Department of Energy

Washington, DC 20585

July 18, 1996

Mr. David Lewis

Lennox International Inc.

2100 Lake Park Boulevard

Richardson, Texas 75080-2254

Dear Mr. Lewis:

Thank you for your recent letter in which you express concern over the Depart ment of Energy's

recent draft of the interpretive rule which will codify the procedures, interpretations -and policies

to guide the Department in establishing new or revised energy efficiency standards for consumer

products.

First, let me emphasize, that the Department appreciates your efforts through your significant

participation at our public meetings and workshops as well as through your assistance in the

drafting of the interpretive rule.

The Department has spent considerable time reviewing and discussing comments submitted to us

in response to our request for feedback on our proposals. Throughout the process improvement,

we have been committed to significant stakeholder interaction and believe that it would be

difficult to cite a similar Federal regulatory initiative that has invited this degree of stakeholder

interaction. However, it also would be unrealistic to assume that the Department could

accommodate all recommendations. Finding the right balance between the Department's

requirements and the variety of stakeholder opinion can sometimes be difficult to achieve.

With respect to your comments on "system versus components," the failure of the most recent

draft to discuss this issue was not intentional. I especially want to thank you for the language that

you drafted which was very helpful and believe that you will find that we did our best to address

your concern in the final rule.

As you know, the law requires, for most products, that the Department undertake two reviews of

statutorily established standards to determine whether revised standards are necessary.

The Department carefully reviewed the language you submitted in your comments on the timing

of rulemakings. After further discussions with the Department's General Counsel and Policy

Office, the Department does not believe that the statutory requirement to conduct rulemakings is

negated when the Department has missed the statutory schedule for conducting these reviews.

However, as the draft rule provides, the period between the issuance of a final rule and its

effective date will be no less than specified in the original statute (typically three years).

Moreover, the period between the first and second reviews of standards will be no less than the

period between reviews specified by statute (typically five years). None of the results of these

rulemakings would be applied retroactively.

Printed with soy ink on recycled paper

EE-PI-96-001 COMMENT 74
We also are confident that the new prioritization process, which will allow the Department to

dedicate limited resources to priority products, will enable the Department to issue rulemakings in

a more timely fashion, providing manufacturers and others with predictability and rulemaking

schedules. I hope that I have been responsive to your concerns and appreciate your bringing

these items to my attention.

SRUC-,

Christine A. Ervin

Assistant Secretary

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

cc: Rich Bender, Office of Senator Harkin

Joe Mattingly, GAMA

Ted Leland, ARI

Charles Samuels, AHAM

EE-PI-96-001 COMMENT 74