159:4,4 160:5

172:11 189:19

hydrogen 78:9,12

hypothetical

128:14,22 129:16

129:17

hypotheticals

121:3

I

Idaho 160:14

idea 46:16 48:4

70:14 162:10

172:5 192:3

ideally 162:17

identify 69:12

ignorance 190:9

ignore 65:22 66:1

ignores 33:22

illustrated 109:3

immediate 28:11

immediately 8:12

8:20 9:21 10:11

21:12 126:21

impact 3:11 17:10

22:7 26:16 27:17

41:7 51:22 54:11

54:13,18 57:1

60:5 73:9 91:10

126:3,8,17 127:6

133:14 151:11,13

impacts 10:13 14:5

15:5,7,20 16:16

20:1,16,22 21:10

24:16 34:21 37:12

49:18 50:3,13,21

51:13,16 52:1,12

57:16 60:9 64:6,6

64:8 101:2 108:17

134:19 148:10

165:5

implement 21:12

126:18

implementation

42:5

implementing

126:20

implication 150:21

implications 23:7

36:10 97:1 119:20

168:17

implicit 130:16

implicitly 131:8

144:8

implies 76:9

import 53:3 96:11
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 205

importance 24:1

28:14

important 17:5

25:4 28:21 37:11

51:1 62:17 65:3

65:12 93:14 110:1

119:9 156:4

167:14 172:7

189:6

importantly 38:8

43:20 44:15

imported 53:1

importing 86:20

imposed 90:21,22

impressed 72:19

impression 34:3

improve 22:12 23:2

40:10 146:14

153:15

improved 43:4

141:1 175:10

improvement

62:11 119:16

142:19 188:19,20

improvements

25:19

improving 3:13

10:15 15:18

142:16 153:8

imputed 31:10,12

imputing 89:21

inappropriate

30:12

inappropriately

31:7

incenting 140:6

incentives 140:19

inches 126:1

include 32:2 66:13

76:13,18 78:10,17

81:5 82:18,19,20

82:22 86:1,10

113:10 116:16

143:4,22 166:3

included 35:5 65:1

77:20,22 78:14

80:13 81:2,7

106:22 140:18

includes 35:15

82:16 135:5

including 65:10

72:20 107:13

113:2,4,6 172:17

182:12

incompatible 97:3

97:6

incomplete 20:10

inconsistency

89:17

incorporate 24:14

28:11 146:5

incorporates 26:14

incorporating 57:8

increase 54:4 55:20

56:1 57:17,19

113:19,21 143:15

increased 42:5

44:16 113:6,11

135:7

increases 27:9

increasingly 65:12

109:22

increment 188:16

independence 1:12

37:1

independent

186:10

indicate 55:6 57:20

67:21

indicated 22:18

53:19 180:21

indication 114:3

117:11

indicator 153:21

individual 158:22

159:1

individualized

32:21

individuals 9:8

41:13 103:20

Industrial 46:8

167:6

industry 22:1,3,8

25:21 34:9,9,21

44:8 45:10 89:11

91:20 100:16

163:22 164:17

inevitable 131:15

infinite 111:6

inflate 30:3

inflated 31:5

inform 94:9 139:21

170:2

information 3:13

7:14 8:4 10:15

13:10 14:7 15:18

16:16,17,20 18:18

20:5,11 22:10,13

22:20,22 23:3,5

23:17 25:22 27:13

27:14,16,20 28:10

28:15 32:15,18,20

36:4,8 37:15,15

40:6 41:10 50:2

67:2 68:11 69:16

69:17 70:6,11

71:8 85:2 93:5

105:20 106:20

107:5 119:11,17

121:6 126:5

139:15 153:3,8,14

154:4,5,12 168:2

171:2,2,20 173:5

173:6 174:6,8,18

174:21 175:15

176:3,17 177:13

177:21 178:1,2,5

178:12,15,20

184:17 186:2,19

187:8 188:4 190:1

191:1,2

information-rela...

70:17 181:14

informed 87:18

172:21

infrastructure

79:10 85:13 86:8

106:21 107:16

108:13,16 109:9

infrastructure-re...

