Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

1

 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

 APPLIANCE STANDARDS AND RULEMAKING

 FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

 Department of Energy

 1000 Independence Avenue SW

 Forrestal Building

 Washington, D.C. 20585

 Wednesday, May 15, 2013

 8:00 a.m.

Reported by: Natalia Thomas,

 Capital Reporting Company
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

2

1 A P P E A R A N C E S

2 FACILITATOR

3 Neil Eisner, Navigant Consulting

4

5 PARTICIPANTS

6 Karim Amrane, Air-Conditioning, Heating, and

7 Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)

8 Viktor Anderson, CRM

9 Timothy Ballo, Earthjustice

10 Laura Barhydt, U.S. Department of Energy

11 Jeff Bauman, National Comfort Products

12 Rodney Beever, United CoolAir Corporation

13 Alex Boesenberg, National Electric Manufacturers

14 Association

15 Brice Bowley, GE Appliances

16 Dan Bramblett, Estes Services

17 Brian Buynacek, Emerson

18 Nia Crowder, SF Environment Commission

19 Mary Dane, Traulsen

20 Laura Degitz, Navigant

21 Jim del Toro, Carrier Corporation

22 Paul Doppel, Mitsubishi Electric
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

3

1 A P P E A R A N C E S

2 Mark Fly, AAON Heating & Cooling Products

3 Jeremiah Freeman, New West Tech

4 Luke Hall-Jordan, EPA

5 Geoffrey Halley, SJI Consultants

6 Pantelis Hatzikaziakis, Lennox International

7 Bruce Helft, California Energy Commission

8 Bruce Hierlmeier, Zero Zone, Inc

9 Charles Hon, True

10 Jill Hootman, Trane

11 Larry Howington, Commercial Refrigeration

12 Marshall Hunt, Pacific Gas & Electric Company

13 Diane Jakobs, Rheem Heating and Cooling

14 Tom Johnson, Daikin McQuay

15 Athar Khan, United CoolAir Corporation

16 Jeff Kleiss, Lochinvar

17 Michael Kojak, UL LLC

18 Dominic Kolandayan, Daikin AC

19 Stephen Kowalski, Ingersoll Rand-Trane North America

20 Bill Larson, Norlake, Inc

21 Iyabo Lawal, An

22 Paul Lin, Regal-Beloit Corporation
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

4

1 A P P E A R A N C E S

2 Bijou Lulla, fSource Energy

3 Steven Ly, SoCalGas

4 John Mandyck, UTC Climate, Controls & Security

5 Aris Marantan, Navigant

6 John McLaughlin, McQuay International

7 David Mecadon, National Comfort Products

8 Mark Menzer, Intertek

9 Karen Meyers, Rheem Manufacturing Company

10 Peter Molvie, Cleaver-Brooks Product Development

11 Wahid Mohamed, Saudi Diyar Consultants

12 John Morris, Continental Refrigerator

13 Vince Mucciola, National Comfort Products

14 Frank Myers, PVI

15 Jeff Newel, Hill Phoenix Systems Division

16 Kent Peterson, P2S Engineering

17 Jay Perkins, MEUS

18 Mark Rabbia, Carrier Corporation

19 David Ransom, McDermott Will & Emery

20 Doug Reed, ASHRAE

21 Wes Roan, Bard Manufacturing Company

22 Carl Roberts, Zero Zone, Inc
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

5

1 A P P E A R A N C E S

2 John Sabelli, Consulting Engineer

3 Harvey Sachs, ACEEE

4 Jason Sands, The Delfield Company

5 Tony Scardomp, MC Law School

6 Stephen Schaefer, Hoshizaki America

7 Ronald Shebik, Hussmann Corporation

8 Judd Smith, OnSpeX

9 Frank Stanonik, Air-Conditioning, Heating, and

10 Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)

11 Louis Starr, Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance

12 (NEEA)

13 Phillip Stephens, HTP Advanced Heating and Water

14 Systems

15 Peter Strait, California Energy Commission

16 Mvuala Suami, NRCAN

17 John Sutphen Cleaver-Brooks Product Development

18 Rusty Tharp, Goodman Air Conditioning and Heating

19 Eric Truskoski, Bradford White Corporation

20 Tom Walsh, Daikin McQuay

21 Kevin Washington, Illinois Tool Works

22 Collin Weber, Navigant
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

6

1 A P P E A R A N C E S

2 Andrew Welch, Johnson Controls

3 Robert Whitwell, Carrier

4 Kevin Washington, Illinois Tool Works

5 Michael Woodford, AHRI

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

7

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

2 MR. EISNER: Nobody is to leave this

3 afternoon until we go over the schedule and the rooms

4 where we're going to be meeting because some people

5 said they needed to know those hotel rooms. So don't

6 let me leave and don't any of you leave before we

7 finish that.

8 Now, we're starting early. And Geoffrey is

9 just raising a suggestion. Do we want to go to lunch

10 at about 11:00 or do you still want to go regular time

11 to lunch?

12 MALE SPEAKER: Both.

13 MR. EISNER: Both?

14 That takes care of that. Anybody disagree?

15 I'll use my judgment.

16 All right. We're starting off this morning

17 with your pass/fail -- pass whatever -- validation

18 system at DOE. And do you guys want to start off with

19 some introduction to the issue?

20 MS. BARHYDT: First, just to recap yesterday,

21 so it looks like we have agreement on which products

22 are going to be able to use an AEDM. Everybody's in
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

8

1 agreement that there should not be preapproval. We

2 have agreement on the categories within each product

3 type as to what sort of testing needs to be done to

4 substantiate the AEDM.

5 And I believe those numbers were on the

6 slides that Ashley did. So then the last issue that we

7 resolved yesterday was the tolerances for the

8 manufacturer testing used to substantiate, validate.

9 We were tossing around some words and we thought maybe

10 authenticate might be a little more clear as to what it

11 is that the manufacturer's doing.

12 We're trying to come up with a word that

13 makes sense to everyone, since there was some

14 terminology question yesterday. You can sit over here.

15 There's a lot more room. And so the tolerances, I

16 believe, for everything were one-sided, 5 percent for

17 all products and equipment.

18 So then the question becomes, what happens

19 when DOE tests? But I would like to present it as

20 possibly more broad than that. We're going to talk

21 about independent certification programs at the end.

22 But our thought is that whatever the DOE number is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

9

1 would be the number that would also apply to an

2 industry certification program that, if a third party

3 is doing the checking, that that number ought to be the

4 same regardless of who that third party is.

5 And so we can talk about that in more detail

6 as well. But if people want to kind of go in thinking

7 along those lines -- Harvey's already gearing up.

8 MR. SACHS: Harvey Sachs. Just for

9 clarification. The number refers not to tolerance band

10 in this case, but the number of samples to be tested.

11 MS. BARHYDT: Both.

12 MR. SACHS: Aha. So the ambiguity was

13 intentional.

14 MS. BARHYDT: The numbers --

15 MR. SACHS: Right. Thank you.

16 MS. BARHYDT: So -- and the -- I've got

17 slides on this. Because we're kind of --

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: You do or don't?

19 MS. BARHYDT: Don't.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: No.

21 MS. BARHYDT: So on the original proposal --

22 goodness, it's been a while since we did the original
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

10

1 proposal. We had proposed a variety of different

2 consequences. One was, if you fail -- if one test is

3 outside of tolerance, if people -- I'm going to just

4 use the word habitually -- are off on their ratings,

5 what the consequences of that might be.

6 And so rather than jumping into all of it at

7 once -- I can also imagine that those are tied in your

8 minds though; whether the consequences might affect

9 what tolerance you're comfortable with. So would

10 people prefer to talk about the tolerance, then the

11 consequences, and then revisit the tolerance, or do you

12 want to talk about the consequences first and then work

13 out tolerances?

14 What makes the most sense to you?

15 MS. DANE: Mary Dane, Traulson. It would

16 probably be better to talk about the tolerances first

17 because then we could decide what the enforcement

18 should be. Do we know how big of a stick we need?

19 Thank you.

20 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from

21 National. I just want you to clarify -- we're talking

22 about -- we're still talking about AEDMs? And this is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

11

1 tolerances for whether you'd invalidate an AEDM, not

2 invalidate it for -- I think -- I just -- there's

3 obviously some cross there. But I just want to be

4 clear that I am understanding what we're -- yeah.

5 MS. BARHYDT: So what we're talking about is

6 if DOE does a test -- and whether it's one test of

7 multiple tests, that's a separate conversation. But --

8 so DOE does testing. And it is more than some

9 percentage off from whatever the rating that you have

10 assigned. And then what happens as a result of that?

11 But it is that -- it's how far DOE's testing

12 is from the number that you have rated the product at.

13 And it -- our assumption is that's one-sided as well.

14 MR. BAUMAN: Okay. And that's --

15 MR. SHEBIK: Laura, it's Ron Shebik of

16 Hussman. So you're -- okay. So we're going beyond

17 substantiation. So now, you're discussing, like,

18 validation and enforcement?

19 MS. BARHYDT: Yes.

20 MR. SHEBIK: Would that be correct?

21 MS. BARHYDT: That is correct.

22 MR. SHEBIK: Thank you. Thank you.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

12

1 FEMALE SPEAKER: Of the AEDM?

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: No.

3 MS. BARHYDT: Of the ratings. Of the rating.

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: So we're at the point now, I

5 think, from yesterday that you guys have all the tools

6 you need to come up with ratings. You -- at the end of

7 the day, you know, how many units you need to test, you

8 know, the types of simulations you may use at the

9 outset, you know, how close your test data needs to be

10 to the number being spit out.

11 And you know that from that number being spit

12 out all the way down to the standard level, you may

13 certify anything in between conservatively. Right? So

14 we've got --

15 MR. SHEBIK: Right.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- we've got that taken care

17 of. You now you have a rating for some subset -- some

18 set of models in your product offering. We'll assume

19 it's all of them. Now, what happens from there?

20 You've certified your ratings. Everything's fine.

21 What happens from there?

22 If a third-party test is done and that test
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

13

1 finds results that are different than what's been

2 certified as the rating, we are talking about how

3 different, how many tests need to be done, what are the

4 considerations around that test? This is if DOE were

5 to test, if an independent -- like Laura was saying, if

6 an independent certification program were to test.

7 I mean, that's what we're talking about.

8 What actually -- what is the process to invalidate a

9 rating?

10 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from

11 National. I guess I also want to get clarification in

12 some senses that if -- okay. We have Product X that

13 was -- has a rating.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh.

15 MR. BAUMAN: Are we also reporting whether

16 that rating was determined -- and I don't think I

17 recall seeing this, but -- where that rating was -- in

18 our submittals whether it was determined for an --

19 using an AEDM versus a full testing?

20 MS. BARHYDT: The current certification

21 requirements do include that.

22 MR. BAUMAN: Okay. So then, when you find
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

14

1 that, if it was rated on an AEDM in addition to

2 decertifying the product, let's say, you would

3 decertify the AEDM or --

4 MS. BARHYDT: That's --

5 MR. BAUMAN: Okay. That's what we're --

6 right. Okay.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: So that's a consequence to

8 us. But first, we have to decide how do you invalidate

9 a rating.

10 MR. BAUMAN: Right. What's outside the

11 acceptable limit? Yeah.

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: What is acceptable? And then

13 it's a consequence. Should it just be that you need to

14 rerate it? Should it just be that you need to retest

15 based on certification tests? Should it be that the

16 AEDM is invalid? I mean, there are a bunch of options

17 on the table.

18 MR. BAUMAN: Right.

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: But at that point, that's a

20 consequence. But first, we need to get to the point of

21 what is -- what is an invalid reading.

22 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

15

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yep.

2 MR. STEPHENS: I think one of the big things

3 that all the manufacturers are going to be concerned

4 about is the possibility that it is a defective sample

5 that was selected. As much as we hate to admit it,

6 sometimes something does happen. And sometimes the

7 test setup isn't correct. We had one instance where a

8 third- party lab inadvertently switched the supply and

9 return water lines. So of course the efficiency was

10 way off.

11 MR. EISNER: Are we getting off the issue,

12 though, of where we should start? We're -- those are

13 all relative in terms of which one we -- which issue we

14 start with.

15 MR. THARP: I think so.

16 MR. EISNER: Okay.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, I think they're all

18 issues on the table. We have to start somewhere.

19 Right? So I mean, if we want to start around tolerance,

20 we can start around tolerance. If we want to --

21 MS. BARHYDT: Why don't we start with the

22 assumption of we have a valid test.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

16

1 MS. HOOTMAN: We're -- okay. This is Jill

2 from Trane. We're assuming we have a valid test. So

3 it is not a defective test. It is not a defective

4 unit.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

6 MS. BARHYDT: Correct.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: So if we have a valid test,

8 the test procedure was done correctly, the unit's not

9 defective; we have a valid test, what is a tested

10 value? What is that tolerance that the tested value

11 needs to be around?

12 MS. BARHYDT: Is there any reason why it

13 shouldn't be the same as what you use to actually

14 validate, substantiate, authenticate -- whatever word -

15 - your AEDM?

16 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik with AHRI.

17 Well, I think the answer to that is, yes, there are

18 reasons. And the biggest one would be that, as we

19 discussed yesterday, if I've -- whatever I've done to

20 validate my AEDM, most likely it's been at a single

21 test facility. And in addition to all the, let's say,

22 engineering knowledge and any experience I have about
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

17

1 my product, I also have that information about my test

2 facility.

3 In this situation, you now have introduced

4 the other test lab and that -- you know, whether we

5 decide to do it or not. But that is a reason that you

6 should have or could have a different tolerance.

7 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Dominic Kolandayan, Daikin.

8 Whatever we decide on the tolerance, I'd like to make a

9 suggestion that we keep the variability as low as

10 possible. So can we use the same test facility for the

11 enforcement testing? So let's say -- I'll use VICP

12 (ph) -- use as a test facility for the certification

13 program. Can we -- can DOE use the same lab for the

14 enforcement testing? Thank you.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: That is an option on the

16 table. Currently, I think DOE uses many of the same

17 facilities that everyone in the room uses. I mean,

18 it's not a secret which third-party test labs test your

19 equipment. We're not using anything different. Now, is

20 it the identical on that you may have tested in? We

21 don't know that.

22 But, you know, there's not, like, a wide
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

18

1 variety of labs out there doing testing of your

2 equipment. So it's not -- this isn't, like

3 MS. BARHYDT: The labs we use are used by the

4 same -- by the same ones that the manufacturers use.

5 Now, whether any individual lab is exactly the lab that

6 you're company uses, that may or may not be the case.

7 MR. EISNER: Were you suggesting it should be

8 or were you just suggesting it should be one of the

9 labs --

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: He's suggesting it should be.

11 MR. KOLANDAYAN: It should be.

12 MR. EISNER: -- that companies use? It

13 should be the same one?

14 MR. ASHFORD: Well, by default, if you test

15 and you're in-house -- right -- we always test at a

16 third- party facility. There are -- we do have

17 existing regs that allow us to test in-house under

18 specific circumstances where we cannot test at a third19 party facility. But we're always going to move to a

20 third- party facility.

21 MR. FLY: Mark Fly with AAON. And is the IER

22 in any of our discussions here or is that a separate
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

19

1 issue somebody worked on somewhere? Because the

2 tolerances are different for IER and AER (ph).

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: So -- okay. I think you

4 would point them out here. And to the extent, you

5 know, they should be in consideration here. Obviously,

6 that's still an open issue and an open rule that the

7 department hasn't made a determination on. But I don't

8 think -- since we know it's an open issue and we know

9 we're facing that open issue in the next couple issues,

10 it doesn't hurt to keep that in mind and point out the

11 differences, where they may be applicable.

12 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp with Goodman.

13 MR. SHEBIK: Ron Shebik with Hussman. I'm

14 not trying to stray from the topic too much. But since

15 you're speaking about third-party testing -- third16 party facilities, one thing I'm going to point out --

17 and I think others had the same concern -- is if you do

18 test at a third party that you're not familiar with or

19 even if you are familiar with, you're going to have --

20 be allowed to have your personnel on hand to at least

21 witness the test.

22 We have tested at third-party facilities in
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

20

1 the past. And without having our people on hand,

2 there's never -- there's not always a guarantee that

3 the test will be conducted at the proper setting.

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Why is that?

5 MR. SHEBIK: Why -- yeah, why is that? We

6 have found that very small -- what may seem like small,

7 minor details affect the outcome of the test results.

8 Whether -- you know, looking at commercial

9 refrigerator, how you place your test simulators -- and

10 again, this should be based off ASHRAE standards, too,

11 as well as how you set your evaporator temperature of

12 your commercial refrigerator.

13 If you're off by a hair or you're slightly

14 off, if you don't have the proper airflow -- there's

15 just a variety of things that if they're not set up

16 right, they could cause a -- could cause a conflict or

17 could give you a result that is different from what you

18 would normally expect.

19 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from

20 National. I want to concur with Ron on that. And we've

21 had -- and we understand labs do test a multitude. And

22 you guys regulate a multitude of products. I think the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

21

1 manufacturers understand and have interpreted the --

2 you know, the laws for the products that they're

3 testing to make sure that they're meeting what those

4 requirements are.

5 And sometimes -- and we've had similar

6 experiences, too, that you get variations that are --

7 you know, they either just did something wrong --

8 because again, there are so many tests that the labs do

9 for different products. They might not know your

10 product category as well or the details of that as well

11 as -- and it's -- you know, that's obviously -- you

12 know, you'll -- don't go and tell them what you're

13 doing.

14 But you tell them, "Hey, what about" -- you

15 know, explain a part of it and what the -- or discuss

16 it as far as how something should be said and for a

17 specific product category. And I've seen that across

18 multiple product categories that we deal with.

19 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp of Goodman. I'll

20 somewhat pile on that the -- well, I answered your

21 question -- was, is there any reason that tolerances

22 should be different? And if everything else is the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

22

1 same, then the tolerances should be -- would be okay to

2 be the same also.

3 But the things like being able to be present

4 at the laboratory -- and we also have seen several

5 setup issues, just things like air sampler locations

6 and whether -- you know, how far is the air sampler

7 from the coil, how much of the coil face area is

8 covered by the sampler. Things of that nature can make

9 a pretty significant difference.

10 You know, just -- I've seen as much as 2

11 percent difference just by where samplers are located

12 and how you're sampling, with no changes whatsoever.

13 And so that's pretty significant.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: The --

15 MR. EISNER: Should we be approaching this

16 from we want tolerances to be the same and here are all

17 the conditions and they're going to have to be the

18 same, or should we be approaching them, we should have

19 these conditions and they'll determine what the

20 tolerance is -- or depending on the conditions? Is it

21 easier to approach it the first way?

22 MALE SPEAKER: We can start that way.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

23

1 MR. EISNER: And should we have somebody

2 writing down the conditions that would go with that?

3 I'll turn the screen so we can see which ones we want

4 to end up with.

5 MR. KLEISS: Jeff Kleiss. There are

6 different conditions, I think, for every different

7 product. One of the options that's been suggested is

8 having manufacturers present so that then they can

9 address those -- or at least have the option to be

10 present so they can address those concerns. If we

11 don't have someone present, we're going to greatly

12 increase the potential for there being challenges to

13 whatever results come out.

14 MR. EISNER: I understand that. What I'm

15 asking is, should we then say, "All right, we all

16 agree, first, that the tolerance should be the same,

17 but under that situation, here are the conditions: the

18 manufacturer has to be present, for example, or you

19 have to use the same testing laboratory that the

20 company used for the first round of tests?" Should we

21 start off with the assumption that tolerances should be

22 the same?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

24

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: We can't do it that way.

2 MR. EISNER: What?

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: Well --

4 MR. SACHS: We need to go backwards.

5 MR. EISNER: Backwards? Meaning what?

6 MR. SACHS: Harvey Sachs. I think that what

7 I'm hearing is that it will be much more comfort, with

8 the idea of talking about tolerances, if we understand

9 the conditions, that failing a test and having exposure

10 to decertification is a substantial risk to a

11 manufacturer with serious consequences.

12 And for that reason, if I were a

13 manufacturer, what I'm hearing is, I would feel very

14 differently about this process depending on whether or

15 not I was allowed to witness that test to assure that

16 the setup was proper and that there was not a defective

17 product that had been shipped inadvertently.

18 So I think we need to discuss the list before

19 we can discuss what the tolerance band is.

20 MR. EISNER: Well, what I'm suggesting maybe

21 is indirectly getting us there. If we all think that

22 it's reasonable to start with the tolerance should be
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

25

1 the same, let's then see if we can agree on the

2 conditions that go along with that. You know, that's

3 what I mentioned before going back --

4 MR. SACHS: I think that if you explicitly

5 added the end of that, revisit what we thought the

6 tolerance ought to be --

7 MR. EISNER: Sure. If we can't --

8 MR. SACHS: -- then --

9 MR. EISNER: -- agree to the conditions, we

10 can't agree to the tolerance.

11 MR. SACHS: Then you may find it more

12 acceptable.

13 MR. EISNER: Yeah. Yes?

14 MR. STANONIK: I'm Frank Stanonik at AHRI.

15 Neil, I agree that that's a good place to start from

16 but I think that -- and Harvey was kind of saying -- I

17 think that it also needs to be -- we can do that, but

18 there needs to be an acknowledgement that we still may

19 end up with some situations where it won't be.

20 And I'll just give you one example because

21 it's pretty, I think, easy to grab onto. And we don't

22 talk about it much, but if you're making a commercial
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

26

1 water heater, you have two criteria. You have the

2 thermal efficiency, how well you heat the water, and

3 the standby loss. When you talk about electric

4 commercial storage water heaters, the only thing you

5 measure is the standby loss.

6 And the requirement today -- the requirement

7 today is so small, it's less than, like, a -- if you're

8 talking about a 50-gallon commercial electric storage

9 water heater, it's less than a 100-watt light bulb --

10 is your standby loss in an hour. All right. Well, so

11 you're talking about something in the tens of watts and

12 a 5 percent tolerance on that test is -- just doesn't

13 fit.

14 In our program, we apply a 10 percent

15 tolerance. And that's still a very difficult test,

16 simply because it's not -- you know, it's a combination

17 of the test procedure and your instrumentation. And

18 you're trying to now measure relatively a very small

19 quantity of energy.

20 And so I think -- and not being an expert in

21 the refrigeration side of things -- I've heard some

22 things say that there still may be again reasons that,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

27

1 you know -- a manufacturer in his facility, he might,

2 you know, apply that 5 percent AEDM validation

3 tolerance to the standby loss, again, because he kind

4 of -- not kind of -- they do know what they're doing

5 there. They do know their lab.

6 But when we get into verification testing,

7 there's -- I'm convinced there will be circumstances

8 where 5 might be a good, common number for a lot of

9 products, if not a universal number.

10 MR. EISNER: Well, I think, again, the first

11 thing that could go on the list is exceptions will be

12 provided. You can get an exemption for a unique

13 situation or you could list the exceptions in the rule

14 if you've got -- if you make the case. Now, of course

15 the DOE has to say they're willing to work with that or

16 they have the resources to work with that.

17 But I think -- again, I'm -- what I'm hearing

18 is, let's start and see what has to be on the list.

19 MR. HALLEY: Geoff Halley with ABMIA (ph).

20 From my experience in the boiler industry, in this --

21 our segment of the marketplace, I think that

22 circumstances will dictate but the majority of testing
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

28

1 will have to be done in the manufacturer's facility

2 because of the capabilities of all the facilities in

3 terms of fuel flows and that sort of thing. So I --

4 MR. EISNER: And these are the things I'd

5 like to start --

6 MR. HALLEY: Right.

7 MR. EISNER: -- putting up on the screen.

8 And we can say --

9 MR. HALLEY: Right.

10 MR. EISNER: -- "Hey, this is too cumbersome

11 a system in the end and we have to go back and start

12 over," or we could say, "Hey, we can keep it to a

13 reasonable list of conditions that the agency can work

14 with."

15 MS. MEYERS: This is Karen with Rheem. I

16 think it's important to note that when you're talking

17 boilers and commercial HVAC units, I mean, some of

18 these units are as big as this room.

19 FEMALE SPEAKER: Bigger.

20 MS. MEYERS: Or bigger. And, you know, 5

21 percent is not very much, especially as these are

22 assembled and then trucked down our wonderful U.S.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

29

1 interstate highways and stuff, you know, and

2 then put into some type of lab where somebody who's not

3 really familiar with running the test has to run it.

4 So, you know, we -- I mean, that's the issue that us,

5 as manufacturers, are struggling with when you're not

6 allowed to witness or be there and you've only got 5

7 percent.

8 I mean, it's a pretty small number.

9 MR. EISNER: You're going to keep the list?

10 MS. BARHYDT: So what do we have on the list?

11 MR. EISNER: All right. Well, I mean, I

12 think the first thing is, a basic rule would be that if

13 the tolerance is the same --

14 MS. BARHYDT: Whoops, I can't type.

15 MR. EISNER: -- and same as for the test for

16 the AEDM. Is that correct?

17 MS. HOOTMAN: We have a basic problem. We

18 already have industry certification programs that are

19 not that.

20 MS. BARHYDT: Okay.

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: So why don't we start with

22 what are your industry certification program tolerances
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

30

1 in terms of the metric, the product, what the tolerance

2 is? And then from there, we can discuss --

3 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay. Also I want to say that

4 even if we say for unitary small, it's a 5 percent on

5 EER, that does not constitute a failure right there.

6 You have the choices after that. You have lots of

7 things that --

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: And all that's on the table

9 here, right? So I mean, what we're talking about now

10 is, assuming the test is done correctly, what is an

11 invalid reading and should that be different than what

12 you guys are currently using through your industry

13 programs to determine an invalid reading now? I get

14 that there's a process, whether it be, you know,

15 manufacturers are on site or a contention process or a

16 defect process. We'll get to that.

17 But I think at first, it's what really is an

18 invalid reading. And from what I understand of the

19 industry programs --

20 MS. BARHYDT: Right.

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- you guys are testing at

22 third-party labs. You're not testing, for the most
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

31

1 part, in your own facilities. They're the same third2 party labs that -- they're around the table and on the

3 phone -- that we use.

4 MR. STANONIK: Let's actually -- Frank

5 Stanonik with AHRI. Let's -- as we have this

6 discussion, I would suggest that we acknowledge that,

7 okay, there's a segment of the commercial products that

8 I'm going to say -- it's reasonable to consider them

9 truckable, if that's a good word, and that they are

10 tested at a third-party agency.

11 Okay? So there's that segment that is

12 tested, let's say, off the manufacturer's site.

13 There's a whole nother segment that the only way you're

14 going to reasonably test them is at -- where they got

15 made. And so -- but I'm saying, you know, maybe just

16 create those two categories first and we can first talk

17 about, okay, tolerances for products that can be easily

18 or reasonably crated and shipped someplace to be tested

19 and that's one set of circumstances.

20 And you have this whole other group of

21 products where, when you want to test it, you're going

22 to -- you know, whoever's going to test it is going to
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

32

1 have to go there. The unit's going to be set up and

2 then it'll be tested because it's the only reasonable

3 thing. And even then, there's -- reasonable becomes a

4 little foggy because we have the whole question of you

5 made the manufacturer make one --

6 MS. BARHYDT: Right.

7 MR. STANONIK: -- which is not like he made a

8 $5 piece of whatever.

9 MR. HON: Charlie Hon. To get this off, for

10 your request, there are two industry standards that I

11 know of for the commercial refrigeration. One is the

12 Energy Star program -- requires 5.0 percent -- is the

13 most they will allow overage. In our Canada is the

14 same number. If you're more than 5 percent -- and

15 that's a hard 5 percent, not 5.499 percent -- 5 percent

16 over you're rated, it's a failure.

17 There's only one other industry program.

18 That's the AHRI program, which only one company right

19 now is using. Frank should be able to speak to that.

20 MR. STANONIK: What was the question? I'm

21 sorry?

22 MR. HON: What's the tolerance rating on your
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

33

1 commercial refrigeration?

2 MR. STANONIK: I did talk to the office

3 during the -- yesterday during lunch. We traded

4 voicemails. It's 5 percent.

5 MR. SUTPHEN: This is John Sutphen, Cleaver6 Brooks. For all of our products, they're tested at our

7 facility. There's no third-party testing lab that can

8 handle the majority of our products. Our low-pressure

9 steam -- really, there's no third-party certification

10 program that can handle that.

11 AHRI only covers cast-iron boilers and their

12 -- for their steam and the large condensing. They

13 really don't have the capacity to handle our larger

14 units. Also, there's a safety issue involved with

15 sending our products to third-party facilities. You

16 need professional technicians to set up combustion.

17 And it's definitely a danger issue.

18 Without having qualified personnel setting up

19 your product, could lead to definitely bodily harm

20 and/or death, according to our warning. So I think

21 there'd be a huge issue if we're forced to use third22 party facilities. A) they don't exist for the majority
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

34

1 of our product, and B) they can't really handle our

2 equipment.

3 Frank, you might want to respond, but --

4 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, AHRI. My

5 suggestion was not to suggest -- well, not to say that

6 it had to be done either way but to acknowledge that in

7 some cases, there -- you know, the idea of saying,

8 "This has to be tested in third-party," is just

9 unworkable.

10 MR. EISNER: Does DOE --

11 MR. STANONIK: So there's no suggestion that

12 everything has to be at a third party.

13 MS. BARHYDT: So let's take a step back. The

14 assumption that we were starting with was that we had a

15 valid test. So clearly, we found some facility where

16 we could test it, whether it was the manufacturer's

17 facility or a third-party facility. So if we go back

18 to our original assumption of we have a valid test,

19 then we were able to obtain the product and we were

20 able to test it.

21 And maybe we obtained it from the

22 manufacturer and tested it at the manufacturer's lab.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

35

1 The question that we were discussing was, what is the

2 appropriate tolerance to determine that it was a valid

3 rating?

4 MR. EISNER: And do I assume, along with

5 this, goes the concept that the next issue or one of

6 the next issues we would address is, what if it's not a

7 valid test or how do we determine it's not a valid

8 test?

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yep.

10 MR. EISNER: Okay. Is everybody then in

11 agreement with that approach?

12 MR. SUTPHEN: This is John Sutphen, Cleaver13 Brooks. We've applied for waivers on the testing

14 requirement. Until we know the status of those

15 waivers, we can't come up with a reasonable tolerance

16 to the -- either AEDM or the validation testing just

17 because we feel that there's no one capable of actually

18 doing the test as in the rules. And so we wouldn't

19 know an applicable tolerance to apply.

20 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. Could

21 I propose that we take a similar approach as we did

22 yesterday and go through each category --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

36

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh.

2 MR. STEPHENS: -- with the percentages --

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yep.

4 MR. STEPHENS: -- identify things like Frank

5 mentioned with the standby loss testing?

6 MR. EISNER: So you're thinking we may end up

7 with different percentages for particular categories?

8 And what would be the justification?

9 MALE SPEAKER: Because (inaudible) industry.

10 MR. EISNER: Why -- explain to me, a non11 technical person, why the same tolerance wouldn't apply

12 at the next stage? I'm not saying I disagree with you.

13 I don't know enough to understand why it would be

14 different.

15 MR. STEPHENS: Because at this point, it's

16 not just statistical determination. When we're

17 validating the AEDM, we -- the DOE has acknowledged

18 that we can do this through statistics. And we can

19 just adjust the mean and the tolerance by nominal

20 shifts. When we get to individual testing for

21 validation to meet the performance of the Department of

22 -- for the Department of Energy, then physics become
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

37

1 involved.

2 With the standby loss test, specifically from

3 my industry for storage tank water heaters, just normal

4 air currents due to ventilation requirements inside the

5 laboratory affect the standby loss. These very small

6 air currents in this room right now, with the doors

7 opening and closing, change values in the standby loss.

8 MR. HON: Charlie Hon, True Manufacturing.

9 Does -- is the test -- does the test standard have air

10 current -- air flow specification?

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: It should.

12 MR. STEPHENS: It's not addressed in that

13 test.

14 MR. HON: Then maybe the test needs to be

15 corrected.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: DOE has an open rule for

17 water heater test procedure right now.

18 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI.

19 COURT REPORTER: That mic is not working.

20 Sorry.

21 MR. EISNER: The mic is not working.

22 COURT REPORTER: The mic is not working.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

38

1 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI

2 Industries. AHRI, who has been doing this kind of

3 testing for many years, decades, and works with the

4 same laboratory with the same people for many, many

5 years -- we have a standing group -- a laboratory

6 liaison committee that periodically goes to the

7 laboratory.

8 Because with the volume of units that we have

9 coming through, we continue to find areas that need to

10 be refined to assure that the results are repeatable

11 and similar to those that the manufacturer got. Some

12 of the things have been mentioned here, air currents,

13 humidity, how long a unit soaks in before it -- in the

14 environment that it's in, if it's been stored in a cold

15 or a hot warehouse, how long it has to stay.

16 And there are pages and pages of these issues

17 that we instruct beyond the test protocol. Here are

18 the additional things that have to be done. And in

19 some cases, the issues are training of the employees.

20 We currently have an issue in water heaters -- oil21 fired water heaters where we have relaxed our

22 requirement where you can't visit the facility while
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

39

1 the test is being run.

2 Well, for a period of time, AHRI is allowing

3 a manufacturer to accompany the product to assure that

4 the unit is set up properly, that the adjustments are

5 made properly that are specified in the installation

6 instructions, and that the unit is being run properly.

7 The reason it's temporary is the hope is that the test

8 laboratory technicians can be trained.

9 We've been assured of low turnover so that

10 that training can stay there. But this is an ongoing

11 situation, where it takes -- in order to comply with

12 the tolerances that AHRI has, we have an ongoing

13 requirement to keep the laboratory up to date. So the

14 thought that you can take a test standard and just go

15 anywhere and get the same results is incorrect.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay. So just to get the

17 ball moving, why don't we start with what is the AHRI

18 program today, as it exists today? What are the

19 tolerances? What are the exclusions? What are the --

20 what is the process by product?

21 MR. STANONIK: Which one you want to start

22 with?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

40

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Pick one.

2 MR. STANONIK: Okay. Well, let's start with

3 commercial boilers. It's a simple 5 percent.

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Five percent.

5 MR. STANONIK: For commercial water heaters,

6 it's 5 percent on the thermal efficiency, 10 percent on

7 the standby loss; commercial A.C., it's -- air cold.

8 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay. Unitary small?

9 MR. STANONIK: Oh, no. We're doing

10 commercial - - you're right. Go ahead and -- you're

11 right. You're right.

12 MS. HOOTMAN: Unitary small is 5 percent on

13 EER.

14 MR. THARP: Correction.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: On SEER?

16 MR. THARP: Unitary small is 10 percent on

17 EER this year.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: On SEER, the less than 65

19 through phase?

20 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, you're right, Rusty.

21 Yep.

22 MR. THARP: It's 10 percent on EER and 5
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

41

1 percent on SEER.

2 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

4 MR. THARP: Correct. Five percent on HSP.

5 MS. HOOTMAN: Five percent on HS -- yeah.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

7 MR. THARP: And actually, I'm going to throw

8 in that one of the reasons those tolerances are as they

9 are is there are some within AHRI who would like those

10 tolerances to be higher but others believe that --

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: Can't measure --

12 MR. THARP: -- DOE would not like them to be

13 higher. So that's why we keep them there.

14 MS. HOOTMAN: Measure -- we have measure

15 problems all over the place.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay. Okay. Can you keep

17 going? So 65 to 135?

18 MS. HOOTMAN: Unitary large is 5 percent on

19 EER, 10 percent on IER. Same -- what --

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sorry. I use our terms but

21 that's fine.

22 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, those are all the same
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

42

1 program. Then on --

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: Very large, so over --

3 MS. HOOTMAN: Same. Some of those can't be

4 measured in a lab.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: Some of those can't be tested

7 in a lab --

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: So I have them down below;

9 right? But I'll --

10 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, I was going to say -- and

11 then on all of those, there's 5 percent NCOP. And then

12 do you have commercial -- you probably do somewhere but

13 I'm not seeing it -- furnaces?

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Nope. Keep going. I'll add

15 it.

16 MS. HOOTMAN: Because they're contained in

17 those unitary products. So it's a dual test.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

19 MS. HOOTMAN: And, yes, 5 percent.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

21 MS. HOOTMAN: Some of those also can't be

22 tested in --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

43

1 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi.

2 VRF is the same as unitary large.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: So 5 percent?

4 MR. DOPPEL: Right.

5 MS. HOOTMAN: Uh-huh.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

7 MR. WHITWELL: This is Bob Whitwell from

8 Carrier. Ashley, can you just confirm what the largest

9 -- what the upper limit for the commercial furnaces

10 program is for AHRI -- I mean, sorry, for DOE?

11 MS. HOOTMAN: None.

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: There isn't one.

13 MS. HOOTMAN: There isn't one. 225,000 BTUs

14 and bigger and that was the problem.

15 MR. WHITWELL: Okay. That's what I thought.

16 Thanks.

17 MS. HOOTMAN: As in one had to be tested at

18 my facility. And even then, it's an outdoor test.

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: Oops. I -- so PTACs and

20 SPVUs, are they the same?

21 MR. STANONIK: I think they are.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: There's no --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

44

1 MS. HOOTMAN: Well, they don't have IER.

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

3 MR. STANONIK: Yeah.

4 MS. HOOTMAN: It's been three years since --

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: There is no program for

6 CRACs, as I know -- Computer Room Air Conditioners.

7 MS. HOOTMAN: Now you got it right.

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: Seems like it would be the

9 same but we don't know.

10 MR. STANONIK: Well, let's start there.

11 Yeah.

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: It's a different metric.

13 It's, like, COP; right?

14 MS. HOOTMAN: It's COP.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: Commercial water heaters?

16 MR. STANONIK: Yeah, that was done.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: Oh, I do. You're right.

18 MR. STANONIK: Yeah, I know we put them in

19 that 5 percent on thermal efficiency, 10 percent on --

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Got it.

21 MR. STANONIK: -- standby loss.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: And then obviously, unfired -
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

45

1 - regardless of what we believe is the test procedure

2 issues with that, which we can deal with later, unfired

3 hot water storage tanks -- the R value?

4 MR. STANONIK: We currently don't -- Frank

5 Stanonik with AHRI. I mean, we currently don't have a

6 program because we don't think they need to be tested.

7 But --

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: I got it. Great. Are there

9 any others in this list? We haven't gotten --

10 refrigeration equipment.

11 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Ashley, can you add 10

12 percent IER for VRF, please?

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh.

14 MR. KOLANDAYAN: And Frank, what was the

15 commercial pump water heater?

16 MR. WHITWELL: Should just clarify that

17 commercial furnaces, the metric is thermal efficiency.

18 MR. HON: Refrigeration, Frank said the AHRI

19 is 5 percent. Energy Star is 5 percent. In Canada,

20 their part of certification (inaudible).

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay. And I didn't spell

22 that right at all.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

46

1 MR. HON: Those are hard (inaudible).

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right. So this is single

3 unit of a given model tested value compared to rated

4 value.

5 MR. BAUMAN: They're all one-sided

6 tolerances?

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: One-sided tolerances.

8 Correct.

9 MR. EISNER: And is everybody in agreement

10 that 5 percent passes or does it have to be less than 5

11 percent to pass? I heard some disagreement.

12 MS. MEYER: Well, this is Karen with Rheem

13 again. It's not necessarily on a single test to pass

14 or fail because there could be reasons that, you know -

15 - I mean, if you fail on one test, it doesn't mean you

16 automatically fail. It could be a defective unit. You

17 could request a second test.

18 MR. EISNER: But what does failure even on

19 one test mean? Is it less than 5 or 5?

20 MS. MEYER: It takes you to the second step.

21 I mean, if you --

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Talk about process.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

47

1 MS. MEYER: Okay. Let's talk about process.

2 It's a good --

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay. So first of all, there

4 -- let's assume we have a valid test. Are there any

5 ones I missed that cannot be tested at a third-party

6 lab that are not under the not-able-to-be-tested-at-a7 third-party- lab-facility?

8 MR. SACHS: Excuse me, please? This is

9 Harvey. I was not ready to accept 5 percent.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Oh, sorry. Go ahead.

11 MR. SACHS: I want to go on the record -- and

12 I recognize it's not popular. But a one-sided 0

13 percent puts the incentives on the industry to resolve

14 the problems with different interpretations at the test

15 labs, to resolve the problems with instrumentation.

16 And I think it's a concept to resolve the problems with

17 imprecise specifications of the test conditions.

18 And I think it's a goal that's worth keeping

19 in mind because of its advantages. Its short-term

20 disadvantage is that it's a 5 percent improvement in

21 the -- or it's tightening of the stringency of the test

22 as applied. But it would be a move toward conformance
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

48

1 with the word of the law as it was written.

2 So I just want to keep that one in play even

3 though I may get stoned for it.

4 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from

5 National. I think, Harvey, I understand and I -- and as

6 we see this -- or I see it as a manufacturer of

7 multiple product categories. The 5 percent, I think,

8 with all the concerns about testing -- and we're going

9 to -- obviously going to get that. But in a sense, the

10 5 percent almost becomes negligible about where your

11 SEER rating is, your EER. It's almost negligible as

12 far as what that is.

13 I mean, you're going to overrate it if you --

14 because you determine what that tolerance is, the

15 manufacturer. And that gives us the flexibility to

16 say, "Hey, we think testing of this one is actually 20

17 percent variation. So I'm going to determine how much

18 I'm going to underrate it." But the 5 percent really

19 almost becomes nothing. That becomes what you can't

20 figure out that you might have not considered.

21 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey again. Jeff,

22 thank you. That's very helpful. What I guess we're --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

49

1 I'm saying then is let's legitimize what we're doing.

2 MR. BAUMAN: And I guess my feeling is that 5

3 percent is pretty darn legitimate for all the

4 variations we have here.

5 MR. HON: Charlie Hon, True Manufacturing.

6 Question of the DOE. There are standards written right

7 now on a lot of these units with a number attached to

8 them. Will you allow the 5 percent variance above that

9 number?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: What do you mean?

11 MR. HON: There are hard numbers saying,

12 "Okay, this unit shall not use more than many kilowatts

13 in a 24- hour period." Do we have the authority within

14 this group to put a 5 percent variance into that number

15 of do we have to then --

16 MR. STANONIK: Who requires that number be on

17 the equipment?

18 MS. BARHYDT: He's talking about the

19 standard.

20 MR. EISNER: The standard itself.

21 MR. STANONIK: Oh, okay. So it should be --

22 MS. BARHYDT: So the standard is the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

50

1 standard. We're talking about an AEDM, though.

2 MR. STANONIK: Right.

3 MS. BARHYDT: This isn't the --

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: No, you're not -- it's your

5 rating; you're not --

6 MS. BARHYDT: Well -- but we're talking about

7 --

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: No, we can't change the

9 standard.

10 MS. BARHYDT: Right.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: What we are doing is

12 comparing your rating to --

13 MS. BARHYDT: To --

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- whether it's a valid

15 rating or whether you comply with the standard.

16 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, AHRI. But to

17 that point, okay, the obligation is that the model's

18 rating has to be accurate.

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

20 MR. STANONIK: Okay? That -- I would

21 maintain that acknowledges that -- that doesn't mean

22 that every single unit you produce of that model is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

51

1 going to be spot on the rating. That's an

2 impossibility.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

4 MR. RIVEST: This is Michael Rivest.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: And --

6 MR. RIVEST: I'd like to go beyond that. I -

7 - what a 5 percent tolerance here means is not that

8 that unit performs at 5 percent below the standard. It

9 -- there are statistics involved here. And what we're

10 saying is that, because of the variabilities and the

11 uncertainties, it's inconclusive what the rating of

12 that product is.

13 And to have 100 percent certainty would, you

14 know, force people to overdesign by 20 percent. And

15 remember, there's a next step to this process, which

16 brings statistics and the confidence intervals.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right.

18 MR. RIVEST: So 5 percent -- just Harvey, to

19 be sure, if you understand here is that saying that,

20 you know, 5 percent is not saying that we know for a

21 fact that unit can produce 5 percent too much energy.

22 MR. SACHS: I'm sorry, Mike. This is Harvey.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

52

1 I disagree and we're pre-shadowing some of the issues

2 about statistical distributions and the variance within

3 products. If I have a Gaussian rather than a Poisson

4 distribution -- or a log-normal distribution, if it is

5 Gaussian, an unskewed bell curve, and I'm using 5

6 percent, that roughly means that 5 percent of the

7 products that come off the line, or a 1 in 20 chance,

8 would have, in the case of the example yesterday, a

9 performance of less than 9.5 if the minimum legal was

10 10.

11 That's a real set of products. Now, the

12 manufacturer finds ways to control the variance that's

13 inherent in the lab, if the industry finds way to

14 control the standardization of the rating conditions,

15 as Charlie's mentioned, if people assign their

16 variability and they accept some risk that a product

17 will fail, whether that's 5 percent -- a 1 in 20 chance

18 or a 1 in 100 chance, these all have effective

19 solutions that are allowed by one-sided tolerance.

20 And one of the goals, I suspect, of the

21 industry is to steepen up that thing to reduce the

22 variance of that product. It's part of general search
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

53

1 for quality. Yeah, I don't expect Charleston to be able

2 to control Regal-Beloit on motors, but there are a lot

3 of approaches that can be done that are in everyone's

4 interest.

5 MR. RIVEST: Harvey, I entirely agree with

6 what you're saying. I'm just saying -- what I'm

7 telling you is that if the result of testing is 5

8 percent below the rating, it can't be concluded that

9 that unit consumes more energy than the standard

10 because there are just too many uncertainties in the

11 measurement.

12 Is -- now, I'd like to add something to that.

13 If it were to turn out that a program over a period,

14 say, of a year, you would plot the distribution of test

15 results and spot on, everybody was always at 5 percent

16 less, I would conclude that the tolerance of 5 percent

17 was unnecessary.

18 But if I were to observe a distribution of -5

19 percent to +5 or +10, then, you know, we can learn from

20 that. And maybe that's something that a program could

21 look at or should be looking at. Because we wouldn't

22 people to have the precision to design exactly to that
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

54

1 tolerance.

2 MR. SACHS: Which, I believe, is what's

3 called Six Sigma. And so we're doing this sort of an

4 academic research exercise, the two of us. And that's

5 probably not a good idea. But I'm trying to suggest

6 that the one- sided tolerance gives you enormous

7 freedom to improve quality while trying to wring out

8 some costs. And I think it is a benefit, not only to

9 the country, but to the manufacturers.

10 And one piece of that is, are we setting the

11 allowable performance on a test, in the case of

12 yesterday's model, a 9.5 or a 10? That's all we're

13 talking about.

14 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from

15 National. I was looking at the math a little different,

16 Harvey. Is it -- you're talking about 5 percent being

17 1 out of 20 units. But actually, it's because the

18 number we're talking about, 5 percent, is the number

19 you're rated at.

20 So it could be 100 percent of those products

21 use -- if you're 10 kilowatts allowed a day, 100

22 percent of those products could be 9.8 and so they're 5
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

55

1 percent below what the standard that you have to meet

2 is. But it could be 100 percent of its products.

3 Where, actually in our case, what we're looking at is,

4 one of those products that I produce any day is going

5 to be the low -- might -- it has to be at least within

6 that 5 percent or that could be the unit that DOE's

7 going to pick out.

8 And that's going to be the one unit out of

9 1000 or whatever are produced in a year that DOE's

10 going to test and do a valid test one and it's going to

11 be more than 5 percent off of what that number is.

12 That could be any unit that I produce ever. So I don't

13 think it really even goes to as much the manufacturing

14 process as what -- you know, how close you are to the

15 number, not how many units are going to fail.

16 MR. SACHS: Jeff, I think we'd -- Harvey

17 again. I think we'd agree that we're really talking

18 about what Rusty has been calling the offsets we use in

19 our design. And I've given my position. It's not going

20 to hold up a negotiating process. So I'm giving away

21 my position as a moral authority and a good boy scout.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Can we move to process,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

56

1 Harvey?

2 MR. SACHS: I'm sorry?

3 MR. ASHFORD: Can we move --

4 MR. TRUSKOSKI: I just want to note -- this

5 is Eric Truskoski from Bradford White -- that there are

6 some large commercial water heaters that cannot be

7 tested at a third-party lab.

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

9 MR. SACHS: Yes, ma'am. Permission granted.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Thank you. Okay. Process.

11 So we talked partially about the process. A single

12 unit, a tested value is compared to the rated value.

13 The one- sided tolerance is listed with the applicable

14 metric. It'll be tested at a third-party lab unless it

15 cannot be tested, in which case the department has the

16 discretion to request testing at a manufacturer's

17 facility, process- wise.

18 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI. What

19 is the difference between commercial package boilers

20 and commercial boilers up at the top?

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Same thing.

22 MR. MYERS: Okay. And if you're looking what
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

57

1 is currently used by the industry, we mentioned it

2 before but I still it on the screen, and that is

3 unfired storage tanks. And I think either that needs

4 to be in paren as your recommendation or remove it

5 because removing it is what the current requirement is.

6 Now, you can leave unfired storage tanks. It's

7 something that has to be dealt with.

8 But I'm saying there is no value in any of

9 the third-party programs.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right. So we're talking

11 about DOE's regs and we're negotiating DOE's regs. Do

12 you want me to remove a tolerance altogether from what

13 may be DOE's regs?

14 MR. MYERS: No. I -- if what you have on the

15 screen is supposed to represent what the current

16 industry practice is in third-party programs, there is

17 no value. If you want to put that up as DOE's

18 suggestion for values, okay, but that would be an

19 anomaly in that list.

20 MS. BARHYDT: So I think Ashley started with

21 what is current industry practice for the ones that

22 have it and then filled in a few gaps, like the R
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

58

1 value. But I think that that is intended to be a

2 starting point for a DOE program.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah.

4 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. If

5 it's going to stay, I would recommend increasing it

6 possibly up to the 10 percent because it's the R value

7 that is the predominant factor in the standby loss.

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's exactly what you do.

9 It's just an insulation test. I'm sorry? Yeah, I can

10 hear you from there.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: I'm a mom.

12 MR. STARR: Can you hear me? Okay. Well, on

13 your unified storage tank -- just a thought -- you

14 might consider putting that as a U value because

15 there's actually some other things you can do in some

16 films and some other things you can do if you have --

17 in the future that may not really be reflected in

18 insulation value, but it has a -- it's part of an

19 assembly. So just a thought.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Until we go through a rule to

21 change the metric, I don't -- I mean, as part of that,

22 we'd consider changing it at that time. So right now
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

59

1 the metric is our value. Okay. Process-wise?

2 MS. HOOTMAN: Jill Hootman from Trane. I

3 want to ask one question. Is part of the process

4 selection of actual models?

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sure.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay.

7 MR. KOLANDAYAN: This is Dominic Kolandayan.

8 I'd like to offer a suggestion that the regs should

9 allow manufacturers to be present at the lab for setup.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: For all single-unit -- so

11 we're not talking about enforcement testing. We're not

12 talking about -- this is just for a single-unit spot

13 check. You think that you need to be present on site -

14 -

15 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Yes.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- and the third-party labs

17 agree with us?

18 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Yes.

19 MS. MEYERS: Yes.

20 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Yes.

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: The third-party labs agree

22 that you need someone on site?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

60

1 MS. MEYERS: Commercial HVAC, yes.

2 MS. HOOTMAN: For commercial, absolutely.

3 MS. MEYERS: We need our choice.

4 MR. DOPPEL: Yeah, this is Paul Doppel with

5 Mitsubishi.

6 MS. MEYERS: Or send us --

7 MR. DOPPEL: VRF already has that. But, you

8 know, I think --

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: You do.

10 MR. DOPPEL: -- the others need that.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: That is correct.

12 MR. DOPPEL: I think the others need that

13 also.

14 MR. CYMBALSKY: Are you there all the time

15 when you do -- I assume you do a lot of third-party

16 testing. We have to do out here -- we have, I think --

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: We have SCA right there.

18 MR. CYMBALSKY: So you guys are always there

19 when you run every single test for your tests that the

20 third party --

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: And you guys can't run a test

22 without them being there.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

61

1 MR. CYMBALSKY: Always? Every single time?

2 I want that on the record.

3 MR. EISNER: Yes.

4 MS. HOOTMAN: We have a choice within the HRI

5 program of whether we will witness or not.

6 MR. EISNER: You want the rule to be --

7 MS. HOOTMAN: So when the unit is selected,

8 we tell them whether we are going to be there or not.

9 MR. EISNER: So you want the rule --

10 MS. HOOTMAN: So in honestly --

11 MR. EISNER: So you may be there --

12 MS. HOOTMAN: -- no, John, we're not there

13 every single time. You know, we make a choice about

14 which ones we do want to be there for or that need

15 factory setup, such that the programming of it or

16 whatever needs a factory technician there just to even

17 set it up.

18 MR. EISNER: I think the issue here is

19 whether you want the rule to say the company may be

20 there or the company must be there. Because then you

21 have to go.

22 MR. DOPPEL: Yeah, for VRF -- this is Paul
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

62

1 Doppel with Mitsubishi. For VRF, it is a requirement

2 for the company to be there.

3 MR. EISNER: But if -- do you want it to be a

4 requirement for everybody or do you want it to be up to

5 the company whether it's there?

6 MR. DOPPEL: Company choice, yeah.

7 MR. EISNER: So then you want to say --

8 MR. DOPPEL: It should be an option.

9 MR. EISNER: -- except for VRF?

10 MS. BARHYDT: So let me make this a little

11 bit easier. DOE tests a lot of products. We are not

12 comfortable with manufacturers being there if we're not

13 there. And we do not have the resources to be there

14 every single time. It is a non-starter for the DOE for

15 a first spot check.

16 MS. BARHYDT: So let me -- let me make this a

17 little bit easier. DOE tests a lot of products. We

18 are not comfortable with manufacturers being there if

19 we're not there, and we do not have the resources to be

20 there every single time. It is a nonstarter for the

21 DOE for the first spot-check.

22 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Dominic Kolandayan, Daikin.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

63

1 I want to clarify, this is not a -- the manufacturer is

2 not there to witness the test. The manufacturer is

3 there to just do a setup checkup. So basically --

4 MS. BARHYDT: You're talking about one part

5 of it.

6 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Okay.

7 MS. BARHYDT: And I don't agree with you on

8 all of it.

9 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Okay.

10 MS. BARHYDT: There's a witness.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: So I guess let's talk about

12 it a little bit longer, so

13 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Okay. I was under the

14 impression that, you know, when -- witness meaning the

15 manufacturer is there, even during the data logging and

16 verifying that the data is correct -- okay.

17 MR. THARP: Actually, if I can, real fast,

18 the spot-check we're talking about is a -- the first

19 step of an enforcement test?

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Not -- no.

21 MR. THARP: No?

22 MALE SPEAKER: No.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

64

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: So that's what I was going to

2 -- let's take a step back for a second. What we do

3 currently is we pull products from market, or from a

4 manufacturer, wherever, we pull products, we have them

5 tested at a third-party facility.

6 The Department's not there, the

7 manufacturer's not there. We rely on the fact that

8 these are third- party labs. They should have the

9 expertise to run our test procedures. If our test

10 procedures are not explicit enough, they need to be

11 revised.

12 If a unit were to -- "fail" is not the right

13 word. If a unit were to potentially perform outside

14 the tolerances we've discussed there, we would initiate

15 a discussion with the manufacturer and say, "Hey, it

16 looks like there's a problem."

17 There can be a number of problems. It can be

18 a manufacturing issue. It can be a testing issue. It

19 can be a number of different things. At that point,

20 you can say, "You tested my unit wrong." If we agree

21 with you, we will retest. We can talk about you being

22 on-site at that point.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

65

1 I don't think it's reasonable to assume that,

2 for the 800 products plus I tested last year, someone

3 needed to be on-site to accurately test every single

4 one of those for a single spot-check. This is not

5 enforcement. We're not talking about noncompliance.

6 We're not talking about penalties at this point.

7 MR. EISNER: What happens if you don't agree

8 with the company that the test was performed

9 improperly?

10 MS. MEYERS: This is Karen with Rheem.

11 MR. EISNER: Wait, can I get an answer --

12 MS. MEYERS: Oh, yeah. Sorry.

13 MR. EISNER: -- to this question first?

14 You said if we don't -- if we agree --

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: I think it comes down to what

16 the test procedure says. If the test procedure --

17 MR. EISNER: But I'm --

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- is clear and it's being

19 done wrong, then it's being done wrong. If the test

20 procedure is being interpreted in different ways, a lot

21 of times, we've given deference to the manufacturer.

