(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 1

 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

 PUBLIC MEETING ON ENERGY CONSERVATION 

 STANDARDS FOR 

 REFRIGERATED BEVERAGE VENDING MACHINES 

 + + + + + 

 Wednesday 

 June 17, 2009 

 + + + + + 

 The Public Meeting convened in the 

Department of Energy, Room 8E-089, 1000 

Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C., at 

9:00 a.m., Doug Brookman, facilitator, 

presiding.

PARTICIPANTS:

 DOUG BROOKMAN, Facilitator 

 BOB McGARRAH, USA Technologies 

 STEVEN COUSINS, Coca-Coca Company 

 MARC CHESSEROT, shecco 

 AMANDA STEVENS, Energy Solutions 

 EDWIN HORNQUIST, Southern California 

 Edison 

 ANDREW deLASKI, Appliance Standards 

 Awareness Project 

 GLEN SELFRIDGE, Royal Vendors 

 RAY McFADDEN, Royal Vendors 

 TRENT ROTH, Dixie-Narco/Crane 

 TROY DOOM, Dixie-Narco/Carne 

 JAMES MATHIS, Dixie-Narco/Crane 

 NINA TARLEY, Pepsi Co. 

 KRISTEN RAYMOND, Department of Justice 

 MARGO FAIER, Department of Justice 

 MICHAEL KIDO, Department of Energy 

 CHARLES LLENZA, Department of Energy 

 MICHAEL FRIEDRICHS, Department of Energy 

 FRANCINE PINTO, Department of Energy 

 SAM JASINSKI, Navigant Consulting 

 ARIS MARANTAN, Navigant Consulting 

PARTICIPANTS (Continued): 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 2

 MATTHEW MILLARD, Navigant Consulting 

 JEFFREY KINGMAN, Navigant Consulting 

 SRIRAM SOMASUNDARAM, Pacific Northwest 

 National Laboratory 

 MICHAEL SCOTT, Pacific Northwest 

 National Laboratory 

 GRAHAM PARKER, Pacific Northwest 

 National Laboratory 

 ERIC ANDERSEN, Pacific Northwest 

 National Laboratory 

 REBECCA DUFF, ICF International 

 MICHAEL REDMAN, American Beverage 

 Association 

 NED MONROE, National Automatic 

 Merchandising Association 

 LANE BURT, National Resources Defense 

 Council 

 AMANDA KORANE, American Council for an 

 Energy Efficient Economy 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 3

 TABLE OF CONTENTS 

 PAGE 

Introductions .............................4 

Rulemaking Overview ......................10 

Discussion of Issues by Participants .....13 

Engineering Analysis .....................43 

Energy Use Analysis by Cycle Cost 

 Analysis ...........................52 

National Impact Analysis .................69 

Manufacturing Impact Analysis ...........170 

Utility Impact Analysis .................212 

Employment Impact Analysis ..............213 

Environmental Assessment ................215 

Regulatory Impact Analysis ..............216 

Additional Issues and Summary Comments by 

 Participants ......................227 

Next Steps ..............................227 

Closing Remarks .........................228 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 4

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

2 (9:14 a.m.) 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Let's please 

4 take your seat and let's get started. 

5 Good morning, everybody, and 

6 welcome. This is the U.S. Department of 

7 Energy's public meeting on energy conservation 

8 standards for refrigerated beverage vending 

9 machines. Glad you could make it here. 

10 Welcome to Washington. 

11 And we're going to start off this 

12 morning with welcoming remarks from Charles 

13 Llenza. 

14 MR. LLENZA: Welcome here to the 

15 Department of Energy. On behalf of my boss, 

16 Ron Lewis, and the rest of the team, I welcome 

17 you here to the beverage vending public 

18 meeting for the NOPR. And it's been a long 

19 three years. So we hope that we get good 

20 inputs from all the parties here on our work 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

22 Are you okay? Yes? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 5

1 PARTICIPANT: There's one more 

2 person. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Well, they 

4 can join us midstream. 

5 It's our tradition to give 

6 everyone a chance to introduce him or herself. 

7 Please say your name and organizational 

8 affiliation. I'll start over here with Bob. 

9 Not all of you will be on the 

10 record for this. This is a matter of 

11 courtesy. 

12 Bob. 

13 MR. McGARRAH: Bob McGarrah, USA 

14 Technologies. 

15 MR. COUSINS: Steve Cousins, the 

16 Coca-Cola Company. 

17 MR. HORNQUIST: Edwin Hornquist, 

18 Southern California Edison. 

19 MS. STEVENS: Amanda Stevens, 

20 consultant for Pacific Gas and Electric 

21 Company. 

22 MR. deLASKI: Andrew deLaski, 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 6

1 Appliance Standards Awareness Project. 

2 MR. McFADDEN: Ray McFadden, Royal 

3 Vendors. 

4 MR. SELFRIDGE: Glen Selfridge, 

5 Royal Vendors. 

6 MR. ROTH: Trent Roth, Dixie7 Narco/Crane. 

8 MS. TARLEY: Nina Tarley, Pepsi 

9 Co. 

10 MS. RAYMOND: Kristen Raymond, 

11 Department of Justice. 

12 MS. FAIER: Margo Faier, 

13 Department of Justice. 

14 MR. KIDO: Michael Kido, 

15 Department of Energy. 

16 MS. PINTO: Francine Pinto, 

17 Department of Energy, General Counsel's Office 

18 with Mike. 

19 MR. LLENZA: I'm Charles Llenza, 

20 Department of Energy. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: I didn't introduce 

22 myself. Doug Brookman. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 7

1 (Laughter.) 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Nice to see you. 

3 Please. 

4 MR. KINGMAN: Jeff Kingman, 

5 Navigant Consulting. 

6 MR. MARANTAN: Aris Marantan, 

7 Navigant Consulting. 

8 MR. JASINSKI: Sam Jasinski, 

9 Navigant Consulting. 

10 MR. MILLARD: Matt Millard, 

11 Navigant Consulting. 

12 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: Sriram 

13 Somasundaram, Pacific Northwest National 

14 Laboratory. 

15 MR. SCOTT: Michael Scott, Pacific 

16 Northwest National Laboratory. 

17 MR. PARKER: Graham Parker, 

18 Pacific Northwest National Lab. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Start over here, 

20 please. 

21 MR. DOOM: Troy Doom, Dixie22 Narco/Crane. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 8

1 MR. MATHIS: Jim Mathis, Dixie2 Narco/Crane. 

3 MR. MONROE: Ned Monroe, the 

4 National Automatic Merchandising Association. 

5 MS. DUFF: Rebecca Duff, ICF 

6 International and Support Energy Center. 

7 MS. KORANE: Amanda Korane, 

8 American Council for an Energy Efficient 

9 Economy. 

10 MR. ANDERSEN: Eric Andersen, 

11 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. 

12 MR. ASHLEY: John Atchley, Elstat 

13 Americas. 

14 MR. REDMAN: Mike Redman, American 

15 Beverage Association. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks. Thanks to 

17 all of you. 

18 Did we miss anybody? 

19 (No response.) 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Just a quick 

21 run-through on the agenda. I think all of you 

22 have received a packet when you came in the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 9

1 door. I think probably everybody handed off a 

2 business card as you registered at the front 

3 desk. The Department will make a copy of the 

4 attendees for this meeting today. 

5 You can see we're going to start 

6 off, for those of you who are looking at this 

7 agenda, we're going to start off with a 

8 rulemaking overview. Immediately following 

9 the overview there's an opportunity for each 

10 of you to make brief summary comments about 

11 the issues that matter to you today. So we 

12 are going to provide that opportunity to you. 

13 We'll take a break mid-morning 

14 around about 10:30 or 10:45 or so. Following 

15 that, we're going to have a description of the 

16 engineering analysis, and then energy use 

17 analysis and life cycle cost analysis. 

18 Around about 12:15 or so we'll 

19 break for lunch. Following the luncheon 

20 break, we'll do national impact analysis, 

21 trial standard levels, manufacturing impact 

22 analysis, and then following that utility 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 10

1 impact analysis, employment impact analysis, 

2 environmental assessment, regulatory impact 

3 analysis. 

4 We'll break mid-afternoon when we 

5 need to take a break, whether that's 3:15 or 

6 whenever that is, and then at the end of the 

7 day there's yet another opportunity for those 

8 of you that wish to do so to raise additional 

9 issues, make summary comments. 

10 We'll close out around about no 

11 later than 4:15, 4:30ish with next steps and a 

12 few closing remarks. 

13 So that's the plan for today. 

14 Questions, Comments about the agenda as 

15 written? 

16 And, in particular, anything that 

17 you came here to discuss that doesn't fall in 

18 the scope of the agenda as written? 

19 (No response.) 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So this 

21 looks good. Then to Charles. 

22 MR. LLENZA: Welcome to the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 11

1 Department of Energy's beverage vending 

2 machine Notice of Proposed rulemaking public 

3 meeting. 

4 The main purpose of our meeting 

5 today is to invite the stakeholders comment on 

6 the proposed energy conservation standard 

7 levels and request recommendations for 

8 alternatives to our presented methodologies; 

9 characterized results; in addition, to discuss 

10 specific issues related to the analysis. We 

11 seek your input on our work on the analysis 

12 and methodologies assumptions, data and 

13 results of the analysis. 

14 We welcome comments from the 

15 participants in written form and/or in today's 

16 meeting, and please note that the NOPR comment 

17 period ends July 28th, 2009. 

18 Under the statutory authority of 

19 EPACT, we are to issue a final rule no later 

20 than August 8, 2009, the standard levels 

21 becoming effective on or after August 8th, 

22 2012. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 12

1 We've also gone through the series 

2 of steps in order to get to this meeting 

3 today. So far the actions from the Department 

4 on the beverage vending machine rule: we 

5 issued test procedures in December 8, 2006; 

6 the framework document was published in June 

7 28, 2006; we had an advanced notice of 

8 proposed rulemaking June 16, 2008; we have a 

9 technical support document that's posted on 

10 the DOE website of all our analysis and work 

11 here at the Department; we published a notice 

12 of proposed rulemaking on May 29th and then 

13 today's meeting. Today's meeting would be the 

14 final step before our final rule is issued on 

15 August 8, 2009. 

16 We all know the seven factors as 

17 described in EPCA, and the selection of our 

18 proposed standards, we have seven TSLs 

19 selected for Class A; six TSLs selected for 

20 Class B; and the way we have come up with 

21 these, our different TSL levels, is that we go 

22 from the most efficient to the less efficient 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 13

1 levels for each class. 

2 At the end of the analysis is a 

3 summary of the potential benefits that 

4 outweigh the potential burdens, and that's 

5 what we try to focus on for the recommended 

6 TSL levels. 

7 And on slide 7 we show what we 

8 have proposed in terms of for equipment Class 

9 B and Class A, and these are the energy 

10 conservation equations that correspond to 

11 each. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: So that is a 

13 summary, an overview from Charles. Now 

14 there's an opportunity for any of you that 

15 wish to do so to make brief summary remarks 

16 about your issues and your concerns. 

17 Did anybody sign up to do this in 

18 advance? Bob did. We'll start with Bob since 

19 he did what he was supposed to do. 

20 MR. McGARRAH: That's what happens 

21 when you retire and have a lot of time. 

22 (Laughter.) 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 14

1 MR. BROOKMAN: And all of you, you 

2 know, I didn't do the ground rules. So let me 

3 just remind you very briefly. I think all of 

4 you are familiar with this. 

5 I'd ask that you please speak one 

6 at a time. Please say your name for the 

7 record. I'm going to be cuing people by name 

8 as best I can to speak. I also wish to 

9 encourage follow-on comments. So after I say 

10 your name, you don't have need to say your 

11 name and organizational affiliation every 

12 time. It's sufficient just to say your name. 

13 Please keep the focus here. Turn 

14 off your cell phones or turn them on silent 

15 mode, and if you need to have a sidebar 

16 conversation with someone, these microphones 

17 work rather well. We can hear you. So please 

18 take that sidebar out of the room, and if 

19 you'd share the air time, be concise today. 

20 There's a lot to be said in a fairly short 

21 amount of time. That would be helpful to 

22 everyone. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 15

1 So then, Bob, please. 

2 MR. McGARRAH: Ladies and 

3 gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity to 

4 once again discuss the energy savings 

5 opportunities in the improved design of 

6 refrigerated beverage vending machines. 

7 The report to date, the TSD, is 

8 probably one of the most factual pieces of 

9 information compiled about the vending machine 

10 that I've ever seen in one document. Nice 

11 job, guys. 

12 In reviewing the report, I went 

13 back to the root, the original of the task we 

14 embarked on in 2005, and that root is the 

15 Energy Policy and Conservation Act. Reviewing 

16 this group's genesis, I'd like to read from 

17 the report prepared on this project by the 

18 Department of Energy, page 12, Item 5. 

19 "The EPCA, Energy Policy and 

20 Conservation Act, precludes Department of 

21 Energy from adopting any standard that would 

22 not result in significant" -- significant -- 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 16

1 "conservation of energy." 

2 I do not believe that we've 

3 established that direction and we are taking 

4 as a result a path that may probably not 

5 result in any significant energy savings. I 

6 would submit that the current proposal does 

7 not result in significant conservation of 

8 energy. Unless the installed base is included 

9 in the standard, the energy efficiency 

10 achieved will be minimal and have little 

11 impact on energy presently consumed by 

12 refrigerated beverage vendors. 

13 Currently produced equipment meets 

14 or exceeds the standards proposed for 

15 implementation in three years. Purchases 

16 since 2003 met ENERGY STAR Tier 2 

17 requirements, and the regulations we're 

18 proposing for implementation are no more 

19 rigorous than the standards currently being 

20 met voluntarily by the industry. 

21 I don't see any savings greater 

22 than what we are currently achieving, and I'll 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 17

1 explain a little bit about that in a minute. 

2 Savings by the elimination of 

3 equipment is not true savings, but only a 

4 reduction in the energy usage by reduction of 

5 the number of energy using products. 

6 Further, the Energy Policy and 

7 Conservation Act, as required by Sections -- 

8 and I'm not going to read -- well, I should 

9 read some of them -- 325(o), 345(a), 342(c) 

10 4(a), they say simply this. We have to 

11 improve energy conservation, use less energy, 

12 and we have to make it possible with greatest 

13 new technology. I don't know that we're doing 

14 that. 

15 Technology is available. It's 

16 tested. It's in use today that provides 

17 greater energy savings than achieved by 

18 current ENERGY STAR II machines. In fact, 

19 technology can be retrofitted for less than 

20 $100 a machine, well within the scope and 

21 criteria established in the report. 

22 The report on refrigerated 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 18

1 beverage vending machines is complete, 

2 exhaustive, and more than reasonably accurate. 

3 Ownership of the five million-plus vending 

4 machines or refrigerated beverage dispensing 

5 machines is primarily in the hands of two 

6 companies: Coca-Cola Company and Pepsi-Cola 

7 Company. 

8 Either through their own companies 

9 or through subsidiaries, these two brands own 

10 and operate 95 percent of cold beverage 

11 vending machines in the United States. That's 

12 on page 45 of the study. These two companies 

13 purchase 90 percent or more of the total 

14 beverage vending machines produced annually in 

15 the United States. There's a table on page 47 

16 and there's comments on page 60 to that 

17 effect. 

18 The energy used to operate these 

19 machines is calculated on page 7 and 8 of the 

20 report, along with the emissions associated 

21 with this level of energy generation. The 

22 tables on page 90 also show consumption levels 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 19

1 for various equipment types. This report 

2 calculates the potential energy savings and 

3 has comprehensive cost-benefit analysis and 

4 projections into the future, page 10. 

5 What it states specifically or by 

6 interpretation are several indisputable facts. 

7 First, vending machines consume a lot of 

8 energy. 

9 Second, machine purchases are 

10 going down and machine energy consumption per 

11 machine is rising due to the shift to a higher 

12 energy consuming glass front-enders. That's 

13 on page 67. I'm sorry. Page 76. 

14 Third, projected machine life, 

15 according to the Coca-Cola Company is 

16 declining from 13 years to about ten years. 

17 That's on page 57. 

18 Fourth, the manufacture of new 

19 machines has declined dramatically in the last 

20 ten years to approximately 25 percent of a 

21 high of 200,000 machines in the 1990s. So 

22 less than 50,000 machines today, a huge 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 20

1 decline. 

2 Fifth, machine placements. Total 

3 machines on location is also declining with 

4 Coca-Cola reporting picking up 200,000 or more 

5 machines a year while purchasing substantially 

6 less than 50,000 machines per year. Industry 

7 production figures confirm this alarming drop 

8 in new equipment purchases. 

9 Machines on location will have a 

10 projected drop to under one million by 2020. 

11 That's less than 13 years. That's on page 79 

12 of the statement. 

13 Sixth, new technology advances are 

14 five or more years away, will only generate 20 

15 to 25 percent energy savings, and will cost 

16 substantially more than the existing machines. 

17 Word is reported on March 30th 

18 that Pepsi Co. was testing energy efficient 

19 machines in Washington, D.C. area and expects 

20 to be "rolling them out worldwide over the 

21 next several years." And I have a copy of 

22 that if anybody wants to read it. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 21

1 Seven, the current flow to 

2 existing machines, approximately five million 

3 Coke or Pepsi machines combined total, and the 

4 current new equipment purchased per year, 

5 under 100,000 units, it would take 50 years to 

6 replace the existing float just on a swap-out 

7 basis with no provision for any increase in 

8 total number of machines or new business. 

9 If Coke's negative replacement 

10 number is real at minus 200,000 machines being 

11 removed annually and not being replaced, the 

12 vending business will all but disappear in 15 

13 years, if the base of five million were taking 

14 out 200,000 per year. And that's just the 

15 Coca-Cola company. 

16 Eight, both Coke and Pepsi are 

17 shifting purchases in vending machines to 

18 Visicoolers or glass front refrigerated boxes. 

19 These machines are currently not regulated by 

20 any industry or government energy standards. 

21 Nine, the vending machine 

22 manufacturers are undergoing significant 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 22

1 consolidation and the industry is in serious 

2 trouble. I just learned this morning that one 

3 of the companies is moving its entire 

4 manufacturing operation and closing one of its 

5 plants. 

6 Ten and last, substantial funds 

7 are becoming available for energy conservation 

8 and reduction of energy consumption for 

9 equipment such as vending machines and 

10 Visicoolers. It is quite clear the simple 

11 facts are that there will be little, if any, 

12 substantial energy savings unless the industry 

13 significantly increases production and 

14 purchase of highly efficient machines. 

15 Neither Coke nor Pepsi appear interested in 

16 making a capital investment of that size. 

17 And that size would be 

18 approximately $150 million for 100,000 

19 machines. 

20 The alterative is to substantially 

21 reduce machine populations. It seems 

22 population reduction is the course the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 23

1 industry is set on. This will result in jobs 

2 lost, revenue lost for the industry. Remember 

3 every 500 machines represents one technician's 

4 job. Every machine represents a minimum of 

5 100 cases of product sold annually, minimum. 

6 Route drivers deliver these cases. 

7 Their jobs go away. The tax on the 

8 employees' salaries, the tax on the product 

9 sales, and all revenue and tax opportunities 

10 in between disappear. All of the vending 

11 manufacturing jobs disappear. It is happening 

12 now. I think some of the folks will speak to 

13 that. 

14 The vending industry is being 

15 legislated out of business. Bottle bills 

16 requiring deposits on soft drink containers, 

17 the restricting of beverage sales in schools, 

18 ENERGY STAR implementation of energy 

19 consumption standards have all hurt the 

20 vending industry. 

21 There are several alternatives. 

22 There is a substantial and immediate 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 24

1 opportunity to reduce energy consumption by 

2 refrigerated beverage machines. At once, no 

3 need to wait for attrition, 10 or even 

4 possibly 50 years based on current purchases 

5 and size of existing base with the float. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Bob, summarize the 

7 rest of your comments. 

8 MR. McGARRAH: I can do it. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

10 MR. McGARRAH: Cut to the chase. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: And you can submit 

12 that for the record if you wish, your entire 

13 MR. McGARRAH: I think I have. 

14 PARTICIPANT: We have it in the 

15 record. 

16 MR. McGARRAH: Over 50 utilities 

17 nationwide are providing rebates for 

18 purchasing technology. Foster Miller, one of 

19 your sources for the report, and a government 

20 contractor has tested the technology for 

21 performance and reliability. The Department 

22 of Energy endorses the technology. This is 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 25

1 not a case of finding the technology solution. 

2 It's a case of properly applying centers to 

3 adopt the existing technology. 

4 The vending industry, its 

5 manufacturers, equipment users are more than 

6 capable of implementing the technology almost 

7 immediately. Utilities are interested in 

8 installing the technology and paying for it, 

9 and the customer will benefit instantaneously 

10 with substantial savings in their energy 

11 bills. 

12 Unique ownership of 90 percent of 

13 machines among two entities makes for 

14 unprecedented chance to encounter significant 

15 savings in a relatively short time. This is 

16 an opportunity to do what the government does 

17 best, put interested parties together and make 

18 it happen with a modest initial incentive. 

19 The opportunity is large, but we can only act 

20 on it and convert the existing base to a more 

21 efficient operation. 

22 We should target stimulus dollars. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 26

1 I'll save three pages of stimulus dollars. 

2 These machines, the millions of 

3 machines that are going to disappear take 

4 thousands of jobs with them in manufacturing, 

5 service, repair and failing. 

6 Tax revenues, et cetera, I talked 

7 about that. 

8 The best and quickest path to 

9 achieving substantial energy savings and 

10 assure that the best available technology is 

11 implemented is to address the 800 pound 

12 gorilla, the installed base. 

13 Thank you. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Bob. 

15 Other summary remarks here at the 

16 outside? Please. 

17 MR. SELFRIDGE: Yeah, I would 

18 postpone it to later, but I'll be brief. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

20 MR. SELFRIDGE: I think it's 

21 appropriate now. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Glen, please say 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 27

1 your name for the record. 

2 MR. SELFRIDGE: Glen Selfridge. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

4 MR. SELFRIDGE: Royal Vendors, 

5 Incorporated. 

6 When I first received my copy of 

7 the proposed rule, I looked at the formula for 

8 the Type A and Type B machines, and my 

9 immediate reaction was that there's whole a 

10 whole typographical error. It seemed to be 

11 inverted. 

12 The Type A machine by its very 

13 nature, cooling more volume than Type B 

14 typically and utilizing a glass transparent 

15 door, is inherently less energy using machine 

16 than a Type A machine. So it was some 

17 surprise that we see a projection that is 

18 fully 20 percent more restrictive than that 

19 for the Type B. 

20 A little mental exercise here 

21 might make this more clear than some I've used 

22 with the other hundreds. I think we believe 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 28

1 CSX, the railroad company, the mileage, per 

2 ton mile for freight rail is 423. Okay? A 

3 freight rail is motorized, engine driven, 

4 ground transportation. Okay? Why shouldn't 

5 the mileage rating for a ton and a half sedan 

6 be on the order of 20 percent better than 

7 that? Okay? Over 500 miles per gallon. 

8 It's just a thought experiment. 

9 Okay? 

10 Coming out of this meeting, we 

11 would like to understand how these formulas 

12 are determine given, okay, that reason and 

13 given that there might be methods to get to a 

14 Class A tank. Why do we use and if we use 

15 them, are there restrictions to trade in terms 

16 of anything out there that would prevent us 

17 doing something that might be allowed under 

18 the test? 

19 And that's what I want to get out 

20 of this meeting. It will be in my public 

21 record. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, okay. Do you 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 29

1 wish to comment, Charles? Charles Llenza. 

2 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza, 

3 Department of Energy. 

4 I think the best thing to do would 

5 be to go through our presentation today, and 

6 as we get to the different steps, there will 

7 be a section that we discuss our results and 

8 the analysis of how we got to those results, 

9 and that would be a good opportunity at that 

10 point to get into more detail. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: And, of course, the 

12 Department would welcome your questions and 

13 specific follow-on to make sure you understand 

14 that methodology. 

15 Trent. 

16 MR. ROTH: Trent Roth from Dixie 

17 Narco. 

18 I would contradict that a little 

19 bit. We'll talk about that at the appropriate 

20 time, but we feel that the standards actually, 

21 when we started doing the math worked out to 

22 be correct in the case where we looked at 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 30

1 stack units. In fact, the change from cubic 

2 capacity, from can capacity to cubic capacity, 

3 when we look at a stack unit compared to a 

4 glass front, actually when we do the 

5 mathematical equations, we'd come out to the 

6 exact threshold on a comparable unit. 

7 So we'll be able to explain why we 

8 think it is correct, and why we would disagree 

9 with that. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: I see. So Class A 

11 and B work for you as described. 

12 MR. ROTH: It appears that it kind 

13 of did what I thought was the original piece 

14 of trying to set up to one that has similar 

15 parameters. Yes, it does work for us. We'll 

16 talk about it at the appropriate time. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Great. Okay. 

18 We'll have significant, detailed presentation 

19 on these matters. 

20 Other summary remarks here at the 

21 outset? Andrew, Andrew deLaski. 

22 MR. deLASKI: A couple of remarks. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 31

1 Is this on? Do you push the button there? 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: No, it's on. 

3 MR. deLASKI: In general, we want 

4 to support the proposal. We think it's a 

5 solid proposal by the Department for new 

6 standards for vending machines. 

7 For Class A machines, the 

8 Department had proposed standards that are the 

9 maximum level that's cost effective, and I 

10 think that's a good policy. It's a policy 

11 that we have long advocated for and rulemaking 

12 that the Department should focus as the 

13 statute requires on setting the standard which 

14 maximizes energy efficiency, energy savings, 

15 and is cost effective. 

16 Sometimes in the past the 

17 Department has gravitated towards setting 

18 standards which maximize economic benefits 

19 focused on consumers, rather than maximizing 

20 cost effective energy savings, and the 

21 distinction in those two points is important, 

22 and over the 25 or so rulemakings that will be 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 32

1 completed in the next two years has the 

2 potential if this stands as policy to be a 

3 significant departure for the Department and 

4 one that will result in very large energy 

5 savings not just in this rulemaking, but over 

6 the many rulemakings that are underway right 

7 now. 

8 With respect to Class B machines, 

9 TSL-3 and TSL-4 seem to have very similar 

10 results, economic results. The Department had 

11 proposed TSL-3. The difference in energy 

12 savings also is pretty small. 

13 That said, we would tend to 

14 suggest that if the economic impacts are about 

15 the same, given uncertainty in the analysis, I 

16 think we'd have to say that they are about the 

17 same; that the Department should set the 

18 stronger standard and that TSL-4 should be 

19 given additional consideration for the Class B 

20 machines, given the uncertainty in the 

21 analysis and the likelihood that the economic 

22 impacts are really about the same. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 33

1 A key question that we have that 

2 hopefully will be dealt with later today I 

3 think relates to point that the two 

4 manufacturers commented on earlier. My 

5 understanding is that the Class A machines, 

6 much of the savings come from the application 

7 of LED lighting in that equipment, and that 

8 the standard proposed for Class B machines 

9 does not include, does not imply, is not based 

10 on design options that assume LED lighting. 

11 Therefore, the large difference in energy and 

12 relative improvement, one set of machines 

13 looking at a 30 or 40 percent more improvement 

14 relative to the best case, the other about 14 

15 percent. 

16 It doesn't work, the current 

17 market situation where glass front machines 

18 now would become the more efficient option in 

19 the marketplace. 

20 We're interested in exploring why 

21 TSL-5 for the Class B machines and 

22 understanding better why the cost 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 34

1 effectiveness falls off a cliff. That is that 

2 DOE has assumed dramatically larger increases 

3 in lighting costs for TSL-5 machines relative 

4 to -- for the solid front machines relative to 

5 the glass front machines and much smaller 

6 savings. 

7 And the result is that we have 

8 standards that would necessarily be applying 

9 to one type of machine but not the other. 

10 Understanding that is something I hope I can 

11 come out of today, why the difference. 

12 I want to highlight, and just to 

13 comment briefly on the issue of significant 

14 savings. The issue of significant savings was 

15 resolved in the 1980s in NRDC v. Harrington. 

16 This standard clearly addresses as proposed 

17 clearly a threshold of significant savings. 

18 It's not the biggest energy conservation 

19 standard the Department will ever do, but when 

20 you add up all the pebbles you get some rocks, 

21 and that's important to keep in mind as we 

22 address each of these energy conservation 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 35

1 standards. 

2 Four quick comments that are 

3 cross-cutting that I hope will come up today. 

4 If not, I hope we can address them at the end 

5 or at some point during the day. One is 

6 multi-part standards. DOE has decided that it 

7 does not have the authority to set standards 

8 for more than one component. We argued early 

9 in this rulemaking that DOE should consider 

10 control strategies in addition to setting up 

11 performance standards. The Department says we 

12 don't have the authority. 

13 We think issue, what's come up in 

14 rulemaking after rulemaking, we think it's 

15 right to be revisited under this new 

16 administration. The Clinton administration 

17 determined it did have authority for multi18 part standards. The Bush folks under 

19 President Bush, there was a determination that 

20 that authority wasn't there. It's time to 

21 revisit again does DOE have the authority to 

22 set multi-part standards that would enable 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 36

1 things that require smart controls in vending 

2 machines. 

3 I understand it's too late in this 

4 rulemaking. August 8th is right around the 

5 corner. It's not going to be considered in 

6 this rulemaking, but I think the policy needs 

7 to be revisited. 

8 Test method, DOE screened out 

9 energy saving technologies early in this 

10 rulemaking on determining that variable speed 

11 technology would not be -- the methods would 

12 not be captured by the test method, and this 

13 is a real shame. Significant energy savings 

14 are not considered in the rulemaking because 

15 of this problem in the test method because it 

16 doesn't grasp those technologies. 

17 This brings into light or 

18 highlights the need for the Department to get 

19 moving on revising and updating test methods 

20 for this technology, but also for other 

21 technologies where control strategies aren't 

22 being reflected in the test method. Real 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 37

1 savings are being left on the table. 

2 Carbon valuation, DOE has 

3 indicated it's reevaluating its approach on 

4 carbon valuation. We think this is important. 

5 We welcome the Department's reevaluation of 

6 this issue. 

7 I would note that it's about time 

8 and something should be done with all due 

9 speed. Looking at the maximum level of carbon 

10 valuation in this rulemaking, it's about one11 third of the maximum NPV calculation, consumer 

12 NPV calculation. It's also five to six times 

13 the estimate of manufacturer impacts, and this 

14 is an estimate that we think is still lower 

15 than it should be based on the literature. 

16 The final issue is one that's been 

17 nagging at me for several years now at the 

18 Department where we consider -- which is the 

19 discount of the physical values. The 

20 Department continues to apply financial 

21 discount rates to physical values like quads 

22 of energy, and it in my view is an 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 38

1 inappropriate application of financial tools, 

2 financial evaluation tools to discount the 

3 value of energy savings and pollution 

4 reductions over time. 

5 It was an approach that was 

6 applied starting a couple of years ago, and I 

7 think it should be discontinued. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Andy. 

9 So other summary remarks here at 

10 the outset before we get into the more 

11 detailed presentation? 

12 (No response.) 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So before we 

14 then launch into the actual presentations -- 

15 go ahead, Aris -- there are a few people that 

16 joined us and missed the introductions at the 

17 outset. Could you state your name and 

18 organizational affiliation? 

19 MR. BURT: Lane Burt, Natural 

20 Resources Defense Council. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Lane. 

22 And would you introduce yourself, 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 39

1 please? 

2 MR. CHASSEROT: Yes, Marc 

3 Chasserot, Managing Director, shecco. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

5 Anybody else that we missed? 

6 PARTICIPANT: (Speaking from an 

7 unmiked location.) 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Good, thank you. 

9 Glad you could join us. 

10 Oh, yes. 

11 MR. FRIEDRICHS: Mark Friedrichs. 

12 I'm with the Policy Office at DOE. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Mark. 

14 Okay. So all of you, I believe, 

15 have a copy of the slides that are going to be 

16 projected up on the screen, and so let's turn 

17 it over to Aris. 

18 MR. MARANTAN: Thank you, Doug. 

19 Aris Marantan. 

20 While DOE requests comments and 

21 feedback on the proposed standards in this 

22 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, DOE also 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 40

1 requests feedback and input from any 

2 stakeholders on the methodology and the 

3 assumptions that's in the data that's used in 

4 the analysis itself. 

5 So everything that's contained in 

6 the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the 

7 Federal Register is subject to that request 

8 for comment. 

9 However, DOE specifically requests 

10 comment on a couple of specific issues, and 

11 these are listed on the next two slides. 

12 Slide 9 starts with industry NPV. DOE is 

13 requesting specific comments on the estimated 

14 decline in industry net present value at TSL-6 

15 and what impacts this could have on industry 

16 parties, including small businesses. 

17 This is summarized in Tables 512 

18 through 515 in Section V(b)(2) of the notice. 

19 The second one is the standards 

20 equations. DOE developed a method to develop 

21 a standard equation based on the analysis. 

22 This is contained in Table B-3 of Section V(a) 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 41

1 of the notice. 

2 The third one is industry impacts 

3 as a whole. This is Section V(b)(2) in the 

4 notice. 

5 And before we get to the next 

6 slide, we will be coming back to these 

7 specifically later on in the day when we get 

8 to that portion of the presentation. So we'll 

9 come back and address these in turn. 

10 Slide 10 has the first three 

11 bullets that deal with small businesses in 

12 particular. This is the impact on small 

13 businesses, how small businesses will be 

14 affected due to the new standards; compliance 

15 costs for the small businesses; and any 

16 alternatives DOE should consider in 

17 establishing this standard. 

18 These are contained in Section 

19 VI(b) of the notice, and the last one is the 

20 standard levels selected themselves, whether 

21 the energy savings and related benefits of 

22 TSL-6 outweigh the costs. That's specifically 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 42

1 for Class A, and that's contained in Section 

2 V(c) of the notice. 

3 So, again, we'll come back to all 

4 of these specifically during the day. 

5 Okay. The next section of the 

6 presentation deals with the rulemaking 

7 analyses. You can see here that the top set 

8 of chevrons describe our rulemaking process. 

9 We start off with the framework document, and 

10 I believe we had our public meeting for that 

11 framework document about two years ago. 

12 The ANOPR, or the Advanced Notice 

13 of Proposed Rulemaking, laid out the 

14 analytical tools that DOE would be using in 

15 the rulemaking. We held a public meeting for 

16 the ANOPR about a year and a day ago. It was 

17 June 16th, as Graham pointed out to me 

18 earlier, last year, and today we're at the 

19 NOPR stage. This is the Notice of Proposed 

20 Rulemaking where DOE is actually proposing a 

21 standard. 

22 And we'll start off with a summary 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 43

1 of the analyses that are part of the NOPR. 

2 The first part is the revision of the ANOPR 

3 analyses, and we will go through the rest of 

4 them later today. 

5 But as part of the first step, the 

6 revision of the ANOPR analyses, we conduct an 

7 engineering analysis, a life cycle cost and 

8 payback period analysis and a national impact 

9 analysis. So to present the engineering is 

10 Sam Jasinski next. 

11 MR. JASINSKI: Thank you, Aris. 

12 As he said, my name is Sam 

13 Jasinski from Navigant Consulting, and I'm 

14 here to discuss the engineering analysis that 

15 the Department of Energy did for beverage 

16 vending machines. 

17 First, the main purpose of the 

18 engineering analysis is to characterize the 

19 cost to manufacturers of producing higher 

20 efficiency equipment, and this is typically in 

21 the form of cost efficiency curves for each 

22 equipment class. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 44

1 Another goal of the engineering 

2 analysis is to evaluate design options. These 

3 are technologies that have the potential to 

4 when they're implemented in the vending 

5 machines to increase and improve their energy 

6 efficiency. 

7 Lastly, when necessary, the 

8 Department conducts as part of the engineering 

9 analysis sensitivity analyses, particular for 

10 vending machines. There was a sensitivity 

11 analysis done on material prices because 

12 variation in material prices could have 

13 impacts on the rulemaking. 

14 Leading up to the engineering 

15 analysis and also encompassing the engineering 

16 analysis is a market and technology 

17 assessment. As part of the market and 

18 technology assessment, the goal of the market 

19 assessment is to develop a qualitative and 

20 quantitative characterization of the BVM 

21 industry. The main goal of the technology 

22 assessment is to develop a preliminary list of 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 45

1 technologies that could increase the 

2 efficiency of vending machines. 

3 The details of this market and 

4 technology assessment, how it was conducted, 

5 and the findings can be found in Chapter 3 of 

6 the TSD, but one of the major outcomes of the 

7 market and technology assessment is the 

8 Department deciding on equipment classes, and 

9 this is just how the Department deems it 

10 necessary to classify the beverage vending 

11 machine equipment available. 

12 The DOE decided that the 

13 classification would be into two separate 

14 equipment classes, Class A and Class B. Class 

15 A equipment, in the decision to classify in 

16 these rulemakings, it's usually determined by 

17 physical characteristics that affect energy 

18 consumption. In this case it was based 

19 largely on refrigeration method, certain 

20 design features, and vending mechanisms. 

21 So for Class A equipment, these 

22 are fully cooled vending machines, and they 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 46

1 typically use a shelf style storage and 

2 vending system, and they also typically have a 

3 glass transparent front. 

4 Class B machines are treated as 

5 anything that can't be classified as a Class A 

6 machine in our analyses, and these machines 

7 are typically solid or closed front machines 

8 that use a stacked storage system or vending 

9 method, and they are zone cooled machines. 

10 As I mentioned earlier in the 

11 technology assessment, a preliminary list of 

12 energy saving technologies is developed, and 

13 then after the market and technology 

14 assessment, there's a subsequent analysis 

15 that's part of the engineering analysis, and 

16 there's a screening analysis in which the DOE 

17 uses certain criteria to screen out 

18 technologies that are either not 

19 technologically feasible, not practical to 

20 manufacture, install or service, have adverse 

21 effects on utility to the consumer, or have 

22 adverse effects on healthy and safety. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 47

1 And after the screening analysis, 

2 certain technologies are eliminated, and what 

3 we have left are the design options, and the 

4 Department of Energy used a design option 

5 approach for this particular engineering 

6 analysis in which we gathered data on the cost 

7 efficiency of these design options for 

8 manufacturers or components and flyers and 

9 used a computer simulation to determine their 

10 effect on the efficiency of the vending 

11 machine equipment, and by using the design 

12 option approach, the outcomes were six cost 

13 efficiency curves, one for each of three 

14 representative sizes. A size here, the metric 

15 uses refrigerator volume or cubic volume as 

16 mentioned earlier for each equipment class. 

17 So the results of the engineering 

18 analysis can be found in Chapter 5, but it's 

19 important to realize that the results of the 

20 engineering analysis are used as inputs for 

21 downstream analyses, such as the LCC, which is 

22 the life cycle cost analysis later on. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 48

1 To wrap up, I'd just like to go 

2 over a few of the major changes that have been 

3 made sine the ANOPR, since it has been a 

4 while. Mainly throughout the rulemaking 

5 process the Department of Energy continues to 

6 look for information with regard to the market 

7 and technology assessment, and since the ANOPR 

8 the Department has found information that 

9 influenced us to increase the external 

10 dimensions for both Class A and Class B 

11 equipment, and those increases have subsequent 

12 effects on things such as wall area, the size 

13 of the glass front. The details of that can 

14 be found in Chapter 5 of the TSD. 

15 The second major change has been 

16 to LED energy consumption and pricing, as well 

17 as configurations for Class B. Configuration 

18 for Class A remain the same, and this is due 

19 mainly to the fact that LEDs are a rapidly 

20 developing technology. So new information is 

21 constantly becoming available, and details of 

22 those changes and explanations of those 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 49

1 changes can also be found in Chapter 5 of the 

2 TSD. 

3 So here's back to the snapshot of 

4 the big picture, and I think the next analysis 

5 that we're going to discuss is the energy use 

6 and characterization. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: In a moment. Let's 

8 just pause for a moment. Any questions on the 

9 engineering analysis, in particular, what Sam 

10 just said about the changes that were made 

11 based on the ongoing analysis? 

12 Yes, please, Amanda. 

13 MS. STEVENS: Amanda Stevens. I'm 

14 with PG&E. 

15 So I had a question. I know that 

16 LED prices were updated based on the 

17 commercial refrigeration equipment rulemaking. 

18 So for the Class B equipment, I see the price 

19 for a fixture goes from about $50 in 2007 to 

20 $135 in 2008. Could you talk a little bit 

21 about why that pricing is --. 

22 MR. JASINSKI: Sure. Class B, 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 50

1 LEDs for Class B equipment, like you said, 

2 were based on commercial refrigeration 

3 equipment. Since the ANOPR of the beverage 

4 vending machine rulemaking, a final rule has 

5 been published for commercial refrigeration 

6 equipment. So information between now and 

7 then for vending machines has been updated to 

8 reflect that because it's originally based on 

9 commercial refrigeration equipment. 

10 Specifically for Class B, we found 

11 based on manufacturing and stakeholder comment 

12 that we were underestimating the number of 

13 LEDs in closed front specifically that were 

14 necessary to maintain a certain standard of 

15 utility in terms of back lighting signage. 

16 So the cost increase is reflective 

17 of we are now putting more LED fixtures in to 

18 replace the fluorescent system as had been 

19 before. 

20 MS. STEVENS: Right. 

21 MR. JASINSKI: So originally it 

22 was a one-to-one ratio. If there was a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 51

1 fluorescent fixture, we replaced it with one 

2 LED fixture. Now that number is around one 

3 and a half. So for every fluorescent fixture 

4 in order to implement an LED fixture, we 

5 implement one and a half times the LED 

6 fixtures. 

7 MS. STEVENS: I guess my question 

8 was more the per fixture cost. I realize 

9 there's a 1.5 differential, but per fixture. 

10 MR. JASINSKI: If you're pulling 

11 those numbers from that table, the one and a 

12 half is implemented before that table. So 

13 that is actually one and a half fixtures. 