85:10,11,14,16,20

86:2 107:13

inherent 67:7

129:13

initial 53:12 117:11

initiated 12:15

initiative 96:12

184:21

input 33:3 84:13

95:11 105:5

133:16 146:13

150:20

inputs 86:17,22

94:9 104:14

inside 119:12

insignificant 130:6

install 155:6,7

installed 145:20

160:21 187:13

instance 43:22

140:1 169:14

Institute 1:16 2:6,7

2:8,11 6:4,22 7:5

7:8,16 18:3 26:1

29:4,7 52:9 56:12

59:3,21 66:21

132:6 134:8

150:10

intake 161:15

integrate 65:12,19

integrated 66:10

integrating 56:20

intend 10:20

intended 70:6

intensive 84:9

intent 141:1 180:14

interagency 58:4

58:11,14,18 149:3

interest 86:15

108:9 156:13

interested 3:5,15

32:8,15,17 171:1

172:15,18 177:2

interesting 83:3

182:9

intermittently

132:18

Internal 120:6

internalize 92:11

internalized 92:10

99:3

international 6:12

52:19 53:16,20

150:14

internet 62:7

interpret 113:22

intervention

121:20

inter-agency

134:12

introduce 4:11

153:4

introductions 3:2

4:16

invented 139:10

invested 83:7,17

involve 53:20

involved 42:3

61:19 127:19,20

IOUs 66:10

Iowa 119:13

IPCC 77:9

irrelevant 78:8

110:22

issue 17:4 44:6

67:16 71:18 79:16

96:18 101:15

107:22 127:16

157:16 159:16

174:1 178:9

180:19 186:1

issued 45:5 93:18

145:11

issues 8:12 9:6

10:19 14:21 17:4

23:22 44:6 48:20

64:17 70:17 72:1

72:6 73:3 108:15

124:6 150:14

153:19 154:11

179:19 180:18

items 174:22

it'll 83:21

I.2 167:19
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 206

J

January 132:10

133:4,22

Jerome 2:2 7:9

Jerry 138:20 139:2

Jim 2:14 5:9

183:13,14,16

Joanmarie 2:13

7:17 61:16 154:15

182:7

job 38:2

join 4:15

joined 25:11

joining 8:1 12:12

49:4

Jon 162:18

July 165:16

jump 63:14

justified 62:14

justify 63:2

justifying 138:11

JVC 2:4 5:7

K

Kahn 189:11

Karim 1:15 7:3

171:16,17 172:2

185:10,11

keep 11:18 17:6

137:14 183:8

keeping 17:13

Ken 1:16 6:5 29:9

key 3:4 8:14 9:1,5

14:3 16:3 29:19

54:12 105:5

175:19

kilowatt 110:9

116:9 117:1

144:14 186:14

kilowatt-hour

110:6 136:18

kilo-watt 143:16

169:15

kind 16:2,17 51:1

90:4 91:10 98:15

104:4 108:19

118:20 131:8

139:7 141:22

143:3 147:14

149:22 153:18

155:18 167:7,9

170:5,20 178:15

178:18,20 180:4

182:17 186:18

kinds 16:3 40:9

91:7 101:9 125:7

139:22 171:11

know 37:12 39:4

44:21 45:6 62:18

62:20 71:2 77:7

77:17 79:1,7

80:22 83:7 84:8

91:14,15 95:8,16

98:5 99:2 110:8

116:6,8 118:2

121:3,13,16,18

122:6 123:9

125:22 126:6

127:17 129:3,8

131:6 133:21

135:3 136:16

137:9 143:14

146:1 149:12

154:8,21 156:2,12

158:20 159:12

160:20 161:18

165:9 166:1,10,17

166:19 167:4,12

170:11 172:22

173:4 177:19,21

178:1

knowledge 183:21

knowledgeable

178:17

known 170:13

knows 128:8

188:21

L

Lab 6:20 16:10

147:2

label 23:11 27:14

28:9 39:18 44:18

48:9,13 62:2

69:11,15 70:5

153:20 171:6,22

174:9,13,15,16

175:12 176:11,15

176:16,22 177:15

178:1,3,6 181:21

184:8,22 185:2

186:3,22 187:14

187:16

labeling 31:17,22

32:2 40:4 175:21

187:6

labels 14:7 20:8

23:6,13,14 28:2

32:3,13 36:8 63:3

64:1 69:9 154:7

154:13 176:7

Laboratory 2:12

71:3,11 74:9

Labs 146:17

laid 126:8

large 29:11 34:4

37:19 65:11 84:8

96:5 121:4 128:15

132:14 140:2

largely 121:20

larger 107:16

175:9

largest 29:12

100:13 188:16

large-scale 156:13

lastly 31:21

lasts 166:10

late 15:9 41:17

latest 71:5

Laughter 63:21

112:1 154:17

157:11 165:8

183:5 190:10,13

190:15

launch 12:3

law 51:8 91:12

lawyer 119:21

lead 30:10,18 41:1

leaders 127:20

leads 130:13

leaning 151:1

learn 141:5

learned 182:10

leave 179:9

leaving 65:4

left 76:3,8 81:20

95:2 113:3 114:10

122:14 123:10

124:17

left-hand 163:19

legislation 40:20

45:15 140:22

legislative 27:21

length 60:6

Leslie 26:2

lesson 46:11

letter 22:4 25:12

let's 4:20 12:19

39:15 41:4 48:22

52:3 54:14 60:15

61:11 64:18 84:14

87:6,20 94:11

99:9 101:17,19

102:21 103:19

104:14 105:15,17

107:9 112:18

114:4 116:4,22

117:1 122:19

123:7,22 136:17

151:8 158:16

159:22 167:15

175:15 189:22

level 21:1 55:6,7

72:20,22 79:18

187:21

levels 54:6,8 129:10

life 35:3,8 44:19

48:5 54:9 55:2

110:4 116:5

lifetime 79:17,19

lifetimes 37:22

light 5:5 139:2

lightning 31:13

limit 11:20

limitations 137:18

limited 48:5 107:4

135:5 165:22

Limiting 33:21

line 69:6 75:14 95:7

108:10 142:18

163:18 172:5

lines 109:2

link 13:22 28:1

liquefaction 78:6

liquid 78:4

list 61:2 177:9

listen 184:17

listening 106:13

184:10

little 4:13 5:5 14:13

49:15 53:12 58:6

60:22 61:21,22

63:14 67:7 70:18

83:4 103:17

112:17 120:17

124:16 139:6

145:1 152:3

156:19 178:4

182:14

live 63:7 188:11

lived 111:22

lives 63:9 189:16

LMPs 162:13

load 128:20 162:22

163:9

load-management

66:8 101:4

loan 140:19

lobbied 47:17,18

located 44:3

location 162:13

191:21

locational 44:5

long 75:13 89:11

90:8 159:5 168:11

longer 123:13

long-run 137:20

look 14:2 22:12

52:12 60:6,7

61:11 68:3 70:11

92:4,7 98:6 111:3

111:9 113:15

121:21 130:14

138:13 143:11

146:13,18 147:3
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 207

154:22 155:2,5

158:2,22 160:4

171:21 178:12

187:11

looked 35:3 141:15

145:5 152:5 164:7

178:6

looking 30:5 59:6

60:11 64:9 68:11

69:2,4 83:5 87:9

89:8 112:8 127:9

139:11,17 140:3

141:12,18 164:5

171:10,19 173:22

looks 59:5 60:10

losers 46:3,10

losses 34:1

lot 44:14 45:3 63:5

64:5 68:15 70:10

72:7 128:10 131:7

139:10,15 140:3

157:16 161:20

182:10

love 143:3 157:14

lower 39:6 65:19

74:21

luck 96:15

lunch 4:20 10:4,6,6

10:11

M

mail 191:14

main 68:14

maintain 102:5

major 77:5,6 105:4

142:2

majority 177:1,20

making 28:4 36:5

127:17 139:13

155:12 175:8

180:3

man 95:3,10

management 66:11

101:12

mandating 178:8

Mann 127:21

Manual 66:7

manufacturer

54:11 169:21

manufacturers

43:5 69:12 120:20

154:21 156:1

manure 95:14

margin 63:8 158:9

162:17,22

marginal 158:2,21

159:2,12,18

161:16,21 162:9

162:14 163:10,15

margins 63:10

Mark 2:1 3:9,12

6:11 12:3 13:9

14:12 18:4,5

49:13 66:21 73:22

90:1 97:16 100:21

108:7 115:6 118:4

124:3 135:15

137:13 147:10,10

153:5 157:12

158:18 159:22

170:18 171:18

184:4,19

market 42:9 43:19

93:9 94:3 136:8

137:2,4,16

markets 42:12,13

162:9

Marks 2:4 5:7,7

mask 34:4

material 30:1 49:1

matter 28:22 39:12

127:20 129:10

163:14 164:16

165:6 185:5

matters 114:6

186:12

maximize 56:4

maximized 42:10

maximum 62:11

mean 39:14 82:10

90:14 95:8,11

100:17 104:22

105:1 168:15

172:11 177:6

meaning 92:11

116:13

meaningful 27:12

28:10 122:1

177:13

means 14:8 36:3

40:13 65:20 82:11

164:12

measure 21:8

176:4

measured 45:1

measurement

13:15 69:20,21

measurements

33:15

measures 14:4 37:1

51:5 64:12

mechanisms 16:18

171:11

median 104:17

meet 159:9

meeting 1:3,11

11:11 49:14 61:20

80:4 147:14

170:21 184:10,12

185:17 191:5

192:12,17

meetings 11:5

12:14 63:19 176:9

Meg 2:11 7:11

megawatts 65:17

65:18

mega-watt 142:11

member 29:15,16

members 24:1

28:22 29:10 47:1

membership 42:6

memory 14:17

mention 12:21 70:9

132:9 150:15

mentioned 44:7

75:10 134:10

183:20

men's 123:3

mercury 88:22

mess 176:16

message 187:3

messing 178:5

messy 163:8

met 184:5

methane 3:11

10:13 15:12 16:14

148:2 150:2

151:18 152:19

method 73:8

methodological

51:2

methodology 16:8

16:15 26:5,8

28:20 48:14 57:11

64:14 72:9,12

136:3 181:7

methods 24:15

50:12,14 51:8

52:11 84:21

metric 21:13 25:4

134:15

metrics 20:10,20

33:22 51:6

mic 7:21 138:22

Michael 1:18 2:12

6:19 53:10 67:6

67:15 73:21 87:17

97:18 101:17,19

120:3 143:6,7,8

146:11 149:21

166:6

Michigan 61:17

63:19 119:13

182:18 183:9

microphone 5:4

143:6 192:1

microphones 11:21

midmorning 9:20

midrange 98:15

Mike 5:15 33:8

87:8 125:16 129:7

miles 95:4

million 98:19,21

100:15 117:2,3

142:9

millions 37:20,21

41:5

milli-BTU 112:19

112:21 114:13,14

mince 18:8

mind 17:6,13 52:20

137:15

mine 189:11

minimizing 42:11

minimum 26:16

113:16

mining 81:5,17

minus 104:15

minutes 122:15

123:7

misconstruing

55:10

misleading 20:9

32:1,7,12 44:19

mismatch 66:3

misplaced 60:22

missing 89:22

112:15

Mississippi 142:11

mix 32:6 48:11

87:12,13 88:6,8,9

88:9,12,14 89:3

91:2 92:12 104:4

157:18 159:20

167:15 170:9,15

mixed 167:18,18

187:2

mixes 158:1

mock 125:21

mockup 126:12

127:4

mode 11:19

model 3:8 10:1

16:10,10 21:16,21

22:5,13,15 34:19

35:12 50:15,19

53:2,6,14 60:21

64:13 67:8 69:13

70:7 72:6 74:2,8

74:13,14,22 75:3

75:8,10,11 76:9

80:4 91:6 92:18

94:10 95:3,6

99:17 100:4

104:16 139:10,19
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 208

141:6 145:8

148:14 169:16

170:6 175:10

modeled 94:1

modeling 67:11

89:16 93:7 97:3,9

97:11 151:3

models 22:9 25:13

25:15,19 27:4

60:6 86:13 87:10

87:11 146:15

modern 39:5

modest 52:1 148:8

modify 50:20

149:17

modifying 171:6

module 93:9

Mohre 2:4 19:5

41:16,18 87:8,19

88:1 89:7,15,20

90:12,16 91:17

92:14,17,20 93:3

99:14 127:10,14

127:16 163:12

164:11 165:1,9,14

165:20 166:5

172:4,10,14

189:10

moment 39:19 52:4

82:2 179:9

monetary 55:16,21

56:5 57:2,12 92:5

135:18,20 136:3

137:19 149:14

151:20,20 166:13

monetize 98:19

165:4

monetized 59:14

monetizing 56:13

57:7 60:1

money 31:15,19

128:10

Montana 160:14

months 72:17

161:13

morning 4:3,15,17

8:4 15:2,9 24:10

29:8 33:7 61:3

64:20 119:8 123:2

182:9 186:8

move 8:12 9:22

18:16 19:8 24:6

26:17 37:6 60:15

73:11,19 96:11

102:17 126:21

147:9 169:5

moving 18:7,9 21:7

37:20 42:15 73:6

124:8 153:2

158:17 181:7

multiple 177:8

multiplier 151:6

multiply 112:10

117:4 151:9

multiplying 137:4

137:8

multi-hundred

100:15

N

name 5:1,6 11:6,12

13:5 18:1 19:18

24:9,11 29:8 33:6

33:8 36:19 41:17

46:18 56:10 61:15

76:9 93:4 94:13

127:12 190:11

narrow 106:1

NAS 14:9,19,22

50:6

NASDAQ 100:13

nation 29:12

national 1:18,20

2:4,12 5:16,17

6:20 7:11 13:13

13:19 14:5 15:4

16:10 18:6 19:6

21:6,9 22:7 31:5

32:6 33:5,8,11

37:10 38:9 41:19

42:21 45:2 55:7

67:10 69:1 70:11

74:9 84:2 94:7

112:9 118:1

126:21 161:8

169:20 170:1,12

177:14

nationally 189:2

nationwide 170:15

natural 2:11 10:5

20:17 25:1 34:17

37:3 39:8 44:12

76:13 78:2,19

80:14,15,17,19,20

82:9,12 83:13

107:20 112:6,10

112:13,14,15,19

112:21 113:3,6,17

113:18,20 114:12

114:13,18 115:13

116:5,9,13,14,17

116:17,18,22

117:3,5 130:3

150:16 161:1,3,19

162:2 164:20

nearing 190:18

nearly 132:11

necessarily 47:18

62:20 169:19

170:6 181:16

need 5:3 11:7,21

20:5 22:22 23:17

28:1 62:22 63:1

63:10,12,13 65:13

71:19 72:12

110:20 115:9,15

122:22 123:14

128:1 132:8

142:15 163:21

176:22 177:15

187:21 189:14

needed 20:13 27:7

27:15 44:21

needs 100:19 145:9

Neil 26:2

neither 91:5

NEMS 25:13 27:3

50:15,21 53:2

67:11 72:6,18

73:2,6,7,14 75:3

80:5 81:1,10 91:6

91:8 102:1,8,16

103:9,13 118:10

146:5,6 148:1,17

NERC 93:1

net 54:9 111:4

135:5

network 163:4

neutral 42:9

never 83:21 93:12

new 12:13 15:10,21

27:6 38:5 41:3

44:11,12 57:14

63:2 79:5 93:17

98:10,13 101:4,9

108:15 120:7,21

134:1 136:9,18

152:18 159:10

160:20 161:2,5,22

166:20,20,21

174:17 175:5

178:3 181:5

nice 44:20

nine 94:2

nitrous 3:11 10:13

15:12 16:14 148:2

150:2 151:18

152:19

noble 62:15

non-combustion

109:18

non-combustion-...