22 MR. EISNER: But if you don't agree with the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

66

1 manufacturer, what is the next step in the process?

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't think -- I think it's

3 a

4

5 MS. BARHYDT: It depends. They're -- part of

6 this is, at this point, we're talking about a potential

7 rating issue. And it would depend on whether or not

8 that rating issue led to a belief that there was a

9 noncompliance with the standard.

10 And I think that those are two different

11 things that people need to think about in different

12 ways. One is, is there a ratings issue, or are we

13 talking about distribution of a noncompliant product?

14 Because it does have different consequences, and -- in

15 both cases.

16 What the next step is, is -- there would be a

17 next step in the process, but it's not a mandatory next

18 step. Obviously, there's always prosecutorial

19 discretion as to whether or not -- if we think that

20 there's potential noncompliance, is it a good case for

21 us, so to speak? We -- just because the next step in

22 the process is enforcement testing doesn't mean that a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

67

1 hundred percent of the time, we're going to move to

2 that next step.

3 So I don't think that -- I don't want to talk

4 about it in terms of, "Oh, well, if we disagree, the

5 next step is enforcement testing," because that makes

6 it sound like it's an absolute, and it's not.

7 DR. SACHS: Laura? This is Harvey, and I

8 want to walk through a chain. With a lot of the --

9 some of the commercial products, the larger ones made

10 in smaller volumes in particular, there may be warranty

11 requirements that say this cannot be activated, started

12 up, without a factory-authorized agent on-site to do

13 the on-site commissioning.

14 MS. BARHYDT: And I believe our position has

15 been in the past that if the actual equipment requires

16 factory installation, our view is that whatever

17 personnel would ordinarily be there for installation

18 should be at the test site.

19 DR. SACHS: Okay. Now, I think some people

20 have taken --

21 MS. BARHYDT: But not everything has that

22 requirement.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

68

1 DR. SACHS: Please let me walk through my

2 chain. So I think we've already agreed that there's one

3 product for what we've been generically -- one kind of

4 product for which -- what we have generically been

5 referring to as witness test -- does involve inherently

6 manufacturers on-site.

7 So the question is how broad -- not whether

8 or not, but how broad should that class be, as

9 something that we are trying to establish in the

10 negotiations? My own instinct is to like openness. My

11 own concern is that any gap between the manufacturer's

12 intent and the manufacturer's instruction is going to

13 be propagated through the local installing techs and

14 lead to a gap between the as-designed and the field15 installed performance.

16 Now, I think the manufacturers would argue

17 that they're shipping product that'll work and not

18 always accommodating the creativity of the installing

19 technician in deviating from the intention of the

20 manufacturer. It's a serious industry issue. So I

21 think there's a lot of room for philosophical

22 disagreement. I don't have an answer, but I think one
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

69

1 possible compromise is allowing the manufacturer

2 representative to be available.

3 But if that's the case, you guys have to hire

4 a local PE to document what's going on so you can

5 review it even if you don't have the resources to

6 travel. I think there's a legitimate case. I don't

7 know how to resolve it, but I want to try to think

8 about it in all of its dimensions.

9 I worry that Joe Six-Pack is going to -- no

10 matter what these fine people tell Joe Six-Pack to do

11 when he's putting that rooftop up there, he's still

12 going to drop it three feet, and he's still going to

13 wire closely the air inlet.

14 And we've got some problems that are bigger

15 than this room, but they do get coalesced around the

16 question of whether I can make sure my product is

17 installed properly in the third-party test.

18 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI. I --

19 Harvey, I completely concur. We spent a good bit of

20 time here over the last hour talking about all of the

21 issues that impact products, including training. I'll

22 wait until Laura's available.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

70

1 We spent a good bit of time talking about all

2 of the things that impact testing, training of the test

3 technician. We talked about the fact that the

4 laboratories that currently do this testing

5 exclusively, day-in and day-out, still require annual

6 and sometimes multiannual monitoring, and AHRI finds

7 problems, even with that level of expertise, in

8 applying the standard, where we have to make sure that

9 the methodology used in applying that standard is

10 consistent, where there's inadequate training. They

11 don't know how to make normal adjustments that are

12 called for.

13 And then to say that we're going to have

14 tests with the kind of consequences, Laura, that you

15 are indicating we will have and not that -- not to

16 allow what AHRI does for most of the commercial

17 equipment, and that is to have the person on-site,

18 doesn't seem reasonable.

19 I think if there's going to be a requirement

20 with this kind of consequence, we have to allow the

21 manufacturer to be present, and if that means there has

22 to be additional staffing from DOE, then it would seem
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

71

1 that's a reasonable solution.

2 MR. EISNER: Laura, why do you feel if you're

3 not there, the company cannot be there? What's the

4 reason for that?

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Why does the company feel

6 like -- why does the company feel like they need to be

7 there if DOE is there? Why can't we both not be there?

8 MS. MEYERS: I'll address that. This is

9 Karen with Rheem.

10 MR. EISNER: I've heard a lot -- no, can I --

11 can I first get the answer to my question? I've heard

12 a lot of reasons why the company wants to be there. I

13 haven't heard why you don't want the company there if

14 you're not there.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: Answer?

16 MS. BARHYDT: Do you want to answer it?

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: Not really, but since you

18 asked.

19 I mean, I think from the Department's

20 perspective, it's a check-and-balance system. Right?

21 I have been on-site for testing.

22 I'm not saying the test labs do everything a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

72

1 hundred percent right, I'm not saying that the

2 manufacturers do everything a hundred percent right,

3 and I'm not saying the Department does everything a

4 hundred percent right, but I do think that there may be

5 reasons when the Department's interpretation or what's

6 explicit in the test procedure or what's being asked to

7 be done is a little bit beyond the bounds of what's

8 actually in there.

9 MR. EISNER: What's being asked to be done by

10 the company that is present?

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: To the test lab. And we have

12 --

13 MR. EISNER: To the test --

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- no way of checking that or

15 no way of balancing that if we're not there. That's

16 not to say they aren't the experts. That's not to say

17 that there aren't specific things in their design and

18 nuances.

19 But I guess the point is, you know, if there

20 are all these specific nuances such that an actual

21 engineer from your facility needs to be there for a

22 test in a lab that this is supposed to be their
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

73

1 expertise with our test procedures, I mean, I don't

2 think it's reasonable, to Harvey's point, that, you

3 know -- an engineer from your lab does not go

4 commission every single one of your units.

5 MR. EISNER: Well, let me ask for a response

6 to the question.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: So, yeah, and that's a

8 different bucket, in my opinion, but every single one

9 of them. You know, it goes both ways.

10 MR. WHITWELL: Bob Whitwell from Carrier.

11 But we do --

12 MR. EISNER: We -- let me keep things in

13 order here, because we had somebody else who also

14 wanted to speak.

15 MR. WHITWELL: Oh, yeah. I apologize.

16 MR. EISNER: But let me, before we get to

17 you, ask are there ways that companies can address this

18 concern? For example, if you thought about, would

19 there be a very, very limited number of tests where you

20 have to be there or should be there and DOE could meet

21 that with their staffing?

22 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

74

1 MS. MEYERS: This is --

2 MR. BAUMAN: And I just want to -- and,

3 again, we're talking about spot-checking, which would

4 only lead to the manufacturer being notified that DOE

5 tested --

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

7 MR. BAUMAN: -- and a spot-check. And I'm

8 not sure how we'd not -- I mean, DOE can kind of do

9 whatever they want to, as long as they're not going to

10 be -- there's not -- you're not taking action against

11 us based on that. And that sounds like what we're

12 talking about as a first step towards anything.

13 I think then the question gets to be should

14 there be, now, an automatic second step? Then this is

15 where we started talking about if -- you know, does

16 that -- whatever that second step is, is it an

17 automatic second step that if you patent -- you know,

18 if DOE found noncompliance on a spot-check, there's --

19 should there be an automatic appeal process or whatever

20 you want to call it that the manufacturer then gets to

21 do its second test, you know, regardless of whether --

22 you know, of anything else about DOE deciding that the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

75

1 test did not comply with the standards?

2 MS. BARHYDT: The reality is, we test a whole

3 lot of products without us present, without the

4 manufacturer present, relying on the expertise of the

5 test lab, and we get the results, and you never hear

6 about it. It was within the tolerance, and that's the

7 end of it.

8 MR. EISNER: Right. But what Jeff is saying

9 is they don't hear about that, then they don't need to

10 be present at the test.

11 FEMALE SPEAKER: Right.

12 MR. EISNER: But when they do hear about it

13 and they get a bad result for the company, can they ask

14 for and get a second test with both sides present?

15 MS. BARHYDT: So that was the part --

16 MR. EISNER: Is that a small --

17 MS. BARHYDT: -- we have not even gotten to.

18 Thus far, a lot of people at the table are insisting on

19 being present for that first test.

20 MR. EISNER: And is anybody insisting on

21 being present for the first test, if you only have --

22 if you have the right to demand another test, where you
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

76

1 get dinged, whatever it is that ding means?

2 MS. HOOTMAN: We're now up to more expense.

3 MR. EISNER: We're what?

4 MS. HOOTMAN: We're now up to more expense.

5 COURT REPORTER: Use the mic, please.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: Now I've got to provide another

7 whole unit.

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: At who? Who is paying for

9 that unit? We pay for the product to initially test

10 it, and we pay for the test, but if there's a second

11 test --

12 MS. HOOTMAN: Why are you spending my tax

13 dollars that way if the first test could have been done

14 correctly? Why are you paying for another one?

15 MR. EISNER: Because they say they don't have

16 the resources to be at every test.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: No, I mean, if the test lab

18 did the test lab wrong --

19 MR. EISNER: Can I finish?

20 MR. KOJAK: Well, this is Mike Kojak with UL.

21 I just wanted to say something here. UL doesn't feel

22 that we need the presence of all the manufacturers for
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

77

1 all the testing. The only -- the only things that we

2 have seen in the past that have been hiccups is with

3 very high- efficiency HVAC units that require some

4 manipulation of the test unit in order to run the test

5 properly.

6 If the manufacturer's unaware that we're

7 performing these tests, and let's say there's a series

8 of DIP switches or some programming that needs to be

9 done to the test unit to force the variable-speed

10 motors to high and low speeds to perform a proper test,

11 that's where the struggle comes in with the third-party

12 test unaware of the manufacturer.

13 If that type of information is not supplied

14 to the DOE when the rating was given, the third-party

15 labs then struggle with figuring out how to do that

16 because that is different for every major manufacturer.

17 So and if we are doing a spot-check and the

18 DOE doesn't want the manufacturer to know, that's

19 another issue we have to figure out. Either that's

20 information that's supplied to the DOE when the rating

21 is given, or we should, as a third-party lab, have the

22 right to call a manufacturer to ask them how to set
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

78

1 their unit properly with program or DIP switches to

2 properly test the high- efficiency units.

3 MR. STARR: I just wanted to add here, I

4 spent a number of years commissioning, and part of

5 that's startup of equipment, so anytime you start up --

6 various pieces of equipment around this room, I've been

7 there just to actually witness the startup.

8 There's certain pieces of equipment in which

9 they do require a factory startup, a lot of times,

10 really big boilers that could potentially blow up the

11 place, and there's a strict specification that they

12 need to have factory startup.

13 But a lot of the others stuff, equipment air

14 handlers in particular, the startup can be done by

15 factory or can be done by someone else. And I think

16 the test procedure should reflect that and how it

17 actually might be started up in the field.

18 And the other thing is the other reason you

19 don't want to have -- you want to have both the -- when

20 I went to factory test, I was always there, because a

21 lot of times, you know, particularly the manufacturers

22 can look at the piece of equipment and check things
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

79

1 out, start tweaking things to make -- in order to

2 affect the performance.

3 And you kind of know -- you want to know --

4 the Department of Energy would want to be there to make

5 sure that, you know, things are -- you know, that

6 everybody's playing by the same set of rules in terms

7 of legitimately you're looking at a piece of equipment.

8 So my thought would be, is that if the --

9 when you get looking at the given pieces of equipment,

10 if it does actually require factory-authorized startup,

11 and maybe the boiler guys can talk about that, I think

12 it's on larger boilers where it specifically requires

13 someone from the factory as part of you buying the

14 piece of equipment, then there might be discussion on

15 that.

16 But the other stuff, where anybody can start

17 it up, from any mechanical contractor, then it seems

18 like that's how it's going to be installed in the

19 actual field, and that's how the energy use is going to

20 be experienced by the general public and lauded that

21 way. So that's just my suggestion.

22 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

80

1 Industries. When we're talking about residential, you

2 cited the large number of tests that you have conducted

3 at a third-party lab. When we're talking about

4 residential smaller equipment, the test procedures are

5 much simpler to work with.

6 When you have the wide variety of products

7 that you have in commercial, you do have many more

8 variables. To your specific question, Ashley, about do

9 we have to be there for the first test because of

10 consequences, the first question I would ask if I were

11 called with a failure is, "I don't know how you tested

12 that unit."

13 And your answer would be, "Well, we tested it

14 in a third-party lab according to the test standard."

15 I would still not know whether that test was conducted

16 correctly and would want to have a retest with me

17 present. If your answer is that you will provide that

18 opportunity, then I don't need to be there for your

19 first test. I don't need --

20 MR. EISNER: I think --

21 MR. MYERS: -- to hear about it --

22 MR. EISNER: I think that's --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

81

1 MR. MYERS: -- if you check something -- and

2 so --

3 MR. EISNER: I think that's what we're --

4 MS. HOOTMAN: Retest with us in there.

5 MR. MYERS: -- to that specific question --

6 MS. HOOTMAN: No, it is not what she's

7 saying.

8 MR. MYERS: Pardon?

9 MS. HOOTMAN: I'm just correcting Neil.

10 That's not what she's saying.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's not what I'm saying.

12 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL. I

13 just wanted to ask you a question about that comment.

14 If the DOE sends a test unit to a third-party lab and

15 there is a failure and they call up the manufacturer,

16 and the manufacturer says, "Well, maybe it wasn't set

17 up correctly," and you want to have another test, and

18 so everybody flies out to the third-party lab to test

19 it again, and it fails, and it finds (sic) out to be a

20 manufacturer's defect, then does the manufacturer pay

21 for all the testing and everyone's travel to the test

22 facility?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

82

1 MR. MYERS: We haven't gotten to manufacturer

2 defect or how that would impact anything. There's a

3 specific procedure in the AHRI program how that's

4 handled, but we haven't gotten to that here. I'm just

5 curious, to Ashley or Laura's response to if there was

6 a failure, and I asked for a retest with me being

7 present to monitor -- don't have to touch the equipment

8 as long as it's been installed according to the

9 instructions, which about 95 percent of my companies'

10 product require a factory-authorized startup, someone

11 who's been trained by my company to go out and start

12 the equipment up.

13 So if it's been properly installed according

14 to the manufacturer's instructions, then I would

15 question, has that test been run correctly? Because

16 I've seen so many tests -- we train a lot of laboratory

17 experts. UL, we've trained a lot of UL's technicians

18 when they've come to our facility in how to test our

19 size and our type equipment.

20 Same thing with Intertek. We've helped train

21 some of their technicians. So I would be very curious

22 as to, you know, what would be the response of DOE if
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

83

1 you had one of these tests where we were not present

2 and there was a failure? Would we have the option to

3 say, "We are" --

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: So --

5 MR. MYERS: "We looked at our data. We say

6 this thing operates fine. You have had a third-party

7 test run it. That makes the third-party test, in my

8 view, very suspect. Would you rerun the test and allow

9 us to be there?"

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: So I'm the lawyer, not an

11 engineer. What does it mean that you've trained them

12 to test your product?

13 MR. MYERS: What are the nuances? How do you

14 handle the equipment when you're setting it up, when

15 you're operating it, when you're running the test?

16 Where do you make the connections? Have those

17 connections been made properly? You know, things like

18 that.

19 MS. HOOTMAN: This is Jill Hootman from

20 Trane. When we have witnessed our own tests through

21 AHRI at these third-party labs, when this is part of

22 our public record and part of our comments that we made
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

84

1 on AEDM, we have witnessed air sampler trees that were

2 not correct. We have witnessed mixers that were not

3 correct, and thermocouples that were not placed

4 correctly; therefore, measurements were wrong.

5 We have witnessed not a break-in in our

6 scroll compressors. Break-in time must be done on

7 scroll compressors. We have witnessed errors in

8 psychometrics, wet-bulb measurements. So this is the

9 kind of nuances he's talking about. We stop them, say,

10 "No, you didn't measure that correctly. This is what

11 you need to do. This is how ASHRAE standard" whatever

12 is, and we tell them to change that.

13 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL.

14 MR. EISNER: Excuse me. Excuse me a second.

15 I've got a -- for a while, I've had a note here.

16 Stephen Schaefer wants to talk. Stephen?

17 MR. SCHAEFER: Yes. This is Stephen Schaefer

18 with Hoshizaki America. And we'd also like to say that

19 we've gone through witness testing of a third-party

20 testing and have seen errors at different times. And

21 the biggest help for us is, in this process, we'd like

22 to at least be there to visually inspect the unit when
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

85

1 it is shipped, because this is a really large unit for

2 commercial refrigerators, and anything can happen in

3 shipping.

4 The other thing is, as the other people have

5 stated, errors in setting up thermocouples, you know, a

6 bad thermocouple, they're -- it's not just a plug the

7 unit in and test it. There's many steps that take --

8 for the process of setting up a commercial refrigerator

9 for this test. It usually takes about two days.

10 So if the wood is not at the right density --

11 there's many things that could go wrong that we'd just

12 like to see -- hey, for the first time, we'd like to

13 see what this test facility is doing with our unit,

14 just to make sure that everything is done correctly in

15 case something does happen during the test.

16 MR. EISNER: Okay. You had a comment?

17 MR. KOJAK: Yes. A couple things. Somebody

18 asked if we came to every test. I -- we don't go to

19 every test for setup, but we probably talk to the lab

20 on every test. They call us, they ask us questions.

21 We give some instructions on how the unit should be set

22 up if it's a fairly simple unit to test.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

86

1 The other issue is I don't sell distributor

2 products, so for DOE to obtain a unit from me, they

3 have to come to me to get it, because I build to order,

4 and I know that there are several other industries in

5 this room that does that. So it's not like I don't

6 have skin in the game. I -- if DOE was supposed to be

7 paying me for that, I'm missing out on something, so

8 So, you know, typically, if I got asked by DOE, I would

9 build a unit and ship it to them, because I felt like

10 that was a requirement that's being asked of me.

11 MR. EISNER: That's a question I had. I feel

12 a little better that you're asking the same question,

13 which is how do you test equipment that the

14 manufacturer has to install without going through the

15 manufacturer?

16 MS. BARHYDT: Have we done any that had

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh.

18 MS. BARHYDT: We did?

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh.

20 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. I don't know what all

21 we've bought. So we buy the first unit, and we test

22 it. So it's not -- and all of that is done at
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

87

1 Department expense. So it's not that the manufacturer

2 is providing that first unit on request.

3 MR. EISNER: Even though the manufacturer's

4 saying they don't sell it unless they install it.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: There are some products that

6 they're saying they build to order. In those cases,

7 there are some that we can still order. There are

8 others that -- you know, obviously we haven't tested

9 all of your equipment. I think it's fair to say that

10 we've tested -- with the exception of one product type,

11 we've tested the rest in this room. And if you haven't

12 heard from us --

13 MR. EISNER: I've heard DOE say they don't

14 have the resources to be at every test. I've heard

15 industry say they need to be at every test to make sure

16 it's done right. And the issue -- and somebody, again,

17 refocused us on it a few minutes ago -- is, is there a

18 way to fix this problem?

19 If DOE is saying -- well, let me just throw

20 out numbers, and I'll make them up. They do a thousand

21 tests a year. Two hundred and fifty have a problem.

22 The other 750 don't have a problem. Nobody needs to be
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

88

1 there. DOE doesn't need to be there, and there was no

2 reason for the company to be there from an enforcement

3 or compliance perspective because DOE says everything

4 was fine in that test.

5 Out of the 250, you come in, and you meet

6 with them, and you point out a certain number of

7 things. And, again, I'm making numbers up. Let's

8 assume 125 of them, they say, "Okay. You've made your

9 point. We'll throw the test results out." That leaves

10 a fraction left, 125 tests.

11 And what I'm asking is if you had an absolute

12 right to demand a retest, would that solve your

13 problem? DOE has to throw the first test out. You and

14 DOE go to 125. I'm assuming DOE would have the

15 resources to do it. You would save the money of not

16 going to 700 and -- you know, 800 of these tests,

17 because you didn't need to be there, because DOE wasn't

18 going to do anything with the results. Why -- is that

19 an option?

20 MS. HOOTMAN: It's an option. I'd also like

21 to make a point that if the third-party testing labs

22 would use video, webinar, and electronic means whereby
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

89

1 we could be seeing this, witnessing as it is happening,

2 we wouldn't have to physically be there as well.

3 MR. EISNER: That --

4 MS. HOOTMAN: So there are tools and

5 techniques.

6 MR. EISNER: That's another option.

7 MS. HOOTMAN: They do have them, because when

8 we do our own pay-for tests, we use those, but they're

9 not always used in the third-party testing. So I

10 agree, Mike. I know you have them.

11 MR. KOJAK: You know, this is Mike Kojak with

12 UL. I just wanted to make a comment about, you know,

13 some of the third-party labs have contracts with AHRI

14 to test small and large unitary, and some of them

15 don't, and some of them, their expertise is R&D

16 testing, which involves a lot of work with the

17 manufacturers and very detailed setups with lots of

18 extra instrumentation and very detailed tests and

19 manipulation of the units, changing out components and

20 retesting. And some of those tests can last from a

21 week up to three months for one unit.

22 And some of the third-party test labs that do
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

90

1 have the contracts, they have to test a lot of volume

2 very quickly. So it's not always in their best

3 interest to be very thorough with setups, because they

4 have to test a high volume to keep their profitability

5 up high.

6 So, you know, when all the comments were made

7 about all the third-party test labs have issues with

8 setups and instrumentations, that's not an accurate

9 statement for all the third-party test labs.

10 MS. HOOTMAN: Also, part of the process with

11 AHRI is -- I believe was stated a little bit before --

12 is that they let us know ahead of time when a unit is

13 going in. So we have a call from the lab that says,

14 "At two a.m. on the third shift, your unit is going in

15 the lab." We have an engineer on the phone with a cell

16 phone that sits there and waits for the phone call and

17 has a discussion with the lab.

18 MR. EISNER: But this is a test the lab --

19 MS. HOOTMAN: So this --

20 MR. EISNER: -- was doing at your request,

21 not DOE's.

22 MS. HOOTMAN: No, this is AHRI independent
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

91

1 testing.

2 MR. EISNER: But it's got nothing to do with

3 DOE.

4 MS. HOOTMAN: Correct.

5 MR. EISNER: What I want to just -- what --

6 MS. HOOTMAN: We're talking about process.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: So --

8 MR. EISNER: I want to focus on tests that

9 DOE asks for without your knowledge.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Well, it would be the same

11 thing. It's a one to one.

12 MS. HOOTMAN: So I don't get a call right now

13 when DOE's testing my unit.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Would middle ground be if the

15 lab feels that they don't have the information they

16 need on the first test, that they contact DOE, who will

17 then also contact the manufacturer. The three of us

18 will talk, on the phone, not physically there, before

19 the test is done for them to get any additional

20 information they may need. Would that help alleviate

21 some of these concerns? In other words, you would

22 still be able to talk to the lab, but DOE would be
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

92

1 present.

2 MR. KOJAK: Would the lab be able to furnish

3 pictures of setup and instrumentation lists and

4 information of the manufacturer so they feel more

5 secure that we're actually using the proper

6 instrumentation --

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sure.

8 MR. KOJAK: -- and the proper --

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't have an issue with

10 that.

11 MR. KOJAK: -- evidence of the setup and

12 things like that?

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah, and that's something we

14 do by default anyway. We would give you all that

15 information after the first test anyway. But if you

16 wanted to do it -- if you had an issue -- this isn't

17 for every test. This would be if you had an issue

18 testing, it would be up to the third-party labs to say,

19 "I cannot test this unit without either additional

20 information or additional instructions," or, "I have

21 two sets of different instructions that were shipped

22 with the unit. I need clarification," or whatever.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

93

1 The three of us, all three parties involved,

2 would be having that discussion.

3 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak again. I just

4 have a question. What about if the third-party labs

5 sees like an anomaly in the unit and they suspect it's

6 defective?

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Come to the DOE.

8 MR. KOJAK: Okay. Does that also go to the

9 manufacturer?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: We would -- that's the next

11 discussion.

12 MR. KOJAK: Okay.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Let's get to one that's not

14 defective first.

15 MR. STEM: This is Mike with Intertek.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, you're already doing

17 that, right? Hi, Mike.

18 MR. STEM: Hey. Just real quick, there are

19 some products that are impossible for us to test

20 without the manufacturers. I do think those products

21 are in the minority, but there are some. So there

22 needs to be provisions for that.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

94

1 Going a little further, the majority of the

2 project -- products, we can test, document the setup,

3 document the instrumentation --

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Mike Stem, Intertek.

5 MR. STEM: Sorry. What was that?

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sorry. They asked me who you

7 were. You're not very loud.

8 MR. STEM: All right. So, anyway, we can --

9 we can test the majority of the products without much

10 additional instructions, obviously. The installation

11 manual, as long as they are complete and thorough, for

12 the standard single-speed systems, not an issue.

13 Now, as long as you have provisions for the

14 one- off products that we do need actual on-site

15 involvement, you know, I would feel comfortable. So --

16 and that's basically all I wanted to put in right now.

17 MR. EISNER: Can you give us a percentage of

18 the ones that you have to have the manufacturer there

19 for?

20 MR. STEM: I mean, basically, it's anything

21 that -- I mean, you know the products that require the

22 factory installation technicians, so I mean, if it's
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

95

1 got a PID controller, if it's got modulating components

2 that have to be tuned to get the unit to operate, that

3 is some manufacturer-specific information that the

4 majority of the technicians do not -- that they're not

5 privy to that information.

6 Somebody mentioned about training Intertek

7 staff, UL staff. We try to send our technicians to as

8 many manufacturer training classes as we can to get

9 well- educated and well-versed with all of the control

10 algorithms, the nuances of wiring, refrigerant piping,

11 the different ways different manufacturers do things,

12 but at the end of the day, there are a lot of different

13 variations.

14 So we can't necessarily claim that we are

15 experts on your equipment. We try to be experts on our

16 testing facilities, how they operate, how they run. We

17 try to be experts on the test standards and try to make

18 sure that we follow the ASHRAE guidelines, Method of

19 Test guidelines, to the letter of the law.

20 Sometimes we're successful, sometimes we are

21 not. Like Ashley said, we're not a hundred percent all

22 the time either, so -- but I do think we're getting
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

96

1 sidetracked on the minority, not the majority.

2 MR. EISNER: I'm just trying to get a handle

3 on what the minority is. Is it 1 percent of the tests

4 of this kind of equipment, 5 percent, 20 percent?

5 DR. SACHS: This is Harvey, and I think that

6 asking that snapshot question of what the percentage is

7 today is not as helpful as thinking about trends in the

8 industry toward greater precision, greater complexity

9 of the products that we're starting to see, even from

10 my remote view, a lot more modulating compressors,

11 variable speed fans on the air handlers and on the

12 condensers we're seeing in order to get better

13 performance and evolution towards smarter and more

14 complicated products.

15 And if I look at some offshore markets, you

16 would get the idea that a hundred percent of the

17 products, or nearly so, have modulated compressors in

18 some commercial classes. So I think we're trying to

19 set up a system that's going to work for the next

20 decade or two --

21 MR. EISNER: I would disagree, but are we

22 setting up a system that DOE will not have the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

97

1 resources to handle in the direction we're -- the way

2 we're going?

3 DR. SACHS: The -- this is a much larger

4 question, which some people have even framed as the

5 future of standards, and it's not our place. There are

6 two things I will say. We will support, in the

7 congressional process, in the appropriations process,

8 the -- get -- trying to get the appropriate resources

9 for this part of DOE's activities so it can be done

10 fairly. And we also are following with great eagerness

11 other efforts to characterize equipments that are

12 underway in other venues. So it's --

13 MR. EISNER: But in terms of setting up a

14 future program, can you set up a future program that is

15 dependent on Congress providing additional resources?

16 DR. SACHS: We're -- all of this is part of

17 the larger policy framework we're operating in, and

18 it's no secret that all of us would like to get an

19 environment that enables people to comply and innovate.

20 MR. EISNER: And with technology constantly

21 improving, are there ways DOE could monitor a test

22 remotely through videoconferencing techniques?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

98

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Can we check out this process

2 for a second?

3 MS. MEYERS: So, Ashley, this is Karen. My

4 question to that -- okay. So let's say the laboratory

5 does not request the additional information.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah, I haven't gotten to

7 that bullet yet.

8 MR. KLEISS: Can we preface that section as

9 spot-check?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh. Sure. Good?

11 MS. MEYERS: So I'm just still struggling

12 with the inefficiency of this process versus notifying

13 the manufacturer when you are going to spot-check a

14 commercial unit. This is not a residential unit.

15 These are highly complex units that are typically --

16 are ordered based upon a specifying engineer's

17 requirements.

18 So I'm trying to understand what the issue is

19 from DOE's perspective of not notifying the

20 manufacturer when you are going to spot-check one of

21 these units, given the complexity of them, and allow

22 them to, at the very least, video witness the test.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

99

1 I'm struggling with why this is such an issue

2 for the Department when this is not a residential unit,

3 it's not a plug-in unit. It even requires typically,

4 in most states, special licenses to even be able to

5 install. Many cases, it requires a manufacturer setup.

6 And yet, it seems to me that DOE is ignoring

7 these -- some very -- some of these are safety issues.

8 And I'm struggling with trying to understand why you

9 will not allow a manufacturer to be notified and at

10 least video witness a spot-check of one of these highly

11 complex units.

12 MR. KLEISS: Jeff Kleiss, Lochinvar. You'd -

13 - Ashley, you'd said that -- I think it was Ashley --

14 that you tested 800 units last year doing spot-checks.

15 Of those 800, can you tell us how many -- what

16 percentage actually failed? That might help us --

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: I have no idea off the top of

18 my head.

19 MR. KLEISS: -- wrap our heads around the

20 efficiency or inefficiency of the process.

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: It's really low. It's very

22 low.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

100

1 MR. STANONIK: Well -- Frank Stanonik, AHRI.

2 Jeff, I think the bigger question is how many of those

3 were commercial products?

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Enough to be relevant --

5 MR. STANONIK: The point -- okay, but --

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- to the discussion.

7 MR. STANONIK: But -- I mean, but the point

8 is, you know, if we're talking about residential

9 products where, you know, again, now we're talking

10 about things built in the millions of units per year,

11 where you can go anywhere and grab one, it's a whole

12 different circumstance.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: We're not just talking -- I

14 don't know what the percentage is off the top of my

15 head, but there was enough across the spectrum.

16 MALE SPEAKER: But it wasn't 800.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: It was not all --

18 MS. MEYERS: It seems like if DOE is going to

19 make public the results of any type of testing, they

20 would make public the fact that they're going to do the

21 test before the results are known. I mean, why can I

22 not make -- this, to me, should be public -- you make
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

101

1 the results public afterwards. Why can't you let me

2 know beforehand? I just cannot --

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: We do not -- we have not made

4 any results public yet.

5 MS. MEYERS: Well --

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: And you seemingly don't want

7 us to.

8 MS. MEYERS: Well, I thought you said they

9 were going to be.

10 MR. EISNER: But there's a whole process they

11 were talking about that you would go through before

12 they would make a decision to make it public --

13 MS. MEYERS: I mean, if --

14 MR. EISNER: -- you would have a chance.

15 MS. MEYERS: If I could maybe get an answer

16 to what the Department's concerns are regarding

17 allowing a manufacturer to witness a test, maybe we

18 could then address those concerns. But it's so --

19 MS. BARHYDT: So, Karen, I have a question.

20 When you say to witness the test, is this a viewing,

21 literally witness, or is this an interactive process

22 that you're envisioning?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

102

1 MS. MEYERS: Well, one would think if

2 something is being done wrong, we'd be able to point

3 that out. I mean, why --

4 MS. BARHYDT: Does wrong mean not in

5 accordance with the test procedure, or just -- or does

6 wrong mean not the way you would have done it yourself?

7 MS. MEYERS: It means two things: not in

8 accordance with the manufacturer's instructions.

9 MS. BARHYDT: Okay.

10 MS. MEYERS: And not in accordance with the

11 test procedure.

12 MS. BARHYDT: And not in accordance with the

13 manufacturer's instructions being something that is

14 published as opposed to the person who's watching?

15 MS. MEYERS: The

16 MS. BARHYDT: I'm just -- I'm literally --

17 MS. MEYERS: It --

18 MS. BARHYDT: -- trying to make sure --

19 MS. MEYERS: The manufacturer's --

20 MS. BARHYDT: -- that we're all on the same

21 page.

22 MS. MEYERS: -- installation and operating
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

103

1 instructions are shipped with the unit.

2 MS. BARHYDT: Okay.

3 MS. MEYERS: Or they're available online.

4 They're available both ways. We make them available

5 both ways.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: But I will say right now, in

7 the AHRI program, we have the ability through what our

8 -- how we list those units with them in what's called a

9 note section to give them specific instructions on how

10 to set up the AHRI test for our unit. Those

11 instructions right now are not published in the public

12 environment, because they have nothing to do with how a

13 building owner actually uses our equipment, partly

14 because the test standard has nothing to do with how an

15 actual unit is used.

16 So, you know, that -- I mean, that's kind of

17 where we're at. So -- but I understand, through these

18 many public workshops, that we would have to somehow

19 make those now in our IOMs, literally, a section that

20 says, "Mr. Building Owner, ignore this part. This is

21 all about how DOE's going to use it for setting up an

22 AHRI test."
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

104

1 MR. STANONIK: But --

2 MS. HOOTMAN: They'll love that.

3 MR. STANONIK: But the -- okay. But there's

4 a distinction here that was made, and I don't think

5 we've all appreciated. Okay? We really have two

6 issues. One of them is the manufacturer needs some

7 assurance the equipment was set up correctly. You

8 haven't taken data point one yet. Okay? Before that

9 happens, the manufacturer has to be comfortable or have

10 the knowledge the unit's been set up properly. Okay?

11 If we get past that point, okay, my own

12 theory here, not -- and I'll probably get corrected,

13 but my idea would be that if we could acknowledge some

14 way that the manufacturer has some ability to get some

15 confirmation that it's been set up properly, then the

16 issue of, in fact, running the test and perhaps getting

17 anomalous results or whatever, I would say that could -

18 - that can be resolved by reviewing the data.

19 Now, you might -- again, certain products,

20 you'll still probably want to be there. Okay? But for

21 a whole larger category of products, if the

22 manufacturer's comfortable it's been set up right, then
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

105

1 the question of, okay, you get the results and

2 something just doesn't look right can, in many cases,

3 be discerned by looking at the data, and you can point

4 out that either something was measuring inaccurately

5 or, in some cases, you could say, "Oh, wait a minute.

6 Something was off on this particular unit." You know,

7 as an example, I'll just use a water heater. Well,

8 wait a minute, you know, I mean, look at the baffles,

9 because that number -- that -- you know, that CO2

10 number just can't be, or something like that.

11 But I think -- I think there should be

12 certainly more flexibility in giving the manufacturer

13 the opportunity to confirm this thing's set up right.

14 MR. STEM: This is Mike with Intertek again,

15 and I believe that onus falls back on the test labs.

16 We -- it's going to be our responsibility to provide

17 ample documentation, photos, video, redundant

18 instrumentation, whatever means necessary to be able

19 to, with empirical data, support the results, and, you

20 know, if we're not able to do that, then, you know, I

21 think you have the right to question that, and we have

22 to prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt, so
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

106

1 MR. EISNER: Could we take a break at this

2 time? I want to talk to a couple people about some of

3 the concerns that are being raised. Ten minutes?

4 (Off the record.)

5 MR. EISNER: All right. Thank you all for

6 your patience. Well, I had some offline discussions.

7 I'm going to start penalizing everybody who keeps

8 talking.

9 MALE SPEAKER: Hi, Neil.

10 MR. EISNER: All right. You guys will each

11 pay for one test -- give the DOE one free test now when

12 they ask for it. All right. Ashley's added to the

13 screen up here, and I asked her to explain what she's

14 added.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: So based on the discussions,

16 based on some of DOE's initial positions, I kind of

17 came up with a process for discussion. So the first

18 would be -- this is for single unit spot-checks only,

19 verification. DOE selects a single unit for test. We

20 select it from retail, or we contact you.

21 We would then test at a third-party lab or at

22 the manufacturer's lab, depending on the category,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

107

1 without DOE or the manufacturer on-site. And then

2 there's unless -- if the model is specifically required

3 to be only installed by a factory-trained installer,

4 then we would talk about DOE and the -- then the DOE

5 and the manufacturer would be on-site.

6 The laboratory may request from the

7 Department additional information on test setup,

8 installation, or testing instructions as they feel

9 necessary. If the request is -- if the lab requests

10 this, DOE will immediately contact the manufacturer.

11 DOE, the manufacturer, and the lab will have

12 a conversation on the phone to discuss any additional

13 details of the testing, and additional test

14 instructions could be given at that time that were

15 agreed upon by the Department and the manufacturer. So

16 we both have to agree.

17 If a unit falls outside the tolerance --

18 that's a single unit compared to the rated value

19 evaluated per the tolerances above, DOE will just

20 initiate a discussion with the manufacturer. At that

21 time, we will show all test setup, the pictures, the

22 test data that was had, the conditions, any of the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

108

1 notes. Everything we have will be turned over to you.

2 You may present any and all claims at this

3 time. If there's an additional testing issue, if

4 there's a result issue, if there's a manufacturing

5 issue, you can present it all. There's no

6 predetermined outcome, repercussions, or anything at

7 this point.

8 We may initiate a discussion about if

9 retesting needs to occur as well as if we both need to

10 be present at that time. Thoughts?

11 MR. SMITH: Hello. This is Judd Smith from

12 CSA. Bullet point -- on bullet point number 4, these

13 are templates that are online already at the DOE,

14 right? Can the manufacturers have input into those

15 templates?

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: Absolutely. They're public.

17 MR. SMITH: Right. So they can have input to

18 that. So when we do give them the report, they have

19 what they want?

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Absolutely. If there is

21 something missing from those templates that they'd like

22 to see -- and I'm not sure if they're all online right
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

109

1 now, but I will double-check that and make sure they

2 are if they are not.

3 But, yeah, absolutely. Send us feedback,

4 send us -- if there's not enough pictures. We've

5 specifically asked for certain types of documentation

6 from the labs. I think many of the labs will say it's

7 more documentation than they're -- typically provide

8 for most of the tests they run. At least, we get a lot

9 of complaints about it.

10 MR. SMITH: I like it, though.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

12 MR. EISNER: By the way, just a reminder to

13 everybody, they're having trouble with the recordings.

14 Remember to turn your mic on. Remember to keep it

15 close to you when you're talking.

16 Any other thoughts? Yes?

17 MR. STANONIK: Ashley, one other thing that

18 came out of the discussion that I think I'm going to

19 put out here, and, again, at the risk of being

20 corrected, is that -- let's see. It would probably be

21 -- yeah, let's say it's the third bullet point. I

22 would suggest that if the model is listed in a VICP --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

110

1 or in a program, okay, that the test lab should check

2 if there are any special installation notes. And I'm

3 not sure what we call that, Jill, but

4 MR. WHITWELL: An operation.

5 MR. STANONIK: Pardon me?

6 MR. WHITWELL: Installation --

7 FEMALE SPEAKER: And operation.

8 MR. STANONIK: That are on record with the

9 program.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Could DOE not be the one to

11 check with you?

12 MR. STANONIK: Sure. Yeah. I mean, yeah.

13 Yeah. I -- yeah, that's fine. My point would be that

14 someone -- that, again, listening to what Jill was

15 saying before, I mean, we do have those notes about,

16 wait a minute, you know, when you have this model, you

17 need to do this or that or whatever, and it's not part

18 of the installation instructions, but it is critical to

19 a proper setup.

20 FEMALE SPEAKER: Test setup.

21 MR. STANONIK: Yeah, test setup.

22 MR. KOJAK: This --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

111

1 MR. STANONIK: Test setup. Right.

2 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL. If

3 the third-party test lab that the DOE is commissioning

4 to do the test is not the AHRI program owner for small

5 and large unitary, do they have access to those notes?

6 MR. STANONIK: That's what I'm saying is

7 that, you know, whoever it is, whether it's the third

8 party or DOE, if DOE asks for it, yeah, we would say,

9 "Okay. Wait a minute. For" -- again, we'd go back and

10 check and say, "For this model, yeah. Here's

11 additional information regarding the proper setup for

12 testing."

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Is there a reason that

14 information can't be given to DOE as part of the

15 certification process?

16 MR. STANONIK: Oh, as part of the

17 certification process?

18 MS. HOOTMAN: I'd really like one upload of

19 files.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: I get that part.

21 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay? So whether I upload a

22 file with a lot of detailed information about how to
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

112

1 set it up, run it for a test setup, whether that goes

2 to my VICP and they pass it to you, I really don't care

3 how that circle goes. But I only want the information

4 in one place, because of the errors that happen when

5 you try to transpose it to other places.

6 So our literature process is kind of outside

7 of all of that, because it has to do with what our

8 customers actually want. I would like to try to keep

9 it out of the literature process and keep it in one

10 upload. Whether that -- like I said, whether that gets

11 passed to one or the other through a database, I'm okay

12 with.

13 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. I

14 would -- I would propose that if these specific units

15 are a member of the VICP, that test -- the Department

16 not do testing, but just request the current test

17 report from the VICP, whoever that is, and do a

18 document --

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: So I think that's later,

20 right? We're trying to come up -- I mean, to the extent

21 we get to a verification program where we all agree,

22 which I think is on the table and is a goal of the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

113

1 Department, to get to a verification program that we

2 find out we can work together, utilize, et cetera.

3 But this is, okay, in absence of that, and

4 for those that don't participate, what do we do? So it

5 seems like I can say -- I can ask for the information,

6 or a manufacturer can submit additional details as part

7 of the cert process, but there has to be a process for

8 those that are not an AHRI member.

9 MR. EISNER: Stephen Schaefer wanted to have

10 a -- submit a comment.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sure.

12 MR. SCHAEFER: Yes. I had a question. When

13 we're going through the certification process and

14 everything with the third party, how are we sure that

15 they have actual experience with this particular test.

16 What we've had going with one or another lab,

17 sometimes there's a learning curve of how to actually

18 set up the test. That's why we'd like to be present,

19 especially if they're asking for help at the offset.

20 It'd definitely help on the speed and accuracy of

21 setting up the test if somebody could be there just to

22 answer questions.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

114

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Up to you. How do you show

2 you have competency in running a test first?

3 MR. KOJAK: For UL, we are ISO 17025

4 accredited to conduct those tests, where we have

5 outside auditors that come to our lab to witness the

6 testing and to verify that the setups and our training

7 and our documentation for the equipment used, the

8 procedure for the testing, the standards, everything is

9 up to the standard to accredit us, you know, for the

10 ISO 17025 accreditation for the testing.

11 MR. KLEISS: Jeff Kleiss, Lochinvar. I have

12 a suggestion related to what's now I think the fourth

13 bullet, and because they're -- that's putting the --

14 seeking out any special instructions for conducting

15 setting up the unit to conduct the test. That's at the

16 discretion of the laboratory technician. And this also

17 might address what Jill was bringing out up about

18 wanting to send the documentation one time and making

19 sure the right information is put out there.

20 Could manufacturers, when they submit the

21 ratings of the product on the DOE template, in a --

22 provide additional information as far as special test
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

115

1 setup instructions, and if we need to on that template,

2 say, you know, Test Instructions 1, and then apply that

3 to whatever set of products; Test Instructions 2, and

4 apply that to the other set of products? That would

5 then automatically be provided to the test lab, and you

6 don't have to rely on the judgment of a technician --

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Absolutely.

8 MR. KLEISS: -- as far as assessing that.

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: My additional -- sorry.

10 MR. JOHNSON: Ashley --

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: I'm trying to capture it

12 correctly here. I'm not -- anyway, I'm getting there.

13 MR. JOHNSON: Ashley, just a quick

14 clarification.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh.

16 MR. JOHNSON: Tom Johnson with Daikin McQuay.

17 In the second bullet, the model is specifically

18 required to be installed?

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: Set up.

20 MR. JOHNSON: Is that the right word?

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Set up.

22 MR. JOHNSON: Set up. It's either start up,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

116

1 commissioned, or set up.

2 MR. STARR: I think startup is the correct

3 word.

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: If the model is specifically

5 required to be installed by a commissioned whatever?

6 MR. STARR: I think startup's the right word,

7 because commissioned means something else.

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

9 MR. CYMBALSKY: So is there a length of time

10 for that startup? Are you saying that the guy stays

11 there for the whole test or just for the what I call

12 setup?

13 MR. SUTPHEN: I have -- the startup's usually

14 -- that's indicated in the manufacturer's things,

15 whether it needs to be started up by a factory

16 representative. That's usually what that means.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right. So say it is required

18 to be --

19 MALE SPEAKER: Turning the key?

20 MR. SUTPHEN: Well, there's a lot more than

21 turning it, but, yeah. Making sure the stuff -- yeah.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: My additional information --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

117

1 MS. HOOTMAN: John, this is Jill. I can see

2 in the future where they would have to stay for, and

3 that would be IER calculations, and specifically when

4 you're talking about variable-speed equipment, we're

5 going to have to be specifically down to a certain

6 hertz being dialed in, and so they would have to stay

7 to see each one of those four setups be done and that

8 you're getting the equipment dialed in to the correct

9 hertz in order to get that.

10 MR. CYMBALSKY: That's what I want to get to.

11 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah.

12 MR. CYMBALSKY: That's exactly right here.

13 MR. DOPPEL: This is Paul Doppel with

14 Mitsubishi. Ashley, if under that second bullet, if

15 you could put another sub-bullets that says if VRF --

16 for VRF systems, follow procedures in the 10 CFR,

17 because we already have authorization to have

18 manufacturer present.

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: Does that work?

20 MR. DOPPEL: Thank you.

21 MS. MEYERS: This is Karen with Rheem. I'd

22 also like to throw out if a test is conducted without a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

118

1 manufacturer representative on-site, then the tolerance

2 should be increased to 10 percent.

3 MS. BARHYDT: Why? Nonstarter for DOE.

4 MS. MEYERS: Because they will not be done

5 correctly.

6 MS. BARHYDT: That's what the --

7 MS. MEYERS: We have -- well, let me -- and

8 let me tell you why I say this. We've been doing this

9 in the AHRI program for over ten years. It's -- these

10 tests are very, very complex. And even with us there,

11 the majority of the time, there are issues. So there

12 is -- I have -- there is no way you're not going to

13 have issues with this. I mean, it's -- we've proven

14 that. It cannot be done.

15 And so I'm not going to sign up for a program

16 where the manufacturer cannot -- on a commercial piece

17 of equipment -- this is what we're talking about. This

18 is not, you know, residential equipment. It's very

19 complex without being present, because it's going to be

20 done incorrectly. We have data that shows that these -

21 - that these are very complicated tests.

22 MS. BARHYDT: So one of the things you just
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

119

1 said was that even if you're present, they can't do the

2 test, right?

3 MS. HOOTMAN: We're having to show them how

4 to do it, yes. They've attached ductwork that's wrong.

5 They've attached thermocouples wrong. They've attached

6 ductwork that has caused airflow feedback. I mean, I

7 can go on and on and on. And I was part of the public

8 record showing some of that. We are having to monitor

9 in the unitary large program -- I'm part of the

10 certification committee, the compliance committee, and

11 we're having to monitor that many.

12 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. So the way this would

13 work -- the way Ashley has it written up there, they

14 would take lots of photographs. I would assume that

15 the photographs would show if they connected the

16 ductwork in the wrong way.

17 MS. HOOTMAN: If they can physically get to

18 that. We are talking about units that are very large,

19 and so getting a photograph of some of this gets hard,

20 because we are now to the walls of the test cell.

21 MS. BARHYDT: So Karen had also suggested

22 video. Are you saying that video won't work either?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

120

1 FEMALE SPEAKER: (Inaudible) a compromise.

2 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, it's a compromise. I

3 might be able to be there.

4 MR. STARR: I have a suggestion. You know, I

5 don't like to necessarily suggest this, but it may be a

6 question of the testing laboratories and their ability

7 to handle that. Perhaps maybe requiring a laboratory

8 to have a certain ISO standard in order to -- in other

9 words, somebody needs to --

10 MS. HOOTMAN: We do that.

11 MS. BARHYDT: We already do.

12 MR. STARR: Oh, okay.

13 MS. HOOTMAN: We already do.

14 MR. STARR: Well, does UL have a problem? Is

15 what she talking happening with UL Laboratories? I

16 mean that's what I'm trying to understand. Are we

17 talking about one laboratory that it got tested at, or

18 is this just every time? Because Michael here says

19 that they have no problem doing it. I hear it a couple

20 times. And then I hear other people saying, no, we

21 can't really test that equipment. I'm trying to figure

22 out is it there are five labs; four can do it right,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

121

1 and only one can't?

2 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL. I

3 would say over 90 percent of all of the testing that UL

4 does is RND testing for the major OEM manufacturers,

5 and not -- it's very rare that we have engineers on

6 site to witness the install, because the time that we

7 invest in the installation process is a lot longer than

8 I think some of the other third-party labs take,

9 because of -- since we do so much R&D testing, we add

10 so much extra instrumentation over and above the

11 standard, and asked to do things outside of the

12 standard.

13 MS. HOOTMAN: We've been doing that here.

14 And we've been doing it to the standard.

15 MR. KOJAK: Yeah, but it's -- I think -- what

16 it sounds like to me what you guys keep bring up is

17 that corners are being cut in the AHRI program for

18 volume reasons for the speed of getting things in and

19 out of their test chambers. You know that's some of

20 the issues that we don't see at UL because we are not

21 being required to test high volumes of units at a set

22 price.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

122

1 MS. HOOTMAN: No. I'm not saying that at

2 all. I'm not saying that the corners are being cut.

3 MR. KOJAK: Well, if you are saying that

4 thermal couples weren't connected properly, that is a

5 basic thing that every laboratory should know how to

6 do. Building duct work is a basic function that every

7 laboratory should know how to do.

8 MS. MEYERS: How do you connect that on

9 residential versus how you do it on -- you know, a 60-

10 ton piece of equipment is not necessarily the same way.

11 And, if the technician is not versed in that, it could

12 become an issue.

13 FEMALE SPEAKER: And they do it --

14 MS. HOOTMAN: And they do it infrequently.

15 So it's then the next technician, and then the next

16 technician.

17 MR. STARR: Well it's --

18 MS. HOOTMAN: A 60-ton piece of equipment is

19 probably only tested -- right now under Unitary Large -

20 - I'm just using rough numbers -- I think there is

21 around 150 to 200 check tests done. On those larger --

22 physically larger -- and they are literally two truck
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

123

1 loads, the size of this room, taller than this room.

2 You know there's probably only a few of those being

3 done out of that 150 to 200; maybe 10, maybe 15 of

4 those are being done.

5 They cost $100,000. They are expensive. You

6 won't be buying them off the street. In fact, in order

7 to get one of those with AHRI static, you will have to

8 come to me to get that, because it will not be able to

9 be bought off the street, to get the static capability

10 for an AHRI test.

11 MR. KOJAK: I can only speak about what we

12 do. We can only test up to a 30-ton commercial at our

13 facilities.

14 MS. HOFFMAN: That's -- you see, I thought

15 you - - that's when I said I don't think you have the

16 capability to actually do this. There is only one test

17 lab independently that can test this product.

18 MR. KOJAK: Yeah. Well, it sounds like there

19 -- that, you know, there could be some training issues

20 then if that's a repeated issue of things not being

21 done properly with a certain size unit over and over

22 again.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

124

1 MR. STEM: This is Mike Stem with Intertek.

2 And I think the underlying issue is every room is

3 designed for specific capabilities, specific features,

4 not necessarily to cover every single type of

5 configuration for commercial equipment. So, you know,

6 if you have a different configuration, an L-shaped coil

7 that's, you know, a horizontal discharge trying to

8 going in an over/under room, that's an issue. But, to

9 Karen's point about increasing a tolerance, if duct

10 work is not connected right, if things are not done in

11 accordance to the standard, again that -- you don't

12 need a tolerance because that's an invalid test. It

13 doesn't count anyway.

14 MR. EISNER: Stephen Schaefer has a question

15 or a comment.

16 MR. SCHAEFER: Yes. We've gone through

17 testing at numerous different labs, whether it be

18 Intertek or UL, and it does go from technician to

19 technician. And, on the last five years, we have been,

20 through the AHRI program, have been able to be there

21 for witness testing, to assist with any questions that

22 might come up. And there have been questions with our
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

125

1 ice machine. And we see also with commercial

2 refrigerators, this is not just a simple set-up where

3 you plug the unit in. There's a loading test that you

4 have to have. There's the opening of the doors. So

5 we'd just like to make sure that, if these technicians

6 do not do this on a daily basis, those questions that

7 will be there; we'd like to be there to help. That's

8 the main thing is to help answer questions for that

9 set-up.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: I guess my perspective of

11 this is, if the lab has questions, this provides a

12 process to allow the lab to ask the Department, along

13 with the manufacturer, all three on the phone at the

14 same time, those questions. If they need to ask you

15 questions while they are testing, they need to contact

16 DOE. Is there an issue there that this doesn't

17 alleviate?

18 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay. Let's say they did put

19 the duct work on wrong; how will they know they put the

20 duct work on wrong?

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right. I mean, that's an

22 aside; right? I mean you would need to see pictures,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

126

1 you would need to see a video, you would need to see

2 that it was done wrong. You can make any claim you

3 want and we can invalidate the test. If they did it

4 wrong, they did it wrong. Mike's absolutely right. If

5 they did something wrong, not in accordance with the

6 test procedure, it's an invalid test off the table.

7 It's not a tolerance thing at that point. It's just

8 not a valid test.

9 MS. HOFFMAN: I wonder even with electronic

10 means, videos, pictures, et cetera, if we will get

11 enough information without being there to see it? I

12 don't know.

13 MR. EISNER: Okay.

14 MR. MYERS: Yeah. This is Frank Myers, PVI

15 Industries. The -- I'll wait -- this is Frank Myers,

16 PVI Industries. The idea that if the lab needs

17 information, then they'll ask, and that makes

18 everything okay; we are concerned that a good lab, a

19 quality lab, an ISO 17025 certified lab, doesn't have

20 the skill set. They don't run the tests often enough.

21 These are huge, complex pieces of equipment that it

22 sounds simple; they just set up and run it according to
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

127

1 the test. Anybody can do that. That's not the case.

2 So we are saying they can ask questions. I want to see

3 what they do, because as a number of us have said

4 repeatedly, with people that work with it more

5 frequently that we are there with, we catch things. We

6 see data unfolding before us as it -- that doesn't make

7 sense. What's wrong because the data is unfolding that

8 way? We may want to run a zero test and make sure that

9 the inlet and outlet temperature on a temperature rise,

10 that they are reading in fact zero; there is no

11 temperature rise across it. We have seen cases where

12 there's three degrees, which might make several percent

13 difference in the outcome with the unit not being

14 energized.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: I think -- I mean, the basic

16 OEM position of the Department is that these third17 party labs that are accredited, that have within their

18 scope the ability to run the DOE test procedure, can

19 run the DOE test procedure correctly when provided with

20 the correct information. It sounds to me like you guys

21 are saying that is impossible; that they still cannot.

22 Yet, you are using these labs for your third-party
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

128

1 verification program.

2 MR. EISNER: With Whitman.

3 MALE SPEAKER: And we have the opportunity to

4 witness the test.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: At times. But you already

6 said that sometimes they don't go there.

7 MR. RIVEST: Neil, Mike Rivest. Is it

8 possible maybe to try and break this down between

9 products where this process would be appropriate, and

10 products for which there might have to be a different

11 process?