14 MS. STEVENS: Okay. I can follow 

15 that maybe off-line. 

16 MR. JASINSKI: Yeah, we can 

17 discuss it later and I can show you the 

18 spreadsheets. 

19 MS. STEVENS: Sure. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, please, Nina. 

21 MS. TARLEY: Nina Tarley, Pepsi 

22 Co. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 52

1 I would just like to state for the 

2 record that the use of LED lights in glass 

3 front vendors is covered by intellectual 

4 property. Coca-Cola owns the patent. So 

5 we're precluded from using it. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

7 Okay. Other questions about this, 

8 the content in engineering analysis, 

9 particularly about the changes from the ANOPR 

10 now to the NOPR? 

11 (No response.) 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

13 MR. JASINSKI: Thank you. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

15 (Pause in proceedings.) 

16 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: Sorry about the 

17 confusion. Sriram Somasundaram, Pacific 

18 Northwest National Laboratory. 

19 I will talk about the first bullet 

20 and then hand over to Mike Scott. 

21 The energy use characterization 

22 step of the analysis, this again was done as 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 53

1 part of the ANOPR, and then revised, updated, 

2 subject to the engineering analysis changes to 

3 the configuration of the two types of beverage 

4 vending machines, Class A and Class B, that 

5 Sam just described. 

6 So we re-developed the energy 

7 consumption numbers for each of the two 

8 classes of beverage vending machines, and then 

9 we fed that energy consumption figures for 

10 both types of machines installed indoors and 

11 outdoors to the life cycle cost analysis, and 

12 before we get to the life cycle cost analysis, 

13 we have to re-develop the mark-ups for the 

14 price of the equipment. 

15 Mike, do you want to describe that 

16 or do you want me to continue? 

17 MR. SCOTT: Why don't you go 

18 through all of the purpose slides and then 

19 I'll come up and do the details. 

20 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: Okay. As part 

21 of the ANOPR analysis, we had assumed three 

22 distribution channels for the beverage vending 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 54

1 machines. The percentages of shipments 

2 through each of the channels were 68 percent, 

3 27 percent, and five percent. 

4 We heard comments from both 

5 manufacturers and users of equipment during 

6 the ANOPR public meeting that those 

7 percentages need to be updated to 85 percent 

8 through Channel 1, which is the manufacturer 

9 direct to bottlers; and ten percent through 

10 Channel 2; and five percent through Channel 3. 

11 So once we incorporated those 

12 percentages through the distribution channels, 

13 we came up with new figures for the markups, 

14 and the percentage numbers that I just 

15 described are described on Slide No. 15. 

16 So like I said, these numbers were 

17 modified from the ANOPR based on comments at 

18 the meeting. So putting in these new 

19 percentages of shipments through the three 

20 channels, we came up with the overall, sort of 

21 the second bullet there, outputs. So the 

22 overall weighted average baseline markup for 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 55

1 baseline equipment turned out to be 1.144 for 

2 the ANOPR analysis. That compares with 1.226 

3 in the ANOPR. 

4 And the simple explanation of this 

5 change is in the fact that the manufacturer 

6 direct, if you remember, the manufacturer 

7 direct to beverage bottler distributor number 

8 went up from 68 to 85, who don't have markups 

9 or have a markup of 1.00. So the overall 

10 weighted average went down to 1.144. 

11 Now, the overage weighted average 

12 incremental markups for higher efficiency 

13 equipment also went down to 1.102 compared to 

14 1.137 in the ANOPR analysis, and both of these 

15 markups include sales tax. 

16 I believe I will hand it over to 

17 Mike Scott now. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's pause there 

19 and see if there questions about these changes 

20 based on from the ANOPR to the NOPR analyses 

21 and the distribution channels. Any comments, 

22 questions on these? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 56

1 (No response.) 

2 MR. SCOTT: Okay. So from there 

3 we proceed to the life cycle cost and payback 

4 period analysis, and the purpose of that, of 

5 course, is to develop the estimates of the 

6 consumer or customer life cycle cost and the 

7 notion of how long it takes to pay back an 

8 initial investment in more efficient 

9 equipment. 

10 The life cycle cost equals the 

11 customer price plus the sum of annual 

12 operating cost discounted to the base year of 

13 the analysis, which in this case is 2012. We 

14 do the economic evaluation loosely speaking 

15 from a customer perspective. We look at the 

16 cost to the customer of purchasing the 

17 equipment, but the savings are included in the 

18 life cycle cost analysis regardless of to whom 

19 they may actually go, and that's by reason of 

20 EPCA. We take a look at the operational 

21 savings, whether or not the actual owner of 

22 the machine gets those savings. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 57

1 The analysis was implemented as 

2 described back in the ANOPR meeting about a 

3 year ago in an Excel spreadsheet with add-on 

4 macros to estimate impacts in what we chose to 

5 be individual states as a way to look at 

6 variation in things like electricity prices, 

7 sales taxes, installation costs and so on, to 

8 obtain not only a point estimate of the 

9 average for the country, but also to see how 

10 that life cycle cost varied with location. 

11 The description of the analysis 

12 can be found in the NOPR itself abbreviated in 

13 Section IV, but in addition to that, it is 

14 more detailed in Chapter 8 of the TSD, of the 

15 technical support document, and the results 

16 can be found in Appendix F. 

17 The results are expressed 

18 generally as life cycle cost savings, that is, 

19 the savings against the baseline equipment, 

20 and also a payback period is calculated for 

21 individuals who like to look at payback 

22 periods. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 58

1 Okay. Electricity prices. There 

2 has been a fair amount of change since the 

3 ANOPR, and the principal change is that last 

4 bullet on this slide. I'm not going to read 

5 through the whole slide. You have it there in 

6 front of you. Generally we followed the same 

7 procedures as we were a year ago with the 

8 difference that electricity price trends have 

9 changed between the AEO 2008 reference case 

10 and the AEO 2009 reference case. 

11 And we're required to follow that 

12 AEO reference case as a central case. That's 

13 what the Department does for the default 

14 scenario, and then we extrapolate the trend in 

15 values from 2020 through 2030 as a forecast to 

16 establish prices for the rest of the 30-year 

17 forecast period. 

18 We use a 30-year forecast period, 

19 and there was a comment about that at the 

20 ANOPR stage, to maintain a consistent frame of 

21 reference for the full life cycle of products 

22 of various lengths because the Department 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 59

1 wants to keep some comparability across 

2 rulemaking so that they can look at equipment 

3 with different lifetimes and see what the 

4 energy savings actually are. 

5 And there's a fairly detailed 

6 write-up in the NOPR about the history of that 

7 30-year rulemaking or 30-year time period. 

8 Other inputs to the life cycle 

9 cost analysis. Installation costs were 

10 updated and then held constant with higher 

11 efficiency levels based on industry comments. 

12 The installation costs are shown in NOPR and 

13 documented in the TSD. 

14 Discount rates were updated 

15 somewhat. We obtain our discount rates from a 

16 weighted average cost of capital calculations 

17 that we do with data on individual companies 

18 from a Website called Damodaran Online. It's 

19 from New York University, and the data were 

20 updated initially for 2008 at the ANOPR stage 

21 and then updated again to 2009 in early this 

22 year. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 60

1 The equipment lifetime, there was 

2 some comment about that at the ANOPR stage. 

3 We had originally, I believe, put in a service 

4 life of 14 years average. We were told at the 

5 ANOPR stage, no, the average service life is 

6 more like ten years with maybe 15 years as 

7 kind of a maximum for that, for BVMs. So we 

8 made that correction. 

9 Repair cost, there was some 

10 discussion of repair cost which got also mixed 

11 in with maintenance cost at the ANOPR stage. 

12 We believe we've sorted all of that out 

13 correctly in the NOPR. We have a baseline 

14 repair cost that does increase due to higher 

15 cost components at more efficient levels. 

16 We got some comment that I believe 

17 it was our base maintenance cost was too high 

18 originally. We corrected that and then did 

19 some other corrections, all of which is 

20 reported in the NOPR. So there were changes 

21 to all of those things. 

22 Our results still look about the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 61

1 same as they did before, although if you look 

2 back at the ANOPR, the numbers are 

3 considerably different due to all of the 

4 changes that were made. 

5 Generally there's a fairly flat 

6 life cycle cost curve as you go to higher and 

7 higher installation cost, meaning that the 

8 operations costs are basically offsetting the 

9 higher cost of investment at each level until 

10 you get to Level 7, and then you go up to 

11 Level 8 and we can discuss why that is. We'll 

12 need some help from Navigant on that, but that 

13 Max Tech is truly Max Tech. It's a very 

14 efficient machine, but it's also a very 

15 expensive one, and so the life cycle costs 

16 tend to rise. 

17 This is only for one case on the 

18 screen here. This is for basically average 

19 U.S. conditions for a bottler owned machine in 

20 a manufacturing facility. We looked at a 

21 whole range of situations, different 

22 locations, different ownership and so on. The 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 62

1 detail of all of that can be found in Appendix 

2 F of the technical support document if you're 

3 looking for it. 

4 We did a similar thing on payback, 

5 and there, again, you get a pretty flat 

6 payback period. All of the payback periods 

7 are less than five years, again, until you get 

8 to that Level 8 Max Tech. 

9 And that's an extra slide, and 

10 that's it for LCC right now. I think I 

11 probably should stop there and wait for 

12 comments. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. So questions 

14 or comments on this series of slides, inputs 

15 and these LCC graphics? Andrew. 

16 MR. deLASKI: I'm not sure where 

17 this comes in, where this will get discussed, 

18 and maybe this is the right time, maybe not. 

19 So let me know. 

20 In my opening remarks I brought up 

21 this issue or this concern about for the Class 

22 B machines, the cost really falls off a cliff, 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 63

1 the TSL-4 and TSL-5. TSL-4 is cost effective, 

2 sort of that chart you showed for Class B with 

3 the elbow-like. 

4 MR. SCOTT: Much earlier, yeah. 

5 MR. deLASKI: Can you describe 

6 what's going on? What is the factor that's 

7 driving that up? 

8 MR. SCOTT: I'd prefer to let 

9 Navigant handle that one for sure. They're 

10 the technological guys on this one. 

11 MR. JASINSKI: Sam Jasinski. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Sam. Go 

13 ahead. 

14 MR. JASINSKI: Yeah, that again 

15 has to do with the LED pricing increase, 

16 again, because of those changes that I 

17 mentioned earlier about having to use more LED 

18 fixtures in Class B as opposed to the ANOPR. 

19 The cost effectiveness of that design option, 

20 LED lighting design option increases and 

21 that's where you see that big jump at TSL-5 

22 for Class B machines. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 64

1 MR. deLASKI: So looking at 

2 Appendix B in the TSD, it looks like you 

3 assumed a $110 increase for LEDs in a glass 

4 front machine and a $420 increase in solid 

5 front is the way I just calculated here. 

6 That strikes me as a huge 

7 differential, more than one and a half times. 

8 Is it that much more light that is needed? 

9 MR. JASINSKI: Based on some of 

10 the comments that we've received from 

11 manufacturers and stakeholders, the difference 

12 in the light, the amount of light that is 

13 sufficient for each machine is that drastic. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, please. 

15 Trent. 

16 MR. ROTH: Trent from Dixie-Narco. 

17 We have four lights, as many as 

18 four in the closed front machine or our Class 

19 B machine and light up the signage. There's 

20 no space between the door and the inner door 

21 liner, which you have space to do. So you 

22 don't get a lot of spreading of the light. So 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 65

1 we do use significantly more light bulbs in a 

2 closed front machine than we do in a glass 

3 front machine. 

4 So that's where they're getting 

5 that, being able to shine a light through and 

6 drive the branding awareness that you have 

7 through a plastic panel that you sign the 

8 light through takes more light. So that's why 

9 you have that the way it is. 

10 LEDs, we'll talk about LEDs later, 

11 but we don't see significant energy savings 

12 today with LEDs at all in glass fronts. We 

13 use more energy today. We use about ten 

14 percent more energy when we use LEDs versus 

15 fluorescent lighting today in the box front 

16 because it's still evolving. 

17 Now, we have not explored 

18 refractors and different ways, reflectors and 

19 other ways to improve that lightability. We 

20 have not gone through that exercise, and I 

21 would think that would drive that. We haven't 

22 done that. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 66

1 But today the costs for LEDs and 

2 LEDs or focused light is difficult, especially 

3 when you get in a very tight environment with 

4 an LED in a closed front. I don't think 

5 you're going to see significant savings. 

6 But it will evolve and it will be 

7 there. So that's why you see that today the 

8 way it is. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Steven Cousins. 

10 MR. COUSINS: Yeah, Doug. I was 

11 going to agree with what Trent had said and 

12 elaborate even further. Lighting with a Class 

13 A versus Class B machine is done differently 

14 because the intent and purpose is different. 

15 With Class A machines, the lighting is really 

16 directed internally so that the product is 

17 what's illuminated so that the consumer can 

18 make better choices. 

19 On the Class B machine, the 

20 lighting is directed externally because we're 

21 trying to capture customers who may be long 

22 distances away, and we're really doing 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 67

1 trademark merchandising with a Class B 

2 machine. 

3 We also have customers. Our 

4 primary account customers of Class B machines 

5 want to use our merchandising lighting for 

6 other purposes, and we're cognizant of that. 

7 So actually when Navigant said a one and a 

8 half factor in terms of illumination -- and we 

9 do have standards around that -- I would 

10 expect that it would be more like two and a 

11 half just as an intuitive. I don't have -- 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Internal standards 

13 or -- 

14 MR. COUSINS: Internal standards. 

15 Pepsi may have internal standards as well. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: You wish to achieve 

17 a certain level of illumination and 

18 brightness, right? And that's what you're 

19 referencing. 

20 MR. COUSINS: That's right. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

22 MR. COUSINS: So I guess what I'm 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 68

1 echoing here is that the purpose of the 

2 lighting is different between Class A and 

3 Class B, and yes, there is significantly more 

4 lighting with a solid door, opaque landscaped 

5 sign front than there would be with a glass 

6 front machine. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew, I'll return 

8 to you, but Glen wishes to speak also. 

9 MR. SELFRIDGE: Well, while we're 

10 temporarily on this subject, I would also 

11 reinforce the difference between Class A and 

12 Class B. I would also say that our Type A 

13 machine also uses what Navigant calls Super 

14 T8s, which actually runs 4-foot tubes on 22 

15 watts a piece. 

16 So is it possible that your 

17 analysis was based on the more conventional 32 

18 watt lamp and that you are believing that 

19 you're capturing a lot more energy savings 

20 than reality would provide when you move in 

21 that direction? Because we're already 

22 substantially below what you might have used 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 69

1 for your analysis. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: I see. Okay. 

3 MR. SELFRIDGE: So the advantage 

4 isn't as clear. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Edwin, do 

6 you wish to follow on? No. 

7 MR. HORNQUIST: No, thanks. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

9 So additional comments on this 

10 series of slides and this subject matter 

11 before we move on? 

12 MR. SCOTT: Okay. Seeing none. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

14 MR. SCOTT: All right. Next what 

15 I'm going to talk about is the shipments 

16 analysis that goes into the national impact 

17 analysis. Then I'll stop for a second and let 

18 Sriram talk after that about how the trial 

19 standard levels were chosen, and then I'll 

20 come back up and talk about the evaluation of 

21 those. 

22 Okay. So the purpose of the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 70

1 shipments analysis is to obviously estimate 

2 the number of BVMs that we expect to be 

3 shipped over time, which has direct bearing on 

4 the national impact analysis because over time 

5 how many machines out there are being replaced 

6 and with what matters. 

7 And then so what we're doing there 

8 is doing a forecast of shipments, and it was 

9 originally derived from historical shipments, 

10 and we still look at those; the replacement 

11 requirements based on equipment lifetimes; and 

12 then the estimate of equipment mix of baseline 

13 and higher efficiency technologies in the 

14 stock as the older stock is gradually 

15 replaced. 

16 And actually, Bob, you did a nice 

17 job this morning of kind of summarizing some 

18 of that. 

19 MR. McGARRAH: Sorry about that. 

20 MR. SCOTT: No, that's fine. 

21 So what we did at the ANOPR stage 

22 was look at a bunch of material from 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 71

1 consulting companies with reports, some 

2 industry periodicals, and we had come up with 

3 a small, but -- well, first of all, there had 

4 been something of a collapse in the shipments 

5 that Bob alluded to earlier from, say, the 

6 late 1990s into the early 2000 period, and we 

7 acknowledge that, and then we said at the 

8 ANOPR period, yeah, but we expect that to turn 

9 around and we should have some growth in new 

10 shipments. 

11 Well, we were told quite 

12 forcefully at the ANOPR stage that, no, 

13 essentially all the shipments now are going to 

14 be for replacement and, furthermore, they're 

15 going to be at a fairly low level. 

16 And we were able to take what data 

17 we had together with the comments, and we 

18 arrived at a constant number approximately of 

19 replacements only at about 90,000 units per 

20 year, and the details of that are in the 

21 shipments chapter which is, I believe, Chapter 

22 10. Let me look at that for a moment here. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 72

1 Yeah, Chapter 10 of the technical 

2 support document, and so then the next 

3 question was, okay, you have that many being 

4 shipped. What's their distribution across 

5 size classes and Class A and Class B machines? 

6 We had been led to believe by some 

7 of the material that we reviewed before the 

8 ANOPR stage that Class B equipment was still 

9 the majority of equipment being shipped. 

10 Again, at the ANOPR stage we were told no, 

11 that somewhere between about 50 and 60 percent 

12 of the shipments are now actually Class A 

13 machines. That left 45 percent for Class B. 

14 Again, in response to comments at 

15 the ANOPR stage, we had a size distribution at 

16 that point of 33 percent large, 33 percent 

17 medium size, and 33 percent small machines. 

18 We were told, no, small machines have never 

19 been all that popular, and now there are very, 

20 very few of them shipped, verging on zero 

21 percent. 

22 There was a little bit of backEERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 73

1 and-forth about the question of the size 

2 distribution between medium and large 

3 machines. There were about four pieces of 

4 different data in that testimony that led us 

5 to believe that the median sized equipment was 

6 probably about 75 percent of the shipments. 

7 Twenty-five percent then would have been 

8 large. 

9 And so the revised shipments 

10 forecast is as you see on the slide, about 

11 90,000 a year, reaching out to 2042 a total of 

12 about 2.79 million units shipped over that 

13 period. 

14 That's not enough to sustain the 

15 what we believe to be the current stock of 

16 around two and a half million units. So what 

17 happens over time is that the stock level 

18 declines to about a million units, a little 

19 less than that by 2020 and then stabilizes 

20 through the end of the time period, 2042. 

21 And I'll stop right there on the 

22 shipments analysis. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 74

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Questions, comments 

2 on this analysis? 

3 MR. SCOTT: Mostly we're looking 

4 for confirmation at this point of did we get 

5 it right, approximately at least. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Glen. 

7 MR. SELFRIDGE: You know, for 

8 purposes of discussion it's probably all 

9 right, but the industry is in further 

10 collapse. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Do you wish to say 

12 more about that? 

13 MR. SELFRIDGE: Not to go on, but 

14 I don't know where it goes from here. What we 

15 said last year is kind of reasonable. Now 

16 going forward it may be not as reasonable. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Mike accurately 

18 reflected the information that was given to 

19 him. You think it could be worse. 

20 MR. SELFRIDGE: I believe that 

21 just because of the current financial 

22 situation and all that it is worse than was 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 75

1 discussed. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: You don't see the 

3 decline -- you see the decline to go beyond 

4 one million units? 

5 MR. SELFRIDGE: I don't know. 

6 This thing is for discussion. These may be 

7 okay, but they may be totally under estimated. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Trent, Steve? 

9 Trent. 

10 MR. ROTH: This is Trent Roth, 

11 Dixie-Narco. 

12 I would, I guess, have to look to 

13 Coke and Pepsi for direction, but going from 

14 where we are today on a recurring basis, I 

15 would say around three million installed base 

16 is currently out there. It might be a little 

17 bit lower, but it's around there. Down to a 

18 million installed base would be very low. I 

19 mean, we lose a lot of potential market here, 

20 but we're not the ones that make the 

21 purchases. We make the machines. So I don't 

22 know the direction, but that would be a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 76

1 substantial loss of opportunity to be able to 

2 sell products through this channel. So I 

3 don't know that it would get that low. 

4 I think it's going to go lower 

5 than what we have today probably because 

6 manufacturing locations are going out of 

7 business or primarily that manufacturing 

8 pressure we have with schools and carbonated 

9 drinks. I do see a decline in the number of 

10 where we are today on an installed basis, but 

11 getting to a million is extremely low. 

12 And I think the operators, not 

13 just Coke and Pepsi, the operators out there 

14 that have locations will demand equipment to 

15 fulfill those locations. So I don't see it 

16 getting to a million. I don't see it getting 

17 that low. I just think there's too much 

18 market share and too much gain. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Just to confirm, 

20 the time frame was 2020 to a million 

21 MR. ROTH: Yeah, but that's still 

22 production in ten years. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 77

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Ten years. Steve. 

2 MR. COUSINS: I would say it's 

3 very uncertain to project that the population 

4 of installed base of vending machines is going 

5 to be stable from where it is now. That's not 

6 going to be the case. 

7 Yeah, there continues to be a 

8 decline of installed base of beverage vending 

9 machines, and there will be, and even in our 

10 system we're not really sure where that's 

11 going. 

12 You know, Bob alluded to the fact 

13 that if we continue on the trend that we are 

14 on, 15, 20 years from now there may not be -- 

15 you know, full service vending may not exist 

16 anymore. That's just based on the trend. 

17 We believe that there will be 

18 continued reduction, but it will stabilize 

19 somewhere, but where it is not going to 

20 stabilize at the point of where we are now. 

21 There will be continued reduction. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Bob McGarrah. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 78

1 MR. McGARRAH: I concur with 

2 everybody, but I'd like to make an 

3 observation. My 45 years in the vending 

4 industry allows me access to presidents of 

5 most of these vending companies. They help 

6 out an old guy every once in a while, and in 

7 recent conversations with those folks, they 

8 tell me that the industry current number of 

9 manufacturers could not stay in business if 

10 all they're producing is under 100,000 

11 machines a year. That just is not a scale 

12 that they can operate on. 

13 So there's going to be further 

14 reduction. We've had plant closings. We've 

15 had tremendous consolidation. Crane/Dixie16 Narco is consolidating to the South for 

17 economic reasons obviously. Royal has closed 

18 one of their manufacturing operations several 

19 years ago and is leasing out part of their 

20 current manufacturing operation. Vendo, the 

21 last third of suppliers, moved into a little 

22 plant down in Texas. I don't know what 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 79

1 they're doing now. I haven't talked to those 

2 folks recently. So this consolidation if it's 

3 going to be below the 100,000 level is very, 

4 very telling for the industry. It's going to 

5 have a tremendous effect on the availability 

6 of choice for the Cokes and Pepsis of the 

7 world. They'll be narrowed down to possibly 

8 one major and one minor source of equipment. 

9 I just don't think that's good, 

10 but that's up to them. They do the buying. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

12 Yes, Trent. 

13 MR. ROTH: Trent Roth, again, 

14 Dixie-Narco. 

15 Two comments I would make. Is the 

16 majority of the machines in the estimate -- 

17 and I don't have the exact numbers; we've done 

18 some work on this -- but the majority of the 

19 machines, actually the majority, I'm talking 

20 about 80, 85 percent of the units that are out 

21 there today are approaching ten years old. I 

22 mean because of the huge influx in numbers 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 80

1 that took place in 1998 and 2000, either those 

2 are going to go away because they're getting 

3 near the end of their life cycle, also with 

4 product changes that have taken place and the 

5 changes from stacked units or the Class B 

6 units, because of the products that go inside 

7 them; they're either going to have to be 

8 replaced by Coke or Pepsi or Coke or Pepsi 

9 slowly are starting to evolve out of the 

10 business. Full operators still have those 

11 qualifications to drive those as operators. I 

12 don't know if there will be a switch in the 

13 business because I can't predict the future, 

14 but are full line operators going to allow 

15 those locations to dwindle? I don't think so 

16 either. I mean, they are certainly going to 

17 try to keep the place locations, but again, a 

18 lot of the equipment purchases need to be off 

19 at some point because frankly, those machines 

20 will be too old to maintain and not cost 

21 effective to maintain in the coming years just 

22 because of the aging value that's out there. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 81

1 So I don't believe we're going to 

2 see the peaks that we ever did in 1998 or 

3 2000. The fact that we did would be bad for 

4 the industry because I think that's a lot of 

5 what we're paying today the price. I still 

6 think a million is too low, and I do think 

7 you're going to have to see an influx of new 

8 equipment here shortly just because of the 

9 aging asset value. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

11 Steven Cousins. 

12 MR. COUSINS: I would guarantee 

13 that. You have to look at the financial 

14 proposition with vending. I mean, the break 

15 even point on unit volume case load per year, 

16 that continues to fall or that continues to 

17 rise rather, and the points of availability 

18 continue to rise as well, and beverage 

19 companies like Coke and Pepsi, we're 

20 constrained with how much we can agree to 

21 cost. 

22 So the break even point for a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 82

1 vending machine over the past ten years has 

2 just continued to climb and climb, and that's 

3 not going to change we don't think. 

4 So what we've been doing as a 

5 system is that we're retiring machines and not 

6 replacing them because in some of those 

7 occasions those machines were marginally 

8 profitable, and that proposition continues to 

9 change and has changed dramatically, and Glen 

10 made a point around this, you know, given the 

11 recessionary times that we've entered into. 

12 Now, I'm not saying that the 

13 business is going to go away. I don't think 

14 it's going to go away, and you made a very 

15 good point that the base of the machines is 

16 aging, but I guess my key point here is that 

17 to assume that the base of machines is going 

18 to remain where it is today would be a 

19 mistake. I think it is going to continue to 

20 fall. We don't know where it is going to go, 

21 but it will stabilize, but it will continue to 

22 fall. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 83

1 I do agree with you, Trent. It's 

2 not going to fall as low as a million 

3 machines. It's not. I don't think it will 

4 fall as low as two million machines either, 

5 but it will continue to fall. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah, Trent, go 

7 ahead. 

8 MR. ROTH: I agree with what Steve 

9 said. It will continue to fall. I don't 

10 think it has stabilized yet. I do think the 

11 purchases will eventually have to come up a 

12 little in order to maintain that base of two 

13 million or one million. I just think one 

14 million is too low. I think it needs to be 

15 higher than that. 

16 MR. SCOTT: Can I inject something 

17 here? 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Please, go ahead, 

19 Mike. 

20 MR. SCOTT: Yeah. Okay. So what 

21 I hear is probably won't fall to a million. 

22 That's an inevitable consequence of what the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 84

1 stock is right now and what 90,000 a year 

2 shipments gets you to. 

3 So at some point between 2012 and 

4 2020, 90,000 has to go up to some other level 

5 to maintain that level of two million. Is 

6 that a reasonable number? 

7 MR. ROTH: Yes. I mean, correct. 

8 You're absolutely correct, and that's why we 

9 say have an 80,000 installed base. Eventually 

10 it's going to force those purchases just to 

11 maintain a level that's 30 percent less than 

12 what it is today. 

13 MR. SCOTT: Okay. So to be clear, 

14 we have to go above 90,000 to get up to 

15 stabilize the stock at something over a 

16 million. 

17 MR. ROTH: At some point to do 

18 that, yes. 

19 MR. SCOTT: Okay. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew, let me hit 

21 another industry person and I'll come back to 

22 you. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 85

1 Go ahead, Bob. 

2 MR. McGARRAH: Just a certain 

3 dimension to what 100,000 machines means, it 

4 means $150 million investment, and Coke and 

5 Pepsi could address this better than I could. 

6 I haven't been there in ten years. But I 

7 talk to the bottlers, and those folks are 

8 postponing fleet purchases for trucks and 

9 vehicles. They're postponing a lot of things 

10 now because of the economic turndown, and the 

11 first thing they're going to be doing is 

12 replacing those trucks and replacing those 

13 business essential pieces, and then he will 

14 come in at some point after that and post mix 

15 equipment will come in at some point after 

16 that. 

17 So I don't see even a good 

18 economic turnaround getting this vending 

19 business jump-started as we used to call it 

20 for at least five years, and that is going to 

21 have a major impact on the manufacturers. One 

22 hundred and fifty million dollars is not chump 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 86

1 change. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Consistent with 

3 your earlier comment, it will get to the point 

4 where they wouldn't have the actual capacity 

5 to produce at the levels required. 

6 MR. McGARRAH: Well, that's the 

7 manufacturers, but that's something that could 

8 happen, yes. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Trent. 

10 MR. ROTH: This is Trent Roth, 

11 Dixie-Narco. 

12 We will be able to manufacture at 

13 the levels because we're only running one 

14 shift today. We have opportunity to increase 

15 that as we expand or we need to expand. I 

16 mean, that's part of what we do. 

17 Today, as Bob has brought up, we 

18 are the ones combining facilities from our 

19 staff facility down to our cold drink 

20 facility. That's part of an acquisition that 

21 took place three years ago and claimed 

22 purchasing assistance by Dixie-Narco, and 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 87

1 that's part of an evolution that was fully 

2 expected to happen. We had to leverage our 

3 assets as a company regarding what 

4 manufacturing location. 

5 So that's what's happening, but 

6 we're all working one shift today. We have 

7 opportunity to grow. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew. 

9 MR. deLASKI: I just wanted to 

10 comment on the shipments issue. It strikes me 

11 that dropping from a current stock of three 

12 million down to 30 percent in ten years is an 

13 awful dramatic shock drop and also is probably 

14 not realistic. 

15 I also acknowledge that there's a 

16 ton of uncertainty around shipments, but if 

17 the stock is twice the size of what your 

18 estimate is, that's twice the energy savings. 

19 So it has impact in terms of the impact of 

20 the rulemaking. 

21 The other thing I would just 

22 comment on is there's a tendency in the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 88

1 analysis to sort of look at what happened 

2 recently and just sort of extracted things, 

3 and it sounds like to some extent what will 

4 happen perhaps is that at one point we were 

5 able with what was happening in the late '90s 

6 when they had the curves going up, if they 

7 were going to keep on going up like that, now 

8 there's been a reaction to that and now the 

9 curve is going down. So, okay, it's going to 

10 keep on going down. 

11 Well, in reaction maybe what we 

12 have here is a bit of a cycle like this given 

13 the aging stock and that, yeah, some of these 

14 actually may be delayed because of the 

15 economic times, but they're not going to be 

16 put off forever. At some point the machine is 

17 going to be replaced. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Nina. 

19 MS. TARLEY: I just wanted to make 

20 two comments. One, we might have to retire a 

21 group of equipment not only because of the 

22 age. As Trent said, most of the group is 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 89

1 approaching the life cycle age, but also due 

2 to the actual consumption depending on where 

3 the DOE mandatory eligibility requirements 

4 are. Some of the older equipment will not be 

5 able to meet it. So rather than investing the 

6 money in upgrading we will have to retire 

7 them. 

8 And another comment is I really 

9 foresee the shifting of business to the Class 

10 A versus Class B. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

12 MR. SCOTT: May I pursue that a 

13 little further? 

14 MS. TARLEY: Please. 

15 MR. SCOTT: Currently we show that 

16 over half are now -- we had numbers 50 percent 

17 to 60 percent. There were two different 

18 estimates given of current shipments being A 

19 Class machines. Going forward, since that's 

20 the number we're using going forward, is that 

21 approximately correct or do you all want to 

22 weigh in and say, "No, no, no, that's 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 90

1 different," or there's a trend in the number 

2 or something? 

3 MS. TARLEY: I wish I could agree 

4 to both. It's very difficult to say. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you, Nina. 

6 Steve Cousins, do you have a 

7 crystal ball? 

8 MR. COUSINS: No. I would say 

9 this. It would be a bad one because where 

10 Coca-Cola thought we would be four or five 

11 years ago, we're not there, and we felt at one 

12 time that we would phase from B Class to A, 

13 and now that doesn't seem to be the case. I 

14 mean, now I think we're buying more solid 

15 front machines. 

16 I mean the trend is going up to 

17 the solid front. I guess what I'm saying is 

18 there is no crystal ball that is really going 

19 to tell us, you know, exactly where we're 

20 going to go. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Bob -- no, go 

22 ahead. Keep going. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 91

1 MR. COUSINS: I wanted to fall 

2 back on this whole thing about the population 

3 phase. You know, to have the opinion that 

4 just because the machine is there that the 

5 business is going to stay, there was a time 

6 ten years ago we only had to sell 20 cases for 

7 a vending machine to make a profit in a year. 

8 You know, now we're talking 100 cases, and it 

9 keeps going up. 

10 Now, you think about if you can go 

11 to a vending machine and buy a 20 ounce 

12 package cheaper than you can buy it from the 

13 convenience store, and there are more 

14 convenience stores and they're selling 

15 beverages now every place you can imagine; the 

16 point I'm making is this. It's not a matter 

17 of -- there's a financial proposition here, 

18 and there are things that are driving the 

19 profitability model through a vending machine, 

20 and to think that that model doesn't change is 

21 erroneous. 

22 I mean, that's one of the reasons 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 92

1 why the base of equipment is falling. So to 

2 say that, oh, we're always going to maintain, 

3 you know, a certain population of machines out 

4 there, you know, because of the profit picture 

5 or the financial model is not going to change, 

6 that's a mistake. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

8 Bob McGarrah. 

9 MR. McGARRAH: Just to comment, 

10 the Pogo comic strip had the saying, "We have 

11 met the enemy and they are us," and this 

12 project, controlling the energy on the vending 

13 machine, started way before the economic 

14 crisis, and I would suspect that Coke and 

15 Pepsi, in light of some regulation changes 

16 coming down the road, may have consciously or 

17 unconsciously pulled back their purchases not 

18 wanting to be stuck with machines that a ten 

19 or better year life that may or may not meet 

20 standards in five years. 

21 I can't talk to that. I don't 

22 work there anymore, but that at one time was a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 93

1 consideration that we would make in doing our 

2 purchases. Is there any technology coming, 

3 particularly on the fountain side when 

4 regulations came in regulating five gallon 

5 transfer tanks? 

6 So when those things happen, the 

7 large companies tend to pull back and say, 

8 "Let's see where this settles." 

9 How many of us are running out and 

10 buying a car today until we see where the 

11 electric, hybrid, what is coming? So that 

12 could be a conscious or unconscious thing 

13 that's happening. 

14 So we could have created part of 

15 this ourselves. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Andrew. 

17 MR. deLASKI: Just to follow up on 

18 a comment from Pepsi, I thought I heard you 

19 say that you thought that the standards might 

20 cause you to retire equipment early, and I 

21 don't understand that comment just because the 

22 standards only apply to new sales. So they 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 94

1 don't affect what you do with your existing 

2 stock. 

3 You could refurbish the machine. 

4 You could put it back into use. That's not 

5 going to be affected by standards on new 

6 equipment that sold, manufactured. 

7 MS. TARLEY: Yeah, that is 

8 correct, and let me just comment to your 

9 question as well as the last comment. I don't 

10 think that -- well, I can't speak for Coke 

11 obviously -- but Pepsi, I don't think we 

12 consciously or subconsciously decided to hold 

13 back due to regulations. However, what does 

14 affect very much our decisions to buy new 

15 equipment or refurbish current equipment is 

16 the various rebate options, and I could talk 

17 with PG&E as one of them. 

18 Because of right now a lot of 

19 states and utility companies are developing in 

20 the midst of developing the rebate options, 

21 that definitely will affect what we do 

22 refurbish or what we do purchase because 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 95

1 everybody knows the energy efficient equipment 

2 costs money, and options to buy anything that 

3 will make the current equipment more energy 

4 efficient also costs a lot of money, and 

5 you've already heard a lot of comments about 

6 the current economic situation and the payback 

7 on the products. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Please. Use the 

9 microphone and say your name for the record. 

10 MR. CHASSEROT: My name is Marc 

11 Chasserot from shecco. 

12 I just had a question regarding 

13 shipments. Has anyone looked into the new 

14 wave of, you know, vending machines working 

15 with hydrocarbons and CO as a refrigerant, 

 2

16 you know, and what impact that will have on 

17 shipments in the future? 

18 Because new technologies are 

19 coming in the market and there are lots of 

20 others working with this around the world as 

21 well, and they're coming to the U.S. I don't 

22 know if anyone has looked at that. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 96

1 Thank you. 

2 MS. TARLEY: Well, Nina Tarley, 

3 Pepsi Co. 

4 Pepsi did install several CO 

 2

5 vending machines in Washington. Actually some 

6 of them you probably can see across the 

7 street. 

8 As far as the energy consumption 

9 if that's the question, we don't think that 

10 CO will save a lot of energy. We don't think 

 2

11 the hydrocarbons either will save a lot of 

12 energy. They are wonderful, new refrigerants. 

13 Pepsi Co. is very, very much interested in 

14 pursuing those options, but I don't know if 

15 that will have any significant effect on the 

16 energy consumption. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Thank 

18 you. 

19 Trent. 

20 MR. ROTH: Trent Roth, Dixie21 Narco. 

22 I agree with what Nina just said. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 97

1 We are experimenting with other refrigerants. 

2 We did not see energy efficiency of CO 

 2

3 anywhere near what we've already accomplished 

4 in 134(a), and to kind of argue with what 

5 Greenpeace got into last time was the fact 

6 that they challenged our carbon footprint 

7 because actually it was a big deal and we use 

8 a lot less carbon footprint when we can get a 

9 134(a). 

10 So we know it's out there. We're 

11 aware of it. We're not just a U.S. based 

12 company. We do stuff globally, and right now 

13 it does not seem to be the way to go. 

14 What would drive that will be the 

15 appliance industry, quite frankly. If you 

16 start building, you know, millions of 

17 household refrigerators using CO the 

 2

18 resources from the manufacturers of 

19 compressors, then that industry may change, 

20 but the vending industry is not large enough 

21 to drive that change with CO . Then it would 

 2

22 be the appliance industry. So right now we 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 98

1 need to wait for that wind to change to really 

2 drive efficiencies. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Marc, follow-on. 

4 MR. CHASSEROT: Yeah, just a few 

5 points. I mean, I can submit some 

6 presentations in time for the deadline, but I 

7 have presentations from Coke over the last 

8 year or show showing that, for example, CO 

 2

9 vending machines are much more efficient than 

10 current technology. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Well, let's 

12 hear from Coke. 

13 MR. CHASSEROT: But that's not the 

14 purpose of this meeting. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Sure. 

16 MR. CHASSEROT: We're not talking 

17 about energy efficiencies, but just to 

18 highlight that. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: I'm sure the 

20 Department would welcome submissions, but 

21 let's hear from Coke. Steve Cousins. 

22 MR. COUSINS: Nina and Trent are 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 99

1 right. CO , actually you're all right. It 

 2

2 depends on the conditions by which we're 

3 operating with CO . We're operating 

 2

4 transcritical CO . We don't have evaporators. 

 2

5 We have gas coolers, and what's happening is 

6 that the efficiencies go haywire from our 

7 testing somewhere around 82 degrees 

8 Fahrenheit. 

9 So if the operating environment 

10 ambient is higher than 82 degrees Fahrenheit, 

11 CO is significantly less efficient than 

 2

12 134(a). The cooler the ambient, the more 

13 efficient it becomes. 

14 So operating at what we consider 

15 to be 75 degrees Fahrenheit, it can be more 

16 efficient. But Trent made a very good point, 

17 which is the availability of the pumps that 

18 can operate at the right capacity for the 

19 efficiencies that we're looking for, and today 

20 there is, at least for the North America power 

21 grid, there's very small commercial 

22 availability, and because of that you don't 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 100

1 have the -- in a practical sense you don't 

2 have the efficiency with CO commercially 

 2

3 available that you have with 133. 

4 Theoretically, it can be done, but 

5 the commercial base is not there. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Yes, go 

7 ahead. Marc. 

8 MR. CHASSEROT: Well, I can send 

9 some information that would maybe disagree to 

10 a certain extent with what's just been said, 

11 but I mean, we work with different companies 

12 in Japan and in Europe as well. The oldest 

13 ones like Sanyo and Embraco, I know not 

14 European, and Danfoss, and they are basically 

15 telling us, "We're just waiting for those 

16 orders from Pepsi and Coke." Their technology 

17 is ready. 

18 But that's maybe not the purpose 

19 of this meeting, but just so that you know. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: I'm sure they heard 

21 you though. 

22 MR. CHASSEROT: And one other 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 101

1 point, can I make one final point? 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, please. 

3 MR. CHASSEROT: In Japan, for 

4 example, this is a market. This is already 

5 commercial this year, the vending machines. 

6 They're already selling close to 100,000 units 

7 in Japan alone right now. So I mean, this is 

8 a technology that's already existing. 

9 I know that Japan is slightly 

10 different from the U.S., but still it's just 

11 for you to know. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Let me go to Steve 

13 first, Nina. Steve Cousins. 

14 MR. COUSINS: All of the companies 

15 you mentioned don't make CO systems for the 

 2

16 North America power grid. None of them do. 

17 MR. CHASSEROT: I'm sorry. I 

18 didn't -- 

19 MR. COUSINS: None of those 

20 companies you mentioned make CO compressors 

 2

21 for 115 volt, 60 hertz, which is for North 

22 Americans. They're building 220/50, 90/50. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 102

1 They're building these for other power grids, 

2 not for North America. 

3 So what I said a moment ago is 

4 theoretically CO can be more efficient in a 

 2

5 very practical sense. It's not commercial 

6 here in North America where we can use it. 

7 And as Trent mentioned a moment 

8 ago, the commercial proposition is not there 

9 yet. If domestic goes into that front, then 

10 it becomes available to us on the commercial 

11 side, but it's just not commercially there 

12 right now. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's go to Nina 

14 and then over to Glen. 

15 MS. TARLEY: I do agree with my 

16 distinguished colleague. One point of 

17 clarification I would like to make. 

18 In three simple you are correct. 

19 CO , depending on the temperature, could 

 2

20 potentially be slightly more energy efficient, 

21 but we're not comparing apples to apples here. 