35:16

non-CO2 149:14

non-gaseous 34:1

non-North 78:3,5

non-polluting 44:5

non-profit 36:21

47:3

non-scrubbed

142:4

NOPR 71:22

141:18

norms 11:3

North 75:22 78:3,6

96:11

Northwest 2:10

5:13 44:3 82:7

96:21 129:21

156:10,14 159:7

189:16

note 12:4 49:4

67:17 115:4

148:20

noted 149:8

notice 13:21,22

14:8 24:13 42:15

45:8 54:2 117:17

120:1 174:20

notices 119:18

notion 97:5

not-for-profit 42:2

NOx 39:1,6 77:14

141:17,19 142:2

143:20 145:4,12

145:14

NPGA 33:10 34:18

36:1 125:17

NRECA 47:5

nuclear 31:1,3

35:17 40:1 44:14

76:19,21 77:2

78:21 79:12 81:15

81:16 84:19

114:17 158:11

null 97:13

number 30:13,21

31:9,21 60:13

69:13 70:3 84:12

84:13 104:11

112:11 114:5,5,6

114:7,21 117:12

118:3 121:4,7,10

127:22 129:12

141:17 182:19

191:12

numbers 59:13

71:15 83:14,18

84:1,2,6 86:1 89:9

89:9 91:19 95:6

98:12 105:18

119:3 120:14

121:10,13 122:4

126:15 130:12,14

131:4,21 142:13
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 209

142:16 144:20

146:14,20 148:19

157:8 160:22

numerous 139:9

N2O 77:7 103:12

151:6

O

observation 92:2,4

96:22 160:3

observations 92:6

observed 106:16

obviously 16:9

18:14 43:2 54:17

68:10 90:20

108:16 115:11

occur 20:19 34:1

57:13 97:14 145:3

occurred 186:14

188:17

occurs 152:15

ocean 82:15

October 1:7 17:2

23:21 35:21 36:14

180:17 191:9

offer 40:13 48:7

122:1

offered 26:3 146:19

office 6:10,13,14

offsite 176:1

off-cycle 76:2

off-gas 46:8

of-purchase 156:5

oh 129:1 139:2

183:15

oil 78:2 80:1,11

82:9,12,20 84:8

93:10 94:5 104:14

105:15 109:4

111:2 130:3

139:14 150:16

151:4 173:16

okay 11:22 19:2

29:6 43:14 46:17

48:21 52:5 53:21

60:15 61:8,10

69:22 72:3 73:19

74:8 82:3 83:3

86:12 87:19,22

88:2 89:7,8,15

96:1 99:6 100:7

101:21 104:5

106:9 107:3 112:6

112:9,11,20 116:2

122:11 123:22

124:15 127:8

128:3 129:17,18

136:4 137:11

143:1,19 144:4

147:7 150:22

151:1,4,15 152:9

152:16,22 153:1

158:18 161:3,9

163:17 165:2,20

172:13,14,17,19

174:15 175:4,5,13

178:21 186:6,12

188:7 189:8

190:16

old 174:15 175:5

189:10

older 44:9

once 7:22 71:10

151:17

ones 44:11 77:7

142:4

one-third 35:8

one-time 79:18

ongoing 25:19 86:4

online 23:3 28:1

153:16 154:2

171:14 172:6

177:5,15 179:5

181:16 184:9

190:2

on-site 34:17

open 74:7 124:6

176:9

opening 3:5 8:17

48:21 64:10

108:15

open-ended 15:17

16:1

operate 100:1

132:17,20 155:4

177:3 186:5

operating 27:10

38:22 187:15

operation 79:9,15

81:16

operational 98:16

operations 153:12

operation-related

85:9

operators 133:6

opportunities 66:1

opportunity 8:15

8:22 9:4 10:2,17

17:11 23:22 27:11

28:21 36:11

122:16 124:18

179:17,21 185:4

188:1 190:17

opposed 70:14

optional 77:6

options 26:22

40:14 122:1

153:13

order 96:6 102:1,5

102:17 103:9,14

119:12 187:20

organization 36:21

124:21 125:11

156:12

organizational 5:1

5:6 11:8

organizations 22:3

47:19

original 66:6 109:8

originate 53:9

ought 129:3

outcome 87:10

outcomes 43:19

outdated 93:17

outlined 29:22

output 28:6 84:13

148:1 184:11

outputs 71:17

outset 41:12 48:19

179:13,16

outside 111:21

overall 24:21 108:5

138:10

overestimate

107:14

oversimplified

54:21

overstated 28:17

overview 3:4 8:14

9:1

Owen 1:19 7:13

93:4 168:1

owners 133:6

oxide 3:11 10:13

15:12 16:14 148:3

150:2 151:18

152:19

ozone 39:12

P

P 105:9

Pacific 44:3 156:14

189:16

packet 8:3,5 124:9

painful 46:11

paper 62:7

papers 67:10

paragraph 62:9

paramount 125:4

parse 120:2

part 9:11 49:14

53:12 55:13 56:22

60:19 61:3 65:3

87:1 114:4 142:9

147:14 152:12

153:2 167:11

170:20 174:11

181:9

partial 48:5

PARTICIPANT

138:22 139:1

164:10,22 191:20

participate 121:5

participated

183:11

participates 58:20

particular 23:11

39:12 55:19 57:16

72:11 98:8 120:14

121:2 135:22

158:6 160:18

particularly 46:3

46:12 69:10

109:22 128:7,18

129:13

parties 3:6,15

32:17

parts 39:9 41:22

106:21

pass 179:2

path 48:11 170:8

paths 121:9

pathway 113:3,17

pathways 77:20,22

78:10,12,14 79:5

patient 94:13

pause 52:3 54:14

82:1 115:4 122:19

123:7,16 124:7

pay 137:3 169:19

payback 155:21

paying 137:7

168:18

pays 90:16

peaker 132:17

penalized 164:3,5

penalizes 30:22

31:7

penetration 129:11

people 11:12 39:3

64:11 83:7 88:5

119:7 121:5 122:1

122:5 123:13

156:11 157:9,21

160:3,19 162:19

172:17 173:12

176:14 187:17

perceived 23:14

120:15

percent 34:10

41:22 43:22 44:1

46:21 47:1 54:4

55:21 57:21 59:12

63:8 84:12 98:12

98:17,22,22 110:8
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 210

110:12 111:8,11

113:7,12,12,19,21

116:7,8,20,21,21

118:22 137:5,9

148:12 156:17,19

156:20 157:7

159:2 161:2,2,13

161:14,15 172:11

perform 27:1 34:22

period 17:2 74:6

90:9 134:21

166:15

Perkins 2:5 4:3,4

6:16,16 12:20

13:4,5 153:5,6

184:15,16 185:1,7

185:16 190:21

192:5,13

Perkins/Doug 3:17

Perkins/Mark 3:4

3:14

Perkins/Michael

3:9

permit 132:19,20

person 58:9 70:12

personally 46:7

47:17

perspective 188:11

petroleum 76:13

78:1,21 79:1

80:11 107:21

112:13 113:15,18

115:12

phones 11:19

photocopies 179:2

photovoltaic

107:11,16 109:20

photovoltaics 79:4

86:7 107:15

physical 48:11

149:1,17

physics 131:14

pick 46:10

picking 46:2

picks 55:6

picture 108:5 126:6

183:3

piece 40:20 69:17

85:17

pieces 140:2,21

pipeline 44:11

82:15

place 32:12 45:11

45:15 109:16

149:14 155:13

160:12

placed 90:5

places 45:15

placing 44:17

plainly 40:12

plan 10:22 12:1

planet 188:17

189:18

planned 44:15

planning 45:11

plant 79:9,12,13,14

79:15,16,17 81:16

81:19 84:18

107:17 110:7

116:6,14,19

132:14 133:6

142:11 143:14

163:1

plants 132:12,16,17

133:22 134:2

136:9 145:14,20

152:14

playing 21:1

187:21

please 5:1 11:5,5,9

11:16,18 19:11

24:9 33:6 41:15

46:18 58:7 61:15

82:8 106:10 123:6

125:15 151:22

154:14 179:8

182:6 190:5

191:22

pleased 32:16

plot 83:19

plunge 141:4

plus 85:10 104:15

119:22 125:6

PM10 77:14

PM2.5 77:14

point 10:5 20:14

22:1 30:7 33:14

33:20 37:7 45:19

46:16 58:3 60:17

67:20 68:10 70:8

75:18 86:17 97:2

97:18 99:13 101:2

104:21 108:9,12

108:19 110:5

114:15 116:12

117:10,22 121:19

156:4 160:19

169:1 170:2,16

174:10,11 190:18

pointed 97:18

points 19:17

106:18 110:14

policies 93:13,18

120:22 162:1

180:22

policy 1:4 4:9 6:12

12:10 13:8 14:9

17:3,6,12 24:13

29:19 30:2 37:5,8

40:22 41:1 42:20

42:21 48:14 51:18

54:19 55:4 62:10

68:1 90:6,10 91:3

91:7,15 92:3

93:16 97:1,22

112:8 117:17

125:20 128:1,2

132:10,11 133:3

135:22 142:22

174:12 175:7

180:3,10,11,18

182:1,11,13

policymaking

183:11

politics 61:19

pollutant 77:13,15

pollution 39:1,11

portfolio 88:18

portion 12:16 31:6

184:18

posed 70:21

position 92:2