12 MR. BAUMAN: Can I ask sort of related to

13 that, Mike, is a thing that occurred to me -- it was

14 kind of mentioned earlier -- was manufacturers have

15 concerns that their particular product could be tested,

16 and to make sure this is how you run the test on my

17 product, or basically what your lab procedures should

18 be for running that test. That might be a little bit

19 different manufacture, or there are certain concerns

20 you want to make sure as far as manufacture that the

21 test was set up a certain way. I obviously can't

22 document 100 percent, you know, everything. But if we
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

129

1 are talking about that, you could go back and look at

2 videos or look at pictures of things, could the

3 manufacturers be allowed, maybe not in your

4 installation manual, but provide all the labs with a

5 lab manual for testing my product that says as long as

6 that's within the scope of the test, and you know, and

7 the lab has reviewed it and said, yeah, this matches

8 the ASHRAE test or whatever we have to do, that that's

9 how they would run the test?

10 MR. KLEISS: I think that's covered in the

11 third bullet, second sub-bullet. And I would suggest

12 that with that addition of that second sub-bullet that

13 we could probably remove the previous sub-bullet

14 regarding getting the test instructions from AHRI.

15 MR. EISNER: Let's go back to the suggestion

16 that Mike made. If it is a limited number of pieces of

17 equipment that are going to need attendance at the site

18 and DOE can afford to send people to that limited

19 number of tests, that may be a way to resolve this

20 particular problem. If it's too many tests, too many

21 pieces of equipment, then it wouldn't solve anything.

22 MR. ARMSTRONG: But, I guess from my point of
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

130

1 view; aren't those the same equipment we are talking

2 about that either can't be tested in a third-party lab,

3 in which case we are testing out your site anyway, or

4 have to be installed by a factory-trained, in which

5 case we have agreed to do DOE and manufacture witness

6 testing and BRFs.

7 MS. HOOTMAN: I don't have a requirement on

8 these for factory-trained.

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: So which ones are we talking

10 about? I mean, what are the products we are talking

11 about?

12 MS. HOOTMAN: Everything in Unitary Large,

13 and specifically anything that has variable speed,

14 variable air volume, variable . . .

15 MR. STARR: I would --

16 MS. HOOTMAN: Right. So it could be 65 -- it

17 could be at 65. More likely right now, currently, it's

18 more likely in the upper sizes, but I'm not saying in

19 the future it wouldn't be at 65,000 BTUs to . . .

20 MR. STARR: It seems though, if it doesn't

21 have a factory-required start-up, how is it going to be

22 installed out on the other four million buildings it
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

131

1 gets installed on?

2 MS. HOOTMAN: This is -- in order to get that

3 specific test at that specific static -- the buildings

4 don't care about that AHRI static. They don't care

5 about making sure that the hertz is exactly right.

6 MALE SPEAKER: No. It's test-specific.

7 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. These are test-specific

8 parameters.

9 MR. HUNT: This is Charlie Hunt. I have a

10 question. If it's this crazy a test, where's the

11 procedural corrections? Are we making procedural

12 corrections, because --

13 MS. HOOTMAN: Yes. As we speak, AHRI 340,

14 360 test standard is being changed, but the Department

15 is rather slow in adopting those new changes. So I

16 envision a time where there will be a lag in that.

17 MR. EISNER: So how many tests are we talking

18 about that DOE would have to --

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: One thing to help with that

20 process would be to have DOE involved in that revision

21 process.

22 MR. EISNER: All right. I go back to my
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

132

1 question. What number of tests are we talking about

2 that would have to be an exception to the general rule?

3 MS. MEYERS: Another thing that could help in

4 this, to your point, Ashley, is if DOE would just

5 recognize the VICP Programs, and then we would not be

6 having these issues either.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Well we are still trying to

8 discuss the lab's capabilities that you guys seem to be

9 using as well.

10 MR. SACHS: If I could chime in and think

11 about

12 Neil's question for a second, as I understood

13 it? I see at least three classes of products for which

14 I'm hearing discomfort from manufacturers about not

15 having permission to be there: too big is one category,

16 and certainly Laura has addressed that by saying we are

17 doing it on your site; too complex, which is an area

18 which I think is going to be increasingly common; but

19 the other one is too infrequently tested. This set

20 here includes a number of niche products, which bluntly

21 the production labs, the certification labs, as opposed

22 to the R&D support labs, you don't see very often.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

133

1 And, in those cases, I think the manufacturers

2 legitimately worried that a production oriented lab

3 might miss something in trying to get the product moved

4 through the process efficiently. So those are at least

5 three classes, as a partial response to how many of

6 these things might have manufacturer sensitivities

7 about not being there even on the initial test.

8 MR. EISNER: And does DOE have a sense as to

9 how many tests it would conduct in giving the area of

10 these types of devices?

11 MS. BARHYDT: That varies.

12 MR. EISNER: Well, what would be the maximum?

13 MR. CYMBALSKY: That's all project dependent.

14 MS. BARHYDT: Right.

15 MR. CYMBALSKY: We wouldn't give a number.

16 MR. EISNER: Well, what I'm trying to get at

17 here is, is the number going to be so great that you

18 wouldn't have the resources to go to them? If you are

19 only -- you know you are conducting about 800 tests a

20 year, as I understand it, and that includes commercial

21 and residential, what percentage is going to be

22 commercial; what percentage is going to be the big
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

134

1 equipment when you think of everything else?

2 MS. BARHYDT: It really varies, Neil.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: There is no way to answer

4 that.

5 MR. EISNER: So there could be 800 in any

6 given year? You only do 800 tests; so there wouldn't

7 be 800?

8 MS. BARHYDT: Right.

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: Well there could be 2000

10 tests.

11 MR. EISNER: I'm asking what the maximum

12 could be in a given year.

13 MS. BARHYDT: Right. So the number actually

14 throughout was we tested 800 last year. That was based

15 on the resources last year.

16 MR. EISNER: So if --

17 MS. BARHYDT: If the amount of money goes up,

18 the number of tests go up. The distribution varies

19 dramatically from year to year. Initially, I think the

20 very first year, we didn't test any commercial

21 products. And that number has been going up every year.

22 So it's really very difficult for us to say how many
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

135

1 different units of a commercial product would be tested

2 in a given year.

3 MR. EISNER: We are talking about a limited

4 subset, and I think we are trying to get a handle on

5 resources here in terms of whether it can be addressed

6 by your attendance. And you don't -- is there a way

7 you could limit it so that you do all the testing you

8 have to do, but still be able to go to these?

9 MS. BARHYDT: I think the Department is

10 uncomfortable with saying we are not going to test

11 because we don't have the resources to go. We don't

12 want to put a cap on what our testing capability is

13 based on our ability to be present, when we think that

14 labs ought to be able to do the test. We think that

15 this is only a spot check. This is only the very first

16 test. To limit our ability to conduct these tests just

17 doesn't make any sense.

18 MR. EISNER: I'm not saying limit the number

19 of tests you conduct, but that does raise the other

20 question, which is, do the labs have a limit on the

21 number of tests they can conduct? Does that make

22 sense?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

136

1 MS BARHYDT: I know there are capacity

2 issues.

3 MR. EISNER: Right. Does that -- all I'm

4 trying to get at, and what I'm hearing here is, is

5 there a small number of tests that you would be

6 conducting so small that you'd be able to go? Not that

7 it would limit you in being able to do the testing you

8 want, but if you had to focus resources anywhere, you

9 could focus on that, between laboratory capacity and --

10 MS. BARHYDT: Are we talking across all

11 commercial, or are we talking about limiting it to only

12 certain?

13 MR. EISNER: Well, Harvey threw out, you

14 know, a limit that he saw there. If it limited to

15 those three kinds of equipment, could you cover them by

16 attending, if the company said we have to be there?

17 I'm not trying to put you on a spot with a

18 number, but everything is limiting.

19 MS. BARHYDT: Right. No. So --

20 MR. CYMBALSKY: Do you want me to take it?

21 MS. BARHYDT: Go ahead.

22 MR. CYMBALSKY: Okay.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

137

1 FEMALE SPEAKER: He has the money.

2 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yeah. So it's my -- not

3 really my money -- so it's not about -- it's not just

4 about how much money we have in a budget to test

5 equipment. There's also -- in the Government, there's

6 program direction money, which I don't see. I don't

7 even know how much it is.

8 In the program direction money there are

9 travel restrictions on federal employees, and it's

10 getting worse and worse in some respects. We don't

11 know what that number is from year to year. So it's not

12 like, sure, I have five million dollars to test

13 equipment; and, oh, by the way, you have no travel

14 budget. That doesn't do us any good. So we can't go

15 there physically.

16 So for us to put a number on, you know, how

17 many of these things we can witness a year; we can't.

18 It's impossible. So all I can say is we do the budget

19 in a way that makes sense from year to year. And so,

20 you know -- but I think I want to go back point of our

21 going in position is that these labs are accredited per

22 ISO or whatever standards there are. They are also
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

138

1 being used by this verification program. My

2 understanding was that meant there was some level of

3 trust that these guys could run a test.

4 Now, I know it doesn't work for everything,

5 but that's our going in position is that these guys are

6 good; they can do it, as opposed to, I don't think they

7 can do it. Because if we didn't think they could do

8 it, I would have built that lab that was $16 million

9 dollars in West Virginia and have my own government

10 lab, but I didn't, because we have third-party labs

11 that we thought could do it in the private sector. So

12 that's the direction we went.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. We see where we stand

14 on this. That's --

15 MR. SHEBIK: Excuse me. This is Ron Shebik

16 of Hussman. It seems like -- I'm hearing I believe

17 this was John on the phone, but it sounds like John and

18 Ashley have full confidence in these third-party labs

19 and their ability to do the test based on their

20 accreditations. I'm just curious, if some of the

21 manufacturers have issue or they feel more comfortable

22 with them being present, at least to witness how the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

139

1 set-up is being done; what is DOE's opposition? I

2 mean, do you feel -- I mean, if you have confidence in

3 the third-party labs, their ability to run a test,

4 their accreditation -- I mean, do you feel that the

5 third-party lab would be influenced by the manufacturer

6 being there?

7 MALE SPEAKER: Mmm-hmm.

8 MR. SHEBIK: I mean it seemed like if the

9 same time --

10 MS. BARHYDT: I think the manufacturers

11 wouldn't want to be there, if they didn't think that

12 they were going to influence that test.

13 MR. SHEBIK: I'm sorry. Was that Ashley?

14 MS. BARHYDT: I mean, we want it done

15 properly too.

16 MR. SHEBIK: Right.

17 MS. BARHYDT: You want to be there because

18 you want to have input into the test.

19 MR. SHEBIK: It's not -- I'm sorry --

20 MR. KLEISS: The word influence --

21 FEMALE SPEAKER: That it's read properly.

22 FEMALE SPEAKER: It's a $100,000 unit.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

140

1 MR. KLEISS: The word influence a test --

2 MR. SHEBIK: Not necessarily have the input

3 in the test, but just --

4 MR. KLEISS: -- does not necessarily mean to

5 defeat the intention of the test.

6 MS. BARHYDT: No. And did not intend that.

7 MR. KLEISS: Right. Okay.

8 MR. SHEBIK: Yeah. I must -- I can't speak

9 for everybody, but I don't think it's necessarily to

10 have an influence on a test; it's reassurance that the

11 test is being done properly, so if there is something

12 at the end, the test result, there is a problem, at

13 least you can say, okay, my person was there. He saw

14 how it was set up. Do we have a problem, or do we not

15 have a problem? Whereas, if no one is there, every time

16 DOE is going to have -- or let's say every time you

17 come back to the manufacturer and say, hey, we have an

18 issue with the test result, obviously the manufacturer

19 is going to say, well, there's no credibility because

20 we weren't there.

21 So, by having the manufacturer there, it

22 would seems like it would save time for everybody.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

141

1 MS. BARHYDT: So I can also tell you from

2 experience that we have on a few occasions had the

3 manufacturer there, and even if the manufacturer is

4 there, it does not necessarily mean that the

5 manufacturer will agree that the test was done entirely

6 correctly. So it doesn't actually necessarily save

7 time in the long run.

8 But I think the -- my concern listening to

9 this is that industry has no confidence in the third10 party labs to be able to do the test properly. And I

11 have to say that gives me a great deal of discomfort

12 with the idea of having an industry program do the

13 testing either. It's just, if the lab can't test, then

14 lab has a problem. It shouldn't -- the manufacturer

15 should not have to be there to make sure they connect

16 duct work right; that they connect thermal couples

17 right. I can tell you that the Department has very

18 exacting standards of what we expect of the lab. If

19 the lab gives us a test report and we look at the

20 pictures and we say, you didn't connect the duct work

21 right; we are going to make the lab do it again.

22 That's not an issue of everybody needed to be present.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

142

1 That's an issue of the lab didn't do it right and we

2 are going to make the lab do it over. And we can sit

3 down and we can discuss with you and you can say we

4 think they did this, this and this wrong, and if they

5 did it wrong, they are going to do it over. It's not -

6 - this isn't a "we are going to cram this test down

7 your throat" kind of an issue. This is an initial spot

8 check, just a scan of what's going on in the industry,

9 the general performance. This is just the very tip of

10 the iceberg.

11 MR. EISNER: Can I ask the testing people w

12 ho are here to address the concern about whether they

13 can be influenced unduly by a company's presence at the

14 lab?

15 FEMALE SPEAKER: What's the word?

16 MR. EISNER: No. You used influence, but you

17 know there can be a positive influence. They were

18 going about to connect something wrong.

19 FEMALE SPEAKER: Right.

20 MR. EISNER: I'm saying improperly influence.

21 MALE SPEAKER: Mike?

22 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL. I
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

143

1 would say our lab staff would not be influenced by the

2 manufacturers being present, because they are well

3 versed of what they can and cannot do per the

4 standards. And if they were asked to do anything

5 outside of what the standard calls out for, we would

6 say, no. Because, you know, for one, they are not our

7 customer. Our customer would be the DOE, and they

8 would be requesting us to do it per the standard only

9 and not to what the manufacturer is asking us to skew

10 from the standard.

11 MR. EISNER: Does anybody else want to speak

12 on that?

13 MR. SMITH: Yeah. Judd Smith from CSA.

14 There is also a possibility of interpretation errors.

15 The standards aren't always --

16 MR. EISNER: Turn your microphone up.

17 MR. SMITH: We've had problems with

18 interpretation errors between manufacturer, between the

19 lab and between DOE; so that discussion can go on for

20 hours.

21 MR. EISNER: Let me ask another question. Is

22 there room for compromise with the following? The
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

144

1 laboratory decides how they are going to do it, how

2 they are going to install it. They then make a record

3 of every change they made at the request of the company

4 representative who was there. And why not?

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: This is Ashley from DOE. I

6 mean to his point, there are interpretations being made

7 of the test procedure right now that DOE would not

8 agree with. And I want to -- just as Karen wants to

9 make sure it's a valid test with her equipment and her

10 set-up, I want to make sure it's a valid test with my

11 test procedure.

12 MR. EISNER: No, but I'm saying --

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: So that being said, I think

14 there needs to be some level of confidence on both

15 parties. I'm willing not to be there for the

16 interpretations of my test procedure, but I get the

17 right to say you did it wrong, retest, as do you in

18 this process. I don't need to be there to look at

19 pictures, look at a video, look at results; something

20 is going on. I get to sit down and say let's have this

21 conversation. If we get to a point where a lab, like

22 when Mike said variable speed equipment, I need
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

145

1 additional instruction. That's when he would say,

2 Ashley, I need additional instruction from the

3 manufacturer. At that point, I would say, "Hey, Joe.

4 We have an issue. We are trying to test your variable

5 speed unit. We can't do it. The lab can't do it."

6 And if you tell me, Ashley, I can't physically write

7 these instructions on the phone, we need to have a

8 conversation about going down there. We will do that,

9 before testing.

10 But at the same time, there's no point in

11 every single model I spot-check, that both of us need

12 to be on site just to have confidence that an initial

13 test was done correctly. When we set up procedures

14 that basically have no repercussion but allow you to

15 contest exactly what you are doing now in your industry

16 program.

17 MR. EISNER: What I'm hearing is --

18 FEMALE SPEAKER: You have the option.

19 MR. EISNER: What I'm hearing is I'm hearing

20 concern on both sides --

21 FEMALE SPEAKER: (Inaudible).

22 MR. EISNER: Can I speak? I'm hearing
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

146

1 concerns on both sides. I understand the confidence

2 you had that what you write can be done right. I'm

3 hearing on the other side that they have concerns that

4 people won't understand the complex equipment. You are

5 saying that the laboratories can say I know how to test

6 it. They are questioning whether the laboratory really

7 is going to know what questions to ask without them

8 being present saying you are doing this wrong. So I'm

9 saying you keep a record of what was changed as a

10 result of the company's presence there. Perhaps the

11 test doesn't go until you approve those changes.

12 That's another way we could look at it. I don't know

13 what this is going to mean in terms of timing and cost,

14 but I'm hearing both sides with problems, and we are

15 trying to get a solution to those problems.

16 MR. STARR: I have a thought. I went to a

17 100- ton unit testing and we had a lot of problems.

18 It's a very big unit to test, and it was kind of -- I

19 don't know if they test that big anymore, but it was

20 part of a specification for jobs that they test the

21 performance of the air handler at design.

22 But one of the things we did is we tested it,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

147

1 and when we started having problems or it seemed like

2 the results were coming out, we would usually call the

3 manufacturer. The manufacturer happened to be there,

4 but if you did a test and it looked like there were

5 problems with it, would there be the option to keep

6 that equipment in the factory and have the manufacturer

7 then come out? It'd have to be done within a day or

8 two, but I bet they'd be willing to fly out.

9 MS. BARHYDT: Just jumping back. You said in

10 the factory; do you mean in the laboratory?

11 MR. STARR: Laboratory. Sorry. Sorry.

12 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. I just wondered.

13 MR. STARR: But I mean, in other words, if it

14 looks like things are going sideways with air handling

15 equipment and they are willing to come out and look at

16 it, it keeps you from having to take all the equipment

17 back out of the test laboratory and put another unit

18 in. It saves a whole bunch of time. I don't know if

19 that would be possible, but I think they could be in

20 there in two days, re-run the whole test, and it could

21 be both people witnessing it, if it looks like things

22 are going sideways.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

148

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, to me, that's what --

2 if the laboratory requests additional information

3 because they are having problems, that's part of that

4 process the three of us will discuss.

5 MR. STARR: Well, part of the --

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, to me, just because a

7 unit isn't performing correctly isn't an automatic

8 indication that the test was done wrong. Now, that

9 being said, it's one indicator that something is wrong.

10 One of those components is definitely is the test being

11 done correctly?

12 MR. STARR: Yeah.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: But, yes, I mean, this puts

14 the onus partially on the lab to say I need help. I

15 need help from the Department; whether it's an

16 interpretation issue. I need help from the

17 manufacturer to test their equipment because it's too

18 complex, period. Or, I'm trying to run this unit and I

19 just can't get what I expected.

20 MR. STARR: A lot of times there are

21 subtleties that are happening, and the technician knows

22 it's not right, but he doesn't know what to do.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

149

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sure.

2 MR. STARR: Like, something may be closed or

3 not open or -- you know, and the manufacturer will know

4 what it is right away and they can fix it. But

5 otherwise, he'll just run a test and say it didn't

6 pass, so there's ability to kind of -- I don't know.

7 It's just there are certain things that happen that can

8 be substantial enough that they see it later.

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sure.

10 MR. STARR: And you could, you know, within

11 the same process probably fix it up. It just -- what

12 it does is it cuts out the whole re-bringing the thing

13 back out - - the equipment back out to the test factory

14 or the test -- the testing place. And I don't know. I

15 guess that's more of how they test the -- how long they

16 can keep a piece of equipment in the test lab and all

17 that.

18 Maybe, Mike, you can talk about -- I mean,

19 assuming you run stuff and you have problems with it;

20 what happens when you start to see problems? Do you

21 call them up?

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Mmm-hmm. That's me.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

150

1 MR. KLEISS: I think that what you are

2 talking about though -- this is Jeff -- I think that

3 what you are talking about is covered in the first

4 sentence on the fourth bullet.

5 MR. STARR: Well, the only difference is that

6 it happened right away instead of like a month later.

7 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah, but you call me in an

8 emergency and it's, you know, second shift, and I'm

9 trying to find somebody. My engineer now is halfway

10 across the world in a design center in Asia. I'm not

11 going to be there in a day.

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: I think -- I mean, to me,

13 that's a specific thing. There may be some simple

14 things that you can relay over the phone, and it

15 doesn't require someone being there. And they can be

16 fixed and we can move on. If we have decided that

17 somebody needs to be on site, then we would work with

18 you. I mean, it's not like we are just going to say,

19 oh, you lose your opportunity; go forth. I mean, we'll

20 talk with the lab. We don't want, at the end of the

21 day, to get all the way through this process and say,

22 oh, invalid test; let's retest. That is not our goal.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

151

1 We are trying to put as many checks and balances in

2 this without us being on site for every single spot

3 check. That's not reasonable for the Department.

4 MR. STARR: Okay.

5 FEMALE SPEAKER: And I agree, Ashley, but if

6 you are taking the --

7 MR. SHEBIK: Ron Shebik.

8 FEMALE SPEAKER: Go ahead.

9 MR. SHEBIK: I'm sorry. This is Ron Shebik

10 of Hussman. I just want to address Ashley and also

11 something that Mike Kojak said.

12 You know, Mike is representing UL, and Mike

13 said that DOE is his customer. He's not -- they are

14 not going to be influenced by the manufacturer being

15 there. I'm assuming Intertek will take the same stand.

16 So, with that being said, why can't just -- I mean, we

17 can put this thing to rest; just let the manufacturer

18 have the option, if they want they to be present, let

19 them be present. If they don't want to be present,

20 they don't have to be present. If both labs feel

21 strongly that they are not going to be influenced

22 because DOE is their customer, then so be it. And then
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

152

1 we can move forward with this. I mean, this --

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: I could say the same thing to

3 you, Ron.

4 MR. SHEBIK: I mean, manufacturers have to

5 have -- you have to establish some trust and some

6 confidence in who's testing their product.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: As do you.

8 MR. SHEBIK: I mean, we at Hussman, we test

9 our own products on site. We have our own lab. We

10 test our own products. Now, we are looking at

11 possibilities of going outside and using other labs

12 because of the volume of work we want to get done. And

13 by doing that we'll establish some confidence with

14 other labs. We'll establish some trust with other

15 labs. But I think a lot of people feel confident in

16 either being there witnessing or testing in-house --

17 or, you know, or wherever helps them with their comfort

18 level.

19 So it's like, I guess if UL and Intertek feel

20 that the customer is not going to -- I'm sorry -- the

21 manufacturer is not going to influence what goes on, I

22 guess I'm not seeing what the problem is?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

153

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: I agree.

2 MALE SPEAKER: Ninety percent of the

3 (inaudible) I don't think would say -- well, not to say

4 anything (inaudible).

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: I'm just -- I don't think

6 this is -- I mean -- I'm just going to -- I mean, this

7 is -- I'm not going to say this is a hard line for the

8 Department, that we won't give, but I think you can see

9 by the number of the things we have built into this, by

10 the lack of, you know, repercussions by us having those

11 discussions with you, by us involving you in as much of

12 the process that we are willing to give and give and

13 give. But one hard line potentially for us is that we

14 cannot be on site at that test all the time. And I

15 think you need to give, too.

16 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr at Northwest

17 Energy Efficiency Alliance. I don't like the idea of

18 just one party being at a test. I mean, the basic of a

19 lot of things in construction is third-party. And, you

20 know, there's another subset of people out there, and

21 that's the people that put these equipments on their

22 building and the public in general, and they have an
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

154

1 interest in this matter too. So, you know, just the

2 nature of it, I prefer that things be third-party. If

3 one party can't be there, then I'd prefer no parties.

4 But, you know, we can't just have one party that has

5 the equipment and another party that's not going to be

6 sure of the test procedure. We need to have one, both

7 or none. I'm sorry. We need both or none.

8 MR. HON: This is Charlie Hon, True

9 Manufacturing. I am frustrated because this is a step

10 in a process. This is not public information that

11 would be released. This is not the final say in the

12 project. It has no legal standing as far as jeopardy

13 of losing your listing on your product at this time.

14 For any of those steps, then go further down in the

15 pages and we'll discover the secondary process, of

16 which we do have options to fight. So I don't know

17 what the exposure limit is on industry here other than

18 informational to the Department.

19 MR. STARR: I mean, essentially, aren't we

20 just talking about larger than 20-ton equipment?

21 That's what we are -- 20 and 60 ton -- so over 240,000.

22 So we are talking about two equipment classes I think
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

155

1 is the major concern.

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: No. I mean, you have CRE

3 manufacturers. She was talking about anything over 65.

4 I mean, the reality is, if the test lab has

5 an issue with testing, we are going to contact you.

6 They are going to contact us. We are going to contact

7 you. You are going to know about it. And, if it's

8 determined as part of that process that we need to be

9 on site, we will figure it out. It's not that we are

10 just going to jump and make a determination that it's

11 out of tolerance just because. I mean, this process

12 doesn't allow for that.

13 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff Bauman from

14 National. As Charlie said, this is -- you know this

15 part of it is really not holding anybody to anything in

16 a sense. It's kind of just a preliminary. To me the

17 piece of that -- I don't know if you give it enough --

18 DOE -- or you want to get a little more understanding

19 -- is it an automatic appeals process, or can it be an

20 automatic appeals process? It does include that? I

21 don't think -- I didn't read it that way.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Oh, okay. Well, I can change
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

156

1 it, but if a unit is outside our tolerance, right,

2 we'll have a discussion with you. And if you say

3 there's an issue with set-up, test conditions, test

4 results -- oh, I'm not on the last bullet -- sorry.

5 We're missing a bullet. It may be more

6 (inaudible), but the intent was there.

7 MS. MEYERS: So let's continue talking about

8 process. You fail a spot check. What is the next

9 action from DOE? Do you automatically then go into

10 enforcement testing?

11 MS. BARHYDT: So are you saying that after

12 you have reviewed the results, after re-testing is

13 done, after everything up there has already been

14 completed and at the end of the day you really truly

15 have fallen outside of tolerance?

16 MS. MEYERS: No. I'm saying that, you pull a

17 unit for test and it fails; what is the process today

18 that DOE must go through after a spot check? Today,

19 what do you do?

20 MS. BARHYDT: Today we contact the

21 manufacturer.

22 MS. MEYERS: Yeah. So you -- and how do you
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

157

1 do that?

2 MS. BARHYDT: We email the test results to

3 the manufacturer.

4 MS. MEYERS: And who contacts the

5 manufacturer? What --

6 MS. BARHYDT: I do. My office does.

7 MS. MEYERS: Oh, okay. So the Office of

8 General Counsel contacts the manufacturer saying that

9 you have failed the test.

10 MS. BARHYDT: And, to date, the only time

11 that we've ever done that is when it fell outside of

12 tolerance and below minimum, not outside of the rating.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Standards.

14 MS. MEYERS: So, under this process, would

15 that same -- under this, would that -- do you see that

16 still - - that process being the same?

17 MS. BARHYDT: Except that this already has

18 built in that some certain types of equipment would

19 have the manufacturer on site for testing. I mean,

20 this provides a lot more than what our current process

21 does.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: For manufacturer involvement.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

158

1 MS. BARHYDT: For the manufacturer.

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: This pretty much allows you

3 with us to talk at the test lab. This allows you in

4 certain cases to be on site. This provides a process

5 for you to contest the test, and it provides a process

6 for us to retest if needed.

7 MS. MEYERS: All before you go into

8 enforcement testing?

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes. Yeah. This is

10 verification. Spot check only.

11 MS. MEYERS: And we have to still hold the

12 five percent tolerance of the industry program, which

13 has completely different verification processes --

14 rules?

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's the proposal as

16 written.

17 MS. MEYERS: I just can't agree to it. I'm

18 sorry.

19 MR. EISNER: What would you add to it?

20 MS. MEYERS: Well, you know, again, we are

21 talking about commercial equipment. I'm looking at

22 equipment that's covered by this working group. It is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

159

1 highly complex, the set-up procedures are multiple

2 pages long, and to have to not be able to see how

3 that's being done and have to stay within a five

4 percent tolerance I think is a completely unreasonable

5 request. Well, it --

6 MR. KLEISS: Aren't we agreeing to the

7 tolerance of --

8 MR. EISNER: People, we need to have some

9 microphones.

10 MS. MEYERS: Pardon me?

11 MR. EISNER: We need to have some microphones

12 for people to speak.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: It says the tolerances on the

14 top of the page, correct. So some are five, some are

15 10. It depends on the measure.

16 MS. MEYERS: Yeah. So it's the AHRI

17 tolerances, but not the AHRI verification process? So

18 this is completely -- this is not the same thing at

19 all.

20 MR. KLEISS: Can we assess tolerance or --

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Can we assess like, yeah, how

22 close we are in the room with other people? Would that
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

160

1 be all?

2 MR. EISNER: how many would object to the

3 proposal that's on the table?

4 MR. RIVEST: Can we just -- Mike Rivest --

5 what is different about this? Because the way I read

6 this -- and Ashley can clarify it if that's the intent

7 -- that opportunity to witness testing is there. It

8 just doesn't come immediately. It comes after concerns

9 are raised. So it seems to me it does include what you

10 are looking for.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: So --

12 MR. RIVEST: Is it a rewording of the last

13 bullet that would satisfy you?

14 MS. MEYERS: So a couple things. So a couple

15 things. And, Jill, you may need to jump in since you

16 are the engineer here. You know, often if a unit is

17 set up wrong, you are going to have to scrap that piece

18 of equipment. Sometimes the set-up can't be corrected

19 if they, you know, cut holes wrong or whatever. So,

20 you know, that could be scrapping a $50,000 piece of

21 equipment. So there is that issue. A lot of times

22 it's hard to tell on a commercial piece of equipment,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

161

1 you know, unless you are there to see it, if it was in

2 fact, you know, done correctly or not.

3 So, from a manufacturer, they get a call from

4 DOE saying that you have failed a spot check. Now, you

5 know, that's a big deal for a manufacturer. That has

6 the, you know, the inconsequent -- the worst case

7 scenario has a chance to financially affect a

8 manufacturer's sales. So can you prove, from the test

9 results and from the photographs, whether it was done

10 correctly or not; yes or no? I don't know.

11 And so here's this unwillingness for us to be

12 there. Be put tape across our mouth if you have to.

13 At least let us record how it's being done. Because

14 the consequences of an incorrect set-up, of which we

15 have knowledge with the AHRI program. It's not an

16 uncommon issue for these large commercial units to be

17 set up or tested incorrectly.

18 MR. RIVEST: Karen, Mike Rivest. So I don't

19 read it this way. I mean, I read -- the way I read

20 this, that third bullet, if a unit is outside the

21 tolerance -- the word "fail" doesn't appear here, and

22 that's intentional; right?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

162

1 MS. MEYERS: Right.

2 MR. RIVEST: So if it's outside the tolerance

3 DOE will initiate a discussion, and as part of that

4 discussion a decision will be made to retest the unit.

5 A determination of failure doesn't come until you've

6 had an opportunity. That's, you know, potentially the

7 same opportunity you have within the voluntary program.

8 MR. SACHS: This is Harvey, and I think

9 there's some framing issues here that have been, to

10 some extent, unspoken. And I don't mean to take one

11 side or the other, because my goal is energy savings;

12 but, Laura, the stress is very different when you say

13 there are three parties involved from when you think of

14 the testing lab, as I think industry does, as being an

15 agent of DOE, an extension of DOE. DOE has written

16 that contract. So when they ask for the ability to be

17 there and you say I can't be, their logical response is

18 you are. You are there by extension of your contract

19 with that testing lab, and we are asking you to be

20 there also. Whether the argument has any merit or not,

21 the question of that framing I think is part of the

22 gulf between Karen and Jill and you on this issue.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

163

1 And the second thing I -- oh, please,

2 respond.

3 MS. BARHYDT: If we were using the AHRI lab,

4 would the reaction be any different?

5 MS. MEYERS: No.

6 MR. SACHS: The second thing is we are all

7 trying to put an adult into -- as Thomas Jefferson

8 said, we are trying to put an adult into the same coat

9 he wore as a child. And all of these testing methods

10 were set up decades ago on the assumption you were

11 trying to measure energy in as electricity and cold air

12 out or hot water out, and these are relatively simple.

13 And we've gotten into equipment now, which is a great

14 deal more complex. And we've worked actively with ACCA

15 on quality installation, and for this stuff it's much

16 more complex than the residential.

17 So that I find myself sympathizing with the

18 desire to be in the -- to have the right to be in the

19 room. And the final reason for that, for my thinking,

20 again trying to think like a manufacturer, is when I

21 get a letter from the Office of the General Counsel,

22 it's likely to be taken very seriously in the executive
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

164

1 board room. It's not quite the same as getting a

2 letter from Michael or Ashley, on the testing side,

3 saying, "I've got a discrepancy." And that's going to

4 cause some hard --

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: (Inaudible).

6 MR. SACHS: But that's going to cause some

7 heartburn, but what I'm trying to do is just trying to

8 think about the people who are going to be involved in

9 this flow while feeling very strongly that your

10 interest and my interest is the integrity of the

11 process. So I don't know if that helps at all, but I

12 wanted to get it off my chest.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean -- go ahead.

14 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL. I

15 just wanted to ask a question. The DOE stated that

16 they have been testing commercial HVAC products in the

17 last couple years. Has anybody at this table, have

18 they ever heard of any of their units that have been,

19 you know, possibly tested that failed?

20 MS. BARHYDT: I don't think anyone at this

21 table is going to want to speak to that.

22 MR. KOJAK: Because my point is if -- if they
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

165

1 have already been doing it and there's never been a

2 problem so far? I mean, I understand your reluctance,

3 but you know, maybe there is?

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, to Karen's point, I

5 think that DOE shares the concern that we get a valid

6 test if we are going to go to a situation where we

7 think that a next step needs to be taken. Our hope is

8 that we never get there ever. The reality is that's

9 just not the case.

10 So what that last bullet -- and maybe the

11 words need to be changed -- is that before we ever get

12 to a next step that the manufacturer has had a chance

13 to present all its claims about anything that was done

14 with the testing, DOE has had a chance to have that

15 discussion with you, we've come to a determination that

16 either retesting needs to be done or that there's no

17 retesting that needs to be done, and if retesting needs

18 to be done for something that's outside of tolerance,

19 both people will find a way to be present and move

20 forward before any determination is made.

21 What we are trying to prevent from the

22 Department's perspective is that every single unit that
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

166

1 I spot check realizing that, you know, 90 percent plus

2 of them may very well just pass, that we all need to be

3 there then. We are not preventing you from being

4 involved. We are just saying we are reserving that to

5 if a unit is outside of tolerance, if there is an

6 actual issue that needs discussing.

7 MR. WHITWELL: Bob Whitwell, Carrier. So the

8 retest, does that include -- could that include either

9 retesting the original unit, or testing a second sample

10 depending on what is found during the evaluation?

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes.

12 MR. BAUMAN: I guess -- this is Jeff Bauman

13 from National again -- I know in the wording on that, I

14 guess my question is that it may -- is it at the

15 manufacturer's -- I'll say the manufacturer's

16 discretion -- if we -- if you look at the test and it's

17 within the test standard, we can still have concerns

18 there within the test standard, but we don't know

19 whether they did something, or it might even be

20 something that they documented. To me, kind of the

21 bullet on that is it automatic that the manufacturer

22 would be -- have the option of appealing and running a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

167

1 second test, or is that just if you can convince the

2 DOE that it was outside of what the test standard is,

3 and what's included in the test standard?

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Well, I don't know. It's not

5 specific, and maybe that's something we should

6 consider, and we could consider. I guess the question

7 back to you would be if it falls into one of those

8 buckets already, where either a manufacturer has been

9 on site, we've tested it at a lab -- we've tested it at

10 their own facility, or, you know, during the set-up

11 process the lab said, hey, I needed problems, and we

12 found a way, the DOE, and -- in other words, during

13 that initial test if we found that the manufacturer was

14 on site, it would seem to then that should alleviate

15 the need for retesting to have them on site.

16 MR. BAUMAN: Yeah, if they were on site for

17 the first test.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. Okay.

19 MR. BAUMAN: But they should have the

20 option of --

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: If not --

22 MR. BAUMAN: -- dependent on -- it should be
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

168

1 the manufacturers that consent the first one; then the

2 second one if it wasn't on site, then they get to be on

3 site.

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Hold on. Okay.

5 MALE SPEAKER: Who will give (inaudible)?

6 MR. BAUMAN: Sorry? What was that again?

7 MR. EISNER: It would be a mandatory retest,

8 if the manufacturer wants it and were not on site for

9 the original test.

10 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp with Goodman. One

11 thing that sounds -- seems obvious to me at this point

12 is we, as manufacturers, have a significant concern

13 over some of the test procedures as they stand today,

14 and it's already been commented that some of these

15 procedures are in processes being revised. And I think

16 we all should take steps to escalate that as quickly as

17 possible so that DOE has a test procedure that we are

18 comfortable with -- that everybody is comfortable with

19 -- let me rephrase that -- so that, you know, you get

20 participation of all interested parties and address

21 these test procedure issues. And there's things in the

22 Unitary Small AHRI program that we are presently
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

169

1 operating under, and we've added some significant

2 measures to where we feel have better accuracy in the

3 operations manual; for example, the secondary capacity

4 checks.

5 We've asked that for AHRI programs there are

6 additional things that the laboratory does for

7 verifying that the secondary checks are correct and

8 adequate, and we believe that we are seeing some good

9 processes, some good improvements in the testing

10 accuracy through those set-ups. But of course, that's

11 not part of the DOE test procedure. That's some

12 additional above and beyond things that AHRI is

13 requiring.

14 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik with AHRI. One

15 other thing that -- well, it's not specific there, but

16 I think I certainly want to put forth here. One of the

17 bullets specifically does say that before the test, if

18 the product is in a program, the DOE would consult to

19 see if there are notes for the installation or

20 whatever. It seems to me that if that's going to

21 happen, one of the questions that could also be -- or

22 some of the information that could also be included was
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

170

1 in fact whether -- again, because it has been mentioned

2 our program allows the option -- the information that

3 could be included is whether or not in fact the

4 manufacturer was present when the program ran their

5 verification test. Not that it's a 100 percent

6 solution, okay, but if the information comes back that

7 that manufacturer was present because they felt they

8 needed to be there -- they are not going to do it

9 because they like doing it because they don't have

10 anything to do; okay? But if they were there because

11 they felt they needed to be there, then, to me, that is

12 -- that information becomes an immediate flag to DOE

13 that there is some, for lack of a better word, some

14 extra attention required to make sure you've got the

15 right set-up, and the test is run properly.

16 Now, how -- you know what -- I guess we can

17 talk about how you follow through with that, but that -

18 - again, that becomes part of the consideration. And,

19 the other -- well, I'll save the other part. But, you

20 know, everyone is obviously concerned about their

21 products, and there's clearly some models that need

22 this, okay, but there's other products that our program
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

171

1 tests frequently -- I won't say daily, but frequently

2 -- and again, they may be -- well, there are

3 subcategories of the commercial products where the

4 tests are not that difficult. The equipment is still

5 not quite that sophisticated, and we don't -- you know,

6 we don't need that -- no one feels they need to be

7 there to watch that test.

8 But again, in terms of that bullet, it says

9 any additional -- regarding tests, you know, will be

10 provided. It seems to me that part of that is, okay,

11 when that program, if they did test that model or unit

12 of that model, was the manufacturer present? That's a

13 significant input.

14 MS. HOOTMAN: I'm willing to -- this is Jill

15 Hootman from Trane -- I'm willing to, shall I say,

16 possibly table some of this in light of talking about

17 eventually VICPs. Since witness testing is part of the

18 VICP, it may still come back around to this discussion.

19 MR. EISNER: Do you have a problem with this

20 now that we couldn't go back and address as a result of

21 that discussion? Can we focus on this and finish this,

22 as it's written now?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

172

1 MS. HOOTMAN: I'm 90 percent there.

2 MR. EISNER: And what do you need for the

3 rest of the 10 percent?

4 MS. HOOTMAN: I really hate the idea that you

5 would waste essentially a test, a unit, a lot of time

6 on my part to essentially -- or on the manufacturer's

7 part to say that, you know, it was not a test done

8 correctly. We have now scrapped a unit. We have now,

9 you know, spent days in our plant making it, sending it

10 to you, at a great expense, and yet we are going to

11 still turn around and tell you that it was . . . so

12 that's where I just find it kind of wasteful all the

13 way around.

14 MR. CYMBALSKY: But isn't it more time wasted

15 on the 95 percent of the stuff that doesn't have an

16 issue that you are going to go to?

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: On both of our parts.

18 MR. CYMBALSKY: Both of our parts. So that's

19 double money.

20 MS. HOOTMAN: I didn't say -- all I want is

21 the option to be there. I'm not saying that every

22 single one of those I'm going to be in there that 95
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

173

1 percent.

2 MR. EISNER: Any other comments?

3 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers, PVI. There

4 was a proposal floated during the break that DOE would

5 alert the manufacturer if there was a failure; do

6 whatever of this is appropriate, as it comes up, and

7 then if there is a failure, during the discussion with

8 the manufacturer, the manufacturer would have the

9 option to say, I don't know exactly what occurred, but

10 I have confidence in my equipment that something was

11 wrong. I wasn't there to see what was not set up

12 right. I wasn't there to see how the test was run, and

13 then have that test be re-run with DOE and --

14 MS. BARHYDT: That's the last bullet point.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's exactly what it says.

16 MALE SPEAKER: I've looked at it but, yeah,

17 that's the last bullet.

18 FEMALE SPEAKER: Yeah, that's the last

19 bullet.

20 MR. MYERS: The key here is we request can do

21 it; we don't have to define what the issue is. Because

22 --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

174

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's what it says.

2 MS. EISNER: Okay. What Ashley added at the

3 end, the very last bullet.

4 MR. MYERS: Okay.

5 MR. KOKAK: This is Mike Kojak with UL. Can

6 it be an option that the manufacturer supply a list to

7 the DOE of the units that they might want to witness,

8 and the units that, you know, you don't really want to

9 witness, before this moves on? Because I understand

10 there's some really complicated units you are going to

11 want to see. So can that list be provided to the DOE so

12 they know off- hand which types of units that you are

13 going to want to, you know, go and see for sure for the

14 test?

15 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Dominic Kolandayan with

16 Daikin. I think the last sentence that Ashley just

17 added doesn't give you an option. It says that if DOE

18 and the manufacturer agrees. What if DOE doesn't

19 agree?

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: There's two parts. That's in

21 a different unit. The sentence before that says, "If a

22 manufacturer was not previously unsafe for the initial
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

175

1 -- it should say test -- a manufacturer can request a

2 retest automatically, and DOE and the manufacturer can

3 be on site," period.

4 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Thank you. Yeah.

5 MR. EISNER: All right. Any objections to

6 the language that's on this screen?

7 MALE SPEAKER: If she could make the

8 adjustments and changes that we've talked about.

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: It's already there. That's

10 what it says. I read off the thing.

11 MALE SPEAKER: We've got Jeremiah over there -

12 -

13 MALE SPEAKER: It's too small for some of our

14 eyes.

15 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi.

16 You know we've talked about the notes -- the testing

17 notes from AHRI. Would other manufacturers object if

18 we made that the operations manual for that; that that

19 would be included?

20 MS. HOOTMAN: Those are specific to a unit.

21 MR. DOPPEL: Okay. But, well -- well, there

22 are things in the OM.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

176

1 MS. HOOTMAN: These are things that are very

2 specific to units.

3 MR. DOPPEL: Right.

4 MS. HOOTMAN: In order to --

5 MR. DOPPEL: And I'm saying this --

6 MS. HOOTMAN: -- set it at the test

7 conditions.

8 MR. DOPPEL: I'm saying this in addition to

9 the notes, the Operations Manual.

10 MS. HOOTMAN: Giving the Operations Manual to

11 the DOE, is that what you are saying?

12 MR. DOPPEL: Yeah.

13 MS. HOOTMAN: Well, I don't have any problem

14 with that.

15 MR. DOPPEL: It's publicly available.

16 MS. HOOTMAN: It's publicly available.

17 MR. DOPPEL: Yeah. Okay.

18 MS. HOOTMAN: It's right on the website.

19 MR. DOPPEL: Okay.

20 MALE SPEAKER: It's not the Operations

21 Manual. It's supplemental information for the lab.

22 MR. DOPPEL: Right.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

177

1 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. The notes section is the

2 supplemental information.

3 MR. DOPPEL: Right. But I want to make sure

4 that the Operations Manual was also included in that,

5 because sometimes there are things in there that are

6 appropriate for testing that we don't necessarily think

7 about.

8 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah.

9 MR. EISNER: Anything to add?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: So Jeff had suggested earlier

11 to get rid of the first bullet because he believes that

12 any information that is needed, whether it be part of

13 an industry program or not part of an industry program,

14 would be subsumed by the second bullet; that it would

15 just be submitted to the Department directly, whether

16 it be by AHRI or the manufacturer.

17 Do you guys agree that the first bullet is

18 not needed? And we will take any additional

19 information regarding test -- that upper testing. It's

20 just a matter of whether it comes from AHRI directly to

21 us, or you guys want to give it to us. We don't care

22 the avenue.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

178

1 MR. EISNER: No objections to her deleting

2 it?

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: All right.

4 MR. EISNER: I thought you guys wanted to go

5 to lunch?

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Testy.

7 MR. KLEISS: What does the first bullet do

8 for us? What does the first bullet do for us that the

9 second bullet doesn't?

10 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik, AHRI. The

11 first bullet establishes there is some documented

12 additional information. I read that third bullet, that

13 all of a sudden I got called in, and I found out my

14 unit is being tested, and then, click, I --

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: No, no, no, no, no. The

16 second -- right under what's highlighted.

17 MR. EISNER: This everybody -- others are

18 saying takes care of this.

19 MR. STANONIK: Okay. But the one under it

20 says, "Any additional information that is provided

21 regarding test set-up or testing, as part of DOE

22 Certification Program, will also be provided to the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

179

1 laboratory." Where is that information coming from?

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: You --

3 MR. STANONIK: From the manufacturer?

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Or the manufacturer.

5 MR. STANONIK: Pardon me?

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: It can come from you or the

7 manufacturer. We don't specify.

8 MS. BARHYDT: That way if they are member of

9 AHRI, we get it from you; if they are a non-member of

10 AHRI, we get -- it makes it clear that will accept it

11 from anyone.

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: If you --

13 MR. DOPPEL: Let me try and explain the point

14 again, because I obviously missed it.

15 MR. KLEISS: Frank, if I may -- Jeff,

16 Lochinvar -- this was written in response to my

17 recommendation that manufacturers would write

18 proactively special test set-up instructions that are

19 needed to comply with the test procedures for their

20 product, and submit that proactively when we submit our

21 ratings to the Department of Energy, so that this list

22 would be in the hands of the testing agency, and not be
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

180

1 something that would be incumbent upon the individual

2 conducting the test to request that information. But

3 it would be specific instructions written by the

4 manufacturers for the purposes of testing the product

5 according to the standards.

6 MR. WHITWELL: Bob Whitwell, Carrier. So

7 maybe the first bullet point needs to be modified to

8 say that; that information will be provided on how --

9 on set-up instructions, special set-up instructions,

10 will be provided to DOE through the certification

11 process.

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: So can I just modify this

13 one? Any additional -- actually, that has . . .

14 MS. HOOTMAN: And I guess I want to --

15 MR. WHITWELL: The second bullet there was

16 saying that that data then would be provided to the

17 laboratory, which is required -- which is important.

18 But the first bullet, I think what's missing now is the

19 fact that this data will be provided to DOE through the

20 certification process; right?

21 MS. HOOTMAN: And so not to repeat for each

22 manufacturer, part of that data might in fact be the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

181

1 OM, Paul; so we want them to follow all the extra

2 details in the OM. So not making every manufacturer

3 have to submit the AHRI OMs. It should be the AHRI OMs

4 plus any additional unique data needed for those units

5 to be run in a test set-up.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Will be provided . . .

7 MS BARHYDT: If someone is not a member of

8 the AHRI Program, should DOE be testing in accordance

9 with the AHRI OM?

10 MALE SPEAKER: No.

11 MS. BARHYDT: Then why should DOE be testing

12 in accordance with the OM for AHRI members?

13 MS. HOOTMAN: I'm just saying that I'm going

14 to --

15 MR. DOPPEL: This is Paul Doppel with

16 Mitsubishi. The OM provides additional information for

17 testing.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: It should be in our test

19 procedure, if you need it.

20 MR. DOPPEL: But, it's like -- it's like --

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: If it's your model OM; that's

22 different. If it's a program OM; it should be part of
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

182

1 our test procedure.

2 MR. DOPPEL: It's like special notes though

3 for testing.

4 MR. WHITWELL: Well, okay.

5 MR. DOPPEL: That's -- I think that's -- I

6 think that's very different.

7 MS. BARHYDT: Maybe we are not talking about

8 the same thing when we say OM. Could you just clarify

9 what you mean when you say OM?

10 MS. HOOTMAN: Sure. The AHRI Operations

11 Manual for each section in AHRI.

12 MS. BARHYDT: Okay.

13 MS. HOOTMAN: So, you know, it might say --

14 I'm trying to pull up one here --

15 MR. DOPPEL: Well, it goes through the --

16 this is Paul Doppel -- it goes through the selection

17 process. It establishes the criteria for selection.

18 MS. HOOTMAN: That's going to be another part

19 of it.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's off the table.

21 MS. HOOTMAN: That's going to be a part of --

22 MALE SPEAKER: Right. We are talking about
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

183

1 details that I don't think matter here.

2 MR. DOPPEL: Well, they asked what was in the

3 OM. I'm telling them what's in the OM. But then it

4 goes down and it'll -- it will also talk about various

5 criteria.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: This is just test set-up and

7 testing, period. There is no selection. There is no -

8 - I mean . . .

9 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik with AHRI. I

10 mean there is one clear-cut example where the OM may be

11 different than the specifications of the DOE test

12 procedure, but be the DOE test procedure. What I'm

13 talking about is, based on experience and everything

14 else, we, in our test programs, may in fact require for

15 some parameters to be measured with a tighter tolerance

16 than what the DOE test procedure specifies. It depends

17 on the product, okay? And we may have done that simply

18 because (a) things evolve; and (b) we find out that, in

19 fact, then we have less, because we also have

20 discussions with manufacturers when products don't

21 pass. Nobody likes that.

22 And so, in some cases, we have had to have
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

184

1 our test facilities invest to in fact make their test

2 cell or their set-up in fact be a little more precise

3 than the range of what's allowed by the DOE test

4 procedures. And so actually in that case, Laura, I

5 guess I'd change the answer where you said, should DOE

6 follow AHRI's OM?

7 In my specific example, I would say it might

8 be wise to do that, again, just to try and -- when

9 there are situations where the test reads indicate

10 possibly a bad rating, then you focus on what are the

11 problems and not talking about whether it was a good or

12 accurate test or whatever.

13 MR. MUCCIOLA: This is Vince from National

14 Comfort Products. Where do we allow them to get the

15 information that we want the compressor to be run in

16 for 72 hours?

17 MS. HOOTMAN: That's exactly what I was going

18 to say.

19 MR. MUCCIOLA: I mean, that's the detail that

20 I think we are trying to get across is, you know, the

21 manufacturer, the compressor manufacturer, says, look,

22 run it in for 72 hours before you test. Where do we
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

185

1 allow DOE to get that information from; either the

2 manufacturer or from AHRI? But if it's nobody that's

3 in AHRI, how do you get that information.

4 MR. KLEISS: Jeff Kleiss, Lochinvar. The

5 information that's in that sub-bullet is the -- that is

6 the direction that the manufacturer should supply the

7 information that goes beyond what is required or part

8 of the test standard, the information that is needed to

9 properly operate the unit. And, if there is a

10 particular warm-up time, a burn-in time, things need to

11 be adjusted a certain way; that is not part of the

12 normal operational methodology. Whether they want to

13 reference particular sections of AHRI's OM, whatever,

14 to say only do it on third Thursdays of the month; that

15 is something that the manufacturer could write and

16 submit. The inclusion or requiring this is a blanket

17 statement for all products is not part of what's on the

18 board. It's not necessary.

19 I think we need to wrap this up and move

20 forward.

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. And I will say, I did

22 add one caveat. I do want to point it out. You can't
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

186

1 add additional instructions that are not in accordance

2 with our test procedures. So we have specifically

3 addressed break-ins. We did it as part of the rule4 making process. It was subject to notice and comment.

5 It allows you to have an optional break-in for most

6 commercial HVAC products of up to 20 hours. And we

7 will use it, and you have to state it. And that was

8 part of the rule-making process.

9 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. We

10 need to increase the tolerance allowable on standby

11 loss of commercial water heaters.

12 MR. MYERS: I have a quick question. This is

13 Frank Myers, PVI. A quick question to Ashley, I

14 believe. What do you mean in that remaining bullet

15 where you just modified where it says ". . . to DOE

16 through the certification process"? What does that

17 mean?

18 MS. ARMSTRING: The data you have to submit

19 to the Department to certify. Right now, you guys do

20 not have to do that. That's why we are here; right?

21 You guys do not have to do that until the end of the

22 year, and then as part of this process, we are hoping
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

187

1 to come up with a process and/or what needs to be

2 submitted. This will be submitted as part of the

3 process, either by yourselves, or by a third-party

4 representative of your choice, like AHRI.

5 MR. WHITWELL: So that will be added to the

6 template?

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah, it can be. Or you can

8 -- we can also find a way that it's just another -- a

9 PDF or something. It gets -- it just gets sent to an

10 SQL database that we have access to. Yeah?

11 MR. MYERS: If we are providing -- this is

12 Frank Myers again -- if we are providing this

13 information on units selected for testing, and that's

14 something we could do, trying to do the level of detail

15 that would give you everything for every possibility on

16 every unit that we have as a part of our data

17 submission for certification; I think that's onerous

18 and not necessary.

19 MS. BARHYDT: Let's table that given that at

20 this point we don't know exactly what level of

21 information you are going to be providing information.

22 We haven't dealt with certification yet.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

188

1 MS. HOOTMAN: Or the template and exactly

2 what's in the information or not, and how much we have

3 to upload and all that. So, yeah, I agree.

4 MR. MYERS: Again, I'm a bit confused

5 because, before those two words were put in, or that

6 string through the certification process, it was we

7 were able to provide DOE and the lab with additional

8 information unique to the product selected. And by

9 adding in certification process, we don't even know

10 what combination of components you are putting together

11 in order to run this test.

12 So I'm not sure what I would write up in

13 advance for that. So, if it's trying to get better

14 information to you to do a better job on the test;

15 that's one thing. But, to do something in advance for

16 all products by model number would be extremely

17 difficult.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: If you are talking about

19 because you custom build to order, we are not going to

20 get past DOE selecting your unit for testing without us

21 contacting you. That's the reality. Right? I mean,

22 it's -- I'm not going to go to Lowes and buy your
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

189

1 custom build to order and then go looking for a manual

2 on how to test it. So the reality of the situation is

3 our discussions will begin a lot earlier for your

4 products than they would for something that I can find

5 at a distributor's site or something else.

6 I don't think that needs to be explicit.

7 It's just not practical to say that I'm not going to

8 find your unit, period.

9 MR. MYERS: Mmm-hmm. We just need to be

10 careful as we are crafting the language here that we

11 don't say the only way we can provide that information

12 is through this method. We should have something where

13 we're talking about the custom manufactured units; that

14 that's the point for that equivalent that you would

15 provide additional information, as opposed to through

16 the certification process.

17 MR. EISNER: Anything else?

18 MS. BARHYDT: (Inaudible).

19 MR. EISNER: Microphone.

20 MS. BARHYDT: Well, I understand your issue

21 and we can make sure that we can make sure that we

22 craft regulatory text that addresses that.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

190

1 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Dominic Kolandayan with

2 Daikin. It sounds like bullet number two is you can

3 submit some information through the certification

4 process, but that bullet also says that you can provide

5 additional information at the request, when the

6 laboratory needs additional information for set-up,

7 such as compressor speeds, which do not have to be on

8 the certification.

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: Absolutely.

10 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Thank you.