22 I want to make very clear when you develop a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 103

1 new piece of equipment, be the glass front 

2 versus back then or your CO machine, you use 

 2

3 brand new compressor. You use brand new, most 

4 efficient motors. The whole system in itself 

5 is more efficient. 

6 That's why some of the glass from 

7 the vendors consume less energy than standard, 

8 not because glass front consumes less energy. 

9 Because the system is more energy efficient. 

10 And the same with CO . We develop 

 2

11 brand new compressors. We develop brand new 

12 systems that allows us the best air flow. It 

13 is that way we are able to save some energy on 

14 the CO vending machine versus the current R-

 2

15 134(a). 

16 But it's not basically because CO 

 2

17 is more energy efficient; because the system 

18 itself is more energy efficient. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

20 Glen. 

21 MR. SELFRIDGE: Only one comment 

22 in passing. Hydrocarbons were also mentioned. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 104

1 It's the same type of an issue in North 

2 America in terms of regulatory. People don't 

3 want refrigerators at the moment; it's illegal 

4 actually to build them that way by using a 

5 hydrocarbon refrigerant. This may change over 

6 time. 

7 Again, it would be people like the 

8 GEs of the world or the . This is not Europe. 

9 We have a completely different set of codes, 

10 standards, opinions on safety as compared with 

11 Europe and the rest of the world. So that is 

12 not something we can assume. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

14 So in a little bit we're going to 

15 take a break just so you're knowing that we 

16 will do that. This has been a very productive 

17 conversation, and I really appreciate 

18 everybody speaking up and contributing all of 

19 this information, all of this knowledge to the 

20 Department. 

21 So I'm going to return to the 

22 slides, and then we'll see where we stand 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 105

1 after one or two more slides. 

2 Mike. 

3 MR. SCOTT: Okay. I have one more 

4 detail I want to nail down. Sorry about this. 

5 That final bullet on Slide 24, we 

6 assumed that the side distribution was going 

7 to be 75 percent medium, 25 percent large, 

8 zero percent small. That's actually a 

9 reasonably important assumption for the 

10 downstream analyses, the net present value 

11 analysis and so on. 

12 Did we get it right? 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: What do you think? 

14 Yeah, Trent. 

15 MR. ROTH: Can you define the -- 

16 I'm just looking for it -- can you define 

17 please what large and small is? 

18 MR. SCOTT: I think we can get 

19 some help from Sam on that. 

20 MR. ROTH: Sure. 

21 MR. JASINSKI: So in terms of 

22 refrigerated volume for Class A, a small 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 106

1 machine would have 19 cubic feet. Medium 

2 would be 31. 

3 MR. SCOTT: No, that's from the A 

4 number. 

5 MR. JASINSKI: Oh, sorry. I'll 

6 give you the updated one. Seventeen for 

7 small; 22 cubic feet for medium; and 34 cubic 

8 feet for a large. That's Class A. 

9 Class B would be 17 for a small, 

10 22 for a medium, and 26 for a large. I also 

11 have can capacities if you'd like those. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: So, Sriram, follow13 on? 

14 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: Yeah. That's 

15 in the Table IV-1 on page 26026, vendable 

16 capacity as well as the refrigerated volume? 

17 PARTICIPANT: Zero, two, eight. 

18 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: Zero, two, 

19 eight, yeah. Top of the page 2602. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: So I can read those 

21 numbers back again if you want me to. Have 

22 you got them? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 107

1 Okay. So then Mike is asking you 

2 for whether these distributions, whether they 

3 are appropriate or not, 75 percent medium, 25 

4 percent large, zero percent small for both 

5 Class A and B. 

6 Zero is too small? Yeah, there 

7 will be some shipments that are small, yeah. 

8 MR. SCOTT: Do you want to put a 

9 number on it? Five percent, 10 percent? 

10 MR. ROTH: I guess if I look at 

11 the manufacturers, but I don't think any falls 

12 in small. I don't think there's anything 

13 else -- 

14 MS. TARLEY: No, I don't think 17 

15 exists. 

16 MR. COUSINS: I'm okay with those 

17 numbers. 

18 MS. TARLEY: Yeah, but why define 

19 a category which doesn't exist? We don't have 

20 anything 17. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Seventeen cubic 

22 doesn't exist. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 108

1 MS. TARLEY: No. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Oh, I see. What 

3 would be the smallest? 

4 MS. TARLEY: I think 19 or 20 

5 probably would be. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So then 

7 there's a reason why it's zero. 

8 MS. TARLEY: All right. 

9 (Laughter.) 

10 MS. TARLEY: That's right. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Because it doesn't 

12 exist, right? 

13 MS. TARLEY: In Category A. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah, right. 

15 MR. SELFRIDGE: I think as I 

16 recall there is one. 

17 (Simultaneous conversation and 

18 laughter.) 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So we've 

20 heard from Steve. Steve thinks the numbers 

21 are okay. Other comments on the numbers? 

22 Glen, go ahead. Glen, we didn't hear you. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 109

1 I'm sorry. 

2 MR. SELFRIDGE: Nothing. A Class 

3 B machine, a very small machine does get down 

4 into that. 

5 MS. TARLEY: Yes, correct, but not 

6 in Class A. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, and also a 

8 very small number? 

9 MR. SELFRIDGE: Very small 

10 numbers. 

11 MR. SCOTT: One percent, five 

12 percent? 

13 MR. ROTH: Are we saying 25 

14 percent in the large category? 

15 MR. SCOTT: Yes. 

16 MR. ROTH: That may be higher. I 

17 mean, ours is the large category. So I don't 

18 know. It could be higher than that. 

19 MR. SCOTT: Okay. I'm trying to 

20 be really clear about this. Class A machines, 

21 we've got zero, 75, 25 as we go up. What 

22 should the distribution be? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 110

1 MR. BROOKMAN: 60/40? 

2 MR. ROTH: 60/40? I don't know. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: 60 medium, 40 

4 large? 

5 MR. ROTH: 60/40. 

6 MR. SCOTT: Okay. What about B? 

7 (Pause.) 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: So there's still 

9 time to receive written comments on this 

10 matter, right? 

11 MR. SCOTT: That's a good idea. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah. 

13 MR. SCOTT: Because it drives so 

14 much of the downstream analysis, early would 

15 be really good on comments about that. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, right. 

17 MR. ROTH: This is Trent. 

18 I would recommend that we use NAMA 

19 as maybe somebody that could filter out what 

20 we sell so that maybe as manufacturers we 

21 could get a third party and have them compile 

22 it. We could -- somehow they could compile it 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 111

1 and then we could get back to what they -- 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Is there a 

3 representative from NAMA in the room? 

4 MR. MONROE: I'll ask. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: You'll ask? 

6 MR. MONROE: It will be up to the 

7 manufacturer, I guess, to give us this 

8 information. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Did you hear what 

10 Mike said? This drives a whole bunch of 

11 important analysis and they need it quickly. 

12 Okay? Good. 

13 Yes, I see some Navigant folks 

14 wanting to speak up. Please say your name. 

15 MR. MILLARD: Yeah, Matt Millard. 

16 It would also be very helpful if 

17 we could have the volumes attached to the 

18 shipment estimations because there's a lot of 

19 uncertainty as far as what some people 

20 consider -- 

21 MR. COUSINS: You can forget about 

22 that. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 112

1 MR. MILLARD: -- what some people 

2 consider small and medium. So just saying 

3 that small is a certain percentage and medium 

4 is -- 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: But if they 

6 aggregate it they can't do that? 

7 MR. McGARRAH: There's only two 

8 buyers. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, yeah. 

10 MR. ROTH: You're talking cubic 

11 volume, not -- 

12 MR. MILLARD: Right, right, cubic 

13 volume. Refrigerated volume. 

14 MR. ROTH: We're talking about 

15 refrigerated volume. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks for 

17 clarifying that. 

18 MR. MILLARD: Sorry. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead. 

20 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: My comment was 

21 going to be we have asked NAMA for those data 

22 since the ANOPR meeting, and we haven't got 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 113

1 anything from the industry. So I just would 

2 put that word of caution. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. So would you 

4 say your name for the record? 

5 MR. MONROE: Ned Monroe. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Ned Monroe. Thank 

7 you, Ned. 

8 So appreciate your efforts to try 

9 to get that done for the Department. 

10 Bob. 

11 MR. McGARRAH: Let me just comment 

12 on that. There's two people that are buying 

13 99 percent of the machines. So they give 

14 their numbers anonymously to NAMA and they 

15 extrapolate their number and they know what 

16 the other guy is buying. It ain't going to 

17 happen. They're not going to give you the 

18 number. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So that's 

20 good to know. 

21 MR. McGARRAH: That's like telling 

22 your market share behind the table. It's a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 114

1 very competitive industry. We fight all the 

2 time as an industry in a friendly way, and 

3 it's just numbers that I can't believe them 

4 sharing because they're the two major buyers. 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Trent, go ahead. 

6 MR. ROTH: This is Trent, Dixie7 Narco. 

8 I guess I might even ask the 

9 Department of Justice here, too, but I believe 

10 it's a minimum of three. There are three 

11 manufacturers. There's Vendo, Royal and us 

12 are supplying numbers. They should be able to 

13 show aggregate market share or aggregate 

14 numbers based on that. 

15 It has always been my 

16 understanding you had three manufacturers. 

17 You have to get at least three in order to be 

18 able to share that. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay 

20 MR. SCOTT: This is Mike Scott 

21 again, and just to be clear, we're not asking 

22 for shipments volumes at all. We're asking 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 115

1 for distribution across size classes here, 

2 percentage, not numbers. 

3 MR. MILLARD: Right. This is Matt 

4 Millard again. 

5 I was referring more to 

6 refrigerated volume because what some people 

7 may consider a small machine other may not. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So I think 

9 we have cleared this up now. Let's do the 

10 final slide and then we're going to take a 

11 break. On approach. 

12 MR. SCOTT: Okay, on approach, and 

13 we're going to be talking -- actually this 

14 would be a really good place to break because 

15 this is the approach for the national energy 

16 savings calculation. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: You want to break 

18 now? 

19 MR. SCOTT: We should do the TSLs 

20 first. So I think this would be a good place 

21 to break. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So let's 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 116

1 take a break. It's now 11 o'clock on the 

2 nose. 

3 I think we're going to extend the 

4 break for 20 minutes in case those of you want 

5 to go halfway to the Capitol for coffee. 

6 Really, the most convenient place is closed 

7 downstairs. If you want to get coffee, you 

8 need to go to the main cafeteria, which is 

9 downstairs and about a half a block that way. 

10 So let's try and resume at 11:20. 

11 Do you have a question or comment? 

12 MR. HORNQUIST: Just a quick 

13 question. This is Edwin Hornquist, Southern 

14 Cal. Edison. 

15 I was just noticing that the 

16 refrigerated volume referred to here is -- 

17 well, the title is "Refrigerated Volume." In 

18 the class fee the refrigerated volume is, as I 

19 understand it, a compartment within this. Is 

20 that the entire system? 

21 PARTICIPANTS: No. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: I'll tell you what. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 117

1 Maybe you could just ask on the break. Let's 

2 go to a break and then if we need to take this 

3 back up when we resume we will. 

4 Okay. Can you just consult with 

5 the Navigant folks? 

6 MR. HORNQUIST: Yeah. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah. We'll resume 

8 at 11:20 right here. 

9 (Whereupon, the foregoing matter went off the 

10 record at 11:03 a.m. and went back 

11 on the record at 11:19 a.m.) 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's start. 

13 Let me start off on behalf of the 

14 . I don't work for the Department, but we're 

15 trying to get them a good research, and so let 

16 me start off on behalf of the Department 

17 saying thanks for that conversation we had 

18 prior to the break. I thought that was very, 

19 very useful. I appreciate everybody speaking 

20 up and saying what they know to be the issues. 

21 That's very helpful to the Department. 

22 So we're going to then proceed. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 118

1 Edwin, did you get your question answered? 

2 MR. HORNQUIST: Well, it raised 

3 other questions. Never mind. So I just want 

4 to understand what the refrigerated 

5 compartment within the Class B machines 

6 represents. Is that the refrigerated volume 

7 that the refrigeration cites to, or is it the 

8 entire volume where the entire product, even 

9 the product that is not refrigerated or 

10 presumably not refrigerated in my mind, is 

11 assumed to be? 

12 MR. ROTH: This is Trent. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks, Trent. 

14 MR. ROTH: I'll try to answer that 

15 one. I'll take technical help if I get out of 

16 line. 

17 We refer to the volume as the 

18 entire volume within that cabinet. That is 

19 the volume that is being cooled. Now it is 

20 slightly different. We direct all the air 

21 flow to the bottom one-third of the cabinet. 

22 So we're cooling those cans in the bottom oneEERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 119

1 third, but there's transfer of the cold air 

2 because of the stacking, what we call stack. 

3 We literally take -- I'll get more exact later 

4 -- but for instance, our 504 Dixie-Narco stack 

5 unit, we stack 504 cans into eight columns -- 

6 seven columns straight up and down. So we're 

7 directing the air flow to the bottom one8 third. The whole cabinet is refrigerated 

9 because you're going to get transfer of cold 

10 air through conduction from the cold cans. 

11 You are cooling all of those cans. 

12 The ones at the bottom are kept at 36 

13 degrees, plus or minus one degree, as stated 

14 in the ASHRAE standard. The upper cans may 

15 reach 50 degrees or somewhere in there, but 

16 they still are being cooled because as those 

17 get hot, you know, in the environment, they're 

18 still going to require or steal cold are from 

19 those cold cans on the bottom third, but the 

20 bottom itself is the entire cabinet because 

21 that is, in fact, refrigerated. It's just how 

22 you're directing the air flow. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 120

1 So the cabinets are all 

2 refrigerated. We're just focusing the air. 

3 Does that help? 

4 MR. HORNQUIST: Yes, absolutely. 

5 So the question would be if the delta T 

6 between the temperature that you're cooling 

7 one-third of the product is lower or higher 

8 than the delta T for two-thirds of the 

9 product, because the refrigeration sizing 

10 obviously is taken into consideration -- 

11 MR. ROTH: Refrigeration sizing 

12 has more to do when you talk about this with 

13 the cool-down requirements, and I'll use 

14 specifically Coke since they have the toughest 

15 cool-down requirements, but the size of our 

16 compressor is more or less based upon not 

17 keeping that product at 36 degrees plus or 

18 minus one, but how fast can we cool the entire 

19 product down and let's put in more, and that's 

20 really driving what our size of our compressor 

21 is, maintaining product at 36 degrees. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: And that's 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 121

1 something they specify for different classes 

2 of -- 

3 MR. ROTH: That's specifies as a 

4 requirement, a test requirement, for pull5 downs. 

6 MR. HORNQUIST: So when you take 

7 it from something like 70 or something degrees 

8 to -- 

9 MR. ROTH: What temperature do we 

10 take it from? Seventy-something? 

11 MR. COUSINS: Condition C 

12 currently in Coke? It's actually full reload 

13 recovery requirement that drives the 

14 refrigeration load. So -- 

15 PARTICIPANT: Ninety. 

16 MR. COUSINS: -- yeah, that's what 

17 we consider at the moment, but I guess to 

18 elaborate on that driver, based on how we do 

19 business, based on how we do business and when 

20 a machine gets visited and reloaded and how we 

21 set up full service vending for the amount of 

22 packages that need to be restocked, we have a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 122

1 requirement that we want the machine to be in 

2 business at the first peak purchase period 

3 after the reload, and that drives our 

4 standard. 

5 So that the temperature and the 

6 time requirement which forces these guys to 

7 size the equipment a certain way is based on 

8 that? 

9 MR. HORNQUIST: I'm curious. 

10 What's the time that you require? Can you 

11 tell me that? 

12 MR. COUSINS: No, I can't. 

13 (Laughter.) 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Well, thank 

15 you. That was useful. 

16 So now we'll proceed with Sriram. 

17 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: Right. Sriram 

18 Somasundaram, Pacific Northwest National 

19 Laboratory. 

20 A slight reorder of slides. We 

21 stopped at , and I'll have Mike Scott come 

22 back up after I talk about the next two 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 123

1 slides, 28 and 29, and then he'll tell you 

2 about the approach that we took to do the NPV 

3 analysis and then report the results of it. 

4 The reason we thought this might 

5 be more useful for the discussion here is that 

6 we assess the NPV, the net present value, or 

7 the national energy savings analysis impacts, 

8 only on the TSLs that we pick at this stage of 

9 the analysis. 

10 So we have to first pick the TSLs 

11 of the standard levels for which the analysis 

12 will be continued and report the results for, 

13 and the way we pick those, if some of you 

14 remember, the ANOPR analysis we reported what 

15 were called the candidate standard levels. 

16 There were a few standard levels that we had 

17 decided would form the basis of this step of 

18 the analysis at the end of the ANOPR analysis. 

19 And so if we go back to that step 

20 and then we say, "Okay. What levels still 

21 make sense to pursue for the NOPR analysis?" 

22 and the methodology used to select these trial 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 124

1 standard levels at this stage are that we pick 

2 the most energy efficient level, the Max Tech 

3 level as sort of the end of the range. So 

4 the TSL-7 or the TSL-6 as the case may be, in 

5 fact, is the Max Tech level. 

6 Then we also pick some 

7 intermediate levels between that and the 

8 baseline. The baseline in this case is the 

9 ENERGY STAR Tier 1 that went into effect or 

10 something close to that is the baseline level, 

11 which is what all the energy savings get 

12 compared to. 

13 So in between these two extremes, 

14 we picked the efficiency levels that either 

15 have a lowest life cycle cost or a payback 

16 period of three years or less, efficiency 

17 levels with some noteworthy technologies, for 

18 example, like the LED lighting or a condenser 

19 motor switch technology from PSC motor to an 

20 ECM motor, for example, would be an example of 

21 a noteworthy technology. 

22 And then if we still have some 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 125

1 gaps between those efficiency levels, we will 

2 pick some intermediate levels to fill the gaps 

3 that may or may not have a combination of 

4 technologies that result in those energy 

5 consumption levels. 

6 So with that introduction to the 

7 selection process, we came up with seven TSLs 

8 for Class A beyond the baseline and six TSLs 

9 for Class B beyond the baseline. 

10 And having picked an energy 

11 consumption level for each of those TSLs, we 

12 then developed correlations as a function of 

13 refrigerated volume for medium and large size 

14 machines using the two point lines or drew a 

15 line across those two points for both Class A 

16 and Class B, and that's how we came up with 

17 these correlations for MDEC, which is maximum 

18 daily energy consumption as a function of the 

19 volume for Class A and Class B. 

20 As you can see, even though, for 

21 example, we call it the TSL-5 for both Class A 

22 and Class B, but as you can see, the levels 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 126

1 are not the same. The energy consumption will 

2 not be the same because you see the 

3 coefficients will be and the intercept values 

4 are different. So please remember that. 

5 So having set these, having picked 

6 these trial standard levels, Michael will now 

7 describe how we assess the impacts of each of 

8 those levels. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: And fortunately for 

10 your purposes, both of these slides are on the 

11 same open page. So you can refer back and 

12 forth. 

13 MR. SCOTT: Good plan. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: That was well done. 

15 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: So let's go 

16 back to 26. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: The approach. 

18 Mike. 

19 MR. SCOTT: Okay. With that as an 

20 introduction, what we then did was estimate 

21 the national energy savings and the national 

22 impact analysis present value of savings for 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 127

1 those TSL levels, and one of the things that 

2 we want you to note is that the national 

3 energy savings are calculated for that 30-year 

4 period that I indicated earlier, plus the 

5 national present value by the convention that 

6 the Department uses is that we count the 

7 present value of the economic savings from all 

8 equipment purchased during the 30-year period 

9 so that 2012 to 2057 actually includes the 

10 lifetime of everything purchased in 2042 as 

11 well as everything before then. 

12 We then came up with a base case 

13 for the national energy standard or national 

14 energy savings and national impact analysis, 

15 and to do that we had to make an assumption or 

16 series of assumptions about what would have 

17 been shipped in the absence of the standards, 

18 and as originally we had a fairly complicated 

19 way of estimating what those efficiency levels 

20 would be that the market generated, we were 

21 told at the ANOPR stage that, no, it's really 

22 a much simpler problem than that. All you 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 128

1 have to remember is that there are two big 

2 purchasers and some smaller purchasers, and 

3 they essentially have wanted TSL -- sorry -- 

4 trial standard level -- trial standard level? 

5 – ENERGY STAR level Tier 1, which is our Level 

6 1 in this diagram, since it was available, 

7 since ENERGY STAR went into effect. 

8 And then by the year 2012 just 

9 about everything that would be purchased by 

10 the larger purchasers anyway would be Tier 2, 

11 and that roughly is equivalent to Level 2 for 

12 Class A equipment and it's Level 3 for a Class 

13 B equipment. 

14 We did allow for some purchases in 

15 between Tier 1 and Tier 2, but it's a 

16 relatively small amount. So essentially we've 

17 got a 10/90 split for the unregulated market. 

18 Then when standards are imposed as 

19 we show in the third bullet on this slide, 

20 everything below the level of the standard 

21 gets rolled up to the standard level. So, for 

22 example, with no standard with a medium 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 129

1 equipment, we would have a ten percent at 

2 Level 1, 90 percent at Level 2. But then with 

3 a Level 4 standard it would all be Level 4 or 

4 higher. 

5 There was no indication that there 

6 would be any equipment purchased above 

7 whatever the maximum level was for ENERGY STAR 

8 or, alternatively, the equipment purchased 

9 under the standard. So Levels 5 through 8 

10 were not affected by the standard unless the 

11 standard is set at that level. 

12 Okay. So once a standard is in 

13 place, then the old equipment, the stock of 

14 the equipment goes out of the inventory 

15 according to its base case efficiency mix, 

16 that or actually there's equipment that's 

17 older than that that's still less efficient 

18 according to the base efficiency mix, and then 

19 new equipment is sold under the standard to 

20 replace the equipment according to the new 

21 efficiency mix. 

22 And then we simply keep track of 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 130

1 all of that using national average customer 

2 prices for the equipment, annual energy prices 

3 and annual repair and maintenance captured 

4 from the LCC analysis. And that's all 

5 calculated then over the period under which 

6 we're working here. 

7 So then flipping over to Slide 30, 

8 the net present value results, for Class A 

9 equipment the standard that the Department 

10 arrived at look at net present values and the 

11 other features of the various trial standard 

12 levels. 

13 TSL-6 was the level chosen for 

14 this analysis, and it provided a maximum NPV 

15 of $0.105 billion at a seven percent discount 

16 rate, roughly double that at the three percent 

17 discount rate, and all trial standard levels 

18 lower than TSL-7 showed a positive NPV. 

19 For Class B equipment, TSL-3 

20 provided a net present value of essentially 

21 zero at the seven percent discount rate. All 

22 trial standard levels lower than TSL-4 had a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 131

1 positive NPV, but everything TSL-4 and above 

2 did not. 

3 I guess this is the point at which 

4 we can either answer questions about the NPV 

5 analysis or alternatively the issue on which 

6 DOE seeks comments, specifically on the trial 

7 standard Level 6 and 3, respectively. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: Well, let's see if 

9 there are any questions on the foregoing 

10 slides. On the approach slide, the selection 

11 of trial standard levels, and the matrix, the 

12 trial standard levels listed for Class A and 

13 B, and also for 30, NPV results. Questions, 

14 comments on those? That's quite a lot of 

15 content there. Bob. 

16 MR. McGARRAH: I'm a little 

17 confused here. Current machines and machines 

18 purchase by Coke and Pepsi since 19 -- 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Bob, get closer to 

20 that mic. 

21 MR. McGARRAH: Bob McGarrah. 

22 Current machines purchased by Coke 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 132

1 and Pepsi and purchase by them probably since 

2 2003 meet ENERGY STAR Tier 1. Many of them 

3 meet ENERGY STAR Tier 2, certainly the ones in 

4 the past several years. And I'm trying to 

5 understand how the set level -- 

6 MR. SCOTT: How the analysis -- 

7 MR. McGARRAH: -- the set level 

8 that you're going to establish relates to 

9 ENERGY STAR Tier 2. 

10 MR. SCOTT: Okay. Well, for A 

11 Class machines, TSL-6 is more efficient than 

12 ENERGY STAR Tier 2, which is, I think Level 2; 

13 is that right? 

14 MS. TARLEY: Can you tell what 

15 percentage? When you say more efficient, by 

16 what percent? 

17 MR. SCOTT: We're talking kilowatt 

18 hours per day. 

19 MR. LLENZA: So it's like 30 

20 percent? 

21 MR. SCOTT: Oh, I'm sorry. You 

22 wanted to know the percentage? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 133

1 MS. TARLEY: Yes. 

2 MR. LLENZA: It's about 30, 31 

3 percent, something like that. 

4 MS. TARLEY: Thirty-one percent? 

5 Thank you. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: We'll check out 

7 that. 

8 MR. SCOTT: He's looking. Just a 

9 minute. 

10 MS. TARLEY: I calculate around 

11 20. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: So, Nina, that last 

13 comment, say it again. You calculate it's 

14 about 20? 

15 MS. TARLEY: That's my 

16 calculations show, but -- 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: I think Trent also 

18 wanted to chime in. 

19 MR. ROTH: We calculated -- this 

20 is Trent Roth -- we calculated 20 percent 

21 reduction. We went 20 percent for Tier 1 and 

22 Tier 2. It looks like we're going 20 percent 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 134

1 for Tier 2 to the schedule. 

2 MR. SCOTT: Oh, okay. 

3 MR. ROTH: So from Tier 1 it would 

4 be greater, but it looks like 20 percent 

5 increments as you went down, and this is a 

6 percent decline. 

7 MS. TARLEY: For Class A. 

8 MR. ROTH: For Class A. 

9 MS. TARLEY: Class B it's higher. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: And are those 

11 increments, they're consistent? 

12 MR. ROTH: Yeah, they are 

13 consistent. In Tier 1, energy is higher in 

14 2004. 2007 was about a 20 percent level. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: So then, Sam, 

16 having looked at the data, for the record, 

17 what-- 

18 MR. SCOTT: We're still getting 

19 one more number. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Come to a 

21 conclusion. I'm coming back to you. 

22 MR. SCOTT: This is the advantage 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 135

1 of paper and pencil, the old school way. 

2 MR. JASINSKI: This is Sam 

3 Jasinski from Navigant. 

4 Our calculations show that for 

5 Class A the proposed TSL-6 is roughly 30 

6 percent more efficient than ENERGY STAR Tier 2 

7 and for Class B, the proposed TSL-3 is roughly 

8 five percent more efficient than ENERGY STAR 

9 Tier 2. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: I see, Nina, you're 

11 shaking your head. 

12 MS. TARLEY: Yeah, my number won't 

13 be definitely much higher. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: So maybe they'll 

15 continue to do their calculations over here 

16 and I'll return to Bob. You were in the 

17 middle. 

18 MR. McGARRAH: I was just trying 

19 to put a dimension on this. 

20 MR. JASINSKI: Well, as a 

21 clarification, we did it for the medium size 

22 class in each class. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 136

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So pardon 

2 me, Bob. Let me continue with this. Trent. 

3 MR. ROTH: This is Trent, Dixie4 Narco. 

5 It's just important to note that 

6 you're not going to get an exact translation 

7 to those. 

8 MR. SCOTT: Right. 

9 MR. ROTH: We switched from can 

10 capacity to cubic capacity. So although I can 

11 show you where the formulas seem to line up, 

12 and we'll do that a little bit later, but it 

13 does change. 

14 Also, when you get to Class B -- I 

15 know we're only talking Class A -- Class B, 

16 you're going to get a significant difference 

17 because we're going from 90 degrees, 65 

18 percent relative humidity, to 75/45. So there 

19 you really are not going to compare apples to 

20 apples at all. 

21 But in the Class A one, you need 

22 to understand that the variables will change 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 137

1 slightly by model, by manufacturer and how 

2 much we're coming down because the can 

3 capacity and cubic capacity are not in direct 

4 correlation with each other. 

5 So we will get some variance on 

6 that, but that's all right. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

8 MR. ROTH: And that's the way it 

9 is. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks for 

11 that clarification. 

12 Do you wish to say anything more 

13 now, Nina? 

14 MS. TARLEY: No, no. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: You all set? Okay, 

16 okay. Well, they'll continue to take a peak 

17 at that. 

18 Bob. 

19 MR. McGARRAH: Tell me what I'm 

20 saying wrong. The current standard that 

21 you're proposing will be between 20 and 31 

22 percent higher than ENERGY STAR Tier 2 for 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 138

1 Class A machines. 

2 MS. TARLEY: Lower. 

3 MR. JASINSKI: More efficient. 

4 MR. McGARRAH: More efficient. 

5 MR. JASINSKI: Yes. 

6 MR. McGARRAH: And for Class B 

7 machines, it will be five percent more 

8 efficient than ENERGY STAR Tier 2. 

9 MR. JASINSKI: Yes. 

10 MR. MILLARD: This is Matt Millard 

11 again. 

12 As Trent said, it's more difficult 

13 for me to develop that relationship because we 

14 estimated what the ENERGY STAR level would be 

15 if it dropped down to 75 degrees. 

16 MR. JASINSKI: For clarification, 

17 this is Sam Jasinski; for clarification, 

18 ENERGY STAR ratings are based on a 90 degree 

19 Fahrenheit ambient temperature test for Class 

20 B machines, and the Department of Energy test 

21 procedure mandates a 75 degree ambient 

22 temperature. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 139

1 MR. McGARRAH: I want to simplify 

2 it so I can explain it to people where it is 

3 from where we were at ENERGY STAR II to where 

4 we're going to be with this new regulation, 

5 and I think you did a pretty good job of 

6 saying -- I don't mind a range. A range is 

7 good -- the current proposed standard will be 

8 20 to 31 percent greater for Class A machines 

9 than ENERGY STAR Tier 2, and one to five 

10 percent greater, meaning requiring more 

11 efficiency, than ENERGY STAR Tier 2 for B 

12 machines. 

13 MR. JASINSKI: That's correct. 

14 MR. McGARRAH: Could we just write 

15 that down? 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: You don't think 

17 it's written down somewhere? 

18 MR. McGARRAH: No. I'm having 

19 trouble translating this. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: I see. 

21 MR. McGARRAH: No, to be honest 

22 with you. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 140

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Then we'll 

2 mull on that point. Are there other questions 

3 and comments then on this series of slides? 

4 There's a lot of content here. 

5 Yes, Trent. 

6 MR. ROTH: It might help you, Bob. 

7 This is Trent from Dixie-Narco. 

8 I'll give you a specific example 

9 so you will maybe -- these are large glass. 

10 We have a 405 can capacity at Tier 2 levels. 

11 We have a threshold of 5.56 kilowatts an hour 

12 for a daily hit. Under the new regulations in 

13 Class A, based on our cubic capacity, we have 

14 a new threshold that we have to hit of 4.48 

15 kilowatts per day. So that's roughly a 20 

16 percent reduction. 

17 MR. McGARRAH: From six to four. 

18 MR. ROTH: From 5.56 to 4.48. So 

19 that's the best translation I can give you -- 

20 MR. McGARRAH: No, that's good. 

21 That's exactly -- 

22 MR. ROTH: -- all our models, but 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 141

1 roughly in Class A it represents to us, Dixie2 Narco, approximately 20 percent. 

3 MR. McGARRAH: I think for me it's 

4 important to dimensionalize it so I can talk 

5 to the average folks and say, "This is what 

6 you're looking at. If you go to ENERGY STAR 

7 Tier 2, you're going to have to get this much 

8 more efficient with the new machine." That's 

9 all. 

10 MR. ROTH: The threshold is that 

11 much more. There are those of us that are 

12 well beyond that already. 

13 MR. McGARRAH: Yeah. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

15 Thanks for that illustration. That was 

16 helpful. 

17 MR. McGARRAH: Very. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Now, any additions 

19 on these slides? Because we're about to move 

20 to wanting to seek specific comment on Slide 

21 30 and then 31. 

22 Andrew, did you have something? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 142

1 MR. SELFRIDGE: I had. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: You had something, 

3 Glen. Thank you. I left somebody out. 

4 MR. SELFRIDGE: And what I had 

5 basically was, number one, I had mentioned 

6 this before. California Energy Commission on 

7 their public site is required by California 

8 Law of 75 degrees and 90 degree results by 

9 model number for every machine that's legal to 

10 sell in the State of California, public 

11 information, you can use it. 

12 Secondly, if you look at our list, 

13 there are no energy management systems that 

14 are used during the ASHRAE test. Okay? To 

15 come up with those numbers, as Trent 

16 mentioned, a year ago others do that and it's 

17 perfectly legitimate. Okay? 

18 But if you're looking at something 

19 like LED lighting and were to pick Trent's 

20 number, the lighting is already backed out of 

21 it similar to what I had talked about with our 

22 Super T8s. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 143

1 So be careful on your calculations 

2 of baseline because you've got some errors 

3 here that are becoming more and more apparent 

4 as you move through on Class A. 

5 MR. JASINSKI: Sam Jasinski. 

6 Just for the record, those 

7 California Energy Commission numbers were used 

8 in our analysis. They can be -- you can find 

9 them in Chapter 3 of the TSD. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

11 Thank you for that. 

12 Andrew. 

13 MR. deLASKI: I do have a comment. 

14 Mike, I thought I heard you say, and this is 

15 reaching back a little bit -- correct me if 

16 I'm wrong -- that the TSL chose for a Class B 

17 TSL-3 was the entire levels were NPV negative. 

18 MR. SCOTT: That's correct. 

19 MR. deLASKI: And I would note 

20 that that's true at the seven percent discount 

21 rate, but not true at the three percent 

22 discount rate. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 144

1 MR. SCOTT: That's also correct. 

2 MR. deLASKI: And that there's no 

3 reason that one should be predisposed to 

4 emphasize one or the other. I would argue 

5 that the actual cost of capital the Department 

6 chose for the purchase of the machine was 

7 lower than seven percent so that the three 

8 percent rate should be considered in the 

9 Department's analysis and is required to be 

10 considered by OMB. 

11 I also would note that the mean 

12 LCC is positive at TSL-4. So that not only is 

13 those two economic indicators are at a 

14 somewhat higher level and that your 

15 presentation at the seven percent rate, you 

16 know, there's no reason you have to start with 

17 just that one rate. 

18 MR. SCOTT: Just one point about 

19 the LCC analysis. I'd have to look back at it 

20 myself to be sure of this, but note that if 

21 you're bringing LCC into the calculations by 

22 TSL level, one thing the Department likes to 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 145

1 look at is the proportion of potential 

2 purchasers of the machine who show a net gain 

3 or show a net loss on an LCC basis. 

4 Recall that I said we do a lot of 

5 this on a distributed basis with probability 

6 distributions, and so we do get some scatter. 

7 MR. deLASKI: I'm looking at the 

8 scatter right here, 80 percent, and that's it. 

9 MR. SCOTT: Okay. 

10 MR. deLASKI: So that to me points 

11 to pretty strong evidence that TSL-4 is at a 

12 higher level as being an appropriate level for 

13 those based on basically all of the economic 

14 criteria except this. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: You've anticipated 

16 where we're going with the agenda. You can 

17 see on Slide 31 that the Department of Energy 

18 seeks comments specifically on proposed trial 

19 standard level TSL-6 for Class A, TSL-3 for 

20 Class B. So let's hear any additional 

21 comments on those. 

22 MR. LLENZA: I just wanted to make 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 146

1 a comment. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Charles Llenza. 

3 MR. LLENZA: Any of our numbers 

4 that you may have some kind of disagreements 

5 like in the trending, we would like your 

6 comments specifically addressing, if we've 

7 made some errors in your opinion, because what 

8 we would like to do is look at them and if 

9 we've made an error we would like to correct 

10 them for the final. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Steve. 

12 MR. COUSINS: Right, and that's on 

13 our agenda for this afternoon, isn't it? I'm 

14 looking at the discussion at 1:45 on the TSL 

15 and I guess we can provide written comment on. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Right, right. So 

17 we're ahead of schedule. 

18 (Laughter.) 

19 MR. COUSINS: Are you saying we 

20 can discuss that now? 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 

22 MR. LLENZA: Yes, we can. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 147

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Steve 

2 Cousins, go ahead. 

3 MR. COUSINS: Well, you know, I 

4 heard the comment. I think Sam made it that 

5 in large measure we refer to California energy 

6 numbers and other publicly available numbers 

7 to help establish the relationships in the 

8 TSLs. 

9 I would submit that those numbers 

10 that you're looking at don't represent an 

11 apples-to-apples comparison, particularly 

12 because, well, one of the reasons you 

13 elaborated on this morning, which was the 

14 light level between an A and a B are 

15 dramatically different. 

16 Also, the test methods that's 

17 used, ASHRAE 32.1, doesn't reflect an apple18 to-apple comparison between the types of 

19 machines because the ASHRAE 32.1 does not 

20 regulate or dictate the control of the 

21 operating methods for all the powered elements 

22 in the equipment. Well, lighting, for 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 148

1 example. 

2 So you know, there are some drive3 around temperature, but not necessarily around 

4 lighting. So what I'm cautioning us on, we 

5 have to go and take a look at it, but my 

6 caution is that some of the data that we 

7 referred to, for example, may reflect a 

8 machine with all of the powered elements 

9 operating and the data for another machine in 

10 the database may not represent it operating 

11 with all the powered elements energized. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Glen, you 

13 had something? 

14 MR. SELFRIDGE: Steve made a nicer 

15 clarification to my comment. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, good. 

17 MR. ROTH: Are you talking, Steve, 

18 specifically about our ability to turn two of 

19 the three lights off during the test method in 

20 which you would have energy savings during 

21 periods of non-usage where we only turn two 

22 lights off and leave the top light illuminated 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 149

1 on the glass front on a Class A machine? Is 

2 that what you mean where we have power savings 

3 due to that as reflection of the way the test 

4 method is done? 

5 MR. COUSINS: I'm going well 

6 beyond that. I'm also talking about idling 

7 condenser motors, cycling the evaporator motor 

8 at a certain period. So it's not just 

9 lighting. It's also the other motors that are 

10 involved. 

11 MR. ROTH: But as long as it stays 

12 within the ASHRAE 32.1 and keeping product at 

13 36 degrees plus or minus one degree and all 

14 the specifications, that's all available to be 

15 able to do as long as it does not have the 

16 ability to turn off. You can't have an 

17 operator override the system and be able to 

18 turn the system off. That's all part of 

19 saving energy, isn't it? 

20 I can't understand why -- 

21 MR. COUSINS: Because Nina will 

22 jump up and tell you that a million control 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 150

1 schemes are patented. We have patents around 

2 control schemes on operating fans, and 

3 operating lights. So the availability of 

4 being able to manipulate some of these things 

5 to achieve energy benefits is not broadly 

6 available to everyone. 

7 Here's the base of what I'm 

8 looking at here. Here's the base of what I 

9 want to communicate, and I think Glen made 

10 reference to this when we first started our 

11 discussion. If you look at the refrigeration 

12 element, if you look at the cooling element 

13 between a Type A and a Type B, yeah, 

14 intuitively and if you look at it carefully, 

15 if you look at apples to apples comparison, 

16 the heat load for an A cap is going to be 

17 large or the cooling load for an A is going to 

18 be larger than for a B. 

19 Yet when you look at the 

20 relationships in the TSLs, the expected 

21 results is actually the reverse of that. I'm 

22 not talking about the lighting. I'm just 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 151

1 talking about the cooling load itself. 

2 Light levels are driven by the end 

3 user, and the controls schemes that drive 

4 those are driven in large measure by who owns 

5 IP. So when I look at these numbers, they 

6 don't make sense to me. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Trent, go ahead. 

8 MR. COUSINS: And I think the 

9 reason why they don't make sense is because 

10 the database is not based on apples-to-apples 

11 comparisons. 

12 MR. ROTH: When I first looked at 

13 the numbers, we heard a lot of comments and 

14 tried to understand are they correct or not? 

15 I think they make very good sense, and I'm 

16 trying to understand why, and I'll try to give 

17 you a comparison of why I think they did. I'm 

18 going to have to walk through some math 

19 equations, but it's not too hard. 

20 When you look at a stack, we're 

21 going to use our 504 stack unit. It's our 

22 closed front, Class B machine. We used to 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 152

1 have a formula based on ENERGY STAR where we 

2 used can capacity which we changed to cubic 

3 capacity. Again, the only variable that 

4 changed and determines the threshold in which 

5 one of these units needs to achieve is the 

6 capacity of the machine. It used to be the 

7 can capacity and now it's the cubic capacity. 

8 But that is the variable today 

9 that choose what threshold you have to meet. 

10 What I tried to do is say, okay, 

11 when is the comparison to a stack unit now 

12 that we changed this in comparison to the 

13 glass. When I look up 504 or our stack unit 

14 with 504 cans, it has very high can 

15 capacities. So the pressure will be pretty 

16 high in the Tier 2 ENERGY STAR levels. 

17 And when you look at a cubic 

18 capacity comparison compared to the numbers 

19 that we have in a glass front, it's half the 

20 capacity. So our threshold number is 

21 extremely lower because of that. 

22 Now, I understand the argument 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 153

1 that we're only cooling one-third. We're not 

2 really only cooling. We're keep one-third at 

3 36 plus or minus one degree, but the upper 

4 two-thirds of that cabinet is still pull heat 

5 through induction or pulling that heat out of 

6 there. So immediately focusing the air flow 

7 on that one piece of it, but our number is 

8 already cut substantially because -- 

9 MR. COUSINS: For your machines 

10 because of the product capacity. I mean, his 

11 machine may hold more capacity for the same 

12 size cabinet. 

13 MR. ROTH: But then I would expect 

14 a relationship between the cubic capacity and 

15 the can capacity to slightly change. You take 

16 a larger machine. I mean, what I was trying 

17 to get at, when you use the formula and you 

18 use cubic capacity rather than the can 

19 capacity as the baseline of the formula, 

20 because we cut it in half with stack units and 

21 you're saying the argument is we're only 

22 cooling one-third which should be easier to 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 154

1 achieve the energy levels, that's already 

2 being done in the formula strictly because the 

3 capacity is cut down. 