possibility 133:18

possible 26:19

86:16 89:22

123:11 129:5

133:10 153:12,20

171:4

possibly 132:2

173:21

potential 23:14

38:11 68:15 77:9

88:21,22 139:20

potentially 32:12

37:17 41:6,7

119:8 122:1

pound 166:9

power 1:16 2:3 6:6

6:8 29:10 35:17

35:18 37:15,16

38:22 41:19 44:4

44:5 46:20 76:18

76:18 78:19,20,21

78:22 79:1,3,3,8

79:14 81:1,15,19

84:18 85:14 86:3

86:5,5 88:7,20,22

89:1,2,5 92:8

99:21 107:11,12

107:17 110:7

116:14,19 132:12

132:14,16,17

133:6,21 134:2

136:9 145:14,20

152:14 160:8

163:1 173:9

powered 38:13,20

39:21

PowerPoint 8:6

49:2 61:1

powers 79:7 86:6

practice 12:13 57:4

66:7

pre 174:16

precise 63:12

precisely 166:1

predict 89:4 91:6

92:12

predicted 165:3

predictions 93:15

predicts 92:8

preliminary 71:22

104:8 112:4

115:21

premature 45:17

prescription 27:7

present 1:14,22

4:22 22:14 54:9

60:1,2 87:17

103:4 129:2

134:18,21 154:4

166:2

presentation 8:7

49:1,5 54:1 61:1

101:20 106:14

109:17 146:11

147:10 191:2

presented 30:1

94:7 138:7

presently 29:6

presents 88:4

preserved 30:16

President 29:13

presiding 1:13

presume 96:7

presumes 131:8

presumption 90:9

91:11 97:21

pretty 11:21

103:14

prevalent 101:6

previous 52:8

58:14 68:6 74:5

170:12

previously 58:16

74:15 81:9

price 95:11 109:11

155:1 164:20

165:13,14 166:18

166:18 167:8

168:5

prices 155:1 169:22

primarily 50:13

75:21 78:22

113:20
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 211

primary 3:7 9:22

15:1,3 26:15 27:9

49:16 50:16,17,20

52:13,15 53:3,4

55:1 57:18 64:4

64:15 67:12 73:8

73:11,12 75:2

79:21 80:2 81:21

98:14 102:17

103:6 113:1,7

148:16 151:4

prior 58:3 127:11

probably 65:16

71:10 104:1 142:3

155:12

problem 65:6 83:4

107:20 156:20

157:14 163:20

172:7,9,12 189:13

problems 45:14

139:20 141:6

procedures 175:22

proceed 48:22

60:15

proceeding 19:21

23:12 26:3 126:4

185:6 187:7

proceedings 123:19

proceeds 178:9

process 18:15

31:11 34:8 55:15

58:6,10,11 64:2

68:2,6,9,16,19

69:4 72:11 75:6

79:20 89:4 101:14

102:9 115:4 135:2

146:8 150:15

177:16 181:9

184:3

processes 58:14,18

processing 80:19

116:17

produce 22:5 30:19

48:3 50:15 78:7

96:10 110:10,10

120:13 131:3

produced 22:15

25:15 27:3 34:11

35:7 58:15 122:6

130:9,11,19

131:11,19

producing 76:11

131:16

product 25:5 49:19

62:19 64:2 70:1

78:7 101:10 119:2

production 15:13

53:8 77:20,22

78:10,12 81:12

83:21 94:17

106:17,18 128:4

148:4 150:15

productivity 135:6

products 4:6 24:22

30:19 101:7

product-specific

153:10,18

profile 33:17

173:10,11

program 1:5 4:5

39:16 47:11 51:19

74:12 75:6 91:5

111:4 134:3 136:7

137:17,19

programs 6:15

66:8

project 66:9

projected 31:20

88:9 130:15

projecting 91:20

projection 90:4

projections 93:15

93:19 159:6

projects 47:14

promised 179:12

179:15

promote 36:22

47:20

promoting 47:13

prompted 61:13

pronounce 127:12

propane 1:18,20

5:16,18 33:5,8

34:9,14,21 35:1,7

35:19 126:14

173:16

property 135:7

proposal 14:13,18

14:20 15:3,10,18

16:5 19:21 23:2

30:9 49:15,21

56:6 57:5 60:19

147:18 148:2

150:5,6 181:9

proposals 8:14 9:1

PROPOSALS/Q...

3:4

propose 149:16

181:6

proposed 1:4 4:8

8:8 12:10 13:8

14:8 17:9 24:13

25:6 26:17 27:2

27:22 29:19 30:2

37:5 41:2 48:14

59:4 64:14 76:6

85:22 99:4 102:10

102:12 108:18

117:17 121:1

135:22 152:18

180:10

proposing 24:14

50:5,10,18 51:4

120:7

provide 14:6 20:4

20:10 22:19,21

23:5 31:4 33:15

35:19 36:7,12

50:1 65:15 107:5

107:11 118:20

119:17 152:11

153:10 178:20

188:4

provided 16:18

42:22 154:7 179:3

provides 24:20

28:11 187:22

providing 16:19

28:14 36:3 67:1

provision 46:8

proxy 109:11

public 1:3,11,17

2:3 5:20 6:8 11:4

12:5,6 14:7 24:8

24:12 25:9 40:10

46:20 74:14 75:10

90:5,10 91:3,7,15

97:22 124:22

128:1,2 153:17

181:4 184:10

191:5

publish 32:9

125:19

pulls 108:5

pump 83:10

pumping 82:13

purchase 20:6

37:13 62:3

purchased 37:21

purchases 25:5

27:18 28:5

purchasing 36:5

38:16

purely 114:13

purpose 34:6 57:2

125:9

purposes 9:15

21:22 25:16

push 5:3 81:11,16

116:15

pushed 113:1

put 70:3 82:14

161:19 173:6,7,17

173:19 174:6,7

176:13 178:4

putting 134:21

135:12 142:1

177:22

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-...

4:1

p.m 192:17

Q

qualification 152:4

quantify 168:22

quantitative

102:14

question 17:22

18:3 48:7 54:20

66:22 68:7 69:9

71:12 72:16 82:4

85:5,6,8 87:9 89:8

92:17 94:15 99:15

104:7 107:4

108:22 109:14

110:3 112:17

115:20 116:4

117:8 143:10

158:14 164:19

167:4 170:20

179:4,13 185:12

questions 3:15 8:14

9:1 10:19 11:1

12:2 16:3 49:7

61:2 70:20 74:2,5

74:6,7 87:13 93:9

102:19 103:3

147:8 150:5 169:5

queuing 11:12

quick 8:11 92:17

109:7 167:3 180:1

quickly 16:2 42:17

103:4 111:14

123:6

quite 119:1 123:10

127:22 130:3

147:13

quote 128:15

Q&A 10:2

R

raise 68:13 108:22

179:19

raised 14:21 87:16

127:16 172:9

179:20

ramping 65:14

162:21 163:7

range 58:11 59:8

59:10 67:2 90:3

104:10,12,13

105:7,16,22 106:1

106:6 118:21

121:10 128:15

136:8 148:11
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 212

150:12,17 151:12

156:17

rapid 44:8

rapidly 128:8

164:18

rate 31:2 34:17

98:13 158:5

rates 136:16,19

rating 27:21

ratio 102:8 130:20

ratios 102:3,6,6,15

103:11,13 131:4

reach 110:16

129:10 164:15

reached 110:17

reaching 34:11

119:9

read 9:13 113:22

134:16 155:16

readers 126:2

183:8

reading 135:10

real 8:11 63:18

66:3 70:7 128:17

133:19

reality 133:20

really 15:22 37:19

45:6 52:14,15

55:5 64:4 68:8

69:5,8 70:4 86:13

104:4 110:20

115:19 137:15,22

139:21 142:15

162:20 171:2,19

177:11,12 182:10

187:7

reason 50:5 68:12

115:9 120:4 164:4

186:18

reasonable 109:13

111:7 144:22

146:6

reasonably 48:9

reasons 21:5 115:6

127:22

receive 17:1 61:12

180:16

received 8:3 180:15

recognized 101:13

recognizes 22:8

25:3

recommendation

14:3 18:6,11

21:11 50:7 126:19

126:20

recommendations

14:10,19 33:11

37:9 166:19

recommended 21:6

21:11

recommending

51:3

reconciling 84:1

record 8:19 9:11,14

11:6,11 19:16

40:17 47:4 123:20

165:12 190:12

recover 82:13

recovery 80:10,19

82:9,10,10,11

84:9,10 116:17

reduce 144:13

158:5,7

reduced 55:9

143:16

reducing 40:9 68:4

reduction 26:20

160:6

reductions 39:11

39:12 55:17,18,22

57:13

reemphasize

163:13

refer 46:7 104:1

reference 93:13

102:22 134:11

164:10,11

referenced 149:21

references 171:14

referring 59:3

refers 104:4

refinements 22:9

refining 80:11

reflect 22:15 35:13

reflected 17:8

130:12 131:20

180:22 181:3

reflects 49:21

134:17

refresh 14:17

Refrigeration 1:16

2:8 7:4,7

refrigerator 98:7

138:8,14 167:19

169:14 174:15,16

refrigerators 59:4

98:11

refrigerator/free...