11 MS. HOOTMAN: Well, and that information that

12 Dominic just talked about, does that have to be in

13 accordance with the DOE test procedure, because those

14 are unit specific things? I mean, I don't know how you

15 are going to tell me whether that --

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: It would be a violation of

17 the DOE's test procedure, but it doesn't seem like --

18 for the ones he's talking about, we don't necessarily

19 have specific provisions --

20 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. That's what I --

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- that are unit specific;

22 right?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

191

1 MS. HOOTMAN: Right.

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: So, in other words, I'm

3 talking about our test says you have to test at this

4 static or this air flow, and you specifically write a

5 manual that has different numbers in it.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: Oh.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Not okay; right? But if it's

8 additional specifications that are beyond the DOE test

9 procedure, and more specific, that are unit specific,

10 absolutely.

11 MR. EISNER: Okay. Anything else on these

12 last bullets with respect to the whole screen? Anybody

13 want to say anything else?

14 Does anybody object to this as it's been

15 rewritten?

16 So we have consensus. We can go off to

17 lunch. Come back at -- come back in five minutes.

18 MR. CYMBALSKY: Give yourself a big hand.

19 MR. EISNER: I'm sorry. I can't hear you.

20 MR. SACHS: Sorry. What are the discussions

21 this afternoon?

22 MR. EISNER: We have some other issues
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

192

1 remaining, don't we?

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: Well, we've now just

3 determined what is an invalid reading; so what happens?

4 MS. BARHYDT: The process and VICPs.

5 (Whereupon, a lunch recess was taken.)

6 MR. EISNER: All right. I think we've got,

7 Laura said, two more issues that we've got to cover

8 this afternoon.

9 MS. BARHYDT: We may not make it to both.

10 MR. EISNER: Do you want to start us off on

11 the first one?

12 MS. BARHYDT: Sure.

13 So I think we've gotten up to the point where

14 we have done a test and maybe there's been retesting,

15 but at any rate, we've made it through -- all the way

16 through having one test that maybe everyone is not

17 happy with, but everyone is somewhat comfortable with

18 as a valid test. And it is still outside of tolerance.

19 And then the issue is then what happens?

20 So I think that that is a different question,

21 and I would prefer to initially just talk about its

22 outside of the tolerance. And what does that mean in
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

193

1 the context of the AEDM? Does that mean that the AEDM

2 is invalid? Does it mean that that particular rating

3 is invalid? That's the question.

4 MR. KLEISS: May I suggest that we discuss

5 the next meeting before we launch into the next topic

6 or is that --

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Sure.

8 MR. EISNER: We can do that.

9 MS. BARHYDT: Quick win.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: We may agree on that.

11 MR. EISNER: Does everybody know the dates of

12 the next meeting, or would they like us to go through

13 them again? Go through them. Okay.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Jeremiah, help, please.

15 Everyone wants to know who you are. The infamous. And

16 just, if you guys have alternates that are coming to

17 the meetings, just make sure you email him and let him

18 know in advance of the meeting just who's switching

19 out. It's not an issue, just so we know.

20 MR. CYMBALSKY: Just sending it to the

21 generic ASRAC mailbox that you've been doing is fine.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes. That's just so we can
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

194

1 make sure they're on the list and security.

2 MR. EISNER: Where did they go? Twenty-ninth

3 and 30th of this month is going to be uptown in

4 Harvey's offices. He's going to get out specifics on

5 it. We will probably start at 10:15 because we

6 understand there's going to be a fire drill, evacuation

7 of the building, practice type thing. So we'll

8 probably start at 10:15; is that correct?

9 MS. BARHYDT: It sounded like it would be

10 10:15. It may be 10:30 for actually starting, but

11 getting into the building, probably around 10:15.

12 MR. STANONIK: We try to let our guests be

13 part of the fire drill, I mean --

14 MS. BARHYDT: Well, he offered, but I told

15 him maybe we could all just show up a little bit later.

16 MR. HON: Excuse me. Logistically, which

17 airport do we fly to, Reagan?

18 MS. BARHYDT: Reagan. Same one.

19 MR. HON: And then you'll send out hotel

20 information and things like that?

21 MR. STANONIK: Harvey will. I know we look

22 alike, but Harvey will.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

195

1 MR. HON: Okay. So --

2 MR. EISNER: Some people have suggested if --

3 for example, some people yesterday staying at Crystal

4 City, you might want to stay in the Crystal City area

5 and just take the subway a few more stops to get to

6 where his building is.

7 MR. KOJAK: Do we have his address?

8 MR. STANONIK: It's on 11th Street. The

9 National Press Building.

10 MR. EISNER: National Press Building is where

11 it is.

12 MR. HON: Do we know what time it ends?

13 MR. EISNER: I think we've agreed the times

14 for the first day of the two day meetings is 10:00

15 until 6:00 on the first day, and 8:00 to 3:00 on the

16 second day, but we will start the first one for this

17 meeting at 10:15.

18 MS. BARHYDT: Uh-huh.

19 MR. EISNER: And go to 6:15.

20 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah.

21 MR. MYERS: Would you repeat the date again?

22 MR. EISNER: The date of the next meeting is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

196

1 the 29th and the 30th of May.

2 MS. BARHYDT: I will be one week away. Yes.

3 I'm going to wait to see what the topics are cued up.

4 Me and the little boy may have a discussion before

5 that. My four-year-old already runs the house. She's

6 like a little me, so. It's coming full circle. My

7 parents just left.

8 MR. EISNER: Okay. Any questions on the next

9 meeting? Are they all set?

10 MR. BAUMAN: We'll set the agenda at the end

11 of this meeting.

12 MR. EISNER: We will get you --

13 MS. BARHYDT: I'm pretty sure I can tell you

14 what it's going to be, but --

15 MR. EISNER: According to my notes, the next

16 meeting is the 10th and 11th of June.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: And we're still working on

18 locations for that one.

19 MR. EISNER: Okay. The 28th of June, our

20 progress report is due to DOE, so the prior meeting

21 we're going to have to decide where we are, whether

22 we're making enough progress to keep going, those sorts
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

197

1 of things. The next meeting is --

2 MS. BARHYDT: It's not until July; right?

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: So it's May 29th and 30th,

4 and then June 10th and 11th. It's probably here, but

5 we don't -- we're not positive. We'll let you know as

6 soon as we do, and we'll send that out via email.

7 We'll know before the 29th and 30th.

8 MS. BARHYDT: Why don't we just send out the

9 list and the location? We'll just send out the whole

10 list and the locations to the blast.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: We're still finalizing a few

12 locations.

13 MR. KLEISS: I have a question about the

14 progress report. Is that -- who is making it to whom?

15 Does it involve us?

16 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think that's actually --

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: I think there's two. One is,

18 Neil and I had -- I had asked Neil a very similar

19 question outside because AEDMs is something that needs

20 to move quickly. So I think we decided that -- or at

21 least Neil suggested that the department could take a

22 first shot at writing up the consensus as agreed upon
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

198

1 the last two days. It would be circulated for you guys

2 to review after Neil approves it. And then if that's

3 what is okay, that can go ahead and go to ASRAC to move

4 that process of AEDM forward while you continue the

5 negotiations of the scope of everything else.

6 Does that seem reasonable, just to get that

7 one moving?

8 MR. EISNER: Does anybody disagree with the

9 idea of sending the first part forward as a separate

10 package so they can begin working on that? It would

11 also give you a hard copy. That was the thing I

12 thought most important. Give you a hard copy of what

13 they're working from in DOE in front of you while we

14 negotiate the rest.

15 Remember, all what we did in the last two

16 days was an add on to what DOE originally intended

17 because you felt you needed that. So again, the report

18 goes nowhere until we take a vote on it. And, you

19 know, we can decide whether we want minority reports on

20 it or whether we -- right now, it looks like we're able

21 to report a unanimous position here with no minority

22 reports necessary. But, you know, you still have the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

199

1 right to come back and say, "Well, I don't like the way

2 you wrote it up. You added words I didn't see before I

3 don't agree should be there."

4 Yes.

5 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers. Is -- does

6 anyone on the committee have any interest? I thought I

7 heard earlier that there was some desire to have AEDM

8 as one path for checking equipment and the other was

9 not just for verification, but also the initial look

10 for validating that you could do -- use the industry

11 VICP program --

12 MS. BARHYDT: Separate. They're separate

13 issues.

14 MR. MYERS: I know that DOE has said they're

15 a separate issue. I just was curious if everyone

16 around the table felt they were separate issues because

17 that's not what I had heard earlier, that there was

18 consensus on that item.

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't think I understand

20 the question.

21 MS. BARHYDT: He wants to hold the consensus

22 of an AEDM package before the VICP.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

200

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

2 MR. MYERS: Thank you.

3 MR. EISNER: Anybody else have a thought on

4 that? As I understand it from talking to Ashley, it's

5 going to go forward, the AEDM, and if they like it,

6 it's going to go back to Ashley and others in DOE to

7 start working on a rulemaking document. That doesn't

8 mean, as I understand, that there isn't time as the

9 negotiations go on for us to say, wait a second, and

10 look back on that. Hopefully, Ashley will be back in

11 the room listening by then with --

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: It depends on how they're

13 going.

14 MS. BARHYDT: I'll keep tabs.

15 MR. EISNER: Okay.

16 MR. MYERS: This is Frank again. There was

17 one other issue, only AEDM directly that was discussed

18 previously and was postponed, but we never brought it

19 back up. And that was the time needed to -- for the

20 industry to respond. Right now, the rule says

21 everything's got to be done by the end of the year, and

22 that's not adequate time. So I think there probably
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

201

1 should be some discussion.

2 MS. BARHYDT: So that's part of

3 certification, and we have not gotten there yet.

4 MR. MYERS: The --

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: So the first thing we heard

6 was, you need AEDMs. Your regs for AEDMs that are

7 working regs up and as fast as possible. And from

8 then, once you know you have them, you can determine a

9 time frame.

10 MS. BARHYDT: For certification.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: So we're trying to deal with

12 the first as fast as we can. And the process through -

13 - the fastest way we can do that is to get something

14 out for you guys to review quickly to get it to ASRAC

15 and to go ahead and start writing a proposal.

16 MR. MYERS: Sure. I don't agree with that.

17 But at the end of the day, are we going to forward this

18 committee's recommendation on when the AEDM and the

19 reporting should be completed because right now the

20 rule is unless it's changed, it's the end of this year?

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: So the AEDM recommendation

22 would go forward as soon as possible. You would
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

202

1 continue negotiations around the rest of the scope,

2 which includes certification, includes verification

3 programs, it includes enforcement testing, it includes

4 many of those types of things. They will continue as

5 you reach consensus on those other issues, they can

6 also keep going -- it's going to be a separate rule,

7 but it's not going to hold up AEDMs in the process.

8 MR. MYERS: Okay. So it's the department's

9 expectation that if we do what you're proposing, that

10 the AEDM requirements will come out as a revision to

11 the -- or with the current AEDM rule and there will be

12 no change at that time. When that rule is published as

13 a final rule, there won't be any change from the

14 December 31 got to report by date.

15 MS. BARHYDT: That's a separate rule.

16 MR. MYERS: Pardon?

17 MR. CYMBALSKY: That's a separate rule. The

18 AEDM is completely separate. It doesn't -- the date of

19 your certification is not relevant to that AEDM.

20 MR. MYERS: Okay.

21 MR. EISNER: And let me stress, as I

22 understand the progress report that's due the end of
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

203

1 June, it's not necessarily going to have rulemaking

2 language in it. It's going to talk about the progress

3 we've made, we've resolved the following issues, we

4 still have the remaining to do, we think we can make

5 the end of August deadline or we think we might need

6 time, it will be that kind of thing.

7 Okay. The next meeting I have is the 1st and

8 2nd of July. Now, we're on a Monday, Tuesday schedule

9 here because of the July 4th weekend coming up. Same

10 thing with late starting time and then an early

11 starting time, second day. Do we know where that one's

12 going to be?

13 MR. CYMBALSKY: So we have July 1st. We have

14 a room for the 1st and we're working on getting a room

15 for the 2nd in the same location, our building up the

16 street. L'Enfant Plaza.

17 MR. EISNER: And the next meeting is July

18 17th and 18th. Now, we're back on a Wednesday and a

19 Thursday. Do we know where that is going to be?

20 MS. BARHYDT: I think all of them are

21 specified up there that -- where we have room for sure

22 and where we're not sure.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

204

1 MR. EISNER: Okay. I didn't realize that was

2 up there.

3 MS. BARHYDT: We just put it up. Sorry.

4 MR. EISNER: The next meeting is the 31st and

5 the 1st of July. Again, a Wednesday, Thursday. And

6 then we have two meetings set up in August, the 7th and

7 8th, which are Wednesday and a Thursday, the 26th and

8 the 27th, which are a Monday and a Tuesday. And then

9 the DOE final report is due the last day of the -- the

10 last Friday of the month, the 30th of the month. We

11 did add a meeting in September on the -- just a one day

12 meeting -- well, I don't know if it was intended to be

13 a one or two day meeting on September 26th. Probably a

14 two-day meeting.

15 MS. BARHYDT: I think we had talked about one

16 day unless, as we get closer to time, we discover that

17 we're going to need a longer meeting.

18 MR. EISNER: Yes. I think if we come to the

19 end of August and we're in very, very good shape and

20 ASRAC agrees we can get -- ASRAC and the department

21 agree they can give us more time, so sometime in July

22 or early August we're going to have to start thinking
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

205

1 about whether we're going to need more dates in

2 September to finish this project up quickly. Any

3 questions?

4 MS. HOOTMAN: That will be in an email blast

5 as well?

6 MS. BARHYDT: Yes. We're going to send it

7 out and we'll have all the locations filled in.

8 MR. EISNER: Okay. Let's go back to the

9 substance.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: We're going to go to what

11 happens if we determine that a unit is outside of

12 tolerance, in other words, the reading has been

13 determined to be invalid based on one test.

14 MS. BARHYDT: Do we need to test the second

15 one? You've had an opportunity to possibly even be

16 there.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: No. I mean, we've gotten

18 through the retest process. At this point we agree

19 that there's an invalid reading.

20 MR. HON: Testing the same unit?

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yup. It's been a single unit

22 tested, unless we both agree another unit needs to be
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

206

1 tested, which is in there.

2 MR. THARP: This is Rusty. Just to make

3 sure, we've tested one single unit --

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: We've tested a single unit.

5 MR. THARP: -- and you agree that one unit is

6 less than 95 percent?

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes. Or the 10 percent or

8 whatever the applicable tolerance that we agreed.

9 MR. THARP: Load to tolerance. I would

10 suggest that more tests would need to be done.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: Even if it's just a reading?

12 If we're talking about the possibility of saying that

13 the AEDM is not valid? I think there's a couple of

14 issues. Right. So we've come up with one test that's

15 outside of tolerance. We've gone through the

16 procedures. We've said the lab's done it correctly.

17 You agree the setup was done correctly. We agree our

18 test procedure's done correctly. We're all at the

19 point where we have a test result that shows that the

20 reading coming out of the AEDM, there's -- it's outside

21 of tolerance.

22 The options on the table are; rerate. How
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

207

1 should that rerating be done? Rerate that specific

2 model, period. Are there any issues -- larger issues

3 with the AEDM? Or we just say that's up to you guys?

4 You guys take care of your AEDM, but the rating needs

5 to change -- be recertified to the department based on

6 something. What is that something? It could be based

7 on that one test. It could be -- one idea would be you

8 now have to rate that model based on certification

9 testing which requires you to do another test. You can

10 do it at your own facility, but you have to do another

11 test.

12 In other words, we have invalidated the AEDM

13 process for coming up with that rating for just that

14 model.

15 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. I

16 think at that point we would consider removing that

17 model from the AEDM, or reviewing the AEDM --

18 MR. SHEBIK: This is Ron Shebik with

19 Hussmann. Can you guys hear me?

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yup.

21 MR. SHEBIK: Thank you. Just make sure I

22 wasn't muted. Okay. So the step we're at right now is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

208

1 after one test; is that correct? One test that shows

2 that there's a problem?

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: One test.

4 MR. SHEBIK: If that's the case, how do you

5 know the product being tested is not, say, a lemon?

6 How do you know it's not a problem? I mean, we're

7 saying the AEDM is wrong, but how do we know the

8 product isn't bad? I don't know if we can make a

9 decision based on one test.

10 MS. BARHYDT: So on the last bullet point

11 before lunchtime, we said that the retest request can

12 include another unit of the same model. So if the

13 manufacturer believed that the first unit tested was

14 defective, wasn't working -- functioning properly,

15 there is the option to have a second unit tested as

16 part of that retest. So unless there are two in a row

17 that are defective, then presumably we have at least

18 one functioning unit that's been tested.

19 MR. SHEBIK: Okay. I just wanted to clarify

20 that. Thank you.

21 MR. THARP: This is Rusty. VICP process that

22 we've discussed. The manufacturer at that point has
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

209

1 the option of either rerating through the test data or

2 testing more samples. And to me --

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: Or obsolete.

4 MR. THARP: Or obsolete that one model. And

5 to me that seems like a reasonable approach for this.

6 MS. BARHYDT: I think you stated three

7 options. Can you just restate those?

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: So rerating based upon --

9 MR. THARP: Rerating based on test data.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: On the DOE test data.

11 Discontinuing the model. Additional manufacturer

12 testing. Rerating based on a combination of DOE and

13 manufacturer testing at that point?

14 MR. THARP: Yeah. At that point it would be

15 based on testing. But again, if -- assuming if you had

16 a 95 percent tolerance, say, the DOE came in at 92

17 percent, it's feasible that the next unit would come in

18 at 105 percent. And that two unit sample might then

19 validate the original rating.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: So I'm going to say rerate

21 based on testing including the DOE test data you would

22 have to use.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

210

1 MR. THARP: Correct.

2 MR. HON: I don't think those would

3 necessarily be reiterated.

4 MR. THARP: Right. Depending on the --

5 MS. BARHYDT: It may be that the number

6 ultimately doesn't change. It's a re-evaluation of the

7 rating.

8 MR. STANONIK: You know, let's just say that

9 in that last case, determination of compliance will be

10 based on all test results, DOE's and manufacturer's.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: So we don't -- I mean,

12 compliance for us is compliance with the standard.

13 MR. STANONIK: I'm sorry?

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: So compliance with --

15 MR. STANONIK: I'm sorry. Verify --

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't think you want to use

17 that word.

18 MR. STANONIK: I'm sorry. Verification of

19 the rating will be determined based on all test

20 results. I think that's what Rusty said.

21 MR. STARR: This is a question I have. It

22 seems like at some point wouldn't DOE want to review
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

211

1 the AEDM to see if it's a legitimate characterization

2 of the equipment? I mean, that seems like a -- no.

3 MS. BARHYDT: Ashley is vehemently shaking

4 her head no behind you.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: I would like to look -- my

6 personal opinion is, I would just prefer to rely on the

7 test data. If they need to tweak their AEDM, if they

8 decide to tweak their AEDM, that is up to them. That

9 is the responsibility of them.

10 MR. STARR: No. I was just more thinking of

11 the test output rather than, you know, to actually see

12 if it's modeling the correct operation, but just to see

13 how the different models and how their test results are

14 falling out and kind of looking more at the -- the

15 statistics rather than the performance parameters.

16 That's what I was kind of getting at. In other words,

17 you can choose how you set up your rating based upon

18 where the models fall in terms of the distribution of

19 the ratings of the equipment that they tested. I'm

20 guessing they probably tested more than two.

21 MR. STANONIK: This is Frank Stanonik with

22 AHRI. I mean, to the point you raised, and to be clear,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

212

1 this is not something DOE would do. But as an operator

2 of a certification program and to some degree and

3 certainly in these cases acting as the manufacturer's,

4 let's say, agent in reporting and stuff, and so in a

5 sense we're also standing behind their AEDM to some

6 degree.

7 If we saw that result, okay, I would tell you

8 that when we make our unit model selections for the

9 next test year, it's going to be influenced by that

10 because in fact -- you know, again, we're also kind of

11 putting our name that, yes, these are valid AEDMs and

12 these ratings are accurate.

13 MR. STARR: I'm thinking more about the

14 people that are in your program is what I was thinking

15 about. I mean, I think there are -- but they're not

16 AHRI.

17 MS. HOOTMAN: If they're not in AHRI, I would

18 still -- I mean, anybody I would think is going to take

19 any of that data back and keep refining their own

20 models. That's just a natural practice. So I think, I

21 mean, you're going to do that. Also, obviously if

22 you're getting at this point letters from the general
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

213

1 council, even if you're not in AHRI, I think you will

2 do something about it.

3 MR. STARR: It will be self-poised.

4 MS. HOOTMAN: Right.

5 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers. I suspect

6 that if DOE found a model and went through all of the

7 steps and whatever monikerring or communication was

8 allowed and required, that if the AEDM selection that

9 had to change effected other products that were

10 similarly chosen and would have ratings that were

11 similarly out of quilter, that although there's only

12 one unit tested, there may well be -- the manufacturer

13 may well change the rating on multiple units; one

14 mandated by what we're putting up here and the others

15 out of prudence by the manufacturer because they

16 recognize -- this pointed out a flaw in the AEDM. I

17 know that I would if this occurred.

18 MS. BARHYDT: Is that something you want to

19 leave to the manufacturer, or is that something that

20 should be required?

21 MR. MYERS: It might be worthwhile to remind

22 the reader of the rule that they should consider any
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

214

1 other models that might be affected with the deficiency

2 of the AEDM that resulted in. But I suspect DOE, just

3 my guess, that you would focus much like Mr. Stanonik

4 is saying, the AHRI program, you've got to know if you

5 have a failure. Anything in that zone is going to be

6 subject to an early test the next time something's

7 selected. I believe that's likely to be the same kind

8 of occurrences with DOE because it's pointed out a

9 deficiency that was supposed to have been corrected and

10 you validate that it was with subsequent tests.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: So did I capture the three

12 options accurately here?

13 MR. KLEISS: I just want to clarify.

14 Rerating based on DOE test data only.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh.

16 MR. KLEISS: If we're talking about ratings

17 of a basic model, we've got to have statistical data in

18 order to do that rating. What does that mean?

19 MS. BARHYDT: I think that that probably is

20 not actually possible.

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: Technically, we're writing

22 the regs now.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

215

1 MS. BARHYDT: Well, that's true.

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: Anything is possible. If you

3 don't distinguish between -- so mine is, this is a

4 rerate single unit test, DOE run test, DOE data only.

5 This is not a rewrite on one test. There are no

6 statistics involved.

7 MS. BARHYDT: Are you comfortable with that?

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: Option three --

9 MS. BARHYDT: Is that your option?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Option three is the

11 certification --

12 MS. BARHYDT: To do more testing.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- testing route. You do

14 more testing at your experience and your option, and

15 you can then change your rating based on any test data

16 you have as well as the DOE test. So there are two

17 distinct things.

18 MR. STARR: It seems to me that if you

19 have an AEDM, it seems like there should be required

20 additional testing to confirm the validity of the AEDM,

21 especially if you're using a cross multiple categories

22 of equipment. It seems like at least that should be a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

216

1 requirement, that there be more statistical backup for

2 that validating the

3 AEDM.

4 I mean, we were talking about the number of

5 models yesterday. Well, maybe this is showing then for

6 a particular manufacturer that they need more models.

7 This is a minimum number now. So maybe that minimum

8 number should be decreasing if your model's not

9 accurately reflecting performance of the equipment.

10 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think the reason we don't -

11 - John Cymbalsky, DOE. So the only way this kicks in

12 is if they're going to lower the number? So think

13 about how this actually came to be, right. They rated

14 too high. So it's only in one direction. So I think it

15 protects what we're trying to protect which is -- so I

16 think we're okay with that.

17 MS. BARHYDT: And by definition, it's outside

18 the tolerance, so it's a fairly significant reduction

19 in the rating.

20 MR. CYMBALSKY: So we're thinking they're

21 going to want to retest if they want to keep the rating

22 at that initial level. So this is going to make them
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

217

1 lower the rating.

2 MR. STARR: I see. I got it.

3 MR. DOPPEL: Paul with Mitsubishi. It seems

4 that there should be a differentiation, maybe two

5 different paths if one -- if this model that was tested

6 by DOE was -- the ratings were formed purely on the

7 AEDM, then that should be one path.

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's all we're talking

9 about.

10 MR. DOPPEL: But if it was one of the units

11 that was tested to help formulate the AEDM, that that

12 may be should be a different path.

13 MS. BARHYDT: I believe we had proposed

14 something like that in the original proposal, but

15 that's open to discussion.

16 MR. STANONIK: This is Frank Stanonik with

17 AHRI. I think I get some of the -- I'll say the

18 conceptual concern here. But when you get to this

19 circumstance, and again, I emphasize, you've had all

20 the discussions and the bottom line was, this model

21 didn't hit the rating. It wasn't inside the tolerance -

22 - or this unit. The fact is that when you look at,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

218

1 okay, so why didn't it make it?

2 Okay. Is it possible your AEDM was faulty?

3 Yes. But it's also possible that particular model,

4 that unit just ended up because of -- you know, we're

5 not in a perfect world -- ended up being produced not

6 to the design. Whether it was a component that was

7 just way off of what you normally get from your

8 supplier, or whether it was, you know, I needed to have

9 this much heat exchange or this much coil and I didn't.

10 So we've got to accept that sometimes it

11 fails not because of the AEDM was wrong, but just that

12 one was built wrong.

13 MR. THARP: Option No. 3 takes care of that.

14 MR. STANONIK: Exactly. Yeah.

15 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens.

16 MS. BARHYDT: Go ahead.

17 MR. STEPHENS: I was thinking under the third

18 bullet point there that we would have the option of, if

19 the statistical validation proves the model is

20 acceptable, then we maintain the ratings. If it

21 doesn't, then we have more options we need to evaluate

22 such as pulling the unit out of the AEDM or reviewing
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

219

1 our AEDM to possibly redefine that and update that.

2 MR. STANONIK: Phillip, why do you keep

3 saying pulling it out of the AEDM? What does that

4 mean? I mean, if it's been rated based on the AEDM,

5 you're either going to have to rerate it or you

6 discontinue the model.

7 MS. HOOTMAN: Right. You discontinue the

8 model.

9 MR. STEPHENS: That's it. If the general

10 purpose of the AEDM is so that manufacturers don't have

11 an inordinate amount of testing to do for every new

12 produce releases; right?

13 MS. HOOTMAN: Or literally the one ofs. We

14 just can't.

15 MR. STANONIK: I mean, for all the models,

16 yeah.

17 MR. STEPHENS: Right. So if there happens to

18 be proven that a design didn't fit the AEDM when the

19 manufacturer thought it was, then it is possible that

20 that design just simply doesn't fit the AEDM. It

21 possibly needs to have another AEDM to characterize the

22 --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

220

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: But I don't think I'm in the

2 position to tell you that. In other words, I think you

3 are in the position to make that decision based on your

4 risk. You better believe that the department will more

5 than likely pull another unit in the near future that's

6 similar. And I think that in and of itself, you know,

7 while that's not going to be written in stone, but I

8 think that in and of itself as well as that seems to be

9 what AHRI does as well, I don't want to get into the

10 business of, A, requesting and AEDM, although Laura

11 does have the authority requested if she really needs

12 to; B, taking the time to go through and try to figure

13 out what's wrong.

14 I just think that's -- I mean, just like with

15 substantiation. That's on you. You have to weigh your

16 risk with your AEDM tolerances, your over

17 manufacturing, how you're rating, whatever you want to

18 do, that's up to you. But once we get to this point,

19 we've all come to the table and agreed we have a

20 ratings issue. And at that point in time, which avenue

21 you take and what you decide to rerate, the scope of

22 your rerate in terms of additional models is up to you,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

221

1 but at the very least we have to deal with this one.

2 I mean, to me, this leaves the flexibility to

3 the manufacturer to weigh their risk with the

4 applicability to other models that may be effected

5 versus which option they want to take in terms of

6 additional testing or just a rerate based on one test,

7 the DOE test only, or just taking the model altogether

8 off. Now, I think that covers the basis. Now, whether

9 the wording needs to be changed, that's open.

10 MS. HOOTMAN: One thing I want to ask on the

11 first one. Since we're doing this on a lot of custom

12 built products that have never been built before and

13 obviously relying on our statistical modeling for those

14 ratings, let's say we had one that we've agreed is now

15 a 92 percent failure, at the 92 percent rate. What if

16 I would like to rerate that at 90 percent of it. Can I

17 still go downwards?

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: You can always go down of the

19 standard.

20 MS. HOOTMAN: And I realize this is all not

21 below the minimums, but anyway.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: We'll get to that. Notice I
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

222

1 did not put anything --

2 MS. HOOTMAN: Right. I realize. We were

3 contexting that around that. Okay. I just wanted to

4 make sure it didn't have to come down to just the test

5 data only.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: No.

7 MS. HOOTMAN: Because that says DOE test data

8 only based on. And you can always --

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's your upper bound. But

10 I'll go there and make that explicit.

11 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel, Mitsubishi. Just a

12 clarification on my point. If you go to bullet No. 3,

13 additional manufacture testing. If the unit that DOE

14 tests did not have any testing and was just purely

15 based on the AEDM, there's no additional manufacturing

16 available -- testing available. If it was tested to

17 help formulate the AEDM, then that test should be

18 available to do an averaging or something like that.

19 That's --

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, that's true. But you

21 would elect to do more testing. I mean, three of the

22 way I look at it --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

223

1 MR. DOPPEL: Well, I know. More testing, but

2 that test should also be allowed.

3 MR. KLEISS: So are you saying --

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, as far as we're

5 concerned, you have to use our test data. And then

6 from there, if you have your own, if you have AHRIs, if

7 you have -- if you want to do more, it's up to you.

8 But you have to maintain all the documentation.

9 MR. DOPPEL: Okay. So the additional

10 manufacture's testing could be either preexisting test

11 data or newly generated test data?

12 MS. BARHYDT: So I'm going to ask if --

13 should the manufacturer be required to do additional

14 testing, or should you be able to rely on that

15 preexisting test data?

16 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp. I would say if a

17 manufacturer has existing test data or that specific

18 model, then they should be able to use that prior data.

19 And if they want to do additional testing, if they have

20 one sample, then there's the DOE sample, and if the

21 manufacturer wants to run one more sample to base it

22 off of three, then that should be okay.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

224

1 MR. DOPPEL: This is Paul Doppel. Was that -

2 - when you say existing, does that have to be -- I

3 mean, it has to be documented. Does it mean any

4 testing or --

5 MR. THARP: Any testing previously done.

6 MS. BARHYDT: To the DOE test procedure.

7 MR. DOPPEL: Right.

8 MR. KOJAK: This is Mike Kojak with U-haul.

9 That's what I wanted to bring up is you keep saying old

10 test data that you might have, but is that to the AHRI

11 test standard, or are you talking about old -- DOE

12 only. Okay.

13 MR. KOLANDAYAN: Dominic, Daikin. I'd like

14 to make a suggestion to Laura's question. I think it

15 should be left to the manufacturer's discretion

16 totally, whether we want to do additional testing, old

17 test data because we know what the risk is, so it's

18 better that we assess what the risk is and we decide

19 whether we want to do additional or use existing.

20 Thanks.

21 MS. BARHYDT: Sounds good. That was easy.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Do we have consensus?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

225

1 MR. WHITWELL: Bob from Carrier. Just so

2 clarification again just to go back. The first -- the

3 last bullet in the prior section that we talked about

4 before lunch, the last sentence there about retests

5 requests can include another unit. So this would be a

6 case perhaps where we've identified that there is a

7 manufacturing defect in the unit, it was not made

8 correctly and we request another test; correct? Or are

9 we talking about that now when we're getting down in

10 this current -- this third bullet in the new language?

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: My favorite term, defect.

12 MR. WHITWELL: Defect, I mean, like --

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct. So what it says

14 there is that DOE and the manufacturer can agree in

15 that last step that another sample is needed. If we

16 both agree that another sample is needed for the

17 retest, it will be a different unit. If we've gotten

18 past that point, you can still use -- I mean, if you

19 pick option three here, you can still pick -- I mean,

20 you can't test the same unit. So you would have to

21 pick an additional unit to test.

22 So by default, you know, you have two
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

226

1 opportunities there. One, it's something that you have

2 to get the department to agree to. The second one, you

3 can always test more units and add them to your sample

4 in your statistics.

5 MR. WHITWELL: Okay.

6 MR. EISNER: Rodney Beever wants to talk.

7 Rodney. Rodney, are you there? Okay. Anybody else

8 have anything they want to raise?

9 MR. KLEISS: Jeff, Lochinvar. Just in terms

10 of what's written on the screen, we probably should put

11 it in print, the manufacturer has the option of, and

12 then or, or.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right. Okay.

14 MR. KLEISS: The second thing is, as I'm

15 looking at this and thinking about, you know, I want

16 this to have teeth for people that aren't in a VICP.

17 And as Ashley said, that you better believe that we're

18 going to, you know, pick some more units that are

19 similar to that soon, but we haven't written it in

20 stone. Why not write it in stone? Should there be

21 additional testing of products --

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Can't do it.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

227

1 MR. KLEISS: -- from that manufacturer as a

2 consequence of a failed test?

3 MS. BARHYDT: DOE testing is always going to

4 be subject to resource availability. So for us to put

5 something in the regulations that mandated us to do

6 additional testing, it just doesn't make sense as a --

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: But you better believe from a

8 practical standpoint --

9 MS. BARHYDT: Right. Exactly.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- we're going to do it if we

11 can.

12 MR. KLEISS: Okay. Not everybody that would

13 be subject to this or that I want to feel the threat of

14 this has heard that. And unless it's in the federal

15 register then --

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: We can do that. I mean, we

17 can write preamble language that suggests that there

18 will be a strong possibility. We just can't promise in

19 red text that we will always. I'll put a note here.

20 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik. Ashley, one

21 other issue, and I'll put it out as a question and

22 withhold my personal opinion. But do we want to put a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

228

1 ceiling on how many additional tests could be done?

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: We don't have one now right

3 for if they take the testing route.

4 MR. STANONIK: Here's my concern. That --

5 okay. So the manufacturer -- first of all, again, we've

6 got this situation where that test unit didn't hit the

7 tolerance. That's serious, okay. And the manufacturer

8 says, "I want to run more tests," okay. That could be

9 a pretty long time.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's what the last sentence

11 was trying to --

12 MS. BARHYDT: So we haven't filled in --

13 MR. STANONIK: I'm sorry. I missed the X.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: I didn't put in the X, but I

15 put in the process needs to be completed by. In other

16 words, this isn't an endless do loop.

17 MR. EISNER: I think Jeff wanted -- didn't

18 Jeff also ask for "or is" after the first two

19 semicolons.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. I put semicolons, but

21 I haven't gotten there yet. Sorry. Thank you for

22 reminding me.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

229

1 MS. MEYERS: This is Karen with Rheem. Just

2 a point of clarification. So back up to the

3 conversation we had before lunch. And if we fail a

4 test, it's been said that the manufacturer has the

5 option to request a retest. Ashley, you made a comment

6 a few minutes ago that says, you know, if DOE agrees to

7 that retest. So are you saying that even though we may

8 request a retest, we may not get it?

9 MS. BARHYDT: I think what --

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: I said on another unit.

11 MS. BARHYDT: The second unit is the DOE

12 agreement part. The ability to request a retest is not

13 subject to DOE.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Which is what that says. If

15 a manufacturer was not previously on-site for the

16 initial test, a manufacturer can request a retest

17 automatically, and DOE and the manufacturer can be on18 site. If the retest request can include another --

19 that doesn't sound right. But basically another unit

20 has to be agreed upon by DOE and the manufacturer,

21 whether it's a separate unit. The retest is automatic.

22 MS. HOOTMAN: Retest to that existing unit.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

230

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Existing unit.

2 MS. MEYERS: Okay. Did everyone understand

3 that because I didn't understand that the first time

4 around.

5 MR. STANONIK: Karen, I think in the first

6 case, it's clearly you're just -- you're not

7 comfortable they ran the test right, you know, and

8 you've, let's say, went through all the discussions and

9 it still doesn't seem right. And you're saying, okay,

10 wait a minute. You know, test it again. Test that one

11 again. And so that's saying if you ask for that,

12 they're just going to go do it.

13 On the other hand, if you say --

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Is that okay?

15 MR. STANONIK: -- okay, well, I have concerns

16 about the test of the first unit, but I want you to

17 test another unit. And I can understand that because

18 you say, wait a minute, you're going to have to explain

19 that to me. Why this bad result on unit A needs me to

20 test unit B at that stage, okay, at that stage.

21 Obviously, when we get into the next stage

22 where every option's been exercised and you still came
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

231

1 back and came back at 92 percent, and you go, okay, now

2 we got to go to the next -- now we are going to test

3 more units or take your medicine and here's your new

4 rating.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Is that more clear?

6 MR. SHEBIK: Ron Shebik with Hussman. When

7 you're referring to another unit, is that -- do you

8 mean another unit of the same nomenclature --

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yes.

10 MR. SHEBIK: -- in model? Okay.

11 MR. BAUMAN: Your certain point at the

12 bottom, Ashley, is really rerating and recertifying

13 based on additional --

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

15 MR. BAUMAN: By rerating --

16 MS. BARHYDT: Would everyone agree that, A --

17 I'm going to say rerate, but it's not so much that I'm

18 expecting the number to change, but that a new

19 representation should be made to the department with

20 regard to that model basically acknowledging that we've

21 completed our additional testing, we've done whatever,

22 and we are recertifying it in accordance with AEDM
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

232

1 because our additional test data showed our AEDM

2 ultimately was within tolerance? Or we are rerating

3 and based upon test data now instead of based on an

4 AEDM? Would everyone agree that that is -- Jeff, you

5 look puzzled.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't think it matters.

7 MR. BAUMAN: Can I just -- I think what

8 you're saying is that if that model doesn't test, it's

9 not part of the AEDM -- it's not part of the AEDM. We

10 don't have a fourth option in there that says I can

11 still rate on an AEDM. I either have to test it on

12 your one test, my multiple tests or take it out.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: You got it.

14 MR. BAUMAN: I can't rate that on an AEDM

15 again.

16 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. So what I'm thinking of

17 is, is more mechanical issue of -- at this point in

18 time, DOE has a certification that the manufacturer has

19 filed with us saying, "We did not test; we rated this

20 in accordance with an AEDM."

21 MS. ARMSTRONG: You would have to revise

22 that.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

233

1 MS. BARHYDT: DOE did a test, and we have now

2 determined it was invalid. And our expectation is that

3 the manufacturer would file something new saying, we've

4 done one of these three things.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right.

6 MS. BARHYDT: Okay.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: We need another option in our

8 -- that's what you're getting at. This process should

9 be done in. What's reasonable? I put X up there. I

10 wasn't going to with a --

11 MR. KLEISS: Jeff, Lochinvar. Sixty.

12 MS. HOOTMAN: What did you say?

13 MR. KLEISS: My bid's 60.

14 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay. In unitary large for the

15 very large rooftops, we have 90 days. That's just to

16 supply it, not to test it. Just to supply it.

17 MR. STANONIK: I think there either has to be

18 -- the duration or the time period either has to be

19 driven by the extremely, the very large, the one ofs or

20 you have two criteria. One criteria being for the

21 stuff that -- for lack of a better word -- I don't make

22 it until you order it, and then it may take me how long
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

234

1 to build it. And then the other criteria for, to

2 whatever extent this fits, readily orderable commercial

3 equipment. I don't know. Maybe it's a better

4 description for that. But the rooftops that you sell

5 in significant volume that --

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: Are you going to go to -- I

7 mean, but for those, are you really going to pick

8 option three?

9 MS. HOOTMAN: Possibly.

10 MR. STANONIK: Oh, you might.

11 MS. HOOTMAN: Done it.

12 MR. CYMBALSKY: Can we have a different

13 option? So if we choose option one and two --

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Thirty days.

15 MR. STANONIK: I mean, actually, then if you

16 wanted to lay the process --

17 MS. HOOTMAN: On options one and two, I think

18 a reasonable time is within 14 days. We will report

19 back to you what we're going to do.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Okay.

21 MS. HOOTMAN: I mean, that's a report.

22 That's a, you know, whatever you want to say something
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

235

1 gets filed, I don't care. A decision gets made. Yeah,

2 14 working days don't you think is reasonable? I mean,

3 that's what we do right now; isn't it?

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: How about 15. Just make it

5 three weeks.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: Okay.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: It should be completed for

8 option one and two in -- I mean, if you decide within

9 15 working days to discontinue the model, you don't

10 need 60 more days to discontinue the model.

11 MR. STANONIK: Right.

12 MS. HOOTMAN: Just another probably 30 to

13 take it out of stuff, you know. I mean, you're going

14 to have to take it out of literature, take it out of --

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. I mean, to complete

16 the process, but I mean to -- so say, maybe we have a

17 different, you know, maybe option one and two.

18 MR. STANONIK: For the sake of discussion, I

19 would say if retesting is selected, that retesting for

20 -- again, what I'm going to call inventoried units --

21 again, maybe that's the wrong word -- but the stuff

22 that you can order readily easily, I would say that
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

236

1 additional testing should be completed within 45 days,

2 just to points of discussion. And then for the one

3 ofs, you know, built to order stuff, what 90 days or

4 longer, 120? Or longer.

5 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. What we have in ULE

6 right now is the participant shall have a second sample

7 of the same model or combination, combination being

8 split systems, available within 60 calendar days for

9 systems 65,000 to 250,000, less than 250,000, and then

10 90 calendar days for systems 250 to 760,000. And then

11 90 days -- I mean, that's stretching it. And that's

12 just to have available.

13 MR. SUTPHEN: This is John Sutphen, Clever

14 Brooks. I suggest that for one ofs, at least 180 days.

15 You got to take into consideration if this unit fails,

16 manufacturers are going to want to do some sort of

17 investigation as to why that unit failed. There's

18 going to have to be some sort of engineering analysis

19 as to that design. Does it fit with the other designs

20 in that model?

21 If there is a difference, there's going to

22 have to be some engineering changes taking place at the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

237

1 manufacturing level. And then a new unit being built.

2 Some of our products are 14-, 15-week lead time units,

3 then it has to get shipped, it has to get installed, it

4 could take another three weeks. Then the test setup

5 and then retesting it could --

6 MS. BARHYDT: So I actually think you've

7 raised an interesting issue which is that I think --

8 what I was envisioning with this was, it was building

9 and testing the same thing that we had previously

10 tested as opposed to reengineering it because if you

11 reengineer it, then DOE's original test isn't a test of

12 the same thing anymore to be combined for the certified

13 rating. So --

14 MR. STANONIK: Yeah. If at this stage, you

15 still have not determined in fact when it's rated

16 correctly or not, so that second test has to be a unit

17 of the same model.

18 MR. HON: I have a question here. If the

19 first unit fails, you presently own it. Is it -- how

20 could we get that unit back because we made need it for

21 analysis? Would it be purchase it back from you?

22 MS. BARHYDT: I'll have to set you up as a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

238

1 vendor in our system. I don't think we can. I will

2 look into that and we can maybe talk about that at the

3 next meeting, but I don't think that you can.

4 MR. HON: Because we would like to get it

5 back for full analysis.

6 MS. BARHYDT: I understand that.

7 MR. HON: That's why I'm asking this question

8 because eventually you're going to have a piece of

9 equipment, either you have to pay to dispose of or sell

10 it in an open market situation or selling it to us.

11 MR. WHITWELL: We won't do that. Charles

12 raises an important question because that's good

13 information for us to understand what happened with

14 that particular unit. And it could help us to improve

15 our AEDM. It could help us to improve our design, our

16 manufacturing process, many things.

17 MS. BARHYDT: We can look into it, but at

18 this time I'm not aware of a way for us to do that.

19 MR. HON: Charlie Hon again. I would highly

20 encourage it because there's three advantages. Number

21 one is we need the unit back to find out what happened.

22 No. 2, you've invested a lot of money in a unit that is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

239

1 now shown deficient. We're going to -- we're

2 definitely going to be spending more money after the

3 fact anyway.

4 So you're benefiting because you're going to

5 recoup some of your original expenditure because you're

6 going to dedicate a lot more time into this program at

7 that point. So your cost of that particular item is

8 very high and growing by the day. Why wouldn't you

9 return it back to you at a reasonable -- at purchase

10 price?

11 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi.

12 Another thing that we have to consider, too, is that a

13 lot of components we put into our systems are

14 purchased. And I've had experience in the past before

15 where a test failure resulted in a compressor that was

16 actually sold to us that was not performing as it

17 should have, but was not told to us. So it was only

18 through additional analysis that we made the

19 determination that we actually had been sold a

20 defective product, a defective component.

21 MS. BARHYDT: I'm persuaded of the value. It

22 is a government regulation issue that I'm going to have
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

240

1 to consult with other people about.

2 MR. EISNER: That said, where do we stand on

3 this?

4 MR. STANONIK: Since it was still up there, I

5 think what I was corrected on is that -- on that last

6 line, it should be perhaps 60, 90. Inventory unit 60,

7 built to order 90.

8 MS. HOOTMAN: Speaking unitary HVAC?

9 MR. STANONIK: And the other --

10 MR. EISNER: Turn on your mic.

11 MS. MEYERS: So that 60, 90, that's in the

12 AHRI program is to have the unit available, it's not

13 really to complete the testing. So --

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: You're doing that testing in

15 your facility.

16 MS. MEYERS: Pardon me?

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: You're doing the testing in

18 your facility.

19 MS. HOOTMAN: The second test?

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Uh-huh. Wherever you want.

21 MS. MEYERS: But even, I've got to open up a

22 lab to do that.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

241

1 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. I'm not saying that

2 that doesn't mean that the time still needs to be

3 changed, but I'm just saying that you're not physically

4 shipping that unit -- well, unless you want to.

5 MS. MEYERS: I ship because my lab is not

6 necessarily at the same place.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: At this point it's all on

8 you. It's at your discretion.

9 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik. One thing I

10 want to point out so we don't lose sight of it, okay,

11 built to order, it requires longer. But the other part

12 of this to recognize is in fact the built to order also

13 around made all that frequently, so the -- if you will,

14 I'm like putting on Harvey's hat right now -- the risk

15 that there are misrated models, units out in the field

16 is just not as great with those products because you

17 wish you could sell more of them. I mean, that's why

18 they're built to order. And so the fact that you're

19 allowing a little more time to figure out, is it rated

20 properly or not, isn't really a major effect in the

21 market.

22 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers on that 90
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

242

1 days on build to order. I don't have the situation

2 right now, but I have had suppliers of critical parts

3 which would disenable me from building some of these

4 units with 12 week lead time which is more than that,

5 so.

6 MR. SUTPHEN: This is John Sutphen. I

7 concur. I think especially for large equipment, there

8 needs to be at least 180 days just to get purchase

9 parts in and put the unit through the shop and ship it

10 to a facility for testing.

11 MR. MYERS: Yeah. A number of pieces of

12 equipment on these have to be custom-built for us, so

13 we get the request for what's desired by the customer,

14 we engineer what they're going to get and then we

15 subcontract it out with different control manufacturers

16 to build these pieces of equipment, and those kinds of

17 providers are generally long lead.

18 MS. BARHYDT: So I'm not exactly sure how we

19 would craft this into regulatory text, but how about if

20 within that 15 working days, the manufacturer

21 identified for DOE the time period they need to be able

22 to have the tests -- not just have the unit built and
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

243

1 ready to go, but we commit to having it done by this

2 date?

3 MR. MYERS: Yeah. We already have the

4 building material for this unit, so we can determine

5 what the time to get all of the components in.

6 MS. BARHYDT: And is there a not to exceed

7 day that everybody would be comfortable with?

8 MR. MYERS: 180.

9 MS. BARHYDT: 180?

10 MR. MYERS: Yeah. Not to exceed 180, but we

11 have to inform you --

12 MS. BARHYDT: For having the testing done as

13 well?

14 MR. MYERS: I --

15 MS. HOOTMAN: Remember, the testing is not,

16 could it be in our lab, but it would be also dependent

17 on whatever labs you have contracted with, and, you

18 know, when is their next time, too. So some of that is

19 under our control, some of that is not under our

20 control.

21 MS. BARHYDT: So this is your ability to test

22 wherever you want to test, so it's not what we have
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

244

1 contracted.

2 MS. HOOTMAN: What if I said, I want you to

3 go ahead and put it --

4 MS. BARHYDT: Oh, if you -- if you're

5 choosing to have it tested there.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah.

7 MS. BARHYDT: Okay. I understand.

8 MR. MYERS: It would be better if we were

9 talking about how quickly we can get it to -- make it

10 available to a test facility. Then once we give you

11 that date, then we can say, all right, test facility,

12 plan on having this unit there by this date so that you

13 can begin testing as soon as possible.

14 And if they're -- if there's one lab that

15 does this particular piece of equipment and we're

16 unable to do it at our facility, so that's our only

17 choice, we made it available, and then as quickly as

18 their schedule can get it in, it would be tested. So

19 regulate us for what we have control over.

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Would this cover it?

21 MS. MEYERS: Maybe if you put, this process

22 should not exceed 180 days instead of must not just in
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

245

1 case it's got to take 190.

2 MS. HOOTMAN: Or just in case a plant burns

3 down. And don't laugh. I've had a supplier that was

4 that way.

5 MR. MYERS: That's reasonable.

6 MR. KLEISS: Jeff, Lochinvar. I've got to

7 throw stones at this. If I've got the Cymbalsky 1000

8 and it failed the test --

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: Likely.

10 MR. KLEISS: -- and I decide --

11 MR. CYMBALSKY: It's called physics.

12 MR. KLEISS: So I discontinue it and next

13 week I release the Cymbalsky 1001 with the same

14 ratings.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: It happens all the time.

16 MR. STANONIK: Keep in mind, Jeff, hopefully

17 we're in the stage where we now have certification

18 reporting requirements that we can all live with.

19 You're going to have to provide certification

20 information for that new model.

21 MS. BARHYDT: I'm going to make Jeff's

22 argument for him. But I have an AEDM.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

246

1 MR. CYMBALSKY: And I can't wait to test it.

2 MR. KOJAK: To play devil's advocate. What

3 happens if, again, it fails and then they pull and they

4 come out with the third version with the same rating?

5 MR. MYERS: It's my understanding these

6 failures are -- this is Frank Myers, PVI -- that these

7 will be made public record so that everybody can see

8 that there has been a failure. If I were a competitor

9 of this manufacturer and I saw such shenanigans going

10 on and had evidence from DOE that there was a failure,

11 I would be reporting that errant manufacturer left and

12 right to DOE, probably even getting one of their pieces

13 of equipment and testing to provide them evidence of

14 this kind of shenanigans.

15 MS. MEYERS: Within AHRI there are

16 significant penalties if you repeatedly fail, and your

17 competitors are informed of that and you have increased

18 testing requirements, there's -- you can go through the

19 list.

20 But I mean, repeated failures, I mean, you

21 get the big Scarlet A on you and everyone knows that.

22 And then we use that against our competitors all the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

247

1 time in the marketplace. So I mean, it's a big deal if

2 you fail a test.

3 MR. STANONIK: And I don't know if this is in

4 the plan here, but I'm in agreement with all of this,

5 but I think at some point we should discuss that if a

6 particular manufacturer with DOE doing the testing, I'm

7 just going to make up a number here. Let's say they

8 had five instances, five different models using the

9 same AEDM where you got to that stage where, wait a

10 minute, something's got to be rated.

11 To me, at some point, there's enough data

12 building that DOE in fact says, wait a minute. Now,

13 we're not talking about rerating models. We're talking

14 about something's wrong with the AEDM because -- and I

15 don't know what the number is, but clearly at some

16 point it's not just a question of, okay, this

17 particular model came down the production line and

18 something went out of my QC. There's at some point an

19 indication an error was made in the AEDM.

20 MR. CYMBALSKY: So do you want to -- John

21 Cymbalsky. Do you want to suggest that if a company's

22 model fails a certain number of times, their AEDM is
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

248

1 pulled?

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: They cannot use the AEDM.

3 MR. CYMBALSKY: They cannot use the AEDM?

4 We're fine with that, but we're leaving it up to you

5 since you suggested it.

6 MR. STANONIK: John, I was just suggesting I

7 think the working group needs to discuss it, but I

8 don't want to derail the current discussion, but I

9 would rather have a discussion within the working group

10 than kind of say, oh, we forgot all about it.

11 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think it's a good point,

12 and we're kind of leaving it up to you all to --

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: We cannot propose something

14 like that.

15 MR. HON: There's a couple questions here.

16 Number one is, because we -- several of us will be

17 developing multiple AEDMs programs, even though the

18 general category is broader than what we would work

19 with, say, glass stored refrigerators, we will have

20 multiple AEDMs within that bracket because of different

21 design criteria built into them. And then is only that

22 AEDM disqualified, or are all of our AEDMs
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

249

1 disqualified?

2 MR. CYMBALSKY: I don't even know if we'll

3 know which one you used, will we? We don't know if

4 it's AEDM one, two, three, four.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Laura can know.

6 MR. HON: That's questions that need to be

7 clarified.

8 MR. CYMBALSKY: Yeah.

9 MR. HON: Because it makes it possible for

10 people to generate huge amounts of AEDMs with only two

11 data points. And then every time you look at one, it's

12 a different AEDM.

13 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers. Again, DOE

14 has suggested, and I understand and agree with their

15 position, they don't want to get into reviewing the

16 AEDM. We've not yet talked about the penalty phase. I

17 don't know if that's a part of what we'll do. But my

18 recollection is there is a fair amount of latitude in

19 how DOE applies penalties. If there's good

20 cooperation, it can be -- I'll euphemize and say a slap

21 on the hands, slap on the wrist. But if there's

22 recalcitrance and denial and I'm not going to fix it,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

250

1 there are some huge fines that can be levied, and I

2 would think that would be the place rather than going

3 after the AEDM. If this manufacturer has shown

4 themselves to be that kind of a manufacturer, there are

5 the financial implications, the financial burdens that

6 can be pressed upon them by DOE.

7 MR. WHITWELL: Bob Whitwell from Carrier.

8 One other comment is, if we have multiple instances,

9 I'm thinking that my management's going to be all over

10 me before DOE comes to talk to us about, what are you

11 doing, how are you rating your products and how come

12 we're having these problems.

13 MR. CYMBALSKY: That's what DOE hopes.

14 That's what we're trying to do here.

15 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik. I want to be

16 clear to Charlie's point. I was specifically saying,

17 it's the same AEDM. But again, to me at some point it

18 becomes a question not of what happened in your

19 production, but what happened in your model. You know,

20 so it's the same AEDM.

21 MR. HON: Charlie Hon. I was just doing it

22 because I think that people can play a secondary game
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

251

1 with multiple AEDMs, everybody shielding the majority

2 of your product from review under a single AEDM.

3 MS. BARHYDT: So let's say hypothetically

4 we've got a company that tries to shelter themselves in

5 that way. They have to have the test data underlying

6 each AEDM. And so if you are trying to gain the system

7 with your AEDMs, you're also increasing your test

8 burden. So --

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: And at some point, we'll just

10 say, "Let us have all your test data."

11 MR. HON: But that's what I'm looking at

12 because it is possible to do this, but it would come

13 with a lot of pain -- potential pain if they get caught

14 often enough.

15 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. I

16 think one of the bullet points we had on one of the

17 previous slides was that we could reuse the same test

18 data for multiple AEDMs under certain categories.

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: I guess that brings up a

20 different question. If one of the failures -- failure

21 is not a good word. But if we determine the rating is

22 invalid for one of the units that you use to
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

252

1 substantiate an AEDM, should you have to have a new

2 unit? A new model. I'm sorry. For your package.

3 Because your package is no longer valid.

4 MR. HON: Charlie Hon. A true AEDM will be

5 modified on a continual basis. Every time you test a

6 unit that would fall within a AEDM scope, you should be

7 applying it into your AEDM to verify the variances and

8 update your AEDM to get you more refined every time you

9 do it.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't disagree with you.

11 And I'm sure that's the practice of every single person

12 in the room. But what if it's not? Do we need to be

13 explicit about that? Because if you guys are already

14 doing it, then you've taken care of it. There's no

15 issue. But if there's not, do we need to be explicit?

16 In other words, for those that don't have verification,

17 for those that may not continually always update, for

18 those who just test the bare minimum and then from

19 there use an Excel spreadsheet? Do we need provisions?