4 Our cubic capacity in the 504 is 

5 about 17 cubic feet, where our glass front is 

6 about almost 35 cubic feet. So just 

7 inherently the way the formula is written, it 

8 cuts that threshold floor down. So that's why 

9 the energy levels that we think are fair, and 

10 you add the lighting back in on top of that 

11 that we need to do from the sign face. We 

12 think the numbers are correct. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Glen, please. 

14 MR. SELFRIDGE: I want to address 

15 this to Trent. I believe, having seen both 

16 cabinets and tested both and worked with both 

17 companies -- 

18 (Laughter.) 

19 MR. SELFRIDGE: -- Twenty-seven 

20 years, 20-something years, that you have 

21 perhaps misinterpreted the requirement for the 

22 calculation of refrigerated volume that was 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 155

1 accepted by this entire group at the first 

2 meeting, because your volumes are significant 

3 higher than that. 

4 As a matter of fact, I don't think 

5 the study was provided by you particularly, 

6 but within the CSA 804 new review over the 

7 last couple of years, your people supplied 

8 test data anonymously with the volumes, and it 

9 worked out to formula that was accepted by the 

10 Canadians at this point under the new 804 

11 standard that clearly show what everybody else 

12 happens to know to be the truth that the Type 

13 B machine is inherently going to use less 

14 energy. 

15 MR. ROTH: I'll address that. 

16 MR. COUSINS: Based on the data 

17 I've seen, yes. 

18 MR. SELFRIDGE: Huh? 

19 MR. COUSINS: Based on the data 

20 that we've seen. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve is talking 

22 about the data, and now Trent, back to you. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 156

1 MR. ROTH: I mean, we don't see 

2 that. Our glass fronts are significantly more 

3 efficient than our stack units. We've posted 

4 the EPA on large glass front 3.95 kilowatts an 

5 hour. 

6 MR. COUSINS: Yeah, I don't deny 

7 that. They are more efficient, but that 

8 doesn't mean they use less energy because of 

9 the required cooling load. 

10 MR. ROTH: Our glass front holds 

11 405 cans. Our stack unit holds 504. Our 

12 glass front is significantly, I mean a 

13 kilowatt and a half less energy. 

14 MR. COUSINS: But what I'm saying 

15 is for that same volumetric capacity there are 

16 machines that will hold more packages than 

17 your machine will hold, and there's a larger 

18 heat load as a result. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: But isn't that true 

20 with -- for the record I want to clarify. 

21 Trent, Steve, Trent, Steve, now back to Glen. 

22 Go ahead. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 157

1 MR. SELFRIDGE: One last comment 

2 and I think I can move on. I believe that the 

3 numbers that you have published with EPA 

4 include the ASHRAE test number where you're 

5 using the automatic management system. 

6 MR. ROTH: Trent. 

7 That is correct. What we've done 

8 is we have three lights in our glass front. 

9 We have a top light and we have two right-hand 

10 lights. We turn those two lights off during 

11 the test method because it is factor set that 

12 if there's a period of non-usage, those lights 

13 will go off. 

14 The lighting though, the majority 

15 of the glass fronts in the marketplace today 

16 are ours. We're going back in the period. 

17 They only had one light in there. We added 

18 two lights when we came up with our new 

19 design. So we didn't decrease the lighting to 

20 what normally was in there. We just increased 

21 the lights in our current machine today to 

22 allow similar test methods as what we do with 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 158

1 computer screens today. When there's non2 usage, it will turn off. 

3 So then those are included on 

4 there, but the lighting is similar to what we 

5 had in lighting a number of years ago in all 

6 of the glass fronts that we had. 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: Glen. 

8 MR. ROTH: But it does account 

9 towards others who are able to do that. 

10 MR. SELFRIDGE: One last comment 

11 on that clarification. I have no disagreement 

12 with what Dixie is doing that's allowed on the 

13 32 months period. But in the question of 

14 agreeing or disagreeing, in fact, we may have 

15 to go there. 

16 But the point is that you take our 

17 Type A machine, pull the lights out of it 

18 entirely and it consumes three and a half 

19 kilowatt hours a day. And I think we got it 

20 rated as a 5-6 or something. So the 

21 differences in the lighting and all of this is 

22 gushing, hits around the assumptions that 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 159

1 might have gone into these volume calculations 

2 on the type A machine being skewed. Okay? 

3 MR. COUSINS: Yeah, right. 

4 MR. SELFRIDGE: Because they heard 

5 me. 

6 MR. COUSINS: Well, yeah, that's 

7 what I said. Steve Cousins. 

8 That's where we don't really have 

9 an apples-to-apples comparison with the 

10 numbers that have been used to develop these 

11 relationships because there's a more focused, 

12 more attention and more development on the 

13 Type A machines, and the operational schemes 

14 around it. You know, it makes me question 

15 what we have here, and I think what we would 

16 have to do, at least what I would have to do 

17 in providing comments before the written 

18 period is over which is to point where I think 

19 are the specific problems in the data set. 

20 MR. BROOKMAN: In the 

21 comparability? 

22 MR. COUSINS: Yeah, and how we 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 160

1 should address that. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Trent. 

3 MR. ROTH: This is Trent. 

4 I just have one question. It 

5 might be directed toward Navigant Consulting 

6 or some DOE, but I don't look at these 

7 thresholds of where our equipment is today. I 

8 mean, I know where we are today. I know where 

9 we stand because you know we've done those 

10 depositions, but isn't the goal for us not to 

11 -- to include all of the equipment where we 

12 are today, accept that standard and let's move 

13 forward? 

14 I think we've wasted three years 

15 of trying to get where we're at today. I 

16 mean, if we're just going to say that we need 

17 to do this threshold and everybody agrees we 

18 need it, everybody is happy, it all falls in 

19 with the same correct number today, then I 

20 think we wasted three years. I mean, where 

21 are we going to be three years from now? We 

22 haven't looked at a lot of things to drive 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 161

1 energy reduction down. We really haven't done 

2 anything seeing if you've got stacks at all or 

3 Class B. We've done very little for Class A 

4 so far. 

5 It all comes back down to cost 

6 later on. 

7 PARTICIPANT: Short equation. 

8 MR. ROTH: And how much do you 

9 need to add to get it down there? 

10 But I don't think we're looking at 

11 everything it needs today. I think it's all 

12 in the baseline, but are we really looking at 

13 where we're going to be three years from now? 

14 That's the question I have. What are these 

15 regulations based on? 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Do we want to -- 

17 Charles? 

18 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

19 Llenza, Department of Energy. 

20 The Department has identified a 

21 path to get there. It does not mean that the 

22 industry does not find other paths to get 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 162

1 there, and so what the Department is saying is 

2 that we see a path to get there and basically 

3 the industry can either use that path or 

4 provide an alternative path. 

5 What Trent Roth is saying is true. 

6 The industry can then look at other means of 

7 getting there. We're just saying that this is 

8 one method or one avenue to get there based on 

9 what we see today. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Bob. 

11 MR. McGARRAH: With all due 

12 respect, I think the industry is just there. 

13 We're proposing over this past three or four 

14 years, the standard that's being proposed I'm 

15 hearing, the industry is either there or maybe 

16 a little beyond it, and we're not going to 

17 propose or enact this for three more years, 

18 two years, 2012. 

19 So the industry is -- 

20 PARTICIPANT: Let's for argument 

21 purposes say that you're there. Are you 

22 there, Trent? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 163

1 MR. ROTH: Class A equipment, 

2 ASHRAE 32.1, we see the stack. 

3 MR. McGARRAH: Okay. So you're -- 

4 PARTICIPANT: The stack in the 

5 Class B equipment? 

6 MR. ROTH: No, we don't. We have 

7 to use work in order to achieve the standard, 

8 achieve the Class B standard, and how much 

9 work would we have to do? We haven't even 

10 worked on that yet. So I don't know the 

11 answer to that question in Class B. We 

12 achieve it today on Class A. 

13 MR. McGARRAH: That's what I was 

14 trying to relate to ENERGY STAR Tier 2, 

15 looking at ENERGY STAR Tier 2 for a long time, 

16 and have been making improvements on ENERGY 

17 STAR Tier 2 right up to today, and two years 

18 from now the standard that I'm hearing is 

19 being proposed, which is 20 to 31 percent 

20 better than ENERGY STAR Tier 2, I believe some 

21 of these folks may already be there. 

22 So the standard two years hence 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 164

1 really doesn't meet the mandate of the Energy 

2 Policy and Conservation Act, which is to -- 

3 shall we all say it together? -- achieve 

4 significant energy savings. If we're there 

5 now, the proposal that we have is wide. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Trent, you okay? 

7 Okay. 

8 So any other comments specifically 

9 surrounding trial standard Level 6 for Class A 

10 and trial Standard Level 3 for Class B? 

11 So I think we have covered that 

12 much. Let's move on with the presentation, 

13 LCC subgroup analysis. 

14 MR. SCOTT: Okay. Well, the 

15 purpose of the subgroup analysis is to 

16 evaluate the economic impacts of standards on 

17 customer subgroups. This is people with the 

18 -- they're returning the ?? and paying the 

19 utility bills. So the impact on customer 

20 subgroups who may be disproportionately 

21 compared with the general user population, 

22 actually the original concern for this comes 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 165

1 out of more the residential side of the house 

2 where the concerns for people like low income 

3 purchasers of household equipment. However, 

4 we do it on the commercial side as well. 

5 The DOE identified potentially 

6 disadvantaged businesses and we exemplified 

7 those by independent manufacturing sites that 

8 own BVMs at their sites. So think about a 

9 factory floor somewhere where somebody has 

10 actually bought the vending machines. They 

11 own them and they operate them. 

12 These owners would experience the 

13 highest financing costs of any of the groups 

14 of potential purchasers of the machines that 

15 we were able to locate, and they also, because 

16 they pay a manufacturing facility, they're 

17 going to be typically paying an industrial 

18 energy price rather than a commercial one. 

19 They also have the lowest energy prices and 

20 therefore the lowest savings with the same 

21 energy savings. 

22 And we used our basic LCC 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 166

1 spreadsheet model just for that group of 

2 people to determine the impact on that 

3 customer subgroup, sort of the worst case 

4 group, and we did find that LCC savings and 

5 the simple payback period was -- well, the LCC 

6 savings were lower and the payback periods 

7 longer for that identified customer subgroup. 

8 However, we didn't feel that they 

9 were disproportionately impacted by the 

10 standard. It was not as good, but it wasn't 

11 radically different. That analysis is found 

12 in Chapter 12 of the TSD, and there's also 

13 some discussion of it in the NOPR. 

14 MS. TARLEY: I have a question. 

15 For the benefit of the group, could you state 

16 what is approximate cost of energy to run a 

17 machine per day or per year? Do you know? 

18 MR. SCOTT: I do not. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Gentlemen, the 

20 total amount of energy to run a vending 

21 machine per day or year? 

22 MS. TARLEY: Cost of the energy. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 167

1 I happen to have the numbers. 

2 (Laughter.) 

3 MR. COUSINS: The cost you mean? 

4 MS. TARLEY: Yes, it's the cost. 

5 On the evidence the vending 

6 machine costs somewhere between 58 cents to 94 

7 cents per day. That's the cost of diving the 

8 machine which per year translates to somewhere 

9 between $200 to $380 per year. 

10 MR. SCOTT: Okay. That sounds 

11 about right to us. You're getting nods from 

12 over there at Navigant's table. 

13 MS. TARLEY: Just so we can 

14 understand what's involved. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

16 Have you finished? 

17 MR. SCOTT: Yeah, I'm finished 

18 with that one. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: So comments on LCC 

20 subgroup analysis? And thanks for that date. 

21 Any additional thoughts on LCC? 

22 It's now 1210. Manufacture impact 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 168

1 analysis followed by these other kinds of 

2 analyses. Do you want to break for lunch now 

3 because I think we have -- well, yeah? Do you 

4 want to break for lunch now? 

5 I think people are starting to get 

6 hungry. Okay. So now it's 12:10. We're 

7 going to pause and take an hour for lunch. 

8 Please wear your badges in the building. 

9 A whole bunch of us are going to 

10 head downstairs and go to the cafeteria which 

11 is across the street underneath, get on the 

12 ground floor and go down a long corridor and 

13 then back up to the floors above. 

14 If you try and go out of the 

15 building off campus, you may have a hard time 

16 getting back here in time. So I'd like very 

17 much to encourage people to see the cafeteria. 

18 It's newly renovated. It's looking pretty 

19 good. 

20 PARTICIPANT: Is the food any 

21 better? 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: I don't know if the 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 169

1 food is any better or not, but we'll find out, 

2 won't we? 

3 So we will resume at 1:10. 

4 Thank you. 

5 (Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the 

6 meeting was recessed for lunch, to reconvene 

7 at 1:10 p.m.) 

8

9

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 170

1 AFTERNOON SESSION 

2 (1:19 p.m.) 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: Welcome back. So 

4 what's the verdict? Do you know the food has 

5 improved any? The cafeteria looks better. 

6 What do you think? Maybe the look does it all 

7 by itself. 

8 (Laughter and simultaneous 

9 conversation.) 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So let the 

11 record reflect that people are generally 

12 impressed by the new cafeteria, but we're 

13 still questioning, we're still evaluating the 

14 food. 

15 We're moving on ahead where we 

16 left off with the slides in your packet, and 

17 we are now by my count on Slide 33, 

18 manufacturing impact analysis 

19 MR. KINGMAN: I'm Jeff Kingman 

20 from Navigant Consulting, and this is a 

21 follow-up to the ANOPR presentation where we 

22 presented some of the initial concerns of 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 171

1 manufacturers. 

2 For the NOPR we continue to do 

3 that but also follow through with a full cash 

4 flow analysis to quantify the impacts on the 

5 industry. 

6 The main point of the 

7 manufacturing impact analysis, or MIA, is to 

8 assess the impacts of energy conservation 

9 standards on the BVM manufacturers. For this 

10 DOE relies on a number of sources of 

11 information. 

12 We rely on information provided 

13 from manufacturers and other stakeholders. 

14 Another part of the analysis is the other 

15 analyses that were completed previously like 

16 the engineering and the MIA. 

17 Another point of the MIA is just 

18 to estimate the impacts on manufacturer's 

19 subgroups. This is separate from the LCC 

20 subgroups. The subgroup we analyzed for this 

21 NOPR is small manufacturers, and in order to 

22 determine if a manufacturer is a small 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 172

1 business we used the SBA definition, which 

2 included parent companies and subsidiaries. 

3 For BVM they have to have less than 500 total 

4 employees. 

5 During the MIA process, DOE 

6 attempts to or the contractor attempts to 

7 interview any manufacturer that's interested 

8 in speaking. That includes small businesses 

9 if they are interested as well. 

10 And the third point of the MIA is 

11 to examine the impact of cumulative regulatory 

12 burden on the industry. For this DOE looks at 

13 federal regulations and other regulations that 

14 could potentially affect the manufacturers. 

15 In order to conduct the MIA DOE 

16 uses all available information to develop 

17 manufacturer's financial parameters and the 

18 costs of comply with the standard. These 

19 inputs are then incorporated into the 

20 government regulatory impact model, or GRIM. 

21 The GRIM outputs cash flows for 

22 the analysis period and calculates the impacts 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 173

1 on the industry, which is called the industry 

2 net present value by assembling the discounted 

3 cash flows over the period. This is done for 

4 the base case, which is absent standards, and 

5 for standards cases at each of the trial 

6 standard levels. 

7 And the differences for each TSL 

8 between the base case and standards case, 

9 INPV, is a quantitative representation of the 

10 manufacturer impacts due to standards. 

11 Additionally, the interview 

12 process is used to refine inputs the GRIM and 

13 to develop other subanalysis, such as the 

14 subgroup analysis, cumulative regulatory 

15 burden, and the impacts on employment. 

16 This slide is just an illustration 

17 of the phases that DOE goes through in order 

18 to conduct the MIA. Phase 1 is the part that 

19 was conducted during the ANOPR, which is when 

20 DOE uses publicly available information, such 

21 as SEC 10-K reports and annual reports for 

22 manufacturers to complete a market and 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 174

1 industry profile. 

2 Phase 2 and 3 are what we 

3 conducted during the NOPR. The first big part 

4 is developing a strawman GRIM, which is using 

5 the previously available information that's 

6 available publicly and also develop an 

7 interview guide. 

8 During Phase 3 is when DOE's 

9 contractor actually conducts the interviews to 

10 develop the other subanalyses, such as the 

11 small business impacts and the cumulative 

12 regulatory burden. And it's also used to 

13 refine some of the GRIM inputs. 

14 And for the MIA presented in the 

15 NOPR, we used two different scenarios in order 

16 to bound the impacts on the industry. To 

17 assess the lower end of the range, we 

18 considered a preservation of gross margin 

19 percent scenario, and that, a single uniform 

20 gross margin percentage mark-up is applied 

21 across all efficiency levels and equipment 

22 classes. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 175

1 In this scenario as product costs 

2 increase with efficiency, the scenario implies 

3 that the absolute dollar margin will also 

4 increase, and to assess the higher end of the 

5 range of potential impacts, DOE considered the 

6 preservation of operating profit scenario, and 

7 in this scenario DOE models manufacturer 

8 concerns about the over capacity of the 

9 industry and the inability to set some of the 

10 prices they charge our customers. 

11 In this scenario, manufacturers 

12 spend the necessary investments required to 

13 convert the facilities to produce the 

14 standards of required equipment. Despite this 

15 effort operating profit does not change from 

16 the base case and decreases as a percentage of 

17 revenues. 

18 The equipment and capital 

19 conversion costs necessary to reach each TSL 

20 are included in both mark-up scenarios. 

21 And at the beginning of the 

22 presentation, DOE requested comment on a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 176

1 number of issues that related to the MIA, and 

2 I think we can go back now and revisit some of 

3 those. 

4 Should I go back in the slides? 

5 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, that will be 

6 fine. 

7 MR. KINGMAN: The first issue was 

8 just any comments on the impact of industry 

9 net present value at the proposed standard 

10 levels. 

11 The next one is what impact TSL-6 

12 could have interested parties, including small 

13 businesses. Another one was whether or not 

14 the proposed standards risk any industry 

15 consolidation. 

16 And a final one was how small 

17 business manufacturers will be affected due to 

18 new energy conservation standards. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: So there you can 

20 see a series of questions. We touched on some 

21 of these at least, I think. So maybe we could 

22 start with the first block there, industry 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 177

1 NPV, and comment on that. 

2 Please, Nina. 

3 MS. TARLEY: Nina Tarley, Pepsi Co. 

4 Yes, the comment I want to make is 

5 just a little bit of history of the vending 

6 machine when it comes to a logical assumption. 

7 Before 2004, vending machines were energy 

8 hogs because nobody paid attention to energy. 

9 As soon as ENERGY STAR started reviews of 

10 Tier 1, there was a humongous effort and not 

11 to say that Pepsi Co. made it mandatory that 

12 all vending machines meet the Tier 1 ENERGY 

13 STAR, and they all complied. The result if I 

14 recall correctly, somewhere around 22, 23 

15 percent energy. 

16 Then in the middle of 2007 the 

17 ENERGY STAR introduced Tier 2, and again Pepsi 

18 Co. led the industry by mandating that all of 

19 our vending machines meet the Tier 2, and that 

20 was tough. Getting to Tier 1 was relatively 

21 easy. Getting from Tier 1 to Tier 2 was a 

22 massive effort, cost a lot of money and 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 178

1 energy, no pun intended. 

2 But as a result, another 28 

3 percent reduction in energy consumption was 

4 achieved. 

5 MS. PINTO: Excuse me. An 

6 additional 28? 

7 MS. TARLEY: That's correct. 

8 That's correct. That was a major, major 

9 effort between the Tier 1 to Tier 2. So 

10 overall if you compare the current model 

11 versus 2003-2004, we saved 51 percent energy. 

12 Pepsi Co. did. 

13 So I just wanted to give this 

14 background so everybody understands that now 

15 that people are talking another 20, well, 

16 let's say, anywhere between ten to 30 percent 

17 reduction in energy consumption, we're talking 

18 about probably cost and effort. 

19 And also not quite related, but 

20 some of you might have heard there is another 

21 nail in the coffin of the vending industry. 

22 Regulation is being discussed as we speak 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 179

1 about mandating nutrition labels on the 

2 vending machines that will specify the caloric 

3 effect of every single item in the vending 

4 machine. This is being discussed and we 

5 expect to -- Mike might have some more updated 

6 information, but it is going, I believe, to 

7 Congress and then to Senate for approval, 

8 which every vending machine will require to 

9 have a label stating -- 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Not on the bottle 

11 itself, but on the actual machine? 

12 MS. TARLEY: Correct, on the 

13 outside of the vending machine. That is 

14 correct, yes. So anyway. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So that's 

16 interesting. Thanks for that history. 

17 Appreciate that. 

18 So then you can see the specific 

19 questions that DOE would like you to comment 

20 on. Maybe we can start with why the private 

21 market has not been able to capture the energy 

22 benefits proposed. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 180

1 Nina has responded to that, but 

2 that's specifically in TSL-6, and whether and 

3 to what extent parties estimate they'll be 

4 able to transfer cost of implementing TL-6 on 

5 to consumers. Maybe we could start with that 

6 one and do both of those two. 

7 What do you thing? Bob? 

8 MR. McGARRAH: I'll take a shot at 

9 it. I don't think you're going to be able to 

10 do it because the energy savings goes to the 

11 person that pays the electric bill. The 

12 utility programs that run programs for energy 

13 saving equipment, the incentive dollars goes 

14 to the person who pays the energy bill. The 

15 manufacturers, machine owners, the Cokes and 

16 Pepsis of the world get zero share of that 

17 savings benefit, which is the reason the 

18 machines have been energy hogs for so long, 

19 because there was nothing to benefit even the 

20 manufacturer or the machine owner. So who 

21 cares what the gas mileage is if I'm not 

22 buying the gas? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 181

1 So until we can get something 

2 going there -- I shouldn't say "until" -- but 

3 when we get something going there, then these 

4 very stark, scary, under a million vending 

5 machines in the marketplace in 12 years, maybe 

6 that won't happen, but if there's a financial 

7 incentive to the machine owner and the machine 

8 manufacturer to get an energy efficient 

9 machine, and I don't say get the benefit, but 

10 share the benefit so that there's a mutual 

11 benefit to the person that pays the electric 

12 bill obviously and a benefit to the folks that 

13 run and build the machines. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve. 

15 MR. COUSINS: For a long time the 

16 cost increases to the system have not been 

17 transferred on to the consumer. Material cost 

18 increases, cost increases to the commodities 

19 or the products that are sold to the 

20 commodities. 

21 I guess the point I'm making is 

22 this. Any up charge or any increased cost 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 182

1 because of more energy efficient technologies 

2 that are put into the machine, that cost will 

3 not be transferred over. 

4 Historically the industry just 

5 doesn't -- we haven't had the means to 

6 actually be able to transfer cost or move cost 

7 downstream. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: You change your 

9 calculation about how many bottles or how much 

10 product needs to be sold and keep it 

11 profitable. 

12 MR. COUSINS: Essentially, yes. 

13 That's what's happening, and that's one of the 

14 things that's driving less and less machines 

15 in the marketplace. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Yes, Trent. 

17 MR. ROTH: Trent Roth, Dixie18 Narco. 

19 I'm just trying to understand 

20 this. You're asking the added cost it will 

21 take us to get to TL-6, how would that be 

22 passed on to the -- 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 183

1 MR. KINGMAN: Yeah, I think this 

2 question is asking from starting from the 

3 manufacturer down the distribution chain how 

4 those costs will be passed along. 

5 MR. ROTH: Well, for A model, a 

6 Class A, we didn't have any additional costs 

7 in getting to that from where we were, from 

8 the last one. We didn't pass on any costs. 

9 Whatever costs there were, and I'm not sure 

10 what that was, we did not pass any costs on in 

11 Class A. We kept it at the same price to our 

12 customers. 

13 MR. COUSINS: So there's no cost 

14 difference between Tier 1 and Tier 2 Class A. 

15 MR. ROTH: From a Tier 2 to go 

16 into where the NOPR is from us? No. 

17 PARTICIPANT: Somebody get that. 

18 MR. ROTH: But that would mean how 

19 much added cost? I mean there wasn't a lot 

20 that we had to do to get to that piece. I 

21 mean, that's saying Tier 1 to Tier 2, yeah, we 

22 had to make changes. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 184

1 MS. TARLEY: Yeah, that was 

2 Steve's question. 

3 MR. ROTH: Sorry, yeah. 

4 MR. SELFRIDGE: Actually Tier 0 to 

5 Tier 1 was fairly substantial when you 

6 consider the up charges for ECM, an operator 

7 paying for special compressors and all the 

8 other things that went into the magnetic 

9 ballast. The accelerator cost, it cost us a 

10 lot. 

11 MR. ROTH: It did. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: From Tier 1 to Tier 

13 2, and so, Glen, thank you that. I just 

14 wanted to acknowledge the last comment was 

15 from Glen. 

16 MR. ROTH: It did cost us more. 

17 This is Trent. It did cost us. I'm just 

18 trying to understand the question. 

19 MR. HORNQUIST: The question on 

20 the table is -- this is Edwin Hornquist -- is 

21 at the TSL level. It's not Tier 1, Tier 2. 

22 It's the incremental cost from TSL-1 through 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 185

1 6. 

2 And you're saying that there is no 

3 cost? 

4 MR. ROTH: No, I corrected myself. 

5 There is a cost because we did have to 

6 implement ECM. I was trying to understand the 

7 question. We did have to incur costs trying 

8 to get to that level. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: In this case TSL-6 

10 is ENERGY STAR 2, Tier 2? 

11 MR. KINGMAN: No, it's the 

12 baseline. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: It's the baseline 

14 Sorry. 

15 MR. LLENZA: Charles Llenza. Tier 

16 1 is the baseline. Sorry. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. We want to 

18 move to the question you see there at the top 

19 of the screen. 

20 MS. PINTO: Excuse me, Doug. This 

21 is Francine Pinto. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 186

1 MS. PINTO: I want to go back to 

2 this other point about the impacts on 

3 manufacturers. I didn't feel like I got a 

4 clear answer that I can understand. 

5 If the TSLs that are proposed, the 

6 proposals, were to become the final rule, what 

7 is the impact on manufacturers? I just want 

8 to get that sense from you all. This will be 

9 finalized the way it is proposed. How does it 

10 impact you? 

11 MR. ROTH: In three years? 

12 MS. PINTO: In the three years, 

13 right. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead. 

15 MR. ROTH: Trent from Dixie-Narco. 

16 It goes for both classes. I'm not 

17 sure what we have to do to get to Class B 

18 because we haven't tested the equipment, and 

19 I'm not sure what we have to do. I don't know 

20 an answer to that at this point. 

21 MS. PINTO: Okay. 

22 MR. ROTH: Class A particularly 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 187

1 for us, nothing. We're there. 

2 MS. PINTO: Okay. 

3 MR. COUSINS: Steve Cousins here, 

4 Coca-Cola. 

5 With regard to what our system 

6 does and the impact that that has on these 

7 manufacturers is closely connected to cost 

8 because historically our available capital and 

9 the capital investment has either been fixed 

10 or is shrinking. 

11 So even though you can achieve 

12 these numbers technologically with A, for 

13 example, you know you can hit the target, the 

14 cost implications may have some impact on the 

15 volume that we purchase. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Trent. 

17 MR. ROTH: The only question I'd 

18 say is if you're buying them today I don't 

19 know where the change is taking place. What 

20 you currently are buying today are the ones 

21 that we pushed down 

22 MR. COUSINS: So you're assuring 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 188

1 me it's not going to be any cost increases 

2 over the next three years? 

3 MR. ROTH: Not at all. 

4 MR. COUSINS: All right. Write 

5 that down for me. 

6 MR. ROTH: Not at all am I 

7 assuring that, but it has nothing to do with 

8 what we've done. The machine, we made a 

9 transition this year and took it to this new 

10 level. We did not have a price increase this 

11 year as a result. 

12 MR. BROOKMAN: Glen. 

13 MR. SELFRIDGE: Yeah. Assuming as 

14 I say Dixie-Narco has done this basically the 

15 way they said they did here on the energy 

16 management system, it's not an expensive add 

17 to the existing machine, then we can pass it 

18 on at substantially no cost provided there was 

19 no intellectual property hanging back into the 

20 background with that petition, but what that 

21 level does do to you, it leaves you with 

22 basically no lighting machine, no nothing else 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 189

1 to play with as you move on down the road five 

2 years from now, ten years from now as you have 

3 with any other one. 

4 You are actually taking functional 

5 equipment and you are disclosing it. Okay? 

6 So to get to the new machine, there is going 

7 to be some cost associated with that one way 

8 or the other, perhaps not greatly huge at 

9 least in our case. But unless we would adopt 

10 the energy management system which we can do 

11 if there's no intellectual property; we could 

12 get to that Level 6. 

13 But it's very misleading because 

14 you adopt the ENERGY STAR? It takes out a 

15 substantial component and nobody in the world 

16 knows about it, except this little room. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Francine. 

18 MS. PINTO: When you say it takes 

19 out a substantial component -- Francine Pinto 

20 -- what does that mean? 

21 MR. SELFRIDGE: What that means is 

22 the machines have lights and if you walk up to 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 190

1 a machine, this is the mass run Type A 

2 machine, and the lights are off when you can't 

3 see the project. 

4 Number two, you believe the 

5 machine is not functioning. The beverage 

6 companies lose their visibility if you want a 

7 little fancy thing. 

8 MS. PINTO: So are you saying -- 

9 this is Francine Pinto -- that in order to get 

10 to the proposed level you have to eliminate 

11 all the lighting? 

12 MR. SELFRIDGE: You have to 

13 eliminate the lighting for the period of the 

14 ASHRAE test. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: That is the 

16 manufacturer wanting to follow on. 

17 Trent, go ahead. 

18 MR. ROTH: I'm just trying to 

19 clarify. Currently today in our machine we 

20 have three lights in our machine, fluorescent 

21 lights. During a period it can be down one 

22 hour with a period of inactivity. Two to 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 191

1 three lights shut off. The top light remains 

2 illuminated. 

3 The top light is the same lighting 

4 we've had on glass fronts prior to what came 

5 out with the BevMax 2 back in 2004. On every 

6 other glass front we ever produced out there, 

7 and I can say there's more of those out there 

8 than every other glass front made by every 

9 other manufacturer combined in the marketplace 

10 today with just one light at the top, it did 

11 not inhibit sale. It did not -- 

12 MR. SELFRIDGE: And the door 

13 light? 

14 MR. ROTH: The doorlight, that was 

15 inside. That didn't illuminate anything. 

16 That was just for -- 

17 MR. SELFRIDGE: Merchandising. 

18 MR. ROTH: Yeah, for 

19 merchandising, but it did not have anything to 

20 do with lighting the interior of the cabinet. 

21 It's the same lighting we have today when we 

22 go down to two lights. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 192

1 So we made a very clear effort to 

2 make sure that when we turn the two lights off 

3 the consumer would not be turned away from 

4 that product thinking the product was on order 

5 because that wouldn't do us any good as well. 

6 So, yes, we do two, three lights 

7 on, but I need to be very clear that we did 

8 that. We made a conscious effort to split the 

9 ballast to be able to make that happen, but 

10 that was one way we could do to insure that 

11 during periods such as, in fact, in schools 

12 when the machine is not being used that we're 

13 saving energy, and that is part of what the 

14 ASHRAE does allow. 

15 That is what we do. 

16 MR. COUSINS: And there's nothing 

17 wrong with that. 

18 MS. PINTO: No, I'm just trying to 

19 understand. 

20 MR. COUSINS: Yes. The ASHRAE 

21 methodology does allow that, but the ASHRAE, 

22 as a result, the ASHRAE methodology does not 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 193

1 reflect the real life use of the machine. 

2 Because if two of the three lights are off in 

3 actual use, that means that the machine is 

4 really not being used. If the machine is not 

5 being used, we're taking the machine out of 

6 trade. 

7 In actual use in accounts where 

8 we're making money, those lights are going to 

9 be fully operational, and not just the lights; 

10 any other powered element whether it be, you 

11 know, the evaporator fan, for example. 

12 Everything is going to be fully operational. 

13 So the way the ASHRAE methodology 

14 is right now is that if you have the correct 

15 control scheme, it may make the machine appear 

16 to be efficient. Whereas in actual use it's 

17 not really as efficient. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: So in school 

19 applications, in warehouses where they're only 

20 doing one shift, it's eight or ten hours or 

21 something like that, and then the machine is 

22 not in active use. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 194

1 MR. COUSINS: And is a minority of 

2 our accounts. 

3 MR. BROOKMAN: I see. 

4 MR. COUSINS: But my point is that 

5 there's nothing wrong with what you guys have 

6 done, but the ? is not making it because that 

7 doesn't reflect how the machine is being used, 

8 but ASHRAE testing will allow that at this 

9 time. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. So, 

11 Francine, does that answer your question? 

12 MS. PINTO: Just to reflect back 

13 what I'm hearing, and correct me if I'm wrong, 

14 so there's effort involved in meeting these 

15 levels. I know you've already met them, but 

16 I'm not hearing any overwhelming major 

17 problem. Am I getting that right or not? 

18 MR. HORNQUIST: I have a question. 

19 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's let Glen 

20 respond first. 

21 MR. SELFRIDGE: I just want to say 

22 one. As I've said, and I'll just repeat one 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 195

1 more time, Trent is right and they are right. 

2 I said this morning if we have to meet that 

3 level we can do exactly what Dixie is doing, 

4 and it has not been discussed today. What I 

5 want to know from all of this is if the 

6 legislation goes forward, if we can do that 

7 and Dixie doesn't have some kind of pending 

8 operations or whatever that would suddenly 

9 come up to doing a similar thing. Because we 

10 have a need and now we have an answer. Our 

11 lights are on all the time. But this is a 

12 fairly sticky one going with control lights on 

13 and paying for the refrigeration. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: Let me ask this. I 

15 may be stepping beyond the scope of this. Is 

16 Dixie-Narco able to say where there is a 

17 patent pending? That's relevant to this, 

18 isn't it? 

19 MR. ROTH: If we turn the lights 

20 off, I don't know the answer. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

22 MS. PINTO: So it is important. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 196

1 MR. BROOKMAN: That's why I asked 

2 it, yeah. Let me go to these two, Andy, just 

3 for a second. Go ahead, Steve. 

4 MR. COUSINS: Yeah. The only 

5 point I wanted to elaborate on, and Glen 

6 touched upon it already. I was saying earlier 

7 and challenging Trent. If achieving the TSLs 

8 is done by going to more costlier energy 

9 efficient component versus non-cost involved 

10 control schemes, that that's -- let me back 

11 up. 

12 I'm not sure how you can hit the 

13 targets. Okay? I don't know if you can hit 

14 it with more efficient components or if you 

15 need to do something beyond that, but the way 

16 my system behaves is that the equipment is 

17 more expensive. We just buy less of it, and 

18 if the only way we can hit these target is by 

19 more efficient components which are costlier, 

20 then the net result is we'll probably buy less 

21 equipment. 

22 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. You're got 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 197

1 pretty much a fixed budget or something, 

2 capital expenditure. 

3 Edwin, I dropped you out. Do you 

4 still? 

5 MR. HORNQUIST: Well, yeah, it was 

6 just a comment and a question. I'm wondering 

7 if what you're saying, Steve, is that a very 

8 small portion of your equipment as operated is 

9 the market that you serve, would benefit from 

10 this control scheme. 

11 MR. COUSINS: No, I wouldn't put 

12 it that way because if you look at the 

13 equipment that we have, we use sophisticated 

14 control schemes in the majority of our cold 

15 drink equipment, but we look at guaranteed 

16 energy savings versus potential or candidate 

17 energy savings. 

18 If there's an elaborate control 

19 scheme with the equipment, that doesn't 

20 guarantee. If we say, okay, we will become 30 

21 percent more efficient by using this elaborate 

22 control scheme, that's not a guaranteed 30 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 198

1 percent energy savings in the trade, and so 

2 there's no guaranteed savings on the control 

3 algorithm that may not reflect real world. 

4 MR. HORNQUIST: So in this case 

5 you have a scheme that is being used using the 

6 test method, the ASHRAE test method, that 

7 allows for this lighting to be taken down to 

8 approximately a third that would otherwise be 

9 used. 

10 MR. COUSINS: Well, what we find 

11 is that we will with that kind of arrangement, 

12 we will have -- we definitely will have 

13 additional energy savings with that kind of 

14 arrangement, but it may not be the 30 percent 

15 that an ASHRAE test or it may not be the same 

16 extent that the ASHRAE test demonstrated. 

17 Chances are it's going to be something less. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: In the actual 

19 application. 

20 MR. COUSINS: Right. 

21 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew, you're next 

22 in the queue. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 199

1 MR. deLASKI: Yeah, I had a couple 

2 of comments. I think we've heard from the 

3 Department in the NOPR and also in the 

4 comments today that we're stuck with 

5 ASHRAE/ANSI for the moment. You know, final 

6 will come out August 8th, but you know, so 

7 we're kind of stuck with the method for the 

8 moment. 

9 And in my opening comments 

10 remarked that why is there a need to reopen 

11 that method and to make it reflect real world 

12 conditions. I think we're certainly in favor 

13 of that, and there are other technologies, 

14 additional control to help reflect it 

15 accurately with technology benefits. 

16 I had another thought but I've 

17 lost it. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. We'll come 

19 back to you. 

20 Bob. 

21 MR. McGARRAH: To answer 

22 Francine's question about patents -- Bob 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 200

1 McGarrah -- to answer that question, there are 

2 patented products out there today in the 

3 hundreds of thousand numbers for after market 

4 equipment, for pieces of equipment that are in 

5 the marketplace today. Wal-Mart, for example, 

6 has a lot of actually the Pepsi machines with 

7 an after market product that's saving 15 to 30 

8 percent. 

9 Austin Energy, the poster child 

10 for energy efficiency, has purchased tens of 

11 thousands of these after market products for 

12 both vending machines and cooler for energy 

13 savings up to 46 percent, and that's patented 

14 product, but it's available to everyone. 

15 You have the situation here, you 

16 know, if Coke has a patent they're not going 

17 to give it to Pepsi and vice versa because 

18 that's a competitive marketplace advantage. 

19 But there are companies out there 

20 today that have patented products that are 

21 available to everybody. The patent just says 

22 you can't make it in your garage and sell it 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 201

1 to the same people I'm selling it to. 

2 It's available and these products 

3 are well under 100 per unit. 

4 MR. BROOKMAN: We don't know the 

5 full answer to the question is what I'm 

6 hearing. 

7 MR. McGARRAH: So there are 

8 patents -- 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: That's an 

10 illustration there. 

11 MR. McGARRAH: There are patented 

12 products that will get you energy savings if 

13 you run into an IP or intellectual property 

14 issue around some of the things that we're 

15 talking about. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Andrew. 

17 MR. deLASKI: Going back to this 

18 patent issue, when DOE proposed standards for 

19 refrigerators in the '90s, there was an 

20 assumption at one point that the new 

21 refrigerator would use vacuum panels, and DOE 

22 tried to guess, you know, what are the panels 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 202

1 that they would use for complying with various 

2 standards or made their best estimate, and 

3 they admittedly have been wrong. 

4 It's difficult because it's not 

5 until these guys go to work figuring out how 

6 to do this as cheaply as they can to meet the 

7 needs of these guys that you're likely to know 

8 the answer to the question of how you're going 

9 to get there. 

10 Because there's one patent on one 

11 particular way doesn't mean there aren't other 

12 ways to get there. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. 

14 MR. deLASKI: That patent may be 

15 perhaps a cheap way to get there, but it 

16 doesn't mean someone else can't find another 

17 way to get there, and there are probably 

18 multiple paths that haven't even been 

19 conceived of today. 

20 And I think that is proven true on 

21 one standard after the other, that, you know, 

22 we're not going to sit here today and figure 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 203

1 out how they're going to do it. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah, okay. Thank 

3 you. 

4 So the question that I'd like to 

5 push to the fore here is the one you see at 

6 the top of the screen, impact on small 

7 businesses, how small business manufacturers 

8 will be affected due to the new energy 

9 conservation standards as proposed, as 

10 proposed. 

11 Yes, please, and use the 

12 microphone. Please say your name for the 

13 record. 

14 MR. DOOM: Troy Doom, Dixie15 Narco/Crane. 

16 Just one comment of what we've 

17 been talking about so far for Class A has been 

18 relative to glass front. Class B, the study 

19 so far has been relative to stack, although it 

20 does capture other ones. 

21 But the impact relative to the 

22 combination of vending or the snack portions, 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 204

1 there is a whole area in the proposal[page] 

2 26024 that says it should include those, but 

3 the manufacturing base in the detailed 

4 analysis of the study hasn't really included 

5 the impact into that whole arena because snack 

6 machines are a different category. So that 

7 is, I think, an open issue that will need to 

8 be studied further. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 

10 I'm not sure I got that. Did you 

11 get that? 

12 Would you repeat the last part of 

13 that statement? Because I didn't follow it 

14 for some -- 

15 MR. DOOM: Yeah. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Use the microphone, 

17 please. 

18 MR. DOOM: Yeah, I guess it's on 

19 page is it 26024? It shows basically a 

20 comment about combination vending, which 

21 essentially is a snack machine that has cooled 

22 the lower portion. So that type of system 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 205

1 hasn't been fully analyzed as the glass front 

2 and stack has and is not heavily purchased by 

3 Coke and Pepsi. It's a whole other set of 

4 manufacturers. 

5 But it's saying that that is going 

6 to be rolled into this proposal. So that's 

7 really an open issue as far as industry impact 

8 and that whole industry base that would need 

9 to be further analyzed. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. I 

11 appreciate that. Okay. Thank you. 