98:14

regard 34:13 35:2

140:4

regarding 20:11

23:10 33:12 90:10

176:3 183:19

region 107:10

157:19,19 158:7

158:13 162:13,13

regional 32:7 68:20

69:2 94:8 172:12

172:21 177:4,14

regionality 172:7

190:2

regions 92:18 93:1

93:22 94:6 107:12

159:19 172:22

190:4

Register 13:22

42:15 102:13

120:1 180:7 191:3

191:10

registered 4:17,19

123:1

regularly 72:8

regulate 133:21

regulated 101:7

132:12

regulation 74:18

91:12

regulations 41:3

88:21 89:1 120:8

145:10

regulations.gov

12:9 191:7,13

regulatory 6:15

17:7,9 18:17

54:13 57:1 72:21

74:16 132:11

145:10

Reidinger 2:6 7:15

7:15

reiterate 135:17

146:12

rejected 175:17

related 26:11 28:1

64:17 72:16

107:17 134:19

135:3 186:19

relative 51:13,16

84:10

relatively 34:10

released 75:19

relevant 15:15 61:3

79:16 171:3

relevantly 78:13

reliance 51:5

rely 73:7 122:3

relying 97:15

remain 25:4 64:8

124:6

remaining 131:17

141:16

remains 91:12

remarkable 38:2

remarks 3:15 8:17

8:17 10:18 41:12

64:10 66:16 143:2

remember 46:9

68:6 191:10

removal 144:9

renewable 44:16

65:13,19 74:19

76:17,22 77:3

79:7 86:4,6 88:18

113:11,13 128:3,6

128:17 129:4

156:18 157:6

158:12 161:14

162:2

renewables 31:1,2

35:18 37:3 84:19

111:4,8,10 163:21

164:18

report 13:20 14:1,2

14:22 38:10 45:2

70:12 134:13,16

135:4

reporting 32:4

represent 46:21

48:10 124:21

representative 24:5

24:9 29:3 70:13

120:19 183:22

represented 161:1

representing 19:10

29:4,9 46:20

represents 156:12

require 50:10

175:21

required 51:7

132:21

requirement 74:20

88:18,19

requirements

175:21

requires 26:17

52:10

research 28:4

47:10,14 61:21,22

63:14 153:13

176:2,8

residential 93:7

residual 80:11

94:20

residue 96:2

resistant 62:4

resolutions 42:7

resolve 101:16

resource 110:1,21

159:3,13 163:10

163:15

resources 2:11 7:12

31:3,4 44:9 46:5

65:21 106:17

128:11,17 159:18

161:16
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 213

respect 140:16

respectively 161:2

respond 9:2 14:19

111:15 133:7,8

171:18

responded 43:6,7

responding 40:19

response 65:8

100:14 127:21

152:20 179:6,14

responsive 169:6

rest 23:19 101:19

124:9

restricted 149:5

151:21

restriction 27:21

restrooms 12:21

13:1 123:2

result 31:5 38:15

41:9 54:3,5 55:17

57:13 58:11 64:4

76:16 80:5 90:7

91:3 102:2,4,8,17

181:14 182:1

resulting 26:18

40:3

results 27:5 35:7

94:7 102:3 105:15

140:4

resume 123:8,16,18

resumed 123:20

retired 142:5

return 10:6 84:16

122:16

returned 83:6

reveals 84:15

Revenue 120:6

review 3:2 8:13,21

35:22 176:7

reviewed 49:10

revise 66:11

revises 23:13

Revolution 167:6

RFI 176:13

RGGI 134:3 136:7

136:15 137:17

Rick 2:11 6:3 17:20

18:1,2 56:7,10,11

59:19,20 66:19,20

134:6,7 192:2

right 16:9 19:2

47:20 52:4 53:1

59:22 73:7,16

76:3,8 82:1 83:1

84:11 85:8 95:17

96:15 106:16,18

107:2 109:13

111:21 114:8,22

115:1 119:15

122:19 124:4,5

128:7 133:20

144:3,11 150:18

150:18 155:3

156:21 163:22

164:13 165:1

168:13 178:19

189:2,5,15

right-hand 163:19

RIN 191:12

risk 108:14 135:7

road 95:10

Robert 1:17,20

24:11

rod 31:13 81:19

Roger 2:13 7:19

94:14

roles 89:2

rolling 56:16

room 1:12 4:16 5:2

19:7 24:6 29:5

39:4 47:20

rooted 50:14

Rosenstock 2:6

6:21,21 52:6,7,8

53:15 59:1,2,2,18

70:22 71:1,1

75:18 84:15,17,17

86:12 98:2,4,4

99:7 103:21,22,22

105:13,14 106:2,5

106:8 132:4,5,5

136:5,6 137:12

138:2,3,5 150:8,9

150:9 160:15,16

160:16 161:7,10

167:2,3,17 168:10

168:19 169:2

173:1,2,2 175:4

175:11,14 179:22

180:1

rough 118:20

roughly 54:3 55:20

57:20 110:7

148:11

round 59:11

rule 8:8 56:6 59:4

72:1 76:7 85:22

98:8,10,14 99:4

102:10,12 138:8

138:14 167:19

rulemaking 23:12

55:1 68:2,5,9,19

71:14,21 72:11,13

118:7 119:18

121:1 125:21

126:4 158:22

174:17,19 175:6

175:18 176:7,13

181:8,9,11,17,22

rulemakings 17:8

57:4 58:3,17 69:7

117:21 151:10

181:1,3

rules 17:9 98:6

167:18 182:12

run 8:10 47:9

126:15

Rural 2:4 19:6

41:19

S

Safe 192:14

Sample 35:6

samples 102:14

sand 78:2 84:8

save 30:5,10 31:15

31:19 183:1

saved 55:8 155:17

savings 15:5 31:5

37:16 38:3 41:6

42:11 43:13 54:5

54:10 64:3 68:4

98:16,17 112:10

118:11 120:13

136:20

saw 103:20

saying 56:13 69:22

128:21 138:13

144:5 145:8 152:6

163:20 165:21

167:13,14 175:12

175:15

says 62:9 112:6

134:17 151:5

187:15,16

scale 144:17

scenario 97:4 151:3

scenarios 97:9

173:22

schedule 122:13

Sciences 13:13,19

21:6 37:10

scope 48:6 107:5

screen 49:3 61:11

124:2 169:6

scrub 142:12

scrubbers 142:2

scrubbing 145:2

scrutinized 69:15

second 15:8 34:16

43:9 51:4 52:9

85:6 86:12 119:6

130:13 147:14

155:2 174:11

179:8

Secretary 25:12

62:12

section 12:9 13:11

sections 106:22

sector 79:14 85:14

86:3,9 88:7,20,22

89:1,5 92:8 93:7

99:21 107:18,20

107:21,22 108:1,2

108:3

sectors 85:17

sector's 89:3

see 14:1,2 44:9,11

44:11,13 49:9,10

53:22 63:20 68:12

75:13,15 76:1

77:21 78:18 80:9

84:5,6,14 85:3

87:2 95:5 118:17

123:17,18 124:2

126:7 127:6

131:20 143:3

145:15,15 147:3

164:15 169:6

174:22 175:1

176:7,8,9 182:1

182:20 184:11

SEEAT 26:4,9 28:7

28:8 146:18

seeing 68:17

109:16 183:22

seeking 150:4

154:1

seeks 64:14 154:10

seen 89:11 130:22

131:7 145:13

segment 183:18

selected 61:20

selection 56:3

sell 95:1

Senate 140:3

sense 60:1 148:6

174:10 184:14

sensitivity 87:4

sent 9:9 22:3

sentence 175:19

separate 76:12

77:1,2,15 176:15

separately 76:15

September 22:2

sequestration

144:18 145:2

series 8:5

serve 125:9

served 13:15

service 154:2 157:4

171:14 190:2

services 120:7

135:8

serving 125:5
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 214

set 43:1,16 108:15

119:10 120:14

121:1 162:19

163:5

sets 58:15 97:13

setting 31:11

119:16

seven 161:13

shale 139:14

share 11:17 84:8

sheet 182:18

shift 3:7 9:22 15:3

15:15 16:5 37:5

49:16 50:6,10

51:20 54:2 57:17

60:20 148:6

shifted 57:3

shooting 121:3

shop 123:4

shopping 157:1,5

short 37:20 65:18

shorter 147:17

shortly 67:6 115:4

show 43:21 62:6

74:13 76:1 79:22

87:11 89:9 118:7

119:3 126:15

136:15 138:10

showed 35:7 86:16

104:2

showing 114:20

150:19

shown 93:19 98:9

99:3 138:8,15

shows 79:2 87:10

132:1 141:19

142:7

shutting 44:10

side 66:11 81:20

94:1 108:17 113:3

114:10 115:11

120:11 123:5

162:22 163:9

sidebar 11:20

side-by-side 27:1

significant 9:18

27:8 37:16 38:18

40:15 44:13 52:10

52:20,22 67:14

86:8 99:2,8

100:12 133:14

137:10 175:20

significantly 48:3

silent 11:19

similar 39:20 53:6

84:20 103:8,15

150:11 176:13

Similarly 16:13

simple 32:17,22

129:6 171:4

189:13

simply 17:19 75:14

90:6 97:19 125:8

142:22 189:19

simulated 102:2

simulation 81:1

simulations 81:10

105:2,4,12 190:8

single 56:5 117:12

188:16

sit 61:20

site 13:16 20:10,19

21:19 26:11 27:22

33:14 44:1,22

47:7,22 62:1 80:2

80:5,12,15,16,18

111:5 189:2

