EERE-2007-BT-STD-0012 COMMENT 21

Jun 06 2008 16:11 

JUN-06-2008 13:18 

HP LASERJET FAX 

OOJ-ATR 

; 

202 353 8856 

DEP ARTMENT OF WSTICE 

Antitrust Divisioo ! 

, 

Main Ju&1i.c.e BuUdi~g 

950 Pennsylvania J\(venue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. ?oS30-0001 

(202) 5 14-i40 11 (2P2) 616--2645 (f) 

antitrUst@iustice.~doj .gov 

http://www.usdoj.g?v 

June 6, 2908 

Warren Belmar •. Deputy General Counsel for Energy Policy 

Department of Energy .. 

Washington, D.C. 20585 

Dear Deputy General Counsel Belmar: 

I am responding to your April:>, 20081etter seeking the views ~fthe Attorney General 

about the potential impact on competition of two proposed energy colJlservation standards for 

packaged terminal air conditioners ("PTACs") and packaged terminal heat pumps (UPTHPs'). 

Your request was submitted pursuant to Section 325(0 )(2)(B)(i)(V) of the Energy Policy and 

Conservation Act, as amended, (UEPCA"). 42 U.S.C. § 6295(o)(B)(i)(V), which requires the 

Attorney General to make a determination of the impact of any les~ng of competition that is 

likely to result from the imposition ()f proposed energy conservation ~tandards. The Attorney 

General's responsibility for responding to requests from other departJlnents about the effect of a 

program on competition has been delegated to the Assistant Attorney! General for the AntitNst 

Division in 28 CFR § ().40(g). i 

p. 1 

P.12!2 

In conducting its analysis the Antitrust Division examines wh~ther a proposed standard 

may lessen competition, for eX'ample.)Jy placing certain manufacturd,r~ of a product at an 

unjustified competitive disadvantage compared to othermanufaeeurets. or by inducing avoidable 

inefficiencies in production or distribution of particular products. lnladdition to harming 

consumers dlrectly through higher prices, these effects Gould under~t the ultimate goals of the 

l~gislatjon. J 

We have reviewed the proposed standards and the supplemen~ infonnaiion submitted 

to the Attorney General, including the transcript of the May 1 publicjm!=(:ting on the proposed 

standards. We have additionally conducted interviews with members of the industry. , 

"''hat we have heard raises legitimate issues about whether ~ proposed standards may 

adversely affect comperition. The proposed standard for non-standatrl PT ACs and PTHPs may 

create a risk that is too strict for the manufacturers to satisfy, given. the state of technology. 

i 

[ 
EERE-2007-BT-STD-0012 COMMENT 21

Jun 06 2008 16:11 

JUN-06-2008 13:19 

HP LASER JET FAX 

DOl-ATR 

'. ".r. 

202 353 6856 

Customers that own older buildings with non-standard wall openings fot air conditioning and 

heating Wlits could face the choice ofincuning capital expenditures to aJlter the ~ize of the wall 

openings so that they could use standard sized units. or of not being abl~ to replace their nonstandardslzed units with units that are appropriately Sized and meet theiJ)t'OPosed energy 

consetVatlon standards. Similarly, we have heard that the proposed s~dards for standard sized 

PTHPs may be too strict for manufacturers to satisfy. Since there arc fe.w manufactureI'$ of 

standard. PTHPs and of nonstandard PTACs and PTHPs, if some manu~acturers cannot meet the 

proposed standards, consumers will have fewer competiti'\7e altcmati~~ and may pay higher 

prices. ' 

p.2 

P.03 

The Department of Justice is not in a position to judge Whether manufacturers will be able I 

to meet the prop()scd standards- we urge, however, the Department of:.Encrgy to take into 

account these possible impacts on competition in determining its final ~ergy efficienc), standard 

for PT ACs and PTHPs. . -. . 

Sincerely, j 

7)/~ ~ ~. 6Ofr~ Deborah A. Garza 

Acting ~istant Attorney General . 

~. 

TOTAL. P.03