20 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi.

21 You know, to me one of the concerns about continually

22 updating your AEDM is that it could cause some of your
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

253

1 systems to fall outside, and then you would have to

2 have a means to rerate those so that they are back

3 within the AEDM. And, you know, right now with AHRI,

4 you just don't go in there, rerate something for no

5 reason.

6 So, you know, we have to think about that,

7 too. You know, what are you going to do if your system

8 suddenly is outside of what it was when the AEDM was

9 originally done?

10 MS. BARHYDT: I have a function question

11 because I don't know really know how you use your AEDMs

12 or how difficult it is to run an AEDM for something.

13 If you have additional data points and you're tweaking

14 your AEDM and always continually improving it, do you

15 then rerun it for, say, your six models or whatever to

16 see whether or not those -- your tweaks have impacted

17 those six that were your substantiation package?

18 MS. HOOTMAN: Sometimes. Sometimes. And so

19 Paul's point is on this, is Jill a trained -- Paul's

20 point is correct. So let me just give a scenario. We

21 develop a product in 2005. We are test models, we've

22 done our simulation. Now, it's gone through many years
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

254

1 of obviously testing through AHRI and we've had

2 multiple more new tests. We've redone the simulation

3 product every single time. We now have revisions on

4 simulations programs.

5 So it's got revision control and all that

6 kind of stuff and we're now in multiple revisions.

7 Yeah. At some points we are going back and checking

8 our data and checking all the other models that might

9 have been based on that. And right now, even if I find

10 literally a typo or something that I found that we did

11 human input error, I have to go back to AHRI to kind of

12 plea that case and get them to help me change my -- I

13 can't go in and physically change my human error.

14 So, you know, I mean, it's a system that

15 doesn't really even allow us to do that. But, yeah, we

16 are -- I would say we're doing it. Now, it's a good

17 point, Ashley, I don't quite have an answer right now,

18 but it's a good point because somebody who is maybe

19 less sophisticated and, like I said, kind of using more

20 of a broad brush kind of program, I don't know. I

21 don't know what -- I do feel like you should have a way

22 to do that, but I don't want those of us that keep
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

255

1 continually doing it have to go rerated on just that

2 one unit.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't think you would have

4 to, right? I mean -- this is Ashley from DOE. To the

5 extent you are continually testing products, you just

6 are building more of a base of your test data at least

7 in my opinion. So putting a provision in there that if

8 you just tested the bare minimum and one of those

9 proves to be invalid, that you need at least -- you

10 need to maintain a minimum number of valid tests

11 always, period. And if you do that on a continual

12 basis, great. But if you don't, then that will trigger

13 an additional test.

14 And so for those of you in the room, which I

15 assume is everyone, you're going to continually

16 validate. There's no issue. You may have additional

17 verification tests. I mean, you're just building your

18 test back up. You go nowhere near the minimum. But for

19 someone who is at the minimum, which could in some

20 cases be two units, in one of the two underlying their

21 whole simulation and all of their ratings is invalid,

22 then they would be triggered -- so the key here would
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

256

1 be you would have to maintain a minimum -- the minimum

2 amount, and they would have to be valid tests always.

3 Does that seem reasonable?

4 MS. HOOTMAN: I think so, yeah.

5 MR. STANONIK: So, Ashley, in your example

6 where you've only got two. So what you're really

7 saying is that -- well, what's going to happen is not

8 one of your - - let me call them data points -- your

9 hard data points, one of them will be a new model,

10 right, because if, again, we went through all this and

11 we couldn't validate that reading, you know, we went

12 through every -- you know, all the steps, and at the

13 end of the day it was, sorry, this rating is

14 inaccurate, it's really saying you're going to have to

15 put a new model in there as your hard data point.

16 MR. KLEISS: Jeff, Lochinvar. If -- would it

17 be reasonable to say that if a manufacturer has within

18 a five year period three units that fail to meet the

19 ratings that are published, that that manufacturer is

20 not allowed to use AED

21 MS. HOOTMAN: That puts the management, the

22 changing, the updating, the validation -- or sorry,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

257

1 substantiation of the AEDM on the shoulders of the

2 manufacturer and allows flexibility.

3 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp, Goodman. I think

4 percentage would be better than a specific number.

5 MS. MEYERS: Jeffrey, you're referring to

6 people that are not in a VICP?

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: I didn't think at this point

8 we're distinguishing because we haven't defined what a

9 VICP is. That's for later; right? So at this point it

10 would just be. Period, this is the minimum base

11 requirements.

12 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: I do agree with Rusty, that a

14 percentage makes a lot more sense than --

15 MR. MYERS: PVI Industries. I would much

16 rather see an escalation of fines with somehow

17 percentages or numbers rather than you cannot use an

18 AEDM, force that manufacturer to revise their AEDM.

19 The reason for that is many manufacturers would simply

20 be unable to continue to do business. They wouldn't

21 have a chance to correct their act if they hit that

22 three because they would be out of business unable to
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

258

1 comply with, practically speaking, DOE's requirements

2 without an AEDM. And if their product line doesn't fit

3 nicely within an existing VICP program, that would be

4 the third strike. You're not out of an AEDM; you're

5 out of business. But if it were a escalating fine,

6 even if it were a horrific fine, at least that gives an

7 opportunity to -- rather than spend more money on

8 fines, spend it on a better AEDM.

9 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. I

10 think I may have concerns with just simply going with a

11 percentage because smaller manufacturers with fewer

12 products in each product line, the percentage can be

13 out of quilter. It's a much larger percentage for one

14 failure out of five than it is one out of 20.

15 MR. KLEISS: Jeff, Lochinvar. In response to

16 the comments about fines versus AEDM, if you have one

17 failure, you need a high motivation to have

18 conservative ratings. If you have two failures, you've

19 got very strong motivation to have conservative

20 ratings. And of course, fines could do a similar

21 thing. But I'm just looking for ways to keep primarily

22 to your question, Karen, primarily to nonparticipants
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

259

1 in VICPs where there is validation I think it's highly

2 unlikely that you would have repeated failures. But in

3 general, I want to make - - try and keep the players

4 honest.

5 MR. SUTPHEN: This is John Sutphen. I think

6 the fines might be a good idea. I find it hard to

7 justify monetary penalty if someone might fail their

8 rating but still be well above the standard, so they're

9 in compliance with the government regulations, they

10 might just be fibbing on their rating. I think they

11 should maybe lower it to the minimum standard and then

12 they can't tout that sales literature, but by all

13 practical purposes, they're within the law.

14 MS. BARHYDT: To borrow your phrase, fibbing

15 on ratings, would not be a lawful activity.

16 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik. But on this

17 question, I think Ashley said it. It only is

18 reasonable to be -- it's a percentage of the models

19 that are rated using that specific AEDM as using Jeff's

20 three. I mean, foreseeably, for whatever number of

21 reasons, maybe an AEDM, I've only listed five models,

22 or I've used for five models of some unique special
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

260

1 design I have, okay.

2 Personally, if two of those failed, I

3 wouldn't feel real good about that AEDM. On the other

4 hand, if, you know, what I think we would all hope, I

5 have an AEDM that I'm applying, let's say, to a hundred

6 models. Well, if three of those failed, I'm still not

7 -- I'm not at all convinced my AEDM's bad. But you

8 know, if -- again, whatever my percentage might be, but

9 if some percentage of those failed, again, now it gets

10 to me where we say kind of the tipping point, says,

11 okay, wait a minute. You know, bad production process,

12 bad components, whatever. This is an issue, your

13 model's -- something foggy's on your model.

14 So I think -- because the AEDM is set up, the

15 manufacturers are going to decide how many models he's

16 going to include in the AEDM based on what he's willing

17 to do to substantiate it, based on what he's willing to

18 do as far as he goes to the market and all those

19 things. And so this issue of at what point does

20 potentially DOE say, "Sorry, you can't use that AEDM

21 anymore." I think it has to be based on a percentage.

22 There's no single one number.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

261

1 MR. HON: This is Charlie. I have a

2 question. I heard two different things here. You're

3 saying a single AEDM and he said you could not use

4 AEDMs, plural, which means all of them. That's a big,

5 big difference.

6 MR. KLEISS: Jeff, Lochinvar. I mean, I'm

7 looking at it from our perspective. The way that we

8 would be applying this I expect is that we would have

9 multiple different AEDMs for each different product

10 family. We got -- we talked -- I'm on. And if a

11 similar manufacturer to us has three different failures

12 from three different AEDMs in a five-year period,

13 there's something wrong with how that manufacturer is

14 using AED

15 FEMALE SPEAKER. And it doesn't matter if they're coming

16 from one or multiple, but something needs to change.

17 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff from National. It

18 seems to me we're somewhat overcomplicating this and

19 really asking -- I mean, we talked previously about

20 self- regulating. And if we do a bad AEDM and somebody

21 says that you're going to get a call from the corner

22 office and you get products that are bad as far as the
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

262

1 engineering.

2 But I think kind of going back to the simple

3 notion that if you don't pass the -- you're off by the

4 percentage, you have to rerate your product to drop it,

5 basically however you do that rerating on that

6 particular product, if that product was used to model

7 your AEDM, that AEDM is invalid anymore because you

8 based it on a faulty premise.

9 But other than that, I think it should go

10 back to the manufacturer to -- you know, again, with

11 DOE having the option to be able to look at many models

12 and look at that manufacturer closer as opposed to

13 saying, this percentage -- you know, and how do those

14 percentages work out to somebody that's had multiple

15 AEDMs versus one AEDM and, you know, all those other

16 considerations. They're just all over the place.

17 MS. BARHYDT: But so DOE goes back and does

18 more testing, and every single thing we test, very

19 consistently, every single thing we test is overrated,

20 should there not be some additional consequence?

21 MR. BAUMAN: Well, yeah. I think that goes

22 to those products. You're getting multiple products,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

263

1 whether they were rated by an AEDM or whether they were

2 rated by testing and they're not meeting with the

3 standard -- or they're outside with the certification,

4 then you have the option as we talked previously that

5 fines or other penalties.

6 That doesn't necessarily -- the kind of one

7 bad apple comes to me is that, you know, was that -- so

8 every product in there, you know, should that become

9 invalid if it was a model that was on the AEDM and not

10 necessarily one that was used to develop it. And you

11 having to go into our -- and again, you back and you

12 try to -- you pull up an AEDM or you just kind of

13 formulate and you go back to try to -- somebody else in

14 our company trying to explain how to -- how you figured

15 -- you know, how that was all figured out and how the

16 calculations were applied to, it seems like that's

17 going to be a lot of challenge for somebody, DOE and

18 us, to try to explain it to you exactly how sometimes

19 it works.

20 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr. A couple of

21 things. One, it does seem like if there's starting to

22 be a pattern of abusive AEDMs, there needs to be some
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

264

1 kind of -- some way of handling that. And the other

2 thing, too, is, is ratings that are over -- above the

3 minimum but still are used for incentive programs or

4 also where a lot of times utilities are awarding

5 rebates based upon those. So if the minimum is ten and

6 you're producing a 12 for an incentive program, it's

7 really 11.9. In my mind, that's pretty bad, too.

8 So there's not really -- it's just as bad as

9 not meeting the minimum as one that's overstating its

10 performance for utility incentives as well. And, you

11 know, that also goes back to reflecting, yesterday,

12 remember we talked about the refrigerator cases and how

13 there's 36 different types and we're going to end up

14 with 16 now. And so the question is, how well do those

15 AEDMs really reflect the performance of it?

16 So it kind of goes to the question of what

17 we're talking about right now to some extent. And

18 that's why if you're using an AEDM for a whole bunch of

19 equipment classes that don't really reflect it

20 accurately, you know, that's kind of why the -- it

21 seems like there needs to be some way to handle that.

22 MR. EISNER: It looks like Ashley's putting
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

265

1 up some ideas on the board with Xs in there. We're

2 getting recommendations all over the place on this.

3 We've got to start narrowing it down.

4 MR. THARP: This is Rusty with Goodman. One

5 of the things that in the AHRI program for products

6 rated with ARM, if one combination fails, the second

7 sample or that first sample the manufacturer chooses to

8 rerate, then all combinations of that specific model

9 are derated the same percentage. Maybe something

10 similar could be done if you have multiple failures

11 from an AEDM. So if you have an AEDM, one model fails

12 at 92, you select another model and it fails at 91,

13 then everything with that AEDM is derated by eight or 9

14 percent.

15 MR. EISNER: Let's look at what Ashley's put

16 up here.

17 First sentence. Does anybody have a problem

18 with it? "All models used to substantiate,

19 authenticate the AEDM must present a valid test."

20 Anybody have a problem?

21 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. When you're -- I guess

22 all models used to substantiate an AEDM. When you're
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

266

1 in development, you're going to use a lot of different

2 things to build that up. And so it may not all be from

3 a valid test, especially when we come down do

4 components and how we're using component, engines and

5 databases.

6 MS. BARHYDT: These are -- I think she's just

7 referring to the two percent category. So the ones

8 that ultimately are part of your substantiation package

9 have to be a valid test.

10 MS. HOOTMAN: So the models, that's fine.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: Is that better?

12 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah.

13 MS. BARHYDT: My question is a wording issue

14 of a valid test. Presumably at the time that test was

15 done, it was a valid test. It's that subsequent

16 testing --

17 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. Test standards have

18 changed.

19 MS. BARHYDT: -- it invalidated the rating;

20 it didn't necessarily invalidate the test.

21 MS. HOOTMAN: Yeah. And also test standards

22 might have changed from the time the initial one was
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

267

1 done.

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't know how else to say

3 it.

4 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. How

5 about valid and current.

6 MS. HOOTMAN: Uhn-uhn. You would have to go

7 back and test, and then you're --

8 MR. EISNER: Just do it? Is the language now

9 okay?

10 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. I

11 think we had just mentioned that manufacturers will be

12 updating their AEDM on an ongoing basis.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Then you would automatically

14 meet this requirement.

15 MR. STEPHENS: Right. So when we update our

16 AEDM, are we expected to provide all of the data to the

17 department every time?

18 MS. BARHYDT: You're never.

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: You're never expected to

20 provide -- I mean, what we've agreed here, unless we

21 ask for it. But if we ask for it and your minimum

22 requirements with a model that we've determined has an
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

268

1 invalid rating, we have an issue. But if you're

2 constantly doing it, then you would just make your

3 package is -- it's just the documentation.

4 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi.

5 Just to be clear on the labs that do the testing, is

6 there any requirement for them to be third party

7 certified?

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: What does that mean? What do

9 you mean?

10 MR. DOPPEL: Well, for Energy Star ratings,

11 the lab has to have a third party.

12 MS. BARHYDT: DOE does not have that

13 requirement.

14 MR. DOPPEL: Okay.

15 MR. SUTPHEN: This is John Sutphen. Is it

16 you're updating your AEDM based on more testing? I'm

17 assuming you're also allowed to update your ratings

18 listed on the --

19 MS. ARMSTRONG: You're required to if they're

20 less efficient.

21 MR. SUTPHEN: If they're more. Let's say --

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. You can update it.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

269

1 MR. SUTPHEN: -- you do your minimum two

2 tests, so you want to be conservative on all your

3 ratings, so you pass. But then as you do more testing,

4 you realize that you might have been too conservative.

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: Absolutely. You can rerate

6 at any time, every day if you'd like.

7 MR. SUTPHEN: Okay. Thank you.

8 MR. EISNER: So any objections to the first

9 sentence?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't think you want to do

11 that, but --

12 MR. EISNER: Hearing no objections, let's go

13 on to the second sentence. Parentheses, if DOE testing

14 shows an invalid rating for one of the models that is

15 part of the minimum substantiation requirements, a new

16 model must be tested. Any objections? Yes. You don't

17 get a vote, but we'll listen to you.

18 MR. MYERS: As I was saying before, that is

19 draconian, especially for a small manufacturer.

20 Perhaps he's only got one single line of products, then

21 if he can't use the AEDM, he has to test every model.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: No one is talking about that.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

270

1 MS. BARHYDT: It's not saying that he can't

2 use the AEDM. It's just saying that he has to test

3 another model as part of his substantiation package,

4 not the one that we determine was --

5 MS. ARMSTRONG: We're not talking about the

6 second bullet. We're still on the first bullet.

7 MS. BARHYDT: First bullet.

8 MR. MYERS: Oh. I thought you said second.

9 MS. BARHYDT: Second sentence, first bullet.

10 MR. MYERS: Sorry. Sorry.

11 MR. EISNER: Okay.

12 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel with Mitsubishi. So

13 that -- that's kind of what the point I was making

14 before about a valid test. That if the test is one of

15 those that has established the AEDM, that there would

16 need to be a different path, and that's kind of what

17 this says.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: That is what that says.

19 MS. BARHYDT: So do you like that?

20 MR. EISNER: Remember, you're not held to

21 what you say.

22 MR. DOPPEL: Well, everyone else kind of shot
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

271

1 that down, though, when I said that. But this clearly

2 is --

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: It's better when I typed it.

4 MR. EISNER: We can put your name in there

5 temporarily if you want.

6 MR. DOPPEL: No, thank you.

7 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff. I guess I have a

8 question on it. So the second case we talk about,

9 again, one of the models that was part of the

10 substantiation. So basically the AEDM -- you have to

11 recertify the AEDM. Can that be -- and I think we're

12 leaving this open to, okay, if a manufacturer has a

13 test from another model that falls in that AEDM and

14 that one he actually tested, he could just resubmit. I

15 don't know if that's a good thing. He could just

16 resubmit based on another actual test that he had done

17 that was within that AEDM. If that makes sense.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: If you take one of the two

19 pathways to get yourself to a valid rating, you're

20 okay.

21 MR. BAUMAN: Are we talking about validating

22 the AEDM or validating a rating for a particular model?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

272

1 I'm talking about --

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: They're one in the same

3 thing.

4 MR. BAUMAN: Well, one of those two models I

5 used, say there's 50 models, and I didn't do this,

6 somebody else did this. Charlie did. Somebody used --

7 the manufacturer is not in this room -- used -- had an

8 AEDM that covered 20 models, and they used two models

9 to certify that AEDM. He happens to have test data on

10 another model, a third model, that he didn't submit as

11 part of it, but now he's gone and you've decertified

12 his AEDM based on one of those points, now he can just

13 come back in and give you the test data on that other

14 model and pick up from there.

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yup.

16 MR. DOPPEL: Okay.

17 MR. EISNER: Okay.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: So the key here is, if I look

19 at this slide, and let's say I make products covering

20 everything here. So 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16. I

21 have only tested 16 models, period. And from there I

22 have applied an AEDM to a hundred. One of those 16 DOE
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

273

1 has made a determination is invalid. I need to test

2 something else. That's what it means.

3 Do we agree?

4 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel. To me it would

5 seem that if the average of the unit that was tested

6 and the DOE test falls within the AEDM, then it should

7 not be retested. Only if the average of the two tests

8 falls without -- outside.

9 MR. THARP: Rusty Tharp. If the manufacturer

10 takes option three --

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: Right. You're getting it

12 back to a valid rating. It's only in the case when you

13 have a complete invalid rating. If you've opted for

14 pathway three for additional testing of your own or you

15 have additional testing from somewhere else and you've

16 been able to pile that up together to come up with a

17 new valid rating, you're good to go, but you need to

18 maintain all those records. That's it.

19 MR. EISNER: Time's up. You can't say

20 anything.

21 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel. Can we see that

22 writing again?
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

274

1 MS. BARHYDT: Yeah. I think everyone's in

2 agreement, it's just a question of wording.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: This is the key.

4 MR. CYMBALSKY: You've already made a valid

5 rating.

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: You've brought that invalid

7 rating back to being valid again.

8 MS. BARHYDT: Right. But what he's saying is

9 in that second sentence it says a new model must be

10 tested, and he's saying I did additional testing and

11 sort of revalidated the same model.

12 MS. ARMSTRONG: It doesn't even meet this.

13 MR. CYMBALSKY: Right. He didn't get there

14 yet. He's already satisfied with the page above this.

15 MR. EISNER: Are you using a microphone?

16 MR. CYMBALSKY: I think I'm talking loud

17 enough.

18 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, I'm happy to change

19 the wording to whatever we need to do, but in my

20 opinion, if you -- as long as they're valid, they're

21 valid.

22 MR. CYMBALSKY: So Paul did option three
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

275

1 above, and by testing an additional unit, he took the

2 average of the two and he made the rating valid. So

3 that second sentence doesn't apply to him anymore.

4 That's -- you're not invalid, you're valid.

5 MR. BAUMAN: This is Jeff again. Aren't we

6 just saying that if DOE testing shows invalid, you have

7 to recertify the AEDM?

8 MS. ARMSTRONG: I don't think so. I mean,

9 not by -- kind of. But if I use this terminology, what

10 does that really mean? I mean, this is what it

11 actually means.

12 MS. BARHYDT: Does everyone understand

13 conceptually what we're talking about because we can

14 massage the language? Everybody doesn't have to sit

15 here through the agonizing --

16 MR. DOPPEL: Hold up. Let me -- but it seems

17 that it's confused, though, because, again, to get the

18 valid rating, I did additional testing. Okay. So

19 that's good. But then it goes back and says that if

20 DOE testing shows an invalid rating, which it already

21 did which is why I retested, then it says then I have

22 to pick a new model. But it seems like that should
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

276

1 say, if additional testing shows an invalid rating.

2 MR. THARP: If all testing for that model.

3 MR. DOPPEL: Yeah.

4 MR. STANONIK: I think we need -- Frank

5 Stanonik. I think we need to be clear here. A lot of

6 this process we're talking about test results that

7 indicate the rating may not be accurate, but there's

8 only one point at which you determine whether the

9 rating is valid or not, and that's either when the

10 manufacturer says, "Okay, I'm rerating," or you've done

11 all these extra tests and you do the averaging,

12 whatever else, and you get to that decision point.

13 But one test doesn't necessarily -- shouldn't

14 be interpreted as invalid rating. At best, it's an

15 indication that the rating may not be accurate. We've

16 been spending all this time talking about what are

17 those next steps to get to the definitive point that

18 you can say, okay, either the rating is correct or it's

19 not.

20 And so I think when you see here when it

21 says, you know, it is not a valid rating, we've been

22 through all the points and it's -- you know, there
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

277

1 isn't any more that can be done for that model. Its

2 rating is wrong, and that's the point where now you've

3 got to -- to support your AEDM, you have to come up

4 with a new anchor I'll call it, a new data point, which

5 is a new model because your other model was rated

6 wrong.

7 MR. DOPPEL: Paul Doppel. Okay. So the

8 point three before says that you can use --

9 MS. BARHYDT: Paul, real quick.

10 MR. DOPPEL: -- any testing to show that.

11 But now you're saying new testing.

12 MR. STANONIK: No.

13 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. I don't think you can

14 do it like this.

15 MS. BARHYDT: This won't work either.

16 MR. STANONIK: The previous -- the previous

17 bullet point, okay, you've got other testing, so you do

18 that other testing. And when you're done with all

19 that, when you've provided all the other tests that

20 exist or you've run additional tests, at that point you

21 make -- you know, the numbers tell you either the

22 rating was in fact accurate or it's not. If they tell
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

278

1 you the rating was accurate, we're not even talking

2 about this whole next thing. If it tells you --

3 MR. DOPPEL: Well, I agree with what Frank

4 was saying, but that doesn't say what Frank was saying.

5 To me what this should say is that if you've done the

6 other procedure and you're still outside, then you

7 can't use that base model anymore.

8 MR. EISNER: Well, suggestions change new to

9 additional.

10 MR. DOPPEL: Change DOE to additional.

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: So the only -- it's really if

12 you discontinue the model; right?

13 MR. DOPPEL: Well, then say that there.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, because if you keep

15 testing and testing --

16 MR. DOPPEL: That's basically what it is.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: -- and you can't come up with

18 a valid rating, you're left with no option but to

19 discontinue the model.

20 MR. DOPPEL: I mean, that's really what it

21 should say. If that test unit is one of the base

22 models for substantiation requirements and it has to be
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

279

1 discontinued, then you have to do a new test to

2 resubstantiate the AEDM. I think that's -- I would

3 agree to that. But that's not what that says up there.

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. So I think we should

5 just take that out.

6 MR. DOPPEL: Just type in what Ashley and I

7 just said. Frank Stanonik gave it a try. You're

8 saying that it has to be obsolete; right? Is that what

9 I'm hearing?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: So, I mean, the reality of

11 the situation is if you can't do initial -- additional

12 testing on additional units to come up with a valid

13 rating, your only option at that point is to

14 discontinue.

15 MR. STEPHENS: Valid meaning not meeting the

16 federal minimums?

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. Everything else is

18 valid. That's what Jeff just asked me.

19 MR. STEPHENS: Yeah, but you're --

20 MR. STANONIK: Okay. Ashley, let's call that

21 an acceptable rerate, okay, because that's where I was

22 getting tripped, okay, because if -- and I think of
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

280

1 this very simply, okay. Let's just use linear

2 interpolation. Let's say my AEDM is this very nice

3 linear interpolation, and I've got, you know, my two

4 end points that I've tested, all right. And let's say

5 my high efficiency end point, if that one fails, okay,

6 I may end up rerating it at the new numbers. I haven't

7 made it obsolete. But that certainly should no longer

8 be my end point of my linear interpolation AEDM.

9 MR. EISNER: So fix it?

10 MR. WHITWELL: Or possibly change it to

11 discontinue or rerate.

12 MS. BARHYDT: Well, Frank, if my end point

13 has moved, why could it not still be part of my AEDM

14 and I just need to revise my AEDM?

15 MR. STANONIK: Oh, it could be, but then your

16 -- then you've reiterated a lot of models, again,

17 because --

18 MS. BARHYDT: I agree.

19 MR. STANONIK: Again, I'm just thinking of

20 this, you know, simple linear interpolation thing, and

21 if it went from this to this, that's possible. But I

22 think, you know, in terms of what we are talking about,
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

281

1 at least what we were talking about, the idea was,

2 okay, I need a new upper point to validate -- continue

3 to validate my AEDM. Or to support my SS.

4 MS. ARMSTRONG: All right. So --

5 MR. EISNER: Does this get us there?

6 MR. THARP: Rusty with Goodman. I think what

7 -- if -- if a manufacturer bases their AEDM on model A

8 and model B, that first bullet point addresses if model

9 A or model B is tested by DOE and fails.

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: Correct.

11 MR. THARP: What happens if they also rate

12 model C, D, and E off of that, and model C fails; what

13 happens to AEDM then?

14 MR. STANONIK: Nothing.

15 MR. THARP: Nothing at all?

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's what the second bullet

17 is supposed to --

18 MR. THARP: Okay. So the first bullet is

19 only addressing if model A or model B is tested? Thank

20 you.

21 MR. EISNER: We okay? We've got no

22 disagreement with the first bullet? Second bullet.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

282

1 Forget the percent, do you agree that it should be a

2 percent if manufacturers' certified models are found to

3 have invalid ratings? Manufacturer may not certify

4 using an AEDM for any models going forward. So do we

5 agree we should use a percentage to make this

6 determination?

7 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. I do

8 not. I believe a tiered approach should be made for a

9 number of products.

10 MR. STANONIK: What approach?

11 MR. STEPHENS: A tiered approach for the

12 number of products in an AEDM. If they are below a

13 certain number, I think the number should be used. If

14 it's above a certain number of models, I think a

15 percentage should be used.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: Can you suggest a --

17 MR. THARP: This is Rusty. I believe that --

18 AHRI people help -- correct me. I think if you get

19 above 10 percent failure, then you're in really bad

20 water with AHRI; is that correct?

21 MALE SPEAKER: You already have (inaudible).

22 MR. THARP: But 10 percent is a value that if
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

283

1 you get above 10 percent, that's when you're in mental

2 mode.

3 MALE SPEAKER: Right.

4 MS. BARHYDT: You're on the spot, Frank.

5 MR. EISNER: You guys have to come to the

6 microphone.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: So if it's 10 percent, then

8 it would say, if 10 percent of a manufacturer's

9 certified models are found to have invalid ratings, a

10 manufacturer may not certify, use an AEDM for any

11 models going forward.

12 MR. MUCCIOLA: This is Vince with National

13 Comfort. We already agreed with AHRI that there was a

14 weighted average. If you had a hundred models and you

15 failed three, you may not get interested in that. So

16 they came up with a weighted average when we went into

17 the penalty mode that you only had four items in your

18 product line --

19 MR. STANONIK: We actually did what Phillip

20 suggested which is, if -- and I don't remember the

21 exact numbers, but I think it was something on the

22 order of if you only, let's say, encompassed ten models
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

284

1 in this case and AEDM, then it was I think actually

2 one.

3 MS. ARMSTRONG: So can you provide that?

4 MR. STANONIK: Yeah.

5 MR. EISNER: Can we just stop for a second.

6 We're losing some people. Do we want to go ahead, or

7 do we want to stop for the day? We said we would stop

8 at 3:00 and continue this without Ashley in two weeks.

9 Or do we want to try to resolve this today with the

10 limited number of people?

11 MALE SPEAKER: I'm willing to let you go

12 ahead.

13 MR. EISNER: Okay. Let's continue.

14 MS. ARMSTRONG: Well, it seems like it's

15 centering around, does Frank have that information

16 available.

17 MR. STANONIK: I have it available, yeah, but

18 -- and I'll send you the actual criteria. My memory

19 says it's -- if you have less than ten models, it's

20 one. If it's more than ten, it's 10 percent. But I'll

21 get you the exact -- it's something along those lines.

22 MR. EISNER: Is everybody in agreement that
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

285

1 that would be a good model to use?

2 MR. MYERS: I would certainly want to -- this

3 is Frank Myers, PVI. I would certainly want to take a

4 look at it. That was set up with a completely

5 different set of criteria where the manufacturers were

6 in control, were able to be there for every test. You

7 know, we have a group that evaluates the laboratory's

8 performance.

9 The criteria that AHRI uses to establish that

10 penalty mode I think would be a really strong and

11 inappropriately strong way to do it here. There needs

12 to be more flexibility. The other thing is this is

13 looking at a percentage with the end result. You can't

14 certify by using any AEDM, and again, I vehemently

15 disagree with that. That's catastrophic. Something

16 more like if you hit some threshold, you have to have -

17 - any ratings that are used to validate the AEDM have

18 to be by an independent third party would be a much

19 better, more appropriate -- you know, where now we can

20 do our own validation testing of the AEDM, have a third

21 party do the testing to validate even if you have to do

22 third party for all of your validation.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

286

1 MR. EISNER: Anybody have thoughts on the

2 third party concept?

3 Frank?

4 MR. THARP: Rusty with Goodman. I think the

5 -- we wouldn't want to say not certify using any AEDM,

6 but only AEDMs for the given product class or

7 substantiation class that was used for. And then along

8 the lines of the penalties and stuff.

9 The way AHRI works is you progress into --

10 after a certain percentage of samples or number of

11 samples, you go into a double selection mode before you

12 get into that final, we call it internally the death

13 penalty or penalty mode, so maybe something of that

14 nature where you go back and select two more samples

15 and test those before you get to a point of

16 catastrophic failure.

17 MR. MYERS: And if there's any -- I don't

18 disagree with what you're saying, but certainly if

19 we're going to say you can't use an AEDM for that

20 family of products, then is there -- can we write in

21 some way to regain the grace of using that? Is there

22 some more stringent verification we can do to, once
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

287

1 again, begin using it?

2 MS. DANE: This is Mary from Traulsen. I

3 agree with that because it would be a big blow to never

4 be able to do an AEDM just before. I mean, it would be

5 different if you thought somebody was cheating on

6 purpose, but if somebody is just a real horrible

7 mathematician or they haven't used the right data set,

8 you know, there has to be a way that we can redeem

9 ourselves and go back to using an AEDM, and I would

10 like to see that in there. And maybe we don't have

11 enough time left to discuss it at this meeting.

12 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik. One point on

13 that, okay. So we're talking about not being able to

14 use an AEDM. What that means is that the manufacturer

15 in this case would have to do testing for each of those

16 models.

17 MS. ARMSTRONG: Yup.

18 MR. STANONIK: And to Frank Myers' point

19 where he was saying before, well, maybe we should just

20 have a monetary penalty. I would say the requirement

21 is that, okay, you no longer have options, you have to

22 do testing. That's a pretty significant monetary
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

288

1 penalty with one little relief which says, okay, if you

2 can do all this testing in your facility, if you've got

3 the time, resources and everything else, then in fact -

4 - well, it may save you some money. It's going to

5 certainly affect you in other places because resources

6 are limited, time is limited.

7 So if you're going to have to be setting

8 aside let's say two months to do all these testing

9 because you still want to make and sell products, then

10 you obviously can't do a lot of other stuff. But, you

11 know, it is -- I guess I always say ultimately it is

12 going to be a financial penalty.

13 MR. MYERS: This is Frank Myers again. You

14 were talking about two months or three months and costs

15 money. With a number of us manufacturers, we have --

16 we're a small company, engineer and build to order. We

17 have a wide variety of products that -- and AEDM makes

18 it manageable where we can comply because remember,

19 it's basic models, which is they have to be essentially

20 the same efficiency. So we might have hundreds of

21 basic models within what appears to be a fairly small

22 family because of this essentially identical
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

289

1 requirement, so now we're faced with testing basically

2 hundreds of models.

3 Remember, our equipment is very large. And

4 so it is a show stopper, a game stopper, a business put

5 out, the business is no more. So we have to be very

6 careful with how we use this. And there should be some

7 way to redeem beyond individually testing every basic

8 model. If we were going to do that I would say we need

9 to set up some kind of a basic model group rule where

10 we can reestablish ourselves within a basic model group

11 because basic models is a nonstarter for testing.

12 MR. STANONIK: Keep in mind -- excuse me, but

13 the Ashley DOE definition of basic model is that it has

14 different efficiency, okay. It has a different

15 efficiency rating or performance rating.

16 So one of the options in this case would be

17 that you could decide, okay, I'm just going to rate

18 them all the same efficiency and call them the same

19 basic model. Not that I agree that's a good solution,

20 but at the moment it would be a solution within DOE

21 regs.

22 MS. ARMSTRONG: So I specifically -- you
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

290

1 know, it's going to be based on how you certify them.

2 I realize we haven't gotten to the concept of, you

3 know, groupings, product classes, families, basic model

4 groups, et cetera. But if you certify them a specific

5 way, we're basing these percentages on how you certify

6 them.

7 I have no doubt that the next meeting we will

8 enter into how they should be certified, but the

9 reality is, if you certify less than ten models and

10 you're using an AEDM, what this says is if one model is

11 found to have an invalid reading, you may not use an

12 AEDM for any of the models that are a part of that same

13 substantiation class. However, if you certify more

14 than ten, then it has to be 10 percent. I don't know

15 if that's reasonable or not, but that is my translation

16 of Frank's program to DOE words.

17 MR. MYERS: Right. This is Frank Myers, PCI

18 Industries. That to me is draconian and there's going

19 to be something other --

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: Let it go.

21 MR. EISNER: Would it be --

22 MR. MYERS: I'm okay with the concept that if
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

291

1 you're bad, you have to have some penalty, do more, but

2 what this says converting -- as you say converting to

3 real world language, if you have ten models and one is

4 out of compliance, you're out of business in that line.

5 So we need something other than you can't use an AEDM,

6 period, for any of your models that are in that

7 substantiation.

8 MR. EISNER: What can we say, 20 percent? 25

9 percent?

10 MR. MYERS: I would propose rather than going

11 to a different percent, let's settle on a percent,

12 whatever the number is, ten, 20, whatever, but that it

13 causes us to do something other than you can't use an

14 AEDM. You have to do all of your validation with a

15 third party which is very expensive and manufacturers

16 would work hard not to have that happen.

17 MS. BARHYDT: So you mentioned that a minute

18 ago, and I'm not sure I understand the idea there

19 because you did -- let's make this easy. You had one

20 substantiation class, two models. You tested your two

21 models, you tested them in-house. You built your AEDM

22 off of that. And we tested a model that was not part
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

292

1 of your substantiation package and it failed. How

2 would doing third party testing impact your AEDM?

3 MR. MYERS: You would have to revise your

4 AEDM so that when the third party tested, it would be

5 supported. It wasn't supported when you were doing it

6 before.

7 MS. ARMSTRONG: What do you mean third party

8 tested?

9 MR. MYERS: Pardon?

10 MS. ARMSTRONG: What do you mean third party

11 tested?

12 MR. MYERS: Not your own testing.

13 Independent laboratory --

14 MS. BARHYDT: Of what?

15 MS. ARMSTRONG: Of what?

16 MR. MYERS: Of your substantiation. You

17 would create a new AEDM -- if you met this penalty

18 requirement, you would have to generate a new AEDM that

19 covered --

20 MS. ARMSTRONG: There's no such thing.

21 MR. MYERS: -- that area, and rather than

22 substantiate that yourself, you have to get it
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

293

1 substantiated by --

2 MS. ARMSTRONG: There is no such thing -- do

3 you want to substantiate their AEDM?

4 MR. WHITWELL: No. It's -- I think maybe

5 what he's saying is that it would perhaps eliminate the

6 question of whether the in-house testing was valid or

7 not.

8 MR. MYERS: Right.

9 MR. WHITWELL: It wouldn't solve the problem

10 of whether the AEDM was developed correctly --

11 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's what we're getting at,

12 right?

13 MR. WHITWELL: -- but it would answer the

14 question perhaps about whether the basic testing was

15 okay or not.

16 MS. BARHYDT: So let's say you had it third

17 party tested, the exact same two models. If your AEDM

18 is not a good predictor of performance, you may get

19 exactly the same two model data points going into your

20 AEDM, and that doesn't have any impact on what's coming

21 out of your

22 AEDM.
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

294

1 MR. STEPHENS: Phillip Stephens, HTP. I

2 think we can make a lot of progress if we change

3 substantiation class to basic model group so we're not

4 out an entire product class, but say it's a family

5 name. Say --

6 MS. ARMSTRONG: That's for next week.

7 MS. BARHYDT: We'll be dealing with that next

8 time.

9 MR. STANONIK: Frank Stanonik. I mean, just

10 one thing because, I mean, I was asked what AHRI's

11 criteria are for I think putting people on probation,

12 and we're talking about, you know, at what point do you

13 say, sorry, you lost your license to do AEDM, okay. I

14 would suggest for purposes of discussion at this point,

15 I'd certainly be more comfortable putting in rather

16 than whatever we have there. My suggestion would be

17 three or one-third, whichever is greater. Either three

18 or one-third of all models included in the AEDM

19 whichever is greater. So basically, if I had ten and I

20 have three failures, that to me raises suspicion about

21 AEDM. If I've got a hundred, then it's one-third.

22 MR. EISNER: I think we've gotten to a point
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

295

1 --

2 MS. HOOTMAN: You would be testing 30?

3 MR. STANONIK: I'm not testing. I'm saying

4 that if I saw --

5 MS. HOOTMAN: Well, they would have to test

6 that 30 to say that they found that they had invalid

7 ratings, and you never get there. And in all honesty,

8 I'm going to tell you I've got 200,000 models.

9 MR. STANONIK: All right. See, it simulated

10 discussion. It simulated discussion.

11 MS. HOOTMAN: And I'm just at the top level.

12 I'm not even to the trillion that Carrier and I would -

13 -

14 MR. EISNER: We're pretty close to not having

15 two people to vote negative, so I think it's time to

16 break up.

17 MS. DANE: Can I make a request on this? Can

18 we just -- I know this is, like, a really rough

19 document. Can you send it out and mark it as a rough

20 document so we don't have to wait for two weeks?

21 MR. EISNER: I think what we're going to get,

22 if we had finished this, we would have gotten a
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

296

1 complete document polished for everything. I think --

2 is Ashley still here?

3 MS. BARHYDT: Actually, I think --

4 MR. EISNER: We can send -- the process that

5 Ashley described, we can send a package through me then

6 to everybody else with all of the other issues plus the

7 rough language for this one.

8 MS. BARHYDT: Another possibility --

9 MS. ARMSTRONG: No. I can't send it out

10 tonight because I want to take the stuff in the

11 PowerPoint out and put it all in one place. But it

12 doesn't necessarily have to be two weeks either.

13 MS. BARHYDT: We're also going to be setting

14 up a share point site, and so at that point it will be

15 much easier to share documents.

16 MS. ARMSTRONG: I mean, give us a couple

17 days, at least.

18 MR. EISNER: We should talk about what

19 material we need for the next meeting, like, agendas,

20 issues, stuff like that. Maybe we should get whoever

21 else you think is necessary because I would like a copy

22 of all of these as soon as we can get them so I can --
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

297

1 when I see the draft, I know what it was based on and I

2 can figure it out, but let's talk.

3 (Whereupon, 3:02 p.m., the Appliance

4 Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory

5 Committee Meeting was concluded.)

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22
Capital Reporting Company 

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013 

1 CERTIFICATE OF COURT REPORTER 

2 I, NATALIA THOMAS, the Court Reporter before whom 

3 the foregoing proceeding was taken, do hereby certify 

4 that the proceeding was recorded by me; that the 

5 proceeding was thereafter reduced to typewriting under 

6 my direction; that said transcript is a true and 

7 accurate record of the proceeding; that I am neither 

8 related to nor employed by any of the parties to this 

9 proceeding; and, further, that I have no financial 

10 interest in this proceeding. 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

NATALIA THOMAS 

Digital Court Reporter 

(866) 448 - DEPO 

www.CapitaIReportingCompany.com © 2013 

298 
Capital Reporting Company 

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013 

1 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIPTION 

2 I, MIRANDA PENNACHI, hereby certify that I am 

3 not the Court Reporter who reported the following 

4 proceeding and that I have typed the transcript of this 

5 proceeding using the Court Reporter's notes and 

6 recordings. The foregoing/attached transcript is a 

7 true, correct and complete transcription of said 

8 proceeding. 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

5 l/1jJL Date MIRANDA PENNACHI 

Transcriptionist 

(866) 448 - DEPO 

www.CapitaIReportingCompany.com © 2013 

299 
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

300

1 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIPTION

2 I, KATHY ZEVE, hereby certify that I am not

3 the Court Reporter who reported the following

4 proceeding and that I have typed the transcript of this

5 proceeding using the Court Reporter's notes and

6 recordings. The foregoing/attached transcript is a

7 true, correct and complete transcription of said

8 proceeding.

9

10

11

12

13

_______________ ________________________

14 Date KATHY ZEVE

 Transcriptionist

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

301

1 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIPTION

2 I, MARY YOUNG, hereby certify that I am not

3 the Court Reporter who reported the following

4 proceeding and that I have typed the transcript of this

5 proceeding using the Court Reporter's notes and

6 recordings. The foregoing/attached transcript is a

7 true, correct and complete transcription of said

8 proceeding.

9

10

11

12

_______________ ________________________

13 Date MARY YOUNG

 Transcriptionist

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

302

1 CERTIFICATE OF TRANSCRIPTION

2 I, PATRICIA DESTAJO, hereby certify that I am

3 not the Court Reporter who reported the following

4 proceeding and that I have typed the transcript of this

5 proceeding using the Court Reporter's notes and

6 recordings. The foregoing/attached transcript is a

7 true, correct and complete transcription of said

8 proceeding.