site-based 20:7

28:12 34:2 51:5,8

site-specific 43:2

80:3

situation 88:15

107:19 158:21

160:4

six 45:20 77:15

155:18

six-year 155:21

Skies 2:2,9 5:12

7:10 36:17,20

139:3

skipped 103:18

slide 52:8 53:21

61:7 64:10 78:16

86:16 87:9,14,14

87:18 88:4,7

101:22 103:5

104:2,5 106:15

122:17,18 124:1,2

141:13 149:21

171:14 190:20

slides 8:6 49:2 54:1

54:20 61:5,7,14

66:22 74:4 84:5

101:18 103:18

122:13 123:10

141:16 147:9,13

180:2

slow 158:4

slowing 160:6

small 34:15 63:10

79:2 113:18

smaller 44:9

smart 20:5 22:22

127:21 162:20

164:3 187:9 188:6

smarter 189:21

SNo 96:10,11

social 31:20 39:2

57:8 134:13 135:4

136:22 149:4

151:7,12 167:4

168:3

societal 92:7,10,11

97:20 137:20

138:10 149:5,6

166:8,9

solar 76:19 79:4

107:10,15,15

161:14,15

sold 46:22

solution 189:13

Solutions 24:4,6

29:13

solved 146:7 177:5

somebody 189:16

someplace 160:9

somewhat 84:9

soon 12:7 93:17

192:6,7

sorry 24:19 41:16

60:18 88:1 92:15

139:2 154:20

165:16 175:5

sort 72:17 106:12

106:16 109:20

177:15

sorts 73:2

Soto 2:7 5:21,21

19:13,15,18 58:1

58:1 126:11,11

187:5,5

sound 23:18

sounds 172:22

source 21:12 26:3

26:10,15 28:7

31:4 44:17 158:2

sources 22:17 31:8

32:21 34:16 35:1

35:15,16 94:19

109:19 187:19

source-based

126:22

Southern 1:18 7:2

72:16 144:16

Southwest 1:12

SOx 39:1 77:14

141:17,20 143:20

145:4,13,14,19

so-called 76:4,5,12

76:17 77:10,16

79:7,10 85:18

96:4

SO2 39:7

space 35:5

span 19:11

speak 11:5,7,10,13

28:21

speakers 191:18

speaking 35:11

40:19 53:11

191:20

speaks 25:6

specially 143:11

specific 70:7,20

80:6 102:19 109:1

115:19 118:11,14

122:18 141:17

164:4 170:4 181:6

specifically 14:22

68:5 75:4 147:18

184:16

specifying 66:16

118:12

spell 119:19 120:13

spend 96:13 112:17

spent 95:19 140:3

spread 165:13,14

spur 37:16

stack 17:18

staff 184:6,9

stages 47:14 80:8

81:7 116:16

stakeholders 87:2

stakes 37:18

standard 27:2 31:6

31:11 37:6,7 41:3

54:6,7 55:19 56:3

57:3,14,16 66:6

74:19,21 105:9

128:5 135:1

151:14 181:6

standards 1:5

13:15 14:6 15:6

20:8,22 21:3

24:17 26:17,19

27:7 30:14 31:14

33:13 38:2,5,11

39:15 40:11 42:10

43:1,2,12,15

49:20 50:4,13

51:7,10,10,11,19

52:12 54:12 55:14

56:2,21 64:1

68:21 69:3 91:5

91:10 101:8,13

119:10,16 120:22

121:1 125:3

126:17 139:18

147:21 148:10

149:19 188:14

189:2

standing 29:15

Stanonik 2:8 7:6,6

54:15,16,16 67:18

67:19,19 111:13
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 215

111:17,18,18

112:2 114:2,19

115:1,18 117:7

185:20,20

Staple 2:9 5:11,11

36:18,19 119:5,6

124:17 139:4

Star 39:16,18

155:20 174:16

start 4:10 8:2 13:7

17:19 109:12

123:22 150:18

159:17 167:6

190:4

started 13:11

136:11 188:12

starting 110:5,14

133:8,22

state 72:22 74:16

stated 13:6 25:11

25:13 172:16

191:9

statement 17:3,6

19:4,8,16 23:20

24:3,7 29:2,6 33:5

36:16 92:3 125:20

146:22 180:17

182:1

statements 3:5 9:5

9:8,10,12 12:6

14:16 17:14 29:5

48:20

states 1:1 39:10

40:8 42:1 88:19

88:20 156:15

157:20 160:21

161:8,12

statewide 66:10

static 48:9

statistic 105:8

statistical 104:19

statute 132:22

stays 141:21

steam 78:22

step 28:12 68:12

189:5

Stephens 2:10 5:13

82:5,6,7,16,21

83:3 96:19,20,20

129:19,20,20

156:8,9,9 158:18

158:19

Steps 3:17 10:21

Steve 6:21 52:6,8

59:1,2 70:21 71:1

75:17 84:15,17

98:2,4 103:21

105:13 132:4,5

136:5 138:4 150:8

150:9 160:15,16

167:2 173:1,2

179:22

Steven 2:6 103:22

138:2

stick 71:20

sticker 155:3

stickers 169:12

stochastic 105:3,12

stop 121:17 122:9

182:20

stopping 10:5

storage 129:14

133:11,18

store 95:21 154:20

157:1,5 187:10

stored 95:20

story 96:8

straight 123:11

142:18

straightforward

125:2

stress 37:18 40:18

strong 18:12 37:9

51:9 162:8

stronger 40:13

strongly 28:18

structure 46:5

structured 14:20

struggling 171:5

study 33:12 35:2,19

35:20 62:22 63:1

81:15 93:1 111:10

stuff 131:12 155:20

173:17 182:17

stuffer 173:9

stuffers 173:8

subject 181:4,10,17

181:18,22

submission 121:21

submit 19:16 23:19

40:16

submitted 17:17

24:4 29:2 41:17

submitting 191:11

subsequent 140:21

subset 77:18 113:9

113:16 114:1

subsidizing 31:20

substantial 39:11

175:22

substantially 39:6

44:16

substantive 8:12

success 43:3

succinctly 19:12

sufficient 21:22

25:16

sufficiently 10:20

sugarcane 94:20

96:7 122:8

suggest 55:4 65:2,5

122:12 128:6

159:9 176:6

suggested 154:2

suggestion 69:16

summarize 16:3

59:15 77:19 88:7

summarizes 78:16

149:22

summary 8:17 9:5

41:12 48:19 62:8

86:16 98:8

supplement 179:18

supplemental

28:10 36:13

supplier 174:5

suppliers 29:18

174:4,5

supplies 131:10,17

supply 41:21 46:6

65:21 86:14,20

104:3,6,9,16,18

105:10,19 106:15

support 23:1 24:13

25:6,12 37:4 45:4

47:5 58:2 74:15

75:9 118:8 119:4

124:19 139:4

153:12 173:5

supported 42:6

supporters 47:15

supporting 42:4,12

42:12

supports 19:20

21:15 33:10 34:18

36:1

sure 12:22 58:8

63:3 67:18 94:5

97:8 101:16

115:19 119:1

127:17 165:12

171:6 175:4 190:1

surface 82:14

suspect 38:15 41:8

147:17

switch 185:13

switchgrass 94:20

95:4 96:5

switching 27:8 39:8

44:13

sympathetic

120:18

synthetic 139:13

system 43:8 67:11

92:21 93:1 101:12

141:3 160:5,7,12

190:9

systems 124:22

158:3 160:8

S-E-E-A 26:4

T

T 26:5 71:8

table 84:5,15 98:8

102:12,20,22

103:19 104:11,11

109:14 111:19

112:3 113:22

115:2,7,16,19

116:3 138:8,15

141:18 142:7

143:11,11 144:3,7

146:18 167:19

tables 104:6,7

120:3

take 4:7,12 9:19

32:20 39:15 45:4

48:8 85:19 102:14

103:2,19,20 120:5

122:12 124:7,18

147:2 178:22

179:8 185:18

190:19

taken 136:21

takes 48:2 120:7

131:18

talk 14:13 19:1

52:2 67:2,7 153:7

talked 66:22 84:18

132:9

talking 41:5 63:4

71:3 94:16 100:8

100:9 129:11

134:14 155:9,10

166:17

talks 177:22

tanker 82:15

taper 83:22

task 66:11

tax 90:22 97:6

120:8 128:4

140:19

technical 26:7 58:2

74:2 92:4 110:3

118:8 119:4

techniques 122:7

technologically

62:13

technologies 78:14

78:17 108:3 140:5

145:20

technology 26:1

29:3 46:2 63:2

108:6 133:1

146:19
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 216

Ted 2:4,14 5:7 6:1

tell 42:16 68:10

119:21 120:20

165:3 166:1

telling 189:15

tells 169:13,14

Tempchin 2:11 6:3

6:3 17:22 18:2,2

56:8,11,11 57:6

59:20,20 60:10

66:20,20 134:7,7

192:2,2

ten 100:17 161:19

tend 41:8

tens 41:5

term 85:8

terms 37:4 51:12

51:15 57:7 59:13

59:14 68:5 85:3

87:3 108:10

117:20 131:13

132:7 134:12

148:13 150:12

161:16,21,22

173:22 180:9

184:3

test 175:22

tests 69:13

th 13:19 17:1 22:1

23:20 35:20 61:6

thank 4:14 12:11

19:14 23:21 24:2

28:20 29:1 33:2,4

36:11,15,18 41:10

41:11,16 46:16,17

48:16,18 59:18

63:15,16 66:18

70:15 72:2 73:16

73:22 87:5,12

93:3 94:11,12

96:17 99:8,11

100:20,21 106:8

111:11,12,16

124:15 125:13

127:8,15 129:18

132:3 134:4,5

136:4 137:12

