From : Llenza , Charles [mailto : Charles

. Llenza @ ee.doe.gov]

Sent : Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:34 PM To: Pinto, Francine Cc: Edwards , Brenda ; Poston, Mona Subject : Faxed response of DO) for CRE NOPR on competitive impacts, 10/24/08 (docket # EE-2006
- STD-0126 , RIN# 1904-AB59) 

### Please find attached the Faxed response pdf of DOJ for CRE NOPR on competitive impacts dated 10/24/08 for the record. Regards, 

# Charles Llenza Project Manager/Engineer US Department of Energy (202)586-2192(work) (202)287-1590(fax) Charles.L1enza^ee. doe.Rov

From : Pinto, Francine Sent : Monday, October 27, 2008 10:59 AM To: Llenza, Charles Subject : We received the faxed response of DOJ for CRE on competitive impacts. They have no problem. Will get to you. Original has not yet arrived here. Francine CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE OR ELECTRONIC MESSAGE IS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMES ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR AN EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF THIS MESSAGE CONTAINS NON-PUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT ANY CONSUMER OR CUSTOMER OF THE SENDER OR INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE FURTHER PROHIBITED UNDER PENALTY OF LAW FROM USING OR DISCLOSING THE INFORMATION TO ANY THIRD PARTY BY PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL GRAMM-LEACH-BAILEY ACT. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS FACSIMILE OR ELECTRONIC MESSAGE IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN OR DESTROY THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO ASSURE THAT IT IS NOT READ, COPIED, OR DISTRIBUTED BY OTHERS.OCT-24 -2008 13:31 DOJ-ATR 202 353 8856 P.01



# 3hpartment of Jwtke Antitrust Division Transportation , Energy and Agriculture

Section 450 5`" Street, N.W., Suite 4100-North Washington, DC 20530 Fax Number: 202/616-2441 OR.

202/307-2784 

### Voice Number : (t ^ O3 -105W

The information contained in this facsimile is government privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee (s) listed on this coversheet

. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of the telecopy is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile in error, please immediately notify the sender at the telephone number listed on this coversheet and the original facsimile must be returned via the United States Postal Service to the address above. Thank you.



## FAX COVER SHEET



## Date : Qcobx crag To: Warren ref ma..f Of. 

# L S . be.p r4me - a^ 

# &W Fax 

## Number : c / 

## 5 

# 8/

-- 1411 !.v From : kcitec i 

# 1 [a

## (r 

# -rcr ZGt.rld- -r1


## Pages Sent (including this sheet):)

Remarks:OCT-24-2006 13:31 DOJ-ATR 282 353 8856 P.02


### DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division

Main Justice Building 950 Pennsylvania Avenuc, N.W. Washington , D.C. 20530-000I (202) 514-2401 / (202).6) 6-2645 (Fax) E-mail: antitrust®usdoj.gov Web site: hnp://w-w w .usdol

. gov/atr 

### October 24, 2008

FACSIMrLE TRANSMITTAL AND FIRST CLASS MAIL Warren Belmar, Esq. Deputy General Counsel for Energy Policy U.S. Department of Energy 

### Washington , D.C. 20585 Dear Deputy General Counsel Belmar: I am responding to your August 12, 2008 letter seeking the views of the Attorney General about the potential impact on competition of the proposed energy efficiency standards for commercial refrigeration equipment

. The Energy Policy and Conservation Act ("SPCA") authorizes the Department of Energy (" DOE") to establish energy conservation standards for a number of appliances where DOE determines that those standards would be technologically feasible, economically justified , and result in significant energy savings. Your request was submitted pursuant to Section 325(o )(2)(B)(i) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, 42 U

. S.C. § 6291 , 6295 (" EPCA" ), which states that, before the Secretary of Energy may prescribe a new or amended energy conservation standard, the Sccretary shall ask the Attorney General to make a determination of "the impact of any lessening of competition

... that is likely to result from the imposition of the standard ." The Attorney General's responsibility for responding to requests from other departments about the effect of a program on competition has been delegated to the Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division in 28 CFR § 0

. 40(g)_ In conducting its analysis the Antitrust Division examines whether a standard may lessen competition , for example , by placing certain manufacturers of a product at an unjustified competitive disadvantage compared to other manufacturers , or by inducing avoidable inefficiencies in production or distribution of particular products

. In addition to harming consumers directly through higher prices , these effects could undercut the ultimate goals of the legislation. Along with your request , you sent us the draft final rule and a number of other documents relating to commercial refrigeration equipment , including a hearing transcript and the names of parties interviewed by DOE' s consultant.OCT-24-2008 13:32 DOJ-ATR 202 353 8856 P.03

We have concluded that the proposed standards would not adversely affect competition. In reaching this conclusion , we note that the proposed standards were developed taking into account comments by commercial refrigeration equipment manufacturers , the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air

- Conditioning Engineers , the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy and electric utilities. We note further that all key components are available for purchase by any manufacturer ; therefore no manufacturer has a technological advantage in meeting the proposed standards

. Finally, DOE found no significant differences between the concerns of large and small manufacturers , and we found no evidence that certain manufacturers would be placed at a competitive disadvantage compared to other manufacturers. In conclusion, the Antitrust Division does not believe the proposed final rule would adversely affect competition. 

### Yours sincerely,

Page 2 Deborah A. Garza Acting Assistant Attorney General

TOTAL P.03L