9

10

11

_______________ ________________________

12 Date PATRICIA DESTAJO

 Transcriptionist

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 1

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

$

$100,000 123:5

139:22

$16 138:8

$5 32:8

$50,000 160:20

+

+10 53:19

+5 53:19

0

0 47:12

1

1 52:7,17,18 54:17

96:3 115:2

10 26:14

40:6,16,22 41:19

44:19 45:11

52:10 54:12,21

58:6 117:16

118:2 123:3

159:15 172:3

206:7 272:20

282:19,22

283:1,7,8 284:20

290:14

10:00 195:14

10:15

194:5,8,10,11

195:17

10:30 194:10

100 51:13 52:18

54:20,21 55:2

128:22 146:17

170:5

1000 1:7 55:9

245:7

1001 245:13

100-watt 26:9

105 209:18

10th 196:16 197:4

11.9 264:7

11:00 7:10

11th 195:8 196:16

197:4

12 242:4 264:6

272:20

120 236:4

125 88:8,10,14

135 41:17

14 234:18 235:2

237:2 272:20

15 1:11 123:3

235:4,9 242:20

150 122:21 123:3

15-week 237:2

16 264:14

272:20,21,22

17025 114:3,10

126:19

17th 203:18

180 236:14 242:8

243:8,9,10

244:22

18th 203:18

190 245:1

1st 203:7,13,14

204:5

2

2 22:10 115:3

238:22 272:20

20 48:16 51:14

52:7,17 54:17

96:4 154:21

186:6 258:14

272:8 291:8,12

200 122:21 123:3

200,000 295:8

2000 134:9

2005 253:21

2013 1:11

20585 1:9

20-ton 154:20

225,000 43:13

24 49:13

240,000 154:21

25 291:8

250 88:5 236:10

250,000 236:9

26th 204:7,13

27th 204:8

28th 196:19

29th 196:1 197:3,7

2nd 203:8,15

3

3 218:13 222:12

3:00 195:15 284:8

3:02 297:3

30 235:12 295:2,6

30th 194:3 196:1

197:3,7 204:10

30-ton 123:12

31 202:14

31st 204:4

340 131:13

36 264:13

360 131:14

4

4 108:12 272:20

45 236:1

4th 203:9

5

5 8:16 26:12 27:2,8

28:20 29:6 30:4

32:14,15 33:4

40:3,6,12,22

41:18 42:11,19

43:3 44:19 45:19

46:10,19 47:9,20

48:7,10,18

49:2,8,14

51:7,8,18,20,21

52:5,6,17

53:7,15,16,18

54:16,18,22

55:6,11 96:4

5.0 32:12

5.499 32:15

50 272:5

50-gallon 26:8

6

6 272:20

6:00 195:15

6:15 195:19

60 122:9 154:21

233:13 235:10

236:8 240:6,11

60-ton 122:18

65 40:18 41:17

130:16,17 155:3

65,000 130:19

236:9
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 2

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

7

700 88:16

72 184:16,22

750 87:22

760,000 236:10

7th 204:6

8

8 272:20

8:00 1:12 195:15

800 65:2 88:16

99:14,15 100:16

133:19

134:5,6,7,14

8th 204:7

9

9 265:13

9.5 52:9 54:12

9.8 54:22

90 121:3 166:1

172:1 221:16

233:15

236:3,10,11

240:6,7,11

241:22

91 265:12

92 209:16 221:15

231:1 265:12

95 82:9 172:15,22

206:6 209:16

A

A.C 40:7

a.m 1:12 90:14

AAON 3:2 18:21

ability 103:7

104:14 120:6

127:18

135:13,16

138:19 139:3

149:6 162:16

229:12 243:21

able 7:22 22:3

32:19 34:19,20

53:1 91:22 92:2

99:4 102:2

105:18,20 120:3

123:8 124:20

135:8,14 136:6,7

141:10 159:2

188:7 198:20

223:14,18

242:21 262:11

273:16 285:6

287:4,13

ABMIA 27:19

absence 113:3

absolute 67:6

88:11

absolutely 60:2

108:16,20 109:3

115:7 126:4

190:9 191:10

269:5

abusive 263:22

AC 3:18

academic 54:4

ACCA 163:14

accept 47:9 52:16

179:10 218:10

acceptable

14:11,12 25:12

218:20 279:21

access 111:5

187:10

accommodating

68:18

accompany 39:3

accordance

102:5,8,10,12

124:11 126:5

181:8,12 186:1

190:13 231:22

232:20

according 33:20

80:14 82:8,13

126:22 180:5

196:15

accredit 114:9

accreditation

114:10 139:4

accreditations

138:20

accredited 114:4

127:17 137:21

accuracy 113:20

169:2,10

accurate 50:18

90:8 184:12

212:12 276:7,15

277:22 278:1

298:7

accurately 65:3

214:12 216:9

264:20

ACEEE 5:3

acknowledge 31:6

34:6 104:13

acknowledged

36:17

acknowledgement

25:18

acknowledges

50:21

acknowledging

231:20

across 21:17

100:15 127:11

136:10 150:10

161:12 184:20

act 257:21

acting 212:3

action 74:10 156:9

activated 67:11

actively 163:14

activities 97:9

activity 259:15

actual 59:4 67:15

72:20 79:19

94:14 103:15

113:15 166:6

271:16 284:18

actually 13:8

16:13 31:4 35:17

41:7 48:16 54:17

55:3 58:15 63:17

72:8 78:7,17

79:10 92:5 99:16

103:13 112:8

113:17 123:16

134:13 141:6

180:13 184:4

194:10 197:16

211:11 214:20

216:13 234:15

237:6 239:16,19

271:14 275:11

283:19 284:1

296:3

add 42:14 45:11

53:12 78:3 121:9

158:19 177:9

185:22 186:1

198:16 204:11

226:3
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 3

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

added 25:5

106:12,14 169:1

174:2,17 187:5

199:2

adding 188:9

addition 14:1

16:21 129:12

176:8

additional 38:18

70:22 91:19

92:19,20 94:10

97:15 98:5

107:7,12,13

108:3 111:11

113:6 114:22

115:9 116:22

145:1,2 148:2

169:6,12 171:9

177:18

178:12,20

180:13 181:4,16

186:1 188:7

189:15 190:5,6

191:8 209:11

215:20 220:22

221:6 222:13,15

223:9,13,19

224:16,19

225:21 226:21

227:6 228:1

231:13,21 232:1

236:1 239:18

253:13

255:13,16

262:20

273:14,15

274:10 275:1,18

276:1 277:20

278:9,10

279:11,12

address 23:9,10

35:6 71:8 73:17

101:18 114:17

142:12 151:10

168:20 171:20

195:7

addressed 37:12

132:16 135:5

186:3

addresses 189:22

281:8

addressing 281:19

adequate 169:8

200:22

adjust 36:19

adjusted 185:11

adjustments 39:4

70:11 175:8

admit 15:5

adopting 131:15

adult 163:7,8

advance 188:13,15

193:18

Advanced 5:13

advantages 47:19

238:20

Advisory 1:4

297:4

advocate 246:2

AED 256:20

261:14

AEDM 7:22 8:4

11:1 12:1 13:19

14:1,3,16

16:15,20 27:2

29:16 35:16

36:17 50:1 84:1

193:1 198:4

199:7,22

200:5,17

201:18,21

202:10,11,18,19

206:13,20

207:3,4,12,17

208:7 211:1,7,8

212:5 213:8,16

214:2 215:19,20

216:3 217:7,11

218:2,11,22

219:1,3,4,10,18,

20,21 220:10,16

222:15,17

231:22

232:1,4,9,11,14,

20 238:15

245:22

247:9,14,19,22

248:2,3,22

249:4,12,16

250:3,17,20

251:2,6

252:1,4,6,7,8,22

253:3,8,12,14

257:1,18

258:2,4,8,16

259:19,21

260:3,5,14,16,20

261:3,20

262:7,15

263:1,9,12

264:18

265:11,13,19,22

267:12,16

268:16 269:21

270:2,15

271:10,11,13,17,

22 272:8,9,12,22

273:6 275:7

277:3 279:2

280:2,8,13,14

281:3,7,13

282:4,12 283:10

284:1

285:14,17,20

286:5,19

287:4,9,14

288:17

290:10,12

291:5,14,21

292:2,4,17,18

293:3,10,17,20,2

2 294:13,18,21

AEDMs 10:22

197:19 201:6

202:7 212:11

248:17,20,22

249:10

251:1,7,18

253:11

261:4,9,12

262:15 263:22

264:15 286:6

AEDM's 260:7

AER 19:2

affect 10:8 20:7

37:5 79:2 161:7

288:5

affected 214:1

afford 129:18

afternoon 7:3

191:21 192:8

afterwards 101:1

against 74:10

246:22

agency 28:13

31:10 179:22

agenda 196:10

agendas 296:19

agent 67:12

162:15 212:4

ago 87:17 163:10

229:6 291:18

agonizing 275:15

agreed 68:2

107:15 130:5

195:13 197:22
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 4

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

206:8 220:19

221:14 229:20

267:20 283:13

agreeing 159:6

agreement 7:21

8:1,2 35:11 46:9

229:12 247:4

274:2 284:22

Aha 9:12

ahead 40:10 47:10

90:12 136:21

151:8 164:13

198:3 201:15

218:16 244:3

284:6,12

AHRI 2:7 5:10 6:5

16:16 25:14 31:5

32:18 33:11 34:4

38:2 39:2,12,17

41:9 43:10

45:5,18 50:16

70:6,16 82:3

83:21 89:13

90:11,22 100:1

103:7,10,22

111:4 113:8

118:9 121:17

123:7,10 124:20

129:14 131:4,13

159:16,17

161:15 163:3

168:22

169:5,12,14

175:17

177:16,20

178:10 179:9,10

181:3,8,9,12

182:10,11 183:9

185:2,3 187:4

211:22

212:16,17 213:1

214:4 217:17

220:9 224:10

240:12 246:15

253:3 254:1,11

265:5 282:18,20

283:13 285:9

286:9

AHRIs 223:6

AHRI's 184:6

185:13 294:10

air 5:18 22:5,6

37:4,6,9,10

38:12 40:7 44:6

69:13 78:13 84:1

96:11 130:14

146:21 147:14

163:11 191:4

Air-Conditioning

2:6 5:9

airflow 20:14

119:6

airport 194:17

alert 173:5

Alex 2:13

algorithms 95:10

alike 194:22

alleviate 91:20

125:17 167:14

Alliance 5:11

153:17

allow 18:17 32:13

49:8 59:9

70:16,20 83:8

98:21 99:9

125:12 145:14

155:12 184:14

185:1 254:15

allowable 54:11

186:10

allowed 19:20

24:15 29:6 52:19

54:21 129:3

184:3 213:8

223:2 256:20

268:17

allowing 39:2 69:1

101:17 241:19

allows 158:2,3

170:2 186:5

257:2

already 9:7 29:18

60:7 68:2 93:16

108:13 117:17

120:11,13 128:5

156:13 157:17

165:1 167:8

168:14 175:9

196:5 243:3

252:13 274:4,14

275:20 282:21

283:13

alternates 193:16

altogether 57:12

221:7

am 11:4 154:9

298:7 299:2

300:2 301:2

302:2

ambiguity 9:12

America 3:19 5:6

84:18

amount 134:17

219:11 249:18

256:2

amounts 249:10

ample 105:17

Amrane 2:6

analysis 236:18

237:21 238:5

239:18

anchor 277:4

and/or 33:20

187:1

Anderson 2:8

Andrew 6:2

annual 70:5

anomalous 104:17

anomaly 57:19

93:5

answer 16:17

65:11 68:22

71:11,15,16

80:13,17 101:15

113:22 125:8

134:3 184:5

254:17 293:13

answered 21:20

anybody 7:14

75:20 79:16

127:1 143:11

155:15 164:17

191:12,14 198:8

200:3 212:18

226:7 265:17,20

286:1

anymore 146:19

237:12 260:21

262:7 275:3

278:7

anyone 164:20

179:11 199:6

anything 12:13

17:19 74:12,22

82:2 85:2 88:18

94:20 108:6

129:21 130:13

143:4 153:4

155:3,15 165:13

170:10 177:9

189:17
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 5

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

191:11,13 214:5

215:2 222:1

226:8 273:20

anytime 78:5

anyway 92:14,15

94:8 115:12

124:13 130:3

221:21 239:3

anywhere 39:15

100:11 136:8

apologize 73:15

appeal 74:19

appealing 166:22

appeals 155:19,20

appear 161:21

appears 288:21

apple 263:7

Appliance 1:3

297:3

Appliances 2:15

applicability

221:4

applicable 19:11

35:19 56:13

206:8

applied 35:13

47:22 263:16

272:22

applies 249:19

apply 9:1 26:14

27:2 35:19 36:11

115:2,4 275:3

applying 70:8,9

252:7 260:5

261:8

appreciated 104:5

approach 22:21

35:11,21 209:5

282:8,10,11

approaches 53:3

approaching

22:15,18

appropriate 35:2

97:8 128:9 173:6

177:6 285:19

appropriations

97:7

approve 146:11

approves 198:2

area 22:7 132:17

133:9 195:4

292:21

areas 38:9

aren't 72:16,17

130:1 143:15

154:19 159:6

226:16 275:5

argue 68:16

argument 162:20

245:22

Aris 4:5

ARM 265:6

ARMSTRING

186:18

ARMSTRONG

9:18,20

12:2,4,16 13:14

14:7,12,19

15:1,17 16:5,7

17:15 18:10 19:3

20:4 22:14

24:1,3 29:21

30:8,21 35:9

36:1,3 37:11,16

39:16

40:1,4,15,18

41:3,6,11,16,20

42:2,5,8,14,18,2

0

43:3,6,12,19,22

44:2,5,8,12,15,1

7,20,22

45:8,13,21

46:2,7,22

47:3,10 49:10

50:4,8,11,14,19

51:3,5,17 55:22

56:8,10,21 57:10

58:3,8,11,20

59:5,10,16,21

60:9,11,17,21

63:11,20 64:1

65:15,18 66:2

71:5,15,17

72:11,14 73:7

74:6 76:8,17

81:11 83:4,10

86:17,19 87:5

91:7,10,14

92:7,9,13

93:7,10,13,16

94:4,6 98:1,6,10

99:17,21

100:4,6,13,17

101:3,6 106:15

108:16,20

109:11 110:10

111:13,20

112:19 113:11

114:1

115:7,9,11,15,19

,21

116:4,8,17,22

117:19

125:10,21

127:15 128:5

129:22 130:9

131:19 132:7

134:3,9 138:13

144:5,13

148:1,6,13

149:1,9,22

150:12 152:2,7

153:1,5 155:2,22

157:13,22

158:2,9,15

159:13,21

160:11 164:5,13

165:4 166:11

167:4,18,21

168:4 172:17

173:15 174:1,20

175:9 177:10

178:3,6,15

179:2,4,6,12

180:12

181:6,18,21

182:20 183:6

185:21 187:7

188:18

190:9,16,21

191:2,7 192:2

193:7,10,14,22

196:17

197:3,11,17

199:19 200:1,12

201:5,11,21

205:10,17,21

206:4,7,11

207:20 208:3

209:3,8,10,20

210:11,14,16

211:5

214:11,15,21

215:2,8,10,13

217:8 220:1

221:18,22

222:6,9,20 223:4

224:22

225:11,13

226:13,22

227:7,10,16

228:2,10,14,20

229:10,14

230:1,14

231:5,9,14

232:6,13,21
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 6

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

233:5,7

234:6,14,20

235:4,7,15

240:14,17,20

241:1,7 244:20

245:9,15

248:2,13 249:5

251:9,19 252:10

255:3 257:7,13

266:11

267:2,13,19

268:8,19,22

269:5,10,22

270:5,18

271:3,18

272:2,15,18

273:11

274:3,6,12,18

275:8 277:13

278:11,14,17

279:4,10,17

281:4,10,16

282:16 283:7

284:3,14 287:17

289:22 290:20

292:7,10,15,20

293:2,11 294:6

296:9,16

as-designed 68:14

ASHFORD 18:14

56:3

Ashley 8:6 43:8

45:11 57:20 80:8

82:5 95:21 98:3

99:13 109:17

115:10,13

117:14 119:13

132:4 138:18

139:13 144:5

145:2,6 151:5,10

160:6 164:2

174:2,16 186:13

200:4,6,10 211:3

226:17 227:20

229:5 231:12

254:17 255:4

256:5 259:17

279:6,20 284:8

289:13 296:2,5

Ashley's 106:12

264:22 265:15

ASHRAE 4:20

20:10 84:11

95:18 129:8

Asia 150:10

aside 125:22 288:8

ASRAC 193:21

198:3 201:14

204:20

assembled 28:22

assembly 58:19

assess 159:20,21

224:18

assessing 115:8

assign 52:15

assigned 11:10

assist 124:21

Association 2:14

assume 12:18 35:4

47:4 60:15 65:1

88:8 119:14

255:15

assuming 16:2

30:10 88:14

149:19 151:15

209:15 268:17

assumption 11:13

15:22 23:21

34:14,18 163:10

assurance 104:7

assure 24:15 38:10

39:3

assured 39:9

Athar 3:15

attached 49:7

119:4,5

attendance 129:17

135:6

attending 136:16

attention 170:14

auditors 114:5

August 203:5

204:6,19,22

authenticate 8:10

16:14 265:19

authority 49:13

55:21 220:11

authorization

117:17

automatic

74:14,17,19

148:7 155:19,20

166:21 229:21

automatically

46:16 115:5

156:9 175:2

229:17 267:13

availability 227:4

available 69:2,22

103:3,4

176:15,16

222:16,18

236:8,12 240:12

244:10,17

284:16,17

avenue 1:7 177:22

220:20

average 273:5,7

275:2 283:14,16

averaging 222:18

276:11

awarding 264:4

aware 238:18

away 55:20 149:4

150:6 196:2

B

backup 216:1

backwards 24:4,5

bad 75:13 85:6

184:10 208:8

230:19

260:7,11,12

261:20,22 263:7

264:7,8 282:19

291:1

baffles 105:8

balances 151:1

balancing 72:15

ball 39:17

Ballo 2:9

band 9:9 24:19

Bard 4:21

bare 252:18 255:8

Barhydt 2:10 7:20

9:11,14,16,19,21

11:5,19,21 12:3

13:20 14:4 15:21

16:6,12 18:3

29:10,14,20

30:20 32:6 34:13

49:18,22

50:3,6,10,13

57:20 62:10,16

63:4,7,10 66:5

67:14,21 71:16

75:2,15,17

86:16,18,20

101:19
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 7

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

102:4,9,12,16,18

,20 103:2

118:3,6,22

119:12,21

120:11

133:11,14

134:2,8,13,17

135:9

136:1,10,19,21

139:10,14,17

140:6 141:1

147:9,12

156:11,20

157:2,6,10,17

158:1 163:3

164:20 173:14

179:8 181:7,11

182:7,12 187:19

189:18,20

192:4,9,12 193:9

194:9,14,18

195:18,20

196:2,13 197:2,8

199:12,21

200:14 201:2,10

202:15 203:20

204:3,15

205:6,14 208:10

209:6 210:5

211:3 213:18

214:19

215:1,7,9,12

216:17 217:13

218:16 223:12

224:6,21 227:3,9

228:12 229:9,11

231:16 232:16

233:1,6 237:6,22

238:6,17 239:21

242:18

243:6,9,12,21

244:4,7 245:21

251:3 253:10

259:14 262:17

266:6,13,19

267:18 268:12

270:1,7,9,19

274:1,8 275:12

277:9,15

280:12,18 283:4

291:17 292:14

293:16 294:7

296:3,8,13

base 223:21 255:6

257:10 278:7,21

based 14:15 20:10

74:11 98:16

106:15,16

134:14 135:13

138:19 183:13

205:13 207:5,6,8

208:9

209:8,9,12,15,21

210:10,19

211:17 214:14

215:15 219:4

220:3 221:6

222:8,15 231:13

232:3 254:9

260:16,17,21

262:8 264:5

268:16 271:16

272:12 290:1

297:1

bases 281:7

basic 29:12,17

122:5,6 127:15

153:18 214:17

288:19,21

289:7,9,10,11,13

,19 290:3 293:14

294:3

basically 63:3

94:16,20 128:17

145:14 229:19

231:20 262:5

271:10 278:16

289:1 294:19

basing 290:5

basis 125:6 221:8

252:5 255:12

267:12

Bauman 2:11

10:20 11:14

13:10,15,22

14:5,10,18 20:19

46:5 48:4 49:2

54:14 73:22

74:2,7 128:12

155:13 166:12

167:16,19,22

168:6 196:10

231:11,15

232:7,14 261:17

262:21 271:7,21

272:4 275:5

become 36:22

122:12 263:8

becomes 8:18 32:3

48:10,19

170:12,18

250:18

Beever 2:12 226:6

beforehand 101:2

begin 189:3

198:10 244:13

287:1

behind 211:4

212:5

belief 66:8

believe 8:5,16

41:10 45:1 54:2

67:14 90:11

105:15 138:16

169:8 186:14

214:7 217:13

220:4 226:17

227:7 282:8,17

believed 208:13

believes 177:11

bell 52:5

benefit 54:8

benefiting 239:4

best 90:2 276:14

bet 147:8

better 10:16 86:12

96:12 169:2

170:13

188:13,14 220:4

224:18 226:17

227:7 233:21

234:3 244:8

257:4 258:8

266:11 271:3

285:19

beyond 11:16

38:17 51:6 72:7

105:22 169:12

185:7 191:8

289:7

bid's 233:13

bigger 28:19,20

43:14 69:14

100:2

biggest 16:18

84:21

Bijou 4:2

Bill 3:20

bit 62:11,17 63:12

69:19 70:1 72:7

90:11 128:18

188:4 194:15

blanket 185:16

blast 197:10 205:4

blow 78:10 287:3

bluntly 132:20
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 8

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

board 164:1

185:18 265:1

Bob 43:7 73:10

166:7 180:6

225:1 250:7

bodily 33:19

Boesenberg 2:13

boiler 27:20 79:11

boilers 28:17

33:11 40:3

56:19,20 78:10

79:12

borrow 259:14

bottom 217:20

231:12

bought 86:21

123:9

bound 222:9

bounds 72:7

Bowley 2:15

boy 55:21 196:4

bracket 248:20

Bradford 5:19

56:5

Bramblett 2:16

break 106:1 128:8

173:4 295:16

break-in 84:5,6

186:5

break-ins 186:3

BRFs 130:6

Brian 2:17

Brice 2:15

bring 121:16

224:9

bringing 114:17

brings 51:16

251:19

broad 8:20 68:7,8

254:20

broader 248:18

Brooks 33:6 35:13

236:14

brought 200:18

274:6

Bruce 3:7,8

brush 254:20

BTUs 43:13

130:19

bucket 73:8

buckets 167:8

budget

137:4,14,18

build 86:3,9 87:6

188:19 189:1

234:1 242:1,16

266:2 288:16

building 1:8

103:13,20 122:6

153:22 194:7,11

195:6,9,10

203:15 237:8

242:3 243:4

247:12 255:6,17

buildings 130:22

131:3

built 100:10 138:8

153:9 157:18

218:12 221:12

236:3 237:1

240:7

241:11,12,18

242:22 248:21

291:21

bulb 26:9

bullet 98:7 108:12

109:21 114:13

115:17 117:14

129:11 150:4

156:4,5 160:13

161:20 165:10

166:21 171:8

173:14,17,19

174:3

177:11,14,17

178:7,8,9,11,12

180:7,15,18

186:14 190:2,4

208:10 218:18

222:12 225:3,10

251:16 270:6,7,9

277:17

281:8,16,18,22

bullets 169:17

191:12

bunch 14:16

147:18 264:18

burden 251:8

burdens 250:5

burn-in 185:10

burns 245:2

business 220:10

257:20,22 258:5

289:4,5 291:4

buy 86:21 188:22

buying 79:13

123:6

Buynacek 2:17

C

calculations 117:3

263:16

calendar 236:8,10

California 3:7

5:15

Canada 32:13

45:19

cap 135:12

capabilities 28:2

124:3 132:8

capability

123:9,16 135:12

capable 35:17

capacity 33:13

136:1,9 169:3

Capital 1:20

capture 115:11

214:11

care 7:14 12:16

112:2 131:4

177:21 178:18

207:4 218:13

235:1 252:14

careful 189:10

289:6

Carl 4:22

Carrier 2:21 4:18

6:3 43:8 73:10

166:7 180:6

225:1 250:7

295:12

case 9:10 18:6

27:14 52:8 54:11

55:3 56:15 66:20

69:3,6 85:15

127:1 130:3,5

161:6 165:9

184:4 208:4

210:9 225:6

230:6 245:1,2

254:12 271:8

273:12 284:1

287:15 289:16

cases 34:7 38:19

66:15 87:6 99:5
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 9

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

105:2,5 127:11

133:1 158:4

183:22 212:3

255:20 264:12

cast-iron 33:11

catastrophic

285:15 286:16

catch 127:5

categories 8:2

21:18 31:16 36:7

48:7 215:21

251:18

category 21:10,17

35:22 104:21

106:22 132:15

248:18 266:7

caught 251:13

cause 20:16

164:4,6 252:22

caused 119:6

causes 291:13

caveat 185:22

ceiling 228:1

cell 90:15 119:20

184:2

center 150:10

centering 284:15

cert 113:7

certain 78:8 88:6

104:19 109:5

117:5 120:8

123:21

128:19,21

136:12 149:7

157:18 158:4

185:11 231:11

247:22 251:18

282:13,14

286:10

certainly 105:12

132:16 169:16

212:3 280:7

285:2,3 286:18

288:5 294:15

certainty 51:13

CERTIFICATE

298:1 299:1

300:1 301:1

302:1

certification 8:21

9:2 13:6,20

14:15 17:12

29:18,22 33:9

45:20 111:15,17

113:13 119:10

132:21 178:22

180:10,20

186:16

187:17,22

188:6,9 189:16

190:3,8 201:3,10

202:2,19 207:8

212:2 215:11

232:18

245:17,19 263:3

certified 12:20

13:2 126:19

237:12 268:7

282:2 283:9

290:8

certify 12:13

186:19 272:9

282:3 283:10

285:14 286:5

290:1,4,5,9,13

298:3 299:2

300:2 301:2

302:2

cetera 113:2

126:10 290:4

CFR 117:16

chain 67:8 68:2

challenge 263:17

challenges 23:12

chambers 121:19

chance 52:7,17,18

101:14 161:7

165:12,14

257:21

change 37:7 50:8

58:21 84:12

144:3 155:22

184:5 202:12,13

207:5 210:6

213:9,13 215:15

231:18

254:12,13

261:16 274:18

278:8,10 280:10

294:2

changed 131:14

146:9 165:11

201:20 221:9

241:3 266:18,22

changes 22:12

131:15 146:11

175:8 236:22

changing 58:22

89:19 256:22

characterization

211:1

characterize 97:11

219:21

Charles 3:9

238:11

Charleston 53:1

Charlie 32:9 37:8

49:5 131:9 154:8

155:14 238:19

250:21 252:4

261:1 272:6

Charlie's 52:15

250:16

cheating 287:5

check 59:13 62:15

78:22 81:1 98:1

110:1,11 111:10

122:21 135:15

142:8 151:3

156:8,18 158:10

161:4 166:1

check-andbalance 71:20

checking 9:3 72:14

199:8 254:7,8

checks 151:1

169:4,7

checkup 63:3

chest 164:12

child 163:9

chime 132:10

choice 60:3

61:4,13 62:6

187:4 244:17

choices 30:6

choose 211:17

234:13

chooses 265:7

choosing 244:5

chosen 213:10

circle 112:3 196:6

circulated 198:1

circumstance

100:12 217:19

circumstances

18:18 27:7,22

31:19

cited 80:2
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 10

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

City 195:4

claim 95:14 126:2

claims 108:2

165:13

clarification 9:9

13:11 92:22

115:14 222:12

225:2 229:2

clarified 249:7

clarify 10:21 45:16

63:1 160:6 182:8

208:19 214:13

class 68:8 286:6,7

290:13 291:20

294:3,4

classes 95:8 96:18

132:13 133:5

154:22 264:19

290:3

clear 8:10 11:4

65:18 179:10

211:22 231:5

250:16 268:5

276:5

clear-cut 183:10

clearly 34:15

170:21 230:6

247:15 271:1

Cleaver 33:5

35:12

Cleaver-Brooks

4:10 5:17

Clever 236:13

click 178:14

Climate 4:4

close 12:9 55:14

109:15 159:22

295:14

closed 149:2

closely 69:13

closer 204:16

262:12

closing 37:7

CO2 105:9

coalesced 69:15

coat 163:8

coil 22:7 124:6

218:9

cold 38:14 40:7

163:11

Collin 5:22

combination 26:16

188:10 209:12

236:7 265:6

combinations

265:8

combined 237:12

combustion 33:16

comes 65:15 77:11

160:8 170:6

173:6 177:20

250:10 263:7

comfort 2:11

4:7,13 24:7

152:17 184:14

283:13

comfortable 10:9

62:12,18 94:15

104:9,22 138:21

168:18 192:17

215:7 230:7

243:7 294:15

coming 38:9 147:2

179:1 193:16

196:6 203:9

206:20 207:13

261:15 293:20

comment 81:13

85:16 89:12

113:10 124:15

186:4 229:5

250:8

commented

168:14

comments 83:22

90:6 173:2

258:16

commercial 3:11

20:8,12 25:22

26:4,8 28:17

31:7 32:11 33:1

40:3,5,7,10

42:12 43:9 44:15

45:15,17

56:6,19,20

60:1,2 67:9

70:16 80:7

85:2,8 96:18

98:14 100:3

118:16 123:12

124:5 125:1

133:20,22

134:20 135:1

136:11 158:21

160:22 161:16

164:16 171:3

186:6,11 234:2

commission 2:18

3:7 5:15 73:4

commissioned

116:1,5,7

commissioning

67:13 78:4 111:3

commit 243:1

committee 1:4

38:6 119:10

199:6 297:5

committee's

201:18

common 27:8

132:18

communication

213:7

companies 18:12

73:17 82:9

company 1:20

3:12 4:9,21 5:4

18:6 23:20 32:18

61:19,20

62:2,5,6 65:8

71:3,5,6,12,13

72:10 75:13

82:11 88:2

136:16 144:3

251:4 263:14

288:16

company's 142:13

146:10 247:21

compared 46:3

56:12 107:18

comparing 50:12

competency 114:2

competitor 246:8

competitors

246:17,22

complaints 109:9

complete 94:11

235:15 240:13

273:13 296:1

299:7 300:7

301:7 302:7

completed 156:14

201:19 228:15

231:21 235:7

236:1

completely 69:19

158:13 159:4,18
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 11

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

202:18 285:4

complex 98:15

99:11 118:10,19

126:21 132:17

146:4 148:18

159:1 163:14,16

complexity 96:8

98:21

compliance 88:3

119:10

210:9,12,14

259:9 291:4

complicated 96:14

118:21 174:10

comply 39:11

50:15 75:1 97:19

179:19 258:1

288:18

component 218:6

239:20 266:4

components 89:19

95:1 148:10

188:10 239:13

243:5 260:12

266:4

compressor

184:15,21 190:7

239:15

compressors

84:6,7 96:10,17

compromise 69:1

120:1,2 143:22

Computer 44:6

concept 35:5 47:16

286:2 290:2,22

conceptual 217:18

conceptually

275:13

concern 19:17

68:11 73:18

141:8 142:12

145:20 155:1

165:5 168:12

217:18 228:4

concerned 15:3

126:18 170:20

223:5

concerns 23:10

48:8 91:21

101:16,18 106:3

128:15,19

146:1,3 160:8

166:17 230:15

252:21 258:10

conclude 53:16

concluded 53:8

297:5

concur 20:20

69:19 242:7

condensers 96:12

condensing 33:12

Conditioners 44:6

Conditioning 5:18

conditions

22:17,19,20

23:2,6,17 24:9

25:2,9 28:13

47:17 52:14

107:22 156:3

176:7

conduct 114:4,15

133:9

135:16,19,21

conducted 20:3

80:2,15 117:22

conducting 114:14

133:19 136:6

180:2

confidence 51:16

138:18 139:2

141:9 144:14

145:12 146:1

152:6,13 173:10

confident 152:15

configuration

124:5,6

confirm 43:8

105:13 215:20

confirmation

104:15

conflict 20:16

conformance

47:22

confused 188:4

275:17

Congress 97:15

congressional 97:7

connect 122:8

141:15,16,20

142:18

connected 119:15

122:4 124:10

connections

83:16,17

consensus 191:16

197:22

199:18,21 202:5

224:22

consent 168:1

consequence

14:7,13,20 70:20

227:2 262:20

consequences

10:2,5,8,11,12

24:11 66:14

70:14 80:10

161:14

conservative

258:18,19

269:2,4

conservatively

12:13

consider 31:8

58:14,22 167:6

207:16 213:22

239:12

consideration 19:5

170:18 236:15

considerations

13:4 262:16

considered 48:20

consistent 70:10

consistently

262:19

constantly 97:20

268:2

constitute 30:5

construction

153:19

consult 169:18

240:1

Consultants 3:5

4:11

Consulting 2:3 5:2

consumes 53:9

contact 91:16,17

106:20 107:10

125:15 155:5,6

156:20

contacting 188:21

contacts 157:4,8

contained 42:16

contention 30:15

contest 145:15

158:5
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 12

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

context 193:1

contexting 222:3

Continental 4:12

continual 252:5

255:11

continually

252:17,21

253:14

255:1,5,15

continue 38:9

156:7 198:4

202:1,4 257:20

281:2 284:8,13

contract 162:16,18

contracted 243:17

244:1

contractor 79:17

contracts 89:13

90:1

control 52:12,14

53:2 95:9 242:15

243:19,20

244:19 254:5

285:6

controller 95:1

Controls 4:4 6:2

conversation 11:7

107:12 144:21

145:8 229:3

converting 291:2

convince 167:1

convinced 27:7

260:7

CoolAir 2:12 3:15

Cooling 3:2,13

cooperation

249:20

COP 44:13,14

copy 198:11,12

296:21

corner 261:21

corners 121:17

122:2

Corporation

2:12,21 3:15,22

4:18 5:7,19

correct 11:20,21

15:7 16:5,6

29:16 41:4 42:5

44:2 46:8 50:19

51:3 60:11 63:16

74:6 84:2,3 91:4

116:2 117:8

127:20 159:14

169:7 194:8

208:1 210:1

211:12 225:8,13

231:14 253:20

257:21 276:18

281:10

282:18,20 299:7

300:7 301:7

302:7

corrected 37:15

104:12 109:20

160:18 214:9

240:5

correcting 81:9

Correction 40:14

corrections

131:11,12

correctly 16:8

30:10 76:14

80:16 81:17

82:15 84:4,10

85:14 104:7

115:12 118:5

127:19 141:6

145:13 148:7,11

161:2,10 172:8

206:16,17,18

225:8 237:16

293:10

cost 123:5 146:13

239:7

costs 54:8 288:14

council 213:1

Counsel 157:8

163:21

count 124:13

country 54:9

couple 19:9 85:17

106:2 120:19

160:14 164:17

206:13 248:15

263:20 296:16

couples 122:4

141:16

course 15:9 27:14

169:10 258:20

Court 37:19,22

76:5 298:1,2,15

299:3,5 300:3,5

301:3,5 302:3,5

cover 124:4

136:15 192:7

244:20

covered 22:8

129:10 150:3

158:22 272:8

292:19

covering 272:19

covers 33:11 221:8

CRACs 44:6

craft 189:22

242:19

crafting 189:10

cram 142:6

crated 31:18

crazy 131:10

CRE 155:2

create 31:16

292:17

creativity 68:18

credibility 140:19

criteria 26:1

182:17 183:5

233:20 234:1

248:21 284:18

285:5,9 294:11

critical 110:18

242:2

CRM 2:8

cross 11:3 215:21

Crowder 2:18

Crystal 195:3,4

CSA 108:12

143:13

cued 196:3

cumbersome

28:10

curious 82:5,21

138:20 199:15

current 13:20

37:10 57:5,15,21

112:16 157:20

202:11 225:10

248:8 267:5

currently 17:16

30:12 38:20

45:4,5 57:1 64:3

70:4 130:17

currents 37:4,6
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 13

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

38:12

curve 52:5 113:17

custom 188:19

189:1,13 221:11

custom-built

242:12

customer 143:7

151:13,22

152:20 242:13

customers 112:8

cut 121:17 122:2

160:19

cuts 149:12

Cymbalsky

60:14,18 61:1

116:9 117:10,12

133:13,15

136:20,22 137:2

172:14,18

191:18 193:20

197:16 202:17

203:13

216:10,11,20

234:12

245:7,11,13

246:1 247:20,21

248:3,11 249:2,8

250:13

274:4,13,16,22

D

D.C 1:9

Daikin 3:14,18

5:20 17:7 62:22

115:16 174:16

190:2 224:13

daily 125:6 171:1

Dan 2:16

Dane 2:19 10:15

287:2 295:17

danger 33:17

darn 49:3

data 12:9 63:15,16

83:5 104:8,18

105:3,19 107:22

118:20 127:6,7

180:16,19,22

181:4 186:18

187:16

209:1,9,10,21

211:7 212:19

214:14,17

215:4,15 222:5,7

223:5,11,15,17,1

8 224:10,17

232:1,3 247:11

249:11

251:5,10,18

253:13 254:8

255:6 256:8,9,15

267:16 272:9,13

277:4 287:7

293:19

database 112:11

187:10

databases 266:5

date 39:13 157:10

195:21,22

202:14,18 243:2

244:11,12

299:13 300:14

301:13 302:12

dates 193:11 205:1

David 4:7,19

day 12:7 54:21

55:4 95:12 147:7

150:11,21

156:14

195:14,15,16

201:17 203:11

204:9,11,13,16

239:8 243:7

256:13 269:6

284:7

day-in 70:5

day-out 70:5

days 85:9 147:20

172:9 198:1,16

233:15

234:14,18

235:2,9,10

236:1,3,8,10,11,

14 242:1,8,20

244:22 296:17

deadline 203:5

deal 21:18 45:2

141:11 161:5

163:14 201:11

221:1 247:1

dealing 294:7

dealt 57:7 187:22

death 33:20

286:12

decade 96:20

decades 38:3

163:10

December 202:14

decertification

24:10

decertified 272:11

decertify 14:3

decertifying 14:2

decide 10:17 14:8

17:5,8 196:21

198:19 211:8

220:21 224:18

235:8 245:10

260:15 289:17

decided 150:16

197:20

decides 144:1

deciding 74:22

decision 101:12

162:4 208:9

220:3 235:1

276:12

decreasing 216:8

dedicate 239:6

default 18:14

92:14 225:22

defeat 140:5

defect 30:16 81:20

82:2 225:7,11,12

defective 15:4

16:3,9 24:16

46:16 93:6,14

208:14,17

239:20

deference 65:21

deficiency 214:1,9

deficient 239:1

define 173:21

defined 257:8

definitely 33:17,19

113:20 148:10

239:2

definition 216:17

289:13

definitive 276:17

Degitz 2:20

degree 212:2,6

degrees 127:12

del 2:21

deleting 178:1

Delfield 5:4

demand 75:22
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 14

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

88:12

denial 249:22

density 85:10

department 1:1,6

2:10 19:7

36:21,22 56:15

72:3 79:4 87:1

99:2 107:7,15

112:15 113:1

125:12 127:16

131:14 135:9

141:17 148:15

151:3 153:8

154:18 177:15

179:21 186:19

197:21 204:20

207:5 220:4

226:2 231:19

267:17

department's 64:6

71:19 72:5

101:16 165:22

202:8

depend 66:7

dependent 97:15

133:13 167:22

243:16

depending 22:20

24:14 106:22

166:10 210:4

depends 66:5

159:15 183:16

200:12

derail 248:8

derated 265:9,13

described 296:5

description 234:4

design 53:22 55:19

72:17 146:21

150:10 218:6

219:18,20

236:19 238:15

248:21 260:1

designed 124:3

designs 236:19

desire 163:18

199:7

desired 242:13

DESTAJO

302:2,12

detail 9:5 184:19

187:14

detailed 89:17,18

111:22

details 20:7 21:10

107:13 113:6

181:2 183:1

determination

19:7 36:16

155:10 162:5

165:15,20 210:9

239:19 273:1

282:6

determine 22:19

30:13 35:2,7

48:14,17 201:8

205:11 243:4

251:21 270:4

276:8

determined

13:16,18 155:8

192:3 205:13

210:19 233:2

237:15 267:22

develop 253:21

263:10

developed 293:10

developing 248:17

development 4:10

5:17 266:1

deviating 68:19

devices 133:10

devil's 246:2

dialed 117:6,8

Diane 3:13

dictate 27:22

difference 22:9,11

56:19 127:13

150:5 236:21

261:5

differences 19:11

different 10:1

13:1,3 17:6,19

19:2 20:17

21:9,22 23:6

30:11 36:7,14

44:12 47:14

54:15 64:19

65:20

66:10,11,14 73:8

77:16 84:20

92:21 95:11,12

100:12 124:6,17

128:10,19 135:1

158:13 160:5

162:12 163:4

174:21 181:22

182:6 183:11

191:5 192:20

211:13 217:5,12

225:17 234:12

235:17 242:15

247:8 248:20

249:12 251:20

261:2,9,11,12

264:13 266:1

270:16 285:5

287:5 289:14

291:11

differentiation

217:4

differently 24:14

difficult 26:15

134:22 171:4

188:17 253:12

Digital 298:15

dimensions 69:8

ding 76:1

dinged 76:1

DIP 77:8 78:1

direction 97:1

137:6,8 138:12

185:6 216:14

298:6

directly 177:15,20

200:17

disadvantage

47:20

disagree 7:14

36:12 52:1 67:4

96:21 198:8

252:10 285:15

286:18

disagreement

46:11 68:22

281:22

discerned 105:3

discharge 124:7

discomfort 132:14

141:11

discontinue

219:6,7 235:9,10

245:12

278:12,19

279:14 280:11

discontinued

279:1

Discontinuing
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 15

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

209:11

discover 154:15

204:16

discrepancy 164:3

discretion 56:16

66:19 114:16

166:16 224:15

241:8

discuss 21:15

24:18,19 30:2

107:12 132:8

142:3 148:4

193:4 247:5

248:7 287:11

discussed 16:19

64:14 200:17

208:22

discussing 11:17

35:1 166:6

discussion 31:6

64:15 79:14

90:17 93:2,11

100:6 106:17

107:20 108:8

109:18 143:19

156:2 162:3,4

165:15

171:18,21 173:7

196:4 201:1

217:15 235:18

236:2 248:8,9

294:14 295:10

discussions 18:22

106:6,15 153:11

183:20 189:3

191:20 217:20

230:8

disenable 242:3

dispose 238:9

disqualified

248:22 249:1

distinct 215:17

distinction 104:4

distinguish 215:3

distinguishing

257:8

distribution 52:4

53:14,18 66:13

134:18 211:18

distributions 52:2

distributor 86:1

distributor's

189:5

Division 4:15

Diyar 4:11

document 69:4

94:2,3 112:18

128:22 200:7

295:19,20 296:1

documentation

105:17 109:5,7

114:7,18 223:8

268:3

documented

166:20 178:11

224:3

documents 296:15

DOE 7:18 8:19,22

11:6,8 13:4

17:13,16 27:15

34:10 36:17

37:16 41:12

43:10 49:6 58:2

62:11,14,17,21

70:22 71:7 73:20

74:4,8,18,22

77:14,18,20

81:14 82:22

86:2,6,8

87:13,19

88:1,3,13,14,17

91:3,9,16,22

93:7 96:22 97:21

99:6 100:18

106:11,19

107:1,4,10,11,19

108:13 110:10

111:3,8,14

114:21 118:3

125:16

127:18,19

129:18 130:5

131:18,20 132:4

133:8 140:16

143:7,19 144:5,7

151:13,22

155:18 156:9,18

161:4 162:3,15

164:15 165:5,14

167:2,12 168:17

169:11,18

170:12 173:4,13

174:7,11,17,18

175:2 176:11

178:21

180:10,19

181:8,11

183:11,12,16

184:3,5 185:1

186:15 188:7,20

190:13 191:8

196:20

198:13,16

199:14 200:6

204:9

209:10,12,16,21

210:22 212:1

213:6 214:2,8,14

215:4,16 216:11

217:6 221:7

222:7,13 223:20

224:6,11 225:14

227:3

229:6,11,13,17,2

0 232:18 233:1

242:21

246:10,12

247:6,12

249:13,19

250:6,10,13

255:4 260:20

262:11,17

263:17 268:12

269:13 272:22

273:6 275:6,20

278:10 281:9

289:13,20

290:16

DOE's 11:11

55:6,9

57:11,13,17

90:21 91:13 97:9

98:19 103:21

106:16 139:1

190:17 210:10

237:11 258:1

dollars 76:13

137:12 138:9

Dominic 3:18 17:7

59:7 62:22

174:15 190:1,12

224:13

done 8:3 12:22

13:3 16:8,19

28:1 30:10 34:6

38:18 44:16 53:3

65:19 72:7,9

76:13 77:9

78:14,15 84:6

85:14 86:16,22

87:16 91:19 97:9

102:2,6 117:7

118:4,14,20

122:21

123:3,4,21

124:10 126:2

139:1,14 140:11
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 16

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

141:5 145:13

146:2 147:7

148:8,11 152:12

156:13 157:11

159:3 161:2,9,13

165:13,16,17,18

172:7 183:17

192:14 200:21

206:10,16,17,18

207:1 224:5

228:1 231:21

233:4,9 234:11

243:1,12

253:9,22 265:10

266:15 267:1

271:16 276:10

277:1,18 278:5

doors 37:6 125:4

Doppel 2:22

43:1,4

60:4,7,10,12

61:22 62:1,6,8

117:13,20

175:15,21

176:3,5,8,12,15,

17,19,22 177:3

179:13

181:15,20

182:2,5,15,16

183:2 217:3,10

222:11 223:1,9

224:1,7 239:11

252:20

268:4,10,14

270:12,22 271:6

272:16 273:4,21

275:16 276:3

277:7,10

278:3,10,13,16,2

0 279:6

double 172:19

286:11

double-check

109:1

doubt 105:22

290:7

Doug 4:20

downwards

221:17

DR 67:7,19 68:1

96:5 97:3,16

draconian 269:19

290:18

draft 297:1

dramatically

134:19

drill 194:6,13

driven 233:19

drop 69:12 262:4

dual 42:17

duct 122:6 124:9

125:19,20

141:16,20

ductwork

119:4,6,16

due 37:4 196:20

202:22 204:9

duration 233:18

during 33:3 63:15

85:15 166:10

167:10,12

173:4,7

E

eagerness 97:10

earlier 128:14

177:10 189:3

199:7,17

early 7:8 203:10

204:22 214:6

Earthjustice 2:9

easier 22:21

62:11,17 296:15

easily 31:17

235:22

easy 25:21 224:21

291:19

educated 95:9

EER 30:5

40:13,17,22

41:19 48:11

effect 241:20

effected 213:9

221:4

effective 52:18

efficiency 5:11

15:9 26:2 40:6

44:19 45:17 77:3

78:2 99:20

153:17 280:5

288:20

289:14,15,18

efficient 268:20

efficiently 133:4

efforts 97:11

eight 265:13

Eisner 2:3 7:2,13

15:11,16 18:7,12

22:15 23:1,14

24:2,5,20

25:7,9,13 27:10

28:4,7,10

29:9,11,15 34:10

35:4,10 36:6,10

37:21 46:9,18

49:20

61:3,6,9,11,18

62:3,7,9

65:7,11,13,17,22

71:2,10 72:9,13

73:5,12,16

75:8,12,16,20

76:3,15,19

80:20,22 81:3

84:14 85:16

86:11 87:3,13

89:3,6 90:18,20

91:2,5,8 94:17

96:2,21 97:13,20

101:10,14

106:1,5,10

109:12 113:9

124:14 126:13

128:2 129:15

131:17,22

133:8,12,16

134:5,11,16

135:3,18

136:3,13

142:11,16,20

143:11,16,21

144:12

145:17,19,22

158:19 159:8,11

160:2 168:7

171:19 172:2

173:2 174:2

175:5 177:9

178:1,4,17

189:17,19

191:11,19,22

192:6,10

193:8,11 194:2

195:2,10,13,19,2

2 196:8,12,15,19

198:8 200:3,15

202:21 203:17

204:1,4,18 205:8

226:6 228:17

240:2,10 264:22

265:15 267:8

269:8,12

270:11,20 271:4

272:17 273:19

274:15 278:8
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 17

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

280:9 281:5,21

283:5

284:5,13,22

286:1 290:21

291:8 294:22

295:14,21

296:4,18

either 21:7 34:6

35:16 57:3 77:19

92:19 95:22

105:4 115:22

119:22 130:2

132:6 141:13

152:16 165:16

166:8 167:8

185:1 187:3

209:1 219:5

223:10 232:11

233:17,18 238:9

276:9,18

277:15,21

294:17 296:12

elect 222:21

electric 2:13,22

3:12 26:3,8

electricity 163:11

electronic 88:22

126:9

eliminate 293:5

else 21:22 73:13

74:22 78:15

116:7 134:1

143:11 183:14

189:5,17

191:11,13 198:5

200:3 226:7

263:13 267:2

270:22 272:6

273:2,15 276:12

279:17 288:3

296:6,21

email 157:2

193:17 197:6

205:4

emergency 150:8

Emerson 2:17

Emery 4:19

emphasize 217:19

empirical 105:19

employed 298:8

employees 38:19

137:9

enables 97:19

encompassed

283:22

encourage 238:20

endless 228:16

energized 127:14

energy 1:1,6 2:10

3:7 4:2 5:11,15

26:19 32:12

36:22 45:19

51:21 53:9

79:4,19 153:17

162:11 163:11

179:21 268:10

enforcement 10:17

11:18 17:11,14

59:11 63:19 65:5

66:22 67:5 88:2

156:10 158:8

202:3

engineer 5:2 72:21

73:3 83:11 90:15

150:9 160:16

242:14 288:16

engineering 4:16

16:22 236:18,22

262:1

engineers 121:5

engineer's 98:16

engines 266:4

enormous 54:6

enter 290:8

entire 294:4

entirely 53:5 141:5

environment 2:18

38:14 97:19

103:12

envision 131:16

envisioning

101:22 237:8

EPA 3:4

equipment 8:17

17:19 18:2 34:2

45:10 49:17

67:15 70:17

78:5,6,8,13,22

79:7,9,14 80:4

82:7,12,19 83:14

86:13 87:9 95:15

96:4 103:13

104:7 114:7

117:4,8

118:17,18

120:21

122:10,18 124:5

126:21

129:17,21 130:1

134:1 136:15

137:5,13

144:9,22 146:4

147:6,15,16

148:17

149:13,16

154:5,20,22

157:18

158:21,22

160:18,21,22

163:13 171:4

173:10 199:8

211:2,19 215:22

216:9 234:3

238:9

242:7,12,16

244:15 246:13

264:19 289:3

equipments 97:11

153:21

equivalent 189:14

Eric 5:19 56:5

errant 246:11

error 247:19

254:11,13

errors 84:7,20

85:5 112:4

143:14,18

escalate 168:16

escalating 258:5

escalation 257:16

especially 28:21

113:19 215:21

242:7 266:3

269:19

essentially 154:19

172:5,6

288:19,22

establish 68:9

152:5,13,14

285:9

established 270:15

establishes 178:11

182:17

Estes 2:16

et 113:2 126:10

290:4

euphemize 249:20

evacuation 194:6

evaluate 218:21
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 18

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

evaluated 107:19

evaluates 285:7

evaluation 166:10

evaporator 20:11

eventually 171:17

238:8

everybody 35:10

46:9 53:15 62:4

81:18 106:7

109:13 140:9,22

141:22 168:18

178:17 193:11

227:12 243:7

246:7 251:1

275:14 284:22

296:6

everybody's 7:22

79:6

everyone 8:13

17:17 170:20

192:16,17

193:15 199:15

230:2 231:16

232:4 246:21

255:15 270:22

275:12

everyone's 53:3

81:21 274:1

everything 8:16

21:22 34:12

67:21 71:22

72:2,3 85:14

88:3 108:1

113:14 114:8

126:18 128:22

130:12 134:1

136:18 138:4

156:13 183:13

187:15 198:5

265:13 272:20

279:17 288:3

296:1

everything's 12:20

200:21

evidence 92:11

246:10,13

evolution 96:13

evolve 183:18

exact 283:21

284:21 293:17

exacting 141:18

exactly 18:5 53:22

58:8 117:12

131:5 145:15

173:9,15 184:17

187:20 188:1

218:14 227:9

242:18 263:18

293:19

example 23:18

25:20 52:8 73:18

105:7 169:3

183:10 184:7

195:3 256:5

exceed 243:6,10

244:22

Excel 252:19

except 62:9 157:17

exception 87:10

132:2

exceptions

27:11,13

exchange 218:9

exclusions 39:19

exclusively 70:5

excuse 47:8 84:14

138:15 194:16

289:12

executive 163:22

exemption 27:12

exercise 54:4

exercised 230:22

exist 33:22 277:20

existing 18:17

223:17 224:2,19

229:22 230:1

258:3

exists 39:18

expect 20:18 53:1

141:18 261:8

expectation 202:9

233:2

expected 148:19

267:16,19

expecting 231:18

expenditure 239:5

expense 76:2,4

87:1 172:10

expensive 123:5

291:15

experience 16:22

27:20 113:15

141:2 183:13

215:14 239:14

experienced 79:20

experiences 21:6

expert 26:20

expertise 64:9

70:7 73:1 75:4

89:15

experts 72:16

82:17 95:15,17

explain 21:15

36:10 106:13

179:13 230:18

263:14,18

explicit 64:10 72:6

189:6 222:10

252:13,15

explicitly 25:4

exposure 24:9

154:17

extension

162:15,18

extent 19:4 112:20

162:10 234:2

255:5 264:17

extra 89:18 121:10

170:14 181:1

276:11

extremely 188:16

233:19

eyes 175:14

F

face 22:7

faced 289:1

FACILITATOR

2:2

facilities 17:17

19:16,22 28:2

31:1 33:15,22

95:16 123:13

184:1

facility 16:21

17:2,10,12

18:16,19,20 27:1

28:1 33:7

34:15,17 38:22

43:18 56:17 64:5

72:21 81:22

82:18 85:13

167:10 207:10

240:15,18

242:10

244:10,11,16

288:2
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 19

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

facing 19:9

fact 51:21 64:7

70:3 100:20

104:16 123:6

127:10 161:2

170:1,3

180:19,22

183:14,19

184:1,2 212:10

217:22 237:15

239:3 241:12,18

247:12 277:22

288:3

factor 58:7

factory 61:15,16

67:16

78:9,12,15,20

79:13 94:22

116:15 147:6,10

149:13

factoryauthorized

67:12 79:10

82:10

factory-required

130:21

factory-trained

107:3 130:4,8

fail 10:2

46:14,15,16

52:17 55:15

64:12 156:8

161:21 229:3

246:16 247:2

256:18 259:7

failed 99:16 157:9

161:4 164:19

227:2 236:17

245:8 260:2,6,9

283:15 292:1

failing 24:9

fails 81:19 156:17

218:11 236:15

237:19 246:3

247:22

265:6,11,12

280:5 281:9,12

failure 30:5 32:16

46:18 80:11

81:15 82:6 83:2

162:5 173:5,7

214:5 221:15

239:15 246:8,10

251:20

258:14,17

282:19 286:16

failures 246:6,20

251:20 258:18

259:2 261:11

265:10 294:20

fair 87:9 249:18

fairly 85:22 97:10

216:18 288:21

fall 211:18 252:6

253:1

fallen 156:15

falling 211:14

falls 105:15 107:17

167:7 271:13

273:6,8

familiar 19:18,19

29:3

families 290:3

family 261:10

286:20 288:22

294:4

fans 96:11

fast 63:17

201:7,12

fastest 201:13

faulty 218:2 262:8

favorite 225:11

feasible 209:17

features 124:3

federal 1:4 137:9

227:14 279:16

297:4

feedback 109:3

119:6

feel 24:13 35:17

71:2,5,6 76:21

86:11 92:4 94:15

107:8 138:21

139:2,4 151:20

152:15,19 169:2

227:13 254:21

260:3

feeling 49:2 164:9

feels 91:15 171:6

feet 69:12

fell 157:11

felt 86:9 170:7,11

198:17 199:16

FEMALE 12:1

28:19 75:11

110:7,20 120:1

122:13 137:1

139:21,22

142:15,19

145:18,21

151:5,8 173:18

261:15

fewer 258:11

fibbing 259:10,14

field 68:14 78:17

79:19 241:15

fifty 87:21

fight 154:16

figure 48:20 77:19

120:21 155:9

220:12 241:19

297:2

figured 263:14,15

figuring 77:15

file 111:22 233:3

filed 232:19 235:1

files 111:19

filled 57:22 205:7

228:12

films 58:16

final 154:11

163:19 202:13

204:9 286:12

finalizing 197:11

financial 250:5

288:12 298:9

financially 161:7

finds 13:1

52:12,13 70:6

81:19

fine 12:20 41:21

69:10 83:6 88:4

110:13 193:21

248:4 258:5,6

266:10

fines 250:1 257:16

258:8,16,20

259:6 263:5

finish 7:7 76:19

171:21 205:2

finished 295:22

fire 194:6,13

fired 38:21

first 7:20 10:12,16

14:8,20 22:21

23:16,20 27:10
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 20

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

29:12 30:17

31:16 47:3

62:15,21 63:18

65:13 71:11

74:12 75:19,21

76:13 80:9,10,19

85:12 86:21 87:2

88:13 91:16

92:15 93:14

106:17 114:2

134:20 135:15

150:3 167:17

168:1 177:11,17

178:7,8,11

180:7,18 192:11

195:14,15,16

197:22 198:9

201:5,12 208:13

221:11 225:2

228:5,18

230:3,5,16

237:19 265:7,17

269:8 270:6,7,9

281:8,18,22

fit 26:13 219:18,20

236:19 258:2

fits 234:2

five 40:4 41:4,5

120:22 124:19

137:12 158:12

159:3,14 191:17

247:8 256:18

258:14

259:21,22

five-year 261:12

fix 87:18 149:4,11

249:22 280:9

fixed 150:16

flag 170:12

flaw 213:16

flexibility 48:15

105:12 221:2

257:2 285:12

flies 81:18

floated 173:4

flow 37:10 164:9

191:4

flows 28:3

fly 3:2 18:21 147:8

194:17

focus 91:8 136:8,9

171:21 184:10

214:3

foggy 32:4

foggy's 260:13

force 51:14 77:9

257:18

forced 33:21

foregoing 298:3

foregoing/

attached 299:6

300:6 301:6

302:6

foreseeably 259:20

Forget 282:1

forgot 248:10

formed 217:6

formulate 217:11

222:17 263:13

Forrestal 1:8

forth 150:19

169:16

forward 152:1

165:20 185:20

198:4,9 200:5

201:17,22 282:4

283:11

fourth 114:12

150:4 232:10

four-year-old

196:5

fraction 88:10

frame 201:9

framed 97:4

framework 97:17

framing 162:9,21

Frank 4:14 5:9

16:16 25:14 31:4

32:19 34:3,4

36:4 37:18 38:1

45:4,14,18 50:16

56:18 69:18

79:22 100:1

126:14,15

169:14 173:3

178:10 179:15

183:9 186:13

187:12 199:5

200:16 211:21

213:5 217:16

227:20 241:9,22

246:6 249:13

250:15 257:12

259:16 276:4

278:3,4 279:7

280:12 283:4

284:15 285:3

286:3 287:12,18

288:13 290:17

294:9

Frank's 290:16

free 106:11

freedom 54:7

Freeman 3:3

frequently 127:5

171:1 241:13

Friday 204:10

front 198:13

frustrated 154:9