138:17 141:10

143:5 146:11

147:5,6 151:15

152:1,16 153:5

156:6,7 162:4,6

163:13 164:11

165:16 167:10,20

169:2,9 176:19

177:17 178:21

182:15 183:12

185:9 188:7 189:8

190:21 191:17

192:11,13,14

thanks 7:22 69:13

70:18 72:3 91:18

108:8 125:14

150:7 172:2

180:13 189:7

191:18

thermal 161:15

they'd 112:9

thick 126:1

thing 46:15 61:22

62:15 86:13 133:5

150:16 154:19,22

155:2,5 162:16

163:18 164:12

176:12 190:6

things 42:7 45:7

50:8 64:11 66:12

68:3 84:21 94:21

94:22 111:3 128:6

129:5 131:9,20

132:8 139:16,22

146:7 161:17

163:6 165:21

178:6 187:2

think 8:3 10:19

18:13,22 37:7

38:8 42:10,18

43:3,6,8,18 45:8

45:17 46:15 49:6

50:22 51:22 55:11

59:16 62:15 64:10

65:4 66:17 68:14

71:4,6 84:4 86:14

87:1 89:19 93:2

97:1,8 99:14,19

100:19 101:3,8,15

102:9 109:12

110:12,19 120:15

122:5 124:1 126:9

128:13 130:1

131:1 132:7

133:17 137:10

139:22 140:7

141:7 144:3,22

145:21 147:7

148:11 153:2

155:8 157:15

159:15 162:16,20

165:9 168:4,7,14

169:3 170:5 172:4

177:5 178:8,19

183:13 189:14,14

190:18

thinking 139:16

140:5,17 180:3

189:10

thinks 118:3

third 44:7 126:18

126:20 134:1

155:5

thought 14:17

17:18 95:16

106:19 127:18

thousand 126:7

three 21:11 30:21

66:10 74:6 76:14

76:16 77:5,8 81:6

101:18 103:7

113:4 114:2,9,10

117:3,4 121:12

123:9 125:22

135:21 136:11

177:9

throw 98:11 105:18

throwing 106:3

THURSDAY 1:7

time 8:2 9:18 11:5

11:6,10,17 17:10

18:7,10,20 21:7

25:19 31:16 33:2

37:19 41:15 43:1

43:5 45:7,14

46:16 48:8 51:18

60:6 67:22 68:7

79:9 80:7 81:5,11

88:17 89:11,16

90:9 91:16 95:18

95:19 96:14 97:14

112:17 133:19

140:3 146:5

148:22 149:15

151:17 159:5

170:2 180:8

times 137:5 183:21

tip 83:9,16

title 112:3 132:20

today 4:7,12 8:7

9:16 10:21,22

11:11 12:2 16:1,4

16:22 40:19,19

47:6 48:4,9 61:21

78:9 131:5 147:14

154:9 165:2

168:12 180:15

182:10 183:10

184:2 191:19

192:4

today's 49:14

133:21 184:10

ton 59:8,8,10 89:16

91:1 97:5 98:18

98:20 134:15,20

136:12,13 137:3,6

137:7 151:2,9

166:12,15

tons 132:15

tool 26:4 28:7

146:18 147:1

tools 28:1 72:7

top 17:20 59:12

76:4 83:14 110:16

174:22

topic 95:18

total 20:21 35:8

40:2 51:22 68:3

77:16,18 83:11

112:12 113:5,8,10

113:10 114:5,5,7

114:21 116:20

147:20 148:9

totaled 118:16

totally 145:5

tourist 182:20

to-apples 85:4

to-one 83:20

traced 95:15

track 160:19

Trade 20:4 23:2

36:2,7 181:20

traded 100:13

tradition 4:16

traditionally

139:18 147:22

transcribed 192:7

transcript 11:11

12:5 192:3

transcription 191:5

translates 120:14

transmission 80:20

transmitted 13:20

transparent 119:19

125:3

transport 53:8

80:20

transportation

71:8 74:18 80:10

80:12 81:6,12,14

81:18,19 94:18

116:18 141:6

148:4

travels 192:15

treat 111:4

tried 73:5

trivial 142:6

trouble 83:22

132:1

troublesome 69:10

true 27:16 130:21

142:22

truly 21:4

trust 121:22 122:3

try 49:7,10 70:20

trying 14:18 18:8

47:21 54:17 65:6

65:21 68:3 71:7
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 217

85:3 91:6 101:8

104:18 119:11

121:21,22 162:20

183:1

tuned 12:17

turbine 39:5 79:4

86:7 110:11

turbines 163:7

turn 11:19 13:9

14:12 27:9 73:21

138:22

turned 11:22

124:12

two 15:10 18:11

30:13 41:13 54:20

55:3 77:1 87:13

88:12 100:16

102:22 103:19

104:11 109:14

115:2,7,16,20

116:3 120:4

121:11 122:15

129:22 137:4,7,15

137:22 144:19

147:19 149:2

152:5,18 157:3,4

164:19 165:6

166:18 167:14,15

179:4 187:1

two-thirds 142:12

type 26:12 30:7

49:8 52:15,19

88:16 107:6

118:14 121:6

154:11 174:7

types 38:21 127:7

154:13 173:21

typical 169:15

typically 4:21 94:7

192:9

U

ultimate 22:18

151:13

ultimately 50:18

83:5

unanimous 18:11

uncertainties 67:8

67:13,14

uncertainty 67:3

71:16 104:10,12

105:7

unchanged 91:12

unclear 152:4

underground

82:14 114:15

underline 47:21

underlying 26:5

67:10

underscored 38:9

understand 19:22

23:7 33:1 36:9

43:6,17 51:1 58:2

62:1 68:2 90:12

97:1 102:9 112:2

117:17 126:3

138:6,12 164:7

182:11 184:20

understandable

125:2

understanding

45:9 67:22 68:8

94:19 112:7 132:2

141:1 153:14

understood 166:11

underway 39:9

142:21

undue 30:19

unfair 128:14

unfortunate 120:16

unfortunately 30:9

61:9 93:8

uninternalized

97:19 98:6 149:6

unit 48:3 117:4

130:9 131:19

142:2,3,12 143:12

143:12,17 144:12

united 1:1 22:1

39:10 40:8 42:1

88:18,20 157:19

160:21 161:7,12

units 44:10,14 83:9

83:16 100:9 117:3

144:18

unknowable 46:4,5

unmiked 191:21

unrealistic 91:14

unusual 63:18

update 22:13 25:22

71:21 174:13

updated 71:6,10

72:8

updates 145:9

upstream 20:13,16

33:18 34:2 133:15

173:22 186:8,20

up-to-date 22:10

uranium 30:8

76:21 81:17,17,18

urban 77:16,17

urge 23:4 28:19

urgency 40:18

use 14:3 16:9 18:8

19:22 20:14 21:2

21:8,16 24:17,21

24:22 27:9 31:10

33:15,18,20 34:18

35:3 36:4 37:2,7

38:13 39:20 46:9

50:12,19 51:7

57:2 63:11 64:12

67:11 71:13,20

72:9 73:10 74:11

75:2 79:21,22

80:3,3,4,6 81:21

81:22 83:13 85:8

88:11 96:3 101:6

102:1,7,18,18

103:6,6,8,16

110:7,13 111:5

113:1,2,5,7,8,16

113:17,18 114:16

116:3,4,10,15,20

116:22 117:1,5,12

118:18 126:22

130:3 132:22

137:19 140:14

148:5,19 152:13

152:13 153:9,10

153:14 154:6

169:16,20 170:6

170:17 176:1

186:12,21 191:22

useable 34:12

useful 43:20 118:2

140:7,10 176:4

usefulness 108:21

useless 171:22

user 63:19

users 23:15 75:20

uses 24:15 140:13

usual 145:22 164:9

usually 154:19

utilities 32:5,9 42:2

47:2,3 128:12

156:14,16,17

173:6,15 177:8,9

utility 23:10 32:5

32:22 101:4,12

144:17 157:4,18

157:18 158:3,7

159:2,20 160:5,8

160:12

utility-specific

32:18

utilized 34:22

U.S 45:16,17 46:22

47:15 79:2 88:6

90:21 92:19,20,22

110:7 132:11

V

valid 45:15 121:17

188:5

validate 146:20

validity 26:7

valuable 171:3

value 45:12 54:10

55:16,21 56:5,15

56:16,20 57:12

60:1,1,3 65:7 90:4

100:9 105:9,16

106:3 118:15,16

118:19 129:2

134:17,18,22

135:8 136:3 137:1

137:2,4,16,19

149:14 150:21

151:20,20 166:2,9

167:13 168:6

values 50:22 57:2

58:12,16,18,21

75:2 92:5,5,6 98:9

98:9 104:13,17

115:10,14 118:11

118:18 135:18,20

137:16,22 138:16

142:1 149:1,17

150:1,13,18 166:8

166:13 177:4

variabilities 174:8

variability 95:9

110:13

variable 159:19

variables 106:6

variance 63:5

variation 38:19

variations 88:16,17

104:9 105:8

variety 35:4

various 22:17 28:3

35:14 40:9 47:13

47:14,19 60:5

65:7 72:21 86:14

106:21,21

vary 39:1 121:11

Veatch 2:15 64:21

99:12 152:2 162:7

188:10

Vehicle 76:5

verifiable 28:15

48:13

verified 45:2

version 71:5,12,19

71:20 75:17 78:18

79:6

versus 62:5 80:2

84:13 85:9 86:5

95:3 107:11,21,21

Vice 29:13

view 40:12 42:6

views 16:12

Virginia 1:16 6:6

29:10 173:8
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 218

virtually 39:6

visible 40:5

vision 162:18

visit 61:18

visitors 111:20

VOC 77:14

W