12 Yes, please. Use the microphone. 

13 MR. CHASSEROT: Marc Chasserot 

14 from shecco. 

15 I just have a basic question. If 

16 you're going to have these higher standards 

17 that are going to force manufacturers to 

18 improve their systems with more costly systems 

19 and they're now saying they don't really have 

20 the money for that, and yet at the same time 

21 they're not the ones that are going to reap 

22 the benefits from more efficient systems 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 206

1 because they're not the ones paying energy 

2 bills, what is the Department of Energy going 

3 to do in terms of incentivizing this so that 

4 they have an incentive to actually introduce 

5 these new products? 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: I don't know 

7 whether the Department wishes to. 

8 MS. PINTO: Well, I mean, Francine 

9 Pinto. Our authority is limited to 

10 promulgating the standards. 

11 MR. BROOKMAN: DOE would not take 

12 the lead role in creating incentives. 

13 MS. TARLEY: So you have the stick 

14 without the carrot. 

15 MS. PINTO: We don't have that 

16 authority. 

17 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah. Okay. Thank 

18 you. That was a clear answer. 

19 So then do we get other comments 

20 on how small business manufacturers will be 

21 affected due to industry conservation 

22 standards? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 207

1 Yes, Marc, go ahead. 

2 MR. CHASSEROT: Can I ask again? 

3 Who would be the appropriate authority then 

4 for that? 

5 MS. TARLEY: Utility companies. 

6 MS. HORNQUIST: Utility companies. 

7 MS. TARLEY: States. 

8 MR. HORNQUIST: Congress. 

9 MS. TARLEY: Congress. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. I don't think 

11 anybody has got additional to say on impact. 

12 So shall we then return to the slides? Yeah? 

13 Aris wishes to address the 

14 combination machines issue. 

15 MS. PINTO: Oh, and I want to 

16 answer. This is Francine Pinto again. 

17 But we do care about the impact. 

18 That's why we have these meetings. We put out 

19 the analysis. The decision makers -- we're 

20 the staff, but the decision makers have to 

21 weigh benefits and burdens. We present them 

22 with all sides of the issue so that they can 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 208

1 make an informed decision, and that's why the 

2 process does take time and why we have all of 

3 these analyses, and we try to get as much of 

4 your input as possible. 

5 So I don't want to make it sound 

6 like we don't care about it because we 

7 obviously do, but also have our authority that 

8 we've been given by Congress. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Aris, do you want 

10 to address the combination units? 

11 MR. MARANTAN: Yeah, regarding 

12 combination machines, I believe what we have 

13 in the notice identifies the combination 

14 machines as covered in this rulemaking because 

15 of the basis definition that was provided in 

16 the legislation. 

17 So if the vending machine has a 

18 component that vends bottles or canned 

19 beverages, it's considered refrigerated, 

20 bottled or canned beverages; it's considered a 

21 vending machine covered in this rulemaking. 

22 And so combination machines, DOE 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 209

1 feels that that's covered. To address the 

2 idea that it has both snacks and beverages, 

3 the idea is that the standards equations takes 

4 care of that because only a portion of that 

5 vending machine, a smaller portion of that 

6 vending machine is refrigerated by the 

7 refrigeration system, not the entire inside of 

8 the case. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: Questions on that? 

10 Any follow-on? 

11 MR. MARANTAN: I welcome any 

12 feedback on that. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Steve. 

14 MR. COUSINS: Steve Cousins. 

15 It's not really an issue for Coke 

16 since we don't purchase these kind of 

17 machines, but if you have a very small 

18 refrigerated capacity because the packages 

19 that you're vending in that snack machine is 

20 pretty small, the limitations with what's 

21 used, what's available by way of refrigeration 

22 component, I know it may have to be studied, 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 210

1 but it may be a situation where the 

2 efficiencies are going to be -- you're going 

3 to be less efficient just because of the 

4 availability of the refrigeration component. 

5 I don't know if that's true or not, but I 

6 would imagine that would be a factor that 

7 would enter into this. 

8 MR. BROOKMAN: That configuration 

9 may diminish the inherent efficiency. 

10 MR. COUSINS: You have to end up 

11 using a larger refrigeration system because 

12 the small one is not commercially available 

13 for the true load that's there. 

14 I don't know if that's the case or 

15 not. Maybe these guys will have a better feel 

16 for it, but that would have an impact I would 

17 guess. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Please say your 

19 name again. 

20 MR. DOOM: Yeah, Troy Doom, Dixie21 Narco/Crane. 

22 Yeah, I mean, one, I guess with a 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 211

1 smaller refrigeration area than the total 

2 kilowatts per day requirement is going to be, 

3 you know, less than the other vending 

4 machines, but I think my point more was that 

5 whole arena, the snack machines, the supply 

6 base, you have your, you know, AMS, USI. 

7 These are not machines that Coke and Pepsi 

8 purchase. There's a whole other area that 

9 benched marked in review for industry impact 

10 that hasn't been done. So I'm not prepared to 

11 comment on it. I just want to say that the 

12 Class A and B, you know, refer to glass front 

13 and stack. Class B is supposed to capture 

14 that other category, but I think all of the 

15 analysis and impact isn't available. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Are there a lot of 

17 them out there, those combination units? 

18 MR. DOOM: I don't know, Sriram, 

19 if you'd be able to comment on that. I'm not 

20 sure of the percentage of the total base. 

21 MS. TARLEY: This is Trent from 

22 Dixie-Narco. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 212

1 I don't know. It's very small. 

2 So I need to understand what the number is. I 

3 don't. We can get that. It's small, to 

4 understand the impact, because we have not 

5 done anything on this combination. 

6 MR. BROOKMAN: Aris, do you want 

7 to say anything more on that before we move 

8 on? 

9 MR. MARANTAN: Just the fact that 

10 it has been very hard to get any data on those 

11 combinations. We understand the shipments to 

12 be small as well. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 

14 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: Okay. Sriram 

15 Somasundaram, Pacific Northwest National Lab. 

16 I'm here to wrap up the slide 

17 presentations pretty much. There are three or 

18 four more steps of impact analyses that we do 

19 at this stage of the rulemaking primarily to 

20 assess the impact of setting these standards 

21 on the electric grid in this case because it 

22 is electricity consuming equipment. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 213

1 So we investigate the effects on 

2 utilities from reduced energy consumption of 

3 these higher efficient equipment, and we do 

4 this using the NEMS-BT model, the national 

5 energy modeling system, tailored for DOE's 

6 building technologies program, and it is 

7 published or it's maintained by EIA, which is 

8 another arm of DOE. 

9 The output of this analysis is 

10 changes in electricity sales and prices by 

11 region of the country, and changes to the mix 

12 of electricity generation in the country and 

13 changes in installed capacity and generation 

14 of electricity. 

15 And those are also reported as 

16 part of the rulemaking in the different 

17 chapters of the TSD. 

18 And this particular utility impact 

19 analysis is in Chapter 14. 

20 The next step is to do the 

21 employment impact analysis. There is a direct 

22 and indirect impact on employment. Direct 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 214

1 impact on employment is captured in the 

2 manufacturer impact analysis that NCI reported 

3 earlier. 

4 The indirect impact is captured 

5 using a model called ImSET or impact of sector 

6 energy technologies that was developed by 

7 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and 

8 this particular model estimates the changes in 

9 employment and the industry output and wage 

10 income to this BVM industry. 

11 And because of setting the 

12 standards in the beverage vending machine 

13 market to the overall United States economy 

14 resulting from changes in expenditures in the 

15 various sectors of the economy, so it does a 

16 sector-by-sector assessment of economic 

17 changes. It also estimates changes in cost 

18 and benefits using from the national energy 

19 savings analysis and together with the direct 

20 employment impact's capture in the MIA, 

21 reports the change in employment in the 

22 national economy, overall national economy. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 215

1 Other than in the manufacturing 

2 sector being regulated, which is the beverage 

3 vending machine industry, as a consequence of 

4 these energy conservation standards. 

5 And as you probably saw in the 

6 results reported in the notice, the impact on 

7 the indirect employment is very small because 

8 of these standards. 

9 And this is in Chapter 15 of the 

10 TSD. 

11 The next step is the environmental 

12 assessment, where together with the utility 

13 impact, as I talked about the impact on the 

14 electricity sales and prices and generation 

15 capacity, there is then an environmental 

16 aspect associated with that, and that's what's 

17 captured here. Again, using the NEMS output 

18 model and NEMS-BT model. 

19 We calculated a reduction in power 

20 plant emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen 

21 oxides and mercury. The sulfur dioxide 

22 emissions are not included in this particular 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 216

1 study or impact analysis because of the 

2 emissions cap set by the Clean Air Act 

3 amendments of 1990. So SO is considered 

 2

4 already capped, and emission changes in this 

5 particular rulemaking was estimated as too 

6 small to affect values of emissions, allowance 

7 allowed under the CAP. 

8 We also converted the amounts of 

9 each of these emissions into a monetized value 

10 using a dollar value per unit of emissions, so 

11 CO , NOx and those are all reported in Chapter 

 2

12 16 of the TSD. 

13 Finally, we also are required to 

14 conduct a regular impact analysis which 

15 primarily investigates the national impacts 

16 due to non-regulatory approaches and 

17 alternatives to this regulatory process. 

18 So the four different non19 regulatory options or alternatives we consider 

20 in our qualitative analysis were either no new 

21 regulatory action at all or some process of 

22 commercial customer rebates to the purchasers 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 217

1 of this equipment, or commercial customer tax 

2 credits, say, from the federal government, and 

3 finally we looked at the approach of 

4 alternative call voluntary energy efficiency 

5 targets, such the ENERGY STAR program that 

6 already exists for this particular product. 

7 We conducted a qualitative 

8 comparison of all these four non-regulatory 

9 alternatives to the regulatory process and 

10 came to the conclusion that this particular 

11 market structure, the particular BVM market 

12 structure did not allow for a successful 

13 quantitative analysis of these alternatives on 

14 whether more energy efficient equipment can be 

15 used or sold in the market. 

16 So we report the qualitative 

17 analysis results in Chapter 17 of the TSD as 

18 well as in the final section of the rule. 

19 So that pretty much concludes the 

20 NOPR analyses, and I think if there aren't any 

21 questions, I might pause here to see if there 

22 are any questions on these four steps. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 218

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Yeah, I think 

2 that's a good practice. 

3 So you can see the final three or 

4 four, four different elements of analysis that 

5 are all considered and rolled into the 

6 proposed standard. So comments, issues 

7 related to these, if there be any? Okay. 

8 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

9 Llenza, Department of Energy. 

10 My team in the Department here 

11 would like to revisit a little bit of the 

12 earlier discussion here, whether or not by de13 facto the industry is now meeting the proposed 

14 standard levels. Can you just restate your 

15 position once again in terms of our proposed 

16 standard levels? 

17 Could we hear one more time to 

18 make sure we understand this? 

19 MR. ROTH: Trent Roth from Dixie20 Narco. 

21 Class A on your proposed levels 

22 right now the ASHRAE testing, we currently 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 219

1 meet those levels. In Class B we do not. 

2 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Glen. 

3 MR. SELFRIDGE: For Class A we do 

4 not currently meet those levels, but given no 

5 intellectual property problem, we could meet 

6 them fairly easily. 

7 For the Type B machine we do not 

8 meet them, but we could without tremendous 

9 effort. 

10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. That's good. 

11 I just want to confirm. There's no other 

12 manufacturer in the room, right? No. Okay. 

13 I just wanted to. 

14 MR. LLENZA: Okay, good. 

15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you very much 

16 for that, yes. 

17 MR. SOMASUNDARAM: So finally, 

18 this is the most important step, that we would 

19 like comments, latest by July 28th if not 

20 earlier, and this is the process by which you 

21 can send us your written comments, either by 

22 E-mail or -- 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 220

1 MR. LLENZA: This is Charles 

2 Llenza, Department of Energy again. 

3 Sometimes we send a lot of things 

4 to Brenda, but I think if we're sending 

5 comments electronically, if you use the portal 

6 there, the E-mail portal for beverage vending 

7 rulemaking, it goes into a docket system and 

8 it's the better place to use if we're going to 

9 do electronic, and of course, you've got the 

10 mail and the courier for the other one. 

11 Also, my link is there in case you 

12 want to, you know. If you have some further 

13 questions or something, you could shoot me an 

14 E-mail. I would be glad to help you out on 

15 that. 

16 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve. 

17 MR. COUSINS: I have a question 

18 with respect to the manufacturers. I just 

19 heard you say that you think you can hit the 

20 targets. My question is can you hit the 

21 target for a self-styled solid front. 

22 Do you know or you don't know? 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 221

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Glen? 

2 MR. SELFRIDGE: Okay. I'll take 

3 the first 

4 MR. COUSINS: You don't even have 

5 to answer the question. My concern is that, 

6 you know, you quickly said you can hit the 

7 target, but have you considered the definition 

8 of an A and a B. 

9 MR. BROOKMAN: A reconfigured 

10 machine. 

11 MR. COUSINS: Well, I'm saying it 

12 may be machine configurations where you cannot 

13 hit that target. 

14 MR. SELFRIDGE: Okay. That's 

15 possible if you had a closed front. 

16 MR. COUSINS: Right. 

17 MR. SELFRIDGE: (Speaking from an 

18 unmiked location.) 

19 MR. COUSINS: Well, I'm suggesting 

20 your refrigeration levels may be higher. 

21 MR. SELFRIDGE: The refrigeration 

22 actually is lower. (Speaking from an unmiked 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 222

1 location.) 

2 MR. COUSINS: Well, if I want to 

3 increase storage capacity in a solid front 

4 shelf styled arrangement, in other words, I 

5 want to put cans in a shelf style machine and 

6 I want to pack out, maximize for that purpose, 

7 on a solid front machine, can you hit the 

8 target? 

9 My guess is you can't hit that 

10 target. You can't hit the TSL target. That's 

11 my guess. I would be very surprised if you 

12 said you could. 

13 So the only thing I'm cautioning 

14 you on is you quickly said, yes, we can hit 

15 the targets. I would challenge that maybe you 

16 cannot hit the targets or the configurations 

17 that we would purchase. 

18 MR. BROOKMAN: Trent. 

19 MS. TARLEY: This Trent from 

20 Dixie-Narco. 

21 I mean, I would agree that it 

22 would be a very big challenge. A lot of it 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 223

1 will come back to you because as you as a 

2 purchaser understand. How do we start to look 

3 at the requirements that, for instance, Coca4 Cola has for lighting, and knowing that we 

5 have this, what are the things that we have to 

6 change? 

7 I think what you're saying on 

8 Glen's comment, it's a Class A machine. 

9 You're going to have when you add the lighting 

10 in it, you're expecting light to decide the 

11 same way you do on a B machine today. 

12 MR. COUSINS: Yeah, I'm thinking 

13 even with that light you may not hit the 

14 target. 

15 MR. SELFRIDGE: Well, this is Glen 

16 again. I think you probably could. With that 

17 particular machine, I would say probably we 

18 could if we could dull the lighting, if you go 

19 to refrigeration mode. The volume would be up 

20 (speaking from an unmiked location). And 

21 it's a variable capacity. But that just 

22 brings me back to my original -- one of my 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 224

1 original concerns, was that the methodology 

2 that uses the ASHRAE energy management system 

3 is it takes the lights out of the equation, is 

4 not allowing for any other technology. 

5 If you take the lights out at 

6 three and a half kilowatt hours right now, 

7 today, on a medium size Class A, in terms of 

8 refrigerating that thing, there's not much 

9 space left to go. 

10 MR. COUSINS: Well, yeah, that's 

11 right. There's not much space. 

12 MR. SELFRIDGE: And there are not 

13 many options. 

14 MR. COUSINS: What I'm concerned 

15 about is if Coke says, "We want to have a U 

16 Vend shelf style machine," you know, I 

17 wouldn't want for the world to come back and 

18 say, "Well, legally we can't build that for 

19 you, and by the way, technology is not good 

20 enough to allow you to do that." 

21 MR. SELFRIDGE: Well, that's 

22 exactly where I was headed with my overall 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 225

1 objection. Until we decide we could meet this 

2 on a regular Type A machine by doing that, but 

3 the other side of that coin is you're limiting 

4 technology into you're clearing a lot of them 

5 with that level because -- 

6 MR. COUSINS: And I want to look 

7 at the numbers again. I'm not convinced that 

8 -- yeah, maybe the majority of the machines 

9 that we guy in the store in the past will be 

10 okay with these TSLs, but, hey, I think I 

11 would want to take advantage of what time I 

12 have now between now and the 28th of July to 

13 see if we can make it. 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: So additional 

15 questions and comments about these 

16 presentation materials, this last bunch. Some 

17 of it is fairly complicated. You saw also the 

18 questions that the Department wanted you to 

19 respond to specifically. Any additional 

20 thoughts on those before we turn to the final 

21 phase of the meeting today? 

22 Yes, Nina. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 226

1 MS. TARLEY: Nina Tarley, Pepsi 

2 Co. 

3 My comment is on the discussion. 

4 Pepsi Co.'s approach is that we would like to 

5 save as much energy as possible in the most 

6 cost efficient way. So if my choice is, for 

7 example, an option that costs nothing and 

8 allows us to save even small percentage of 

9 energy and potentially to promote cheap even 

10 larger, that's definitely our first choice. 

11 As you know, there are a lot of 

12 energy management devices available now in the 

13 market. They all cost a lot of money, and 

14 they're not allowed to be used during the 

15 energy testing. So that always becomes not 

16 the first choice because you're looking at 

17 extra cost with some maybe guaranteed ban if 

18 you took energy saving. But we're not allowed 

19 to use it during the testing protocol. So 

20 that's how we group, you know. 

21 The objective is save the most 

22 energy and the most cost efficient way. 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 227

1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. thank you. 

2 Thanks for clarifying that and that 

3 illustration as well. 

4 Any additional comments at this 

5 point? 

6 (No response.) 

7 MR. BROOKMAN: So now there's one 

8 more opportunity to thank. Now there's an 

9 opportunity for anybody to make closing 

10 remarks to summary remarks, issues that you 

11 wish to bring to the floor that you haven't 

12 covered already? 

13 (No response.) 

14 MR. BROOKMAN: No closing remarks. 

15 Okay. So then for my part I'm going to turn 

16 it back to Charles Llenza, who is the senior 

17 federal official, and I would just thank all 

18 of you for what was a very productive 

19 workshop. I appreciate the candor and the 

20 sense of exchange, what happened here. 

21 The final page in your packet it 

22 an evaluation form. Please take one minute to 

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 228

1 fill it out. The Department reads them 

2 carefully. They're always looking for a way 

3 to do these meetings better. 

4 So thanks to all of you. 

5 MR. LLENZA: I just want to say 

6 thank you for attending the meeting, we are 

7 eager to receive your comments in written 

8 form, and once again I just want to emphasize 

9 these are the methods to getting your comments 

10 back to us as soon as possible. 

11 And thanks for attending the 

12 meeting. That's all I have. 

13 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 

14 (Whereupon, at 2:18 p.m., the 

15 public meeting was concluded.) 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 229