fSource 4:2

fuel 28:3

full 13:19 138:18

196:6 238:5

function 122:6

253:10

functioning

208:14,18

furnaces 42:13

43:9 45:17

furnish 92:2

future 58:17

97:5,14 117:2

130:19 220:5

G

gain 251:6

game 86:6 250:22

289:4

gap 68:11,14

gaps 57:22

Gas 3:12

Gaussian 52:3,5

GE 2:15

gearing 9:7

general 52:22

79:20 132:2

142:9 153:22

157:8 163:21

212:22 219:9

248:18 259:3

generally 242:17

generate 249:10

292:18

generated 223:11

generic 193:21
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 21

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

generically 68:3,4

Geoff 27:19

Geoffrey 3:5 7:8

gets 74:13,20

112:10 119:19

131:1 187:9

235:1 260:9

getting 15:11

24:21 95:22

104:16 115:12

117:8 119:19

121:18 129:14

137:10 164:1

194:11 203:14

211:16 212:22

225:9 233:8

246:12 262:22

265:2 273:11

279:22 293:11

given 46:3 55:19

65:21 77:14,21

79:9 98:21

107:14 111:14

134:6,12 135:2

187:19 286:6

gives 48:15 54:6

141:11,19 258:6

giving 55:20

105:12 133:9

176:10

glass 248:19

goal 47:18 112:22

150:22 162:11

goals 52:20

gone 84:19 124:16

206:15 253:22

272:11

Goodman 5:18

19:12 21:19

168:10 257:3

265:4 281:6

286:4

goodness 9:22

gotten 45:9 75:17

82:1,4 98:6

163:13 192:13

201:3 205:17

225:17 228:21

290:2 294:22

295:22

government 137:5

138:9 239:22

259:9

grab 25:21 100:11

grace 286:21

granted 56:9

great 45:8 97:10

133:17 141:11

163:13 172:10

241:16 255:12

greater 96:8

294:17,19

greatly 23:11

ground 91:14

group 31:20 38:5

49:14 158:22

248:7,9 285:7

289:9,10 294:3

groupings 290:3

groups 290:4

growing 239:8

guarantee 20:2

guess 13:11 48:22

49:2 63:11 72:19

125:10 129:22

149:15

152:19,22

166:12,14 167:6

170:16 180:14

184:5 214:3

251:19 265:21

271:7 288:11

guessing 211:20

guests 194:12

guidelines

95:18,19

gulf 162:22

guy 116:10

guys 7:18 12:5

20:22 30:12,21

60:18,21 69:3

79:11 106:10

121:16 127:20

132:8 138:3,5

177:17,21 178:4

186:19,21

193:16 198:1

201:14

207:3,4,19

252:13 283:5

H

habitually 10:4

hair 20:13

halfway 150:9

Halley 3:5 27:19

28:6,9

Hall-Jordan 3:4

hand 19:20 20:1

174:12 191:18

230:13 260:4

handle 33:8,10,13

34:1 83:14 96:2

97:1 120:7 135:4

264:21

handled 82:4

handler 146:21

handlers 78:14

96:11

handling 147:14

264:1

hands 179:22

249:21

happen 15:6

85:2,15 112:4

149:7 169:21

256:7 291:16

happened 147:3

150:6 238:13,21

250:18,19

happens 8:18

11:10 12:19,21

65:7 104:9

149:20 192:3,19

205:11 219:17

245:15 246:3

272:9 281:11,13

happy 192:17

274:18

hard 32:15 46:1

49:11 119:19

153:7,13 160:22

164:4 198:11,12

256:9,15 259:6

291:16

harm 33:19

Harvey 5:3 9:8

24:6 25:16 47:9

48:5,21 51:18,22

53:5 54:16 55:16

56:1 67:7 69:19

96:5 136:13

162:8 194:21,22

Harvey's 9:7 73:2

194:4 241:14

hat 241:14

hate 15:5 172:4

Hatzikaziakis 3:6
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 22

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

haven't 45:9 71:13

82:1,4 87:8,11

98:6 104:8

187:22 226:19

228:12,21 257:8

280:6 287:7

290:2

having 20:1 23:8

24:9 33:18 93:2

109:13

119:3,8,11

132:6,15 140:21

141:12 147:1,16

148:3 153:10

192:16 243:1,12

244:12 250:12

262:11 263:11

295:14

head 99:18 100:15

211:4

heads 99:19

hear 58:10,12

75:5,9,12 80:21

120:19,20

191:19 207:19

heard 26:21 46:11

71:10,11,13

87:12,13,14

164:18 199:7,17

201:5 227:14

261:2

hearing 24:7,13

27:17 132:14

136:4 138:16

145:17,19,22

146:3,14 269:12

279:9

heartburn 164:7

heat 26:2 218:9

heater 26:1,9

37:17 45:15

105:7

heaters 26:4 37:3

38:20,21 40:5

44:15 56:6

186:11

Heating 2:6 3:2,13

5:9,13,18

held 270:20

Helft 3:7

he'll 149:5

Hello 108:11

help 84:21 91:20

99:16 113:19,20

125:7,8 131:19

132:3

148:14,15,16

193:14 217:11

222:17

238:14,15

254:12 282:18

helped 82:20

helpful 48:22 96:7

helps 152:17

164:11

hereby 298:3

299:2 300:2

301:2 302:2

here's 111:10

161:11 228:4

231:3

hertz 117:6,9

131:5

he's 18:10 49:18

69:11,12 84:9

151:13 190:18

194:4

260:15,16,17

269:20 272:11

274:8,10,14

293:5

hey 21:14 28:10,12

48:16 64:15

85:12 93:18

140:17 145:3

167:11

Hi 93:17 106:9

hiccups 77:2

Hierlmeier 3:8

high 77:3,10 78:2

90:4,5 121:21

216:14 239:8

258:17 280:5

higher 41:10,13

highlighted

178:16

highly 98:15 99:10

159:1 238:19

259:1

highways 29:1

Hill 4:15

hire 69:3

hit 217:21 228:6

257:21 285:16

ho 142:12

HOFFMAN

123:14 126:9

hold 55:20 158:11

168:4 199:21

202:7 275:16

holding 155:15

holes 160:19

Hon 3:9 32:9,22

37:8,14 45:18

46:1 49:5,11

154:8 194:16,19

195:1,12 205:20

210:2 237:18

238:4,7,19

248:15 249:6,9

250:21 251:11

252:4 261:1

honest 259:4

honestly 61:10

honesty 295:7

Hootman 3:10

16:1 29:17 30:3

40:8,12,20

41:2,5,14,18,22

42:3,6,10,16,19,

21 43:5,11,13,17

44:1,4,7,14

59:2,6 60:2

61:4,7,10,12

76:2,4,6,12

81:4,6,9 83:19

88:20 89:4,7

90:10,19,22

91:4,6,12 103:6

104:2 111:18,21

117:1,11

119:3,17

120:2,10,13

121:13

122:1,14,18

125:18

130:7,12,16

131:2,7,13 150:7

171:14,15

172:1,4,20

175:20

176:1,4,6,10,13,

16,18 177:1,8

180:14,21

181:13

182:10,13,18,21

184:17 188:1

190:11,20

191:1,6 205:4

212:17 213:4

219:7,13
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 23

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

221:10,20

222:2,7 229:22

233:12,14

234:9,11,17,21

235:6,12 236:5

240:8,19 243:15

244:2,6 245:2

253:18 256:4,21

265:21

266:10,12,17,21

267:6 295:2,5,11

hope 39:7 165:7

260:4

hopefully 200:10

245:16

hopes 250:13

hoping 186:22

horizontal 124:7

horrible 287:6

horrific 258:6

Hoshizaki 5:6

84:18

hot 38:15 45:3

163:12

hotel 7:5 194:19

hour 26:10 49:13

69:20

hours 143:20

184:16,22 186:6

house 196:5

Howington 3:11

HRI 61:4

HS 41:5

HSP 41:4

HTP 5:13 14:22

35:20 58:4

112:13 186:9

207:15 251:15

258:9 267:4,10

282:7 294:1

huge 33:21 126:21

249:10 250:1

human 254:11,13

humidity 38:13

hundred 67:1

72:1,2,4 87:21

95:21 96:16

260:5 272:22

283:14 294:21

hundreds 288:20

289:2

Hunt 3:12 131:9

hurt 19:10

Hussman 11:16

19:13 138:16

151:10 152:8

231:6

Hussmann 5:7

207:19

HVAC 28:17 60:1

77:3 164:16

186:6 240:8

hypothetically

251:3

I

ice 125:1

iceberg 142:10

I'd 17:8 28:4 51:6

53:12 59:8 88:20

111:18 117:21

154:3 184:5

224:13 294:15

idea 24:8 34:7

54:5 96:16 99:17

104:13 126:16

141:12 153:17

172:4 198:9

207:7 259:6

281:1 291:18

ideas 265:1

identical 17:20

288:22

identified 225:6

242:21

identify 36:4

IER 18:21 19:2

41:19 44:1 45:12

117:3

ignore 103:20

ignoring 99:6

I'll 7:15 17:11

21:19 23:3 25:20

42:9,14 69:21

71:8 87:20

104:12 105:7

126:15 166:15

170:19 200:14

217:17 222:10

227:19,21

237:22 249:20

277:4 284:18,20

Illinois 5:21 6:4

I'm 10:3 19:13,16

23:14 24:7,13,20

25:14 27:7,17

31:8,15 32:20

36:12 41:7 42:13

48:17,18 49:1

51:22 52:5 53:6

54:5 55:20 56:2

57:8 58:9,11

65:17 71:22

72:1,3 74:7

81:9,11 82:4

83:10 86:7

88:7,11,14 96:2

98:11,18 99:1,8

102:16 106:7

108:22 109:18

110:2 111:6

112:11

115:11,12

118:15 119:9

120:16,21

122:1,2,20

130:18 132:14

133:16 134:11

135:18

136:3,4,17

138:16,20

139:13,19

142:20

144:12,15

145:17,19,22

146:2,8,14

148:18 150:8,10

151:9,15

152:20,22

153:5,6,7 154:7

156:4,16

158:17,21 164:7

171:14,15

172:1,21,22

176:5,8 181:13

182:14 183:3,12

188:4,12,22

189:7 191:2,19

196:3,13 209:20

210:13,15,18

211:19 212:13

220:1 223:12

226:14 228:13

231:17 232:16

235:20 238:7,18

239:21,22

241:1,3,14

242:18 245:21

247:4,6 249:22

250:9 251:11

252:2,11 258:21

260:5,6,7

261:6,10 268:16
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 24

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

272:1 274:16,18

276:10 279:9

280:19 284:11

289:17 290:22

291:18

295:3,8,11,12

imagine 10:7

immediate 170:12

immediately

107:10 160:8

impact 69:21 70:2

82:2 292:2

293:20

impacted 253:16

implications 250:5

important 28:16

180:17 198:12

238:12

impossibility 51:2

impossible 93:19

127:21 137:18

imprecise 47:17

impression 63:14

improperly 65:9

142:20

improve 54:7

238:14,15

improvement

47:20

improvements

169:9

improving 97:21

253:14

inaccurate 256:14

inaccurately 105:4

inadequate 70:10

inadvertently 15:8

24:17

inappropriately

285:11

inaudible 36:9

45:20 46:1 120:1

145:21 153:3,4

156:6 164:5

168:5 189:18

282:21

Inc 3:8,20 4:22

incentive 264:3,6

incentives 47:13

264:10

include 13:21

155:20 160:9

166:8 208:12

225:5 229:18

260:16

included 167:3

169:22 170:3

175:19 177:4

294:18

includes 132:20

133:20 202:2,3

including 69:21

209:21

inclusion 185:16

inconclusive 51:11

inconsequent

161:6

incorrect 39:15

161:14

incorrectly 118:20

161:17

increase 23:12

186:10

increased 118:2

246:17

increasing 58:5

124:9 251:7

increasingly

132:18

incumbent 180:1

Independence 1:7

independent 8:21

13:5,6 90:22

285:18 292:13

independently

123:17

indicate 184:9

276:7

indicated 116:14

indicating 70:15

indication 148:8

247:19 276:15

indicator 148:9

indirectly 24:21

individual 18:5

36:20 180:1

individually 289:7

industries 38:2

80:1 86:4

126:15,16

257:15 290:18

industry 9:2 27:20

29:18,22

30:12,19

32:10,17 36:9

37:3 47:13

52:13,21

57:1,16,21 68:20

87:15 96:8

141:9,12 142:8

145:15 154:17

158:12 162:14

177:13 199:10

200:20

inefficiency 98:12

99:20

infamous 193:15

influence

139:12,20

140:1,10

142:16,17,20

152:21

influenced 139:5

142:13 143:1

151:14,21 212:9

inform 243:11

information 17:1

77:13,20

91:15,20

92:4,15,20

95:3,5 98:5

107:7

111:11,14,22

112:3 113:5

114:19,22

116:22

126:11,17

127:20 148:2

154:10 169:22

170:2,6,12

176:21

177:2,12,19

178:12,20 179:1

180:2,8 181:16

184:15

185:1,3,5,7,8

187:13,21

188:2,8,14

189:11,15

190:3,5,6,11

194:20 238:13

245:20 284:15

informational

154:18

informed 246:17

infrequently

122:14 132:19
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 25

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

Ingersoll 3:19

inherent 52:13

inherently 68:5

in-house 18:15,17

152:16 291:21

293:6

initial 106:16

133:7 142:7

145:12 167:13

174:22 199:9

216:22 229:16

266:22 279:11

initially 76:9

134:19 192:21

initiate 64:14

107:20 108:8

162:3

inlet 69:13 127:9

innovate 97:19

inordinate 219:11

input 108:14,17

139:18 140:2

171:13 254:11

inside 37:4 217:21

insisting 75:18,20

inspect 84:22

install 86:14 87:4

99:5 121:6 144:2

installation 39:5

67:16,17

94:10,22 102:22

107:8 110:2,6,18

121:7 129:4

163:15 169:19

installed 68:15

69:17 79:18

82:8,13 107:3

115:18 116:5

130:4,22 131:1

237:3

installer 107:3

installing 68:13,18

instance 15:7

instances 247:8

250:8

instead 150:6

232:3 244:22

instinct 68:10

Institute 2:7 5:10

instruct 38:17

instruction 68:12

145:1,2

instructions 39:6

82:9,14 85:21

92:20,21 94:10

102:8,13

103:1,9,11

107:8,14 110:18

114:14 115:1,2,3

129:14 145:7

179:18 180:3,9

186:1

instrumentation

26:17 47:15

89:18 92:3,6

94:3 105:18

121:10

instrumentations

90:8

insulation 58:9,18

integrity 164:10

intend 140:6

intended 58:1

198:16 204:12

intent 68:12 156:6

160:6

intention 68:19

140:5

intentional 9:13

161:22

interactive 101:21

interest 53:4 90:3

154:1 164:10

199:6 298:10

interested 168:20

283:15

interesting 237:7

internally 286:12

International 3:6

4:6

interpolation

280:2,3,8,20

interpretation

72:5 143:14,18

148:16

interpretations

47:14 144:6,16

interpreted 21:1

65:20 276:14

interstate 29:1

Intertek 4:8 82:20

93:15 94:4 95:6

105:14 124:1,18

151:15 152:19

intervals 51:16

introduced 17:3

introduction 7:19

invalid 14:16,21

30:11,13,18

124:12 126:6

150:22 192:3

193:2,3

205:13,19 233:2

251:22 255:9,21

262:7 263:9

268:1 269:14

273:1,13 274:6

275:4,6,20

276:1,14 282:3

283:9 290:11

295:6

invalidate 11:1,2

13:8 14:8 126:3

266:20

invalidated 207:12

266:19

inventoried

235:20

Inventory 240:6

invest 121:7 184:1

invested 238:22

investigation

236:17

involve 68:5

197:15

involved 33:14

37:1 51:9 93:1

131:20 162:13

164:8 166:4

215:6

involvement 94:15

157:22

involves 89:16

involving 153:11

IOMs 103:19

isn't 15:7 18:2

43:12,13 50:3

92:16 142:6

148:7 172:14

200:8 208:8

228:16 235:3

237:11 241:20

277:1

ISO 114:3,10

120:8 126:19
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 26

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

137:22

issue 7:19 8:6

15:11,13

19:1,6,8,9 29:4

33:14,17,21 35:5

38:20 61:18

64:18 66:7,8,12

68:20 77:19 86:1

87:16 92:9,16,17

94:12 98:18 99:1

104:16 108:3,4,5

122:12 123:20

124:2,8 125:16

138:21 140:18

141:22 142:1,7

145:4 148:16

155:5 156:3

160:21 161:16

162:22 166:6

172:16 173:21

189:20 192:19

193:19 199:15

200:17 220:20

227:21 232:17

237:7 239:22

252:15 255:16

260:12,19

266:13 268:1

issues 15:18 19:9

22:5 35:6

38:16,19 45:2

52:1 69:21 90:7

99:7 104:6

118:11,13

121:20 123:19

132:6 136:2

162:9 168:21

191:22 192:7

199:13,16 202:5

203:3 206:14

207:2 296:6,20

It'd 113:20 147:7

item 199:18 239:7

items 283:17

it'll 32:2 56:14

183:4

it's 9:22 11:6,11,15

12:19 14:13

16:20 17:18 18:2

19:8 21:11 24:22

25:21 26:7,9,16

28:16 29:8

30:4,17 31:8

32:2,16 33:4,17

35:6,7 36:15

37:12 38:14 39:7

40:3,6,7,22

42:17 43:18

44:4,12,13,14

46:13

47:2,12,16,18,20

,21 48:11

50:4,14 51:11

52:22 54:17

55:10,19 57:6

58:5,6,9,18 62:5

65:1,18,19

66:2,17 67:6

68:20 71:20 73:2

79:12,18 82:8,13

85:6,22 86:5,22

87:1,9,16 88:20

90:2 91:2,11

93:5 94:20,22

95:1 97:5,12,18

99:3,21 100:11

101:18

104:15,22

105:16 109:6,21

110:17 111:7

115:22

118:9,13,18,19

120:2 121:5,15

122:15,17

126:6,7 129:20

130:17 131:6,10

134:22

137:2,3,9,11,18

139:19,21,22

140:9,10 141:13

142:5 144:9,10

146:18

148:9,15,17,22

149:7 150:8,18

152:19

155:7,9,10,16

159:16 160:22

161:13,15 162:2

163:15,22 164:1

166:16 167:4

168:14 169:15

170:5 171:22

175:9,13

176:15,16,18,20,

21 177:19

181:20,21,22

182:2 185:2,18

187:8 188:13,22

189:7 191:7,14

193:19 195:8

196:6,14

197:2,3,4

200:4,6 201:20

202:6,7,8

203:1,2 205:21

206:11,20 208:6

209:17 210:6

211:1,12 212:9

214:8

216:14,17,18

218:3 219:4

223:7 224:17

226:1 227:14

229:4,21 230:6

231:17 232:8,9

234:3 237:15

240:12 241:7,8

243:22 245:1,11

246:5 247:1,16

248:11 249:4,11

250:17,20

252:12 253:22

254:5,14,16,18

256:14 258:13

259:1,18 264:6,8

266:15 268:3

270:1,2 271:3

273:12 274:2

275:17

276:14,18,22

277:22 278:11

282:14 283:7

284:14,19,20,21

288:4,19 290:1

293:4 294:4,21

295:15

I've 9:16 16:19

21:17 22:10

26:21 55:19

71:10,11 76:6

78:6 82:16 84:15

87:13,14 164:3

173:16 239:14

240:21 245:3,6,7

259:21,22

280:3,4 294:21

295:8

Iyabo 3:21

J

Jakobs 3:13

Jason 5:4

Jay 4:17

Jeff 2:11 3:16 4:15

10:20 13:10

20:19 23:5

48:4,21 54:14

55:16 73:22 75:8

99:12 100:2

114:11 150:2

155:13 166:12

177:10 179:15

185:4 226:9

228:17,18 232:4

233:11 245:6,16
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 27

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

256:16 258:15

261:6,17 271:7

275:5 279:18

Jefferson 163:7

Jeffrey 257:5

Jeff's 245:21

259:19

jeopardy 154:12

Jeremiah 3:3

175:11 193:14

Jill 3:10 16:1 59:2

83:19 110:3,14

114:17 117:1

160:15 162:22

171:14 253:19

Jim 2:21

job 188:14

jobs 146:20

Joe 69:9,10 145:3

John 4:4,6,12

5:2,17 33:5

35:12 61:12

117:1 138:17

216:11 236:13

242:6 247:20

248:6 259:5

268:15

Johnson 3:14 6:2

115:10,13,16,20,

22

Judd 5:8 108:11

143:13

judgment 7:15

115:6

July 197:2

203:8,9,13,17

204:5,21

jump 155:10

160:15

jumping 10:6

147:9

June 196:16,19

197:4 203:1

justification 36:8

justify 259:7

K

Karen 4:9 28:15

46:12 65:10 71:9

98:3 101:19

117:21 119:21

144:8 161:18

162:22 229:1

230:5 258:22

Karen's 124:9

165:4

Karim 2:6

KATHY 300:2,14

Kent 4:16

Kevin 5:21 6:4

key 116:19 173:20

255:22 272:18

274:3

Khan 3:15

kicks 216:11

kilowatts 49:12

54:21

kinds 136:15

242:16

Kleiss 3:16 23:5

98:8 99:12,19

114:11 115:8

129:10 139:20

140:1,4,7 150:1

159:6,20 178:7

179:15 185:4

193:4 197:13

214:13,16 223:3

226:9,14

227:1,12

233:11,13

245:6,10,12

256:16 258:15

261:6

knowledge 16:22

91:9 104:10

161:15

known 100:21

Kojak 3:17 76:20

81:12 84:13

85:17 89:11

92:2,8,11

93:3,8,12 110:22

111:2 114:3

121:2,15 122:3

123:11,18

142:22 151:11

164:14,22 174:5

195:7 224:8

246:2

KOKAK 174:5

Kolandayan 3:18

17:7 18:11

45:11,14

59:7,15,18,20

62:22 63:6,9,13

174:15 175:4

190:1,10 224:13

Kowalski 3:19

L

lab 15:8 17:4,13

18:5 27:5 29:2

33:7 34:22

42:4,7 47:6

52:13 56:7,14

59:9 72:11,22

73:3 75:5

76:17,18 77:21

80:3,14 81:14,18

85:19

90:13,15,17,18

91:15,22 92:2

106:21,22

107:9,11 110:1

111:3 113:16

114:5 115:5

123:17

125:11,12

126:16,18,19

128:17 129:5,7

130:2 133:2

138:8,10 139:5

141:13,14,18,19,

21 142:1,2,14

143:1,19 144:21

145:5 148:14

149:16 150:20

152:9 155:4

158:3 162:14,19

163:3 167:9,11

176:21 188:7

240:22 241:5

243:16 244:14

268:11

lab-facility 47:7

laboratories 70:4

120:6,15 146:5

laboratory 22:4

23:19 37:5

38:4,5,7 39:8,13

82:16 98:4 107:6

114:16 120:7,17

122:5,7 136:9

144:1 146:6

147:10,11,17

148:2 169:6

179:1 180:17

190:6 292:13

laboratory's 285:7

labs 17:18 18:1,3,9

20:21 21:8 30:22

31:2 47:15
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 28

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

59:16,21 64:8

71:22 77:15

83:21 88:21

89:13,22 90:7,9

92:18 93:4

105:15 109:6

120:22 121:8

124:17

127:17,22 129:4

132:21,22

135:14,20

137:21

138:10,18 139:3

141:10 151:20

152:11,14,15

243:17 268:5

lab's 132:8 206:16

lack 153:10 170:13

233:21

lag 131:16

language 175:6

189:10 203:2

225:10 227:17

267:8 275:14

291:3 296:7

large 33:12 41:18

42:2 43:2 56:6

80:2 85:1 89:14

111:5 119:9,18

122:19 130:12

161:16

233:14,15,19

242:7 289:3

larger 33:13 67:9

79:12 97:3,17

104:21

122:21,22

154:20 207:2

258:13

largest 43:8

Larry 3:11

Larson 3:20

last 8:6 65:2 69:20

89:20 99:14

124:19

134:14,15 156:4

160:12 164:17

165:10

173:14,17,18

174:3,16 191:12

198:1,15

204:9,10 208:10

210:9 225:3,4,15

228:10 240:5

late 203:10

later 45:2 112:19

149:8 150:6

194:15 257:9

latitude 249:18

lauded 79:20

laugh 245:3

launch 193:5

Laura 2:10,20

11:15 13:5 67:7

70:14 71:2

132:16 162:12

184:4 192:7

220:10 249:5

Laura's 69:22

82:5 224:14

law 5:5 48:1 95:19

259:13

Lawal 3:21

lawful 259:15

laws 21:2

lawyer 83:10

lay 234:16

lead 33:19 68:14

74:4 237:2

242:4,17

learn 53:19

learning 113:17

least 19:20 23:9

55:5 84:22 98:22

99:10 109:8

132:13 133:4

138:22 140:13

161:13 197:21

208:17 215:22

221:1 236:14

242:8 255:6,9

258:6 281:1

296:17

leave 7:2,6 57:6

213:19

leaves 88:9 221:2

leaving 248:4,12

271:12

led 66:8

legal 52:9 154:12

legitimate 49:3

69:6 211:1

legitimately 79:7

133:2

legitimize 49:1

lemon 208:5

L'Enfant 203:16

length 116:9

Lennox 3:6

less 26:7,9 40:18

46:10,19 52:9

53:16 183:19

206:6 236:9

254:19 268:20

284:19 290:9

let's 14:2 16:21

17:11 25:1 27:18

31:4,5,12 34:13

40:2 44:10

47:1,4 49:1

63:11 64:2 77:7

88:7 93:13 98:4

109:20,21

125:18 129:15

140:16 144:20

150:22 156:7

187:19 205:8

210:8 212:4

221:14 230:8

247:7 251:3

260:5 265:15

268:21 269:12

272:19 279:20

280:1,2,4 283:22

284:13 288:8

291:11,19

293:16 297:2

letter 95:19 163:21

164:2

letters 212:22

level 12:12 70:7

138:2 144:14

152:18

187:14,20

216:22 237:1

295:11

levied 250:1

liaison 38:6

license 294:13

licenses 99:4

light 26:9 171:16

likely 16:20

130:17,18

163:22 214:7

220:5 245:9

limit 14:11 43:9

135:7,16,18,20

136:7,14 154:17

limited 73:19

129:16,18 135:3
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 29

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

136:14 284:10

288:6

limiting 136:11,18

Lin 3:22

line 52:7 153:7,13

217:20 240:6

247:17 258:2,12

269:20 283:18

291:4

linear 280:1,3,8,20

lines 9:7 15:9

284:21 286:8

list 24:18

27:11,13,18

28:13 29:9,10

45:9 57:19 103:8

174:6,11 179:21

194:1 197:9,10

246:19

listed 56:13 109:22

259:21 268:18

listen 269:17

listening 110:14

141:8 200:11

listing 154:13

lists 92:3

literally 101:21

102:16 103:19

122:22 219:13

254:10

literature 112:6,9

235:14 259:12

little 8:10 32:4

54:15 62:10,17

63:12 72:7 86:12

90:11 94:1

128:18 155:18

184:2 194:15

196:4,6 241:19

288:1

live 245:18

LLC 3:17

Load 206:9

loading 125:3

loads 123:1

local 68:13 69:4

located 22:11

location 197:9

203:15

locations 22:5

196:18

197:10,12 205:7

Lochinvar 3:16

99:12 114:11

179:16 185:4

226:9 233:11

245:6 256:16

258:15 261:6

logging 63:15

logical 162:17

Logistically

194:16

log-normal 52:4

long 38:13,15 74:9

82:8 94:11,13

129:5 141:7

149:15 159:2

228:9 233:22

242:17 274:20

longer 63:12 121:7

204:17 236:4

241:11 252:3

280:7 287:21

loop 228:16

lose 150:19 241:10

losing 154:13

284:6

loss 26:3,5,10 27:3

36:5 37:2,5,7

40:7 44:21 58:7

186:11

lost 294:13

lot 8:15 27:8 49:7

53:2 60:15

62:11,17 65:20

67:8 68:21

71:10,12 75:3,18

78:9,13,21

82:16,17 89:16

90:1 95:12 96:10

109:8 111:22

116:20 121:7

146:17 148:20

152:15 153:19

157:20 160:21

172:5 189:3

221:11 238:22

239:6,13 251:13

257:14 263:17

264:4 266:1

276:5 280:16

288:10 294:2

lots 30:6 89:17

119:14

loud 94:7 274:16

Louis 5:11 153:16

263:20

love 104:2

low 17:9 39:9 55:5

77:10 99:21,22

lower 216:12

217:1 259:11

Lowes 188:22

low-pressure 33:8

L-shaped 124:6

Luke 3:4

Lulla 4:2

lunch 7:9,11 33:3

178:5 191:17

192:5 225:4

229:3

lunchtime 208:11

Ly 4:3

M

ma'am 56:9

machine 125:1

mailbox 193:21

main 125:8

maintain 50:21

218:20 223:8

255:10 256:1

273:18

major 77:16 121:4

155:1 241:20

majority 27:22

33:8,22 94:1,9

95:4 96:1 118:11

251:1

MALE 7:12 22:22

36:9 63:22

100:16 106:9

116:19 128:3

131:6 139:7

142:21 153:2

168:5 173:16

175:7,11,13

176:20 181:10

182:22 282:21

283:3 284:11

manageable

288:18

management

256:21

management's

250:9

mandated 213:14
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 30

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

227:5

mandatory 66:17

168:7

Mandyck 4:4

manipulation 77:4

89:19

manual 94:11

129:4,5 169:3

175:18

176:9,10,21

177:4 182:11

189:1 191:5

manufacture

128:19,20 130:5

222:13

manufactured

189:13

manufacturer 8:8

23:18 24:11,13

27:1 32:5 34:22

38:11 39:3

48:6,15 52:12

63:1,2,15

64:4,15 65:21

66:1 68:20 69:1

70:21 74:4,20

75:4

77:12,16,18,22

81:15,16,20 82:1

86:14,15 87:1

91:17 92:4 93:9

94:18 95:8

98:13,20 99:5,9

101:17

104:6,9,14

105:12

107:1,5,10,11,15

,20 113:6 117:18

118:1,16 125:13

133:6 139:5

140:17,18,21

141:3,5,14

143:9,18 145:3

147:3,6 148:17

149:3 151:14,17

152:21 156:21

157:3,5,8,19,22

158:1 161:3,5

163:20 165:12

166:21 167:8,13

168:8 170:4,7

171:12 173:5,8

174:6,18,22

175:1,2 177:16

179:3,4,7 180:22

181:2 184:21

185:2,6,15

208:13,22

209:11,13

213:12,15,19

216:6 219:19

221:3

223:13,17,21

225:14 226:11

227:1 228:5,7

229:4,15,16,17,2

0 232:18 233:3

242:20 246:9,11

247:6 250:3,4

256:17,19

257:2,18

261:11,13

262:10,12 265:7

269:19 271:12

272:7 273:9

276:10 281:7

282:3 283:10

287:14

manufacturers

15:3 18:4 21:1

23:8 29:5 30:15

54:9 59:9

62:12,18 68:6,16

72:2 76:22 78:21

89:17 93:20

95:11 108:14

114:20 121:4

128:14 129:3

132:14 133:1

138:21 139:10

143:2 152:4

155:3 168:1,12

175:17 179:17

180:4 183:20

219:10 236:16

242:15 257:19

258:11 260:15

267:11 282:2

285:5 288:15

291:15

manufacturer's

8:11 28:1 31:12

34:16,22 56:16

64:7 68:11,12

77:6 81:20 82:14

87:3 102:8,13,19

104:22 106:22

116:14 161:8

166:15 172:6

210:10 212:3

224:15 283:8

Manufacturers

2:13

manufacturerspecific 95:3

manufacture's

223:10

manufacturing

4:9,21 37:8 49:5

55:13 64:18

108:4 154:9

220:17 222:15

225:7 237:1

238:16

Marantan 4:5

mark 3:2 4:8,18

18:21 295:19

market 64:3

238:10 241:21

260:18

marketplace 27:21

247:1

markets 96:15

Marshall 3:12

Mary 2:19 10:15

287:2 301:2,13

massage 275:14

matches 129:7

material 243:4

296:19

math 54:15

mathematician

287:7

matter 69:10

154:1 177:20

183:1 261:15

matters 232:6

maximum 133:12

134:11

may 1:11 12:8,12

17:20 18:6 19:11

20:6 25:11,18

26:22 36:6 48:3

57:13 58:17

61:11,19 67:10

72:4 91:20 107:6

108:2,8 120:5

127:8 129:19

149:2 150:13

156:5 160:15

166:2,14

171:2,18 179:15

183:10,14,17

192:9 193:4,10

194:10 196:1,4

197:3 210:5

213:12,13

217:12 221:4
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 31

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

229:7,8 233:22

252:17 255:16

258:10 266:2

276:7,15 280:6

282:3 283:10,15

288:4 290:11

293:18

maybe 8:9 24:20

31:15 34:21

37:14 53:20

79:11 81:16

101:15,17 120:7

123:3 128:8

129:3 149:18

165:3,10 167:5

180:7 182:7

192:14,16

194:15 216:5,7

217:4 234:3

235:16,17,21

238:2 244:21

254:18

259:11,21 265:9

286:13

287:10,19 293:4

296:20

MC 5:5

McDermott 4:19

McLaughlin 4:6

McQuay 3:14 4:6

5:20 115:16

mean 13:7 14:16

15:17,19 17:17

28:17 29:4,8,11

30:9 36:19 43:10

45:5 46:15,19,21

48:13 49:10

50:21 58:21

66:22 71:19 73:1

74:8 76:17 83:11

93:16

94:20,21,22

100:7,21 101:13

102:3,4,6 103:16

105:8 110:12,15

112:20 118:13

119:6 120:16

125:21,22

127:15 130:10

139:2,4,8,14

140:4 141:4

144:6 146:13

147:10,13

148:1,6,13

149:18

150:12,18,19

151:16 152:1,4,8

153:6,18 154:19

155:2,4,11

157:19 161:19

162:10 164:13

165:2,4 182:9

183:8,10 184:19

186:14,17

188:21 190:14

192:22 193:1,2

194:13 200:8

205:17 208:6

210:11 211:2,22

212:15,18,21

214:18 216:4

219:4,15 220:14

221:2 222:20,21

223:4 224:3

225:12,18,19

227:16 231:8

234:7,15,21

235:2,8,13,15,16

236:11 241:2,17

246:20 247:1

254:14 255:4,17

259:20 261:6,19

267:20 268:8,9

274:18 275:8,10

278:14,20

279:10 287:4

292:7,10

294:9,10 296:16

meaning 24:5

63:14 279:15

means 51:7 52:6

70:21 76:1 88:22

102:7 105:18

116:7,16 126:10

253:2 261:4

273:2 275:11

287:14

meant 138:2

measure 26:5,18

41:11,14 84:10

159:15 163:11

measured 42:4

183:15

measurement

53:11

measurements

84:4,8

measures 169:2

measuring 105:4

Mecadon 4:7

mechanical 79:17

232:17

medicine 231:3

meet 36:21 55:1

73:20 88:5

256:18 267:14

274:12

meeting 1:4 7:4

21:3 193:5,12,18

195:17,22

196:9,11,16,20

197:1 203:7,17

204:4,11,12,13,1

4,17 238:3 263:2

264:9 279:15

287:11 290:7

296:19 297:5

meetings 193:17

195:14 204:6

member 112:15

113:8 179:8

181:7

members 181:12

memory 284:18

mental 283:1

mentioned 25:3

36:5 38:12 52:15

57:1 95:6 128:14

170:1 267:11

291:17

Menzer 4:8

merit 162:20

met 292:17

method 95:18

189:12

methodology 70:9

185:12

methods 163:9

metric 30:1 44:12

45:17 56:14

58:21 59:1

MEUS 4:17

MEYER 46:12,20

47:1

Meyers 4:9

28:15,20 59:19

60:1,3,6

65:10,12 71:8

74:1 98:3,11

100:18

101:5,8,13,15

102:1,7,10,15,17

,19,22 103:3

117:21 118:4,7

122:8 132:3
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 32

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

156:7,16,22

157:4,7,14

158:7,11,17,20

159:10,16

160:14 162:1

163:5 229:1

230:2

240:11,16,21

241:5 244:21

246:15 257:5

mic 37:19,21,22

76:5 109:14

240:10

Michael 3:17 6:5

51:4 120:18

164:2

microphone

143:16 189:19

274:15 283:6

microphones

159:9,11

middle 91:14

Mike 51:22 76:20

81:12 84:13

89:10,11

93:3,15,17 94:4

105:14 111:2

121:2 124:1

128:7,13 129:16

142:21,22

144:22 149:18

151:11,12 160:4

161:18 164:14

174:5 224:8

Mike's 126:4

million 130:22

137:12 138:8

millions 100:10

mind 19:10 47:19

245:16 264:7

289:12

minds 10:8

mine 215:3

minimum 52:9

157:12 216:7

252:18

255:8,10,18,19

256:1 257:10

259:11 264:3,5,9

267:21 269:1,15

minimums 221:21

279:16

minor 20:7

minority 93:21

96:1,3 198:19,21

minute 105:5,8

110:16 111:9

230:10,18

247:10,12

260:11 291:17

minutes 87:17

106:3 191:17

229:6

MIRANDA

299:2,13

misrated 241:15

miss 133:3

missed 47:5

179:14 228:13

missing 86:7

108:21 156:5

180:18

Mitsubishi 2:22

43:1 60:5 62:1

117:14 175:15

181:16 217:3

222:11 239:11

252:20 268:4

270:12

mixers 84:2

Mmm-hmm 139:7

149:22 189:9

mode 283:2,17

285:10

286:11,13

model 46:3 50:22

54:12 107:2

109:22 110:16

111:10 115:17

116:4 145:11

171:11,12

181:21 188:16

207:2,8,14,17

208:12 209:4,11

212:8 213:6

214:17 217:5,20

218:3,19 219:6,8

221:7 223:18

231:10,20 232:8

235:9,10

236:7,20 237:17

245:20

247:17,22

250:19 252:2

256:9,15 260:13

262:6 263:9

265:8,11,12

267:22

269:16,21 270:3

271:13,22

272:10,14

274:9,11 275:22

276:2 277:1,5

278:7,12,19

281:7,8,9,12,19

285:1

289:8,9,10,13,19

290:3,10 291:22

293:19 294:3

modeling 211:12

221:13

models 12:18 59:4

170:21

211:13,18

212:20 214:1

216:5,6 219:15

220:22 221:4

241:15 247:8,13

253:15,21 254:8

259:18,21,22

260:6,15 262:11

265:18,22

266:10 269:14

271:9

272:4,5,8,21

278:22 280:16

282:2,4,14

283:9,11,14,22

284:19 287:16

288:19,21

289:2,11

290:9,12

291:3,6,20,21

293:17 294:18

295:8

model's 50:17

216:8 260:13

modified 180:7

186:15 252:5

modify 180:12

modulated 96:17

modulating 95:1

96:10

Mohamed 4:11

Molvie 4:10

mom 58:11

moment 289:20

Monday 203:8

204:8

monetary 259:7

287:20,22

money 88:15

134:17
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 33

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

137:1,3,4,6,8

172:19 238:22

239:2 258:7

288:4,15

monikerring

213:7

monitor 82:7

97:21 119:8,11

monitoring 70:6

month 150:6

185:14 194:3

204:10

months 89:21

288:8,14

moral 55:21

morning 7:16

Morris 4:12

motivation

258:17,19

motors 53:2 77:10

mouth 161:12

move 18:19 47:22

55:22 56:3 67:1

150:16 152:1

165:19 185:19

197:20 198:3

moved 133:3

280:13

moves 174:9

moving 39:17

198:7

Mucciola 4:13

184:13,19

283:12

multiannual 70:6

multiple 11:7

21:18 48:7 159:1

213:13 215:21

232:12

248:17,20 250:8

251:1,18 254:2,6

261:9,16

262:14,22

265:10

multitude

20:21,22

muted 207:22

Mvuala 5:16

Myers 4:14 37:18

38:1 56:18,22

57:14 69:18

79:22 80:21

81:1,5,8 82:1

83:5,13

126:14,15

173:3,20 174:4

186:12,13

187:11,12 188:4

189:9 195:21

199:5,14

200:2,16

201:4,16

202:8,16,20

213:5,21 241:22

242:11

243:3,8,10,14

244:8 245:5

246:5,6 249:13

257:12,15

269:18 270:8,10

285:2,3 286:17

287:18 288:13

290:17,22

291:10

292:3,9,12,16,21

293:8

myself 163:17

N

narrowing 265:3

Natalia 1:19

298:2,15

National 2:11,13

4:7,13 10:21

13:11 20:20 48:5

54:15 155:14

166:13 184:13

195:9,10 261:17

283:12

natural 212:20

nature 22:8 154:2

286:14

Navigant 2:3,20

4:5 5:22

NCOP 42:11

nearly 96:17

necessarily 46:13

95:14 120:5

122:10 124:4

140:2,4,9

141:4,6 177:6

190:18 203:1

210:3 241:6

263:6,10 266:20

276:13 296:12

necessary 105:18

107:9 185:18

187:18 198:22

296:21

NEEA 5:12

negative 295:15

negligible

48:10,11

negotiate 198:14

negotiating 55:20

57:11

negotiations 68:10

198:5 200:9

202:1

Neil 2:3 25:15 81:9

106:9 128:7

134:2 197:18,21

198:2

Neil's 132:12

neither 298:7

Newel 4:15

newly 223:11

Nia 2:18

nice 280:2

nicely 258:3

niche 132:20

Ninety 153:2

nobody 7:2 87:22

183:21 185:2

nomenclature

231:8

nominal 36:19

non 36:10

noncompliance

65:5 66:9,20

74:18

noncompliant

66:13

none 43:11 154:7

non-member

179:9

nonparticipants

258:22

nonstarter 62:20

289:11

non-starter 62:14

Nonstarter 118:3

Nope 42:14

nor 298:8

Norlake 3:20
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 34

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

normal 37:3 70:11

185:12

normally 20:18

218:7

North 3:19

Northwest 5:11

153:16

not-able-to-betested-at-a 47:6

note 28:16 56:4

84:15 103:9

227:19

notes 108:1

110:2,15 111:5

169:19

175:16,17 176:9

177:1 182:2

196:15 299:5

300:5 301:5

302:5

nother 31:13

nothing 48:19 91:2

103:12,14

281:14,15

notice 186:4

221:22

notified 74:4 99:9

notifying 98:12,19

notion 262:3

nowhere 198:18

255:18

NRCAN 5:16

nuances 72:18,20

83:13 84:9 95:10

numerous 124:17

O

object 160:2

175:17 191:14

objections 175:5

178:1

269:8,12,16

obligation 50:17

obsolete 209:3,4

279:8 280:7

obtain 34:19 86:2

obtained 34:21

obvious 168:11

obviously 11:3

19:5 21:11 44:22

48:9 66:18 87:8

94:10 128:21

140:18 170:20

179:14 212:21

221:13 230:21

254:1 288:10

occasions 141:2

occur 108:9

occurred 128:13

173:9 213:17

occurrences 214:8

OEM 121:4

127:16

offer 59:8

offered 194:14

offering 12:18

office 33:2 157:6,7

163:21 261:22

offices 194:4

offline 106:6

offset 113:19

offsets 55:18

offshore 96:15

ofs 219:13 233:19

236:3,14

oh 40:9 44:17

47:10 49:21

65:12 67:4 73:15

105:5 111:16

120:12 137:13

150:19,22

155:22 156:4

157:7 163:1

191:6 234:10

244:4 248:10

270:8 280:15

oil 38:20

old 224:9,11,16

OM 175:22

181:1,2,9,12,16,

21,22 182:8,9

183:3,10 184:6

185:13

OMs 181:3

onerous 187:17

ones 18:4 23:3

47:5 57:21 61:14

67:9 94:18 130:9

190:18 266:7

one's 203:11

one-sided 8:16

11:13 46:5,7

47:12 52:19

one-third

294:17,18,21

ongoing 39:10,12

267:12

online 103:3

108:13,22

on-site 64:22 65:3

67:12,13 68:6

70:17 71:21

94:14 107:1,5

118:1 229:15

OnSpeX 5:8

onto 25:21

onus 105:15

148:14

Oops 43:19

open 19:6,8,9

37:16 149:3

217:15 221:9

238:10 240:21

271:12

opening 37:7

125:4

openness 68:10

operate 95:2,16

185:9

operates 83:6

operating 83:15

97:17 102:22

169:1

operation 110:4,7

211:12

operational

185:12

operations 169:3

175:18

176:9,10,20

177:4 182:10

operator 212:1

opinion 73:8 211:6

227:22 255:7

274:20

opportunities

226:1

opportunity 80:18

105:13 128:3

150:19 160:7

162:6,7 205:15

258:7

opposed 102:14

132:21 138:6
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 35

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

189:15 237:10

262:12

opposition 139:1

opted 273:13

option 17:15 23:9

62:8 83:2

88:19,20 89:6

145:18 147:5

151:18 166:22

167:20 170:2

172:21 173:9

174:6,17 208:15

209:1

215:8,9,10,14

218:13,18 221:5

225:19 226:11

229:5 232:10

233:7 234:8,13

235:8,17 262:11

263:4 273:10

274:22 278:18

279:13

optional 186:5

options 14:16 23:7

154:16 206:22

209:7 214:12

218:21 234:17

287:21 289:16

option's 230:22

order 39:11 73:13

77:4 79:1 86:3

87:6,7 96:12

117:9 120:8

123:6 131:2

176:4 188:11,19

189:1 214:18

233:22 235:22

236:3 240:7

241:11,12,18

242:1 283:22

288:16

orderable 234:2

ordered 98:16

ordinarily 67:17

oriented 133:2

original 9:21,22

34:18 166:9

168:9 209:19

217:14 237:11

239:5

originally 198:16

253:9

others 19:17 41:10

45:9 60:10,12

78:13 87:8

178:17 200:6

213:14

otherwise 149:5

ought 9:3 25:6

135:14

ourselves 287:9

289:10

outcome 20:7

108:6 127:13

outdoor 43:18

outlet 127:9

output 211:11

outset 12:9

outside 10:3 14:10

64:13 107:17

112:6 114:5

121:11 143:5

152:11 156:1,15

157:11,12

161:20 162:2

165:18 166:5

167:2 192:18,22

197:19 205:11

206:15,20

216:17 253:1,8

263:3 273:8

278:6

over/under 124:8

overage 32:13

overcomplicating

261:18

overdesign 51:14

overrate 48:13

overrated 262:19

overstating 264:9

owner 103:13,20

111:4

P

p.m 297:3

P2S 4:16

Pacific 3:12

package 56:19

198:10 199:22

252:2,3 253:17

266:8 268:3

270:3 292:1

296:5

page 102:21

159:14 274:14

pages 38:16

154:15 159:2

pain 251:13

Pantelis 3:6

parameters 131:8

183:15 211:15

Pardon 81:8 110:5

159:10 179:5

202:16 240:16

292:9

paren 57:4

Parentheses

269:13

parents 196:7

partial 133:5

partially 56:11

148:14

participant 236:6

PARTICIPANTS

2:5

participate 113:4

participation

168:20

particular 36:7

67:10 78:14

105:6 113:15

128:15 129:20

185:10,13 193:2

216:6 218:3

238:14 239:7

244:15 247:6,17

262:6 271:22

particularly 78:21

parties 93:1

144:15 154:3

162:13 168:20

298:8

partly 103:13

party 9:2,4 15:8

18:16,19,20

19:16,18 31:2

33:22 34:12

60:20 64:8 111:8

113:14 127:17

141:10 153:18

154:3,4,5

268:6,11

285:18,21,22

286:2 291:15

292:2,4,7,10

293:17

pass 7:17 46:11,13

112:2 149:6
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 36

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

166:2 183:21

262:3 269:3

pass/fail 7:17

passed 112:11

passes 46:10

past 20:1 67:15

77:2 104:11

188:20 225:18

239:14

patent 74:17

path 199:8

217:7,12 270:16

paths 217:5

pathway 273:14

pathways 271:19

patience 106:6

PATRICIA

302:2,12

pattern 263:22

Paul 2:22 3:22

43:1 60:4 61:22

117:13 175:15

181:1,15 182:16

217:3 222:11

224:1 239:11

252:20 268:4

270:12 273:4,21

274:22 277:7,9

Paul's 253:19

pay 76:9,10 81:20

106:11 238:9

pay-for 89:8

paying 76:8,14

86:7

PCI 290:17

PDF 187:9

PE 69:4

penalizing 106:7

penalties 65:6

246:16 249:19

263:5 286:8

penalty 249:16

259:7 283:17

285:10 286:13

287:20 288:1,12

291:1 292:17

PENNACHI

299:2,13

people 7:4 9:6

10:3,10 20:1

38:4 51:14 52:15

53:22 66:11

67:19 69:10

75:18 85:4

97:4,19 106:2

120:20 127:4

129:18 142:11

146:4 147:21

152:15

153:20,21

159:8,12,22

164:8 165:19

195:2,3 212:14

226:16 240:1

249:10 250:22

257:6 282:18

284:6,10 294:11

295:15

per 100:10 107:19

137:21 143:3,8

percent 8:16 22:11

26:12,14 27:2

28:21 29:7 30:4

32:12,14,15 33:4

40:3,4,6,12,16,2

2 41:1,4,5,18,19

42:11,19 43:3

44:19 45:12,19

46:10,11

47:9,13,20

48:7,10,17,18

49:3,8,14

51:7,8,13,14,18,

20,21 52:6,17

53:8,15,16,19

54:16,18,20,22

55:1,2,6,11 58:6

67:1 72:1,2,4

82:9 95:21

96:3,4,16 118:2

121:3 127:12

128:22 153:2

158:12 159:4

166:1 170:5

172:1,3,15 173:1

206:6,7

209:16,17,18

221:15,16 231:1

265:14 266:7

282:1,2,19,22

283:1,7,8 284:20

290:14

291:8,9,11

percentage 11:9

94:17 96:6 99:16

100:14

133:21,22

257:4,14

258:11,12,13

259:18

260:8,9,21

262:4,13 265:9

282:5,15 285:13

286:10

percentages 36:2,7

257:17 262:14

290:5

perfect 218:5

perform 64:13

77:10

performance

36:21 52:9 54:11

68:15 79:2 96:13

142:9 146:21

211:15 216:9

264:10,15 285:8

289:15 293:18

performed 65:8

performing 77:7

148:7 239:16

performs 51:8

perhaps 104:16

120:7 146:10

225:6 240:6

269:20 293:5,14

period 39:2 49:13

53:13 148:18

175:3 183:7

189:8 207:2

233:18 242:21

255:11 256:18

257:10 261:12

272:21 291:6

periodically 38:6

Perkins 4:17

permission 56:9

132:15

person 36:11

70:17 102:14

140:13 252:11

personal 211:6

227:22

Personally 260:2

personnel 19:20

33:18 67:17

perspective 71:20

88:3 98:19

125:10 165:22

261:7

persuaded 239:21

Peter 4:10 5:15

Peterson 4:16
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 37

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

ph 17:12 19:2

27:19

phase 40:19

249:16

Phillip 5:13 14:22

35:20 58:4

112:13 186:9

207:15 218:15

219:2 251:15

258:9 267:4,10

282:7 283:19

294:1

philosophical

68:21

Phoenix 4:15

phone 31:3

90:15,16 91:18

107:12 125:13

138:17 145:7

150:14

photograph

119:19

photographs

119:14,15 161:9

photos 105:17

phrase 259:14

physically 89:2

91:18 119:17

122:22 137:15

145:6 241:3

254:13

physics 36:22

245:11

pick 40:1 55:7

225:19,21

226:18 234:7

272:14 275:22

pictures 92:3

107:21 109:4

125:22 126:10

129:2 141:20

144:19

PID 95:1

piece 32:8 54:10

78:22 79:7,14

118:16

122:10,18

149:16 155:17

160:17,20,22

238:8 244:15

pieces 78:6,8 79:9

126:21

129:16,21

242:11,16

246:12

pile 21:20 273:16

piping 95:10

placed 84:3

places 112:5 288:5

plan 244:12 247:4

plant 172:9 245:2

play 48:2 246:2

250:22

players 259:3

playing 79:6

Plaza 203:16

plea 254:12

please 45:12 47:8

68:1 76:5 163:1

193:14

plot 53:14

plug 85:6 125:3

plug-in 99:3

plural 261:4

plus 65:2 166:1

181:4 296:6

point 12:4

14:19,20

19:4,10,16 36:15

50:17 58:2

64:19,22 65:6

66:6 72:19 73:2

88:6,9,21

100:5,7 102:2

104:8,11 105:3

108:7,12 109:21

110:13 124:9

126:7 129:22

132:4 137:20

144:6,21

145:3,10 164:22

165:4 168:11

173:14 179:13

180:7 185:22

187:20 189:14

192:13 205:18

206:19 207:16

208:10,22

209:13,14

210:22 211:22

212:22 218:18

220:18,20

222:12 225:18

229:2 231:11

232:17 239:7

241:7,10

247:5,11,16,18

248:11

250:16,17 251:9

253:19,20

254:17,18

256:15 257:7,9

260:10,19

270:13

276:8,12,17

277:2,4,8,17,20

279:13

280:5,8,12

281:2,8 286:15

287:12,18

294:12,14,22

296:14

pointed 213:16

214:8

points 236:2

249:11 251:16

253:13 254:7

256:8,9 272:12

276:22 280:4

293:19

Poisson 52:3

policy 97:17

polished 296:1

popular 47:12

position 55:19,21

67:14 127:16

137:21 138:5

198:21 220:2,3

249:15

positions 106:16

positive 142:17

197:5

possibilities

152:11

possibility 15:4

143:14 187:15

206:12 227:18

296:8

possible 17:10

69:1 128:8

147:19 168:17

201:7,22 214:20

215:2 218:2,3

219:19 244:13

249:9 251:12

280:21

possibly 8:20 58:6

164:19 171:16

184:10 205:15

219:1,21 234:9

280:10
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 38

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

postponed 200:18

potential 23:12

66:6,20 251:13

potentially 64:13

78:10 153:13

162:6 260:20

PowerPoint

296:11

practical 189:7

227:8 259:13

practically 258:1

practice 57:16,21

194:7 212:20

252:11

preamble 227:17

preapproval 8:1

precise 184:2

precision 53:22

96:8

predetermined

108:6

predictor 293:18

predominant 58:7

preexisting

223:10,15

preface 98:8

prefer 10:10

154:2,3 192:21

211:6

preliminary

155:16

premise 262:8

presence 76:22

142:13 146:10

present 8:19 22:3

23:8,10,11,18

59:9,13 70:21

72:10

75:3,4,10,14,19,

21 80:17 82:7

83:1 92:1

108:2,5,10

113:18 117:18

118:19 119:1

135:13 138:22

141:22 143:2

146:8

151:18,19,20

165:13,19

170:4,7 171:12

265:19

presently 168:22

237:19

pre-shadowing

52:1

Press 195:9,10

pressed 250:6

presumably

208:17 266:14

pretty 22:9,13

25:21 29:8 49:3

158:2 196:13

228:9 264:7

287:22 295:14

prevent 165:21

preventing 166:3

previous 129:13

251:17 277:16

previously 174:22

200:18 224:5

229:15 237:9

261:19 263:4

price 121:22

239:10

primarily

258:21,22

print 226:11

prior 196:20

223:18 225:3

private 138:11

privy 95:5

proactively

179:18,20

probably 10:16

42:12 54:5 85:19

104:12,20

109:20 122:19

123:2 129:13

149:11

194:5,8,11 197:4

200:22 204:13

211:20 214:19

226:10 235:12

246:12

probation 294:11

problem 29:17

43:14 64:16

87:18,21,22

88:13 120:14,19

129:20

140:12,14,15

141:14 152:22

165:2 171:19

176:13 208:2,6

265:17,20 293:9

problems 41:15

47:14,15,16

64:17 69:14 70:7

143:17

146:14,15,17

147:1,5 148:3

149:19,20

167:11 184:11

250:12

procedural 131:11

procedure 16:8

26:17 37:17 45:1

65:16,20 72:6

78:16 82:3

102:5,11 114:8

126:6 127:18,19

144:7,11,16

154:6 168:17,21

169:11 181:19

182:1 183:12,16

190:13,17 191:9

224:6 278:6

procedures

64:9,10 73:1

80:4 117:16

128:17 145:13

159:1 168:13,15

179:19 184:4

186:2 206:16

procedure's

206:18

proceeding

298:3,4,5,7,9,10

299:4,5,8

300:4,5,8

301:4,5,8

302:4,5,8

process 13:8 24:14

30:14,15,16

39:20 46:22 47:1

51:15

55:14,20,22

56:10,11,17 59:3

66:1,17,22 74:19

84:21 85:8 90:10

91:6 97:7

98:1,12 99:20

101:10,21

106:17

111:15,17

112:6,9 113:7,13

121:7 125:12

128:9,11

131:20,21 133:4

144:18 148:4

149:11 150:21

153:12

154:10,15
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 39

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

155:8,11,19,20

156:8,17

157:14,16,20

158:4,5 159:17

164:11 167:11

180:11,20

182:17

186:4,8,16,22

187:1,3 188:6,9

189:16 190:4

192:4 198:4

201:12 202:7

205:18 207:13

208:21 228:15

233:8 234:16

235:16 238:16

244:21 260:11

276:6 296:4

processes 158:13

168:15 169:9

Process-wise 59:1

produce 50:22

51:21 55:4,12

219:12

produced 55:9

218:5

producing 264:6

product 4:10 5:17

8:2 11:12 12:18

13:12 14:2 17:1

21:10,17,18 23:7

24:17 30:1 33:19

34:1,19 39:3,20

48:7 51:12

52:16,22 66:13

68:3,4,17 69:16

76:9 82:10 83:12

87:10 114:21

123:17

128:15,17 129:5

133:3 135:1

152:6 154:13

169:18 179:20

180:4 183:17

188:8 208:5,8

239:20 251:2

253:21 254:3

258:2,12 261:9

262:4,6 263:8

283:18 286:6

290:3 294:4

production 132:21

133:2 247:17

250:19 260:11

products 2:11 3:2

4:7,13 7:21 8:17

20:22 21:2,9

27:9 31:7,17,21

33:6,8,15 42:17

52:3,7,11

54:20,22 55:2,4

62:11,17 64:3,4

65:2 67:9 69:21

75:3 80:6 86:2

87:5 93:19,20

94:2,9,14,21

96:9,14,17

100:3,9

104:19,21

115:3,4 128:9,10

130:10

132:13,20

134:21 152:9,10

164:16

170:21,22 171:3

183:20 184:14

185:17 186:6

188:16 189:4

213:9 221:12

226:21 237:2

241:16 250:11

255:5 258:12

261:22 262:22

265:5 269:20

272:19 282:9,12

286:20 288:9,17

professional 33:16

profitability 90:4

program 9:2 13:6

17:13 26:14

29:22

32:12,17,18

33:10 39:18 42:1

43:10 44:5 45:6

53:13,20 58:2

61:5 78:1 82:3

97:14 103:7

110:1,9 111:4

112:21 113:1

118:9,15 119:9

121:17 124:20

128:1 137:6,8

138:1 141:12

145:16 158:12

161:15 162:7

168:22 169:18

170:2,4,22

171:11 177:13

178:22 181:8,22

199:11 212:2,14

214:4 239:6

240:12 254:20

258:3 264:6

265:5 290:16

programming

61:15 77:8

programs 8:21

29:18 30:13,19

57:9,16 132:5

169:5 183:14

202:3 248:17

254:4 264:3

progress

196:20,22

197:14 202:22

203:2 286:9

294:2

project 94:2

133:13 154:12

205:2

promise 227:18

propagated 68:13

proper 20:3,14

24:16 77:10

92:5,8 110:19

111:11

properly 39:4,5,6

69:17 77:5

78:1,2 82:13

83:17 104:10,15

122:4 123:21

139:15,21

140:11 141:10

170:15 185:9

208:14 241:20

proposal 9:21 10:1

158:15 160:3

173:4 201:15

217:14

propose 35:21

112:14 248:13

291:10

proposed 10:1

217:13

proposing 202:9

prosecutorial

66:18

protect 216:15

protects 216:15

protocol 38:17

prove 105:22

161:8

proven 118:13

219:18

proves 218:19

255:9

provide 76:6 80:17

105:16 109:7
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 40

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

114:22 129:4

188:7 189:11,15

190:4 245:19

246:13

267:16,20 284:3

provided 27:12

115:5 127:19

171:10 174:11

178:20,22

180:8,10,16,19

181:6 277:19

providers 242:17

provides 125:11

157:20 158:4,5

181:16

providing 87:2

97:15

187:11,12,21

provision 255:7

provisions 93:22