wait 84:14 85:5

walk 102:20 112:18

Waltner 2:11 7:11

7:11

Wang 2:12 3:9 6:19

6:19 53:10 67:6

71:2 73:21,22

82:3,11,18 83:1

84:4 85:7 87:22

88:4 89:14,19

92:1,19,22 95:17

96:2,10,17 99:12

99:18 101:21

103:1,4 104:21

105:21 106:4,7

107:2,8 110:2

111:14 112:16

114:9,22 116:2

120:3 143:7,8,8

144:2,6,11 145:12

166:6,7 167:11,17

want 12:20 13:6

14:2 16:4 18:5

37:18 48:8 50:8

59:21 66:12 67:21

73:4 74:3 87:3

93:20 98:17 119:6

120:10 121:6

124:11 147:18

155:13 166:21

172:20 173:19

176:14 177:21

178:15,17 182:15

184:17 190:19,21

191:15

wanted 16:2 19:3

60:17 63:17 64:22

96:22 108:22

124:18 134:9

135:9 146:10,12

173:12 175:1

wanting 70:10

warming 77:9

189:18

warranted 37:8

warranty 155:17

155:21

Washington 1:9

36:21 61:18,20

119:22 183:10

wasn't 168:5

Wasted 110:22

water 25:1 35:6

43:21 51:11,13,14

51:17 62:4 65:10

65:16 84:22

100:11,18 129:6

159:14 163:2

water-heater

134:16

water-heating

159:13

way 5:3 9:13 10:8,9

17:19,20 32:11

46:13 50:9 53:2,6

59:15 66:5 71:9

80:2,17,18 81:11

81:17 84:6 86:21

89:9,10 94:17,18

95:15 108:4 111:2

111:3 114:15

118:6 119:9

121:12 122:21

125:11 138:7

139:9,17,17 154:4

157:15 160:3

165:7 168:18

171:4,7,7 172:14

183:1 184:13

ways 15:21 22:12

95:22 101:9 171:8

wear 122:22

web 12:15,15 49:5

49:8 75:13,14

webinar 12:13

184:16

website 32:19

75:12,16 136:15

147:1 173:14

191:13

week 192:10

weeks 17:1 59:5

Weighting 30:16

Weiss 2:13,13,13

2:13 7:17,17,17

7:19,19,19 61:16

61:16 94:14,14,14

96:1,9,15 154:15

154:15,18 182:7,7

182:8 183:6

weisscentennialf...

183:7

welcome 3:2 12:12

63:18

Wellinghoff's

162:18

wells 150:16

went 93:20 123:19

weren't 14:21

we'll 9:19,21 10:3,9

13:2 15:8 23:20

49:2,10 67:18

91:21 103:2 123:7

123:11,16,16,17

123:18 124:7,8

143:4 178:22

191:4

we're 4:7 8:11 10:5

16:21 40:16,21

41:5 47:15 48:4

49:13 50:5,9

60:16 62:1 65:21

67:20,21 68:7,10

68:16 69:8 70:1

73:19 86:20 87:18

97:14 100:7,9

101:15,16 107:9

115:4 118:22

119:10,16 120:12

121:21,22 122:12

123:12 127:18

129:1,11 131:9,16

134:21 135:11,11

145:18 150:4

153:2,7,9 154:1

155:10,14,20

163:20 165:4,22

166:3,17 168:17

169:3 170:1 171:5

171:6,10 175:14

179:10,10 182:13

182:21,22 183:1

184:6 189:22

190:18

we've 14:19,20

16:9 42:3 54:17

55:7,9 70:10

122:14 145:13

147:7 153:19

154:8 165:10

180:15 183:20

184:5 186:7

189:21 190:22

191:11,12

wholly 26:18

Williams 2:14 6:1,1

wind 40:1 76:18

79:4 86:7 109:19

109:22 110:11,13

110:14,15,22

111:2 128:7,9,11

129:11 161:14

163:16,16

winners 46:2,2,10

wish 11:13 48:20

123:14

wishes 8:16 9:2,4

41:14 179:17

women's 123:3

wondering 184:1

Woodward 2:14

5:9,9 183:14,15

183:16

words 18:9 44:20

51:11 60:2 126:7

189:15

work 11:21,22

17:20 20:3 23:4

32:1,16 36:2,6

45:22 47:11 48:3

93:6 96:14 120:9

120:17 121:14

132:2 139:10

140:7 141:7

142:15 146:2

149:9,11 153:8

156:1 181:15

185:4 188:3

worked 47:18 75:6

120:22 139:9,20

188:14

working 5:5 22:20

58:4 153:15 184:2

188:12

works 10:8 12:16

43:8 47:8,22

49:11 122:21

world 45:16 150:17

155:13

worldwide 75:21

worth 126:6 165:4

wouldn't 52:19

136:2 181:16

Woychik 2:15

64:20,21 66:18

99:11,12 100:7

127:13,13,14,15

152:1,2,9,16

162:6,7 188:9,9

188:20 189:1

wrestle 72:5

writing 66:6 140:1

180:16

written 9:10 17:17

29:2 36:13 40:20

42:13 66:15

121:20 143:2

191:6,8

wrong 135:10

145:9 189:14,20

wrote 74:5

www.regulations...

12:7

X

X 44:1 70:1

xerox 4:21
202-234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 219

Y

Y 70:2

year 17:5 37:22

41:2 58:13 60:2

63:9,10 71:10

75:19 83:18 93:19

94:5 131:21

132:19 134:20

135:19 161:13,17

161:17 166:18

167:5 169:16

170:12 180:19,20

years 6:13 21:18

38:3 40:21 42:4

55:15 56:21 60:11

65:18,18 71:9

75:9 83:20 88:12

97:7 100:19

118:12 119:22

127:22 129:2

131:1 134:19

135:21 136:11

139:9 146:2

155:17,18 159:9

161:18,19,20

164:20 165:4,6

166:2,10,11,16,18

167:8 190:7

year's 173:7

yellow 80:7,9 81:20

114:11,12 176:22

yield 27:4 38:6 96:6

Z

zero 34:4 79:8

111:4 168:5,7,15

Zigbee 163:3

zip 177:6,8,10

Zoi 25:12

$

$10 100:18

$2.9 98:15,20

$21 98:18

$25,000 63:9

$250,000 63:8

$316 98:19

$4 90:3

$4.70 59:8

$5 59:11 63:5,12

$64 89:16,21 90:2,3

91:1 97:18

$64.90 59:8

$65 59:11 63:5,13

97:5 98:20

$963 98:20

0

07 165:16

08 165:16,16

09 166:20

1

1E-245 1:12

1.02 105:17,22

1.063 117:5

1.12 141:20 151:5

151:10

1.13 104:15 105:16

1.14 141:20

1.16 151:6,10

1.3 105:17,22

1.8D.1 71:5 75:18

10 59:12 63:8

100:19 110:12

10,000 65:17,18

10:45 9:20

100 111:8,11

156:17 159:2

166:10,11 172:11

100,000 132:15

100-some 77:21

100-year 166:8

1000 1:12

102.904 142:8

102.905 142:8

11 98:22

11:13 123:20

11:15 122:19

123:17

11:30 123:8,17

11:32 123:21

12 22:2

12:15 10:4

12:30 123:12

12:40 192:17

13 3:4 93:1 94:4

104:15 165:15

13.50 165:2

137 156:13

14 93:2

14,000 75:20

15 13:20 46:21,22

54:4 55:21 57:21

59:12 71:9 75:9

83:18 84:11

118:21 122:15

123:7 161:19

150 95:4

153 3:13

158 3:15

16th 134:16

1700 167:5

1790 168:4

1802 13:11

19 3:6 17:2 23:21

35:21

19th 180:17 191:9

191 3:17

192 3:18

1978 46:9

1979 188:13

1983 66:8

1995 71:4 83:15

2

2 136:17 138:8

2nd 132:10 133:4

133:22

20 61:7 97:7 110:12

131:20 146:2

190:4

200 166:8,16

2005 13:12 140:2

140:21 174:12

175:7

2007 74:20 83:17

134:3 175:18

2009 13:21 161:1

173:11

2010 1:7 40:22

42:15 88:8,8

130:15 141:19

142:19 145:7,16

151:5 161:11

166:20 180:4

2011 41:4 94:5

132:10

2014 83:20

2020 133:19

2030 87:11 88:9

89:6 91:2 93:20

130:15 141:20

142:9,20 144:10

145:3,16 164:8,14

2040 166:21

21 151:8

22 94:4 172:22

190:4

230 134:19

2300 60:2

25 119:22

250 137:5

27 43:22

29th 175:18

290 60:11 129:2

165:4 166:2

3

3 98:12,17 117:2,2

136:17

3,300 137:8

3:15 10:21

3:30 10:22

30 22:2 42:3

300 167:8

32 110:7

33 98:22 137:9

35 110:7

36 161:15

38 161:2

4

4 3:2 142:7 143:11

143:11 144:7

4.50 165:18

43 161:2

447-page 62:7

45 83:16

48 161:14

49 3:8

5

5 104:16 132:20

50 86:18 116:7,8

121:9 156:19,20

157:7 165:15

6

6 141:18 144:3

6.3 116:21

6.5 113:21

600 142:10

65 134:15 137:6

7

7 1:7 54:3 55:20

57:20 118:21

7.1 116:19,21

7.2 113:12

7.3 113:7,12,19

700 124:22

75 42:20 86:19

78 42:22

8

82 161:13

83 41:22

87 34:10

88 34:10

9

9:00 1:12

9:02 4:2

90 144:15

95 44:1
220

CERT]FICATE

This is to certify that the foregoing transcript

in the matter of: Public Meetinq

Before: Doug Brookman, Facilitator

Date: Or.|-ol-rer '7. 

t t 2010

Pl-ace: Washingt.on, D. C.

ranr^aaanf c i- lra

aforementioned

f-rznor.rri t- i n a rvtrlY.

full and compl-ete proceedings of the

mal-l-er 

tse

:s ranorferi and reduCed tO

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

WASHTNGTON. D.C. 20005-3701

Charles Morrison

\202) 234-4433 www.nearrgross.com