A

abbreviated 57:12

ability 148:18

149:16

able 30:7 65:5

71:16 76:1 86:12

88:5 89:5 103:13

114:12,18 149:15

149:17 150:4

158:9 165:15

179:21 180:4,9

182:6 192:9

195:16 211:19

absence 127:17

absent 173:4

absolute 175:3

absolutely 84:8

120:4

accelerator 184:9

accept 160:12

accepted 155:1,9

access 78:4

accomplished 97:3

account 67:4 158:8

accounts 193:7

194:2

accurate 18:2

accurately 74:17

199:15

achieve 67:16

150:5 152:5 154:1

163:7,8,12 164:3

187:11

achieved 16:10

17:17 178:4

achieving 16:22

26:9 196:7

acknowledge 71:7

87:15 184:14

acquisition 86:20

act 15:15,20 17:7

25:19 164:2 216:2

action 216:21

actions 12:3

active 193:22

actual 38:14 56:21

86:4 89:2 144:5

179:11 193:3,7,16

198:18

add 34:20 154:10

161:9 188:16

223:9

added 157:17

182:20 183:19

addition 11:9 35:10

57:13

additional 3:14

10:8 32:19 69:9

145:20 167:21

178:6 183:6

198:13 199:14

207:11 225:14,19

227:4

Additionally

173:11

additions 141:18

address 26:11

34:22 35:4 41:9

85:5 154:14

155:15 160:1

207:13 208:10

209:1

addresses 34:16

addressing 146:6

add-on 57:3

administration

35:16,16

admittedly 202:3

adopt 25:3 189:9

189:14

adopting 15:21

advance 13:18

advanced 12:7

42:12

advances 20:13

advantage 69:3

134:22 200:18

225:11

adverse 46:20,22

advocated 31:11

AEO 58:9,10,12

affect 45:17 94:1

94:14,21 172:14

216:6

affiliation 5:8

14:11 38:18

afternoon 146:13

170:1

age 88:22 89:1

agenda 8:21 9:7

10:14,18 145:16

146:13

aggregate 112:6

114:13,13

aging 80:22 81:9

82:16 88:13

ago 38:6 42:11,16

57:3 58:7 78:19

86:21 90:11 91:6

102:3,8 142:16

158:5

agree 66:11 81:20

83:1,8 90:3 96:22

102:15 222:21

agreeing 158:14

agrees 160:17

ahead 38:15 63:13

83:7,18 85:1

90:22 100:7

108:22 112:19

114:5 146:17

147:2 151:7

156:22 170:15

185:22 186:14

190:17 196:3

207:1 209:13

ain't 113:16

air 14:19 103:12

118:20 119:1,7,10

119:22 120:2

153:6 216:2

alarming 20:7

algorithm 198:3

allow 80:14 128:14

157:22 192:14,21

194:8 217:12

224:20

allowance 216:6

allowed 28:17

158:12 216:7

226:14,18

allowing 224:4

allows 78:4 103:12

198:7 226:8

alluded 71:5 77:12

alterative 22:20

alternative 162:4

217:4

alternatively 129:8

131:5

alternatives 11:8

23:21 41:16

216:17,19 217:9

217:13

Amanda 1:13 2:9

5:19 8:7 49:12,13

ambient 99:10,12

138:19,21

amendments 216:3

America 99:20

101:16 102:2,6

104:2

American 2:6,9 8:8

8:14

Americans 101:22

Americas 8:13

amount 14:21 58:2

64:12 121:21

128:16 166:20

amounts 216:8

AMS 211:6

analyses 42:7 43:1

43:3,6 44:9 46:6

47:21 55:20

105:10 168:2

171:15 208:3

212:18 217:20

analysis 3:6,7,7,8,9

3:10,11,13 9:16

9:17,17,20,22

10:1,1,3 11:10,11

11:13 12:10 13:2

19:3 29:8 32:15

32:21 40:4,21

43:7,8,9,14,18

44:2,9,11,15,16

46:14,15,16 47:1

47:6,18,20,22

49:4,9,11 52:8,22

53:2,11,12,21

55:2,14 56:4,13

56:18 57:1,11

59:9 68:17 69:1

69:16,17 70:1,4

73:22 74:2 88:1

105:11 110:14

111:11 123:3,7,9

123:11,14,18,18

123:21 126:22

127:14 130:4,14

131:5 132:6 143:8

144:9,19 164:13

164:15 166:11

167:20 168:1

170:18 171:4,7,14

172:22 173:14

204:4 207:19

211:15 213:9,19

213:21 214:2,19

216:1,14,20

217:13,17 218:4

analytical 42:14

analyzed 171:20

205:1,9

Andersen 2:5 8:10

8:10

Andrew 1:15 5:22

30:21,21 62:15

68:7 84:20 87:8

93:16 141:22

143:12 198:21

201:16

Andy 38:8 196:2

and-forth 73:1

and/or 11:15

annual 56:11 130:2

130:3 173:21

annually 18:14

21:11 23:5

anonymously

113:14 155:8

ANOPR 42:12,16

43:2,6 48:3,7 50:3

52:9 53:1,21 54:6

54:17 55:2,3,14

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 230

55:20 57:2 58:3

58:20 59:20 60:2

60:5,11 61:2

63:18 70:21 71:8

71:12 72:8,10,15

112:22 123:14,18

127:21 170:21

173:19

answer 118:14

131:4 163:11

186:4,20 194:11

195:10,20 199:21

200:1 201:5 202:8

206:18 207:16

221:5

answered 118:1

anticipated 145:15

anybody 8:18

13:17 20:22 39:5

207:11 227:9

anymore 77:16

92:22

anyway 128:10

179:14

apparent 143:3

appear 22:15

193:15

appears 30:12

Appendix 57:16

62:1 64:2

apple 147:17

apples 102:21,21

136:19,20 150:15

150:15

apples-to-apples

147:11 151:10

159:9

appliance 1:15 6:1

97:15,22

application 33:6

38:1 198:19

applications

193:19

applied 38:6

174:20

apply 37:20 93:22

applying 25:2 34:8

appreciate 104:17

113:8 117:19

179:17 205:11

227:19

approach 37:3 38:5

47:5,12 115:11,12

115:15 123:2

126:17 131:10

217:3 226:4

approaches 216:16

approaching 79:21

89:1

appropriate 26:21

29:19 30:16 107:3

145:12 207:3

approval 179:7

approximate

166:16

approximately

19:20 21:2 22:18

71:18 74:5 89:21

141:2 198:8

area 20:19 48:12

204:1 211:1,8

arena 204:5 211:5

argue 97:4 144:4

argued 35:8

argument 152:22

153:21 162:20

Aris 1:22 7:6 38:15

39:17,19 43:11

207:13 208:9

212:6

arm 213:8

arrangement

198:11,14 222:4

arrived 71:18

130:10

ASHLEY 8:12

ASHRAE 119:14

142:14 147:17,19

149:12 157:4

163:2 190:14

192:14,20,21,22

193:13 194:8

198:6,15,16

218:22 224:2

ASHRAE/ANSI

199:5

asked 112:21 196:1

asking 107:1

114:21,22 182:20

183:2

aspect 215:16

assembling 173:2

assess 123:6 126:7

171:8 174:17

175:4 212:20

assessment 3:12

10:2 44:17,18,19

44:22 45:4,7

46:11,14 48:7

214:16 215:12

asset 81:9

assets 87:3

assistance 86:22

associated 18:20

189:7 215:16

Association 2:7,8

8:4,15

assume 33:10

82:17 104:12

assumed 34:2

53:21 64:3 105:6

118:11

Assuming 188:13

assumption 105:9

127:15 177:6

201:20

assumptions 11:12

40:3 127:16

158:22

assure 26:10

assuring 187:22

188:7

Atchley 8:12

attached 111:17

attempts 172:6,6

attendees 9:4

attending 228:6,11

attention 159:12

177:8

attrition 24:3

August 11:20,21

12:15 36:4 199:6

Austin 200:9

authority 11:18

35:7,12,17,20,21

206:9,16 207:3

208:7

automatic 2:7 8:4

157:5

availability 79:5

81:17 99:17,22

150:3 210:4

available 17:15

22:7 26:10 45:11

48:21 100:3

102:10 128:6

147:6 149:14

150:6 172:16

173:20 174:5,6

187:8 200:14,21

201:2 209:21

210:12 211:15

226:12

avenue 1:8 162:8

average 54:22

55:10,11 57:9

59:16 60:4,5

61:18 130:1 141:5

aware 97:11

awareness 1:15 6:1

65:6

awful 87:13

a.m 1:9 4:2 117:10

117:11

B

B 12:20 13:9 27:8

27:13,19 30:11

32:8,19 33:8,21

45:14 46:4 48:10

48:17 49:18,22

50:1,10 53:4

62:22 63:2,18,22

64:2,19 66:13,19

67:1,4 68:3,12

72:5,8,13 80:5

89:10 90:12 106:9

107:5 109:3 110:6

118:5 125:9,16,19

125:22 128:13

130:19 131:13

134:9 135:7

136:14,15 138:6

138:20 139:11

143:16 145:20

147:14 150:13,18

151:22 155:13

161:3 163:5,8,11

164:10 186:17

203:18 211:12,13

219:1,7 221:8

223:11

back 15:13 41:6,9

42:3 49:3 50:15

56:7 57:2 61:2

69:20 72:22 84:21

91:2 92:17 93:7

94:4,13 103:2

106:21 111:1

117:3,10 122:22

123:19 126:11,16

134:21 143:15

144:19 154:10

155:22 156:21

157:16 161:5

168:13,16 170:3

176:2,4 186:1

188:19 191:5

194:12 196:10

199:19 201:17

223:1,22 224:17

227:16 228:10

backed 142:20

background

178:14 188:20

bad 81:3 90:9

badges 168:8

ball 90:7,18

ballast 184:9 192:9

ban 226:17

base 16:8 21:13

24:5 25:20 26:12

56:12 60:17 75:15

75:18 77:4,8

82:15,17 83:12

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 231

84:9 92:1 100:5

127:12 129:15,18

150:7,8 173:4,8

175:16 204:3

205:8 211:6,20

based 24:4 33:9

37:15 40:21 45:18

49:11,16 50:2,8

50:11 54:17 55:20

59:11 64:9 68:17

70:11 77:16 97:11

114:14 120:16

121:18,19 122:7

138:18 140:13

145:13 151:10

152:1 155:16,19

161:15 162:8

baseline 54:22 55:1

57:19 60:13 70:12

124:8,8,10 125:8

125:9 143:2

153:19 161:12

185:12,13,16

basic 165:22

205:15

basically 61:8,18

100:14 103:16

142:5 145:13

162:2 188:14,22

204:19

basis 21:7 75:14

76:10 123:17

145:3,5 208:15

bearing 70:3

becoming 11:21

22:7 48:21 143:3

beginning 175:21

behalf 4:15 117:13

117:16

behaves 196:16

believe 16:2 27:22

39:14 42:10 55:16

60:3,12,16 71:21

72:6 73:5,15

74:20 77:17 81:1

114:3,9 154:15

157:2 163:20

179:6 190:4

208:12

believing 68:18

benched 211:9

benefit 25:9 166:15

180:17,19 181:9

181:10,11,12

197:9

benefits 13:3 31:18

41:21 150:5

179:22 199:15

205:22 207:21

214:18

best 14:8 25:17

26:8,10 29:4

33:14 103:12

140:19 202:2

better 28:6 33:22

66:18 85:5 92:19

163:20 168:21

169:1 170:5

210:15 220:8

228:3

beverage 1:2 2:6

4:8,17 8:15 11:1

12:4 15:6 16:12

18:1,4,10,14

23:17 24:2 43:15

45:10 50:3 53:3,8

53:22 55:7 77:8

81:18 190:5

214:12 215:2

220:6

beverages 91:15

208:19,20 209:2

BevMax 191:5

beyond 75:3 125:8

125:9 141:12

149:6 162:16

195:15 196:15

big 49:4 63:21 97:7

128:1 174:3

222:22

biggest 34:18

bill 180:11,14

181:12

billion 130:15

bills 23:15 25:11

164:19 206:2

bit 17:1 29:19

49:20 72:22 75:17

88:12 104:14

136:12 143:15

177:5 218:11

block 116:9 176:22

Bob 1:12 5:8,12,13

13:18,18 15:1

24:6 26:14 70:16

71:5 77:12,22

85:1 86:17 90:21

92:8 113:10

131:15,19,21

135:16 136:2

137:18 140:6

162:10 180:7

199:20,22

boss 4:15

bottle 23:15 179:10

bottled 208:20

bottler 55:7 61:19

bottlers 54:9 85:7

bottles 182:9

208:18

bottom 118:21,22

119:7,12,19,20

bought 165:10

bound 174:16

box 65:15

boxes 21:18

brand 103:3,3,11

103:11

branding 65:6

brands 18:9

break 9:13,19,20

10:4,5 81:14,22

104:15 115:11,14

115:17,21 116:1,4

117:1,2,18 168:2

168:4

Brenda 220:4

brief 9:10 13:15

26:18

briefly 14:3 34:13

brightness 67:18

bring 227:11

bringing 144:21

brings 36:17

223:22

broadly 150:5

Brookman 1:9,11

4:3,21 5:3 6:21,22

7:2,19 8:16,20

10:20 13:12 14:1

24:6,9,11 26:14

26:19,22 27:3

28:22 29:11 30:10

30:17 31:2 38:8

38:13,21 39:4,8

39:13 49:7 51:20

52:6,12,14 55:18

62:13 63:12 64:14

66:9 67:12,16,21

68:7 69:2,5,8,13

74:1,6,11,17 75:2

75:8 76:19 77:1

77:22 79:11 81:10

83:6,18 84:20

86:2,9 87:8 88:18

89:11 90:5,21

92:7 93:16 95:8

96:17 98:3,11,15

98:19 100:6,20

101:2,12 102:13

103:19 104:13

105:13 106:12,20

107:21 108:2,6,11

108:14,19 109:7

110:1,3,8,12,16

111:2,5,9 112:5,9

112:16,19 113:3,6

113:19 114:5,19

115:8,17,22

116:22 117:7,12

118:13 120:22

122:14 126:9,14

126:17 131:8,19

133:6,12,17

134:10,15,20

135:10,14 136:1

137:7,10,15

139:16,20 140:1

141:14,18 142:2

143:10 145:15

146:2,11,16,21

147:1 148:12,16

151:7 154:13

155:21 156:19

158:7 159:20

160:2 161:16

162:10 164:6

166:19 167:15,19

168:22 170:3,10

176:5,19 179:10

179:15 181:14

182:8,16 184:12

185:9,13,17,22

186:14 187:16

188:12 189:17

190:15 193:18

194:3,10,19

195:14,21 196:1

196:22 198:18,21

199:18 201:4,9,16

202:13 203:2

204:9,16 205:10

206:6,11,17

207:10 208:9

209:9,13 210:8,18

211:16 212:6,13

218:1 219:2,10,15

220:16 221:1,9

222:18 225:14

227:1,7,14 228:13

brought 62:20

86:17

budget 197:1

build 104:4 181:13

224:18

building 97:16

101:22 102:1

168:8,15 213:6

bulbs 65:1

bullet 52:19 54:21

58:4 105:5 128:19

bullets 41:11

bunch 70:22

111:10 168:9

225:16

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 232

burden 172:12

173:15 174:12

burdens 13:4

207:21

Burt 2:8 38:19,19

Bush 35:18,19

business 9:2 21:8

21:12 23:15 76:7

78:9 80:10,13

82:13 85:13,19

89:9 91:5 121:19

121:19 122:2

172:1 174:11

176:17 203:7

206:20

businesses 40:16

41:11,13,13,15

165:6 172:8

176:13 203:7

button 31:1

buy 91:11,12 94:14

95:2 196:17,20

buyers 112:8 114:4

buying 79:10 90:14

93:10 113:12,16

180:22 187:18,20

BVM 44:20 171:9

172:3 214:10

217:11

BVMs 60:7 70:2

165:8

B-3 40:22

C

C 4:1 121:11

cabinet 118:18,21

119:8,20 153:4,12

191:20

cabinets 120:1

154:16

cafeteria 116:8

168:10,17 170:5

170:12

Cal 116:14

calculate 133:10,13

calculated 18:19

57:20 64:5 127:3

130:5 133:19,20

215:19

calculates 19:2

172:22

calculation 37:11

37:12 115:16

154:22 182:9

calculations 59:16

133:16 135:4,15

143:1 144:21

159:1

California 1:14

5:18 142:6,7,10

143:7 147:5

call 85:19 119:2

125:21 217:4

called 59:18 123:15

173:1 214:5

calls 68:13

caloric 179:2

campus 168:15

Canadians 155:10

candidate 123:15

197:16

candor 227:19

canned 208:18,20

cans 118:22 119:5

119:10,11,14,19

152:14 156:11

222:5

cap 150:16 216:2,7

capable 25:6

capacities 106:11

152:15

capacity 30:2,2,2

86:4 99:18 106:16

136:10,10 137:3,3

140:10,13 152:2,3

152:6,7,7,18,20

153:10,11,14,15

153:18,19 154:3,4

156:15 175:8

209:18 213:13

215:15 222:3

223:21

capital 22:16 59:16

144:5 175:18

187:8,9 197:2

Capitol 116:5

capped 216:4

capture 66:21

179:21 203:20

211:13 214:20

captured 36:12

130:3 214:1,4

215:17

capturing 68:19

car 93:10

carbon 37:2,4,9

97:6,8 215:20

carbonated 76:8

card 9:2

care 207:17 208:6

209:4

careful 143:1

carefully 150:14

228:2

cares 180:21

carrot 206:14

case 25:1,2 29:22

33:14 45:18 56:13

58:9,10,12,12

61:17 77:6 81:15

90:13 116:4 124:4

124:8 127:12

129:15 166:3

173:4,8,8 175:16

185:9 189:9 198:4

209:8 210:14

212:21 220:11

cases 23:5,6 91:6,8

173:5

cash 171:3 172:21

173:3

category 107:19

108:13 109:14,17

204:6 211:14

cause 93:20

caution 113:2

148:6

cautioning 148:4

222:13

cell 14:14

Center 8:6

centers 25:2

central 58:12

cents 167:6,7

certain 45:19 46:17

47:2 50:14 67:17

85:2 92:3 100:10

112:3 122:7 149:8

certainly 80:16

132:3 199:12

cetera 26:6

chain 183:3

challenge 222:15

222:22

challenged 97:6

challenging 196:7

chance 5:6 25:14

Chances 198:17

change 30:1 48:15

55:5 58:2,3 82:3,9

86:1 91:20 92:5

97:19,21 98:1

104:5 136:13,22

153:15 175:15

182:8 187:19

214:21 223:6

changed 58:9 82:9

152:2,4,12

changes 48:2,22

49:1,10 52:9 53:2

55:19 60:20 61:4

63:16 80:4,5

92:15 183:22

213:10,11,13

214:8,14,17,17

216:4

channel 54:8,10,10

76:2

channels 53:22

54:2,12,20 55:21

chapter 45:5 47:18

48:14 49:1 57:14

71:21,21 72:1

143:9 166:12

213:19 215:9

216:11 217:17

chapters 213:17

characteristics

45:17

characterization

44:20 49:6 52:21

characterize 43:18

characterized 11:9

charge 175:10

181:22

charges 184:6

Charles 1:20 4:12

6:19 10:21 13:13

29:1,1,2 146:2

161:17,18 185:15

218:8 220:1

227:16

chart 63:2

chase 24:10

Chasserot 39:2,3

95:10,11 98:4,13

98:16 100:8,22

101:3,17 205:13

205:13 207:2

cheap 202:15 226:9

cheaper 91:12

cheaply 202:6

check 133:6

CHESSEROT 1:13

chevrons 42:8

child 200:9

chime 133:18

choice 79:6 226:6

226:10,16

choices 66:18

choose 152:9

chose 57:4 143:16

144:6

chosen 69:19

130:13

chump 85:22

cites 118:7

claimed 86:21

clarification

102:17 135:21

137:11 138:16,17

148:15 158:11

clarify 156:20

190:19

clarifying 112:17

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 233

227:2

class 12:19,20 13:1

13:8,9 28:14

30:10 31:7 32:8

32:19 33:5,8,21

42:1 43:22 45:14

45:14,14,21 46:4

46:5 47:16 48:10

48:10,17,18 49:18

49:22 50:1,10

53:4,4 62:21 63:2

63:18,22 64:18

66:12,13,15,19

67:1,4 68:2,3,11

68:12 72:5,5,8,12

72:13 80:5 89:9

89:10,19 90:12

105:22 106:8,9

107:5 109:2,6,20

116:18 118:5

125:8,9,15,16,19

125:19,21,22

128:12,12 130:8

130:19 131:12

132:11 134:7,8,9

135:5,7,22,22

136:14,15,15,21

138:1,6,19 139:8

140:13 141:1

143:4,16 145:19

145:20 149:1

151:22 161:3,3

163:1,5,8,11,12

164:9,10 183:6,11

183:14 186:17,22

203:17,18 211:12

211:13 218:21

219:1,3 223:8

224:7

classes 45:8,14 53:8

72:5 115:1 121:1

174:22 186:16

classification 45:13

classified 46:5

classify 45:10,15

Clean 216:2

clear 22:10 27:21

69:4 84:13 102:22

109:20 114:21

186:4 192:1,7

206:18

cleared 115:9

clearing 225:4

clearly 34:16,17

155:11

cliff 34:1 62:22

climb 82:2,2

Clinton 35:16

close 10:10 101:6

124:10

closed 46:7 50:13

64:18 65:2 66:4

78:17 116:6

151:22 221:15

closely 187:7

closer 131:19

closing 3:17 10:12

22:4 227:9,14

closings 78:14

Coca 223:3

Coca-Coca 1:12

Coca-Cola 5:16

18:6 19:15 20:4

21:15 52:4 90:10

187:4

codes 104:9

coefficients 126:3

coffee 116:5,7

coffin 178:21

cognizant 67:6

coin 225:3

Coke 21:3,16 22:15

75:13 76:13 80:8

80:8 81:19 85:4

92:14 94:10 98:7

98:12,21 100:16

120:14 121:12

131:18,22 200:16

205:3 209:15

211:7 224:15

Cokes 79:6 180:15

Coke's 21:9

Cola 223:4

cold 18:10 86:19

119:1,9,10,18,19

197:14

collapse 71:4 74:10

colleague 102:16

columns 119:5,6

combination 125:3

203:22 204:20

207:14 208:10,12

208:13,22 211:17

212:5

combinations

212:11

combined 21:3

191:9

combining 86:18

come 12:20 30:5

33:6 34:11 35:3

35:13 41:9 42:3

53:19 69:20 71:2

83:11 84:21 85:14

85:15 122:21

134:20 142:15

195:9 199:6,18

223:1 224:17

comes 62:17 161:5

164:22 177:6

comic 92:10

coming 28:10 41:6

80:21 92:16 93:2

93:11 95:19,21

134:21 137:2

comment 11:5,16

29:1 34:13 40:8

40:10 50:11 58:19

60:2,16 86:3

87:10,22 89:8

92:9 93:18,21

94:8,9 103:21

112:20 113:11

116:11 133:13

141:20 143:13

146:1,15 147:4

148:15 157:1

158:10 175:22

177:1,4 179:19

184:14 197:6

203:16 204:20

211:11,19 223:8

226:3

commented 33:4

comments 3:14

9:10 10:9,14

11:14 14:9 18:16

24:7 35:2 39:20

40:13 54:4,17

55:21 59:11 62:12

62:14 64:10 69:9

71:17 72:14 74:1

79:15 88:20 95:5

108:21 110:9,15

131:6,14 140:3

145:18,21 146:6

151:13 159:17

164:8 167:19

176:8 199:2,4,9

206:19 218:6

219:19,21 220:5

225:15 227:4

228:7,9

commercial 49:17

50:2,5,9 99:21

100:5 101:5 102:5

102:8,10 165:4,18

216:22 217:1

commercially

100:2 102:11

210:12

Commission 142:6

143:7

commodities

181:18,20

communicate

150:9

companies 18:6,8

18:12 22:3 59:17

71:1 78:5 81:19

93:7 94:19 100:11

101:14,20 154:17

172:2 190:6

200:19 207:5,6

company 1:12 5:16

5:21 18:6,7 19:15

21:15 28:1 87:3

97:12

comparability 59:1

159:21

comparable 30:6

compare 136:19

178:10

compared 30:3

55:13 104:10

124:12 152:18

164:21

compares 55:2

comparing 102:21

comparison 147:11

147:18 150:15

151:17 152:11,12

152:18 159:9

217:8

comparisons

151:11

compartment

116:19 118:5

competitive 114:1

200:18

compile 110:21,22

compiled 15:9

complete 18:1

173:22

completed 32:1

171:15

completely 104:9

compliance 41:14

complicated

127:18 225:17

complied 177:13

comply 172:18

complying 202:1

component 35:8

189:15,19 196:9

208:18 209:22

210:4

components 47:8

60:15 196:14,19

comprehensive

19:3

compressor 103:3

120:16,20

compressors 97:19

101:20 103:11

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 234

184:7

computer 47:9

158:1

conceived 202:19

concern 62:21

164:22 221:5

concerned 224:14

concerns 13:16

165:2 170:22

175:8 224:1

concise 14:19

concluded 228:15

concludes 217:19

conclusion 134:21

217:10

concur 78:1

condenser 124:18

149:7

Condition 121:11

conditions 61:19

99:2 199:12

conduct 43:6

172:15 173:18

216:14

conducted 45:4

173:19 174:3

217:7

conduction 119:10

conducts 44:8

174:9

configuration

48:17 53:3 210:8

configurations

48:17 221:12

222:16

confirm 20:7 76:19

219:11

confirmation 74:4

confused 131:17

confusion 52:17

Congress 179:7

207:8,9 208:8

connected 187:7

conscious 93:12

192:8

consciously 92:16

94:12

consequence 83:22

215:3

conservation 1:1

4:7 11:6 13:10

15:15,20 16:1,7

17:7,11 22:7

34:18,22 164:2

171:8 176:18

203:9 206:21

215:4

consider 35:9

37:18 41:16 99:14

111:20 112:2

115:7 121:17

184:6 216:19

considerably 61:3

consideration

32:19 93:1 120:10

considered 36:5,14

144:8,10 174:18

175:5 208:19,20

216:3 218:5 221:7

consistent 58:20

86:2 134:11,13

consolidating

78:16

consolidation 22:1

78:15 79:2 176:15

constant 59:10

71:18

constantly 48:21

constrained 81:20

consult 117:4

consultant 5:20

consulting 1:22,22

2:1,1 7:5,7,9,11

43:13 71:1 160:5

170:20

consume 19:7

103:7

consumed 16:11

consumer 37:11

46:21 56:6 66:17

181:17 192:3

consumers 31:19

180:5

consumes 103:8

158:18

consuming 19:12

212:22

consumption 18:22

19:10 22:8 23:19

24:1 45:18 48:16

53:7,9 89:2 96:8

96:16 125:5,11,18

126:1 178:3,17

213:2

contained 40:5,22

41:18 42:1

containers 23:16

content 52:8

131:15 140:4

CONTENTS 3:1

continue 53:16

77:13 81:18 82:19

82:21 83:5,9

135:15 136:2

137:16 171:2

continued 1:23

77:18,21 82:2

123:12

continues 37:20

48:5 77:7 81:16

81:16 82:8

contractor 24:20

172:6 174:9

contradict 29:18

contributing

104:18

control 35:10 36:21

147:20 149:22

150:2 193:15

195:12 196:10

197:10,14,18,22

198:2 199:14

controlling 92:12

controls 36:1 151:3

convened 1:7

convenience 91:13

91:14

convenient 116:6

convention 127:5

conventional 68:17

conversation 14:16

104:17 108:17

117:17 170:9

conversations 78:7

conversion 175:19

convert 25:20

175:13

converted 216:8

convinced 225:7

cool 120:18

cooled 45:22 46:9

118:19 119:16

204:21

cooler 99:12

200:12

coolers 99:5

cooling 27:13

118:22 119:11

120:6 150:12,17

151:1 153:1,2,22

156:9

cool-down 120:13

120:15

copy 9:3 20:21 27:6

39:15

corner 36:5

correct 29:22 30:8

84:7,8 89:21 94:8

102:18 109:5

139:13 143:15,18

144:1 146:9

151:14 154:12

157:7 160:19

178:7,8 179:12,14

193:14 194:13

corrected 60:18

185:4

correction 60:8

corrections 60:19

correctly 60:13

177:14

correlation 137:4

correlations 125:12

125:17

correspond 13:10

corridor 168:12

cost 3:7 9:17 20:15

31:9,15,20 33:22

43:7,19,21 47:6

47:12,22 50:16

51:8 53:11,12

56:3,6,10,12,16

56:18 57:10,18

59:9,16 60:9,10

60:11,14,15,17

61:6,7,9 62:22

63:1,19 80:20

81:21 124:15

144:5 161:5

166:16,22 167:3,4

167:7 177:22

178:18 180:4

181:16,17,18,22

182:2,6,6,20

183:13,19 184:9,9

184:16,17,22

185:3,5 187:7,14

188:1,18 189:7

214:17 226:6,13

226:17,22

costlier 196:8,19

costly 205:18

costs 34:3 41:15,22

57:7 59:9,12 61:8

61:15 66:1 95:2,4

165:13 167:6

172:18 175:1,19

183:4,6,8,9,10

185:7 226:7

cost-benefit 19:3

Council 2:9,9 8:8

38:20

Counsel's 6:17

count 127:6 170:17

country 57:9

213:11,12

couple 30:22 38:6

40:10 155:7 199:1

courier 220:10

course 22:22 29:11

56:5 220:9

courtesy 5:11

Cousins 1:12 5:15

5:15 66:9,10

67:14,20,22 77:2

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 235

81:11,12 90:6,8

91:1 98:21,22

101:13,14,19

107:16 111:21

121:11,16 122:12

146:12,19 147:2,3

149:5,21 151:8

153:9 155:16,19

156:6,14 159:3,6

159:7,22 167:3

181:15 182:12

183:13 187:3,3,22

188:4 192:16,20

194:1,4 196:4

197:11 198:10,20

209:14,14 210:10

220:17 221:4,11

221:16,19 222:2

223:12 224:10,14

225:6

covered 52:3

164:11 208:14,21

209:1 227:12

Crane/Dixie 78:15

created 93:14

creating 206:12

credits 217:2

crisis 92:14

criteria 17:21

46:17 145:14

cross-cutting 35:3

crystal 90:7,18

CSA 155:6

CSX 28:1

cubic 30:1,2 47:15

106:1,7,7 107:21

112:10,12 136:10

137:3 140:13

152:2,7,17 153:14

153:18 154:4,5,6

cuing 14:7

cumulative 172:11

173:14 174:11

curious 122:9

current 16:6 17:18

21:1,4 24:4 33:16

73:15 74:21 78:8

78:20 87:11 89:18

94:15 95:3,6

98:10 103:14

131:17,22 137:20

139:7 157:21

178:10

currently 16:13,19

16:22 21:19 75:16

89:15 121:12

187:20 190:19

218:22 219:4

curve 61:6 88:9

curves 43:21 47:13

88:6

customer 25:9 56:6

56:11,15,16 130:1

164:17,19 166:3,7

216:22 217:1

customers 66:21

67:3,4 175:10

183:12

cut 24:10 153:8,20

154:3

cuts 154:8

cycle 3:7 9:17 43:7

47:22 53:11,12

56:3,6,10,18

57:10,18 58:21

59:8 61:6,15 80:3

88:12 89:1 124:15

cycling 149:7

D

D 4:1

daily 125:18

140:12

Damodaran 59:18

Danfoss 100:14

data 11:12 40:3

47:6 59:17,19

71:16 73:4 112:21

134:16 148:6,9

155:8,16,19,22

159:19 212:10

database 148:10

151:10

date 15:7 167:20

day 10:7 35:5 41:7

42:4,16 132:18

140:15 158:19

166:17,21 167:7

211:2

de 218:12

deadline 98:6

deal 41:11 97:7

deals 42:6

dealt 33:2

December 12:5

decide 223:10

225:1

decided 35:6 45:12

94:12 123:17

deciding 45:8

decision 45:15

207:19,20 208:1

decisions 94:14

decline 20:1 40:14

75:3,3 76:9 77:8

134:6

declined 19:19

declines 73:18

declining 19:16

20:3

decrease 157:19

decreases 175:16

deems 45:9

default 58:13

Defense 2:8 38:20

define 105:15,16

107:18

definitely 94:21

135:13 198:12

226:10

definition 172:1

208:15 221:7

degree 119:13

138:18,21 142:8

149:13 153:3

degrees 99:7,10,15

119:13,15 120:17

120:21 121:7

136:17 138:15

142:8 149:13

deLASKI 1:15

5:22,22 30:21,22

31:3 62:16 63:5

64:1 87:9 93:17

143:13,19 144:2

145:7,10 199:1

201:17 202:14

delayed 88:14

deliver 23:6

delta 120:5,8

demand 76:14

demonstrated

198:16

deny 156:6

Department 1:1,8

1:19,19,20,20,21

1:21 4:6,15 6:11

6:13,15,17,20 9:3

11:1 12:3,11

15:18,20 24:21

29:3,12 31:5,8,12

31:17 32:3,10,17

34:19 35:11 36:18

37:18,20 43:15

44:8 45:8,9 47:4

48:5,8 58:13,22

98:20 104:20

113:9 114:9

117:14,16,21

127:6 130:9

138:20 144:5,22

145:17 161:19,20

162:1 199:3 206:2

206:7 218:9,10

220:2 225:18

228:1

Department's 37:5

144:9

departure 32:3

depending 89:2

102:19

depends 99:2

depositions 160:10

deposits 23:16

derived 70:9

describe 42:8 53:15

63:5 126:7

described 12:17

30:11 53:5 54:15

54:15 57:2

description 9:15

57:11

design 15:5 33:10

44:2 45:20 47:3,4

47:7,11 63:19,20

157:19

desk 9:3

Despite 175:14

detail 29:10 62:1

105:4

detailed 30:18

38:11 57:14 59:5

204:3

details 45:3 48:13

48:21 53:19 71:20

determination

35:19

determine 28:12

47:9 166:2 171:22

determined 35:17

45:16

determines 152:4

determining 36:10

develop 40:20

44:19,22 56:5

102:22 103:10,11

138:13 159:10

172:16 173:13

174:6,10

developed 40:20

46:12 125:12

214:6

developing 48:20

94:19,20 174:4

development

159:12

devices 226:12

diagram 128:6

dictate 147:20

difference 32:11

33:11 34:11 58:8

64:11 68:11

136:16 183:14

differences 158:21

173:7

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 236

different 12:21

29:6 59:3 61:3,21

61:22 65:18 66:14

68:2 73:4 89:17

90:1 100:11

101:10 104:9

118:20 121:1

126:4 147:15

166:11 174:15

204:6 213:16

216:18 218:4

differential 51:9

64:7

differently 66:13

difficult 66:2 90:4

138:12 202:4

dimension 85:3

135:19

dimensionalize

141:4

dimensions 48:10

diminish 210:9

dioxide 215:20,21

direct 54:9 55:6,7

70:3 118:20 137:3

213:21,22 214:19

directed 66:16,20

160:5

directing 119:7,22

direction 16:3

68:21 75:13,22

Director 39:3

disadvantaged

165:6

disagree 30:8 100:9

disagreeing 158:14

disagreement

158:11

disagreements

146:4

disappear 21:12

23:10,11 26:3

disclosing 189:5

discontinued 38:7

discount 37:19,21

38:2 59:14,15

130:15,17,21

143:20,22

discounted 56:12

173:2

discuss 10:17 11:9

15:4 29:7 43:14

49:5 51:17 61:11

146:20

discussed 62:17

75:1 178:22 179:4

195:4

discussion 3:5

60:10 74:8 75:6

123:5 146:14

150:11 166:13

218:12 226:3

dispensing 18:4

disproportionately

164:20 166:9

distances 66:22

distinction 31:21

distinguished

102:16

distributed 145:5

distribution 53:22

54:12 55:21 72:4

72:15 73:2 105:6

109:22 115:1

183:3

distributions 107:2

145:6

distributor 55:7

diving 167:7

Dixie 6:6 7:21 8:1

29:16 96:20 114:6

136:3 141:1

158:12 182:17

195:3,7 203:14

210:20 218:19

Dixie-Narco 64:16

75:11 79:14 86:11

86:22 119:4 140:7

186:15 188:14

195:16 211:22

222:20

Dixie-Narco/Car...

1:17

Dixie-Narco/Cra...