94:13 190:19

252:19

prudence 213:15

psychometrics

84:8

PTACs 43:19

public 79:20 83:22

100:19,20,22

101:1,4,12

103:11,18

108:16 119:7

153:22 154:10

246:7

publicly 176:15,16

published 102:14

103:11 202:12

256:19

pull 64:3,4 156:16

182:14 220:5

246:3 263:12

pulled 248:1

pulling 218:22

219:3

pump 45:15

purchase 237:21

239:9 242:8

purchased 239:14

purely 217:6

222:14

purpose 219:10

287:6

purposes 180:4

259:13 294:14

puts 47:13 148:13

256:21

putting 28:7 58:14

69:11 114:13

188:10 212:11

213:14 241:14

255:7 264:22

294:11,15

puzzled 232:5

PVI 4:14 37:18

38:1 56:18 69:18

79:22 126:14,16

173:3 186:13

246:6 257:15

285:3

Q

QC 247:18

qualified 33:18

quality 53:1 54:7

126:19 163:15

quantity 26:19

question 8:14,18

21:21 32:4,20

35:1 49:6 59:3

65:13 68:7 69:16

71:11 73:6 74:13

80:8,10 81:5,13

82:15 86:11,12

93:4 96:6 97:4

98:4 100:2

101:19 105:1,21

113:12 120:6

124:14 131:10

132:1,12 135:20

143:21 162:21

164:15 166:14

167:6 186:12,13

192:20 193:3

197:13,19

199:20 210:21

224:14 227:21

237:18 238:7,12

247:16 250:18

251:20 253:10

258:22 259:17

261:2 264:14,16

266:13 271:8

274:2 293:6,14

questioning 146:6

questions 85:20

113:22

124:21,22

125:6,8,11,14,15

127:2 146:7

169:21 196:8

205:3 248:15

249:6

quick 93:18

115:13

186:12,13 193:9

277:9

quickly 90:2

168:16 197:20

201:14 205:2

244:9,17

quilter 213:11

258:13

quite 164:1 171:5

254:17

R

R&D 89:15 121:9

132:22

Rabbia 4:18

raise 135:19 226:8

raised 106:3 160:9

211:22 237:7

raises 238:12

294:20

raising 7:9

ran 170:4 230:7

Rand-Trane 3:19

range 184:3

Ransom 4:19

rare 121:5

rate 192:15 207:8

221:15

232:11,14

281:11 289:17

rated 11:12 14:1

32:16 46:3 54:19

56:12 107:18

216:13 219:4

232:19 237:15

241:19 247:10

259:19 263:1,2

265:6 277:5

rather 10:6 52:3

131:15

211:11,15 248:9

250:2 257:16,17

258:7 291:10

292:21 294:15

rating 11:9

12:3,17

13:2,9,13,16,17

14:9 32:22 35:3
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 41

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

48:11

50:5,12,15,18

51:1,11 52:14

53:8 66:7,8

77:14,20 157:12

184:10 193:2

207:4,13 209:19

210:7,19 211:17

213:13 214:18

215:15

216:19,21

217:1,21 220:17

231:4 237:13

246:4 250:11

251:21 256:13

259:8,10 266:19

268:1 269:14

271:19,22

273:12,13,17

274:5,7

275:2,18,20

276:1,7,9,14,15,

18,21 277:2,22

278:1,18 279:13

289:15

ratings 10:4

12:3,6,20 66:12

114:21 179:21

211:19 212:12

213:10 214:16

217:6 218:20

220:20 221:14

245:14 255:21

256:19

258:18,20

259:15 264:2

268:10,17 269:3

282:3 283:9

285:17 295:7

reach 202:5

reaction 163:4

reader 213:22

readily 234:2

235:22

reading 14:21

30:11,13,18

127:10 192:3

205:12,19

206:11,20

256:11 290:11

reads 184:9

ready 47:9 243:1

Reagan 194:17,18

real 52:11 63:17

93:18 260:3

277:9 287:6

291:3

reality 75:2 155:4

165:8 188:21

189:2 279:10

290:9

realize 204:1

221:20 222:2

269:4 290:2

realizing 166:1

really 29:3 30:17

33:9,13 34:1

48:18 55:13,17

58:17 71:17

78:10 85:1 99:21

104:5 111:18

112:2 120:21

134:2,22 137:3

146:6 155:15

156:14 172:4

174:8,10 220:11

231:12 234:7

240:13 241:20

253:11 254:15

256:6,14 261:19

264:7,8,15,19

275:10

278:11,20

282:19 285:10

295:18

reason 16:12 17:5

21:21 24:12 39:7

71:4 78:18 88:2

111:13 163:19

216:10 253:5

257:19

reasonable 24:22

28:13 31:8

32:2,3 35:15

65:1 70:18 71:1

73:2 151:3 198:6

209:5 233:9

234:18 235:2

239:9 245:5

256:3,17 259:18

290:15

reasonably

31:14,18

reasons 16:18

26:22 41:8 46:14

71:12 72:5

121:18 259:21

reassurance

140:10

rebates 264:5

re-bringing

149:12

recalcitrance

249:22

recall 13:17

recap 7:20

recertified 207:5

recertify 271:11

275:7

recertifying

231:12,22

recess 192:5

recognize 47:12

132:5 213:16

241:12

recollection

249:18

recommend 58:5

recommendation

57:4 179:17

201:18,21

recommendations

265:2

record 47:11 61:2

83:22 106:4

110:8 119:8

144:2 146:9

161:13 246:7

298:7

recorded 298:4

recordings 109:13

299:6 300:6

301:6 302:6

records 273:18

recoup 239:5

red 227:19

redeem 287:8

289:7

redefine 219:1

redone 254:2

reduce 52:21

reduced 298:5

reduction 216:18

redundant 105:17

Reed 4:20

reengineer 237:11

reengineering

237:10

reestablish 289:10

re-evaluation
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 42

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

210:6

reference 185:13

referring 68:5

231:7 257:5

266:7

refers 9:9

refined 38:10

252:8

refining 212:19

reflect 78:16

264:15,19

reflected 58:17

reflecting 216:9

264:11

refocused 87:17

refrigerant 95:10

refrigeration 2:7

3:11 5:10 26:21

32:11 33:1

45:10,18

refrigerator 4:12

20:9,12 85:8

264:12

refrigerators 85:2

125:2 248:19

regain 286:21

Regal-Beloit 3:22

53:2

regard 231:20

regarding 101:16

111:11 129:14

171:9 177:19

178:21

regardless 9:4

45:1 74:21

register 227:15

regs 18:17

57:11,13 59:8

201:6,7 214:22

289:21

regular 7:10

regulate 20:22

244:19

regulating 261:20

regulation 239:22

regulations 227:5

259:9

regulatory 189:22

242:19

reiterated 210:3

280:16

related 114:12

128:12 298:8

relative 15:13

relatively 26:18

163:12

relaxed 38:21

relay 150:14

release 245:13

released 154:11

releases 219:12

relevant 100:4

202:19

relief 288:1

reluctance 165:2

rely 64:7 115:6

211:6 223:14

relying 75:4

221:13

remaining 186:14

192:1 203:4

remember 51:15

109:14 198:15

243:15 264:12

270:20 283:20

288:18 289:3

remind 213:21

reminder 109:12

reminding 228:22

remote 96:10

remotely 97:22

remove 57:4,12

129:13

removing 57:5

207:16

repeat 180:21

195:21

repeatable 38:10

repeated 123:20

246:20 259:2

repeatedly 127:4

246:16

repercussion

145:14

repercussions

108:6 153:10

rephrase 168:19

report 108:18

112:17 141:19

196:20 197:14

198:17,21

202:14,22 204:9

234:18,21

reported 1:19

299:3 300:3

301:3 302:3

Reporter 37:19,22

76:5 298:1,2,15

299:3 300:3

301:3 302:3

Reporter's 299:5

300:5 301:5

302:5

reporting 1:20

13:15 201:19

212:4 245:18

246:11

reports 198:19,22

represent 57:15

representation

231:19

representative

69:2 116:16

118:1 144:4

187:4

representing

151:12

request 32:10

46:17 56:16 87:2

90:20 98:5

107:6,9 112:16

144:3 159:5

173:20 175:1

180:2 190:5

208:11 225:8

229:5,8,12,16,18

242:13 295:17

requested 220:11

requesting 143:8

220:10

requests 107:9

148:2 225:5

require 70:5 77:3

78:9 79:10 82:10

94:21 150:15

183:14

required 107:2

115:18 116:5,17

121:21 170:14

180:17 185:7

213:8,20 215:19

223:13 268:19

requirement 26:6
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 43

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

35:14 38:22

39:13 57:5

62:1,4 67:22

70:19 86:10

130:7 216:1

267:14 268:6,13

287:20 289:1

292:18

requirements

13:21 21:4 37:4

67:11 98:17

202:10 245:18

246:18 257:11

258:1 267:22

269:15 278:22

requires 32:12

49:16 67:15

79:12 99:3,5

207:9 241:11

requiring 120:7

169:13 185:16

rerate 14:14

206:22 207:1

209:20 215:4

219:5 220:21,22

221:6,16 231:17

253:2,4 262:4

265:8 269:5

279:21 280:11

rerated 255:1

rerating 207:1

209:1,8,9,12

214:14

231:12,15 232:2

247:13 262:5

276:10 280:6

rerun 83:8 253:15

re-run 147:20

173:13

research 54:4

reserving 166:4

residential 80:1,4

98:14 99:2 100:8

118:18 122:9

133:21 163:16

resolve

47:13,15,16 69:7

129:19 284:9

resolved 8:7

104:18 203:3

resource 227:4

resources 27:16

62:13,19 69:5

76:16 87:14

88:15 97:1,8,15

133:18 134:15

135:5,11 136:8

288:3,5

respect 191:12

respects 137:10

respond 34:3

163:2 200:20

response 73:5

82:5,22 133:5

162:17 179:16

258:15

responsibility

105:16 211:9

rest 87:11 151:17

172:3 198:14

202:1

restate 209:7

restrictions 137:9

resubmit

271:14,16

resubstantiate

279:2

result 11:10 20:17

53:7 75:13 108:4

140:12,18

146:10 171:20

206:19 212:7

230:19 285:13

resulted 214:2

239:15

results 13:1 20:7

23:13 38:10

39:15 53:15 75:5

88:9,18

100:19,21

101:1,4 104:17

105:1,19 144:19

147:2 156:4,12

157:2 161:9

210:10,20

211:13 276:6

retail 106:20

retest 14:14 64:21

80:16 81:4 82:6

88:12 144:17

150:22 158:6

162:4 166:8

168:7 175:2

205:18

208:11,16

216:21 225:17

229:5,7,8,12,16,

18,21,22

retested 273:7

275:21

retesting 89:20

108:9 165:16,17

166:9 167:15

192:14 235:19

237:5

re-testing 156:12

retests 225:4

return 15:9 239:9

reuse 251:17

revalidated 274:11

review 69:5 198:2

201:14 210:22

251:2

reviewed 129:7

156:12

reviewing 104:18

207:17 218:22

249:15

revise 232:21

257:18 280:14

292:3

revised 64:11

168:15

revision 131:20

202:10 254:5

revisions 254:3,6

revisit 10:11 25:5

rewording 160:12

rewrite 215:5

rewritten 191:15

Rheem 3:13 4:9

28:15 46:12

65:10 71:9

117:21 229:1

rid 177:11

rise 127:9,11

risk 24:10 52:16

109:19 220:4,16

221:3 224:17,18

241:14

Rivest 51:4,6,18

53:5 128:7

160:4,12 161:18

162:2

RND 121:4

Roan 4:21

Robert 6:3

Roberts 4:22
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 44

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

Rodney 2:12

226:6,7

Ron 11:15 19:13

20:20 138:15

151:7,9 152:3

207:18 231:6

Ronald 5:7

rooftop 69:11

rooftops 233:15

234:4

room 8:15 17:17

28:18 37:6 44:6

68:21 69:15 78:6

86:5 87:11 123:1

124:2,8 143:22

159:22 163:19

164:1 200:11

203:14,21

252:12 255:14

272:7

rooms 7:3,5

rough 122:20

295:18,19 296:7

roughly 52:6

round 23:20

route 215:13 228:3

row 208:16

rule 19:6 27:13

29:12 37:16

58:20 61:6,9,19

132:2 186:3

200:20 201:20

202:6,11,12,13,1

5,17 213:22

289:9

rulemaking 200:7

203:1

rule-making 186:8

Rulemaking 1:3

297:4

rules 35:18 79:6

158:14

run 29:3 39:1,6

60:19,21 64:9

77:4 82:15 83:7

95:16 109:8

112:1 126:20,22

127:8,18,19

128:16 129:9

138:3 139:3

141:7 148:18

149:5,19 170:15

173:12 181:5

184:15,22

188:11 215:4

223:21 228:8

253:12 277:20

running 29:3

83:15 104:16

114:2 128:18

166:22

runs 196:5

Rusty 5:18 19:12

21:19 40:20

55:18 168:10

206:2 208:21

210:20 223:16

257:3,13 265:4

273:9 281:6

282:17 286:4

S

Sabelli 5:2

Sachs 5:3

9:8,12,15 24:4,6

25:4,8,11

47:8,11 48:21

51:22 54:2 55:16

56:2,9 67:7,19

68:1 96:5

97:3,16 132:10

162:8 163:6

164:6 191:20

safety 33:14 99:7

sake 235:18

sales 161:8 259:12

sample 15:4 166:9

209:18

223:20,21

225:15,16 226:3

236:6 265:7

sampler 22:5,6,8

84:1

samplers 22:11

samples 9:10

209:2

286:10,11,14

sampling 22:12

Sands 5:4

satisfied 274:14

satisfy 160:13

Saudi 4:11

save 88:15 140:22

141:6 170:19

288:4

saves 147:18

savings 162:11

saw 136:14 140:13

212:7 246:9

295:4

SCA 60:17

scan 142:8

Scardomp 5:5

Scarlet 246:21

scenario 161:7

253:20

Schaefer 5:6

84:16,17

113:9,12

124:14,16

schedule 7:3 203:8

244:18

School 5:5

scope 127:18

129:6 198:5

202:1 220:21

252:6

scout 55:21

scrap 160:17

scrapped 172:8

scrapping 160:20

screen 23:3 28:7

57:2,15 106:13

175:6 191:12

226:10

scroll 84:6,7

search 52:22

second 46:17,20

64:2

74:14,16,17,21

75:14 76:10

84:14 98:2

115:17 117:14

129:11,12

132:12 150:8

163:1,6 166:9

167:1 168:2

177:14 178:9,16

180:15 195:16

200:9 203:11

205:14 208:15

226:2,14 229:11

236:6 237:16

240:19 265:6

269:13 270:6,8,9

271:8 274:9

275:3 281:16,22

284:5
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 45

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

secondary 154:15

169:3,7 250:22

secret 17:18 97:18

section 98:8

103:9,19 177:1

182:11 225:3

sections 185:13

sector 138:11

secure 92:5

security 4:4 194:1

seeing 13:17 42:13

89:1 96:12

152:22 169:8

seeking 114:14

seem 20:6

70:18,22 132:8

167:14 190:17

198:6 230:9

256:3 263:21

273:5

seemed 139:8

147:1

seemingly 101:6

seems 44:8 79:17

99:6 100:18

113:5 130:20

138:16 140:22

160:9 168:11

169:20 171:10

209:5 210:22

211:2

215:18,19,22

217:3 220:8

261:18 263:16

264:21

275:16,22

284:14

seen 21:17 22:4,10

77:2 82:16 84:20

127:11

SEER 40:15,18

41:1 48:11

sees 93:5

segment 27:21

31:7,11,13

select 106:20

265:12 286:14

selected 15:5 61:7

187:13 188:8

214:7 235:19

selecting 188:20

selection 59:4

182:16,17 183:7

213:8 286:11

selections 212:8

selects 106:19

self 261:20

self-poised 213:3

sell 86:1 87:4

234:4 238:9

241:17 288:9

selling 238:10

semicolons

228:19,20

send 60:6 95:7

109:3,4 114:18

129:18 194:19

197:6,8,9 205:6

284:18 295:19

296:4,5,9

sending 33:15

172:9 193:20

198:9

sends 81:14

sense 8:13 10:14

48:9 127:7 133:8

135:17,22

137:19 155:16

212:5 227:6

257:14 271:17

senses 13:12

sensitivities 133:6

sent 187:9

sentence 150:4

174:16,21 225:4

228:10 265:17

269:9,13 270:9

274:9 275:3

separate 11:7

18:22 198:9

199:12,15,16

202:6,15,17,18

229:21

September

204:11,13 205:2

series 77:7

serious 24:11

68:20 228:7

seriously 163:22

Services 2:16

sets 92:21

setting 20:3 33:18

54:10 83:14

85:5,8 96:22

97:13 103:21

113:21 114:15

288:7 296:13

settle 291:11

setup 15:7 22:5

24:16 59:9 61:15

63:3 85:19

92:3,11 94:2

99:5 107:7,21

110:19,20,21

111:1,11 112:1

115:1 116:12

206:17 237:4

set-up 125:2,9

139:1 144:10

156:3 159:1

160:18 161:14

167:10 170:15

178:21 179:18

180:9 181:5

183:6 184:2

190:6

setups 89:17

90:3,8 114:6

117:7

set-ups 169:10

several 22:4 86:4

127:12 248:16

SF 2:18

shadow 105:22

shaking 211:3

shape 204:19

share 296:14,15

shares 165:5

Shebik 5:7

11:15,20,22

12:15 19:13 20:5

138:15

139:8,13,16,19

140:2,8 151:7,9

152:4,8

207:18,21

208:4,19

231:6,10

shelter 251:4

shenanigans

246:9,14

she's 81:6,10

106:13 196:5

266:6

shielding 251:1

shift 90:14 150:8

shifts 36:20
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 46

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

ship 86:9 241:5

242:9

shipped 24:17

31:18 85:1 92:21

103:1 237:3

shipping 68:17

85:3 241:4

shop 242:9

short-term 47:19

shot 197:22 270:22

shoulders 257:1

showed 232:1

showing 119:8

216:5

shown 239:1 250:3

shows 118:20

206:19 208:1

269:14 275:6,20

276:1

sic 81:19

sided 54:6 56:13

sides 75:14 145:20

146:1,14

sidetracked 96:1

sideways

147:14,22

sight 241:10

Sigma 54:3

sign 118:15

significant 22:9,13

168:12 169:1

171:13 216:18

234:5 246:16

287:22

similar 21:5 35:21

38:11 197:18

220:6 226:19

258:20 261:11

265:10

similarly

213:10,11

simple 40:3 85:22

125:2 126:22

150:13 163:12

262:2 280:20

simpler 80:5

simply 26:16

183:17 219:20

257:19 258:10

280:1

simulated

295:9,10

simulation 253:22

254:2 255:21

simulations 12:8

254:4

simulators 20:9

single 16:20

46:2,13 50:22

56:11 60:19

61:1,13 62:14,20

65:3,4 73:4,8

106:18,19

107:18 124:4

145:11 151:2

165:22 172:22

205:21 206:3,4

215:4 251:2

252:11 254:3

260:22 261:3

262:18,19

269:20

single-speed 94:12

single-unit

59:10,12

sit 8:14 142:2

144:20 275:14

site 30:15 31:12

59:13,22 67:18

121:6 129:17

130:3 132:17

145:12 150:17

151:2 152:9

153:14 155:9

157:19 158:4

167:9,14,15,16

168:2,3,8 175:3

189:5 229:18

296:14

sits 90:16

situation 17:3

23:17 27:13

39:11 165:6

189:2 228:6

238:10 242:1

279:11

situations 25:19

184:9

six 54:3 253:15,17

Six-Pack 69:9,10

Sixty 233:11

size 82:19 123:1,21

sizes 130:18

SJI 3:5

skew 143:9

skill 126:20

skin 86:6

slap 249:20,21

slide 272:19

slides 8:6 9:17

251:17

slightly 20:13

slow 131:15

small 20:6 26:7,18

29:8 30:4 37:5

40:8,12,16 75:16

89:14 111:4

136:5,6 168:22

175:13 269:19

288:16,21

smaller 67:10 80:4

258:11

smarter 96:13

Smith 5:8

108:11,17

109:10

143:13,17

snapshot 96:6

soaks 38:13

SoCalGas 4:3

sold 239:16,19

solution 71:1

146:15 170:6

289:19,20

solutions 52:19

solve 88:12 129:21

293:9

somebody 19:1

23:1 29:2 73:13

85:17 87:16 95:6

113:21 120:9

150:9,17 254:18

261:20 262:14

263:13,17 272:6

287:5,6

somehow 103:18

257:16

someone 23:11

59:22 65:2 78:15

79:13 82:10

110:14 150:15

181:7 255:19

259:7

someplace 31:18

something's 214:6
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 47

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

247:10,14

sometime 204:21

somewhat 21:20

192:17 261:18

somewhere 15:18

19:1 42:12

273:15

sophisticated

171:5 254:19

sorry 32:21 37:20

41:20 43:10

47:10 51:22 56:2

58:9 65:12

94:5,6 115:9

139:13,19

147:11 151:9

152:20 154:7

156:4 158:18

168:6 191:19,20

204:3

210:13,15,18

228:13,21 252:2

256:13,22

260:20 270:10

294:13

sort 8:3 28:3 54:3

128:12

236:16,18

274:11

sorts 196:22

sound 67:6 229:19

sounded 194:9

sounds 74:11

121:16 123:18

126:22 127:20

138:17 168:11

190:2 224:21

speak 32:19 66:21

73:14 123:11

131:13 140:8

143:11 145:22

159:12 164:21

SPEAKER 7:12

12:1 22:22 28:19

36:9 63:22 75:11

100:16 106:9

110:7,20 116:19

120:1 122:13

128:3 131:6

137:1

139:7,21,22

142:15,19,21

145:18,21

151:5,8 153:2

168:5 173:16,18

175:7,11,13

176:20 181:10

182:22 261:15

282:21 283:3

284:11

speaking 19:15

240:8 258:1

special 99:4 110:2

114:14,22

179:18 180:9

182:2 259:22

specific 18:18

21:17 72:17,20

80:8 81:5 82:3

103:9 112:14

124:3 131:3

150:13 167:5

169:15 175:20

176:2 180:3

184:7

190:14,19,21

191:9 207:1

223:17 257:4

259:19 265:8

290:4

specifically 37:2

79:12 107:2

109:5 115:17

116:4 117:3,5

130:13 169:17

186:2 191:4

250:16 289:22

specification

37:10 78:11

146:20

specifications

47:17 183:11

191:8

specifics 194:4

specified 39:5

203:21

specifies 183:16

specify 179:7

specifying 98:16

spectrum 100:15

speed 96:11

113:20 121:18

130:13 144:22

145:5

speeds 77:10 190:7

spell 45:21

spend 258:7,8

spending 76:12

239:2 276:16

spent 69:19 70:1

78:4 172:9

spit 12:10,11

split 236:8

spot 51:1 53:15

59:12 62:15

135:15 136:17

142:7 151:2

156:8,18 158:10

161:4 166:1

283:4

spot-check 62:21

63:18 65:4

74:7,18 77:17

98:9,13,20 99:10

145:11

spot-checking

74:3

spot-checks 99:14

106:18

spreadsheet

252:19

SPVUs 43:20

SQL 187:10

SS 281:3

staff 95:7 143:1

staffing 70:22

73:21

stage 36:12

230:20,21

237:14 245:17

247:9

stand 138:13

151:15 168:13

240:2

standard 12:12

37:9 39:14

49:19,20,22

50:1,9,15 51:8

53:9 55:1 66:9

70:8,9 80:14

84:11 94:12

103:14 114:9

120:8

121:11,12,14

124:11 131:14

143:5,8,10

166:17,18

167:2,3 185:8

210:12 221:19

224:11 259:8,11

263:3

standardization
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 48

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

52:14

standards 1:3

20:10 32:10 49:6

75:1 95:17 97:5

114:8 137:22

141:18 143:4,15

157:13 180:5

266:17,21 297:4

standby 26:3,5,10

27:3 36:5

37:2,5,7 40:7

44:21 58:7

186:10

standing 38:5

154:12 212:5

standpoint 227:8

Stanonik 5:9

16:16 25:14

31:4,5 32:7,20

33:2 34:4,11

39:21 40:2,5,9

43:21

44:3,10,16,18,21

45:4,5 49:16,21

50:2,16,20

100:1,5,7

104:1,3 109:17

110:5,8,12,21

111:1,6,16

169:14

178:10,19

179:3,5 183:9

194:12,21 195:8

210:8,13,15,18

211:21 214:3

217:16 218:14

219:2,15 227:20

228:4,13

230:5,15 233:17

234:10,15

235:11,18

237:14 240:4,9

241:9 245:16

247:3 248:6

250:15 256:5

259:16 276:4,5

277:12,16

279:7,20

280:15,19

281:14 282:10

283:19 284:4,17

287:12,18

289:12 294:9

295:3,9

Star 32:12 45:19

268:10

Starr 5:11 58:12

78:3 116:2,6

120:4,12,14

122:17

130:15,20

146:16

147:11,13

148:5,12,20

149:2,10 150:5

151:4 153:16

154:19 210:21

211:10 212:13

213:3 215:18

217:2 263:20

start 7:18

15:12,14,18,19,2

0,21 22:22 23:21

24:22 25:15

27:18 28:5,11

29:21 39:17,21

40:2 44:10 78:5

79:1,16 82:11

106:7 115:22

149:20 192:10

194:5,8 195:16

200:7 201:15

204:22 265:3

started 57:20

67:11 74:15

78:17 116:15

147:1

starting 7:8,16

34:14 58:2 96:9

194:10

203:10,11

263:21

startup

78:5,7,9,12,14

79:10 82:10

116:2,10

start-up 130:21

startup's 116:6,13

state 186:7

stated 85:5 90:11

164:15 209:6

statement 90:9

185:17

states 99:4

static 123:7,9

131:3,4 191:4

statistical 36:16

52:2 214:17

216:1 218:19

221:13

statistics 36:18

51:9,16 211:15

215:6 226:4

status 35:14

stay 38:15 39:10

58:5 117:2,6

159:3 195:4

staying 195:3

stays 116:10

steam 33:9,12

steepen 52:21

Stem 93:15,18

94:4,5,8,20

105:14 124:1

step 34:13 46:20

51:15 63:19 64:2

66:1,16,17,18,21

67:2,5

74:12,14,16,17

154:9 165:7,12

207:22 225:15

Stephen 3:19 5:6

84:16,17 113:9

124:14

Stephens 5:13

14:22 15:2 35:20

36:2,4,15 37:12

58:4 112:13

186:9 207:15

218:15,17

219:9,17 251:15

258:9

267:4,10,15

279:15,19

282:7,11 294:1

steps 85:7 154:14

168:16 213:7

256:12 276:17

Steven 4:3

stick 10:18

stone 220:7 226:20

stoned 48:3

stones 245:7

stop 84:9 284:5,7

stopper 289:4

stops 195:5

storage 26:4,8

37:3 45:3 57:3,6

58:13

stored 38:14

248:19

Strait 5:15

stray 19:14
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 49

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

street 123:6,9

195:8 203:16

stress 162:12

202:21

stretching 236:11

strict 78:11

strike 258:4

string 188:6

stringency 47:21

stringent 286:22

strong 227:18

258:19

285:10,11

strongly 151:21

164:9

struggle 77:11,15

struggling 29:5

98:11 99:1,8

stuff 29:1 78:13

79:16 116:21

149:19 163:15

172:15 212:4

233:21

235:13,21 236:3

254:6 286:8

288:10

296:10,20

Suami 5:16

sub-bullet

129:11,12,13

185:5

sub-bullets 117:15

subcategories

171:3

subcontract

242:15

subject 186:4

214:6 227:4,13

229:13

submission 187:17

submit 113:6,10

114:20 179:20

181:3 185:16

186:18 190:3

272:10

submittals 13:18

submitted 177:15

187:2

subsequent 214:10

266:15

subset 12:17 135:4

153:20

substance 205:9

substantial 24:10

149:8

substantiate 8:4,8

16:14 252:1

260:17

265:18,22

292:22 293:3

substantiated

293:1

substantiation

11:17 220:15

253:17 257:1

266:8 269:15

270:3 271:10

278:22 286:7

290:13 291:7,20

292:1,16 294:3

subsumed 177:14

subtleties 148:21

subway 195:5

successful 95:20

sudden 178:13

suddenly 253:8

suggest 31:6 34:5

54:5 109:22

120:5 129:11

193:4 206:10

236:14 247:21

282:16 294:14

suggested 23:7

119:21 177:10

195:2 197:21

248:5 249:14

283:20

suggesting

18:7,8,10 24:20

248:6

suggestion 7:9

17:9 34:5,11

57:18 59:8 79:21

114:12 120:4

129:15 224:14

294:16

suggestions 278:8

suggests 227:17

supplemental

176:21 177:2

supplied 77:13,20

supplier 218:8

245:3

suppliers 242:2

supply 15:8 174:6

185:6 233:16

support 97:6

105:19 132:22

277:3 281:3

supported 292:5

supposed 57:15

72:22 86:6 214:9

281:17

sure 21:3 25:7

51:19 59:5 69:16

70:8 74:8 79:5

85:14 87:15 92:7

95:18 98:10

102:18 108:22

109:1 110:3,12

113:11,14

114:19 116:21

125:5 127:8

128:16,20 131:5

137:12 141:15

144:9,10 149:1,9

154:6 170:14

174:13 177:3

182:10 188:12

189:21 192:12

193:7,17 194:1

196:13 201:16

203:21,22 206:3

207:21 222:4

242:18 252:11

291:18

suspect 52:20 83:8

93:5 213:5 214:2

suspicion 294:20

Sutphen 5:17 33:5

35:12 116:13,20

236:13 242:6

259:5 268:15,21

269:1,7

SW 1:7

switched 15:8

switches 77:8 78:1

switching 193:18

sympathizing

163:17

system 7:18 28:11

71:20 96:19,22

238:1 251:6

253:7 254:14

systems 4:15 5:14

94:12 117:16

236:8,9,10
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 50

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

239:13 253:1

T

table 14:17 15:18

17:16 30:8 31:2

75:18 112:22

126:6 160:3

164:17,21

171:16 182:20

187:19 199:16

206:22 220:19

tabs 200:14

taking 74:10 151:6

220:12 221:7

236:22

talk 8:20 9:5

10:10,12,16

25:22 26:3 31:16

33:2 46:22 47:1

63:11 64:21 67:3

79:11 84:16

85:19 91:18,22

106:2 107:4

149:18 150:20

158:3 170:17

183:4 192:21

203:2 226:6

238:2 250:10

271:8 296:18

297:2

talked 56:11 70:3

175:8,16 190:12

204:15 225:3

249:16

261:10,19 263:4

264:12

talking 10:21,22

11:5 13:2,7 24:8

26:8,11 28:16

30:9 49:18

50:1,6

54:13,16,18

55:17 57:10

59:11,12 63:4,18

65:5,6 66:6,13

69:20 70:1

74:3,12,15

80:1,3 84:9 91:6

100:8,9,13

101:11 106:8

109:15 117:4

118:17 119:18

120:15,17 129:1

130:1,9,10

131:17 132:1

135:3 136:10,11

150:2,3

154:20,22 155:3

156:7 158:21

171:16 182:7,22

183:13 184:11

188:18 189:13

190:18 191:3

200:4 206:12

214:16 216:4

217:8 224:11

225:9 244:9

247:13 264:17

269:22 270:5

271:21 272:1

274:16 275:13

276:6,16 278:1

280:22 281:1

287:13 288:14

294:12

taller 123:1

tank 37:3 58:13

tanks 45:3 57:3,6

tape 161:12

tax 76:12

Tech 3:3

technical 36:11

Technically

214:21

technician 61:16

68:19 70:3

114:16 115:6

122:11,15,16

124:18,19

148:21

technicians 33:16

39:8 82:17,21

94:22 95:4,7

125:5

techniques 89:5

97:22

technology 97:20

techs 68:13

teeth 226:16

temperature 20:11

127:9,11

template 114:21

115:1 187:6

188:1

templates

108:13,15,21

temporarily 271:5

temporary 39:7

ten 106:3 118:9

264:5 283:22

284:19,20

290:9,14

291:3,12 294:19

tens 26:11

term 225:11

terminology 8:14

275:9

terms 15:13 28:3

30:1 41:20 67:4

79:6 97:13 135:5

146:13 171:8

211:18 220:22

221:5 226:9

280:22

test 10:2 11:6

12:7,9,22

13:4,5,6 15:7,22

16:2,3,7,8,9,21

17:1,4,10,12,18

18:14,15,17,18

19:18,21

20:3,7,9,21

24:9,15

26:12,15,17

29:3,15 30:10

31:14,21,22

34:15,16,18,20

35:7,8,18

37:2,9,13,14,17

38:17 39:1,7,14

42:17 43:18 45:1

46:13,15,17,19

47:4,14,17,21

53:14 54:11

55:10 58:9

60:19,21 63:2,19

64:9

65:3,8,16,19

67:18 68:5 69:17

70:2 71:22

72:6,11,13,22

73:1 74:21

75:1,2,5,10,14,1

9,21,22

76:9,10,11,13,16

,17,18

77:4,9,10,12

78:2,16,20

80:4,9,14,15,19

81:14,17,18,21

82:15,18

83:7,8,12,15

85:7,9,13,15,18,

19,20,22

86:13,21

87:14,15

88:4,9,13

89:14,22

90:1,4,7,9,18
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 51

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

91:16,19

92:15,17,19

93:19 94:2,9

95:17,19 97:21

98:22 100:21

101:17,20

102:5,11

103:10,14,22

104:16 105:15

106:11,19,21

107:7,13,21,22

110:1,20,21

111:1,3,4

112:1,15,16

113:15,18,21

114:2,15,22

115:2,3,5 116:11

117:22 119:2,20

120:21

121:19,21

123:10,12,16,17

124:12 125:3

126:3,6,8

127:1,8,18,19

128:4,16,18,21

129:6,8,9,14

131:3,10,14

133:7 134:20

135:10,14,16

137:4,12

138:3,19

139:3,12,18

140:1,3,5,10,11,

12,18

141:5,10,13,19

142:6

144:7,9,10,11,16

145:4,13

146:5,11,18,19,2

0 147:4,17,20

148:8,10,17

149:5,13,14,15,1

6 150:22

152:8,10

153:14,18 154:6

155:4 156:3,17

157:2,9 158:3,5

161:8 165:6

166:16,17,18

167:1,2,3,13,17

168:9,13,17,21

169:11,17

170:5,15

171:7,11 172:5,7

173:12,13

174:14 175:1

176:6 177:19

178:21

179:18,19 180:2

181:5,18 182:1

183:6,11,12,14,1

6

184:1,3,9,12,22

185:8 186:2

188:11,14 189:2

190:13,17

191:3,8

192:14,16,18

205:13,14

206:14,18,19

207:7,9,11

208:1,3,9

209:1,9,10,21

210:10,19

211:7,11,13

212:9 214:6,14

215:4,5,15,16

221:6,7

222:4,7,17

223:2,5,10,11,15

,17

224:6,10,11,17

225:8,20,21

226:3 227:2

228:6 229:4,16

230:7,10,16,17,2

0 231:2

232:1,3,8,11,12,

19 233:1,16

237:4,11,16

239:15 240:19

243:21,22

244:10,11 245:8

246:1 247:2

251:5,7,10,17

252:5,18 253:21

255:6,13,18

262:18,19

265:19

266:3,9,14,15,17

,20,21 267:7

269:21 270:2,14

271:13,16

272:9,13 273:1,6

276:6,13 278:21

279:1 285:6

286:15 295:5

tested 9:10 16:9,10

17:20 19:22

31:10,12,18 32:2

33:6 34:8,22

42:6,22 43:17

45:6 46:3 47:5

56:7,12,14,15

64:5,20 65:2

74:5 80:11,13

87:8,10,11 99:14

120:17 122:19

128:15 130:2

132:19 134:14

135:1 146:22

161:17 164:19

167:9 178:14

205:22 206:1,3,4

208:5,13,15,18

211:19,20

213:12 217:5,11

222:16 237:10

244:5,18 255:8

269:16 271:14

272:21 273:5

274:10 280:4

281:9,19

291:20,21,22

292:4,8,11

293:17

testing 8:3,8

11:8,11 13:19

17:11,14 18:1

19:15 21:3 23:19

27:6,22 30:21,22

33:7 35:13,16

36:5,20 38:3

48:8,16 53:7

56:16 59:11

60:16 64:18

66:22 67:5

70:2,4 71:21

77:1 81:21

84:19,20 88:21

89:9,16 91:1,13

92:18 95:16

100:19 107:8,13

108:3 111:12

112:16

114:6,8,10 120:6

121:3,4,9

124:17,21

125:15 129:5

130:3,6 135:7,12

136:7 141:13

142:11 145:9

146:17 149:14

152:6,16 155:5

156:10 157:19

158:8 160:7

162:14,19 163:9

164:2,16 165:14

166:9 169:9

171:17 175:16

177:6,19 178:21

179:22 180:4

181:8,11,17

182:3 183:7

187:13 188:20

202:3 205:20

207:9

209:2,12,13,15,2
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 52

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

1

215:12,13,14,20

219:11 221:6

222:13,14,16,21

223:1,10,14,19

224:4,5,16

226:21 227:3,6

228:3 231:21

236:1 237:9

240:13,14,17

242:10

243:12,15

244:13

246:13,18 247:6

254:1 255:5

262:18 263:2

266:16 268:5,16

269:3,13

273:14,15

274:10

275:1,6,18,20

276:1,2

277:10,11,17,18

278:15 279:12

285:20,21

287:15,22

288:2,8

289:1,7,11

292:2,12

293:6,14 295:2,3

tests 8:19 11:7

13:3 14:15 21:8

23:20 60:19

62:11,17 70:14

73:19 77:7 80:2

82:16 83:1,20

87:21 88:10,16

89:8,18,20 91:8

96:3 109:8 114:4

118:10,21

122:21 126:20

129:19,20

131:17 132:1

133:9,19

134:6,10,18

135:16,19,21

136:5 171:1,4,9

206:10 214:10

222:14 228:1,8

232:12 242:22

254:2 255:10,17

256:2 269:2

273:7 276:11

277:19,20

test-specific

131:6,7

Testy 178:6

text 189:22 227:19

242:19

thank 9:15 10:19

11:22 17:14

48:22 56:10

106:5 117:20

175:4 190:10

200:2 207:21

208:20 228:21

269:7 271:6

281:19

Thanks 43:16

224:20

Tharp 5:18 15:15

19:12 21:19

40:14,16,22

41:4,7,12

63:17,21 168:10

206:2,5,9 208:21

209:4,9,14

210:1,4 218:13

223:16 224:5

257:3 265:4

273:9 276:2

281:6,11,15,18

282:17,22 286:4

that'll 68:17

that's 11:7,13,14

13:7 14:4,5,7,19

19:6 21:11 22:13

23:7 25:2,15

26:15 29:4 30:8

31:9,19 32:15,18

41:13,21 43:15

47:18 48:22 51:1

52:11,12,17

53:20 54:4,12

55:8 58:8 64:1

69:3 71:1

72:15,16 73:7

75:6

77:11,18,19,20

78:5 79:18,19,21

80:22 81:3,10,11

82:3 86:10,11

89:6 90:8 92:13

93:10,13 94:16

96:19 103:16

107:18 110:13

111:6 112:19

113:18

114:13,15

116:14,16

117:10,12 118:6

119:4 120:16

121:19

123:14,15,20

124:7,8,12

125:7,21 127:1

129:6,8,10

133:13

138:5,12,14

141:22 142:1

145:1 146:12

148:1,3

149:15,22

150:13 151:3

153:21 154:5,21

158:15,22 159:3

160:3,6 161:5,22

162:6 164:3,6

165:8,18 167:5

169:10,11,20

171:12

172:12,18

173:14,15,17,18

174:1,20 175:6,9

181:21

182:5,6,18,20,21

184:17,19

185:2,5 186:20

187:13,17

188:15,21

189:14 190:20

193:3,22 197:16

198:2 199:17

200:22 201:2

202:15,17,22

206:14 207:3

208:4,18 210:20

211:16 212:20

214:7 215:1

217:8,15 219:9

220:5,7,14,15,18

221:9

222:9,19,20

224:9 228:7,10

230:11 233:8,15

234:21,22

235:3,21 236:11

238:7,12 240:11

241:17 244:16

245:5 249:6,17

250:13,14

251:11 252:11

257:9 261:4

262:14 263:16

264:7,9,18,20

266:10

270:13,16

271:15 273:2,18

275:4,19 276:9

277:2 278:16,20

279:2,3,18,21

280:21 281:16

283:1 285:15

287:22 289:19

290:15 293:11
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 53

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

294:6

themselves 250:4

251:4

theory 104:12

thereafter 298:5

there'd 33:21

therefore 84:4

there's 8:15 11:2

17:22 20:2,14

27:7 30:14

31:7,11,13

32:3,17

33:7,9,14 34:11

35:17 42:11

43:22 51:15

58:15 63:10

64:16 66:18,20

68:2,21 69:6

70:10,19

74:10,18 76:10

77:7 78:8,11

82:2 85:7,11

101:10 104:3

107:2 108:3,4,5

109:4 113:17

116:20 123:2

125:3,4 127:12

137:5 140:19

145:10 149:6

153:20 156:3

162:9 165:1,16

168:21

170:21,22

174:10,20

192:14 194:6

197:17 205:19

206:13,20 208:2

213:11 222:15

223:20

236:17,21

238:20 244:14

246:18

247:11,18

248:15

249:19,21

252:14,15

255:16 260:22

261:13 263:21

264:8,13 272:5

276:7 286:17

290:18 292:20

thermal 26:2 40:6

44:19 45:17

122:4 141:16

thermocouple

85:6

thermocouples

84:3 85:5 119:5

they'd 108:21

147:8

they'll 22:19 104:2

126:17

they're 15:17

20:15 21:2,3

22:17 27:4,15

31:1,2 33:6

42:16 46:5 54:22

66:5 68:17 74:9

85:6 87:6 89:8

95:4 100:20

103:3,4

108:16,22

109:7,13 113:19

114:13 194:1

198:13

199:12,14

200:12

212:15,17

216:12,20

230:12 241:18

242:14 244:14

259:8,13 261:15

262:16 263:2,3

268:19,21 272:2

274:20

they've 82:18

119:4,5

thing's 105:13

third 9:2,4 15:8

18:16,18,20

19:15,18 31:1

33:21 34:12

60:20 64:8 90:14

109:21 111:7

113:14 127:16

129:11 141:9

161:20 178:12

185:14 218:17

225:10 246:4

258:4 268:6,11

272:10

285:18,20,22

286:2 291:15

292:2,4,7,10

293:16

third-party 12:22

17:18 19:15,22

30:22 31:10

33:7,9,15

34:8,17 47:5,7

56:7,14 57:9,16

59:16,21 60:15

64:5 69:17

77:11,14,21

80:3,14 81:14,18

83:6,7,21 84:19

88:21 89:9,13,22

90:7,9 92:18

93:4 106:21

111:3 121:8

127:22 130:2

138:10,18

139:3,5 153:19

154:2 187:3

Thirty 234:14

Thomas 1:19

163:7 298:2,15

thorough 90:3

94:11

thoughts 108:10

109:16 286:1

thousand 87:20

threat 227:13

threshold 285:16

threw 136:13

throat 142:7

throughout

134:14

throw 41:7 87:19

88:9,13 117:22

245:7

Thursday 203:19

204:5,7

Thursdays 185:14

Thus 75:18

tied 10:7

tiered 282:8,11

tightening 47:21

tighter 183:15

Time's 273:19

Timothy 2:9

tip 142:9

tipping 260:10

today 26:6,7 39:18

96:7

156:17,18,20

168:13 284:9

tolerance 9:9

10:3,9,10,11

15:19,20 16:10

17:6,8 22:20

23:16 24:19,22

25:6,10 26:12,15

27:3 29:13 30:1

32:22 35:2,15,19
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 54

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

36:11,19 48:14

51:7 52:19 53:16

54:1,6 56:13

57:12 75:6

107:17 118:1

124:9,12 126:7

155:11 156:1,15

157:12 158:12

159:4,7,20

161:21 162:2

165:18 166:5

183:15 186:10

192:18,22

205:12

206:8,9,15,21

209:16 216:18

217:21 228:7

232:2

tolerances 8:7,15

10:13,16 11:1

19:2 21:21

22:1,16 23:21

24:8 29:22 31:17

39:12,19 41:8,10

46:6,7 64:14

107:19

159:13,17

220:16

Tom 3:14 5:20

115:16

ton 122:10 146:17

154:21

tonight 296:10

Tony 5:5

Tool 5:21 6:4

tools 12:5 89:4

top 56:20 99:17

100:14 159:14

295:11

topic 19:14 193:5

topics 196:3

Toro 2:21

tossing 8:9

totally 224:16

touch 82:7

tout 259:12

toward 47:22 96:8

towards 74:12

96:13

traded 33:3

train 82:16,20

trained 39:8

82:11,17 83:11

253:19

training 38:19

39:10 69:21

70:2,10 95:6,8

114:6 123:19

Trane 3:10 16:2

59:2 83:20

171:15

transcript 298:6

299:4,6 300:4,6

301:4,6 302:4,6

transcription

299:1,7 300:1,7

301:1,7 302:1,7

Transcriptionist

299:13 300:14

301:13 302:12

translation 290:15

transpose 112:5

Traulsen 2:19

287:2

Traulson 10:15

travel 69:6 81:21

137:9,13

trees 84:1

trends 96:7

tries 251:4

trigger 255:12

triggered 255:22

trillion 295:12

tripped 279:22

trouble 109:13

truck 122:22

truckable 31:9

trucked 28:22

true 3:9 37:8 49:5

154:8 215:1

222:20 252:4

298:6 299:7

300:7 301:7

302:7

truly 156:14

Truskoski 5:19

56:4,5

trust 138:3

152:5,14

try 69:7 95:7,15,17

112:5,8 128:8

179:13 184:8

194:12 220:12

259:3

263:12,13,18

279:7 284:9

trying 8:12 19:14

26:18 54:5,7

68:9 96:2,18

97:8 98:18 99:8

102:18 112:20

115:11

120:16,21 124:7

132:7 133:3,16

135:4 136:4,17

145:4 146:15

148:18 150:9

151:1

163:7,8,11,20

164:7 165:21

182:14 184:20

187:14 188:13

201:11 216:15

228:11 250:14

251:6 263:14

Tuesday 203:8

204:8

tuned 95:2

turn 23:3 53:13

109:14 143:16

172:11 240:10

turned 108:1

turning 116:19,21

turnover 39:9

tweak 211:7,8

tweaking 79:1

253:13

tweaks 253:16

Twenty-ninth

194:2

two-day 204:14

type 8:3 29:2,14

77:13 82:19

87:10 100:19

124:4 194:7

279:6

typed 271:3 299:4

300:4 301:4

302:4

types 12:8 109:5

133:10 157:18

174:12 202:4

264:13

typewriting 298:5

typically 86:8

98:15 99:3 109:7
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 55

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

typo 254:10

U

U.S 2:10 28:22

U-haul 224:8

Uh-huh 13:14 36:1

43:5 45:13

86:17,19 98:10

115:15 195:18

214:15 240:20

Uhn-uhn 267:6

UL 3:17 76:20,21

81:12 82:17

84:13 89:12 95:7

111:2 114:3

120:14,15

121:2,3,20

124:18 142:22

151:12 152:19

164:14 174:5

ULE 236:5

UL's 82:17

ultimately 210:6

232:2 266:8

288:11

unable 244:16

257:20,22

unanimous 198:21

unaware 77:6,12

uncertainties

51:11 53:10

uncomfortable

135:10

uncommon 161:16

underlying 124:2

251:5 255:20

underrate 48:18

understand 20:21

21:1 23:14 24:8

30:18 36:13 48:5

51:19 98:18 99:8

103:17 120:16

133:20 146:1,4

165:2 174:9

189:20 194:6

199:19 200:4,8

202:22

230:2,3,17

238:6,13 244:7

249:14 275:12

291:18

understanding

11:4 138:2

155:18 246:5

understood

132:12

underway 97:12

unduly 142:13

unfired 44:22 45:2

57:3,6

unfolding 127:6,7

unified 58:13

unique 27:12

181:4 188:8

259:22

unit 16:4 38:13

39:4,6 46:3,16

49:12 50:22

51:8,21 53:9

55:6,8,12 56:12

61:7 64:12,13,20

76:7,9 77:4,9

78:1 80:12 81:14

84:22

85:1,7,13,21,22

86:2,9,21 87:2

89:21 90:12,14

91:13 92:19,22

93:5 95:2 98:14

99:2,3

103:1,10,15

105:6 106:18,19

107:17,18

114:15 123:21

125:3 127:13

139:22 145:5

146:17,18

147:17 148:7,18

156:1,17 160:16

161:20 162:4

165:22 166:5,9

171:11 172:5,8

174:21 175:20

178:14 185:9

187:16 188:20

189:8 190:14,21

191:9

205:11,20,21,22

206:3,4,5

208:12,13,15,18

209:17,18 212:8

213:12 215:4

217:22 218:4,22

220:5 222:13

225:5,7,17,20,21

228:6

229:10,11,19,21,

22

230:1,16,17,19,2

0 231:7,8

236:15,17

237:1,16,19,20

238:14,21,22

240:6,12 241:4

242:9,22 243:4

244:12 252:2,6

255:2 273:5

275:1 278:21

unitary 30:4

40:8,12,16 41:18

42:17 43:2 89:14

111:5 119:9

122:19 130:12

168:22 233:14

240:8

United 2:12 3:15

units 12:7

28:17,18 33:14

38:8 49:7 54:17

55:15 73:4 77:3

78:2 89:19

98:15,21

99:11,14 100:10

103:8 112:14

119:18 121:21

135:1 161:16

164:18

174:7,8,10,12

176:2 181:4

187:13 189:13

213:13 217:10

226:3,18 231:3

235:20 237:2

241:15 242:4

251:22 255:20

256:18 279:12

unit's 16:8 32:1

104:10

universal 27:9

unless 56:14 87:4

107:2 161:1

201:20 204:16

205:22 208:16

227:14 241:4

267:20

unlikely 259:2

unnecessary 53:17

unreasonable

159:4

unsafe 174:22

unskewed 52:5

unspoken 162:10

unwillingness

161:11

unworkable 34:9
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 56

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

update 219:1

252:8,17 267:15

268:17,22

updating 252:22

256:22 267:12

268:16

upload 111:18,21

112:10 188:3

upon 98:16 107:15

180:1 197:22

209:8 211:17

229:20 232:3

250:6 264:5

upper 43:9 130:18

177:19 222:9

281:2

uptown 194:3

usually 85:9

116:13,16 147:2

UTC 4:4

utilities 264:4

utility 264:10

utilize 113:2

V

valid 15:22

16:2,7,9

34:15,18 35:2,7

47:4 50:14 55:10

126:8 144:9,10

165:5 192:18

206:13 212:11

252:3 255:10

256:2 265:19

266:3,9,14,15

267:5 270:14

271:19

273:12,17

274:4,7,20,21

275:2,4,18

276:9,21 278:18

279:12,15,18

293:6

validate 8:8

16:14,20 209:19

214:10 255:16

256:11 281:2,3

285:17,21

validating 36:17

199:10 216:2

271:21,22

validation 7:17

11:18 27:2 35:16

36:21 218:19

256:22 259:1

285:20,22

291:14

validity 215:20

value 16:10 45:3

46:3,4 56:12

57:8,17

58:1,6,14,18

59:1 107:18

239:21 282:22

values 37:7 57:18

variabilities 51:10

variability 17:9

52:16

variable 96:11

130:13,14

144:22 145:4

variables 80:8

variable-speed

77:9 117:4

variance 49:8,14

52:2,12,22

variances 252:7

variation 48:17

variations 21:6

49:4 95:13

varies 133:11

134:2,18

variety 10:1 18:1

20:15 80:6

288:17

various 78:6 183:4

vehemently 211:3

285:14

vendor 238:1

ventilation 37:4

venues 97:12

verification 27:6

106:19 112:21

113:1 128:1

138:1 158:10,13

159:17 170:5

199:9 202:2

210:18 252:16

255:17 286:22

verify 114:6

210:15 252:7

verifying 63:16

169:7

versed 122:11

143:3

version 246:4

versus 13:19 98:12

122:9 221:5

258:16 262:15

via 197:6

VICP 17:11

109:22

112:2,15,17

132:5 171:18

199:11,22

208:21 226:16

257:6,9 258:3

VICPs 171:17

192:4 259:1

video 88:22 98:22

99:10 105:17

119:22 126:1

144:19

videoconferencing

97:22

videos 126:10

129:2

view 67:16 83:8

96:10 130:1

viewing 101:20

Viktor 2:8

Vince 4:13 184:13

283:12

violation 190:16

Virginia 138:9

visit 38:22

visually 84:22

voicemails 33:4

volume 38:8

90:1,4 121:18

130:14 152:12

234:5

volumes 67:10

121:21

voluntary 162:7

vote 198:18 269:17

295:15

VRF 43:2 45:12

60:7 61:22

62:1,9 117:15,16

W

Wahid 4:11

wait 65:11 69:22

105:5,8 110:16

111:9 126:15

196:3 200:9
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 57

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

230:10,18 246:1

247:9,12 260:11

295:20

waits 90:16

waivers 35:13,15

walk 67:8 68:1

walls 119:20

Walsh 5:20

warehouse 38:15

warm-up 185:10

warning 33:20

warranty 67:10

Washington 1:9

5:21 6:4

wasn't 81:16 88:17

100:16 168:2

173:11,12

207:22 208:14

217:21 233:10

292:5

waste 172:5

wasted 172:14

wasteful 172:12

watch 171:7

watching 102:14

water 5:13 15:9

26:1,2,4,9

37:3,17 38:20,21

40:5 44:15

45:3,15 56:6

105:7 163:12

186:11 282:20

watts 26:11

ways 52:12 65:20

66:12 73:9,17

95:11 97:21

103:4,5 258:21

Weber 5:22

webinar 88:22

website 176:18

we'd 55:16,17

58:22 74:8

84:18,21

85:11,12 102:2

111:9 113:18

125:5,7

Wednesday 1:11

203:18 204:5,7

week 89:21 196:2

242:4 245:13

294:6

weekend 203:9

weeks 235:5 237:4

284:8 295:20

296:12

weigh 220:15

221:3

weighted

283:14,16

Welch 6:2

we'll 12:18 30:16

88:9 150:19

152:13,14

154:15 156:2

194:7 196:10

197:5,6,7,9

205:7 221:22

249:2,17 251:9

269:17 294:7

well-versed 95:9

we're 7:4,8,16

8:12,20 9:17

10:21,22

11:4,5,16 12:4

13:7 14:5 15:12

16:1,2 17:19

18:19 19:9 23:11

30:9 33:21 36:16

40:9 48:8,22

49:1 50:1,6 51:9

52:1 54:3,12,18

55:3,17 57:10,11

59:11 61:12

62:12,19 63:18

65:5,6 66:6 67:1

70:13 72:15

74:3,11 76:2,3,4

77:6 80:1,3 81:3

91:6 92:5

95:20,21,22

96:9,12,18

97:1,2,16,17

100:8,9,13

102:20 103:17

105:20 112:20

113:13 117:4

118:17 119:3,11

156:5 189:13

196:17,21,22

197:5,11 198:20

201:11

203:8,14,18,22

204:17,19,22

205:1,6,10

206:12,18

207:22 208:6

212:5,10 213:14

214:16,21

216:15,16,20

217:8 218:4

221:11 223:4

225:9 226:17

227:10 234:19

239:1 244:15

245:17 247:13

248:4,12

250:12,14

254:6,16 257:8

261:18

264:13,17 265:1

266:4 270:5,6

271:11 275:13

276:6 278:1

284:6 286:19

287:13 288:16

289:1 290:5

293:11 294:3,12

295:14,21

296:13

Wes 4:21

West 3:3 138:9

wet-bulb 84:8

we've 12:14,16

20:20 21:5 35:13

39:9 64:14 65:21

68:2,3 69:14

82:17,20 84:19

86:21 87:10,11

104:5 109:4

113:16 118:8,13

121:13,14

124:16 143:17

157:11

163:13,14

165:15 167:9

169:1,5

175:8,11,16

192:2,6,7,13,15

195:13 203:3

205:17

206:3,4,14,15,16

208:22 214:17

218:10 220:19

221:14 225:6,17

228:5 231:20,21

233:3 249:16

251:4 253:21

254:1,2 265:3

267:20,22

276:15,21

281:21 294:22

whatever 7:17

8:22 11:9

16:14,19 17:8

23:13 32:8 55:9
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 58

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

61:16 67:16

74:9,16,19 76:1

84:11 92:22

104:17 105:18

110:17 115:3

116:5 129:8

137:22 160:19

169:20 173:6

184:12 185:13

206:8 213:7

220:17 231:21

234:2,22 243:17

253:15 259:20

260:8,12 274:19

276:12 291:12

294:16

whatsoever 22:12

Whereas 140:15

whereby 88:22

where's 131:10

Whereupon 192:5

297:3

wherever 64:4

152:17 240:20

243:22

whether 10:8

11:1,6 13:15,18

17:4 18:5 20:8

22:6 24:14 30:14

34:16 50:14,15

52:17 61:5,8,19

62:5 66:7,19

68:7 69:16 74:21

80:15 111:7,21

112:1,10 116:15

124:17 135:5

142:12 146:6

148:15 161:9

162:20 166:19

170:1,3

177:12,15,20

184:11 185:12

190:15 196:21

198:19,20 205:1

218:6,8 221:8

224:16,19

229:21 253:16

263:1 276:8

293:6,10,14

whichever

294:17,19

White 5:19 56:5

Whitman 128:2

Whitwell 6:3

43:7,15 45:16

73:10,15 110:4,6

166:7 180:6,15

182:4 187:5

225:1,12 226:5

238:11 250:7

280:10

293:4,9,13

whoever 111:7

112:17 296:20

whoever's 31:22

whole 31:13,20

32:4 75:2 76:7

100:11 101:10

104:21 116:11

147:18,20

149:12 191:12

197:9 255:21

264:18 278:2

whom 197:14

298:2

Whoops 29:14

who's 29:2 82:11

102:14 152:6

193:18

wide 17:22 80:6

288:17

willing 27:15

144:15 147:8,15

153:12

171:14,15

260:16,17

284:11

win 193:9

wire 69:13

wiring 95:10

wise 56:17 184:8

wish 241:17

withhold 227:22

witness 19:21

24:15 29:6 61:5

63:2,10,14 68:5

78:7 84:19 98:22

99:10

101:17,20,21

114:5 121:6

124:21 128:4

130:5 137:17

138:22 160:7

171:17 174:7,9

witnessed 83:20

84:1,2,5,7

witnessing 89:1

147:21 152:16

wonder 126:9

wondered 147:12

wonderful 28:22

wood 85:10

Woodford 6:5

wording 166:13

221:9 266:13

274:2,19

wore 163:9

work 10:12

27:15,16 28:13

68:17 80:5 89:16

96:19 113:2

117:19

119:13,22 122:6

124:10

125:19,20 127:4

138:4 141:16,20

150:17 152:12

248:18 262:14

277:15 291:16

worked 19:1

163:14

working

37:19,21,22

158:22 196:17

198:10,13 200:7

201:7 203:14

208:14 235:2,9

242:20 248:7,9

works 5:21 6:4

38:3 263:19

286:9

workshops 103:18

world 150:10

218:5 291:3

worried 133:2

worry 69:9

worse 137:10

worst 161:6

worth 47:18

worthwhile

213:21

wrap 99:19 185:19

wring 54:7

wrist 249:21

write 145:6 146:2

179:17 185:15

188:12 191:4

226:20 227:17

286:20

writing 23:2
Capital Reporting Company

Appliance Standards Federal Advisory Committee Meeting 05-15-2013

Page 59

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2013

197:22 201:15

214:21 273:22

written 48:1 49:6

119:13 158:16

162:15 171:22

179:16 180:3

220:7 226:10,19

wrong 21:7 64:20

65:19 76:18 84:4

85:11 102:2,4,6

119:4,5,16

125:19,20

126:2,4,5 127:7

142:4,5,18

144:17 146:8

148:8,9

160:17,19

173:11 208:7

218:11,12

220:13 235:21

247:14 261:13

277:2,6

wrote 199:2

X

Xs 265:1

Y

Yep 15:1 35:9 36:3

40:21

yesterday 7:20

8:7,14 12:5

16:19 33:3 35:22

52:8 195:3 216:5

264:11

yesterday's 54:12

yet 98:7 99:6 101:4

104:8 127:22

172:10 187:22

201:3 228:21

249:16 274:14

you'll 21:12

104:20 194:19

YOUNG 301:2,13

yourself 102:6

191:18 271:19

292:22

yourselves 187:3

you've 12:20 27:14

29:6 83:11 88:8

162:5 170:14

193:21 205:15

214:4 217:19

230:8 237:6

238:22 252:14

256:6 258:18

272:11

273:13,15

274:4,6 276:10

277:2,17,19,20

278:5 280:16

288:2

Yup 205:21

207:20 272:15

287:17

Z

zero 3:8 4:22

127:8,10

ZEVE 300:2,14

zone 3:8 4:22

214:5