1:17,18

docket 220:7

document 12:6,9

15:10 42:9,11

57:15 62:2 72:2

documented 59:13

DOE 12:10 34:2

35:6,9,21 36:8

37:2 39:12,20,22

40:9,12,20 41:16

42:14,20 45:12

46:16 89:3 131:6

160:6 165:5

171:10 172:5,12

172:15 173:17,20

175:5,7,22 179:19

201:18,21 206:11

208:22 213:8

DOE's 174:8 213:5

doing 17:13 28:17

29:21 66:22 70:7

70:8 79:1 82:4

85:11 93:1 158:12

193:20 195:3,9

225:2

dollar 175:3 216:10

dollars 25:22 26:1

85:22 180:13

domestic 102:9

Doom 1:17 7:21,21

203:14,14 204:15

204:18 210:20,20

211:18

door 9:1 27:15

64:20,20 68:4

191:12

doorlight 191:14

double 130:16

Doug 1:9,11 6:22

39:18 66:10

185:20

downs 121:5

downstairs 116:7,9

168:10

downstream 47:21

105:10 110:14

182:7

dramatic 87:13

dramatically 19:19

34:2 82:9 147:15

drastic 64:13

drew 125:14

drink 23:16 86:19

197:15

drinks 76:9

drive 65:6,21 80:11

97:14,21 98:2

148:2 151:3

160:22

driven 28:3 151:2,4

driver 121:18

drivers 23:6

drives 110:13

111:10 121:13

122:3

driving 63:7 91:18

120:20 182:14

drop 20:7,10 87:13

dropped 138:15

197:3

dropping 87:11

due 19:11 37:8

41:14 48:18 60:14

61:3 89:1 94:13

149:3 162:11

173:10 176:17

203:8 206:21

216:16

Duff 2:6 8:5,5

dull 223:18

dwindle 80:15

D.C 1:8 20:19

E

E 4:1,1

eager 228:7

earlier 33:4 42:18

46:10 47:16 63:4

63:17 71:5 86:3

127:4 196:6 214:3

218:12 219:20

early 35:8 36:9

59:21 71:6 93:20

110:14

easier 153:22

easily 219:6

easy 177:21

echoing 68:1

ECM 124:20 184:6

185:6

economic 31:18

32:10,14,21 56:14

78:17 85:10,18

88:15 92:13 95:6

127:7 144:13

145:13 164:16

214:16

economy 2:10 8:9

214:13,15,22,22

Edison 1:14 5:18

116:14

Edwin 1:14 5:17

69:5 116:13 118:1

184:20 197:3

effect 18:17 47:10

79:5 96:15 124:9

128:7 179:3

effective 11:21 31:9

31:15,20 63:1

80:21

effectiveness 34:1

63:19

effects 46:21,22

48:12 213:1

efficiencies 98:2,17

99:6,19 210:2

efficiency 16:9

31:14 43:20,21

44:6 45:2 47:7,10

47:13 55:12 59:11

70:13 97:2 100:2

124:14,16 125:1

127:19 129:15,18

129:21 139:11

174:21 175:2

200:10 210:9

217:4

efficient 2:10 8:8

12:22,22 20:18

22:14 25:21 33:18

56:8 60:15 61:14

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 237

95:1,4 98:9 99:11

99:13,16 102:4,20

103:4,5,9,17,18

124:2 129:17

132:11,15 135:6,8

138:3,4,8 141:8

156:3,7 181:8

182:1 193:16,17

196:9,14,19

197:21 205:22

210:3 213:3

217:14 226:6,22

effort 175:15

177:10,22 178:9

178:18 192:1,8

194:14 219:9

efforts 113:8

EIA 213:7

eight 21:16 106:17

106:19 119:5

193:20

either 18:8 46:18

80:1,7,16 83:4

96:11 124:14

131:4 162:3,15

187:9 216:20

219:21

elaborate 66:12

121:18 196:5

197:18,21

elaborated 147:13

elbow-like 63:3

electric 5:20 93:11

180:11 181:11

212:21

electricity 57:6

58:1,8 212:22

213:10,12,14

215:14

electronic 220:9

electronically

220:5

element 150:12,12

193:10

elements 147:21

148:8,11 218:4

eligibility 89:3

eliminate 190:10

190:13

eliminated 47:2

elimination 17:2

Elstat 8:12

embarked 15:14

Embraco 100:13

emission 216:4

emissions 18:20

215:20,22 216:2,6

216:9,10

emphasize 144:4

228:8

employees 23:8

172:4

employment 3:11

10:1 173:15

213:21,22 214:1,9

214:20,21 215:7

enable 35:22

enact 162:17

encompassing

44:15

encounter 25:14

encourage 14:9

168:17

endorses 24:22

ends 11:17

enemy 92:11

energized 148:11

energy 1:1,1,8,13

1:20,20,21,21

2:10 3:7 4:7,15

6:15,17,20 8:6,8

9:16 11:6 13:9

15:4,15,18,19,21

16:1,5,8,9,11,16

17:4,5,6,11,11,17

17:18 18:18,21

19:2,8,10,12

20:15,18 21:20

22:7,8,12 23:18

23:18 24:1,22

25:10 26:9 27:15

29:3 31:14,14,20

32:4,11 33:11

34:18,22 36:9,13

37:22 38:3 41:21

43:15 44:5 45:17

46:12 47:4 48:5

48:16 49:5 52:21

53:6,9 59:4 65:11

65:13,14 68:19

87:18 92:12 95:1

95:3 96:8,10,12

96:16 97:2 98:17

102:20 103:7,8,9

103:13,17,18

115:15 123:7

124:2,9,11 125:4

125:10,18 126:1

126:21 127:3,13

127:14 128:5,7

129:7 130:2 132:2

132:3,9,12 134:13

135:6,8 137:22

138:8,14,18,20

139:3,9,11 141:6

142:6,13 143:7

145:17 147:5

148:20 149:19

150:5 152:1,16

154:1,9 155:14

156:8,13 161:1,19

163:14,15,16,20

164:1,4 165:18,19

165:21 166:16,20

166:22 171:8

176:18 177:7,8,9

177:12,15,17

178:1,3,11,17

179:21 180:10,12

180:14,18 181:8

182:1 185:10

188:15 189:10,14

192:13 196:8

197:16,17 198:1

198:13 200:9,10

200:12 201:12

203:8 206:1,2

213:2,5 214:6,18

215:4 217:4,5,14

218:9 220:2 224:2

226:5,9,12,15,18

226:22

Energy's 4:7 11:1

engine 28:3

engineering 3:6

9:16 43:7,9,14,18

44:1,8,14,15

46:15 47:5,17,20

49:9 52:8 53:2

171:16

enter 210:7

entered 82:11

entire 22:3 24:12

116:20 118:8,8,18

119:20 120:18

143:17 155:1

209:7

entirely 158:18

entities 25:13

environment 66:3

99:9 119:17

environmental

3:12 10:2 215:11

215:15

EPA 156:4 157:3

EPACT 11:19

EPCA 12:17 15:19

56:20

equals 56:10

equation 40:21

161:7 224:3

equations 13:10

30:5 40:20 151:19

209:3

equipment 13:8

16:13 17:3 19:1

20:8 21:4 22:9

25:5 33:7 43:20

43:22 45:8,11,14

45:15,21 47:11,16

48:11 49:17,18

50:1,3,6,9 53:14

54:5 55:1,13 56:9

56:17 57:19 59:2

60:1 70:11,12

72:8,9 73:5 76:14

79:8 80:18 81:8

85:15 88:21 89:4

92:1 93:20 94:6

94:15,15 95:1,3

103:1 122:7 127:8

128:12,13 129:1,6

129:8,13,14,16,19

129:20 130:2,9,19

147:22 160:7,11

163:1,5 165:3

174:21 175:14,18

180:13 186:18

189:5 196:16,21

197:8,13,15,19

200:4,4 212:22

213:3 217:1,14

equivalent 128:11

Eric 2:5 8:10

erroneous 91:21

error 27:10 146:9

errors 143:2 146:7

especially 66:2

essential 85:13

essentially 71:13

128:3,16 130:20

182:12 204:21

establish 58:16

132:8 147:7

established 16:3

17:21

establishing 41:17

estimate 37:13,14

57:4,8 70:1,12

79:16 87:18

126:20 171:18

180:3 202:2

estimated 40:13

75:7 138:14 216:5

estimates 56:5

89:18 214:8,17

estimating 127:19

estimations 111:18

et 26:6

Europe 100:12

104:8,11

European 100:14

evaluate 44:2

164:16

evaluating 170:13

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 238

evaluation 38:2

56:14 69:20

227:22

evaporator 149:7

193:11

evaporators 99:4

eventually 83:11

84:9

everybody 4:5 9:1

78:2 95:1 104:18

117:19 155:11

160:17,18 178:14

200:21

evidence 145:11

167:5

evolution 87:1

evolve 66:6 80:9

evolving 65:16

exact 30:6 79:17

119:3 136:6

exactly 90:19

140:21 195:3

224:22

examine 172:11

example 98:8 101:4

124:18,20,20

125:21 128:22

140:8 148:1,7

187:13 193:11

200:5 226:7

exceeds 16:14

Excel 57:3

exchange 227:20

Excuse 178:5

185:20

exemplified 165:6

exercise 27:20

65:20

exhaustive 18:2

exist 77:15 107:19

107:22 108:12

existing 20:16 21:2

21:6 24:5 25:3,20

94:1 101:8 188:17

exists 107:15 217:6

expand 86:15,15

expect 67:10 70:2

71:8 153:13 179:5

expected 87:2

150:20

expecting 223:10

expects 20:19

expenditure 197:2

expenditures

214:14

expensive 61:15

188:16 196:17

experience 165:12

experiment 28:8

experimenting

97:1

explain 17:1 30:7

139:2

explanation 55:4

explanations 48:22

explored 65:17

exploring 33:20

expressed 57:17

extend 116:3

extent 88:3 100:10

180:3 198:16

external 48:9

externally 66:20

extra 62:9 226:17

extracted 88:2

extrapolate 58:14

113:15

extremely 76:11

152:21

extremes 124:13

E-mail 219:22

220:6,14

F

F 57:16 62:2

face 154:11

facilitator 1:9,11

facilities 86:18

175:13

facility 61:20 86:19

86:20 165:16

fact 17:18 30:1

48:19 55:5 77:12

81:3 97:5 119:21

124:5 155:4

158:14 192:11

212:9

facto 218:13

factor 63:6 67:8

157:11 210:6

factors 12:16

factory 165:9

facts 19:6 22:11

factual 15:8

Fahrenheit 99:8,10

99:15 138:19

Faier 1:19 6:12,12

failing 26:5

fair 58:2 154:9

fairly 14:20 59:5

61:5 71:15 127:18

184:5 195:12

219:6 225:17

fall 10:17 81:16

82:20,22 83:2,4,5

83:9,21 91:1

falling 92:1

falls 34:1 62:22

107:11 160:18

familiar 14:4

fan 193:11

fancy 190:7

fans 150:2

far 12:3 96:8

111:19 161:4

203:17,19 205:7

fast 120:18

favor 199:12

feasible 46:19

features 45:20

130:11

fed 53:9

federal 40:7 172:13

217:2 227:17

fee 116:18

feedback 39:21

40:1 209:12

feel 29:20 166:8

186:3 210:15

feels 209:1

feet 106:1,7,8 154:5

154:6

felt 90:11

Fifth 20:2

fifty 85:22

fight 114:1

figure 202:22

figures 20:7 53:9

54:13

figuring 202:5

fill 125:2 228:1

filter 110:19

final 11:19 12:14

12:14 37:16 50:4

101:1 105:5

115:10 146:10

176:16 186:6

199:5 217:18

218:3 225:20

227:21

finalized 186:9

finally 216:13

217:3 219:17

financial 37:20

38:1,2 74:21

81:13 91:17 92:5

172:17 181:6

financing 165:13

find 143:8 161:22

166:4 169:1

198:10 202:16

finding 25:1

findings 45:5

fine 70:20 176:6

finished 167:16,17

first 19:7 27:6

41:10 43:2,5,17

52:19 71:3 85:11

101:13 115:20

122:2 123:10

150:10 151:12

155:1 174:3 176:7

176:22 194:20

221:3 226:10,16

five 18:3 20:14 21:2

21:13 37:12 54:3

54:10 62:7 85:20

90:10 92:20 93:4

107:9 109:11

135:8 138:7 139:9

189:1

fixed 187:9 197:1

fixture 49:19 51:1

51:2,3,4,8,9

fixtures 50:17 51:6

51:13 63:18

flat 61:5 62:5

fleet 85:8

flipping 130:7

float 21:6 24:5

floor 154:8 165:9

168:12 227:11

floors 168:13

flow 21:1 103:12

118:21 119:7,22

153:6 171:4

flows 172:21 173:3

fluorescent 50:18

51:1,3 65:15

190:20

flyers 47:8

focus 13:5 14:13

31:12

focused 31:19 66:2

159:11

focusing 120:2

153:6

folks 23:12 35:18

78:7 79:2 85:7

111:13 117:5

141:5 163:21

181:12

follow 51:14 58:11

69:6 93:17 106:12

171:3 190:16

204:13

followed 58:6

168:1

following 9:8,14,19

9:22

follow-on 14:9

29:13 98:3 209:10

follow-up 170:21

food 168:20 169:1

170:4,14

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 239

footprint 97:6,8

force 84:10 205:17

forcefully 71:12

forces 122:6

fore 203:5

forecast 58:15,17

58:18 70:8 73:10

foregoing 117:9

131:9

foresee 89:9

forever 88:16

forget 111:21

form 11:15 43:21

123:17 227:22

228:8

formula 27:7 152:1

153:17,19 154:2,7

155:9

formulas 28:11

136:11

forth 126:12

fortunately 126:9

forward 74:16

89:19,20 160:13

195:6

Foster 24:18

found 45:5 47:18

48:8,14 49:1

50:10 57:12,16

62:1 166:11

fountain 93:3

four 35:2 64:17,18

73:3 90:10 140:17

162:13 212:18

216:18 217:8,22

218:4,4

Fourth 19:18

frame 58:20 76:20

framework 12:6

42:9,11

Francine 1:21 6:16

185:21 189:17,19

190:9 194:11

206:8 207:16

Francine's 199:22

frankly 80:19

97:15

freight 28:2,3

Friedrichs 1:21

39:11,11

friendly 114:2

front 9:2 21:18

30:4 33:17 34:4,5

46:3,7 48:13

50:13 52:3 58:6

64:4,5,18 65:2,3

65:15 66:4 68:5,6

90:15,17 102:9

103:1,8 149:1

151:22 152:19

154:5 156:4,10,12

157:8 191:6,8

203:18 205:1

211:12 220:21

221:15 222:3,7

fronts 65:12 156:2

157:15 158:6

191:4

front-enders 19:12

fulfill 76:15

full 58:21 77:15

80:10,14 121:12

121:21 171:3

201:5

fully 27:18 45:22

87:1 193:9,12

205:1

function 125:12,18

functional 189:4

functioning 190:5

funds 22:6

further 17:6 66:12

74:9 78:13 89:13

204:8 205:9

220:12

furthermore 71:14

future 19:4 80:13

95:17

G

G 4:1

gain 76:18 145:2

gallon 28:7 93:4

gaps 125:1,2

garage 200:22

gas 5:20 99:5

180:21,22

gathered 47:6

general 6:17 31:3

164:21

generally 57:18

58:6 61:5 170:11

generate 20:14

generated 127:20

generation 18:21

213:12,13 215:14

genesis 15:16

gentlemen 15:3

166:19

GEs 104:8

getting 65:4 76:11

76:16,16 80:2

85:18 134:18

162:7 167:11

168:16 177:20,21

183:7 194:17

228:9

give 5:5 106:6

111:7 113:13,17

140:8,19 151:16

178:13 200:17

given 28:12,13

32:15,19,20 74:18

82:10 88:12 89:18

208:8 219:4

glad 4:9 39:9

220:14

glass 19:12 21:18

27:14 30:4 33:17

34:5 46:3 48:13

52:2 64:3 65:2,12

68:5 103:1,6,8

140:9 149:1

152:13,19 154:5

156:2,4,10,12

157:8,15 158:6

191:4,6,8 203:18

205:1 211:12

Glen 1:16 6:4 26:22

27:2 68:8 74:6

82:9 102:14

103:20 108:22,22

142:3 148:12

150:9 154:13

156:21 158:7

184:13,15 188:12

194:19 196:5

219:2 221:1

223:15

Glen's 223:8

globally 97:12

go 12:21 23:7 29:5

38:15 43:3 48:1

53:17 56:19 61:6

61:10 63:12 74:13

75:3 76:4 80:2,6

82:13,14,20 83:6

83:18 84:4,14

85:1 90:20,21

91:10 97:13 99:6

100:6 101:12

102:13 108:22

109:21 112:19

114:5 116:5,8

117:2 123:19

126:15 141:6

147:2 148:5 151:7

156:22 157:13

158:15 168:10,12

168:14 176:2,4

183:15 185:22

186:1,14 190:17

191:22 196:2,3

202:5 207:1

209:13 223:18

224:9

goal 44:1,18,21

160:10

goes 49:19 69:16

74:14 102:9

129:14 173:17

180:10,13 186:16

195:6 220:7

going 4:11 9:5,7,12

9:15 14:7 17:8

19:10 26:3 36:5

39:15 49:5 58:4

63:6 66:5,11

69:15 71:13,15

74:16 75:13 76:4

76:6 77:4,6,11,19

78:13 79:3,4 80:2

80:7,14,16 81:1,7

82:3,13,14,17,19

82:20 83:2 84:10

85:11,20 88:6,7,7

88:9,9,10,15,17

89:19,20 90:16,18

90:20,22 91:5,9

92:2,5 94:5

104:14,21 105:6

112:21 113:16,17

115:10,13 116:3

117:22 119:9,18

132:8 133:22

136:6,16,17,19

139:4 141:7

145:16 149:5

150:16,17 151:18

151:21 155:13

157:16 160:16,21

161:13 162:16

165:17 168:7,9

179:6 180:9 181:2

181:3 188:1 189:6

193:8,12 195:12

196:8 198:17

200:16 201:17

202:8,22 203:1

205:5,16,17,21

206:2 210:2,2

211:2 220:8 223:9

227:15

good 4:5,19 10:21

29:9 31:10 39:8

79:9 82:15 85:17

99:16 110:11,15

111:12 113:20

115:14,20 117:15

126:13 139:5,7

140:20 148:16

151:15 166:10

168:19 192:5

218:2 219:10,14

224:19

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 240

gorilla 26:12

government 21:20

24:19 25:16

172:20 217:2

gradually 70:14

Graham 2:4 7:17

42:17

graphics 62:15

grasp 36:16

gravitated 31:17

Great 30:17

greater 16:21

17:17 134:4 139:8

139:10

greatest 17:12

greatly 189:8

Greenpeace 97:5

grid 99:21 101:16

212:21

grids 102:1

GRIM 172:20,21

173:12 174:4,13

gross 174:18,20

ground 14:2 28:4

168:12

group 88:21,22

155:1 166:1,4,15

226:20

groups 165:13

group's 15:16

grow 87:7

growth 71:9

guarantee 81:12

197:20

guaranteed 197:15

197:22 198:2

226:17

guess 51:7 67:22

75:12 82:16 90:17

107:10 111:7

114:8 121:17

131:3 146:15

181:21 201:22

204:18 210:17,22

222:9,11

guide 174:7

gushing 158:22

guy 78:6 113:16

225:9

guys 15:11 63:10

122:6 194:5 202:5

202:7 210:15

H

half 28:5 51:3,5,12

51:13 64:7 67:8

67:11 73:16 89:16

116:9 152:19

153:20 156:13

158:18 224:6

halfway 116:5

hand 52:20 55:16

handed 9:1

handle 63:9

hands 18:5

hanging 188:19

happen 25:18 86:8

87:2 88:4 93:6

113:17 167:1

181:6 192:9

happened 88:1

227:20

happening 23:11

87:5 88:5 93:13

99:5 182:13

happens 13:20

73:17 155:12

happy 160:18

hard 151:19 168:15

212:10

Harrington 34:15

haywire 99:6

head 135:11 168:10

headed 224:22

healthy 46:22

hear 14:17 83:21

98:12,21 108:22

111:9 145:20

218:17

heard 54:4 93:18

95:5 100:20

108:20 143:14

147:4 151:13

159:4 178:20

199:2 220:19

hearing 162:15

163:18 194:13,16

201:6

heat 150:16 153:4,5

156:18

heavily 205:2

held 42:15 59:10

help 61:12 78:5

105:19 118:15

120:3 140:6 147:7

199:14 220:14

helpful 14:21

111:16 117:21

141:16

hertz 101:21

hey 225:10

he'll 123:1

high 19:21 60:17

152:14,16

higher 19:11 43:19

55:12 59:10 60:14

61:6,7,9 70:13

83:15 99:10

109:16,18 120:7

129:4 134:9,13

135:13 137:22

144:14 145:12

155:3 175:4

205:16 213:3

221:20

highest 165:13

highlight 34:12

98:18

highlights 36:18

highly 22:14

historical 70:9

historically 182:4

187:8

history 59:6 177:5

179:16

hit 84:20 140:12,14

187:13 196:12,13

196:18 220:19,20

221:6,13 222:7,9

222:10,14,16

223:13

hits 158:22

hogs 177:8 180:18

hold 94:12 153:11

156:16,17

holds 156:10,11

honest 139:21

hope 4:19 34:10

35:3,4

hopefully 33:2

Hornquist 1:14

5:17,17 69:7

116:12,13 117:6

118:2 120:4 121:6

122:9 184:19,20

194:18 197:5

198:4 207:6,8

hot 119:17

hour 140:11 156:5

168:7 190:22

hours 132:18

158:19 193:20

224:6

house 165:1

household 97:17

165:3

huge 19:22 64:6

79:22 189:8

Huh 155:18

humidity 136:18

humongous 177:10

hundred 85:22

hundreds 27:22

200:3

hungry 168:6

hurt 23:19

hybrid 93:11

hydrocarbon 104:5

hydrocarbons

95:15 96:11

103:22

I

ICF 2:6 8:5

idea 110:11 209:2,3

identified 161:20

165:5 166:7

identifies 208:13

idling 149:6

II 17:18 139:3

illegal 104:3

illuminate 191:15

illuminated 66:17

148:22 191:2

illumination 67:8

67:17

illustration 141:15

173:16 201:10

227:3

imagine 91:15

210:6

immediate 23:22

27:9

immediately 9:8

25:7 153:6

impact 3:8,9,10,11

3:13 9:20,21 10:1

10:1,2 16:11

41:12 43:8 69:16

70:4 85:21 87:19

87:19 95:16

126:22 127:14

164:19 166:2

167:22 170:18

171:7 172:11,20

176:8,11 186:7,10

187:6,14 203:6,21

204:5 205:7

207:11,17 210:16

211:9,15 212:4,18

212:20 213:18,21

213:22 214:1,2,4

214:5 215:6,13,13

216:1,14

impacted 166:9

impacts 32:14,22

37:13 40:15 41:2

44:13 57:4 123:7

126:7 164:16

171:4,8,18 172:22

173:10,15 174:11

174:16 175:5

186:2 216:15

impact's 214:20

implement 51:4,5

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 241

185:6

implementation

16:15,18 23:18

implemented 26:11

44:4 51:12 57:1

implementing 25:6

180:4

implications

187:14

implies 175:2

imply 33:9

important 31:21

34:21 37:4 47:19

105:9 111:11

136:5 141:4

195:22 219:18

imposed 128:18

impressed 170:12

improve 17:11 44:5

65:19 205:18

improved 15:5

170:5

improvement

33:12,13

improvements

163:16

ImSET 214:5

inability 175:9

inactivity 190:22

inappropriate 38:1

incentive 25:18

180:13 181:7

206:4

incentives 206:12

incentivizing 206:3

include 33:9 55:15

157:4 160:11

204:2

included 16:8

56:17 158:3 172:2

175:20 204:4

215:22

includes 127:9

172:8

including 40:16

176:12

income 165:2

214:10

incorporated 27:5

54:11 172:19

increase 21:7 44:5

45:1 48:9 50:16

60:14 63:15 64:3

64:4 86:14 175:2

175:4 188:10

222:3

increased 157:20

181:22

increases 22:13

34:2 48:11 63:20

181:16,18,18

188:1

incremental 55:12

184:22

increments 134:5

134:11

incur 185:7

Independence 1:8

independent 165:7

indicated 37:3

127:4

indication 129:5

indicators 144:13

indirect 213:22

214:4 215:7

indisputable 19:6

individual 57:5

59:17

individuals 57:21

indoors 53:10

induction 153:5

industrial 165:17

industry 16:20

20:6 21:20 22:1

22:12 23:1,2,14

23:20 25:4 40:12

40:14,15 41:2

44:21 59:11 71:2

74:9 78:4,8 79:4

81:4 84:21 97:15

97:19,20,22 113:1

114:1,2 161:22

162:3,6,12,15,19

171:5 172:12

173:1,1 174:1,16

175:9 176:8,14,22

177:18 178:21

182:4 205:7,8

206:21 211:9

214:9,10 215:3

218:13

inevitable 83:22

influenced 48:9

influx 79:22 81:7

information 15:9

48:6,8,20 50:6

74:18 100:9

104:19 111:8

142:11 171:11,12

172:16 173:20

174:5 179:6

informed 208:1

inherent 210:9

inherently 27:15

154:7 155:13

inhibit 191:11

initial 25:18 56:8

170:22

initially 59:20

inject 83:16

inner 64:20

input 11:11 40:1

208:4

inputs 4:20 47:20

59:8 62:14 172:19

173:12 174:13

INPV 173:9

inside 80:6 191:15

209:7

install 46:20 96:4

installation 57:7

59:9,12 61:7

installed 16:8

26:12 53:10 75:15

75:18 76:10 77:4

77:8 84:9 213:13

installing 25:8

instance 119:4

223:3

instantaneously

25:9

insure 192:10

intellectual 52:3

188:19 189:11

201:13 219:5

intended 178:1

intent 66:14

intercept 126:3

interested 22:15

25:7,17 33:20

96:13 172:7,9

176:12

interesting 179:16

interior 191:20

intermediate 124:7

125:2

internal 67:12,14

67:15

internally 66:16

International 2:6

8:6

interpretation 19:6

interview 172:7

173:11 174:7

interviews 174:9

introduce 5:6 6:21

38:22 206:4

introduced 177:17

introduction 125:6

126:20

introductions 3:3

38:16

intuitive 67:11

intuitively 150:14

inventory 129:14

inverted 27:11

investigate 213:1

investigates 216:15

investing 89:5

investment 22:16

56:8 61:9 85:4

187:9

investments 175:12

invite 11:5

involved 149:10

167:14 194:14

196:9

IP 151:5 201:13

issue 11:19 34:13

34:14 35:13 37:6

37:16 62:21 87:10

104:1 131:5 176:7

201:14,18 204:7

205:7 207:14,22

209:15

issued 12:5,14

issues 3:5,14 9:11

10:9 11:10 13:16

40:10 117:20

176:1 218:6

227:10

item 15:18 179:3

IV 57:13

IV-1 106:15

J

JAMES 1:18

Japan 100:12

101:3,7,9

Jasinski 1:22 7:8,8

43:10,11,13 49:22

50:21 51:10,16

52:13 63:11,11,14

64:9 105:21 106:5

135:2,3,20 138:3

138:5,9,16,17

139:13 143:5,5

Jeff 7:4 170:19

JEFFREY 2:1

Jim 8:1

job 15:11 23:4

70:17 139:5

jobs 23:1,7,11 26:4

John 8:12

join 5:4 39:9

joined 38:16

July 11:17 219:19

225:12

jump 63:21 149:22

jump-started 85:19

June 1:5 12:6,8

42:17

Justice 1:19,19

6:11,13 114:9

K

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 242

keep 14:13 34:21

59:1 80:17 88:7

88:10 90:22

129:22 153:2

182:10

keeping 120:17

149:12

keeps 91:9

kept 119:12 183:11

key 33:1 82:16

Kido 1:20 6:14,14

kilowatt 132:17

156:13 158:19

224:6

kilowatts 140:11

140:15 156:4

211:2

kind 30:12 60:7

70:17 74:15 97:4

146:4 195:7

198:11,13 199:7

209:16

kinds 168:1

Kingman 2:1 7:4,4

170:19,19 176:7

183:1 185:11

know 12:16 14:2

17:13 49:15 62:19

74:7,14 75:5,22

76:3 77:12,15

78:22 80:12 82:10

82:20 90:19 91:3

91:8 92:3,4 95:14

95:16,22 96:14

97:10,16 100:13

100:19 101:9,11

109:18 110:2

113:15,20 117:20

119:17 132:22

136:15 144:16

147:3 148:2

155:12 159:14

160:8,8,9 163:10

166:17 168:22

170:4 186:19

187:13,19 193:11

194:15 195:5,20

196:13 199:5,6

200:16 201:4,22

202:7,21 206:6

209:22 210:5,14

211:3,6,12,18

212:1 220:12,22

220:22 221:6

224:16 226:11,20

knowing 104:15

223:4

knowledge 104:19

knows 95:1 189:16

Korane 2:9 8:7,7

Kristen 1:19 6:10

L

Lab 7:18 212:15

label 179:9

labels 179:1

Laboratory 2:2,3,4

2:5 7:14,16 8:11

52:18 122:19

214:7

Ladies 15:2

laid 42:13

lamp 68:18

landscaped 68:4

Lane 2:8 38:19,21

large 25:19 32:4

33:11 72:16 73:2

73:8 93:7 97:20

105:7,17 106:8,10

107:4 109:14,17

110:4 125:13

140:9 147:5

150:17 151:4

156:4

largely 45:19

larger 34:2 128:10

150:18 153:16

156:17 210:11

226:10

Lastly 44:7

late 36:3 71:6 88:5

latest 219:19

laughter 7:1 13:22

108:9,18 122:13

146:18 154:18

167:2 170:8

launch 38:14

Law 142:8

LCC 47:21 62:10

62:15 130:4

144:12,19,21

145:3 164:13

165:22 166:4,5

167:19,21 171:19

lead 206:12

Leading 44:14

learned 22:2

leasing 78:19

leave 148:22

leaves 188:21

led 33:7,10 48:16

49:16 50:17 51:2

51:4,5 52:2 63:15

63:17,20 66:4

72:6 73:4 124:18

142:19 177:18

LEDs 48:19 50:1

50:13 64:3 65:10

65:10,12,14 66:1

66:2

left 37:1 47:3 72:13

142:3 170:16

224:9

legal 142:9

legally 224:18

legislated 23:15

legislation 195:6

208:16

legitimate 142:17

lengths 58:22

let's 4:3,4 39:16

49:7 55:18 93:8

98:11,21 102:13

115:9,22 116:10

117:1,12 120:19

126:15 131:8

145:20 160:12

162:20 164:12

178:16 194:19

level 18:21 31:9

37:9 61:9,10,11

62:8 67:17 71:15

73:17 79:3 84:4,5

84:11 124:2,3,5

124:10 125:11

128:4,4,5,5,11,12

128:20,21 129:2,2

129:3,3,7,11

130:13 131:7

132:5,7,12 134:14

138:14 144:14,22

145:12,12,19

147:14 164:9,10

184:21 185:8

188:10,21 189:12

190:10 195:3

225:5

levels 9:21 11:7,20

12:21 13:1,6

18:22 41:20 59:11

60:15 69:19 86:5

86:13 123:11,15

123:16,20 124:1,7

124:14,17 125:1,2

125:5,22 126:6,8

127:1,19 129:9

130:12,17,22

131:11,12 140:10

143:17 151:2

152:16 154:1,9

173:6 174:21

176:10 194:15

218:14,16,21

219:1,4 221:20

leverage 87:2

Lewis 4:16

life 9:17 19:14 43:7

47:22 53:11,12

56:3,6,10,18

57:10,18 58:21

59:8 60:4,5 61:6

61:15 80:3 89:1

92:19 124:15

193:1

lifetime 60:1

127:10

lifetimes 59:3

70:11

light 36:17 64:8,12

64:12,19,22 65:1

65:5,8,8 66:2

92:15 147:14

148:22 151:2

157:9,17 191:1,3

191:10,13 223:10

223:13

lightability 65:19

lighting 33:7,10

34:3 50:15 63:20

65:15 66:12,15,20

67:5 68:2,4

124:18 142:19,20

147:22 148:4

149:9 150:22

154:10 157:14,19

158:4,5,21 188:22

190:11,13 191:3

191:20,21 198:7

223:4,9,18

lights 52:2 64:17

148:19,22 150:3

157:8,10,10,12,18

157:21 158:17

189:22 190:2,20

190:21 191:1,22

192:2,6 193:2,8,9

195:11,12,19

224:3,5

likelihood 32:21

likes 144:22

limitations 209:20

limited 206:9

limiting 225:3

line 80:14 118:16

125:15 136:11

liner 64:21

lines 125:14

link 220:11

list 44:22 46:11

142:12

listed 40:11 131:12

literally 119:3

literature 37:15

little 16:10 17:1

22:11 27:20 29:18

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 243

49:20 72:22 73:18

75:16 78:21 83:12

89:13 104:14

131:16 136:12

143:15 161:3

162:16 177:5

189:16 190:7

218:11

Llenza 1:20 4:13

4:14 6:19,19

10:22 29:1,2,2

132:19 133:2

145:22 146:2,3,22

161:18,19 185:15

185:15 218:8,9

219:14 220:1,2

227:16 228:5

load 81:15 121:14

150:16,17 151:1

156:9,18 210:13

locate 165:15

location 20:3,9

39:7 57:10 87:4

221:18 222:1

223:20

locations 61:22

76:6,14,15 80:15

80:17

logical 177:6

long 4:18 31:11

56:7 66:21 149:11

149:15 163:15

168:12 180:18

181:15

longer 166:7

look 30:3 48:6

56:15,20 57:5,21

59:2 60:22 61:1

70:10,22 71:22

75:12 81:13 88:1

107:10 130:10

142:12 144:19

145:1 146:8 148:5

150:11,12,14,15

150:19 151:5,20

152:13,17 160:6

162:6 170:6

197:12,15 223:2

225:6

looked 27:7 29:22

61:20 95:13,22

134:16 151:12

160:22 217:3

looking 9:6 33:13

37:9 62:3 64:1

74:3 99:19 105:16

133:8 141:6

142:18 145:7

146:14 147:10

150:8 161:10,12

163:15 168:18

226:16 228:2

looks 10:21 64:2

133:22 134:4

170:5 172:12

loosely 56:14

lose 75:19 190:6

loss 76:1 145:3

lost 23:2,2 199:17

lot 13:21 14:20

19:7 64:22 68:19

75:19 80:18 81:4

85:9 94:18 95:4,5

96:10,11 97:8

111:18 131:14

140:4 145:4

151:13 160:22

177:22 183:19

184:10 200:6

211:16 220:3

222:22 225:4

226:11,13

lots 95:19

low 71:15 75:18

76:3,11,17 81:6

83:2,4,14 165:2

lower 37:14 75:17

76:4 120:7 130:18

130:22 138:2

144:7 152:21

166:6 174:17

204:22 221:22

lowest 124:15

165:19,20

lunch 9:19 168:2,4

168:7 169:6

luncheon 9:19

M

machine 11:2 12:4

15:9 17:20 19:9

19:10,11,14 20:2

21:21 22:21 23:4

27:12,15,16 34:9

45:11 46:6 47:11

50:4 56:22 61:14

61:19 64:4,13,18

64:19 65:2,3

66:13,19 67:2

68:6,13 82:1

88:16 91:4,7,11

91:19 92:13 94:3

103:2,14 106:1

109:3,3 115:7

121:20 122:1

141:8 142:9 144:6

145:2 148:8,9

149:1 151:22

152:6 153:11,16

155:13 156:17

157:21 158:17

159:2 166:17,21

167:6,8 177:6

179:4,8,11,13

180:15,20 181:7,7

181:9 182:2 188:8

188:17,22 189:6

190:1,2,5,19,20

192:12 193:1,3,4

193:5,15,21 194:7

204:21 208:17,21

209:5,6,19 214:12

215:3 219:7

221:10,12 222:5,7

223:8,11,17

224:16 225:2

machines 1:2 4:9

15:6 17:18 18:1,4

18:5,11,14,19

19:7,19,21,22

20:3,5,6,9,16,19

21:2,3,8,10,17,19

22:9,14,19 23:3

24:2 25:13 26:2,3

27:8 31:6,7 32:8

32:20 33:5,8,12

33:17,21 34:3,4,5

36:2 43:16 44:5

44:10 45:2,22

46:4,6,7,9 50:7

53:4,8,10 54:1

62:22 63:22 66:15

67:4 70:5 72:5,13

72:17,18 73:3

75:21 77:4,9

78:11 79:16,19

80:19 82:5,7,15

82:17 83:3,4 85:3

89:19 90:15 92:3

92:18 95:14 96:5

98:9 101:5 109:20

113:13 118:5

125:14 131:17,17

131:22 132:11

138:1,7,20 139:8

139:12 147:19

153:9 156:16

159:13 165:10,14

177:7,12,19 179:2

180:18 181:5,13

182:14 189:22

200:6,12 204:6

207:14 208:12,14

208:22 209:17

211:4,5,7 225:8

macros 57:4

magnetic 184:8

mail 220:10

main 11:4 43:17

44:21 116:8 171:6

maintain 50:14

58:20 80:20,21

83:12 84:5,11

92:2

maintained 213:7

maintaining

120:21

maintenance 60:11

60:17 130:3

major 45:6 48:2,15

79:8 85:21 114:4

178:8,8 194:16

majority 72:9

79:16,18,19

157:14 197:14

225:8

makers 207:19,20

making 22:16

91:16 163:16

181:21 193:8

194:6

management

142:13 157:5

188:16 189:10

224:2 226:12

Managing 39:3

mandate 164:1

mandates 138:21

mandating 177:18

179:1

mandatory 89:3

177:11

manipulate 150:4

manufacture 19:18

46:20 86:12

167:22

manufactured 94:6

manufacturer

37:13 54:8 55:5,6

111:7 137:1

171:22 172:7

173:10 175:7

180:20 181:8

183:3 190:16

191:9 214:2

219:12

manufacturers

21:22 25:5 33:4

43:19 47:8 54:5

64:11 78:9 85:21

86:7 97:18 107:11

110:20 114:11,16

171:1,9,13,21

172:14 173:22

175:11 176:17

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 244

180:15 186:3,7

187:7 203:7 205:4

205:17 206:20

220:18

manufacturer's

171:18 172:17

manufacturing 3:9

9:21 22:4 23:11

26:4 50:11 61:20

76:6,7 78:18,20

87:4 165:7,16

170:18 171:7

204:3 215:1

Marantan 1:22 7:6

7:6 39:18,19

208:11 209:11

212:9

Marc 1:13 39:2

95:10 98:3 100:7

205:13 207:1

March 20:17

margin 174:18,20

175:3

marginally 82:7

Margo 1:19 6:12

Mark 39:11,13

marked 211:9

market 33:17

44:16,17,18 45:3

45:7 46:13 48:6

75:19 76:18 95:19

101:4 113:22

114:13 127:20

128:17 173:22

179:21 197:9

200:3,7,11 214:13

217:11,11,15

226:13

marketplace 33:19

157:15 181:5

182:15 191:9

200:5,18

markup 54:22 55:9

markups 54:13

55:8,12,15

mark-up 174:20

175:20

mark-ups 53:13

mass 190:1

massive 177:22

material 44:11,12

70:22 72:7 181:17

materials 225:16

math 29:21 151:18

mathematical 30:5

Mathis 1:18 8:1,1

matrix 131:11

Matt 7:10 111:15

115:3 138:10

matter 5:10 9:11

69:10 91:16

110:10 117:9

155:4

matters 30:19 70:6

MATTHEW 2:1

Max 61:13,13 62:8

124:2,5

maximize 31:18

222:6

maximizes 31:14

maximizing 31:19

maximum 31:9

37:9,11 60:7

125:17 129:7

130:14

McFADDEN 1:16

6:2,2

McGARRAH 1:12

5:13,13 13:20

15:2 24:8,10,13

24:16 70:19 77:22

78:1 85:2 86:6

92:8,9 112:7

113:11,21 131:16

131:21,21 132:7

135:18 137:19

138:4,6 139:1,14

139:18,21 140:17

140:20 141:3,13

141:17 162:11

163:3,13 180:8

199:21 200:1

201:7,11

MDEC 125:17

mean 75:19 79:22

80:16 81:14 84:7

86:16 90:14,16

91:22 98:5 100:11

101:7 109:17

144:11 149:2

153:10,16 156:1,8

156:12 160:8,16

160:20 161:21

167:3 183:18,19

183:21 189:20

202:11,16 206:8

210:22 222:21

meaning 61:7

139:10

means 85:3,4 162:6

182:5 189:21

193:3

measure 147:5

151:4

mechanisms 45:20

median 73:5

medium 72:17 73:2

105:7 106:1,7,10

107:3 110:3 112:2

112:3 125:13

128:22 135:21

224:7

meet 89:5 92:19

132:2,3 152:9

164:1 177:12,19

195:2 202:6 219:1

219:4,5,8 225:1

meeting 1:1,7 4:7

4:18 9:4 11:3,4,16

12:2,13,13 28:10

28:20 42:10,15

54:6,18 57:2

98:14 100:19

112:22 155:2

169:6 194:14

218:13 225:21

228:6,12,15

meetings 207:18

228:3

meets 16:13

mental 27:20

mentioned 46:10

47:16 63:17

101:15,20 102:7

103:22 142:5,16

merchandising 2:8

8:4 67:1,5 191:17

191:19

mercury 215:21

met 16:16,20 92:11

194:15

method 36:8,12,15

36:22 40:20 45:19

46:9 148:19 149:4

157:11 162:8

198:6,6 199:7,11

methodologies 11:8

11:12

methodology 29:14

40:2 123:22

192:21,22 193:13

224:1

methods 28:13

36:11,19 147:16

147:21 157:22

228:9

metric 47:14

MIA 171:7,16,17

172:5,10,15

173:18 174:14

176:1 214:20

mic 131:20

Michael 1:20,21

2:3,6 6:14 7:15

126:6

microphone 95:9

203:12 204:16

205:12

microphones 14:16

middle 135:17

177:16

midst 94:20

midstream 5:4

mid-afternoon

10:4

mid-morning 9:13

Mike 6:18 8:14

52:20 53:15 55:17

74:17 83:19 105:2

107:1 111:10

114:20 122:21

126:18 143:14

179:5

mile 28:2

mileage 28:1,5

180:21

miles 28:7

Millard 2:1 7:10,10

111:15,15 112:1

112:12,18 115:3,4

138:10,10

Miller 24:18

million 20:10 21:2

21:13 22:18 73:12

73:16,18 75:4,15

75:18 76:11,16,20

81:6 83:2,4,13,13

83:14,21 84:5,16

85:4,22 87:12

149:22 181:4

millions 26:2 97:16

million-plus 18:3

mind 34:21 118:3

118:10 139:6

minimal 16:10

minimum 23:4,5

114:10

minor 79:8

minority 194:1

minus 21:10

119:13 120:18

149:13 153:3

minute 17:1 133:9

227:22

minutes 116:4

misinterpreted

154:21

misleading 189:13

missed 38:16 39:5

mistake 82:19 92:6

mix 70:12 85:14

129:15,18,21

213:11

mixed 60:10

mode 14:15 223:19

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 245

model 91:19,20

92:5 137:1 142:9

166:1 172:20

178:10 183:5

213:4 214:5,8

215:18,18

modeling 213:5

models 140:22

175:7

modest 25:18

modified 54:17

moment 49:7,8

71:22 102:3,7

104:3 121:17

199:5,8

monetized 216:9

money 89:6 95:2,4

177:22 193:8

205:20 226:13

Monroe 2:7 8:3,3

111:4,6 113:5,5,6

months 158:13

morning 4:5,12

22:2 70:17 147:13

195:2

motor 124:19,19,20

149:7

motorized 28:3

motors 103:4 149:7

149:9

move 68:20 69:11

141:19 143:4

157:2 160:12

164:12 182:6

185:18 189:1

212:7

moved 78:21

moving 22:3 36:19

170:15

mull 140:2

multi 35:17

multiple 202:18

multi-part 35:6,22

mutual 181:10

N

N 4:1

nagging 37:17

nail 105:4 178:21

NAMA 110:18

111:3 112:21

113:14

name 5:7 14:6,7,10

14:11,12 27:1

38:17 43:12 95:9

95:10 111:14

113:4 203:12

210:19

Narco 29:17 78:16

96:21 114:7 136:4

141:2 182:18

218:20

Narco/Crane 6:7

7:22 8:2 203:15

210:21

narrowed 79:7

national 2:2,3,4,5,7

2:8 3:8 7:13,16,18

8:4,11 9:20 43:8

52:18 69:16 70:4

115:15 122:18

123:7 126:21,21

127:2,5,13,13,14

130:1 212:15

213:4 214:7,18,22

214:22 216:15

nationwide 24:17

Natural 38:19

nature 27:13

Navigant 1:22,22

2:1,1 7:5,7,9,11

43:13 61:12 63:9

67:7 68:13 111:13

117:5 135:3 160:5

170:20

Navigant's 167:12

NCI 214:2

near 80:3 97:3

necessarily 34:8

148:3

necessary 44:7

45:10 50:14

175:12,19

Ned 2:7 8:3 113:5,6

113:7

need 10:5 14:10,15

24:3 36:18 54:7

61:12 80:18 86:15

98:1 111:11 116:8

117:2 121:22

136:21 154:11

160:16,18 161:9

192:7 195:10

196:15 199:10

204:7 205:8 212:2

needed 64:8

needs 36:6 83:14

152:5 161:11

182:10 202:7

negative 21:9

143:17

Neither 22:15

NEMS 215:17

NEMS-BT 213:4

215:18

net 40:14 105:10

123:6 130:8,10,20

145:2,3 173:2

176:9 196:20

never 72:18 118:3

new 17:13 19:18

20:8,13 21:4,8

31:5 35:15 41:14

48:20 54:13,18

59:19 71:9 81:7

93:22 94:5,14

95:13,18 96:12

103:1,3,3,11,11

129:19,20 139:4

140:12,14 141:8

155:6,10 157:18

170:12 176:18

188:9 189:6

201:20 203:8

206:5 216:20

newly 168:18

nice 7:2 15:10

70:16

nicer 148:14

Nina 1:18 6:8 51:20

51:21 88:18 90:5

96:2,22 98:22

101:13 102:13

133:12 135:10

137:13 149:21

177:2,3 180:1

225:22 226:1

Nine 21:21

Ninety 121:15

nitrogen 215:20

nods 167:11

non 158:1 216:18

non-cost 196:9

non-regulatory

216:16 217:8

non-usage 148:21

157:12

NOPR 4:18 11:16

42:19 43:1 52:10

55:20 57:12 59:6

59:12 60:13,20

123:21 166:13

171:2,21 174:3,15

183:16 199:3

217:20

normally 157:20

North 99:20 101:16

101:21 102:2,6

104:1

Northwest 2:2,3,4

2:5 7:13,16,18

8:11 52:18 122:18

212:15 214:7

nose 116:2

note 11:16 37:7

127:2 136:5

143:19 144:11,20

noteworthy 124:17

124:21

notice 11:2 12:7,11

39:22 40:6,18

41:1,4,19 42:2,12

42:19 208:13

215:6

noticing 116:15

notion 56:7

NOx 216:11

NPV 37:11,12

40:12 123:2,6

130:14,18 131:1,4

131:13 143:17

177:1

NRDC 34:15

number 17:5 21:8

21:10 50:12 51:2

55:7 70:2 71:18

76:9 78:8 84:6

89:20 90:1 106:4

107:9 109:8

113:15,18 134:19

135:12 142:5,9,20

152:20 153:7

157:4 158:5

160:19 171:10

176:1 190:4 212:2

numbers 51:11

53:7 54:14,16

61:2 79:17,22

89:16 106:21

107:17 108:20,21

109:10 113:14

114:3,12,14 115:2

142:15 143:7

146:3 147:6,6,9

151:5,13 152:18

154:12 157:3

159:10 167:1

187:12 200:3

225:7

nutrition 179:1

O

O 4:1

objection 225:1

objective 226:21

observation 78:3

obtain 57:8 59:15

obviously 70:1

78:17 94:11

120:10 181:12

208:7

occasions 82:7

Office 6:17 39:12

official 227:17

offsetting 61:8

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 246

off-line 51:15

oh 39:10 92:2 106:5

108:2 132:21

134:2 207:15

okay 4:3,22 5:3

8:20 10:20 24:9

28:2,4,7,9,12,22

28:22 30:17 38:13

39:14 42:5 51:14

52:7,12 53:20

56:2 58:1 67:21

69:2,5,12,22 72:3

75:7 79:11 83:20

84:13,19 88:9

89:11 93:16 98:11

100:6 103:19

104:13 105:3

107:1,16 108:6,19

108:21 109:7,19

110:6,16 111:12

112:9 113:19

114:19 115:8,12

115:22 117:4

122:14 123:20

126:19 129:12

132:10 134:2,20

136:1 137:7,10,15

137:16 140:1

141:14 142:14,17

143:10 145:9

147:1 148:12,16

152:10 159:2

160:2 163:3 164:6

164:7,14 167:10

167:15 168:6

170:10 179:15

182:16 185:17

186:21 187:2

189:5 194:10

195:21 196:13

197:20 199:18

203:2 204:9

205:11 206:17

212:13,14 218:7

219:2,10,12,14

221:2,14 225:10

227:1,15

old 78:6 79:21

80:20 129:13

135:1

older 70:14 89:4

129:17

oldest 100:12

OMB 144:10

once 15:4 24:2

54:11 78:6 129:12

218:15 228:8

ones 75:20 86:18

100:13 119:12

132:3 187:20

203:20 205:21

206:1

one-third 118:21

120:7 153:1,2,22

one-to-one 50:22

ongoing 49:11

Online 59:18

opaque 68:4

open 126:11 204:7

205:7

opening 62:20

199:9

operate 18:10,18

78:12 99:18

165:11

operated 197:8

operating 56:12

99:3,3,9,14

147:21 148:9,10

150:2,3 175:6,15

operation 22:4

25:21 78:20

operational 56:20

159:13 193:9,12

operations 61:8

78:18 195:8

operator 149:17

184:6

operators 76:12,13

80:10,11,14

opinion 91:3 146:7

opinions 104:10

opportunities 15:5

23:9

opportunity 9:9,12

10:7 13:14 15:3

24:1 25:16,19

29:9 76:1 86:14

87:7 227:8,9

opposed 63:18

option 33:18 47:4

47:12 63:19,20

226:7

options 33:10 44:2

47:3,7 94:16,20

95:2 96:14 216:19

224:13

order 12:2 28:6

51:4 83:12 114:17

163:7 171:21

172:15 173:17

174:15 190:9

192:4

orders 100:16

organizational 5:7

14:11 38:18

original 15:13

30:13 164:22

223:22 224:1

originally 50:8,21

60:3,18 70:9

127:18

ounce 91:11

outcomes 45:6

47:12

outdoors 53:11

output 213:9 214:9

215:17

outputs 54:21

172:21

outset 30:21 38:10

38:17

outside 26:16

179:13

outweigh 13:4

41:22

overage 55:11

overall 54:20,22

55:9 178:10

214:13,22 224:22

override 149:17

overview 3:4 9:8,9

13:13

overwhelming

194:16

owned 61:19

owner 56:21

180:20 181:7

owners 165:12

180:15

ownership 18:3

25:12 61:22

owns 52:4 151:4

oxides 215:21

o'clock 116:1

P

P 4:1

Pacific 2:2,3,4,5

5:20 7:13,15,18

8:11 52:17 122:18

212:15 214:7

pack 222:6

package 91:12

packages 121:22

156:16 209:18

packet 8:22 170:16

227:21

page 3:2 15:18

18:12,15,16,19,22

19:4,13,13,17

20:11 106:15,19

126:11 204:19

227:21

pages 26:1

paid 177:8

panel 65:7

panels 201:21,22

paper 135:1

parameters 30:15

172:17

pardon 136:1

parent 172:2

Parker 2:4 7:17,17

part 35:18 43:1,2,5

44:8,17 46:15

53:1,20 78:19

86:16,20 87:1

93:14 149:18

171:14 173:18

174:3 192:13

204:12 213:16

227:15

PARTICIPANT

5:1 24:14 39:6

106:17 121:15

161:7 162:20

163:4 168:20

183:17

participants 1:10

1:23 3:5,15 11:15

116:21

particular 10:16

41:12 44:9 47:5

49:9 202:11

213:18 214:8

215:22 216:5

217:6,10,11

223:17

particularly 52:9

93:3 147:11 155:5

186:22

parties 4:20 25:17

40:16 176:12

180:3

party 110:21

pass 183:8,10

188:17

passed 182:22

183:4

passing 103:22

patent 52:4 195:17

200:16,21 201:18

202:10,14

patented 150:1

200:2,13,20

201:11

patents 150:1

199:22 201:8

path 16:4 26:8

161:21 162:2,3,4

paths 161:22

202:18

pause 49:8 52:15

55:18 110:7 168:7

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 247

217:21

pay 56:7 165:16

payback 43:8 56:3

57:20,21 62:4,6,6

95:6 124:15 166:5

166:6

paying 25:8 81:5

164:18 165:17

184:7 195:13

206:1

pays 180:11,14

181:11

peak 122:2 137:16

peaks 81:2

pebbles 34:20

pencil 135:1

pending 195:7,17

people 14:7 38:15

104:2,7 111:19

112:1 113:12

115:6 139:2 155:7

164:17 165:2

166:2 168:5,17

170:11 178:15

201:1

Pepsi 1:18 6:8

20:18 21:3,16

22:15 51:21 67:15

75:13 76:13 80:8

80:8 81:19 85:5

92:15 93:18 94:11

96:3,4,13 100:16

131:18 132:1

177:3,11,17

178:12 200:6,17

205:3 211:7 226:1

226:4

Pepsis 79:6 180:16

Pepsi-Cola 18:6

percent 18:10,13

19:20 20:15 25:12

27:18 28:6 33:13

33:15 54:2,3,3,7,9

54:10 65:14 72:11

72:13,16,16,17,21

73:6,7 79:20

84:11 87:12 89:16

89:17 105:7,7,8

107:3,4,4,9,9

109:11,12,14

113:13 129:1,2

130:15,16,21

132:16,20 133:3,4

133:20,21,22

134:4,6,14 135:6

135:8 136:18

137:22 138:7

139:8,10 140:16

141:2 143:20,21

144:7,8,15 145:8

163:19 174:19

177:15 178:3,11

178:16 197:21

198:1,14 200:8,13

percentage 54:14

112:3 115:2

132:15,22 174:20

175:16 211:20

226:8

percentages 54:1,7

54:12,19

perfectly 142:17

performance 24:21

35:11

period 11:17 43:8

56:4 57:20 58:17

58:18 59:7 62:6

71:6,8 73:13,20

122:2 124:16

127:4,8 130:5

149:8 157:12,16

158:13 159:18

166:5 172:22

173:3 190:13,21

190:22

periodicals 71:2

periods 57:22 62:6

148:21 166:6

192:11

person 5:2 84:21

180:11,14 181:11

perspective 56:15

petition 188:20

PG&E 49:14 94:17

phase 90:12 91:3

173:18 174:2,8

225:21

phases 173:17

phones 14:14

physical 37:19,21

45:17

pick 123:8,10,13

124:1,6 125:2

142:19

picked 124:14

125:10 126:5

picking 20:4

picture 49:4 92:4

piece 30:13 68:15

103:1 153:7

183:20

pieces 15:8 73:3

85:13 200:4

Pinto 1:21 6:16,16

178:5 185:20,21

186:1,12,21 187:2

189:18,19 190:8,9

192:18 194:12

195:22 206:8,9,15

207:15,16

place 80:1,4,17

86:21 91:15

115:14,20 116:6

129:13 187:19

220:8

placements 20:2

plan 10:13 126:13

plant 78:14,22

215:20

plants 22:5

plastic 65:7

play 189:1

please 4:3 5:7 7:3

7:20 11:16 14:5,6

14:13,17 15:1

26:16,22 39:1

49:12 51:20 64:14

83:18 89:14 95:8

101:2 105:17

111:14 126:4

154:13 168:8

177:2 203:11,12

204:17 205:12

210:18 227:22

plus 56:11 119:13

120:17 127:4

149:13 153:3

Pogo 92:10

point 29:10 33:3

35:5 57:8 72:16

74:4 77:20 80:19

81:15,22 82:10,15

82:16 84:3,17

85:14,15 86:3

88:4,16 91:16

99:16 101:1,1

102:16 125:14

131:3 140:2

144:18 155:10

158:16 159:18

171:6,17 172:10

181:21 186:2,20

194:4 196:5

201:20 211:4

227:5

pointed 42:17

points 31:21 81:17

98:5 125:15

145:10

policy 15:15,19

17:6 31:10,10

32:2 36:6 39:12

164:2

pollution 38:3

popular 72:19

population 22:22

77:3 91:2 92:3

164:21

populations 22:21

portal 220:5,6

portion 41:8 197:8

204:22 209:4,5

portions 203:22

position 218:15

positive 130:18

131:1 144:12

possible 17:12

68:16 208:4

221:15 226:5

228:10

possibly 24:4 79:7

post 85:14

posted 12:9 156:3

poster 200:9

postpone 26:18

postponing 85:8,9

potential 13:3,4

19:2 32:2 44:3

75:19 145:1

165:14 175:5

197:16

potentially 102:20

165:5 172:14

226:9

pound 26:11

power 99:20

101:16 102:1

149:2 215:19

powered 147:21

148:8,11 193:10

practical 46:19

100:1 102:5

practice 218:2

precluded 52:5

precludes 15:20

predict 80:13

predisposed 144:3

prefer 63:8

preliminary 44:22

46:11

prepared 15:17

211:10

present 40:14 43:9

105:10 123:6

126:22 127:5,7

130:8,10,20 173:2

176:9 207:21

presentation 29:5

30:18 38:11 41:8

42:6 144:15

164:12 170:21

175:22 225:16

presentations

38:14 98:6,7

212:17

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 248

presented 11:8

170:22 174:14

presently 16:11

preservation

174:18 175:6

President 35:19

presidents 78:4

presiding 1:9

pressure 76:8

152:15

presumably 118:10

pretty 32:12 62:5

139:5 145:11

152:15 168:18

197:1 209:20

212:17 217:19

prevent 28:16

previously 171:15

174:5

price 49:18 53:14

56:11 58:8 81:5

165:18 183:11

188:10

prices 44:11,12

49:16 57:6 58:1

58:16 130:2,2

165:19 175:10

213:10 215:14

pricing 48:16 49:21

63:15

primarily 18:5

76:7 212:19

216:15

primary 67:4

principal 58:3

prior 117:18 191:4

private 179:20

probability 145:5

probably 9:1 15:8

16:4 62:11 73:6

74:8 76:5 83:21

87:13 96:6 108:5

132:1 178:18

196:20 202:17

215:5 223:16,17

problem 36:15

127:22 194:17

219:5

problems 159:19

procedure 138:21

procedures 12:5

58:7

proceed 56:3

117:22 122:16

proceedings 52:15

process 42:8 48:5

125:7 172:5

173:12 208:2

216:17,21 217:9

219:20

produce 86:5

175:13

produced 16:13

18:14 191:6

producing 43:19

78:10

product 23:5,8

66:16 80:4 118:8

118:9 120:7,9,17

120:19,21 149:12

153:10 175:1

182:10 192:4,4

200:7,14 217:6

production 20:7

22:13 76:22

productive 104:16

227:18

products 17:5

58:21 76:2 80:6

95:7 181:19 200:2

200:11,20 201:2

201:12 206:5

profile 174:1

profit 91:7 92:4

175:6,15

profitability 91:19

profitable 82:8

182:11

program 213:6

217:5

programs 180:12

180:12

project 1:15 6:1

15:17 77:3 92:12

190:3

projected 19:14

20:10 39:16

projection 27:17

projections 19:4

promote 226:9

promulgating

206:10

properly 25:2

property 52:4

188:19 189:11

201:13 219:5

proportion 145:1

proposal 16:6 31:4

31:5 164:5 205:6

proposals 186:6

proposal[page

204:1

propose 162:17

proposed 11:2,6

12:8,12,18 13:8

16:14 27:7 31:8

32:11 33:8 34:16

39:21,22 40:6

42:13,19 135:5,7

139:7 145:18

162:14 163:19

176:9,14 179:22

186:5,9 190:10

201:18 203:9,10

218:6,13,15,21

proposing 16:18

42:20 137:21

162:13

proposition 81:14

82:8 91:17 102:8

protocol 226:19

proven 202:20

provide 9:12 68:20

146:15 162:4

provided 130:14,20

155:5 171:12

188:18 208:15

provides 17:16

providing 24:17

159:17

provision 21:7

PSC 124:19

public 1:1,7 4:7,17

11:2 28:20 42:10

42:15 54:6 142:7

142:10 228:15

publicly 147:6

173:20 174:6

published 12:6,11

50:5 157:3 213:7

pull 93:7 121:4

153:4 158:17

pulled 92:17

pulling 51:10 153:5

pumps 99:17

pun 178:1

purchase 18:13

22:14 94:22 122:2

131:18 132:1

144:6 187:15

209:16 211:8

222:17

purchased 21:4

127:8,10 128:9

129:6,8 131:22

200:10 205:2

purchaser 223:2

purchasers 128:2,2

128:10 145:2

165:3,14 216:22

purchases 16:15

19:9 20:8 21:17

24:4 75:21 80:18

83:11 84:10 85:8

92:17 93:2 128:14

purchasing 20:5

24:18 56:16 86:22

purpose 11:4 43:17

53:18 56:4 66:14

68:1 69:22 98:14

100:18 164:15

222:6

purposes 67:6 74:8

126:10 162:21

pursue 89:12

123:21

pursuing 96:14

push 31:1 203:5

pushed 187:21

put 25:17 60:3

88:16 94:4 107:8

113:2 120:19

135:19 182:2

197:11 207:18

222:5

putting 50:17

54:18

p.m 169:5,7 170:2

228:14

Q

quads 37:21

qualifications

80:11

qualitative 44:19

216:20 217:7,16

quantify 171:4

quantitative 44:20

173:9 217:13

question 33:1

49:15 51:7 72:3

73:1 94:9 95:12

96:9 116:11,13

118:1 120:5

158:13 159:14

160:4 161:14

163:11 166:14

183:2 184:2,18,19

185:7,18 187:17

194:11,18 197:6

199:22 200:1

201:5 202:8 203:4

205:15 220:17,20

221:5

questioning 170:13

questions 10:14

29:12 49:8 52:7

55:19,22 62:13

74:1 118:3 131:4

131:9,13 140:2

176:20 179:19

209:9 217:21,22

220:13 225:15,18

queue 198:22

quick 8:20 35:2

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 249

116:12

quickest 26:8

quickly 111:11

221:6 222:14

quite 22:10 71:11

97:15 131:14

178:19

R

R 4:1 103:14

radically 166:11

rail 28:2,3

railroad 28:1

raise 10:8

raised 118:2

range 61:21 124:3

139:6,6 174:17

175:5

rapidly 48:19

rate 130:16,17,21

143:21,22 144:8

144:15,17

rated 158:20

rates 37:21 59:14

59:15

rating 28:5

ratings 138:18

ratio 50:22

Ray 1:16 6:2

Raymond 1:19

6:10,10

reach 119:15

175:19

reaching 73:11

143:15

reaction 27:9 88:8

88:11

read 15:16 17:8,9

20:22 58:4 106:20

reads 228:1

ready 100:17

real 21:10 36:13,22

193:1 198:3

199:11

realistic 87:14

reality 68:20

realize 47:19 51:8

really 32:22 62:22

66:15,22 77:10

89:8 90:18 98:1

104:17 109:20

110:15 115:14

116:6 120:20

127:21 136:19

153:2 159:8 161:1

161:12 164:1

193:4,17 204:4

205:7,19 209:15

reap 205:21

reason 28:12 56:19

108:7 123:4 144:3

144:16 151:9

180:17

reasonable 74:15

74:16 84:6

reasonably 18:2

105:9

reasons 78:17

91:22 147:12

rebate 94:16,20

rebates 24:17

216:22

Rebecca 2:6 8:5

recall 108:16 145:4

177:14

receive 110:9 228:7

received 8:22 27:6

64:10

recessed 169:6

recessionary 82:11

recommend 110:18

recommendations

11:7

recommended 13:5

reconfigured 221:9

reconvene 169:6

record 5:10 14:7

24:12,15 27:1

28:21 52:2 95:9

113:4 117:10,11

134:16 143:6

156:20 170:11

203:13

recovery 121:13

recurring 75:14

Redman 2:6 8:14

8:14

reduce 22:21 24:1

reduced 213:2

reduction 17:4,4

22:8,22 77:18,21

78:14 133:21

140:16 161:1

178:3,17 215:19

reductions 38:4

reevaluating 37:3

reevaluation 37:5

refer 118:17

126:11 147:5

211:12

reference 58:9,10

58:12,21 150:10

referencing 67:19

referred 116:16

148:7

referring 115:5

refine 173:12

174:13

reflect 50:8 147:17

148:7 170:11

193:1 194:7,12

198:3 199:11,14

reflected 36:22

74:18

reflection 149:3

reflective 50:16

reflectors 65:18

refractors 65:18

refrigerant 95:15

104:5

refrigerants 96:12

97:1

refrigerated 1:2

4:8 15:6 16:12

17:22 18:4 21:18

24:2 105:22

106:16 112:13,15

115:6 116:16,17

116:18 118:4,6,9

118:10 119:8,21

120:2 125:13

154:22 208:19

209:6,18

refrigerating 224:8

refrigeration 45:19

49:17 50:2,5,9

118:7 120:9,11

121:14 150:11

195:13 209:7,21

210:4,11 211:1

221:20,21 223:19

refrigerator 47:15

201:21

refrigerators 97:17

104:3 201:19

refurbish 94:3,15

94:22

regard 48:6 187:5

regarding 87:3

95:12 208:11

regardless 56:18

region 213:11

Register 40:7

registered 9:2

regular 216:14

225:2

regulate 147:20

regulated 21:19

215:2

regulating 93:4

regulation 92:15

139:4 178:22

regulations 16:17

93:4 94:13 140:12

161:15 172:13,13

regulatory 3:13

10:2 104:2 172:11

172:20 173:14

174:12 216:17,19

216:21 217:9

reinforce 68:11

relate 163:14

related 11:10 41:21

176:1 178:19

218:7

relates 33:3 132:8

relationship 138:13

153:14

relationships 147:7

150:20 159:11

relative 33:12,14

34:3,4 136:18

203:18,19,21

relatively 25:15

128:16 177:20

relevant 195:17

reliability 24:21

relies 171:10

reload 121:12

122:3

reloaded 121:20

rely 171:12

remain 48:18 82:18

remains 191:1

remarked 199:10

remarks 3:17 4:12

10:12 13:15 26:15

30:20,22 38:9

62:20 227:10,10

227:14

remember 23:2

55:6 123:14 126:4

128:1

remind 14:3

removed 21:11

renovated 168:18

reopen 199:10

reorder 122:20

repair 26:5 60:9,10

60:14 130:3

repeat 194:22

204:12

replace 21:6 50:18

129:20

replaced 21:11

51:1 70:5,15 80:8

88:17

replacement 21:9

70:10 71:14

replacements

71:19

replacing 82:6

85:12,12

report 15:7,12,17

17:21,22 18:20

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 250

19:1 24:19 123:3

123:12 217:16

reported 20:17

60:20 123:14

213:15 214:2

215:6 216:11

reporting 20:4

reports 71:1

173:21,21 214:21

represent 147:10

148:10

representation

173:9

representative

47:14 111:3

represents 23:3,4

118:6 141:1

request 11:7 40:7

requested 175:22

requesting 40:13

requests 39:20 40:1

40:9

require 36:1

119:18 122:10

179:8

required 17:7

58:11 86:5 142:7

144:9 156:9

175:12,14 216:13

requirement 121:4

121:4,13 122:1,6

154:21 211:2

requirements

16:17 70:11 89:3

120:13,15 223:3

requires 31:13

requiring 23:16

139:10

research 117:15

residential 165:1

resolved 34:15

resources 2:8 38:20

97:18

respect 32:8 162:12

220:18

respectively 131:7

respond 194:20

225:19

responded 180:1

response 8:19

10:19 38:12 52:11

56:1 72:14 227:6

227:13

rest 4:16 24:7 43:3

58:16 104:11

restate 218:14

restocked 121:22

restricting 23:17

restrictions 28:15

restrictive 27:18

result 15:22 16:4,5

16:7 23:1 32:4

34:7 125:4 156:18

177:13 178:2

188:11 192:22

196:20

resulting 214:14

results 11:9,13 29:7

29:8 32:10,10

47:17,19 57:15,17

60:22 123:3,12

130:8 131:13

142:8 150:21

215:6 217:17

resume 116:10

117:3,7 169:3

retire 13:21 88:20

89:6 93:20

retiring 82:5

retrofitted 17:19

return 68:7 104:21

135:16 207:12

returning 164:18

revenue 23:2,9

revenues 26:6

175:17

reverse 150:21

review 155:6 211:9

reviewed 72:7

reviewing 15:12,15

reviews 177:9

revised 53:1 73:9

revising 36:19

revision 43:2,6

revisit 35:21 176:2

218:11

revisited 35:15

36:7

re-develop 53:13

re-developed 53:6

right 32:6 35:15

36:4 50:20 62:10

62:18 67:18,20

69:14 73:21 74:5

74:9 84:1 94:18

97:12,22 99:1,1

99:18 101:7

102:12 105:12

108:8,10,12,14

110:10,16 112:12

112:12 115:3

117:8 122:17

132:13 136:8

137:6 145:8

146:11,12,16,16

159:3 163:17

167:11 186:13

188:4 193:14

194:17 195:1,1

196:22 198:20

202:13 218:22

219:12 221:16

224:6,11

right-hand 157:9

rigorous 16:19

rise 61:16 81:17,18

rising 19:11

risk 176:14

road 92:16 189:1

rocks 34:20

role 206:12

rolled 128:21 205:6

218:5

rolling 20:20

Ron 4:16

room 1:8 14:18

111:3 189:16

219:12

root 15:13,14

Roth 1:17 6:6,6

29:16,16 30:12

64:16 75:10,10

76:21 79:13,13

83:8 84:7,17

86:10,10 96:20,20

105:15,20 107:10

109:13,16 110:2,5

110:17 112:10,14

114:6 118:12,14

120:11 121:3,9

133:19,20 134:3,8

134:12 136:3,9

137:8 140:6,18,22

141:10 148:17

149:11 151:12

153:13 155:15

156:1,10 157:6

158:8 160:3 161:8

162:5 163:1,6

182:17,17 183:5

183:15,18 184:3

184:11,16 185:4

186:11,15,22

187:17 188:3,6

190:18 191:14,18

195:19 218:19,19

roughly 128:11

130:16 135:5,7

140:15 141:1

Route 23:6

Royal 1:16,16 6:2,5

27:4 78:17 114:11

rule 11:19 12:4,14

27:7 50:4 186:6

217:18

rulemaking 3:4 9:8

11:2 12:8,12

31:11 32:5 35:9

35:14,14 36:4,6

36:10,14 37:10

39:22 40:6 42:6,8

42:13,15,20 44:13

48:4 49:17 50:4

59:2,7 87:20

208:14,21 212:19

213:16 216:5

220:7

rulemakings 31:22

32:6 45:16

rules 14:2

run 166:16,20

180:12 181:13

190:1 201:13

running 86:13 93:9

runs 68:14

run-through 8:21

S

s 4:1 226:4

safety 46:22 104:10

salaries 23:8

sale 191:11

sales 23:9,17 55:15

57:7 93:22 213:10

215:14

Sam 1:22 7:8 43:10

43:12 49:9 53:5

63:11,12 105:19

134:15 135:2

138:17 143:5

147:4

Sanyo 100:13

save 26:1 96:10,11

103:13 226:5,8,21

saved 178:11

saving 36:9 46:12

149:19 180:13

192:13 200:7

226:18

savings 15:4 16:5

16:21 17:2,3,17

19:2 20:15 22:12

25:10,15 26:9

31:14,20 32:5,12

33:6 34:6,14,14

34:17 36:13 37:1

38:3 41:21 56:17

56:21,22 57:18,19

59:4 65:11 66:5

68:19 87:18

115:16 123:7

124:11 126:21,22

127:3,7,14 148:20

149:2 164:4

165:20,21 166:4,6

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 251

180:10,17 197:16

197:17 198:1,2,13

200:13 201:12

214:19

saw 215:5 225:17

saying 82:12 90:17

92:10 109:13

112:2 117:17,20

137:20 139:6

146:19 153:21

156:14 162:1,5,7

183:21 185:2

190:8 196:6 197:7

205:5,19 221:11

223:7

says 35:11 200:21

204:2 224:15

SBA 172:1

scale 78:11

scary 181:4

scatter 145:6,8

scenario 58:14

174:19 175:1,2,6

175:7,11

scenarios 174:15

175:20

schedule 134:1

146:17

scheme 193:15

197:10,19,22

198:5

schemes 150:1,2

151:3 159:13

196:10 197:14

school 135:1

193:18

schools 23:17 76:8

192:11

scope 10:18 17:20

195:15

Scott 2:3 7:15,15

52:20 53:17 55:17

56:2 63:4,8 69:12

69:14 70:20 74:3

83:16,20 84:13,19

89:12,15 105:3,18

106:3 107:8

109:11,15,19

110:6,11,13

114:20,20 115:12

115:19 122:21

126:13,19 132:6

132:10,17,21

133:8 134:2,18,22

136:8 143:18

144:1,18 145:9

164:14 166:18

167:10,17

screen 39:16 46:17

61:18 185:19

203:6

screened 36:8

screening 46:16

47:1

screens 158:1

seat 4:4

SEC 173:21

second 19:9 40:19

48:15 54:21 69:17

196:3

Secondly 142:12

section 29:7 40:18

40:22 41:3,18

42:1,5 57:13

217:18

Sections 17:7

sector 214:5 215:2

sectors 214:15

sector-by-sector

214:16

sedan 28:5

see 7:2 9:5 16:21

27:17 30:10 42:7

49:18 55:19 57:9

59:3 63:21 65:11

66:5,7 69:2 73:10

75:2,3 76:9,15,16

81:2,7 85:17 93:8

93:10 96:6 97:2

104:22 108:2

111:13 125:20,22

126:2 131:8

135:10 139:20

145:17 156:1

162:2,9 163:2

168:17 176:20

179:18 185:18

190:3 194:3 203:5

217:21 218:3

225:13

seeing 69:12 161:2

seek 11:11 141:20

seeks 131:6 145:18

seen 15:10 154:15

155:17,20

select 123:22

selected 12:19,19

41:20

selection 12:17

125:7 131:10

Selfridge 1:16 6:4,4

26:17,20 27:2,2,4

68:9 69:3 74:7,13

74:20 75:5 103:21

108:15 109:2,9

142:1,4 148:14

154:14,19 155:18

157:1 158:10

159:4 184:4

188:13 189:21

190:12 191:12,17

194:21 219:3

221:2,14,17,21

223:15 224:12,21

self-styled 220:21

sell 76:2 91:6

110:20 142:10

200:22

selling 91:14 101:6

201:1

Senate 179:7

send 100:8 219:21

220:3

sending 220:4

senior 227:16

sense 100:1 102:5

123:21 151:6,9,15

186:8 227:20

sensitivity 44:9,10

separate 45:13

171:19

series 12:1 62:14

69:10 127:16

140:3 176:20

serious 22:1

serve 197:9

service 26:5 46:20

60:3,5 77:15

121:21

SESSION 170:1

set 23:1 30:14

32:17 33:12 35:7

35:22 42:7 104:9

121:21 126:5

129:11 132:5,7

137:15 157:11

159:19 175:9

205:3 216:2

setting 31:13,17

35:10 212:20

214:11

settles 93:8

seven 12:16,18 21:1

119:6 125:7

130:15,21 143:20

144:7,15

Seventeen 106:6

107:21

Seventy-something

121:10

shaking 135:11

shame 36:13

share 14:19 76:18

113:22 114:13,18

180:16 181:10

sharing 114:4

shecco 1:13 39:3

95:11 205:14

shelf 46:1 222:4,5

224:16

shift 19:11 86:14

87:6 193:20

shifting 21:17 89:9

shine 65:5

shipment 111:18

shipments 54:1,19

69:15 70:1,8,9

71:4,10,13,21

72:12 73:6,9,22

84:2 87:10,16

89:18 95:13,17

107:7 114:22

212:11

shipped 70:3 72:4,9

72:20 73:12

127:17

shock 87:13

shoot 220:13

short 14:20 25:15

161:7

shortly 81:8

shot 180:8

show 13:7 18:22

51:17 89:15 98:8

114:13 128:19

133:16 135:4

136:11 145:2,3

155:11

showed 63:2

130:18

showing 98:8

shown 59:12

shows 204:19

shrinking 187:10

shut 191:1

side 93:3 102:11

105:6 165:1,4

225:3

sidebar 14:15,18

sides 207:22

sign 13:17 65:7

68:5 154:11

signage 50:15

64:19

significant 15:22

15:22 16:5,7

21:22 25:14 30:18

32:3 34:13,14,17

36:13 65:11 66:5

96:15 136:16

155:2 164:4

significantly 22:13

65:1 68:3 99:11

156:2,12

silent 14:14

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 252

similar 30:14 32:9

62:4 142:21

157:22 158:4

195:9

simple 22:10 55:4

102:18 166:5

simpler 127:22

simplify 139:1

simply 17:10

129:22

simulation 47:9

simultaneous

108:17 170:8

sine 48:3

single 174:19 179:3

sit 202:22

site 142:7

sites 165:7,8

situation 33:17

74:22 95:6 200:15

210:1

situations 61:21

six 12:19 37:12

47:12 125:8

140:17

Sixth 20:13

size 22:16,17 24:5

47:14 48:12 72:5

72:15,17 73:1

87:17 115:1

120:15,20 122:7

125:13 135:21

153:12 224:7

sized 73:5

sizes 47:14

sizing 120:9,11

skewed 159:2

slide 13:7 40:12

41:6,10 54:15

58:4,5 62:9 73:10

105:5 115:10

128:19 130:7

131:10 141:20

145:17 170:17

173:16 212:16

slides 39:15 40:11

53:18 62:14 69:10

104:22 105:1

122:20 123:1

126:10 131:10

140:3 141:19

170:16 176:4

207:12

slight 122:20

slightly 101:9

102:20 118:20

137:1 153:15

slowly 80:9

small 32:12 40:16

41:11,12,13,15

71:3 72:17,18

99:21 105:8,17,22

106:7,9 107:4,6,7

107:12 109:3,8,9

112:2,3 115:7

128:16 171:21,22

172:8 174:11

176:12,16 197:8

203:6,7 206:20

209:17,20 210:12

212:1,3,12 215:7

216:6 226:8

smaller 34:5 128:2

209:5 211:1

smallest 108:3

smart 36:1

snack 203:22 204:5

204:21 209:19

211:5

snacks 209:2

snapshot 49:3

soft 23:16

sold 23:5 94:6

129:19 181:19

182:10 217:15

solid 31:5 34:4 46:7

64:4 68:4 90:14

90:17 220:21

222:3,7

solution 25:1

Solutions 1:13

Somasundaram

2:2 7:12,13 52:16

52:17 53:20

106:14,18 112:20

122:17,18 126:15

212:14,15 219:17

somebody 110:19

142:3 165:9

183:17

somewhat 59:15

144:14

soon 177:9 228:10

sophisticated

197:13

sorry 19:13 52:16

70:19 101:17

105:4 106:5 109:1

112:18 128:3

132:21 184:3

185:14,16

sort 54:20 63:2

88:1,2 124:3

166:3

sorted 60:12

sound 208:5

sounds 88:3 167:10

source 79:8

sources 24:19

171:10

South 78:16

Southern 1:14 5:18

116:13

space 64:20,21

224:9,11

speak 14:5,8 23:12

68:8 94:10 111:14

178:22

speaking 39:6

56:14 104:18

117:19 172:8

221:17,22 223:20

special 184:7

specific 11:10

29:13 40:10,13

140:8 141:20

159:19 179:18

specifically 19:5

40:9 41:7,22 42:4

50:10,13 120:14

131:6 145:18

146:6 148:18

164:8 180:2

225:19

specifications

149:14

specifies 121:3

specify 121:1 179:2

speed 36:10 37:9

spend 175:12

split 128:17 192:8

spreading 64:22

spreadsheet 57:3

166:1

spreadsheets 51:18

Sriram 2:2 7:12

52:17 69:18

106:12 122:16,17

211:18 212:14

stabilize 77:18,20

82:21 84:15

stabilized 83:10

stabilizes 73:19

stable 77:5

stack 30:1,3 119:2

119:4,5 151:20,21

152:11,13 153:20

156:3,11 163:2,4

203:19 205:2

211:13

stacked 46:8 80:5

stacking 119:2

stacks 161:2

staff 86:19 207:20

stage 42:19 58:20

59:20 60:2,5,11

70:21 71:12 72:8

72:10,15 123:8

124:1 127:21

212:19

stakeholder 50:11

stakeholders 11:5

40:2 64:11 171:13

stand 104:22 160:9

standard 9:21 11:6

11:20 15:21 16:9

31:13 32:18 33:8

34:16,19 40:21

41:17,20 42:21

50:14 69:19 103:7

119:14 122:4

123:11,15,16

124:1 126:6

127:13 128:4,4,20

128:21,22 129:3,9

129:10,11,12,19

130:9,11,17,22

131:7,11,12

137:20 139:7

145:19 155:11

160:12 162:14

163:7,8,18,22

164:9,10 166:10

172:18 173:6

176:9 202:21

218:6,14,16

standards 1:2,15

4:8 6:1 12:18

16:14,19 21:20

23:19 29:20 31:6

31:8,18 34:8 35:1

35:6,7,11,18,22

39:21 40:19 41:14

67:9,12,14,15

92:20 93:19,22

94:5 104:10

127:17 128:18

164:16 171:9

173:4,5,8,10

175:14 176:14,18

201:18 202:2

203:9 205:16

206:10,22 209:3

212:20 214:12

215:4,8

stands 32:2

STAR 16:16 17:18

23:18 124:9 128:5

128:7 129:7 132:2

132:3,9,12 135:6

135:8 137:22

138:8,14,18 139:3

139:9,11 141:6

152:1,16 163:14

163:15,17,20

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 253

177:9,13,17

185:10 189:14

217:5

stark 181:4

start 4:11 5:8 7:19

9:5,7 13:18 42:9

42:22 97:16

117:12,13,16

144:16 176:22

179:20 180:5

223:2

started 4:4 29:21

92:13 150:10

177:9

starting 38:6 80:9

168:5 183:2

starts 40:12

state 38:17 52:1

142:10 166:15

stated 119:13

statement 20:12

204:13

states 18:11,15

19:5 57:5 94:19

207:7 214:13

stating 179:9

statute 31:13

statutory 11:18

stay 78:9 91:5

stays 149:11

steal 119:18

step 12:14 43:5

52:22 123:17,19

213:20 215:11

219:18

stepping 195:15

steps 3:16 10:11

12:2 29:6 212:18

217:22

Steve 5:15 75:8

77:1 83:8 90:6

98:21 101:12,13

108:20,20 146:11

147:1 148:14,17

155:21 156:21,21

159:7 181:14

187:3 196:3 197:7

209:13,14 220:16

Steven 1:12 66:9

81:11

Stevens 1:13 5:19

5:19 49:13,13

50:20 51:7,14,19

Steve's 184:2

stick 206:13

sticky 195:12

stimulus 25:22

26:1

stock 70:14,14

73:15,17 84:1,15

87:11,17 88:13

94:2 129:13

stop 62:11 69:17

73:21

stopped 122:21

storage 46:1,8

222:3

store 91:13 225:9

stores 91:14

straight 119:6

strategies 35:10

36:21

strawman 174:4

street 96:7 168:11

strictly 154:2

strikes 64:6 87:10

strip 92:10

strong 145:11

stronger 32:18

structure 217:11

217:12

stuck 92:18 199:4,7

studied 204:8

209:22

study 18:12 155:5

203:18 204:4

216:1

stuff 97:12

style 46:1 222:5

224:16

styled 222:4

subanalyses 174:10

subanalysis 173:13

subconsciously

94:12

subgroup 164:13

164:15 166:3,7

167:20 171:20

173:14

subgroups 164:17

164:20 171:19,20

subject 40:7 53:2

68:10 69:10

submissions 98:20

submit 16:6 24:11

98:5 147:9

subsequent 46:14

48:11

subsidiaries 18:9

172:2

substantial 22:6,12

23:22 25:10 26:9

76:1 184:5 189:15

189:19

substantially 20:5

20:16 22:20 68:22

153:8 188:18

successful 217:12

suddenly 195:8

sufficient 14:12

64:13

suggest 32:14

suggesting 221:19

sulfur 215:21

sum 56:11

summarize 24:6

summarized 40:17

summarizing 70:17

summary 3:14 9:10

10:9 13:3,13,15

26:15 30:20 38:9

42:22 227:10

Super 68:13 142:22

supplied 155:7

suppliers 78:21

supply 211:5

supplying 114:12

support 8:6 12:9

31:4 57:15 62:2

72:2

supposed 13:19

211:13

sure 29:13 49:22

51:19 62:16 63:9

77:10 98:15,19

100:20 105:20

144:20 183:9

186:17,19 192:2

196:12 204:10

211:20 218:18

surprise 27:17

surprised 222:11

surrounding 164:9

suspect 92:14

sustain 73:14

swap-out 21:6

switch 80:12

124:19

switched 136:9

system 46:2,8

50:18 77:10 82:5

103:4,9,17 116:20

149:17,18 157:5

181:16 187:5

188:16 189:10

196:16 204:22

209:7 210:11

213:5 220:7 224:2

systems 101:15

103:12 142:13

205:18,18,22

S.W 1:8

T

T 120:5,8

table 3:1 18:15

37:1 40:22 51:11

51:12 106:15

113:22 167:12

184:20

tables 18:22 40:17

tailored 213:5

take 4:4 9:13 10:5

14:18 21:5 26:3

56:20 71:16

104:15 115:10

116:1 117:2

118:15 119:3

121:6,10 137:16

148:5 153:15

158:16 168:7

180:8 182:21

206:11 208:2

221:2 224:5

225:11 227:22

taken 80:4 120:10

198:7

takes 56:7 65:8

189:14,18 209:3

224:3

talk 29:19 30:16

49:20 52:19 65:10

69:15,18,20 85:7

92:21 94:16

120:12 122:22

141:4

talked 26:6 79:1

142:21 215:13

talking 79:19 91:8

98:16 112:10,14

115:13 132:17

136:15 148:17

149:6 150:22

151:1 155:21

178:15,17 201:15

203:17

tank 28:14

tanks 93:5

target 25:22 187:13

196:18 220:21

221:7,13 222:8,10

222:10 223:14

targets 196:13

217:5 220:20

222:15,16

Tarley 1:18 6:8,8

51:21,21 88:19

89:14 90:3 94:7

96:2,2 102:15

107:14,18 108:1,4

108:8,10,13 109:5

132:14 133:1,4,10

133:15 134:7,9

135:12 137:14

138:2 166:14,22

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 254

167:4,13 177:3,3

178:7 179:12

184:1 206:13

207:5,7,9 211:21

222:19 226:1,1

task 15:13

tax 23:7,8,9 26:6

55:15 217:1

taxes 57:7

team 4:16 218:10

Tech 61:13,13 62:8

124:2,5

technical 12:9

57:15 62:2 72:1

118:15

technician's 23:3

technological 63:10

technologically

46:19 187:12

technologies 1:12

5:14 36:9,16,21

44:3 45:1 46:12

46:18 47:2 70:13

95:18 124:17

125:4 182:1

199:13 213:6

214:6

technology 17:13

17:15,19 20:13

24:18,20,22 25:1

25:3,6,8 26:10

36:11,20 44:16,18

44:21 45:4,7

46:11,13 48:7,20

93:2 98:10 100:16

101:8 124:19,21

199:15 224:4,19

225:4

tell 78:8 90:19

116:22 122:11

123:1 132:14

137:19 149:22

telling 79:4 100:15

113:21

temperature

102:19 120:6

121:9 122:5

138:19,22 148:3

temporarily 68:10

ten 19:16,20 22:6

54:9 60:6 65:13

76:22 77:1 79:21

82:1 85:6 87:12

91:6 92:18 129:1

178:16 189:2

193:20

tend 32:13 61:16

93:7

tendency 87:22

tens 200:10

terms 13:8 28:15

50:15 67:8 87:19

104:2 105:21

206:3 218:15

224:7

test 12:5 28:18 36:8

36:12,15,19,22

121:4 138:19,20

142:14 147:16

148:19 149:3

155:8 157:4,11,22

190:14 198:6,6,15

198:16

tested 17:16 24:20

154:16 186:18

testimony 73:4

testing 20:18 99:7

194:8 218:22

226:15,19

Texas 78:22

thank 4:21 15:3

26:13,14 27:3

38:8,21 39:4,8,13

39:18 43:11 52:6

52:13,14 69:8,13

79:11 81:10 90:5

92:7 96:1,17,17

103:19 104:13

113:6 122:14

133:5 141:14

142:3 143:10,11

167:15 169:4

184:13 203:2

204:9 205:10,11

206:17 219:15

227:1,8,17 228:6

228:13

thanks 8:16,16

69:7 112:16

117:17 118:13

137:10 141:15

167:20 179:16

227:2 228:4,11

theoretically 100:4

102:4

thing 29:4 62:4

75:6 85:11 87:21

91:2 93:12 144:22

180:7 190:7 195:9

222:13 224:8

things 36:1 48:12

57:6 60:21 85:9

88:2 91:18 93:6

127:1 150:4

160:22 182:14

184:8 201:14

220:3 223:5

think 8:21 9:1 14:3

23:12 24:13 26:20

27:22 29:4 30:8

31:4,10 32:16

33:3 35:13,14

36:6 37:4,14 38:7

49:4 62:10 65:21

66:4 74:19 76:4

76:12,17 79:9

80:15 81:4,6,6

82:3,13,19 83:3

83:10,10,13,14

90:14 91:10,20

94:10,11 96:9,10

105:13,18 107:11

107:12,14 108:4

108:15 115:8,20

116:3 132:12

133:17 139:5,16

141:3 147:4 150:9

151:8,15,17 154:9

154:12 155:4

157:2 158:19

159:15,18 160:14

160:20 161:10,11

162:12 164:11

165:8 168:3,5

170:6 176:2,21

180:9 183:1 199:2

199:12 202:20

204:7 207:10

211:4,14 217:20

218:1 220:4,19

223:7,16 225:10

thinking 192:4

223:12

thinks 108:20

third 19:14 37:11

41:2 78:21 110:21

119:1,8,19 128:19

172:10 198:8

Thirty-one 133:4

thought 28:8 30:13

90:10 93:18,19

117:18 123:4

143:14 199:16

thoughts 167:21

225:20

thousand 200:3

thousands 26:4

200:11

three 4:19 16:15

26:1 41:10 47:13

53:21 54:19 75:15

86:21 87:11

102:18 114:10,10

114:16,17 124:16

130:16 143:21

144:7 148:19

157:8 158:18

160:14,20,21

161:13 162:13,17

186:11,12 188:2

190:20 191:1

192:6 193:2

212:17 218:3

224:6

threshold 30:6

34:17 140:11,14

141:10 152:4,9,20

154:8 160:17

thresholds 160:7

Tier 16:16 124:9

128:5,10,15,15

132:2,3,9,12

133:21,22 134:1,3

134:13 135:6,9

137:22 138:8

139:9,11 140:10

141:7 152:16

163:14,15,17,20

177:10,12,17,19

177:20,21,21

178:9,9 183:14,14

183:15,21,21

184:4,5,12,12,21

184:21 185:10,15

tight 66:3

time 13:21 14:6,12

14:19,21 25:15

29:20 30:16 35:20

37:7 38:4 59:7

62:18 70:3,4

73:17,20 76:20

90:12 91:5 92:22

97:5 98:6 104:6

110:9 114:2 122:6

122:10 163:15

168:15,16 181:15

194:9 195:1,11

205:20 208:2

218:17 225:11

times 37:12 51:5

64:7 82:11 88:15

title 116:17

TL-6 180:4 182:21

today 9:4,11 10:13

11:5 12:3 14:19

17:16 19:22 29:5

33:2 34:11 35:3

42:18 43:4 65:12

65:13,15 66:1,7

75:14 76:5,10

79:21 81:5 82:18

84:12 86:14,17

87:6 93:10 99:19

152:8 157:15,21

158:1 160:7,8,12

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 255

160:15,19 161:11

162:9 163:12,17

187:18,20 190:19

191:10,21 195:4

199:4 200:2,5,20

202:19,22 223:11

224:7 225:21

today's 11:15 12:13

12:13

told 60:4 71:11

72:10,18 127:21

ton 28:2,5 87:16

tools 38:1,2 42:14

top 42:7 106:19

148:22 154:10

157:9 185:18

191:1,3,10 203:6

total 18:13 20:2

21:3,8 73:11

166:20 172:3

211:1,20

totally 75:7

touched 176:20

196:6

tough 177:20

toughest 120:14

to-apple 147:18

track 129:22

trade 28:15 193:6

198:1

trademark 67:1

tradition 5:5

transcritical 99:4

transfer 93:5 119:1

119:9 180:4 182:6

transferred 181:17

182:3

transition 188:9

translates 167:8

translating 139:19

translation 136:6

140:19

transparent 27:14

46:3

transportation

28:4

treated 46:4

tremendous 78:15

79:5 219:8

trend 58:14 77:13

77:16 90:1,16

trending 146:5

trends 58:8

Trent 1:17 6:6

29:15,16 64:15,16

66:11 75:8,9,10

79:12,13 83:1,6

86:9,10 88:22

96:19,20 98:22

99:16 102:7

105:14 110:17

114:5,6 118:12,13

133:17,20 136:2,3

138:12 140:5,7

142:15 151:7

154:15 155:22

156:21,21 157:6

160:2,3 162:5,22

164:6 182:16,17

184:17 186:15

187:16 190:17

195:1 196:7

211:21 218:19

222:18,19

Trent's 142:19

trial 9:21 69:18

123:22 126:6

128:4,4 130:11,17

130:22 131:6,11

131:12 145:18

164:9,10 173:5

tried 151:14 152:10

201:22

trouble 22:2

139:19

Troy 1:17 7:21

203:14 210:20

trucks 85:8,12

true 17:3 143:20,21

156:19 162:5

202:20 210:5,13

truly 61:13

truth 155:12

try 13:5 80:17

113:8 116:10

118:14 151:16

168:14 208:3

trying 30:14 66:21

109:19 117:15

132:4 135:18

151:16 153:16

160:15 163:14

182:19 184:18

185:6,7 190:18

192:18

TSD 15:7 45:6

48:14 49:2 57:14

59:13 64:2 143:9

166:12 213:17

215:10 216:12

217:17

TSL 12:21 13:6

127:1 128:3

143:16 144:22

146:14 173:7

175:19 184:21

222:10

TSLs 12:18,19

115:19 123:8,10

125:7,8,11 147:8

150:20 186:5

196:7 225:10

TSL-1 184:22

TSL-3 32:9,11

130:19 135:7

143:17 145:19

TSL-4 32:9,18 63:1

63:1 130:22 131:1

144:12 145:11

TSL-5 33:21 34:3

63:1,21 125:21

TSL-6 40:14 41:22

124:4 130:13

132:11 135:5

145:19 176:11

180:2 185:9

TSL-7 124:4

130:18

tubes 68:14

turn 14:13,14

39:16 41:9 71:8

148:18,21 149:16

149:18 157:10

158:2 192:2

195:19 225:20

227:15

turnaround 85:18

turndown 85:10

turned 55:1 192:3

Twenty-five 73:7

Twenty-seven

154:19

twice 87:17,18

two 18:5,9,12 25:13

31:21 32:1 33:3

40:11 42:11 45:13

53:3,7 67:10

73:16 79:15 83:4

83:12 84:5 88:20

89:17 105:1

106:17,18 112:7

113:12 114:4

122:22 124:13

125:14,15 128:1

144:13 148:18,21

157:9,10,18

162:18 163:17,22

174:15 180:6

190:4,22 191:22

192:2,6 193:2

196:2

two-thirds 120:8

153:4

type 27:8,8,12,13

27:16,19 34:9

68:12 104:1

150:13,13 155:12

158:17 159:2,13

190:1 204:22

219:7 225:2

types 19:1 53:3,10

147:18

typically 27:14

43:20 46:1,2,7

165:17

typographical

27:10

T8s 68:14 142:22

U

U 224:15

uncertain 77:3

uncertainty 32:15

32:20 87:16

111:19

unconscious 93:12

unconsciously

92:17

underestimating

50:12

undergoing 21:22

underneath 168:11

understand 28:11

29:13 36:3 93:21

116:19 118:4

132:5 136:22

149:20 151:14,16

152:22 167:14

182:19 184:18

185:6 186:4

192:19 212:2,4,11

218:18 223:2

understanding

33:5,22 34:10

114:16

understands

178:14

underway 32:6

uniform 174:19

Unique 25:12

unit 30:3,6 81:15

119:5 151:21

152:11,13 156:11

201:3 216:10

United 18:11,15

214:13

units 21:5 30:1

71:19 73:12,16,18

75:4 79:20 80:5,6

101:6 152:5

153:20 156:3

208:10 211:17

University 59:19

unmiked 39:7

221:18,22 223:20

unprecedented

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 256

25:14

unregulated

128:17

updated 49:16 50:7

53:1 54:7 59:10

59:14,20,21 106:6

179:5

updating 36:19

upgrading 89:6

upper 119:14 153:3

USA 1:12 5:13

usage 17:4 158:2

use 3:7 9:16 17:11

17:16 28:14,14

46:1,8 49:5 52:2

52:21 58:18 63:17

65:1,13,13,14

67:5 94:4 95:8

97:7 102:6 103:2

103:3 110:18

120:13 142:11

151:21 153:17,18

155:13 156:8

162:3 163:7 193:1

193:3,7,16,22

197:13 201:21

202:1 203:11

204:16 205:12

220:5,8 226:19

useful 117:19

122:15 123:5

user 151:3 164:21

users 25:5 54:5

uses 46:17 47:15

68:13 127:6

172:16 173:20

224:2

USI 211:6

usually 45:16

utilities 24:16 25:7

213:2

utility 3:10 9:22

46:21 50:15 94:19

164:19 180:12

207:5,6 213:18

215:12

utilizing 27:14

U.S 1:1 4:6 61:19

95:21 97:11

101:10

V

v 34:15

vacuum 201:21

valuation 37:2,4,10

value 38:3 40:14

80:22 81:9 105:10

123:6 126:22

127:5,7 130:8,20

173:2 176:9 216:9

216:10

values 37:19,21

58:15 126:3

130:10 216:6

variable 36:10

152:3,8 223:21

variables 136:22

variance 137:5

variation 44:12

57:6

varied 57:10

various 19:1 58:22

94:16 130:11

202:1 214:15

vehicles 85:9

Vend 224:16

vendable 106:15

vending 1:2 4:8,17

11:1 12:4 15:6,9

18:1,3,11,14 19:7

21:12,17,21 22:9

23:10,14,20 25:4

31:6 36:1 43:16

44:4,10 45:2,10

45:20,22 46:2,8

47:10 50:4,7 53:4

53:8,22 77:4,8,15

78:3,5 81:14 82:1

85:18 91:7,11,19

92:12 95:14 96:5

97:20 98:9 101:5

103:14 121:21

165:10 166:20

167:5 177:5,7,12

177:19 178:21

179:2,3,8,13

181:4 200:12

203:22 204:20

208:17,21 209:5,6

209:19 211:3

214:12 215:3

220:6

Vendo 78:20

114:11

vendors 1:16,16

6:3,5 16:12 27:4

52:3 103:7

vends 208:18

verdict 170:4

verging 72:20

versa 200:17

versus 65:14 66:13

89:10 103:2,14

178:11 196:9

197:16

vice 200:17

view 37:22

visibility 190:6

Visicoolers 21:18

22:10

visited 121:20

VI(b) 41:19

volt 101:21

volume 27:13

47:15,15 81:15

105:22 106:16

112:11,13,13,15

115:6 116:16,17

116:18 118:6,8,17

118:18,19 125:13

125:19 154:22

159:1 187:15

223:19

volumes 111:17

114:22 155:2,8

volumetric 156:15

voluntarily 16:20

voluntary 217:4

V(a) 40:22

V(b)(2) 40:18 41:3

V(c) 42:2

W

wage 214:9

wait 24:3 62:11

98:1

waiting 100:15

walk 151:18 189:22

wall 48:12

Wal-Mart 200:5

want 28:19 31:3

34:12 53:15,16

67:5 89:21 102:22

104:3 105:4

106:21 107:8

115:17 116:4,7

118:3 122:1 127:2

139:1 150:9

154:14 156:20

161:16 168:2,4

177:4 185:17

186:1,7 190:6

194:21 195:5

207:15 208:5,9

211:11 212:6

219:11 220:12

222:2,5,6 224:15

224:17 225:6,11

228:5,8

wanted 87:9 88:19

91:1 128:3 132:22

133:18 145:22

178:13 184:14

196:5 219:13

225:18

wanting 92:18

111:14 141:20

190:16

wants 20:22 59:1

warehouses 193:19

Washington 1:8

4:10 20:19 96:5

wasn't 35:20

166:10 183:19

wasted 160:14,20

watt 68:18

watts 68:15

wave 95:14

way 12:20 57:5

64:5 65:9 66:8

92:13 97:13

103:13 104:4

114:2 116:9 122:7

123:13 127:19

135:1 137:8 149:3

154:7 186:9

188:15 189:7

192:10 193:13

196:15,18 197:12

202:11,15,17

209:21 223:11

224:19 226:6,22

228:2

ways 65:18,19

202:12

wear 168:8

website 12:10

59:18

Wednesday 1:4

weigh 89:22 207:21

weighted 54:22

55:10,11 59:16

welcome 4:6,10,14

4:16 10:22 11:14

29:12 37:5 98:20

170:3 209:11

welcoming 4:12

went 15:12 55:8,10

55:13 117:9,10

124:9 128:7

133:21 134:5

184:8

we'll 9:13,18,20

10:4,10 13:18

29:19 30:7,15,18

41:8 42:3,22

61:11 65:10

104:22 117:7

122:16 133:6

136:12 140:1

169:1 196:20

199:18

we're 4:11 9:5,7,15

16:17 17:13 33:20

42:18 49:5 52:5

58:11 66:20,22

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 257

67:6 68:9,21 70:7

74:3 75:20 77:10

81:1,5,19 82:5

86:13 87:6 89:20

90:11,14,19 91:8

92:2 97:10,11

98:16 99:2,3,19

100:15 102:21

104:14 112:14

114:21,22 115:10

115:13 116:3

117:14,22 118:22

119:6 120:2 130:6

132:17 133:22

134:18 136:15,17

137:2 139:4

141:19 145:16

146:17 151:20

153:1,1,2,21

157:16 160:15,16

161:10,13 162:7

162:13,16 164:4

168:6 170:12,13

170:15 178:17

187:1 192:12

193:5,8 199:4,7

199:12 201:14

202:22 207:19

220:4,8 226:18

we've 12:1 16:2

60:12 64:10 78:14

78:14 79:17 82:4

82:11 97:3 108:19

109:21 128:16

146:6,9 155:20

156:3 157:7 160:9

160:14 161:3

188:8 191:4 199:2

203:16 208:8

wide 164:5

wind 98:1

wish 10:8 13:15

14:8 24:12 29:1

67:16 69:6 74:11

90:3 137:12

227:11

wishes 68:8 206:7

207:13

wonderful 96:12

wondering 197:6

word 20:17 113:2

words 222:4

work 4:20 11:11

12:10 14:17 30:11

30:15 33:16 79:18

92:22 100:11

117:14 163:7,9

202:5

worked 29:21

154:16 155:9

163:10

working 87:6 95:14

95:20 130:6

workshop 227:19

world 79:7 95:20

104:8,11 180:16

189:15 198:3

199:11 224:17

worldwide 20:20

worse 74:19,22

worst 166:3

wouldn't 86:4

192:5 197:11

224:17

wrap 48:1 212:16

write 139:14 188:4

write-up 59:6

written 10:15,18

11:15 110:9

139:17 146:15

154:7 159:17

219:21 228:7

wrong 137:20

143:16 192:17

194:5,13 202:3

Y

yeah 26:17 51:16

63:4,14 66:10

71:8 72:1 76:21

77:7 83:6,20

88:13 94:7 98:4

105:14 106:14,19

107:6,7,18 108:14

110:12 111:15

112:9 117:6,7

121:16 134:12

135:12 141:13

150:13 156:6

159:3,6,22 167:17

168:3 183:1,21

184:1,3 188:13

191:18 196:2,4

197:5 199:1 203:2

204:15,18 206:17

207:12 208:11

210:20,22 218:1

223:12 224:10

225:8

year 20:5,6 21:4,14

42:16,18 56:12

57:3 58:7 59:22

71:20 73:11 74:15

78:11 81:15 84:1

91:7 92:19 98:8

101:5 128:8

142:16 166:17,21

167:8,9 188:9,11

years 4:19 16:15

19:16,16,20 20:11

20:14,21 21:5,13

24:4 32:1 37:17

38:6 42:11 60:4,6

60:6 62:7 76:22

77:1,14 78:3,19

79:21 80:21 82:1

85:6,20 86:21

87:12 90:11 91:6

92:20 124:16

132:4 154:20,20

155:7 158:5

160:14,20,21

161:13 162:14,17

162:18 163:17,22

181:5 186:11,12

188:2 189:2,2

York 59:19

Z

zero 72:20 105:8

106:17,18 107:4,6

108:7 109:21

130:21 180:16

zone 46:9

$

$0.105 130:15

$100 17:20

$110 64:3

$135 49:20

$150 22:18 85:4

$200 167:9

$380 167:9

$420 64:4

$50 49:19

0

0 184:4

1

1 54:8 124:9 128:5

128:6,15 129:2

132:2 133:21

134:3,13 173:18

177:10,12,20,21

178:9 183:14,21

184:5,12,21

185:16

1.00 55:9

1.102 55:13

1.137 55:14

1.144 55:1,10

1.226 55:2

1.5 51:9

1:10 169:3,7

1:19 170:2

1:45 146:14

10 3:4 19:4 24:3

41:10 71:22 72:1

107:9

10-K 173:21

10/90 128:17

10:30 9:14

10:45 9:14

100 23:5 91:8 201:3

100,000 21:5 22:18

78:10 79:3 85:3

101:6

1000 1:8

11 116:1

11:03 117:10

11:19 117:11

11:20 116:10 117:8

115 101:21

12 15:18 166:12

181:5

12:10 168:6 169:5

12:15 9:18

1210 167:22

13 3:5 19:16 20:11

133 100:3

134(a) 97:4,9 99:12

103:15

14 33:14 60:4

213:19

15 21:12 54:15 60:6

77:14 200:7 215:9

16 12:8 216:12

16th 42:17

17 1:5 106:9 107:14

107:20 154:5

217:17

170 3:9

19 106:1 108:4

131:18

1980s 34:15

1990 216:3

1990s 19:21 71:6

1998 80:1 81:2

2

2 16:16 54:10 95:15

96:4,10 97:2,17

97:21 98:8 99:1,3

99:4,11 100:2

101:15,20 102:4

102:19 103:2,10

103:14,16 128:10

128:11,15 129:2

132:3,9,12,12

133:22 134:1

135:6,9 137:22

138:8 139:9,11

140:10 141:7

152:16 163:14,15

163:17,20 174:2

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
(202) 234-4433

Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.

Page 258

177:17,19,21

178:9 183:14,15

183:21 184:13,21

185:10,10 191:5

216:3,11

2.79 73:12

2:18 228:14

20 20:14 27:18 28:6

77:14 91:6,11

108:4 116:4

133:11,14,20,21

133:22 134:4,14

137:21 139:8

140:15 141:2

163:19 178:15

20-something

154:20

200,000 19:21 20:4

21:10,14

2000 71:6 80:1 81:3

2003 16:16 132:2

2003-2004 178:11

2004 134:14 177:7

191:5

2005 15:14

2006 12:5,7

2007 49:19 134:14

177:16

2008 12:8 49:20

58:9 59:20

2009 1:5 11:17,20

12:15 58:10 59:21

2012 11:22 56:13

84:3 127:9 128:8

162:18

2020 20:10 58:15

73:19 76:20 84:4

2030 58:15

2042 73:11,20

127:10

2057 127:9

212 3:10

213 3:11

215 3:12

216 3:13

22 68:14 106:7,10

177:14

220/50 101:22

227 3:15,16

228 3:17

23 177:14

24 105:5

25 19:20 20:15

31:22 105:7 107:3

109:13,21

26 106:10 126:16

2602 106:19

26024 204:2,19

26026 106:15

27 54:3

28 12:7 123:1 178:2

178:6

28th 11:17 219:19

225:12

29 123:1

29th 12:12

3

3 45:5 54:10 128:12

131:7 143:9

164:10 174:2,8

3.95 156:4

3:15 10:5

30 33:13 84:11

87:12 130:7

131:13 132:19

133:2 135:5

141:21 178:16

197:20,22 198:14

200:7

30th 20:17

30-year 58:16,18

59:7,7 127:3,8

31 106:2 133:2

137:21 139:8

141:21 145:17

163:19

32 68:17 158:13

32.1 147:17,19

149:12 163:2

325(o) 17:9

33 72:16,16,17

170:17

34 106:7

342(c) 17:9

345(a) 17:9

35 154:6

36 119:12 120:17

120:21 149:13

153:3

4

4 3:3 129:3,3

4(a) 17:10

4-foot 68:14

4.48 140:14,18

4:15 10:11

4:30ish 10:11

40 33:13 110:3

405 140:10 156:11

423 28:2

43 3:6

45 18:12 72:13 78:3

46 200:13

47 18:15

5

5 15:18 47:18 48:14

49:1 129:9

5-6 158:20

5.56 140:11,18

50 21:5 24:4,16

72:11 89:16

119:15

50,000 19:22 20:6

500 23:3 28:7 172:3

504 119:4,5 151:21

152:13,14 154:4

156:11

51 178:11

512 40:17

515 40:18

52 3:7

57 19:17

58 167:6

6

6 131:7 164:9 185:1

189:12

60 18:16 72:11

89:17 101:21

110:3

60/40 110:1,2,5

65 136:17

67 19:13

68 54:2 55:8

69 3:8

7

7 13:7 18:19 61:10

70 121:7

75 73:6 99:15 105:7

107:3 109:21

138:15,21 142:8

75/45 136:18

76 19:13

79 20:11

8

8 11:20 12:5,15

18:19 57:14 61:11

62:8 129:9

8E-089 1:8

8th 11:21 36:4

199:6

80 79:20 145:8

80,000 84:9

800 26:11

804 155:6,10

82 99:7,10

85 54:7 55:8 79:20

9

9 40:12

9:00 1:9

9:14 4:2

90 18:13,22 25:12

129:2 136:17

138:18 142:8

90s 88:5 201:19

90,000 71:19 73:11

84:1,4,14

90/50 101:22

94 167:6

95 18:10

99 113:13

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56
259

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that che foregoing transcript

in the matter of:

Before:

Date:

Place:

Public Meeting on Energy

Conservation Standards for

Refrigerated Beverage Vending

Machines

US Department of Energy

June 17, 2009

Washington, DC

represents the full and complete proceedings of the

aforementioned matter, as reporced and reduced to

typewriting.

Peter Sullivan

(202) 234-4433

NEAL R. GROSS

COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS

1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

WASHINGTON, D.C 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

EERE-2006-STD-0125 COMMENT 56